Composite sandwich structures, consisting of a glass fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP) skin and a PMI foam core, are a viable option for radome construction. These structures are capable of meeting design requirements such as electromagnetic transparency and meet the structural airworthiness requirements for aerodynamic load and bird impact load. This study examines the dynamic characteristics of a composite sandwich panel made of GFRP skin and PMI core when subjected to bird impact and calculates the velocity at which the simulated bird can penetrate the panel. The impact resistance of 1 m × 1 m composite sandwich panels was evaluated at three distinct velocities: 82 m/s, 127 m/s, and 149 m/s. The bird failed to puncture the panel at speeds of 82 m/s and 127 m/s but pierced through at the speed of 149 m/s. A precise numerical model, created using LSDYNA, accurately simulates the bird impact test conducted at the specified velocities, resulting in a stronger correlation. Same finite element model is employed to determine the velocity at which a bird may pierce through a 1 m × 1 m sandwich panel consisting of GFRP skin and PMI core, known as the ‘A’ type sandwich panel. The panel is subjected to edge constrained conditions, and the calculated threshold speed at which the panel can withstand the bird hit is found to be 144 m/s.
ChoiIKimJGLeeDG, et al.Aramid/epoxy composites sandwich structures for low-observable radomes. Compos Sci Technol2011; 71: 1632–1638.
2.
ZhouLWangPPeiY, et al.Design and characterization for dual-band and multi-band A-sandwich composite radome walls. Compos Sci Technol2017; 149: 28–33.
3.
KenionTYangNXuC. Dielectric and mechanical properties of hypersonic radome materials and metamaterial design: a review. J Eur Ceram Soc2022; 42: 1–17.
4.
WangBLuoBHuW, et al.Manufacturing and mechanical testing of woven lattice truss C-sandwich radome composites. Compos Struct2023; 308: 116675.
5.
MavRK. Numerical analysis of bird strike damage on composite sandwich structure using abaqus/explicit. San Jose, CA: San Jose State University, 2013.
6.
LamannaGDe LucaAMarzocchellaF, et al.Tendency analysis of a tilt rotor wing leading edge under bird strike events. Forces Mech2023; 10: 100173.
7.
DinulovicMRasuoBTrninicMR, et al.Numerical modeling of nomex honeycomb core composite plates at meso scale level. FME Trans2020; 48: 874–881.
8.
Federal Aviation Regulations(FAR).Part 25: Airworthiness standards: transport category. Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Regulations, 2024.
9.
Bird strike requirements for transport category airplanes – federal register. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration / vol. 80, No. 138 / monday, july 20, 2015/proposed rules.
10.
O’CallaghanJ. Bird-strike certification standards and damage mitigation. Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Board.
11.
TarlochanF. Sandwich structures for energy absorption applications: a review. Materials2021; 14: 4731.
12.
HouSZhaoSRenL, et al.Crashworthiness optimization of corrugated sandwich panels. Mater Des2013; 51: 1071–1084.
13.
SanthanakrishnanRSamlalSJoseph StanleyA, et al.Impact study on sandwich panels with and without stitching. Adv Compos Mater2018; 27: 163–182.
14.
StanleySSanthanakrishnanR. Low-velocity impact behaviour of foam core sandwich panels face sheets. Polymers2022; 14(5): 1060.
15.
HeQMaDZhangZ, et al.Crushing analysis and crashworthiness optimization design of reinforced regular hexagon honeycomb sandwich panel. Sci Eng Compos Mater2016; 23: 625–639.
16.
SongYHaoNRuanS, et al.Free vibration properties of beetle elytron plate: composite material, stacked structure and boundary conditions. Mech Mater2023; 185: 104754.
17.
RadhakrishnanPMRamajeyathilagamK. Effect of stress ratio on tension-tension fatigue behaviour of woven angle ply GFRP laminates. Int J Fatig2023; 172: 107633.
18.
RadhakrishnanPMBharadwajSSudhiG, et al.Effect of stress ratio on the tension–tension fatigue behavior of tungsten carbide nanoparticles toughened GFRP. GFRP2023; 46: 2949–2965.
19.
PhamDCLuaJSunH, et al.A three-dimensional progressive damage model for drop-weight impact and compression after impact. J Compos Mater2020; 54(4): 449–462.
20.
RoyRParkSJKweonJH, et al.Characterization of Nomex honeycomb core constituent material mechanical properties. Compos Struct2014; 117: 255–266.
21.
GoldsmithWSackmanJL. An experimental study of energy absorption in impact on sandwich plates. Int J Impact Eng1992; 12: 241–262.
KhodaeiMHaghighi-YazdiMSafarabadiM. Numerical modeling of high velocity impact in sandwich panels with honeycomb core and composite skin including composite progressive damage model. J Sandw Struct Mater2020; 22: 2768–2795.
28.
LiuJLiYGaoX, et al.A numerical model for bird strike on sidewall structure of an aircraft nose. Chin J Aeronaut2024; 27: 542–549.
29.
StoraceAFNimmerRPRavenhallR. Analytical and experimental investigation of bird impact on fan and compressor blading. J Aircraft2012; 21: 45002.
30.
LiuJLiYYuX, et al.A novel design for reinforcing the aircraft tail leading edge structure against bird strike. Int J Impact Eng2017; 105: 89–101.
31.
HedayatiRZiaei-RadS. A new bird model and the effect of bird geometry in impacts from various orientations. Aero Sci Technol2013; 28: 9–20.
32.
HeimbsS. Computational methods for bird strike simulations: a review. Comput Struct2011; 89: 2093–2112.
33.
SmojverIIvancevicD. Bird strike damage analysis in aircraft structures using abaqus/explicit and coupled Eulerian Lagrangian approach. Compos Sci Technol71: 489–498.
34.
ModelingMHeimbsSMiddendorfP, et al.Honeycomb sandwich material modeling for dynamic simulations of aircraft interior components. In: 9th international LS-DYNA users conference, Dearborn, MI, June 2006.
35.
WangJHuoLGaiD, et al.Study on bird impact response of windshield glass of all general aviation aircraft. Tech2022; 18: 67–75.
36.
WangFSYueZF. Numerical simulation of damage and failure in aircraft windshield structure against bird strike. Mater Des2010; 31: 687–695.
37.
University of Dayton. Bird impact forces and pressures on rigid and compliant targets – technical report AFFDL-TR-77-60, final report for period april 1976 – december 1976. Dayton, OH: University of Dayton, Research Institute, 1976.
38.
SeidtJDPereiraJMHammerJT, et al.NASA/TM—2012-217661: dynamic load measurement of ballistic gelatin impact using an instrumented tube. Washington, DC: NASA, 2012.
39.
GungorESakaryaEAykut SumerL, et al.ICEM20: experimental and numerical investigation of bird strike impact on rigid plate – part 2: investigation of gelatin bird deformation and formation during bird Strike tests. In: 20th international conference on experimental mechanics, Porto, Portugal, 2–7 July 2023.
HeimbsSMiddendorfPMaierM. Honeycomb sandwich material modeling for dynamic simulations of aircraft interior. In: 9th international LS-DYNA users conference, Dearborn, MI, June 2006.
42.
ArezooSTagarielliVLPetrinicN, et al.The mechanical response of Rohacell foams at different length scales. J of Mat Sci46(21): 6863–6870.
43.
Evonik Corporation. Product Data Sheet: Product information Rohacell (R) Hero – 71. 2024.
44.
BrainCLoboH. Selecting material models for simulation of foams in LSDYNA. In: 7th European LS-DYNA conference, Salzburg, Austria, 14–15 May 2009.
45.
Flores-JohnsonEA. Numerical simulations of quasi-static indentation and low velocity impact of Rohacell 51 WF foam. International J of Comput Met2014; 11: 1344004.
GurusideswarSSrinivasanNVelmuruganR, et al.Tensile response of epoxy and glass/epoxy composites at low and medium strain rate regimes. In: 11th international symposium on plasticity and impact mechanics, New Delhi, India, 11–14 December 2016.
48.
LiuLJiaZMaXL, et al.Analytical and experimental studies on the strain rate effects in penetration of 10 wt% ballistic gelatin. J of Phy Conf Seri2013; 451(1): 2035.
49.
Ansys. Test case documentation and testing results test case id AWG-ERIF-3: rubber projectile impacting a rigid plate. Canonsburg, PA: Ansys, 2024.
50.
Ansys. Test case documentation and testing results test case id AWG-ERIF-5: bird Strike on rigid plate. Canonsburg, PA: Ansys, 2024.
51.
McCarthyMAXiaoJRMcCarthyCT, et al.Modelling of bird strike on an aircraft wing leading edge made from fibre metal laminates – part 2: modelling of impact with SPH bird model. Appl Compos Mater2004; 11: 317–340.
52.
KarthickMSanthanakrishnanR. Experimental and numerical investigation on GFRP – aramid honeycomb sandwich panel under bird impact: estimation of penetration velocity. Forces in Mech2023; 13: 100240.
