2.5D Silica / DG-UHTR TPS Composite Koo Research Group Ryan [PDF]

SLIDE 1

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

Koo Research Group Ryan McDermott, Dr. Jitendra Tate, Dr. Joseph Koo, Kurt Schellhase, Ethan Liu

2.5D Silica / DG-UHTR TPS Composite

SLIDE 2

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 2

Thesis Advisory Group

DR TATE

Associate Professor

DR KOO

Sr. Research Scientist

DR ASIABANPOUR

Associate Professor

Ingram School of Engineering Texas State University Cockrell School of Engineering The University of Texas at Austin Ingram School of Engineering Texas State University

SLIDE 3

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

Advanced Thermal Protection Material

3

Project Focus Compression molding, 2D, 2.5D, 3D Architecture Carbon, silica, glass Reinforcement Epoxy, phenolic, cyanate ester, polysiloxane Matrix Multiwall carbon nanotubes, nanoclay, graphite Fillers

SLIDE 4

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

Advanced Thermal Protection Material

4

Project Focus Compression molding, 2D, 2.5D, 3D Architecture Carbon, silica, glass Reinforcement Epoxy, phenolic, cyanate ester, polysiloxane Matrix Multiwall carbon nanotubes, nanoclay, graphite Fillers

SLIDE 5

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 5

Study 1: MX2600 vs S/DG-UHTR

Research by Kurt Schellhase

S/DG-UHTR MX2600

SLIDE 6

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 6

S/DG-UHTR as an Ablative

Proprietary (patent pending) inorganic mix of polysiloxane chemistries

1

Low temperature curing (260°C)

2

Heat resistance to high temperature environments

3

Low heat transfer

4

High chemical resistance Minimal smoke or toxic fumes

SLIDE 7

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

86.6 85.3 97.5 96.7 95.8 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 S/Ph MX S/Ph F0 S/DG F1 S/DG F2 S/DG F3

7

Char Yield (TGA)*

MX2600 Silica / Phenolic Silica / DG-UHTR

F1: 35wt% F2: 40wt% F3: 48wt%

*Refer to the JSR paper “Material Properties Characterization of Novel Silica/Polysiloxane Ablatives” by Kurt Schellhase.

SLIDE 8

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 8

Oxyacetylene Test Bed (OTB) [1]

IR Camera

IR Pyrometer HD Camera Torch Thermocouple

SLIDE 9

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 9

Experimental Procedures

3 samples tested per material

Heat Flux

1000 W/cm2

Oxygen: Acetylene

1.1 : 1.0

Exposure Time

40 s

Sample Diameter

15.5 mm

Sample Thickness

12-16 mm

SLIDE 10

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 10

OTB Test Results

0.031 0.031 0.021 0.022 0.023

0.020 0.023 0.026 0.028 0.031 0.034

S/Ph MX S/Ph F0 S/DG F1 S/DG F2 S/DG F3

Mass Loss Rate (g/s)*

0.058 0.071 0.031 0.054 0.047

0.020 0.035 0.050 0.065 0.080

S/Ph MX S/Ph F0 S/DG F1 S/DG F2 S/DG F3

Recession Rate (mm/s)*

MX2600 Silica / Phenolic Silica / DG-UHTR MX2600 Silica / Phenolic Silica / DG-UHTR

F1: 35wt% F2: 40wt% F3: 48wt%

*Refer to the JSR paper “Material Properties Characterization of Novel Silica/Polysiloxane Ablatives” by Kurt Schellhase.

SLIDE 11

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 360 290 296 291 283

260 283 305 328 350 373

S/Ph MX S/Ph F0 S/DG F1 S/DG F2 S/DG F3

Heat Soaked Temp (°C)*

MX2600 Silica / Phenolic Silica / DG-UHTR

11

OTB Test Results

Heat Soak over Time (°C)*

F1: 35wt% F2: 40wt% F3: 48wt%

*Refer to the JSR paper “Material Properties Characterization of Novel Silica/Polysiloxane Ablatives” by Kurt Schellhase.

SLIDE 12

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 12

S/DG-UHTR Performance*

Better thermal stability Lowest peak heat soak temperature Lowest recession rate Lowest mass loss rate

1 2 3 4

*Refer to the JSR paper “Material Properties Characterization of Novel Silica/Polysiloxane Ablatives” by Kurt Schellhase.

SLIDE 13

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 13

Study 2: 2D vs 2.5D vs 3D

[3]

[2]

Research by Ethan Liu

SLIDE 14

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 14

2D Composites

[2]

Delamination

PRO CON

Inexpensive Complex Shapes

SLIDE 15

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

[3]

15

3D Composites

Lower delamination, ballistic, and impact damage Higher tensile strain-to-failure values Higher interlaminar toughness Expensive Lower tension, compression, shear and torsion properties Durability and long-term properties are not fully understood

PRO CON

SLIDE 16

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

NEEDLES

16

2.5D Composites

MAIN DRIVE FEED ROLLS FINAL 2.5D PREFORM NEEDLE BOARD 2D WEAVE

[4]

SLIDE 17

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

In-plane properties are diminished Durability and long-term properties are not fully understood

17

2.5D Composites

Complex shapes Higher delimitation resistance Higher interlaminar fracture toughness Higher interlaminar impact tolerance

PRO CON

SLIDE 18

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 18

Test Samples

2.5D C/Ph

Allcomp Inc. (CA)

3D C/Ph

Airbus-Safran Launchers

2D C/Ph

MX 4926N provided by Sun Research Institute Cytec-Solvay Inc.

SLIDE 19

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 19

Experimental Procedures

3 samples tested per material

Heat Flux

1000 W/cm2

Oxygen: Acetylene

1.2 : 1.0

Torch Flow Rate

20 SLPM

Exposure Time

40 s

Sample Diameter

15 mm

Sample Thickness

15 mm

SLIDE 20

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 20

OTB Test Results

0.022 0.023 0.031

0.000 0.008 0.016 0.023 0.031 0.039

2D 2.5D 3D

Mass Loss Rate (g/s)*

0.003 0.013 0.019

0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020

2D 2.5D 3D

Recession Rate (mm/s)*

*Refer to the SAMPE 2017 presentation “A comparative study of the effects of fiber architecture on the ablation properties of Carbon/Phenolic” by Ethan Liu.

SLIDE 21

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 21

OTB Test Results

311 314 462

120 240 360 480 600

2D 2.5D 3D

Heat-Soaked Temp (°C)*

2,397 2,355 2,323

2280 2300 2320 2340 2360 2380 2400 2420

2D 2.5D 3D

Ave Surface Temp (°C)*

*Refer to the SAMPE 2017 presentation “A comparative study of the effects of fiber architecture on the ablation properties of Carbon/Phenolic” by Ethan Liu.

SLIDE 22

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 22

Normalized Thermal Diffusivity*

0.700 0.875 1.050 1.225 1.400

50 100 150 200 250 300

Temperature (°C)

2D 2.5D 3D

*Refer to the SAMPE 2017 presentation “A comparative study of the effects of fiber architecture on the ablation properties of Carbon/Phenolic” by Ethan Liu.

SLIDE 23

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 23

2.5D C/Ph Performed the Best Overall*

1

Lower surface temperature

2

Comparable mass loss and recession

3

Comparable thermal wave penetration

4

Lower thermal diffusivity

*Refer to the SAMPE 2017 presentation “A comparative study of the effects of fiber architecture on the ablation properties of Carbon/Phenolic” by Ethan Liu.

SLIDE 24

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 24

2.5D Silica / Dyna-Glas-UHTR

1

Higher interlaminar strength

2

Mass loss and recession rate comparable to 2D

3

Lower surface temperature and thermal diffusivity

4

Cost effective Goals

[6] [5]

SLIDE 25

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 25

Sample Manufacturing

1 2 3 4

2.5D preform fabrication (Allcomp) Custom infusion mold creation Resin infiltration Refine

SLIDE 26

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 26

2.5D Preform Fabrication

1

Adequately join 2D plies in z direction

2

Maintain preform shape (100mm x 100mm)

3

Maintain in-plane silica fabric integrity

Challenges

[7]

SLIDE 27

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 27

Resin Infusion

Green cure in place Heating to control flow Resin metering with peristaltic pump Vacuum Infusion Process (VIP)

1 2 3 4

SLIDE 28

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 28

Resin Infusion

1

Control flow of DG-UHTR resin

2

100% saturation of preform

3

Control off-gassing during the cure process Challenges

SLIDE 29

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 29

Experimental Procedures

1

Ablation Testing - Oxyacetylene test bed (OTB)

2

Mechanical Testing

3

Morphological

4

Scanning Electronic Microscope (SEM)

5

Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA)

SLIDE 30

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott 30

Timeline

2.5D Fabrication

October

Reporting

March

Testing

December-February

Resin Infiltration

November

Material Acquisition

August

SLIDE 31

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

THANK YOU

EMAIL rjm142@txstate.edu TELEPHONE 469-323-9218 [8]

SLIDE 32

Page: Advanced TPS Composite | Ryan McDermott

1. Lisco, B. E., Lewis, J. A., Kassem, C. T., Moser, K. W., Koo, J. H., Berdoyes, M., & Castex, J.

(2017). In-Situ Ablation and Thermal Sensing of a 3-Dimensionally Woven Carbon/Phenolic Composite for Computer Modeling and Simulation. AIAA-2017-0356, 2017, 2017 AIAA SciTech

Forum. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. doi:10.2514/6.2017-0356
2. AliExpress. (2017, September 15). New Carbon Fiber Cloth. Available:

https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1IMULOpXXXXakXFXXq6xXFXXXG/New-Carbon-Fiber-Cloth- Fabric-2x2-Twill-50-3k-6oz-203-43gsm-0-25mm-Thickness-Carbon.jpg_50x50.jpg

3. E. C. a. C. company. (2017, September 11). billets.jpg. Available: http://3dwovens.com/wp-

content/uploads/2015/02/billets.jpg

4. D. V. Corporation. (2017, September 15). Needle Punching Diagram. Available:

http://www.dvc500.com/images/big-Process-w-Steps.jpg

5. Allcomp. (2017, September 15). 95771672_scaled_231x112.png. Available:

http://www.allcomp.net/image/95771672_scaled_231x112.png

6. L. Dyna-Glas Technologies. (2017, September 1). Available: http://www.dyna-glas.com/photos/
7. X. Chen, L. Chen, C. Zhang, D. Zhang, and L. Song, "Three-dimensional needle-punching for

composites – A review," Composites Part A, vol. 85, pp. 12-30, 2016.

8. NASA. (September 20). orion-d4-liftoff2.jpg. Available:

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/orion-d4-liftoff2.jpg

References

32