4.7 Article

Three-point bending properties of carbon fiber/honeycomb sandwich panels with short-fiber tissue and carbon-fiber belt interfacial toughening at different loading rate

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2021.106289

关键词

Composite sandwich structures; Interfacial toughening; Three-point bending; Loading rate

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation [11872138, 11702048, 11732004]
  2. Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST [2018QNRC001]
  3. Dalian Young TechStar Project [2019RQ045, 2019RQ069]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Experimental results show that both short aramid fiber tissue and carbon fiber belts can enhance the bending performances of carbon fiber/honeycomb sandwich panels at different loading rates, leading to increased energy absorption and peak load. Crack isolation phenomenon is identified as the main mechanism for avoiding interfacial damage of the sandwich specimen.
The bending performances at different loading rate are studied for carbon fiber/honeycomb sandwich panels toughened by short aramid fiber tissues and carbon fiber belts. The carbon fiber belts are stitched cross the pores of honeycomb core for interfacial improvements. Three-point bending tests at different loading rates are carried out to investigate the effect of short aramid fiber tissue and carbon fiber belt on mechanical properties of carbon fiber/honeycomb sandwich specimens. Experimental results firstly indicate that the short-aramid-fiber interfacial toughening and carbon fiber belts toughening could both enhance the energy absorption and peak load of sandwich specimens at loading rates ranging from 2 mm/min to 500 mm/min. The failure modes and microstructures of toughened specimens are observed to analyse and explain the underlying mechanism of enhancing effect. It is illustrated that crack isolation phenomenon is found to be the main mechanism for avoiding interfacial damage of the sandwich specimen.

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