Abstract
Abstract. The structure of the lightweight honeycomb sandwich panel is complex. Thus, establishing an equivalent simplified model is indispensable to improve the efficiency of the dynamic analysis of honeycomb sandwich panels. In this paper, three commonly used dynamically equivalent modeling methods for honeycomb sandwich panel are studied: a dynamically equivalent method based on laminated plate theory, a single-layer plate equivalent method based on the theory of Hoff (1948), and an improved equivalent method based on Allen (1969). Using theoretical study, numerical simulations, and experiments, the applicability of these equivalent methods and the effect of design parameters on the dynamic characteristics are studied, and the optimal dynamically equivalent method for honeycomb sandwich panels is obtained.
Highlights
Honeycomb sandwich (HS) structure has been widely used in aerospace applications because of its high specific strength and high specific stiffness
Gcyz h+t h+2t where Gcxz and Gcyz are derived from Eq (1); h is the height of the core layer, and t is the thickness of the facing skin; K is the bulk modulus of the core layer; and D denotes the bending stiffness of the HS panel
The dynamically equivalent method based on laminated plate theory contains all of the original material parameters, and the honeycomb core material is assumed to be orthogonal anisotropic material, which will be closer to the actual situation
Summary
Honeycomb sandwich (HS) structure has been widely used in aerospace applications because of its high specific strength and high specific stiffness. The equivalent method of Gibson et al (1982) does not consider the shear deformation of the core layer. Stemming from the theory of sandwich structure bending from Reissner (1948), Wang et al (2020) established a mechanical model of bending stiffness degradation for a soft-honeycomb sandwich structure by introducing the equivalent debonding coefficient of the adhesive and elastic modulus temperature dependence of panels. These three equivalent methods are investigated and compared to verify each method’s accuracy and reliability using the theoretical analysis, numerical simulations, and experimental study
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
