Upload
sumit-singh
View
679
Download
5
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY Politechnika Warszawska
FACULTY OF POWER AND AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING
Wydział Mechaniczny Energetyki i Lotnictwa
DIVISION: Strength of Materials and Structures Zakład: Wytrzymałości Materiałów i Konstrukcji
Anticlastic Behaviour Analysis of Sandwich Honeycomb Core
(Hexagonal)
Badanie Antyklastycznej Deformacji Rdzenia Przekładkowego o Strukturze Plastra Miodu (Sześciokąta)
Supervisor/Promotor: Dr. Inz. Adam DackoMaster Diploma Thesis PresentationPresented By: SUMIT SINGHStudent Index Number: 265593M.Sc. Aerospace Engineering
2 Presentation Plan
Introduction
Thesis Objectives
Honeycomb Core Modelling
MPC (Constrained Equations) – RBE 3 Application
Loads and Boundary Conditions
Material Properties and Manufacturer Data for Honeycomb Core
Analysis and Results
Conclusion9/23/2014
3 Introduction
Application of Sandwich Honeycomb Core
Hollow Hexagonal Cells
High Strength to Weight Ratio
Increased Bending Stiffness
Anticlastic/Saddle Behaviour
9/23/2014
4 Thesis Objectives
Anticlastic Behaviour Analysis of a Rectangular Block of Honeycomb Core.
Global Apparent Poison’s Ratios Comparison of Four Different Cell Sized Square Block of Honeycomb Core While Bent Out of Plane.
Out of Plane Bending Comparison of Two thin Plates (Made of Isotropic and Orthotropic Material Respectively) and Honeycomb Core.
9/23/2014
5 Honeycomb Core Modelling
Single Hexagonal Cell Creation and Translation Creation of Elements on Curve and Extrusion
9/23/2014
6 MPC – RBE 3 Application
RBE 3 is an interpolation element which defines a linear relationship between nodal DOFs.
RBE 3 Comprises one Dependent Node and many Independent Nodes.
9/23/2014
7 MPC – RBE 3 Application
9/23/2014
8 Loads and Boundary Conditions
Moments
Displacements
Input Data Descriptions (N.mm)Force (F1,F2,F3) < >
Moment (M1,M2,M3) <0, ±200, 0>
Input Data Descriptions (mm)
Translations (T1,T2,T3) <0, 0, 0>
Rotations (R1,R2,R3) <0, 0, 0>
9/23/2014
9 Loads and Boundary Conditions
9/23/2014
10 Material Properties and Manufacturer Data for Honeycomb core
Material Properties
Manufactures Data for Honeycomb Core
Material E11 (MPa) G11 (MPa) µ
Aluminium 68000 25564 0.33
Sample CodeAluminium
Cell Size (mm)
Core Thickness (mm)
Cell Wall Thickness (mm)
Material Density (ton/mm3)
AL002540 3.2 20 0.025 0.072E-9AL002640 4.8 20 0.038 0.070E-9AL002840 6.4 20 0.038 0.054E-9AL002940 13 20 0.1 0.062E-9
9/23/2014
11 Cell Wall Thickness for Honeycomb core
Assumed Cell Wall Thickness for Numerical Experiments
Cell Size (mm) Cell Wall Thickness 1 (mm)
Cell Wall Thickness 2 (mm)
3.2 0.05 0.14.8 0.05 0.1
6.4 0.05 0.1
13 0.05 0.1
9/23/2014
12 Cell Size Comparison of honeycomb cores
Four Different Cell Sized Honeycomb Core
13 mm Cell Size
4.8 mm Cell Size
3.2 mm Cell Size
6.4 mm Cell Size
9/23/2014
13 Analysis and Results 3.2 mm Cell Size
0.025 mm Cell Wall Thickness
0.05 mm Cell Wall Thickness
0.1 mm Cell Wall Thickness
9/23/2014
14 Analysis and Results 4.8 mm Cell Size
0.038 mm Cell Wall Thickness
0.05 mm Cell Wall Thickness
0.1 mm Cell Wall Thickness
9/23/2014
15 Analysis and Results 6.4 mm Cell Size
0.038 mm Cell Wall Thickness
0.05 mm Cell Wall Thickness
0.1 mm Cell Wall Thickness
9/23/2014
16 Analysis and Results 13 mm Cell Size
0.05 mm Cell Wall Thickness
0.1 mm Cell Wall Thickness
9/23/2014
17 Global Apparent Poison’s Ratios Comparison
0.85 0.9 0.95 1 1.05 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.25 1.3 1.350
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Cell Size vs. Global Apparent Poison's Ratio
Global Apparent Poison's ratio obtained from manufacturer data cell wall thicknessGlobal Apparent Poison's ratio obtained from 0.05mm cell wall thicknessGlobal Apparent Poison's ratio obtained from 0.1mm cell wall thickness
Global Apparent Poison's Ratio
Cell
Size
9/23/2014
18 Out of Plane Bending of Honeycomb Core with Skin
9/23/2014
19 Material Properties of thin plates
Isotropic Material
Orthotropic Material
Material E11 (MPa) G11 (MPa) µ
Aluminium 68000 25564 0.33
Material E11 (MPa) E22 (MPa) G11 (MPa) µ
S2-Glass Epoxy 52000 11700 7600 0.28
9/23/2014
20 Comparison of Out of Plane Bending between Thin Plates and Honeycomb Core
Isotropic Orthotropic
9/23/2014
21 Comparison of Global Apparent Poison’s Ratio of Thin Plates and Honeycomb Core
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Series1; 1.58
-0.99 -0.93
0.0413
Global apparent Poison's Ratio vs. change in materials of thin plate and honeycomb core
Glob
al A
ppar
ent P
oiso
n's
Ratio
9/23/2014
22 Conclusion
Relation between Hexagon Cell Size and Global Apparent Poison’s ratio is not predictable.
Increase in Hexagon Cell Wall Thickness reduces Global Apparent Poison’s Ratio.
Application of Skin on Honeycomb Core Destroys the Anticlastic Behaviour.
Change in Material Doesn’t affect Anticlastic Bending.
9/23/2014
23
Thank Your for Your Attention
9/23/2014