Effects of anisotropy and off‐axis angle on buckling behavior of carbon/epoxy Z‐pin under axial pressure
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The axial buckling load of single carbon fiber or composite strands is typically predicted using Euler's formula, developed for isotropic materials. This study introduces anisotropy in a mechanical carbon/epoxy Z‐pin model under axial pressure. It examines the influence of compressive modulus, shear modulus, off‐axis angle, and aspect ratio on its buckling behavior. Results show that the axial instability performance of the Z‐pin decreases with lower compression, shear modulus, and aspect ratio while keeping the tensile modulus fixed. Anisotropy decreases buckling load by up to 14% compared with Euler's formula, which only considers tensile modulus. Additionally, the impact of the deflection Angle between the pressure and pin‐axis can be ignored when it is less than 3°. Highlights Euler formula overestimates composite Z‐pin buckling force under axial pressure. Anisotropy decreases buckling load by up to 14% for carbon/epoxy. Shear modulus is more influential on Z‐pin with a small aspect ratio. For off‐axial compression angles <3°, influence can be ignored.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Fiber-reinforced polymer composites · Tribology and Wear Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
State Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic System School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang University Hangzhou China
Zhejiang Key Laboratory of Advanced Manufacturing Technology School of Mechanical Engineering, Zhejiang University Hangzhou China
References (34)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2020.10612810.1016/j.compositesa.2020.106128 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2016.06.00510.1016/j.compscitech.2016.06.005 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2018.03.00410.1016/j.compositesa.2018.03.004 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.11346310.1016/j.compstruct.2020.113463 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2021.10890610.1016/j.compscitech.2021.108906 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2022.10703110.1016/j.compositesa.2022.107031 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2021.10874910.1016/j.compscitech.2021.108749 ↗
8. PegorinF PingkarawatK DaynesS MouritzAP.Delamination fatigue properties of Z‐pinned carbon‐epoxy laminate using metal or composite rods. In:Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Composite Materials Copenhagen Denmark 2015.
9. 10.1002/pc.2630910.1002/pc.26309 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2007.08.01610.1016/j.compositesa.2007.08.016 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jcomc.2022.10026810.1016/j.jcomc.2022.100268 ↗
12. 10.1177/0021998318781210.1177/00219983187812 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.08010.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.080 ↗
14. 10.1080/09243046.2018.143350610.1080/09243046.2018.1433506 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.measurement.2016.06.02410.1016/j.measurement.2016.06.024 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2014.08.02110.1016/j.compositesa.2014.08.021 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.carbon.2012.02.05310.1016/j.carbon.2012.02.053 ↗
18. 10.1177/096739111101900610.1177/0967391111019006 ↗
19. 10.1016/S0008‐6223(00)00147‐010.1016/S0008‐6223(00)00147‐0 ↗
20. 10.1016/S0266‐3538(99)00123‐210.1016/S0266‐3538(99)00123‐2 ↗
21. 10.1002/pc.2649310.1002/pc.26493 ↗
22. ZhangX LiY ChuQ XiaoJ.Experimental study on the performance of twisted fiber reinforced composite Z‐Pin. In:Proceedings of the 21st international conference on composite materials Xi'an China 2017.
23. 10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20150401.00110.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20150401.001 ↗
24. Timoshenko SP · 1978
25. 10.1520/D7264_D7264M‐2110.1520/D7264_D7264M‐21 ↗
26. 10.1520/STP36912S10.1520/STP36912S ↗
27. 10.1520/D4018‐1710.1520/D4018‐17 ↗
28. 10.1002/pc.75016020210.1002/pc.750160202 ↗
29. Hu H · 1981
30. Yi X · 2009
31. 10.1002/pc.2503010.1002/pc.25030 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.jsv.2011.02.01210.1016/j.jsv.2011.02.012 ↗
33. 10.1016/0022‐460X(83)90511‐410.1016/0022‐460X(83)90511‐4 ↗
34. 10.1115/1.362504610.1115/1.3625046 ↗