Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 8731–8738 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

ICAAMM-2016

Numerical Investigation of Damage Area Due to Different Shape of

Impactors at Low Velocity Impact of GFRP Laminate
Prashant Rawata*, K. K. Singhb, Nand Kishore Singha
a
Research Scholar, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad and 826004, India
b
Assistant Professor, ,Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad and 826004, India

Abstract

In this paper numerical investigation of damage area caused by different shapes of impactor is studied. Quasi-isotropic symmetric
glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) laminate have been used with zero bending extension coupling. Four different shape of
impactors used for analysis are: (i) Hemispherical headed cylindrical impactor, (ii) Spherical impactor, (iii) Oval shaped impactor
and (iv) Flat base cylindrical impactor. These impactors having mass of 5.23 kg and impact velocity 3 m/sec. FEM analysis is
done using commercially available software LS-DYNA. On impacting with energy of 23.5 J, oval headed impactor lead to
minimum damage area of 394.61 mm2 and form maximum fiber breakage pyramid structure on the back face of GFRP laminate.
On the other hand, flat base cylindrical impactor causes no fiber damage and causes maximum damage area of 1211.27 mm2.

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and Peer-review under responsibility ofthe Committee Members of International Conference on Advancements in
Aeromechanical Materials for Manufacturing (ICAAMM-2016).

Keywords:GFRP; Impactor shape; fiber damage; LS-DYNA

1. Introduction
The use of Fiber reinforced polymers (FRP) composites have been increased in various industries includes
aerospace, automobile, marine and many more. The reason of this application revolution is exceptional properties of
FRPs like low mass, high strength, high stiffness and high capacity to absorb kinetic energy. Impact on FRP
components becomes major problem when they are exposed for use. Sudden strike of one object on other called
impact and it causes failure of component. Impact damage may be external or internal and it is very difficult to find
it by visual inspection [1]. Impact can be divided into three categories on the basis of collision velocity (i) low

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 9472745795.

E-mail address: aadiprashant@gmail.com

2214-7853© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and Peer-review under responsibility ofthe Committee Members of International Conference on Advancements in Aeromechanical
Materials for Manufacturing (ICAAMM-2016).
8732 Prashant Rawat / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 8731–8738

Velocity impact, (ii) high velocity impact and (iii) Hyper velocity impact [2, 3]. Damage caused by impact depends
upon energy delivered to the component and it may be matrix crack, fiber breakage, debonding of fiber interface,
ply delamination and impactor penetration [1, 5].Many researchers have investigated impact behaviour using
experimental and numerical methods. Experimental testing for low velocity impact is done by drop weight impact
and weights may be of different shapes, pendulum type test (Charpy impact test). Ghasemnejad et al [6] used
charpy impact method to study LVI phenomenon on hybrid composite beam. T. Mitrevski et al [7] examined the
effect of impactor shape and its respond on CFRP laminate using LVI experimentally. Ali Kursun et al [8] worked
on impact problem using experimental method and validation using ABAQUS and concluded that impactor shape
(steel based conical shaped, oval shaped, hemispherical and flat cylindrical impactors) greatly influences the damage
pattern and stress distribution. They also concluded that flat cylindrical impactor causes stamp on laminate with
maximum damage area while lower contact surface causes less damage area while low velocity impact. A. N.
Palazotto et al [9] numerically investigated LV impact respond of composite sandwich plate by FEM algorithm. E.
Sevkat et al [10] investigated drop weight impact on hybrid composite, research was based on experiment and its
validation through LS-DYNA. Previous research exposed that impactor shape significantly affects the impact
respond on composite. In this paper, FE analysis of low velocity impact response on symmetric GFRP laminate with
four different impactor shapes is done and the effect of the same on damage pattern, damage area and penetration is
studied.
2. Finite Element Modelling
2.1 Problem Description
Previous work [6] explained that symmetrical laminate absorbs more energy as compared to asymmetrical laminate
as well as this research also proved that numerical validation using LS DYNA provides good agreement of results
between experimental and numerical investigation. Impactor shape plays a significant role in during impact [1].
Thus previous research [6] had a limitation of single shape impactori.e. hemispherical. This paper numerically
investigates the influence of impactor shapes on damage area and damage pattern and penetration. Damage induced
in symmetrical laminates using four different shapes of impactors as (i) hemispherical headed cylindrical impactor,
(ii) spherical impactor, (iii) oval headed and Cylindrical headed impactor (Figure 1) have been investigated as well
as pattern of delamination between different plies is also shown.All impactors having same mass of 5.23 kg., made
of steel and having 3 m/sec striking velocity. GFRP laminate properties considered for this problem are show in
table 1.

Fig. 1: (a) Hemispherical headed cylindrical impactor, (b) spherical impactor, (c) oval headed impactor and (d) cylindrical impactor
 Prashant Rawat /Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 8731–8738 8733

Table 1. Materials properties [6].

GFRP Material (00-900) Value
Young’s Modulus (GPa) E11 26
E22 26
E33 8
Poisson’s Ratio υ21 0.1
υ 31 0.25
υ 32 0.25
Tensile Strength (GPa) TX .850
TY .850
TZ .120
Compressive Strength (GPa) CX .720
CY .720
CZ .50
Shear Strength (GPa) S12 .105
S13 .065
S23 .065

2.2 Numerical Simulation

FEM simulation is a best technique available for analysing impact behaviour on composite plate since they are
accurate, economical and less time consuming [2]. In this work all meshing part was done on HyperMesh v9.0 and
Numerical simulation was on LS PrePost 4.2 (Beta) version under boundary conditions similar to real impact test.
FEM model of impact system is illustrated in figure 2 for hemispherical headed impactor. In FEM modelling all
impactors are defined as rigid body.

Fig. 2: FEM model for impact test (hemispherical headed cylindrical impactor)
2.2.1 Material Card
MAT-59 (SOLID-COMPOSITE-FAILURE-SOLID-MODEL) was chosen for laminate simulation. It is an
orthotropic material model which uses maximum stress failure criterion.For Impactor MAT-020 (RIGID) material
card was used and mechanical properties used are given below.
2.2.2 Contact
Proper contact between projectile and laminate is required to model impact simulation. Two different contacts had
been defined first one between impactor and laminate AUTOMATIC_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE and second was
used to define the contact between laminate layers AUTOMATIC_ONE_WAY_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE.
2.2.3 Boundary Conditions
BONDARY_SPC is defined to constrain laminate boundaries as shown in fig. 3 in x, y, z- directions. The
translational and rotational motion are constrained in all direction.
8734 Prashant Rawat / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 8731–8738

Fig. 3: Boundary condition

2.2.4 Contact time
Contact time or termination time for defined problem is 3.5 micro seconds.
3. Simulation Result and Discussion
3.1 Damage pattern
Damage pattern for four different time-steps i.e. 1 msec, 2 msec, 3msec and 3.5 msec have been compared. It is
found that initially at 1 msec cylindrical impactor (figure 7) did not break any laminate fiber, while all three
impactors damaged top layer of laminate. Hemispherical impactor (figure 4) have red fringe at right side shows
more stress as compared to left side. This is the reason in this case damage shifted towards right side of the laminate.
Spherical impactor (figure 5) showed homogeneous stress fringe levels in all sides thus damage is observed in the
middle portion of laminate as compare to hemispherical headed impactor. In case of oval headed impactor (figure 6)
there is also no stress imbalance found in fringe levels and damage pattern was found at the middle of the laminate.
Cylindrical impactor did not break any fiber during impact and damage pattern also showed homogeneous stress
generation on horizontal and vertical sides (figure 7) at 1 msec. Thus cylindrical impactor worked as a punch for
laminate and caused stamping effect in the middle of the laminate was found at the end of impact.

Fig. 4: Damage at different time-steps with hemispherical headed impactor (a) 1 msec (b) 2 msec (c) 3 msec and (d) 3.5 msec

Fig. 5: Damage at different time-steps with Spherical impactor (a) 1 msec (b) 2 msec (c) 3 msec and (d) 3.5 msec
 Prashant Rawat /Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 8731–8738 8735

Fig. 6: Damage at different time-steps with oval impactor (a) 1 msec (b) 2 msec (c) 3 msec and (d) 3.5 msec

Fig. 7: Damage at different time-steps with cylindrical impactor (a) 1 msec (b) 2 msec (c) 3 msec and (d) 3.5 msec
3.2 Damage area
Rectangular damage area based on damage pattern is calculated for all cases as shown in Fig.8. Maximum
damage area of 32.50 X 37.27 mm2 observed for cylindrical impactor but no fiber breakage took place as impactor
behaviour was found as stamping effect. Minimum damage area caused by oval impactor of 19.79 X 19.94 mm2.
Damage area caused by spherical impactor (Fig.9) 22.45 X 24.98 mm2 was closed todamage area caused by
hemispherical headed impactor i.e. 22.48 X 22.52 mm2. Pyramidal fiber damage was maximum for oval shaped
impactor shown in figure 10 and no pyramidal fiber damage was seen in case of cylindrical impactor (figure 11).

Fig. 8: Rectangular damage area for hemispherical headed impactor

8736 Prashant Rawat / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 8731–8738

Fig. 9: Rectangular damage area for Spherical impactor

Fig. 10: Rectangular damage area for oval impactor

Fig. 11: Rectangular damage area for cylindrical impactor

 Prashant Rawat /Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 8731–8738 8737

Fig. 12: Impactor penetration and fiber breakage at bottom layer

3.3 Penetration Pattern

Sectional view of penetration pattern and pyramidal damage. Figure 12 showed that maximum penetration was
generated by oval shaped impactor. Figure 13 sectional view also clarified maximum penetration by oval impactor
and no fiber damage in case of cylindrical impactor. It is also clear from figure 13 that in case of spherical impactor
stress fringe was distributed throughout in damage pyramid while oval impactor has maximum stress was found at
top layers. For cylindrical impactor and hemispherical impactors maximum stress fringes were not observed in
sectional view.

Fig. 13: Sectional view for impactor penetration

8738 Prashant Rawat / Materials Today: Proceedings 4 (2017) 8731–8738

4. Conclusion
The damage behaviour symmetric GFRP laminate subjected to low velocity impact has been studied by numerical
analysis using LS-DYNA. Numerical study was done by using four different shapes of impactors (i) hemispherical
headed cylindrical impactor, (ii) spherical impactor, (iii) oval shaped impactor and (iv) cylindrical impactor.
Damage caused by indenters was examined by three parameters damage pattern at different time-steps, damage area
and penetration of impactors inside GFRP plate. Numerical analysis was performed at 23.5 J energy by using steel
impactors having diameter of 20 mm. The general findings can be summarized as follows
• Indenter with minimum contact surface i.e. oval shaped impactor caused minimum damage area of 394.62
mm2 on GFRP laminate.
• Cylindrical impactor with maximum contact area generated maximum damage area of 1211.27 mm2 on
GFRP plate.
• Oval shaped impactor caused maximum fiber breakage and the pattern was pyramidal damage in nature
while cylindrical impactor showed no fiber breakage while impact and caused stamping effect.
• Hemispherical headed impactor, spherical impactor, oval shaped impactor created penetration inside GFRP
plate but cylindrical indenter did not penetrated inside plate.

References
[1]
S. Agarwal, K. K. Singh, P. K. Sarkar, J. of comp. mat. 48 (2014) 317-332.
[2]
P. Rawat, K. K. Singh, W. online Lib.,Poly. Comp,DOI: 10.1002/pc.23573 (2015).
[3]
N. K. Singh, K. K. Singh. W. online Lib.,Poly. Comp,36 (2015) 1786-1798.
[4]
K. K. Singh, R. K. Singh, P. S. Chandel, P. Kumar, W. Int. Sci. Poly. Comp29(2008) 1378–1383.
[5]
H. Ghasemnejad, A.S.M. Furquan, P.J. Mason, Mat.& Des. 31(2010) 3653–3660.
[6]
K. K. Singh, N. K. Singh, R. Jha, Sage, J. of comp. mat, DOI: 10.1177/0021998315596594(2015).
[7]
T. Mitrevski, I.H. Marshall, R. Thomson, R. Jones, B. Whittingham, Comp. Str. 67(2005) 139–148.
[8]
Kurşun, M. Şenel, H. M. Enginsoy, E. Bayraktar, Comp. Part B: Eng. 86(2016) 143–151.
[9]
A.N. Palazotto, , E.J. Herup, L.N.B. Gummadi, Comp. Str. 49(2000) 209–227.
[10]
E. Sevkat, B. Liaw, F. Delale, Mat.& Des. 52 (2013) 67–77.