Advertisement

Innovative designs of an in-tank hydrogen valve towards direct metal laser sintering compatibility and fatigue life enhancement

  • Thanh Binh Cao
  • Slawomir Kedziora
Industrial Application
  • 32 Downloads

Abstract

Replacements of using fossil fuel by different types of renewable energy are the current development trend in the automotive industry towards sustainable vehicles. A hydrogen-powered car is a promising solution, in which the safe and smooth operation of the car is strongly depended on how an in-tank valve of a fuel-storage-system performs. The present paper introduces the investigations and innovations of structures of the mentioned valve, whose designs can be subjected to fabricate by direct metal laser sintering. Two parts of the valve were taken into considerations, including the largest female-thread and the body. While the threads were investigated in the proposed conditions via fatigue-life assessment, the bodies were only assessed after being built from the concepts, developed by structural optimisations and lattice implementation. The achieved results showed that within the same pre-treated conditions, the optimised valves have considerably higher fatigue life, but lower masses, than those of the original. It was also observed that the applications of pre-treatment by autofrettage could contribute significantly to life prolongation of the valves as compared to the non-treated ones. In addition, those essential features, such as powder-release channels, which make the developed valves compatible with DMLS, were implemented into the valve-designs to be able to ensure their successful prints. Finally, the results suggested that the second innovated structure of the lattice-valve is the best candidate, which could be additively produced for the upcoming experimental-validation phase of the demonstrated works.

Keywords

Automotive hydrogen valve Direct metal laser sintering Sustainable design Free-shape optimisation Topology optimisation Lattice implementation 

Nomenclature

b

fatigue strength exponent

c

fatigue ductility exponent

d

diameter

di

design variable

E

elastic modulus

H

empirical tightening factor

K

real stiffness matrix of elements

\( \overline{\boldsymbol{K}} \)

penalised stiffness matrix

Nf

half number of reversals to failure

P

factor for penalisation

pi

perturbation vector

Pt

pretension load

S

material constant

T

tightening torque

γmax

maximum shear strain amplitude on critical plane

δεn

normal strain range on the maximum shear strain plane

∆ε

strain range

εa

strain amplitude

\( \overset{\sim }{\varepsilon } \)

path-independent damage parameter proposed by Wang-Brown

\( {\varepsilon}_{\mathrm{f}}^{\prime } \)

fatigue ductility coefficient

ϑ

effective Poisson ratio

ρ

element density

σa

stress amplitude

\( {\sigma}_{\mathrm{f}}^{\prime } \)

fatigue strength coefficient

σmean

mean stress

σmax

maximum stress

σn, mean

mean stress, normal to maximum shear strain plane

x

vectors of nodal coordinates

x0

vectors of nodal coordinates of original design

AF

autofrettage

AM

additive manufacturing

ANoE

averaged-node-on-element

CAD

computer-aided design

DMLS

direct metal laser sintering

EN

strain-life

FE

finite element

FSO

free shape optimisation

LI

lattice implementation

LV

lattice valve

M-A

critical plane with Smith-Watson-Topper mean stress correction

M-B

critical plane with Morrow mean stress correction

M-C

critical shear plane with Smith-Watson-Topper mean stress correction

M-D

critical shear plane with Morrow mean stress correction

NoE

node-on-element

OV

original valve

PRC

powder release channels

SIMP

solid isotropic material with penalisation

SWT

Smith-Watson-Topper

TO

topology optimisation

WB-mean

Wang-Brown method with mean stress correction

Notes

Acknowledgements

Special thanks are given to Dr. Stephan Sellen (ROTAREX S.A.) for providing the original model of the hydrogen valve.

Funding information

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support provided by the University of Luxembourg.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Altair University (2015) Practical aspects of structural optimization (a study guide)Google Scholar
  2. ANSYS I (2018) ANSYS mechanical enterprise: mechanical engineering software. https://www.ansys.com/products/structures/ansys-mechanical-enterprise. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
  3. Autodesk I (2017) Inventor|mechanical design; 3D CAD software. https://www.autodesk.eu/products/inventor/overview. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
  4. Bendsøe MP, Sigmund O (1999) Material interpolation schemes in topology optimization. Arch Appl Mech (Ingenieur Arch) 69:635–654.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s004190050248 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Cao TB, Kedziora S (2017) New methodology for designing direct-laser-sintered motorcycle frame based on combination of topology optimization and lattice implementation. Int J Mech Eng 6:39–50Google Scholar
  6. Cheng L, Zhang P, Biyikli E et al (2017) Efficient design optimization of variable-density cellular structures for additive manufacturing: theory and experimental validation. Rapid Prototyp J 23:660–677.  https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-04-2016-0069 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Clausen A, Aage N, Sigmund O (2016) Exploiting additive manufacturing infill in topology optimization for improved buckling load. Engineering 2:250–257.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENG.2016.02.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Commission Regulation (EU) No 406/2010 (2010) Implementing Regulation (EC) No. 79/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council on type-approval of hydrogen-powered motor vehicles. Off J Eur UnionGoogle Scholar
  9. Deng S, Suresh K (2016) Multi-constrained 3D topology optimization via augmented topological level-set. Comput Struct 170:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSTRUC.2016.02.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gaynor AT, Guest JK (2016) Topology optimization considering overhang constraints: eliminating sacrificial support material in additive manufacturing through design. Struct Multidiscip Optim 54:1157–1172.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-016-1551-x MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gorguluarslan RM, Gandhi UN, Song Y, Choi S-K (2017) An improved lattice structure design optimization framework considering additive manufacturing constraints. Rapid Prototyp J 23:305–319.  https://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-10-2015-0139 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. HBM United Kingdom Limited nCode DesignLife (n.d.) CAE fatigue analysis software—nCode. https://www.ncode.com/products/designlife-cae-fatigue-analysis. Accessed 25 Sept 2018
  13. Ince A, Glinka G (2011) A modification of Morrow and Smith-Watson-Topper mean stress correction models. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 34:854–867.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2695.2011.01577.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ISO/ASTM 52900:2015 (2015) Additive manufacturing—general principles—terminologyGoogle Scholar
  15. Langelaar M (2017) An additive manufacturing filter for topology optimization of print-ready designs. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55:871–883.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-016-1522-2 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu J, To AC (2017) Topology optimization for hybrid additive-subtractive manufacturing. Struct Multidiscip Optim 55:1281–1299.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-016-1565-4 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu S, Li Q, Chen W et al (2015) An identification method for enclosed voids restriction in manufacturability design for additive manufacturing structures. Front Mech Eng 10:126–137.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11465-015-0340-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. NCode (2016) DesignLife theory guideGoogle Scholar
  19. Primo T, Calabrese M, Del Prete A, Anglani A (2017) Additive manufacturing integration with topology optimization methodology for innovative product design. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 93:467–479.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0112-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schmidt M, Merklein M, Bourell D et al (2017) Laser based additive manufacturing in industry and academia. CIRP Ann 66:561–583.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2017.05.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sellen S (2014) Untersuchung der Ermüdungsfestigkeit von komplexen innendruckbelasteten Aluminiumgeometrien und der Lebensdauersteigerung durch Autofrettage. University of LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  22. Sellen S, Lu P (2016) Metallic body with threaded port subject to autofrettageGoogle Scholar
  23. Sellen S, Maas S, Andreas T et al (2015) Improved design of threaded connections by autofrettage in aluminium compounds for cyclic high pressure loading: design calculations and experimental verification. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 38:714–729.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ffe.12270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sellen S, Maas S, Andreas T et al (2016) Design rules for autofrettage of an aluminium valve body. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 39:68–78.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ffe.12328 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tofail SAM, Koumoulos EP, Bandyopadhyay A et al (2017) Additive manufacturing: scientific and technological challenges, market uptake and opportunities. Mater Today.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mattod.2017.07.001
  26. Wang MY (2006) Structural topology optimization using level set method. In: Computational methods in engineering & science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, pp 310–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wang CH, Brown MW (1993) A path-independent parameter for fatigue under proportional and non proportional loading. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 16:1285–1297.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2695.1993.tb00739.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Xie YM, Steven GP (1993) A simple evolutionary procedure for structural optimization. Comput Struct 49:885–896.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0045-7949(93)90035-C CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yadollahi A, Shamsaei N, Thompson SM et al (2017) Effects of building orientation and heat treatment on fatigue behavior of selective laser melted 17-4 PH stainless steel. Int J Fatigue 94:218–235.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2016.03.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. You BR, Lee SB (1996) A critical review on multiaxial fatigue assessments of metals. Int J Fatigue 18:235–244.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-1123(96)00002-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zegard T, Paulino GH (2016) Bridging topology optimization and additive manufacturing. Struct Multidiscip Optim 53:175–192.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00158-015-1274-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Science, Technology, and CommunicationUniversity of LuxembourgLuxembourgLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations