4.5 Article

Topology optimization of anisotropy hierarchical honeycomb acoustic metamaterials for extreme multi-broad band gaps

期刊

MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES
卷 30, 期 17, 页码 3540-3552

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15376494.2022.2079027

关键词

Acoustic metamaterials; hierarchical honeycomb; topological optimization; low-frequency broadband gap; transmission loss experiments

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reports on an acoustic metamaterial composed of hierarchical honeycomb structures, which have suitable mechanical properties and low-frequency band gaps. By optimizing the scatterer filling scheme, multiple wide band gaps are achieved. The effectiveness of the optimized structures is verified through experimental measurements. This research aims to promote the application of this metamaterial for low-frequency vibration isolation in the industrial field.
Acoustic metamaterials (AMMs), especially based on hierarchical honeycomb structure and topology-optimized design with suitable mechanical properties and low-frequency band gaps (BGs), have been studied recently. The present work reports a series of anisotropy hierarchical honeycomb structure lattices composed of the cell walls and vertices of regular hexagonal lattice replacement honeycombs of various sizes, as well as improved BG evaluation indicators. The band structures of three different types of unfilled hierarchical honeycomb lattices are calculated and the mechanism of BGs generation is analyzed. To obtain multi-broad BGs in the low-frequency range, the scatterers filling schemes are optimized by using a genetic algorithm (GA). Additionally, the effects of structural/material parameters on the BG characteristics of the optimized structures are discussed. Finally, the transmission loss (TL) experiment verified the optimization of the structures. This paper aims to promote the application of hierarchical honeycomb metamaterials with low-frequency vibration isolation in the industrial field.

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