Article
Mechanical Properties and Energy-Absorption Capability of
a 3D-Printed TPMS Sandwich Lattice Model for
Meta-Functional Composite Bridge Bearing Applications
Pasakorn Sengsri , Hao Fu






Citation: Sengsri, P.; Fu, H.;
Kaewunruen, S. Mechanical
Properties and Energy-Absorption
Capability of a 3D-Printed TPMS
Sandwich Lattice Model for
Meta-Functional Composite Bridge
Bearing Applications. J. Compos. Sci.
2022, 6, 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/
jcs6030071
Academic Editors: Francesco
Tornabene and Thanasis Triantafillou
Received: 1 February 2022
Accepted: 21 February 2022
Published: 24 February 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs6030071
and Sakdirat Kaewunruen *
Laboratory for Track Engineering and Operations for Future Uncertainties (TOFU Lab), School of Engineering,
The University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK; pxs905@student.bham.ac.uk (P.S.);
hxf992@student.bham.ac.uk (H.F.)
* Correspondence: s.kaewunruen@bham.ac.uk
Abstract: This paper reports on a proposed novel 3D-printed sandwich lattice model using a triply
periodic minimal surface (TPMS) structure for meta-functional composite bridge bearings (MFCBBs).
It could be implemented in bridge systems, including buildings and railway bridges. A TMPS
structure offers a high performance to density ratio under different loading. Compared to typical
elastomeric bridge bearings with any reinforcements, the use of 3D-printed TPMS sandwich lattices
could potentially lead to a substantial reduction in both manufacturing cost and weight, but also to
a significant increase in recyclability with their better mechanical properties (compressive, crushing,
energy absorption, vibration, and sound attenuation). This paper shows predictions from a numerical
study performed to examine the behaviour of a TPMS sandwich lattice model under two different
loading conditions for bridge bearing applications. The validation of the modelling is compared
with experimental results to ensure the possibility of designing and fabricating a 3D-printed TPMS
sandwich lattice for practical use. In general, the compressive experimental and numerical load–
displacement behaviour of the TPMS unit cell are in excellent agreement within the elastic limit region.
Moreover, its failure mode for bridge bearing applications has been identified as an elastic–plastic
and hysteretic failure behaviour under uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear
loading, respectively.
Keywords: triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS); meta-functional composite bridge bearings
(MFCBBs); 3D-printed TPMS sandwich lattice
1. Introduction
Bridge bearings play an important role in bridge systems as their main functions are
to accommodate/transfer the deformations/forces between the superstructure and the
substructure of a bridge whilst supporting the bridge weight. As such, if bearings are used
for buildings, the compressive and shear behaviour are considered [1]. However, these
bearings can undergo rotational displacements when they are utilised as bridge/railway
bearings. [2,3]. It is important to investigate these displacements for bridge bearing appli-
cations. Based on a critical review [4–6], bridge bearings should provide proper vertical
stiffness to withstand the weight of a bridge superstructure and be able to transfer dead
and live loads to the substructure. Additionally, these bridge bearings should be flexible in
the horizontal direction to be able to facilitate rotational or lateral displacements occurring
by girders. The failure of bridge bearings caused by these concerns possibly results in
damage to the bridge structure or accelerated bridge deterioration [7].
Typical bridge bearings can be classified as either elastomeric or high load multi-
rotational bridge bearings, including spherical, disc, and pot ones [8]. It is important to note
that, in this paper, we focus on the development of a 3D-printed TPMS sandwich lattice
model for meta-functional composite bridge bearings compared to conventional elastomeric
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jcs
 to experience a particular rollover behaviour under shear and a lift-off behaviour under
high rotational displacements due to the lack of flexural rigidity in the fibre reinforcement
[10], as presented in Figure 1c,d, respectively.
According to reviews in [11–14], it has been found that these behaviours can elimi-
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 nate the circumstance of large tensile stresses in the UFLEBBs when they are subjected to
2 of 16
shear or rotational loading. As such, higher tensile stresses can occur in the SLEBBs under
lateral and rotational deformations due to their fastening to top and bottom contact sup-
ports, which can initially accelerate bearing deterioration. However, both steel/unbonded
bridge bearings without/with any reinforcements. A key part of an elastomeric bridge bear-
fibre-laminated elastomeric bridge bearings are still heavy, costly, and non-recyclable due
ing is the elastomeric layers which are also known as rubber ones layers [9]. Rubber layers
to rigid steel end plates, steel-reinforced plates, and rubber block layers. Furthermore, in
are combined with alternate reinforcement layers (steel plates or fibre sheets), which provide
aorder to afford in
high modulus to order
eliminate the failure
to increase patternsofofthe
the stiffness both SLEBBs
bearings andvertical
in the UFLEBBs as previ-
direction by
ously mentioned, the development of a proposed novel bridge bearing model
resisting the bugling of the rubber as shown in Figure 1b. Additionally, elastomeric layershas been
considered
are able to beindirectly
this paper.
utilised without being reinforced (plain bridge bearings).

Figure1.1.(a)
Figure (a)Unloaded,
Unloaded,(b)
(b)compressive,
compressive,(c)
(c)lateral,
lateral,and
and(d)
(d) rotational
rotationaldeformation
deformationpatterns
patternsof
ofaanon-
non-
reinforcedelastomeric
reinforced elastomericbridge
bridgebearing
bearingand
andan anunbonded
unbondedfibre/steel-reinforced
fibre/steel-reinforcedelastomeric
elastomericbridge
bridge
bearing,respectively.
bearing, respectively.

Nowadays, bridge
Elastomeric the usebearings
of 3D-printed
(EBBs),complex
which structural
are basicallycomponents
laminatedusing
with lattice struc-
steel plates
tures applied inelastomeric
(steel-laminated civil engineering
bridgeisbearings,
rapidly becoming attractive
SLEBBs), can [15]. Among
alternatively the various
be replaced with
lattice
fibre structures
sheets presented
(unboned in Figure 2,elastomeric
fibre-laminated the triply periodical minimalUFLEBBs)
bridge bearings, surface (TPMS) struc-
as another
tures which
reinforced are among
material. thosebenefit
The main lattice structures have
of using fibre received
sheets considerable
in bridge bearings attention
instead ofwith
the
other onesadvantages
potential is that they throughout
are easily installed underlattices
struct-based the girders. However,
(also known UFLEBBs
as TPMS havesuch
lattices no
rigid end plates
as schwarz leading
primitive to gyroid,
(SP), a lack ofetc.),
mechanical
because connections between
of their low weight tothe superstructure
strength ratios and
and the substructure
weight of agood
to cost ratios, bridge. This causes these
crashworthiness bearings with
performance, andthe fibre reinforcement
high-energy to
absorption
experience
[16–20]. a particular rollover behaviour under shear and a lift-off behaviour under high
rotational displacements due to the lack of flexural rigidity in the fibre reinforcement [10],
as presented in Figure 1c,d, respectively.
According to reviews in [11–14], it has been found that these behaviours can eliminate
the circumstance of large tensile stresses in the UFLEBBs when they are subjected to shear
or rotational loading. As such, higher tensile stresses can occur in the SLEBBs under lateral
and rotational deformations due to their fastening to top and bottom contact supports,
which can initially accelerate bearing deterioration. However, both steel/unbonded fibre-
laminated elastomeric bridge bearings are still heavy, costly, and non-recyclable due to
rigid steel end plates, steel-reinforced plates, and rubber block layers. Furthermore, in
order to afford to eliminate the failure patterns of both SLEBBs and UFLEBBs as previously
mentioned, the development of a proposed novel bridge bearing model has been considered
in this paper.
Nowadays, the use of 3D-printed complex structural components using lattice struc-
tures applied in civil engineering is rapidly becoming attractive [15]. Among the various lat-
tice structures presented in Figure 2, the triply periodical minimal surface (TPMS) structures
which are among those lattice structures have received considerable attention with potential
advantages throughout struct-based lattices (also known as TPMS lattices such as schwarz
primitive (SP), gyroid, etc.), because of their low weight to strength ratios and weight to
cost ratios, good crashworthiness performance, and high-energy absorption [16–20].

J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71
mal surfaces which are periodic in three-coordinate directions with zero me
free of self-intersections. Moreover, they show superior 3D printing materia
continuous curves. This means that previous layers support the following
support [21–23]. Compared to other lattice structures, they need support
3 of 16 or
their angle [24].

Figure
Figure 2. Various
2. Various latticelattice structures
structures used
used for many for many
applications applications
in engineering. in engineering.
At the same time, additive manufacturing (3D printing) approaches provide the op-
Another
portunity to realisebenefit
TPMS parts of with
using TPMS designs
complicated structures is thatTPMSs
and features. thesearestructures
minimal exh
surfaces which are periodic
stress distribution, in three-coordinate
whilst struct-based directions with zero
structures canmean curvatures,
undergo free conce
stress
of self-intersections. Moreover, they show superior 3D printing material properties as
to the joints of the structs [24–27]. In the same way, from our previous wo
continuous curves. This means that previous layers support the following layers without
failures
support of struct-based
[21–23]. Compared to otherstructures are likely
lattice structures, theyto occur
need before
support or are yielding
limited by under
Lei Zhang et al. [27] found that TPMS structures exhibited a better stiffness,
their angle [24].
andAnother benefit of using TPMS structures is that these structures exhibit a uniform
energy-absorption ability to struct-based body-centred cubic (BCC) latti
stress distribution, whilst struct-based structures can undergo stress concentrations close
ally,
to TPMS
the joints structures
of the performed
structs [24–27]. In the samebetter
way, than
from ourface-centred-cubic
previous work [6,15],(FCC)local lattic
over, of
failures other studies
struct-based haveare
structures exhibited that
likely to occur theyielding
before excellent
underproperties
compression. Leiof TPMS
Zhang et al. [27] found that TPMS structures exhibited a better stiffness, plateau stress, and
terms of vibration, acoustic attenuation, and thermal management are bett
energy-absorption ability to struct-based body-centred cubic (BCC) lattices. Additionally,
typical
TPMS lattices
structures [29,30].better than face-centred-cubic (FCC) lattices [28]. Moreover,
performed
Triggered by this that
other studies have exhibited point, many studies
the excellent propertieshave recently
of TPMS considered
structures in terms of the TP
vibration, acoustic attenuation, and thermal management are better than that of typical
design and finite element analysis (FEA), showing that TPMS geometrie
lattices [29,30].
portant
Triggeredrolebyinthistheir mechanical
point, many studies response
have recently[31–36].
consideredTPMS mechanical
the TPMS geometric perfor
pressive,
design crushing,
and finite energy(FEA),
element analysis absorption, vibration,
showing that and sound
TPMS geometries play anattenuation,
important etc
role in their mechanical response [31–36]. TPMS mechanical performances (compressive,
inated by structure geometry, but also certainly based on material properti
crushing, energy absorption, vibration, and sound attenuation, etc.) are not dominated by
In geometry,
structure terms ofbuttheir performances
also certainly for bridge
based on material bearing
properties [37]. applications, they
multiple geometry and superior properties, for example,
In terms of their performances for bridge bearing applications, a lightweight
they could provide stru
multiple geometry and superior properties, for example, a lightweight structure due to
high vertical/horizontal stiffness to weight ratio and an energy absorber d
a high vertical/horizontal stiffness to weight ratio and an energy absorber due to its
specific
high specificstrength
strength and and energy
energy absorption
absorption per volume, per volume,
respectively. respectively.
Nowadays, TMPS Now
structures
structures have have
been been investigated
investigated under either under eitherorcompression
compression impact loading or impact loa
for other
civil engineering applications, and extending the use of TMPS sandwich lattices to bridge
civil engineering applications, and extending the use of TMPS sandwich lat
bearing applications requires the comprehension of their behaviour under compression–
bearing
shear applications
deformation. requires
Nevertheless, therethe
arecomprehension
currently no studiesof their
that havebehaviour
investigated under
shear deformation. Nevertheless, there are currently no studies that
the behaviours of a 3D-printed TPMS structure for bridge bearing applications underhave in
compression–shear loading.
behaviours of a 3D-printed TPMS structure for bridge bearing application
In the present study, we present a proposed novel 3D-printed TPMS sandwich lat-
pression–shear
tice loading.composite bridge bearing applications using a parametric
model for meta-functional
In the present study, we present a proposed novel 3D-printed TPMS sa
model for meta-functional composite bridge bearing applications using a pa
putational and experimental approach. The predictions of the mechanical
both the load–displacement/stress–strain curves of a TPMS unit cell model
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 4 of 16

computational and experimental approach. The predictions of the mechanical behaviours

of both the load–displacement/stress–strain curves of a TPMS unit cell model and the
sandwich lattice model with 3 × 2 × 1 unit cell models, compared to an elastomeric block
unit cell model under combined compression–shear loading, could be obtained. In ad-
dition, a TPMS structure used in both TPMS models is schwarz primitive (SP) without
thickness, because this TPMS structure is likely to own its symmetry in geometry subjected
to both two loading conditions. To realise the proposed novel 3D-printed TPMS sandwich
model, the validation of the SP unit cell model under uniaxial compression was carried
out by comparing the numerical predictions with experimental measurements. Then, the
stress–strain relationships of the mechanical behaviours of the proposed novel sandwich
lattice model are employed to determine their mechanical properties, for example, elastic
modulus (E), shear modulus (G), and Poisson’s ratio (V). These parameters can be adjusted
for the further design of novel composite bridge bearings using a sheet-based or double
TPMS sandwich lattice subjected to different loading conditions.

2. Methodology Strategy
2.1. Gibson–Ashby Model of Cell Structures
In reference [38], Ashby exhibited the correlation between the mechanical proper-
ties of the lattice structure and the relative density (modulus of elasticity, plateau stress,
and densification strain), which is categorised into two groups of lattice structures with
diverse mechanical behaviours. Figure 3a,b demonstrate the typical compressive bending-
dominated behaviour and stretch-dominated behaviour of a lattice structure, respectively.
It is attributed to these mechanical properties which are based on three factors (lattice
geometry, material, and volume fraction). These three factors affect the load–displacement
of a lattice structure under any loading. The correlations are referred to the Ashby model:
 k
Ml Dl
= B1 , (1)
Ms Ds
 j
Yl Dl
= B2 , (2)
Ys Ds
 
Dl
Ed = 1 − A , (3)
Ds
where Ms , Ys , and Ds determine the Young0 s modulus, yield strength, and density of a base
solid material, respectively, whilst, Ml , Yl , and Dl denote the Young0 s modulus, yield
strength, and density of a lattice structure, respectively. Ed is the initial densification strain
of the lattice structure where the densification point appears. In terms of energy absorption
applications, Ed can alternatively be used as the effective limit. Beyond this limit point,
the structure will sustain its energy absorption, but the occurrence of transmitted stress
is observed over the structure. Additionally, the rest of certain parameters (B1 , B2 , k, j,
and A) is calculated by fitting the result of the compressive experiment in a review [38].
In this paper, the energy absorption capacity of a lattice structure is determined using
numerical integration, which provides the region below the stress–strain curve under
uniaxial compression. The following equation expresses the energy absorption per unit
volume, Sv : Z E
Sv = Y ( E)dE (4)
0
J.J.Compos.
Compos.Sci.
Sci.2022,
2022,6,6,71
x FOR PEER REVIEW 55ofof16
17

Figure 3. Typical stress–strain curves of (a) a bending-dominated lattice structure and (b)
dominated lattice structure under uniaxial compression.

2.2. Schwarz Primitive (SP) Unit Cell Design

The aim of this paper was to exhibit the mechanical behaviour of a propos
Figure 3. Typical stress–strain curves of (a) a bending-dominated lattice structure and (b) a stretch-
3D-printed
Figure latticeTPMS
3. Typical
dominated sandwich
stress–strain
structure curves
under of lattice
uniaxial model underlattice
(a)compression.
a bending-dominated uniaxial
structurecompression
and (b) a stretch-and co
compression–shear
dominated lattice structureloading and to
under uniaxial replace a common elastomeric bridge bearing s
compression.
2.2. Schwarz Primitive (SP) Unit Cell Design
with it. Regarding the design of a lattice unit cell model, two key methods can be
The aim Primitive
2.2. Schwarz of this paper(SP) was
Unit to exhibit
Cell Designthe mechanical behaviour of a proposed novel
create a solid
3D-printed TPMS schwarz
sandwich primitive
lattice (SP).under
model The uniaxial
first method can beand
compression used to generate a
combined
The aim of this paper was to exhibit the mechanical behaviour of a proposed novel
struct, known assandwich
compression–shear
3D-printed TPMS loading
a skeletal toschwarz
andlattice replace
model
primitive
a common for acompression
elastomeric
under uniaxial
SPbridge
unit bearing
celland model without th
structure
combined
Thisit.method
with Regarding
compression–shear is the
baseddesign
loading onand
ofone of the
atolattice
replace subdomains
unit cell model,
a common twodivided by the
key methods
elastomeric bridge cansurface
bearing usedastoa solid.
bestructure
create
method
with a solid schwarz
is to create
it. Regarding primitive
a termed
the design (SP). The first
sheet-based
of a lattice method
unit cell or can
double
model, be used
two schwarz to generate
key methods primitivea network
can be usedforto a schwa
struct,
create known
a solid as a skeletal
schwarz schwarz
primitive (SP).primitive
The firstfor a SP unit
method can cell
be model
used to without thickness.
generate a network
itive
This
unit cell
method
model
is based
with
on oneschwarz
a thickness, obtained
of the subdomains divided
by plotting
by the
two minimal surfaces w
struct,
variant known
level assets
a skeletal
of the constant primitive
k for
together, a SPleading
unit cellsurface
model
to an
aswithout
a solid.thickness.
offset from
Another
a hypothet
method is to create a termed sheet-based or double schwarz primitive for a schwarz
This method is based on one of the subdomains divided by the surface as a solid. Another
face at the
primitive unitaverage
cell modelofwith theatwo level-set
thickness, surfaces.
obtained The TPMS
by plotting
method is to create a termed sheet-based or double schwarz primitive for a schwarz prim-
schwarz
two minimal primitive
surfaces with with
two variant
nessunit
cancell level
bemodel sets of
approximately the constant k
generatedtogether, leading to an offset from a hypothetical
itive with a thickness, obtainedusing the equation
by plotting two minimal of the implicated
surfaces with twosurfac
surface at the average of the two level-set surfaces. The TPMS schwarz primitive with
in Equation
variant level sets(5):of the constant k together, leading to an offset from a hypothetical sur-
a thickness can be approximately generated using the equation of the implicated surface as
face at the average of the two level-set surfaces. The TPMS schwarz primitive with a thick-
seen in Equation (5):
ness can be approximately generated
2𝜋𝑥 using the 2𝜋𝑦 2𝜋𝑧
𝑐𝑜𝑠 + 𝑐𝑜𝑠 equation + 𝑐𝑜𝑠of the implicated
− 𝑘 = 𝐻(surface𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧)as, seen
in Equation (5): 2πx 𝑏 2πy 2πz𝑏 𝑏
cos + cos + cos − k = H ( x, y, z), (5)
where b denotes the unit b 2𝜋𝑥cell size b 2𝜋𝑦 b 2𝜋𝑧 (Figure 4) and k is the volume fractio
of a lattice
𝑐𝑜𝑠 + 𝑐𝑜𝑠 + 𝑐𝑜𝑠 − 𝑘 = 𝐻(𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧), (5)
areasbwhich
where denotesisthe divided
unit cellby 𝑏size the 𝑏
of surface
a lattice [39].𝑏 The
(Figure 4) andvolume
k is thefraction of a lattice
volume fraction of desc
the areas
relative
where which
density
b denotes isthe
divided
ofunit
itscellby size
the surface
components. [39].
of a latticeIt canThe volume
also
(Figure 4) be
andusedfraction of a lattice
tovolume
k is the adjust thedescribes
thickness
fraction of the of th
the relative
areas which density
is dividedof its
by components.
the surface It can
[39]. Thealso be
volume
and to compare models with an identical volume. It is important to note used to
fractionadjust
of a the thickness
lattice describesof the
thethat, in
model and
relative to compare
density models with an
of its components. identical
It can also bevolume.
used toItadjust
is important to noteof
the thickness that,
thein this
model
search,we
research,
weonlyonly use the first
use the first
method for generating a skeletal SP unit cell4model.
and to compare models withmethod for generating
an identical volume. It a skeletal SP unit
is important to cell
notemodel.
that, inFigure
this re-
illustrates
illustrates
search, wethe the
only schwarz
schwarz
use the firstprimitive
primitive forunit
unit cell
method CADcell model
generating CAD
a for model
all
skeletal for all
simulations
SP unit cellinsimulationsFigure in
this paper.
model. 4 this p
illustrates the schwarz primitive unit cell CAD model for all simulations in this paper.

Figure 4. Schwarz primitive unit cell CAD model.

Figure
Figure 4. Schwarz
4. Schwarz primitive
primitive unit
unit cell CADcell CAD model.
model.
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 6 of 16

2.3. Finite Element Modelling of a Schwarz Primitive and Elastomeric Block Unit Cell
2.3. Finite Element Modelling of a Schwarz Primitive and Elastomeric Block Unit Cell
2.3.1. Design, Material, and Geometric Parameters
2.3.1. Design, Material, and Geometric Parameters
In this section, the uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear analysis
In this section, the uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear analysis
of a 50 mm × 50 mm × 50 mm schwarz primitive unit cell model and an elastomeric block
of a 50 mm × 50 mm × 50 mm schwarz primitive unit cell model and an elastomeric
model with the same dimensions for bridge bearing applications are modelled within an
block model with the same dimensions for bridge bearing applications are modelled
elastic–plastic region using the FEA software Abaqus Static 2017 [40]. These two models
within an elastic–plastic region using the FEA software Abaqus Static 2017 [40]. These
possess a quasi-isotropic material behaviour with isotropic properties, but only in-plane,
two models possess a quasi-isotropic material behaviour with isotropic properties, but
which have three certainly independent parameters including the equivalent Young’s
only in-plane, which have three certainly independent parameters including the equivalent
modulus (Ex = Ey = Ez), Poisson ratio (Vyx = Vxy = Vyz = Vxz = Vzy = Vzx), and shear modulus
Young’s modulus (Ex = Ey = Ez ), Poisson ratio (Vyx = Vxy = Vyz = Vxz = Vzy = Vzx ), and
(Gxy = Gxz = Gyz). A proposed 3D-printing resin material, also known as photosensitive resin
shear modulus (Gxy = Gxz = Gyz ). A proposed 3D-printing resin material, also known as
(UV resin), is considered as a model material for all simulations. The designed dimensions
photosensitive resin (UV resin), is considered as a model material for all simulations. The
of the two models are based on the full-scale dimensions of common bridge bearings used
designed dimensions of the two models are based on the full-scale dimensions of common
in highway bridge systems in Thailand [41]. This parametric study using a proposed ma-
bridge bearings used in highway bridge systems in Thailand [41]. This parametric study
terial
usingcovers the bridge
a proposed bearing
material coversapplications of this applications
the bridge bearing paper. Figureof5a,b
this present the finite
paper. Figure 5a,b
element models of a schwarz primitive unit cell and an elastomeric block unit cell
present the finite element models of a schwarz primitive unit cell and an elastomeric block in
Abaqus,
unit cell respectively.
in Abaqus, respectively.

Figure
Figure 5.
5. Finite
Finite element models
models of
of (a)
(a)aaschwarz
schwarzprimitive
primitiveunit
unit cell
cell and
and (b)(b) elastomeric
elastomeric block
block unitunit
cell
cell in Abaqus.
in Abaqus.

2.3.2.Mesh
2.3.2. MeshGeneration
Generation
Theschwarz
The schwarzprimitive
primitiveunitunitcell
cellmodel
modeland andelastomeric
elastomericblock
blockone
oneareare designed
designedand and
meshed utilising tetrahedral mesh (element type C3D4R) generation
meshed utilising tetrahedral mesh (element type C3D4R) generation from softwarefrom software Abaqus.
In order In
Abaqus. to order
obtaintocorrect
obtainFEA results
correct FEA with highwith
results performance from all models
high performance in models
from all this paper,in
the mesh sensitivity investigation is considered by observing the vertical stiffness
this paper, the mesh sensitivity investigation is considered by observing the vertical stiff- (K)
against
ness (K) the whole
against thenumber of elements.
whole number The mesh
of elements. Thesensitivity of a schwarz
mesh sensitivity primitive
of a schwarz unit
primi-
cell model is presented as a curve shown in Figure 6. This curve demonstrates
tive unit cell model is presented as a curve shown in Figure 6. This curve demonstrates that when
the mesh
that whensize reduces
the mesh from
size 5 mmfrom
reduces to 0.75 mm,tothe
5 mm percentage
0.75 error of theerror
mm, the percentage vertical stiffness
of the ver-
is within 3%.
tical stiffness is within 3%.
2.3.3. Boundary Conditions and an Applied Force
In this step, the proper selection of boundary conditions is important to observe the
behaviour of the schwarz primitive unit cell model and the elastomeric block unit cell
model under uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear loading, shown in
Figure 7a,b, respectively. For combined compression–shear simulation, each model is
located between two thin rigid plates, therefore both the top and bottom faces are tied
to those rigid plates. Firstly, a concentrated force is applied to the reference point on
the top face of each model. After that, a shear displacement with a periodic sinusoidal
amplitude is applied parallel to the same reference point, whilst their bottom surfaces are
fixed. Furthermore, the rest of all translational and all rotational degrees of freedom on their
reference point and bottom surfaces are fixed to prevent rigid body motion. Additionally,
the fronts and sides of the two models are not considered with these boundary conditions.
Moreover, the concentrated load and shear displacement for both models are applied by
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 7 of 16

employing
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW the static FEA model on Abaqus. Whilst boundary conditions for uniaxial 7 of 17
Figure 6. Mesh
compression sensitivity
are appliedofinathe
schwarz
sameprimitive
manner,unit cell (50 × 50
an enforced × 50) mm, for is
displacement a mesh sizeto
applied from
the5
(coarse) to 0.75 (fine) mm.
upper reference point moving forwards the bottom of each model instead.

2.3.3. Boundary Conditions and an Applied Force

In this step, the proper selection of boundary conditions is important to observe the
behaviour of the schwarz primitive unit cell model and the elastomeric block unit cell
model under uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear loading, shown in
Figure 7a,b, respectively. For combined compression–shear simulation, each model is lo-
cated between two thin rigid plates, therefore both the top and bottom faces are tied to
those rigid plates. Firstly, a concentrated force is applied to the reference point on the top
face of each model. After that, a shear displacement with a periodic sinusoidal amplitude
is applied parallel to the same reference point, whilst their bottom surfaces are fixed. Fur-
thermore, the rest of all translational and all rotational degrees of freedom on their refer-
ence point and bottom surfaces are fixed to prevent rigid body motion. Additionally, the
fronts and sides of the two models are not considered with these boundary conditions.
Moreover, the concentrated load and shear displacement for both models are applied by
employing the static FEA model on Abaqus. Whilst boundary conditions for uniaxial com-
pression
Figure are applied
Figure6.6.Mesh
Meshsensitivity
in the same manner,
sensitivityofofaaschwarz
an enforced
schwarzprimitive
primitiveunit
unitcell
displacement
(50×× 50
cell(50 50 ×
is applied
50) mm,
× 50) mm, to size
foraamesh
for mesh the
sizeupper
from5
from
5reference
(coarse) topoint
0.75 moving
(fine) mm.
(coarse) to 0.75 (fine) mm. forwards the bottom of each model instead.

2.3.3. Boundary Conditions and an Applied Force

In this step, the proper selection of boundary conditions is important to observe the
behaviour of the schwarz primitive unit cell model and the elastomeric block unit cell
model under uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear loading, shown in
Figure 7a,b, respectively. For combined compression–shear simulation, each model is lo-
cated between two thin rigid plates, therefore both the top and bottom faces are tied to
those rigid plates. Firstly, a concentrated force is applied to the reference point on the top
face of each model. After that, a shear displacement with a periodic sinusoidal amplitude
is applied parallel to the same reference point, whilst their bottom surfaces are fixed. Fur-
thermore, the rest of all translational and all rotational degrees of freedom on their refer-
ence point and bottom surfaces are fixed to prevent rigid body motion. Additionally, the
Figure
fronts7.7.
Figure andBoundary conditions
the twoofofmodels
sides conditions
Boundary of (a)aaschwarz
(a) schwarz
are notprimitive unitcell
considered
primitive unit cell
withFEA
FEA model
these
model and(b)
(b)an
boundary
and anelastomeric
elastomeric
conditions.
block
block unit
Moreover, cell FEA
unit cellthe
FEA model under
concentrated combined
model under load compression–shear
and shear
combined displacement
compression–shear loading.
for both models are applied by
loading.
employing the static FEA model on Abaqus. Whilst boundary conditions for uniaxial com-
2.3.4.
2.3.4.Material
Material Properties
Properties
pression are applied in the same manner, an enforced displacement is applied to the upper
In
Inthis
referencethis research,
research,
point the
moving proposed
theforwards
proposedthe photosensitive
photosensitive
bottom of each resin
resin (UV resin)
resin)material
(UVinstead.
model materialmodel
modelisisem-
em-
ployed
ployed for all FEA simulations due to its availability on the 3D printing market andinin
for all FEA simulations due to its availability on the 3D printing market and
elastomeric-like
elastomeric-likematerial
materialproperties.
properties. Figure 8 presents
Figure the stress–strain
8 presents curvecurve
the stress–strain for a UV
for resin
a UV
material used in the simulations of the elastomeric block and schwarz
resin material used in the simulations of the elastomeric block and schwarz primitive primitive unit cell
unit
model. It is important to mention that the stress–strain relationships from the curve are
calibrated from experimental data in Abaqus to obtain correct results when simulating.

2.3.5. Data Collection

All finite element simulations for both models are run and their stress–strain curves
are obtained. Using a reaction force as an enforced displacement applied to the reference
point on the upper rigid plate can give a load and stress can be evaluated by dividing the
load with the area of a unit cell. Additionally, strain is obtained from the applied enforced
displacement divided by cell height. The force–displacement curves of the uniaxial com-
pression and combined compression–shear behaviours of the SP unit cell and elastomeric
Figure
block FE7. model
Boundary
forconditions of (a) a schwarz
the simulations primitive
are shown unit cell
in Figures FEA10,
9 and model and (b) an elastomeric
respectively.
block unit cell FEA model under combined compression–shear loading.

2.3.4. Material Properties

In this research, the proposed photosensitive resin (UV resin) material model is em-
ployed for all FEA simulations due to its availability on the 3D printing market and in
elastomeric-like material properties. Figure 8 presents the stress–strain curve for a UV
resin material used in the simulations of the elastomeric block and schwarz primitive unit
 30
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 17

25

Stress (MPa)
20 It is important to mention that the stress–strain relationships from the curve
cell model.
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 8 of 16
are calibrated from experimental data in Abaqus to obtain correct results when simulat-
15
ing.
10
35
5
30
0
25 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2

Stress (MPa) 20
Strain

Figure158. Proposed material properties from compressive stress–strain relationships used in numer-
ical analysis.
10
2.3.5. Data Collection
5
All finite element simulations for both models are run and their stress–strain curves
are obtained.
0 Using a reaction force as an enforced displacement applied to the reference
point on 0the upper rigid0.05
plate can give a load
0.1 and stress can0.15be evaluated by 0.2dividing the
load with the area of a unit cell. Additionally,
Strainstrain is obtained from the applied enforced
displacement divided by cell height. The force–displacement curves of the uniaxial com-
pression
Figure 8. and combined
Proposed compression–shear
material properties from behaviours
compressiveofstress–strain
the SP unit relationships
cell and elastomeric
used in
Figure
block8.FE
Proposed
numerical model material properties from
for the simulations
analysis. arecompressive stress–strain
shown in Figures 9 andrelationships used in numer-
10, respectively.
ical analysis.
120
2.3.5. Data Collection
All
100finite element simulations for both models are run and their stress–strain curves
are obtained. Using a reaction force as an enforced displacement applied to the reference
point on80the upper rigid plate can give a load and stress canSP unit cell
be evaluated by dividing the
load with the area of a unit cell. Additionally, strain is obtained from the applied enforced
60
Force (kN)

displacement divided by cell height. The force–displacement curves of the uniaxial com-
pression and combined compression–shear behaviours ofElastomeric
the SP unit cell and elastomeric
40
block FE model for the simulations are shown in Figures block 9 andunit
10, cell
respectively.
20
120
0
100 0 2 4 6 8 10
Displacement (mm)
80 SP unit cell
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17
Figure 9. Comparative force–displacement curves of both the SP unit cell FE model and elastomeric
block60unit
Force (kN)

block unit cell

cell FE
FE model
model under
under uniaxial
uniaxial compression
compression loading.
loading.
Elastomeric
40
40 block unit cell
20
20
0
Force (kN)

SP unit cell
0 2 4 6 8 10
0
Displacement (mm)
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
Figure 9. Comparative force–displacement curves of both the SP unit
Elastomericmodel and elastomeric
cell FE
-20
block unit cell FE model under uniaxial compression loading. block unit
cell
-40
Displacment (mm)

Figure10.
Figure 10. Comparative
Comparativeforce–displacement
force–displacementcurves
curvesofofboth
boththe
theSP
SPunit
unitcell
cellFE
FEmodel
modeland
andelastomeric
elastomeric
block unit cell FE model under combined compression–shear loading.
block unit cell FE model under combined compression–shear loading.

2.4. Mechanical Testing

In order to validate the FEA results of the SP unit cell model, three 50 mm × 50 mm ×
50 mm SP unit cell samples were manufactured and tested under uniaxial compression.
The SP unit cell model was first designed using the CAD software Solidworks, and then
exported as the STL format for the sample preparation of additive manufacturing. Then,
 block unit
cell
-40
Displacment (mm)

J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 Figure 10. Comparative force–displacement curves of both the SP unit cell FE model and elastomeric
9 of 16
block unit cell FE model under combined compression–shear loading.

2.4. Mechanical Testing

2.4. Mechanical Testing
In order to validate the FEA results of the SP unit cell model, three 50 mm × 50 mm ×
In order to validate the FEA results of the SP unit cell model, three 50 mm × 50 mm × 50 mm
50 mm SP unit cell samples were manufactured and tested under uniaxial compression.
SP unit cell samples were manufactured and tested under uniaxial compression. The SP
The SP unit cell model was first designed using the CAD software Solidworks, and then
unit cell model was first designed using the CAD software Solidworks, and then exported
exported as the STL format for the sample preparation of additive manufacturing. Then,
as the STL format for the sample preparation of additive manufacturing. Then, three
three compression samples were manufactured for the same model using a stereolithog-
compression samples were manufactured for the same model using a stereolithography
raphy (SLA)-based 3D printer. Figure 11 shows one of the final specimens for compression
(SLA)-based 3D printer. Figure 11 shows one of the final specimens for compression testing.
testing. The tests on these three specimens were performed in the build direction to pre-
The tests on these three specimens were performed in the build direction to prevent the
vent the build orientation effect using a universal testing machine, as shown Figure 11c.
build orientation effect using a universal testing machine, as shown Figure 11c. During
During
the tests,the
the tests, the load–displacement
load–displacement data weredata were by
collected collected by the
the testing testingand
machine machine
plottedand
in
plotted
Excel. in Excel. Furthermore,
Furthermore, photographsphotographs are periodically
are periodically captured
captured to observe thetofailure
observe the fail-
behaviour
ure
at behaviour at aofdisplacement
a displacement 9.3 mm. of 9.3 mm.

Figure11.
Figure 11.Experimental
Experimentalprocedures:
procedures:(a)
(a)aaprepared
preparedspecimen;
specimen;(b)(b)uniaxial
uniaxialcompression
compressiontest
testwithin
within
the elastic–plastic region; and (c) uniaxial compression test at the failure.
the elastic–plastic region; and (c) uniaxial compression test at the failure.

3.3.Model
ModelValidation
Validationof ofthe
theSPSPUnit
UnitCell
CellModel
Model
Before
Beforedesigning
designing aaproposed
proposed novel
novel SPSPlattice
lattice model,
model, ititisisimportant
important to tofirst
firstvalidate
validate
the SP unit cell model. Thus, the validation of the SP unit cell model
the SP unit cell model. Thus, the validation of the SP unit cell model subjected to uniaxial subjected to uniaxial
compression
compressionisisconducted
conducted bybycomparing
comparing its numerical
its numerical predictions
predictions with with
experimental mea-
experimental
surements. To mimic the experimental boundary conditions, entire
measurements. To mimic the experimental boundary conditions, entire degrees of free- degrees of freedom of
the upper and bottom faces are constrained by tying them to rigid
dom of the upper and bottom faces are constrained by tying them to rigid plates in the plates in the compressive
simulation.
compressive Figure 12 illustrates
simulation. Figure representative
12 illustrates therepresentative
force–displacement curves of the com-
the force–displacement
pression
curves ofbehaviours of the SP
the compression unit cell between
behaviours of the SPthe unitFEA
cell predictions
between theand FEAthe experimental
predictions and
results. The results between numerical and experimental
the experimental results. The results between numerical and experimental datadata are in excellent agreement
are in ex-
within the elastic region. Nevertheless, there is a slight difference in the plastic region. This
cellent agreement within the elastic region. Nevertheless, there
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17 is a slight difference in the
might be an influence of specimen defects during manufacturing, which leads to a certain
plastic region. This might be an influence of specimen defects during manufacturing,
time interval for laying the next layer causing the change of properties. It is important to
which leads to a certain time interval for laying the next layer causing the change of prop-
mention
not availablethat, inofthis
because data paper, themight
errors which result of the third
be environmental experiment
disturbances duringis not available because of
erties.
the It is important to mention that, in this paper, the result of the third experiment is
testing.
data errors which might be environmental disturbances during the testing.

Figure 12. Comparison of force–displacement curves of the SP unit cell between numerical and ex-
Figure
perimental12. Comparison of force–displacement curves of the SP unit cell between numerical and
results.
experimental results.
4. Finite Element Modelling of a Proposed Novel SP Sandwich Lattice
Based on the previous results, it is likely to use a SP unit cell for a TPMS sandwich
lattice for bridge bearing applications. As a result, the proposed novel model of a 150 mm
× 100 mm × 50 mm SP sandwich lattice with at least six unit cell models was modelled
(Figure 13) and analysed for its mechanical behaviour compared to both behaviours of the
SP and elastomeric block unit cell model. To obtain the mechanical properties of the SP
lattice model, the Young’s modulus (Esp) and shear modulus (Gsp) of the schwarz primitive
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 Figure 12. Comparison of force–displacement curves of the SP unit cell between numerical10and
of 16
ex-
perimental results.

4.4.Finite
FiniteElement
ElementModelling
Modellingofofa aProposed
ProposedNovel NovelSP SPSandwich
SandwichLattice Lattice
Basedon
Based onthetheprevious
previous results,
results, it
it is
is likely
likely totouse
useaaSP SPunit
unitcell
cellforfor
a TPMS
a TPMS sandwich
sand-
lattice for bridge bearing applications. As a result, the proposed
wich lattice for bridge bearing applications. As a result, the proposed novel model novel model of a 150 mmof
a ×150
100mmmm × ×100
50 mm
mm×SP50sandwich lattice with
mm SP sandwich at least
lattice withsixat unit
least cell models
six unit cellwas modelled
models was
(Figure 13)
modelled and analysed
(Figure 13) and for its mechanical
analysed behaviour compared
for its mechanical behaviourtocompared
both behaviours
to bothofbe-the
SP and elastomeric
haviours of the SP and block unit cellblock
elastomeric model. unitTocell
obtain
model.the To
mechanical
obtain theproperties
mechanical of prop-
the SP
lattice
erties ofmodel,
the SP the Young’s
lattice model,modulus (Esp) and
the Young’s shear modulus
modulus (Esp ) and(G sp) ofmodulus
shear the schwarz (Gspprimitive
) of the
sandwich
schwarz lattice model
primitive sandwich were obtained
lattice modelfrom werethe slopes of
obtained fromstress–strain
the slopes relationships
of stress–strain for
uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear, respectively.
relationships for uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear, respectively. In In terms of Pois-
son’sof
terms ratio (Vsp), longitudinal
Poisson’s and transverse
ratio (Vsp ), longitudinal and displacement were obtainedwere
transverse displacement fromobtained
the com-
pression
from sandwich lattice
the compression sandwichmodel. Additionally,
lattice the computation
model. Additionally, time required
the computation to run a
time required
tosimulation
run a simulation
for theforSPthe SP sandwich
sandwich latticelattice
modelmodelis moreis more
than than
that that required
required for the
for the SP
SP unit
unit
cellcell
oneone
duedue togreater
to its its greater number
number of FEofmeshes.
FE meshes. The The results
results of the ofSPthelattice
SP lattice
model model
simu-
simulations
lations are are discussed
discussed in the
in the following
following section.
section.

Figure 13. Full-FEA simulations of the proposed novel sandwich lattice model under uniaxial com-
Figure 13. Full-FEA simulations of the proposed novel sandwich lattice model under uniaxial
pression and combined compression–shear loading.
compression and combined compression–shear loading.

5. Results and Discussion

Considering the high performance to weight ratio of the schwarz primitive (SP) unit
cell model, the mechanical behaviours of the proposed SP unit cell model under uniaxial
compression and combined compression–shear loading were observed and compared to
that of the elastomeric block unit cell model, which is commonly known as a rubber unit
cell block structure used for a rubber layer. The data collection section shows the compar-
ison of the mechanical responses between a SP unit cell model and an elastomeric block
unit cell model as force–displacement curves under uniaxial compression and combined
compression–shear loading. It was found that the SP unit cell model appears preferable
for use as a sandwich lattice for bridge bearing applications. This is because it can better
perform in the horizontal direction, as presented in Figure 10. However, this SP unit cell
model has less stiffness in the vertical direction when compared to the other model due to
its low stiffness to volume fraction ratio. The combination of at least six unit cells used as
a SP lattice can eliminate this drawback by increasing the vertical stiffness discussed in the
following part.
To validate the design and manufacturing of a proposed novel SP lattice, a unit cell
FEA model was developed for specimens for uniaxial compression. This unit cell model
was compared with experimental measurements. The force–displacement relationships
obtained from the SP unit cell model (red solid circles) and the two 3D-printed SP specimens
(blue and green solid circles) are together in Figure 12. Additionally, it was found that the
compressive failure of the SP unit cell is likely to be elastic–plastic due to the geometries,
relative density, and material properties. It is clear that the model validation of the SP unit
cell model under uniaxial compression observed is excellent within the elastic region and
good within the plastic region until the failure point of the structure. It is attributed to
 model, respectively. However, the maximum shear force of the SP sandwich lattice model
at the 10 mm combined compression–shear displacement is more than 1.4 and 18 than that
of the elastomeric block unit cell model and the SP unit cell model, respectively. Moreover,
among these three structure models, the SP sandwich lattice model exhibits the highest
energy absorption per volume after a strain of 0.04 due to the highest strength per weight
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 11 of 16
ratio.
With regard to the mechanical properties of the SP sandwich lattice, its stress–strain
curves under uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear loading are ob-
this unit
tained cell the
from modelFEAthat its proposed
simulations and material modelare
the properties developed
calculatedin from
this research
the slopes forofa the
SP
lattice
curves.used as1bridge
Table gives thebearing
threeismechanical
acceptableproperties
under uniaxial
of thecompression. It is important
SP sandwich lattice model and to
mention that in this paper the only compression tests for model validation
Figure 18a,b show its stress–strain curves under compression and combined compres- were conducted
because
sion–sheara SPloading,
unit cellrespectively.
model using The any material
Young’s or composite
modulus material
of the properties
SP sandwich first model
lattice needs
to be considered on the compressive behaviour as a bridge bearing
is 1.4 times higher than the shear modulus—and the design requirements of a typicalto support the weight
of a bridge
bridge superstructure.
bearing have less shear Thismodulus—but
means that this unit Young’s
a high cell model is needed
modulus needsto beto further
experi-
developed either
ence/facilitate in itsdisplacements.
lateral geometry design or alternative
Additionally, material
Figure properties.
19 presents the uniform stress
In addition,
distribution of the thecombined
stress distribution of the SP behaviour
compression–shear unit cell model
of theisSP better than that
sandwich of
lattice
the elastomeric block one. As such, the uniform stress distribution
model. Surprisingly, the compressive behaviour is likely to be typically bending-domi- of the SP unit cell
model occurs rather
nated according than random stress distribution in the other one, which can avoid
to [38].
the concentrated stresses
As previously mentioned, shown inattributed
it is Figure 14.toTherefore,
the proposedthe novel
finite 3D-printed
element analysisSP sand- of
a large-scale model for a SP lattice structure is able to capture the mechanical response and
wich lattice model that it is the best performer used as an unbonded bridge bearing under
energy abruption of a lattice structure under combined compression–shear loading and
both uniaxial compression and combined compress-shear loading. This novel lattice must
uniaxial compression, respectively. Then, as previously mentioned, the proposed novel
be a combination of at least six SP unit cell models in order to improve its mechanical
SP sandwich lattice model under the two loading conditions is run for determining its
properties and replace the elastomeric layers used in common bride bearing.
mechanical properties and energy absorption.

Figure (a)Uniform
Figure 14. (a) Uniformandand(b)(b)random
randomstress
stress distribution
distribution of of
thethe combined
combined compression–shear
compression–shear be-
haviours ofof
behaviours the SPSP
the unit cell
unit model
cell model and the
and theelastomeric
elastomericblock
blockunit cell
unit model,
cell respectively.
model, respectively.

In terms of the performance of the proposed novel SP sandwich lattice model with
at least six SP unit cell models under both the identical loading conditions for bridge
bearing applications, Figures 15 and 16 present the comparative force–displacement curves
of the uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear behaviour of the SP unit
cell model, the SP sandwich lattice model, and the elastomeric block unit cell model,
respectively. Furthermore, the comparative specific energy absorption per volume curves
of all three models are shown in Figure 17. The maximum compressive force of the SP unit
cell model is 33 kN at a displacement of 9.3 mm, whilst under combined compression–shear
loading, the maximum shear force is 6.6 kN at a displacement of 10 mm. Its failure modes
under both loading conditions are elastic–plastic and hysteretic.
It is obvious that the SP sandwich lattice model with at least six SP unit cell models
provides more vertical stiffness and shows flexible behaviour under both uniaxial compres-
sion and combined compression–shear loading condition, respectively. Additionally, the
compression force of the SP sandwich lattice model at the yield point is more than 1.5 and
6 times higher than that of the elastomeric block unit cell model and the SP unit cell model,
respectively. However, the maximum shear force of the SP sandwich lattice model at the
10 mm combined compression–shear displacement is more than 1.4 and 18 than that of the
elastomeric block unit cell model and the SP unit cell model, respectively. Moreover, among
these three structure models, the SP sandwich lattice model exhibits the highest energy
absorption per volume after a strain of 0.04 due to the highest strength per weight ratio.
J.J.
J.Compos. Sci.
J.Compos.
Compos.
Compos. 2022,
Sci.
Sci.
Sci. 6,6,
2022,
2022,
2022, 6,x6,x71
FOR
xFORPEER
FOR REVIEW
PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 13
12
13ofof
13 17
ofof
16
1717

250
250
250

200
200
200 SP
SPunit
SP cell
unit
unit cell
cell

150
150
150 Elastomeric
Elastomeric
Elastomeric
Force (kN)
(kN)
block
blockunit
unit
Force(kN)
100
100
100
block
cell
cell
unit
cell
SPSP
SP
Force

sandwich
sandwich
sandwich
5050
50 lattice
lattice
lattice
000
000 222 444 666 888 1010
10
Displacement
Displacement
Displacement (mm)
(mm)
(mm)
Figure
Figure15.
Figure15.
15.Force–displacement
15.Force–displacement
Force–displacementcurves
Force–displacementcurves
curvesofof
curves all
ofof
allthree
all
all three
threemodels
threemodels
modelssubjected
modelssubjected
subjectedtoto
subjected touniaxial
touniaxial
uniaxialcompression
uniaxial loading.
compression
compression
compression loading.
loading.
loading.

6060
60

4040
40

2020
20
Force (kN)
(kN)

SP unit
SP cell
unit cell
Force(kN)

SP unit cell
000
Force

-15
-15
-15 -10
-10
-10 -5-5-5 000 555 1010
10 1515
15
-20
-20 SPSP
SP
-20
sandwich
sandwich
sandwich
-40
-40 lattice
lattice
lattice
-40
Elastomeric
Elastomeric
Elastomeric
-60
-60
-60 block
blockunit
unit
Displacment
Displacment(mm)
(mm) block unit
Displacment (mm) cell
cell
cell
Figure
Figure
Figure 16.
16.16. Force–displacement
Force–displacement
Force–displacement curves
curves
curves ofall
ofofof
all all
threethree models
models
three subjected
subjected
models tototo
subjected to combined
combined compression–
compression–shear
combined compression–shear
Figure 16. Force–displacement curves all three models subjected combined compression–shear
shear loading.
loading.
loading.
loading.

888

777
(J/mm3) x 10-5-5
10-5
energy (J/mm3)xx10

666
Specific energy(J/mm3)

555

444 SP unit
SP cell
unit cell
Specificenergy

SP unit cell
333
Elastomeric
Elastomeric
Elastomeric
Specific

222 block
blockunit
blockunitcell
unit cell
cell
SPSP
SP sandwich
sandwich
sandwich
111
lattice
lattice
lattice
000
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.01
0.01
0.01 0.02
0.02
0.02 0.03
0.03
0.03 0.04
0.04
0.04 0.05
0.05
0.05 0.06
0.06
0.06 0.07
0.07
0.07
Strain
Strain
Strain
Figure
Figure 17.
17. Energy
Energy absorption
absorption per
per volume
volume ofof
of allall
three models subjected to
totouniaxial compression loading.
Figure
Figure 17.
17. Energy
Energy absorption
absorption per
per volume
volume ofall
allthree
three models
three
models subjected
models subjected
subjected uniaxial
to compression
uniaxial
uniaxial compression
compression load-
load-
load-
ing.
ing.
ing.
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 13 of 16

With regard to the mechanical properties of the SP sandwich lattice, its stress–strain
curves under uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear loading are ob-
tained from the FEA simulations and the properties are calculated from the slopes of the
curves. Table 1 gives the three mechanical properties of the SP sandwich lattice model and
Figure 18a,b show its stress–strain curves under compression and combined compression–
shear loading, respectively. The Young’s modulus of the SP sandwich lattice model
is 1.4 times higher than the shear modulus—and the design requirements of a typical
bridge bearing have less shear modulus—but a high Young’s modulus needs to experi-
ence/facilitate lateral displacements. Additionally, Figure 19 presents the uniform stress
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 17
distribution of the combined compression–shear behaviour of the SP sandwich lattice
model. Surprisingly, the compressive behaviour is likely to be typically bending-dominated
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, x FOR PEER according
REVIEW to [38]. 14 of 17
Table 1. Mechanical properties of the proposed novel SP sandwich lattice model subjected to com-
bined1.compression–shear
Table loading.
Mechanical properties of the proposed novel SP sandwich lattice model subjected to
combined compression–shear
Table 1. Mechanical properties loading.
of the proposedShear
novel Modulus,
SP sandwich lattice model subjected to com-
Young’s Modulus, Poisson’s Ratio, Total Absorption
Proposed
bined Material
compression–shear loading.
Esp (MPa) Gsp (MPa) Vsp Energy (J)
Young’s Modulus, Shear Modulus, Total Absorption
Proposed Material UV resin 213.56 Poisson’s
153.33 Ratio, Vsp 0.36 2,153.97
Esp (MPa) Material Young’s
Proposed Gsp Modulus,
(MPa) Shear Modulus, Poisson’s Ratio, Total Absorption
Energy (J)
Esp (MPa) Gsp (MPa) Vsp Energy (J)
UV resin 213.56
UV resin 153.33
213.56 153.33 0.36 0.36 2153.97
2,153.97

Figure
Figure18.
Figure 18. Representative
18.Representative
Representative stress–strain
stress–strain
stress–strain curvescurves
curves of
of theof theproposed
the proposed
proposed novel
novel
novel SP SPSP sandwich
sandwich
sandwich lattice lattice
lattice
model model
model
sub- sub-
subjected
jected to to
(a) (a) uniaxial
uniaxial compression
compression and and
(b) (b)
combinedcombined compression–shear
compression–shear loading, loading, respectively.
respectively.
jected to (a) uniaxial compression and (b) combined compression–shear loading, respectively.

Figure 19. Uniform stress distribution of the combined compression–shear behaviour of the pro-
posed novel SP sandwich lattice model.
Figure 19. Uniform stress distribution of the combined compression–shear behaviour of the pro-
Figure 19. Uniform stress distribution of the combined compression–shear behaviour of the proposed
6. Conclusions
posed novel SP sandwich lattice model.
novel SP sandwich lattice model.
In this research, a proposed novel TPMS sandwich lattice model with schwarz prim-
6. Conclusions
itive (SP) unit cell models using a 3D-printed material (UV resin) for meta-functional com-
positeInbridge bearing (MFCBB)
this research, applications
a proposed was developed
novel TPMS sandwichtolattice
definemodel
its mechanical ma-
with schwarz prim-
terial properties and the failure modes of the uniaxial compression and combined com-
itive (SP) unit cell models using a 3D-printed material (UV resin) for meta-functional com-
pression–shear behaviour with the help of the SP and elastomeric block unit cell model.
posite bridge bearing (MFCBB) applications was developed to define its mechanical ma-
Firstly, three samples of the SP unit cell were designed and fabricated using SLA; then, an
terial properties and the failure modes of the uniaxial compression and combined com-
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 14 of 16

As previously mentioned, it is attributed to the proposed novel 3D-printed SP sand-

wich lattice model that it is the best performer used as an unbonded bridge bearing under
both uniaxial compression and combined compress-shear loading. This novel lattice must
be a combination of at least six SP unit cell models in order to improve its mechanical
properties and replace the elastomeric layers used in common bride bearing.

6. Conclusions
In this research, a proposed novel TPMS sandwich lattice model with schwarz prim-
itive (SP) unit cell models using a 3D-printed material (UV resin) for meta-functional
composite bridge bearing (MFCBB) applications was developed to define its mechani-
cal material properties and the failure modes of the uniaxial compression and combined
compression–shear behaviour with the help of the SP and elastomeric block unit cell model.
Firstly, three samples of the SP unit cell were designed and fabricated using SLA; then,
an elastomeric block unit cell model was designed for the comparative numerical results
between both two-unit cell models. These were investigated for their behaviours under
uniaxial compression and combined compression–shear loading. Subsequently, the model
validation of the numerical predictions of a SP unit cell compared to the experimental
results was conducted under conditions of uniaxial compression. The results of the model
validation are in excellent agreement within the elastic region.
In addition to the experimental results recorded herein, the compressive mechanical
behaviour of the SP unit cell using the UV resin begins with a linear stress–strain dominated
by the bending of structs, followed by a long collapse plateau related to the formation
of being based on the plastic hinges, brittle crushing, or materials, and ending with the
opposing structs touching each other and resulting in densification. The effect of the layer
collapse is not observed because its geometry has only one layer as the total height of
a typical bridge bearing for Thailand, and highway bridges should not be higher than
45 mm in height [41]. Unlike the SP lattice model, the whole height of the model is slightly
more than that of the conventional Thailand bridge bearing, but this can be ignored as
its volume fraction sufficiently high to obtain more vertical stiffness under compression.
A proposed novel SP sandwich lattice FEA model is then considered to determine its
mechanical material properties. Finally, the major conclusions are as follows:
• The mechanical response of a SP unit cell model under combined compression–shear
loading is superior to that of an elastomeric block unit cell model, but it needs an
increase in vertical stiffness under uniaxial compression by combining at least six SP
unit cell models used as a SP sandwich lattice.
• During the testing, the three SP unit cell specimens fail in compression at a displace-
ment of 9.3 mm and their failure behaviour is elastic–plastic due to the geometries,
relative density, and material properties.
• The failure mode of the SP unit cell model under combined compression–shear loading
is identified as a hysteretic behaviour at a displacement of 10 mm.
• The proposed novel SP sandwich lattice model exhibits the highest peak force and
specific energy absorption under uniaxial compression at a displacement of 9.3 mm.
However, under combined compression–shear loading, it still performs well with the
highest peak shear force at a displacement of 10 mm.
• The stress–strain curve of this proposed lattice model under uniaxial compression loading
condition is likely a typical bending-dominated one based on a Gibson–Ashby model.
• For bridge bearing applications, this proposed novel lattice model under compression-
shear loading is likely to be stiff in the vertical direction and flexible in the horizontal
one, in order to support the superstructure weight and accommodate horizontal
displacements, respectively.
The findings in this paper show that a proposed novel schwarz primitive (SP) sandwich
lattice model with at least six SP unit cell models can meet the mechanical responses
and specific energy absorption under combined compression and uniaxial compression,
respectively, as a common elastomeric unit cell requires these properties for bridge bearing
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 15 of 16

applications. Additionally, it was found that the computational time and simulation speed
of a SP sandwich lattice model can be significantly reduced from several hours to a couple
of minutes. According to the results of this paper, this proposed novel SP sandwich
lattice model can be considered a promising alternative for meta-functional composite
bridge bearings with a high-performance to density ratio. In future work, we will further
investigate the mechanical responses and energy absorption of sheet-based or double TPMS
sandwich lattice models, in order to determine their material properties and stress–strain
curves under the same loading conditions.

Author Contributions: Conceptualisation, S.K.; methodology, S.K.; software, S.K.; validation, P.S., H.F.;
formal analysis, P.S.; investigation, S.K., P.S.; resources, S.K.; writing—original draft preparation, P.S.;
writing—review and editing, S.K.; visualisation, P.S.; supervision, S.K.; project administration, S.K.;
funding acquisition, S.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the European Commission, grant number: H2020-MSCA-RISE
No. 691135.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data that support the findings of this study are available from the
corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments: The first author wishes to thank the Royal Thai Government for his Scholarship
at the University of Birmingham. The last author wishes to gratefully acknowledge the Japan
Society for Promotion of Science (JSPS) for his JSPS Invitation Research Fellowship (long term),
Grant No. L15701, at the Track Dynamics Laboratory, Railway Technical Research Institute and at
Concrete Laboratory, the University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. The JSPS financially supported this
work as part of the research project entitled “Smart and reliable railway infra-structure”. Special
thanks are given to the European Commission for H2020-MSCA-RISE Project No. 691135 “RIS-EN:
Rail Infrastructure Systems Engineering Network” (www.risen2rail.eu), accessed 16 August 2021.
Partial support from H2020 Shift2Rail Project No. 730849 (S-Code) is acknowledged. In addition, the
sponsorships and assistance from LORAM, Network Rail, RSSB (Rail Safety and Standard Board, UK)
are highly appreciated.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Naeim, F.; Kelly, J. Design of Seismic Isolated Structures: From Theory to Practice; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1999.
2. Lee, D.J. Bridge Bearings and Expansion Joints; E & FN Spon: London, UK, 1994.
3. Al-Anany, Y.; Tait, M. Fiber-reinforced elastomeric isolators for the seismic isolation of bridges. Compos. Struc. 2016, 160, 300–311.
[CrossRef]
4. Constantinou, M.; Kalpakidis, I.; Filiatrault, A.; Ecker, L.R. LRFD-Based Analysis and Design Procedures for Bridge Bearings and
Seismic Isolators. Report No. MCEER-11e0004; Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research: Buffalo, NY, USA;
University at Buffalo: Buffalo, NY, USA; State University of New York: Buffalo, New York, NY, USA, 2011.
5. Al-Anany, Y. Fiber Reinforced Elastomeric Isolators for Bridge Applications. Ph.D. Thesis, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON,
Cananda, 2016.
6. Sengsri, P.; Kaewunruen, S. Additive manufacturing meta-functional composites for engineered bridge bearings: A review.
Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 262, 120535. [CrossRef]
7. AASHTO. LRFD Bridge Design Specifications; American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials: Washington,
DC, USA, 2012.
8. Ramberger, G. Structural Bearings and Expansion Joints for Bridges; International Association for Bridges and Structural Engineering
(IABSE): Zurich, Switzerland, 2002.
9. Kelly, J.; Konstantinidis, D. Mechanics of Rubber Bearings for Seismic and Vibration Isolation; Wiley: Chichester, UK, 2011.
10. Yasser, M.; Al-Anany, Y.; Michael, J.T. Experimental assessment of utilizing fiber reinforced elastomeric isolators as bearings for
bridge applications. Compos. Part B Eng. 2017, 114, 373–385. [CrossRef]
11. Al-Anany, Y.; Tait, M. A Study on the Rotational Behaviour of Bonded and Unbonded Fiber Reinforced Elastomeric Isolators.
In Proceedings of the 11th Canadian Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Victoria, BC, Canada, 21–24 July 2015.
12. Al-Anany, Y.; Tait, M. A numerical study on the compressive and rotational behavior of fiber reinforced elastomeric isolators
(FREI). Compos. Struct. 2015, 133, 1249–1266. [CrossRef]
J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 71 16 of 16

13. Osgooei, P. Advanced Numerical Modeling of Fiber-Reinforced Elastomeric Isolators (FREIs). Ph.D. Thesis, McMaster University,
Hamilton, ON, Canada, 2014.
14. Toopchi-Nezhad, H.; Tait, M.; Drysdale, R. Bonded versus unbonded strip fiber reinforced elastomeric isolators: Finite element
analysis. Compos Struct. 2011, 93, 850–859. [CrossRef]
15. Sengsri, P.; Kaewunruen, S. Local Failure Modes and Critical Buckling Loads of a Meta-Functional Auxetic Sandwich Core for
Composite Bridge Bearing Applications. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 10844. [CrossRef]
16. Schoen, H. Infinite Periodic Minimal Surfaces without Selfintersections. NASA TN D-5541; National Aeronautics and Space Adminis-
tration: Washington, DC, USA, 1970.
17. Schwarz, H.A. Gesammelte Mathematische Abhandlungen; American Mathematical Soc.: New York, NY, USA, 1972.
18. Sajadi, S.M.; Owuor, P.S.; Schara, S.; Woellner, C.F.; Rodrigues, V.; Vajtai, R.; Lou, J.; Galvão, D.S.; Tiwary, C.S.; Ajayan, P.M.
Multiscale geometric design principles applied to 3D printed schwarzites. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 1704820. [CrossRef]
19. Sun, G.Y.; Jiang, H.; Fang, J.G.; Li, G.Y.; Li, Q. Crashworthiness of vertex based hierarchical honeycombs in out-of-plane impact.
Mater. Des. 2016, 110, 705–719. [CrossRef]
20. Yang, Y.; Song, X.; Li, X.; Chen, Z.; Zhou, C.; Zhou, Q.; Chen, Y. Recent progress in biomimetic additive manufacturing technology:
From materials to functional structures. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 1706539. [CrossRef]
21. Yan, C.; Hao, L.; Hussein, A.; Raymont, D. Evaluations of cellular lattice structures manufactured using selective laser melting.
Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 2012, 62, 32–38. [CrossRef]
22. Yan, C.; Hao, L.; Hussein, A.; Young, P. Ti-6Al-4V triply periodic minimal surface structures for bone implants fabricated via
selective laser melting. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 2015, 51, 61–73. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Yan, C.; Hao, L.; Hussein, A.; Young, P.; Raymont, D. Advanced lightweight 316L stainless steel cellular lattice structures
fabricated via selective laser melting. Mater. Des. 2014, 55, 533–541. [CrossRef]
24. Mazur, M.; Leary, M.; Sun, S.; Vcelka, M.; Shidid, D.; Brandt, M. Deformation and failure behaviour of Ti-6Al-4V lattice structures
manufactured by selective laser melting (SLM). Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016, 84, 1391–1411. [CrossRef]
25. Al-Ketan, O.; Adel Assad, M.; Abu Al-Rub, R.K. Mechanical properties of periodic interpenetrating phase composites with novel
architected microstructures. Compos. Struct. 2017, 176, 9–19. [CrossRef]
26. Smith, M.; Guan, Z.; Cantwell, W.J. Finite element modelling of the compressive response of lattice structures manufactured
using the selective laser melting technique. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2013, 67, 28–41. [CrossRef]
27. Zhang, L.; Feih, S.; Daynes, S.; Chang, S.; Wang, M.Y.; Wei, J.; Lu, W.F. Energy absorption characteristics of metallic triply periodic
minimal surface sheet structures under compressive loading. Addit. Manuf. 2018, 23, 505–515. [CrossRef]
28. Aremu, A.O.; Maskery, I.; Tuck, C.A. Comparative finite element study of cubic unit cells for selective laser melting.
Self-supporting unit cells. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Solid Freeform Fabrication Symposium, Coventry, UK,
4–6 August 2014; pp. 1238–1249.
29. Selo, R.R.J.; Catchpole-Smith, S.; Maskery, I.; Ashcroft, I.; Tuck, C. On the thermal conductivity of AlSi10Mg and lattice structures
made by laser powder bed fusion. Addit. Manuf. 2020, 34, 101214. [CrossRef]
30. Simsek, U.; Arslan, T.; Kavas, B.; Gayir, C.E.; Sendur, P. Parametric studies on vibration characteristics of triply periodic minimum
surface sandwich lattice structures. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 115, 675–690. [CrossRef]
31. Habib, F.N.; Iovenitti, P.; Masood, S.H.; Nikazad, M. Cell geometry effect on in-plane energy absorption of periodic honeycomb
structures. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Tecnol. 2018, 94, 2369–2380. [CrossRef]
32. Sarvestani, H.Y.; Akbarzadeh, A.H.; Niknam, H.; Hermenean, K. 3D printed architected polymeric sandwich panels: Energy
absorption and structural performance. Compos. Struct. 2018, 200, 886–909. [CrossRef]
33. Sugiyama, K.; Matsuzaki, R.; Ueda, M.; Todoroki, A.; Hirano, Y. 3D printing of composite sandwich structures using continuous
carbon fiber and fiber tension. Compos. Part A-Appl. S. 2018, 113, 114–121. [CrossRef]
34. Ling, C.; Cernicchi, A.; Gilchrist, M.D.; Cardiff, P. Mechanical behaviour of additively-manufactured polymeric octet-truss lattice
structures under quasi-static and dynamic compressive loading. Mater. Des. 2019, 162, 106–118. [CrossRef]
35. Abueidda, D.W.; Elhebeary, M.; Shiang, C.S.; Pang, S.Y.; Abu, A.; Jasiuk, I.M. Mechanical properties of 3D printed polymeric
gyroid cellular structures: Experimental and finite element study. Mater. Des. 2019, 165, 107597. [CrossRef]
36. Askarinejad, S.; Choshali, H.A.; Flavin, C.; Rahbar, N. Effects of tablet waviness on the mechanical response of architected
multilayered materials: Modeling and experiment. Compos. Struct. 2018, 195, 118–125. [CrossRef]
37. Sang, L.; Han, S.; Peng, X.; Jian, X.; Wang, J. Development of 3D-printed basalt fiber reinforced thermoplastic honeycombs with
enhanced compressive mechanical properties. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2019, 125, 105518. [CrossRef]
38. Ashby, M.F.; Medalist, R.M. The mechanical properties of cellular solids. Metall. Trans. 1983, 14, 1755–1769. [CrossRef]
39. Triply Periodic Level Surfaces, Archived. 2019. Available online: http://www.msri.org/publications/sgp/jim/geom/level/
library/triper/index.html (accessed on 28 August 2021).
40. Abaqus CAE User’s Guide; DS Simulia Abaqus: Providence, RI, USA, 2017.
41. Standard Drawings for Highway Design and Construction 2015 Revision, Thai Version. 2015. BP-102. Available online:
http://www.doh.go.th/uploads/tinymce/service/bid/doc_bid/STANDARD%20DRAWING%202015%20EDITION_2018.pdf
(accessed on 18 December 2021).