DURABILITY ANALYSIS OF A VEHICLE BODY STRUCTURE
USING MODAL TRANSIENT METHODS
Liphg I-hang *, Hali Agmwd **, Victor Bomwski *
* &-,&,eering Andy& Services Inc.
30800 Telqmph Rd. Suite 3700
Singham Fmm, Ml 48025
Am3TRAcr
Vehicle body structures can have major
implications in terms of amplifications of stress
magnitudes due to vibrations and ultimately in
developing fatigue cracks. A vehicle body structure
subjected to major damaging road loads is studied
utilizing the Finite Element Method. The fmite
element model was correlated with modal testing
in low frequency range. Transient response
analysis is performed using (1) Modal Stress
Method for structural global stress distribution
and (2) Component Mode Synthesis Method for
complete local stress time history. Fatigue life of
the structure is then estimated. The practice
demonstrates an approach for dynamic durability
analysis of a large sbucture.
1. IRTRODUC-TIOR
The real environmenf in which vehicles operate, is
dynamic in nature. Currently, most durability
analysis of vehicle structures employs static or
quasi-static (Inertia Relief) analysis (11 due to
constraints on available computer resources. Since
vibration resonance may amplify stress level and
reduce structural fatigue life, static or quasi-static
analysis may not be able to fully ident@ some
critical areas and reduced fatigue life. As CAE
s-w requirements increase, better FEA
simulation and methodology evolve along with the
availability of increased and efficient computer
resmlrces.
Structural durability analysis requiring fatigue life
prediction needs stress response time history hm
a typical transient response analysis method. In
the past, major dimculties were encountered in
transient dynamic analysis of a vehicle due to very
high demands on computer storage space and
CPU time. Besides these issues, accurate transient
407
* Ford Motor Company
P.O.Box 2053, M/DX3054
Dearinn, MI 48121
response was not even considered due to a lack of
substantial and accurate road load data and post-
processing tools for huge transient structural
response data.
Normally, a finite element model of a vehicle body
structure may have 500,000 to 1,500,OOO degrees
of freedom with compressed load history of a
vehicle durability test route longer than 2,000
seconds. Therefore, it is almost impossible to
calculate complete stress response of a vehicle
body structure to the loads within current
computer capability using regular methods.
However, very recent improvements in computer
analysis software have greatly reduced the storage
problem 121. The basic proposed appmach involves
sorting element response levels and suspending
output of small response elements during
analysis. Current available mainframe computer
space for an analysis of a vehicle body structure
with short time period loads is sufficient to handle
these types of problems. At times, transient
dynamic analysis is feasible for a relatively longer
time period of load input but is cons&Gned by
computer CPU tit With the advent of better and
more efficient post-processing software, road loads
and fmer FEX models, computer CPU time limit is
becoming the largest obstacle for dynamic analysis
of a large structure with long time loads.
This paper presents a practice of dynamic
durability analysis (from model correlation to
fatigue life prediction) of a vehicle body structure,
demonstrating an effort of efficiently using modal
methods to conduct transient dynamic analysis of
large structure with long time loads.
2. MODEL CRKCKOUT & CORRELATIOR
Compared with the static analysis, transient
dynamic stress analysis requires a higher quality
model in ternls of accurate representation of
system dynamics behavior. Test feedback is
required to insure quality finite element analysis.
That is, finite element models should be verified,
updated and if necessary validated (reconciliation).
Modal analysis is a key twl tc check out and
correlate the analytical model.
A rinite element model of a body structure is
shown in Figure 1. The model consists 94,087
elements and 89,227 grids. The total number of
degrees of freedom is 535,362. The model was
connected with ground by 6 spring elements
which simulate 4 airbags under the structure in
modal testing, The original finite element model
had some significant problems: (1) body structure
modes obtained were in the wrong sequence with
inconsistent trequencies, (2) fit few analytical
global elastic modes seemed similar, so that the
major structural modes could not be identified, (3)
magnitude of central tlwr movement was too high
compared with test, (4) doors seemed to be
separating from the body and their fequencies
were too low, etc. In summary, tbe analytic modes
were not consistent with test modes in both modes
sequence and mode shapes. Therefore, the model
was not able to represent the real sbucture.
The model was checked and reconciled in the
following aspects.
(1). Mau Ch& Total mass, moments of inertia
and Center of Gravity (C.G.) of the analytical model
were checked and compared with measured data.
It was found that analytical model was 72 lbs
lighter than the real skucture and the inertia
moments check indicated that some mass was
missing on left/right-hand sides of the body in the
model. It was found by disassembly of a
production body and weight comparison of
analytical model that absence of a few door inner
components caused a reduction of 62.5 lbs alone.
Weight discrepancies were also discovered in the
instrument panel and steering column. The
corrections resulted in agreements with total
mass, C.G., moments of inertia of analytical model
with measurements and substantial agreement of
six global rigid body modes between the analysis
and the test
(2). Rigid Body Hoda Cheek The rigid body
modes check provided basic check of the model
and mass distribution. During the model
reconciliation, rigid body modes check helped in
finding missing mass and ident@ing that the
support reactions of airbags were not simulated
408
properly. When the number of airbags was
reduced from six to four, the rigid body modes
could be used to back calculate the stiffness and
damping of the airbags. This data was required for
correlation of the flexible response data.
(3). Modes Ortho~onautp Cheds. Normal Modes
orthcgonali~ with respect to test/an&ysis model
was checked at diKerent stages, including rigid
body modes, to adjust the quality of the model and
to identify potential problems. Concerns such as
wrong mode sequence, missing mass, etc. were
thus resolved.
(4). FRF Studies. Measured and calculated
Frequency Response Functions (FRF) helped in
identifying problems of the model like high central
floor response. The floor pmblem directed the
analyst to focus on front seat models which were
modeled as concentrated masses and were not
considered as significant dynamic subsystems
affecting the underbody for both the modeling and
modal testing. On substitution of detailed seat
models, seat modes filled the missing modes gap
a s i n d i c a t e d by orthogonali~ check and
distinguished the first few modes clearly. It also
reduced central floor vibration magnitude
displaying realistic floor stiffness. FRFs were also
used to establish parameters for the seat model
with driver.
(5). Frequency check % Mode shape Animation.
Comparison of frequencies and mode shapes
between analytical and experimental data were
performed continuously during the model
reconciliation. Some model problems were
discovered while animating mode shapes. For
example, information fmm door modes from modal
test led to the finding of incorrect door hinge
modeling. After correcting the door hinge models
and adding door seal simulation elements, the
model moved analy!ical door modes from 14-2OHz
to above 3oHz along with the elimination of
incorrect modes.
(6) Component model -tion. Front seats
were tested separately on a bedplate and the seat
finite element model was correlated with the modal
test@ Actual seat part gages were substituted
and all masses were represented in the seat model
before it was substituted to replace simplitied seat
mcclel.
After correlation and correction efforts (more
technical details are. reported in the reference [3]),
the ftite element model reached good agreement
with test in low frequency range. Frequency
comparison of the frst sj, rigid body modes and
five elastic modes of the model are as shown in
Table 1.
utilized to select critical areas (elements) for further
fatigue comptations.
A basic fact is that most elements experience small
stress amplitudes resulting in almost inftite
fatigue life and only a small number of elements
wiII have large stress reversals with the potential
for a limited fatigue life. Structure fatigue life is
determined by the life of only those critical
elements. Therefore, it is important to find those
critical elements fxst In some cases, critical areas
(elements) may be identified from past experience
or from test data. With shorter product
development cycles, it is necessary to ident@
critical areas using FEA approach during the
development phase.

Two major factors affecting f%tige life of an

element are stress magnitude and number of
occurrences of high-magnitude stresses. To be on
seats (Y),floor (Z) -~
the consetvative side, the critical elements are
8 9.82 10.09 front end bending, selected based upon element stress magnitudes.
seats M, floor (-Z) The number of occurrences are accounted in
9 11.14 11.10 tent seats w fatigue life calculations.
10 12.20 11.39 t-ont end torsion,
seats (x), floor (Z) Most of the time, hi& stresses are caused by big
11 12.63 11.85 front end torsion, peak loads. In this study, transient dynamic
front seats ix) stresses for all elements (global stress distribution)
were computed corresponding to an input of big
peak loads of short time periods. Modal approach
is employed because degrees of freedom of the
3. CRITICAL ELEMENT SEL-EClIOA model (about 500,000) is much more than the
number of modes in the frequency range of
3.1 critical EIeme!lts interest (350 modes under 100 Hz).

The structure was subjected to road loads at 16
body mounts, each in x, y, and z directions.
Vehicle durability testing was conducted at the
Vehicle Roving Ground which simulates major
damaging road conditions. Figure 2 shows a
typical single channel load time history obtained
during a durability test mute.
Prediction of structural fatigue life is based on an
estimation of tirst element crack initiation when
subjected to the road loads. Currently, it is not
practical to calculate fatigue life of all elements in a
large structure because fatigue life estimation
needs complete stress time history for each
element requiring a large amount of CPU time and
space to compute and store alI components of
stresses at each time step. Therefore, it is almost
impossible to compute complete stress time
histories of all elements with the current available
computer resources. A practical method must be
3.2 Global 3tsus DislAbution
3.2.1 Regular modd method
The regular method of stress calculation in modal
formulation requires finding modal displacements
first, then computation of displacements in
physical coordinates at all nodes, and lastiy,
celclation of stresses employing regular stress
equations and shape functions.
Assume that U;(t) and V; (t) are displacements
of node k of element i in x and y directions
respectively in physical coordinates and that they
are associated with the r, th and (* + I) th degrees
of freedom of system. It is also assumed that the
first m mode shape vectors are {$I},,{@}, , . ,
Iel, and that the corresponding j th mode shape

409
V&ES of the ?-k th and (r, +I) th degrees of

freedom are I$,,~ and $C<+,,j. Then, u:(r) and

i(I) are gfven as According to reference [4], the cost ratio of two
modal methods for large model is approximately
Ut(l)=~+r,j5j(f)
equal to
j=l

ViCr) = g$(r,+l)jlj(')
Modal Stress Method mode number
j=1 _ - ________ _________ __
is the j th modal solution Regular Method time steps
w h e r e E,j(r)
(displacement), wherej=l, , m. Normally the frequency spectrum of road loads is
below 5OHz and body structure modes may be
Normal stresses at the shell element i (in x-y plane) truncated up to 100Hz. In order to catch response
are computed as follows. peaks for all modal solutions, the time step interval
must be less than 0.001 (=l/lOO(Hz)/lO(time
steps in one cycle)) so that the solution time step
number may be thousands over those short time
periods of load peaks even though such periods
may be only a few seconds.

Since the transient response analysis performed

where h;(x,y) is shape function of the element i
for node k, where k = 1, , 9; and g is total
number of nodes of the element i ;
3.2.2 Modal stxess method
An alternative modal method for stress calculation
in fmite element analysis is Modal Stress Method
(also referred to as Matrix Method), which is an
extension of regular method. It uses the concept of
Normal Modes Stress. Normal Modes Stresses of
the element i for the j th mode are defined as
here has many more time steps than modes,
Modal Stress Method (also referred as to M&ix
Method) is used in this work. It can be seen from
the above equation that Modal Stress Method is
more efficient if the total number of solution time
steps is more than the number of modes.
Therefore, it is critical to use the Modal Stress
Method for !&al skess calculations of a large
structure since it makes transient response
analysis of a large structure possible within
current computer capabilities.
3.2.3 Element &lection
Global stress distribution of the body structure for
short peak load time periods were evaluated using
Modal Skess Method. Van Mises skess level
distribution is given in Table 2.

Table 2. Van Mises Stress Level Dihibution

Stresses at the element i are calculated as

a 300 I 204
s 200 537
> 100 1112

410
It can be seen from the table that only 1% of
elements have Von Mises stress range h&!her then
lOOMPa. Therefore, OXI& a smell number of
elements may suffer si&icant damage. Based
upon magnitudes of element stress ranges, the top
100 elements were selected as critical elements for
fatigue life caldations. These elements have high
shsses end have the potendal for fatigue failures.
They are focused for fatigue analysis.
4. LOCAL STRRSS TMIP: HISTORY
Once critical elements are identified, it is
necessary to compute complete stress tie
histories of ell critical elements for one durability
test route for fatigue life predictions.
1. Principal plane angles at all time steps is
computed and a critical plane is selected for each
element based on stress range, number of
occurrence and mean stress.
2. uniaxial stress time history, o;(r) for the
element i, is computed perpendicular to the critical
plane and is rainflow counted. Elastic strain,
et(r), is calculated using elastic stress usf(t) by
elastic strain-stress relationship.
3. Since the element stress and strain are
computed by linear analysis, they are corrected,
resulting in actual stress and strain called cyclic
stress of(r) and strti E;(I), using Neubers Rule

&in, due to large model size and long input load

time history, Component Mode Synthesis Method
and Cyclic strain-stress relationship
(CMS) [5] is used to compute stress time histories
of critical elements.
1
y+(d+;
E:(f) = (---
Component Mode Synthesis Method is a form of
superelement dynamic reduction wherein matrices
are defined in terms of modal coordinates where K is Cyclic Strength Coefficient and n is
(corresponding to the superelement modes) and Cyclic Strain Hardening Exponent
physical coordinates [corresponding to the grid
points on the superelement boundaries). The 4. For each strain amplitude, the number of
matrices represent substructures. Entire structure reversals to failure (2 N, ) is computed using
can be synthesized from all substructures in
Smith-Watson-Topper mean stress correction
model coordinates. Component Mode Synthesis
Method is advantageous because there are fewer
*
modal coordinates then physical coordinates. It is
O-E, =%(2Nf)Zb +o~E/(~N,)~+~
very efficient for anelysis of large model.

In this work, only 16 load application points and 4 where o,, a n d E, are stress and strain
support points were assigned to be physical amplitudes respectively, omar is sum of mean
boundary points and all others are inside one
stress and stress amplitude o L1, (T f is Fatigue
superelement Using the Component Mode
Synthesis Method, the structure is condensed to a Strength Coefficient, ef is Fatigue Ductility
small systmn which has 444 dqqees of freedom Coefficient, b and care Fatigue Strength Exponent
(16*6 (degrees of freedom) + 348 (modal and Fame Ductility Exponent respectively.
coordinates of superelement) ). Transient response
analysis was performed on the condensed system 5. Cumulative damage (D) for the element is
and the stress response time histories of critical calculated by Palmgren-Miner Rule as
elements to road loads of one durability test route
were computed. Von Mises stress time history of a
typical critical element is shown in Figure 3.

where @A,) is number of reversals at strain

5. FATIGUE LIFE amplitude k and (2Nfjr is the number of
reversals to failure at stmin amplitude k
Element fatigue life based on estimation of crack
initiation time was estimated using stress time
6. Fatigue life (L) s given by
history in the following steps.

411
 L=l/D
Physically, L represents fatigue life in number of
times of input load-time history (passes) that the
element can sustain before the cumulative damage
start crack initiation.
The results of fatigue Iife of top 10 critical elements
are given in Table 3.
Table 3. Fatigue Life of Top 10 Elementa
Physically, the results mean that a crack initiates
after 3 durability test route (pass) at the element
210738,4.6 passes on 23762, etc. The locations of
top 100 elements are circled in the Figure 4.
6. coricLlJsIoris
A systematic and practical transient dynamic
durability analysis of a vehicle body structure is
presented. The main conclusions regarding a large
structural dynamic durability anaiysis are
summarized below.
(1) Transient dynamic analysis of a large structure
with long input load histories can be perfamed
within the constraints of current computer
resources by efficiently using modal methods.
Possible failure sites (critical elements) can be
identified from global stress distribution by
performing transient response analysis over
critical short load periods using Modal Stress
Method. Complete stress response of critical
elements can be obtained using Component Mode
Synthesis Method.
(2) Fatigue life of a large structure can be
estimated by identifying the most probable failure
areas in order to reduce CPU time and storage
space.
412
(3) For complicated structures, basic system
mechanics properly checks are very useful and
efficient diagnosis tools for model reconciliation.
Basic model checkout using these methods and
tools is imprtant for large and complex structures
and should be done before any mathematical
model optimization task is udertaken.
7. ACKMOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the
contributions from various Ford Motor Company
activities for providing test vehicles and conducting
tests, from Measurement Analysis Corporation for
providing technical guidance of modal test and
model correlation, Engineering Analysis Services
Inc. for providing facilities and support to conduct
the model correlation and Al Conle of Ford Motor
company for providing fatigue life calculation
method. Thanks also to Steve Marulis and
Subhash Kelka of Ford Motor for supporting this
work.
8. REFERENCES
[l] Agrawal, H., Conle, A, et at, Upfront Durability
CAE Andysis for Automotive Sheet Metal
SbllCtUES, SAE International Congress c%
Exposition, Detroit, MI, 1996
[Z] CSA/NASTRAN Quick Look Users Manual,
Version 97
[3] Coppolino, R. N., Borowsld, V. J. Integrated
Modal Testine, and Analysis of A Body-On-Frame
Automobile, Proceedings of the 15th International
Modal Analysis Conference, 1997
[4] MSC/NASTRAN Dynamics Handbook, 1993
[S] Craig, R. R., Bampton, M. C. C., Y%upling of
Substructures for Dynamic AnaIyses, AL44 J. 6,
1313 (1968)
Figure 1. Finite Element Model of Vehicle Body Structure

Figure 2. A Typical Road Load Time History

413
Figure 3. Van Mises Stress Time History of A Typical Element

Figure 4. Locations of Short Life Elements

414