4.6 Article

Bioinspired sutured materials for strength and toughness: Pullout mechanisms and geometric enrichments

期刊

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2018.01.004

关键词

Sutured lines; Shape descriptors; Analytical models; Finite element models; Optimization

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. Nigerian Government through the National Universities commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hard structural elements in nature are often joined with sutures lines, as seen in human skull, cephalopods or turtle shell. These sutures can arrest cracks, and can provide flexibility for respiration, locomotion or growth. In this paper we introduce a morphometric method to capture the complex shape of sutured interfaces using only a few parameters. The method is simple, and can capture relatively complex suture geometries with re-entrants, interlocking features. The study starts with a simple jigsaw-like model which is enriched with additional features (plateau regions in dovetail-like sutures, multiple locking sites). For each case, closed form and finite elements solutions are developed to capture the full nonlinear pullout response and to predict the maximum stress (and potential fracture) in the solid material. These models were then used to identify the geometries and interface properties (friction) that lead to optimum combinations of strength and energy absorption. Suture designs that reduced frictional stress with low coefficient of friction or with multiple contact points were the most efficient. The results can serve as guidelines to design and optimization of non-adhesive sutures with arbitrary shapes made of arc of circles and lines. We found that the best designs involve low coefficient of friction, which raises an interesting hypothesis on the function of the protein layer in natural sutured lines: This soft layer could act as lubricant to prevent the fracture of the solid structures. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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