Safety during railway vehicle collisions requires an excellent energy-absorbing ability of the structures of trains. In this paper, a new composite energy-absorbing structure is designed by combining the characteristics of a thin-walled metal structure and an aluminum honeycomb structure. A finite element model of the energy-absorbing structure is created using mechanical properties of the honeycomb structures simulated using material equivalent models. Structures with three types of aluminum honeycomb (honeycombs 1, 2 and 3, respectively) and without a honeycomb are numerically assessed. The results indicate that the entire structure generates an orderly deformation of the structure using the designed energy-absorbing system. The larger the extent of the plateau stress of the honeycomb, the greater is its contribution to the total energy dissipation of the entire structure. For the three energy-absorbing structures, honeycombs 1, 2 and 3, the energy absorbed by the honeycomb structure accounts for 18.03, 19.86 and 27.40 % of the total energy dissipation, respectively. The total energy dissipation of the energy-absorbing structure is also improved with an increase of the plateau stress of the honeycomb structure.
BelingardiGCavatortaMPDuellaR. Material characterization of a composite-foam sandwich for the front structure of a high speed train. Compos Struct2003; 61(1–2): 13–25.
2.
CengizBEminSSureyyaEB. Railroad passenger car collision analysis and modifications for improved crashworthiness. Int J Crashworthiness2011; 16(3): 319–329.
3.
AmbrosioJ. Crash analysis and dynamical behaviour of light road and rail vehicles. Veh Syst Dyn2005; 6(7): 385–411.
4.
TianHQGaoGJYaoS. Structure realization method for collapse threshold of plastic deformation in train collision condition. J Central South Univ Technol2011; 18(1): 244–249.
5.
Hosseini TehraniPNankaliA. Study on characteristics of a crashworthy high-speed train nose. Int J Crashworthiness2010; 15(2): 161–173.
6.
XieSZhouH. Research on the crashworthy structures of subway vehicles. Int J Crashworthiness2014; 19(6): 555–566.
7.
LuG. Energy absorption requirement for crashworthy vehicles. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit2002; 216(1): 31–39.
8.
TangZLiuSZhangZ. Energy absorption properties of non-convex multi-corner thin-walled columns. Thin-Walled Struct2012; 51: 112–120.
9.
NagelGMThambiratnamDP. Computer simulation and energy absorption of tapered thin-walled rectangular tubes. Thin-Walled Struct2005; 43(8): 1225–1242.
10.
XiangYJWangQXFanZJFangHB. Optimal crashworthiness design of a spot-welded thin-walled hat section. Finite Elements Anal Des2006; 42(10): 846–855.
11.
HongSPanJTyanTPrasadP. Dynamic crush behaviors of aluminum honeycomb specimens under compression dominant inclined loads. Int J Plast2008; 24(1): 89–117.
12.
EramiKOhnoNOkumuraD. Long-wave in-plane buckling of elastoplastic square honeycombs. Int J Plast2006; 22(9): 1569–1585.
13.
MujikaFPujanaJOlaveM. On the determination of out-of-plane elastic properties of honeycomb sandwich panels. Polym Test2011; 30(2): 222–228.
14.
WangZYuPE. Mathematical modelling of energy absorption property for paper honeycomb in various ambient humidities. Mater Des2010; 31(9): 4321–4328.
15.
AcarEGulerMAGerCC. Multi-objective crashworthiness optimization of tapered thin-walled tubes with axisymmetric indentations. Thin-Walled Struct2011; 49(1): 94–105.
16.
AlexanderJM. An approximate analysis of the collapse of thin cylindrical shells under axial loading. Q J Mech Appl Math1960; 13(1): 10–15.
17.
QiaoJSChenJHCheHY. Crashworthiness assessment of square aluminum extrusions considering the damage evolution. Thin-Walled Struct2006; 44(6): 692–700.
WangBLuG. Mushrooming of circular tubes under dynamic axial loading. Thin-Walled Struct2002; 40(2): 167–182.
20.
KimHS. New extruded multi-cell aluminum profile for maximum crash energy absorption and weight efficiency. Thin-Walled Struct2002; 40(4): 311–327.
21.
HouSLiQLongS. Design optimization of regular hexagonal thin-walled columns with crashworthiness criteria. Finite Elements Anal Des2007; 43(6–7): 555–565.
22.
AhmadZThambiratnamDP. Crushing response of foam-filled conical tubes under quasi-static axial loading. Mater Des2009; 30(7): 2393–2403.
23.
ZhangYSunGLiG. Optimization of foam-filled bi-tubal structures for crashworthiness criteria. Mater Des2012; 38: 99–109.
24.
BiJFangHWangQRenX. Modeling and optimization of foam-filled thin-walled columns for crashworthiness designs. Finite Elements Anal Des2010; 46(9): 698–709.
25.
HongSTPanJTyanTPrasadP. Quasi-static crush behavior of aluminum honeycomb specimens under compression dominant combined loads. Int J Plast2006; 22(1): 73–109.
26.
HongSTPanJTyanTPrasadP. Quasi-static crush behavior of aluminum honeycomb specimens under non-proportional compression-dominant combined loads. Int J Plast2006; 22(6): 1062–1088.
BurlayenkoVNSadowskiT. Effective elastic properties of foam-filled honeycomb cores of sandwich panels. Compos Struct2010; 92(12): 2890–2900.
29.
SongJGuoF. A comparative study on the windowed and multi-cell square tubes under axial and oblique loading. Thin-Walled Struct2013; 66: 9–14.
30.
Haghi KashaniMShahsavari AlavijehHAkbarshahiHShakeriM. Bi-tubular square tubes with different arrangements under quasi-static axial compression loading. Mater Des2013; 51: 1095–1103.
31.
GibsonLJAshbyMF. Cellular solids: structure and properties, Second ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
32.
WangD. Impact behavior and energy absorption of paper honeycomb sandwich panels. Int J Impact Engng2009; 36(1): 110–114.
33.
NakamotoHAdachiTArakiW. In-plane impact behavior of honeycomb structures randomly filled with rigid inclusion. Int J Impact Engng2009; 36: 73–80.
34.
NakamotoHAdachiTArakiW. In-plane impact behavior of honeycomb structures filled with linearly arranged inclusions. Int J Impact Engng2009; 36(8): 1019–1026.
35.
DeqiangSWeihongZYanbinW. Mean out-of-plane dynamic plateau stresses of hexagonal honeycomb cores under impact loadings. Compos Struct2010; 92(11): 2609–2621.
36.
DeqiangSWeihongZ. Mean in-plane plateau stresses of hexagonal honeycomb cores under impact loadings. Compos Struct2009; 91(2): 168–185.
37.
Hosseini-TehraniPBayatV. Study on crashworthiness of wagon's frame under frontal impact. Int J Crashworthiness2011; 16(1): 25–39.
38.
YanXRichardsSSuX. Using hierarchical tree-based regression model to predict train-vehicle crashes at passive highway-rail grade crossings. Accident Anal Prevent2010; 42(1): 64–74.
39.
BaykasogluCSunbulogluEBozdagSE. Crash and structural analyses of an aluminum railroad passenger car. Int J Crashworthiness2012; 17(5): 519–528.
40.
GaoGJTianHQ. Train's crashworthiness design and collision analysis. Int J Crashworthiness2007; 12(1): 21–28.
41.
EN 15227: 2008. Railway applications-crashworthiness requirements for railway vehicle bodies.
42.
ZhongZH. Finite element procedures for contact-impact problems, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1993, pp. 96–213.
