Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh
This is my argument that the Governments should allow use of computer simulated crash testing for certification. This in many instances would close the business model for producing a chassis with varying drive train configurations. The chassis is developed using very sophisticated computer modeling tools for finite element analysis design. A computer simulated crash test tool would be as accurate in determining safety performance variability of a chassis/drive train combination as any level of precision left to the test setup or at worst, a real-world crash.
It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on the subject.
|
I am not knowledgeable about the application of computer simulation. I know from casual observation that such CAD (and other programs I don't know/remember by name) simulation was used in the early design and simulated impact development work, before parts/vehicles were created for barrier testing. I also know that a series of prototypes of the identical (to the degree that is possible) vehicle can be produced and impact tested, and results in impact testing can vary, for a long list of possible reasons, from vehicle to test dummy. As a result, the objective was set for 20% above FMVSS requirements so that all the variation, including the most significantly different outlier at the low end of the distribution would be well within the requirements. I don't know how a computer simulation for compliance certification could account for that real-world variation.