2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.07.058
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Study on the low-velocity impact response and CAI behavior of foam-filled sandwich panels with hybrid facesheet

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
45
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

7
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 109 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
1
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…P c and δ c are the load and displacement when the crack propagates to a specific length Δa, while b and l are the width and length of the specimens, respectively. Δ S is the area covered by P c and δ c , as indicated in Figure 2 h. The minor deviations of experimental results in Table 3 , Table 4 and Table 5 may be caused by uncertainty factors in the manufacturing process of the anisotropic composite materials [ 28 , 29 ]. Specially, in Table 5 , the maximum loads in the three tests are 112.5 N, 1628.4 N, and 512.3 N, with corresponding failure displacements of 5.45 mm, 8.78 mm, and 10.67 mm, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…P c and δ c are the load and displacement when the crack propagates to a specific length Δa, while b and l are the width and length of the specimens, respectively. Δ S is the area covered by P c and δ c , as indicated in Figure 2 h. The minor deviations of experimental results in Table 3 , Table 4 and Table 5 may be caused by uncertainty factors in the manufacturing process of the anisotropic composite materials [ 28 , 29 ]. Specially, in Table 5 , the maximum loads in the three tests are 112.5 N, 1628.4 N, and 512.3 N, with corresponding failure displacements of 5.45 mm, 8.78 mm, and 10.67 mm, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of the surface treatment and fiber conditions of the banana pseudo-stem fiber in order to increase the surface bonding between the fiber and matrix was still insufficient and failed to offer high resistance to CAI strength compared to synthetic fibers. With respect to CAI behavior in the sandwich structures experiments, core breaking and skin buckling were identified as the major failure modes of the sandwich structures [48]. Castanié et al [49] mentioned that matrix cracking and delamination between the face sheet and the core were found to be the most common damage mechanisms of the sandwich structure under residual compression strength.…”
Section: Compression After Impact (Cai) Of Structure Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The test results of Schubel et al [8] showed that the sandwich panels containing delamination in the impacted facesheets had edgewise compressive strength which is less than the half of the original strength. The reduction of residual compressive strength of sandwich panels with CFRP skins (60.8%) is far greater than that of panels with GFRP skins (14.3%) [12]. Castanie [13] proposed a core crush criterion to analyze the nonlinear impact response and predicted the residual strength of sandwich composite structures with impact damage.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%