DESIGN AND EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF AN

IMPACT ATTENUATOR
1

C. LALITH SHARAVAN, 2K. JOSHUARAJ IMMANUEL, 3A.K. VARUN, 4C. SUDIR, S. KRISHNA
1,2,3,4

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jeppiaar Engineering College

Abstract- An impact attenuator is a device used to protect the vehicle from damage during a collision thereby preventing the
occurrence of injury to the driver. Nowadays with the increasing number of accidents occurring during automotive races,
driver safety has become one of the major research areas. Engineers are now designing and producing various advanced
safety systems to ensure the safety of the driver. However, the development time and cost of any product in real time is high.
This can be reduced to a great extent by certain computer simulated software's. The simulated results however cant be used
directly into real life without any validation with experimental results. The aim of this paper is to compare the computer
simulated results of energy absorbing capabilities of Aluminium 6082 T6 foils for impact attenuator using ANSYS with that
of the actual drop test values performed in the structural mechanics laboratory of IIT Madras. The analysis results are found
in good agreement with experimental results obtained from crash testing in real time and this validates our design of the
attenuator. Average deceleration of impact is less than 20 g as per the requirement of SUPRA SAE design rules.

concentrates on the impact performance of a structure

made of Aluminium 6082 T6 foils. This paper aims at
verifying the dynamic deceleration by drop test
method. Fig. (1) depicts the CAD model of the
attenuator designed using PRO-E software. Overall
dimensions of the attenuator were 250 x 125 x 200
mm3. The sheet thickness eventually used was 1.5
mm. Fig. (2) depicts the frame of a typical formula
race car and the way in which an impact attenuator is
mounted in the front bulkhead.

I. INTRODUCTION:
The main purpose of this paper is to determine the
best material for an impact attenuator of a formula
race car as per the SAE norms. For design and
construction of impact attenuators in race cars,
structural weight saving is one of the major
considerations. To meet this requirement, sandwich
construction is frequently used instead of increasing
material thickness. Sandwich construction consists of
two thin facing layers separated by a core material.
Several types of core shapes and core material have
been applied to the construction of sandwich
structures. Among them, the honeycomb core that
consists of very thin foils in the form of hexagonal
cells perpendicular to the facings is the most popular
structure. A sandwich construction provides excellent
structural efficiency with high ratio of strength to
weight, elimination of welding, superior insulating
qualities and design versatility.
Potential materials for sandwich facings are
Aluminium alloy foils 6082 T6, Balsa wood, Long
Fiber Reinforced Thermoplastic Composite (LFRT).
Out of these materials, the one with the lesser value
of peak deceleration is chosen as the final material
and that material is used to fabricate the impact
attenuator.

Figure 1. Pro-E model of attenuator

II. DESIGN AND MATERIAL SELECTION:

According to the SUPRA SAE rulebook 2014, the
rule regarding impact attenuator states that the
attenuator must be installed in the front bulkhead of
the vehicle and it must be at least 200mm long. Also
if a vehicle of total mass of 300 kg were to run into a
solid, non yielding impact barrier with an impact
velocity of 7 m/s, the attenuator must give an average
deceleration of less than 20g. The present work

Figure 2. Placement of attenuator in a frame of a formula car

Proceedings of Twelveth IRF International Conference, 31st August 2014, Chennai, India, ISBN: 978-93-84209-48-3
62

Design And Experimental Analysis of An Impact Attenuator

Aluminium 6082 T6 foils are commercially available.

Its sheets were used for the impact attenuator. This
material is highly weldable using TIG welding. It is
light in weight and cost effective. Table (1) and Table
(2) give us the respective material composition and
material properties of Aluminium 6082 T6 alloy
structure.
Element

specimens are modeled to the dimensions as used in

practical tests. The material properties are applied for
each material and meshing is done. The specimen is
fixed on its bottom face. A constant load of 8000N is
applied on its test face. By comparing the
deformation values, ranking is given to the
compression resistive materials and verified with the
experimental work.

% Present
Fig. (3) shows the ANSYS image of load application
on attenuator structure.

Silicon (Si)
0.70 - 1.30
Magnesium (Mg)
0.60 - 1.20
Manganese (Mn)
0.40 - 1.00
Iron (Fe)
0.0 - 0.50
Chromium (Cr)
0.0 - 0.25
Zinc (Zn)
0.0 - 0.20
Titanium (Ti)
0.0 - 0.10
Copper (Cu)
0.0 - 0.10
Other
0.0 - 0.05
Aluminium (Al)
Balance
Table (1). Composition of Aluminium 6082 T6 foils
Property
Proof stress
Tensile strength
Elongation A 50mm

Value

Figure 3. Before load application on attenuator

Figure 4 shows the snapshot taken after the front

portion is kept rigid and the back portion is fixed.
Load is applied on the rigid portion.

255 Min MPa

300 Min MPa
Min 9%

Brinell Hardness
91HB
Table (2). Properties of Aluminium 6082 T6
The other materials chosen for selection of impact
attenuator are Balsa Wood and Long Fiber
Reinforced Thermoplastic( LFRT) composite. All the
three materials are designed in the same shape and
dimensions and they are acted upon by the same load
during both software simulation and real time
compression tests and drop tests so that the best
material can be found out.

Figure 4. After load application on attenuator

III. ANALYSIS OF THE DESIGN:

Fig. (5), Fig.(6), Fig.(7) are the snapshots of analysis

done for various materials with the simulation
software ANSYS.

The analysis of the impact attenuator is done in two

ways, one using ANSYS software and the other way
is by using compression tests and drop tests.
Simulation using ANSYS:
The CAD model generated using PRO-E software is
opened for structural analysis in ANSYS software.
Analysis requires proper boundary conditions.
Carefully applied boundary conditions will only give
good results which can be correlated with
experimental results. The front wall portion of the
attenuator is rigid wall and the back end of the
attenuator is fixed to the frame of the vehicle.
The simulation is carried out as the same procedure
followed for the experimental static test. The

Figure 5. ANSYS of Aluminium Honeycomb Structure

Proceedings of Twelveth IRF International Conference, 31st August 2014, Chennai, India, ISBN: 978-93-84209-48-3
63

Design And Experimental Analysis of An Impact Attenuator

Fig. (9) shows the compression of the material placed

in the UTM. All the three materials undergo similar
process of compression loading. The amount of loads
applied and the deformation due to that load are noted
down for each material.

Figure 6. ANSYS of Balsa Wood

Figure 9. Structure applied to compressive load

Fig. (10) shows the compressed specimen of LFRT

after compression load is applied for same duration of
time. All the three specimens were subjected to
compression loading and the initial and final values
of height were noted down. Deformation due to load
is the difference in lengths between the initial and
final heights.

Figure 7. ANSYS of LFRT

Compression Test:
Compression tests are conducted by loading the test
specimen between two plates, and then applying a
force to the specimen by moving the crossheads
together. The compression test is used to determine
elastic limit, proportional limit, yield point, yield
strength, and (for some materials) compressive
strength.
The three materials to be compared are manufactured
in the same dimensions and these models are
subjected to a compression load provided by a
Universal Testing Machine(UTM). The specimen is
loaded between the fixed and movable cross- heads.
We placed a reference material of a height near the
specimen, so that the specimen can be compressed to
that specific height. As the compression height is kept
constant for all the specimens, we are able to compare
and justify our result by observing the compressive
load for each specimen.

Figure 10. Compressed structure

Observations of compression test:

Table 3 gives the values of compression test for all
the three materials. Among these LFRT has the same
deformation present even for a very high value of
compressed load . Clearly LFRT is the best material
to be chosen after compression test.

Fig. (8) Shows the Aluminium Honeycomb structure

being placed on the UTM before the application of
compression load. The initial height of the material is
noted down and repeated for other materials.

Material

Area
(m2)
0.025

Deformation
(m)
0.02

Load
(kN)
16

Balsa
wood
LFRT
0.025
0.02
191
Aluminium
0.025
0.02
20
Honeycomb
Table 3. Values of compression test

However the compression test is just a static test. In

real time collisions the impact loads are not gradual

Figure 8. Structure kept on UTM for compression test

Proceedings of Twelveth IRF International Conference, 31st August 2014, Chennai, India, ISBN: 978-93-84209-48-3
64

Design And Experimental Analysis of An Impact Attenuator

and they act instantaneously. Within a few seconds of

time impact loads can cause serious damage to the
vehicle. Hence we have to carry out the drop test
which brings out the real time load application
scenario.

t = 0.4517 s
Where,
P.E. =>Potential Energy (N-m)
K.E. => Kinetic Energy (N-m)
u , v => Initial and Final Velocity (m/s)
a => Acceleration due to gravity (m/s2)
h => Drop Height (m)
I => Impulse (Kg-m/s)
T => Time of impact (s)

Drop Test:
As the major load acting on the vehicle is dynamic,
our project will not be complete without testing the
materials with dynamic load. The objective of
performing this test is to determine the best energy
absorbing material under dynamic loading condition.
The material which produces the minimum peak
amplitude at the time of impact is the best energy
absorbing material. Energy absorbing materials are
those which can withstand the impact load acting on
one face of the material without transferring it to the
opposite face of it. For example, a good front impact
attenuator of a race vehicle must withstand the force
acting on its front face without transferring it to the
driver who is on the inner side of it.

Table 4 gives us the values of voltage and time

obtained during the drop test of Aluminium
Honeycomb Structure while Fig.(11) gives the image
of the graph obtained using LABVIEW.
Time
Amplitude
54:57.2
0.0408483
54:57.8
0.163429
54:58.4
0.287855
54:58.9
0.28945
54:59.5
-0.13833
55:00.1
-0.160832
55:00.6
-0.160575
Table 4. Values of drop test conducted using
Aluminium Honeycomb

With this concept in mind, the testing procedure was

designed for the three materials - LFRT, Balsa wood
and Aluminium Honeycomb foils. Only the results to
compare the three materials are needed and the exact
toughness values of the materials are not necessary.
The material under study on a tray is fixed to the
floor. The tray is designed in such a way that it holds
the specimen, but allows it to transfer load to the
other side as it is hollow in shape. The energy on the
other is side indicated by bending which is measured
using a strain gauge setup. The result is plotted using
Lab View. The material which produces the highest
potential value in Lab view is the one which transmits
maximum load to the bottom surface. Hence, the
material which transmits the least energy (producing
least potential) will be ranked as the best energy
absorbing material.
Observations of Drop Test:
The weight of the drop beam is 5 Kg. A hole is made
on the beam to fasten it with the main frame at a
height of 1m from the specimen. Here the kinetic
energy is converted into potential energy.

Figure 11. Voltage vs Time graph of drop test on Aluminium

Honeycomb structure

Table 5 gives us the values of voltage and time

obtained during the drop test of Balsa Wood Structure
while Fig.(12) gives the image of the graph obtained
using LABVIEW.

Kinetic Energy = Potential Energy

P.E. = mgh = 5 * 9.8 * 1
= 49 N-m
P.E. = K.E.= 49N-m
v2 = u2 + 2ah = 0 + (2 * 9.8 * 1)
= 19.6
v = 4.427 m/s

Time
42:25.8
42:26.3
42:26.9

Amplitude
0.273646
0.365632
0.0110149
42:27.4 0.0749373
Table 5. Values of drop test conducted using balsa
wood

I = v*m
= 4.427 * 5
I = 22.135 Kg-m/s
t = v/a = 4.427 / 9.8

Proceedings of Twelveth IRF International Conference, 31st August 2014, Chennai, India, ISBN: 978-93-84209-48-3
65

Design And Experimental Analysis of An Impact Attenuator

material among the materials taken for study. LFRT

performs as a good compression resistive material
and a decent energy absorber. Balsa Wood also
showed a good result as a good energy absorber.
However as Aluminium Honeycomb absorbs the
maximum amount of energy, it can be chosen as the
best material for the attenuator.
REFERENCES:
[1]

M.T.J.Fonteyn, Dr. Ir. Witteman, Formula Student Racing

Team Eindhoven- Crash Safety, MT06.10, Eindhoven,
2006.

[2]

Giovanni Belingardi, Jovan Obradovic, Design of the

Impact Attenuator for a Formula Student Racing Car:
Numerical Simulation of the Impact Crash Test, Journal of
the Serbian Society for Computational Mechanics, Vol. 4,
No. 1, 2010, pp. 52-65.

[3]

Jon Hart, Craig Kennedy, Todd LeClerc, Justin Pollard,

Formula SAE Impact Attenuator, Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, Plascore, 2009-2010.

[4]

Hiroshi Enomoto, Yusuke Mitazaki, Hiroshi Mizuno, Eiji

Hirano, Satoshi Kityama, Koetsu Yamazaki, Naoki Uota,
Development of CFRP Monocoque Front Impact
Attenuator for FSAE with VaRTM, Kanazawa University,
KADO Corporation, Published by-Society of Automotive
Engineers of Japan, 2007

[5]

Jovan Obradovic, Simonetta Boria , Giovanni Belingardi,

Lightweight design and crash analysis of composite frontal
impact energy absorbing structures, Composite Structures,
Vol. 94, 2012, pp. 423-430.

[6]

Gagandeep Singh, Naman Khanna, Sachin Kumar,

Devender Kumar, Design, Fabrication and Testing of
Impact Attenuator for Formula SAE Car, National
Conference on Recent Innovations in Engineering &
Technology, March 2012.

[7]

ARAI, Pune,
10/27(V9)/46

[8]

Formula SAE Rule book, SAE International, 02 Jan 2014

[9]

Avalle M., Belingardi G., Advanced materials for

automotive applications, Mobility and Vehicle Mechanics,
2004, vol. 30.

Figure 12. Voltage vs Time graph of drop test on Balsa Wood

Table 6 gives us the values of voltage and time

obtained during the drop test of LFRT Structure while
Fig.(13) gives the image of the graph obtained using
LABVIEW.
Time

Amplitude

27:29.6
-0.16257
27:30.1
1.59386
27:30.7
1.55134
27:31.3
1.54721
Table 6. Values of drop test conducted using LFRT

Test

Report

No.

CAE/7194/2009-

[10] Online Material library available at www.matweb.com,

March 2014.

Figure 13.Voltage vs Time graph of drop test on LFRT

CONCLUSION:

[11] Material handbook,

www.designadvisor.org/pdfs/materials.pdf,March 2013.

From our investigation, we have concluded that

Aluminium Honeycomb is the best energy absorbing

[12] A book on Composite materials- Design and Applications

by Daniel Gay, Suong V. Hoa and Stephen W. Tsai Edition
2003 by CRC Press LLC.

Proceedings of Twelveth IRF International Conference, 31st August 2014, Chennai, India, ISBN: 978-93-84209-48-3
66