| People | Locations | Statistics |
|---|---|---|
| Naji, M. |
| |
| Motta, Antonella |
| |
| Aletan, Dirar |
| |
| Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
| Ertürk, Emre |
| |
| Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
| Kononenko, Denys |
| |
| Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
| Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
| Bih, L. |
| |
| Casati, R. |
| |
| Muller, Hermance |
| |
| Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
| Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
| Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
| Azam, Siraj |
| |
| Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
| Blanpain, Bart |
| |
| Ali, M. A. |
| |
| Popa, V. |
| |
| Rančić, M. |
| |
| Ollier, Nadège |
| |
| Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
| Landes, Michael |
| |
| Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Wang, Fengwen
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (18/18 displayed)
- 2021On the competition for ultimately stiff and strong architected materialscitations
- 2018Benchmarking state-of-the-art numerical simulation techniques for analyzing large photonic crystal membrane line defect cavities
- 2018Benchmarking state-of-the-art numerical simulation techniques for analyzing large photonic crystal membrane line defect cavities
- 2018Benchmarking state-of-the-art optical simulation methods for analyzing large nanophotonic structures
- 2018Benchmarking state-of-the-art optical simulation methods for analyzing large nanophotonic structures
- 2018Benchmarking five numerical simulation techniques for computing resonance wavelengths and quality factors in photonic crystal membrane line defect cavitiescitations
- 2018Which Computational Methods Are Good for Analyzing Large Photonic Crystal Membrane Cavities?
- 2018Which Computational Methods Are Good for Analyzing Large Photonic Crystal Membrane Cavities?
- 2018Investment casting and experimental testing of heat sinks designed by topology optimizationcitations
- 2018Benchmarking five numerical simulation techniques for computing resonance wavelengths and quality factors in photonic crystal membrane line defect cavitiescitations
- 2017Comparison of Five Computational Methods for Computing Q Factors in Photonic Crystal Membrane Cavities
- 2017Comparison of Five Computational Methods for Computing Q Factors in Photonic Crystal Membrane Cavities
- 2017Benchmarking five computational methods for analyzing large photonic crystal membrane cavitiescitations
- 2017Benchmarking five computational methods for analyzing large photonic crystal membrane cavitiescitations
- 2015Topology Optimized Architectures with Programmable Poisson's Ratio over Large Deformationscitations
- 2014Design of materials with prescribed nonlinear propertiescitations
- 2011Modelling of Active Semiconductor Photonic Crystal Waveguides and Robust Designs based on Topology Optimization
- 2011Modelling of Active Semiconductor Photonic Crystal Waveguides and Robust Designs based on Topology Optimization
Places of action
| Organizations | Location | People |
|---|
article
On the competition for ultimately stiff and strong architected materials
Abstract
Advances in manufacturing techniques may now realize virtually any imaginable microstructures, paving the way for architected materials with properties beyond those found in nature. This has lead to a quest for closing gaps in property-space by carefully designed metamaterials. Development of mechanical metamaterials has gone from open truss lattice structures to closed plate lattice structures with stiffness close to theoretical bounds. However, the quest for optimally stiff and strong materials is complex. Plate lattice structures have higher stiffness and (yield) strength but are prone to buckling at low volume fractions. Hence here, truss lattice structures may still be optimal. To make things more complicated, hollow trusses or structural hierarchy bring closed-walled microstructures back in the competition. Based on analytical and numerical studies of common microstructures from the literature, we provide higher order interpolation schemes for their effective stiffness and (buckling) strength. Furthermore, we provide a case study based on multi-property Ashby charts for weight-optimal porous beams under bending, that demonstrates the intricate interplay between structure and microarchitecture that plays the key role in the design of ultimate load carrying structures. The provided interpolation schemes may also be used to account for microstructural yield and buckling in multiscale design optimization schemes.