The low-velocity impact (LVI) test on the surface of the structural component may not be barely visible. However, it can cause severe structural damage and challenge the material’s damage resistance. The study of damage evolution and damage mechanism of the Kevlar fiber-reinforced polymer (KFRP) subjected to a three-point bending test after repeated LVI is the primary focus of this research. The KFRP laminates were subjected to single, triple, and penta-impact loadings with the same impact energy, and the specimens were subjected to a flexural test after impact. The results revealed that the through-thickness damage intensity increases with the number of impacts, reducing the material’s bending strength. The prominent damage mechanism was observed to be delamination induced through the impact, monitored through the acoustic emission (AE) sensors. The reduction of AE events noted during the delamination damage is 48.23, 55.49, and 96.36% in single, triple, and penta-impacted specimens compared with the nonimpacted specimens. The critical information provided here will help develop novel material capable of resisting repeated LVI, thus enhancing its mechanical strength.
UrsacheŞCerbuCHadărA. Characteristics of carbon and kevlar fibres, their composites and structural applications in civil engineering—a review. Polymers (Basel)2023; 16(1): 127.
2.
LebaupinYHoangT-QTChauvinM, et al. Influence of the stacking sequence on the low-energy impact resistance of flax/PA11 composite. J Compos Mater2019; 53(22): 3187–3198.
3.
XuJTangLLiuY, et al. Hybridization effects on ballistic impact behavior of carbon/ aramid fiber reinforced hybrid composite. Int J Impact Eng2023; 181: 104750.
4.
MuñozRSeltzerRMartínezV, et al. A material selection approach for protecting carbon/epoxy laminates against single and repeated low-velocity impacts. Int J Impact Eng2024; 186: 104893.
5.
AbrateS.Impact on laminated composite materials. Appl Mech Rev1991; 44(4): 155–190.
6.
KangTJKimC.Energy-absorption mechanisms in Kevlar multiaxial warp-knit fabric composites under impact loading. Compos Sci Technol2000; 60(5): 773–784.
7.
SunXCHallettSR.Barely visible impact damage in scaled composite laminates: experiments and numerical simulations. Int J Impact Eng2017; 109: 178–195.
8.
DalfiHKatnamKBPotluriP.Intra-laminar toughening mechanisms to enhance impact damage tolerance of 2D woven composite laminates via yarn-level fiber hybridization and fiber architecture. Polym Compos2019; 40(12): 4573–4587.
9.
YangSWeiYYinH, et al. Low-velocity impact damage behavior of glass fiber reinforced composites with different crack propagation. Polym Compos2024; 45(17): 16097–16111.
10.
ZouXGaoWXiW.Influence of various damage mechanisms on the low-velocity impact response of composite laminates. Polym Compos2024; 45(1): 722–737.
11.
ShahSZHKaruppananSMegat-YusoffPSM, et al. Impact resistance and damage tolerance of fiber reinforced composites: a review. Compos Struct2019; 217: 100–121.
12.
ReisPNBFerreiraJAMSantosP, et al. Impact response of Kevlar composites with filled epoxy matrix. Compos Struct2012; 94(12): 3520–3528.
13.
Md ShahAUHameed SultanMTSafriSNA.Experimental evaluation of low velocity impact properties and damage progression on bamboo/glass hybrid composites subjected to different impact energy levels. Polymers (Basel)2020; 12(6): 1288.
14.
CoskunTYarADemirO, et al. Residual compressive strength of polyamide fiber-reinforced epoxy composites after low-velocity impact. Polym Compos2023; 44(5): 2671–2684.
15.
FerreiraLMCoelhoCACPReisPNB. Damage mechanisms in composite laminated shells subjected to multiple impacts at different points. Polym Compos2024; 45(6): 5084–5095.
16.
NassirNABirchRSCantwellWJ, et al. The response of glass fibre reinforced PEKK laminates subjected to single and multiple impact loading. Polym Test2024; 131: 108323.
17.
MouritzAPGallagherJGoodwinAA.Flexural strength and interlaminar shear strength of stitched GRP laminates following repeated impacts. Compos Sci Technol1997; 57(5): 509–522.
18.
SantiusteCSanchez-SaezSBarberoE.Residual flexural strength after low-velocity impact in glass/polyester composite beams. Compos Struct2010; 92(1): 25–30.
19.
SozenBCoskunTKapıcıS, et al. Comparison of the dynamic characteristics of GFRP, CFRP, and hybrid composites subjected to repeated low-velocity impact. Polym Compos2024; 45(17): 15941–15953.
20.
WangHLiuZLiuZ, et al. Hybrid effects and failure mechanisms of carbon/Kevlar fiber composite laminates under the bending-after-impact loading. Eng Struct2024; 299: 117101.
21.
LiuYNatsukiTSuzukiD, et al. Low-velocity impact-resistance of aramid fiber three-dimensional woven textile-reinforced thermoplastic-epoxy composites. J Thermoplast Compos Mater2024; 37(9): 2827–2857.
22.
LyuQWangBZhaoZ, et al. Predicting damage behaviors of composite laminates under multiple low-velocity impacts. Polym Compos2024; 45(5): 4760–4775.
23.
WuJAZhangZDaiX, et al. Effect of stacking sequence on multi-point low-velocity impact and compression after impact damage mechanisms of UHMWPE composites. Polym Compos2021; 42(12): 6500–6511.
24.
HuangWLiCXieL, et al. Experimental and numerical investigation on compression after impact behavior of hygrothermal aged CFRP laminates. Polym Compos2022; 43(9): 6678–6695.
25.
LiHYuZTaoZ, et al. Experimental investigations on the repeated low velocity impact and compression-after-impact behaviors of woven glass fiber reinforced composite laminates. Polym Compos2024; 45(2): 1884–1897.
26.
SalehMNEl-DessoukyHMSaeedifarM, et al. Compression after multiple low velocity impacts of NCF, 2D and 3D woven composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2019; 125: 105576.
27.
GholizadehSLemanZBaharudinBTHT, et al. Acoustic emission analysis for characterisation of damage mechanisms in glass fiber reinforced polyester composite. Aust J Mech Eng2018; 16(1): 11–20.
28.
PappasYZKostopoulosV.Toughness characterization and acoustic emission monitoring of a 2-D carbon/carbon composite. Eng Fract Mech2001; 68(14): 1557–1573.
29.
MailletEBakerCMorscherGN, et al. Feasibility and limitations of damage identification in composite materials using acoustic emission. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2015; 75: 77–83.
30.
MuirCSwaminathanBAlmansourAS, et al. Damage mechanism identification in composites via machine learning and acoustic emission. NPJ Comput Mater2021; 7(1): 95.
31.
HuguetSGodinNGaertnerR, et al. Use of acoustic emission to identify damage modes in glass fibre reinforced polyester. Compos Sci Technol2002; 62(10–11): 1433–1444.
32.
BourchakMFarrowIBondI, et al. Acoustic emission energy as a fatigue damage parameter for CFRP composites. Int J Fatigue2007; 29(3): 457–470.
33.
Karger-KocsisJC.Fracture behaviour of glass-fibre mat-reinforced structural nylon RIM composites studied by microscopic and acoustic emission techniques. J Mater Sci1993; 28(9): 2438–2448.
34.
CesariFDal ReVMinakG, et al. Damage and residual strength of laminated carbon–epoxy composite circular plates loaded at the centre. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2007; 38(4): 1163–1173.
35.
MontiAEl MahiAJendliZ, et al. Mechanical behaviour and damage mechanisms analysis of a flax-fibre reinforced composite by acoustic emission. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2016; 90: 100–110.
36.
AssararMScidaDZouariW, et al. Acoustic emission characterization of damage in short hemp-fiber-reinforced polypropylene composites. Polym Compos2016; 37(4): 1101–1112.
37.
HagguiMEl MahiAJendliZ, et al. Static and fatigue characterization of flax fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites by acoustic emission. Appl Acoust2019; 147: 100–110.
38.
Ramirez-JimenezCPapadakisNReynoldsN, et al. Identification of failure modes in glass/polypropylene composites by means of the primary frequency content of the acoustic emission event. Compos Sci Technol2004; 64(12): 1819–1827.
39.
GutkinRGreenCJVangrattanachaiS, et al. On acoustic emission for failure investigation in CFRP: pattern recognition and peak frequency analyses. Mech Syst Signal Process2011; 25(4): 1393–1407.
40.
SaidaneEHScidaDPacM-J, et al. Mode-I interlaminar fracture toughness of flax, glass and hybrid flax-glass fibre woven composites: failure mechanism evaluation using acoustic emission analysis. Polym Test2019; 75: 246–253.
41.
ZhouWYangSJiX, et al. Quantitative assessment of damage evolution of carbon fiber-reinforced polymer laminates embedded with different nanoparticles using acoustic emission. J Appl Polym Sci2022; 139(15): 51920.
42.
RanzDCuarteroJCastejónL, et al. A study on interlaminar behavior of carbon/epoxy laminated curved beams by use of acoustic emission. Mech Adv Mater Struct2020; 27(18): 1609–1618.
43.
HuKZhengYZhangM, et al. Bending behavior and damage evolution of GLARE laminate using in-situ AE technology and FEM. Polym Compos2024; 45(14): 13327–13347.
44.
DemirbasMDCaliskanUNuman ZafarHM.Damage detection on flexural loading of hybrid laminated composite by acoustic emission. Compos Struct2025; 360: 119056.
45.
WooS-CKimT-W.High-strain-rate impact in Kevlar-woven composites and fracture analysis using acoustic emission. Compos Part B Eng2014; 60: 125–136.
46.
SeamoneADavidsonPWaasAM, et al. Low velocity impact and compressive response after impact of thin carbon fiber composite panels. Int J Solids Struct2022; 257: 111604.
47.
LinSThorssonSIWaasAM.Predicting the low velocity impact damage of a quasi-isotropic laminate using EST. Compos Struct2020; 251: 112530.
48.
HosurMVKarimMRJeelaniS.Experimental investigations on the response of stitched/unstitched woven S2-glass/SC15 epoxy composites under single and repeated low velocity impact loading. Compos Struct2003; 61(1–2): 89–102.
49.
TengXXuYHuiX, et al. Experimental study on the low-velocity impact and post-impact flexural properties of curved CFRP laminates reinforced by pre-hole Z-pinning (PHZ) technique. Mech Adv Mater Struct2023; 30(17): 3479–3490.
50.
SaeedifarMZarouchasD.Damage characterization of laminated composites using acoustic emission: a review. Compos Part B Eng2020; 195: 108039.
51.
TanWFalzonBGChiuLNS, et al. Predicting low velocity impact damage and Compression-After-Impact (CAI) behaviour of composite laminates. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2015; 71: 212–226.
52.
KimE-HRimM-SLeeI, et al. Composite damage model based on continuum damage mechanics and low velocity impact analysis of composite plates. Compos Struct2013; 95: 123–134.
53.
FaggianiAFalzonBG.Predicting low-velocity impact damage on a stiffened composite panel. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2010; 41(6): 737–749.
54.
AlmeidaRSMMagalhãesMDKarimMN, et al. Identifying damage mechanisms of composites by acoustic emission and supervised machine learning. Mater Des2023; 227: 111745.
55.
LeiZXMaJSunWK, et al. Low-velocity impact and compression-after-impact behaviors of twill woven carbon fiber/glass fiber hybrid composite laminates with flame retardant epoxy resin. Compos Struct2023; 321: 117253.
56.
YanHOskayCKrishnanA, et al. Compression-after-impact response of woven fiber-reinforced composites. Compos Sci Technol2010; 70(14): 2128–2136.
57.
BarHNBhatMRMurthyCRL. Parametric analysis of acoustic emission signals for evaluating damage in composites using a PVDF film sensor. J Nondestruct Eval2005; 24(4): 121–134.
58.
BarréSBenzeggaghML.On the use of acoustic emission to investigate damage mechanisms in glass-fibre-reinforced polypropylene. Compos Sci Technol1994; 52(3): 369–376.
