A Comparative Study of Energy Absorbing Foams for Head Impact Energy Management

Everitt, Lori; Fialka, John; Kerman, Michael; Laabs, Edward

doi:10.4271/980972

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mechanical properties of the candidate materials at specifi c intervals of environmental conditions and velocities are however still required input for such simulations and extensive comparative investigations of mechanical properties of energy absorbing materials are diffi cult to fi nd in the literature. Some reports on materials suitable for car interior energy absorption do exist (2)(3)(4)(5) , but they mainly deal with a few materials from within a specifi c material category.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selection of Energy Absorbing Materials for Automotive Head Impact Countermeasures

Juntikka

Hallström

2004

Cellular Polymers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Material candidates for energy absorption in head impact countermeasures for automotive applications are evaluated using both quasi-static and dynamic test methods. Ranking of different materials turns out to be difficult since the mechanical response of a material could vary considerably with temperature, especially for polymers. Twenty-eight selected materials, including foams, honeycombs and balsa wood are tested and evaluated. The materials are subjected to a sequence of tests in order to thin out the array systematically. Quasi-static uni-axial compression is used for initial mapping of the selected materials, followed by quasi-static shear and dynamic uni-axial compression. The quasi-static test results show that balsa wood has by far the highest energy absorption capacity per unit weight but the yield strength is too high to make it suitable for the current application. The subsequent dynamic compression tests are performed for strain rates between 56 s−1 and 120 s−1 (impact velocities between 1.4 and 3 m/s) and temperatures in the range −20 - 60 °C. The test results emphasize the necessity of including both strain rate and temperature dependency to acquire reliable results from computer simulations of the selected materials.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%