cross section crash boxes

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(a) (b) Figure 5.5. Contact algorithms used in <strong>crash</strong> box modeling a) without and b) with montage plates. 5.3. The Response Surface Methodology As stated earlier, tube G1 geometry (70.2x67.6x125.2 mm) was selected for the optimization study. The response surface algorithm was implemented in order to determine the optimum combination of 1050H14 Al and 6061 T4 Al <strong>crash</strong> box thickness and Alulight and Hydro foam filler relative density. A quadratic-polynomial objective function was selected for constraint single-objective optimization. 6061 T4 Al alloy is known to have higher strength than 1050H14 Al and Hydro foam has higher plateau stress than Alulight foam at similar relative densities. The selection of these materials was to determine the effect of box and filler material properties on the optimized crush box parameters. Response surface methodology (RSM) is a widely used method of crush box energy absorption optimization studies. RSM has three terms (Giess 1998) 90
Page 1 and 2:
OPTIMIZATION OF THE AXIAL CRUSHING
Page 3 and 4:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My PhD quest has b
Page 5 and 6:
ÖZET KAPALI HÜCRELİ ALUMİNYUM K
Page 7 and 8:
CHAPTER 4 EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS ....
Page 9 and 10:
CHAPTER 8 ALUMINUM CRASH BOX OPTIMI
Page 12 and 13:
Figure 3.7. Simulations of the defo
Page 14 and 15:
Figure 4.9. Dimensions of tensile t
Page 16 and 17:
Figure 6.21. Sequential deformation
Page 18 and 19:
Figure 7.20. Sequential deformation
Page 20 and 21:
LIST OF TABLES Table Page Table 4.1
Page 22 and 23:
Figure 1. 1. The body in white stru
Page 24 and 25:
Figure 1. 4. Commercial crash boxes
Page 26 and 27:
CHAPTER 2 AL CLOSED CELL FOAMS: PRO
Page 28 and 29:
The processing methods and mechanic
Page 30 and 31:
Figure 2. 5 The preferred particle
Page 32 and 33:
Figure 2. 8. Typical cellular struc
Page 34 and 35:
Figure 2. 10. Manufacturing cost of
Page 36:
Figure 2. 12. Laser assisted foamed
Page 41 and 42:
Figure 2.16. Shear strength, normal
Page 43 and 44:
Figure 2. 19. Yield strength vs. re
Page 45 and 46:
Figure 2. 21. Unit cell geometry an
Page 47 and 48:
Figure 2. 24. Load-displacement cur
Page 49 and 50:
Figure 2. 26. The photographs of a
Page 51 and 52:
CHAPTER 3 CRUSHING BEHAVIOR OF TUBU
Page 53 and 54:
Figure 3.2. Diamond deformation mod
Page 57 and 58:
deformation mode transition from ax
Page 59 and 60: Figure 3.8. Energy absorption of qu
Page 61: (a) (c) Figure 3.10. Deformation mo
Page 65 and 66: (a) (b) Figure 3.13. a) Schematic o
Page 67 and 68: (a) (b) (c) Figure 3.15. a) Load-di
Page 72 and 73: Figure 3.18. The crush terminology.
Page 75 and 76: The quasi-static compression behavi
Page 77 and 78: Figure 3.22. The variation of speci
Page 79 and 80: Figure 3.24. Deformation modes of e
Page 81 and 82: Figure 3.27. SEA values of empty an
Page 83 and 84: Figure 3.29. (cont.) 3.5. Motivatio
Page 85 and 86: CHAPTER 4 EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS 4.1.
Page 87 and 88: (a) (b) Figure 4.3.Pictures of a) f
Page 89 and 90: oxes are shown in Figure 4.6. The l
Page 91 and 92: Figure 4.7. The method of trigger m
Page 93 and 94: 4.4. Compression Tests of Crash Box
Page 95 and 96: 4.5.2. Uniaxial Compression Testing
Page 97 and 98: Table 4.1 (Cont.) G1 T3 F2 G1T3F2 3
Page 99 and 100: Table 4.2 (Cont.) G1 T2.5 WP F2 G1T
Page 101: CHAPTER 5 SIMULATION AND OPTIMIZATI
Page 105: considered in axial and transverse
Page 109: were constrained. Since the width o
Page 117 and 118: imposed was a constant prismatic cr
Page 119 and 120: The mesh of sampling points are sho
Page 123 and 124: Figure 6.2. Experimental and foam m
Page 125 and 126: Figure 6.4(b) shows the picture of
Page 127 and 128: Figure 6.6.(Cont) (b) 6.5. Quasi-st
Page 129 and 130: Figure 6.8. Load-displacement and m
Page 131 and 132: fixing part on the mean load values
Page 133 and 134: Figure 6.13. Sequential deformation
Page 137 and 138: deformation in both geometries, Fig
Page 139 and 140: Figure 6.19.(cont.) (c) (a) Figure
Page 141 and 142: crash boxes, totally two folds form
Page 143 and 144: (a) (b) Figure 6.22. Sequential def
Page 145 and 146: Load-displacement and mean load-dis
Page 147 and 148: Figure 6.25.(cont.) (b) (c) (a) Fig
Page 149 and 150: displacement curve of empty tube is
Page 151 and 152: Table 6.4. Initial peak and mean lo
Page 153 and 154: Figure 7.1. Experimental and simula
Page 155 and 156: Figure 7.3. (cont.) (b) 7.3. Simula
Page 161 and 162:
(a) (b) (c) Figure 7.13. Load-displ
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
(b) Figure 7.16. Sequential deforma
Page 167 and 168:
Figure 7.17. (cont.) (b) (c) 147
Page 169 and 170:
Figure 7.18. (cont.) (c) (a) Figure
Page 171 and 172:
(a) (b) Figure 7.20. Sequential def
Page 173 and 174:
Figure 7.21.(cont.) (b) (c) 153
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
7.5. Dynamic Testing of Empty and A
Page 180:
(b) Figure 8.1. Load-displacement c
Page 183 and 184:
Figure 8.3. (cont.) (b) (a) (b) Fig
Page 186 and 187:
oxes experience higher mean load an
Page 188 and 189:
foam relative density of filled box
Page 190:
Figure 8.8. (cont.) (b) 170
Page 193 and 194:
Figure 9.1. (cont.) (c) (d) (a) (b)
Page 195 and 196:
9.2. Stroke Efficiency of Crash Box
Page 198 and 199:
foam filled boxes increase with inc
Page 200:
Figure 9.7.(cont.) 9.4. Total Effic
Page 204:
and Ψ ′ = GV 0 2 2σ0AL εr (9.1
Page 208 and 209:
Figure 9.11. SEA vs. relative densi
Page 210 and 211:
CHAPTER 10 CONCLUSIONS The present
Page 212 and 213:
same. The deformation patterns of d
Page 214 and 215:
REFERENCES Abedrabbo, N., Mayer, R.
Page 216 and 217:
Bonaccorsi, L. and Proverbio, E., 2
Page 218 and 219:
EPA -United States of America Envir
Page 220 and 221:
Hou, S., Li, Q., Long, S., Yang, X.
Page 222 and 223:
Lopatnikov, S. L., Gama, B. A. and
Page 224 and 225:
Miyoshi, T., Itoh, M., Mukai, T., K
Page 226 and 227:
Seitzberger, M., Rammerstorfer, F.,
Page 228 and 229:
Wen, C. E., Yamada, Y., Shimojima,
Page 232:
Education VITA Ahmet Kaan TOKSOY (1
show all

cross section crash boxes

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?