Analisa Perbandingan Uji Simulasi Abaqus Cae 6-14 dan Uji Eksperimental Compression Test pada Crash Box Berbentuk Hexagonal Menggunakan Material Aluminium 6061-T4

Abstract

The rapid development of the industrialized world, automobile safety and impact- resistant performance have attracted increasing attention to vehicle design. One of them is Crash box. The crash box has a function as an absorber that is able to channel the kinetic energy formed in the vehicle during a collision. The durability of the aluminum crash box material helps protect other important components in the vehicle and helps keep passengers safe. The overall design of the crash box and the use of other materials also play a role in determining the performance and safety of the vehicle in a crash situation. In addition, applicable safety standards and regulations must also be considered to ensure compliance and optimal protection. This research aims to analyze experimental crash box testing using compression tests with a hexagonal-shaped crash box manufacturing process with variations of one hole, two holes, and three holes, to predict crash box performance. While the experimental test results have the aim to validate and test the effectiveness of crash boxes with variations of triger holes in energy absorption in collision events. Then, analyze the simulation results of error presentation using abaqus CAE software and experimental compression test with variation of hexagonal triger hole model. The test used a universal compression testing machine. Based on the analysis of the simulation study of the crash box model with a variety of holes, the more the number of holes in the crash box, the smaller the energy that can be absorbed. The result of the one-hole crash box can absorb 697 joules of energy when compared to the two hole crash box model which only absorbs 674 joules of energy and the three-hole crash box model which can absorb 659 joules of energy. This comparison shows that the energy absorption trend decreases as the number of trigger holes increases. The results of the analysis on the compressive test study of the one-hole crash box model which can absorb energy of 730 joules when compared to the two- hole crash box model which only absorbs energy of 639 joules and the three-hole crash box model which can absorb energy of 608 joules. The results of abaqus cae 6-14 simulation tests and experimental compression tests obtained the percentage value of errors in each crash box model of one hole model of 4.5%, two holes of 5.4% and three holes of 7.7%. In conclusion, the comparison of crash box models with hole variations results in decreased energy absorption as the number of trigger holes in the crash box increases and there are several sources that need to be improved in experimental and simulation methods to obtain more accurate results.