2013
DOI: 10.5267/j.esm.2013.09.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact response of glass/epoxy laminate interleaved with nanofibrous mats

Abstract: Plain and nanofiber-interleaved glass/epoxy laminates clamped according to ASTM D7136 tested under impact loading to assess the improvement in impact resistance of composite laminates that have been interleaved by electrospun polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) nanofibers with two different thicknesses. Composite specimens with stacking sequence [0/90/0/90]S were impacted at impact energy of 5J. Variation of the impact characteristics such as maximum contact load, maximum deflection, maximum contact time, absorbed … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Glass fibers received even more attention than carbon, and among the papers here considered, only one showed negative results [75]. In [64] and [51], plain and curved glass-fiber specimens have been tested, respectively, showing positive results in terms of absorbed energy (+9,5% and +13,4%, depending on the thickness of the nanomat) and damaged area (-27%). In [29,49], the same authors present interesting studies using different types of nanofibers and different nanofiber orientation.…”
Section: Impactmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Glass fibers received even more attention than carbon, and among the papers here considered, only one showed negative results [75]. In [64] and [51], plain and curved glass-fiber specimens have been tested, respectively, showing positive results in terms of absorbed energy (+9,5% and +13,4%, depending on the thickness of the nanomat) and damaged area (-27%). In [29,49], the same authors present interesting studies using different types of nanofibers and different nanofiber orientation.…”
Section: Impactmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Carbon nanofibers/nanotubes (CNFs/CNTs) proved to be the most effective solution in terms of mechanical reinforcement [10][11][12], but their difficult mixing process with the resin [13] and serious risks for human health [14] make them unsuitable in many cases. Polymers present several advantages compared to CNF/CNT, and the authors of present paper have a successful history of reinforcing composite laminates' interfaces using polymeric nanofibers [15][16][17][18], in particular Nylon 6,6 [19][20][21][22][23]. The academic community produced accurate research on nanomodified composites, but some aspects still need to be further investigated: in particular this paper aims to study nanointerleaved laminates subjected to cycling loads, which is a topic for only few papers can be found in literature [10][11][12]24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Although the idea is not new, there has been increasing attention devoted to this topic in recent years. Various types of polymeric nanofibres such as poly caprolactone (PCL) [8], polyacrylonitrile (PAN) [9], polyamide (PA) [10], polyamide 6/6 (PA 6/6) [11], polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) [12] and polysulfone PSF [13] have already been studied. Most of these studies mainly focused on the interlaminar fracture toughness of composite laminates.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%