Manufacturing-constrained design reveals optimized hollow auxetic structures for lightweight applications, suggesting enhanced stiffness and mass reduction.
Hollow auxetic structures enable lightweight mechanical design by reducing mass while preserving architected deformation. However, hollow auxetic studies focus on LPBF metals. This study presents a manufacturing-constrained design and validation framework for a hollow hybrid re-entrant chiral lattice produced by stereolithography. The unit cell was parameterised by chiral angle, re-entrant strut length, and hollow internal diameter, with drainage features integrated into the CAD model to preserve hollow channels during printing and post-processing. A minimum internal diameter study defined the printable design window. Within these limits, a central composite design coupled with finite element analysis mapped the response surface and identified an optimised geometry of θ = 15°, L = 3.5 mm, and d = 1.68 mm, with a predicted unit-cell negative Poisson’s ratio of about −1.17. Compression testing confirmed that the printed unit cell and 3 × 3 × 3 lattice retained the intended rotation-dominated auxetic deformation mode. At the selected comparison strain, the unit cell showed a negative Poisson’s ratio of −0.68 and the 3 × 3 × 3 lattice showed −0.29. Relative to the solid lattice, the hollow lattice reduced density by 42.4% with only a 3.0% reduction in stiffness, increasing specific stiffness by 68.9% and specific peak strength by 5.2%, but reducing specific energy absorption by 25.6% due to earlier localisation and junction driven fracture. These results provide practical design guidance for manufacturable hollow SLA auxetic lattices, especially for lightweight and stiffness-limited applications where low mass and high specific stiffness are more important than energy absorption.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bridge et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: