Differences between 2D and 3D Interlaminar Fracture Analysis of Unidirectional Carbon/Epoxy Arcan Specimens: Numerical and Experimental Approaches

Reza Bakhtiari; Naghdali Choupani; Ehsan Darabi

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.626.575

Paper Titles

Low Temperature Catalytic Steam Gasification of Waste Palm Trunk by Pottasium Carbonate Supported on Perovskite Oxide
p.551

Experimental Investigation on the Shear Behaviour of Concrete Beams Reinforced with GFRP Reinforcement Bars
p.559

Quality Evaluation of Cold Embossed Hole Based on Profile Measurement Technique
p.564

The Effect of pH on Zinc Phosphate Coating Morphology and its Corrosion Resistance on Mild Steel
p.569

Differences between 2D and 3D Interlaminar Fracture Analysis of Unidirectional Carbon/Epoxy Arcan Specimens: Numerical and Experimental Approaches
p.575

Fabrication and Photoresponse of Self-Organized TiO₂ Mesoporous by Alternative Voltage Condition
p.580

Development of Lubricants Evaluation for Different Friction Laws by Using Rigid-Plastic Finite Element Method
p.584

Energy Absorption Characteristics of Interface Modified GFRP Laminates under Low Velocity Impact
p.589

Effects of Various Additives on Drying Shrinkage, Compressive and Flexural Strength of Lightweight Foamed Concrete (LFC)
p.594

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vol. 626Differences between 2D and 3D Interlaminar...

Differences between 2D and 3D Interlaminar Fracture Analysis of Unidirectional Carbon/Epoxy Arcan Specimens: Numerical and Experimental Approaches

Abstract:

In this paper, the mixed-mode interlaminar fracture behavior of unidirectional carbon-epoxy composite was investigated based on experimental and numerical analysis. A modified version of Arcan specimen was employed to conduct a mixed-mode fracture test using a special loading device. A full range of mixed-mode loading conditions including pure mode-I and pure mode-II loading were created and tested. This test method is a simple procedure, clamping/unclamping the specimens is easy to achieve and only one type of specimen is required to generate all loading conditions. Also, the correction factors were determined via two-and three-dimensional analysis and the results were compared. Results indicated that the interlaminar cracked specimen is tougher in shear loading condition and weaker in tensile loading condition.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Advanced Materials Engineering and Technology

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volume 626)

Pages:

575-579

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.626.575

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

December 2012

Authors:

Reza Bakhtiari, Naghdali Choupani, Ehsan Darabi

Keywords:

Delamination, Finite Element Analysis (FEA), Fracture Toughness

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] J.W. Gillespie, L.A. Carlsson, Delaware Composites Design Encyclopedia, vol. 6, Technomic Publishing Co. Inc., 1990, p.113–119.

Google Scholar

[2] N. Choupani. Experimental and numerical investigation of the mixed-mode delamination in Arcan laminated specimens. J Materials Science and Engineering A 478(2008) 229–242.

DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2007.05.103

Google Scholar

[3] ASTM E399, Standard Test Method for Plane Strain Fracture Toughness and Strain Energy Release Rate of Metallic Materials: Annual Book of ASTM Standards, (1983).

DOI: 10.1520/stp33670s

Google Scholar

[4] ASTM D5045, Standard Test Method for Plane Strain Fracture Toughness and Strain Energy Release Rate of Plastic Materials: Annual Book of ASTM Standards, (1995).

DOI: 10.1520/d5045-14r22

Google Scholar

[5] ABAQUS (2004) ABAQUS user's manual, version 6. 5. Hibbit, Karlsson and Sorensen, HKS Inc, Pawtucket, USA.

Google Scholar

[6] ASTM D2651-90. Standard guide for preparation of metal surfaces for adhesive bonding. In: Annual book of ASTM standards; 1995. p.162–7.

Google Scholar

[7] H.R. Daghyani, L. Ye, Y. -W. Mai, Mixed-mode Fracture of Adhesively Bonded CF/Epoxy Composite Joints, Journal of Composite Materials. 30 (11) (1996) 1248–1265.

DOI: 10.1177/002199839603001104

Google Scholar