0
Research Papers

Design of Crashworthy Structures With Controlled Energy Absorption in the Hybrid Cellular Automaton Framework

[+] Author and Article Information
Punit Bandi

e-mail: bandi.punit@gmail.com

James P. Schmiedeler

Associate Professor
Mem. ASME
e-mail: schmiedeler.4@nd.edu
Department of Aerospace and Mechanical
Engineering,
University of Notre Dame,
Notre Dame, IN 46556

Andrés Tovar

Assistant Professor
Mem. ASME
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Indiana University Purdue
University Indianapolis,
Indianapolis, IN 46202
e-mail: tovara@iupui.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Design Automation Committee of ASME for publication in the Journal of Mechanical Design. Manuscript received May 18, 2012; final manuscript received May 11, 2013; published online July 2, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Shinji Nishiwaki.

J. Mech. Des 135(9), 091002 (Jul 02, 2013) (11 pages) Paper No: MD-12-1267; doi: 10.1115/1.4024722 History: Received May 18, 2012; Revised May 11, 2013

This work presents a novel method for designing crashworthy structures with controlled energy absorption based on the use of compliant mechanisms. This method helps in introducing flexibility at desired locations within the structure, which in turn reduces the peak force at the expense of a reasonable increase in intrusion. For this purpose, the given design domain is divided into two subdomains: flexible (FSD) and stiff (SSD) subdomains. The design in the flexible subdomain is governed by the compliant mechanism synthesis approach for which output ports are defined at the interface between the two subdomains. These output ports aid in defining potential load paths and help the user make better use of a given design space. The design in the stiff subdomain is governed by the principle of a fully stressed design for which material is distributed to achieve uniform energy distribution within the design space. Together, FSD and SSD provide for a combination of flexibility and stiffness in the structure, which is desirable for most crash applications.

Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic representation of a knee bolster impacted by the passenger's knee

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Illustration of the HCA-based controlled energy absorption method for designing crashworthy structures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of a 2D beam impacted at its center by a rigid pole with an initial velocity for example 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

(a) Final design for example 1 (Fig. 3) using the traditional HCA method. (b) Force–displacement behavior of the final design compared with the initial and two intermediate designs.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Schematic of the 2D beam problem in example 1 solved using the CEA method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Two load cases are defined to design the FSD using the dummy load method in example 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

(a) Final design for example 1 (Fig. 5) using the CEA method. (b) Force–displacement behavior of the final design compared to the initial design.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Force–displacement behavior comparison of the example 1 designs obtained with the CEA and traditional HCA methods

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Final designs for the two scenarios (obtained by varying the relative subdomain size and mass fraction in the base case shown in Fig. 5) considered for example 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Comparison of the force–displacement behavior of all designs obtained using the CEA and traditional HCA-based methods in example 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Schematic of a 2D slender beam impacted at its center by a rigid pole with an initial velocity for example 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

(a) Final design for example 2 using the traditional HCA method. (b) Force–displacement behavior of the final design compared with the initial and two intermediate designs.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Schematic of the 2D slender beam problem in example 2 solved using CEA method

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

(a) Final example 2 design obtained using the CEA method. (b) Force–displacement behavior of the final design compared with the design obtained using the traditional HCA method.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Final designs for the two scenarios (obtained by varying the relative subdomain size and mass fraction in the base case shown in Fig. 13) considered for example 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Comparison of the force–displacement behavior of all example 2 designs obtained using the CEA and traditional HCA-based methods

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In