journal article·2024-08

Comparative experimental investigation of design allowable of composite materials based on k-sample Anderson–Darling test

Lijun Sui, Youchao Sun

Publisher page

Abstract

The design allowable values of composite materials were experimentally studied by specimen from two different suppliers, and the test data of grouped samples for bending strength, tensile strength, and interlaminar shear strength were obtained. The k-sample Anderson–Darling test method was adopted to analyze the test results, and the correlation conclusions of bending strength, tensile strength, and interlaminar shear strength were achieved. The test and analysis results show that the fluctuation range of bending strength, tensile strength, and interlaminar shear strength of composite specimen manufactured by the two suppliers is small, and the error range is less than 10.5%. The A-D test critical value ADC corresponding to bending strength, tensile strength, and interlayer shear strength is greater than the corresponding test statistical value ADK. The test data of the samples processed by the two suppliers have strong correlation, which can be considered to be from the same population. The above conclusions provide guidance of ideas and methods for the strength performance consideration of composite structure selection and substitution.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Fatigue and fracture mechanics · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Wood Treatment and Properties

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

Affiliations

College of Civil Aviation, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China

References (27)

Show source-provided references
1. Du SY · Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica · 2008 · 1 · 1
2. 10.1016/j.ijlmm.2022.02.00110.1016/j.ijlmm.2022.02.001 ↗
3. Yang NB · Chinese Society of Mechanics: Chinese Society of Mechanics · 2000 · 843
4. Wang CS · Mechanical Design and Manufacturing Engineering · 2018 · 47 · 81
5. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2021.11109510.1016/j.ijsolstr.2021.111095 ↗
6. Liu SC · Journal of Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics · 2018 · 50 · 81
7. Feng ZY · Aerospace Materials Technology · 2011 · 41 · 15
8. Wang CS · Science Technology and Engineering · 2018 · 18 · 127
9. 10.5139/IJASS.2015.16.3.36010.5139/IJASS.2015.16.3.360 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2018.01.01110.1016/j.ijadhadh.2018.01.011 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2020.10606910.1016/j.compositesa.2020.106069 ↗
12. Zhang L · Fiber Composites · 2021 · 38 · 56
13. 10.2514/3.5744710.2514/3.57447 ↗
14. 10.1179/174328909X43075810.1179/174328909X430758 ↗
15. 10.1016/S0263-8223(98)00053-110.1016/S0263-8223(98)00053-1 ↗
16. Meng XM · Engineering Plastics Application · 2019 · 47 · 115
17. ASTM · 2017
18. ASTM · 2017
19. ASTM · 2016
20. Scholz FW · Journal of the American Statistical Association · 1987 · 82 · 918
21. 10.1155/2020/666238910.1155/2020/6662389 ↗
22. Sulewski P · Afinidad · 2019 · 76
23. 10.1080/00224065.1998.1197985810.1080/00224065.1998.11979858 ↗
24. Rui F, LiuXue Y. Research on K Distribution in Anderson-Darling goodness-of-fit test[J]. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2013, pp. 475–476.10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.475-476.27 ↗
25. Liu S · Journal of Aeronautical Materials · 2013 · 33 · 86
26. 10.1080/01621459.1974.1048019610.1080/01621459.1974.10480196 ↗
27. Composite Materials Handbook-17 Coordinate Committee · 2012