This disclosure generally relates to composite structures, and deals more particularly with a composite sandwich structure having a segmented core and an integral arrestment feature.
One type of composite structure used in a variety of applications comprises a core sandwiched between a pair of composite facesheets, sometimes referred to as a sandwich structure. Where the core includes multiple core details, such as multiple core segments joined together, the structure may be referred to as a “core blanket”. The core in these structures may be formed of any of various materials including, but not limited to honeycombs, foams and balsa, to name only a few. The facesheets may be formed from multiple laminated plies of a fiber reinforced resin.
Inconsistencies may sometimes occur within localized areas of the facesheets of these sandwich structures. For example, a facesheet may contain a void, a dent or a porosity that may occur at the time the facesheet is manufactured or later during the service life of the sandwich structure. For instance, a facesheet impacted by an object may cause a localized disbond or crack occurring in one or more plies of the facesheet. Unless arrested, a disbond or crack may spread or propagate to areas outside of the local impact area.
One solution to the problem involves the inclusion of substructures within the sandwich to limit the propagation of inconsistencies, however substructures may be relatively expensive to manufacture and assemble, and may add additional weight to the sandwich structure. In addition, known substructure solutions are specifically designed to either limit propagation of disbands or cracks, but may not limit both. It may be possible to combine multiple substructure designs in order to arrest the propagation of both disbonds and cracks, however the use of multiple substructures may lead to an overall composite structure design that exceeds target weight specifications. Another solution to the problem is to limit the operating strain applied to the sandwich structure, and perform periodic visual checks on the integrity of the structure, however this approach may not be practical in some applications where the operating strains placed on the sandwich structure cannot be limited, and/or predicted.
Accordingly, there is a need for a sandwich structure having a lightweight but robust core capable of reducing or arresting the propagation of irregularities that may occur in the structure, particularly as a result of object impacts.
According to the disclosed embodiments, a sandwich structure comprises a lightweight, segmented core which may reduce or arrest the propagation of irregularities that may occur in the structure, such as those resulting from an object impact on facesheets during service. The structure includes an arrestment feature that may be easily and inexpensively integrated into the core along joints where the core segments are spliced together. In addition to arresting the propagation of inconsistencies, the arrestment feature may improve the strength of the core, as well as both its fracture and structural toughness and the overall load carrying ability of the sandwich structure.
According to one disclosed embodiment, a composite sandwich structure is provided comprising a core including a plurality of core segments sandwiched between the facesheets. Arrestment means are provided between the core and each of the facesheets for arresting the propagation of an inconsistency in the facesheets. The arrestment means may include a composite wrap that covers edges of the core segments includes a portion sandwiched between the core and each of the facesheets. The arrestment means may further include a composite strap overlying joints between the core segments, as well as a layer of adhesive that joins the wraps along the joints.
According to another disclosed embodiment, a composite sandwich structure having integral arrestment comprises a segmented core sandwiched between and joined to first and second multi-ply, composite facesheets. The core includes a plurality of core segments that are spliced together along joints between their mutual edges. The sandwich structure further comprises composite wraps and composite straps. The wraps cover the edges of each of the core segments along the joints and may have a C-shaped cross section. The wraps on the adjacent core sections form a back-to-back C-shape along each of the joints. The composite straps respectively cover the joints and are sandwiched between each of the wraps and one of the facesheets. Each of the wraps may cover three adjacent sides of one of the core segments. Adjacent ones of the wraps may be joined together with a layer of adhesive. The wraps and the straps may comprise a fiber reinforced resin.
According to another embodiment, a method is provided of making a composite sandwich structure. The method comprises producing a core by forming joints between a plurality of core segments, and sandwiching the core between first and second facesheets, including joining the core to each of the facesheets. The method further comprises forming an arrestment feature between the core and at least one of the facesheets along each of the joints. Forming the arrestment feature may include placing a composite wrap on each of the core segments along each of the joints. Forming the arrestment feature may further include placing a composite strap between the wrap and at least one of the facesheets.
The disclosed embodiments satisfy the need for a composite sandwich structure and a method of producing the same that may overcome the limitations of existing sandwich structures while providing a segmented core that may exhibit improved strength, and which includes an integral arrestment feature that may limit the propagation of irregularities in the facesheets.
Referring first to
The sandwich structure 20 includes an arrestment feature 25 along the joints 30, which is disposed between both adjacent ones of the core segments 28, and between the facesheets 24, 26. As will be discussed below in more detail, the arrestment feature 25 may function to arrest the propagation of one or more localized inconsistencies (not shown) in the sandwich structure 20, such as a disbond or crack in either of the facesheets 24, 26 resulting from, for example and without limitation, an object (not shown) impacting an outer surface 26a of one of the facesheets 26. As used herein “inconsistent area”, “inconsistency” and “inconsistencies” refer to a localized area in the composite sandwich 20 that may be outside of designed tolerances. The inconsistency may comprise, for example and without limitation, a void, a dent, a crack or a porosity that may occur at the time the composite sandwich structure 20 is manufactured or later during the service life of the sandwich structure 20. Additionally, the arrestment feature 25 may provide the core 22 with additional strength and/or form alternate load paths through the sandwich structure 20.
Referring now also to
As best seen in
The composite tear straps 34 extend along the joint 30 and are sandwiched between one of the facesheets 24, 26 and legs 32b, 32c of the wraps 32. As best seen in
Wraps 32 and tear straps 34 may each comprise a composite ply laminate such as, without limitation, a fiberglass reinforced epoxy resin which may be in the form of a unidirectional tape. The straps 34 may include ply drop offs 34a which conform to the tapered section 40 of the wrap 32. The outer end 42 of each of the wraps 32 extends a distance “D” beyond the outer edges 34b of each of the straps 34, so that the ends 42 of each of the wraps 32 are joined directly to the innermost ply 38a of one of the facesheets 24, 26. The extension of the wrap ends 32 past the tear straps 34 may aid in guiding the propagation of possible disbonds along a desired path that leads to arrestment.
From the forgoing, it can be appreciated that both the wraps 32 and the straps 34 are affixed directly to the facesheets 24, and that the core segments 28 are secured to the facesheets 24 through both the wraps 32 and the straps 34. Moreover, as best seen in
Reference is now made to
Next, as shown at step 48 in
Next, as shown at step 52 in
Next, as shown at step 56 in
In the embodiment illustrated in
In some embodiments, it may be not be necessary to use both the wraps 32 and the straps 34. For example, as shown in
Embodiments of the disclosure may find use in a variety of potential applications, particularly in the transportation industry, including for example, aerospace, marine and automotive applications. Thus, referring now to
Each of the processes of method 68 may be performed or carried out by a system integrator, a third party, and/or an operator (e.g., a customer). For the purposes of this description, a system integrator may include without limitation any number of aircraft manufacturers and major-system subcontractors; a third party may include without limitation any number of vendors, subcontractors, and suppliers; and an operator may be an airline, leasing company, military entity, service organization, and so on.
As shown in
Systems and methods embodied herein may be employed during any one or more of the stages of the production and service method 68. For example, components or subassemblies using the disclosed sandwich structure corresponding to production process 76 may be fabricated or manufactured in a manner similar to components or subassemblies produced while the aircraft 70 is in service. Also, one or more of the disclosed embodiments may be utilized during the production stages 76 and 78, for example, by substantially expediting assembly of or reducing the cost of an aircraft 70. Similarly, one or more of the embodiments, or a combination thereof may be utilized while the aircraft 70 is in service, for example and without limitation, to maintenance and service 184.
Although the embodiments of this disclosure have been described with respect to certain exemplary embodiments, it is to be understood that the specific embodiments are for purposes of illustration and not limitation, as other variations will occur to those of skill in the art.
This application is a divisional application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/631,029, filed Dec. 4, 2009.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3106500 | Turner | Oct 1963 | A |
3331174 | Wesch et al. | Jul 1967 | A |
3552329 | Parris | Jan 1971 | A |
3826056 | Smith et al. | Jul 1974 | A |
4099355 | Strunk | Jul 1978 | A |
4416349 | Jacobs | Nov 1983 | A |
4557961 | Gorges | Dec 1985 | A |
4671470 | Jonas | Jun 1987 | A |
4712352 | Low | Dec 1987 | A |
4744186 | Smith et al. | May 1988 | A |
5154963 | Terry | Oct 1992 | A |
5245809 | Harrington | Sep 1993 | A |
6065259 | Clear | May 2000 | A |
7197852 | Grillos | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7669372 | Schaffer | Mar 2010 | B2 |
20060037282 | Layfield | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060165480 | Kennedy | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20070134466 | Rajaram et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070256379 | Edwards | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20110135887 | Saff et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20120193016 | Saff et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20130129970 | Saff et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0136189 | May 2001 | WO |
2011068592 | Jun 2011 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Search Report, dated Nov. 26, 2010, regarding Application No. PCT/US2010/052343, 2 pages. |
Russell et al., “Damage Tolerance and Fail-Safety of Composite Sandwich Panels,” SAE 1994 Transactions, Journal of Aerospace, vol. 103, Oct. 1994, pp. 2175-2182. |
Tomblin et al., “Review of Damage Tolerance for Composite Sandwich Airframe Structures,” Office of Aviation Research Final Report No. DOT/FAA/AR-99/49, Aug. 1999, 71 pages. |
Office Action, dated Dec. 15, 2011, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 12/631,029, 11 pages. |
Final Office Action, dated Apr. 20, 2012, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 12/631,029, 9 pages. |
Office Action, dated Jul. 5, 2012, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 13/431,706, 10 pages. |
Office Action, dated Sep. 26, 2013, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 13/716,593, 25 pages. |
Final Office Action, dated Jan. 29, 2014, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 13/716,593, 25 pages. |
Office Action, dated Jul. 15, 2014, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 13/716,593, 17 pages. |
Notice of Allowance, dated Oct. 8, 2014, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 13/716,593, 9 pages. |
Office Action, dated Jun. 20, 2014, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 12/631,029, 27 pages. |
Notice of Allowance, dated Nov. 21, 2014, regarding U.S. Appl. No. 12/631,029, 18 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20150183181 A1 | Jul 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12631029 | Dec 2009 | US |
Child | 14644348 | US |