Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 43, Issue 20, pp 6593–6598 | Cite as

Scaling effects in notched carbon fibre/epoxy composites loaded in compression

Stretching the Endurance Boundary of Composite Materials: Pushing the Performance Limit of Composite Structures

Abstract

The aim of the work was to develop an understanding of the failure mechanisms controlling the strength of composites of different dimensions and hence to be able to predict size effects in composite structures without resorting to empirical laws. Adequate models do not currently exist, and extensive testing is necessary, which is very costly. The ability to predict the effect of size on strength would be a major step forward, which would reduce costs and encourage the more widespread usage of these materials in the aerospace and other industries. In this article the effects of scaling (specimen size) on the strength of notched laminates are presented. The most important variables have been identified as hole (notch) size, ply and laminate thickness. Manufacturing defects and specimen design can also lead to premature failures, especially in unnotched laminates, but in laminates with an open hole are of less significance, since the notch dominates the fracture. The compressive strength results are compared to data obtained for the same composite system and laminate stacking sequences loaded in uniaxial tension.

Keywords

Compressive Strength Cohesive Zone Model Scaling Effect Thick Specimen Open Hole 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (Grant No. GR/R89479/01), the UK Ministry of Defence, Airbus UK and Smiths Aerospace as well as the supply of material by Hexcel Composites.

References

  1. 1.
    Jackson KE, Kellas S, Morton J (1992) J Compos Mater 26(18):2674. doi: 10.1177/002199839202601803 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kellas S, Morton J (1992) AIAA J 30(4):1074. doi: 10.2514/3.11029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lavoie JA, Soutis C, Morton J (2000) J Comput Sci Technol 60(2):283. doi: 10.1016/S0266-3538(99)00124-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jiang W, Hallett SR, Green BG, Wisnom MR (2007) Int J Numer Methods Eng 69:1982. doi: 10.1002/nme.1842 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Green B, Wisnom MR, Hallett SR (2007) Compos Part A 38(3):867. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2006.07.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hallett SR, Wisnom MR (2006) J Compos Mater 40(2):119. doi: 10.1177/0021998305053504 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Soutis C, Lee J, Kong C (2002) J Polym Rubbers Compos 31(8):364. doi: 10.1179/146580102225006459 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee J, Soutis C (2005) Compos A 36(2):213Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee J, Soutis C (2007) Compos Sci Technol 67(10):2015. doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.12.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Airbus industry test methods: AITM-1.0008, Issue 2, June 1994Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Berbinau P, Soutis C, Guz IA (1999) Compos Sci Technol 59(9):1451. doi: 10.1016/S0266-3538(98)00181-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Soutis C, Guz IA (2006) Aeronaut J 110(1105):185Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Soutis C (2007) Mech Compos Mater 43(1):51. doi: 10.1007/s11029-007-0005-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Soutis C, Curtis PT (2000) Compos Part A 31(7):733. doi: 10.1016/S1359-835X(00)00003-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Soutis C, Smith FC, Matthews FL (2000) Compos Part A 31(6):531. doi: 10.1016/S1359-835X(99)00103-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soutis C, Lee J (2008) To appear in Compos Sci TechnolGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aerospace EngineeringThe University of SheffieldSheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations