4.6 Article

Robust design of magneto-rheological (MR) shock absorber considering temperature effects

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00170-016-9480-9

关键词

Magneto-rheological; Shock absorber; Temperature; Six sigma optimization method; Response surface method

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of People's Republic of China [51275539, 51675063]
  2. Chongqing University Postgraduates' Innovation Project [CYB15017]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [CDJZR14115501]
  4. Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University [NCET-13-0630]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the increment of working temperature in magneto-rheological (MR) absorber, the performance of the absorber will be significantly degraded. In order to improve the performance (MR) absorber considering the negative effect on output damping force, the six sigma robust optimal method is proposed. The maximum damping force, the dynamic range, the power dissipation, and the fail-safe ability are analyzed in the optimal process. The fluctuations of several key geometrical parameters due to manufacturing tolerances or other uncontrollable factors are also considered to achieve the optimal objective. To increase computing efficiency of the optimal design procedure, the magnetic field model based on the response surface method is utilized to predict the distribution of the magnetic field intensity. The adaptive simulated annealing algorithm is used to solve the non-linear optimal problem. The numerical results show that the perturbation of output force can be reduced while the temperature is fluctuating, which means that the optimization process can alleviate the damping force's sensitivity to the temperature fluctuation and increase the robust of the absorber. Subsequently, the performances of the semi-active suspension with the optimized absorber under different loads and temperatures are analyzed and the effectiveness of the optimization algorithm is confirmed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据