Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr
A short review of molecularly inspired strut-based metal lattice structures
N Shivakumar a, b, T Ramesh a, *, S. Muthukumaran c
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu 620 015, India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Periyar Maniammai Institute of Science & Technology (Deemed to be University), Thanjavur, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University College of Engineering, Panruti, Cuddalore District, Tamil Nadu, India
b
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords:
Additive manufacturing
Multi-cell structure
Porous structure
Lattices
Mechanical performance
Load-resilient porous materials are highly useful in aerospace, biomedical, automobile, and mechanical engi­
neering applications. Crystals have an ordered and repeated arrangement of atoms as lattice structures with unit
cells as fundamental building blocks. Unit cells such as SC, BCC, FCC, diamond, and HCP are often found in
molecular-based lattice structures. Mimicking these lattice structures at the macro level could yield unique
material properties. Rapid progress in additive manufacturing has made it possible to design and fabricate
molecularly inspired structures at the macroscale. Metal lattice structures (MLSs) are intricately shaped,
molecularly inspired, lattice structures that are porous and possess mechanical strength. Moreover, there are
different types of MLSs, such as shell-based, strut-based, hollow-strut-based, plate-based, and TPMS-based
structures. This review focusses on recent improvements in strut-based MLSs, specifically hybrid MLSs based
on SC, BCC, FCC, diamond, and other molecular lattice-based structures, and the yield strength of these lattice
structures.
1. Introduction
1.1. Recent work on molecularly inspired, strut-based MLSs
Many porous structures are available in both natural and synthetic
forms. Metallic porous structures can be classified according to regu­
larity (regular or irregular), dimensionality (2D or 3D), structure (strut
or surface), type (solid, hollow or shell-based), or node reinforcement
(node reinforced or strut-based) [1]. Strut-based metal lattice structures
(MLSs) can be divided into solid-strut-based and hollow-strut-based
lattice structures, node-reinforced structures, and combinations of
node-reinforced and hollow-strut structures. In recent years, the focus of
experiments on strut-based MLSs has been mainly on determining
compressive strength and energy absorption. These values were ob­
tained through various testing methods, such as quasi-static compres­
sion. Other mechanical performance tests include tensile, dynamic and
fatigue tests. The primary cellular configurations in these structures are
simple cubic (SC) [2–5], body-centred cubic (BCC) [6–10], face-centred
cubic [2,8,11,12], edge-centred cubic (ECC) [12], octahedron [13],
double pyramid dodecahedron [14], rhombic dodecahedron [15–18],
tetrakaidecahedron [3,10], and diamond [10,15]. This review consid­
ered molecularly inspired MLSs: SC, BCC, FCC, diamond, Fluorite and
Kelvin.
Primarily, MLS samples were fabricated using the SLM process,
sandwiched between two identical metallic plates, and then analysed
using a quasi-static compression test at a 0.5 mm/min strain rate. The
lattice structures discussed in this study were tested using a quasi-static
compression test. Typically, samples were fabricated with at least three
replicas [19]. During quasi-static compression, the MLS undergoes
various types of deformation in different zones. Under dynamic loading
conditions, certain BCC-based MLSs exhibit the bending-based defor­
mation behaviour of the struts, FCC metal lattice structures exhibit
stretching-based deformation, while others exhibit a combination of
stretching and bending during compression [20]. Certain nodereinforced BCC MLS exhibit sudden plastic deformation [19], and
some of the MLSs experience oscillations in stress values after the yield
point [21]. As a result, local densification, which increases in size as
compression proceeds, is often observed in specific MLS regions. In
addition, certain hybrid MLSs reinforced with nodes exhibit uniform
densification [22] as compression progresses, which reduces the size of
the lattice structures, resulting in increased stress levels. The area under
the stress–strain curve is defined as energy absorption (MJ/mm3), which
is also measured similarly for most MLSs. A higher energy absorption
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tramesh@nitt.edu (T. Ramesh).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2024.05.080
Received 14 March 2024; Received in revised form 10 May 2024; Accepted 13 May 2024
2214-7853/© 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 3rd International Conference
on Materials Science and Engineering.
Please cite this article as: N Shivakumar et al., Materials Today: Proceedings, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2024.05.080
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 1. Variations in the unit cell design of SC-based MLSs.
value is preferable for structural applications. Molecularly inspired
simple cubic MLSs based on simple struts are primitive lattice structures
that are simple in design and fabrication. Struts are often positioned
vertically or horizontally without any inclination angles, which in­
creases the difficulty of fabrication using the SLM technique. SC, BCC,
FCC, and diamond-based MLSs with different design variations were
named based on the base lattice structure.
The SC MLS coupled with the BCC MLS results in a hybrid lattice
structure called SC-BCC. Similarly, SC coupled with Octet MLS is called
SC-Octet. SC rectangular truss connected using snap-fitting method re­
sults in MLSs called SC-snap-fit1, SC-snap-fit2. The SC MLS is centred
inside an octagonal MLS called SC-Octagonal. SC MLS is based on a strut
coupled to plate-like structures, resulting in SC-Plate. SC MLSs with
curved struts are called SC-curved MLSs. The strut-based hollow SC MLS
is reinforced with four plates around the strut axis, resulting in three
design variations. The plates could be arranged at the periphery of the
strut, called SC-hollow-node-out; plates that are entirely inside the
hollow strut are called SC-hollow-node-in, and plates that are partially
placed both inside and outside of the strut were named SC-hollow-nodemix. SC MLS has a hollow rectangular strut called SC-hollow-rect. SC
MLSs with curved struts inspired by catenary architecture were named
SC-arch. SC lattice structure with smooth strut was named SC-smooth.
2
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Table 1
SC lattice structures and materials.
SC-Type
Fabrication
process
Strut Dia.
(mm)
Strut
Length
(mm)
Lattice Size
(mm)
Loading Method
Load Type
Energy
absorption
MJ/m3
Applications
Materials
(Refs.)
SC-Octet
SC-BCC
SLM
10–100
NA
3,4.5,6 and
10
Uniaxial tensile
displacement
Quasi-static,
simulations
–
SS316L
[23]
SC-Octagonal
(hybrid)
LPBF
1.0753
<10 mm
10,50
Uniaxial
compression
Simulated
compression
SC
(cylindrical
strut and
plate)
SC-BCC
High-precision
SLM
0.5 mm
0.2 mm for
BCC-P
NA
Around 15
Uniaxial
compression
Compression
Titanium alloy
sheets cut and
assembled,
vacuum brazing
NA
Around
15
Around 45
Uniaxial
compression
(10^-3 s− 1)
Compression
HS2 better in
energy
absorption
EA (not
available),
SEA = 16.3
to 18.3 J/g.
1.5–3.5
SC (curved
beam)
Selective electron
beam melting
NA
0.57
55 × 25 × 25
Compression
–
SC-hollownodereinforcedin, mix, out
PBF
NA
Cell
repetitions 2
× 2 × 2, 4 ×
4 × 4, and 7
×7×7
Compression
NA
Ultra lightweight
energy
absorptive
components.
Ti-6Al-4V
[27]
SC (hollow
strut)
Dip coating 3D
printed polymer
with metal particle
suspension and
sintering
1.73, Strut
with plates,
thickness
0.89 mm
wide and
0.36 mm
thick
1
Hydro
compression
between two
plates
Uniaxial
compression
using MTS 250
kN
Functional
engineering in
aerospace,
automobile and
biomedical
Aerospace,
automobile and
marine vessels
Aerospace,
Automobile and
construction
industries.
Lightweight loadbearing
applications in
aerospace,
energy
absorption
applications
Impact
engineering with
blast protection
1
8×8×7
Quasi-static
compression
Compression
NA
Metal oxide
(CuO,
Cu2O,
Fe2O3) [28]
SC-BCC
(Delaunay)
Additive
manufacturing
NA
0.5
NA
Quasi-static
compression at
10-4 s− 1
Compression
NA
SC (catenary
arched
strut)
SLM under argon
environment,
samples heat
treated
SLM using
Renishaw AM250
SLM system with
AlSi7Mg powder.
3D printing
Around 2 µm
NA,
curved
16 µm
Uniaxial
compression
Compression
NA
Tissue
engineering
scaffolds, thermal
insulation, hightemperature
filtration
Automobile,
protective sports
equipment,
aerospace
Load bearing
applications
0.6
2.4
9.6 × 9.6 ×
9.6
Fatigue test
Cyclic loadinginduced fatigue
test
NA
Aerospace
AlSi7Mg
[30]
1.5–3
10–50
60 × 12 × 12
Compression,
tension
0.5–1.5
Sandwich
structures in
aerospace
Ceramics
[31]
snap-fit and
vacuum brazing
processes
Around 1
20
35
Compressive
test at 1 mm/
min and tensile
test 5 mm/min.
Compressive at
10-3 s− 1
Compression
NA
Lightweight loadbearing
applications
suitable for Ti
alloy
Ti-6Al-4V
[32]
SC-BCC, SC8FCC
SC (smooth
strut, node,
plated)
SC-Snapfit1,2
SC MLSs with FCC lead to different variations named SC8-FCC. SC MLSs
represented as Tesseract were named SC-Tesseract. All SC MLSs are
illustrated in Fig. 1 and are listed in Table 1.
Bamboo-inspired BCC MLSs have different design variations, such as
hybrid BCC, hybrid bio-BCC, MBCC-1, MBCC-2, and hybrid MBCC.
Hollow BCC MLSs with hollow spherical node reinforcement were
named Hollow BCC. The BCC struts supported by vertical strut members
were named VBCC. BCC unit cell with the thickness of the strut
increasing from top to bottom (blue indicates a lower strut thickness, red
indicates higher strut thickness) was named BCC-graded1. BCC unit cell
with the thickness of the strut decreasing from top to centre, increasing
from centre to bottom (blue indicates the lower strut thickness, red
SS316L
[24]
SS316L
[25]
Ti-6Al-4V
[26]
Ti-6Al-4V
[4]
Al-6101 [3]
AlSi10Mg
[29]
indicates higher strut thickness) was named BCC-graded2. The BCC
MLSs with bent struts using cosine function were named BCC-cosinegraded. The BCC MLS, coupled with FCC and vertical Z-struts, was
named FBCCZ. Vertical strut members support the BCC MLS called
BCCZ; instead of adding vertical strut support to the BCC MLSs, hori­
zontal strut support could be added, resulting in BCC + C MLSs. The BCC
unit cell adjusted for height was called BCC-height adjusted MLSs.
The BCC unit cell design variant is called G7(BCC). The bio-inspired,
glass-sponge-based BCC MLSs were named BCC-sponge. Purely strutbased body-centred (BCC), face-centred cubic lattice (FCC), combined
lattice (F2BCC) and enhanced body-centred cubic lattice (BCT), while
the curved strut of BCC, BCT, and F2BCC MLS was called BCC-curved,
3
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 2. Variations in the unit cell design of BCC-based MLSs.
BCT-curved, and F2BCC-curve. BCC MLSs with curved struts inspired by
catenary architecture were named BCC-catenary arch. The BCC MLS,
coupled with plate-like structures, was named the BCC-plate. The G7
(BCC) centred inside an octagonal lattice was called the BCC-Octagonal.
BCC with a larger strut diameter of 575 µm was called BCC-1, while a
lower strut diameter of 500 µm was called BCC-2; the BCC reinforced
with spherical solid nodes (node reinforcement) was called NR-BCC. All
BCC MLSs illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3, and listed in Table 2.
The FCC MLSs with added vertical strut support were named VFCC,
FCC MLSs with curved struts were called FCC-Curve, and FCCs with
vertical rectangular solid support were called FCC-Z. The edge-centre
interstitial lattice (ECIL) structure and the Vertex-node substitutional
lattice (VNSL) structure are some of the other FCC-based lattice variants.
The FCC-based Hollow Octet Truss (HOT) lattice, Hollow Sphere As­
sembly (HSA), Solid Octet Truss (SOT) and Hybrid Truss-Sphere
Assembly (HTS), The graded skeleton diamond (GSKD), graded sheet
diamond (GSHD), uniform skeleton diamond (USKD), and uniform sheet
diamond (USHD) are different graded lattice structures. The FCC with
different samples of laser energy densities is called S-FCC, S-FCC-Z, and
FCC-XYZ. The bamboo-inspired FCC MLS coupled with octahedron MLS
is called Bamboo FCC-Octahedron. All FCC, diamond and other MLSs are
illustrated in Fig. 4 and are listed in Tables 3 and 4.
2. Comparison of the yield strengths for different lattice
structures
The compressive yield strengths of various SC-based lattice struc­
tures are shown in Fig. 6. SC-based lattice structures, including SC-arch
(catenary), SC-BCC, SC-FCC, SC-Smooth, SC-Tesseract, SC-hollow-rect.,
SC-Octagonal, SC-Octet, SC-Snap-fit1, SC-Snap-fit2, SC-hollow-node-in,
4
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 3. Variations in the unit cell design of BCC-based MLSs.
SC-hollow-node-mix, and SC-hollow-node-out, were compared for their
quasistatic compressive performance against relative density.
The SC-arch (catenary) lattice, composed of AlSi10Mg, exhibited a
yield strength of 8 MPa in quasi-static simulations. Similarly, the
AlSi7Mg-based SC-BCC and SC-FCC lattices demonstrated lower
compressive fatigue strengths, around 4 MPa. Lattices manufactured
from ceramic resin, such as SC-Smooth and SC-Tesseract, also exhibited
minimal compressive yield strengths of 2.25 to 3.125 MPa and 2.08
MPa, respectively, as determined through quasi-static simulations.
Additionally, the metal oxide-based lattice, SC-hollow-rect., displayed a
yield strength of 0.15 MPa. Stainless steel SS316L-based lattice struc­
tures, including SC-Octagonal, SC-BCC, and SC-Octet, demonstrated
increased compressive and tensile strengths, as their geometry and
material composition primarily influence the mechanical performance
of these lattices. SC-Snap-fit structures fabricated from Ti6-AL4-V at a
relative density of 23 % possess a maximum yield strength of 100 MPa
under quasi-static compression, followed by the SC-Octet fabricated
using SS316L, which exhibited a yield strength of 87.5 MPa.
The BCC MLSs with design variations are represented in Figs. 2 and 3
and are listed in Table 2. The compression yield strength vs. relative
density plot is shown in Fig. 7. BCC structures with lower relative den­
sities tend to have lower compression yield strengths under quasi-static
compression. The lattice structures composed of AlSi12Mg and
AlSi10Mg, such as BCC, BCC + C, BCCZ, and FBCCZ, exhibit lower
compression yield strengths of 4.5, 7, 9, and 19 MPa, respectively, due to
their lower relative density.
SS316L-based lattice structures, namely BCC, BCC-graded1, BCCgraded2, BCC-cosine-graded, BCC uniform, Hybrid Bio BCC, BCC (G7)
-octagonal, VBCC, Hybrid MBCC, Hollow BCC, and MBCC-1, exhibit
yield strengths of 2.17, 3.5, 7, 4.86, 7, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, and 23 MPa,
respectively. The BCCZ, composed of AlSi10Mg, exhibits a medium yield
strength of 38 MPa at a relative density of 31 %.
5
N. Shivakumar et al.
Table 2
BCC MLSs with material details.
BCC-Type
Fabrication
process
Strut Dia. (mm)
Strut length (mm)
Lattice size
(mm)
Loading method
Load type
Energy
absorption MJ/
m3
Applications
Materials
(Refs.)
BCC(G7) +
octagonal
LPBF
1.0753
<10 mm
10,50
Uniaxial compression
Simulated compression
Aerospace, automobile
and marine vessels
SS316L
[24]
BCC- (hexactinellid
sponge structure)
BCC (hollow strut,
node)
SLM
0.03
7
Quasi-static compression
Compression
SLM
0.3
1
Varying
sizes.
40 × 40 × 40
HS2 better in
energy
absorption
0.2 J/g–20 J/g.
Compression
NA
SS316L
[33]
SS316L
[34]
VBCC (Vertical strut
added BCC)
BCC (Uni,
Bidirectionally
graded)
CFCB-BCC (graded
cosine function)
SLM
0.8
Around 1
25 × 25 × 40
Compression was done using a
universal electronic testing
unit, loading velocity at 2.4
mm/min.
Uniaxial compression
Structures with energy and
sound absorption.
Structural materials
Compression
7.57 J/g
SLM
1.25–1.89
2
40 × 40 × 40
Quasi-static compression,
tensile testing
Compression, tension
6
SS316L
[35]
SS316L
[36]
Metal sintering 3D
printer (ZRapidiSLM280)
SLM
Around 0.5, varying
based on the cosine
function
0.05–0.2
Varying
8–12
Quasi-static compression
Compression
3–5
Aerospace, military
equipment
Impact, ballistic and load
response-related
component fabrication
Optimized design
applications
Around 100
Quasi-static compression
Compression
0.01–0.1
Aerospace and automotive
BCC + C (Central
column attached)
SLM
Quasi-static compression
Lightweight structures
with crashworthiness
10–15
NA
SLM
0.8–2
Varying, gradient
type
Tension, Compression
NA
High-strength and highstiffness applications
Lightweight applications
AlSi10Mg
[40]
Al-Si alloy
BCC (aspect ratio
adjusted)
BCC (based on G7
struts)
SLM
0.5–0.8
4
Compression between two
plates
Tension testing
Uniform compression load of
2000 N
Quasi-static compression
Compression was done
using the servohydraulic (2 mm/min)
Compression
NA
SLM
Decided by an
optimization
algorithm
around 3
AlSi12Mg
[38]
AlSi10Mg
[39]
Tetrahedral-BCC,
BCCZ
BCC-SDG (Size and
dia. gradient)
Decided by an
optimization
algorithm
0.5–0.8
2×2×2
unit cells
4–16
Electron beam
melting (EBM)
1.4–2.9
0.98–2.28
8.41–17.57
Compression at 3 mm/
min.
Compression
Lightweight applications
with tailored property.
Biomedical devices,
implants.
Ti-6Al-4 V
[41]
Ti-6Al-4 V
ELI [42]
BCC-GSLS (Glass
Sponge Lattice
structure)
BCC (functionally
graded)
BCC, BCT, FCC and
F2BCC (curved)
BCC-1, BCC-2, nodereinforced BCC
SLM
0.35
3
15 × 15 × 15
Dynamic explicit load in
analysis
5.95
Medical implants
Ti-6Al-4 V
[43]
LPBF
NA
NA, graded
Compression at 0.001
s− 1
Compression load at 3
mm/min
Compression at 0.001
s− 1
1.5 kJ/g
Medical implants
Ti6Al4VELI [44]
Ti-6Al-4 V
[45]
Ti-6Al-4 V
[19]
BCC, BCCZ
6
35
0.6
Around 2
SLM
0.5,0.575 for strut
1.16 for node dia.
1.66
10 × 10 × 15
Quasi-static compression
Compression testing is done
60kN protective loading cell
Quasi-static compression
NA
3
2–18 J/cm
Light-weight components
Nodereinforced BCC100.8
BCC-1 77.2
BCC-2 33.6
Biomedical implants
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
LPBF
Not
mentioned
20 × 20 × 20
Compression testing is done by
Instron 8854 servo-hydraulic
machine
Quasi-static compression
simulated using ABAQUS
SS316L
[37]
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 4. Variations in the unit cell design of FCC, diamond, and other MLSs.
7
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 5. Variations in the unit cell design of cubic Fluorite and Kelvin MLSs.
Ti6Al4V-based lattice structures exhibit lower, medium, and higher
yield strengths with increasing relative density. The BCC-catenary-arch,
BCC, BCT, and BCC-curved samples exhibited yield strengths of less than
17 MPa. The primary reasons behind this are the limited relative density
and the lattice structure. The BCT-curved lattice structure exhibits a
medium yield strength of 27.5 MPa at a relative density of 10 %. The
F2BCC, BCC-sponge, BCC-graded, F2BCC-Curve, BCC-height-adjusted,
G7 (BCC), BCC-1, node-reinforced BCC, and BCC-2 lattice structures
exhibit compressive yield strengths of 40, 40, 42, 58, 80, 160, 322.6,
349, and 435 MPa, respectively, at relative densities ranging from 18.5
% to 67 %. Ti6AL4V-based BCC lattice structures show an increasing
trend in compressive yield strength corresponding to their increasing
relative density and lattice structures.
The different FCC, diamond, and other MLSs are represented in Fig. 4
and listed in Table 3. The compression yield strength vs. relative density
plot is shown in Fig. 9. The FCC-smooth strut and the diamond-smooth
strut composed of ceramic resin exhibit compression yield strengths of
1.562 MPa and 2.08 MPa, respectively.
Quadrangular, hexagonal, and triangular MLSs composed of
AlSi10Mg exhibit lower compressive yield strengths of 5.8 MPa, 6.1
MPa, and 7 MPa versus relative densities of 18.2, 20.7 and 21.1 %,
respectively. Other aluminium alloy-based FCC-VNSL, FCC-Z, FCCFCSL, and FCC-ECIL MLSs composed of Al-Mg-Sc-Zr also exhibit lower
compressive yield strengths of 8.9 MPa, 9 MPa, 10.22 MPa, and 11.8
MPa, respectively, corresponding to relative densities of 8.3 %, 7.2 %,
7.8 %, and 7.8 %, respectively. As shown in Fig. 8, the aluminium alloybased FCC MLSs tended to have a lower compressive yield strength than
the other FCC MLSs.
Ti-6Al-4V and SS316L exhibit compressive yield strengths that range
from low to high, proportional to increasing relative density. For
example, SS316L MLSs, FCC-HOT, skeletal-diamond-GSKD, and VFCC
exhibit lower compressive yield strengths of 20, 21.54, and 25 MPa,
respectively, corresponding to relative densities of 20 %, 30 %, and
12.63 %. SS316L-based USKD, S-FCC, GSHD, FCC-HTS, FCC-SOT, FCC
and USHD exhibited medium compressive yield strengths of 33.4, 35,
36.67, 40, 40, 55, and 56.34 against relative densities of 30, 23.1, 30, 20,
8
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Table 3
FCC MLSs with material details.
FCC-Type
Fabrication
process
Strut dia.
(mm)
Strut
length
(mm)
Lattice size
(mm)
Loading method
Load type
Energy
absorption
MJ/m3
Applications
Materials
(Refs.)
FCC-Z, S-FCC, S-FCCZ, and FCC-XYZ.
SLM machine
with laser
power of 114
W and 200 W
SLM
1 mm
5
25 × 20 ×
20
Tensile testing,
Flexural testing using
3-point bending
Tensile,
Compressive
And Flexural
38.6–99.9
Biomedical
implant
SS316L
[46]
Controlled
by strut-tolength ratio
NA
unit cell
repetitions
5x5x5
UTM
Compression
–
SS316L
[47]
SLM
0.3
1
40 × 40 ×
40
SLM
0.8
Around
1
25 × 25 ×
40
Compression
loading
velocity at 2.4
mm/min.
Compression
NA
VFCC (Vertical strut
added FCC)
Compression was
done using a
universal electronic
testing unit
Uniaxial
compression
Structural
components for
aerospace and
engineering
applications.
Structural
materials
SS316L
[35]
FCC, FCCZ (hollow
strut)
LPBF
NA
30 × 30 ×
30
Uniaxial
compression
Compression
34 (hollow
strut)
FCC -GSLS (Glass
Sponge Lattice
structure)
SLM
0.54 to 0.86
Outer dia.
1.1 mm for
hollow
0.35
NA
18x18x18
Compression
3–5
FCC- (bioinspired
lattice-based
mechanical
metamaterials
(BLMMs))
FCC (functionally
graded)
FCCZ structure, Facecentred
substitutional
lattice (FCSL),
Edge-centred
interstitial lattice
(ECIL), Vertexnode substitutional
lattice (VNSL)
FCC, FCCZ, and
FBCCZ
SLM
1.1 (Outer
dia.)
Around
5
20 × 20 ×
20
Quasi-static uniaxial
compression tests
were conducted by a
100-kN
electromechanical
universal testing
machine
Compression testing
through Numerical
optimized samples
Aerospace,
military
equipment
Heat
exchangers,
medical
equipment
Load bearing
applications
Compression
8
Biomedical
applications
Ti-6Al-4 V
[49]
LPBF
NA
1
Not
mentioned
30 × 30 ×
30
Quasi-static
compression
compression testing
by the CMT5205
machine
Compression at
0.001 s− 1
Compression
1.55 kJ/g
LPBF
NA,
graded
NA
Medical
implants
Energyabsorptive
lightweight
components
Ti6Al4V
ELI [44]
Al–Mg-ScZr alloy
[22]
SLM
0.05–0.2
Around
100
2×2×2
unit cells
Quasi-static
compression
Compression
0.01–0.1
Aerospace and
automotive
AlSi12Mg
[38]
FCC-octet, FCChollow node, FCChollow octet strut,
FCC-hollow-strut,
sphere
FCC (hollow strut,
node)
NA
70–90
SS316L
[34]
Ti-6Al-4 V
[48]
Ti-6Al-4 V
[43]
Table 4
Diamond lattice structures.
Diamond-Type
Fabrication
process
Strut Dia.
(mm)
Strut
Length
(mm)
Lattice Size
(mm)
Loading Method
Load Type
Energy
absorption
MJ/m3
Applications
Materials
(Refs.)
Diamond-solid
SLM
0.54–4.02
Varying
15 × 15 × 15
Tensile testing,
compression
testing
Tension,
compression
Na
SS316L
[50]
Diamond
(Graded
skeleton)
SLM
graded
graded
15 × 15 × 15
Tension,
compression
80 to 100
Diamond -GSLS
(Glass Sponge
Lattice
structure)
Diamond-BCCFCC
SLM
0.35
3
15 × 15 × 15
Dynamic
explicit load in
analysis
0.21
Medical implants
Ti-6Al-4V
[43]
SLM
0.5
NA
42.42–51.96
Tensile testing,
compression
testing
At UTM at 2mm/
min
Quasi-static
compression
simulated using
ABAQUS
Quasi-static
compressive test
Aerospace and
automobile
lightweight
components
Aerospace and
automobile
lightweight
components
Compression
Around 12
Lightweight
aerospace and
automobile
applications
AlSi10Mg
[52]
9
SS316L
[51]
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 6. Yield strength of different simple cubic MLSs.
Fig. 7. Yield strength of different BCC-based MLSs.
60, 32.3, and 30 %, respectively. The SS316L-based S-FCC-Z, FCC-HSA,
FCC-Z, and FCC-XYZ MLSs exhibited higher compressive yield strengths
of 70, 70, 80, and 92 MPa at relative densities of 27.1, 60, 34.2, and 39.1
%, respectively. In addition, SS316L-reported MLSs exhibit a slightly
lower compressive yield strength than Ti6Al4V-reported MLSs. The
SS316L-based Diamond MLS exhibited 45 MPa at a relative density of
30 %.
The FCC and the FCC-Curve of the Ti6Al4V MLSs exhibit lower
compressive yield strengths at lower relative densities of 9 % and 9 %,
respectively. The Ti6Al4V MLSs F2BCC, F2BCC-Curve, and bioinspired
10
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 8. Yield strength of different FCC, diamond and other MLSs.
Table 5
Fluorite and Kelvin lattice structures.
Lattice-Type
Fabrication process
Strut
Dia.
(mm)
Strut
Length
(mm)
Lattice
size (mm)
Loading method
Load type
Energy
absorption
MJ/m3
Applications
Materials
(Refs.)
Cubic fluorite-1
SLM
0.4, 0.5
NA
NA
SLM
0.6 to
0.85
NA
Compression test
at 10-4 s− 1
Compression test
at 7.0 × 10–4 s− 1
Compression
Cubic fluorite-2
Around
15
4.8–8.5
Compression
NA
AlSi10Mg
[53]
WE43[54]
Open Kelvin
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
compression
NA
Open Kelvin
(foam) − 2
SLM using M290 3D
printer,
2
NA
30 × 30
× 30
Compression
NA
Kelvin cell (KC),
elliptical
skeletons (ES),
reversed
elliptical
skeletons (RES)
Open Kelvin-1
SLM
KC0.62,
ES-0.45,
RES0.45
NA
100 × 50
× 12
Numerical
simulation
Numerical
simulation,
compression
Numerical
simulation,
compression
–
NA
Open Kelvin
(foam) − 1
Modelling and
simulation
Modelling and
simulation, compared
Lightweight
components
Components
with corrosion
resistance
Lightweight
components
Tailored
engineering
materials
Lightweight
components
–
NA
Heat transfer
lightweight
components
GH4169
[58]
SLM
1.5
30.75 ×
30.75 ×
30.75
Compression,
tensile testing,
simulation
Compression,
Tension,
NA
Lightweight
Engineering
component
SS316L
[59]
Open Kelvin − 2,
Cubic fluorite-3
Open Kelvin-3
–
0.5,
0.70,
0.85 and
1.00
–
–
–
–
–
–
- [60]
1
4
20 × 20
× 20
- Numerical
simulation only
Compression,
tensile testing
Compression,
Tension
NA
Lightweight
component
Inconel
718 [61]
Vat
photopolymerization
3D printing
NA -Not applicable/Not available.
11
NA[55]
NA[56]
IN625[57]
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
Fig. 9. Yield strength of Kelvin and fluorite MLSs.
should be the first choice among strut-based MLSs with higher yield
strengths, followed by FCC, diamond, and SC. Bioinspired MLSs gener­
ally exhibit relatively high compressive yield strengths with low relative
densities.
Bamboo FCC exhibit medium compressive yield strengths of 40 MPa, 57
MPa, and 62.5 MPa at relative densities of 19 %, 19 %, and 28.9 %,
respectively.
Fig. 5 and Table 5 show recently reported literature on fluorite and
kelvin-based MLSs. From Fig. 9, it is evident that AlSi10Mg-based MLSs
with fluorite structures with relative densities ranging from 20 to 45 %
tend to have yield strength of 50–225 MPa. For a similar range of rela­
tive densities, WE43 has a relatively lower yield strength of 7–70 MPa
than AlSi10Mg-based MLSs. IN625 and SS316L-based Kelvin structures
have a relative velocity of around 5 % with yield strength values ranging
from 7 to 10 MPa.
Most of the MLSs tested were using quasi-static compression fol­
lowed by tensile and fatigue testing, with less exploration of thermal and
heat transfer capabilities. Hollow MLS has the potential to increase heat
transfer capability, and being lightweight, along with tailored yield
strength, is a suitable combination for future lightweight applications.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
N Shivakumar: . T Ramesh: Writing – review & editing, Visuali­
zation, Project administration, Investigation. S. Muthukumaran: .
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
3. Summary
Data will be made available on request.
This review primarily focuses on recent studies of molecularly
inspired metal lattice structures (MLSs), such as simple cubic (SC), bodycentred cubic (BCC), face-centred cubic (FCC), diamond, and other
structures. Due to their diverse designs, these structures result in a wide
range of MLSs with varying yield strengths. The BCC-based MLS with a
larger strut diameter (BCC-2), fabricated with Ti-6Al-4V, exhibited the
highest yield strength of 435 MPa and a relative density of 67 %. The
node-reinforced BCC structure demonstrated the second highest
compressive yield strength of 349 MPa with a relative density of 59 %.
With a smaller strut diameter than BCC-2, BCC-1 exhibited a yield
strength of 322.6 MPa and a relative density of 55 %. The G7(BCC) MLS
exhibited a yield strength of 160 MPa with a relative density of 20 %.
The bioinspired FCC-octahedron MLSs fabricated using Ti-6Al-4V had a
yield strength of 120 MPa, followed by the MLS based on SS316L.
AlSi10Mg-based cubic fluorite MLSs have yield strength of 225 MPa for
a moderate relative density of 45 %, which gives more strength for a
medium relative density. As inferred from the results, Ti-6Al-4V is the
primary material, and SS316L is the secondary preferred material for
constructing MLSs with higher yield strengths. With its added advantage
of biocompatibility, Ti-6Al-4V is an ideal material for biomedical ap­
plications. SS316L could be beneficial in engineering applications that
require lightweight and energy-absorptive materials. Furthermore, BCC
References
[1] H. Yin, W. Zhang, L. Zhu, F. Meng, J. Liu, G. Wen, Review on lattice structures for
energy absorption properties, Compos. Struct. 304 (2023) 116397, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.116397.
[2] T. Tancogne-Dejean, D. Mohr, Elastically-isotropic truss lattice materials of
reduced plastic anisotropy, Int. J. Solids Struct. 138 (2018) 24–39, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.12.025.
[3] J. Mueller, K.H. Matlack, K. Shea, C. Daraio, Energy absorption properties of
periodic and stochastic 3D lattice materials, Adv. Theory Simul. 2 (2019), https://
doi.org/10.1002/adts.201900081.
[4] B. Nečemer, S. Glodež, N. Novak, J. Kramberger, Numerical modelling of a chiral
auxetic cellular structure under multiaxial loading conditions, Theor. Appl. Fract.
Mech. 107 (2020) 102514, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102514.
[5] X. Ren, J. Shen, P. Tran, T.D. Ngo, Y.M. Xie, Design and characterisation of a
tuneable 3D buckling-induced auxetic metamaterial, Mater. Des. 139 (2018)
336–342, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.11.025.
[6] E. Cetin, C. Baykasoğlu, Energy absorption of thin-walled tubes enhanced by lattice
structures, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 157–158 (2019) 471–484, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijmecsci.2019.04.049.
[7] H. Lei, C. Li, J. Meng, H. Zhou, Y. Liu, X. Zhang, P. Wang, D. Fang, Evaluation of
compressive properties of SLM-fabricated multi-layer lattice structures by
experimental test and μ-CT-based finite element analysis, Mater. Des. 169 (2019)
107685, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.107685.
[8] M. Leary, M. Mazur, H. Williams, E. Yang, A. Alghamdi, B. Lozanovski, X. Zhang,
D. Shidid, L. Farahbod-Sternahl, G. Witt, I. Kelbassa, P. Choong, M. Qian,
M. Brandt, Inconel 625 lattice structures manufactured by selective laser melting
12
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
(SLM): mechanical properties, deformation and failure modes, Mater. Des. 157
(2018) 179–199, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.06.010.
[9] G.N. Labeas, M.M. Sunaric, Investigation on the static response and failure process
of metallic open lattice cellular structures, Strain 46 (2010) 195–204, https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1475-1305.2008.00498.x.
[10] T. Zhong, K. He, H. Li, L. Yang, Mechanical properties of lightweight 316L stainless
steel lattice structures fabricated by selective laser melting, Mater. Des. 181 (2019)
108076, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108076.
[11] T. Tancogne-Dejean, D. Mohr, Stiffness and specific energy absorption of
additively-manufactured metallic BCC metamaterials composed of tapered beams,
Int. J. Mech. Sci. 141 (2018) 101–116, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijmecsci.2018.03.027.
[12] Z. Xiao, Y. Yang, R. Xiao, Y. Bai, C. Song, D. Wang, Evaluation of topologyoptimized lattice structures manufactured via selective laser melting, Mater. Des.
143 (2018) 27–37, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2018.01.023.
[13] Mechanical and in vitro study of an isotropic Ti6Al4V lattice structure fabricated
using selective laser melting - ScienceDirect, (n.d.). https://www.sciencedirect.
com/science/article/pii/S0925838818347765 (Accessed September 28, 2023).
[14] Elastic and plastic characterization of a new developed additively manufactured
functionally graded porous lattice structure: Analytical and numerical models ScienceDirect, (n.d.). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S002074031833087X (Accessed September 28, 2023).
[15] B. Bahrami Babamiri, H. Askari, K. Hazeli, Deformation mechanisms and postyielding behavior of additively manufactured lattice structures, Mater. Des. 188
(2020) 108443, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108443.
[16] Crush performance of additively manufactured maraging steel microlattice
reinforced plates - ScienceDirect, (n.d.). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S1350630719311185 (Accessed September 28, 2023).
[17] G. Epasto, G. Palomba, D. D’Andrea, E. Guglielmino, S. Di Bella, F. Traina, Ti-6Al4V ELI microlattice structures manufactured by electron beam melting: effect of
unit cell dimensions and morphology on mechanical behaviour, Mater. Sci. Eng. A
753 (2019) 31–41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.03.014.
[18] A. du Plessis, I. Yadroitsava, I. Yadroitsev, Ti6Al4V lightweight lattice structures
manufactured by laser powder bed fusion for load-bearing applications, Opt. Laser
Technol. 108 (2018) 521–528, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2018.07.050.
[19] Y. Liu, J. Zhang, X. Gu, Y. Zhou, Y. Yin, Q. Tan, M. Li, M.-X. Zhang, Mechanical
performance of a node reinforced body-centred cubic lattice structure
manufactured via selective laser melting, Scr. Mater. 189 (2020) 95–100, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2020.08.015.
[20] N. Jin, F. Wang, Y. Wang, B. Zhang, H. Cheng, H. Zhang, Failure and energy
absorption characteristics of four lattice structures under dynamic loading, Mater.
Des. 169 (2019) 107655, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2019.107655.
[21] B. Jagadeesh, M. Duraiselvam, K.G. Prashanth, Deformation behavior of metallic
lattice structures with symmetrical gradients of porosity manufactured by metal
additive manufacturing, Vacuum 211 (2023) 111955, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
vacuum.2023.111955.
[22] H. Liu, D. Gu, J. Yang, K. Shi, L. Yuan, Laser powder bed fusion of node-reinforced
hybrid lattice structure inspired by crystal microstructure: Structural feature
sensitivity and mechanical performance, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 858 (2022) 144048,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2022.144048.
[23] K. Somlo, S.S. Chauhan, C.F. Niordson, K. Poulios, Uniaxial tensile behaviour of
additively manufactured elastically isotropic truss lattices made of 316L, Int. J.
Solids Struct. 246–247 (2022) 111599, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijsolstr.2022.111599.
[24] L. Li, F. Yang, P. Li, W. Wu, L. Wang, A novel hybrid lattice design of nested cell
topology with enhanced energy absorption capability, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 128
(2022) 107776, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2022.107776.
[25] T. Yu, X. Li, M. Zhao, X. Guo, J. Ding, S. Qu, T.W.J. Kwok, T. Li, X. Song, B.
W. Chua, Truss and plate hybrid lattice structures: Simulation and experimental
investigations of isotropy, large-strain deformation, and mechanisms, Mater. Today
Commun. 35 (2023) 106344, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2023.106344.
[26] L. Dong, Mechanical responses of Ti-6Al-4V truss lattices having a combined
simple-cubic and body-centered-cubic (SC-BCC) topology, Aerosp. Sci. Technol.
116 (2021) 106852, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2021.106852.
[27] J. Noronha, J. Dash, M. Leary, D. Downing, E. Kyriakou, M. Brandt, M. Qian, Nodereinforced hollow-strut metal lattice materials for higher strength, Scr. Mater. 234
(2023) 115547, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2023.115547.
[28] P.K. Kanaujia, M.A. bin Ramezan, X.Y. Yap, Y. Song, Z. Du, C.L. Gan, Y.C. Lam, C.
Q. Lai, Mechanical Response of Lightweight Hollow Truss Metal Oxide Lattices,
2019. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3415209.
[29] A.K. Mishra, A. Kumar, Taking inspiration from medieval architecture: Using
catenary arches in place of straight beam as the building block into bendingdominated lattice structures, Eng. Fail. Anal. 152 (2023) 107476, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.engfailanal.2023.107476.
[30] L. Boniotti, S. Beretta, L. Patriarca, L. Rigoni, S. Foletti, Experimental and
numerical investigation on compressive fatigue strength of lattice structures of
AlSi7Mg manufactured by SLM, Int. J. Fatigue 128 (2019) 105181, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.06.041.
[31] S.A.M. Ghannadpour, M. Mahmoudi, K. Hossein Nedjad, Structural behavior of 3Dprinted sandwich beams with strut-based lattice core: Experimental and numerical
study, Compos. Struct. 281 (2022) 115113. Doi: 10.1016/j.
compstruct.2021.115113.
[32] L. Dong, S. Zhang, K. Yu, Ti–6Al–4V truss lattices with a composite topology of
double-simple-cubic and body-centered-cubic, Eur. J. Mech. A. Solids 92 (2022)
104486, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechsol.2021.104486.
[33] P. Wang, F. Yang, G. Lu, Y. Bian, S. Zhang, B. Zheng, H. Fan, Anisotropic
compression behaviors of bio-inspired modified body-centered cubic lattices
validated by additive manufacturing, Compos. B Eng. 234 (2022) 109724, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2022.109724.
[34] L. Xiao, G. Feng, S. Li, K. Mu, Q. Qin, W. Song, Mechanical characterization of
additively-manufactured metallic lattice structures with hollow struts under static
and dynamic loadings, Int. J. Impact Eng 169 (2022) 104333, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2022.104333.
[35] J. Ye, Z. Sun, Y. Ding, Y. Zheng, F. Zhou, The deformation mechanism, energy
absorption behavior and optimal design of vertical-reinforced lattices, Thin-Wall.
Struct. 190 (2023) 110988, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2023.110988.
[36] C. Rodrigo, S. Xu, Y. Durandet, D. Fraser, D. Ruan, Quasi-static and dynamic
compression of additively manufactured functionally graded lattices: experiments
and simulations, Eng. Struct. 284 (2023) 115909, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
engstruct.2023.115909.
[37] G. Zhu, D. Wen, L. Wei, Z. Wang, X. Zhao, Mechanical performances of novel cosine
function cell-based metallic lattice structures under quasi-static compressive
loading, Compos. Struct. 314 (2023) 116962, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compstruct.2023.116962.
[38] M. Leary, M. Mazur, J. Elambasseril, M. McMillan, T. Chirent, Y. Sun, M. Qian,
M. Easton, M. Brandt, Selective laser melting (SLM) of AlSi12Mg lattice structures,
Mater. Des. 98 (2016) 344–357, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.02.127.
[39] A. Alaimo, A. Del Prete, G. Mantegna, C. Orlando, F.W. Panella, T. Primo,
D. Tumino, C.R. Vindigni, Modified beam modeling of powder bed fusion
manufactured lattice structures, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 259 (2023) 108599, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2023.108599.
[40] A. Namdeo, V. Bhandare, B.J. Sahariah, P. Khanikar, Tetrahedral and strutreinforced tetrahedral microlattices: Selectively laser melted high-strength and
high-stiffness cellular metamaterials, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 855 (2022) 143878,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2022.143878.
[41] L. Bai, C. Gong, X. Chen, J. Zheng, J. Yang, K. Li, Y. Sun, Heterogeneous
compressive responses of additively manufactured Ti-6Al-4V lattice structures by
varying geometric parameters of cells, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 214 (2022) 106922,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106922.
[42] F. Distefano, E. Guglielmino, R. Mineo, G. Epasto, Mechanical and morphological
characterization of BCC - derived unit cells for biomedical devices, Proc. Struct.
Integr. 41 (2022) 470–485, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2022.05.053.
[43] M. He, Y. Li, J. Yin, Q. Sun, W. Xiong, S. Li, L. Yang, L. Hao, Compressive
performance and fracture mechanism of bio-inspired heterogeneous glass sponge
lattice structures manufactured by selective laser melting, Mater. Des. 214 (2022)
110396, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2022.110396.
[44] X. Zhang, L. Jiang, X. Yan, Z. Wang, X. Li, G. Fang, Regulated multi-scale
mechanical performance of functionally graded lattice materials based on multiple
bioinspired patterns, Mater. Des. 226 (2023) 111564, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matdes.2022.111564.
[45] L. Bai, Y. Xu, X. Chen, L. Xin, J. Zhang, K. Li, Y. Sun, Improved mechanical
properties and energy absorption of Ti6Al4V laser powder bed fusion lattice
structures using curving lattice struts, Mater. Des. 211 (2021) 110140, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.matdes.2021.110140.
[46] C.-P. Jiang, A.T. Wibisono, T. Pasang, Selective laser melting of stainless steel 316L
with face-centered-cubic-based lattice structures to produce rib implants, Materials
14 (2021) 5962, https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14205962.
[47] C. Bonatti, D. Mohr, Large deformation response of additively-manufactured FCC
metamaterials: from octet truss lattices towards continuous shell mesostructures,
Int. J. Plast 92 (2017) 122–147, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2017.02.003.
[48] J. Noronha, J. Rogers, M. Leary, E. Kyriakou, S.B. Inverarity, R. Das, M. Brandt,
M. Qian, Ti-6Al-4V hollow-strut lattice materials by laser powder bed fusion,
Addit. Manuf. 72 (2023) 103637, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103637.
[49] Z. Zhang, L. Zhang, B. Song, Y. Yao, Y. Shi, Bamboo-inspired, simulation-guided
design and 3D printing of light-weight and high-strength mechanical
metamaterials, Appl. Mater. Today 26 (2022) 101268, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apmt.2021.101268.
[50] Z. Liang, X. Chen, Z. Sun, Y. Guo, Y. Li, H. Chang, L. Zhou, A study on the
compressive mechanical properties of 316L diamond lattice structures
manufactured by laser powder bed fusion based on actual relative density,
J. Manuf. Process. 84 (2022) 414–423, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jmapro.2022.09.041.
[51] Z. Li, Z. Kuai, J. Li, B. Liu, M. Zhao, Z. Yang, F. Liu, P. Bai, W. Huo, Effect of heat
treatment on compression properties of the 316L diamond structure fabricated
through selective laser melting, J. Mater. Res. Technol. 25 (2023) 5076–5095,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.06.268.
[52] C. Li, H. Lei, Z. Zhang, X. Zhang, H. Zhou, P. Wang, D. Fang, Architecture design of
periodic truss-lattice cells for additive manufacturing, Addit. Manuf. 34 (2020)
101172, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2020.101172.
[53] T. Yu, H. Hyer, Y. Sohn, Y. Bai, D. Wu, Structure-property relationship in high
strength and lightweight AlSi10Mg microlattices fabricated by selective laser
melting, Mater. Des. 182 (2019) 108062, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matdes.2019.108062.
[54] H. Hyer, L. Zhou, Q. Liu, D. Wu, S. Song, Y. Bai, B. McWilliams, K. Cho, Y. Sohn,
High strength WE43 microlattice structures additively manufactured by laser
powder bed fusion, Materialia 16 (2021) 101067, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
mtla.2021.101067.
[55] The compressive response of the filled Kelvin foam - ScienceDirect, (n.d.). https://
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0997753823001109?via%3Dihub
(Accessed May 9, 2024).
13
N. Shivakumar et al.
Materials Today: Proceedings xxx (xxxx) xxx
[56] V.G. Belardi, S. Trupiano, P. Fanelli, F. Vivio, Overall elastic characterization of
equivalent FE models for aluminum foams through computational homogenization
approach and genetic algorithm optimization, Eur. J. Mech. A. Solids 103 (2024)
105189, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechsol.2023.105189.
[57] L. Cheng, X. Zhang, J. Xu, T.O. Olugbade, G. Li, D. Dong, F. Lyu, H. Kong, M. Huo,
J. Lu, Nickel-based superalloy architectures with surface mechanical attrition
treatment: compressive properties and collapse behaviour, Nano Mater. Sci.
(2024), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoms.2023.11.008.
[58] M. Sun, G. Yan, Y. Liang, J. Zhao, Y. Song, The investigation of anisotropic kelvin
cells: Forced convective heat transfer, Energy 292 (2024) 130517, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2024.130517.
[59] E. Wang, C. Chen, G. Zhang, Q. Luo, Q. Li, G. Sun, Multiaxial mechanical
characterization of additively manufactured open-cell Kelvin foams, Compos.
Struct. 305 (2023) 116505, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.116505.
[60] K. Moj, R. Owsiński, G. Robak, M.K. Gupta, S. Scholz, H. Mehta, Measurement of
precision and quality characteristics of lattice structures in metal-based additive
manufacturing using computer tomography analysis, Measurement 231 (2024)
114582, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2024.114582.
[61] Y. Zhang, S. Li, X. Liu, X. Li, W. Duan, L. Li, B. Liu, G. Wang, Additive
manufacturing and characterization of microstructure evolution of Inconel 718
superalloy produced by vat photopolymerization, Addit. Manuf. 61 (2023) 103367,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2022.103367.
14