The present invention relates to bumpers having thermoplastic energy absorbers with crush lobes that crush to absorb a uniform and predictable amount of energy regardless of where impacted across a face of the bumper, and that are adapted with sensors to sense an impact. More particularly, the present invention relates to energy absorbers particularly designed for reduced injury upon impacting a pedestrian, and including an elongated impact sensor on the energy absorber.
Existing bumper systems include reinforcement beams and energy absorbers with crush lobes tuned to provide a desired impact resistance and energy absorption (i.e. a desired force-deflection curve). However, improvements are desired in the areas of improved pedestrian safety (e.g. reduced leg injury during an impact, regardless of impact location), and having the ability to reliably sense accidents and to optimally respond to varied impact severities (and for example, to pass barrier impact testing and also pedestrian leg injury minimization testing using a FLEX PLI test apparatus). Also, a design is desired having design flexibility, yet that provides consistency of crush lobe geometry and shape, and that is more easily moldable and tunable to a specific energy absorption force-deflection impact-receiving occurrence. Also, a design is desired having an integrated impact sensor carried in a position causing reliable and quick sensing of impacts.
In one aspect of the present invention, a bumper system comprises a bumper reinforcement beam having a face surface; and an energy absorber having a base flange engaging the face surface, and having forwardly-extending top and bottom rows of spaced-apart crush lobes, the top row of crush lobes providing a higher first force-deflection curve upon impact that is designed for barrier bumper impact testing, and the bottom row of crush lobes providing a lower second force-deflection curve upon impact designed for FLEX PLI pedestrian-leg-injury-simulating impact testing.
In another aspect of the present invention, a bumper system comprises a bumper reinforcement having a face surface, an energy absorber having a base flange engaging the face surface, and having forwardly-extending top and bottom rows of crush lobes, each crush lobe having shear walls, and an elongated sensor positioned at least partially between several of the crush lobes.
In another aspect of the present invention, an energy absorber apparatus is provided for a bumper system having a bumper reinforcement beam. The apparatus includes an energy absorber with a base flange adapted to engage the reinforcement beam and having forwardly-extending top and bottom rows of crush lobes, each crush lobe having shear walls. An elongated sensor is positioned at least partially under or immediately adjacent some of the shear walls of the energy absorber.
In another aspect of the present invention, a bumper system comprises a bumper reinforcement beam having a face surface; an energy absorber having a base flange engaging the face surface, and having at least one forwardly-extending row of similarly-shaped spaced-apart crush lobes; and a horizontally-extending tubular sensor secured to the energy absorber to retain the sensor in position on the bumper system. In a narrower form, the energy absorber includes integrally-formed structure, such as attachment tabs, that secure the tubular sensor to the energy absorber.
In another aspect of the present invention, a bumper system comprises a bumper reinforcement beam having a face surface, and an energy absorber having a base flange engaging the face surface and having at least one forwardly-extending rows of similarly-shaped spaced-apart crush lobes, each crush lobe having a plurality of shear walls that form a geometric shape with a face wall that closes a forward end of each crush lobe. The shear walls all include stiff wall structure of a first wall thickness and at least some shear walls also including a soft wall structure formed by thinned material thickness that is thinner than the first wall thickness and that causes a lower force of resistance during an initial impact stroke.
In a narrower form, the bumper system also includes a sensor tube attached to the energy absorber in a position where energy from a low impact occurrence is absorbed by the soft wall structure, and where energy from a high impact occurrence causes the stiff wall structure to engage the sensor tube in a manner generating and sending a signal representing a high impact occurrence.
In another aspect of the present invention, a bumper system comprises a bumper reinforcement beam having a face surface; an energy absorber having a base flange engaging the face surface, and having forwardly-extending top and bottom rows of similarly-shaped spaced-apart crush lobes; and an apron extending horizontally and spaced below the beam; the beam and top row of crush lobes combining to define a high first force-deflection curve that upon impact by a barrier bumper impact tester provides energy absorption to pass barrier bumper impact testing; the bottom row of crush lobes and apron combining to define a lower second force-deflection curve that upon impact against a FLEX PLI pedestrian-leg-injury-simulating impact testing device provides a lower second force-deflection curve upon that provides reduced leg injury sufficient to pass FLEX PLI leg-injury-simulating impact testing.
In one aspect of the present invention, a bumper system comprises a bumper reinforcement beam having a face surface, and an energy absorber having a base flange engaging the face surface and further having forwardly-extending top and bottom rows of similarly-shaped spaced-apart crush lobes. Each crush lobe has a centerline offset from the centerlines of vertically adjacent crush lobes, and each crush lobe has a vertical dimension DV and a horizontal dimension DH, with a ratio of DV:DH being less than 1.0.
An object of the present invention is to provide a bumper system with energy absorber that provides consistent local loading laterally across a vehicle during pedestrian impact (i.e. “on-lobe” and “between-lobe” impact resistance force is the same), yet that does so in a manner that is easily tuned, and that has low sensitivity to core shifting of a molding die.
An object of the present invention is to provide an alternate load level for IIHS bumper barrier offset overlap impacts, where one row of crush lobes (such as a bottom horizontal row) can be designed for pedestrian impact testing (to reduce leg injury) and another row of crush lobes (such as a top horizontal row) can be designed for different/higher loads for bumper barrier loading/impact testing.
An object of the present invention is to provide a bumper and energy absorber system where the energy absorber is configured to secure an elongated impact sensor (such as a silicone sensor tube) against a bumper reinforcement beam for consistent sensing of a vehicle impact and also using reduced parts while also facilitating assembly.
An object of the present invention is to provide an energy absorber with a soft initial force of resistance during an initial impact stroke, and with a higher force of resistance during a continued impact stroke, while reducing an effect of wall thickness variation, and also providing improved molding and allowing more efficient tuning of the final energy absorber, including use of very thin wall sections.
These and other aspects, objects, and features of the present invention will be understood and appreciated by those skilled in the art upon studying the following specification, claims, and appended drawings.
The illustrated apparatus (
The upper row of the illustrated crush lobes 31 are designed to provide a uniform impact against a rigid post (and against an IIHS post impact test device) regardless of a particular location of impact, and the lower row of crush lobes 32 are designed to provide a uniform impact against a pedestrian's leg (and against a FLEX PLI pedestrian-leg-impact-simulating test device), regardless of a particular location of impact. Their combination provides an unusual innovative combination capable of providing uniformity of impact resistance regardless of a point of impact and that is able to provide a novel system uniquely able to function in response to different types of impacts, especially as integrated with the tubular sensor 40 described below. Notably, the present disclosure is sufficient for an understanding by a person skilled in this art. However, the reader's attention is directed to Ralston U.S. Pat. No. 8,196,979 B2 (assignee Shape Corp), which describes a technology for providing uniformity of impact regardless of impact location. The disclosure of Ralston '979 is incorporated herein for its detailed discussion and teachings.
Briefly, the illustrated crush lobe dimensions (
It is contemplated that dimensions of crush lobes may vary. An exemplary contemplated range for the various dimensions of crush lobes 31/32 in the energy absorber 25 is: DV=10 mm to 60 mm, DW=50 mm to 120 mm, DD=20 mm to 150 mm, DS=10 mm to 100 mm, and DF=10% to 90%. For example, the illustrated crush lobes are horizontally elongated to have a vertical height dimension DV and a horizontal width dimension DW, with a ratio of DV:DW less than 1.0, or more preferably a ratio of DV:DW of less than between 0.5 and 0.3. Restated, the illustrated crush lobes are 2-3 times longer in a horizontal direction than in a vertical direction. This dimensional ratio tends to provide good overlap of the crush lobes between top and bottom rows, and also good spacing of the vertical shear walls of the crush lobes. This in combination with crush lobe overall dimensions and spacing results in the shear walls being spread apart a distance, which results in more uniformity of force-deflection impact test results across the bumper system regardless of a particular point of impact against a pedestrian's leg or other object, as discussed below. This arrangement also provides a sufficiently short total vertical dimension that is able to meet the aesthetic and functional design constraints of most vehicle bumper systems, where a front fascia extends over and covers the bumper system vertically and horizontally.
Specifically, the illustrated top and bottom rows of crush lobes 31-32 (
An elongated sensor 40 (see
As illustrated, the crush lobes are similarly-shaped and equally spaced-apart (except for some of the most outboard crush lobes, which are extended so that the outermost crush lobes 31 and 32 terminate in a same location at ends of the bumper beam 22, (see
The present arrangement accurately and reliably causes the sensor tube 40 to generate a signal indicating a crash has occurred, including a severity of the crash.
As noted, each crush lobe has a plurality of shear walls 33-36 that form a generally rectangular geometric shape with a face wall 37 that closes a forward end of each crush lobe. The shear walls 33-36 are curved slightly to facilitate predictable crumbling and good energy absorption (and to resist premature catastrophic failure during an impact), and also to facilitate molding. The shear walls 33-36 can be tuned to provide a two-stage level of impact resistance, with the first stage (illustrated by zone Z1,
In the second zone Z2, the shear walls 33-36 and front wall 37 form a box-like shape which provides excellent energy-absorbing characteristics (i.e. good force-deflection), including a quick rise in force of resistance during an initial impact stroke, and then a high level of continued resistance including substantial energy-absorbing dense-folding of shear walls during a further impact stroke. This is sometimes referred to as an efficient energy absorber in the industry, and is a desirable condition in vehicle bumper systems. In the first zone Z1, the shear walls 33-36 and base flange 30 are weakened by the apertures 42,43, such that a plurality of almost strap-like structures support the box-like shapes described above. The strap-like structures quickly collapse in zone Z1, leading to the softer impact resistance, described above, yet they operably support the box-like shapes in a manner maintaining the desirable energy-absorbing characteristics of the overall energy absorber system when an impact stroke fully collapsed zone Z1 and causes crushing of zone Z2.
The illustrated shear walls 33-36 (
Notably, the thick and thin wall structure 33A and 33B can be formed into injection molding tooling, and can be modified within the molding tooling, such that tuning of the crush lobes can be readily and relatively easily accomplished, even late in a bumper development program. This is seen as a very significant advantage. Also, the material can be changed late in a bumper development program to improved bumper test results. It is contemplated that the illustrated energy absorber can be made of polymeric materials such as PP, TPO, PC/PBT, that a wall thickness is typically 1 mm-4 mm, and that a preferred manufacturing process for forming the energy absorbers includes injection molding or thermoforming. Lobe dimensions can be varied significantly depending on the (higher) impact requirements of the upper row of crush lobes and the (lower/softer) impact requirements of the lower row of crush lobes. Particular preferred dimensions for the illustrated crush lobes 31, 32 were discussed above.
The sensor tube 40 (
The bumper system 21 described above combines with an apron 26 on the vehicle 20 for optimal pedestrian impact characteristics that minimize pedestrian leg injury (based on testing using the FLEX PLI leg-injury-simulating tester 15). Specifically, the apron 26 is attached to the vehicle frame and extends generally horizontally at a location spaced below the beam 22, such as at a height of a typical pedestrian's ankle. The beam 22 and top row 31 of crush lobes combine to define a high first force-deflection curve and relatively flat front that, upon impact by a barrier bumper impact tester 16 (see
An optimal system of crush lobes 32 and apron 26 defines a relatively flat front vehicle surface (referred to as “flatness” herein) so that, upon impact against a FLEX PLI pedestrian-leg-injury-simulating impact testing device 15, it provides a lower second force-deflection curve upon that provides reduced leg injury sufficient to pass FLEX PLI leg-injury-simulating impact testing. The term “flat front vehicle surface” is used herein to mean that a vertical cross section of the front surface defines a line that is relatively vertical and flat, even though a front on the vehicle is laterally curved/swept rearwardly near its fenders. Surprisingly, the flatness of the front vehicle surface, as defined by the lower crush lobes 32 and apron 26, works in part because the flatness tends to reduce a tendency of a struck pedestrian to fall under the vehicle as the vehicle continues to move forward after impact against the pedestrian. Also, a strength and relative position of the crush lobes 32 and apron 26 cause a good distribution of stress into the pedestrian's leg, regardless of where the impact occurs on the crush lobes 32 and apron 26.
The present innovation allows for consistent local loading laterally across vehicle during pedestrian impact (i.e. “on lobe” and “between lobe” impacts results in similar force-deflection curves). It also provides alternative load level for IIHS bumper barrier offset overlap impacts (i.e. one lower row of lobes is designed for pedestrian impact loading, and a second higher row of lobes are designed to provide a different/higher load for bumper barrier loading). It also allows consistent deformation of lobes at all locations, during pedestrian impacts, and therefore allows for integration of the silicone sensor tube.
The present design solves previous issues seen in other designs. For example, the present design maintains package space (lobe depth) and load performance is maintained. In other words, the present design does not require “extra” package space to meet impact force-deflection curve requirements, and yet high quality load performance is maintained. Also, the present innovation includes shear walls having stiff and “soft” wall structures (that provide optimal low-initial force of resistance to impact, while providing higher resistance to impact forces upon continued impact stroke), which structures are designed to provide benefits in injection molding tooling, such as reduced sensitivity of the molded part to core die shifting (which results in inconsistent wall thickness depth in molded parts). This improved molding and crush lobe tuning is achieved by “closing” crush initiation holes (i.e. the molded energy absorber does not have to include said crush initiation holes), since they are replaced by very thin wall sections (i.e. the soft wall structure 33B).
It is to be understood that variations and modifications can be made on the aforementioned structure without departing from the concepts of the present invention, and further it is to be understood that such concepts are intended to be covered by the following claims unless these claims by their language expressly state otherwise.
This application claims priority to Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 61/814,517, filed on Apr. 22, 2013, entitled BUMPER ENERGY ABSORBER WITH SENSOR AND OFFSET LOBES, the entire disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3933387 | Salloum et al. | Jan 1976 | A |
3938841 | Glance et al. | Feb 1976 | A |
4275912 | Bayer | Jun 1981 | A |
4925224 | Smiszek | May 1990 | A |
4941701 | Loren | Jul 1990 | A |
5139297 | Carpenter et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5290078 | Bayer et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5290079 | Syamal | Mar 1994 | A |
5425561 | Morgan | Jun 1995 | A |
5988713 | Okamura et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6068320 | Miyano | May 2000 | A |
6082792 | Evans et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6247745 | Carroll, III et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6315339 | Devilliers et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6398275 | Hartel et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6406081 | Mahfet et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6443513 | Glance | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6467821 | Hirota | Oct 2002 | B2 |
6575510 | Weissenborn | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6609740 | Evans | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6644701 | Weissenborn et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6663150 | Evans | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6669251 | Trappe | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6669252 | Roussel et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6672635 | Weissenborn et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6685243 | Evans | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6715592 | Suzuki et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6726262 | Marijnissen et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6746061 | Evans | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6758506 | Malteste et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6848730 | Evans | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6866313 | Mooijman | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6874832 | Evans et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6877785 | Evans et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6890009 | Murata et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6908127 | Evans | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6923494 | Shuler et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6938936 | Mooijman et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6949209 | Zander et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6962379 | Minami et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6994384 | Shuler et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
6997490 | Evans et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7031674 | Kataoka et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7044515 | Mooijman et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7052056 | Weissenborn et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7073831 | Evans | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7086690 | Shuler et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7134700 | Evans | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7144054 | Evans | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7144055 | Kimura et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7147258 | Evans et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7159911 | Nguyen et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7163242 | Shuler et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7163243 | Evans | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7172227 | Weissenborn et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7188876 | Jaarda et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7204545 | Roux et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7220374 | Zander et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7222896 | Evans | May 2007 | B2 |
7222897 | Evans et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7234741 | Reynolds et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7278667 | Mohapatra et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7296833 | Mohapatra et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7399014 | Mellis et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7494165 | Evans et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7575259 | Hasegawa | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7699367 | Evans et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7699383 | Fukukawa et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7733219 | Kamei et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7768381 | Takafuji et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7854453 | Tanabe | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7881843 | Murakami et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
8128140 | Tanabe | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8196979 | Ralston et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8368523 | Takahashi et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
20020060462 | Glance | May 2002 | A1 |
20020070584 | Carroll, III et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20030227183 | Weissenborn et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040036302 | Shuler et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040066048 | Mooijman et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040084910 | Amano et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040094977 | Shuler et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040174025 | Converse et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040201255 | Jonsson | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040256867 | Evans et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050269837 | Carroll, III et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060001277 | Mellis et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060018089 | Chou | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060043743 | Shuler et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060055187 | Jaarda et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060145491 | Shuler et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060261611 | Mohapatra et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070069535 | Mohapatra et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070108778 | Evans et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070210615 | Tamada | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20090206618 | Ralston et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090322107 | Takahashi et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100109354 | Agrahari et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20110109105 | Ralston et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20120061978 | Ralston et al. | Mar 2012 | A9 |
20130313841 | Mana et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2004018261 | Mar 2004 | WO |
2006127242 | Nov 2006 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20140312636 A1 | Oct 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61814517 | Apr 2013 | US |