First of all, Good Morning to all.

My topic is optimization of dynamically loaded forged steel

crankshaft for cost & weight reduction with changes in crank geometry.
Introduction: - As per name the main objective was to optimize the weight & manufacturing
cost of forged steel crankshaft which not only reduce production cost but also results in
lighter weight. It was attempted by changing the crankpin geometry, increasing oil hole
diameter & fillet radius, increasing hole depth & changing crank web geometry.
FEA was used to obtain the variation in stress magnitude. Each optimization step was
approximated based on improving fatigue resistance while considering manufacturing
feasibility & maintaining dynamic balance with an our aim.
Dynamic Load & Stress Analysis: - Fig shows crankshaft model created in Pro-E. The
crankshaft analysis could be simplified to an application of bending load only. Satisfactory
results were obtained using Ansys as 119,337 elements for crankshaft as shown in fig.
Graph shows maximum & range of Von-mises stress at an engine speed of 2000 rpm at
different location of crankshafts.
Optimization objective & constraints:-
Objective: - Reducing weight & manufacturing cost while maintaining fatigue performance
of original component. Optimization was carried out in such a way that the equivalent local
stress amplitude at any location of optimized model did not exceed equivalent stress
amplitude at critical location of the original model. Following dimension not changed Outer
dia of different cylinder, crank radius, location & geometry of main bearing.
Design variable Changing crankpin geometry, oil hole diameter & fillet radius, hole depth
and crank web geometry.
Geometry Optimization Procedure:-
Optimization Process


Geometry Modification Manufacturing Process Consideration Material alternative
Local shape optimization techniques were applied to different location of the crankshaft to
lower the weight. After each step counter weights were balanced to achieve the aim. Figs
shows low stresses during loading cycle & have potential for material removal & weight
reduction.
Different Optimization Cases: - Several cases of geometric modification. Maintaining
dynamic balance is key concern for this optimization.
Case 1:- Increasing depth of drilled hole at back of crankshaft Removing material
symmetric to the central axis. Increasing depth of drill hole.
Case 2:- Increasing hole diameter of crankpin oil hole & fillet radius Due to this M.I. of
cross section decreases. Weight reduction is about 3%.
Case 3:- Reducing the thickness of web Due to this weight reduction is about 7%.
Considering manufacturing processes the weight of original crankshaft reduces by 18%.
In addition, micro alloyed steel has 5 to 10 % better machinability than quenched & tempered
steel resulting in reduce manufacturing cost.
Conclusion.