ArticleScientific reports2026
Design, simulation, and 3D-printing of new auxetic metamaterials considering sensitivity analysis under impact loadings.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, a new class of three-dimensional (3D) printed metamaterials with auxetic behavior was designed, fabricated, and experimentally analyzed under impact loading conditions. The metamaterials were created by combining multiple unit cells—honeycomb, tetra-chiral, and cubic—in different configurations to enhance their energy absorption capability. All samples were fabricated using the Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) method with polylactic acid (PLA) material. Impact tests were conducted at three drop heights of 1, 3, and 5 cm to evaluate parameters such as maximum acceleration, absorbed energy, and specific energy absorption. The honeycomb–tetra-chiral–cubic configuration showed the best performance, achieving a specific energy absorption of 5.13 J/g, which was approximately 18% higher than the other designs. The maximum acceleration increased nonlinearly with drop height, indicating a strong dependence on impact energy. A sensitivity analysis performed using Design Expert software demonstrated that impact height was the most influential parameter, followed by Poisson’s ratio and unit-cell type. These findings confirm that combining auxetic geometries in hybrid lattice structures significantly improves energy absorption efficiency, making them promising candidates for use in protective equipment and lightweight 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.