Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Experimental and numerical investigation of the effects of porosity on the in-plane shear properties of CFRPs using the V-notched rail shear test method

  • IJMF 10th Anniversary - Advances in Composites Forming and their induced...
  • Published:
International Journal of Material Forming Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Voids occurred after the manufacturing process are a common defect of composite materials. They appear to have a negative impact on the matrix-dominated material properties, the gravity of which depends upon the porosity content, the shape and the volume of pores. In the present work, the effects of porosity on the shear mechanical properties of unidirectional carbon fiber-reinforced plastic composites are evaluated via mechanical testing and numerical simulation. In this framework, the V-Notched Rail Shear test method is applied on carbon fiber reinforced plastic specimens of four porosity levels. Moreover, two finite element methodologies are utilized for simulating this particular mechanical test namely the progressive damage model (PDM) and the Virtual Crack Closing Technique (VCCT). Double cantilever beam (mode I) and end notched flexure tests (mode II) are also conducted for the development of the VCCT model. The results from the shear mechanical tests reveal a considerable drop in both the elastic properties and strength. In addition to that, for larger porosity contents, more cracks are present and crack initiation and propagation occur at a faster pace. Finally, the advantages and disadvantages of the two numerical methods are presented and assessed revealing a satisfying consistency with the results obtained by the mechanical tests.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Campbell FC (2004) Manufacturing processes for advanced composites. Elsevier Advanced Technology, ISBN 1856174158

  2. Njionhou A, Berthet F, Castanie B (2013) Effects of process parameters on the mechanical properties and morphology of stitched and non-stitched carbon/epoxy liquid resin-infused NCF laminate, out of autoclave and out of oven. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 65:1289–1302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ricotta M, Quaresimin M, Talreja R (2009) Mode I strain energy release rate in composite laminates in the presence of voids. Compos Sci Technol 68(16):2616–2623

    Google Scholar 

  4. de Almeida FM, Nogueira Neto ZDS (1994) Effect of void content on the strength of composite laminates. Compos Struct 28:139–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Stamopoulos AG, Tserpes KI, Dentsoras AJ (2018) Quality assessment of porous CFRP specimens using X-ray computed tomography data and artificial neural networks. Compos Struct 192:327–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Khan M. (1998) Non-destructive testing applications in commercial aircraft maintenance. Proceedings of the 7th European conference on non-destructive testing ECNDT, 26-29 may, Copenhagen, Denmark

  7. Chrysafi A, Athanasopoulos N, Siakavellas NJ (2017) Damage detection on composite materials with active thermography and digital image processing. Int J Therm Sci 116:242–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tsuda H (2006) Ultrasound and damage detection in CFRP using fiber Bragg grating sensors. Compos Sci Technol 66(5):676–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Nikishkov Y, Airoldi L, Makeev A (2013) Measurement of voids in composites by X-ray computed tomography. Compos Sci Technol 89:89–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. ASTM D5379/ D5379M. Standard Test Method for Shear Properties of Composite Materials by the V-notched Beam Method.ASTM International, 1999

  11. ASTM D4255D/ D4255M.Standard Test Method for In-plane Shear Properties of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials by the Rail Shear Method. ASTM International, 2002

  12. Almeida JHS Jr, Angrizzani CC, Botelho EC, Amico SC (2015) (2015) effect of fiber orientation on the shear behaviour of glass fiber/epoxy composites. Mater Des 65:789–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Adams DO, Moriarty JM, Gallegos AM, Adams DF (2007) The V-notched rail shear test. J Compos Mater 41(3):281–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tserpes KI, Stamopoulos AG, Pantelakis SG (2016) A numerical methodology for simulating the mechanical behavior of CFRP laminates containing pores using X-ray computed tomography data. Compos Part B 102:122–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Stamopoulos A.G., Tserpes K.I, Prucha P., Vavrik D. (2016) Evaluation of porosity effects on the mechanical properties of carbon fiber-reinforced plastic unidirectional laminates by X-ray computed tomography and mechanical testing. J Compos Mater; 50 (15), 2087–2098

  16. ASTM D7078/ D7078M.Standard Test Method for Shear Properties of Composite Materials by V-Notched Rail Shear Method. ASTM International, 2012

  17. ASTM D5528–01. Standard Test Method for Mode I Interlaminar Fracture Toughness of Unidirectional Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composites. ASTM International, 2007

  18. Low KO, Teng SM, Johar M, Israr HA, Wong KJ (2009) Mode I delamination behaviour of carbon/epoxy composite at different displacement rates. Composites Part B 176:1072–1093

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sham Prasad MS, Venkatesha CS, Jayaraju T (2011) Experimental methods of determining fracture toughness of Fiber reinforced polymer composites under various loading conditions. Journal of Minerals & Materials Characterization & Engineering 10(13):1263–1275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. AITM 1.0006. Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastics Determination of Interlaminar Fracture Toughness Energy Mode II GIIc Test. Airbus Industrie, 1994

  21. Smiley AJ, Pipes RB (1987) Rate sensitivity of mode II interlaminar fracture toughness in graphite/epoxy and graphite/PEEK composite materials. Compos Sci Technol 29(1):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Colin de Verdiere M, Skordos AA, Walton AC, May M (2012) Influence of loading rate on the delamination response of untufted and tufted carbon epoxy non-crimp fabric composites/Mode II. Eng Fract Mech 96:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tserpes KI, Papanikos P, Kermanidis A (2001) A three-dimensional progressive damage model for bolted joints in compositpe laminates subjected to tensile loading. Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures 24:663–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chang FK, Chang KY (1987) A progressive damage model for laminated composites containing stress concentrations. J Compos Mater 21:834–855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Chen JF, Mozorov EV, Shankar K (2014) Progressive failure analysis of perforated aluminium/CFRP fibre metal laminates using a combined elastoplastic damage model and including delamination effects. Compos Struct 114:64–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. ANSYS User's manual, version 11. Pittsburgh, PA, USA: Swanson Analysis Systems; 2008

  27. Chamis C.C. (1984) Mechanics of composite materials: past, present and future. NASA technical memorandum 100793, in: 21st annual meeting of the Society for Engineering Science, October 15–17 , Blacksburg, Virginia, USA

  28. Daniel I.M., Ishai O. (1994) Engineering mechanics of composite materials. Oxford University press; 0-19-507506-4

  29. Hashin Z (1980) Failure criteria for unidirectional fiber composites. J Appl Mech 47(2):329–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Irissari FX, Laurin F, Carrere N, Maire JF (2012) Progressive damage and failure of mechanically fastened joints in CFRP laminates – part II: failure prediction of an industrial junction. Compos Struct 94:2278–2284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Shivakumar KN, Tan PW, Newman JC Jr (1988) A virtual crack-closure technique for calculating stress intensity factors for cracked three dimensional bodies. Int J Fract 36:43–50

    Google Scholar 

  32. Leski A (2007) Implementation of the virtual crack closure technique in engineering FE calculations. Finite Elem Anal Des 43:261–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Krueger R (2015) The virtual crack closure technique for modeling interlaminar failure and delamination in advanced composite materials. Woodhead publishing series in composites science and engineering: 3-53

  34. Irwin GR (1958) Fracture I. Handbuch der Physik VI, Flügge: 558–590

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Technology & Strength of Materials, Department of Mechanical Engineering & Aeronautics, University of Patras, 26500, Patras, Greece

    A. G. Stamopoulos, A. P. Psaropoulos & K. Tserpes

  2. Department of Industrial and Information Engineering and Economics (DIIIE), University of L’Aquila, Montelucco di Roio, 67100, L’Aquila, Italy

    A. G. Stamopoulos

Authors
  1. A. G. Stamopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. P. Psaropoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K. Tserpes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Tserpes.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stamopoulos, A.G., Psaropoulos, A.P. & Tserpes, K. Experimental and numerical investigation of the effects of porosity on the in-plane shear properties of CFRPs using the V-notched rail shear test method. Int J Mater Form 14, 67–82 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-020-01544-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-020-01544-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation