Energy Absorption of 3D Printed ABS and TPU Multimaterial Honeycomb Structures
Source abstract
Abstract
Advances in multimaterial 3D printing are enabling the construction of advantageous engineering structures that benefit from material synergies. Cellular structures, such as honeycombs, provide high-energy absorption to weight ratios that could benefit from multimaterial strategies to improve the safety and performance of engineered systems. In this study, we investigate the energy absorption for honeycombs with square and hexagonal unit cells constructed from acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) and thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU). Honeycombs were fabricated and tested for out-of-plane and in-plane compression using ABS, TPU, and a combination of ABS with a central TPU band of tunable height. Out-of-plane energy absorption for square honeycombs increased from 2.2 kN·mm for TPU samples to 11.5 kN·mm for ABS samples and energy absorption of hexagonal honeycombs increased from 2.9 to 15.1 kN·mm as proportions of TPU/ABS were altered. In-plane loading demonstrated a sequential collapse of unit cell rows in square honeycombs with energy absorption of 0.1 to 2.6 kN·mm and a gradual failure of hexagonal honeycombs with energy absorption of 0.6 to 2.0 kN·mm. These results demonstrate how multimaterial combinations affect honeycomb compressive response by highlighting their benefits for controlled energy absorption and deformation for tunable performance in diverse engineering applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Cellular and Composite Structures · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA.
References (54)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.01210.1016/j.compositesb.2018.02.012 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.11.00810.1016/j.bioactmat.2017.11.008 ↗
3. 10.3390/polym1309149910.3390/polym13091499 ↗
4. Chen T, , Mueller J, , Shea K. Integrated design and simulation of tunable, multi-state structures fabricated monolithically with multi-material 3D printing. Sci Rep, 2017; 7(1):1–8.
5. 10.1002/advs.20190230710.1002/advs.201902307 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.matdes.2022.11061310.1016/j.matdes.2022.110613 ↗
7. 10.1080/17452759.2019.160775810.1080/17452759.2019.1607758 ↗
8. 10.1080/17452759.2016.127449010.1080/17452759.2016.1274490 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.matdes.2020.10893010.1016/j.matdes.2020.108930 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.10721910.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107219 ↗
11. 10.1038/s41598-019-39953-110.1038/s41598-019-39953-1 ↗
12. 10.1177/030936462090522010.1177/0309364620905220 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.jcomc.2020.10005210.1016/j.jcomc.2020.100052 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.matdes.2017.10.02810.1016/j.matdes.2017.10.028 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.05.02910.1016/j.compstruct.2011.05.029 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2015.05.00110.1016/j.pmatsci.2015.05.001 ↗
17. 10.1089/3dp.2021.000410.1089/3dp.2021.0004 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.11551710.1016/j.compstruct.2022.115517 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.09.02710.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.09.027 ↗
20. 10.1115/1.403639610.1115/1.4036396 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.10749610.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107496 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.actbio.2015.10.04810.1016/j.actbio.2015.10.048 ↗
23. 10.1098/rsta.2005.167810.1098/rsta.2005.1678 ↗
24. 10.1089/3dp.2019.008910.1089/3dp.2019.0089 ↗
25. 10.1115/1.404221310.1115/1.4042213 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.addma.2020.10156210.1016/j.addma.2020.101562 ↗
27. 10.1007/s00170-019-04085-310.1007/s00170-019-04085-3 ↗
28. 10.1098/rsta.2005.169710.1098/rsta.2005.1697 ↗
29. 10.1089/3dp.2018.012510.1089/3dp.2018.0125 ↗
30. 10.1089/3dp.2019.003010.1089/3dp.2019.0030 ↗
31. 10.1115/1.403099510.1115/1.4030995 ↗
32. Munsch M. Laser additive manufacturing of customized prosthetics and implants for biomedical applications. In: Laser Additive Manufacturing. (Brandt M ed.) Woodhead Publishing; 2017; pp. 399–420.10.1016/B978-0-08-100433-3.00015-4 ↗
33. 10.1002/adem.20210064610.1002/adem.202100646 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.addma.2021.10184210.1016/j.addma.2021.101842 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.measurement.2017.11.03710.1016/j.measurement.2017.11.037 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.08.06210.1016/j.matdes.2016.08.062 ↗
37. 10.1063/1.500041310.1063/1.5000413 ↗
38. Gibson LJ Ashby MF. Cellular Solids: Structure and Properties 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge; 1997.10.1017/CBO9781139878326 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.01.01910.1016/j.compositesb.2017.01.019 ↗
40. Zhang X Yan P Yan B. The influence of interface design and external frame on the energy absorption performance of the semi-auxetic structure. 3D Print Add Manuf 2021.
41. 10.3390/ma1302045710.3390/ma13020457 ↗
42. ASTM D. 1621-04a: Standard test Method for Compressive Properties of Rigid Cellular Plastics. 1999 Annual Book of ASTM Standards; 2004; pp. 347–353.
43. 10.1016/0020-7403(92)90013-710.1016/0020-7403(92)90013-7 ↗
44. 10.1007/s00170-017-1314-x10.1007/s00170-017-1314-x ↗
45. 10.1016/j.mechmat.2004.08.00110.1016/j.mechmat.2004.08.001 ↗
46. 10.1016/j.cad.2016.05.01710.1016/j.cad.2016.05.017 ↗
47. 10.1108/1355254021044116610.1108/13552540210441166 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2014.08.00910.1016/j.ijmecsci.2014.08.009 ↗
49. 10.3389/fmech.2019.0003710.3389/fmech.2019.00037 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.matdes.2018.11.01910.1016/j.matdes.2018.11.019 ↗
51. Anni IA, , Uddin KZ, , Pagliocca N, et al. Out-of-plane load-bearing and mechanical energy absorption properties of flexible density-graded TPU honeycombs. Compos C Open Access, 2022; 8:100284.
52. 10.1038/s41598-021-98839-310.1038/s41598-021-98839-3 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.10534210.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.105342 ↗
54. Khatri NR Egan PF. Tailored Energy Absorption for 3D Printed Multi-Material Cellular Structures Using ABS and TPU. ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition; Virtual 2021.10.1115/IMECE2021-73699 ↗