Role of discontinuous fiber core material on the mechanical behavior of hybrid sandwich polyester composites
Source abstract
Abstract
This study investigated the potential for improving the mechanical behavior of glass fiber polyester composites by using symmetric hybrid sandwich configurations that combine continuous woven composite and different discontinuous reinforcements used as a core. The discontinuous reinforcements included sheet molding compound (SMC), bulk molding compound (BMC), and the discontinuous prepreg based platelets that were chopped from the woven trim scrap. Hybrid sandwich configurations using different core materials exhibited improvements in flexural mechanical properties, while providing more progressive failure under both flexural and compressive loading. Compressive strength in polyester SMC and woven laminate was significantly lower than flexural strength, while BMC and chopped platelets exhibited similar levels of strength in flexure and compression. Overall, hybridized compression molding produced sandwich structures can be used to control the failure progression and to improve the structural characteristics of composite, especially under flexural loads. The trim scrap core sandwich configuration had mechanical properties comparable with the BMC core hybrid. Therefore, trim scrap upcycling can be an efficient approach to reducing the amount of material waste during the manufacturing.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Cellular and Composite Structures
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA
Department of Materials Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
References (33)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.05.00510.1016/j.compositesa.2016.05.005 ↗
2. 2009
3. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2016.10.02410.1016/j.compscitech.2016.10.024 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.matpr.2016.03.05210.1016/j.matpr.2016.03.052 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.28910.1016/j.procir.2017.03.289 ↗
6. 10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00084-810.1016/S0266-3538(03)00084-8 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.06.00210.1016/j.compstruct.2017.06.002 ↗
8. Larson R · Society of Plastics Engineers Automotive Composites Conference Exhibition · 2018
9. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.04.04310.1016/j.carbpol.2011.04.043 ↗
10. 10.1002/pc.1001110.1002/pc.10011 ↗
11. 10.1002/app.1321910.1002/app.13219 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2021.10677910.1016/j.compositesa.2021.106779 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.01.03110.1016/j.compositesb.2012.01.031 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.12.01810.1016/j.compositesa.2016.12.018 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2018.02.03210.1016/j.compositesa.2018.02.032 ↗
16. Kravchenko S · 2017
17. Kravchenko S · 2018
18. 10.1177/002199831770725310.1177/0021998317707253 ↗
19. 10.1002/app.4471110.1002/app.44711 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.10.19710.1016/j.proeng.2014.10.197 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.matdes.2006.11.00610.1016/j.matdes.2006.11.006 ↗
22. 10.1177/073168441875436010.1177/0731684418754360 ↗
23. 10.1177/073168441349286710.1177/0731684413492867 ↗
24. 10.1177/109963621351249810.1177/1099636213512498 ↗
25. 10.1520/D7264_D7264M-1510.1520/D7264_D7264M-15 ↗
26. 10.1520/D3410_D3410M-1610.1520/D3410_D3410M-16 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.05.04610.1016/j.compstruct.2017.05.046 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.mtcomm.2018.03.01210.1016/j.mtcomm.2018.03.012 ↗
29. 10.1177/00219983920260180410.1177/002199839202601804 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.05.02010.1016/j.compscitech.2019.05.020 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.10.09110.1016/j.compstruct.2016.10.091 ↗
32. 10.1098/rspa.1997.011110.1098/rspa.1997.0111 ↗
33. 10.1520/D0695-1510.1520/D0695-15 ↗