0DVWHU

V'HJUHH7KHVLV
,651%7+$07(;'6(


'HVLJQDQG$QDO\VLVRI6KLSSLQJ

&RQWDLQHUPDGHRI+RQH\FRPE


6DQGZLFK3DQHOV


3UDVKDQWK.XPDU&KDZD
6DL.XVKDO0XNNDPDOD

'HSDUWPHQWRI0HFKDQLFDO(QJLQHHULQJ
%OHNLQJH,QVWLWXWHRI7HFKQRORJ\
.DUOVNURQD6ZHGHQ


6XSHUYLVRUV $QVHO%HUJKXYXG%7+
2
 Design and Analysis of Truck
container made of Honeycomb
Sandwich panels
Prashanth Kumar Chawa
Sai Kushal Mukkamala

Department of Mechanical Engineering Blekinge Institute of Technology,

Karlskrona, Sweden. 2017
Thesis submitted for completion of Master of Science in Mechanical
Engineering with emphasis on Structural Mechanics at the Department of
Mechanical Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden.

Abstract:
This paper applies to the design and simulation of a shipping container
made of sandwich panels. The amount of stresses acting on the body of
the container is calculated and is optimized to reduce stresses for the
better design output of the structure. The design aims to produce an
application to reduce the tare weight of the container in order to increase
the payload. Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is performed to evaluate the
strength of structures of both old and new models helps us to compare
which model is better and more efficient. Complete design and analysis
is performed using Autodesk Inventor.
Keywords:
Finite Element Analysis, Autodesk Inventor, Honeycomb structures,
Design and Simulation.

3
Acknowledgements

This work was carried out at the Department of Mechanical Engineering,

Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden, under the
supervision of Prof. Ansel Berghuvad
Firstly, we would like to thank our supervisor Ansel Berghuvad for giving
his valuable guidance and help during the project and throughout the course
study. We are really grateful to him for the support he provided when we
are in difficult time. The project could have not been successful without his
guidance and also a special thanks for evaluating my work.
We also would like to thank my friends who helped us in carrying out the
project without any struggles. They are always with us whenever we need
some help.
We would like to thank Mechanical Engineering Department of Blekinge
Institute of Technology for providing access to lab equipment and to the
required software’s.

Karlskrona, January 2018

Prashanth Kumar Chawa,

Sai Kushal Mukkamala

4
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ...............................................................................................................4
Figures: .................................................................................................................................7
Tables: ...................................................................................................................................9
Notation...............................................................................................................................10
Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................11
1 Background ......................................................................................................................12
2 Introduction ....................................................................................................................12
2.1 Problem Description ..................................................................................................14
2.2 Aim and Objectives ...................................................................................................15
2.3 Research Question .....................................................................................................15
3 Related Work ..............................................................................................................16
4 Studied Model .............................................................................................................17
4.1 Material Data and Material Model ............................................................................19
4.2 Stacking .....................................................................................................................22
4.2.1 Advantages of container stacking .......................................................................22
4.2.2 Disadvantages of container stacking: .................................................................23
4.3 Manufacturing methods of sandwich panels ............................................................. 23
4.3.1 Continuous panel production..............................................................................23
4.3.2 Discontinuous panel production .........................................................................24
5 Method Overview........................................................................................................25
6. Autodesk Inventor ...........................................................................................................27
7 FE Analysis for integral parts (Panels) ...........................................................................28
7.1 Design .......................................................................................................................28
7.2 Materials....................................................................................................................29
7.2.1 Benefits of using XPS and EPS foam sheets ......................................................29
7.3 Meshing .....................................................................................................................30
7.4 Results .......................................................................................................................31
7.5 Comparison ...............................................................................................................36
8 Finite Element Analysis of the Complete Model ........................................................37
8.1 Design Description ....................................................................................................37
.........................................................................................................................................39
8.2 Assembly ...................................................................................................................40
8.3. Loading ....................................................................................................................41
8.4 Meshed model ...........................................................................................................42
8.5 Material Usage ..........................................................................................................44
8.5.1 Replacement for the panels ....................................................................................45
8.6 Parts for assembly .....................................................................................................47
8.7 Results .......................................................................................................................49
8.7.1 Stress analysis on the Existing model ...........................................................49
8.7.2 Stacking model ..................................................................................................51
8.7.3 Honeycomb structured model ............................................................................53
9 Comparison of results .................................................................................................56
10 Summary and Conclusions .....................................................................................57
10.1 Discussion .............................................................................................................57
10.2 Conclusion...............................................................................................................58
10.3 Future works............................................................................................................59
5
References: ..........................................................................................................................60
APPENDIX .........................................................................................................................61

6
Figures:

Figure 2 1 CAD model of the sandwich panel ............................................ 12

Figure 2 2 CAD model of the honeycomb core ........................................... 13
Figure 2 3 CAD model of the container with honeycomb structure ........... 14
Figure 4 1 Standard and high cube dry containers .................................... 19
Figure 5 1 Flow chart of the method followed ............................................ 25
Figure 7 1 Integral part of the container panel .......................................... 28
Figure 7 2 Meshed model of the integral sandwich panel .......................... 30
Figure 7 3 Stress distribution on the integral part of the container ........... 32
Figure 7 4 Displacement of the integral part .............................................. 33
Figure 7 5 Stress distribution on the sandwich panel ................................. 34
Figure 7 6 Dispacement of the sandwich panel .......................................... 35
Figure 8 1 Corner casting ........................................................................... 38
Figure 8 2 Lock rod ..................................................................................... 38
Figure 8 3 side panel ................................................................................... 39
Figure 8 4 Floor plate ................................................................................. 39
Figure 8 5 Assembled model ....................................................................... 40
Figure 8 6 uniformly distributed load and the fixed constraint .................. 41
Figure 8 7 Meshed model ............................................................................ 42
Figure 8 8 Mesh settings ............................................................................. 42
Figure 8 9 Honeycomb core ........................................................................ 44
Figure 8 10 Container parts ....................................................................... 47
Figure 8 11 Full model after assembly ....................................................... 48
Figure 8 12 Stress distribution on the existing model (Aluminium) ........... 49
Figure 8 13 Displacement ........................................................................... 50
Figure 8 14 Safety factor of the existing model .......................................... 50
Figure 8 15 Stress distribution on the stacked container............................ 51
Figure 8 16Displacement on the stacked container .................................... 51
Figure 8 17 Safety factor of stacked container ........................................... 52
Figure 8 18 Stress distribution on the honeycomb structure ...................... 53
Figure 8 19 Displacement of the honeycomb structure .............................. 54
Figure 8 20 Safety factor............................................................................. 55
Figure Ap 1 floor joist over floor pocket..................................................... 62
Figure Ap 2 floor joist ................................................................................. 62
Figure Ap 3 End rail rear ........................................................................... 63
Figure Ap 4 Top End rail rear .................................................................... 63
Figure Ap 5 Door rail ................................................................................. 64
Figure Ap 6 Door post ................................................................................ 64
7
Figure Ap 7 Corner post ............................................................................. 65
Figure Ap 8 Base rail 20 feet ...................................................................... 65
Figure Ap 9 Base side rail .......................................................................... 66
Figure Ap 10 Base rail ................................................................................ 66
Figure Ap 11 Fork pocket ........................................................................... 67
Figure Ap 12 Door post end........................................................................ 67
Figure Ap 13 Door pocket ........................................................................... 67
Figure Ap 14 Door plate ............................................................................. 68
Figure Ap 15 Side panel rib ........................................................................ 68
Figure Ap 16 Roof panel ............................................................................. 68
Figure Ap 17 Roof joist ............................................................................... 69
Figure Ap 18 M12*80 ................................................................................. 69
Figure Ap 19 M12*40 ................................................................................. 69
Figure Ap 20 M12 spring washer ............................................................... 70
Figure Ap 21 M12 nut ................................................................................. 70
Figure Ap 22 M12 washer........................................................................... 70
Figure Ap 23 Lock rod lever ....................................................................... 71
Figure Ap 24 Lock rod keep ........................................................................ 71
Figure Ap 25 Lock rod latch ....................................................................... 72
Figure Ap 26 Lock rod bracket ................................................................... 72
Figure Ap 27 Lip rail .................................................................................. 72
Figure Ap 28 Short hinge spacer ................................................................ 73
Figure Ap 29 Long hinge spacer ................................................................. 73
Figure Ap 30 Hinge plate ............................................................................ 74
Figure Ap 31 Hinge bracket ........................................................................ 74
Figure Ap 32 Hinge pin ............................................................................... 75
Figure Ap 33 Hinge bracket ........................................................................ 75
Figure Ap 34 Door rail trim........................................................................ 76

8
Tables:

Table 4 1 External dimensions .................................................................... 18

Table 4 2 Internal dimensions ..................................................................... 18
Table 4 3 Material properties ..................................................................... 21
Table7 1 Comparison of integral and honeycomb panels........................... 36
Table 8 1 External and Internal dimensions of the standard container...... 45
Table 9 1 Comparison of final results ......................................................... 56

9
Notation

A Area
b breadth
d diameter
ft feet
GPa giga pascal
h height
Kg kilogram
kN Kilo newton
KPa kilo pascal
l length
m meter
mm millimetre
MPa Mega pascal
N newton
Pa pascal
t thickness

10
Abbreviations
CAD Computer Aided Design
CFRP Carbon fibre reinforced plastic
EPS Expanded Polystyrene

FE Finite Element
FEA Finite Element Analysis
FEM Finite Element Method
ISO International Standards Organization

XPS Extruded Polystyren

11
1 Background
Honey comb structures are natural and man-made structures employed to
allow the minimization of the amount of material to be used in order to
decrease the weight and material cost to some extent. Its geometry vary
widely but common feature of these structures is an array of hollow cells
formed in between the thin walls. Cells can be columnar or hexagonal in
shape but only the structure made of hexagonal sandwich panels has been
employed and studied in this paper. The honeycomb shaped structure
provides a material with minimal density and relatively high out of plane
compression and shear properties.

2 Introduction

Application of honeycomb structures helps in avoiding the wastage of the

material which leads to the reduction in weight of the component. It also
helps to attain greater specific strength with minimum use of material. It
helps to increase the capacity of the structure. Because of its valuable
properties most of the Automobile industries are trying to develop and
apply this technology. Already these structures are being used in the
Aerospace industry, boats, trains etc. for the maximum strength.

Figure 2 1 CAD model of the sandwich panel

Sandwich panels are the combination of stiff plates and a low density core.
Hexagonal honeycomb structure has been considered. The core material can
12
also be different shapes but the hexagonal shape has been employed
because of its performance.

Figure 2 2 CAD model of the honeycomb core

Figure 2.2 denotes the shape of a honeycomb core. It is just designed for the
explanation purpose and has not been used in any following design or
analysis part.

In this work only a 20 feet dry container is considered of all the existing
designs because these parameters are standard in almost all the countries.
There are different types of containers with different design parameters but
the containers with honeycomb structures are never designed.

In this paper, design and analysis been performed on a sandwich panel in

comparison with the existing designs to clarify that the application is valid
before continuing to the full structure. The maximum stresses acting on the
sandwich panel helps in depicting how stresses acting on the complete
model.

13
2.1 Problem Description

Most of the containers in the present day are made of a single material like
Mild steel, Aluminium, Weathering steel, wood etc. but the honeycomb
structure is a combination of two structures with two different materials
helps in strengthening the structure. Anytime in the present or in the future
saving or reducing the material wastage is very important. The main
challenge of this paper is to present a standard structure with the application
of sandwich panels to the container to minimize the wastage of material
with better strength. Therefore the structural analysis is in need to perform
on the structure to prove the structure is better than the previous designs.

Figure 2 3 CAD model of the container with honeycomb structure

In the Figure 2.3 the CAD model of the container designed with sandwich
panels is shown. Actually each and every part in the CAD model shown
above is assembled by designing each and every part individually for the
better output. The outer cover of the model looks like same as the
previously existing models because the inner parts of the model cannot be
seen. But the complete model design and its description will be provided in
the next steps.

14
2.2 Aim and Objectives

The aim of this work is to build a container employed with sandwich panels
applied in the place of side and roof panels and to present an advanced
structure with all necessary data for the future use. The structure is
compared with already existing container to prove the design is better and
efficient. This aim can be achieved by designing a finite element model in
the software and perform the structural analysis on the component and to
determine the application helps in reducing the stresses acting on the
structure.

The objectives include the following steps:

¾ Literature study to be performed on the containers, materials,
honeycomb structures and its application
¾ Design a Finite element model of a honeycomb panel and compare
with pre-existing panels to verify the honeycomb panels are strength
enough.
¾ Selection of standard container existing and used in the market
globally and the materials need to be applied for better performance
of the structure.
¾ Use FEA tool to design a standard container and a honeycomb
panelled container and perform structural analysis.
Compare the results

2.3 Research Question

1. How the application of hexagonal honeycomb structures to a

shipping container effects its strength and performance?
2. What are the advantages of replacing shipping container panels with
honeycomb sandwich panels?

15
3 Related Work

Information gathered about sandwich panels is being explained in here. In a

book written by T.N Bitzer [2], the concept for the construction of
sandwich panels is presented. In a book written by R.K Rajput [1], the
techniques used in production and fabrication of sandwich panels is
explained. In a book written by Sascha Peters [3], different materials used
for different designs is explained clearly. The core of the sandwich panel
are of different kinds. The design and analysis of different kinds of
sandwich panels is performed and explained in a book written by Howard
G. Allen [4].
Application of Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) to the
honeycomb structures helps in increasing the strength of the structure even
more because of its low density which has been glued by metal plated on
the both sides helps in adding strength. The outer layers may be coated with
aluminium, stainless steel, polypropylene etc. The effect of CFRP when the
honeycomb is filled with circular CFRP tubes has been explained in a
journal by Wang and Liu [5]. R. Wang and J. Wang explained the
modelling behaviour of honeycomb structures made of laminated cell walls
helps in understanding the behaviour of the honeycomb structures to some
extent [6].
Modelling and analysis of the shipping containers has been performed
by the Kevin, Sezen and Rebecca and explained the behaviour of shipping
container when a load has been applied. This helps us to understand the
existing model behaviour. As the dimensions are considered based on the
ISO standard, the journal gives the real time behaviour of the container [7].
The experimental and numerical analysis performed in a journal
written by Vinicius [8], explains the multiple stack dynamics used to study
the structural response of container when the container stacks are excited.
The model considered is a 20 feet container to study the losses and
structural response in a container has been explained clearly.

16
4 Studied Model

A 20 feet dry container is studied for the application. There are 14 different
most common types of containers they are
¾ Dry containers
¾ Flat Rack containers
¾ Open top containers
¾ Tunnel containers
¾ Side open storage containers
¾ Refrigerated ISO containers
¾ Insulated or thermal containers
¾ Tanks
¾ Cargo storage roll containers
¾ Half height containers
¾ Car carriers
¾ Drums
¾ Special purpose containers
¾ Swap bodies
Based on the application and usage, containers are divided in to 13 types
and the names listed above the types of containers used for specific
purpose. Of all these, dry containers are the most considerable and
acceptable throughout the globe. Swap bodies are the container sheets
which are used only in Europe. These are also providing very good service
but they are not strong on the sides. These dry 40 feet and 20 feet containers
are constructed to handle cargo and there are some types which are
constructed for the different purposes like to handle garments on hangers.
These dry containers available in different sizes (10, 20 and 40 feet). 20ft
containers are again divided in to two types based on their size.
They are:
Standard container
High cube container

17
 Size (containers) Length Width Height

20 feet standard 6060 2440 2590

20 feet High cube 6060 2440 2900

Table 4 1 External dimensions (mm)

In the table 4.1, the dimensions of a high cube dry container have been
tabulated.

Size (containers) Length Width Height

20 feet standard 5891 2440 2390

20 feet High cube 5891 2440 2690

Table 4 2 Internal dimensions (mm)

Table 4.2 denotes the dimensions of a 20 feet standard dry container.

The main difference in between stand and high cube containers is the
variation in height. High cube container will be 100 mm higher
compared to standard container. The figure shown below can clearly
show the difference between standard and high cube containers

18
 Figure 4 1 Standard and high cube dry containers

In this paper only a standard 20 feet standard container is considered.

The paper only explains the effect of the application of honeycomb
structures to the container. Based on this, the stresses and strength
can be determined for other types of containers. Therefore, it is not so
important to consider any other type of container.

4.1 Material Data and Material Model

The containers which are available in the present day are mostly made
of Aluminium and steel. Aluminium dry containers have a slightly
larger payload compared to steel dry containers. Steel dry containers
have a slightly larger internal cube therefore the volume of the
container is more in steel dry containers. Steel shipping containers are
the most commonly used type of containers. Older dry containers were
built by using Aluminium and the present day containers are built
using steel and these are much apt and useful for heavy cargo because
of its properties.
On the surface of steel containers heavy duty coating is applied
for the optimal strength and corrosion resistance. These containers are
used for different purposes and they are available as storage
containers, portable storage units, office containers and semi-trailers.
19
Aluminium containers are mostly used in refrigerated shipments as
they need to be much lighter in load capacity. These are developed
normally using Aluminium and stainless steel. The overall weight of
Aluminium is much less compared to steel and in the refrigerated
container a thick insulated layer has to be placed for the maintenance
of temperature inside the container. Aluminium container also has an
advantage of thermal efficiency and has the ability to maintain
minimum air leakage.
Steel and aluminium containers are used for the same function.
Therefore based on the needs these containers are used. Steel
containers are used as it is king with dry goods and aluminium
containers are the best choice for the frozen goods. All these
containers are manufactured based on the ISO standard.
In this paper the structure is designed and analysed in two
combinations they are

¾ Mild steel and Aluminium 6061

¾ Aluminium 6061 with mild steel
The combinations mentioned above are applied for the product and
simulated as we expect the model could be more strength enough
compared to the single alloyed structure.

Material properties of steel and aluminium6061 are tabulated below

for comparison.

20
 Property Steel Aluminium
6061

Density(Kg/mm^3) 7.9e-6 2.70e-6

Elasticity Modulus 200 68.9

(GPa)

Poisson’s ratio 0.25 0.33

Yield strength 250 276

(MPa)
Shear strength 375 207
(MPa)
Shear modulus 80 26
(GPa)
Ultimate tensile 420 310
strength (MPa)

Table 4 3 Material properties

These are some of the properties of the materials employed in the

container made of honeycomb sandwich panels. These sandwich
panels consisting of a core honeycomb structure and is being glued
with two outer surfaces on either sides. Honeycomb sandwich Panels
made of steel core with aluminium outer layers, aluminium core with
steel outer layers have been analysed. These combinations are
analysed for the better performance.

21
4.2 Stacking
Stacking of container is the process of arranging the shipping
containers one on the other. They are stacked one on top of the other
by using a lifting machine like crane. The height of stacking is limited
to which the lifting machine can stack. The present stacking height is
6-7 container tier high.
During the stacking test, a weight of 3392 kN will be applied
on the corner or end fittings. According to ISO, every container can
safely withstand a vertical load of 192 tonnes with a factor of safety of
1.8.
There are many methods and types are involved in container
stacking. It is being explained by Rommert Dekker in his book titled
“Advanced methods for container stacking”.

4.2.1 Advantages of container stacking

International shipments normally need greater protection when
compared to domestic shipments. Other issues such a handling of
products, climate. Potential for pilferage, communication & language
difference, freight costs etc. also influence the decision of
containerization. Also, the bottom, line in all international package
decisions is that the consignment must arrive at its destination
undamaged. To facilitate product handling and protect the product
during the movement and storage, many companies use containers,
especially when these moves by sea.
Advantage of containerization:
1) Cost due to loss or damage are reduced
2) Labour costs in freight handling due to the use automated materials
handling equipment.
3) Lower warehousing & transportation costs since containers are
more easily stored and transported.
4) Containers can also be used for temporary storage at ports with
limited warehousing facilities.

22
4.2.2 Disadvantages of container stacking:
1) Ports or terminals with container facility may not be available in
certain parts of the world.
2) Even where such facilities are available, delays may occur due to
overburden of loads.
3) Large capital expenditure may be essential to handle ‘container
based’ networks.

4.3 Manufacturing methods of sandwich panels

Sandwich panels are normally manufactured or produced by two
techniques. They are
¾ Continuous process
¾ Discontinuous process

4.3.1 Continuous panel production

¾ All the used materials are processed together and cut in to the
desired or required shape and length without stopping the line.
¾ A continuous line has an average speed of about 14 meters per
minute in production of medium panel of thickness 40-50mm
with metal facings.
¾ A typical continuous panel production has three sections
x External layers processing section
x Insulating material processing section
x Panels handling section
¾ In a typical case of a sandwich panel with both exterior
surfaces in sheet metal and an insulating core in polyurethane
rigid foam, the first section starts with the sheet de coilers and
continues with all the equipment for forming the two sheets
into the desired shape.
¾ The panel could be a panel for walls or for roofs. Sandwich
panels with flexible layers (aluminium, glass fibre sheets, and
asphalt paper) are not roll formed. Both surfaces of the final
panels are entirely flat. The surfaces are pre-heated to the
temperature required by the process (usually between 40 and
65 C) and then the insulating material is prepared.

23
4.3.2 Discontinuous panel production

¾ Materials are processed separately. This means facings are

formed and cut to the desired length and then assembled
together in a press where the foam is injected.
¾ The discontinuous process has a lower level of productivity
that cannot be compared with that of the continuous one.
¾ It is used today for products with shapes that do not allow the
continuous process, or when the production rate required does
not justify investment in a continuous line.

24
5 Method Overview

Start

Pre processing

Literature Review

Material and
Software selection

FEA analysis of
both models, stacking

Comparison

Analysing the results

Satisfactory
Results

Discussions and conclusion

Figure 5 1 Flow chart of the method followed

25
 The method followed in carrying out the project is shown in a
flow chart above in the Figure 5.1.
The method chart start with the pre-processing. This is
nothing but the selection of the thesis. The most advanced technologies and
the subjects developing in the present day are considered for the selection
of thesis. The thought of application of most advanced honeycomb
structures is the main motive behind the selection of this topic.
It is followed by the literature review in which the complete
background and the developments took place till now are studied and
analysed. Material selection is one of the important step for this paper.
These materials are taken in to account after several deep studies.
The complete project is about the FEA analysis of the
container with the application of honeycomb structure. To perform analysis
of the structure Autodesk Inventor is chosen. The results from the two
different structures are compared and is verified for the best results.
The report completely describes and explains the steps
followed in carrying out the project. By following this method for the
present work, the results or the knowledge obtained can be used for the
future use.

26
6. Autodesk Inventor

Autodesk Inventor is a 3D CAD modelling software used to design,

visualize and test products. It allows to create product prototypes that
accurately simulate the weight, stress, friction, driving loads, and much
more of products and their components in a simulated 3D environment.
Everything from basic mould designs to detailed mechanical engineering
models can be created and tested using Inventor's integrated motion
simulation and assembly stress analysis tools. Inventor is well known for its
accurate 3D modelling features that help you create and visualize your
products. Inventor also includes integrated CAD simulation and design
communication tools that not only enhances CAD productivity and help to
reduce errors but also can be integral in cutting development timelines in
half.
It is normally used by the professionals to minimize the gap
between design, engineering and manufacturing. For example, mountain
bike manufactures may use Inventor to create digital prototypes of end
products to virtually optimize suspension component interactions and
ensure that clearances and tolerances are correct. In the case of yacht
manufacturers, Inventor may be used to accurately model and prototype
ground-breaking flagships and run stress tests to identify where to trim
weight and improve boat performance.

Another example of how Inventor may be used is in the case of a

mining machinery manufacturer. In this case, Inventor could be used to
conduct stress analysis and simulate a machine's motion to identify
unexpected collisions and other errors that might not otherwise manifest
until physical production. Ultimately, Autodesk Inventor is used to cut
production costs drastically via digital prototyping and virtual testing. This,
in turn, helps to reduce errors and labour-intensive manual reworking,
which ultimately speeds up production cycles and helps to get finished
products to the market faster.

Inventor offers a familiar design environment and many AutoCAD-

compatible shortcuts; and with true DWG (drawing) file support, Inventor
allows AutoCAD users to leverage their existing 2D drawings to build
accurate 3D models. These are some of the factors made us to choose the
software to design and simulate the structure.

27
7 FE Analysis for integral parts (Panels)
There is no pre designed model. Therefore the models existing and the
model proposed are designed and the results are presented from the both
simulations for the comparison. The complete design of both models is
being done in Autodesk Inventor and the FEA is also performed in the
Autodesk inventor itself. Each and every part of the container is designed
separately and is assembled to encounter the precision. Two CAD models
are designed and four simulations are performed. Two simulations on the
existing design and two simulations on the developed design are performed
and being compared.

7.1 Design

Before designing the complete model sandwich panel and the

previously existing panel of the container are designed and simulated for
the verification. A load of 5000 N is applied on both the models for the
verification.

Figure 7 1 Integral part of the container panel

28
7.2 Materials

Aluminium 6061 is applied to the outer part of the sandwich panel and Mild
steel is applied to the core honeycomb structure. These honeycomb core
and the outer plates are joined by using adhesives like EPS foam, XPS
foam, Polyurethane, rock wool, mineral wool etc.

In this paper we are using extruded polystyrene (XPS) foam as an adhesive

to join the face sheets with honeycomb core. XPS or extruded blowing
agents stay embedded in the material for years where as EPS or expanded
foam blowing agents will leave the bead very soon and are not strong
enough compared to extruded (XPS) sheets. These both closed cell
insulation is made from the same base polystyrene resins and are
manufactured in different ways.

EPS or expanded foam sheets are made by moulding or cutting the foam
sheet in to different shapes and sizes whereas XPS are the extruded sheets.
If we take a 1 inch thick sheet of same material, XPS has a lower moisture
absorption rate than EPS due to the differences mentioned above.

Using the materials mentioned above, sandwich panels are designed and are
being analysed.

7.2.1 Benefits of using XPS and EPS foam sheets

¾ Light weight
¾ Tough
¾ Insulating
¾ Versatile and easily branded
¾ Hygienic safe
¾ Water proof
¾ Low carbon impacts and
¾ Economic

29
After simulating the integral part of the container panel using steel,
Aluminium and different alloys, Aluminium 6061 has better strength
compared to all other materials. Therefore Aluminium 6061 is applied
to the complete portion of the integral part and being simulated in the
following steps.

7.3 Meshing
Honeycomb sandwich panels looks like
Meshing is done carefully to reach the most accurate point. Meshed
part of both the structures with loads can be seen in the below figures
6.5 and 6.6.

Figure 7 2 Meshed model of the integral sandwich panel

30
Figure 7.2 denotes the meshed part of the honeycomb sandwich
panel.

The figure shown above denotes the layers of honeycomb sandwich

panel. The outer most face sheets and the core honeycomb structure
are being joined using adhesives which is XPS foam sheet considered
in this paper.

7.4 Results
Simulated parts are shown below, describes the von-misses stresses
on these parts, and helps to verify which combination of materials is
more efficient and strength worthy. As the maximum von-misses
stress value acting on the existing model is more than the stress value
on the sandwich panel used for the construction of the container.

31
Figure 7 3 Stress distribution on the integral part of the container

32
Figure 7 4 Displacement of the integral part

33
Figure 7 5 Stress distribution on the sandwich panel

34
Figure 7 6 Displacement of the sandwich panel

35
7.5 Comparison

Von misses stresses acting on the sandwich panel and the integral part
are compared to verify whether the design is worthy or to terminate here
itself.

Parameters Sandwich Integral part Difference

panel
Von misses stress 6.7 7.135 6.096%
(MPa)
Displacement(mm) 1.307 1.325 1.35%

Table7 1 Comparison of integral and honeycomb panels

The model can be termed as more strength enough compared to the panels
already existing can be said based on the difference in von-misses stress.
Therefore the difference in maximum stresses and the maximum
displacement value clearly defines the sandwich panel has the better
outcome with 6.096% minimum stresses acting on its body compared to
the existing model. The model proposed is acceptable. Therefore, the
complete model can be designed and simulated to know the maximum
stresses acting on the container.

The deviation in the value of displacement is just 1.35% for the same
volume of the material but when we consider for the whole part of the
model, we will get to understand the reduction in stresses and the amount
of difference in deviation involved.

36
8 Finite Element Analysis of the Complete Model
In this part of the work after verifying that the application of honeycomb
structure has better use compared to the existing model, the CAD models of
the containers are designed and simulated. Only the side panels, floor and
the roof panels of the container are replaced with the sandwich panels or the
hexagonal honeycomb structured panels. Remaining design is not changed
as it becomes more complicated for the assembly. Each and every part of
the container was assembled by using joint condition. This helps in binding
the object with other parts. Therefore helps in performing static analysis on
the complete structure.
As it is said before, a 20 feet standard dry container is designed and
being simulated for the comparison with the existing model. The models are
designed on the basis of the ISO standard.

8.1 Design Description

All the parts like frame, door, side panels, roof panels and the layers
involved in the panels are all designed separately and being attached. But
the analysis is done only on the assemble part of frame and the floor. It is
because in the static analysis only the floor panel will be deflected as all
other panels are being kept constant or fixed.
Already existing dimensions are being considered for the project.
These are standard dimensions given by the ISO.
The difference in dimensions helps to find the thickness of the
structure in each direction. The design has been performed in Autodesk
inventor

37
 Figure 8 1 Corner casting
Figure shown above is the corner casting, is a part used in the connection of
bottom and upper side rails of the container.

Figure 8 2 Lock rod

The lock rod shown above is attached to the door as a locking system to
open and close the door.

38
 Figure 8 3 side panel
The panel shown above is used as a outer cobe=ver for the container is
assembled by welding it to the bottom and upper side rails

Figure 8 4 Floor plate

Plate shown above is used as floor for the container.
There are still many parts which are designed and are being assembled to
form the container. The remaining parts will be attached in the appendix.

39
8.2 Assembly

The honeycomb design shown above in the figure 7.1.3 is being

extruded to form the plate. In the figure 7.1.4 the three layers are being
joined in the assembly section. The complete three layered plate is being
attached or assembled to the frame shown in the figure 7.1.2. The complete
model is being created but the stresses in the container acts only on the
floor and almost remaining part is assumed to be stationary as the analysis
performed is only static structural analysis.
The complete project has been carried out using the software
available at the University. The software has limitations as we cannot
perform very large simulations. Therefore, in place of 40ft container, we
have designed 20ft container and being simulated in the software.

Figure 8 5 Assembled model

40
8.3. Loading

Figure 8 6 uniformly distributed load and the fixed constraint

The analysis performed in the paper is static analysis. For this, the
bottom rails of the structure are being fixed. A load 300kN is being
applied on the floor panel. It gives us the maximum stresses acting on
the body along with the positions of stress. The stress obtained is
helpful to study the behaviour of the container. The bottom side of the
container has been fixed as it will be installed or attached to the
chassis of the truck body or even during shipping of the container it
will be places on the floor. So, in most of the cases the container will
be fixed to the floor. Therefore only static analysis with bottom face
fixed has been simulated

41
8.4 Meshed model

Figure 8 7 Meshed Model

Figure 8 8 Mesh Settings

42
From the sources, it has been observed that the maximum payload is around
30000 kg which is equal to 294kN (for the full model). Therefore to analyse
the stresses acting on the body at the maximum load are being considered
for the comparison. This helps in depicting how much the newly proposed
model is strength enough compared to the available models.
Automatic meshing is applied as if the mesh goes on complicating,
the model could not get simulated in the available software. The load is
applied uniformly on the floor panel. This doesn’t happen in the real life but
can be depicted by considering the load based on the type of the cargo used
to be transported,

From the mesh settings figure we can observe the average element
size is given as 0.1 with grading factor equal to 0.5 and turn angle equal to
60 degrees. These parameter settings makes the mesh more biased and will
give more precise results.

43
8.5 Material Usage

The material wastage and the stress distribution are the main goals of this
project. Therefore the stress distribution can be explained in the following
section. The reduction in material wastage is explained in this section.

Figure 8 9 Honeycomb core

44
The figure shown above is the sketch of the honeycomb structure. The
volume of the material considered for the existing model and the proposed
model are calculated and the reduction being explained with mathematical
formulae.
The volume of material used in construction of container can be calculated
based on its internal and external dimensions.

Dimensions Length Breadth Height

(mm)
External 6006 2440 2591
dimensions
Internal 5891 2340 2390
dimensions
Table 8 1 External and Internal dimensions of the standard container

Usage of sandwich panels have become more prominent in the construction

due to its wide range of advantages. The panels will be in 5 layers with two
outer layers and inner honeycomb structured core glued by an adhesive of
two layers. The complete model becomes very stiff enough. These
advantages made these structures to become prominent in Aerospace and
automobile industry.

8.5.1 Replacement for the panels

The shipping container have four walls of which one roof panel, one floor
panel and two side panels. The two side panels are of the same dimensions
whereas the roof panel and the floor panel will have slight thickness
change. It is because, normally most of the weight will be acting on the
floor of the container. Therefore the roof panel will be made bit thin
compared to the floor panel helps in increasing the volume of the body.
Now, In this paper these panels are being replaced by honeycomb
structures with similar dimensions helps in reducing the volume of the
material used with same inner volume of the container with reduced stress.
This helps in increasing the maximum payload and decreases the
tare weight of the container. In this way, by decreasing the tare weight of
the container and increasing the pay load will bring the gross weight of the
container to the similar stage as before.

45
Replacement of these panels will save an amount of 7.7 cubic meters of
material of 29 cubic meters. Therefore t can save up to 27% of the material
and helps to carry the same weights without any problem.

46
8.6 Parts for assembly

Number of parts used in structuring the model is shown below. Only names
of the parts are being attached here. The designs or models will be attached
in the appendix. Each and every part are designed using Inventor and is
being assembled and simulated. There are several parts and some of the
parts are similar in shape but with different sizes. Therefore, only the parts
with different shapes are being attached in the appendix.

The parts of the model are being shown below and the list is attached with
name and number of that component.

Figure 8 10 Container parts

47
There are many parts as shown in the above figure. All the parts have been
designed and for the design of parts which are needed to be assembled have
been mentioned in the appendix.

The final assembled full model is shown below

Figure 8 11 Full model after assembly

48
8.7 Results

8.7.1 Stress analysis on the Existing model

Figure 8 12 Stress distribution on the existing model (Aluminium)

In this the stress analysis is performed on the structure with a load of 294
kN ( which is the maximum load can be carried by a pre-existing
container). The maximum von misses stress value is 0.1416MPa. This is
really small. This is the stress analysis performed on the existing design
model. The stresses acting in this is being compared with the stress
outcomes from the model made from high strength low alloy steel. These
two are the materials normally considered for the construction of a shipping
container.

49
 Figure 8 13 Displacement
The maximum displacement is obtained as 0.6645 mm. It is very small but
the stresses can be even reduced. This helps in increasing the capacity of
the container.

Figure 8 14 Safety factor of the existing model

50
8.7.2 Stacking model

Figure 8 15 Stress distribution on the stacked container

Figure 8 16 Displacement on the stacked container

51
The stress distribution and the displacement figure is shown above.

Figure 8 17 Safety factor of stacked container

52
8.7.3 Honeycomb structured model

Figure 8 18 Stress distribution on the honeycomb structure

The stress distribution is shown in the above figure. The maximum von
misses stress is observed as 61.29 MPa. It is very low compared to the
existing model.

53
 Figure 8 19 Displacement of the honeycomb structure

Displacement or the deviation value obtained as 0.2378 mm. It is also very

small compared to the observation model. These values makes the structure
more efficient. The model is light in weight and possess high strength. If
some failure occurs the deviation mainly occurs on the honeycomb
structures. It can be observed only at very heavy loads but the simulations
before helps in avoiding such heavy loads.
The model is highly safe compared to the aluminium or steel
made existing models. Complete weight of the body acts on the stripes
shown on the surface of the panel. This helps in reducing the loading effect
on the body of the panel. The resultant stresses shows the effect of uniform
distribution of load on the container.

54
Figure 8 20 Safety factor

55
9 Comparison of results

The stress distribution, displacement and safety factor figures are shown
and discussed above. In this section the results obtained are compared for
the better understanding of the effective model which has to be considered
finally. The von misses stress values and displacement values of two
simulations are being tabulated below.

Max. Von misses

Type of the model/ stress Displacement (mm)
parameters (MPa)
Existing model made 287.6 0.6645
of Aluminium 6061
Honeycomb model 61.29 0.2378
made of Aluminium
6061
Table 9 1 Comparison of final results

¾
The deviation of maximum stress compared in between Aluminium
made existing model and the honeycomb model is 70.52% and the
deviation in maximum displacement is 65.19%.
¾
The stress analysis is also performed by stacking the containers. The
analysis is performed on the model not with the empty containers.
 It
is analysed when the containers are with maximum payload.
¾
The maximum von misses stress value
 is 482.3 MPa and the
maximum displacement is 6,083 mm.
¾
5 cubic meters of material has  been reduced which can cut the
material cost to a great extent.



56
10 Summary and Conclusions
10.1 Discussion

The results obtained are compared to the previously existing models are
being acceptable. The very low stress values indicates that the model
previously accepted is being optimized to a large extent. The project
performed here is somewhat related to the optimization of the structure
when we consider the structure and the material change. But the results
presented in this paper describes the stress and the deviation results and are
helpful in the future for better understanding of application of structures
and materials.
These honeycomb structures are of different shapes like rectangular,
triangular, hexagonal etc. but only hexagonal honeycomb structures are
considered because these structures are the standard structures already been
proved based on many calculations. Therefore only hexagonal structures are
taken in to account.
The stress values obtained when the materials like aluminium, steel and
CFRP are mixed together and are being applied to the existing structure
helps to know the strength factor of the combination of the materials and
different structures. The deviation in the result is very high when it is
compared to the existing model.
The complete project has been performed in Autodesk Inventor. We
tried the simulation using Solid works and CATIA v5 but then we tried
with Inventor and we felt it is easy and compatible for the structure we are
analysing.
The materials selected are Aluminium 6061, high strength and low
alloy steel and Mild steel. Before considering these materials many trials
have been performed using stainless steel, iron, CFRP and other
combinations to find the best possible outcome. Aluminium and steel are
the most commonly used materials in construction of shipping containers.
Therefore many alloys of steel and Aluminium are also tested with the
verification model. Of all these, the combinations of aluminium 6061 and
mild steel core combination has given the best results.

57
 Our research question describes just to showcase the effect of
application of honeycomb structures to the existing container models. The
report clearly explains the steps ad method followed during the project. The
verification model or just the simulation of the integral parts of both
existing and proposed models are done to get clear understanding of which
materials are need to be used and how the load and constrains have to be
defined on the complete model. This made us to understand the effect to
some extent. When the simulation of honeycomb sandwich panels is
performed, the deviation results are just around 6 percent but when the
simulation performed on the complete model the deviation has been
increased to around 60 percent when is very huge. But this cannot be
applied directly in the industry. This is because the validation is not
performed on the structure. Before that it need to be simulated or should
have been tested with a verification model and should be analysed. This
helps in a perfect success of the structural application and helps the industry
to increase the capacity of the container.
The dimensions considered in the paper are the standard dimensions.
Therefore there is no need of changing the length of the truck or the rail
used to stick the container.

10.2 Conclusion

The main motive of the project is to show the alloying of materials

can differ the strength and will be helpful in increasing the strength. With
almost 5 cubic meters of less material, 60% less von misses stress is
achieved compared to the existing model. The load carrying capacity will
be increased to a greater level. The values may differ when the model being
analysed but the structure proposed is having phenomenal strength. The aim
of reduction of material wastage and the maximization of strength has been
successfully achieved.

58
10.3 Future works

¾
Optimization of the structure
 can be performed considering different
 optimization techniques.
¾
Dynamic simulation of the complete model constrained to truck
 analyzation of the stresses and effects at different
helps in better
 conditions.
¾
Different load cases can be considered during the dynamic
simulation helps in finding the maximum load capacity the structure
can bare and the optimization of the structures helps in reducing the
 stresses.
¾
There are many different materials are still discovering and there are
still many types of materials and material combinations can be
applied and to be tested for the best outcome.

59
References:
[1] R. K. Rajput, A Textbook of Manufacturing Technology:
Manufacturing Processes. Firewall Media, 2007.
[2] T. N. Bitzer, Honeycomb Technology: Materials, Design,
Manufacturing, Applications and Testing. Springer Science & Business
Media, 2012.
[3] S. Peters, Material Revolution: Sustainable and Multi-Purpose
Materials for Design and Architecture. Walter de Gruyter, 2011.
[4] H. G. Allen, Analysis and Design of Structural Sandwich Panels: The
Commonwealth and International Library: Structures and Solid Body
Mechanics Division. Elsevier, 2013.
[5] Z. Wang and J. Liu, “Mechanical performance of honeycomb filled
with circular CFRP tubes,” Compos. Part B Eng., vol. 135, no.
Supplement C, pp. 232–241, Feb. 2018.
[6] R. Wang and J. Wang, “Modeling of honeycombs with laminated
composite cell walls,” Compos. Struct., vol. 184, no. Supplement C, pp.
191–197, Jan. 2018.
[7] K. Giriunas, H. Sezen, and R. B. Dupaix, “Evaluation, modeling, and
analysis of shipping container building structures,” Eng. Struct., vol. 43,
no. Supplement C, pp. 48–57, Oct. 2012.
[8] V. Aguiar de Souza et al., “Experimental and numerical analysis of
container multiple stacks dynamics using a scaled model,” Ocean Eng.,
vol. 74, no. Supplement C, pp. 218–232, Dec. 2013

60
 APPENDIX

There are many parts designed and assemble to form the final component.
Some of the parts are attached above in the document and the remaining are
being attached here.

Parts shown in the above figure are designed and are shown below. These
are used in assembling of parts to form the complete model.

61
Figure Ap 1 floor joist over floor pocket

Figure Ap 2 floor joist

62
 Figure Ap 3 End rail rear

Figure Ap 4 Top End rail rear

63
Figure Ap 5 Door rail

Figure Ap 6 Door post

64
 Figure Ap 7 Corner post

Figure Ap 8 Base rail 20 feet

65
Figure Ap 9 Base side rail

Figure Ap 10 Base rail

66
Figure Ap 11 Fork pocket

Figure Ap 12 Door post end

Figure Ap 13 Door pocket

67
 Figure Ap 14 Door plate

Figure Ap 15 Side panel rib

Figure Ap 16 Roof panel

68
Figure Ap 17 Roof joist

Figure Ap 18 M12*80

Figure Ap 19 M12*40

69
Figure Ap 20 M12 spring washer

Figure Ap 21 M12 nut

Figure Ap 22 M12 washer

70
Figure Ap 23 Lock rod lever

Figure Ap 24 Lock rod keep

71
 Figure Ap 25 Lock rod latch

Figure Ap 26 Lock rod bracket

Figure Ap 27 Lip rail

72
Figure Ap 28 Short hinge spacer

Figure Ap 29 Long hinge spacer

73
 Figure Ap 30 Hinge plate

Figure Ap 31 Hinge bracket

74
 Figure Ap 32 Hinge pin

Figure Ap 33 Hinge bracket

75
Figure Ap 34 Door rail trim

76
77









'HSDUWPHQWRI0HFKDQLFDO(QJLQHHULQJ 7HOHSKRQH 
%OHNLQJH,QVWLWXWHRI7HFKQRORJ\ (PDLO LQIR#EWKVH
6(.DUOVNURQD6:('(1