Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and

Structures
http://jim.sagepub.com/

A Cellular Kirigami Morphing Wingbox Concept

Kazuya Saito, Fabio Agnese and Fabrizio Scarpa
Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures published online 5 August 2011
DOI: 10.1177/1045389X11416030

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://jim.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/07/30/1045389X11416030
A more recent version of this article was published on - Aug 30, 2011

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://jim.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://jim.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Version of Record - Aug 30, 2011

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Aug 5, 2011

What is This?

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013

 A Cellular Kirigami Morphing Wingbox Concept
KAZUYA SAITO,1 FABIO AGNESE2 AND FABRIZIO SCARPA2,
1
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency, Institute of Space and Astronautical Science, Yoshinodai, Sagamihara,
Kanagawa 252-5210, Japan
2
Advanced Composites Centre for Innovation and Science, University of Bristol, BS8 1TR Bristol, UK

ABSTRACT: This study introduces the design and manufacturing of a wingbox based on a
cellular hexagonal morphology and produced using kirigami techniques. The wingbox is
manufactured in autoclave-cured woven Kevlar fabric using ply-cutting patterns designed
around an airfoil profile. The cellular wingbox can be completely or partially folded, providing
some shape-adapting capabilities for possible morphing applications. A numerical and ana-
lytical evaluation of the torsional stiffness of the wingbox with novel elastomeric face skins is
also performed.

Key Words: honeycomb, origami, airfoil, morphing, torsional stiffness.

INTRODUCTION structures made by truss rods and distributed actuators

ORPHING wing technologies have created a con-
M siderable interest between engineers and scientists
during the past two decades; thanks also to major R&D
programs run by US agencies (Wlezien et al., 1998;
Kudva, 2000). A morphing wing platform allows for
expanding the flight envelope of a given aircraft, provid-
ing in theory a multitude of cruise operational configu-
rations or adaptive surface controls to increase the
performance during approach or increase maneuver
characteristics (Powers and Webb, 1997; Monner,
1999; Bowman et al., 2002; Ashley, 2003). Morphing
wing configurations have been evaluated in particular
for micro air vehicles (MAVs), due to the intrinsic
high efficiency of any actuation authority provided to
deform in a continuous way high-deformable wings
(Abdulrahim et al., 2005). A particular strand of
research in morphing wing technologies has been the
development of compliant and flexible skins/structures
for one-dimensional (1-D) morphing capabilities, either
using cellular configurations (Murray et al., 2010;
Olympio et al., 2010) or laminate corrugation using rec-
tangular-type profiles (Thill et al., 2010). For more
information on morphing skins configurations, the
interested reader can consult the work of (Thill et al.,
2008). In typical fixed-wing architecture, the wingbox is
the other component subjected to innovative re-design
to accommodate continuous camber variations. One of
the most evaluated solutions is the use of lattice

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
E-mail: f.scarpa@bris.ac.uk
Figures 2—8 appear in color online: http://jim.sagepub.com
for adaptive camber and trailing edge tip displacement
control (Monner et al., 1999; Baker and Friswell, 2008).
Cellular wingboxes using a chiral rotational symmetry
and showing equivalent negative Poisson’s ratio (Prall
and Lakes, 1996) have been also proposed as constitu-
tive architectures for aeroelastically tailored morphing
camber wings (Bornengo et al., 2005; Spadoni and
Ruzzene, 2007; Martin et al., 2008).
The cellular structures used in morphing applications
have been insofar designed and manufactured using
molding techniques, rapid prototyping (Spadoni et al.,
2006; Martin et al., 2008), or using complex composite
joints (Bettini et al., 2010). In this study, a novel
manufacturing method based on kirigami techniques is
proposed to produce a prototype of adaptive cellular
wingbox configuration. Kirigami is a variation of ori-
gami, the traditional Japanese popular art of paper fold-
ing that has received broad attention from artists,
architects, and mathematicians. From the engineering
point of view, the use of origami has two significant
features: the capability of producing a foldable/deploy-
able structure and the provision at the same time of a
reinforcement function. The former has inspired various
types of deployable structures (Pellegrino, 2002;
Mitsuishi et al., 2008), while the latter enables the
designer to create a lightweight but rigid structure
from a single flat sheet. Unlike a traditional origami,
kirigami involves paper cutting, allowing artists to
create amazing patterns on paper by combining cut
and fold techniques.
Nojima and Saito (2006) applied origami techniques
to create integral sandwich structures and devised vari-
ous core panels with different shapes and tessellations.

JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT MATERIAL SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURES, Vol. 0—2011 1

1045-389X/11/00 0001—10 $10.00/0 DOI: 10.1177/1045389X11416030
ß The Author(s), 2011. Reprints and permissions:
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013
2 K. SAITO ET AL.
(a)
(c)
Figure 1. The manufacturing process of the Kirigami honeycomb.
The cellular structures are manufactured by folding a
thin flat sheet with periodical distributions of slits or
punched out portions. One of the results of the applica-
tion of the origami technique includes a new type of
honeycomb core (regular hexagonal) created from cut-
ting and folding a single paper. By using this method,
Nojima and Saito (2006) also suggest the way to create
3-D honeycombs having various cross-sections, includ-
ing an airfoil shape.
The cellular wingbox that is proposed in this study
could be entirely or partially foldable, due to the partic-
ular kirigami manufacturing process used. The use of
honeycomb fillers is quite traditional in control surface
constructions, being (for example) an integral part of the
design of the rudder surface of the Concorde (Hamer,
1971), trailing edges of the Airbus A300B (Anonymous,
1993) and of helicopter rotor blades (McCrum et al.,
1997). While for commercial honeycomb constructions
the manufacturing of sections of the trailing edge of wing-
box requires the machining of the core, the origami
manufacturing process allows producing a honeycomb-
based structure with the minimum amount of required
material. Moreover — as it will be demonstrated in this
study—the origami (or kirigami) based process allows
for manufacturing a honeycomb structure with an arbi-
trary shape that is not limited to rectangular extruded
panels like commercial hexagonal honeycombs. The
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013
(b)
Prepreg with cut
Top mold
Bottom mold
Autoclave
Cure
partial folding of the kirigami honeycombs also allows
the production of multiple hinges and adaptive struc-
tures, making the cellular origami wingbox design an
appealing concept for morphing wing applications. In
particular, the performance of the cellular wingbox pro-
posed in this study as core for a wing design based on a
NACA 2415 profile is assessed using a finite element (FE)
approach. The NACA 2415 is a profile used in low-speed
UAVs (unnamed aerial vehicles) and MAV configura-
tions (Goraj and Frydrychewicz, 2004), and as such, it
has been chosen as a baseline profile for the cellular wing-
box produced in this study. In view of the dimensions of
the demonstrators manufactured, the numerical models
related to a morphing wing configuration are developed
for a possible MAV application using novel types of elas-
tomeric face skins developed for unidirectional morphing
applications (Murray et al., 2010; Olympio et al., 2010).
In particular, the torsional stiffness is evaluated to assess
the impact of using the cellular wingbox in static aero-
elastic divergence (Bisplinghoff et al., 1983), a flight
mechanics parameter of significant importance for
MAV design (Stanford, 2008).
MANUFACTURING PROCESS
Figure 1 shows the basic process layout to manufac-
ture a composite kirigami honeycomb with regular
 A Cellular Kirigami Morphing Wingbox Concept
Figure 2. Cutting—folding pattern for the NACA 2415 honeycomb.
hexagonal topology (wall aspect ratio 1, internal cell
angle 30 (Gibson and Ashby, 1997). The production
consists of three steps: (a) making the pattern of cutting
and folding lines on the prepreg sheet, (b) curing the
sheet into a corrugated shape using a mold, and (c),
folding and gluing the corrugated sheet. An orthogonal
cutting pattern produces normal flat honeycombs
(Figure 1(a)); otherwise it is possible to create cross sec-
tions of various shapes only by changing the pattern of
the cuts in the composite prepreg sheet.
Figure 2(a) shows the development charts for the
airfoil honeycomb considered in this study, a NACA
2415. The prepreg used in Kevlar woven fabric 49
(914) (Wang et al., 1995, Daniel and Oshai, 2005)
(Young’s modulus EK ¼ 29 GPa, Poisson’s ratio
nK ¼ 0.05, density rK ¼ 1380 kg m3), with thickness of
the sheets equal to 0.24 mm. Black lines and dashed lines
indicate cutting and folding, respectively. In this model,
the cross-sections are equally partitioned and approxi-
mated into 17 trapeziums, as shown at the top of Figure
2(a). The dimensions of these trapeziums determine the
cutting patterns of the chart (Nojima and Saito, 2006).
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013
3
The chord of the airfoil honeycomb produced is 0.13 m,
with a span width of 0.097 m. Figure 2(b) shows the
prepreg cut with the above pattern. Dashed line cutting
is used to make the folding lines.
The overall manufacturing process used for the wing-
box honeycomb is shown in Figure 3. In order to make
the corrugation on the sheet, seven aluminum trapezium
rods (2024 alloy) are used, each obtained from hexago-
nal cross-section bars. The woven Kevlar is folded along
the specific lines around the three top and four bottom
rods, while the mold—Kevlar assembly is wrapped using
polyethylene release film (Figure 3(a)). The mold is sub-
sequently inserted into a vacuum bag and put in an
autoclave for 60 min and 175 C to cure the prepreg
(Figure 3(b)). The cured sample with the corrugate
shape is shown in Figure 3(c). The wingbox honeycomb
can be finally assembled by folding and gluing progres-
sively the patterned sheets using single-component
epoxy glue (Figure 4(a)—(d)). Due to gluing, the hori-
zontal walls have a double thickness, similar to commer-
cial honeycombs manufactured using the classical
staggered pattern process (Zenkert, 1997). One can
4 K. SAITO ET AL.

Top rods

(a)

Bottom rods

Vacuum bag
(b)
Breather

A1 Plate
Release film
Prepreg
Rod Release film
Valve

Sealing tape

Aluminum plate

(c)

Figure 3. Setup of the mold and obtained corrugated sheet.

notice also that an equivalent hinge can be produced at
any section along the airfoil chord, simply avoiding to
glue a specific section of the corrugated core (Figure 4(b)
and (c)).
NUMERICAL EVALUATION OF THE
TORSIONAL STIFFNESS
An evaluation of the torsional stiffness GJ of the
cellular honeycomb wingbox completely folded is
performed using an FE approach benchmarked in
Scarpa et al. (2003). The honeycomb walls are modeled
using SHELL63 quadrilateral elements from the
ANSYS commercial FE code (ANSYS, 2008). Each
shell element has six nodal degrees of freedom
(DOFs) (three translations and three rotations), with
an average dimension equal to 1/8 of the length of
the oblique wall. The dimensions of the FE model
are the same as that of the prototype produced. The
solid model of the origami airfoil honeycomb is
obtained through a Boolean operation, where a

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013

 A Cellular Kirigami Morphing Wingbox Concept
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Figure 4. The folding process for the airfoil honeycomb.
classical hexagonal honeycomb panel with uniform
extrusion along the thickness chord direction is inter-
sected by a volume with a constant cross-section that is
equal to the NACA 2415 airfoil extruded along the
wingspan direction (Figure 5(a)). All the DOFs present
at one end of the wingbox are clamped, while the rota-
tional DOFs around the z-direction (corresponding to
the wingspan axis) are coupled together at the opposite
wingbox end. At the same location, a unit torque Mt is
applied at a single central node of the cross-section.
After solving a linear static problem, the output rota-
tion yt is obtained, and an approximation of the tor-
sional gradient calculated as d/dz & yt/b, where b is
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013
5
the span of the wingbox. The torsional stiffness of
the cellular wingbox is then obtained using the classical
relation GJ ¼ Mt/ (d/dz). A similar approach is also
taken to assess the effect given by the presence of skins
over the cellular airfoil (Figure 5(b)). To this extent,
the material of the skin considered is 10 A elastomer
(Murray et al., 2010) (Es ¼ 0.138 MPa, ns ¼ 0.45,
rs ¼ 1100 kg m3), while the uniform thickness of the
skins is 2 mm. The boundary conditions applied to cal-
culate the torsional stiffness are the same for the pure
cellular wingbox configuration.
The value of GJ for the cellular airfoil configuration is
0.63 N m2 (Figure 5(a)), while the presence of the skins
6 K. SAITO ET AL.

Figure 5. Total deformation patterns under pure torsion for: (a) airfoil honeycomb section and (b) cellular wingbox with face skins.

provides only a slight increase of 3% to the stiffness in
question (0.64 N m2, Figure 5(b)). From these simula-
tions, it is evident that the cellular wingbox not only
maintains the aerodynamic shape, but contributes criti-
cally to the torsional stiffness of the entire wingbox. The
load-bearing capabilities of the cellular wingbox become
very appealing when extremely flexible skins are used,
providing the control for the divergence speed in
static aeroelastic cases. In terms of mass distribution,
the airfoil wingbox of this study has an overall weight
of 10.7 g, which constitutes 15% only of the total weight
related to the wingbox with the 10A elastomer skins
(70.1 g).
The above simulations are valid for the wingbox with
no hinge present. The presence of an embedded hinge at
specific discrete locations of the airfoil does tend to
decrease the overall torsional stiffness of the airfoil. A
demonstration of this fact can be made from examining
a simplified (and symmetric) version of the airfoil, as
illustrated in Figure 6.
Let us consider the airfoil made with a skin of con-
stant thickness and homogeneous material. From
Bedt—Batho theory (Howe, 2004), ignoring the the influ-
ence of the internal structure of the wingbox, the tor-
sional stiffness of the airfoil is proportional to Aw =P2w ,
where Aw and Pw are, respectively, the cross-sectional

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013

 A Cellular Kirigami Morphing Wingbox Concept 7

(a) (b)
A0 hk

h0

Ck
hk
P0
Cn

Figure 6. (a) Simplified airfoil configuration with discrete possible hinge locations and (b) artificial tab at location k created by a rotation  of the
corresponding kirigami-folded section.

area and perimeter of the wingbox. If one assumes that 6

the morphing part of the airfoil is represented by a tri-
angular component made of n sections of length ck each
(corresponding to the folds of the kirigami structure), 5
the area of the undeformed wingbox is represented by: Torsional stiffness loss (%) θ = 2°
4 θ = 5°
k h0 ck θ= 10°
Ab ¼ A0 þ ð1Þ
2 θ = 20°
3 θ = 50°
where A0 is the area of the fixed portion of the morphing
section and h0 the maximum thickness of the fixed part
of the airfoil. The perimeter Pb can be approximated as 2
follows:
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 1
Pb ¼ P0 þ h20 þ 4 n2 c2k ð2Þ
0
From Equations (1) and (2), the torsional stiffness of 1 2 3 4
k
the undeformed morphing wing section can be calcu-
lated as Ab =P2b . At a specific section k ¼ 1, . . . , n  1 Figure 7. Torsional stiffness loss for a kirigami-based symmetric
(with k ¼ n at the trailing edge), the thickness of the morphing wingbox.
Note: The simulations have been carried out for A0 ¼ 2740 mm2,
morphing part of the airfoil is hk ¼ h0 (n  k)/n. An P0 ¼ 89 mm, ck ¼ 25 mm, and n ¼ 5.
equivalent tab angle y induces an increase of the perim-
eter of the skin equal to hky and an augmentation of the
area of the wingbox cross-section of h2k =2. These rela- From Equations (3) and (4), it is possible to define the
tions are valid assuming the skin is stretched completely torsional stiffness loss compared to the base unmorphed
elastically and is subjected to loading prior to tensile configuration as:
failure. After some mathematical manipulations, the
perimeter Pm and area Am of the morphed wingbox at

Am P2b
the kth location can be represented as: TSL ¼ 1  ð5Þ
Ab P2w
 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
1 Figure 7 shows the value of TSL for a configuration
Pm ¼ P0 þ h20 þ 4 n2 c2k þ h0 ðn  kÞ ð3Þ similar to the kirigami morphing box manufactured in
n
this study (n ¼ 5, constant ck cut-fold distance of 25
1     mm). The length of the fixed part of the wingbox has
Am ¼ h0 ck n3 þ n2 2 A0 þ h20   2 h20  k n þ h20  k2 been assumed to be equal to one-fourth of the total
2n
chord c. For all the tab angles y considered, the highest
ð4Þ
torsional stiffness loss is observed when the hinge is

Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013

8 K. SAITO ET AL.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 8. Variable equivalent tab angle for a trailing edge obtained through partial folding of the honeycomb wingbox.
created at the root of the fixed portion of the airfoil
section, with a maximum loss of 6% for y ¼ 50 . The
loss is decreased by more than 50% when only the last
fold line (k ¼ 4) is used for the morphing. However,
these results are not conservative. As mentioned
above, for the kirigami cellular wingbox, the honey-
comb-based configuration provides 97% of the overall
torsional stiffness for the airfoil. The creation of a
hinged configuration splits the cellular core into two dif-
ferent blocks, and therefore, the torsional stiffness of the
hinged kirigami wingbox would be lowered compared to
the unmorphed configuration. From a purely static
point of view, the hinges should be considered also in
terms of non-linear mechanical analysis, making, there-
fore, the design and simulations related to the kirigami-
based wingbox dependent on issues highlighted for com-
pliant cellular mechanisms (Mehta et al., 2009;
Ramrakhyani et al., 2009). Moreover, the presence of
embedded hinges provides also a complex mechanical
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013
response of the wingbox when considering divergence-
related problems, where a non-linear behavior of the
wing with possible contact between the split blocks
could occur (Bharti et al., 2007).
DEMONSTRATION OF ADAPTIVE
CAMBER LAYOUT
The origami manufacturing process allows to produce
an artificial hinge in the wingbox, avoiding gluing the
corrugated sheet at specific positions. Figure 8 shows the
effect of ungluing the airfoil at 25% of the chord from
the trailing edge tip. The different positions of the arti-
ficial tab created by simple ungluing of the wingbox are
fixed with metal clips in the demonstrator at 5
(Figure 8(a)), 20 (Figure 8(b)), and 70 (Figure 8(c)).
The artificial hinge capability indicates that the origami
manufacturing process could be used to develop
 A Cellular Kirigami Morphing Wingbox Concept
adaptive structures with possible embedded actuators,
especially for MAV applications. It is worth noting
that polyvinylidene (PVDF) and MFC actuators have
been embedded in honeycomb and truss core walls for
structural health monitoring and active microwave
absorption (Abramovitch et al., 2010). The relative com-
pliance of the woven Kevlar honeycomb walls, also due
to their reduced thickness, would favor the actuation
authority of any PVDF/piezoelectric actuator used in
the design. The partial folding is also prone to the inser-
tion of torsional rods, providing therefore continuous
pitch change control, like in other examples of morphing
wing MAV (Garcia et al., 2003).
CONCLUSIONS
The origami manufacturing technique used in this
study allows for producing arbitrary shapes of cellular
structures, with positive effects in terms of cost-effective
use of materials. While most of the prototypes of cellular
structures used in wingbox constructions have been pro-
duced using either rapid prototyping or complex molded
composite joints, the origami process outlined in this
study does allow to employ woven composite fabric
and production facilities standard for modern aerospace
constructions. The kirigami technique also provides the
possibility of creating artificial hinge mechanisms at
selected positions of the cellular airfoil as well as favor-
ing adaptable structures by partial folding/gluing the
corrugated origami composite sheet. The foldability of
the honeycomb produced using this technique could also
offer advantages to novel generation of energy absorp-
tion cellular structures where deployability is a key issue
(ScienceDaily, 2009). With the use of compliant skins,
the cellular wingbox topology could be considered an
interesting platform for morphing wing applications,
especially for what is concerned about MAV applica-
tions. From the numerical simulations carried out, the
presence of the cellular wingbox provides the dominant
contribution to the torsional stiffness and static diver-
gence of the wing structure, making therefore the use of
the origami wing section interesting for general morph-
ing applications, particularly small-sized aircraft.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study has been supported by grant-in-aid for
JSPS Fellows by the Japan Society for Promotion of
Science. Authors Fabio Agnese and Fabrizio Scarpa
also thank the support of ACCIS and Mr Ian Chorley
of the Materials Laboratory for helping with
manufacturing of the corrugated composites. The
authors are also indebted to the comments of the refer-
ees, particularly for suggesting the extensive use of the
term kirigami in this research.
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013
9
REFERENCES
Abdulrahim, M., Garcia, H. and Lind, R. 2005. ‘‘Flight
Characteristics of Shaping the Membrane Wing of Micro
Aerial Vehicles,’’ Journal of Aircraft, 41:131—137.
Abramovitch, H., Burgard, M., Edery-Azulay, L., Evans, K.,
Hoffmeister, M., Miller, W., Scarpa, F., Smith, C. and Tee, K.
2010. ‘‘Smart Tetrachiral and Hexachiral Honeycomb: Sensing
and Impact Detection,’’ Composites Science and Technology,
70:1072—1079. special issue on Chiral Smart Honeycombs.
Anonymous. 1993. ‘‘European A300B Airbus General Review,’’
Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology 43:18—19.
ANSYS. 2008. ANSYS Release 11.0 Users Manual, Swanson Inc.,
Canongsburg, PA.
Ashley, S. 2003. ‘‘Flying on Flexible Wings,’’ Scientific American
Magazine, pp. 84—91.
Baker, D. and Friswell, M.I. 2008. ‘‘The Design of Morphing
Aerofoils using Compliant Mechanisms,’’ In: 19th International
Conference on Adaptive Structures and Technologies, 6—9
October, Ascona, Switzerland.
Bettini, P., Airoldi, A., Sala, G., Landro, L.D., Ruzzene, M. and
Spadoni, A. 2010. ‘‘Composite Chiral Structures for Morphing
airfoils: Numerical Analyses and Development of a Manufactur-
ing Process,’’ Composites Part B: Engineering, 41:133—147.
Bharti, S., Frecker, M., Lesieutre, G. and Browne, J. 2007. ‘‘Tendon
Actuated Cellular Mechanisms for Morphing Aircraft Wing,’’
Proceedings of SPIE, 6523:52307—52307.
Bisplinghoff, R.L., Holt, A. and Halfman, R.L. 1983. Aeroelasticity,
Dover Science Books, Mineola, New York.
Bornengo, D., Scarpa, F. and Remillat, C. 2005. ‘‘Evaluation of hex-
agonal Chiral Structure for Morphing Aerofoil Concept,’’
Proceedings of the IMechE Part G: Journal of Aerospace
Engineering, 219:185—191.
Bowman, J., Sandres, B. and Wessharr, T. 2002. ‘‘Identification of
Military Morphing Aircraft Missions and Morphing
Technology Assessment,’’ SPIE, San Diego, CA, Vol. 4698,
pp. 121—132.
Daniel, I.M. and Oshai, O. 2005. Engineering Mechanics of Composite
Materials, Oxford University Press, USA.
Garcia, H., Abdulrahim, M. and Lind, R. 2003. ‘‘Roll Control for a
Micro Air Vehicle using Active Wing Morphing,’’ AIAA-2003-
5347.
Gibson, L.J. and Ashby, M.F. 1997. Cellular Solids - Structure and
Properties, Cambridge Solid State Science, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Goraj, Z. and Frydrychewicz, A. 2004. ‘‘Development Approach of
the PW-103. An Increased Reliability Male UAV Under the
CAPECON Project within the V FR of EU,’’ In: Proceedings
of the 24th International Conference of Aeronautical Sciences, 29
August—3 September, Yokohama, Japan.
Hamer, J. 1971. ‘‘Honeycomb structure and its application to the
Concorde rudder,’’ Composites, 2:242—245.
Howe, D. 2004. Aircraft Loading and Structural Layout, Professional
Engineering Publishing, London.
Kudva, J.N. 2000. ‘‘Overview of the DARPA Smart Wing Project,’’
SPIE, Newport Beach, CA, Vol. 3674.
Martin, J., Heyder-Bruckner, J.J, Remillat, C.D.L., Scarpa, F., Potter,
K. and Ruzzene, M. 2008. ‘‘The Hexachiral Prismatic Wingbox
Concept,’’ Physica Status Solidi B, 245:570—577.
McCrum, N.G., Buckley, N.P. and Bucknall, C.B. 1997.
Principles of Polymer Engineering, 2nd edn, Oxford University
Press, Oxford.
Mehta, V., Frecker, M. and Lesieutre, G.A. 2009. ‘‘Stress Relief in
Contact-aided Compliant Cellular Mechanisms,’’ Journal of
Mechanical Design, 131:091009 (11pp).
Mitsuishi, M., Ueda, K. and Kimura, F. (eds) 2008, ‘‘41th Conference
on Manufacturing Systems,’’ In: Proceedings of the 41th CIRP
Conference of Manufacturing Systems, 26—28 May, Tokyo,
Japan.
10
Monner, H.P., Sachau, D. and Breitbach, E. 1999. Design Aspects of
the Elastic Trainling Edge For an Adaptive Wing, Research and
Technology Agency, Ottawa, Canada.
Murray, G., Gandhi, F. and Bakis, C. 2010. ‘‘Flexible Matrix
Composite Skins for One-Dimensional Wing,’’ Journal of
Intelligent Materials Systems and Structures, 21:1771—1781.
Nojima, T. and Saito, K. 2006. ‘‘Development of Newly Designed
Ultra-Light Core Structures,’’ JSME International Journal A,
49:38—42.
Olympio, K.R., Gandhi, F., Asheghian, L. and Kudva, J. 2010.
‘‘Design of a Flexible Skin for a Shear Morphing Wing,’’
Journal of Intelligent Materials Systems and Structures,
21:1755—1770.
Pellegrino, S. (ed.) 2002. Deployable Structures, no. 412, CISM
International Centre for Mechanical Sciences, Springer, Wien.
Powers, S.G. and Webb, L.D. 1997. ‘‘Flight Wing Surface Pressure
and Boundary-Layer Data Report from F-111 Smooth Variable
Camber Supercritical Mission Adaptive Wing,’’ Technical
Memorandum 4789, NASA Dryden Flight Research Centre.
Prall, D. and Lakes, R.S. 1996. ‘‘Properties of a Chiral Honeycomb
with a Poisson’s Ratio -1,’’ International Journal of Mechanical
Sciences, 39:305—314.
Ramrakhyani, D., Frecker, M. and Lesieutre, G. 2009. ‘‘Hinged Beam
Elements for the Topology Design of Compliant Mechanisms
Using the Ground Structure Approach,’’ Structural and
Multidisciplinary Optimization, 37:557—567.
Scarpa, F., Burriesci, G., Smith, F.C. and Chambers, B. 2003.
‘‘Mechanical and electromagnetic behaviour of auxetic honey-
comb structures,’’ The Aeronautical Journal, 2774:175—183.
Downloaded from jim.sagepub.com at University of Bristol Library on March 25, 2013
K. SAITO ET AL.
ScienceDaily. 2009. Chopper Drop Tests New Technology:
Expandable Honeycomb Cushion Could Make Helicopters
Safer. Available at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/
12/091209185654.htm (accessed on December 12, 2010).
Spadoni, A. and Ruzzene, M. 2007. ‘‘Numerical and Experimental
Analysis of The Static Compliance of Chiral Truss Core
Airfoils,’’ Journal of Mechanics of Materials and Structures,
2:965—981.
Spadoni, A., Ruzzene, M. and Scarpa, F. 2006. ‘‘Dynamic Response
of Chiral Truss-core Assemblies,’’ Journal of Intelligent Materials
Systems and Structures, 17:941—952.
Stanford, B.K. 2008. ‘‘Aeroelastic Analysis and Optimisation of
Membrane Micro Air Vehicle Wings,’’ Ph.D. Thesis, University
of Florida.
Thill, C., Etches, J., Bond, I.P., Potter, K. and Weaver, P.M. 2008.
‘‘Morphing Skins,’’ The Aeronautical Journal, 112:117—139.
Thill, C., Etches, J., Bond, I.P., Potter, K. and Weaver, P.M. 2010.
‘‘Composite Corrugated Structures for Morphing Wing Skin
Applications,’’ Smart Materials and Structures, 19:124009 (10pp).
Wang, Y., Li, J. and Zhao, D. 1995. ‘‘Mechanical Properties of Fiber
Glass and Kevlar Woven Fabric Reinforced Composites,’’
Composites Engineering, 5:1159—1175.
Wlezien, R.W., Homer, G.C., McGowan, A.R., Padula, S.L., Scott,
M.A., Silcox, R.J. and Simpson, J.O. 1998. ‘‘The Aircraft
Morphing Program,’’ AIAA-98-1927 MS493, NASA Langley
Research Centre.
Zenkert, D. 1997. The Handbook of Sandwich Constructions, Emas
Publishing, London.