Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

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

Performance of bio-inspired Kagome truss core structures

under compression and shear loading
I. Ullah a,b, J. Elambasseril a, M. Brandt a, S. Feih a,b,c,
a

Advanced Manufacturing Precinct, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476, Melbourne 3001, Australia
Sir Lawrence Wackett Aerospace Research Centre, School of Aerospace, Mechanical & Manufacturing Engineering, RMIT University, GPO Box 2476, Melbourne 3001, Australia
c
Joining Technology Group, Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology (SIMTech), 71 Nanyang Drive, Singapore 638075, Singapore
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Available online 2 August 2014
Keywords:
Selective laser melting
Sandwich materials
Bio-inspired core structures
Titanium alloys

a b s t r a c t
Additive manufacture of titanium structures allows the realisation of advanced design strategies not
achievable through traditional manufacturing methods. This work analyses the performance of Ti-6Al4V Kagome truss core structures produced by selective laser melting (SLM) for composite sandwich structures. These bio-inspired core structures can be manufactured for truss diameters larger than 0.6 mm and
internal truss angles of less than 60 without requiring additional support structures. Mechanical testing
is conducted to determine the deformation and failure of the core structure in compression and shear. A
nite element model validates the structural performance and can further optimise the unit cell design.
Design charts show that the performance of the proposed titanium core in both compression and shear is
superior (strength) or equal (stiffness) to honeycomb cores for aerospace applications.
2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Sandwich structures are very useful for structural applications
requiring low weight, high strength and high energy absorption.
For standard industry applications in aerospace, marine and automotive, a variety of cores including honeycomb, foam and balsa
wood cores are generally employed [13].
Advanced metallic core design has in the past been limited by
traditional manufacturing processes such as investment casting,
forming and welding [4,5]. Aerospace sandwich structures generally utilise aluminium honeycomb cores, despite of problems with
poor interface bonding between core and composite skins [6] and
possible problems with galvanic corrosion in the case of carbon
bre skin material [7].
In recent years, the advancement of additive manufacture and
in particular the selective laser melting (SLM) technology has led
to alternative design possibilities for the sandwich core. Emmelmann et al. [8] highlighted the importance of additive manufacturing for aerospace industry, to produce bionic structural
components with complex surfaces and internal features. SLM
manufacture allows the use of aerospace grade titanium alloy
Ti-6Al-4V for the core material. The excellent corrosion resistant
Corresponding author at: Joining Technology Group, Singapore Institute of
Manufacturing Technology (SIMTech), 71 Nanyang Drive, Singapore 638075,
Singapore. Tel: +65 6793 8378
E-mail address: feihs@simtech.a-star.edu.sg (S. Feih).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.07.036
0263-8223/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

properties and exceptionally high strength to density ratio of titanium alloys make them a prominent choice for high performance
aerospace applications. Titanium alloys can also easily be bonded
to carbon bre composites.
Truss and lattice type core structures belong to the innovative
3D structural core category. Key performance parameters of a core
material are its compressive and shear strength in relation to its
weight. The structural performance of truss and lattice structures
and their potential as a metallic core in sandwich panels has been
studied by various research groups. The deformation behaviour of
a large variety of lattice structures was researched by Emmelmann
et al. [8], Mines et al. [9], Rehme and Emmelmann [10] and Cote
et al. [11]. Rehme and Emmelmann compared specic strength of
lattice structures produced from SLM. It was found that facecentred unit cell structures with vertical support (f2cc) exhibited
the highest specic yield strength. Cote et al. [11] studied properties of prismatic lattice structures for in-plane and out-of-plane
compression and shear. They compared analytical, numerical and
mechanical test results for diamond and corrugated congurations.
Furthermore they suggested that these structures are equivalent to
square honeycomb in longitudinal shear strength but lower in
transverse shear and compression. George et al. [12] used CFRP lattice structures to enhance the performance of foam cores. Compression and shear results showed increase in strength and
modulus, while a major gain was achieved for the energy absorption characteristic. Wicks and Hutchinson [13] demonstrated the

I. Ullah et al. / Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

295

Fig. 1. Design of advanced composite sandwich structures with SLM core.

Fig. 2. Kagome truss cell as used for analysis with design parameters of diameter,
truss length and cell height and internal angle.

superior crush resistance of truss cores compared to honeycomb

materials. In addition to a superior high strength-to-weight ratio,
truss and lattice type core structures have the advantage of being
multifunctional: they enable superior blast wave mitigation, and
enhanced thermal management [14] or uid ow [15].
A special class of 3D truss structure is the Kagome structure. The
Kagome truss geometry is originally inspired from the rod-like
internal structure of cancellous bone, and is therefore often classied as a bio-inspired core material. Lee and Kang [16] analysed
the compressive behaviour of wire-woven Kagome structures with
different diameters, lengths and multiple truss layers. It was shown
that Kagome structures performed better than aluminium foam and
egg box structures in compressive strength and energy absorption
capacity [16] and also had better energy absorbing characteristics
than tetragonal truss structures, such as resistance to plastic buckling and deferred susceptibility to softening [17]. Wadley et al. [18]
manufactured Kagome structures through investment casting and
concluded that these structures perform better than tetrahedral,
pyramid and honeycomb structures with higher specic strength.

This study focuses on the deformation and failure of Kagome

structures made from Ti-6Al-4V under the two main loading conditions of compression and shear. The demonstration of superior
properties for titanium Kagome truss structures manufactured
with a technique capable of large scale panel production for
aerospace applications has not yet been demonstrated in the
literature. Furthermore, while deformation characteristics have
been successfully predicted, past studies have not included the failure validation of Kagome truss structures under various loading
conditions. SLM is utilised to produce the structural Kagome cores
for sandwich composites. The design concept for a typical
aerospace sandwich component is shown in Fig. 1. The paper
summarises the outcomes of the complete design process from
manufacture to testing, including numerical validation of the
deformation and failure processes. Kagome structures are compared against commonly used core structures with the help of
design charts. The optimum Kagome design parameters are identied for the static loading cases of compression and shear.

Table 1
SLM build parameters.
Parameter

Value

Laser power
Layer thickness
Area scan speed
Energy density
Hatch type
Hatch spacing
Spot size
Platform temperature

175 W
30 lm
710 mm/s
68.5 J/mm3
Checkerboard
120 lm
80 lm
200 C

Fig. 3. (a) Preprocessing of test specimen for SLM production (b) specimen panel
produced from SLM showing Kagome truss and faces.

296

I. Ullah et al. / Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

Fig. 4. Shear test set-up.

Fig. 5. (a) FE mesh of Kagome cell, locating three types of elements (b) radial cross-section (c) axial cross-section, locating three types of elements (Type 1:C3D4, Type
2:C3D6, Type 3:C3D8R).

297

I. Ullah et al. / Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

chamber is lled with Argon to avoid material oxidation. Process

parameters (laser power, scan type, and layer thickness) used in
this study are listed in Table 1. These parameters were recommended by the machine manufacturer SLM solutions and were
found to produce structures with low porosity of less than 0.3%
as established through tomography. The bulk material has a modulus of 110GPa and yield strength of 1028 MPa. The properties are
weakly dependent on the build direction. An average failure strain
of 9% is observed at failure. While the modulus and tensile strength
compare well to forged Ti-6Al-4V components, the strain-to-failure is reduced signicantly due to the change of the typical ab
microstructure to a martensitic structure due to the faster cooling
rates obtained during SLM manufacture [19].
2.3. Manufacturing constraints for truss structures
In full scale panel construction the core structures are ideally
produced with incorporated metallic faces as shown in Fig. 3(a)
to allow easy joining of the core to lightweight face sheets typically
made from carbon bre composites. In order to enable manufacture of a panel with face plates through SLM, these faces must be
constructed normal to the build platform. Fig. 3(b) shows the
pre-processing in AutoFab software of Kagome compression specimens with support structure under face sheets.
The SLM manufacturing method has some limitation for the
minimum diameter and internal angle for constructing the truss
structures in the horizontal conguration: The minimum diameter
of trusses that can be accurately produced with the SLM system
and the current build parameters was found to be 0.5 mm; below
this value the circular truss cross-section distorted from its original
shape. For the internal angle (h) of the Kagome truss structure, an
upper limit of construction in SLM was found as truss members
become almost horizontal when the internal angle increases more
than 60.
3. Mechanical testing

Fig. 6. (a) Fracture locus limit curve and (b) tensile stressstrain data.

2. Design and manufacturing

2.1. Kagome truss core design
The Kagome cell existing in a sandwich panel is illustrated in
Fig. 2. The Kagome structure has the advantage of isotropic properties in the horizontal plane due to the evenly-distributed arrangement of the three trusses. A Kagome truss may be geometrically
parameterised by truss diameter d, internal angle of the truss
structure h, length of truss members l and cell height h. For this
study, the height h of the cell is xed to a height of 11.5 mm, which
is a typical core height in sandwich panels. The diameter and
internal angle of the truss structure play an important role in characterising the mechanical properties and are considered key
parameters in optimisation studies. The length l of the truss members is a dependent variable and will be controlled only by the
internal angle of the truss and cell height.
2.2. SLM processing
The SLM system used in this research is the SLM250HL with a
build volume of 250  250  350 mm equipped with a YLR-FibreLaser of 400 W maximum power in the continuous mode. The

Aerospace sandwich structures are prone to combinations of

compression and shear loading conditions (either static or as a
result of impact scenarios). The performance of Kagome truss
structures was therefore evaluated for these two static loading
conditions. Six different sample congurations were built with
two truss diameters (d = 0.6 mm and 1.2 mm) and three internal
angles (h = 50o, 55o and 60o). For each sample conguration, three
specimens were tested.
3.1. Compression testing
Flatwise compression testing of single Kagome truss cells was
undertaken on a 10kN Instron mechanical testing system. Displacement controlled compression test speed was maintained at
0.5 mm/min. Specimens were placed between at compression
plates, and an extensometer was attached between the two face
sheets of the specimen to determine the compressive strain.
Table 2
The coefcients of failure locus curve of Ti-6Al-4V.
Coefcients

Ti-6Al-4V Billet

Ti-6Al-4V SLM

D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
D7

0.164
0.292
1.376
0.052
0.461
1.89
1.853
0.49

0.1
0.1
1.3
0.03
0.2
1.15
2.0
0.458

gT

298

I. Ullah et al. / Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

was 0.05 s for up to 6 mm of displacement (50% compressive strain),

and automatic mass scaling was used to maximise the stable time
increments of 1e7s with minimal dynamic effects.
The mesh quality and element type was found to be a critical
factor for accurate results. Linear elements with lumped mass
matrix were required for the explicit analysis. A change of element
type along the outer surface of the truss towards the centre junction was found to lead to minor stress jumps at the transition
points, which triggered failure at that location. The mesh of the
truss structure was therefore modelled with three different element types shown in Fig. 5 to achieve mesh-independent failure
predictions. The truss members were modelled with tetrahedral
elements (C3D4) on the outer surface and triangular prism
(C3D6) and brick (C3D8R) elements at the centre of the truss
cross-section. In the case of a compression FE model for 0.5 mm
truss diameter and 55o angle a total of 200,000 elements were
generated for converged results. A similar meshing technique is
utilised for the shear model.
The failure of ductile metals is strongly dependent on the stress
triaxiality as established by previous research studies [20,21]. Bao
and Wierzbicki [20] demonstrated that failure in metal specimen

Fig. 7. Deformation behaviour of single Kagome truss under compression for (a)
1.2 mm truss diameter and 55 angle and (b) 0.5 mm diameter and 60 angle.
Circles on load-displacement trace indicate the point of truss failure in the test and
numerical model.

3.2. Shear testing

A unit cell with two truss structures separated by a face sheet
was designed to allow the symmetric transfer of shear load. The
test conguration is shown in Fig. 4(a). The specimen face sheets
on either end were glued to steel plates and mounted on the test
xture (Fig. 4(b)). The centre plate was loaded downward, while
side plates were kept xed in horizontal and vertical directions.
This set-up introduces horizontal movement constraints during
the shear test, but the constraint forces remain small. The downward displacement was measured with an attached LVDT.
4. Finite element model
An explicit model with nonlinear material and geometry is used
for the following predictions in Abaqus 6.11. The explicit dynamic
solution was found to run in a more stable manner when predicting
failure of the truss structures. An elasticplastic material model is
used in the nite element model with the properties given in Section
2.2. Additionally, ductile fracture and progressive damage material
behaviour is used in the analysis, hence requiring solid continuum
elements. The time period used for simulations in Abaqus/Explicit

Fig. 8. (a) Deformation behaviour of 0.5 mm diameter and 50 angle double cell
Kagome truss comparison of test and FE under shear (b) test specimen (c) FE model.

I. Ullah et al. / Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

299

Fig. 9. Ti-6Al-4V Kagome trusses as compared to honeycomb and foam core family of structures for (a) compressive strength and (b) compressive modulus. Data for
benchmark honeycomb and closed-cell foam materials is obtained from CES EduPack2012.

can occur in three main modes: ductile void growth, pure shear or
a mixed mode void growth. The strain-to-failure depends on the
stress triaxiality. The distinctive regions are illustrated in
Fig. 6(a). Giglio et al. [22] used a set of three equations with seven
different coefcients (D1D7) to completely describe the failure
strain under multi-axial stress conditions:

ef

8 D1
D2
>
13g
>
>
<
2

D3 g D4 g D5
>
>
>
:
D6 D7 eD6 g

1=3 < g 6 0

Shear failure

0 < g 6 gT

Mixed mode

gT 6 g

Ductile failure
1

where g represents the stress triaxiality, and gT is the transition

point between mixed mode and ductile failure stress triaxiality.
The graph with dashed red curve shown in Fig. 6(a) illustrates the
model presented for conventionally produced Ti-6Al-4V as established by Giglio et al. [22]. Specimens manufactured with SLM have
a signicantly lower ductility due to their martensitic microstructure. In order to construct a failure envelope for the SLM produced
Ti-6Al-4V, model calibrations were conducted in a similar manner
to Giglio et al. [22] with the available tensile test results and one
set of Kagome truss shear specimens (0.5 mm, 50). The resulting
coefcients are summarised in Table 2. A ductile damage model
with damage evolution was applied in Abaqus to capture this
behaviour accurately.

300

I. Ullah et al. / Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

Fig. 10. Ti-6Al-4V Kagome trusses as compared to honeycomb and foam core family of structures for (a) shear strength and (b) shear modulus. Data for benchmark
honeycomb and closed-cell foam materials is obtained from CES EduPack2012.

5. Results and discussions

Force and displacement were recorded for each compression
and shear test. To obtain results for strength and moduli for shear
and compression loading, the following data analysis was
undertaken:

rmax F max =Aface

E r= with e Dh=h:

2
3

For the given structures, the face area, Aface, was equal to the
cross-sectional area of Kagome unit cell and depended only on
the truss angle. For the linear strain conversion, the current core
height during deformation was divided by the original height of
the truss core structures, which for all congurations was
11.5 mm as outlined previously.

Fig. 7 shows the stressstrain graphs for the compression tests

for examples of both thick and thin truss structures. The predictions were very accurate for all test cases for peak load, deformation characteristics and failure location. The experimental elastic
stiffness was within 510% of the numerical predictions. In the
presented work, the experimental stiffness under compression
loading was found to be very sensitive to non-parallel face skins
and deviations from the cylindrical geometry of truss members,
both of which can occur during manufacturing. Additional machining of top and bottom skin surfaces was undertaken following
manufacture to minimise the effect of non-parallel face skins.
As expected, the maximum strength and stiffness increase signicantly with an increase in truss diameter from 0.5 mm to
1.2 mm (7.4 times for strength and 4.5 times for stiffness). Failure
was found to occur consistently in the regions of highest bending

I. Ullah et al. / Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

deformation in the individual truss elements as highlighted in the

images of the deformed specimens. The numerical simulations
reveals that the plastic strains in this part of the structure were
signicantly higher than in the surrounding structure during compression. The failure mode is ductile void growth as determined by
the failure model. It is also of interest to note that failure for thin
structures occurs at a larger compressive strain (0.25 as compared
to 0.14), indicating that thinner structures are able to withstand a
higher compressive displacement as the resulting maximum
surface strains in thin trusses are lower during bending. This is validated by the experimental results. This nding is important when
considering the optimum structural parameters for energy absorbance (area under forcedisplacement curve) during impact
scenarios.
Fig. 8(a) shows the shear behaviour for truss structures under
shear deformation. Numerical shear load simulations can also capture the load bearing capacity and deformation accurately for this
load type when compared to mechanical tests. The maximum
stress under shear is signicantly lower than under compression.
The three key deformation and failure characteristics are highlighted in Fig. 8(b). Location A shows buckling of the rst truss at
peak load, while location B shows buckling of the second truss
member. Location C in Fig. 8(a) corresponds to the location of tensile fracture of the rst truss on the stressstrain curve, which is
followed by an abrupt load drop. The general trend of this curve
is captured well with the numerical model. The increase in stress
in mechanical testing prior to reaching point C is observed due to
a slight tilting of the positioning xture, which was not incorporated in the model. Increasing the truss diameter from 0.6 to
1.2 mm increased the stiffness by a factor of 4 and the strength
by a factor of 7.4.
During the experimental tests, various failure locations were
found, such as (1) joint failures, (2) failures close to the joints,
and (3) failure of truss/plate connections (see Fig. 8(b)). Failure
predictions in the numerical model occurred at the joint connection of the truss elements (see Fig. 8(c)); however, the other experimental failure locations also showed high plastic strains in the
numerical simulation, indicating a potential failure location. The
centre joint thickness most likely increased slightly during manufacture, which is not considered in the numerical model. Similarly,
the connection between the truss elements and face sheets will be
prone to defects (pores). The stress triaxiality at failure is close to
zero (near pure shear onset) in the failure model.
The good agreement between numerical and experimental
results indicates the usefulness of numerical simulations for the
exploration of the Kagome truss design space. For additional design
responses, truss diameters between 0.5 and 1.3 mm diameter and
angles between 45 and 60 were explored and compared to conventional aluminium honeycomb core structures for aerospace
applications as well as foam and metallic core structures. The
design limits are derived through manufacturing constraints
(internal angle) and engineering considerations for diameter to cell
height ratio.
The results for compression loading can be seen in Fig. 9. For the
same core density, the Kagome truss core structure outperforms
the conventional core structures signicantly for peak strength.
The stiffness for the same density is comparable to honeycomb
stiffness, but signicantly higher than for polymeric and metallic
foam core structures. The geometric parameter limits are indicated
in the design charts. Kagome structures under compression perform best for the largest diameters and largest internal angles.
The results for shear deformation can be seen in Fig. 10. For
shear strength, the Kagome truss core again outperforms honeycomb structures, and metallic and polymeric closed cell foam
materials. Regarding shear stiffness, the Kagome truss structure
outperforms all types of foam, and shows a similar stiffness to

301

most honeycomb cores. For shear optimisation, Kagome truss

structures perform best under shear for smallest internal angles
and largest diameters. In general proposed Kagome core structures
are located in upper left area of the compressive and shear strength
charts (Fig. 9(a) and Fig. 10(a)), which show that they have highest
specic strengths among the competitors.

6. Conclusions
Bio-inspired Kagome truss core structures were tested to failure
in compression and shear, and the deformation characteristics and
failure could be successfully predicted with nonlinear explicit nite
element analysis incorporating a ductile failure metal criterion.
Numerical analysis was then utilised to create design charts for a
wide range of truss core parameters (diameters between 0.5 and
1.3 mm and internal angles between 45 and 60). For these parameters, core structures could be built without including additional
support structures. Minimising support structures is important to
(a) minimise manufacturing cost and (b) for the viable manufacture
of core structural panels combining a large number of unit cells.
The Kagome truss core structures were found to perform better
than conventional honeycomb aerospace core structures in terms
of their specic strength for compression and shear for all parameters analysed. The core stiffness under these loading conditions
remained similar to honeycomb structures.
It is shown that the optimisation of the Kagome truss parameters depends on the load case. The internal angle of the truss structure can be tailored to perform best for shear (close to 45) or
compressive loading (close to the 60 limit due to manufacturing
constraints). The internal angle of a larger sandwich panel with
numerous truss structures may also be changed depending on
the trusses location within the panel. The diameter of the trusses
can be maximised locally or uniformly for a given weight requirement of the panel.
These ndings make SLM manufactured titanium truss core
structures a viable replacement for honeycomb cores in future
aerospace applications. SLM manufacture of core structures
furthermore has the added advantage of better bonding to composite skins due to the integrated face sheets and the possibility of
incorporating additional through-thickness reinforcement for the
composite skins in the forms of z-pins.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the efforts of Mr. Aaron Pateras, for
manufacturing of SLM structures and Mr. Peter Tkatchyk, for providing support during mechanical testing. The CT-Scanning for this
work was done at the South Australian node of the Australian
National Fabrication Facility under the National Collaborative
Research Infrastructure Strategy to provide nano- and micro-fabrication facilities for Australias researchers. One of the authors, I.
Ullah, acknowledges the support of the Australian Government
through the Endeavour Scholarship for this research project.
References
[1] Hall DJ, Robson BL. A review of the design and materials evaluation program
for the grp/foam sandwich composite hull of the ran minehunter. Composites
1984;15:26676.
[2] Johnson AF, Sims GD. Mechanical properties and design of sandwich materials.
Composites 1986;17:3218.
[3] Herrmann A, Zahlen P, Zuardy I. Sandwich structures technology in
commercial aviation. In: Thomsen OT, Bozhevolnaya E, Lyckegaard A, editors.
Sandwich structures 7: advancing with sandwich structures and
materials. Netherlands: Springer; 2005. p. 1326.
[4] Chiras S, Mumm DR, Evans AG, Wicks N, Hutchinson JW, Dharmasena K, et al.
The structural performance of near-optimized truss core panels. Int J Solids
Struct 2002;39:4093115.

302

I. Ullah et al. / Composite Structures 118 (2014) 294302

[5] Lee YH, Kang KJ. A wire-woven cellular metal: part-I, optimal design for
applications as sandwich core. Mater Des 2009;30:443443.
[6] Balasko M, Svab E, Molnar G, Veres I. Classication of defects in honeycomb
composite structure of helicopter rotor blades. Nucl Instrum Meth Phys Res
Sect A-Accelerators Spectrometers Detectors Associated Equipment
2005;542:4551.
[7] Fischer P, DeLuccia J. Effects of graphite-epoxy composite materials on the
corrosion behavior of aircraft alloys. In: Symposium on Environmental Effects
on Advanced Composite Materials 1975, Montreal, Quebec, p. 95.
[8] Emmelmann C, Petersen M, Kranz J, Wycisk E. Bionic lightweight design by
laser additive manufacturing (LAM) for aircraft industry. 2011, p. 80650L80650L-12.
[9] Mines RAW, Tsopanos S, Shen Y, Hasan R, McKown ST. Drop weight impact
behaviour of sandwich panels with metallic micro lattice cores. Int. J. Impact
Eng. 2013;60:12032.
[10] Rehme O, Emmelmann C. Rapid manufacturing of lattice structures with
selective laser melting. Laser-based Micropackaging 2006;6107. art. no.
61070K, K1070-K1070.
[11] Cote F, Deshpande VS, Fleck NA, Evans AG. The compressive and shear
responses of corrugated and diamond lattice materials. Int J Solids Struct
2006;43:622042.
[12] George T, Deshpande VS, Sharp K, Wadley HNG. Hybrid core carbon ber
composite sandwich panels: fabrication and mechanical response. Compos
Struct 2014;108:696710.

[13] Wicks N, Hutchinson JW. Performance of sandwich plates with truss cores.
Mech Mater 2004;36:73951.
[14] Wadley HNG. Multifunctional periodic cellular metal. Philos Trans R Soc AMath Phys Eng Sci 2006;364:3168.
[15] Joo JH, Kang KJ, Kim T, Lu TJ. Forced convective heat transfer in all metallic
wire-woven bulk Kagome sandwich panels. Int J Heat Mass Transfer
2011;54:565862.
[16] Lee BK, Kang KJ. A parametric study on compressive characteristics of wirewoven bulk Kagome truss cores. Compos Struct 2010;92:44553.
[17] Hyun S, Karlsson AM, Torquato S, Evans AG. Simulated properties of Kagome
and tetragonal truss core panels. Int J Solids Struct 2003;40:698998.
[18] Wadley HNG, Fleck NA, Evans AG. Fabrication and structural performance of
periodic cellular metal sandwich structures. Compos Sci Tech
2003;63:233143.
[19] Brandt M, Sun S, Leary M, Feih S, Elambasseril J, Liu Q. High-value SLM
aerospace components: from design to manufacture. In: Subic A, Advances in
Engineering Materials, Product and Systems Design 2013, 633, p. 13547.
[20] Bao Y, Wierzbicki T. On fracture locus in the equivalent strain and stress
triaxiality space. Int J Mech Sci 2004;46:8198.
[21] Bai YL, Wierzbicki T. A new model of metal plasticity and fracture with
pressure and Lode dependence. Int J Plast 2008;24:107196.
[22] Giglio M, Manes A, Vigano F. Ductile fracture locus of Ti-6Al-4V titanium alloy.
Int J Mech Sci 2012;54:12135.