CHARACTERIZATION OF LOW VELOCITY IMPACT

INDUCED DETERIORATION IN UHMWPE PANELS USING

LAMB WAVES

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
in
Engineering Structures
by
S.V. Khonde
Roll No: 201524

Under the guidance of

Dr. T. P. Tezeswi,
Assistant Professor, NITW

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
WARANGAL-506004
June 2022

1
 APPROVAL SHEET

The dissertation entitled “Characterization of low velocity impact induced

deterioration in UHMWPE panels using lamb waves” by S. V. Khonde is
approved for the degree of Master of Technology in Engineering Structures
from the National Institute of Technology, Warangal.

Examiners

Supervisor

Dr. T. P. Tezeswi
Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering
National Institute of Technology, Warangal

Chairman (Program Coordinator)

Dr. S. Venkateswara Rao,

Associate Professor

Date: 27-06-2022
Place: Warangal

2
 DECLARATION

I declare that this written submission represents my ideas in my own words and
where others’ ideas or words have been included, I have adequately cited and
referenced the sources. I also declare that I have adhered to all principles of
academic honesty and integrity and have not misrepresented or fabricated or
falsified any idea/data/fact/source in my submission. I understand that any
violation of the above will be cause for disciplinary action by the Institute and
can also evoke penal action from the sources which have thus not been properly
cited or from whom proper permission has not been taken when needed.

Sanket.V. Khonde
Date: 27-06-2022
Place: Warangal

3
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the dissertation work entitled “Characterization of Low

Velocity Impact Induced Deterioration In UHMWPE Panels Using Lamb
Waves” is a bonafide record of the work done by S.V. KHONDE (Roll No.
201524) and submitted to the Department of Civil Engineering in partial
fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of
Technology in Engineering Structures from National Institute of Technology,
Warangal.

Dr. T.P. Tezeswi Dr. S. Venkateswara Rao

Assistant Professor,
Structures Division,
Department of Civil Engineering,
National Institute of Technology,
Warangal, Telangana – 506004
Associate Professor and Division Head
Structures Division,
Department of Civil Engineering,
National Institute of Technology,
Warangal, Telangana – 506004

4
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am highly indebted to Dr. T. P. Tezeswi, Assistant Professor, National Institute of

Technology, Warangal for his guidance and constant supervision as well as for providing
necessary information regarding the project & also for their support in completing the project.
I would also like to thank, Dr. S. Venkateswara Rao, Head of the Division, Engineering
Structures, Department of Civil Engineering, for his enlightening guidance and help rendered
in bringing out this work.
I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents & the Faculty of Civil
Engineering Department for their kind co-operation and encouragement which help me in the
completion of this project.
I am grateful to Ms. V. Sri Harika, Ph. D. Scholar. She has provided me with valuable
guidance and constant encouragement at every step throughout the progress of this project.
Working with her was a great learning experience.
My thanks and appreciations also go to my friends in developing the project and people
who have willingly helped me out with their abilities.

5
 ABSTRACT

Damage detection studies are critical in a variety of fields, including aerospace, military, and
civil engineering. The performance of a structure must be checked on a regular basis through
continuous monitoring. To avoid catastrophic and irreversible damage, it is critical to identify
damage as soon as possible. The goal of this thesis is to use Lamb waves to detect faults in
pristine UHMWPE panels. The panels are subjected to low-velocity impact for creating
damage. A three-step procedure is followed in this damage detection technique. Firstly, to
collect the virgin panel signature by Lamb wave propagation from one end to the other end,
and then perform low velocity drop impact. Lastly to collect the damage signature by Lamb
wave propagation. Comparison of the virgin signature and the damage signature are studied.
The amplitude drops and frequency shifts are observed which validates that the Lamb wave is
capable of detecting external and internal damages.

6
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ....................................................................................................2

CERTIFICATE .......................................................................................................4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .....................................................................................5

ABSTRACT ...........................................................................................................6

LIST OF FIGURES ...............................................................................................9

1. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 11

1.1 Background .................................................................................................10

1.2 Research Motivation: .................................................................................. 11

1.3 Scope and Objective: ..................................................................................12

1.4 Organization of Thesis: ...............................................................................12

2. LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................13

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................13

2.2 Summary of Literature Review..................................................................13

3. LOW VELOCITY IMPACT ............................................................................19

3.1 Summary of Test Method ............................................................................19

3.2 Significance and Use ...................................................................................19

3.3 Interferences ................................................................................................21

3.3.1 Material and Specimen Preparation: ...............................................23

3.3.2 Specimen Geometry and Impact Location .....................................24
3.3.3 Support Fixture Characteristics ......................................................25
3.3.4 Impact Device Characteristics ........................................................26
3.3.5 Force Oscillations ...........................................................................27

7
 3.3.6 Impact Variables ..............................................................................28
4. NUMERICAL MODELLING AND POSTPROCESSING ............................29

4.1 Material Properties ......................................................................................29

4.2 Lamb wave propagation through pristine panel .........................................31

4.3 Low Velocity Impact Simulation ................................................................41

5. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................50

REFERENCES.................................................................................................51

8
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Impact Device with Cylindrical Tube Impactor Guide Mechanism ..................20
Figure 2: Test Setup ................................................................................................................20
Figure 3 Representative Impactor Force versus Time History ...........................................22
Figure 4 Impactor forces versus time history with harmonic resonance ...........................23
Figure 5 Commonly observed damage modes from out of plane drop plate impactError! Bookmark not
Figure 6 Flowchart for step-by-step procedure ....................................................................32
Figure 7 Sine wave generated for 150 kHz ...........................................................................33
Figure 8 Geometry of Undamaged Model ............................................................................36
Figure 9 Step Manager ..........................................................................................................36
Figure 10 Load and Boundary Conditions ...........................................................................37
Figure 11 Hexahedral (C3D8) element Meshing of different ..............................................38
Figure 12 Mesh Sensitivity Analysis Curves .........................................................................39
Figure 13 Contour Plot of Resultant displacement magnitude (Umag) in pristine panel ..40
Figure 14: The propagation of Lamb wave in X-Z Plane of undamaged Homogeneous
model ........................................................................................................................................40
Figure 15 UHMWPE panel ....................................................................................................42
Figure 16 Hemispherical Steel Impactor ..............................................................................42
Figure 17 Material properties and Damage parameters .....................................................43
Figure 18 Low velocity Impact Assembly .............................................................................43
Figure 19 Step Manager .........................................................................................................44
Figure 20 Initial Boundary Condition of the plate ..............................................................45
Figure 21 Velocity and boundary condition provided to the impactor ..............................46
Figure 22 Contour Plot of displacement for damaged plate due to low velocity Impact .46
Figure 23 Frequency response graph - Damage Vs Undamaged ........................................48
Figure 24 Damage percentage Vs Frequency .......................................................................49

9
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Properties of a hemispherical Impactor ...................................................................................... 30

Table 2 Material Properties of UHMWPE ............................................................................................... 30
Table 3 Prony Parameters .......................................................................................................................... 30
Table 4 Johnson-Cook Damage Parameters ............................................................................................. 31

10
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Modern structures, particularly those with military uses, are more complicated and have
higher performance needs, which, combined with economical and safety constraints, make
current designs difficult to complete. To construct a safe, light structure with cheap initial and
maintenance costs, material selection, design, and safety issues must frequently be integrated.
The earliest signs of breakdown for important components should be discovered as soon as
possible, preferably at a low cost, to allow enough time for the proper repair within a
reasonable budget, ensuring the system's safety and reliability. Damage progression
monitoring also aids in the estimation of remaining life and the establishment of inspection
and maintenance intervals. SHM's damage identification procedure comprises determining
the following:
i. the existence of damage
ii. damage location
iii. types of damage
iv. damage severity.
Optical, liquid penetrant, magnetic particles, ultrasonic, and eddy current inspection
techniques are just a few of the defect identification techniques that have been developed
throughout the years. Traditional non-destructive evaluation (NDE) methods, such as
ultrasonic C-scan, thermography, or radiography, require the approximate location of damage
to be known a priori and that the inspected region be directly accessible; however, ultrasonic
wave-based non-destructive evaluation (NDE) methods, such as ultrasonic C-scan,
thermography, or radiography, require the approximate location of damage to be known a
priori and that the inspected region be directly accessible. Furthermore, these NDE
approaches may not be ideal for monitoring structures that are larger and have complex
shape. The majority of these treatments are time-consuming, costly, and necessitate special
structural treatment, such as disassembly of some elements. Furthermore, they aren't
employed to detect damage in real time in most cases. The need for real-time, low-cost
damage detection, as well as the limitations of traditional inspection techniques and
technological advancements in embedded actuators, sensors, reasoning algorithms, and life-

11
prediction methodologies, all support non-destructive evaluation methods under the heading
of Structural Health Monitoring (SHM). SHM is the continuous, autonomous in-service
monitoring of a structure by embedded or connected sensors. The process of putting a
damage detection system in place for civil, mechanical, and aerospace infrastructure is known
as structural health monitoring (SHM).
Lamb waves, a type of elastic wave that may travel long distances and is impacted by
cracks and other imperfections in a structure, have been studied for several years among
SHM approaches. As a result, the development and detection of these waves in a structure
can provide data on the level of structural degradation. This data can subsequently be utilized
to determine the system's reliability, residual strength, and/or remaining life [1].

1.1.1 Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE)

Ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMW-PE) is defined as polyethylene with a

molecular weight of 3.1 million or higher. It has outstanding abrasion resistance and an
extremely low coefficient of friction. Impact strength is high and chemical resistance is
excellent. UHMW-PE has a recommended service temperature of about 180°F. However,
UHMW-PE has a high coefficient of thermal expansion, which can cause it to dramatically
change dimensions over temperature variations. There are many fillers that can be added to
UHMW-PE to enhance its properties.

UHMWPE is high tensile strength, light weight (1/8 the weight of steel), and simple to
process. It makes an excellent lining for material handling systems and storage containers and
is the ideal material for various wear parts in machinery and equipment. UHMW PE is self-
lubricating, durable, resistant to corrosion, abrasion, and shattering, among other qualities.

1.2 Research Motivation

In actuality, there is no established way to check for damage or defects other than destructive
testing to ensure a structure's long-term viability. Furthermore, these technologies have
considerable monitoring costs. It is vital to examine the health of these plates at regular

12
intervals in order to ensure the structures' function, ability to estimate their balance life, and
reconditioning. For the purpose of identifying damage, FEA models are created and signal
processing studies are conducted to save time and money.

1.3 Aim and Objective

Aim: Characterization of low velocity impact induced deterioration in UHMWPE Panels

using lamb waves

The objectives of this work are:

• To conduct low velocity impact simulations on pristine UHMWPE panels.
• To characterize damage in the pristine panels after the impact using Lamb waves.

Scope:
In this study, the UHMWPE material is viewed as an isotropic, homogenous material. Low
velocity impact damage at the centroid of the plate is specifically used to simulate the
damage. Furthermore, a correlation between trends in the characteristics of lamb waves
before and after damage has been established.

1.4 Organization of Thesis:

The Organization of the thesis is as follows

Chapter 1: A brief introduction about various types of damage detection methods what is
structural health monitoring and its importance for ensuring safety and enhancing the life of
the structure is highlighted. The current state of the SHM research and challenges associated
with damage detection in structures. This is followed by the scope and objectives of the
research work presented in this thesis.

Chapter 2: This chapter contains the literature reviews on the application of low velocity
impact test. A literature review about the historical overview, low velocity impact modelling
in Abaqus and results obtained from the simulation are presented. From this literature review,
conclusions are made which lead to the presented thesis.

13
Chapter 3: In this chapter, low velocity impact test, its significance application and
experimental setup is presented. Moreover, damage models used for composites and its
parameters are discussed.

Chapter 4: Presents the summary of the work carried out in this thesis and also the expected
conclusions based on the theory developed.

14
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter provides a brief review of the literature on Low Velocity Impact, as well as the
experimental setup for the test. Damage models utilized in FE Software (Abaqus 6.14) for
polymer composites are also reviewed.
Selim Gurgen (2020), fabricated bulk UHMWPE specimens in a compression moulding
chamber, and moulding parameters such as pressure and temperature were varied in the
specimen preparation stage to investigate the effect of moulding parameters on the impact
performance. In addition, silicon carbide fillers were included in the UHMWPE matrix to
enhance the anti-impact properties of the specimens. From the results, high moulding
pressure provides enhanced impact resistance due to improved microstructural consolidation.
On the other hand, moulding temperature just above the melting point of polymer is much
beneficial to the anti-impact behaviour of the structures. Carbide fillers lead to an increase in
the frictional interaction between the impactor and composites and thereby enhancing the
impact resistance of the structures. However, the gain in the protective properties
performance is restricted up to a certain amount of carbide loading because at higher filler
ratios, the composites change from ductile to brittle characteristics. Hence, crack growth
susceptibility develops in the composites at excessive carbide loadings [2].

M. Karahan and K. Yildirim (2015), presented the effect of the reinforcement material type
and cross-plied condition of reinforcement were examined using high-level impact tests. The
impact tests were performed at low speed but high energy, and thus the behaviour of the
composite materials that were exposed to high-level impact energy could be examined.
According to the results, the UD aramid composite produced the best results with respect to
high-level impact tests. In addition, mass optimisation could be achieved without the loss of
the high-level impact energy by preparing a hybrid composite with UD UHMWPE and UD
aramid fibers [3].

15
Cuiyu Li, Rui Zhang et al. (2019) investigated the impact and post-impact behavior of
different layer weft plain knitted composite materials based on modified ultra-high-
molecular-weight polyethylene/epoxy composites. The modified ultra-high-molecularweight
polyethylene weft plain knitted composites with 8, 12, 16 layers were prepared by vacuum-
assisted resin transfer molding process and then subjected to impact and post-impact
compression test. The impact properties were analyzed using the contact force–deflection and
energy–time curves, and the post-impact compression was analyzed using the compression
strength–strain curves. It can be obtained that the maximum contact force, absorbed energy,
and residual compression strength after impact of the 16-layer specimen are 81.40%, 74.18%,
and 73.25% more than those in the 8-layer specimen. respectively. According to the
ultrasonic C-scan tests for the impact samples, the 16-layer specimen had the least damage
area after the impact test, and the 8-layer composites damage area was 117.45% more than
the 16-layer specimen[4].

M. Deng and S. W. Shalaby (1996), The physical properties of ultra-high-molecular-weight

polyethylene (UHMWPE) fibre/UHMWPE matrix composites is characterized. He found that
the tensile strength and modulus, and creep resistance, were significantly increased after
incorporating UHMWPE fibres into a UHMWPE matrix. The longitudinal tensile strength of
the resulting self-reinforced composite increased with fibre content, according to the law of
mixtures. The transverse strength did not change for fibre content of up to 7%. The double-
notch impact strength of the composites was higher than plain UHMWPE. There was no
difference in wear properties between the composites and plain UHMWPE. The cross-section
and tensile fracture surfaces of the composites were examined by scanning electron
microscopy (SEM). Overall results indicate that the self-reinforced UHMWPE composites
may be good candidates for load-bearing biomedical applications [5].

A.Porras, J.Tellez, and J.P.Casas-Rodriguez (2012), carried investigation on the

delamination toughness behaviour exhibited by UHMWPE composites laminated was made.
The interlaminar Mode II critical strain energy release rates of (UHMWPE) fibre reinforced
composites were characterized using the End Notch Flexural (ENF) test. Critical strain
energy release rate was obtained from the load – deflection test data using the beam theory
expression. It was found that the energy release rate of the composite exhibited a very low
value of around 60 J/m2 using a moulding pressure of approximately 1200 psi. In order to
analyse the delamination resistance of composite, the effects of changing the manufacture

16
process variables and the use of a thermoplastic adhesive film in the composites were
investigated. The composite laminates were produced by hot compressing moulding using a
film-stacking procedure. It was found that the damage resistance of the UHMWPE composite
was influenced by the manufacture method, which affects the Mode II interlaminar fracture
toughness and the ballistic response of composites [6].

M. Padhan, G. Paul and J. Bijwe (2020), presented research is based on development and
performance evaluation of ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene composites with Titania
particles in various amounts and of two sizes, including nano-size. It also included
functionalization of nanoparticles (NPs) with a siloxane group to enhance adhesion with the
matrix, which would help to reduce wear. Thus, the work had several objectives such as to
investigate the effect of size (nano vs. micro) and determine the amount that delivers the best
performance from among a series of composites with different Titania particle amounts [0–
8% in the case of micro composites (MCs) and 0–4% in the case of nanocomposites (NCs)].
It was also of interest to examine the effect of siloxane-functionalization of NPs [since they
performed significantly better than microparticles (MPs)] on the performance of NCs. It was
observed that for adhesive and erosive wear modes, both types of particles (MPs and NPs)
proved detrimental in spite of the enhanced hardness of the composites, essentially because of
the irregular shape of particles, which altered the wear mechanisms adversely. Nanoparticles
proved less detrimental, while F-NPs (functionalized NPs) proved marginally detrimental. In
abrasive wear mode, both proved beneficial, NPs being more effective than MPs, and F-NPs
proved the best. The studies revealed how the shape of particles influences the performance
of composites in various wear modes [7].

Mark K. Hazzard, et al. (2017), discussed the role of UHMWPE fibre architecture (cross-
ply, quasi-isotropic and rotational “helicoidal” layups) is considered on the damage and
deformation mechanisms arising from low velocity impacts with 150 J impact energy and
clamped boundary conditions. Dyneema® panels approximately 2.2 mm thick were impacted
with a fully instrumented hemi-spherical impactor at velocities of 3.38 m/s. Full field
deformation of the panels was captured through digital image correlation (DIC). The results
indicate that the crossply laminate [0°/90°] had the largest back face deflection, whilst quasi-
isotropic architectures restricted and reduced the central deflection by an average of 43%. In
the case of the [0°/90°] panel, the deformation mechanisms were dominated by large amounts
of in-plane shear with limited load transfer from primary fibres [8].

17
Yuan Hu, et al. (2020), The effects of hybrid woven on impact behaviour and residual
flexural stiffness of CFRPs, compared with plain carbon-fiber woven laminates, were
investigated by drop weight impact and fourpoint bending experimental tests, together with
finite element analysis (FEA). Indentation measurement and X-ray tomography, together with
Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) were employed for a comprehensive inspection of
external and internal damage of specimens subjected to impact previously. A significant
increment of 71.43% in penetration energy revealed the lower sensitivity of hybrid laminates
to impact events in comparison with the pure carbon fiber reinforced ones, while post-impact
flexural tests demonstrated that two-dimensional hybrid weavingwas capable of bringing
about a promotion of 10.1% in damage tolerance. The suppressionmechanism of damage
propagation in impact test, which lead to an enhancement in damage tolerance and structural
integrity, is explained [9].

Logesh Shanmugam et al. (2020), suggested that the interfacial bonding strength between
UHMWPE fibers and MMA thermoplastic matrix is improved by a simple deposition of
polydopamine (PDA) surface treatment (on the fiber surface) with the addition of 0.03 wt%
of functionalized multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT). Experimental investigations
were carried out to determine the low-velocity impact behavior on the pristine and PDA
surface-treated thermoplastic composites at three different impact energies of 26 J, 32 J, and
50 J. The results after the impact test revealed that PDA and PDA with MWCNT fiber
surface-treated composites offer less structural damage, thanks to the improved delamination
resistance at the fiber and matrix interface when compared to that of the pristine composite at
all different impact energies [10].

2.2Summary of literature review

All the literature studies discusses about the strength characteristics of UHMWPE combined
with other materials Irrespective of the material the failures usually observed in a fibre
reinforced composites are fiber tension, fiber compression, matrix tension, and matrix
compression which are characterized as Hashin damage failure criteria. Damage
characterization of UHMWPE panels is not discussed using Lamb waves. Damage
characterization of UHMWPE panels is not discussed using Lamb waves. Detection and
quantification of damage and deterioration in panels exposed to hygrothermal environment
using Lamb waves is not observed.

18
 CHAPTER 3

LOW VELOCITY IMPACT

3.1 Low velocity impact

Bullet resistant jackets and hard armour panel inserts, which are utilised in the military,
security, and defence sectors to absorb impact and lessen or halt bullet penetration, are made
from two or more distinct composite materials. For example, ceramic, HDPE, and
UHMWPE. When it is employed in combat circumstances on the battlefield, they are
subjected to low velocity impact since inadvertent impact on hard surfaces is inevitable.

The effects of low-velocity impact damage on the tensile or compressive strength of

composite laminates have been the subject of extensive investigation. These studies focused
on the properties of the resin and fibre that affected damage tolerance, determined laminate
failure modes, and created strategies to increase damage tolerance. To determine how
susceptible they were to damage, a composite panel was fabricated and struck with a metal
sphere.

Low-velocity impact events can occur on composite applications, such as the inserts for hard
armour panels. These HAP inserts could unintentionally strike a hard surface. The impactor
typically has a reasonably high mass but a low velocity, as in tool-dropping situations. The
impact results show the importance of delamination during the damage initiation, which takes
place at few interfaces. Delaminations, which are difficult to see with ordinary naked eye
inspections, are the most common type of damage created in such situations. The residual
compressive strength of the structure, maybe even below the limit load for which it was
initially built, may be seriously compromised by the spread of these delamination over large
portions of the structure. Therefore, it is crucial for those working in the security and defence
industries to be able to foresee the impact damage that will come from impact events that are
expected to occur.

19
Due to the lack of a standardized test for long fiber composites, early research efforts to
define impact behavior of advanced composites were uneven. The challenge has been
rectified thanks to a new set of standardized tests (ASTM D7136 and D7137) that assess the
impact tolerance of fiber reinforced polymer matrix composites, allowing companies to
compare and enhance their products. The official standard for performing a low velocity
impact test on a fiber reinforced polymer matrix composite is ASTM D7136, which explains
how to strike an advanced composite sample with a known energy and then analyze the
damage. The ASTM D7137 standard is used to determine how the composite's compressive
strength has changed after the D7136 test. The D7136 test necessitates the use of a number of
critical pieces of apparatus and equipment. A low velocity impact drop tower, such as the one
donated for the project illustrated in Figure 1, with its diagram representation in Figure 2, is
the most important piece of equipment required. An additional impactor weight (Figure 1), a
striker tip (Figure 2), a sample clamping mechanism, and several hand-held measuring
equipment are also required. If the tester needs more information for analysis, velocity
detectors and force indicators are available as options.

Figure 1: Impact Device with Cylindrical Tube

Figure 2: Test Setup Impactor Guide Mechanism

20
3.1 Summary of Test Method

With a balanced, symmetric laminated plate, a drop-weight impact test is done. A drop weight
with a hemispherical striker tip is used to deliver damage that is out-of-plane and
concentrated (perpendicular to the laminated plate's plane). The damage resistance is
measured by the size and type of damage that the specimen sustains as a result of the harm.
The damage response is determined by the test configuration; hence, no comparisons between
materials can be done unless similar test configurations, test circumstances, and other factors
are employed.
There are optional ways for measuring impact velocity and applied contact force versus time
history data. The preferred impact damage states are in the centre of the plate, far enough
away from the plate edges that the local stress states at the edges and at the impact position
do not interact during the damage generation event.

3.2 Significance and Use

One of the key design problems of many advanced composite laminate constructions is their
susceptibility to damage from concentrated out-of-plane impact forces. Product development
and material selection benefit from knowledge of a laminated composite plate's damage
resistance qualities.

Drop-weight impact testing can serve the following purposes:

− To establish quantitatively the effects of stacking sequence, fiber surface treatment,

variations in fiber volume fraction, and processing and environmental variables on the
damage resistance of a particular composite laminate to a concentrated drop-weight
impact force or energy.

− To compare quantitatively the relative values of the damage resistance parameters for
composite materials with different constituents. The damage response parameters can
include dent depth, damage dimensions, and through-thickness locations, F1, Fmax, E1
and Emax, as well as the force versus time curve.

21
 Figure 3 Representative Impactor Force versus Time History

The standard impactor geometry has a blunt, hemispherical striker tip. Historically, for the
standard laminate configuration and impact energy, this impactor geometry has generated a
larger amount of internal damage for a given amount of external damage, when compared
with that observed for similar impacts using sharp striker tips. Alternative impactors may be
appropriate depending upon the damage resistance characteristics being examined. For
example, the use of sharp striker tip geometries may be appropriate for certain damage
visibility and penetration resistance assessments. The standard test utilizes a constant impact
energy normalized by specimen thickness, as defined in 11.7.1. Some testing organizations
may desire to use this test method in conjunction with D7137/D7137M to assess the
compressive residual strength of specimens containing a specific damage state, such as a
defined dent depth, damage geometry, and so forth. In this case, the testing organization
should subject several specimens, or a large panel, to multiple low velocity impacts at various
impact energy levels using this test method. A relationship between impact energy and the
desired damage parameter can then be developed. Subsequent drop weight impact and
compressive residual strength tests can then be
performed using specimens impacted at an interpolated energy level that is expected to
produce the desired damage state.

22
 Figure 4 Impactor forces versus time history with harmonic resonance

3.3 Interferences

The response of a laminated plate specimen to out of plane drop-weight impact is dependent
upon many factors, such as laminate thickness, ply thickness, stacking sequence,
environment, geometry, impactor mass, striker tip geometry, impact velocity, impact energy,
and boundary conditions. Consequently, comparisons cannot be made between materials
identical test configurations, test conditions, and laminate are used. Therefore, all deviations
from the test configuration shall be reported in the results.
3.3.1 Material and Specimen Preparation -
Poor material fabrication practices, lack of control of fiber alignment, and damage induced by
improper specimen machining are known causes of high material data scatter in composites
in general. Important aspects of plate specimen preparation that contribute to data scatter
include thickness variation, out-of-plane curvature, surface roughness, and failure to maintain
the dimensions specified.
3.3.2 Specimen Geometry and Impact Location -
The size, shape, thickness, and stacking sequence of the plate, along with the impact location,
can affect the impact deformation and damage formation behavior of the specimens

23
significantly. The degree of laminate orthotropy can strongly affect the damage formation.
Results can be affected if the impact force is not applied perpendicular to the plane of the
laminated plate.

3.3.3 Raise Impactor

Position the impactor at the calculated drop height.
3.3.4 Impact
Drop the impactor to impact the specimen once without a rebound impact. Some impact
devices may utilize mechanisms to automatically prevent rebound hits. If such equipment is
unavailable, this may be done by sliding a piece of rigid material (wood, metal, and so forth)
between the impactor and specimen, after the impactor rebounds from the specimen surface
after impact.
3.3.5 Data Recording
If instrumentation is utilized, record force versus time data during contact continuously or at
frequent regular intervals; for this test method, a sampling rate of 100 kHz and a target
minimum of 100 data points per test are recommended. Record the time at which the velocity
indicator light beam is interrupted by each of the flag prongs.

Examples of recorded contact force versus time curves are shown in Figs. 12 and 13. The
onset of specimen impactor contact is noted by the detection of a non-zero contact force. As
the impactor presses into the specimen, it will flex the specimen and form a local depression
as the contact force increases. Sharp drops in recorded contact force indicate damage
processes that result in a sudden loss of stiffness in the contact region.

Rapid increases and decreases in recorded contact force response with time, shown in Fig. 10,
can result from harmonic resonance of the impactor, load cell or specimen during the impact
event. Significant resonance can make determination of the F1 force and E1 energy difficult.
For material forms such as plastics, post-test digital smoothing is often utilized to understand
the effective peak force and absorbed energy in such instances. For composite materials,
however, the oscillations in the force response most often reflect actual forces applied to the
specimen and should not be smoothed out. The use of digital post-processing can also
“smooth out” sharp drops in the impact response curve. If smoothing is used in data

24
interpretation, both the recorded data and the post-processed “smoothed” data shall be
reported, along with a description of the post-processing algorithm.
Parameters which can be determined from the contact force versus time curve(s) after the test
include the F1 force (recorded contact force at which the force versus time curve has a
discontinuity in force or slope), the maximum contact force Fmax, absorbed energy E1 (at F1
force), absorbed energy Emax (at maximum contact force), and contact duration tT.
3.3.6 Dent Depth
Residual depth of the depression formed by an impactor after the impact event. The dent
depth
shall be defined as the maximum distance in a direction normal to the face of the specimen
from the lowest point in the dent to the plane of the impacted surface that is undisturbed by
the
dent. Measure the dent depth, as defined, using a suitable dent depth indicator. The dent shall
be measured immediately after the specimen is impacted. If distances are measured relative to
a fixed point, the dent depth will be the difference between the lowest point in the dent and
the plate surface. The distance to the plane of the specimen’s surface shall be the average of
four measurements spaced 90° apart and at least 25 mm from the impact point to provide a
sufficient distance away from the dent to not influence the measurement. If the depth is
measured directly using a depth gage, the depth shall be the average of two measurements
with the gage rotated 90° between measurements. The base of the depth gage shall be at least
50 mm and sufficiently large to span over the region affected by the dent. These requirements
also apply if the depth is measured using a tripod-mounted depth gage (one which bases its
reference surface on a micrometer holder that touches the surface at three points on a
prescribed diameter). The dent depth shall be measured to the nearest 0.03 mm.
3..3.7 Dent Relaxation
Over time, or under environmental exposure, the dent depth may decrease due to relaxation
of the composite material. If information on short term dent relaxation is desired, measure the
dent depth 7 days after impacting. Record the dent depth, the time duration after impacting
that the measurement was taken, and the environmental conditions prior to measurement.
3.3.8 Non-Destructive Inspection
Evaluate the extent of damage caused by the impact event using non-destructive inspection
(NDI) techniques. Utilize NDI methods, specifications, and parameters consistent with those
used to evaluate the specimen prior to impact. Record the methods, specifications, and
parameters used in the NDI evaluations.

25
Measure and record geometric dimensions for the detected damage, using a suitable
instrument as defined. Determine locations of the eight indicated points relative to the center
of the specimen. Also determine the damage width, damage length, and maximum damage
diameter. Alternative measurement locations may be required to characterize the extent of
damage for non-standard layups or fiber orientations, or both. Alternatively, automated
algorithms may be used to define the extent of damage and to calculate the two-dimensional
damage area using digital NDI data.

Record the damage modes observed for each specimen, and the surfaces and locations at
which the damage modes are observed. More than one damage mode may be present in a
damaged specimen. Fig. 14 illustrates commonly observed damage modes.

3.4 Calculation
3.4.1 Impact Velocity
If the impact device is capable of detecting the velocity of the impactor, calculate the impact
velocity using Eq 4 and report the results to three significant figures. This calculation is
performed automatically by most systems with velocity detection capability, but may be
performed manually using the indicated timing data if necessary.

𝑾𝟏𝟐 (𝒕𝟏 +𝒕𝟐 )

vi = 𝒕 + 𝒈[𝒕𝒊 − ] (4)
𝟐 − 𝒕𝟏 𝟐

Where:
vi = impact velocity, m/s [in./s],
W12 = distance between leading edges of the first (lower) and second (upper) flag prongs,
(m),
t1 = time first (lower) flag prong passes detector,
t2 = time second (upper) flag prong passes detector, and
ti = time of initial contact obtained from force versus time curve, sec.
3.4.2 Measured Impact Energy
If the impact device is capable of detecting the velocity of the impactor, calculate the actual
impact energy using Eq 5 and report the results to three significant figures. This calculation is
performed automatically by most systems with velocity detection capability, but may be

26
performed manually if necessary. The measured impact energy may differ from the nominal
impact energy calculated in 3.4.4.1due to friction losses during the drop.
𝒎𝒗𝟐 𝒊
𝑬𝒊 (5)
𝟐

Where:
Ei = measured impact energy, J, and
m = mass of impactor, kg

3.4.3 Velocity versus Time

If the impact device is monitoring contact force, generate a curve of nominal velocity versus
time using Eq (9) and numerical integration of the force versus time data. A positive velocity
value represents downward motion. Common numerical integration algorithms used in this
application include the trapezoidal rule and Simpson’s rule (2 and 3 point Newton-Cotes
formulas, respectively. The time step of the numerical integration must be equal to the time
step (inverse of the frequency) of data sampling.

𝒕 𝑭(𝒕)
𝒗(𝒕) = 𝒗𝒊 + 𝒈𝒕 − ∫𝟎 𝒅𝒕 (9)
𝒎

Where:
v = impactor velocity at time t, m/s,
t = time during test, in which t = 0 is the time when the impactor initially contacts the
specimen, sec, and
F = measured impactor contact force at time t, N

3.4.4 Impactor Displacement versus Time

If the impact device is monitoring contact force, generate a curve of impactor displacement
versus time using Eq (10) and numerical integration of the force versus time data. A positive
displacement value represents downward displacement from the drop height.
𝑔𝑡 2 𝑡 𝑡 𝐹(𝑡)
𝛿(𝑡) = 𝛿𝑖 + 𝑣𝑖 𝑡 + ∫0 (∫0 𝑑𝑡) 𝑑𝑡 (10)
2 𝑚

Where:
𝛿 = impactor displacement at time t, m [in.], and
𝛿 i = impactor displacement from reference location at time t = 0, m

27
3.4.5 Absorbed Energy versus Time
If the impact device is monitoring contact force, generate a curve of energy absorbed by the
specimen versus time using Eq (11).
𝑚(𝑣𝑖2 −𝑣(𝑡)2 )
𝐸𝑎 (𝑡) = + 𝑚𝑔𝛿(𝑡) (11)
2

Where:
Ea = absorbed energy at time t, (J)

28
 CHAPTER 4

NUMERICAL MODELLING AND POSTPROCESSING

Introduction

An isotropic UHMWPE composite panel is taken into consideration for the analysis in this
chapter. Three steps make up the complete modelling and result extraction process.
Unharmed UHMWPE composite sheet panel is modelled in the first stage. This panel was
given material characteristics such an elastic modulus and a density. Additionally, DMA
analysis was used to establish the model's viscoelastic properties, which were then applied.
The Lamb waves were permitted to pass through the undamaged panel. Time-series data of a
range of frequencies which are to be considered as input (exciting force), also plots of the
maximum amplitude vs frequency were recorded.

Low velocity impact simulations have been used in the second step. A UHMWPE panel and a
spherical impactor both are modelled, and an impactor with a known mass is intended to fall
from a specific height and do damage to a completely unscathed panel.

In the final phase, the Lamb wave is allowed to travel through the damaged UHMWPE panel.
The maximum amplitude vs. frequency signatures were further recorded and contrasted with
all those obtained from the unharmed panel, out of which conclusions can be extracted.

4.1 Material Properties

UHMWPE panel consists of several physical and chemical characteristics. To obtain a

realistic simulation in finite element modeling, certain attributes must be given to the material
being modeled. The Johnson-Cook damage model is used to include damage into the
UHMWPE plate. The material factors taken into account for these simulations are modulus of
elasticity, density, viscoelastic parameters such as the Prony series, and others. The
viscoelastic properties can be assigned by providing Prony parameters which are derived

29
from the dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA). The following table lists the material
characteristics utilized to make the plate and impactor.
Table 1 Properties of a hemispherical Impactor

Parameter Symbol Value Unit

Density ρ 7.8 x 10-9 Tonne/mm3
Young’s modulus E 2 x 105 N/mm2
Weight w 5.29 x 10-3 Tonne

Table 2 Material Properties of UHMWPE

Parameter Symbol Value Unit

Density ρ 9.3 x 10-10 tonne/mm3
Young’s modulus E 7527 N/mm2
Poisson’s ratio ν 0.46 -

The UHMWPE material is subjected to a dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA), and a

significant amount of data, including storage modulus and loss modulus, were collected. By
using the curve fitting approach, this data is used to obtain Prony Series parameters.
Table 3 Prony Parameters

Gi Ki i
0.0275 0 16.33
0.0376 0 -0.1752

4.1.1Johnson–Cook Failure Model

The failure of material occurs due to strength degradation, strain energy dissipation, loading,
and thermal and mechanical effects Johnson-Cook proposed a failure model using strain rate
and temperature, which affect the fracture strain. These parameters/variables are an integral
part of their proposed model. The Johnson–Cook failure model has a damage parameter D.
𝜺𝒑
𝑫= 𝒇 (12)
𝜺𝒊

𝑡
Where, 𝜀𝑝 = ∫𝑡=0 𝜀̇𝑝 𝑑𝑡 with fracture strain given as follows:

30
 𝜺𝒑 = (𝑫𝟏 + 𝑫𝟐 𝐞𝐱𝐩 (𝑫𝟑 𝝈∗ ))(𝟏 + 𝑫𝟒 𝐥𝐧 𝜺′𝒑 )(𝟏 + 𝑫𝟓 𝑻′) (13)

Where σ* is the stress triaxiality, which is σ* = σh/σe, σh is hydrostatic stress, and σe is

effective stress, while D1, D2, D3, D4, and D5 are the damage parameters of the material under
consideration. D1, D2, and D3 are determined from the curve fitting of equivalent plastic
strain plotted against the stress triaxiality. Similarly, D4 and D5 are determined from the curve
fitting of equivalent plastic strain plotted against the strain rate and temperature, respectively.
The Johnson-Cook damage parameters used for the simulations are given in the following
table.

Table 4 Johnson-Cook Damage Parameters

Johnson-Cook D1 D2 D3 D4 D5
fracture model 0.059 0.246 2.41 0.05 0
Parameters

4.2 Lamb wave propagation through pristine panel (Step-1)

A step-by-step procedure of Lamb wave propagation through pristine panel

1. Generating Time-series data of a range of frequencies which are to be considered

as input (exciting force).
2. FEA modelling of plate employing Abaqus 6.14 software. Modelling includes
dimensions of the plate, material properties, mesh properties, boundary
conditions, damage modelling.
3. Output time-series data were obtained for the undamaged plate.
4. The time-series data of all the frequencies are converted to the frequency domain
and signatures recorded in the form of frequency Vs. Maximum displacement
(Amplitude) graphs.

31
The following flowchart represents the procedure

Generating Time-series data

FEA modelling of plate employing Abaqus

6.14

frequency vs Maximum amplitude graph

for undamaged plate

Figure 5 Flowchart for step-by-step procedure

4.2.1 Generating Time Series Data:

A time Vs amplitude sine series data is generated for a range of frequencies using the
following wave equation

𝐲(𝐭) = 𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝛚𝐭)

Where, a - Amplitude of the wave

f - Natural Frequency
ω - Angular frequency = 2πf
The time step is generally considered as 1/f. This series of data is given as an input excitation
force where the output generated also appears to be a time series which is converted to
frequency domain for further analysis

32
 Sine wave
1.5

1
Amplitude in Volts

0.5

0
0 1E-08 2E-08 3E-08 4E-08 5E-08
-0.5

-1

-1.5
Time in Seconds

Figure 6 Sine wave generated for 150 kHz

4.2.2 FEA Modelling of Plate

For Simulation in Abaqus, the following tasks to be performed:
➢ Create the three-dimensional geometry and sketch a part representing the model.
➢ Define the material properties and also model section properties.
➢ Generate the Assembly of the model.
➢ Configure the analysis and output requests.
➢ Applying the load and boundary conditions to the model.
➢ Meshing of the model.
➢ Create a job and submit it for analysis and view the results of the analysis.
Abaqus has NO in-built system of units. All input data must be specified in consistent units.
All dimensions are in mm used for this simulation.

33
 Creating a part

Creating a material

Defining and assigning section

properties

Defining the assembly

Configuring your analysis

Applying boundary conditions

and loads to the model

Meshing

Creating an analysis job

Running the analysis

Post processing with Abaqus/CAE

i. Generating solution contours.
ii. Generating report of Field Outputs

4.2.3 Mesh Sensitivity Analysis:

A mesh sensitivity analysis was performed before the main analysis of the model. The
mesh size of the model or shape of the mesh was changed and the output plots were observed
for a particular frequency. This analysis is vital for assigning the optimal mesh size or shape
for the model so that the best results can be obtained for the analysis. The mesh analysis can
be carried out for tetrahedral mesh or hexahedral mesh to obtain the best results. A larger
mesh size produces a plot that is very crude and incomprehensible. As the mesh size is
reduced, plots with an appreciable amount of precision were observed which can account for

34
displacement values over very short time durations. Though smaller mesh size means large
amounts of data and longer tables, it is always preferred over large mesh size as it reduces the
probability of any error.

4.2.4 Simulation Studies - Numerical Investigation:

A numerical model developed employing Abaqus 6.14, has been used to simulate the
propagation of Lamb waves in an Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene material. The
model can be generated using several MODULES like Part, Property, Assembly, Step,
Interaction, Load, Mesh, Optimization, Job, Visualization, Sketch.

4.2.5 Undamaged Model:

We have considered a solid homogeneous, isotropic material. The Dimensions of the plate are
245x290x20 mm as shown in Figure 7. The Rectangular panel is made of Ultra High
Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) and it is assumed to be Visco-elastic material.
The material properties utilized for the simulations are discussed above.

A transmitter is placed at one end and a receiver is placed at the other end of the plate; the
nodes are highlighted in the figure. The exciter is located at the centre of an edge face and the
sensor is at the centre of a longitudinally opposite face. The boundary conditions of the plate
are four of the corners of the plate are restrained against displacement along all three
coordinate axes. A range of frequencies (varying from 10-250 kHz in increments of 10kHz)
with an amplitude of 1V are used to generate sine waves which are applied at the transmitter
to verify the spatial displacement for both damaged and undamaged sections. The sine wave
data was generated using Microsoft Excel where SIN() functions are used.

35
 Figure 7 Geometry of Undamaged Model

For each frequency sine wave, a time period of 0.002 seconds is considered. Dynamic,
Explicit procedure is used for the analysis.

Figure 8 Step Manager

36
 Fixed Corner

Excitation
force

Figure 9 Load and Boundary Conditions

4.2.5 Wave velocity and wave length

Using material elastic properties mentioned in table 2 wave velocity and wave length are
computed.

7.5 ∗ 109
𝜇= = 2.57 ∗ 109
2(1 + 0.46)
2.57 ∗ 109 ∗ (7.5 ∗ 109 − 2 ∗ 2.57 ∗ 109 )
𝜆= = 2.95 ∗ 1010
(1 − 2 ∗ 0.46)(1 + 0.46)

𝜇
𝑐𝑆 = √
𝜌

2.57 ∗ 109
𝑐𝑆 = √
(930 ∗ 9.81)

𝑐𝑆 = 0. .536𝑘𝑚/𝑠

37
 𝜆 + 2𝜇
𝑐𝐿 = √
𝜌

12.95 ∗ 1010 + 2 ∗ 2.57 ∗ 109

𝑐𝐿 = √
(930 ∗ 9.81)

𝑐𝐿 = 1.94𝑘𝑚/𝑠
𝑐𝑆
𝑤𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ(𝜆) =
𝑓

530.62 − 𝑐 2 2
tanh {𝜋 ∗ 150000 ∗ 0.02 ∗ √ } 𝑐2
530.62 ∗ 𝑐 2 (2 − )
530.62
=
1949.52 − 𝑐 2 2 2
tanh {𝜋 ∗ 150000 ∗ 0.02 ∗ √ } 4
√(1 − 𝑐2 𝑐2
1949.52 ∗ 𝑐 2 ) ∗ (1 − )
1949.52 530.62

By solving above equation using trial and error method, we obtain c=2190.67 m/sec
𝑓 150000
and wave length = 𝑐 = 490.70
= 0.00327m = 3.2mm

The wavelength observed at 150KHz is equal to 3.2mm. further investigation on mesh

convergence is carried out considering the wave length,

4.2.6 Mesh Analysis:

By reducing element size, we can see more accuracy in the output but it takes more time for
computation. So, some trails are made with an element type of Hexahedral (C3D8) with a
size of 2, 5, 7.5, 10 (all are in mm), and optimum size is selected which takes a small run time
and also generates minimum error output.

Figure 10 Hexahedral (C3D8) element Meshing of different

38
 Mesh studies
3.50E-04
Mesh size 2mm
3.00E-04

2.50E-04
Amplitude

2.00E-04
Mesh size 5mm
1.50E-04

1.00E-04 Mesh size 7.5mm

5.00E-05
Mesh size 10mm

0.00E+00
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
Frequency (KHz)
Amplitude - 2mm Amplitude - 5mm
Amplitude - 7.5mm Amplitude - 10mm
Figure 11 Mesh Sensitivity Analysis Curves

Figure 12 represents the graph of Mesh element size Vs Maximum Amplitude at frequency
range of 30 - 150 kHz. From the above mesh sensitivity curve, convergence is not observed.
As the wavelength is 3mm, the convergence can be seen below 2mm which is a computation
time challenge. Further analysis is carried out considered with 5mm mesh size to reduce the
computation time.

4.2.7 Post Processing

Output is generated at the receiver sensor where the time-displacement series corresponding
to each frequency is collected for all three coordinate axes (U1, U2, and U3 represent
displacement in X, Y, and Z directions respectively) and also the resultant of these axes U
magnitude is derived. The maximum displacement of each time series data is stored which
represents the amplitude of that particular frequency. These Amplitude data and respective
frequencies are plotted to draw a Frequency response graph of the undamaged plate. Each

39
analysis takes approximately1.5 hours on a workstation with 92GB RAM 24 core and 4TB
memory.

Figure 12 Contour Plot of Resultant displacement magnitude (Umag) in pristine panel

Figure 13: The propagation of Lamb wave in X-Z Plane of undamaged Homogeneous
model

40
4.3 Low Velocity Impact Simulation (Step-2)

Impact damage models have traditionally relied on either mathematical calculations or a large
amount of experimental data. On one hand, analytical estimates of composite laminate impact
damage resistance and tolerance are unduly simplified and erroneous. Testing each promising
concept, on the other hand, is time consuming and costly. Virtual testing of laminates using
nonlinear finite element calculations can be used to replace most of the actual impact testing.
Progressive failure analyses can be a useful technique in accurately predicting impact damage
resistance of composites once the dynamics of the impact phenomena and the damage
mechanisms are correctly predicted.

A reliable virtual tool for numerical simulation of low velocity impact damage on UHMWPE
composite isotropic panels is proposed in this study. To incorporate viscoelastic
characteristics in a composite panel, the Prony series material parameters are used.
Furthermore, a Johnson-Cook damage model is implemented in a numerical method as a user
subroutine of the commercially available Abaqus 6.14 finite element software for the
simulation of damage phenomenon.

A step-by-step procedure of low velocity impact simulation

➢ Create the three-dimensional geometry and sketch a part representing the plate and a
hemispherical impactor.
➢ Define the material properties, damage characteristics and also model section properties.
➢ Generate the Assembly of the model.
➢ Configure the analysis and output requests.
➢ Applying the load and boundary conditions to the model.
➢ Meshing of the model.
➢ Create a job and submit it for analysis and view the results of the analysis.

41
4.3.1 Modelling
The FE models simulate, in the way shown in Figure, the geometry and boundary conditions
defined by the ASTM D7136 test standard. UHMWPE test specimen of 245 x 290 mm2 are
fixed between four supports. The UHMWPE isotropic sheet of 20 mm thickness is taken into
the consideration. In the simulations, the support is considered perfectly rigid, fixed, and in
hard contact with the specimen.

Figure 14 UHMWPE panel

The hemispherical impactor is modelled as a rigid body with a lumped mass equal to 5.29 kg
the one used in the experiments. It has a spherically-shaped impact surface with a diameter of
32mm. An initial velocity of 2426.10 mm/sec in the vertical direction is prescribed to the
impactor, simulating the impact velocity measured during the tests.

Figure 15 Hemispherical Steel Impactor

42
4.3.2 Property Definition
The model is given the material characteristics for an impactor and a UHMWPE panel,
including their densities and young ’s modulus of elasticity. The Johnson-Cook damage
model is also assigned to incorporate damage into the panel and also because the plate is
considered to be viscoelastic, the Prony parameters which are derived from dynamic
mechanical analysis are also used.

Figure 16 Material properties and Damage parameters

4.3.3 Assembly
The model sketched in part module which is plate and an impactor are two individual models
these models are needs to be assembled as the centroid of the UHMWPE composite panel is
supposed to be damaged by the impactor. In order to obtain the required simulations, it is
assembled using the assembly module provided in the Abaqus cae 6.14 package.

Figure 17 Low velocity Impact Assembly

43
4.3.4 Step
Analysis should now be set up as assembly is built. We are interested in the dynamic
behaviour of the plate following a low velocity impact from the impactor in this simulation.
As a result, the simulation just requires one analysis step. Consequently, there will be two
stages in total for the model:
• Applying boundary conditions to the frame's ends as a first step to constrain its ends.

• An analytical stage when a concentrated load is applied to the plates midspan.

The first step is automatically generated by Abaqus/CAE; however, the analysis step must be
created. Additionally, output for any analysis step can be requested.
A time window of 0.002 seconds is taken into account for the entire analysis. The analysis is
conducted using a dynamic, explicit procedure.

Figure 18 Step Manager

4.3.5 Interaction Between Surfaces

Two components make up the interaction between contacting surfaces: one that is normal to
the surfaces and one that is tangential to the surfaces. In our case we need to set contact
properties between impactor and plate. The surfaces' relative motion (sliding), as well as
potential frictional shear pressures, make up the tangential component. Every contact
interaction has a contact attribute associated with it that describes a model for the interaction
of the contacting surfaces. Abaqus offers a number of contact interaction models; the analysis
uses the frictionless contact with no bonding model by default. Interaction models available

44
in Abaqus; the default model is frictionless contact with no bonding. We have selected a
general contact in which normal behaviour as a default is selected. In tangential behaviour
frictionless is opted. Furthermore, two surfaces are specified which were interacting with
each other.
Now that the interaction has been created, we can configure CAE to save results associated
with the contact to the output database.

4.3.6 Boundary Conditions

Giving the model boundary and initial conditions is the following step. The plate needs to be
restrained in all three directions. For this reason, even though rotation is permitted, the four
corners of the plate should be secured against displacement in any of the three directions.

Figure 19 Initial Boundary Condition of the plate

45
 Figure 20 Velocity and boundary condition provided to the impactor

4.3.7 Post Processing

When a UHMWPE plate is hit with a hemispherical impactor at a low velocity, the plate
incorporates damage. The plate experiences a certain degree of displacement and strains as a
result of the impact from the impactor. These stresses and displacements are analyzed.

Figure 21 Contour Plot of displacement for damaged plate due to low velocity Impact

46
4.4 Lamb wave propagation through damaged panel (Step-3)

A transmitter is placed at one end and a receiver is placed at the other end of the damaged
plate; the nodes are highlighted in the figure. The exciter is located at the centre of an edge
face and the sensor is at the centre of a longitudinally opposite face. The boundary conditions
of the plate are four of the corners of the plate are restrained against displacement along all
three coordinate axes. A range of frequencies (varying from 10-250 kHz in increments of
10kHz) with an amplitude of 1V are used to generate sine waves which are applied at the
transmitter to verify the spatial displacement for both damaged and undamaged sections. The
sine wave data was generated using Microsoft Excel where SIN() functions are used. The
amplitude variations is captured and compared with the virgin plate and the conclusions
drawn.

Figure 22 Contours formed due to Lamb wave propagation after low velocity impact

47
4.6 Comparisons:

Frequency response graph - Damage Vs Undamaged

2.00E-04

1.80E-04 Amplitude without

damage
1.60E-04

1.40E-04

1.20E-04
Axmplitude

1.00E-04

8.00E-05

6.00E-05

4.00E-05

2.00E-05

0.00E+00
0 50 100 150 200 250
Frequency (KHz)
Figure 23 Frequency response graph - Damage Vs Undamaged

Figure 23 shows the comparison plot of the undamaged model with damaged plate. From
10KHz to 40KHz the amplitude appears to be same for both damaged plate and undamaged
plate. It is proposed that the diffraction of the Lamb waves around the obstacle with
dimensions of the order of the wavelength is the cause. Also, we can say that there is
reduction in amplitudes after the damage.

The percentage of damage detected by the drop in amplitude and percentage damage Vs
frequency graph is plotted.

48
 Percentage of damage at each frequency
16.00%

14.00%
Percentage of damage

12.00%

10.00%
Damage…
8.00%

6.00%

4.00%

2.00%

0.00%
0 50 100 150 200 250
Frequency (KHz)
Figure 24 Damage percentage Vs Frequency

Summary
The numerical investigation carried out in this chapter indicates that the proposed method of
damage detection using lamb waves is effective. the simulations are carried out for both
undamaged and damaged plate and by comparing the response data, it can be concluded that
the proposed approach can confirm the presence of damage.

49
 CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSIONS
5.1 Discussions
The objective of the work presented in this thesis is to simulate and establish the damage
detection technique using Lamb waves. An extensive simulation study was carried out on
Low Velocity Impact induced damage. The results obtained were presented in chapter 3.
The damage diagnosis technique has been developed by modelling a rectangular plate
with a thickness of 20mm. The damage deterioration is induced in a plate by performing low
velocity impact simulation.
Parameter studies are performed to confirm the optimum mesh size and element type for
analysis. Hexahedral elements (C3D8) and Tetrahedral elements (C3D6) are compared
considering undamaged plate, where tetrahedral elements are found to be more suitable for
geometric representation of circular type of damages, and hexahedral elements are suited for
plate. A 5mm hexahedral mesh is considered for modelling both damaged and undamaged
plates.
There is a significant change in output signals derived from the damaged and undamaged
models. Frequency shifts and amplitude drops are seen in the damaged model signal when
compared with the virgin plate (an undamaged). Thus, the ability to detect damage magnitude
in simulated plates using Lamb waves is confirmed.

5.2 Significant research contributions

The Proposed method enables detection of damage magnitude by observing signal
pattern when compared to that of a healthy panel.

5.3 Suggestions for future research

The following issues can be addressed in future research work.
i. As the present work relates to damage detection it can be further extended to
quantifying the damage.
ii. Location of damage using Lamb waves can be identified.
iii. Realistic material properties including the effects of anisotropy, visco-elasticity and
damage modelling.

50
 REFERENCES

1. Faeez A. Masurkar and Nitesh P. Yelve, Lamb Wave Based Experimental and
Finite Element Simulation Studies for Damage Detection in an Aluminium and a
Composite Plate using Geodesic Algorithm, International Journal of Acoustics and
Vibration, Vol. 22, 1-2, (2017).
2. Lamb, H. (1917) “On waves in an elastic plate” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A,
93(648),114-128.
3. Doktoringenieur, Numerical Simulations of Lamb Waves in Plates Using a Semi-
Analytical Finite Element Method, 2011,4-8
4. Worlton, D.C. (1957), “Ultrasonic Testing with Lamb Waves”, Nondestructive Testing,
15:218 222.
5. Torvik, P.J. (1967), “Reflection of wave trains in semi infinite plates”, J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. (1967), 99(4), pp. 346-353.
6. Seth S. Kessler,S. Mark Spearing,Damage Detection in Composite Materials Using
Lamb Wave Methods,Article in Smart Materials and Structures ·,2002,5-6
7. Zhongqing Su, Lin Ye, Ye Lu, Guided Lamb waves for identification of damage in
composite structures: A review, Journal of Sound and Vibration 295 (2006) ,2-3.
8. Nils Ryden, Choon B. Park, Peter Ulriksen, Lamb wave analysis for non-destructive
testing of concrete plate structures,2003,782-783
9. Adel Sedaghati, Farhang Honarvar and Anthony N Sinclair, Lamb wave-based
experimental and numerical studies for detection and sizing of corrosion damage in
metallic plates, journal of mechanical engineering science 2018, 3-4
10. Mustofa N Ahmed, An Abstract of "A Study of Guided Ultrasonic Wave Propagation
Characteristics in Thin Aluminum Plate for Damage Detection" Submitted to the
Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science
Degree in Civil Engineering,2014,29-30.
11. C T Ng and M Veidt, A Lamb wave based technique for damage detection in composite
laminates, Article in Smart Materials and Structures 2009,6-7.
12. A De Lucaa, Z Sharif-Khodaeib, M H Aliabadib, F Caputoa*,Numerical simulation of
the Lamb wave propagation in impacted CFRP laminate,Procedia Engineering 167 (
2016 ) 109 – 115

51
13. Matthieu Gresila, Adisorn Poohsai, Neha Chandarana,Guided wave propagation and
damage detection in composite pipes using piezoelectric sensors,6th Asia Pacific
Workshop on SHM, 6th APWSHM,( 2017 ), 148 – 155.
14. Sangeeta Patra , Avinash Nath Tiwari, A Study on Lamb Wave Based Damage
Identification and Detection on A Metallic Structure,International Journal of Engineering
Research & Technology (IJERT),Vol.7,2018,1-4.
15. Z. Chang and A. Mal, Scattering of Lamb waves from a rivet hole with cracks,
Mechanics of Materials, 1999, vol. 31, 197-204
16. N.N. Kishore, I. Sridhar and N.G.R. Iyengar, Finite element modelling of the scattering
of ultrasonic waves by isolated flaws NDT&E International, 2000, vol. 33, 297-305.
17. Paul Fromme and Mahir B. Sayir, Ultrasonics, Detection of cracks at rivet holes using
guided waves, Ultrasonics, 2002, vol. 40, 199–203
18. J. E. Michaels, T. E. Michaels and B. .Ultrasonic Monitoring of Fastener Holes Using
Load Modulated Energy Algorithms for Early Detection of Fatigue Cracks Mi Journal of
Nondestructive Evaluation, 2006, vol. 25 (1), 3-16.
19. Yelve NP, Mitra M, Mujumdar PM, et al. A hybrid method based upon nonlinear Lamb
wave response for locating a delamination in composite laminates. Ultrasonics 2016; 70:
12–17
20. Hu N, Cai Y, Zhu G, et al. Characterization of damage size in metallic plates using Lamb
waves. Structural Health Monitoring 2011; 11(2): 125–137.
21. Su Z and Ye L. A fast damage locating approach using digital damage fingerprints
extracted from Lamb wave signals. Smart Mater Structures 2005; 14: 1047.
22. Seeber,H ,Ramezani, A, Development of Flexible and Lightweight Ballistic Body Armor
Constructional Contributions for Ballistic Components out Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight
Polyethylene,2018

52
 Appendix

Keywords

FEA - Finite Element Analysis

EDA - Explicit Dynamic Analysis
SHM - Structural Health Monitoring
NDT - Non-Destructive Testing
CAE - Complete Abaqus Environment
FE - Finite Element
UHMWPE- Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene

53