Licensed to Daimler AG - Germany Licensed from the SAE Digital Library Copyright 2011 SAE International E-mailing, copying

and internet posting are prohibited Downloaded Tuesday, March 08, 2011 11:57:16 AM

CAD - Based Synthesis of a Window Lifter Mechanism

A. Harrich, J. Mayr, M. Hirz and P. Rossbacher
Institute of Automotive Engineering, Graz University of Technology

2010-01-0009
Published 04/12/2010

J. Lang and A. Gfrerrer

Institute of Geometry, Graz University of Technology

A. Haselwanter
Magna Steyr Fahrzeugtechnik
Copyright 2010 SAE International

ABSTRACT
The kinematic layout is an essential part in the early development phase of an automotive door. Apart from the door opening mechanism, the main focus lies on the synthesis of the window lifter, which has a high impact on the glass shape and on window tightness properties. The main task is to find a proper window motion with respect to the space requirements and the maximum seal deflection. Boundary conditions are given by the shape of the pillars and the window which are mainly styling driven. In this contribution a method is described to compute an optimized motion allowing for all such restrictions. The applied method is based on a CAD platform and combines simulation with parametric-associative design. This leads to a high level of flexibility and simple handling. The presented approach is an example of an upfront design analysis significantly supporting the door development process.

subsequent detailed design-engineering work. To build up a proper concept efficiently, it is vital to utilize the abilities of the respective tools of virtual engineering. To tap the full potential of CAE development in an automotive concept phase, it is necessary to integrate the design methods and processes within the layout of the respective subsystems. Exemplarily, one of these sub-systems consists of the closures. Comparable to other bodywork components, the layout of the closure system has to fulfill requirements concerning crashworthiness, ergonomics, tightness or others considering weight, costs, legislative regulations or quality. Additionally, the design of closures systems is driven by their kinematics. The kinematics of a standard automotive door can roughly be divided into two areas: The door opening and the window lifting mechanism. Apart from functional aspects, the kinematic layout has a high influence on the car body shell. Thus, the shapes of the door gap and the styling shell have to be considered, to ensure a collision free opening, [1]. Furthermore, the window lifting mechanism is closely linked to the window shape and the pillar shape. Due to this high impact on the styling it is vital that the layout of the door kinematics is addressed at an early development stage.

INTRODUCTION
Today's bodywork design is affected by the attempt of reducing costs and shortening the development process. At the same time, the diversification within the model range is raised and the product quality is enhanced. These requirements lead to an increased application of computer aided engineering (CAE) with an extensive linkage of design platforms, simulation tools and data management systems. Among others, this integration offers the possibility to generate an optimized vehicle concept at an early development stage. This in turn offers the basis for

Author:Gilligan-SID:12298-GUID:46049017-141.113.85.93

Licensed to Daimler AG - Germany Licensed from the SAE Digital Library Copyright 2011 SAE International E-mailing, copying and internet posting are prohibited Downloaded Tuesday, March 08, 2011 11:57:16 AM

THE CONCEPT PHASE IN AUTOMOTIVE DOOR DEVELOPEMENT

Figure 1 shows the major steps of the technical layout in a typical door concept phase. One important input of the concept phase consists of the car body styling. The styling data are transferred to the respective CAE tools, which are used to define a proper door concept. The definition of such an optimized concept is an iterative process with several loops. In the end of the concept phase the result consists of a draft design, which is the basis for the following detail design phase.

philosophies and the door type, systems with one, two or three sealing lines are being used. Apart from its main function, the sealing system has a big impact on acoustic and aesthetic characteristics. The layout of the window lifting mechanism ensures that the seals are not excessively deflected during the window movement. To meet this requirement some adaption of the window surface or the pillar styling can be necessary. The space needed for the window lifter mechanism is one major input for the packaging configuration of the door. The door packaging analysis considers the placement and functionalities of all components assembled, such as the window and its lifting mechanism, lock and check mechanism, safety barriers, door moulding, loudspeaker systems and others. Finally, as a result of numerous analyses in the concept phase, a door concept geometry is generated. The initial geometry includes a main door sheet which is adapted to the styling surface. The concept geometry serves as a source for digital mock up studies of the car, for weightand structural optimisation processes and for the precalculation of production related tasks [2]. This contribution focuses on the definition of the window lifting mechanism. This is one of the major development steps of the concept phase, which will be described in detail. A method is shown to evaluate the given styling regarding its feasibility. Furthermore, an optimized window movement is computed, which in turn delivers an optimal window lifter mechanism. Finally the restrictions for the selection of a proper mechanism are described.

Figure 1. Typical steps in the concept phase of an automotive door Boundaries coming from the car styling relate to different engineering-based tasks. Ergonomic studies regarding the entrance area, the seat position and door opening functionalities are in close interaction with the outer- and (later on inner-) shape specifications of the door itself and its neighbouring components. The access comfort at front and rear doors is an important characteristic of a car. The bodyin-white flange of the door defines the access comfort and influences the design and different technical specifications of the door and the entrance area. The development of the door gap goes hand in hand with the hinge axis definition process. With a turn-in analysis a collision between the opened door and neighbouring body-inwhite components can be avoided. Furthermore, the definition of the hinge axis has a high influence on the position of several door components like the hinges, the locking system or the check arm. In a next major step the seals are selected. There are different sealing concepts used in automotive closure applications. Depending on the vehicle class, the car manufacturer

GENERAL WORK FLOW FOR THE DEFINITION OF A WINDOW LIFTER MECHANISM

A typical workflow to define the kinematic layout of the window movement is shown in Figure 2. The CAD input data consist of the window face and its boundary curves, which are predefined by the styling. The window movement has to be computed on the basis of these styling inputs. Boundary conditions are given by the window seals which are arranged along the boundary curves of the window face.

Author:Gilligan-SID:12298-GUID:46049017-141.113.85.93

Licensed to Daimler AG - Germany Licensed from the SAE Digital Library Copyright 2011 SAE International E-mailing, copying and internet posting are prohibited Downloaded Tuesday, March 08, 2011 11:57:16 AM

Figure 2. A typical workflow in the layout of a window lifter mechanism In a closed position the window is embedded in seals preventing leakage and damping its vibration. By moving the window, the glass slides along these seals. If the glass is not perfectly moving in itself, it will deflect the seals. This can cause noise and increased wear. To prevent these effects, the maximum seal deflection must not exceed given limits. The kinematic synthesis process will deliver an optimized window trajectory and the corresponding data on the seals deflection. It may happen that even the optimal window motion delivers deflection values exceeding the seals producers' limits. In this case the given window surface will simply not be appropriate. The system will deliver an alternative surface for a modified window, which sources as a styling proposal. In real life examples this alternative may only slightly differ from the stylist's original suggestions, but it will all but reduce the seals deflection to zero. In a next step the lifter mechanism is selected and defined. The result of this definition process consists of a kinematic layout of the window lifter. This kinematic layout contains all relevant data to characterize the architecture of the mechanism. These data may be used as an input for the detail design as well as for package investigations.

Figure 3. Surfaces and curves being movable in themselves Strictly speaking, such surfaces would be the perfect side window faces as they may cause no seal deflection at all if properly moved. The trajectories of such a proper movement would also be moveable in itself. Depending on the used surfaces this can be straight lines, circles and screw lines, Figure 3.

ASSUMPTIONS CONCERNING THE WINDOW MOTION

Normally, the input styling data are provided in a neutral data format, which hincludes no information regarding its creation. Therefore it can not be assured, that the styling data fulfill the demands of a screw surface. Additionally, deviations to an ideal surface may be desired by means of styling. The required input data consist of a styling window face S and its boundaries: The roof curve R, the daylight curve D and - in the case of a front door - the B-pillar B, Figure 4. The window seals are arranged along the boundary curves R, D and B. The respective limitations in terms of deflection correspond to the used seal types and may vary in each direction. The deflection of the seals along R can be neglected due to the fact that the window glass is only in contact with them in the closed position. By moving the window, its surface traverses along the seals of D and B.

KINEMATIC SYNTHESIS APPROACH OBJECTIVES

The task of the synthesis approach is to find an optimized movement of the given styling data, whereas the seal deflection should not exceed a maximum value. To satisfy this restriction a trajectory is sought, in which the window surface is moving best in itself. Such a movement can only be fulfilled by surfaces that are cylindrical surfaces (including planes), the surfaces of revolution and the helical surfaces (screw surfaces), Figure 3. The latter contains the former ones as special cases.

Author:Gilligan-SID:12298-GUID:46049017-141.113.85.93

Licensed to Daimler AG - Germany Licensed from the SAE Digital Library Copyright 2011 SAE International E-mailing, copying and internet posting are prohibited Downloaded Tuesday, March 08, 2011 11:57:16 AM

The screw motion MS will fit S, but ignore the shape of B. Similarly, the screw motion MB will fit B as properly as possible, but it will ignore the shape of the window surface S. Therefore, it is necessary to find an optimized screw motion M, which meets both targets. This motion M will lead to minimal total deflections. In Figure 5 M is symbolized by its axis a.

ABOUT THE METHOD

Figure 4. The styling input data The deflection is limited along both curves normal to the moving surface. Additionally, the movement of the window surface is restricted in longitudinal direction along the curve B. Thus, the shape of the curve B has a high influence on the eventual optimized window movement. Let MS be the optimal screw motion belonging to S. This screw motion is symbolized in Figure 5 by its screw axis aS. Moving S by MS will cause minimal normal deflections along D. If S was a helical surface the deflection would even be zero. However, in general the boundary curve B will not be a trajectory of MS. This will cause considerable deflections along B. To have minimal deflections along B, the surface S has to make a movement in a way, that the boundary curve B is moving in itself. Therefore, a screw line has to be found, which best fits the shape of B. This screw line will define the motion MB with its screw axis aB, and its screw parameter, Figure 5. Moving S according to MB will lead to minimal deflections along B. However, such a movement can cause large deflections at D. In Figure 6 the steps within the kinematic synthesis are displayed. If a surface S (side window) and the B-pillar B is given straight from the stylist it is unlikely that S is a helical surface and that B is a screw line. All the same they have to be the starting point of the engineering job. Firstly a helical motion has to be found which best fits the given surface S and the given curve B. This is the core part of the job. A detailed description of this method will not be given here as this matter is currently undergoing a patent process. It basically is some optimization in a higher dimensional space providing the optimal screw motion M as a result, [3]. Normally, the styling data of the window surface S and the Bpillar curve B are available in a CAD platform. These data serve as input for a following optimization step to determine the optimized motion M. Due to performance reasons, this part of the process is done in a separate computation program, which is linked to the CAD platform with a data interface. The input data arrays are generated in the CAD program using internal macro routines and transferred via a neutral data format into the computation code. The output of the optimization step consists of the screw axis a and the corresponding screw parameter. The results can be retransferred to the CAD platform within the data interface.

Figure 6. Workflow of the kinematic synthesis approach Further on a helical surface S and a screw line B have to be defined, which could serve as substitutes for S and B. To this end the roofline R is subjected to the motion M: This way, the helical surface S is generated which truly can be moved in itself. The top end point of B, subjected to M, will move

Figure 5. The window sheet and its set of computed screw axes

Author:Gilligan-SID:12298-GUID:46049017-141.113.85.93

Licensed to Daimler AG - Germany Licensed from the SAE Digital Library Copyright 2011 SAE International E-mailing, copying and internet posting are prohibited Downloaded Tuesday, March 08, 2011 11:57:16 AM

along a screw line B on S. B again will be moved in itself if the motion M is applied. S and B are the perfect substitutes for S and B, causing zero deflection along any of the seals. At this point it may seem that replacing the designer surface S by another surface S will significantly compromise the design. As quite a few examples have shown, this is not the case. The optimal motion M found above perfectly matches the given designer surface S. The deviation between S and S in general is pretty small. Considerable deviations will only occur if the given design surface S is far away from any selfmovable surface. In this case the problem would certainly have to be sent back to the designer's drawing board. Analog to the creation of S a new B-pillar curve B is generated, by screwing the endpoint of the selected generation curve. The shape of the initial boundary curve B is an input for the optimization of M. Therefore, the new screw curve B will only have very small deviations to the initial boundary curve B. S to S can easily be compared by measuring the distances between the two surfaces. These distances have two different interpretations: In the discussion between the stylist and the designer the maximum distance between S and S can be an argument for the decision whether or not the original surface S should be replaced by the screw surface S. If it is prefered to stick to S, the maximum distance between S and S can be interpreted as a measure for the maximum deflection along the sealing D. Analogously B to B can be compared, checking the quality of B. If the substitute surface S is taken, B also has to be replaced by B. Again the distances between B and B can be interpreted as a measure for the deflection. This deflection will only occur if the original designer surface will remain. Replacing S and B by S and B will all but deliver a smooth motion with no deflection.

doors. With this mechanism the window glass is clamped at two sliding blocks which are moving along two guide rails. The sliding blocks are connected with a cable driven by an actor.

Figure 7. Prevalent cable actuated window lifter mechanism with two guides Using the described type of window mechanism will cause some restrictions concerning the window motion. The first restriction is resulting from the cable linking. This connection implies that both sliding blocks will cover the same distance along their guides. This means that the optimal window motion M, can only be ensured if each attachment point between window and sliding block has the same distance to the screw axis a. The second restriction follows from the guide rails. To ensure an optimal motion M it is necessary that the guide rails follow the shape of a screw line. Due to production cost limitations screw line guides will be replaced by circular shaped rails. To approximate a screw line arc by a circular arc will not cause serious deviations. Similar to the described cable actuated window lifter, also other types of lifter mechanisms have boundary conditions and restrictions. With these restrictions an optimized motion M may not be perfectly realized. However, it is tried to approximate the optimal motion M. This will lead to an approximated motion Ma, which consequently increases the deflections along the seals. Therefore, an evaluation of the seals deflection is necessary again.

DEFINITION OF THE LIFTER MECHANISM ABOUT THE LIFTER MECHANISM

Having found a feasible styling and an optimal window motion M, the next step is the definition of the window lifter. For this purpose there is a multitude of possible lifter types available. They can be divided by their drive arrangement and their mechanism configuration. Currently in most instances electric driven lifter types with one single motor are being used. Concerning the mechanism, there are three major types actuated by leverages, traction means or traction and attraction means [4]. Today, the prevalent used mechanisms are traction driven types, using Bowden cables. Exemplarily, in Figure 7 a cable actuated window lifter with two guide rails is shown. This type is commonly used in front

WORK FLOW FOR DESIGNING THE LIFTER MECHANISM

The workflow for the definition of the window lifter mechanism is shown in Figure 8. This definition process is driven by requirements concerning costs, functionality, production reasons and others. Costs will certainly be the main driving factor. These requirements may reduce the

Author:Gilligan-SID:12298-GUID:46049017-141.113.85.93

Licensed to Daimler AG - Germany Licensed from the SAE Digital Library Copyright 2011 SAE International E-mailing, copying and internet posting are prohibited Downloaded Tuesday, March 08, 2011 11:57:16 AM

range of possible mechanism types to a small field of concepts.

handling and a high rate of automation, which support the engineers in the assessment and in their decision. This leads to an advanced assistance of the vehicle styling and to a high quality of the resulting kinematic layout. This is the basis for subsequent detailed design-engineering work. Thus, the presented method will significantly shorten the amount of engineering effort within the construction of the side window kinematics. It will simultaneously improve the quality of the final result.

REFERENCES
1. Harrich A., Hirz M., Mayr J., Rossbacher P., Haselwanter A., Kinematic Optimization of an Automotive Door, presented at NAFEMS World Congress 2009, Greece, 2009 2. Harrich A., Mayr J., Hirz M., Haselwanter A., Untersttzung der Trenkonstruktion in der Konzeptphase durch parametrisch-assoziative Konstruktionsmethoden, VDI-Berichte 2064, 2009 3. Pottmann H., Hofer M., Odehnal B., Wallner J., Line Geometry for 3D Shape Understanding and Reconstruction, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3021: 297-309, 2004, doi: 10.1007/b97865. 4. Grabner J., Nothhaft R., Konstruieren von PKW Karosserien, Springer, Berlin, ISBN 3-540-43290-6, 2002

Figure 8. Workflow of the mechanism definition The selected mechanism has restrictions concerning its trajectories. With these restrictions it is often not possible to follow the desired optimized motion M perfectly. This is why the approximating motion Ma is generated by some simulation within a CAD program. Of course, circular guides will not be able to perfectly replace the screw line rails. So the motion Ma may cause unwanted deflection along the seals. A final deflection check has to be applied to ensure that there are no problems. If necessary, modifications of the styling, the sealings or the lifter mechanism can be carried out. In case, that the deflections are within the given limits, the feasibility of the selected mechanism and the styling is approved. As a result of the definition process the kinematic layout of the window lifter is generated. This layout serves as an input for a subsequent packaging process and will state the basis for the detail design of the door at the end of the concept phase.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Alexander Harrich Institute of Automotive Engineering Graz University of Technology Inffeldgasse 11/1 A-8010 Graz, Austria +43 316 873-5255 alexander.harrich@tugraz.at

DEFINITIONS/ABBREVIATIONS
CAD Computer aided design CAE Computer aided engineering

SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Modern automotive development processes are driven to optimize the development process and to minimize costs and time delays. The basis for such an improved development process stands in a proper concept layout with a high level of significance. To get a suitable vehicle concept, a combination of design and simulation is vital. The presented approach is an example of an integrated CAE method. It is meant to be implemented at an early stage of the door design process. The target was the definition of the kinematic layout of a window movement. The input styling data were analyzed with respect to their feasibility and an optimized result was computed. The advantages of this method are its simple

Author:Gilligan-SID:12298-GUID:46049017-141.113.85.93

Licensed to Daimler AG - Germany Licensed from the SAE Digital Library Copyright 2011 SAE International E-mailing, copying and internet posting are prohibited Downloaded Tuesday, March 08, 2011 11:57:16 AM

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAE's peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. This process requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE. ISSN 0148-7191 doi:10.4271/2010-01-0009

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. SAE Customer Service: Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada) Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA) Fax: 724-776-0790 Email: CustomerService@sae.org SAE Web Address: http://www.sae.org Printed in USA

Author:Gilligan-SID:12298-GUID:46049017-141.113.85.93