journal article·2019-01Open access

Effect of fiber orientations of composite panels under far‐field pyroshock

E. Mohamed Najeeb, R. Velmurugan

Polymer Composites· Volume 40· Issue 1

Abstract

The effect of different fiber orientations of composite panels of E‐Glass/Epoxy under far‐field pyroshock is presented in this article. To get the far‐field pyroshock response, the experiments are conducted using Bi‐plate technology under low range of input chamber pressures to projectiles of three different lengths. PCB accelerometers and NI‐DAQ system with LabView software are used to capture the structural responses in the form of acceleration‐time histories and analyze them at selected locations. Abaqus/Explicit code is used in the Finite Element Analysis (FEA) for the pyroshock response of composite panels with different fiber orientations. From the results, it is found that the selected locations on the [0/90/±45]s WRM (Woven Roving Mat) laminate experience higher accelerations, above 30% extra, than other fiber orientations. Since [0/90/±45]s laminate has lengthier fiber rovings along the diagonal direction, higher Young's modulus along the fiber direction and the most vibration modes are diagonally biased, the response amplitude would be high enough to experience maximum acceleration. The acceleration responses are obtained both from FEA and experiments and show good agreement. POLYM. COMPOS., 40:255–262, 2019. © 2017 Society of Plastics Engineers
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Vibration and Dynamic Analysis · Structural Engineering and Vibration Analysis

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

Affiliations

Department of Civil Engineering Government College of Engineering Tirunelveli 627007 India

Department of Aerospace Engineering Indian Institute of Technology Madras Chennai 600036 India

References (19)

Show source-provided references
1. MIL‐STD‐810F:Test Method Standard—Environmental Engineering Considerations and Laboratory Tests Department of Defense USA (2000).
2. NASA‐STD‐7003:NASA Technical Standard—Pyroshock Test Criteria National Aeronautics and Space Administration USA (1999).
3. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.20-23.145810.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.20-23.1458 ↗
4. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.108-111.104310.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.108-111.1043 ↗
5. 10.1299/spacee.1.7910.1299/spacee.1.79 ↗
6. 10.1115/1.282798510.1115/1.2827985 ↗
7. 10.1080/1537649080266428110.1080/15376490802664281 ↗
8. 10.1299/spacee.1.110.1299/spacee.1.1 ↗
9. Bateman V.I. · Sound Vib. · 2012
10. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.9.8910.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.9.89 ↗
11. 10.1088/0022-3727/40/17/05210.1088/0022-3727/40/17/052 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.measurement.2011.12.01110.1016/j.measurement.2011.12.011 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.jsv.2012.02.02410.1016/j.jsv.2012.02.024 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.jsv.2013.06.01410.1016/j.jsv.2013.06.014 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2014.02.01310.1016/j.ijimpeng.2014.02.013 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.02210.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.022 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.optlastec.2014.02.00510.1016/j.optlastec.2014.02.005 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.optlastec.2014.09.00510.1016/j.optlastec.2014.09.005 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.ast.2017.05.02810.1016/j.ast.2017.05.028 ↗