People | Locations | Statistics |
---|---|---|
Naji, M. |
| |
Motta, Antonella |
| |
Aletan, Dirar |
| |
Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
Ertürk, Emre |
| |
Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
Kononenko, Denys |
| |
Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
Bih, L. |
| |
Casati, R. |
| |
Muller, Hermance |
| |
Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
Azam, Siraj |
| |
Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
Blanpain, Bart |
| |
Ali, M. A. |
| |
Popa, V. |
| |
Rančić, M. |
| |
Ollier, Nadège |
| |
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
Landes, Michael |
| |
Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
González, Ev
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (2/2 displayed)
Places of action
Organizations | Location | People |
---|
article
Hygrothermal effects on the translaminar fracture toughness of cross-ply carbon/epoxy laminates: Failure mechanisms
Abstract
The present work addresses the damage mechanisms of polymer-based laminated composite materials under different hygrothermal conditions by means of the translaminar fracture toughness using Double Edge Notched Tensile tests of a cross-ply laminate manufactured with T800S/M21 carbon/epoxy material.Three different conditions were considered: as received-room temperature (AR/RT), wet-room temperature (WET/RT), and wet-high temperature (WET/HOT). The highest fracture toughness was for WET/HOT and the lowest for WET/RT. To observe the corresponding failure mechanisms, Scanning Electronic Microscopy (SEM) analysis was performed. The SEM inspections show that the pull-out length and the frictional coefficient are the most significant parameters that best explain the differences observed in the crack propagation and the fracture toughness. For AR/RT, the suitable adhesion between components allows stresses to be transferred from the matrix to the fibers, so the crack is practically continuous in the same failure plane and the pull-out is barely visible. However, higher pull-out lengths can be observed in WET/RT and WET/HOT, especially in the second one. For WET/RT, the crack surface shows fiber bundles at different pull-out lengths, while for WET/HOT fibers are broken individually at longer pull-out lengths. According to the moisture absorption in WET/RT and WET/HOT, a lower frictional coefficient is thought to slightly reduce the fracture toughness, which can be compared between AR/RT and WET/RT. Nevertheless, the highest fracture toughness is caused by the large pull-out lengths in WET/HOT tests, despite the reduction of the frictional coefficient. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd.