4.7 Article

Evaluation of the integrity of 3D orthogonal woven composites with embedded polymer optical fibers

期刊

COMPOSITES PART B-ENGINEERING
卷 78, 期 -, 页码 79-85

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.03.092

关键词

Glass fibers; Resins; 3-Dimensional reinforcement; Mechanical properties

资金

  1. North Carolina State University College of Textiles

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to their high flexibility, high tensile strain and high fracture toughness, polymer optical fibers (POF) are excellent candidates to be utilized as embedded sensors for structure health monitoring of fiber reinforced composites. In 3D orthogonal woven structures yarns are laid straight and polymer optical fiber can be easily inserted during preform formation either as a replacement of constituents or between them. The results of the previous paper indicated how an optic fiber sensor can be integrated into 3D orthogonal woven preforms with no signal loss. This paper addresses whether incorporating POF into 3D orthogonal woven composites affects their structure integrity and performance characteristics. Range of 3D orthogonal woven composites with different number of layers and different weft densities was fabricated. The samples were manufactured with and without POF to determine the effect of embedding POF on composite structure integrity. Bending, tensile strength tests, and cross section analysis were conducted on the composite samples. Results revealed that integrity of 3D orthogonal woven composite was not affected by the presence of POF. Due to its high strain, embedded POF was able to withstand the stresses without failure as a result of conducting destructive tests of the composite samples. Micrograph of cross-section of composite samples showed that minimum distortion of the yarn cross-section in vicinity of POF and no presence of air pocked around the embedded POF which indicates that 3D woven preform provided a good host for embedded POF. (C) 2015 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