Iven in Table three. However, the coefficient = 0.25, 0.12, 6.11 and = 0.92, 0.79,five.34 are given for FPT, and FPV, respectively. While the FPV FPV the reduce side of Figure for FPMA, FPMA, FPT, and FPV, respectively. Despite the fact that the is on is on the reduced side of 10a, Figure 10a, FPMA and moduli comparable to TPMS-based lattices lattices close the FPT plus the FPT haveFPMA have moduli comparable to TPMS-based and areand areto truss close to truss the relative the relative yield strength, the novel lattices surpass the presented lattices. As forlattices. As foryield strength, the novel lattices surpass the majority of most of the presented lattices from except for the sheet TPMS-based lattices. lattices in the literature,the literature, except for the sheet TPMS-based lattices.10-1.50-Relative Young’s Modulus50-5 5FPMA FPT FPV Gyroid-sheet [43] Diamond-sheet [43] Octet-truss [43] FCC [44] Gyroid-solid [43] Diamond-solid [43]Relative Yield Strength5010-3 5FPMA FPV FPT Gyroid-sheet [43] Diamond-sheet [43] Octet-truss [43] FCC [44] Gyroid-solid [43] Diamond-solid [43]50Actual Relative Density(a)Actual Relative Density(b)Figure (a) Relative modulus vs. relative density, (b) relative yield strength vs. relative density. Figure 10.ten. (a) Relative modulus vs. relative density, (b) relative yield strength vs. relative density.The specific energy absorption (SEA) vs.vs. strain is plotted in Figure 11, and it was The specific energy absorption (SEA) strain is plotted in Figure 11, and it was identified by dividing the location under the stress train curve by the lattice’s density discovered by dividing the location below the tension train curve by the lattice’s density (), as( ), as shown in the equation under, where ( ) the densification strain [58]. shown within the equation beneath, where ( )d isis the densification strain [58].Polymers 2021, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW= SEA =5.six.0 9.61 16.four 20.five()d d 0 ()d15 of(four)(four)1.eight 1.six 1.four.5 four.0 three.SEA (J/g)SEA (J/g)1.2 1.0 0.eight 0.six 0.four 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.two 0.3 0.4 0.five 0.six 0.5.eight ten.2 14.5 20.03.0 two.five two.0 1.five 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.Strain (mm/mm)Strain (mm/mm)(a)2.four 2.two 2.0 1.eight 1.six 1.4 1.two 1.0 0.eight 0.six 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.(b)SEA (J/g)5.41 9.9 15.2 20.10.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.Strain (mm/mm)(c)Figure 11. AB928 medchemexpress Certain energy absorption strain, (a) flat-plate modified auxetic, flat-plate tesseract, (c) flat plate vintile. Figure 11. Distinct power absorption vs.vs. strain, (a)flat-plate modified auxetic, (b)(b) flat-plate tesseract, (c) flat plate vintile.The FPT can attain a outstanding SEA of 4.50 J/g at a strain of 0.7, the FPV reaches a SEA of two.20 J/g at a strain of 0.75, and the MA reaches an SEA of 1.70 J/g at a strain of 0.58. On the other hand, it’s worth noting that the FPT at 20 relative density sees a reduce in its SEA because of the early onset of densification. It’s intriguing to note that the effects of cell architecture come to be much less pronounced with an increase in relative density, as evident by FigurePolymers 2021, 13,15 ofThe FPT can reach a Elesclomol Formula remarkable SEA of 4.50 J/g at a strain of 0.7, the FPV reaches a SEA of 2.20 J/g at a strain of 0.75, plus the MA reaches an SEA of 1.70 J/g at a strain of 0.58. On the other hand, it is actually worth noting that the FPT at 20 relative density sees a reduce in its SEA due to the early onset of densification. It can be interesting to note that the effects of cell architecture become less pronounced with an increase in relative density, as evident by Figure eight, where the fits are likely to converge to a single point. Nonetheless, that does.