4.5 Article

Numerical and Experimental Investigation of Cumulative Fatigue Damage under Random Dynamic Cyclic Loads of Lattice Structures Manufactured by Laser Powder Bed Fusion

期刊

METALS
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/met11091395

关键词

lattice structures; structural dynamic response; vibration fatigue testing; fatigue life prediction

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, University and Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the dynamic response of lattice structures, specifically Face-Centered-Cubic (FCC) and Diamond lattice-based structures, under resonant conditions and random vibrations. Finite Element (FE) models are used to estimate structural integrity and predict fatigue life, with good results in both resonant and random vibration scenarios.
Lattice structures are lightweight engineering components suitable for a great variety of applications, including those in which the structural integrity under vibration fatigue is of paramount importance. In this work, we experimentally and numerically investigate the dynamic response of two distinct lattice configurations, in terms of fatigue damage and life. Specifically, Face-Centered-Cubic (FCC) and Diamond lattice-based structures are numerically studied and experimentally tested under resonant conditions and random vibrations, until their failure. To this end, Finite Element (FE) models are employed to match the dynamic behavior of the system in the neighborhood of the first natural frequency. The FE models are employed to estimate the structural integrity by way of frequency and tip acceleration drops, which allow for the identification of the failure time and a corresponding number of cycles to failure. Fatigue life under resonant conditions is well predicted by the application of conventional multiaxial high cycle fatigue criteria to the local state of stress. The same approach, combined with the Rainflow algorithm and Miner's rule, provides good results in predicting fatigue damage under random vibrations.

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

4.5
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