Aerospace Structural Design

MAE 4281

Sandwich Structures

David Fleming
Associate Professor
Aerospace Engineering
Sandwich Structure is comprised of two
(typically) thin face sheets are separated by
a (typically) lightweight core material
Facesheets
also known as:
Faces
Facings
Skin
ASM Handbook Vol. 21: Composites
Sandwich Structures are particularly
efficient in bending applications
Sandwich structures may be used for a variety of purposes,
including to provide insulation, or fire resistance capabilities, for
example, but the most common reason for utilizing sandwich
structures is:
Sandwich structures can provide exceptional strength-to-weight
and, especially, stiffness-to-weight characteristics for structures
loading in bending.
ASM Handbook Vol. 21: Composites
Bending behavior of sandwich structure
is analogous to that of an I-beam
Move the high stiffness/strength material
away from the neutral axis to enhance
its effectiveness in flexure.

Similar to the flanges in an I-beam, the
faces in a sandwich structure support
most of the bending load.
Similar to a web in an I-beam, the
sandwich core carries most of the
shear loading
ASM Handbook Vol. 21: Composites
Applications of sandwich structures
are numerous throughout aerospace
Cirrus S20:
All primary structures (wing skins,
spars, ribs, fuselage skins, firewall,
bulkheads, floors, ribs and longerons,
cowling, fairings, horizontal skins, ribs
and spars) are manufactured from
Divinycell HT 70 sandwich
composite.

www.diabgroup.com/europe/literature/e_pdf_files/e_pia_pdf/aero/cirrus.pdf
Bell M427
About 80 percent of the Bell
M427 airframe is made from
composite materials, the
majority of which are
carbon/epoxy.
www.compositesworld.com/hpc/issues/2005/March/773
Airliner
1.Radome: Specialized glass Prepregs. Flexcore
honeycomb
2 Landing Gear Doors and Leg Fairings: Glass/carbon
Prepregs,honeycomb and Redux bonded assembly.
Special process honeycomb.
3 Galley, Wardrobes, Toilets: Fabricated Fibrelam panels
4 Partitions: Fibrelam panel materials
5 Wing to Body Fairing: Carbon/glass/aramid Prepregs.
Honeycombs. Redux adhesive.
6 Wing Assembly: (Trailing Edge Shroud Box) Carbon/glass
Prepregs. Nomex honeycomb. Redux bonded assembly
7 Flying Control Surfaces - Ailerons, Spoilers, Vanes, Flaps:
Glass/carbon/aramid Prepregs. Honeycomb. Redux
adhesive
8 Passenger Flooring: Fibrelam panels
9 Engine Nacelles and Thrust Reversers: Carbon/glass
Prepregs. Nomex honeycomb. Special process parts.
10 Pylon Fairings: Carbon/glass Prepregs. Bonded
assembly. Redux adhesives
11 Winglets: Carbon/glass Prepregs
12 Keel Beam: Carbon Prepregs
13 Cargo Flooring: Fibrelam panels
14 Flaptrack Fairings: Carbon/glass Prepregs. Special
process parts
15 Overhead Storage Bins: Prepregs/fabricated Fibrelam
panels
16 Ceiling and Side Wall Panels: Glass Prepregs
17 Airstairs: Fabricated Fibrelam panels
18 Pressure Bulkhead: Carbon Prepregs
19 Vertical Stabilizer: Carbon/glass/aramid Prepregs
20 Rudder: Carbon/glass Prepregs. Honeycomb bonded
assembly
21 Horizontal Stabilizer: Carbon/glass Prepregs
22 Elevator: Carbon/glass Prepregs. Honeycomb bonded
assembly
23 Tail Cone: Carbon/glass Prepregs
www.hexcel.com/Markets/Aerospace/Civil.htm
J.R. Vinson, The Behavior of Sandwich Structures of
Isotropic and Composite Materials, CRC Press,
1999.
Satellite
1 Solar Panels : Epoxy carbon prepregs, aluminum honeycomb, film adhesive
2 Reflectors Antennae : Epoxy/aramid prepreg, cyanate carbon prepreg,
aramid/aluminum honeycomb
3 Satellite Structures : Carbon prepreg, aluminum honeycomb, film adhesive
www.hexcel.com/Markets/Space+and+Defense/SatelliteMat.htm
A variety of materials is used for
facesheets and core
Face sheets:
Metal sheet
Composite laminate
Core:
Foam
Honeycomb
aluminum
aramid (Nomex)
steel
Balsa
ASM Handbook Vol. 21: Composites
Cost-performance measure of
core materials
Sandwich Panel covers large surface
areas,
Sandwich Beam is more 1-D
Hexcel Publication No. AGU 075b, 2000.
Sandwich Panel
Sandwich Beam
ASM Handbook V. 21
Analysis of a sandwich
beam is based on similar
idealizations as a
stiffened web structure
Assuming skin much stiffer than the core:
Normal stresses much larger in faces than in core
Assuming core much thicker than the faces:
Transverse shear stress much larger in core than in faces
Variation in normal stresses across face are small
Hexcel Publication No. AGU 075b, 2000.
Consider bending:
Idealized Analysis
Can idealize the response based on
assumptions:
Core thick compared to faces
Faces stiff compared to core (in axial
direction of beam)
Results in the following simplifications:
Assume uniform normal stress within
each face (if structure is asymmetric,
the faces may carry different
stresses). Analytically, it will be more
convenient to work in terms of the
total load carried by each face.
Neglect transverse shear stresses in
the faces
Assume transverse shear stresses
are constant in the core
Neglect normal stresses in the core

Idealized Analysis
Simple statics:

2 2
1 1
2 1
2 1
2 1
2 1
2
2
2
bht
M
bt
P
bht
M
bt
P
t t
M
P
t t t
t t
t h
h
M
t t
t
M
P
t t
t P M
f
f
f c
f
f
c
c
f
c f
= =
= =
+
=
= =
+
+ =
=
+
+
=
|
.
|

\
| +
+ =
2
1
: as expressed
be can faces the in stress Average
thickness face equal For
where
o
o
faces. the by carried
actually is that load
shear the for factor
correction a provide
to of place in
used is : Note
c
c
t
h
bh
V
= t
Axial Loading in Faces
Shear in Core
Note: Notation 1 and 2 here do
not refer to principle stress,
rather to the face number 1 and
face number 2.
There are many modes of failure
possible for sandwich structures
Strength of constituents
Faces
Core
Instability
General instability (buckling of complete
panel/beam)
Local instability
Face Wrinkling
Intracell buckling (dimpling)
Interface failure

ASM Handbook Vol. 21: Composites
Core crushing due
to concentrated load
Various independent strength
considerations must be
considered
Instability can appear in a variety of
forms
ASM Handbook Vol. 21: Composites
Vinson
Failure Analysis must consider all
relevant failure modes
Design of a sandwich panel must select face/core
material and dimension such that positive margins
of safety are obtained for all of the possible failure
modes.
We will look at some of these in detail, others
qualitatively.

For more information:
Analysis of Sandwich Structures, in ASM Handbook,
Vol. 21 (in Library reference section)
HexWeb Honeycomb Sandwich Design Technology,
Hexcel Pub. No. AGU 075b (Available on-line)
Facing Tensile Failure
For the idealized sandwich structure, we can
predict failure based on the tensile stress
in a face:
1 1
1
bht
M
bt
P
f
= = o
Set
1
=
ult
or
Y
, as appropriate, to estimate the
failure load or moment based on this failure
mode.
(Can apply similar strength-based analysis to the
compressive face but note that compressive
instability effects may be more likely.)
Transverse Shear Failure of Core
For idealized sandwich beam, we have simple
formula for transverse shear stress in the core.



Simply check this against measured transverse
shear strength of the core material.
Note: different shear strength for different
orientation of core materials.
To increase shear strength of a beam if
necessary, can use a higher density core, or
increase core thickness to provide more
surface area.
bh
V
c
= t
Honeycomb Core Data
Hexcel Honeycomb Data Sheet 4000 (5/98)
Core Crushing can result
from flexural loading
or direct application of
pressure
2
: es thickness facing equal For
beam of stiffness flexural
direction ss in thickne pressure direct
: proof Without
2
crushing core
b h t E
D
D
p
p
hD
M
f f
=
=
=
+ = o
Check against crush strength of core. Note: honeycomb is reasonably strong against
core crushing.
For highly concentrated load application points, it may be necessary to use a stronger
core material locally, or even to reinforce the core with hard points
Panel Hardpoints for Fasteners
Hexcel
Instability Failures
I am not going to describe the analysis of these modes quantitatively,
though they may be significant as should be checked in design.
Some basics:
Shear crimping relates to compression buckling of the core
material.
Intracell buckling appears only for honeycomb sandwich panels,
and is a local buckling of the face into or out of the cells.
Typically this does not lead to failure of the panel, though it may
damage the surface finish or can cause undesirable aerodynamic
surface roughness
Face wrinkling is a short wavelength buckling of a face influenced
by either a weak face/core bond, or due to a soft core stiffness.
Analysis is difficult, and response is sensitive to initial waviness
of the face.
Example
From Hexcel HexWeb Honeycomb Sandwich
Design Technology, Hexcel Pub. No. AGU
075b

Manufacturing
In MAE 4284 Sandwich Panels and Beams are
fabricated using a simple open mold
process.
The sandwich structure is cocured (meaning
all composite parts are laminated and
integrated with the core in a single step).
This is not necessarily typical of high-quality
fabrication.
Secondary Bonding (using a separate
bonding operation) is often used to join
faces to core
Fabricate the composite faces separately
as a first step, and then bond the
faces to the core material in a second
step.
Composite processing may require
higher pressure (autoclave, press)
than the core can tolerate.
Secondary bonding:
Typically uses a film adhesive
Care needed in surface
finish/cleanliness of parts
May need to dry core materials prior
to bonding
Hexcel
Other Issues in Sandwich Structures
Impact response
Moisture intrusion in honeycomb
core materials
marine applications
Navy aircraft
X-33
Repair issues
ASM Handbook V. 21: Composites