Advertisement

Acta Mechanica Solida Sinica

, Volume 29, Issue 5, pp 490–501 | Cite as

Dynamic Crushing Strength Analysis of Auxetic Honeycombs

  • Xiuhui Hou
  • Ziehen Deng
  • Kai Zhang
Article

Abstract

The in-plane dynamic crushing behavior of re-entrant honeycomb is analyzed and compared with the conventional hexagon topology. Detailed deformation modes along two orthogonal directions are examined, where a parametric study of the effect of impact velocity and cell wall aspect ratio is performed. An analytical formula of the dynamic crushing strength is then deduced based on the periodic collapse mechanism of cell structures. Comparisons with the finite element results validate the effectiveness of the proposed analytical method. Numerical results also reveal higher plateau stress of re-entrant honeycomb over conventional hexagon topology, implying better energy absorption properties. The underlying physical understanding of the results is emphasized, where the auxetic effect (negative Poisson’s ratio) induced in the re-entrant topology is believed to be responsible for this superior impact resistance.

Key Words

auxetic effect re-entrant honeycomb deformation mode dynamic crushing strength energy absorption 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lu, T.J., He, D.P., Chen, C.Q., et al., The multi-functionality of ultra-light porous metals and their applications. Advances in Mechanics, 2006, 36(4): 517–535 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhu, F., Wang, Z., Lu, G., et al., Analytical investigation and optimal design of sandwich panels subjected to shock loading. Materials and Design, 2009, 30: 91–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fleck, N. and Deshpande, V., The resistance of clamped sandwich beams to shock loading. Journal of Applied Mechanics, ASME, 2004, 71: 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gibson, L.J. and Ashby, M.F., Cellular Solids : Structure and Properties. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hu, L.L. and Yu, T.X., Dynamic crushing strength of hexagonal honeycombs. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2010, 37(5): 467–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dharmasena, K., Queheillalt, D., Wadley, H., et al., Dynamic response of a multilayer prismatic structure to impulsive loads incident from water. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2009, 36: 632–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xue, Z. and Hutchinson, J. W., A comparative study of impulse-resistant metal sandwich plates. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2004, 30: 1283–1305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rathbun, H.J., Radford, D.D., Xue, Z., et al., Performance of metallic honeycomb-core sandwich beams under shock loading. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2006, 43: 1746–1763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zheng, Z., Yu, J. and Li, J., Dynamic crushing of 2D cellular structures: A finite element study. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2005, 32: 650–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ajdari, A., Nayeb-Hashemi, H. and Vaziri, A., Dynamic crushing and energy absorption of regular, irregular and functionally graded cellular structures. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2011, 48: 506–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zou, Z., Reid, S.R., Tan, P.J., et al., Dynamic crushing of honeycombs and features of shock fronts. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2009, 36(1): 165–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nakamoto, H., Adachi, T. and Araki, W., In-plane impact behavior of honeycomb structures filled with linearly arranged inclusions. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2009, 36(8): 1019–1026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huang, X. and Blackburn, S., Developing a new processing route to manufacture honeycomb ceramics with negative Poisson’s ratio. Key Engineering Materials, 2002, 206: 201–204.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lakes, R.S. and Elms, K., Indentability of conventional and negative Poisson’s ratio foams. Journal of Composite Materials, 1993, 27: 1193–1202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lakes, R.S., Foam structures with a negative Poisson’s ratio. Science, 1987, 235: 1038–1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Scarpa, F., Ciffo, L.G. and Yates, J.R., Dynamic properties of high structural integrity auxetic open cell foam. Smart Materials and Structures, 2004, 13: 49–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Evans, K.E., Tailoring the negative Poisson’s ratio. Chemistry and Industry, 1990, 20: 654–657.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ruan, D., Lu, G., Wang, B., et al., In-plane dynamic crushing of honeycombs—a finite element study. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2003, 28(2): 161–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu, Y. and Zhang, X.C., The influence of cell micro-topology on the in-plane dynamic crushing of honeycombs. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2009, 36(1): 98–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hu, L.L. and Yu, T.X., Mechanical behavior of hexagonal honeycombs under low-velocity impact-theory and simulations. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 2013, 50: 3152–3165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reid, S.R. and Peng, C., Dynamic uniaxial crushing of wood. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 1997, 19: 531–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Chinese Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics and Technology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanics, Civil Engineering and ArchitectureNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina
  2. 2.State Key Laboratory of Structural Analysis for Industrial EquipmentDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina

Personalised recommendations