Post-Impact Fatigue Behavior of Woven and Knitted Fabric CFRP Laminates for Marine Use

  • Isao KimparaEmail author
  • Hiroshi Saito


In this study, the damage evolution behavior was evaluated. Damage observation was conducted by the integration of non-destructive and direct observation methods. Target reinforcements were T300-3k plain woven fabric (PW) and T700S-12k multi-axial knitted fabric (MA). Impact damage distribution in the CFRP laminate was observed precisely, and three-dimensional damage model was constructed. Compression after impact (CAI) and post impact fatigue (PIF) performances were evaluated. The effect of water absorption on these performances was also evaluated. The effect of water absorption on CAI and PIF performances were small in PW CFRP laminates. Conversely, PIF properties of water-absorbed MA drastically decreased than that of dry ones. CAI strength was not affected by water absorption. PIF performance of dry MA CFRP was fairly higher than that of the others. From the precise observation, some evidences of interfacial deterioration caused by water absorption were confirmed in both PW and MA CFRP laminates.


Fiber Bundle Damage Evolution Impact Point Transverse Crack Impact Damage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors thank the Office of Naval Research for supporting this work through an ONR award (N000140110949) with Dr. Yapa Rajapakse as the program manager of solid mechanics. The authors thank Professor Richard Christensen at Stanford University as the consultant of this project and Toray Industries, Inc. as the supplier of CFRP laminates.

All of experimental data were measured by the graduate students of author's laboratory, in Kanazawa Institute of Technology. The authors thank these graduate students, Mr. Teppei Kimura and Norihiko Ikeda.


  1. 1.
    Brouwer WD, van Herpt ECFC, Labordus M (2003) Vacuum injection moulding for large structural applications. Compos Part 34:551–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    TECABS general presentation:5th Framework Programme of European Community for RTD and Demonstration Activities (1998–2002). (
  3. 3.
    Abrate S (1991) Impact on laminate composite materials. ASME J Appl Mech Rev 44(4):155–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Demuts E (1985) Assessment of damage tolerance in composites. Compos Struct 4:45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ding YQ, Yan Y, Mcllhagger R (1995) Effect of impact and fatigue loads on the strength of plain weave carbon–epoxy composites. J Mater Process Technol 55:58–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lauder AJ, Amateau MF, Queeney RA (1993) Fatigue resistance of impact damaged specimen vs. machined hole specimens. Composites 24:443–445.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mahinfalah M, Skordahl RA (1998) The effects of hail damage on the fatigue strength of a graphite/epoxy composite laminate. Compos Struct 42:101–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen AS, Almond DP, Harris B (2002) Impact damage growth in composites under fatigue conditions monitored by acoustography. Int J Fatig 24:257–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Palazotto A, Maddux GE, Horban B (1989) The use of stereo X-ray and deply techniques for evaluating instability of composite cylindrical panels with delaminations. Exp Mech 29(2):144–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mitrovic M, Hahn HT, Carman GP, Shyprykevich P (1999) Effect of loading parameters on the fatigue behavior of impact damaged composite laminates. Compos Sci Tech 59:2059–2078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kinsey A, Saunders DEJ, Soutis C (1995) Post-impact compressive behaviour of low temperature curing woven CFRP laminates. Composites 26:661–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Symons DD, Davis G (2000) Fatigue testing of impact-damaged T300/914 carbon-fibre-reinforced plastic. Compos Sci Technol 60:379–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Soutis C, Curtis PT (1996) Prediction of the post-impact compressive strength of CFRP laminated composites. Compos Sci Technol 56:677–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gao SL, Kim JK (1998) Three-dimensional characterization of impact damage in CFRPs. Key Eng Mater 141–143:35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cantwell WJ (1988) The influence of target geometry on the high velocity impact response of CFRP. Compos Struct 10:247–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Davies GAO, Hitchings D, Zhou G (1996) Impact damage and residual strengths of woven fabric glass/polyester laminates. Compos Part A 27:1147–1156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Symons DD (2000) Characterisation of indentation damage in 0/90 lay-up T300/914 CFRP. Compos Sci Technol 60:391–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bibo GA, Hogg PJ, Backhouse R, Mills A (1998) Carbon-fibre non-crimp fabric laminates for cost-effective damage-tolerant structures. Compos Sci Technol 58:129–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cantwell WJ, Curtis PT, Morton J (1984) Impact and subsequent fatigue damage growth in carbon fibre laminates. Int J Fatig 6:113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hosur MV, Murthy CRL, Ramamurthy TS, Shet A (1998) Estimation of impact-induced damage in CFRP laminates through ultrasonic imaging. NDT and E Int 31(5):359–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tai NH, Yip MC, Lin JL (1998) Effects of low-energy impact on the fatigue behavior of carbon/ epoxy composites. Compos Sci Technol 58:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang X, Davies GAO, Hitchings D (1999) Impact damage with compressive preload and post-impact compression of carbon composite plates. Int J Impact Eng 22:485–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim JK, Sham ML (2000) Impact and delamination failure of woven-fabric composites. Compos Sci Technol 60:745–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Margueres PH, Maraghni F, Benzeggagh ML (2000) Comparison of stiffness measurements and damage investigation techniques for a fatigued and post-impact fatigued GFRP composite obtained by RTM process. Compos Part A 31:151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Melin LG, Schon J, Nyman T (2002) Fatigue testing and buckling characteristics of impacted composite specimens. Int J Fatig 24:263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kumar P, Rai B (1993) Delaminations of barely visible impact damage in CFRP laminates. Compos Struct 23:313–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shikhmanter L, Cina B, Eldror I (1995) Fractography of CFRP composites damaged by impact and subsequently loaded statically to failure. Composites 26:154–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Selvarathinam AS, Weitsman YJ (1999) A shear-lag analysis of transverse cracking and delam-ination in cross-ply carbon-fibre/epoxy composites under dry, saturated and immersed fatigue conditions. Compos Sci Technol 59:2115–2123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weitsman YJ, Guo YJ (2002) A correlation between fluid-induced damage and anomalous fluid sorption in polymeric composites. Compos Sci Technol 62:889–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tang R, Guo YJ, Weitsman YJ (2004) An appropriate stiffness degradation parameter to monitor fatigue damage evolution in composites. Int J Fatig 26:421–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Matsuda S, Hojo M, Ochiai S (1999) Effect of water environment on Mode II delamination fatigue in interlayer-toughened CFRP. JSME Int J 42(3):421–428.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kootsookos A, Mouritz AP (2004) Seawater durability of glass- and carbon-polymer composites. Compos Sci Technol 64:1503–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Laboratory for Integrated Technological SystemsKanazawa Institute of TechnologyHakusanJapan

Personalised recommendations