Study on Accuracy Improvement of Vehicle Crash Simulation Considering Stamping Effects

Abstract

It is general preferable to consider stamping effects of sheet metal forming for vehicle crash simulation nowadays. However, the present approaches for stamping simulation and coupling forming results to crash finite element model require massive pre-works. To overcome these difficulties, an inverse method for rapid and simple stamping simulation using HYCRASH is introduced, where crashworthiness analysis of front side rail under frontal crash was used as an example in this study. A detailed stamping simulation by AUTOFORM is used for comparison, also accompanied with the one without stamping effects. Through comparison of stamping results and frontal crashworthiness performance, it is concluded that effective plastic strain makes more contribution on simulation accuracy than thickness reduction, and HYCRASH shows an attractive approach for stamping analysis than AUTOFORM coupled in crash simulation in the context of computational cost.

Coupled effect of thickness optimization and plastic forming history on crashworthiness performance of thin-walled square tube

“…They stated that thickness variation and residual stress/strains originated from forming application improves impact performance of the tubes compared to tubes with constant thickness. Du et al [20] proposed an inverse method for implementing stamping effect to the crash simulations. Considering side rail, they indicated that with regards to the simulation accuracy effective plastic strain is more important than thickness reduction.…”

A Contribution to Assessment of Transportation Structures Vulnerability

“…The available technical literature contains different procedures (e.g. based on the application of a finite element method) [10,11,12,13] which enable us to set the course of a force during the crash of a vehicle into a barrier, and provide very good results at speeds and masses used during common homologation tests [6,7,8]. However, the procedures are not verified in the case of the analyzed impact into a bridge column.…”