Comparison of aluminium sandwiches for lightweight ship structures: Honeycomb vs. foam

By Vincenzo Crupi, G. Epasto, Eugenio Guglielmino. 2013

234 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Mechanical Engineering, Mechanics of Materials

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/eb8b3a5200623e0e05c05699170e0fe4470ac819

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Mechanical Engineering

1. G. Epasto
2. Vincenzo Crupi
3. G. Palomba
4. Quanjin Ma
5. Zhongwei Guan
6. J. Siregar
7. M. Rejab

In Mechanics of Materials

1. Vincenzo Crupi
2. G. Epasto
3. G. Palomba
4. Zhongwei Guan
5. M. Rejab

Citations in the corpus

• Lightweight sandwich structures for marine applications: a review (2021, background): “AA 5754 AA 5052 9 1 3–6 [39, 40] Steel-Al honeycomb AISI 304 Al series 3000 5 12 0.”
• Crushing behavior of honeycomb structure: a review (2019, background): “Moreover, it has higher resistance against crush load than foam structures [8,9].”
• A review of the recent trends on core structures and impact response of sandwich panels (2021, background): “Aluminium foam sandwich (AFS), fabricated by combination the two metal face sheets and a lightweight metallic foam core, which provide peculiar properties such as low specific weight, high impact strength, thermal insulation, and efficient capacity of energy dissipation.(76,77) It is interesting met”