斜向低速冲击载荷下多边形旋转拼接折纸管耐撞性研究

滕晨皓; 刘坤澎; 宋志博; 陈家玉; 周才华; 涂昕昊; 朱冬妹

doi:10.21656/1000-0887.450336

斜向低速冲击载荷下多边形旋转拼接折纸管耐撞性研究

doi: 10.21656/1000-0887.450336

1.
大连理工大学力学与航空航天学院, 辽宁大连 416000
2.
比亚迪股份有限公司, 广东深圳 518000
3.
北京星航机电装备有限公司, 北京 100074

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金(面上项目) 12472378

国家自然科学基金青年科学基金 12302465

详细信息

作者简介:
滕晨皓(1996—)，男，博士(E-mail: tengchenhao1@163.com)

通讯作者:
周才华(1987—)，男，教授，博士，博士生导师(通讯作者. E-mail: zhoucaihua@dlut.edu.cn)

中图分类号: O347.1
计量
- 文章访问数: 47
- HTML全文浏览量: 18
- PDF下载量: 7
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2024-12-19
- 修回日期: 2025-02-20
- 刊出日期: 2025-05-01

Crashworthiness of Polygonal Rotary Splicing Origami Tubes Under Oblique Low-Speed Impact Loads

1.
School of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, Liaoning 416000, P.R.China
2.
BYD Company Limited, Shenzhen, Guangdong 518000, P.R.China
3.
Beijing Xinghang Electro-Mechanical Fquipment Co., Ltd., Beijing 100074, P.R.China

摘要

摘要: 为提升车用碰撞盒斜向冲击载荷下耐撞性能，该文创新设计出了一种具有多边形旋转拼接折纸图案的折纸管构型，开展了落锤冲击试验及数值仿真分析. 研究发现，冲击载荷下新型折纸管较传统方管具有优异的耐撞性，且最终产生具有高耐撞性能的钻石模式. 另外，该文对新型折纸管开展了不同冲击角度下几何参数耐撞性影响研究，数值结果表明，新型折纸管折痕高度比和折痕长度比以及宽厚比的参数变化显著影响折纸管耐撞性，并引发不同变形模式；不同冲击角度下，新型折纸管的平均力F_ave和峰值力F_max虽然随着冲击角度θ的增大而逐渐下降，但峰值力F_max的下降趋势较平均力F_ave下降趋势更为显著，且折纸管在不同冲击角度下依旧表现出较高的载荷压溃率η_CFE. 进一步验证了多边形旋转拼接折纸管具有优异的斜向冲击吸能性能.
- 斜向冲击 /
- 薄壁结构 /
- 折纸设计 /
- 耐撞性
Abstract: To improve the crashworthiness of automotive collision energy absorption boxes under oblique impact loads, a new-type origami tube with a polygonal rotary splicing origami pattern was designed based on conventional square tubes. The drop hammer impact experiment and numerical simulation analysis were conducted to prove the excellent crashworthiness of the new-type origami tube compared with the conventional square tube under impact load, with a high-crashworthiness diamond pattern finally produced. Additionally, the effects of geometric parameters on the crashworthiness of the new-type origami tubes were studied at different impact angles. The numerical results show that, the changes of the crease height ratios, length ratios and width-to-thickness ratios of the origami tube significantly affect the crashworthiness, and lead to different deformation modes. Under different impact angles, average force F_ave and initial peak force F_max of the new-type origami tube gradually decrease with the increase of impact angle θ, but the decline trend of F_max is more significant than that of F_ave, and the origami tube still shows a relatively high crush load efficiency under different impact angles, to further verify that the polygonal rotary splicing origami tube has excellent oblique impact energy absorption performance.
- oblique impact /
- thin-walled structure /
- origami design /
- crashworthiness

HTML全文

图 1 斜向载荷下DOT变形模式^[19]

注为了解释图中的颜色，读者可以参考本文的电子网页版本，后同.

Figure 1. Deformation modes of the diamond origami tube under oblique loads^[19]

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 2 PRT

Figure 2. PRT

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 3 PRT加工过程

Figure 3. The manufacture process of the PRT

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 4 PRT(双胞元)

Figure 4. PRT (2 modules)

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 5 冲击试验现场布置

Figure 5. Impact test setup

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 6 有限元模型与网格收敛性分析

Figure 6. The finite element model and mesh sensitivity study

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 7 折纸管变形过程与力-位移曲线

Figure 7. The deformation process and force-displacement curves of the origami tube

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 8 CCB构型示意图与尺寸

Figure 8. The configuration and dimensions of the conventional vehicle crash box

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 9 CCB斜向冲击模型与力-位移曲线和变形过程

Figure 9. The oblique impact model, force-displacement curves, and deformation process of the conventional crash box

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 10 不同高度比h₁(h₃)/h₂对F_max, F_ave和η_CFE的影响

Figure 10. Effects of different ratios h₁(h₃)/h₂ on F_max, F_ave and η_CFE

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 11 PRT-1/3h-4deg和PRT-2h-0deg的变形过程以及塑性变形区域对比

Figure 11. Comparison of deformation processes and plastic deformation regions between PRT-1/3h-4deg and PRT-2h-0deg

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 12 不同折痕长度比a₁(b₁)/a₂(b₂)对F_max, F_ave和η_CFE的影响

Figure 12. Effects of different ratios a₁(b₁)/a₂(b₂) on F_max, F_ave, and η_CFE

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 13 PRT-5a-0deg的变形过程以及力-位移曲线

Figure 13. Deformation processes of PRT-5a-0deg and force-displacement curves

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 14 不同宽厚比c/t对F_max, F_ave, η_CFE和e_a的影响

Figure 14. Effects of different ratios c/t on F_max, F_ave, η_CFE and e_a

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 15 不同冲击角度θ对F_max, F_ave, η_CFE和e_a的影响

Figure 15. Effects of different impact angles on F_max, F_ave, η_CFE and e_a

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 16 折纸管PRT-ct-49-25deg的变形过程以及力-位移曲线

Figure 16. Deformation processes of origami tube PRT-ct-49-25deg and force-displacement curves

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 17 不同类型折纸管25°斜向冲击下F_max和F_ave对比

Figure 17. Comparison of F_max and F_ave under 25° oblique impact on different types of origami tubes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

图 18 不同类型折纸管25°斜向冲击下η_CFE和e_a对比

Figure 18. Comparison of η_CFE and e_a under 25° oblique impact on different types of origami tubes

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 试验件的主要几何尺寸

Table 1. The main geometric dimensions of the specimens

experimental sample	a₁/mm	a₂/mm	b₁/mm	b₂/mm	α/(°)	β/(°)	L/mm	t/mm	quality/g
PRT-IE1	30	30	30	30	162	162	115.9	0.85	165.7
PRT-IE2	30	30	30	30	162	162	116.1	0.85	169.2

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 数值模型主要几何尺寸

Table 2. The main dimensions of the specimen (numerical model)

numerical model	a₁/mm	a₂/mm	b₁/mm	b₂/mm	α/(°)	β/(°)	L/mm	t/mm	quality/g
PRT-IN-D	30	30	30	30	162	162	116	0.85	169.7

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 数值与试验重要指标结果

Table 3. Numerical and experimental significant index results

tube type	F_max/kN	error/%	F_ave/kN	error/%	η_CFE/%	error/%	e_a/(J/g)	error/%
CST-IE	59.9	-	11.4	-	19.0	-	6.7	-
PRT-IE1	34.6	-42.2	24.2	112.3	69.9	267.9	14.3	113.4
PRT-IE2	35.9	-40.1	24.2	112.3	65.6	245.3	14.3	113.4
PRT-IN-D	33.9	-43.4	26.0	128.1	76.7	303.7	15.3	128.4

下载: 导出CSV

表 4 CCB耐撞性能

Table 4. The CCB crashworthiness

tube type	θ/(°)	F_max/kN	error/%	F_ave/kN	error/%	η_CFE/%	e_a/(J/g)	η_EA
CCB-0deg	0	391.7	-	147.3	-	37.6	13.3	3.07E-5
CCB-4deg	4	247.9	-36.7	129.9	-11.8	52.4	11.7	2.71E-5
CCB-7deg	7	232.9	-40.5	104.3	-29.2	44.8	9.4	2.18E-5

下载: 导出CSV

表 5 不同折痕高度比h₁(h₃)/h₂折纸管的几何尺寸和数值计算结果

Table 5. Dimensions and numerical results for different ratios h₁(h₃)/h₂

tube type	h₁(h₃)/mm	h₂/mm	h₁(h₃)/h₂	θ/(°)	F_max/kN	F_ave/kN	η_CFE/%	e_a/(J/g)	η_EA
PRT-1/3h-0deg PRT-1/3h-4deg PRT-1/3h-7deg	30	90	1/3	0	102.8	111.9	108.9	10.1	2.34E-5
				4	89.2	127.4	142.8	11.5	2.66E-5
				7	84.2	112.4	133.6	10.1	2.35E-5
PRT-1/2h-0deg PRT-1/2h-4deg PRT-1/2h-7deg	37.5	75	1/2	0	132.3	127.7	96.5	11.5	2.66E-5
				4	117.6	122.4	104.1	11.0	2.55E-5
				7	96.9	113.0	116.7	10.2	2.36E-5
PRT-1h-0deg PRT-1h-4deg PRT-1h-7deg	50	50	1	0	235.6	137.3	58.3	12.4	2.87E-5
				4	154.1	133.0	86.3	12.0	2.78E-5
				7	135.6	126.7	93.4	11.4	2.64E-5
PRT-11/8h-0deg PRT-11/8h-4deg PRT-11/8h-7deg	55	40	11/8	0	267.8	143.2	53.5	12.9	2.99E-5
				4	162.4	136.2	83.9	12.3	2.84E-5
				7	150.3	129.1	85.9	11.7	2.69E-5
PRT-2h-0deg PRT-2h-4deg PRT-2h-7deg	60	30	2	0	277.9	140.9	50.7	12.7	2.94E-5
				4	167.3	133.6	79.9	12.1	2.79E-5
				7	162.9	128.8	79.1	11.6	2.69E-5

下载: 导出CSV

表 9 耐撞性指标对比

Table 9. Comparison of crashworthiness indexes

tube type	F_max/kN	error/%	F_ave /kN	error/%	η_CFE/%	error/%	e_a/(J/g)	error/%
CCB-0deg	391.7	-	147.3	-	37.6	-	13.3	-
PRT-ct-49-0deg	112.0	-71.4	183.0	24.2	163.4	334.6	13.4	0.8

下载: 导出CSV

表 6 不同折痕长度比a₁(b₁)/a₂(b₂)折纸管几何尺寸和数值计算结果

Table 6. Dimensions and numerical results for different ratios a₁(b₁)/a₂(b₂)

tube type	a₁(b₁)/mm	a₂(b₂)/mm	a₁(b₁)/a₂(b₂)	θ/(°)	F_max/kN	F_ave/kN	η_CFE/%	e_a/(J/g)	η_EA
PRT-1a-0deg PRT-1a-7deg	61.25	61.25	1	0	134.1	119.2	88.9	10.8	2.49E-5
PRT-1a-0deg PRT-1a-7deg	61.25	61.25	1	7	121.2	110.6	91.3	10.0	2.31E-5
PRT-2a-0deg PRT-2a-7deg	81.67	40.83	2	0	104.8	114.2	109.0	10.3	2.38E-5
PRT-2a-0deg PRT-2a-7deg	81.67	40.83	2	7	96.7	114.0	117.9	10.3	2.38E-5
PRT-3a-0deg PRT-3a-7deg	91.875	60.625	3	0	102.8	111.9	108.9	10.1	2.34E-5
PRT-3a-0deg PRT-3a-7deg	91.875	60.625	3	7	84.2	112.4	133.6	10.1	2.35E-5
PRT-4a-0deg PRT-4a-7deg	98	24.5	4	0	92.8	127.7	137.5	11.5	2.66E-5
PRT-4a-0deg PRT-4a-7deg	98	24.5	4	7	84.4	108.5	128.6	9.8	2.26E-5
PRT-5a-0deg PRT-5a-7deg	102.08	20.42	5	0	91.0	135.6	149.1	12.2	2.83E-5
PRT-5a-0deg PRT-5a-7deg	102.08	20.42	5	7	80.1	117.1	146.3	10.6	2.44E-5

下载: 导出CSV

表 7 不同宽厚比c/t折纸管几何尺寸和数值计算结果

Table 7. Dimensions and numerical results for different ratios c/t

tube type	t/mm	c/t	F_max/kN	error/%	F_ave/kN	error/%	η_CFE/%	error/%	e_a/(J/g)	error/%
CCB-0deg	2.0	61.3	391.7	-	147.3	-	37.6	-	13.3	-
PRT-ct-49	2.5	49.0	112.0	-71.4	183.0	24.2	163.4	334.6	13.4	0.8
PRT-ct-61	2.0	61.3	91.0	-76.8	135.6	-3.0	149.1	296.5	12.2	-8.3
PRT-ct-81	1.5	81.7	45.8	-88.3	78.7	-46.6	171.8	356.9	9.6	-27.8
PRT-ct-122	1.0	122.5	23.8	-93.9	37.4	-28.1	157.1	317.8	6.8	-48.9
PRT-ct-245	0.5	245.0	8.0	-98.0	12.3	-91.6	153.8	309.0	4.5	-66.2

下载: 导出CSV

表 8 不同冲击角度对F_max, F_ave, η_CFE和e_a的影响结果

Table 8. Effects of different impact angles on F_max, F_ave, η_CFE and e_a

tube type	θ/(°)	F_max/kN	error/%	F_ave/kN	error/%	η_CFE/%	error/%	e_a/(J/g)	error/%
PRT-ct-49-0deg	0	112.0	-	183.0	-	163.4	-	13.4	-
PRT-ct-49-10deg	10	40.1	-64.2	146.3	20.1	364.8	123.3	10.7	-20.1
PRT-ct-49-15deg	15	62.0	-44.6	158.8	13.2	256.1	56.7	11.6	-13.4
PRT-ct-49-20deg	20	51.2	-54.3	150.0	18.0	293.0	79.3	10.9	-20.1
PRT-ct-49-25deg	25	36.8	-67.1	119.2	34.9	323.9	98.2	8.7	-35.1

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(19)

[1]	何远鹏, 王凌峰, 杨秋松, 等. 多折角梯形台面折纸夹层结构的冲击防护性能[J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2024, 44 (4): 36-48. HE Yuanpeng, WANG Lingfeng, YANG Qiusong, et al. Impact response of TPS folded sandwich structure[J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2024, 44 (4): 36-48. (in Chinese)
[2]	霍鹏, 许述财, 范晓文, 等. 鹿角骨单位仿生薄壁管斜向冲击耐撞性研究[J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2020, 40(11): 127-138. HUO Peng, XU Shucai, FAN Xiaowen, et al. Oblique impact resistance of a bionic thin-walled tube based on antles osteon[J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2020, 40 (11): 127-138. (in Chinese)
[3]	贾豪博, 任柯融, 卿华, 等. 破片冲击作用下油箱动力学响应行为实验研究[J]. 应用数学和力学, 2023, 44 (8): 944-952. doi: 10.21656/1000-0887.440002 JIA Haobo, REN Kerong, QING Hua, et al. Experimental study on dynamic responses of fuel tanks under fragment impacts[J]. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 2023, 44 (8): 944-952. (in Chinese) doi: 10.21656/1000-0887.440002
[4]	YILDIRIM A, DEMIRCI E, KARAGÖZ S, et al. Experimental and numerical investigation of crashworthiness performance for optimal automobile structures using response surface methodology and oppositional based learning differential evolution algorithm[J]. Materials Testing, 2023, 65 (3): 346-363. doi: 10.1515/mt-2022-0304
[5]	张智扬, 赵振宇, 任建伟, 等. 蜂窝夹芯结构用连接接头抗冲击性能研究[J]. 应用数学和力学, 2024, 45 (8): 1024-1036. doi: 10.21656/1000-0887.450131 ZHANG Zhiyang, ZHAO Zhenyu, REN Jianwei, et al. Study on impact resistance of connection joints for honeycomb sandwich structures[J]. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 2024, 45 (8): 1024-1036. (in Chinese) doi: 10.21656/1000-0887.450131
[6]	HAN D C, PARK S H. Collapse behavior of square thin-walled columns subjected to oblique loads[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 1999, 35 (3): 167-184. doi: 10.1016/S0263-8231(99)00022-1
[7]	REYES A, LANGSETH M, HOPPERSTAD O S. Crashworthiness of aluminum extrusions subjected to oblique loading: experiments and numerical analyses[J]. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 2002, 44 (9): 1965-1984. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7403(02)00050-4
[8]	柳占立, 初东阳, 王涛, 等. 爆炸和冲击载荷下金属材料及结构的动态失效仿真[J]. 应用数学和力学, 2021, 42 (1): 1-14. LIU Zhanli, CHU Dongyang, WANG Tao, et al. Dynamic failure simulation of metal materials and structures under blast and impact loading[J]. Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 2021, 42 (1): 1-14. (in Chinese)
[9]	杨欣, 范晓文, 许述财, 等. 仿虾螯结构薄壁管设计及耐撞性分析[J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2020, 40 (4): 62-72. YANG Xin, FAN Xiaowen, XU Shucai, et al. Design and crashworthiness analysis of thin-walled tubes based on a shrimp chela structure[J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2020, 40 (4): 62-72. (in Chinese)
[10]	张筱, 肖勇, 刘洪波, 等. 轴向串联式吸能管的缓冲吸能特性[J]. 爆炸与冲击, 2024, 44 (11): 104-113. ZHANG Xiao, XIAO Yong, LIU Hongbo, et al. Energy absorption characteristics of axial series energy absorption tubes[J]. Explosion and Shock Waves, 2024, 44 (11): 104-113. (in Chinese)
[11]	SONG Z, MING S, DU K, et al. Energy absorption of metal-composite hybrid tubes with a diamond origami pattern[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2022, 180 : 109824. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2022.109824
[12]	TENG C H, SONG Z B, ZHOU C H, et al. The imperfection sensitivity of trapezoid origami crash boxes[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2024, 196 : 111486. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2023.111486
[13]	MING S, SONG Z, ZHOU C, et al. The energy absorption of long origami-ending tubes with geometrical imperfections[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2021, 161 : 107415. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2020.107415
[14]	YE H, ZHOU X, MA J, et al. Axial crushing behaviors of composite pre-folded tubes made of KFRP/CFRP hybrid laminates[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2020, 149 : 106649. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2020.106649
[15]	YAO S, ZHU H, LIU M, et al. Energy absorption of origami tubes with polygonal cross-sections[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2020, 157 : 107013. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2020.107013
[16]	YE H T, MA J Y, ZHOU X, et al. Energy absorption behaviors of pre-folded composite tubes with the full-diamond origami patterns[J]. Composite Structures, 2019, 221 : 110904. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.110904
[17]	MA J Y, DAI H P, SHI M Y, et al. Quasi-static axial crushing of hexagonal origami crash boxes as energy absorption devices[J]. Mechanical Sciences, 2019, 10 (1): 133-143. doi: 10.5194/ms-10-133-2019
[18]	YANG K, XU S Q, ZHOU S W, et al. Multi-objective optimization of multi-cell tubes with origami patterns for energy absorption[J]. Thin-Walled Structures, 2018, 123 : 100-113. doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2017.11.005
[19]	ZHOU C H, JIANG L L, TIAN K, et al. Origami crash boxes subjected to dynamic oblique loading[J]. Journal of Applied Mechanics, 2017, 84 (9): 091006. doi: 10.1115/1.4037160