This paper presents an experimental investigation of the impact behaviour of three layer sandwich structures made of high density polyethylene (HDPE) and hemp, with and without a foam core. Low-velocity falling weight and Charpy impact tests were performed to investigate the influence of hemp content, skin thickness and core density. The strength, load, absorbed energy, and deflection histories were recorded and analysed and the damaged specimens were inspected to determine the failure patterns. Based on the Charpy impact results, the structures with foam core had higher energy absorption capabilities compared to their counterparts without foam core. In addition, based on the falling weight impact results the energy dissipation properties of sandwich structures without foam core were superior to the structures with foam core. This property was also greatly influenced by skin fibre content, skin thickness and structure configuration.
ZhangJ., Ashby M. Mechanical selection of foams and honeycombs used for packaging and energy absorption. Journal of Materials Science, 29 (1994), 157–163.
ShimV., YapK.Static and impact crushing of layered foam-plate systems, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 39 (1997), 69–86.
4.
BhuiyanA., HosurM., JeelaniS.Low-velocity impact response of sandwich composites with nanophased foam core and biaxial ±45 braided face sheets. Composites Part B: Engineering, 40 (2009), 561–571.
5.
WangB., YangM.Damping of honeycomb sandwich beams. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 105 (2000), 67–72.
6.
TanC., AkilH.Impact response of fiber metal laminate sandwich composite structure with polypropylene honeycomb core. Composite: Part B, 43 (2012), 1433–1438.
7.
WangaJ., WaasA., WangH.Experimental and numerical study on the low-velocity impact behavior of foam-core sandwich panels. Composite Structures, 96 (2013), 298–311.
8.
CantwellW.J., MortonJ.The impact resistance of composite materials - a review. Composites, 22 (1991), 347–362.
9.
AbrateS.Impact on composite structures, Cambridge University Press, UK, (1998)
10.
AndersonT., MadenciE.Experimental investigation of low-velocity impact characteristics of sandwich composites. Composite Structures, 50 (2000), 239–247.
11.
ParkJ., HaS., KangK., KimC., KimH.Impact damage resistance of sandwich structure subjected to low velocity impact. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 201 (2008), 425–230.
12.
MinesP., WorrallC., GibsonA.Low velocity performation behaviour of polymer composite sandwich panels. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 32 (1990), 855–879.
13.
BernardM.L., LagaceP.A.Impact resistance of composite sandwich plates. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 8 (1989), 432–445.
14.
ShihW.K., JangB.Z.Instrumented impact testing of composite sandwich panels. Journal of Reinforced Plastics & Composites, 8 (1989), 270–298.
15.
ZhouG., HillM.Investigation of parameters governing the damage and energy absorption characteristics of honeycomb sandwich panels. Sandwich Structures, 9 (2007), 309–342.
16.
HazizanM., CantwellW.J.The low velocity impact response of foam-based sandwich structures. Composites: Part B, 33 (2002), 193–204.
17.
LeeL.J., ZengC., CaoX., HanX., ShenJ., XuG.Dynamic response of composite sandwich plate impacted by a rigid ball. Journal of Composite Materials, 27 (1993), 1238–1256.
MohanK., YipT.H., IdapalapatiS., ChenZ.Impact response of aluminum foam core sandwich structures. Material Science and Engineering A, 529 (2011), 94–101.
20.
KazemiY., CloutierA., RodrigueD.Design analysis of three-layered structural composites based on post-consumer recycled plastics and wood residues. Composites Part A, 53 (2013), 1–9.
21.
KavianiboroujeniA., CloutierA., RodrigueD.Mechanical characterization of asymmetric HDPE/hemp composite sandwich panels with and without a foam core. Journal of Sandwich Structures and Materials, 17 (2015), 748–765.
22.
DoroudianiS., ParkC.B., KortschotM.T.Processing and characterization of microcellilar foamed high-density polyethylene/isotactic polypropylene blends. Polymer Engineering and Science, 38 (1998), 1205–1215.
23.
JayaramanK., BhattacharyyaD.Mechanical performance of woodfibre-waste plastic composite materials. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 41 (2004), 307–319.
24.
AtasC., LiuD.Impact response of woven composites with small weaving angles. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 35 (2008), 80–97.
25.
EvciC., GülgeçM.An experimental investgation on the impact response of composite materials. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 43 (2012), 40–51.
26.
ShyrT.W., PanY.H.Impact resistance and damage characteristics of composite laminates. Composite Structures, 62 (2003), 193–203.
27.
BelingardiG., VadoriR.Low velocity impact tests of laminate glass-fiber-epoxy matrix composite material plates. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 27 (2001), 213–229.
Tovar-CisnerosC., González-NúñezR., RodrigueD.Effect of mold temperature on morphology and mechanical properties of injection molded HDPE structural foams. Journal of Cellular Plastics, 44 (2008), 223–237.
30.
ZhouJ., Zaki HassanM, GuanZ.W., CantwellW.J.The low velocity impact response of foam-based sandwich panels. Composites Science and Technology, 72 (2012), 1781–1790.
31.
ThroneJ.L., ProgelhofR.C., KumarS.Closed-cell foam behavior under dynamic loading-III. Impact loading of high density foams. Journal of Cellular Plastics, 21 (1985), 123–140.
32.
HassanM., CantwellW.The influence of core properties on the perforation resistance of sandwich structures–An experimental study. Composites Part B: Engineering, 43 (2012), 3231–3238.
33.
RizovV.I.Low velocity localized impact study of cellular foams. Materials and Design, 28 (2007), 2632–2640.
