PSI - Issue 71

Deepak Kumar et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 71 (2025) 380–387

387

Laminate sequence Mass of impactor (kg) Impact velocity (m/s 2 ) Energy absorbed (J) Peak force reaction (N) CCCC 5.5 2.62 17.51 11334 CFFC 5.5 2.62 17.80 11063 CSSC 5.5 2.62 17.70 7807.2 CFSC 5.5 2.62 17.89 9500.5 FFFF 5.5 2.62 15.49 2665.6 SSSS 5.5 2.62 3.727 771.25

Table 7: Absorbed energy and peak force reaction of all laminates as per ASTM standard.

5. Conclusions: The numerical low velocity impact analysis is performed in the present work to capture the effect of hybridization with flax, sisal fibers and carbon fibers on impact properties. At low levels of impact energy, the sandwiched hybrid specimens such as CFSC, CFFC, and CSSC absorbed more energy compared to the natural fiber specimens (FFFF or SSSS), which absorbed less energy. The carbon (CCCC) fibers specimen has absorption energy quite higher than their natural fiber counterpart but a bit lower than all the sandwiched hybrid specimens. At high impact energy level, the carbon (CCCC) specimen showed higher peak reaction force while the sisal (SSSS) and flax (FFFF) laminates show lower peak force and the hybridized laminates are found to be in between. The observed peak reaction force sequence for all six types of composite laminates subjected to different impact velocities are as follows: 1.7 m/s: SSSS< FFFF< CSSC< CFSC