4.7 Article

A methodology for the design, fabrication and testing of axially graded polymeric structures with tailored vibration characteristics

期刊

POLYMER TESTING
卷 94, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2021.107054

关键词

FDM; Graded materials; Polymer; Natural frequency; Vibration testing

资金

  1. Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering department of Miami University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study involved the design, fabrication, and testing of multi-polymer axially graded structures using 3D printing to control and avoid undesirable vibration behavior in machinery subject to mechanical excitations. The ability to combine different materials through additive manufacturing has shown success in creating graded structures with specific performance metrics. This technique enables the development of tuned structures that meet desired spectral characteristics in machinery design.
Machinery subject to internal and/or external mechanical excitations typically require careful control or avoidance of undesirable vibration behavior to meet operational constraints. To address this difficulty, the design, fabrication and testing of multi-polymer axially graded (segmented) structures fabricated through 3D printing was performed. Experiments were conducted on axially graded beams composed of four different polymers in a linear spatial arrangement. The ability to combine multiple materials through additive manufacturing affords the ability to create graded structures that can meet specific performance metrics: higher damping at the desired vibration modes and greater modal separation has been successfully demonstrated. The significance of this work is vested in the fact that the proposed technique can enable the development of tuned structures which can deliver desired spectral characteristics. Furthermore, strength, stability (e.g. buckling) as well as vibrational targets in the design of machinery can be met simultaneously using axial grading of materials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据