4.6 Article

Fabrication and Mechanical Testing of the Uniaxial Graded Auxetic Damper

Journal

MATERIALS
Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma15010387

Keywords

uniaxial graded auxetic damper; energy absorber; mechanical properties; finite element method; explicit solver

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents the fabrication and experimental testing of the Uniaxial Graded Auxetic Damper (UGAD), a shock-absorbing system with lightweight and excellent energy-dissipation characteristics. The results show that the manufactured UGAD matches well with the computational predictions, validating the proposed computational and material models.
Auxetic structures can be used as protective sacrificial solutions for impact protection with lightweight and excellent energy-dissipation characteristics. A recently published and patented shock-absorbing system, namely, Uniaxial Graded Auxetic Damper (UGAD), proved its efficiency through comprehensive analytical and computational analyses. However, the authors highlighted the necessity for experimental testing of this new damper. Hence, this paper aimed to fabricate the UGAD using a cost-effective method and determine its load-deformation properties and energy-absorption potential experimentally and computationally. The geometry of the UGAD, fabrication technique, experimental setup, and computational model are presented. A series of dog-bone samples were tested to determine the exact properties of aluminium alloy (AW-5754, T-111). A simplified (elastic, plastic with strain hardening) material model was proposed and validated for use in future computational simulations. Results showed that deformation pattern, progressive collapse, and force-displacement relationships of the manufactured UGAD are in excellent agreement with the computational predictions, thus validating the proposed computational and material models.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available