Fatigue Testing of Semi-Structural

Composite Materials
Tim Langschwager
Product Manager
A. Schulman Engineered Composites

20-February, 2018

1
Agenda

• What is Fatigue and why is it important?

• Test methods and process
• Key application areas
• Test data
• Vinyl ester vs. Epoxy
• Carbon Fiber vs. E-glass Fiber
• 3K Carbon Fiber vs. 12K Carbon Fiber
• Conclusion

2
Fatigue

Fatigue testing in composites is used to determine a life cycle capability at load of a material in a tension-
tension method. This is done in a positive load method to evaluate any potential crack propagation, fiber
fractures, de-laminations. ASTM D3479 copyright ASTM Int’l, February 5, 2018

By stressing the material repeatedly in a constant stress environment you are able to evaluate the life
cycle capabilities of your material whether it be through material specifications, research and
development, quality assurance, or structural design.

Fatigue as defined by English Oxford Living Dictionary “Weakness in metal or other materials caused by
repeated variations in stress.”

3
Fatigue Test Methods

• ASTM D3039 Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials
ASTM D3039 Copyright ASTM Int’l
• ASTM D3479 Standard Test method for Tension-Tension Fatigue of Polymer Matrix Composite
Materials ASTM D3479 copyright ASTM Int’l, February 5, 2018

Testing consisted of 3 lots of material, 12 specimen per lot for a total for 36 test bars to determine the
Tensile properties. ASTM D3039 methodology consist of using specimen machined from flat panels.

-Using the ASTM D3039 Data, 3 specimen per lot- 3 lots per load parameter were tested per load
from 40% up to 90% of maximum load.
-This results in 54 test bars per material to develop fatigue results to achieve a S-N curve (stress life).
-Testing proceeded in Tension-Tension at 3 Hz.
-This testing for 1 material can take over 45 days of test time when evaluation out through 1 million +
cycles.

Data is from a controlled environment.

4
Test Procedure-

250 KN Hydraulic
Instron (56,000 lbf)

Instron WaveMatrix
software

Test point Time Required Test Mode Total Time

100% Minutes per sample ASTM D3039 36 specimen 3 hours
90% Minutes per sample ASTM D3479 9 specimen 1 hour
80% 0-20 minutes per specimen ASTM D3479 9 specimen 2 hour
70% 20-3 hours per specimen ASTM D3479 9 specimen 4-8 hours
60% 1 day per specimen ASTM D3479 9 specimen 9 days
50% 4 days/specimen ASTM D3479 9 specimen 36 days
5
Graphs

• Monitoring the testing through 3 different graphs

• Graph 1. (top right) shows the cyclic frequency of the
oscillation over a period of time. This is to ensure consistency
of the oscillatory testing.
• Graph 2. (bottom right) shows the force in relation to
distance. This is used to monitor the force maximum and
minimum as well as the force line remain consistent.
Cracking, slipping of the specimen can alter the values.
• Graph 3. (bottom middle) is used to monitor the maximum
and minimum distance during the testing over the total
cycles. This shows any changes is elongation which may
occur.

6
Test Data- Epoxy Carbon vs. E-glass
S-N curve
100

90

80

70
% Maximum Load

60

50
E Glass Epoxy
40 CF Epoxy

30

20

10

0
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000
Life (Cycles)

As a % Maximum Load there is little difference found between Carbon Fiber or E-glass fiber
products using the same resin system at 40-45% fiber volume.

7
Test Data- 3K vs. 12K PAN Carbon fiber Vinyl Ester resin
S-N curve
100

90

80

70
% Maximum Load

60

50
3K CF-SMC

40 12K CF-SMC

30

20

10

0
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000
Life (Cycles)

As a % Maximum Load there is little difference found between 3K and 12K carbon fiber products
using the same resin system at 40-45% fiber volume even though there is a difference in Ultimate
Tensile Strength
8
Test Data- Epoxy vs. Vinyl Ester Carbon Fiber
S-N curve
100

90

80

70
% Maximum Load

60

50
CF Vinyl Ester

40 CF Epoxy SMC

30

20

10

0
0 200000 400000 600000 800000 1000000
Life (Cycles)

As a % Maximum Load there is a notice-able difference found between Carbon fiber SMC using
Vinyl Ester or Epoxy resin at 40-45% fiber volume.

9
3K Carbon Fiber vs. 12K Carbon Fiber Vinyl Ester resin
S-N curve
50,000
Tension – Tension 3Hz
45,000

40,000

35,000

30,000
UTS (psi)

25,000
3K CF-SMC

20,000 12K CF-SMC

AL6061-T6
15,000

10,000

5,000

0
0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000
Life (Cycles)
Langschwager, Tim, “Carbon Fiber SMC Technology for Lightweight Structures” SPE-ACCE, Novi, Michigan September, 2013.

When comparing based on Ultimate Tensile Strength there is a difference in Fatigue performance
however when comparing to AL6061-T6 Aluminum the results show promising evidence of similar
fatigue performance at 40-50% of maximum load.
10
Summary-

• It’s important to consider fatigue life in structural and semi-structural components that are subjective to
repetitive stresses.
• Aerospace, Automotive are primary concern areas which have benefited from this data.
• Time consuming- Aerospace, Automotive-Structural/Semi-Structural Applications.
• For less critical applications engineers will have a tendency to us more robust safety factors as opposed
to performing fatigue testing.

• Through our testing-

• The resin system is showing to be more of the dominate factor vs. fiber.
• Minor difference between % Maximum load testing when comparing Carbon fiber and E-glass fiber.
• The Hybrid Vinyl Ester system performed slightly better than the Epoxy SMC system.
• Regardless of Ultimate Tensile Strength- % Maximum load showed typical results for fatigue life in
chopped fiber SMC to be 40-50%.

11
 Thank you

This presentation contains proprietary information of A. Schulman, Inc., including registered, unregistered and pending
trademarks, which may not be used, reproduced or disclosed to any other parties without the express written prior permission of
Schulman.
The information contained in this presentation is based on data believed to be reliable on the date compiled by
Schulman. Schulman does not represent, warrant, or otherwise guarantee, expressly or impliedly, the merchantability, fitness for a
particular purpose, suitability, accuracy, reliability, or completeness of the information contained in this presentation or the
products, materials, or processes described herein. You are solely responsible for any and all determinations regarding the use of
any Schulman material or product, including suitability for your own purposes. Schulman expressly disclaims liability for any loss,
damage, or injury directly or indirectly suffered or incurred as a result of or related to you using or relying on any of the information
provided in this presentation. This presentation does not endorse any material, product or process, and Schulman expressly
disclaims any contrary implication. The terms, “we”, “our”, or “Schulman” are used for convenience, and may include A. Schulman,
Inc. and any of its affiliated companies.

12