Nonlinear behavior of a three-dimensional chiral mechanical metamaterial with compression-twist coupling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Due to their tunable mechanical properties and broad applicability, three dimensional compressible–twistable mechanical metamaterials (3D-CTMM) have attracted significant attention in recent years. While the recent research on these configurations is limited to linear mechanical behavior analysis, the nonlinear characteristics of these metamaterials are crucial in practical applications such as adaptive vibration isolation, impact protection, and energy harvesting. This study introduces a combined nonlinear stress–strain relationship and strain-energy-based analytical framework, supported by finite-element analysis and experimental validation for investigating the nonlinear mechanical load-deformation behavior of a 3D-CTMM, with potential applicability to a broader class of the 3D-CTMM designs. The constitutive model and coupled load-deformation and load-torsion responses of the unit cells are investigated by incorporating the intrinsic material nonlinearity and complementary strain energy theory into the analysis and then expanded to the overall phase of the 3D-CTMM. The accuracy of the mechanical modeling is evaluated through both numerical simulations and experimental characterization. The results demonstrate strong agreement across the multiscale analyses and reveal pronounced nonlinear behavior in the deformation responses particularly in relatively high global strain values of up to <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>16</mml:mn> <mml:mi mathvariant="normal">%</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> . The nonlinear behavior suggests that the conventional assumption of constant Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio for the overall phase of the 3D-CTMM may not fully capture the response, as these parameters vary with nonlinearity and depend on the number of unit cells in the configuration. Furthermore, as a tangible application, the capability of the studied 3D-CTMM to absorb impact energy is also presented where a <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> assembly fabricated by thermoplastic polyurethane exhibits superior potential for absorbing impact energy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".