X-ray computed tomography has recently become an increasingly popular non-destructive imaging method in composites research. However, due to the complexity of 3D computed tomography data sets, it can be difficult to accurately and quantitatively assess the damage state of a composite structure without additional post-processing. A new segmentation procedure has been developed that takes a 3D computed tomography data set of an impacted composite laminate and separates internal damage into information about intraply and interlaminar damage within each ply and at each interface. Impacted flat T800/3900-2 unidirectional carbon/epoxy composite panels were scanned and then segmented to create comprehensible maps of internal damage states. Based on the types of data extracted by the developed computed tomography segmentation, techniques to input these datasets into numerical modeling have been developed. Additionally, various damage visualization and interpretation techniques made possible by the computed tomography segmentation have been explored.
Adsit NR and Waszczak JP. Effect of near-visual damage on the properties of graphite/epoxy. In: Composite materials: testing and design (fifth conference), New Orleans, Louisiana. March 20-22 1978. Jan 1979. ASTM International: 1979.
5.
MeolaCCarlomagnoGM. Impact damage in GFRP: new insights with infrared thermography. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2010; 41: 1839–1847.
6.
UsamentiagaRVenegasPGuerediagaJet al.Feature extraction and analysis for automatic characterization of impact damage in carbon fiber composites using active thermography. NDT E Int2013; 54: 123–132.
7.
AymerichFMeiliS. Ultrasonic evaluation of matrix damage in impacted composite laminates. Compos Part B Eng2000; 31: 1–6.
8.
KesslerSSSpearingSMSoutisC. Damage detection in composite materials using Lamb wave methods. Smart Mater Struct2002; 11: 269–269.
9.
StockSR. Recent advances in X-ray microtomography applied to materials. Int Mater Rev2008; 53: 129–181.
10.
WithersPJans PreussM. Fatigue and damage in structural materials studied by X-ray tomography. Ann Rev Mater Res2012; 42: 81–103.
11.
SchillingPJKaredlaBRTatiparthiAKet al.X-ray computed microtomography of internal damage in fiber reinforced polymer matrix composites. Compos Sci Technol2005; 65: 2071–2078.
12.
WrightPFuXSinclairIet al.Ultra high resolution computed tomography of damage in notched carbon fiber – epoxy composites. J Compos Mater2008; 42: 1993–2002.
13.
WrightPMoffatASinclairIet al.High resolution tomographic imaging and modelling of notch tip damage in a laminated composite. Compos Sci Technol2010; 70: 1444–1452.
14.
Léonard F, Stein J, Wilkinson A, et al. 3D characterisation of void distribution in resin film infused composites. In: Conference on industrial computed tomography, 1 Sep 2012.
15.
LittleJEYuanXJonesMI. Characterisation of voids in fibre reinforced composite materials. NDT E Int2012; 46: 122–127.
16.
Léonard F, Shi Y, Soutis C, et al. Impact damage characterisation of fibre metal laminates by X-ray computed tomography. In: International conference on industrial computed tomography (ICT), 2014.
17.
McCombeGPRouseJTraskRSet al.X-ray damage characterisation in self-healing fibre reinforced polymers. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2012; 43: 613–620.
18.
LéonardFSteinJSoutisCet al.The quantification of impact damage distribution in composite laminates by analysis of X-ray computed tomograms. Compos Sci Technol2017; 152: 139–148.
19.
BouvetCCastaniéBBizeulMet al.Low velocity impact modelling in laminate composite panels with discrete interface elements. Int J Solids Struct2009; 46: 2809–2821.
20.
XiongYPoonCStraznickyPVet al.A prediction method for the compressive strength of impact damaged composite laminates. Compos Struct1995; 30: 357–367.
21.
De MouraMFGonçalvesJPMarquesATet al.Prediction of compressive strength of carbon–epoxy laminates containing delamination by using a mixed-mode damage model. Compos Struct2000; 50: 151–157.
22.
SoutisCCurtisPT. Prediction of the post-impact compressive strength of CFRP laminated composites. Compos Sci Technol1996; 56: 677–684.
23.
CravenRIannucciLOlssonR. Delamination buckling: a finite element study with realistic delamination shapes, multiple delaminations and fibre fracture cracks. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2010; 41: 684–692.
24.
SencuRMYangZWangYCet al.Generation of micro-scale finite element models from synchrotron X-ray CT images for multidirectional carbon fibre reinforced composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2016; 91: 85–95.
25.
Abdul-Aziz A, Roth DJ, Cotton R, et al. Material characterization and geometric segmentation of a composite structure using microfocus X-ray computed tomography image-based finite element modeling. Cleveland, OH: NASA Glenn Research Center; July 2011. Available at: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20110014984.
26.
ASTM D. 7136/D 7136M–05:2007. Standard test method for measuring the damage resistance of a fiber-reinforced polymer matrix composite to a drop-weight impact event. ASTM International.
27.
DelaneyMPFungSYKimH. Dent depth visibility versus delamination damage for impact of composite panels by tips of varying radius. J Compos Mater2018; 0: 1–15.
28.
SchneiderCARasbandWSEliceiriKW. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods2012; 9: 671–675.
29.
MATLAB. Natick, Massachusetts: The MathWorks Inc, 2015.
30.
BarrettJFKeatN. Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics2004; 24: 1679–1691.
