PSI - Issue 27

Laksmana Widi Prasetya et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 27 (2020) 132–139 Prasetya et al. / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000 – 000

139

8

At the 10 s, the maximum strain is 0.5993, while at the step 20 s, the maximum strain was 0.177. In this situation, the can at the top was already deformed on the entire surface. Furthermore, at the time of 30 s, the maximum strain experienced an increase compared to the time of 20 s, at of 0.1979. At the 30 s, the arrangement of the lower cans appeared to be deformed, and at the 40 s, the maximum strain was finally recorded at 0.1984. The cans on the top and bottom are deformed all over the surface. 4. Conclusions Based on the results of the deformation that occurs, when viewed in sections x, y, and z stress, the impact attenuator deformation behavior at each time step tends to increase. Besides that, it can be seen that in step 10 s the plastic deformation first takes place at the bottom of the can in the upper can arrangement. This plastic deformation occurs as a reaction to energy absorption, so it can be concluded that the more the number of elements or surfaces that are deformed, the higher the energy that can be absorbed. Furthermore, the displacement that occurs on the x and y axes shows no significant difference in value and differs from the z-axis because the load moves opposite to the z-axis so that the displacement results will read that the z-axis displacement displays the highest value. Although the rigid wall setting has been set at 200 mm displacement, the element shows a maximum displacement rate of 207.4 mm. This phenomenon happened because several cans had folded downwards so that geometrical elements had a movement of more than 200 mm. From all the deformations that occur and comparison with findings in Part I, internal energy or energy absorbed has a value of 6662.332 Joules. Although it has not yet reached 7350 joules, the value is quite good. This impact attenuator may be a leading solution for the waste recycling process and improvement of safety devices in the future. Prospects in this subject are still wide with variations in material, configuration, or arrangement of cans or combination with other material structures are to be analyzed. References Belingardi, G., Obradovic, J., 2010. Design of the Impact Attenuator for a Formula Student Racing Car:Numerical Simulation of the Impact Crash Test. Journal of the Serbian Society for Computational Mechanics 4, 52-65. Boria, S., Forasassi, G., 2008. Crash Analysis of an Impact Attenuator for Racing Car in Sandwich Material. FISITA Conference, 167 – 176. Boria, S., Pettinari, S., Giannoni, F., Cosimi, G., 2016. Analytical and Numerical Analysis of Composite Impact Attenuators. Composite Structure, 348 – 355. Boria, S., 2010. Behaviour of an Impact Attenuator for Formula SAE Car under Dynamic Loading. International Journal of Vehicle Structures and Systems 2, 45-53. Fonteyn, M., Witteman, 2006. Formula Student Racing Team Eindhoven-Crash Safety. MT06.10, Eindhoven. Mellor, A.N., 2002. Impact Testing in Formula One. International Journal of Crashworthiness 7, 475-486. Munusamy R., Barton, C., Lightweight Impact Crash Attenuators for a Small Formula SAE Race Car. International Journal of Crashworthiness 2, 223 – 234. Prabowo, A.R., Nubli, H., Sohn, J.M., 2019. On the Structural Behaviour to Penetration of Striking Bow under Collision Incidents between Two Ships. International Journal of Automotive and Mechanical Engineering 16, 7480-7497. Prabowo, A.R., Laksono, F.B., Sohn, J.M., 2020. Investigation of structural performance subjected to impact loading using finite element approach: case of ship-container collision. Curved and Layered Structures 7, 17-28. SAE International, 2018. Formula SAE Rules 2019, 1 – 134.