Characterization of CFRP and GFRP Composite Materials at High Strain Rate Tensile Loading PDFDrive (SFILE

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 113

CHARACTERIZATION OF CFRP AND GFRP COMPOSITE MATERIALS AT

HIGH STRAIN RATE TENSILE LOADING

A Thesis by

Anand B. Deshpande

Bachelor of Engineering, Dr. B.A.M. University, India, 2002

Submitted to the Department of Mechanical Engineering


And the faculty of Graduate School of
Wichita State University
in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science

December 2006
© Copyright 2006 by Anand B. Deshpande

All Rights Reserved

Note that thesis and dissertation work is protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. Only
the author has the legal right to publish, produce, sell, or distribute this work. Author
permission is needed for others to directly quote significant amounts of information in their
own work. Limited amounts of information cited, paraphrased, or summarized from the work
may be used with proper citation of where to find the original work.
CHARACTERIZATION OF CFRP AND GFRP COMPOSITE MATERIALS AT HIGH
STRAIN RATE TENSILE LOADING

The following faculty members have examined the final copy of this thesis for form and
content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Mechanical Engineering.

__________________________________

Hamid M. Lankarani, Committee Chair

___________________________________

K. Suresh Raju, Co-Chair and Committee Member

___________________________________

Bob Minaie, Committee Member

iii
DEDICATION

To my parents and friends


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to present my sincere gratitude towards my advisor Dr. Hamid

Lankarani for his continuous support and guidance in completing my thesis. In all the

difficult times he supported me like a friend and cared like a parent and truly showed me

that creativity can only flourish if the mind is set free. I learned a great deal of things

from him in my entire journey of MS.

It is difficult to overstate my gratitude to my co-advisor Dr. K. Suresh Raju, who

has always helped me understanding technical details. For his valuable help, patience,

encouragement, I owe him the deepest gratitude. It’s hard to express the thanks

towards him in words.

I thank Dr. Bob Minaie for reviewing my manuscript and helping me to improve

this thesis. Special gratitude is given to Dr. Chandrashekhar Thorbole for his timely

guidance and support.

Most of my experiments would not have been possible without help from NIAR

laboratories.

I owe the deepest appreciation to my colleagues Vivek Mariyanna, Satish

Dandayudhapani, Sandeep Shetty, Juan Acosta Felipe, Manoj Varma, and Mohan

Ghimire and engineers from the National Institute for Aviation Research, especially for

Kim Leng Poon, Siddartha Arood for their kind assistance in carrying out experiments

and helping with various applications.

I am indebted to my many colleagues and friends for providing a stimulating and

fun environment to learn and grow. I wish to thank my best friends from Wichita State

University; Vinay Bhamare, Amit Yeole, Ashwin Sheshadri, Divakara Basavaraju, and

v
Govind Pillai for helping me to get through difficult times and for their emotional support,

entertainment and caring.

Lastly and most importantly, I want to thank my parents who have been a source

of encouragement and inspiration throughout my life.

Finally, I would like to thank all the direct and indirect supports that helped me

complete this thesis.

vi
ABSTRACT

High strength-to-weight ratio, directional strength and stiffness are the significant

factors, forcing polymer composites into the Aerospace, Marine and Automotive

industries. Due to these major factors fuel efficiency and crashworthiness properties are

the significant outcomes from use of these advanced materials. The work presented in

this thesis investigates the experimental study of tensile properties of in-plane polymer

matrix composite materials in Quasi-Static and High Strain Rate tests. Behavior of

Glass fiber-reinforced (GFRP) and Carbon fiber reinforced (CFRP) composite materials

is studied. The test coupons are balanced and symmetric in fiber orientation with

respect to the test direction. With a MTS 810 high stroke rate test machine the related

experiments are carried out to find out the mechanical properties of test specimens. The

test coupons are tested for quasi-static test of 0.05 in/min and at high speed of up to

500 in/s. All specimens are tested till total failure to point up the effect of high strain rate

on failure strength.

In this work, a new method to obtain stress-strain curves for the tensile tests is

proposed. The strain rate nature of composite laminates in tensile loadings clearly show

that unlike in metals these materials do not exhibit the constant strain rate behavior in

case of high strain rate tests. Throughout the test, the strain rate values change due to

the dynamics of the system and directional stiffness of the composite laminates. In case

of 0º fiber oriented specimens, the fiber properties dominate the matrix properties as

fiber strength is much higher than that of matrix materials. For different fiber orientations

of the laminates the strain rate varies for the same stroke rate tests as the matrix

material starts playing role in case of higher fiber angles.

vii
The outcome shows that high stroke rates have a considerable effect on the

properties of the composites materials. The increment of the failure strength with high

stroke rate is proportional to the strain rate. In the future developments the stress-strain

curves obtained from these various tensile tests can be used to insert in a finite element

code to develop a material model for computational simulations.

viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page

1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Simple Tensile Test ................................................................................... 2


1.2 Important Factors in Tensile Testing of Composite Materials .................... 4
1.2.1 Deformation of Mechanical Links .................................................. 4
1.2.2 Stress Concentration .................................................................... 4
1.2.3 Alignment Precision ...................................................................... 5
1.2.4 Strain Measurement...................................................................... 6

2. BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................... 7

2.1 General Terms and Purpose of Tensile Testing ........................................ 7


2.2 Literature Review ....................................................................................... 8

3. PROBLEM STATEMENT AND SOLUTION APPROACH .................................. 20

3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 20


3.2 Statement of Problem .............................................................................. 21
3.3 Solution Approach ................................................................................... 22

4. MATERIAL SPECIFICATION AND TEST SET-UP ............................................ 23

4.1 Material Specifications ............................................................................. 23


4.2 Static Testing ........................................................................................... 24
4.3 High Speed Testing ................................................................................. 25

5. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS .............................................................................. 29

5.1 Test Results of Newport PWCF 0º specimens ......................................... 29


5.2 Test Results of Newport PWCF 15º, 30º, and 45º specimens ................. 30
5.3 Stress-Strain Plots for Newport PWCF (0º, 15º, 30º, 45º) ........................ 33
Specimens in Static Loading
5.4 Stress-Strain Behavior for Newport PWCF (0º) Specimens in ................. 35
Higher Stroke Rates
5.5 Failure Patterns of Newport PWCF (0º) Specimens in Different .............. 38
Stroke Rates

6. METHODOLOGY FOR ISO STRAIN RATE CHARACTERIZATION.................. 41

6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 41


6.2 Variable Strain Rate Behavior .................................................................. 42

ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Chapter Page

7. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS ................................... 49

7.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 49


7.2 Future Recommendations........................................................................ 50

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................. 51

APPENDIX ................................................................................................................. 55

x
LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Summary of Systems Used for Dynamic Loading ................................................ 9

2. Summary of Test Data for Newport PWCF Material (0º) .................................... 29

3. Summary of Test Data for Newport PWCF Material (15º, 30º, 45º) .................... 30

4. Summary of Test Data for Newport Glass Fiber Material (0º, 15º, 30º, 45º) ....... 70

xi
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. General specimen geometry................................................................................. 3

2. Modified specimen geometry .............................................................................. 21

3. Static Test Set-up ............................................................................................... 24

4. Set-up of mechanical grips and slack inducer mechanism ................................. 26

5. Strength comparison for Newport PWCF (0º) specimens on the ........................ 31

basis of stroke rates

6. Strength distribution over the range of fiber orientation angles for ..................... 32

Newport PWCF material in quasi-static stroke rates

7. Stress-Strain behavior in quasi-static test for Newport PWCF (0º) material ....... 33

8. Stress-Strain behavior in quasi-static test for Newport (15º) material ................. 34

9. Stress-Strain behavior in quasi-static test for Newport PWCF (30º) material ..... 34

10. Stress-Strain behavior in quasi-static test for Newport PWCF (45º) material ..... 35

11. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 1 in/s stroke rate ....... 36

12. Stress-Strain behavior of 0º Newport PWCF in 10 in/s stroke rate ..................... 36

13. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 100 in/s stroke rate ... 37

14. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 250 in/s stroke rate ... 37

15. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 500 in/s stroke rate ... 38

16. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) material in static stroke rate ..................... 38

17. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 1 in/s stroke rate ..................... 39

18. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 10 in/s stroke rate ................... 39

19. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 100 in/s stroke rate ................. 39

xii
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure Page

20. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ............................... 40

21. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ............................... 40

22. Strain-Time data for Newport PWCF (0º) material for 100 in/s test .................... 43

23. Strain Rate-Strain data for Newport PWCF (0º) material for 100 in/s test .......... 44

24. Family of Stress-Strain Rate curves for different strain intervals ........................ 45

25. Family of Stress-Strain Rate curves for different strain intervals ........................ 46

26. Family of Stress-Strain curves for Newport PWCF (0º) material at ................... 47

different strain rates

27. Family of Stress-Strain curves for Newport Glass fiber (0º) material at .............. 48

different strain rates

28. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 1 in/s stroke rate .................. 56

29. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 1 in/s stroke rate .................. 57

30. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 1 in/s stroke rate .................. 57

31. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ................ 58

32. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ................ 58

33. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ................ 59

34. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 100 in/s stroke rate .............. 59

35. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 100 in/s stroke rate .............. 60

36. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 100 in/s stroke rate .............. 60

37. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 250 in/s stroke rate .............. 61

38. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 250 in/s stroke rate .............. 61

xiii
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure Page

39. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 250 in/s stroke rate .............. 62

40. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 500 in/s stroke rate .............. 62

41. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 500 in/s stroke rate .............. 63

42. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 500 in/s stroke rate .............. 63

43. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in static stroke rate ................................. 64

44. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ................................. 64

45. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ............................... 64

46. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ............................. 65

47. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ............................. 65

48. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ............................. 65

49. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in static stroke rate ................................. 66

50. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ................................. 66

51. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ............................... 66

52. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ............................. 67

53. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ............................. 67

54. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ............................. 67

55. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in static stroke rate ................................. 68

56. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ................................. 68

57. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ............................... 68

58. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ............................. 69

59. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ............................. 69

xiv
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure Page

60. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ............................. 69

61. Stress-Strain behavior of 0º Newport Glass-Fiber in Quasi-static test ................ 71

62. Stress-Strain behavior of 15º Newport Glass-Fiber in Quasi-static test .............. 72

63. Stress-Strain behavior of 30º Newport Glass-Fiber in Quasi-static test .............. 72

64. Stress-Strain behavior of 45º Newport Glass-Fiber in Quasi-static test .............. 73

65. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 1 in/s stroke rate .............. 74

66. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ............ 75

67. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 100 in/s stroke rate .......... 75

68. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 250 in/s stroke rate .......... 76

69. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 500 in/s stroke rate .......... 76

70. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ............ 77

71. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 10 in/s stroke rate .......... 78

72. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ........ 78

73. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ........ 79

74. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ........ 79

75. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ............ 80

76. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 10 in/s stroke rate .......... 81

77. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ........ 81

78. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ........ 82

79. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ........ 82

80. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ........... 83

xv
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure Page

81. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 10 in/s stroke rate .......... 84

82. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ........ 84

83. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ........ 85

84. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ........ 85

85. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in static stroke rate ........................... 86

86. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) material in 1 in/s stroke rate.............. 86

87. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ......................... 86

88. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ....................... 87

89. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) material in 250 in/s stroke rate.......... 87

90. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ....................... 87

91. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in static stroke rate ......................... 88

92. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ......................... 88

93. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ....................... 88

94. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ..................... 89

95. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ..................... 89

96. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ..................... 89

97. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in static stroke rate ......................... 90

98. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ......................... 90

99. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ....................... 90

100. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ..................... 91

101. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ..................... 91

xvi
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure Page

102. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ..................... 91

103. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in static stroke rate ......................... 92

104. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 1 in/s stroke rate ......................... 92

105. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 10 in/s stroke rate ....................... 92

106. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 100 in/s stroke rate ..................... 93

107. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 250 in/s stroke rate ..................... 93

108. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 500 in/s stroke rate ..................... 93

109. Family of Stress-Strain Curves for Newport PWCF (30º) material ...................... 94

110. Family of Stress-Strain Curves for Newport Glass Fiber (30º) material ............. 94

111. Family of Stress-Strain Curves for Newport PWCF (45º) material ..................... 95

112. Family of Stress-Strain Curves for Newport Glass Fiber (45º) material .............. 95

xvii
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

A composite material is formed by the combination of two or more different

materials to form a new material with improved material properties. The oldest

composite material is wood consisting of cellulose fibers in a lignin matrix. When

composites are selected over traditional materials such as metal alloys it is usually

because of one or more of the following advantages:

1. Weight:

Light weight

Weight distribution

2. Strength and Stiffness:

High strength-to-weight ratio

Directional strength and/or stiffness

3. Surface Properties:

Corrosion resistance

Weather resistance

Tailored surface finish

4. Thermal Properties:

Low thermal conductivity

Low coefficient of thermal expansion

1
Fiber-reinforced composite materials are characterized by specific stiffness and

strength exceeding that of similar metal structures. With emphasis on light weight

vehicles, the use of composite materials in aerospace and automotive structures has

created a need to further understand the energy absorption characteristics of composite

materials.

High strength and light weight remain the best combination that is forcing

composite materials in the new field from last few decades. Even if bulk of a metal or

other material provides a certain degree of safety but at the same time it can have

heavy weight parts and consequently high energy transfer in case of safety in terms of

weight. Composite materials are extensively used in aerospace, marine and automotive

industries due to the need for increased fuel efficiency, corrosion resistance and fatigue

resistance. In recent years of materials research work high strain rate testing of

laminated composites gained a significant importance as these materials are

prominently used in lightweight structural applications and there are many cases in

which the mechanical properties of composite materials are notably reliant on the strain

rate. The ultimate strength for composite materials show significant increment

compared to the value under static loading conditions.

1.1 Simple Tensile Test

A thin flat strip of material having a constant rectangular cross section, as shown

in Figure1 is mounted in the grips of a mechanical testing machine and monotonically

loaded in tension while recording the load. The ultimate strength of the material can be

determined from the maximum load carried before failure. If the coupon strain is

2
monitored with strain or displacement transducers then the stress-strain response of the

material can be determined [1].

Tab Area Gage Section

Overall Length

Thickness Tab Bevel Angle

Figure 1. General specimen geometry.

Tensile testing is the most fundamental type of mechanical testing and applies a

proof load to a specimen past the yield point to failure. This test method is intended to

construct tensile property data for specified material, structural design and analysis. As

per the ASTM standards for tensile testing of the composite materials, the test

specimens are balanced and symmetric laminates towards to the test direction.

Influential factors for the tensile response of the composites are: materials, methods of

material preparation, ply stacking sequence, specimen conditioning, specimen

alignment and gripping and condition of testing. Specimens may be dog bone tensile

bars or dumbbell shape or straight sided specimens with end tabs. Any tough adhesive

system that can meet the test environments can be used with a minimum, uniform

bondline thickness to reduce the undesirable stress concentrations while bonding the

tabs to the test coupons [1]. Tensile tests provide following mechanical properties in the

test direction:

3
Ultimate tensile strength

Ultimate tensile strain

Young’s Modulus

Poisson’s ratio

1.2 Important Factors in Tensile Testing of Composite Materials:

1.2.1 Deformation of Mechanical Links

High performance composites, such as those made from carbon or ceramic

fibers, are generally very stiff and strong, but also quite brittle, making them especially

sensitive to non-uniform loading during axial tests. This means that the testing

instrument requires high force capacity and a very stiff design. If the load frame lacks

sufficient stiffness, it will absorb too much energy as the specimen is loaded. Then, as

the specimen begins to fail, energy will be transferred from the load frame back to the

specimen, causing premature failure and giving an erroneous maximum strength value

[3].

1.2.2 Stress Concentration

Some of the most common tests performed on composite materials are designed

to determine tensile properties. However, preparation of tensile specimens is

particularly challenging. Because most composites have a high ratio of tensile strength

to shear strength, the tab area of dog bone geometry tends to shear off. If a straight-

sided specimen is used, stress concentrations from gripping generally cause failure.

Therefore, many composite specimens require double tabs to be bonded to both sides

at the ends. The tabs distribute gripping stresses and prevent specimen failure caused

by grip jaws damaging the specimen's surface [16]. Specimen bending during tensile

4
tests can arise from misalignment of the grip or the specimen. The testing machine also

must have good repeatability of grip alignment from test to test to ensure that stresses

are uniform across the specimen's width. Considering that the material is strong, the

necessary clamping forces can be significant so that the specimen will not slip through

the grips of the testing machine. The problem then is how to reduce these required

clamping forces, and maintain them from dropping the precise tensile strength of the

specimen. One solution to this problem is to build the specimen as thin as theoretically

possible while maintaining it as representative of the material specification. Specimen

width is not an issue in this case because both gripping area and applied force fluctuate

in direct proportion to the specimen width. By forcing these restrictions, it is always

beneficial to get rid of, or at least minimize the stress concentrations introduced by the

grips. Generally the end tabs used are of composite materials only due to the ability of

machining the tabs and test material at the same time. The most recent version of

ASTM D 3039 [1] has revised the use of end tabs with reinforcement at ± 45°. The

reason for specifying the ± 45° material is that it imposes less constraint on the

specimen in both the longitudinal and lateral directions [27].

1.2.3 Alignment Precision

Many composites are designed to be much stronger in one orientation than

another. Precise alignment in the test fixture is vital, because even a slight angle can

produce an unexpected failure mode and invalidate the test. For example, a

misalignment might produce a transverse failure rather than the intended axial failure,

because the transverse strength of the material might be extremely low relative to its

5
axial strength. A load frame with high lateral stiffness provides better alignment and

reduces stress concentrations [3].

1.2.4 Strain Measurement

Strain measurement of composites is more difficult than with conventional

materials. Because composites release a large amount of energy at failure,

conventional clip-on extensometers can be damaged. Bonded strain gauges are often

required to measure bending or determine Poisson's Ratio. A test coupon should

include a region of uniform stress over which strain measurements can be made i.e.

gage length and in that region the expected failure should occur [3].

CHAPTER 2

6
BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 General Terms and Purpose of Tensile testing

Tensile tests are performed for several reasons. The results of these tests are

used for selecting the proper materials for engineering applications. Tensile properties

are measured during development of new materials so that new materials can be

developed and compared. Tensile properties of composites are often measured to

predict the material behavior under loading conditions other than uni-axial tension.

Strength of the materials is always primary concern in tensile tests. Strength can be

interpreted as the stress necessary to cause plastic deformation or the maximum stress

that materials can withstand [4].

Tensile testing of materials include following main factors as primary concerns:

Test specimens and testing equipment.

Stress-Strain curves and corresponding modulus.

Test methodology and data analysis.

High strain rate tensile testing is necessary to understand the material response

under dynamic loading conditions. Strain rates ranges between 100 s -1 to 104 s-1 can

occur in many practical events like foreign object impact damage, blast loadings,

structural impacts etc. The behavior of materials under high strain rate tensile loads

may be considerably different than that of static loadings. Strain rate sensitivity also

depends upon whether engineering or true strain formulations are used because local

stress concentrations such as necking are normally not present in high rate loadings [4].

2.2 Literature Review

7
One of the aspects of structural engineering that is and will be always appealing

is destructive testing. At different high stroke rates the performance of the fiber-

reinforced composite materials has been experimentally calculated in many conditions

mainly under tensile and compressive loads. These tests are carried out with Split

Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) method, as it depicts the properties of the materials

over a wide variety of strain rates [2, 11, and 21]. The experimental method used to

determine the dynamic properties depends on the range of strain rate required. The

easiest system is the Charpy pendulum with special fixtures for tensile tests. This

system is used in many laboratories but the drawback behind this system is limited

range of strain rates. The Falling Weight method can also produce accurate results but

this technique can also become complicated in data interpretation due to the stress

wave reflections in the fixtures and the specimen. The most widely used technique for

obtaining direct determination of material properties at higher strain rates, the split

Hopkinson bar, was introduced by Herbert Kolsky [2]. Table 1 summarizes the various

instrument types and corresponding strain rate ranges for high rate tests of composite

materials.

TABLE 1

8
SUMMARY OF SYSTEMS USED FOR DYNAMIC LOADING

Strain Rate Range


Test System Test Type
(sˉ¹)
Charpy Pendulum Tensile <100
Falling Weight Tensile <10
Hydraulic Machines Tensile, Shear 10ˉ³ to 50
Hopkinson Bar Tensile, Shear & Compression 100 to 3000

In this technique a short material specimen was deformed at a high rate while it

is essentially under a constant state of stress till it breaks. This technique was not

widely used for tensile tests in its early days because in the simple form of this test set

up the specimen could be used to get loaded only in compression.

In later research in this area researchers found out a separate test set up of

Kolsky bar (SHPB) technique for tensile testing of materials. In attempt to determine

the mechanical properties of composite materials under dynamic tensile loads, a review

of techniques was given by Harding and Welsh [6]. Difficulties encountered in the

design of a satisfactory tensile impact testing machine for composite materials were

discussed and a new method using modified version of SHPB was suggested. In the

standard tensile version of Kolsky bar apparatus the input loading bar became the

weigh-bar tube within which the output bar slides freely. Dynamic stress strain curves

for unidirectionally reinforced carbon epoxy composite in which failure occurs in less

than 30 µs at a mean strain rate of about 400s-1 were presented and their validity was

established by the authors. They also did an extension of the technique to allow the

testing of woven reinforced glass/epoxy composites and dynamic stress-strain curves

obtained for which the time to failure approach 100 µs and the average strain rate was

9
around 1000s-1. Comparative stress-strain curves at low and intermediate rates of strain

were obtained and compared.

Many researchers use and thus show that SHPB technique is the most popular.

Although, use of split bars for material testing needs very intricate study of wave

propagation in composite materials. These factors have to be taken into account to

interpret the correct result values of tests at range of any stroke rate.

Use of servo hydraulic machines can minimize the issues of wave propagation,

which is a great help in producing better and very much repetitive results [7, 16, and

26]. Pardo and Baptiste [16] carried out tests of unidirectional E-Glass/polyester

composite specimens on a Schenck high strain rate hydraulic test machine to explore

the effect of strain rate on tensile properties. Different fiber orientations of 0°, 90° and

5% weft fibers combined with unidirectional fibers were tested from velocities of quasi-

static up to 20 m/s. Difficulties faced due to high velocities were solved by modifying the

specimen geometry and reducing the shock at the grip engagement link, in order to

obtain reliable material properties. 5% volume weft fibers were present in the

specimens and these were the source of the damage development. 0° and 90°

specimens with and without weft fibers were tested. The failure behavior of the pure

unidirectional fibers was linear and brittle. Also the rate effect on 90° composite was

significant on maximum stress but the mechanical characteristics of the 0° composite

evolved weakly.

Hayes and Adams [5] conducted various tests at various tests speeds and load

levels to characterize the tensile impact behavior and rate sensitive materials properties

of unidirectional glass/epoxy and graphite/epoxy composites. An instrumented tensile

10
impact test system with partial loading capabilities has been developed and tested. A

standard Pendulum type impact testing machine was modified for these tests. The

various test speeds used in this research were 2.7, 3.4, 3.8, 4.5, and 4.9 m/s. The

micromechanics of fracture within the composite caused by impact were studied, using

partially loaded impact test specimens and scanning electron microscopy. The

glass/epoxy material exhibited a considerable increase in the strength and modulus as

the strain rates were increased but in case of the graphite/epoxy material system the

results were opposite to that of glass/epoxy. There was decrease in the strength of

graphite/epoxy test coupons.

Peterson and Pantano [7] studied the mechanical response of discontinuous fiber

reinforced styrene-maleic anhydride (S/MA) polymer and have been characterized at

static and high strain rates. Five different materials were tested and ultimate strength,

failure strains and effective moduli for each material were investigated as function of

strain rate under dry and wet test conditions. The authors got a different type of results

here in terms of failure strains for the materials tested. Results of the S/MA tests

showed 60% increase in the strength but there was reduction in failure strains at higher

speed tests. All these different materials showed twice the strength and 2.5 times the

stiffness and less than a tenth of the strain to failure compared to the unreinforced

S/MA. There was significant increment in ultimate strength in the materials in dry test

conditions than that of wet test environments.

Barre’ and Chotard [8] studied the tensile dynamic behavior of glass fiber

reinforced polyester and phenolic resins in order to find the effects of strain rate on the

mechanical properties of composite materials produced by resin transfer molding (RTM)

11
and pultrusion processes. They created a new specimen design and validated using

drop-weight dynamic tests. The results showed that the dynamic elastic modulus and

strength increased by a ratio for majority of the materials studied. The shear modulus

measured with off-axis and ±45 coupons produce different effects as a function of strain

rate.

The effects of strain rate on the mechanical behavior of Scotchply type 1002

glass/epoxy angle-ply laminates were investigated by Staab and Gilat [9]. Tests were

conducted at high strain rates of approximately 1000/s using direct tension split

Hopkinson bar apparatus and quasi-static tests of strain rate approximately 0.0001 s-1

using servo-hydraulic testing machine. Results showed that maximum normal stress

experienced by glass/epoxy laminates is higher for dynamic than for quasi-static loading

conditions. Authors described that both fibers and matrix are sensitive to strain rates but

fibers dominate the laminate properties in case of high rate loadings. Authors also

mentioned that the failure patterns change with the fiber orientations.

On the basis of loading and unloading tests, the transient temperature rise

measurement and energy analysis of unidirectional fiber reinforced epoxy under tensile

impact, Yuanming and Xing [10] proposed a coated fiber bundle model. According to

this model, a one dimensional constitutive equation for glass fiber reinforced epoxy in

tensile impact tests from 300 to 2000 s-1 was derived from statistical analysis of the test

data. Yuanming and Xing also proposed that the constitutive equation for coated fiber

bundle model has general meaning and it can be used for other unidirectional brittle

fiber-reinforced resins.

12
Lifshitz and Leber [11] investigated the interlaminar tensile strength and modulus

of two material systems namely PW E-glass/epoxy and Unidirectional Carbon fiber

epoxy of 30-32 mm thick plates at high strain rates with SHPB. Results for CFRP

specimens were too scattered and also showed that both strength and modulus were

rate sensitive and increase with the loading rates.

Hou and Ruiz [12] tested CFRP T300/914 laminates at different strain rates

ranging from 10-4 s-1 to 103 s-1. Specimens were waisted symmetrically in the thickness

direction and there were difficulties in testing of ±45 tension test specimens. So the

specimens for ±45 were used as rectangular in cross section. In tension tests,

specimens remained virtually linear elastic up to failure. Tensile modulus and strength in

0° direction were rate dependent and tests on ±45 specimens gave non-linear stress

strain curves. Authors have discussed one more important issue that due to brittle

failure pattern of the specimen’s, plasticity should not be considered as a factor in

damage predictions of the composite materials.

In later research work with Zhou and Xia [13] carried out tensile impact tests on

T300/Al and M40J/Al (metal matrix) composite specimens with the help of a custom-

designed Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) apparatus. Quasi-static tensile tests

were performed on the MTS-810 apparatus to compare the data with dynamic test data.

Specimens were tested in the range of strain rates of 0.001 to 1300 s -1. From the

experimental results it appears that both the materials show rate sensitive behavior. The

elastic-plastic coated fiber bundle model and one dimensional damage constitutive

equation for the composite wires has been put forth by the authors based on these

experimental results. The statistical analysis of the experimental data was performed

13
using Weibull distribution, which is a continuous probability distribution. The relationship

between the mechanical parameters in the constitutive equation of the composites wires

and strain rate was derived from this statistical study.

Srikanth and Sun [14] observed the rate dependent non-linear characteristics of

the unidirectional S2 glass/8553-40 and the woven 7781/F155 E-glass fabric. The

motive was to find out a rate dependent failure model. Various tension tests were

conducted on different off-axis test coupons to acquire stress/strain data for various

strain rates. The test speeds used were in the limits of 0.0001 to 1/s. Srikanth and Sun

thus reached on a conclusion of a three parameter constitutive model to fit the test data.

Wang and Xia [15] proposed a one dimensional elastic brittle damage

constitutive equation for GRP on the basis of Double Weibull distribution function to

interpret the stress distribution. This equation was on the basis of stress-strain curves of

unidirectional GRP at a strain rate of 300/s and the coated fiber bundle model. Further-

more the tensile impact experiments on unidirectional KFRP were performed at strain

rates up to 1500/s. Experimental results showed that the mechanical properties of

KFRP were also rate dependent. Consistency between simulated results and the

experimental data confirmed that the coated fiber bundle model and the modified

constitutive equation are valid.

Strain rate dependent behavior of IM7/977-2 carbon/epoxy matrix composite in

tension is studied by testing various laminate configurations at different strain rates up

to 400-600 s-1 by Gilat and Goldberg [17]. High rate tests were conducted with SHPB

and low rate tests were conducted on conventional hydraulic testing machine. To avoid

the uncertainties in the data interpretation due to different test set ups, authors kept the

14
specimen geometry same for all specimens. Strain rates showed significant effect on

material response. General observation showed that the response at higher strain rates

is stiffer and stress-strain curve increased more rapidly with increased strain rates i.e.

higher maximum stresses were associated with deformation at higher rates.

Strain rate dependent behavior was observed for continuous filament random

mat glass polyester material when testing both in tension and compression by Fernie

and Warrior [18]. In their test data they noticed an increase in ultimate strength of 115%

in tension and corresponding 43% increase in modulus. In this work, in order to facilitate

the testing of materials with a relatively large unit cell, an instrumented falling weight

testing machine had been modified with appropriate loading rigs to allow the use of

larger specimens to test in compression, tension and shear. Till date research was

focused on various methods of reducing the test system noise and vibration from the

load data collected. These include extreme data reduction, data processing methods

and using the principle of impedance mismatching in order to absorb stress waves. But

the work had focused on eliminating noise and vibration through the design of the

system and impactor itself.

To characterize the high strain rate response of composite materials, Tsai and

Sun [19] developed a constitutive model using non-zero axis composite specimens.

Based on the experimental data, a viscoplasticity model was developed for strain rates

up to 1/s and verified with data obtained from high strain rate experiments conducted on

a SHPB using off-axis specimens. Authors used the rate dependent constitutive model

based on low strain rate tension tests on off-axis coupon specimens to predict the

15
dynamic laminate response observed in the SHPB test. Assumption made here was

that, material behavior was same in tension and compression.

At NASA Glenn Research Center Goldberg and Roberts [20, 25] used an

approach to modify the state variable constitutive equations originally developed for

metals in order to model the nonlinear, strain rate dependent deformation of polymeric

materials. One objective behind this study was to see the effects of hydrostatic stresses

on strength predictions which can be significant in polymers composites. To get the

detailed view in this direction, authors modified the equations of inelastic strain rate

tensor using classical plasticity theory definitions of effective stress and effective

inelastic strain. The results from the constitutive equations associated well with the

experiments. These constitutive equations then implemented within strength of

materials based micromechanics approach to predict the nonlinear strain rate

dependent deformation of polymer matrix composites. The mechanics approach was

then verified for different fiber angles and for different strain rates. Also in the later

research work of these authors [25], as there is not any specific material model for

predicting High Strain rate behavior using FE codes, the developed constitutive

equations were implemented in a user defined sub-routine material card to an explicit

transient dynamic finite element code LS-Dyna to get better idea of dynamic material

behavior.

Majzoobi and Saniee [21] used the high rate tensile testing apparatus called

“flying wedge” for testing of R2000 Glass/Epoxy. Specimens were tested at low rates of

10-3 s-1 using conventional Instron testing machine and up to 850 s-1 with the help of

flying wedge apparatus. Observations showed that there is significant increase in failure

16
strength and reduction in failure strain in dynamic tests compared to the static tests.

Also the rate of the increase of stress versus strain slowed down as ply angle

increased. With the help of Electron microscopy authors also showed that failure

mechanisms do not change much at high strain rates compared to low strain rates.

Fitoussi et al. [22] dealt with development and optimization of an experimental

methodology devoted to the microscopic and macroscopic characterization of

composites mechanical behavior under high speed loadings. The applied experimental

procedure has been optimized in order to isolate the inertial disturbances attributed to

the system. The optimization aims at minimizing the amplitude of noise in

measurements in order to obtain homogeneous stress-strain regions within the tested

specimen. Using a servo-hydraulic machine, monotonic and interrupted tensile tests

were performed at different strain rates. Strain rates up to 200s-1 have been applied to

SMC-R26 and woven carbon-epoxy laminates. Authors concluded that due to time

dependent (high strain rate) damage behavior the strength was increased. In extension

to this research work, currently authors are trying to develop a multi-scale FE model to

implement as a simulation tool to obtain material’s micro-structural effects in high rate

loadings.

Rio et al. [24] performed dynamic tensile tests on different carbon/epoxy

laminates of configurations 0º, 90º and quasi-isotropic [±45/0/90] s. All these tests were

carried out at two temperatures 20ºc and -600c. The work here mainly validated the Split

Hopkinson bar theory using one-dimensional wave propagation theory and analyzed the

effect of low temperature on elastic wave propagation along the bars of the and the

subsequent wave dispersion phenomena. The results of the dynamic tests showed little

17
effect of temperature and strain rate on the tensile strength of a unidirectional laminate

loaded in the fiber direction but in the other case strength increases evidently in the

transverse direction at low temperature and high strain rate. The test results presented

here by the authors indicate the non-sensitivity of carbon fibers to the temperature but

strain rate plays important role in ultimate strength values.

Shenoi and Makarov [26] dealt with experimental investigation of the high strain

rate behavior of unidirectional glass fiber-reinforced composite materials. High speed

hydraulic test machine is used to dig out the properties of unidirectional E-Glass/Epoxy

materials. Specimens were tested for static and high speed conditions separately. The

conclusion from the results here was also the same that there was significant increase

in ultimate strength and modulus of the material.

The overall issues of testing and summary for various strain rate ranges are

discussed here. These strain rates are generally covered by universal test instruments,

servo-hydraulic machines, and specialized drop towers. Strain rates above 500s -1

require other testing solutions such as SHPB/Kolsky bar. Slack grip system is used on

servo-hydraulic machines is used to ramp to the needed test speed prior to engaging

the test specimen. Specimen geometry details, Force and strain measurement details

and data collection and data reduction issues are elaborated.

Recent regulations by the government regarding automobile/aircraft safety issues

[28] have served as motivation for the development of high strain rate test data to

observe the changes in the material properties in case of a crash event. These test

results and be used as inputs in the computational softwares to build accurate material

models. By doing this expensive test methods and testing set up can be eliminated

18
which is a major step in today’s design process. Also, this will be helpful in efficient and

multiple design checks by making minor changes in the models which will lead to best

designs in the industry.

Generating high stroke rate test data is a great deal than obtaining static test

data. In a high speed tensile test, the gage section (actual material area) of a coupon

will not be under a consistent stress or strain state. In a particular test set up for high

strain rate material testing, the mechanical links should be having lowest weight

possbile while maintaining the strongest material properties. Due to this stress waves

propagate along the specimen and travel through all of the mechanical links which can

affect the load readings by load cell as the load cell will is calibrated and fixed in

between the top portion of the links. By making small test coupons this effect can be

diminished and average stress state can be simulated. Additionally, a very precise

engineering study and understanding is required when filtering high strain rate data.

Because of this, the test data recorded from the high strain rate tests should be

compared only with data obtained from tests having comparable experimental setups

and data analysis methods.

At present no specific method exists for performing high strain rate tests or for

obtaining the data generated from these tests. Major different methods in high strain

rate test and analysis techniques exist between researchers. Due to these reasons, a

standard methodology that specifically points out and resolve issues related to high

speed testing and data analysis is needed.

19
CHAPTER 3

PROBLEM STATEMENT AND SOLUTION APPROACH

3.1 Introduction

The requirement of high strain rate tensile tests is to obtain the data containing

the basic material properties like Ultimate Strength, Strain Rate distribution over the test

time and Failure Strain. This test data can be compared with the static tests data for the

same material configurations and changes in material properties can be observed with

respect to the increase in the strain rates.

The modified specimen geometry for the tests conducted is as shown in Figure 2.

The specimen geometry as per the ASTM 3039 standard is different in dimensions. But

as discussed earlier for reduction in problems of stress propagation, the specimen gage

length is reduced to 2 inches. Also, the number of laminas and width of the specimen

are reduced to trim down the strength so that it should be within the load carrying

capacity of the High Rate test machine used. (Facility provided by National Institute for

Aviation Research). Also the tabs used according to ASTM 3039 are tapered at ≥5º

angle to reduce the stress concentrations in the tabbed region. But in this present work

as the specimen geometry is modified as per requirements, the specimen thickness is

considerably thin than that of specified in ASTM standard. So the glass fiber laminate

used for tabbing is also of just 2 plies. As the tabbing laminate is very thin there is no

possibility of providing a taper for the tabs.

20
90°

0.5
1.25
3.25
4.50

Figure 2. Modified specimen geometry (All dimensions in inches).

The goal of this work is to discover the high speed tensile testing factors and

analysis technique that may have a noteworthy effect on the resulting data and to

recommend a procedure that specifically addresses the problems related to high strain

rate tensile testing of composite materials.

3.2 Statement of Problem

Making it simple, the purpose of tensile testing is to determine ultimate tensile

stress and tensile modulus of the material. With the crashworthiness perspective, the

following aspects of the composite laminated coupons in static and high strain rate

tensile loadings were to be studied:

1. The ultimate strength of the material.

2. Failure pattern of the test coupons according to the strain rates.

3. Nature of the strain rate with respect to the time and strain throughout the

test.

4. Change in ultimate strength of the materials corresponding to the fiber

orientation and strain rates.

21
3.3 Solution Approach

Using MTS test systems, the specimens are tested in static and high stroke rate

tensile loadings. A 22 Kip MTS hydraulic machine is used for all static tests and a

special purpose high rate MTS hydraulic machine is used for all high rate tests. Tests

are conducted at quasi-static rate of 0.05 in/min and at five different higher stroke rates

of 1 in/s, 10 in/s, 100 in/s, 250 in/s and 500 in/s. For each stroke rate including the static

test 3 specimens are tested of each material and each lay-up combination.

The test data obtained in each test is analyzed for iso-strain rate behavior,

ultimate tensile strength and failure strain.

22
CHAPTER 4

MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS AND TEST SET-UP

4.1 Material Specifications

Using vacuum bag forming, both quasi-static and dynamic test specimens with

identical physical and mechanical properties are manufactured. Glass and carbon fiber

pre-preg with epoxy matrix cured at the specified cure cycle in autoclave.

The materials and their lay-up combinations used to study in this present work

are as follows:

Materials used,

1. Newport NB321/7781 Satin Weave Fiberglass.

2. Newport NB321/3K70 PWCF.

Fiber orientations,

1. [0]4

2. [+15/-15]2s

3. [+30/-30]2s

4. [+45/-45]2s

The tabs are fabricated using NEWPORT NB321/7781 FIBERGLASS prepreg.

The tabs consist of two laminas (plies) oriented at 45° to the loading direction. Hysol-

9394 is used as adhesive for bonding of the tabs to the specimens.

23
4.2 Static Testing

At constant actuator velocity of 0.05 in/min, quasi-static tests were carried out

using a servo-hydraulic MTS testing machine. An MTS Load cell 100KN/22kip

specification measured the tensile load. The longitudinal strain of the specimen was

measured by uni-axial tension strain gage (Vishay micro measurements-CEA-06-

250UN-120). The M-BOND-200 adhesive is used for bonding stain gauges. Three

specimens of each combination were tested to failure at quasi-static stroke rate to get

the strain values and maximum load carrying capacity. A specimen set-up for static test

is as shown in Figure 3.

Stationary Top
Fixture
(crosshead)

Specimen

Moving
Bottom Fixture

Figure 3. Static test set-up.

24
All the materials specified above are tested in static rate for all lay-up combinations to

get the ultimate strength data in static stroke rate.

4.3 High Speed Testing

An MTS 810 high rate testing machine is used to perform dynamic tests on the

composite material specimens. This machine is designed to function at dynamic loads

of maximum of 9 Kip and actuator velocity of 500 in/s. By providing the slack-inducer

mechanism it is assured that the actuator plunger reaches the required velocity before

starting to apply load to the test coupon. The plunger displacement and recorded loads

by the load cell are calibrated to read the voltage readings in inches and pounds

respectively. Figure 4 shows the design of grips and slack inducer mechanism

(Courtesy: National Institute for Aviation Research). In this design, specimen is

manually tightened in the top and bottom grips with high strength steel bolts. In between

the bottom grip and the hydraulic actuator shaft a slack inducer mechanism is attached

so that the desired speed can be achieved before the specimen starts taking actual load

at that speed. A crushable foam ring is placed in between the bottom grip and the slack

inducer to absorb the shock due to the high speeds. The supply pressure chargers of

the hydraulic actuator must be fully charged before the start of the actual test. These

supply the force to achieve the “high speeds” which will be dissipated during the test. By

providing the slack inducer mechanism it is ensured the required constant velocity of the

plunger is achieved before the grips are engaged to start applying tensile load on the

specimen. The specimen is loaded in tension until it fails completely and the load and

strain data is simultaneously recorded by high rate data acquisition system (National

Instruments data acquisition system).

25
Load Cell

Top and Bottom


Grips

Note that
thesis
and
dissertati
on work
is
protected
by Foam
copyright, Ring
with all
rights
reserved.
Only the
author
has the
legal right Slack
Inducer
to
publish,
produce,
sell, or
distribute
this work.
Author
permissio
n is
Actuator
needed
Shaft
for others
to directly
Figure quote
4. Set-up of mechanical grips and slack inducer mechanism.
significan
t amounts
of
informatio
n in their
own
work.
Limited 26
amounts
of
informatio
The primary aim of this study is to keep the same specimen design and strain

gages for static and high speed tests. This is done to ensure that specimen geometry,

size and end fixing conditions do not affect the tensile load and strain readings. Typical

signals from the compact-size piezoelectric PCB PIEZOTRONICSINC load cell are

obtained for getting the load values in terms of voltages and then the calibration sheet

provided by the manufacturer is used to convert the voltage values in load values in

pounds. The details about the load cell are as follows;

Model: 206M33 Serial No: 1051

Type: ICP Force Sensor Bias: 10.67 VDC

The load cell is calibrated in compression mode and with a customer supplied

bolt as per the requirements of mechanical fittings available on the test fixture. Load cell

is preloaded to 26000 lbs prior to calibration. So the bias value of 10.67 V corresponds

to the preload value of 26000 lbs. This means if the load cell records a value of 10.67 V

in a test, then the load carried by the specimen in terms of pounds is 26000 lbs. So thus

the conversion factor is used to convert the obtained load data in terms of voltage to the

load values in lbs.

The Vishay 2210 signal conditioning amplifier system is used to obtain the strain

gage signals. As the high speed data acquisition system is set to record the data in

terms of 10 V calibration value, the strain gage signal conditioning amplifier is also set

for 10 V excitation voltage and respective gain settings. The maximum strain value the

specified strain gage can read is 50000 micro-strains. So the 50000 micro-strain value

corresponds to 10 V value in terms of voltage. Thus conversion factor is found out and

strain values are obtained in terms of in/in strains.

27
The high speed data acquisition system used is BNC-2090, a rack-mountable

breakout box designed for use with National Instruments data acquisition cards. The

BNC-2090 has 16 BNC inputs on the front panel, labeled ACH 0 to ACH 15 (ACH =

Analog Channel). Consequently, the BNC-2090 will accommodate 8 or 16 differential

channels of analog data inputs. In the test set-up we are interested in only four data

inputs which are actuator displacement, Load, Strain and Test time. These data signals

are then processed through the associated software provided by National Instruments

to convert the analog input signals into the desired output values.

28
CHAPTER 5

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

5.1 Test Results of Newport PWCF 0º Specimens

Considering the number of materials tested and the lay-up sequences for each

material, the task to present and explain the test data in detail for every material in this

chapter is pretty much vast. For this reason the data presented in this chapter limits for

one material and all of its lay-up combinations tested for each stroke rate.

The material taken into consideration in this chapter is Newport PWCF. Following

table describes the test results for each stroke rate for 0º lay-up combination.

TABLE 2

SUMMARY OF TEST DATA FOR NEWPORT PWCF MATERIAL (0º)

Stroke Rate Failure Stress Failure Strain Average Strain


Orientation
(in/s) (lbf/in²) (in/in) Rate (1/s)
0º (4 ply) 0.000833 107934.926 0.0146 0.000415
0º (4 ply) 1 115104.151 0.0124 0.1460
0º (4 ply) 10 118085.333 0.0120 1.7225
0º (4 ply) 100 179144.346 0.0121 57.0393
0º (4 ply) 250 87679.101 0.0121 92.2193
0º (4 ply) 500 118885.87 0.012 98.482

From the above data presented it is observed that even if the failure stress is

changing with respect to the stroke rate, the failure strain is not changing and it is

almost constant. The average strain rate mentioned in the table above is the mean

value taken for the strain rate values recorded at specific equal time intervals. From the

29
data presented above we can observe that the material strength is increasing with

respect to the stroke rate.

5.2 Test Results of Newport PWCF 15º, 30º and 45º Specimens

Now the following table describes the test data for 15º, 30º and 45º fiber angle

test coupons tested at each stroke rate.

TABLE 3

SUMMARY OF THE TEST DATA FOR NEWPORT PWCF MATERIAL (15º, 30º, 45º)

Stroke Rate Failure Stress Failure Strain Average Strain


Orientation
(in/s) (lbf /in²) (in/in) Rate (1/s)

15º (8 ply) 0.000833 79462.971 0.0124 0.000415


15º (8 ply) 1 82006.097 0.0112 0.1438
15º (8 ply) 10 88179.962 0.0112 0.5106
15º (8 ply) 100 178670.676 0.0114 48.8590
15º (8 ply) 250 87675.169 0.0117 85.2219
15º (8 ply) 500 90780.18 0.0116 92.255
30º (8 ply) 0.000833 56177.947 0.0184 0.000415
30º (8 ply) 1 64003.513 0.0170 0.1834
30º (8 ply) 10 65995.159 0.0177 1.5366
30º (8 ply) 100 151521.068 0.0172 68.1032
30º (8 ply) 250 98391.463 0.0195 95.2602
30º (8 ply) 500 82042.131 0.01823 98.574
45º (8 ply) 0.000833 31956.908 0.0604 0.000415
45º (8 ply) 1 37098.937 0.0415 0.2482
45º (8 ply) 10 38542.971 0.0414 1.9253
45º (8 ply) 100 81960.809 0.0410 58.7862
45º (8 ply) 250 94892.736 0.0411 131.1468
45º (8 ply) 500 63717.575 0.0344 170.58

30
The test results for the angled fiber orientation specimens show that the material

strength decreases as the fiber angle increases. But still taking one angle into

consideration, the failure strength is directly proportional to the stroke rate.

The Strength comparison chart for 0º fiber orientation specimens is presented

below from which one can get clear understanding of the material behavior in the

different stroke rate tensile tests.

Figure 5. Strength comparison for Newport PWCF (0º) specimens on the basis of
stroke rates.

In the Figure 5 we can clearly understand that the material strength is increasing

as the stroke rate is increasing but it is true till the 100 in/s tests and after that as the

stroke rate increases the strength is reduced than that of the 100 in/s tests.

31
Now considering for one stroke rate and different fiber orientation angles, we can

compare the strength distribution over the range of fiber angles as presented in Figure 6

below,

Figure 6. Strength distribution over the range of fiber orientation angles for Newport
PWCF in quasi-static stroke rate.

Here in we can clearly see that the tensile strength of the material clearly

diminish as the fiber angle of the test coupon increases. So the 0º fibers are the

strongest in a tensile test along the longitudinal direction. Same as the quasi-static

stroke rate, the material strength distribution holds true for all different stroke rates,

which means as the fiber orientation angle increases tensile strength of the material

decreases irrespective of the test rate.

32
5.3 Stress-Strain Plots for Newport PWCF (0º, 15º, 30º, 45º) Specimens in Static

Loading

To study the nature of the stress-strain graph for Newport PWCF material, the

following figure describes the brittle behavior of the material in 0º orientation. The

specimen does not elongate but breaks suddenly after a particular load range.

Figure 7. Stress-Strain behavior in quasi-static test for Newport PWCF (0º) material.

In case of higher orientation angles the nature of the stress-strain graphs goes

on changing and the specimen tends to go into the plastic deformation region as the

fiber orientation angle increases. Figure 8 describes the nature of the stress-strain

graph for Newport PWCF 15º orientation. Here we can observe that the failure strain

values are increasing and the strength of the material is diminishing as the fiber angle

increases.

33
Figure 8. Stress-Strain behavior in quasi-static test for Newport PWCF (15º) material.

Figure 9. Stress-Strain behavior in quasi-static test for Newport PWCF (30º) material.

34
Figure 10. Stress-Strain behavior in quasi-static test for Newport PWCF (45º) material.

We can observe from the above graphs that as the fiber angle is increasing,

more specimen elongation is occurring and there is reduction in ultimate strength. This

suggests that as the fiber angle increases, the material shows plastic deformation

region before failure.

5.4 Stress-Strain Behavior for Newport PWCF (0º) Specimens in Higher Stroke

Rates

Considering the various types and combinations of fiber orientations and stroke

rates, in this chapter we will observe only stress-strain nature of 0º fiber orientation with

all different stroke rates. The following figures describe the stress-strain nature of the 0º

orientation for different stroke rates.

35
Figure 11. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 12. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 10 in/s stroke rate.

36
Figure 13. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) material in 100 in/s stroke
rate.

Figure 14. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

37
Figure 15. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (0º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

5.5 Failure Patterns of Newport PWCF (0º) Specimens in different Stroke Rates

Following figures show the failure mode patterns of Newport PWCF (0º) material

in different stroke rate tests

Figure 16. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) in static stroke rate.

38
Figure 17. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 18. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 19. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

39
Figure 20. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 21. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (0º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

The figures above suggest that there is no change in failure pattern of the specimens

according to the stroke rates. In each stroke rate test the specimen is failing in the gage

section and no change can be seen in the mode of failure.

40
CHAPTER 6

METHODOLOGY FOR ISO-STRAIN RATE CHARACTERIZATION

6.1 Introduction

Up till now many researchers have done extensive work in the area of tensile

testing of polymer composites. Unlike metals there are no specified material properties

are mentioned anywhere for polymers as they exhibit anisotropic behavior. As the fiber

orientation changes, these materials display different properties. Till now many

scientists suggested many methods to determine the specific material properties so that

one can use those to implement in a Finite Element code to reduce the extensive work

of testing for individual material configuration each time.

Unlike metals, there are no specific material property cards provided in any Finite

Element Analysis (FEA) code for polymer composites. So with the data obtained from

actual testing of these materials, one needs to develop user defined material cards to

input the data for a FEA code. This is one of the ways to interpret the test data and get

an analysis model for a particular material combination so that further testing for that

combination can be eliminated and analysis software can replace the actual testing.

From the tensile testing of a material, one can get fundamental properties like

Young’s Modulus, Failure Stress and Failure Strain. To obtain the Young’s modulus,

stress-strain curves are needed. Generally to obtain a stress strain curve from a tensile

test data, the test should be at constant strain rate. In case of metals, as they show

isotropic properties and ductile in nature, one can easily achieve a constant strain rate

test requirements. But in case of polymers, these materials exhibit brittleness and non

41
ductile properties. When brittleness comes into picture, these materials can not show a

constant strain rate elongation in case of a tensile test. So throughout the test period the

specimen shows a variable strain rate elongation as the fiber breakage takes place

randomly.

To validate the real life test scenario in FEA software, one needs to input the

stress-strain curves in the material model. For this reason we need to input the stress-

strain curves obtained from a constant strain rate test. In this present study a unique

approach can be used to obtain the stress-strain curves at constant strain rates and to

input into the user defined material model.

6.2 Variable Strain Rate Behavior

From the data obtained from various stroke rate tests, the strain rates are found

out. In this present study, to obtain the strain rate throughout the test strain-time curves

are plotted for each stroke rate test. This strain-time data then differentiated with

respect to the each time instance and strain rate data is obtained. The following graph

in figure 22 shows the nature of the strain-time data. Fitting a best fit polynomial to the

strain-time curve and differentiating with respect to the time instances can get us to the

strain rate at each time point. The red line is the best fit polynomial for the strain-time

curve for a 100 in/s test. The reason to fit the polynomial is to get rid of some noise from

the data obtained from actual test. As one can obtain the strain rate at each data point

from the original data also but it gives some erratic values of strain rate due to the

noise. So fitting the polynomial is to get rid of those noisy data points and obtain a

smooth curve.

42
Figure 22. Strain-Time data for Newport PWCF (0º) in 100 in/s test.

The reason behind fitting a polynomial curve to find out the strain rate is that the

individual derivative at each time instance gives some erratic values for strain rates.

After differentiating the polynomial equation displayed above with respect to time, we

can get the strain rate data for the overall strain-time data.

Following figure 23 describes the nature of the strain rate vs. strain data. In this

graph we can clearly see that the strain rate is not constant for the total test time and is

continuously changing.

43
Figure 23. Strain Rate-Strain data for Newport PWCF (0º) in 100 in/s test.

As the strain rate is not constant in nature, we need to extract the stress strain

data from the available test data for a particular constant strain rate. As one can see

that the strain rate is starting from zero value at the start of the test and it reaches

approximately to the value of 70 s-1 at the end of the test. Like this in every stroke rate

test, the strain rate starts initially from a zero value and reaches a certain value at the

end of the test.

For extracting the constant strain rate data for a particular strain rate, the strain

rate at which the isostrain-rate stress/strain curves must be obtained are chosen. Here

the chosen strain rates are 1s-1, 10s-1, 30s-1, 50s-1, and 100s-1. To get the family of

stress-strain curves for mentioned iso-strain rates, first the total strain interval is divided

into smaller divisions. In case of Newport PWCF (0º) specimens the failure strain is

0.012 in/in. So this total strain interval of 0.012 in/in is divided into 12 strain intervals.

44
For each strain interval value Stress vs. Strain Rate values are obtained. Stress vs.

Strain rate curves are plotted from these values and equations for stress as a function

of strain rate are obtained for the same. Figure 24 describes the Stress vs. Strain rate

behavior for random strain intervals of 0.001 in/in, 0.004 in/in and 0.008 in/in.

Figure 24. Family of Stress-Strain Rate curves for different strain intervals.

For each Stress vs. Strain rate curve, one equation is obtained by fitting a trend

line to the data as shown in Figure 25. The equation for each line represents an

equation for stress in terms of strain rate at each of different strain levels.

45
1000000

y = 86953x0.0759
100000
y = 38769x0.0695

y = 8124.5x0.0828
Stress (psi)

10000

0.001 in/in
1000
0.004 in/in
0.008 in/in
100 Power (0.008 in/in)
Power (0.004 in/in)
Power (0.001 in/in)
10
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Strain Rate

Figure 25. Family of Stress-Strain Rate curves for different strain intervals.

Now to get an iso-strain rate Stress-Strain curve for a particular strain rate we

can input the desired constant strain rate value in each of these equations and for each

strain interval we will get a stress value. The family of Stress-Strain curves obtained

from different equations of Stress vs. Strain rate data for Newport PWCF (0º) material

are as shown in Figure 26.

Figure 26 suggests the iso-strain rate nature of the family of the stress-strain

curves for different strain rates. These curves for different strain rates can be input to

the FEA code to develop the material model for particular configuration.

46
Figure 26. Family of Stress-Strain curves for Newport PWCF (0º) material at
different strain rates.

In the figure above we can notice that the failure stress is increasing in case of higher

strain rates than that of Quasi-static tests.

Similarly, following the same procedure to obtain the family of stress-strain

curves, figure 27 shows the Iso-strain rate Stress-Strain curves for Newport Glass fiber

(0º) material. Comparing the stress-strain data for Newport PWCF (0º) and Newport

Glass fiber (0º) materials we can observe that there is some plastic deformation in case

of glass fiber specimens. Also the important observation can be seen that the failure

strength of Newport PWCF material is higher than that of glass fiber material.

47
Figure 27. Family of Stress-Strain curves for Newport Glass Fiber (0º) material at
different strain rates.

48
CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 Conclusions

In-plane tensile tests are carried out on Glass and Carbon fiber materials of

various lay-up configurations for different strain rates. All the tests are carried out on the

MTS static and high stroke rate hydraulic machines.

Following conclusions can be drawn from the static and high strain rate experimental

data:

1. In case of Glass fiber materials, a region of plastic strain hardening can be

seen.

2. In case of 0º fiber orientation of Newport PWCF materials, the failure modes

are quite brittle in nature so the plastic strain hardening can’t be seen.

3. In case of higher fiber orientation angles, there can be seen a region of plastic

strain hardening as the fibers get separate from each other and load is carried

by the matrix material.

4. As the ply orientation angle increases in lay-up schedules, the failure strength

of the material decreases.

5. The failure strength of both the materials increases proportionately to the

strain rate.

49
7.2 Future Recommendations

Research activities, aimed to expand the applications in composite industry, must

be addressed to improve manufacturing composite technology, through a better

integration of product and process design; to develop new constituent materials with

better performances and for the development of new processes and new manufacturing

technologies. The future developments in this present research work can be as follows;

1. In case of the test set-up, there should be enough damping provided in

between the slack adapter and the engaging pin so that to reduce the

vibrations and data scatter in higher stroke rate tests.

2. These iso-strain rate curves can be introduced in FEA packages to simulate

the presented experiments here and can be used to modify the existing

material models for response prediction of composite materials in different

strain rates.

3. This data can be used to determine the parameters of the material models

presented by other researchers.

4. Future focus can be on the development of the test standards for evaluation

of dynamic material properties for composites.

50
REFERENCES

51
REFERENCES

[1]. Anonymous, “Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix
Composite Materials,” ASTM Standards, Designation: D 3039/D 3039M, Dec.
2002.

[2]. Kolsky, H., “An investigation of the mechanical properties of materials at very
high rates of loading,” Proceedings of Physics Society, London, 62-B: 676-700,
1949.

[3]. Hodgkinson, J.M., “Mechanical Testing of Advanced Fiber Composites,”


Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2000.

[4]. Davis, J.R., & Associates, “Tensile Testing” Second edition, ASM International,
2004.

[5]. Hayes, S. V., and Adams, D.F., “Rate sensitive tensile impact properties of fully
and partially loaded unidirectional composites,” Journal of Testing and
Evaluation, Vol. 10, No.2, pp 61-68, 1982.

[6]. Harding, J., and Welsh, L.M., “A tensile testing technique for fiber reinforced
composites at impact rates of strain,” Journal of Material Science, Vol. 18, pp
1810-1826, 1983.

[7]. Peterson, B.L., and Pantano, C.G., “Static and high strain rate response of a
Glass Fiber reinforced thermoplastic,” Journal of Composite Materials, Vol. 25,
pp 887-905, 1991.

[8]. Barre’, S., and Chotard, T., “Comparative study of strain rate effects on
mechanical properties of glass fiber-reinforced thermoset matrix composites,”
Composites Part A, Vol. 27A, pp 1169-1181, 1991.

[9]. George, H.S., and Gilat, A., “High strain rate response of angle-ply Glass/Epoxy
Laminates,” Journal of Composite Materials, Vol. 29, No.10, 1995.

[10]. Yuanming, X., and Wang, X., “Constitutive equation for unidirectional composites
under tensile impact,” Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 56, pp 155-160,
1996.

[11]. Lifshitz, J.M., and Leber, H., “Response of fiber-reinforced polymers to high
strain-rate loading in interlaminar tension and combined tension/shear,”
Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 58, pp 987-996, 1998.

[12]. Hou, J.P., and Ruiz, C., “Measurement of the properties of woven CFRP
T300/914 at different strain rates,” Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 60,
pp 2829-2834, 2000.

52
[13]. Yuanxin, Z., and Yuanming, X.,”Experimental study of the rate sensitivity of
unidirectional-fiber-reinforced metal-matrix composite wires and the
establishment of a dynamic constitutive equation,” Composites Science and
Technology, Vol. 61, pp 2025-2031, 2001.

[14]. Srikanth, V., and Sun, C.T., “Models for the strain-rate-dependent behavior of
polymer composites,” Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 61, pp 1-12,
2001.

[15]. Wang, Y., and Yuanming, X., “A modified constitutive equation for unidirectional
composites under tensile impact and the dynamic tensile properties of KFRP,”
Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 60, pp 591-596, 2000.

[16]. Pardo, S., Baptise, D., and Fitoussi, J., “Tensile dynamic behavior of a quasi-
unidirectional E-Glass polyester composite,” Composites Science and
Technology, Vol. 62, pp 579-584, 2002.

[17]. Gilat, A., and Goldberg, R.K., “Experimental study of strain rate dependent
behavior of Carbon/Epoxy composite,” Composites Science and Technology,
Vol. 62, pp 1469-1476, 2002.

[18]. Fernie, R., and Warrior, N.A., “Impact test rig for high strain rate tensile and
compressive testing of composite materials,” Strain, Blackwell Science Ltd, Vol.
38, pp 69-73, 2002.

[19]. Tsai, J. and Sun, C.T., “Constitutive model for high strain rate response of
polymeric composites,” Composites Science and Technology, Vol. 62, pp 1289-
1297, 2002.

[20]. Goldberg, R.K., Roberts, G., and Gilat, A., “Implementation of an Associative
Flow rule including Hydrostatic stress effects into the high strain rate deformation
analysis of polymer matrix composites,” NASA Technical Publication: NASA/TM-
2003-212382.

[21]. Majzoobi, G.H., and Sainee, F., “A tensile impact apparatus for characterization
of fibrous composites at high strain rates,” Journal of Material Processing
Technology, Vol. 162-163, pp 76-82, 2005.

[22]. Fitoussi, J., Meraghni, F., and Hug, G., “Experimental methodology for high strain
rates tensile behavior analysis of polymer matrix composites,” Composites
Science and Technology, Vol. 65, pp 2174-2188, 2005.

[23]. Testing Brief, Anonymous, “Testing at High Strain Rates,” Axel physical testing
services, July 2005.

53
[24]. Barbero, E., Zaera, R., and Navarro, C., “Dynamic tensile behavior at low
temperature of CFRP using a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar,” Composites
Science and Technology, Vol. 65, pp 61-71, 2005.

[25]. Zheng, X., and Goldberg, R.K., “Rate dependent shell element composite
material model implementation in LS Dyna,” 46th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC
Structures, Structural Dynamics & Materials Conference, 2005.

[26]. Makarov, G., and Shenoi, R.A., “Deformation and fracture of unidirectional GFRP
composites at High strain rate tension,” School of Engineering Sciences,
University of Southampton, UK, COMP Test 2004, [2] BS EN ISO 527-4:1997, [3]
BS EN ISO 14129:1998.

[27]. “Unidirectional composite axial tensile specimens,” High Performance


Composites, Magazine, Jan 2006.

[28]. http://www.sae.org/standardsdev, June 2006.

54
APPENDIX

55
APPENDIX

As discussed earlier in chapter 5, following are the Stress-Strain graphs of Newport

PWCF material for 15º, 30º and 45º fiber orientations tested at high stroke rates.

Figure 28. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

56
Figure 29. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 30. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

57
Figure 31. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 32. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

58
Figure 33. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 34. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

59
Figure 35. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 36. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

60
Figure 37. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 38. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

61
Figure 39. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 40. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (15º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

62
Figure 41. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (30º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 42. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport PWCF (45º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

63
Failure Patterns of Newport PWCF (15º) Specimens in different Stroke Rates

Figure 43. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in static stroke rate.

Figure 44. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 45. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

64
Figure 46. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 47. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 48. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (15º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

The figures 43 to 48 suggest that there is no change in failure pattern of the

specimens according to the stroke rates. In each stroke rate test the specimen is failing

in the gage section and no change can be seen in the mode of failure.

65
Failure Patterns of Newport PWCF (30º) Specimens in Different Stroke Rates

Figure 49. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in static stroke rate.

Figure 50. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 51. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

66
Figure 52. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 53. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 54. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (30º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

The figures 49 to 54 suggest that there is no change in failure pattern of the

specimens according to the stroke rates. In each stroke rate test the specimen is failing

in the gage section and no change can be seen in the mode of failure.

67
Failure Patterns of Newport PWCF (45º) Specimens in different Stroke Rates

Figure 55. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in static stroke rate.

Figure 56. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 57. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

68
Figure 58. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 59. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 60. Failure mode of Newport PWCF (45º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

The figures 55 to 60 suggest that there is no change in failure pattern of the

specimens according to the stroke rates. In each stroke rate test the specimen is failing

in the gage section and no change can be seen in the mode of failure.

69
As discussed earlier in Chapter 5, following is the test data of Newport Glass-Fiber

material for 0º, 15º, 30º and 45º fiber orientations tested at quasi-static and high stroke

rates.

TABLE 4

SUMMARY OF THE TEST DATA - NEWPORT GLASS-FIBER (0º, 15º, 30º, 45º)

Stroke Rate Failure Stress Failure Average Strain


Orientation
(in/s) (lbf /in²) Strain (in/in) Rate (1/s)

0º (4 ply) 0.000833 63413.975 0.0258 0.000415


0º (4 ply) 1 86062.082 0.0252 0.1311
0º (4 ply) 10 100937.341 0.0285 2.0346
0º (4 ply) 100 160730.954 0.035 58.480
0º (4 ply) 250 206450.554 0.0325 109.420
0º (4 ply) 500 181191.315 0.0295 142.967
15º (8 ply) 0.000833 33550.218 0.055 0.000415
15º (8 ply) 1 40217.102 0.0387 0.2499
15º (8 ply) 10 42177.69 0.0488 1.724
15º (8 ply) 100 77445.547 0.0401 67.506
15º (8 ply) 250 56840.376 0.0458 150.071
15º (8 ply) 500 54834.214 0.0475 184.212
30º (8 ply) 0.000833 61678.547 0.0299 0.000415
30º (8 ply) 1 73402.535 0.0303 0.1947
30º (8 ply) 10 74627.877 0.0294 1.1332
30º (8 ply) 100 133332.347 0.0357 55.963
30º (8 ply) 250 114574.476 0.0274 101.937
30º (8 ply) 500 116228.774 0.0394 123.266
45º (8 ply) 0.000833 45242.599 0.0418 0.000415
45º (8 ply) 1 52579.231 0.0418 0.239
45º (8 ply) 10 54925.751 0.0357 1.4758
45º (8 ply) 100 108352.22 0.0420 63.468
45º (8 ply) 250 87113.034 0.029 115.008
45º (8 ply) 500 89379.554 0.037 154.384

70
Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber in Quasi-static Loading

Following graphs describe the stress-strain nature of the Newport Glass-fiber test

coupons in quasi-static loading.

Figure 61. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-Fiber (0º) in Quasi-static test.

71
Figure 62. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-Fiber (15º) in Quasi-static test.

Figure 63. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-Fiber (30º) in Quasi-static test.

72
Figure 64. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-Fiber (45º) in Quasi-static test.

73
Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in High Stroke Rate Loading

Following graphs describe the stress-strain nature of the Newport Glass-fiber (0º) test

coupons in high stroke rate loading.

Figure 65. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

74
Figure 66. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 67. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

75
Figure 68. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 69. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (0º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

76
Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in High Stroke Rate Loading

Following graphs describe the stress-strain nature of the Newport Glass-fiber (15º) test

coupons in high stroke rate loading.

Figure 70. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

77
Figure 71. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 72. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

78
Figure 73. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 74. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (15º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

79
Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in High Stroke Rate Loading

Following graphs describe the stress-strain nature of the Newport Glass-fiber (30º) test

coupons in high stroke rate loading.

Figure 75. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

80
Figure 76. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 77. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

81
Figure 78. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 79. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (30º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

82
Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in High Stroke Rate Loading

Following graphs describe the stress-strain nature of the Newport Glass-fiber (45º) test

coupons in high stroke rate loading.

Figure 80. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

83
Figure 81. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 82. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

84
Figure 83. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 84. Stress-Strain behavior of Newport Glass-fiber (45º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

85
Failure Patterns of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) Specimens in different Stroke Rates

Figure 85. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in static stroke rate.

Figure 86. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 87. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

86
Figure 88. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 89. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 90. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (0º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

The figures 85 to 90 suggest that there is no change in failure pattern of the

specimens according to the stroke rates. In each stroke rate test the specimen is failing

in the gage section and no change can be seen in the mode of failure.

87
Failure Patterns of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) Specimens in different Stroke Rates

Figure 91. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in static stroke rate.

Figure 92. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 93. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

88
Figure 94. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 95. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 96. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (15º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

The figures 91 to 96 suggest that there is no change in failure pattern of the

specimens according to the stroke rates. In each stroke rate test the specimen is failing

in the gage section and no change can be seen in the mode of failure.

89
Failure Patterns of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) Specimens in different Stroke Rates

Figure 97. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in static stroke rate.

Figure 98. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 99. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

90
Figure 100. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 101. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 102. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

The figures 97 to 102 suggest that there is no change in failure pattern of the

specimens according to the stroke rates. In each stroke rate test the specimen is failing

in the gage section and no change can be seen in the mode of failure.

91
Failure Patterns of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) Specimens in different Stroke Rates

Figure 103. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in static stroke rate.

Figure 104. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 1 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 105. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 10 in/s stroke rate.

92
Figure 106. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 100 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 107. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 250 in/s stroke rate.

Figure 108. Failure mode of Newport Glass Fiber (45º) in 500 in/s stroke rate.

The figures 103 to 108 suggest that there is no change in failure pattern of the

specimens according to the stroke rates. In each stroke rate test the specimen is failing

in the gage section and no change can be seen in the mode of failure.

93
Family of Stress-Strain Curves at Iso Strain Rates for Newport PWCF and

Newport Glass fiber (30º and 45º) Materials:

Figure 109. Family of Stress-Strain Curves for Newport PWCF (30º) material.

Figure 110. Family of Stress-Strain Curves for Newport Glass Fiber (30º) material.

94
Figure 111. Family of Stress-Strain Curves for Newport PWCF (45º) material.

Figure 112. Family of Stress-Strain Curves for Newport Glass Fiber (45º) material.

95
The figures 109 and 110 suggest that the strength of Newport PWCF (30º)

material is higher than that of Newport Glass Fiber (30º) material. But as in case of

higher fiber angles the matrix plays more important role than that of fibers in strength

comparison. So in case of 45º fiber angle (Figures 111 and 112), Glass Fiber

specimens are depicting higher failure strength values than that of Newport PWCF

specimens in high strain rates as the matrix material is more stronger in strength in case

of Newport Glass Fiber material.

96

You might also like