Thin–Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Crashworthiness of circular fiber reinforced plastic tubes filled with

composite skeletons/aluminum foam under drop-weight impact loading
Haiyang Yang a, b, Hongshuai Lei a, *, Guoxing Lu b, **
a
Beijing Key Laboratory of Lightweight Multi-functional Composite Materials and Structures, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, 100081, PR China
b
Faculty of Science, Engineering and Technology, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Vic, 3122, Australia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) and glass fiber reinforced plastic (GFRP) have shown great promise in the
FRP tubes design of light-weight thin-walled energy absorbers. Herein, circular CFRP/GFRP hybrid tubes and tubes,
Crashworthiness reinforced with internal composite skeletons (XS and OS), were fabricated to further enhance the energy ab­
Drop-weight impact
sorption capacities. The crashworthiness and failure pattern of reinforced structures were compared with the
Thin-walled energy absorbers
Failure mechanism
hollow and aluminum foam-filled composite tubes. Moreover, low-velocity drop-weight impact tests were carried
out to investigate the effect of hybridization design and filler types on the energy dissipation mechanism under
axial compression. The experimental results revealed that the hollow composite tubes collapsed in progressive
and the impact energy was absorbed by the generation of cracks, fiber fracture and friction. Also, the GFRP tubes
exhibited better crashworthiness than CFRP tubes under low velocity impact, which was different from the quasi-
static compression conditions. In contrast to hollow counterparts, the mean crushing force (MCF) of foam-filled
tubes was improved by approximately 40%, whereas the specific energy absorption (SEA) was reduced by 30%
due to the low weight efficiency of the aluminum foam. The filling of XS-skeleton divided the tube into four cells
and improved the MCF by more than 10%. However, it reduced the SEA by around 8% due to unstable and
inefficient deformation of XS-skeleton during crushing. By contrast, the OS-skeleton divided the hollow tube into
more cells and collapsed progressively, resulting in superior energy absorption characteristics. Herein, the OS-
filled GFRP tube was found to be the most crashworthy structure that improved the crushing force efficiency
(CFE) and SEA by 50% and 7%, respectively.

1. Introduction deformation of metallic components mainly dissipates the energy.

Fatal crash accidents have been recognized as the top killer for
people with enormous economic losses each year. Therefore, the
crashworthy design has gained significant attention due to the growing
number of vehicles. The crashworthiness of thin-walled energy
absorbing structures becomes a major safety criterion for the automobile
and aircraft industry. Such energy absorbing structures need to absorb a
large amount of kinetic energy in a controlled and irreversible manner to
protect occupants or passengers from severe injuries during crash [1,2].
There are several methods to enhance the crashworthiness, which are
mainly related to the material selection and structural design [3,4].
In practical applications, steel and aluminum are widely employed
for the fabrication of thin-walled energy absorbers due to their excellent
mechanical properties and cost-effectiveness, where the plastic
Hence, the metallic structures with a multi-cell configuration render
superior energy absorption properties due to severe plastic deformation
at the near-corner zones [4–7]. For instance, Wu et al. [8] carried out
experimental and numerical sturdies to investigate the crushing
behavior of proposed multi-cell tubes. The results revealed that the
crashworthiness characteristics increased with increasing number of
cells in a multi-cell structure. Moreover, Li et al. [9] proposed novel
circumferentially-corrugated multi-cell square tubes to further enhance
the energy absorption capacity. Besides, the dynamic loading conditions
may increase the crushing force compared to the quasi-static conditions,
which is closely associated with the strain rate sensitivity of the metallic
components [10].
Furthermore, the newly introduced vehicles are designed to be light-
weight to lower fuel consumption and environmental pollution.

* Corresponding author.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: leihongshuai@pku.edu.cn (H. Lei), glu@swin.edu.au (G. Lu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2020.107380
Received 23 September 2020; Received in revised form 28 November 2020; Accepted 4 December 2020
Available online 16 December 2020
0263-8231/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H. Yang et al.
Therefore, fiber reinforced plastics (FRP) have gained increasing popu­
larity due to their excellent strength-to-weight ratio, which are desirable
substitutions for conventional metallic materials. The most popular
composites for commercial applications are carbon fiber reinforced
plastics (CFRP) and glass fiber reinforced plastics (GFRP). Unlike the
plastic deformation of metallic components, the energy dissipation
mechanism of FRP-based components is dominated by the fiber fracture,
initiation and propagation of intra-/inter-laminar cracks and friction
[11]. Zhu et al. [12] established a numerical simulation model for
square CFRP tubes and validated the theoretically predicted results by
quasi-static crushing experiment. Then, they evaluated the crashwor­
thiness characteristics of tubes with different sectional profiles and
demonstrated that the circular tube was preferable for energy absorber
design. In addition, the loading rate may render significant influence on
crushing behavior and energy absorption mechanisms of FRP
thin-walled structures. Zhang et al. [13] experimentally study the tensile
behavior of weave CFRP laminates under different stain rates. They
found that the strain rate dependency became evident when the strain
rate was over 30 s− 1. Ataabadi et al. [14] conducted a comparative study
on circular CFRP tubes under quasi-static and dynamic loadings. The
experimental results indicated that the stacking sequence and loading
rate rendered a minor effect on specific energy absorption. However,
Wang et al. [15] demonstrated that the crushing speed had a significant
influence on failure pattern and crashworthiness of circular CFRP tubes.
Also, the specific energy absorption under impact loading was much
lower than the quasi-static compression. Hence, the crushing response of
FRP thin-walled structures were explored by drop-weight impact tests in
this study, providing more realistic meanings for energy absorber
design.
A large number of studies have been carried out to further enhance
the crashworthiness of hollow thin-walled FRP structures, which could
mainly be categorized as: (i) filling the cellular material, i.e., honeycomb
or foam [16–21], (ii) reinforcement of multi-cell structure by internal
stiffener [22–24], (iii) FRP/metal hybrid design of tube-walls [25–29],
(iv) utilization of triggering system [30–33] and (v) adjusting the di­
mensions or fiber orientations to alter the stacking sequence [34–37].
Filling the cellular material, such as metallic honeycomb structures,
foams or polymeric foams, is proved to be an effective technique to
enhance the energy absorption capacity without increasing much
weight. Nevertheless, the application of cellular materials may lower the
weight efficiency, leading to undesirable specific energy absorption
(SEA) compared with hollow FRP thin-walled structures. On the other
hand, the tubes, reinforced with internal stiffener, exhibited superior
energy absorption capacity and better light-weight performance. The
given structure can have multiple cell configurations due to the filling of
an internal stiffener. For most of the corresponding studies, the internal
stiffener was made of metallic materials due to their excellent machin­
ability. The anisotropic properties and brittle nature of FRP materials
raise manufacturing and analysis challenges, limiting the utilization of
complex-shaped FRP energy absorbers.
Moreover, the FRP/metal hybrid design is favored to maximize the
crashworthy performance, originating from the synergistic influence of
ductile metal and brittle FRP laminates. It is acknowledged that the
GFRP has better ductility and lower cost than the CFRP [38,39]. Similar
to the FRP/metal hybrid structure, the hybridization of these two FRP
materials may present new features in crushing behavior during the
collapse. Therefore, in the current study, the CFRP/GFRP hybrid tubes,
filled with a single reinforcement (aluminum foam or composite skel­
eton), were proposed and evaluated to demonstrate their potential in
light-weight energy absorbers.
Herein, hollow circular FRP tubes were internally reinforced by
composite skeletons/aluminum foam to further enhance the energy
absorption characteristics. One end of each tube was chamfered to
trigger progressive failure and lower peak crushing force under low
velocity impact. By inserting composite skeletons, the reinforced struc­
ture exhibited a multi-cell cross-section, which is determined by the
2
Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380
configurations of skeletons. The drop-weight axial impact tests were
carried out for various FRP tubes combined with different re­
inforcements. Hollow FRP tubes were also tested for comparison rea­
sons. Then, the crashworthiness parameters were calculated from the
load-displacement curves, recorded by the drop-weight impact system.
Finally, the influence of hybridization design and filler-type on crushing
behavior and energy absorption mechanism was comprehensively
investigated and discussed.
2. Architectural design and crashworthiness assessment
2.1. Reinforced design of composite tubes
The designs of FRP thin-walled structures focus on enhancing the
crashworthy performance without reducing the weight efficiency during
energy absorption. Based on the published literature, several rein­
forcement designs of composite tubes were presented in Fig. 1. For
hollow tubes, the hybridization design of the tube wall could acquire
excellent crashworthiness due to the desired interaction between
different components (Fig. 1(a)). For example, the metal component
would fold both outwards and inwards due to the formation of ductile
hinges. The movement of metal component would be constrained due to
the combined composite component. Such strong interaction between
various components would be beneficial for the energy absorption ca­
pacity. Nevertheless, the hybrid structures were mainly made from
brittle CFRP composites and ductile metals. The crushing response of
hybrid structures, based on various FRP materials, has been rarely re­
ported. Compared with CFRP, the GFRP materials render better ductility
and lower cost. In addition, some studies revealed that the GFRP-based
components exhibited better crashworthiness and impact resistance
than CFRP-based components. Chen et al. [39] studied the low velocity
impact behavior of hybrid composite laminates made from CFRP, GFRP
or basalt fibers. They found that the CFRP layers exhibited relatively
poor impact resistance due to the brittle nature of carbon fibers. More­
over, glass reinforced aluminum laminates have been widely applied in
aircraft, which was known as GLARE. Compared to aramid (Arall) or
carbon (Carall) reinforced aluminum laminate, the GLARE exhibited
higher energy absorption, smaller damage width and lower permanent
deflection under impact [40]. For this reason, hybrid CF/GF tubes,
consisting of both CFRP and GFRP layers, were proposed in the pre­
sented study. One should note that the CF and GF are the abbreviations
for CFRP and GFRP, respectively.
Moreover, the energy absorption characteristics can also be
improved by filling the reinforcements inside the structure, such as
cellular materials or stiffener. The energy absorption of reinforced
structures can exceed the sum of individual components through proper
structural design and material selection [16–19,22,23]. For instance,
aluminum foam (Fig. 1(b)) is widely used as a cellular material in the
field of energy absorption due to its light-weight, high-porosity and
stable deformation pattern [41]. In the case of stiffener, the
cross-sectional configurations play a significant role in crushing
Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of the reinforced designs for FRP thin-walled
structures: (a) tube-wall hybrid design; (b) foam-filled tube; (c) double-cell
configuration by inserting an internal tube; (d) multi-cell design by inserting
XS-skeleton; (e) multi-cell design by inserting OS-skeleton.
H. Yang et al.
behavior and energy absorption mechanism. The stiffener was generally
made of metals due to their excellent machinability. Several studies have
managed to employ composite stiffeners to acquire better specific en­
ergy absorption capacity. For instance, Sun et al. [42] proposed a novel
sandwich structure, comprised of two FRP tubes and aluminum foam, to
obtain better energy absorption capacities. The proposed structure could
also be regarded as a double-cell structure (Fig. 1(c)). Zhu et al. [23]
investigated the crashworthiness of aluminum tubes, filled with X-shape
CFRP skeletons (Fig. 1(d)) and separate aluminum foams. The results
revealed that the strong interaction among different components
rendered maximum contribution to the growth of crashworthiness.
Inspired from the multi-cell designs, two configurations of composite
skeletons were proposed in the current study, i.e., crisscross skeleton
(XS) and cross-rib with an inner circle (OS), as shown in Fig. 1(d) and
(e), respectively. It can be seen that the XS- and OS-skeleton divide the
empty tube into four and five cells, respectively. Besides, the composite
skeletons were integrally fabricated through proper design of the molds.
The discontinuity inside the FRP products should be avoided to ensure
the stable deformation of overall structure during compression.
2.2. Crashworthiness parameters
The main goal of the proposed thin-walled structures is to dissipate
the kinetic energy and protect the occupants or goods during impact.
Several assessment parameters are defined and commonly used in the
crashworthy design, which can be calculated from the force-
displacement curves recorded by the drop weight system. The peak
crushing force (PCF) is defined as the maximum load during crushing,
which must be low enough to avoid severe damage. The mean crushing
force (MCF) is considered as the average load during crushing, which
can be given as
∫x=l
1
MCF = F(x)dx (1)
l First, the FRP prepregs were cut into desired dimensions based on the
x=0
where F(x) represents the crushing load and l refers to the effective
crushing distance. The effective crushing distance is not a fixed value
and determined by the length of damaged part after drop weight impact.
Therefore, the effective crushing distance need to be quantitatively
determined to calculate the crashworthiness parameters. In this study,
the effective crushing distance corresponds to the displacement when
the load equals the value of PCF at the end of crushing. For tubes without
distinct densification stage, the inflection point at the end of load-
displacement curve was used to determine the effective crushing dis­
tance, where the load began to rapidly drop to zero.
The energy absorption (EA) represents the total energy absorbed
during the crushing process, which can be calculated by integrating the
area under the force-displacement curve. One should note that the value
of EA is equal to the product of MCF times the effective crushing dis­
tance. Thus, the magnitude of MCF represents the capacity of total en­
ergy absorption to a great extent. Hence, the energy absorption can be
given as:
∫x=l
EA = F(x)dx = MCF*l (2)
x=0
The crushing force efficiency (CFE) represents the ratio of MCF and
PCF. For the design of energy absorbers, the value of MCF should be as
high as possible contrary to PCF. A high value of CFE indicates that the
proposed structure can absorb a large amount of impact energy while
minimizing the deceleration injuries on the human body. The crushing
force efficiency can be given as:
CFE = MCF/PCF (3)
The specific energy absorption (SEA) refers to the energy absorption
3
Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380
capacity per unit mass, which is one of the most critical criteria in light-
weight designs. Unlike the quasi-static compression tests, the effective
crushing distance varies for different specimens under the same impact
condition. For specimens with various energy absorption capacity, only
the mass crushed part that participated in the energy absorption process
was used to calculate the SEA and it is given as:
m = M*l/H (4)
where M refers to the total mass of each specimen and H corresponds to
the height of the thin-walled structure before crushing, which is 80 mm
for all tube specimens in the present study.
The SEA is evaluated as the ratio of EA to the mass of damaged part,
which can be given as:
SEA = EA/m (5)
3. Fabrication and characterization
3.1. Fabrication of hollow FRP tubes and composite skeletons
The circular tubes and skeletons were made from the CFRP (W-3011,
plain woven fabric, 0◦ /90◦ ) and GFRP (W-9011, plain woven fabric, 0◦ /
90◦ ) prepregs, which were pre-impregnated with 6508 Epoxy (Weihai
Guangwei Composites industry, China). The plain-woven fabric was
fabricated by interlacing the warp (0◦ ) fibers and weft (90◦ ) fibers,
resulting in a symmetric pattern and similar mechanical properties
along different fiber orientations (0◦ and 90◦ ) for each layer. The hollow
tubes were fabricated by a vacuum bag molding process, which can
make use of pressure to evacuate air bubbles during curing. This, in turn,
resulted in a lower void content in FRP products and rendered superior
mechanical properties. To compare the energy absorption characteris­
tics of various thin-walled specimens, the inner diameter and height of
hollow circular tubes were set at 40 mm and 80 mm, respectively. A
schematic illustration of the fabrication process was shown in Fig. 2.
lay-up design. Then, the FRP laminate was wound on a metal mandrel
and placed inside a vacuum bag. Note that the outer diameter of the
metal mandrel dictates the inner diameter of the tube (40 mm). The
external atmospheric pressure exerted a force on the vacuum bag and
compacted the FRP laminates subsequently. After curing in an oven at
398 K for 1.5 h, the hollow FRP tubes were obtained by removing the
metal mandrel. The fabrication process of composite skeletons was
similar to the hollow tubes. Two sets of molds were designed, as shown
in Fig. 2(b) and (c), which could be assembled after placing FRP lami­
nates. The layer-up design and geometric dimensions of the outer tubes
and skeletons were illustrated in Fig. 3. Note that the composite skele­
tons were freely inserted inside the tubes without gluing or other
joining, due to the limited contact surfaces. To enhance the interaction
effect, there was no gap between the tube wall and the edges of com­
posite skeletons. Besides, the ply orientations of each FRP component
were [0◦ /90◦ ]n to minimize the influence of fiber orientation on energy
absorption, where n denotes the number of FRP layers.
The circular tubes and composite skeletons were cut into the desired
height (80 mm) by lathe machining. The feed rate should be small to
avoid the fracture of brittle FRP laminates. A 45◦ chamfer was applied
on one end of each tube to reduce the peak crushing force and trigger the
progressive deformation of FRP tubes [3]. Different types of specimens,
consisting of various outer FRP tubes and reinforcements, were illus­
trated in Fig. 4. Prior to the impact experiment, the weight of each
component was recorded and used to calculate the crashworthiness
characteristics (section 2.2). The details of tubes and reinforcements
were summarized in Table 1, where CF and GF represent carbon fiber
and glass fiber reinforced plastics, respectively.
H. Yang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380

Fig. 2. Schematic illustration of mold designs for the fabrication of hollow tubes and composite skeletons: (a) Circular FRP tubes; (b) XS-skeleton; and (c)
OS-skeleton.

Fig. 4. The specimens for axial drop weight impact tests.

Fig. 3. Lay-up design and cross-sectional configurations: (a) outer FRP tubes
and (b) composite skeletons.
3.2. Drop-weight impact test
Axial impact tests were carried out by the JLY-6500 drop weight
impact system (Fig. 5). A cylindrical steel hammer, with a diameter of
100 mm, was used as the punch head, which has a much larger cross-
section than the tube specimen. The maximum impact energy of the
given system was 6500 J, which can be adjusted by tuning the dropping
mass and height. Considering the energy absorption ability of the
designed specimens, the dropping mass and height of the impactor were
set as 200 kg and 1.0 m, respectively. The theoretical impact velocity
should be 4.47 m/s by calculation, however, the measured impact ve­
locity was found to be 3.5 m/s due to the friction between hammer and
guide rails. The tube specimens were placed freely at the center of steel
support without clamping or gluing. Three identical tests were per­
formed to guarantee the accuracy and repeatability of the experimental
results. Furthermore, the load-displacement curves recorded by the
impact system were filtered by LOWESS signal processing technique to
remove noise. The filter coefficient was set as 0.1 to eliminate extremely
small fluctuations. The filtered curves were able to not only capture the
major trend of the data, but also facilitate the calculation and analysis of
crashworthiness parameters.
3.3. Material characterization
Quasi-static tensile and shear tests were carried out to acquire the

4
H. Yang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380

Table 1
Details of components for drop weight impact test.
Component Specimen Thickness (mm) Diameter (mm) Height (mm) Weight (g) Density (g/cm3) Stacking Sequence

Empty tube CF 1.90 40 80 27.62 1.45 [CF]8

GF 2.20 40 80 40.23 1.82 [GF]8
C4G4 2.05 40 80 32.56 1.58 [CF4GF4]
G4C4 2.05 40 80 33.25 1.61 [GF4CF4]
Reinforcement CF-XS 0.95 – 80 7.79 1.33 [CF]4
CF-OS 0.95 – 80 9.84 1.48 [CF]4
GF-XS 1.10 – 80 11.12 1.64 [GF]4
GF-OS 1.10 – 80 13.84 1.68 [GF]4
AF (Al foam) – 39.50 80 44.05 0.45 –

Fig. 5. Experimental setup for drop-weight impact test.

mechanical properties of FRP materials according to ASTM D3039 and

Table 2
ASTM D3518 standards. The strain was accurately recorded by using the
The properties of CFRP and GFRP laminates.
digital image correlation (DIC) system and the obtained engineering
stress-strain curves were presented in Fig. 6. Under same loading con­ Material Density (kg/m3) Elastic properties (GPa) Strength (MPa)

ditions, five independently carried out tests were used to obtain the E1 = E2 G12 v12 Xt = Yt S
average values, as summarized in Table 2. CFRP 1560 61.05 4.12 0.027 737.87 96.97
Cellular materials, with high-porosity and low weight, are excellent GFRP 1820 26.98 3.81 0.12 616.86 102.38
fillers for thin-walled structures to improve the energy absorption
ability. Herein, aluminum foam (0.45 g/cm3, Southeast China Univer­
sity, China) was used as a reinforcement to ensure better

Fig. 6. Material characterization: (a) tensile properties of CFRP and GFRP coupons along the fiber orientation; (b) shear response of CFRP and GFRP coupons by
tensile test of ±45◦ laminates; and (c) low velocity impact test of cylindrical aluminum foam (diameter = 39.5 mm).

5
H. Yang et al.
crashworthiness. The diameter of cylindrical aluminum foam was 39.5
mm, which matched with the hollow tubes and left no gap between the
tube wall and aluminum foam. Axial drop weight test was conducted to
determine the compressive properties of aluminum foam. The typical
load-displacement curve and deformation history were shown in Fig. 6
(c).
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Hollow FRP tubes
The typical load-displacement curves and failure pattern of hollow
tubes were presented in Fig. 7. It can be seen that the curves of various
circular specimens followed a similar trend. In general, the crushing
history can be divided into three stages, i.e., pre-crush stage, post-crush
stage and densification stage. In the pre-crush stage, the load linearly
increased to a maximum value with increasing displacement and the
tubes elastically deformed without damage. The post-crush stage started
after the initial peak load, where the load rapidly dropped and oscillated
in a small range. The small fluctuations around the MCF illustrated that
all the hollow FRP tubes failed in progressive. The load of CF and CF/GF
hybrid (C4G4 and G4C4) tubes tend to rise rapidly at the crushing
displacement of around 55 mm, corresponding to the initiation of the
densification stage. Nevertheless, the crushing of GF tube did not exhibit
the densification stage under the same impact condition. The impact
energy was totally consumed through the progressive failure of GF
tubes, which indicates a superior energy absorption ability of GF tubes.
Note that the value of initial peak load was equivalent to PCF, consid­
ering that the magnitude of initial peak load was the highest before
densification stage for each kind of specimens in this study.
The discrepancy between load response and failure pattern can be
ascribed to the nature of materials. Owing to the brittle nature of CFRP,
the CF tubes crushed progressively and generated abundant debris
without large pieces, as shown in Fig. 7(b). The failure mechanism of CF
tubes is known as fragmentation (transverse shearing) mode and the
impact energy was mainly consumed by fiber breakage, inter-laminar
cracking, intra-laminar delamination and friction. By contrast, the GF
tubes exhibited splaying (lamina bending) failure mode due to the better
plasticity of GFRP. The tube walls split into internal and external fronds,
as shown in Fig. 7(b), and a large amount of energy was absorbed
through the initiation and propagation of micro-cracks, resulting in a
prickly and shaggy surface of GF fronds. In addition, the bending of
fronds and friction between fronds and punch head also consumed
impact energy to a certain extent. The CF/GF hybrid tubes (C4G4 and
G4C4) exhibited a combination of these two failure mechanisms. Irre­
spective of the lay-up sequence of CFRP and GFRP laminates, the CFRP
Fig. 7. Drop weight impact tests for hollow tubes (diameter = 40 mm, height = 80 mm): (a) load-displacement curves with mean crushing force (MCF) lines; and (b)
failure pattern of collapsed tubes after impact.
6
Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380
laminate tended to fracture into debris and the GFRP laminates split into
7–10 fronds. At the end of crushing (densification stage), the debris or
fronds inside the tube structures started to compact and the load rapidly
increased.
The MCF was calculated as the energy absorbed per unit crushing
distance, which was depicted as the dashed lines in load-displacement
curves in Fig. 7(a). A higher level of MCF line represents a higher en­
ergy absorption capacity during impact. The GF tubes displayed the
highest MCF (34.15 kN) among the hollow FRP tubes, which was almost
46% higher than the CF tubes (23.36 kN). The tubes, with CF/GF hy­
bridization design (C4G4 and G4C4), exhibited a moderate MCF of
around 28 kN. Based on the experimental results, the lay-up sequence of
CFRP and GFRP laminate rendered a little influence on the energy ab­
sorption capacity of hollow tubes. Unlike the FRP/metal hybrid struc­
ture, the beneficial interactive effect between various FRP materials
remains inconspicuous. Instead of macroscopically combining the CFRP
and GFRP laminates in this study, such an interactive effect might be
modified by layer-by-layer hybridization of these two FRP materials.
According to the quasi-static compression (3 mm/min) results of
previous study [38], both CF and GF tubes failed in splaying mode.
However, the deformation behavior of CF tubes turned into fragmen­
tation mode under the drop-weight impact. The deformation history of
CF and GF tubes under different loading rates was shown in Fig. 8. One
should note that the tube specimens had the same geometric dimensions
(Height = 80 mm, Diameter = 40 mm) and lay-up design ([0◦ /90◦ ]8) for
the quasi-static and low velocity loading experiments. It can be clearly
seen that the loading conditions had a significant influence on the
deformation mechanism of hollow CF tubes. The CF tube progressively
burst into a cloud of small debris under the low-velocity impact.
Furthermore, the MCF of CF tube was found to be 27.02 kN under
quasi-static crushing, which was around 13.5% higher than the low
velocity loading conditions. The reason for lower force response was the
lack of friction between CFRP fronds and loading platen (punch head)
when the CF tubes failed in fragmentation mode during low velocity
impact. Based on the analytical model developed by Hussein et al. [11],
the energy dissipated by friction accounts for around 30% of the total
energy. By contrast, the deformation behavior of GF tubes seems
insusceptible to the loading rate, leading to a similar MCF of around 34
kN. The GF thin-walled tube exhibited better impact resistance, which
indicated that the GFRP materials are preferable for crashworthy
structural design under impact.
4.2. Aluminum-foam reinforced tubes
The typical load-displacement curves and failure pattern of foam-
filled tubes were shown in Fig. 9. All the foam-filled tubes
H. Yang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380

Fig. 8. The crushing behavior of circular FRP tubes under various loading conditions: (crushing distance = 0 mm, 30 mm and 45 mm) (a) quasi-static compression of
CF tube [38]; (b) low velocity impact of CF tube; (c) quasi-static compression of GF tube; (b) low velocity impact of GF tube.

Fig. 9. Drop weight impact tests for tubes (diameter = 40 mm, height = 80 mm) filled with aluminum foam (0.45 g/cm3): (a) load-displacement curves with MCF
lines; and (b) failure pattern of foam-filled specimens after impact.

progressively collapsed in a similar manner as hollow FRP tubes. The
densification stage was not obvious compared to that of hollow tubes,
indicating better energy absorption ability of foam-filled tubes. The
impact energy can be consumed before the foam-filled tubes were
entirely crushed.
Due to the filling of aluminum foam, there was no space for internal
fronds or fiber debris during the crushing process. Therefore, the
interaction between aluminum foam and failed materials rendered a
significant influence on energy absorption capacity. Based on the low
velocity impact test, the MCF of pure aluminum foam was found to be
6.6 kN (Fig. 6(c)), whereas the MCF of foam-filled tubes was found to be
14% higher than the summation of hollow counterpart and aluminum
foam. The positive interaction between the tube wall and aluminum
foam considerably enhanced the total energy absorption. In particular,
the MCF of G4C4 tubes increased by more than 40% after filling with
aluminum foam.
4.3. Composite skeletons reinforced tubes
4.3.1. XS-filled FRP tubes
The integrally formed XS-skeleton possessed a crisscross shape with a
thickness of 1 mm. Herein, the abbreviations of CF-XS and GF-XS
represented that the XS-skeletons were made from CFRP and GFRP,
respectively. We have not observed any gap between the tube wall and
four axial edges of the XS-skeleton. The crushing response of XS-filled
FRP tubes were illustrated in Fig. 10. It can be seen that the energy
absorption capacity of XS-filled GF tubes was much higher than the XS-
filled CF tubes, regardless of the material used for XS-skeletons (CF-XS
and GF-XS). The XS-filled GF tubes completed absorbed the impact en­
ergy when the stroke was around 50 mm, whereas the XS-filled CF tubes
exhibited obvious densification stage at the end of crushing.
The filling of XS-skeleton had little effect on the failure pattern of
outer FRP tubes, as shown in Fig. 10(b). The CF tube progressively
crushed into small debris, whereas the GF tube split into internal and
external fronds. In the case of XS-filled tubes, the interaction between
tube wall and reinforcement exhibited a smaller influence on energy
absorption than the foam-filled tubes due to large interior space for CF
debris or GF fronds. In addition, the composite skeletons (CF-XS and GF-
XS) failed into large pieces of fragments during crushing, which could be
regarded as an unstable deformation mode. The failed XS-skeletons were
extracted from the specimens after crushing, as shown in Fig. 11. The
failure pattern of composite skeletons indicated poor material utiliza­
tion, where the majority of FRP did not participate in the energy ab­
sorption process. Compared with the hollow specimens, the MCF was

7
H. Yang et al.
Fig. 10. Drop weight impact tests for tubes reinforced with XS-skeletons: (a) load-displacement curves with MCF lines; and (b) failure pattern of XS-filled specimens
after impact.
Fig. 11. Failed composite XS-skeletons extracted from the specimens after crushing: (a) CF-XS and (b) GF-XS.
increased by 8–27% for various combinations of FRP tubes and XS-
skeletons. However, the improvement in MCF was much lower than
the foam-filled tubes (around 40%). Such unstable deformation of XS-
skeleton could be mainly related to its configuration. The crisscross
skeleton twisted under the hammer pressure, leading to torsional frac­
ture instead of progressive failure. Therefore, this issue could be solved
by improving the interaction between the outer tube and skeletons. For
example, the filling of separate foams inside the four cells of XS-filled
tubes was a feasible method to constrain the deformation of XS-
skeleton and maintain progressively failure [23]. In addition, the
XS-skeletons were freely inserted inside the tubes in this study. Hence,
the discontinuity between tube wall and skeletons degraded the defor­
mation stability of inside FRP structure. To this end, the fabrication of
single-piece XS-reinforced tubes can ensure the stable deformation of
skeletons and further improve the crashworthy performance. However,
such an integral structure, with multi-cell configurations, shall be
experimentally and theoretically explored in the future.
4.3.2. OS-filled FRP tubes
The tube specimens obtained multi-cell cross-section by filling the
composite skeletons. Compared with XS-skeletons, the OS-skeletons (CF-
OS and GF-OS) further divided the circular tubes into smaller cells. The
thickness of OS-skeleton was found to be 1 mm and the cross-sectional
area was 28.5% larger than the XS-skeleton. Fig. 12 showed the load-
displacement curves and failure pattern of OS-filled tubes. It can be
seen that all specimens crushed in a progressive mode without densifi­
cation. The tube wall of both OS-filled and XS-filled specimens exhibited
a similar deformation mechanism. Meanwhile, the inside OS-skeletons
8
Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380
collapsed in a stable and progressive manner, resulting in a much bet­
ter material utilization than the XS-skeletons. The CF-OS collapsed in
fragmentation failure mode and left abundant debris due to the brittle
nature of CFRP, whereas the GF-OS collapsed in splaying failure mode
due to the better plasticity of GFRP. According to the MCF lines for
different tube specimens in Fig. 12(a), it can be clearly seen that the GF-
OS filler had better improvement on the energy absorption than the CF-
OS filler. Similar to XS-filled tubes, the damaged material filled inside
the interior space of OS-filled tubes during crushing. However, the
interactive effect was enhanced when the tube was divided into smaller
cells with less space. Based on the experiment results, the MCF of OS-
filled tubes was found to be around 20% higher than the XS-filled
counterparts, originating from the stable deformation mode and high
material utilization of OS-skeletons under impact loading.
4.4. Crashworthiness analysis
Herein, several parameters are used to evaluate the crashworthy
performance of designed structures, including MCF, PCF, SEA and CFE.
The results of all kinds of specimens are summarized in Table 3. For
better comparison, the experimental results were displayed by using the
bar graphs with standard deviation error bars, as shown in Figs. 13 and
14. It can be concluded a good repeatability of the proposed fabrication
and test procedure due to the relatively small deviation of the mean
values.
The PCF should be kept as small as possible to avoid severe damage
to occupants due to the peak deceleration effect during crash. As shown
in Fig. 13(a), the PCF of hollow GF tube was more than 10% higher than
H. Yang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380

Fig. 12. Drop weight impact tests for tubes reinforced with OS-skeletons: (a) load-displacement curves with MCF lines and (b) failure pattern of OS-filled specimens
after impact.

Table 3
Crashworthiness for hollow and reinforced specimens.
Description Specimen Mass (g) Stroke (mm) PCF (kN) MCF (kN) CFE SEA (kJ/kg)

Hollow tube CF 28.00 61.95 62.94 ± 8.84 23.36 ± 1.56 0.38 66.76 ± 2.64
GF 40.53 56.36 76.03 ± 2.22 34.15 ± 0.46 0.45 67.38 ± 0.68
G4C4 33.57 62.25 68.53 ± 0.84 28.19 ± 0.69 0.44 71.90 ± 2.18
C4G4 32.40 58.13 51.44 ± 0.73 27.36 ± 0.51 0.53 67.97 ± 0.21
Filled with Al foam (AF) CF + AF 64.17 53.44 66.25 ± 3.36 33.88 ± 2.56 0.51 42.22 ± 0.22
GF + AF 78.02 38.72 73.33 ± 0.51 46.69 ± 1.10 0.64 47.88 ± 0.42
G4C4+AF 70.81 43.84 87.62 ± 1.95 42.97 ± 1.17 0.49 48.56 ± 1.59
C4G4+AF 70.60 50.17 74.15 ± 2.76 38.67 ± 2.18 0.52 43.78 ± 1.33
Filled with XS-skeleton CF + CF-XS 35.87 58.82 49.65 ± 4.32 27.64 ± 0.59 0.56 61.67 ± 1.67
CF + GF-XS 38.86 60.10 44.68 ± 2.26 29.73 ± 1.59 0.67 61.29 ± 4.42
GF + CF-XS 48.32 46.20 61.90 ± 1.00 41.10 ± 1.00 0.66 67.98 ± 1.00
GF + GF-XS 48.35 51.39 65.38 ± 11.38 37.06 ± 0.47 0.59 61.33 ± 0.14
Filled with OS-skeleton CF + CF-OS 37.62 58.00 65.45 ± 9.61 33.82 ± 0.47 0.53 71.91 ± 0.99
CF + GF-OS 41.36 53.19 55.43 ± 4.43 36.05 ± 0.03 0.65 69.75 ± 0.35
GF + CF-OS 50.42 39.59 69.11 ± 3.08 45.74 ± 1.33 0.66 72.58 ± 2.14
GF + GF-OS 52.8 37.79 69.50 ± 2.47 47.04 ± 0.16 0.68 71.28 ± 0.39
G4C4+CF-OS 43.36 47.70 68.33 ± 13.52 39.33 ± 1.03 0.60 72.59 ± 2.42
C4G4+GF-OS 46.67 45.46 63.24 ± 1.29 41.14 ± 0.10 0.65 70.54 ± 0.99

the hollow CF tube. One should note that, even though the strength of
GFRP was 16.3% lower than CFRP along fiber orientation (Table 2), GF
tubes could withstand higher loads before collapse due to superior
impact resistance and fiber fracture energy of GFRP (area under stress-
strain curve in Fig. 6). Herein, all FRP tubes were chamfered (45◦ ) at
one end to trigger the progressive deformation and lower PCF. The lay-
up design and chamfer angle determined the material composition of
chamfered end. Thus, the chamfered end of G4C4 and C4G4 hybrid
tubes were mainly composed of GFRP and CFRP, respectively. First, the
chamfered end was subjected to the impact loading, which collapsed
when the load reached PCF. Therefore, the PCF of hollow G4C4 tube was
33.2% higher than the hollow C4G4 tube, originating from the higher
force response of GFRP.
Compared with hollow tubes, the aluminum foam-filled tubes
rendered a small increase in PCF. Nevertheless, the filling of composite
skeletons lowered the PCF of tubes reinforced with XS-skeletons, which
can be ascribed to the unstable deformation of XS-skeletons. The XS-
skeleton twisted and fractured into large fragments at the beginning of
impact. Hence, the twisted XS-skeleton applied a lateral compression on
the outer tube wall, which could act as a blade trigger and lower the
initial peak force. Such deformation mechanism inside the tube could
not be recorded by the high-speed camera, which could be further
investigated by finite element numerical simulation in future study.
The MCF is defined as the total absorbed energy per crushed tube
length. Thus, the magnitude of MCF could determine the total absorbed
energy of a proposed thin-walled structure when it failed in progressive.
Fig. 13(b) showed that the structures, with an outer GF tube, acquired
the highest MCF (blue bars), whereas the hollow and reinforced CF tubes
(green bars) exhibited the lowest MCF for each group of specimens. The
tubes, consisting of CF/GF hybrid laminates (G4C4 and C4G4), did not

9
H. Yang et al.
Fig. 13. The comparison of crushing force: (a) peak crushing force (PCF) and
(b) mean crushing force (MCF).
exhibit any obvious interactive effect between these two fiber materials.
Therefore, the C4G4 and G4G4 tubes exhibited a similar and moderate
MCF in the current study. It has been reported that the load-carrying
capacity can be improved by positive interaction between different
layers [27–29,43,44]. However, despite the fact that the hybrid struc­
ture lowered the material cost by around 30%, the proposed CF/GF
hybrid design demonstrated a little advantage over pure FRP tubes in
terms of energy absorption. In the case of reinforcements, both
aluminum foam and OS-skeletons could effectively increase the MCF.
The filling of XS-skeleton is not recommended due to the unstable
deformation mechanism and poor material utilization. The GF + GF-OS
displayed the highest MCF (47.04 kN), indicating that the GFRP material
was more appropriate for energy absorption design under impact
loading.
In practical applications, the light-weight design of energy absorber
has become increasingly vital due to fuel consumption and pollution
problem. Thus, the energy absorption capacity per unit weight, i.e., SEA,
is widely utilized to evaluate the light-weight property. The SEA values
for all kinds of tube specimens were presented in Fig. 14(a). The
aluminum foam (0.45 kg/cm3) filled tubes exhibited the lowest SEA
compared with the hollow and composite skeleton reinforced counter­
parts. The reason is that the weight of aluminum foam was comparable
to the outer FRP tubes and much heavier than the composite skeletons
(Table 1). This resulted in a poor weight efficiency of aluminum foam,
although the filling of aluminum foam significantly improved the MCF.
Using aluminum foam with lower density may be beneficial to the SEA of
the foam-filled structure [18,23]. In addition, multi-functional foams
could be used as the fillers to broaden the application prospects in en­
ergy absorption. For example, Pinto et al. [45] have developed various
metal and polymer foams. Such multi-functional foam could not only
enhance the energy absorption in a controlled manner, but also improve
the non-inflammability and sound absorption coefficient of the
10
Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380
Fig. 14. The comparison of crashworthy performance: (a) specific energy ab­
sorption (SEA) and (b) crushing force efficiency (CFE).
foam-filled structure.
In the case of XS-filled tubes, the SEA value was found to be lower
than the hollow counterparts because of the unstable deformation of XS-
skeletons during crushing. Most parts of the composite skeletons did not
contribute to the energy dissipation. This problem was solved by
introducing more angle elements in the cross-section of skeletons, i.e.,
OS-skeletons, which collapsed in progressive failure mode similar to the
outer FRP tubes. Among these specimens, the OS-filled tubes exhibited
optimal SEA performance, which were approximately 4–10% higher
than the hollow counterparts. Moreover, the configuration of reinforced
skeletons played a significant role in energy absorption. The insertion of
angle elements is a common method to improve the SEA of metallic
energy absorbers, originating from more plastic deformation at corners
and hence more energy consumption. However, the mechanism of en­
ergy consumption in FRP structures is quite different from metals, which
is mainly dominated by fiber fracture, crack propagation and friction.
Pehlivan et al. [46] experimentally investigated the effects of cell ge­
ometry and wall thickness on crushing responses of CFRP honeycombs
with various cell configurations. The results show that the compressive
strength of hexagonal specimen groups was better than those of square
and circular groups. In addition, the MCF and CFE of composite hon­
eycombs could be significantly improved by increasing the wall thick­
ness. Thus, the influence of cross-sectional configuration and wall
thickness of FRP multi-cell structures is worth investigating, which shall
be carried out.
Furthermore, the CFE represents MCF to PCF ratio, which is another
vital factor in evaluating the crashworthy performance of energy
absorbed structure. Fig. 14(b) showed that the filling of aluminum
foam/skeletons effectively increased the CFE of hollow FRP tubes. The
OS-filled GFRP tubes exhibited the highest CFE due to their superior
MCF and moderate PCF. In addition, the improvement on CFE was
H. Yang et al.
higher when filled with GFRP-based OS-skeleton, indicating the poten­
tial of GFRP in crashworthy designs of light-weight thin-walled
structure.
5. Conclusions
The current study aimed to explore the crashworthiness character­
istics of circular FRP tubes, which were internally reinforced with
aluminum foam (0.45 g/cm3) or composite skeletons. The tubes
exhibited multi-cell configurations after filling with composite skele­
tons. Two types of composite skeletons with various cross-sections (XS
and OS) were proposed, All the outer FRP tubes had same dimensions
(height = 80 mm, diameter = 40 mm) and chamfered at one end to
trigger the progressive failure mode under axial impact. Low velocity
impact tests were conducted to investigate the crushing behavior and
energy absorption capacity of hollow and reinforced FRP structures.
Based on the experimental results, the following conclusions can be
drawn:
(1) The hollow CF tubes collapsed in progressive fragmentation
failure mode, which was characterized by the formation of small
debris due to the brittle nature of CFRP. By contrast, the hollow
GF tubes collapsed in progressive splaying failure mode and the
tube wall split into internal and external fronds during crushing.
The hollow CF/GF hybrid tubes (C4G4 and G4C4) exhibited a
combination of progressive splaying and fragmentation failure
mode. In addition, there was no obvious interaction between
CFRP and GFRP layers that beneficial to the energy absorption.
(2) The aluminum foam-filled tubes progressively collapsed and
exhibited 14% higher MCF than the summation of hollow coun­
terpart and aluminum foam. This indicated a strong interactive
effect between aluminum foam and tube wall (FRP fronds or
debris), leading to superior total energy absorption. However, the
SEA of foam-filled tubes was decreased by around 30% compared
to the hollow counterparts. The main reason is that the mass of
cylindrical aluminum foam was comparable to the FRP tubes,
resulting in poor weight efficiency.
(3) The crushing behavior of XS-skeletons was unstable with poor
material utilization. On the contrary, the OS-skeletons progres­
sively collapsed in a similar manner as outer FRP tubes. The
filling of OS-skeletons effectively improved the MCF without
adding much weight, resulting in superior SEA. For instance, the
GF + GF-OS exhibited the highest CFE of 0.68 with excellent SEA
of 72.59 kJ/kg. Compared with the hollow counterparts, the CFE
and SEA were improved by 50% and 7%, respectively.
(4) Considering the material factor, the GFRP seemed preferable for
the design of thin-walled structures to CFRP under low velocity
impact. Under quasi-static compression loading, the hollow CF
tubes failed in splaying mode with MCF of 27.02 kN. However,
the deformation mechanism of CF tubes altered to fragmentation
failure mode and the MCF was reduced by 14% (23.36 kN) under
low velocity impact. On the other hand, the loading rate rendered
a little influence on deformation mode (splaying) and MCF
(around 34 kN) of hollow GF tubes, indicating superior impact
resistance of GFRP.
In summary, the proposed OS-filled composite tubes displayed
excellent SEA and CFE, demonstrating great potential in light-weight
energy absorbers. This novel thin-walled FRP structure possessed
multi-cell cross-section due to the utilization of composite skeleton.
Moreover, the crashworthiness can be further improved by adjusting the
configuration and thickness of composite skeletons. The optimization of
structural parameters for multi-cell composite structure shall be carried
out in future work.
11
Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380
Credit author statement
Haiyang Yang: Investigation, Methodology, Writing - original draft.
Hongshuai Lei: Conceptualization, Methodology, Funding acquisition.
Guoxing Lu: Conceptualization, Writing - review & editing,
Supervision.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Key Research and Devel­
opment of China (2018YFA0702804), the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (11872012) and the Young Elite Scientists Spon­
sorship Program.
References
[1] N.A.Z. Abdullah, M.S.M. Sani, M.S. Salwani, N.A. Husain, A review on
crashworthiness studies of crash box structure, Thin-Walled Struct. 153 (2020)
106795.
[2] X. Yang, J. Ma, D. Wen, J. Yang, Crashworthy design and energy absorption
mechanisms for helicopter structures: a systematic literature review, Prog. Aero.
Sci. 114 (2020) 100618.
[3] G. Lu, T. Yu, Energy Absorption of Structures and Materials, Woodhead Publishing
Ltd., Cambridge, 2003.
[4] A. Baroutaji, M. Sajjia, A.G. Olabi, On the crashworthiness performance of thin-
walled energy absorbers: recent advances and future developments, Thin-Walled
Struct. 118 (2017) 137–163.
[5] T. Chen, Y. Zhang, J. Lin, Y. Lu, Theoretical analysis and crashworthiness
optimization of hybrid multi-cell structures, Thin-Walled Struct. 142 (2019)
116–131.
[6] D. Zhang, G. Lu, D. Ruan, Q. Fei, Energy absorption in the axial crushing of
hierarchical circular tubes, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 171 (2020).
[7] S. Xie, W. Yang, N. Wang, H. Li, Crashworthiness analysis of multi-cell square tubes
under axial loads, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 121 (2017) 106–118.
[8] S. Wu, G. Zheng, G. Sun, Q. Liu, G. Li, Q. Li, On design of multi-cell thin-wall
structures for crashworthiness, Int. J. Impact Eng. 88 (2016) 102–117.
[9] Z. Li, W. Ma, L. Hou, P. Xu, S. Yao, Crashworthiness analysis of corrugations
reinforced multi-cell square tubes, Thin-Walled Struct. 150 (2020).
[10] A.G. Hanssen, M. Langseth, O.S. Hopperstad, Static and dynamic crushing of
circular aluminium extrusions with aluminium foam filler, Int. J. Impact Eng. 24
(2000) 475–507.
[11] R.D. Hussein, D. Ruan, G. Lu, An analytical model of square CFRP tubes subjected
to axial compression, Compos. Sci. Technol. 168 (2018) 170–178.
[12] G. Zhu, G. Sun, G. Li, A. Cheng, Q. Li, Modeling for CFRP structures subjected to
quasi-static crushing, Compos. Struct. 184 (2018) 41–55.
[13] X. Zhang, Y. Shi, Z.X. Li, Experimental study on the tensile behavior of
unidirectional and plain weave CFRP laminates under different strain rates,
Compos. B Eng. 164 (2019) 524–536.
[14] P.B. Ataabadi, D. Karagiozova, M. Alves, Crushing and energy absorption
mechanisms of carbon fiber-epoxy tubes under axial impact, Int. J. Impact Eng.
131 (2019) 174–189.
[15] Y. Wang, J. Feng, J. Wu, D. Hu, Effects of fiber orientation and wall thickness on
energy absorption characteristics of carbon-reinforced composite tubes under
different loading conditions, Compos. Struct. 153 (2016) 356–368.
[16] R.D. Hussein, D. Ruan, G. Lu, I. Sbarski, Axial crushing behaviour of honeycomb-
filled square carbon fibre reinforced plastic (CFRP) tubes, Compos. Struct. 140
(2016) 166–179.
[17] R.D. Hussein, D. Ruan, G. Lu, S. Guillow, J.W. Yoon, Crushing response of square
aluminium tubes filled with polyurethane foam and aluminium honeycomb, Thin-
Walled Struct. 110 (2017) 140–154.
[18] G. Sun, S. Li, Q. Liu, G. Li, Q. Li, Experimental study on crashworthiness of empty/
aluminum foam/honeycomb-filled CFRP tubes, Compos. Struct. 152 (2016)
969–993.
[19] Z. Zhang, W. Sun, Y. Zhao, S. Hou, Crashworthiness of different composite tubes by
experiments and simulations, Compos. B Eng. 143 (2018) 86–95.
[20] I. Duarte, L. Krstulović-Opara, J. Dias-de-Oliveira, M. Vesenjak, Axial crush
performance of polymer-aluminium alloy hybrid foam filled tubes, Thin-Walled
Struct. 138 (2019) 124–136.
[21] M. Vesenjak, I. Duarte, J. Baumeister, H. Göhler, L. Krstulović-Opara, Z. Ren,
Bending performance evaluation of aluminium alloy tubes filled with different
cellular metal cores, Compos. Struct. 234 (2020) 111748.
H. Yang et al.
[22] M. Abada, A. Ibrahim, Hybrid multi-cell thin-walled tubes for energy absorption
applications: blast shielding and crashworthiness, Compos. B Eng. 183 (2020)
107720.
[23] G. Zhu, Z. Wang, X. Huo, A. Cheng, G. Li, C. Zhou, Experimental and numerical
investigation into axial compressive behaviour of thin-walled structures filled with
foams and composite skeleton, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 122 (2017) 104–119.
[24] Z. Huang, X. Zhang, C. Yang, Static and dynamic axial crushing of Al/CRFP hybrid
tubes with single-cell and multi-cell sections, Compos. Struct. 226 (2019) 111023.
[25] R.D. Hussein, D. Ruan, G. Lu, R. Thomson, An energy dissipating mechanism for
crushing square aluminium/CFRP tubes, Compos. Struct. 183 (2018) 643–653.
[26] A.B.M. Supian, S.M. Sapuan, M.Y.M. Zuhri, E.S. Zainudin, H.H. Ya, Hybrid
reinforced thermoset polymer composite in energy absorption tube application: a
review, Def. Technol. 14 (2018) 291–305.
[27] X. Zhi, Q. Wu, C. Wang, Experimental and numerical study of GFRP-reinforced
steel tube under axial impact loads, Int. J. Impact Eng. 122 (2018) 23–37.
[28] Z. Wang, X. Jin, Q. Li, G. Sun, On crashworthiness design of hybrid metal-
composite structures, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 171 (2020) 105380.
[29] G. Zhu, J. Liao, G. Sun, Q. Li, Comparative study on metal/CFRP hybrid structures
under static and dynamic loading, Int. J. Impact Eng. 141 (2020).
[30] R.D. Hussein, D. Ruan, G. Lu, Cutting and crushing of square aluminium/CFRP
tubes, Compos. Struct. 171 (2017) 403–418.
[31] Y. Tong, Y. Xu, Improvement of crash energy absorption of 2D braided composite
tubes through an innovative chamfer external triggers, Int. J. Impact Eng. 111
(2018) 11–20.
[32] H. Jiang, Y. Ren, Crashworthiness and failure analysis of steeple-triggered hat-
shaped composite structure under the axial and oblique crushing load, Compos.
Struct. 229 (2019) 111375.
[33] H. Jiang, Y. Ren, B. Gao, J. Xiang, F.G. Yuan, Design of novel plug-type triggers for
composite square tubes: enhancement of energy-absorption capacity and inducing
failure mechanisms, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 131–132 (2017) 113–136.
[34] C. Priem, R. Othman, P. Rozycki, D. Guillon, Experimental investigation of the
crash energy absorption of 2.5D-braided thermoplastic composite tubes, Compos.
Struct. 116 (2014) 814–826.
12
Thin-Walled Structures 160 (2021) 107380
[35] Z. Zhang, S. Hou, Q. Liu, X. Han, Winding orientation optimization design of
composite tubes based on quasi-static and dynamic experiments, Thin-Walled
Struct. 127 (2018) 425–433.
[36] G. Zhou, Q. Sun, J. Fenner, D. Li, D. Zeng, X. Su, Y. Peng, Crushing behaviors of
unidirectional carbon fiber reinforced plastic composites under dynamic bending
and axial crushing loading, Int. J. Impact Eng. 140 (2020) 103539.
[37] S. Patel, V.R. Vusa, C. Guedes Soares, Crashworthiness analysis of polymer
composites under axial and oblique impact loading, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 156 (2019)
221–234.
[38] H. Yang, H. Lei, G. Lu, Z. Zhang, X. Li, Y. Liu, Energy absorption and failure pattern
of hybrid composite tubes under quasi-static axial compression, Compos. B Eng.
198 (2020) 108217.
[39] D. Chen, Q. Luo, M. Meng, Q. Li, G. Sun, Low velocity impact behavior of interlayer
hybrid composite laminates with carbon/glass/basalt fibres, Compos. B Eng. 176
(2019) 107191.
[40] M. Sadighi, R.C. Alderliesten, R. Benedictus, Impact resistance of fiber-metal
laminates: a review, Int. J. Impact Eng. 49 (2012) 77–90.
[41] Y. Sun, Q.M. Li, Dynamic compressive behaviour of cellular materials: a review of
phenomenon, mechanism and modelling, Int. J. Impact Eng. 112 (2018) 74–115.
[42] G. Sun, Z. Wang, H. Yu, Z. Gong, Q. Li, Experimental and numerical investigation
into the crashworthiness of metal-foam-composite hybrid structures, Compos.
Struct. 209 (2019) 535–547.
[43] G. Zhu, G. Sun, Q. Liu, G. Li, Q. Li, On crushing characteristics of different
configurations of metal-composites hybrid tubes, Compos. Struct. 175 (2017)
58–69.
[44] Z. Huang, X. Zhang, C. Yang, Experimental and numerical studies on the bending
collapse of multi-cell Aluminum/CFRP hybrid tubes, Compos. B Eng. 181 (2020)
107527.
[45] S.C. Pinto, P.A.A.P. Marques, M. Vesenjak, R. Vicente, L. Godinho, L. Krstulović-
Opara, I. Duarte, Characterization and physical properties of aluminium
foam–polydimethylsiloxane nanocomposite hybrid structures, Compos. Struct. 230
(2019) 111521.
[46] L. Pehlivan, C. Baykasoğlu, An experimental study on the compressive response of
CFRP honeycombs with various cell configurations, Compos. B Eng. 162 (2019)
653–661.