18
Dan Adams Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT AMTAS Autumn 2011 Meeting Edmonds, WA November 1, 2011 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF FRACTURE MECHANICS TEST METHODS FOR SANDWICH COMPOSITES

Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    0

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

Dan Adams

Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT

AMTAS Autumn 2011 Meeting Edmonds, WA November 1, 2011

DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF FRACTURE MECHANICS TEST METHODS

FOR SANDWICH COMPOSITES

Page 2: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

FAA Sponsored Project Information

•  Principal Investigator: Dr. Dan Adams

•  Graduate Student Researchers: Joe Nelson Zack Bluth Josh Bluth Brad Kuramoto Chris Weaver Andy Gill

•  FAA Technical Monitor – Curt Davies David Westlund

•  Primary Collaborator: – NASA Langley Research Center (James Ratcliffe)

Page 3: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:

Fracture Mechanics Test Methods for Sandwich Composites

•  Focus on facesheet-core delamination •  Mode I and Mode II

–  Identification and initial assessment of candidate test methodologies

–  Selection and optimization of best suited Mode I and Mode II test methods

–  Development of draft ASTM standards

Page 4: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

§  Elimination of bending of sandwich specimen §  Minimal Mode II component (less than 5%) §  No significant bending stresses in core §  No crack “kinking” observed §  Appears to be suitable for a standard test method

Piano Hinge

Delamination

Crack Tip

Applied Load

Plate Support

SELECTED MODE I CONFIGURATION: Single Cantilever Beam (SCB) Test

Page 5: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

PARAMETERS INVESTIGATED: Single Cantilever Beam (SCB) Test

•  Specimen geometry •  Length •  Width •  Initial delamination length

•  Facesheet properties •  Thickness •  Flexural stiffness •  Flexural strength

•  Core properties •  Thickness •  Density •  Stiffness •  Strength

Page 6: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

RECENT EFFORTS: Single Cantilever Beam Test for Sandwich Composites

•  Establishment of recommended specimen width •  Anticlastic curvature and curved crack fronts •  Minimum number of honeycomb cells

•  Effects of thru-thickness placement of starter crack •  Procedures for testing sandwich configurations with “thin” facesheets •  Excessive facesheet rotation •  Problems with using

compliance calibration method •  Use of doublers

Page 7: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

0  

0.05  

0.1  

0.15  

0.2  

0.25  

0.3  

0   10   20   30   40   50   60   70  G c  (N

/mm)  

Debond  Length  (mm)  

25.4  mm  

50.8  mm  

76.2  mm  

RECOMMENDED SPECIMEN WIDTH: Anticlastic Curvature and Curved Crack Fronts

Foam Core Sandwich Specimens with Quasi-Isotropic Facesheets

51 mm (2 in) selected as recommended specimen width

Page 8: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

RECOMMENDED SPECIMEN WIDTH: Minimum Number of Honeycomb Cells

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

0   10   20   30   40   50   60   70   80  

Gc (

N/m

m)

Debond Length (mm)

25.4 mm

50.8 mm

76.2 mm

25 mm ≈ 3 cells

51 mm ≈ 6 cells

76 mm ≈ 9 cells

Minimum of 6 honeycomb cells across specimen width •  Most honeycomb cores will have at least 6 cells across width •  Width can be increased for larger-celled honeycomb cores

Nomex Honeycomb Core, 3/8 in. Honeycomb Cell Size

Page 9: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

EFFECTS OF STARTER CRACK PLACEMENT: Predicted Mode Mixity

•  Modeled with and without an adhesive layer

•  Four crack locations: •  Facesheet/core interface

(no adhesive) •  Within adhesive •  Above adhesive •  Below adhesive

•  Initial results: no effect on mode mixity •  Further investigation underway

Page 10: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

5/15

Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method

CSCB =δP

=4λk

λ2a3

3+ λ2a2F1 + λaF2 +

3ak10λGxz,f t fb

+F3

2

⎣ ⎢

⎦ ⎥

Ratcliffe J. and Reeder, J., “Sizing A Single Cantilever Beam Specimen for Characterizing Facesheet/Core Peel Debonding in Sandwich Structure, to appear in Journal of Composite Materials, 2011.

SCB FACESHEET THICKNESS EFFECTS: Thin Facesheets

Page 11: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

SCB FACESHEET THICKNESS EFFECTS: Adding Tabbing “Doublers” to Thin Facesheets

Adding tabbing doublers to upper

facesheet predicted to increases accuracy of

GIC calculation

Piano Hinge

Plate Support

Tabbing Doubler Geometrically nonlinear FE simulation

of compliance calibration method

Page 12: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

USE OF FACESHEET DOUBLER: Preliminary Test Results

Different crack locations:

•  Thick-tabbed: crack growth in core at the base of adhesive fillets

•  Thin-tabbed: crack growth in in vicinity of adhesive/core interface

•  Untabbed: crack growth in film adhesive

0.58 mm tab

1.6 mm tab

0.6 mm tab

Untabbed

Page 13: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

Different failure locations produces different fracture toughness values

USE OF FACESHEET DOUBLER: Preliminary Test Results

Untabbed

0.6 mm tabbing

1.6 mm tabbing

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Gc

(N/m

m)

Crack Length (mm)

0.6 mm tab

Untabbed

1.6 mm tab

Page 14: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

CURRENT FOCUS: Single Cantilever Beam (SCB) Test

•  Further investigation: Effects of thru-thickness location of starter crack

•  Further investigation: Effects of facesheet thickness variations and doublers on crack location and fracture toughness

•  Composing draft ASTM standard

Page 15: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

SELECTED MODE II CONFIGURATION: End Notched Sandwich (ENS) TEST

•  Modified three-point flexure fixture •  High percentage Mode II (>80%)

for all materials investigated •  Semi-stable crack growth along

facesheet/core interface •  Appears to be suitable for a standard

Mode II test method

Page 16: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

MODE II END NOTCHED SANDWICH TEST: Numerical Investigations Performed •  Mode mixity of crack growth (% GII)

•  Specimen width effects •  Facesheet thickness effects

•  Adding doubler to lower facesheet •  Crack growth stability

•  Specimen length effects •  Precrack length effects

Page 17: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

ADDRESSING CRACK GROWTH STABILITY:

Specimen Span Length and Precrack Length

0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

0.006

0.007

0.008

0.009

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Bea

m D

efle

ctio

n(m

)

a/L

Required Displacement for Crack Growth

Region of Unstable Crack Growth

Minimum pre-crack

Pre-crack

Precrack length/Span Length

App

lied

Dis

plac

emen

t (m

)

•  Selection of proper precrack length/span length expected to produce stable crack growth

•  Experimental investigation underway

Page 18: Dan Adams - University of Washington...5/15 Thin facesheets create inaccuracies when using conventional compliance calibration method € C SCB = δ P = 4λ k λ2a3 3 + λ2a2F 1 +

TOWARDS STANDARDIZATION…

Presentation and discussion at ASTM Committee D30 on Composites every six months •  Last presentation: October 18, 2011 in Ft. Worth TX

Overview presentations at CMH-17 Testing Working Group •  Next presentation: November 15, 2011 in Wichita, KS

Performing SCB testing at the University of Utah for interested parties