Finite Element Analysis and Machine Learning Guided Design of Carbon Fiber Organosheet-Based Battery Enclosures for Crashworthiness
Source abstract
Abstract
Carbon fiber composite can be a potential candidate for replacing metal-based battery enclosures of current electric vehicles (E.V.s) owing to its better strength-to-weight ratio and corrosion resistance. However, the strength of carbon fiber-based structures depends on several parameters that should be carefully chosen. In this work, we implemented high throughput finite element analysis (FEA) based thermoforming simulation to virtually manufacture the battery enclosure using different design and processing parameters. Subsequently, we performed virtual crash simulations to mimic a side pole crash to evaluate the crashworthiness of the battery enclosures. This high throughput crash simulation dataset was utilized to build predictive models to understand the crashworthiness of an unknown set. Our machine learning (ML) models showed excellent performance (R2 > 0.97) in predicting the crashworthiness metrics, i.e., crush load efficiency, absorbed energy, intrusion, and maximum deceleration during a crash. We believe that this FEA-ML work framework will be helpful in down select process parameters for carbon fiber-based component design and can be transferrable to other manufacturing technologies.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Fiber-reinforced polymer composites · Advanced Battery Technologies Research · Mechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (50)
Show source-provided references
1. Eftekhari, A.: Lithium Batteries for electric vehicles: from economy to research strategy. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 7(6), 5602–5613 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b0149410.1021/acssuschemeng.8b01494 ↗
2. Iclodean, C., Varga, B., Burnete, N., Cimerdean, D., Jurchiş, B.: Comparison of different battery types for electric vehicles. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 252, 012058 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/252/1/01205810.1088/1757-899X/252/1/012058 ↗
3. Zhu, J., Wierzbicki, T., Li, W.: A review of safety-focused mechanical modeling of commercial lithium-ion batteries. J. Power Sources. 378, 153–168 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.12.03410.1016/j.jpowsour.2017.12.034 ↗
4. Bao, N., Zhao, R.: Design optimization of battery holder for electric vehicle. 2018 6th Int. Conf. Mech. Automot. Mater. Eng. (CMAME). IEEE. 79–84 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/CMAME.2018.859244110.1109/CMAME.2018.8592441 ↗
5. Zhang, X., Chen, Y., Hu, J.: Recent advances in the development of aerospace materials. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 97, 22–34 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2018.01.00110.1016/j.paerosci.2018.01.001 ↗
6. Grand View Research: Automotive polymer composites market size report by resin (epoxy, polyurethane, polyamide, polypropylene, polyethylene), by application, by product, by end use, by manufacturing, and segment forecasts, 2018–2025. (2018). https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/automotive-polymer-composites-market
7. Dhoke, A., Dalavi, A.: A critical review on lightweight design of battery pack enclosure for electric vehicles. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. Technol. 4(2), 53–62 (2021). https://doi.org/10.31427/ijstt.2021.4.2.210.31427/ijstt.2021.4.2.2 ↗
8. Zhao, X., Zhang, B., Zhang, S.: Lightweight design of battery box for electric vehicle. ICCM Int. Conf. Compos. Mater. (ICCM), Xi’an August (2017)
9. Swentek, I., Ball, C.A., Greydanus, S., Nara, K.R.: Phenolic SMC for fire resistant electric vehicle battery box applications. SAE Technical Paper. No. 2020-01-0771 (2020). https://doi.org/10.4271/2020-01-077110.4271/2020-01-0771 ↗
10. Zhu, J., Zhang, X., Wierzbicki, T., Xia, Y., Chen, G.: Structural designs for electric vehicle battery pack against ground impact. SAE Technical Paper. No. 2018-01-1438. (2018). https://doi.org/10.4271/2018-01-143810.4271/2018-01-1438 ↗
11. Qiao, W., Yu, L., Zhang, Z., Pan, T.: Study on the battery safety in frontal collision of electric vehicle. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 2137, no. 1, p. 012008. IOP Publishing, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-596/2137/1/01200810.1088/1742-596/2137/1/012008 ↗
12. Ruiz, V., Pfrang, A., Kriston, A., Omar, N., Van den Bossche, P., Boon-Brett, L.: A review of international abuse testing standards and regulations for lithium ion batteries in electric and hybrid electric vehicles. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 81, 1427–1452 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.19510.1016/j.rser.2017.05.195 ↗
13. Trattnig, G., Leitgeb, W.: Battery modelling for crash safety simulation. Automotive Battery Technology. 19–35 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02523-0_210.1007/978-3-319-02523-0_2 ↗
14. Pan, Y., Xiong, Y., Wu, L., Diao, K., Guo, W.: Lightweight design of an automotive battery-pack enclosure via advanced high-strength steels and size optimization. Int. J. Automot. Technol. 22(5), 1279–1290 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12239-021-0112-510.1007/s12239-021-0112-5 ↗
15. Potter, K.D.: Understanding the origins of defects and variability in composites manufacture. In: International conference on composite materials (ICCM)-17, Edinburgh, U.K. UK, p. 18. (2009).
16. Das, S.: The Cost of automotive polymer composites: a review and assessment of DOE’s lightweight materials composites research. Vol. 47. Oak Ridge, TN, USA: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. (2001). https://doi.org/10.2172/77765610.2172/777656 ↗
17. Joost, W.J.: Reducing vehicle weight and improving US energy efficiency using integrated computational materials engineering. JOM 64(9), 1032–1038 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11837-012-0424-z10.1007/s11837-012-0424-z ↗
18. PAM-FORM: (2023). https://www.esi.com.au/software/pamform/
19. ESI-Group: PAM-Form User Guide, France. (2019). https://myesi.esi-group.com/downloads/software-documentation
20. Kim, J.-Y., Hwang, Y.-T., Baek, J.-H., Song, W.-Y., Kim, H.-S.: Study on inter-ply friction between woven and unidirectional prepregs and its effect on the composite forming process. Compos. Struct. 267, 113888 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.11388810.1016/j.compstruct.2021.113888 ↗
21. Virtual Performance Solution (VPS) | Crash Simulation Software: (2023). https://www.esi-group.com/products/virtual-performance-solution. Accessed 24 Apr 2023.
22. Coppola, A., Faruque, O., Truskin, J.F., Board, D., Jones, M., Tao, J., Chen, Y. and Mehta, M.: Validation of material models for automotive carbon fiber composite structures via physical and crash testing (VMM composites Project). No. DOE-USAMP-05661-1. United States Automotive Materials Partnership LLC (USAMP), Southfield, MI (United States). (2017). https://doi.org/10.2172/139583110.2172/1395831 ↗
23. Balusu, K., Skinner, T., Chattopadhyay, A.: An efficient implementation of the high-fidelity generalized method of cells for complex microstructures. Comput. Mater. Sci. 186(August), 110004 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2020.11000410.1016/j.commatsci.2020.110004 ↗
24. Tan, P., Tong, L., Steven, G.P.: Modelling for predicting the mechanical properties of textile composites—a review. Compos. Part. Appl. Sci. Manuf. 28(11), 903–922 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-835X(97)00069-910.1016/S1359-835X(97)00069-9 ↗
25. Kim, D.-J., Yu, M.-H., Lim, J., Nam, B., Kim, H.-S.: Prediction of the mechanical behavior of fiber-reinforced composite structure considering its shear angle distribution generated during thermo-compression molding process. Compos. Struct. 220, 441–450 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.04.04310.1016/j.compstruct.2019.04.043 ↗
26. Roy, A., Taufique, M.F.N., Khakurel, H. et al.: Machine-learning-guided descriptor selection for predicting corrosion resistance in multi-principal element alloys. npj Mater Degrad 6, 9 (2022). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41529-021-00208-y10.1038/s41529-021-00208-y ↗
27. Mamun, O., Taufique, M.F.N., Wenzlick, M. et al.: Uncertainty quantification for Bayesian active learning in rupture life prediction of ferritic steels. Sci. Rep. 12, 2083 (2022). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-06051-810.1038/s41598-022-06051-8 ↗
28. Mamun, O., Wenzlick, M., Hawk, J., Devanathan, R.: A machine learning aided interpretable model for rupture strength prediction in Fe-based martensitic and austenitic alloys. Sci. Rep. 11(1), 5466 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83694-z10.1038/s41598-021-83694-z ↗
29. Mamun, O., Wenzlick, M., Sathanur, A., Hawk, J.: Machine learning augmented predictive and generative model for rupture life in ferritic and austenitic steels. npj Mater. Degrad. 5(1), 1–10 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41529-021-00166-510.1038/s41529-021-00166-5 ↗
30. Cui, X., Panda, B., Chin, C.M.M., Sakundarini, N., Wang, C., Pareek, K.: An application of evolutionary computation algorithm in multidisciplinary design optimization of battery packs for electric vehicle. Energy Storage. 2(3), e158 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/est2.15810.1002/est2.158 ↗
31. Lu, W., Xiao-kai, C., Procedia, Z.Q.-E., and undefined: Muti-objective topology optimization of an electric vehicle’s traction battery enclosure. Elsevier. Available: (2016). Accessed 24 Apr 2023. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610216301680
32. Kulkarni, S.S., Hale, F., Taufique, M.F.N. et al.: Investigation of Crashworthiness of Carbon Fiber-Based Electric Vehicle Battery Enclosure Using Finite Element Analysis. Appl. Compos. Mater. 30, 1689–1715 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-023-10146-410.1007/s10443-023-10146-4 ↗
33. Euro, NCAP | The European New Car Assessment Programme. (2023). https://www.euroncap.com/en. Accessed 24 Apr 2023
34. Side Impact Protection | NHTSA: (2023). https://www.nhtsa.gov/fmvss/side-impact-protection. Accessed 24 Apr 2023
35. Ladeveze, P., LeDantec, E.: Damage modelling of the elementary ply for laminated composites. Compos. Sci. Tech. 43(3), 257–267 (1992). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/026635389290097M10.1016/0266-3538(92)90097-M ↗
36. Iman, R.L., Conover, W.J.: Small sample sensitivity analysis techniques for computer models with an application to risk assessment. Commun. Stat-Theory. Methods. 9(17), 1749–1842 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1080/0361092800882799610.1080/03610928008827996 ↗
37. Xu, J., Ma, Y., Zhang, Q., Sugahara, T., Yang, Y., Hamada, H.: Crashworthiness of carbon fiber hybrid composite tubes molded by filament winding. Compos. Struct. 139, 130–140 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.11.05310.1016/j.compstruct.2015.11.053 ↗
38. Deng, X., Qin, S.: In-plane energy absorption characteristics and mechanical properties of novel re-entrant honeycombs. Compos. Struct. 313, 116951 (2023)10.1016/j.compstruct.2023.116951 ↗
39. Lu, Q., Deng, X.: Energy absorption and in-plane mechanical behavior of honeycomb structures with reinforced strut. Compos. Struct. 322, 117399 (2023)10.1016/j.compstruct.2023.117399 ↗
40. Christensen, J., Bastien, C.: Vehicle architectures, structures, and Safety requirements. In: Nonlinear optimization of vehicle safety structures, pp. 1–49. Elsevier (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-417297-5.00001-810.1016/B978-0-12-417297-5.00001-8 ↗
41. Kotak, B., Kotak, Y., Brade, K., Kubjatko, T., Schweiger, H.-G.: Battery crush test procedures in standards and regulation: Need for augmentation and harmonisation. Batteries. 7(3), 63 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries703006310.3390/batteries7030063 ↗
42. Khakurel, H., Taufique, M.F.N., Roy, A. et al.: Machine learning assisted prediction of the Young’s modulus of compositionally complex alloys. Sci. Rep. 11, 17149 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-96507-010.1038/s41598-021-96507-0 ↗
43. Schapire, R.E.: The strength of weak learnability. Mach. Learn. 5(2), 197–227 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0011603710.1007/BF00116037 ↗
44. Friedman, J.H.: Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Ann. Statist. 29(5), 1189–1232, (2001). https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/101320345110.1214/aos/1013203451 ↗
45. Freund, Y., Shapire, R.E.: A Decision-Theoretic Generalization of On-Line Learning and an Application to Boosting. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 55(1), 119–139. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002200009791504X10.1006/jcss.1997.1504 ↗
46. Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., et al.: Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011). Accessed 24 Apr 2023. Available: http://scikit-learn.sourceforge.net
47. Chen, T., Guestrin, C.: Xgboost: a scalable tree boosting system. dl.acm.org. 13-17, 785–794 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.293978510.1145/2939672.2939785 ↗
48. Symbolic regression software - TuringBot: (2023). https://turingbotsoftware.com/. Accessed 24 Apr 2023
49. Cornelio, C., et al.: AI Descartes: combining data and theory for derivable scientific discovery. arxiv.org. Accessed 24 Apr 2023. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.01634
50. Ashok, D., Scott, J., Wetzel, S.J., Panju, M., Ganesh, V.: Logic guided genetic algorithms (Student Abstract). Proc. AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell. 35(18), 15753–15754 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1609/AAAI.V35I18.1787310.1609/AAAI.V35I18.17873 ↗