cross section crash boxes
cross section crash boxes
cross section crash boxes
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
9.2. Stroke Efficiency of Crash Boxes<br />
In all <strong>crash</strong> <strong>boxes</strong> tested and simulated, the SE values decreases with foam<br />
filling as compared with empty <strong>boxes</strong> (Figures 9.4(a-d)). The reduction of SE values of<br />
empty <strong>boxes</strong> with foam filling was also previously reported for foam filled square Al<br />
<strong>boxes</strong> (Hanssen, et al. 2000a, Seitzberger, et al. 2000). Figure 9.5 shows further the<br />
variation of SE values with the plateau stress relative density ratio. In the same figure,<br />
the variation SE values with the plateau stress relative density ratio of Alulight foam<br />
filled square steel (RST37) and Hydro Al full foam filled square steel and Al (6060T4)<br />
tubes are also shown for comparison. It should be noted that the Alulight AlSi10 foams<br />
used in this study have lower p/ * ratios than those of Alulight AlMg0.6Si0.3 and<br />
Hydro AlSi8Mg foams which were previously used to fill square <strong>section</strong>s by<br />
Seitzberger et al. (Seitzberger, et al. 2000) and Hanssen et al.(Hanssen, et al. 1999),<br />
respectively. The SE values as shown in Figure 9.5 decrease slightly with increasing<br />
foam plateau stress relative density ratio and SE values reach almost a constant value of<br />
about 0.55 after a foam plateau stress relative density ratio of 30.<br />
(a) (b)<br />
Figure 9.4. Stroke efficiency vs. relative density graphs of a) G1, b)G2, c) G1WP and<br />
d)G2WP.<br />
(cont. on next page)<br />
175