Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T16:13:13.224Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Identifying damage to composite materials based on deep residual shrinkage network

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2024

J. Li
Affiliation:
Rocket Force University of Engineering, Shaanxi, Xi’an, China
Y. Zhang*
Affiliation:
Rocket Force University of Engineering, Shaanxi, Xi’an, China
X. Chang
Affiliation:
Rocket Force University of Engineering, Shaanxi, Xi’an, China
C. Sun
Affiliation:
Rocket Force University of Engineering, Shaanxi, Xi’an, China
J. Lu
Affiliation:
Rocket Force University of Engineering, Shaanxi, Xi’an, China
*
Corresponding author: Y. Zhang; Email: 2040242495@qq.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Interlaminar delamination damage is a common and typical defect in the context of structural damage in carbon fiber-reinforced resin matrix composites. The technology to identify such damage is crucial for improving the safety and reliability of structures. In this paper, we fabricated carbon fiber-reinforced composite laminates with different degrees of delamination damage, conducted static load experiments on them and used femtosecond fiber Bragg grating sensors (fsFBG) to determine their structural state to investigate the effects of delamination damage on their performance. We constructed a model to identify damage based on the deep residual shrinkage network, and used experimental data to enable it to identify varying degrees of delamination damage to carbon fiber-reinforced composites with an accuracy of 97.98%.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Aeronautical Society
Figure 0

Table 1. Mechanical parameters of the T800 unidirectional carbon fiber pre-pregs

Figure 1

Figure 1. Cured carbon fiber-reinforced composite laminate.

Figure 2

Table 2. Parameters of pre-fabricated delamination damage to the composite

Figure 3

Figure 2. Patch-type fsFBG sensor with a pre-load.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Schematic diagram of the simulated concentrated static load.

Figure 5

Figure 4. Plot of the centre wavelength recorded by the fsFBG sensor versus the size of the layering.

Figure 6

Table 3. The 24 modes set according to the parameters of layering damage

Figure 7

Figure 5. Plot of the centre wavelength of the fsFBG sensor versus the thickness of the layering.

Figure 8

Figure 6. Plot of the centre wavelength distribution map of 24 sets of experimental data.

Figure 9

Figure 7. Plot of variations in the centre wavelengths of damage modes 1 to 12.

Figure 10

Figure 8. Comparison diagram of convolutional neural network underlying mapping and deep residual network identity mapping.

Figure 11

Figure 9. Residual blocks and overall framework diagram of deep residual networks.

Figure 12

Figure 10. Two types of residual blocks improved by deep residual shrinkage network.

Figure 13

Figure 11. Iteration of error in the proposed model.

Figure 14

Figure 12. Accuracy of the proposed model.

Figure 15

Figure 13. Results of damage identification of the proposed model.