DEVELOPMENT OF A

COMPOSITE CRASH CUSHION

USING COMPUTER
SIMULATIONS
BY
Nyakalilo Gasper Willy KUSSAGA
501161414
Overview

 Over the years, there is an increase in

importance of roadside safety.
 The aim is to ensure safety to
occupants using a highway.
 Due to the stochastic nature of human
behavior, the situation becomes to a
matter of ‘When’ and not ‘if’ an
accident will occur.
What is a Crash cushion?

 Is a shielding device that contains and

decelerates an errant vehicle at acceptable
rates.
 They can be classified in terms of behaviour
and mechanism.
 In terms of behaviour; a crash cushion is either
non-directive or re-directive.
 While in terms of mechanism; a crash cushion
can either absorb kinetic energy or transfer
momentum of an impacting vehicle.
 Example of crash cushions installed in Turkey TAU crash cushion
are the TAU crash cushion and SMA110p.
Problem and Solution

Problem
 Develop a re-directive crash cushion that absorb kinetic energy of a vehicle (even
when moving at high speed).
Solution Steps
 Develop a crash cushion model.
 Use EN1317-3 standard as a guideline to perform tests on the crash cushion.
 Test by simulations using LS-DYNA.
 Evaluate the performance.
Crash cushion components

 The crash cushion under research is

designed by Ulukur plastic traffic
products.
 The main components are; Head
container, Mid-container, Rigid
support, Anchored cables, Guidance
cables, steel plates and Energy
absorbing tubes which are installed
within each container.
Dimensions
 The total length of the crash
cushion is 3700mm.
 Hence 6 mid-containers are
going to be used in the model.
 The design enables connection
between containers by form of
interlock.
Material properties
 The material of the containers and
Property S235JR LLDPE
energy absorbing tubes is Linear Low
Density Polyethylene (LLDPE). Mass density 8E-9 9.35E-10
(kg/mm3)
 While the rigid support, cables and
plates is Structural steel grade S235 Young’s Modulus 2E+5 724
JR. (N/mm2)
Poison’s ratio 0.3 0.4
Yield Strength 235 18
(N/mm2)
 DEVELOPMENT OF
FINITE ELEMENT MODEL
Formulation steps

1. Create a 3D model using

AutoCAD.
2. Export file as IGES.
3. Import IGES file to LS-DYNA and
Mesh the components using
Automesher.
4. Define section and material
properties. Then assign them to
their appropriate parts.
5. Assign boundary conditions.
6. Assign constraints that will define
the behavior of bolt connection on
the steel plates.
7. Define contact.
Development of Finite Element Model

Automesher
 This is a tool that is used to
generate a Finite element
mesh from 3D CAD drawings
(i.e IGES files).
 Divides the parts into
elements for analysis.
 The finer the mesh the more
precise the results BUT
increase in computation time.
Boundary conditions

 The aim for this function is to

restrict movement or hold in place
some parts.
 Example: The rigid support is not
supposed to move and the cables
are constrained on each end.
 Keyword used in LS-DYNA is
BOUNDARY_SPC
Constraints

 The keyword used in LS-DYNA

to define the bolt connection
between the steel plates is
CONSTRAINED_NODAL_RIGID
_BODY.
 The most common usage of the
NODAL_RIGID_BODY definition
is to model connections between
structural parts.
 Constrained nodal rigid bodies
are treated internally in LS-DYNA
like a rigid body part.
 TESTS
AND
RESULTS
EN1317-3
• Is a standard specifies the requirements
for the performance of crash cushions
during vehicle impacts.
• It specifies the acceptance criteria for
impact tests.
• In this research 3 simulation tests were
performed, while 2 full scale crash tests
were done.
• TC.1.1.50

Vehicle speed
Vehicle type Test Speed
Acceptance Tests
(kph)
Approach/ Point of impact 50 TC 1.1.50 TC 4.2.50
80 TC 1.1.80 TC 1.2.80 TC 2.1.80 TC 3.2.80 TC 4.2.80 TC 5.2.80
100 TC 1.1.100 TC 1.2.100 TC 2.1.100 TC 3.2.100 TC 4.2.100 TC 5.2.100
Test of crash cushion 110 TC 1.1.100 TC 1.3.110 TC 2.1.100 TC 3.3.110 TC 4.3.110 TC 5.3.110
TC.1.1.50
 This is a head on crash test ınvolving a
900kg vehicle travelling at 50kph.
 The crash cushion successfully
absorbed the kinetic energy of the
vehicle.
 As a result two containers were affected
and deformed.
 The first container had extensive
deformation and should be replaced
after test.
 The second container sustained
moderate damage.
TC.1.1.50
 The simulation runtime is 0.15
seconds.
 At 0.072 seconds after impact,
the second container begins to
deform.
 At 0.12 seconds after initial
impact, the kinetic energy of the at 0.072sec
vehicle is fully absorbed and
begins to move backwards.

at 0.12sec
TC.4.2.50
 This is a side impact test on crash
cushion.
 1300 kg vehicle travelling at 50 kph
impacts the crash cushion at 15
degrees and a third of the total length
(L/3) from the frontal centre.
 The aim is to test the capability of the
crash cushion to redirect a vehicle.
 The test is successful and the vehicle
was decelerated and redirected.
TC.4.2.50
 The simulation runtime is 0.22
seconds.
 A total of four containers
sustained moderate damage.
 At 0.2 seconds after initial impact,
the crash cushion was able to
contain and redirect the vehicle.
TC.1.1.100
 This is a head on crash impact test
involving a 900 kg vehicle travelling at
100 kph.
 The aim is to test the capability of the
crash cushion to absorb the kinetic
energy of the vehicle and decelerate it
at acceptable rates.
 The test is successful and acceptable.
TC.1.1.100
 Simulation run time is 0.25 seconds.
 At 0.19 seconds after initial impact, the
kinetic energy of the vehicle is
completely absorbed and the vehicle
starts to move backwards.
COMPARISON BETWEEN FULL SCALE TEST
AND SIMULATIONS
TC1.1.50 full scale test and simulation

Full scale crash test Test simulation

Deformation comparison between crash test and simulation after
TC.1.1.50
TC.4.2.50 full scale crash test and simulation

Full scale crash test Test simulation

Deformation comparison between crash test and simulation after
TC.4.2.50
Conclusion
 The crash cushion successfully absorbed
completely the kinetic energy of a 900 kg vehicle
travelling at 50 kph and 100 kph.
 Also, it was able to contain and redirect a 1300
kg vehicle travelling at a speed of 50 kph.
 It is safe and reduces occupant’s risks.
 Hence, recommended for installation on
highways.