4.6 Article

A generic theoretical approach for estimating bandgap bounds of metamaterial beams

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS
卷 130, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/5.0053004

关键词

-

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council [201907000126]
  2. Faculty Research Development Fund from the University of Auckland [3722094]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Researchers have proposed a generic theoretical approach for fast estimation of bandgap bounds in metamaterials, verified the feasibility of the method in both lattice and continuous metamaterial systems, and explored bandgap tailoring and optimization.
The bandgap phenomenon in metamaterials has attracted much research interest for controlling structural vibrations. To tailor the bandgap for applications in a specific frequency range, analytical tools for bandgap bound estimations are critically important. This work presents a generic theoretical approach for fast estimation of the bandgap bounds. Starting from the lattice metamaterial systems, we develop the procedure and provide the analytical bound expressions based on a hypothesis of extreme points in the band structure of metamaterial systems. The proposed approach for the lattice system is verified by the results of transmittance analysis. Subsequently, to explore the fidelity of the proposed approach on continuous metamaterial systems, three typical metamaterial beams (metabeams) have been investigated: a metabeam with mechanical local resonators, a piezoelectric metabeam with shunt resonant circuits, and a hybrid metabeam. Finite element analysis is performed to verify the theoretical expressions of bandgap bounds derived using the proposed approach. With the verified bound expressions, bandgap tailoring and optimization are further investigated. In summary, the developed theoretical approach is generic and offers a promising technique for bandgap estimation of metamaterial systems integrated with various types of resonators. Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing.

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