Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Review

Bending behavior of composite sandwich structures with graded corrugated T

truss cores
⁎
Yang Suna, Li-cheng Guoa, , Tian-shu Wanga, Su-yang Zhonga, Hai-zhu Panb
a
Department of Astronautic Science and Mechanics, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, PR China
b
College of Computer and Control Engineering, Qiqihar University, Qiqihar 161006 PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this paper a design method based on bending strength and continuum damage evaluation is developed for
Composite sandwich structures composite sandwich structures with graded corrugated truss core. Three types of sandwich panels with different
Continuum damage model graded corrugated truss core (the width of the core and inclination angle described by linear and exponential
Bending strength functions) are designed and analyzed by the continuum damage evolution model. The influences of the geo-
Graded corrugated truss core
metric parameters on the load capacity and damage distribution of the graded sandwich structures with graded
corrugated truss core are studied. The numerical results show that the analyzed structure with the graded core
width designed in a lower convex function arrangement will get a higher buckling load under three-point
bending load, and the inclination angle parameter may influence the bending strength of the graded sandwich
structure slightly.

1. Introduction honeycombs, and it is significant greater than those exhibited by dia-

Sandwich structures are widely used in aerospace, marine and au-
tomobile industries because of high bending stiffness and strength and
low density. Cores as principle component of sandwich structures have
been studied widely. Honeycomb, foam, truss core and corrugated core
are most common in sandwich structures [1]. Many researchers pre-
sented that lattice core, including tetrahedral, pyramidal, and kagome,
supports higher specific strength. Lattice structures have been regarded
as potential replacement for foam cores [2]. Lu et al. [3] found that the
octahedral stitched composite cores showed higher specific shear
stiffness and out of plane compressive strength than conventional
sandwich cores. Queheillat et al. [10] designed a multifunctional
sandwich panel based on a truncated square honeycomb sandwich
structure. Many researchers developed interest in lattice sandwich
structures, whose strength and stiffness are quite particular. Gao et al.
[11] presented an improved design of laminate layer to fabricate
composite sandwich panel with lattice truss core. Zhang et al. [9] in-
vestigated the response of pyramidal truss core sandwich structures
under the compression and impact loading, and these pyramidal truss
core sandwich structures consisted of carbon fiber reinforced polymer
facesheets and aluminum alloy cores. Libove and Hubka [4] in-
vestigated the elastic constant of corrugated core sandwich panels in
1954. Rejab et al. [6] reported that the shear strength of corrugated
cores in the longitudinal direction is comparable with square
mond cores and traditional foam cores.
Although lattice composite sandwich structures offer advantages
over other types of structures, it is important to develop new types of
structures in order to obtain the absolute minimum weight for given
conditions such as structural geometry [2]. Xu et al. [2,7] introduced a
new idea to combine graded material and lattice core for forming the
graded lattice core sandwich, which shows great difference in their load
capacity-per-weight. Comparing with the conventional truss core
composite sandwich beam, the graded corrugated truss core composite
sandwich beam shows weak struts in the middle region [7]. Wang et al.
[8] presented a theoretical investigation in free vibration of a func-
tionally graded beam.
We design a series of sandwich structures with graded corrugated
truss core, whose parameters are gradually varied in the length direc-
tion. Sandwich structure with graded corrugated truss core could
achieve its optimal design via a numerical simulation based on con-
tinuum damage model. The structure of the paper is as follows. We
describe the analyzed corrugated truss cores and the parameters that
we assume as design variables in Section 2. A continuum damage model
[12] is adopted for prediction of strength of sandwich structure with
graded corrugated core. The damage model employed in the paper is
expressed in Section 3. The details of the finite element model are ex-
plained in Section 4. Next, in Sections 5 and 6, we present a parametric
study on the strength and stiffness of three types of different structures

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: guolc@hit.edu.cn (L.-c. Guo).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.043
Received 6 September 2017; Received in revised form 13 November 2017; Accepted 16 November 2017
Available online 20 November 2017
0263-8223/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Sun et al. Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454

Fig. 1. Front view of a sandwich structure with

graded corrugated core.

Fig. 2. Unit cell of corrugated sandwich analyzed in this paper.

Fig. 3. Geometric parameter gradient variation.

under 3-point bending load. At the end of the paper, we review the
main results of the study (Section 7).
2. Design of typical graded corrugated truss core
The graded corrugated truss core sandwich structure is comprised of
graded corrugated core between two facesheets (see Fig. 1). The graded
corrugated truss core could be obtained by varying the width of core w
and inclination angle θ from the center to ends of the plate for each unit
cell. Fig. 2 shows a unit cell of the sandwich structure with graded
corrugated truss core and its geometric parameters. We assume
l x = 20 mm, l y = 25 mm, H = 12 mm, h = 1.113 mm, k = 3 mm and

447
Y. Sun et al. Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454

Table 1
Mechanical properties of carbon fiber/expoxy prepreg.

E1t [Gpa] 184.7 Longitudinal tensile stiffness

E1c [Gpa] 179.7 Longitudinal compressive stiffness
E2t [Gpa] 9.676 Transverse tensile stiffness
E2c [Gpa] 11.9 Transverse compressive stiffness
G12,G13 [Gpa] 2.138 Shear modulus
G23 [Gpa] 2 Shear modulus
Xt [Mpa] 2221.1 Longitudinal tensile strength
Yt [Mpa] 35.04 Transverse tensile strength
Xc [Mpa] 672.7 Longitudinal compressive strength
Yc [Mpa] 71.54 Transverse compressive strength
S [Mpa] 82.13 Shear strength
ν21 0.32 Poisson’s ratio
ν23 0.3 Poisson’s ratio

Fig. 6. Load-displacement curves of Structure 1–3.

and then decreases. These sandwich structures are defined as Type 1

structure. While in Fig. 3b, the dimensionless parameter w / L first de-
creases until the middle of the structure and then increases. And these
sandwich structures are defined as Type 2 structure. Fig. 3c shows the
variation of the dimensionless parameter of inclination angle q/ l x along
the length direction of the structure. These sandwich structures are
defined as Type 3 structure.
The corrugated truss core and facesheets are assumed to be made of
carbon fiber/expoxy prepreg sheets with stacking non-symmetry se-
Fig. 4. The action plane in the fiber yarn [12].
quence [0/90/0/90]. The mechanical properties of the composite are
given in Table 1.

they are the same for all the unit cells. L is the length of a core.
In this paper, the sandwich structures with graded corrugated truss
core are symmetric about z-axis, as shown in Fig. 1. Xu et al. [2,7]
presented a new method to design graded corrugated truss core. They
obtained the gradient variation by the adjustment of strut width of core.
In their study, the sandwich structures are comprised of two facesheets
and a graded corrugated truss core with different strut width of core for
each unit cell. Referring to the concept of the graded corrugated truss
cores in Ref. [7], three types of sandwich panels with different graded
corrugated truss cores (the width of the core and inclination angle
described by linear and exponential functions) are designed and ana-
lyzed by using the continuum damage evolution model. Since
q/ l x = cosθ, q/ l x is selected to be the dimensionless parameter of in-
clination angle θ. And w / L is the dimensionless parameter of width of
core. These dimensionless parameters vary as linear and exponential
functions in the length direction of the structure (see Fig. 2). In Fig. 3a,
the dimensionless parameter of width of core w / L first increases along
the length direction of the structure until the middle of the structure
3. Continuum damage model
A continuum damage model based on Puck failure criteria [12] was
implemented in ABAQUS for the composite material by means of a user
subroutine VUMAT. The damage initiation and propagation criteria can
be expressed as:
Fi = ϕi−ri ⩽ 0, i = (1t ,1c,2t ,2c,3t ,3c ) (1)
here, ϕi is the loading function for different failure modes, and ri is
threshold parameter to describe the damage accumulation, the sub-
script 1c and 1t denote the compression and tension in longitudinal
direction respectively, and the subscript 2t and 3t denote the tension
transverse directions of the fiber, the subscript 2c and 3c denote the
compression transverse directions of the fiber. The loading functions in
fiber direction can be expressed as

Fig. 5. The finite element model for the sandwich structure under three-point bending.

448
Y. Sun et al. Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454

Fig. 7. Buckling images of deformation for Structure 1.

Fig. 8. Damage variables d5 distribution of Structure 1–3.

449
Y. Sun et al. Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454

Fig. 9. Load-displacement curves of structure 4–6 and buckling images of deformation for Structure 4.

ε11 E1 + mf V12 σ22 + mf V13 σ33 max

ϕ1t = for σ11 ⩾ 0 ⎧ ϕt (θ′) = max {ϕt (θ)}
S1t θ ∈ [0,π )
ε11 E1 + mf V12 σ22 + mf V13 σ33
⎪
2
ϕ1c = for σ11 < 0 ⎨ ϕ (θ) =
2 2
⎡σ ⎛ 1 − pϕ,t ⎞⎤ + ⎛ τ͠ nt ⎞ + ⎛ τ͠ nl ⎞ + σ pϕ,t
S1c (2a)
⎢ n ⎝ S2At SϕA ⎠⎥ n SA
⎜ ⎟
⎪ t A
⎝ S23 ⎠
A
⎝ S21 ⎠ ϕ
⎩ ⎣ ⎦ (3a)
where σ11 is the effective stress in fiber direction, σ22 and σ33 denote the
effective stress transverse fiber direction. max
⎧ ϕc (θ′) = θmax {ϕc (θ)}
The loading functions in transverse directions of the fiber are ⎪
∈ [0,π ]

2 2 2
⎨ ϕ (θ) = ⎛ τ͠ nt ⎞ + ⎛ τ͠ nl ⎞ + σ ⎛ pϕ,c ⎞ + σ pϕ,c
max 2 n SA n SA
⎧ ϕ2t = 1 + [ϕt (θ′)−1]cos θ′
⎜ ⎟
⎪ c S23
⎝ ⎠
A A
S21
⎝ ⎠
for σn ⩾ 0 ⎩ ⎝ ϕ⎠ ϕ
(3b)
max
⎨ ϕ3t = 1 + [ϕt (θ′)−1]sin2 θ′ (2b)
⎩
where θ denotes the action plane of the material (see Fig. 4), θ = θ′ if
ϕt (θ) or ϕc (θ) reaches its maximum value, S2At , S21A, S23A and SϕA are frac-
max ture resistance. pϕ,t , pϕ,c and p23,c are the inclination parameters. Here,
⎧ ϕ2c = 1 + [ϕc (θ′)−1]cosθ′
for σn < 0
S23A = 2(1 +2pc ) . σn, ∼
τnl and ∼
S
max
⎨ ϕ3c = 1 + [ϕc (θ′)−1]sinθ′ τnt are the normal and shear stresses on the
⎩ (2c) 23,c
action plane, which can be written as:
where mf is the stress magnification effect caused by the different 2 2 ∼
moduli of material, S1c and S1t denote the compressive and tensile ⎧ σn = σ22cos θ + σ33sin θ + 2 τ23sinθ cosθ
∼ ∼
τ = (σ −σ )sinθcosθ + τ23 (cos2 θ−sin2 θ)
strength of the material in longitudinal direction respectively, σn is ⎨ ∼nt ∼ 33 22 ∼
explained in Eq. (4), the angle θ′ is the angle of most dangerous plane, ⎩ τnl = τ31sinθ− τ21cosθ (4)
and the loading functions ϕtmax (θ′) and ϕcmax (θ′) can be expressed as:
In Eq. (1), once the damage threshold value ri is greater than 1, the
damage accumulates, ri cam be expressed as:

450
Y. Sun et al. Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454

Fig. 10. Damage variables d5 distribution of Structure 4–6.

Fig. 11. The variation of EB / ρ and P / ρ changing with the ratio w5/ w1.

ri = max{1,max(ϕiτ )}, (i = 1t ,1c,2t ,2c,3t ,3c ), τ ∈ [0,t ] (5) d1t if σ11 ⩾ 0

d1 ⎧
⎩ d1c
⎨ if σ11 < 0
where t is the total time, ϕiτ is load function at time τ.
d2t if ϕ2t ⩾ ϕ2c
The damage variables are introduced to characterize the damage d2 ⎧
⎨ d2c
⎩ if ϕ2c ⩾ ϕ2t
process. Once the damage accumulates, the damage variables will
evolve according to the following equation: d3t if ϕ3t ⩾ ϕ3c
d3 ⎧
⎩ d3c if ϕ3c ⩾ ϕ3t
⎨
1
di = 1− exp[Ai (1−ri )], i = {1t ,1c,2t ,2c,3t ,3c }
ri (6) Then the damage variables caused by shear d4,d5 and d6 can be given
by
where Ai is a parameter that defines the exponential softening law.
d1 is damage variable for fiber tension and compressive, d2, d3 are ⎧ d4 = 1−(1−d1)(1−d2)
damage variables for matrix tension and compressive. d5 = 1−(1−d2)(1−d3)
⎨
⎩ d6 = 1−(1−d3)(1−d1) (7)

A series of damage variables d1, d2, d3, d4, d5, d6 are introduced to
relate the damage to the decrease of the material properties. Thus, the

451
Y. Sun et al. Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454

5. Sandwich structures with graded width of core

The continuum damage model in Section 3 has been programmed as

user subroutine of ABAQUS package and the following analyses in this
section is implemented by using this user subroutine. For the pyramidal
truss, the core can be characterized by three tests: transverse com-
pression σ33, in-plane shear σ13 , and in-plane tension σ11 [5]. All the
structures have the same length (200 mm) and width (25 mm). Fig. 6
shows the load-displacement curves of Type 1 sandwich structures. The
load firstly increases linearly until the core buckling of No.1 and No.2
unit cell (see Fig. 7) is observed (at point A), which is mainly caused by
in-plane shear σ13 . Then the load increases slightly and a slight un-
dulation occurs until the peak reaches and then the load begins to drop.
The three sandwich structures with different width of core parameters
(w / L0 , have different core shear failure load. The core buckling load of
structure 2 is 702.37N, and it is 581.64N for structure 3, which is much
lower than that of structure 2. Fig. 5 also shows that the load maximum
Fig. 12. Load-displacement curves of Structure 7–9.
of structure 2 is 3.82% higher than structure 3. This demonstrates that
the arrangement of width of core does influence the buckling load,
constitutive function for composites can be expressed as: while the arrangement has little influence on load maximum peak of
the whole structure. For the Type 1 sandwich structures, it is a better
1 ν
12 ν
⎡ (1 − d1) E1 − E1 − E13 ⎤ way to arrange the width of core along the length direction in a lower
1
⎢ ν12 1 ν
⎥ convex function order (see Fig. 3a structure 2) to get a higher buckling
ε1 ⎢− E − E22 0 ⎥ σ1
⎡ ⎤ ⎢ 1 (1 − d2) E2 2
⎥ ⎡σ ⎤ load under three-point bending load. Fig. 8 shows the predicted damage
⎢ ε2 ⎥ ⎢− ν13 − E
ν 22 1
⎥ ⎢ 2⎥ distribution of structure 1–3 under three-point bending load. The da-
⎢ ε3 ⎥ = ⎢ E1 2 (1 − d3) E3 ⎥ ⎢ σ3 ⎥ mage caused by shear is dominant failure for these structures. This kind
⎢ ε4 ⎥ ⎢ 1 ⎥ ⎢ σ4 ⎥
⎢ ε5 ⎥ ⎢ (1 − d 4 ) G12 ⎥ ⎢ σ5 ⎥ of damage first occurs in the thin width of core region. And damage
⎢ ε6 ⎥ ⎢ 0 1 ⎥ ⎢ σ6 ⎥ variable d5 is the most prominently.
⎣ ⎦ ⎢ (1 − d5) G 23 ⎥⎣ ⎦ Fig. 9 shows the load-displacement curves of structures 4–6 and the
⎢ 1 ⎥
⎢ (1 − d6) G13 ⎥ images of structure 4 deformed after the maximum load. The load in-
⎣ ⎦
creases linearly until the buckling (at point A) at the cores near the
(8)
middle of the support span occurs, and then the load keeps increasing to
reach the peak. The peak load of structure 5 is only 7% higher than that
of structure 6. It indicates that the arrangement has no discernable
4. Finite element model impact on load-carrying capacity for Type 2 structures. It is found that
the load peak of Type 1 structure is at least 40.2% higher than that of
Three-dimension finite element method is employed for the fol- Type 2 structure. Fig. 10 shows the predicted damage distribution of
lowing simulation. The corrugated truss cores and facesheets are structure 4–6 under three-point bending load. The dominant damage is
merged together. The sandwich structures are meshed with reduced- also caused by shear and most likely to occurs in the region near
integration elements (C3D8R). And there are 312064 elements in total. loading nose. This kind of damage eventually results in a further de-
The sandwich structure rests on two supports and is loaded by crease of load. And damage variable d5 is the most prominently.
means of a loading nose midway between the supports (see Fig. 5). The We assume that the width of core arranges as structure 3, and we let
sandwich structure is simulated by using solid elements. The supports the ratio w5/ w1 vary between 1 and 5, where w5 is the width of core at
and loading noses are simulated by using discrete rigid with reference the mid-span and w1 is the width of core at the support span. The
points. Boundary conditions for two supports are exerted on reference tangent modulus of elasticity of structure can be expressed as:
points with six degrees of freedom fixed. A displacement load is exerted EB = L3m /4bd (9)
on the reference point of loading nose with a velocity of 0.05 mm/s
along the depth direction of structure. The finite element model for where EB is modulus of elasticity in bending, L is support span, b is
three-point bending test is shown in Fig. 5. width of the structure, d is depth of structure, and m is slope of tangent
to the initial straight line portion of the load-displacement curve.
Fig. 10 shows the variation of P / ρ and EB / ρ changing with the ratio

Fig. 13. A series of images of deformation for Structure 8.

452
Y. Sun et al.
w5/ w1 respectively, where ρ is density of structure and P is peak load.
The results in Fig. 11 show that P / ρ and EB / ρ ratios significantly in-
crease with increasing values of the w5/ w1 ratio. We observe that
EB / ρ = 18.12175 × 10−12 Mpa·m3/kg and P / ρ = 0.01377 × 10−12 N·m3/kg
for w5/ w1 = 1.8; EB / ρ = 26.53706 × 10−12 Mpa·m3/kg and
P / ρ = 0.03396 × 10 N·m3/kg for w5/ w1 = 5.0 . We deduce that a
−12
higher w5/ w1 ratio can significantly improve stiffness and strength of a
sandwich structure with corrugated core. It is more important to en-
hance the cores near the support span and mid-span to improve the load
capacity under three-point bending.
6. Sandwich structures with graded inclination angle of core
The results in Fig. 12 show that the graded q/ l x ratio has no sig-
nificant impact on maximum peak load, which is about 800N. Fig. 13
shows the images of structure 8 after maximum load. Fig. 13 shows the
predicted damage distribution of structure7-9. As displacement in-
creases, shear damage occurs and result in collapse of structures. Fig. 14
shows the predicted damage distribution of structure 7–9 under three-
point bending load. And damage variable d5 is the most prominently.
7. Conclusion
A design method based on bending strength and continuum damage
evaluation is developed for composite sandwich structures with graded
corrugated truss core in this paper
1. Three types of sandwich structures with different graded corrugated
truss cores (the width of the core and inclination angle described by
453
Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454
Fig. 14. Damage variables d5 distribution of Structure 7–9.
linear and exponential functions) are designed and analyzed by the
continuum damage evolution model. This paper considers the in-
fluence of geometric parameters on the load capacity and damage
distribution of the sandwich structures with graded corrugated truss
core.
2. For Type 1 structure (the width of core is bigger near the middle of
the structure) the arrangement of width of core does influence the
buckling load, while the arrangement has little influence on load
maximum peak of the whole structure. And the lower convex
function arrangement of width of core can improve buckling load
under three-point bending load. For the type 1 structure with width
of core linear variation, the strength and stiffness significantly in-
crease with increasing values of the w5/ w1 ratio. The increasing the
ratio w5/ w1 can improve load capacity and stiffness of a sandwich
structure under three-point bending.
3. However, the arrangement of width of core slightly influences
maximum load and stiffness for Type 2 (the width of core is smaller
near the middle of the structure) structures. The failure mode of
these two types of structures is caused by shear, which is more likely
to occur in the region near thin width of core. The load-carrying
capacity of Type 1 sandwich structures are higher than those of Type
2 structures.
4. For the Type 3 structures (with graded inclination angle), the var-
iation of inclination angle in x-direction has no significantly impact
of mechanical strength of sandwich structure.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the National Natural Science
Y. Sun et al. Composite Structures 185 (2018) 446–454

Foundation of China (11432005), Education Department of Eng, ASCE 1951;122(8):958–66.

Heilongjiang Province, SSR135109239.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the
online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.
043.
References
[10] Queheillalt Douglas T, Carbajal Gerardo, Peterson GP, Wadley Haydn NG. A mul-
[1] Bitzer T. Honeycomb technology: materials, design, manufacturing, applications
and testing. The Netherlands: Chapman & Hall; 1997.
[2] Xu Guo-dong, Zhai J-jun, Zeng Tao, Wang Zhi-Hai, Cheng Su, Fang D-Ning.
[11] Gao Liang, Sun Yuguo, Cong Lixin, Chen Peng. Mechanical behaviours of composite
Response of composite sandwich beams with graded lattice core. Compos Struct
2015;119:666–76.
[3] Che L, Xu GD, Zeng T, Cheng S, Zhou XW, Yang SC. Compressive and shear char-
[12] Zhong Suyang, Guo Licheng, Liu Gang, Huaiyu Lu, Zeng Tao. A continuum damage
acteristics of an octahedral stitched sandwich composite. Compos Struct
2014;112:179–87.
[4] Libove C, Hubka RE. Elastic constants for corrugated core sandwich plates. J Struct
[5] Zok FW, Waltner SA, Wei Z, Rathbun HJ, McMeeking RM, Evans AG. A protocol for
characterizing the structure performance of metallic sandwich panels: application to
pyramidal truss cores. Int J Solids Struct 2004;41:6249–71.
[6] Rejab MRM, Cantwell WJ. The mechanical behaviour of corrugated-core sandwich
panels. Compos B Eng 2013;47:267–77.
[7] Xu Guo-dong, Yang Fan, Tao Zeng, Cheng Su, Wang Z-hai. Bending behavior of
graded corrugated truss core composite sandwich beams. Compos Struct
2016;138:342–51.
[8] Wang Z-hai, Wang Xi-hong, Xu Guo-dong, Cheng Su, Zeng Tao. Free vibration of
two-directional functionally graded beams. Compos Struct 2016;135:191–8.
[9] Zhang Guoqi, Wang Bing, Ma Li, Xiong Jian, Wu Linzhi. Response of sandwich
structures with pyramidal truss cores under the compression and impact loading.
Compos Struct 2013;100:451–63.
tifunctional heat pipe sandwich panel structure. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
2008;51:312–26.
sandwich panel with strengthened pyramidal truss cores. Compos Struct
2013;105:149–52.
model model for three-dimensional woven composites and finite element im-
plementation. Compos Struct 2015;128:1–9.

454