## 8 AM Techniques for Crash Boxes
### Hybrid Manufacturing Techniques
The standard deviation is highest for SLM-produced crash boxes at 16.50 J/g, reflecting greater variability in energy absorption, while SLA-produced crash boxes have the lowest standard deviation at 0.78 J/g, indicating more consistent but lower energy absorption capacity. Remarkably, few studies have investigated the crashworthiness of SLA-, MJT-, and SLS-produced crash boxes, highlighting the need for further research to explore their potential in energy-absorbing capabilities. Figure 24: \(SEA\) of AM techniques for crash boxes: SLA, MJT, SLM, SLS, FDM, and hybrid manufacturing techniques. A detailed summary of the geometric designs, materials, and fabrication techniques presented in various studies is provided in Table 2, highlighting the current research landscape in the development of additively manufactured crash boxes. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline
**AM Technique** & **Material** & **Geometry** & **Reference** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{SLA} & Tough 1500 Resin & Lattice & [102] \\  & R4600 Resin & Bio-Inspired Multi-Cell Tube & [103] \\  & R4600 Resin & Bio-Inspired Multi-Cell Tube & [104] \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{MJT} & VeroWhitePlus/ & \multirow{2}{*}{Bio-Inspired Tube} & [98] \\  & TangoPlus Polymers & & \\  & VeroWhitePlus & Hierarchical Lattice & [105] \\  & DSM Somos 14120 Resin & Bio-Inspired Hierarchical Lattice & [106] \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{SLM} & Stainless Steel 316L & Multi-Cell Origami Tube & [55] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Bio-Inspired Multi-Cell Origami Tube & [56] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Hierarchical Lattice & [61] \\  & Stainless Steel 304L & Origami Graded Lattice & [62] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Triply Periodic Minimal Surface Lattice & [64] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Hierarchical Triply Periodic Minimal & [65] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Surface Lattice & [65] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Bio-Inspired Multi-Cell Tube & [72] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Bio-Inspired Tapered Tube & [73] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Bio-Inspired Hierarchical Multi-Cell & [74] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Tube & [74] \\  & Stainless Steel 316L & Bio-Inspired Lattice & [110] \\  & Aluminum AlSi10 Mg & Tube & [96] \\  & Aluminum AlSi10 Mg & Tube & [97] \\  & Aluminum AlSi10 Mg & Corrugated Tube & [109] \\  & Aluminum AlSi10 Mg & Auxetic Lattice & [111] \\  & Aluminum AlSi10 Mg & Non-Auxetic Lattice & [111] \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{SLS} & PA11 & Origami Tube & [112] \\  & PA2200 & Lattice & [113] \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{FDM} & PLA Carbon Fiber & Tube & [46] \\  & PLA/TPU Blend & Corrugated Tube & [47] \\  & PLA+ & Multi-Cell Tube & [48] \\  & ABS & Multi-Cell Tube & [49] \\  & PA Carbon Fiber & Multi-Cell Stepwise Graded Tube & [50] \\  & PA Carbon Fiber & Multi-Cell Continuous Graded Tube & [54] \\  & PA Carbon Fiber & Origami Tube & [54] \\  & PA Carbon Fiber & Auxetic Lattice & [63] \\  & PA Carbon Fiber & Lattice-Filled Multi-Cell Tube & [66] \\  & PLA & Bio-Inspired Multi-Cell Tube & [71] \\  & PA & Bio-Inspired Hierarchical Lattice & [75] \\  & PLA+ & Bio-Inspired Hierarchical Lattice & [76] \\  & PLA-LW & Multi-Cell Tube & [82] \\  & PLA-ST & & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Summary of the geometric designs, materials, and fabrication techniques used across various studies.