2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2020.106989
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Low-energy impact response of composite sandwich panels with thermoplastic honeycomb and reentrant cores

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

1
23
0
3

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
1
23
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The second category of sandwich structures, on the other hand, is characterized by an internal core and skins, both made of plastic materials, which are usually lighter when compared to metallic materials. However, their energy absorption capability, related to elastic and fracture mechanisms, is far less than that provided by metallic absorbers [8,9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second category of sandwich structures, on the other hand, is characterized by an internal core and skins, both made of plastic materials, which are usually lighter when compared to metallic materials. However, their energy absorption capability, related to elastic and fracture mechanisms, is far less than that provided by metallic absorbers [8,9].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They also studied the energy absorption capability of 3D-printed PLA lightweight sandwich panels with architected cellular cores under low-velocity impact. Özen et al [19] also investigated the low-energy impact response of woven CFRP sandwich composite panels with 3D-printed thermoplastic ABS honeycomb and re-entrant cores, particularly their impact strength and energy dissipation behavior. Chen et al [20] performed a similar analysis on additive manufactured 3D re-entrant honeycombs under impact and quasi-static compression loading, in order to determine their energy absorption capability and failure modes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the design point of view, there are various architectures with different cell topology such as auxetic and honeycomb, which already are being used in the literature [ 1 , 15 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ]. Among them, honeycomb cells are the most common topology used to study the quasi-static and dynamic behavior of such structures [ 34 , 35 , 36 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among them, honeycomb cells are the most common topology used to study the quasi-static and dynamic behavior of such structures [ 34 , 35 , 36 ]. Corrugated and (meta-) sandwich structures are one of the common applications of lattice structures for the application of impact, bending resistance and energy absorbing systems [ 31 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 ]. The improvement of energy absorption of 2D lattice structures was experimentally and numerically investigated by gradual changes in the size of the unit cells [ 18 , 34 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%