Sogorb et al 2023a - Revision history

Marherna at 14:39, 17 October 2023

2023-10-17T14:39:52Z

Marherna: Marherna moved page Review 400440468313 to Sogorb et al 2023a

2023-10-17T11:49:14Z

Marherna moved page Review 400440468313 to Sogorb et al 2023a

Jsogorb at 09:24, 20 June 2023

2023-06-20T09:24:01Z

Jsogorb: added space under table 4

2023-06-10T20:12:17Z

added space under table 4

Jsogorb at 20:05, 10 June 2023

2023-06-10T20:05:12Z

Jsogorb at 20:02, 10 June 2023

2023-06-10T20:02:58Z

Jsogorb at 20:00, 10 June 2023

2023-06-10T20:00:01Z

Jsogorb at 19:59, 10 June 2023

2023-06-10T19:59:04Z

Jsogorb at 19:58, 10 June 2023

2023-06-10T19:58:29Z

Jsogorb at 19:54, 10 June 2023

2023-06-10T19:54:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:39, 17 October 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
−
−
−	~~<div class="center" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;">~~
−	~~<big>'''Characterization of Induction Welded Thermoplastic Composites'''</big></div>~~
−
−	~~<div class="center" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;">~~
−	~~J. Sogorb*<sup>1</sup>, N. Sarin<sup>2</sup>, C. Worrall<sup>2</sup>, J. Wächter<sup>3</sup>, S. González<sup>1</sup>, R. Buelga<sup>4</sup>, F. Lasagni<sup>1</sup></div>~~
−
−	~~<div class="center" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;">~~
−	<sup>1</sup>CATEC-Advanced Center for Aerospace Technologies, <sup>2</sup>The Welding Institute, <sup>3</sup>Direct Manufacturing Research Center – Paderborn University, <sup>4</sup>Airbus Defence and Space (CBC).</div>
−
−	~~<div class="center" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;">~~
−	~~[mailto:jsogorb@catec.aero jsogorb@catec.aero]</div>~~

	==1. Introduction==		==1. Introduction==

@@ Line 254: / Line 254: @@
 ==4. Conclusions==
-In this investigation, SCFR/PEEK parts processed by AM-FDM technology were inductively welded to a CFR/PEEK laminate consolidated in an oven by charging an electric current of 290 A and a frequency of 250 kHz into the induction coil while applying a pressure of 0.5 MPa during 100 sec. A maximum temperature of 400 °C was generated at the welded interface. Optical microscopy and non-destructive characterization revealed a good continuity between both adherends in the areas of influence of eddy currents and no thermal degradation of the resins or damage to the adherends was observed.
+In this investigation, SCFR/PEEK parts processed by AM-FDM technology were induction welded to a CFR/PEEK laminate consolidated in an oven by charging an electric current of 290 A and a frequency of 250 kHz into the induction coil while applying a pressure of 0.5 MPa during 100 sec. A maximum temperature of 400 °C was generated at the welded interface. Optical microscopy and non-destructive characterization revealed a good continuity between both adherends in the areas of influence of eddy currents and no thermal degradation of the resins or damage to the adherends was observed.
 Active IRT technique was considered as a non-contact methodology for the inspection of induction welded joints to evaluate the manufacturing quality. The results confirmed the feasibility of this technique to identify the welded and non-welded areas through the application of PPT processing algorithm to the infrared sequences. The results were validated by means of the 3D reconstruction of the welded interface obtained by XCT.

@@ Line 242: / Line 242: @@
 |}
-<span id='cite-_Ref134135148'></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] shows a representative fracture surface of the welded specimens after the block shear test. A cohesive failure (<span id='cite-_Ref134135148'></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (a)) occurred within the weld interface, involving the adjacent areas of the PEEK layer and the SCFR/PEEK substrate, resulting in the major failure mechanism of welded joints. It can be identified by the grainy appearance on both sides of the fracture. An interlayer failure also occurred within the SCFR/PEEK substrate on a smaller surface (<span id='cite-_Ref134135148'></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (b)) indicating that the interface resistance was higher than the substrate. Adhesive failure was observed in the remaining areas (<span id='cite-_Ref134135148'></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (c)) where the PEEK layer with a few fibers adhered was removed from the CFR/PEEK laminate due to insufficient adhesion.
+<span id="cite-_Ref134135148"></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] shows a representative fracture surface of the welded specimens after the block shear test. A cohesive failure (<span id="cite-_Ref134135148"></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (a)) occurred within the weld interface, involving the adjacent areas of the PEEK layer and the SCFR/PEEK substrate, resulting in the major failure mechanism of welded joints. It can be identified by the grainy appearance on both sides of the fracture. An interlayer failure also occurred within the SCFR/PEEK substrate on a smaller surface (<span id="cite-_Ref134135148"></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (b)) indicating that the interface resistance was higher than the substrate. Adhesive failure was observed in the remaining areas (<span id="cite-_Ref134135148"></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (c)) where the PEEK layer with a few fibers adhered was removed from the CFR/PEEK laminate due to insufficient adhesion.
 <div class="center" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;">

@@ Line 213: / Line 213: @@
 The results of the block shear tests corresponding to the specimens extracted only from the central zone of the assembly are listed in <span id='cite-_Ref132869703'></span>[[#_Ref132869703|Table 4]]. Average BSS of 23.3 MPa was obtained with a standard deviation of 1.4 MPa.
 {| style="width: 51%;margin: 1em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
@@ Line 239: / Line 241: @@
 |  style="border-bottom: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|23.3 ± 1.4
 |}
 <span id='cite-_Ref134135148'></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] shows a representative fracture surface of the welded specimens after the block shear test. A cohesive failure (<span id='cite-_Ref134135148'></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (a)) occurred within the weld interface, involving the adjacent areas of the PEEK layer and the SCFR/PEEK substrate, resulting in the major failure mechanism of welded joints. It can be identified by the grainy appearance on both sides of the fracture. An interlayer failure also occurred within the SCFR/PEEK substrate on a smaller surface (<span id='cite-_Ref134135148'></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (b)) indicating that the interface resistance was higher than the substrate. Adhesive failure was observed in the remaining areas (<span id='cite-_Ref134135148'></span>[[#_Ref134135148|Figure 8]] (c)) where the PEEK layer with a few fibers adhered was removed from the CFR/PEEK laminate due to insufficient adhesion.

@@ Line 148: / Line 148: @@
 IRT inspections were performed with an infrared camera (FLIR SC7000) with a resolution of 640 x 512 px that operates at a bandwidth of 3 - 5 µm. The camera uses an Indium Antimonide (InSb) detector and a 25 mm F/2 (22˚ x 17˚) lens. To provide the thermal excitation two halogen lamps (Hedler H25s) with a power of 2kW were used. IRT inspection parameters are listed in <span id='cite-_Ref133080596'></span>[[#_Ref133080596|Table 3]]. Specimens were inspected in reflection mode through the CFR/PEEK laminate side.
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
@@ Line 172: / Line 174: @@
 |  style="border-bottom: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|450
 |}
 The IRT results were validated by means of XCT with a VJT 225 µ-CT equipment (225kV and 3 mA X-ray unit; 2048 x 2048 px detector).

← Older revision	Revision as of 11:49, 17 October 2023
(No difference)

@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 |  style="border-bottom: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|260
 |}
 The consolidation cycle of the APC-2 PEEK/AS4 prepreg was conducted in an oven at 400°C (±5°C) for 15-20 minutes with a vacuum level of 0.7-0.8 bar. A CFR/PEEK laminate of 700 x 450 mm and a nominal thickness of 2.43 mm was manufactured (<span id="cite-_Ref133064456"></span>[[#_Ref133064456|Figure 1]]b) with stacking sequence [0/+45/-45/0/-45/+45/90/-45/+45]s.
@@ Line 81: / Line 80: @@
 Figure 2. (a) Schematic representation of the single-sided welded joint configuration; (b) Induction welding setup: (1) Load cell, (2) Non-conductive block, (3) Flux concentrator, (4) Induction coil, (5) SCFR/PEEK, (6) CFR/PEEK.</div>
 {| style="width: 100%;margin: 1em auto 0.1em auto;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-
@@ Line 105: / Line 106: @@
 |  style="border-bottom: 1pt solid black;text-align: center;vertical-align: top;"|4.58
 |}
 The final SCFR/PEEK sample welded to the CFRP/PEEK laminate is shown in <span id='cite-_Ref133371245'></span>[[#_Ref133371245|Figure 3]]a. Block shear specimens were obtained by machining the SCFR/PEEK part and the CFRP/PEEK laminate as indicated in <span id='cite-_Ref133371245'></span>[[#_Ref133371245|Figure 3]]b, resulting in three specimens per welded part. The sample geometry (<span id='cite-_Ref133371245'></span>[[#_Ref133371245|Figure 3]]c) was defined based on the ASTM D4501 standard, consisting of a 25 x 25 mm SCFR/PEEK part welded to a CFR/PEEK plate of 50 x 50 mm.

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 <div id="_Ref133062869" class="center" style="width: auto; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;">
 Table 1. FDM process parameters for KT-CF10.</div>
 {| style="width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;"
 |-