A unit cell structure with tunable Poisson's ratio from positive to negative
A unit cell structure with tunable Poisson's ratio from positive to negative
Materials Letters
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matlet
art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t
Article history: A novel unit cell structure with re-entrant hollow skeleton was designed and its Poisson's ratio was
Received 23 September 2015 studied using the finite element method (FEM) as a function of the geometric variables and the parent
Received in revised form material Poisson's ratio. The simulation results showed that the Poisson's ratio of the unit cell structure is
27 October 2015
tunable over the full range of Poisson's ratio ( 1 to þ0.5) by varying the geometric variables and parent
Accepted 7 November 2015
material Poisson's ratio. Three types of samples with identical geometric variables were fabricated via 3D
Available online 10 November 2015
printing using three different materials, and their Poisson's ratios were measured and compared with the
Keywords: ones from FE simulation, and excellent agreement was found between the experimental results and FE
Re-entrant cellular structure simulation.
Negative Poisson's ratio
& 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Simulation and modeling
Elastic properties
Structural
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2015.11.037
0167-577X/& 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
D. Li et al. / Materials Letters 164 (2016) 456–459 457
Fig. 1. (a) The ANSYS model of the unit cell structure with a re-entrant hollow skeleton; (b) schematic drawing of the unit cell structure viewed in the x–z plane; (c) a sample
fabricated by 3D printing from Vero White Plus.
Fig. 2. The relationships between the Poisson's ratio of the designed cellular structure and the h/l ratio from 0 to 0.45. Plot (a), L/l¼1.1; (b), 1.2; (c), 1.3; (d), 1.4. Symbols (■),
(●), (▲), (▼), (◆) and (◄) represent different parent materials with Poisson's ratio of 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.45, respectively, used to make the designed cellular structures.
from three different materials: Vero White Plus, Tango Black Plus, materials have three independent elastic constants [16]. The unit
and PLA. Vero White Plus has the highest stiffness among the cell samples were compressively loaded in the Z direction using a
three materials while the Tango Black Plus is most compliant. A universal testing machine (Zwick010, Germany) with a testing
printed sample is shown in Fig. 1c. One face of the cube was re- speed of 2 mm/min (corresponding to a strain rate of 10 3/s). The
moved to show in the inner structure. The geometric variables of transverse displacements in both the X and Y directions in the
the printed samples are h ¼12 mm, l¼ 30 mm, L ¼33 mm. middle plane of the unit cell sample were recorded by a digital
Cubic materials have equal moduli and Poisson's ratios in the outside micrometer (Guilin Measuring and Cutting Tool Co. Ltd.
principal directions but can differ in oblique directions. Cubic China) at the unit cell 0.4% normal strain for Vero White Plus and
458 D. Li et al. / Materials Letters 164 (2016) 456–459
2% normal strain for Tango Black Plus and PLA. The strains were
selected because they are lower than the unit cell elastic limit but
sufficiently high that the end effect (due to frictions between the
test sample and the surfaces of the platens) can be neglected. The
high machining precision of 3D printing route ensures a geome-
trically accurate final product. If the symmetry is orthotropic, there
are three independent Poisson's ratios. To test symmetry, load was
applied in each principal direction and Poisson's ratio measured.
Negligible difference (less than 5%) was found between νxy , νyz , and
νxz , a fact that suggests good cubic responses of the fabricated unit
cell structure. In this study, the arithmetic mean of the X and Y
direction displacements was recorded as the transverse strain. The
arithmetic mean of the transverse strains recorded from 8 separate
measurements was used to determine the unit cell Poisson's ratio
v.
References [8] D. Li, T.M. Jaglinski, D.S. Stone, R.S. Lakes, Appl. Phys. Lett. 101 (2012) 251903.
[9] D. Li, L. Dong, R.S. Lakes, Mater. Lett. 143 (2015) 31–34.
[10] M. Rovati, Scr. Mater. 48 (2003) 235–240.
[1] L.J. Gibson, M.F. Ashby, G.S. Schajer, C.I. Robertson, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 382 [11] H. Hu, V. Silberschmidt, J. Mater. Sci. 48 (2013) 8493–8500.
(1982) 25–42. [12] X.N. Hou, H. Hu, V. Silberschmidt, Composites: Part B 58 (2014) 152–159.
[2] A.G. Kolpakov, Prikl. Mat. Mekh. 49 (1985) 969–977. [13] Y. Prawoto, Comput. Mater. Sci. 58 (2012) 140–153.
[3] K.W. Wojciechowski, Phys. Lett. A 137 (1989) 60–64. [14] N.T. Kaminakis, G.E. Stavroulakis, Composites: Part B 43 (2012) 2655–2668.
[4] R.S. Lakes, Science 238 (1987) 551. [15] A.A. Pozniak, J. Smardzewski, K.W. Wojciechowski, Smart Mater. Struct. 22
[5] T. Buckmann, R. Schittny, M. Thiel, M. Kadic, G.W. Milton, M. Wegener, New J. (2013) 1–11.
Phys. 16 (2014) 033032. [16] J.F. Nye, Physical Properties of Crystals, Clarendon, Oxford, 1976.
[6] S. Hirotsu, J. Chem. Phys. 94 (1991) 3949.
[7] L. Dong, D.S. Stone, R.S. Lakes, Philos. Mag. Lett. 90 (2010) 23–33.