High Velocity Impact Behavior of Aramid/S2 Glass Interply Hybrid Laminates

Applied Composite Materials
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-021-09946-3
High‑Velocity Impact Behavior of Aramid/S2‑Glass Interply

Hybrid Laminates
Amanda Albertin Xavier da Silva1 · Riccardo Scazzosi2 · Andrea Manes2 ·

Sandro Campos Amico1
Received: 25 February 2021 / Accepted: 21 July 2021

© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2021
Abstract
This work investigates the effect of hybridization and stacking sequence on the ballistic
impact response of S2-glass/aramid/epoxy laminates. Different laminates were manufac-
tured by vacuum infusion, one with only aramid fabrics (12 layers, K 12), two with only
S2-glass fabrics (12 or 18 layers, Gl12 and G l18) and five interply hybrids (Gl3K9, [GlK]6,
K6Gl6, Gl6K6, Gl9K3). Ballistic tests were performed according to EN1522- FB3, with the
.357 Magnum FMJ projectile. The ballistic curves were determined to obtain the ballis-
tic limit velocity ( VBL), and in-plane damage area and through-the-thickness damage were
analyzed. For the impact at 430 m/s, all laminates were perforated, and the G l18 exhibited
greater specific absorbed energy (26.6 J.m2/kg), with lower thickness and in-plane damage
12 (22.6 J.m2/kg) with a similar areal density (≈0.77 g/cm2). No significant dif-
than the K
ferences in ballistic limits (pairing effect) were observed for the [GlK]6, Gl6K6 and K6Gl6
hybrids, and the Gl3K9 hybrid exhibited a positive hybrid effect. The areal density of lami-
nates has shown a great influence on the final ballistic response. The results have shown
that hybridization of aramid composites with S2-glass may enhance the impact absorption
capability of hard composite armors, however, the ballistic limit velocity, which is a crucial
parameter to assess ballistic shield performance, reduced.
Keywords Hybrid laminates · Interply hybrids · Aramid fibers · S2-glass fibers · Vacuum
infusion · Ballistic tests
1 Introduction
Composite materials for ballistic applications are commonly based on glass (S- and
R-type), polyaramid, polyethylene or polybenzoimidozole fibers [1]. S2-glass fibers are
35–40% stronger than E-glass and offer outstanding structural performance and ballistic
protection for hard composite armor applications [2]. Aramid fibers show high strength
and stiffness with low density [3], and have excellent impact performance (especially for
* Amanda Albertin Xavier da Silva

amanda.albertin@ufrgs.br
1
Federal University of Rio Grande Do Sul, PPGE3M, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Politecnico Di Milano, Milan, Italy
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
high velocity impact) in terms of material weight, but present a relatively higher cost
and are more demanding in terms of manufacturing [4], e.g. the low permeability of
aramid fabrics makes impregnation of the preform difficult in liquid molding processes.
Impact loading (low or high velocity) is, indeed, one of the most critical in-service
conditions for a structural component [3]. The impact resistance of laminates can be
improved by modifying the fiber/matrix interface, the matrix, by using a different fiber
architecture, such as 3D weaves [5], and also by fiber hybridization [6]. Indeed, hybridi-
zation may effectively combine high penetration resistance and energy absorption capa-
bility with cost reduction and processability [7], sometimes resulting in a synergistic
behavior also known as hybrid effect [8]. Muhi et al. [9] hybridized E-glass laminates
with one layer of Kevlar29 and concluded that hybridization enhanced performance
under dynamic penetration, being the response highly sensitive to projectile geom-
etry, however no damage analysis was carried out. In another study [10], Kevlar49/S-
glass/epoxy intralayer hybrid 2D woven (twill 2 × 2) laminates showed better flexural
and impact specific strength compared to the pure Kevlar49 laminate. Bulut and Erglik
[11] investigated quasi-static indentation (QSI) behavior of Kevlar (twill 2 × 2)/S-glass
(plain-weave)/carbon (plain-weave) hybrids laminates, and characterized failure modes
and damage mechanisms by observing the surfaces and through-the-thickness regions of
the indented samples, concluding that S-glass laminates showed poor indentation resist-
ance and damage tolerance which could be increased by the hybridization with carbon
or Kevlar. Berk et al. [12] analyzed the low velocity impact (drop weight) response of
aramid (twill-weave)/epoxy and S2-glass (plain-weave)/epoxy laminates manufactured
by vacuum infusion, and the S2-glass samples absorbed more energy than the aramid
ones.
The failure under high-velocity impact of a hybrid three-dimensional orthogonal woven
composite (3DWC) was investigated by Ahmed et al. [13], who reported that intraply
hybridization of carbon and Kevlar fibers has an outstanding effect on energy absorption
capability compared to their non-hybrid composites, and that the asymmetric hybrid lami-
nates presented better performances when impacted on the carbon (stiffer) face. The effect
of hybridization on interply hybrid laminates was also investigated by Bandaru et al. [14]
for Kevlar, glass and carbon fibers. The simulations showed that, for constant thickness,
the stacking sequence has a significant effect on ballistic performance, but no experimen-
tal results and damage analysis were included. The pairing effect in Kevlar/glass/carbon
interply hybrid laminates on high velocity energy absorption was discussed by Randjbaran
et al. [15]. Different hybrids were manufactured, with equal mass, shape and density, but
different stacking sequences and the GCKCKG hybrid absorbed the most energy, with bet-
ter results when the glass fabric was positioned at the first impacted layer, however, the bal-
listic limit velocities were not determined, a simple cilindrical projectile (not commercial
ammunition) was used, and damage analysis was not included.
In terms of processing techniques for composites, vacuum infusion is an attractive
option, being a relatively simple process, able to produce materials of similar quality to
those from more robust processes [16]. However, for aramid reinforced composites for
impact applications, it is a great challenge to obtain high performance and high quality
composites due to the limited thickness and fiber volume fraction which results from the
low pressure used (-1 bar). The very low through-the-thickness permeability of aramid fab-
rics is also a challenge, and tends to lead to high void content in liquid molding processes
[17]. Hybridization with glass fabrics, which exhibit greater permeability, may facilitate
resin flow during processing and yield higher quality and more homogeneous laminates
[18].
13
Some studies have already focused on aramid/glass hybrid composites, evaluating

the effect of hybridization and fiber orientation on general mechanical behavior [10,
18–20], and on low velocity impact [7, 11, 21–23]. However, high velocity impact
results are hard to find [9], especially in terms of ballistic curves and energy absorp-
tion mechanisms for S2-glass/aramid interply hybrids, two fibers with high impact
absorption capability. In this context, this work evaluates the experimental ballistic
impact response of aramid/S2-glass hybrid laminates manufactured by vacuum infu-
sion. The effect of interply hybridization on the performance of the laminates in high
velocity impacts with the 0.357 Magnum FMJ projectile (commercial and deformable
ammunition) was evaluated. Results of absorbed energy and ballistic limit velocity
from ballistic curves are discussed, along with damage mechanisms when different
layups are used.
2 Experimental
Plain-weave Kevlar®29 (440 g/m2, 0.62 mm, 7 threads per cm) fabrics from Dupont
and Hexcel 8-harness satin S2-glass (302 g/m2, 0.24 mm, 22 threads per cm) fabrics
were used as reinforcements (Fig. 1b). The fabrics were characterized under compres-
sion in a Universal Instron 3382 testing machine using circular parallel plates, as in
[24]. The distance between the plates simulated the final thickness of the laminates,
therefore, a correlation was obtained between the compression load (pressure, kPa)
and the expected fiber content (Vf) The test started by placing the stack of layers
between the compression plates spaced by 22 mm. The load required to bring the rein-
forcement to the required thickness and achieve the desired fiber volume fraction was
recorded.
Fig. 1 (a) Stacking sequence and nomenclature adopted of the laminates (yellow for aramid, white for
S2-glass), (b) Kevlar and S2-glass fabrics
13
2.1 Manufacturing
Epoxy resin AR260 with AH260 hardener (AR/AH260) – 100/26 g/g ratio, supplied by
Barracuda Advanced Composites (www.barracudacomposites.com.br), was used to manu-
facture the laminates by vacuum infusion, as in Silva et al. [18]. The dried fabrics (Kevlar
or S2-glass, 2 h at 100 °C) were stacked in a lay-up (600 × 300 mm2) on the one-sided
mold, a layer of peel ply was added, and a flow mesh was placed partly covering the rein-
forcement. The mold was sealed using a tacky tape and a vacuum bag. The cavity was
then evacuated, removing air and compacting the reinforcement (100 kPa = 1 bar). Then
the resin infiltrated the preform, the plates were cured for 24 h under vacuum, and the com-
posite extracted and subjected to post-curing (16 h at 65 °C).
Eight stacks (laminates) were manufactured, five of them interply hybrids, (Fig. 1a),
which are hereafter referred to as K 12, [GlK]6, K6Gl6, Gl3K9, Gl6K6, Gl9K3, Gl12 and G
l18.
The main idea for choosing those stackings was to maintain the total number of layers, 12
layers, except for one laminate which was produced with 18 layers, Gl18, to match the areal
density of the pure aramid composite, K12, for an easier comparison between them since
areal density is a key parameter for energy absorption. It was defined to impact the samples
at the S2-glass face based on the literature, which showed better results in high-velocity
impacts of aramid/glass hybrid laminates [9, 14]. The K6Gl6 was the only hybrid impacted
on the face with aramid fibers.
2.2 Testing of the Laminates
Density of the laminates was evaluated according to ASTM D792 standard. The overall
fiber content (Vf), and the aramid (VK), glass (VG), matrix (Vm), and void (Vv) volume
fraction were determined by acidic matrix digestion (with nitric acid), according to ASTM
D3171, procedure A (bath temperature: 65 ± 3 °C, digestion time: ~ 6 h). For the hybrids,
aramid and glass fibers were manually separated after resin digestion and individually
dried and weighed. For the laminates with only glass fibers, fiber content was determined
by matrix thermal degradation (temperature: ≈600 °C, digestion time: ~ 6 h), also accord-
ing to ASTM D3171.
The laminates were impacted with the 0.357 Magnum FMJ projectile with lead core and
brass jacket, nominal mass and velocity of 10.2 g and 430 ± 10 m/s, respectively, according
to European Standard EN 1522 FB3, at the Banco Nazionale di Prova, Italy. Both initial
(V0) and residual (Vres) velocities were measured using a light screen placed 2.5 m away
from the target and coupled to a data acquisition system, as shown in Fig. 2a. The shooting
distance was 5 m. Attention was paid in placing the frame that constrains the panels (and
consequently the panels themselves) perpendicularly to the trajectory of the bullets so that
the impacts are expected to be normal to the laminate plane.
The specimens were square shaped (side: 270 mm) with four 12 mm diameter holes to
allow attachment to a frame (opening: 150 mm × 150 mm) for testing (Fig. 2b). Each panel
was impacted by a single hit at the center. Impacts at initial velocities in the 160–650 m/s
range were performed to build a ballistic curve for six of the laminates (six samples for
each type). The G l3K9 and Gl9K3 laminates were used to determine residual velocities in
a specific case: only two samples of each were tested with an initial velocity of approxi-
mately 430 m/s (FB3) (Table 2). The absorbed energy (Eabs) was determined by the kinetic
p.
energy conservation equation, using the projectile mass, m
13
Fig. 2 (a) Ballistic test set-up, (b) Gun, specimen support, specimen and projectile used in the ballistic tests
The ballistic experimental data (initial and residual velocities) were fitted using the
Jonas-Lambert model [25], shown in Eq. (1):
�
Vres = √ 0 →
if 0 < Vi ≤ VBL
(1)
k p V0 p − VBL p if V0 > VBL
where VBL is the ballistic limit velocity, and k and p are the ballistic Jonas-Lambert
parameters.
The in-plane damage area of each laminate was determined by taking photographs
of the front and back of the plates and using the ImageJ software [26, 27]. C-scan ultra-
sonic inspection was also performed to assess the damage using an NDT Systems equip-
ment, Raptor model, with 2.25 MHz (0.5 inch) transducer and water as coupling medium.
Attenuation of the ultrasonic waves occurs through the loss of signal though reflection and
dispersion at the internal interfaces and absorption by the material. The fibers and resin
contents, and their densities influence the loss of signal amplitude. Thus, higher values of
amplitude scale (toward yellow and green tones) indicate higher resin content, and lower
values (toward darker tones) indicate greater content of fibers and voids. The plates were
waterjet cut in two halves and one of the halves of each plate was photographed (photos
and microscopy) for through-the-thickness damage analysis.
The photographs were taken with a Sony professional camera, Cyber-shot GPs HD
model, with 20.4 megapixels of resolution. A digital microscope (Haiz, zoom of 1600 x)
was used to obtain the microscopies to analyze the through-the-thickness damages of the
laminates.
The degree of hybrid effect ( he) [28] was evaluated based on Eq. (2) and Eq. (3):
( ) ( )
nK ∗ t K nG ∗ tG
(2)
H K G
Eabs(RoM) = Eabs ∗ + Eabs ∗
tK12 tGl18
( ) EH
Hybrid effect he = H
−1 (3)
Eabs(RoM)
13
Table 1 General characteristics of the laminates

K12 Gl3K9 [GlK]6 K6Gl6 Gl6K6 Gl9K3 Gl12 Gl18
Vf [%] 60.9 ± 1.4 59.1 ± 1.6 58.7 ± 1.1 58.0 ± 1.9 58.0 ± 1.9 53.2 ± 1.1 48.9 ± 1.4 49.7 ± 1.0

Vm [%] 26.8 ± 1.4 30.2 ± 2.2 30.8 ± 1.4 32.1 ± 2.6 32.1 ± 2.6 37.5 ± 2.0 44.4 ± 3.0 42.6 ± 2.2
Vv [%] 12.3 ± 0.3 10.7 ± 0.6 10.5 ± 0.4 9.9 ± 0.8 9.9 ± 0.8 9.3 ± 0.9 6.8 ± 1.6 7.7 ± 1.1
VK [%] 60.9 ± 1.4 52.7 ± 1.4 43.7 ± 1.0 43.5 ± 1.5 43.5 ± 1.5 25.8 ± 0.4 –- –-
VG [%] –- 6.4 ± 0.3 15.0 ± 0.2 14.5 ± 0.5 14.5 ± 0.5 27.5 ± 0.7 48.9 ± 1.4 49.7 ± 1.0
ρ [g/ 1.20 ± 0.01 1.28 ± 0.02 1.37 ± 0.02 1.37 ± 0.03 1.37 ± 0.03 1.50 ± 0.03 1.74 ± 0.04 1.74 ± 0.04
cm3]
ρarea [g/ 0.78 0.73 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.58 0.51 0.76
cm2]
t [mm] 6.53 5.68 4.55 4.73 4.73 3.87 2.92 4.34
where, Eabs
K
and Eabs
G
are absorbed energy in the ballistic tests of the single-fiber laminates
(K12 and G
l18, with similar areal densities); tK and tG are the thickness, and nK and nG are
the number of Kevlar and glass layers in the hybrids, respectively; tK12 and tGl18 are the
thickness of the K 12 and G l18 laminates; Eabs(RoM)
H
indicates the resulting rule of mixture
value, and E H is the experimental value of absorbed energy of a particular hybrid sample.
3 Results and Discussion
Table 1 shows the main characteristics of the laminates. The K12 presented the greatest
overall fiber content (61%) and G l12 and G
l18 (50%) the lowest, and the overall Vf reduces
when more glass layers-S2 are used. This is justified by the different fabric architecture,
and because aramid allows greater compaction for the maximum pressure (-1 bar) avail-
able during the vacuum infusion processing. This can be better appreciated by the results
of the fabric compression test shown in Fig. 3. For 100 kPa (1 bar) pressure, the expected
fiber content is ca. 60% for the aramid fabric and 50% for the S2-glass. In addition, with the
increase in the number of glass layers, there is a reduction in void content (Vv), probably
Fig. 3 Results of the fabric com-

pression test
13
Table 2 Ballistic tests velocities Samples V0 Vres Eabs Samples V0 Vres Eabs

and absorbed energy of the [m/s] [m/s] [J] [m/s] [m/s] [J]
laminates
K12 01 293.1 0 438.1 [GlK]6 01 217.5 0 241.3
02 295.2 123.2 366.8 02 241.9 0 298.5
03 325.2 173.5 385.7 03 270.7 234.2 94.2
04 339.3 264.3 230.8 04 331.5 263.7 205.8
05 431.8 389.5 176.9 05 422.9 390.0 136.4
06 541.5 503.6 202.0 06 648.2 605.9 269.9
K6Gl6 01 227.2 0 263.3 Gl6K6 01 198.5 0 201.0
02 235.2 0 282.2 02 223.7 0 255.2
03 280.8 222.6 149.4 03 280.4 210.1 175.8
04 327.7 264.5 190.8 04 323.5 274.5 149.4
05 423.4 390.6 136.0 05 431.0 402.9 119.5
06 552.3 515.9 197.9 06 527.4 499.5 146.3
Gl12 01 160.1 0 130.8 Gl18 01 246.9 0 310.8
02 205.3 0 215.0 02 284.4 0 412.6
03 244.1 190.5 118.8 03 311.1 225.9 233.4
04 330.7 308.6 72.0 04 329.0 234.9 270.5
05 431.9 409.0 98.1 05 426.2 376.1 204.8
06 550.5 526.2 133.3 06 543.2 505.3 202.6
Gl3K9 01 428.2 382.3 189.7 Gl9K3 01 430.6 403.1 117.2
02 420.0 375.1 182.0 02 427.9 401.4 112.2
The values in bold indicate the samples that were tested according to
the FB3 class, i.e. at 430 ± 10 m/s
due to the higher permeability of the S2-glass fabric, facilitating resin flow within the
preform.
Since the S2-glass fabric used has lower areal density and thickness (300 g/m2,
0.25 mm) than Kevlar aramid fabric (440 g/m2, 0.62 mm), there is a reduction in areal den-
sity and thickness of the laminates when more glass layers are used. So, the pure laminates
K12 and G l18 with similar areal density (≈0.76–0.78 g/cm2), show a significant difference
in final thickness.
Table 2 shows the impact velocities (V0), residuals velocities (Vres), and absorbed
energy (Eabs) of all laminates. The respective ballistic curves according to the Lambert-
Jonas model are shown in Fig. 4, and the model parameters (k, p, VBL and R2) are compiled
in Table 3. The K12 laminate showed the highest ballistic limit (293 m/s), closely followed
by the Gl18 laminate (284 m/s), bearing in mind that they have similar areal density and
that the Gl18 thickness is 35% lower. In that case, the performance is an overall balance of
different fabric architectures, number of layers, types of fibers and thread size. Therefore,
aramid and S2-glass fiber laminates showed similar performance with added advantages
for the latter considering the manufacturing process used. This also confirms the impor-
tance of the areal density parameter in defining ballistic impact absorption capability.
Bresciani et al. [29] analyzed Kevlar29 (mats)/epoxy laminates, 5 mm (12 layers) and
10 mm (24 layers) thick, and reported a ballistic limit of 143 and 176 m/s, respectively.
Pandya et al. [30] tested E-glass/epoxy laminates with thickness ranging from 3 to
20 mm and the reported ballistic limit velocity were within 92—287.3 m/s. Therefore,
the aramid/epoxy laminates manufactured by vacuum infusion exhibited interesting
13
Fig. 4 Ballistic curves of the

laminates
results for application in ballistic protection components, even with a higher void con-
tent and with a thickness of 6.5 mm.
In the work of Kumar and Ahmad [31], S2-glass (plain-weave)/epoxy laminates
were subjected to impact with 0.30 caliber FSP projectile (≈2.67 g). For similar thick-
ness (6.23 mm) and properties in relation to the G l18 or G
l12 laminate of this study
(Table 2), the reported ballistic limit was 387 m/s for a 4 times lower projectile mass.
So, the S2-glass (8-harness satin)/epoxy laminates of the present work, the G l18 and
Gl12, yielded relatively better results. The Eabs at the ballistic limit, with the 0.30 caliber
and VBL of 387 m/s, was 199.9 J, while the thinner G l18 and Gl12 laminates absorbed,
respectively, 214.9 J and 412.6 J at the ballistic limit for the 0.357 Magnum. Hosur et al.
[32], investigated the response of laminates with plain- and satin-weave carbon fabrics,
and the satin-weave laminate absorbed greater energy, with 38% higher ballistic limit.
That was justified by the lower crimp in the fibers along the length for the satin-weave
fabric [33].
In another study [34], E-glass/epoxy laminates ≈4 mm thick, with areal density of
0.74 g/cm2 and fiber content of 50%, similar to the Gl18, exhibited a ballistic limit of
137 m/s, approximately half that of the Gl18 laminate (284 m/s). The higher stiffness and
strength of S2-glass fibers, 35–40% stronger than E-glass [2], can offer better ballistic
performance for hard composite armor applications. This justifies the use of S2-glass
fibers, even though at a higher cost than E-glass fibers.
Comparing the [GlK]6, K6Gl6 and Gl6K6 hybrid laminates, which only differ in the
stacking sequence, the hybrids [GlK]6 and Gl6K6, where the impact occurred on the
Table 3 Parameters k, p, VBL Laminates K P VBL R2 Specific bal-

and R2 of the ballistic curves and [dn] [dn] [m/s] [dn] listic energy
specific ballistic energy [J.m2/kg]
K12 0.9647 3.43 293.0 0.97 56.2

[GlK]6 0.9658 3.39 241.9 0.98 45.9
K6Gl6 0.9329 3.51 235.2 0.99 43.4
Gl6K6 0.9671 3.54 242.3 0.99 46.1
Gl12 0.9711 3.50 205.3 0.99 42.1
Gl18 0.9397 3.80 284.4 0.99 54.3
13
glass-fiber face, exhibited ballistic limit (≈242 m/s) just slightly higher than for the K6Gl6
laminate (235 m/s). This small increase may be due to the greater hardness, stiffness,
strength, and compressive properties of the S2-glass fiber, reducing the penetration capa-
bility of the projectile. Thus, the stacking sequence has an influence on the ballistic perfor-
mance (VBL), but the influence was small for the glass fibers on the impact surface. Simi-
larly, in [33], the authors concluded that stacking the first layer with glass fibers is better
than using Kevlar fibers. The G l12 laminate showed the lowest V BL (205 m/s), justified by
the much lower areal density and thickness, ratifying the importance of these parameters
on ballistic performance.
To be able to compare the ballistic performance in relation to the areal density of each
abs/areal density at V
laminate, the specific ballistic energy, i.e. E BL, was used (Table 3). The
highest specific ballistic energy was found for K 12 (56.2 J.m2/kg), closely followed by the
Gl18 (54.3 J.m2/kg). The hybrid laminates [GlK]6 and Gl6K6 showed similar values, ≈46 J.
m2/kg, and the hybrid with aramid on the impact surface showed a slightly lower value
(≈43 J.m2/kg). Thus, based solely on this parameter, the hybrids reached ≈22% lower per-
formance than the pure laminates.
The specific absorbed energy (Eabs/ρarea) and thickness values of the laminates
impacted at 430 ± 10 m/s according to the European Standard EN 1522 FB3, are com-
piled in Fig. 5. All laminates suffered full perforation. The G l3K9 hybrid laminate, with
only three S2-glass layers, presented higher specific energy absorption than K12 laminate
(25.99 and 22.69 J.m2/kg, respectively), with lower thickness and areal density. Compar-
ing the 12-layer laminates, [ GlK]6, K6Gl6, Gl6K6, Gl9K3 and G l12, there was a decrease in
impact absorption capability when the number of S2-glass layers increased (see Fig. 5).
This is justified by the reduction in areal density, thickness and fiber content (Table 1)
when more S2-glass layers are used, parameters that have a direct influence on the bal-
listic performance of composite armor, and also because the content of the tough aramid
fibers is being reduced.
However, for the same areal density (K12 and G l18 laminates), the pure glass laminate
clearly showed greater impact absorption capability, 26.69 J.m2/kg compared to 22.69 J.
m2/kg. The higher number of layers and the fabric architecture of the G l18 can provide
the greater energy dissipation, due to delamination of the layers and dissipation of energy
along the fibers (fabric with less crimp than the plain-weave) [35].
Fig. 5 Specific absorbed energy

and thickness of the various
laminates for V0 = 430 m/s
13
Now comparing the K 6Gl6, [GlK]6, and G l6K6 hybrids, the hybrid with alternating
stacking sequence, [GlK]6 and the K 6Gl6 presented similar values. Analyzing the K 6Gl6,
and Gl6K6 hybrids, the specific Eabs was 14% higher when the impacted surface was the
aramid fabric. On the other hand, the hybrids with S2-glass on the impact surface, [GlK]6
and [Gl6K6] exhibited higher V BL (≈242 m/s) than that with aramid on the impact surface,
K6Gl6 (235 m/s), i.e. the laminates with stiffer fibers on the impact surface showed better
performance as in [9, 19]. In all, these results ratify the importance of comparing ballistic
performance using ballistic limit velocity instead of isolated results of energy absorption.
The hybrid effect (he) in each hybrid laminate was determined for 430 ± 10 m/s, and the
results are shown in Fig. 6. The only hybrid that exhibited a positive hybrid effect was the
Gl3K9, with higher specific Eabs than the pure aramid laminate, K12, indicating a synergistic
effect. As described by Abtew et al. [2], after impact, first occurs compression of the target
directly below the projectile and tensile stress in the primary yarns. These effects counter the
direct projectile force and bear the greatest stress, also providing resistance to penetration into
the target. The tensile and compressive properties of S2-glass fibers are greater than aramid
fibers and can absorb a considerable amount of projectile kinetic energy at first contact with
the target. However, if the laminate had only S2-glass fibers, it would not benefit from the
deformability and toughness of aramid, which ensures that the energy is absorbed by other
important energy absorption mechanisms, such as conical deformation of the back face of
the target and secondary yarns deformation. This may justify the observed synergistic effect.
3.1 Damage Analysis
Photographs of the front and back faces and C-scan inspection of the laminates impacted at
≈430 m/s (totally perforated plates) and ≈200 m/s (partially perforated plates) are seen in
Fig. 7. In pure S2-glass laminates (Gl12 and Gl18), the observed damage using both methods
was similar. For hybrids and aramid ( K12) laminates, C-scan was not efficient for damage eval-
uation, but was still adequate for pre-impact evaluation (resin distribution and homogeneity
verification).
In Fig. 8, the measured front and back damage area data are compiled. Greater damage
area is clearly observed for lower initial velocity, which is justified by the longer interaction
between projectile and laminate, which can transfer a greater amount of energy. The Gl3K9
and Gl9K3 hybrid laminates showed similar damage areas, even though the Gl3K9 exhibited
60% greater energy absorption.
Fig. 6 Hybrid effect in the

various hybrid laminates for an
impact velocity of 430 ± 10 m/s
13
Fig. 7 Front and back damage images and C-scan maps
The Gl6K6 and K6Gl6 hybrid laminates showed the largest and similar damage areas
(Fig. 8a), especially S2-glass layers, regardless of the impact face. The laminate with alter-
nating layers [GlK]6, showed lower and more even front/back damage compared to the
Fig. 8 Front and back damage areas for different initial velocities: (a) ≈200 m/s and (b) ≈430 m/s
13
K6Gl6 and Gl6K6 hybrids (Fig. 8a), whose damage was more visible in the glass layers,
nevertheless their ballistic limits were similar. Therefore, the layup influenced through-the-
thickness damage distribution.
For impacts at higher velocity (Fig. 8b), the K6Gl6 hybrid showed the greatest damage
area, again in the S2-glass fiber face, the back face of the plate. In the G l6K6 and [GlK]6
hybrids, damage of the rear face is smaller since the S2-glass layers are on the impact
surface. Similar back-damage areas were obtained for the pure laminates (K12 and Gl18)
but, for the former, with plain-weave fabric architecture, the energy (tensile wave/impact
deformation) propagates more evenly in the main directions (weft and warp), producing a
slightly more circular shape delamination (see Fig. 7), compared to the satin fabric archi-
tecture of the latter.
In general, the energy lost by the projectile is absorbed by the laminated panels and
depends on various damage and energy absorption mechanisms, such as deformation, sur-
face damage, stress in the first fiber tows, strain in the secondary fiber tows, delamination
and fracture of the matrix, tow pull-out, fiber rupture, type of fibers, tow linear density,
fabric configurations, number of fabric layers and their layup [2]. Selecting the type of
fabric architecture is important because it affects how and which fiber tows directly contact
the projectile, and this affects overall impact resistance [36]. The plain-weave has been
reported to show better energy absorption due to their maximum interweaving points to
transmit stress to a larger area of the fabric, involving more secondary yarns [2]. How-
ever, Hosur et al. [32] reported that the satin-weave absorbed 38% higher ballistic energy
than the plain-weave. In another work [37], four different architectures of carbon laminates,
namely, non-crimp, 2D plain-weave, 3D plain-weave orthogonal and 3D twill orthogo-
nal, were subjected to low-velocity impact, and the 3D architectures exhibited the highest
impact resistance, with the least damage.
Comparing the pure laminates, K12 and G l18, the back-damage areas showed similar val-
ues, but the damage propagated differently. The pure plain-weave aramid (Kevlar) is able
to dissipate the energy (tensile wave/impact deformation) more homogeneously in the two
main directions of the fabric, producing a circular shape delamination, while in the satin
fabric (pure S2-glass), the energy propagated more in one of the main directions, produc-
ing elliptical shape delamination.
According to Shanazari et al. [35], as a result of the yarns interweaving, a greater
extent of the ballistic strain/stress wave is reflected back even though the filaments are not
stretched along their axis until the yarns are completely non-crimp, this reduces the veloc-
ity of the longitudinal strain wave and affects the energy dissipation capability. The satin
fabric architecture presents greater crimp in the warp direction, decreasing the speed of
the longitudinal strain wave, and generating less damage in this direction compared to the
weft direction. The same delamination pattern is observed for the S2-glass laminate with
12 layers (Fig. 7), but with a smaller area of damage propagation, since the lower thickness
reduces the contact time of the projectile with the target, decreasing energy dissipation
capability.
The following energy absorption mechanisms have been observed in fiber reinforced
composites: out-of-plane compression, tension in the primary yarns, cone deformation of
the target back face, interlaminar shear, deformation in secondary yarns, shear plugging,
friction (projectile-laminate), delamination, and matrix cracking [27]. These are shown in
chronological order (numbers) in Fig. 9. According to Patterson et al. [27], out-of-plane
compression is related to transverse compression modulus of the laminate, in-plane ten-
sion with the tensile modulus of the fibers, the cone deformation with flexural modulus
of the laminate, in-plane shear with shear modulus of the laminate, delamination with
13
Fig. 9 Microscopy of the cross-section of the impacted G

l18 laminate and the observed energy absorption
mechanisms
interlaminar shear and fracture toughness, matrix cracking with fracture toughness of the
matrix, shear plug failure with several mechanical properties, and friction with the friction
coefficient.
Figure 10 shows the cross sections of the fully perforated single-fiber laminates, K 12 and
Gl18. The observed damage mechanism was similar and included compression, delamina-
tion, cracks in the matrix and bulge formation (cone deformation) on the back face, where
the fibers ruptured by tension due to excessive elongation during perforation. The three
major successive failure modes reported by Cheng et al. [38] can be seen for the S2-glass
laminate (Fig. 10b), failure by punching shear, fiber tension and delamination.
When the velocity was reduced, the projectile was retained by the K 12 and G
l18 targets
and different energy absorption mechanisms were observed, as shown in Fig. 6c-d. For
K12, the projectile was largely deformed and encrusted within the laminate (Fig. 10c),
similar to the report of Nunes [36], but this did not occur for the S2-glass laminate
Fig. 10 Microscopy of the cross-section of the impacted K l18 laminates: perforation (a, b, respec-
12 and G
tively); partial penetration (c, d, respectively)
13
(Fig. 10d). Besides, bulging and bending is seen on the back face of K12 due to the pro-
jectile accommodation between the layers, but not for Gl18 due to the superior stiffness,
strength (in compression and flexure), higher shear modulus and interlaminar shear
strength of the S2-glass fibers. For G l18, the projectile was rebound, and only the first
stages of fiber compression, delamination and matrix rupture were observed. Regardless
of the distinct energy absorption mechanisms, both laminates showed similar ballistic
limits, 293 and 284 m/s.
Analyzing the hybrid laminates impacted at ≈430 m/s, Fig. 11, the same mechanisms of
energy absorption exhibited by the pure laminates can be observed. When the impacted face
was an aramid fabric (Fig. 11d), a smaller protuberance occurred at the back of the plate due
to the lower deformation capability of S2-glass fibers. In all perforated laminates, Fig. 10–11,
a characteristic “V-shaped” deformation is noticed (as in Fig. 11c), spreading radially out-
ward, with an angle between the upper and radial boundaries remaining almost constant
until the target fails [29]. At the back face, the damage is mostly due to the propagation of
delamination, matrix cracking and fiber breakage by tensile stress. At the front, the damage is
mainly due to indentation, compression and shearing [8]. The formation of the “V-shaped” is
mainly driven by strain and rupture of the tows by shear and tensile, and the displacement of
material during the penetration of the projectile through the thickness of the laminate.
Fig. 11 – Microscopy of the

cross-section of the perforated
hybrid laminates impacted at
≈430 m/s: (a) Gl3K9, (b) [GlK]6,
(c) Gl6K6, (d) K6Gl6 and (e)
Gl9K3
13
The failure mechanisms of the Gl3K9 hybrid is seen in Fig. 11a. This laminate presented
greater absorbed energy (25.99 J.m2/kg) than the pure aramid laminate (22.69 J.m2/kg),
which can be partially explained by the higher stiffness in compression, bending and in-
plane and interlaminar shear of the S2-glass fibers on the impact surface, compared to the
aramid fibers, therefore greater energy could be absorbed through the failure mechanisms
linked to these mechanical properties during the impact event [39]. The shear and com-
pression properties explain the greater energy absorption capability of S2-glass laminates
(26.69 J.m2/kg) compared to the pure aramid with similar areal density.
Analyzing the K 6Gl6, Gl6K6 and [ GlK]6 laminates impacted at ≈200 m/s (Fig. 12), par-
tial penetration/rebound of the projectile is observed, and, regardless of the fiber at the
impact surface, the projectile was never encrusted between layers, as seen for the K12 lami-
nate. Figure 12a shows fiber failure by compression and penetration in the first two aramid
layers of the K 6Gl6 laminate. In Fig. 12b, failure of the six S2-glass fibers layers of the
Gl6K6 by compression and shear is observed, along with large delamination close to the
glass/aramid interface and bulge formation of the back face. Some bending is seen due to
the aramid layers at the back compared to the K6Gl6 laminate (Fig. 12a). As for the [ GlK]6
laminate, shown in Fig. 12c, the energy absorption mechanisms were similar to the K 6Gl6
laminate, with fiber rupture by compression and also delamination, but somewhat greater
bending.
l6K6 laminate (Fig. 12b), greater delamination at the interface of the aramid and
In the G
S2-glass fibers is seen. Delamination occurred mostly at the S2-glass and aramid interfaces
due to their different bending stiffness [40]. After impact, compression of the layers in the
target occurs first and, as the projectile advances, shear stresses occur in-plane and inter-
laminar, and also a tensile stress in the bottom layers due to bending. S2-glass and aramid
fibers have different flexural modulus, when the aramid layers are positioned at the back of
Fig. 12 Cross-sectional view (photos and microscopies) showing partial penetration/rebound of the hybrid
laminate impacted at ≈200 m/s: (a) K6Gl6, (b)Gl6K6 and (c) [GlK]6
13
the laminate (Gl6K6), there is higher flexural strain in the aramid than in the S2-glass fib-
ers, yielding greater delamination at the S2-glass/aramid interface. The same occurs for the
laminate with alternating layers, [GlK]6, although it tends to present a more uniform defor-
mation (Fig. 12c) since the layers of each material (S2-glass and aramid) have a smaller
thickness, and the change in properties is less abrupt. For the K6Gl6 laminate, the flex-
ural strain was limited by the S2-glass fibers at the back, not allowing the aramid fibers to
deform more than the S2-glass fibers, then, large delamination at the glass/aramid interface
was not observed (Fig. 12a), and delamination occurred mostly at the glass/glass interface.
The hybrid laminates presented a combination of energy absorption mechanisms of the
pure laminates K 12 and G
l18 when not perforated. However, their characteristics were more
similar to those of the S2-glass fiber laminates, with higher energy dissipation due to fiber
compression, shear plugging and delamination, preventing a deeper penetration of the pro-
jectile. These mechanisms of energy absorption mostly occur at the first stage of the impact
event, and the shear plugging and compression of the region directly below the projectile are
the mechanisms of absorption that dissipate more energy during impact, according to Naik
and Doshi [39]. With the S2-glass fibers on the impact surface, with higher compression and
shear modulus, properties directly related to, respectively, out-of-plane compression and in-
plane shear (energy absorption mechanisms), the laminate can dissipate more energy.
4 Conclusions
Epoxy laminates based aramid and S2-glass fabrics were successfully obtained by vacuum
infusion and hybridization improved the final quality of the composites, with a reduction in
void content for the hybrid laminates compared to pure aramid. The laminates that under-
went ballistic impact at 430 m/s were fully perforated. The areal density of the laminate
was found to have greater influence on the final response to ballistic impact than thickness.
For similar areal densities, the pure S2-glass laminate exhibited greater energy absorption,
with 35% lower thickness than the pure aramid laminate, but very similar VBL.
The effect of the stacking sequence (lay-up) was analyzed for the [GlK]6, [K6Gl6] and
[Gl6K6] hybrids. The E abs was 14% higher when the impacted surface was aramid, K 6Gl6,
BL was lower compared to the [ GlK]6 and [Gl6K6]. This ratifies the importance of
but the V
determining the ballistic limit velocity when comparing the performance of components
for ballistic protection, i.e. isolated results of energy absorption can be misleading. Also,
the laminate may be able to absorb a large amount of energy in high-velocity impacts via
different mechanisms, but the ability to retain the projectile at a given impact velocity is not
directly related. This was also noticed when the pure K12 and Gl18 laminates are compared.
The laminate lay-up showed a greater influence on energy absorption and damage prop-
agation than on the ballistic limit velocity. Even so, the Gl3K9 hybrid laminate exhibited an
interestingly positive hybrid effect, with higher energy absorption (190 J) than the pure K12
laminate (177 J), even with lower thickness and areal density. Unfortunately the ballistic
limit velocity was not determined in that case to allow a more positive analysis.
Similar energy absorption mechanisms were observed for aramid and S2-glass lami-
nates impacted at high-velocity (≈430 m/s), with complete perforation in all cases. The
hybrid laminates impacted on the glass fiber faces also showed similar energy absorp-
tion mechanisms but a smaller protuberance appeared at the back of the K 6Gl6 due to the
lower deformation of the stiffer and stronger S2-glass fibers. For impacts at low velocity
13
(≈200 m/s), the projectile was retained by all targets. The hybrid laminates [ GlK]6, Gl6K6
and K6Gl6 presented a combination of energy absorption mechanisms of the pure laminates
K12 and Gl18, but resembling more the pure glass laminates, with major energy dissipation
due to fiber compression, shear plugging and delamination, preventing deeper penetration
of the projectile.
The studied hybridization may bring an additional benefit of extending the life of the
protection since S2-glass fibers on the outer surface of the hybrid laminates are expected to
shelter the aramid fibers from deleterious ultraviolet light and water contact. In all, hybridi-
zation of aramid with S2-glass lead to easier manufacturing by vacuum infusion, increased
impact absorption capability with weight reduction and maintained loading support capa-
bility, therefore it may lead to an optimized application in rigid composite reinforcements.
Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge DuPont for the fiber supply and CNPq and
CAPES for the financial support.
Funding The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Data Availability The data of the research are available if the journal request.
Declarations
Consent to Participate All authors have approved the manuscript.
Consent for Publication This manuscript has not been published and is not under consideration for publica-
tion elsewhere. All authors have approved and are in agreement with their submission to Applied Composite
Materials.
Conflicts of interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of
this article.
References
1. Nayak, N., Sivaraman, P., Banerjee, A., Madhu, V., Dutta, A.L., Mishra, V.S., Chakraborty, B.C.:
Effect of Matrix on the Ballistic Impact of Aramid Fabric Composite Laminates by Armor Piercing
Projectiles. Polym Compos (2012). https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.21259
2. Alubel, M., Boussu, F., Bruniaux, P., Loghin, C., Cristian, I.: Ballistic impact mechanisms – A review
on textiles and fibre-reinforced composites impact responses. Compos Struct (2019). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.compstruct.2019.110966
3. Sharma, S., Dhakate, S.R., Majumdar, A., Singh, B.P.: Improved static and dynamic mechanical prop-
erties of multiscale bucky paper interleaved Kevlar fiber composites. Carbon N Y (2019). https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.carbon.2019.06.055
4. Randjbaran, E., Zahari, R., Majid, D.L., Aswan, N., Jalil, A.: The Effects of Stacking Sequence Layers
of Six Layers Composite Materials in Ballistic Energy Absorption. Int J Mater Eng Innov 1, 293–305
(2013)
5. Zhang, C., Rao, Y., Li, W.: Low-velocity impact behavior of intralayer hybrid composites based
on carbon and glass non-crimp fabric. Compos Struct (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.
2019.111713
6. Wu, Z., Zhang, L., Ying, Z., Ke, J., Hu, X.: Low-velocity impact performance of hybrid 3D carbon
/ glass woven orthogonal composite : Experiment and simulation. Compos Part B (2020). https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108098
13
7. Bulut, M., Erkliǧ, A., Yeter, E.: Hybridization effects on quasi-static penetration resistance in
fiber reinforced hybrid composite laminates. Compos Part B Eng (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compositesb.2016.05.025
8. Reddy, P.R.S., Reddy, T.S., Madhu, V., Gogia, A.K., Rao, K.V.: Behavior of E-glass composite
laminates under ballistic impact. Mater Des (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2015.06.094
9. Muhi, R.J., Najim, F., de Moura, M.F.S.F.: The effect of hybridization on the GFRP behavior under
high velocity impact. Compos Part B Eng (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2009.08.
002
10. Valenҫa, S.L., Griza, S., De Oliveira, V.G., Sussuchi, E.M., De Cunha, F.G.C.: Evaluation of the
mechanical behavior of epoxy composite reinforced with Kevlar plain fabric and glass/Kevlar
hybrid fabric. Compos Part B Eng (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.09.040
11. Bulut, M., Erkliğ, A.: The investigation of quasi-static indentation effect on laminated hybrid com-
posite plates. Mech Mater (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechmat.2017.11.005
12. Berk, B., Karakuzu, R., Murat, B.I., Arikan, V., Arman, Y., Atas, C., Goren, A.: An experimental
and numerical investigation on low velocity impact behavior of composite plates. J Compos Mater
(2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998315622805
13. Ahmed, S., Zheng, X., Yan, L., Zhang, C., Wang, X.: Influence of asymmetric hybridization on
impact response of 3D orthogonal woven composites. Compos Sci Technol (2020). https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compscitech.2020.108326
14. Bandaru, A.K., Vetiyatil, L., Ahmad, S.: The effect of hybridization on the ballistic impact behav-
ior of hybrid composite armors. Compos Part B Eng (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.
2015.03.012
15. Randjbaran, E., Zahari, R., Majid, D.L., Jalil, N.A.A., Vaghei, R., Ahmadi, R.: The Effects of
Stacking Sequence Layers of Hybrid Composite Materials in Energy Absorption under the High
Velocity Ballistic Impact Conditions: An Experimental Investigation. J Mater Sci Eng (2013).
https://doi.org/10.4172/2169-0022.1000130
16. Song, J.H.: Pairing effect and tensile properties of laminated high-performance hybrid composites
prepared using carbon/glass and carbon/aramid fibers. Compos Part B Eng (2015). https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.015
17. Nunes, S.G., de Amorim, W.F., Manes, A., Amico, S.C.: The effect of thickness on vacuum infu-
sion processing of aramid/epoxy composites for ballistic application. J Compos Mater (2019).
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998318785702
18. Silva, A.A.X., Souza, J.A., Manes, A., Amico, S.C.: In-plane Permeability and Mechanical Proper-
ties of R-Glass /Aramid Hybrid Composites. J Mater Eng Perform (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11665-020-04944-1
19. Srivathsan, A., Vijayaram, B., Ramesh, R., Gokuldass, R.: Investigation on Mechanical Behavior of
Woven Fabric Glass/Kevlar Hybrid Composite Laminates Made of Varying Fibre Inplane Orienta-
tion and Stacking Sequence. Mater Today Proc (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2017.07.244
20. Isa, M.T., Ahmed, A.S., Aderemi, B.O., Taib, R.M., Mohammed-Dabo, I.A.: Effect of fiber type
and combinations on the mechanical, physical and thermal stability properties of polyester hybrid
composites. Compos Part B Eng (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.04.018
21. Fidan, S., Sınmazcelik, T., Avcu, E.: Detecting Impact Damages In An Aramid/Glass Fiber Rein-
forced Hybrid Composite With Micro Tomography. Adv. Mat. Res. (2012). https://doi.org/10.4028/
www.scientific.net/AMR.445.9
22. Park, R., Jang, J.: Impact behavior of aramid fiber/glass fiber hybrid composite: Evaluation of four-
layer hybrid composites. J. Mater. Sci. 36, 2359–2367 (2001)
23. Park, R., Jang, J.: Impact Behavior of Aramid Fiber/Glass Fiber Hybrid Composites: The Effect of
Stacking Sequence. Polym Compos 22, 80–89 (2001)
24. Trindade, R.S., Ribeiro, A.C., Souza, J.A., Amico, S.C.: Experimental Investigation of Transverse
Permeability Applied to Liquid Molding. Polym Compos (2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.25254
25. Ferriter, E.A. and Mcculloh, I.A. ed. (2005). Techniques Used to Estimate Limit Velocity in Bal-
listics Testing with Small Sample Size. Proceedings of the 13th Annual U.S. Army Research
Laboratory/United States Military Academy Technical Symposium, New York, United States,
72–95 (2005)
26. Al-Hajaj, Z., Sy, B.L., Bougherara, H., Zdero, R.: Impact properties of a new hybrid composite mate-
rial made from woven carbon fibres plus flax fibres in an epoxy matrix. Compos Struct (2019). https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.10.033
27. Patterson, B.A., Busch, C.E., Bratcher, M., Cline, J., Harris, D.E., Masser, K.A., Fleetwooda, A.L.,
Knorr, D.B., Jr.: Influence of temperature dependent matrix properties on the high-rate impact
13
performance of thin glass fiber reinforced composites. Compos Part B (2020). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.compositesb.2020.108009
28. Marom, G., Wagner, D.H.: Hybrid effects in composites : conditions for positive or negative effects
versus rule-of-mixtures behaviour. J Mater Sci (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00553194
29. Bresciani, L.M., Manes, A., Ruggiero, A., Iannitti, G., Giglio, M.: Experimental tests and numerical
modelling of ballistic impacts against Kevlar 29 plain-woven fabrics with an epoxy matrix : Macro-
homogeneous and Meso-heterogeneous approaches. Compos Part B (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compositesb.2015.10.039
30. Pandya, K.S., Pothnis, J.R., Ravikumar, G., Naik, N.K.: Ballistic impact behavior of hybrid compos-
ites. Mater Des (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.07.044
31. Kumar, B.A., Ahmad, S.: Numerical simulation of progressive damage of laminated composites under
ballistic impact. Safety, Reliability, Risk and Life-Cycle Performance of Structures & Infrastructures.
586, 4375–4382, CRC Press (2013)
32. Hosur, M.V., Vaidya, U.K., Ulven, C., Jeelani, S.: Performance of stitched/unstitched woven carbon/
epoxy composites under high velocity impact loading. Compos Struct (2004). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.compstruct.2003.09.046
33. Shyr, T., Pan, Y.: Impact resistance and damage characteristics of composite laminates. Compos Struct
(2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0263-8223(03)00114-4
34. Nair, N.S., Kumar, C.V.S., Naik, N.K.: Ballistic impact performance of composite targets. Mater Des
(2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.04.093
35. Shanazari, H., Liaghat, G., Hadavinia, H. et al. (2015). Analytical investigation of high-velocity impact
on hybrid unidirectional/woven composite panels. J Thermoplast Compos Mater (2015). https://doi.
org/10.1177/0892705715604680
36. Nunes S.: Vacuum Infusion Processing of Aramid/Epoxy Thick Composites and Impact Performance
Analysis. 2018. Doctoral thesis. Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul. (in Portuguese).
37. El-dessouky, H.M., Saleh, M.N., Wang, Y.: Effect of Unit-Cell Size on the Barely Visible Impact
Damage in Woven Composites. Appl Sci (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/app11052364
38. Cheng, W.L., Langlie, S., Itoh, S.: High velocity impact of thick composites. Int J Impact Eng (2003).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2003.09.015
39. Naik, N.K., Doshi, A. V.: Ballistic impact behaviour of thick composites: Parametric studies. Compos
Struct (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2007.01.025
40. Sevkat, E., Liaw, B., Delale, F.: Ballistic performance of hybrid and non-hybrid composite plates. J.
Strain Anal. (2012). https://doi.org/10.1177/0309324712457897
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
13

High Velocity Impact Behavior of Aramid/S2 Glass Interply Hybrid Laminates

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

High Velocity Impact Behavior of Aramid/S2 Glass Interply Hybrid Laminates

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Applied Composite Materials