11.02.2013 Views

Composite Materials Research Progress

Composite Materials Research Progress

Composite Materials Research Progress

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

184<br />

Giangiacomo Minak and Andrea Zucchelli<br />

for a general crisis of the laminate. In fact the PII,1 is followed by a small series of strain<br />

energy storing phases, PI,2 and PI,3, and a combination of sub-function of type II, III and IV<br />

highlighting a great material damage.<br />

The QI3 is characterized by a sentry function that mixes the behaviour of the studied UD<br />

and AP laminates. At the test beginning is visible a combination of sub-functions of type I<br />

and of type II with a predominant strain energy storing phase. This phase is characterized by<br />

the sequence of the following sub-functions: PI,1, PII,1, PI,2, PII,2 and PI,3. A delamination<br />

failure is revealed by the slope change of f corresponding to PII,3. After this failure a reduced<br />

energy storing capability is revealed by the PI,4 and the following drop PII,4 is due to the<br />

failure of the weakest ply inside the laminate. This first ply crisis is followed by a subfunction<br />

of type I, PI,5, that has a smooth trend due to the previous material damage. The<br />

damage corresponding to the sub-function PII,6 is due to the crisis of one of the stronger plies.<br />

After this laminate crisis the energy storing phase represented by the PI,6 is due to the stresses<br />

redistribution between the undamaged plies that are now working as springs in parallel.<br />

The analysis here described has been used to perform a quantitative estimation of the<br />

laminate damage and in particular the sentry function of each laminate has been used to<br />

perform a discretization of the stress-strain curve. As an example of this analysis we report<br />

the case of UD laminate type.<br />

f<br />

40<br />

35<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

f Stress-Strain<br />

Drops<br />

0<br />

0<br />

0.000 0.003 0.005 0.008 0.010<br />

Strain<br />

0.013 0.015 0.018 0.020<br />

Figure 11. Stress and f diagram versus strain, the most key drops of f are highlighted by means of gaps<br />

diagram.<br />

The analysis of the sentry function in figure 11 allows the identification of 10 drops on<br />

the basis of which the stress-strain curve was divided in order to calculate the Elastic<br />

modulus.<br />

2500<br />

2000<br />

1500<br />

1000<br />

500<br />

Stress (MPa)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!