Ballistic performance of a novel auxetic core in sandwich structures under impact loading
Source abstract
Abstract
To enhance energy absorption and ballistic resistance, a novel auxetic unit cell is incorporated into sandwich structures and evaluated in this work. Starting from a perforated design domain and tested under regulated compressive and impact loading conditions, a topology optimization technique is used to create a re-entrant braced auxetic (REBA) geometry with auxetic behavior. When compared to traditional designs, the resultant unit cell significantly improves specific energy absorption under quasi-static compression and shows a negative Poisson’s ratio. Finite element simulations confirm that the optimized core offers enhanced mechanical performance compared to conventional lattice designs. Using a hemispherical shell, the new unit cell is further incorporated into a sandwich design with many layers, mimicking the use of ballistic impact. Superior ballistic resistance and energy dissipation over conventional core designs are demonstrated by high-velocity impact simulations, highlighting the suggested structure’s potential for defensive applications. The results demonstrate how well topology-driven design works to customize cellular materials for impact loads.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Cellular and Composite Structures · Topology Optimization in Engineering · Automotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Ghent University
China University of Mining and Technology
King Khalid University
Tongji University
Jožef Stefan Institute
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China · Shanghai Pilot Program for Basic Research, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities · Deanship of Research and Graduate Studies at King Khalid University for funding this work through the Large Group Project
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.rineng.2025.10766010.1016/j.rineng.2025.107660 ↗
2. 10.1088/1361-665X/aaa61c10.1088/1361-665X/aaa61c ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.01.02710.1016/j.compositesb.2018.01.027 ↗
4. Allen HG. Analysis and design of structural sandwich panels. Elsevier, 2013.
5. 10.3390/polym1420426710.3390/polym14204267 ↗
6. 10.3390/ma1416473110.3390/ma14164731 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.08.00710.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.08.007 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.tws.2020.10686910.1016/j.tws.2020.106869 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.07.01310.1016/j.compositesb.2013.07.013 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.10.01310.1016/j.compstruct.2009.10.013 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2014.07.01910.1016/j.ijimpeng.2014.07.019 ↗
12. 10.1177/109963621875766910.1177/1099636218757669 ↗
13. 10.1177/002199831769542310.1177/0021998317695423 ↗
14. 10.1177/109963621668946210.1177/1099636216689462 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.05.00710.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.05.007 ↗
16. 10.3390/polym1422486610.3390/polym14224866 ↗
17. 10.1177/09636935110200050210.1177/096369351102000502 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2016.12.03310.1016/j.compscitech.2016.12.033 ↗
19. 10.1177/109963621881341210.1177/1099636218813412 ↗
20. 10.1177/109963620403821710.1177/1099636204038217 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.07.02510.1016/j.compstruct.2013.07.025 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.03.02810.1016/j.compstruct.2011.03.028 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2010.03.00610.1016/j.ijimpeng.2010.03.006 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.09.00410.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.09.004 ↗
25. Mohamed R, Lawaty S, El-Butch. Ballistic impact response of an aluminium sandwich panel with auxetic honeycomb core structure. The International Conference on Applied Mechanics and Mechanical Engineering 2016; 17: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.21608/amme.2016.3516710.21608/amme.2016.35167 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.finmec.2026.10035410.1016/j.finmec.2026.100354 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.04.00710.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.04.007 ↗
28. 10.1007/s00419-024-02636-z10.1007/s00419-024-02636-z ↗
29. 10.1177/109963621456519010.1177/1099636214565190 ↗
30. Yang L, Harrysson O, West H, et al. A comparison of bending properties for cellular core sandwich panels. Mater Sci Appl 2013; 4: 471–477. https://doi.org/10.4236/msa.2013.48057
31. Utham AV, Watts G, Mishra RR. Numerical assessment of blast performance of a sandwich structure with novel circular re-entrant star honeycomb auxetic core. J Sandw Struct Mater 2025; 28: 10996362251411359–10996362251411945. https://doi.org/10.1177/10996362251411359
32. 10.1016/j.cja.2020.09.02010.1016/j.cja.2020.09.020 ↗
33. 10.1002/adem.20230188710.1002/adem.202301887 ↗
34. 10.1177/0954406222110061410.1177/09544062221100614 ↗
35. 10.3390/ma1602052010.3390/ma16020520 ↗
36. 10.1002/adem.20230045110.1002/adem.202300451 ↗
37. 10.1177/1099636224127280810.1177/10996362241272808 ↗
38. 10.1080/15376494.2024.236145210.1080/15376494.2024.2361452 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.10679310.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106793 ↗
40. Johnson GR. A constitutive model and data for materials subjected to large strains high strain rates and high temperatures. In: Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on ballistics The Hague 19-21 April 1983 pp. 541–547.
41. 10.1088/1742-6596/1906/1/01205810.1088/1742-6596/1906/1/012058 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.10805410.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.108054 ↗