ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
The Effect of Continuous Carbon Fiber Reinforcement on 3D-Printed Honeycomb and Re-Entrant Sandwich Panels Subjected to In-Plane Compression.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study examines the in-plane compression behavior of sandwich panels produced with additive manufacturing. This study focuses on two types of honeycomb unit cell topologies with larger dimensions: a hexagonal one and a re-entrant one. For each panel geometry, two material configurations were examined: Onyx (a nylon-based composite) and Onyx reinforced with 10% continuous carbon fibers (CCFs) by mass. The objective was to assess the influence of fiber reinforcement on the mechanical performance and deformation response of the panel structures. In-plane compression tests were conducted to determine the stiffness, strength, and failure modes of the specimens. Additionally, the digital image correlation (DIC) technique was used to capture full-field strain distributions and analyze local deformation mechanisms during loading. The results revealed distinct mechanical responses between the two geometries: the re-entrant structure exhibited auxetic behavior and enhanced energy absorption characteristics. Although reinforced honeycomb panels have an average load capacity that is 35% higher, they fail at a displacement that is approximately 55% smaller compared to unreinforced panels. Despite accounting for only 25% of the total number of layers and 10% of the panel's mass, the reinforcement achieved superior strength. Re-entrant panel testing showed a 25% force increase in favor of the reinforced variant. They fail at a displacement that is 36.5% greater than that of reinforced honeycombs. This demonstrates a more compliant response while also maintaining 4.9% greater strength, indicating the superior behavior of auxetic reinforced sandwich panels. Introducing CCF reinforcement increased the load-bearing capacity and reduced localized strain concentrations without altering the overall deformation pattern. These findings suggest that enhancing materials can increase the strength and flexibility of 3D-printed re-entrant structures, providing valuable insights for lightweight design and optimized material use in structural applications.
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.