4.7 Article

Finite element analysis of aircraft tyre - Effect of model complexity on tyre performance characteristics

Journal

MATERIALS & DESIGN
Volume 35, Issue -, Pages 810-819

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2011.05.055

Keywords

Aircraft tyre; Finite element analysis; Model complexity; Burst simulation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A brief study on the complexity of the structure of aircraft tyres is presented. The main goal is to investigate how complexity of Finite element (FE) models of the tyre can affect the simulation behaviour with respect to accurate prediction of real tyre behaviour. Three FE models, so called simple, regular and complex were developed for this investigation so that the accuracy of results obtained from the models for different types of analysis can be determined in comparison with measured test data. For all the simulations carried out, including tyre burst test and tyre inflation, a hyperelastic material property was assumed for modelling rubber and cord materials, using the Yeoh model [1]. Simulations were performed using Abaqus/CAE for two dimensional (2D) analysis and Abaqus command line partly for three dimensional (3D) simulation of tyre inflation. Physical tests were carried out on two tyres for FE model validation in terms of tyre burst test and profile sizing measurements. The results showed excellent accuracy in terms of deformation in FE models by comparison with real size measurements of tyre profiles. Also, a quite good prediction of tyre burst pressure under high inflation was obtained for the different models. Finally, the investigation showed that while maximum stress in cords and maximum deflection of tyres at the rated inflation pressure were fairly insensitive to varying the mesh size in the FE models, maximum stress in the rubber components was particularly sensitive to such mesh size variation. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available