Characterization of the mixed‐mode interlaminar fracture toughness of an additive manufacturing continuous carbon fiber reinforced‐thermoplastic composite
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract There is a lack of knowledge concerning the interlaminar fracture toughness under mixed‐mode ratios of 3D‐printed composites. In this work, several additive manufacturing (AM) continuous Fiber Reinforced Thermoplastic (cFRT) specimens have been tested to characterize the initiation and propagation of interlaminar fracture toughness under three different mixed‐mode GII/(GI + GII) ratios: 25, 50, and 75%. The results obtained do not exhibit the common tendency seen in traditional laminated composite materials, in which the fracture toughness increases with the mixed‐mode ratio. While the fracture toughness for the 50% mixed‐mode ratio falls between the corresponding mode I and mode II values, the fracture toughness for the 25% and 75% ratios falls outside this range. To provide a reasonable explanation, fractography and microstructure analyses were conducted to quantify fiber, matrix, and void contents. It was concluded that this uncommon behavior is probably related to the intrinsic variability of the material and manufacturing process. Highlights Continuous fibers improve mechanical properties of 3D‐printed composite parts. Delamination is a critical failure mode for laminated composite materials. Characterization of mixed‐mode delamination is key for simulation and design. First complete study of mixed‐mode delamination for 3D‐printed composites.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies · Epoxy Resin Curing Processes
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Análisis y Tecnología de Estructuras en Ingeniería (ATEI) Universidad Politécnica Salesiana Cuenca Ecuador
School of Engineering University of the West of England, Frenchay Campus Bristol UK
Analysis and Advanced Materials for Structural Design (AMADE), Department of Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Construction Universitat de Girona Girona Spain
Funding
Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
References (57)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.coco.2021.10090710.1016/j.coco.2021.100907 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.jmst.2021.11.06310.1016/j.jmst.2021.11.063 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.01.00210.1016/j.addma.2018.01.002 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.10914310.1016/j.compositesb.2021.109143 ↗
5. 10.1002/admt.20180027110.1002/admt.201800271 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.03.01610.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.03.016 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.02.01010.1016/j.addma.2018.02.010 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.addma.2019.05.00610.1016/j.addma.2019.05.006 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.04.03910.1016/j.addma.2018.04.039 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.07.01810.1016/j.compstruct.2016.07.018 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.addma.2017.06.00410.1016/j.addma.2017.06.004 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.09.02210.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.09.022 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.jcomc.2020.10000710.1016/j.jcomc.2020.100007 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.05210.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.052 ↗
15. 10.3390/polym1417347110.3390/polym14173471 ↗
16. 10.1177/109963621983605810.1177/1099636219836058 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.05.00710.1016/j.addma.2018.05.007 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.10768810.1016/j.compscitech.2019.107688 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.matdes.2017.10.02110.1016/j.matdes.2017.10.021 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.04.05410.1016/j.compositesb.2018.04.054 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.10711210.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107112 ↗
22. 10.1504/ijrapidm.2017.08215210.1504/ijrapidm.2017.082152 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.10865710.1016/j.compositesb.2021.108657 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.10276310.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102763 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.addma.2019.10088410.1016/j.addma.2019.100884 ↗
26. 10.3390/polym1403050610.3390/polym14030506 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.addma.2021.10214410.1016/j.addma.2021.102144 ↗
28. 10.1080/15376494.2020.182126610.1080/15376494.2020.1821266 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.10889110.1016/j.compositesb.2021.108891 ↗
30. 10.1016/S0266‐3538(98)00069‐410.1016/S0266‐3538(98)00069‐4 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.addma.2022.10307710.1016/j.addma.2022.103077 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2023.10765510.1016/j.compositesa.2023.107655 ↗
33. Namiki M · 2014
34. 10.1016/j.addma.2019.01.00510.1016/j.addma.2019.01.005 ↗
35. 10.4236/ojcm.2016.6100310.4236/ojcm.2016.61003 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.09.01410.1016/j.compstruct.2018.09.014 ↗
37. 10.3390/technologies804005110.3390/technologies8040051 ↗
38. 10.1520/d6671_d6671m‐2210.1520/d6671_d6671m‐22 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2015.08.03810.1016/j.compositesa.2015.08.038 ↗
40. 10.1002/adv.1989.06009020610.1002/adv.1989.060090206 ↗
41. 10.1177/073168440403073010.1177/0731684404030730 ↗
42. 10.1007/BF0003428110.1007/BF00034281 ↗
43. SarradoC.Experimental characterization and numerical simulation of composite adhesive joints using the cohesive zone model approach. PhD thesis. Universitat de Girona.2015.
44. 10.1098/rspa.1990.000710.1098/rspa.1990.0007 ↗
45. 10.1016/0266-3538(93)90031-B10.1016/0266-3538(93)90031-B ↗
46. 10.3390/polym1510240310.3390/polym15102403 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.11147610.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111476 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.prostr.2021.12.01710.1016/j.prostr.2021.12.017 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.coco.2023.10153210.1016/j.coco.2023.101532 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2015.06.06110.1016/j.engfracmech.2015.06.061 ↗
51. 10.1163/156856109X45270110.1163/156856109X452701 ↗
52. DIN EN 2564:2019–08 · 2018
53. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.10846010.1016/j.compositesb.2020.108460 ↗
54. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2020.10807710.1016/j.compscitech.2020.108077 ↗
55. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.11322610.1016/j.compstruct.2020.113226 ↗
56. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.11503310.1016/j.compstruct.2021.115033 ↗
57. IragiM.Caracterización y modelización del comportamiento mecánico de materiales compuestos de fibra continua con orientaciones no‐convencionales fabricados mediante impresión 3D. PhD Thesis. Mondragon Unibertsitatea.2022.