Effect of adding carboxyl-modified multi-walled carbon nanotubes (COOH-MWCNTs) on the high velocity impact of sandwich panels with plywood core and two different facesheets, E-glass/epoxy and E-glass/ nylon 6, was investigated in this study. Facesheets were prepared with and without COOH-MWCNTs. Three different weight percentages of 0.3, 0.5, and 1 wt% of COOH-MWCNTs were used to reinforce epoxy and nylon 6 polymers. The sandwich panels’ estimated ballistic limit (Vbl) and impact energy absorbed (Eab) were determined by subjecting them to impact velocities in their ballistic limit range and above by conical nose projectile. It was found that the sandwich panels containing E-glass/ epoxy facesheets exhibited more energy absorption than those containing E-glass/nylon 6 facesheets. Moreover, the high velocity impact response of sandwich panels improved with the increase of COOH-MWCNT content. Besides, the damage area for different types of materials studied is presented, and it is observed that at a given impact velocity, the damage size on the rear facesheet of target around the point of impact decreases on addition of COOH-MWCNTs.
ShakerMKoFSongJ. Comparison of the low and high velocity impact response of kevlar fiber-reinforced epoxy composites. J Compos Technol Res1999; 21: 224–229.
4.
GibsonLJAshbyMF. Cellular solids: Structures and properties, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
5.
LangdonGSYahyaMYCantwellWJ, et al.Response of honeycomb core sandwich panels, with aluminium and composite face sheets, to blast loading. J Sandwich Struct Mater2010; 12: 733–754.
6.
BhuiyanMHosurMJeelaniS. Low-velocity impact response of sandwich composites with nanophased foam core and biaxial (±45°) braided face sheets. Compos Part B: Eng2009; 40: 561–571.
7.
Al-ShamaryAKJKarakuzuROzdemirO. Low-velocity impact response of sandwich composites with different foam core configurations. J Sandwich Struct Mater2016; 18: 754–768.
8.
CompstonPStylesMKalyanasundaramSh. Low energy impact damage modes in aluminum foam and polymer foam sandwich structures. J Sandwich Struct Mater2006; 8: 365–379.
9.
MackerleJ. Finite element analyses in wood research: a bibliography. Wood Sci Technol2005; 39: 579–600.
10.
Otkur AM. Impact modeling and failure modes of composite plywood. Master Thesis of Mechanical Engineering, Texas Tech University, USA, 2010.
11.
HanssenAGEnstockLLangsethM. Close range blast loading of aluminium foam panels. Int J Impact Eng2002; 27: 593–618.
12.
DvorakGJSuvorovAP. Protection of sandwich plates from low-velocity impact. J Compos Mater2006; 40: 1317–1331.
13.
HosurMMohammedAZainuddinS, et al.Processing of nanoclay filled sandwich composites and their response to low-velocity impact loading. Compos Struct2008; 82: 101–116.
14.
AvilaAFCarvalhoMGRDiasEC, et al.Nano-structured sandwich composites response to low-velocity impact. Compos Struct2010; 92: 745–751.
15.
ReisPNBSantosPFerreiraJAM, et al.Impact response of sandwich composites with nano-enhanced epoxy resin. J Reinf Plast Compos2013; 32: 898–906.
16.
GroganJTekalurSAShuklaA, et al.Ballistic resistance of 2D and 3D woven sandwich composites show less. J Sandwich Struct Mater2007; 9: 283–302.
17.
Duc ND, Quan TQ and Khoa ND. New approach to investigate nonlinear dynamic response and vibration of imperfect functionally graded carbon nanotube reinforced composite double curved shallow shells subjected to blast load and temperature. JAST. 2017; 71: 360–372. DOI: org/10.1016/j.ast.2017.09.031.
18.
ThanhNVKhoaNDTuanND, et al.Nonlinear dynamic response and vibration of functionally graded carbon nanotubes reinforced composite (FG-CNTRC) shear deformable plates with temperature dependence material properties and surrounded on elastic foundations. J Therm Stress2017; 40: 1254–1274.
19.
DucNDLeeJNguyen-ThoiT, et al.Static response and free vibration of functionally graded carbon nanotube-reinforced composite rectangular plates resting on Winkler-Pasternak elastic foundations. JAST2017; 68: 391–402.
20.
DucNDCongPHTuanND, et al.Thermal and mechanical stability of functionally graded carbon nanotubes (FG CNT)-reinforced composite truncated conical shells surrounded by the elastic foundations. Thin Walled Struct2017; 115: 300–310.
21.
BagheriRMaroufBTPearsonRA. Rubber-toughened epoxies: a critical review. Polym Rev2009; 49: 201–225.
22.
GargAMaiYW. Failure mechanisms in toughened epoxy resins - a review. Compos Sci Technol1988; 31: 179–223.
23.
LimSHDasariAYuZZ, et al.Fracture toughness of nylon 6/ organoclay/ elastomer nanocomposites. Compos Sci Technol2007; 67: 2914–2923.
24.
MoisalaALiQKinlochIA, et al.Thermal and electrical conductivity of single and multi-walled carbon nanotube-epoxy composites. Compos Sci Technol2006; 66: 1285–1288.
25.
HerSCLaiCY. Dynamic behavior of nanocomposites reinforced with multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs). Materials2013; 6: 2274–2284.
26.
Naghizadeh Z, Faezipour M, Pol MH, et al. Improvement in impact resistance performance of glass/epoxy composite through carbon nanotubes and silica nanoparticles. Proc IMechE, Part L: J Materials: Design and Applications. 2018; 232(9): 785–799. DOI: 10.1177/1464420716649403.
27.
GrujicicMAngstadtDCSunYP, et al.Micro-mechanics based derivation of the materials constitutive relations for carbon-nanotube reinforced poly-vinyl-ester-epoxy based composites. J Mater Sci2007; 42: 4609–4623.
28.
GrujicicMPanduranganBAngstadtDC, et al.Ballistic performance optimization of a hybrid carbon nanotube/E-glass reinforced poly-vinyl-ester- epoxy-matrix composite armor. J Mater Sci2007; 42: 5347–5359.
29.
RahmanMHosurMZainuddinSh, et al.Effects of amino-functionalized MWCNTs on ballistic impact performance of E-glass/ epoxy composites using a spherical projectile. Int J Impact Eng2013; 57: 108–118.
30.
Salekeen S, Kibria Khan MG and Jeelani S. High velocity impact properties characrerization of nano-phased bi-layered body armor. In: ASME conference on mechanical engineering (IMECE2011), Denver, CO, USA, 11–17 November 2011.
31.
MaPZhangFJiangG, et al.Transverse impact characterization of carbon woven fabric-foam sandwich composites with carbon nanotubes. Fibers Polym2014; 15: 1560–1566.
32.
AydınIColakogluG. Effects of surface inactivation, high temperature drying and preservative treatment on surface roughness and color of alder and beech wood. Appl Surf Sci2005; 252: 430–440.
33.
Aydın I. Effects of some manufacturing conditions on wettability and bonding of veneers obtained from various wood species. PhD Thesis, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, 2004 (Turkish).
34.
ASTM D805-52: 1995. Standard test methods for veneer, plywood, and other constructions, West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM, 1995.
35.
ASTM D3039: 2003. Standard test method for tensile properties of polymer matrix composite materials, West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM, 2003.
36.
PolMHLiaghatGh. Investigation of the high velocity impact behavior of nanocomposites. Polym Compos2016; 37: 1173–1179.
37.
QuekSTLinVWJMaalejM. Development of functionally-graded cementitious panel against high-velocity small projectile impact. Int J Impact Eng2010; 37: 928–941.
38.
LiuTPhengIYShenL, et al.Morphology and mechanical properties of multiwalled carbon nanotubes reinforced nylon-6 composites. Macromolecules2004; 37: 7214–7222.
39.
JinLBowerCZhouO. Alignment of carbon nanotubes in a polymer matrix by mechanical stretching. Appl Phys Lett1998; 73: 1197–1199.
40.
AjayanPMSchadlerLSGiannarisC, et al.Single-walled carbon nanotube polymer composites: Strength and weakness. Adv Mater2000; 12: 750–753.
41.
AjayanPMStephanOColliexC, et al.Aligned carbon nanotube arrays formed by cutting a polymer resin-nanotube composite. Science1994; 265: 1212–1214.
42.
GaoJZhaoBItkisME, et al.Chemical engineering of the single walled carbon nanotube-nylon 6 interface. J Am Chem Soc2006; 128: 7492–7496.
43.
LiuTPhengIYShenL, et al.Morphology and mechanical properties of multiwalled carbon nanotubes reinforced nylon 6 composites. Macromolecules2004; 37: 7214–7222.
44.
LiuLWagnerHD. Rubbery and glassy epoxy resins reinforced with carbon nanotubes. Compos Sci Technol2005; 65: 1861–1868.
45.
GibsonJMcKeeJFreihoferG, et al.Enhancement in ballistic performance of composite hard armor through carbon nanotubes. Int J Smart Nano Mater2013; 4: 212–228.
46.
EitanAJiangKDukesD, et al.Surface modification of multi walled carbon nanotubes: Toward the tailoring of the interface in polymer composites. Chem Mater2003; 15: 3198–3201.
47.
CuiLJWangYBXiuWJ, et al.Effect of functionalization of multi-walled carbon nanotube on the curing behavior and mechanical property of multi-walled carbon nanotube/epoxy composites. Mater Des2013; 49: 279–284.
48.
BlancoJGarciaEJDe VilloriaRG, et al.Limiting mechanisms of mode I interlaminar toughening of composites reinforced with aligned carbon nanotubes. J Compos Mater2009; 43: 825–841.
49.
MIL-STD-662F: 1997. V50 ballistic test for armor. United States Department of Defense, Washington DC, 1997.
50.
Lambert JP and Jonas GH. Towards standardization of in terminal ballistics testing: Velocity representation. Ballistic Research Laboratories, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Report No. BRL-R- 1852, Maryland, 1976.
51.
KoloppAAlvaradoRARivallantS, et al.Modeling impact on aluminium sandwich including velocity effects in honeycomb core Show less. J Sandwich Struct Mater2013; 15: 733–757.
52.
RahmanMHosurMZainuddinS, et al.Effects of amino-functionalized MWCNTs on ballistic impact performance of E-glass/ epoxy composites using a spherical projectile. Int J Impact Eng2013; 57: 108–118.
53.
PandyaKSAkellaKJoshiM, et al.Ballistic impact behavior of carbon nanotube and nanosilica dispersed resin and composites. J Appl Phys2012; 112: 113522–113522.
54.
Bland PW and Pitakthapanaphong S. A discussion on the role played by velocity in impact mechanics. In: The 19th conference on mechanical engineering of Thailand, Phuket, Thailand, 19–21 October 2005. Paper no. AMM068.
55.
Da SilvaJRJELPaciornikSd'AlmeidaJRM. Evaluation of effect of ballistic damaged area on the residual impact strength and tensile stiffness of glass fabric composite materials. Compos Struct2004; 64: 123–127.
56.
NaikNKShriraoP. Composite structures under ballistic impact. Compos Struct2004; 66: 579–590.
