Advances in Engineering Software xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Advances in Engineering Software

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/advengsoft

Research paper

Cross-sectional shape design of automobile structure considering rigidity

and driver's field of view
Zuo Wenjiea,b,*, Lu Yayunb, Zhao Xingb, Bai Jiantaob
a
State Key Laboratory of Automotive Simulation and Control, Jilin University, Changchun 130025, PR China
b
School of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Jilin University, Changchun 130025, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Thin-walled beam structure can be used to efficiently predict the performances of automobile frame for con-
Automobile frame ceptual design. However, it is an open issue to acquire an accurate cross-sectional shape of A-pillar structure
Conceptual design considering both rigidity and driver's field of view (DFOV). This paper proposes an approach to calculate the
Sectional shape cross-sectional rigidity and DFOV. Firstly, formulations of cross-sectional properties, including open, single-cell,
Driver's field of view
double-cell, three-cell, four-cell section, are summarized. Secondly, the obstruction angle is introduced to de-
Obstruction angle
scribe DFOV, which is acquired by a nonlinear optimization model. Finally, a A-pillar example of Toyota RAV4,
solved by the developed software – CarFrame, proves that the proposed method can be completely applied at the
conceptual design of the automobile structure.

1. Introduction cross-sectional shapes are needed to describe the simplified automobile

The design of automobile body consists of conceptual and detailed
design. Conceptual design is crucial and indispensable for the devel-
opment of new automobile body [1]. At the conceptual design state,
automobile performances, such as rigidity [2,3], vibration [4] and
crashworthiness [5–7] are often taken into consideration to reduce the
design cycles and manufacturing venture for detailed design. Espe-
cially, many automobile manufacturers make great efforts to shorten
production period and to extend the spectrum of new automobile, so
the demand for conceptual design persists in increasing.
Since the automobile frame occupies almost one third of the total
weight of a passenger car, a large amount of design engineers have been
focused on this area. For example, an automobile front-structure with
metamodel-based lightweight design was solved by using robust opti-
mization [8]. As well, it was also noticed to the dynamic-based sensi-
tivity for a railway vehicle [9]. Structural rigidity had great effect on
the fatigue strength of the frame and the dynamic performance of ve-
hicle [10]. Meanwhile, the multi-objective lightweight collaborative
design of the automobile frame was conducted for passenger cars by
optimizing the thickness and cross-sectional shape [11]. These methods
promoted the development of conceptual design [12,13], in which it
was well solved by using a simplified automobile structure consisting of
thin-walled beams, as shown in Fig. 1. This simplified automobile frame
can largely decrease the computational cost of modeling and analysis,
but simultaneously reduce the accuracy of solution. Hence, complex
structure [14]. For example, some researchers made great efforts to
establish simplified automobile frame. A multiple cross-sectional shape
optimization method for automotive body frame was firstly proposed
by Yoshimura et al, but only open, single-cell and double-cell sections
were applied to the automobile [15]. Besides, the issue for thin-walled
beam with complex cross-sectional shape under axial crushing load
considering crashworthiness design and optimization was solved by
using genetic algorithm [16]. Also, automobile structure considering
semi-rigid joints was put forward to improve the accuracy of stiffness
evaluation [17]. Additionally, sensitivity analysis of component was
put forward to modify and optimize the automobile body structure with
rectangular tubes [18]. Recently, cross-sectional shape design and op-
timization of automotive body with stamping constraints was studied
[19]. However, above investigations do not involve the more complex
three-cell and four-cell sections. In fact, three-cell and four-cell sections
have outstanding designability for the rigidity and stability, and are
often used in A-pillar or B-pillar structures of automobile body.
Besides the rigidity of A-pillar of automobile, it is critical for drivers
to acquire effective DFOV for manipulating and controlling the vehicle.
There are some criterions to describe or measure DFOV, for example,
SAE_J1050 and GB11562-1994 standards. In engineering, the DFOV can
be measured by using computer simulations of a digital human model,
which is positioned on the seat of an automobile body [20]. Generally,
this automobile body is described by a refined CAD model with concept
A surfaces, which is a time-consuming task. If we position a digital

*
Corresponding author at: State Key Laboratory of Automotive Simulation and Control, Jilin University, Changchun 130025, PR China.
E-mail address: zuowenjie@jlu.edu.cn (W. Zuo).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.09.006
Received 22 July 2017; Received in revised form 1 September 2017; Accepted 17 September 2017
0965-9978/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: zuo, w., Advances in Engineering Software (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2017.09.006
W. Zuo et al. Advances in Engineering Software xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Fig. 1. Simplified Toyota RAV4’s frame.

Fig. 4. Double cells.

Fig. 2. A typical complex section.

Fig. 3. Single cell.

human model into an automobile frame, the measuring cost of DFOV

can be largely reduced, because the automobile frame model can be
easily created by using thin-walled beam within 2 or 3 days. To our Fig. 5. Three cells.

knowledge, there is no mathematical formulation to rationally calculate

the DFOV. So the paper puts forward a method that can calculate the
obstruction angle of automobile frame, and we further program a CAE
software to accelerate the design process.
Therefore, in this paper, we focus on the formulations of the tor-
sional moment of inertia of open, double-cell, three-cell and four-cell
section, and obstruction angle of DFOV.
2. Formulations of cross-sectional rigidity
A typical complex section is shown in Fig. 2. The shape of complex
cross section is designed in the yoz coordinates. Point C is the centroid
of cross section. Each sheet can be regarded as a folded line including
some rectangle segments. Therefore, the cross-sectional area of all

2
W. Zuo et al. Advances in Engineering Software xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Fig. 6. Four cells.

Fig. 9. Components of Toyota RAV4’s frame.

Fig. 10. Cross-sectional shape of Toyota RAV4’A-pillar.

Fig. 7. (a) Schematic diagram of the obstruction angle; (b) The obstruction angle in top
view.
sheets is
m n m n
A= ∑ ∑ Aij = ∑ ∑ lij ti
i=1 j=1 i=1 j=1 (1)

where m denotes the number of sheets; n denotes the number of seg-

ment of the i-th sheet; ti denotes the thickness of the i-th sheet; Aij and lij
denote the area and length of the j-th segment of i-th sheet, respectively.
The centroid of cross section may be written as
m n m n
1 1
yc =
A
∑ ∑ Aij ycij and z c = A
∑ ∑ Aij z cij
i j i j (2)

where ( yCij , z Cij ) indicates the coordinate of the center of j-th segment in
i-th sheet.
Bending moments of inertia Iy, Iz and product of inertia Iyz with
Fig. 8. Geometric relationships of E1, E2, and P1.
regard to the centroid of cross section can be expressed as

3
W. Zuo et al. Advances in Engineering Software xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Table 1 n m e n m
lij ⎛ lij ⎞
Geometric data of A-pillar section. qr ∑∑ ti
− ∑ ⎜ s ∑ ∑ ti ⎟
q = Fr (r = 1, 2, 3 … m)
i=1 j=1 s = 1, s ≠ r ⎝ i=1 j=1 ⎠ (10)
Point number Coordinates (mm)
where qr is the shear flow of the r-th cell, Fr is the enclosed area of the r-
Y Z
th cell, and e is the number of cells.
1 0.40 33.91 Step 2: substituting qr into Eq. (11) to obtain the torsional moment
3 9.04 33.96 of inertia
4 −15.17 25.51
e
8 −21.58 13.15
9 −9.83 −32.15
J c = 4 ∑ qr ·Fr
r=1 (11)
11 −20.25 −13.76
12 −16.66 −2.31
To be more specific, the torsional moment of inertia J1c of single-cell
14 −17.55 −20.14
18 19.65 20.03 section, as shown in Fig. 3, can be expressed as
19 12.29 19.58
21 11.42 28.16 4F12
J1c =
23 15.01 −0.35 ll / tl + lu / tu (12)
25 17.50 14.00
26 9.86 −18.79 As shown in Fig. 4, the torsional moment of inertia J2c of double-cell
27 6.64 −27.98 section, can be written as
28 −4.26 −32.46
−31.02
29
31
1.52
8.92 17.89
J2c =
{ (
4 F12
ll
tl
+
lr
tr
+
lu − lu′
tu ) − F ( + )}
2
2
lr
tr
lu′
tu
33 33.27 19.55 lr2
34
37
26.09
−12.63
19.02
−14.61
( lr
tr
+
lu′
tu )( ll
tl
+
lr
tr
+ tu )−
lu − lu′
tr2 (13)
38 −3.84 11.98 As shown in Fig. 5, the torsional moment of inertia J3c of three-cell
40 −12.80 −43.32
41 −9.18 −37.33
section, can be expressed as
42 −5.46 −29.65
J3c = 4(q1 F1 + q2 F2 + q3 F3) (14)

where q1, q2 and q3 are solved by Eq. (15)

m n 3 3
⎡ ⎛ lij ti ⎞ 2 ⎛ lij ti ⎞ 2 2 ⎤
Iy = ∑∑ ⎢ ⎜ 12 ⎟ sin θij + ⎜ 12 ⎟ cos θij + lij ti yCij ⎥ ⎡ lu lm − lm′ l l lm − lm′ ⎤
i=1 j=1 ⎣ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦ (3) + + r − r −
⎢ tu tm tr tr tm ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎛ q1 ⎞ ⎛ F1 ⎞
⎢− lr lr l ′ lm′ ⎥ q2 = F2
m n 3
⎡ lij ti ⎞ 2
3
⎛ lij ti ⎞ 2 2 ⎤
+ m −
Iz = ∑ ∑ ⎢ ⎜⎛ ⎟ cos θij + ⎜ ⎟ sin θij + lij ti z Cij ⎥ ⎢ tr tr tm tm ⎥ ⎜ q ⎟ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟
12 12 (4) ⎢ ⎥ ⎝ 3 ⎠ ⎝ F3 ⎠
i=1 j=1 ⎣⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦ lm − lm′ lm′ lm l
⎢− − + l ⎥
⎢
⎣ tm tm tm tl ⎦⎥ (15)
m n 3 3
⎡ lij ti − lij ti ⎞ ⎤
Iyz = ∑ ∑ ⎢ ⎛⎜ 24 ⎟ sin 2θij + lij ti z Cij yCij ⎥ The J4c of four-cell section, as shown in Fig. 6, can be written as
i=1 j=1 ⎣⎝ ⎠ ⎦ (5)
J4c = 4(q1 F1 + q2 F2 + q3 F3 + q4 F4 ) (16)
where θij indicates the angle between the j-th segment of i-th sheet and
the positive z axis. Then, the principal moment of inertia are obtained where q1, q2 q3 and q4 are acquired by Eq. (17)
by
⎡ lu lr 1 l − lm′ lr l − lm′ ⎤
1 2 1 + + m − 1 − m 0
Imax = (Iz + Iy ) + I yz + (Iz − Iy )2 ⎢ tu tr1 tm tr 1 tm ⎥
2 2 (6) ⎢ ⎥
⎢− lr 1 lm′ lr 1 lm′ ⎥ q1 F1
⎢ + − 0 ⎥⎛q ⎞ ⎛ F ⎞
1 1 tr 1 tm tr 1 tm
Imin = (Iz + Iy ) − 2
I yz + (Iz − Iy )2 ⎢ ⎥ ⎜ 2 ⎟ = ⎜ 2⎟
2 2 (7) ⎢ lm − lm′ lm′ lr 2 l lr ⎥ q3 ⎜ F3 ⎟
⎢− − + m − 2 ⎥ ⎜q ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
The angle φ of principle direction of inertia with regard to the re- tm tm tr 2 tm tr 2 ⎝ 4 ⎠ ⎝ F4 ⎠
⎢ ⎥
ference z′ axis is derived as ⎢ lr 2 lr 2 l⎥
⎢0 0 − + l⎥
⎣ tr 2 tr 2 tl ⎦
1 −2Iyz ⎞
φ= tan−1 ⎜⎛ ⎟ (17)
2 ⎝ Iy − Iz ⎠ (8)
where F1, F2, F3 and F4 are the enclosed area of Cell 1, Cell 2, Cell 3 and
The y′cz′ coordinate axis is called principle coordinate axis of in- Cell 4, respectively; lu, lm, ll, lr 1 and lr 2 are the length of upper sheet,
ertia. The torsional moment of inertia of an open section is calculated as middle sheet, lower sheet, reinforcement 1 and reinforcement 2, re-
m n spectively; lu′ is the part of upper sheet as shown in Fig. 4; lm′ is the
Jo = ∑ ∑ lij ti3 length of the shared part of Cell 2 and Cell 3 as shown in Figs. 5 and 6;
i=1 j=1 (9) tu, tm, tl, tr 1 and tr 2 are the thickness of upper sheet, middle sheet, lower
The process of formulating the torsional moment of inertia for close sheet, reinforcement 1 and reinforcement 2, respectively.
section depends on the number of cells. For the sake of brevity, the In addition, when a more complex section consist of open and close
algebraic equation with respect to the originally integral equation is sections, the torsional moment inertia is
directly given here. For the arbitrary number of cells, the torsional J = J o + Jkc k = 1, 2, 3 and 4 (18)
moment of inertia can be generally calculated by the following two
steps. In summary, the bending moments of inertia Iy and Iz for the five
Step 1: solving the system of linear Eq. (10) to obtain shear flow of types of cross sections are the same. However, the torsional moments of
each cell inertia J for the five types of cross sections are different.

4
W. Zuo et al. Advances in Engineering Software xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Fig. 11. (a) Cross-sectional design; (b) Solution of DFOV; (c) Solution of rigidity; (d) Results of rigidity.

3. Formulation of the obstruction angle
As shown in Fig. 7(a), the obstruction angle is the blind area that A-
pillar shelters from driver's view when driver look to the left A-pillar.
SAE_J1050 standard is stricter than others, so this paper introduces this
one to derive the formulations of obstruction angle. The boundaries of
sight line can be determined by the tangential of cross-sectional shape
with respect to the left and right eye points E1(x E1, yE1 ) and E2(x E2 , yE2 ) ,
as shown in Fig. 7(b), i.e. line AE1 and BE2. Because the points of A-
pillar are discrete, the tangent points A and B can be approximately

5
W. Zuo et al. Advances in Engineering Software xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Table 2 Max α
Three key points’ coordinates. −r < x E1 < r
⎧
⎪−r < yE1 < r
Point name X (mm) Y (mm) Z (mm) ⎪− r < x E < r
2
⎪
N1 −1494.74 600.73 1241.77 ⎪−r < yE2 < r
N2 −1202.95 650.40 930.45
S. T.
⎨ x E1 2 + yE 2 = r 2
P1 −1568.73 575.69 1129.65 ⎪ 2 1

⎪ x E2 + yE2 2 = r 2
⎪
⎪ (x E1 − x E2)2 + (yE1 − yE2 )2 = 65
⎩ (21)
where E1(x E1, yE1 ) and E2(x E2 , yE2 ) are the design variables. Eq. (21) is a
nonlinear optimization problem, where polynomial expressions are
computationally inexpensive. So genetic algorithm with elitism pre-
servation is used to solve this problem. To evaluate the fitness of genetic
algorithm, the constrained problem (21) is converted to an un-
constrained problem by penalty function method.

4. Example and application

Above solution procedures of cross-sectional rigidity and the ob-

struction angle are coded into the previous engineering software:
CarFrame [17,21]. As shown in Fig. 9, the automobile structure in-
cludes forty-six components, which are colorfully classified by the
cross-sectional shape. The shape of complex cross section of A-pillar is
demonstrated in Fig. 10, whose detailed geometric data is listed in
Table 1. The thickness of sheet 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 is 1.0, 1.2, 0.8, 1.2 and
Fig. 12. Fitness vs. generation of genetic algorithm with elitism preservation.
1.4 mm, respectively. The configurations of GA, i.e., the number of
population, the number of generations, crossover probability, and
Table 3 mutation probability are, respectively, 200, 100, 0.4, 0.05.
Sectional properties of RAV4’s A-pillar. The graphic user interfaces (GUIs) of solution and results are depicted
in Fig. 11. Users only need to create the cross-sectional shape by mouse-
Properties Results
click, and then the properties of rigidity can be directly solved. While
2
Cross-sectional area A (mm ) 314.33 calculating obstruction angle, three key points are needed to enter, which
Centroid yc (mm) −0.70 are the two endpoints N1 and N2 of A-pillar and the neck pivot point of
Centroid zc (mm) −0.94
driver's left side P1, respectively. The coordinates of the three key points,
Bending moments of inertia Iy (mm4) 126588.93
Bending moments of inertia Iz (mm4) 54780.03
listed in Table 2, can be input by the GUI of Fig. 11(b). Eleven seconds is
Torsional moments of inertia J (mm4) 3.00 spent on the optimization problem, solved by genetic algorithm. The
Obstruction angle α (°) 1.449 curve of fitness vs. generation is show in Fig. 12, where elitism pre-
servation promotes this iteration process much steadier. Optimal solution
of Eq. (21), i.e., obstruction angle, is acquired as 1.449°. The obtained
regarded as the bottom point and the top point of A-pillar section, re- cross-sectional properties of A-pillar are all summarized in Table 3. Be-
spectively. Therefore, the coordinates A(xA,yA) and B(xB,yB) are both sides, based on the SAE_J1050 standard, the DFOV is measured by using
known for subsequent calculation. automobile frame in Fig. 9. The measured DFOV is 1.506°, so the error is
The driver's left and right eye points E1 and E2 rotate around neck 3.8%, which can be completely accepted in engineering.
pivot point P1, which is the origin of coordinates. The geometric re-
lationship of these three points is displayed in Fig. 8. Accordingly, E1
5. Conclusion
and E2 are on the circle with the center of P1, and its radius is r
(r = 32.52 + 982 ). The obstruction angle is the maximum angle be-
This paper proposed a comprehensive design of complex cross sec-
tween the lines AE1 and BE2. This angle can be defined as
tion for automobile structure, including the cross-sectional rigidity and
the obstruction angle, which is useful for the conceptual design. The
k + k2 ⎞
α = arctan ⎛ 1 ⎜ ⎟ torsional moment of inertia for open, single-cell, double-cell, three-cell
⎝ 1 − k1 k2 ⎠ (19) and four-cell cross sections was formulated to evaluate the rigidity of
thin-walled beam. The calculation of obstruction angle was expressed
where k1 and k2 indicate the slope of straight line AE1 and BE2, re-
as a nonlinear optimization problem, solved by genetic algorithm. The
spectively, i.e.
significant contribution of this study was that we derived the for-
yE1 − yA yE2 − yB mulations to rationally calculate the DFOV for the first time. Numerical
k1 = and k2 = example proved that CarFrame software can effectively acquire the
x E1 − xA x E2 − xB (20)
sectional properties of A-pillar. The proposed method can guide the
conceptual design of automobile frame and reduce the risk of cross-
Therefore, the calculation of the obstruction angle is an optimiza-
sectional shape design.
tion problem, constrained with the above geometric relationship, which
may be defined as
Acknowledgment

This work was supported by the National Natural Science

Foundation of China (grant number 51575226), and the China
Postdoctoral Science Foundation.

6
W. Zuo et al.
References
[1] Qin H, Liu Z, Liu Y, Zhong H. An object-oriented MATLAB toolbox for automotive
body conceptual design using distributed parallel optimization. Adv Eng Soft
2017;106:19–32.
[2] Zuo W. Bi-level optimization for the cross-sectional shape of a thin-walled car body
frame with static stiffness and dynamic frequency stiffness constraints. Pro IMechE
Part D 2015;229. 1046–59.
[3] Mundo D, Donders S, Stigliano G, Auweraer HVD. Concept design of vehicle bodies
using reduced models of beams, joints and panels. Int J Veh Des 2011;57:71–83.
[4] Vizzini S, Olsson M, Scattina A. Component mode synthesis methods for a body-in-
white noise and vibration analysis. Pro IMechE Part D 2016;231. 279–88.
[5] Hamza K, Saitou K. Automated vehicle structural crashworthiness design via a crash
mode matching algorithm. J Mech Des 2010;133:33–43.
[6] Hamza K, Saitou K. Design optimization of vehicle structures for crashworthiness
using equivalent mechanism approximations. J Mech Des 2004;127. 485–92.
[7] Gutowski M, Palta E, Fang H. Crash analysis and evaluation of vehicular impacts on
W-beam guardrails placed on sloped medians using finite element simulations. Adv
Eng Soft 2017;112:88–100.
[8] Zhu P, Zhang Y, Chen G. Metamodel-based lightweight design of an automotive
front-body structure using robust optimization. Pro IMechE Part D 2009;223.
1133–47.
[9] Ding G, He Y, Zou Y, Li R, Ma X, Qin S. Multi-body dynamics-based sensitivity
analysis for a railway vehicle. Pro IMechE Part F 2015;229. 518–29.
[10] Olatunbosun O, Gauchia A, Boada M, Diaz V. Dynamic performance analysis of a
light van body-in-white structure. Pro IMechE Part D 2011;225. 167–77.
Advances in Engineering Software xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx
[11] Wang C, Wang D, Zhang S. Design and application of lightweight multi-objective
collaborative optimization for a parametric body-in-white structure. Pro IMechE
Part D 2016;230. 273–88.
[12] Nishigaki H. First order analysis for automotive body structure design using excel.
R&D Rev Toyota CRDL 2002;37:1–8.
[13] Zuo W, Saitou K. Multi-material topology optimization using ordered SIMP inter-
polation. Struct Multidisciplinary Optimization 2017;55. 477–91.
[14] Hou W, Zhang H, Zhang W, Hu P. Rapid structural property evaluation system for
car body advanced design. Int J Veh Des 2011;57. 242–53.
[15] Yoshimura M, Nishiwaki S, Izui K. A multiple cross-sectional shape optimization
method for automotive body frames. J Meche Des 2005;127:49–57.
[16] Bai J, Li Y, Zuo W. Cross-sectional shape optimisation for thin-walled beam
crashworthiness with stamping constraints using genetic algorithm. Int J Veh Des
2017;73:76–95.
[17] Zuo W, Li W, Xu T, Xuan S, Na J. A complete development process of finite element
software for body-in-white structure with semi-rigid beams. NET Framework. Adv
Eng Soft 2012;45. 261–71.
[18] Chen W, Zuo W. Component sensitivity analysis of conceptual vehicle body for
lightweight design under static and dynamic stiffness demands. Int J Veh Des
2014;66. 107–23.
[19] Zuo W, Bai J. Cross-sectional shape design and optimization of automotive body
with stamping constraints. Int J Automot Technol 2016;17. 1003–11.
[20] Gilad I, Byran E. Quantifying driver's field-of-view in tractors: methodology and
case study. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 2015;21. 20–9.
[21] Zuo W. An object-oriented graphics interface design and optimization software for
cross-sectional shape of automobile body. Adv Eng Soft 2013;64:1–10.