Low temperature effect on single and repeated impact behavior of woven glass-epoxy composite plates

http://jcm.sagepub.com/Journal of Composite Materials

http://jcm.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/09/0021998314531309The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0021998314531309

published online 11 April 2014Journal of Composite MaterialsBulent Murat Icten

Low temperature effect on single and repeated impact behavior of woven glass-epoxy composite plates

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

American Society for Composites

can be found at:Journal of Composite MaterialsAdditional services and information for

http://jcm.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jcm.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://jcm.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/09/0021998314531309.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Apr 11, 2014OnlineFirst Version of Record >>

at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 12, 2014jcm.sagepub.comDownloaded from at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 12, 2014jcm.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jcm.sagepub.com/

http://jcm.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/09/0021998314531309

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://www.asc-composites.org/

http://jcm.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jcm.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jcm.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/09/0021998314531309.refs.html

http://jcm.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/09/0021998314531309.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml



XML Template (2014) [4.4.2014–11:27am] [1–8]//blrnas3/cenpro/ApplicationFiles/Journals/SAGE/3B2/JCMJ/Vol00000/140060/APPFile/SG-JCMJ140060.3d (JCM) [PREPRINTER stage]

JOURNAL OFC O M P O S I T EM AT E R I A L SArticle

Low temperature effect on single andrepeated impact behavior of wovenglass-epoxy composite plates

Bulent Murat Icten

Abstract

This study deals with the determination of the response of woven glass-epoxy composites to the single and repeated

impact loading at room temperature and at �50�C. Single impacts were performed at various energies up to perforation

took place and the characteristics such as contact force, contact duration, deflection, and absorbed energy were

obtained. In addition, some low energy values were selected for the repeated impact tests. The maximum contact

force and absorbed energy versus repeat numbers were given. It was found that temperature is extremely important for

determining the response of the composite subjected to single and repeated impact loadings.

Keywords

Glass fibers, epoxy, impact behavior, drop weight, repeated impact

Introduction

Fiber-reinforced composites are utilized for manystructural applications because of high specific proper-ties such as high stiffness and strength to their weightratios. However, these materials are sensitive to trans-verse impact loading that may cause serious damagessuch as matrix cracking, delamination, and fiber break-age. The presence of damages can lead to reduction inmechanical performance of composites. Researchershave been studying on the impact behavior of compos-ite materials, for a long time.1–3

Structural parts manufactured from compositematerials may be required to serve at low temperatures.The responses to the impact loading at low temperatureswere reported in some studies.4–8 Ibekwe et al.4 studiedon low velocity impact behavior and the residual load-carrying capacity of unidirectional and cross-ply glass–epoxy laminates at various temperatures ranging from20�C to�20�C. They have concluded that more damagewas induced in specimens with decreasing temperature.Rio et al.5 examined the low velocity impact response ofunidirectional, cross-ply, quasiisotropic, and wovencarbon–epoxy laminates in low temperature conditionsup to �150�C and observed that cooling increases thedamage extension. In their investigation, Khojin et al.6

studied within the temperature range of �50�C and

120�C, and found that impact energy level and tempera-ture have significant effects on the impact behavior ofglass fiber and combinations of glass fiber with Kevlar.They have indicated that the absorbed energy is depend-ent on temperature. Hirai et al.7 reported that thedamage area of E-glass/vinyl-ester composite increaseswith increasing temperature and impact energy. Ictenet al.8 studied on the low temperature effect on impactresponse of quasi-isotropic glass/epoxy laminatedplates. They found that besides impact energies, testingtemperatures significantly affect different impactcharacteristics.

Composites, in service, may be subjected to impactloading at a localized site. Especially in marine applica-tions there are many realistic cases that repeated impactsare experienced. Ships and offshore structures are sub-jected to repeated impacts from hard objects other thanwaves.9 Each impact may cause or expand the damage incomposite in the manner of matrix cracking, fiber break-ages and delamination, and consequently may affect the

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dokuz Eylul University, Buca,

Izmir, Turkey

Corresponding author:

Bulent Murat Icten, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dokuz Eylul

University, Buca, Izmir, Turkey.

Email: [email protected]

Journal of Composite Materials

0(0) 1–8

! The Author(s) 2014

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0021998314531309

jcm.sagepub.com

at University of Alabama at Birmingham on May 12, 2014jcm.sagepub.comDownloaded from



subsequent mechanical performance of the structure. Tosimulate repeated impact loading Hosur et al.10 selecteda certain repeat numbers of impact and various impactenergies. They focused on the effect of stitching on thecomposite subjected to single and repeated impacts atroom temperature. The effect of impactor mass on theresponse of the composites impacted was investigated bySugun and Rao.11 They found that heavier impactorcaused more damage to the laminates as reflected bytheir lower number of drops to failure. They continuedtheir studies with various materials such as glass/epoxy,carbon/epoxy, and Kevlar/epoxy while impactor masswas kept constant and incident energies ranged from3.5 J to 15 J.12 The residual tensile and compressivestrengths of specimens cut from composite plates sub-jected to repeated impact at various energy levels weremeasured by Wyrick and Adams.13 Belingardi et al.14

compared the vacuum infusion and hand lay-up tech-niques in terms of the response to repeated impact load-ing. The effect of stacking sequence on the glass-epoxycomposites was studied by Icten.15 Number of repeat tofailure for various impact energies was found and thenresidual performance of composites was studied. Ataset al.16 investigated the thickness effect on repeatedimpact response of woven fabric composite plates.Atas and Sevim17 conducted an experimental work onsingle impact and repeated impact responses of sand-wich composites with PVC foam core and balsa core.

In previous studies, although the comparisonsbetween the room temperature and a low temperaturein terms of the response of composite to the singleimpact were done, the repeated impact response com-parisons were not investigated sufficiently. In this study,single and repeated impact responses of compositeplates of woven E-glass fabric and epoxy resin areinvestigated as they are commonly used for aircrafts,boats, automobiles, water tanks, pipes, wind turbineblades, etc. Room temperature and a very low tempera-ture, that is possible to encounter in the world (�50�C),were selected as test temperatures. The impact charac-teristics such as contact force, maximum deflection,contact duration, and absorbed energy were obtainedfrom single impact having the energies from 5 J to 60 J.In the case of repeated impact tests, four different lowimpact energies such as 5, 7.5, 10, and 12.5 J werechosen. For each of the impact energy level, the repeat-ing was sustained until perforation of the compositeplate took place. The number of repeat to perforationand the total projection areas of damages were foundand comparisons were made.

Experimental procedure

Composite specimen was manufactured from six layersof plain weave glass fabric, each of 500 g/m2, with 22

yarns/10 cm in one direction and 19 yarns/10 cm in theother direction, and an epoxy resin. Vacuum-assistedresin infusion method was used. Curing was performedon a heat-controlled table at 90�C for 2 h. The fibervolume fraction of the composite and its thickness weremeasured as 47% and 2.50� 0.1mm, respectively. Thespecimens having the dimensions of 100� 100mm weretrimmed from the composite plate with diamondsaw blade.

The impact tests were performed using FractovisPlus drop weight impact test machine.8,15 The impactorhaving a hemispherical nose with 12.7mm diameter wasconnected with a force transducer which had a max-imum loading capacity of 22.4 kN. The total impactormass including impactor nose, force transducer, and abox for additional mass was 5.02 kg. Before any impacttests, the specimens were clamped at the base of themachine by a pneumatic fixture mounted in an envir-onmental chamber. The inner diameter of the clampingapparatus was 76.2mm. The environmental cham-ber had a thermostatic controller from �100�C toþ150�C and in order to reach low temperatures,liquid nitrogen was used. During an impact test allthe data were taken from force transducer by a dataacquisition system. Software based on Newton’s secondlaw and kinematics relations converts the time-forcehistory to the velocity, displacement, and absorbedenergy histories.

The incident impact energies for single impact testswere selected from low impact energy (5 J) to the energyhigh enough for the perforation of the specimen (60 J).The impact energy was increased by increasing the fall-ing height of the impactor while the mass of the impac-tor was held constant. For repeated impact tests fourimpact energies (5, 7.5, 10, and 12.5 J) were selected.These energies were not enough to cause seriousdamage on the composite at single impact. Repeatedimpact tests were continued until perforation.

Single and repeated impact performances of the com-posite were investigated at room temperature and at�50�C. Prior to the tests at low temperature, all of thespecimens were conditioned in the chamber. Because ofthe type of the material and its low thickness, 20minwere enough to obtain desired uniform temperature dis-tribution in the specimen. Every test was repeated forthree times to calculate the mean values.

Results and discussion

Single impact

The woven glass-epoxy composite specimens wereimpacted at room temperature and at �50�C. Thegraphs of the contact force versus deflection of the con-tact point are given in Figure 1. In this figure, for clear

2 Journal of Composite Materials 0(0)




presentation, some of the impact energies are selectedand shown. Among three tests performed for each par-ameter, only one contact force-deflection curve is givenin Figure 1. As can be seen in this Figure 1(a), theresponse of the composite to the impact loading alterswith changing incident impact energy. According to thedefinitions in an earlier study,8 the impactor reboundsfrom the composite surface at impact energies of 10 Jand 20 J. While some part of the impact energy is con-sumed for failure such as matrix cracking, fiber break-age, and delamination the other part is stored by thecomposite specimen as elastic strain energy. The mag-nitude of the lost energy such as heating and vibrationis low in comparison to the other types of energies andthus neglected. The stored energy by composite is usedfor rebounding of the impactor. The absorbed energycan be calculated from the closed area of the force-deflection curves. Increasing impact energy increasesabsorbed energy by composite resulting as the forma-tion of failure. The impact energy and the absorbedenergy must be same at penetration. For brittle andthin materials, obtaining penetration threshold is diffi-cult and requires more number of experiments. Forexample, for the impact at 30 J at room temperatureit is very close to being the penetration case, however,it is a rebounding case. The absorbed energy for fullperforation of the composite is named as perforationthreshold. The impact energy minus this thresholdenergy is excessive energy and is consumed for frictionbetween the impactor nose and the perforated speci-men. The friction zone is starting at the end of thedescending section of the force-deflection curves. Thesituations at 40 J, 50 J, and 60 J impact energies are per-foration cases.

As can be seen in Figure 1(b), low temperatureaffects the force-deflection curves and material responseto the impact loading. For example, the impact energyat 40 J, while the composite perforates at room tem-perature the striker rebounds from the composite

plate at �50�C. In spite of the fact that the differencesbetween the impact responses at room temperature andthe frozen temperature can be seen easily from thisfigure, it is necessary to determine the magnitude ofimpact characteristics.

Some characteristics such as contact force, max-imum deflection, contact time, and absorbed energyvalues were found and compared in Figure 2. As canbe seen in Figure 2(a), the maximum contact force con-tinuously increases by increasing impact energy up to25 J at room temperature. Actually, up to this impactenergy, matrix cracking and fiber breakages are seen inthe composite. At this impact energy, through-thick-ness fiber breakages occur. For the impact energieshigher than this energy value the maximum contactforce does not change much and stay nearly constant.The general tendency of the maximum contact force-impact energy curve is similar for impact tests at�50�C. However, the increasing of the maximum con-tact force sustains up to 30 J. For all impact energies,maximum contact force at �50�C is greater than theforce values at room temperature.

When impact event is investigated in terms of con-tact duration (Figure 2b), it can be seen that the contactduration decreases until 20 J, which is the energy caus-ing matrix cracking and fiber failures at room tempera-ture. After this impact energy, the contact timeincreases rapidly. In this region, the matrix crackingspreads and through-to-thickness failure occurs. Thecontact duration reaches the maximum value at 35 J.At this point, the perforation of the composite is tohappen and impactor transfers nearly all of theenergy to the composite for spreading of the failure.Increasing impact energy causes perforation and thecontact duration decreases suddenly. After that pointthe contact duration decreases regularly. The contactduration-impact energy curve of �50�C is similar tothat of room temperature. However, the contact dur-ation decreases until 25 J and reaches the maximum

Room temperature

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14Deflection (mm)

Co

nta

ct fo

rce

(kN

)

.

10J20 J 30 J

40 J

60 J

50 J

(a) -50 C°

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14Deflection (mm)

Conta

ct fo

rce (kN

) .

40 J10 J

20 J

30 J

50 J

60 J

(b)

Figure 1. Contact force-deflection curves of composites impacted at (a) room temperature and (b) �50�C.

Icten 3




value at 45 J, then drops immediately. The contact dur-ation values of the tests at �50�C are lower than thevalues at room temperature up to 35 J, which is theimpact energy inadequate for perforation for bothenvironmental conditions. As can be seen inFigure 2(c), at room temperature the deflection of thecomposite increases up to 40 J, and then remains con-stant, because the composite is perforated. For the not-perforated cases of both temperature conditions, thedeflection values of the composites impacted at roomtemperature are greater than that of the compositesimpacted at �50�C.

Absorbed energy by composite can be calculatedfrom the enveloped area of contact force-deflectioncurves for rebounding case. In case of perforation itcan be calculated from the area between the contactforce-deflection curves and horizontal axis minus fric-tion zone. As can be seen in Figure 2(d), for room tem-perature case, the absorbed energy is distinctly lowerthan impact energy (under the equal energy line) up to30 J. The difference between the absorbed energy andthe impact energy is excessive energy consumed forrebounding. From 30 J to 35 J, the value of absorbedenergy is very close to the impact energy for it is pene-tration region. And then, again the absorbed energy

values are lower than the impact energy because thisis the perforation case. In this situation the perforationthreshold is 35 J. The absorbed energy values of thecomposites impacted at both temperatures are veryclose at low impact energies (energies up to 20 J). Thisresult is compatible with a previous study.6 Theabsorbed energy values of the composites impacted at�50�C are lower than that of the composites impactedat the room temperature up to 35 J. The absorbedenergy of the composite impacted at �50�C continuesto increase with increasing impact energy up to 45 J. Atthis temperature, the absorbed energy has not the samevalue with the impact energy. It means that the pene-tration case and the perforation thresholds are notdetected directly. The penetration case and the perfor-ation threshold are between the impact energy of 40 Jand 45 J. However, the approximate perforation thresh-old can be calculated from the mean absorbed energyafter 45 J impact tests. From the results, the perforationthreshold of the composite impacted at �50�C can befound as 42.75 J.

In their study, Hirai et al.7 depicted that the matrixproperties are mainly responsible for the impact per-formance of the laminates. The resistance to plasticdeformation, strain to failure, and fracture toughness

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Impact energy (J)

Max

imu

m c

onta

ct fo

rce

(kN

) .

Room temperature

-50 C°

(a)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Impact energy (J)

Co

ntac

t dur

atio

n (m

s) .

Room temperature

-50 C°

(b)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Impact energy (J)

Max

imu

m d

efle

ctio

n (m

m)

.

Room temperature

-50 C°

(c)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Impact energy (J)

Abs

orbe

d e

nerg

y (J

) .

Room temperature-50 C°

Equal energy line

(d)

Figure 2. Impact energy versus (a) maximum contact force, (b) contact duration, (c) maximum deflection, (d) absorbed energy

curves of the composites impacted at room temperature and at �50�C.





of polymer matrixes are strongly dependent on tem-perature and strain rate as a consequence of their visco-elastic nature. Polymer matrix composites are of brittlecharacteristics at low temperatures resulting in highercontact force, lower deflection, lower contact duration,lower absorbed energy in comparison to the roomtemperature.

The mechanical properties of the matrix, includingstrength, stiffness, and toughness, are very importantparameters for the determination of the nature of fail-ure.7 As sample cases for determining failure modes,the photos taken from the top and bottom of the com-posites impacted at room temperature are given inFigure 3. According to the impact energy, the failuresare seen in the forms of matrix crushing, matrix crack-ing, fiber breakage, penetration, and perforation. Atlow impact energy such as 10 J, there are minor

matrix cracks and matrix crushing in the contact-impact zone, and some delamination on the laminateinterfaces. As the impact energy is increased, such as25 J, central through-to-thickness fiber breakagesoccur. At these two stages, the impactor reboundsfrom the surface impacted; 30 J is nearly enough forpenetration. The perforated specimen photos are alsogiven in Figure 3.

Because of the transparent characteristics of thinglass epoxy composite plates, the overall damagesincluding matrix cracks, fiber breakages, and delamin-ations can be easily seen when the specimens are placedon a light source. A photo is taken and processed withan image program. The failure region is seen as a darkspot and its area can be calculated (Figure 4). Figure 5gives the total failure area of the composite impacted at

mottoBpoT

10 J

25

J

30 J

60

J

Figure 3. Top and bottom images of woven glass-epoxy com-

posites impacted at room temperature.

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Impact energy(J)

Tot

al d

am

age

are

a (m

m 2

)

Room temp.-50C°

Figure 5. Total damage areas of the composite single impacted

at room and at �50�C temperatures.

Figure 4. Total failure area.

Icten 5




room temperature and �50�C. As can be seen, the fail-ure areas are nearly the same for low-energy impactsfor both ambient temperatures. Then the total failurearea of the composite impacted at low temperature islarger than that at room temperature. Ibekwe et al.4

reported similar results. The possible reason for thisresult is that the matrix becomes more brittle withdecreasing temperature. Propagation of the cracks ina brittle material is easier than a ductile material.

Repeated impact

The contact force versus deflection curves of wovenglass epoxy composites subjected to repeated impactloadings with 5 J at �50�C are given in Figure 6. Theslope of the ascending section of the curves is named asthe impact-bending stiffness. It is seen from this figurethat the impact bending stiffness and the maximumcontact force of the first impact loading are lowerthan the subsequent impacts. This behavior may beexplained by the fact that at the first impact loadingthe impactor contacts with relatively softer matrix.Initial increase in the peak force is the result of thecompaction of this thin and unreinforced matrixlayer. At low impact energies and at low repeat num-bers, the damage of the fibers near the surface remainslittle and compaction presents a harder surface. For thesubsequent impacts, the impactor contacts with stiffercomposite and the contact force gets highervalues.10,13–15 The contact force and the stiffnessremain constant at following impacts. After a certainrepeat number, due to the fiber breakages, additionalmatrix cracks, and delaminations, the stiffness and con-tact force gradually decrease again. Belingardi et al.14

have obtained similar results and explained two oppos-ite mechanisms to determine the magnitude of the con-tact force: the compaction of the matrix that provides a

harder surface and propagation of the damages thatreduces the mechanical properties of the composite.

Figure 7 represents the variation of peak force versusrepeat numbers of composites subjected to 5, 7.5, 10,12.5 J repeated impacts at room temperature and at�50�C. It can be seen from the figure that the max-imum contact force is higher for higher impact energies.Each curve has three parts: first, the contact forceincreases, later it remains constant, and then decreaseswith increasing repeat number. All the curves followthis rule but the wideness of each curve changes accord-ing to the magnitude of the impact energy. The curve iswider for 5 J repeated impact and narrower for 12.5 Jrepeated impact. Figure 7 also gives the absorbedenergy-repeat numbers data of composites subjectedto 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5 J repeated impact at room tempera-ture and at �50�C. In these curves, initially theabsorbed energy decreases, then remains nearly con-stant, and increases with increasing impact number.The absorbed energy is higher for higher impact ener-gies. In Figure 7, it can also be seen that for the sameimpact energies the repeat number for perforation and

Room temp.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 50 100 150 200

Number of repeated impacts

Ma

xim

um

co

nta

ct fo

rce

(kN

) .

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

Ab

sorb

ed

en

erg

y (J

)5.0 J- 202 rpt.7.5 J- 31 rpt.10.0 J- 9 rpt.12.5 J- 6 rpt

Maximum contact force

Absorbed energy

(a)

-50C°

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 100 200 300 400 500

Number of repeated impacts

Max

imum

co

ntac

t for

ce (k

N) .

0

4

8

12

16

20

24

Ab

sorb

ed e

nerg

y (J

)5.0 J- 548 rpt.

7.5 J- 151 rpt.

10.0 J- 45 rpt.

12.5 J- 11 rpt

Absorbed energy

Maximum contact force(b)

Figure 7. Maximum contact force and absorbed energy versus

number of impact curves of composite plate impacted at various

impact energies (a) room temperature and (b) �50�C ambient

temperature.

0

1

2

3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6Deflection (mm)

Con

tact

forc

e(k

N)

548th

100th

1st

2nd

300th

-50C° 5J

Figure 6. Contact force-deflection curves of composite plate

under repeated impact at 5 J and �50�C ambient temperature.





contact forces get higher, and absorbed energies getlower at �50�C in comparison to the room tempera-ture. It means that repeat number for perforation,absorbed energy, and contact force highly depend onenvironmental temperature. The impact energy versusrepeat number curves are given in Figure 8.

Impact-induced damage photos of perforated com-posites at room temperature and at �50�C are shown inFigure 9, where it is seen that the total damage areaincluding fiber breakages, delamination, and matrixcracking increases with decreasing impact energy. Forthe same impact energies, the damage area of the com-posites impacted at �50�C is greater than that at roomtemperature. This increase is the result of increasingrepeat number. More impact causes more matrix crack-ing and delaminations. In Figure 8, at 12.5 J, the repeatnumbers seem to be same. However, as can be seen inFigure 7(a) and (b), the repeat number to perforation atroom temperature is 6 while that of �50�C is 11, result-ing in a larger damage area.

Conclusions

In this study, the effect of temperature on single andrepeated impact response of woven E-glass/epoxy com-posites is investigated. Room temperature and a frozentemperature (�50�C) were selected as test temperatures.The impact characteristics were obtained from singleimpact tests. The specimens were also subjected torepeated impact with four low-energy levels. The num-bers of impacts until perforation were obtained for eachtest. According to the results, following conclusions canbe drawn on woven glass-epoxy composites:

1. Temperature highly affects the single impactresponse of the woven glass-epoxy composites.

The contact force and perforation threshold increasewith decreasing temperature. The characteristicssuch as maximum deflection, contact duration, andabsorbed energy values differ according to theimpact level with changing of the temperature.

2. At low-impact energies the total failure area is simi-lar at both temperatures. However, for the higherimpact energies the failure area of the compositeimpacted at low temperature is larger than that ofthe composite impacted at room temperature.

3. According to the repeat number, the compositebending stiffness, maximum contact force, andabsorbed energy by composite change for bothtemperatures.

4. The number of repeat for perforation highly dependson the ambient temperature. For some impact ener-gies the repeat number of the composites impacted at

Room Temperature −−−−50C°

E=5

J

E=7

.5 J

E

=10

J E

=12.

5 J

Figure 9. Impact-induced damage photos of perforated com-

posites at various impact energies at room and at �50�C

temperatures.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2,5 5,0 7,5 10,0 12,5 15,0

Impact energy(J)

Rep

eat

nu

mbe

rs to

pe

rfora

tion

Room temp.-50C°

Figure 8. Repeat numbers of impacts until perforation at room

and at �50�C temperatures.

Icten 7




�50�C is five times higher than that of the compos-ites impacted at room temperature.

5. The total failure area for perforation value of thecomposite impacted at �50�C is larger than that atthe room temperature for the same repeated impactenergy levels.

Acknowledgement

The author is greatly indebted to the TUBITAK ResearchFoundation for providing financial support.

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Funding

This work was supported by TUBITAK ResearchFoundation (Project Number:107M591).

References

1. Abrate S. Impact on laminated composite materials. ApplMech Rev 1991; 44: 155–190.

2. Abrate S. Impact on laminated composite materials: recentadvances. Appl Mech Rev 1994; 47: 517–544.

3. Cantwell WJ and Morton J. The impact resistance of com-posite materials-a review. Composites 1991; 22: 347–362.

4. Ibekwe SI, Mensah PF, Li G, et al. Impact and post

impact response of laminated beams at low temperatures.Compos Struct 2007; 79: 12–17.

5. Rio TG, Zaera R, Barbero E, et al. Damage in CFRPs due

to low velocity impact at low temperature. Compos Part BEng 2005; 36: 41–50.

6. Khojin AS, Bashirzadeh R, Mahinfalah M, et al. The role

of temperature on impact properties of Kevlar/fiberglasscomposite laminates. Compos Part B Eng 2006; 37:593–602.

7. Hirai Y, Hamada H and Kim JK. Impact response ofwoven glass-fabric composites-II. Effect of temperature.Compos Sci Technol 1998; 58: 119–128.

8. Icten BM, Atas C, Aktas M, et al. Low temperature effecton impact response of quasi-isotropic glass/epoxy lami-nated plates. Compos Struct 2009; 91: 318–323.

9. Zhu L and Faulkner D. Damage estimate for plating of

ships and platforms under repeated impacts. Mar Struct1996; 9: 697–720.

10. Hosur MV, Karim MR and Jeelani S. Experimental

investigations on the response of stitched/unstitchedwoven S2-glass/SC15 epoxy composites under singleand repeated low velocity impact loading. Compos

Struct 2003; 61: 89–102.11. Sugun BS and Rao RMVGK. Impactor mass effects in

glass-epoxy composites subjected to repeated drop tests.

J Reinf Plast and Compos 2004; 23: 1547–1560.12. Sugun BS and Rao RMVGK. Low-velocity impact char-

acterization of glass, carbon and Kevlar composites usingrepeated drop tests. J Reinf Plast and Compos 2004; 23:

1583–1599.13. Wyrick DA and Adams DF. Residual strength of a

carbon/epoxy composite material subjected to repeated

impact. J Comp Mater 1988; 22: 749–763.14. Belingardi G, Cavatorta MP and Paolino DS. Repeated

impact response of hand layup and vacuum infusion thick

glass reinforced laminates. Int J Impact Eng 2008; 35:609–619.

15. Icten BM. Repeated impact behavior of glass/epoxylaminates. Polym Compos 2009; 32: 1562–1569.

16. Atas C, Icten BM and Kucuk M. Thickness effect onrepeated impact response of woven fabric compositeplates. Compos Part B Eng 2013; 49: 80–85.

17. Atas C and Sevim C. On the impact response of sandwichcomposites with cores of balsa wood and PVC foam.Compos Struct 2010; 93: 40–48.




Documents

Low temperature effect on single and repeated impact behavior of woven glass-epoxy composite plates