Advertisement

Modeling and multi-objective optimization of a bionic crash box with folding deformation

  • ChunYan Wang
  • Guangchao Lu
  • WanZhong ZhaoEmail author
  • Yuanlong Wang
Research Paper
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract

Traditional crash box is unable to efficiently solve the problem of bending deformation during the collision process, which limits the energy absorption performance and crashworthiness. This paper introduces the structure of cactus into the design of crash box and attempts to redesign a new one with stable folding deformation. By imitating the cactus characteristic, the bionic crash box consists of two parts: one is the corrugated angular structure, and the other is its thickness functionally gradient distribution along the axial direction. Based on the sensitivity analysis, the parameters which have great influences on the energy absorption performance are selected as the design variables. The multi-objective optimization design is conducted based on response surface model and Latin hypercube design of experiment. Simulation results show that the bionic crash box can effectively weaken the damage to the autobody and improve the energy absorption performance through stable folding deformation.

Keywords

Crash box Folding deformation Cactus Bionic structure Thickness gradient 

Notes

Funding

This work was support by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. NS2018013) and the Open Fund for Graduate Innovation Base of Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics (kfjj20180201).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Alavi NA, Haddad HJ (2010) Comparative analysis of energy absorption and deformation of thin walled tubes with various cross sections geometries. Thin-Walled Struct 48:946–955CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bhushan B, Jung YC (2011) Natural and biomimetic artificial surfaces for super hydrophobicity, self-cleaning, low adhesion, and drag reduction. Prog Mater Sci 56(1):1–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chan M (2015) Global status report on road safety: time for action. Injury Prevention Journal of the International Society for Child & Adolescent Injury Prevention 15(4):286Google Scholar
  4. Cho JU, Hong SJ, Lee SK, Cho CD (2012) Impact fracture behavior at the material of aluminum foam. Mater Sci Eng A 539:250–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Desai D, Kadam (2016) Analysis and development of energy absorbing crash box. Int J Adv Res Innov Ideas In Educ 2(3):3776–3782Google Scholar
  6. Emami R, Moghadam ESA, Sohrabi M (2012) Crashworthiness optimization of thin walled cylindrical tubes with annular grooves under axial compression. Adv Mater Res 463-464Google Scholar
  7. Hao L, Xu T, Cui J, Tatsuo Y (2013) Multi-objective optimization for crashworthiness of crash box with parameterized inducing grooves. J Jilin Univ 43(1):39–44Google Scholar
  8. Hernandez C, Maranon A, Ashcroft IA, Casas-Rodriguez JP (2013) A computational determination of the Cowper-Symonds parameters from a single Taylor test. Appl Math Model 37(7):4698–4708MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Hosseinipour SJ, Daneshi GH (2003) Energy absorption and mean crushing load of thin-walled grooved tubes under axial compression. Thin-Walled Struct 41(1):31–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jamian S, Abidin MRZ, Muda AM (2015) Crashworthiness behavior of hollow Al-based functionally graded material (FGM) box under quasi-static loading. Appl Mech Mater 773-774:110–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jiang ZY, Gu MT (2010) Optimization of a fender structure for the crashworthiness design. Mater Des 31(3):1085–1095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kang S (2016) Bumper stay design for RCAR front low speed impact test RCAR. Trans KASE 24(2):191–197Google Scholar
  13. Kozlov A, Chowdhury H, Mustary I, Loganathan B, Alam F (2015) Bio-inspired design: aerodynamics of boxfish. Procedia Eng 105:323–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kral J (2006) Yet another look at crash pulse analysis. SAE Technical PaperGoogle Scholar
  15. Lanzi L, Castelletti LML, Anghileri M (2004) Multi-objective optimization of composite absorber shape under crashworthiness requirements. Compos Struct 65(3–4):433–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lee SJ, Lee HA, Yi SI, Kim DS, Yang HW, Park GJ (2013) Design flow for the crash box in a vehicle to maximize energy absorption. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D J Automob Eng 227(2):179–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li BW, Zhao HP, Feng XQ (2011) Static and dynamic mechanical properties of cattle horns. Mater Sci Eng C 31(2):179–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li ML, Bi DS, Hao JK (2015) Automotive sheet metal SAPH440 and Q235 formability of comparative study. In: International conference on material science and application (ICMSA 2015), vol 3, pp 1027–1030Google Scholar
  19. Liao XT, Li Q, Yang XJ, Li W, Zhang WG (2008) A two-stage multi-objective optimization of vehicle crashworthiness under frontal impact. Int J Crashworthiness 13(3):279–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu Y, Ding L (2016) A study of using different crash box types in automobile frontal collision. Int J Simul: Syst Sci Technol 17(38):21.1–21.5Google Scholar
  21. Mohamad A, Ahmad F, Ray T, Smith W (2012) A hydrodynamic preliminary design optimization framework for high speed planning craft. J Ship Res 56(1):35–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mohammadiha O, Beheshti H, Aboutalebi FH (2015) Multi-objective optimization of functionally graded honeycomb filled crash boxes under oblique impact loading. Int J Crashworthiness 21(1):44–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Omkar BG, Krishna SP, Prashant KT, Amit MW, Sagar PC (2018) Analysis and experimental validation of crash box for the energy absorption capacity. Res Rev: J Eng Technol 7(1):11–14Google Scholar
  24. Salehghaffari S, Tajdari M, Panahi M, Mokhtarnezhad F (2010) Attempts to improve absorption characteristics of circular metal tubes subjected to axial loading. Steel Constr 48(6):379–390Google Scholar
  25. Shin MK, Yi SI, Kwon OT, Park GJ (2008) Structural optimization of the automobile frontal structure for pedestrian protection and the low-speed impact test. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D J Automob Eng 222(12):2373–2387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sinha K (2007) Reliability-based multi-objective optimization for automotive crashworthiness and occupant safety. Struct Multidiscip Optim 33(3):255–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tanlak N, Sonmez FO (2014) Optimal shape design of thin-walled tubes under high-velocity axial impact loads. Thin-Walled Struct 84:302–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Villavicencio R, Kim YH, Cho SR, Guedes Soares C (2013) Deformation process of web girders in small-scale tanker double hull structures subjected to lateral impact. Mar Struct 32:84–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wang J, Zhang Y, He N, Wang CH (2018) Crashworthiness behavior of Koch fractal structures. Mater Des 144:229–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wu HQ, Xin Y (2008) True stress-strain curves used in finite element vehicle model. IEEE vehicle power and propulsion conference (VPPC), Harbin, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  31. Xu T, Liu N, Yu ZL, Xu TS, Zou M (2017) Crashworthiness design for bionic bumper structures inspired by cattail and bamboo. Appl Bionics Biomech 2017:1–9Google Scholar
  32. Yildiz AR, Solanki KN (2012) Multi-objective optimization of vehicle crashworthiness using a new particle swarm based approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 59(1–4):367–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yin HF, Xiao YY, Wen GL, Gan NF, Chen C, Dai JL (2016) Multi-objective robust optimization of foam-filled bionic thin-walled structures. Thin-Walled Struct 109:332–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yu Z, Li L, Yang J (2011) Frontal structure improvement on car based on RCAR impact test. Infats International Forum of Automotive Traffic Safety, ChangshaGoogle Scholar
  35. Yu JJ, Zou M, Xu SC, Zhang RR, Wang HX, Liu JT (2014) Structure and mechanical characteristic of cattle horns. J Mech Med Biol 12(6):140011Google Scholar
  36. Zhan ZF, Fu Y, Yang RJ, Peng YH (2011) An automatic model calibration method for occupant restraint systems. Struct Multidiscip Optim 44(6):815–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • ChunYan Wang
    • 1
  • Guangchao Lu
    • 1
  • WanZhong Zhao
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yuanlong Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Automotive EngineeringNanjing University of Aeronautics and AstronauticsNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations