MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403857328 · doi:10.1088/1361-665x/ad8cb4

Additive manufactured 3D re-entrant auxetic structures for enhanced impact resistance

2024· article· en· W4403857328 on OpenAlexafffund
Ryan Nam, Hani E. Naguib

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Materials and Structures · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCellular and Composite Structures
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAuxeticsImpact resistanceMaterials scienceComposite material3D printingStructural engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study presents a novel exploration of the geometric parameters within a 3D re-entrant auxetic lattice structure, specifically focusing on their unique impact energy absorption properties, which were systematically evaluated through drop weight impactor testing. Each lattice configuration was additively manufactured using stereolithography, allowing for precise control over strut thickness (t), re-entrant angle (θ), and the aspect ratio (h/l) of unit cells during both low and high energy impact scenarios. This study found that the overall auxetic behavior is predominantly controlled by the aspect ratio of the cell ribs, while the modulus is governed by rib thickness. A finite element model was subsequently developed to simulate the experimental impact loading conditions and was used to examine a wider range of parameters that were not experimentally tested. The simulated dynamic test results displayed the deformation trends and changes to the Poisson’s ratio. Among the studied parameters, experimental results highlighted that a lattice structure with t = 1.6 mm, θ = 65°, and a h/l ratio = 1.8 exhibited the highest specific energy absorption (SEA) under uniaxial impact deformation with 5 Joules of impact energy. Conversely, when employing 20 Joules of impact energy revealed the greatest SEA at t = 1.0 mm, θ = 65°, and an h/l ratio of 2.2. The results demonstrate unique deformation mechanism of auxetic structures under impact loading and the capacity to adapt the 3D re-entrant lattice structure for applications requiring tailored impact energy absorption.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart Materials and StructuresSame topicCellular and Composite StructuresFrench-language works237,207