Analyzes crashworthiness improvements in high-strength steel tubes, suggesting a new design approach for electric vehicle structures.
Lightweight design and crashworthiness of protective structures are critical for battery safety in electric vehicles (EVs). This study addresses the limited research on cross-sectional shape design of high-strength steel double-cell roll-formed tubes (DCRFTs), widely used in EV bumper beams, battery boxes, and electric bus frames. A parametric design method is proposed based on three parameters: middle flange offset (o), upper deflection angle (α), and lower deflection angle (β). Under the constraints of constant cross-sectional height and enclosed area, this method systematically generates diverse shapes, including square, trapezoid, hexagon, re-entrant hexagon, and various hybrid shapes. Validated finite element models were employed to analyze the deformation modes and crashworthiness of DP980 steel DCRFTs under idealized lateral three-point bending with simple supports. The results indicated that the re-entrant hexagon section reduced maximum deformation (Disp) by 2.95%, peak crushing force (PCF) by 9.53%, and improved crushing force efficiency (CFE) by 13.88% compared to the baseline square section. The parametric study and sensitivity analysis confirmed that the offset (o) was the most critical parameter, contributing over 80% of the variance in Disp, PCF, and CFE. Multi-objective optimization using an RBF surrogate model and the NSGA-II algorithm yielded Pareto optimal solutions. Compared to the baseline, three representative solutions achieved Disp reductions of 11.83–25.10% and CFE improvements of 15.63–22.26%, each with distinct trade-offs among objectives. This work establishes a methodological framework for parametric cross-section design of roll-formed profiles; its extension to realistic boundary conditions will further facilitate practical EV protective structure design.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: