SS symmetry

Article
On Aluminum Honeycomb Impact Attenuator
Designs for Formula Student Competitions
Phu Ma Quoc 1, * , David Krzikalla 1 , Jakub Mesicek 2 , Jana Petru 2 , Jakub Smiraus 3 ,
Ales Sliva 3 and Zdenek Poruba 1
1 Department of Applied Mechanics, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, VSB-Technical University of Ostrava,
70833 Ostrava, Czech Republic; david.krzikalla@vsb.cz (D.K.); zdenek.poruba@vsb.cz (Z.P.)
2 Department of Machining, Assembly and Engineering Metrology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
VSB-Technical University of Ostrava, 70833 Ostrava, Czech Republic; jakub.mesicek@vsb.cz (J.M.);
jana.petru@vsb.cz (J.P.)
3 Institute of Transport, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, VSB-Technical University of Ostrava,
70833 Ostrava, Czech Republic; jakub.smiraus@vsb.cz (J.S.); ales.sliva@vsb.cz (A.S.)
* Correspondence: phu.ma.quoc@vsb.cz; Tel.: +420-607-326-979




Received: 7 September 2020; Accepted: 24 September 2020; Published: 8 October 2020


Abstract: The use of impact attenuators (IA) is important for vehicles as they absorb the kinetic
energy exerted from the car crashes to protect the drivers from any possible injuries. Under the
framework of the Formula Student (FS) competition, we investigate various designs of IA made
of aluminum honeycomb material. Specifically, the crushing behavior of the honeycomb structure
is investigated from the theoretical point of view and later verified with numerical simulations.
To achieve the desired crushing behavior of the aluminum honeycomb structure, apart from the
so-called pre-crushing method, another way to pre-process the aluminum honeycomb is proposed.
Modification on the aluminum honeycomb is done in a symmetric manner to ensure the same uniform
crushing behavior on the two sides of the mirror plane of the car. Different variations presented in
this paper shed a light on future aluminum honeycomb IA designs in the context of FS competitions.

Keywords: formula student; impact attenuator; aluminum honeycomb

1. Introduction
Formula Student (FS) is a multinational auto racing competition established to foster university
students under the framework of a semi-professional motorsport competition. Joining this competition,
students can improve their business and engineering skills while attempting to deliver a racing car to
compete with others from different universities [1].
It is possible to construct the vehicle with designed or commercially available components. Among
the designable components, there are the bell crank, suspension link, rear upright, etc. [2–5]. The impact
attenuator (IA) is as well in this category, and is defined as a deformable, energy-absorbing device
mounted forward of the car’s front [6]. In practice, porous materials are generally suitable for impact
energy absorption due to their internal material structure which allows the progressive collapse under
impact loading. Hence, structures such as polymeric foams or aluminum honeycombs are the most
favored among FS teams. Due to the ease of access, novice FS teams often purchase the standard,
commercially available IA made of foam as shown in Figure 1. The standard IA was also tested in [7].
It was found that the standard IA can be further reduced in size, thus its weight, and still it can meet
the competition requirements.

Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647; doi:10.3390/sym12101647 www.mdpi.com/journal/symmetry

Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 2 of 17
Symmetry 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 17

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Standard IA [8].

As composite
composite materials
materialsbecomebecomewidelywidelyavailable,
available,considerable
considerableendeavor endeavor is is
putputinto thethe
into design
design of
composite IA among FS teams and the research community in
of composite IA among FS teams and the research community in general. Nevertheless, in 1983 general. Nevertheless, in 1983 NASA
came up with a study study of of energy-absorbing
energy-absorbing propertiesproperties of of tubes
tubes under
under compression
compression [9]. [9]. Examinations
Examinations
were
were mademade for for aluminum,
aluminum, glass-epoxy,
glass-epoxy, graphite-epoxy,
graphite-epoxy, and andaramid-epoxy
aramid-epoxy tubes. tubes. Chamfering or
notching was suggestedsuggested to to reduce
reduce the the peak
peak load
load during
during the theimpact.
impact. In In addition,
addition, post-crushing
post-crushing
integrity and failure mechanisms
mechanisms were examined. examined. Composite tubes were recently studied for their
energy-absorbing
energy-absorbingproperties propertiesin in [10]. TheThe
[10]. influence of tube
influence of diameter,
tube diameter, windingwinding
angles, and wall and
angles, thickness
wall
on energy absorption
thickness on energy was examined,
absorption wassuggesting
examined, thatsuggesting
for a largerthat tubefor diameter,
a larger thetube
absorbed energythe
diameter, is
higher.
absorbed Then,
energytheiswinding angle the
higher. Then, of 35 degreesangle
winding showed of 35more energy
degrees absorbed
showed morefor less compressive
energy absorbed for
strength than other
less compressive angles.
strength thanThe utilization
other angles. The of composite
utilization of material
composite (including
materialcarbon
(including fibers) was
carbon
also
fibers)studied
was also in [11–13].
studied in The papersThe
[11–13]. brought
papersinsights
broughtabout insightsIA design,
about IA testing,
design,numerical analysis,
testing, numerical
and optimization.
analysis, Optimization
and optimization. methods examined
Optimization in [11] allowed
methods examined in [11]authors
allowedtoauthors
design an IA withan14%
to design IA
better energy absorption.
with 14% better energy absorption.
Another group of IA IA isis welded
welded thin-walled
thin-walled structures.
structures. Such designs were examined for their
impact performance in [14–16]. [14–16]. All designs met FS competition competition requirements,
requirements, suggesting
suggesting anotheranother
promising
promising methodmethod of of designing
designing IA. IA. Indeed,
Indeed, thisthis solution
solution is possibly
possibly the most feasible and economical
in terms of numerical
numerical simulation
simulation and and physical
physical tests.
tests.
Owing to the maturitymaturity of of additive
additive technologies,
technologies, a lot lot of
of studies
studies examined
examined 3D-printed
3D-printed latticelattice
structures
structures of of various
various materials
materials for their energy-absorbing
energy-absorbing properties.properties. Existing literature suggests that
a lot ofof effort
effortwas
wasput putinto
intoexaminations
examinations of of aluminum
aluminum alloy
alloy lattice
lattice structures,
structures, made made of AlSi10Mg.
of AlSi10Mg. The
The authors
authors in [17–19]
in [17–19] examinedexamined
latticelattice
structure structure
designsdesigns
for energy for absorbers
energy absorbersmanufacturedmanufactured
by selective by
selective
laser meltinglaser melting
technology technology
(SLM). (SLM).
The studiesThe studies
provide provide
insights insights
aboutabout latticelattice
failurefailure mechanisms,
mechanisms, the
the influence
influence of lattice
of lattice cell cell design,
design, and and
printprint imperfections
imperfections on structure
on structure performance
performance under under impact.
impact. The
The authors
authors in [17,20]
in [17,20] found
found thatthatthethe heat
heat treatmentofofAlSi10Mg
treatment AlSi10Mglattice latticestructure
structure increases
increases its strain
capacity suggesting that more energy energy can can bebe absorbed.
absorbed. Further investigation of lattice cells in [19,21]
found that for the same relative density of structure, different types of lattices have different impact
resistance.
resistance. This is caused by different different failure
failure modes
modes for for different
differentlatticelatticecell
celldesigns.
designs.
Another
Another favorite
favorite material
material for for SLM
SLM is alloyed titanium.
titanium. Lattice structures of titanium alloys were
investigated
investigated in in [22–24].
[22–24]. An interesting combination
combination of of materials
materials was was investigated
investigated in in [22].
[22]. The authors
examined
examined sandwich
sandwichpanels
panelsof ofcarbon
carbonfiber-reinforced
fiber-reinforcedpolymer polymer (CFRP)
(CFRP) faces
faceswhich
which were
were constructed
constructed of
two
of twotypes
typesof core—aluminum
of core—aluminum honeycomb
honeycomb andand
titanium
titaniumalloyalloy
(Ti64) lattice
(Ti64) structure.
lattice It was
structure. found
It was that
found
panels with with
that panels aluminum
aluminumhoneycomb
honeycomb cores cores
have comparable
have comparable impactimpact
resistance as panels
resistance with Ti64
as panels withlattice
Ti64
structure cores. The
lattice structure disadvantage
cores. of panelsof
The disadvantage with Ti64 with
panels latticeTi64coreslattice
is its double
cores isweight compared
its double weightto
panels
compared withtoaluminum
panels withhoneycomb. Panels with Panels
aluminum honeycomb. Ti64 lattice
with core showed
Ti64 lattice less
core dent depth
showed and depth
less dent more
localized
and moredamage localizedarea. That isarea.
damage probably
That caused by thecaused
is probably brittle failure
by the mechanism
brittle failure of Ti64 lattices leading
mechanism of Ti64
to unstable
lattices energy-absorbing
leading behavior. Hence,behavior.
to unstable energy-absorbing the use ofHence,titanium thealloy
use oflattices for energy
titanium absorbers
alloy lattices for
needs
energytoabsorbers
be further examined.
needs In [23,25],
to be further optimum
examined. design optimum
In [23,25], strategiesdesign for Kagome structures
strategies for Kagomewere
structures were investigated. Prediction of the failure of SLM-manufactured lattice structures with a
wide range of slenderness ratios and different failure modes was performed. Failure modes and
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 3 of 17

investigated. Prediction of the failure of SLM-manufactured lattice structures with a wide range of
slenderness ratios and different failure modes was performed. Failure modes and failure locations
of Kagome structures were also predicted. Results show that Kagome structures indicated superior
performance compared to lattice structures.
Among widely printed materials, there is also stainless steel 316L. The energy-absorbing
performance under compression of the SLM-manufactured steel 316L lattice structure was investigated
in [26,27]. An interesting study was presented in [28], where an SLM-manufactured aluminum lattice
structure coated by ceramic was examined for its energy-absorbing properties. A combination of
increasing truss angle and oxide coating thickness results in improvements in the compressive strength,
energy absorbed per volume and per mass. Improvement in the performance of the structure is caused
by the change of failure mode from mid-strut buckling to a hinge kinking mode as the oxide coating
thickness increases. In terms of energy absorption, the best performing lattice materials in the study
are comparable with the best available cellular materials in the existing literature.
Furthermore, it is worth mentioning the honeycomb structure, which is well known for its
remarkably lightweight property, relatively high strength-to-weight ratio and energy-absorbing ability.
Honeycomb structures can be metallic (usually aluminum) or nonmetallic (paper reinforced with
plastic), with similar unique crushing behavior. The most utilized honeycomb structure is the sandwich
shape, as investigated in [29,30], in which the honeycomb layers are glued in between metal sheets to
make the airplane walls, vehicle bodies, etc. The aluminum honeycomb block specifically designed
for FS competition is available on the website of the Plascore company [31]. Thus, a number of
teams purchased the product, tested, and deployed it in their car. As a matter of fact, owing to the
complexity of the simulations, a few studies attempted to numerically study the crushing behavior
of the honeycomb block in the scope of FS competitions [32–34]. An unusual IA design made from
aluminum honeycomb panels and aluminum sheets was examined in [33], which met the competition
requirements. For purposes of FS competition, in [34], an aluminum honeycomb IA was examined and
compared with a hollow truncated thin-walled pyramid and a hybrid IA made from honeycomb panels
bonded to several CFRP plates. It was found that all designs met FS requirements and the hybrid IA
was the lightest and the most energy-absorbing. The collapse of aluminum honeycomb structures
under compression loading was also examined in [35,36]. The authors in [36] suggested various
honeycomb cell shapes which, under out-of-plane compression, performed better than conventional
honeycombs. Another interesting design of an energy-absorbing structure utilizing honeycombs
was studied in [37]. The authors examined an IA of aluminum honeycomb internally reinforced by
corrugated aluminum sheets. Significant enhancement of absorbed energy was found compared to the
performance of bare honeycomb or corrugated sheet. As honeycombs are not always loaded purely
in-plane or out-of-plane, examination in [38] showed honeycomb performance when inclined cells
were compressed, and hence loaded under non-ideal conditions. Results suggested that the angle of
inclination dictates the failure mode of cells and that plateau stress is influenced by the inclination
angle of cells. The larger cell inclination, the more the plateau stress is reduced leading to less energy
to be absorbed. Studies of an innovative approach, aluminum honeycomb reinforced with CFRP tubes
in cells, were reported in [39,40]. The authors conducted studies of impact behavior of aluminum
honeycombs with CFRP tubes in cells. Results showed an increase of about 60% absorbed energy
compared to bare aluminum honeycomb. For designing the IA for FS competition, not only is the
absorbed energy the criterion, but there are also average and peak accelerations during the impact.
It should be noted that for the majority of the cited studies, the acceleration values were not reported.
Hence, suggestions of cited studies should serve future designers as a guide and an encouragement to
investigate the real impact properties of their IA design.
For FS vehicles, it is also necessary to design a backing plate for the IA which is called the
anti-intrusion plate (AIP). Standard options given by rules are steel or aluminum sheets of specific
thicknesses. As the mass reduction of the vehicle is desirable, studies were conducted to see the
performance of AIP of different materials. The most frequently investigated material in terms of the
 Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 4 of 17

strength-to-weight ratio is carbon fiber composite. The authors in [41,42] performed examinations of
cross-ply
Symmetry unidirectional
2020, 12, x FOR PEER polyethylene
REVIEW fiber composite under dynamic loading utilizing the bi-material 4 of 17
model to evaluate the failure and energy absorption modes. In [43], the thermoplastic composite was
composite
evaluatedwas evaluated
for its penetrationfor its penetration resistance-deriving
resistance-deriving method for themethod for theofquick
quick design fiber design
volumeoffraction
fiber
volume
and platefraction and plate
thickness. CFRPthickness. CFRP plates
plates reinforced byreinforced
aluminum bysheets
aluminum
weresheets
testedwere tested
for their for their
perforation
perforation
resistance resistance in [44].
in [44]. Mainly theMainly the protection
protection effect of aluminum
effect of aluminum sheets wassheets was investigated.
investigated. It was found It
was
thatfound that aluminum
aluminum sheet helpssheet helps to the
to distribute distribute
loadingthe loading
from from more
an impact an impact
evenly more
overevenly over
CFRP layers
CFRP layers contributing to the overall perforation resistance. Regarding the AIP
contributing to the overall perforation resistance. Regarding the AIP design, suggestions from cited design, suggestions
from cited
studies studies
can can only
only serve as a serve
guideas fora the
guide for the
design design
of AIP for of
FSAIP for FSFurther
vehicles. vehicles. Further examination
examination of materials
ofand
materials and real
real impact impactwith
behavior behavior
specificwithIA specific IA used is needed.
used is needed.
Inspired
Inspiredbybythetheabove
abovestudies, wewe
studies, decide to numerically
decide to numerically investigate the crushing
investigate behavior
the crushing of IAsof
behavior
made
IAs madeof aluminum
of aluminum honeycomb.
honeycomb. Differing itselfitself
Differing fromfrom
existing works,
existing works, herein,
herein,wewesimulate
simulatethe the
honeycomb
honeycombblock blockwith
withdetailed
detailedcell
cellwalls
wallsininassociation
associationwithwitha aportion
portionofofthe
thecar’s
car’sfront,
front,asasananeffort
effort
totoreplicate
replicatethe thereal
realphysical
physicalcrash
crashtesttestthat
thatisisdescribed
describedininthe theFSFSrules.
rules.Consequently,
Consequently,our ourmain
main
contributions
contributionsare areasasfollows:
follows:
● • WeWepropose
proposean analternative
alternativeway
waytotoprocess
processthe
thehoneycomb
honeycombblock
blockinstead
insteadofofpre-crushing
pre-crushingfor
for
energy-absorbing purposes and conducted numerical simulations to verify the concept.
energy-absorbing purposes and conducted numerical simulations to verify the concept.
● From the simulation results, we are able to describe the insights of the crushing process which
• From the simulation results, we are able to describe the insights of the crushing process which can
can be useful for future development.
be useful for future development.
Furthermore, readers can refer to the Figure 2 below for the workflow diagram of this paper:
Furthermore, readers can refer to the Figure 2 below for the workflow diagram of this paper:

Figure 2. Workflow diagram of the present paper.

Figure 2. Workflow diagram of the present paper
2. Materials and Methods
2. Materials and Methods
In this section, we introduce the honeycomb materials and the typical properties of the aluminum
In this section,
honeycomb makingwe introduce
it feasible the honeycomb application.
for shock-absorbing materials and Thethe typical properties
information of the
of the aluminum
aluminum honeycomb making it feasible for shock-absorbing application. The information
honeycomb block is taken from real products of the Plascore company and later modeled accordingly of the
aluminum honeycomb block
for numerical simulations. is taken from real products of the Plascore company and later modeled
accordingly for numerical simulations.

2.1. Terminologies
To manufacture the aluminum honeycomb, the corrugated aluminum sheets are joined by
means of resistance welding. Inheriting from such a process, the in-between thicknesses (node bonds)
are two times the incline walls. It should be noted that for our numerical simulations, we model the
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 5 of 17

2.1. Terminologies
To manufacture the aluminum honeycomb, the corrugated aluminum sheets are joined by means
Symmetry 2020, 12,welding.
of resistance x FOR PEERInheriting
REVIEW from such a process, the in-between thicknesses (node bonds) 5 of 17
are two times the incline walls. It should be noted that for our numerical simulations, we model
node bonds
the node with with
bonds double thickness
double according
thickness to Figure
according 3 taken3 from
to Figure taken[45]
frombelow. With regard
[45] below. With to [46],
regard
the single-thickness walls collapse following the same failure mechanism but sooner than the double-
to [46], the single-thickness walls collapse following the same failure mechanism but sooner than the
thickness walls. walls.
double-thickness

Figure
Figure 3.
3. Honeycomb
Honeycomb terminologies
terminologies [45].
[45].

For our
For our study,
study, we consider
consider two
two profiles;
profiles; namely
namely PAMG-PA3-3.0-3⁄8-20-N-5052
PAMG-PA3-3.0-3⁄8-20-N-5052 (profile
(profile A)
A) and
and
PAMG-PA3-5.4-3⁄8-40-N-5052 (profile
PAMG-PA3-5.4-3⁄8-40-N-5052 (profile B) B) in the Plascore’s catalog. The naming explains, in order:
The naming explains, in order:
Aerospace grade
Aerospace grade aluminum-PA3 corrosion coating-Density-Cell thickness x10,000-Not
coating-Density-Cell thickness x10,000-Not perforated
perforated
(N)-Alloy of
(N)-Alloy of the
the material
material (5052
(5052 Al),
Al), [47]. ItIt should
should bebe noted
noted that
that only
only the
the density
density and
and geometric
geometric data
data
are employed for modeling the honeycomb cells made with 5052 Al. Thus, listed in Table
are employed for modeling the honeycomb cells made with 5052 Al. Thus, listed in Table 1 below are 1 below are
our considered
our considered details.
details.

Table 1. Honeycomb dimensions.

Table 1. Honeycomb dimensions.
Material
Material Density
Density Cell size
Cell size Cell Thickness
Cell Thickness
3.0 3.0
pcfpcf 3⁄8 inch 0.002 0.002
inch inch
profile A A
profile −3 ) −3)
(0.0480
(0.0480 g·cmg.cm (9.525 mm) (0.0508 mm) mm)
(0.0508
5.4 5.4
pcfpcf 3⁄8 inch 0.004 0.004
inch inch
profile B B
profile −3 ) −3
(0.0865 g·cm
(0.0865 g.cm ) (9.525 mm) (0.1016
(0.1016 mm) mm)

Applications
Applications of
of aluminum
aluminum honeycomb
honeycomb for
for energy
energy absorption
absorption are
are mostly
mostly with
with impact
impact pressure
pressure
applied on the out-of-plane surface which is prescribed by W and L.
applied on the out-of-plane surface which is prescribed by W and L.
2.2. Properties
2.2. Properties
The aluminum honeycomb is orthotropic material. Its applications span widely in aerospace,
The aluminum honeycomb is orthotropic material. Its applications span widely in aerospace,
automobile, marine, and military fields, owing to its lightweight property; excellent energy-absorbing
automobile, marine, and military fields, owing to its lightweight property; excellent energy-
ability; and high strength-to-weight and stiffness-to-weight ratios. Besides, according to [45], it possesses
absorbing ability; and high strength-to-weight and stiffness-to-weight ratios. Besides, according to
excellent and constant crush strength; high structural integrity; high fatigue, corrosion, and flammability
[45], it possesses excellent and constant crush strength; high structural integrity; high fatigue,
resistance; etc.
corrosion, and flammability resistance; etc.

2.2.1. Crushing Behavior

For out-of-plane compressive loading, compression applied perpendicularly to the out-of-plane
surface, after the structure reaches its ultimate strength, the crushing behavior follows the crush curve
as shown in Figure 4 below.
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 6 of 17

2.2.1. Crushing Behavior

For out-of-plane compressive loading, compression applied perpendicularly to the out-of-plane
surface, after the structure reaches its ultimate strength, the crushing behavior follows the crush curve
Symmetry
as shown2020, 12, x FOR
in Figure PEER REVIEW
4 below. 6 of 17

Figure 4. Aluminum honeycomb crush curve [48].

Figure 4. Aluminum honeycomb crush curve [48].
However, the peak load owing to the initialization of the collapse is harmful for under-protected
However, the peak load owing to the initialization of the collapse is harmful for under-protected
structures [14]. Thus, this peak load is eliminated by a so-called pre-crushing process and what remains
structures [14]. Thus, this peak load is eliminated by a so-called pre-crushing process and what
is a uniform crush curve.
remains is a uniform crush curve.
It should be noted that Figure 4 is taken from the manual of the manufacturer to explain in general
It should be noted that Figure 4 is taken from the manual of the manufacturer to explain in
the effect of pre-crushing on the crushing behavior of the material. Thus, specific values and units on
general the effect of pre-crushing on the crushing behavior of the material. Thus, specific values and
the axes are not within our interest.
units on the axes are not within our interest.
In the next subsection, we discuss the collapse mechanism of the honeycomb cell walls and explain
In the next subsection, we discuss the collapse mechanism of the honeycomb cell walls and
the benefit of the pre-crushing process.
explain the benefit of the pre-crushing process.
2.2.2. Collapse Mechanism
2.2.2. Collapse Mechanism
Under out-of-plane compressive loading, at first, the thin-walled cells elastically buckle within
Under
the free out-of-plane
spaces between the compressive loading,
cells, indicated by theatrhombus
first, theshapes
thin-walled cells5.elastically
in Figure bucklebeyond
Further loaded within
the free spaces between the cells, indicated by the rhombus shapes in Figure 5. Further
the yield limit, the structure starts to “dimple” (cell walls are hinged among the free space between loaded beyond
the yield
cells) limit,
leading to the
the structure starts to
plastic collapse of “dimple”
the whole (cell walls[35,46],
structure are hinged
Figureamong
6. the free space between
cells)This
leading to the plastic collapse of the whole structure [35,46], Figure 6.
uniform plastic collapse process happens along the thickness of the honeycomb block and
corresponds to the flat portion of the curve in Figure 4. During this time, the kinetic energy that the
crashing vehicle exerts will be converted uniformly to the deformation energy of the honeycomb block.
The pre-crushing process is able to cut out the peak load because it introduces some initial plastic
buckling to the honeycomb block, thus allowing the plastic collapse of the whole structure to happen
without the need of initiation from the peak load.
In the next section, we discuss analytical and numerical approaches for computing the IA design.
2.2.2. Collapse Mechanism
Under out-of-plane compressive loading, at first, the thin-walled cells elastically buckle within
the free spaces between the cells, indicated by the rhombus shapes in Figure 5. Further loaded beyond
the yield limit, the structure starts to “dimple” (cell walls are hinged among the free space between
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 7 of 17
cells) leading to the plastic collapse of the whole structure [35,46], Figure 6.

Symmetry 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW

Figure 5. Axial elastic buckling of hexagon cells [46]. 7 of 17
Figure 5. Axial elastic buckling of hexagon cells [46].

Figure
Figure 6. Axial plastic
6. Axial plastic buckling
buckling of
of hexagon
hexagon cells
cells (a)
(a) in
in general
general and
and (b)
(b) on
on one
one wall,
wall, [46].
[46].
2.3. Analytical Estimation of Impact Values
This uniform plastic collapse process happens along the thickness of the honeycomb block and
Given that
corresponds a car
to the m = 300
flatofportion kg travels
of the vimpact4.=During
curve inatFigure 7 m.s−1 to time,
this hit a the
rigid wall.energy
kinetic Designthat
an the
IA
that can fully
crashing stopexerts
vehicle the car bybe
will absorbing
converted least Ke = 7350
at uniformly to theJ of the kinetic energy
deformation energy ofthat thehoneycomb
the car exerts.
The decelerations
block. of such event are not higher than a average = 20 g’s on average and a peak = 40 g’s at
peak,The
with g = 9.81 m.s −2 . No part of the AIP deflects more than 25 mm from its original position.
pre-crushing process is able to cut out the peak load because it introduces some initial plastic
buckling to the honeycomb block, thus allowing the plastic collapse of the whole structure to happen
• Kinetic energy:
without the need of initiation from the peak
1 2 load. 1 2
e = mvimpact
In the next section, we discussKanalytical and= ·300·(7)approaches
numerical = 7350 J; for computing the IA design.
2 2
•2.3. Analytical
Approximation of impact
Estimation time:
of Impact Values
Given that a car of m = 300 kg travels at vimpact
vimpact = 7 m.s
7 −1 to hit a rigid wall. Design an IA that can
timpact = = = 0.0357s;
fully stop the car by absorbing at least Kae average
= 7350 J 20·9.81
of the kinetic energy that the car exerts. The
decelerations of such event are not higher than aaverage = 20 g’s on average and apeak = 40 g’s at peak,
•withDeflection
g = 9.81 m.s . Noispart
of−2AIP of the AIP
measured deflects more than 25 mm from its original position.
in ANSYS.
● Kineticare
There energy:
three versions of IA presented. According to the analytical result, the simulation
time was preset to 0.04 s for the first
𝐾 two 𝑚𝑣versions, and∙ 3000.055
∙ 7 s for7350
the 𝐽;
final version. It should be
noted that since the simulation time is approximated, we do not know in advance during that period
● Approximation
whether of impact
the vehicle will be fullytime:
stopped or not. This issue is later indicated by the fact that not all the
deceleration–time curves converge to zero, as shown later in Section 3.
𝑡 0.0357𝑠;
∙ .
2.4. Numerical Solution of Impact Behavior
● Deflection of AIP is measured in ANSYS.
We used the ANSYS Workbench for Researcher, Version 18.2 with four processors. In addition,
There are three versions of IA presented. According to the analytical result, the simulation time
the impact simulations were conducted using the explicit dynamic module. Thus, the below design
was preset to 0.04 s for the first two versions, and 0.055 s for the final version. It should be noted that
and setting were conducted following the ANSYS format.
since the simulation time is approximated, we do not know in advance during that period whether
the vehicle will be fully stopped or not. This issue is later indicated by the fact that not all the
deceleration–time curves converge to zero, as shown later in Section 3.

2.4. Numerical Solution of Impact Behavior

We used the ANSYS Workbench for Researcher, Version 18.2 with four processors. In addition,
the impact simulations were conducted using the explicit dynamic module. Thus, the below design
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 8 of 17

2.4.1. Designs for Simulations

According to the rules [6], in Figure 7, we designed a portion of the car’s front for the explicit
dynamic simulations. There is an impact attenuator assembly which includes the honeycomb IA,
the AIP, and the rectangular front bulkhead (FB). The IA assembly has the plane of symmetry to be
xzO. From the finite element analysis (FEA) perspective, the model was constructed of shell elements
with zero thickness, thus allowing us to flexibly change the thicknesses while saving a considerable
amount
Symmetry of modeling
2020, 12, x FOR and
PEERcomputing
REVIEW time. 8 of 17

Figure 7. Simulation
Figure 7. Simulation model,
model, [49].
[49].

From
From left
left to
to right,
right, to
to the
the -Oz
-Oz axis
axis direction,
direction,there
thereare:
are:
•● Wall:
Wall: Hidden
Hidden inin Figure
Figure 7,7, which
which isis aa rigid
rigid plane,
plane, normal
normal to to the
the Oz
Oz axis,
axis, 11 mm
mm away
away from
from the
the rear
rear
most surface of the
most surface of the IA.IA.
•● IA:
IA: An
An aluminum
aluminum honeycomb
honeycomb blockblockdimensioning
dimensioning200 200mmmm×× 150 mm mm ×× 250 mm (profile A or B),
which
whichisisfurther
furthermodified
modifiedfor fordifferent
differentvariations.
variations.
•● AIP:
AIP: Rectangular
Rectangular steel
steel plate
plate dimensioning
dimensioning357 357mmmm×× 305 mm mm × × 1.5 mm.
•● FB and
FB and other
other tubes:
tubes: Four
Four round
round steel
steel tubes
tubes forming
forming aa rectangle
rectangleof of307
307mm
mm×× 255 mm (center-line
(center-line
distances); one X-bracing or one +
distances); one X-bracing or one + -bracing; four extra tubes for mounting the FB on the Vehicle
Vehicle
plane. All
plane. All tubes
tubes are
are round
round 25 25 mm,
mm, thickness
thickness ofof 22 or
or44mm.
mm.
•● Vehicle: A rigid plane with an artificial mass of
Vehicle: A rigid plane with an artificial mass of 300 kg. 300 kg.

2.4.2. Constraints
2.4.2.
The rigid
The rigid Wall
Wall is
is fixed
fixed in
in space
space inin six
six degrees
degrees of
of freedom
freedom (DOF)
(DOF) atat 11 mm
mm inin front
front of
of the
the IA,
IA, using
using
Fix Support
Fix Support function. The The rest,
rest, as
as aa whole,
whole, moves
movesatataavelocity
velocityofof7000
7000mm.s −1
mm·s ininthe
−1
+Oz
+Oz
the direction
directionto
crash
to into
crash thethe
into rigid Wall.
rigid Additionally,
Wall. Additionally,we use the Bonding
we use the Bondingjoining function
joining to weld
function the FB
to weld and
the FBother
and
tubes,tubes,
other the AIP
theand
AIPthe
andFB. theThe
FB.same function
The same is used
function to glue
is used the IA
to glue thetoIA
the toAIP. LastLast
the AIP. but not
but least, the
not least,
separate
the honey
separate walls
honey are are
walls grouped
groupedto form a continuous
to form a continuousIA block.
IA block.

2.4.3.
2.4.3. Materials
Readers
Readers can
canrefer
refertotothe Tables
the Table2 and 3 below
2 and Table for the Material
3 below for theproperties
Material and Materialand
properties assignment
Material
for the simulations.
assignment for the simulations.
It is noteworthy that tangent modulus is employed to describe the behavior of materials after
being stressed beyond their elastic limits.
TableValues of 1 properties,
2. Material or 1000 MPa caused no difference to the numerical
[49].
results as studied by the authors.
Al 5052 Structural Steel (SS) Structural Steel Artificial (SSA) Unit

Density 2680 7850 214000 kg.m−3

Young’s modulus 70300 200000 200000 MPa

Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 9 of 17

Table 2. Material properties, [49].

Structural Steel
Al 5052 Structural Steel (SS) Unit
Artificial (SSA)
Density 2680 7850 214,000 kg·m−3
Young’s modulus 70,300 200,000 200,000 MPa
Poisson ratio 0.33 0.3 0.3 -
Yield strength 193 200 200 MPa
Tangent modulus 1 1000 1000 MPa

Table 3. Material assignment, [49].

Component Material Thickness [mm] Type Note

Cell size × Cell thickness.
9.525 × 0.1 (profile B) or
IA Al 5052 Deformable Bond node thickness is
9.525 × 0.05 (profile A)
double.
AIP SS 1.5 Deformable -
FB + other tubes SS 2.0 or 4.0 Deformable -
Wall SSA 1.0 Rigid 1 mm away from IA
Vehicle SSA 10 Rigid -

2.4.4. Others
Simulation results were shown in True Scale, no magnification. Automatic Mass Scaling was
turned on (Yes), for the efficient computational time and to avoid the Error of too large Energy.
Elements which experienced higher stress level than their yield limit would be eliminated from the
IA assembly during the impact. Moreover, it is worth noting that the acceleration was measured
in mm·s−2 then divided by the gravitational acceleration of g = 9.81 mm·s−2 to obtain the g times,
providing a perception of weight for the impacts. The deceleration should be on average 20 g’s and at
peak 40 g’s because these are the limits that a human body can withstand, [50].

3. Results and Discussions

In Figure 8, there are simulation results of the three versions modified from the basic shape shown
in Figure 7. Besides, the deceleration versus time results during the impact are plotted in Figure 9.

3.1. Version 1 (V.1)

According to the rule [6], because of the relative size of the honeycomb block on the AIP, we must
consider adding an X-bracing to enhance the stiffness of the FB. We start with a honeycomb block
with profile B. Besides, as an attempt to reduce the peak load, we modify the honeycomb block as in
Figure 10 below.
It should be noted that the deceleration versus time also indicates the force versus time load.
Regarding Figure 9, the vehicle is fully stopped at 0.038 s and then bounds back. With regard to
Figure 7, the assembly moves in +Oz direction to crash into the rigid wall. Thus, from 0 to 0.038 s,
the acceleration is negative, deceleration. Later on, the positive acceleration indicates the bound back
of the assembly. Additionally, the assembly first experiences a peak load at 0.01 s. The peak load is
transferred from the honeycomb cells to the AIP and the FB. If the AIP and the FB survive this peak
load, the vehicle will continue to be pushed forward and the peak load will initiate the collapse of the
honeycomb block. Then, the honeycomb block will attenuate the kinetic energy from the car crash
with its deformation energy.
 Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 10 of 17
Symmetry 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17

Figure 8. Top view. Three columns from left to right, the deformation shape to time of (a) Version 1
(V.1), (b) Version 2 (V.2), and (c) Version 3 (V.3), respectively [49].
Figure 8. Top view. Three columns from left to right, the deformation shape to time of (a) Version 1
(V.1), (b) Version 2 (V.2), and (c) Version 3 (V.3), respectively [49].
 Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 11 of 17
Symmetry 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17
Symmetry 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17

Figure
Figure 9.
9. The
Thedeceleration
deceleration versus
versus time
time curves
curves of
of V.1,
V.1, V.2, and V.3,
V.2, and V.3,[49].
[49].
Figure 9. The deceleration versus time curves of V.1, V.2, and V.3, [49].

Figure 10. Design of V.1 (a) with the AIP, and (b) without the AIP, [49].
Figure 10. Design
Figure of V.1
10. Design (a) with
of V.1 the the
(a) with AIP, andand
AIP, (b)(b)
without thethe
without AIP, [49].
AIP, [49].
It should be noted that the deceleration versus time also indicates the force versus time load.
Regarding
It should
However, Figure
for 9,
be noted the
thisthat vehicle is fully
the deceleration
version, the AIP andstopped
versus at
time0.038
the diagonal alsostubes
and then
indicates bounds
of thethe fail back.
FBforce versus
under Withtime
the regard
load.
peak loadto
Figure is
Regarding
which 7,Figure
the assembly moves in
9, theindicated
figuratively vehicle +Oz
isby thedirection
fully fact thatto
stopped atcrash
they areinto
0.038 s andthethen
squeezed rigid wall.
tobounds Thus,
the rigid back. from
vehicle 0plane
With toregard
0.038 s,
tothe
at 0.01 s,
acceleration
Figure
and 7,
henceforth is negative,
the assembly remain moves deceleration.
in with
intact the Later
+Oz direction
vehicle on,
to the positive
crash
plane into the
until theacceleration
rigid
end ofwall. indicates
theThus, from the
simulation. 0 tobound
0.038 s,back
the of
the assembly.
acceleration
However, Additionally,
is negative, noticethe
we candeceleration. thatassembly
Later
the on,first
honeycombtheexperiences
positive a peakanload
blockacceleration
inherits at 0.01the
indicates
interesting s.collapsing
The peak
bound backload
of is
pattern.
transferred
theThe collapsefrom
assembly. thefrom
Additionally,
starts honeycomb
theshoulder
the cells to
assembly the AIP
first
edges andare
experiences
which thethen
FB. Iffolded
a peak the AIP
load atand
0.01the
inward. FB
Thesurvive
s.The peak load
kinetic this peak
energy is is
load, the from
transferred
transferred vehicle thewill
to deformationcontinue
honeycomb to beprimarily
cells
energy pushed
to the AIP forward
and the
owing toand FB.
the theIf peak
the AIP
collapse load
of and
thewill initiate
the the collapse
FB survive
shoulder pattern. of the
this peak
honeycomb
load, theThe
vehicle block.
maximum Then,
will continue the
deformation tohoneycomb
be pushed
of the AIP block
forward will
measuredandattenuate
the peak
from the
loadkinetic
ANSYS will energy
initiate
as shown from
theFigure
in the
collapse 11car crash
of the
below is
with its
honeycomb
127.1 − 57.82 = 69
deformation
block. Then,
mm. energy.
the honeycomb block will attenuate the kinetic energy from the car crash
with itsWeHowever,
deformation forenergy.
aim to come this
up version, the AIP
with a design whichandisthe diagonal
strong enough tubes of the FBthe
to withstand failpeak
underloadthe peak load
indicated by
which
the factisthat
However, figuratively
for AIP
the indicated
this deflects
version, the
less bythan
the 25
AIP fact
and that they are
theThus,
mm. diagonalthissqueezed
tubes
version to the
offails.
the FB rigid vehicle
fail under theplane
peakatload0.01 s,
and is
which henceforth
figuratively
Subsequently, remain
for the intact
indicated by
next with
thethefactvehicle
versions, that plane
they
we investigateareuntil the end
squeezed
further to of
into thethe simulation.
rigid
decreasing vehicle plane at 0.01
the honeycomb s,
block’s
However,
andcrashworthiness
henceforth we
remain can
and notice
intact thatthe
with
increasing thevehicle
honeycomb
FB’s one.plane block
until theinherits
end of anthe
interesting
simulation. collapsing pattern. The
collapse
However, starts fromnotice
we can the that
shoulder edges which
the honeycomb blockare then an
inherits folded inward.
interesting The kinetic
collapsing pattern. energy
The is
transferred
collapse startstofromdeformation
the shoulderenergyedgesprimarily which owingare tothenthe folded
collapseinward.
of the shoulder
The kinetic pattern.energy is
The to
transferred maximum
deformation deformation of the AIP
energy primarily measured
owing to the from
collapse ANSYSof theasshoulder
shown in Figure 11 below is
pattern.
127.1
The−maximum
57.82 = 69 deformation
mm. of the AIP measured from ANSYS as shown in Figure 11 below is
127.1 − 57.82 = 69 mm.
Symmetry 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17

Symmetry
Symmetry 12, x12,
2020,
2020, FOR1647PEER REVIEW 1217
12 of of 17

Figure 11. 11.

Figure Deformation shape
Deformation of AIP
shape in V.1,
of AIP [49].
in V.1, [49].
Figure 11. Deformation shape of AIP in V.1, [49].
3.2. Version 2 (V.2)
We aim to come up with a design which is strong enough to withstand the peak load indicated
by We aim
the fact to come
that the AIP
Witnessing
upthe
with
that deflects
aless
longer
design
than
side
which
25 mm.
tubes
isThus,
of the
strong
thisenough to
versionthe
FB experience
withstand the peak load indicated
fails.
most severe deformity, we decide
by the fact that the
toSubsequently, AIP deflects
change the X-bracing less than
to + versions,
for the next -bracing to25 mm.
weenhance Thus,
investigate this version
further into
the stiffness fails.
of thedecreasing the honeycomb
FB side tubes. In addition,
we introduce a so-called double-shoulder pattern on the honeycomb block and change to ahoneycomb
Subsequently,
block’s for
crashworthiness the
and next versions,
increasing the we
FB’s investigate
one. further into decreasing the smaller
block’s crashworthiness
honeycomb and profile
cell thickness, increasing
A, to the FB’sweaken
further one. it as shown in Figure 12 below.
3.2. Version 2 (V.2)
As can be seen in Figure 9, the V.2 curve varies within a smaller range in comparison with V.1.
3.2. Version
The 2 (V.2)that
magnitude
Witnessing of the
the longer
first peak
sideload,
tubesapplied within
of the FB the firstthe
experience 0.008
mosts period, is reducedwe
severe deformity, significantly.
decide
As a result,
to change the AIP deforms
the X-bracing less than
to + -bracing to V.1. However,stiffness
enhance it still does notFB
meet
sidethe 25 mmIn requirement.
Witnessing that the longer side tubes of thethe
FB experience of the
the most tubes.
severe addition, we
deformity, we decide
introduce a so-called double-shoulder pattern on the honeycomb block and change to a13
The maximum deformation of the AIP measured from ANSYS as shown in Figure below is
smaller
to change
185.4 −the X-bracing
63 mm.toprofile
+ -bracing to enhance the stiffness of the FB side tubes. In addition, we
honeycomb cell =
122.5 thickness, A, to further weaken it as shown in Figure 12 below.
introduce a so-called double-shoulder pattern on the honeycomb block and change to a smaller
honeycomb cell thickness, profile A, to further weaken it as shown in Figure 12 below.

Figure 12. Design

Figure of V.2
12. Design (a) with
of V.2 the the
(a) with AIP,AIP,
andand
(b) (b)
without thethe
without AIP, [49].
AIP, [49].

As can be seen in Figure 9, the V.2 curve varies within a smaller range in comparison with V.1.
The magnitude ofFigure
the first
12.peak load,
Design ofapplied within
V.2 (a) with thethe first
AIP, and0.008 s period,the
(b) without is reduced
AIP, [49].significantly.
As a result, the AIP deforms less than V.1. However, it still does not meet the 25 mm requirement.
AsThe
canmaximum deformation
be seen in of the
Figure 9, the V.2AIP measured
curve variesfrom
withinANSYS as shown
a smaller range in in
Figure 13 belowwith
comparison is V.1.
185.4 − 122.5 = 63 mm.
The magnitude of the first peak load, applied within the first 0.008 s period, is reduced significantly.
As a result, the AIP deforms less than V.1. However, it still does not meet the 25 mm requirement.
The maximum deformation of the AIP measured from ANSYS as shown in Figure 13 below is
185.4 − 122.5 = 63 mm.
 Symmetry 2020,
Symmetry 12, x1647
2020, 12, FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of
13 of 17
17

Symmetry 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 17

Figure 13. Deformation shape of AIP in V.2, [49].

Figure 13. Deformation shape of AIP in V.2, [49].
3.3. Version 3 (V.3)
3.3. Version 3 (V.3)
For this version, we further stiffen the FB by increasing the tube thickness of the + -bracing from
2 mmForto this
4 mm.version, we further
Additionally, stiffen the
we further FB by
pursue theincreasing the tube thickness
idea of weakening of the + -bracing
the profile-A-based from
honeycomb
2block
mmwith to 4a triple-shoulder
mm. Additionally, weasfurther
pattern shown inpursue
Figurethe idea of weakening the profile-A-based
14 below.
honeycomb block with a triple-shoulder pattern as shown
With regard to Figure 8, we can observe that the honeycomb in Figureblock
14 below.
crashes uniformly. Indeed,
this proves the correctnessFigure
of our 13. Deformation
findings shape
about the of AIPbetween
relation in V.2, [49].
different components contributing
to the crashworthiness of the IA assembly. In Figure 9, this uniform crash is indicated by the almost
3.3.constant
Version 3trend
(V.3) of the V.3 curve starting from 0.033 s. For vehicle crashes, both in simulations and
testing, this
For this constant
version, wedeceleration is desirable
further stiffen the FB bybecause it helps
increasing to ensure
the tube the safety
thickness of the of the drivers
+ -bracing from[10].
2 mm The to 4maximum deformation
mm. Additionally, weoffurther
the AIPpursue
measured the from
idea ANSYS as shown
of weakening in Figure
the 15 below is
profile-A-based
195.0 − 160.6 = 34.5 mm.
honeycomb block with a triple-shoulder pattern as shown in Figure 14 below.

Figure 14. Design of V.3 (a) with the AIP, and (b) without the AIP, [49].

With regard to Figure 8, we can observe that the honeycomb block crashes uniformly. Indeed,
this proves the correctness of our findings about the relation between different components
contributing to the crashworthiness of the IA assembly. In Figure 9, this uniform crash is indicated
by the almost constant trend of the V.3 curve starting from 0.033 s. For vehicle crashes, both in
simulations and testing, this constant deceleration is desirable because it helps to ensure the safety of
Figure 14. Design
Figure of V.3
14. Design (a) with
of V.3 the the
(a) with AIP, andand
AIP, (b) (b)
without thethe
without AIP, [49].
AIP, [49].
the drivers [10].
The maximum deformation of the AIP measured from ANSYS as shown in Figure 15 below is
With regard to Figure 8, we can observe that the honeycomb block crashes uniformly. Indeed,
195.0 − 160.6 = 34.5 mm.
this proves the correctness of our findings about the relation between different components
contributing to the crashworthiness of the IA assembly. In Figure 9, this uniform crash is indicated
by the almost constant trend of the V.3 curve starting from 0.033 s. For vehicle crashes, both in
simulations and testing, this constant deceleration is desirable because it helps to ensure the safety of
the drivers [10].
The maximum deformation of the AIP measured from ANSYS as shown in Figure 15 below is
Symmetry 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 17
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 14 of 17

Figure 15. Deformation shape of AIP in V.3, [49].

Figure 15. Deformation shape of AIP in V.3, [49].
3.4. Comparison Studies
3.4. Comparison Studies
The simulation results are summarized in Table 4 below.
The simulation results are summarized in Table 4 below.
Table 4. Result summary, [49].
Table 4. Result summary, [49].
Peak Deceleration Average AIP Deformation
Name Note
[g’s] Deceleration [g’s] [mm]
Peak Deceleration Average Deceleration AIP Deformation
NameV.1 30.5 18.0 69.0 Note
X-bracing, 2 mm tubes, profile B
V.2
[g’s]19.9 [g’s]
11.9 63.0
[mm] + -bracing, 2 mm tubes, profile A
V.3 16.1 11.8 34.5 + -bracing, 4 mm tubes, profile A
X-bracing, 2 mm tubes,
V.1 30.5 18.0 69.0
profile B
Before commenting on the data in the above table, it is worth noting that the deceleration is only
calculated
V.2
for the19.9
whole crashing period (until the vehicle stops)
11.9 63.0
in V.1. For+V.2
-bracing, 2 mm
and V.3, wetubes,
cannot
capture the moment the vehicle stops during the preset time. profile A
With reference to Figure 9, within the duration of 0.04 s, we can see that V.1 is fully stopped
+ -bracing, 4 mm tubes,
and even bounds16.1
V.3 back. The deceleration 11.8
on average and at peak 34.5 during this period meets the rules.
profile A
However, the AIP deformation does not satisfy the rules.
For V.2, at 0.04 s, the deceleration–time curve does not show any trend of rising or declining.
Before commenting
The decelerations on the and
on average dataat
in peak
the above table,
during thisit period
is worthmeet
noting
thethat the deceleration
rules. However, the is only
AIP
calculated for the whole crashing period (until the vehicle stops) in V.1.
deformation does not satisfy the rules. This is the worst simulation among the three. For V.2 and V.3, we cannot
capture
Forthe
V.3,moment
at 0.055the vehicle
s, the stops during the
deceleration–time preset
curve showstime. a monotonic trend of rising to zero floor.
The decelerations on average and at peak during this periodwe
With reference to Figure 9, within the duration of 0.04 s, can the
meet see rules.
that V.1 is fully
Even stopped
though and
the AIP
even bounds back. The deceleration on average and at peak during this period
deformation does not satisfy the rules, we can conclude that this version is the most promising one. meets the rules.
However,
Owing thetoAIP deformation
the time that wasdoes not satisfy
permitted theproject,
for this rules. our study stopped at V.3.
For V.2, at 0.04 s, the deceleration–time curve does not show any trend of rising or declining.
The decelerations on average and at peak during this period meet the rules. However, the AIP
4. Conclusions
deformation does not satisfy the rules. This is the worst simulation among the three.
This paper presents crash simulations of aluminum honeycomb IA for the Formula Student
For V.3, at 0.055 s, the deceleration–time curve shows a monotonic trend of rising to zero floor.
VSB-TU Ostrava team. The properties of the aluminum honeycomb are studied from theory and
The decelerations on average and at peak during this period meet the rules. Even though the AIP
numerical simulations. The effect of different components on the crashworthiness is studied by
deformation does not satisfy the rules, we can conclude that this version is the most promising one.
incrementally developed designs. Specifically, to avoid the force (deceleration) peaks, instead of
Owing to the time that was permitted for this project, our study stopped at V.3
pre-crushing, we introduce cutting with shoulder pattern. This pattern inherits uniform crushing
behavior
4. as shown in the simulation results. Ideally, the force (deceleration) versus time curves are
Conclusions
flat. However, in our simulations, the first peak load is reduced but cannot be eliminated thoroughly.
This paperpatterns
The shoulder presentswork
crashwell
simulations
as crushofinitiators
aluminum thathoneycomb IA for
significantly the Formula
improve StudentofVSB-
the response the
TU Ostrava team. The properties of the aluminum honeycomb are studied from theory and numerical
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 15 of 17

structure from the frontal impact point of view. Possible future works for this would be to re-evaluate
the simulation time so that we can capture the moment when the velocity of the vehicle is reduced
to zero. Besides, we can evaluate the effect of mesh sizes on the computing time for optimizing the
computing resources according to [51]. These two things should be done in the context of better
designs according to the findings in this paper.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.S. and J.M.; methodology, Z.P.; formal analysis, P.M.Q. and D.K.;
investigation, P.M.Q. and D.K.; writing—original draft preparation: P.M.Q.; writing—review and editing, P.M.Q.
and D.K.; supervision, Z.P.; project administration, A.S.; funding acquisition, J.P. All authors have read and agreed
to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The research was funded in association with project Innovative and additive manufacturing
technology—new technological solutions for 3D printing of metals and composite materials, reg. no.
CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17_049/0008407 financed by Structural Funds of the European Union and project.
Acknowledgments: This article has been completed in connection with project Innovative and additive
manufacturing technology–new technological solutions for 3D printing of metals and composite materials,
reg. no. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17_049/0008407 financed by Structural Funds of European Union and project.
The authors express their gratitude towards the Formula Student VSB-TU Ostrava for establishing the foundation
for this project.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Available online: https://www.imeche.org/events/formula-student/
about-formula-student (accessed on 19 August 2020).
2. Mesicek, J.; Pagac, M.; Petru, J.; Novak, P.; Hajnys, J.; Kutiova, K. Topological optimization of the formula
student bell crank. MM Sci. J. 2019, 2019, 2964–2968. [CrossRef]
3. Kutiová, K.; Měsíček, J.; Krzikalla, D. Experimental examination of adhesive bonded carbon Fibre tube to
aluminum alloy AW 7075. Mater. Sci. Forum 2020, 994, 125–132. [CrossRef]
4. Mesicek, J.; Richtar, M.; Petru, J.; Pagac, M.; Kutiova, K. Complex view to racing car upright design and
manufacturing. Manuf. Technol. 2018, 18, 449–456. [CrossRef]
5. Hunar, M.; Jancar, L.; Krzikalla, D.; Kaprinay, D.; Srnicek, D. Comprehensive view on racing car upright
design and manufacturing. Symmetry 2020, 12, 1020. [CrossRef]
6. Formula Student Rules. 2020. Available online: https://www.formulastudent.de/fileadmin/user_upload/all/
2020/rules/FS-Rules_2020_V1.0.pdf (accessed on 19 August 2020).
7. Albak, E.I.; Solmaz, E.; Kaya, N.; Öztürk, F. Lightweight foam impact attenuator design for formula Sae car.
Turk. J. Eng. 2018, 2, 17–21. [CrossRef]
8. Alexander Bilewski. Available online: https://alexbilewski.myportfolio.com/polsl-racing-2016-impact-
attenuator (accessed on 19 August 2020).
9. Farley, G.L. Energy absorption of composite materials. J. Compos. Mater. 1983, 17, 267–279. [CrossRef]
10. Muhammad, A. Energy Absorption Behaviour of Filament Wound Glass and Carbon Epoxies Composite
Tubes. Master’s Thesis, Kano University of Science & Technology, Wudil, Nigeria, 2014; pp. 30–37. [CrossRef]
11. Boria, S.; Obradovic, J.; Belingardi, G. On design optimization of a composite impact attenuator under
dynamic axial crushing. FME Trans. 2017, 45, 435–440. [CrossRef]
12. Boria, S.; Pettinari, S. Mathematical design of electric vehicle impact attenuators: Metallic vs composite
material. Compos. Struct. 2014, 115, 51–59. [CrossRef]
13. Wang, J.; Yang, N.; Zhao, J.; Wang, D.; Wang, Y.; Li, K.; He, Z.; Wang, B. Design and experimental verification
of composite impact attenuator for racing vehicles. Compos. Struct. 2016, 141, 39–49. [CrossRef]
14. Belingardi, G.; Obradovic, J. Design of the impact attenuator for a formula student racing car: Numerical
simulation of the impact crash test. J. Serb. Soc. Comput. Mech. 2010, 4, 52–65.
15. López-Campos, J.; Baldonedo, J.; Suárez, S.; Segade, A.; Casarejos, E.; Fernández, J. Finite element validation
of an energy attenuator for the design of a formula student car. Mathematics 2020, 8, 416. [CrossRef]
16. Rooppakhun, S.; Boonporm, P.; Puangcha-Um, W. Design and analysis of impact attenuator for student
formula. SAE Tech. Pap. Ser. 2015, 1. [CrossRef]
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 16 of 17

17. Maskery, I.; Aboulkhair, N.T.; Aremu, A.; Tuck, C.; Ashcroft, I.; Wildman, R.; Hague, R. A mechanical
property evaluation of graded density Al-Si10-Mg lattice structures manufactured by selective laser melting.
Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2016, 670, 264–274. [CrossRef]
18. Vrána, R.; Červinek, O.; Maňas, P.; Koutny, D.; Palousek, D. Dynamic loading of lattice structure made by
selective laser melting-numerical model with substitution of geometrical imperfections. Materials 2018, 11,
2129. [CrossRef]
19. Vrana, R.; Koutny, D.; Palousek, D. Impact resistance of different types of lattice structures manufactured by
slm. MM Sci. J. 2016, 2016, 1579–1585. [CrossRef]
20. Vrána, R.; Vaverka, O.; Červinek, O.; Pantělejev, L.; Hurník, J.; Koutný, D.; Paloušek, D. Heat treatment
of the SLM processed lattice structure made of AlSi10Mg and its effect on the impact energy absorption.
In Proceedings of the Euro PM2019 Congress & Exhibition, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 13–16 October 2019;
pp. 1–6, ISBN 978-1-899072-51-4.
21. Kempen, K.; Thijs, L.; Van Humbeeck, J.; Kruth, J.-P. Mechanical properties of AlSi10Mg produced by
selective laser melting. Phys. Procedia 2012, 39, 439–446. [CrossRef]
22. Hasan, R.; Mines, R.A.; Shen, E.; Tsopanos, S.; Cantwell, W.; Brooks, W.; Sutcliffe, C. Comparison of the drop
weight impact performance of sandwich panels with aluminium honeycomb and titanium alloy micro lattice
cores. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2010, 24, 413–418. [CrossRef]
23. Ullah, I.; Brandt, M.; Feih, S. Failure and energy absorption characteristics of advanced 3D truss core
structures. Mater. Des. 2016, 92, 937–948. [CrossRef]
24. Veiga, C.; Davim, J.P.; Loureiro, A.J. Properties and applications of titanium alloys: A brief review. Rev. Adv.
Mater. Sci. 2012, 32, 133–148.
25. Hwang, J.-S.; Choi, T.-G.; Lee, N.; Lyu, M.-Y.; Gil Lee, D.; Yang, D.-Y. Development of a bendable pyramidal
kagome structure and its structural characteristics. Compos. Struct. 2016, 142, 87–95. [CrossRef]
26. Smith, M.; Guan, Z.; Cantwell, W. Finite element modelling of the compressive response of lattice structures
manufactured using the selective laser melting technique. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2013, 67, 28–41. [CrossRef]
27. Gümrük, R.; Mines, R. Compressive behaviour of stainless steel micro-lattice structures. Int. J. Mech. Sci.
2013, 68, 125–139. [CrossRef]
28. Yu, B.; Chien, K.; Abu Samk, K.; Hibbard, G. A mechanism for energy absorption: Sequential micro-kinking
in ceramic reinforced aluminum alloy lattices during out-of-plane compression. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2018, 716,
11–22. [CrossRef]
29. Wu, Y.; Liu, Q.; Fu, J.; Li, Q.; Hui, D. Dynamic crash responses of bio-inspired aluminum honeycomb
sandwich structures with CFRP panels. Compos. Part B: Eng. 2017, 121, 122–133. [CrossRef]
30. Wang, J.; Shi, C.; Yang, N.; Sun, H.; Liu, Y.; Song, B. Strength, stiffness, and panel peeling strength of
carbon fiber-reinforced composite sandwich structures with aluminum honeycomb cores for vehicle body.
Compos. Struct. 2018, 184, 1189–1196. [CrossRef]
31. Plascore CrushLite™. Available online: https://www.plascore.com/download/datasheets/energy_absorption_
documentation/Plascore_CrushLite-Sheet-Metric.pdf (accessed on 19 August 2020).
32. Fahland, J.; Hoff, C.; Brelin-Fornari, J. Evaluating impact attenuator performance for a formula SAE vehicle.
SAE Int. J. Passeng. Cars-Mech. Syst. 2011, 4, 836–847. [CrossRef]
33. Boria, S. Behaviour of an impact attenuator for formula SAE car under dynamic loading. Int. J. Veh. Struct.
Syst. 2010, 2. [CrossRef]
34. Vettorello, A.; Campo, G.A.; Goldoni, G.; Giacalone, M. Numerical-experimental correlation of dynamic test
of a honeycomb impact attenuator for a formula SAE vehicle. Metals 2020, 10, 652. [CrossRef]
35. Zhang, S.; Chen, W.; Gao, D.; Xiao, L.; Han, L. Experimental study on dynamic compression mechanical
properties of aluminum honeycomb structures. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1188. [CrossRef]
36. Chen, Q.; Shi, Q.; Signetti, S.; Sun, F.; Li, Z.; Zhu, F.; He, S.; Pugno, N.M. Plastic collapse of cylindrical
shell-plate periodic honeycombs under uniaxial compression: Experimental and numerical analyses. Int. J.
Mech. Sci. 2016, 111, 125–133. [CrossRef]
37. Han, B.; Qin, K.; Yu, B.; Wang, B.; Zhang, Q.; Lu, T.J. Honeycomb–corrugation hybrid as a novel sandwich
core for significantly enhanced compressive performance. Mater. Des. 2016, 93, 271–282. [CrossRef]
38. Wang, Z.; Liu, J.; Hui, D. Mechanical behaviors of inclined cell honeycomb structure subjected to compression.
Compos. Part B: Eng. 2017, 110, 307–314. [CrossRef]
Symmetry 2020, 12, 1647 17 of 17

39. Wang, Z.; Liu, J. Mechanical performance of honeycomb filled with circular CFRP tubes. Compos. Part B Eng.
2018, 135, 232–241. [CrossRef]
40. Balaji, G.; Annamalai, K. Crushing response of square aluminium column filled with carbon fibre tubes and
aluminium honeycomb. Thin-Walled Struct. 2018, 132, 667–681. [CrossRef]
41. Segala, D.; Cavallaro, P. Numerical investigation of energy absorption mechanisms in unidirectional
composites subjected to dynamic loading events. Comput. Mater. Sci. 2014, 81, 303–312. [CrossRef]
42. Segala, D.B.; Cavallaro, P.V. Energy Absorption Mechanisms in Unidirectional Composites Subjected to Dynamic
Loading Events. Available online: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/ADA564440 (accessed on 19 August 2020).
43. Zhang, Q.; Zhang, J.; Wu, L. Impact and energy absorption of long fiber-reinforced thermoplastic based on
two-phase modeling and experiments. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2018, 122, 374–383. [CrossRef]
44. Yu, B.; Deshpande, V.; Fleck, N. Perforation of aluminium alloy-CFRP bilayer plates under quasi-static and
impact loading. Int. J. Impact Eng. 2018, 121, 106–118. [CrossRef]
45. HexWebTM. Honeycomb Sandwich Design Technology. Available online: https://www.hexcel.com/user_area/
content_media/raw/Honeycomb_Sandwich_Design_Technology.pdf (accessed on 19 August 2020).
46. Gibson, L.J.; Ashby, M.F. Cellular Solids: Structure and Properties; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge,
UK, 1999.
47. PAMG-PA3 5052 Aluminum Honeycomb. Available online: https://www.plascore.com/download/datasheets/
honeycomb_data_sheets/PLA_PAMG_PA3_5052.pdf (accessed on 19 August 2020).
48. HexWebTM. Honeycomb Attributes and Properties. Available online: https://www.hexcel.com/user_area/
content_media/raw/HexWebHoneycombAttributesandProperties.pdf (accessed on 19 August 2020).
49. Ma Quoc, P. Design and Numerical Modeling of Impact Attenuator. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/
10084/129693 (accessed on 19 August 2020).
50. Kumar, K.V.; Norfleet, W.T. Issues of Human Acceleration Tolerance after Long-Duration Space Flights.
Available online: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19930020462 (accessed on 19 August 2020).
51. Markopoulos, A.; Hapla, V.; Čermák, M.; Fusek, M. Massively parallel solution of elastoplasticity problems
with tens of millions of unknowns using PermonCube and FLLOP packages. Appl. Math. Comput. 2015, 267,
698–710. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).