[Leoshashi]

Originally Posted by Flying Shadow

[[ Renault was caught trying to take advantage of this,not long ago with the Kwid. Knowing the NCAP crash procedure,after a crash test failure,Renault strengthened only the driver side for next test.

But this time NCAP did a crash test for passenger side too and GUESS WHAT?

The driver side was fine..but the passenger side collapsed.

Finally, it took Renault 3 updates on the car and 4 crash tests just to get a 1 star rating for Kwid. ]]

The question is, Is Tata also doing the same with Tiago?

My post is not related to Tiago but this is what I was wondering when I looked at an image of Nexon's Bodyshell.



What's the use of this member and why is this specifically on the RHS floorboard and not on LHS side? From the looks of it, its most likely for reinforcement. If this is true then why is it missing on the LHS side?

Regards,
Shashi

PS: Please understand that my post is just a query and I'm not doubting/defaming anyone.

[McLaren Rulez]

Originally Posted by Leoshashi

PS: Please understand that my post is just a query and I'm not doubting/defaming anyone.

You don't need to apologize for asking these questions at all. From Toyota's airbag deployment failures to Renault's ridiculous gaming of the system to Maruti and Hyundai removing structural components vis-a-vis the international variants there is almost no low that manufacturers don't stoop to.

Posts like these help in restoring the balance and I welcome them wholeheartedly.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by McLaren Rulez

Posts like these help in restoring the balance and I welcome them wholeheartedly.

Oh sure! Whilst I think many people have unreasonable expectations of car bodies, we absolutely should call out the manufacturers when they are caught out. Like, I forget who it was... putting the reinforcement in the driver's door and not the passenger door

[venkyhere]

Originally Posted by Leoshashi

What's the use of this member and why is this specifically on the RHS floorboard and not on LHS side? From the looks of it, its most likely for reinforcement. If this is true then why is it missing on the LHS side?

looks like an inverse tunnel to carry the fuel lines underneath, from tank to engine. May not be for structural rigidity

[Nanolover]

Originally Posted by venkyhere

looks like an inverse tunnel to carry the fuel lines underneath, from tank to engine. May not be for structural rigidity

I worked in crash testing and that member is part of RH side to pass RH side crash test norms regarding pedal intrusion, pedal displacement etc.

For LHD versions and the corresponding crash tests, that reinforcement comes in the LH side

Guys, for crash testing, just like emissions a lot of elements are at play. everything from wheel size to regulation and the corresponding speed. Some of these reinforcements ( same additional will be inside the front RH or LH side crash members) are added to meet regulation criteria for A,B,C pedal intrusion, stiffening the floor pan ( to prevent floor pan buckling under crash and pushing the pedals inward).

[BoneCollector]

Originally Posted by Nanolover

I worked in crash testing and that member is part of RH side to pass RH side crash test norms regarding pedal intrusion, pedal displacement etc.

Some of these reinforcements ( same additional will be inside the front RH or LH side crash members) are added to meet regulation criteria for A,B,C pedal intrusion, stiffening the floor pan ( to prevent floor pan buckling under crash and pushing the pedals inward).

Thanks. I think this does clarify a few things. It's highly understandable that driver side has more stuff viz steering wheel and ABC pedals and it requires more reinforcement to prevent pedal intrusion etc. I hope that it is not something just to pass the crash tests.

[Leoshashi]

Originally Posted by venkyhere

looks like an inverse tunnel to carry the fuel lines underneath, from tank to engine. May not be for structural rigidity

Being the curious cat I am, I have done enough homework on this and came to the conclusion that it isn't an inverse tunnel for fuel/brake lines. Reasons:

A. Suppose such a design is made for tunnel to carry lines, it won't have mounting holes. While designing these things, OEMs also take into account possibility of mechanic later using a larger size bolt and eventually damaging it.

B. The brake and fuel lines of Nexon seem to be travelling from underneath the car as seen in this pic:



Regards,
Shashi

[Nanolover]

Originally Posted by Leoshashi

Being the curious cat I am, I have done enough homework on this and came to the conclusion that it isn't an inverse tunnel for fuel/brake lines. Reasons:

A. Suppose such a design is made for tunnel to carry lines, it won't have mounting holes. While designing these things, OEMs also take into account possibility of mechanic later using a larger size bolt and eventually damaging it.

B. The brake and fuel lines of Nexon seem to be travelling from underneath the car as seen in this pic:

Attachment 1928925

Regards,
Shashi

Hi Sashi, bone collector

Both of you are correct. Let me explain

The floor reinforcement ( that shashi has marked in red) is welded to the inner floor main panels ( there are two pressings front floor and rear floor- these are the two huge floor pressing panels and the one that cost most money, hence what manufacturers say as "retain the floor pan terminology"). The reinforcement plate in also welded on top to the inner floor main panel.So in cross section it is a 3 plate weld with common weld points along the flange length usually at a 30 mm pitch

It is mostly to clear crash test, but structurally also rigidity might go up as it prevents flexing ( i was not part of the body rigidity team that tests bending and torsional stiffness)

[GTO]

Thanks for sharing, Leoshashi! Moving your post & replies to a new thread.

[Sutripta]

Might be to do with offset impact.

Regards
Sutripta

[Nanolover]

Yup. It is to clear offset crash against deformable barrier. This test is usually conducted with base spec model tyres so as to minimise tyre /wheel well intrusion. In new cars like Audi's I think the front wheel is designed to detach in a head on or offset collision to prevent intrusion

[Turbohead]

Originally Posted by Leoshashi

Attachment 1928925

Appreciate your curiosity Mr Shasi!

In this given picture, I see there are two members on both sides of the chassis. So that is a good sign The member you have pointed out on the first picture will in all probability be the member to avoid protrusion of steering column and pedals.

As a designer, developer and a virtual tester, I find it pointless to provide more members on the passenger side of the frame if it can withstand the given load in an assumed scenario. It's very easy to add as many members as possible but it is a challenge to optimise the right amount of material/ members to suit the requirements/ conditions/scenarios. It's a balance between requirement and cost.

Also, having a very stiff structure is also not safe as there will be higher deceleration rate during collision compared to a structure which crumbles in a controlled manner. Higher deceleration rates result in larger forces which acts on your body. ( Check out stuff about crumble zones to learn more about this)

Honestly, if Team BHPians feel this is an issue, I dont find anything wrong in asking Tata to come out with a worthy explanation.

[arjab]

Originally Posted by Leoshashi

My post is not related to Tiago but this is what I was wondering when I looked at an image of Nexon's Bodyshell.

Attachment 1928800

What's the use of this member and why is this specifically on the RHS floorboard and not on LHS side? From the looks of it, its most likely for reinforcement. If this is true then why is it missing on the LHS side?

Regards,
Shashi

PS: Please understand that my post is just a query and I'm not doubting/defaming anyone.

Floor reinforcement cum additional load dissipation path to keep floor buckling within prescribed measurable limits when subjected to NCAP 64ODB, (64kmph Offset Deformable Barrier).
Is this chassis pre 2019 Jan ? Possibly post Jan 2019, after a certain VIN number cut-off, all Nexon's would have similar additional reinforcements on both sides.
All of Nexon's brake & fuel line plumbing are underfloor.

In fact the X1 platform, which underpins the Nexon, Zest, Bolt and the now defunct Vista & Manza is fundamentally quite strong as it was always designed for Euro crash norms, as TML's initial strategy was to export the Vista to European countries as well.

[Leoshashi]

Originally Posted by arjab

Floor reinforcement cum additional load dissipation path to keep floor buckling within prescribed measurable limits when subjected to NCAP 64ODB, (64kmph Offset Deformable Barrier).
Is this chassis pre 2019 Jan ? Possibly post Jan 2019, after a certain VIN number cut-off, all Nexon's would have similar additional reinforcements on both sides.
All of Nexon's brake & fuel line plumbing are underfloor.

The screenshot is from a Video which was shot by NDTV and Tata motors after Nexon got 5 star Global NCAP rating. What happened in January 2019 which as per your claim made them give such reinforcements on both sides?

The pic I shared is from this video, exact time-6:45

https://youtu.be/7WQv8o9TDNo

Regards,
Shashi

[pranavGTI]

Originally Posted by Leoshashi

What's the use of this member

Looking at the picture, this is separately formed, and spot welded to the floor. You rightly said, this is a support structural reinforcement. When a collision happens, the impact stress is passed on to this formed part through the weld so that the floor doesn’t crumple and the driver is safely cocooned inside. You could see similar one (floor hump) on the rear passenger side in VW Polo & Vento, serving the same purpose.