Failure mode analysis and prediction model of additively manufactured continuous carbon fiber‐reinforced polylactic acid
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Carbon fiber‐reinforced composites are widely used in aerospace, rail transportation, and new energy vehicles due to their small specific gravity as well as good mechanical and chemical properties. Additive manufacturing of continuous carbon fiber‐reinforced polymer composites is an innovative composite manufacturing technique. In this paper, bending and shear specimens with different hatch spacing and layer thicknesses were prepared by fused filament fabrication (FFF) technique and subjected to three‐point bending experiments and interlayer shear experiments, respectively. The results showed that the maximum flexural strength and flexural modulus of the fabricated parts were 383.81 MPa and 41.23 GPa, respectively, and the maximum interlayer shear strength was 13.64 MPa. Finally, an optimized criterion for determining fiber kinking, fiber breakage, and matrix damage was proposed by considering in situ strength variations induced by process parameters. This new model was subsequently validated and could provide a method for fracture predicting of additive manufactured carbon fiber‐reinforced composites. Highlights CCFRC parts with different porosities were prepared by adjusting the layer thickness and hatch spacing. The bending and interlaminar shear damage mechanisms of CCFRC fabrications are revealed, and the effects of layer thickness and hatch spacing on their mechanical properties are investigated. Introduction of additive manufacturing factors to optimize failure models for CCFRC parts. Introduction of additive manufacturing coefficients to accurately predict the interlaminar shear strength of CCFRC parts by AM.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Manufacturing Process and Optimization · Additive Manufacturing Materials and Processes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Transportation and Logistics Engineering Wuhan University of Technology Wuhan China
State Key Laboratory of Waterway Traffic Control and Safety Wuhan University of Technology Wuhan China
School of Materials Science and Engineering Huazhong University of Science and Technology Wuhan China
References (45)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.3390/polym1314229810.3390/polym13142298 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.ast.2016.12.01910.1016/j.ast.2016.12.019 ↗
3. 10.1115/1.404964610.1115/1.4049646 ↗
4. 10.1002/adem.20180062210.1002/adem.201800622 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.03.07310.1016/j.compositesb.2019.03.073 ↗
6. Recent Progress in 3D Printing of Fiber‐Reinforced Composite and Nanocomposites
7. 10.1088/1757-899X/406/1/01204210.1088/1757-899X/406/1/012042 ↗
8. 10.1063/1.513834210.1063/1.5138342 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.addma.2020.10129010.1016/j.addma.2020.101290 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2023.11764210.1016/j.compstruct.2023.117642 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.10600710.1016/j.ijfatigue.2020.106007 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.10711210.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107112 ↗
13. 10.1002/pc.2664510.1002/pc.26645 ↗
14. Additive manufacturing of carbon fiber‐reinforced composites: a review
15. 10.1016/j.addma.2020.10168610.1016/j.addma.2020.101686 ↗
16. 3D printing of continuous fiber reinforced polymer composites: development, application, and prospective
17. 10.3390/ma907058310.3390/ma9070583 ↗
18. Ply and interlaminar behaviours of 3D printed continuous carbon fibre‐reinforced thermoplastic laminates; effects of processing conditions and microstructure
19. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2014.10.00910.1016/j.compscitech.2014.10.009 ↗
20. 10.1002/pc.2628210.1002/pc.26282 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.04.03910.1016/j.addma.2018.04.039 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.07.01810.1016/j.compstruct.2016.07.018 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2020.10807710.1016/j.compscitech.2020.108077 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2022.10716210.1016/j.compositesa.2022.107162 ↗
25. 10.1080/10426914.2020.184366410.1080/10426914.2020.1843664 ↗
26. 10.3390/polym1310165310.3390/polym13101653 ↗
27. 10.1002/pc.2780510.1002/pc.27805 ↗
28. 10.3390/ma1317385010.3390/ma13173850 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12784210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127842 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.05.00710.1016/j.addma.2018.05.007 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2023.11039710.1016/j.compscitech.2023.110397 ↗
32. 10.1002/pc.2642310.1002/pc.26423 ↗
33. 10.1002/pc.2529410.1002/pc.25294 ↗
34. KathavateVS PawarDN BagalNS et al.Progressive failure analysis of fiber reinforced polymer matrix composites. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Materials Manufacturing and Modelling (ICMMM) VIT University Vellore India March 29–31 2019.2020.
35. 10.1115/1.315366410.1115/1.3153664 ↗
36. 10.1002/pc.2427510.1002/pc.24275 ↗
37. 10.1177/002199831245447810.1177/0021998312454478 ↗
38. 10.1177/002199831347652310.1177/0021998313476523 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.addma.2021.10211210.1016/j.addma.2021.102112 ↗
40. 10.1108/RPJ-08-2015-009810.1108/RPJ-08-2015-0098 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.10870410.1016/j.compositesb.2021.108704 ↗
42. Influence of slicing parameters on surface quality and mechanical properties of 3D‐printed CF/PLA composites fabricated by FDM technique
43. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.11377910.1016/j.compstruct.2021.113779 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.04.02310.1016/j.compositesa.2005.04.023 ↗
45. PinhoSTDVC CamanhoPP.Failure Models and Criteria for Frp under in‐Plane or Three‐Dimensional Stress States Including Shear Non‐linearity. NASA/TM‐2005‐213530 NASA Langley Research Center VA 2368 2005.