+高级检索
基于频域和时域法的电池包随机振动疲劳计算对比研究
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

通讯作者:

基金项目:


A Comparing Study on Battery Pack Random Vibration Fatigue Calculation Based on Frequency Domain and Time Domain Approaches
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 图/表
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 引证文献
  • |
  • 资源附件
    摘要:

    针对频域法和时域法在随机振动疲劳计算中的适用性问题,以某型号电池包为研究对象,综合研究了2种方法的计算精度和计算效率.首先,建立电池包有限元模型,并通过模态试验进行验证;其次,以国标GB 38031―2020加速度功率谱密度(PSD)载荷谱作为频域载荷输入,并利用傅里叶逆变换技术将其转换为加速度时域载荷;最后,分别基于频域法和时域法计算电池包的振动加速度、应力和疲劳寿命,并进行了计算精度、效率的对比分析和精度的试验验证.结果表明,在电池包总振级和应力均方根值(RMS)方面,频域法和时域法计算结果相近,相对误差小于16%;在加速度和应力峰值方面,频域法“3σ”计算结果与时域法差距较大,若采用“4σ”或“5σ”原则,计算结果与时域法相近,相对误差小于15%;在振动疲劳方面,频域法计算寿命约为时域法的3~6倍,主要原因包括Dirlik模型和应力响应PSD谱差异,其中Dirlik模型造成的差距小于1.5倍;在计算效率方面,频域法比时域法高约134倍.试验数据表明,时域法计算精度更高,适用于结构危险位置振动疲劳的精确计算,而频域法计算效率更高,适用于结构危险位置的快速预测.

    Abstract:

    Focusing on the applicability of the frequency domain method and time domain method in random vibration fatigue calculation, the accuracy and efficiency of the two methods are comprehensively studied with a certain type of battery pack as the research object. First, a finite element model of the battery pack is established and verified through the modal test. Secondly, the acceleration Power Spectral Density (PSD)of GB 38031―2020 is taken as the load spectrum in the frequency domain and converted into the time domain load using Fourier inverse transformation technology. Finally, the vibration acceleration, stress, and fatigue life of the battery pack are calculated based on the frequency domain method and the time domain method, respectively. The calculation accuracy and efficiency of both methods are compared and verified by the test. The results show that in regard of the total vibration level and stress RMS value of the battery pack, the calculated values of the frequency domain method and the time domain method are similar, and the relative error is less than 16%. For the peak value of acceleration and stress, the "3σ" calculation results of frequency domain method are much different from those of time domain method. With the adoption of the "4σ" or "5σ" principle, the calculation results of both methods are similar, and the relative error is less than 15%. In concern of vibration fatigue, the calculated life by the frequency domain method is about as 3 to 6 times long as that by the time domain method. The main reasons include Dirlik model and stress response PSD, in which the difference caused by the Dirlik model is less than 1.5 times. In terms of computational efficiency, the frequency domain method is about 134 times faster than the time domain method. The test data show that the time domain method is with higher accuracy and suitable for the accurate calculation of vibration fatigue at dangerous positions, while the frequency domain method is more efficient and suitable for the rapid prediction of structural high-risk positions.

    参考文献
    相似文献
    引证文献
文章指标
  • PDF下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 摘要点击次数:
  • 引用次数:
引用本文

吴光强 ?,李超 ,丁丰 ,章蕾 .基于频域和时域法的电池包随机振动疲劳计算对比研究[J].湖南大学学报:自然科学版,2024,(2):208~218

复制
历史
  • 收稿日期:
  • 最后修改日期:
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2024-03-21
  • 出版日期:
作者稿件一经被我刊录用,如无特别声明,即视作同意授予我刊论文整体的全部复制传播的权利,包括但不限于复制权、发行权、信息网络传播权、广播权、表演权、翻译权、汇编权、改编权等著作使用权转让给我刊,我刊有权根据工作需要,允许合作的数据库、新媒体平台及其他数字平台进行数字传播和国际传播等。特此声明。
关闭