4.7 Article

On the effective elastic constants of anti-tetra chiral tubular structure

期刊

ENGINEERING STRUCTURES
卷 278, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2022.115507

关键词

Tubular auxetic structure; Anti-tetra chiral; Negative Poisson?s ratio; Metamaterial; Theoretical derivation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a theoretical model based on the anti-tetra chiral honeycomb was developed, and its effectiveness was verified through finite element analysis. The model elucidates the role of microstructural geometry in the effective elastic constants of the anti-tetra chiral tubular structure. The results show that the tubular structure exhibits tunable effective elastic Poisson's ratios and elastic modulus in broad ranges.
Anti-tetra chiral honeycomb is a typical auxetic metamaterial that exhibits excellent auxetic behavior. Based on anti-tetra chiral honeycomb, previous studies proposed a 3D tubular structure and performed detailed in-vestigations on its tensile and compressive force-displacement responses. The basic elastic mechanical proper-ties, i.e., the effective elastic constants (elastic modulus and Poisson's ratio) of such a structure, were not investigated in those works. To understand the underlying microstructural mechanisms, a theoretical model under the infinitesimal deformation assumption is developed in the present work by adopting a simple energy-based approach. The analytical solutions, as validated by systematic finite element (FE) analyses, elucidate different roles of the microstructural geometry on the effective elastic constants of the anti-tetra chiral tubular structure. The results show that the anti-tetra chiral tubular structure exhibits tunable effective elastic Poisson's ratios (from-4 to-0.3) and elastic modulus (over two orders of magnitude) in broad ranges. To provide valuable guidelines for the design of metamaterials, sensitivity analysis of the geometrical parameters on the effective elastic constants is finally conducted.

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