Crash Barrier Local Rigidity for Realistic Collision Pulse Simulation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing crash barriers fail to realistically simulate the forces and pulses of a collision with a vehicle, particularly with modern vehicle bodies that have increased longitudinal member rigidity, leading to inadequate representation of collision scenarios.

Innovation Solution

A crash barrier with a volume region of increased rigidity, which can be achieved by altering the material structure, such as using a honeycomb structure with smaller cell sizes or different materials, to depict the mechanical properties of a vehicle's longitudinal member, allowing for a more realistic simulation of collision impacts without substantial design changes.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the crash barrier uses a uniform structure throughout, then the manufacturing is simple and cost-effective, but it cannot realistically simulate the pulse behavior of a vehicle's longitudinal member

Engineering Contradiction:

Improverealistic simulation of collision pulseVSAvoidstructural complexity of crash barrier

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The crash barrier incorporates a volume region with increased rigidity at a specific location to simulate the pulse behavior of a vehicle's longitudinal member, while the rest of the barrier maintains a simpler structure. This local differentiation allows realistic collision simulation without requiring the entire barrier to be complex.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Strength

If the crash barrier uses a honeycomb structure with smaller cell sizes in a selected volume region, then the rigidity is increased to simulate longitudinal member pulse, but the manufacturing complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improverigidity of crash barrierVSAvoidmanufacturing simplicity

Core Design Contradiction:

StrengthVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The honeycomb structure with smaller cell sizes is implemented only in a selected volume region of the crash barrier, rather than throughout the entire structure. This localized approach increases rigidity where needed to simulate the longitudinal member pulse, while minimizing the overall manufacturing complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

3Reliability

If the crash barrier has a closed front side, then it meets legal regulations and maintains structural integrity, but it cannot accurately represent vehicle bodies where the longitudinal member does not extend to the front

Engineering Contradiction:

Improverealistic depiction of vehicle structureVSAvoidshape of crash barrier front

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSShape

Solution Approach 1:

The crash barrier features a closed front side to meet legal regulations, but incorporates a volume region with increased rigidity at a specific distance from the front to simulate the actual structure of vehicle longitudinal members that do not extend to the front. This allows both regulatory compliance and realistic collision simulation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS9804060B2Crash barrier

Publication Date: 2017.10.31 DR ING H C F PORSCHE AG

AI summary

A crash barrier for implementing a collision with a vehicle has a front to be moved toward the vehicle when the collision is implemented. The front side has a predetermined width and a predetermined height. The front side further has a selected surface region that takes up at most a 50% part of a width of the front side. A volume region of the crash barrier behind the surface region has a greater level of rigidity than a surrounding region of the crash barrier. Therefore, in the event of an impact against the vehicle, a greater level of rigidity acts in the selected surface region than in a surrounding region.