Performance Optimization of Auxetic Structures on Energy Absorption of Cylindrical Sandwich Using Taguchi and ANOVA Methods

Abstract

High engineering requirements of shock absorbers have increased interest in auxetic materials, which have higher specific energy absorption performance compared to conventional solid absorbers. Last decade, many optimization studies were conducted to improve the energy absorption performance of auxetic tubular structures. Most studies focused on adding inner and outer shells to thin-walled auxetic tubular absorbers with different types of lattice structures to enhance energy absorption of the cylindrical sandwiches. There are limited studies on thicker-walled auxetic tubes and their related shell thicknesses to optimize performance. In this study, the thickness of the thicker-walled auxetic core thickness (1.2 mm, 1.6 mm, 2 mm), shell thickness (16 mm, 20 mm, 24 mm), and auxetic lattice structure (Re-Entrant Circular, SiliComb, and ArrowHead) were optimized to improve the specific energy absorption of cylindrical sandwiches. The Taguchi method was used to determine the optimum parameters for cylindrical sandwiches. In addition, the effect ratio of the parameters on the specific energy absorption was investigated using the ANOVA method. The energy absorption properties of the cylindrical sandwiches were determined using the drop-weight test. The highest specific energy absorption was obtained using a shell thickness of 1.2 mm and a core thickness of 16 mm using an SiliComb lattice. It was determined that the lattice geometry was the most effective parameter on the specific energy absorption of cylindrical sandwiches, with an effect rate of 61.62%.

Keywords

• Auxetic
• Energy Absorption
• Taguchi
• ANOVA

References

1. [1] K. E. Evans and A. Alderson, “Auxetic materials: Functional materials and structures from lateral thinking!,” Advanced Materials, vol. 12, no. 9, pp. 617–628, 2000, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-4095(200005)12:9<617::AID-ADMA617>3.0.CO;2-3.
2. [2] G. N. Greaves, A. L. Greer, R. S. Lakes, and T. Rouxel, “Poisson’s ratio and modern materials,” Nat Mater, vol. 10, no. 11, pp. 823–837, 2011, doi: 10.1038/nmat3134.
3. [3] J. Zhang, G. Lu, and Z. You, “Large deformation and energy absorption of additively manufactured auxetic materials and structures: A review,” Compos B Eng, vol. 201, no. 108340, pp. 1–36, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108340.
4. [4] A. Alomarah, S. H. Masood, and D. Ruan, “Out-of-plane and in-plane compression of additively manufactured auxetic structures,” Aerosp Sci Technol, vol. 106, pp. 106–107, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2020.106107.
5. [5] C. Luo, C. Z. Han, X. Y. Zhang, X. G. Zhang, X. Ren, and Y. M. Xie, “Design, manufacturing and applications of auxetic tubular structures: A review,” Thin-Walled Structures, vol. 163, no. December 2020, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2021.107682.
6. [6] Q. Gao, L. Wang, Z. Zhou, Z. D. Ma, C. Wang, and Y. Wang, “Theoretical, numerical and experimental analysis of three-dimensional double-V honeycomb,” Mater Des, vol. 139, pp. 380–391, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.024.
7. [7] W. Lee et al., “Effect of auxetic structures on crash behavior of cylindrical tube,” Compos Struct, vol. 208, no. April 2018, pp. 836–846, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.10.068.
8. [8] Y. Guo et al., “Deformation behaviors and energy absorption of auxetic lattice cylindrical structures under axial crushing load,” Aerosp Sci Technol, vol. 98, p. 105662, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2019.105662.

9. [9] F. Usta, O. F. Ertaş, A. Ataalp, H. S. Türkmen, Z. Kazancı, and F. Scarpa, “Impact behavior of triggered and non-triggered crash tubes with auxetic lattices,” Multiscale and Multidisciplinary Modeling, Experiments and Design, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 119–127, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s41939-018-00040-z.
10. [10] H. Sun, C. Ge, Q. Gao, N. Qiu, and L. Wang, “Crashworthiness of sandwich cylinder filled with double-arrowed auxetic structures under axial impact loading,” International Journal of Crashworthiness, pp. 1–10, 2021, doi: 10.1080/13588265.2021.1947071.
11. [11] X. Y. Zhang et al., “A novel type of tubular structure with auxeticity both in radial direction and wall thickness,” Thin-Walled Structures, vol. 163, no. March, p. 107758, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2021.107758.
12. [12] L. Chen et al., “Dynamic crushing behavior and energy absorption of graded lattice cylindrical structure under axial impact load,” Thin-Walled Structures, vol. 127, no. October 2017, pp. 333–343, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2017.10.048.
13. [13] L. Jiang and H. Hu, “Finite element modeling of multilayer orthogonal auxetic composites under low-velocity impact,” Materials, vol. 10, no. 8, 2017, doi: 10.3390/ma10080908.
14. [14] B. G. Çakan, C. Ensarioglu, V. M. Küçükakarsu, I. E. Tekin, and M. Cemal Çakir, “Experimental and numerical investigation of in-plane and out-of-plane impact behaviour of auxetic honeycomb boxes produced by material extrusion,” Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 1657–1667, 2021, doi: 10.17341/gazimmfd.829758.
15. [15] M. Cherief, A. Belaadi, M. Bouakba, M. Bourchak, and I. Meddour, “Behaviour of lignocellulosic fibre-reinforced cellular core under low-velocity impact loading: Taguchi method,” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 108, no. 1–2, pp. 223–233, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s00170-020-05393-9.
16. [16] Q. Gao, X. Zhao, C. Wang, L. Wang, and Z. Ma, “Multi-objective crashworthiness optimization for an auxetic cylindrical structure under axial impact loading,” Mater Des, vol. 143, pp. 120–130, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2018.01.063.
17. [17] C. Qi, F. Jiang, C. Yu, and S. Yang, “In-plane crushing response of tetra-chiral honeycombs,” Int J Impact Eng, vol. 130, no. April, pp. 247–265, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2019.04.019.
18. [18] C. Qi et al., “Quasi-static crushing behavior of novel re-entrant circular auxetic honeycombs,” Compos B Eng, vol. 197, no. 108117, pp. 1–12, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108117.
19. [19] S. H. Ahn, M. Montero, D. Odell, S. Roundy, and P. K. Wright, “Anisotropic material properties of fused deposition modeling ABS,” Rapid Prototyp J, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 248–257, 2002, doi: 10.1108/13552540210441166.
20. [20] K. C. Ang, K. F. Leong, and C. K. Chua, “Investigation of the mechanical properties and porosity relationships in fused deposition modelling-fabricated porous structures,” vol. 2, no. November 2005, pp. 100–105, 2006, doi: 10.1108/13552540610652447.
21. [21] O. A. Mohamed, S. H. Masood, and J. L. Bhowmik, “Optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters : a review of current research and future prospects,” pp. 42–53, 2015, doi: 10.1007/s40436-014-0097-7.
22. [22] G. Lu and T. Yu, “Introduction,” Energy Absorption of Structures and Materials, pp. 68–87, 2003, doi: 10.1533/9781855738584.68.
23. [23] T. Shepherd, K. Winwood, P. Venkatraman, A. Alderson, and T. Allen, “Validation of a Finite Element Modeling Process for Auxetic Structures under Impact,” Phys Status Solidi B Basic Res, vol. 257, no. 10, pp. 1–14, 2020, doi: 10.1002/pssb.201900197.
24. [24] A. H. Bademlioglu, A. S. Canbolat, N. Yamankaradeniz, and O. Kaynakli, “Investigation of parameters affecting Organic Rankine Cycle efficiency by using Taguchi and ANOVA methods,” Appl Therm Eng, vol. 145, no. September, pp. 221–228, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2018.09.032.
25. [25] F. Rayegani and G. C. Onwubolu, “Fused deposition modelling (fdm) process parameter prediction and optimization using group method for data handling (gmdh) and differential evolution (de),” International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 73, no. 1–4, pp. 509–519, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s00170-014-5835-2.