An objective comparison of common vacuum assisted resin infusion processes

This study executed an objective comparison between Resin Infusion methods currently used, providing a level comparison in identical circumstances. Six different resin infusion methods including VARTM, SCRIMP, CAPRI, DBVI, VAP, and PI were investigated to discern if the modifications made relevant t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Composites. Part A, Applied science and manufacturing Applied science and manufacturing, 2019-10, Vol.125, p.105528, Article 105528
Hauptverfasser: van Oosterom, S., Allen, T., Battley, M., Bickerton, S.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study executed an objective comparison between Resin Infusion methods currently used, providing a level comparison in identical circumstances. Six different resin infusion methods including VARTM, SCRIMP, CAPRI, DBVI, VAP, and PI were investigated to discern if the modifications made relevant to the standard VARTM process have a distinguishable effect, and how significant the effect was. Process parameters were found to vary significantly between methodologies, with large differences in infusion time, laminate pressure and relaxation, and resin usage. Fibre volume fractions were found to vary significantly both between methodologies and along the infusion length of some panels. Differences of up to 13% and 10% were found in short beam strength and compression strength between the infusion methods. There was found to be no significant difference in void content between methodologies once the best process parameters had been established, with the exception of PI which resulted in a significant increase.
ISSN:1359-835X
1878-5840
DOI:10.1016/j.compositesa.2019.105528