4.7 Article

Process parameters design of a three-dimensional and five-directional braided composite joint based on finite element analysis

期刊

MATERIALS & DESIGN
卷 46, 期 -, 页码 291-300

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2012.10.025

关键词

3D five-directional braided composites; Elastic constants calculation; 3D braided composite joint; Finite element analysis; Parameters design

资金

  1. Tianjin Municipal Science and Technology Commission, China [10SYSYJC27800, 11ZCKFSF00500, 2010ZD02]
  2. Ministry of Education Key Project of Science and Technology, China [211007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents an analytical method for designing the configuration of composite joint with three-dimensional (3D) five-directional braided composites. Based on the analysis of 3D braided structure characteristics, the elastic properties of the 3D five-directional braided composites were determined by the volume averaging method. The effects of the braiding angle and fiber volume fraction on the elastic constants of the braided composites were also discussed. Finite element analysis on the load capacity of the 3D five-directional braided composite joint was implemented using the software ANSYS Workbench 14.0. The influence of braiding angle on the stress, strain and deformation of the composite joint under tensile loading were calculated. The results show that when the fiber volume fraction of the 3D five-directional braided preform is given, the equivalent stress of the composite joint decreases monotonically as the braiding angle increases, while the normal stress, maximum principal stress and total deformation firstly decreases and then increases. Based on the finite element analysis, we found that at the fiber volume fraction of 60%, the braiding angle within the range of 30-35 degrees are the optimum processing parameters for the 3D five-directional braided composite joint structure that used in the tensile load 320 N condition. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据