Composite Structures 79 (2007) 12–17

www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Impact and post impact response of laminated beams

at low temperatures
Samuel I. Ibekwe a,*, Patrick F. Mensah a, Guoqiang Li a,b
,
Su-Seng Pang b, Michael A. Stubblefield a
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Southern University, Baton Rouge, LA 70813, United States
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, United States

Available online 24 January 2006

Abstract

In this study, glass fiber reinforced unidirectional and crossply laminated composite beams were subjected to low velocity impact and
compression after impact (CAI) testing at low temperatures. A total of fifty effective 152.4 mm · 50.8 mm · 3.2 mm laminated beam
specimens were prepared. Low velocity impact tests were conducted on the prepared specimens using an instrumented drop-tower impact
machine at frozen temperatures 0 C, 10 C, and 20 C. Temperatures at 20 C and 10 C were also used for comparisons. CAI tests
were conducted using a hydraulic-servo MTS machine to determine the residual load carrying capacity of the impact damaged speci-
mens. Damage observation was conducted to aid in the understanding of the damage mechanism. The effect of environmental temper-
atures on the impact damages and on the residual compressive buckling strength and elastic modulus was evaluated based on the test
results.
 2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords: Laminates; Impact; Damage tolerance; Buckling; Strength; Low temperature

1. Introduction crack propagation, damage observation, application of

Over the years, there has been mounting concern over
the safety of laminated composites subjected to a low
velocity impact. A low velocity impact on laminated com-
posites can cause various types of damages including
delamination, fiber breakage, matrix cracking, and fiber–
matrix interfacial debonding. These types of damage are
very dangerous because they cannot be detected visually
and lead to structural failure at loads well below design lev-
els. A number of researchers have investigated the low
velocity impact behavior of laminated composites at an
ambient environment. Baker et al. [1] has summarized the
work on damage of laminated composites including the
techniques for nondestructive testing and observation of
*
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ibekwe@engr.subr.edu (S.I. Ibekwe).
failure criteria, effect of impactor mass, target geometry,
impact velocity and initial stress and the residual strength.
Abrate [2] and Cantwell and Morton [3] have also given
reviews on the impact of laminated composites that cover
both theoretical and experimental aspects of the problem,
such as impact modeling, impact damage, damage predic-
tion, and residual properties.
Because most composite structures are used out-of-
doors, it cannot be avoided that composite structures are
subjected to various environmental conditioning. The study
of impact and post impact response of laminated compos-
ites subjected to environmental conditioning other than
ambient is more realistic. Karasek et al. [4] have evaluated
the influence of temperature and moisture on the impact
resistance of an epoxy/graphite composite. They have found
that only at elevated temperatures has moisture had a signif-
icant effect on damage initiation energy and that the energy
required for initiating damage has been found to decrease

0263-8223/$ - see front matter  2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2005.11.025
 S.I. Ibekwe et al. / Composite Structures 79 (2007) 12–17
with temperature. The investigations by Bibo et al. [5] have
shown that temperature is capable of altering the nature and
extent of impact induced damages. Parvatareddy et al. [6]
have investigated the low velocity impact behavior of lami-
nated composites aged at elevated temperature in both air
and nitrogen environments. They have indicated that the
aging environment has a significant effect on the residual
tensile strength. Hale et al. [7] have found that the effect
of temperature and moisture is interactive. The loss of
strength and stiffness of laminated composites at elevated
temperatures is exacerbated by the increased rate of water
absorption at high temperatures. Li et al. [8] have investi-
gated the effect of cycling moisture on the low velocity
impact behavior of laminated composites at elevated tem-
perature. Their results show that the first moisture cycle
has a significant effect on reducing the low velocity impact
resistance of laminated composites. Elevated temperature
accelerates the damaging effect of cycling moistures. Pang
et al. [9] have investigated the effect of ultraviolet radiation
on the low velocity impact response of laminated beams.
They have found that UV radiation alone has a significant
effect on reducing the residual load carrying capacity of
impact damaged laminated beams. The presence of water
enhanced the damage effect of UV radiation.
From the above literature survey, almost all the previ-
ous studies were focused on impact and post-impact
response at elevated temperatures. There is currently a lack
of understanding of the low velocity impact behavior and
the post-impact load carrying capacity of laminated com-
posites at low temperatures. In this present study, low
velocity impact response and post-impact compressive
buckling strength of laminated composites at low tempera-
tures were investigated experimentally. The effect of tem-
perature variation on the low velocity impact behavior
and residual compressive buckling strength were evaluated
based on the test results.
2. Materials and experimental procedure
2.1. Materials
Two types of Scotchply 1002 laminated beams were used
in the tests, one was unidirectional [08]s, and the other was
crossply [(0/90)4]s. Scotchply is an E-glass reinforced epoxy
laminated composite. The dimensions of the specimens
were 152.4 mm · 50.8 mm · 3.2 mm. The mechanical prop-
erties of a lamina are listed in Table 1.
2.2. Experimental procedure
The DynaTup Model 8250HV impact equipment was
used to conduct the low velocity impact tests. This drop-
Table 1
Mechanical properties of a lamina
E1 (GPa) E2 (GPa) G12 (GPa) m12 m21
38.6 8.27 4.14 0.26 0.056
13
weight tester combines gravity with pneumatic assistance
to cover a range of impact velocity from 0.61 m/s to
36.6 m/s. With the combination of available weights that
alter the hammer weight, impact energies in the range
0.6–840 J can be achieved. An environmental conditioning
chamber is integrated with the equipment. The temperature
range is controlled with an electronic thermostatic control-
ler between 50 C and +175 C. The clamping fixture,
which simulates a rigid clamping with a force of 72 kg, is
located within this environmental chamber, ensuring that
specimens are tested at the desired temperature. Communi-
cation and data acquisition with the impact equipment is
via a computer integrated control and data acquisition sys-
tem. In this study, specimens were cooled in the environ-
mental chamber achieved by utilizing liquefied nitrogen.
Impact tests were carried out at the following tempera-
tures, 20 C, 10 C, 0 C, 10 C, and 20 C, which were
regulated by a solenoid valve connected to the controller
and environmental chamber. The comparatively higher
temperatures 10 C and 20 C were used to make compar-
isons. All the coupons were impacted at a velocity of 2 m/s
and at an energy level of 12.8 J. The pneumatic clamp that
rigidly clamped the specimen during impact tests was
housed within the environmental chamber. Fig. 1 shows a
schematic of the impact test set-up.
After impact test, the same environmental chamber,
controller accessory and liquefied nitrogen were used for
the post impact compression tests as shown in Fig. 2. A
special fixture was designed to isolate the large hydraulic
grips of the MTS 810 machine from the environmental
chamber. This was done at a slow rate and under cooling
water in order to minimize any extraneous damage. Before
the test, specimens were placed in the chamber, and suffi-
cient soak time was allowed to ensure that the coupons
Fig. 1. A schematic of DynaTup drop tower impact machine.
14 S.I. Ibekwe et al. / Composite Structures 79 (2007) 12–17

Fig. 4. Impact load and impact energy variation with time of an

unidirectional specimen at 20 C.
Fig. 2. Test set-up for compressive buckling test.

attained their respective test temperatures. Compression

tests were carried out at the same temperature as impact
tests, i.e., 20 C, 10 C, 0 C, 10 C, and 20 C. The test
results (stress–strain curve, compressive buckling strength,
elastic modulus, etc.) were recorded and analyzed by the
assembled TEST STAR II software and computer.

3. Results and discussions

3.1. Impact test results and discussion

Using the DynaTup Model 8250 HV impact testing

equipment, various impact responses, including impact
load, impact energy, impact velocity, impact deflection,
indentation, etc., were obtained graphically and numeri-
cally. Figs. 3 and 4 show typical variations of the impact
load and energy with time during the impact process at var-
ious temperatures. A total of 50 effective specimens (25 uni-
directional and 25 crossply) were tested. Some of the
specimens after the impact tests are shown in Fig. 5. From
these test results, a number of parameters can be chosen to
characterize the effect of temperature on the low velocity
impact responses of the GFRP laminates. Because the
energy absorbed during the impact is a direct indication
Fig. 5. Specimens after impact.
of the damage levels of the specimens, impact energy
absorbed by the specimens will be analyzed.
Fig. 6 shows the averaged impact energy absorbed by
the specimens at various temperatures. The absorbed
energy is used to create various damages in the specimens,
including delamination, matrix cracking, fiber breakage,
7.30

7.25
Absorbed energy (J)

7.20

7.15

7.10

Unidirectional
7.05
Crossply

7.00
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
Temperature (°C)
Fig. 3. Impact load and impact energy variation with time of an
unidirectional specimen at +20 C. Fig. 6. Variation of energy absorbed with temperature.
 S.I. Ibekwe et al. / Composite Structures 79 (2007) 12–17 15

fiber–matrix interfacial debonding, etc. From Fig. 6, the specimens increase as the temperature cools down. This
impact energy absorbed by the specimens increases as the suggests that more damages be induced at lower tempera-
temperature drops. This means the specimens impacted at tures than at higher temperatures, which supports the con-
lower temperatures absorb more energy and create more clusions obtained through impact energy analysis. A
damages than specimens impacted at higher temperatures. possible reason for this is that, with the decrease of temper-
This analysis can be further validated by a visual inspec- ature, the resin matrix becomes more brittle. A brittle
tion. Fig. 7 shows the back surface damage pattern and material tends to produce more damages than a ductile
damage area of unidirectional and crossply specimens material at a low velocity impact because cracks propagate
impacted at various temperatures. These pictures were more easily in brittle materials. In addition, the damage
taken using an optical microscope. It is seen from Fig. 7 area for unidirectional laminates is larger than that for
that the back surface crack propagates along fiber direc- crossply laminates. This suggests that crossply laminates
tions. As a result, crack geometrical shape for unidirec- are stronger in resisting low velocity impact damages than
tional specimens is elongated in fiber direction, while the that of unidirectional laminates, even at low temperatures.
crack shape for crossply specimens looks like a circular
area due to the fiber orientation in two directions. By mea- 3.2. Compressive buckling test results and discussion
suring the crack area manually, the variation of the equiv-
alent diameter of the crack area with temperature is shown Typical stress–strain distributions during compressive
in Fig. 8. It is seen that the damage areas for both types of buckling test at various temperatures are shown in Fig. 9.
From Fig. 9, the stress–strain shows a linear relation until
the stress comes to the peak value. This suggests that the
composite laminates are linear elastic materials. The tem-
perature ( 20 C or +20 C) does not alter the linear
behavior. The peak stress is the maximum stress the speci-
men can bear and thus it is the compressive buckling
strength of the laminated composite. Following the peak
point shows a sudden drop of the stress, which means the
specimen is buckled and the strain will develop dramati-
cally until the failure of the specimen.
Figs. 10 and 11 show the variation of the compressive
buckling strength and elastic modulus with temperature,
respectively. With the drop of temperature, the compres-
sive buckling strength and elastic modulus increase until
they come to their peak values at about 10 C. This is
understandable because the resin matrix tends more brittle
as temperature drops, which increases the stiffness of the
specimens. As a result, the residual compressive buckling
strength and the elastic modulus increase as temperature
Fig. 7. (a,b) Back surface crack pattern and area.

40000
20
Equivalent diameter of back face damage (mm)

18
30000
Compressive stress (psi)

16

14 20000

12

10000
10

8
0 Unidirectional, + 20 oC
Unidirectional
6 Crossply Unidirectional, - 20 oC

4
-25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 0.000 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010
Temperature (oC) Compressive strain

Fig. 8. Measured equivalent diameter of back face damage at various Fig. 9. Stress–strain relation of unidirectional specimens at various
temperatures. temperatures.
16
5000
Compressive buckling strength (psi)
4900
4800
4700
4600
4500
4400
-25 -20 -15
Fig. 10. Effect of temperature change on the compressive buckling
strength of impact damaged composites.
3.0
2.8
Elastic modulus (106 psi)
2.6
2.4
2.2
2.0
-30 -20 -10
Fig. 11. Effect of temperature change on the elastic modulus of impact
damaged composites.
drops. Beyond the peak point (temperature lower than
10 C), both the compressive buckling strength and elas-
tic modulus begin to drop. A possible reason is that the
impact has caused more damages at 20 C than at
10 C because the resin is more brittle at 20 C, as
shown in Figs. 6 and 8. Therefore, although the increased
stiffness at 20 C tends to increase the residual compres-
sive buckling strength and elastic modulus, the impact
induced damages cause a larger decrease in stiffness of
the specimens. The final outcome of these two opposite
trends is that the decrease in stiffness caused by the impact
overtakes the increase in stiffness caused by the lowered
temperature. As a result, both the compressive buckling
strength and elastic modulus are reduced at 20 C.
It is noted that, although laminated crossply beams
showed higher resistance to low velocity impact at the tem-
peratures investigated, the residual buckling strength and
stiffness of the laminated unidirectional beams are higher
than those of laminated crossply beams, as shown in Figs.
10 and 11. A possible reason is that uniaxial compressive
S.I. Ibekwe et al. / Composite Structures 79 (2007) 12–17
loads were used to conduct the buckling test. All the fibers
Unidirectional in the laminated unidirectional beams were along the direc-
tion of the applied load, while only a portion of fibers were
Crossply
along the direction of the applied load in the laminated
crossply beams. Because fibers have a higher stiffness and
higher load carrying capacity than resins, laminated unidi-
rectional beams have a higher residual strength and stiff-
ness than laminated crossply beams.
4. Conclusion
The low velocity impact behavior and the residual load
carrying capacity of laminated beams at low temperatures
-10 -5 0 5 10 15 were experimentally studied. A total of fifty effective spec-
Temperature ( o C) imens were prepared, low velocity impact damaged, and
buckled. The effect of low temperatures on the low velocity
impact and post impact responses was evaluated based on
the test results. The following conclusions are obtained:
(1) Temperature has a significant effect on the low velocity
Unidirectional
Crossply
impact responses of laminated composites. More
impact damage is induced in specimens impacted at
lower temperatures than those at higher temperatures.
(2) Crossply laminates present a higher impact resistance
than unidirectional laminates within the whole tem-
perature range investigated.
(3) The residual compressive buckling strength and elas-
tic modulus increase until a certain point ( 10 C) as
temperature drops; at a much lower temperature
( 20 C), both the residual compressive buckling
strength and the elastic modulus drop.
(4) The impact damage and the temperature have an
0 10 20 30
Temperature ( o C)
opposite effect on the residual compressive buckling
strength and elastic modulus. The impact damage
reduces the residual strength, while the low tempera-
ture tends to increase the residual strength if the tem-
perature is higher than 10 C.
(5) Although crossply laminates have a higher resistance
to low velocity impact damage than unidirectional
laminates, unidirectional laminates have a higher
residual buckling strength and stiffness than crossply
laminates at the temperatures investigated.
Acknowledgements
This investigation was partially sponsored by the Loui-
siana Board of Regents under contract Nos. LEQSF(1998-
01)-RD-B-06, LEQSF(1998-01)-RD-A-27, LEQSF(1999-
02)-RD-B-10, LEQSF(2000-03)-RD-B-05, and LEQSF
(2004-07)-RD-B-05.
References
[1] Baker A, Jones R, Callinan RJ. Damage tolerance of graphite/Epoxy
composite. Compos Struct 1985;4:14–44.
[2] Abrate S. Impact on laminated composite materials. Appl Mech Rev
1991;444:155–90.
 S.I. Ibekwe et al. / Composite Structures 79 (2007) 12–17
[3] Cantwell WJ, Morton J. The impact resistance of composite materi-
als—a review. Composites 1991;225:347–62.
[4] Karasek ML, Strait LH, Amateau MF, Runt JP. Effect of temperature
and moisture on the impact behavior of graphite/Epoxy composites:
Part II—impact damage. J Compos Technol Res, JCTRER
1995;171:11–6.
[5] Bibo GA, Leicy D, Hogg PJ, Kemp M. High temperature damage
tolerance of carbon fiber-reinforced plastics. 1: impact characteristics.
Composites 1994;25(6):414–24.
[6] Parvatareddy H, Wang JZ, Dillard DA, Ward TC, Rogalski
ME. Environmental aging of high performance polymeric
17
composite: Effects on durability. Compos Sci Technol 1995;53:
399–409.
[7] Hale JM, Gibson AG, Speake SD. Tensile strength testing of GRP
pipes at elevated temperatures in aggressive offshore environments. J
Compos Mater 1998;32(10):969–86.
[8] Li G, Pang SS, Helms JE, Ibekwe SI. Low velocity impact response of
GFRP laminates subjected to cycling moisture. Polym Compos
2000;21(5):686–95.
[9] Pang SS, Li G, Helms JE, Ibekwe SI. Influence of ultraviolet radiation
on the low velocity impact response of laminated beams. Compos Part
B: Eng 2001;32(6):521–8.