Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Fabrication-Directed Entanglement for Designing Chiral and Anisotropic Metamaterial Foams

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A single 3D-printed filament can be patterned into a foam with programmed stiffness, chirality, and normal-shear coupling.

desk verdict FDE is a genuinely new integration of inverse homogenization with viscous thread printing, and the qualitative chiral response is credible, but the headline normal-shear coupling is measured on a mirrored bi-chiral sample with a post-hoc sign-flip, so the quantitative claim needs direct confirmation on a uniform chiral array. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.03064 v1 pith:Z4LVUUCI submitted 2025-05-05 physics.app-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.comp-ph

Daniel Revier , Jeffrey Ian Lipton This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.app-phcond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.comp-ph
keywords MetamaterialsChiralityFoamsTopologyOptimizationViscousThreadPrintingNormal-shearcouplingAnisotropyInversehomogenization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper introduces Fabrication-Directed Entanglement (FDE), a printing strategy in which one continuous filament is deliberately coiled into dense and sparse regions, turning an ordinary entangled foam into a mechanical metamaterial. The authors claim that coupling viscous thread printing with computational design—topology optimization—lets them program anisotropy, Poisson's ratio, and chirality within a monolithic, single-material foam. They support this with four printed designs whose measured responses agree with calibrated simulations, including a chiral foam with normal-shear coupling $\eta_{212}\approx 0.72$. If correct, FDE broadens what is achievable from one extruded thermoplastic without adding a second phase or changing its chemistry.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the eigenstructure target $T^* = V\Lambda V^T$, where $V$ is an orthonormal set of principal strain directions chosen by the designer and $\Lambda = \mathrm{diag}(a,1,1)$ assigns one compliant (or rigid) direction relative to two supporting directions. The optimizer matches the normalized homogenized stiffness matrix (for unimodes) or compliance matrix (for bimodes) to this target, and the resulting density field is realized as dense versus sparse coiling by varying the viscous thread printing parameters $H^*=H/D_T$ and $V^*=F/U$ along the toolpath. The mismatch between the idealized topology and the roughly 1.2 mm coil size is then corrected by a single dilation factor $\chi=0.15$ fit to the four fabricated samples.

What would settle it

Fabricate three designs from the simulated 247 that were not part of the calibration set and whose predicted properties differ sharply from the four tested samples, then measure their Poisson's ratios and normal-shear coupling in the 0-2.5% strain regime. If the measured values depart from the calibrated-simulation predictions in sign or in magnitude beyond the scatter seen in the calibration set, the single-dilation-factor 2D model does not represent the 3D foam.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that patterned entanglement density alone can prescribe macroscopic elasticity. Using two compatible print regimes to create quasi-two-phase dense and sparse regions, and inverse homogenization to decide where each goes, the paper realizes unimode designs (one prescribed compliant direction) and bimode designs (two prescribed compliant directions) with targeted stiffness directions. The four fabricated examples show directional stiffness ratios such as $E_1/E_2 \approx 1.87$, Poisson's ratios spanning roughly $0.06$ to $0.56$, and a programmed vertical-to-shear coupling of $\eta_{212}\approx 0.72$ that gives the foam a handed, chiral response. The authors further argue that 247 simulated designs occupy property regions inaccessible to simple blends of dense and sparse homogeneous foams, so the mechanism is not just mixing two stiffnesses but arranging them.

Load-bearing premise

The predicted 247-design property map rests on a two-dimensional simulation corrected by a single post-hoc dilation factor ($\chi=0.15$) fit to four fabricated samples, assuming that this captures how the real layer-by-layer three-dimensional foam behaves.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Monolithic single-material foams can be designed for directional stiffness, with vertical-compliant samples reaching $E_1/E_2\approx 1.87$ while keeping lateral and shear strains small.
  • Poisson's ratio can be tuned from about $0.06$ to $0.56$ by choosing the target eigenstructure instead of optimizing the ratio directly.
  • A single filament can produce a chiral foam whose vertical compression is converted into shear, which the authors interpret as the first programmed chirality in a monolithic foam built from one continuous strand.
  • Because the printed structure remains one continuous filament, the resulting material is inherently connected, avoiding the disconnected features that often plague density-based topology optimization.
  • The calibrated simulations of 247 designs indicate that patterned entanglement expands the accessible stiffness, Poisson-ratio, and normal-shear coupling space beyond any simple mixing rule for homogeneous foams.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same eigenstructure-targeting scheme should transfer to other additive or deposition processes that can create two-phase-like density patterns, so the core idea is not limited to viscous thread instability.
  • Because the measured minor coupling terms in symmetric designs likely trace to toolpath orientation and layer stacking, aligning the printed toolpath with the intended material axes may clean up or even eliminate those artifacts.
  • A natural stress test is to fabricate several of the 247 simulated designs that were not part of the calibration set; if their measured properties track the calibrated predictions, the idea of a single fitted dilation factor is corroborated, and if not, the 2D model needs a richer 3D correction.
  • The early buckling around 5% strain suggests FDE foams are best used in small-strain regimes or with geometry changes, so pairing FDE with stability-aware layout constraints could bring the programmed response into practical strain ranges.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript introduces Fabrication-Directed Entanglement (FDE), which combines viscous thread printing (VTP) with eigenstructure-based inverse homogenization to pattern dense and sparse entangled regions within a monolithic foam made from a single continuous filament. The authors fabricate four topology-optimized designs, measure their effective elastic properties under uniaxial compression using digital image correlation, and compare them with 2D periodic homogenization simulations calibrated post-fabrication by adjusting the projection dilation factor χ from 0.5 to 0.15. They report tunable directional stiffness (E1/E2 up to about 1.87), Poisson's ratios from about 0.06 to 0.56, and a normal-shear coupling η212≈0.72 measured on a mirrored chiral sample, and they use the calibrated model to map an expanded property space across 247 simulated designs. The authors are transparent that post-hoc calibration and 2D modeling limit a priori prediction.

Significance. If the quantitative claims survive scrutiny, FDE would be a meaningful advance: it would provide a route to program anisotropy and chirality in a monolithic, single-material entangled foam, and the paper's open data/code and explicit limitation statements are strengths. The qualitative experimental evidence—especially the anisotropy and Poisson's-ratio trends and the visual opposite-signed shear in the chiral sample—supports the concept. However, the headline η212 value is derived from a mirrored bi-chiral sample through a sign-flip averaging procedure, and the simulated property-space claims rest on a calibration parameter fitted to the same samples used for validation; the paper does not yet establish quantitative predictive capability.

major comments (4)
  1. [§6.5; SI S3] The post-fabrication calibration in §6.5 and SI S3 fits the projection dilation factor χ, together with base-material properties and objective weights, to minimize errors in E1, E2, ν12, and ν21 measured on the four fabricated samples; Table 1 then presents agreement between that same calibration and measurement, and §4.4 uses the fitted χ=0.15 to generate the 247-design property space. This is a fitting-labeled-prediction loop for the simulation-based claims, not an independent validation, and it makes the expanded property space conditional on the unproven transferability of a single dilation parameter to other topologies, volume fractions, and target eigenstructures. I request out-of-sample validation (hold out at least one fabricated design or fabricate a new design predicted by the calibrated model), a sensitivity analysis of the property-space predictions with respect to χ, and error bars on the calibrated parameters.
  2. [§4.2; SI S1] The headline normal-shear coupling η212≈0.72 is not directly measured on a uniform chiral foam. As described in §4.2 and SI S1, the fabricated sample is mirrored about its horizontal axis, and the reported value is recovered by locating the sample midline and multiplying all shear strains below it by −1 before ROI averaging. This sign-flip procedure assumes the two mirrored halves produce exactly equal and opposite shear; any imperfection in the antisymmetry from the 45° toolpath, layer-by-layer stacking, or ROI/midline misalignment can systematically inflate the averaged coupling. Because η was intentionally excluded from the calibration objective (SI S3), the simulated-versus-measured agreement of 0.67 versus 0.72 is not an independent confirmation, and the simulation represents a uniform periodic cell while the sample is a bi-chiral supercell. I request either a direct measurement on a uniformly chiral (non-mirrored) array or a detailed uncertainty analysis of the sign-flip procedure, and the text should state clearly that the reported η212 is an effective property of the bi-chiral supercell rather than a directly measured homogeneous property.
  3. [Table 1; §4.3] Table 1 reports one value per property with no replicates or error bars, and the measured-versus-simulated agreement is much weaker for secondary properties: for the Unimode Bulk design ν12 is 0.06 measured versus 0.18 simulated and ν21 is 0.06 versus 0.14, while §4.3 attributes such discrepancies to toolpath orientation and stacking effects that the 2D periodic model cannot capture. This means the current data support only qualitative claims about Poisson's ratios and minor coupling terms, and the quantitative error bars around the headline anisotropy and chirality numbers are unknown. I request at least three replicate samples per design, reporting of standard deviations, and an explicit statement of which effective properties the calibrated 2D model is expected to predict quantitatively.
  4. [§4.4; §6.5] The claimed expansion of the achievable material property space (n=247 simulations) is generated entirely by applying the single calibrated dilation factor χ=0.15 to designs whose targets include different eigenstructures, symmetries, and volume fractions. No evidence is provided that χ, fit to four samples, transfers to this much larger design library, and the authors themselves caution in §4.3 and §5 that Poisson's-ratio predictions and minor coupling terms should be viewed qualitatively. The property-space plots therefore should be presented as exploratory predictions under a strong modeling assumption, with sensitivity to χ shown (e.g., error bars or shaded regions), until one or more designs outside the calibration set are fabricated and tested.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§3.1] In the discussion of the selected VTP parameters, 'dense and spare phases' should read 'dense and sparse phases'.
  2. [Figure 3 caption] The caption refers to 'the handed shearing material (Figure 2c)'; the handed sample is the fourth design shown in Figure 2d, not Figure 2c.
  3. [Figure 2 caption] The caption lists 'complaint to shear' where 'compliant to shear' is intended.
  4. [SI S3] The parenthetical 'referred to as η in [18, 35]' appears to be a typo; the projection parameter being discussed is χ (or β), not η.
  5. [§4; SI S1] The definition of the normal-shear coupling coefficient should be stated consistently: the main text defines ηkij = γij/εkk, while SI S1 uses ¯ηyxy = d¯εxy/d¯εy, which is half of the engineering-strain slope; the relationship between these conventions (including any factor of two) should be made explicit for readers.
  6. [Figure 4c] The homogeneous baseline in Figure 4c appears to use a single ν=0.4 for both endpoints, whereas the measured homogeneous phases have νLD≈0.45 and νHD≈0.35; the interpolation line should reflect the actual phase properties or state that it is a schematic approximation.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The post-fabrication χ calibration makes the Table 1 E/ν simulation comparisons partly fit-by-construction, but the excluded η212 and the measured chiral response carry independent weight.

  1. fitted input called prediction [§6.5 Calibration of Simulation Parameters; SI §S3; Table 1; §4.4]
    "This calibration involved optimizing key simulation parameters to minimize the difference between simulated and measured mechanical properties (specifically E1, E2,ν12, andν21). Through this process, the topology optimization projection dilation factor (χ) was identified as the dominant parameter influencing the agreement... All simulated properties reported subsequently in this work (Table 1, Figure 4) utilize the calibrated dilation factor of χ = 0.15 (compared to the initial value of χ = 0.5)."

    The calibration objective in SI S3 minimizes the weighted squared error between simulated and measured E1, E2, ν12, and ν21 across the fabricated designs. Table 1 then reports those same simulated quantities as 'Measured(Simulated)' validation entries, so the agreement for those four properties is partly the result of fitting χ to the measured data rather than an independent prediction. The Figure 4 property space of 247 designs is generated with this same fitted χ, making it a calibrated extrapolation rather than an a priori prediction. Importantly, η212 was excluded from the calibration objective, so the simulated-versus-measured chiral coupling (0.67 versus 0.72) and the measured chiral response remain independent evidence for the central chirality claim.

full rationale

The paper is transparent about its calibration loop: the χ = 0.15 dilation factor is fit post-fabrication to E1, E2, ν12, and ν21, and the authors explicitly state in the Conclusion that this reliance on post-fabrication calibration limits a priori prediction of new designs. That admission does not eliminate the circularity in presenting the Table 1 E/ν comparisons as validation, but it does mean the circularity is confined to the fitted quantities. The headline chiral result, η212 ≈ 0.72, is measured from DIC and was deliberately left out of the calibration objective, so its agreement with the calibrated simulation is an independent check. The DIC measurement on the mirrored, bi-chiral sample does rely on an antisymmetry assumption and a sign-flip procedure, which is an experimental validity concern rather than a derivation-chain circularity. The self-citations to prior VTP work (e.g., refs. 19, 22, 24, 40, 42) are used as method inputs or design precedents, not as load-bearing uniqueness theorems, and no ansatz is smuggled in through citation. Overall, the core FDE claim—that patterned entanglement produces programmable anisotropy and chirality—rests on measured samples and an excluded-from-calibration coupling term, so the circularity is partial and localized rather than total.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on calibrated simulation to a substantial degree, and on the 2D-to-3D modeling assumption. There are four hand-chosen or fitted parameters, dominated by the post-hoc calibration of χ, and three domain assumptions about continuum homogenization of a stochastic coil network. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Projection dilation factor χ = 0.15 (calibrated from 0.5)
    Fitted in §6.5/S3 to minimize weighted error between simulated and measured E1, E2, ν12, and ν21 for the four fabricated designs; used for all subsequent property space simulations.
  • Target eigenvalue ratio a = 1/30
    Set equal to the measured dense/sparse stiffness ratio (ELD/EHD ≈ 1/30) in §S2; controls the relative magnitude of the compliant direction in the target tensor T*.
  • Effective Poisson's ratio ν for both phases = 0.4
    Assumed intermediate between measured νLD≈0.45 and νHD≈0.35 in §S2; used in TO material interpolation and simulations.
  • Calibration objective weights = w=1 for E1,E2; w=0.1 for ν12,ν21
    Chosen by hand in §S3; these weights influence the fitted χ and hence all simulated properties.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Periodic homogenization and linear elasticity with the relation σ=Cε apply to the entangled foam at effective scales.
    Invoked in §2.2 and §6.4; the foam is treated as a continuum material with a symmetric homogenized elasticity matrix C, despite the discrete stochastic coil structure.
  • ad hoc to paper A 2D cross-diagonal triangular mesh with periodic boundary conditions captures the 3D response of the layer-by-layer printed foam.
    Used in §6.4; out-of-plane and layer-stacking effects are neglected, and §4.3 attributes some simulation-experiment discrepancies to toolpath orientation and stacking.
  • domain assumption The quasi-two-phase description with a ~30:1 stiffness ratio and constant Poisson's ratio 0.4 represents the mechanical behavior of dense and sparse VTP coils.
    Introduced in §3.1 and §S2; the actual foam has continuous stiffness variations and possibly different Poisson's ratios per phase.
  • ad hoc to paper The calibration of χ on four samples transfers to other topologies and targets in the expanded property space sweep.
    Implicit in §4.4, where 247 simulated designs use the same calibrated χ=0.15; no independent validation of this transfer is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fabrication-Directed Entanglement for Designing Chiral and Anisotropic Metamaterial Foams." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z4LVUUCI

@misc{pith2026250503064,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fabrication-Directed Entanglement for Designing Chiral and Anisotropic Metamaterial Foams},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z4LVUUCI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.03064}
}
abstract

Entangled networks are fundamental in various systems, from biological structures to engineered materials. Current techniques for programming entanglement often rely on intricate chemistry or result in statistically homogeneous networks, limiting the ability to create spatially patterned structures with precisely engineered functions. Thus, a key challenge remains in developing approaches to program complex mechanical behaviors, such as anisotropy and chirality, within monolithic entangled structures. This work introduces Fabrication-Directed Entanglement (FDE), a methodology integrating viscous thread printing (VTP) and topology optimization (TO) to program the entanglement of a single homogeneous filament. By spatially adjusting VTP parameters (deposition height, speed), we control local coiling density, creating quasi-two-phase (dense/sparse) regions within a monolithic entangled foam. Topology optimization guides the placement of these regions to achieve target macroscopic mechanical properties. Here we show foam-like mechanical metamaterials with tunable compliance, rigidity, and chirality. Experimental testing and simulation confirm that FDE expands the achievable material property space compared to homogeneous VTP foams, enabling properties like tunable directional stiffness, Poisson's ratios from $\nu\approx0.06~\text{to}~0.56$, and novel significant normal-shear coupling ($\eta_{212}\approx0.72$) from a single base material. This approach offers a viable new pathway for designing complex, functional entangled foam structures with tailored mechanical behaviors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Soft Electrothermal Meta-Actuator for Robust Multifunctional Control

    cs.RO 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A double-sided thin-film electrothermal actuator demonstrates electrically selectable bidirectional bending, >100x lower ambient-temperature sensitivity of the rest state, and about 10x faster active return than passi...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    & Trovato, A

    Salicari, L., Baiesi, M., Orlandini, E. & Trovato, A. Folding kinetics of an entangled protein. PLoS Comput. Biol. 19, e1011107 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Dhand, A. P. et al. Additive manufacturing of highly entangled polymer networks. Science 385, 566–572 (2024)

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Lu, X. L. & Mow, V. C. Biomechanics of articular cartilage and determination of material properties. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 40, 193–199 (2008)

    work page 2008

  4. [4]

    Day, T. C. et al. Morphological entanglement in living systems. Phys. Rev. X. 14 (2024). 5 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6Value Comparison for E1 Comparison for E2 1049 1467 2246 Experiment ID 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6Value Comparison for nu12 1049 1467 2246 Experiment ID Comparison for nu21 Fit Quality Comparison Original Sim Measured Calibrated Sim Fig. S...

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Sulkowska, J. I. On folding of entangled proteins: knots, lassos, links andθ-curves. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 60, 131–141 (2020)

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    & Sulkowska, J

    Dabrowski-Tumanski, P. & Sulkowska, J. I. Topological knots and links in proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 114, 3415–3420 (2017)

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Christian, T. et al. Methyl transfer by substrate signaling from a knotted protein fold. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 23, 941–948 (2016)

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Zhang, D. et al. Compression mechanics of nickel-based superalloy metal rubber. Mater. Sci. Eng. A Struct. Mater. 580, 305–312 (2013)

    work page 2013

Show all 46 references
  1. [9]

    Tan, Q., Liu, P., Du, C., Wu, L. & He, G. Mechanical behaviors of quasi-ordered entangled aluminum alloy wire material. Mater. Sci. Eng. A Struct. Mater. 527, 38–44 (2009)

    2009

  2. [10]

    Tan, Q. & He, G. 3D entangled wire reinforced metallic composites. Mater. Sci. Eng. A Struct. Mater. 546, 233–238 (2012)

    2012

  3. [11]

    Liu, P., Tan, Q., Wu, L. & He, G. Compressive and pseudo-elastic hysteresis behavior of entangled titanium wire materials. Mater. Sci. Eng. A Struct. Mater. 527, 3301–3309 (2010). 6

    2010

  4. [12]

    Gadot, B. et al. Entangled single-wire NiTi material: A porous metal with tunable superelastic and shape memory properties. Acta Mater. 96, 311–323 (2015)

    2015

  5. [13]

    Rodney, D., Gadot, B., Martinez, O., Du Roscoat, S. R. & Org´ eas, L. hal. science (ed.) Poisson’s function of single-wire entangled materials: below 0 in traction and above 1/2 in compression. (ed.hal. science) CFM 2015-22` eme Congr` es Fran¸ cais de M´ ecanique(hal.science, 2015)

    2015

  6. [14]

    & Newell, P

    Kuts, M., Walker, J. & Newell, P. Computational homogenization of linear elastic properties in porous non-woven fibrous materials. Mech. Mater. 189, 104868 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    G., Nukavarapu, S

    Kumbar, S. G., Nukavarapu, S. P., James, R., Nair, L. S. & Laurencin, C. T. Electrospun poly(lactic acid-co-glycolic acid) scaffolds for skin tissue engineering. Biomaterials 29, 4100–4107 (2008)

    2008

  8. [16]

    & Xia, Y

    Xue, J., Wu, T., Dai, Y. & Xia, Y. Electrospinning and electrospun nanofibers: Methods, materials, and applications. Chem. Rev. 119, 5298–5415 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    & Xia, Y

    Li, D. & Xia, Y. Electrospinning of nanofibers: Reinventing the wheel? Adv. Mater. 16, 1151–1170 (2004)

    2004

  10. [18]

    Bendsøe, M. P. & Kikuchi, N. Generating optimal topologies in structural design using a homogenization method. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 71, 197–224 (1988)

    1988

  11. [19]

    Lipton, J. I. & Lipson, H. 3D printing variable stiffness foams using viscous thread instability. Sci. Rep. 6, 29996 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    & Zhao, X

    Yuk, H. & Zhao, X. A new 3D printing strategy by harnessing deformation, instability, and fracture of viscoelastic inks. Adv. Mater. 30 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    Emery, B., Revier, D. L. & Lipton, J. I. Beaman, J. J. (ed.) Applied viscous thread instability for manufacturing 3D printed foams . (ed.Beaman, J. J.) (University of Texas at Austin, 2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    Emery, B. et al. Foams with 3D spatially programmed mechanics enabled by autonomous active learning on viscous thread printing. Adv. Sci. (Weinh.) 11, e2408062 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    M., Eaves, T

    Brun, P.-T., Audoly, B., Ribe, N. M., Eaves, T. S. & Lister, J. R. Liquid ropes: a geometrical model for thin viscous jet instabilities. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 174501 (2015)

    2015

  16. [24]

    A., Revier, D., Sarkar, V., Nakura, M

    Emery, B. A., Revier, D., Sarkar, V., Nakura, M. & Lipton, J. I. Beaman, J. J. (ed.) 3D printed intelligently graded functional stiffness foam for sturdier multi stiffness materials. (ed.Beaman, J. J.) (University of Texas at Austin, 2023). 7

    2023

  17. [25]

    Materials with prescribed constitutive parameters: An inverse homogenization problem

    Sigmund, O. Materials with prescribed constitutive parameters: An inverse homogenization problem. Int. J. Solids Struct. 31, 2313–2329 (1994)

    1994

  18. [26]

    & Andreasen, C

    Andreassen, E. & Andreasen, C. S. How to determine composite material properties using numerical homogenization. Comput. Mater. Sci. 83, 488–495 (2014)

    2014

  19. [27]

    Andreassen, E., Lazarov, B. S. & Sigmund, O. Design of manufacturable 3D extremal elastic microstructure. Mech. Mater. 69, 1–10 (2014)

    2014

  20. [28]

    & Kiziltas, G

    El-Kahlout, Y. & Kiziltas, G. Inverse synthesis of electromagnetic materials using homogenization based topology optimization. Electromagn. Waves (Camb.) 115, 343–380 (2011)

    2011

  21. [29]

    Diaz, A. R. & Sigmund, O. A topology optimization method for design of negative permeability metamaterials. Struct. Multidiscipl. Optim. 41, 163–177 (2010)

    2010

  22. [30]

    Lu, L. et al. Topology optimization of an acoustic metamaterial with negative bulk modulus using local resonance. Finite Elem. Anal. Des. 72, 1–12 (2013)

    2013

  23. [31]

    Jensen, J. S. & Sigmund, O. Topology optimization for nano-photonics. Laser Photon. Rev. 5, 308–321 (2011)

    2011

  24. [32]

    Milton, G. W. & Cherkaev, A. V. Which elasticity tensors are realizable? J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 117, 483–493 (1995)

    1995

  25. [33]

    & Wegener, M

    Kadic, M., B¨ uckmann, T., Stenger, N., Thiel, M. & Wegener, M. On the practi- cability of pentamode mechanical metamaterials. Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 191901 (2012)

    2012

  26. [34]

    Bendsoe, M. P. & Sigmund, O. Topology optimization: Theory, methods, and applications 2 edn (Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    Wang, F., Lazarov, B. S. & Sigmund, O. On projection methods, convergence and robust formulations in topology optimization. Struct. Multidiscipl. Optim. 43, 767–784 (2011)

    2011

  28. [36]

    M., Oskooi, A., Johnson, S

    Hammond, A. M., Oskooi, A., Johnson, S. G. & Ralph, S. E. Photonic topology optimization with semiconductor-foundry design-rule constraints. Opt. Express 29, 23916–23938 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    Jones, R. M. Mechanics of composite materials 2 edn (CRC Press, London, England, 2018)

    2018

  30. [38]

    Grima, J. N. & Evans, K. E. Auxetic behavior from rotating squares. J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 19, 1563–1565 (2000). 8

    2000

  31. [39]

    Milton, G. W. Composite materials with poisson’s ratios close to – 1. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 40, 1105–1137 (1992)

    1992

  32. [40]

    Lipton, J. I. et al. Handedness in shearing auxetics creates rigid and compliant structures. Science 360, 632–635 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Alderson, A. et al. Elastic constants of 3-, 4- and 6-connected chiral and anti- chiral honeycombs subject to uniaxial in-plane loading. Compos. Sci. Technol. 70, 1042–1048 (2010)

    2010

  34. [42]

    & Lipton, J

    Nakura, M., Sarkar, V., Revier, D., Emery, B. & Lipton, J. I. Beaman, J. J. (ed.) An interpolative slicing algorithm for continuously graded stiffness in viscous thread printed foams. (ed.Beaman, J. J.) (University of Texas at Austin, 2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    & Antoniou, A

    Blaber, J., Adair, B. & Antoniou, A. Ncorr: Open-source 2D digital image correlation matlab software. Exp. Mech. 55, 1105–1122 (2015)

    2015

  36. [44]

    Alnæs, M. et al. The FEniCS project version 1.5 (2015)

    2015

  37. [45]

    Johnson, S. G. The NLopt nonlinear-optimization package

  38. [46]

    The method of moving asymptotes–a new method for structural optimization

    Svanberg, K. The method of moving asymptotes–a new method for structural optimization. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 24, 359–373 (1987). 9 T able S3 Original outputs of the IH process (column 1) and the post-calibrated topologies (column 2) for the examples from Figure 2 and as ...

    1987

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.