Crumple Zone Lab Report

Aim: The aim of the experiment is to study and experiment the effect a crumple zone has on a collision.
The following experimental investigation regards the effect a crumple zone has on the impact of a collision. How it can be improved and what variables affect its effectiveness. In this experiment it was seen that after the data was recorded, that the most effective crumple zone was the Zigzag shape crumple zone. This was most likely because its shape deforms easily and acts like a spring therefore decreases the force on impact, whilst increasing the time. This result aligns with the hypothesis.
Recommendations would be to use different material as crumple zones, also to test if the shape of a car (not crumple zone) would change the outcome

of a collision.
(A short summary of the experimental investigation and its conclusions. It includes a statement of the aim, short description of the method, main results and a conclusion and implications or recommendations.)

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Relevance of Topic
Crumple zones. A genius creation that ensures the risk of a crash is minimised. Not impressed? Crumple zones from 1959 to today have saved many lives, more than can be recorded. Therefore it is imperative that research and experimentation must take place in order to find ways to improve crumple zones and their effectiveness. The investigation of crumple zones is relevant because without further investigation and study, the effectiveness of crumple zones cannot be enhanced.

1.2Background to Crumple Zone Context
The crumple zone (also called crush space) is a structural feature mainly used in automobiles and recently incorporated into railcars.

Crumple zones are designed to absorb the energy from the impact during a traffic collision by controlled deformation. The equation associated with the experimentation of crumple zones is I = ft (Impulses = force x time). In any given collision if, the time
(Seconds) is increased then the force (In Newtons) is decreased. If the time is decreased then the force is increased. Within the study of crumple zones it can be said that newtons first law of motion greatly applies. Newtons first law of motion states; an object will stay at rest or in uniform motion unless acted upon by an external unbalanced force. Theoretically the external unbalanced force is the crumple zone, although the crumple zone is neither unbalanced or external but rather quite controlled and internal. From research and subsequent experimental investigations, it was found that with increased time of a collision the force of the impact substantially decreased. This can be seen when comparing data from a long crumple zone to a short crumple zone. Although time and force play a huge role in the outcome of a collision other variables such as materials (what the crumple zone is made out of), size (large, medium, small crumple zone) and shape (whether the crumple zone is a rectangle, cone, cube, etc.) and the incline of the track (amount of text

books).

2.0 Experimental Investigation
2.1 Research Question

The world out there today is a dangerous place for motorists, with quick automobile advancements over the last few decades regarding speed, traction and manoeuvrability. It is experiments like these that need to take place in order to improve another major topic concerning automobiles, this being ‘safety’.
Research Question: By changing the size (regarding length) and shape of a crumple zone will this increase or decrease the force felt by a collision?

2.2 Hypothesis

If the length of a crumple zone is increased and the shape of the crumple zone has the ability to deform, then the force will decrease. So in simple terms if the time of the collision increases then the force of the collision will decrease.

2.3 Materials
- Paper (crumple zone)
- Plastic (sticky tape)

2.4 Equipment
- Sticky tape
- Spark
- Force meter
- Motion sensor
- 50cm Track x 2
- Text books x 6
- Retort stand
- Experimental toy car
- Connection cables

2.5 Procedure

Procedure for motion sensor:
Step 1) all equipment and apparatus was collected.
Step 2) all equipment and apparatus was assembled.
Step 3) three textbooks were placed underneath one end of the track to create a controlled incline.
Step 4) three text books were placed against the bottom of the track.
Step 5) a motion sensor was attached to the top of the track and plugged into the spark.
Step 6) the crumple zone was placed at the bottom of the track, resting on the track and against the text books to simulate a wall.
Step 7) the experimental toy car was placed at the top of the track, then released.
Step 8) the data was then recorded by the spark.

Procedure for force detector:
Step 1) all equipment and apparatus was collected.
Step 2) all equipment and apparatus was assembled.
Step 3) three textbooks were placed underneath one end of the track to create a controlled incline.
Step 4) three text books were placed against the bottom of the track.
Step 5) a force detector was attached to a retort stand placed at the bottom of the track.
Step 6) the crumple zone was placed at the bottom of the track, resting on the track and against the force detector to simulate a wall.
Step 7) the experimental toy car was placed at the top of the track, then released.
Step 8) the data was then recorded by the spark.

Modifications:
- The original incline of the track was 4 text books, we modified the incline to 3 text books because the experimental toy car kept pushing the force detector several centimetres each time on impact.
- It is an old myth that red cars travel faster for no particular reason at all, our starting experimental car was red, but it was replaced by a blue car in case the red car was faster.

2.6 Results
*The following raw data tables show only 10 points of data, these points are the first 10 substantial figures. Because the full versions are 15 pages long per table.
Trial 1 Zigzag shape crumple zone.
Time s Position m Velocity m/s Acceleration m/s/s
0 0.124
0.004 0.125 0.04
0.008 0.124 -0.22 -32.7
0.012 0.123 -0.22 36.9
0.016 0.123 0.08 49.1
0.02 0.123 0.17 8.8
0.024 0.124 0.15 -7.1
0.028 0.125 0.12 87.9
0.032 0.125 0.85 -10
0.036 0.131 0.04 -231.2
Table 1.

Graph 1.

Trial 3 Zigzag shape crumple zone.
Time s Position m Velocity m/s Acceleration m/s/s
0 0.123
0.004 0.124 0.17
0.008 0.125 0.2 -43
0.012 0.125 -0.17 -51
0.016 0.123 -0.21 45.9
0.02 0.124 0.2 50.6
0.024 0.125 0.2 -41.3
0.028 0.125 -0.13 -36.1
0.032 0.124 -0.09 47.9
0.036 0.125 0.25 -7.8
Table 3.

Graph 3.

Trial 2 Zigzag shape crumple zone.
Time s Position m Velocity m/s Acceleration m/s/s
0 0.125
0.004 0.125 0
0.008 0.125 0 0
0.012 0.125 0 0
0.016 0.125 0 0
0.02 0.125 0 0
0.024 0.125 0 -0.2
0.028 0.125 0 2.7
0.032 0.125 0.02 2.9
0.036 0.125 0.02 -0.2
Table 2

Graph 2.

Trial 1 Pyramid crumple zone.
Time s Position m Velocity m/s Acceleration m/s/s
0 0.125
0.004 0.125 0
0.008 0.125 0 -0.2
0.012 0.125 0 2.7
0.016 0.125 0.02 3.2
0.02 0.125 0.02 -2.7
0.024 0.125 0 -2.7
0.028 0.125 0 -2.7
0.032 0.125 -0.02 -3.2
0.036 0.125 -0.02 2.7
Table 4.

Table 4.

Trial 2 Pyramid crumple zone.
time s position m velocity m/s Acceleration m/s/s
0.06 0.125 0 0
0.064 0.125 0 0.2
0.068 0.125 0 -2.7
0.072 0.125 -0.02 -3.2
0.076 0.125 -0.02 2.7
0.08 0.125 0 2.9
0.084 0.125 0 -0.2
0.088 0.125 0 2.7
0.092 0.125 0.02 3.2
Table 5.

Graph 5.

Trial 3 Pyramid crumple zone.
time s position m velocity m/s acceleration m/s/s
0.124 0.125 0 -0.2
0.128 0.125 0 2.7
0.132 0.125 0.02 2.9
0.136 0.125 0.02 -0.2
0.14 0.125 0.02 2.4
0.144 0.125 0.04 5.4
0.148 0.126 0.06 2.9
0.152 0.126 0.06 31.2
0.156 0.126 0.31 47.6
0.16 0.128 0.45 -4
Table 6.

Graph 6.

Trial 1 cube crumple zone.
Time s Position m Velocity m/s Acceleration m/s/s
0 0.132
0.004 0.132 -0.13
0.008 0.131 -0.35 -17.8
0.012 0.129 -0.27 35.6
0.016 0.129 -0.07 0.1
0.02 0.129 -0.27 -37.3
0.024 0.126 -0.37 20
0.028 0.126 -0.11 40.4
0.032 0.126 -0.04 8.3
Table 7.

Graph 7.

Trial 2 cube crumple zone.
Time s Position m Velocity m/s Acceleration m/s/s
0 0.125
0.004 0.125 0
0.008 0.125 0.03 -2.4
0.012 0.125 -0.02 -6.1
0.016 0.125 -0.02 2.7
0.02 0.125 0 2.9
0.024 0.125 0 0
0.028 0.125 0 0
0.032 0.125 0 0
0.036 0.125 0 0
Table 8.

Graph 8.

Trial 3 cube crumple zone.
Time s Position m Velocity m/s Acceleration m/s/s
0 0.124
0.004 0.125 -0.13
0.008 0.123 -0.13 41.3
0.012 0.124 0.2 36.6
0.016 0.125 0.16 -49.6
0.02 0.125 -0.2 -42.7
0.024 0.123 -0.18 53.2
0.028 0.124 0.23 33
0.032 0.125 0.08 -44.2
0.036 0.125 -0.12 -0.2
Table 9.

Graph 9.

(Only significant qualitative and/or quantitative data collected that is presented sequentially in appropriately formatted tables that are easily read. This includes raw data, calculations & graphs where appropriate. Any peripheral experiments which investigate the relationships between dependent and independent variables should also be included.)

Graph 10.

Graph 11.

Graph 12.

Graph 13.

Graph 14.

Graph 15.

Graph 16.

Graph 17.

3.0 Discussion
3.1 Analysis of Results

3.1.1 Primary Data / Secondary Data
The aim of this experiment was to study and experiment the effect a crumple zone has on a collision. In the experiment we tested 4 different crumple zones in order to see the influencing factors that take part in the duration of a collision regarding the scientific aspect. For example, the relationship between the force of a collision and time of a collision (impulse). Thus being said if we were to plot a graph concerning force and time, it could be concluded that the gradient formed from the relationship of the force-times graph would result in impulses. From the information stated above an equation can be explicitly seen, this being (Impulses = force x time). By discerning which test (crumple zone) experiences the least amount of force, we would be able to determine which crumple zone is more effective. If the car experiences a high amount of force in a short time than the crumple zone isn’t very effective, whereas if the car experiences a low amount of force over a longer period of time than the crumple zone is very effective.
The following analysis of data is all primary, gathered from first hand experimentation;
Graph 1:

(A systematic analysis of primary data to identify relationships between patterns, trends, errors and anomalies is to be included. Secondary data should be included where appropriate and its source clearly stated. Analysis and comparison of both types of data should also be included.)

3.1.2 Application of Algorithms
(Linking and application of algorithms, concepts, principles, theories and schema)

3.2 Analysis and Evaluation of Experiment

3.2.1 Procedural Evaluation
(Evaluation of problems and difficulties encountered in the process of determining the final procedure and other experiments that could have been done to improve the match between experimental results theory)

3.2.2 Evaluation of the data with reference to the physics involved.
(Analysis and evaluation of your data and relationships found with respect to theory)

3.3 Justification of Experiment Design, Modification and Refinement
(Justify your choice of experiments and any refinements with respect to your research question)

3.4 Conclusions and Recommendations
(Explore your outcomes providing justified conclusions / recommendations)

References
(Use the Harvard referencing system)
Appendices
(These include experimental data, observations and literature tables/values that have helped in drawing the final conclusions and have been cited in the report but not directly pertinent to the final result).