Elsevier

Composite Structures

Volume 183, 1 January 2018, Pages 242-261
Composite Structures

Blast resistance of auxetic and honeycomb sandwich panels: Comparisons and parametric designs

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.03.018Get rights and content

Abstract

Equivalent sandwich panels composed of auxetic and conventional honeycomb cores and metal facets are analysed and compared for their resistance performances against impulsive loadings. The dynamic behaviours of these structures are numerically investigated, taking into account the rate-dependent effects. The Johnson-Cook model is employed to describe the dynamic responses of the composite sandwiches subjected to high strain-rate loadings. Analytical models are derived correlating unit cell geometrical parameters and crushing strengths of the representative panels at different impact velocities. Parametric studies are conducted to evaluate the performances of different sandwich panel designs under impulsive loadings. In particular, transmitted reaction forces and maximum stresses on the protected structure are quantified for various design parameters including the geometrical factors and the effective Poisson’s ratios. A quarter of the panel is symmetrically modelled with shell elements and the CONWEP model is used to simulate the blast loading. Auxetic panels demonstrate interesting crushing behaviour, effectively adapting to the dynamic loading by progressively drawing material into the locally loaded zone to thereby enhance the impact resistance. Meanwhile, conventional honeycomb panels deform plastically without localised stiffness enhancement.

Introduction

Nowadays, the importance of smart materials and structures for energy-absorption in extreme events is growing more and more. Moreover, the design of structures both light in weight and able to mitigate both blast and localised impacts is a complex challenge [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. The use of auxetic structures –i.e. characterised by negative Poisson’s ratio– is an interesting opportunity to solve all these issues. These auxetic materials present an interesting and unique behaviour; they contract when compressed and expand if stretched [9]. Consequently, many mechanical properties, such as fracture toughness, indentation resistance, shear modulus and vibration absorption show enhanced performances [10], [11], [12], [13].

Negative Poisson’s ratio materials and structures have been investigated for protective purposes since their discovery. Many researchers looked into the behaviour of auxetic and conventional foams, demonstrating that auxetic foams present higher yield strength, lower stiffness and better energy absorption [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]. Other studies of auxetic structures in composite panels demonstrated improvements in static indentation, specifically in terms of stiffness, low impact velocities and resistance to fibre pull-out with localisation of damage, therefore overall requiring less maintenance [20]. Sandwich panels with certain auxetic cores have been analysed under static and dynamic loadings, including blast-induced shockwaves. Reduction of deformation, localisation of damage [21], [22], [23], better flexure response [24], [25] –with lower effective shear modulus and higher maximum effective shear strain and better energy absorption have been obtained in different studies [21], [22], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30].

In general, cellular structures have shown better properties than the conventional monolithic materials, such as higher strength to weight ratio and energy absorption [31]. It is necessary to understand the benefits of auxetic composite panels compared to typical honeycomb composite structures for their performances against extreme loadings. Honeycomb structures have been used in a wide range of applications, from shock absorption to high temperature dissipation [31], [32], [33], [34]. Specifically, they have been used for structural applications, due to their impact resistance and energy absorption properties. Analytical [35], [36], experimental [37], [38] and numerical [39], [40] studies have been conducted to evaluate their mechanical behaviours. In-plane behaviour has also been investigated [36], [39], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], where analyses show the importance of the cell-wall geometrical configurations.

The design and manufacture of lightweight composite structures for protective purposes has been a main interest for both defence and civilian applications, such as the protection of critical infrastructures or light weight armoured vehicles (Fig. 1). The sandwich structure, which is composed of crushable cores between two monolithic facet panels, is one of the most effective approaches for blast and impact protection. The frontal panel helps to distribute the impulsive load over the crushable core, dissipating a large amount of imparted energy, slows the shockwave and, therefore, prevents critical failure. A large number of studies on sandwich panels showed their better performance when compared with monolithic structures of similar areal mass [33], [44], [46], [47], [48], [49].

From the manufacturing perspective, the 2D-based structures are simpler and less expensive to fabricate [50], [51], [52] compared to the three dimensional ones. In order to manufacture a 3D truss-lattice structure, more complex design processes are required, such as 3D printing or deformation forming –with perforated sheets punched to obtain the right shape. Instead, it is possible to manufacture these 2D composite panels through stamping or profile-rolling of sheet-metal blanks [27], slotting together steel sheets [53] or 3D printing. As the manufacturing process can be complex and expensive, the necessity of developing an initial design and understanding the dynamic responses of the hybrid auxetic composite sandwich panels is paramount.

In this paper, we will develop a numerical model to simulate hybrid auxetic composite sandwich panels under blast loadings and we will show a comparison with a conventional honeycomb sandwich panel. The well-known 2D re-entrant NPR structure [10] will be used and modelled in multiple layers for the core, and sandwiched between two metallic facets. Numerical models will be validated with analytical results. The last section will present a comparison of auxetic and conventional structures and some parametric studies on their geometric parameters to observe and explain their effect on blast resistance performance.

Section snippets

Unit cell descriptions

The two different types of unit cells investigated in this work are presented in Fig. 2. In particular, the honeycomb unit cell (HU) is one of the most typical cellular structures (Fig. 2b), while the auxetic unit cell (AU) with a re-entrant shape (Fig. 2a) is considered as the most popular structure exhibiting negative effective Poisson’s ratio. Both structures have simple designs, which make them easier to manufacture and maintain at minimum cost. Due to the cellular structures, these panels

Material characterisation and models

Various materials have been used for the facets, the auxetic core and the concrete base. As the HACPs are analysed under high-speed impacts, it is necessary to also describe their rate-dependency for low-to-high strain rates. For the containment case, a ballistic steel, AISI 4340 steel alloy –with higher yield strength and lower ductility– is used and its properties are obtained from previous studies [62].

Aluminium alloy 5083-H116 is used for the auxetic structure as it is characterised by high

Blast resistance performances of baseline HACP and best EPP

The baseline model of the auxetic panel (HACP) is presented here and compared with the best result from an equivalent honeycomb panel (EPP) with positive Poisson’s ratio. The baseline HACP is defined through the following shape factors: θ = 50°; rL = 0.5; N = 5, while the EPP is characterised by: θ = 130°; rL = 2.5; N = 5. This EPP is chosen to have similar relative density compared with the HACP. The differences in relative density will be taken in account using a normalisation. A blast load of 300 g TNT

Influences of geometrical parameters: angles θ and ratios rL

Different auxetic unit cells can be obtained by changing the geometrical parameters indicated in Fig. 2. In particular, angles θ and ratios rL largely vary the effective Poisson’s ratio of the unit cell and, consequently, of the structure. Different HACPs are obtained changing these parameters, with different relative densities and behaviours. The height of all the structures is kept constant to 100 mm. In this section, three representative combinations of angles θ (30°, 50° and 70°) and ratios r

Conclusions

Numerical investigations of the dynamic responses and energy absorbing properties of hybrid auxetic composite panels (HACPs) and equivalent honeycomb panels (EPPs) under blast loadings were conducted. The Poisson’s ratio and general mechanical behaviours were controlled by changing the geometrical parameters θ and rL. Convergence studies and comparison with analytical results were conducted to validate the numerical model. An empirical model for describing the relationship between the

Acknowledgements

This research is sponsored by the Australian Research Council linkage grant LP150100906. Authors also greatly appreciate the MIFRS and MIRS scholarships from the University of Melbourne.

References (69)

  • C. Lira et al.

    Transverse elastic shear of auxetic multi re-entrant honeycombs

    Compos Struct

    (2009)
  • W.Y. Liu

    In-plane dynamic crushing of re-entrant auxetic cellular structure

    Mater Des

    (2016)
  • M. Grujicic

    Multi-physics modeling of the fabrication and dynamic performance of all-metal auxetic-hexagonal sandwich-structures

    Mater Des

    (2013)
  • G. Imbalzano

    A numerical study of auxetic composite panels under blast loadings

    Compos Struct

    (2016)
  • K.P. Dharmasena

    Mechanical response of metallic honeycomb sandwich panel structures to high-intensity dynamic loading

    Int J Impact Eng

    (2008)
  • X. Li

    Dynamic behavior of aluminum honeycomb sandwich panels under air blast: Experiment and numerical analysis

    Compos Struct

    (2014)
  • H.J. Rathbun

    Performance of metallic honeycomb-core sandwich beams under shock loading

    Int J Solids Struct

    (2006)
  • L. Hu et al.

    Dynamic crushing strength of hexagonal honeycombs

    Int J Impact Eng

    (2010)
  • D. Okumura et al.

    Post-buckling analysis of elastic honeycombs subject to in-plane biaxial compression

    Int J Solids Struct

    (2002)
  • S. Xu

    Experimental study of the out-of-plane dynamic compression of hexagonal honeycombs

    Compos Struct

    (2012)
  • Z. Zou

    Dynamic crushing of honeycombs and features of shock fronts

    Int J Impact Eng

    (2009)
  • D. Ruan

    In-plane dynamic crushing of honeycombs—a finite element study

    Int J Impact Eng

    (2003)
  • L. Hu

    The inhomogeneous deformation of polycarbonate circular honeycombs under in-plane compression

    Int J Mech Sci

    (2008)
  • J. Chung et al.

    Compressive response of circular cell polycarbonate honeycombs under inplane biaxial static and dynamic loading. Part I: experiments

    Int J Impact Eng

    (2002)
  • S. Papka et al.

    Biaxial crushing of honeycombs:—Part 1: Experiments

    Int J Solids Struct

    (1999)
  • L. Hu et al.

    Effect of cell-wall angle on the in-plane crushing behaviour of hexagonal honeycombs

    Mater Des

    (2013)
  • L. Hu et al.

    Analyses on the dynamic strength of honeycombs under the y-directional crushing

    Mater Des

    (2014)
  • C. Qi

    Blast resistance and multi-objective optimization of aluminum foam-cored sandwich panels

    Compos Struct

    (2013)
  • Z. Xue et al.

    A comparative study of impulse-resistant metal sandwich plates

    Int J Impact Eng

    (2004)
  • P. Heinl

    Cellular Ti–6Al–4V structures with interconnected macro porosity for bone implants fabricated by selective electron beam melting

    Acta Biomater

    (2008)
  • F. Cote

    The out-of-plane compressive behavior of metallic honeycombs

    Mater Sci Eng, A

    (2004)
  • S. Reid et al.

    Dynamic uniaxial crushing of wood

    Int J Impact Eng

    (1997)
  • S. Reid et al.

    Structural plastic shock model for one-dimensional ring systems

    Int J Impact Eng

    (1983)
  • X. Qiu et al.

    Collapse of periodic planar lattices under uniaxial compression, part II: Dynamic crushing based on finite element simulation

    Int J Impact Eng

    (2009)
  • Cited by (329)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text