Group Seminar 2014
Progress on Experimental and Numerical analysis with a special focus on Corevo Foam and Perlite Composite Material (PMC)
2nd October 2014
By: Mohd Ayub Sulong
Supervisors:
Dr. Thomas Fiedler*Prof. Dr. Irina BelovaProf. Dr. Graeme MurchProf. Dr. Andreas Oechsner
*Principal supervisor
1
Introduction
Fig. 1: Metal foam made of Zinc and bread roll (Banhart J., 2002)
2
Stochastic
3
Introduction
Corevo foam Perlite composite material (PCM) Sintered Titania
Scaffold
4
Computed tomography method
Fig. 2: Computed tomography method from raw image to 3D model.
5
Introduction
Fig. 3: Corevo or salt foam
Average pore size, d=5.6 mm Average pore
size, d=1.9 mm
6
Base Material Properties Corevo Foam: Aluminium alloy - AS7G06 (Al, 7 wt%Si, 0.6 wt%
Mg) Density = 2675kg/m3
Young’s modulus = 74 GPa Poisson’s ratio = 0.33 Yield stress = 241 MPa
7
Experimental analysis
Fig. 4: Equivalent plastic strain distribution for (a) d=5.6 mm, sample S#2 (b) d=1.9 mm), sample A (Fiedler et. al, 2014).
ISO 13314 standard
8
Failure Analysis
Fig. 5: 0.2% offset yield stress result of sample S#1 and S#2.
9
Failure Analysis
Fig. 6: Equivalent plastic strain distribution for (a) d=5.6 mm, sample S#2 (b) d=1.9 mm), sample A (Fiedler et. al, 2014).
10
Failure Analysis
Fig. 7: Uni-axial compression test done on Sample S#1
11
Failure Analysis
Fig. 8: Experimental compression test snapshots of (a) Corevo® foam samples with an average pore size (d=5.6 mm) , sample S#2 (b) Corevo® foam samples with an average pore size (d=1.9 mm), sample B.
12
Introduction
Perlite Composite Material (PCM)
13
PMC base material: Aluminium alloy - A356 (7.2 wt% Si, 0.4 wt% Mg, 0.1 wt% Ti, 0.12 wt% Fe) Density = 2.675 g/cm3
Young’s modulus = 75 GPa Poisson’s ratio = 0.33
Expanded perlite (EP) particles Density ≈ 0.1 g/cm3
Young’s modulus = less than 5GPa Composition: 75 wt% SiO2, 14 wt% Al2O3, 3 wt% Na2O, 4 wt% K2O, 1.3 wt%
CaO, 1 wt% Fe2O3, 0.3 wt% MgO, 0.2 wt% TiO2 with traces of heavy metal oxides.
14
Sample S 3D view on BoneJ
Fig. 9: Sample S visualised by BoneJ software
15
PCM with 3 particle sizes
Fig. 10: Strut’s local thickness distribution for PCM materials.
16
Boundary Conditions-PCM
Fig. 11: Mesh sensitivity analysis and boundary conditions used for PCM
17
Collapse Mechanism- Treated
Fig. 12: Failure mechanism observed for treated PCM samples
18
19
Fig. 13: Failure mechanism observed for untreated PCM samples
Collapse Mechanism- Untreated
Sample#10
Failure Analysis
Fig. 14: Equivalent plastic strain prediction for PCM with average EP particle size of 3-4 mm (Group M)
Sample#13
20
Average stress-strain curves from experiments
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7020406080
100120140
Stress_SStress_MStress_L
Strain ( - )
Stre
ss (
MPa
)
Fig. 15: Experimental average stress-strain data for three groups of EP particle size sample
21
Material Properties-Solid samples
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.50100200300400500600700800 HT3 Initial YS E_Low E_Literature
Strain ( - )
Stre
ss (
MPa
)
Fig. 16: Experimental average stress-strain data for three groups of EP particle size sample
22
Material Properties
-0.0999999999999998 0.1 0.30
100
200
300
400
500
600Piece-wise hardening modulus model
UT_solid_sampleHT3_exp
Strain, -
Stre
ss, M
Pa
E_Exp = 9.8 GpaEquivalent E = 9.8 GPaE_literature = 75 GPa
Fig. 17: Experimental average stress-strain data for three groups of EP particle size sample
23
Material Properties
Fig. 18: Experimental average stress-strain data for three groups of EP particle size sample
Numerical result without hardening modulus defined
24
Material Properties
Item S M L
Young’s modulus, E (GPa) 12 14 14
Yield Stress 230 230 250
Hardening Modulus, HM y = 10x2 – 3x +1 y = 0.2x +1 y=1
Poisson’s ratio 0.33 0.33 0.33
Fig. 19: Experimental average stress-strain data for three groups of EP
25
y = 10x2 – 3x +1
y = 0.2x +1
y=1
Conclusions Corevo foam with two different average pore sizes
have been mechanically characterised. A significant change in plateau stress is observed
between these two group of Corevo foam. Material properties for perlite composite material
are developed using ‘reverse engineering’ method. PCM with different average particle sizes differ
significantly in hardening modulus.
27
Q & A Session
28
Thanks for your attention
29
Top Related