Structures of Solids
Lattice Centering and Coordination Number
Bewley Lattice Diagram
You might also read
Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.
Updated: Aug 14, 2025

Indirect Fabrication of Lattice Metals with Thin Sections Using Centrifugal Casting
Published on: May 14, 2016
Bill Lozanovski1,2, David Downing1,2, Rance Tino1,2,3
1RMIT Centre for Additive Manufacture, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia.
This study explores how the geometry of nodes in additively manufactured lattice structures differs from their idealized designs. Using X-ray microcomputed tomography and a custom software tool, researchers analyzed the geometry of nodes in face-centered cubic and axial strut lattices made via selective laser melting. The findings show that nodes in real-world AM structures differ from CAD models, which can affect how accurately numerical models predict mechanical behavior. The study proposes that understanding these deviations is a key step toward improving lattice design and simulation accuracy.
Area of Science:
Background:
Additive manufacturing allows for the creation of lattice structures with tailored mechanical and thermal properties. Prior research has shown that lattice structures often contain geometric deviations in struts, which affect numerical predictions. However, the geometry of nodes remains poorly understood despite their influence on structural performance. No prior work had resolved the impact of node-level deviations in lattice structures. This gap motivated the need to examine as-manufactured node geometries in detail. Understanding how nodes differ from CAD models can help improve design accuracy. Prior knowledge has shown that struts are commonly studied, but nodes are less explored. This uncertainty drove the development of new methods to analyze node geometry. The goal is to bridge the gap between CAD expectations and real-world AM outcomes.
Purpose Of The Study:
This study aimed to investigate the geometrical characteristics of nodes in additively manufactured lattice structures. The specific problem is the lack of detailed understanding of how node geometry deviates from CAD models. The motivation stems from the need to improve numerical models for AM lattices. Current models often overlook node-level variations, which may affect mechanical predictions. The researchers propose to use μCT imaging to capture real-world node geometries. This approach allows for quantification of deviations at the node level. The study focuses on face-centered cubic and axial strut lattices fabricated via selective laser melting. The goal is to develop tools for isolating and analyzing node geometries.
Main Methods:
The study employed X-ray microcomputed tomography to capture detailed images of as-manufactured lattice structures. A custom software tool was developed to isolate and classify nodal joints from μCT-derived cross-sectional slices. The tool enabled automated extraction of geometrical properties from each node. These properties were compared with their idealized CAD model counterparts. The method involved analyzing face-centered cubic and axial strut lattices fabricated via selective laser melting. Cross-sectional slices were used to assess deviations in node geometry. The process included auto-isolation of nodal regions to ensure accurate comparisons. The researchers propose that this method improves the ability to quantify geometric uncertainties.
Main Results:
The study found significant variations between as-manufactured node geometries and their CAD counterparts. These deviations were quantified using μCT-derived cross-sectional slices. The custom tool successfully isolated and classified nodal joints for analysis. Face-centered cubic and axial strut lattices showed distinct geometrical differences. Node geometry deviations were found to be non-uniform across the lattice structure. The results suggest that node-level uncertainties may affect mechanical predictions. The researchers propose that these findings can inform improved lattice design. Quantification of defects provides insight into how nodes differ from idealized models.
Conclusions:
The authors suggest that quantifying node-level geometrical deviations improves numerical modeling accuracy. Their findings indicate that as-manufactured nodes differ from CAD models in non-uniform ways. This research is an initial step toward better node design for AM lattices. The study proposes that understanding node geometry helps refine lattice performance predictions. The researchers suggest that their method can be extended to other lattice types and AM processes. The results support the need for more detailed node-level analysis in AM research. The authors propose that future work should focus on integrating these findings into design workflows. This approach may enhance the reliability of numerical simulations for AM structures.
The study quantifies geometrical deviations in as-manufactured nodes of lattice structures using μCT imaging and a custom tool.
Face-centered cubic and face-centered cubic with axial struts lattices fabricated via selective laser melting were studied.
Node geometry significantly influences mechanical behavior and numerical predictions of lattice structures.
A custom software tool was developed to auto-isolate and classify nodal joints from μCT cross-sectional slices.
Geometrical properties were extracted from isolated nodal cross sections and compared with CAD models.
The authors suggest that quantifying node-level deviations improves numerical model accuracy and lattice design.