Structural analysis of composites with porosity defects based on X-ray computed tomography
Source abstract
Abstract
Advanced structural analysis methods that account for manufacturing defects in composite parts are needed to enable accurate assessment of their capability and useful life and to enhance current design and maintenance practices. In particular, porosity/voids are typical defects in carbon/epoxy and glass/epoxy composite aircraft flight-critical components. High-fidelity nondestructive evaluation by X-ray computed tomography allows accurate defect measurement and automatic conversion to structural models to assess the effects of defects on structural properties. This study presents a comprehensive structural analysis methodology, which includes nondestructive detection and finite element modeling of the defects in composites. Effects of porosity/voids on interlaminar tensile and shear strength of unidirectional carbon/epoxy composite specimens are investigated. Failure predictions and subsequent test correlations are presented.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Epoxy Resin Curing Processes · Composite Material Mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of Texas at Arlington, USA
References (24)
Show source-provided references
1. Makeev A, Nikishkov Y, Carpentier P, et al. Manufacturing issues and measurement techniques for assessment of the effects on structural performance of composite parts. In: Proceedings of the 66th American helicopter society international annual forum , Phoenix, Arizona, 11–13 May 2010.
2. Makeev A and Nikishkov Y. Fatigue life assessment for composite structure. In: (ed J Komorowski) ICAF 2011 Structural integrity: influence of efficiency and green imperatives , Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 2011; pp. 119–134.10.1007/978-94-007-1664-3_9 ↗
3. 10.1016/0010-4361(95)96808-J10.1016/0010-4361(95)96808-J ↗
4. 10.1016/S0266-3538(01)00157-910.1016/S0266-3538(01)00157-9 ↗
5. 10.1016/0266-3538(95)00128-X10.1016/0266-3538(95)00128-X ↗
6. 10.1016/0266-3538(95)00024-010.1016/0266-3538(95)00024-0 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.03.00710.1016/j.compositesa.2004.03.007 ↗
8. 10.1016/0263-8223(94)90044-210.1016/0263-8223(94)90044-2 ↗
9. 10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00097-610.1016/S0266-3538(03)00097-6 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.02.01910.1016/j.compscitech.2005.02.019 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2008.04.02810.1016/j.compscitech.2008.04.028 ↗
12. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.383.3510.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.383.35 ↗
13. 10.1016/S1005-0302(11)60028-510.1016/S1005-0302(11)60028-5 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2011.11.02310.1016/j.compscitech.2011.11.023 ↗
15. ABAQUS 6.11.1. User’s manual . Pawtucket, RI, USA: ABAQUS Inc, 2011.
16. Makeev A, Nikishkov Y, Seon G, et al. Fatigue structural substantiation for thick composites. In: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on composite materials, Edinburgh, UK, 27–31 July 2009.
17. ASTM Standard D6415/D6415M. Standard test method for measuring the curved beam strength of a fiber-reinforced polymer-matrix composite. West Conshohocken, PA, USA: ASTM International, 2006.
18. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2012.07.02110.1016/j.compositesa.2012.07.021 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2012.09.01010.1016/j.compscitech.2012.09.010 ↗
20. 10.1177/002199830934535210.1177/0021998309345352 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.02.01710.1016/j.compscitech.2006.02.017 ↗
22. 10.1177/002199830504645210.1177/0021998305046452 ↗
23. 10.4050/JAHS.55.04200910.4050/JAHS.55.042009 ↗
24. 10.1177/00219983740080030310.1177/002199837400800303 ↗