Virtual Evaluation of Vehicle Passive and Active Safety with ESI Solutions ASEAN AUTOMOBILE SAFETY FORUM https://blog.esi.co.jp/pro-sivic/pedestrian Copyright ESI Copyright Group, 2015. ESI Group, All rights 2015. reserved. All rights reserved. Miaoyong ZHU and Pierre CULIÈRE 31 MAY 2016 1
ESI Group History First full car crash simulation 1986 1973 ESI founded; expert in physics of materials Software editor of applied mechanics; worldwide expansion On the stock market: listed in Euronext Paris 2000 Acquired: IC.IDO, leader in immersive Virtual Reality, and Efield, specialist in electromagnetic simulations 2011 2012 Acquired: Civitec Active Safety Cloud Computing and big data analytics ITI (Mechatronic and Multi-Domain Systems) 2014 2015 Today 2008 1991 Acquired: OpenCFD, editor or open source CFD software OpenFOAM Leader in End-to-End 1997 Acquired: Framasoft (welding, multiphysics), Optris (sheet metal forming) Acquired: Straco & VASCi (vibro-acoustics), ProCAST (casting) & EASi (environment) Acquired: Vdot (Project Management) & Mindware Engineering Inc. (CFD) Virtual Prototyping 2
ESI Group Locations More than 40 countries 15 subsidiaries 1000 people Paris, France Eschborn, Germany Farmington Hills, MI & San Diego, CA, USA Bangalore, India Beijing, China Tokyo, Japan Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam 3
Introduction Pedestrian fatalities in proportion of all road traffic deaths Worldwide: 22% China: 25% Flex-PLI THUMS ADAS Integrated safety 4
Pedestrian impactors Increasing complexity with FLEX-PLI Head form impactors(adult, child) Upper leg form impactor Leg form impactor Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor Developed with Nissan Validated with VW project Partnership with Humanetics 5
Development overview Flexible Pedestrian Legform Impactor Nissan co-creation project Geometry (Nissan) and meshing (ESI) Material testing (Nissan) and calibration (ESI) Sub-assembly validations Assembly validations (pendulum & rig tests) Volkswagen Group validation project Sports car, Sedan, and SUV rig tests Humanetics experimental and modeling partnership Dynamic properties of materials: tests and calibrations Component tests and validations 6
Static Bending Certification Tests Bone material calibrations Curves represent the moment calculated from support reaction and from the section forces (device output). All curves are within corridors 7
Static Bending Certification Tests Femur validation 8
Static Bending Certification Tests Tibia validation 9
Static Bending Certification Tests Knee validation 10
Pendulum test Kinematics 11
Pendulum test 12
Pendulum test All measurements are within corridors Initial velocity ω = 5.2 rad/s Calculated from test movie. 13
VWGR rig tests Sports car 0 30 Sedan 0 30-30 SUV 0 30 14
VW Group rig tests - Flex-PLI V1.6 SEDAN SUV SPORTS CAR AVERAGE PER ANGLE AVERAGE ALL TESTS 0 Test offset: 0.5 ms 0 Test offset: 0.0 ms 0 Test offset: 1.5 ms 0 Value ESI VWGR Value ESI VWGR Value ESI VWGR Value ESI VWGR Femur 3 0.84 0.92 Femur 3 0.83 0.79 Femur 3 0.90 0.97 Femur 3 0.86 0.89 Femur 2 0.89 0.91 Femur 2 0.94 0.95 Femur 2 0.94 0.98 Femur 2 0.93 0.95 Femur 1 0.93 0.95 Femur 1 0.94 0.92 Femur 1 0.89 0.92 Femur 1 0.92 0.93 MCL 0.90 0.83 MCL 0.96 0.96 MCL 0.90 0.88 MCL 0.92 0.89 LCL 0.92 0.97 LCL 0.91 0.78 LCL 0.91 0.91 LCL 0.91 0.89 ACL 0.91 0.84 ACL 0.87 0.93 ACL 0.88 0.86 ACL 0.88 0.87 PCL 0.96 0.89 PCL 0.71 0.81 PCL 0.88 0.88 PCL 0.85 0.86 Tibia 1 0.91 0.94 Tibia 1 0.92 0.92 Tibia 1 0.82 0.84 Tibia 1 0.88 0.90 Tibia 2 0.93 0.96 Tibia 2 0.92 0.92 Tibia 2 0.82 0.88 Tibia 2 0.89 0.92 Tibia 3 0.91 0.94 Tibia 3 0.89 0.90 Tibia 3 0.80 0.88 Tibia 3 0.87 0.91 Tibia 4 0.87 0.92 Tibia 4 0.88 0.89 Tibia 4 0.86 0.96 Tibia 4 0.87 0.92 Average 0.91 0.90 Average 0.88 0.89 Average 0.86 0.89 Average 0.88 0.90 30 Test offset: 1.5 ms 30 Test offset: 0.0 ms 30 Test offset: 1.5 ms 30 Value ESI VWGR Value ESI VWGR Value ESI VWGR Value ESI VWGR Value ESI VWGR Femur 3 0.84 0.90 Femur 3 0.80 0.74 Femur 3 0.93 0.96 Femur 3 0.85 0.86 Femur 3 0.86 0.88 Femur 2 0.91 0.94 Femur 2 0.93 0.90 Femur 2 0.94 0.98 Femur 2 0.93 0.94 Femur 2 0.93 0.94 Femur 1 0.94 0.97 Femur 1 0.93 0.92 Femur 1 0.91 0.94 Femur 1 0.93 0.94 Femur 1 0.93 0.94 MCL 0.86 0.80 MCL 0.94 0.94 MCL 0.90 0.89 MCL 0.90 0.88 MCL 0.91 0.87 LCL 0.83 0.92 LCL 0.72 0.65 LCL 0.76 0.78 LCL 0.77 0.78 LCL 0.84 0.84 ACL 0.91 0.88 ACL 0.93 0.94 ACL 0.86 0.89 ACL 0.90 0.90 ACL 0.89 0.89 PCL 0.86 0.80 PCL 0.90 0.87 PCL 0.84 0.82 PCL 0.87 0.83 PCL 0.85 0.83 Tibia 1 0.91 0.96 Tibia 1 0.90 0.91 Tibia 1 0.85 0.86 Tibia 1 0.89 0.91 Tibia 1 0.89 0.91 Tibia 2 0.93 0.97 Tibia 2 0.89 0.91 Tibia 2 0.81 0.89 Tibia 2 0.88 0.93 Tibia 2 0.89 0.93 Tibia 3 0.90 0.95 Tibia 3 0.88 0.90 Tibia 3 0.78 0.87 Tibia 3 0.85 0.91 Tibia 3 0.87 0.91 Tibia 4 0.86 0.92 Tibia 4 0.87 0.89 Tibia 4 0.86 0.95 Tibia 4 0.86 0.92 Tibia 4 0.87 0.92 Average 0.89 0.90 Average 0.89 0.89 Average 0.85 0.88 Average 0.88 0.89 Average 0.88 0.89-30 Test offset: 0.0 ms Value ESI VWGR Femur 3 0.85 0.90 Femur 2 0.92 0.95 Femur 1 0.95 0.97 MCL 0.88 0.81 LCL 0.86 0.90 ACL 0.88 0.92 PCL 0.81 0.73 Tibia 1 0.90 0.94 Tibia 2 0.95 0.96 Tibia 3 0.92 0.95 Tibia 4 0.89 0.92 Average 0.89 0.89 From V1.5.3 to V1.6, rig test Cora ratings have improved of 3.8% in average, from 0.85 to 0.89. ESI & Humanetics continue to work on dynamic properties of materials to further improve model quality 15
Human body models Motivations and types of models Accident re-construction Development of new standards Rigid body models kinematics Finite element models injury mechanisms Since 2012, ESI partners with Toyota to deliver VPS/PAM-CRASH versions of the THUMS family (Total Human body Models for Safety) 16
THUMS models available from ESI in VPS version Fast models Detailed models 150 K elements 2.3 M elements 1.8 M elements 1.9 M elements AM50 AF05 AM50 AM95 Occ. Ped. Occ. Ped. Occ. Ped. Occ. Ped. V3 V4 V3 TUC H1 2016 H1 2016 V5 VPS model available H2 2016 Conversion from LS-DYNA planed 17
Rigid car shape impact validation VPS THUMS V4 vs. V3 Pedestrian Model Rigid car shape derived from Neon public domain model Initial velocity: 8.33 m/s (30 km/h) Mass: 1500 kg VPS THUMS Model: ESI V4 1.0 Simulation time: 200ms Compared sections: Rigid Car Shape Neon FE Model 18
19
Robustness test: impact until road contact - V3 vs. V4 (1.2 second simulated time Jan Vychytil @ ESI Group 6/2015) THUMS v4 vs THUMS v3 20
Changing model posture: the SIM-POSITIONER Process Adaptation of FE model Handles Variables Motion definition Sequence of targets reach Preview Accelerated VPS run 200ms in 1h52 on E5620 8c Final state is new initial geometry Right arm trajectory results from arm-pelvis contact 21
Validation case 9: pedestrian-neon collision at 40 km/h Animation (Y- view) V4.02 fracture vs. V4.02 no fracture Femur and Tibia null shells fly away after fractures in tibia and fibula. 22
Validation case 9: pedestrian-neon collision at 40 km/h Knee ligament ruptures and lower leg bone fractures 0 ms 20 ms 40 ms 60 ms 23
Advanced Driver Assistance Systems Using onboard cameras, radar, infrared and other sensors Source: Texas Instruments - http://www.ti.com.cn/cn/lit/sl/slyy044a/slyy044a.pdf 24
Pro-SiVIC Sensor and Environment Simulation for ADAS and Autonomous Driving 25
Pro-SiVIC Framework and Core Pedestrian models in Pro-SiVIC Dynamic (arms & legs move) Static 26
Example of camera simulation: motion blur 27
Simulation and cycles 28
Example of Active Safety System Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB) AEB has already matured and is already in many production vehicles Euro-NCAP has carried out City and Inter-urban AEB assessments in 2014 and will add Pedestrian assessment in 2016 To avoid the driving comfort and customer acceptance runoff due to too early intervene, current pre-crash systems can only prevent accidents from happening in a limited degree. When velocity is relative high, it can only mitigate the crash, instead of avoidance. 29
Active, passive & integrated safety Hazard Detection Collision Avoidance Collision Mitigation Injury Mitigation Active Safety Impact Passive Safety Time Aims at avoiding collision Techniques under devt/upgrade Adaptive front light (AFL) Night vision (NV), Adaptive cruise control (ACC), Lane-departure warning (LDW), Emergency Brake Assist (EBA), Lane-Keeping Support (LKS) Pedestrian detection, Blind-spot detection (BSD), Rear collision warning (RCW), Lane-Change Assist (LCA), Park Assist (PA), Traffic-sign-recognition (TSR), Integrated Safety Protect occupant during crash Body crashworthiness restraint systems Restraint systems or pedestrian protection devices can be better deployed using pre-crash information 30
Simulation Solutions for Integrated Safety Human models vision & challenges Active Safety Impact Passive Safety - Muscles/joints+actuators - Control (e.g. Modelica) Challenge: maintain coherent, integrated solutions Visual human models to test sensors/control Active human models to predict kinematics Passive human models to predict injuries Generation of scenarios Initial impact conditions 31
THANK YOU 32