4.6 Article

The effects of loading direction on the compression after impact strength of quasi-isotropic face sheet honeycomb core sandwich structure

Journal

JOURNAL OF SANDWICH STRUCTURES & MATERIALS
Volume 24, Issue 7, Pages 2013-2029

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/10996362221116572

Keywords

Sandwich structure; damage tolerance; compression after impact (CAI) strength; co-cure; ply waviness; quasi-isotropic stacking sequence

Funding

  1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Marshall Space Flight Center [58577.08.50.50.40.14]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study presents experimental results showing that the CAI testing results of aluminum honeycomb core sandwich structure are influenced by material direction. Previous research has shown different CAI strengths, and this study further reveals the cause of this difference, which is the change in ply sequence of the face sheet material.
This study presents experimental results of compression after impact (CAI) testing of aluminum honeycomb core sandwich structure with face sheets made of quasi-isotropic carbon/epoxy with two orthogonal directions of testing. In a previous study examining the CAI strength of honeycomb sandwich structure,(1) it was found that that specimens had different CAI strengths depending on whether the core was oriented in the L or W direction. Since the face sheets were quasi-isotropic and the core should not (theoretically) affect the CAI strength for a given amount of damage (if the specimens fail by face sheet failure), this result was puzzling. In the study presented in this paper, further CAI tests, along with open hole compression testing were used in an attempt to ferret out the cause of the differing CAI strengths in the aforementioned study. The results showed that the lower CAI strength values were not due to the core orientation, but to the change in the quasi-isotropic face sheet ply sequence due to the 90 degrees rotation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available