轿车准静态顶盖抗压及动态翻滚虚拟试验研究
|
摘要
车辆翻滚是一种伤亡风险极高的事故形态。据统计，美国每年翻滚事故中丧生人数达到近万人，约占机动车碰撞死亡总数的三分之一；在我国，乘员安全同样受到翻滚事故的严重威胁。车辆顶盖侵入是翻滚事故中乘员伤亡的主要原因，也是当前翻滚安全试验程序对车身结构强度的主要考察参数之一。美国联邦机动车辆安全标准FMVSS216是翻滚安全领域全球影响力最大的强制性法规，但其加载条件一直饱受争议；同时该试验在准静态条件下开展，难以反映真实事故的特点。轿车的JRS (Jordan Rollover System)试验在动态翻滚条件下开展，具有较高的代表性和可操作性；目前JRS的试验条件设置是相关试验开发研究的重要课题。此外，顶盖防护装置的开发也是该领域的研究热点。
基于FMVSS216法规，开展双侧顶盖抗压性能虚拟试验研究。首先建立了车辆顶盖抗压有限元模型并通过准静态抗压试验进行验证。采用全因子正交试验方法按照顶盖准静态抗压试验条件对9组侧倾角以及4组俯仰角进行组合试验，研究加载角度对顶盖强度的影响，并对近侧及远侧顶盖抗压性能差异进行评估；然后对车身关键结构件以及挡风玻璃在顶盖抗压中的作用进行敏感性分析；最后分别建立近、远侧顶盖抵抗力的响应面模型，通过优化评估来确定最严格的顶盖加载角度。结果表明：近侧顶盖的强度整体上高于远侧；挡风玻璃在顶盖抗压中贡献强度的变化范围为18%~37%；此外，俯仰角和侧倾角的变化对顶盖抗压性能影响十分显著。俯仰角相同，侧倾角范围在10°~45°时，顶盖强度随着角度增加而持续下降。侧倾角相同，俯仰角范围在5°~10°时，顶盖强度均随着角度增大而明显降低。从顶盖强度变化范围来看，侧倾角对远侧强度的影响更大，而俯仰角对近侧强度影响更显著。综合优化评估来看，45°侧倾角以及10°俯仰角组合为最严格的顶盖加载角度。
基于JRS试验程序，开展整车动态翻滚安全性能研究。建立整车JRS虚拟试验模型后通过顶盖冲击试验进行验证。在不同的初始侧倾、俯仰角度组合条件下，研究整车惯性响应以及顶盖抗压性能的变化。在既定初始角度下，分析车辆顶盖在准静态和动态试验条件下的性能差异。通过参数分析，研究JRS初始试验设置包括车辆跌落高度、翻滚速度以及移动路面初速度等对车辆翻滚响应特性的影响。试验结果表明，相同试验条件下，车辆远侧顶盖的侵入风险远高于近侧。初始侧倾角或初始俯仰角增加时，远侧顶盖侵入程度显著上升，而近侧侵入明显下降。从车辆在准静态和动态试验中顶盖性能差异来看，FMVSS216试验中近侧顶盖的加载距离标准过于宽松；在翻滚的惯性作用下，远侧顶盖抵抗力峰值的增加幅度为17%~72%。在不同初始跌落高度下，近侧顶盖侵入量、侵入速度峰值变化幅度分别为210%和92%，而远侧侵入程度无显著差异。在不同移动路面初速度下，远侧顶盖侵入量、侵入速度变化幅度分别为31%和63%，而近侧侵入程度无明显变化。
在LS-DYNA模拟环境下，分别建立了沥青，水泥及泥土路面的有限元模型，基于JRS试验条件开展了道路路面对车辆翻滚响应特性的敏感性研究；分析不同道路刚度，摩擦系数对车辆惯性响应以及顶盖侵入特性的影响。结果显示，摩擦系数对车辆顶盖侵入的影响十分显著；而路面刚度对顶盖侵入特性影响很小。不同路面刚度下，远侧顶盖侵入量变化范围为2.2%~8.5%，侵入速度的变化范围为0.8%~4.8%。
本论文分别采用加强型顶盖以及新型蛋盒式顶盖防护装置来提高车辆翻滚安全性。建立了蛋盒形结构的有限元模型，开展准静态抗压测试来研究蛋盒形的抗压变形特性并对有限元模型进行验证。在JRS基准试验条件下，分别对加强型顶盖以及蛋盒形盖板对翻滚过程中的防护性能进行研究。结果表明，在采用加强型顶盖、蛋盒式盖板的条件下，远侧顶盖侵入量分别减少31.4%和33%；而远侧顶盖侵入速度分别下降21.8%和26.6%；综合采用以上两种改进方法，远侧顶盖侵入量、侵入速度分别降低57%以及37.5%。
Vehicle rollover crashes are complex events which result in relatively higher fa-tality rate than any other crash scenarios. In the United States, it’s indicated that therewere approximately10,000people killed as occupants involved in light vehicle roll-over crashes each year. This accounted for one third of occupant fatalities in crashes.In China, rollover crashes also critically threaten the occupant safety. It has been re-vealed that roof crush is a predominant factor accounting for fatalities and seriousinjuries of belted occupants in rollover crashes. Therefore the current test proceduresconcerning rollover have been particularly emphasizing on the roof mechanical beha-viors. As a unique compulsory legislation of rollover in the US, FMVSS216incurs alot of arguments due to the poor representative and its quasi-static loading manner.Jordan rollover system (JRS) is considered as a versatile test procedure that can wellrepresent the real world scenarios. It is also meaningful to develop some new me-chanisms to reduce the risks in rollover crashes.
A study of double-sided roof crush was carried out by virtual testing in accor-dance with FMVSS216. A Ford Fiesta FE model was refined and validated against theroof crush test. A full factorial DOE (Design of Experiment) was then made based onvarying pitch and roll angles. Thereafter parametric analyses were conducted to in-vestigate the effects of body structure, windscreen, and the dynamic variables of rollangle and pitch angle on roof strength. Subsequently, the response functions con-cerning the resistance force of the double-sided roof were hence constructed with theresults from a series of virtual tests based on9levels of roll angle and4levels ofpitch angle. Finally, the worst loading conditions were evaluated using an optimiztionanalysis. The results show that roof strength is a function of the roll and pitch angles.In general, the roof on the near side performs stronger than the far side and greatlyinfluences the overall collapse behaviour. Within the127mm (5inch) crush, thestrength on both sides of the roof decrease as the roll angle varies from10°to45°.The variation of the pitch angle influences the resistance force. In addition, the con-tribution of the windscreen on the far side roof varies from18%to37%with differentloading angle combinations. From the virtual parametric analysis and optimisationcarried out, it further shows that the recommended stringent loading angle combina-tions in the newly updated FMVSS216roof crush test should be roll angle of45°and pitch angle of10°for both near and far side roof Load application.
The dynamic behaviour of vehicle rollover was investigated based on JRS testprocedure. The Ford Fiesta FE model for rollover virtual testing was established andfurther validated against the roof impact test in dynamic condition. The mechanicalbehaviours including the roof intrusions and relevant resistance forces in the rolloverevents were investigated at varying combinations of initial pitch and roll angle. Af-terwards, the behaviour discrepancies on the roof were evaluated while the vehiclesubjected to quasi-static and dynamic test with fixed angle combinations. Then para-metric studies were carried out to assess the effect of JRS test setup involving dropheight, roll rate of the vehicle as well as the velocity of the moving roadbed. The re-sults reveal that the intrusion level on the far side is extremely greater than that on thenear side in the same test. As the initial pitch or roll angle rises, the intrusion on thefar side tremendously goes up, while it drops down sharply on the near side. Form thecomparisons between the quasi-static and dynamic test, it could be revealed that thecrush distance in FMVSS216is overestimated; in addition, the contribution of thedynamic inertia effect to the resistance forces on the far side varies from17%~72%.The initial drop height extensively results in an additional intrusion amount and in-trusion velocity by210%and92%on the near side respectively, whereas there is nosignificant difference to be found on the far side. With the varying velocity of movingroadbed, the maximum discrepancies are correspondingly31%and63%in terms ofroof intrusion and intrusion speed on the far side, while trivial differences could benoticed on the near side.
Finite element models of road surface were established with regard to differenttypes of materials including bitumen, concrete as well as sandy soil in LS-DYNA. Asensitive study on the roof structural behaviour subjected to JRS test was then carriedout with different road types. Thereafter the effect of varying stiffness and the frictionfactors on the roof behaviour were conducted. The results indicate that roof intrusionis a function of the friction factor as shown in logistical regression equations; whilethe stiffness could hardly make any significant effect. With different stiffness of theroad surface, the discrepancies in intrusion amplitude and intruding speed vary from2.2%~8.5%and0.8%~4.8%correspondingly.
Two approaches were proposed to enhance the crashworthiness of the vehicle inrollover crashes in this thesis. One is a strengthen roof and another an egg-box styleroof panel. A finite element model of egg-box panel was established and validatedagainst the relevant quasi-static crush tests which particularly focus on the collapse behavior of the egg-box. The strengthen roof and the egg-box panels were then re-spectively employed in the JRS test. As depicted in the results, the intrusion on the farside could be reduced by31.4%and33%respectively with the strength roof and theegg-box roof panel; while the intruding speed could be decreases by21.8%and26.6%correspondingly with the strength roof and the egg-box roof panel. Ultimately, theroof that incorporates the two approaches can considerably reduce the far side intru-sion amplitude and intrusion speed by57%and37.5%respectively.
基于FMVSS216法规，开展双侧顶盖抗压性能虚拟试验研究。首先建立了车辆顶盖抗压有限元模型并通过准静态抗压试验进行验证。采用全因子正交试验方法按照顶盖准静态抗压试验条件对9组侧倾角以及4组俯仰角进行组合试验，研究加载角度对顶盖强度的影响，并对近侧及远侧顶盖抗压性能差异进行评估；然后对车身关键结构件以及挡风玻璃在顶盖抗压中的作用进行敏感性分析；最后分别建立近、远侧顶盖抵抗力的响应面模型，通过优化评估来确定最严格的顶盖加载角度。结果表明：近侧顶盖的强度整体上高于远侧；挡风玻璃在顶盖抗压中贡献强度的变化范围为18%~37%；此外，俯仰角和侧倾角的变化对顶盖抗压性能影响十分显著。俯仰角相同，侧倾角范围在10°~45°时，顶盖强度随着角度增加而持续下降。侧倾角相同，俯仰角范围在5°~10°时，顶盖强度均随着角度增大而明显降低。从顶盖强度变化范围来看，侧倾角对远侧强度的影响更大，而俯仰角对近侧强度影响更显著。综合优化评估来看，45°侧倾角以及10°俯仰角组合为最严格的顶盖加载角度。
基于JRS试验程序，开展整车动态翻滚安全性能研究。建立整车JRS虚拟试验模型后通过顶盖冲击试验进行验证。在不同的初始侧倾、俯仰角度组合条件下，研究整车惯性响应以及顶盖抗压性能的变化。在既定初始角度下，分析车辆顶盖在准静态和动态试验条件下的性能差异。通过参数分析，研究JRS初始试验设置包括车辆跌落高度、翻滚速度以及移动路面初速度等对车辆翻滚响应特性的影响。试验结果表明，相同试验条件下，车辆远侧顶盖的侵入风险远高于近侧。初始侧倾角或初始俯仰角增加时，远侧顶盖侵入程度显著上升，而近侧侵入明显下降。从车辆在准静态和动态试验中顶盖性能差异来看，FMVSS216试验中近侧顶盖的加载距离标准过于宽松；在翻滚的惯性作用下，远侧顶盖抵抗力峰值的增加幅度为17%~72%。在不同初始跌落高度下，近侧顶盖侵入量、侵入速度峰值变化幅度分别为210%和92%，而远侧侵入程度无显著差异。在不同移动路面初速度下，远侧顶盖侵入量、侵入速度变化幅度分别为31%和63%，而近侧侵入程度无明显变化。
在LS-DYNA模拟环境下，分别建立了沥青，水泥及泥土路面的有限元模型，基于JRS试验条件开展了道路路面对车辆翻滚响应特性的敏感性研究；分析不同道路刚度，摩擦系数对车辆惯性响应以及顶盖侵入特性的影响。结果显示，摩擦系数对车辆顶盖侵入的影响十分显著；而路面刚度对顶盖侵入特性影响很小。不同路面刚度下，远侧顶盖侵入量变化范围为2.2%~8.5%，侵入速度的变化范围为0.8%~4.8%。
本论文分别采用加强型顶盖以及新型蛋盒式顶盖防护装置来提高车辆翻滚安全性。建立了蛋盒形结构的有限元模型，开展准静态抗压测试来研究蛋盒形的抗压变形特性并对有限元模型进行验证。在JRS基准试验条件下，分别对加强型顶盖以及蛋盒形盖板对翻滚过程中的防护性能进行研究。结果表明，在采用加强型顶盖、蛋盒式盖板的条件下，远侧顶盖侵入量分别减少31.4%和33%；而远侧顶盖侵入速度分别下降21.8%和26.6%；综合采用以上两种改进方法，远侧顶盖侵入量、侵入速度分别降低57%以及37.5%。
Vehicle rollover crashes are complex events which result in relatively higher fa-tality rate than any other crash scenarios. In the United States, it’s indicated that therewere approximately10,000people killed as occupants involved in light vehicle roll-over crashes each year. This accounted for one third of occupant fatalities in crashes.In China, rollover crashes also critically threaten the occupant safety. It has been re-vealed that roof crush is a predominant factor accounting for fatalities and seriousinjuries of belted occupants in rollover crashes. Therefore the current test proceduresconcerning rollover have been particularly emphasizing on the roof mechanical beha-viors. As a unique compulsory legislation of rollover in the US, FMVSS216incurs alot of arguments due to the poor representative and its quasi-static loading manner.Jordan rollover system (JRS) is considered as a versatile test procedure that can wellrepresent the real world scenarios. It is also meaningful to develop some new me-chanisms to reduce the risks in rollover crashes.
A study of double-sided roof crush was carried out by virtual testing in accor-dance with FMVSS216. A Ford Fiesta FE model was refined and validated against theroof crush test. A full factorial DOE (Design of Experiment) was then made based onvarying pitch and roll angles. Thereafter parametric analyses were conducted to in-vestigate the effects of body structure, windscreen, and the dynamic variables of rollangle and pitch angle on roof strength. Subsequently, the response functions con-cerning the resistance force of the double-sided roof were hence constructed with theresults from a series of virtual tests based on9levels of roll angle and4levels ofpitch angle. Finally, the worst loading conditions were evaluated using an optimiztionanalysis. The results show that roof strength is a function of the roll and pitch angles.In general, the roof on the near side performs stronger than the far side and greatlyinfluences the overall collapse behaviour. Within the127mm (5inch) crush, thestrength on both sides of the roof decrease as the roll angle varies from10°to45°.The variation of the pitch angle influences the resistance force. In addition, the con-tribution of the windscreen on the far side roof varies from18%to37%with differentloading angle combinations. From the virtual parametric analysis and optimisationcarried out, it further shows that the recommended stringent loading angle combina-tions in the newly updated FMVSS216roof crush test should be roll angle of45°and pitch angle of10°for both near and far side roof Load application.
The dynamic behaviour of vehicle rollover was investigated based on JRS testprocedure. The Ford Fiesta FE model for rollover virtual testing was established andfurther validated against the roof impact test in dynamic condition. The mechanicalbehaviours including the roof intrusions and relevant resistance forces in the rolloverevents were investigated at varying combinations of initial pitch and roll angle. Af-terwards, the behaviour discrepancies on the roof were evaluated while the vehiclesubjected to quasi-static and dynamic test with fixed angle combinations. Then para-metric studies were carried out to assess the effect of JRS test setup involving dropheight, roll rate of the vehicle as well as the velocity of the moving roadbed. The re-sults reveal that the intrusion level on the far side is extremely greater than that on thenear side in the same test. As the initial pitch or roll angle rises, the intrusion on thefar side tremendously goes up, while it drops down sharply on the near side. Form thecomparisons between the quasi-static and dynamic test, it could be revealed that thecrush distance in FMVSS216is overestimated; in addition, the contribution of thedynamic inertia effect to the resistance forces on the far side varies from17%~72%.The initial drop height extensively results in an additional intrusion amount and in-trusion velocity by210%and92%on the near side respectively, whereas there is nosignificant difference to be found on the far side. With the varying velocity of movingroadbed, the maximum discrepancies are correspondingly31%and63%in terms ofroof intrusion and intrusion speed on the far side, while trivial differences could benoticed on the near side.
Finite element models of road surface were established with regard to differenttypes of materials including bitumen, concrete as well as sandy soil in LS-DYNA. Asensitive study on the roof structural behaviour subjected to JRS test was then carriedout with different road types. Thereafter the effect of varying stiffness and the frictionfactors on the roof behaviour were conducted. The results indicate that roof intrusionis a function of the friction factor as shown in logistical regression equations; whilethe stiffness could hardly make any significant effect. With different stiffness of theroad surface, the discrepancies in intrusion amplitude and intruding speed vary from2.2%~8.5%and0.8%~4.8%correspondingly.
Two approaches were proposed to enhance the crashworthiness of the vehicle inrollover crashes in this thesis. One is a strengthen roof and another an egg-box styleroof panel. A finite element model of egg-box panel was established and validatedagainst the relevant quasi-static crush tests which particularly focus on the collapse behavior of the egg-box. The strengthen roof and the egg-box panels were then re-spectively employed in the JRS test. As depicted in the results, the intrusion on the farside could be reduced by31.4%and33%respectively with the strength roof and theegg-box roof panel; while the intruding speed could be decreases by21.8%and26.6%correspondingly with the strength roof and the egg-box roof panel. Ultimately, theroof that incorporates the two approaches can considerably reduce the far side intru-sion amplitude and intrusion speed by57%and37.5%respectively.
引文
[1]世界卫生组织．世界预防道路交通伤害报告.瑞士:世界卫生组织,2004,1-24
[2] Viano D, Parenteau C. Roll crash sensing and safety overview, In: Proc of SAEConference, Detroit,2004,2004-01-0342
[3] FARS, http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx.
[4] Rechardson S, Rechnitzer G, Grzebieta R, et al. An advanced methodology forestimating vehicle rollover propensity, International journal of crashworthiness,2002,8(1):63-72
[5] Richard Cuerden, Robecca Cookson and David Richards. Car rollover mecha-nisms and injury outcome, In: Proc of21thESV Conference, Paper09-0481,2009
[6] Dietmar O, Christian K. Rollover accidents of cars in the german road traf-fic-an In-Depth analysis of injury and deformation pattern By GIDAS, Interna-tional Journal of Crashworthiness,2005,10(1):75-86
[7]王正国．新世纪道路交通事故的发生趋势.中华创伤杂志,2002,18:325-328
[8]公安部交通管理局．中华人民共和国道路交通事故统计年报.北京,2001-2007
[9] AAAM. Abbreviated Injury Scale-2005Revision. Association for the Ad-vancement of Automotive Medicine, Des Plaines,1L, USA,2005
[10] NASS. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/NASS.html
[11] FARS. http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx.2010-4-5.
[12] CIREN. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/menuitem
[13] GIDAS. http://www.gidas.org/eng/index.html,2010-3-8.
[14] Digges K, Malliaris A, Ommaya A, et al. Characterization of rollover casualties,In: Proceeding of IRCOBI Conference,1991
[15] Parenteau C. Near and far-side adult front passenger kinematics in a vehiclerollover, In: Proc of Society of Automotive Engineering conference,2001-01-0176, March,2001
[16] Digges K, Eigen A. Crash attributes that influence the severity of rollovercrashes, In: Proceedings of the18th ESV Conference,2003
[17] Digges K H, Eigen A, Esaid D. Injury patterns in rollovers by crash severity, In:Proc of19thESV Conference, Paper number05-0355,2005
[18] Viano D, Parenteau, C, Edwards, Mark L. Rollover Injury: Effects of Near andFar-Seating Position, Belt Use, and Number of Quarter Rolls, Traffic InjuryPrevention,2007,8（4）:382-392
[19] Digges K. https://fdncenter.org/grantmaker/santos/rcsr.pdf, Summary Report ofRollover Crashes,2002,
[20] Partka S. Roof intrusion and occupant injury in light passenger vehicle twoaway crashes, NHTSA, FEB.1992
[21] Carol C, Rollover crashes: predicting serious injury based on occupant, Vehicleand crash characteristics
[22] K F Orlowski, E A Moffatt, R T Bundorf, et al. Reconstruction of RolloverCollisions, In: Proc of Society of Automotive Engineering890857,1989
[23] Cohen D., Digges K., Nichols H. Rollover crashworthiness classification andseverity indices, In: Proc of Society of Automotive Engineering,1989
[24] Digges K., Eigen A. Crash attributes that influence the severity of rollovercrashes，In: Proc of18thESV Conference Paper number231,2003
[25] Us Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Adminis-tration, National Center for Statistics and Analysis, National Automotive Sam-pling System,1997Crashworthiness Data System, Data Collection, Coding, andEditing Manual, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, WashingtonDC
[26] Eigen A.M, Examination of rollover crash mechanisms and occupant out-comes,,www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/809-692.pdf, DOT HS809692, Wash-ington DC, December2003
[27] Hu J, Lee J B, Yang K H, et al, Injury patterns and sources of non-ejected oc-cupants in trip-over crashes; a survey of NASS-CDS database from1997to2002, In: Proc of49th the association for the advancement of automotivemedicine,12-14September,2005
[28] Rollover Project Report: T5.1, Renault Impact Angle Simulations,2004
[29] NHTSA, Review of NMVCCS Rollover Variables in Support of Rollover Re-construction, www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/811-234.pdf, DOT HS811235,Washington DC, January2010,
[30] Chen T, Chirwa E. C, Mao M et al. Rollover far side roof strength test and si-mulation, International Journal of Crashworthiness,20062(12):29-39
[31]中华人民共和国标准化管理委员会，中华人民共和国国家标准《校车安全技术条件》GB24407-2012，2012
[32]中华人民共和国标准化管理委员会，中华人民共和国国家标准《幼儿校车安全技术条件》征求意见稿，2011
[33] Office of the Federal Register. Federal Register, vol.36, no.236, pp.23299-23300.National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-Final rule.Docket no.2-6, Notice5;49CFR Part571–Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Administration,1971
[34] Office of the Federal Register. Federal Register, vol.56, no.74, pp.15510-15517.National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-Final rule.Docket no.89-22, Notice03;49CFR Part571–Federal Motor Vehicle SafetyStandards, Roof Crush Resistance. Washington, DC: National Archives andRecords Administration,1991.
[35] Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No.216-Roof Crush Resistance,49CFR Parts571and585, May12,2009–Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Stan-dards, Roof Crush Resistance. Washington, DC: National Archives and RecordsAdministration
[36] Stephen A, Robert M. Dynamic roof crush intrusion in inverted drop testing, In:Proc of19th ESV Conference, Paper Number05-0146, Washington D.C,2005
[37] Exponent Failure Analysis. http://www.exponent.com
[38] C.C. Chou, R.W. McCoy, and J. Le, A literature review of rollover test me-thodologies, International Journal of Vehicle Safety.2005(1):200-237
[39] Jordan A, Bish J. Repeatability Testing of a Dynamic Rollover Test Fixture，In:Proc of19th ESV Conference, Paper Number05-0362, Washington D.C,2005
[40] EURO-NCAP. http://www.euroncap.com/home.aspx
[41] http://www.howsafeisyourcar.com.au/what_is_ancap.php
[42] ANCAP. http://www.ancap.com.au/
[43] U.S. Department of Transportation, Laboratory Test Procedure for School BusRollover Protection, TP-220-02,1991
[44] Directive2001/85/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of20November2001. Office for Official Publication of the European Communities，http://europa.eu.int/eurlex/en/consleg/pdf/2001/en2001L0085do001.pdf,Last updated: May21,2003; last access date: July11,2007
[45] Orlowski K, Bundorf R and Moffatt E. Rollover crash tests–the influence ofroof strength on injury mechanics, In: Proc of SAE Conference,851734,1985.
[46] G S Bahling, R T Bundorf, G S Kaspzyk, et al. Rollovers and drop tests–theinfluence of roof strength on injury mechanics using belted dummies, In: Procof SAE Conference, Paper No.902314,1990.
[47] Moffatt E. Occupant motion in rollover collisions, In: Proc of Conference ofthe American Association of Automotive Medicine,1975: San Diego, Califor-nia, USA.
[48] Young D, Grzebieta R, McIntoshc A, et al, Diving versus roof intrusion: a re-view of rollover injury causation, International Journal of Crashworthiness,200712(6):609–628
[49] Grzebieta R H, Young D, McIntosh A.Rollover crashworthiness: The finalfrontier for vehicle passive safety，In: Proc of Australasian road safety researchpolicing and education conference, Melbourne, Australia,2007
[50] Richardson S, Grezebieta R and Rechnitzer G. Proposal for dynamic rolloverprotective system test, International Journal of Crashworthiness,20028（2):133-141
[51] R Austin, M Hicks, S. Summers. The role of post-crash headroom in predictingroof contact injuries to the head, neck or face during FMVSS No.216rollovers,National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,2001
[52] Rechnitzer G, Lanes J, McIntosh A, et al. Serious neck injury in rollovers-isroof crush a factor? International Journal of Crashworthiness,19983(3):286–294
[53] Friedman D. Improved vehicle design for the prevention of severe head andneck injuries to restrained occupants in rollover accidents, In: Proc of15thESVconference,96-S5-O-14, Melbourne.1996
[54] EC Chirwa, M Mao, T Chen, et al. Flaws in Malibu I and II interpretation oftest results that have influenced many poor rollover roof designs, In: Proc ofthe5thBi-annual International crashworthiness conference, Athens, Greece,2006.
[55] Brumbelow M, Teoh B. Relationship between roof strength and injury risk inrollover crashes, In: Proc of SAE conference,2008
[56] Initiatives to address the mitigation of vehicle rollover, NHTSA, June2003
[57] Donald Friedman, Raphael Grzebieta. Vehicle roof geometry and its effect onrollover roof performance. In: Proc of21thESV conference,09-0513,2009
[58] David Shillidays, Greg Mowry. Required airbag characteristics for occupantretention in rollover crashes In: Proc of19thESV conference,05-226,2005
[59]王国权编．虚拟试验技术.北京:电子工业出版社,2004,2-8
[60]王勖成，邵敏编．有限元单元法基本原理和数值方法.北京：清华大学出版社,1996
[61] Benson,D, Hallquist J. Simple rigid body algorithm for structural dynamicsprogram, International Journal of Numerical method Engineering,1986(22)
[62] Pan F, Zhu P, Zhang Y. Metamodel-based lightweight design of B-pillar withTWB structure via support vector regression, Computers and Structures,2010(88):36-44
[63] Friedman D, Nash C. Advanced roof design for rollover protection, In the procof17th ESV conference, Amsterdam： North Atlantic Treaty OrganizationCommittee,200l
[64] Mao M, Chirwa E C, Chen T. Static and dynamic roof crush simulation usingLS-DYNA3D, International Journal of Crashworthiness,2004,9(5):495-504
[65] Friedman D, Nash C, BISH J. Results from two sided quasi-static (M216) andrepeatable dynamic rollover tests (JRS) relative to FMVSS216,In the20thproceeding of ESV conference. Lyon： North Atlantic Treaty OrganizationCommittee,2007
[66] Peng Q, Chirwa E C，Yang Jikuang. The newly updated FMVSS216roof crushmodeling and analysis. International Journal of Crashworthiness,2012,17(2):195–207
[67] S-B Jeong, S-I Yi, C-D Kan, et al. Structural optimization of an automobileroof structure using equivalent static loads. International Journal of Automo-bile Engineering2008(222):1985-1995
[68]张铁茂，丁建国．试验设计与数据处理.北京：兵器工业出版社，1990
[69]栾军．现代试验设计优化方法.上海：上海交通大学出版社，1995
[70] Jack，Kleijnen P C. An overview of the design and analysis of simulation ex-periments for sensitivity analysis. European Journal of Operational Research，2005，164:287-300
[71] Montgomery D C. Design and analysis of experiments.4th Version, New York:NY Wiley，1997
[72]刘文卿.试验设计．北京：清华大学出版社，2005
[73]郭勤涛,张令弥，费庆国．用于确定性计算仿真的响应面法及其试验设计研究.航空学报，2005，26(1):55-61
[74]王永菲，王成国．响应面法的完全数值方案及其在悬挂参数优化中的应用.中央民族大学学报,2006，15(2):130-135
[75]郑刚，李光耀，孙光永．基于近似模型的拉延筋几何参数反求.中国机械工程.2006,17(19)：1988-1992
[76]廖兴涛，李青，张维刚．基于连续响应表面法的汽车结构耐撞性仿真优化.机械强度，2007，29(6):941-945
[77] Liu Y. Thin-walled curved hexagonal beams in crashes-FEA and design, Inter-national journal of crashworthiness,201015(2):151-159
[78] MYERS R H，MONTGOMERY D C. Response Surface Methodology: Processand Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments. New York: WileyPublishers,1995
[79] Forsberg J, Nilsson L. Evaluation of response surface methodologies used incrashworthiness optimization, International Journal of Impact Engineering,2006,32:759-777
[80] Clifford C. Chou, Jingwen Hu, King H. Yang，A Method for Determining theVehicle-to-Ground Contact Load during Laboratory-based Rollover Tests. In:Proc of SAE Conference,2008-01-0351,2008
[81] Mao M, Chirwa E C, Wang W. Assessment of vehicle roof crush test protocolsusing FE models: Inverted drop tests versus updated FMVSS No.216. Interna-tional Journal of Crashworthiness,2005,11(1),49-63.
[82] Chirwa C, Peng Q, Yang J. Mechanics of the double-sided roof crush as afunction of heredity structural design and induced input parameters. In: Proc ofTRB Conference，2012
[83] Friedman K. Review of existing repeatable vehicle rollover dynamic physicaltesting methods, In the proc of2008ASME International Mechanical Engi-neering Congress and Exposition, November2008
[84]祝军，李一兵．汽车侧翻和滚翻事故建模研究.汽车工程，2006（28），3:254-258
[85]李杰，庄继德，赵旗．汽车地面力学中土的弹性本构模型的研究.汽车技术，1997（1）：15~35
[86]李杰，庄继德，赵旗．车辆地面力学弹塑性本构关系的研究.吉林工业大学学报，1999,29（2）
[87]姚祖康．水泥混凝土路面设计理论和方法[M]．北京：人民交通出版社，2003，28-40，144-152.
[88]交通部公路规划设计院，同济大学．水泥混凝土路面设计理论和参数研究报告集．1982，72-95
[89] Ameri M, Mansourian A, Heidary K,et al. Cracked asphalt pavement undertraffic loading-A3D finite element analys is Engineering Fracture Mechanics,2011,78:1817–1826
[90]梁冠军．交通荷载作用下城市沥青道路路基的动力响应和塑性变形分析.[同济大学硕士论文].上海:同济大学，2007
[91] Mulungye R, Owende P. Finite element modelling of flexible pavements onsoft soil subgrades, Mellon Materials and Design,2007,28:739–756
[92] Pan F, Zhu P. Design optimization of vehicle roof structures: benefits of usingmultiple surrogates, International Journal of Crashworthiness,2011,16(1):88-95
[93] Bozzini S, Jimenez J, Mattos G,et al. Commercial, police, and military vehiclerollover protection and evaluating the effectiveness of geometry and retrofitrollover testing. In: Proc of ICRASH Conference,2010
[94] Nowpada S, Chirwa C, Myler P, et al. Egg-Box Panel as Energy Absorber forPedestrian Protection, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Mate-rials,2010,12(7):591-595
[95] Wierzbicki T and Bhatt S. A moving hinge solution for axisymmetric crushingof tubes, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,1986,28(3):135-151.
[96] Johnson W, Soden P, Hassani A. In extensional collapse of thin-walled tubesunder axial compression, Journal of Stress Analysis,1977,(12):317-30
[97] Reid, S. Plastic deformation mechanisms in axially compressed metal tubesused as energy-absorbers. International Journal of Mechanical Science,1993,35(12):1035-1052
[98] Ashby. M, Evans A, Fleck N, et al Metal Foams: A design Guide. ButterworthHeinemann, Stoneham, MA (2000)
[99] Wierzbicki T. Crushing analysis of metal honeycombs, International Journal ofImpact Engineering,1983,1(2):157-174
[100] Zupan M, Chen C, Fleck N. The plastic collapse and energy absorption capac-ity of egg-box panels, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,2003,(45)
[101] Deshpande V and Fleck N. Energy absorption of an egg-box material, Journalof Mechanics and Physics of Solids,2003,(51):187-208
[102] Nowpada S, Chirwa C, Myler P, et al. Egg-Box panel for commercial vehiclefront-compressive loading tests. International Journal of Crashworthiness,2010,15(1):59-70.
[103] Reid J. Crashworthiness of automotive steel midrails: thickness and materialsensitivity, Thin-walled structure,1996,26(2):83-103
[104]冯祎卿．双相钢在汽车行业中的应用.工艺材料，2008，4:39-41
[105]马鸣图，Shi M．先进的高强度钢及其在汽车工业中的应用.钢铁，2004，39(7):68-72
[106]叶平，沈建平，王光耀，等．汽车轻量化用高强度钢现状及其发展趋势．机械工程材料．2006,30(3)：4-7
[2] Viano D, Parenteau C. Roll crash sensing and safety overview, In: Proc of SAEConference, Detroit,2004,2004-01-0342
[3] FARS, http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx.
[4] Rechardson S, Rechnitzer G, Grzebieta R, et al. An advanced methodology forestimating vehicle rollover propensity, International journal of crashworthiness,2002,8(1):63-72
[5] Richard Cuerden, Robecca Cookson and David Richards. Car rollover mecha-nisms and injury outcome, In: Proc of21thESV Conference, Paper09-0481,2009
[6] Dietmar O, Christian K. Rollover accidents of cars in the german road traf-fic-an In-Depth analysis of injury and deformation pattern By GIDAS, Interna-tional Journal of Crashworthiness,2005,10(1):75-86
[7]王正国．新世纪道路交通事故的发生趋势.中华创伤杂志,2002,18:325-328
[8]公安部交通管理局．中华人民共和国道路交通事故统计年报.北京,2001-2007
[9] AAAM. Abbreviated Injury Scale-2005Revision. Association for the Ad-vancement of Automotive Medicine, Des Plaines,1L, USA,2005
[10] NASS. http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/departments/nrd-30/ncsa/NASS.html
[11] FARS. http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx.2010-4-5.
[12] CIREN. http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/site/nhtsa/menuitem
[13] GIDAS. http://www.gidas.org/eng/index.html,2010-3-8.
[14] Digges K, Malliaris A, Ommaya A, et al. Characterization of rollover casualties,In: Proceeding of IRCOBI Conference,1991
[15] Parenteau C. Near and far-side adult front passenger kinematics in a vehiclerollover, In: Proc of Society of Automotive Engineering conference,2001-01-0176, March,2001
[16] Digges K, Eigen A. Crash attributes that influence the severity of rollovercrashes, In: Proceedings of the18th ESV Conference,2003
[17] Digges K H, Eigen A, Esaid D. Injury patterns in rollovers by crash severity, In:Proc of19thESV Conference, Paper number05-0355,2005
[18] Viano D, Parenteau, C, Edwards, Mark L. Rollover Injury: Effects of Near andFar-Seating Position, Belt Use, and Number of Quarter Rolls, Traffic InjuryPrevention,2007,8（4）:382-392
[19] Digges K. https://fdncenter.org/grantmaker/santos/rcsr.pdf, Summary Report ofRollover Crashes,2002,
[20] Partka S. Roof intrusion and occupant injury in light passenger vehicle twoaway crashes, NHTSA, FEB.1992
[21] Carol C, Rollover crashes: predicting serious injury based on occupant, Vehicleand crash characteristics
[22] K F Orlowski, E A Moffatt, R T Bundorf, et al. Reconstruction of RolloverCollisions, In: Proc of Society of Automotive Engineering890857,1989
[23] Cohen D., Digges K., Nichols H. Rollover crashworthiness classification andseverity indices, In: Proc of Society of Automotive Engineering,1989
[24] Digges K., Eigen A. Crash attributes that influence the severity of rollovercrashes，In: Proc of18thESV Conference Paper number231,2003
[25] Us Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Adminis-tration, National Center for Statistics and Analysis, National Automotive Sam-pling System,1997Crashworthiness Data System, Data Collection, Coding, andEditing Manual, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, WashingtonDC
[26] Eigen A.M, Examination of rollover crash mechanisms and occupant out-comes,,www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/809-692.pdf, DOT HS809692, Wash-ington DC, December2003
[27] Hu J, Lee J B, Yang K H, et al, Injury patterns and sources of non-ejected oc-cupants in trip-over crashes; a survey of NASS-CDS database from1997to2002, In: Proc of49th the association for the advancement of automotivemedicine,12-14September,2005
[28] Rollover Project Report: T5.1, Renault Impact Angle Simulations,2004
[29] NHTSA, Review of NMVCCS Rollover Variables in Support of Rollover Re-construction, www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pubs/811-234.pdf, DOT HS811235,Washington DC, January2010,
[30] Chen T, Chirwa E. C, Mao M et al. Rollover far side roof strength test and si-mulation, International Journal of Crashworthiness,20062(12):29-39
[31]中华人民共和国标准化管理委员会，中华人民共和国国家标准《校车安全技术条件》GB24407-2012，2012
[32]中华人民共和国标准化管理委员会，中华人民共和国国家标准《幼儿校车安全技术条件》征求意见稿，2011
[33] Office of the Federal Register. Federal Register, vol.36, no.236, pp.23299-23300.National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-Final rule.Docket no.2-6, Notice5;49CFR Part571–Motor Vehicle Safety Standards.Washington, DC: National Archives and Records Administration,1971
[34] Office of the Federal Register. Federal Register, vol.56, no.74, pp.15510-15517.National Highway Traffic Safety Administration-Final rule.Docket no.89-22, Notice03;49CFR Part571–Federal Motor Vehicle SafetyStandards, Roof Crush Resistance. Washington, DC: National Archives andRecords Administration,1991.
[35] Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No.216-Roof Crush Resistance,49CFR Parts571and585, May12,2009–Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Stan-dards, Roof Crush Resistance. Washington, DC: National Archives and RecordsAdministration
[36] Stephen A, Robert M. Dynamic roof crush intrusion in inverted drop testing, In:Proc of19th ESV Conference, Paper Number05-0146, Washington D.C,2005
[37] Exponent Failure Analysis. http://www.exponent.com
[38] C.C. Chou, R.W. McCoy, and J. Le, A literature review of rollover test me-thodologies, International Journal of Vehicle Safety.2005(1):200-237
[39] Jordan A, Bish J. Repeatability Testing of a Dynamic Rollover Test Fixture，In:Proc of19th ESV Conference, Paper Number05-0362, Washington D.C,2005
[40] EURO-NCAP. http://www.euroncap.com/home.aspx
[41] http://www.howsafeisyourcar.com.au/what_is_ancap.php
[42] ANCAP. http://www.ancap.com.au/
[43] U.S. Department of Transportation, Laboratory Test Procedure for School BusRollover Protection, TP-220-02,1991
[44] Directive2001/85/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of20November2001. Office for Official Publication of the European Communities，http://europa.eu.int/eurlex/en/consleg/pdf/2001/en2001L0085do001.pdf,Last updated: May21,2003; last access date: July11,2007
[45] Orlowski K, Bundorf R and Moffatt E. Rollover crash tests–the influence ofroof strength on injury mechanics, In: Proc of SAE Conference,851734,1985.
[46] G S Bahling, R T Bundorf, G S Kaspzyk, et al. Rollovers and drop tests–theinfluence of roof strength on injury mechanics using belted dummies, In: Procof SAE Conference, Paper No.902314,1990.
[47] Moffatt E. Occupant motion in rollover collisions, In: Proc of Conference ofthe American Association of Automotive Medicine,1975: San Diego, Califor-nia, USA.
[48] Young D, Grzebieta R, McIntoshc A, et al, Diving versus roof intrusion: a re-view of rollover injury causation, International Journal of Crashworthiness,200712(6):609–628
[49] Grzebieta R H, Young D, McIntosh A.Rollover crashworthiness: The finalfrontier for vehicle passive safety，In: Proc of Australasian road safety researchpolicing and education conference, Melbourne, Australia,2007
[50] Richardson S, Grezebieta R and Rechnitzer G. Proposal for dynamic rolloverprotective system test, International Journal of Crashworthiness,20028（2):133-141
[51] R Austin, M Hicks, S. Summers. The role of post-crash headroom in predictingroof contact injuries to the head, neck or face during FMVSS No.216rollovers,National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,2001
[52] Rechnitzer G, Lanes J, McIntosh A, et al. Serious neck injury in rollovers-isroof crush a factor? International Journal of Crashworthiness,19983(3):286–294
[53] Friedman D. Improved vehicle design for the prevention of severe head andneck injuries to restrained occupants in rollover accidents, In: Proc of15thESVconference,96-S5-O-14, Melbourne.1996
[54] EC Chirwa, M Mao, T Chen, et al. Flaws in Malibu I and II interpretation oftest results that have influenced many poor rollover roof designs, In: Proc ofthe5thBi-annual International crashworthiness conference, Athens, Greece,2006.
[55] Brumbelow M, Teoh B. Relationship between roof strength and injury risk inrollover crashes, In: Proc of SAE conference,2008
[56] Initiatives to address the mitigation of vehicle rollover, NHTSA, June2003
[57] Donald Friedman, Raphael Grzebieta. Vehicle roof geometry and its effect onrollover roof performance. In: Proc of21thESV conference,09-0513,2009
[58] David Shillidays, Greg Mowry. Required airbag characteristics for occupantretention in rollover crashes In: Proc of19thESV conference,05-226,2005
[59]王国权编．虚拟试验技术.北京:电子工业出版社,2004,2-8
[60]王勖成，邵敏编．有限元单元法基本原理和数值方法.北京：清华大学出版社,1996
[61] Benson,D, Hallquist J. Simple rigid body algorithm for structural dynamicsprogram, International Journal of Numerical method Engineering,1986(22)
[62] Pan F, Zhu P, Zhang Y. Metamodel-based lightweight design of B-pillar withTWB structure via support vector regression, Computers and Structures,2010(88):36-44
[63] Friedman D, Nash C. Advanced roof design for rollover protection, In the procof17th ESV conference, Amsterdam： North Atlantic Treaty OrganizationCommittee,200l
[64] Mao M, Chirwa E C, Chen T. Static and dynamic roof crush simulation usingLS-DYNA3D, International Journal of Crashworthiness,2004,9(5):495-504
[65] Friedman D, Nash C, BISH J. Results from two sided quasi-static (M216) andrepeatable dynamic rollover tests (JRS) relative to FMVSS216,In the20thproceeding of ESV conference. Lyon： North Atlantic Treaty OrganizationCommittee,2007
[66] Peng Q, Chirwa E C，Yang Jikuang. The newly updated FMVSS216roof crushmodeling and analysis. International Journal of Crashworthiness,2012,17(2):195–207
[67] S-B Jeong, S-I Yi, C-D Kan, et al. Structural optimization of an automobileroof structure using equivalent static loads. International Journal of Automo-bile Engineering2008(222):1985-1995
[68]张铁茂，丁建国．试验设计与数据处理.北京：兵器工业出版社，1990
[69]栾军．现代试验设计优化方法.上海：上海交通大学出版社，1995
[70] Jack，Kleijnen P C. An overview of the design and analysis of simulation ex-periments for sensitivity analysis. European Journal of Operational Research，2005，164:287-300
[71] Montgomery D C. Design and analysis of experiments.4th Version, New York:NY Wiley，1997
[72]刘文卿.试验设计．北京：清华大学出版社，2005
[73]郭勤涛,张令弥，费庆国．用于确定性计算仿真的响应面法及其试验设计研究.航空学报，2005，26(1):55-61
[74]王永菲，王成国．响应面法的完全数值方案及其在悬挂参数优化中的应用.中央民族大学学报,2006，15(2):130-135
[75]郑刚，李光耀，孙光永．基于近似模型的拉延筋几何参数反求.中国机械工程.2006,17(19)：1988-1992
[76]廖兴涛，李青，张维刚．基于连续响应表面法的汽车结构耐撞性仿真优化.机械强度，2007，29(6):941-945
[77] Liu Y. Thin-walled curved hexagonal beams in crashes-FEA and design, Inter-national journal of crashworthiness,201015(2):151-159
[78] MYERS R H，MONTGOMERY D C. Response Surface Methodology: Processand Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments. New York: WileyPublishers,1995
[79] Forsberg J, Nilsson L. Evaluation of response surface methodologies used incrashworthiness optimization, International Journal of Impact Engineering,2006,32:759-777
[80] Clifford C. Chou, Jingwen Hu, King H. Yang，A Method for Determining theVehicle-to-Ground Contact Load during Laboratory-based Rollover Tests. In:Proc of SAE Conference,2008-01-0351,2008
[81] Mao M, Chirwa E C, Wang W. Assessment of vehicle roof crush test protocolsusing FE models: Inverted drop tests versus updated FMVSS No.216. Interna-tional Journal of Crashworthiness,2005,11(1),49-63.
[82] Chirwa C, Peng Q, Yang J. Mechanics of the double-sided roof crush as afunction of heredity structural design and induced input parameters. In: Proc ofTRB Conference，2012
[83] Friedman K. Review of existing repeatable vehicle rollover dynamic physicaltesting methods, In the proc of2008ASME International Mechanical Engi-neering Congress and Exposition, November2008
[84]祝军，李一兵．汽车侧翻和滚翻事故建模研究.汽车工程，2006（28），3:254-258
[85]李杰，庄继德，赵旗．汽车地面力学中土的弹性本构模型的研究.汽车技术，1997（1）：15~35
[86]李杰，庄继德，赵旗．车辆地面力学弹塑性本构关系的研究.吉林工业大学学报，1999,29（2）
[87]姚祖康．水泥混凝土路面设计理论和方法[M]．北京：人民交通出版社，2003，28-40，144-152.
[88]交通部公路规划设计院，同济大学．水泥混凝土路面设计理论和参数研究报告集．1982，72-95
[89] Ameri M, Mansourian A, Heidary K,et al. Cracked asphalt pavement undertraffic loading-A3D finite element analys is Engineering Fracture Mechanics,2011,78:1817–1826
[90]梁冠军．交通荷载作用下城市沥青道路路基的动力响应和塑性变形分析.[同济大学硕士论文].上海:同济大学，2007
[91] Mulungye R, Owende P. Finite element modelling of flexible pavements onsoft soil subgrades, Mellon Materials and Design,2007,28:739–756
[92] Pan F, Zhu P. Design optimization of vehicle roof structures: benefits of usingmultiple surrogates, International Journal of Crashworthiness,2011,16(1):88-95
[93] Bozzini S, Jimenez J, Mattos G,et al. Commercial, police, and military vehiclerollover protection and evaluating the effectiveness of geometry and retrofitrollover testing. In: Proc of ICRASH Conference,2010
[94] Nowpada S, Chirwa C, Myler P, et al. Egg-Box Panel as Energy Absorber forPedestrian Protection, International Journal of Advanced Engineering Mate-rials,2010,12(7):591-595
[95] Wierzbicki T and Bhatt S. A moving hinge solution for axisymmetric crushingof tubes, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,1986,28(3):135-151.
[96] Johnson W, Soden P, Hassani A. In extensional collapse of thin-walled tubesunder axial compression, Journal of Stress Analysis,1977,(12):317-30
[97] Reid, S. Plastic deformation mechanisms in axially compressed metal tubesused as energy-absorbers. International Journal of Mechanical Science,1993,35(12):1035-1052
[98] Ashby. M, Evans A, Fleck N, et al Metal Foams: A design Guide. ButterworthHeinemann, Stoneham, MA (2000)
[99] Wierzbicki T. Crushing analysis of metal honeycombs, International Journal ofImpact Engineering,1983,1(2):157-174
[100] Zupan M, Chen C, Fleck N. The plastic collapse and energy absorption capac-ity of egg-box panels, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,2003,(45)
[101] Deshpande V and Fleck N. Energy absorption of an egg-box material, Journalof Mechanics and Physics of Solids,2003,(51):187-208
[102] Nowpada S, Chirwa C, Myler P, et al. Egg-Box panel for commercial vehiclefront-compressive loading tests. International Journal of Crashworthiness,2010,15(1):59-70.
[103] Reid J. Crashworthiness of automotive steel midrails: thickness and materialsensitivity, Thin-walled structure,1996,26(2):83-103
[104]冯祎卿．双相钢在汽车行业中的应用.工艺材料，2008，4:39-41
[105]马鸣图，Shi M．先进的高强度钢及其在汽车工业中的应用.钢铁，2004，39(7):68-72
[106]叶平，沈建平，王光耀，等．汽车轻量化用高强度钢现状及其发展趋势．机械工程材料．2006,30(3)：4-7
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |