Optimum Design of Carbon/Epoxy Composite Pressure Vessels Including Moisture Effects
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methodology
2.1. Case 1: SST 316L and C/E AS4/3501-6, Without Moisture Effects
2.2. Case 2: C/E IM7/977-3, Without Moisture Effects
2.3. Case 3: C/E IM7/977-3, Including Moisture Effects
3. Results and Discussion
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Yan, H.G.; Liu, Z.M.; Xie, Y.J. Buckling optimization of hybrid-fiber multilayer-sandwich cylindrical shells under external lateral pressure. Compos. Sci. Technol. 1996, 56, 1349–1353. [Google Scholar]
- Katirci, N.; Parnas, L. Design of fiber-reinforced composite pressure vessels under various loading conditions. Compos. Struct. 2002, 58, 83–95. [Google Scholar]
- Krikanov, A.A. Composite pressure vessels with higher stiffness. Compos. Struct. 2000, 48, 119–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, S.-H.; Son, D.-S. Evaluation of modeling techniques for a type III hydrogen pressure vessel (70 MPa) made of an aluminum liner and a thick carbon/epoxy composite for fuel cell vehicles. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2012, 37, 2353–2369. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, G.; Dar, U.-A.; Mian, H.H.; Zhang, W. Optimization of Composite Material System and Lay-up to Achieve Minimum Weight Pressure Vessel. Appl. Compos. Mater. 2013, 20, 873–889. [Google Scholar]
- Sun, C.T.; Hu, H. The equivalence of moisture and temperature in physical aging of polymeric composites. J. Compos. Mater. 2003, 37, 913–928. [Google Scholar]
- Ayoub, G.M.; Malaeb, L. Reverse osmosis technology for water treatment: State of the art review. Desalination 2011, 267, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, Y.M.; Kim, S.J.; Kim, Y.S.; Lee, S.; Kim, I.S.; Kim, J.H. Overview of systems engineering approaches for a large-scale seawater desalination plant with a reverse osmosis network. Desalination 2009, 238, 312–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García-Rodríguez, L.; Peñate, B. Current trends and future prospects in the design of seawater reverse osmosis desalination technology. Desalination 2012, 284, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Porter, M.C. Handbook of Industrial Membrane Technology; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- El-Sayed, T.A.; El-Butch, A.M.A.; Farghaly, S.H.; Kamal, A.M. Analytical and finite element modeling of pressure vessels for seawater reverse osmosis desalination plants. Desalination 2016, 397, 126–139. [Google Scholar]
- Hanbury, W.T.; Hodgkiess, T.; Al-Bahri, Z.K. Optimum feed temperatures for seawater reverse osmosis plant operation in an MSF/SWRO hybrid plant. Desalination 2001, 138, 335–339. [Google Scholar]
- Nisbett, K.; Budynas, R.G. Shigley’s Mechanical Engineering Design; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Kaw, A.K. Mechanics of Composite Materials; CRC Press: Qialadun, FL, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Ishai, O.; Isaac, M.D. Engineering Mechanics of Composite Materials; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Sayman, O.; Dogan, T.; Tarakcioglu, N.; Onder, A. Burst failure load of composite pressure vessels. Compos. Struct. 2009, 89, 159–166. [Google Scholar]
PV Size | Diameter (mm) | Length (mm) |
---|---|---|
2.5″ | 63.5 | 400 |
4″ | 101.6 | 1000 |
8″ | 203.3 | 1000 |
16″ | 406.6 | 1000 |
Property | Value |
---|---|
Density (kg/m3) | 7750 |
Young’s modulus (GPa) | 193 |
Poisson’s ratio | 0.31 |
Tensile yield strength (MPa) | 207 |
Tensile ultimate strength (MPa) | 586 |
Properties | C/E AS4/3501-6 | C/E IM7/977-3 |
---|---|---|
Fiber volume fraction | 0.63 | 0.45 |
Density (kg/m3) | 1580 | 1610 |
Longitudinal modulus (GPa) | 142 | 190 |
Transverse modulus (GPa) | 10.3 | 9.9 |
In-plane shear modulus (GPa) | 7.2 | 7.8 |
Major Poisson’s ratio | 0.27 | 0.35 |
Longitudinal tensile strength (MPa) | 2280 | 3250 |
Transverse tensile strength (MPa) | 57 | 62 |
In-plane shear strength (MPa) | 71 | 75 |
Longitudinal compressive strength (MPa) | 620 | 1590 |
Transverse compressive strength (MPa) | 128 | 200 |
Longitudinal moisture expansion coefficient | 0.01 | *0.0081 |
Transverse moisture expansion coefficient | 0.20 | *0.5575 |
Size | Material | Moisture | No. of Laminas | Optimum Lay-up | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.5′ | SST 316L | No | 2.00 | 1.36 | - | - | - |
C/E AS4/3501-6 | No | 3.72 | 0.21 | 84.8 | 08 | (±55.1)2S | |
C/E IM7/977-3 | No | 2.85 | 0.10 | 92.3 | 04 | (±55.8)S | |
C/E IM7/977-3 | Yes | 2.50 | 0.10 | 92.3 | 04 | (±54.0)S | |
4′ | SST 316L | No | 2.00 | 8.69 | - | - | - |
C/E AS4/3501-6 | No | 2.33 | 0.82 | 90.6 | 08 | (±55.1)2S | |
C/E IM7/977-3 | No | 3.57 | 0.84 | 90.4 | 08 | (±55.8)2S | |
C/E IM7/977-3 | Yes | 2.41 | 0.41 | 95.2 | 04 | (±54.0)S | |
8′ | SST 316L | No | 2.00 | 34.81 | - | - | - |
C/E AS4/3501-6 | No | 3.20 | 3.28 | 90.6 | 16 | (±55.1)4S | |
C/E IM7/977-3 | No | 2.40 | 2.50 | 92.8 | 12 | (±55.8)3S | |
C/E IM7/977-3 | Yes | 1.60 | 1.66 | 95.2 | 08 | (±54.0)2S | |
16′ | SST 316L | No | 2.00 | 139.23 | - | - | - |
C/E AS4/3501-6 | No | 2.03 | 11.46 | 91.8 | 28 | (±55.1)7S | |
C/E IM7/977-3 | No | 2.23 | 08.31 | 94.0 | 20 | (±55.8)5S | |
C/E IM7/977-3 | Yes | 2.19 | 06.63 | 95.2 | 16 | (±54.0)4S |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Halawa, M.; Al-Huniti, N. Optimum Design of Carbon/Epoxy Composite Pressure Vessels Including Moisture Effects. J. Compos. Sci. 2019, 3, 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs3030065
Halawa M, Al-Huniti N. Optimum Design of Carbon/Epoxy Composite Pressure Vessels Including Moisture Effects. Journal of Composites Science. 2019; 3(3):65. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs3030065
Chicago/Turabian StyleHalawa, Mohammad, and Naser Al-Huniti. 2019. "Optimum Design of Carbon/Epoxy Composite Pressure Vessels Including Moisture Effects" Journal of Composites Science 3, no. 3: 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs3030065