Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-27T09:32:55.340Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Life extension of impact damaged honeycomb sandwich panels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

R. R. Aitken ,
D. P. W. Horrigan  and
G. Moltschaniwskyj
R. R. Aitken
Affiliation:
Composites Research Centre, Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
D. P. W. Horrigan
Affiliation:
Composites Research Centre, Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
G. Moltschaniwskyj
Affiliation:
Composites Research Centre, Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The assessment of damage due to impacts in composite sandwich panels and the component life reductions associated with such damage is becoming increasingly important within the aerospace industry. This study analyses minimum gauge, non-metallic honeycomb wing panels subject to impact damage. In all instances the damage is caused by ‘soft body’ impactors travelling at elevated velocities to simulate bird strike and other soft debris. The damage formed during these impacts is shown to be large in plan area but shallow and primarily causes crushing of the core in a thin layer. Loading of the panels after impact has been performed to determine the reduction in load carrying capacity and associated failure mechanisms. Damage due to soft body impact is shown to be very different to the classical rigid body impact upon which current repair schemes are based. As a result in many applications the use of current repair schemes may be inappropriate. The viability of new repair techniques is discussed with particular attention to the prevention of failure mechanisms due to loading after impact.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 104 , Issue 1041 , November 2000 , pp. 509 - 516
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2000 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Salepkar, S.A. Analysis of delamination in cross-ply laminates initiating from impact induced matrix cracking, J Composites Tech & Research, Summer 1993, 15, (2), pp 88–94.Google Scholar
2. Russel, S.G., Lin, W., Kan, H. and Deo, R.B. Damage tolerance and fail-safety of composite sandwich panels, Aerotech 94, Society of Auto motive Engineers, Warrendale, Pennsylvania, USA, SAE Trans, Oct 1994, 103, (1).Google Scholar
3. Zenkert, D. An Introduction to Sandwich Construction, EMAS, Solihull, UK, 1995.Google Scholar
4. Aitken, R., Horrigan, D. and Moltschaniwskyj, G. Impacting thin skinned composite sandwich laminates, Proc of 19th Symposium of the International Committee on Aeronautical Fatigue, 18–20 June 1997, Edinburgh, Scotland.Google Scholar
5. Aitken, R.R. Damage Due to Soft Body Impact Damage on Composite Sandwich Aircraft Panels. PhD Thesis, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand, 1999.Google Scholar
6. Hoff, N.J. and Mautner, S.E. The buckling of sandwich-type panels, J Aero Sci, 1946, 13–14, pp 285–297.Google Scholar
7. Wan, C.C. Face buckling and core strength requirements in sandwich construction, J Aero Sci, 1946, 13–14, pp 531–539.Google Scholar
8. Eggers, H. Modeling of damage in sandwich structures after impact, Proc of Third International Conference on Sandwich Construction, Southampton, pp 775–768, Allen, H.G. (Ed), ISBN 0 947817 80 8, 1996.Google Scholar
9. Allcock, A.W.R. and Collin, D.M. The development of a dummy bird for use in bird strike research, National Gas Turbine Institute, June 1968.Google Scholar
10. Akay, M. and Hanna, R. A. comparison of honeycomb-core sandwich structures, Composite Structures, 1994, 29, (l), pp 47–55.Google Scholar
11. Minguet, P.J. A model for predicting the behaviour of impact-damage minimum gage sandwich panels under compression, Proc 32nd A1AA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference, Orlando, USA, 1991, pp 1112-22.Google Scholar
12. Boeing Commercial Airplane Group. Structural Repair Manual, 51-40-09. pp 62–70.Google Scholar
13. Horrigan, D.P.W. Stress concentration factors for multi-site impact damage in isotropic and orthotropic material systems, D6-82270, 1998.Google Scholar