Page 19 - Template Tesis UTM v2.0

Figure 2.21 Load - displacement curves for quasi-static test of carbon
sandwich composites [82] 48

Figure 2.22 Damage area of the tested specimen by digitally
photographing lightbox using “ImageJ” software [92] 49

Figure 2.23 Impact damage between glass and basalt composites (100
J) [86] 52

Figure 2.24 Energy absorption as a function of glass content in hybrid
composite of jute/glass [34] 53

Figure 2.25 Peak load as a function of glass content in hybrid composite
of jute/glass [34] 53

Figure 2.26 Quasi-isotropic (hole) failure type of jute/epoxy under
impact loading [34] 55

Figure 2.27 Anisotropic failure type of glass/jute under impact loading
[34] 55

Figure 2.28 Energy absorption vs volume fraction kevlar in glass/kevlar
hybrid composites [102] 57

Figure 2.29 Stress-strain curves of glass/vinyl ester 59

Figure 2.30 Stress-strain curves of hemp/vinyl ester 60

Figure 2.31 Stress-strain curves of hemp/glass vinyl ester with 50/50 of
weight fraction 60

Figure 2.32 Maximum stress vs strain rates for glass and hemp
composites 61

Figure 2.33 Stress–strain curves of S-2 glass/epoxy at various strain
rates (through-thickness direction) [119] 65

Figure 2.34 Stress and strain curves of dry nylon 6–clay
nanocomposites at three different strain rates [120] 66

Figure 2.35 Stress and strain curves of wet nylon 6-clay nano-
composites at three different strain rates [120] 66

Figure 2.36 Effect of slenderness ratio on the stress-strain curve [122] 69

Figure 3.1 Research flow chart 74

Figure 3.2 Schematic diagram of vacuum infusion process (VIP) 76

Figure 3.3 Hybrid composite stacking sequence; (a) sandwich-like
(SL), and (b) Intercalation (IC) 77

Figure 3.4 Electronic densimeter (MD-300S) 79

Figure 3.5 Specimen dimension for tensile test [125] 81

xv