Quasi-static indentation characteristics of sandwich composites with hybrid facesheets: Experimental and numerical approach
Source abstract
Abstract
The load response, energy absorption, different damage mechanisms and failure modes of sandwich panels subjected to complete perforation by quasi-static indentation and the insights gleaned are presented in this paper. The experimental campaign was carried out on samples made of different type of facesheets: Aluminium, glass fibre-reinforced plastic and metal-composite hybrid (combined aluminium and GFRP) with two different core heights. Reliable numerical models were developed with appropriate constitutive material and damage model for facesheets and honeycomb core to complement the experimental observations. Good agreement between experimental results and numerical predictions in terms of force-displacement response and perforation damage ensure the fidelity of the developed numerical model. Effects of facesheet type, core height, energy absorbed by the constituent layers, damage evolution history are briefly discussed. It was observed that the energy absorption of sandwich panels and peak indentation force resisted by the top and bottom facesheet are strongly dependent on its metal-volume fraction, whilst unaffected with the height of the core. Recommendations for developing computationally efficient numerical models were provided.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Cellular and Composite Structures · Metal Forming Simulation Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Energy Research Institute @ NTU (ERIAN), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Division of Aerospace Engineering, School of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. Hawk J. The Boeing 787 dreamliner: more than an airplane. In: Presented at the AIAA/AAAF aircraft noise and emissions reduction symposium , Monterey, California, 24–26 May 2005.
2. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.04.00910.1016/j.compscitech.2005.04.009 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.09.02510.1016/j.compstruct.2017.09.025 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.11.01410.1016/j.compstruct.2009.11.014 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.06.01010.1016/j.compstruct.2013.06.010 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.02.06410.1016/j.compstruct.2017.02.064 ↗
7. Douglas MJ. A comparison of quasi-static indentation to low-velocity impact. p. 98, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20000109864.pdf (2000, accessed 15 February 2021).
8. 10.1016/S1359-8368(03)00089-110.1016/S1359-8368(03)00089-1 ↗
9. 10.1007/978-3-7091-0523-810.1007/978-3-7091-0523-8 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2007.10.01610.1016/j.compstruct.2007.10.016 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2012.11.03110.1016/j.compstruct.2012.11.031 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.02.01010.1016/j.compstruct.2013.02.010 ↗
13. 10.1177/073168441561257310.1177/0731684415612573 ↗
14. 10.1177/073168441142184410.1177/0731684411421844 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.09.00410.1016/j.ijimpeng.2016.09.004 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.03.00810.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.03.008 ↗
17. 10.1260/2041-4196.1.4.50710.1260/2041-4196.1.4.507 ↗
18. 10.1177/109963620706713410.1177/1099636207067134 ↗
19. 10.1007/978-94-010-0995-910.1007/978-94-010-0995-9 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.08.00310.1016/j.compstruct.2013.08.003 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.11.00810.1016/j.compscitech.2005.11.008 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.08.00310.1016/j.compstruct.2017.08.003 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2007.05.00210.1016/j.compstruct.2007.05.002 ↗
24. ASTM D6264/D6264M − 12
25. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp. Abaqus Analysis User’s Guide, Version 2016. Providence, RI, USA, http://abaqus.software.polimi.it/v2016/ (accessed 1 February 2019).
26. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.02.01510.1016/j.compscitech.2009.02.015 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.02.01710.1016/j.compositesb.2015.02.017 ↗
28. Khan SS. Low cycle lifetime assessment of Al2024 alloys. Report, Von der Fakultät Maschinenbau der Technischen Universität Dortmund, 2012.
29. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2012.05.01510.1016/j.compstruct.2012.05.015 ↗
30. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp. [ QA9176e] how much hourglass energy is acceptable? Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp. 2017, https://onesearch.3ds.com (accessed 15 February 2021).
31. Dassault Systemes Simulia Corp. · 2009
32. 10.1016/S1359-835X(00)00186-X10.1016/S1359-835X(00)00186-X ↗
33. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.06.01010.1016/j.compstruct.2014.06.010 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.09.04110.1016/j.compstruct.2016.09.041 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2016.03.02510.1016/j.compscitech.2016.03.025 ↗
36. Hexcel, Honeycomb DataSheet, www.hexcel.com/Resources/DataSheets/Honeycomb (accessed 1 February 2019).
37. 10.1016/j.commatsci.2008.09.01710.1016/j.commatsci.2008.09.017 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.09.07110.1016/j.compstruct.2016.09.071 ↗
39. Hexcel, Honeycomb attributes and properties. www.hexcel.com/user_area/content_media/raw/HexWebHoneycombAttributesandProperties.pdf (accessed 1 February 2019).
40. 10.1017/CBO978113987832610.1017/CBO9781139878326 ↗
41. 10.1007/978-94-011-5856-510.1007/978-94-011-5856-5 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.11.03410.1016/j.compstruct.2014.11.034 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.06.03310.1016/j.compstruct.2014.06.033 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.08.01610.1016/j.compositesb.2011.08.016 ↗
45. Abrate S. · 2005
46. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2010.12.01810.1016/j.compscitech.2010.12.018 ↗