Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
S1359-835X(!N)OOW4-7
ELSEVIER
Review
Review of low-velocity
of composite materials
M. 0. W. Richardson
impact
properties
and M. J. Wisheart
Loughborough
University
of
This paper is a review of low-velocity impact responses of composite materials. First the term low-velocity
impact is defined and major impact-induced damage modes are described from onset of damage through to
final failure. Then, the effects of the composites constituents on impact properties are discussed and postimpact performance is assessed in terms of residual strength. Copyright 0 1996 Elsevier Science Limited
(Keywords: low-velocity impact; damage modes; constituent properties; specimen geometry; post-impact residual strength;
review)
INTRODUCTION
This review has been carried out as part of a research
programme investigating the application of pultruded
composite systemsle3 to the construction of freight containers. This is a realistic goal, owing to opportunities
which have arisen in the container industry&I6 and technological advances in the putrusion process7-9. Containers have traditionally been metal constructions, and
extensive research has been performed on the impact
response of metals over a wide range of velocities. Impact
damage in metals is easily detected as damage starts at
the impacted surface; however, damage in composites
often begins on the non-impacted surface or in the form
of an internal delamination.
Impact damage is generally not considered to be a
threat in metal structures because, owing to the ductile
nature of the material, large amounts of energy may be
absorbed. At yield stress the material may flow for very
large strains (up to 20%) at constant yield before work
hardening. In contrast, composites can fail in a wide
variety of modes and contain barely visible impact
damage (BVID) which nevertheless severely reduces the
structural integrity of the component. Most composites
are brittle and so can only absorb energy in elastic
deformation and through damage mechanisms, and not
via plastic deformation. The term damage resistance
refers to the amount of impact damage which is induced
* To whom correspondence should be addressed
in a composite
system. Clearly, the vast majority
of
impacts on a composite plate will be in the transverse
direction but due to the lack of through-thickness rein-
DEFINITION
OF LOW-VELOCITY
IMPACT
1123
Review of low-velocity
impact velocity
speed of sound in the material
For failure strains between 0.5 and l%, this gives the
transition to stress wave dominated events at lo20 m s-* for epoxy composites.
MODES OF FAILURE
IMPACT
IN LOW-VELOCITY
The heterogeneous and anisotropic nature of fibrereinforced plastic (FRP) laminates gives rise to four major
modes of failure (although many others could be cited):
occurs parallel to the fibres
1) matrix mode-cracking
due to tension, compression or shear;
2) delamination mode-produced
by interlaminar stresses;
3) jibre mode-in-tension
fibre breakage and incompression fibre buckling; and
4) penetration-the
impactor completely perforates the
impacted surface.
It is very important to identify the mode of failure
because this will yield information not only about the
impact event, but also regarding the structures residual
strength. Interaction between failure modes is also very
important in understanding damage mode initiation and
propagation24.
Matrix damage
mmx
._..
J--k
Ii!_11
90
delamination
(a) uansvcrse view
Figure 1
1124
Review of low-velocity
and M. J. Wisheart
contributing
to a bending
21-*WL3
Energy = 9Et
f
matrixcrack
clamped boundary
pattern
from line-
1125
1126
Review of low-velocity
impact properties:
Fibres
Fibres are the main load-bearing constituent, providing the composite with the majority of its strength and
stiffness. The most common fibres are glass, carbon and
Kevlar. Carbon is widely used in the aircraft industry
and in many structural applications as it has the highest
strength and stiffness values; however, it also is the most
brittle, with a strain to failure of 0.5 to 2.4%. Glass fibres
have a lower strength and stiffness but have a higher
strain to failure (~3.2%~) and are less expensive than
carbon fibres. The mechanical properties of Kevlar lie
between those of carbon and glas?. Carbons design
ultimate allowable strain is only 0.4% currently, whilst
M. 0. W. Richardson
and M. J. Wisheart
1127
Review of low-velocity
Interphase region
IMPACT PERFORMANCE
GEOMETRY SPECIMENS
OF COMPLEX
1128
POST-IMPACT
RESIDUAL
STRENGTH
As stated previously, due to the susceptibility of composite materials to impact damage, dramatic loss in
residual strength and structural integrity results. The
term damage tolerance refers to a systems ability to
perform post-impact. Even BVID can cause strength
reductions of up to 50%. Residual strengths in tension,
compression, bending and fatigue will be reduced to
varying degrees depending on the dominant damage
mode.
Residualf
Tensile
;1\_.
snength
II
III
II
Impact Energy
Figure 4
versus
Review of low-velocity
damage mode. Caprino68 developed a linear elastic fracture mechanics model to predict residual tensile strength
as a function of impacting kinetic energy which gave
good correlation to experimental results.
Residual compressive
strength
lOms_ which are ordinarily introduced in the laboratory by mechanical test machines such as the IFWIT
technique. The contact period is such that the whole
structure has time to respond to the loading. The modes
of impact damage induced range from matrix cracking
and delamination through to fibre failure and penetration. Damage mode interaction must also be understood
when attempting to predict initiation and propagation
of a particular form of damage. Toughened resins or
thermoplastics can reduce matrix-dominated
damage
but the fibres have the most bearing on impact response
and, over the narrow velocity range under consideration,
the strain rate sensitivity of fibres can be ignored. Postimpact performance is related to the major damage
mode, therefore a combination of tension and compression residual strength testing is required to characterize
the laminate.
Much research has been performed on simple geometry carbon/epoxy cross-ply laminates consisting of
plies at various fibre orientation, due to their importance
in the aerospace industry. The low-velocity impact
response of random fibre/unidirectional laminate combinations (such as are found in pultrusions) and impacts
on complex geometry are less well documented, and
progress is required in these areas if composite laminates
are to be employed in more structural applications.
REFERENCES
life
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Maunsell Structural
Plastics Ltd, London,
UK, Data Pack,
April 1992
Robbins, J. Links to a tee. New Civil Engineer August 1992,2023
Richmond, B. Bridge construction and beyond. Reinforced Plastics October 1993,26-30
Anon. Composite box unveiled. World Cargo News March 1995,
16
Damas, P. Genstar Do-It-All. Containerisafion Int. April 1995,
78- 79
Anon. Looking to a plastic future. Container Management June
1995,57
Thomas, R. More from the floor. Cargo Systems September
1994,37739
Anon. Envirodek funded. Cargo Systems March 1995, 15
Tooth, E.S. Container
standardisation:
its impact on shipping
Dock and Harbour Authority 1990,
and port operations.
70(816), 299-303
Davis, R. The protective alternative for cargo containers.
Product Finishing 1988,41(12), 26-27
Anon. Domestic container
prospects assessed. Cargo Systems
Inc.: J. ICHCA 1986, 13(6), 81-83
Gooden, C.W. Intermodal
operators
raise efficiency. Railway
Gazette Int. 1991. 147(12). 885-888
Munford,
C. Box fldorprices
hit the roof. Cargo Systems
August 1993,61-63
Anon. Hitting the floor. Container Management July/August
1993,15517
Anon. Floors under the spotlight.
Container Management
January 1994,34-35
Anon. Wanted: new floor for new flat. Container Management
December 1993, 556
Sumerak, J.E. and Martin, J. Pultruded products-new
capability on the horizon. In Advanced Composites-Conference
Proceedings, Dearborn, MI, 2-4 December 1985, pp. 133-138
Holloway, L. Current developments in materials technology and
engineering-pultrusion.
RaIna Review No 3 1989, 2(3) -_
Meyer, R.W. Handbook
of Pultrusion Technology,
Chapman
and Hall, London, 1985
1129
Review of low-velocity
20
21
22
23
46
47
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
48
155-190
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
1978,9,
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
1130
25-32
56
Wu, H.-Y.T. and Springer, G.S. Measurements of matrix cracking and delamination caused by impact on composite plates.
J. Compos. Mater. 1988,22, 518-532
Chang,. F.-K., Choi, H.Y. and Jeng, S.-T. Study on impact
damage in laminated composites. Mech. Mater. 1990,10, 83-95
Choi, H.Y., Downs, R.J. and Chang, F.-K. A new approach
toward understanding damage mechanisms and mechanics of
laminated composites due to low-velocity impact: Part I
Exneriments. J. ComDos. Muter. 1991. 25.992-1011
Chbi, H.Y. and Chadg, F.-Y. Impact damage threshold of laminated composites. In Failure Criteria and Analysis in Dynamic
Response, AMD Vol. 107, ASME Applied Mechanics Division,
Dallas, TX, November 1990, pp. 31-35
Choi, H.-Y., Wang, H.S. and Chang, F.-K. Effect of laminate
configuration and impactors mass on the initial impact damage
of graphite/epoxy composite plates due to line loading impact.
J. Compos. Muter. 1992, 26(6), 804-827
Chang, F.-K. and Chang, K.-Y. A progressive damage model
for laminated composites containing stress concentrations.
57
63
64
1993,25,
39-59
33
834-855
58
113-120
1993,31(8),
59
60
61
62
1498-1502
Lee, S. and Zahuta, P. Instrumented impact and static indentation of composites. J. Compos. Muter. 1991, 25, 204-222
El-Habak, A.M. Effect of impact perforation load on GFRP
composites. Composites 1993,24(4), 341-345
Chaturvedi. S.K. and Sierakowski. R.L. Effects of imnactor size
on impact damage-growth and residual properties in an SMCR50 composite. J. Compos. Mater. 1985, 19, 100-l 13
Khetan, R.P. and Chang, DC. Surface damage of sheet molding
compound panels subject to a point impact loading. J. Compos.
Muter. 1983. 17, 182-194
1257-1271
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
15(10), 13-31
Review of low-velocity
12
13
74
15
impact properties:
Caprino, G., Crivelli Visconti, I. and Di Rio, A. Elastic behaviour of composite structures under low velocity impact. Composires 1984, 15(3), 23 l-234
Sims, G.D. Understanding Charpy impact testing of composite
laminates. In Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Composite Materials and
2nd European Conf. on Composite Materials, Imperial College,
London, 1988, Vol. 3, pp. 3.494-3.507
Hayes, S.V. and Adams, D.F. Rate sensitive tensile impact properties of fully and partially loaded unidirectional composites.
J. Tesfing Ed. 1982, 10(2), 61-68
Li, Y.L., Harding, J. and Ruiz, C. Modelling of the impact
response of fibre reinforced composites. Report OU-DESOUEL 1863/90, University of Oxford Department of Engineering Science, 1990
16
II
78
79
M. 0. W. Richardson
and M. J. Wisheart
1131