journal article·2022-02

On the use of a trilinear traction-separation law to represent stitch failure in stitched sandwich composites

Daniel A Drake, Rani W Sullivan, Stephen Clay

Publisher page

Abstract

Modern aircraft employ the use of lightweight engineering materials such as sandwich composites to increase the flexural rigidity of their structural components. These sandwich composites are limited by their low interfacial strength between the outer facesheets and internal core, which can result in facesheet-core debonding at relatively low out-of-plane loads. In this study, sandwich composites that are reinforced with through-the-thickness stitching are considered. Stitched sandwich composite specimens, fabricated from 110 kg/m 3 perforated foam core with cross-ply carbon/epoxy facesheets, were manufactured with different combinations of stitch densities (0.0016–0.01 stitches/mm 2 ) and linear thread densities (400–1200 Denier) of through-the-thickness reinforcement. Single cantilevered beam (SCB) tests were performed to characterize the facesheet-core debonding within the stitched sandwich composites. Unique fracture morphologies were observed that exhibit dependency on stitch processing parameters. A discrete cohesive zone modeling approach is used to simulate the separation of the facesheet from the core. Three-dimensional finite element analysis reveals crack curvature near the stitching. Good agreement between predicted and experimental measurements were obtained.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Cellular and Composite Structures · Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Aerospace Engineering, Mississippi State University, Starkville, MS, USA

Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, OH, USA

Funding

Air Force Research Laboratory

References (44)

Show source-provided references
1. Drake DA · J Compos Mater · 2021 · 1
2. 10.12783/asc35/3496310.12783/asc35/34963 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.07.00610.1016/j.compositesb.2014.07.006 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.07.00210.1016/j.compositesb.2012.07.002 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.11.00610.1016/j.compscitech.2009.11.006 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.08.01210.1016/j.compstruct.2009.08.012 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.09.00510.1016/j.compscitech.2005.09.005 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.matdes.2013.03.05810.1016/j.matdes.2013.03.058 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2012.12.04010.1016/j.compstruct.2012.12.040 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.05510.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.055 ↗
11. Stanley LE. Development and evaluation of stitched sandwich panels . NASA Langley Technical Report Server, 2001.
12. 10.1007/s10704-009-9366-z10.1007/s10704-009-9366-z ↗
13. 10.1177/002199831246407810.1177/0021998312464078 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.03.00610.1016/j.compositesa.2004.03.006 ↗
15. 10.1080/10759419930558410.1080/107594199305584 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.11.01810.1016/j.compstruct.2009.11.018 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2008.12.01810.1016/j.compscitech.2008.12.018 ↗
18. 10.1177/002199831036958110.1177/0021998310369581 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.12.03410.1016/j.compstruct.2014.12.034 ↗
20. Bergan AC. Test and analysis of stitched composite structures to assess damage containment capability. PhD Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Drexel University, 2014.
21. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.03.07110.1016/j.compositesb.2016.03.071 ↗
22. 10.1177/073168441038306510.1177/0731684410383065 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2014.06.01010.1016/j.ijsolstr.2014.06.010 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.01.01110.1016/j.compstruct.2013.01.011 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.05.05210.1016/j.compositesb.2017.05.052 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.rinp.2020.10342210.1016/j.rinp.2020.103422 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.02210.1016/j.compositesb.2015.04.022 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2011.09.00410.1016/j.compscitech.2011.09.004 ↗
29. 10.1179/1743289815Y.000000003510.1179/1743289815Y.0000000035 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2021.10638310.1016/j.compositesa.2021.106383 ↗
31. 10.1007/s10704-021-00547-610.1007/s10704-021-00547-6 ↗
32. 10.2514/6.2014-025910.2514/6.2014-0259 ↗
33. 10.12783/asc34/3139310.12783/asc34/31393 ↗
34. Ratcliffe JG. Sizing single cantilever beam specimens for characterizing facesheet/core peel debonding in sandwich structure. In: 9th International conference on sandwich structures , Pasadena, CA, 2010.
35. ASTM. Standard test method for mode I interlaminar fracture toughness of unidirectional fiber-reinforced polymer matrix composites. ASTM STD 5528–13.
36. 10.12783/asc33/2612810.12783/asc33/26128 ↗
37. DMS-2436 warp/Knit-Axial carbon fiber fabric. Long Beach, CA: The Boeing Company, 2008.
38. Evonik. Product Information, Rohacell HERO, 2020.
39. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2019.05.03510.1016/j.compositesa.2019.05.035 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2004.08.01710.1016/j.ijsolstr.2004.08.017 ↗
41. 10.1080/1478644910862009610.1080/14786449108620096 ↗
42. Olsson R. On improper foundation models for the DCB specimen. In: 16th International conference on composite materials , Kyoto, Japan, 2007.
43. 10.2514/3.1079110.2514/3.10791 ↗
44. 10.1016/0266-3538(96)00001-210.1016/0266-3538(96)00001-2 ↗