Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
819102 | Composites Part B: Engineering | 2012 | 15 Pages |
Abstract
Quasi-static penetration resistance of a composite structure represents the energy dissipating capacity of the structure under transverse loading without dynamic and rate effects. In this paper, a comparative study of the quasi-static penetration resistance behavior of S-2 Glass/SC-15, S-2 Glass/HDPE and E-Glass/HDPE composite systems with varying thicknesses, i.e., 1.4-8.4-mm, is presented using the Quasi-Static Punch Shear Test (QS-PST) methodology developed earlier. The penetration resistance behavior is usually presented by a series of force-displacement graphs at different support conditions, the integral of which is the energy dissipated by the composite during the quasi-static penetration at corresponding support conditions. The penetration energy varies with the diameter of the support span which is usually higher than the punch diameter, and also with the thickness of the composite laminate. During QS-PST experiments, a flat punch of diameter 7.6-mm with a range of support spans 8.89-50.8-mm has been used to obtain varying support span to punch diameter ratios (i.e., SPRÂ =Â DS/DPÂ =Â 1.16, 1.33, 1.67, 2.00, 2.33, 2.67, etc.). In order to compare the penetration resistance behavior of three different material systems, the S-2 Glass/SC-15, S-2 Glass/HDPE and E-Glass/HDPE composites of identical layer counts are used and the S-2 Glass/SC15 composite system is considered as the baseline. Composite plate specimens are sectioned after the test and then dipped into an ink-alcohol solution to study the damage mechanisms at different SPRs. Non-linear penetration stiffness and an average penetration resistance force are defined to quantify the average penetration resistance of each material. S-2 Glass and E-Glass reinforced HDPE composite material showed lower stiffness, lower peak force, higher deflection, lower damage area, and lower energy dissipation as compared to the baseline. A detailed comparison of results is presented.
Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering
Engineering
Engineering (General)
Authors
Ãmer F. Erkendirci, Bazle Z. (Gama) Haque,