4.6 Article

Clamping method and mechanical properties of aluminum honeycomb cylindrical curved plates under radial compression

期刊

JOURNAL OF SANDWICH STRUCTURES & MATERIALS
卷 24, 期 8, 页码 2142-2152

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/10996362221122010

关键词

Curved surface; sandwich plate; compression performance; test method; fixture

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51875102]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study mainly focuses on the development of a new type of bionic curved sandwich plate and the establishment of experimental methods and evaluation criteria. Using finite element simulation and experimental tests, the effects of different clamping methods on the mechanical characteristics of the plate were studied, and clamping methods that are easy to prepare and have wide applicability were proposed.
To develop a new type of bionic curved sandwich plate, it is necessary to first develop experimental methods and evaluation criteria for curved plates. Thus, this paper focuses on an aluminum cylindrical honeycomb plate and proposes two types of clamping methods for radial compression tests. Using finite element simulation, radial compression tests were carried out, and the mechanical characteristics under different clamping methods were studied. The results showed that (1) the two types of clamping methods have significant effects on the radial compression performance, and each has its own characteristics. The influence mechanism was explored from the perspective of the deformation shape of the sample and the sliding direction of the foot. (2) Clamping methods were given with regard to different experimental purposes or engineering application objects (backgrounds), and three clamping methods that are easy to prepare and have great universality were also presented. This research provides an important theoretical basis for the development of curved plates, radial compression test methods for curved plates and the formulation of corresponding test standards.

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