4.0 Article

Finite Element Modelling Approach for Progressive Crushing of Composite Tubular Absorbers in LS-DYNA: Review and Findings

Journal

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES SCIENCE
Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcs6010011

Keywords

crashworthiness; composites; FEA; progressive crushing; LS-DYNA

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper reviews various parameters in finite element techniques for simulating the crushing behavior of glass/epoxy tubes and compares the results with experimental data.
Robust finite element models are utilised for their ability to predict simple to complex mechanical behaviour under certain conditions at a very low cost compared to experimental studies, as this reduces the need for physical prototypes while allowing for the optimisation of components. In this paper, various parameters in finite element techniques were reviewed to simulate the crushing behaviour of glass/epoxy tubes with different material models, mesh sizes, failure trigger mechanisms, element formulation, contact definitions, single and various numbers of shells and delamination modelling. Six different modelling approaches, namely, a single-layer approach and a multi-layer approach, were employed with 2, 3, 4, 6, and 12 shells. In experimental studies, 12 plies were used to fabricate a 3 mm wall thickness GFRP specimen, and the numerical results were compared with experimental data. This was achieved by carefully calibrating the values of certain parameters used in defining the above parameters to predict the behaviour and energy absorption response of the finite element model against initial failure peak load (stiffness) and the mean crushing force. In each case, the results were compared with each other, including experimental and computational costs. The decision was made from an engineering point of view, which means compromising accuracy for computational efficiency. The aim is to develop an FEM that can predict energy absorption capability with a higher level of accuracy, around 5% error, than the experimental studies.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available