Protection of critical infrastructure in an urban environment is a challenging task, specifically against the vehicle bourne improvised explosive device threat. To design infrastructure to withstand this evolving threat, novel solutions and advanced materials need to be developed. One such material of interest are auxetics. This study experimentally analysed the mitigation of blast response of auxetic re-entrant honeycomb structures, with geometries varying between −ve 30° and +ve 30° using additive manufacturing (3D printing) techniques and non-explosive loading via shock tube. Re-entrant auxetic structures (−ve 15°) exhibited repeatable blast mitigation of 23% and reduced the transmitted pressure and impulse of the blast wave. Further highlighting their potential application as a protective measure to enhance a structures blast survivability.
AldersonA (1999) A triumph of lateral thought. Chemistry & Industry10: 384–391.
2.
AndamiHToopchi-NezhadH (2020) Performance assessment of rigid polyurethane foam core sandwich panels under blast loading. International Journal of Protective Structures11(1): 109–130.
3.
AndreottiRColomboMGuardoneA, et al. (2015) Performance of a shock tube facility for impact response of structures. International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics72: 53–66.
4.
ArifurrahmanFCritchleyRHorsfallI (2020) Experimental and numerical study of auxetic sandwich panels on 160 grams of PE4 blast loading. Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials. Epub ahead of print 30 September 2020. DOI: 10.1177/1099636220961756.
5.
AttardDFarrugiaPSGattR, et al. (2020) Starchirals–A novel class of auxetic hierarchal structures. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences179: 105631.
6.
AuneVFagerholtELangsethM, et al. (2016) A shock tube facility to generate blast loading on structures. International Journal of Protective Structures7(3): 340–366.
7.
BezaziAScarpaF (2007) Mechanical behaviour of conventional and negative Poisson’s ratio thermoplastic polyurethane foams under compressive cyclic loading. International Journal of Fatigue29(5): 922–930.
8.
BezaziAScarpaF (2009) Tensile fatigue of conventional and negative Poisson’s ratio open cell PU foams. International Journal of Fatigue31(3): 488–494.
9.
Bloodworth-RaceSCritchleyRHazaelR, et al. (2021) Testing the blast response of foam inserts for helmets. Heliyon7(5): e06990.
10.
ChanNEvansKE (1997a) Fabrication methods for Auxetic foams. Journal of Materials Science32(22): 5945–5953.
11.
ChanNEvansKE (1997b) Microscopic examination of the microstructure and deformation of conventional and auxetic foams. Journal of Materials Science32(21): 5725–5736.
12.
ChanNEvansKE (1999a) The mechanical properties of conventional and auxetic foams. Part I: Compression and tension. Journal of Cellular Plastics35(2): 130–165.
13.
ChanNEvansKE (1999b) The mechanical properties of conventional and auxetic foams. Part II: Shear. Journal of Cellular Plastics35(2): 166–183.
14.
ChenCPLakesRS (1995) Analysis of the structure – property relations of foam materials. Cellular Polymers14(3): 186–202.
15.
ChenLXiaoYXiaoG, et al. (2015) Test and numerical simulation of truck collision with anti-ram bollards. International Journal of Impact Engineering75: 30–39.
16.
ChoiJBLakesRS (1991) Design of a fastener based on negative Poisson’s ratio. Cellular Polymers10(3): 205–212.
17.
ChoiJBLakesRS (1995a) Analysis of elastic modulus of conventional foams and of re-entrant foam materials with a negative Poisson’s ratio. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences37(1): 51–59.
18.
ChoiJBLakesRS (1995b) Nonlinear analysis of the Poisson’s ratio of negative Poisson’s ratio foams. Journal of Composite Materials29(1): 113–128.
19.
CormieDMaysGSmithP (2009) Blast Effects on Buildings. London: Thomas Telford Publishing.
20.
CritchleyRCorniIWhartonJA, et al. (2013a) A review of the manufacture, mechanical properties and potential applications of auxetic foams. Advanced Functional Materials250: 1963–1982.
21.
CritchleyRCorniIWhartonJA, et al. (2013b) The preparation of auxetic foams by three-dimensional printing and their characteristics. Advanced Engineering Materials15(10): 980–985.
22.
DannemannKALankfordJ (2000) High strain rate compression of closed-cell aluminium foams. Materials Science and Engineering A293(1–2): 157–164.
23.
DingYWangSZhaoK, et al. (2016) Blast alleviation of cellular sacrificial cladding: A nonlinear plastic shock model. International Journal of Applied Mechanics08(04): 1650057.
24.
DraganićHGazićGVarevacD (2019) Experimental investigation of design and retrofit methods for blast load mitigation – A state-of-the-art review. Engineering Structures190: 189–209.
25.
DziewitPPłatekPJaniszewskiJ, et al. (2017) Mechanical response of additive manufactured regular cellular structures in quasi-static loading conditions-part I experimental Investigations. In: 7th International conference mechanics and materials in design at, Albufeira/Portugal, 11–15 June 2017.
26.
EvansKEAldersonA (2000) Auxetic materials: Functional materials and structures from lateral thinking!Advanced Materials12(9): 617–628.
GasparN (2010) A granular material with a negative Poisson’s ratio. Mechanics of Materials42(7): 673–677.
33.
GibsonLJAshbyMF (1988) Cellular Solids: Structure and Properties. London: Cambridge University Press.
34.
GrujicicMGalgalikarRSnipesJS, et al. (2013) Multi-physics modeling of the fabrication and dynamic performance of all-metal auxetic-hexagonal sandwich-structures. Materials & Design51: 113–130.
35.
GuruprasadSMukherjeeA (2000a) Layered sacrificial claddings under blast loading part I — Analytical studies. International Journal of Impact Engineering24(9): 957–973.
36.
GuruprasadSMukherjeeA (2000b) Layered sacrificial claddings under blast loading part II — Experimental studies. International Journal of Impact Engineering24(9): 975–984.
37.
HabibFNIovenittiPMasoodSH, et al. (2017) In-plane energy absorption evaluation of 3D printed polymeric honeycombs. Virtual and Physical Prototyping12(2): 117–131.
38.
HabibFNIovenittiPMasoodSH, et al. (2018) Cell geometry effect on in-plane energy absorption of periodic honeycomb structures. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology94(5–8): 2369–2380.
39.
HanssenAGEnstockLLangsethM (2002) Close-range blast loading of aluminium foam panels. International Journal of Impact Engineering27(6): 593–618.
40.
HanssenAGGirardYOlovssonL, et al. (2006) A numerical model for bird strike of aluminium foam-based sandwich panels. International Journal of Impact Engineering32(7): 1127–1144.
41.
HuBLiGQChenSW, et al. (2011) State-of-the-Art review on anti-ram bollards. Applied Mechanics and Materials90-93: 3206–3213.
42.
ImbalzanoGLinforthSNgoTD, et al. (2018) Blast resistance of auxetic and honeycomb sandwich panels: Comparisons and parametric designs. Composite Structures183: 242–261.
43.
JiangYLiY (2018) 3D printed Auxetic mechanical metamaterial with chiral cells and re-entrant cores. Scientific Reports8(1): 2397.
44.
JinXWangZNingJ, et al. (2016) Dynamic response of sandwich structures with graded auxetic honeycomb cores under blast loading. Composites Part B Engineering106: 206–217.
45.
JoblingA (1991) An introduction to rheology H. A. Barnes, J. F. Hutton and K. Walters, Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 1989. Pp. V + 199, price $6050/dfl 115.00. ISBN 0-444-87469-0. Polymer International25(1): 61–61.
46.
KalubadanageDRemennikovANgoT, et al. (2020) Close-in blast resistance of large-scale auxetic re-entrant honeycomb sandwich panels. Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials. Epub ahead of print 27 November 2020. DOI: 10.1177/1099636220975450.
47.
LakesR (1987) Foam structures with a negative Poisson’s ratio. Science235(4792): 1038–1040.
48.
LakesR (1991) Deformation mechanisms in negative Poisson’s ratio materials: Structural aspects. Journal of Materials Science26(9): 2287–2292.
49.
LakesR (1992) New materials – No contractile obligations. Nature358(6389): 713–714.
50.
LakesRS (1993) Design considerations for materials with negative Poisson’s ratios. Journal of Mechanical Design115(4): 696–700.
51.
LakesRSElmsK (1993) Indentability of conventional and negative Poisson’s ratio foams. Journal of Composite Materials27(12): 1193–1202.
52.
LanXFengSHuangQ, et al. (2019) A comparative study of blast resistance of cylindrical sandwich panels with aluminum foam and auxetic honeycomb cores. Aerospace Science and Technology87: 37–47.
53.
LanX-KHuangQZhouT, et al. (2020) Optimal design of a novel cylindrical sandwich panel with double arrow auxetic core under air blast loading. Defence Technology16: 617–626.
54.
LeeTLakesRS (1997) Anisotropic polyurethane foam with Poisson’s ratio greater than 1. Journal of Materials Science32(9): 2397–2401.
55.
LisieckiJKłyszSBłażejewiczT, et al. (2014) Tomographic examination of auxetic polyurethane foam structures. physica status solidi (b)251(2): 314–320.
56.
LiuYPHuH (2010) A review on auxetic structures and polymeric materials. Scientific Research and Essays5(10): 1052–1063.
57.
LiXZhangPWangZ, et al. (2014) Dynamic behavior of aluminum honeycomb sandwich panels under air blast: Experiment and numerical analysis. Composite Structures108: 1001–1008.
58.
MaGWYeZQ (2007a) Analysis of foam claddings for blast alleviation. International Journal of Impact Engineering34(1): 60–70.
59.
MaGWYeZQ (2007b) Energy absorption of double-layer foam cladding for blast alleviation. International Journal of Impact Engineering34(2): 329–347.
60.
MukaiTKanahashiHMiyoshiT, et al. (1999) Experimental study of energy absorption in a close-celled aluminum foam under dynamic loading. Scripta Materialia40(8): 921–927.
61.
NeubergerAPelesSRittelD (2007a) Scaling the response of circular plates subjected to large and close-range spherical explosions. Part I: Air-blast loading. International Journal of Impact Engineering34(5): 859–873.
62.
NeubergerAPelesSRittelD (2007b) Scaling the response of circular plates subjected to large and close-range spherical explosions. Part II: Buried charges. International Journal of Impact Engineering34(5): 874–882.
63.
NovakNStarčevičLVesenjakM, et al. (2019) Blast response study of the sandwich composite panels with 3D chiral auxetic core. Composite Structures210: 167–178.
64.
QiCRemennikovAPeiL-Z, et al. (2017) Impact and close-in blast response of auxetic honeycomb-cored sandwich panels: Experimental tests and numerical simulations. Composite Structures180: 161–178.
65.
QiCYangSYangL-J, et al. (2013) Blast resistance and multi-objective optimization of aluminum foam-cored sandwich panels. Composite Structures105: 45–57.
66.
RemennikovAKalubadanageDNgoT, et al. (2019) Development and performance evaluation of large-scale auxetic protective systems for localised impulsive loads. International Journal of Protective Structures10(3): 390–417.
67.
SadotOAntebyIHarushS, et al. (2005) Experimental investigation of dynamic properties of aluminum foams. Journal of Structural Engineering131(8): 1226–1232.
68.
ScarpaFBulloughWALumleyP (2004) Trends in acoustic properties of iron particle seeded Auxetic polyurethane foam. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C – Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science218(2): 241–244.
69.
ScarpaFPastorinoPGarelliA, et al. (2005) Auxetic compliant flexible PU foams: Static and dynamic properties. Physica Status Solidi B-Basic Solid State Physics242(3): 681–694.
70.
ScarpaFSmithFC (2004) Passive and MR fluid-coated Auxetic PU foam – Mechanical, acoustic, and electromagnetic properties. Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures15(12): 973–979.
71.
ScarpaFTomlinPJ (2000) On the transverse shear modulus of negative Poisson’s ratio honeycomb structures. Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures23(8): 717–720.
72.
ScarpaFYatesJRCiffoLG, et al. (2002) Dynamic crushing of Auxetic open-cell polyurethane foam. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science216(12): 1153–1156.
73.
ShahbeykSPetrinicNVafaiA (2007) Numerical modelling of dynamically loaded metal foam-filled square columns. International Journal of Impact Engineering34(3): 573–586.
74.
ShimCYunNYuR, et al. (2012) Mitigation of blast effects on protective structures by aluminum foam panels. Metals2: 170–177.
75.
ShimCSYunNR (2010) Evaluation of closerange blast pressure mitigation using a sacrificial member. Journal of the Earthquake Engineering Society of Korea14(1): 11–23.
76.
ShirbhatePAGoelMD (2021) A critical review of blast wave parameters and approaches for blast load mitigation. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering28(3): 1713–1730.
77.
SmithCWLehmanFWoottonRJ, et al. (1999) Strain dependent densification during indentation in Auxetic foams. Cellular Polymers18(2): 79–101.
78.
SmithPDWhalenGPFengLJ, et al. (2001) Blast loading on buildings from explosions in city streets. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Structures and Buildings146(1): 47–55.
79.
TasissaAFHautefeuilleMFitekJH, et al. (2016) On the formation of Friedlander waves in a compressed-gas-driven shock tube. Proceedings of The Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences472(2186): 20150611.
WangYZhaoWZhouG, et al. (2018) Analysis and parametric optimization of a novel sandwich panel with Double-V auxetic structure core under air blast loading. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences142–143: 245–254.
82.
XueZHutchinsonJW (2004) A comparative study of impulse-resistant metal sandwich plates. International Journal of Impact Engineering30(10): 1283–1305.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
