Optimization of damage parameters in glass fiber-reinforced composites: numerical and experimental insights into structural integrity enhancement
Source abstract
Abstract
To optimizing damage tolerance in glass fiber-reinforced composites (GFRP) by introducing a novel evaluation of damage shape and size effects on different stacking sequences through combined experimental and numerical methods.GFRP are widely used in structural applications for their high strength-to-weight ratio and durability. Understanding their damage processes is essential for improving impact resistance and long-term performance. A holistic approach combining experimental testing, regression modeling, and numerical simulations was employed to investigate the influence of damage area, shape, and stacking sequence (bidirectional, unidirectional, and cross-ply) on residual strength. The analysis included GFRP samples with widths ranging from 25 mm to 50 mm and damage areas of 400 mm2, 200 mm2, and 100 mm2. Damage shapes examined included circular, square, rectangular, and elliptical geometries. Numerical simulations using ANSYS software identified the optimal shape for damage tolerance, which was then validated experimentally. Results showed that a 200 mm2 vertical elliptical damage design improved flexural strength by approximately 8–12% compared to circular and horizontal elliptical shapes, while horizontal elliptical designs reduced strength by nearly 10%. This research provides valuable insights into optimizing damage parameters for enhancing the structural integrity of GFRP laminates. The innovation of this work lies in linking geometric damage characteristics with stacking sequences, supported by predictive regression models (R2 > 0.95) and validated simulations (<5% deviation), thereby solving a key technical problem in composite repair. The conclusions underline the potential industrial relevance of these findings, particularly for aerospace, automotive, and civil engineering sectors where reliable and durable composite repairs are essential
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Structural Analysis of Composite Materials · Structural Response to Dynamic Loads
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Madras Institute of Technology Campus, Chromepet, Anna University
Department of Aerospace Engineering, B.S. Abdur Rahman Crescent Institute of Science and Technology
Funding
Science and Engineering Research Board
References (65)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.apmt.2023.10182110.1016/j.apmt.2023.101821 ↗
2. 10.3390/polym1515323810.3390/polym15153238 ↗
3. 10.3390/polym1510239010.3390/polym15102390 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2023.11715410.1016/j.compstruct.2023.117154 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2023.11737210.1016/j.compstruct.2023.117372 ↗
6. 10.1080/00218464.2023.216914510.1080/00218464.2023.2169145 ↗
7. 10.1002/pc.2747410.1002/pc.27474 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.10540710.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.105407 ↗
9. 10.3390/s2101021910.3390/s21010219 ↗
10. 10.15282/ijame.20.2.2023.05.080310.15282/ijame.20.2.2023.05.0803 ↗
11. 10.1080/15397734.2023.218994110.1080/15397734.2023.2189941 ↗
12. 10.1177/0021998323117868410.1177/00219983231178684 ↗
13. 10.1080/10589759.2020.183455610.1080/10589759.2020.1834556 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.06.00710.1016/j.compstruct.2009.06.007 ↗
15. Santiuste Romero C Sánchez Sáez S Barbero Pozuelo E. Residual flexural strength after low- velocity impact in glass/polyester composite beams.
16. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2006.08.01910.1016/j.compstruct.2006.08.019 ↗
17. Dinesh Babu V Arumugam V … Santulli C. Damage monitoring of glass/epoxy-curved laminates with different stacking sequences using acoustic emission.Structural Health Monitoring. ; 2024.;14759217241276333.10.1177/14759217241276333 ↗
18. 10.1002/app.5586510.1002/app.55865 ↗
19. 10.1007/s10443-024-10244-x10.1007/s10443-024-10244-x ↗
20. 10.1002/pc.2813610.1002/pc.28136 ↗
21. 10.1177/0731684424124312810.1177/07316844241243128 ↗
22. 10.1002/pc.3050010.1002/pc.30500 ↗
23. 10.1002/pc.3050110.1002/pc.30501 ↗
24. 10.1007/s10853-023-06936-910.1007/s10853-023-06936-9 ↗
25. Dhamodharan S Abraham SJ Selvarajan A et al. Investigation on flexural strength of reinforced silk fabric epoxy composite under cold and elevated temperature conditions. In: AIP Conference Proceedings Vol. 3192 No. 1. AIP Publishing; 202410.1063/5.0241759 ↗
26. 10.1177/073168440708707710.1177/0731684407087077 ↗
27. 10.1016/0010-4361(93)90018-410.1016/0010-4361(93)90018-4 ↗
28. 10.1002/pc.2823910.1002/pc.28239 ↗
29. 10.1080/15376494.2018.152495210.1080/15376494.2018.1524952 ↗
30. 10.1177/002199831877943010.1177/0021998318779430 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2022.11630810.1016/j.compstruct.2022.116308 ↗
32. Bradley LD Travis BA Ryan EP. Processing and characterization of needled carbon composites proceedings of the 2015 Composites and Advanced Materials Expo(CAMX).Dallas TX Arlington (VA). 2015.
33. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.05.00210.1016/j.engfracmech.2014.05.002 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2010.02.00110.1016/j.compositesa.2010.02.001 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2015.08.01910.1016/j.compscitech.2015.08.019 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.03.02310.1016/j.compositesb.2019.03.023 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.03.03210.1016/j.compscitech.2006.03.032 ↗
38. 10.1016/S1359-8368(01)00015-410.1016/S1359-8368(01)00015-4 ↗
39. 10.3390/polym1211260010.3390/polym12112600 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2010.09.00710.1016/j.compositesa.2010.09.007 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2024.11178610.1016/j.compositesb.2024.111786 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2012.01.00310.1016/j.compscitech.2012.01.003 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2009.02.01910.1016/j.compositesa.2009.02.019 ↗
44. 10.3390/polym1401009510.3390/polym14010095 ↗
45. 10.1080/15376494.2013.83409610.1080/15376494.2013.834096 ↗
46. 10.1007/s40430-015-0460-z10.1007/s40430-015-0460-z ↗
47. 10.1016/S1359-835X(01)00083-510.1016/S1359-835X(01)00083-5 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2004.07.02410.1016/j.compstruct.2004.07.024 ↗
49. 10.1177/0954406222111046610.1177/09544062221110466 ↗
50. Basmacı G Çelikyürek V Köklü U et al. Drilling of carbon fiber reinforced polymer without support and using support plates with different properties. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science; 202510.1177/09544062251336576 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.09.04010.1016/j.compositesb.2014.09.040 ↗
52. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2014.12.00110.1016/j.compositesa.2014.12.001 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.11097110.1016/j.compstruct.2019.110971 ↗
54. 10.1016/j.paerosci.2013.03.00310.1016/j.paerosci.2013.03.003 ↗
55. 10.1177/00219983830170020410.1177/002199838301700204 ↗
56. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2017.12.02910.1016/j.compositesa.2017.12.029 ↗
57. 10.1590/1980-5373-mr-2022-032510.1590/1980-5373-mr-2022-0325 ↗
58. 10.5545/sv-jme.2010.17010.5545/sv-jme.2010.170 ↗
59. Kennedy I. Comparative evaluation of delamination in carbon fiber reinforced composites (CFRPs) utilizing various common non-destructive inspection techniques.
60. 10.1515/mt-2022-034810.1515/mt-2022-0348 ↗
61. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2022.10942910.1016/j.compscitech.2022.109429 ↗
62. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.09.00510.1016/j.compositesb.2011.09.005 ↗
63. 10.1007/s40032-018-0448-410.1007/s40032-018-0448-4 ↗
64. 10.1016/j.jmrt.2013.10.00710.1016/j.jmrt.2013.10.007 ↗
65. Fan XL Sun Q Kikuchi M. Review of damage tolerant analysis of laminated composites 2010:275–289.