cross section crash boxes

More documents

Recommendations

Info

5.4. The Crashworthiness Optimization of Tubular Structures The crushing behavior of multi-corner, thin-walled columns was previously optimized using RSM (Liu 2008a). The wall thickness and cross-section edge length were selected independent variables for the maximization of SEA. In another study, a square crush box with multi-cell sections was optimized with optimum cell numbers and cell geometrical parameters using again RMS (Hou, et al. 2008). The objective functions including linear, quadratic, cubic, quadratic and quintic polynomial were implemented, while the minimum error was accomplished by using a quadratic polynomial objective function. In a study of the multi-objective optimization of the frontal crush of an automobile chassis, RSM and radial basis function methodology were implemented together for comparison purpose (Fang, et al. 2005). Both were shown to be effective in the optimization of the intricate structure of automobile frontal section. RMS was also applied to determine the optimum thickness and radius of a cylindrical shell type tubular structure (Yamazaki and Han 2000). An orthogonal polynomial function was chosen as objective function and an orthogonal sampling array was implemented to create the response surface. Additionally, dynamic tests were carried out in order to validate objective function. The crashworthiness optimization of the circular Al tubes was studied by Zarei and Kröger, (Zarei and Kröger 2006). Various shapes of the impact side of circular tubes were investigated for the maximization of crush performance (Chiandussi and Avalle 2002). The taper length and the smallest diameter of tube were selected independent variable and the load uniformity (maximum load divided by mean load) dependent variable. The minimization of the load uniformity was applied to, in an separate study, the optimization of corrugated circular and tapered rectangular tubes (Avalle, et al. 2002). The shape optimization of a non-uniform closed hat front crash absorber section of an automobile was studied using RSM by Y.-B Cho et al.(Cho, et al. 2006). Two different crush initiator shapes, rectangular hole-type and circular dent-type, were investigated to maximize the crush energy absorption. A cross-section shape optimization study was further performed by Giess and Tomas (Giess 1998) by implementing the average mean crushing load as an objective function. The constraint 96
imposed was a constant prismatic cross-section and resulted in a 91% increase in the energy absorption at an impact velocity of 48 km h -1 . The minimum weight optimization of an Al foam filled S-Frame was carried out using an analytical energy absorption equation as an objective function (Kim, et al. 2002). The optimized variables, the thickness and cross-section length of the frame and the foam relative density, were validated with the finite element simulations. The simulation and optimization results showed 5% difference. Zarei and Köreger (Zarei and Kröger 2008b) worked on the optimization of Alporas Al foam-filled Al tubes to maximize SEA for the crush box applications by taking the width of cross-section and foam density as independent variables. The optimum parameters of empty square Al tubes were determined under the maximum mean load constraint of 68.5 kN. Equivalent SEA values of the optimized empty square tubes were compared with those of the optimized foam filled Al tube. Approximately, 20% increase in SEA values was found after the optimization in foam filled tubes. A similar optimization study was conducted on Al honeycomb filled Al square tubular structures (Zarei and Kröger 2008c). With respect to empty counterpart, 14.3% increase in SEA values were found in filled tube. Zhang et al.(Zhang, et al. 2008) performed an optimization study on the honeycomb filled bitubular hexagonal columns using Chebyshev’s orthogonal polynomial as objective function with the independent variables of inner side length and the thickness of inner and outer wall. With the maximized average mean load, 40% increase in SEA values was found in the optimized bitubal honeycomb filled Al tubes. Single and weighted arithmetic and geometrical average methods of multi objective optimization were implemented to foam filled thin-wall structures (Hou, et al. 2009). The applied Pareto analysis showed that geometrical average method was more effective than arithmetic average method in multi objective optimization of foam filled thin-wall structures. The bending properties of Alporas Al foam filled square tubular structures were optimized by Zarei and Kröger (Zarei and Kröger 2008a). Agreements between experimental and numerical results were found under the prescribed constraints and 28.1% increase in SEA values was found in foam filled tubular structures. Square tapered mild steel tubes were optimized in terms of tube thickness and width and taper angle (Liu 2008b). Full factorial design with 27 sampling points and second order objective functions were implemented using RSM. It was shown that taper angle had a 97
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 and 110: were constrained. Since the width o
Page 118 and 119: great effect on the crushing behavi
Page 120: CHAPTER 6 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS 6.1.
Page 124 and 125: Figure 6.3.Tensile stress-strain cu
Page 126 and 127: (a) (b) Figure 6.5. Sequential defo
Page 128 and 129: plate (Figure 6(b)). The trigger is
Page 130 and 131: (a) (b) Figure 6.9. Deformation seq
Page 132 and 133: Figure 6.12. Sequential deformation
Page 138 and 139: Figure 6.18. (cont.) (c) (a) (b) Fi
Page 140 and 141: Figure 6.20.(cont.). (b) (c) 6.5.4.
Page 142 and 143: Figure 6.21.(cont.) (b) (c) 122
Page 144 and 145: Figure 6.22.(cont.) (c) Figure 6.23
Page 146 and 147: Figure 6.24.(Cont.) (b) (c) (a) Fig
Page 148 and 149: Figure 6.26.(cont.) (b) (c) 6.6. Dy
Page 150 and 151: Figure 6.27. (cont.) (b) (c) 130
Page 152 and 153: CHAPTER 7 MODELING RESULTS OF FOAM,
Page 154 and 155: experimental tensile stress-strain
Page 156 and 157: significant effect of weld seem ope
Page 158 and 159: Figure 7.7. Deformation photo of fi
Page 160 and 161: Figure 7.11. Deformation photos of
Page 162 and 163:
(a) (b) (c) Figure 7.14. Load-displ
Page 164 and 165:
7.4. Simulation of Empty and Partia
Page 166 and 167:
Figure 7.16. (cont.) (c) (a) Figure
Page 168 and 169:
(a) (b) Figure 7.18. Sequential def
Page 170 and 171:
Figure 7.19. (cont.) (b) (c) 150
Page 172 and 173:
Figure 7.20. (cont.) (c) (a) Figure
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178:
(a) (b) Figure 7.26. Experimental a
Page 182 and 183:
The constructed response surface of
Page 184:
Table 8.1. R 2 , Radj 2 and RMSE va
Page 187 and 188:
(a) (b) Figure 8.7. Response surfac
Page 189 and 190:
an empty tube wall thickness higher
Page 192 and 193:
where, K is a dimensionless constan
Page 194 and 195:
The dynamic simulation and analytic
Page 196:
Figure 9.4. (cont.) (c) (d) Figure
Page 199 and 200:
Figure 9.6. (cont.) (c) (d) (a) Fig
Page 203 and 204:
Equation 9.7 can also be rewritten
Page 206:
(a) (b) Figure 9.10. Energy-absorbi
Page 209 and 210:
Figure 9.11. (cont.) (d) The variat
Page 211 and 212:
foam filling were evaluated. The re
Page 213 and 214:
13. The interaction between foam fi
Page 215 and 216:
Arora, J. S.,2004,Introduction to O
Page 217 and 218:
Dannemann, K. A. and Lankford, J.,
Page 219 and 220:
Hall, I. W., Guden, M. and Yu, C. J
Page 221 and 222:
Kim, D-K. and Lee, S., 1999, Impact
Page 223 and 224:
Mamalis, A. G., Manolakos, D. E., I
Page 225 and 226:
Pugsley, A. G. and Macaulay, M., 19
Page 227 and 228:
T. Miyoshi, M. Itoh S. Akiyama A. K
Page 229:
Zhao, H., Elnasri, I. and Girard, Y
show all

cross section crash boxes

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?