4.7 Article

On design of graded honeycomb filler and tubal wall thickness for multiple load cases

Journal

THIN-WALLED STRUCTURES
Volume 109, Issue -, Pages 377-389

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2016.09.017

Keywords

Functionally-graded honeycomb; Functionally-graded thickness; Composite structure; Energy absorption

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51575172]
  2. Australian Research Council (ARC) DECRA Fellow [DE160101633]
  3. Australian Research Council [DE160101633] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Circular tube filled with cellular materials becomes a fairly attractive structural option in energy absorbing devices, such as crash box and front rail in vehicle. This paper introduces a novel configuration, namely double functionally graded (DFG) structure, which comprises of a functionally graded honeycomb filler in a functionally graded thickness (FGT) tube. Based on the validated finite element (FE) models, a comparative study on the DFG tube, single functionally graded (SFG) tube, and traditional uniform honeycomb filled uniform thickness (H-UT) tube were carried out to explore the crashing behaviors of different structures under multiple load cases. It is found that as crushing displacement increases, DFG structure exhibits superior capacity of energy absorption over other configurations and this trend is positively related to the impact angles. In addition, the comparisons of deformation modes and critical crushing angles clearly indicate that the DFG structure is of better and more stable crashing characteristics, being a crashworthy structure. Following the configurational comparison, further parametric studies on the DFG structures were conducted to explore the effects of tubal thickness range and honeycomb thickness range on the crashworthiness. It is found that the tube thickness range is more important to crashworthiness, which provides a basis for structural optimization.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available