Quasi‐Static Penetration Behavior of Fiber Metal Laminates Exposed to Thermal Cycling: A Comparative Analysis of Hybrid and Pure Structures
Source abstract
Abstract
ABSTRACT The increasing demand for lightweight and high‐performance materials necessitates a thorough understanding of the mechanical behavior of fiber metal laminates (FMLs), particularly under extreme conditions such as thermal cycling. This study evaluates the out‐of‐plane perforation resistance of FML composites, which incorporate various fiber reinforcements (aramid, carbon, glass, and basalt) between aluminum layers, after undergoing thermal cycling. A total of 10 different FML configurations were subjected to thermal cycles ranging from 0 to 150, within a temperature range of −45°C to +75°C. Following thermal exposure, quasi‐static punch shear test (QSPT) was performed in accordance with ASTM D732 to assess the mechanical response. The performance of the composites was analyzed based on key parameters such as maximum penetration force, displacement at failure, and energy absorption. The results demonstrate that hybrid laminates exhibit superior energy absorption compared to single‐fiber systems across all thermal cycle levels, primarily due to synergistic effects between different fiber types. Among the tested configurations, the Aramid–Carbon hybrid FML (Ar‐Carall) achieved up to a 12% increase in energy absorption, indicating improved resistance to out‐of‐plane loading.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Composite Structure Analysis and Optimization · Fiber-reinforced polymer composites
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical Engineering Batman University Batman Turkey
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1177/00219983930270030210.1177/002199839302700302 ↗
2. 10.1016/S0924-0136(00)00411-810.1016/S0924-0136(00)00411-8 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.paerosci.2005.02.00110.1016/j.paerosci.2005.02.001 ↗
4. S.Das J.Warren D.West andS. M.Schexnayder “Global Carbon Fiber Composites Supply Chain Competitiveness Analysis (No. ORNL/SR‐2016/100|NREL/TP‐6A50‐66071) ”Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Oak Ridge TN (United States); The University of Tennessee Knoxville 2016.
5. 10.1016/S0924-0136(96)02652-010.1016/S0924-0136(96)02652-0 ↗
6. 10.3390/jcs508021710.3390/jcs5080217 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.matdes.2012.06.03810.1016/j.matdes.2012.06.038 ↗
8. 10.1007/s11029-017-9632-510.1007/s11029-017-9632-5 ↗
9. 10.1115/1.48278810.1115/1.482788 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.06.06310.1016/j.jmapro.2021.06.063 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.05.02510.1016/j.compositesb.2016.05.025 ↗
12. 10.3390/ma1320468610.3390/ma13204686 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2012.05.00610.1016/j.ijimpeng.2012.05.006 ↗
14. 10.1007/s11340-024-01123-410.1007/s11340-024-01123-4 ↗
15. 10.1007/s13369-023-08277-810.1007/s13369-023-08277-8 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.tws.2021.10802610.1016/j.tws.2021.108026 ↗
17. 10.3390/ma1404070910.3390/ma14040709 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.finmec.2024.10029510.1016/j.finmec.2024.100295 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.tws.2024.11251610.1016/j.tws.2024.112516 ↗
20. 10.1080/09276440.2025.248234610.1080/09276440.2025.2482346 ↗
21. 10.1080/01495739.2013.78784610.1080/01495739.2013.787846 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.01.00410.1016/j.compositesa.2016.01.004 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.mechmat.2019.01.01710.1016/j.mechmat.2019.01.017 ↗
24. 10.1177/105678952199873110.1177/1056789521998731 ↗
25. 10.1007/s43452-021-00181-y10.1007/s43452-021-00181-y ↗
26. 10.1177/0954406221100716910.1177/09544062211007169 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.11.01410.1016/j.compstruct.2009.11.014 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.tws.2019.03.05610.1016/j.tws.2019.03.056 ↗
29. 10.1016/0734-743X(96)89050-610.1016/0734-743X(96)89050-6 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2006.08.01710.1016/j.ijengsci.2006.08.017 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2006.12.00510.1016/j.compositesa.2006.12.005 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2008.07.02910.1016/j.compstruct.2008.07.029 ↗
33. 10.1007/s40870-015-0009-310.1007/s40870-015-0009-3 ↗