You are on page 1of 52

FRONTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF HEAVY PASENGER VECHICE

submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements


for the award of degree in
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
By
R. SANKAR 2845279
I. RUPESH 2845274
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
SATHYABAMA UNIVERSITY
(Established under Section 3 of UGC Act 1956)
JEPPIAAR NAGAR, RAJIV GANDHI ROAD
CHENNAI 600119
OCTOBER 2011
1
DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that this project report is the bonafide work of R. SANKAR,
Reg.No. 2845279, who carried out the project entitled
FRONTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF HEAVY PASENGER VECHICE
under our supervision from June 2011 to October 2011.
Internal Guide External Guide
Mr E.V.V RAMANAMURTHY M.E., Ph.D.,
Head of the Department
Dr. S.RAMACHANDRAN M.E., Ph.D.,
Submitted for Viva Voce Examination held on_________________
Internal Examiner External Examiner
2
DECLARATION
I, R. SANKAR hereby declare that the Project Report entitled
FRONTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS OF HEAVY PASENGER VECHICE is done by me
under the guidance of Mr E.V.V RAMANAMURTHY M.E., Ph.D., is submitted in partial
fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree in
BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING.
DATE:
PLACE: SIGNATURE OF THE CANDIDATE
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The satisfaction and euphoria that accompany the successful completion of
any task would be incomplete without mentioning the people who made it possible
and whose constant guidance and encouragement crowned efforts with success.
I would like to express my profound gratitude to our respected Chancellor
Thiru. Dr.JEPPIAAR, M.A.B.L., Ph.D., our directors Thiru. MARIE JOHNSON,
B.E., M.B.A., M.Phil., (Ph.D.,) and Tmt. MARIAZEENA JOHNSON, B.E.,
M.B.A., M.Phil, (Ph.D.,) for having given us the opportunity to carry out this
project.
I feel greatly indebted and glad to express my sincere thanks to
Dr. S. RAMACHANDRAN, M.E., Ph.D., HOD, Department of Mechanical
Engineering for giving me necessary facilities and continuous encouragement for
the completion of my project successfully.
I would like to extend my thanks to the internal guide cum Project Coordinator
Mr E.V.V RAMANAMURTHY M.E., Ph.D., for her intellectual guidance, valuable
suggestions and spending her precious time for successful completion of my project.
I express my deep gratitude to our Counselor Mr. R.SIVA, M.Tech,
for his inspiration and encouragement in bringing out my project successfully.
I also convey my thanks to the departmental staff and technicians for
prompt help and support.
I must thank GOD for giving me the spirit and power to do this project.
Last and most of all, I offer a special word of thanks to my beloved parents
and friends who have encouraged me with good spirit by their incessant prayers
and suggestions
4
Abstract
As accidents are increasing day-by-day all over the world, the government
bodies are examining the safety features in the vehicles to reduce the injuries to the
occupants. For any company the safety of the passenger or the driver is the primary
concern. Even though the companies concentrate more on the safety in the cars, the
public transport like buses get less attention from the vehicle manufactures and
government bodies. Whenever two vehicles coming from two directions come in front
of each other drivers tends to steer their vehicle to the left to avoid impact. This
evasive action may prevent the head on collision but can lead to an offset collision
which can have more severe consequences.
The present project work is undertaken to study the behavior of the
passenger bus in frontal offset collision. Responses of the structure of a 54 seated
bus involved in collisions with different offsets were studied. From the results key
structural elements that influence the kinematics and deceleration of the bus after
collision were identified. Effects of changes in component sizes were also studied to
develop some design guidelines for reducing the severity of the impact on the
passengers.
5
Introduction
As the number of vehicles increase day-by-day the traffic is increasing not
only in cities but also on the high-ways. High-way accidents are of major concern, as
the speeds are higher on the highways. On undivided highways, where head on
collision is distinct possibility, the impacts can be very severe. To reduce the effect of
the impact to the occupants, understanding of the crashworthiness of the vehicle is
very important. For an automotive industry safety is becoming major concern and
customers are also looking for safety aspects in the vehicle before owning the
vehicle.
In automotive industry more emphasis is given to the car than the other
vehicles. In India there are middle class people who travel in public transport buses
as they cannot afford owning a car. So there is need to study and understand the
crashworthiness aspect of a bus structure. In this project the more emphasis is given
for the safety of passengers who are travelling through buses. When the bus is
moving at a high speed and another bus is coming in opposite direction then the
driver tries to avoid the collision so he makes a turn to the left side and there may
chances of offset collision. This kind of collision can be observed in the figure 1.1. So
in this project report the emphasis is given to the behaviour of a passenger bus
structure in frontal offset collision.
Figure 1. 1: Result of an offset collision of a long distance bus
6
1.1Crashworthiness of a bus structure in frontal offset collisions:
The word crashworthiness means measure of the ability of a structure to
deform plastically and also maintaining survival space for the occupants in crashes
where there are reasonable deceleration loads. In frontal collisions of any bus the
first person who will be severely injured is the bus driver. If the collision is in the
offset condition then the injury criteria will be more for a driver. According to the
study there are 80% chances for a driver to die then the other passengers in frontal
offset collisions. So crashworthiness of a passenger bus is very much important and
more significance is given for the structural behaviour of a passenger bus at the time
of collision. [2]
The main bus body i.e. skeleton body is a complex design and most of the
deformation should happen to this body only to safe guard the driver. Thus bus body
stands on the chassis and bumper is also connected to the chassis which will have
more deformation in the frontal collisions. The below figure 1.2 shows the skeleton
body of the bus.
Figure 1. 2: Skeleton Body of a bus
7
In early days of automotive industry the vehicle body was manufactured with
wood to avoid the deformations when the vehicle is collided. As years are passing
the crush zones are introduced to absorb some part of the kinetic energy by plastic
deformations for the vehicle body structure. Now the vehicle bodies are
manufactured with steel panels and the goal of the crashworthiness is an optimized
structure of the vehicle which absorbs the crash energy by controlled vehicle
deformations while maintaining required space so that the residual crash energy can
be managed by the restraint systems for minimizing the transfer of the crash loads to
the other components of the vehicle. In India other than some luxury buses there will
no seat belt for the driver and also air bag and majority of the customers won't
expect these active safety systems as these increases their budget. So the
automotive companies are preferred for the improvement of structural integrity of the
bus. So the project work was carried out to identify possible improvements in the
structural behavior of the passenger bus at time of collision for minimizing the injury
risk to the driver.
The study was made for the behavior of the bus structure for improving the
crashworthiness of the vehicle. So when the vehicles collide with each other the
kinetic energy is to be absorbed for minimizing the injury risk. Thus automotive
industry introduced the crumple zones for absorbing the kinetic energy and this is
achieved by the plastic deformation of the components bearing the brunt of the
impact. The crumple zones are divided into three different categories and they are
soft front zone, primary crush zone and secondary crush zone [3].
The first soft zone is designed for reducing the aggressiveness of the vehicle
in vehicle to vehicle collisions and also pedestrian to vehicle collisions. In this
soft zone there is a bumper as well as energy absorber shown in the figure
1.3.1.
8

Figure 3.2.1: First / Soft Zone Figure 3.2.1: Primary Crush Zone
Then the next zone is the primary zone which is also known as main
energy absorbing structure which is the part of the section in the power train
compartment. In this zone the main energy absorbing components are bumper
reinforcing beam, front upper and lower rail and also the other components
which are at the front side shown in the figure 1.3.2.
9
Figure 3.2.1: Secondary Crush Zone
Then after the primary zone there is a secondary crumple zone. In this zone
there is a structural interface between the absorber and the passenger compartment.
This zone is extended till the dash board of the passenger compartment shown in the
figure 1.3.3.
Requirement for the improvement of the crashworthiness:
For improved crashworthiness of the vehicle the structure should be such that the
Deceleration pulse generated by the deformation of the structural elements satisfies
the following requirements [4]
The structure of the passenger bus must be deformable with good stiffness
and also with crumple zones for absorbing the kinetic energy by plastic deformation
and also preventing the intrusion into the passenger compartment in offset crashes.
10
FACTORS INFLUENCING BUS BODY DESIGN.
1. Exterior / Aerodynamics.
This is a main factor while designing or building an automobile bus outer part.
Because the exterior design will also judge the look of the vehicle. If the exterior is
well designed according to the aerodynamic constraint then it will bear a sharp look
and style to the passengers. Most of the passengers will opt for good aesthetic look
bus.
2. Weight and Cost.
The bus body must be designed to such an extent that it should reduce the
overall weight of the vehicle. If there is as less weight as possible then the vehicle
should get good overall efficiency in all terms. The manufacturing cost should also be
reduced. By implementing new manufacturing methods there is a possibility to reduce
the cost of the vehicle even up to 7%. This will tend buyers to choose the smart as
well as cheaper model when compared to its competitors.
3. NVH & HVAC Factors.
While travelling in a cross country vehicle there exist some vibrations and
even in some buses they will provide with Air Conditioning system to have maximum
comfort for the passengers. Noise Vibration and Harshness (NVH) is a factor which
determines the amount of noise and vibration exist in the passenger compartment
and the total amount of vibration the vehicle experiences in its running time. If there
tends to exit less vibration and less noise, it will lead to increased passenger comfort.
Also in modern highway long route buses, they are providing with A/c system. This
has got a major share in the design department. If the total bus body is designed in
an optimum way, then the HVAC system will also be as simple as possible.
11
4. Layout and Ergonomics.
The bus body must be designed in such a way that it will increase the
ergonomics along with the drivers and the passengers. Ergonomic design means that
the passenger and the driver should not feel too much fatigue in their zones. The
driver must have full access control over all the parts and controls of the vehicle in
the dash board in front of him. The passenger must be provided with an
ergonomically designed seat which reduces travel stress to the passengers.
5. Ride and Handling.
To have an improved ride and handling of the vehicle, the overall bus design
must be optimized. This is possible only by obtaining good design layout and well-
engineered structure.
6. Structure and Reliability.
Structure of the vehicle must be as strong as possible. In a vehicles lifetime it
has to go under several uncommon circumstances or situations which may cause
failure of the structure. If failure occurs then it will lead to failure of the model and
there will be harm to the passengers or occupants inside the bus. When the total
structure fails then there also will exist reduced reliability.
7. Safety.
Safety is the main term in which many auto makers are targeting on. Every
passenger wants to have a safe journey and also there are many systems now being
adopted to improve safety condition not for passengers but also to the driver.
Literature Review
12
Introduction to Literature Review:
The research study in the frontal offset collision of a passenger bus is very rare,
but in full frontal collisions some people had been done the research. Some of the
literature related to the full frontal gives the details regarding the analysis which are
helpful in carrying out the project. In the following paragraphs some of the literatures
are to be studied with the relevance to the project.
Majunath Rao. T [4] had carried out frontal impact of a passenger bus. He had
chosen a KSRTC passenger bus for his analysis. The design details required for the
creation of geometric modeling was acquired from the KMS coach builders. Then for
creation of finite element model he used one of the good software called ANSA.
Through this software he created shell meshing throughout the bus body. Then to
reduce the element size and also computational time he has taken 1d elements
where there will be not much impact in the body i.e. first thirty percent of the body is
shell meshing and rest of the part is with 1d elements and with this fifty percent
reduction of the elements achieved thereby decreasing the computational time. But
the entire chassis part including the differential and also tire rim are considered as
shell meshing only as the weight of these parts will have the impact on the frontal
collision. In his literature survey he has found that the accidents in case bus to heavy
duty vehicle will happen at speed of 35 km/h. So the velocity he had taken was 30
km/h and collided with a rigid wall and termination time is taken as 2 sec. The
material properties that are assigned to the bus and also the rigid wall are
MAT_PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY (mat 24), MAT_ELASTICITY (mat 1). The
MAT 24 material was used because of the elasto-plasticity material with arbitrary
stress versus strain curve and arbitrary strain rate dependency. This material
primarily used for the bumper, fender and door panels. The
AUTOMATIC_SINGLE_SURFACE is the contact interface used between bus and the
rigid wall with the help one box as shown in the figure 3.1. After the analysis, it was
observed that the peak load occurred at 60 milli seconds.
13
Figure 3.1.1: Contact block and a finite element model [4]
The peak load observed at the 60 milli seconds is 16.6 * 105 kN which can be
observed in the figure 3.2. After this analysis crush initiators were used for reducing
the force and also to increase the deformation in the structure. There were several
crush initiators in which bead type crush initiator had been used as energy absorption
is high in this bead type than any other type crush initiators. The first peak load will be
155 kN in this bead type crush initiator and the amount of energy absorption is
11099J. From one of experiment it has been observed that the peak load of single
bead crush initiator is around 160 klN and peak load of three bead crush initiator is
150 kN and the crush initiator is uniform than the other designs and also it has been
observed that the 20 % of peak load is dropped in three bead design compared to
normal tube. So three bead design was chosen and modified the bus structure
according to that. This modification is done for the side structure beside the driver
cabin
14
Figure 3.1.2: Without and with with modification of the froce Vs time plot graph
From the figure 3.2 it has been observed that the peak load has been decreased of
20 percent after doing the design modifications in the bus structure.
Tomiji Sugimoto, et al. [5] has carried out the different offset crash tests for different
cars weighing 1200 kg, 1500 kg and 1800 kg. The velocity of the vehicle chosen is 55
km/h and 64 km/h for 50% offset condition and 40% offset condition respectively. The
various test configurations that are followed in different countries are show in the
figure 3.1.3.
15
Figure 3.1.3: Various test configurations and the regulations followed in
different countries
The tests were conducted on the car considering two situations i.e. single
vehicle collisions that means car with different mass with a rigid structure or a pole
and vehicle to vehicle collisions of same mass and also collisions of vehicles with
different mass and also it has been understood that full frontal rigid barrier collisions
seems to be very much helpful for the evaluation of life saving capabilities which
indeed reduces the injury of the driver and passengers in strong frontal impacts. [5]
The figure 3.4 shows the collision of a vehicle with different mass (1200 kg,
1500 kg and 1800kg) with a rigid wall at a velocity of 55 km/h and also shows the
energy absorption factor for the various parts. From the same figure 3.4 it is observed
that the vehicle with less mass has more energy absorption than the vehicle with
large mass, which means as the vehicle mass increases the stiffness increases. In
case of vehicle to vehicle offset collisions the regulatory body has implemented the
test conditions of vehicle colliding with a deformable rigid wall. The analysis was done
16
for the vehicle to vehicle collision with same mass and vehicle to deformable rigid
wall collision.
Figure 3.1.4: Vehicle with different mass colliding with a rigid wall and Energy
absorption of different parts of the vehicle
When the figure 3.5 (a, b) was observed it was understood that the energy absorption
is not equal in vehicle to vehicle collision of same mass and vehicle to deformable
rigid wall collision. In both the cases only 1500 kg mass has been considered. In case
of vehicle to vehicle collision the velocity is 56 km/h and it is a 50% offset position but
in vehicle to deformable rigid wall case it the velocity is 64 km/h and it is a 40% offset
position. The difference can be observed because in vehicle to vehicle collision both
vehicles are having same velocity and same mass. But in case of vehicle to
17
deformable rigid wall collision, the rigid wall will not have the same of another vehicle
and also the wall is fixed at one place and it is not a movable thing. So the energy
absorption is also different in both the cases. In first case both the vehicles are
travelling with same speed at the time of collision, so the velocity is doubled and in
second case the moving body is one vehicle and the other will be stationary, so the
velocity of the vehicle is more and the offset also different as in first case the curved
front structure is collided with the same kind of structure but in second case the
curved front structure is colliding with a flat surface. That is the reason why the offset
positions are different.
18

Figure 3.1.5 (a, b): Vehicle to vehicle collision with same mass and vehicle to
deformable rigid wall collision with energy absorption of various parts
19
The energy absorption in both the cases is almost equal. But in the analysis
of same test with different mass of the two vehicles and the results of vehicle to
deformable rigid wall is different, as rigid wall specifies the same mass of the vehicle
with which it is colliding.
In this paper they suggested that instead of colliding with a non-moving
deformable rigid wall, the vehicle is collided with the moving deformable rigid wall [5].
VINCZE-PAP Sndor and CSISZR Andrs [6] have carried out frontal impact test
using FEM simulation and comparing the simulation results with the physical test
carried out on a Hungarian Ikarus bus. The paper shows frontal impact test
arrangements of a 10 ton city bus with three different impact speeds and computer
simulation versions of these real tests.
Figure 3.1.6: Frontal impact of a bus shows more deformation on left side than
right side
It has been clearly explained about the importance of the under-structure
energy absorption during frontal bus impact. Although there were no design changes,
it was very much understood that there should be some good design for the structural
part of the bus. In this paper the amount of the energy for the impact is absorbed as
20
19kJ at low speed for a 10 ton bus and also the maximum deformation takes place in
the left side of the bus as shown in the figure 3.6. This is happening because of the
doors at that side.
This observation will remain same with most of the modern passenger bus
until and unless they provide a better structural design features in these areas. The
impact force distribution should also be noted, where the impact force distribution is
very high on the left side of the bus. According to the analysis which they have
carried out, the under-structure energy absorption is very important. It was also
observed that the floor deceleration is bit higher than with that of the prescribed
trolley deceleration by ECE R80. (Where ECE R80 prescribes 8-12 g of deceleration
for trolley at 30 km/h speed standardized impact)
Yoshiriro Sukegawa et al [7] have extensively worked on defining the crash
testing methods that has to be carried out on heavy duty vehicles. In their work they
have analyzed the crash survey reports from 9000 heavy vehicles (buses and trucks),
from which they have confirmed that more than 90% of the crashes occur at the
velocity of 35km/h for buses & 40km/h for trucks. It was also found from the analysis
of accident data that frontal impact against the other vehicle shows the highest rate.
In particular, head-on collisions are the highest for buses, while both rear-end and
head-on collisions account for the majority for trucks. With the analysis of various
accident statistics, they have formulated various guidelines for crash test of heavy
duty vehicles. Flat barrier impact is used for the frontal crash test, and the test speed
is set at 35 km/h for large buses and at 40 km/h for large trucks. They have also
carried out the crash test by following the newly formulated guidelines, from which the
results obtained were satisfactory with the actual data.
21
Summary of Literature Review:
It was understood from the review that the research on the bus structural
stability is very little.
The force developed in the full frontal collision can be reduced by using some
of the crush initiators. In this full frontal collision three beads (crush initiators) had
been applied and acquired the results with 10% reduction in force indeed reduced the
peak load too.
Major energy absorption has to take place at bumpers and minor energy
absorption is to be taken place in the side structures with include of crush initiators.
Energy absorption is more at the door in a bus. So at this place a better
structural design is required.
From the literature it was understood the regulatory bodies conducts offset test
with 56 km/hr in vehicle to vehicle collisions and 64 km/h in vehicle to rigid wall
collisions.
The vehicle to vehicle collisions and vehicle to deformable barrier collisions will
not give the same results. As deformable barrier take the same mass of the vehicle,
so it is difficult to conduct tests when mass of the two vehicles are different.
22
Problem Statement
Introduction to the Problem
In the automotive industry importance is given to the safety of the car than the
safety of the passenger bus. As studied in the various news papers and also some
literature surveys states that the collision is in between the passenger bus and some
other vehicle (it can same bus or truck too). When the collision is happened first
person who is injured severely than the other persons or passengers are drivers of
the passenger bus. So a study in this frontal offset collision is to be carried out.
In India for a public transport buses are used most than any other vehicles. These
most of the buses are owned by the state road transport corporations. The safety in
these buses is not bothered by the state road transport corporations; as such the
accidents for these buses are increasing day by day. So for the project a bus has
been chosen from one of the state road transport corporation. A 54 seater bus from
the NEKRTC is taken.
Problem Statement:
To analyze the structural behavior of a passenger bus in frontal offset collision
i.e. 50% offset and 30% offset with another bus and also with rigid wall in order to
look at the safety of a driver.
Project Objectives:
To review the literature of a passenger bus for modelling according to the
design specifications and also material properties with loads and boundary conditions
To carry out bus to bus frontal 50 percent offset crash analysis for a passenger
bus by simulation.
To carry out the same offset crash analysis for a passenger bus considering
30 percent offset.
23
To carry out the bus to rigid wall frontal offset crash analysis for the same
passenger bus
To analyze the deformation of the bus structure at the time of crash in the
simulation with a constant velocity
METHODLOGY
Literature review on crashworthiness of bus will be carried out by referring
reviewed books, journals and related documents.
Geometric modeling of the bus structure will be carried out by using design
Software like CATIA V5 R18/ Pro-E Wildfire.
FE model generation for all parts will be carried out using Hypermesh.
Input deck for simulation will be created using Hypermesh.
Frontal impact simulation will be carried out using LS-DYNA and post
processing will be carried out using LS-DYNA POST.
Investigation of the analysis result in order to improve crashworthiness.
MODELING.
CATIA (Computer Aided Three-dimensional Interactive Application) is a
multi-platform CAD/CAM/CAE commercial software suite developed by the French
company Dassault Systems and marketed worldwide by IBM. Written in the C++
programming language, CATIA is the cornerstone of the Dassault Systems product
lifecycle management software suite.
The software was created in the late 1970s and early 1980s to develop
Dassault's Mirage fighter jet, and then was adopted in the aerospace, automotive,
shipbuilding, and other industries. CATIA competes in the CAD/CAM/CAE market
with Siemens NX, Pro/ENGINEER, SolidWorks, Autodesk Inventor and Solid Edge.
24
Commonly referred to as 3D Product Lifecycle Management software
suite, CATIA supports multiple stages of product development (CAX), from
conceptualization, design (CAD), manufacturing (CAM), and engineering (CAE).
CATIA can be customized via application programming interfaces (API). V4 can be
adapted in the FORTRAN and C programming languages under an API called CAA.
V5 can be adapted via the Visual Basic and C++ programming languages, an API
called CAA2 or CAA V5 that is a component object model (COM)-like interface.
Although later versions of CATIA V4 implemented NURBS, V4 principally used
piecewise polynomial surfaces. CATIA V4 uses a non-manifold solid engine.
Catia V5 features a parametric solid/surface-based package which uses
NURBS as the core surface representation and has several workbenches that
provide KBE support.V5 can work with other applications, including Enovia,
Smarteam, and various CAE Analysis applications.
For designing this model, the reference diagram was collected from PEETEE
COACH BUILDERS Pvt Ltd, KARUR. All the structural details were as per the 2D
drawings provided by them. There are six kits that have been modeled for their
analysis.
Front and Rear kits.
Left & Right side kits.
Roof & Floor kits.
Chassis kit.
The developed kits have to be analyzed for crash investigation. It has to be
carried out using two software. The designed model has to be converted to a FEA
model. This is done with the help of HPERMESH software.
Altair Hyper Mesh is a high-performance finite element pre-processor that
provides a highly interactive and visual environment to analyze product design
performance.
With the broadest set of direct interfaces to commercial CAD and CAE
25
systems, Hyper Mesh provides a proven, consistent analysis platform for the entire
enterprise.
A Powerful FEA Modeling Solution for the Enterprise
With the broadest set of direct CAD and CAE interfaces and the ability to define
custom integrations, Hyper Mesh works seamlessly within any engineering
environment.
Hyper Mesh provides a robust, common FEA modeling framework across the
corporation - minimizing niche modeling tool investments and training costs.
High-speed, High-quality Meshing
With automatic and semi-automatic shell, tetra, and hexa meshing capabilities,
Hyper Mesh simplifies the modeling process of complex geometries.
Increase End-user Efficiency with Batch Meshing and Automated Model
Assembly
Batch Mesher technology eliminates the need to perform manual geometry
cleanup and meshing thus accelerating the model development process.
Highly automated methods for rapid model assembly including the assignment and
management of connections such as bolts, spot welds, adhesives and seam welds.
Interactive Feature and Volume-based Morphing for Geometric Shape Changes
and Design Variable Definition
A flexible set of morphing tools allows users to modify legacy meshes without
re-meshing to automate the investigation new design proposals.
Close the Loop between CAD and FEA
26
Generate 3D CAD geometries from finite element models to communicate
design direction to design and engineering teams.
This meshed model has to be crash tested in a pre-processor platform. Here
the chosen software is LS-DYNA.
Geometric Modelling and Generation of F.E Model
Introduction to Geometric Modelling
Geometric modeling is to be done for the construction of finite element model
for doing a crash simulation. The solid modelling was done for the bus shown in the
figure 3.2. The figure 3.2.6 shows the structural part of bus when it is manufacturing.
After which the mid-surfaces of these solid sections were extracted and important
geometric features of the bus can be defined with thickness, which makes the way for
shell meshing for creating the FE model.
Figure 3.2.1: 3D FLOOR CAD
27
28

3D FLOOR CAD
29
Figure 3.2.2: ROOF KIT
30
Figure 3.2.3: LEFT SIDE KIT
31
Figure 3.2.4: RIGHT SIDE KIT
32
33

Figure 3.2.5: FRONT STRUCTURE
34
Figure 3.2.6: 3D ISOMETRIC BUS CAD
Figure 3.2.7: 3D EXPLODED ISOMETRIC BUS CAD
35
Most of the body members are rectangular cross sections as shown in the figure 5.2
shows the geometric model of a passenger bus. The generation of the model is done
by using the data from Leyland coach builders. Parts that are not directly related to
the frontal offset impact or the parts that are not having much significance on the
analysis have not been considered. All the systems like engine, radiator,
transmission, differential, tires are discarded and added mass in their respective
places.
Generation of Finite Element Model:
The generation of finite element model for the bus was carried out by using the
Hypermesh 12.0. The shell meshing is done for the first 30% of the model which will
have an impact and rest which doesn't have much impact is meshed with 1d
elements for reducing the computational time.
The contact surface was given to all the parts of the bus and also sub-systems. The
type of contact given is node to node type of contact. For the other parts the rigid
contact has been assigned by using 1D rigid element. As already said all sub-
36
systems have been removed and placed a mass element in their respective places of
those sub-systems is observed in the figure 3.3.1
Figure 3.3.1: Mass and Rigid Elements placed at their respective places of sub-
systems
The figure 3.3.2 shows the finite element model of the passenger bus with all
discarded subsystems.
Figure 3.3.2: A Finite Element Model of a Passenger Bus
37
Figure 3.3.3: A Meshing View assembly of a Passenger Bus
Figure 3.3.4: Two buses with necessary boundary conditions
3.4.1 Boundary Conditions and other inputs:
After creating the finite element model then pre-processing work should be
carried out for running the analysis using the LS-DYNA. Some of the inputs should be
provided for running the analysis; they are termination time and velocity of the bus.
38
The velocity input is given to the single bus by using
INITIAL_VELOCITY_GENERATION card and another bus or a rigid wall is kept as
stationary and fixed with constraints. The termination time is given as 1.5 sec and the
velocity given is 60 km/h. For maintaining the contact interface between the two
buses in 50% and 30% offset collisions and also bus to rigid wall 50% offset collision
the contact interface should be given. In this process the contact interface chosen for
solving this problem is CONTACT_AUTOMATIC_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE has
been given and made two contact blocks for both the buses and specified as moving
bus as a master box and non- moving or stationary bus as a slave box. The figure 5.5
shows two buses which are in position with all necessary boundary conditions for
running an analysis. [8]
3.4.2 Material properties:
After providing the necessary boundary conditions for the simulation then next
objective in pre-processing is providing the material properties for all bus
components. The material which has to behave according to their properties in the
LS-DYNA analysis is to be assigned in pre-processing itself. As LS-DYNA recognizes
the materials and solve the problem according to the behaviour of the material which
is assigned to the components. There are numerous material cards available in the
LS-DYNA software which is used to define the behaviour of the various materials. [8]
The MAT_PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITY (MAT 24) is the one type of material
which is assigned for some of the bus components. This is Elasto-plastic material
with an arbitrary stress versus strain curve and arbitrary strain rate dependency.
There eight stress-strain points defined for this material for the relation of stress-
strain. The failures based on the plastic strain or minimum time step size can be
defined with these material models. Normally this material is defined for front bumper,
door panels and fender for the FE model of a car.
3.4.3 Simulation Inputs given:
39
S. No. Parameters Units
1 Mass 13 tones
2 Time 0.15 sec
3 Velocity at 60 km/h 16666.66 mm/sec
4 Acceleration due to gravity 9.81e+03 mm/sec
5 Force 8.33e+03 mm/sec
6 Length millimeter (mm)
Frontal Impact Calculations:
Forces in Vehicle crash:
Initial Kinetic Energy = mv
2
Engine Load = 50kg (approx.)
Roof load = 1000kg (approx.)
Driver load = 65kg (approx.)
Passenger load = 60kg (approx.)
Total passenger load = 65 60 =3900kg.
Weight of the passenger bus = 10 tons
= 10 10
3
kg
Velocity = 60 1000 3600 = 16.67 m/s
Mass =
g
w
40
=
81 . 9
10 13
3


= 1325.17 kg

Initial K.E =
2
67 . 16 17 . 1325
2

=184125.01
2
2
1
v m d F
avg

Where d is the bus impact we set as 1 metre,
d
v m
F
avg
2
2
1




1
01 . 184125


N 01 . 184125
Bus frontal impact on the rigid wall,
Rate of deceleration :-

d
v
a
2
2

where,
a = rate of deceleration
v = the velocity with point of impact foot =
s m 1
d = deceleration distance foot = 1m
41
) 1 ( 2
67 . 16
2
a

=138.94
2
s m
Time taken to impact on the speed.

g
s
t
2




81 . 9
1 2

s 45 . 0
By using Kinetic Energy Equivalent speed,
KEES =
( )
1
]
1

,
_


+
,
_



,
_

3600
1000
3600
1000
1
81 . 9
5 . 0
30
IS IS P
VW IW
I
W
Energy
maximum damage
=

,
_

,
_

,
_

,
_

81 . 9 81 . 9
81 . 9 81 . 9
5 . 0
vehicle impact
vehicle impact
weight weight
speed
weight weight
Speed
(mpa) =
eight objectivew
Energy ge maimumdama 30
I
w
= Impact for weight
I
is
= Impact for impact speed
V
w
= Vehicle weight
P
is
= Post impact speed
42
Vehicle weight = 10 x 10
3
kg
Impact for weight = V
weight
x Velocity
=
3600
1000 72
10000

= 200000 kg-m/sec.
Impactor Impact speed
=
3600
2 1000 72
= 40 m/s.
Post Impact speed =
) ( 2
2
d
V
d = reverse foot of the vehicle assume (1m)

=
( ) 1 2
67 . 16
2

= 138.94 m/s
2
Energy
maximum damage
=

,
_

,
_

,
_

,
_

81 . 9 81 . 9
81 . 9 81 . 9
5 . 0
vehicle impact
vehicle impact
weight weight
speed
weight weight
43

,
_

,
_

,
_

81 . 9
10000
81 . 9
20000
2
81 . 9
10000
81 . 9
20000
5 . 0
= 1.33 m/s.
Speed of Impact =

,
_

eight Objectivew
imum Energy max
30
=
10000
33 . 1
30
= 0.0632 m/s
=
1000
3600
0632 . 0
= 0.22 kph.
KEES Calculation:
KEES =
( )
1
1
]
1

,
_

,
_

,
_

2 2
3600
1000
3600
1000
1
81 . 9
5 . 0
30
IS IS P
VW IW
I
W
= ( ) ( )( ) [ ]
2 2
2 10000 12000 4 12000
81 . 9
5 . 0
30 +

,
_

= 88000 98 . 293577

= 453.40 mm/sec.
44
Problem Solving
4.1 Introduction:
When solving this problem three different offset collisions are considered and
have to study these three different offset collisions with the behaviour of the
passenger bus structure. The distance between the two buses is taken as 20 mm.
Because of this very little distance between the buses the computational time will be
very less. The distance between them is same for all the three collisions. The figure
6.1 shows a top view of two buses which are in 50% offset position for the collision
and single bus running with a velocity of 60 km/h and figure 5.2 shows bus with rigid
wall in 50% offset position and is about the simulate the real collision and the bus is
running with same velocity. The figure 5.3 shows the bus to bus collision with 30%
offset position and one bus running with same velocity and the other is stationary with
fixed constraints.
45
Figure 5. 1: 50% offset bus to bus collision
.
Figure 5. 2: 50% offset bus to rigid wall collision
46
Figure 5. 3: 30% offset bus to bus collision
Results and Discussion
Simulation results of bus to rigid wall collision:
The simulation results of bus to rigid wall with 50% offset collision can be
observed in the below figure 4.1. These results are obtained from LS-POST (post-
processing tool of LS-DYNA). The behaviour of the bus structure with respect to time
is also observed.
47
Figure 4. 1: Post-processing results of bus to rigid wall 50% offset collision
Discussion on the graph plots of bus to rigid wall collision:
48
Figure 4. 2: Force vs. time plot of bus to rigid wall collision
The figure 4.2 shows the graph of force vs. time. As from the observation it
is noticed that there is peak force due to peak load at 30 milliseconds and the force at
this point is 6.14E6 kN and then it has fallen down immediately. This kind of
fluctuation is happened because of the bus chassis and also chassis supporter which
in between chassis and bumper. This supporter is in between the chassis
perpendicularly and attached to the bumper. The chassis is came in contact with the
rigid wall at 20 milliseconds and started bending at 30 milliseconds and after bending
started then immediately the force has fallen. Then at 90 milliseconds also it showed
short increase in force, this is because of the entire bus where it started turning
towards left side as only right side having a rigid wall. This force is started increasing
from 70 milliseconds only. After 90 milliseconds the force has dropped and then went
on. By this time the bus turned much. From the figure 7.3 it is observed that how the
kinetic energy is dropping and how the internal energy is increasing with respect to
time. As already said the chassis is started bending at 30 milliseconds, so the kinetic
energy is slightly increased at this point and then dropped down. This fluctuation is
happened because of the stiffness of the chassis and once the chassis started
bending then immediately the force as well as the kinetic energy is falling down.
49
Figure 4. 3: Energy plot vs. Time for bus to rigid wall collision
The kinetic energy started at 1.85 E+9 J and ended at 0.78 E+9 J. From the same
figure it is observed that the internal energy is increasing from 0 to 1.08 (E+9) N-mm.
The internal energy is proportional to the deceleration of the bus. If the deceleration
of the passenger bus becomes slower then the internal energy increases more in this
stipulated time. The deceleration will become slower when there is more energy
absorption in the bus structure.
Figure 4. 4: Velocity vs. Time
50
From the figure 4.4 it is observed that the velocity of the vehicle is very initially
and then decreased. The velocity starting with 14.65 E+3 mm/sec then at 20
milliseconds the velocity is falling very fast as because the bus chassis is touching at
this time only. This dropping of velocity can be observed till 35 milliseconds then as
already the bending started in chassis so the velocity is not decreasing abruptly. At
40 milliseconds the velocity is 9.43 E+3 mm/sec and at end of termination time the
velocity is 7.98 E+3 mm/sec. By this it is understood that the velocity is decreasing
very slowly after 40 milliseconds. As after 40 milliseconds only the bus body is
started moving slightly towards the left side.

Figure 4. 5 (a, b) : Deceleration vs. Time for bus to rigid wall collision
The above figure 4.5 is the deceleration vs. time graph of the bus to rigid wall
collision. The figure 4.5 (a) locates the nodes position on the bus i.e. these both
nodes are at the driver cabin, one is at the side structure and another is at the sitting
position of the driver. From the figure 4.5 (b) it is observed that exactly at 20
milliseconds the deceleration suddenly increases, that is due to the chassis hitting
the rigid wall and this can be observed from the figure 4.1 at different milliseconds.
After bending started in the chassis at 30 milliseconds then immediately the
deceleration decreases and after some fluctuations finally at termination the
deceleration becomes zero. The bending point starts after 20 milliseconds.
51
After the tests, numerical models and analytical calculus are developed. Both
processes presented here are fundamental for the full bus model. Detailed analytical
calculus and information on the finite element model (as the imperfections used to
start the buckling or the curve tension versus de- Formation of the material) can be
found in Reference [7]. In table 1, the results are shown and the efficiency of the
method is proved for this case. In fig. 2 the final configuration of the samples in the
tests and in the FEM model are shown, allowing to conclude that the same collapse
configurations for them are obtained.
52