An experimental and finite element analysis of 3D printed honeycomb structures under axial compression
Source abstract
Abstract
The present study focuses on maximum compressive force of honeycomb structures produced from polylactic acid (PLA) and acrylonitrile butadiene styrene filament using an Ultimaker hot plate 3D printer. A honeycomb structure with an equal surface area and three different cell sizes and wall thickness was designed. The samples were produced with a cell width (d) of 6 mm, 9 mm, 12 mm, a cell wall thickness (t) of 0.8 mm, 1.2 mm, 1.6 mm and a cell height (h) of 10 mm, 20 mm and 30 mm for each cell width, respectively. The produced samples were weighed in order to calculate their porosity percentages. During the compression test, the highest compressive force was obtained from the samples produced from PLA filament with a cell height of 10 mm, a width of 12 mm and a wall thickness of 1.6 mm. Similarly, a detailed finite elements analysis of three structures with different cell widths and thicknesses using ANSYS® software yielded results similar to the experimental study. ANSYS® results were reliable in the range of approximately 81–98%. Thus, although the cell width in honeycomb structures with an equal surface area was increased using both experimental and finite elements method, it was observed that the wall thickness was directly proportional to a higher maximum compressive force.
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 Machinery and Metal Technology, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye
Department of Mechanical Engineering, İnönü University, Malatya, Türkiye
Funding
InÃ&z.hfl;¶nÃ&z.hfl;¼ Ã&z.hfl;œniversitesi
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. HexaPan honeycomb brand website. https://www.hexapan.com/tr/ (Accessed 10.03.2021).
2. 10.1177/096739111882227310.1177/0967391118822273 ↗
3. Vasanthanathan A, Navin Kumar C. Fabrication of aluminum honeycomb cored carbon fabric/epoxy composite sandwich structures via vacuum assisted resin infusion technique. Polym Composites 43(3): 1407–1420.10.1002/pc.26461 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.eml.2016.02.01210.1016/j.eml.2016.02.012 ↗
5. La Saponara V, Kamaya S. Evaluation of static compression properties of notched stitched sandwich structures. In 45th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics & Materials Conference, 19–22 April 2004. CA: AIAA10.2514/6.2004-1704 ↗
6. Aslan M · Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi · 2018 · 24 · 1062
7. 10.37358/MP.17.1.478810.37358/MP.17.1.4788 ↗
8. Kıyak B · Fırat Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi · 2019 · 31 · 47
9. 10.1177/089270572199789210.1177/0892705721997892 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2010.10.00710.1016/j.compstruct.2010.10.007 ↗
11. 10.1177/09673911080160040210.1177/096739110801600402 ↗
12. Arslan N · Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Fen ve Mühendislik Dergisi · 2002 · 4 · 113
13. Solmaz MY · Fırat Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi · 2018 · 30 · 277
14. 10.1177/096739112097350810.1177/0967391120973508 ↗
15. 10.1007/s12206-016-1216-010.1007/s12206-016-1216-0 ↗
16. Akour SN, Maaitah HZ. Effect of core material stiffness on sandwich panel behavior beyond the yield limit. In Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering, 2010.
17. 10.1177/09673911170250050710.1177/096739111702500507 ↗
18. 10.1177/09673911100180040110.1177/096739111001800401 ↗
19. 10.1080/20550340.2017.130633710.1080/20550340.2017.1306337 ↗
20. 10.1007/s00170-021-07382-y10.1007/s00170-021-07382-y ↗
21. 10.1177/109963621875858910.1177/1099636218758589 ↗
22. 10.1111/ijac.1339910.1111/ijac.13399 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.10369610.1016/j.ijimpeng.2020.103696 ↗
24. 10.3390/polym1201024610.3390/polym12010246 ↗
25. 10.1088/1757-899X/297/1/01201810.1088/1757-899X/297/1/012018 ↗
26. ASTM C365-16 · 2004
27. 2022
28. 2020
29. ASTM D695-15 · 2020
30. Ertane EG · 2018