Polymeric Crash Box With Internally Tapered Channels

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Polymeric crash boxes face instability and sudden collapse when subjected to angled impact forces, leading to compromised functionality and increased stress on rear extremities, and high extraction forces during injection molding limit the production of larger, cost-effective crash boxes with sufficient shock-absorbing capacity.

Innovation Solution

A polymeric crash box design featuring a substantially alveolar structure with internally tapered channels and inclined walls, allowing for reduced extraction forces and a more gradual increase in resistant section, maintaining stability and constant collapsing force during impacts, and enabling easier production with less expensive machinery.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If the crash box is designed with a standard alveolar structure for impact absorption, then it achieves good impact strength resistance and high rigidity, but it becomes unstable and prone to sudden collapse when subjected to angled impact forces

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveimpact strength resistanceVSAvoidstability during angled impact
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by differentiating the channel structures into two distinct types: first channels with substantially vertical walls for impact absorption, and second channels with substantially inclined walls for stability. Each channel type is strategically positioned and designed with specific wall orientations to address different functional requirements - the vertical walls provide rigidity and impact resistance, while the inclined walls prevent sudden collapse during angled impacts by distributing stresses more evenly.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Loss of energy

If the crash box size is increased to improve shock-absorbing capacity, then energy absorption improves, but extraction forces during injection molding become excessively high

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveshock-absorbing capacityVSAvoidextraction force during molding
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of energyVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent resolves this contradiction by implementing local quality through differentiated channel designs. The first channels with vertical walls are optimized for impact absorption, while the second channels with inclined walls are specifically designed to reduce extraction forces during molding. The inclined walls create a self-release mechanism that allows the larger crash box structure to be extracted from the mold with reduced forces, enabling production of larger, more effective shock absorbers without requiring excessively high extraction forces.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Loss of energy

If the crash box absorbs more kinetic energy through plastic deformation, then impact protection improves, but the collapsing force becomes non-constant and stability is compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvekinetic energy absorptionVSAvoidconstant collapsing force
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of energyVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies segmentation by dividing the alveolar structure into two distinct channel systems with different orientations. The first channels with vertical walls handle the primary impact absorption through controlled plastic deformation, while the second channels with inclined walls provide structural support that maintains constant collapsing force. This segmentation allows the crash box to progressively dissipate kinetic energy through folding and deformation while maintaining stability and force constancy throughout the collapse process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The design enhances stability and maintains constant collapsing force during impacts, reduces production costs, and allows for larger crash box sizes without excessive extraction forces, ensuring effective energy absorption and reduced production costs.

Implementation Method 1

designed in order to have in case of a crash a permanent plastic deformation and a programmed collapse

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectPlastic deformation: Plasticity

Implementation Method 2

each channel 30 of said plurality of channels 30 being internally tapered towards said second rear portion 14 and preferably having an inner rake

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectFriction reduction through tapering: Friction

Data Source

PatentEP2598380B1A polymeric crash box for a vehicle
Publication Date: 2016.01.20 TRES
  • EP2598380B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2598380B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2598380B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

Polymeric crash box (10) for a motor vehicle, having a first open frontal extremity (12) and a second rear extremity (14), and besides it comprises a substantially alveolar structure (20) having a plurality of channels (30) realized in just one piece which extends internally to the polymeric crash box (10), besides each channel (30) being internally tapered towards the second rear extremity (14). The substantially alveolar structure (20) comprises a second plurality of channels (40) realized in just one piece with the plurality of channels (30), besides each channel (40) being internally tapered towards the first open frontal extremity (12). Besides each cannel (40) internally tapered towards the first open frontal extremity (12) it is surrounded by channels (30) internally tapered towards the second rear extremity (14).