Loading…

Behavior of Different PLA Sandwich Structures Loaded in Three Points Bending

Sandwich structures can be classed as composite materials in that they consist of two or more individual components of differing properties which when combined result in a high‐performance material. In contrast to monolithic composites—which consist of an intimate mixture of fibers (glass, Kevlar, c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Macromolecular symposia. 2021-04, Vol.396 (1), p.n/a
Main Authors: Jiga, Gabriel Gh, Burtoiu, Mircea G., Pascu, Nicoleta E., Dobrescu, Tiberiu G.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Sandwich structures can be classed as composite materials in that they consist of two or more individual components of differing properties which when combined result in a high‐performance material. In contrast to monolithic composites—which consist of an intimate mixture of fibers (glass, Kevlar, carbon etc.) supported within a continuous matrix (e.g., thermoplastic or thermoset resin)—sandwich structures show a discrete structure in which a core material is bonded to, and faced with, a skin material. The skin material usually shows a high stiffness, whereas the core typically has high compressive and shear strength. The primary advantage of a sandwich composite is very high stiffness‐to‐weight and high bending strength‐to‐weight ratio. The sandwich enhances the flexural rigidity of the structure without adding substantial weight. First of all, the core should possess low density in order to add as little as possible to the total weight of the sandwich construction. In this paper, three different core configurations are been studied: honeycomb, inversed honeycomb and Kagome bonded to aluminum skins. The cores are made from PLA using the FDM (fusion deposition method) procedure, on a 3D printer.
ISSN:1022-1360
1521-3900
DOI:10.1002/masy.202000306