Composites: Part B 61 (2014) 300–306

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites: Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Prediction of post-impact residual strength and fatigue characteristics

after impact of CFRP composite structures
Jae-Mean Koo a, Jung-Hun Choi b, Chang-Sung Seok a,⇑
a
School of Mechanical Engineering, Sungkyunkwan University, 300 Cheoncheon-dong, Jangan-gu, Suwon, Gyeonggi-do 440-746, South Korea
b
Research & Development Division, Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd., 772-1, Jangduk-dong, Hwaseong-si, Gyeonggi-do 445-706, South Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The residual strength and fatigue life of CFRP (Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Plastic) composite structures with
Received 23 September 2013 impact damage were predicted by using the characteristic length of the composite with the hole corre-
Received in revised form 7 January 2014 sponding to the impact damage area. Since the specimen has a C-shaped structure that is different from
Accepted 13 January 2014
the shape of a standard specimen, the shape factor was obtained from the concentration of the plate spec-
Available online 24 January 2014
imen and that of the structure using finite element analysis. The fatigue life of composite structures with
impact damage can be predicted accurately by applying the prediction model, which takes into account
Keywords:
the residual strength after impact, the shape factor which considers geometric characteristics, and the
A. Carbon fiber
A. Prepreg
fatigue characteristics of virgin composites that have not been impacted to the model for strength deg-
B. Fatigue radation following impact.
B. Residual/internal stress Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction where ro and rR indicate tensile strength and residual strength,

Structures composed of fiber-reinforced composite materials
have become quite popular due to their high strength-to-weight
and stiffness-to-weight ratios. However, these materials are suscep-
tible to damage caused by low-velocity impact load during manufac-
ture and while in service. If an external object strikes a composite
structure in the direction perpendicular to a surface, it can degrade
both its static and fatigue load-bearing capacity [1–5]. If repeated fa-
tigue loads are applied after such damage, the damage grows and
eventually leads to complete structure failure. Therefore, in order
to ensure a margin of safety and damage tolerance in composite
structures, understanding the strength degradation of composites
due to impact damage and fatigue load is required, as well as an
understanding of these factors’ interactions. Therefore, many
researchers have conducted studies to evaluate residual strength
and fatigue characteristics of composite structures with impact dam-
age [6–8]. However, because the failure mechanism of impact dam-
age is complex, it is very difficult to evaluate the residual strength
and fatigue life of composite structures damaged by impact [9–11].
Caprino [12,13] suggested a prediction model for the residual
strength after impact:
 a
rR Eth
¼ ð1Þ
ro Ei
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 31 290 7446; fax: +82 31 290 7482.
E-mail address: seok@skku.edu (C.-S. Seok).
respectively. Ei and Eth are the incident impact energy and threshold
impact energy, respectively, and a is a constant. It has been re-
ported that Eth and a are influenced by the shape and size of the
impactor as well as the shape, size and boundary conditions of
the specimen or structure. Koo et al. reported that for low-velocity
impact, the influence of the mass of an impactor on the residual
strength of the composite materials is small for the impact mass
(3–7 kg) and impact energy (23 J) [28]. Cui et al. [14] investigated
the tensile residual strength of composite laminates after low-
velocity impact by using numerical and experimental methods
and reported that an increase in the impact energy increases the
damaged area and decreases the residual strength. Davies et al.
[15] reported that the residual strength is rapidly reduced with
increasing damage area, and that the relationship between the
residual compressive strength and impact energy finally approaches
an asymptote. Chen et al. [16] reported that when the composites
receive a load after impact damage, since the stress concentrates
near the interface of the impact and damage areas, the stress con-
centration factor is an important indicator of the residual load-car-
rying capability. They recognized that the stiffness reduction within
the damaged area causes a stress concentration near the interface of
the intact and damaged areas under loading. They supposed that
the worst case of stiffness reduction is a hole.
Also, Koo et al. [17] proposed a prediction model for residual
strength after impact, in which the damaged area is replaced with
an equivalent hole notch when sufficient impact is received. The
model is as follows:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.01.024
1359-8368/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J.-M. Koo et al. / Composites: Part B 61 (2014) 300–306
    2
rR  rHR Di Ei
¼ 1  1:45   0:01
ro DI Eth
where rHR is the hole notch strength and DI and Di are the diameters
of the impactor and the permanent impression, respectively. It was
reported that since the results predicted by Eq. (2) agree well with
the experimental results of CFRP composites, the residual strength
after impact can be estimated by measuring the size of the perma-
nent impression on the surface of the composite.
Whitney and Nuismer [18,19] proposed the point-stress crite-
rion (PSC) and average-stress criterion (ASC), which require evalu-
ation of the characteristic length. Such a characteristic length is
assumed to be a material property, independent of the hole size
or geometry of the plate. However, Pipes et al. [20] proposed a
modified PSC model that assumes an exponential relationship be-
tween the characteristic length and the size of the discontinuity
rather than regarding the characteristic length as a material con-
stant. Also, Kim and Kim [21] reported the effects of hole size
and specimen width on the fracture behavior of woven glass and
woven carbon fabric composites. Kim et al. [22] suggested a failure
model for notch strength and characteristic length, considering the
effects of hole size and specimen width.
Broutman and Sahu [23] suggested a fatigue life prediction
model under block loading as a function of residual strength, on
the basis of experimental observations that the residual strength
decreases as the number of fatigue loading cycle increases. When
a series of m fatigue blocks of cycle number ni at a maximum stress
ri are applied, the residual strength rm is given by:
m 
X 
ro  ri n i
¼1
i¼1
ro  rm N i
where Ni is the fatigue life when ri is applied. They assumed that
failure occurs when the maximum cyclic stress exceeds the residual
strength. Hahn and Kim [24] reported that fatigue failure of com-
posites is not dictated by the initiation and growth of a dominant
crack as in metallic materials, and assumed that the rate of residual
strength reduction is inversely proportional to the residual strength.
From this assumption and the static strength distribution, they de-
rived the fatigue life distribution. Whitworth [25] proposed a model
for relating the residual strength of graphite/epoxy laminates to the
applied fatigue cycles and the maximum applied stress. Based on
the model, the statistical distribution of the residual strength was
derived. Kang and Kim [26] introduced the strength reduction con-
cept, based on Broutman’s model under 2-stage loading, to describe
the fatigue behavior of the impacted laminates. Also, Koo et al. [17]
assumed that damages by impact and fatigue are due to two-step
block loading and proposed a prediction model in which the predic-
tion equation for the residual strength after impact is applied to the
prediction equation for the fatigue life after impact.
In this study, in order to predict the residual strength of the
composite structures damaged by impact, the hole notched
strength was analytically predicted by applying the characteristic
length to the composite structures with the hole corresponding
to an impact damage area. Next, after the shape factor was ob-
tained from the concentration factor of a plate specimen and that
of the structure with the hole corresponding to an impact damage
area by finite element analysis, those factors were substituted into
the prediction model for the residual strength after the impact of
the CFRP composites [17], thereby computing the residual strength
based on the geometric characteristics. Also, the prediction model
for the residual strength after impact was applied to the prediction
model for fatigue life based on the residual strength reduction con-
cept, and the fatigue life was predicted and then verified against
the results of an actual fatigue test of composite structures with
impact damage.
301
2. Evaluation of residual strength of CFRP composite structures
ð2Þ
with impact damage
2.1. Residual strength test of CFRP composite structures with impact
damage
This residual strength test was performed with WSN3K mate-
rial, which is a plain-woven carbon prepreg with a thickness of
0.27 mm, made by Hankuk Carbon Co., Ltd. in Korea. The laminated
plate was molded for 60 min in an autoclave at a temperature of
140 °C and pressure of 5.88 MPa, and the 16-ply fabricated lami-
nate was 3.6 mm thick. The structure specimen was made into a
C shape as shown in Fig. 1, with dimensions W = 40 mm,
H = 25 mm, L = 200 mm, and Hg = 20 mm. The chemical composi-
tions of the prepreg are shown in Table 1 and the mechanical prop-
erties of specimens are shown in Table 2.
The impact damage was applied to the center of the composite
structures using a drop impact tester in which an impactor of 7 kg
in mass drops with an initial velocity of 0 m/s, with a block in-
serted inside the body in order to implement the plane support
conditions (Fig. 2). The incident impact energy (Ei) of 23.5 J was ap-
plied using impactors 15.8 mm and 25.4 mm in diameter. Also, to
evaluate the residual strength after the impact of the C-shaped
structure specimen, tensile tests were performed at room temper-
ature at a speed of 3 mm/min using a universal testing machine
with a capacity of 250 kN (Instron, Co.).
The residual strength tests after impact using an impactor
15.8 mm in diameter were performed three times (Fig. 3). The
measured residual strength values were 345–383 MPa, with mean
value 364.3 MPa. Similar tests using an impactor 25.4 mm in diam-
ð3Þ
eter were performed twice. The residual strength values were 320–
373 MPa, with a mean value of 346.5 MPa.
2.2. Notch strength of a finite plate
Whitney and Nuismer [18,19] assumed that failure occurs when
the normal stress is equal to the fracture strength at a certain dis-
tance from the tip of a discontinuity in a material. Also, the PSC is
expressed as follows from the normal stress distribution at the tip
of the hole:
r1
N 2 R
¼ ; g¼ ð4Þ
r0 2 þ g2 þ 3g4  ðK 1
T  3Þð5g  7g Þ
6 8 R þ d0
where r1 N is the notch strength for an infinite plate, do is the char-
acteristic length, R is the hole radius and K 1
T is the stress concentra-
tion factor of an infinite plate:
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u sffiffiffiffiffi !
u Ey Ey
K1 t
¼1þ 2  mxy þ ð5Þ
T
Ex Gxy
Fig. 1. Appearance of C-shaped structure specimen.
302 J.-M. Koo et al. / Composites: Part B 61 (2014) 300–306

rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
h i
Table 1 3ð12R=WÞ
Chemical compositions of prepreg. 1  8 2þð12R=WÞ 3  1  1

M2 ¼ ð7Þ
Fabric wt. (g/m2) Resin wt. (g/m2) Resin content (%) Total wt. (g/m2) 2ð2R=WÞ2
205 148 42 ± 2 353
Kim and Kim [21] evaluated the notch strength as a function of the
width of a composite specimen and the hole size and suggested a
characteristic length as follows, considering the effects of hole size
Table 2
and specimen width.
Mechanical properties of prepreg.
 m
Ex (GPa) Ey (GPa) gxy Gxy (GPa) 1 2R
d0 ¼ ð8Þ
55 55 0.13 4.75
k W
where k is a notch sensitivity coefficient related to 2R and W, and m
is the characteristic length change ratio (0 < m < 1). After Kim, et al.
[22] obtained the experimental relationship between the character-
istic length and notched strength of CFRP composites by regression
analysis, the relationship for an infinite plate was converted into the
following equation for a finite plate:
 m
rN 1 d0 1 2R
¼ ; d0 ¼ ð9Þ
r0 Y 0:2R þ d0 k W

They reported that the constant of Eq. (9), m, is the material con-
stant and the value of k changes according to 2R/W [22]. In the pres-
ent study, the characteristic length was obtained using Eq. (9).

2.3. Application of characteristic length to composite structures

From the point-stress criterion (PSC), the applied stress can be

Fig. 2. Setup for inflicting impact on a C-shaped structure specimen.
defined as the residual strength when the normal stress is equal
to the tensile strength at the characteristic length do. Therefore,
in this study, using the commercial finite element analysis pro-
gram, ANSYS, the applied stress was acquired from the case of
the normal stress reaching the tensile strength at the point of the
characteristic length do. In this analysis, shell 99 for layered appli-
cations of a structural shell model was used and 16 plies were
stacked. Also, as shown in Fig. 4, a quad mapped mesh was applied
in the vicinity of the hole using a mesh size of 0.19do, for which the
maximum principal stress converges to a constant value. The mod-
el for FEA was composed of 5200 elements and 15,960 nodes. The
elastic moduli Ex and Ey in the x and y directions and Poisson’s ratio
mxy, and shear modulus Gxy in Table 2 were given as the material
properties.
According to Koo et al. [17,28], since the permanent impression
made by an impactor nose diameter of 15.8 mm corresponds to the
hole notch of Di = 6.4 mm, finite element analysis was performed
for a standard plate specimen with a hole notch 6.4 mm in diame-
ter, with a width of 25 mm and thickness of 3.6 mm. The character-
istic length was computed by using Eq. (9). Kim et al. [22] reported
that m is 0.35 and k is 0.883 when the width of the CFRP composite

Fig. 3. Load–displacement curves for C-shaped structure specimen (impactor

diameter = 15.8 mm) [34].

Here, Ex, Ey, Gxy and txy are the effective elastic moduli and Poisson’s
ratio of the laminate. If rN represents the notch strength for a finite
plate, the notch strength for an infinite plate r1 N can be expressed as
YrN, where Y is the finite plate correction factor. From Tan’s study
[27], the approximate finite width correction factor of composites
with a circular hole can be obtained by using Eq. (6).
"  6   #1
3ð1  2R=WÞ
1 2R 1 2R
Y¼ þ M ðK T  3Þ 1  M
2 þ ð1  2R=WÞ3 2 W W
ð6Þ

where W is the width of the specimen and M is expressed by the fol-

lowing equation: Fig. 4. Finite element modeling near a circular hole in the specimen.
 J.-M. Koo et al. / Composites: Part B 61 (2014) 300–306 303

specimen is 25 mm and the hole notch diameter is 6.4 mm. Apply-

ing the constant to Eq. (9), the characteristic length was
do = 0.703 mm.
Fig. 5 shows the maximum principal stress distribution at the
applied load 31,325 N, that is, the remote stress of 358 MPa, when
the maximum principal stress reaches the tensile strength
(780 MPa) at the characteristic length do. By substituting the hole
notch strength (358 MPa) computed using FEM into Eq. (2), the
residual strength after impact of 369 MPa was obtained. Because
the mean residual strength after impact of the damaged specimen
by an impactor 15.8 mm in diameter is 364.4 MPa according to the
results of Koo et al. [28] (Fig. 6), it can be seen that the prediction
using Eq. (2) agrees well with the experimental result.
The shape of the composite structure for finite element analysis
is identical to that for the residual strength test of the structure
(Fig. 1), but with the inclusion of a hole of 6.4 mm diameter in
the center of the structure. The finite element analysis model
was formulated by the same method as depicted in Fig. 4. Fig. 6. Residual strength versus impactor diameter [28].
Because the C-shaped structure specimen differs in shape from
the plate specimen, the width of the structure was defined in this
study as the width of a specimen with both wing parts unfolded;
namely, 73 mm (Fig. 7). This is because stress acts across the
cross-section. The characteristic length do = 0.830 mm was ob-
tained from Eq. (9).
When the maximum principal stress reaches the tensile
strength (780 MPa) at the characteristic length do, the remote
stress was obtained from the applied load. The result predicted
for the residual strength of the CFRP composite structure after im-
pact was 432 MPa when substituting the remote stress into Eq. (2).
The mean residual strength of the structure in the actual test was
364.3 MPa; thus, the difference between the predicted result and
the experimental result was about 68 MPa. This considerable dif-
ference is thought to be caused by the change in the characteristic
length, and by the stress concentration effect of the damaged area
due to a change in the structure’s geometry.
Therefore, the shape factor was defined as the ratio of the stress
concentration factor of the standard plate specimen to that of the
composite structure:
K t;specimen
F¼ ð10Þ
K t;structure
If this shape factor is applied to Eq. (2), Eq. (2) becomes
    2
rR  F rHR Di Ei
¼ 1  1:45   0:01 ð11Þ
ro DI Eth

Fig. 7. Definition of width to calculate the characteristic length of the C-shaped

structure.

After stress analysis was performed for the standard plate specimen
with width (W) = 73 mm, thickness (t) = 3.5 mm, and hole notched
diameter = 6.4 mm, the shape factor of 0.879 was calculated from
the stress concentration factors for the standard plate specimen
with width = 73 mm and the C-shaped structure specimen in
Fig. 1 as follows:

K t;specimen 2:532
F¼ ¼ ¼ 0:879 ð12Þ
K t;structure 2:882

When this shape factor was substituted into Eq. (11), the residual
strength was about 379 MPa. The predicted result can be seen to
agree with the tested mean residual strength of the structure after
Fig. 5. Analysis results for a standard plate specimen [34]. impact (364.3 MPa), with a difference of about 14.7 MPa.
304 J.-M. Koo et al. / Composites: Part B 61 (2014) 300–306

For the case in which an impactor of diameter 25.4 mm was

used, since the maximum diameter of the permanent impression
appearing on the surface was 7.6 mm, finite element analysis
was performed for the C-shaped structure with a hole notch diam-
eter of 7.6 mm in the center of the structure. By using Eq. (9), the
characteristic length do of about 0.860 mm was obtained. A remote
stress applied to the structure was obtained when the maximum
principal stress reached 780 MPa at the characteristic length do,
and the predicted residual strength after impact of the composite
structures was calculated to be 407 MPa by substituting this char-
acteristic length into Eq. (2). Also, from the finite element analysis,
after the stress concentration factors were calculated for the stan-
dard plate specimen of width W = 73 mm and hole notch diameter
2R = 7.6 mm, and for the C-shaped structure specimen, and by
substituting those stress concentration factors into Eq. (10), the
shape factor was calculated to be 0.872. By applying this shape fac-
tor to Eq. (11), the residual strength was calculated to be 356 MPa.
This result differs by 9.5 MPa from the 346.5 MPa mean residual Fig. 9. Predicted and actual fatigue behavior of impacted specimens and structures.
strength of the C-shaped structure specimen determined by tensile
residual strength testing, but this difference is within the range of
variation of the experimental results, 320–373 MPa.
Impact damage was applied to the center of the composite
From these results, it can be seen that the residual strength of
structures using a drop impact tester, with a block inserted inside
the CFRP composite structure after impact can be predicted by
the body to implement the plane support conditions. After an inci-
Eqs. (10) and (11) regardless of the impactor diameter.
dent impact energy (Ei) of 10 J was given using an impactor
15.8 mm in diameter, fatigue tests were performed in conditions
identical to those used in the tests on standard plate specimens.
3. Evaluation of fatigue characteristics after impact
The maximum applied stress was determined to be 0.95–0.99
times the residual strength. The test results were similar to those
3.1. Fatigue test after impact
shown in Fig. 9.
Standard plate specimens and C-shaped structure specimens for
3.2. Prediction of fatigue life of impact damaged composite structures
the fatigue test were made using identical manufacturing materi-
als and methods used to make specimens for the residual strength
If the case of two-step block loading is applied to Eq. (3) as in
test. The standard plate specimens were made according to the D-
the method of Broutman and Sahu [23], the result is as follows:
3039 ASTM standard [29] (Fig. 8), while the C-shaped structure
 
specimens used were identical in shape and dimensions to the ro  r1 n1 n2
depiction in Fig. 1. A constant load amplitude fatigue test with a
þ ¼1 ð13Þ
ro  r2 N1 N2
stress ratio (R) of 0.1 was performed at room temperature (23 °C)
using a universal testing machine with a capacity of 250 kN (In- If the composite materials are under two-step block loading, the
stron Co.). The wave form of the fatigue load was a sine wave, composite material undergoes n1 repeated cycles under the first-
and its frequency was about 5 Hz. step block load of r1, and is then destroyed after undergoing n2 cy-
The results of fatigue tests for the standard plate specimens cles under the second-step block load of r2. Broutman and Sahu
with no impact damage and with impact damage at an incident [23] reported that the strength degradation due to the first block
impact energy of 5 J are shown in Fig. 9. Impact damage was ap- is (ro–r1)n1/N1. If it is assumed that the strength degradation after
plied to composite specimens using a drop impact; an incident im- impact damage is equivalent to that by first-step block loading, the
pact energy of 5 J resulted in a residual strength corresponding to strength degradation by impact damage, ro–rR, can be expressed as
approximately 70% of the tensile strength. The impactor diameter n1
was 15.8 mm and the diameter of the permanent impression (Di) ro  rR ¼ ðro  r1 Þ ð14Þ
N1
on the specimen surface created by an impactor diameter (D) of
15.8 mm was about 6.4 mm. Also, the maximum applied stress Therefore, Eq. (13) can be expressed as
 
smax was determined to be 0.75–0.95 times the residual strength. ro  rR n2
The fatigue life of the composite materials can be seen to decrease þ ¼1 ð15Þ
ro  r2 N2
due to the impact damage.
In addition, because the fatigue damage after impact under con-
stant-amplitude fatigue loading is equivalent to the damage by
the second block loading, the maximum stress of the constant
amplitude fatigue (rmax) is substituted for r2 [30–32], and the fati-
gue life of impacted composite materials (Ni) is substituted to n2.
The fatigue life of non-impacted composite materials (Nf) is substi-
tuted for N2. The substitutions allow Eq. (15) to be rewritten as
follows:
 
ro  rR Nf  Ni
¼ ð16Þ
ro  rmax Nf

If Eq. (16) is expressed as the fatigue life after impact, the result
Fig. 8. Specimen configuration. becomes:
 J.-M. Koo et al. / Composites: Part B 61 (2014) 300–306 305

 
rR  rmax For the case in which an incident impact energy of 10 J was in-
Ni ¼ Nf ð17Þ
ro  rmax flicted on a CFRP composite structure by an impactor 15.8 mm in
diameter, the residual strength was predicted to be about
Hwang and Han [33] proposed the following equation as a fatigue
496 MPa using the characteristic length method described in Sec-
life prediction model for composite materials without impact:
tion 2.3. The prediction curve for fatigue life applying the predicted
 
rmax q hole notched strength to Eq. (21) agrees well with the actual test
Nf ¼ p 1  ð18Þ results for this case (Fig. 8).
ro
This result indicates that the fatigue life of CFRP composite
where p and q are material constants obtained from the fatigue structures with impact damage can be predicted accurately by
tests for composite materials without impact. From the fatigue test the combined application of the prediction model for the residual
results for composite materials without impact, the values obtained strength after impact, the shape factor considering the geometric
for p and q are 1.305  1011 and 9.815, respectively. If the prediction characteristics, and the fatigue characteristics of virgin composites
equation of Hwang and Han for the fatigue life of composite mate- without impact to the model of strength degradation due to impact
rials without impact [33] is applied to Eq. (17), the equation damage.
becomes:
 q
rR  rmax rmax 4. Conclusions
Ni ¼ p 1 ð19Þ
ro  rmax ro
In this study, residual strength and fatigue characteristics were
If the residual strength prediction model of Eq. (2) is substituted predicted for the CFRP composite structures that received a dam-
into Eq. (19), the result is as follows: aging impact. The following results were obtained.
"    2 # 
Di Ei rHR  rmax ro
Ni ¼ 1 þ 1:45  þ  0:01 p (1) Using finite element analysis, the hole notched strength of a
D Eth ro ro  rmax standard plate specimen, with the hole corresponding to an
 
rmax q area of impact damage, was acquired from the point-stress
 1
ro criterion (PSC). The residual strength was calculated by
ð20Þ substituting the hole notched strength of a standard plate
specimen into the prediction model for the residual strength
In the case of composite structures, since the shape factor (F) should after impact. The predicted result agrees well with the
be considered, Eq. (20) becomes as follows; experimental result.
"    2 #  (2) To apply s method for predicting residual strength using the
Di Ei F rHR  rmax ro
Ni ¼ 1 þ 1:45  þ  0:01 p point-stress criterion (PSC) to a C-shaped structure, the
D Eth ro ro  rmax shape factor obtained from the concentration factor of a
  K
rmax q plate specimen and that of the structure, that is, F ¼ Kt;specimen
 1 t;structure
ro was applied to the prediction model for the residual
ð21Þ strength. The predicted result agreed well with the experi-
mental result.
In this study, to evaluate the influence of the residual strength on (3) In this study, the following prediction model for fatigue life
the fatigue life of the standard plate specimen, the result of was proposed and the fatigue test results agreed well with
Eq. (20) and the result of substituting Eq. (1) from the prediction the fatigue prediction results.
model of Caprino [12,13] into Eq. (19) were compared to the fatigue
test results. The fatigue prediction from Eq. (20) agreed well with "    2 # 
Di Ei F rHR  rmax ro
the fatigue test results shown in Fig. 9. On the other hand, since Ni ¼ 1 þ 1:45  þ  0:01 p
D Eth ro ro  rmax
the result from the fatigue prediction model applying Caprino’s  q
model is located in the lower boundary area of the fatigue test rmax
 1
ro
results (see Fig. 10), the fatigue prediction model applying Caprino’s
model produces slightly conservative results.
(4) The fatigue life of CFRP composite structures with impact
damage can be predicted accurately by the combined appli-
cation of a prediction model that takes into account the
residual strength after impact, the shape factor which con-
siders geometric characteristics, and the fatigue characteris-
tics of virgin composites that have not been impacted to the
model of the strength degradation due to impact damage.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation

of Korea (NRF) (No. 2011-0020024 and 2012R1A1A2043624).

References

[1] Schoeppner GA, Abrate S. Delamination threshold loads for low velocity impact
on composite laminates. Composite Part A 2000;31(9):903.
[2] Bahei-El-Din YA, Rajendran AM, Zikry MA. A micro-mechanical model for
damage progression in woven composite systems. J Solids Struct 2004;41(9–
10):2307.
[3] Ji KH, Kim SJ. Dynamic direct numerical simulation of woven composites for
Fig. 10. Predicted and actual fatigue behaviors for impacted specimens. low-velocity impact. J Compos Mater 2007;41(2):175.
306 J.-M. Koo et al. / Composites: Part B 61 (2014) 300–306
[4] Kim JK, Kang KW. An analysis of impact force in plain-weave glass/epoxy
composite plates subjected to transverse impact. Compos Sci Technol
2001;61:135.
[5] Hashin Z. Analysis of stiffness reduction of cracked cross-ply laminates. Eng
Fract Mech 1986;25(5–6):771.
[6] Tai NH, Yip MC, Lin JL. Effects of low-energy impact on the fatigue behavior of
carbon/epoxy composites. Compos Sci Technol 1998;58(1):1.
[7] Rao VV, Singh R, Malhotra SK. Residual strength and fatigue life assessment of
composite patch repaired specimens. Composites: Part B 1999;30:621.
[8] Luo YS, Lv LH, Sun BZ. Transverse impact behavior and energy absorption of
three-dimensional orthogonal hybrid woven composites. Compos Struct
2007;81(2):202.
[9] Hamada H, Maekawa ZI. Strength prediction of mechanically fastened quasi-
isotropic carbon/epoxy joints. J Compos Mater 1996;30:1596.
[10] Starnes JH, Rhodes MD, Williams JG. Effect of impact damage and holes on the
compressive strength of a graphite/epoxy laminate. Non-destructive
evaluation and flaw criticality for composite materials. ASTM STP
1979;696:145.
[11] Kinsey A, Saunders DEJ, Soutis C. Post-impact compressive behaviour of low
temperature curing woven CFRP laminates. Composites 1995;26:661.
[12] Caprino G. Residual strength prediction of impacted CFRP laminates. J Compos
Mater 1984;18:508.
[13] Caprino G. On the prediction of residual strength for notched laminates. J
Mater Sci 1983;18:2269.
[14] Cui HP, Wen WD, Cui HT. An integrated method for predicting damage and
residual tensile strength of composite laminates under low velocity impact.
Comput Struct 2009;87:456.
[15] Davies GAO, Hitchings D, Zhou G. Impact damage and residual strengths of
woven fabric glass/polyester laminates. Composites: Part A 1996;27(A):1147.
[16] Chen VL, Wu HYT, Yeh HY. A parametric study of residual strength and
stiffness for impact damaged composites. Compos Struct 1993;25:267.
[17] Koo JM, Choi JH, Seok CS. Evaluation for residual strength and fatigue
characteristics after impact in CFRP composites. Compos. Struct. 2013;105:58.
[18] Whitney JM, Nuismer RJ. Stress fracture criteria for laminated composites
containing stress concentrations. J Compos Mater 1974;8:253.
[19] Nuismer RJ, Whitney JM. Uniaxial failure of composite laminates containing
stress concentrations. ASTM STP 1975;593:117.
[20] Pipes RB, Wetherhold RC, Gillespie JW. Notched strength of composite
materials. J Compos Mater 1979;13:148.
[21] Kim JK, Kim DS. Notched strength and fracture criterion of glass/epoxy plain
woven composites containing circular holes. J Mech Sci Technol
1992;16(7):1285.
[22] Kim SY, Koo JM, Kim D, Seok CS. Prediction of the static fracture strength of
hole notched plain weave CFRP composites. Compos Sci Technol
2011;71:1671.
[23] Broutman LJ, Sahu S. A new theory to predict cumulative fatigue damage in
fiberglass reinforced plastics. Compos Mater Test Des ASTM STP
1972;497:170.
[24] Hahn HT, Kim YR. Proof testing of composite materials. J Compos Mater
1975;9:297.
[25] Whitworth HA. Evaluation of the residual strength degradation in composite
laminates under fatigue loading. Compos Struct 2000;48(4):261.
[26] Kang KW, Kim JK. Fatigue life prediction of impacted carbon/epoxy laminates
under constant amplitude loading. Composites: Part A 2004;35:529.
[27] Tan SC. Finite-width correction factors for anisotropic plate containing a
central opening. J Compos Mater 1988;33:1080.
[28] Koo JM, Choi JH, Seok CS. Prediction of residual strength of CFRP after impact.
Composites: Part B 2013;54:28.
[29] ASTM D 3039-02. Standard test method for tensile properties of fiber resin
composite. Philadelphia: American Society for Testing and Materials; 2002.
[30] Jayantha A, Epaarachchi a, Richard C. An experimental investigation of the
properties of cross-ply laminate used for manufacturing of small aircraft
components. Compos Struct 2006;75:93.
[31] Curtis DC, Davies M, Moore JDR, Slater B. Fatigue behavior of continuous
carbon fiber-reinforced PEEK. ASTM STP 1991;1110:581.
[32] Maier G, Ott H, Protzner A, Protz B. Damage development in carbon fibre-
reinforced polyimides in fatigue loading as a function of stress ratio.
Composites 1986;17(2):111.
[33] Hwang W, Han KS. Fatigue of composite materials-damage model and life
prediction. ASTM STP 1989;1012:87.
[34] Koo. J.M., Choi, J.H. and Seok, C.S. Prediction of Residual Strength after Impact
of CFRP Composite Structures, Int. J. Precis. Eng. Manuf., in Press.