Advertisement

Applied Composite Materials

, Volume 19, Issue 3–4, pp 669–688 | Cite as

Impact of the Fibre Bed on Resin Viscosity in Liquid Composite Moulding Simulations

  • Marc GasconsEmail author
  • Norbert Blanco
  • Pavel Simacek
  • Joaquim Peiro
  • Suresh Advani
  • Koen Matthys
Article

Abstract

In the past, simulation of liquid composite moulding processes was often based on the assumption that resin viscosity could be implemented as a constant value. However, viscosity can be subject to changes during the infusion process and now, non-constant and process parameter dependent expressions have become more common in simulation practice. Nevertheless, even with the inclusion of more advanced resin viscosity models, the prediction of flow front propagation in large, thick composite parts or in slow infusion processes is often still inaccurate when compared to the real application. Discrepancies are found to be most pronounced in the final stages of the infusion process, exactly where high accuracy predictions are most valued. A new simulation method based on an infusion time-dependent resin viscosity expression is proposed in this work. The method not only incorporates non-linear viscosity behaviour, but also takes into account the impact of reinforcement fibre sizing and fibre bed architecture on resin viscosity characteristics. Such fibre bed effects are not identifiable in neat resin viscosity characterization tests but are thought to have substantial impact on in-situ viscosity values during infusion, especially for large, thick composite part applications and slow infusion processes. An application case study has been included to demonstrate the prediction capability of the proposed simulation method. The design of an infusion process for a composite pressure vessel was selected for this purpose. Results show high predictive power throughout the infusion process, with most pronounced benefit in the final infusion stages.

Keywords

Fibre bed Viscosity Resin infusion Injection moulding Composites 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the ELRIPS consortium (Efficient Life Cycle Management of Resin Infused Flight Critical Composite Primary Structures) and its sponsors EPSRC-MOD and DTI, through grant GR/S33963/01, as well as Dr. Jeffrey M Lawrence from V System Composites for giving valuable support.

The authors want to acknowledge the Spanish government for their support through research project MAT2009-07918. The authors also want to acknowledge the Center for Composite Materials at the University of Delaware for support with LIMS software.

References

  1. 1.
    Rudd, C., Long, A., Kendall, K., Mangin, C.: Liquid Moulding Technologies. Woodhead Publishing and SAE International, Warrendale (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dave, R.S., Loos, A.C.: Processing of Composites. Hanser, Cincinnati (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Campbell, F. Jr.: Manufacturing Processes for Advanced Composites. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shirinzadeh, B., Alici, G., Foong, C., Cassidy, G.: Fabrication process of open surfaces by robotic fibre placement. Robot. Comput.-Integr. Manuf. 20(1), 17–28 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Newell, G., Buckingham, R., Khodabandehloo, K.: The automated manufacture of prepreg broadgoods components. A review of literature. Compos., Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 27(3), 211–217 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schuessler, P.W., Dobbin, W.J.: Gel time measurement of resins. Anal. Chem. 53, 2380–2381 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Advani, S., Murat Sozer, E.: Process Modelling in Composites Manufacturing. Marcel Dekker/Taylor and Francis, UK (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tucker, C. III: Fundamentals of Computer Modelling for Polymer Processing. Hanser, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bruschke, M., Advani, S.: A finite element/control volume approach to mold filling in anisotropic porous media. Polym. Compos. 11(6), 398–405 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Williams, C., Summerscales, J., Grove, S.: Resin infusion under flexible tooling (RIFT). A review. Compos., Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 27(7), 517–524 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mazumdar, S.: Composites Manufacturing. Materials, Product and Process Engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hexcel Composites: HexFlow RTM6 Datasheet, Publication ITA 065e. Hexcel Composites, Stanford (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Simacek, P., Advani, S.: Desirable features in mold filling simulations for liquid composite molding processes. Polym. Compos. 25(4), 355–367 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Advani, S., Simacek, P.: Programming in LBasic. Lims 5.0.4 Software Documentation. Center for Composite Materials, UDel, Newark (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Skinner, M.L.: New applications and approaches expand market for composites software. Reinf. Plast. 50(6), 24–28 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bear, J.: Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media. Dover Books, New York (1989)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Halley, P., Mackay, M.E.: Chemorheology of thermosets-an overview. Polym. Eng. Sci. 36(5), 593–609 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kiuna, N., Lawrence, C., Fontana, Q., Lee, P., Selerland, T., Spelt, P.: A model for resin viscosity during cure in the resin transfer moulding process. Compos., Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 33(11), 1497–1503 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fontana, Q.: Viscosity: thermal history treatment in resin transfer moudling process modelling. Compos., Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 29(1–2), 153–158 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Seeton, C.: Viscosity temperature correlation for liquids. Tribol. Lett. 22(1), 67–78 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Malkin, A., Kulichikhin, S.G.: Rheokinetics of Curing. Springer, Berlin (1991)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kamal, M., Sourur, S.: Kinetics and thermal characterization of thermoset cure. Polym. Eng. Sci. 13(1), 59–64 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mussati, F., Macosko, C.: Rheology of network forming systems. Polym. Eng. Sci. 13(3), 236–240 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Williams, M.L., Landel, R.F., Ferry, J.: The temperature dependence of relaxation mechanism in amorphous polymers and other glass-forming liquids. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 77, 3701–3707 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stolin, A.M., Merzhanov, A.G., Malkin, A.Y.: Non-isothermal phenomena in polymer engineering and science: a review. Part I: non-isothermal polymerization. Polym. Eng. Sci. 19(15), 1065–1073 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lipshitz, S.D., Macosko, C.W.: Kinetics and energetics of a fast polyurethane cure. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 21(8), 2029–2039 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mijovi, J., Lee, C.H.: A comparison of chemorheological models for thermoset cure. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 38(12), 2155–2170 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chiou, P.L., Letton, A.: Modelling the chemorheology of an epoxy resin system exhibiting complex curing behaviour. Polymer 33(18), 3925–3931 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Martin, J., Laza, J., Morras, M., Rodriguez, M., Leon, L.: Study of the curing process of a vinyl ester resin by means of tsr and dmta. Polymer 41(11), 4203–4211 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Advani, S., Bruschke, M., Parnas, R.: Resin transfer molding flow phenomena in polymeric composites. In: Advani, S.G. (ed.) Flow and Rheology in Polymer Composites Manufacturing. Amsterdam (1994)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Heardman, E., Lekakou, C., Bader, M.: Flow monitoring and permeability measurement under constant and transient flow conditions. Compos. Sci. Technol. 64(9), 1239–1249 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wong, C., Long, A., Sherburn, M., Robitaille, F., Harrison, P., Rudd, C.: Comparisons of novel and efficient approaches for permeability prediction based on the fabric architecture. Compos., Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 37(6), 847–857 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hexcel Composites: G0926 Carbon Fabric Product Data. Hexcel Composites, Stanford (2009)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Endruweit, A., Matthys, K.S., Peiro, J., Long, A.C.: Effect of differential compression on in-plane permeability tensor of heterogeneous multilayer carbon fibre preforms. Plast. Rubber Compos. 38(1), 1–9 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Henz, B.J., Tamma, K., Kanapady, R., Ngo, N., Chung, P.: Process Modeling of Composites by Resin Transfer Moulding: Sensitivity Analysis for Isothermal Considerations ARL-TR-2686. Army Research Laboratory (ARL), University of Minessota (2002)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stadtfeld, H.C., Erninger, M., Bickterton, S., Advani, S.G.: An experimental method to continously measure permeability of fiber preforms as a function of fiber volume fraction. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 21(10), 879–899 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Heardman, E., Lekakou, C., Bader, M.: In-plane permeability of sheared fabrics. Compos., Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 32(7), 933–940 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marc Gascons
    • 1
    Email author
  • Norbert Blanco
    • 1
  • Pavel Simacek
    • 2
  • Joaquim Peiro
    • 3
  • Suresh Advani
    • 2
  • Koen Matthys
    • 4
  1. 1.AMADE, Department of Mechanical Engineering and Industrial ConstructionUniversity of GironaGironaSpain
  2. 2.Center for Composite Materials and Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA
  3. 3.Department of AeronauticsImperial CollegeLondonUK
  4. 4.School of Engineering and DesignBrunel UniversityMiddlesexUK

Personalised recommendations