|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. TABLE 3-2 Typical Properties of Unidirectional Composites
To further illustrate the cost differences based on fibers, consider a hybrid composite with a carbon/glass volume ratio vc/g. The ratio of the cost of the hybrid composite to an all-glass composite to provide the same structural stiffness is given by 
The parameters in Equation (1) are defined as follows: $, price per unit mass; s, specific gravity; E, Young's modulus; g, glass; and c, carbon. On the other hand, the weight ratio, defined as the weight of the hybrid composite divided by that of the all-glass composite, is given by 
E-glass fiber costs around $2/lb; a high-strength carbon fiber costs about $30/lb. Thus, an all-carbon fiber composite costs 3.5 times more than an all-glass fiber composite to provide the same structural stiffness at a weight savings of 76 percent. When a 50/50 glass/carbon hybrid composite is used, however, the calculated cost ratio is reduced to 2.9 with a weight savings of 58 percent.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
