4.7 Article

Axial crush behavior and energy absorption capability of foam-filled GFRP tubes manufactured through vacuum assisted resin infusion process

Journal

THIN-WALLED STRUCTURES
Volume 98, Issue -, Pages 263-273

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tws.2015.10.004

Keywords

GFRP tube; Foam-filled; Axial crush behavior; Energy absorption; Analytical model

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation for the Youth of China [51408305, 51208251]
  2. Key Program of National Natural Science Foundation of China [51238003]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20140946]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Foam-filled circular metallic tube has been widely used in safety design of automobile, space craft recovery and so on due to its advantage of high energy absorption. But poor chemical stability and easily oxidized of metal materials seriously threaten the durability and safety of the traditional metallic tube. The application of fiber reinforcement polymer (FRP) can effectively address these issues. In this paper, a simple and innovative foam-filled GFRP tube, fabricated by vacuum assisted resin infusion process, is proposed to enhance the durability and improve the energy absorption capacity. An experimental study was conducted to validate the effectiveness of this kind of absorptor for increasing the energy absorption capacity. Meanwhile, the influences of GFRP skin thickness, diameter of tube, foam density and fiber orientation angle of GFRP mat on failure mode, initial stiffness, stroke efficiency and specific energy absorption were also investigated. An analytical model, considered the confinement effect on foam core and local buckling of GFRP skin, was also developed to predict the ultimate peak strength of foam-filled GFRP tubes. The experimental and analytical results were shown to be well matched. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available