journal article·2018-12Open access

Effects of the core density on the quasi-static flexural and ballistic performance of fibre-composite skin/foam-core sandwich structures

Cihan Kaboglu, Long Yu, Iman Mohagheghian, Bamber R. K. Blackman, Anthony J. Kinloch, John P. Dear

Journal of Materials Science· Volume 53· Issue 24

Abstract

Polymeric foams are extensively used as the core materials in sandwich structures and the core material is typically bonded between relatively thin fibre-composite skins. Such sandwich structures are widely used in the aerospace, marine and wind-energy industries. In the present work, various sandwich structures have been manufactured using glass-fibre-reinforced polymer (GFRP) skins with three layers of poly(vinyl chloride) foam to form the core, with the densities of the foam layers ranging from 60 to 100 kg/m 3 . This study has investigated the effects on the quasi-static flexural and high-velocity impact properties of the sandwich structures of: (a) the density of the polymeric-foam core used and (b) grading the density of the foam core through its thickness. The digital image correlation technique has been employed to quantitatively measure the values of the deformation, strain and onset of damage. Under quasi-static three-point and four-point bend flexural loading, the use of a low-density layer in a graded-density configuration reduced the likelihood of failure of the sandwich structure by a sudden force drop, when compared with the core configuration using a uniform (i.e. homogenous) density layer. The high-velocity impact tests were performed on the sandwich structures using a gas-gun facility with a compliant, high-density polyethylene projectile. From these impact experiments, the graded-density foam core with the relatively low-density layer located immediately behind the front (i.e. impacted) GFRP skin was found to absorb more impact energy and possess an increased penetration resistance than a homogeneous core structure.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Cellular and Composite Structures

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

References (31)

Show source-provided references
1. Nasirzadeh R, Sabet AR (2014) Study of foam density variations in composite sandwich panels under high velocity impact loading. Int J Impact Eng 63:129–13910.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.08.009 ↗
2. Rajaneesh A, Sridhar I, Rajendran S (2014) Relative performance of metal and polymeric foam sandwich plates under low velocity impact. Int J Impact Eng 65:126–13610.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.11.012 ↗
3. Ashwill TD, Paquette JA (2008) Composite materials for innovative wind turbine blades. In: SAMPE 2008, Los Angeles
4. Mishnaevsky L Jr (2011) Composite materials in wind energy technology. In: Favorsky ON (ed) Thermal to mechanical energy conversion: engines and requirements. EOLSS Publishers, Oxford, UK
5. Mølholt Jensen F, Branner K (2013) 1—Introduction to wind turbine blade design. In: Brøndsted P, Nijssen RPL (eds) Advances in wind turbine blade design and materials. Woodhead Publishing, UK, pp 3–2810.1533/9780857097286.1.3 ↗
6. Chou J-S, Chiu C-K, Huang IK, Chi K-N (2013) Failure analysis of wind turbine blade under critical wind loads. Eng Fail Anal 27:99–11810.1016/j.engfailanal.2012.08.002 ↗
7. Marín JC, Barroso A, París F, Cañas J (2009) Study of fatigue damage in wind turbine blades. Eng Fail Anal 16(2):656–66810.1016/j.engfailanal.2008.02.005 ↗
8. Ackermann T (2012) Wind power in power systems, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken10.1002/9781119941842 ↗
9. Steeves CA, Fleck NA (2004) Collapse mechanisms of sandwich beams with composite faces and a foam core, loaded in three-point bending. Part I: analytical models and minimum weight design. Int J Mech Sci 46(4):561–58310.1016/j.ijmecsci.2004.04.003 ↗
10. Steeves CA, Fleck NA (2004) Collapse mechanisms of sandwich beams with composite faces and a foam core, loaded in three-point bending. Part II: experimental investigation and numerical modelling. Int J Mech Sci 46(4):585–60810.1016/j.ijmecsci.2004.04.004 ↗
11. Abbadi A, Koutsawa Y, Carmasol A, Belouettar S, Azari Z (2009) Experimental and numerical characterization of honeycomb sandwich composite panels. Simul Model Pract Theory 17(10):1533–154710.1016/j.simpat.2009.05.008 ↗
12. Juntikka R, Hallstrom S (2007) Shear characterization of sandwich core materials using four-point bending. J Sandwich Struct Mater 9(1):67–9410.1177/1099636207070574 ↗
13. Fathi A, Wolff-Fabris F, Altstädt V, Gätzi R (2013) An investigation on the flexural properties of balsa and polymer foam core sandwich structures: influence of core type and contour finishing options. J Sandwich Struct Mater 15(5):487–50810.1177/1099636213487004 ↗
14. Fathi A, Keller J-H, Altstaedt V (2015) Full-field shear analyses of sandwich core materials using Digital Image Correlation (DIC). Compos B Eng 70:156–16610.1016/j.compositesb.2014.10.045 ↗
15. Kaboglu C, Pimenta S, Morris A, Dear JP (2017) The effect of different types of core material on th flexural behaviour of sandwich composites for wind turbine blades. J Therm Eng 3(2):1102–110910.18186/thermal.298608 ↗
16. Battley M, Burman M (2010) Characterization of ductile core materials. J Sandwich Struct Mater 12(2):237–25210.1177/1099636209104532 ↗
17. Gupta N, Woldesenbet E (2005) Characterization of flexural properties of syntactic foam core sandwich composites and effect of density variation. J Compos Mater 39(24):2197–221210.1177/0021998305052037 ↗
18. Gupta N, Woldesenbet E, Hore K, Sankaran S (2002) Response of syntactic foam core sandwich structured composites to three-point bending. J Sandwich Struct Mater 4(3):249–27210.1177/1099636202004003140 ↗
19. Zhou G, Hill M, Hookham N (2007) Investigation of parameters governing the damage and energy absorption characteristics of honeycomb sandwich panels. J Sandwich Struct Mater 9(4):309–34210.1177/1099636207067134 ↗
20. Mines RAW, Worrall CM, Gibson AG (1998) Low velocity perforation beahviour of polymer composite sandwich panels. Int J Impact Eng 21(10):855–87910.1016/S0734-743X(98)00037-2 ↗
21. Dear JP, Lee H, Brown SA (2005) Impact damage processes in composite sheet and sandwich honeycomb materials. Int J Impact Eng 32(1):130–15410.1016/j.ijimpeng.2005.02.005 ↗
22. Dear JP, Brown SA (2003) Impact damage processes in reinforced polymeric materials. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 34(5):411–42010.1016/S1359-835X(03)00082-4 ↗
23. García-Castillo SK, Buitrago BL, Barbero E (2011) Behavior of sandwich structures and spaced plates subjected to high-velocity impacts. Polym Compos 32(2):290–29610.1002/pc.21047 ↗
24. Razali N, Sultan M, Mustapha F, Yidris N, Ishak M (2014) Impact damage on composite structures–a review. Int J Eng Sci 3(7):08–20
25. Data Sheet AIREX C70 Universal Structural Foam (2011) [cited December 2014; http://www.3accorematerials.com/products/airex/airexreg-c70.html
26. Zhou J, Hassan MZ, Guan Z, Cantwell WJ (2012) The low velocity impact response of foam-based sandwich panels. Compos Sci Technol 72(14):1781–179010.1016/j.compscitech.2012.07.006 ↗
27. ASTM C393 (2000) Standard test method for flexural properties of sandwich constructions. ASTM International, Philadelphia
28. Kaboglu C, Mohagheghian I, Zhou J, Guan Z, Cantwell W, John S, Blackman BRK, Kinloch AJ, Dear JP (2018) High-velocity impact deformation and perforation of fibre metal laminates. J Mater Sci 53(6):4209–4228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-017-1871-210.1007/s10853-017-1871-2 ↗
29. Wang E, Gardner N, Shukla A (2009) The blast resistance of sandwich composites with stepwise graded cores. Int J Solids Struct 46(18–19):3492–350210.1016/j.ijsolstr.2009.06.004 ↗
30. Gardner N, Wang E, Shukla A (2012) Performance of functionally graded sandwich composite beams under shock wave loading. Compos Struct 94(5):1755–177010.1016/j.compstruct.2011.12.006 ↗
31. Rolfe E, Kelly M, Arora H, Hooper PA, Dear JP (2017) Failure analysis using X-ray computed tomography of composite sandwich panels subjected to full-scale blast loading. Compos B Eng 129:26–4010.1016/j.compositesb.2017.07.022 ↗