Comparison of Brazed Residual Stress and Thermal Deformation between X-Type and Pyramidal Lattice Truss Sandwich Structure: Neutron Diffraction Measurement and Simulation Study
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This paper uses finite element method and neutron diffraction measurement to study the residual stress in lattice truss sandwich structure. A comparison of residual stress and thermal deformation between X-type and pyramidal lattice truss sandwich structure has been carried out. The residual stresses are concentrated in the middle joint and then decreases gradually to both the ends. The residual stresses in the X-type lattice truss sandwich structure are smaller than those in pyramidal structure. The maximum longitudinal and transverse stresses of pyramidal structure are 220 and 202 MPa, respectively, but they decrease to 190 and 145 MPa for X-type lattice truss sandwich structure, respectively. The thermal deformation for lattice truss sandwich panel structure is of wave shape. The X-type has a better resistance to thermal deformation than pyramidal lattice truss sandwich structure. The maximum wave deformation of pyramidal structure (0.02 mm) is about twice as that of X-type (0.01 mm) at the same brazing condition.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Cellular and Composite Structures · Structural Analysis and Optimization · Mechanical Behavior of Composites
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
College of Chemical Engineering, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266555, PR China
Neutron Science Division, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 1045 Daedeok-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-353, South Korea
References (31)
Show source-provided references
1. [1] G.W. Kooistra and H.N.G. Wadley, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 28 (2007) 507–514.10.1016/j.matdes.2005.08.013 ↗
2. [2] X. Wang, J. Gong, Y. Zhao and Y. Wang, High Temp. Mater. Process. (2014), DOI: 10.1515/htmp-2014-0039.10.1515/htmp-2014-0039 ↗
3. [3] J.S. Moita, A.L. Araújo, C.M. Mota Soares and C.A. Mota Soares, Adv. Eng. Softw., 66 (2013) 34–39.10.1016/j.advengsoft.2012.10.002 ↗
4. [4] D.T. Queheillalt, Y. Murty and H.N.G. Wadley, Scripta Mater., 58 (2008) 76–79.10.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.08.041 ↗
5. [5] F. Côté, V.S. Deshpande and N.A. Fleck, Scripta Mater., 56 (2007) 585–588.10.1016/j.scriptamat.2006.12.035 ↗
6. [6] F. Côté, N.A. Fleck and V.S. Deshpande, Int. J. Fatigue, 29 (2007) 1402–1412.10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2006.11.013 ↗
7. [7] S.M. Oppenheimer and D.C. Dunand, Acta Mater., 55 (2007) 3825–3834.10.1016/j.actamat.2007.02.033 ↗
8. [8] Z.G. Fan, C.Q. Chen and T.J. Lu, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 540 (2012) 83–88.10.1016/j.msea.2012.01.086 ↗
9. [9] T. Kim, H.P. Hodson and T.J. Lu, Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer, 48 (2005) 4243–4264.10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2005.04.026 ↗
10. [10] T.J. Lu, L. Valdevit and A.G. Evans, Prog. Mater. Sci., 50 (2005) 789–815.10.1016/j.pmatsci.2005.03.001 ↗
11. [11] W.-C. Jiang, H. Chen, J.M. Gong and S.T. Tu, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 528 (2011) 4715–4722.10.1016/j.msea.2011.02.073 ↗
12. [12] W.-chun Jiang, B. Yang, B.Y. Wang, H. Chen and J.M. Gong, Mater. Des., 49 (2013) 1048–1055.10.1016/j.matdes.2013.01.059 ↗
13. [13] G. Zhang, B. Wang, Li. Ma, J. Xiong and L. Wu, Comp. Struct., 100 (2013) 451–463.10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.01.012 ↗
14. [14] D.T. Queheillalt and H.N.G. Wadley, Mater. Des., 30(2009) (1975) 1966–.10.1016/j.matdes.2008.09.015 ↗
15. [15] C.T. Chang and R.K. Shiue, Int. J. Refractory Metals Hard Mater., 23 (2005) 161–170.10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2005.01.002 ↗
16. [16] R. Monti, F. Coppola, P. Gasbarri and U. Lecci, Acta Astronaut., 66 (2010) 897–913.10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.09.009 ↗
17. [17] J.E. LaRue and S.R. Daniewicz, Int. J. Fatigue, 29 (2007) 508–515.10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2006.05.008 ↗
18. [18] L.Y. Chen, G.Z. Wang, J.P. Tan, F.Z. Xuan and S.T. Tu, Eng. Fract. Mech., 97 (2013) 80–91.10.1016/j.engfracmech.2012.10.020 ↗
19. [19] A. Joseph, S.K. Rai, T. Jayakumar and N. Murugan, Int. J. PVP, 82 (2005) 700–705.10.1016/j.ijpvp.2005.03.006 ↗
20. [20] M.K. Khan, M.E. Fitzpatrick, S.V. Hainsworth, A.D. Evans and L. Edwards, Acta Mater., 59 (2011) 7508–7520.10.1016/j.actamat.2011.08.034 ↗
21. [21] R. Delville, B. Malard, J. Pilch, P. Sittner and D. Schryvers, Acta Mater., 58 (2010) 4503–4515.10.1016/j.actamat.2010.04.046 ↗
22. [22] D.W. Brown, T.M. Holden, B. Clausen, M.B. Prime, T.A. Sisneros, H. Swenson and J. Vaja, Acta Mater., 59 (2011) 864–873.10.1016/j.actamat.2010.09.022 ↗
23. [23] R.U. Vaidya, P. Rangaswamy, M.A.M. Bourke and D.P. Butt, Acta Mater., 46 (1998) 2047–2061.10.1016/S1359-6454(97)00429-1 ↗
24. [24] N.R. Hamilton, M.O. Robbie, J. Wood, A. Galloway, I. Katramados and J. Milnes, Fus. Eng. Des., 86 (2011) 1642–1645.10.1016/j.fusengdes.2011.04.027 ↗
25. [25] M. Akbari, S. Buhl, C. Leinenbach, R. Spolenak and K. Wegener, Mech. Mater., 52 (2012) 69–77.10.1016/j.mechmat.2012.04.010 ↗
26. [26] M. Jacobs, G. Van Oost, J. Degrieck, I. De Baere, A. Gusarov and V. Massaut, Fus. Eng. Des., 86 (2011) 2831–2838.10.1016/j.fusengdes.2011.05.003 ↗
27. [27] Y. He, J. Zhang, F. Pan, C. Liu and X. Li, Ceram. Int., 39 (2013) 709–718.10.1016/j.ceramint.2012.06.082 ↗
28. [29] O. Muránsky, C.J. Hamelin, M.C. Smith, P.J. Bendeich and L. Edwards, Comput Mater Sci., 54 (2012) 125–134.10.1016/j.commatsci.2011.10.026 ↗
29. [30] W. Woo, G.B. An, E.J. Kingston, A.T. DeWald, D.J. Smith and M.R. Hill, Acta Mater., 61 (2013) 3564–3574.10.1016/j.actamat.2013.02.034 ↗
30. [31] Q. Zhang, Y. Han, C. Chen and T. Lu, Sci. China Ser. E Technol. Sci., 52 (2009) 2147–2154.10.1007/s11431-009-0219-9 ↗
31. [32] Q. Zhang, A. Chen, C. Chen and T. Lu, Sci. China Series E: Technol. Sci., 52 (2009) 2670–2680.10.1007/s11431-009-0228-8 ↗