Design of Hood Stiffener of a Sedan Car for

Pedestrian Safety
Ramesh C. K.1, Dr. Srikari S.2, Suman M. L. J. 3
1- M. Sc. [Engg.] Student, 2-Professor, 3-Asst. Professor
Automotive and Aeronautical Engineering,
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies, Bangalore 560 058

Abstract
Safety is the most important criteria in automobile designs which concentrates on both pedestrian and occupant
safety. The pedestrians are the most vulnerable road users and are at high risk of traffic accidents. The major reason for
the fatality of the pedestrian in traffic accident is due to the head injury resulting from the hard impact of the head against
the stiffer hood or the ground. This leads to the necessity of new inner hood panel which is less stiffer and pedestrian
friendly.
The head impact analysis on the present hood of the car was done to study the response of the adult head form at two
different locations. Structural and modal analysis for the same present hood assembly was done to observe the local and
global stiffness. In order to reduce the head injury of the pedestrian the local stiffness over the area of head impact has to
be reduced thus the new design of hood inner panel was focused on that and the structural and modal analysis was done
for the new design. The design with lesser local stiffness and similar global stiffness compared to the existing hood was
finalized.
The head impact analysis for the new design of hood inner panel was performed. The HIC values of the adult head
form for two different locations are found to be 706 and 948 which meets the safety limitations of the adult head
acceleration during impact as proposed by EEVC WG17 and Euro NCAP regulations. Thus the new design of the hood is
pedestrian friendly, considerably maintaining the overall global stiffness of the hood.
Key Words: Pedestrian Safety, Head Injury Criteria, Stiffness, Inner Hood Panel

Nomenclature 1.1 Pedestrian -Vehicle Collision

A Acceleration (mm/s2) Pedestrian injuries and fatalities at the time of vehicle
ρ Density (ton/mm3) collision are mainly due to the speed differential. The
t Time (s) pedestrian kinematics during collision depends on the
v Velocity (mm/s) position of the pedestrian and the vehicle speed, the
average speed of the vehicle at the time of crash is 40
Abbreviations km/h.[1] Figure 1.1 shows the type of vehicle which is
CG Centre of Gravity involved in the road traffic accidents, and it can be
DOF Degrees of freedom observed that maximum in case of cars.
EEVC European Enhanced Vehicle-Safety
Committee
HIC Head Injury Criteria
NCAC National Crash Analysis Centre
NCAP New Car Assessment Program
WAD Wrap Around Distance

1. INTRODUCTION
Pedestrians are the most vulnerable road users who are
at the high risk of vehicle collisions in traffic, Almost
1.2 million pedestrians are killed annually in road
traffic accidents worldwide. The major injuries occur in
lower, upper leg and head of the pedestrian, where the
fatalities of the pedestrians in the accident is mainly due
to head injury resulting from the hard impact of the
head against the stiff hood or to the ground. In recent
years, engineers are working on the vehicle front end
design which includes bumper and hood to reduce the
injuries to the pedestrians in the event of pedestrian-
vehicle collision.

Fig. 1 Vehicles types involved in pedestrian

accidents, crash fatalities [2, 3]

SASTECH Journal 67 Volume 11, Issue 2, Sep 2012

From figure 1 it is seen that the proportion of crash The locations selected has different hood structure and
fatalities shows that 12% of them are pedestrians and clearance to the under hood engine parts for the impact
the rest of those killed in the crash are vehicle test. First point ‘a’ was considered as open impact area,
occupants, motorcyclists and others. The sequence of where the hood had no reinforcement and had large
events in car pedestrian accident happens in such a way clearance to the engine. The second point ‘b’ was the
that the lower leg of the pedestrian is first hit by the alternator impact point which had no reinforcement but
bumper and then the upper thigh comes in contact with less clearance with the alternator and the third point ‘c’
the bonnet leading edge of the car and finally the head had heavy hood reinforcement with less clearance. The
and the upper torso is struck hardly by the top surface tested results showed higher HIC value at point c where
of the stiff car bonnet which has rigid parts like engine there was less clearance and then followed by points b
under the hood that leads to serious head injury and and a, which was similar to that of the actual case. The
fatalities of the pedestrian. similarity of the results encourages the use of these
techniques to make connection with injuries due to
accident and acceleration or force measurement in
accident reconstruction.
Tsukatada Matsumoto, Koushi Kumagai and Hideaki
Arimoto.[9] has described the importance of shape of
the hood inner panel as the important factor for
pedestrian head protection in order to reduce the HIC
values. The section geometry of the hood inner frame
has been optimised to achieve the targeting value of
HIC, where the height of cross section of the inner
panel was 0.76 times smaller than the original one and
width of the panel was 1.14 times larger than the
original hood inner panel and the thickness of the panel
was maintained the same. Finally the test results
showed that the optimized shape has improved the
probability of achieving the target HIC value by 60% to
Fig. 1 Pedestrian injury region based on the severity 99%.
[4]
Dr. Grace Mary Thompson, Christoph Kerkeling and
From figure 2 it is seen that among the various injury Joachim Schafer.[6] described the structural hood
regions like leg, head, thorax, neck, arm, abdomen, the concepts for pedestrian protection where they used two
leg region has more contribution of about 41% and 50 different concepts of hood to replace the traditional
% in minor and serious injuries followed by the arm and hood which was designed to meet the standard load
abdomen region. In case of pedestrian death, it is cases. They designed inner hood with one having
caused mainly due to the head injury with maximum increased number of ribs and the other with multiple
contribution of 60% which leads to focus on pedestrian cone drawn structure instead of rib structure using
head protection [4]. aluminium. This structure did not have any ribs or
2. LITERATURE REVIEW cutouts which had continuous stiffness distribution over
the panel and it was easy to change the overall stiffness
European enhanced vehicle-safety committee (EEVC as strong or weak. Pedestrian head protection was done
WG17).[1] describes the sub system test procedures for by reducing inner panel gage thereby reducing the
pedestrian safety during vehicle collision. For bonnet stiffness of the hood.
top tests the adult head form is created as per the EEVC
WG17 regulation, where the outer skin of the head is Scattina A., Gaviglio I., Belingardi G., Chiandussi G.,
about 12mm thick and the material assigned is PVC and Gobetto E.[10] has described about the redesign of
instead of Poly urethane which was used earlier and the bonnet targeting lightweight and pedestrian safety.
outer diameter of the head form is 165mm. The inner They analysed five different concepts with different
skull is made of sphere and the material assigned is materials for the inner and outer hood in which three of
aluminium. The mass of the adult head form is 4.8 kg. them showed most promising solutions. The first
The impact position of the adult head form on the concept ‘C1’ was the inner hood with three long ribs
bonnet for testing is given by the Wrap around distance which was made of short glass fibre polyamide that has
of 1500 – 2100 mm and the head form is inclined to 650 good thermal properties and the outer skin was
with respect to ground reference line, also the test aluminium which offered a good pedestrian safety. In
points should be within 82.5mm inside the bonnet side the second concept ‘C2’ the central portion of the inner
reference line and rear reference line and each test panel was removed and full aluminium was
points should be 165mm apart. implemented taking into consideration only the
pedestrian safety and excluding the strength of the
Jason A. Stammen, Roger A. Saul and Brian Ko.,[8] has hood. The results showed that use of aluminium is the
assessed the proposed head impact test procedures by best solution for achieving weight reduction and
the ISO and EEVC with laboratory impact tests and pedestrian safety.
computer simulation and the results were compared
with the actual case. Ford Taurus car model was taken Finally in the third concept ‘C3’ a hybrid metal/plastic
for test and three different locations namely a, b and c bonnet design with a net internal structure was studied.
was marked on the hood. The bonnet was made of external aluminium skin, a
void internal structure in aluminium and net wire made
of polyamide reinforced with glass fibres which lead to

SASTECH Journal 68 Volume 11, Issue 2, Sep 2012

further weight reduction and better energy distribution  Structural Analysis for the existing hood was
during impact between the pedestrian head and the done to assess the deformation of the hood
bonnet. The torsional stiffness of the hood was very low assembly under various load cases.
when compared to that of the original and thus was  Design and modeling of new hood concepts
considered as a concept design. was done focusing on lower local stiffness.
Masoumi A., Mohammad Hassan Shojaeefard and Amir  Structural analysis for the modified hood
Najibi,[11] compared and analyzed steel, aluminium assembly was done and the deformation of
and composite bonnet for pedestrian protection. Finite the hood under various load cases was
element model head impactor was created and impact compared with the original hood to arrive at
simulation on three bonnets with identical structure best inner hood structure.
made of steel, aluminium and composite material was  Head impact analysis on the finalized design
done on different locations of the bonnet to study the of modified hood was done.
behaviour of the bonnet. From the results it was  Comparison of the results obtained through
concluded that use of aluminium bonnet resulted in design improvements with the earlier results
lower HIC and increase in head displacement when was done.
compared to that of steel and it was 50% lighter than 5. FEA MODEL SETUP
steel bonnet which failed in strength factors. Where as
composite bonnet resulted in lowest HIC value and
5.1 FE Model for Baseline Head Impact Test
highest head displacement, besides good torsional The front end of the car was extracted from the full
stiffness and light weight. Finally, the modification of vehicle model of ford taurus developed by National
inner structure which may provide lower displacement, Crash Analysis Centre (NCAC) which was essential for
lower HIC and less displacement of head form was the baseline head impact test. The extracted front end
suggested. model of the car contains components namely Inner and
Outer hood, Fenders, Engine shields, Engine, Intake air
Christian Pinecki, Richard Zeitouni.,[12] discussed
manifold and Tie bar module. The finite element model
about the pedestrian head protection by providing
of all these components consists of 38662 elements.
clearance between the bonnet and under hood engine
components and softening of the bonnet to generate
more progressive head deceleration during impact so
that the impactors do not come into contact with the
rigid elements. Active bonnet system was used to
provide space between the bonnet and the under hood
engine components during impact for the vehicles
which has insufficient under hood space. This system
deploys as soon as the impact with the pedestrian is
detected and the space under the bonnet is increased
artificially in order to prevent head from impacting hard
points. Fig. 3 Front end finite element model of
Collapsible bonnet arrester was used for softening of benchmarked vehicle
the bonnet to generate more progressive head
5.2 Positioning of Head Form
deceleration during head impact on bonnet. The
collapsible bonnet arrester works in a way that when The finite element model of the adult head form was
head impacts the bonnet, the top layer of bonnet positioned over the hood of the car as per EEVC WG17
deforms and deflects to press the arresters beneath the regulation. Initially the adult head form was imported
bonnet which is designed to collapse after certain into the finite element model of the car and then the
amount of load is received and this leads to increase in adult head form was rotated so that the angle of
the deceleration time of the head and preventing the inclination of the head form was in 650 with respect to
head from moving down further to hit the rigid parts. the ground and then the head form was placed between
the Wrap around distance (WAD) of 1500 - 2100
3. PROBLEM STATEMENT mm[1] for adult pedestrians, considering the limitation
“To study the head injury criteria of the pedestrian with that the test points should be within 82.5mm inside the
the present hood of the sedan car and to reduce the hood side reference line and rear reference line and
same by redesigning the hood structure” each test points should be 165mm apart.

4. METHODOLOGY The baseline head impact analysis was done at two

positions, First the head form was placed at centre of
 Review of various literatures present in the hood which was 100mm from the rear reference line
journals, books, manuals and related technical of the hood and the second position was 350mm left
papers were carried out. from the centre of the hood and 150mm from the rear
 Finite element modeling and validating the reference line of the hood.
adult head form as per EEVC WG17 and
Euro NCAP regulation was done.
 Head impact analysis for the present hood
was done and the pedestrian head injury level
was assessed.

SASTECH Journal 69 Volume 11, Issue 2, Sep 2012

 5.6.1 Oil Canning Analysis [15]
Oil Canning analysis was done in order to find the local
stiffness of the hood assembly at the location where the
point load was acting. The boundary condition for this
analysis is based on the hood hinge and latch points.
Point A and B in the figure 6 represent the hinge points
of the hood and point C represents the latch point. At
point A and B all the five degrees of freedom namely
Position 1 Position 2 translational motion UX, UY, UZ and rotational motion
Fig. 4 Head form impact positions on the hood RY, RZ are arrested without arresting the rotational
motion RX. At point C in the hood all the six degrees of
5.3Initial Velocity of Head form freedom including RX is arrested. A concentrated load
of 50N was applied at two different locations on the
Since the average speed of the vehicle is 40 km/h
hood as shown in figure 6.
during the pedestrian vehicle traffic collision and the
head form velocity is 80% of the vehicle speed. The
resultant velocity of the head form for the impact
analysis was taken as 30 km/h. Since the head form was
rotated to 650 the resultant velocity of the component
was resolved into horizontal and vertical components as
shown in figure 5.The node set was created by selecting
all the nodes of the head form and the velocity for the
head form was assigned by selecting the created node
set ID in the load collector.
5.4 Model Setup for Structural and Modal
Analysis
As the analysis was done on the hood assembly to find
the stiffness, strength and natural frequencies of the Fig. 6 Boundary conditions and load case for oil
hood, the finite element model of the Ford Taurus hood canning analysis
assembly was extracted from the full vehicle model
developed by NCAC. The hood assembly consists of 5.6.2 Self Weight Analysis [15]
two components namely outer hood and inner hood Self weight analysis was done in order to find the global
stiffener. stiffness of the hood assembly and the boundary
V Cos650
condition for this analysis is same as oil canning
analysis discussed above. The loading for this case is
650
the gravitational force of the hood assembly itself.
5.6.3 Torsion Analysis [16]
Torsion analysis was done in order to find the torsional
stiffness of the hood. The boundary condition for this
analysis is as follows,
 Initially all the six degrees of freedom i.e.,
translation and rotational motion about all the
V V Sin650 three directions were arrested at Points A, B
and C as Shown in figure 7
Fig. 5 Initial velocity for head form  At the latch point i.e. point D of the hood only
5.5 Finite Element Model for Ansys Solver the translation motion UX, UY and UZ were
arrested and rotational motions RX, RY and
The finite element hood model extracted was defined in RZ are free.
LS Dyna deck and thus it was redefined for Ansys deck  A point load of 100N was applied at the Point
in Hypermesh. The hood assembly was considered to be E.
a single component in order to find the stiffness and
strength of the complete hood assembly and thus the
outer hood and inner frame was connected by means of
1-D rigid element (CERIG) by selecting the node to
node option.
5.6 Boundary Conditions and Load Cases
Three different structural analysis of the hood such as
oil canning, self weight and torsion analysis were done
in order to find the local, global and torsional stiffness
of the hood assembly respectively. Fig. 7 Boundary conditions and load case for torsion
analysis

SASTECH Journal 70 Volume 11, Issue 2, Sep 2012

6. PROBLEM SOLVING the head form resultant acceleration in the drop test a
node at the centre of the head form is selected. Figure 9
6.1 Introduction shows the resultant acceleration at the C.G of the head
The main objective of the work is to reduce the head form and the maximum acceleration is 2.642e6 mm/s2
injury (HIC) value of pedestrian in the event of which is equal to 269g. According to Euro NCAP
pedestrian vehicle collision. The reason for high HIC proposal the acceleration of the adult head form with
value is that in the event of collision head of the 4.8 kg of mass should be within the limit of 225g to
pedestrian comes in contact with the hood of the car 275g and from the above it is evident that the resultant
which is stiffer due to the inner reinforcement of the acceleration of the head form lies within the limit.
hood providing strength. Thus the stiffness of the Thus the adult head form is validated and it can be used
present hood was found by structural analysis and a for further head impact analysis on the hood for
new inner hood reinforcement structure was designed assessing the head injury of the pedestrian.
focusing on reduced local stiffness to reduce the head
injury of the pedestrian. 6.3 Baseline Model Head Impact Analysis
6.2 Validation of Head Form The head impact analysis on the hood for baseline
model was done in order to study the response of the
The finite element model of the head form was head form in the present hood. The impact analysis was
validated as proposed by EEVC WG17 and Euro NCAP performed at two locations on the hood as shown in
regulation in order to use the head form in head impact figure 4. The simulation of the head impact analysis on
analysis on the hood. the hood for the two locations is shown in figure 10
6.2.1 Head Form Impactor Test Also it is seen that during the impact of the head form,
hood structure deforms in order to absorb the energy
This impactor test on the adult head form was done as produced by head.
per the proposal of EEVC WG17 regulation. In order to
find the head form resultant acceleration in the impactor
test a node at the centre of the head form is selected.

Fig. 8 Head resultant acceleration of impactor test

Figure 8 shows the resultant acceleration at the C.G of
the head form and the maximum acceleration is 3.852e6 Fig. 10 Head impact simulation at various timestep
mm/s2 which is equal to 392g. According to EEVC for baseline model position 1 and position 2
WG17 the acceleration of the adult head form with 4.8 Table. 2 Acceleration and HIC values for baseline
kg of mass should be within the limit of 337.5g to model
412.5g. Thus the resultant acceleration of the head form
lies within the limit. Head Form Position Acceleration (g) HIC Obtained HIC Required

Position 1 409 2144 < 1000

6.2.2 Head Form Drop Test
Position 2 368 2400 < 1000

6.4 Baseline Structural and Modal Analysis

The structural analysis for the baseline hood assembly
model was done in order to find out the local, global,
torsional stiffness values and natural frequencies of the
present hood.
Table. 3 Displacement and Stress values of baseline
model for various load cases
SI No Type of Analysis Displacement (mm) von Mises Stress (MPa)

1 Oil Canning 0.107 16.41

2 Self Weight 0.047 6.09

Fig. 9 Head resultant acceleration of drop test
3 Torsion 0.36 31.5
The drop test on the adult head form was done as per
the proposal of Euro NCAP regulation. In order to find

SASTECH Journal 71 Volume 11, Issue 2, Sep 2012

Thus the deformation and stress values of the baseline frequencies of this concept 2 are also similar to the
model analysis are taken as the benchmark for further baseline model. Thus the concept 2 was finalized for
design of the hood inner panel. From oil canning head impact analysis to analyze the head form
analysis it is seen that the deflection of the hood is acceleration at different locations.
0.107 mm for the load of 50N and thus the local
stiffness of the hood is 467.2 N/mm. Table. 3 Comparison of structural analysis results
of modified hood with baseline
6.5 Design and Selection of Modified Hood
Inner Panel
The HIC value is directly proportional to stiffness and
inversely proportional to the deformation of the hood.
Thus in order to design the hood for pedestrian
friendliness the inner panel of the hood which provides
reinforcement to the outer hood panel is redesigned
focusing on reducing the local stiffness of the hood and
thereby increasing the deformation of the hood.

Table. 4 Comparison of natural frequencies of

baseline and modified model

Fig. 11 New design hood inner panels A, B and C

Stiffness of the component varies either by changing the
geometry of the component or by changing the material 7.3 Modified Hood Model Head Impact
properties of the component. In this work the stiffness Analysis
of the hood was varied by changing the geometry of the Head impact analysis for the modified hood was done
hood. Figure 11 shows three designs of the hood inner and the results of the head acceleration for the modified
panel which has smaller cross section ribs in the area of hood were compared with baseline model.
head impact. The model was created in CATIA V5 as a
surface model and was meshed in Hypermesh.
In order to finalise the new design of hood inner panel
from the above three again the structural and modal
analysis for the three concepts were performed and
results of the three concepts namely local stiffness,
global stiffness, torsional stiffness and the modal
frequencies is compared with the benchmarked baseline
model.
7. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
7.1 Structural and Modal Analysis of Modified
Hood
Structural Analysis of the modified hood assembly for
the three concepts was done to find out the local, global,
torsional and natural frequencies of the modified hood
structures. From that, the hood inner panel concept Fig. 12 Head impact simulation at various time step
which has lower local stiffness and similar global, for concept 2 at position 1 and position 2
torsional stiffness was selected.
7.2 Results of Modified Hood Inner Panel
The Summary of the results for the structural analysis
of the modified hood inner panel concepts are shown in
table 3. From Table 3 and 4 it is evident that the
modified hood inner panel concept 2 has less local
stiffness when compared to the others and the global
and torsional stiffness values of this model is almost
similar to that of the baseline hood model. The natural Fig. 13 Comparison of HIC for concept 2 and
baseline hood model at position 1

SASTECH Journal 72 Volume 11, Issue 2, Sep 2012

 the Injury Severity of Pedestrians In Real World
Accidents” Paper Number 05-0352.
[3] National Pedestrian Crash Report, June 2008,
“U.S Department of Transportation – National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration” DOT HS
810 968,
[4] Yuji Ono., Yukikazu komiyama., and Kunio
Yamazaki., “Introduction Of Pedestrian Head
Protection Performance Test In J-Ncap” Paper
Fig. 14 Comparison of HIC for concept 2 and Number 05-0307.
baseline hood model at position 2 [5] Jikuang Yang, February 28, 2002, “Review of
Injury Biomechanics in Car -Pedestrian
Figure 13 and 14 shows the comparison of HIC values Collisions” (Report to European Pasive Safety
and it was seen that the acceleration of the head form Network),
was reduced when compared to that of the baseline [6] Dr.Grace Mary Thompson, Christoph Kerkeling
model. This is because the stiffness of the hood in the and Joachim Schafer., “Structural Hood and
impact area was reduced and the deformation of the Hinge Concepts for Pedestrian Protection” Paper
hood was more thereby absorbing more amount of Number 05-0304.
impact energy. Also there is no secondary acceleration [7] Sarath Babu Kamalakkannan, 2004, “MADYMO
of the head due to components underneath the hood Modeling of the IHRA Pedestrian head form
because of more clearance between the hood and the impactor” A thesis presented in partial fulfilment
engine components. of the requirements for the Degree of Master
Table. 5 Comparison of HIC of head for baseline Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State
and concept 2 hood model University.
[8] Jason A. Stammen, Roger A. Saul and Brian Ko.,
”Pedestrian Head Impact Testing And Pcds
Reconstructions” Paper 326.
[9] Tsukatada Matsumoto, Koushi Kumagai and
Hideaki Arimoto.,”Development of Robust
Design Method in Pedestrian Impact Test” SAE
Paper 2007-01-0881.
Table 5 shows the comparison of HIC value and the [10] Scattina A., Gaviglio I., Belingardi G.,
head acceleration of the baseline and concept 2 hood Chiandussi G., and Gobetto E., “Redisign of A
model. It was seen that due to lower local stiffness of Front Bonnet Targetted to Lightweight and
the concept 2 hood model the HIC value and the Pedestrian Safety By Virtual Techniques”
resultant head acceleration has been reduced. HIC Faculty of Mechanics And Technology,
values for the concept 2 hood model at two different University of Pitesti, Italy.
positions are 706 and 948 respectively which are well [11] Masoumi A., Mohammad Hassan Shojaeefard
within 1000 as proposed by EEVC WG17 for the safety and Amir Najibi., May 4, 2010 “Comparison of
of the pedestrian and thus the modified hood inner steel, aluminum and composite bonnet in terms
panel concept 2 of the sedan car is pedestrian friendly. of pedestrian head impact” Automotive
8. CONCLUSIONS Engineering Department, Iran University of
Science & Technology, Iran.
Head impact analysis was simulated in present hood
and the hic value was found to be 2144 and 2400 at two [12] Christian Pinecki, Richard Zeitouni., “Technical
locations. These values exceed the adult head form solutions for enhancing the pedestrian
limitation of 1000.redesign of the hood inner panel was protection” Paper number 07-0307.
carried out considering the hood design requirements. [13] National Crash Analysis Centre, http
Head impact analysis with modified hood was //www.ncac.gwu.edu/vml/models.html, May 12
simulated and the hic values are found to be 760 and 2008, Retrieved on September 21 2011.
948 at two locations which are within the target value. [14] Akarsh S, March 2009, “Design of a sedan
Thus the new design of the hood is pedestrian friendly, bonnet to reduce pedestrian head injury”,
considerably maintaining the overall global stiffness of MSRSAS, Bangalore.
the hood.
[15] Dae Young Kwak, Jin Ho Jeong, Jae Sevng
REFERENCES Cheon and Yong Taek Im., “Optimal Design of
Composite Hood with Reinforcing Ribs through
[1] EEVC Working Group 17 Report., “Improved Stiffness Analysis”, Retrieved on February 6
test methods to evaluate pedestrian protection 2012.
afforded by passenger cars” (December 1998 [16] D-Col, F-Furini, O-Mueller, R-Trivero., “Static
with September 2002 updates). Vibrational Design of a Bonnet with Frame
[2] Jikuang Yang., Jianfeng Yao and Dietmar Otte., Topological Optimisation”, Retrieved on
“Correlation of Different Impact Conditions to February 14 2012.

SASTECH Journal 73 Volume 11, Issue 2, Sep 2012