Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Results in Engineering
journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/results-in-engineering

Speed-dependent impact analysis on a car bumper structure using

various materials
Mohammad Sakib Ul Abrar , Kazi Forhan Nadim Ezaz , Md. Jahid Hasan *,
Ridowan Islam Pranto , Tamzeed Ahmed Alvy , Md. Zahid Hossain
Department of Mechanical and Production Engineering (MPE), Islamic University of Technology (IUT), Board Bazar, Gazipur, 1704, Bangladesh

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Automotive safety is a critical concern, and the design of bumpers plays a pivotal role in enhancing impact
Automotive safety resistance and overall vehicle safety. Prior research has assessed several materials and structural layouts for car
Bumper design bumpers, emphasizing characteristics, impact resistance, and financial analysis. Further study in this area is
Impact resistance
necessary since there is a research gap in discovering the ideal bumper design incorporating a spring-supported
Finite element method
Spring-supported system
system and using various materials for more excellent impact resistance at varying speeds. To create a bumper
design with a spring-supported system, this study will employ the finite element method (FEM) to undertake
structural analysis. It will also evaluate the impact resistance of the bumper at various speeds and utilize various
materials. The model has been verified by previous research. To ensure that the design does not exceed the
maximum yield strength of the material, it was evaluated based on the average Von Mises stress at the impact
location, prioritizing configurations with the lowest stress and most significant displacement. It has been
discovered that Aluminium 2024 T-86 may substitute carbon fibre in accidents up to 30 kmph. GMT and SMC can
also be substituted in crashes under 25 kmph. Utilizing these materials led to increased deformation followed by
decreased absorbed stress, making them ideal for bumper design.

strength. This study aims to contribute original insights into bumper

design and material selection, utilizing SolidWorks and ANSYS Me­
1. Introduction chanical for modeling and analysis, which sets it apart from previous
research. Bumpers prevent damage to crucial components and are
Vehicle-related accidents have risen globally, causing significant evolving for better safety and lighter weight in modern cars [1].
mortality. Contributing factors include urbanization, increased car Manufacturing automobile bumpers vary based on materials and design,
ownership, and distracted driving. Inadequate infrastructure and lax using injection and blow molding methods. Recycling polymer waste,
traffic enforcement are also issues. Addressing this requires better like vehicle bumpers, into carbon-based nano-materials via catalytic
infrastructure, education, enforcement, and awareness campaigns. Car pyrolysis with TiO2 nanoparticles shows promise. Bumper beams are
bumpers play a vital role in reducing the impact of accidents by crucial for safety and require flexible yet rigid design, validated through
absorbing impact damage. This research focuses on assessing bumper Finite Element Analysis (FEA) and testing. The plan focuses on strength,
effectiveness through testing and modeling to improve crashworthiness weight reduction, and recyclability, with factors like cross-section
and safety. Car bumpers are essential for absorbing low-speed collision shape, curvature, attachment methods, rib thickness, and strength
forces and protecting the vehicle and occupants. They come in various essential in bumper beam production [2,3]. A good car bumper design
materials and designs, focusing on balancing stiffness and energy ab­ must provide safety for passengers and should have low weight, ac­
sorption. The scope of the present work involves analyzing the structural cording to the research of Motgi et al. [4].
behavior of car bumpers under low-speed impacts, focusing on bumper Plastic is increasingly used in contemporary car bumpers, which
design and material selection. The motivation for this study stems from have functional and aesthetic advantages. These advantages include
the need to improve car safety through enhanced bumper beam design, recyclable materials, affordable repairs, and impact resistance on the
weight reduction, and recyclability, addressing factors such as cross- same level as metal. These plastic bumpers expand in line with their
section shape, curvature, attachment methods, rib thickness, and

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Md.J. Hasan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2024.101927
Received 29 November 2023; Received in revised form 5 February 2024; Accepted 16 February 2024
Available online 17 February 2024
2590-1230/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

Nomenclature d Wire diameter

p1 End Coil Pitch
Symbols Description p2 Middle Coil Pitch
FEM Finite Element Analysis nt Number of total Coils
CAD Computer Aided Design na Number of active Coils
CFRP Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic v Final velocity of the car in m/s
GMT Glass-Mat Thermoplastics u Initial velocity of the car in m/s
SMC Sheet Molding Compound a Deceleration
AGV Automated Guided Vehicle F Impact Force
L Bumper beam length t Time after which the vehicle stopped in seconds
W Bumper beam width P Pressure acted on the bumper
H Bumper beam height A Surface Area of Collision on the bumper beam
t Bumper beam shell thickness E Young’s Modulus
Ө Bumper beam corner angle Sy Yield Strength
l Spring Length X Displacement
D Mean Coil Diameter

metal counterparts and don’t need any extra fittings, making them a energy the car took in during the crash. The authors also compare their
practical and effective building choice, as found by the research of simulation results to actual data from other studies [13,14] and the two
Uddandapu et al. [5]. Using okra and banana fibers as reinforcement in data sets agree well. Car accidents cause most injuries and deaths
composite materials is becoming increasingly common because of their worldwide. The bumper assembly is vital to automotive safety since it
favorable effects on the environment, affordability, and renewability. deflects collision energy and protects occupants. Computer simulations
These lignocellulosic fibers improve the strength and stiffness of mate­ and models have been used to study bumper assembly performance
rials, which makes them appropriate for structural applications, as during collisions [15,16]. ANSYS was used in several studies [17,18] to
found in the research of Obumneme et al. [6]. However, further research analyze how well car bumper assemblies performed in a collision. These
is required to thoroughly understand their mechanical and thermal tests have shown that ANSYS can be a valuable tool for creating and
characteristics before they can be used in real applications. Olor­ enhancing the crashworthiness of bumper components. Basith et al. [19]
unnishola et al. [7] emphasize the increasing use of thermoplastics analyzed a passenger car bumper assembly accident using ANSYS,
derived from natural fibers in the automotive industry, particularly in where the authors developed a model of the bumper assembly and tested
building bumpers. Materials like jute fiber have benefits, including it at low speed. The simulation revealed the bumper structure’s defor­
biodegradability, recyclability, renewability, and cost-effectiveness. mation patterns, stress and strain distribution, and collision energy ab­
After investigating several composites for bumper pallets, such as sorption. The authors also compared their simulation results to
glass fiber and synthetic glass fibers, the study concludes that jute fiber is experimental data from other research and discovered similarities.
the best option in this context. Composite materials are gaining popu­ Lightweight, high-strength materials like Aluminum, steel, and
larity in the vehicle industry because of their weight reduction, perfor­ composites are typically used to create automotive bumper beams. The
mance, and environmental benefits. Several studies have assessed the selection of a bumper beam’s material is influenced by several variables,
viability of employing composite materials for several automobile ap­ including price, weight, and performance [20,21]. They built and
plications, including bumper beams, according to a study of the litera­ assessed an automotive bumper beam using SolidWorks and ANSYS
ture [5]. Workbench. They chose mild steel for their bumper beam since it was
Chawla et al. [8] examined bumper beam applications of composites sturdy and affordable. Several studies have examined alternate bumper
reinforced with natural fibers. According to the study, natural fiber beam materials [22] and simulated Aluminum and CFRP bumper beam
composites may give the car industry a green and economical alternative performance using Finite Element Analysis. They found that CFRP
to traditional materials because they have comparable mechanical bumper beams absorbed more energy than Aluminum and mild steel. In
properties. Another study by El-Sayed et al. [9] explored hybrid com­ a different study [20] the authors examined the application of
posite bumper beams made of carbon and glass fibers. The study found multi-material bumper beams made of CFRP, steel, and Aluminum. They
that hybrid composite bumper beams beat steel bumper beams by 20% found hybrid bumper beams were more energy-absorbing and lighter
in impact resistance and energy absorption. The study of S.S. Godara and than conventional bumper beams composed of a single material.
Shiv Narayan Nagar [10] analyzes carbon fiber composite material for Selecting the suitable material for automobile bumper beams is essential
an automobile’s frontal bumper beam, expanding on previous research. for assuring the protection of the car’s occupants in the event of a
The bumper beam was designed, analyzed using finite element analysis, low-speed frontal collision. Coil springs are necessary to a vehicle’s
and compared to traditional steel bumper beams; this study’s results suspension system, and good design and analysis ensure performance
align with those of other investigations that have shown potential ad­ and safety. Al Sahlani et al. [23] designed and analyzed automobile coil
vantages of employing composite materials in automotive applications. springs using FEA software. FEA has been used in several research to
Recent years have focused more on car safety, particularly head-on develop and analyze coil springs. In another study, Lee et al. [24]
collisions. Many computer models and simulations have been used to examined how coil spring design elements, including turns, wire
study car crash behavior. ANSYS, a finite element analysis (FEA) system, diameter, and coil diameter, affected static and dynamic properties. The
can simulate and study building behavior under varied loads [11,12] wire diameter has the most significant impact on spring performance. In
examined frontal car crashes using Ansys. The authors define ANSYS and another study [25], improved a passenger car coil spring using FEA.
describe how it models crashes. Then, they discussed the study’s They changed the spring’s composition, wire diameter, and coil diam­
methodology. Afterward, a car was modeled using ANSYS, and a rigid eter to minimize weight while preserving spring rate and deflection.
block frontal impact was simulated. The paper shows the modeling re­ Kadam and Jain [26] compared helical and conical coil springs in
sults, including how the car’s structure changed, how stress and strain vehicle suspension systems. They found that conical springs had better
were spread among the different parts of the vehicle, and how much weight, stiffness, and fatigue life than helical springs.

2
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

To increase performance and safety, this thesis looks at the thermal Mises stress under the yield strength limit and maximum deformation at
behavior of vehicle disc brakes. Specifically, it focuses on improving a 30 kmph impact test when materials like Aluminium 2024 T-86,
heat dissipation. The paper assesses five typical disc brake geometries Carbon Fibre, GMT and SMC were used. Fig. 1 depicts the breakdown
using mathematical theories, numerical techniques, and ANSYS simu­ design of a bumper beam. The flowchart in Fig. 2 shows the process
lations. It also suggests two innovative designs that make use of N-38 followed for the research work.
ventilation blades. Findings show a notable 23.8% improvement in heat
dissipation over current methods, allowing for efficient brake applica­ 2. Design and modifications
tion even under harsh circumstances. The study aims to give brake en­
gineers helpful information by providing a thorough analytical approach 2.1. Bumper modelling
for evaluating disc brake assemblies’ structural and contact behavior
and improving their performance [27–29]. This thesis investigates the The modeling of the bumper is done using a CAD tool, SolidWorks.
thermal behavior of automobile disc brakes through an extensive nu­ The bumper beam is considered as a shell part here. There are two
merical simulation utilizing the coupled thermo-structural technique in supports, and the supports are solid. The schematic representation of the
ANSYS software. Thermal coefficients for three distinct brake disc ma­ modeled bumper beam with dimensions is shown in Fig. 3.
terials are determined using a thorough 3D CFD thermal analysis used in The bumper of this particular model is shown in Fig. 4. In this model,
the study to comprehend heat dispersion over the brake disc. Compar­ materials with the same thickness of 1.6 mm have been used. Copper
ative analysis is used to determine which material has the best thermal springs, in addition to this, are frequently used in automobiles and other
behavior. In addition, the study tackles the issue of passenger vehicle vehicles because of their ability to absorb the stress that is created by
disc brake squeals by creating a finite element model to investigate how bumps and wrecks on the road. The same result can be accomplished by
Young’s modulus affects squeal production. Also, the study explores the installing a spring made of copper alloy within the shelled supports to
more extensive implications of braking system use on traffic safety, with create the same effect. Copper springs, which are more often located in
a particular emphasis on problems such as brake wear, noise pollution, suspension systems, will be repurposed for use in bumpers to test their
and health impact [30–32]. This thesis uses ANSYS software to conduct performance. This was done to ensure that the performance of the
extensive numerical modeling and simulation to examine car braking copper springs was not compromised. This particular spring had been
systems’ mechanical and thermal characteristics. This research explores constructed so that it would easily slide into place within the support leg
the temperature evolution for full and vented brake discs, optimizing shell that the bumper has. After the tests had been completed, the ma­
heat dispersion via Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and thermal terials that had proven to be the most successful would have been
analysis. The brake disc material with the best thermal behavior is selected. Various Impact speeds were used in this research to test the
determined by comparing the various materials. To ensure adherence to durability of the bumper used with the eight different materials listed
safety regulations, the research discusses temperature decreases in drum later in the paper. All the parameters of the bumper were kept constant,
brakes and their effect on parking brake systems. To improve fatigue life, including length, thickness, height, and width. At the same time, the
the thesis closes with a unique evolutionary optimization method for materials were changed from time to time, along with the pressure
determining the ideal vented brake disc design characteristics [33–35]. associated with the particular speed.
The present study analyses front-end car crashes using ANSYS soft­ The dimensional parameters of the Bumper beam and the spring as
ware to understand complicated crash scenarios and automotive struc­ shown in Fig. 4 are placed in Table 1 & Table 2 presents the values for
ture behavior. The earlier studies aimed to improve bumper assembly each parameter found on the spring, a newly included component of the
design for low-speed incidents to increase automotive safety. Previous bumper beam.
literature reveals that bumper beam material selection is critical, with
Aluminum and composites showing potential for energy absorption but
mild steel remaining popular due to its affordability and strength. 2.2. Material selection
Optimizing bumper beams with multi-material techniques deserves
additional study. The present study also emphasized Finite Element Many materials are currently under consideration in automobile
Analysis to develop and analyze coil springs in car suspension systems. bumper design to satisfy the continuously changing requirements for
Wire diameter, coil diameter, and material selection affect spring per­ vehicle safety, weight reduction, and environmental sustainability.
formance and suspension system performance, whether helical or Magnesium AZ31B is a lightweight alloy that distinguishes itself from
conical. the competition by its durability, corrosion resistance, malleability, and
The study presents original findings on the structural behavior of car robustness. Although it presents an appealing option for automobile
bumpers under low-speed impacts, offering unique insights into bumper bumpers, its drawbacks encompass exorbitant expenses, reactivity, and
design and material selection. Overall, significant data was provided by
the research that could inform car safety improvements. Springs had
only been used in suspensions to absorb shocks, and this concept was
utilized in our study. The best material-based spring was incorporated at
the supports of the bumper for shock absorption, and the results were
simulated. Previously, material tests on the spring-based bumper system
had not been implemented, so in addition to that, different materials
were incorporated with the bumper itself to see their effect on the
Average von Mises Stress at the impact region, how they could handle
low-speed frontal crashes and impacts to give the highest displacement
values. This work’s significance lies in its contribution to understanding
bumper beam design for strength, weight reduction, and recyclability,
focusing on factors such as cross-section shape, curvature, attachment
methods, rib thickness, and strength. These original findings offer
valuable insights for improving car safety and could potentially influ­
ence future developments in automotive engineering. The research
provides quantifiable results, demonstrating that the open hat section
design outperformed other designs, yielding the lowest average von Fig. 1. Diagram of bumper system [36].

3
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

emerges as an economically viable and resilient selection for automotive

bumpers. It is widely available, inexpensive, durable, impact-resistant,
and simple to shape into various bumper sizes and shapes, all of
which make it an excellent material for mass production. Nonetheless,
steel bumpers are cumbersome, susceptible to swift corrosion, less
dependable regarding force dispersion, and resource-intensive in ma­
terials and energy. As a result, the utilization of commercial steel should
be thoroughly evaluated in terms of its benefits and drawbacks [40].
Glass-Mat thermoplastic (GMT), composed of short glass fibers and
thermoplastic resin, is an additional candidate for barrier materials. It
provides durability, a lightweight composition, and impact and abrasion
resistance. GMT bumpers afford substantial passenger and vehicle pro­
tection by effectively absorbing and distributing collision energy.
However, compared to steel or Aluminum, GMT bumpers may be more
expensive and more challenging to repair, resulting in increased main­
tenance costs. As a result, the utilization of GMT should be accompanied
by a comprehensive assessment of its advantages and disadvantages
[41].
Sheet molding compound (SMC), which is lightweight and robust, is
an additional noteworthy option for bumper materials. Incorporating
polyester resin, fragmented glass fibers, and other components, SMC
possesses remarkable resistance to impact. Similar to GMT bumpers,
SMC bumpers have disadvantages, including higher costs and more
incredible difficulty in replacement and repair compared to other
materials.
The high-strength Steel Bare/EG-HF 80Y 100T material is introduced
when searching for durable and resilient automobile bumpers. This
“bare” low-carbon steel alloy enhances corrosion resistance due to
manganese and chromium traces. Furthermore, besides being robust and
long-lasting, the final product is impact and abrasion-resistant. It may be
heavier than alternative materials, which could reduce the efficacy of
Fig. 2. Flowchart depicting methodology. the vehicle. When selecting high-strength steel for automobile bumpers,
careful consideration should be given to its cost, durability, and
the arduous process of welding [37]. The potential of aluminum alloy to strength.
decrease carbon emissions makes it an appealing material for bumpers. Finally, aerospace-grade 2024-T86 high-strength aluminum alloy is
Aluminum alloys bearing the following designations—2008, 6111, being considered for automotive bumpers. Although it is potentially
6016, 6009, and 6010—provide noteworthy attributes, including lighter than alternative metals, which could result in weight reductions,
cost-effectiveness, robust energy absorption, and corrosion resistance. it carries a more significant cost. In addition, its lower strength renders it
These materials nevertheless require a comprehensive evaluation of more vulnerable to collision damage compared to other materials.
their advantages and disadvantages for optimal deployment [38]. Before contemplating using aluminum alloy in bumper design, careful
A critical concern within the automotive sector is lightweight, which consideration is required [38].
is by the sector’s objectives regarding energy efficiency. Carbon fiber Determining the most appropriate material for constructing auto­
bumpers have emerged as a potentially effective solution, as they mobile bumpers necessitates a detailed evaluation of constraints. Every
effectively decrease the curb weight of vehicles, thereby leading to material, including carbon fiber, steel, magnesium alloy, high-strength
improved performance and efficiency. Further, carbon fiber exhibits steel, and high-strength Aluminum, possesses a distinct combination of
remarkable proficiency in absorbing impact forces that occur during benefits and drawbacks. The selection process should be based on
collisions. The automotive industry has adopted carbon fiber-reinforced particular design objectives, environmental factors, and economic
plastic to reduce component count, enhance crashworthiness, dura­ viability, guaranteeing an ideal equilibrium among weight, safety, and
bility, and resilience, and improve aesthetics. Even longer-lasting than sustainability in automotive design. Table 3 represents the properties of
metal bumpers, composite bumpers may necessitate fewer repairs and all the materials used in the study.
replacements [2,39].
Transitioning to a more traditional alternative, commercial steel

Fig. 3. Schematic of bumper design.

4
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

Fig. 4. (a) Isometric View of bumper beam model, (b) Cross Section View of bumper beam model, (c) Spring Element used inside support leg shell, (d) Side View of
Spring with Length Dimensions, (e) Front View of spring showing wire diameter and (f) Mean coil diameter.

3. Methodology and structural analysis were done with ANSYS Mechanical. The bumper
models were then imported into ANSYS to build and analyze the struc­
The primary objective of this study was to look at how car bumpers ture. Previously, following the Godara and Shiv Narayan Nagar’s [10]
behave structurally when hit at low speeds. In this study, the bumper study reference, a bumper was selected with an open hat cross-section,
models were made with SolidWorks, which allows precise control over which yielded the best results and moved forward for modification
factors like shape, size, and material qualities. The bumper, meshing, and improvement.

5
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

Table 1 Table 4
Dimensional parameter of bumper beam. Properties of the materials used for bumper beam.
Parameter Description Value Property of Mesh Values Values Values Values

L Bumper beam length 1300 mm Element Size 2 mm 8 mm 6 mm 4 mm

W Bumper beam width 65 mm Nodes 507350 151630 253711 507206
H Bumper beam height 60 mm Element 83000 27787 43702 82089
t Bumper beam shell thickness 1.6 mm
Ө Bumper beam corner angle 26◦
after 4 (four) where the increase in nodes and elements after increasing
the element size does not deviate significantly; hence, element size was
Table 2 selected to be 4 mm. Table 4 gives values for different element sizes and
Parameters of spring element. their number of nodes and elements.
Parameter Description Value

l Spring Length 91 mm 3.2. Process of impact calculations

D Mean Coil Diameter 53.6 mm
d Wire diameter 3.2 mm The entire body of a passenger car functions in the same way as a
p1 End Coil Pitch 3.5 mm
chassis. Because of this, the body’s structure was constructed in such a
p2 Middle Coil Pitch 20 mm
nt Number of total Coils 7 way that it would be able to convey all of its energy. When a vehicle is
na Number of active Coils 4 running, it has some kinetic energy; however, if an accident causes the
vehicle to stop, it has zero velocity and, therefore, zero kinetic energy, so
the vehicle does not have any kinetic energy. Following a very modest
Table 3 speed reduction trend and in virtually the same pattern, the kinetic
Properties of the materials used for bumper beam. energy should be zero to reduce the number of injuries. The frontal
structure must absorb all of the kinetic energy transferred during a
Material name Young’s Poisson’s Density Yield
modulus ratio (kg/m3) strength frontal collision [10]. In this study, we take a specific mass of automo­
(MPa) (MPa) bile along with the bumper, and we hit the car at various speeds with a
Carbon fiber 70,000 0.10 2172 × 570
bumper that is not moving. Consideration is given to speeds of 10, 15,
composite 104 20, 25, and 30 km per hour. The pressure exerted on the bumper was
Magnesium AZ31B 68900 0.35 1740 190 determined by calculating its forces at each speed and deriving that
body pressure from those calculations. In our simulation, these particular
Aluminum Alloy 69000 0.30 2770 280
numbers were chosen for pressure. The results of the measures that were
Body
Commercial Steel 207000 0.30 7860 250 done to determine the pressure are shown below [10].
bare CS Mass of the vehicle with bumper (without passenger) = 1400 kg.
GMT 12000 0.41 1280 230 Group of five people (average) = 300 kg.
SMC 20000 0.33 1830 310 The total weight (including passenger) = 1400 + 300 = 1700 kg.
Steel Bare/E.G. –H. 207000 0.30 7860 584
F. 80Y 100T
Frontal surface area of Bumper = 80910 mm2
Aluminum 2024- 72400 0.33 2780 440 Now, the equation of motion is,
T86
v = u + at (1)
Assuming the car hits another identical one, it will stop in 0.1 s.
3.1. Meshing
Deceleration of the car is given by,

The construction of sub-blocks of the whole physical model is the a = (u − v)/t (2)
core idea behind FEA, which stands for finite element analysis. To
Force acting during collision is given by,
ensure that the analysis findings were reliable, it was necessary to
connect the entirety of the sub-block to the remaining parts of the model F = ma (3)
[17]. Node and element are both components of the subblock, but only
the node can estimate its displacement when exposed to an external where v = final velocity of the car in m/s.
load. According to Fig. 5, the mesh was generated under ‘fine’ meshing
to divide the whole bumper beam into small blocks of solids for easy u = initial velocity of the car in m/s
calculations and simulations. Mesh properties are given in Table 4.
A number of varying element numbers from 20 to 2 mm were taken, t = time after which the vehicle stopped in seconds.
and a mesh independence analysis was performed. It was seen that the F = Impact force.
most significant number of Nodes and Elements was given from values Pressure acted on the bumper, P = F/A (4)
Where A is the surface area of the collision on the bumper beam.

3.3. Boundary conditions

In ANSYS modeling, boundary conditions were crucial specifications

determining how a structure interacted with its environment. Essential
conditions, such as fixed constraints on displacement or rotation,
represent the structure’s supports or restraints. Natural conditions
involving forces or fluxes simulate external loads or environmental ef­
fects. An accurate definition of these conditions is essential for obtaining
realistic simulation results, reflecting the actual behavior of the struc­
Fig. 5. Meshing of the bumper beam. ture under specific constraints and loads.

6
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

The bumper beam was modeled using SolidWorks and imported into Table 5
the ANSYS software. There, it meshed, and the boundary conditions Impact pressure on car bumper at varying speed.
were applied, as shown in Fig. 6, showing that the bumper supports are Car Speed Velocity (m/ Deceleration (m/ Force Pressure
fixed, and pressure is applied to the front part of the bumper, colored (km/h) s) s2) (N) (MPa)
red. 10 2.77 27.7 47090 0.582
Bumper beam load calculations are shown in Table 5, which shows 15 4.17 41.7 70890 0.876
the finalized pressure values acting on the bumper. 20 5.55 55.5 94444 1.167
25 6.94 69.4 117980 1458
30 8.33 83.3 141666 1.751
3.4. Model validation

During the validation, the dimensions are taken exactly as in Table 1 induced stress and displacement, while blue shows the minimum stress
while modeling. The five designs were modeled, which were (a) Open and displacement. Magnesium performed one of the worst among all the
hat section, (b) Rolled form section, (c) C section, (d) Rectangle Section, materials, and Aluminum 2024 T-86 was one of the best. In Fig. 7 (a) and
and (e) Open B section according to Ref. [10]. The simulation of the (b), the bumper lost its shape, and the material exceeded its yield
bumper beam was done using Finite Element Analysis. The advanced strength limit. At the same time, Aluminum did not cross its yield
ANSYS Workbench tool can resolve dynamic as well as static structural strength limit, thus maintaining its shape while inducing less stress with
problems. Here, the static-nonlinear analysis was used. The carbon fiber a higher deformation.
composite material is considered for these designs of the bumper beam.
The stress and displacement induced by the low-speed (30 kmph) 4. Results and discussions
Impact test on the five different designs were investigated. The results of
Impact tests conducted at 30 km per hour are presented in Table 6. These 4.1. Stress and displacement analysis on bumper beam at a speed of 10
tables detail the stresses and displacements that were found for each of kmph
the five designs that were taken into consideration. After performing the
Impact test, it was found that the Open Hat Section delivered the best In the initial impact test of 10 kmph, it was seen that none of the
results, giving minimum average Von Mises stress under yield strength materials crossed their yield strength limit. Meaning all of the materials
limit and maximum deformation. These results also satisfied the results are useable at this low-speed range. The red dotted lines in Fig. 8 indi­
that were found in previous studies [10]. cate the Maximum Yield Strength of each material. GMT outperforms
every other material, giving a deformation of 29.583 mm with an
average Von Mises stress of 155.68 MPa. SMC is the second best after
3.5. Stress and displacement analysis on modified bumper beam using
GMT, with a total deformation of 17.973 mm, as shown in Fig. 9, and an
different materials
average Von Mises stress of 156.58 MPa, as shown in Fig. 8. This ma­
terial has a higher increase in deformation at lower speed crashes due to
The bumper beam was modeled and then imported into the ANSYS,
its lower density and Young’s Modulus, according to the equation E =
where it meshed, and the boundary conditions were applied as shown in
FL/AX. If E (Young’s Modulus) is less, it will result in higher X
Figs. 4 and 5, which shows that the supports of the bumper are fixed, and
(Displacement) value.
pressure is applied to the front part of the bumper colored red. The static
structural study of a car bumper model using ANSYS software helps to
better understand the performance and durability of the bumper under 4.2. Stress and displacement analysis on bumper beam at a speed of 15
various loading conditions. The bumper must withstand collisions and kmph
impacts while causing the least damage to the vehicle and its occupants,
which is why this study is crucial. The entire deformation investigation In the second impact test of 15 kmph, it is seen that most of the
includes measuring the displacement of the bumper model in response materials do not cross their yield strength limit except for magnesium,
to a predefined load. According to this study, engineers can now identify which crossed its elastic limit. The red dotted lines in Fig. 10 indicate the
bumper parts that are severely distorted and in danger of failing or Maximum Yield Strength of each material. This means all materials are
sustaining structural damage. The Equivalent von Miss Stress study aims useable at this low-speed range except for magnesium. GMT out­
to calculate the maximum stresses that can exist in the bumper model performs every other material again by giving the highest deformation
under a given load. This research is crucial for locating bumper com­ of 44.375 mm, as shown in Fig. 9, with a low average Von Mises stress of
ponents under significant stress, which might eventually cause failure or 230.77 MPa, as shown in Fig. 10. GMT barely makes it in this case, as the
fatigue. Engineers may optimize the bumper’s design to make sure it can stress is nearly equal to the yield strength. SMC is the second-best and
resist Impacts and crashes without suffering structural damage by safest material after GMT, with a total deformation of 26.96 mm and an
studying the stress distribution in the bumper. A stress test was per­ average Von Mises stress of 233.52 MPa. SMC is the best option because
formed with all eight different materials. Fig. 7 (a-d) shows the total it can absorb more energy quickly and exhibit minor deformation
deformation and stress distribution tests for two materials at 30 kmph: compared to GMT. Moreover, the stress doesn’t cross its yield strength,
Magnesium and Aluminum 2024 T-86. Red shows the maximum which makes it more viable. The lower density and Young’s modulus
also come into part this time.

4.3. Stress and displacement analysis on bumper beam at a speed of 20

kmph

In the 3rd test at 20 kmph, Magnesium, GMT, Commercial Steel and

Aluminum cross their yield strength limits and cannot be used as these
materials cross their elastic limit, as shown in Fig. 11. The red dotted
lines in Fig. 11 indicate the Maximum Yield Strength of each material.
SMC is the best out of the remaining materials, with a lower average Von
Mises stress of 312.16 MPa, staying within its yield strength limit with a
Fig. 6. Front Part of Bumper under pressure. high deformation of 36.039 mm. The lower Young’s modulus followed

7
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

Table 6
Validation Data for particular design at 30 kmph
Design Cross section Average Von Mises Stress Observed at Maximum Average Von Mises Stress Observed at Maximum Displacement
Impact Region (MPa) Displacement (mm) Impact Region (MPa) [10] (mm) [10]

Bumper Open Hat 560.71 14.85 536.25 14.50

1 Section
Bumper C Section 896.49 28.65 750.6 26.40
2
Bumper Rolled Form 386.52 14.072 398.25 13.49
3 Section
Bumper Open B Section 213.76 8.4598 250.1 9.14
4
Bumper Rectangle 613.61 16.615 590.8 14.05
5 Section

by density gives reason for the better performance of SMC compared to the SMC’s Yield Strength (Sy) value of 350 MPa. The Yield Strength
others followed by its higher energy absorption rate. Carbon Fiber and values of the Aluminum body and GMT intersect at an average Von
Aluminum 2024 T- 86 also give lower stress values that do not cross their Mises stress when traveling at a speed of 20 kmph. At 25 km per hour,
yield strength while giving a moderate value for the displacement of only the materials mentioned do not exceed their Yield Strength limits.
10.108 mm and 10.18 mm, as shown in Fig. 9, respectively. At a speed of 20 km per hour, the SMC experiences a deformation of
36.039 mm. However, the average Von Mises stress in the impact area
4.4. Stress and displacement analysis on bumper beam at a speed of 25 remains below its Sy value of 330 MPa. The SMC crosses its Sy for the
kmph average Von Miss Stress in the Impact Region at a speed of 25 kmph.
Carbon fiber and Aluminum 2024-T86 perform best when combined,
At 25 kmph, Magnesium, GMT, Commercial Steel, and Aluminum achieving a deformation of 15.166 mm and 15.274 mm, respectively, at
cross their yield strength limits and cannot be used as these materials a speed of 30 km/h. The Von Mises stress in the Impact region of these
exceed their elastic limit, as shown in Fig. 12. The red dotted lines in materials does not seem to be exceeded even at a speed of 30 km per
Fig. 12 indicate the Maximum Yield Strength of each material. SMC is hour. Aluminum 2024-T86 has a value of 440 MPa, whereas carbon fiber
the best out of the remaining materials with a low average Von Mises has a value of 576 MPa. The material called Steel Bare/EG - HF 80Y
stress of 350.26 MPa, almost equal to its yield strength limit with a high 100T meets the requirements and has a Sy value of 584 MPa. It calcu­
deformation of 45.065 mm. Using SMC at such speed will be risky, so the lates a displacement of only 5.26 mm. GMT and SMC are two materials
safer options, in this case, will be Carbon Fiber and Aluminum 2024 T-86 that produce excellent results, alongside Carbon Fiber and Aluminum
with lower stress values within their yield strength limits and higher 2024-T86. These four materials give the best minimum average stress to
deformation values of 12.727 mm and 12.637 mm, as shown in Fig. 9. maximum displacement values. Fig. 14 shows a graph of displacement
These two materials have a higher tensile strength, making them values at all speeds for all materials, and Fig. 15 shows the average Von
stronger than SMC and a higher strength-to-weight ratio. Mises stress of all the materials at the specified 5-speed values. These
graphs show an additive result of the whole experiment. As the bumper
design and materials like GMT and SMC are analyzed for low-speed
4.5. Stress and displacement analysis on bumper beam at a speed of 30
crashes, the design can be implemented on AGV in industries. The
km/h
other two materials could be used daily, mainly in vehicles like sedans.

Finally, at 30 kmph, almost all other materials cross their limits

5. Conclusion
except Carbon fiber, Aluminum 2024 T-86, and Steel Bare, as shown in
Fig. 13. The red dotted lines in Fig. 13 indicate the Maximum Yield
This study thoroughly analyzed strategic design changes to improve
Strength of each material. Only three materials are useable at this speed.
vehicle bumper impact resistance, culminating in a spring-supported
Steel Bare has a very low deformation of only 5.26 mm; it will not be
mechanism. We investigated alternative material combinations using
economical to use when compared to the other two. Carbon Fiber and
rigorous finite element analysis, focusing on preventing excessive Von
Aluminum have higher Young’s Modulus values, so according to the
Mises stress in impact locations and minimizing displacement values.
equation E = FL/AX, the deformation will be lower than that compared
The study utilized the Finite Element Method for investigation. The
to SMC and GMT, but the yield strength is not being crossed by either
study found that our bumper design reduces crash stress while main­
making Carbon Fiber Composite and Aluminum 2024 T-86 a better
taining structural integrity and that Aluminum 2024-T86 can replace
option for 30 kmph crash with total deformation values of 15.16 mm and
Carbon Fiber composites, where Aluminum reduced stress by 21% and
15.274 mm respectively as shown in Fig. 9.
increased deformation by 6% when compared with the previous study.
GMT and SMC Could also be used as alternatives for low-speed crashes
4.6. Effect of impact speed on the average Von Mises stress and under 20 kmph where, At 10 kmph, GMT reduces stress by 20% while
deformation for various materials increasing deformation by 390%; at 20 kmph using SMC, reduction of
stress is achieved by 12.6% and increase in deformation by 173% when
Different materials reacted differently during the crash analysis, as compared to the previous study. It is possible to develop these combi­
revealed by the tests. At 10 km per hour, none of the materials exceeds nations for large-scale manufacturing, then analyze their applicability
their Sy Value in the Impact region when compared to the usual Von and conduct laboratory experiments. This study proposes a numerical
Mises stress. The optimal outcome is achieved at 15 kmph GMT, causing study in terms of a revolutionary material selection method to improve
a significant deformation of 44.375 mm. The average Von Mises stress is automotive safety. The present work holds significance in real-world
also lower than its Yield Strength value, measuring 240 MPa. Both applications, particularly in the automotive industry. Safety and per­
commercial steel and magnesium reach their yield values when sub­ formance can be improved by applying this study’s conclusions to
jected to an average Von Mises stress while moving at a speed of 15 km automobile bumper design. For instance, the improvised bumper design
per hour. The SMC performs best for us at a speed of 20 km/h, with a with materials like GMT and SMC is best for minimizing stress and
deformation of 36.039 mm and an average Von Mises stress value below

8
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

Fig. 8. Total Stress Curve at 10 kmph

Fig. 9. Total Displacement Curve at different speeds.

Fig. 10. Total Stress Curve at 15 kmph

Fig. 7. (a) Total Deformation of Magnesium at 30 kmph (b) Stress Distribution

of Magnesium at 30 kmph (c) Total Deformation of Aluminum 2024 T-86 at 30 • At 10 kmph, GMT reduces stress by 20% while increasing deforma­
kmph (d) Stress Distribution of Aluminum 2024 T-86 at 30 kmph tion by 390%.
• At 20 Kmph SMC reduction of stress is achieved by 12.6% and an
deformation during low-speed collisions, which might guide automobile increase in deformation by 173%.
bumper design for AGVs used in different factories. The effects of copper
springs alongside carbon fiber composite material and Aluminium 2024 In anticipation of the future, we enhance promising concepts to
T-86 on stress and displacement during 25 kmph and 30 kmph frontal maximize performance and limit weight, improving fuel efficiency and
crashes can be used to optimize bumper beams for cars in areas with maneuverability. Cost study is crucial to establishing the financial sus­
speed limits of 30 kmph. The critical points based on the study are given tainability and potential problems of extensive system adoption. Bumper
as follows: adjustments for AGVs are crucial in the developing field of industrial
automation, improving workplace safety in manufacturing and storage
• Aluminum 2024-T86 can replace Carbon Fiber, reducing stress by facilities. These areas could lead to passenger safety advances and
21% and increasing deformation by 6% for crashes under 30 kmph. industry-specific applications.
• GMT and SMC Could also be used as alternatives for low-speed
crashes under 20 kmph.

9
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

Fig. 11. Total Stress Curve at 20 kmph

Fig. 14. Total Displacement vs. Impact Speed for all Materials.

Fig. 12. Total Stress Curve at 25 kmph

Fig. 15. Average Von Mises Stress vs Impact Speed for all Material.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial

interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.

Data availability
Fig. 13. Total Stress Curve at 30 kmph
Data will be made available on request.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
References
Mohammad Sakib Ul Abrar: Writing – original draft, Visualization,
[1] D. Cochran, Joachim Linck, J. Won, Manufacturing System Design of Automotive
Validation, Software, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data Bumper Manufacturing, Semantic Scholar, 2001.
curation, Conceptualization. Kazi Forhan Nadim Ezaz: Writing – [2] H. Ahmad, A.A. Markina, M.V. Porotnikov, F. Ahmad, A review of carbon fiber
original draft, Visualization, Validation, Software, Methodology, materials in automotive industry, Mater. Sci. Eng. (2020) 971, https://doi.org/
10.1088/1757-899X/971/3/032011.
Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Md. [3] M.M. Davoodi, S.M. Sapuan, A. Aidy, N.A. Abu Osman, A.A. Oshkour, W.A.B. Wan
JahidHasan: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Abas, Development process of new bumper beam for passenger car: a review,
Visualization, Supervision, Software, Methodology. Ridowan Islam Mater. Des. 40 (2012) 304–313, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.03.060.
[4] M.N.S. Motgi, Impact analysis of front bumper, Int. J. Eng. Trends Technol. (IJETT)
Pranto: Writing – review & editing. Tamzeed Ahmed Alvy: Writing –
6 (2013) 28–291.
review & editing, Writing – original draft, Resources, Data curation. Md. [5] Uddandapu Pradeep Kumar, Impact analysis on car bumper by varying speeds
ZahidHossain: Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Project admin­ using materials, International Journal of Modern Engineering Research 3 (2013)
istration, Methodology, Investigation, Conceptualization. 391–395.
[6] Onyedum and S.C.A.O., “Comparative mechanical analysis of okra fiber and,”
American Journal of Engineering, Technology and Society, pp. 193–199..

10
M.S. Ul Abrar et al. Results in Engineering 21 (2024) 101927

[7] A. A. E. Olorunnishola, “A comparative analysis of a Blend of natural jute and [27] R.A. García-León, N. Afanador-García, J.A. Gómez-Camperos, Numerical study of
glass,” IOSR J. Mech. Civ. Eng. (IOSR-JMCE, pp. 67–71.. heat transfer and speed air flow on performance of an auto-ventilated disc brake,
[8] Chandramohan, Natural fiber reinforced polymer composites for automobile Fluid 6 (4) (2021) 160, https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids6040160. Apr.
accessories, Am. J. Environ. Sci. 9 (2013) 494–505, https://doi.org/10.3844/ [28] A. Belhocine, M. Bouchetara, Thermomechanical modelling of dry contacts in
ajessp.2013.494.504. Woodhead Publishing. automotive disc brake, Int. J. Therm. Sci. 60 (Oct. 2012) 161–170, https://doi.org/
[9] M.A.A.-S.H. El-Sayed, A.-E. A, Hybrid composite bumper beam for automobiles, 10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2012.05.006.
International Journal of Engineering Science and Computing (2019) 19945–19949. [29] A. Belhocine, N.M. Ghazaly, Effects of material properties on generation of brake
[10] S.S. Godara, Shiv Narayan Nagar, Analysis of frontal bumper beam of automobile squeal noise using finite element method, Lat. Am. J. Solid. Struct. 12 (8) (Aug.
vehicle by using carbon fiber composite material, Mater. Today: Proceedings 26 2015) 1432–1447, https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-78251520.
(2020) 2601–2607, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.02.550. [30] A. Belhocine, O.I. Abdullah, A thermomechanical model for the analysis of disc
[11] A.B. Joshi, A review of finite element method and its applications, nternational brake using the finite element method in frictional contact, J. Therm. Stresses 43
Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering (2016) 282–287. (3) (Mar. 2020) 305–320, https://doi.org/10.1080/01495739.2019.1683482.
[12] Sono Bhardawaj, Rakesh Chandmal Sharma, Sunil Kumar Sharma, Analysis of [31] A. Belhocine, N.M. Ghazaly, Effects of young’s modulus on disc brake squeal using
frontal car crash characteristics using ANSYS, Mater. Today: Proc. 25 (2020) finite element analysis, Int. J. Acoust. Vib. 21 (3) (2016), https://doi.org/
898–902, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2019.12.358. 10.20855/ijav.2016.21.3423. Sep.
[13] Y.H. J, Z.K. Chang, Analysis of the front-end structures of a passenger car under [32] N. Stojanovic, A. Belhocine, O.I. Abdullah, I. Grujic, The influence of the brake pad
NCAP frontal impact using finite element simulation, Int. J. Crashworthiness construction on noise formation, people’s health and reduction measures, Environ.
(2015) 77–86. Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 30 (6) (2022) 15352–15363, https://doi.org/10.1007/
[14] B.Y.J.C.Z. Gao, Z. L, Simulation Study on Passenger Car Frontal Impact with Rigid s11356-022-23291-3. Sep.
Barrier, Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2013, pp. 398–401. [33] A. Belhocine, A. Afzal, Finite element modeling of thermomechanical problems
[15] H.R. Ghorbel, Development of a car bumper using finite element analysis, J. Mech. under the vehicle braking process, Multiscale and Multidisciplinary Modeling,
Eng. Autom. (2014) 47–52. Experiments and Design 3 (1) (Mar. 2020) 53–76, https://doi.org/10.1007/
[16] K.K. Kim, S N S H S, An investigation of the crashworthiness of a front bumper for s41939-019-00059-w.
pedestrian protection using FE analysis, Int. J. Automot. Technol. (2016) 253–258. [34] M.R. Ishak, A.R. Abu Bakar, A. Belhocine, J.M. Taib, W.Z.W. Omar, Brake torque
[17] A. G. M. D. E., K.V. Mamalis, Crashworthiness design optimization of automotive analysis of fully mechanical parking brake system: theoretical and experimental
bumper systems, J. Mater. Process. Technol. (2003) 460–465. approach, Measurement 94 (Dec. 2016) 487–497, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[18] Z. L. G. L. X., L.Y. Zhang, Numerical analysis and design of an automobile bumper measurement.2016.08.026.
with the crash box by finite element method, in: In Proceedings of the International [35] A. Belhocine, D. Shinde, R. Patil, Thermo-mechanical coupled analysis based
Conference on Mechanic Automation and Control Engineering, 2011. design of ventilated brake disc using genetic algorithm and particle swarm
[19] Mohammed Abdul Basith, N. Chandrashekar Reddy, Sudhakar Uppalapati, S. optimization, JMST Advances 3 (3) (Sep. 2021) 41–54, https://doi.org/10.1007/
P. Jani, Crash analysis of a passenger car bumper assembly to improve design for s42791-021-00040-0.
impact test, Mater. Today Proc. 45 (2021) 1684–1690, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [36] K.C. Rush, “An overview of automotive plastic bumpers, in: Automotive Bumper
matpr.2020.08.561. System and Exterior Panels ,”, SAE Technical Paper, 1990.
[20] L.H.J. Shih, M C L C Y, The design of a multi-material bumper beam using [37] Yueqian Jia, Yuanli Bai, Experimental study on the mechanical properties of
numerical and experimental analyses, Compos. Struct. (2018) 30–41. AZ31B-H24 magnesium alloy sheets under various loading conditions, Int. J. Fract.
[21] Javad Marzbanrad, Masoud Alijanpour, Mahdi Saeid Kiasat, Design and analysis of 197 (2016) 25–48, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-015-0057-7.
an automotive bumper beam in low-speed frontal crashes, Thin-Walled Struct. 47 [38] J.T. Staley, D.J. Lege, Advances in aluminum alloy products for structural
(8–9) (2009) 902–911, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2009.02.007. applications in transportation, Journal de Physique Archives 7 (1993) 179–190,
[22] C.Y. Jiang, Analysis of automotive bumper beam based on different materials using https://doi.org/10.1051/jp4:1993728.
Finite Element Analysis, Mater. Sci. Forum (2015) 105–110. [39] Hossein Mohammadi, Zaini Ahmad, Saiful Amri Mazlan, Lightweight glass fiber
[23] K.H.H. AlSahlani, Design and Analysis of Coil Spring in Vehicles Using Finite reinforced polymer composite for automotive bumper applications: a review,
Elements Method, Journal of King Saud University - Engineering Sciences, 2018, Polymers 15 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15010193, 193–193.
pp. 375–382. [40] John Alen, Alex Sanu, A review on the composite materials used for automotive
[24] L.C. H Lee, Design optimization of coil spring for automotive suspension system bumper in passenger vehicles, International Journal of Engineering and
using Taguchi method and finite element analysis, Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf. Management Research 4 (4) (2014) 98–101.
(2016) 817–823. [41] Nonaka Toshiki, Koichi Goto, Taniguchi Hirokazu, Kazumasa Yamazaki,
[25] A.M.C.S. S, P.P.R. Patel, Finite element analysis and optimization of coil spring of a Development of Ultra-High-Strength Cold-Rolled Steel Sheets for Automotive Use,
passenger car, Int J Innov Res Sci Eng Technol (2017) 4524–4530. 2003.
[26] J.S.S. Kadam, A comparative study of helical and conical coil springs in a passenger
car, J. Mech. Sci. Technol. (2018) 4969–4977.

11