cross section crash boxes

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 7.20. Sequential deformation pictures of crash box with montage parts a)Empty, b) F1 foam filled and c) F2 foam filled (Geometry G2, t= 2.5 mm.) ................................................................................................... 151 Figure 7.21. Sequential deformation pictures of crash box with montage parts a) empty, b) F1 foam filled and c) F2 foam filled (Geometry G2, t= 2 mm) .......................................................................................................... 152 Figure 7.22. Load-displacement graphs of empty crash box with fixing parts a) 3 mm, b) 2.5 mm and c)2 mm thickness. .................................................... 154 Figure 7.23. Load-displacement graphs of F1 foam filled crash box with fixing parts a) 3 mm, b) 2.5 mm and c)2 mm thickness. .................................... 155 Figure 7.24. Load-displacement graphs of F2 foam filled crash box with fixing parts a) 3 mm, b) 2.5 mm and c)2 mm thickness. .................................... 156 Figure 7.25. Deformations pictures of empty and filled crash boxes in quasi- static and dynamic testing and simulation. ............................................... 157 Figure 7.26. Experimental and numerical load-displacement graphs of a) empty and b) partially filled crash box. ............................................................... 158 Figure 8.1. Load-displacement curves of empty and foam filled 1050H14 crush box, thicknesses of a) 1.5 mm and b) 3 mm. .................................. 160 Figure 8.2. The variation of (a) mean load and (a) SEA of 1050H14 crush boxes with foam relative density and box wall thickness. ....................... 161 Figure 8.3. Response surface foam filled 1050H14 crush box; a) mean load and b) SEA vs. foam relative density and box thickness. ............................... 162 Figure 8.4. Comparison between simulation and response surface analysis of a) mean load-foam relative density , b) SEA vs. foam relative density curves. ...................................................................................................... 163 Figure 8.5. Load-displacement curves of empty and partially Hydro foam-filled 6061T4 Al crush box with a wall thickness of 2 mm. .............................. 165 Figure 8.6. Response surface of mean load of filled boxes; a) Alulight and b) Hydro foam filling. ................................................................................... 166 Figure 8.7. Response surface of SEA of filled boxes; a) Alulight and b) Hydro foam filling. .............................................................................................. 167 Figure 8.8. Mean load and SEA vs. empty box thickness; a) 1050H14 and b) 6061T4 Al crash box. ............................................................................... 169 xviii
Figure 9.1. Pm,e vs. thickness graph for a) G1, b) G2, c) G1WP and d) G2WP empty crash boxes .................................................................................... 172 Figure 9.2. The change of Pm with filler relative density; a) G1, b) G2, c) G1WP and d) G2WP empty and partially foam filled crash boxes. ....... 173 Figure 9.3. a) 2D and b) 3D representation of Pm vs. thickness graphs for dynamic simulation of G1WP. ................................................................. 174 Figure 9.4. Stroke efficiency vs. relative density graphs of a) G1, b)G2, c) G1WP and d)G2WP. ................................................................................ 175 Figure 9.5. Stroke efficiency vs. plateau stress relative density change ratio. ........... 176 Figure 9.6. Crush force efficiency vs. relative density of a) G1, b)G2, c)G1WP and d)G2WP. ............................................................................................ 178 Figure 9.7. AE vs. plateau stress /relative density of crash boxes a) without and b)with fixing plate. ................................................................................... 179 Figure 9.8. Total efficiency vs. relative density of a) G1, b)G2, c)G1WP and d)G2WP. ................................................................................................... 181 Figure 9.9. The variation of strengthening coefficient with foam plateau stress relative density ratio in fully and partially filled boxes............................ 183 Figure 9.10. Energy-absorbing effectiveness factor for a) statically and b) dynamically tested boxes. ........................................................................ 186 Figure 9.11. SEA vs. relative density of a) G1, b)G2, c)G1WP and d)G2WP. ........... 188 Figure 9.12. 3D plot of SEA variation with thickness and filler relative density for G1WP crash box. ................................................................................ 189 xix
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 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 116 and 117:
5.4. The Crashworthiness Optimizati
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 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?