Nowadays, most energy-absorbing devices used in industry absorb energy through permanent deformation. In some cases, consumers have to repair or even replace energy absorbers even after a mild collision. The work presented in this paper proposes a novel reusable solution in the form of a hybrid bumper–crush can design where a recoverable structure is integrated into the bumper beam and crush can for a mild-collision situation in addition to the traditional energy absorbers recommended for more severe collisions. The main investigation is focused around the performance and optimisation of a negative-stiffness honeycomb, the recoverable structure and the honeycomb-filled elements. A comprehensive study was carried out to investigate numerically the behaviour of these energy-absorbing structures in crash conditions, corresponding to real scenarios and simulated using a specially developed finite element model.
GlassbrennerD. An analysis of recent improvements to vehicle safety. NHTSA Report DOT HS 811 572, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, USA, 2012.
DavoodiMMSapuanSMAidyAet al. Development process of new bumper beam for passenger car: a review. Mater Des2012; 40: 304–313.
4.
ZhangZLiuSTangZ. Design optimization of cross-sectional configuration of rib-reinforced thin-walled beam. Thin-Walled Structs2009; 47(8–9): 868–878.
5.
MarzbanradJAlijanpourMKiasatM. Design and analysis of an automotive bumper beam in low-speed frontal crashes. Thin-Walled Structs2009; 47(8–9): 902–911.
6.
KotsikosGGrassoM. Damage tolerance of rail vehicle energy absorbers. Procedia – Social Behav Sci2012; 48: 1403–1414.
BhuyanAGanilovaO. Crush can behaviour as an energy absorber in a frontal impact. In: Modern practice in stress and vibration analysis 2012Glasgow UK28–31 August 2012, Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol 382, Conference 1, paper 012009. Bristol: IOP Publishing.
12.
DebASrinivasKC. Development of a new lumped-parameter model for vehicle side-impact safety simulation. Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering2008; 222(10): 1793–1811.
13.
PatbergLPhilippsMDittmannR. Fibre-reinforced composites in the car side structure. Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering1999; 213(5): 417–423.
14.
DaynesSWeaverPM. Review of shape-morphing automobile structures: concepts and outlook. Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering2013; 227(11): 1603–1622.
15.
GanilovaOACartmellMP. An analytical model for the vibration of a composite plate containing an embedded periodic shape memory alloy structure. J Composite Structs2009; 92(1): 39–47.
16.
CartmellMPGanilovaOAGristchakVZ. Controlling plate vibrations by means of embedded active shape memory alloy elements. In: Euromech colloquium 498, Kazimierz Dolny, Poland, 21–25 May 2008, pp. 112–118. Lublin: Lublin University of Technology.
17.
NiknejadAAbdolzadehYRouzegarJAbbasiM. Experimental study on the energy absorption capability of circular corrugated tubes under lateral loading and axial loading. Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering2015; 229(13): 1739–1761.
18.
OlabiAMorrisEHashmiM. Metallic tube type energy absorbers: a synopsis. Thin-Walled Structs2007; 45(7–8): 706–726.
19.
PrasadPBelwafaJ (eds). Vehicle crashworthiness and occupant protection. Southfield, Michigan: American Iron and Steel Institute; 2004.
20.
AlghamdiA. Collapsible impact energy absorbers: an overview. Thin-Walled Structs2001; 39(2): 189–213.
PetrasA. Design of sandwich structures. PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, 1998.
23.
Hexcel Composites. HexWebTM honeycomb attributes and properties, 1st edition, http://www.hexcel.com/ (1999, accessed 15 May 2017).
24.
YinHWenGHouSet al. Crushing analysis and multiobjective crashworthiness optimization of honeycomb-filled single and bitubular polygonal tubes. Mater Des2011; 32(8–9): 4449–4460.
25.
GudenM. Quasi-static axial crushing behavior of honeycomb-filled thin-walled aluminum tubes. Open Mater Sci J2011; 5(1): 184–193.
26.
SaidMTanC. Aluminium honeycomb under quasi-static compressive loading: an experimental investigation. Suranaree J Sci Technol2009; 16(1): 1–8.
27.
MarzbanradJMehdikhanloMPourA. An energy absorption comparison of square, circular and elliptic steel and aluminium tubes under impact loading. Turk J Engng Environ Sci2009; 33(3): 159–166.
28.
ThorntonP. Energy absorption in composite structures. J Composite Mater1979; 13(3): 247–262.
29.
YanWDurifEYamadaYet al. Crushing simulation of foam-filled aluminium tubes. Mater Trans2007; 48(7): 1901–1906.
30.
KumarPRVitalaHS. Evaluation for energy absorbing capacity of concentric aluminium tubes filled with foam of different density. Int J Mech Ind Technol2014; 2(1): 113–124.
31.
DuerigT. Engineering aspects of shape memory alloys. Oxford: Butterworth–Heinemann, 1990.
32.
BayraktarEKhalidFLevaillantC. Deformation and fracture behaviour of high manganese austenitic steel. J Mater Processing Technol2004; 147(2): 145–154.
Standard for verification and validation in computational fluid dynamics and heat transfer. New York: ASME, 2009.
43.
KlatTHabermanMSeepersadC. Selective laser sintering of negative stiffness mesostructures for recoverable, nearly-ideal shock isolation. In: 24th annual international solid freeform fabrication symposium – an additive manufacturing conference, Austin, Texas, USA, 12–14 August 2013, pp. 1010–1022. Austin, Texas: University of Texas at Austin.
44.
CES EduPack 2014. Cambridge: Granta Material Intelligence, 2014.
45.
EllobodyEFengRYoungB. Finite element analysis and design of metal structures. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2014.
