16 views

Original Title: Dynamic failure of Beam

Uploaded by muhdqasim

- w_wile114
- 1123_fmprecast Seismic Design of Reinforced
- SACS Training
- Strength of Materials_d4a
- Seismic Notes and Example- Arabic
- sad9781447143291-c2asca
- Mechanics of Solids Nov2003 or 220352
- Bearing Stress Between a Lifting Lug and a Shackle Pin
- MOM Lec 1
- Advantages of PET-PP Secugrid
- 2D Cartesian Elasticity
- Structural_Behavior_of_Concrete_Encased_Steel_Beam.pdf
- 00215 Wouter Van Beerschoten
- Torsion Simplified
- Class 4
- Equivalent Nodal Values
- Combined Stresses Worked Problems OCR
- Mekanika Kekuatan Material_kul 1
- IJESIT201601_23
- Report-212+450-RCC-mailed

You are on page 1of 10

www.elsevier.com/locate/compscitech

to axial impact

Zheng Zhang, Farid Taheri*

Department of Civil Engineering, Dalhousie University, 1360 Barrington Street, Halifax, NS, Canada B3J 1X1

Received 30 January 2003; received in revised form 18 June 2003; accepted 24 July 2003

Abstract

The dynamic damage behavior of carbon-epoxy laminated beams, having initial geometric imperfections, subject to an axial

impulse was investigated numerically and experimentally. The study focused on investigating the damage initiation and damage

mechanism in the beams impacted axially by a moving mass. The dynamic equilibrium equations were developed based on the

Timoshenko beam assumption with the consideration of beams transverse inertia, transverse shear deformation and the cross

sections rotational inertia eects. The Higher-Order Shear Deformation Theory was adopted to model the nonlinear distributed

shear strain across the beam thickness. The von-Karman StrainDisplacement nonlinear relationship was used to model the

deformation of the beam. Hashins failure criteria was used to predict the damage of beams. The experiments were conducted using

a horizontal linear bearing impact setup. Scanning Electron Microscopy results showed that delamination and matrix crack were

the primary damage mechanisms in the beams. Eect of ber angle, lay-up sequence and initial geometric imperfection on critical

energy of damage initiation was also investigated.

# 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: B. Impact behaviour; C. Damage mechanics; C. Delamination; B. Modeling; D. Fractography

1. Introduction

Due to their high specic stiness and strength, berreinforced plastic (FRP) laminated composites have been

widely used in industrial applications such as aerospace,

automobile, shipbuilding, marine and civil infrastructures. However, their susceptibility to damage

resulted from mechanical, physical and chemical factors,

greatly degrades their stiness, strength and durability.

Impact in particular is one of the most signicant sources

of damage that can cause matrix crack, delamination and

ber breakage. Often damages generated in FRP are

undetectable to the naked eyes, therefore, it is particularly important to understand the damage mechanism

(including initiation and progression) in FRP.

Although a great number of investigations have considered FRP impact characterization, most of such

works [110] have considered on the damage due to

transverse impact. Choi et al. [1] conducted analytical

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-902-494-3935; fax: +1-902-4846635.

E-mail address: farid.taheri@dal.ca (F. Taheri).

0266-3538/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.compscitech.2003.07.002

graphite/epoxy composite plates subjected to transverse

line-loading impact, in which the eects of laminate lay-up

sequence and impactors mass were the focus. Pavier and

Clarke [3] proposed an experimental technique which

could be used to replicate the damage of composite laminates, which was transversely impacted by a drop-weight.

Zhou [4] conducted tests on thick glass-ber-reinforced

laminates under transverse impact by a at-ended impactor. Post-impact damage mechanism was investigated by

visual inspection and ultrasonic C-scanning techniques.

Sohn et al. [5] performed drop-weight impact damage test

of carbon-ber/epoxy composite and used several characterization techniques, such as cross-section fractography, scanning acoustic microscopy, scanning electron

microscopy (SEM), to observe and assess the damage due

to impact. Park and Zhou [6] investigated the transverse

impact response and damage in composite laminates by

obtaining time history results of contact force, displacement and energy absorption on a three-point bend xture

in a split Hopkinson pressure bar. With the photo elastic

stress coating technique, Franz [7] established an experimental method for investigating the dynamic response

720

load. Necib and Mili [8] experimentally investigated the

dynamic behavior of various E-glass/epoxy laminates

subjected to a drop weight impact on the transverse side

of the specimens. Luo et al. [9] proposed an approach to

evaluate the impact damage initiation and propagation

in composite plates, both experimentally and numerically. The plates were impacted by a controlled drop

weight transversely and the damage and propagation

were inspected with an optical microscope and X-ray

chamber. Olsson [10] suggested an analytical model for

prediction of impact damage initiation and growth in

composite laminates. Critical loads and energies for

damage initiation and growth were discussed.

Most of the experimental and analytical works have

been based on transverse impact of composite laminates

due to a drop weight. Only a few investigations have

been reported on the response of composite laminates

subject to axial or in-plane impact.

Axially load bearing, slender structural components are

commonly found in various structures. These components

may easily buckle when subjected to static or dynamic

loads [11]. Due to manufacturing induced factors, many

composite laminates bear initial imperfections and/or

voids. When such a laminate is subjected to an axial or inplane static or dynamic load, regardless of whether the

component undergoes buckling or not, it may experience

damage in the form of delamination, ber breakage and

matrix crack if certain stress or strain components exceed

the limiting criterion during the loading period.

Using a falling weight impact system, Hsiao and Daniel

[12] investigated the strain rate eect on the compressive

and shear behavior of carbon/epoxy composite laminates. Bogdanovich and Friedrich [13] predicted the

initial failure and ply-by-ply failure processes of composite laminates under dynamic loading. Abrate [14] introduced an energy-balance model, spring-mass model and a

full model to simulate the impact in composite structures.

It can be seen that damage characterization in axial

composite members, subjected to impulse loading, has not

been thoroughly investigated. The scarcity of such experimental data thus motivated the present investigation.

The purpose of this paper is to therefore experimentally investigate the damage initiation mechanism and

type of damage in ber-reinforced composite laminated

beams subjected to axial impulse. The objective is also

to predict and simulate such damage mechanism by

computational simulations.

including the damping eects in the dynamic equilibrium equations. We considered a n-layer FRP composite laminated beam with one end impacted by a pulse

load as shown in Fig. 1. The cross section of the beam

was rectangular with width b and thickness h. The

length of the beam is L. The initial geometric imperfection is w0 x, which is dened as the initial displacement

of the beam in Z-direction as a function of location x.

With the Timoshenko beam assumption, the equilibrium equations were constructed for the FRP laminated

beam. The formulation includes the axial, lateral and

rotational inertias of the beam, the shear deformation

through thickness of the beam, and the damping eects in

axial, lateral and rotaional directions as follows:

I1

@2 u @Nx

@u

CL

2

@t

@t

@x

@w0

@

N

x

@2 w @V

@w

@x

I1 2

CT

@t

@x

@t

@x

I2

@2 @Mx

@

V CR

@t2

@t

@x

1a

1b

1c

the beam in x-direction; wx; t, an unknown, is the lateral displacement of the beam in z-direction; x; t, also

an unknown, is the rotation of the cross section of the

beam about the y-axis;

h=2

Nx

x dz

2a

h=2

are the axial force per unit beam width, x is the axial

stress of each lamina;

h=2

x zdz

2b

Mx

h=2

2.1. Dierential equations of motion

To investigate the dynamic behavior of composite

laminated beams subject to axial impulse, we upgraded

721

h=2

V

xz dz

h=2

is the mass density of the lamina.

h=2

z2 dz

4b

I2

h=2

CL ,CT ,CR are damping factors in axial, lateral direction

and rotation of cross section of beam, respectively.

The boundary conditions for Eqs. (1a)(1c) can be

pinned-end or clamped-end supports or any reasonable

combinations with the provision that the impacted end

is allowed to move freely along the axial direction of the

beam. The impact can be due to a known impulse force

time history F(t), to a known mass M with initial velocity V0 of the impact body, or other types of impact

contact model. For our current problems, we will only

consider the xed end support conditions [i.e., both the

left end (x=0) and right end (x=L) of the beam are

xed, but the beam can roll in x direction at the right

end]. Thus, the following boundary conditions are

established,

@w

0

@x

u0

at

at

x 0; x L

x0

5a

5b

ut Ut

at

is the shear force per unit beam width across the crosssection of beam, and x is the shear stress of each

lamina;

h=2

dz

4a

I1

Vtdt;

Ut

h=2

x L

5c

the impact period and can be represented by:

t

b

Vt V0 A1; 1 "x jxL dt

7

M

0

The beam is assumed to be at rest initially. Therefore,

the initial conditions of the current problem are

wxjt0 w0 x

8a

@w0

@x

8b

xjt0

@w

j 0

@t t0

8c

@

j 0

@t t0

8d

ujt0 0x < L

8e

@u

j 0x < L

@t t0

8f

The strain and stress relationship for the kth layer of

the laminated beam is,

8

9 2

< x =

Q 11

4

y

Q 21

:

;

xy

Q 61

yz

xz

Q 44

Q54

Q 45

Q 55

9

38

Q 16 < "x =

Q 26 5 "y

:

;

xy

Q 66

yz

xz

9a

9b

For the slender laminated beam, we can assume

"y 0,

xy 0, and

yz 0, then Eq. (9a) and (9b)

simplify to:

x Q 11 "x

10a

and

xz Q 55

xz

beam is free to move in the axial direction (i.e.,

Nx x L 0), while the right ends displacement of

beam can be obtained through zero neutral axis strain.

In Eq. (5c), Ut is dened as the displacement of the

moving mass [15],

Q 12

Q 22

Q 62

10b

the current problem

As demonstrated by the authors in their earlier work

[16], higher order shear deformation theory (HSDT)

722

investigation than that of the rst order shear deformation theory when evaluating the accurate distribution of

shear strain across the thickness. To predict the damage

initiation of composite laminated beams, one also needs

to obtain accurate strain and stress distributions across

the beam thickness when subject to axial impact. Using

Reddys higher order shear deformation theory [17],

and considering the initial geometric imperfection w0 x

of the beam, the displacement eld of the composite

beam can be dened as follows [16],

@w @w0

4z3

ux x; z; t ux; t z

2

@x

@x

3h

11a

uz x; z; t wx; t w0 x

11b

transverse shear strain distribution through the thickness of the beam is parabolic. Not only the transverse

shear strain distribution is nonlinear, but HSDT

assumes that the relationship between the axial strain

and displacement, and the deection of the beam is also

nonlinear.

The von Karman straindisplacement relationship

was then used to model the nonlinear relationship,

@ux 1 @w 2 1 @w0 2

"x

12a

2 @x

@x 2 @x

xz

@ux @uz

@z

@x

12b

could be rewritten in the non-dimensional form and

solved using nite dierence method (FDM). One

could then evaluate the dynamic behavior, (i.e., time

history results of axial displacement, transverse

deection and rotation of cross section) of the FRP

laminated beam. Moreover, with help of the von

Karman straindisplacement relationship and the

constitutive relationship, the strain and stress time

history results of each layer of the beam can be

evaluated. Refs. [11] and [16] provide detailed

description and verication of the analytical model

and the FDM solution, and their integrity in predicting post impulse response of such beams.

2.5. Damage criterion

Three failure modes in the forms of ber failure,

matrix failure and delamination can be expected to

occur in the composite laminated components subject

to the dynamic load. For the one-dimensional laminated beams subject to axial impulse, we will not

and, therefore, only ber failure and through the thickness delamination of the beam will be considered in the

simulation of laminated beams subject to axial impulse

in this investigation.

2.6. Fiber failure

2.6.1. Tension mode

and

shear stress, 13 of the bers aect the failure of

and shear stress 13 of bers satisfy the following

equations,

2

11

13 2

T

5 1:0

13

Ff

SLT

SL

in which, FfT is the failure index of ber in tension

mode, the SL is the tension strength of lamina and SLT

is the shear strength of the lamina in the 13 plane.

2.6.2. Compressive mode

Under compressive status, ber is assumed to fail in

microbuckling and kinking of bers with the matrix.

Rosen [19] stated that bers under axial compression

buckle in a shear mode provided that volume fraction of

bers is higher than a certain limit (i.e., 60% for carbon/epoxy). The shear and compressive stresses both

contribute to the compressive failure of bers. The

deviatoric strain energy theory, also known as the Tsai

Hill criterion [20], is similar to Hashins failure criteria

for bers in tension, that is:

2

13 2

FfC 11

5 1:0

14

SL

SLT

is the compressive stress, FfC is the failure

in which, 11

index of ber in compressive status, the SL is the compressive strength of ber.

2.7. Delamination

Delamination occurs in laminates due to the normal

and inter-laminar shear stresses. For the current onedimensional laminated beam subject to axial impulse, as

described by the dierential equations, the normal and

through-the-thickness stresses are ignored. The failure

criteria can then be described by [18],

31 2

Fd

5 1:0

15

STL

in which, Fd is the failure index of delamination and STL

is the through-the-thickness shear strength of the

lamina.

3. Experimental setup

3.1. Experimental setup

Drop weight setup is a common mean for applying

impact load for dynamic testing, as reported in several

experimental works [110]. The disadvantage is that it is

dicult to eliminate the rebound impact. To overcome

this problem, a new impact setup was designed to perform the axial impulse, as shown in Fig. 2. The major

components of the system include a pendulum, a guiding tube with linear bearings along its full length, specimen support xtures and an impactor. The linear

bearings were horizontally xed on a strand. The linear

bearing, xture and specimen were calibrated horizontally so that the impact contact would be collinear.

When the pendulum hits the impactor, it forces the

impactor to travel through the tube on the bearings. By

this system the impactor does not rebound and impact

the specimen more than once. Two non-contact optical

sensors were used to monitor the velocity of the impactor. The rst optical sensor also acted as a trigger for

the data acquisition setup to collect the data. The extant

of damage in the specimens was inspected by visual

method and scanning electron microscopy (SEM).

3.2. Specimen preparation

The material used in this study was TENAX/R6376

carbon ber/epoxy pre-preg by HEXCEL. R6376 is a

high performance tough matrix formulated for the fabrication of primary aircraft structures. It oers high

impact resistance and damage tolerance. The laminate

was cured 2 h at temperature 175 C and 700 kN/m2

pressure with heating rate of 2 C to 5 C per min in an

oven, as recommended by the manufacturer. The laminate was then cut into beams. The mechanical properties of the laminate and geometric properties of beams

are listed in Table 1.

723

Table 1

Physical and mechanical properties of carbon-ber/epoxy laminated

beams

Specimen length (mm)

Specimen width (mm)

Specimen thickness (mm)

Imperfection magnitude W0 (mm)

Longitudinal modulus E11 (GPa)

Transverse modulus E22 (GPa)

In-plane shear modulus G12 (GPa)

Major Poissons ratio (v12)

Density (Kg/m3)

Longitudinal tensile strength S+

L (MPa)

Longitudinal compressive strength S

L (MPa)

Transverse tensile strength S+

T (MPa)

Transverse compressive strength S

T (MPa)

In-plane shear strength SLT (MPa)

Through-the-thickness shear strength STL (MPa)

300

20

1.6

Factor thickness

1.18E+02

5.54E+00

4.77E+00

0.27

1512

1094.8

712.9

26.44

84.33

84.42

65.36

To investigate the damage initiation behavior of carbon/epoxy composite laminated beams with initial geometric imperfections subject to axial impulse of a

moving mass, several groups of beams with dierent

lay-up congurations were fabricated and tested, and

also analyzed numerically.

The lay-up

congurations

in

this

study

were

0

22:5

45

67:5

12

3 s

3 s,

3 s

0=903 s and 0=902 =02 s . The support condition of

the beam is shown in Fig. 1. The initial geometric

shapes of the beams were either in sinusoidal or random

forms [21,22]. Fig. 3 shows the typical initial geometric

imperfection forms. The imperfection values were

obtained using a measuring gauge after the beams were

mounted on the test xture (jig), before the impact tests

were conducted. The damping coecient of the beam is

approximately 0.04, as measured by a GrindoSonic

MK5 Industrial instrument [23].

4.1. Strain records

Fig. 4 shows typical strain values recorded by two

strain gages mounted on beams top and bottom surfaces, at the mid-span of the beam. When a geometrically imperfect beam is impacted axially, it would

vibrate in both axial and transverse directions. From

Fig. 4, we can see that both top and bottom surfaces

experience compressive strain at the beginning of the

event, because the beam is deformed axially due to the

impact compressive load. As the stress wave propagates

along the beam, the beam experiences a combined

bending and axial compressive loading, in which the top

surface of the beam is in compressive state, while the

bottom is in tension. Due to the damping eect, the

vibration diminishes gradually. From this gure, we can

see the maximum strain or stress that occurred during

the rst transverse vibration cycle. Considering the

724

Fig. 3. Initial out of plane geometric imperfection shapes of tested

specimens.

may occur during pre- and/or post-buckling phases.

4.2. Damage investigation

The damage mechanism of axially impacted FRP

beams diers from the damage of FRP due to transverse impact in which the damages, including delamination, ber breakage and matrix crack mainly occurs

around the contact area of the impacted region [35].

Under axial impact, the damage occurs at a location

along the beam or along the whole length of the beam.

Damage location through the beam thickness varies

depending on lay-up congurations. When impacted

axially, the beams with initial geometric imperfections

deform transversely and axially. The maximum tension

and/or compression strains occur at the outer plies.

According to the higher order shear deformation theory, the shear strain through beam thickness varies in

parabolic distribution and the maximum occurs on the

beams mid-plane. This phenomenon was demonstrated

in Fig. 5. Fig. 5 represents a typical demalination and

matrix damage. Initial voids due to manufacturing are

not negligible, and delmination and matrix crack occurs

usually on the weak regions.

For all the

tested

specimens, except those with 67:53 s and 012 lay-ups,

delamination and matrix cracking dominated the

damage mechanism. For most of the beams with

67:53 s lay-up, no delamination and matrix crack

were observed after impact, but the deformed shape was

maintained due to the plastic deformation of matrix, as

shown in Fig. 6(a) and (b). The details of such mechanism and prediction method will be presented elsewhere.

Fig.

6. Initial

and deformed beam shape of one of the beams with

67:53 s lay-up.

For those beams with 012 lay-up, matrix cracking

occurred normal to the ber direction, and the beam

was split into two or more parts.

4.2.1. Damage analysis of beams with 22:53 s lay-up

of beams, having lay up sequence of

Three groups

22:53 s had three dierent lengths of 105, 128 and

148 mm. Each group had 4 specimens and each specimen was impacted with dierent impact energy.

Damage, mostly in the form of delamination, was

observed between plies 6 and 7. Some of the delaminations extended along the whole length of the beams but

was limited between the two restrained ends. Fig. 7(a)

and (b) show the time history results of axial displacement and lateral deection at station 0.7 of the beam

(0.7 indicates 7/10L distance from the cantilever support

end of the beam), obtained though our numerical analyses for one of the specimens. Fig. 7(c) shows the lateral deformed shape at time 0.4ms compared with the

initial shape of the beam. Fig. 8(a) and (b) show the

failure indices of ber breakage for each layer, and

delamination failure for each inter-laminar interface at

station 0.7 of the beam, obtained though Eqs. (13)(15).

From the gures, we can see that all ber failure indices

are less than 1.0, which indicates that the bers do not

break; some of the delamination failure indices are

however grater than 1.0, indicating that delamination

would have occurred. Further analysis of Fig. 8(b)

indicated that even though failure indices of interface 5

725

axial displacement at station 0.7 of the beam. (b) Time history of

deection at station 0.7 of the beam. (c) Deformed shape and initial

shape of beam.

did not conrm such a mechanism. This was because the

interface 67, which was at the beams mid-plane, met

the delamination criterion before the other interfaces. In

this case the other interfaces did not have the opportunity to delaminate, even though the failure factors were

greater than 1.0.

4.2.2. Damage analysis of beams with

453 s lay-up

Unlike in beams with 22:53 s lay-up in which the

delamination extended along the whole length of beam

and dominated the damage mechanism, the delamination in these beams occurred at several discrete stations

along the beam length and was predominantly accompanied by matrix cracking. Fig. 9 is a typical illustration

of delamination and matrix crack in those beams.

Fig. 10 is another example of this beam group, showing

a major delamination between the ply 6 and 7, which

was also connected to another delamination (between

ply 3 and 4) by a matrix crack, which was facilitated

though an initial void. Fig. 11 illustrates a typical

matrix cracking of this group.

In summary,

most of the delaminations in 22:53 s

and 453 s beams occurred at the beams mid-span,

extending

through

the beams thickness. The specimens

having 0=903 s lay-up, however, exhibited dierent

failure patterns, as follows.

Fig. 8. Numerical results of the failure Indies. (a) Failure index for

ber breakage. (b) Failure index for delamination.

Fig. 9. SEM

showing typical delamination and matrix

fractograph

crack of a 453 s specimen.

726

4.2.3. Damage analysis of beams with 0=903 s lay-up

In this group of beams, the two 90 plies placed at

the beams mid-plane did not contribute much in

carrying the axial force. During the transverse deformation stage, outer plies endured most of the tensile

and compressive loads. The 3rd, 5th, 8th and 10th 0

plies would have endured the maximum shear strain.

Therefore, it is reasonable to see that delaminations

would occur between plies 12, 1112, 56 and 78,

as was the case. Moreover, the 56 interface delamination was connected to the 78 by a matrix crack

running through plies 6 and 7. Fig. 12(a) is an example of delamination between plies 1 and 2. Fig. 12(b)

described above.

4.2.4. Damage analysis of beams with 0=902 =02 s

lay-up

Four specimens were tested within this group. Most

delaminations occurred at the mid-plane and delamination dominated the damage mechanism. Similarly,

delamination modes were very similar to those discussed

earlier.

4.3. Location of damage initiation

When a damage criterion is satised, the damage (ber

breakage, delamination and or matrix crack) would initiate due to excessive stresses. According to the visual

inspection and the associated numerical analyses of the

test specimens, delamination and matrix cracks are the

most dominating damage mechanisms observed in the

imperfect beams that were subject of our investigation.

delaminations.

Fig. 12. SEM fractographs. (a) delamination between ply 1 and 2. (b)

delamination between plies 5 and 6 connected to delamination

between plies 7 and 8 by a matrix crack.

the energy absorbed by the beam was partly released by

generation of damage, and then, whether the delamination would propagate, it would depend on the amount

of energy absorbed by the beam. This phenomenon will

be discussed later, in another document. In here, we

discuss the initiation location of delamination, that is,

location along the beam and through inter-laminar

interfaces. Visual and microscope inspection of the tested specimens suggested that most delamination occurred between the supports. Numerical analysis results for

all the tested specimens indicated that initial geometric

imperfection has a signicant eect on the delamination

initiation position along the beam. Fig. 13(a) and (b) are

histograms showing the density of delamination based

on their relative distance along the beam, and their

interface location. From Fig. 13, one can see that beside

the initiation positions at station 0.0 (xed end) and 1.0

(impacted end) along the beam, most damage took

place around stations 0.3 to 0.4 (near to the xed end)

and 0.7 (near to the impacted end). The delamination

positions through the thickness were at inter-laminar 4,

5 and 6. The distribution of shear strain through the

beam thickness was maximum at the beam mid-span,

and minimum at the top and bottom surfaces of the

beams. Due to the dierence of ply orientation, however, the center plies did not necessarily experience a

maximum stress; therefore, a certain amount of delaminations occurred at the 4-5 interface.

727

function of the axial stiness and slenderness ratio.

that beam having relatively large imperfection (i.e.,

W0 =h > 0:2), failed mostly at their ends; otherwise, failure occurred along the length of the beams.

4.4. Critical energy for damage initiation

When addressing the damage initiation of FRP laminated beams subject to axial impulse load, one should

consider the critical energy used for damage initiation,

an unavoidable phenomenon. The angle ply laminates

with relatively large axial and bending stiness will

endure greater axial and transverse deformation resistance when subject to impact, and thus would endure

larger stresses; the reverse is true for laminates which

have smaller axial and bending stiness. Moreover, the

larger the slenderness ratios, the larger the energy

required to initiate the damage. This can be seen from

Fig. 14, which was constructed based on the inspection

of the experimental results. The axial stiness on the

x-axis is normalized relative to that of the zero degree

(uniaxial) layers.

5. Conclusion

Dynamic damage behavior of FRP laminated slender

beams, having various lay-ups, subjected to axial impulse

was investigated experimentally and numerically. Several

factors (such as the beams axial transverse inertia, cross

sections rotational inertia, the non-uniform distribution

of shear stress across the beam cross-section, damping

eect, the nonlinear strain-displacement relationship

between axial strain and transverse displacement) were

accounted by our numerical solution.

Our experimental investigation subjected carbon/

epoxy laminated beams with dierent lay-up and slenderness ratio to axial impact load. The following conclusions could be drawn from the results obtained

through our numerical and experimental analyses:

Fig. 13. Histograms from all specimens of failure occurrence in the

FRP beams. (a) Delamination initiation location. (b) Lamina interface

number.

dominating damage mechanisms in the carbon/

728

impulse.

2. The density and length of delamination(s)

depend on the lay-up sequences.

3. The delaminations were mainly concentrated at

stations 0.40.7 (along the beam length), and at

interface of layers 4 and 5. The damage

mechanism was also strongly dependent on nature of the initial geometric imperfections.

4. The critical energy for damage initiation varied

with the lay-up and slenderness ratio.

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

Acknowledgements

[13]

operating grant to the second author in support of this

work is gratefully acknowledged.

[14]

References

[16]

[1] Choi HY, Wang HS, Chang GK. Eect of laminate conguration

and impactors mass on trhe initial impact damage of graphite/

epoxy composite plates due to line-loading impact. J Compos

Mater 1992;26:80527.

[2] Christoforou AP, Yigit AS. Normalized impact response and

damage in a thin thin composite laminate supported by a rigid

substrate. J Compos Mater 1994;28:155373.

[3] Pavier MJ, Clarke MP. Experimental techniques for the investigation of the eects of impact damage on carbon-ber composites. Compos Sci Technol 1995;55:15769.

[4] Zhou G. Damage mechanisms in composite laminates impacted

by a at-ended impactor. Compos Sci Technol 1995;54:26773.

[5] Sohn MS, Hu XZ, Kim JK, Wlker L. Impact damage characterization of carbon ber/epoxy exompoasite with multi-layer reinfotrcement. J Compos B 2000;31:68191.

[6] Park SW, Zhou M. Time-resolved impact response and damage

[15]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

34:879904.

Franz T. Photoelastic study of the mechanic behavior of orthotropic composite plates subject to impact. J Compos Struct 2001;

54:16978.

Necib B, Mili F. Impact behavior of cross-ply laminated composite plates under low velicities. J Compos Struct 2001;51:23744.

Luo RK, Green ER, Morrison CJ. An approach to evaluate the

impact damage initiation and propagation in composite plates. J

Compos B 2001;32:51320.

Olsson R. Analytical prediction of large mass impact damage in

composite laminates. J Compos A 2001;32:120715.

Zhang Z, Taheri F. Numerical studies on dynamic pulse buckling

of FRP composite laminated beams subject to an axial impact. J

Compos Struct 2002;56:26977.

Hsiao HM, Daniel IM. Strain rate behavior of composite materials. J Compos B 1998;29:52133.

Bogdanovich A, Friedrich K. Initial and progressive failure analysis of laminated composite structures under dynamic loading. J

Compos Struct 1994;27:43956.

Abrate S. Modeling of impacts on comosite structures. J Compos

Struct 2001;51:12938.

Ari-Gur J, Weller T, Singer J. Experimental and theoretical

studies of columns under axial impact. Int J Solids Struct 1982;

18(7):61941.

Zhang Z, Taheri F. Dynamic pulsebuckling and postbuckling of

composite laminated beam using higher order shear deformation

theory. J Compos B 2003;34:3918.

Reddy JN. A simple higher-order theory for laminated composite

plates. J Appl Mech 1984;51:74552.

Hashin Z. Failure criteria for unidirectional ber composites. J

App Mech 1980;47:32934.

Rosen BW. Mechanics of composite strengthening, Ch. 3. In:

Fiber composite materials, ASM, Metal Park, OH, 1965.

Hill R. A theory of the yielding and plastic ow of anisotropic

metals. Proceedings of the Royal Society 1948:193.

Lindberg HE, Florence AL. Dynamic Pulse Buckling Theory and

Experiment. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijho Publishers; 1987.

Kenny S, Pegg N, Taheri F. Dynamic elastic buckling of a slender beam with geometric imperfection subject to an axial impulse.

Finite Elements in Analysis and Design 2000;35:22746.

J.W. Lemmens, Inc., Operating instructions for the GrindoSonic

MK5 Industrial instrument. Avaialble: http://www.grindosonic.com.

- w_wile114Uploaded byTurtas
- 1123_fmprecast Seismic Design of ReinforcedUploaded byrakoll
- SACS TrainingUploaded byAli Zaidi
- Strength of Materials_d4aUploaded byAntonette Badillo
- Seismic Notes and Example- ArabicUploaded byshayetft
- sad9781447143291-c2ascaUploaded byTash Kent
- Mechanics of Solids Nov2003 or 220352Uploaded byNizam Institute of Engineering and Technology Library
- Bearing Stress Between a Lifting Lug and a Shackle PinUploaded byYl Wong
- MOM Lec 1Uploaded byTahoor Asim
- Advantages of PET-PP SecugridUploaded byoanaariadna
- 2D Cartesian ElasticityUploaded byMartin Kora
- Structural_Behavior_of_Concrete_Encased_Steel_Beam.pdfUploaded byJoseph Tuzon
- 00215 Wouter Van BeerschotenUploaded byRigobertoGuerra
- Torsion SimplifiedUploaded byyadavame
- Class 4Uploaded byharish_charlie
- Equivalent Nodal ValuesUploaded by1005641
- Combined Stresses Worked Problems OCRUploaded byAnonymous uN2lxB
- Mekanika Kekuatan Material_kul 1Uploaded bylia tyyan
- IJESIT201601_23Uploaded byMaduka Smart
- Report-212+450-RCC-mailedUploaded byskumarsr
- CE 2009Uploaded bySTRUCTURE -STRUCTURE
- chap10Uploaded byedgar_chieyahoocom
- 4. Shear of Beam Open CS - Hw5_aUploaded byUmAr Malick
- Beam AnalysisUploaded bySuyash Prakash Srivastava
- MassoneEtAl_2009_wallModelingUploaded byRory Cristian Cordero Rojo
- testUploaded byMunther Mohd
- Silt Gravel Removal GateUploaded byRaja Singh
- Production Technologies notesUploaded byarshnoor singh
- Massart Localization 2007Uploaded byElena Efthymiadi
- Stud shear connectors paper.pdfUploaded bySwapnil Kamerkar

- ACCA-F5Uploaded bymuhdqasim
- Shell Manhole Detail for Vertical Tanks Ul 142Uploaded bymuhdqasim
- Roof Manhole Detail for Vertical Tanks Ul 142Uploaded bymuhdqasim
- Factors Calculated Against G LoadsUploaded bymuhdqasim
- AMETank.pdfUploaded byMadan Yadav
- Motor Tarque CalculationsUploaded bymuhdqasim
- Head Joints as Per UL142Uploaded bymuhdqasim
- Ansys SolutionUploaded bymuhdqasim
- Ansys LoadingUploaded bymuhdqasim
- o level chemistry paperUploaded bymuhdqasim
- Buoyancy AnalysisUploaded bymuhdqasim
- Testing Underground Steel Storage Tank for BucklingUploaded bydeerajks
- Header SketchUploaded bymuhdqasim
- Asme Pressure Vessel SupportUploaded bySourendra Dey
- Crane Design TompsonUploaded byAhmed
- Draws Ch 2015Uploaded bymuhdqasim

- Unit 17 CAD B11 Assessment P1of3 v4_Answer 1 (3)Uploaded bydharul khair
- Datasheet 1385Uploaded byrtv_domoratskaya
- eBook HPC v3Uploaded byDavid Frsofthe Verno
- IVMS-4200 User ManualUploaded byUmair Shahbaz
- Xperia Z Ultra 1276-6439 Part List Mechanical Rev5Uploaded byTec Scr Serrano
- 9.Method Statement for Pipe Culvert WorksUploaded byvnil
- info.txtUploaded byDraculaDesign Romania
- Etb Engineering the Future v1.0a LrUploaded byMax Boom
- Aalco Socket WeldUploaded by364290
- docukemetUploaded byChetan Raj
- Speech FOR ORIENTATIONUploaded bymit cs
- _4 Gauge Fixture StandardsUploaded byeldibujante
- g WidgetsUploaded byAndres Fernando Guaca
- 9702 p1 Current Electricity All CompletedUploaded bysajitcs6082
- Pool,Car,Policy, ,March,2018 DECEMBERUploaded byRiyaz Basheer
- NTPC SUMMER TRAINING REPORT 2013Uploaded bySanket Kinage
- En Matrox MuraControl Windows User GuideUploaded byNope
- BellmanUploaded bymsahrani
- Multi Domain Silicone WaxesUploaded bysekhonns
- Manual de Configuracion de Puerto HuaweiUploaded byHarold Ochoa
- Final Year project (thesis)Uploaded byMisgates
- electro static charge in gen rotorUploaded bymontanad
- Info QuesUploaded byballav
- HEC-HMS Applications Guide March2008Uploaded bySaloua Azzakhnini
- Basic AerodynamicsUploaded byAnonymous XykTMaXO
- Design ComparisonsUploaded byferry4321
- Project EstimationUploaded bynanapopo
- DB 11g Security Soporte 2Uploaded byRicardo Monge
- Franklin 2Uploaded bySriram Raghavan
- Arun ResumeUploaded bytanvi_36