Composite Materials Research Progress

242
Maria Pia Cavatorta and Davide Salvatore Paolino
Table 1. Main characteristics of the laminates analyzed in the chapter
Ref. Fiber /Matrix Lay-up
Thickness
[mm]
Acronym
used
[30] Glass/Vinylester [random/02/90/random 12.31 GVP90_12.31
+Polyester
/90/02/random]
[0/90] 15
4.00 GE90s_4.00
[32] Glass/Epoxy
[0/90] 30
8.00 GE90s_8.00
[03 /903] 5
4.00 GE90m_4.00
[03 /903] 10
8.00 GE90m_8.00
[21] Glass/Epoxy [random/-45/+45/02] 2 4.50 GE45_4.50
[0/90] 4
0.35 CE90_0.35
[0/90] 8
0.75 CE90_0.75
[14] Carbon/Epoxy
[0/90] 16
1.55 CE90_1.55
[0/60/-60] 4
0.40 CE60_0.40
[0/60/-60] 8
0.85 CE60_0.85
[0/60/-60] 16
1.75 CE60_1.75
Results for Single Impact Tests
Figures 1-3, 5-6 reports the results obtained for the analyzed laminates. For sake of
comparison among the different laminates, in all graphs the impact energy Ei is divided by the
penetration threshold Pn [34].
F peak/F pen
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
E i/P n
GVP90_12.31
GE90s_8.00
GE90m_8.00
GE45_4.50
GE90s_4.00
GE90m_4.00
CE60_1.75
CE90_1.55
CE60_0.85
CE90_0.75
CE60_0.40
CE90_0.35
1st linear trend
2nd linear trend
polynomial trend
Figure 1. Normalized peak force plotted against non-dimensional impact energy E i/P n. Linear and
polynomial trends.
Figure 1 reports data for Fpeak vs. the non-dimensional impact energy Ei/Pn. Values of
Fpeak are normalized by the peak force Fpen registered for an impact energy equal to Pn.