Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Damage characteristics of composite-skinned honeycomb sandwich panels in bending are investigated with both hemispherical (HS) and flat-ended (FE) indenters. The thickness of the cross-ply skins varies from 8 to 16 plies, whereas the density of the 12.7-mm thick aluminum honeycomb core varies from 50 to 70 kg/m³. Clamped panels with a 100-mm testing area are loaded quasi-statically either in bending or on a rigid base. The effects of varying these parameters on damage mechanisms are examined through response curves as well as cross sections of selected specimens. Special emphasis is placed on their potential change induced by the variation of skin thickness and core density with a specific indenter. Damage mechanisms are identified as core crush, top-skin delamination, and fracture or shear-out. The threshold and ultimate loads as well as the initial slope increase significantly either on increase of skin thickness or change of the nose shape of indenter from a hemisphere to a flat-end. The increase in the post-initial-damage slope is small and can be attributed to membrane stretching of the damaged top skin. Increasing the core density affects substantially not only the threshold load, but also the initial slope associated with the FE indenter. Changing the nose shape of the indenter has an overriding effect on the nature of damage mechanisms. In particular, top-skin delaminations occur after core crush. The panel deflection contributes to 20-53% sandwich deformation. The bottom skin in all the tests remains intact.

Keywords

sandwich panels damage characteristics damage resistance composite skins honeycomb core

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abrate, S. (1997). Localized Impact on Sandwich Structures with Laminated Facings , Applied Mechanics Review, 50: 69-82 .

Kassapoglou, C. , Jonas, P.J. and Abbott, R. (1988). Compressive Strength of Composite Sandwich Panels after Impact Damage: An Experimental and Analytical Study , J. of Composite Technology and Research, 10: 65-73 .

Bernard, M.L. and Lagace, P.A. (1989). Impact Resistance of Composite Sandwich Plates , J. of Thermoplastic Composite Materials, 8: 432-444 .

Williamson, J.E. and Lagace, P.A. (1994). Response Mechanisms in the Impact of Graphite/Epoxy Honeycomb Sandwich Panels , In: Proc. of 8th American Society for Composites, pp. 287-297 .

Mines, R.A.W. , Worall, C.M. and Gibson, A.G. (1990). The Response of GRP Sandwich Panels to Dropped Object Impact Loading , In: Proc. of FRC 90, pp. 149-155 .

Mines, R.A.W. , Worall, C.M. and Gibson, A.G. (1998). Low Velocity Perforation Behaviour of Polymer Composite Sandwich Panels , Int. J. of Impact Engineering, 21: 855-879 .

Tsotsis, T.K. and Lee, S.M. (1996). Characterisation of Localized Failure Modes in Honeycomb Sandwich Panels using Indentation , Composite Materials: Testing and Design, ASTM STP, 1274: 139-165 .

Herup, E. and Palazotto, A.N. (1997). Low-velocity Impact Damage Initiation in Graphite/Epoxy/Nomex Honeycomb-sandwich Plates , Composites Science and Technology, 57: 1581-1598 .

Anderson, T. and Madenci, E. (2000). Experimental Investigation of Low-velocity Impact Characteristics of Sandwich Composites , Composite Structures, 50: 239-247 .

10.

Hoo Fatt, M.S. and Park, K.S. (2001). Dynamic Models for Low-velocity Impact Damage of Composites Sandwich Panels - Part A: Deformation , Composite Structures, 52(3-4): 335-351 .

11.

Hoo Fatt, M.S. and Park, K.S. (2001). Dynamic Models for Low-velocity Impact Damage of Composite Sandwich Panels - Part B: Damage Initiation , Composite Structures, 52(3-4): 353-364 .

12.

Raju, K.S. and Tomblin, J.S. (2001). Damage Characteristics in Sandwich Panels Subjected to Static Indentation using Spherical Indentors, AIAA-2001-1189, pp. 103-111.

13.

Anon . (1995). Standard Test Method for Flatwise Compressive Properties of Sandwich Cores, ASTM C365, pp. 15-17.

14.

Anon . (1995). Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials, ASTM D3039/D3039M, pp. 114-123.

15.

Anon . (1994). Standard Test Method for Compressive Properties of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials with Unsupported Gage Section by Shear Loading, ASTM D3410/D3410M, pp. 131-147.

16.

Anon . (1995). Standard Test Method for In-plane Shear Response of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials by Tensile Test of 45 Laminate, ASTM D3518/D3518M, pp. 151-157.

17.

Anon . (2000). Standard Test Methods for Flexural Properties of Unreinforced and Reinforced Plastics and Electrical Insulating Materials, ASTM D790, pp. 150-158.

18.

Anon . (1984). Standard Test Method for Apparent Interlaminar Shear Strength of Parallel Fibre Composites by Short-beam Method, ASTM D2344, pp. 43-45.

19.

Whitney, J.M. and Browning, C.E. (1985). On Short-beam Shear Tests for Composite Materials , Experimental Mechanics, 25: 294-300 .

20.

Zhou, G. and Davies, G.A.O. (1995). Characterization of Thick Glass Woven Roving/Polyester Laminates: Tension, Compression and Shear , Composites, 26: 579-586 .

21.

Yang, S.H. and Sun, C.T. (1982). Indentation Law for Composite Laminates , Composite Materials: Testing and Design, ASTM STP, 787: 425-449 .

22.

Zhou, G. (1996). Static Behaviour and Damage of Thick Composite Laminates , Composite Structures, 36: 13-22 .

23.

Mohr, D. and Doyoyo, M. (2004). Deformation-induced Folding Systems in Thin-walled Monolithic Hexagonal Metallic Honeycomb , Int. J. of Solids and Structures, 41: 3353-3377 .

Damage Characteristics of Composite Honeycomb Sandwich Panels in Bending under Quasi-static Loading

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References