Publication: Innovative acrylic thermoplastic composites versus conventional composites: Improving the impact performances
Loading...
Advisors
Tutors
Editor
Publication date
Defense date
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Elsevier
publication.page.ispartofseries
Creative Commons license
To cite this item, use the following identifier: https://hdl.handle.net/10016/32458
Abstract
This study focuses on the benefits to the mechanical performance against impact loading offered by glass fiber reinforced (GFR) acrylic thermoplastic polymers, based on new room temperature cure methyl-methacrylate (MMA) matrix. Glass fiber reinforcement is a common solution for a wide variety of engineering applications based on thermoset matrices. However, its use presents some disadvantages such as adequate control of manufacturing temperature, problematic recycling and low damage tolerance. In contrast, acrylic polymers presents a high potential as an alternative matrix for thermoset composites due to their superior mechanical properties, manufacturing at low temperatures and recycled possibilities. In order to compare the mechanical behavior under impact loading of acrylic thermoplastic composites versus conventional composites, Charpy impact test and low velocity impact tests are carried out. The GFR acrylic laminate composites considered are compared to conventional composites manufactured with epoxy and polyester resins in terms of impact resistance and damage evolution. This study covers an impact energy rate from 10 to 60 J and analyses the maximum load, deflection, absorbed energy and associated damage, showing a better performance of the new GPR. acrylic thermoplastic polymers with respect to conventional GFR composites.
Note
Funder
Research project
Bibliographic citation
Kinvi-Dossou, G., Matadi Boumbimba, R., Bonfoh, N., Garzon-Hernandez, S., Garcia-Gonzalez, D., Gerard, P. & Arias, A. (2019). Innovative acrylic thermoplastic composites versus conventional composites: Improving the impact performances. Composite Structures, vol. 217, pp. 1–13.