The present invention relates generally to automotive roofs, and more specifically, to an enhancement to the roof resulting in support advantages.
The present invention generally relates to automotive roof design that upon the advent of a side pole collision inhibits or prevents the intrusion of a roof rail into the interior of the vehicle. The post-collision space within the vehicle is therefore increased thereby enhancing the occupant safety. Because there is always an emphasis on increased vehicle safety, the potential for the roof rail to intrude into the vehicle interior during a side pole collision is desirably mitigated or eliminated.
In certain vehicle roof “green house” architectures, the roof may be designed with a roof rail system supported by the front header at an A-pillar and a roof bow at a B-pillar, for example. In these types of designs there is typically no direct transverse load path available at the point where the pole or tree may impact the roof rail. In the absence of such a load path, it is difficult to laterally transfer loads to the roof bow and header efficiently thereby limiting roof rail intrusion.
One method of increasing the strength of known roof structures is to increase the size, thickness, and weight of the various roof components, and enhance their material structure by more exotic alloys known for their respective strengths or toughness, for example. Limiting intrusion through an increase in sheet metal thicknesses is generally considered to be inefficient in terms of weight, for any structural members that may be subjected to transverse loadings. Section sizes, on the other hand, are often limited by the vehicle styling, binocular vision, and also by weight constraints. Taken alone or in combination, these options increase the manufacturing cost and complexity and are therefore effective, but more costly.
Because lighter-weight vehicular bodies are a primary constraint for all current and future roof designs, the development of new architecture that mitigates roof rail intrusion must be efficiently achieved, while minimizing the associated weight.
The above-referenced concerns are resolved by a “green house” architecture that efficiently manages the transverse load upon a side pole or tree impact, without substantially adding to the weight of the vehicle.
A roof support for a vehicle may include a first roof rail extending along a length of the vehicle; a roof bow laterally extending from the first roof rail; a front header laterally extending from said first roof rail; and a first brace fixed to the first roof rail at a third point between the roof bow and the front header. The first brace extends to the roof bow and is fixed to a first point on the roof bow, thereby defining a first angle between the first roof rail and the first brace. The vehicle roof support may also include a second roof rail opposite the first roof rail such that the roof bow and the front header both extend from the first roof rail to the second roof rail in substantial parallel relation to each other. A second brace may also be provided and fixed to the second roof rail between the roof bow and the front header, the second brace extending to the roof bow and fixed to a second point on the roof bow, thereby defining a second angle between the second roof rail and the second brace.
The angular relationship between the roof rails and the braces provides a lateral load management from the roof rails to the header and the roof bow. Increasing the distance between the point of attachment of the brace on the roof rail and the roof bow is believed to increase the lateral load transferred from the side roof rail to the front header, during a side pole or side tree impact collision.
As further shown in
As shown in
As also shown in the FIGURES, the roof brace 12 may be attached to the underside 20b of side roof rail 20 and to the underside 16b of the roof bow 16. When assembled with the roof assembly 10 in this manner, the brace 12 may be designed as a two-piece closed section structural member packaged between the roof panel and the interior roof trim.
As further shown in
As described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,758,109, 7,543,884, and 7,758,107, the teachings of which are herein incorporated by reference, the components of the roof assembly 10 including braces 12 and 14, side rails 20 and 22, front header 16, and roof bow 18 may be roll-formed, hydro-formed, and/or otherwise formed depending on the material composition of each constituent. The various components may be manufactured from any standard material including, in the way of examples, steel, aluminum, composites, nylon and magnesium, and manufactured from any known process including hot-stamping, cold stamping, hydroforming, and extrusion, for example.
In yet another aspect of the invention, and with reference to the FIGURES, a method of transferring load distribution within a roof assembly is provided as follows:
The present description is for illustrative purposes only, and should not be construed to limit the breadth of the present invention in any way. Thus, those skilled in the art will appreciate that various modifications and/or equivalents could be made to the presently disclosed embodiments without departing from the scope of the present invention, as defined in the appended claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5671968 | Masuda et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
6003898 | Teply et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6012764 | Seksaria et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6073992 | Yamauchi et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
7243985 | Yatabe et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7407222 | Anderson et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7543884 | Reed et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7614686 | Robertson et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7758107 | Ratsos et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7758109 | Reed et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
20070187991 | Mori | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20080030050 | Chen et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080116714 | Timmermans et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20090071737 | Leonard et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2005059649 | Mar 2005 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130082484 A1 | Apr 2013 | US |