Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review examines recent advances in three‐dimensional (3D) textile‐reinforced composites, with emphasis on architecture, mechanical performance, and multiscale modeling. It compares 3D woven, knitted, and braided composites in terms of structural characteristics, load‐transfer mechanisms, and architecture‐dependent modeling requirements. By first discussing the limitations of two‐dimensional textile reinforcements, particularly the absence of continuous through‐thickness reinforcement, this review clarifies the structural necessity and engineering significance of 3D textile architectures. The mechanical behavior of these composites under tensile, flexural, compressive, impact, and interlaminar loading is then reviewed. Particular attention is given to the effects of through‐thickness yarns, connecting yarns, and spatially continuous fiber bundles on interlaminar load transfer, delamination resistance, and load‐bearing capacity. Recent advances in meso‐scale geometric modeling are further discussed, including yarn cross‐section approximation, yarn path description, representative volume element construction, homogenization analysis, and progressive damage simulation. Key challenges associated with failure criteria, parameter calibration, and numerical stability are also highlighted. Finally, future research directions are proposed regarding preform manufacturing, structure–property relationships, near‐net‐shape forming of complex components, and multiscale mechanical prediction. Together, these discussions link textile architecture with load transfer, process‐induced mesostructure, and multiscale damage prediction. The comparison highlights both transferable modeling principles and architecture‐specific limitations across 3D textile systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: