A Comparative Study on the Impact Resistance of Composite Laminates and Sandwich Panels

Abstract

An experimental study was conducted to compare the damage resistance and energy-absorbing capabilities of graphite/bismaleimide composite laminates and foam-core sandwich panels. Two types of tests were conducted: static indentation and drop weight impact. The load-displacement response and energy absorbed were recorded for quasi-static and impact tests. The amount of core compression in sandwich panels was also measured. Damage in the laminates and sandwich panels was assessed by using ultrasonic C-scan, X-radiography, and photo-micrography. The load-displacement responses and damage area obtained from quasi-static and impact testing matched very well for the laminates. The quasi-static and impact responses for the sandwich panels have the same overall trend but differ due to the viscoelastic properties of the foam core. Test results show that the sandwich panels can absorb more energy than the laminates and undergo less deflection to absorb the same maximum energy as the laminates. Impact energy above a statically determined threshold level has been shown to cause extensive foam core damage.

References

1. Sjoblom, P. O. , J. Y. Hartness and T. M. Cordell . 1988. "On Low-Velocity Impact Testing of Composite Materials," Journal of Composite Materials, 22:30-52.

2. Sun, C. T. and S. Chattopadhyay . 1975. "Dynamic Response of Anisotropic Laminated Plates under Initial Stress to Impact of a Mass," Journal of Applied Mechanics, 52:693-698.

3. Kwon, Y. S. and B. V. Sankar . 1993. "Indentation-Flexure and Low Velocity Impact Damage in Graphite/Epoxy Laminates," ASTM Journal of Composites Technology & Research, 1_5(2): 101-111.

4. Prasad, C. B. , D. R. Ambur and J. H. Starnes . 1993. "Response of Laminated Composite Plates to Low-Speed Impact by Airgun-Propelled and Drop Weight Impactors," 34th AIAA/SDM Technical Conference, AIAA-93-1402-CP, pp. 887-900.

5. Rhodes, M. D. 1978. "Impact Tests on Fibrous Composite Sandwich Structures," NASA Technical Memorandum 78719, August 1978.

6. Oplinger, D. W. and J. M. Slepetz . 1975. "Impact Damage Tolerance of Graphite/Epoxy Sandwich Panels," Foreign Object Impact Damage to Composites, ASTM STP 568, American Society for Testing and Materials, pp. 30-48.

7. Bernard, M. L. and P. A. Lagace . 1989. "Impact Resistance of Composite Sandwich Plates," Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 8(9):432-445.

8. Williamson, J. E. and P. A. Lagace . 1993. "Response Mechanisms in Impact of Graphite/Epoxy Honeycomb Sandwich Panels," Proceedings of the American Society for Composites 8th Technical Conference, pp. 287-297.

9. Nemes, J. A. and K. E. Simmonds . 1992. "Low-Velocity Impact Response of Foam-Core Sandwich Composites," Journal of Composite Materials, 26(4):500-519.

10.

10. Sankar, B. V. 1996. "Low-Velocity Impact Response and Damage in Composite Materials," in Fracture of Composites, E. Armanios , ed., Switzerland: Transtech Publications, Ltd., Switzerland, pp. 555-582.

11.

11. Ferri, R. 1994. "Impact Resistance and Damage Tolerance of Composite Laminates and Foam Core Sandwich Panels," M.E. Thesis, Department of Aerospace Engineering, Mechanics, and Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

12.

12. Winkel, J. D. and D. F. Adams . 1985. "Instrumented Drop Weight Impact Testing of Cross-Ply and Fabric Composites," Composites, 16(4):268-278.

13.

13. Sankar, B. V. 1989. "Interlaminar Shear Stresses in Composite Laminates due to Static Indentation," Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 8:458-471.