journal article·2005-02

Effects of composite lay-up configuration and thickness on the damage self-sensing behavior of carbon fiber polymer-matrix composite

S. Wang, D. D. L. Chung, J. H. Chung

Journal of Materials Science· Volume 40· Issue 3
Publisher page

Abstract

The lay-up configuration (unidirectional, crossply and quasi-isotropic) and thickness (8–24 laminae) affect the damage self-sensing characteristics of continuous carbon fiber epoxy-matrix composites. The damage is by drop impact directed at the top surface of the laminate. The oblique resistance (i.e., resistance at an angle between the longitudinal and through-thickness directions) is an effective damage indicator for all lay-up configurations and thicknesses. The surface resistance of the bottom surface is an effective damage indicator for thin (8-lamina) composites, though it is less sensitive to minor damage than the oblique resistance. The surface resistance of the top surface is less effective than that of the bottom surface for 8-lamina multidirectional composites. The through-thickness resistance is an effective damage indicator for 16- and 24-lamina quasi-isotropic composites, but is ineffective for 8-lamina composites of any lay-up configuration. In general, effectiveness means a monotonic and significant increase of the resistance with damage extent.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Smart Materials for Construction · Icing and De-icing Technologies · Structural Health Monitoring Techniques

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

References (20)

Show source-provided references
1. A. SJOGREN, A. KRASNIKOVS and J. VARNA, Composites Part A: Appl. Schience & Manufact. 32(9) (2001) 1237.10.1016/S1359-835X(01)00058-6 ↗
2. M. DE FREITAS, A. SILVA and L. REIS, Composites Part B: Engineering 31(3) (2000) 199.10.1016/S1359-8368(00)00003-2 ↗
3. J. M. A. SILVA, J. A. M. DERREIRA and T. C. DEVEZAS, Mater. Sci. Tech. 19(6) (2003) 809.10.1179/026708303225002127 ↗
4. K. S. C. KUANG and W. J. CANTWELL, Polym. Compos. 23(4) (2002) 603.10.1002/pc.10460 ↗
5. A. MARTIN, J. HUDD, P. WELLS, D. TUNNICLIFFE and D. DAS-GUPTA, Key Eng. Mater. 167/168 (Damage Assessment of Structures) (1999) 102.10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.167-168.102 ↗
6. T. MARTIN, A. JONES, I. READ, S. MURRAY, D. HAYNES, P. LLOYD, P. FOOTE, R. NOBLE and D. TUNNICLIFFE, Key Eng. Mater. 204/205 (Damage Assessment of Structures) (2001) 371.10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.204-205.371 ↗
7. S. WANG, D. D. L. CHUNG and J. H. CHUNG, Composites: Part A, in press.
8. S. WANG, D. D. L. CHUNG and J. H. CHUNG, Smart Mater. Struct., in press.
9. S. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, Comp. Interf. 9(1) (2002) 51.10.1163/156855402753642890 ↗
10. S. WANG, Z. MEI and D. D. L. CHUNG, Int. J. Adh. Adh. 21(ER6) (2001) 465.10.1016/S0143-7496(01)00023-9 ↗
11. S. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, Polym. Polym. Comp. 9(2) (2001) 135.
12. X. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, J. Mater. Res. 14(11) (1999) 4224.10.1557/JMR.1999.0572 ↗
13. X. WANG, S. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, J. Mater. Sci. 34(11) (1999) 2703.10.1023/A:1004629505992 ↗
14. S. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, Comp. Interf. 6(6) (1999) 507.10.1163/156855499X00189 ↗
15. X. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, Polym. Comp. 18(6) (1997) 692.10.1002/pc.10322 ↗
16. X. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, Smart Mater. Struct. 6 (1997) 504.10.1088/0964-1726/6/4/017 ↗
17. D. D. L. CHUNG and S. WANG, Polym. Polym. Comp. 11(7) (2003) 515.
18. X. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, Composites: Part B 29B(1) (1998) 63.10.1016/S1359-8368(97)00014-0 ↗
19. Z. MEI, V. H. GUERRERO, D. P. KOWALIK and D. D. L. CHUNG, Polym. Compos. 23(3) (2002) 425.10.1002/pc.10444 ↗
20. S. WANG and D. D. L. CHUNG, in preparation.