Crashworthiness of Axis

Symmetric Composite Structures

for Automotive Applications
Maximillian D X Dixon

www.bris.ac.uk/composites
 2/9
Crumple Zone

Source: http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics- Source:

2008/nopq/2008-Porsche-911-GT2-Body-shell- http://www.motortrader.com.my/news/euroncap-5-
1280x960.jpg stars-for-2014-mazda3/mazda-skyactiv-structure/
 3/9
Crush Response Metric

Progressive Failure
Catastrophic Failure
Load

Load
Displacement Displacement
 4/9
Progressive Failure Modes

• Global Buckling (Euler Buckling),

• Progressive Folding,
• Progressive Crushing,
– Progressive Splaying, Progressive Folding1

– Progressive Fragmentation.

Progressive Splaying1 Progressive Fragmentation1

1. Source: D Hull, 1990, “A Unified Approach to Progressive Crushing of Fibre-Reinforces Composite Tubes”.
 5/9
Fracture Toughness
Matrix Interlaminar Fracture
Material Toughness GIC (kJ/m2)
PEEK 1.6-2.4
PEI 1.0-1.2
PI 0.8-0.9
Epoxy 0.2-0.3
Source: G C Jacob, 2002, “Energy Absorption in Polymer
Composites for Automotive Crashworthiness”.

Source: G C Jacob, 2002, “Energy Absorption in

Polymer Composites for Automotive Crashworthiness”.
 6/9
Monolithic Structures
Contributing factors include:
Fibre Type, Matrix Type, Cross Section & Fibre Architecture

Material SEA (kJ/kg)

Steel & Aluminium 15-30 240
230

SEA (kJ/kg)
Carbon/Epoxy 80 220
Glass/Epoxy 60
210
200
Carbon/PEEK 194
Carbon/PEI 155 190
Carbon/PI 131 180
Carbon/Epoxy 110 0 5 10 15 20 25
Source: G C Jacob, 2002, “Energy Absorption in Polymer Fibre Angle (°)
Composites for Automotive Crashworthiness”. Source: S Ramakrishna, 1995, “Energy Absorption Behaviour
of Carbon Fiber Reinforced Thermoplastic Composite Tubes”.
 7/9
Off Axis Loading
35
Specific Energy Absorption

30

25
(kJ/kg)

20

15

10

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Loading Angle (°)
Source: F. Tarlochan, 2013, “Design of thin
Carbon Glass Hybrid wall structures for energy absorption
applications Enhancement of crashworthiness
Source: V M Karbhari, 2003, “Energy absorbing characteristics of
due to axial and oblique impact forces”.
circular frustra”.
 8/9
Sandwich Structures
• Potential improved axial and off axis loading performance

• Monolithic SEA - 10.3 kJ/kg (no core)

• Sandwich SEA - 30.3 kJ/kg (foam core)

Source: G. Pitarresi, 2005, “A

comparative evaluation of
Source: F. Tarlochan, 2012, “Advanced composite sandwich structure design crashworthy composite sandwich
for energy absorption applications: Blast protection and crashworthiness”. structures”.

• Further performance enhancement through use of “tied

core” structures
 9/9
Summary
The Efficient Energy Absorber should include:

•PEEK matrix
•Carbon/glass Hybrid laminate
•Frustra (Conical)
•Hexagonal cross section
•15°off axis fibre angle
•Foam core