Thin–Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Full length article

Crushing performance evaluation of gradient Sierpinski triangular

fractal column
Yong Zhang a, *, Kunyuan Li b, Wenzhan Huang a, Yu Chen a, Yubo Hou c, Liang Su d, Baoxing Lin d
a
College of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Huaqiao University, Xiamen, China
b
College of Physics and Information Engineering, Quanzhou Normal University, Quanzhou, China
c
Quanzhou Institute of Equipment Manufacturing, Fujian Institute of Research on the Structure of Matter, Chinese Academy of Science, Quanzhou, China
d
Xiamen King Long United Automotive Industry Co., Ltd, Xiamen, China

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

Keywords: Thin-Walled Structures with excellent mechanical properties are the key to the protective system of the vehicle.
Fractal design This paper proposes a novel Sierpinski triangular fractal column with graded thickness (STFC-GT) to improve the
Thickness gradient crushing stability and energy absorption of Thin-Walled Structures. The crashworthiness of the STFC-GT is
Energy absorption
investigated through the experimental test and numerical simulation under axial crushing load. The results show
Theoretical prediction
that the Sierpinski triangular fractal column contributes to the energy absorption, and the graded thickness
design can decrease the initial peak force. Specifically, the energy absorption of STFC-GT improves by 144.22 %
from 0th to 2nd. And the initial peak force of 2nd STFC-GT is 55.32 % lower than that of 2nd STFC with uniform
thickness. In addition, a theoretical relationship between the parameter configurations and the mean crushing
force of STFC-GT are developed using the simplified super folding element theory (SSFE). The maximum error is
less than 7.89 % between the theoretical and numerical results. Finally, the influence of gradient types on
crushing performance is investigated to determine the optimal gradient configuration and maximize the me­
chanical performance of the STFC. The research result provides reliable guidance for the design of a new vehicle
safety protection device.

the thin-walled structure.

The thin-walled structure with the thickness gradient design has
1. Introduction
attracted broad interest in protective structure since it can effectively
tailor the mechanical behavior under different load conditions [11–16].
Thin-walled structures are widely used as protective devices in
Some studies have been performed on the mechanical properties of
automobile, rail transportation, aerospace, and other industries due to
single-cell gradient structures. For example, Lu et al. [17,18] studied the
their high energy absorption characteristics [1–5]. Over the past de­
mechanical properties of the thickness gradient square tube by intro­
cades, there has emerged numerous investigations revolving around the
ducing the concept of equivalent strength and thickness. It was found
crushing behavior of thin-walled structure [6,7]. For example, Huang
that the crushing performance of the square tube could be optimized by
et al. experimentally explored the axial crushing behaviors of
adjusting the specific thickness distribution. Zhang et al. [19] found that
thin-walled structures with the uniform thickness. It was found that the
square tubes with varying thicknesses along the lateral direction had an
crushing energy was dissipated by the plastic folding of the corner ele­
increase of 35 % in SEA compared with uniform thickness square col­
ments [8]. Ha et al. derived a theoretical model for the crushing
umns. In addition, for the single-cell circular tube, Song et al. [20]
behavior of uniform thin-walled structures and found that the form of
investigated the energy absorption for thickness gradient circular tubes
corner element a significant effect on their energy absorption [9].
under oblique loading. The thickness gradient circular tube was a 9.3 %
However, Zhang et al. discovered that the uniform thin-walled columns
higher SEA than the uniform thickness circular tube. Sun et al. [21]
were prone to trigger the global bending deformation when subjected to
found that the thickness gradient circular tube had better mechanical
axial crushing loads, which seriously decreased the full development of
properties than the uniform thickness tube since it had more regions to
the material properties [10]. Therefore, it was necessary to reasonably
participate in deformation under transverse load.
configure the material distribution to maximize the crashworthiness of

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: zhangyong@hqu.edu.cn (Y. Zhang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2024.111784
Received 18 October 2023; Received in revised form 6 March 2024; Accepted 6 March 2024
Available online 12 March 2024
0263-8231/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Zhang et al.
Nomenclature
STFC Sierpinski triangular fractal column
STFC-GT Sierpinski triangular fractal column with thickness
gradient
STFC-UT Sierpinski triangular fractal column with uniform
thickness
FE Finite element
WEDM Wire-cut electrical discharge machining method
PCF Peak crushing force
IPCF Initial peak crushing force
EA Energy absorption
ES Effective stroke
MCF Mean crushing force
SEA Specific energy absorption
SSFE Simplified super folding element
η Energy efficiency
n Fractal order
Sn Iteration area
Ln Side length of n th fractal triangle
t Thickness of the STFC at a certain height
t1, t2 Top thickness and bottom thickness of STFC
h Distance from the top end
In addition, multi-cell columns with thickness gradient design have
captured increasing attention due to their superior energy absorption
and weight efficiency. Pang et al. [22] conducted gradient design of
9-cell tube and 5-cell square tubes and found that the thickness gradient
structure significantly reduced the initial peak crushing force of uniform
thickness multi-cell columns under the same energy absorption. Zheng
et al. [23] proposed and analyzed laterally variable thickness (LVT)
multi-cell tubes. Results showed that the SEA of four cell LVT tube
increased by 26.45 % compared with the uniform thickness thin-walled
tube with the same mass. Fang et al. [24] analyzed the dynamic crashing
behavior of extrudable multi-cell tubes with a graded thickness and
found that the thickness gradient parameters greatly improved the
crashworthiness of the FGT multi-cell tubes.
Recently, geometrical fractal design as a novel topological method
has attracted a growing interest to effectively improve the mechanical
properties of thin-walled structures. Zhang et al. [25] studied the
out-of-plane crushing resistance of vertex fractal-like honeycombs by
numerical investigation and analytical method. The results show that
fractal hexagon design could significantly enhance the crushing resis­
tance of the regular honeycomb under the same relative density. Xu
et al. [16] designed a fractal hexagonal column by adding a sub-hexagon
to the corner element of the hexagon column. The numerical results
revealed that the crushing performance of the fractal design thin-walled
structure has dramatic improvement. In addition, He et al. [26] found
that the hexagonal side fractal structure had the highest SEA by
Fig. 1. The geometric shape characteristics of Sierpinski triangle.
2
Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784
H height of STFC
Eout Work done by the external force
Eb Bending energy
Em Membrane energy
Eflange Membrane energy of a flange
Epanel Membrane energy of the additional panel
Em1 Membrane energy of the acute-angle corner
Em2 Membrane energy of the four-panel corner
Ein Internal dissipation energy
M0 Full plastic bending moment
σ0 flow stress of material
σ y, σu Initial yield strength and ultimate strength
Lw Folding wavelength of the plastic folds
B Perimeter of the cross-section
δ Effective compression displacement coefficient
S Plastic flow area
λ Dynamic enhancement coefficient
α Rotation angle of the bending hinge line
β Acute-angle of two-panel
γ Angle generated by the additional panel
x, y acute-angle and four-panel corner numbers
tI~tIV Thickness of STFC with four gradient forms
comparing the crashworthiness of hexagonal, triangular, and square
side fractal structures. Zhang et al. [27] proposed a new edge fractal
structure and researched by experiment test and numerical simulation.
The results showed that the edge fractal structure by replacing the
geometrical edges could greatly improve the mechanical properties.
Wang et al. [28] proposed three Koch fractal columns and found that the
2nd order Koch structure was the highest SEA. These studies showed
that geometrical fractal design effectively improved the mechanical
behavior of thin-walled structures.
Overall, the geometrical fractal and thickness gradient design are
effective methods to improve the mechanical performance of the thin-
wall structure. As one of the most typically fractal patterns, the Sier­
pinski triangle is a self-similar structure discovered by Waclaw Sier­
pinski in the 1900s [29]. However, to the best of author’s knowledge,
less research was conducted on the energy absorption characteristics of
Sierpinski triangle column with thickness gradient design. Therefore,
Based on a simple structural element of Sierpinski triangles [30,31], this
paper proposes a Sierpinski triangular fractal column (STFC) with
thickness gradient design to improve the load stability and energy ab­
sorption characteristics. Furthermore, the crushing crashworthiness of
the STFC with thickness gradient is investigated, and the theoretical
models are established to predict the mean crash force and energy ab­
sorption of the gradient STFC. Finally, the influence of gradient types on
the crushing crashworthiness of the STFC is investigated by numerical
simulation under axial impact.
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Fig. 2. Sierpinski triangular fractal column:(a) Thickness gradient model; (b) Uniform thickness model.

2.2. Design of the Sierpinski triangular fractal column with thickness

gradient

According to the fractal method, the 3D Sierpinski triangular fractal

column (STFC) is developed in Fig. 2(a). The height H of the STFC is 160
mm. The side length of the 1st order and 2nd order STFC is 34.24 mm
and 17.12 mm, respectively. In addition, the thickness gradient design is
introduced by Eq. (3) along the axial direction of the STFC.
t2 − t1
t = t1 + h (3)
H

where t is the thickness corresponding to a certain position in the axial

direction of the STFC, h is the distance that the thin-walled structure
extends downward in the height direction, and t1 and t2 are the corre­
sponding thickness of the top end (thin end) and bottom end (thick end)
of the structure, respectively; H is the height of the column. Specifically,
the STFC has uniform thickness when t = t1 = t2, as shown in Fig. 2(b).

3. Numerical simulation and experimental test

3.1. Evaluation indicators

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of crashworthiness indicators.
To evaluate the energy absorption of the STFC, it is necessary to
define the crushing crashworthiness indicators. As shown in Fig. 3,
2. Fractal designs of Sierpinski triangles
several indicators are summarized as follows:
Energy absorption (EA) is the total energy absorption by the column
2.1. Description of the fractal method
during the compression displacement, which can be calculated by
integrating the force–displacement response and expressed as:
The Sierpinski triangle shown in Fig. 1 is the most typical geometric
∫ ES
fractal design. The basic geometry is an equilateral triangle (0th order),
EA = F(x)dx (4)
and the midpoint of each side of the triangle is a fractal point, 1st order 0
fractal design is formed by connecting the midpoints of each side of the
0th order triangle, an n th order Sierpinski triangle is obtained after n where F(x) denotes the axial instantaneous crushing load. ES is the
fractal iterations. Fig. 1 shows the fractal process of the 2nd Sierpinski effective stroke, which is the displacement of the force–displacement
triangle. response entering the densification stage, and it is determined by
Geometric characteristics of the Sierpinski triangle are described as maximum energy efficiency η(x) of structures [32]. That is
follows: ∫x ⃒
F(x)dx dη(x)⃒⃒
The iteration area Sn is calculated as η(x) = 0 , =0 (5)
F(x) dx ⃒x=ES
3n
Sn = S0 (1) Mean crushing force (MCF) is the mean value of the F(x) during the
4n
crash process. It reflects the average strength of carrying capacity and is
where S0 is the area of 0 order regular triangle. The side length Ln of n th calculated as:
fractal triangle can be expressed as ∫ ES
EA F(x)dx
1 MCF = = 0 (6)
Ln = L0 (2) ES ES
2n
The specific energy absorption (SEA) is the EA of the column per unit
where L0 is the length of 0 order equilateral triangle. mass, it can effectively evaluate the crushing crashworthiness of column
with different mass. It is presented as:

3
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 4. The true stress–strain response and material parameters of AA6061-O.
Table 1
Material parameters of AA6061-O.
Specimen Initial yield stress Ultimate strength
(MPa) (MPa)
S-1 96.8 182.6
S-2 95.6 183.5
S-3 94.3 187.2
Note. The initial yield strength approximated the stress produced by the residual
deformation of 0.2 %.
EA
SEA =
Mass
3.2. Material characteristics
In this paper, the base material of the STFC is AA6061-O aluminum
alloy. To determine the material properties of the AA6061-O, the tensile
test of three dog bone-shaped specimens were carried out on the Suns
5305 universal material testing machine. According to GBT228-2002,
the tensile speed is 1 mm/min. Fig. 4 shows the true stress–strain
response of three specimens. The initial yield stress and ultimate
strength measured from the three tensile tests are listed in Table 1. The
stress–strain responses have a good consistency. The maximum error in
both initial yielding and ultimate yielding is within 5 %. This indicates
that there is little difference in material properties between different
regions. The mechanical properties of the material have high repeat­
ability. In addition, the density, Young’s modulus and Poison’s ratio of
AA6061-O are 2.7 × 103 kg/m3, 68 GPa and 0.33 [33], respectively.
3.3. Crushing test
To investigate the energy absorption mechanism of STFC with
thickness gradient, the specimen with 2nd fractal configuration was
prepared. Main methods for thin-walled structures with the thickness
gradient characteristic are 3D printing technology and wire-cut elec­
trical discharge machining method (WEDM). Since WEDM can achieve
better surface quality in the manufacture of structures with thickness
gradient, it is selected for the machining of 2nd order STFC-GT speci­
mens in this paper. Specifically, the WEDM machine is equipped with a
0.18 mm molybdenum wire for machining accuracies up to 0.01 mm. As
shown in Fig. 5(a), there were two specimens machined to ensure the
reproducibility of the experimental results.
It was seen in Fig. 5(b) that the experimental test was carried out on
the Suns 5305 universal material testing machine with maximum range
of 300 kN at a constant compressive speed of 5 mm/min. During the
experiment, the flat indenter on the top of the testing machine moved
Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784
vertically downward to compress the test specimen. The experimental
process was finished when the sample was crushed and reached the
termination displacement. The experimental termination displacement
was set to 120 mm, 75 % the height of STFC specimen [34–36]. The test
process was recorded with a Nikon D700 camera at a resolution of 1080p
and a frame rate of 30 fps. The force–displacement response in the
experiment was captured by a transducer included with the Suns 5305 at
a sampling frequency of 20 Hz.
3.4. Finite element model and feasibility validation
The nonlinear explicit finite element (FE) program LS-DYNA 971 was
employed to establish FE models of the STFC-GT shown in Fig. 6(a). The
FE models with thickness gradient were realized by extracting the
middle surface from a solid CAD model with thickness information.
Then, the middle surface was meshed to establish the finite element
model with the thickness gradient information. The Belytschko–Tsay
shell element with five integration points through the thickness was
used for all FE models.
The AUTOMATIC NODE TO SURFACE CONTACT was used to define
the contact between the STFC and the impactor. Meanwhile, the
AUTOMATIC SINGLE SURFACE CONTACT was employed for the self-
contact of the STFC during plastic deformation. The decay coefficient
was set to 0.1. The measuring processes of static and dynamic friction
coefficients were recorded in Appendix A, which were taken as 0.316
and 0.211, respectively. The similar values were given in References
[37,38]. The impactor and rigid support plate were modeled by the
RIGID MATERIAL (MAT_20) of the LS-DYNA. In addition, the material
constitutive of the STFC was defined by the PIECEWISE LINEAR PLAS­
TICITY MATERIAL (MAT_24) of the LS-DYNA. The FE model was fixed
(7) on a rigid support plate and crushed by an impactor with a velocity of v.
To comprehensively investigate the mechanical behavior of STFC-GT,
the quasi-static crushing process and dynamic impact of the STFC-GT
are performed by experimental test and FE simulation. The
quasi-static mechanical behavior of STFC-GT was explored by
compressive experiment and numerical simulations with a crush ve­
locity of 1 m/s. And its dynamic mechanical behavior was numerically
investigated by using a 500 kg impactor at an initial crushing velocity of
13.89 m/s (50 km/h). The output period of force and displacement re­
sponses is 2.3 × 10− 5 s. Furthermore, according to the validation in
Appendix B, the strain rate effects of STFC were neglected during the
numerical modeling process. The similar approach was also adopted in
Reference [39–41]. The mesh convergence of the FE model of the 2nd
order STFC was conducted to choose the suitable computational accu­
racy and saved computational time. It was observed from Fig. 6(b) that
the mesh sizes obviously affected the force–displacement responses, and
the force–displacement responses were closed gradually with decreasing
the mesh size. Therefore, the mesh size of 1 mm × 1 mm was chosen to
mesh all FE models.
To validate the reliability of the numerical models, a constant ve­
locity of 1 m/s was used to simulate the quasi-static experimental pro­
cess of STFC-GT to save computational cost [39,38]. Fig. 7(a) presents
the energy-displacement response in the process of numerical simula­
tion. The kinetic energy of the 2nd order STFC-GT is only 0.138 % of the
internal energy, which indicates that the 1 m/s boundary condition can
be considered as the quasi-static compression [36,42]. Fig. 7(b) com­
pares the force–displacement responses for the experiment and numer­
ical simulation. It is found that the compressive force from the two
experiments and the numerical simulation have the similar growth
trend. Moreover, it is observed from Table 2 that the corresponding
crushing performance indicators of the experiment and numerical
simulation have relatively close. The maximum error between experi­
ment and simulation is within 10 % in terms of effective stroke, mean
crushing force and specific energy absorption. Fig. 7(c) further presents
the deformation processes of the 2nd order STFC-GT for both numerical
simulation and crushing experiment. It is observed that the deformation
4
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Fig. 5. WEDM processing and compression experiment:(a) WEDM processing; (b) Compression experiment.

Fig. 6. Finite element (FE) models of the STFC.

mode of the 2nd order STFC-GT maintains a high consistency at every
stage of experimental and numerical simulations. The plastic fold is
triggered from the thin end and propagate to the thick end with as the
compression progresses, eventually forming a progressive folding
deformation. Furthermore, the fold number of the numerical simulation
and experimental test are consistent during the entire crushing process,
as means that the numerical simulation and the experiment are highly
consistent in the deformation process and the deformation mode. In
addition, integrated validation metrics are further employed to validate
the accuracy of the FE model of STFC-GT [43,44]. The validation metrics
of the experiment and simulation reaches 0.952 while their cumulative
error is only 0.0292. It is indicated that the modeling approach can
effectively support the subsequent crashworthiness design of STFC.
The difference between experiment and simulation can be triggered
by the manufacturing error shown in Fig. 8. The accuracy of the spec­
imen wall thickness and taper is determined by measuring the top,
bottom and height of the specimen using a vernier calipers. The thick­
ness of the specimen is smaller than the designed size, and the tube wall
has inclined slightly. However, the maximum error of the crushing
crashworthiness indicators between the experiment and numerical
simulation is less than 10 %. Therefore, it is believed that the numerical
simulation model has good accuracy.

5
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Fig. 7. The compression: (a) Deformation modes comparison of Sierpinski triangle thin-wall structures with numerical simulation and experiment; (b) Force­
–displacement response; (c) Energy–displacement response in the process of experiment and numerical simulation.

absorption growth rate of the STFC-GT is greater than the STFC-UT with
Table 2
the increase of the displacement, and the energy absorption of 0th, 1st,
Crashworthiness indicators of experiment and numerical simulation.
and 2nd order STFC-GT are higher than that of the STFC-UT when the
Mass ES MCF SEA (kJ/ EA compression displacement is 92 mm, 101 mm, and 113 mm, respec­
(g) (mm) (kN) kg) (kJ)
tively. Moreover, the energy absorption advantage of the STFC-GT be­
Experiment 1 381.3 116.04 109.14 33.31 12.66 comes more obvious with the increase of the crushing displacement.
Experiment 2 387.1 115.81 112.86 33.76 13.07 Fig. 10(a–c) compare the force–displacement responses corre­
Numerical 403.8 115.53 119.02 34.375 13.75
simulation
sponding to the 0th, 1st, and 2nd order STFC-GT and STFC-UT. It is
Maximum error – 0.44 % 9.05 % 3.20 % 8.61 % found that the initial peak force of STFC-GT is significantly lower than
that of STFC-UT, which effectively reduces the injury to the occupants
from the transient crushing force. As compression proceeds, the me­
4. Crushing performance of the STFC with thickness gradient chanical response of the STFC-UT fluctuates within a certain range. In
and uniform thickness contrast, the mechanical response of the STFC-GT grows with the in­
crease of displacement, thus improving the adaptation to impacts for
To investigate the strengthening mechanism of the thickness occupant. Moreover, the ES of the STFC-GT is higher than that of the
gradient design, this section compares the dynamic characteristics of STFC-UT, which indicates that the STFC-GT enters the densification
STFC-GT and STFC-UT at an initial velocity of 13.89 m/s. This velocity is stage later than the STFC-GT, thus improving the energy absorption
required by the China-New Car Assessment Program (C-NCAP). capacity. Although the response fluctuations of STFC-GT gradually in­
Fig. 9(a–c) shows the energy absorption of the STFC-GT and STFC-UT crease as the compression processes, it will be significantly improved the
with the 0th, 1st, and 2nd order fractal configuration. The top wall evolution of the fractal configuration.
thickness t1 and the bottom wall thickness of STFC-GT are set to 1 mm Fig. 11 shows the cross-sectional view of the deformation mode of
and 3 mm respectively. The wall thickness of STFC-UT is 2 mm. It is seen the STFC-GT and the STFC-UT in 0th, 1st, and 2nd order at the
that the energy absorption of the STFC-GT is less than the STFC-UT in displacement of 10 mm, 40 mm, 70 mm, and 100 mm, respectively. It
the initial stage of the compression process. However, the energy can be clearly observed that the initial deformation positions of the

Fig. 8. Fabrication errors.

6
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Fig. 9. The result of energy absorption: (a) The energy absorption of the STFC-GT and STFC-UT with 0th; (b) The energy absorption of the STFC-GT and STFC-UT
with 1st; (c) The energy absorption of the STFC-GT and STFC-UT with 2nd.

Fig. 10. The result of force–displacement response: (a) The force–displacement response the STFC-GT and STFC-UT with 0th; (b) The force–displacement response
the STFC-GT and STFC-UT with 1st; (c) The force–displacement response the STFC-GT and STFC-UT with 2nd.

STFC-UT and the STFC-GT are different. The initial deformation position
of the STFC-UT is at the bottom, and the deformation of the STFC-GT
starts from the thinnest end. This suggests that gradient design has the
function of inducing the deformation of the structure, and cause the
peak crushing force (PCF) of the STFC-GT smaller than the STFC-UT. As
compression displacement increases, the thickness of STFC-GT gradually
increases, which leads to more energy being consumed by the plastic
deformation of the structure, thus contributing to its progressively
increasing mechanical response. Moreover, from the cross-sectional
view, the wall of the STFC-UT is almost completely folded and
deformed at a displacement of 100 mm. On the contrary, the STFC-GT
still remains undeformed area (black dotted line) at the displacement
of 100 mm, which generates a longer ES of STFC-GT. In addition, owing
to the evolution of the Sierpinski fractal configuration, the folding
wavelength of the 2nd STFC-GT is significantly smaller than that of 0th
STFC-GT, which improves the material utilization of the structure,
contributing to the increasement of SEA.
The mechanical responses of the STFC-GT and the STFC-UT under
different fractal orders are shown in Table 3. The SEA and MCF of the
STFC-GT are greater than that of the corresponding STFC-UT. Moreover,
the energy absorption of the 0th, 1st, and 2nd order STFC-GT increases
by 26.46 %, 19.19 %, and 10.82 % compared with the corresponding

7
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Fig. 11. The deformation of the STFC-GT and the STFC-UT: (a) The deformation of the STFC-GT and STFC-UT with 0th; (b) The deformation of the STFC-GT and
STFC-UT with 1st; (c) The deformation the STFC-GT and STFC-UT with 2nd.

the IPCF of the 2nd order STFC-UT is 2.24 times that of the 2nd order
Table 3 STFC-GT.
Crashworthiness indicators of the STFC-GT and the STFC-UT.
Type ES (mm) EA (kJ) SEA (kJ/kg) MCF (kN) IPCF (kN) 5. Theoretical prediction of the mean crushing force (MCF)
0th STFC-GT 119 2.82 15.67 23.69 35.76
0th STFC-UT 115 2.23 12.39 19.39 63.10 5.1. Theoretical method
1st STFC-GT 124 7.02 25.07 56.61 51.98
1st STFC-UT 118 5.89 22.65 49.92 97.39 The simplified super folding element (SSFE) theory predicts the axial
2nd STFC-GT 122 15.46 38.27 126.72 77.75
collapse of the STFC-GT and the STFC-UT. In the SSFE theory, the basic
2nd STFC-UT 117 13.95 34.53 119.23 174.01
folding element is simplified to consist of only extensional triangular
elements and stationary hinge lines. The work done by the external force
STFC-UT. In addition, the IPCF of the STFC-GT and the STFC-UT show Eout is equal to the sum of the energy dissipated by bending and the
the largest difference. The STFC-GT has a smaller initial peak crushing membrane energy during a folding process:
force (IPCF) compared with the corresponding STFC-UT. In particular,

Fig. 12. Diagram of plastic folds of Sierpinski triangular thin-walled structure.

8
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Fig. 13. Two basic angle elements of the Sierpinski triangle thin-walled structure.

Fig. 14. The deformation modes of acute-angle corner. (a) The two deformations modes; (b) FE model deformations.

Eout = 2Lw ⋅MCF = Eb + Em = Ein (8)

σy + σu
σ0 = (11)
2
where Lw represents the folding wavelength of the plastic folds, Ein, Eb
and E m are the internal dissipation energy, bending energy and mem­ α is the rotation angle of the bending hinge line. Based on the SSFE
brane energy, respectively. It is worth noting that the flange of the theory, there are three bending hinge lines in a basic folding element.
folding element can’t be completely flattened during the compression The rotation angles of the three hinge lines are π/2, π, and π/2,
process, as shown in Fig. 12. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce an respectively, as shown in Fig. 12. Therefore, the total bending energy Eb
effective compression displacement coefficient δ to eliminate the error. is summarized as the sum of the bending energy of the three hinge lines:
In this paper, the value of δ is determined by the effective stroke.
Eb = 2πM0 B (12)
Therefore, the external energy of the thin-walled structure in the impact
process is defined as: where B is the perimeter of the cross-section, derived as
2Lw ⋅MCF⋅δ = Eb + Em (9) B = 3n+1 ⋅Ln (13)

5.2. The bending energy 5.3. The membrane energy

The bending energy Eb of each fold is expressed by the sum of the The STFC mainly includes two basic angle elements, as shown in
energy of all the static hinge lines: Fig. 13. The two basic angle elements are named the acute-angle corner
∑
3 and the four-panel corner. It can dissipate crash energy through
Eb = M0 αi B (10) extending and shrinking metal plastic membranes during the crushing
t=1
process.
The energy dissipation of a flange can be estimated by integrating the
where M0 = σ0 t 2 /4 is the full plastic bending moment of the flange, σ 0 is
metal plastic membrane triangular area during a wavelength. It is
the flow stress of material defined as the average of the initial yield
expressed as:
strength σ y and the ultimate strength σu :

9
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Table 4 5.4. The theoretical model of the MCF

The number of corner element of the STFC.
Number 0th 1st 2nd According to the number of basic constituent corners of the STFC
with different fractal orders, their MCF can be predicted during the axial
Acute-angle corner (x) 3 3 3
Four-panel corner (y) 0 3 12 loading process. By integrating Eqs. (9), (15), (17), the MCF of the STFC
Perimeter of the cross-section B (mm)
√̅̅̅
120 3
√̅̅̅
180 3
√̅̅̅
270 3 is expressed as:
Eb + xEm1 + yEm2
∫ MCF = (19)
2Lw δ
Eflange = σ 0 tds (14)
s
where x and y represent the acute-angle and four-panel corner numbers,
where S is the plastic flow area. As shown in Fig. 14(a), the folding respectively. Table 4 shows the number of different corners of the STFC
deformations of corner elements usually include symmetric and asym­ with different fractal orders.
metric deformation [45,46]. The plastic flow regions resulting from the The number of corner elements of the STFC with different fractal
two deformations are characterized by the yellow areas. It is necessary orders can be obtained according to Table 4.
to determine the folding deformation modes of the acute-angle corner According to the minimum energy principle:
and four-panel corner to predict the MCF during the collision accurately. ∂MCF
Fig. 14(b) combines the numerical and experimental results to reveal the =0 (20)
∂Lw
deformation modes of the two corner elements. It is found that the
symmetric mode dominates the deformation of folding flanges in the the partial derivative of the half-wavelength Lw is derived as
two corner elements under the axial compression. Therefore, the plastic √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√
flow area S for a flange can be calculated as: √ πBt
Lw = √ () ( () ) (21)
√
β 4xtan 2 + 4y tan β2 + cos− 1 (γ)
β

S = L2w tan (15)

2
Then the MCF of the STFC-GT with different fractal orders can be
For the acute-angle corner, the flanges of both sides are equivalent,
obtained:
and the membrane energy of the acute-angle corner Em1 during a folding
⎧
wavelength is expressed as: ⎪ 30.25 ( t − t )1.5
⎪
⎪λ σ0 t1 + 2 1 h π0.5 B0.5 .......................0thSTFC − GT
⎪
⎪
8M0 L2w tan β2 ⎪
⎪ δ H
⎪
Em1 = 2Eflange = (16) ⎨ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎪ √̅̅̅ (
t 6+2 3 t − t )1.5
MCF = λ
⎪ σ0 t1 + 2 1 h π0.5 B0.5 ..............1stSTFC − GT
The four-panel corner can be considered a combination of an acute- ⎪
⎪
⎪
δ
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
H
⎪ √̅̅̅ (
angle corner and two additional panels [45,47]. Therefore, the mem­ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 24 + 5 3 t2 − t1 )1.5 0.5 0.5
⎩λ σ 0 t1 + h π B .............2ndSTFC − GT
brane energy of the four-panel corner is simplified as the sum of the δ H
acute-angle corner membrane energy and the two additional panels (22)
membrane energy. The membrane energy of other additional panels
during a wavelength folding process can be summarized as: where λ is a dynamic enhancement coefficient, and the dynamic
∫ enhancement coefficient of the aluminum alloy is from 1.1 to 1.6 [48,
L2 L2 49]. Due to the impact velocity used in this paper is 13.89 m/s, the
Epanel = σ 0 tds = σ0 t w = 4M0 w (17)
s cosγ tcosγ dynamic coefficient λ = 1.3 is introduced to balance the inertial effect
during the impact.
where γ is the angle between the additional panels and the acute-angle
For the STFC-UT, t1 = t2, theoretical prediction results of the 0th, 1st,
corner, which can be determined β = γ = 60◦ by the geometric rela­
2nd order STFC-UT can be obtained:
tionship. Therefore, the membrane energy dissipated by the four-panel
corner in a fold wavelength can be expressed as:
( )
L2 β 1
Em2 = Em1 + 2Epanel = 8M0 w tan + (18)
t 2 cosγ

Fig. 15. The theoretical prediction results: (a) STFC-UT; (b) STFC-GT.

10
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Table 5 The axial thickness is related to the height H, h is the distance from
The detailed prediction results of the STFC-UT. the top end to the low end of the STFC, and the corresponding design
Fractal order ES (mm) η FEM (MCF) Theo. (Pm) Err. method for four gradient types are as follow:
0th 115 0.719 20.69 kN 20.88 kN 0.91 % 1
1st 118 0.738 53.22 kN 57.78 kN 7.89 % tI = 1 + h (24)
80
2nd 117 0.725 134.36 kN 136.01 kN 1.21 %
⎧
⎪ 1
⎪
⎨ 1+ h, h ≤ 80
⎧ 40
⎪
⎪ 30.25 1.5 0.5 0.5 tII = (25)
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
λ
δ
σ 0 t π B .......................0thSTFC − GT ⎩ 3 − 1 (x − 80), 80 < h
⎪
⎪
⎪ 40
⎪ √̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
⎨ √̅̅̅
6 + 2 3 1.5 0.5 0.5
MCF = λ σ 0 t π B ..............1stSTFC − GT (23) ⎧
1
⎪
⎪ δ ⎪
⎪ 3− h, h ≤ 80
⎪
⎪ √ ̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ ⎨
⎪ √ ̅̅
̅ 40
⎪
⎪
⎪ 24 + 5 3 1.5 0.5 0.5 tIII = (26)
⎪ ⎪
⎩λ
δ
σ0 t π B .............2ndSTFC − GT ⎩ 1 + 1 (h − 80), 80 < h
⎪
40
⎧
5.5. The result of theoretical prediction ⎪
⎪ 1
⎪
⎪ 1 + h, h ≤ 40
⎪
⎪ 20
⎪
⎪
The theoretical prediction results of the STFC-GT and the STFC-UT ⎪
⎪
⎪ 1
⎪
⎨ 3− (h − 40), 40 < h ≤ 80
are shown in Fig. 15. It can be observed that the Pm of the STFC-UT 20
tIV = (27)
presents a plateau mode, while the Pm of the STFC-GT is a gradually ⎪
⎪ 1
⎪ 1 + (h − 80), 80 < h ≤ 120
increasing mode. In addition, Table 5 shows the detailed prediction ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 20
⎪
results. It is seen that the error of the maximum Pm is within 10 %, which ⎪
⎪
⎪ 1
⎪
is sufficient to illustrate the accuracy of the theoretical prediction. ⎩3 −
20
(h − 120), 120 < h ≤ 160

6. The investigation of crushing crashworthiness on gradient The MCF and EA of the STFC with four thickness gradients and the
type
Table 6
The above investigation shows that the thickness gradient design can The crashworthiness indicators of four different thickness gradient types.
effectively improve the stability and energy absorption capacity of thin- Indicator Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4
walled structures. Therefore, this section mainly discusses the effect of IPCF (kN) 76.05 69.63 79.06 76.45
the gradient type of the 2nd order STFC on crushing crashworthiness, MCF (kN) 130.57 134.68 129.91 141.65
the initial impact velocity of numerical simulation is 50 km/h. Fig. 16 EA (kJ) 15.93 16.70 16.11 17.70
shows four different axial thickness gradient designs.

Fig. 16. Four axial thickness gradient types.

Fig. 17. The mechanical properties: (a) MCF; (b) EA.

11
Y. Zhang et al.
Fig. 18. The deformation modes of four different thickness gradients
types structures.
same mass are shown in Fig. 17. It is seen that the thickness gradient
type has an obvious effect on the MCF and EA. The STFC with type 4 has
the highest energy absorption, and the STFC with type 1 has the lowest
absorption energy.
Table 6 shows crushing crashworthiness indicators of the STFC with
four gradient types. Obviously, the STFC with gradient type 4 has better
mechanical properties, and the mean crushing force and energy
Fig. 19. The Sierpinski triangle thin-walled structure with a thickness gradient of different segments number.
Fig. 20. The mechanical properties of the STFC with different segments number: (a) MCF; (b) EA.
12
Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784
absorption are 141.65 kN and 17.70 kJ, respectively. In addition, the
effective compression displacement of the STFC with gradient type 4 is
the largest.
Fig. 18 further presents the deformation modes of four thickness
gradient types. It is found that the gradient type has a significant effect
on the deformation mode of the STFC. The STFC with four gradient types
begins to deform from the position with thinner thickness and lower
structural strength. Then the plastic fold gradually progresses toward
the thicker area and finally forms a folded layer during the compression
process. Furthermore, the plastic fold has a smaller wavelength at the
thin end and a larger wavelength at the thick end. The reason is that the
material distribution of the thin-walled structure is changed according
to the gradient type, which makes thin-walled structures have different
structural strength in the axial direction, and the thin area has less
material distribution and low structural strength.
To reveal the influence of the number of thin-thick-thin designs (type
4) on the crushing crashworthiness. Fig. 19 further presents the design of
the STFC-GT with the same height and different segment numbers, each
segment adopts a thin–thick–thin (1 mm–3 mm–1 mm) distribution
regulation.
Fig. 20 shows the MCF and EA of the STFC with different segment
numbers. The results show that the segment number of the thickness
gradient has a significant effect on the mechanical properties of the
STFC. From Fig. 20(a), the MCF increases sharply and reaches a peak at
the initial stage, and then the MCF enters the plateau stage. When the
plateau stage ends, the MCF increases rapidly again. It can be found that
MCF peak force and the displacement of the end of the plateau stage
increase with the segment number. In addition, the MCF of the STFC
with 10 segments is maximum at the displacement is less than 76 mm.
With the displacement increases, the MCF of 10 segments gradually
becomes the smallest. Finally, the STFC of 4 segments has the largest
MCF. As given in Fig. 20(b), the EA of 4 segments exceeds 10 segments at
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Fig. 21. The deformation mechanism of the STFC with different segment numbers: (a) The deformation mechanism of the STFC when the thinner wall is fully folded;
(b) The deformation mechanism of the STFC at the same displacement.

and IPCF of the thin-walled structure with 4 segment thickness gradients

Table 7
are increased by 38.63 % and decreased by 34.24 % compared 10 seg­
The crushing results of the STFC with different segments number.
ments thickness gradient structures.
2 seg. 4 seg. 6 seg. 8 seg. 10 seg.

IPCF (kN) 76.45 85.82 95.76 104.02 110.77 7. Conclusions

MCF (kN) 141.65 145.23 137.32 136.83 108.19
EA (kJ) 17.70 18.30 16.89 16.83 13.20
a displacement of 76 mm and increases rapidly, and with the increase of
compression displacement, compared with the STFC of 10 segments, the
energy absorption advantage of 4 segments becomes more obvious.
Fig. 21 presents the deformation mechanism of the STFC with
different segment numbers. The thinner wall (red area) is less strong
where is the plastic deformation first occurs during the axial compres­
sion. When the thinner end is fully folded (Fig. 21(a)), the response of
MCF (Fig. 19) ends the plateau stage, and the more segments, the longer
the plateau stage. After this, with further compression, the plastic folds
transition to the thicker area with higher strength, and the MCF starts to
enter the rapid increase stage. In addition, from Fig. 21(b), with segment
number increase, especially 8 segments and 10 segments, this kind of
thin-walled trigger area affects the stability of the structure. It appears to
be the buckle deformation mechanism and affects the energy absorption
of the structure. Therefore, the proper segment number is beneficial for
the thin-walled structure to produce plastic folds on impact and improve
the energy absorption capacity of the STFC.
Table 7 further compares the crushing crashworthiness results of the
STFC with different segment numbers. It can be found that the segment
number of the thickness gradient greatly affects the mechanical prop­
erties of the STFC. However, if the segment number exceeds 4, the MCF
and EA of the STFC decrease with the segment number increase. The EA
This paper proposes a novel thickness gradient fractal Sierpinski
triangles column to enhance the crushing crashworthiness of the thin-
walled structure. Several conclusions are summarized as follows:
(1) The STFC-GT can greatly reduce the initial peak crushing force
compared to the STFC-UT under the same mass. Especially the
2nd order STFC, the IPCF STFC-UT is 2.24 times that of the STFC-
GT.
(2) The STFC-GT has a higher energy absorption capacity. The en­
ergy absorption of the STFC-GT of 0th, 1st, and 2nd fractal order
increases by 26.46 %, 19.19 %, and 10.82 % compared with the
corresponding STFC-UT. In addition, the simplified super folding
element (SSFE) theory predicts the axial collapse of the STFC-GT
and the STFC-UT. The theoretical solution of the MCF is good
consistent with the numerical results.
(3) The thickness gradient type greatly influences the mechanical
properties of the STFC. The STFC with type 4 has the highest EA
and MCF. Moreover, the segment number of the thickness
gradient (type 4) has a significant effect on the crashworthiness of
the STFC, and the STFC of 4 segments has the largest MCF.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Yong Zhang: Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Methodology.

13
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Kunyuan Li: Writing – original draft. Wenzhan Huang: Writing – re­ Data availability
view & editing. Yu Chen: Validation, Data curation. Yubo Hou:
Investigation. Liang Su: Resources. Baoxing Lin: Software. Data will be made available on request.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of
interest associated with this publication and there are no known
competing financial supports for this work that could have influenced its
outcome.
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (52075188 and 11772135), Program for New Century Excel­
lent Talents in Fujian Province University, Open fund of Fujian Key
Laboratory of Automotive Electronics and Electric Drive (KF-X19001),
Youth Innovation Fund of Xiamen City (3502Z20206003).

Appendix A

Fig. A1(a) shows the test process of the static friction coefficient between the specimen and the supporter. The supporter was fixed on a plate with a
gradually increasing inclination angle α. The specimen was then placed on the supporter. When the specimen just slides, the inclination angle α at this
point was recorded. According to the force equilibrium, the static friction coefficient was derived as
mg⋅sinα − μs ⋅mg⋅cosα = 0 (A1)

μs = tanα (A2)

where m is the mass of specimen.

Based on the definition of dynamic friction coefficient μd, i.e., the ratio of the sliding friction force f to the normal force N = mg, the friction force of
specimen during the uniform motion was tested in Fig. A1(b) using a force gauge.
The static and dynamic friction coefficients were tested three times, which were recorded in Table A1. The average values were 0.316 and 0.211,
respectively.

Fig. A1. Schematic measurement of static (a) and dynamic (b) friction coefficients.

Table A1
Measured coefficient of static μs and dynamic μd friction.

Number m (kg) α (◦ ) μs = tan α f (N) μd = f/N

1 0.38 17.6 0.3172187 0.82 0.22019334
2 17.2 0.3095517 0.78 0.209452202
3 17.8 0.3210649 0.76 0.204081633
Note. The f is the friction force, N = mg is the normal force.

Appendix B

To investigate the strain rate effect of STFC-GT, the Cowper–Symonds constitutive is introduced to the numerical model:
σe (ε )1/q
(B1)
e
=1+
σo D

where σ 0, σ e and εe represent the flow stress of extruded material, the effective flow (and/or yield) stress of extruded material and average effective
strain rate, respectively. According to References [50], the constant D and q were taken as 6500 s− 1 and 4, respectively. As shown in Fig. B1, the
crashworthiness performance of FE STFC-GT with Cowper–Symonds constitutive parameters are compared at different crushing speeds. It is found
that the mechanical responses are close. The difference in the IPCF and MCF are 7.56 % and 8.68 %, respectively. Thus, the strain rate effect is
neglected within the crushing speed of 13.889 m/s.

14
Y. Zhang et al. Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784

Fig. B1. Crashworthiness performance of FE STFC-GT with Cowper–Symonds constitutive parameters at different crushing speeds. (a) Crushing force. (b) IPCF
and MCF.

References [23] G. Zheng, T. Pang, G. Sun, S. Wu, Q. Li, Theoretical, numerical, and experimental
study on laterally variable thickness (LVT) multi-cell tubes for crashworthiness,
Int. J. Mech. Sci. 118 (2016) 283–297.
[1] J. Ma, S. Chai, Y. Chen, Geometric design, deformation mode, and energy
[24] J. Fang, Y. Gao, G. Sun, G. Zheng, Q. Li, Dynamic crashing behavior of new
absorption of patterned thin-walled structures, Mech. Mater. (2022) 168.
extrudable multi-cell tubes with a functionally graded thickness, Int. J. Mech. Sci.
[2] A.A. Attar, M. Kazemi, Novel geometric arrangement effects on energy absorption
103 (2015) 63–73.
of a conical structure with various cross-sections, Thin-Walled Struct. 173 (2022)
[25] Y. Zhang, J. Wang, C. Wang, Y. Zeng, T. Chen, Crashworthiness of bionic fractal
109005.
hierarchical structures, Mater. Des. 158 (2018) 147–159.
[3] J. Li, Y. Chen, X. Feng, J. Feng, P. Sareh, Computational modeling and energy
[26] Y. Zhang, N. He, X. Song, T. Chen, H Chen, On impacting mechanical behaviors of
absorption behavior of thin-walled tubes with the Kresling origami pattern, J. Int.
side fractal structures, Thin-Walled Struct. 146 (2020) 106490.
Assoc. Shell Spat. Struct. 62 (2021) 71–81.
[27] D. Zhang, Q. Fei, D. Jiang, Y. Li, Numerical and analytical investigation on
[4] C. Zhou, B. Wang, J. Ma, Z You, Dynamic axial crushing of origami crash boxes, Int.
crushing of fractal-like honeycombs with self-similar hierarchy, Compos. Struct.
J. Mech. Sci. 118 (2016) 1–12.
192 (2018) 289–299.
[5] G. Sun, T. Pang, J. Fang, G. Li, Q Li, Parameterization of criss-cross configurations
[28] J. Wang, Y. Zhang, N. He, C.H. Wang, Crashworthiness behavior of Koch fractal
for multiobjective crashworthiness optimization, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 124 (2017)
structures, Mater. Des. 144 (2018) 229–244.
145–157.
[29] A.R. Kenari, M. Solaimani, Optical properties of two dimensional fractal shaped
[6] X. Zhang, H. Zhang, Energy absorption limit of plates in thin-walled structures
nanostructures: comparison of Sierpinski triangles and Sierpinski carpets, Opt.
under compression, Int. J. Impact Eng. 57 (2013) 81–98.
Commun. 474 (2020) 126185.
[7] V.J. Shahi, J. Marzbanrad, Analytical and experimental studies on quasi-static axial
[30] K. Wang, Y. Liu, T. Liang, Band structures in Sierpinski triangle fractal porous
crush behavior of thin-walled tailor-made aluminum tubes, Thin-Walled Struct. 60
phononic crystals, Phys. B: Condens. Matter 498 (2016) 33–42.
(2012) 24–37.
[31] A.M. Hinz, C.H. Auf Der Heide, S.S. Zemljič, Metric properties of Sierpiński triangle
[8] J. Huang, K. He, R. Liu, C. Shi, Theoretical and numerical investigation of mean
graphs, Discrete Appl. Math. 319 (2022) 439–453.
crushing load of uniform and non-uniform multi-cell tube, Thin-Walled Struct. 180
[32] Y. Xiang, T. Yu, L. Yang, Comparative analysis of energy absorption capacity of
(2022) 109956.
polygonal tubes, multi-cell tubes and honeycombs by utilizing key performance
[9] N. San Ha, T.M. Pham, W. Chen, H. Hao, G Lu, Crashworthiness analysis of bio-
indicators, Mater. Des. 89 (2016) 689–696.
inspired fractal tree-like multi-cell circular tubes under axial crushing, Thin-Walled
[33] Z. Wang, J. Zhang, Z. Li, C Shi, On the crashworthiness of bio-inspired hexagonal
Struct. 169 (2021) 108315.
prismatic tubes under axial compression, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 186 (2020) 105893.
[10] D. Zhang, G. Lu, D. Ruan, Q. Fei, Energy absorption in the axial crushing of
[34] Z. Gao, D. Ruan, Axial crushing of novel hierarchical multi-cell square tubes, Eng.
hierarchical circular tubes, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 171 (2020) 105403.
Struct. 286 (2023) 116141.
[11] C. Baykasoglu, M.T. Cetin, Energy absorption of circular aluminium tubes with
[35] X. Deng, W. Liu, L. Jin, On the crashworthiness analysis and design of a lateral
functionally graded thickness under axial impact loading, Int. J. Crashworthiness
corrugated tube with a sinusoidal cross-section, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 141 (2018)
20 (2015) 95–106.
330–340.
[12] O. Mohammadiha, H. Ghariblu, Optimal shape design of functionally graded
[36] C. Gong, Z. Bai, Y. Wang, L. Zhang, On the crashworthiness performance of novel
thickness inversion tubes subjected to oblique loading, Struct. Multidiscip. Optim.
hierarchical multi-cell tubes under axial loading, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 206 (2021)
56 (2017) 587–601.
106599.
[13] F. Xu, Enhancing material efficiency of energy absorbers through graded thickness
[37] S. Xie, P. Chen, N. Wang, J. Wang, X Du, Crashworthiness study of circular tubes
structures, Thin-Walled Struct. 97 (2015) 250–265.
subjected to radial extrusion under quasi-static loading, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 192
[14] F. Xu, X. Tian, G. Li, Experimental study on crashworthiness of functionally graded
(2021) 106128.
thickness thin-walled tubular structures, Exp. Mech. 55 (2015) 1339–1352.
[38] C. Gong, Z. Bai, J. Lv, L. Zhang, Crashworthiness analysis of bionic thin-walled
[15] Y. Chen, Z. Bai, L. Zhang, Y. Wang, G. Sun, L. Cao, Crashworthiness analysis of
tubes inspired by the evolution laws of plant stems, Thin-Walled Struct. 157 (2020)
octagonal multi-cell tube with functionally graded thickness under multiple
107081.
loading angles, Thin-Walled Struct. 110 (2017) 133–139.
[39] W. Ma, Z. Li, S. Xie, Crashworthiness analysis of thin-walled bio-inspired multi-cell
[16] F. Xu, X. Zhang, H. Zhang, A review on functionally graded structures and
corrugated tubes under quasi-static axial loading, Eng. Struct. 204 (2020) 110069.
materials for energy absorption, Eng. Struct. 171 (2018) 309–325.
[40] N. Qiu, Y. Gao, J. Fang, G. Sun, N.H. Kim, Topological design of multi-cell
[17] R. Lu, W. Gao, X. Hu, W. Liu, Y. Li, X. Liu, Crushing analysis and crashworthiness
hexagonal tubes under axial and lateral loading cases using a modified particle
optimization of tailor rolled tubes with variation of thickness and material
swarm algorithm, Appl. Math. Model. 53 (2018) 567–583.
properties, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 136 (2018) 67–84.
[41] Z. Ahmad, D.P. Thambiratnam, Dynamic computer simulation and energy
[18] R. Lu, X. Liu, S. Chen, X. Hu, L Liu, Axial crashing analysis for tailor rolled square
absorption of foam-filled conical tubes under axial impact loading, Comput. Struct.
tubes with axially graded both wall thickness and material strength, Thin-Walled
87 (2009) 186–197.
Struct. 117 (2017) 10–24.
[42] H. Zhang, W. Sun, Mechanical behavior and crashworthiness assessment of
[19] X. Zhang, Z. Wen, H. Zhang, Axial crushing and optimal design of square tubes
corrugated inner rib reinforced tubular structures, Thin-Walled Struct. 189 (2023)
with graded thickness, Thin-Walled Struct. 84 (2014) 263–274.
110894.
[20] J. Song, S. Xu, J. Zhou, H. Huang, M. Zou, Experiment and numerical simulation
[43] W.L. Oberkampf, T.G. Trucano, Verification and validation in computational fluid
study on the bionic tubes with gradient thickness under oblique loading, Thin-
dynamics, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 38 (2002) 209–272.
Walled Struct. 163 (2021) 107624.
[44] J. Magliaro, A. Shakib, A. Gudisey, W. Altenhof, Evolution of energy dissipation
[21] G. Sun, T. Pang, G. Zheng, J. Song, Q. Li, On energy absorption of functionally
mechanisms over a comprehensive range of cutting modes and enhanced
graded tubes under transverse loading, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 115 (2016) 465–480.
capabilities via hybrid cutting/clamping in AA6061 extrusions, Thin-Walled Struct.
[22] T. Pang, G. Zheng, J. Fang, D. Ruan, G. Sun, Energy absorption mechanism of
159 (2021) 107238.
axially-varying thickness (AVT) multicell thin-walled structures under out-of-plane
[45] X. Deng, W. Liu, Z. Lin, Experimental and theoretical study on crashworthiness of
loading, Eng. Struct. 196 (2019) 109130.
star-shaped tubes under axial compression, Thin-Walled Struct. 130 (2018)
321–331.

15
Y. Zhang et al.
[46] X. Zhang, H. Zhang, Experimental and numerical investigation on crush resistance
of polygonal columns and angle elements, Thin-Walled Struct. 57 (2012) 25–36.
[47] T. Tran, S. Hou, X. Han, M Chau, Crushing analysis and numerical optimization of
angle element structures under axial impact loading, Compos. Struct. 119 (2015)
422–435.
[48] T. Tran, Study on the crashworthiness of windowed multi-cell square tubes under
axial and oblique impact, Thin-Walled Struct. 155 (2020) 106907.
16
Thin-Walled Structures 199 (2024) 111784
[49] N. Qiu, Y. Gao, J. Fang, Z. Feng, G. Sun, Q. Li, Theoretical prediction and
optimization of multi-cell hexagonal tubes under axial crashing, Thin-Walled
Struct. 102 (2016) 111–121.
[50] J. Magliaro, W. Altenhof, A. Gudisey, A. Shakib, Energy dissipation characteristics
for AA6061 extrusions subjected to hybrid cutting/clamping at impact velocities
up to 32 m/s, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 208 (2021) 106678.