Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Technical Report

Numerical investigation of axial crushing behavior of a tailor welded tube

Hasan Gedikli ⇑
Karadeniz Technical University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Trabzon 61080, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study aimed to determine numerically the crashworthiness performances of tubular members made
Received 19 June 2012 of aluminum (AL6061-T6), high strength steels (AISI1018, HSLA350, DP600, DP800) and tailor-welded
Accepted 19 August 2012 tubes (TWTs), which are composed of aluminum and high strength steels (AL6061-T6&AISI1018,
Available online 30 August 2012
AL6061-T6&HSLA350, AL6061-T6&DP600, AL6061-T6&DP800). Numerical analyses were carried out to
investigate the effects of material type, thickness and aspect ratio (tube length to diameter ratio) of tube
using the commercially available finite element analysis package Ls-Dyna. Absorbed energy and crushing
force variations against the crushing displacement were obtained to determine the axial crushing perfor-
mance of TWTs. Results showed that the absorbed energy and crushing force can be favorably adjusted by
choosing the TWTs with different materials and thickness.
Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Recent developments in numerical simulation methods, espe-

Energy absorbers totally or partially convert kinetic energy into
strain energy to protect passengers and deformation of the occu-
pant compartment during collision [1]. Thin walled structures have
been extensively used as energy absorbers due to their high energy
absorbing capacity, light weight and low price [2,3]. Thin walled
structures having geometries such as circular [4] and square tubes
[5], multi-corner columns [6], frusta, honeycomb cells, sandwich
plates, which are filled with foam [7,8], liquid, sand or wood have
been studied as energy absorbing systems in the literature [9,10].
Amongst them, thin walled tubes, in particular circular ones, are
one of the most common collapsible energy absorbers due to the
their low weights, manufacturing simplicity and high axial energy
absorption capacity and therefore, are of great importance for the
structural crashworthiness applications [11–13]. Bambach [14]
investigated the axial capacity and crashing behavior of square sec-
tion tubes composed of metal and metal–carbon fiber reinforced
polymer. The high axial energy absorption characteristics of the
circular thin walled tubes provides a suitable constant operating
force which makes them unique for the crashworthiness applica-
tions. Therefore, many researchers have studied the absorbed en-
ergy and mean crush force of these tubes in the practical
applications during the past decades [15,16]. The quasi-static
load–deflection characteristics of square tubular rings were stud-
ied by Reid et al. [17] to determine the energy absorbing capacity.
Yamashita et al. [18] investigated the crush behaviors of hollow
structures with various polygonal cross sections under axial load-
ing. Abramowicz and Jones [19] and Lellep and Torn [20] studied
the dynamic behavior of a circular tube subjected to axial loading.
⇑ Tel.: +90 462 377 2995; fax: +90 462 377 3336.
E-mail address: hgedikli@ktu.edu.tr
cially in finite element analysis software and computation technol-
ogy have been allowing researchers to predict the physical
behavior of the impact, welding, metal forming and multi-physic
problems. In addition, these tools can help successfully simulate
the axial crushing of tubular structures and design optimal mate-
rial and geometry of energy absorbing structures with or without
welding. In recent years, some studies have been specifically per-
formed in order to optimize the crashworthiness of tubular struc-
tures foam by utilizing optimization techniques [21,22]. Acar et al.
[23] studied the crash performances of thin walled tubes with
tapering and introducing axisymmetric indentations using the
multi-objective optimization.
In the last three decades crashworthiness has become a chal-
lenging issue in the design and testing of various types of vehicles.
Accordingly, due to their possible high stiffness–weight ratio and
deformation pattern, thin-walled structures have been widely uti-
lized as main the energy absorbers by vehicles manufacturers.
Moreover, joining of dissimilar materials such as aluminum alloys
and high strength steels has received much attention in the metal-
lic energy dissipating systems design process in the automotive
and aerospace industries, since it provides high strength to weight
ratios and superior functional capabilities [24,25]. Padmanabhan
et al. [26] numerically investigated the formability characteristics
of aluminum–steel tailor welded blanks. Shi et al. [27] studied
modeling techniques of the welding of the tailor-welded square
tube with dissimilar thicknesses on vehicle impact using the finite
element analysis. Salehghaffari et al. [28] studied the characteris-
tics of cylindrical metal tubes where a rigid steel ring was press-fit-
ted on top of circular aluminum tubes. Chu et al. [29] carried out
both experimental and analytical investigations to characterize
thickness distribution for so-called tailor-welded tube (TWT) in
hydroforming process with dissimilar thicknesses of a stainless

0261-3069/$ - see front matter Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.08.050
588 H. Gedikli / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595

steel material. They also reported that Zhang et al. [30] determined AISI 1018
the effects of thickness difference on axial deformation of TWT. DP600
1400
However, the aforementioned study is in Chinese and there is no DP800
access to it at all. 1200
HSLA350
Although a few studies were performed on crushing behavior of AA6061
tubes with dissimilar thickness [27,30], as far as the author’s 1000
knowledge is concerned, there is no such a study performed on

Stress [MPa]
crushing behavior of TWT with dissimilar materials as an energy 800
absorber. The main objective of this study is, therefore, to investi-
gate the dynamic behavior of TWT with dissimilar materials com- 600
posed of aluminum and high strength steel. The investigation was
pursued by simulating the dynamic behavior of TWT via finite ele- 400
ment software, Ls-Dyna. The effects of material type, thickness and
aspect ratio of tube were also investigated numerically. 200

0
2. Tube geometries 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Strain
The tubular members used in this study were constructed from
a single material, which were called as monolithic tubes. The mate- Fig. 1. Flow stress–strain curves at strain rate of 0.001 s1.
rials of the monolithic tubes are aluminum alloy AL6061-T6
(AL6061), cold drawn steel (AISI1018), high strength low alloy
weld nugget, a concentration of 60% for the aluminum and 40%
(HSLA350), and advanced high strength steels with dual phase
for the steel is applied in Eq. (1) [26]. Johnson–Cook material model
(DP600 and DP800) which have been currently used to reduce
predicts the behavior of materials subjected to large strains and
weights of automobiles. The outside diameter (D) of the tubes
high strain rates such as high velocity impact. Since the high veloc-
was 40 mm with 1 mm and 2 mm thickness while the tube length
ity impact was performed in this study, the plastic behaviors of alu-
(L) was selected to be 80 mm, 200 mm, and 400 mm in order to
minum and high strength steels were characterized by using
carry out the simulations at three different length to diameter as-
Johnson–Cook material model which is expressed as [31]:
pect ratios of 2, 5, and 10, respectively (L = 2D, L = 5D, L = 10D). In
order to have the tubes with two dissimilar materials (called as    m 
e_ T  T0
TWTs), AL6061 was then welded to the each of the aforementioned r ¼ ½A þ Benp  1 þ C ln _ p 1  ð2Þ
e0 T Melt  T 0
high strength steels. A weld seam with the width of 10 mm was
generated at the equal distance to the both ends of the tube. During where r is the equivalent stress, eP is the equivalent plastic strain, e_ p
the crash, keeping the crushing force as low as possible while the is the equivalent plastic strain rate, e_ 0 is the reference strain rate
absorbed energy as high as possible in order not to pass a survival which has the value of 1 s1, T0 and TMelt are the reference and melt-
limit is important for the passenger health. Therefore, the upper ing temperatures, respectively. A, B, C, n and m are the material con-
part of the TWTs was made of AL6061 while the lower part was stants for Johnson–Cook model. Fig. 1 shows the flow (stress–strain)
high strength steel in all simulations. curves of all the materials obtained using the constants in Table 1
and Eq. (2) at the strain rate of 0.001 s1 and the reference temper-
3. Constitutive equations ature (T = T0).

The rule of mixture for the weld seam (XW), which is used to
determine the elasto-plastic material properties such as elasticity
modulus, density, material constants (A, B, C, n, m) of Johnson–
Cook material model, is given as follows, and the results are tabu-
lated in Table 1:
X W ¼ð0:6ÞX AL þð0:4ÞX ST
where the suffixes W, AL and ST refer to the weld, aluminum and
steel, respectively. Since the steel diffuses less than aluminum in
4. Numerical and experimental analyses
Numerical analyses were performed by using the commercial ex-
plicit finite element code Ls-Dyna. The simulations were carried out
under axial impact loading for five monolithic tubes and four dissim-
ilar TWTs which were made of AL6061&AISI1018, AL6061&DP600,
ð1Þ
AL6061&DP800, and AL6061&HSLA350. A weld seam of 10 mm for
all tubes was placed at the mid-section of the tube. The tubes of three
different aspect ratios (length/diameter ratios of 2, 5 and 10) were

Table 1
Linear material properties and Johnson–Cook material constants for AL6061 [32], AISI1018 [33], DP600 [34], HSLA350 [34], DP800 [35], AL6061&AISI1018, AL6061&DP600,
AL6061&DP800 and AL6061&HSLA350 materials.

Materials Johnson–Cook material constants Linear material properties

A (MPa) B (MPa) C n m Density (kg/m3) Elastic modulus (GPa)
AL6061 289.6 203.4 0.0110 0.350 1.34 2850 72
AISI1018 520.0 269.0 0.0476 0.282 0.553 7850 200
DP600 350.0 655.7 0.0144 0.189 1.23 7850 200
DP800 472 1026 0.016 0.582 – 7850 200
HSLA350 453.0 617.5 0.0255 0.615 0.629 7850 200
Based on rule of mixture
AL6061&AISI1018 381.8 229.6 0.0256 0.323 1.136 4850 123.2
AL6061&DP600 313.8 384.3 0.0718 0.286 1.296 4850 123.2
AL6061&DP800 362.6 532.4 0.0724 0.443 0.804 4850 123.2
AL6061&HSLA350 355.0 369.0 0.0762 0.456 1.056 4850 123.2
 H. Gedikli / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595 589

for all materials were not placed here. The linear mechanical prop-
erties were given in Table 1 while Poisson’s ratio was assumed to
be 0.3.
The finite element models of all parts of the tubes were created
by utilizing 3D quadrilateral shell elements including Belytschko–
Tsay element formulation with 9 integration points in thickness
[36]. Finite element model of tailor welded tube is illustrated in
Fig. 2. Mesh size of 2 mm  2 mm was implemented in the simula-
tions. In this model, while tube bottom was cantilevered, the upper
end was kept free. The tube was subjected to the impact loading
from the upper end in the axial direction by a 60 kg rigid plate with
an initial velocity of 10 m/s using the ‘‘Initial_Velocity_Rigid_Body’’
command.
Two types of contact algorithm having Coulomb friction model
with the friction coefficient of 0.1 were used to analyse the prob-
Fig. 2. Finite element model of tailor welded tube. lem. The first one was utilized at the interface between the rigid
plate and the upper end of the tube via ‘‘Contact_Automatic_Sur-
face_Surface’’ command. The other algorithm was used to prevent
interpenetration during analysis of the tube utilizing the ‘‘Con-
120 tact_Automatic_Single_Surface’’ command.
Termination_Node and Termination_Sensor cards were employed
Experimental result
100 to terminate the analysis. The analysis was continued to solve the
Numerical result problem until one of the following criteria was met. The first one
Crushing force [kN]

80
60
40
20
0 seam was placed at the mid-section of the TWT. The experiments
0 1
Fig. 3. Numerical and experimental results for the TWT of AL6061&AISI1018.
analyzed for 1 and 2 mm thicknesses. The dynamic crushing behav-
ior of each tube was investigated for an axial impact loading of 60-kg
rigid impactor plate at the initial impact velocities of 10 m/s in the
reference temperature (T = T0).
In the simulations, Johnson–Cook isotropic material model
(MAT15) was used to model the aluminum and steel tubes.
Although this material model is capable of performing complex
structural and thermal analyses, only the structural analysis was
imposed in the current study as the crashing temperature equals
the reference temperature. Therefore, thermal material properties
was that when the crushing displacements were reached to
50 mm, 140 mm and 280 mm, for tubes of L = 2D, L = 5D and
L = 10D, respectively. Second criteria is that the analysis was ended
when the velocity of the rigid plate was reached to 0.01 m/s.
In order to validate the finite element model, the experiments
were also performed for the tube of AL6061&AISI1018 to deter-
mine axial dynamic crushing behavior of the TWTs. The geometry
of the TWT had an outside diameter of 40 mm, length of 80 mm
(L = 2D) and wall thickness of 1.5 mm. The 10 mm-length weld
2 3 4 5 6 were then pursued under the axial impact loading of the rigid
Time [ms] impactor plate at the initial impact velocities of 8 m/s. The TWT
with the same materials and geometries was also numerically
modeled using the mesh size of 2 mm  2 mm and solved by utiliz-
ing the finite element method. Both experimental and numerical
results were then compared to each other for the validation pur-
pose in this study.
5. Results and discussion
Fig. 3 shows the experimental and numerical results obtained for
the TWT which was made of AL6061&AISI1018. It clear from Fig. 3
that both results showed good agreement with each other. This val-
idation study leaded also to determine the numerical parameters
used in the current study. Therefore, the mesh size, element formu-

(A) 3000 (B)

AL6061
2500
Absorbed energy (J)

AISI1018
DP600
2000 DP800
HSLA350
1500

1000

500

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 4. Distribution of absorbed energy: (A) and crushing force (B) for the monolithic tube with thickness of 1 mm and length of 80 mm (L = 2D).
590 H. Gedikli / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595

(A) 3000 (B)

Absorbed energy (J) 2500 AL6061AISI1018
AL6061DP600
2000 AL6061DP800
AL6061HSLA350
1500

1000

500

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 5. Distribution of absorbed energy (A) and crushing force (B) for the monolithic tube with thickness of 1 mm and length of 80 mm (L = 2D).

(A) 3000 (B)

AL6061&AISI1018
3000 AL6061&DP600
2500
Absorbed energy (J)

AL6061&DP800
2500 AL6061&HSLA350

Absorbed energy (J)

2000
AL6061 2000
1500 AISI1018
DP600 1500
1000 DP800
HSLA350 1000
500 500

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 6. The absorbed energy vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes: (A) and TWTs (B) with thickness of 2 mm and length of 80 mm (L = 2D).

AL6061&AISI1018
(A) 200 AL 6061 (B) 200 AL6061&DP600
180 AL6061&DP800
AISI 1018
AL6061&HSLA350
DP600
Crushing force (kN)

160
Crushing force (kN)

DP800 150
140
HSLA350
120
100 100
80
60
50
40
20
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 7. The crushing force vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes: (A) and TWTs (B) with thickness of 2 mm and length of 80 mm (L = 2D).

lation, integration point and contact algorithms of this particular AL6061, AISI1018, DP600, DP800 and HSLA350 materials were ac-
study were also imposed to all numerical analysis performed. quired as 41 kN, 88 kN, 81 kN, 72 kN and 67 kN, respectively. The
The crushing force and absorbed energy were used to determine lowest crushing force and absorbed energy values were obtained
the energy absorption capacity and deceleration value of the tube. for AL6061 tube while those of the highest values were achieved
Fig. 4a shows the absorbed energy in the monolithic tubes for the for the monolithic tubes of DP600 and AISI1018. This can be ex-
aspect ratio of 2 and thickness of 1 mm while Fig. 4b illustrates the plained by the stress–strain behavior of the material shown in
crushing forces. The highest absorbed energy was 1897 J for the Fig. 1. Since the highest yield stresses were found for DP600 and
monolithic tube of DP600 while the lowest one was 891 J for AISI1018 while the lowest value was obtained for AL6061 and
AL6061 tube at the crushing displacement of 50 mm. The rest were according to these results, the highest force and absorbed energy
about 1890 J, 1796 J and 1544 J for the monolithic tubes of values were determined.
AISI1018, DP800 and HSLA350, respectively. The peak crushing The absorbed energies for TWTs with the aspect ratio of 2 and
forces (at the beginning of the crash) for the monolithic tubes of thickness of 1 mm, which were given in Fig. 5a, were obtained as
 H. Gedikli / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595 591

AL6061&AISI1018
(A) 3000 AL6061
AISI1018
(B) 3000 AL6061&DP600
AL6061&DP800
2500 DP600 2500 AL6061&HSLA350
Absorbed energy (J)

Absorbed energy (J)

DP800
2000 HSLA350 2000

1500 1500

1000 1000

500 500

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 8. The absorbed energy vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes: (A) and TWTs (B) with thickness of 1 mm and length of 200 mm (L = 5D).

(A) 3000 (B) 3000

2500 2500
Absorbed energy (J)

Absorbed energy (J)

2000 AL6061 2000
AISI1018
DP600 AL6061&AISI1018
1500 1500
DP800 Al6061&DP600
HSLA350 AL6061&DP800
1000 1000 AL6061&HSLA350

500 500

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 9. The absorbed energy vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes: (A) and TWTs (B) with thickness of 2 mm and length of 200 mm (L = 5D).

(A) 200 (B) 200

AL 6061 AL6061&AISI1018
AISI 1018 AL6061&DP600
Crushing force (kN)

Crushing force (kN)

150 DP600 150 AL6061&DP800

DP800 AL6061&HSLA350
HSLA350
100 100

50 50

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 10. The crushing force vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes: (A) and TWTs (B) with thickness of 1 mm and length of 200 mm (L = 5D).

1340 J, 1320 J, 1209 J and 1215 for AL6061&AISI1018, the crushing forces were started to increase, because the steel part
AL6061&DP600, AL6061&DP800 and AL600&HSLA350, respec- of TWTs was reached, but never passed the initial peak value of
tively. The absorbed energy values in TWTs were, therefore, in- 42 kN, as given in Fig. 5b.
creased about 37–50% comparing to that of the monolithic tube The absorbed energies against the crushing displacement for
of Al6061 (Fig. 4a). The peak crushing forces for all TWTs were the monolithic tubes and TWTs with the aspect ratio of 2 and
determined about 42 kN and given in Fig. 5b. This value is very thickness of 2 mm were shown in Fig. 6a and b, respectively. All
close to the peak value of 41 kN obtained for the monolithic tube analyses for the monolithic tubes except AL6061 were stopped at
of AL6061. Since the upper part of TWT (impact side) was made the critical velocity of 0.01 m/s because the impact energy of
of AL6061, the deformation was first started the aluminum part 3000 J was absorbed by those tubes before the crushing deforma-
of TWTs and then reached to the steel part. After having the crush- tion of 28 mm was reached. Since the global damping option of
ing displacement of 38 mm, the length of aluminum part of TWTs, 2% and the critical velocity of 0.01 m/s were integrated to the
592 H. Gedikli / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595

(A) 200 (B) 200

AL6061&AISI1018
AL 6061 AL6061&DP600
Crushing force (kN)

Crushing force (kN)

150 AISI 1018 150 AL6061&DP800
DP600 AL6061&HSLA350
DP800
HSLA350
100 100

50 50

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 11. The crushing force vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes: (A) and TWTs (B) with thickness of 2 mm and length of 200 mm (L = 5D).

Fig. 12. Crushing displacements for the tubes with the thickness of 1 mm and the length of 200 mm (L = 5D) (A) undeformed tube, (B) AL6061, (C) AISI1018, (D) DP 600, (E) DP
800, (F) HSLA 350, (G) AL6061&AISI1018, (H) AL6061&DP600, (I) AL6061&DP800, and (J) AL6061&HSLA 350.
 H. Gedikli / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595 593

numerical code, the maximum absorbed energies of the tubes were
reduced to 2850 J. On the other hand, the maximum absorbed en-
ergy for the monolithic tube of AL6061 was attained to 2850 J at
the maximum crushing displacement of 50 mm. It is given in
Fig. 6b that the absorbed energies at the final crushing displace-
ment of 40 mm for TWTs of AL6061&AISI1018, AL6061&DP600,
AL6061&DP800 and AL600&HSLA350 were obtained as 2550 J,
2837 J, 2829 J and 2835 J, respectively while that of the monolithic
tubes of AL6061 was 2250 J. These results clearly show that the ab-
sorbed energy values for TWTs based on the crushing displacement
of 40 mm were increased approximately 13–26% comparing to that
of the AL60661 tube. The maximum crushing displacements for the
monolithic tubes made of AL6061, AISI1018, DP600, DP800 and
HSLA350 were determined as 50 mm, 25 mm, 24 mm, 24 mm
and 29 mm at the maximum absorbed energy level, respectively.
This clearly shows that the crushing displacements for the mono-
lithic tubes of AISI1018, DP600, DP800 and HSLA350 were in-
creased from 24–25 mm to 40 mm by manufacturing tubular
members from these dissimilar materials.
Fig. 7a and b shows the peak crushing force distributions vs. the
crushing displacement for the monolithic tubes and TWTs with the
aspect ratio of 2 and thickness of 2 mm, respectively. The peak
crushing forces for the monolithic tubes of the AL6061, AISI1018,
DP600, DP800 and HSLA350 were found as 88 kN, 183 kN,
178 kN, 160 kN and 143 kN, respectively. As depicted in Figs. 4b
and 7a, increasing the thickness of the monolithic tubes decreased
the crushing displacements from 50 mm to 24–25 mm but in-
creased the peak crushing forces from 41 kN to 88–183 kN. As
illustrated in Fig. 7b, the peak crushing forces for all TWTs were
also increased and achieved at about 89 kN. After the crushing dis-
placement was near to and finally reached to 38 mm, which is the
end of aluminum part and beginning of the steel part of TWTs, the
crushing force started increasing, and very interestingly, passed
that of the initial peak force. Although the absorbed energy values
for TWTs based on the 40 mm crushing displacement were in-
creased approximately by 13–26% comparing to that of the
AL60661 tube (Fig. 6a and b), the peak crushing forces which cause
serious injury during collisions were remained steady (Fig. 7a and
b). However, an increase in absorbed energy for the tube with
thickness of 1 mm was determined as 37–50%, which is more than
twice of that of the tube with the thickness of 2 mm (13–26%). As a
result, increasing thickness of TWTs from 1 mm to 2 mm decreases
their advantages in terms of absorbed energy.
The same analyses given previously were repeated for the tubes
with the aspect ratio of 5 (L = 5D = 200 mm). The absorbed energies
against the crushing displacement for the monolithic tubes and
TWTs with the thickness of 1 mm were shown in Fig. 8a and b
while Fig. 9a and b showed those of 2 mm thickness, respectively.
The figures illustrated the same trend to those of the tubes with
the aspect ratio of 2 (L = 2D = 80 mm). The impact energy (3000 J)
has always been absorbed by the monolithic tubes with thickness
of 1 mm except the AL6061 tube. As shown in Fig. 8b, after the
crushing displacement of 75 mm, the absorbed energy rapidly in-
creases. Moreover, all TWTs consumed more energy in a shorter
crushing displacement, approximately 17–24% less, when com-
pared to that of AL6061 tube. The peak crushing force distributions
against the crushing displacement for the monolithic tubes and
TWTs with the thickness of 1 mm were shown in Fig. 10a and b.
It can be deduced from Fig. 10a that the peak crushing forces for
the monolithic tubes of AL6061, AISI1018, DP600, DP800 and
HSLA350 were determined to be 42 kN, 85 kN, 79 kN, 70 kN and
65 kN, respectively. Moreover, the peak crushing forces for TWTs
are same as that of the monolithic tube of AL6061 which is
41 kN (Fig. 10a and b). It can also be easily seen from Fig. 10a that
the crushing displacement of the monolithic tubes of AL6061,
AISI1018, DP600, DP800 and HSLA350 were 140 mm, 81 mm,

AL6061&AISI1018
(A) 3000 (B) 3000 AL6061&DP600
AL6061&DP800
2500 2500 AL6061&HSLA350
Absorbed energy (J)

Absorbed energy (J)

2000 2000

1500 1500
AL6061
AISI1018
1000 DP600 1000
DP800
500 HSLA350 500

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

(C) 200 AL 6061 (D) 200

AISI 1018 AL6061&AISI1018
DP600 AL6061&DP600
Crushing force (kN)

Crushing force (kN)

150 DP800 150 AL6061&DP800

HSLA350 AL6061&HSLA350

100 100

50 50

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

Fig. 13. The absorbed energy vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes (A) and TWTs (B), and the crushing force vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes (C)
and TWTs (D) in the tubes with thickness of 1 mm and length of 400 mm (L = 10D).
594 H. Gedikli / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595

(A) 3000 (B) 3000

2500 2500

Absorbed energy (J)

Absorbed energy (J)
2000 2000
AL6061
1500 AISI1018 1500 AL6061&AISI1018
DP600 Al6061&DP600
1000 DP800 1000 AL6061&DP800
HSLA350 AL6061&HSLA350
500 500

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)

(C) 200 (D) 200

Crushing force (kN)

Crushing force (kN)

150 150
AL6061&AISI1018
AL 6061 AL6061&DP600
AISI 1018 AL6061&DP800
100 100 AL6061&HSLA350
DP600
DP800
HSLA350
50 50

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Crushing displacement (mm) Crushing displacement (mm)
Fig. 14. The absorbed energy vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes (A) and TWTs (B), and the crushing force vs. displacement behaviors for monolithic tubes (C)
and TWTs (D) in the tubes with thickness of 2 mm and length of 400 mm (L = 10D).

83 mm, 88 mm and 100 mm while the displacements for the tube
with thickness of 2 mm were acquired as 56 mm, 24 mm, 23 mm,
24 mm and 28 mm, respectively, as shown in Fig. 11a. The crushing
displacements for the TWTs of AL6061&AISI1018, AL6061&DP600,
AL6061&DP800 and AL600&HSLA350 with 1 mm thickness were
achieved as 122 mm, 123 mm, 127 mm and 133 mm, respectively
as given in Fig. 10b. When the thickness of TWTs was increased
from 1 mm to 2 mm, the crushing displacements for all TWTs were
obtained as 51 mm for all, as given in Fig. 11b. The difference in the
crushing displacements for 2 mm tube thickness between TWTs
and the monolithic tube of AL6061 were acquired approximately
9.9% when impact energy was completely absorbed. As clearly
illustrated in Fig. 10b that the peak crushing forces were increased
after the displacement value of 75 mm was reached.
Fig. 12 shows the deformation behavior of all tubes. It was given
in Fig. 12b that AL6061 tubes with the thickness of 1 mm were
completely deformed non-symmetrically over the whole length
because it was more ductile than the others. In the monolithic
tubes, the impact energy was entirely absorbed as in non-symmet-
rical deformation pattern.
The similar analyses were repeated for the tubes with aspect ra-
tio of 10 (L = 10D = 400 mm). For the thickness of 1 mm, Fig. 13a
and b show the absorbed energy vs. the crushing displacement dis-
tributions of monolithic and tailor welded tubes while those of the
crushing force variations are given in Fig. 13c and d, respectively.
The absorbed energies and the crushing force against the crushing
displacement for the monolithic tubes and TWTs for thickness of
2 mm are given in Fig. 14. It is clear from the figures that the im-
pact energy in all tubes was absorbed similar to the aspect ratio
of 5. In the monolithic tubes of AL6061, AISI1018, DP600, DP800
and HSLA350 materials, the crushing displacement were found as
173 mm, 80 mm, 79 mm, 88 mm and 95 mm for the thickness of
1 mm while 53 mm, 23 mm, 23 mm, 24 mm and 27 were obtained
for the thickness of 2 mm of the same tubes, respectively.
When the impact energy is completely absorbed in TWTs with
the aspect ratios of 5 and 10, the crushing displacements were very
close to each other. Namely, the absorbed energy has been spent
entirely in the AL6061 part of the tube. Therefore, the advantages
of usage of TWTs as energy absorbers were clearly not observed
when the aspect ratio of TWT’s increased from 2 to 5 and 10.
6. Conclusion
A numerical investigation was pursued to investigate the crash-
worthiness performance of the TWTs subjected to axial impact
loading. The study was then evaluated comparatively to those of
monolithic tubes. The absorbed energy and the peak crushing force
distributions were obtained to investigate the effects of material
type, tube thickness, and tube length on the dynamic behaviors
of the tubes. The following results can be drawn based on the ob-
tained results given above:
1. When compared to the monolithic tube of AL6061, the total
absorbed energies have been increased by using the TWTs
whereas the peak crushing force remained the same.
2. The crushing displacements for the monolithic tubes were
increased from 24–25 mm to 40 mm by manufacturing tubular
members (TWTs) from the dissimilar materials used in this
study.
3. The absorbed energy and peak crushing force were increased by
increasing the thickness of the monolithic tube and TWTs. How-
ever, the crushing displacement values were decreased by
increasing the thickness, as expected.
4. It is observed that increasing the thickness of TWTs from 1 mm
to 2 mm decreases the relative percentage increase in the
absorbed energy from 37–50% to 13–26%. In another words,
advantages of using TWTs as an energy absorber were reduced
by increasing the thickness of the tube.
 H. Gedikli / Materials and Design 44 (2013) 587–595
5. The absorbed energy and especially peak crushing force values
were significantly affected by the materials of TWTs. Since the
deformation always started from more ductile part of TWTs at
every aspect ratio used in current study, the peak crushing force
decayed two times more than that of the monolithic tubes
except the aluminum tube. The peak force can, therefore, be
adjusted to a desired level by choosing ductile and hard mate-
rials in manufacturing TWTs.
Acknowledgement
This work was supported by the Research Fund of Karadeniz
Technical University. Project number is 2008.112.003.8.
References
[1] Lu GX, Yu TX. Energy absorption of structures and materials. Boca Raton: CRC
Press; 2003. 1–2.
[2] Alghamdi AAA. Collapsible impact energy absorbers: an overview. Thin Wall
Struct 2001;39(2):189–213.
[3] Abramowicz W. Thin-walled structures as impact energy absorbers. Thin-Wall
Struct 2003;41:91–107.
[4] Aktay L, Toksoy AK, Guden M. Quasi-static axial crushing of extruded
polystyrene foam-filled thin-walled aluminum tubes: experimental and
numerical analysis. Mater Des 2006;27:556–65.
[5] Chen WG, Wierzbicki T. Relative merits of single-cell, multi-cell and foam filled
thin-walled structures in energy absorption. Thin-Wall Struct
2001;39:287–306.
[6] Abramowicz W, Wierzbicki T. Axial crushing of multicorner sheet metal
columns. J Appl Mech 1989;56(3):113–20.
[7] Abramowicz W, Wierzbicki T. Axial crushing of foam-filled columns. Int J Mech
Sci 1988;30(3–4):263–71.
[8] Hanssen AG, Hopperstad OS, Langseth M. Validation of constitutive models
applicable to aluminum foams. Int J Mech Sci 2002;44:359–406.
[9] Qiao P, Yang M, Bobaru F. Impact mechanics and high-energy absorbing
materials: review. J Aerospace Eng 2008;21:4.
[10] Kavi H, Toksoy AK, Guden M. Predicting energy absorption in a foam-filled
thin-walled aluminum tube based on experimentally determined
strengthening coefficient. Mater Des 2006;27:263–9.
[11] Jones N. Structural impact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1989. p.
1–575.
[12] Lu G, Yu T. Energy absorption of structures and materials. Cambridge
(UK): Woodhead Publishing Limited; 2003. 1–424.
[13] Reid SR. Metal tubes as impact energy absorbers. In: Reid SR, editor. Metal
forming and impact mechanics. New York: Pergamon Press; 1985. p. 249–69.
[14] Bambach MR. Axial capacity and crushing behavior of metal–fiber square
tubes – steel stainless steel and aluminum with CFRP. Composites: Part B
2010;41:550–9.
595
[15] Alexander JM. An approximate analysis of the collapse of thin cylindrical shells
under axial loading. Quart J Mech Appl Math 1960;13(1):10–5.
[16] Wierzbicki T, Abramowicz W. The manual of crashworthiness engineering,
vols. I–IV. Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Center for Transportation
Studies; 1987.
[17] Reid SR, Austin CD, Smith R. Tubular rings as impact energy absorber. In:
Davies G, Morton J, editors. Structural impact and crashworthiness. New
York: Elsevier; 1984. p. 555–63.
[18] Yamashita M, Gotoh M, Sawairi Y. Axial crush of hollow cylindrical structures
with various polygonal cross-sections numerical simulation and experiment. J
Mater Process Technol 2003;140(1–3):59–64.
[19] Abramowicz W, Jones N. Dynamic axial crushing of circular tubes. Int J Impact
Eng 1984;2(3):263–81.
[20] Lellep J, Torn K. Plastic response of a circular cylindrical shell to dynamic
loadings. Int J Impact Eng 2004;30(5):555–76.
[21] Liu Y. Design optimization of tapered thin-walled square tubes. Int J
Crashworthiness 2008;13(5):543–50.
[22] Guler MA, Cerit ME, Bayram B, Gerçeker B, Emrah K. The effect of geometrical
parameters on the energy absorption characteristics of thin-walled structures
under axial impact loading. Int J Crashworthiness 2010;15(4):377–90.
[23] Acar E, Guler MA, Gerceker B, Cerit ME, Bayram B. Multi-objective
crashworthiness optimization of tapered thin-walled tubes with
axisymmetric indentations. Thin-Wall Struct 2011;49(1):94–105.
[24] Schubert E, Klassen M, Zerner I, Wlaz C, Sepold G. Light-weight structures
produced by laser beam joining for future applications in automobile and
aerospace industry. J Mater Process Technol 2001;115:2–8.
[25] Hisashi K, Toshiyuki T, Fumiaki N. Formability of tailored blanks. J Mater
Process Technol 1997;71:134–40.
[26] Padmanabhan R, Oliveira MC, Menezes LF. Deep drawing of aluminium–steel
tailor-welded blanks. Mater Des 2008;29:154–60.
[27] Shi Y, Lin Z, Zhu P, Han S. Impact modeling of the weld line of tailor-welded
blank. Mater Des 2008;29:232–8.
[28] Salehghaffari S, Tajdari M, Panahi M, Mokhtarnezhad F. Attempts to improve
energy absorption characteristics of circular metal tubes subjected to axial
loading. Thin-Wall Struct 2010;48:379–90.
[29] Chu G, Liu G, Yuan S, Liu W. Characteristics of thickness distribution of tailor-
welded tube hydroforming. J Cent South Univ Technol 2011;18:1813–8.
[30] Zhang Li-ling, Feng GAO, Fa-rong DU. Experimental and numerical
investigation of axial crushing of dissimilar thickness tailor-welded tube. J
Plast Eng 2006;13(4):7–11 [in Chinese].
[31] Johnson GR, Cook WH. A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to
large strains, high strain rate and high temperatures. In: Proc Seventh Int Symp
on Ballistics, Hague, Netherlands; 1983. p. 541–47.
[32] Fish J, Oskay C, Fan R. AL6061-T6-elastomeer impact simulations, Rensselaer
polytechnic institute. Research report; 2005.
[33] Sasso M, Newaz G, Amodio D. Material characterization at high strain rate by
Hopkinson bar tests and finite element optimization. Mater Sci Eng A
2008;487:289–300.
[34] Abedrabbo N, Mayer R, Thompson A, Salisbury C, Worswick M, Riemsdijk I.
Crash response of advanced high-strength steel tubes: experiment and model.
Int J Impact Eng 2009;36:1044–57.
[35] Björström D. FEM simulation of electrohydraulic forming. Master science. KTH
Industrial Production. Joining Technology; 2008.
[36] LS-DYNA keyword user’s manual, version 971. LSTC; 2007.