Although good progress was made by two international benchmark exercises on in-plane permeability, existing methods have not yet been standardized. This paper presents the results of a third benchmark exercise using in-plane permeability measurement, based on systems applying the radial unsaturated injection method. 19 participants using 20 systems characterized a non-crimp and a woven fabric at three different fiber volume contents, using a commercially available silicone oil as impregnating fluid. They followed a detailed characterization procedure and also completed a questionnaire on their setup and analysis methods. Excluding outliers (2 of 20), the average coefficient of variation (c v) between the participant's results was 32% and 44% (non-crimp and woven fabric), while the average c v for individual participants was 8% and 12%, respectively. This indicates statistically significant variations between the measurement systems. Cavity deformation was identified as a major influence, besides fluid pressure/viscosity measurement, textile variations, and data analysis.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper reports the results of an international benchmark exercise on the measurement of fibre bed compaction behaviour. The aim was to identify aspects of the test method critical to obtain reliable results and to arrive at a recommended test procedure for fibre bed compaction measurements. A glass fibre 2/2 twill weave and a biaxial (±45°) glass fibre non-crimp fabric (NCF) were tested in dry and wet conditions.All participants used the same testing procedure but were allowed to use the testing frame, the fixture and sample geometry of their choice. The results showed a large scatter in the maximum compaction stress between participants at the given target thickness, with coefficients of variation ranging from 38 % to 58 %. Statistical analysis of data indicated that wetting of the specimen significantly affected the scatter in results for the woven fabric, but not for the NCF. This is related to the fibre mobility in the architectures in both fabrics. As isolating the effect of other test parameters on the results was not possible, no statistically significant effect of other test parameters could be proven. The high sensitivity of the recorded compaction pressure near the minimum specimen thickness to changes in specimen thickness suggests that small uncertainties in thickness can result in large variations in the maximum value of the compaction stress.Hence, it is suspected that the thickness measurement technique used may have an effect on the scatter.

In polymer nanocomposites, the interface region between the matrix and the fillers has been identified as a key interaction region that strongly determines the properties of the final material. Determining its structure is crucial from several points of view, from modeling (i.e., properties prediction) to materials science (i.e., understanding properties/structure relationships). In the presented paper, a method for characterizing the interface region of polymer nanocomposites is described using molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. In particular, the structure of the polymer within the interface region together with its dimension in terms of thickness were analyzed through density profiles. Epoxy resin nanocomposites based on diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A (DGEBA) were studied using this approach, and the interface region with triple walled carbon nanotubes (TWCNT) and carbon fibers (CF) was characterized. The effect of carbon nanotube diameter, type of hardener, and effect of epoxy resin cross-linking degree on interface thickness were analyzed using MD models. From this analysis no general rule on the effect of these parameters on the interface thickness could be established, since in some cases overlapping effects between the analyzed parameters were observed, and each specific case needs to be analyzed independently in detail. Results show that the diameter has an impact on interface thickness, but this effect is affected by the cross-linking degree of the epoxy resin. The type of hardener also has a certain influence on the interface thickness.