4.5 Article

Scattering of the fundamental anti-symmetric Lamb wave at delaminations in composite laminates

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
卷 129, 期 3, 页码 1288-1296

出版社

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/1.3533741

关键词

-

资金

  1. University of Queensland
  2. Cooperative Research Centre for Advanced Composite Structures (CRC-ACS)
  3. Australian Research Council [DP0771585]
  4. Australian Research Council [DP0771585] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An analysis of the scattering characteristics of the fundamental anti-symmetric (A(0)) Lamb wave at a delamination in a quasi-isotropic composite laminate is presented. Analytical solutions for this problem do not exist due to the anisotropic nature and multilayer characteristics of composite laminates. This study uses a three-dimensional finite element (FE) method and experimental measurements to provide physical insight into the scattering phenomena. Good agreement is found between simulations and experimental measurements. The results show that the A(0) Lamb wave scattering at a delamination in composite laminates is much more complicated than the scattering at a defect in isotropic plates. Scatter amplitudes and scatter directivity distributions depend on the delamination size to wavelength ratio and the through-thickness location of the delamination damage. The study also investigates the feasibility of the common experimental practice of simulating delamination damage by bonding masses to the surface of composite laminates for guided wave damage detection and characterization methodologies verifications. The results suggest that care is required to use bonded masses to simulate delamination damage for verifying and optimizing damage characterization techniques. In summary, the results of the investigation help to further advance the use of the A(0) Lamb wave for damage detection and characterization. (C) 2011 Acoustical Society of America. [DOI: 10.1121/1.3533741]

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

4.5
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