Buckling Behavior Of Laminates Composite Under Compressive Loading
This research is dedicated to the study of buckling behavior of composite panels subjected to compressive loading. It focuses on the in vestjgation buckling behavior of composite structures. Fabrication of test specimen which includes two types of materials that are CFRP and GFRP are made prior t...
| Summary: | This research is dedicated to the study of buckling behavior of composite panels
subjected to compressive loading. It focuses on the in vestjgation buckling behavior of
composite structures. Fabrication of test specimen which includes two types of materials
that are CFRP and GFRP are made prior to compression test as per ASTM 0695, with
dimension of 75 mm x 10 mm x 2 mm. The effect of loading rate is also considered in
this study. with the range of 1.3 mmlmin to 1.5 mm/min. Under compressive loading, for
CFRP laminates, woven possessed higher stiffness and compressive strength. At loadjng
rate of I .3 mm/min, the stiffness and compressive strength are low. For the GFRP
laminate, the specimens showed highest stiffness at loading rate of 1.5 mm/min.
Comparison between CFRP (woven) and GFRP (woven) showed that CFRP (woven) is
higher in terms of stiffness as well as compressive strength. At microscopic level, from
SEM micrograph, it is observed that for CFRP laminates, fi·acture surface is relatively
smooth and consists of a network of blocky outcrops of fibres and resin at different
level. The transverse strength of laminae is poor compared to the longitudinal tensile
strength. The fracture surfaces show the failure of single fibres , kink band, and
microbuckling for each specimen. For OFRP laminates, the fracture surface consists of
bundle of fibres and overlapping platelet topography in the resin, termed hackles or
lacerations. In the compressive fracture region, striation can be seen on both the fibres
and the epoxy. lt is observed that there are some similarities between two types of
materials that is fonnation of kinking band and microbuckling failure surface. Both of
materials have a longitudinal fracture bundle of fibre and the other fibre fracture in
different direction (longitudinal). From the numerical simulation via Nastran/Patran, at
preliminaJy stage, it is found that the CFRP laminates showed the buckling behavior
with stiffness higher than GFRP when load is applied at 1.3 mm/min, while the critical
load ofGFRP is lower than CFRP. |
|---|