Lightweight MacPherson Strut Suspension Front Lower Control Arm Design Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper will discuss the results of a study to develop lightweight steel proof-of-concept front lower control arm (FLCA) designs that are less expensive and achieve equivalent structural performance relative to a baseline forged aluminum FLCA assembly. A current production forged aluminum OEM sedan FLCA assembly was selected as an aggressive mass target based on competitive benchmarking of vehicles of its size. CAE structural optimization methods were used to determine the initial candidate sheet steel and forged designs. Two (2) sheet steel FLCA designs and one (1) forged steel FLCA design were selected and developed to meet specified performance criteria. An iterative optimization strategy was used to minimize the mass of each design while meeting the specified stiffness, durability, extreme load, and longitudinal buckling strength requirements. The manufacturing cost was estimated for the sheet steel designs relative to the baseline design for production volumes ranging from 30,000 to 250,000 vehicles per year. The results of the study showed that a clamshell design, based on DP780 steel sheet, achieves equal mass to the baseline assembly and up to a 34% reduction in manufacturing cost. An I-beam design based on DP780 and DP980 sheet, DP780 tube, and HSLA550 was predicted to have a 2% mass increase, relative to the baseline assembly, and up to a 21% reduction in manufacturing cost. A forged design, based on AISI 15V24 grade material and a 3 mm minimum gage target, was predicted to have a 4% mass increase relative to the baseline assembly.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".