2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2017.11.082
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A FEM study on mechanical behavior of cellular lattice materials based on combined elements

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
21
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
2
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Using the displacement fields measured inside a 5 mm central gage length of one of the plain specimens (DIC-ARAMIS), the stress-strain diagram was built (Figure 8b), and the Young's modulus E, the yield stress σy, the ultimate tensile strength σUTS, and the elongation at break εmax were calculated and are shown in Table 2. These results are comparable to those obtained with the same alloy subjected to a similar heat treatment by Geng et al [38]: the differences in the E and σUTS values are less than 4%, while that in the σy values, less than 20%. The red curve in Figure 8b corresponds to the stress-strain diagram fitted with an exponential expression (Hollomon fitting).…”
Section: Fully Dense Specimens Plain Specimenssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Using the displacement fields measured inside a 5 mm central gage length of one of the plain specimens (DIC-ARAMIS), the stress-strain diagram was built (Figure 8b), and the Young's modulus E, the yield stress σy, the ultimate tensile strength σUTS, and the elongation at break εmax were calculated and are shown in Table 2. These results are comparable to those obtained with the same alloy subjected to a similar heat treatment by Geng et al [38]: the differences in the E and σUTS values are less than 4%, while that in the σy values, less than 20%. The red curve in Figure 8b corresponds to the stress-strain diagram fitted with an exponential expression (Hollomon fitting).…”
Section: Fully Dense Specimens Plain Specimenssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…Consequently, these models allow for a direct comparison with experiments. 37,38,57,64,65,67 Furthermore, finite-sized archimat models allow considering structural irregularities in a statistical manner. Typical irregularities are a misalignment of struts and vertices, 42,43,47,48,55,66,68,69 radius variations within individual struts, 55,67 porosity of the parent material 67 and missing struts or missing clusters of struts.…”
Section: Discrete Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To indicate the influence of the joint on the stiffness of the lattice, strut, beam, and solid element models were generated. A similar approach was invented by Geng et al [ 30 ] who used finite element models based on combined elements. Some of the Timoshenko beam elements in a unit cell in the middle of the loaded lattice structure were replaced with solid tetrahedral elements C3D10.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%