Advanced high strength steels (AHSS), in particular, are an attractive group materials, offering higher strength for improved energy absorption and the opportunity to reduce weight through the use of thinner gauges. High pressure tube hydroforming (HPTH) has been used to produce safety components for these steels, but it is expensive. Low pressure tube hydroforming (LPTH) is a lower cost alternative to form the safety components in the car. The side intrusion beam is the second most critical part after front rail in the car structure for passenger safety during crash. The forming as well as crash behaviour of a square side intrusion beam from both processes was investigated using numerical simulation. This paper investigated the interaction between the forming and crash response of these materials in order to evaluate their potential for use in vehicle design for crashworthiness. The energy absorption characteristics of the different tubes were calculated and the results from the numerical analyses compared for both hydroforming process.
[1]
Jyhwen Wang,et al.
Plastic instability in dual-pressure tube-hydroforming process
,
2005
.
[2]
Lorenzo M. Smith,et al.
Double-sided high-pressure tubular hydroforming
,
2003
.
[3]
Nader Asnafi,et al.
Theoretical and experimental analysis of stroke-controlled tube hydroforming
,
2000
.
[4]
L J Sparke.
Vehicle design for minimum societal harm: improving side impact protection
,
2006
.
[5]
Seijiro Maki,et al.
Mechanism of improvement of formability in pulsating hydroforming of tubes
,
2007
.
[6]
K. C. Chang,et al.
Crashworthiness Evaluation of Side-Door Beam of Vehicle
,
2008
.
[7]
Peter Hodgson,et al.
Numerical investigation of high and low pressure tube hydroforming
,
2008
.