See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/249920530

Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures of folded Chevron

patterns

Article in International Journal of Materials and Product Technology · January 2004

DOI: 10.1504/IJMPT.2004.004750

CITATIONS READS

55 745

2 authors:

Basily B Basily Elsayed Elsayed

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
47 PUBLICATIONS 1,368 CITATIONS 217 PUBLICATIONS 6,719 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Elsayed Elsayed on 17 February 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Int. J. Materials and Product Technology, Vol. 21, Nos. 1/2/3, 2004 169

Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures of

folded Chevron patterns

Basily B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed*

Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering,
Rutgers University, 96 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway,
NJ 08854-8018, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
*Corresponding author

Abstract: The objective of this paper is to investigate our recently

developed innovative sheet folding theory and manufacturing processes
in designing impact energy absorbing structures with superior properties to
existing structures, such as honeycomb, while achieving a volume reduction
of between 40 and 50%. Initial results indicate that we can mathematically
generate three-dimensional patterns and use our folding technology to
produce such patterns by simply folding flat sheets of materials, resulting
in significant cost savings. The three-dimensional patterns, folded from
different sheet materials, can be used as cores for laminated structures for
impact energy absorption applications, such as in high speed airdrops of
heavy items and in improving crash worthiness of vehicle body and
bumpers. The results of testing samples of the Chevron patterns (the
simplest to fold from flat sheets) indicate that core structures made from
this pattern will serve as absorbers of high velocity impact energy per unit
volume when compared with the well known and typically used
honeycomb structures.

Keywords: folding geometry; high speed airdrop; honeycomb; impact

energy absorption; Kraft paper; lamination; plastic hinge; sandwich
structures; sheet material folding; tessellation.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Basily, B.B. and

Elsayed, E.A. (2004) `Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures
of folded Chevron patterns', Int. J. Materials and Product Technology,
Vol. 21, Nos. 1/2/3, pp.169±185.

Biographical notes: Basily B. Basily is Research Professor in the Department

of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Rutgers University. He is also a
Professor in Mechanical Design, and Production Department, Cairo
University. His research interests are in the areas of experimental stress
analysis, elasticity and plasticity, metal forming and machine design. He is
the author of five international patents, and twenty-four publications in the
above areas of interest. His research has been funded by the NSF, DoD,
Honda Corporation and other industry.

E.A. Elsayed is Professor in the Department of Industrial and Systems

Engineering, Rutgers University. He is also the Director of the NSF/
Industry/ University Co-operative Research Center for Quality and
Reliability Engineering, Rutgers-Arizona State University. His research
interests are in the areas of manufacturing processes, engineering design,

Copyright # 2004 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

170 B.B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed

quality and reliability engineering and Production Planning and Control.

His research has been funded by the DoD, FAA, NSF, Honda Corporation
and other industry. He is serving as an Editor, Area Editor or a member of
the editorial board of five journals.

1 Introduction

Core structures are widely used in many applications ranging from temporary
facilities, automotives, floor decks and bridge decks, to the most advanced aircraft
components. In all cases, core materials address the need for high strength and
stiffness at low weight. There are several design criteria for the core structures; we
briefly describe the most common ones below.
High specific strengths: For most core applications, it is necessary to maximise the
compression and shear strength-to-weight ratio for structural efficiency purposes.
This is important for cores primarily subject to compressive loads. In such cases, the
design should also have equal shear properties both in the length and width
directions. Honeycomb cores do not always have balanced properties, but the high
specific properties compensate for that.
Damage tolerance: Damage tolerance is the second important design criterion for
core structures. The main idea of damage tolerance design is that initial defects or
flaws are assumed to exist in structures before operation, and that these initial defects
will grow during operation. Therefore, the design under this criterion requires that
the material resists propagation of damage under both static and fatigue loading.
Analytical methods using the damage tolerance criterion have been widely
investigated in many areas such as aeronautical engineering [1±5], marine and
offshore engineering [5], civil engineering [6] and in welded joints [7]. The damage
tolerance is usually quantified in a probabilistic form; for example, for specific
damage propagation limits the designed core should reduce the probability of the
following typical failure modes:
* facesheet to core disbond (greater bond area, provides stronger bond)
* core crush normal to the facesheet (buckling resistance, is function of cell size,
core compliance)
* facesheet delaminations and dimpling (is function of load redistribution through
core).
The method of bonding the facesheets to the core is critical. Current cores achieve
this in two very efficient ways. For solid cores, such as balsa and foam cores, the
bond is over the entire surface area, resulting in a very efficient bond. Hence, lack of
damage tolerances in these cores is usually due to moisture degradation, especially
for balsa, and in core crushing, for foams. Honeycomb cores are bonded on a line at
the intersection of the honeycomb and the facesheet. However the bond strength is
formed from the bond meniscus that fairs the honeycomb vertical surface with the
facesheet. This provides an efficient bond shear reaction, especially in facesheet pull
off conditions [8].
 Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures 171

Noncatastrophic failure modes: The third design criterion is ensuring that failure
of the core structure is noncatastrophic. This means the graceful failure in
compression and shear loading is required. This is usually achieved by limiting the
unstable buckling mode of the core structure. In other words, the core designs should
not have highly directional properties. A typical example of undesirable directional
properties is the conventional hexagonally shaped honeycomb core where there is a
factor of two differences in its shear strength in the length versus width direction.
However, this is highly dependent on core cell geometry and core ribbon material [8].
Dynamic impact energy absorption: Impact energy absorption is an important
criterion for the design of core structures subject to dynamic impact loads, such as
cushions for high velocity airdrop packages, automobile bumpers and items subject
to single or multiple impact strikes. The core should be designed to absorb the total
dynamic impact energy in order to minimise the destructive effect of unabsorbed
energy on the items protected (cushioned) by the core structure.
This paper focuses on the design of new core structures that maximise impact
energy absorption at minimum core volume. Honeycomb sandwich structures are
typically used in absorbing impact loading by dissipating the energy in plastic
deformation. Such honeycomb structures have been used for buffer appliances, such
as those used to absorb the impact associated with motor vehicle impact accidents
and aircraft supply drops. The energy absorption performance of these structures
under impact is strongly influenced by both the honeycomb geometrical
configuration and the mechanical properties of the honeycomb material.
Characteristics of impact energy absorption via crushing have been reported for a
single aluminium honeycomb panel and a honeycomb core cell, considering the
dynamic effect [3,8]. However, the energy absorption performance of multilayer
built-up honeycomb panels, under quasi-static and impact velocity conditions, does
not appear to be well established. In this study, several multilayer panels were
purposely crushed to extend the practicable design of energy absorbing buffer
materials that make use of hexagonal honeycomb core panels.
In honeycombs, the impact crush performance is largely determined by core
density, cell size, material properties, and the panel geometrical configuration. The
dynamic axial crushing behaviour of multilayer aluminium hexagonal honeycomb
sandwich structure panels, including the single-layer honeycomb panel, has been
investigated experimentally. The performance of these panels used as buffer
appliances was verified using the uniform cross-section type of two or three
multilayer panels [9], as well as using the pyramid type of two or three multilayer
panels [10]. The pyramid type consisted of a number of square single panels of the
same thickness, but with different dimensions, built up in order of decreasing area.
As for all the multilayer honeycomb panels, the height of each panel is the same.
Aluminium sandwich construction has been recognised as a prime candidate for
structural design of lightweight transportation systems, such as aircraft, high-speed
trains and fast ships. Strength characteristics of aluminium sandwich panels with
aluminium honeycomb cores, have been extensively investigated, both theoretically
and experimentally. A series of strength tests is carried out on aluminium
honeycomb-cored sandwich panel specimens in three-point bending, axial
compression and lateral crushing loads. Simplified theories are applied to analyse
bending deformation, buckling/ultimate strength and crushing strength of
172 B.B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed

honeycomb sandwich panels subject to the corresponding load component. The

structural failure characteristics of aluminium sandwich panels are discussed and test
data developed in Reference [11].
An integrated hollow E-glass/epoxy core sandwich composite construction that
provides lightweight and bending stiffness has also been investigated. In comparison
with traditional foam and honeycomb cores, the integrated space core has the
advantage of providing a means to route wires/rods, embed electronic assemblies,
and store fuel and fire-retardant foam. The low-velocity impact (LVI) response of
innovative integrated sandwich core composites was investigated. However, the
low-velocity impact (LVI) results indicated that these types of hollow and
functionality-embedded integrated cores suffered a localised damage state limited
to a system of core members in the vicinity of the impact. The peak forces attained
under static compression and LVI were in accordance with Euler's column buckling
equation. Stacking of the core was an effective way of improving functionality and
limiting the LVI damage in the sandwich plate [12].
New material formed in known geometries might result in core structures with
equivalent or superior characteristics to known traditional materials, as discussed
below.

1.1 New lightweight materials

Ultra-lightweight metal foams are an emerging class of new engineering materials
that can be tailored to have a very attractive combination of properties. Aluminium
foams produced by Fraunhofer's powder metallurgy process show significant
promise as multifunctional materials for a broad range of applications. Their
lightweight and very high specific stiffness offer significant potential for vehicle
weight reduction and impact energy absorption.
The high-energy absorption capabilities of aluminium foams can provide
improved crash energy management, the ranges of material properties that can be
achieved using aluminium foams in various configurations and in combination with
other structural material are reviewed. Current and potential future applications of
aluminium foams in automobiles, trucks, and military vehicles for weight reduction,
increased fuel efficiency, and improved mobility are also described [13].
We conclude this section by stating that the ability of a core structure to absorb
impact energy is limited by the core density, geometry, and the core material. An
optimum combination of these parameters results in an optimum core structure that
maximises the energy absorption while minimising the core volume. The objective of
this paper is to introduce a recently developed core geometry and compare its
performance with known core structures; namely, honeycomb. The core structure is
referred to as the Chevron pattern which is generated and manufactured by a recently
developed technology [14±16]. The patterns developed are simply folded from flat
sheets of materials; hence, its manufacturing cost is minimum. We begin with a brief
description of the geometry needed to generate the Chevron pattern followed by a
description of the folding process and technology and finally we present the
experiments and comparative results with honeycomb structures.
 Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures 173

2 Generation of sheet folded structures: the Chevron pattern

Unlike the previous approaches, a new and innovative methodology for the
generation of new lightweight metal or composite structures was developed. The
generated patterns have the ability to absorb significant dynamic impact energy and
could have many applications in high-velocity airdrop packages and the panels for
energy absorption. The methodologies are based on a recently developed geometric
theory developed by Kling and Elsayed [14±16], and the innovative continuous sheet
folding production machine developed by Basily et al. [17] and Elsayed and Basily
[18]. They describe folding flat sheets of material into intricate three-dimensional
structures (cores) that yield an order of magnitude improvement of mechanical
properties over existing structures of equivalent volume.
We utilise the recently developed sheet folding theory and technology to generate
new core structures of the Chevron pattern folded from flat sheets of new or
traditional materials. We intend to utilise the traditional or new material by
developing sandwich structures with different geometries capable of providing
improved impact energy absorption characteristics at a much reduced volume.

2.1 Sheet folding geometry

The sheet folding geometry describes folding three-dimensional configurations from any
flat sheet material. For example, the patterns in Figure 1 [14,15] are folded from paper,
but can be folded from aluminium, copper, steel, or other composite sheet material. It
can also be laminated to provide an efficient truss work core of a high-strength
lightweight rigid panel. Depending on scale and composition, the panel has applications
ranging from shipping crates, stiffeners of aerospace structures, automotive chassis,
auto body and vehicle floors to warehouse roofs. Moreover, with this folding
technology one can design countless repetitive folding patterns with other physical and
mechanical properties tailored to meet a wide variety of industrial applications.

Figure 1 Planar trusses and Chevron folded pattern

174 B.B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed

It should be emphasised that folding of sheet material from rolled stock is possibly
one of the most efficient forming processes. Other production methods, such as
forging, casting, forming and fabrication assembly, may produce three-dimensional
structures that may appear similar, but its manufacturing processes would be
prohibitively expensive or very impractical. Thus, the significance of this innovative
folding technology is that it will enable intricate structures to be produced at an
economical production rate that makes it a complementary process to most sheet
material processes.

2.2 Chevron folding geometry

Details of the sheet folding theory are given in several references [14±20]. In this
paper, we limit our presentation to folding the well-known Chevron pattern from flat
sheets of materials. Folded patterns have one or more elementary flat surfaces, each
of which has a specific geometrical shape that forms the basic building elements of
the folded pattern. Additionally, a combination or multiplication of these elementary
flat surfaces of a specific geometrical shape constitutes the basic building cell of a
folded pattern, as it is repeated in two dimensions, creating the three-dimensional
folded shape.
In the case of a Chevron folded pattern, as an example, the basic building element
is a flat surface polyhedron defined by its length a, width b, and the included angle ,
shown in Figure 2 where both a and b are of arbitrary lengths with typical included
angle  = 60 , however  could theoretically assume any value in the range of
0    =2 [18].

Figure 2 Basic folding element, cell, tessellated sheet and folded Chevron structure,
respectively

The basic building cell of a Chevron pattern consists of four identical polyhedra [A,
B, C, and D], each of length a, width b and an included angle  = 60 . The cell is
arranged laying flat prior to folding as shown in Figure 2b. Also the repetition of the
cell m times in the direction of the arrow along the X axis provides the unfolded
length of the tessellated sheet, while the cell repetition n times in the direction of the
arrow along the Y axis provides the unfolded width of the tessellated sheet.
Creation of three-dimensional folded Chevron structures from a sheet tessellated
with the basic building cell is achieved by inducing a permanent edge bending in
particular directions between these four polyhedron elements and along all the edges
of these four basic elements. During any folding stage, the geometrical dimensions
 Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures 175

and angles of the folded structure can be determined in terms of the three parameters
of the basic building cell of the pattern a, b,  and the folding angle  with respect to
the X±Y plane. Where  varies from  ˆ 0, corresponding to a flat unfolded cell, to
 ˆ =2, corresponding to a fully folded block.

3 Folding technology

Once the parameters of the folded Chevron pattern have been determined, it becomes
important to develop some means to produce the core as specified. The authors
developed an effective continuous folding machine capable of producing the desired
core. The machine designed and constructed for continuous production of folded
patterns is shown in Figure 3. It successfully folds patterns of different geometries
from different sheet materials. This was achieved by implementing a novel technique
in which sheet material is prefolded through a set of sequential and circumferentially
grooved rollers, followed by a final set of cross folding rollers engraved with specific
patterns (Patent is applied for by Rutgers University).

Figure 3 The continuous sheet folding machine and final sheet folding rolling sequence

4 Impact loading and energy absorption characteristics

The time duration of load application distinguishes impact loading from static
tl
loading. Impact loading occurs when  0:5, where tl and tn correspond to the time
tn
to peak load and the period of system natural frequency, respectively. There are two
general cases of impact loading [21], namely; striking impact and force impact. In
addition, there are two types of stresses resulting from collisions between moving
objects, namely elastic stresses and plastic stresses, with the latter causing permanent
deformation of the colliding bodies.

4.1 Impact of elastic bodies

In the case of elastic collisions, if the mass of the striking object m is large compared
to that of the struck object mb, and if the striking object can be considered rigid, then
the kinetic energy of the striking body will be converted to stored elastic energy in the
176 B.B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed

struck body. The ratio of dynamic Pi loading to static loading W and the elastic
energy stored in the struck body is then given by:
r
Pi i 
ˆ ˆ vi 1†
W st gst
where i and st are the deformation corresponding to the dynamic loading and static
loading respectively, i is the impact velocity and  is defined as the correction factor
for the case of axial impact [21]. The kinetic energy E is then expressed as
 
1
E ˆ  mv2i
2
1 : 2†
ˆ mb
1‡
3m
For the case of a mass falling through a distance h, Equations (1) and (2) can be
rewritten as:
s
Pi i 2h
ˆ ˆ1‡ 1‡ 3†
W st st

E ˆ mg h ‡ i †: 4†
This applies only to the case of resulting elastic stresses where impact forces are too
small to cause permanent deformation in the folded structure during impact,
resulting in a negligible amount of absorbed impact energy in general.

4.2 Impact of plastically deformed bodies

When permanent deformation occurs during impact some parts of the folded
structure will undergo plastic deformation and absorb most of the impact energy.
The failure mode of these structures is mainly due to plastic hinge and a little is due
to sheet plastic stretching of the sheet material as a result of unfolding or buckling,
depending on the following two main loading and constructional conditions.

4.2.1 Energy absorption of folded sheet impacted between two smooth surfaces
The energy absorption in this case is equivalent to the total energy required for the
structure to return to its flat-sheet condition through unfolding. The impact energy
dissipates as heat, due to the plastic work consumed in unfolding the plastically bent
edges of the pattern tessellations. In this case, this energy is theoretically equal to that
required for folding the pattern assuming no strain hardening of the material [17].
The plastic work required to unfold the Chevron pattern of a given angle , which is
function of the bend angle of the edges of the flat surface of polyhedron tessellation
of length a, the width b and the included angle  where 0 <  <=2 and
 
0 < < =3, that is between the initially folded pattern   and  and the
2 3
fully unfolded back to flat sheet ( = = 0) is given by:
 Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures 177
!      
t2o y Lo Wo Wo Lo
Wp ˆ ÿ1 a ‡ ÿ 1 b 5†
4 a b sin  b sin  a

where Lo , Wo and t0 are initial sheet material length, width, and thickness
respectively.

4.2.2 Energy absorption of impacted laminated folded structure

The energy absorption in the case of a laminated structure is different from that given
in Equation (5) This is due to the effect of the laminated sheet in imposing a failure
buckling mode of the tessellated facets, rather than the plastic hinge of sheet
unfolding on unlaminated cores. This mode of failure is extremely complicated to
formulate analytically and requires lengthy numerical solutions. The localised
sequential tessellation failure produces a festooned curve typical of that of classical
buckling failure of thin cylinders under axial loading [22].
In the Chevron folded structures, the crushing buckling loads, and hence the
structure energy absorbing capacity, are a function of the folded geometry, number
of tessellations, folded angles and the mechanical properties of the sheet material. In
addition, the amount of stretching in the laminate sheet material depends on the
relative core/laminate stiffness ratio, structural geometry and bond strength between
core and laminate sheet material. Figure 4 shows the difference between the two main
loading conditions of laminated and unlaminated fold squeezed between two smooth
surfaces. The impact energy is then absorbed in a localised scale in the form of
multiple plastic bending of the individual facets of the folded structure due to
buckling only and not in simple plastic bending as in an unlaminated folded sheet.
Therefore, higher crushing forces are involved in the absorbing of the impact energies
of the folded structure when compared with the typical folding mode of the
unlaminated structure.

Figure 4 Deformation of unlaminated and laminated folded structures

178 B.B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed

The plastic bending moments and forces, and hence energy required to
permanently crush these truss-like elements to a given height, is derived from
the plastic work involved in the bending of these initially flat elements around the
newly developed ridges within the element itself, due to localised buckling, to a
given permanent angle. These angles, on average, correspond to what degree the
initial structure was deformed under impact. This crushing mechanism is so
complicated that only experimental investigations were used to determine the
parameters influencing energy absorbing capacity of different structures in a
comparative scale.

5 Constructions and testing of the Chevron-folded structures

Impact energy absorbing pads were constructed from multiple layers of laminated
cores of folded Kraft paper sheet material. The folded core was initially compacted
to a specific ratio, which corresponds to a given fold angle . In the prismatic pads, a
sheet of the same Kraft paper on one side laminates the core only, since consecutive
lamination will build up the structure with alternative layers of cores and laminated
sheet respectively. Elm paper adhesive was used in gluing the structured pads that are
then cured at 200 F for 24 h before conducting the impact tests. In the Cylindrical
configuration, the folded layers are rolled vertically in a circular shape forming a
cylinder which has a diameter of 6.2" that provides a cross-sectioned area equivalent
to 5.5  5.5" above the prismatic pads.
Impact tests were conducted using the Dynatup 950 INSTRON impact testing
machine. The test pads were constructed by multiple laminations and were trimmed
to 5.5  5.5" in cross-section and to multiple heights of 3" to facilitate comparison
with standard honeycomb sandwich structures of a fixed 3" height, which are
already used in similar commercial applications. Samples of 5.5  5.5" and of 3, 6 9
and 12" in height, respectively, were tested at various impact speeds according to
their height.

6 Test sample orientation of prismatic and cylindrical core structures

Impact tests were conducted on Kraft paper Chevron folded structures samples using
four orientations, namely: (a) flat orientation; (b) side orientation; (c) vertical
orientation; and (d) axial orientation for cylindrical samples, as shown in Figure 5.
The orientation of the folded structure is related to the direction of the folded pattern
and lamination with respect to the direction of the applied impact force as clearly
shown in the figures by arrows.
 Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures 179

Figure 5 Sample orientations of the folded Chevron pad with arrow showing the direction
of the impacted force
(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Test samples are subjected to different impact speeds varying from 20 to 40 ft/sec.
Multi-layers of the 3" standard height of the honeycomb samples were glued to
achieve heights (6, 9 and 12") equivalent to those of the Chevron samples.
Additionally, the choice of the cylindrical configuration is intended for individual
packaging applications, such as for relatively large calibre ammunitions, since the
geometry, folding properties and ease of manufacture makes it ideal for such
applications.

7 Impact energy tests and results

Impact testing was conducted on the Dynatup 950 INSTRON Impact Testing
Machine at four predetermined speed settings of 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 ft/sec, using a
hammer weight of 21.0 lb, which provided a precalculated impact energy of about 25,
130, 200, 300, 400 and 525 lb.ft corresponding to the above predetermined impact
speeds.
180 B.B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed

7.1 Test results of honeycomb samples

A typical load deflection diagram of the results of the impact test conducted on a
two-layered 5.5  5.5" cross-section honeycomb sample is shown in Figure 6. All
samples were subjected to 30 ft/sec impact velocity. For the honeycomb sample, it is
shown that the maximum impact load is 1444 lbs and the maximum deflection is
4.85". The absorbed impact energy is 279.52 lb/ft, with typical two-hump load
deflection characteristics reflecting the energy absorbed by the two layers of the
honeycomb sample. Photograph of the impacted folded Chevron cylindrical and the
honeycomb samples are shown in Figure 7.

Figure 6 Load±energy±deflection diagram of the honeycomb sample

Figure 7 Photograph of impacted Chevron cylinder and the honeycomb sample

 Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures 181

7.2 Test results of the Chevron samples

Laminated folded Chevron samples of similar dimensions to that of honeycomb were

tested along the three orientations of the lamination, namely, flat, side and vertical
loading directions, using the same impact speed of 30 ft/sec and drop weight of
21.5 lb.
The test results of the flat impacted sample are shown in Figure 8a. It can be seen
that the flat sample absorbs the energy gradually at a constant rate, but since it could
not absorb the entire impact energy at that rate, the remaining impact energy resulted
in a peak load of 1450 lbs near the end of the load deflection diagram. This
directional type of cushioning can be used for packaging highly sensitive and fragile
objects. The results of the side impacted sample show that these samples behaved
similar to that of the flat samples.

Figure 8 Load±energy±deflection diagrams for flat and vertically oriented Chevron

samples

The test results for the vertical impacted sample show that it outperforms the
honeycomb sample as it absorbs the total energy at a uniform load when compared
with the honeycomb sample as shown in Figures 8(b) and 9. The total deflection is
significantly less than for the honeycomb sample, implying that the energy absorbed
per unit volume for the vertical sample is higher than that for the honeycomb sample.
Hence, a significant reduction in packaged volume can be achieved using the vertical
sample configuration. Combining these three directional configurations would
provide a means of tailoring the cushioning pad to absorb a given impact energy at a
minimum volume for a specific object fragility.
182 B.B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed

Figure 9 Load±energy±deflection for both the honeycomb (two humps curve) and vertically
oriented Chevron samples

7.3 Test results of impacted cylindrical samples

The test results of the axially impacted Cylindrical sample are shown in Figure 10a. It
can be seen that the cylindrical samples also outperformed the honeycomb samples
(Figure 10b) in that they absorbed the total energy at a higher load than the
honeycomb. However, it is important to note that the total deflection is significantly
less than in the honeycomb sample, implying that the energy absorbed per unit
volume for the vertical sample is higher than that for the honeycomb sample.

Figure 10 Load±energy±deflection for both the cylindrical Chevron sample and the
honeycomb (two humps curve)
 Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures 183

8 Test results and conclusions

The energy absorbing pads of the folded Kraft sheet paper produced by the folding
technology outperformed the standard honeycomb sandwich structure for high-speed
airdrop applications. The comparison is based on the energy absorbing capacity per
unit volume.

* A comparison between folded and honeycomb structures, in their energy

absorbing capacity per unit volume at different impact speeds, indicates that the
vertically impacted folded structures exceeded that of the honeycomb,
particularly at a higher speed where it nearly absorbed double the energy that can
be absorbed by the honeycomb, Figure 11.

* The ability of the folded structure to absorb energy in the three directions of
orientation is a valuable and important factor, which is a major drawback of
honeycomb structures, in that the honeycomb structures do not have energy
absorbing capacities in directions normal to the surface resulting in a total
collapse under slight load application in other directions. Therefore, the
specifications of high-speed airdrop require that the direction of dropped items
cushioned by a honeycomb structure should not exceed 2.5 deviation from
normal to the surface at impact. It is usually difficult to maintain such a
specific angle of orientation of the dropped items in actual airdrop
applications.

* For any given impact speed the folded patterns absorb impact energy gradually
and in a more uniform fashion when compared with the atypical stop±go
characteristics of successive collapsing of each honeycomb layer during
deformation. The results show that the folded structures absorb the same impact
energy at almost half the deformation. In other words, the folded Chevron
structures can absorb the same impact energy at half the volume of that of the
honeycomb structures.

* The above results demonstrate the great design flexibility of the folded structures,
as it can be designed to vary from low values of impact loads suitable for
packaging of fragile products to much higher impact loads for minimum material
usage. This is due to the main characteristic of the folded Chevron pattern as fully
extended (becomes a flat sheet again), fully compacted or in any other
configuration between these two extremes. In each case, the mechanical
properties and the impact energy absorption capability of the resultant structure
(configuration) vary significantly.
184 B.B. Basily and E.A. Elsayed

Figure 11 Variation of absorbed impact energy/unit volume with impact speed of folded and
honeycomb structures

Acknowledgements

This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under
Grant No. DMII 0115440, and the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Port
Hueneme, contract No. N47408-01-C-7230. The authors would like to thank Ms.
Jessica Hiraoka of the Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center for her help and
suggestions during the course of this research.

References

1 Atluri, S.N. (1997) Structural Integrity and Durability, Forsyth, Georgia, USA: Tech
Science Press.
2 Goranson, U.G. (1997) `Fatigue issues in aircraft maintenance and repair', International
Journal of Fatigue, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp.413±431.
3 Provan, J.W. (1987) Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics and Reliability, Leiden, The
Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
4 Shi, P. and Mahadevan, S. (2001) `Damage tolerance approach for probabilistic pitting
corrosion fatigue life prediction', Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 68, pp.1493±1507.
5 Lassen, T. and Sorensen, J.D. (2002) `A probabilistic damage tolerance concept for
welded joints. Part 1: data base and stochastic modeling', Marine Structures, Vol. 15,
pp.599±613.
6 Proppe, C., Schueller, G.I., Hartl, J. and Kargl, H. (2002) `Probabilistic design of
mechanical components', Structural Safety, Vol. 24, pp.363±376.
7 Mahadevan, S. and Ni, K. (2003) `Damage tolerance reliability analysis of automotive
spot-welded joints', Reliability Engineering & System Safety, Vol. 81, No. 1, pp.9±21.
8 Foster-Miller Corporation (December 2000) Personal communications.
 Dynamic axial crushing of multilayer core structures 185

9 Yausi, Y. (2000) `Dynamic axial crushing of multi-layer honeycomb panels and impact
tensile behavior of the component members', International Journal of Impact Engineering,
Vol. 24, pp.659±671.
10 Aronson, R.B. (1999) `Materials for the next-generation vehicle', Manufacturing
Engineering, Vol. 123, p.7.
11 Paik, J.K., Thayamballi, A.K. and Kim, G.S. (1999) `Strength characteristics of
aluminum honeycomb sandwich panels', Thin-Walled Structures, Vol. 35, pp.205±231.
12 Vaidya, U.K., Hosur, M.V., Earl, D. and Jeelani, S. (2000) `Impact response of integrated
hollow core sandwich composite panels', Composites ± Part A: Applied Science &
Manufacturing, Vol. 31, pp.761±772.
13 Claar, T.D., Yu, C.-J., Hall, I., Banhart, J., Baumeister, J., Weber, M. and Seeliger, W.
(2000) `Ultra-lightweight aluminum foam materials for automotive applications',
International Journal of Powder Metallurgy, Vol. 36, pp.10±15.
14 Kling, D. and Elsayed, E.A. (2000) `Innovative new sheet forming processes', Proceedings
of the 2000 NSF Design and Manufacturing Research Conference, Vancouver, Canada,
January 3±6.
15 Kling, D. and Elsayed, E.A. (2000) `New sheet metal folding processes', Ninth Industrial
Engineering Research Conference, Cleveland, Ohio, May 21±23.
16 Kling, D. and Elsayed, E.A. (2001) `Doubly periodic folded surfaces and their
applications', The International Conference on Computers and Industrial Engineering,
Cocoa Beach, Florida, March 5±7.
17 Basily, B.B., Elsayed, E.A. and Kling, D. (2003) `Folded sheet materials manufacturing
process and applications', Proceedings of 2003 the NSF Design, Service and Manufacturing
Grantees and Research Conference, Birmingham, Alabama, January 6±10.
18 Elsayed, E.A. and Basily, B.B. (2003) `A continuous folding process for sheet materials',
ICPR-17 Conference Proceedings, Blacksburg, VA, August 4±7.
19 Kling, D.H. (1997) `Doubly periodic flat surfaces in three-space', Doctoral dissertation,
Rutgers University.
20 Kling, D., Elsayed, E.A. and Basily, B.B. (2002) `Manufacturing process for folded sheet
material', Proceedings of the 2002 NSF Design and Manufacturing Research Conference,
San Juan, January 6±10, pp.1555±1562.
21 Burr, A.H. and Cheatham, J.B. (1995) Mechanical Analysis and Design, 2nd edition,
Chapter 14, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
22 Abramowicz, W. (2003) `Thin-walled structures as impact energy absorbers', Journal of
Thin-Walled Structures, Vol. 41, pp.91±107.

View publication stats