Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 54, Issue 8, pp 6286–6300 | Cite as

Energy absorption of a bio-inspired honeycomb sandwich panel

  • Ngoc San Ha
  • Guoxing LuEmail author
  • Xinmei Xiang
Computation
  • 146 Downloads

Abstract

In this study, a novel bio-inspired honeycomb sandwich panel (BHSP) based on the microstructure of a woodpecker’s beak is proposed. Unlike a conventional honeycomb, the walls of the bio-inspired honeycomb (BH), which is used as the core of a sandwich panel, are made wavy. Finite element simulation shows that under dynamic crushing the proposed BHSPs exhibit superior energy absorption capability compared with the conventional honeycomb sandwich panel (CHSP). In particular, the specific energy absorption (SEA) of the BHSP increases by 125% and 63.7%, respectively, compared with that of the honeycomb sandwich panel with the same thickness core or the same volume core. In addition, a parametric study of the BHSPs is carried out to investigate the influences of the wave amplitude, wave number and core thickness on the energy absorption performance of the BHSPs. It is found that the BH core with a larger wave number and amplitude shows higher SEA. Furthermore, an increase in core thickness can improve the SEA. These results provide guidelines in the design of a lightweight sandwich panel for high-energy absorption capability.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Australian Research Council for the financial support through a Discovery Grant (DP160102612).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Zhu F, Lu G, Ruan D, Wang Z (2010) Plastic deformation, failure and energy absorption of sandwich structures with metallic cellular cores. Int J Protect Struct 1:507–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Birman V, Kardomateas GA (2018) Review of current trends in research and applications of sandwich structures. Compos Part B Eng 142:221–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Manalo A, Aravinthan T, Fam A, Benmokrane B (2017) State-of-the-art review on FRP sandwich systems for lightweight civil infrastructure. J Compos Constr 21:04016068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Feng L-J, Wei G-T, Yu G-C, Wu L-Z (2019) Underwater blast behaviors of enhanced lattice truss sandwich panels. Int J Mech Sci 150:238–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liu C, Zhang YX, Li J (2017) Impact responses of sandwich panels with fibre metal laminate skins and aluminium foam core. Compos Struct 182:183–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yahaya MA, Ruan D, Lu G, Dargusch MS (2015) Response of aluminium honeycomb sandwich panels subjected to foam projectile impact—an experimental study. Int J Impact Eng 75:100–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sun G, Chen D, Huo X, Zheng G, Li Q (2018) Experimental and numerical studies on indentation and perforation characteristics of honeycomb sandwich panels. Compos Struct 184:110–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rong Y, Liu J, Luo W, He W (2018) Effects of geometric configurations of corrugated cores on the local impact and planar compression of sandwich panels. Compos Part B Eng 152:324–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang J, Shi C, Yang N, Sun H, Liu Y, Song B (2018) Strength, stiffness, and panel peeling strength of carbon fiber-reinforced composite sandwich structures with aluminium honeycomb cores for vehicle body. Compos Struct 184:1189–1196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mozafari H, Khatami S, Molatefi H (2015) Out of plane crushing and local stiffness determination of proposed foam filled sandwich panel for Korean Tilting Train eXpress—numerical study. Mater Des 66:400–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burlayenko VN, Sadowski T (2010) Effective elastic properties of foam-filled honeycomb cores of sandwich panels. Compos Struct 92:2890–2900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chen J, Fang H, Liu W et al (2018) Energy absorption of foam-filled multi-cell composite panels under quasi-static compression. Compos Part B Eng 153:295–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Han B, Qin K, Yu B, Wang B, Zhang Q, Lu TJ (2016) Honeycomb–corrugation hybrid as a novel sandwich core for significantly enhanced compressive performance. Mater Des 93:271–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Imbalzano G, Linforth S, Ngo TD, Lee PVS, Tran P (2018) Blast resistance of auxetic and honeycomb sandwich panels: comparisons and parametric designs. Compos Struct 183:242–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Qi C, Remennikov A, Pei L-Z, Yang S, Yu Z-H, Ngo TD (2017) Impact and close-in blast response of auxetic honeycomb-cored sandwich panels: experimental tests and numerical simulations. Compos Struct 180:161–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jin X, Wang Z, Ning J, Xiao G, Liu E, Shu X (2016) Dynamic response of sandwich structures with graded auxetic honeycomb cores under blast loading. Compos Part B Eng 106:206–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhao L, Qian X, Sun Y et al (2018) Ballistic behaviors of injection-molded honeycomb composite. J Mater Sci 53:14287–14298.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-018-2611-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Xiang XM, Lu G, Ruan D, You Z, Zolghadr M (2017) Large deformation of an arc-Miura structure under quasi-static load. Compos Struct 182:209–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fischer S (2015) Aluminium foldcores for sandwich structure application: mechanical properties and FE-simulation. Thin Walled Struct 90:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gattas JM, You Z (2015) The behaviour of curved-crease foldcores under low-velocity impact loads. Int J Solids Struct 53:80–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McKittrick J, Chen PY, Tombolato L et al (2010) Energy absorbent natural materials and bioinspired design strategies: a review. Mater Sci Eng, C 30:331–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang B, Yang W, McKittrick J, Meyers MA (2016) Keratin: structure, mechanical properties, occurrence in biological organisms, and efforts at bioinspiration. Prog Mater Sci 76:229–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weaver JC, Milliron GW, Miserez A et al (2012) The stomatopod dactyl club: a formidable damage-tolerant biological hammer. Science 336:1275–1280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chen J, Zhang X, Okabe Y, Saito K, Guo Z, Pan L (2017) The deformation mode and strengthening mechanism of compression in the beetle elytron plate. Mater Des 131:481–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ha NS, Le VT, Goo NS (2018) Investigation of punch resistance of the Allomyrira dichtoloma beetle forewing. J Bionic Eng 15:57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xiang J, Du J, Li D, Scarpa F (2017) Numerical analysis of the impact resistance in aluminum alloy bi-tubular thin-walled structures designs inspired by beetle elytra. J Mater Sci 52:13247–13260.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-017-1420-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hao P, Du J (2018) Mechanical properties of bio-mimetic energy-absorbing materials under impact loading. J Mater Sci 53:3189–3197.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-017-1798-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yang X, Ma J, Shi Y, Sun Y, Yang J (2017) Crashworthiness investigation of the bio-inspired bi-directionally corrugated core sandwich panel under quasi-static crushing load. Mater Des 135:275–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wu Y, Liu Q, Fu J, Li Q, Hui D (2017) Dynamic crash responses of bio-inspired aluminium honeycomb sandwich structures with CFRP panels. Compos Part B Eng 121:122–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhang X, Xie J, Chen J, Okabe Y, Pan L, Xu M (2017) The beetle elytron plate: a lightweight, high-strength and buffering functional-structural bionic material. Sci Rep 7:4440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yu X, Pan L, Chen J, Zhang X, Wei P (2019) Experimental and numerical study on the energy absorption abilities of trabecular–honeycomb biomimetic structures inspired by beetle elytra. J Mater Sci 54:2193–2204.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-018-2958-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang L, Cheung JT-M, Pu F, Li D, Zhang M, Fan Y (2011) Why do woodpeckers resist head impact injury: a biomechanical investigation. PLoS ONE 6:e26490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Liu Y, Qiu X, Zhang X, Yu T (2015) Response of woodpecker’s head during pecking process simulated by material point method. PLoS ONE 10:e0122677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liu Y, Qiu X, Ma H, Fu W, Yu TX (2017) A study of woodpecker’s pecking process and the impact response of its brain. Int J Impact Eng 108:263–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lee N, Horstemeyer MF, Rhee H, Nabors B, Liao J, Williams LN (2014) Hierarchical multiscale structure–property relationships of the red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes carolinus) beak. J R Soc Interface 11:20140274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Alkhatib SE, Tarlochan F, Eyvazian A (2017) Collapse behavior of thin-walled corrugated tapered tubes. Eng Struct 150:674–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ha NS, Lu G, Xiang X (2018) High energy absorption efficiency of thin-walled conical corrugation tubes mimicking coconut tree configuration. Int J Mech Sci 148:409–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tarlochan F, Samer F, Hamouda AMS, Ramesh S, Khalid K (2013) Design of thin wall structures for energy absorption applications: enhancement of crashworthiness due to axial and oblique impact forces. Thin Walled Struct 71:7–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ashab ASM, Ruan D, Lu G, Bhuiyan A (2016) Finite element analysis of aluminium honeycombs subjected to dynamic indentation and compression loads. Materials 9:162–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Xu S, Beynon JH, Ruan D, Lu G (2012) Experimental study of the out-of-plane dynamic compression of hexagonal honeycombs. Compos Struct 94:2326–2336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zhang X, Zhang H, Wen Z (2014) Experimental and numerical studies on the crush resistance of aluminium honeycombs with various cell configurations. Int J Impact Eng 66:48–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wierzbicki T (1983) Crushing analysis of metal honeycombs. Int J Impact Eng 1:157–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Science, Engineering and TechnologySwinburne University of TechnologyHawthornAustralia
  2. 2.School of Civil EngineeringGuangzhou UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations