Materials and Design 43 (2013) 283–290

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /matdes

The influence of hybridization on impact damage behavior and residualcompression strength of intraply basalt/nylon hybrid composites

Majid Tehrani Dehkordi a,⇑, Hooshang Nosraty b, Mahmood Mehrdad Shokrieh c, Giangiacomo Minak d,Daniele Ghelli d

a Department of Carpet, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord 56811-88617, Iranb Department of Textile Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran 15914, Iranc Composites Research Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering Department, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran 16846-13114, Irand DIEM Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, Viale Risorgimento 2, 40136 Bologna, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history:Received 22 May 2012Accepted 2 July 2012Available online 20 July 2012

Keywords:IntraplyHybridImpactBasaltNylon

0261-3069/$ - see front matter � 2012 Elsevier Ltd. Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2012.07.005

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 912 487 4180; faE-mail address: mtehrani@aut.ac.ir (M. Tehrani De

Low-velocity impact and compression after impact (CAI) tests were performed to investigate the impactbehavior of hybrid composite laminates reinforced by basalt-nylon intraply fabrics. The purpose of usingthis hybrid composite is to combine the good mechanical property of basalt fiber as a brittle fiber with theexcellent impact resistance of nylon fiber as a ductile fiber. Five different types of woven fabric with dif-ferent contents of nylon (0%, 25%, 33.3%, 50% and 100%) were used as reinforcement. The effect of nylon/basalt fiber content on impact parameters, impact damage behavior and CAI strength was studied at dif-ferent nominal impact energy levels (16, 30 and 40 J). The results indicate that at low impact energy,hybridization and variation in basalt/nylon fiber content cannot improve the impact performance of com-posite plates. With increasing impact energy, the impact performance becomes more and more depen-dent on the content of nylon and basalt.

� 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Interest has been growing, particularly in the few last decades,in the use of composite materials in structural applications becauseof numerous advantages, including low weight, high monotonicand fatigue strengths, high chemical resistance, design flexibilityand the possibility of manufacturing large integral shell structures[1]. In spite of these advantages, composite materials have lowresistance under impact loading, which can cause various typesof damage, such as matrix cracks, delaminations and fiber break-age. This damage causes reduction in structural stiffness, leadingto growth of the damage and final fracture [2]. Therefore, for anappropriate design, it is important to ensure that the residualstrength of a damaged structure is sufficient either for service untilthe damage is detected or for the rest of the service life of thatstructure. CAI is a method for determining the degradation in thecompressive strength of the composite plate after prior impactloading [2–4]. Many researchers such as Gustin et al. [5], Akhbariet al. [6], Imielinska et al. [7], Kim et al. [8] and Naik et al. [9] inves-tigated the influence of hybridization on impact performance ofcomposite laminates using CAI results.

ll rights reserved.

x: +98 382 722 0007.hkordi).

In order to enhance the impact performance of composite lam-inates, extensive studies have been performed, which include con-trolling fiber/matrix interfacial bond strength [10,11], modifyingfiber fabrics [12] and using hybrid composite structures [6,13,14].

Hybrid composites are materials made by combining two ormore different types of fibers in a common matrix. They offer arange of properties that cannot be obtained with a single kind ofreinforcement. Hybridization allows designers to tailor the com-posite properties to the exact needs of the structure under consid-eration. Depending on the geometric pattern of fiber arrangements,hybrid composites may be classified as interply hybrids, where lay-ers of the two (or more) homogeneous reinforcements are stacked,and intraply hybrids in which tows of the two (or more) constitu-ent types of fibers are mixed in the same layer [14–16]. While themechanical properties of interply hybrid composite have beeninvestigated by many researchers [7,9,16–18], the properties ofintraply hybrid composites have not been studied extensively.Among a few publications in this subject area, Qing Zeng et al.[19] studied stress concentrations in a carbon–glass/epoxy intraplyhybrid composite sheet. Chamis et al. [20], Bhatia [21], Pegorettiet al. [16], Park and Jang [22] and Wang [15] investigated mechan-ical properties such as tensile, flexural, interlaminar shear and Izodimpact properties of intraply hybrid laminates made of different fi-bers. Akhbari et al. [6] and Tehrani et al. [14] studied low velocitydrop impact and CAI of ductile/brittle fiber intraply hybridcomposites.

284 M. Tehrani Dehkordi et al. / Materials and Design 43 (2013) 283–290

As an inorganic fiber, basalt fiber has a good tensile strength,modulus and compressive strength. Some investigators claimedthat these properties are better than those of glass [17,23–26].Besides good mechanical properties, basalt fiber has high thermalstability, and good electrical and sound insulating properties.Basalt has much better chemical resistance than glass fibers, espe-cially in strong alkalis [17,24]. Basalt fibers are therefore more andmore widely studied and used in polymer composites. In spite ofthese advantages, basalt composites – like other brittle fiber com-posites – have low resistance under impact loading [15]. In manyinvestigations, an improvement in the impact properties of poly-mer composites with inorganic brittle reinforcements, such as car-bon, glass or basalt fibers, was attempted by mixing them withmore ductile organic fibers, such as aramid, polyester or nylon.One of the most important purposes of using this hybrid compositeis to combine the good mechanical property of brittle fibers withthe excellent impact resistance of ductile fibers [6,7,15,22]. Limitedresearch has been performed on the hybrid of basalt and ductilefiber composites [15].

During our previous work it was found that the impact perfor-mance of basalt/nylon fiber intraply hybrid composites is signifi-cantly affected by the nylon/basalt fiber content [14]. The currentstudy is focused on the impact and CAI properties of nylon/basaltintraply hybrid composites. The behavior of the laminates is stud-ied through low energy impact damage while the damage toler-ance is expressed by impact parameters and post-impact residualcompressive strength. The effect of nylon/basalt fiber content onimpact performance is the main point of interest in the presentpaper.

2. Experimental procedure

2.1. Material and specimen preparation

The fabrics used for these intraply hybrid composites is a plaintype of basalt and nylon 6 fibers. The basalt fiber was supplied byHengdian Group Shanghai Russia & Gold Basalt Fiber Co. (China) inthe form of 800 Tex, and 360 filament yarn. The nylon fiber wassupplied by Junma Tyre Cord Co. (China) in the form of 365 Tex,360 filament yarn. These fibers were supplied with a suitable coatfor epoxy resin. The matrix resin is an ML-506 epoxy resin suppliedby Mokarrar Co. (Iran). HA11 was added to the matrix resin as thehardener. The physical properties of basalt fiber, nylon fiber andepoxy resin are given in Table 1.

All fabrics were produced in the Textile Engineering Depart-ment of Amirkabir University (Iran) in the form of both homoge-neous and intraply hybrid fabrics with a rapier loom. Fivedifferent types of fabric were produced, namely, a homogeneousbasalt fabric, a homogeneous nylon fabric and three hybridbasalt/nylon fabrics with different volume percentages of nylon(25%, 33.3%, 50%). For hybrid fabrics, the percentage of nylon orbasalt was equal in the warp and weft directions. The fabric countsin the warp and weft directions were 5 ends/cm and 5 picks/cm, forhomogeneous and hybrid samples. More details about the compo-sition of each fabric are reported in Table 2. Fabrics were coded byusing the percentage of basalt and nylon. For example, sample

Table 1Physical and mechanical properties of fibers and matrix.

Properties Basalt Nylon 6 Epoxy

Density (kg/m�3) 2700 1250 1110Tensile modulus (GPa) 85 2.45 2.73Tensile strength (MPa) 1800 1000 75Elongation at break (%) 2 20.5 2

66B33N has 66% basalt and 33% nylon in the warp and weftdirection.

All composites were made by the hand lay-up method at theIran Composites Institute (Iran). Composites consisted of four-plylaminates prepared by impregnating each fabric with epoxy resinby means of a hand roller. In Fig. 1 composites are coded accordingto the fabric codes. Two types of laminates were obtained: intraplyhybrids (laminates b, c, d) and homogeneous types (laminates a, e).Composite plates were laminated with the quasi-isotropic stackingsequence [(+45, �45)/(0, 90)]s. The designations (+45/�45) and (0/90) represent a single layer of woven fabric with the warp and weftfibers oriented at the specified angles. The laminates were pre-pared in the form of square plates (300 � 300 mm2) and the spec-imens were then cut from the laminates by using an air-cooleddiamond saw. The average thickness, fiber volume fraction, densityand void content for the laminates are reported in Table 3.

2.2. Mechanical tests

All tests were performed in the Department of Industrial Engi-neering of Bologna University, Italy. Low velocity impact tests wereperformed according to ASTM D 7136 [27] on rectangular speci-mens with a length of 150 mm and a width of 100 mm. A lowvelocity instrumented falling weight impact tester was employed,with a 12.7 mm diameter hemispherical nose, fitted in the impac-tor with the mass of 1.22 ± 0.01 kg (Fig. 2a and b). The specimenswere firmly fixed at all edges by using four 12 mm diameterclamps (Fig. 2c). After the first impact of the specimen, a brakemechanism was activated to prevent a second strike. During theimpact, the resistive force exerted by the specimen on the strikeras a function of time was measured by a piezoelectric load celland stored in a computer for subsequent display and analysis.The actual velocity of the impactor before and after collision wasmeasured by a laser device located approximately 30 mm abovethe specimen surface (Fig. 2a). Three different heights of 1.3, 2.4and 3.3 m were chosen, corresponding to nominal impact energiesof 16, 30 and 40 J, respectively. At least three tests were performedat each drop height for each specimen type.

After the impact test, all specimens were compression tested toanalyze how their strength was reduced by the impact damage.The tests were conducted at room temperature, using a servo-hydraulic machine with 250 kN load capacity (Fig. 3a). The testswere carried out at a constant crosshead-displacement rate of0.02 mm/s, until failure of the laminate was reached (Fig. 3c).The laminates were supported in a fixture built according to ASTMD 7137 [28], shown in Fig. 3b. By using this fixture the specimenswere clamped at the top and bottom edges. To prevent buckling ofthe specimen under compressive load, a lateral support was alsoprovided in the fixture. During the test, a data acquisition systemrecorded the force versus displacement history. Three tests wereperformed for each specimen type. Three non-impacted specimensof each laminate were also tested to determine the variation ofresidual strength due to the damage produced by impact. The re-sults of the impact and compression tests are reported as meanand standard deviation.

2.3. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)

SEM analysis was performed on a large number of test samplesto determine the actual failure mechanisms. The microstructure ofthe sample was studied using a Philips (model XL30, the Nether-lands) scanning electron microscope. All specimens were coatedwith a thin layer of gold to improve the sample conductivity andto avoid the accumulation of charges. The samples were viewedthough the surface area.

Fig. 1. Stacking sequences of composite laminates: (a) 100B, (b) 75B25N, (c) 66B33N, (d) 50B50N, (e) 100N.

Table 2Composition of the various plain weave fabrics used for composite manufacturing.

Type of fabric Fabric code Mass per unit area (kg/m�2) Density (kg/m�3) Fiber type Fiber distribution (vol %)

Warp Weft Warp Weft

Basalt Nylon Basalt Nylon

Homogeneous basalt 100B 0.795 2700 Basalt 50 0 50 0Basalt/nylon(75/25) 75B25N 0.743 2320 Basalt & Nylon 37.5 12.5 37.5 12.5Basalt/nylon(66/33) 66B33N 0.697 2180 Basalt & Nylon 33.3 16.6 33.3 16.6Basalt/nylon(50/50) 50B50N 0.628 1950 Basalt & Nylon 25 25 25 25Homogeneous nylon 100N 0.411 1250 Nylon 0 50 0 50

Table 3Thickness, fiber volume fraction, density and void content for the various laminates.

Laminate code Thickness (mm) vf (%) qth (kg m�3) Pexp (kg m�3) Void content (%)

100B 3.11 56 1840 1830 0.5475B25N 3.00 63 1750 1720 1.7166B33N 3.24 62 1650 1610 2.4250B50N 3.62 49 1380 1360 1.45100N 3.21 66 1160 1150 0.86

M. Tehrani Dehkordi et al. / Materials and Design 43 (2013) 283–290 285

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Impact parameters

In our previous study, the drop impact parameters of basalt/ny-lon fiber intraply hybrid composites are presented [14]. The resultsof the impact parameters are reported in Table 4.

The contact force results show that the 100B and 100N have thehighest and least maximum loads, respectively. The hybrid com-posites show approximately the same maximum force between100B and 100N in all impact energy levels. In addition, it can beseen that by increasing the nylon/basalt fiber ratio, the contactduration increases. The deformation of nylon fibers is believed tobe the key factor that improves the impact resistance of the com-

Fig. 2. Drop weight tester (a) overall view of the machine, (b) impactor load cell, (c) support fixture.

286 M. Tehrani Dehkordi et al. / Materials and Design 43 (2013) 283–290

posites [29]. By increasing the content of nylon (ductile fiber), thecomposites become less stiff and bear the applied load up to ahigher deflection and failure occurs in a ductile manner [16,22].The maximum deflection results in Table 4 confirm this suggestion.

The impact response of each system can be qualified by calcu-lating the established value of damping index [30,31]. The resultsof the damping index show that at low impact energy, hybridiza-tion and variation in basalt/nylon fiber content cannot improvethe impact performance of composite plates. With increasing im-pact energy, the impact performance becomes more and moredependent on the content of nylon and basalt. At high impact en-ergy, the hybrid samples, especially 66B33N, have a better impactperformance than the homogenous ones.

3.2. Impact damage behavior

The important step in studying the impact behavior of compos-ite materials is to characterize the type of the damage induced inthe impacted specimens. The microscopy of impact failures in hy-brid composites requires attention because of the various possiblefailure modes [9]. Fig. 4 shows SEM studies on the failure surface ofhomogenous and intraply hybrid composites. SEM observation ofthe fracture surfaces of the pure basalt composite (100B) showedfiber fracture as the predominant failure mechanism (Fig. 4a andb). Therefore, the integrity of this composite was demolished inimpacted area. As the pure basalt composite is subjected to the im-pact, the sudden stress transferred from the matrix to the fiber ex-ceeds the fiber strength, hence resulting in the fracture of thebasalt fibers at the crack plane [15]. At high impact energy, thework of fiber fracture needs more energy and thus the elastic en-

ergy decreases (Table 4). Fig. 4f and g shows that the fracture modeof pure nylon was different. It can be observed that, in this sample,the surface appeared without any fiber fracture and the matrixcracking occurred over an extensive area (Fig. 4f). The pure nyloncomposite shows the poor interfacial bonding between fibers andmatrix that produces a relatively clean surface over the pulledout fibers (Fig. 4g) due to greater extent of delamination. The dif-ferent intraply hybrid samples have very similar SEM micrographs.Hybrid composite fractures show the presence of broken basalt fi-ber and matrix cracking, which are evident in Fig. 4c–e. In thesesamples, the basalt breakage happened especially on the back sideof specimens (Fig. 4c and e). In high nylon content specimens, ny-lon yarns help the damaged basalt yarns and the integrity of thesecomposites after impact was therefore maintained (Fig. 4c and d).The high degrees of fiber pull out as seen in the case of pure nylonand hybrid composites provide clear evidence of the shear failurein these composites.

3.3. Compression after impact

The CAI test was used widely to evaluate the residual strengthsof the composite laminates [5–9]. Fig. 5 shows a typical plot ofstress–strain obtained from instrumented buckling testing. Thisfigure shows the various changes in failure mechanism duringbuckling event. During the tests, all specimens are loaded uniaxial-ly until the first inflection is reached. The point of inflection in thestress–strain plot was used to determine the critical bucklingpoint. After the critical point, the test continued until the failurepoint (maximum stress) was reached [32].

Fig. 3. Apparatus for CAI test. (a) Servo-hydraulic machine. (b) Support fixture. (c) Specimen during test.

Table 4Parameters of impact events for different nylon/basalt fiber content.

Impact energy Samples Maximum force (kN) Contact duration (ms) Max deflection (mm) Elastic energy (J) Damping index

15 J 100B 4.10 5.0 8.25 8.76 0.7975B25N 3.59 5.9 9.93 7.88 1.0166B33N 3.34 6.1 10.49 8.01 0.9850B50N 3.18 6.3 11.19 7.87 0.99100N 2.36 9.3 15.81 7.64 1.05

30 J 100B 5.24 5.3 11.16 8.33 2.5375B25N 4.60 5.9 12.76 8.79 2.3066B33N 4.67 6.0 13.33 10.81 1.7050B50N 4.55 5.8 12.81 11.40 1.58100N 2.83 10.4 21.03 8.50 2.45

40 J 100B 5.18 8.3 14.87 0.87 40.7275B25N 4.52 6.9 15.04 6.54 4.4666B33N 4.60 6.3 15.71 9.57 2.7350B50N 4.59 5.5 13.58 6.54 4.25100N 2.29 10.8 26.07 3.03 10.56

M. Tehrani Dehkordi et al. / Materials and Design 43 (2013) 283–290 287

The critical and failure loads were determined from the force–displacement curve. The compression strength and strain of thespecimen are calculated by following expressions [28]:

rc ¼ F=ðw_tÞ ð1Þ

e ¼ DL=L� 100 ð2Þ

where rc is the compressive strength (MPa), e is the strain (%), F isthe compression force (N), DL is the distance variation betweengrips of compressive machine, L, w and t are the length, widthand thickness of the specimen (mm) respectively. The critical andfailure strengths of non-impacted and impacted specimens are re-ported in Table 5.

Fig. 6 shows the variation of stress versus strain for non-im-pacted specimens. It can be seen that, by increasing the nylon con-tent, the critical and failure strength decreased. In these figure, the100B laminate shows the highest critical and failure strength, asteep initial slope and low failure strain. On the contrary, the100N laminate exhibits the least critical and failure strength, aslow load rise and high failure strain. These features suggest thatwith an increasing content of nylon, the composite bears the ap-plied load up to a higher strain, and failure occurs in a ductile man-ner [16,22]. For high nylon content specimens, nylon yarns helpthe damaged basalt yarns, and after buckling the specimen returnsto its original shape. The integrity of these composites after buck-ling was therefore maintained.

The impact performance of different composites can be rankedby calculating the residual compression strength. The residual

Fig. 4. The fracture surface of the homogenous and intraply hybrid composites.

Fig. 5. Typical plot of compression stress–strain.

Table 5Critical and failure strength of non-impacted and impacted specimens.

Sample Critical strength (MPa) Failure strength (MPa)

Non-impacted 16 J 30 J 40 J Non-impacted 16 J 30 J 40 J

100B 65.7 ± 1.8 62.3 ± 2.1 50.6 ± 1.5 37.7 ± 1.6 77.1 ± 2.5 71.7 ± 2.8 60.4 ± 2.1 39.0 ± 1.775B25N 41.1 ± 1.1 38.6 ± 1.6 34.2 ± 1.3 25.2 ± 1.1 45.0 ± 1.8 40.8 ± 1.9 38.2 ± 1.3 30.5 ± 0.866B33N 29.6 ± 1.4 25.0 ± 1.1 23.7 ± 1.2 18.9 ± 0.7 34.0 ± 1.5 30.7 ± 1.5 28.1 ± 1.0 26.0 ± 1.150B50N 24.6 ± 1.2 23.8 ± 0.6 20.6 ± 0.8 17.8 ± 0.5 29.1 ± 1.2 27.0 ± 0.9 23.6 ± 0.7 20.6 ± 0.8100N 9.8 ± 0.4 8.1 ± 0.2 8.0 ± 0.2 5.8 ± 0.1 13.3 ± 0.5 12.9 ± 0.3 12.0 ± 0.3 10.3 ± 0.2

Fig. 6. Compression stress versus strain curves of non-impacted specimens.

288 M. Tehrani Dehkordi et al. / Materials and Design 43 (2013) 283–290

Fig. 7. Residual critical strength of samples with different contents of nylon andbasalt.

Fig. 8. Residual failure strength of samples with different contents of nylon andbasalt.

M. Tehrani Dehkordi et al. / Materials and Design 43 (2013) 283–290 289

strength is defined as the ratio between the compression strengthof an impacted specimen and the compression strength of a non-impacted specimen [6,28]. Figs. 7 and 8 show the residual criticaland failure stress for composites with different basalt/nylon fibercontent at various impact levels. It can be seen that strength afterimpact varies considerably with content of nylon and impact en-ergy level. In specimens with the same content of fiber, the CAIstrength is reduced by increasing the energy level. This is becausethe low velocity impact event can create damage such as crack,delamination and fiber breakage in the specimens. This damage

Fig. 9. Failure patterns for non-impacte

can produce localized buckling and consequently reduce CAIstrength [6].

The results show that the influence of fiber type is extremelymarked. With increasing impact energy, the content of nylon andbasalt becomes more and more important as regards residualstrength. These results are in agreement with what was found bythe preset authors in a previous study [14].

For all impact energies, the residual critical and failure stress isdifferent. As can be seen in Fig. 8, at 16 and 30 J impact energy, 50B50N has the best residual critical strength. At 40 J impact energy,the hybrid composites show higher critical strength than thehomogenous ones. At this impact energy, the critical stress of100B and 100N decreases more than 42% during the impact event.Among the hybrid composites, 50B50N has the highest residualcritical stress. These results are compatible with what was foundby Akhbari and co-workers [6] who reported that glass/polyesterintraply hybrid composites showed better residual critical strengththan those of the homogenous glass fiber composites.

Fig. 8 shows that at all energy levels, 100N has the highestresidual failure strength. At 30 and 40 J impact energy, 100B hasthe least residual failure strength. At 40 J impact energy, thestrength of 100B decreases 50% during the impact event. In thiscase, 100N and 66B33N have the best impact response. The failurestress of these specimens is 77% of non-damaged composite plates.

3.4. Buckling failure pattern

Typical examples of failure patterns for non-impacted and im-pacted samples due to compression loads are shown in Fig. 9. Inthe non-impacted samples, the deformed shape of the buckledlaminate has two half-waves, not exactly symmetric with respectto the median horizontal axis. The impacted samples show a buck-ling shape with one half-wave and in these samples compressionfailure occurred exactly at the damaged zone. In these specimens,cracks were initiated at the impacted region and progressed in atransverse direction to the loading direction with little or no dam-age growth in the loading direction.

4. Conclusions

This study investigated the impact properties of basalt-nylon/epoxy intraply hybrid composite plates subjected to different im-pact energy. Based on the study, the following observations regard-ing the impact parameter and impact damage behavior can bemade:

� At low impact energy, hybridization and variation in basalt/nylon fiber content cannot improve the impact performanceof composite plates. With increasing impact energy, the impactperformance becomes more and more dependent on the con-tent of nylon and basalt.

d and impacted buckled samples.

290 M. Tehrani Dehkordi et al. / Materials and Design 43 (2013) 283–290

� The toughening mechanism of pure basalt composite underimpact is fiber fracture. The essential work performed in theinner fracture process zone of pure nylon reinforced compositesis the energy required to debond and pull out the fibers, and todeform the matrix, including crazing and shear yielding.� The mechanisms responsible for toughening of hybrid compos-

ites under impact loading are nylon fiber pullout, basalt fiberfracture and matrix shear yielding. There is competitionbetween matrix deformation and fiber-related toughening.Rigid fibers also restrict the matrix deformation, leading to adecrease in the extent of delamination.

From the results obtained by CAI testing, the following conclu-sions can be drawn:

� In the non-impacted specimens, the pure basalt fiber laminateshows the highest buckling and failure strength, the higheststiffness and the least failure strain. On the contrary, the purenylon laminate exhibits the least buckling and failure strength,the least stiffness and the highest failure strain.� With increasing impact energy, the content of nylon and basalt

becomes more and more important as regards the residualstrength.� At 16 and 30 J impact energy, the hybrid laminate with equal

content of nylon and basalt fibers has the best residual bucklingstrength. At 40 J impact energy, the hybrid composites showhigher buckling strength than both homogenous composites.

References

[1] Abrate S. Impact on composite structures. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress; 1998.

[2] Ishai O, Shragai A. Effect of impact loading on damage and residualcompressive strength of CFRP laminated beams. Compos Struct1990;14:319–37.

[3] Papanicolaou GC, Stavropoulos CD. New approach for residual compressivestrength prediction of impacted CFRP laminates. Composites 1995;26:517–23.

[4] Lee SH, Aono Y, Noguchi H. Residual compressive characteristics of hybridcomposites with non-woven tissue after static indentation damage. Jpn SocMech Eng (A) 2003;69(686):465–72.

[5] Gustin J, Joneson A, Mahinfalah M, Stone J. Low velocity impact of combinationkevlar/carbon fiber sandwich composites. Compos Struct 2005;69(4):396–406.

[6] Akhbari M, Shokrieh MM, Nosraty H. A study on buckling behavior ofcomposite sheet reinforced by hybrid woven fabrics. Trans CSME2008;32:81–9.

[7] Imielinska K, Castaings M, Wojtyra R, Haras J, Le Clezio E, Hosten B. Air-coupledultrasonic C-scan technique in impact response testing of carbon fiber andhybrid: glass, carbon and kevlar/epoxy composites. J Mater Process Technol2004;158:513–22.

[8] Kim JK, Sham ML, Sohn MS, Hamada H. Effect of hybrid layers with differentsilane coupling agents on impact response of glass fabric reinforced vinylestermatrix composites. Polymer 2001;42:7455–60.

[9] Naik NK, Ramasimha RR, Arya H, Prabhu SV, Shamarao N. Impact response anddamage tolerance characteristics of glass–carbon/epoxy hybrid compositeplates. Composites 2001;32:565–74.

[10] Kessler A, Bledzki AK. Low velocity impact behavior of glass/epoxy cross-plylaminates with different fiber treatments. Polym Compos 1999;20(2):269–78.

[11] Hirai Y, Hamada H, Kim JK. Impact response of woven glass–fabric composites.Effect of fiber surface treatment. Compos Sci Technol 1998;58:91–104.

[12] Kim JK, Leung LM, Lee SWR, Hirai Y. Impact performance of a woven fabricCFRP laminate. Polym Compos 1996;4(8):549–61.

[13] Jang J, Moon SI. Impact behaviour of carbon fiber/ultra-high modulus PE fiberhybrid composites. Polym Compos 1995;16(4):325–39.

[14] Tehrani Dehkordi M, Nosraty H, Shokrieh MM, Minak G, Ghelli D. Low velocityimpact properties of intraply hybrid composites based on basalt and nylonwoven fabrics. Mater Des 2010;31:3835–44.

[15] Wang X. Low velocity impact properties of 3D woven basalt/aramid hybridcomposites. Compos Sci Technol 2008;68:444–50.

[16] Pegoretti A, Fabbri E, Migliaresi C, Pilati F. Intraply and interply hybridcomposites based on E-glass and poly (vinyl alcohol) woven fabrics: tensileand impact properties. Polym Int 2004;53:1290–7.

[17] Liu Q, Giffard HS, Shaw MT, McDonnell AM, Parnas RS. Preliminaryinvestigation of basalt fiber composite properties for applications intransportation. The Official Newsletter of the International Institute for FRPin Construction 2005; 2. p. 6–8.

[18] Hosur MV, Abdullah M, Jeelani S. Studies on the low velocity impact responseof woven hybrid composites. Compos Struct 2004;67:253–62.

[19] Zeng Q, Huang X, Lin X. Study on stress concentrations in an intraply hybridcomposite sheet. Appl Math Mech 2001;22:154–9.

[20] Chamis CC, Lark RF, Sinclair JH. Mechanical property characterization ofintraply hybrid composites. Pentagon reports 2003. Report number A665103.

[21] Bhatia NMH. Strength and fracture characteristics of graphite-glass intraplyhybrid composites. Compos Mater Test Des 1982;22:183–99. 6th conference.

[22] Park R, Jang J. The effect of hybridization on the mechanical performance ofaramid/polyethylene intraply fabric composites. Compos Sci Technol1998;58:1621–8.

[23] Pavlovski D, Mislavsky B, Antonov A. CNG cylinder manufacturers test basaltfiber. Reinf Plast 2007:37–9.

[24] Liu Q, Shaw MT, McDonnell AM, Parnas RS. Investigation of basalt fibercomposites mechanical properties for application in transportation. PolymCompos 2006;27:41–8.

[25] Carmisciano S, Rosa IMD, Sarasini F, Tamburrano A, Valente M. Basalt wovenfiber reinforced vinyl ester composites: flexural and electrical properties.Mater Des 2011;32:337–42.

[26] Artemenko SE. Polymer composites materials made from carbon, basalt andglass fibers, structures and properties. Fiber Chem 2003;35:226–9.

[27] ASTM Standard D.7136. Standard test method for measuring the damageresistance of a fiber reinforced polymer matrix composite to a drop-weightimpact event; 2005.

[28] ASTM Standard D.7137. Standard test method for compressive residualstrength properties of damaged polymer matrix composite plates; 2005.

[29] McIntyre JE. Synthetic fibers: nylon, polyester, acrylic, polyolefin. CRC Press;2005.

[30] Bledzki AK, Gassan J, Kessler A. Loss energy of composite materials, part G:impact loading. J Test Eval 1999;27(1):36–41.

[31] Walker L, Sohn MS, Hu XZ. Improving impact resistance of carbon–fibrecomposites through interlaminar reinforcement. Composites Part A2002;33:893–902.

[32] Aslan Z, Sahin M. Buckling behaviour and compressive failure of compositelaminates containing multiple large delaminations. Compos Struct2009;89:382–90.