Tunable deformation behavior and penetration performance of the adjustable-similarity-ratio nested folded honeycomb sandwich panels under low-velocity impact
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026
Tunable deformation behavior and penetration performance of the adjustable-similarity-ratio nested folded honeycomb sandwich panels under low-velocity impact
Honeycomb sandwich panels are widely used in aerospace, automotive, and marine applications. To meet the demands of complex loading conditions and specialized application scenarios requiring flexibly tunable advanced structures, an adjustable-similarity-ratio nested folded honeycomb core was developed by integrating the adjustable similarity ratio nested hierarchical and folding design strategies. Numerical simulations were conducted to investigate the low-velocity impact response of sandwich panels with cores of varying geometric parameters under different impact velocities. The local crash efficiency (LCE) and energy balance models were employed to evaluate deformation resistance, while specific penetration energy was analyzed. The new structure can ensure that the external dimensions remain unchanged, and the mechanical properties can be altered by changing the nesting similarity ratio. Analysis demonstrates that the nested folded honeycomb sandwich panels can achieve 25.5% and 85.6% enhancements in resistance to local deformation and global stiffness, respectively, compared to traditional honeycomb sandwich panels. At high impact velocity, structures with vertical folding and high nesting similarity ratios demonstrated the maximum specific penetration energy, being 1.076 times that of nested honeycomb and 1.248 times that of traditional honeycomb structures, respectively. The deformation process and energy absorption characteristics of the nested folded honeycomb structure provide valuable guidance for the design of new energy-absorbing materials.
GeYXueJLiuL, et al.Advances in multiple assembly acoustic structural design strategies for honeycomb composites: a review [J/OL]. Mater Today Commun2024; 38: 108013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2023.108013
3.
BubertEAWoodsBKSLeeK, et al.Design and fabrication of a passive 1D morphing aircraft Skin [J/OL]. J Intell Mater Syst Struct2010; 21(17): 1699–1717. https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X10378777
4.
RůžekRLohonkaRJirončJ. Ultrasonic C-scan and shearography NDI techniques evaluation of impact defects identification [J/OL]. NDT E Int2006; 39(2): 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2005.07.012
5.
ZhuGLiSSunG, et al.On design of graded honeycomb filler and tubal wall thickness for multiple load cases [J/OL]. Thin-Walled Struct2016; 109: 377–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2016.09.017
6.
GanilovaOALowJJ. Application of smart honeycomb structures for automotive passive safety [J/OL]. Proc Inst Mech Eng - Part D J Automob Eng2018; 232(6): 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954407017708916
7.
JiMGuoYHanX, et al.Dynamic cushioning energy absorption of paper composite sandwich structures with corrugation and honeycomb cores under drop impact [J/OL]. J Sandw Struct Mater2022; 24(2): 1270–1286. https://doi.org/10.1177/10996362211028877
8.
GuoHYuanHZhangJ, et al.Review of sandwich structures under impact loadings: experimental, numerical and theoretical analysis [J/OL]. Thin-Walled Struct2024; 196: 111541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2023.111541
ZhangHWangXGuoZ, et al.On impact damage and repair of composite honeycomb sandwich Structures [J/OL]. Materials2023; 16(23): 7374. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16237374
11.
LiuJWangGLeiZ. Comparisons on the local impact response of sandwich panels with In-Plane and out-of-plane honeycomb Cores [J/OL]. Sustainability2023; 15(4): 3437. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043437
12.
LiuHYuQNZhangZC, et al.Analytical solutions for heat transfer efficiency in metallic honeycombs using two-equation method [J/OL]. Int Commun Heat Mass Tran2016; 75: 147–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2016.04.014
13.
ChenY. Self-similar hierarchical honeycombs in two different fractal layouts: a comparative study of the in-plane crushing behaviors [J/OL]. Mech Mater2024; 189: 104900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2023.104900
14.
ZhangYLuMWangCH, et al.Out-of-plane crashworthiness of bio-inspired self-similar regular hierarchical honeycombs [J/OL]. Compos Struct2016; 144: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.02.014
15.
LiuHZhangETWangG, et al.In-plane crushing behavior and energy absorption of a novel graded honeycomb from hierarchical architecture [J/OL]. Int J Mech Sci2022; 221: 107202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.107202
16.
HuangWZhangYZhouJ, et al.Stabilized and efficient multi-crushing properties via face-centered hierarchical honeycomb [J/OL]. Int J Mech Sci2024; 266: 108918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2023.108918
17.
HeQFengJChenY, et al.Mechanical properties of spider-web hierarchical honeycombs subjected to out-of-plane impact loading [J/OL]. J Sandw Struct Mater2020; 22(3): 771–796. https://doi.org/10.1177/1099636218772295
18.
QiJLiCTieY, et al.Energy absorption characteristics of origami-inspired honeycomb sandwich structures under low-velocity impact loading [J/OL]. Mater Des2021; 207: 109837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.109837
19.
SongKLiuHYeH, et al.Transverse energy absorption performance of sandwich tubes with various origami foldcores [J/OL]. J Sandw Struct Mater2025; 27(1): 151–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/10996362241293648
20.
TownsendSAdamsRRobinsonM, et al.3D printed origami honeycombs with tailored out-of-plane energy absorption behavior [J/OL]. Mater Des2020; 195: 108930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108930
21.
ZhaiJLiuYGengX, et al.Energy absorption of pre-folded honeycomb under in-plane dynamic loading [J/OL]. Thin-Walled Struct2019; 145: 106356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2019.106356
22.
ZhaoSZhangDZhangX, et al.Crashing behavior of bio-inspired nested folded honeycomb structures [J/OL]. Mech Adv Mater Struct2025: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/15376494.2025.2508358
23.
JohnsonGRCookWH. A constitutive model and data for metals subjected to large strains, high strain rates and high temperatures. In: Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on ballistics, Hague, The Netherlands, 1983, Vol. 21, pp. 541–547.
24.
PalombaGEpastoGCrupiV, et al.Single and double-layer honeycomb sandwich panels under impact loading [J/OL]. Int J Impact Eng2018; 121: 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2018.07.013
25.
Pernas-SánchezJArtero-GuerreroJAVarasD, et al.Cork core sandwich plates for blast Protection [J/OL]. Applied Sciences2020; 10(15): 5180. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10155180
26.
QinQChenSBaiC, et al.On influence of face sheet distributions on low-velocity impact failure of metal honeycomb core sandwich plates [J/OL]. Thin-Walled Struct2023; 182: 110202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2022.110202
27.
CrupiVEpastoGGuglielminoE. Collapse modes in aluminium honeycomb sandwich panels under bending and impact loading [J/OL]. Int J Impact Eng2012; 43: 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2011.12.002
28.
SunGHuoXWangH, et al.On the structural parameters of honeycomb-core sandwich panels against low-velocity impact [J/OL]. Compos B Eng2021; 216: 108881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.108881
29.
HeWLiuJTaoB, et al.Experimental and numerical research on the low velocity impact behavior of hybrid corrugated core sandwich structures [J/OL]. Compos Struct2016; 158: 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.09.009
BoonkongTShenYOGuanZW, et al.The low velocity impact response of curvilinear-core sandwich structures [J/OL]. Int J Impact Eng2016; 93: 28–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.01.012
32.
ASTM International. ASTM D7136/D7136M-15: Standard Test Method for Measuring the Damage Resistance of a Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composite to a Drop-Weight Impact Event. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1520/D7136_D7136M-15
33.
FooCCChaiGBSeahLK. A model to predict low-velocity impact response and damage in sandwich composites [J/OL]. Compos Sci Technol2008; 68(6): 1348–1356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2007.12.007
34.
UstaFTürkmenHSScarpaF. Low-velocity impact resistance of composite sandwich panels with various types of auxetic and non-auxetic core structures [J/OL]. Thin-Walled Struct2021; 163: 107738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2021.107738
35.
SankarBV. Scaling of low-velocity impact for symmetric composite laminates [J/OL]. J Reinforc Plast Compos1992; 11(3): 296–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/073168449201100304
36.
ShivakumarKNElberWIllgW. Prediction of impact force and duration due to low-velocity impact on circular composite laminates [J/OL]. J Appl Mech1985; 52(3): 674–680. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3169120
MahfuzHAl MamumWJeelaniS. Effect of core density and implanted delamination on the high strain rate response of foam core sandwich composites. Sandwich Construction1997; 5: 597–606.
