See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325307308

Time-dependent crashworthiness of polyurethane foam

Article in Mechanics of Time-Dependent Materials · May 2019

DOI: 10.1007/s11043-018-9391-2

CITATIONS READS
5 1,192

2 authors, including:

Munshi Basit
Georgia Southern University
20 PUBLICATIONS 499 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Munshi Basit on 01 July 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 1

Time dependent crashworthiness of polyurethane foam

Munshi Mahbubul Basit1,*,Seong Sik Cheon2

Abstract Time-dependent stress strain relationship as well as crashworthiness of Polyurethane foam was investigated under
constant impact energy with different velocities, considering inertia and strain rate effects simultaneously during the impact
testing. Even though the impact energies were same, the percentage in increase in densification strain due to higher impact
velocities was found, which yielded the wider plateau region, i.e. growth in crashworthiness. This phenomenon is analyzed by
microstructure of Polyurethane foam obtained from scanning electron microscope. The equations, coupled with the Sherwood-
Frost model and the Impulse-Momentum theory, were employed to build the constitutive equation of the Polyurethane foam
and calculate energy absorption capacity of the foam. The nominal stress-strain curves obtained from the constitutive equation
were compared with results from impact tests and were found to be in good agreement. This study is dedicated to guide designer
use Polyurethane foam in crashworthiness structures such as automotive bumper system by providing crashworthiness data,
determining crush mode, and mathematical model of crashworthiness.

Keywords Impact; Crashworthiness; Constitutive model; Microstructure; Polyurethane (PU) foam

1 Introduction

Polyurethane (PU) foam is universally applied in automotive manufacturing; for instance, it is used inside motor vehicles
to protect the passengers during the traffic accidents. Due to its combination of lightweight, higher compressive strength, and
lower cost, it is considered as a popular smart material that can be widely applied in producing various automotive parts. Again,
PU foam can be modeled in complex parts of automobile because it allows great design flexibility. Moreover, PU foam is
commonly used in shock absorption applications such as packaging and cushioning because of their effectiveness in absorbing
impact energy and mitigating collision damage while limiting force levels. Of particular interest to this study is to guide
designer use PU foam in crashworthiness structures such as automotive bumper system by providing crashworthiness data,
determining crush mode, and mathematical model of crashworthiness. Key design parameters such as impactor’s velocity,
mass, impact energy have been considered in this study.
In the recent years’ mechanical properties and energy absorption of foams have been extensively studied by some
researchers (Zhang et al. 2014; Taher et al. 2009; Serban et al. 2016; Pellegrino et al. 2015). Espadas-Escalante and Avilés
(2015) obtained a very strong property-structure relationship between the anisotropic microstructure of the foam’s unit cell and
the resulting anisotropic mechanical properties of the macroscopic foam. Some other researchers (Song et al. 2009; Mukai et
al. 2006; Chao et al. 2012; Kumar et al. 2016; Wu et al. 2007) investigated compressive behavior of foam over a wide range of
strain rates. Constitutive modeling of PU foam considering strain rate sensitivity has been studied before (Jeong et al. 2012;
Jeong 2016), whereas Pawlikowski (2014) presented the non-linear constitutive modelling of PU nanocomposite. The
simulation and modeling approach to study crashworthiness property of PU foam was proposed at extreme ranges of
temperature by Beheshti and Lankarani (2010). Foam recovery for different densities of the polyurethane foams were analyzed
by Apostol and Constantinescu (2013) as a function of direction of testing, temperature, and speed of testing.

M.M. Basit
mbasit@georgiasouthern.edu

S.S. Cheon
sscheon@kongju.ac.kr

*
Corresponding Author
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Southern University, USA
2
Division of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering, Kongju National University, Chungnam, Korea
 2
Effects of density and filler particle size on mechanical behavior of PU foam, were examined by Michel et al. (2006).
Marsavina et al. (2008) determine the dynamic fracture toughness of PU foam and study the effect of impregnation on the
fracture toughness. A new method based on the split Hopkinson pressure bar was developed by Lin et al. (2014) to test the
dynamic friction under impact loading. They studied rigid PU foam samples with different densities and thicknesses subjected
to high-velocity impact loadings in both normal and oblique cases with different projectile nose shapes. Sherwood and Frost
(1992) modified the shape function of constitutive model for the compressive behavior of the PU foam.
Vehicles undergo load varying due to the different number of passengers, weight as well as speeds during accidents.
However, no data are available in the literature under the condition of constant impact energy by varying impactor masses and
velocities. Therefore, the aim of the current work is to understand the crashworthy behavior of PU foams with different masses
and velocities of the striker under the constant impact energy. This allows a rigorous investigation on the time sensitive
crashworthy properties of PU foam considering inertia and strain-rate effects simultaneously. In this study, quasi-static and
impact tests were performed with cylindrical PU foam specimens. Also, the model of Sherwood-Frost (1992) and Impulse-
momentum theory (Beer and Johnston 1981) were coupled to characterize the compressive behavior of PU foams in terms of
the nominal stress-strain curves. The iterative method for solving the coupled equations was employed.

2 Experimental

Typical engineering stress-strain curve of PU foam is divided into three main regions, i.e. elastic, plateau and densification.
In the elastic region, stress proportionally rises with strain. Plateau region represents fairly constant stress due to localised
plastics collapse propagated from one cell wall to another. Trend of plateau stress remains fairly constant with or without
oscillation with respect to deviation of cell size as well as wall thickness. In the densification region, cell walls are totally
compressed and the stress rises rapidly along with the strain. Plateau region has major role in crashworthiness of the structures
since the effective crushing of the foam cell is indispensable to absorb kinetic energy.
The energy absorbing PU foam in the current study is widely used as automotive bumper cores. The closed-cell type
cylindrical PU foam (Fig. 1, Supplied by Lacomtech, co. ltd., Republic of Korea) with densities of 67 and 89 kg/m 3 were tested
at room temperature. Dimensions of the specimen were carefully chosen to aim at the one-dimensional deformation during
crush.

Fig. 1 Specimen of the PU foam.

 42

40

2.1 Quasi-static test

The quasi-static tests were carried out in a MTS 810 machine (Maximum load capacity: 100 kN) at room temperature to
determine the material constants in Sherwood-Frost model (1992). It was equipped with the displacement measuring device
and force transducers. Several commands were given to operate the machine by software that the specimen would be loaded
and unloaded hydraulically. The test was terminated when the compressive deformation would reach the 90% of the total height
of the specimen for the sake of safety. 0.001 s-1 and 0.1 s-1 strain rates were applied to the foam specimen of lower density and
higher density, i.e. 64 kg/m3 and 89 kg/m3, respectively. Density irregularity exists within 5% for 64 and 12% for 89 kg/m 3.
Fig. 2 shows the nominal stress-strain curves of each specimen for the quasi-static loading. It was obvious from our previous
study (Jeong et al. 2012) that the PU foam was strain-rate sensitive; however, it was impossible to analyse the strain-rate and
inertia effects based only on quasi-static test results.
 3

5 5
Nominal stress (MPa)

Nominal stress (MPa)

4 4 10-1 S-1

10-1 S-1
3 3

2 2

-3 -1
1 -3 -1 1 10 S
10 S
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Strain Strain

(a) (b)

Fig. 2 Stress-strain curves of PU foam under quasi-static test: (a) Density: 64 kg/m3 and (b) 89 kg/m3.

2.2 Impact test

A drop tower type impact testing machine (Instron Dynatup 9250 HV) was employed in impact testing on the inertia and
strain-rate effects. The machine can raise a discretely changeable weight to a specific height and drop it to the specimen either
using gravitation or accelerating springs.
Impact tests were performed under two different initial impact energies of 100 J and 200 J with moderate variation of each
case. Three types of masses were used, i.e. 7 kg, 16.5 kg and 26.5 kg. For 100 J, the corresponding impact velocities of the
striker for those masses were set to be 2.75 m/s, 3.50 m/s and 5.35 m/s in turns to produce constant impact energy. Also, the
corresponding initial velocities of the striker were set to be 3.85 m/s, 5.00 m/s and 7.60 m/s in turns for 200 J. The masses and
velocities of the striker and the absorbed energy results were listed in Table 1. In the Table 1, initial triple digit in specimen ID
implies impact energy (J), letter does lower (L) or higher (H) density, and last number is impact velocity level. Absorbed energy
was calculated using the data of the stress-strain curve. The area under the stress-strain curve up to the densification strain (d)
was calculated as an absorbed energy. It indicated that there was growth of absorbed energy while the impact velocity was
increased under constant impact energy. The absorbed energy for lower density specimen was gradually changed from 27.78 J
to 31.12 J which is about 12% increase by the higher impact velocity when impact energy was 100 J.

Table 1 Impact crush test results

Impact Striker Specimen Impact Absorbed

Specimen Densification
velocity mass density energy energy
ID strain (d)
(m/s) (kg) (kg/m3) (J) (J)

For 100 J of impact impact energy

100L1 2.75 26.50 67 100.20 27.78 0.60
100L2 3.52 16.50 63 102.22 29.37 0.65
100L3 5.40 7.00 61 102.06 31.12 0.71
100H1 2.73 26.50 97 98.80 34.39 0.45
100H2 3.52 16.50 84 102.22 37.24 0.57
100H3 5.60 7.00 93 109.76 45.36 0.64

For 200 J of impact impact energy

200L1 3.88 26.50 67 199.47 31.09 0.62
200L2 4.98 16.50 64 204.60 32.48 0.66
200L3 7.73 7.00 60 209.14 33.12 0.72
200H1 3.86 26.50 88 197.42 41.61 0.55
200H2 5.00 16.50 94 206.25 44.22 0.59
200H3 7.71 7.00 78 208.05 45.90 0.64
 4

5 5
100L1 100H1
4 100L2 4 100H2
Stress (MPa)

Stress (MPa)
100L3 100H3
3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Strain Strain

(a) (b)

5 5
200L1 200H1
4 200L2 4 200H2
Stress (MPa)

Stress (MPa)
200L3 200H3
3 3

2 2

1 1

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Strain Strain

(c) (d)

Fig. 3 Stress-strain curves of impact tests: (a) Impact energy: 100 J, specimen density: low (b) 100 J, high, (c) 200 J, low and
(d) 200 J, high.

Fig. 3 showed the stress-strain curves of impact tests. It indicated that there were insignificant changes in plateau stress
with respect to the initial impact velocities under constant impact energy, however, the higher impact velocities caused the
bigger increase in densification strain for all cases, which yielded the wider plateau region, i.e. growth in crashworthiness. The
higher density specimens underwent the larger oscillation especially in the plateau region as well as yield point.
While the equation proposed by Gibson and Ashby (1998) to determine the onset of densification in term of relative density,
it was found that the densification strain was affected both by the relative density and strain rate especially for the polymeric
foams in the current study. Tan et al. (2005) suggested the method for determining densification strain of the metallic foams
using the efficiency of the energy. However, it did not match well with the PU foam specimen. Therefore, the intersection of
tangent method, described by Paul and Ramamurty (2000) and followed by Lopatnikov et al. (2007) was used to determine the
onset of densification in this study.
In Fig. 4, the densification strain range was plotted since tangent lines could be chosen subjectively from the different point
of view. The average of the lowest and the highest values in the range was selected as the onset of densification strain of each
curve. After evaluating the densification strain, the results were plotted in Fig. 5. It was found that the onset of densification
strain of low density specimen changed from 60% to 71% and 62% to 72%, as the striker velocity increased under 100 J and
200 J impact impact energies respectively. On the other hand, for higher density specimen it varied from 45% to 64% and 55%
to 64%.
 5
Fig. 4 Determination of densification strain.

Stress
Densification strain (d) range

Plateau

Densification

Strain

Impact energy 100 J Impact energy 200 J

0.8 0.8
Densification strain

Densification strain

0.7 0.7

0.6 0.6

0.5 low density specimen 0.5 low density speciment

high density specimen high density specimen

0.4 0.4
0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
Impact velocity (m/s) Impact velocity (m/s)
(a) (b)

Fig. 5 Variation of the onset of densification strain with respect to the initial impact velocity of the striker: (a) impact energy
=100 J and (b) 200 J.

Fig. 6 shows microscopic structures of the uncrushed and crushed PU foam, captured by a scanning electron microscope
(SEM, Phillips W type 535M). PU sample was cut at one time with a sharp knife and gilt to promote its conductivity. The
micrographs were analyzed to quantify void ratio of the arbitrary cross-section of the PU foam. Microstructures of uncrushed
low and high density PU foams are shown in Figs. 6(a) and (b). From the uncrushed images it was found that most of the cells
were basically isolated with thin membrane, i.e. closed cell morphology. The main difference between low and high density
specimens was the cell size. Cell size of high density foam is comparatively smaller than low density foam. It is believed that
smaller cell sizes are less prone to buckling which translates to higher peak stress Saha et al. (2005). Moreover, the low density
specimen had comparatively minor standard deviation in the geometry of the cell. Morphological defects such as missing of
cells are prominent in the images of high density PU foam. Therefore, in the stress strain curve, higher peak stress as well as
frequent oscillation was found for high density specimen. Microstructures of crushed PU foam by lower velocities are shown
in Figs. 6(c), and (d). Also, Figs. 6(e) and (f) shows micrographs of crushed PU foam by higher velocities. Those images of
specimen crushed by higher impact velocities illustrated that the collapse became general with severe wall contact while
comparatively lower wall contact and some voids were observed in the images of specimen crushed by lower impact velocities.
 6

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

Fig. 6 Microstructure of PU foam: (a) Uncrushed, specimen density: low, (b) uncrushed, high, (c) crushed by low impact
velocity, low density, (d) crushed by low impact velocity, high density, (e) crushed by high impact velocity, low density, and
(f) crushed by high impact velocity, high density.

Fig. 7 shows the deformation patterns of PU foam crushed by various velocities of the striker. The images of PU foam
crushed by lower impact velocity striker revealed that deformation progressed with cooperative collapse of all layers as shown
in Fig. 7(b) and (e). Overall deformation pattern is homogeneous. On the other hand, for the specimen crushed by medium
impact velocity (Fig. 7(c)), deformation was mainly concentrated in the plane of upper surface, which was contacted with the
striker; whereas bottom surface was almost unchanged. The phenomenon of this local buckling deformation and the occurrence
of the higher buckling mode in the upper surface of cylindrical foam impacted axially are mainly due to the effects of stress
wave and structural inertia. The initial buckling deflection, occurring near the impacted end, spread forward and developed
into the higher mode as the axial stress wave was propagated. The obvious unloading of the axial stress wave appeared in the
region near the impacted end when the buckling deformation became large enough in this region. The lower surface remains
unchanged because it was found that significant buckling displacements usually appear if the stress wave had moved a long
distance along the specimen, the early local buckling did not influence essentially the final buckling form (Lepik et al. 2001).
Thus, the adjacent layers of striker moved inward while after next layers spread outward; overall deformation was being
considered as inhomogeneous as shown in Fig.7 (f). Finally, the specimen was broken for the highest impact velocity shown
in Fig. 7(d).
 7

(a) (b) (c) (d)

(e) (f)

Fig. 7 Deformation pattern of PU foam: (a) Uncrushed, (b) crushed by low impact velocity, (c) crushed by medium impact
velocity, (d) crushed by high impact velocity, (e) crushed by low impact velocity; close view and (f) crushed by medium impact
velocity; close view.

3 Constitutive models for elastic and plateau regions

3.1 Constitutive models

Stress-strain behaviour is expressed by the Sherwood-Frost model (1992), which incorporates the effects of foam density,
temperature and strain rate. This model included the modulus function as well as shape function, was applied to the plateau
region shown as follows.

 10 
  H T D  0 a b    An  n  (ε  εd) (1)
 n 0 

H(T) and D(ρ) represent the temperature and density effects, a and b are material constants which can be determined by
quasi-static tests. εd is the onset of densification strain.
Strain rate remains constant in quasi-static compression, however, it varies during impact testing. The strain rate can be
obtained by the Eq. (2) expressed as follows:
 8

 
d 
d 1 d
  
L v
   (2)
dt dt L dt L

where, L is the overall height of the specimen,  and v are deformation of the specimen and the transient velocity of the striker
at arbitrary strain during impact, respectively.
To calculate transient velocity, the Impulse-momentum theory (Beer and Johnston 1981) was employed, as shown below.

mvi   Fi t  mvi 1 (3)

where, Fi was assumed to be constant within a small t.

It is necessary to solve coupled equations, i.e. Eq. (1) and (3) with respect to time, for obtaining transient velocity, stress as
well as compressive deformation of the specimen at each stage. Fig. 8 summarises the solving procedure of coupled equations
briefly. As the time step becomes smaller, more accurate result would be obtained since the deformation is assumed to be
proportional with velocity of that step. In the current study, 4.88 s was chosen for the time step.

START

Input vi value

Input ti

Calculate
i (deformation)

Calculate
.
i (strain), i (strain rate)

Calculate i using
Sherwood-Frost model

Calculate
Fi (Force)

Calculate vi+1 using

Impulse-momentum

NO
i  d

YE
S
END

Fig. 8 Flowchart for solving coupled equations.

 9
Table 2 Coefficients of the shape function
n 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
An 0.01 13 -197 1687 -8656 27942 -57375 73627 -55839 21937 -3098

10 experiment 10 experiment

Transient velocity (m/s)

analysis
Transient velocity (m/s)

analysis
8 8
100L3 100H3
6 6

100L2 100H2
4 4

2 2
100L1 100H1
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Strain Strain
(a) (b)

10 experiment 10 experiment
200L3 200H3
Transient velocity (m/s)

analysis
Transient velocity (m/s)

analysis
8 8

6 200L2 6 200H2

4 4

2 200L1 2 200H1

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Strain Strain
(c) (d)
Fig. 9 Transient velocity curves: (a) Impact energy: 100 J, specimen density: low, (b) 100 J, high, (c) 200 J, low and (d) 200 J,
high.

Experimental data as well as results from solving coupled equations for obtaining transient velocities were shown in Fig.9.
The calculated transient velocity curves showed excellent agreement with the experiments allowing less than 10% error.
 10

3 3
experiment experiment
analysis analysis
Stress (MPa)

Stress (MPa)
2 2
100H1 100H2

1 1
100L1 100L2

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Strain Strain

(a) (b)

3 3
experiment experiment
analysis analysis
Stress (MPa)

2 Stress (MPa) 2
100H3 200H1

1 1

100L3 200L1

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Strain Strain

(c) (d)

3 3
experiment experiment
analysis analysis
Stress (MPa)

Stress (MPa)

2 200H2 2
200H3

1 1
200L2
200L3
0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Strain Strain

(e) (f)

Fig. 10 Calculated and experimental stress-strain response of PU foam under impact loading: (a) Impact energy: 100 J, low
velocity, (b) 100 J, medium velocity, (c) 100 J, high velocity, (d) 200 J, low velocity, (e) 200 J, medium velocity and (f) 200
J, high velocity.
 11

12 12
experiment experiment
analysis analysis 100H2
9 9
SEA (kJ/kg)

SEA (kJ/kg)
100H1
100L2
6 100L1 6

3 3

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Strain Strain

(a) (b)

12 12
experiment experiment
100H3
analysis analysis
9 9 200H1
SEA (kJ/kg)

SEA (kJ/kg)
100L3
200L1
6 6

3 3

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Strain Strain

(c) (d)

12 12 200H3
experiment 200H2 experiment
analysis analysis
9 9
SEA (kJ/kg)

SEA (kJ/kg)

200L2 200L3
6 6

3 3

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Strain Strain

(e) (f)

Fig. 11 Comparison between calculated and experimentally obtained specific energy absorption (SEA) vs. strain curves: (a)
Impact energy: 100 J, low velocity, (b) 100 J, medium velocity, (c) 100 J, high velocity, (d) 200 J, low velocity, (e) 200 J,
medium velocity and (f) 200 J, high velocity.
 12
3.2 Evaluation

For the Sherwood-Frost model, the base curve selected from the quasi-static results was as follows:

Density of the specimen,  = 67 kg/m3

Lowest constant strain rate,  = 10-3 s-1
Temperature, T = 23C (room temperature)

An, coefficients of the shape function, which were specified in Eq. (1), were obtained by regression with 10th order polynomial
of quasi-static data as listed in Table 2. The temperature effect H (T) was assumed to be unity since all tests were conducted at
room temperature. H (T) function needs to be determined through impact testing at different temperatures.
The density effect was determined by comparing two quasi-static experimental results under the strain rate of 10-3 s-1 applied
to different densities at room temperature, setting that 67 kg/m3 density specimen has a unity effect. Thus, the density and the
temperature effects were:

D   0.046  2.059 , (60    97) (4)

H (T) = 1; (T = 23 C) (5)

Using the static test results, the values of a and b in Eq. (1) for the PU foam in the current study were found to be 0.05173
and 0.001553, respectively.
The comparison between the analytical and experimental stress-strain curves during impact crush was shown in Fig. 10.
Even though the analysis didn’t simulate the oscillation of the curves, analytical stress-strain results under various impact
velocities demonstrated a fit quite similar to test data occupying allowable error (within ±5% range of error) in elastic and
plateau regions. In general, experimental curves of lower density specimens have a better fit with analytical curves than for the
high density specimens, because oscillation in the stress-strain curves was observed more in higher density specimens.
Crashworthy characteristics is commonly quoted in the form of the specific energy absorption (SEA), absorbed energy per
crushed mass, and it is considered one of the major parameters in designing the structures which undergo high strain rate or
impact load applications (Mamalis et al. 1997; Zarei and Kröger 2008). It was possible to calculate SEA of the PU foam from
Eq. (6).

1 


u  d (6)
0

Fig. 11 shows the experimental and calculated specific energy absorption curves. Each specific energy absorption curve
was evaluated until the onset of densification strain. It is obvious from the figure that high density specimen has more energy
absorption capacity. The specific energy absorption curves from the analytical results matched well with the specific energy
absorption curves from the experimental data.

4 Conclusions

Crashworthy characteristics of the PU foams, with respect to varying the striker velocity under constant impact energy, was
investigated. Under the identical impact energy, the energy absorption of the PU foam was increased by the increment of the
densification strain as the striker velocity became higher, however, there were no obvious changes in Young’s modulus as well
as plateau stress. Crush mode of PU foam was determined by analysing SEM microstructures. Also, coupled equations using
Sherwood-Frost model as well as Impulse-momentum theory were solved to predict mechanical behaviour of the PU foam.
Analytical stress-strain curves under various impact velocities demonstrate a fit quite similar to test data occupying allowable
error for analysing crashworthiness in elastic and plateau regions even though it didn’t simulate the oscillation of the real data.
Moreover, the specific energy absorption, which was calculated from the analytical stress-strain curves, showed good
agreement with experimental.

5 Societal benefits

The improvement of the crashworthiness of automobiles cannot be overestimated. US Department of Traffic (US
Department of Transportation, NHTSA, Traffic safety facts 2015: A compilation of motor vehicle crash data from the fatality
analysis reporting system and the general estimates system; DOT HS 812 384) estimated that there were 35,092 fatalities and
 13
1 million injuries requiring hospitalization in 2015. This, together with a range of environmental concerns and social pressures
backed by legislation has led, and will continue to lead, to highly innovative designs, involving advanced materials such as
nonferrous alloys, smart structures, composites and foams. The goal of this study is to guide designer use Polyurethane foam
in crashworthiness structures such as automotive bumper system by providing crashworthiness data, determining crush mode,
and mathematical model of crashworthiness. Therefore, this study will help to reduce deaths and injuries in motor vehicle
crashes.

Acknowledgements This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (KR) under the grant number of
D00011.

Conflicts of interest The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

Apostol, D.A., Constantinescu, D.M.: Temperature and speed of testing influence on the densification and recovery of
polyurethane foams. Mech. Time-Depend. Mater. 17, 111–136 (2013)
Beer, F.P., Johnston, Jr. E.R.: Vector Mechanics for Engineers: Dynamics. Toronto: McGraw-Hill; 1981.
Beheshti, H. K., Lankarani, H.: An investigation in crashworthiness evaluation of aircraft seat cushions at extreme ranges of
temperature. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 24, 1105–1110 (2010)
Chao, L.B., Ping, Z.G., Jian, L.T.: Low strain rate compressive behavior of high porosity closed-cell aluminum foams. Sci.
China Technol. Sci. 55, 451–463 (2012)
Espadas-Escalante, J.J., Avilés, F.: Anisotropic compressive properties of multiwall carbon nanotube/polyurethane foams.
Mech. Mater. 91, 167–176 (2015)
Gibson, L.J, Ashby, M.F.: Cellular Solids: Structure and Properties. Cambridge Press (1998)
Jeong, K.Y., Cheon, S.S., Basit M. B.: A constitutive model for polyurethane foam with strain rate sensitivity. J. Mech. Sci.
Technol. 26, 2033–2038 (2012)
Jeong, K.Y.: Constitutive modeling of polymeric foams having a four-parameter modulus function with strain rate sensitivity.
J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 30, 683–688 (2016)
Kumar, B.R. B., Singh, A.K., Doddamani, M., Luong, D.D., Gupta, N.: Quasi-Static and High Strain Rate Compressive
Response of Injection-Molded Cenosphere/HDPE Syntactic Foam. J. O. M. 68, 1861–1871 (2016)
Lepik, Ü.:Dynamic buckling of elastic-plastic beams including effects of axial stress waves. Int. J. Impact Eng. 25, 537–552
(2001)
Lin, Y., Qin, J., Chen, R., Lu, F., Lu, L.: Time-Resolved Dynamic Friction Testing of a Polyurethane Foam Against a
Polymer/Clay Nano-composite Under Impact Loading. Tribol. Lett. 56, 37–45 (2014)
Lopatnikov, S.L., Gama, B.A., Gillespie, J.W..: Modeling the progressive collapse behaviour of metal foams. Int. J. Impact
Eng. 34, 587–95 (2007)
Mamalis, A.G., Robinson, M., Manolakos, D.E., Demosthenous, G.A., Ioannidis, M.B., Carruthers, J.: Crashworthy capability
of composite material structures. Compos. Struct. 37, 109–134 (1997)
Marsavina, L., Sadowski, T.: Dynamic fracture toughness of polyurethane foam. Polym. Test. 27, 941–944 (2008)
Michel, F.S., Chazeau, L., Cavaillé, J.Y., Chabert, E.: Mechanical properties of high density polyurethane foams: I. Effect of
the density. Comps. Sci. Tech. 66, 2700–2008 (2006)
Michel, F.S., Chazeau, L., Cavaillé, J.Y., Chabert, E.: Mechanical properties of high density polyurethane foams: II Effect of
the filler size. Comps. Sci. Tech. 66, 2709–2718 (2006)
Paul, A., Ramamurty, U.: Strain rate sensitivity of a closed-cell aluminium foam. Mat. Sci. Eng. A 281, 1-7 (2000)
Pawlikowski, M.: Non-linear approach in visco-hyperelastic constitutive modelling of polyurethane nanocomposite. Mech.
Time-Depend. Mater. 18, 1–20 (2014)
Pellegrino, A., Tagarielli, V.L., Gerlach, R., Petrinic, N.: The mechanical response of a syntactic polyurethane foam at low and
high rates of strain. Int. J. Impact Eng. 75, 214–221 (2015)
Saha, M.C., Mahfuz, H., Chakavarty, U.K., Uddin, M., Kabir, M.E., Jeelani, S.: Effect of density, microstructure, and strain
rate on compression behavior of polymeric foams. Mat. Sci. Eng. A 406, 328–336 (2005)
Serban, D.A., Weissenborn, O., Geller, S., Marsavina, L., Gude, M.: Evaluation of the mechanical and morphological properties
of long fibre reinforced polyurethane rigid foams. Polym. Test. 49, 121–127 (2016)
Sherwood, J.A., Frost, C.C.: Constitutive modeling and simulation of energy absorbing PU foam under impact loading. Polym.
Eng. Sci. 32, 1138–46 (1992)
 14
Song, B., Lu, W.Y., Syn, C. J., Chen, W.: The effects of strain rate, density, and temperature on the mechanical properties of
polymethylene diisocyanate (PMDI)-based rigid polyurethane foams during compression. J. Mater. Sci. 44, 351–357
(2009)
Taher, S.T., Zahari, R., Ataollahi, S., Mustapha, F., Basri, S.N.: A double-cell foam-filled composite block for efficient energy
absorption under axial compression. Compos. Struct. 89, 399–407 (2009)
Tan, P.J., Reid, S.R., Harrigan J.J., Zou, Z., Li, S.: Dynamic compressive strength properties of aluminium foams. Part I-
experimental data and observations. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 53, 2174–2205 (2005)
Wu, G.H., Dou, Z.Y., Sun, D.L., Jiang, L.T., Ding B.S., He, B.F.: Compression behaviors of cenosphere–pure aluminum
syntactic foams. Scripta Mater. 56, 221–224 (2007)
Zarei, H., Kröger, M.: Optimum honeycomb filled crash absorber design. Mater. Des. 29, 193–204 (2008)
Zhang, G., Wang, B., Ma, L., Wu, L., Pan, S., Yang, J.: Energy absorption and low velocity impact response of polyurethane
foam filled pyramidal lattice core sandwich panels. Compos. Struct. 108, 304–310 (2014)

View publication stats