ArticlePolymers2025
Tailorable Energy Absorption During Quasi-Static Crush via Additively Manufactured Honeycomb.
Article in Polymers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Honeycomb materials are being used for energy absorption applications in aerospace and automotive industries due to their high strength-to-weight ratio. In this work, additively manufactured honeycombs with different inscribed diameters were tested in quasi-static compression on a servo-hydraulic material test system to determine how the geometry affects the energy absorption properties. Samples were made from acrylonitrile butadiene styrene in order to study the performance of brittle honeycomb structures in energy absorption applications. Samples were manufactured with buckling initiators, or small triangle cutouts, located at varying distances from the bottom of the sample, while others had no modifications. These buckling initiators create preferential stress concentrations, thus encouraging a controlled folding of the structure. As this study shows, the crush efficiency and energy absorbed efficiency increase as the inscribed diameter decreases. When the inscribed diameter is 20 mm, the crush efficiency is 20.29%, while it is three times larger when the inscribed diameter decreases to 10 mm (62%). The energy absorbed efficiency is 45% for the 10 mm sample while it decreases to 16.70% when the diameter is 20 mm (a 36% decrease). Similarly, the presence of buckling initiators increases crush efficiency and energy absorbed efficiency when compared to samples of similar geometry but no buckling initiators, regardless of the size of the honeycomb.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.