Compressive properties of sandwiches with functionally graded rubber core and jute–epoxy skins
Source abstract
Abstract
The compressive behaviour of a new class of sandwich composite made up of jute fiber reinforced epoxy skins and piece-wise linear fly ash reinforced functionally graded (FG) rubber core is investigated in flat-wise mode. FG samples are prepared using conventional casting technique. Presence of gradation is quantified physically by weight method. This paper addresses the effect of weight fraction of fly ash, core to thickness ratio (C/H) and orientation of jute on specific compressive modulus and strength. In each trial five replicates are tested with lower amount of fly ash below the upper skin of sandwich (rubber-up). Results of experimentation are subjected to statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) to find the influential factor governing the compressive behaviour. Furthermore piece-wise linear gradation is modeled in finite element and strength values are compared with experimental results. Sandwich sample with fly ash content of 40%, C/H of 0·4 and orientations of 30°/60° registered better performance. Specific strength is observed to increase upto 30% filler content followed by stabilization. Finite element results for strength match very well with experimental ones.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Composite Structure Analysis and Optimization · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Cellular and Composite Structures
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (34)
Show source-provided references
1. Anderson T A 2003 Compos. Struct. 60 26510.1016/S0263-8223(03)00013-8 ↗
2. Apetre N A, Sankar B V, Ambur D R 2003 in Proceedings of the 44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics and materials conference, Functionally graded sandwich core with arbitrary variation in properties (Washington DC: AIAA, CDROM)
3. ASTM C 274-07 1999 West Conshohocken (PA: ASTM International)
4. ASTM C 393-06 2006 Standard test method for core shear properties of sandwich constructions by beam flexure (PA: ASTM International)
5. Atckinson R 1997 Reinf. Plast. 41 30
6. Blackley D C 1997 Polymer lattices: science and technology –application of lattice (London: Chapman and Hall)
7. Bull P H and Edgren F 2004 Compos. Engin. Part B 35 53510.1016/j.compositesb.2003.11.007 ↗
8. Chakraborty A, Gopalakrishnan S and Reddy J N 2003 Int. J. Mech. Sci. 45 51910.1016/S0020-7403(03)00058-4 ↗
9. Dai J and Thomas Hahn H 2003 Compos. Struct. 61 24710.1016/S0263-8223(03)00040-0 ↗
10. Daniel I M and Abot J L 2000 Compos. Sci. Technol. 60 245510.1016/S0266-3538(00)00039-7 ↗
11. Davalos J F, Qiao P Z, Xu X F, Robinson J and Barth K E 2001 Compos. Struct. 52 44110.1016/S0263-8223(01)00034-4 ↗
12. Doddamani M R and Kulkarni S M 2009 in Proceedings of interdisciplinary conference on chemical, mechanical and materials engineering (2009 ICCMME), (Australia: Australian Institute of High Energetic Materials) 314
13. Doddamani M R, Kulkarni S M and Kishore 2011 Polym. Compos. 32 154110.1002/pc.21173 ↗
14. Doddamani M R and Kulkarni S M 2012 Mech. Compos. Mater. 48 8910.1007/s11029-012-9254-x ↗
15. Evans A G, Hutchinson J W, Fleck N A, Ashby M F and Wadley H N G 2001 Progr. Mater. Sci. 46 30910.1016/S0079-6425(00)00016-5 ↗
16. Gdoutos E E and Daniel I M 2008 J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 35 10510.2298/TAM0803105G ↗
17. Keller T 2006 Material tailored use of FRP composites in bridge and building construction (Switzerland: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne)
18. Kirugulige M S, Kitey R and Tippur H V 2005 Compos. Sci. Technol. 65 105210.1016/j.compscitech.2004.10.029 ↗
19. Kishore, Kulkarni S M, Sharathchandra S and Sunil D 2002 Polym. Test. 21 76310.1016/S0142-9418(02)00008-9 ↗
20. Ma L S and Wang T J 2004 Internat. J. Sol. Struct. 41 8510.1016/j.ijsolstr.2003.09.008 ↗
21. Manalo A C, Aravinthan T, Karunasena W and Islam M M 2010 Compos. Struct. 92 98410.1016/j.compstruct.2009.09.046 ↗
22. Montgomery D C 2001 Design and analysis of experiments (New York: Wiley) 5th ed
23. Mouritz A P and Thomson R S 1999 Compos. Struct. 44 26310.1016/S0263-8223(98)00133-0 ↗
24. Najafizadeh M M and Eslami M R 2002 Internat. J. Mech. Sci. 44 247910.1016/S0020-7403(02)00186-8 ↗
25. Rocca S V and Nanni A 2005 Composites in construction. in Third international conference (USA: University of Miami)
26. Ross P J 1988 Taguchi techniques for quality engineering (New York: McGraw-Hill Book company)
27. Russo A and Zuccarello B 2007 Compos. Struct. 81 57510.1016/j.compstruct.2006.10.007 ↗
28. Sankar B V 2001 Compos. Sci. Technol. 61 68910.1016/S0266-3538(01)00007-0 ↗
29. Shen H S 2002 Internat. J. Solids Struct. 39 599110.1016/S0020-7683(02)00479-1 ↗
30. Shen H S and Leung A Y T 2003 J. Eng. Mech. 129 41410.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2003)129:4(414) ↗
31. Shen H S 2005 Compos. Sci. Technol. 65 167510.1016/j.compscitech.2005.02.008 ↗
32. Venkata Dinesh Muthyala 2007 Composite sandwich structure with grid stiffened core, Master thesis (Graduate Faculty of the State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, Louisiana)
33. Vinson J 1999 The behaviour of sandwich structures of isotropic and composite materials (Pennsylvania: Technomic)
34. Wadley H N G, Fleck N A and Evans A G 2003 Compos. Sci. Technol. 63 233110.1016/S0266-3538(03)00266-5 ↗