Fatigue Life Assessment of Fastened Composite (FRP and CRP) Plates: A Comparative Study

Abstract:

Composite materials are now a day most frequently used materials in aerospace structures. Mechanically fastened joints are usually used there for joining process due to number of advantages over other conventional joints. These joints are easy to assemble and dissemble and are cheaper. However, they create stress concentration near the hole, leading to source of nucleation and subsequent propagation of cracks under cyclic loading. They also increase weight of the system tat may nullify the advantages we get from composite materials. The present work intent to find fatigue life of two composite laminates usually employed in spacecraft structures. The composites studies are fiberglass reinforced Plastic (FRP) and Carbon Reinforced Plastic (CRP). After preparing the composites, moisture, tension and fatigue tests were conducted on both composites. To know the behavior under damped condition, absorption tests were conducted. Fatigue tests were done both under as plate and butt joint conditions. It was found that in bolted joint condition, both CRP and FRP plates fails in net tension at minimum load but for maximum load they fail in shear.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volumes 110-116)
• Pages: 1155-1160
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.110-116.1155
• Online since: October 2011
• Authors: K.N. Pandey, Yogesh K. Tembhurne
• Keywords: Bolt Joints, Carbon Reinforced Plastic (CRP), Composite Material, Fatigue Life, Fibreglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP)

References

[1] Camanho, P.P.: Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 66 (2006), p.3004–3020.

[2] P. Vale Antunes and A. Ramalho: Tribology International Vol. 38 (2005), p.363–379.

[3] Min-Hwan Song, Jin-Hwe Kweon, Sang-Kuk Kim, Cheol Kim, Tae-Joo Lee, Sang-Min Choi and Myeong-Su Seong: Composite Structures, Vol 86 (1-3)( 2008), pp.125-134.

DOI: 10.1109/77.920330

[4] M.A. McCarthy, C.T. McCarthy, V.P. Lawlor and W.F. Stanley: Composite Structures 71 (2005) 140–158.

[5] Joakim Scho and Tonny Nyman: International Journal of Fatigue, Vol. 24(2002), p.273–279.

[6] Roman Starikova and Joakim SchÖn: Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 62 (2002), p.243–253.

[7] M.A. McCarthy, V.P. Lawlor, W.F. Stanley and C.T. McCarthy: Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 62(2002), p.1415–1431.

[8] Hung-Shyong Chen: Composite structures, Vol. 52 (2001), pp.295-306.

[9] V.P. Lawlor, M.A. McCarthy and W.F. Stanley: Composite Structures, Vol. 71 (2005), p.176–190.

[10] Yi Xiao and Takashi Ishikawa: Composites Science and Technology 65 (2005), p.1022–1031.

[11] Tae Seong Lim, Byung Chul Kim and Dai Gil Lee: Composite Structures 72 (2006), p.58–68.

[12] Persson E, Eriksson I and Zackrisson L: Applied Science and Manufacturing 1997; Vol. 28(2)(1997), p.141 –151.

[13] Saunders DS, Galea SC and Deirmendjian GK : Composites, Vol. 24(4) (1993), p.309–21.

[14] B. Kolesnikov , L. Herbeck and A. Fink: Composite Structures, Vol. 83 (2008), p.368–380.

[15] Yi Zhao: Submitted to Marshall space flight center, The University of Alabama, NASA faculty fellowship program (2002).

[16] ASTM, Vol. D 5961/D 5961M – 08: Standard test method for bearing response of polymer matrix composite laminates, (1996).

[17] Joakim SchÖn and Tonny Nyman: International Journal of Fatigue, Vol. 24 (2002), p.273–279.

[18] Ramkumar RL and Tossavainen EW: ASTM STP 927 (1986), p.251–73.