4.4 Article

Research on parameter estimation methods of fatigue life distribution model of automotive chassis parts

期刊

ADVANCES IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
卷 14, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/16878132221117752

关键词

Fatigue life; Weibull distribution; parameter estimation; genetic algorithm

资金

  1. Guangzhou Mechanical Engineering Research Institute Co., Ltd. [1014300038]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The reliability assessment of fatigue life of automotive chassis parts is crucial for automobile safety. In this study, fatigue endurance tests were conducted on automotive half-axles, and a three-parameter Weibull distribution model was established to analyze the fatigue life distribution. A new parameter estimation method based on dual genetic algorithm was proposed, which improved the accuracy and iteration speed of parameter estimation, providing new ideas and theoretical basis for reliability assessment of mechanical components.
The reliability assessment of fatigue life of automotive chassis parts is an important part of automobile safety. The fatigue endurance tests of automotive half-axles were carried out. The three-parameter Weibull distribution model was established according to the fatigue life distribution of samples. Using the right approximation method and the genetic algorithm to estimate three parameters of the distribution model and a comparative analysis was made. The results show that the initial life unreliability estimated by the median rank in the right approximation method had a large deviation from the true value, which may cause the iterative algorithm fall into the local optimal solution and affect the estimation accuracy. Therefore, a new parameter estimation method based on dual genetic algorithm was proposed. The newly proposed dual genetic algorithm not only improves the iteration speed, but also improves the accuracy of parameter estimation, which provides new ideas and theoretical basis for reliability assessment of mechanical components.

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

4.4
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