Combined Analysis of LS-DYNA Crash-Simulations and Crash-Test Scans

In robustness campaigns and optimization processes metamodels are created out of a set of crash- simulations. With the help of such analyses the models used for the simulations can be improved. For example, instabilities can be found and explained or the needed material can be minimized under certain safety restrictions. An important question in this context is: How good can these metamodels represent the reality? To answer this question, one can compare the crash-simulations to the real crash-tests, which were recorded by camera systems after the crash. To be able to compare the test-data with the LS-DYNA crash-simulations, we first need to convert the test-data by matching the geometries and transferring the part information from the simulation to the crash-test. Afterwards one can calculate the combination of the simulations, which approximates geometry and deformation behavior of the test- data as close as possible. The distance and difference in behavior between this calculated Best Fit and the actual crash-test can be used to measure the quality of the simulation model. Once the evaluation of the model is finished, the test-data can also be added to a robustness campaign as an additional simulation and used for further analysis. This allows us to answer questions such as: How does the test fit into the simulation subspace? Which simulation runs are similar to the test for a certain crash event? Which of the dominating crash events found in the simulation can also be found in the test? Thus, the described matching procedure combined with exemplary further analysis methods on the one hand allow for a quick and automated matching between test and simulation and on the other hand a more detailed validation of the simulation model in comparison to the actual test. Due to the conversion of the test-data, the same post-processors can be used for both the simulations and the test-data, resulting in a smoother workflow.