NDT&E International 51 (2012) 1–7

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

NDT&E International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ndteint

Internal damage investigation of the impacted glass/glass þ aramid fiber

reinforced composites by micro-computerized tomography
Sinan Fidan a,n, Tamer Sınmazc- elik b,c, Egemen Avcu b
a
School of Civil Aviation, Kocaeli University, Arslanbey Campus, 41285, Izmit, Turkey
b
Mechanical Engineering Deptarment, Kocaeli University, Umuttepe Campus, 41380 Izmit, Turkey
c
TUBITAK-MAM, Materials Institute, PO Box 21, 41470 Gebze, Turkey

a r t i c l e i n f o abstract

Article history: This paper utilizes the micro-computerized tomography as the non-destructive inspection technique to
Received 17 April 2012 characterize and compare damage modes of glass and glass þ aramid fiber reinforced polyester
Accepted 7 July 2012 laminated composites. Main goal of this study is to visualize the internal impact damage variation
Available online 20 July 2012
due to reinforcement type by using micro-computerized tomography scanning. Impact tests were
Keywords: performed on glass fiber reinforced and glass fiberþ aramid fiber reinforced polyester composites at the
Computed tomography same conditions and both composites were tested at 80 J energy. After low velocity impact tests, micro-
Composite materials computerized tomography scans of both composites were taken from SkyScan 1173 system.
Impact & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Visualization
Damage

1. Introduction radiography instrumentation. Most micro-CT studies in the litera-

Fiber reinforced polymer–matrix composites are among the
most outstanding engineering materials available nowadays. Glass
reinforced and glassþaramid fiber reinforced hybrid composites
are commonly used as light-weight materials in a wide variety of
marine applications including sporting equipment as well as
military structures etc. However, the shortcoming of glass-rein-
forced plastics along with other fiber-reinforced polymer laminates
is that their mechanical properties in the trans-laminar (through
thickness) direction are relatively low [1]. Due to the weak bonds
between the plies, even small energies imparted by low velocity
impacts can result in damage, which, although hardly detectable,
causes considerable strength losses in tension and, especially, in
compression [2–5].
Composites, nevertheless, also have unique and complex fail-
ure characteristics. Fiber and/or matrix breakage, fiber debonding
and delaminations are common events not found on monolithic
materials, and that can precede the ultimate failure of a compo-
site [6,7].
Micro-computerized tomography (micro-CT) can be used to
reconstruct interior structural details with a high resolution on a
scale of interest for damage evaluation. It is also gaining popularity
as a technique for non-destructive testing (NDT) of materials and
components, in many cases through conversion of conventional
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ90 262 3513310; fax: þ90 262 3513311.
E-mail address: sinan_fidan@hotmail.com (S. Fidan).
ture have been carried out using specialized one-of-a-kind instru-
ments, often located at synchrotron radiation laboratories. As a
consequence, the application of micro-CT has been relatively
limited, with measurements largely dependent on scientists with
expertise in X-ray techniques and instrumentation. The recent
appearance of several commercial micro-CT systems on the market
makes micro-CT more accessible for laboratory testing. Such
instruments offer the potential for the widespread use of micro-
CT by engineers as a tool for characterization of damage in com-
posite materials.
Micro-CT in material science is now becoming a conventional
characterization technique which is confirmed by the number of
articles published in international journals devoted to materials
science [8–10]. In the field of polymer based composites, micro-
CT is succesfully employed to analyze the micro-structure of
multi-axial multi-ply stitched carbon preforms [11] by character-
izing the size and shape of resin-rich regions of the composites
and 3D microcracks created by hygothermal fatigue. Researchers
use X-ray radiography and micro-CT to understand the behavior
and damage of composite materials undergoing fatigue, tensile or
impact loading better [12–19], besides analyzing internal struc-
tures and complex architectures. Micro-CT has been used by
many researches from various disciplines as listed in Table 1.
Fiber-reinforced composite materials such as glass, aramid and
glassþaramid hybrid fiber-reinforced composites are finding
increasing use in a wide range of both low and high technology
engineering applications. Composites offer a number of distinct
advantages over more conventioanal engineeering materials, on

0963-8695/$ - see front matter & 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2012.07.005
2 S. Fidan et al. / NDT&E International 51 (2012) 1–7

the other hand they suffer from some serious limitations such as
their response to localized impact loading caused by external
foreign hits. In recent years many investigations have been done
in an attemp to better understand the impact response of these
materials [28–36]. In this study, variation of impact parameters
such as force versus displacement, displacement–time is exam-
ined in order to figure out the effect of fiber content on the
damage process of polyester matrix composites during an impact
event. To visualaze the complex internal damage architecture due
to impact loading, micro-CT images were taken.
2. Experimental details
2.1. Materials
Glass fiber reinforced polyester matrix composite and glass þ
aramid fiber reinforced hybrid polyester matrix composite pro-
duced by TUB_ITAK in same stacking sequences namely [0/90]s.
The volume fractions are approximately 60% for glass reinforced
composite and 30% glass 30% aramid for glass þaramid reinforced
hybrid composite in fibers. (0/90)s oriented cross-ply polyester
laminated composites of 5 mm nominal thickness are used for
low velocity drop weight impact testing. The cross-ply laminated
specimens are prepared in 100 mm  100 mm by cutting out from
composite sheets of 200 mm  200 mm.
2.2. Drop-weight impact test
Low velocity drop weight impact tests were performed accord-
ing to ASTM D 7136 standard which determines the damage
resistance of multidirectional polymer matrix composite lami-
nated plates subjected to a drop-weight impact. Instron Dynatup
9250 HV impact test machine was used in experiments which
have an impactor with a total mass of 10.02336 kg with a
hemispherical radius of 10 mm. The drop-weight apparatus was
equipped with a motorized lifting track. Data were stored in
Impulse Data Acquisition software after each impact and the
impactor was returned to its original starting energy. The square
composite specimens in dimensions of 100  100  5 mm were
clamped with a 40 mm inner diameter, and fixed to a rigid base to
prevent slippage of the specimen. The clamping system was
designed to provide a uniform pressure all over the clamping
area. A rebound catcher is adopted the test device for catching the
impactor on a stop during its second decent. Both composites
were impacted with 80 J.

Table 1
Researchers and their composite micro-CT literature works.
Researchers
Müller [20]
Ramaswamy et al. [21], Goel
et al. [22], Thibault et al. [23]
Lomov et al. [24]
Delerue et al. [25]
Cornelis et al. [26]
Vodolan et al. [27]
2.3. Micro-computed tomography scans
Micro-CT research topic
Composite specimens were scanned with SkyScan 1173 micro-
Three dimensional high-resolution CT system. In Fig. 1 SkyScan 1173 system and specifications are
computed tomography in biomedical
given.
applications.
Used for the 3D characterization of paper, Scanning parameters of composite samples are given in
board and felt and polymeric fabrics used in Table 2.
paper manufacturing. The porosity, specific
surface area, pore size distribution and
tortuosity of paper or its reinforcing
materials were investigated. Table 2
Dimensions of the rovings and the spaces Micro-CT scanning parameters.
between them to generate geometrical
models of the 3D textiles using WiseTex Scanning Parameters
software. These models serve as input for
simulation of permeability and meso- Source voltage 130 kV
mechanical properties determination. Source current 61 mA
Acquire the pore network geometry of a Image pixel size 12.5 mm
reinforcement to model its permeability. Object to source 92.125 mm
Carbon fiber reinforced polymers and Camera to source 364 mm
metals. Examined the fiber arrangement Exposure 1300 ms
and the fiber and matrix distribution. Rotation step 0.11
Developed some methods to get Reconstruction program NRecon
automatically information of the yarn Ring artifact correction 17
center structure, textile layer position or Beam hardening correction % 20
yarn shape estimation from micro-CT Cone-beam angle horizontal 17.2902601
images. Cone-beam angle vertical 17.2902601

Fig. 1. SkyScan 1173 micro-CT system and specifications.

 S. Fidan et al. / NDT&E International 51 (2012) 1–7 3

3. Results and discussion
3.1. Low velocity impact damage characterization
Force–deflection curves of low velocity impact gives informa-
tion about materials response to impact loading. Two types of
curves can be observed in a low velocity impact event which
named open and closed curves respectively. If material system
subjected to impact loading resist to impact load only by means of
internal damage formation and fully perforated by the impact,
results an open type force–displacement curve appears. The key
point in calculating the accurate energy absorption due to inter-
nal damage formation in a system can be achieved by removing
the post-perforation sections seen as descending part at the end
of curve [37]. Here absorbed energy termed as the amount of
energy absorbed by the composite system after a low velocity
impact loading. On the other hand, having a closed type force–
displacement curve implies that material system has a rebound-
ing ability after impact event and the absorbed energy can be
calculated from the initial kinetic energy minus the rebound
kinetic energy by using the initial and rebound velocities [38,39].
In Fig. 2, force–displacement plots of glass fiber and
glassþaramid fiber reinforced composites are given with their
internal micro-CT cross-sectional images taken from the mid-
point of the impact plane. Although, both composites impacted
with 80 J, glass reinforced polyester matrix composite has an
open curve on the other hand glass þaramid fiber reinforced
hybrid polyester matrix composite has a closed one. Adding
aramid fibers beside glass fibers into a composite turned the
open force–displacement curve to a closed one due to the increase
in rebounding capacity. In other words, aramid fibers changed the
impact characteristic from perforation to sub-perforation and
impactor rebound from the composite laminate. It can be con-
cluded that 80 J is high enough for glass reinforced system to go
on perforation while for glass þaramid fiber reinforced hybrid
system it is not a perforation threshold value. The slope of the
ascending section of each force–displacement curve was termed
the impact bending stiffness due to its representation of the

Fig. 2. Force–displacement curves of composites.

Fig. 3. Displacement–time curves of composites.

4 S. Fidan et al. / NDT&E International 51 (2012) 1–7
stiffness of composite laminates under impact-induced bending
in the beginning of impact process [40]. In this force–displacement
curve, glass fiber reinforced composite has a slope angle of 511 in
ascending section while this angle value drops to 371 by adding
aramid fibers to material system.
Fig. 3 compares the displacement–time curves of glass fiber
and glassþaramid fiber reinforced composites. When impacted
with 80 J, glass reinforced composite has a maximum displace-
ment of 15.3 mm while glass þaramid reinforced composite has a
maximum displacement value of 12.27 mm. After impact, glass
reinforced composite go through a full perforation process and as
a result of plastic deformations, delaminations, fiber and matrix
breakages an irreversible internal damage appeared. On the other
hand, glassþaramid reinforced composite followed an ascending
trend till 5 ms of impact and a descending trend afterwards as a
Fig. 4. Schematic illustration of micro-CT scanning process in composites after
low velocity impact loading.
Fig. 5. Cross-sectional views of composite (80 J impacted) specimens using micro-CT.
result of rebounding mechanism which composite gained by
adding of aramid as reinforcement beside glass fibers. Displace-
ment differential between glass fiber reinforced and glass þ
aramid fiber reinforced hybrid composite can clearly be seen
from the micro-CT cross-sectional views. Impact plastic displace-
ment of glass reinforced composite has its maximum value at the
bottom side of the specimen while in glass þaramid reinforced
composite nearly turned into its original geometry except internal
damage regions.
3.2. Micro-CT impact damage characterization
X-ray micro-CT complements the use of X-ray radiography by
imaging detailed cross-sectional views of the specimens, thereby
resolving through-thickness delamination and matrix cracks
(Fig. 4). Micro-CT is a three dimensional imaging technique which
is used non-destructively to inspect the inner structure of an
object by transmission measurements using X-rays. A large
number of projection images are obtained by rotating the sample.
Micro-CT images of 5 mm thick specimens subjected to 80 J
impact loading are presented in Fig. 5. The cross-sectional images
are taken in the lateral through-thickness direction of the speci-
mens, particularly containing the delamination and crack region.
2193 cross-sectional slices were taken from micro-CT scanning
in fact during actual examination. On the other hand, showing all
the slices in a limited space in paper is impossible so 5 cross-
sectional micro-CT pictures were taken for evaluation. C–C cross-
section is the center of impact. Other cross-section images were
taken from right and left sides of C–C. Adjacent slices are 0.3 mm
apart and total scanning length from A–A to E–E was 1.5 mm. The
light gray regions in micro-CT images represent the matrix and
reinforcement of the composite. In glass þ aramid fiber reinforced
composite micro-CT slices whiter regions point out the glass
fibers due to their X-ray absorption value. Damage mechanisms,
primarily dominated by matrix cracks and delaminations are
 S. Fidan et al. / NDT&E International 51 (2012) 1–7
clearly identified in these images (Fig. 5). Adjacent cross-sectional
slices also provide obvious and comprehensible 3D delamination
damage patterns of glass fiber reinforced and glass þaramid fiber
reinforced composite specimens.
Impact cone at the center can be observed from the contrast
tone in every cross-section. This region named as impact-com-
pression zone by many researchers [6,41,42]. Other researches
[42] explained this region as a low shear region and show
characteristics of through-thickness compression, so delamina-
tion do not start from here. This zones high shear and normal
stress values initiates matrix cracks. For glass reinforced compo-
site, brittle character of the reinforcement and impact energy over
threshold value prevents the generation of impact-compression.
Composite goes through a full-penetration period. Aramid rein-
forcement has made impact compression zone more pronounced
(Fig. 6).
Prior knowledge of impact damage in composite materials
imparts that when impact energy threshold is above a critical
level, matrix cracks are generated by shear or tensile flexural
stresses around the indentation area develop mainly in the
intermediate and back face layers [43]. Matrix cracks are then
followed by interface delaminations growing from the crack tips;
delaminations occur between plies of different orientations and
are elongated along the fiber direction of the lower layer at
Fig. 6. Cross-sectional micro-CT slices of composites at impact point.
Fig. 7. Delamination maps of composites at impact point.
5
interface, with the largest delaminations developing between
layers with the highest orientation mismatch [43]. Delaminations
appear in a regular pattern producing altogether a typical three-
dimensional spiral staircase [44,45]. It is observed that the
delamination pattern of glass reinforced composite (Fig. 7)
follows a reverse pine-tree shaped characteristics whereby dela-
minations start at the mid-point of thickness and largest at the
distal back face. The delamination damage distribution is thus
reverse cone with maximum damage on the back face. However,
the delamination pattern of glass þaramid reinforced composite
has a reverse geometry with glass reinforced one. As seen in Fig. 7,
delaminations are occurred nearby the impact face. While dela-
minations are the largest at back face in glass reinforced addition
of aramid fibers change this characteristic. At the back face of
glassþaramid reinforced composite, limited delamination
damage that worth to consider could be observed. This is due to
the fact that delamination propagation is effectively arrested and
contained by the aramid fibers. Glassþaramid fiber reinforced
composite has small local delamination and damage regions as
seen from the Fig. 7. These small discontinuities at the glass þ
aramid fiber reinforced composite could not be observed so much
in glass fiber reinforced composite. They come together and
create delaminations due to the lack of propagation arresting
factor like aramid fibers. To explain and summarize the influence
of aramid fiber addition on 3D delamination pattern is illustrated
in Fig. 7.
It is recognized that glassþaramid reinforced specimen, dela-
mination spread is greatly suppressed by the presence of aramid
fibers, thus resulting in a smaller projected delamination area, as
aforementioned. In glass þaramid reinforced composite, the
growth of delamination is less restrained by aramid fiber addition
beside glass fibers. In the case of using only glass fibers as
reinforcement; delamination propagation is naturally created,
thus producing the largest delamination growth.
Enlarged micro-CT images taken from 3D reconstruction of the
glass fiber reinforced and glass þaramid fiber reinforced compo-
sites are given in Fig. 8. For visualization of delamination areas
through thickness, four distinct slices 1.25 mm apart from each
other, taken from the 3D model of the composites. From Fig. 7,
delamination pattern of glass fiber reinforced composite can be
seen very clear, sharp and systematic. Total delamination area is
getting bigger from impact surface to back surface of the impacted
composite. However, in the case of glassþaramid reinforced
composite, the delamination pattern is unclear, diffused and
difficult to visualize. Aramid fiber has a positive effect at load
carrying capacity hence reduced delamination formation can be
seen clearly from these through the thickness micro-CT slices
(Fig. 8). Delamination of glass fiber reinforced composite is more
complicated due to the fact that more cracks are induced by brittle
6 S. Fidan et al. / NDT&E International 51 (2012) 1–7
Fig. 8. 3D delamination maps of impacted composites.
glass fibers and delaminations are generated from these induced
cracks. On the other hand, flexible characteristic of aramid fibers
prevent crack formation under impact loading and reduce delami-
nation growths.
The above discussions made in this section are mostly based
on the effect of adding aramid fibers to composite beside glass
fibers. Addition of aramid fibers to composite shows a noticeable
difference on impact loading capacity and damage progression.
This could mean that the damage mechanisms and distribution
are significantly affected by aramid fibers and make glass fiber
composite more durable to impact loads.
4. Conclusions
This study experimentally investigates the impact damage
characteristics of glass fiber reinforced and glass þaramid rein-
forced composites by using micro-CT. Laminated composites with
varying types of reinforcements (glass and glass þaramid) are
subjected to low-velocity impact loading at 80 J energy level
which is a penetration threshold value for glass fiber reinforced
system although glass þaramid composite stayed on sub-perfora-
tion. Micro-CT scans of impacted composites are used to examine
cross-sectional views showing detailed through-thickness dela-
mination distribution and 3D delamination damage pattern.
Based on these studies, the following conclusions can be drawn:
1. Micro-CT analysis and 3-D rendered models reveal the internal
damages (delamination, fiber breakage, matrix cracking etc.)
of impacted composite samples. It is concluded that micro-ct
analysis can be used to determine internal damages of impacted
composite samples.
2. Micro-CT scans showed that adding aramid fibers to composite
beside glass fibers greatly increase the load carrying capacity
of composite under low-velocity impact loading. It is also
found that after impact loading, glass þaramid fiber reinforced
composite can rebound the impactor although glass fiber
reinforced composite go through a perforation.
3. Micro-CT evidently shows that 3D delamination pattern in
glass reinforced composite is more visible due to nature of
glass fibers. By adding of aramid fibers to composite, this
obvious delamination pattern lost its effectiveness. Micro-CT
conclusively substantiates the fact that aramid fibers perform
a great work in impact resistance improvement and raise the
perforation threshold value of the composite.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge Assoc. Prof. Dr. Volkan Günay
from TUBITAK Marmara Research Center Materials Institute for his
experimental guidance in low-velocity impact tests. Sincere apprecia-
tion goes to application scientist PhD. Evi Bongaers from SkyScan in
Kontich/ Belgium and SkyScan Turkey distributor Mr. Asım Horasan
from Teknogem Eng. Ltd.
References
[1] Mouritz AP, Gallagher J, Goodwin AA. Flexural strength and interlaminar
shear strength of stiched GRP laminates following repeated impacts. Compos
Sci Technol 1997;57:509–22.
[2] Lopresto V, Scarponi C, Briotti G. Influence of material thickness on the
response of carbon fabric/epoxy panels to low velocity impact. Compos Sci
Technol 1999;59:2279–86.
[3] Davies GA, Hitchings D, Zhou G. Impact damage and residual strength of
woven fabric glass/polyester laminates. Composites 1996;27A:1147–56.
[4] Hawyes VJ, Curtis PT, Sout C. Effect of impact damage on the compressive
response of composite laminates. Composites A 2001;32:1263–70.
[5] Hirai Y, Hamada H, Kim JK. Impact response of glass woven fabric composites—I.
Effect of fiber surface treatment. Compos Sci Technol 1998;58:91–104.
[6] Hou JP, Petrinic N, Ruiz C, Hallett SR. Prediction of impact damage in
composite plates. Compos Sci Technol 2000;60:273–81.
[7] Hancox NL. An overview of the impact behavior of fibrereinforced compo-
sites. In: Reid SR, Zhou G, editors. Impact behavior of fiber-reinforced
composite materials and structures. Oxford: Woodhead Publishing Limited;
2000. p. 1–32.
[8] Salvo Luc, Suéry Michel, Marmottant Ariane, Limodin Nathalie, Bernard
Dominique. 3D imaging in material science: Application of X-ray tomogra-
phy. C R Phys 2010;11(9–10):641–9.
[9] Schilling Paul J, Karedla Bhanu Prakash R, Tatiparthi Arun K, Verges Melody A,
Herrington Paul D. X-ray computed microtomography of internal damage in fiber
reinforced polymer matrix composites. Compos Sci Technol 2005;65(14):
2071–8.
[10] Schell JSU, Renggli M, Van Lenthe GH, Müller R, Ermanni P. Micro-computed
tomography determination of glass fiber reinforced polymer meso-structure.
Compos Sci Technol 2006;66(13):2016–22.
[11] Liotier PJ, Alain V, Christine D. Characterization of 3D morphology and
microcracks in composites reinforced by multi-axial multi-ply stitched pre-
forms. Composites Part A 2010;41:653–62.
 S. Fidan et al. / NDT&E International 51 (2012) 1–7
[12] Xiao Y, Ishikawa T. Bearing strength and failure behavior of bolted composite
joints part I: experimental investigation. Compos Sci Technol 2005;65:
1022–31.
[13] Kobayashi S, Takeda N. Experimental characterization of microscopic damage
behavior in carbon/bismaleimide composite—effects of temperature and
laminate configuration. Composites Part A 2002;33:1529–38.
[14] Kobayashi S, Takeda N. Experimental and analytical characterization of
transverse cracking behavior in carbon/bismaleimide cross-ply laminates
under mechanical fatigue loading. Composites Part B 2002;33:471–8.
[15] Bayraktar E, Bessri K, Bathias C. Deformation behavior of elastomeric matrix
composites under static loading conditions. Eng Fracture Mech 2008;75:
2695–706.
[16] Bayraktar E, Antolonovich S, Bathias C. Multiscale study of fatigue behavior of
composite materials by X-rays computed tomography. Int J Fatigue 2006;28:
1322–33.
[17] Symons DD, Davis G. Fatigue testing of impact-damaged T300/914 carbon-
fibre- reinforced plastic. Compos Sci Technol 2000;60:379–89.
[18] Symons DD. Characterization of indentation damage in 0/90 lay-up T300/914
CFRP. Compos Sci Technol 2000;60:391–401.
[19] Schilling PJ, Karedla BPR, Tatiparthi AK, Verges MA, Herrington PD. X-ray
computed microtomography of internal damage in fiber reinforced polymer
matrix composites. Compos Sci Technol 2005;65:2071–8.
[20] Müller R. The Zürich experience: one decade of three dimensional high-
resolution computed tomography. Top Magn Reson Imaging 2002;13(5):
307–22.
[21] Ramaswamy S, Gupta M, Goel A, Aaltosalmi U, Kataja M, Koponen A, et al.
The 3D structure of fabric and its relationship to liquid and vapor transport.
Colloid Surface A 2004;241(1–3):323–33.
[22] Goel A, Tzanakakis M, Huang S, Ramaswamy S, Choi D, Ramarao B.
Characterization of three-dimensional structure of paper using Xray micro-
tomography. Tappi J 2001;84:1.
[23] Thibault X, Bloch J-F. Structural analysis by X-ray microtomography of a
strained nonwoven papermaker felt. Text Res J 2002;72(6):480–5.
[24] Desplentere F, Lomov SV, Woerdeman DL, Verpoest I, Wevers M. Geometrical
characterization of 3D warp-interlaced fabrics. SAMPEUSA; 2003.
[25] Delerue J-F, Verpoest I, Wevers M, Lomov SV, Parnas RS. Pore network
modelling of permeability for textile reinforcements. Polymer composite
2003;24(3):344–57.
[26] Cornelis E, Kottarand A, Degischer HP. X-ray computed tomography char-
acterising carbon fiber reinforced composites. In: Proceedigns of the 11th
European conference on composite materials. Rhodes; 2004.
[27] Kosek M, Vodolan J. Study of textile composite structure using CT and optical
microscopy. In: Proceedings of the international conference of ICCM 15.
Durban South Africa; 2005.
[28] Manders PW, Harris WC. A parametric study of composite performance in
compression-after-impact testing. SAMPE J 1986;22:47–51.
7
[29] Akay M. Post damage capability of carbon fiber reinforced matrices.
In: Proceedings of the international conference on polymers for composites,
The Plastics and Rubber Iost: London, UK; 1987, 11.1-11.10.
[30] Stellbrink KKU. Improved impact damage tolerance. In: Verpoest I, Wevers M,
editors. Proceedings of the European symposium on damage development
and failure processes in composite material. Belgium: Leuven; 1987.
[31] Curson AD, Leach DC, Moore DR. Impact failure mechanisms in carbon fiber/
PEEK composites. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 1990;3:24–31.
[32] Redmk S, Sna CT. Optimal use of adhesive layers in reducing impact damage
in composite laminates. In: Composite structures, vol 2, Damage assessment
and material evaluation. Elsevier Applied Science Publications; 1987: 2.18–
2.31.
[33] Hong S, Liu D. On the relationship between impact energy and delamination
area. Exp Mech 1989:115–20.
[34] Boll DJ, Bracero WD, Weidaer JC, Man’i WJ. A microscopy study of impact
damage on epoxy-matrix carbon fiber composites. In: Proceedings of the
international conference on post failure analysis techniques for fiber rein-
forced composites, OH, USA, 1985, paper 8.
[35] Takeda N, Sierakewski RL, Ross CA, Malvera LE. Delamination-crack propaga-
tion in ballistically impacted glass/epoxy composite laminates. Exp Mech
1961;1:19–25.
[36] Takeda N, Sierakowski RL, Malvern LE. Transverse cracks in glass/epoxy
cross-ply laminates impacted by projectiles. J Mater Sci 1981;16:2008–11.
[37] Atas C, Sayman O. An overall view on impact response of woven fabric
composite plates. Compos Struct 2008;82:336–45.
[38] Mitrevski T, Marshall IH, Thomson R, Jones R, Whittingham B. The effect of
impactor shape on the impact response of composite laminates. Compos
Struct 2005;67:139–48.
[39] Mitrevski T, Marshall IH, Thomson RS, Jones R. Low-velocity impacts on
preloaded GFRP specimens with various impactor shapes. Compos Struct
2006;76:209–17.
[40] Dahsin Liu, Basavaraju B Raju, Xinglai Dang. Impact perforation resistance of
laminated and assembled composite plates. Int J Impact Eng 2000;24(6–7):
733–46.
[41] Yoshimura A, Nakao T, Yashiro S, Takeda N. Improvement on out-of-plane
impact resistance of CFRP laminates due to through-the-thickness stitching.
Composites Part A 2008;39:1370–9.
[42] Davies GAO, Zhang X. Impact damage prediction in carbon composite
structures. Int J Impact Eng 1995;16(1):149–70.
[43] Tan KT, Watanabe N, Iwahori Y. X-ray radiography and micro-computed
tomography examination of damage characteristics in stitched composites
subjected to impact loading. Composites Part B 2011;42:874–84.
[44] Abrate S. Impact on laminated composite materials. Appl Mech Rev
1991;44(4):155–90.
[45] Abrate S. Impact on laminated composites: recent advances. Appl Mech Rev
1994;47(11):517–44.