1987
DOI: 10.1016/0266-3538(87)90015-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanical and acoustic emission response of unidirectional and cross-plied GRP laminates

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This kinematic is independent of the type of damage (amplitude < 85 dB) and, as we will see in the next paragraph, of its location. This kinetic has been observed, for example, by Henrat et al 22 as well as Ceysson 11 on cross-plied composites under monotonic tests. This change in damage mechanisms is not visible on the stress curve.…”
Section: Ae Signals Versus Loadsupporting
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This kinematic is independent of the type of damage (amplitude < 85 dB) and, as we will see in the next paragraph, of its location. This kinetic has been observed, for example, by Henrat et al 22 as well as Ceysson 11 on cross-plied composites under monotonic tests. This change in damage mechanisms is not visible on the stress curve.…”
Section: Ae Signals Versus Loadsupporting
confidence: 68%
“…This kinetic has been observed, for example, by Henrat and al. as well as O.Ceysson on cross plied composites under monotonic tests 11,22 .This change in damage mechanisms is not visible on the stress curve.…”
Section: Acoustic Emission Signals Versus Loadmentioning
confidence: 83%