Crushing Characteristics Comparison between Aluminum/CFRP and Aluminum/CFRP/Aluminum Hybrid Tubes

Abstract

This study experimentally investigated the axial crushing characteristics of the hybrid tubes with the configuration of aluminum/carbon fiber-reinforced polymer (CFRP) (1/1) and aluminum/CFRP/aluminum (2/1). The effects of geometry size and fiber lay-up sequence on the axial crushing energy-absorption performances and failure modes of the two types of hybrid tubes were compared. The results showed that the energy absorption of the specimens with [0°/90°] lay-up sequence was better than that of the ones with [45°/−45°] lay-up sequence for both types of hybrid tubes. The proper length of the tubes should be selected to avoid too small a length-to-diameter ratio so that a stable and controllable progressive crushing failure mode can be achieved. When the crushing failure process was relatively stable, the specific energy absorption and crushing force efficiency of the 2/1 hybrid tubes were not affected by the geometric size. The energy absorption of the hybrid tubes was higher than the sum of the energy absorption of all the corresponding individual tubes, showing a positive hybrid effect.

A Review on Mechanical Properties and Response of Fibre Metal Laminate under Impact Loading (Experiment)

“…The thickness of Al-out may influence its impact performance 46) . The results obtained were similar to Fie et al 81) who conducted the Al tube with different diameters in the axial crushing test 81) .…”

“…The greater diameter of the Al tube exhibited better energy absorption and peak crushing force. It can be concluded that the thickness of the Al tube influenced the impact performance 46,81) . On the other hand, the transition condition or buckling shape of the alloy tube subjected to axial impact loading was influenced by impact velocity [82][83][84] , striking mass 82,83) , material characteristic 84) and the width-to-thickness ratio 86) .…”

“…Ge et al 81) compared the EA, SEA, PCF and CFE between Al/CFRP (1/1) and Al/CFRP/Al (2/1) hybrid tubes under axial crushing. Table 8 indicates that the impacts of geometry size and fibre lay-up sequence on the axial crushing energy-absorption performances of the two hybrid tube types were compared.…”

“…The most tested FML structures were in form of tubes (circular/cylindrical, square). The influence of FML's constituents (composite and metal alloy), fibre orientation, stacking sequence, metal arrangement and laminate thickness played a role in determining the crushing behavior and improving the crush stability and energy absorption of FML structures 41,46,81,[87][88][89][90][91][92]95) . The FML structure had better crushing strength compared to the metal structure [94][95][96] .…”

Failure behavior and crashworthiness characteristic of repaired composites‐metal hybrid tubes by acoustic emission

“…In addition, several typical indicators such as energy absorption (EA), specific energy absorption (SEA), peak crushing force (PCF), mean crushing force (MCF), and crushing force efficiency (CFE) were used to assess the crashworthiness. 52,53 The PCF indicates the peak load during crushing test. The EA is the total energy absorbed throughout the crushing test, defined as:…”