## 1 Introduction
Research conducted through quasi-static compression testing on lattice structures has revealed a sequential layer-by-layer collapse at a similar stress level, as documented in existing literature [22; 28]. However, variations in the preparation techniques of identical architecture and material using SLM and casting may result in differences in the collapsed mode [23]. A Gibson-Ashby model [29] and Maxwell's number [30] are the models that may provide a rudimentary prediction for the mode of failure of a lattice structure. Additionally, tensile testing of SLM structures has shown higher ultimate strength than those produced through casting. Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) images indicate that samples from SLM printers have more controllable dimensions but may have coarser grains than those made through casting. Even well-prepared lattice structure specimens with identical materials may exhibit different deformation modes. Hence, information on a lattice's structure or material cannot be considered an adequate tool for predicting the collapsed mode since their behaviour is dissimilar [23]. Topological modifications to many lattice structures, such as the introduction of a \"Z\" column to each unit cell (e.g., BCC and BCCZ) [25; 27], may increase the rigidity and strength of the structure [31]. For example, a polymer lattice structure with topological structures like BCCZ, DiamondZ, and PyramidZ has been observed to exhibit higher strength than its original structure [27]. The phenomena of shock and impulse show notable similarities, yet distinct specifications exist between the two. Shock refers to the collision of a force, which is typically excited through solid or non-solid compactors, such as sound waves, with objects. In contrast, impulse pertains to the collision between two solid objects. Both shock and impulse are characterised by sudden excitation between an exciter and a target, and such collisions may occur at either intermediate or high strain rates [28]. Although shock and impulse are distinct phenomena, they are often associated with one another. Shock has a unit of measurement as acceleration in (g) and frequency (f) in (Hz or rad\(\cdot\)s\({}^{-1}\)) while impulse is a change of momentum that can measure in (N\(\cdot\)s or kg m\(\cdot\)s\({}^{-1}\)). There are many methods for conducting shock measurements, with the most prevalent techniques being Charpy impact, pneumatic exciter, and Hopkinson bar tests [32; 33; 34]. Shock experiments can be performed using a variety of exciters, such as the conventional Charpy impact test [35]. However, this method may lack sensitivity as it does not discern different responses between BCC and BCCZ structures while identifying a higher elastic modulus in Gyroid structures [35]. One study examining high-strain rate testing focused on the macroscopic shock response obtained from elastically isotropic metallic structures with orthogonal plates and a relative density ranging from 0.225 to 0.229. In this research, both structures were made of 316 L stainless steel using a powder-bed fusion additive manufacturing approach. Although this investigation employed orthogonal plates, it provided valuable data for quasi-static and high-dynamic impact testing using a Hopkinson bar. In comparison to the quasi-static test, the maximum stress observed in high-strain rate experiments may decrease due to premature fracture [28]. The Hopkinson split bar, another piece of equipment for both tensile and compressive testing, can generate acceleration up to an ultra-high shock of 10,000 g [36]. This exciter, increasingly utilised for high to ultra-high shock acceleration, has become a standard in acceleration calibration and mechanical testing [37]. The responses of various lattice structures during this test exhibit signs of viscoelasticity, as different travel wave velocities are observed. Under these testing conditions, the complex modulus is dependent on the impact frequency [38].