Impact resistance of Nomex honeycomb sandwich structures with thin fibre reinforced polymer facesheets

Abstract

In order to investigate the impact resistance of the Nomex honeycomb sandwich structures skinned with thin fibre reinforced woven fabric composites, both drop-weight experimental work and meso-mechanical finite element modelling were conducted and the corresponding output was compared. Drop-weight impact tests with different impact parameters, including impact energy, impactor mass and facesheets, were carried out on Nomex honeycomb-cored sandwich structures. It was found that the impact resistance and the penetration depth of the Nomex honeycomb sandwich structures were significantly influenced by the impact energy. However, for impact energies that cause full perforation, the impact resistance is characterized with almost the same initial stiffness and peak force. The impactor mass has little influence on the impact response and the perforation force is primarily dependent on the thickness of the facesheet, which generally varies linearly with it. In the numerical simulation, a comprehensive finite element model was developed which considers all the constituent materials of the Nomex honeycomb, i.e. aramid paper, phenolic resin, and the micro-structure of the honeycomb wall. The model was validated against the corresponding experimental results and then further applied to study the effects of various impact angles on the response of the honeycomb. It was found that both the impact resistance and the perforation depth are significantly influenced by the impact angle. The former increases with the obliquity, while the latter decreases with it. The orientation of the Nomex core has little effect on the impact response, while the angle between the impact direction and the fibre direction of the facesheets has a great influence on the impact response.

Keywords

Nomex honeycomb sandwich fibre reinforced polymer facesheet impact resistance oblique angle finite element

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Kim

Jun

. Impact resistance of composite laminated sandwich plates. J Compos Mater 1992; 26: 2247–2261.

Zhou

Hill

Loughlan

et al.

Damage characteristics of composite honeycomb sandwich panels in bending under quasi-static loading. J Sandw Struct Mater 2006; 8: 55–90.

Abrate

. Localized impact on sandwich structures with laminated facings. Appl Mech Rev 1997; 50: 69–82.

Lacy

Hwang

. Numerical modeling of impact-damaged sandwich composites subjected to compression-after-impact loading. Compos Struct 2003; 61: 115–128.

Aktay

Johnson

Kroplin

. Numerical modelling of honeycomb core crush behaviour. Eng Fract Mech 2008; 75: 2616–2630.

McQuigg TD. Compression after impact experiments and analysis on honeycomb core sandwich panels with thin facesheets. NASA/CR-2011-217157, 2011.

Zinno

Prota

Maio

et al.

Experimental characterization of phenolic-impregnated honeycomb sandwich structures for transportation vehicles. Compos Struct 2011; 93: 2910–2924.

Meo

Morris

Vignjevic

et al.

Numerical simulation of low-velocity impact on an aircraft sandwich panel. Compos Struct 2003; 62: 353–360.

Manes

Gilioli

Sbarufatti

et al.

Experimental and numerical investigations of low velocity impact on sandwich panels. Compos Struct 2003; 99: 8–18.

10.

Gilioli

Sbarufatti

Manes

et al.

Compression after impact test (CAI) on NOMEX™ honeycomb sandwich panels with thin aluminum skins. Compos Part B-Eng 2014; 67: 313–325.

11.

Meng

Chen

et al.

Projectile impact behaviour of sandwich material with Nomex honeycomb and metallic skins. Adv Mater Res 2011; 204–210: 632–635.

12.

Aminanda

Castanie

Barrau

et al.

Experimental and numerical study of compression after impact of sandwich structures with metallic skins. Compos Sci Technol 2009; 69: 50–59.

13.

Castanié

Bouvet

Aminanda

et al.

Modelling of low-energy low-velocity impact on Nomex honeycomb sandwich structures with metallic skins. Int J Impact Eng 2008; 35: 620–634.

14.

Aktay

Johnson

Holzapfel

. Prediction of impact damage on sandwich composite panels. Comput Mater Sci 2005; 32: 252–260.

15.

Aktay

Johnson

Kroplin

. Numerical modelling of honeycomb crush behaviour. Eng Fract Mech 2008; 75: 2616–2630.

16.

et al.

A rate-dependent constitutive model for honeycomb material and its application in a lunar lander. J Vibr Shock 2014; 33: 114–119.

17.

Foo

Chai

Seah

. A model to predict low-velocity impact response and damage in sandwich composites. Compos Sci Technol 2008; 68: 1348–1356.

18.

Menna

Zinno

Asprone

et al.

Numerical assessment of the impact behaviour of honeycomb sandwich structures. Compos Struct 2013; 106: 326–339.

19.

Petras

Sutcliffe

MPF

. Indentation failure analysis of sandwich beams. Compos Struct 2000; 50: 311–318.

20.

Mohr

Doyoyo

. Analysis of the Arcan apparatus in the clamped conﬁguration. J Compos Mater 2002; 36: 2583–2594.

21.

Mohr

Doyoyo

. A new method for the biaxial testing of cellular. Solids Exp Mech 2003; 43: 174–183.

22.

Doyoyo

Mohr

. Microstructural response of aluminum honeycomb to combined out-of-plane loading. Mech Mater 2003; 35: 865–876.

23.

Mohr

Doyoyo

. Experimental investigation on the plasticity of hexagonal aluminum honeycomb under multiaxial loading. J Appl Mech 2004; 71: 375–385.

24.

Hong

Pan

Tyan

et al.

Quasi-static crush behaviour of aluminum honeycomb specimens under non-proportional compression dominant combined loads. Int J Plast 2006; 22: 1062–1088.

25.

Hong

Pan

Tyan

et al.

Dynamic crush behaviours of aluminum honeycombs specimens under compression dominant inclined loads. Int J Plast 2008; 24: 89–117.

26.

Hexcel Composites. HexWeb honeycomb attributes and properties, Stamford, CT: Hexcel Corporation, 1999.

27.

Heimbs

. Virtual testing of sandwich core structures using dynamic finite element simulations. Comp Mater Sci 2009; 45: 205–216.

28.

Liu

Wang

Guan

. Experimental and numerical study on the mechanical response of Nomex honeycomb core under transverse loading. Compos Struct 2015; 121: 304–314.

29.

ASTM Committee. ASTM D 3763-02. Standard test method for high speed puncture properties of plastics using load and displacement sensors, West Conshohocken, PA: Author, 2002.

30.

Deng Yan. A multi-scale correlating model for predicting the mechanical properties of textile composites. Master Thesis, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 2014.

31.

Hahn

Tsai

. Nonlinear elastic behaviour of unidirectional composite laminate. J Compos Mater 1973; 7: 102–118.

32.

Shokrieh

Lessard

. Effects of material nonlinearity on the three-dimensional stress state of pin-loaded composite laminates. J Compos Mater 1996; 30: 839–861.

33.

Liu

Zhou

Gao

et al.

Continuum damage model and damage parameter identifications for composites considering the effect of shear nonlinearity. Acta Mater Compos Sin 2013; 30: 221–226.

34.

Yen

. A ballistic material model for continuous-fibre reinforced composites. Int J Impact Eng 2012; 46: 11–22.

35.

Hallquist

. LS-DYNA keyword user’s manual, version 970, California: Livermore Software Technology Corporation, 2007.

36.

Herrington

Sabbaghian

. Factors affecting the friction coefficients between metallic washers and composite surfaces. Composites 1991; 22: 418–424.

37.

Ren

Zhang

Zhu

et al.

Influence of functional graphene as filler on the tribological behaviours of Nomex fabric/phenolic composite. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 2013; 49: 157–164.