Ideas & Consultation Record

This was the first conversation I had with Dr. Ojha. This conversation included introductions and advice for moving forward. Dr. Ojha attached a report for preliminary reading (Crash Analysis of Car Chassis Frame Using ANSYS Software) and made recommendations such as starting to brainstorm ideas and learning the software ANSYS which would be used later in the project.

From this interaction I began reading the project report and making notes to fully understand the project, the topic and how it is expected to be carried out. I proceeded to download the ANSYS Software and explore its features.  Reading  the project report gave a solid understanding of what to research and kickstarted brainstorming potential improvements that can be made to the car chassis.

I brainstormed these ideas:

• Optimizing the design by exploring the material placement throughout the chassis structure.
• An alternative shape of the chassis to protect the safety cabin.

The final project proposal to be submitted to the department was approved by the supervisor and  delivered to the department. Dr. Ojha indicated to me that the headings that should be discussed in the detailed proposal and advised me to continue work on it.

I carried out further research on the topics to prepare the literature review and began developing my background, problem statement,  introduction and methodology. At this stage the Gantt Chart was created. 

I inquired about referencing the impact test data from the preliminary reading material, however, Dr. Ojha recommended that more authentic data be sourced unless the document contained such data from a published source. In that case the information could  be referenced and used. 

I began my research for credible impact test data for a typical car chassis. This process took a lot of time and the approach had to be changed. Instead of searching for results that was readily available  I decided to look for a particular model with dimensions and impact test data results.

I requested permission to use impact test data from credible sources for a 2016 Honda Civic 4-door sedan since the dimensions for the model was also available online. From this I stated that the SolidWorks model can be developed and simulated to compare the model before and after optimization. Dr. Ojha granted permission and also said that this approach adds validity to my concept design.

I brainstormed these ideas:

• Use impact test results from a car manufacturing company as opposed to a source developing a chassis solely for test purposes.
• Use an older model Honda or Mazda vehicle. Nissan perhaps?

After I gathered the data for the impact test  I began working on the SolidWorks 

I contacted Dr. Ojha to find out if the preliminary results should include the simulation results of the original model and  how to go about writing the expected outcomes. He explained that for this part of the project the preliminary results are not required, all results will be in the final report and the expected outcomes will simply be a response to the objectives stated at the beginning.

I continued to work on the report developing my literature review.

I emailed concerning the contents of the literature review, the details of the project work and resources and consequently the structure of the document. Dr. Ojha informed me that the project work and resources is not applicable to this project and asked about my guide for formatting. After this was sorted out, it was decided that a draft would be sent to the supervisor for review. 

I continued work on my project proposal and  worked on the model in SolidWorks.

A proposal draft was sent for review and Dr. Ojha  expressed satisfaction with the aims and objectives but suggested expanding on the methodology by including information regarding the design, the data collection and analysis methods and the model. In addition to this, he advised to be specific to the model to be developed if a typical car is not being used. To improve the document, another suggestion was to include preliminary work that shows how the objectives are being achieved such as including the project schedule and the completed model. He also sent a document for assistance in formatting and another for additional resources.

After this conversation I reiterated the model I intended to use for the project,  informed the supervisor that a Gantt Chart was constructed for the project and explained that her student SolidWorks Licenses had expired resulting in the loss of all my work thus far with respect to developing the model. I also mentioned that she would attempt to rebuild the model in ANSYS.

I contacted my supervisor for assistance in gaining permission to use remote access SolidWorks. Dr. Ojha forwarded the email to the necessary persons to begin the process but a delay caused me to not get access until Monday 02nd November 2020.

This was because my  emails weren't getting responses from the IT Technician's when a correction to my node ID was needed. I reached out again and I didn't receive any responses. Finally I contacted Dr. Ojha once more regarding  my difficulties and I received  guidance and  consequently access to SolidWorks a few hours later and restarted the model.

I emailed my supervisor to explaining the layout of the logbook in the form of a website and asked him to confirm ease of access and maneuverability of the logbook. He responded saying that the website looks good and innovative and directed me to achieve the main purpose of the logbook, that is highlighting our communication throughout the semester.

I continued the work on the website and sent in another email to  ensure I improved the quality of the website. He responded approving of the content and organization with recommendations of including graphics.

I sent my update proposal draft including the changes Dr. Ojha suggested I make to my methodology. These changes were to include information about the data collection and analysis process, the description of the design and the description of the development process. I also sent to him the PowerPoint draft to ensure that I addressed all the main points. He gave me some tips with respect  to the formatting of the proposal document, suggested that I include my progress to date and evidence of preliminary work given that my report appears a bit generic thus far. This advice extended to the PowerPoint as well.

After this conversation, I adjusted the proposal as he recommended and continued work on the SolidWorks Model to include in the Proposal and Presentation.

I emailed Dr. Ojha explaining that I encountered difficulties with the model I was currently working on because it was missing some important dimensions. I notified him that I would switching to the 2014 Toyota Corolla instead and he approved my decision. 

From this point forward, my time was spent reconstructing the model in SolidWorks I was only able to complete the underbody of the chassis. I also made the necessary adjustments in my proposal and logbook.

Dr Ojha sent me an email of the examiners comments highlighting those that I should pay particular attention to. 

These were:

• Nonlinear simulation/strain energy analysis.
• Ansys student version capabilities to perform these simulations
• Combinations of SolidWorks simulations and Ansys simulations.

I combined his noes with those I made from the interview:

• Obtaining the loading data for the crash test analysis
• Take caution when doing element analysis, do not choose sizes that are too small the analysis will take a long time to run.
• When performing simulations pay attention to the Stress and Strain Energy data.

While continuing work on my SolidWorks model I noticed many flaws in the approach I was taking . I started drawing the model from the underbody using Sketch so that I can replicate the monocoque structure as best as I can, however, When I began developing the side panel this method became very difficult. As a result I had to scrap that method and start again using 3D Sketch, I had many complications in achieving the likeness of the underbody created using Sketch. In the end I kept the largest and strongest parts of the underbody. After completing the sketch I had trouble choosing the appropriate weldment for the frame. I settled on the largest rectangular beam.

In these few days I also searched online for loading data required to perform the simulations and thus far there isn't any information readily available, therefore I will continue this search next month. 

This week I continued my search for test data results online. I decided that I should send out emails to organizations requesting access to the information. I emailed Transport Canada, Toyota Brand Engagement Centre, and Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

I received responses from all three. Transport Canada advised that I contact the manufacturer for the information I was searching for, Toyota Brand Engagement Centre recommended that I visit Toyota Global, and IIHS contacted me confirming my requests and granting me access to a database (TechData) recording the ratings from the tests.

I also started working on the engine compartment of the model. I updated my Gantt Chart and planned out my course of action to complete the project.

This week I contacted Dr Ojha informing him of the developments in my project. I told him that I planned to combine use both SolidWorks and ANSYS for simulation and that I received test data results from IIHS and will now be continuing work on the model. 

I did additional research  on crumple zones of the chassis to be added to the literature review.

In these three weeks I had to restart  modelling the chassis in SolidWorks using a new techniques. 

To obtain some of the curves of the structure I had to use the spline feature, however, with this I was unable to apply the weldments to the structure in 3D sketch and I was unable to get the arc feature to accurately match the dimension given on the blueprint.

For the next attempt of constructing the chassis I used the spline for the curves and a mixture of the sweep feature and the weldment pipes instead of the rectangular tubes. This failed because the pipes were not connecting smoothly to the sweep and I had to redraw the model again.

In this attempt I used only the sweep feature to construct the underbody and the engine compartment and each part was done successfully.