仪表板气囊静态点爆试验典型失效形式研究
Research on the Typical Failure Forms of the Instrument Panel Airbag Static Explosion Test
摘要: 针对仪表板气囊静态点爆试验过程中,仪表板表皮飞出、仪表板上体碎裂、气囊支架铰链碎裂、气囊囊袋破孔,四种典型失效形式进行分析讨论。结果表明:对于发泡仪表板,提高表皮的性能、表皮与泡沫层的粘接力,可避免表皮飞出,增加气囊支架铰链止断筋的宽度会缓解铰链断裂。对于硬质仪表板,上体存在吸能结构可降低气囊门撞碎上体的风险。增加囊袋织物密度和基布层数,会降低囊袋破孔的几率。
Abstract:
The instrument panel skin flying out, the instrument panel body fragmentation, the airbag bracket hinge fragmentation, and the airbag bag rupture in the instrument panel airbag static explosion test are analyzed and discussed. The results show that for the foamed instrument panel, improving the performance of the skin and the adhesion between the skin and the foam layer can prevent the skin from flying out, and increasing the width of the airbag bracket hinge stop ribs will relieve the hinge fracture. For hard instrument panels, an energy-absorbing structure on the upper body can reduce the risk of the airbag door smashing the upper body. Increasing the fabric density of the pouch and the number of base fabric layers will reduce the probability of pouch holes.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
刘凯勋. 中国汽车安全技术现状与展望[J]. 中国新技术新产品, 2017(23): 139-140.
|
|
[2]
|
Ramachandran, K., Fordyce, T.A., Ray, R.M., et al. (2005) The Relationship between Airbags and Injuries. SAE Technical Paper, 2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[3]
|
李国城. 隐藏式安全气囊仪表板优化设计及试验研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 重庆: 重庆交通大学, 2016.
|
|
[4]
|
殷潇. 仪表板隐式弱化线及激光弱化工艺研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 镇江: 江苏大学, 2019.
|
|
[5]
|
卞春雷, 安慧, 于善平, 孙军. 无缝安全气囊仪表板气囊区弱化线的加工工艺[J]. 汽车工艺与材料, 2014(5): 31-36.
|
|
[6]
|
袁智军, 王辉, 刘华官, 危学兵, 华林, 房飞. 无缝安全气囊仪表板撕裂线的结构分析与优化[J]. 汽车工程, 2016, 38(8): 1025-1029.
|
|
[7]
|
江伟. 仪表板气囊爆破失败的工艺改善[J]. 机电技术, 2013, 36(1): 67-69.
|
|
[8]
|
耿辉斌, 赵海英, 曹慧林, 张晶, 杨现伟, 李彩凤. 仪表板气囊点爆失败原因分析及优化[J]. 汽车零部件, 2020(11): 27-31.
|