Experimental and Numerical Modal Analysis of Composite Sandwich Structures Using Surfboards as Model Systems
Source abstract
Abstract
Composite sandwich structures derive their mechanical behaviour from the interaction between lightweight cores and stiff fibre‐reinforced skins, making their dynamic response highly sensitive to laminate design and reinforcement strategies. This study investigates the vibrational behaviour of surfboards as representative composite sandwich structures using combined experimental and numerical modal analysis. Boards with wooden stringers, without stringers, and with a composite spine reinforcement were tested using a hammer–accelerometer setup to extract frequency response functions. Poly(urethane) (PU)‐core boards with wooden stringers exhibited two distinctive local ‘stringer modes’ (400–450 Hz), observable only when excitation and sensing were aligned with the stringer. Expanded/extruded poly(styrene) (EPS) boards without reinforcements showed no such modes and displayed only global bending and torsional responses. EPS boards incorporating a composite spine exhibited two high‐frequency local modes (570–632.5 Hz), confirming that reinforcements create characteristic dynamic signatures. Finite element simulations reproduced global modal behaviour with a 2.7% average error. These findings demonstrate modal analysis as an effective tool for characterising flex behaviour and structural integrity in composite sandwich structures.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Composite Structure Analysis and Optimization · Aeroelasticity and Vibration Control · Structural Analysis and Optimization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Surf Flex Lab and School of Science University of Wollongong Wollongong NSW Australia
Department of Mechanical Engineering Politecnico di Milano Milan Italy
Funding
University of Wollongong
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. Kenned D. M. · 202510.1007/978-3-031-80979-8 ↗
2. Warren A. · 2024
3. McCagh S. · 2013
4. 10.3390/ma1110184110.3390/ma11101841 ↗
5. Greeley T. · 1997 · 22410.1520/STP12277S ↗
6. 10.1002/app.5648810.1002/app.56488 ↗
7. Zenkert D. · 1997
8. Gere J. M. · 1997
9. Reddy J. N. · 200310.1201/b12409 ↗
10. A.Fischer The Inertia Let's Talk about Flex: Everything You Need to Know about Flex 2015 accessed November 26 2025 https://www.theinertia.com/surf/lets‐talk‐about‐flex‐everything‐you‐need‐to‐know‐about‐surfboard‐flex/.
11. 10.3390/proceedings202004906510.3390/proceedings2020049065 ↗
12. 10.3390/polym1512270310.3390/polym15122703 ↗
13. Fu Z. F. · 2001
14. Inman D. J. · 2014
15. Ewins D. J. · 2000
16. 10.5957/jst.2017.0510.5957/jst.2017.05 ↗
17. Russell D. A. · 2025
18. 10.1007/s11340‐013‐9803‐910.1007/s11340‐013‐9803‐9 ↗
19. Haake S. · 1996
20. D. A.Russell Vibrational Modes of a Racquetball Racket Acoustics and Vibration Animation 2011 accessed November 26 2025 https://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/Demos/Rackets/Racket.html.
21. 10.1080/02640414.2018.146257810.1080/02640414.2018.1462578 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.proeng.2012.04.06010.1016/j.proeng.2012.04.060 ↗
23. 10.1155/2016/608423010.1155/2016/6084230 ↗
24. 10.1121/1.39233810.1121/1.392338 ↗
25. 10.3390/jcm1014308310.3390/jcm10143083 ↗
26. 10.3109/08990220.2011.62249310.3109/08990220.2011.622493 ↗
27. 10.1093/gerona/58.8.b68010.1093/gerona/58.8.b680 ↗
28. Characterization of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Rigid Polyurethane Foam
29. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2003.04.00110.1016/j.compositesb.2003.04.001 ↗
30. 10.1080/15583058.2020.182587610.1080/15583058.2020.1825876 ↗
31. 10.1007/s00707‐023‐03598‐z10.1007/s00707‐023‐03598‐z ↗
32. 10.1038/s41598‐024‐58387‐y10.1038/s41598‐024‐58387‐y ↗
33. Shapers Spine Tek Shapers Manufacturing Co 2018 accessed November 20 2025 https://shapers.com.au/shapers‐spinetek.