sustainability

Article
Frontal Vehicular Crash Energy Management Using Analytical
Model in Multiple Conditions
Danqi Wang 1,2 , Junyuan Zhang 3 , Shihang Wang 3 and Lin Hu 1, *

1 College of Automotive and Mechanical Engineering, Changsha University of Science & Technology,
Changsha 410000, China
2 State Key Laboratory of Automobile Safety and Energy Conservation, Tsinghua University,
Beijing 100000, China
3 State Key Laboratory of Automobile Simulation and Control, Jilin University, Changchun 130015, China
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: When it comes to frontal vehicular crash development, matching the stiffness of the front-
end structures reasonably, i.e., impact energy management, can effectively improve the safety of
the vehicle. A multi-condition analytical model for a frontal vehicular crash is constructed by a
three-dimensional decomposition theory. In the analytical model, the spring is used to express the
equivalent stiffness of the local energy absorption space at the front-end structure. Then based on
the analytical model, the dynamic responses and evaluation indexes of the vehicle in MPDB and
SOB conditions are derived with the input of the crash pulse decomposition scheme. Comparing the
actual vehicle crash data and the calculation results of the proposed solution method, the error is less
than 15%, which verifies validity of the modeling and the accuracy of the solution. Finally, based
on the solution method in the MPDB and the SOB conditions, the sensitivities of the crash pulse
decomposition scheme to evaluation indexes are analyzed to obtain qualitative rules which guide
crash energy management. This research reveals the energy absorption principle of the front-end
structure during the frontal impact process, and provides an effective optimization method to manage
Citation: Wang, D.; Zhang, J.; Wang, the multiple conditions of the vehicle crash energy such as the FRB (frontal rigid barrier), the MPDB
S.; Hu, L. Frontal Vehicular Crash (mobile progressive deformable barrier), and the SOB (small overlap barrier).
Energy Management Using
Analytical Model in Multiple Keywords: crash energy management; front-end structure; modelling; multiple conditions; vehicle
Conditions. Sustainability 2022, 14,
16913. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su142416913

Academic Editor: Marilisa Botte 1. Introduction

Received: 18 November 2022

The process of an automobile crash includes the following three parts: barriers, vehi-
Accepted: 12 December 2022
cles, and occupants, and is a complex dynamics system. According to the annual statistical
Published: 16 December 2022
report of road traffic accidents from the Chinese government, frontal impact of automobile
accidents account for the highest proportion among all accident forms [1,2]. In a frontal
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
crash, the crash energy is absorbed by the front-end structures of vehicle [3]. With the
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
development of crash safety regulations, today’s vehicle front-end structural design needs
published maps and institutional affil-
to meet the requirements of multiple conditions such as FRB (frontal rigid barrier), MPDB
iations.
(mobile progressive deformable barrier), and SOB (small overlap barrier) [4,5]. This greatly
increases the difficulty of the vehicle safety design. From the perspective of dynamics,
revealing the crash energy dissipation mechanism and constructing a dynamic model of
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
the front-end structure, which solves energy management in the early design stage, is of
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. great significance for improving the safety of the vehicle [6].
This article is an open access article The ultimate goal of vehicular frontal crash safety research is to protect the safety of
distributed under the terms and its occupants. In the crash process, the initial kinetic energy of the occupants is dissipated
conditions of the Creative Commons through the following two ways: the deformation of the vehicle structure and the action of
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// the restraint system [7]. According to statistics about existing vehicles, the structure absorbs
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ more than 60% of the kinetic energy of the occupants and is the most important way to
4.0/). absorb energy [8,9]. Crash energy management is meant to control the dissipation of energy

Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416913 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 2 of 18

by designing the rigidity and deformation of the vehicle structure so as to protect the safety
of the occupants. In the process of a vehicular frontal crash, the energy dissipation is related
to the topology of the auto body and the transmission path of the impact force [10,11].
During the process of a frontal vehicular crash, the total energy of the system is mainly
absorbed through the deformation of the front-end structures. In theory, the product of
force and displacement is equal to energy. Thus the crash energy absorbed by the vehicle is
approximately equal to the product of the impact force and the deformation of the front-end
structures [8]. The mass loss of the vehicle in a frontal crash is negligible compared with the
total weight. In other words, the mass of the vehicle during the collision is approximately
constant. In theory the impact force is approximately equal to the product of the acceleration
and mass. Similar conclusions were also demonstrated in reference [12], which defines crash
energy per unit mass as energy density. Then, the energy density absorbed by the vehicle
during the impact is the product of the acceleration and the structural deformation [8,13].
When the vehicle hits FRB, almost all of the crash energy is absorbed by the structural
deformation. In this process, the vehicle acceleration is also called the crash pulse. The
sum of the deformations of all vehicle structures in the longitudinal direction (the driving
direction) is the maximum dynamic crushing. The maximum dynamic crushing is obtained
by the quadratic integration of the crash pulse [12,14]. That is to say, the crash energy is
integral to the crash pulse in the displacement domain. Therefore, from the perspective of
mechanics, the frontal crash energy management of the vehicle is actually the design and
the decomposition problems of the crash pulse [8].
The design problem of the crash pulse has been extensively studied through theories,
simulations, and experiments [15–17]. At present, there are relatively mature methods and
qualitative conclusions for guiding engineering design of crash pulses [18,19]. In terms
of engineering conclusions, without considering the engine layout, the high-low-height
crash pulse can effectively reduce occupant injuries; the double-step crash pulse is suitable
for vehicles considering the engine layout, and the higher first step, the lower second step
are the better for occupant safety [7]. As a continuation of the paper on multi-condition
optimization of crash pulse, this article focuses on the decomposition of the crash pulse.
In this paper, the crash pulse in the displacement domain is the total energy target
during the impact process which is then is decomposed into absorption energies of sub-
structures based on the topology and the load path of vehicle. To achieve this, it is necessary
to find the correlation between the target crash pulse and the structural performance. From
2006 to 2011, the magic cube approach was proposed to decompose the crash energy into
sub-structure design goals from the three-dimensions of time, space, and size, and de-
sign the load of the front longitudinal beams through the dynamic topology optimization
method [20,21]. In 2011, the energy-absorbing space of the front-end structure is divided
into four layers in the vertical direction according to the transmission path of impact force,
and used to derive the design goals of energy absorption by the simplified model [22]. In
2016, the vehicle longitudinal energy management method and the lateral energy manage-
ment method are summarized to divide the front-end structure longitudinally, and then
decompose the energies of each area according to the horizontal arrangement of the energy
absorbing structure [7,23].
Our team has studied the frontal vehicular crash mechanics, crash pulse optimization,
and energy management methods in the early stage. In the reference [12], we analyzed
the energy dissipation process of a frontal vehicular crash and established the relationship
between crash pulse and energy from the perspective of mechanics. In the references [15,24],
we discussed the coupling relationship between the crash pulse and auto body structures,
and established an automatic optimization method for the crash pulse considering multiple
impact conditions. In the references [13,25,26], the energy absorption space of front-end
structures is vertically layered and longitudinally segmented by the deformation mode of
the sub-structures to obtain the decomposing energy as the design targets of anti-collision
beam, the energy absorbing box, and the longitudinal beam.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 3 of 18

At present, it is mainly focused on the research of crash energy management meth-

ods of the vehicle front-end structure based on engineering experience in the FRB impact
condition [27–29]. Considering the impact force transmission characteristics of FRB con-
dition, the front-end structure of the vehicle is divided into space, and the crash pulse is
decomposed according to the sub-space as the energy absorption target [12]. In addition
to FRB condition, the vehicle also needs to absorb energy through the deformation of the
front-end structure in other frontal impact conditions, such as the MPDB impact condition
which mainly test crash compatibility and SOB impact conditions which mainly test the
safety of the passenger compartment [5,30,31]. Therefore, managing the energy absorption
of front-end structures to meet the performance requirements and evaluation indicators of
multiple frontal crash conditions is an urgent problem in the vehicle design industry, and it
is also the research purpose of this paper.
Based on the frontal multi-condition crash pulse design method studied in the previous
stage, this paper proposes a multi-condition crash energy management method, that is,
the decomposition method of crash pulse. The proposed method optimizes the energy
absorption of the vehicle front-end structures considering the design requirements of three
conditions (that is FRB, MPDB, and SOB). The method can help enterprises to carry out
the forward design of frontal vehicular crashes when the empirical data are insufficient.
The main contributions of this paper include the following three aspects: (1) constructing a
three-dimensional analytical model of vehicle front-end structure to describe the energy
absorption space, impact load path, and structural stiffness; (2) deriving the dynamic
responses and evaluation indexes of vehicle and barrier in the MPDB and SOB conditions
to realize the crash pulse decomposition considering multiple conditions based on the
proposed analytical model; (3) analyze the sensitivity of the crash pulse decomposition
scheme to the evaluation indexes to obtain the qualitative crash pulse energy management
strategy based on the analytical model.
The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces a mechanical analytical model
of vehicle front-end structure. In Section 3, we derive the solution of analytical model
in MPDB and SOB conditions. An empirical case and the simulation results of existing
vehicles that have been running in China are applied to verify this constructed model
and the solution method in Section 3. Analysis and discussion are conducted in Section 4.
Finally, the conclusions of this paper are drawn in Section 5.

2. Three-Dimensional Analytical Model of Vehicle Front-End Structure

2.1. Three-Dimensional Decomposition of Energy Absorption Space
In this section, the energy absorption space during a frontal impact can be determined
as shown in Figure 1, where B represents the width of the whole vehicle; H represents
the vertical distance from the intersection point of pillar A and the front finger beam to
the chassis; D represents the longitudinal space L in the forward compartment of the
vehicle minus the engine or motor occupancy E. The total energy absorption space can be
decomposed into longitudinal, lateral, and vertical dimensions as follows, also considering
the overlap rate of impact conditions, topological structure of the car body, and the layout
position of the engine and motor.
Lateral decomposition: On both sides of the body symmetry plane, the energy ab-
sorption structure of the vehicle is almost exactly the same, and the contact area between
the vehicle and the wall barrier in MPDB impact condition is also 50% of the width of the
vehicle. Thus, the total energy absorption space can be divided horizontally into two equal
regions. To ensure a better safety level of the vehicle in the condition of 25% small bias
impact, the energy absorption structure should be set within 25% wide range on both sides
of the vehicle. If the requirements of meeting various impact conditions are considered at
the same time, four regions can be divided horizontally. The width of each region is 25% of
the total car width.
Longitudinal decomposition: According to the impact force transfer path of the vehicle
in the frontal impact, the total energy absorption space can be vertically divided into two,
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 4 of 18

three, and four tiers longitudinally. Take a typical passenger vehicle as an example, which
includes four tiers of the total energy-absorbing apace, the first tier is the engine cover;
the second one is the front finger beam; the third one is the anti-impact beam, energy
absorption box, and longitudinal beam; and the fourth one is the sub-frame structure. The
energy absorption corresponds to the impact force. The energy absorption of each tier
accounts for about 10%, 20%, 50%, and 20% of the total energy absorption, respectively [22].
The third tier includes the main energy absorption area of the vehicle. To improve the
lightweight effect of vehicles, the engine hood is designed to be thinner and absorb less
energy, so the energy absorption space is mainly divided into three tiers, that is, the first
tier contains the engine hood, front finger beam and other structures. In addition,
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 ofthe
20
sub-frames of some vehicles are removed in consideration of the economic and lightweight
factors, so that the longitudinal space is two tiers.

Theenergy
Figure1.1.The
Figure energyabsorption
absorptionspace
spaceduring
duringaafrontal
frontalimpact.
impact.

Verticaldecomposition:
Lateral decomposition:On The engine
both sidesofofthe
thetraditional
body symmetry automobile
plane,andthethe motor
energy ab-of
a pure electric vehicle almost do not deform during the impact,
sorption structure of the vehicle is almost exactly the same, and the contact area betweenwhich can be regarded
as avehicle
the rigid structure; therefore,
and the wall barrieraccording to the layout
in MPDB impact position
condition is alsoof50%
rigidofcomponents
the width ofsuchthe
as engine
vehicle. or motor,
Thus, theenergy
the total total space of energy
absorption spaceabsorption can be divided
can be divided longitudinally.
horizontally into two
For traditional gasoline cars and hybrid cars, rigid components such as engine need to
equal regions. To ensure a better safety level of the vehicle in the condition of 25% small
be placed in the middle of the front end firewall considering the connection between the
bias impact, the energy absorption structure should be set within 25% wide range on
engine and drive shaft and maintenance problems. Thus, the two sections from the front
both sides of the vehicle. If the requirements of meeting various impact conditions are
end of the engine to the anti-impact beam and from the back end of the engine to the
considered at the same time, four regions can be divided horizontally. The width of each
firewall are set as impact energy absorption spaces. For pure electric vehicles, the motor
region is 25% of the total car width.
can be considered close to the firewall layout because there is no drive shaft on the vehicle.
Longitudinal decomposition: According to the impact force transfer path of the ve-
In this way, the hole from the anti-impact beam to the front end of the motor can be used as
hicle in the frontal impact, the total energy absorption space can be vertically divided into
a section of energy absorption space.
two, three, and four tiers longitudinally. Take a typical passenger vehicle as an example,
In general, the three-dimensional decomposition of the total space of energy absorption
which includes four tiers of the total energy-absorbing apace, the first tier is the engine
at the front end of vehicle is to take into account the impact condition, the transmission
cover; the second one is the front finger beam; the third one is the anti-impact beam, en-
path of impact force, and the arrangement of the engine and motor, etc., and conduct
ergy absorption
horizontal box,vertical
division, and longitudinal beam;
stratification, and and the fourth
longitudinal one is the sub-frame
segmentation successively.struc-
The
ture. The energy absorption corresponds to the impact force.
decomposed fore cabin energy absorption space becomes the accumulation of the energyThe energy absorption of
each tier accounts for about 10%, 20%, 50%, and 20% of the total energy
absorption subspace. As a sample, the total space of energy absorption at the front end of absorption, re-
spectively [22]. The third
vehicle is decomposed 4× tier3 includes
× 2 sectionsthe as
main
shownenergy absorption
in Figure 2. area of the vehicle. To
improve the lightweight effect of vehicles, the engine hood is designed to be thinner and
absorb less energy, so the
2.2. Three-Dimensional energy absorption
Decomposition of Crash space
Pulse is mainly divided into three tiers, that
is, theInfirst tier contains the engine hood,
the FRB impact condition, the wall is rigid front finger
andbeam and other
the overlap ratestructures.
between the Invehicle
addi-
tion,
and the sub-frames
the wall is 100%.ofThis
some vehiclesthat
indicates arealmost
removed in consideration
all the energy absorption of thestructures
economicinand the
lightweight
front end offactors, so that
the vehicle arethe longitudinal
involved space is two
in deformation tiers.
energy absorption during the impact,
and Vertical decomposition:
the acceleration responseThe engine
of the of the
vehicle, traditional
namely automobile
the crash and the
pulse, is also the result
motorofofthea
pure electric vehicle almost do not deform during the impact, which
comprehensive action of the energy absorption structure. Thus, we take the crash pulse of can be regarded as a
rigid structure;as
FRB condition therefore,
the overallaccording to the layout
energy absorption position
objective of theof vehicle’s
rigid components such as
front end structure,
engine or motor,decompose
and gradually the total space
it intoofeach
energy absorption
energy absorptioncan be dividedand
subspace longitudinally. For
the design target
traditional gasoline cars and hybrid cars, rigid components such as engine need to be
placed in the middle of the front end firewall considering the connection between the
engine and drive shaft and maintenance problems. Thus, the two sections from the front
end of the engine to the anti-impact beam and from the back end of the engine to the
firewall are set as impact energy absorption spaces. For pure electric vehicles, the motor
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 20

tion of the energy absorption subspace. As a sample, the total space of energy absorption
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 20
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 at thefront end of vehicle is decomposed 4 × 3 × 2 sections as shown in Figure 2. 5 of 18

tion of the energy absorption subspace. As a sample, the total space of energy absorption
of the energy absorption structure in space, so as to achieve the forward design of the
at the front end of vehicle is decomposed 4 × 3 × 2 sections as shown in Figure 2.
front-end structure.

Figure 2. Three-dimensional decomposition of the total energy absorption space of automobile

front compartment.

2.2. Three-Dimensional Decomposition of Crash Pulse

Figure In2.2.
Figure Three-dimensional
theThree-dimensionaldecomposition
decomposition
FRB impact condition, ofofthe
the wall total
isthe
rigid energy
total theabsorption
energy
and absorption
overlap space
space
rate ofofautomobile
between automobile
the ve-
front
hiclecompartment.
front and
compartment.
the wall is 100%. This indicates that almost all the energy absorption structures
in the front end of the vehicle are involved in deformation energy absorption during the
2.2. Three-Dimensional
impact,Theandhorizontal Decomposition
coordinate
the acceleration of the
response of Crash
crash Pulse
of thepulse in the
vehicle, displacement
namely the crash domain
pulse,isisthe defor-
also the
mation,
In of
result thewhich
theFRB corresponds
impact condition,
comprehensive toaction
the longitudinal
the
of wall direction
is rigid
the energy of the
and the
absorption energyrate
overlap
structure. absorption
between
Thus, wespace,
the ve-
take but
the
there
hicle is no difference between the lateral direction and the vertical direction. Therefore, the
crashand the of
pulse wall
FRB is 100%.
conditionThisasindicates
the overall thatenergy
almost absorption
all the energy absorption
objective of thestructures
vehicle’s
in three-dimensional
the front decomposition
end of theand vehicle method
are involved proposed
in deformation in this section is mainly to decompose
front end structure, gradually decompose it into eachenergy energy absorption
absorption during the
subspace
the crash pulse
impact, the into each energy-absorbing subspace innamely
accordance with apulse,
givenisproportion
and theand design acceleration
target of theresponse of the
energy absorption vehicle,
structure in the crash
space, so as to achieve also the
the
according
result of the tocomprehensive
the three-dimensionalaction of decomposition
the energy scheme structure.
absorption of the totalThus,
energy-absorbing
we take the
forward design of the front-end structure.
space.
crash If the
pulse of longitudinal
FRB condition part
as ofof the
the total energyabsorption
overall absorbing objective
space is divided into two
The horizontal coordinate the crash energy
pulse in the displacement of the is
domain vehicle’s
the de-
parts,
front the crash
end structure, pulse is divided
and gradually into two
decompose parts at the deformation
it intodirection
each energy corresponding
absorption to the
subspace
formation, which corresponds to the longitudinal of the energy absorption
andlongitudinal
thebutdesign subspace.of the energy absorption structure in space, so as to achieve the
space, theretarget
is no difference between the lateral direction and the vertical direction.
When the front energy absorption space of the vehicle is divided into N tiers vertically
forward
Therefore, design
the of the front-end structure.
three-dimensional decomposition method proposed in this section is
and M zones horizontally, the decomposition scheme Q of the crash pulse is obtained as
mainly to decompose the crash pulse crash
The horizontal coordinate of the into each pulse in the displacement
energy-absorbing domain
subspace is the de-
in accordance
shown in Figure 3. Note that the percentage of the absorbed energy of the sub-absorbent
formation, which corresponds to the longitudinal direction
with a given proportion according to the three-dimensional decomposition scheme of the of the energy absorption
space in the total absorbed energy is represented by qnm (n = 1, 2, . . . , N; m = 1, 2, . . . , M).
space, but there is no difference
total energy-absorbing space. If thebetween the lateral
longitudinal partdirection
of the total andenergy
the vertical direction.
absorbing space
Therefore,
is divided the into three-dimensional
two parts, the crash decomposition

pulse is divided
q11 q12 · · · q1M methodinto
proposed in this section is
two parts at the deformation
mainly to decompose
corresponding to the the crash pulse
longitudinal  into
subspace. each energy-absorbing subspace in accordance
 q21 q22 · · · q2M 

with aWhengiventhe proportion according
front energy absorptionQ = to the. three-dimensional
.. of .the .. decomposition
is divided intoschemeN tiersofverti-
the(1)
 .. space . . vehicle
 
total energy-absorbing space. If the longitudinal . part of .thetotal energy absorbing space
cally and M zones horizontally, the decomposition scheme Q of the crash pulse is ob-
q N1 is q · · · qinto
istained
divided into twoinparts,
as shown Figurethe3. crash
Note pulse
that theN2divided
percentage N Mof two theparts at theenergy
absorbed deformation
of the
corresponding
sub-absorbent to the longitudinal
space

inQthe total subspace.
absorbed energy is represented by q (n = 1, 2,…, N; m
Ym = q1m + q2m + . . . + q Nm , m = 1, 2, . . . , Mnm
When the front energy absorption space of the vehicle is divided into N tiers verti-(2)
= 1, 2,…, M). QnZ = qn1 + qn2 + . . . + qnM , n = 1, 2, . . . , N
cally and M zones horizontally, the decomposition scheme Q of the crash pulse is ob-
tained as shown in Figure 3. Note that the percentage of the absorbed energy of the
sub-absorbent space in the total absorbed energy is represented by qnm (n = 1, 2,…, N; m
= 1, 2,…, M).

Preliminarydecomposition
Figure3.3.Preliminary
Figure decompositionscheme
schemeof
offrontal
frontal impact
impact energy.
energy.

In Equations (1) and (2), Q represents the total absorbed energy; QYm represents the
absorbed energy of mth region, m = 1, 2, . . . , M; QYm represents the absorbed energy of nth
tier, n3.=Preliminary
Figure 1, 2, . . . , N.decomposition scheme of frontal impact energy.
 QYm = q1m + q2 m + .... + qNm , m = 1, 2, ..., M
 (2)
QnZ = qn1 + qn 2 + .... + qnM , n = 1, 2, ..., N
In Equations (1) and (2), Q represents the total absorbed energy; QYm represents
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 the absorbed energy of mth region, m = 1, 2,…, M; QYm represents the absorbed energy of
6 of 18
nth tier, n = 1, 2,…, N.

2.3. 2.3.
Construction of Analytical
Construction Model
of Analytical Model
After the the
After three-dimensional
three-dimensional decomposition
decompositionofofthe thetotal energy absorption
total energy absorptionspace,
space,each
eachsubspace
subspacecorresponds
correspondstotoaadecomposed
decomposedcrash crashpulse,
pulse,or
or aa sub-pulse.
sub-pulse. ItIt is
is the
the same
same as
as the
the original
original pulse
pulsein inshape,
shape,butbutthe theamplitude
amplitude is different,
is different, which
which is the
is the product
product oforiginal
of the the
original
pulsepulse
and and the proportion
the proportion of energy
of energy absorbed
absorbed by each
by each subspace.
subspace. TheThe crash
crash pulse
pulse in the
in the displacement domain can be regarded as the equivalent specific
displacement domain can be regarded as the equivalent specific stiffness of the front-end stiffness of the
front-end
structure structure of the vehicle;
of the vehicle; similarly, similarly, the sub-pulse
the sub-pulse decomposeddecomposed to each ener-
to each energy-absorbing
gy-absorbing
subspace can subspace can be as
be regarded regarded as the equivalent
the equivalent specificofstiffness
specific stiffness of the space.
the space.
Figure 4 represents
Figure 4 representsthethe
three-dimensional
three-dimensional vehicle
vehicleanalytical
analyticalmodelmodelforforfrontal
frontal im-
impact.
pact.InInthis
thismodel,
model,the theequivalent
equivalentspecific
specificstiffness
stiffness of
of each
each energy-absorbing
energy-absorbing subspacesubspace isis ex-
expressed
pressedby byspring
springstiffness
stiffnesskkij,ijrigid
, rigidbodies
bodiessuch
suchas asengine,
engine,motor,
motor, and
and passenger
passenger cabin
cabin are
are expressed by a mass block.

Figure 4. Three-dimensional vehicle analytical model.

Figure 4. Three-dimensional vehicle analytical model.
The spring stiffness k can be calculated as follows:
The spring stiffness kij canij be calculated as follows:
av
k ij = qija· ·M (3)
v dv
k = q ⋅ ⋅M
ij ij (3)
dv
where, av represents the crash pulse; dv represents vehicle displacement; M represents
vehicle
where, mass; i is the
av represents thenumber of lateral
crash pulse; dv decomposition of thedisplacement;
represents vehicle total space of energy absorption
M represents
in the
vehicle fronti compartment,
mass; is the numberand j is thedecomposition
of lateral number of vertical decomposition
of the total space ofof energy
the totalab-
space
of energy absorption.
sorption in the front compartment, and j is the number of vertical decomposition of the
total space of energy absorption.
3. Solution of Analytical Model in Multi-Conditions of a Frontal Vehicular Crash
3.1. Solution
3. Solution Method forModel
of Analytical MPDBinCondition
Multi-Conditions of a Frontal Vehicular Crash
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEWIn 7 ofand
20
3.1. Solutionthe MPDB
Method forimpact
MPDBsystem,
Condition it mainly consists of the following two parts: barrier
vehicle. The impact process of the MPDB condition is defined as the process in which the
In the and
vehicle MPDBthe impact system,
barrier start it mainly
to contact consists
either of them ofwith
the following two of
a deceleration parts: barrier
0. It is assumed
andthat
vehicle.
the The
massesimpact
of process
the MPDB of the
and MPDB
vehicle condition
are constant is defined
and the as the process
energy-absorbing in which
structures
structures of the two are only plastically deformed without elastic deformation during
the of
vehicletwo
andare
theonly
barrier start todeformed
contact either of them with a deceleration of the
0. Itimpact
is
the the
impact process. plastically
Due to the rotations of without
vehicleelastic deformation
and barrier are all during
small during the
assumed thatDue
process. thetomasses of the MPDB
the rotations and and
of vehicle vehicle are constant andduring
the energy-absorbing
impact process, structural deformation is thebarrier are all small
most important the impact
way to absorb energy process,
[24].
structural
The deformation
simplified model ofisMPDB the most important
condition can way to absorb energy
be constructed [24].
ignoring theThe simplified
energy con-
model of MPDB condition can be
verted to rotation as shown in Figure 5. constructed ignoring the energy converted to rotation as
shown in Figure 5.

Thesimplified
Figure5.5.The
Figure simplifiedmodel
modelofofMPDB
MPDBcondition.
condition.

In this model, the barrier parameters obtained in the conceptual design stage include
the mass and equivalent stiffness of the barrier, the general layout parameters of the ve-
hicle, including the energy absorption space of the front-end structure and the mass of
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 7 of 18

In this model, the barrier parameters obtained in the conceptual design stage include
the mass and equivalent stiffness of the barrier, the general layout parameters of the vehicle,
including the energy absorption space of the front-end structure and the mass of the vehicle
as the system parameters. Taking the crash pulse of vehicle FRB condition as input; the
dynamic response of the vehicle and the barrier during the impact was solved, and the
vehicle compatibility evaluation indexes are calculated.
In Figure 5, the vehicle and the barrier move in relative motion; M and MB are the
masses of the vehicle and the barrier; dBv is their relative displacement; dij is the local
deformation of the vehicle; dBij is the local deformation of the barrier; kij is the local stiffness
of the vehicle, and kBij is the local stiffness of the barrier.
During the impact, the local stiffness of the vehicle and the barrier, kij and kBij , are
first connected in series to obtain the equivalent stiffness keqij of each energy absorption
subspace, and then the equivalent stiffness of each energy absorption subspace is connected
in parallel to obtain the equivalent stiffness Keq of the vehicle and the barrier, as follows:

k Bij ·k ij
(
k eij = k Bij +k ij (4)
Keq = ∑ k eij

MB · M
(
Meq = M B+M
v0 · v0 v0 (5)
veq = v0 +v0 = 2

where, Meq represents the equivalent mass of the model, and veq represents the equivalent velocity.
The motion response of the vehicle and the barrier is obtained as follows:

d B (t) = MBM+ M · 2vω0 · sin(ω · t)

(
(6)
dv (t) = MM B
B+M
· 2vω0 · sin(ω · t)
(
M
d B (t) = MB + M · (−2 · v0 · ω · sin(ω · t))
MB (7)
dv (t) = MB + M · (−2 · v0 · ω · sin(ω · t))
 R
v B (t) = v0 − R a B (t)dt
(8)
vv (t) = v0 − a(t)dt
s
Keq
ω= (9)
Meq
where, dB and dv are respectively for the barrier and the deformation of the vehicle impact
process; aB and av are respectively for the barrier and the vehicle acceleration, vB and
vv are the barrier and the vehicle speed, respectively; ω is the natural frequency of the
impact system.
In addition, three compatibility evaluation indexes of MPDB condition, i.e., the relative
motion displacement of the vehicle and the barrier (dBv ), the uniformity index of the barrier
(SD), and the maximum deformation of the barrier (MD), as follows:

d Bv = d B + dv (10)

k ij
d Bij = d Bv × (11)
k Bij + k ij
r 2
1 
SD = × ∑ d Bij − d Bij (12)
m


d Bmax = max d Bij (13)
where, m represents the number of forward compartment subspaces that absorb energy.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 8 of 18

3.2. Solution for Small Overlap Condition

In the small overlap condition, the vehicle decelerates along the longitudinal direction
and rotates around its contact point with the rigid barrier after contacting with the barrier.
If one of the following two point occurs, the impact process of small overlap condition is
considered to be over: (1) when the speed of the vehicle decreases to 0, the structures of the
vehicle no longer deform longitudinally; (2) if the vehicle displacement in the Y direction
is ≥25% of the vehicle width, the vehicle is detached with the barrier without structural
deformation. Therefore, the vehicle motion responses in the impact process of the small
overlap condition can be considered from two aspects, i.e., the deceleration motion and
rotation motion of the vehicle.
Based on the theory of impact mechanics, the simplified model of small overlap
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
condition can be obtained as shown in Figure 6. In this model, O is the contact 9point of 20
between the vehicle and the barrier, and also the rotation center of the vehicle. v0 is the
impact speed, M is the mass of the vehicle, and kij is the vehicle stiffness.

Thesimplified
Figure6.6.The
Figure simplifiedmodel
modelof
ofsmall
smalloverlap
overlapcondition
conditionin
inlongitudinal.
longitudinal.

Themotion
The motionresponse
responseof ofthe
thevehicle
vehiclein
inthis
this condition
conditioncancanbe
be considered
consideredfrom
from two
two
aspects, i.e., the deceleration motion and the rotation motion of the vehicle.
aspects, i.e., the deceleration motion and the rotation motion of the vehicle. The 25% The 25%
overlaparea
overlap areabetween
betweenthe
the vehicle
vehicleand
and the
the barrier
barrier isis mainly
mainly the
the energy-absorbing
energy-absorbing area
area
during the impact, and its equivalent stiffness (k25% ) is calculated as follows:
during the impact, and its equivalent stiffness (k25%) is calculated as follows:

k 25% = ∑
k25% =
kki2i 2 (14)
(14)
The vehicle makes a single-degree-of-freedom free vibration in the X-axis direction.
The vehicle makes a single-degree-of-freedom free vibration in the X-axis direction.
The vibration equation is as follows:
The vibration equation is as follows:
..
M x (t) + k25% x (t) = 0 (15)
Mx ( t ) + k25% x ( t ) = 0 (15)
..
where, x(t) is the displacement of the vehicle, and x (t) is the acceleration response of
where, x(t)
the vehicle.is the displacement of the vehicle, and x(t ) is the acceleration response of the

r
vehicle. k25%
ω= (16)
M
k
 x. (t) = ω A= sin(ωt25% (16)

+ φ)
x (t) = Aω cos(M ωt + φ) (17)
 ..
x (t) = − Aω 2 sin(ωt + φ)
 x ( t ) = A sin (ωt + φ )
In this condition, t = 0, x =0, and x = v0 . Thus, the motion response of the vehicle is
.

obtained as follows:
 x ( t ) = Aω cos (ωt + φ ) (17)

xv(=
 x t ) x=
.
sin((ω
=ω ω sin
(t−) A v20
ωtt)+ φ )
vv = x (t) = v0 cos(ωt) (18)
..
= x (tx) ==v−
In this condition, t = 0 , x = 0av, and .vThus,sinthe
( motion
) response of the vehicle

0 0 ω ωt
is obtained as follows:
The force analysis of the vehicle under the condition of the small overlap condition
is shown in Figure 7. The vehicle will rotate around point O under the action of impact
 the vehicle’sv
xv = x ( t ) = 0 sin
reaction F, and the distance between
 (ωt )of mass and the center of rotation
center
ω


vv = x ( t ) = v 0 cos (ωt ) (18)


 Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 9 of 18

is the radius of rotation r. When the vehicle is decelerating, its longitudinal displacement is
xv , and the longitudinal distance between the center of mass and the center of rotation is
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
1/2L − xv . When the vehicle is rotating, the transverse displacement of the center of 10 mass
of 20

is y, and the transverse distance from the center of mass to the center of rotation is 25%
B + y.

Figure 7. The simplified model of small overlap condition in rotation.

Figure 7. The simplified model of small overlap condition in rotation.
The radius of rotation (r) and the rotation angle (θ) of the vehicle are calculated
The radius of rotation (r) and the rotation angle (θ) of the vehicle are calculated as
as follows:
follows:
q
r = (y + 0.25 · B)2 + (1/2 · L − xv )2 (19)
r = ( y + 0.25 ⋅ By)++0.25
(1 2· B⋅ L − xv )
 2 2
(19)

θ = a · tan (20)
1/2 · L − xv
 y + 0.25 ⋅ B  of the vehicle rotation (β), and
θ =the
The torque of the vehicle (Me), tan acceleration
a ⋅angular  (20)
1 2 ⋅ L − as
the lateral displacement of the vehicle (y) isobtained 
xv follows:
Me = F 0(Me),
The torque of the vehicle · r = the
F · sin (θ ) · r =
angular F · (y + 0.25
acceleration of· the
B) vehicle rotation (β),
(21)
and the lateral displacement of the vehicle (y) is obtained as follows:
Me = F 0 · r = J · β (22)
( ) (
M e = F ′ ⋅ r = F ⋅ sin θ ⋅ r = F ⋅ y + 0.25 ⋅ B
y = r · sin(θ ) − 0.25 · B
) (21)
(23)
where, F 0 represents the component Mforce ′ the
e = Fof⋅ r J ⋅ β reaction F perpendicular to(22)
= impact the
direction of the radius of rotation; J represents the moment of inertia of the vehicle.
y = r ⋅ sin (θ )of
The maximum longitudinal displacement − 0the ⋅ B is the structural deformation
.25vehicle (23)
of the vehicle in the process of impact. The intrusion of the crew compartment (D )
where, F ′ represents the component force of the impact reaction F perpendicular 25%max to the
can be calculated as follows:
direction of the radius of rotation; J represents the moment of inertia of the vehicle.
D25%max = max
The maximum longitudinal displacement of (the − L1 is the structural deformation
xv )vehicle (24)
of the vehicle in the process of impact. The intrusion of the crew compartment (D25%max)
3.3.be
can Verification
calculated as follows:
3.3.1. Evaluation Indexes
(1) Occupant load criterion (OLC) D25% max = max xv − L1 ( ) (24)

The OLC is calculated by the velocity–time curve of the barrier as Figure 8. A smaller
3.3.
OLC is preferable [19]. At the time t1 in the Figure 8, the virtual occupant makes free
Verification
movement relative
3.3.1. Evaluation to the barrier, and the displacement is S1 = 0.065 m; from the time t1 to
Indexes
t2 , the relative displacement between virtual occupant and barrier is S2 = 0.235 m.
1) Occupant load criterion (OLC)
(2) TheMaximum deformation
OLC is calculated (MD)
by the velocity–time curve of the barrier as Figure 8. A smaller
OLC is If there is an intrusion
preferable depth
[19]. At the time of t0.63
1 in m
theinFigure
an area8,larger mm × 40makes
than 40occupant
the virtual mm on the
free
barrier, therelative
movement barrier tois considered
the barrier, to
andbethe
bottoming out. Atisthe
displacement S1 =time,
0.065deduction of two
m; from the timepoints
t1 to
t2is MDrelative
, the = 2, otherwise MD = between
displacement 0. virtual occupant and barrier is S2 = 0.235 m.
(3) Standard deviation (SD)
 Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 10 of 18

The SD of barrier intrusion is obtained by the homogeneity of footprint based on

scans of barrier. A smaller SD is preferable. The barrier deformation uniformity factor h is
calculated by SD as follows:

i f SD < 50mm,
 h=0
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW i f 50mm < SD < 150mm, h = (SD − 50)/100 11 of(25)
20

i f SD > 100mm, h=1


Figure8.8.The
Figure OLCcalculated
TheOLC calculatedby
byvelocity–time
velocity–timecurve
curveofofbarrier.
barrier.

2)(4) Maximum
The penalty of Mcompat
deformation (PM)
(MD)
IfThe calculation
there rules for
is an intrusion PM of
depth reference to an
0.63 m in [31]area
are larger
shownthan
in the
40following:
mm × 40 mm on the
barrier, the barrier
 is considered to be bottoming out. At the time, deduction of two
points is MD =
 OLC < 25g,
i2,f otherwise MD = 0.

deviation (SD)= −2 · h − MBO;
Mcompat

3) Standard




25g ≤
ofi fbarrier OLC ≤ 40g,


The SD  intrusion is obtained by the homogeneity of footprint based on
scans of barrier. A Mcompat
smaller SD = is−preferable.
2 · OLC/15 The barrier deformation uniformity factor(26)
+ 10/3 h

is calculated 
by SD as − h ·
follows:
(( 4 · OLC/10 − 8 ) − ( 2 · OLC/15 − 10/3 )) − MBO;




i f OLC > 40g,

if SD < 50mm, h=0





Mcompat = −2 − 6 · h − MBO.

if 50mm < SD < 150mm, h = ( SD − 50 ) 100 (25)
if SD > 100mm, h =1

3.3.2. Verification of MPDB Condition
The main MATLAB algorithm of the solution method is established as shown in
4)the The penalty of Mcompat
Supplementary Information.(PM)The data about three quality grade vehicles in FRB and
MPDB Thetests
calculation
[30] arerules
usedfor PM reference
to verify to [31]and
the accuracy arereliability
shown in ofthethe
following:
solution method. In
this condition, research of the influence of pulse parameters and vehicle quality on the
OLC < 25 g ,
 ifindex,
evaluation including OLC, MD, SD, and PM, three kinds of vehicles, i.e., V 1 , V122 ,ofand
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW
 Mcompat = −kg,
2 ⋅ h1400
− MBO ; 1100 kg, respectively, are applied. The crash
20
V 3 , with the masses of 1700 kg, and
pulses ofVif1 , V25g ≤ OLC
2 , and V 3 are≤ shown
40 g , in Figure 9.

 Mcompat = − 2 ⋅ OLC 15 + 10 3 (26)
 − h ⋅ ((4 ⋅ OLC 10 − 8 ) − (2 ⋅ OLC 15 − 10 3 )) − MBO ;

 if OLC > 40 g ,
 Mcompat = − 2 − 6 ⋅ h − MBO .


3.3.2. Verification of MPDB Condition

The main MATLAB algorithm of the solution method is established as shown in the
Supplementary Information. The data about three quality grade vehicles in FRB and
MPDB tests [30] are used to verify the accuracy and reliability of the solution method. In
this condition, research of the influence of pulse parameters and vehicle quality on the
evaluation
Figure
Figure 9.
9. Theindex,
crashincluding
crash pulses of VV1OLC,
pulses of , V2, and MD,
V3. SD, and PM, three kinds of vehicles, i.e., V1, V2,
The 1 , V 2 , and V 3 .
and V3, with the masses of 1700 kg, 1400 kg, and 1100 kg, respectively, are applied. The
crash The
pulses of V1, decomposition
stiffness V2, and V3 are shown schemesin Figure 9.
of the front structures of the three vehicles are
all transverse 50% + 25% zone and vertical three floors, denoted as “4 × 3” decomposition,
as shown in Figure 10. Decomposition plans (Q) of V1, V2, and V3 are obtained as shown in
Equation (27).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 11 of 18

The stiffness decomposition schemes of the front structures of the three vehicles are all
transverse 50% + 25% zone and vertical three floors, denoted as “4 × 3” decomposition, as
shown9.inThe
Figure Figure
crash10. Decomposition
pulses plans
of V1, V2, and V 3. (Q) of V 1 , V 2 , and V 3 are obtained as shown in
Equation (27).
The stiffness
 decomposition  schemes  of the frontstructures of the three vehicles are
all transverse 50%0.080 0.070
+ 25% zone and vertical0.080 0.070 denoted as “40.090
three floors, 0.060
× 3” decomposition,
Q(V1)in=Figure
as shown 0.12010. 0.080 , Q(V2) =plans
Decomposition 0.110 0.090
(Q) of V 1,  (V3V) 3=are
V,2,Qand 0.100
obtained0.100 (27)
as shown
 in
Equation (27). 0.085 0.070 0.080 0.070 0.090 0.060

Figure 10. The decomposition of the crash pulse.

The values of OLC, MD, SD and PM are obtained in Table 1. The errors between the
 0.080 0.070   0.080 0.070   0.090 0.060 
calculation results and the existing data are all about 10%, whichindicate that the accuracy
Q ( V1) = 0.120 0.080  , Q ( V2 ) =  0.110 0.090  , Q ( V3) =  0.100 0.100 
   
(27)
of the solution method is acceptable.
 0.085 0.070   0.080 0.070   0.090 0.060 

1. The
TableThe values
values OLC,MD,
ofofOLC, MD, SD
SD, and
and PM.
PM are obtained in Table 1. The errors between the
calculation results and the existing data are all about 10%, which indicate that the accu-
Evaluation Indexes
racyVehicles
of the solutionResults
method is acceptable.
OLC (g) MD (m) SD (mm) PM
Table 1. The values of OLC,data
Existing MD, SD, 35.9
and PM. Bottoming, MD > 0.63 56 3.74
V1 Calculation 31.30 0.71 63.34 3.38
Error −12.26% Evaluation
Accord Indexes 13.1% −9.6%
Vehicles Results
OLC (g) MD (m) SD (mm) PM
Existing data 27.8 NO, MD < 0.63 93.5 1.57
V2 Existing data
Calculation 35.9
27.33 Bottoming,
0.62 MD > 0.63 98.356 3.74
1.58
V1 Calculation
Error −31.30
1.7% 0.71
Accord 63.34
5.1% 3.38
0.5%
Error data −12.26%
Existing 26.3 Accord
NO, MD < 0.63 13.1%
96.4 −9.6%
1.26
V3 Calculation
Existing data 23.75
27.8 NO, 0.57
MD < 0.63 107.05
93.5 1.14
1.57
V2 Error
Calculation − 9.7%
27.33 Accord
0.62 11.04%
98.3 − 9.5%
1.58
Error −1.7% Accord 5.1% 0.5%
3.3.3. Verification of Small
Existing dataOverlap26.3
Condition NO, MD < 0.63 96.4 1.26
The finiteCalculation
V3 element calculation results of a vehicle
23.75 in small overlap
0.57 condition 1.14
107.05 as the
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 20
basic data are usedErrorto verify the accuracy
−9.7% of the analytical
Accord model by the maximum
11.04% intrusion
−9.5%
amount of the upper part of the passenger compartment. The vehicle mass is 1365 kg,
and the
3.3.3. energy absorption
Verification space in
of Small Overlap the front compartment is 0.68 m. The maximum
Condition
intrusion value
intrusion value ofofthe
thefour
fourintrusion
intrusionmeasurement
measurementpoints
pointsononthe
theupper
upperpart
partofofthe
thepassenger
pas-
The
senger finite element
compartment calculation
is taken as 34.2 results
cm ofsimulation
in the a vehicle in smallofoverlap
results condition
the vehicle
vehicle as as the
compartment is taken as 34.2 cm in the simulation results of the as shown
shown in
basic data
in Figure are used to verify the accuracy of the analytical model by the maximum intru-
Figure 11 11 [32].
[32].
sion amount of the upper part of the passenger compartment. The vehicle mass is 1365
kg, and the energy absorption space in the front compartment is 0.68 m. The maximum

Figure 11.
Figure 11. The
The finite
finiteelement
elementcalculation
calculationresults ofof
results vehicle in in
vehicle FRB.
FRB.

It is known that the energy absorption decomposition scheme of the front-end

structure of the car body is shown in Equation (28). Take the crash pulse of the vehicle as
shown in Figure 12 into the analytical model together with the decomposition scheme in
Equation (28) to calculate the maximum longitudinal displacement of the vehicle as
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 Figure 11. The finite element calculation results of vehicle in FRB. 12 of 18

It is known that the energy absorption decomposition scheme of the front-end

structure of the car
It is known thatbody is shown
the energy in Equation
absorption (28). Take scheme
decomposition the crash
of pulse of the vehicle
the front-end as
structure
shown
of the car body is shown in Equation (28). Take the crash pulse of the vehicle as shown in
in Figure 12 into the analytical model together with the decomposition scheme in
Equation (28)the
Figure 12 into to analytical
calculate model
the maximum longitudinal
together with displacement
the decomposition schemeof in
the vehicle(28)
Equation as
1.0019 m. Thethe
to calculate maximum
maximum intrusion value of
longitudinal the passenger
displacement ofcompartment
the vehicle as calculated
1.0019 m.byThe
the
analytical
maximummodel is 1.0019
intrusion value− 0.68 = 0.3219
of the m, and
passenger the error with
compartment the maximum
calculated by thevalue of the
analytical
upper
model intrusion
is 1.0019 −of 0.68
the passenger
= 0.3219 m, compartment
and the errorofwith
the finite element model
the maximum is −5.88%.
value of the upperIt
shows that the analytical model solved in small overlap condition is effective.
intrusion of the passenger compartment of the finite element model is −5.88%. It shows
that the analytical model solved in small overlap condition is effective.
0.06 0.04 
Q ( vehicle ) =  0.21 0.10

 
0.06 0.04 (28)
Q(vehicle) = 0.21 0.10 (28)
0.06 0.03
0.06 0.03

Figure
Figure 12. The
The crash
crash pulse
pulse of
of vehicle
vehicle in FRB condition.

4. Analysis
4. Analysis and
and Discussion
Discussion
4.1. Impact Analysis of Different Waveform Decomposition Schemes
4.1. Impact Analysis of Different Waveform Decomposition Schemes
In this section, the effect of waveform decomposition scheme on three evaluation
In this section, the effect of waveform decomposition scheme on three evaluation
indexes of compatibility, i.e., OLC, MD, and SD, is studied. Note that the 4 × 3 decomposi-
indexes of compatibility, i.e., OLC, MD, and SD, is studied. Note that the 4 × 3 decompo-
tion method is adopted in this research. Considering the lateral symmetry of the car body,
sition method is adopted in this research. Considering the lateral symmetry of the car
the variables of the decomposition method are the proportion of energy absorbed by six
body, the variables of the decomposition method are the proportion of energy absorbed
variables, and the sum of the six variables is 50%, as shown in Equation (28).
by six variables, and the sum of the six variables is 50%, as shown in Equation (28).
 
q11 q12
Q = q21 q22 , q11 + q12 + q21 + q22 + q31 + q32 = 50% (29)
q31 q32

Three variation schemes for six variables are proposed, as follows:

Alternative 1: setting any one of the six variables to increase from 0 to 50%, and the
other variables are equal.
Alternative 2: setting any two of the six variables are increased from 0 to 50%, and the
other variables are equal.
Alternative 3: setting any three of the six variables and increase them from 0 to 50%,
and the other variables are equal.
The decomposition difference of each scheme is calculated by Equation (29). In
addition, the design and decomposition difference (W) of the three alternatives are shown
in Table 2.

W = |q11 − q12 | + |q11 − q21 | + |q11 − q22 | + |q11 − q31 | + |q11 − q32 |+
|q12 − q21 | + |q12 − q22 | + |q12 − q31 | + |q12 − q32 |+
|q21 − q22 | + |q21 − q31 | + |q21 − q32 |+ (30)
|q22 − q31 | + |q22 − q32 |+
|q31 − q32 |
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 13 of 18

Table 2. The design and decomposition difference of the three alternatives.

Alternative A Alternative B Alternative C

No. One of qij Other qij W Two of qij Other qij W Three of qij Other qij W
1 0 0.10 0.50 0 0.125 1.00 0 0.1667 1.5
2 0.05 0.09 0.20 0.05 0.10 0.40 0.05 0.1177 0.6
3 1/12 0.0833 0 1/12 0.0833 0.00 1/12 0.0833 0
4 0.1 0.08 0.10 0.1 0.075 0.20 0.1 0.0667 0.3
5 0.15 0.07 0.40 0.15 0.05 0.80 0.15 0.0167 1.2
6 0.2 0.06 0.70 0.2 0.025 1.40
7 0.25 0.05 1 0.25 0 2.00
8 0.3 0.04 1.30
9 0.35 0.03 1.60
10 0.4 0.02 1.90
11 0.45 0.01 2.20
12 0.5 0 2.50

In this section, the decomposition difference and the stiffness-change position of the
three schemes are adopted as the criteria to measure the uniformity of the barrier. The
greater W is, the poorer the uniformity of the decomposition scheme. At the same W, with
the more varied locations, the uniformity of the decomposition scheme is better. With W as
the horizontal coordinate, the values of OLC, MD, and SD calculated by the three schemes
are drawn, as shown in Figure 13, respectively.
When W is 0, the local stiffnesses of vehicle are evenly distributed. As the W increases,
the uniformity becomes worse. Through the above analysis and the information in Figure 13,
it is found that when W is 0, the OLC is the largest, the MD is the smallest, and the SD equals
0. In the Figure 13, as the W increases, the decomposition scheme becomes more and more
uneven, the OLC value gradually decreases, and the MD and SD value gradually increases.
Corresponding to the same value of W, the positional relationship of local stiffness changes
in the three stiffness decomposition schemes is: Alternative 3 > Alternative 2 > Alternative 1.
When W is the same, the OLC values of three alternatives are basically the same, which
shows that OLC is more sensitive to W, but has nothing to do with the position of the
stiffness distribution. When the W is the same, the increase in the stiffness-change position
helps to reduce the MD, and increase SD. It shows that MD and SD are more sensitive to
the change position of local stiffness and W. In general, the worse the uniformity of the
vehicle stiffness distribution, the smaller the OLC, and the larger the MD and SD. In order
to ensure that the barrier is not penetrated and to control the deformation uniformity index
SD, it is necessary to reasonably allocate the stiffness of the front-end structure.

4.2. Discussion about Stiffness Decomposition of Vehicle

The study of automobile crash safety is very important to improve road traffic
safety [33–35]. In the reference [24], an analytical model integrating barrier, vehicle, and
occupant is established to obtain not only the system dynamic responses but also the two
evaluation indexes in MPDB (OLC and MD), known as BVO model, as shown in Figure 14.
The BVO model system refers to simplified models with the elements of masses and springs.
It is assumed that vehicle and barrier have constant masses during the impact process. The
spring stiffnesses are used to represent the deformation energy absorption process of the
structures. Since the overlap between vehicle and barrier are ignored in the modeling, the
rotation responses of the BVO system and the local deformation index of barrier SD cannot
be calculated [31,36].
 Sustainability
lity 2022, 14, x FOR PEER2022, 14, 16913
REVIEW 15 of 20 14 of 18

(a) W VS. OLC.

Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 20

When W is the same, the OLC values of three alternatives are basically the same,
which shows that OLC is more sensitive to W, but has nothing to do with the position of
the stiffness distribution. When the W is the same, the increase in the stiffness-change
position helps to reduce the MD, and increase SD. It shows that MD and SD are more
sensitive to the change position of local stiffness and W. In general, the worse the uni-
formity of the vehicle stiffness
(b) W VS. MDdistribution, the smaller the OLC, and the larger the MD
and SD. In order to ensure that the barrier is not penetrated and to control the defor-
mation uniformity index SD, it is necessary to reasonably allocate the stiffness of the
front-end structure.

4.2. Discussion about Stiffness Decomposition of Vehicle

The study of automobile crash safety is very important to improve road traffic safety
[33–35]. In the reference [24], an analytical model integrating barrier, vehicle, and occu-
pant is established to obtain not only the system dynamic responses but also the two
evaluation indexes in MPDB (OLC and MD), known as BVO model, as shown in Figure
14. The BVO model system refers to simplified models with the elements of masses and
springs. It is assumed that vehicle and barrier have constant masses during the impact
process. The spring stiffnesses are used to represent the deformation energy absorption
process of the structures. Since the overlap between vehicle and barrier are ignored in the
modeling, the rotation(c)Wresponses
VS. SD of the BVO system and the local deformation index of
barrier13.
Figure 13. The relationships
Figure SDThe
cannot
between be three
W and calculated
relationships [31,36].
compatibility
between W and evaluation indexes.
three compatibility evaluation indexes.

When W is 0, the local stiffnesses of vehicle are evenly distributed. As the W in-
creases, the uniformity becomes worse. Through the above analysis and the information
in Figure 13, it is found that when W is 0, the OLC is the largest, the MD is the smallest,
and the SD equals 0. In the Figure 13, as the W increases, the decomposition scheme be-
comes more and more uneven, the OLC value gradually decreases, and the MD and SD
value gradually increases. Corresponding to the same value of W, the positional rela-
tionship of local stiffness changes in the three stiffness decomposition schemes is: Alter-
native 3 > Alternative 2 > Alternative 1.
Figure 14.
Figure 14. The
The BVO
BVO model.
model.

In order to solve the dynamic response of the vehicle in the overlap impact condi-
tions, the equivalent stiffness of the BVO model (KB and K) are decomposed into the local
stiffness in this paper, as shown in Figure 5. The three-dimensional analytical model of
vehicle front end structure after stiffness decomposition is shown in Figure 4. The pre-
vious impact mechanics model can solve the one-dimensional dynamic response. The
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 15 of 18

In order to solve the dynamic response of the vehicle in the overlap impact conditions,
the equivalent stiffness of the BVO model (KB and K) are decomposed into the local stiffness
in this paper, as shown in Figure 5. The three-dimensional analytical model of vehicle
front end structure after stiffness decomposition is shown in Figure 4. The previous impact
mechanics model can solve the one-dimensional dynamic response. The analytical model
and solution method proposed in this paper provide new calculation ideas for the three-
dimensional dynamic response of the impact system.
The vehicle data as the verification of the analytical model solved in MPDB test, are
the same with data to verify the accuracy of BVO model in the reference [24]. The results of
the BVO model are calculated by the vehicle mass and the crash pulse in the Section 3.3.2,
as shown in Table 3.

Table 3. The results of the BVO model.

Large Vehicle Medium Vehicle Small Vehicle

avmax (g) 30.77 36.14 43.34
OLC (g) 33.15 29.17 25.84
MD (m) 0.63 0.55 0.48

Comparing with the results calculated by the BVO model in Table 3, the OLC values
calculated by the analytical model are smaller and the MD values are larger. This may
be because that the local stiffnesses obtained after decomposing the vehicle stiffness are
connected in parallel when the vehicle parameters are the same. The local stiffnesses of
vehicle and barrier are first connected in series and then in parallel as the overall equivalent
stiffness between the two to calculate the impact responses under the MPDB condition.
Therefore, if the decomposition is uniform, the equivalent stiffness between barrier and
vehicle is constant, that is, the OLC and accelerations of the system calculated by the BVO
model and proposed analytical model are the same, and the deformation standard deviation
SD of the barrier is 0. If it is not uniformly decomposed, the equivalent stiffness between
vehicle and barrier is decreased, so that the OLC is decreased; and a part of local stiffnesses
of vehicle are increased to cause the local deformation of the barrier to increase, i.e., MD is
increased; at the same time, the SD value is larger than 0.
In engineering application, the main methods to improve vehicle compatibility are the
following: reducing the quality of the entire vehicle, evenly distributing structural stiffness,
and designing a reasonable crash pulse [12,13]. In the process of safety development, the
quality level of the vehicle should be determined first, then the BVO model should be used
to optimize the crash pulse, and finally the proposed model in this paper should be used to
decompose the stiffness of front-end structure [7,37].
The effect of vehicle stiffness decomposition on the dynamic responses of small offset
impact conditions is not analyzed in this paper. Theoretically, the greater the stiffness of
the 25% area (QY1 or QY4 in the Figure 10), the smaller the deformation of the vehicle
front-end structure and the smaller intrusion into the passenger compartment. Therefore, in
the engineering design, the sum of the stiffness of the three positions in the 25% area should
be increased as much as possible to improve the safety of the passenger compartment. That
is to say, adding an energy-absorbing structure or increasing the stiffnesses of the existing
structures in the 25% area can effectively improve the safety of the vehicle in small offset
impact condition.

4.3. Comparison with Existing Research

The energy management method distributes the total collision energy to the various
energy absorption structures of the auto body. According to the difference of the decom-
position method in time and space order, a variety of energy management methods are
proposed. From 2006 to 2011, Qi proposed the magic cube approach which decomposes
crashworthiness target into sub-structure design targets, and designs the load of front longi-
tudinal beam by the dynamic topology optimisation method [20,21,38]. In 2011, the book of
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 16 of 18

‘Fundamentals of Automobile Body Structure Design’ divided the energy absorption space
of the front-end structure according to the transmission path of the impact force [22]. From
2011 to 2013, Zhang et al. effectively decomposed total collision energy into sub-structure
performance targets based on energy management technology [25,39]. From 2013 to 2016,
Qiu presented an average allocation between ride-down energy and restraint energy to de-
crease occupant injury; in his book ‘Automobile Crash Safety Engineering’, the concepts of
‘longitudinal energy management’ and ‘lateral energy management’ were proposed [7,40].
The existing researches basically use qualitative methods to decompose the total energy
of a frontal vehicular crash into the front-end structures [31,37]. The existing methods rely
on empirical data or the subjective judgment of engineers and experts. Compared with the
existing methods, the most important feature of this paper is to use an analytical method
to optimize the crash energies of the vehicle front-end structures. This analytical method
greatly reduces the empirical dependence of the frontal vehicular crash. In addition, the
existing studies are based on empirical conclusions of FRB. The multi-conditions crash
energy optimization method proposed in this paper is mainly based on the FRB, and takes
into account the design requirements of MPDB and SOB.

5. Conclusions
This paper studies the modeling method of vehicle front-end structures and the
solution method of system dynamic responses in multiple impact conditions to manage
the crash energy. The energy absorption space of vehicle front-end is decomposed in three
dimensions, and expressed by the spring stiffness to construct the analytical model of
the front-end structure. Based on the three-dimensional analytical model of the front-end
structure, the dynamic responses and evaluation indexes of the MPDB and SOB operating
system are solved by the principle of engineering vibration with input of crash pulse
decomposition scheme. Subsequently, the sensitivity of the crash pulse decomposition
scheme to the evaluation indicators of each operating condition is analyzed based on the
solution method in the multi-condition. Several concluding remarks are drawn as follows:
(1) comparing the experimental data of the MPDB test and the calculation results of
constructed analytical model, the errors of evaluation indexes, i.e., OLC, SD and
PM, are all less than 15%, and judgments about the barrier bottoming out are all
in accordance;
(2) comparing the simulation data of the SOB test and the calculation results of con-
structed analytical model, the errors of the maximum intrusion into passenger com-
partment is −5.88%;
(3) as the W increases, the decomposition scheme becomes more and more uneven, the
OLC value gradually decreases, the MD and SD value gradually increases;
(4) OLC is more sensitive to W; MD and SD are more sensitive to the change position of
local stiffness and W;
(5) the greater the stiffness of the 25% area, the smaller the deformation of the vehicle
front-end structure and the intrusion into the passenger compartment.
To sum up, the proposed method reveals the energy absorption principle of the front-
end structure during the frontal impact process. The calculation results provide references
for vehicle crash energy management in three conditions. In the case of insufficient enter-
prise experience data, the optimization method in this paper can be used to carry out the
forward design of frontal vehicular crash safety.

Supplementary Materials: The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://
www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/su142416913/s1, Supplementary Information: The main MATLAB
algorithm of the solution method is established in the paper.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, D.W. and L.H.; Methodology, J.Z.; Software, S.W.; Writing—
original draft, D.W.; Writing—review & editing, L.H. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 17 of 18

Funding: This work was supported by the State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy
under Project No. KFY2203, and the Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province (No. 2022JJ40493).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data used to support the findings of this study are available from
the corresponding author upon request.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References
1. Zhang, H.; Peng, Y.; Hou, L.; Tian, G.; Li, Z. A hybrid multi-objective optimization approach for energy-absorbing structures in
train collisions. Inf. Sci. 2019, 481, 491–506. [CrossRef]
2. Zhang, H.; Peng, Y.; Hou, L.; Wang, D.; Tian, G.; Li, Z. Multistage impact energy distribution for whole vehicles in high-speed
train collisions: Modeling and solution methodology. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2020, 16, 2486–2499. [CrossRef]
3. Bilston, L.; Brown, J.; Whyte, T. Head excursion in frontal impacts is lower in high back booster seats than in forward facing child
seats with internal harnesses designed for children up to 8 years of age. Traffic Inj. Prev. 2022, 23, 244–249. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Reddy, S. Multi-cornered thin-walled sheet metal members for enhanced crashworthiness and occupant protection. Thin-Walled
Struct. 2015, 94, 56–66. [CrossRef]
5. Nguyen, L.P.T. An optimisation approach to choose thickness of three members to improve IIHS small-overlap structural rating.
Int. J. Crashworthiness 2017, 22, 518–526. [CrossRef]
6. Gidlewski, M.; Prochowski, L.; Jemioł, L.; Żardecki, D. The process of front-to-side collision of motor vehicles in terms of energy
balance. Nonlinear Dyn. 2019, 97, 1877–1893. [CrossRef]
7. Qiu, S. Automobile Crash Safety Engineering; Institute of Technology Press: Beinjing, China, 2016.
8. Huang, M. Automobile Crash Mechanics; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2002.
9. Hu, L.; Zhou, X.; Zhang, X.; Wang, F.; Li, Q.; Wu, W. A review on key challenges in intelligent vehicles: Safety and driver—Oriented
features. IET Intell. Transp. Syst. 2021, 15, 1093–1105. [CrossRef]
10. Othaganont, P.; Assadian, F.; Auger, D.J. Multi-objective optimisation for battery electric vehicle powertrain topologies. Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. Part D J. Automob. Eng. 2017, 231, 1046–1065. [CrossRef]
11. Huang, H.; Siddiqui, C.; Abdel-Aty, M. Indexing crash worthiness and crash aggressivity by vehicle type. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2011,
43, 1364–1370. [CrossRef]
12. Zhang, J. Parameters Design Method for Structure and Occupant Restraint System in Vehicle Crash; Science Press: Beijing, China, 2018.
13. Zhang, J.; Wang, D.; Wu, L.; Liu, L. Conceptual design of the front-end structure of automobile considering crashworthiness: A
three-stage target decomposition method. Int. J. Crashworthiness 2020, 25, 183–191. [CrossRef]
14. Mizuno, K. Crash Safety of Passenger Vehicles; China Communications Press: Beijing, China, 2016.
15. Teng, T.L.; Chang, P.H.; Liang, C.C. Application of crash pulse on the car crashworthiness design. Adv. Mech. Eng. 2017, 9,
168781401770009. [CrossRef]
16. Iraeus, J.; Lindquist, M. Analysis of minimum pulse shape information needed for accurate chest injury prediction in real life
frontal crashes. Int. J. Crashworthiness 2021, 26, 684–691. [CrossRef]
17. Tian, G.; Zhang, H.; Feng, Y.; Jia, H.; Zhang, C.; Jiang, Z.; Li, Z.; Li, P. Operation patterns analysis of automotive components
remanufacturing industry development in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 164, 1363–1375. [CrossRef]
18. Shi, Y.; Wu, J.; Nusholtz, G.S. Optimal Frontal Vehicle Crash Pulses—A Numerical Method for Design. In Proceedings of
the 18th Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV) Conference, Nagoya, Japan, 19–22 May 2003; p. 514. Available online: https:
//www.safetylit.org/citations/index.php?fuseaction=citations.viewdetails&citationIds[]=citjournalarticle_245671_38 (accessed
on 17 November 2022).
19. Lars, K.; Simon, G.; Konrad, E. Frontal crash pulse assessment with application to occupant safety. ATZ Worldw. 2009, 111, 12–17.
20. Anselma, P.; Niutta, C.; Mainini, L.; Belingardi, G. Multidisciplinary design optimization for hybrid electric vehicles: Component
sizing and multi-fidelity frontal crashworthiness. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 2020, 62, 2149–2166. [CrossRef]
21. Qi, C.; Ma, Z.; Kikuchi, N.; Raju, B. Blast protection design of a military automobile system using a magic cube approach. SAE SP
2008, 2195, 21.
22. Malen, D. Fundamentals of Automobile Body Structure Design; SAE International: Warrendale, PA, USA, 2011.
23. Narukawa, T.; Nishimura, H.; Ito, Y.; Motozawa, Y. Studies on Occupant Restraint Method in Car Crash Using Reduced-Order
Dynamic Model Considering Thoracic Deflection. Nihon Kikai Gakkai Ronbunshu C Hen/Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng. Part C 2013, 79,
1396–1405. [CrossRef]
24. Wang, D.; Zhang, J.; Ma, Y.; Jin, Y. Analytical modeling and collaborative optimization of the dynamic responses for barrier-
vehicle-occupant system considering crashworthiness and compatibility. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 2021, 64, 349–367. [CrossRef]
25. Zhang, J.; Chen, G.; Liu, L.; Li, H.; Tang, H. Design and target decomposition of impact pulse of car frontal crashworthiness. J.
Jilin Univ. Eng. Technol. Ed. 2012, 42, 823–827.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16913 18 of 18

26. Huang, M.; Laya, J.; Loo, M. A study on ride-down efficiency and occupant responses in high speed crash tests. SAE Tech.
Pap. 1995. [CrossRef]
27. Mizuno, K.; Itakura, T.; Hirabayashi, S.; Tanaka, E.; Ito, D. Optimization of vehicle deceleration to reduce occupant injury risks in
frontal impact. Traffic Inj. Prev. 2014, 15, 48–55. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28. Dima, D.; Covaciu, D. Vehicles Frontal Impact Analysis Using Computer Simulation and Crash Test. Int. J. Automot. Technol. 2019,
20, 655–661. [CrossRef]
29. Zou, T.; Shang, S.; Simms, C. Potential benefits of controlled vehicle braking to reduce pedestrian ground contact injuries. Accid.
Anal. Prev. 2019, 129, 94–107. [CrossRef]
30. Yan, H.; Zhong, L.; Yu, J.; Jiang, W. Research on 2020 E-NCAP MPDB Test. Automob. Appl. Technol. 2019, 21, 6.
31. Watanabe, T.; Kuroda, I.; Nakajima, T. Relationship between frontal car-to-car test result and vehicle crash compatibility evaluation
in mobile progressive deformable barrier test. Traffic Inj. Prev. 2019, 20, S78–S83. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Nguyen, P.; Lee, J.; Yim, H. Analysis of vehicle structural performance during small-overlap frontal impact. Int. J. Automot.
Technol. 2015, 16, 799–805. [CrossRef]
33. Hu, L.; Tian, Q.; Zou, C.; Huang, J.; Ye, Y.; Wu, X. A study on energy distribution strategy of electric vehicle hybrid energy storage
system considering driving style based on real urban driving data. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 162, 112416. [CrossRef]
34. Wang, F.; Yin, J.; Hu, L.; Wang, M.; Liu, M.; Miller, K.; Wittek, A. Should anthropometric differences between the commonly used
pedestrian computational biomechanics models and Chinese population be taken into account when predicting pedestrian head
kinematics and injury in vehicle collisions in China? Accid. Anal. Prev. 2022, 173, 106718. [CrossRef]
35. Farid, A.; Ksaibati, K. Modeling Two-Lane Highway Passing-Related Crashes Using Mixed Ordinal Probit Regression. J. Transp.
Eng. Part A Syst. 2020, 9, 146. [CrossRef]
36. Tian, G.; Yuan, G.; Aleksandrov, A.; Zhang, T.; Li, Z.; Fathollahi-Fard, A.M.; Ivanov, M. Recycling of spent Lithium-ion Batteries:
A comprehensive review for identification of main challenges and future research trends. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2022,
53, 102447. [CrossRef]
37. Wang, K.; Xie, G.; Xiang, J.; Li, T.; Peng, Y.; Wang, J.; Zhang, H. Materials selection of 3D printed polyamide-based composites at
different strain rates: A case study of automobile front bumpers. J. Manuf. Process. 2022, 84, 1449–1462. [CrossRef]
38. Hu, S.; Ma, Z.D.; Qi, C. Magic Cube approach application on crashworthiness design of front rail in front angle impact. In
Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation, Changchun, China, 9–12 August 2009;
pp. 3521–3526.
39. Zhou, Y.; Lan, F.; Wei, X.A. A Study on the Matching Law of High Strength Steel Sheets for Car-body Front-end Structures Based
on Frontal Impact Requirements. Automot. Eng. 2009, 31, 990–994.
40. Qiu, S.; Li, H.; Zhang, J. Optimized ride-down rate control in frontal impact and its application in the energy management of
occupant restraint system. SAE Tech. Pap. 2013. [CrossRef]