Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Modelling of the Monolithic Stiffener Forming Process from a Paek Thermoplastic Composite Matrix Using Pam-Form Software Cover

Modelling of the Monolithic Stiffener Forming Process from a Paek Thermoplastic Composite Matrix Using Pam-Form Software

Transactions on Aerospace Research
Volume 2023 (2023): Issue 2 (June 2023)
By: Witold Polański  
Open Access
|Jun 2023

Figures & Tables

Figure 1.

Model of monolithic door stiffening part for the ILX-34 aircraft [11].
Model of monolithic door stiffening part for the ILX-34 aircraft [11].

Figure 2.

Dimensions of the ILX-34 aircraft door in millimetres [11].
Dimensions of the ILX-34 aircraft door in millimetres [11].

Figure 3.

Examples of spring fastenings using ‘colds pots’ zones [5].
Examples of spring fastenings using ‘colds pots’ zones [5].

Figure 4.

Example of mounting the blank on a transport frame.
Example of mounting the blank on a transport frame.

Figure 5.

a) Block diagram of the thermoforming process [13], b) process chart.
a) Block diagram of the thermoforming process [13], b) process chart.

Figure 6.

Scheme of a composite sample for determining the shear angle: a) before applying force, b) after reaching the maximum elongation [16].
Scheme of a composite sample for determining the shear angle: a) before applying force, b) after reaching the maximum elongation [16].

Figure 7.

a) Model of the stretched sample (shear angle in degrees), b) illustrative photo of the stretched sample [18].
a) Model of the stretched sample (shear angle in degrees), b) illustrative photo of the stretched sample [18].

Figure 8.

Graph of the theoretical shear angle change.
Graph of the theoretical shear angle change.

Figure 9.

Tensile test result [15].
Tensile test result [15].

Figure 10.

Shear stiffness in the plane of the layer G.
Shear stiffness in the plane of the layer G.

Figure 11.

Comparison of stretching graphs of the composite sample at 360°C and the result of numerical analysis.
Comparison of stretching graphs of the composite sample at 360°C and the result of numerical analysis.

Figure 12.

Comparison of theoretical shear angle and shear angle diagrams obtained in the numerical analysis.
Comparison of theoretical shear angle and shear angle diagrams obtained in the numerical analysis.

Figure 13.

Diagram of the test stand for bending the sample.
Diagram of the test stand for bending the sample.

Figure 14.

Sample model during free overhanging: a) fibre direction 0°, b) displacement values in [mm] for 0° direction at T = 360°C.
Sample model during free overhanging: a) fibre direction 0°, b) displacement values in [mm] for 0° direction at T = 360°C.

Figure 15.

Comparison of the shape of the bent sample at T = 360°C in the direction of the fibres 0°.
Comparison of the shape of the bent sample at T = 360°C in the direction of the fibres 0°.

Figure 16.

Comparison of the shape of the bent sample at T = 360°C in the direction of the fibres 90°.
Comparison of the shape of the bent sample at T = 360°C in the direction of the fibres 90°.

Figure 17.

Diagram of a numerical model.
Diagram of a numerical model.

Figure 18.

Stamp displacement profile.
Stamp displacement profile.

Figure 19.

Graph of spring stiffness used in the analysis.
Graph of spring stiffness used in the analysis.

Figure 20.

a) Blank displacements in the y direction, b) shear angles in the 45 layer.
a) Blank displacements in the y direction, b) shear angles in the 45 layer.

Figure 21.

Comparison of the part shape with the result of the analysis.
Comparison of the part shape with the result of the analysis.

Figure 22.

Mesh comparison: a) without local mesh ‘refinement’ option, b) local ‘refinement’ option at level 3.
Mesh comparison: a) without local mesh ‘refinement’ option, b) local ‘refinement’ option at level 3.

Figure 23.

Shear angle values for: a) 0° layer, b) 45° layer.
Shear angle values for: a) 0° layer, b) 45° layer.

Figure 24.

Values of bending moments in fibres during the process, for: a) 0° layer, b) 45° layer.
Values of bending moments in fibres during the process, for: a) 0° layer, b) 45° layer.

Figure 25.

Comparison of wrinkle formation as a result of the shear angle in the part with the result of the analysis.
Comparison of wrinkle formation as a result of the shear angle in the part with the result of the analysis.

Figure 26.

Formation of wrinkles as a result of bending the material.
Formation of wrinkles as a result of bending the material.

Figure 27.

Values of friction coefficient during the process for a) 0° layer, b) 45° layer.
Values of friction coefficient during the process for a) 0° layer, b) 45° layer.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/tar-2023-0012 | Journal eISSN: 2545-2835
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 58 - 75
Submitted on: Mar 18, 2021
|
Accepted on: Apr 13, 2023
|
Published on: Jun 12, 2023
Published by: ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
thermoplastic composite,
thermoforming,
fabric,
PAEK,
numerical analysis,
monolithic part,
aviation
Related subjects:
Engineering,
Introductions and overviews,
Engineering, other,
Geosciences,
Geosciences, other,
Materials sciences,
Materials sciences, other,
Physics,
Physics, other

© 2023 Witold Polański, published by ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 2023 (2023): Issue 2 (June 2023)