Sandwich constructions are widely used in numerous sectors such as aerospace, marine, architectural, and transportation industry acknowledging their excellent light-weight, exceptional corrosion characteristics, and rapid installation capabilities. The combination of the face-sheet and core should be profound so the sandwich structure’s functionality is maintained over its life-span and guarantee structural integrity. The interfacial adhesion between the core and face-sheets plays a vital role to ensure structural integrity. The adhesion is primarily responsible for load transfer between the face-sheets and core and its failure results in severe degradation of the sandwich structure’s functionality. Therefore, this study investigates the significance of adhesive layer application at the skin-core interface while manufacturing Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic/End-Grain Balsawood sandwich composites and its impact on the composite’s mechanical performance. Interface adhesive application demonstrated overall improved mechanical behavior under quasi-static flexural loading; which essentially accounts for superior interfacial skin-core bonding. The technique enhances structural performance without a considerable density variant. Numerical results agreed well with the experimental findings and aided in further understanding of the associated damage mechanisms. Sandwich composite’s flexural damage mechanisms were essentially the same irrespective of the presence of reinforced interfacial bond; however; the improved interfacial bond resulted in higher load capacity and reduced skin-core debonding.
SusainathanJEymaFDe LuyckerE, et al.Manufacturing and quasi-static bending behavior of wood-based sandwich structures. Compos Structures2017; 182: 487–504.
2.
AbdalslamS. Impact Damage Analysis of Balsa Wood Sandwich Composite Materials. PHD Dissertation. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University, 2013.
3.
PhadatareASThesisMS. Flexural Analysis of Balsa Core Sandwich Composite: Failure Mechanisms, Core Grain Orientation And Padding Effect. PHD Dissertation. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University, 2012.
4.
NewazGDhaliwalGSPhadatareA, et al.Effect of padding on flexural response of sandwich composites. J Sandwich Struct Mater2019: 23(4): 109963621985200.
5.
SayahlatifiSRahimiGBokaeiA. Experimental and numerical investigation of sandwich structures with balsa core and hybrid corrugated composite/balsa core under three-point bending using digital image correlation. J Sandwich Struct Mater2019: 23: 94–131.
6.
SayahlatifiSRahimiGHBokaeiA. The quasi-static behavior of hybrid corrugated composite/balsa core sandwich structures in four-point bending: experimental study and numerical simulation. Eng Structures2020; 210: 110361.
7.
GarridoMMelroPCorreiaJR. Effects of elevated temperature on the shear response of end-grain balsa used in composite sandwich panels. J Sandwich Struct Mater2020: 23(6): 1099636220909773.
8.
ZahariaSMMorariuCONedelcuA, et al.Experimental study of static and fatigue behavior of CFRP-balsa sandwiches under three-point flexural loading. BioResources2017; 12(2): 2673–2689.
9.
DaiJThomas HahnH. Flexural behavior of sandwich beams fabricated by vacuum-assisted resin transfer molding. Compos Struct2003; 61(3): 247–253.
10.
FathiAWolff-FabrisFAltstädtV, et al.An investigation on the flexural properties of balsa and polymer foam core sandwich structures: influence of core type and contour finishing options. J Sandwich Struct Mater2013; 15(5): 487–508.
11.
AstasariASutiknoSWijanarkoW. Bending and torsional characteristics of carbon fiber and balsa wood sandwich composite. IPTEK J Proc Ser2017; 3(2): 5–9.
12.
MontiAEL MahiAJendliZ, et al.Quasi-static and fatigue properties of a balsa cored sandwich structure with thermoplastic skins reinforced by flax fibres. J Sandwich Struct Mater2019; 21(7): 2358–2381.
13.
NallagulaS. Behavior and Flexure Analysis of Balsa Wood Core Sandwich Composites: Experimental, Analytical and Finite Element Approaches. University of New Orleans, Louisiana Thesis and Dissertations. 2006: 371.
14.
AkourSNMaaitahHZ. Effect of Core Material Stiffness on Sandwich Panel Behavior beyond the Yield Limit. Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2010 Vol II WCE 2010, London, UK,30 June–2 July 2010; 2010.
15.
TosonBViotPPesquéJJ. Finite element modeling of balsa wood structures under severe loadings. Eng Struct2014; 70: 36–52.
16.
BaranIWeijermarsW. Residual bending behaviour of sandwich composites after impact. J Sandwich Struct Mater2020; 22(2): 402–422.
17.
BambalAS. Mechanical Evaluation and FE Modeling of Composite Sandwich Panels. Graduate Theses, Dissertations, and Problem Reports.Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Libraries, 2007.
18.
O’NeillK. Feasibility Study of Lightweight High-Strength Hollow Core Balsa-Frp Composite Beams under Flexure. Thesis/dissertation: State or province government publication. Orlando, FL: University of Central Florida. 2010.
19.
MitraNRajaBR. Improving delamination resistance capacity of sandwich composite columns with initial face/core debond. Compos B Eng2012; 43(3): 1604–1612.
20.
ZhengNHuangYLiuH-Y, et al.Improvement of interlaminar fracture toughness in carbon fiber/epoxy composites with carbon nanotubes/polysulfone interleaves. Compos Sci Tech2017; 140: 8–15.
21.
SunZHuXSunS, et al.Energy-absorption enhancement in carbon-fiber aluminum-foam sandwich structures from short aramid-fiber interfacial reinforcement. Compos Sci Technol2013; 77: 14–21.
22.
PrabhakarP. Nanowire reinforcements for improving the interlaminar properties of textile composites. In: GopalakrishnanSRajapakseY (eds) Blast Mitigation Strategies in Marine Composite and Sandwich Structure. Singapore: Springer Transactions in Civil and Environmental Engineering, 2018, 281–299.
23.
XuFHuangD-dDuX. Improving the delamination resistance of carbon fiber/epoxy composites by brushing and abrading of the woven fabrics. Construct Build Mater2018; 158: 257–263.
24.
NanayakkaraAMFeihSMouritzAP. Improving the fracture resistance of sandwich composite T-joints by z-pinning. Compos Structures2013; 96: 207–215.
25.
BlokLGKratzJLukaszewiczD, et al.Improvement of the in-plane crushing response of CFRP sandwich panels by through-thickness reinforcements. Compos Struct2017; 161: 15–22.
26.
ShiSSunZHuX, et al.Flexural strength and energy absorption of carbon-fiber-aluminum-honeycomb composite sandwich reinforced by aluminum grid. Thin-Walled Struct2014; 84: 416–422.
27.
SanthanakrishnanRSamlalSJoseph StanleyA, et al.Impact study on sandwich panels with and without stitching. Adv Compos Mater2018; 27(2): 163–182.
28.
KimJChoiJ-HSungM, et al.Improved adhesion of metal-polymer sandwich composites using a spontaneous polymer grafting process. Funct Compos Struct2019; 1(2): 025004.
29.
KabirMMWangHLauKT, et al.Mechanical properties of chemically-treated hemp fibre reinforced sandwich composites. Compos Part B Eng2012; 43(2): 159–169.
30.
BeylergilBTanoğluMAktaşE. Enhancement of interlaminar fracture toughness of carbon fiber-epoxy composites using polyamide-6,6 electrospun nanofibers. J Appl Polym Sci2017; 134(35): 45244.
31.
ASTM C. Standard Test Method for Flexural Properties of Sandwich Constructions. American Society for Testing and Materials Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 2000, 393.
32.
LawnB. Fracture of Brittle Solids. 2nd ed. ASTM International Maryland: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
33.
WilliamsKVVaziriR. Application of a damage mechanics model for predicting the impact response of composite materials. Comput Struct2001; 79(10): 997–1011.
34.
MatzenmillerALublinerJTaylorRL. A constitutive model for anisotropic damage in fiber-composites. Mech Materials1995; 20(2): 125–152.
35.
SchweizerhofKWeimarKMünzT. Crashworthiness analysis with enhanced composite material models in LS-DYNA–merits and limits. In: 5th International LS-DYNA User’s Conference (1998), Southfield, Michigan, 21 and 22 September 1998; 1998.
36.
HörmannUSMcCarthyMAXiaoJR. Horizontal Tailplane Subjected to Impact Loading. In: 8th International LS-DYNA Users Conference, May 2004; Detroit, May, 2004.
37.
XiaoXMcGregorCVaziriR, et al.Progress in braided composite tube crush simulation. Int J Impact Eng2009; 36(5): 711–719.
38.
MurrayYD. Manual for LS-DYNA Wood Material Model 143, Report no. FHWA-HRT-04-097: 2007.McLean, VA: US Departement of Transportation, 2007.
39.
LS DYNA Version 971. Keyword User’s Manual,Volume-II. Material Models, Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 2016.
40.
BenzeggaghMLKenaneM. Measurement of mixed-mode delamination fracture toughness of unidirectional glass/epoxy composites with mixed-mode bending apparatus. Compos Sci Tech1996; 56(4): 439–449.
41.
DhaliwalGSNewazGM. Compression after impact characteristics of carbon fiber reinforced aluminum laminates. Compos Structures2017; 160: 1212–1224.
42.
DhaliwalGSNewazGM. Experimental and numerical investigation of flexural behavior of carbon fiber reinforced aluminum laminates. J Reinforced Plastics Compos2016; 35(12): 945–956.
43.
Osei-AntwiMde CastroJVassilopoulosAP, et al.Analytical modeling of local stresses at balsa/timber core joints of FRP sandwich structures. Compos Struct2014; 116: 501–508, DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2014.05.050.
44.
Osei-AntwiMde CastroJVassilopoulosAP, et al.Fracture in complex balsa cores of fiber-reinforced polymer sandwich structures. Construction Building Mater2014; 71: 194–201, DOI: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.08.029.
FatimaNSDhaliwalGSNewazG. Influence of interfacial adhesive on impact and post-impact behaviors of CFRP/end-grain balsawood sandwich composites. Compos Part B Eng2021; 212: 108718, DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.108718.
