1

Dual Degree Thes

Department of Mechanical Engineering

is

Title:
Composite Testing

Name: Purushottam Meena
Roll Number: 07D10028
Guide: Prof. Anirban Guha
Co-Guide: Prof. Ramesh Singh

2

Declaration Form
I Purushottam Meena Roll No. 07d10028 understand that plagiarism is defined as any one or
the combination of the following:
1. Uncredited verbatim copying of individual sentences, paragraphs or illustrations (such as
graphs, diagrams, etc.) from any source, published or unpublished, including the internet.
2. Uncredited improper paraphrasing of pages or paragraphs (changing a few words or
phrases, or rearranging the original sentence order)
3. Credited verbatim copying of a major portion of a paper (or thesis chapter) without clear
delineation of who did or wrote what. (Source: IEEE, The Institute, Dec. 2004)
I have made sure that all the ideas, expressions, graphs, diagrams, etc., that are not a
result of my work, are properly credited. Long phrases or sentences that had to be used
verbatim from published literature have been clearly identified using quotation marks. I
affirm that no portion of my work can be considered as plagiarism and I take full
responsibility if such a complaint occurs. I understand fully well that the guide of the project
report may not be in a position to check for the possibility of such incidences of plagiarism in
this body of work.
Signature:
Name: Purushottam Meena
Roll No.: 07D10028
Date:





3

Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere gratitude towards my project guide Prof. Anirban Guha
and Co-guide Prof. Ramesh Singh for invaluable support and guidance throughout my stage 1
of Dual Degree Project.
I would like to thank Mr. Ganesh Soni(PhD Student-IITB-Monash) for his support and
valuable suggestions.












Purushottam Meena
(Roll no. 07d10028)

4

Abstract
Fiber-reinforced composite structures have seen an increased application in aeronautics and
in other industries such as automotive, marine transportation, civil engineering, sporting
goods, medical equipment and prosthetic devices. With the increased use of composite
materials, there is a need to develop methods to predict the material properties and behavior
of composite materials and structures made of these materials under a variety of loading and
environmental conditions.
In this report chapter 1 incorporates introductory part of composite which includes properties
of composites, classification and application. Detailed study of CFRP is done. In chapter 2,
types of mechanical tests for composite are studied. Later literature review of tensile,
compression, buckling and in-plane shear test has been carried out. In last chapter work done
and future proposed specimen manufacturing and experimental work is described.











5

Content
Chapter 1. Introduction: composites.8
1.1 classifications of composites..8
1.1.1. Particle reinforced composites..8
1.1.2. Fiber reinforced composites..9
1.1.3. Structural composites9
1.2. Properties of composites..10
1.3. Application of composites...11
1.4. Fibre-reinforced plastic (FRP) ....13
1.4.1. CFRP (Carbon fiber reinforced polymer)14
1.5. Testing requirements in composites
1.6. Problem statement/specific objectives
1.7. Outline of report
Chapter 2: Mechanical testing of Composites and literature review..16
2.1. Mechanical testing of composites...16
2.1.1. Properties to be evaluated in testing16
2.2. Testing and literature review...17
2.2.1. Tensile testing..17
2.2.2. Literature review on tensile test..18
2.3. Compressive test..23
2.3.1. Types of Compression tests for Composites23
2.3.2. Literature review on compression test.26
2.3.3. Literature review on Buckling.33
2.4. In plane shear ..35
2.4.1. Shear Tests...35
2.4.2. Literature review for in-plane shear test.38
Chapter 3: Work done and Future work...42
6

3.1. Work done...42
3.2.Future work..44






















7

List of figures
Figure:1.1 Classification of Composites 8
Figure:1.2 Types of composites 9
Figure:1.3 properties a) isotropic b)orthotropic c)anisotropic 11
Figure:1.4 Use of composite in military aircraft 12
Figure:1.5 Engine component made of composites 14
Figure:1.6 Use of Composites in sports 14
Figure:1.7 a) Basic structure Laminae b) Unbounded view of laminate construction 15
Figure:2.1 CFRP Specimen Shape 18
Figure:2.2 Schematic illustrations of laminates with various lay-up sequences 19
Figure:2.3 Configurations of (a) unnotched tensile, (b) notched tensile 19
Figure:2.4 a) Unnotched tensile fracture stress. b) Notched tensile fracture stress for
laminates
20
Figure:2.5 Coupons for testing the properties of CFRP 20
Figure:2.6 a) Stress-strain curves of CFRP b) The effect of strain rate on the tensile stress of
CFRP
21
Figure:2.7 a) Effect of strain rate on the modulus of elasticity of CFRP b) Effect of strain
rate on the strain to failure of CFRP
22
Figure:2.8 a) Experimental and predicted load-displacement curves b) Damage initiation
time of damaged laminae and interfaces
23
Figure:2.9 Progression of damage initiation in L1 23
Figure:2.10 Interface damage initiation and propagation in I1 24
Figure:2.11 a)Celanese test fixture b)Modified grips for IITRI
c) Northrop compression test specimen and fixture)
d) NBS compression test specimen and Fixture
26
Figure:2.12 a) SWRI compression test fixture b) Lockheed compression test fixture 26
Figure:2.13 a) Sandwich beam edgewise test configuration b) Four-point bend sandwich 27
Figure:2.14 a) Longitudinal compression sandwich beam test specimen b) Stress distribution
in the thickness-wise direction
28
Figure:2.15 a) Four-point flexural test apparatus of sandwich specimen b) stressstrain curves
of compression test
29
Figure:2.16 (a) ICSTM compression test fixture and (b) clamping blocks specimen. 32
Figure:2.17 (a)Post-failure mode of unidirectional specimens b) loaddisplacement curve 33
Figure:2.18 Typical stressstrain curves of the unidirectional specimens 33
Figure:2.19 a) Sub laminate-level([45/90/-45/0]ns) b) Ply-level scaled ([45n/90n/-45n/0n]s) 34
8

Figure:2.20 a) Plate geometry with parametric dimensions b) Top and bottom supports 35
Figure:2.21 a) Comparison critical buckling loads of unperforated composite plates.
b) Comparison of critical buckling ratio for various U-shaped cutouts
35
Figure:2.22 a) Two-rail shear apparatus and specimen.
b) Three-rail shear apparatus and specimen
c)Specimen geometry for two- and three-rail shear
36
Figure:2.23 a) Off-axis test specimen
b) Effects of end constraints on off-axis tensile specimens
37
Figure:2.24 a)Schematic of Iosipescu test fixture and specimen
b)Specimen configurations for determination of shear properties from the
Iosipescu test procedure
38
Figure:2.25 a) Specimen configuration of the off-axis tensile test.
b) Specimen configuration of the off-axis flexure test
40
Figure:2.26 Points of maximum normal and shear stresses in off-axis tensile specimen 40
Figure:2.27 off-axis tensile stresses as a function of the fiber orientation angle at failure load 41
Figure:2.28 Geometric loci of maximum normal and shear stresses 42
Figure:2.29 Experimental values of off-axis flexure stresses 42
Figure:3.1 machine design for testing 44
Figure:3.2 Specimen with different -2 cutouts 46
Figure:3.3 Specimen with varying angle of fibers 46
Figure:3.4 Specimen combining with different-2 angle of prepregs 47
Figure:3.5 Specimen with load axial and tranverse direction 47
Figure:3.6 Flow chart for implementation of the proposed proje 51
Figure 3.7
Timelines for proposed project
51








9

CHAPTER 1
Introduction:
1. Composites Composites are combinations of two materials in which one of the
materials, called the reinforcing phase, is in the form of fibers, sheets, or particles, and is
embedded in the other materials called the matrix phase. The reinforcing material and the
matrix material can be metal, ceramic, or polymer. Typically, reinforcing materials are strong
with low densities while the matrix is usually a ductile, or tough, material. Examples of some
current application of composites include the diesel piston, brake-shoes, pads aircraft etc.
1.1 Classification of Composites On the basis of reinforced we can divided
composites in three parts which is shown in Figure 1.1.

Fig.1.1: Classification of Composites
1.1.1. Particle Reinforced Composites - These are the cheapest and most widely used. They
can be divided in two categories depending on the size of the particles: large-particle
composites, which act by restraining the movement of the matrix, if well bonded.
Dispersion-strengthened composites contain 10-100 nm particles. The matrix bears the
major portion of the applied load and the small particles hinder dislocation motion, limiting
plastic deformation. Particulate phase is harder and stiffer than the matrix. Examples:
Concrete (Matrix : Cement, Particulates : sand and gravel) Cermets- Hard Carbide Ceramic
embedded in Metal Matrix, used as cutting tools for hardened steel (Matrix : Cobalt,
Composites
Particle-
reinforced
Large particle
Dispersion-
strengthened
Fiber-
reinforced
Continuous
(aligned)
Discontinuous
(short)
Aligned
Randomly
oriented
Structural
Laminated
sandwich
panels
10

Particulates : Tungsten Carbide), TDNi (Thoria dispersed Nickel), SAP (Sintered Al.
powder)


Fig1.2:Types of composites a) Particle Reinforced Composite b ) Fiber Reinforced composites c) Structural
Composites [13]
1.1.2. Fiber Reinforced Composites: A fiber-reinforced composite (FRC) consists of three
components: (i) the fibers as the discontinuous or dispersed phase, (ii) the matrix as the
continuous phase, and (iii) the fine inter phase region, also known as the interface.
Reinforcing fibers can be made of metals, ceramics, glasses, or polymers that have been
turned into graphite and known as carbon fibers. Fibers increase the modulus of the matrix
material.
1.1.3. Structural Composites: Common structural composite types are two types:
1.1.3.1 Laminar: It Is composed of two-dimensional sheets or panels that have a
preferred high strength direction such as is found in wood and continuous and aligned fiber-

(a) (b)
(c)
11

reinforced plastics. The layers are stacked and cemented together such that the orientation of
the high-strength direction varies with each successive layer. Example: Ski and plywood.
1.1.3.2. Sandwich Panels: They consist of two strong outer sheets which are called face
sheets and may be made of aluminum alloys, fiber reinforced plastics, titanium alloys, steel.
Face sheets carry most of the loading and stresses. Core may be a honeycomb structure which
has less density than the face sheets and resists perpendicular stresses and provides shear
rigidity. Sandwich panels can be used in variety of applications which include roofs, floors,
walls of buildings and in aircraft, for wings, fuselage and tail plane skins.
1.2. Properties of composites
Composite materials have many mechanical behavior characteristics that are different from
normal engineering materials. Some characteristics are merely modifications of conventional
behavior; others are totally new and require new analytical and experimental procedure
procedures. Composite material is often both inhomogeneous (or non homogeneous or
heterogeneous and nonisotropic (orthotropic or anisotropic):
An inhomogeneous body has nonuniform properties over the body, i.e., the properties
depend on position in the body. The orthotropic body has material properties that are
different in three mutually perpendicular planes of material property symmetry. Thus, the
properties depend on orientation of a point in the body. An anisotropic body has material
properties that are different in all direction at a point in the body. No depends on material
property symmetry exist. Again, the properties depends on orientation at a point of body .

Fig 1.3: a)isotropic b)orthotropic c)anisotropic[29]
Because of the different properties from normal materials of composites materials,
they are conveniently studied from two points of view: micromechanics and macro
mechanics:
12

Micromechanics is the study of composite material behavior wherein interaction of
the constituent materials is examined on a microscopic scale to determine their effects on the
properties of the composite material.
Macro mechanics is the study of composite material behavior wherein the material is
presumed homogeneous and the effects of the constituent materials are detected only as
averaged apparent macroscopic properties of the composites material.

1.3. Application of composites: There are many reasons for the growth in
composite applications, but the primary impetus is that the products fabricated by composites
are stronger and lighter. Today, it is difficult to find any industry that does not utilize the
benefits of composite materials. The largest user of composite materials today is the
transportation industry. The composites application can be divided into the following industry
categories: aerospace, automotive, construction, marine, corrosion resistant equipment,
consumer products, appliance/business equipment, and others.
1.3.1. Aerospace Industry- The aerospace industry was among the first to use the benefits of
composite materials. Airplanes, rockets, and missiles all fly higher, faster, and farther with
the help of composites. Glass, carbon, and Kevlar fiber composites have been routinely
designed and manufactured for aerospace parts. The aerospace industry primarily uses carbon
fiber composites because of their high-performance characteristics. The composite
components used in fighter planes are horizontal and vertical stabilizers, wing skins, fin
boxes, flaps, and various other structural components. The use of composite materials are
used in spacecraft applications to include weight savings as well as dimensional stability.
1.3.2. Automotive Industry - Composite materials are used in some applications of the
automotive industry to deliver high-quality surface finish, styling details, and processing
options. Composite body panels have a successful track record in all categories from
exotic sports cars to passenger cars to small, medium, and heavy truck. Because the
automotive market is very cost-sensitive, carbon fiber composites are not yet accepted due to
their higher material costs. Automotive composites utilize glass fibers as main
reinforcements.

13


Fig.1.4:Use of composite in military aircraft[18]


Fig: 1.5: Engine component made of composites [18]

1.3.3. Sporting Goods Industry - Sports and recreation equipment suppliers are becoming
major users of composite materials. The growth in structural composite usage has been
greatest in high-performance sporting goods and racing boats. We can see products such as
14

golf shafts, tennis rackets, snow skis, fishing rods, etc. made of composite materials. These
products are light in weight and provide higher performance, which helps the user in easy
handling and increased comfort.

Fig.1.6: Use of Composites in sports [15]
1.3.4. Marine Applications - Composite materials are used in a variety of marine
applications such as passenger ferries, power boats, buoys, etc. because of their corrosion
resistance and light weight, which gets translated into fuel efficiency, higher cruising speed,
and portability. The majority of components are made of glass-reinforced plastics (GRP) with
foam and honeycomb as core materials.
1.3.5. Construction and Civil Structures- The construction and civil structure industries are
the second major users of composite materials. The driving force for the use of glass- and
carbon-reinforced plastics for bridge applications is reduced installation, handling, repair, and
life-cycle costs as well as improved corrosion and durability. It also saves a significant
amount of time for repair and installation and thus minimizes the blockage of traffic.
1.3.6. Industrial Applications - The use of composite materials in various industrial
applications is growing. Composites are being used in making industrial rollers and shafts for
the printing industry and industrial drive shafts for cooling-tower applications. Filament
winding shows good potential for the above applications. Injection molded, short fiber
composites are used in bushings, pump and roller bearings, and pistons. Composites are also
used for making robot arms and provide improved stiffness, damping, and response time.
1.4. Fibre-reinforced plastic (FRP)
It is a composite material made of a polymer matrix reinforced with fibers. The fibers
are usually fiberglass, carbon, or aramid, while the polymer is usually an epoxy, vinylester or
polyester thermosetting plastic. FRPs are commonly used in the aerospace, automotive,
15

marine, and construction industries. A polymer is generally manufactured by
polycondensation, polymerization or polyaddition. Fibre reinforced plastics are a category of
composite plastics that specifically use fibrous materials to mechanically enhance the
strength and elasticity of plastics. The original plastic material without fibre reinforcement is
known as the matrix. The matrix is a tough but relatively weak plastic that is reinforced by
stronger stiffer reinforcing filaments or fibers. The extent that strength and elasticity are
enhanced in a fibre reinforced plastic depends on the mechanical properties of the fibre and
matrix, their volume relative to one another, and the fibre length and orientation within the
matrix.
1.4.1. CFRP (Carbon fiber reinforced polymer)
It is a very strong and light fiber-reinforced polymer which contains carbon fibers.
The polymer is most often epoxy, but other polymers, such as polyester, vinyl ester or nylon,
are sometimes used. Although it can be relatively expensive, it has many applications in
aerospace and automotive fields, as well as in sailboats, and notably finds use in modern
bicycles and motorcycles, where its high strength-to-weight ratio and good rigidity is of
importance. Improved manufacturing techniques are reducing the costs and time to
manufacture, making it increasingly common in small consumer goods as well, such as
laptops, tripods, fishing rods, paintball equipment, archery equipment, racquet frames,
stringed instrument bodies, drum shells, golf clubs, and pool/billiards/snooker cues.
The physical properties of CFRP are anisotropic (different depending on the
direction of the applied force or load). The properties depends on of a CFRP panel will often
depend upon the orientation of the applied forces and/or moments and orientation of CFRP
Laminates.
To study mechanical behavior of CFRP we need to basic terminology of CFRP.
Laminae and laminates: Laminae is the basic building block of laminate which is a flat
(sometime curved as in a shell) arrangement of unidirectional fibers or woven fibers in a
matrix.
16


(a) (b)
Fig:1.7 a) Basic structure Laminae b) Unbounded view of laminate construction[29]
A laminate is a bonded stack of laminae with various orientations of principal
material directions in laminae as shown in figure. The layers of a laminates are usually
bonded together by the same matrix material that is used in the individual laminae.
1.6. Requirement of composites testing
The use of composites in commercial aircraft, transportation, machinery, marine, and the
public works industries is increased too much. To use composite material in these fields, it is
necessary to determine quality or acceptability of specific components and to determine
intrinsic material properties such as modulus and strength for use in design and analysis. So
there is a need to develop methods to predict the material properties and behavior of
composite materials and structures made of these materials under a variety of loading and
environmental conditions.
1.5. Problem statement
As we know that use of composite material is increasing in automotive, marine
transportation, civil engineering, sporting goods, medical equipment and prosthetic devices,
so there is a need to develop methods to predict the material properties and behavior of
composite materials and structures made of these materials under a variety of loading and
environmental conditions.
In this research project, Experimental testing of will be carried out on CFRP composite
material varying specimen parameters like thickness of specimen, placing laminate in
different-2 angle, with cutout at different-2 place and varying depth and radius of cutout and
17

varying strain rate. Then the results will be compared with numerical data which will be
obtained in ABAQUS

software to verify experimental results.

1.6. Outline of the report
The report has been divided into 3 chapters. Chapter 1 includes introductory part of
composite which includes properties of composites, classification, applications, CFRP
introduction, problem statement and the outline of the report. In chapter 2, types of
mechanical tests for composite are studied in detail. Later literature review of tensile,
compression, buckling and in-plane shear test has been carried out. Next chapter describe the
work done and future proposed work which includes methodology and flowchart of work.













18

Chapter 2 : Mechanical Testing of Composites and Literature
Review
2.1. Mechanical testing of composites The use of composites in commercial
aircraft, transportation, machinery, marine, and the public works industries is increased too
much. So to use composite material in these fields, it is necessary to determine quality or
acceptability of specific components and to determine intrinsic material properties such as
modulus and strength for use in design and analysis.
2.1.1. Properties to be evaluated in Testing
We do experiments to find out to find out the strength and elastic properties of a
material. But as we know that by experiment tests we can only measure loads and
displacements. To find out the desired properties of composites from these parameters we use
the theory of elasticity for an anisotropic body. Fibrous composites with unidirectional,
laminated or spatial fiber lay-ups are inhomogeneous, are anisotropic materials. So to specify
the direction of load and its relationship with axes of elastic symmetry of the material, two
systems of coordinates are introduced: the axes of elastic symmetry in the material (1, 2, 3)
and axes of loading x, y, z . It is preferable to use methods in which the x, y, z axes coincide
with the 1,2,3 axes.
The majority of laminated and fibrous composites exhibit low interlaminar shear and
transverse tension strengths. Shear strength is characterized by the relations between
/
x xz
E G (shear stiffness) and /
u u
x xz
; (shear strength). Transverse tension and compression
strengths perpendicular to the fibers are determined by the relations E
x
/ E
z
, /
tu tu
x z
,
/
tu cu
x z
; where E
x
and E
z
are the moduli of elasticity in the x and z directions; G
xz
is
interlaminar shear modulus
u
x
and
u
z
are strengths in the x and z directions;
u
xz
is shear
strength in xz plane. The x and y axes are located in the fiber lay-up (reinforcement) plane,
the z-axis is perpendicular to this plane; the (t) and (c) designate tension and compression,
respectively.



19

2.2. Testing and Literature review
2.2.1. Tensile testing: A uniaxial tension test specimen has several functionally parts:
two loading sections, a gage section, and two transition sections. The loading sections
provide a means of fastening the specimen in the testing machine. They receive and transmit
the external loads to the gage section of the specimen. In thegage section, deformations are
measured and stresses are calculated according to the geometrical dimensions and external
load. The transition sections serve to attenuate stress-strain perturbations in the loading
section to isolate them from the gage section.
The greatest technical challenge in tension testing of composites, especially
unidirectional composites, is the reliabletransmission of tensile forces from the grips to the
specimen. This is generally performed through the use of friction forces. Tabs bonded to the
specimen improve the efficiency of load transmission considerably. For better grip we choose
the tabs made of a material that has a much lower modulus of elasticity and a higher total
elongation than the respective characteristics of the specimen material. Tabs have been made
of fiberglass reinforced composites, aluminum and wood veneers. The thickness of tabs
should be between 1.5t and 4t, where t is the specimen thickness. The tabs must have a large
enough area that the ultimate shear load capacity of the bond between the tabs and the
specimen is greater than the breaking load of the specimen gage section.
The mode of failure in tension depends on the relationship between the external load
and the reinforcing fibers and on the type of reinforcement lay-up. When unidirectional
composites are loaded in the reinforcement direction, they fail by breakage of the reinforcing
fibers. This is accompanied by transverse cracks, longitudinal shear cracks and
delamination of the polymer matrix. Increasing the angle between the load and the
reinforcing fibers causes the mode of failure to change gradually from shear and splitting of
the polymer matrix parallel to the fiber direction to pure transverse tensile cracking of the
polymer matrix. The failure mode of composites with balanced angle-ply reinforcement
depends on the angle of the fiber lay-up.
20


Fig.2.1:CFRP Specimen Shape [?]
2.2.2. Literature review on tensile test
1) The effect of the lay-up sequences on the mechanical properties and fracture
behavior of the advanced carbon fiber-reinforced plastics (CFRP) composite was determined
in [1]. Specimens with angles of 0, 45 and 90 between the fibers of the 0 layers and the
longitudinal direction of the specimen ((0), (45) and (90) specimens) were used. The
mechanical properties were evaluated by tensile test. he found that the tensile fracture stress
of the 0/90 ply-(0) and (90) specimens were about one-half that of the 0/0 ply-(0)
specimen.
Specimen used
Used specimen was 3.5-mm-thick carbon/epoxy laminates whose schematic illustrations are
shown in Fig 2.2(b) ; unidirectional (designated as 0/0 plies) orthotropic (designated as
0/90 plies) and quasi- isotropic (designated as 0/90/. 45 plies) laminates (20 plies) of
0.205 mm prepregs consisted of long carbon fibers (6 7 m in diameter)
Types of specimen used 1) unidirectional (designated as 0/0 plies)
2) orthotropic (designated as 0/90 plies)
3) quasi-isotropic (designated as 0/90/ 45 plies)
Fig2.2: Schematic illustrations of laminates with various lay-up sequences. Fig 2.3: Configurations of (a)
unnotched tensile, (b) notched tensile,[1]
21

Configuration of specimens
1) unnotched- width 7 mm thickness- 3.5mm Tab length- 60 mm gage length- 20
2) notched -width 11 mm thickness- 3.5mm Tab length- 60 mm gage length- 20
notch 2mm with 45 angle
Result
So he found out as he increase angle from 0
0
to 90
0
Tensile fracture stress decreased. As it
was above 1000MPa for 0
0
and at 90
0
it decreased to less than 100mpa.Tensile fracture stress
of the 0/0 ply-(0) specimen at and above 1000 MPa was independent of specimen type, but
that of the 0/0 plies-(45) and (90) specimens was less than 100MPa.The anisotropy of the
properties for the 0/90 plies was improved compared to that of the 0/0 plies. However,
the tensile fracture stress of the 0/90 ply- (0) and (90) specimens was only about one-half
that of the 0/0 ply-(0) specimen. The tensile fracture stress of the 0/90 ply-(45)
specimen was less than 200 MPa. The 0/90/ 45 ply specimen exhibited an isotropy of the
properties, but its fracture stress was about 40% of that of the 0/0 ply-(0) specimen.
Fig 2.4: a) Unnotched tensile fracture stress for laminates with various lay-up sequences. b) Notched tensile
fracture stress for laminates with various lay-up sequences[1]


2) The mechanical properties of unidirectional normal modulus carbon fibre
reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheet under quasi-static and medium impact tensile loads with
different strain rates was experimentally investigated in [2]. He found that mechanical
properties are strain rate dependent. The tensile stress, modulus of elasticity and strain at
failure obtained at 3 strain rates (54.2, 67.2 and 87.4 s-1) were compared with those obtained
from quasi-static tests to demonstrate the influence of strain rate on mechanical properties

Test specimen
Material- fibre reinforced polymer sheet (CF130).
22

Process and shape size- wet-lay-up process was used to manufacture a test panel (thin
laminate carbon/epoxy) which was later cut into several coupons. Steel tabs were bonded on
both sides at the ends of specimens to avoid damage on gripping CFRP sheets. Length for test
specimen is 138 mm.

Fig.2.5: Coupons for testing the properties of CFRP [ 2 ]

Equipments and test procedure
The drop mass rig which was modified to carry out the impact tensile tests was utilized for
testing CF130. The strain rate for the quasi-static tests was 2.42 x 10-4 s-1. The strain rates
for the impact tests were 54.2, 67.2 and 87.4 s-1. The different strain rates were generated by
dropping a mass of 156kg from various heights (0.375m, 0.575m and 0.975m).
10 static tests were conducted in an Instron testing machine to serve as reference tests. The
measured properties include tensile stress, modulus of elasticity and strain at failure.

The influence of axial strain rate on the stress-strain curve of carbon/epoxy specimens is
illustrated in Fig.2.6 (a). The effect of strain rate on tensile stress ,the tensile stress against the
strain rate is presented in Fig.2.6 (b) for all the aforementioned strain rates. It is clear that
there is a general trend of increase in tensile stress as the strain rate increases. The increase in
tensile stress varies from 20% to 43% when compared with that under quasi-static load.
Increase in modulus of elasticity was about 20% when the strain rate was above 52.4 s-1.
Fig 2.7(b) illustrates the influence of strain rate on the strain at failure for CF130.
Again there is a general trend of increasing strain at failure as the strain rate increases. For
strain rate of 54.2 and 67.2 s-1 the increase is about 9%. A greater increase (24%) was found
when the strain rate reached 87.4 s
-1
.

23

Fig 2.6: a) Stress-strain curves of CFRP for various strain rates b) The effect of strain rate on the tensile stress
of CFRP [2]


Fig 2.7: a) The effect of strain rate on the modulus of elasticity of CFRP b) The effect of strain rate on the strain
to failure of CFRP[2]

3) Tensile behavior of the 17-ply anti-symmetric carbon/epoxy composite which
were arranged in the ply sequence of [-60
2
/0/60
5
/0/-60
5
/0/60
2
] subjected to tensile load was
examined, subjected to uniaxial tensile loading both experimentally and numerically in [4].
The author described the damage behavior of the plies, whereas damage initiation and
progression of the interfaces. Force displacement curves obtained numerically and
experimentally. His Results shows that all laminae and interfaces experienced the damage
except laminae with 0
o
fibre. In addition, damage was concentrated at the tab and central
regions of the tensile specimen. Edge delamination was observed in all interfaces. He
observed that damage was first initiated at the tab region, which slowly-2 propagated and
accompanied by damage at the central region. He observed for interfaces delamination also
occurs along the edges.

24

Results: Load-displacement curves: The measured and predicted load-displacement
responses of the composite specimen under tensile loading was compared which is shown in
Fig.2.8 (a). Gauge length of 3 mm specimen was used. The linear plot suggests that no
apparent damage is observed during loading until the final catastrophic fracture occurs. The
peak load at fracture was compared well to predicted load magnitude. The difference could
be due to inability of the numerical computation to account for the load carrying ability of the
fibre after complete failure of the matrix.

Fig 2.8: a) Experimental and predicted load-displacement curves b) Damage initiation time of damaged laminae
and interfaces[4]

Damage behavior of laminae and interfaces: Evolution of internal states and
damage in the laminae and interfaces throughout the loading was predicted by the finite
element model. Fig.2.8(b) describes the corresponding time at damage initiation of each
lamina and interface. Damage is initiated in all laminae and interfaces except laminae with 0
o

fibre. It is predicted that only tensile matrix failure occurs in the lamina during the tension
test.
Next, the progression of damage in L1 is described. Fig.2.9 illustrates the sequence
of matrix damage propagation with continuously increasing tensile loading of the specimen.
Results show damage is initiated at near tab region (Fig.2.9 (a)). Then, the stresses and thus
matrix damage variable are increased uniformly across the whole lamina (Fig.2.9 (b)). This is
followed by matrix damage initiation at isolated region nearby (Fig. 5. (c)) that propagated to
the edges (Fig.2.9 (d). Fig.2.9.(e) illustrates the damage contour at peak load, where matrix
cracking at the central region is observed. Besides, anti-symmetric feature of the lamina is
obvious as reflected in anti-symmetric distribution of matrix cracking damage.

25

Fig.2.9: Progression of damage initiation in L1[4]

Fig.2.10: Interface damage initiation and propagation in I1 [ 4 ]

Fig.2.10 describes the initiation and progression of delamination damage in I1. Since damage
is initiated at the edges near the tabs (circled in red in Fig.2.10.(a)), delamination propagates
across the width and connects after that (Fig.2.10. (b)). It is accompanied by edge
delamination along the edges. Then, delamination is predicted to propagate slightly further
from the tabs (Fig.2.10. (c)). When peak load is attained, delamination is found at the central
edges of the specimen (Fig.2.10. (d)).
He observed that damage is first initiated at the tab region, which slowly-2 propagated and
accompanied by damage at the central region. He observed for interfaces delamination also
occurs along the edges.

2.3. Compressive test
2.3.1. Types of Compression tests for Composites
In compression testing of unidirectional composites in the fiber direction, three basic modes
of failure are observed: buckling of the reinforcing fibers, transverse cracking of the matrix,
and shearing of reinforcing fibers at a 45
0
angle without local buckling of the reinforcement.
Transverse cracking is caused by differences in the Poisson's ratios of the material
components and by a non-uniform transverse strain distribution along the specimen length.
Materials reinforced at an angle to the specimen's longitudinal axis fail in shear without
crumpling at the end faces because the entire shear load is taken up by the matrix. The
aforementioned basic modes of failure can be accompanied by a series of other phenomena:
26

inelastic and non-linear deformation of the reinforcing fibers and matrix, delamination,
surface peeling, overall buckling and crushing of the end faces. Failures with different
combinations of these phenomena can make the determination of the failure mode very
difficult. In compression testing, great care must be taken to ensure stability of the specimen,
especially in the gage section. Buckling of the specimen side face is not always detectable
and will cause erroneous strain measurements. Special test fixtures are used to prevent overall
buckling of the specimen. There arethree accepted test methods. Each is briefly outlined and
schematic diagrams of grip arrangements are presented. Strain gages are generally used for
each of these test methods.
Type 1
This method is characterized by having a completely unsupported specimen with a relatively
short test section length. Several types of fixtures exist for this method. The Celanese (ASTM
D-3410-75) test fixture and associated specimen geometry are shown in Figure 2.11(a). The
Illinois Institute of Technology Research Institute (IITRI) test fixture uses a test specimen
identical to the Celanese fixture and is shown in Figure 4.11(b).









Fig.2.11: a)Celanese test fixture and specimen (ASTM D 3410-75) b)Modified grips for IITRI compression test
c) Northrop compression test specimen and fixtured) d) NBS compression test specimen and
Fixture[19][20][21][22]



(a) (b)
(c)
(d)
27

Strain gages are mounted on the specimen, which is loaded through serrated wedges
constrained by solid steel bases. The Northrop test fixture is simpler than the Celanese or
IITRI fixtures and is shown in Figure 2.11(c) The final example of type I compression testing
is the NBS (National Bureau of Standards) test fixture. This fixture combines aspects of the
Celanese and IITRI fixtures and adds features that allow for tensile tests. The NBS fixture is
shown in Figure 2.11(d). All four of the Type I test methods yield acceptable results, but are
difficult to conduct because of load line eccentricity.
Type 2
In this class of tests the specimens are characterized as having a relatively long test
section that is fully supported. The SWRT (Southwest Research Institute) and the Lockheed
type fixtures are schematically shown in Figures2.12 (a) and (b), respectively. Results from
experiments using these grips are comparable to data from Type I tests. The SWRI grip has a
cut in one support to allow for a transverse gage to measure Poissons ratio in compression.
Longitudinal strain is measured by an extensometer or strain gage placed on the edge of the
specimen. The specimen is a modified tensile specimen in which the overall length is reduced
while the end tab lengths are increased. The entire specimen length is supported by the
fixture. The Lockheed fixture uses side supports only over the gage section of the specimen,
which is the primary difference between it and the SWRI fixture.








Fig 2.12: a) SWRI compression test fixture b) Lockheed compression test fixture [22][23]

Type 3
The final class of compression test methods involves two sandwich beam specimen
configurations. In each case straight-sided coupons are bonded to a honeycomb core, which
supplies lateral support. The elastic moduli and Poissons ratio are determined from


(a) (b)
28

relationships between applied loads and strain gage readings taken from the specimen
.Results of failure strengths from this method are usually higher than those from the other
methods. The sandwich beam method can also be used to determine tensile properties. The
two specimen configurations are shown schematically in Figure 2.13. The specimen in
Figure2.13.(a) is referred to as the edgewise compression test specimen and is used to
determine
y
E
, and
yx
from the initial linear portion of the load-displacement curves
generated during testing.








Fig.2.13: a) Sandwich beam edgewise compression test configuration b) Four-point bend sandwich beam
compression test[26]

The applied load is assumed to be distributed equally between the top and bottom specimens.
The core is assumed to carry no in-plane load and is intended to supply lateral stability so that
the potential for buckling is reduced. The elastic modulus and Poissons ratio are determined
from strain gage readings to be
x
yx
y

= .2.1
2 2
y
y
y y y
P P
E
A bh

= = =
.2.2

The specimen in Figure 2.13(b) is somewhat different because it is loaded in four
point bending. The specimen is the top sheet, which experiences compression. The bottom
face sheet is in tension and is metal. Since the sandwich beam is subjected to flexure, various
parameters (metal face sheet strength, core cell size, etc.) can be changed to achieve the
desired compression failure of the specimen. Poissons ratio for this specimen is determined
from direct strain gage readings to be /
xy y x
= . The elastic modulus Ex, is somewhat
harder to establish since it requires an assumption of uniform deformation in each face sheet
while bending stresses in the core are neglected.



(a) (b)
29

2.3.2. Literature review
1) Nonlinear mechanical behaviors of unidirectional composites under
compressive loading using a sandwich beam specimen with the emphasis on the elastic
material nonlinearity in the fiber direction was studied in [6]. Measured compressive
behaviors were compared with those from coupon-type compression tests of unidirectional
and quasi-isotropic laminates. The compressive strength of unidirectional laminates
evaluated, using the present sandwich method, was much higher than that of coupon
specimens, whereas the failure strain of the former was almost identical to that of coupon
type quasi-isotropic laminates.
Test specimen
A sandwich beam flexure specimen consisting of unidirectional CFRP and honeycomb core
was utilized to measure compressive response and strength of
0
0 laminates. In order to
prevent unwanted failure modes (e.g., core failure, skin/core debonding) Sandwich
construction was applied only to the gauge section of the specimen used here. In addition,
sandwich specimen with a relatively thin core wad used in his[6] study to make the ratio of
span length to specimen thickness large so that applied load in four-point bending is small
enough not to induce failure near load pins (even when flexible cushion is placed between
load pins and specimens).









Fig2.14: a) longitudinal compression sandwich beam test specimen b) Assumed stress distribution in the
thickness-wise direction.[6]
In figure parameters are h
f
(mm)- 1.1 h
c
(mm) =5.0 h
o
(mm)=2.2 l
c
(mm)=20 l
p
(mm) =
25 l
m
(mm)=105.
This study used a T800H/3633 carbon/epoxy. An aluminum honeycomb (1/8-5052-002,
Showa Aircraft Industry Co. Ltd.) is used as the core of the sandwich beam in the gauge
section. Sandwich beams were manufactured in the manner that the longitudinal direction of

(a) (b)
30

the honeycomb core coincides with the [0]
8
direction of CFRP. In order to prevent failure in
the tension side, [0]
8
laminates and [0]
16
laminates were used in the compression side and
tension side, respectively. The rest of the core consists of [0]
32
laminates. The fiber volume
fractions are almost identical between the three unidirectional laminates (V
f
=57%). CFRP
laminates and aluminum core were bonded using structural epoxy film adhesives (AF163-2K,
3M) in order to prepare sandwich specimens with 280mm length, 20mm wide, and 8mm
thickness.

Experimental Procedure - The manufactured specimen and test apparatus is shown in
Figure 2.15(a). Flexible rubber sheets were placed between the load pins and specimens in
order to avoid unwanted failures near contact regions. Strain gauges were attached onto both
surfaces in the central gauge section. The four-point flexure tests of the sandwich specimens
were performed using a mechanically driven machine (4482, Instron) until failure. The
crosshead speed was set to be 2 mm.

Fig.2.15: a) Four-point flexural test apparatus of sandwich specimen b)Experimental stressstrain curves of
compression test.[6]
Test result - The measured compressive stressstrain relations of the three specimens are
shown in Figure2.15 (b). Clear nonlinear response can be observed in high strain ranges.
Compressive failure occurred in the gauge section. No damage was observed in the
honeycomb core until skin compressive failure. The tensile strain in the opposite skin was
less than 1% at specimen failure, which was low enough compared to the tensile failure strain
to be considered as no tensile damage in the opposite skin. By this results he concluded that
this is the fairly adequate compressive testing of unidirectional laminates could be performed.
The average compressive strength and failure strain were 1860MPa and 1.67%, respectively.
The coefficient of variation estimated from three specimens is relatively small (5.4%).
31

The results obtained from this experiment were compared with coupon type test
methods. Which has same volume fraction with unidirectional [0]
20
laminates. The stress
strain relation of coupon specimen coincides well with that of sandwich specimen, which
shows the validity of the present test method.
However, compressive strength of the sandwich specimen was found much higher
than that of the coupon specimen, at 1860MPa for the sandwich and 1420MPa for the
coupon.
The effect of specimen size on the axial compressive strength of IM7/8552 carbon
fibre/epoxy unidirectional laminates (UD) was experimentally studied evaluated in [5].
Laminate gauge length, width and thickness were increased by a scaling factor of 2 and 4
from the baseline specimen size of 10 mm * 10 mm * 2 mm. In all cases, strength decreased
as specimen size increased, with a maximum reduction of 45%; no significant changes were
observed for the axial modulus. Optical micrographs show that the failure mechanism is fibre
micro buckling accompanied by matrix cracking and splitting. The location of failure in most
specimens, and especially the thicker ones, was where the tabs terminate and the gauge
section begins suggesting that the high local stresses developed due to geometric
discontinuity contribute to premature failure and, hence, reduced compressive strength. Two
generic quasi-isotropic multi-directional (MD) lay-ups were also tested in compression,
one with blocked plies [45
n
/90
n
/-45
n
/0
n
]
s
and the other with distributed plies [45/90/ /45/0]
ns
with n =2, 4 and 8. Strength results showed no evidence of a size effect when the specimens
are scaled up using distributed plies and compared to the 2 mm thick specimens. All blocked
specimens had similar compressive strengths to the sub laminate ones apart of the 8 mm
specimens that showed a 30% reduction due to extensive matrix cracking introduced during
the specimens cutting process. The calculated unidirectional failure stress (of the 0
0
ply
within the multidirectional laminate) of about 1710 MPa was slightly higher than the average
measured value of 1570 MPa of the 2 mm thick baseline unidirectional specimen, suggesting
that the reduced unidirectional strength observed for the thicker specimens was a testing
artefact. It appears that the unidirectional compressive strength in thicker specimens (>2 mm)
is found to be limited by the stress concentration developed at the end-tabs and
manufacturing induced defects such as fibre misalignment, ply waviness and voids.




32


Experimental procedure
Specimen:
Material: The specimens were fabricated from carbon/epoxy pre impregnated tapes 0.125
mm thick. The tapes were made of continuous intermediate modulus IM7 carbon fibers pre-
impregnated with Hexcel 8552 epoxy resin (34 vol% resin content).
Specimen type: 1.Unidirectional plates [0
4
]
ns
with n =2, 3, 4, and 8.(thickness)
2. Quasi-isotropic
1. Blocked plies [45n/90n/-45n/0n]
s

2. Distributed plies [45/90/-45/0]
ns
with n =2, 4 and 8
Specimen geometry-
Design of a compressive test specimen certain constraints considered: (i) end-tabs were
required both to effectively transfer load from the test machine grips to the specimen and to
provide an adequate restraint against specimen buckling; (ii) the overall specimen stability
needs to be sufficient to ensure that compressive failure occurs significantly before potential
buckling, implying correct combination of specimen length and flexural stiffness.
The maximum allowable specimen gauge section length was determined on the
basis of an Euler column buckling analysis assuming a pinned end strut with a rectangular
cross-section and corrected to account for the influence of shear deflection due to transverse
shear forces developed in anisotropic materials.
Critical gauge lengths for plain specimens
Thickness (mm) 2 4 6 8 10
L
max
(mm) 13.9 27.6 45.9 55.9 69.9
Minimum gauge length for waisted specimens
t
0
(mm) 1.34 2.67 4 5.34 6.67
Lmin (mm) 8.2 16.6 24.9 33.1 41.5
In order to avoid failure occurring at the junction of end-tab and the gauge section
or within the tabs, then a specimen with waisted gauge section could be considered. Waisting
the specimen through its thickness, which is in fact an optimized form of tabbing, has to be
carried out carefully in order to maintain a symmetric specimen, otherwise one would be
likely to introduce bending and cause premature failure.
Test fixture and mechanical tests
33

Generating a uniform one-dimensional stress state was the main objective of a compression
test fixture. Stress concentrations due to load introduction present the most serious problems
for unidirectional lay-ups and may cause premature failure of the specimen. Currently, there
are no universally accepted test standards for testing specimens thicker than 2 mm. In[5]
compression tests on the unidirectional specimens were performed using the Imperial College
ICSTM test jig at a constant compression rate of 1 mm/min on a servo-hydraulic machine
with a load capacity of 1000 kN, which is shown in Figure 2.16.
By this fixtures specimen was loaded purely on the ends. However, a small amount
(in the region of 10%) is applied by shear loading via the end-tabs, thus lowering the average
stresses at the end of the test piece. The fixture consists of two grip blocks, Fig. 2.16 that
accommodates the specimen and prevent debonding of the tabs from the specimen end, shear
failure of the end or compression failure under the tab. The clamping blocks rest on hardened
and ground steel plates, a measure that was necessary to avoid indentations of the loading
surfaces. The high precision die set shown in Fig. 2.16(a) was designed to eliminate specimen
misalignments. The lower grip was not attached to the lower plate of the die set in order to
minimize additional constraints during testing, like bending of the specimen due to
misalignment between the upper and lower grips. The bolt torque applied in the clamping
blocks for the 2 mm thick specimen was in the region of 810 N m and increased slightly for
the thicker specimens. An advantage of the fixture was that by adjusting the size of the
clamping blocks a variety of specimen sizes can be accommodated; it was also used to test
multidirectional laminates.

Fig.2.16: (a) ICSTM compression test fixture and (b) clamping blocks for a 40 mm 40 mm 8 mm
specimen.[5]

34

Foil strain gauges were used on both faces to tested degree of Euler bending and measure
axial strain and, hence, axial modulus. The location and nature of damage in the UD
laminates was obtained by optical and scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
Compressive test results: The experimental results consist of stressstrain plots,
fracture stresses and strains for the unidirectional and multidirectional laminates, scanning
electron micrographs of some of the fracture surfaces, and photographs showing the overall
failure mode of selected specimens.
Unidirectional laminates: Initial compression tests on unidirectional specimens with
relatively thin end-tabs showed that failure occurred within the tabbed region, Fig. 2.17(a),
resulting in relatively lower compressive strengths (2030% lower than expected). It appears
that damage initiated on the end of the specimen (top corner) at the load introduction point
and propagated down the length and across the width of the specimen. Due to the clamping
constraining effect failure was progressive in nature, resulting in a more ductile load
displacement curve, Fig. 2.17(b), rather than the relatively brittle catastrophic failure that is
usually observed when the specimen breaks within the gauge section or near the end-tab.


Fig 2.17:(a)Post-failure mode of unidirectional specimens b) loaddisplacement curve of a 4 mm thick
specimen that failed within the tabbed region[5]

Representative stressstrain curves of 2 mm (plot A), 4 mm (plot B) and 8 mm (plot C) thick
unidirectional specimens obtained at the centre of each specimen from back-to-back strain
gauges are shown in Fig.2.18.
35


Fig.2.18:Typical stressstrain curves of the unidirectional specimens obtained from back-to-back strain gauges
(A: 10 mm *10 mm * 2 mm, B: 20 mm *20 mm * 4 mm and C: 40 mm *40 mm* 8 mm.).[5]

Multidirectional laminates -stressstrain curves of the 2 mm, 4 mm and 8 mm thick
multidirectional specimens laminated with distributed plies [45/ 90/45/0]ns (sub laminate-
level scaling)and blocked plies [45n/90n/45n/0n]s (ply-level scaling)stacking sequences are
shown in Fig. 2.19:a and b, respectively. Plots B for the 4 mm thick specimen and C for the 8
mm thick specimen are offset by 0.5% and 1.0% strain, respectively.

Fig.2.19: a) Sub laminate-level([45/90/-45/0]ns) laminate b) Ply-level scaled ([45n/90n/-45n/0n]s) laminate[5]

2.3.3. Buckling
The influence of cutout shape upon the buckling stability of multilayered
rectangular epoxy plates reinforced by glass fiber, with different orientation angles was
studied in [17].U-shaped cutouts were made on the long sides symmetrically. The
investigated plates were simply supported on the loaded edges (i.e. short sides) and free on
the unloaded edges. The plates without cutouts were examined theoretically to confirm
experimental and Finite Element (FE) results. The FE and experimental results were found
36

out for different U-shaped cutouts sizes. U-notch shape effects are examined depending on
notch depth and notch root radius. It was found that the effect of notch depth was stronger
than that of the notch root radius on buckling loads of plates. But, in some cases, although
plates containing U-notch, no reduction was obtained in buckling loads.










Fig 2.20: a) Plate geometry with parametric dimensions b) Top and bottom supports[17]
Specimen-
Material- LY5082 epoxy resin matrix (Ciba Geigy) and E-Glass fiber.
glass fiber volume fractions- 30%.
Process used lay- up
Specimen size- 200mm long*100mm wide *2.25 mm thickness
unperforated (r=0, a=0), and three type notched panels with r=1 a=0, r=1 a=1, and r=1 a=2
cm .The panels consists three plies which have 0, 30, 45, 60 and 90
0
fiber orientation angles.

Test fixture and testing speed- INSTRON 4301 universal uniaxial tensioncompression
testing machine was used. Fixtures were designed to apply compression load with simply
supported edges. The unloaded edges of the panel were free. The panels were loaded slowly
at 1 mm/min rate and critical buckling load were obtained. To determine the initial buckling
load two methods were used, firstly the point of inflection in the plot of load against in-plane
displacement and secondly the point of reversal in the membrane strain.
Results-


37


Fig. 2.21: a) Comparison of FE, experimental, and theoretical critical buckling loads of unperforated composite
plates. b) Comparison of critical buckling ratio for various U-shaped cutouts, based on fiber orientation angle
of ply.[17]

2.4.In Plane Shear
2.4.1. Shear Tests The material properties in the plane of lamination (1 -2) are
commonly termed in plane, while those in the 1-3 and 2-3 planes are known as inter laminar
properties. There are some commonly accepted methods for in-plane shear testing and out
plane testing which are presented here.
1) Shear Rail Test-
There are two acceptable configurations for the shear rail test: two-rail and three-rail. A
schematic of the load fixture for each is shown in Figures 2.22(a) and (b), respectively. For
both tests the shear stress in the strain gaged region of each specimen is defined in terms of
the applied load P and the specimen thickness (h), as well as the distance between each
vertical rail (b). The shear stress for each configuration is approximated by

xy
p
bh
= (Two rail ) ..2.3
2
xy
p
bh
= (Three rail).2.4

38


Fig.2.22: a) Two-rail shear apparatus and specimen.( ASTM D-30) b) Three-rail shear apparatus and specimen
c)Specimen geometry for two- and three-rail shear tests[24][25]
Free surfaces at the top and bottom of each specimen experience large normal stresses
concentrated at the corners. A length-to-width ratio of 10:l has been shown to approximate a
state of pure shear stress, provided the edges are perfectly clamped. The requirement of
perfect clamping can be met if the bolts in the rails each apply the same clamping pressure to
the edges. Since a state of pure shear is only approximated with the two- and three-rail
configurations, a single element strain gage oriented at 45
0
to the load axis may not
adequately define the true state of strain.
2) 10
0
Off-Axis Test: An off-axis test is generally performed in order to establish stress-
strain responses in directions other than the principal material directions. The off-axis test is
a tension test and no special fixtures or specimen preparation is required. Consider the
unidirectional test coupon loaded as shown in Figure 2.23(a). The rectangular rosette in this
figure is not required for establishing G12. Its presence is solely for the purpose of indicating
that an off-axis test can be used for defining more than one parameter. The strains indicated
by each gage in the rosette are related to Cartesian (x-y) strains by the strain transformation.
The relations between gage strain and the Cartesian strains are
A
=
x
,
y
=
C
, and
2
xy B A C
= , where
A
,
B
, and
C
are the strains indicated by gages A, B, and C,
respectively. The normal stress
x
, and strain
x
, (from strain gage measurements) are related
by /
x x x
E = .
39


Fig 2.23: a) Off-axis test specimen b)Effects of end constraints on off-axis tensile specimens[10]
Assuming that
1
E ,
2
E , and
12
are known, and that
x
E is defined from testing the
specimen of Figure 2.23(a), the only remaining unknown is G
12
, which can be determined
from the foregoing equation.
The uniaxial state of stress results in a biaxial state of strain in the specimen. From
theoretical and experimental results the best angle for establishing G
12
is 10
0
.The 10
0
angle
was chosen since it minimizes the effect of longitudinal and transverse tensile stress
components
1
and
2
on the shear response. A comparison of the 10
0
off-axis procedure with
other approaches has shown it to produce reasonable results for in-plane shear properties. The
simplicity of the 10
0
off-axis test for establishing G12 should not be taken for granted, since
problems can result from the specimen being orthotropic.
A uniaxial tensile stress in an orthotropic specimen can result in a shear-coupling
deformation as shown in Figure 2.23 (b)Constraints imposed on the specimen by rigid
clamping forces at the ends (Figure 2.23) impose other testing difficulties. Clamping at the
end of the specimen prohibits localized rotation and produces a nonuniform strain field. A
uniform strain field can be developed at the center of the specimen provided L/w is
sufficiently large.
3) Iosipescu Shear Test: The Iosipescu shear test is similar to an antisymmetric four-
point bend (AFPB) test method for composites. The major difference is that for the Iosipescu
test, the shear force through the test section is equal to the applied load. The Iosipescu test
fixture and specimen are shown in Figure 2.24 (a). This test procedure can be applied to
composites for determining material properties in the 1-2, 2-3, and 1-3 directions. The
appropriate fiber orientations for determining in-plane and interlaminar properties are shown
in Figure 2.24(b). This test method is versatile and allows for determination of a wider
40

variety of material properties than other procedures. Analysis of the procedure has led to the
evolution of several specimen and fixture geometries.

Fig:2.24: a) Schematic of Iosipescu test fixture and specimen b) Specimen configurations for determination of
shear properties from the Iosipescu test procedure.[26]
4) [ 4 5 ]
2s
Coupon Test: This procedure involves a uniaxial tension test of a [ 45]
2s

laminate, with strain gages. Although a biaxial rosette is sufficient, a three-element rosette
provides additional information that can be used to verify the state of stress in the specimen.
Specimen preparation and testing are identical to a conventional tension test. Results from the
[ 45]
2s
test are in good agreement with those from other procedures, and it is considered to
be a reliable test configuration
2.4.2. Literature review for in-plane shear test
In-plane Shear Strength of Unidirectional Composite Materials Using the Off-axis Three-
point Flexure and Off-axis Tensile Tests was determined and compared in [9]. In the case of
the off-axis three-point flexure test, the condition of small displacements and the condition of
lift-off between the specimen and the fixture supports were taken into account. Some
considerations regarding stress and displacement fields were presented. The in-plane shear
characterization were performed on a carbon fiber reinforced unidirectional laminate with
several fiber orientation angles: 10
0
, 20
0
, 30
0
, and 45
0
.Test conditions for both off-axis
experimental methods, in order to ensure their applicability, are presented. By investigation
results the author found out Off-axis flexure test more suitable than off-axis tensile test for
the determination of in-plane shear strength.

Material and Apparatus
41

Material - Toughened epoxy matrix-based carbon fiber reinforced. All specimens had the
same Cross section- width b =12.5mm and thickness h=1 mm. with off-axis fiber orientation
angles: 10
0
, 20
0
, 30
0
, and 45
0
, with different length-to-width ratios. A universal testing
machine Instron- 4206 with two load cell of 100 and 1 kN, and standard test fixtures, were
used.

Geometric parameters in off-axis tests:
Off-axis tensile test Off-axis flexure test
h L (mm) L (mm) c L
0
(mm) L (mm) c c
LO

10
0
275 175 14 90 80 6.5 6.34
20
0
275 175 14 70 60 4.6 3.19
30
0
250 150 12 60 50 3.8 2.25
45
0
200 100 8 50 40 3.1 2.20

Off-axis Tensile Test
A cross-head speed of 1 mm/min was considered for tensile tests. Both the nominal gage
length L and the nominal overall-length L of the tensile specimens are consigned in Table
(Figure 2.25) as well as the nominal length-to-width ratio c. All authors suggest a high
length-to-width ratio, in order to reduce the end-constraint effect: c
max
9. c
max
=10 , c
max

16, c
max
=18 and c
max
=28. The gripping system consisted of sandpaper placed between the grip
and the specimen along the gripping length H presented in Figure 2.25(a). For all off-axis
tensile tests H=50 mm.

Fig.2.25: a) Specimen configuration of the off-axis tensile test. b) Specimen configuration of the off-axis flexure
test.[9]


Off-axis Flexure Test
The flexure tests were performed at a nominal strain rate of 1%/min. The nominal span L, the
nominal overall-length L, and span-to-width ratio c of the flexure specimens showed in fig.
42

In order to increase the shear stresses at the failure critical point the span-to width ratio must
be as high as possible, bearing in mind the small displacement condition, ensuring that the
maximum deflection during the test do not exceed the 10% of the span.

Result
Off-axis Tensile Test
there are three critical points in the off-axis tensile test: point F near the gripping zone, point
M located along the longitudinal middle line of the specimen, and point F located along the
longitudinal edge of the specimen where it is assumed that failure starts.

Fig.2.26:Points of maximum normal and shear stresses in off-axis tensile specimen[9]

The longitudinal normal stress, transverse normal stress, and the in-plane shear stress
as function of the fiber orientation angle, at points F, M, and F, are presented in Figure 2.26.
Results show that all stress components are higher at F than at F and at M. In spite of the fact
that all in-plane stress components are a little greater at point F than at point F, the failure
starts at point F due to the greater probability of containing machining defects through the
longitudinal edge of the specimen.

Fig:2.27: Experimental values of off-axis tensile stresses as a function of the fiber orientation angle at failure
load: (a) longitudinal normal stresses, (b) transverse normal stresses, (c) in-plane shear stresses.[9]
43

Figure 2.27(c)According to [9] results it was revealed that in-plane shear stress
decreases as the fiber orientation angle increases, due to increasing influence of
T
as seen in
Figure 2.27(b), and that determination of (in plane shear strength)X
LT
by means of the off-
axis tensile test provides a conservative value. It is recommended to consider low fiber
orientation angles (e.g., =10
0
). Comparing in-plane shear stress at critical points with the
nominal interfacial shear stress it can be affirmed that, on the one hand,
0
is quite similar to
(
LT
)
M
specially for high off-axis angles. On the other hand, (
LT
)
F
and (
LT
)
F
are higher
than
0
in all cases. Regarding the in-plane shear strength experimentally obtained by the off-
axis tensile test, it can be inferred from the results that the present approach, considering
X
LT=
(
LT
)
F
, gives values up to 24% higher than values obtained with the conventional
approach, based on
0
.


Off-axis Flexure Test
In-plane shear strength by the off-axis flexure test was determined at critical point K and K.
Figure 2.28 shows the longitudinal normal stress, the transverse normal stress, and the in-
plane shear stress as a function of the fiber orientation angle at both K and K points.

Fig.2.28: Geometric loci of maximum normal and shear stresses in the off-axis flexure specimen[9]

Figure 2.29(a) shows that longitudinal normal stress decreases as the fiber orientation angle
increases, and Figure 2.29(b) indicates that transverse normal stress has the opposite trend; it
increases as increases. These results lead to conclude that for fiber orientation angles
between 10
0
and 45
0
, for the span-to-width ratios considered, failure is mainly due to shear
stresses. In-plane shear stresses at points K and K for all analyzed orientations are depicted
in Figure 2.29(c), and compared to the reference value 114 MPa.

44


Fig.2.29: Experimental values of off-axis flexure stresses as a function of the fiber orientation angle at failure
load: (a) longitudinal normal stresses, (b) transverse normal stresses, (c) in-plane shear stresses.[9]













45

Chapter 3: Work done and Future work
3.1. Work Done:
3.1.1.Design of setup
In starting we had three stages of translational motions. Using these translational stages
according our requirement we developed design to take out experimental work. The features
of design is as follows
We are using high-precision motorized translation stages. It is very useful in
Application where motion fields which needs high linearity. For example: femetosecond laser
experiment, laser processing, three-dimensional scanning measured system and mechanical
test of material.
Characteristics of setup-
Using three degree of freedom translation motion stages in which two are 400 mm travel
range and 3
rd
has 500 mm range. It has 1 micron closed loop resolution with maximum
speed of 500 mm/sec. backlash with less than 5 micron. It can work on on load up to 500
N. It has High-precision ball screw, ultra-precision linear slide ,which ensure the accuracy
and linearity of Motion
Using servomotor which can achieve high speed motion which can be used to make
experiments in high strain rates.
Has two means of motion :inching and increment
Point to point: Rapid positioning to the target location. Which will help to
Accelerate the experimental process.
Increment: Applicable to those need for reciprocating positioning in a number
of target locations. Operation of a button you can reach the target location.
Decided the speed of return original, initial speed constant speed and accelerate speed and
software position limit ,suitable for different control; For example: the system need
limit response time, set up larger original or accelerate speed ;system need stable
motion, light force, set up small original or accelerate speed ;system need constant
speed can choose constant motion model Set up any position as the working origin
We can give three degree of freedom motion simultaneously which will help in studying
the effect of multidirectional forces in our experiment.
46

Store the parameter ,non-loss electric, simple operating process Lead mechanism of
translation .radium of rotation and motion parameter is set up , can memory, avoid the
reset parameter when open and close PC, avoiding the error from artificial.
According to the needs we can choose pulses, mm, microns for motion unit.
pluses: The basic unit of controller.
Mm/microns: Show the Linear displacement.
Any position can be set to be the user working origin position. The convenience of setting to
zero position is to simplify the experiment and reduce time.
Real-time read the control system logical position, real position, drive speed and the
acceleration during the movement, which will help us to find out the instantaneous speed
and position of fixtures.
Parameters can be stored and with memory function in case of power-down.

Fig 3.1: Set-up for testing




47

3.2. Future work: It is divided in four parts
1) Specimen
2) Fixture
3) Testing parameters
4) Experiment

1) Specimen
1) Material: Raw Materials for type of CFRP prepregs has to be choose according to
availability of material and our process.

2) Process: Prepreg lay-up process will be chosen as it is Simple to manufacture
complex parts easily using this process. It has the advantage of low tooling
cost. Very strong and stiff parts can be fabricated using this process.
3) Cutting process: The test coupons will be cutout from stacked composite sheets
using required precision machining process.

2) Fixtures: Fixtures will be chosen according to our experiments. We have three option
for compressive test:1) Celanese (ASTM D-3410-75) test fixture, Illinois Institute of
Technology Research Institute (IITRI) , Northrop compression test fixture and NBS
compression test specimen so on the basis of our requirement and for better result best
fixture will be chosen. For type 2. Experiment we have option of a) SWRI compression test
fixture b) Lockheed compression test fixture . For In-plane we will have to decide the fixture.

3) Testing parameters:
We will do experiment on the specimen by varying following parameters of the CFRP
specimen.
1) Specimen with cutout at different-2 place, with varying shape of cutout and depth of
cutout.
48



Figure3.2: Specimen with different -2 cutouts


2) Specimen with varying thickness and placing the laminas in different -2 angles
witdifferent-2 number of lamina stakes.


Radius
L
b
Depth of cut
Thickness of
Laminate(t)
t
49


Figure.3.3.:Specimen with varying angle of fibers


Figure:3.4. Specimen combining with different-2 angle of prepregs


90
0
60
0
30
0
Prepreg
with angle
90
0
Prepreg
with angle
0
0
Prepreg
with angle
45
0
50

3) Angle between load and fiber direction.


Figure:3.5. Specimen with load axial and transverse direction


4) Experiment- Experiment will be done at various parameters which is decided above to
determine the influence of fiber orientation on the CFRP mechanical properties. Each of the
specimens will be tested in a random order and the stress and strain will be calculated from
the load and displacement results.
The results will be compared with numerical data which will be obtained in abaqus
software to verify experimental results.

Flow chart for implementation of the proposed project in shown in figure: 3.6.





F
F
F
F
51


Fig.3.6: Flow chart for implementation of the proposed project

Figure 3.7 shows the start and completion of various tasks mentioned in Figure.3.6 The
entire project duration is 8 months which is divided into 8 quarters.

Task/Month Oct Nov Dec J an Feb Mar Apr J un
Task1 Done
Task2
Task3
Task4
Task5
Task6

Fig.3.7: Timelines for proposed project

Expected outcome from the project
After successful completion of the project in mechanical testing of CFRP in varying fiber
orientation and varying thickness. Following specific objectives are identified with the above
mentioned study:
Detailed understanding about mode of failures during testing of specimen.
Detailed understanding of mechanical properties of CFRP laminates with varying
parameters(thickness, fiber orientation, strain rate) in specimen
Validation of experimental data with modeling data .
Task1:
Literature survey
Task2:
Selection of material
and manufacturing of
specimen
Task3:
Design,Fabrication and
instrumentation of
experimental setup
Task4:design and
develpoment of
specimen
Task5:
Experiments on
specimen
Task6:
Experimantal data
proceesing and
analysis
Task7:
Publishing results
52

References
1) Kojiro morioka,Yoshiyuki tomita, Effect of lay-up sequences on mechanical properties
and fracture behavior of CFRP laminate composites , , journal of Materials Characterization
45 (2000) 125-136, 29 February 2000.

2) Haider AL-Zubaidy et al, Mechanical Behavior of Normal Modulus Carbon Fibre
Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) and Epoxy under Impact Tensile Loads, Procedia Engineering
10 (2011) 24532458,

3) T. Okabea, N. Takedab Size effect on tensile strength of unidirectional CFRP
composites-experiment and simulation, journal of Composites Science and Technology 62
(2002) 20532064

4) K. J . Wong et al , Tensile behaviour of anti-symmetric CFRP composite ,Procedia
Engineering 10 (2011) 18651870

5) J . Lee, C. Soutis , A study on the compressive strength of thick carbon fibreepoxy
laminates , Composites Science and Technology 67 (2007) 20152026

6) Tomohiro Yokozeki et al. Evaluation of Compressive Nonlinear Response of
Unidirectional Carbon Fiber Reinforced Composites using a Modified Sandwich Beam
Specimen in Flexure , J ournal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites 2008 27: 5

7) A.C. Manalo et al In-plane shear behaviour of fibre composite sandwich beams using
asymmetrical beam shear test ,journal of Construction and Building Materials 24 (2010)
19521960

8) D.E. Walrath, The Iosipescu Shear Test as Applied to Composite Materials
Experimental Mechanics, page 150, March 1983

9) G. Vargas and F. Mujika , Determination of In-plane Shear Strength of Unidirectional
Composite Materials Using the Off-axis Three-point Flexure and Off-axis Tensile Tests
J ournal of Composite material 2010 44: 2487
53


10) George H. Staab , Mechanical test methods for lamina Page 120, Laminar
composites 1999

11) Yu.M. Tarnopol'skii and V.L. Kulakov, Mechanical tests page 778, HANDBOOK OF
COMPOSITES , SECOND EDITION, Edited by S. T. Peters.

12) K. Schneider et al, Compression Shear Test (CST) A Convenient Apparatus for the
Estimation of Apparent Shear Strength of Composite Materials journal of Applied
Composite Materials 8: 4362, 2001.

13) http://info.lu.farmingdale.edu/depts/met/met205/composites.html

14) http://www.virginia.edu/bohr/mse209/chapter17.htm
15) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_material#Properties
16) http://core.materials.ac.uk/search/detail.php?id=2677
17) Murat Yazici et al, Buckling of Composite Plates With U-shaped Cutouts J ournal of
Composite Materials, Vol. 37, No. 24/2003.
18) Sanjay K. Mazumdar, Composites manufacturing Materials, Product, and Process
Engineering , CRC PRESS.
19) Hofer, K. E., J r., N. Rao, and D. Larsen. Development of Engineering Data on
Mechanical Properties of Advanced Composite Materials, AFML-TR- 72-205, Part I, Sept.
1972.
20) Verette, R. M., and J . D. Labor. Structural Criteria for Advanced Composites, AFFDL-
TR-76-142, Vol. 1. Summary, March 1977.
21) Kasen, M. B., R. E. Schramm, and D. T. Read. Fatigue of Composites at Cryogenic
Temperatures, Fatigue of Filamentary Composites, ASTM STP 636, pp. 141-151, 1977.
22) Grimes, G. C., P. H. Frances, G. E. Commerford, and G. K. Wolfe. An Experimental
Investigation of the Stress Levels at Which Significant Damage Occurs in Graphite Fiber
Plastic Composites, AFML-TR-72-40, May 1972.
54

23) Ryder, J . T., and E. D. Black. Compression Testing of Large Gage Length Composite
Coupons, Composite Materials: Testing and Design (Fourth Conference), ASTM STP 617.
Philadelphia: ASTM, pp. 170-189, 1977.
24) Whitney et al, Experimental Mechanics of Fiber Reinforced Composite Materials.
SESA Monograph No. 4. Westport, CT: Technomic, 1982.
25) Lee, S., and M. Munro. Evaluation of In-Plane Shear Test Method for Advanced
Composite Materials by the Decision Analysis Technique, Composites, 17 (1986): 13-22.
26) Slepetz et al In-Plane Shear Test for Composite Materials, AMMRC TR 78-30, Army
Materials and Mechanics Research Center, Watertown, MA, J uly 1978.
27) Robert jones, Mechanics of composites materials, second edition, press Taylor &
Francis.