Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 54, Issue 5, pp 3942–3959 | Cite as

Size effects in lattice-structured cellular materials: edge softening effects

  • Marcus Yoder
  • Lonny Thompson
  • Joshua Summers
Computation
  • 34 Downloads

Abstract

Cellular materials possess size-dependent mechanical behavior. This work examines the causes of these size effects in periodic thin-walled cellular materials, modeled as a network of beam elements. The literature has attributed stiffening size effects to the local beam bending behavior of these materials; there is an additional stiffness connected to the rotation of the beam nodes at lattice vertices that causes a stiffening size effect. This work decomposes the strain energy of the beams in the lattice into energy from axial stretching and beam bending and shows that size effects are connected to bending strain energy in certain situations. Other literature has shown a softening size effect in stochastic foams caused by damaged or incomplete cells on free surfaces. This work uses a strain map of the lattice model along with the micropolar constitutive law to show that these edge softening effects can appear in periodic cellular materials when surface cells are neither damaged nor incomplete. This edge softening effect is due to the truncation of repeated unit cells found in the interior of the body. This effect is only observed for certain lattice topologies and is quantified and connected to a global size effect. In conjunction with the beam bending size effect, this edge effect is able to explain the origin of size effects for a variety of lattice topologies and boundary conditions.

References

  1. 1.
    Lakes RS, Nakamura S, Behiri JC, Bonfield W (1990) Fracture mechanics of bone with short cracks. J Biomech 23:967–975.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(90)90311-P CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goda I, Ganghoffer JF (2015) Identification of couple-stress moduli of vertebral trabecular bone based on the 3D internal architectures. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 51:99–118.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.06.036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goda I, Assidi M, Ganghoffer JF (2014) A 3D elastic micropolar model of vertebral trabecular bone from lattice homogenization of the bone microstructure. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 13:53–83.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-013-0486-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lakes RS (1991) Experimental micro mechanics methods for conventional and negative Poisson’s ratio cellular solids as Cosserat continua. J Eng Mater Technol 113:148–155.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2903371 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Andrews EW, Gioux G, Onck P, Gibson LJ (2001) Size effects in ductile cellular solids. Part II: experimental results. Int J Mech Sci 43:0–1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0020-7403(00)00043-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yoder M, Thompson L, Summers J (2018) Size effects in lattice structures and a comparison to micropolar elasticity. Int J Solids Struct 143:245–261.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2018.03.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Diebels S, Steeb H (2002) The size effect in foams and its theoretical and numerical investigation. Proc R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 458:2869–2883.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2002.0991 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bažant ZP, Christensen M (1972) Analogy between micropolar continuum and grid frameworks under initial stress. Int J Solids Struct 8:327–346.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7683(72)90093-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wheel MA, Frame JC, Riches PE (2015) Is smaller always stiffer? On size effects in supposedly generalised continua. Int J Solids Struct 67–68:84–92.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2015.03.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tollenaere H, Caillerie D (1998) Continuous modeling of lattice structures by homogenization. Adv Eng Softw 29:699–705.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-9978(98)00034-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dos Reis F, Ganghoffer JF (2012) Construction of micropolar continua from the asymptotic homogenization of beam lattices. Comput Struct 112–113:354–363.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2012.08.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brezny R, Green DJ (1990) Characterization of edge effects in cellular materials. J Mater Sci 25:4571–4578.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01129908 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Anderson WB, Lakes RS (1994) Size effects due to Cosserat elasticity and surface damage in closed-cell polymethacrylimide foam. J Mater Sci 29:6413–6419.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00353997 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tekoğlu C (2007) Size effects in cellular solids. University of Groningen, GroningenGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liebenstein S, Sandfeld S, Zaiser M (2018) Size and disorder effects in elasticity of cellular structures: from discrete models to continuum representations. Int J Solids Struct 146:97–116.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2018.03.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rueger Z, Lakes RS (2016) Experimental Cosserat elasticity in open-cell polymer foam. Philos Mag 96:93–111.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14786435.2015.1125541 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lakes RS (1991) Deformation mechanisms in negative Poisson’s ratio materials: structural aspects. J Mater Sci 26:2287–2292.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01130170 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lakes RS (1983) Size effects and micromechanics of a porous solid. J Mater Sci 18:2580–2752.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00547573 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gibson LJ, Ashby MF (1999) Cellular materials: structure and properties, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kumar RS, McDowell DL (2004) Generalized continuum modeling of 2-D periodic cellular solids. Int J Solids Struct 41:7399–7422.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2004.06.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fish J, Belytschko T (2007) A first course in finite element analysis. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Perano KJ (1983) Application of micropolar elasticity to the finite element continuum analysis of articulated structures. University of California, Davis, Ph.D. DissertationGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mora RJ, Waas AMM (2007) Evaluation of the micropolar elasticity constants for honeycombs. Acta Mech 192:1–16.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00707-007-0446-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tekoğlu C, Onck P (2008) Size effects in two-dimensional Voronoi foams: a comparison between generalized continua and discrete models. J Mech Phys Solids 56:3541–3564.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps.2008.06.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Diebels S, Scharding D (2011) From lattice models to extended continua. In: Lecture notes in applied and computational mechanics, 59 LNACM, pp 19–45.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22738-7_2
  26. 26.
    Diebels S, Steeb H (2003) Stress and couple stress in foams. Comput Mater Sci 28:714–722.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2003.08.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringClemson UniversityClemsonUSA

Personalised recommendations