Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impact behavior of triggered and non-triggered crash tubes with auxetic lattices

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Multiscale and Multidisciplinary Modeling, Experiments and Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, impact behavior of triggered and non-triggered tubes with and without auxetic filler is examined using numerical methods. Material properties of tubes made of aluminum alloy and auxetic lattices utilizing ABSplus plastics are determined using tensile tests. Finite element analyses are performed using LS-DYNA software at 5 m/s impact velocity. Two different trigger shapes are suggested and compared each other and discussed the advantages and disadvantages over non-triggered tubes. For these loading conditions, trigger mechanism provides lower peak forces and higher crash force efficiency (CFE), but lower specific energy absorption (SEA). In addition, the effects of using auxetic fillers in these triggered tubes are investigated in terms of crashworthiness characteristics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdollahpoor A, Marzbanrad J (2010) Crashworthiness study of axial impact in cylindrical aluminium tubes. J Mech Eng Stroj Časopis 61:1

    Google Scholar 

  • Ali M, Ohioma E, Kraft F, Alam K (2015) Theoretical, numerical, and experimental study of dynamic axial crushing of thin walled pentagon and cross-shape tubes. Thin Walled Struct 94:253–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dirrenberger J, Forest S, Jeulin D (2013) Effective elastic properties of auxetic microstructures: anisotropy and structural applications. Int J Mech Mater Des 9(1):21–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan O, Allen T, Foster L, Gatt R, Grima JN, Alderson A (2018) Controlling density and modulus in auxetic foam fabrications—implications for impact and indentation testing. MDPI Proc 2(6):250

    Google Scholar 

  • El-Hage H, Mallick PK, Zamani N (2005) A numerical study on the quasi-static axial crush characteristics of square aluminum tubes with chamfering and other triggering mechanisms. Int J Crashworthiness 10(2):183–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elipe JCÁ, Lantada AD (2012) Comparative study of auxetic geometries by means of computer-aided design and engineering. Smart Mater Struct 21(10):105004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eyvazian A, Habibi MK, Hamouda AM, Hedayati R (2014) Axial crushing behavior and energy absorption efficiency of corrugated tubes. Mater Des 1980–2015(54):1028–1038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallquist JO (2006) LS-DYNA theory manual. Livermore Softw Technol Corp 3:25–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Hou W, Yang X, Zhang W, Xia Y (2018) Design of energy-dissipating structure with functionally graded auxetic cellular material. Int J Crashworthiness 23(4):366–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang L, Hu H (2017) Low-velocity impact response of multilayer orthogonal structural composite with auxetic effect. Compos Struct 169:62–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karnessis N, Burriesci G (2013) Uniaxial and buckling mechanical response of auxetic cellular tubes. Smart Mater Struct 22(8):084008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakes RS (1987) US Patent No. 4,668,557. Washington, DC: US Patent and Trademark Office

  • Lee S, Hahn C, Rhee M, Oh JE (1999) Effect of triggering on the energy absorption capacity of axially compressed aluminum tubes. Mater Des 20(1):31–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim TC, Alderson A, Alderson KL (2014) Experimental studies on the impact properties of auxetic materials. Phys Status Solid B 251(2):307–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsolek J, Reimerdes HG (2004) Energy absorption of metallic cylindrical shells with induced non-axisymmetric folding patterns. Int J Impact Eng 30(8–9):1209–1223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ren X, Shen J, Ghaedizadeh A, Tian H, Xie YM (2016) A simple auxetic tubular structure with tuneable mechanical properties. Smart Mater Struct 25(6):065012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodríguez JF, Thomas JP, Renaud JE (2001) Mechanical behavior of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) fused deposition materials, experimental investigation. Rapid Prototyp J 7(3):148–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarpa F, Panayiotou P, Tomlinson G (2000) Numerical and experimental uniaxial loading on in-plane auxetic honeycombs. J Strain Anal Eng Des 35(5):383–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usta F, Turkmen HS (2017) Crash behavior of nested tube structures with various cross sections. In Recent Advances in Space Technologies (RAST), 8th International Conference on IEEE, 23–27)

  • Usta F, Eren Z, Turkmen HS, Kazancı Z, Mecitoglu Z (2015) Numerical investigation of stepped concentric crash tubes subjected to axial impact: The effects of number of tubes, Recent Advances in Space Technologies (RAST), 2015 7th International Conference on. IEEE, 39–43

  • Usta F, Eren Z, Kurtaran H, Türkmen HS, Kazancı Z, Mecitoglu Z (2018) Crashworthiness optimization of nested and concentric circular tubes using response surface methodology and genetic algorithm. Latin Am J Solids Struct 15(5):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang S, Qi C, Guo DM, Wang D (2012) Energy absorption of an re-entrant honeycombs with negative Poisson’s ratio. Appl Mech Mater 148:992–995 (Trans Tech Publications)

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang C, Vora HD, Chang Y (2018) Behavior of auxetic structures under compression and impact forces. Smart Mater Struct 27(2):025012

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Support for this work has been provided by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey under Project Number 115M465.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Istanbul Technical University, Maslak, 34469, Istanbul, Turkey

    Fatih Usta, Osman F. Ertaş, Altuğ Ataalp & Halit S. Türkmen

  2. Advanced Composites Research Group, School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, BT9 5AH, UK

    Zafer Kazancı

  3. Bristol Composites Institute (ACCIS), University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 ITR, UK

    Fabrizio Scarpa

Authors
  1. Fatih Usta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Osman F. Ertaş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Altuğ Ataalp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Halit S. Türkmen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zafer Kazancı
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Fabrizio Scarpa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fatih Usta.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Usta, F., Ertaş, O.F., Ataalp, A. et al. Impact behavior of triggered and non-triggered crash tubes with auxetic lattices. Multiscale and Multidiscip. Model. Exp. and Des. 2, 119–127 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-018-00040-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-018-00040-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation