PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 6, 2026Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part F Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit0 citations

Offset impact in railway vehicles: A study on energy absorbers

View Full Paper
LBLuca BuoncristianiAPA. PerticoneNBN Baldanzini

Key Points

  • The aim is to evaluate the crashworthiness of thin-walled tubular energy absorbers under offset impact conditions.
  • Conducted Finite Element simulations using LS-DYNA.
  • Analyzed four typologies: Simple Tubes, Tapered Tubes, Multi-Cell Tubes, and Bi-Tubular Tubes.
  • Assessed the impact of cross-sectional dimensions and wall thickness on energy absorption.
  • Larger cross-sectional dimensions improved energy absorption and promoted progressive folding.
  • BTT and MCT had the highest absolute energy absorption but showed performance decline under offset conditions.
  • ST and TT showed the least change in performance, indicating stability under off-axis impact.

Abstract

In response to the growing regulatory emphasis on evaluating non-axial impact conditions in crash safety assessments, this study investigates the crashworthiness of thin-walled tubular energy absorbers under offset impact using Finite Element simulations, performed with LS-DYNA. Four typologies were analysed: Simple Tubes (ST), Tapered Tubes (TT), Multi-Cell Tubes (MCT) and Bi-Tubular Tubes (BTT). Larger cross-sectional dimensions (above 225 mm) significantly improved energy absorption and promoted progressive folding, while wall thickness had minimal effect on stability. While BTT and MCT achieved the highest absolute energy absorption, they also exhibited the greatest performance decline under offset conditions. Conversely, ST and TT showed the lowest change in performance. Cross-sectional shape critically influenced deformation: narrow corner angles (e.g., triangles, squares) enhanced folding and stability, while wider shapes (e.g., octagons) increased buckling risk. These findings inform optimal design strategies for energy absorbers under realistic off-axis impact conditions.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Buoncristiani et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69fa989404f884e66b5325ebhttps://doi.org/10.1177/09544097261448261
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper