Using Experimental Data to Improve Crash Modeling for Composite Materials

  • Morteza Kiani
  • Hirotaka Shiozaki
  • Keiichi Motoyama
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)


Accurate simulation of the composite material crash tubes subjected to axial impact is a challenging field of study in automotive or aerospace industry; however, analytical prediction of the crashworthiness behavior in composite materials is limited. In this paper, three different analytical approaches are presented which have been used to study the crashworthiness of a pultruded glass-polyester tube. The first model is established based on the single shell elements. This approach is very effective, when composite part is assembled in the full structure. However, this technique can be used when the experimental result is available. In the second approach, the crash tube is modeled by using multi-layered shell element (delamination model). Relying on coupon test information of the composite material, this modeling technique can provide reasonable result for the energy absorption of the tube. The third modeling approach is looking for crashworthiness prediction of the discussed tube by using the first model which its parameters are tuned based on the result of the second model. Finally, the sensitivity of the result is studied by changing the major parameters in the first model. This paper is looking for finding a method to reasonably estimate the crashworthiness behavior in the composite materials.


Energy Absorption Carbon Fiber Reinforce Plastic Coupon Test Contact Algorithm Composite Tube 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Thornton PH (1979) Energy absorption in composite structures. J Compos Mater 13:247–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hamada H, Ramakrishna SA (1997) FEM method for prediction of energy absorption capacity of crashworthy polymer composite materials. J Reinforc Plast Compos 16:226–242Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carruthers JJ, Kettle AP, Robinson AM (1998) Energy absorption capability and crashworthiness of composite material structures: a review. Appl Mech Rev 51:635–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Botkin M, Johnson N, Zywicz E, Simunovic S (1998) Crashworthiness simulation of composite automotive structures. In: 13th annual engineering society of detroit advanced composites technology conference and exposition, DetroitGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Deleo F, Feraboli P (2011) Crashworthiness energy absorption of carbon fiber composites: experiment and simulation.In: SPE automotive composites conference, 98195–2400Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mamalis AG, Manolakos DE, Ioannidis MB, Papapostolou DP (2006) The static and dynamic axial collapse of CFRP square tubes: finite element modeling. Compos Struct 74:2213–2250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Palanivelu S, Paepegem WV, Degrieck J, Kakogiannis D, Ackeren JV, Hemelrijck DV, Wastiels J (2009) Numerical energy absorption study of composite tubes for axial impact loadings. In: 17th international conference on composite materials (ICCM-17), pp 27–31Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haug E, Fort O, Trameçon A, Watanabe M, Nakada I (1991) Numerical crashworthiness simulation of automotive structures and components made of continuous fiber reinforced composite and sandwich assemblies. SAE Technical paper series 910152Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fleming DC (2001) Modeling delamination growth in composites using MSC.DYTRAN. MSC User’s conference proceedingsGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Belingardi G, Obradovic J (2010) Design of the impact attenuator for a formula student racing car: numerical simulation of the impact crash test. J Serbian Soc Comput Mech 4:52–65, ISSN:1820–6530, 2010Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haipeng H, Taheri F, Neil P, You L (2007) A numerical study on the axial crushing response of hybrid pultruded and +/−45[degree sign] braided tubes. Compos Struct 80:253–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hamidreza Z, Matthias K, Henrik A (2008) An experimental and numerical crashworthiness investigation of thermoplastic composite crash boxes. Compos Struct 85:245–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kakogiannis D, Hemelrijck DV, Wastiels J, Ackeren JV, Palanivelu S, Paepegem WV, Vantomme J, Nurick GN, Chung KS (2009) Experimental and numerical study of the energy absorption capacity of pultruded tubes under blast load. In: Proceedings of SEM annual conferenceGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mamalis AG, Manolakos DE, Demosthenous GA, Ioannidis MB (1997) The static and dynamic axial crumbling of thin-walled fiberglass composite square tubes. Compos Part B 28B(4):439–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mamalis AG, Manolakos DE, Ioannidis MB, Papapostolou DP (2007) On the response of thin-walled composite tubular components subjected to static and dynamic axial compressive loading: experimental. Compos Struct 69:407–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Feraboli P, Deleo F, Garattoni F (2007) Efforts in the standardization of composite materials energy absorption. In: American society for composites 22nd technical conference, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Feraboli P (2006) Current efforts in standardization of composite materials testing for crashworthiness and energy absorption. In: 47th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, dynamics and materials conference, No. 2006–2217, NewportGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sims GD, Broughton WR (2000) Compr Comp Mater 2:151–197Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Boukhili R, Hubert P, Gauvin R (1991) Loading rate effect as a function of the span-to-depth ratio in three-point bend testing of unidirectional pultruded composites. Composites 22:39–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heimbs S, Heller S, Middendorf P, Hähnel F, Weiße J (2009) Low velocity impact on CFRP plates with compressive preload: Test and modeling. Int J Impact Eng 36(10–11):1182–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    LS-DYNA keyword user’s manual (2010) Version 971 Rev. 5, Livermore Software Technology Corporation, LivermoreGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chang FK, Chang KY (1987) A progressive damage model for laminated composites containing stress concentrations. J Compos Mater 21(9):834–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Deleo F, Wade B, Feraboli P, Rassaian M (2010) Crashworthiness of composite structures: modeling of the crushing of UD tape sinusoidal specimens using a progressive failure model. In: Presented at AMTAS Fall Meeting, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schweizerhof K, Weimar K, Rottner T (1998) Crashworthiness analysis with enhanced composite material models in LSDYNA: merits and limits. In Proceeding of fifth LSDYNA international user conference, Livermore Software Technology Corp., Livermore, Sept 1998Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Borg R (2002) Simulation of delamination initiation and growth in fiber composite laminates Ph.D. thesis, Linköpings Universitet, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Szekrenyes A (2011) The influence of crack length and delamination width on the mode-III energy release rate of laminated composites. J Compos Mater 45(3):279–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Morteza Kiani
    • 1
  • Hirotaka Shiozaki
    • 2
  • Keiichi Motoyama
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Advanced Vehicular System, Computational Engineering ProgramMississippi State UniversityStarkvilleUSA
  2. 2.Mitsubishi Motors CorporationOkazakiJapan
  3. 3.Center for Advanced Vehicular SystemMississippi State UniversityStarkvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations