TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER

PAGE

NO.

TITLE

NO.

ABSTRACT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

xiii

LIST OF FIGURES

vi

LIST OF TABLES

INTRODUCTION
1.1 INDUCTION OF THE AVRO 748
1.1.1 The First Flight

1
1

1.2 Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer

(CFRP) Composites

1.2.1 Introduction

1.3 Composites Introduction

1.3.1 Fiber Composites Introduction

5
5

1.4 Introduction to Carbon Fibers

1.5 Testing Equipments

1.6 Requirements For Refurnishing Of

Avro 748

1.7 Background

10

1.8 Objectives
1.8.1 Finite Element Modeling of
FRP sandwich panels
1.9 Organization of Thesis
2

11
12

LITERATURE REVIEW

13

2.1 Composites

13

2.1.1 Literature Data

i

14

2.2 CFC WVU Past Work

18

2.3 Applications of CFRP Composites

19

2.3.1 Naval Vessels

3

19
20

METHODOLOGY
3.1 METHODOLOGY CHART

20

3.1.1 Design of Fiber Reinforced

Polymer Composites
3.2 Resin

22
24

3.2.1 Conventional Thermosetting

Resin

24

3.2.2 Epoxy Resin System

24

3.2.3 Vinyl Ester Resin

26

3.3 Fiber Properties

27

3.4 Stitched Fabric

30

3.5 Manufacturing Method

30

3.5.1 Pultrusion Process

3.5.1.1 Sandwich Panels

31
32

3.5.1.2 Core Material Balsa

Wood

33

3.5.2 Compression Molding

35

3.5.3 Resin Infusion

37

3.6 Summary

38

3.7 Baldwin Universal Testing Machine

38

3.7.1 Instron Model 8501 Servo

Hydraulic Material Testing System

39

3.7.2 Data Acquisition Unit

41

ii

3.8 Testing Methodologies

3.8.1 Tension Test

41

3.8.1.1 Step wise Procedure

for Tension Tests
3.8.1.2 Tension Test Calculations
3.9 Bending Test
3.9.1 Four Point Bending Test

43
44
44
45

3.9.2 Step wise Procedure for

Bending Tests

45

3.9.2.1 Three Point Bending Tests

50

3.9.2.2 Step wise Procedure for

Bending Tests

50

3.10 Physical and Morphological

Properties

53

3.10.1 Fiber Content

53

3.10.2 Void Content

55

3.11 Summary
4

55

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

57

4.1 Coupon Level Testing

57

4.2 Tension Test

57

4.3 Bending Test

58

4.3.1 Compression Molding

58

4.3.1.1 Symmetric Fiber

Architecture with 510A VE Cured
at 190F

58

4.4 Chart comparison of bending stress for

compression molding

iii

59

4.4.1 Chart comparison of bending

stress for carbon/VE composites by
pultrusion
4.4.2 Chart comparison of bending
stress for carbon/VE/epoxy
composites by resin infusion

62

4.5 Sandwich Panel Testing

63

4.5.1 12x27x3.5 CFRP Panels

63

4.5.2 12x80x3.5 CFRP Panels

64

4.5.3 40x100x3.5 CFRP Panels

64

4.6 Physical Characterization

4.6.1

Void

Analysis

67
of

FRP

Composites by Scanning Electron

Microscopy
5

MODELING OF FRP SANDWICH PANELS

5.1 FEA Objectives

67
72
72

5.2 Finite Element Analysis Software

MSC.Nastran

72

5.3 Experimental Set up and Loading

Conditions

73

5.4 Evaluation of FE Models for Sandwich

Panels

74

5.4.1 Sandwich Beam Model

75

5.4.2 3D Solid Model

79

5.4.3 Orthotropic Beam Model

81

5.4.4 3D Orthotropic Solid Model

82

5.4.4.1 Deflection and strain

83

5.4.4.2 Bending stress

87

iv

5.4.4.3 Shear stress

89

5.5 Prediction of CFRP Sandwich Panel

Response

91

5.5.1 End Caps of Pultruded Sandwich

Panels

93

5.5.2 FE Deflection

93

5.6 Joint Analysis of Composite Sandwich

Analysis

99

5.6.1 Composite Panel Joints

100

5.6.2 FE Analysis of Joined Sandwich

Panels
6

100

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 105

6.1

Mechanical

Properties

of

CFRP

Composites

105

6.1.1 Compression Laminates

105

6.1.2 Pultrusion Laminates

106

6.1.3 Resin Infused Laminates

106

6.2 Sandwich Panel Properties

106

6.2.1 12x27x3.5 CFRP Panel

106

6.2.2 12x80x3.5 CFRP Panel

107

6.2.3 40x100x3.5 CFRP Panel

107

6.3 Finite Element Modeling of FRP

Sandwich Panels

107

6.4 Recommendations

108
109

REFERENCES

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Proposed Design Of AVRO 748

10

Figure 3.1 Quad-axial Toray T700SC/12 K/FOE carbon fabric

26

Figure 3.2 Generalized orientations of multiaxial fibers

28

Figure 3.3 Direction of stitch for fabric stitching

30

Figure 3.4 Stitching Machines

30

Figure 3.5 Manufacturing line for typical pultrusion process

32

Figure 3.6 Experimental setup for compression molding

35

Figure 3.7 Baldwin Universal Testing Machine

39

Figure 3.8 Instron Model 8501 Servo-hydraulic Material Testing

System

40

Figure 3.9 Data Acquisition Unit

41

Figure 3.10 Schematic of tension test sample along with the cross
Sectional view AA

42

Figure 3.11 Tension test specimens

43

Figure 3.12 Typical plot of stress vs. strain for pultruded sample
under tension test

44

Figure 3.13 Schematic of 4pt. bending test set up with shear force,
Stress and moment distribution in the component
Figure 3.14 Typical Test set-up for four point bending test

46
47

Figure 3.15 Three different sizes of sandwich panels tested by 4pt

bending test

48

Figure 3.16 Typical load vs. strain curve for sandwich panel

48

Figure 3.17 Schematic of three point bending (midspan type) test set up
with shear force and moment distribution in the component

49

Figure 3.18 Typical plot of load vs. deflection for pultrusion sample

52

Figure 3.20 SEM images of pultruded composites

55

Figure 4.1 Load-deflection behavior of carbon/VE (190F) composites

vi

58

by compression molding
Figure 4.2 Chart comparison of bending stress for compression
Molding

59

Figure 4.3 Chart comparison of Eb for compression molding

60

Figure 4.4 Chart comparison of bending stress for carbon/VE

composites by pultrusion

61

Figure 4.5 Chart comparison of flexural modulus for carbon/VE

composites by pultrusion

61

Figure 4.5 Chart comparison of bending stress for carbon/VE/epoxy

composites by resin infusion

62

Figure 4.6 Chart comparison of Eb for carbon/VE/epoxy composites by

resin infusion

62

Figure 4.7 Different fiber orientations of carbon/VE composites

produced by pultrusion method

68

Figure 4.8 SEM images showing good fiber-matrix adhesions for

carbon/VE composites

68

Figure 4.9 Pultrusion sample showing high void surface for carbon/VE
Composites

69

Figure 4.10 Pultrusion sample with regions of high/low void density for
carbon/VE composites

69

Figure 4.11 Resin infusion showing improper wet out for carbon/VE
Composites

70

Figure 4.12 Resin infusion showing improper wet out for carbon/VE
Composites

70

Figure 4.13 Compression molding sample showing better wet out for
carbon/epoxy composites

71

Figure 5.1 Predicted deflection contours by sandwich beam model for

40x100GFRP panel

77

vii

Figure 5.2 Predicted and experimental deflection data across the span
under failure load for 40x100 GFRP panel

77

Figure 5.3 Predicted and experimental deflection as a function of loads

for 40x100 GFRP panel

77

Figure 5.4 Predicted and experimental bending stress across the span
under failure load for 40x100 GFRP panel

78

Figure 5.5 Predicted and experimental deflection data across the span
under failure load for 12x96 GFRP panel

78

Figure 5.6 Predicted and experimental bending stress across the span
under failure load for 12 x 96 GFRP panel

79

Figure 5.7 Construction of 3D Orthotropic Solid Model A

83

Figure 5.8 Construction of 3D Orthotropic Solid Model B

83

Figure 5.9 Predicted deflection contours by 3D orthotropic model B for

12x 96GFRP panel

85

Figure 5.10 Predicted and experimental deflection data across the span
under failure load for 12 x 96 GFRP panel

85

Figure 5.11 Predicted and experimental deflection data as a function of

loads for12x96 GFRP panel

86

Figure 5.12 Predicted and experimental strain data as a function of

loads for 12x96 GFRP panel

86

Figure 5.13 Predicted bending stress contours by 3D orthotropic model

B for 12x96 GFRP panel

87

Figure 5.14 Predicted and experimental bending stress data across the
span under failure load for 12 x 96 GFRP panel

88

Figure 5.15 Predicted bending stress across the thickness under failure
load for 12x96 GFRP panel
Figure 5.16 Predicted shear stress contours by 3D orthotropic model B

viii

88
89

for 12x 96 GFRP panel

Figure 5.17 Predicted shear stress across the span under failure load for
12 x 96 GFRP panel

90

Figure 5.18 Predicted shear stress across the thickness under failure
load for 12x96 GFRP panel
Figure 5.19 Cross sectional view of sandwich panel showing end caps

90
93

Figure 5.20 Predicted deflection contours by 3D orthotropic model for

40x100 CFRP panel with 3 caps

94

Figure 5.21 Predicted deflection contours by 3D orthotropic model for

40x100 CFRP panel with 3 caps (close view)

94

Figure 5.22 Predicted deflection contours by 3D orthotropic model

for40x100 CFRP panel with 3.5 caps (close view)

94

Figure 5.23 Predicted deflection data across the span under failure load
for 40x100 CFRP panel

95

Figure 5.24 Predicted bending stress contours for 40x100 CFRP

panel with 3 caps

96

Figure 5.25 Predicted bending stress data across the span under failure
load for 40x100 CFRP panel BS across

96

Figure 5.26 Predicted bending stress across the thickness under failure
load for 40x100 CFRP panel

97

Figure 5.27 Predicted shear stress contours for model w/o end caps for
40x100 CFRP panel

97

Figure 5.28 Predicted shear stress contours for model with 3 end caps
for 40x100 CFRP panel

98

Figure 5.29 Predicted shear stress profile across the thickness under
failure load for 40x100 CFRP panel

99

Figure 5.30 Schematic joining of two 4 wide GFRP sandwich panels

by a double sided lap joint

102

ix

Figure 5.31 Predicted deflection contours for model with 11.5x80

joint GFRP panel with 24, 18and 12 wide layers
Figure 5.32 Predicted deflection contours for model with 11.5x80
joint GFRP panel with 24, 18and 12 wide layers

103

Figure 5.33 Predicted bending stress contours for model with

11.5x80 joint GFRP panel with 24, 18and 12 wide layers

103

Figure 5.34 Predicted shear stress contours for model with 11.5x80
joint GFRP panel with 24, 18and 12 wide layers

104

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Properties of some thermoplasts for carbon fiber polymerMatrix

15

Table 2.2 Effect of various surface treatments on properties oh highModulus

16

Table 2.3 Mechanical properties of unidirectional carbon fiber(62vol%

AS-4) epoxy matrix composites. (Chung et. al., 1994)

17

Table 2.4 Room temperature mechanical properties of carbon fiber

epoxy-matrix composites with P-75 fibers and 934 epoxy
(Chung et. al., 1994)

17

Table 2.5 Sandwich panel 40"x100"x3.5" bending properties, 4 pt.

bending test(GangaRao Hota et. al., 2005, 2006)

19

Table 3.1 Data sheet for Vinyl Ester resin 510A (Dow Chemical Co.)

27

Table 3.2 Data sheet for carbon fiber composite

29

(Toray Carbon Fibers America, Inc.)

Table 3.3 Fiber orientation and share in each direction

29

(Toray Carbon Fibers America, Inc.)

Table 3.4 Details of production runs for CFRP sandwich panels

33

Table 3.5 Data sheet for balsa wood (Baltek Corporation)

35

Table 3.6 Summary of different configuration of fiber orientation,

resin system and manufacturing methods used for CFRP
fabrication

38

Table 3.7 Range of fiber content for different manufacturing processes

54

Table 3.8 Summary of specimen tested for mechanical testing

56

Table 4.1 Bending test results for carbon /VE composite by

compression molding

59

Table 4.2 12x27 Sandwich Panels Bending Properties

65

Table 4.3 12x80 Sandwich Panels Bending Properties

66

xi

Table 5.1 Load/BC and material properties for sandwich beam model

76

Table 5.2 Sandwich beam model predictions in comparison with

experimental values for 40x100 GFRP panel

76

Table 5.3 Load, BC and material properties for isotropic 3D solid

Model

80

Table 5.4 Model predictions in comparison with experimental values

for 12x96 panel @failure load 17062 lbs

81

Table 5.5 Load/BC and material properties for orthotropic beam model

82

Table 5.6 Material properties for 3D Orthotropic Solid Model

84

A and B
Table 5.7 Model predictions in comparison with experimental values
for 12x96 GFRP panel

84

Table 5.8 Material properties for CFRP sandwich panels

91

Table 5.9 Model prediction in comparison with experimental values for

12x80 and 40x100 CFRP panels
Table 5.10 Material properties for GFRP sandwich panels with joints

92
101

Table 5.11 Model prediction in comparison with experimental values

for 11.5x80 panels with joint

xii

101

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to our principal Mr. Dr.
M MADHESWARAN and our HOD Mrs. C DHAVAMANI (Ph.D) for
giving us an opportunity to undertake this project in the reputed organization
TAAL (Taneja Aerospace and Aviation Limited)
We acknowledgment in no terms the qualified and excellent assistance
rendered by Mr. U V RAO, for his cooperation. We owe our debt of gratitude
for his valuable suggestions, kind inspiration and encouragement.
We are much grateful to Mr. A.J Sri Ganapathy for his encouragement,
discussion. Valuable comments and innovative ideas for this project. Without
his timely help it would impossible for to complete this project.
We most sincerely acknowledgment all those who have helped as
directly or indirectly by giving their constant inspirations and suggestions.
We owe our debt of gratitude to our parents and friends for their advice
to keep our spirit high to complete this project.

xiii