applied

sciences
Article
Experimental and Simulation Study of Low-Velocity
Impact on Glass Fiber Composite Laminates with
Reinforcing Shape Memory Alloys at Different
Layer Positions
Min Sun, Mengzhou Chang, Zhenqing Wang *, Hao Li and Xiaokun Sun
College of Aerospace and Civil Engineering, Harbin Engineering University, Harbin 150001, China;
sunmin@hrbeu.edu.cn (M.S.); changmengzhou@hrbeu.edu.cn (M.C.); lihao0202@hrbeu.edu.cn (H.L.);
sunxiaokun@hrbeu.edu.cn (X.S.)
* Correspondence: wangzhenqing@hrbeu.edu.cn




Received: 26 October 2018; Accepted: 23 November 2018; Published: 27 November 2018


Abstract: The effects of shape memory alloy (SMA) wires on the damage behavior of glass
fibers/epoxy resin composite laminates for the case of low-velocity impact are investigated
experimentally and numerically. In this work, the low-velocity impact tests of SMAs/glass
fibers/epoxy resin composite laminates are carried out. The elastic–plastic theory was adopted
to simulate the mechanical behavior of SMA during the loading stage. The three-dimensional (3D)
Hashin failure criterion is adopted in Abaqus/Explicit to model the damage initiation of composite
laminates. The cohesive damage model is introduced to control the interface element and model the
delamination failure. Moreover, the impact damage mechanisms of composite laminates are analyzed
based on the experimental and numerical simulation results. These results show that the numerical
results obtained in the present study have a reasonably good agreement with the experimental
results. In addition, it is also found that impact damages are mainly caused by matrix cracks and
delamination with no perforation for the case of 32-J impact energy, and impact damages are mainly
caused by fibers breakage with perforation for the case of 64-J impact energy.

Keywords: shape memory alloy; composite laminates; low-velocity impact; finite element analysis;
damage mechanism

1. Introduction
Composite materials are widely used in aerospace structures due to their high strength-to-weight
ratio [1,2]. However, their impact damage tolerance has been a major concern in engineering
applications. It is well-known that the mechanical properties of composite laminates deteriorate
and the structural stability of composite laminates decreases for the case of the low-velocity impact
loading. In applications, the loading conditions are multitude and complex, such as impacts by
dropped tools during maintenance, collision from gravels on the runway during takeoff and landing,
bird strike, and impact of hails during flight [3,4]. Thus, improving the impact resistance and energy
absorption capability of composite laminates is a very important task.
In the early 1960s, Buehler et al. [5,6] discovered the shape memory effect in an equiatomic Ni–Ti
alloy. Afterward, it was discovered in some research studies that the Ni–Ti alloy exhibited fully
recoverable transformation strains up to 8%, which could be also obtained in various forms, such as
wires, strips, rods, tubes, and plates [7]. Due to the unique properties of shape memory alloy (SMA)
wires, it was speculated that it may enhance the impact resistance of composites. Some studies on the
impact response of SMA-reinforced composites have been reported in the literature. It is found that

Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405; doi:10.3390/app8122405 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 2 of 15

the impact resistance and energy absorption capability of composite laminates can be improved by
embedding SMA into the composites. In the past three decades, a few experimental investigations were
carried out for the impact response of SMA-reinforced composites. Aurrekoetxea et al. [8] investigated
the effect of super-elastic SMAs on the impact behavior of fiber-reinforced composites. The results
suggest that SMAs have a positive effect on the maximum absorbed energy. Kang et al. [9] identified
the effect of SMAs on the damage behavior of laminates subjected to low-velocity impact at low
temperatures of 293 K, 263 K, and 233 K. It is found that the impact damage behavior of the base
laminates was slightly affected by the temperatures, but the deformation and damage of SMA laminates
was affected by the temperatures. Pappadà et al. [10] evaluated the influence of the integration of thin
super-elastic SMA wires into laminated composites on the impact behavior of the hybrid composites,
and distinguished the influence of the martensitic transformation from the introduction of a pure
metallic wire and super-elastic SMA wire by embedding unidirectional steel wires into the polymeric
matrix. They also investigated the influence of the integration of thin super-elastic wires on preventing
damage propagation in composite structures [11]. It was found that the super-elastic SMA fibers
can absorb much more strain energy than other fibers before their failure. Roh et al. [12] found that
the deflections of composite structures can be significantly reduced by changing the SMA volume
fractions and temperature. Tsoi et al. [13] showed that the damage resistance of the SMA-reinforced
composites under low-velocity impact can improve for some cases. Paine et al. [14] found that the
impact resistance of the hybrid composites can improve by embedding the SMA fibers into composites.
Moreover, a few numerical investigations on the low-velocity impact responses of SMA-reinforced
composites have been also conducted. For example, Meo et al. [15] conducted the finite element
simulation for SMA-reinforced composite plates under low velocity impact. It is found that the
impact damage of composites can be reduced significantly by embedding super-elastic shape memory
alloys into a composite structure. Kim et al. [16] studied the low-velocity impact behavior of a shape
memory alloy hybrid composite by using the Abaqus/Explicit program. Shariyat et al. [17] studied
the accurate eccentric impact behavior for the preloaded SMA composite plates based on a novel
mixed-order hyperbolic global–local theory. Birman et al. [18] presented an optimum approach to the
design problem of composite plates subjected to low-velocity impact. Khalili et al. [19] investigated the
effect of some important parameters on the impact behavior of the active thin-walled hybrid composite
plates embedded with SMAs, and the Choi’s linearized Hertzian contact model is adopted in the
impact analysis of the laminated hybrid composite plate. Shariyat et al. [20] conducted the impact
analysis for the strain rate-dependent composite plates with SMA wires in a thermal–mechanical
environment for the first time, and they proposed a set of coupled thermos-elasticity constitutive
relations, and related contact models.
Although many efforts have been made to study the impact response in SMA-reinforced composite
laminates, the scope of the investigations is still limited. Moreover, a comprehensive experimental
study for the impact response of SMA-reinforced composites under different loading conditions is
still lacking. In particular, an experiment supported numerical simulation, such as a finite element
method (FEM) simulation of SMA-reinforced composites, has not been systematically performed.
Furthermore, numerical simulation based on the effective damage analysis model, which has become
increasingly important as a cost-effective and necessary method for the design of SMA-reinforced
composite laminates, is scarce, if there is any at all.
The objective of the present work is to study the low-velocity impact response of SMA-reinforced
composite laminates under non-perforation (32 J) and perforation (64 J) conditions by combining
both experimental and numerical simulation approaches. The low-velocity impact test is performed
by an Instron Dynatup 9250HV Drop Weight Impact Testing Machine at room temperature.
The three-dimensional (3D) Hashin failure criterion is adopted in Abaqus/Explicit by using
the user-defined subroutine (VUMAT) to model the damage initiation of composite laminates.
The elastic–plastic theory was adopted to simulate the mechanical behavior of SMA during the
loading stage.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8,
Appl. Sci. 8, x
2405
FOR PEER REVIEW 33of
of 15

2. Methods: Experiment and Numerical Simulation

2. Methods: Experiment and Numerical Simulation
2.1. Low-Velocity Impact Experimental Tests
2.1. Low-Velocity Impact Experimental Tests
In the impact experimental tests, the testing composite specimen has the dimension
In the impact experimental tests, the testing composite specimen has the dimension L x × Ly × Lz =
Lx ×mm
100 Ly ××Lz100= 100mm
mm × × (n100mm
× 0.2 mm× ( n)×, in
0.2mmwhich ) , nin= which n = 16 is the ply number of the glass fiber in
16 is the ply number of the glass fiber in the laminate.
the laminate.
Composite Composite
laminates laminatesofare
are composed SMAs,composed
glass fiber, of SMAs,
and epoxy glass resinfiber,
by aand epoxy resin resin
vacuum-assisted by a
vacuum-assisted resin injection
injection (VARI) process. SMA wires (VARI) process.
adopted SMA wires55.9
super-elastic adopted
wt.% Ni super-elastic
balance Ti wire 55.9 wt.%
with the Ni
balance
diameterTiofwire with
0.2 mm the diameter
obtained of 0.2 mm
from Jiangyin obtainedMaterials
Fasten-PLT from Jiangyin
ScienceFasten-PLT Materials
Co., Ltd., Jiangsu, P.R.Science
China.
Co., glass
The Ltd., Jiangsu,
fiber (GF) P.R. China. The glass
is unidirectional glassfiber
fiber(GF) is unidirectional
(EDW800) with the glass layer fiber (EDW800)
thickness withand
of 0.2 mm the
layer thickness
the mass surfaceofdensity
0.2 mmofand 200 the
g/m 2
mass surface
. It was density
provided of 200
from g/m Jiuding
Jiangsu 2 . It was New
provided
MaterialfromCo.,
Jiangsu
Ltd.,
Jiuding
Nantong, New Material
Jiangsu, P.R. Co., Ltd., The
China. Nantong,selected Jiangsu,
resinP.R. China.vinyl
is epoxy The selected
ester resin resin is epoxy
(VER) 411,vinyl ester
in which
resin (VER) 411,
the matching in which
curing agenttheand
matching
accelerating curingagent agentare andmethyl
accelerating agent are
ethyl ketone methyl (MEKP)
peroxide ethyl ketone
and
peroxide (MEKP)itand
dimethylaniline; wasdimethylaniline;
bought from Harbin it was bought
Akihito from Harbin
composite Akihito
material Co., composite
Ltd., Harbin, material Co.,
P.R. China.
Ltd.,
Figure Harbin, P.R. China.
1a represents the Figure 1a represents the
pure fiber-reinforced pure fiber-reinforced
laminate with the stacking laminate with the
sequences of stacking
[0/90]8 ,
sequences of [0/90] , and Figure 1b represents the SMA and fiber
and Figure 1b represents the SMA and fiber hybrid-reinforced laminates with the stacking sequences
8 hybrid-reinforced laminates with
the stacking
of [(0/90) sequences of4 ],[(0/90)
4 /SMA/(0/90) 4/SMA/(0/90)4], ],
[0/SMA/90/(0/90) 7 [0/SMA/90/(0/90)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90) 7], [0/SMA/90/(0/90)
3 /SMA/(0/90)43/SMA/(0/90)
], respectively.4],

respectively. Here, the stacking sequence mentioned above

Here, the stacking sequence mentioned above is from bottom to up, where the subscript indicates is from bottom to up, where the
subscript indicates
repeated times, andrepeated
the numberstimes,0 and and the numbers
90 are the ply0 angles
and 90 of areeach
the layer
ply angles
glass of each
fiber, inlayer
which glass
the
fiber,
anglesinofwhich
0 andthe angles of 0 and
90 correspond to x 90and correspond
y directions to (see
x and y directions
Figure 1). In this(seework,
Figurethe1).SMAs
In this work,
are the
stitched
SMAs are stitched in laminate by two types: one is the whole surface
in laminate by two types: one is the whole surface (Figure 1c), and the other is the local surface (Figure 1c), and the other is the
local surface
(Figure 1d), and(Figure
the SMA 1d), and
wires the SMA parallel
always wires always to the parallel
directiontoofthe 0◦ fiber layup
thedirection of the direction
0° fiber layup
in all
direction
specimens. in The
all specimens.
diameters The diameters
of SMAs is 0.2of mm, SMAs andisthe 0.2 interval
mm, andspacing the interval
betweenspacing
the twobetween
SMAsthe is
two SMAs is 5 mm for all of the specimens. The thicknesses of laminates
5 mm for all of the specimens. The thicknesses of laminates for all specimens mentioned above are for all specimens mentioned
above are all 3.2 mm.
all 3.2 mm.

Figure 1. Schematic
Figure 1. diagram of
Schematic diagram of stacking
stacking sequence
sequence of
of hybrid
hybrid composite
composite laminates
laminates and
and impact
impactregion.
region.
SMA: shape memory alloy. SMA: shape memory alloy.

The low-velocity
The low-velocity impact
impact tests
tests are
are carried
carried out
out by
by using
using aa drop
drop weight
weight impact
impact testing
testing machine
machine of
of
Instron Dynatup 9250HV followed by ASTM D7136/D7136M-07, which is a standard
Instron Dynatup 9250HV followed by ASTM D7136/D7136M-07, which is a standard test method test method for
for
measuring the
measuring the damage
damage resistance
resistance of
of aa fiber-reinforced
fiber-reinforced polymer
polymer matrix
matrix composites
composites to to aa drop-weight
drop-weight
impact event. The hydraulic fixing device and circular clamp with a diameter of 76 mm areare
impact event. The hydraulic fixing device and circular clamp with a diameter of 76 mm used
used to
fix the specimens. A semispherical rigid impactor with a diameter of 14 mm and a total weight of
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 4 of 15

to fix the specimens. A semispherical rigid impactor with a diameter of 14 mm and a total weight
of eight kilograms (error ±0.1 kg) are used in the low-velocity impact tests. The impact energies
in the low-velocity impact tests are 32 J and 64 J, respectively, and the relevant parameters of the
hybrid composite laminates and the initial impact energy are listed in Table 1. Further details on
the manufacturing process and low-velocity impact experimental tests of composite laminates are
described according to the previous work of our research group [21].

Table 1. The relevant parameters of hybrid composite laminates and the initial impact energy.

Codes/Stacking Sequence
I: [0/90]8
II: [(0/90)4 /SMA/(0/90)4 ]
III: [0/SMA/90/(0/90)7 ]
IV: [0/SMA/90/(0/90)3 /SMA/(0/90)4 ]
V: [0/90]8
VI: [(0/90)4 /SMA/(0/90)4 ]
VII: [0/SMA/90/(0/90)7 ]
VIII: [0/SMA/90/(0/90)3 /SMA/(0/90)4 ]
Layer Number of SMAs Root Number of SMAs Initial Impact Energy (J)
0 0
1 21
32
1 21
2 42
0 0
1 5
64
1 5
2 10

2.2. Numerical Models

2.2.1. SMA Model

The SMA wires that are used in the experiment are the super-elastic 55.9 wt.% Ni balance Ti wire
with the diameter of 0.2 mm, produced by Jiangyin Fasten-PLT Materials Science Co., Ltd. (Pelertech),
Jiangsu, P.R. China. In Abaqus, the elastic–plastic theory following the von Mises (J2) yield criterion
was adopted to simulate the mechanical behavior of SMA during the loading stage. The elasticity
governing equations:
σji = λδij εelkk + 2µεelij (1)

The plasticity yield function: r

3
S S − σy (ε pl ) = 0 (2)
2 ij ij
1
Sij = σij − δij σkk (3)
3
The equivalent plastic strain:
Zt
pl pl
ε = ε dt (4)
0
r
. pl 2 . pl . pl
ε = ε ε (5)
3 ij ij
The plastic flow law:
. pl 2 Sij . pl
εij = ε (6)
3 σy
. pl
where Sij is deviatoric stress, σy is yield stress, ε pl is the equivalent plastic strain, and ε is the
equivalent plastic strain rate. The schematic diagram of the stress–strain curve for Ni–Ti SMAs in
the case of breaking is shown in Figure 2, and the yield stress versus equivalent plastic strain for the
Ni–Ti SMA wires are tabulated in Table 2. The stress–strain data are input to define the SMA material
behavior in the simulation.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 15

the case of breaking is shown in Figure 2, and the yield stress versus equivalent plastic strain for the
Ni–Ti SMA
Appl. wires
Sci. 2018, are tabulated in Table 2. The stress–strain data are input to define 5the
8, 2405 of 15SMA
material behavior in the simulation.

Figure 2. Stress–strain
Figure 2. Stress–straindiagram
diagram of Ni–Ti
Ni–Tishape
shapememory
memory alloy
alloy wires.
wires.

Table 2. Yield stress versus equivalent plastic strain for the Ni–Ti SMA wires.
Table 2. Yield stress versus equivalent plastic strain for the Ni–Ti SMA wires.
Yield stress (MPa) 440.3 455.1 453.1 455.1 451.4 453.1 453.4
Yield stress
Equivalent plastic (MPa)
strain 0 440.3 0.032
455.1 0.045
453.1 451.4
0.074 455.1
453.1
0.060
0.082 453.4
0.092
Equivalent plastic
Yield stress (MPa) strain457.1 0 0.032
492.6 0.045
624.1 0.060
772.2 0.074
952.4 0.082
1111.9 0.092
1226.3
Equivalent plastic (MPa)
Yield stress strain 0.102
457.1 0.111
492.6 0.121624.1 0.130
772.2 952.40.141 0.151
1111.9 0.160
1226.3
3 , Young’s modulus = 20.2 GPa, Poisson ratio = 0.3.
Equivalent plastic strain 0.102 0.111 0.121 0.130 0.141 0.151
Note: Density of SMA = 6417 kg/m 0.160
Note: Density of SMA = 6417 kg/m3, Young’s modulus = 20.2 GPa, Poisson ratio = 0.3.
2.2.2. Failure Criterion
The 3D
2.2.2. Failure Hashin failure criterion accounting for fiber failure and matrix failure is adopted in
Criterion
Abaqus/Explicit using a user-defined subroutine (VUMAT) to analyze the damage mechanisms of the
The 3D Hashin
composites. failure
The tensile andcriterion accounting
compressive for fiber
failure of fiber, failure
and that and can
of matrix matrix failure as
be expressed is [22–24]:
adopted in
Abaqus/Explicit using
Fiber tension a user-defined
failure, d f t = 1: subroutine (VUMAT) to analyze the damage mechanisms of
the composites. The tensile and compressive failure of fiber, and that of matrix can be expressed as
 2  2  2
[22–24]: σ11
+
σ12
+
σ13
≥ 1, (σ11 > 0) (7)
Fiber tension failure, d ft =X
1 T: S12 S13

Fiber compression failure, d f c = 1:2 2 2

 σ 11   σ 12   σ 13 
 +  2  +   ≥ 1, (σ 11 > 0) (7)
 X T  σ11 S12 ≥ 1,(Sσ1311 < 0) (8)
XC
Fiber compression failure, d fc = 1 :
Matrix tension failure, dmt = 1:
2
 2  2 (σ
σ 11)2
+  22  +≥ 1, (σ2211 < 0)
σ11 σ12 σ (8)
+ ≥ 1, (σ22 + σ33 > 0) (9)
2XT S12 YXT Y
C C YT + YC

Matrix
Matrix compression
tension dmt = 1d:mc = 1:
failure, failure,
 2  2 2
2 ( σ22 )
σ11 S σ12 Y (Y 22 + ) YT +22σY22C ≥ 1, (σ22 + σ33 < 0)
σ11 2 σ12 2 σ
 +  
+ σ (10)
2XT   +12  + T C + ≥ 1, (σ 22 + σ 33 > 0) (9)
 2 XT   S12  YT YC YT + YC
where d f t , d f c , dmt , and dmc are the damage variables for evaluating the tensile failure and compressive
damage
Matrix of the fiber andfailure,
compression dmc = 1 : σij (i, j = 1, 2, 3) are the Cauchy stress tensor components.
matrix, respectively.
XT , XC , YT , and YC are the tensile and compressive strengths in the longitudinal and transverse
 σS1223 are (the ) strength
2 2 2
directions, respectively. S12 σ,11S13 , and σ 22shear σ 22 in the fiber and transverse direction,
fiber and thickness direction,  and +  transverse
 + and+thickness≥ direction,1, (σ 22 + σ 33 < 0)
respectively. In this work, (10)
 2 X T   S12  YT YC YT + YC
the initiation failure criterion is modeled based on 3D Hashin failure criterion by using a user-defined
subroutine
where d ft , d fc(VUMAT)
, dmt , and thatdis adopted in Abaqus/Explicit to analyze the damage mechanisms of
mc are the damage variables for evaluating the tensile failure and
composite laminates. To ensure the stability during analysis, the failure elements will be eliminated
compressive damage
from geometry, and of will
the befiber
notand matrix, in
considered respectively. σ ij (i, j =The
further calculations. 1, 2,material
3) are the Cauchyofstress
parameters
tensor components.
composites used in X finite X C , YT(FE)
T , element , and YC are
simulation the tensile
is listed in Table and
3. compressive strengths in the
longitudinal and transverse directions, respectively. S12 , S13 , and S 23 are the shear strength in the
fiber and transverse direction, fiber and thickness direction, and transverse and thickness direction,
material parameters of composites used in finite element (FE) simulation is listed in Table 3.

Table 3. The material parameters of composites used in finite element (FE) simulation.

Mechanical Constants (Symbols) Values

Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 6 of 15
Young’s modulus ( E1 , E2 , E3 ) 55.2 GPa, 18.4 GPa, 18.4 GPa
Poisson’s ratio ( υ12 ,υ13 ,υ 23 ) 0.269, 0.269, 0.428
Table 3. The material parameters of composites used in finite element (FE) simulation.
Shear modulus ( G12 , G13 , G23 ) 13.8 GPa, 13.8 GPa, 13.8 GPa
Mechanical Constants (Symbols) Values
Ultimate tensile stress ( X T , YT , ZT ) 1656 MPa, 73.8 MPa, 73.8 MPa
Young’s modulus (E1 , E2 , E3 ) 55.2 GPa, 18.4 GPa, 18.4 GPa
Ultimate Poisson’s
compressive (υ , υ ( ,X
ratio stress υ C ), YC , Z C )
12 13 23
1656 MPa,
0.269, 91.8
0.269,MPa,
0.42891.8 MPa
Shearshear
Ultimate modulus
stress ( ,SG1213,S
(G12 , G23,S
13
)
23 )
13.8MPa,
117.6 GPa, 13.8 GPa,
117.6 13.8117.6
MPa, GPa MPa
Ultimate tensile stress (XT , YT , ZT ) 1656 MPa, 73.8 MPa, 73.8 MPa
Ultimate compressive stress (XC , YC , ZC ) 1656 MPa, 91.8 MPa, 91.8 MPa
2.2.3. InterlaminarUltimate
Damage Model
shear stress (S12 , S13 , S23 ) 117.6 MPa, 117.6 MPa, 117.6 MPa

In the paper, the delamination between interlayer interfaces or SMA and layer interfaces are
2.2.3.
modeledInterlaminar Damage Model
by surface-based cohesive behavior in Abaqus/Explicit. The surface-based cohesive
behavior is defined as a surface
In the paper, the delamination interaction
betweenproperty, and
interlayer can be used
interfaces to model
or SMA the delamination
and layer interfaces areat
interfacesbydirectly
modeled in terms
surface-based of traction
cohesive versus
behavior separation [25–29].
in Abaqus/Explicit. TheThe available traction–separation
surface-based cohesive behavior
model in Abaqus assumes initially linear elastic behavior, followed by the
is defined as a surface interaction property, and can be used to model the delamination initiation andat
evolution of
interfaces
damage. The elastic behavior is written in terms of an elastic constitutive matrix
directly in terms of traction versus separation [25–29]. The available traction–separation model in that relates the
normal assumes
Abaqus and shear stresses
initially to the
linear normal
elastic and followed
behavior, shear separations across and
by the initiation the evolution
interface. of
The elastic
damage.
behavior can then be written as:
The elastic behavior is written in terms of an elastic constitutive matrix that relates the normal and
shear stresses to the normal and sheartseparations
 K nn across
0 the  δinterface. The elastic behavior can then
n 0 n
   
=  ts =  0 K ss 0 
be written as:
t
 nn 0
δs  = Κδ
(11)
0  

 tn 
   K  
δn 
tτ  00 K 0 K 0 tt  δ t δs
 
t= ts = = Kδ (11)
 
 ss

 t  
 δ 
τ
 0 0 K tt t

where nominal traction stress vector t consists of three components— t , t and t —which n s t

where nominal
represent traction
the normal andstress
twovector t consists respectively.
shear tractions, of three components—t n , ts and
Here, we adopt the tuncoupled
t —which represent
traction–
the normal and
separation two shear
behavior, andtractions,
the terms K nn , K ss ,Here,
respectively. and we K tt adopt the uncoupled
are not defined any traction–separation
dependencies on
behavior,
temperatureand orthefield Knn , Kss , and
termsvariables. Ktt are
Abaqus not default
uses defined contact
any dependencies
penalties to on model
temperature or field
the traction–
variables. Abaqus
separation behavior. uses default contact penalties to model the traction–separation behavior.
Damage
Damage modeling simulates the
modeling simulates thedegradation
degradationand andeventual
eventual failure
failure of the
of the bondbond between
between two
two cohesive
cohesive surfaces.
surfaces. TheThe failure
failure mechanism
mechanism consistsofoftwo
consists twoingredients:
ingredients:aadamage
damage initiation
initiation criterion
criterion
and
andaadamage
damageevolution
evolution law.law.
TheTheinitial response
initial is assumed
response is assumedto be linear,
to be and onceand
linear, a damage
once ainitiation
damage
criterion
initiationiscriterion
met, damage candamage
is met, occur according
can occur to aaccording
user-definedto adamage evolution
user-defined law. Figure
damage 3 shows
evolution law.
aFigure
typical3 traction–separation response with a failure mechanism.
shows a typical traction–separation response with a failure mechanism.

traction

tn0 ( ts0 , tt0 ) A

Gc

separation
B
δ n0 (δ s0 , δ t0 ) δ nf (δ sf , δ t f )

Figure 3. Typical traction–separation response.

Damage initiation refers to the beginning of degradation of the cohesive response at a contact
point. The process of degradation begins when the contact stresses satisfy certain damage initiation
criteria. Damage is assumed to initiate when a quadratic interaction function involving the contact
stress ratios reaches a value of one. This criterion can be represented as:
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 7 of 15

 2  2  2
tn ts tt
+ + =1 (12)
t0n t0s t0t
where, t0n , t0s , and t0t represent the peak values of the contact stress when the separation is either purely
normal to the interface or purely in the first or the second shear direction, respectively.
The damage evolution law describes the rate at which the cohesive stiffness is degraded once the
corresponding initiation criterion is reached. Damage evolution can be defined based on the energy
that is dissipated as a result of the damage process, which is also called the fracture energy. The fracture
energy is equal to the area under the traction–separation curve in Figure 3. Unloading subsequent to
damage initiation is always assumed to occur linearly toward the origin of the traction–separation
plane, as shown in Figure 3. Reloading subsequent to unloading also occurs along the same linear
path until the softening envelope (line AB) is reached. Once the softening envelope is reached, further
reloading follows this envelope, as indicated by the arrow in Figure 3. The dependence of the fracture
energy on the mode mix is defined based on a power law fracture criterion. The power law criterion
states that failure under mixed-mode conditions is governed by a power law interaction of the energies
that are required to cause failure in the individual (normal and two shear) modes. It is given by:
 α  α  α
Gn Gs Gt
+ + =1 (13)
Gnc Gsc Gtc

where, Gnc , Gsc , and Gtc refer to the critical fracture energies that are required to cause failure in the
normal, first, and second shear directions, respectively. The cohesive parameters values that are
adopted in the simulation are listed in Table 4.

Table 4. The cohesive parameters values adopted in simulation.

Symbols Interlayer Interfaces SMA–Layer Interfaces

Cohesive damage (GPa/m) Knn , Kss , Kss 15, 15, 15 1.5, 1.5, 1.5
Initiation (MPa) σn0 , τs0 , τt0 123, 96, 96 12.3, 19.6, 19.6
Evolution (N/m) Gnc , Gsc , Gtc 0.831, 1.99, 1.99 0.167, 0.398, 0.398

2.2.4. Modeling of Composite Laminates

The finite element model of SMA-reinforced composite laminates is generated and analyzed
by ABAQUS/Explicit, and the FE model of composite laminates is identical to the experimental
setup (see Figure 1). Here, the impactor is modeled as a cylindrical rigid body, and since the mass
density of the spherical impactor is 7800 kg/m3 , the mass density of the cylindrical impactor entered
in Abaqus should be converted to 2012903 kg/m3 based on the actual model shape and size of
the impactor. The fixed boundary condition is adopted with 48 fully constrained supports that are
applied symmetrically to the upper and lower surfaces at the edges of the specimen and the circular
rings clamp regions, and the displacements and rotation angles in the x, y, and z direction are all
set as zero. Fiber and resin are considered as a whole, and SMA wires are used as reinforcement;
both are meshed using an eight-node linear brick, reduced integration hourglass control (C3D8R).
Furthermore, to improve computational efficiency and reduce computational time, the accuracy of the
mesh sizes and densities is needed. It should be noted that some mesh elements will be eliminated
from analysis, such as when a specified mesh element lost its load capability and was accompanied
by significant deformation after the impact. Figure 4 shows the finite element model of the laminate
under impact loading. Figure 5 shows the schematic diagram of different types of laminates under
different impact energies.
 Appl.Sci.
Appl. Sci.2018,
2018,8,8,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 88ofof15
15

eliminatedfrom
eliminated fromanalysis,
analysis,such
suchas
aswhen
whenaaspecified
specifiedmesh
meshelement
elementlost
lostits
itsload
loadcapability
capabilityand
andwas
was
accompanied by significant deformation after the impact. Figure 4 shows the finite element
accompanied by significant deformation after the impact. Figure 4 shows the finite element model of model of
the
the laminate
Appl.laminate under
Sci. 2018, 8,under impact loading. Figure 5 shows the schematic diagram of different
2405 impact loading. Figure 5 shows the schematic diagram of different types types of
8 ofof
15
laminates under different impact
laminates under different impact energies. energies.

SMA

Matrix

Figure
Figure4.4.
Figure Finite element
Finiteelement
4.Finite model
elementmodel of
modelof composite
ofcomposite laminate
compositelaminate under
laminateunder impact
underimpact loading.
impactloading.
loading.

(a)one layer SMA, (b)two layers SMA, (c)one layer SMA, (d)two layers SMA,
32J 32J 64J 64J

Figure 5.
Figure Schematic diagram
5. Schematic diagram of
of different
different types
types of
of laminates
laminates under
under different
different impact energies.
impactenergies.
energies.
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of different types of laminates under different impact
3. Results and Discussions
3.3.Results
Resultsand andDiscussions
Discussions
3.1. Impact Dynamics
3.1.Impact
3.1. ImpactDynamics
Dynamics
The contact force and absorbed energy are two important parameters in low-velocity impact
analysisThecontact
The contactforce
process. force andabsorbed
and
Therefore, absorbed
the contact energy
energy arehistories
are
force twoimportant
two important parameters
parameters
and absorbed energy inlow-velocity
in low-velocity
histories from impact
impactthe
analysis process.
analysis
experiments process. Therefore, the
Therefore,
and simulations the clearly
are contactpresented
contact force histories
force histories
in this and and absorbed
section. absorbed energy energy histories
histories from from the the
experiments
experiments and simulations
and force–time
The typical simulations are clearly
arehistory
(f-t) clearlycurve presented
presented
consists in this
in this section.
of ansection.
ascending section of loading until reaching
The
The typical
typical force–time
force–time (f-t)
(f-t) history
history
a peak force, and a descending section of unloading. In the f-t curve
curve consists
consists of
of an
an ascending
ascending
curve, section of
section
the oscillations of loading until
loading
demonstrate until
the
reaching
reaching
possibility a
a of peak
peak force,
force,inand
failures and a descending
a descending
the material section
causedsectionby the of of unloading.
unloading.
reduced stiffness In
In of the
thethe f-t curve,
f-tmaterial,
curve, the the oscillations
andoscillations
no sudden
demonstrate
demonstrate
force thepossibility
the
drop implies possibility offailures
of
that the material failureshaveininthe
the material
material
higher caused
caused
resistance bythe
by
under the reducedstiffness
reduced
low-velocity stiffness
impact.of of
The thepeak
the material,
material,
force
and
and no
no sudden
sudden force
force drop
drop implies
implies that
that the
the material
material have
have higher
higher
on the f-t curve is an important index to evaluate the load capacity of composite laminates after impact. resistance
resistance under
under low-velocity
low-velocity
impact.reaching
impact.
Before The peak
The peak force
theforce
peakon on the
force the f-tcurve
f-t
value, curve isisan
the smooth an important
important
trend on the index
index toto evaluate
f-t curve evaluate
represents the
thethe load
load
elastic capacity
capacity
response of
of
composite
composite
of composite laminates
laminates
laminates, after
afterand impact.
impact. Before
Before
the first reaching
reaching
sudden forcethethe
drop peak
peak force
force the
reveals value,
value, the smooth
the smoothof
development trend
trend
a crack on
on thethe f-t
f-t
on the
curve
curve
impacted represents
represents
side of the the elastic response
elastic response
composite of
laminatesoforcompositecomposite
the occurrence laminates,
laminates, and the first
and the firstAfter
of delamination. sudden
sudden force
force the
reaching drop
droppeak reveals
reveals
force
the development
the
value, development
a sudden drop ofof ain
a crack
crack
the onon the
magnitude the impacted
impacted side of
side
of force indicates ofthecomposite
composite
occurrence laminates
laminates
of perforation or the
or theon occurrence
occurrence
the impacted of
of
delamination.
delamination.
side of composite After
After reachingthe
reaching
laminates. thepeakpeakforceforcevalue,
value,aasuddensuddendrop dropin inthethemagnitude
magnitudeof offorce
forceindicates
indicates
the occurrence
the occurrence
Figure 6 shows of perforation
of perforation
the typical on the
on force–timeimpacted
the impacted side
side of
history of composite
composite
curves laminates.
laminates.
for different laminates from experimental
Figure
and Figure
numerical66shows
shows
results
thetypical
the typical force–time
for theforce–time
case of 32history
history curvesenergy,
curves
J of impact
fordifferent
for different laminatesfrom
and laminates
(a)-(d) indicate
fromexperimental
experimental
the laminate
andnumerical
and numericalresultsresultsfor forthethecasecaseof of3232JJof ofimpact
impactenergy,
energy,and and(a)-(d)
(a)-(d)indicate
indicatethe thelaminate
laminatetypes typesof of
types of I, II, III and IV, respectively. As seen from Figure 6, the f-t curve obtained by numerical
I, II, III
I,simulations and
II, III and IV, IV, respectively.
respectively. As
As the seen from
seenf-tfrom Figure
Figure 6,
6, thethe f-t curve obtained by numerical simulations
matches well with curve obtained byf-texperiments,
curve obtained except by numerical
for that of the simulations
laminate
matcheswell
matches wellwithwiththe thef-tf-tcurve
curveobtained
obtainedby byexperiments,
experiments,except exceptfor forthatthatofofthe thelaminate
laminateofof[0/90] [0/90]8.8.ItIt
of [0/90]8 . It is remarkable that the numerical simulation can predict the peak force values well
isremarkable
isin remarkablethat thatthe thenumerical
numerical simulationcan canpredict
predictthe thepeak
peakforceforcevalues valueswell wellin inallallspecimens,
specimens,
all specimens, and the level ofsimulation
peak force values obtained from numerical calculations is almost
and
and the level
the level of peak
oflevel
peakofforceforce values obtained from numerical calculations is almost identical tothe
the
identical to the peak values
force valuesobtained fromfrom
obtained numerical calculations
experimental is almost identical
tests. Moreover, in terms of to peak
level
level of peak force values obtained from experimental tests. Moreover, in terms of peak force, the
force,ofthe peak force values obtained
laminate-stitched SMAs have from aexperimental
larger load capacity tests. Moreover,
than the in terms of peak force,
laminate-unstitched the
SMAs.
laminate-stitched
laminate-stitched SMAs
SMAsofhave have a larger
a larger load capacity than the laminate-unstitched SMAs. In terms of
In terms of the trend the f-t curve,load the capacity than the laminate-unstitched
laminate-stitched SMAs have smallerSMAs. damages In terms
than theof
the
the trend of
trend of the f-t the f-t curve, the laminate-stitched SMAs
curve, the laminate-stitched SMAs have smaller damages than the have smaller damages than the
laminate-unstitched SMAs.
laminate-unstitchedSMAs.
laminate-unstitched SMAs.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 9 of 15
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15
8 8 8 8
8 exp 8 exp 8 exp 8 exp
Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

exp
num exp
num exp
num exp
num
Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

6 num 6 num 6 num 6 num
6 6 6 6
4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4
2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2
0 0 0 0
00 2 4 6 8 10 00 2 4 6 8 10 00 2 4 6 8 10 00 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 [ms]6
Time 8 10 0 2 4 [ms]6
Time 8 10 0 2 4 [ms]6
Time 8 10 0 2 4 [ms]6
Time 8 10
Time [ms] Time [ms] Time [ms] Time [ms]
(a) (b) (c) (d)
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Figure 6. The comparison plots of force–time from experimental and numerical results for the case of
Figure
Figure 6.6. The
The comparison
comparison plots
plots of
of force–time
force–time from
from experimental
experimental and
and numerical
numerical results
results for
for the
the case
case of
of
32
32JJof
ofimpact
impact energy.
energy.
32 J of impact energy.

Theabsorbed
The absorbedenergyenergyof ofcomposite
compositelaminates
laminatesisisrelevant
relevantto tothe
thearea
areaunder
underthe theforce–time
force–timehistory
history
The absorbed energy of composite laminates is relevant to the area under the force–time history
curve, which
curve, which cancan bebe calculated
calculated by by the
the following
following equation:
equation:
curve, which can be calculated by the following equation:
Z t t 1
−22 m((V
EaV=0 V0 FttFdt − Vt t))22
2
dt−− 11m m V00 − (14)
Ea = Ea = V0 0 Ft t dt (V0 − V Vt ) (14)
(14)
0 0 2
where E isthe theabsorbed
absorbedenergy energyofofcomposite
composite laminatessubjected subjected to low-velocity impact, impact, V and
where EEaaais is
where the absorbed energy of compositelaminates laminates subjectedtotolow-velocity low-velocity impact,V0V0and 0 and
m
m
areare
the the impactor’s
impactor’s initialinitial velocity
velocity and and
mass, mass, respectively,
respectively, and F and V
m are the impactor’s initial velocity and mass, respectively,t and tFt and Vt are the impact forceFt and
are the Vimpact
t are the impact
force and force
impact
velocity
and impactat time
velocity at time t , respectively.
t, respectively.
and impact velocity at time t , respectively.
Figure 77 show
Figure show the the absorbed
absorbed energy–time
energy–time (e-t) (e-t) history
history curves
curves for for different
different laminates
laminates from
from
Figure 7 show the absorbed energy–time (e-t) history curves for different laminates from
experimental and
experimental and numerical
numericalresults resultsforforthe
thecase
caseof of 32
32 JJ ofof impact
impact energy,
energy, and and (a)-(d)
(a)-(d) indicate
indicate thethe
experimental and numerical results for the case of 32 J of impact energy, and (a)-(d) indicate the
laminate types
laminate types of of I,I, II,
II, III
III and
and IV,
IV, respectively.
respectively. As As seen
seen from
from Figure
Figure 7, 7, the
the e-te-t curve
curve obtained
obtained by by
laminate types of I, II, III and IV, respectively. As seen from Figure 7, the e-t curve obtained by
numerical simulations
numerical simulations does does notnot match
match very
very well
well with
with the e-t curve
the e-t curve obtained
obtained by by experiments.
experiments. ItItisisalso
also
numerical simulations does not match very well with the e-t curve obtained by experiments. It is also
foundthat
found thatthe
themaximum
maximumabsorbed absorbed energy
energy values
values areare predicted
predicted wellwell
in all inofalltheoftest
the specimens,
test specimens,
and
found that the maximum absorbed energy values are predicted well in all of the test specimens, and
andlevel
the the level
of the of the maximum
maximum absorbed
absorbed energy
energy values
values obtained
obtained fromthe
from thenumerical
numericalcalculations
calculations is is
the level of the maximum absorbed energy values obtained from the numerical calculations is
almost identical
almost identical to to the
the level
level ofof the
the maximum
maximum absorbed absorbed energyenergy valuesvalues obtained
obtained from from experimental
experimental
almost identical to the level of the maximum absorbed energy values obtained from experimental
tests.However,
tests. However,the theabsorbed
absorbedenergy energyin inthe
the final
final state
state isis not
not well-predicted.
well-predicted. ItItisisremarkable
remarkablethat thatthethe
tests. However, the absorbed energy in the final state is not well-predicted. It is remarkable that the
numerical
numericalsimulation
simulationcan canpredict
predictthethemaximum
maximumabsorbed absorbedenergy energyvalues,values,but butititdoes
doesnot notpredict
predictthethe
numerical simulation can predict the maximum absorbed energy values, but it does not predict the
ultimate
ultimate energy
energy absorption
absorption capacitycapacity of of composite
composite laminates
laminates specimens
specimens well well in in the
the no-perforation
no-perforation
ultimate energy absorption capacity of composite laminates specimens well in the no-perforation
condition
condition ofof the
the 32-J
32-J case.
case.
condition of the 32-J case.
35 35 35 35
35 35 35 35
Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

30 30 30 30
Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

30 30 30 30
25 25 25 25
25 25 25 25
20 20 20 20
20 20 20 20
15 15 15 15
15 15 15 15
10 10 10 10
10 exp 10 exp 10 exp 10 exp
5 exp 5 exp 5 exp 5 exp
5 num 5 num 5 num 5 num
0 num 0 num 0 num 0 num
00 2 4 6 8 10 00 2 4 6 8 10 00 2 4 6 8 10 00 2 4 6 8 10
0 2 4 [ms]6
Time 8 10 0 2 4 [ms]6
Time 8 10 0 2 4 [ms]6
Time 8 10 0 2 4 [ms]6
Time 8 10
Time [ms] Time [ms] Time [ms] Time [ms]
(a) (b) (c) (d)
(a) (b) (c) (d)
Figure 7. The comparison plots of energy–time from experimental and numerical results for the case
Figure 7. 7. The
The comparison
comparisonplots
plotsof
ofenergy–time
energy–timefrom
fromexperimental
experimental and
and numerical
numerical results
results forfor
thethe case
case of
of 32 J of impact energy.
of 32
32 J ofJ impact
of impact energy.
energy.

In orderto to
In order quantitatively capture the load-carrying capacity
energyand energycharacteristics
absorption
order quantitatively capture
to quantitatively the load-carrying
capture capacity and
the load-carrying capacity absorption
and energy absorption
characteristics
of the composite of the composite plate specimen, the specific values of peak force andforabsorbed
characteristics ofplate specimen, the
the composite platespecific valuesthe
specimen, of peak force
specific and absorbed
values energy
of peak force and different
absorbed
energy for different
laminates laminates for theenergy
case of 32-Jlisted
impact energy 5. are listed in Table 5.
energy forfor the case
different of 32-J impact
laminates for the case ofare in Table
32-J impact energy are listed in Table 5.
Figures 8 and 9 show the typical force–time history curves and absorbed energy–time history
Table 5. The impact parameters of various laminates for experiment and simulation under 32-J
curvesTable 5. The impact
for different parameters
laminates from of various laminates
experimental for experiment
and numerical andfor
results simulation
the case under
of 64-J32-J
impact
impact energy.
impact
energy, andenergy.
(a)-(d) indicate the laminate types of V, VI, VII and VIII, respectively. As seen from
Figures 8 and 9, the f-t curve obtained by numerical Experiments simulations match Simulations
well with the f-t curve
Experiments Simulations
obtained by the experiments
Stacking in all of thePeak
Sequence specimens,
Force and the e-t curve
Absorbed Peak obtained by the numerical
Force Absorbed
Stacking Sequence Peak Force Absorbed Peak Force Absorbed
simulations matches well with the e-t curve obtained (kN) by experiments,
Energy (J) except
(kN) for the laminate
Energy (J) type of
(kN) Energy (J) (kN) Energy (J)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)3[0/90] /SMA/(0/90)
8 4 ]. Moreover,
6.1012it is found that the FE6.2480
26.2039 model has better
29.0969conformity
[0/90]8 6.1012 26.2039 6.2480 29.0969
[(0/90)4/SMA/(0/90)4] 6.4666 25.0616 6.7845 20.9080
[(0/90)4/SMA/(0/90)4] 6.4666 25.0616 6.7845 20.9080
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)7] 6.9370 24.0008 7.2166 29.0764
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)7] 6.9370 24.0008 7.2166 29.0764
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 10 of 15

with
Appl. the2018,
Appl.Sci.
Sci. experimental
2018,
8,8,xxFOR results
FORPEER
PEER in the
REVIEW
REVIEW perforation condition of the 64-J case than in the non-perforation 10 of
10 of 15
15
condition of the 32-J case.
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)3/SMA/(0/90)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90) 3/SMA/(0/90) 4]
4] 6.8569
6.8569 23.2786
23.2786 7.1506
7.1506 20.9550
20.9550
Table 5. The
Figures88and
Figures impact
and99show parameters
showthe thetypical of various
typicalforce–time laminates
force–timehistory for experiment
historycurves
curvesand and
andabsorbed simulation
absorbedenergy–time under 32-J
energy–time history
history
impact
curves for energy.
different laminates from experimental and numerical results for the case of 64-J impact
curves for different laminates from experimental and numerical results for the case of 64-J impact
energy, and
energy, and (a)-(d)
(a)-(d) indicate
indicate the the laminate
laminate types
types of of V,
V, VI,
VI, VII
Experiments VII and
and VIII,
VIII, respectively.
respectively.
Simulations As seen
As seen fromfrom
figures 8 and Stacking
9, the Sequence
f-t curve obtained by numerical simulations match well with the f-t curve
figures 8 and 9, the f-t curve obtained byPeak numerical
Force simulations
Absorbed match well with
Peak Force the f-t curve
Absorbed
obtained by
obtained by the
the experiments
experiments in in allall of
of the (kN)
the specimens,
specimens, Energy
and
and (J)
the e-t
the curve(kN)
e-t curve obtained by
obtained Energy
by (J)
the numerical
the numerical
simulationsmatches
simulations matches well8with
well
[0/90] withthe thee-te-tcurve
curveobtained
obtained
6.1012 by byexperiments,
experiments,
26.2039 except
except
6.2480 forthe
for thelaminate
laminate
29.0969 type typeof of
[(0/90)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90) /SMA/(0/90)
/SMA/(0/90) ]. ]
Moreover, it6.4666
is found that25.0616
the FE model
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)3/SMA/(0/90)4]. Moreover, it is found that the FE model has better conformity with
3 4 4 4 6.7845
has better 20.9080
conformity with
the experimental
experimental[0/SMA/90/(0/90)
results in the7 ]perforation
in the 6.9370
perforation condition
condition of 24.0008
of the
the 64-J
64-J case 7.2166
case than
than in in the 29.0764
the non-perforation
non-perforation
the results
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)3 /SMA/(0/90)4 ] 6.8569 23.2786 7.1506 20.9550
conditionof
condition ofthe
the32-J
32-Jcase.
case.

88 88 88 88
exp
exp exp
exp exp
exp exp
exp
Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

Contact Force [kN]

num
num num
num num
num num
num
66 66 66 66

44 44 44 44

22 22 22 22

0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00
0 11 22 33 44 55 0 11 22 33 44 55 0 11 22 33 44 55 0 11 22 33 44 55
Time[ms]
Time [ms] Time[ms]
Time [ms] Time[ms]
Time [ms] Time[ms]
Time [ms]

(a)
(a) (b)
(b) (c)
(c) (d)
(d)
Figure8.8.The
Figure Thecomparison
The comparisonplots
comparison plotsof
plots offorce–time
of force–timefrom
force–time fromexperimental
from experimentaland
experimental andnumerical
and numericalresults
numerical resultsfor
results forthe
thecase
caseof
of
64-Jimpact
64-J impactenergy.
energy.

5050 5050 5050 6060

exp
exp exp
exp exp
exp exp
exp
Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

Absorbed Energy [J]

4040 num
num 4040 num
num 4040 num
num num
num
4040
3030 3030 3030

2020 2020 2020

2020
1010 1010 1010

0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00
0 11 22 33 44 55 0 11 22 33 44 55 0 11 22 33 44 55 0 11 22 33 44 55
Time[ms]
Time [ms] Time[ms]
Time [ms] Time[ms]
Time [ms] Time[ms]
Time [ms]

(a)
(a) (b)
(b) (c)
(c) (d)
(d)
Figure9.9.The
Figure Thecomparison
comparisonplots
plotsof
plots ofenergy–time
of energy–timefrom
energy–time from
from experimental
experimental
experimental and
and
and numerical
numerical
numerical results
results for
forfor
results the
thethe case
case of
case
of64-J
64-J
of 64-J impact
impact energy.
energy.
impact energy.

In order
Inorder
In to
orderto quantitatively
toquantitatively represent
quantitativelyrepresent the
representthe carrying
thecarrying capacity
carryingcapacity and
capacityand energy
andenergy absorption
energyabsorption characteristics,
absorptioncharacteristics,
characteristics,
the specific
the specific
the values
specific values of
values of peak
of peakforce and
peak force
force andabsorbed
and absorbedenergy for
absorbed energy different
energy for laminates
for different for
different laminatesthe case
laminates for
for theofcase
the 64-J of
case impact
of 64-J
64-J
energy
impact are
impactenergylisted
energy inlisted
are
are Tablein
listed 6.Table
in Table6.6.

Table
Table6.
Table The
6.6. The impact
The impact parameters
impact parameters of
parameters of various
of various laminates
various laminates for
laminates for experiment
for experiment and
experiment and simulation
and simulation under
simulation under 64-J
under 64-J
64-J
impact energy.
impactenergy.
impact energy.

Experiments
Experiments
Experiments Simulations
Simulations
Simulations
Stacking Sequence
StackingSequence
Sequence Peak Force Absorbed Peak Force Absorbed
Stacking PeakForce
Peak Force Absorbed
Absorbed Peak
PeakForce
Force Absorbed
Absorbed
(kN) Energy (J) (kN) Energy (J)
(kN)
(kN) Energy(J)
Energy (J) (kN)
(kN) Energy(J)
Energy (J)
[0/90]8 6.4438 45.3494 6.7991 45.1237
[0/90]88
[0/90] 6.4438
6.4438 45.3494
45.3494 6.7991
6.7991 45.1237
45.1237
[(0/90)4 /SMA/(0/90) 4] 6.5688 43.8837 6.7771 44.9752
[(0/90)4/SMA/(0/90)
[(0/90) 4/SMA/(0/90)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90) 4]
7 ]4]
6.5688
6.5688
6.3605 43.8837
43.8837
43.3652 6.7771
6.7771
6.3418 44.9752
44.9752
41.9943
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90) 7]7]
3 /SMA/(0/90)4] 6.3605
6.5549
6.3605 43.3652
43.0796
43.3652 6.3418
6.7991
6.3418 41.9943
52.7428
41.9943
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)3/SMA/(0/90)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90) 3/SMA/(0/90) 4]
4] 6.5549
6.5549 43.0796
43.0796 6.7991
6.7991 52.7428
52.7428
3.2. Damage Morphology
3.2.Damage
3.2. DamageMorphology
Morphology
Figure 10 shows the damage comparison diagram for different laminates from the experimental
Figure10
and Figure
numerical10shows
shows
resultsthe
the damage
damage
for the case comparison
comparison diagramenergy.
of 32-J of diagram
impact fordifferent
for different laminates
laminates
As seen fromthe
from
from Figure the experimental
10,experimental
the damage
and
and numerical
numerical
diagrams results
of all results for the case
for the case
of the composite of 32-J of
of 32-J obtained
laminates impact energy.
of impactbyenergy. As seen
As seen
numerical from Figure
from Figure
simulations match10,10,
well the
the damage
damage
with those
diagramsof
diagrams ofall
allof
ofthe
thecomposite
compositelaminates
laminatesobtained
obtainedbybynumerical
numericalsimulations
simulationsmatch
matchwell
wellwith
withthose
those
obtained by
obtained by experiments.
experiments. Besides,
Besides, inin terms
terms of of damage
damage morphology,
morphology, thethe laminate-stitched
laminate-stitched SMAsSMAs
havesmaller
have smallerdamage
damagethanthanthethelaminate-unstitched
laminate-unstitchedSMAs SMAsin inthe
the32-J
32-Jperforation
perforationcondition.
condition.
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 11 of 15

obtained by experiments. Besides, in terms of damage morphology, the laminate-stitched SMAs have
smaller damage than the laminate-unstitched SMAs in the 32-J perforation condition.
Appl. Sci.
Appl. Sci. 2018,
2018, 8,
8, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 11 of
11 of 15
15

(a)
(a)

(b)
(b)
10. Comparison
Figure 10.
Figure 10. Comparison of
Comparison ofnon-impacted
of non-impactedside
non-impacted sidediagram
side diagramfor
diagram forthe
for thecase
the caseofof
case of 32-J
32-J
32-J impact
impact energy.
energy.
impact (a)
(a)(a)
energy. Results
Results of
Results
experimental
of tests;
of experimental
experimental (b)(b)
tests;
tests; Results
(b) of numerical
Results
Results calculations.
of numerical
of numerical calculations.
calculations.

Figure
Figure 1111shows
showsthethedamage
damagecomparison
comparison diagram
diagramforfor
different laminates
different fromfrom
laminates experimental and
experimental
Figure 11 shows the damage comparison diagram for different laminates from experimental
numerical
and numericalresults
numerical for thefor
results case
theofcase
64-J of
case impact energy. energy.
64-J impact
impact As seen As
from Figure
seen from11,Figure
the damagethediagrams
11, the damage
and results for the of 64-J energy. As seen from Figure 11, damage
of all of the
diagrams of composite
of all
all of
of the laminates
the composite obtained
composite laminates by numerical
laminates obtained
obtained by simulations
by numerical match
numerical simulations well with
simulations match those
match well obtained
well with
with those
those
diagrams
by experiments.
obtained by experiments.
obtained by experiments.

(a)
(a)

(b)
(b)
Figure 11.
Figure 11. Comparison
Comparison of ofnon-impacted
of non-impactedside
non-impacted sidediagram
side diagramfor
diagram forthe
for thecase
the caseofof
case of 64-J
64-J impact
impact
64-J energy.
energy.
impact (a)
(a)(a)
energy. Results
Results of
Results
of
of experimental
experimental
experimental tests;
tests; (b)
(b)(b)
tests; Results
Results of numerical
of numerical
Results calculations.
calculations.
of numerical calculations.

3.3. Impact
3.3. Impact Damage
Impact Damage Mechanism
Damage Mechanism
Mechanism
3.3.
There are
There are two
are two types
two types of
types of impact
of impact damages
impact damages
damages inin composite
in composite laminates:
composite laminates: intra-ply
laminates: intra-ply damage
intra-ply damage
damage and and inter-ply
and inter-ply
inter-ply
There
damage. The
damage. The intra-ply
The intra-ply damage
intra-ply damage includes
damage includes pull-out,
includes pull-out, matrix
pull-out, matrix crack,
matrix crack, fiber/matrix,
crack, fiber/matrix, debonding,
fiber/matrix, debonding,
debonding, and and fiber
and fiber
fiber
damage.
breakage, and the inter-ply damage includes delamination [30,31]. Pull-out occurs due
breakage, and the inter-ply damage includes delamination [30,31]. Pull-out occurs due to the weaker to the weaker
interface between
interface between thethe fiber
fiber and
and matrix.
matrix. Matrix
Matrix cracks
cracks initiate
initiate at
at the
the upper
upper layers
layers of
of laminate
laminate that
that are
are
in contact with the impactor, and are usually oriented in planes that are parallel to the fiber
in contact with the impactor, and are usually oriented in planes that are parallel to the fiber directiondirection
in unidirectional
in unidirectional fiber
fiber composites.
composites. Fiber/matrix
Fiber/matrix debonding
debonding occurs
occurs when
when the
the fiber
fiber is
is pulled
pulled out
out from
from
the matrix. Fiber breakage occurs later than matrix crack and delamination in the impact process,
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 12 of 15

breakage, and the inter-ply damage includes delamination [30,31]. Pull-out occurs due to the weaker
interface between the fiber and matrix. Matrix cracks initiate at the upper layers of laminate that are in
contact with the impactor, and are usually oriented in planes that are parallel to the fiber direction in
unidirectional fiber composites. Fiber/matrix debonding occurs when the fiber is pulled out from
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW
the
12 of 15
matrix. Fiber breakage occurs later than matrix crack and delamination in the impact process, and it
is
anda precursor to catastrophic
it is a precursor penetration
to catastrophic mode.mode.
penetration Delamination
Delamination is caused by transverse
is caused impact
by transverse after
impact
reaching a certain energy, and it develops in the presence of
after reaching a certain energy, and it develops in the presence of a matrix crack. a matrix crack.
Figure
Figure 12 12 shows
shows thethecross-section
cross-sectioncontour
contourplotplotofofthe
the Mises
Mises stress
stress of composite
of composite laminates
laminates for
for the
the case of 32-J impact energy. The contour plot of Mises stress represents
case of 32-J impact energy. The contour plot of Mises stress represents the stress distribution of the stress distribution
of composite
composite laminates,
laminates, and and the
the vonMises
von Misesstress
stressisisused
usedto topredict
predict the the yielding
yielding of of materials
materials under
under
complex loading. From
complex loading. Fromthe thecontour
contourplot plotofof Mises
Mises stress,
stress, it can
it can be seen
be seen thatthat
therethere is a write
is a write blankblank
area,
area, which refers to the failure elements that have been deleted. At
which refers to the failure elements that have been deleted. At the time of 4 ms, the laminate with the time of 4 ms, the laminate
with stacking
stacking sequence
sequence [0/90]
[0/90] 8 (Figure
8 (Figure 12a)
12a) and[0/SMA/90/(0/90)
and [0/SMA/90/(0/90) 7 ] (Figure
7] (Figure 12c)show
12c) showthethe damages,
damages,
including
including indentation,
indentation, matrixmatrix crack,
crack, delamination,
delamination, and and fiber
fiber breakage.
breakage. The The laminate
laminate withwith stacking
stacking
sequence [(0/90) /SMA/(0/90) ] (Figure 12b) and [0/SMA/90/(0/90)
sequence [(0/90)44/SMA/(0/90)4] 4 (Figure 12b) and [0/SMA/90/(0/90)33/SMA/(0/90)4] 4 (Figure 12d) /SMA/(0/90) ] (Figure 12d)
represents
representsthe thedamages,
damages, including
includingindentation, matrix
indentation, crack, crack,
matrix and delamination,
and delamination,without fiber breakage.
without fiber
At the time of 8 ms, the laminate with stacking sequence [0/90] (Figure
breakage. At the time of 8 ms, the laminate with stacking sequence [0/90]8 (Figure 12a) and
8 12a) and [0/SMA/90/(0/90) 7]
(Figure 12c) shows further, more serious damages compared that
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)7] (Figure 12c) shows further, more serious damages compared that at 4 ms. at 4 ms. However, the laminate
with stackingthe
However, sequence
laminate[(0/90) 4 /SMA/(0/90)
with stacking 4 ]sequence
(Figure 12b) and 4[0/SMA/90/(0/90)
[(0/90) /SMA/(0/90)4] (Figure 3 /SMA/(0/90)
12b) and 4]
(Figure 12d) represent smaller damages compared with those at the
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)3/SMA/(0/90)4] (Figure 12d) represent smaller damages compared with those at the time of four ms. Furthermore,
most
time of of the
fourMises stress measurement
ms. Furthermore, most ofdatathe at the time
Mises stressof measurement
8 ms in Figuredata 12b–d at are
the smaller
time ofthan
8 msthe in
Mises
Figurestress
12b–dvalues at the than
are smaller time ofthe4 Mises
ms. This is mainly
stress values due to time
at the the SMAsof 4 ms. playing
This is anmainly
active role
due into the
the
impact process, which
SMAs playing recovers
an active role inpartthe
of impact
the elastic strain of
process, composite
which recovers laminates
part ofinthe the elastic
non-perforation
strain of
case. The other
composite reasoninfor
laminates thedifferent Mises stress
non-perforation values
case. is because
The other reason of the
for different stiffness of composite
Mises stress values is
laminates
because ofinthe various directions.
different stiffness of composite laminates in various directions.

(a) [0/90]8

(b) [(0/90)4/SMA/(0/90)4]

(c) [0/SMA/90/(0/90)7]

(d) [0/SMA/90/(0/90)3/SMA/(0/90)4]
Figure 12.
Figure 12.Cross-section
Cross-sectioncontour
contour plot
plot of Mises
of Mises stress
stress (Pa)
(Pa) of of composite
composite laminates
laminates in the damage
in the damage process
process for the case of 32-J impact
for the case of 32-J impact energy. energy.

Figure 13 shows the cross-section contour plot of Mises stress of composite laminates for the
case of 64-J impact energy. In contour plot of Mises stress, the elements that reached yield strength
have been also deleted. At the time of 1 ms, the damages status of all of the composite laminates
show almost no difference, which is the early elastic stage in the impact process. At the time of 2.5
ms, the Mises stress values exhibit a significant difference in different laminate types. At the time of
4.5 ms, all of the composite laminates show delamination and fiber breakages, whereas the
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 13 of 15

Figure 13 shows the cross-section contour plot of Mises stress of composite laminates for the case
of 64-J impact energy. In contour plot of Mises stress, the elements that reached yield strength have
been also deleted. At the time of 1 ms, the damages status of all of the composite laminates show almost
no difference, which is the early elastic stage in the impact process. At the time of 2.5 ms, the Mises
stress values exhibit a significant difference in different laminate types. At the time of 4.5 ms, all of the
composite laminates show delamination and fiber breakages, whereas the laminate-stitched SMAs
have much smaller damage than the laminate-unstitched SMAs. In addition, the laminate with stacking
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 15
sequence [(0/90)4 /SMA/(0/90)4 ] exhibits SMAs bucking, which shows that part of the SMAs cannot
recover
shows that in the impact
part perforation
of the SMAs cannotstage.recover
The laminate
in the with
impactstacking sequence
perforation [0/SMA/90/(0/90)
stage. The laminate with 7]
exhibits more serious damage than the laminate with stacking sequence [(0/90) /SMA/(0/90)
stacking sequence [0/SMA/90/(0/90)7] exhibits more serious damage than the4laminate with 4stacking ]; this is
because
sequenceembedding SMAs into
[(0/90)4/SMA/(0/90) the bottom of the laminate tears the bottom surface layer more easily.
4]; this is because embedding SMAs into the bottom of the laminate
The
tears the bottom surface layer [0/SMA/90/(0/90)
laminate with stacking sequence more easily. The 3 /SMA/(0/90) ] exhibits
laminate 4with smallersequence
stacking damage
compared to the laminate with stacking sequence [(0/90) /SMA/(0/90) ] and [0/SMA/90/(0/90)
[0/SMA/90/(0/90)3/SMA/(0/90)4] exhibits smaller damage4 compared to 4the laminate with stacking 7 ].
This shows
sequence that 4the
[(0/90) load capacity
/SMA/(0/90) and impact resistance of two layers of laminate-stitched SMAs is
4] and [0/SMA/90/(0/90)7]. This shows that the load capacity and impact
better than one layer of laminate-stitched
resistance of two layers of laminate-stitched SMA.
SMAs is better than one layer of laminate-stitched SMA.

(a) [0/90]8

(b) [(0/90)4/SMA/(0/90)4]

(c) [0/SMA/90/(0/90)7]

(d) [0/SMA/90/(0/90)3/SMA/(0/90)4]
Figure 13.
Figure 13.Cross-section
Cross-sectioncontour
contour plot
plot of Mises
of Mises stress
stress (Pa)
(Pa) of of composite
composite laminates
laminates in the damage
in the damage process
process
for for the
the case caseimpact
of 64-J of 64-Jenergy.
impact energy.

4.
4. Conclusions
Conclusions
Based
Based on
on the
the above
above analysis,
analysis, we
we may
may draw
draw the
the following
followingconclusions:
conclusions:
(1) (1)
TheThe
reported numerical
reported numerical results show
results showa reasonable agreement
a reasonable agreementwithwith
the the
experimental results.
experimental results.
(2) Local indentation, delamination, and matrix crack are the main damage
(2) Local indentation, delamination, and matrix crack are the main damage mechanisms of composite mechanisms of
composite
laminates laminates
at the at the
initial stage of initial stage and
the impact, of the impact,
fiber and occurs
breakage fiber breakage
later thanoccurs
matrixlater than
fracture
andmatrix fractureduring
delamination and delamination during the impact
the impact penetration process.penetration process.
(3) (3)
ForFor
thethe caseofof32-J
case 32-Jimpact
impact energy,
energy, impact
impact damages
damagesare aremainly
mainlycaused by by
caused matrix cracks
matrix and
cracks
anddelamination
delaminationinin the
theinterlayers
interlayersor or
thethe
SMA–composite
SMA–composite interface of composite
interface laminates.
of composite For
laminates.
the case of 64-J impact energy, impact damages are mainly caused by fiber breakage in
composite laminates.
(4) The impact resistance property of composite laminates can be significantly improved by
embedding the SMA wires into the composites.

Author Contributions: M.S. conceived, designed and performed the numerical simulation, wrote and revised
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 14 of 15

For the case of 64-J impact energy, impact damages are mainly caused by fiber breakage in
composite laminates.
(4) The impact resistance property of composite laminates can be significantly improved by
embedding the SMA wires into the composites.

Author Contributions: M.S. conceived, designed and performed the numerical simulation, wrote and revised the
paper; M.C. analyzed the data; Z.W. provided the funding; H.L. performed the modeling guidance; X.S. modified
the language of the manuscript.
Funding: This work is financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China,
grant number 11472086.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Haider, M.F.; Majumdar, P.K.; Angeloni, S.; Reifsnider, K.L. Nonlinear anisotropic electrical response of
carbon fiber-reinforced polymer composites. J. Compos. Mater. 2018, 52, 1017–1032. [CrossRef]
2. Atas, C.; Sayman, O. An overall view on impact response of woven fabric composite plates. Compos. Struct.
2008, 82, 336–345. [CrossRef]
3. Sevkat, E.; Liaw, B.; Delale, F. Drop-weight impact response of hybrid composites impacted by impactor of
various geometries. Mater. Des. 2013, 52, 67–77. [CrossRef]
4. De Moura, M.; Marques, A.T. Prediction of low velocity impact damage in carbon epoxy laminates. Compos. A
Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2002, 33, 361–368. [CrossRef]
5. Buehler, W.J.; Gilfrich, J.V.; Wiley, R.C. Effect of low-temperature phase changes on the mechanical properties
of alloys near composition TiNi. J. Appl. Phys. 1963, 34, 1475–1477. [CrossRef]
6. Buehler, W.J.; Wiley, R.C. Nickel-Base Alloys. U.S. Patent 3174851, 1965.
7. Lagoudas, D.C. Shape Memory Alloys; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2008; ISBN 978-0-387-47685-8.
8. Aurrekoetxea, J.; Zurbitu, J.; de Mendibil, I.O.; Agirregomezkorta, A.; Sánchez-Soto, M.; Sarrionandia, M.
Effect of superelastic shape memory alloy wires on the impact behavior of carbon fiber reinforced in situ
polymerized poly (butylene terephthalate) composites. Mater. Lett. 2011, 65, 863–865. [CrossRef]
9. Kang, K.W.; Kim, J.K. Effect of shape memory alloy on impact damage behavior and residual properties of
glass/epoxy laminates under low temperature. Compos. Struct. 2009, 88, 455–460. [CrossRef]
10. Pappadà, S.; Gren, P.; Tatar, K.; Gustafson, T.; Rametta, R.; Rossini, E.; Maffezzoli, A. Mechanical and
vibration characteristics of laminated composite plates embedding shape memory alloy superelastic wires.
J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2009, 18, 531–537. [CrossRef]
11. Pappadà, S.; Rametta, R.; Toia, L.; Coda, A.; Fumagalli, L.; Maffezzoli, A. Embedding of superelastic SMA
wires into composite structures: Evaluation of impact properties. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2009, 18, 522–530.
[CrossRef]
12. Roh, J.H.; Kim, J.H. Hybrid smart composite plate under low velocity impact. Compos. Struct. 2002, 56,
175–182. [CrossRef]
13. Tsoi, K.A.; Stalmans, R.; Schrooten, J.; Wevers, M.; Mai, Y.W. Impact damage behaviour of shape memory
alloy composites. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2003, 342, 207–215. [CrossRef]
14. Paine, J.S.N.; Rogers, C.A. The response of SMA hybrid composite materials to low velocity impact. J. Intell.
Mater. Syst. Struct. 1994, 5, 530–535. [CrossRef]
15. Meo, M.; Antonucci, E.; Duclaux, P.; Giordano, M. Finite element simulation of low velocity impact on shape
memory alloy composite plates. Compos. Struct. 2005, 71, 337–342. [CrossRef]
16. Kim, E.H.; Lee, I.; Roh, J.H.; Choi, R.H.; Koo, K.N. Effects of shape memory alloys on low velocity impact
characteristics of composite plate. Compos. Struct. 2011, 93, 2903–2909. [CrossRef]
17. Shariyat, M.; Hosseini, S.H. Accurate eccentric impact analysis of the preloaded SMA composite plates,
based on a novel mixed-order hyperbolic global–local theory. Compos. Struct. 2015, 124, 140–151. [CrossRef]
18. Birman, V.; Chandrashekhara, K.; Sain, S. An approach to optimization of shape memory alloy hybrid
composite plates subjected to low-velocity impact. Compos. Part. B Eng. 1996, 27, 439–446. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 2405 15 of 15

19. Khalili, S.M.R.; Shokuhfar, A.; Malekzadeh, K.; Ghasemi, F.A. Low-velocity impact response of active
thin-walled hybrid composite structures embedded with SMA wires. Thin. Wall. Struct. 2007, 45, 799–808.
[CrossRef]
20. Shariyat, M.; Niknami, A. Impact analysis of strain-rate-dependent composite plates with SMA wires
in thermal environments: Proposing refined coupled thermoelasticity, constitutive, and contact models.
Compos. Struct. 2016, 136, 191–203. [CrossRef]
21. Sun, M.; Wang, Z.Q.; Yang, B.; Sun, X.K. Experimental investigation of GF/epoxy laminates with different
SMAs positions subjected to low-velocity impact. Compos. Struct. 2017, 171, 170–184. [CrossRef]
22. Hashin, Z.; Rotem, A. A fatigue failure criterion for fiber reinforced materials. J. Compos. Mater. 1973, 7,
448–464. [CrossRef]
23. Hashin, Z. Failure Criteria for Unidirectional Fiber Composites. Int. J. Appl. Mech. 1980, 47, 329–334.
[CrossRef]
24. Puck, A.; Schürmann, H. Failure analysis of FRP laminates by means of physically based phenomenological
models. Compos. Sci. Technol. 1998, 58, 1045–1067. [CrossRef]
25. Shi, Y.; Swait, T.; Soutis, C. Modelling damage evolution in composite laminates subjected to low velocity
impact. Compos. Struct. 2012, 94, 2902–2913. [CrossRef]
26. Benzeggagh, M.L.; Kenane, M. Measurement of mixed-mode delamination fracture toughness of
unidirectional glass/epoxy composites with mixed-mode bending apparatus. Compos. Sci. Technol. 1996, 56,
439–449. [CrossRef]
27. Lopes, C.S.; Camanho, P.P.; Gürdal, Z.; Maimí, P.; González, E.V. Low-velocity impact damage on dispersed
stacking sequence laminates. Part II: Numerical simulations. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2009, 69, 937–947.
[CrossRef]
28. Camanho, P.P.; Davila, C.G. Mixed-Mode Decohesion Finite Elements for the Simulation of Delamination
in Composite Materials; NASA/TM-2002-211737; NASA Langley Research Center: Hampton, VA, USA,
June 2002.
29. Feng, D.; Aymerich, F. Finite element modelling of damage induced by low-velocity impact on composite
laminates. Compos. Struct. 2014, 108, 161–171. [CrossRef]
30. Anderson, T.L. Fracture Mechanics-Fundamentals and Applications; CRC Press: New York, NY, USA, 1995.
31. Abrate, S. Impact Engineering of Composite Structures; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin,
Germany, 2011.

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).