Macroscale ceramic origami structures with hyper-elastic coating
Source abstract
Abstract
Origami-based technologies offer a promising avenue for constructing deployable, adaptable, and lightweight structures. While much of the research on origami-inspired metamaterials has been focused on materials with inherent flexibility and ductility, there is noteworthy importance in utilizing brittle materials that undergo catastrophic failure even in quasi-static loading. Herein, we explore the possibility of utilizing origami engineering to divert the catastrophic failure nature of brittle materials into a graceful failure mode. To induce flexibility, we 3D printed a ceramic-based Miura-ori structure and coated it with a biocompatible hyperelastic polymer. We performed quasi-static and cyclic compression tests in three orthogonal directions on the printed origami structure with and without the hyperelastic coating and compared them with finite element simulations. Remarkably, the simulations closely matched the outcomes of the actual experiments. Through the combination of experiments and numerical simulations, we observed consistently higher toughness in the coated origami structure compared to the uncoated one. Additionally, the increase in toughness varied across directions, with the most significant improvement occurring in the least stiff direction. This research sheds light on the mechanics of origami engineering within brittle materials at a macroscale, particularly suitable in applications such as prosthetics and other medical domains.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Materials and Mechanics · Innovations in Concrete and Construction Materials · Structural Analysis and Optimization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (44)
Show source-provided references
1. Meloni M, Cai J, Zhang Q, Lee DSH, Li M, Ma R, Parashkevov TE, Feng J (2021) Engineering origami: a comprehensive review of recent applications design methods and tools. Abstr Adv Sci 8(13). https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.v8.13. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.20200063610.1002/advs.v8.13 10.1002/advs.202000636 ↗
2. Johnson M, Chen Y, Hovet S, Xu S, Wood B, Ren H, Tokuda J, Tse ZTH (2017) Fabricating biomedical origami: a state-of-the-art review. Int J CARS 12:2023–2032. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-017-1545-110.1007/s11548-017-1545-1 ↗
3. Bolaños Quiñones VA, Zhu H, Solovev AA, Mei Y, Gracias DH (2018) Origami biosystems: 3D assembly methods for biomedical applications. Adv Biosys 2:1800230. https://doi.org/10.1002/adbi.20180023010.1002/adbi.201800230 ↗
4. Wei ZY, Guo ZV, Dudte L, Liang HY, Mahadevan L (2013) Geometric mechanics of periodic pleated origami. Phys Rev Lett 110:215501. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.21550110.1103/PhysRevLett.110.215501 ↗
5. Lv C, Krishnaraju D, Konjevod G, Yu H, Jiang H (2014) Origami based mechanical metamaterials. Sci Rep 4:5979. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep0597910.1038/srep05979 ↗
6. Gattas JM, You Z (2015) Geometric assembly of rigid-foldable morphing sandwich structures. Eng Struct 94:149–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.03.01910.1016/j.engstruct.2015.03.019 ↗
7. Fang H, Wang KW, Li S (2017) Asymmetric energy barrier and mechanical diode effect from folding multi-stable stacked-origami. Extreme Mech Lett 17:7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eml.2017.09.00810.1016/j.eml.2017.09.008 ↗
8. Xie R, Li J, Chen Y (2015) The graded origami structures. In: Volume 5B: 39th mechanisms and robotics conference. p. V05BT08A026. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Boston, Massachusetts. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2015-4608110.1115/DETC2015-46081 ↗
9. Schenk M, Guest SD (2013) Geometry of Miura-folded metamaterials. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110:3276–3281. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.121799811010.1073/pnas.1217998110 ↗
10. Filipov ET, Tachi T, Paulino GH (2015) Origami tubes assembled into stiff, yet reconfigurable structures and metamaterials. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112:12321–12326. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.150946511210.1073/pnas.1509465112 ↗
11. Jiao P, Mueller J, Raney JR, Zheng X, Alavi AH (2023) Mechanical metamaterials and beyond. Nat Commun 14:6004. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-41679-810.1038/s41467-023-41679-8 ↗
12. Yu X, Zhou J, Liang H, Jiang Z, Wu L (2018) Mechanical metamaterials associated with stiffness, rigidity and compressibility: a brief review. Prog Mater Sci 94:114–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.12.00310.1016/j.pmatsci.2017.12.003 ↗
13. Zhao Z, Kuang X, Wu J, Zhang Q, Paulino GH, Qi HJ, Fang D (2018) 3D printing of complex origami assemblages for reconfigurable structures. Soft Matter 14:8051–8059. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8SM01341A10.1039/C8SM01341A ↗
14. Wang RZ, Suo Z, Evans AG, Yao N, Aksay IA (2001) Deformation mechanisms in nacre. J Mater Res 16:2485–2493. https://doi.org/10.1557/JMR.2001.034010.1557/JMR.2001.0340 ↗
15. Sajadi SM, Vásárhelyi L, Mousavi R, Rahmati AH, Kónya Z, Kukovecz Á, Arif T, Filleter T, Vajtai R, Boul P, Pang Z, Li T, Tiwary CS, Rahman MM, Ajayan PM (2021) Damage-tolerant 3D-printed ceramics via conformal coating. Sci Adv 7:eabc5028. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abc502810.1126/sciadv.abc5028 ↗
16. Rashed A, Yazdani M, Babaluo A, Hajizadeh Parvin P (2016) Investigation on high-velocity impact performance of multi-layered alumina ceramic armors with polymeric interlayers. J Compos Mater 50:3561–3576. https://doi.org/10.1177/002199831562298210.1177/0021998315622982 ↗
17. Eddings MA, Johnson MA, Gale BK (2008) Determining the optimal PDMS–PDMS bonding technique for microfluidic devices. J Micromech Microeng 18:067001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0960-1317/18/6/06700110.1088/0960-1317/18/6/067001 ↗
18. Lubliner J, Oliver J, Oller S, Oñate E (1989) A plastic-damage model for concrete. Int J Solids Struct 25:299–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7683(89)90050-410.1016/0020-7683(89)90050-4 ↗
19. Lee J, Fenves GL (1998) Plastic-damage model for cyclic loading of concrete structures. J Eng Mech 124:892–900. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1998)124:8(892)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(1998)124:8(892) ↗
20. Abaqus 6.13 Documentation. http://130.149.89.49:2080/v6.13/index.html. Accessed 22 Jan 2024.
21. Arruda EM, Boyce MC (1993) A three-dimensional constitutive model for the large stretch behavior of rubber elastic materials. J Mech Phys Solids 41:389–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(93)90013-610.1016/0022-5096(93)90013-6 ↗
22. Seibert DJ, Schöche N (2000) Direct comparison of some recent rubber elasticity models. Rubber Chem Technol 73:366–384. https://doi.org/10.5254/1.354759710.5254/1.3547597 ↗
23. Johnston ID, McCluskey DK, Tan CKL, Tracey MC (2014) Mechanical characterization of bulk Sylgard 184 for microfluidics and microengineering. J Micromech Microeng 24:035017. https://doi.org/10.1088/0960-1317/24/3/03501710.1088/0960-1317/24/3/035017 ↗
24. Zhang N, Zheng S, Liu Z (2017) Numerical simulation and experimental study of crack propagation of polydimethylsiloxane. Procedia Engineering 214:59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.19110.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.191 ↗
25. Kong XQ, Zhou P, Wu CW (2011) Numerical simulation of microneedles’ insertion into skin. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 14:827–835. https://doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2010.49714410.1080/10255842.2010.497144 ↗
26. Børvik T, Hopperstad OS, Berstad T, Langseth M (2002) Perforation of 12mm thick steel plates by 20mm diameter projectiles with flat, hemispherical and conical noses. Int J Impact Eng 27:37–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0734-743X(01)00035-510.1016/S0734-743X(01)00035-5 ↗
27. Arias A, Rodríguez-Martínez JA, Rusinek A (2008) Numerical simulations of impact behaviour of thin steel plates subjected to cylindrical, conical and hemispherical non-deformable projectiles. Eng Fract Mech 75:1635–1656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.06.00510.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.06.005 ↗
28. Kulkarni SS, Choi KS, Kuang W, Menon N, Mills B, Soulami A, Simmons K (2021) Damage evolution in polymer due to exposure to high-pressure hydrogen gas. Int J Hydrogen Energy 46:19001–19022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.03.03510.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.03.035 ↗
29. Shu W, Heimark H, Bertollo N, Tobin DJ, O’Cearbhaill ED, Annaidh AN (2021) Insights into the mechanics of solid conical microneedle array insertion into skin using the finite element method. Acta Biomater 135:403–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2021.08.04510.1016/j.actbio.2021.08.045 ↗
30. Zhu YX, Liu YL, Yang H, Li HP (2013) Improvement of the accuracy and the computational efficiency of the springback prediction model for the rotary-draw bending of rectangular H96 tube. Int J Mech Sci 66:224–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2012.11.01210.1016/j.ijmecsci.2012.11.012 ↗
31. Ma J, Song J, Chen Y (2018) An origami-inspired structure with graded stiffness. Int J Mech Sci 136:134–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.12.02610.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.12.026 ↗
32. Yuan L, Dai H, Song J, Ma J, Chen Y (2020) The behavior of a functionally graded origami structure subjected to quasi-static compression. Mater Des 189:108494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.10849410.1016/j.matdes.2020.108494 ↗
33. Chen Z, Li Z, Li J, Liu C, Lao C, Fu Y, Liu C, Li Y, Wang P, He Y (2019) 3D printing of ceramics: a review. J Eur Ceram Soc 39:661–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2018.11.01310.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2018.11.013 ↗
34. High resolution SLA and SLS 3D printers for professionals. In: Formlabs. https://formlabs.com/. Accessed 22 Jan 2024.
35. Ritchie RO (2011) The conflicts between strength and toughness. Nature Mater 10:817–822. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat311510.1038/nmat3115 ↗
36. Studart AR (2014) Turning brittleness into toughness. Nature Mater 13:433–435. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat395510.1038/nmat3955 ↗
37. Greco F, Leonetti L, Pranno A, Rudykh S (2020) Mechanical behavior of bio-inspired nacre-like composites: a hybrid multiscale modeling approach. Compos Struct 233:111625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.11162510.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111625 ↗
38. Li C, Lei H, Liu Y, Zhang X, Xiong J, Zhou H, Fang D (2018) Crushing behavior of multi-layer metal lattice panel fabricated by selective laser melting. Int J Mech Sci 145:389–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.07.02910.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.07.029 ↗
39. Zienkiewicz OC, Gerstner RW (1960) A stress-function approach to interface and mixed boundary-condition problems (boundary conditions and finite-difference techniques). Int J Mech Sci 2:93–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7403(60)90015-110.1016/0020-7403(60)90015-1 ↗
40. Genikomsou AS, Polak MA (2015) Finite element analysis of punching shear of concrete slabs using damaged plasticity model in ABAQUS. Eng Struct 98:38–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.04.01610.1016/j.engstruct.2015.04.016 ↗
41. Kesner KE, Billington SL, Douglas KS (2003) Cyclic response of highly ductile fiber-reinforced cement-based composites. Mater J 100. https://doi.org/10.14359/1281310.14359/12813 ↗
42. Meier T, Li R, Mavrikos S, Blankenship B, Vangelatos Z, Yildizdag ME, Grigoropoulos CP (2024) Obtaining auxetic and isotropic metamaterials in counterintuitive design spaces: an automated optimization approach and experimental characterization. Npj Comput Mater 10:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-023-01186-210.1038/s41524-023-01186-2 ↗
43. Sheikh HM, Meier T, Blankenship B, Vangelatos Z, Zhao N, Marcus PS, Grigoropoulos CP (2022) Systematic design of Cauchy symmetric structures through Bayesian optimization. Int J Mech Sci 236:107741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.10774110.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.107741 ↗
44. Vangelatos Z, Sheikh HM, Marcus PS, Grigoropoulos CP, Lopez VZ, Flamourakis G, Farsari M (2021) Strength through defects: a novel Bayesian approach for the optimization of architected materials. Sci Adv. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abk221810.1126/sciadv.abk2218 ↗