4.7 Article

Experimental and numerical analysis of the compression behavior of aluminum syntactic foams reinforced with alumina hollow particles

期刊

ENGINEERING STRUCTURES
卷 300, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2023.117144

关键词

Composite materials; Powder metallurgy; Mechanical properties; Micromechanics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the compressive behavior of alumina hollow particles reinforced aluminum matrix syntactic foams (AMSF) was investigated using analytical, numerical, and experimental methods. The results showed that the FE solver ABAQUS could accurately predict the elastic and elastio-plastic behavior of AMSFs. The study also suggested that FE models have great potential in developing new materials and composites under compression loading.
In this study, analytical, numerical, and experimental methods are used to investigate the compressive behavior of alumina hollow particles reinforced aluminum matrix syntactic foams (AMSF). The representative volume element (RVE) models are generated for different volume fractions to analyze the elastic and elastio-plastic behavior of AMSFs using the FE solver ABAQUS. The geometric feature of the hollow particles is selected close to the actual physical dimensions. The effective elastic properties are estimated using linear homogenization models. For example, the elastic properties predicted using the Mori-Tanaka model are close to the FE-based RVE model data. Later, the macroscopic response (stress-strain data) is determined using the volume-averaging method proposed in the literature. The stress-strain response of the FE model with a 30% volume fraction has shown close agreement with the experimental data. Further, a parametric study is conducted for different particle wall thicknesses. These FE models have great potential in studying the ceramic hollow particles reinforced metal matrix syntactic foams and developing new porous composites under compression loading using RVE-based models.

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