| Abstract: | Additive Manufacturing (AM) is rapidly evolving due to its unlimited design freedom to fabricate complex and intricate light-weight geometries with the use of lattice structure that have potential applications including construction, aerospace and biomedical applications, where mechanical properties are the prime focus. Buckling instability in lattice structures is one of the main failure mechanisms that can lead to major failure in structural applications that are subjected to compressive loads, but it has yet to be fully explored. This study aims to investigate the effect of surface-based lattice structure topologies and structured column height on the critical buckling load of lattice structured columns. Four different triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) lattice topologies were selected and three design configurations (unit cells in x, y, z axis), i.e., 2 × 2 × 4, 2 × 2 × 8 and 2 × 2 × 16 column, for each structure were designed followed by printing using HP MultiJet fusion. Uni-axial compression testing was performed to study the variation in critical buckling load due to change in unit cell topology and column height. The results revealed that the structured column possessing Diamond structures shows the highest critical buckling load followed by Neovius and Gyroid structures, whereas the Schwarz-P unit cell showed least resistance to buckling among the unit cells analyzed in this study. In addition to that, the Diamond design showed a uniform decrease in critical buckling load with a column height maximum of 5193 N, which makes it better for applications in which the column’s height is relatively higher while the Schwarz-P design showed advantages for low height column maximum of 2271 N. Overall, the variations of unit cell morphologies greatly affect the critical buckling load and permits the researchers to select different lattice structures for various applications as per load/stiffness requirement with different height and dimensions. Experimental results were validated by finite element analysis (FEA), which showed same patterns of buckling while the numerical values of critical buckling load show the variation to be up to 10%. |
