Modes I and II interlaminar fracture toughness and fatigue delamination of CF/epoxy laminates with self-same epoxy interleaf

By M. Hojo, Tadashi Ando, Mototsugu Tanaka, T. Adachi, Shojiro Ochiai, Y. Endo. 2006

281 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Mechanics of Materials, Polymers and Plastics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dff7e77e0ad280bf1797d3361690c80dbf5e0733

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Mechanics of Materials

1. J. Pascoe
2. Rinze Benedictus
3. Rene Alderliesten
4. Jang‐Kyo Kim
5. W. Paepegem
6. S. Khan

In Polymers and Plastics

1. S. Khan
2. Ning Hu
3. Jang‐Kyo Kim
4. W. Paepegem
5. Rene Alderliesten
6. Rinze Benedictus

Citations in the corpus

• Interlaminar mechanical properties of carbon fiber reinforced plastic laminates modified with graphene oxide interleaf (2015, result): “This phenomenon is similar to that in [43].”
• Nanofibre bridging as a toughening mechanism in carbon/epoxy composite laminates interleaved with electrospun polyamide nanofibrous veils (2015, background): “These delaminations are mainly due to Mode I and Mode II loading conditions of cracks in frequently encountered loadings such as impact and fatigue [23,28–30].”
• Methods for the prediction of fatigue delamination growth in composites and adhesive bonds: A critical review (2013, background): “fracture toughness) and resistance to fatigue delamination growth [7, 67, 86, 99].”
• Impact and Delamination Failure of Multiscale Carbon Nanotube-Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites: A Review (2011, background): “…Composites: ... http://ijass.org (Abe et al., 2003; Mouritz, 2007), fiber hybridization, toughening the matrix resin (Reeder, 1995) and interleaving with tough polymer, short fibers or microscale particles (Hojo et al., 2006a, b; Kim et al., 1992; Liao et al., 1994; Singh and Partridge, 1995).”
• Misinterpreting the Results: How Similitude can Improve our Understanding of Fatigue Delamination Growth (2011, background): “If we consider this simple DCB example and determine what applied load cycles would produce the same ΔG for different R-ratios (considering crack and specimen geometry is kept constant), we can easily see the loss in similitude when using ΔG = Gmax – Gmin.”