KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 4

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN FOR BENDING STRENGTH ALUMINUM HONEYCOMB STRUCTURE

Harun AKKUŞ
Hayrettin DÜZCÜKOĞLU
Ömer Sinan ŞAHİN
Sayfa
555–561
Yayın Tarihi
2016-12-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Order of importance according to S/N answer table for force factor was ordered as cell width, cell height and adhesive. 95% was significant for the force values of the factor and levels selected in ANOVA results.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:In this study, a Taguchi model was formed for the three point bending test behaviors of aluminum honeycomb composite structures.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Effect of the three independent variables (cell width, cell height and adhesive) on the dependent variable (bending forces) was determined using mix design L16(4*1 2*2) orthogonal series.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Order of importance according to S/N answer table for force factor was ordered as cell width, cell height and adhesive. 95% was significant for the force values of the factor and levels selected in ANOVA results.
🔬Tür:Modelleme & Sayısal Simülasyon
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Epoxy · MWCNT · aluminum honeycomb

Abstract

In this study, a Taguchi model was formed for the three point bending test behaviors of aluminum honeycomb composite structures. Effect of the three independent variables (cell width, cell height and adhesive) on the dependent variable (bending forces) was determined using mix design L16(4*1 2*2) orthogonal series. As a result of the experiments, bending force values were measured. As a result of Taguchi analysis according to 'better than most' solution approach, bending force value was concluded to be optimum with the use of 58.59 S/N ratio A1 B2 C1 level namely, primary 6.78 mm for cell width and secondary 30 mm for cell height and primary epoxy adhesive. Order of importance according to S/N answer table for force factor was ordered as cell width, cell height and adhesive. 95% was significant for the force values of the factor and levels selected in ANOVA results.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

AKKUŞ, H., DÜZCÜKOĞLU, H., ŞAHİN, Ö. S. (2016). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN FOR BENDING STRENGTH ALUMINUM HONEYCOMB STRUCTURE. Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 4, 555–561. https://ajindex.com/articles/419268

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (14)

  1. Lu C., Zhao M., Jie L., Wang J., Gao Y., Cui X., Chen P., (2015) Stress distribution on composite honeycomb sandwich structure suffered from bending load, Procedia Engineering, 99, 405-412
  2. Akatay A., Bora M.Ö., Coban O., Fidan S., Tuna V., (2015) The influence of low velocity repeated impacts on residual compressive properties of honeycomb sandwich structures, Composite Structures, 125, 425-433
  3. Liu L., Wang H., Guan Z., (2015) Experimental and numerical study on the mechanical response of Nomex honeycomb core under transverse loading, Composite Structures, 121, 304-314
  4. Crupi V., Epasto G., Guglielmino E., (2012) Collapse modes in aluminium honeycomb sandwich panels under bending and impact loading, International Journal of Impact Engineering, 43, 6-15
  5. Nia A.A., Sadeghi M.Z., (2010) The effects of foam filling on compressive response of hexagonal cell aluminum honeycombs under axial loading-experimental study, Materials and Design, 31, 1216-1230
  6. Kılıcarslan C., Guden M., Odacı I.K., Tasdemirci A., (2013) The impact responses and the finite element modeling of layered trapezoidal corrugated aluminum core and aluminum sheet interlayer sandwich structures, Materials and Design, 46, 121-133
  7. Solmaz M.Y., Kaman M.O., Tura K., Turgut A., (2010) Investigation of Bending Behaviors of Honeycomb Sandwich Panels, Fırat Univ. Journal of Enginering, 22, 1-11
  8. Abbadi A., Tixier C., Gilgert J., Azari Z., (2015) Experimental study on the fatigue behaviour of honeycomb sandwich panels with artificial defects, Composite Structures, 120, 394-405
  9. Crupi V., Montanini R., (2007) Aluminium foam sandwiches collapse modes under static and dynamic three-point bending, International Journal of Impact Engineering, 34, 509-521
  10. Giglio M., Gilioli A., Manes A., (2012) Numerical investigation of a three point bending test on sandwich panels with aluminum skins and Nomex™ honeycomb core, Computational Materials Science, 56, 69-78
  11. Miller W., Smith C.W., Evans K.E., (2011) Honeycomb cores with enhanced buckling strength, Composite Structures, 93, 1072-1077
  12. Lu D.D., Li Y.G., Wong C.P., (2008) Recent advances in nano-conductive adhesives, Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, 22, 815-834
  13. Kaboorani A., Riedl B., (2012) Nano-aluminum oxide as a reinforcing material for thermoplastic adhesives, Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 18, 1076-1081
  14. Asılturk I., Akkus H., (2011) Determining the effect of cutting