Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites: Part A
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesa

Comparison of out-of-plane tensile moduli of CFRP laminates obtained

by 3-point bending and direct loading tests
Eiichi Hara a,⇑, Tomohiro Yokozeki b, Hiroshi Hatta c, Yutaka Iwahori a, Takashi Ishikawa d
a
Advanced Composite Research Center, IAT, Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), 6-13-1, Ohsawa, Mitaka-shi, Tokyo 181-0015, Japan
b
Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656, Japan
c
Institute of Space and Astronautical Science (ISAS), Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), 3-1-1, Yoshinodai, Sagamihara, Kanagawa 229-8510, Japan
d
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Nagoya University, Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Aichi 464-8603, Japan

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

Article history: The out-of-plane tensile modulus of laminated carbon fiber reinforced plastics (CFRPs) was evaluated
Received 22 January 2014 through 3-point bending tests using laminated UD-CFRP and quasi-isotropic (QI) CFRP samples with
Received in revised form 25 July 2014 out-of-plane span directions. Direct loading tests of QI-CFRP samples were performed for comparison.
Accepted 1 August 2014
It was shown that the bending modulus measured for a UD-CFRP specimen with L/t > 25 is consistent
Available online 11 August 2014
with the tensile modulus if the bending modulus is less than 15 GPa. An analytical description of the
out-of-plane modulus of thin QI-CFRP samples was derived by modifying the three-dimensional laminate
Keywords:
theory and introducing conditions similar to plane-stress. Subsequently, it was demonstrated that this
A. Polymer–matrix composites (PMCs)
B. Mechanical properties
modified out-of-plane modulus is the lower bound of the apparent bending moduli and that the one
C. Laminate mechanics predicted by the three-dimensional laminate theory is the upper bound. Finally, it was demonstrated that
D. Mechanical testing the 3-point bending test method is more practical than a direct loading test when comparing both
methods.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction strengths of uni-directional (UD)-CFRP and cross ply-CFRP by

Composites are increasingly being used in major structural
parts of modern commercial aircrafts. Whitehead recommended
that potential ‘‘hot spots’’ caused by out-of-plane loading should
be carefully evaluated in design development testing of composite
structure [1]. Similarly, an interlaminar tension or out-of-plane
nature generated as secondary loads in heavily loaded primary
structures was indicated by Ashizawa and Toi [2]. In such applica-
tions, higher toughness in the thickness direction is frequently
required. To satisfy this requirement, CFRPs with increased tough-
ness have been developed (with thermoplastic micro-particles in
interlayers) and various types of three-dimensional reinforcements
have been proposed. Because of the layered nature of these com-
posites, it is important to evaluate the out-of-plane and in-plane
properties. The investigations of out-of-plane mechanical proper-
ties in composite materials have been studied by several research-
ers [3–6]. Several test methods for out-of-plane strength and
modulus of FRP were reviewed by Olsson [3]. Lagace and Weems
reported experimental results for tensile through-the-thickness
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 50 3362 8910; fax: +81 422 40 3548.
E-mail address: eichi12@chofu.jaxa.jp (E. Hara).
direct loading test method [4]. Mespoulet et al. proposed the direct
loading test method modified by using epoxy blocks between a
specimen and rigid end tabs for reducing stress concentrations in
laminated specimen due to Poisson effects [5]. Abot and Daniel
reported the test results about through-thickness mechanical char-
acterizations of woven fabric by direct loading test method [6]. A
direct out-of-plane tensile test method for CFRP laminates was
standardized by the ASTM D 7291 standard [7]. However, this test
method has several limitations. The out-of-plane modulus of lam-
inated composites is calculated from measurements of tensile
strains using strain gauges on the side of a cylindrical specimen
edlm: either two gauges glued at 180° intervals or three strain
gauges at 120° intervals. However, we demonstrated that these
patterns of strain gauges are not sufficient to properly evaluate
the out-of-plane tensile modulus [8]. Furthermore, for anisotropic
material, edlm vary with the specimen thickness, diameter and
measurement position. As a result, out-of-plane moduli values
evaluated using ASTM D 7291 varies with these parameters. In
previous papers [8–10], we have reported a procedure for over-
coming these difficulties for measurements of both the modulus
and strength.
It has been reported that the in-plane tensile modulus could be
evaluated from an in-plane bending test [11]. We assumed that

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2014.08.003
1359-835X/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
78 E. Hara et al. / Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85
Nomenclature
d specimen diameter of cylindrical specimen of the di-
rect loading method
D total beam deflection of the centreline of the 3-point
bending specimen
E tensile modulus
Eb bending modulus
EL Young’s modulus of lamina parallel to fiber
ET Young’s modulus of lamina in-plane transverse to
fiber
EZ Young’s modulus of lamina out-of-plane transverse
to fiber
EZ-QI-UD out-of-plane modulus of laminated composites hav-
ing a quasi-isotropic stacking sequence, derived by
the three-dimensional laminate theory
EZ-QI-UD-dlm out-of-plane modulus of laminated composites hav-
ing a quasi-isotropic stacking sequence evaluated
by direct loading test method
EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED out-of-plane modulus of laminated composites
having a quasi-isotropic stacking sequence, derived
by the modified three-dimensional laminate theory
G shear modulus
GLT shear modulus of lamina in LT plane
GLZ Shear modulus of lamina in LZ plane
GTZ shear modulus of lamina in TZ plane
GXZ-QI-UD XZ plane transverse shear modulus of laminated com-
posites having a quasi-isotropic stacking sequence,
derived by the three-dimensional laminate theory
GYZ-QI-UD YZ plane transverse shear modulus of laminated com-
posites having a quasi-isotropic stacking sequence,
derived by the three-dimensional laminate theory
similar correspondence should be applicable for the out-of-plane
tensile properties. Thus, the purpose of the present study is to pro-
pose and demonstrate that the bending test is an effective proce-
dure for determining the out-of-plane tensile modulus. The
bending modulus varies with the span-to-thickness ratio (L/t).
Hence, we first discuss the effective range of this ratio. Experimen-
tal verifications were made using UD-CFRP and quasi-isotropic
(QI)-CFRP.
2. Relationship between the bending and tensile moduli
The apparent bending modulus obtained by 3-point bending
tests varies with the L/t ratio. This variation arises because the
beam deflection is induced not only by the bending stress but also
by the shear stress [12]. Zweben et al. [11] formulated Eq. (1) to
describe the apparent bending modulus Eb from 3-point bending
tests.
PL3
Eb ¼ ; ð1Þ
4wt3 Db ð1 þ Ds =Db Þ
where Ds is shear deflection in a centrally-loaded bending test
specimen, and Db is the bending deflection. Eq. (2) shows the ratio
of Ds/Db,
  2
Ds E t
¼ 1:2 ; ð2Þ
Db G L
where E and G are tensile and shear moduli, respectively.
Therefore, the apparent bending modulus depends on the ratios
E/G and L/t. The apparent bending modulus approaches the tensile
modulus when Ds/Db is sufficiently small. In this study, the
L length of support span
P bending load at a given point
t thickness of bending test specimen
tdlm specimen thickness of cylindrical specimen of the
direct loading method
tply thickness of 1-ply lamina
w width of bending test specimen
eb bending strain
edlm out-of-plane strain by direct loading test method
Ds shear deflection in a centrally-loaded bending test
specimen
Db bending deflection in a centrally-loaded bending test
specimen
m Poisson’s ratio
mk volume fraction of ply k
mLT Poisson’s ratio relating contraction in the T direction
as a result of extension in the L direction
mLZ Poisson’s ratio relating contraction in the Z direction
as a result of extension in the L direction
mTZ Poisson’s ratio relating contraction in the Z direction
as a result of extension in the T direction
mYZ-QI-UD Poisson’s ratio of laminated composites having a
quasi-isotropic stacking sequence derived by the
three-dimensional laminate theory relating contrac-
tion in the Z direction, as a result of extension in
the Y direction
mZL Poisson’s ratio relating contraction in the L direction
as a result of extension in the Z direction
bending specimens were not a homogeneous material; the thick-
ness direction of the mother plate coincided with the span direc-
tion of bending specimens (Fig. 1). However, the specimen could
still be regarded as being homogeneous based on the thickness of
a single ply and a bending specimen.
3. Experimental
3.1. Materials
The test materials were either UD- or QI-CFRPs. These CFRPs
were fabricated from a unidirectionally-reinforced prepreg make
of reinforcing fiber IM600 and epoxy matrix #133 supplied by
Toho Tenax Co., Ltd. The thickness of a single ply lamina was
0.145 mm. CFRP plates were fabricated by laminating 200 plies
of the prepreg sheets and curing at 180 °C. The resulting
Fig. 1. Specimens and CFRP mother plate. (For interpretation of the references to
color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
 E. Hara et al. / Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85 79

thicknesses of the plates were approximately 29 mm. The stacking

sequences were [0]200 and [(45/0/45/90)25]sym, and the fiber vol-
ume fraction was 55%.

3.2. Specimens

All specimens were machined from the two mother plates. As

shown in Fig. 1, the bending specimens were machined ensuring
that the thickness direction of the mother plate coincided with that
of the span. For comparison, direct loading specimens (with a
cylindrical shape) were prepared, as shown in Fig. 2. This test
was performed only for QI-CFRP samples. Direct loading specimens
with different thicknesses were machined symmetrically from
both sides of the mother plate to obtain samples with the same
centers. To measure deformation, strain gauges (KFG-2-120-C1
supplied by KYOWA, Japan) were used. Fig. 2b. A coordinate system showing origin at the center of the specimen, fiber
direction and definition of the mid-plane. (For interpretation of the references to
color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
3.3. Experimental procedures

The 3-point bending tests and direct loading tests were per-
formed at room temperature (23 ± 3 °C).

3.3.1. 3-point bending tests

Table 1 shows the parameters and numbers of specimens for
the bending tests. The 3-point bending tests were based on the
JIS K 7171 [13] and the ASTM D 790 standard [14]. The radius of
the loading nose was 5 mm and the radii of support noses were
2 mm. Total beam deflection, D, on the centreline was measured.
Fig. 2c. A cross section of cylindrical specimen. (For interpretation of the references
The bending strain eb and bending stress rb were calculated from to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this
Eqs. (3) and (4), respectively. article.)

6Dt
eb ¼ : ð3Þ
L2
Table 1
3PL Specimen data for 3-point bending tests.
rb ¼ : ð4Þ
2wt2 Stacking Length of Thickness Length of span to Number of
sequence span L (mm) t (mm) thickness ratio L/t (–) specimens
UD 25 0.5 50 30
25 1 25 26
25 2 12.5 5
25 3 8.33 5
25 4 6.25 6
15 0.5 30 5
15 1 15 8
15 3 5 4
15 4 3.75 3
7.5 0.5 15 6
7.5 1 7.5 5
7.5 2 3.75 3
7.5 3 2.5 3
End-tab-blocks 7.5 4 1.875 2
QI 25 0.5 50 33
25 1 25 6
25 2 12.5 6
15 0.5 30 5
15 1 15 5
15 2 7.5 5
7.5 0.5 15 5
7.5 1 7.5 5
7.5 2 3.75 5

3.3.2. Direct loading test

Fig. 2a. A test setup. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Table 2 shows the parameters and numbers of specimens for
the direct loading tests. The direct loading tensile tests were based
on the ASTM D 7291 standard. Fig. 2a shows a schematic of the
setup of a specimen and the test fixture. Firstly, the specimen
was bonded to two end-tab-blocks using a film adhesive (AF163-
2K, 120 °C curing temperature, thickness of 0.1 mm, supplied by
3 M, USA). The specimen/end-tab-blocks and end-plates were
80 E. Hara et al. / Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85

Table 2 100
Specimen data for axial loading tests.

Modulus ratio, Eb/E (%)

Thickness of specimens tdlm (mm) Number of specimens
80

4 3 60
16 2 G=1GPa
25 6
40 G=2.5GPa

20 G=5GPa

assembled with a pivoting joint using an axial adjustment fixture.

0
Six strain gauges were glued to the side surface of the specimen; 0 10 20 30 40 50
the centers of the strain gauges were located on the mid-plane Span-to-thickness ratio, L/t (-)
with a spacing of 45°, as shown in Fig. 2b. These gauges measured
Fig. 4. Calculated elastic modulus ratio as a function of span-to-thickness ratio (L/t)
the tensile strain distribution as a function of the applied load. The
using Eq. (1). Tensile modulus E is kept constant at 15 GPa. (For interpretation of the
assembled specimen was attached to two grips of an INSTRON references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of
8500 testing machine and tensile loading was performed at con- this article.)
stant crosshead displacement rate of 0.1 mm/min. The apparent
out-of-plane tensile modulus EZ-QI-UD-dlm was calculated from the
tensile stress increment Dr divided by the corresponding tensile Table 3
Properties of CFRP lamina.
strains increment De, where Dr was determined from the average
stress difference at tensile strains of 500 le and 1500 le. Property IM600/#133 Test method Number of Standard
Specimens deviation
EL (GPa) 152 SACMA SRM 4R 7 2.15
4. Analyses
ET (GPa) 8.21 SACMA SRM 4R 6 0.19
GLT (GPa) 4.36 SACMA SRM 7R 5 0.07
4.1. Sensitivity analysis mLT 0.334 SACMA SRM 4R 7 0.01
EZ (GPa) 8.447 3-point bending test 30 0.15
The relationship between the ratio of the apparent bending GLZ (GPa) 3.993 ASTM D 5379 10 0.04
GTZ (GPa) 2.516 ASTM D 5379 10 0.03
modulus Eb and tensile modulus E (Eb/E) and ratio L/t for a homo-
mLZ 0.346 SACMA SRM 4R 7 0.01
geneous bending specimen was calculated using Eq. (1). Fig. 3 mTZ 0.536 SACMA SRM 4R 6 0.004
shows the modulus ratio as a function of L/t, where E is a variable
but G is kept constant at 2.5 GPa (approximately the value for lam-
inated CFRP, GTZ in Table 3). As can be seen in Fig. 3, when L/t is lar-
ger than 25 and E is less than 20 GPa, Eb attains 98% of E (100%) as the assumption of a linear elastic response. Models of QI-CFRP
L/t tends to infinity. specimens with tdlm = 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 25 and 30 mm were produced
Fig. 4 shows Eb/E as a function of L/t, where G is varied and E is and their strain distributions calculated. Considering the symmetry
kept constant at 15 GPa. It can be seen that when L/t is larger than of the loading and the specimen geometry, the finite-element mod-
25, Eb attains 97% of E, even when G is assumed to be as low as els included only half of the specimen and the adhesive layer, while
1 GPa. The shear modulus of pure resin is higher than 1 GPa in gen- the mid-plane of the specimen was constrained in the Z-direction.
eral; thus, G of FRPs is higher than 1 GPa. Therefore, consideration The end-tab-blocks were assumed to be rigid bodies. Eight-node
of the shear modulus of the polymer matrix of the UD-CFRP com- hexahedral elements with reduced integration were used for
posite is not required in this case, when assuming L/t is at least 25. finite-element models. The thickness of the elements was
Hence, we can conclude that when we obtain Eb less than 15 GPa, 0.145 mm, and the in-plane edge lengths were about 0.5 mm.
Eb is regarded as E in sufficient accuracy if Eb was experimentally The thickness of the adhesive layer elements was set to 0.1 mm.
obtained using a bending specimen with L/t > 25. The strain edlm was calculated from the displacement of the node
point located at half-length of a strain gauge from the mid-plane.
4.2. Finite element analysis (FEA) A mean out-of-plane stress rZ-mean was calculated from FEA by
dividing the total reaction force in the Z-direction of the nodes
The strain distributions generated in QI-CFRP specimens were on the mid-plane by the cross-sectional area of the mid-plane. Sub-
estimated using a commercial FEA program, ABAQUS 6, under sequently, the out-of-plane tensile modulus was estimated from
rZ-mean/edlm.
Most of the elastic moduli of the UD-CFRP required for imple-
100 menting FEA were obtained, as shown in Table 3 (Table 3 shows
Modulus ratio, Eb/E (%)

moduli and Poisson’s ratios of UD-CFRP). However, the in-plane

80 shear modulus (GLT) was obtained from the Advanced Composites
Database System published by the Japan Aerospace Exploration
60 E=5GPa
Agency [15]. The properties of the adhesive layer were also deter-
E=10GPa mined by tensile tests; Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio were
40
found to be 2.75 GPa and 0.33, respectively.
E=20GPa
20
E=150GPa
5. Results
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Span-to-thickness ratio, L/t (-) Fig. 5 shows the set up for the 3-point bending test, and Fig. 6
shows a stress–strain curve of the UD-CFRP obtained from these
Fig. 3. Calculated elastic modulus ratio as a function of span-to-thickness ratio (L/t)
tests. The apparent bending modulus was calculated from the
using Eq. (1). Shear modulus G is kept constant at 2.5 GPa. (For interpretation of the
references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of slope of a stress–strain relation between 25% and 50% of fracture
this article.) stress.
 E. Hara et al. / Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85 81

10
9
QI-CFRP specimen tply
8

t 7
6
w
5
4
3
L
2
1
Fig. 5. Test setup for bending test. (For interpretation of the references to color in 0
this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Fig. 7. The bending modulus of UD-CFRP as a function of length of span-to-

thickness ratio (L/t). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
100%σb legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Bending stress, σb (M Pa)

50%σb
Δσ
25%σb
Δε

Bending strain, εb (mm/mm)

Fig. 6. Stress–strain curve of UD-CFRP obtained by a bending test under the

condition of L25/t0.5. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Fig. 8. Stress–strain curve of QI-CFRP obtained by a bending test under the

Fig. 7 shows the bending modulus of the UD-CFRP as a function
of L/t. From this figure, the average bending modulus at L/t = 50 of
8.45 GPa was chosen as the out-of-plane tensile modulus. A bend-
ing modulus vs. L/t curve predicted using Eq. (1) is also shown in
Fig. 7. The shear modulus G used for this calculation was the value
GTZ, as shown in Table 2. The curves for the conditions 8.1 GPa and
8.7 GPa are also shown in Fig. 7 under the assumption that the
error in measurement of the modulus was 0.3 GPa. The apparent
bending moduli under two conditions: L/t = 7.5/1.0 and 7.5/0.5
were lower than the predicted curves. However, most of the exper-
imental results (except for the above two conditions) lie between
the predicted curves.
Fig. 8 shows a typical stress–strain curve of the QI-CFRP sam-
ples obtained from a bending test. Fig. 9 shows bending modulus
of the QI-CFRP as a function of L/t, where the out-of-plane tensile
modulus of the QI-CFRP is 10.0 GPa.
Fig. 10 shows typical stress–strain curves obtained from a direct
loading test. Fig. 11 shows the moduli of QI-CFRP determined at
positions of 0°, 45° and 90° by the direct loading method as a
function of specimen thickness tdlm. The out-of-plane moduli by
experimental and FEA results were found to be similar, as shown
in Fig. 11. An average of the apparent out-of-plane modulus
EZ-QI-UD-dlm of QI-CFRP samples (tdlm = 25 mm direct loading test
specimen at 0° measurement position) was 10.44 GPa. As shown
in Fig. 11, the experimental and FEA results of EZ-QI-UD-dlm were
higher than those for EZ-QI-UD under the condition where tdlm was
thin (less than 16 mm). This phenomenon was also found in the
case of UD-CFRP samples [9]. The thickness of the specimen at
which the apparent modulus is similar to the material property
depends on the geometry and properties of the specimen lamina
and adhesive. A comparison of the experimental and FEA results
is required to verify the experimental results. Moreover, it is
condition of L25/t0.5. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
complex to select strain measurement positions as the measured
strain values vary with the measurement location, for example,
cases such as UD-CFRP and cross ply-CFRP samples. The aspect
ratio of thickness to diameter of direct loading specimen was less
than 1 in all specimens. The stress and strain curves provide the
stiffness in plane strain for short specimens. The curves provide
the elastic modulus for long specimens. Thus, curves by FEA and
EZ-QI-UD-dlm in Fig. 11 are apparent moduli. In order to determinate
the out-of-plane elastic modulus, high aspect ratio specimen is
required. For instance, Abot and Daniel reported the test results
with direct loading specimen under the condition of aspect ratio
above 3 [6]. Specifically, thickness and in-plane size of specimen
were 16.5 mm and 4.5 mm, respectively [6]. Though aspect ratio
of ASTM D 7291 specimen is less than 1, specimens can be
machined from mother plate produced practically. Specimens
which aspect ratio was less than 1 were tested in this study.
6. Discussion
6.1. Out-of-plane modulus of QI-CFRP
According to the three-dimensional laminate theory given by
Gudmundson and Zang [16], Eqs. (5) and (6) can be directly
derived for laminated composites having a quasi-isotropic stacking
sequence; [45/0/45/90]sym.
EZ
EZ-QI-UD ¼ : ð5Þ
EZ fmTZ EL  mLZ ET g2
1
EL ET fEL þ ð1 þ 2mLT ÞET g
82 E. Hara et al. / Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85

t0.5
t1.0
t2.0
Predicted curve (11.3GPa)
Predicted curve (9.37GPa)

Fig. 9. The bending modulus of QI-CFRP as a function of Length of span-to-thickness ratio (L/t). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is
referred to the web version of this article.)

45 direction and out-of-plane direction, respectively. As shown in

Fig. 2b, an X–Y–Z coordinate system is also defined as L–T–Z coordi-
40
nates with an optional angle rotated around the Z axis. An appendix
35 shows a derivation of Eq. (5) from the three-dimensional laminate
30 theory by Gudmundson.
Stress (MPa)

25
6.2. Modified out-of-plane modulus of QI-CFRP
20
strain1(0)
15 strain2(180) The experimental out-of-plane tensile modulus of QI-CFRP sam-
strain3(90) ples from 3-point bending tests was 10 GPa, while the out-of-plane
10 strain4(270) modulus calculated from Eq. (5) is 11.3 GPa. Eq. (5) for the out-of-
5 strain5(45) plane modulus was derived assuming a laminate with infinite
strain6(225)
0 lengths in the X–Y directions, but the actual thickness of the
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 bending specimen was small (0.5–2.0 mm as shown in Fig. 1).
Strain (µε) Therefore, the effect of increasing out-of-plane modulus reduces
because the in-plane X-direction (thickness direction of bending
Fig. 10. Stress–strain curves of tdlm: 25 mm QI-CFRP obtained by a direct loading specimen) stress decreases.
test. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is
referred to the web version of this article.)
Therefore, the three-dimensional laminate theory was modified
to include a thin bending specimen. Stress–strain relation of
lamina is expressed by the following equation:
2 3
2 3 Q k11 Q k12 Q k16 Q k13 Q k15 Q k14 2 eX 3
rkX6 7
6 7 6 76 7
6 rk 7 6 Q k22 Q k26 Q k23 Q k25 Q k24 76 eY 7
EZ-QI-UD 6 Y 7 6 76 7
6 7 6 76 7
11.3GPa 6 sk 7 6 Q k66 Q k36 Q k56 k 76
Q 46 76 cXY 7
6 XY 7 6 7
6 7 6 76 7;
EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED 6 k 7¼6 76
k 76 e
7 ð7Þ
6 rZ 7 6 Q k33 Q k35 Q 34 76 Z 7
9.37GPa 6 7 6 7
6 7 6 76 7
6 sk 7 6 k 76 c 7
4 XZ 5 6 sym Q k55 Q 45 74 XZ 5
4 5
s k
YZ Q k44
cYZ

where e and c are strain, r and s are stress and k is the number of
ply. Assuming rX, sXY and sXZ were 0, the plane stress status for
X-direction, Eq. (8) is derived as follows:
2 3
2 3 Q k11 Q k12 Q k16 Q k13 Q k15 Q k14 2 eX 3
Fig. 11. Moduli EZ-QI-UD-dlm measured using QI-CFRP measured at 0°, 45° and 90° 0
6 7
positions as functions of specimen thickness tdlm. The solid curves were calculated 6 k 7 6 76 7
6 rY 7 6 Q k22 Q k26 Q k23 Q k25 Q k24 76 eY 7
by finite element analysis. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure 6 7 6 76 7
6 7 6 76 7
legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) 6 0 7 6 Q k66 Q k36 Q k56 k 76
Q 46 76 cXY 7
6 7 6 7
6 7¼6 76 7: ð8Þ
6 k 7 6 76 7
6 rZ 7 6 Q k33 Q k35 k 76 e
Q 34 76 Z 7
2GLZ GTZ 6 7 6 7
GXZ-QI-UD ¼ GYZ-QI-UD ¼ : ð6Þ 6 7 6 76 7
GLZ þ GTZ 6 0 7 6 k 76 c 7
4 5 6 sym Q k55 Q 45 74 XZ 5
4 5
A Cartesian coordinate system of a UD-CFRP is defined as an L–T–Z s k
YZ Q k44
cYZ
system, where L, T and Z are the fiber direction, in-plane transverse
 E. Hara et al. / Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85 83

From this equation, a 3  3 stiffness matrix was derived. is a criterion that restrains the test conditions for laminates,
8 9 02 3 2 3 although this conclusion is limited to the conditions of this study
< rY =
> k
> Q k22 Q k23 Q k24 Qk Q k26 Q k25 [18].
B6 7 6 12 7
>
rkZ > ¼ B6
@4 Q k33 Q k34 7
5
6 Qk
4 13 Q k36 Q k35 7
5 For bending tests, EZ-QI-UD and EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED are the upper
: k ; bound and lower bound solution for the out-of-plane modulus
sYZ sym Q k44 Q k14 Q k46 Q k45
2 31 2 318 for laminates, respectively. The authors propose that the out-of-
9
Q k11 Q k16 Q k15
Qk Q k13 Q k14 k
< eY >
> = plane modulus depends on the ratio of in-plane size to tply, and var-
6 7 6 12 7 C ies between Eqs. (5) and (11) [18].
6
4
k k 7 6 k
Q 66 Q 56 5 4 Q 26 Q k36 Q k46 7 C k
5A> eZ >
: k ; Eqs. (5) and (11) were derived as out-of-plane moduli of QI-
sym Q k55 Q k25 Q k35 Q k45 cYZ CFRP. The bending moduli of QI-CFRP under the condition of high
2 38 9
0k 0k 0k L/t ratio were close to the value calculated with Eq. (11). However,
Q Q 23 Q 24 > ek >
6 22 7< Y = bending moduli do not agree with the value calculated with Eq.
6
4 0k 0k 7
Q 33 Q 34 5 ekZ :
>
: k > ; (11) because the size in the X-direction of actual specimen; thick-
sym 0k
Q 44 cYZ ness of bending specimen is not zero.
ð9Þ
6.3. Influence of wide beam
In addition, Eq. (10) was obtained from Eq. (9) with an inverse
procedure.
8 9 2 38 k 9 In this study, equations of beam theory are used for calculating
k
< eY >
> = S022 k
S023 k S024 k <> rY >= bending stress and bending strain. On the other hand, width of all
6 7 bending specimens was 12.7 mm in this study. The first reason
ek
Z ¼4 S033 k S034 k 5 rkZ : ð10Þ
>
: k > ; >
: k >
cYZ sym S044 k sYZ ; deciding 12.7 mm width was for testing in a measurable load.
The second reason was that the specimen width in ASTM D 790
According to Refs. [17,18], Eq. (10) for the modified out-of-plane is specified to 12.7 mm [14]. As a result, we expected that the
modulus was derived using the conditions of Eq. (10) for laminated bending test method was more practical for general CFRP users.
composites having an 8 ply quasi-isotropic stacking sequence; However, taking into consideration ratio of span length to width,
[45/0/45/90]sym. bending specimens are close to wide beam rather than to beam.

EZ
EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED ¼ : ð11Þ
EZ fmTZ EL  mLZ ET g2 fEL ð3GLT þ ET Þ þ ET GLT ð3  2mLT Þg
1
EL ET  4fE2L ET þ EL E2T þ E2L GLT þ EL ET GLT ð10  2mLT Þ þ E2T GLT ð1  2mLT Þg

The out-of-plane modulus EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED was determined to be The bending deformation is generated with anticlastic curvature
9.37 GPa using Eq. (11) and the data in Table 3. according to theory of elasticity [19]. Moreover, the deflection of
The denominator of Eq. (11) is lower than 1. Therefore, the cylindrical bending under the condition of constrained from
EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED is higher than EZ. Moreover, EZ-QI-UD is higher than anticlastic curvature is different from beam theory [19]. For
EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED under the following two conditions [17], instance, the bending modulus of isotropic material in cylindrical
bending is given by E/(1  m2) [19]. Similarly, bending moduli of
0 < mLT < 1; ð12Þ
UD-CFRP and QI-CFRP in cylindrical bending is given by Eqs. (14)
and (15), respectively.
ET < EL : ð13Þ
EZ EZ
The inequality, EZ-QI-UD > EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED is thought to be reasonable ¼ ¼ 1:007EZ : ð14Þ
1  mZL mLZ 1  0:019  0:346
considering the definition.
Fig. 9 shows two predicted curves calculated from Eq. (1). The EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED
experimental results lie within a band between the two predicted ¼
1  mZY-QI-UD mYZ-QI-UD 1  0:073  0:367
curves. The relationship between the experimental results and the
predicted curves is consistent within the following assumptions: ¼ 1:028EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED ; ð15Þ

where mYZ-QI-UD and mZY-QI-UD are Poisson’s ratios of QI-CFRP. These

(1) Infinite length in the in-plane XY direction (EZ-QI-UD). Poisson’s ratios were calculated with Eq. (A3), Eq. (5) and Table 3.
(2) Finite (thin) sample in the in-plane X direction Both predicted errors were lower than 3%. These errors can be
(EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED). ignored.

Although the bending specimens had the same L/t ratio in Fig. 9,
the modulus calculated assuming a thick bending specimen was
higher than that of a thin specimen. For instance, the bending mod-
ulus under the condition L15/t2 was higher than L7.5/t1, although
L7.5/t1 is the same ratio as L15/t2. It is thought that the restrained
condition varies with t/tply, which qualitatively affects the
measured bending modulus. In this study, t/tply is lower under
the condition L7.5/t1 than under the condition L15/t2, because all
bending specimens have the same thickness of 1-ply lamina: tply.
Thus, the bending modulus under L7.5/t1 was lower than that for
L15/t2. These results suggest that the ratio of in-plane size to tply
6.4. Comparison of experimental and theoretical modelling data
As shown in Fig. 9, the order of the four moduli was as follows:
EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED < Eb ðQI-CFRP;L=t : 50Þ < EZ-QI-UD-dlm ðt dlm : 25Þ
< EZ-QI-UD : ð16Þ
The relative magnitudes of each modulus are reasonable as they
agree with that of the ratios of the in-plane size to tply. The geome-
try, ratios of in-plane size to tply and evaluated moduli by two test
methods and two assumed theories are also shown in Fig. 9. The
84 E. Hara et al. / Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85

Table 4
Feature comparison between 3-point bending and direct loading test method.

Test method 3-pt. bending Direct loading

Adhesive procedure
Affordability for fixture
Required procedure for
verification about
experimental results
Not required
Bending test fixture is common
Easy
Confirming experimental bending
modulus is lower than 15GPa
Required
Request for end tab fixtures (Fig. 2), and bond fixture
Complicated
Comparing between experimental and FEA results (Fig. 10). Required FEA included
estimating properties of Table 3. Deciding strain measurement positions. Checking a system
alignment

parameter d/tply is not strictly the same as t/tply. However, both Appendix A. Derivation of Eq. (5) from the three-dimensional
ratios of d and t are of in-plane size. It is obvious that the ratio of laminate theory
the in-plane size to tply for the direct loading test is higher than that
of the 3-point bending test because d: 25 mm is larger than t: Gudmundson et al. formulated Eq. (A1) to describe the out-of-
0.5 mm. Table 4 compares both test methods, considering test pro- plane submatrix; SOO of the effective compliance tensor [16].
cedures and verification of the experimental results. The 3-point
T 1 X
N h T 1
i
bending test method is more practical than the direct loading test SOO ¼ ðSIO Þ ðSII Þ SIO þ mk SkOO  ðSkIO Þ ðSKII Þ SKIO ; ðA1Þ
method because the out-of-plane modulus between EZ-QI-UD and k¼1
EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED could be easily measured and verified (manual
where
calculations). On the other hand, previously performed FEA is
required for verification of the direct loading test. Moreover, the " #1
XN
1
experimental and FEA results for the direct loading test were SII ¼ m k
ðSkII Þ ; ðA2Þ
overestimated EZ-QI-UD in the case of the thin tdlm. k¼1

" #
X
N
1
7. Conclusions SIO ¼ SII m k
ðSkII Þ SkIO ; ðA3Þ
k¼1

The purpose of the present study was to propose and and mk is the volume fraction of ply k [16].Stress and strain equation
demonstrate the 3-point bending test as a standard method for of lamina was shown in following equation;
measuring the out-of-plane tensile modulus of CFRP laminates, 2
and some conclusions of this study are as follows:
eL 3 2 S11 S12 0 S13 0 0
32
rL 3 2
rL 3
6 eT 7 6 S 0 7 6 7 6r 7
6 7 6 12 S22 0 S23 0 76 rT 7 6 T 7
6 7 6 76 7 6 7
(1) The 3-point bending test is an available test method for 6 cLT 7 6 0
6 7 6
0 S66 0 0 0 7
76
6 sLT 7 6s 7
7 ¼ ½S6 LT 7;
evaluating the out-of-plane modulus. 6 e 7 ¼ 6S 0 7 6 7 6r 7
6 Z 7 6 13 S23 0 S33 0 76 rZ 7 6 Z 7
(2) The ratio of the bending and shear deformation affects the 6 7 6 76 7 6 7
4 cLZ 5 4 0 0 0 0 S55 0 54 sLZ 5 4 sLZ 5
out-of-plane tensile modulus measured by the 3-point
bending test. The bending modulus approached the tensile
cTZ 0 0 0 0 0 S44 sTZ sTZ
modulus as L/t increased. ðA4Þ
(3) It was predicted and demonstrated that the apparent where
bending modulus of a UD-CFRP sample equaled the tensile
modulus if the former measured with an L/t > 25 bending 1
S11 ¼ ; ðA4aÞ
specimen was under 15 GPa. EL
(4) The apparent bending moduli of QI-CFRP were observed to
lie between two predicted curves: an out-of-plane modulus 1
S22 ¼ ; ðA4bÞ
calculated using existing three-dimensional laminate theory ET
under the assumption of infinite in-plane size, and a modu-
lus calculated using a modified three-dimensional laminate 1
S33 ¼ ; ðA4cÞ
theory under the assumption of a thin bending specimen. EZ
(5) Both 3-point bending and direct loading results were found
mLT
to lie between EZ-QI-UD and EZ-QI-UD-MODIFIED. S12 ¼  ; ðA4dÞ
EL
(6) Performing direct loading tests was complex and required
detailed selection of the measurement positions, checking mLZ
the system alignment and bonding the specimen on end- S13 ¼  ; ðA4eÞ
EL
tab fixtures. Moreover, the verification of the results
required FEA, which included estimating properties of the mTZ
CFRP lamina. S23 ¼  ; ðA4fÞ
ET
(7) The 3-point bending test method is more practical than the
direct loading test method due to the affordability of the 1
S66 ¼ ; ðA4gÞ
fixtures, easy verification and simpler procedure. GLT

1
S55 ¼ ; ðA4hÞ
GLZ
Acknowledgements
1
Suggestions for this paper by reviewers are gratefully S44 ¼ : ðA4iÞ
GTZ
acknowledged.
 E. Hara et al. / Composites: Part A 67 (2014) 77–85
The submatrix SOO can be derived as Eq. (A5) for laminated com-
posites having an 8 ply quasi-isotropic stacking sequence; [45/0/
45/90]sym.
2 3
ðS22  2S12 þ S11 ÞS33  S223 þ 2S13 S23  S213
6 0 0 7
6 S22  2S12 þ S11 7 [8]
6 S44 þ S55 7
SOO ¼ 6
60 0
7:
7
6 7
2
4 5
S44 þ S55
0 0
2 tensile method. Composites Part A 2010;41:1425–33.
ðA5Þ
Eq. (5) is derived by substituting Eqs. (A4a–A4i) to the inverses of
element of the first row and the first column of Eq. (A5). Similarly,
Eq. (6) is derived from the second row and the second column of Eq.
(A5).
References
[1] Whitehead RS. Certification of primary composite aircraft structures. New
materials and fatigue resistant aircraft design. In: Proceedings of the 14th ICAF
symposium; 1987. p. 585–617.
[2] Ashizawa M, Toi Y. Unique features and innovative application of advanced
composites to the MD-11. AIAA/AHS/ASEE aircraft design. In: Systems and
operations conference, Dayton, OH; September 1990. p. 1–10 [AIAA paper 90-
3217].
[3] Olsson R. A survey of test methods for multiaxial and out-of-plane strength of
composite laminates. Compos Sci Technol 2011;71:773–83.
[4] Lagace PA, Weems DB. A through-the-thickness strength specimen for
composite. Test methods of design allowables for fibrous composites. vol. 2.
ASTM STP 1003. Philadelphia: ASTM; 1989. p. 197–207.
[5] Mespoulet S, Hodgkinson JM, Matthews FL, Hitchings D, Robinson P. Design,
development and implementation of test methods for determination of
85
through thickness properties of laminated composites. Plast Rubber Compos
2000;29:496–502.
[6] Abot JL, Daniel IM. Through-thickness mechanical characterization of woven
fabric composites. J Compos Mater 2004;38:543–53.
[7] ASTM D 7291. Standard test method for through-thickness ‘‘flatwise’’ tensile
strength and elastic modulus of a fiber-reinforced polymer matrix composite
material. American Society for Testing and Materials; 2007.
Hara E, Yokozeki T, Hatta H, Iwahori Y, Ishikawa T. CFRP laminate out-of-plane
tensile modulus determined by direct loading. Composites Part A
2010;41:1538–44.
[9] Hara E, Yokozeki T, Hatta H, Ishikawa T, Iwahori Y. Effects of geometry and
specimen size on out-of-plane strength of aligned CFRP determined by direct
[10] Hara E, Yokozeki T, Hatta H, Iwahori Y, Ogasawara T, Ishikawa T. Comparison
of out-of-plane tensile strengths of aligned CFRP obtained by 3-point bending
and direct loading tests. Composites Part A 2012;43:1828–36.
[11] Zweben C, Smith WS, Wardle MW. Test methods for fiber tensile strength,
composite flexural modulus, and properties of fabric-reinforced laminates. In:
ASTM STP 674 composite materials: testing and design (fifth conference);
1979. p. 228–62.
[12] Timoshenko S, Young DH. Elements of strength of materials. 5th ed. [translated
Japanese version by Maezawa S]. Corona Publishing Co., Ltd.; 1972. p. 227–32.
[13] JIS K 7171-2008. Plastics-determination of flexural properties; 2008.
[14] ASTM D 790. Standard test methods for flexural properties of unreinforced
plastics and electrical insulating materials. American Society for Testing and
Materials; 2007.
[15] Advanced Composites Database System. JAXA-ACDB, Ver.06-1. <http://
www.jaxa-acdb.com/>.
[16] Gudmundson P, Zang W. Int J Solids Struct 1993;30(23):3211–31.
[17] Hara E, Yokozeki T, Hatta H, Iwahori Y, Ishikawa T. Size effects of CFRP quasi-
isotropic laminate out-of-plane tensile modulus by 3-pt. bending test. In:
Conference proceeding for 4th Japan conference on composite materials,
JCCM-4, 7–9 March, 2012, Tokyo, Japan; 2012 [in Japanese].
[18] Hara E, Yokozeki T, Hatta H, Iwahori Y, Ishikawa T. Out-of-plane tensile
modulus of CFRP laminates by 3-point bending test. Adv Compos Mater 2014
[in press].
[19] Kobayashi A, Kondo K. Theory of elasticity. BAIFUKAN Co., Ltd.; 1987. p. 161–2
[in Japanese].