Appl Compos Mater

DOI 10.1007/s10443-016-9560-x

Improvement of Mode I Interlaminar Fracture Toughness

of Stitched Glass/Epoxy Composites

D. Göktaş 1 & W. R. Kennon 1 & P. Potluri 1

Received: 29 September 2016 / Accepted: 31 October 2016

# The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com

Abstract This study examines the improvement of Interlaminar Fracture Toughness (IFT) of
multilayered 3D glass/epoxy textile composites when through thickness reinforcement is
introduced. Three stitching techniques have been examined: Modified Lockstitch (ISO-301),
Single-yarn Orthogonal-stitch (ISO-205) and Double-yarn Orthogonal-stitch (ISO-205). It was
found that the use of class ISO-205 manual-type stitched reinforcement significantly enhanced
the Mode I-IFT, GIC measured using a Double Cantilever Beam technique. Furthermore, in
every case, the use of class ISO-205 stitching and high stitch densities offer a significant
improvement of 74.5 % on Mode I-IFT against interlaminar delamination.

Keywords Mode I interlaminar fracture toughness . Delamination resistance . Stitching . Glass/

epoxy composite

1 Introduction

Fibre reinforced textile composite materials generally comprise a number of layers of 2D

textile fabrics. Because of their weak through thickness mechanical properties, they suffer
significant interlaminar delamination when exposed to out of plane loading [1, 2]. As part of
the research into the in-plane mechanical properties of multilayered textile composites,
numerous studies have been carried out by researchers in recent years [3, 4].
To provide through thickness reinforcement, braiding, knitting, 3D weaving, and stitching
have been used to improve the interlaminar crack (delamination) resistance of multilayered
composites. Among these reinforcement techniques, researchers have concluded that stitching
is an effective reinforcement technique to limit crack propagation and to minimise delamina-
tion within multilayered textile composites [3–10]. The awareness of stitching as a technique
for through thickness reinforcement has increased rapidly during the last three decades.

* W. R. Kennon
richard.kennon@manchester.ac.uk

1
School of Materials, Northwest Composite Centre, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
 Appl Compos Mater

In this study, class ISO-205, a Single-yarn Orthogonal-stitch (SOS) and a Double-yarn

Orthogonal-stitch (DOS) technique have been used to obtain through thickness reinforcement
and these differ from the stitching techniques that have been previously utilised for this task;
Modified Lockstitch (ISO-301), Lockstitch(ISO-301) and Chain Stitch (ISO-101) as reported
by Morales in 1990 [11]. These commonly-used reinforcement stitching techniques are shown
in Fig. 1, and were subsequently re-examined by Dransfield [3].
Both the lockstitch and the modified lockstitch require two constituent threads. The
needle thread is inserted through the top of the fabric via the sewing needle, even as
the under-thread is supplied from beneath the fabric via a bobbin. The two stitch
yarns are first interlaced and then pulled into position in the middle of the fabric
layers in the through thickness direction throughout the configuration of the balanced
lockstitch. This formation damages the fabric fibres around the stitch loop and may
trigger a high stress concentration point [11]. To avoid this problem the lockstitch is
generally modified when used for textile composite preforms by diminishing the
tension of the bobbin yarn (by loosening the bobbin-case spring), and also by
increasing of the needle yarn, by increasing the pressure applied on the needle thread
by the tension-disc adjuster. This readjustment of the stitch balance brings the
interlace point to the top surface of the preform [11, 13]. Thus, the geometry of the
lockstitch may be modified to ease the stress concentration and to address the
problem stated above; this stitch form is almost universally used in composite
applications. This stitching technique usefully halves the number of small-radius loops
in the sewing thread from two per stitch to just one.
In contrast to these two stitch forms, the ISO-101 chain stitch is intralooped and only
involves one yarn to complete the stitch formation process. It is very similar in structure to the
weft knitting process, as it uses one single stitch yarn constantly making loops around itself
[11]. Nevertheless, because small radius loops of 360° are required in the formation of every
stitch and these are held during stitching by an under-bed looper, the flexibility demanded of
the stitching yarn for this stitch geometry makes it inconvenient for advanced fibre yarns such
as carbon, Kevlar and glass [3].
The alternative SOS and DOS techniques which have been used in this study are structur-
ally simpler than the traditionally-used lockstitching techniques and moreover the theoretical
stitch formation does not require any angles to be made in the yarn of greater than 90°. In
practice, because of the flexibility and compressibility of the fabric layers being sewn, the
bending of the stitching yarn is further minimised in radius. The orthogonal seam can therefore
be created using high-performance (stiff) fibre yarns. Further critical characteristics of the SOS
and DOS techniques are that an equal distance is left between successive needle penetration

Fig. 1 Typical stitch types used for through-thickness reinforcement; (a) Lockstitch, (b) Modified Lockstitch, (c)
Chain Stitch [11, 12]
Appl Compos Mater

points and the stitching yarn is laid on both sides of the fabric preform; therefore the fabric is
stabilised with even tensions applied above and below.

1.1 The Effects of Stitching on the Mechanical Properties of Multilayered

Composites

The stitching technique as a through thickness reinforcement for multilayered textile

composite structures has been mainly used by researchers in their experimental studies
[8–10, 14, 15]. To stitch the laminates, especially high strength yarns frequently made
of carbon, Kevlar, and glass have been used. Many studies have shown that stitching
is the most effective through thickness reinforcement technique for composite pre-
forms, even if many studies differ from each other with reference to fabric structure,
fibre orientation, resin type, stitch density, direction of stitching, stitching yarn, stitch
tension, and stitch patterns utilised. To limit interlaminar delamination and to achieve
high delamination resistance many experimental studies on multilayered textile com-
posite materials using the Double Cantilever Beam technique (DCB) test method have
been carried out. These studies show that stitching the laminates results in a conspic-
uous enhancement of the Mode I-IFT, GIC in comparison with unstitched composite
laminates [1, 3–10, 13, 16]. The researchers have stated that the introduction of
through thickness stitching has increased the Mode II-IFT performance of multilayered
textile composites and likewise the Mode I-IFT is also enhanced [1, 17–20].
Most studies confirm that stitching the laminates had not altered the impact damage
resistance even though through thickness stitching has been shown to improve impact damage
resistance [21]. Liu’s findings [22] show that stitching enhances the interlaminar strength and
diminishes the damage area. The delamination resistance was inspected with respect to the
effectiveness of various stitch patterns and across a variety of stitch densities. Liu pointed out
[22] that stitching impedes the propagation of delamination and reduces the delamination area
in accordance with the increase of stitch density.
Sharma and Shankar [19] concluded that stitching of laminates did not have a significant
effect on the impact damage resistance, but decreased the damage area and increased the
compression strength after impact, whilst Kang and Lee [23] found that the impact resistance
properties had been improved by stitching the textile composite laminates.
Some studies show that stitching enhances or has no effect on flexural strength [1].
According to Kang and Lee [23], the tensile and flexural properties of woven
laminate composites were improved by stitching. However, Mouritz [14] found that
the stitching of glass reinforced polymer (GRP) laminates lessened the flexural
properties. Moreover, it was found that these reductions were caused by the damage
introduced by the stitching process, creation of resin-rich areas at the stitch holes,
breakage of glass fibres, and also stitch interlacements. Even though stitching in-
creased the elastic modulus, it did not affect the flexural and yield strengths [14].
In this study, the MLS, SOS and DOS stitching techniques have been used for the through
thickness reinforcement of glass fibre fabric preforms. In total, five different stitch densities have
been applied to multilayered preforms using these three stitching techniques. Hence, the effect of
different stitching techniques and different stitch densities have been examined for stitched glass/
epoxy composite specimens and compared to unstitched (UNS) composite specimens.
 Appl Compos Mater

2 Experimental

2.1 Materials and Preparation of Preform Panels

In this study, it was chosen to use 8 layers of 2×2 twill weave structure made from E-glass
fabric supplied by Sigmatex Ltd UK [24], having an a real weight of 876 g/m2 and with 2.54 g/
cm3 E-glass fibre density [25] and this was integrated into a single preform panel to provide a
test specimen thickness between 3 and 5 mm, in accordance with the ASTM D5528–01
standard test method [26]. All fabric layers were laid in the warp direction with dimensions of
390 mm (width) x 320 mm (length). The stitching process was performed (and will be
explained in detail in the following section) after layering the eight plies of fabric. Following
the completion of the stitching process, 12 extra layers of unidirectional (UD) E-glass fabric
supplied by Formax with 498 g/m2 +/− 5 % fabric density and 2.54 g/cm3 E-glass fibre density
[25] was used to obtain an increment for the final thickness of the test specimens. Even though
international standards were followed wherever appropriate, this modification was made
because, during initial testing of the trial set of composite specimens, the test malfunctioned;
part of the test specimens fractured before the delamination part of the process had been
completed. It was realised that the standard (ASTM) thickness of the trial set of test specimens
was inadequate for the delamination process to be completed. It was found that for all the DCB
test specimens, either the top or bottom arm bent severely without the first stitch being broken.
Additionally, many of the loading hinges became detached as shown in Fig. 2, although this
problem did not effect the entire range of composite test specimens used in this work.
Supplementary UD E-glass fabric plies were added to both sides of the pre-prepared
preform panels; 6 plies of UD were added on top and six plies beneath. Therefore, the
thickness of the test specimens was almost doubled (with a commensurate increase in stiffness)
in order to gain a final thickness of the test specimens which allowed the test to be
accomplished correctly [26]. The preform panel fabric specifications are given in Table 1.

2.2 Through Thickness Reinforcement - the Stitching Process

Following the preparation of preform panels, the Mode I-DCB test specimens were marked
with the dimensions as required by the DCB testing standard in 25 mm (width) x 125 mm
(length) on the preform panels. While marking the test specimens, 62 mm was retained as the
working length for the stitching area and 63 mm of the specimens were separated by inserting
Teflon film to separate the initial delamination length (a0) of the test samples. To reinforce the

Fig. 2 a The top arm of the test specimen bent during the trial. b Detachment of metal hinge during testing
Appl Compos Mater

Table 1 Specifications of fabrics

used in preform panels Twill fabric UD fabric

Fabric type E-glass E-glass

Fabric structure 2 × 2 twill weave Unidirectional
Areal density of fabric 876 g/m2 498 g/m2 ± 5 %
Density of fibre 2.54 g/cm3 2.54 g/cm3
Yarn linear density 1200 Tex 1200 Tex
One layer fabric thickness 1.3 mm 1.1 mm

preform panels the through thickness stitching method was introduced in the z-direction. Five
different stitch densities were created by using a number of different stitch lengths: 20, 10, and
5 mm, inserted vertically in a single column through the length of the specimen; the yarns are
specified in Table 2. Stitch patterns of: 10 × 10 and 5 × 5 mm were also inserted vertically and
horizontally in two columns as shown in Table 4. The different stitch types being compared in
the experimental work were inserted into the preform panel at the marked needle insertion
points, so that the three stitching techniques could be compared in an unbiased fashion. The
first stitching technique to be inserted was the commonly used MLS, the second technique was
SOS, and the third was DOS.

2.2.1 Modified Lockstitch (MLS)

The commonly-used MLS (ISO-301) stitch technique was applied to the preform panels in the
through thickness direction, as the first stitching procedure to be performed on an ADLER:
KL267 type sewing machine. This sewing machine is designed to create a standard lockstitch
seam using heavy gauge thread and is particularly well-suited to use in the automotive and
upholstery industrial sectors [12]; the needle thread tension was increased and the bobbin
thread tension decreased so that it would generate a modified lock-stitch. For the needle yarn,
nylon 6.6 of 0.5 mm diameter was used as a top thread which was implemented to lock the
stitches on the surface of the laminate. For the bobbin yarn, 0.6 mm diameter E-glass was used
as the bottom thread which was implemented for through thickness reinforcement inside the

Table 2 Specifications of stitching yarns and stitching techniques used in sample preparation

Stitching techniques MLS SOS DOS

Stitching yarn type Needle Yarn: Single E-glass Yarn Double E-glass Yarn
nylon 6.6 (S-twisted-2ply) (S-twisted-2ply)
(Z-twisted-3ply) 272 tex 272 tex
50 tex 0.6 mm 0.6 mm
0.5 mm single yarn diameter single yarn diameter single yarn diameter
Bobbin Yarn:
E-glass Yarn
(S-twisted-2ply)
272 tex
0.6 mm single yarn diameter
Stitch type ISO-301 (machine) ISO-205 (manually) ISO-205 (manually)
Needle specs. 1.10 mm (round point) 1.10 mm (round point) 1.10 mm (round point)
 Appl Compos Mater

laminates as is shown in the sketch in Fig. 3 which illustrates the cross section of the MLS
stitch geometry.

2.2.2 Single-yarn Orthogonal-stitch (SOS)

The BSingle-yarn Orthogonal-stitch^ (ISO-205) is an alternative stitch geometry which has

been named the SOS technique. It was applied to the preform panels as through thickness
reinforcement by hand [12] at this stage. The SOS technique was applied with precisely
defined stitch lengths using single 0.6 mm diameter E-glass yarn with identical stitch spacing
to that of the MLS technique as illustrated in Fig. 4 which shows the cross section of the SOS
stitch geometry.

2.2.3 Double-yarn Orthogonal-stitch (DOS)

The BDouble-yarn Orthogonal-stitch^ (ISO-205) offers an alternative stitch geometry and was
named the DOS technique. This was applied by hand [12] using twin 0.6 mm diameter E-glass
yarns for stitching the preform panels as through thickness reinforcement. The stitches were
inserted in defined steps precisely following the method used to generate the SOS technique.
The DOS technique has an altered stitch pattern in comparison with the MLS and SOS
techniques; this is particularly apparent in the vertically and horizontally stitched specimens
with two columns as is illustrated in the sketch in Fig. 5 which demonstrates the cross section
of the DOS stitch pattern.

2.2.4 Comparison of SOS and DOS techniques versus MLS technique

The alternative SOS and DOS techniques which have been applied in this work are
structurally simpler than the conventionally-used modified lock-stitching technique and
of considerable significance is the fact that the theoretical stitch formation does not
require any angles to be made in the yarn that are greater than 90°.

Fig. 3 Schematic drawing of the MLS technique (cross section of the MLS geometry)
Appl Compos Mater

Fig. 4 Schematic drawing of the SOS technique (cross section of the SOS geometry)

The seam is devoid of intra-looping or interlacement, both of which techniques unavoid-

ably introduce small radius curves which reduce the performance of textile threads.
In practice, because of the flexibility of the fabric layers being sewn, the bending of the
stitching yarn is further degraded in radius. These orthogonal seams are therefore well-
suited to being generated using advanced stiff fibre yarns.
The main and common fundamental characteristic of SOS and DOS stitch geometries are
that an equal space is left between two successive needle entry points and the stitching
yarn is laid evenly on both sides of the fabric preform to prevent fabric deformation at the
needle penetration points, as occurs when applying the commonly-used stitching
methods.
This novel stitching technique generates different stitch geometry; therefore, it positions
the stitching fibre on both sides of the fabric and thus the fabric is stabilised equally
during stitch insertion.

Fig. 5 Schematic drawing of the DOS technique (cross section of the DOS geometry)
 Appl Compos Mater

And the most vital difference between these two alternative stitching techniques is when
using the different stitch patterns, in particular vertically and horizontally when stitching
two column specimens which feature two parallel columns of stitching shown in Fig. 6.

The nylon 6.6 yarn with a fibre density of 1.14 g/cm3 [27] was supplied by Oxcel
and E-glass yarn with a fibre density of 2.54 g/cm3 [25] was supplied by PPG Textile
[28]. All specifications of the stitching yarns are collated in Table 2. The tensile test
[29] was examined for both nylon 6.6 and E-glass yarns to compare the mechanical
characteristics of the stitching yarns. All mechanical characteristics of the stitching
yarns are collated in Table 3.

2.3 Fabrication of Composite Panels and Test Specimens

The three steps of vacuuming, resin infusion and curing were carried out on the dry
preform panels to fabricate the composite panels. In order that the 63 mm upper and
lower unstitched parts of the test samples should stay separated during and after resin
infusion, a non-adhesive Aerovac-A6000 ETFE release film (thickness 20 μm) was
laid into the midplane of the preform panel according to the test standard before
commencing the vacuuming process. Bisphenol A epoxy resin (Araldite LV 564 with
a density of 1.15 g/m3) and hardener (Aradur XB 3486 with a density of 0.95 g/m3),
were mixed in the proportion of 100:34 to infuse the preform panel as prescribed by
the suppliers, Huntsman International LLC [30]; further preparation before infusion
included gas extraction. The composite panels were cured in a Thermo-Scientific
Heraeus Oven (T20P) at a temperature of 80 °C for 8 h subsequent to the infusion
process. Following the curing of the preform panel, the test specimens were cut into
separate pieces of 25 mm width and 125 mm length. Metal loading hinges with

Fig. 6 Overhead view of the schematic patterns of the MLS, SOS, and DOS techniques which are stitched
vertically in one column, and vertically and horizontally in two columns
Appl Compos Mater

Table 3 Mechanical characteristics of Nylon 6.6 and E-glass stitching yarns

Stitching yarn Max. displacement (mm) Max. load (N) Strain (%) Tenacity (N/tex) Modulus (N/tex)

Nylon 6.6 84.63 (±3.76) 99.53 (±2.84) 33.85 (±1.50) 1.99 (±0.06) 10.06 (±0.16)
E-glass yarn 6.36 (±0.57) 116.64 (±12.08) 2.54 (±0.23) 0.43 (±0.04) 19.81 (±0.20)

dimensions of 25 mm (width) x 13 mm (length) were mounted at the end of the test

specimens to prepare them for DCB testing.

3 Test Methods

The unstitched and stitched composite specimens’ Mode I-IFT performances were evaluated
by performing DCB tests using an Instron model-8862 machine equipped with a 100 kN load
cell. Figure 7 demonstrates a DCB test specimen dimensions and configuration. The test
conditions were prescribed by test standard ASTM D5528-01 [26]. The prepared DCB test
specimens were held in the tensile testing machine by clamping the loading hinges in the jaws.
The test specimens were initially loaded at a constant cross-head speed of 5 mm/min for the
first 5 mm of crack extension to provide initial crack growth under stable conditions. The aim
of the initial loading is to observe if unsteady crack growth from the insert is apparent. When
the crack length reached 3 to 5 mm, the specimens were un-loaded at a constant cross-head
speed of 10 mm/min and the ends of the cracks were pinpointed to check the difference in
crack lengths on both edge sides of the specimens. Subsequently, the DCB composite test
specimens were re-loaded at the same loading speed of 5 mm/min until the incremental crack
growth extended along the entire length of the specimen (50 to 60 mm). The test specimens
were then un-loaded at a constant cross-head speed of 10 mm/min to finish the DCB test.
During loading, the onset of delamination crack growths was visually observed and captured
using an optical microscope on the edges of the test specimens and crack lengths were noted.
When crack growth was observed, at the same time, the load and displacement data were
recorded digitally.

Fig. 7 Configuration and dimensions of DCB test specimens

 Appl Compos Mater

3.1 Calculation of GIC

The Mode-IFT, GIC - energy release rates were calculated by using modified beam theory
(MBT) [26]. The equation is as follows:
3Pδ
GI ¼
2bða þ jΔjÞ

Where: P is the Load (N), δ is the load point displacement, b is the specimen width, a is the
delamination length, and Δ is determined experimentally by generating a least squares fit plot
of the cube root of compliance, C1/3, as a function of delamination length. The initiation GIC-NL
(NL-Deviation from Linearity) and propagation GICP values were calculated for all composite
specimen groups and were used for generating a Delamination Resistance Curve (R-Curve).
The R-Curve shows the relationship between the delamination length, a (mm) and the Mode I-
IFT, GIC (kJ/m2).

4 Results

In total sixteen composite specimen groups were prepared for the DCB test and each type of
group comprising five specimens to be tested is named in Table 4. These groups of stitched
and unstitched test specimens varying in respect of stitch densities and stitching techniques
were investigated and compared with each other. The average dimensions of DCB test
specimens and their VF (%) are shown in Table 5.
All the fracture toughness values were calculated by using collected data from DCB testing.
The overall test results are presented in the form of load–displacement curves with the help of
each particular crack growth point and are displayed in the form of R-Curves with the help of
GIC values and the delamination length at each particular point. The load–displacement curves
and R-curves were classified as UNS-MLS, UNS-SOS, and UNS-DOS. The aim of doing this
comparison was to indicate the efficiency of the stitched composites against the unstitched
composites, and after eliminating the unstitched specimens, to identify the most effective
stitching technique.

Table 4 DCB test specimens, with five different stitch lengths and three different stitch types

Mode I-DCB composite test specimens

Components in the composite material E-glass (Twill and Unidirectional Fabric) / Epoxy

No. of layers 20 Layers (6 UD+8 TWILL+6 UD)

Stitch type UNS MLS SOS DOS
Stitch lengths
– A1 (0)
20 mm vertically in one column B1 (20) G1 (20) L1 (20)
10 mm vertically in one column C1 (10) H1 (10) M1 (10)
5 mm vertically in one column D1 (5) I1 (5) N1 (5)
10 × 10 mm horizontally and vertically in two columns E1 (10 × 10) J1 (10 × 10) O1 (10 × 10)
5 × 5 mm horizontally and vertically in two columns F1 (5 × 5) K1 (5 × 5) P1 (5 × 5)
Appl Compos Mater

Table 5 Averaged dimensions of five DCB test specimens with VF (%)

MODE I-DCB composite Average dimensions and volume fractions

specimens
Length L Width b Thickness h Initial delamination Volume fractions
(mm) (mm) (mm) length, a0 (mm) VF (%)

Average 125.6 24.8 9.7 48.2 53.1

STDEV (±1.1) (±0.5) (±0.7) (±0.7) (±3.6)

4.1 Load–displacement Curves

UNS; as shown in Fig. 8 the unstitched sample group, A1 (0) has been included as a reference
and compared with groups stitched using the MLS, SOS, and DOS techniques. The NL
displacement point appears after 4.8 mm. Sample group A1 (0) has the lowest maximum load
and displacement, these being approximately 311.2 N and 12.9 mm respectively. The load
reached a maximum level and remained around this maximum level for a while, and then crack
propagation slowly decreased without jumping. The crack growth progressed easily and
specimens were delaminated with relative ease through the entire specimen length. Hence
the load–displacement curve has a smooth shape. The gradient in the linear region for sample
group A1 (0) was bigger than that for all the MLS groups.
MLS; for the MLS groups: B1 [20], C1 [10], D1 [5], E1 (10 × 10), and F1 (5 × 5), the NL
displacement points are close to each other and appear near the maximum load point. The crack
propagation proceeded steadily as shown in Fig. 8, throughout the full specimen length. While the
crack behaviour was similar in all the groups made using the MLS technique, the crack propaga-
tion behaviour was different from that of the UNS group. All the MLS groups show similarity in
behaviour of delamination and crack propagation and in respect of the gradient in the linear region,
but amongst these groups, the gradient for sample group F1 (5 × 5) was smaller than the others.
When they reached the maximum load, they rapidly decreased with sharp jumping at each

A1 (0-UNS) - Loading
450 A1 (0-UNS) - Crack Growth
B1 (20-MLS) - Loading
B1 (20-MLS) - Crack Growth
400 C1 (10-MLS) - Loading
C1 (10-MLS) - Crack Growth
D1 (5-MLS) - Loading
350 D1 (5-MLS) - Crack Growth
E1 (10x10-MLS) - Loading
E1 (10x10-MLS) - Crack Growth
300 F1 (5x5-MLS) - Loading
F1 (5x5-MLS) - Crack Growth
Load (N)

250

200

150

100

50

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Displacement (mm)
Fig. 8 Typical load–displacement curves for groups of UNS and MLS stitched samples
 Appl Compos Mater

individual stitch point. Hence, these groups’ load–displacement curves have a characteristic jagged
shape and the average maximum load and displacement values were variable. In general, sample
groups B1 [20], C1 [10], and D1 [5] which were stitched in one column have low values of load
and displacement. Amongst these groups, B1 [20] and C1 [10] have the lowest maximum average
load of 311.6 N with displacements of 16.3 and 17.0 mm respectively. And group D1 [5]
demonstrates the highest maximum average load and displacement. This difference seems to be
influenced by featuring the shortest stitch length. However, sample groups E1 (10 × 10) and F1
(5 × 5) which were stitched in two columns have high values of load and displacement, and among
these two groups; the F1 (5 × 5) has the highest maximum average load of 375.4 N with a
displacement of 26.6 mm, and it is characterised by having the shortest stitch length and also by
the number of columns of stitching in the specimen; this is the densest reinforcement stitching used
in this work.
SOS; as shown in Fig. 9, in general, all the SOS groups: G1 [20], H1 [10], I1 [5], J1 (10 ×
10) and K1 (5 × 5), the NL displacement points are quite close to each other and appear near the
maximum load point. They show similar behaviour in respect of delamination and crack
propagation. It can be seen that the load and displacement values increase in line with reducing
stitch length and with an increased number of columns of stitches. When they reach a maximum
load, they suddenly decrease sharply at each stitching point. Hence, all the SOS groups’ load–
displacement curves exhibit a jagged shape. The gradient in the linear region for all the SOS
groups was similar; furthermore, it shows similarity to the UNS composite group. Among sample
groups G1 [20], H1 [10], and I1 [5] which were stitched in one column through the specimen
length; I1 [5] has the highest maximum average value of 341.9 N with the value of 14.6 mm
displacement. This performance seems to be influenced considerably by having the smallest
stitch length. However, amongst the groups of J1 (10 × 10), and K1 (5 × 5) which were stitched in
two columns through the specimen length, K1 (5 × 5) has by a considerable margin the highest
value of maximum average load, 365.4 N, with a displacement of 15.6 mm.

450
A1 (0-UNS) - Loading
A1 (0-UNS) - Crack Growth
400 G1 (20-SOS) - Loading
G1 (20-SOS) - Crack Growth
H1 (10-SOS) - Loading
350 H1 (10-SOS) - Crack Growth
I1 (5-SOS) - Loading
I1 (5-SOS) - Crack Growth
J1 (10x10-SOS) - Loading
300
J1 (10x10-SOS) - Crack Growth
K1 (5x5-SOS) - Loading
Load (N)

K1 (5x5-SOS) - Crack Growth

250

200

150

100

50

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Displacement (mm)
Fig. 9 Typical load–displacement curves for groups of UNS and SOS stitched samples
Appl Compos Mater

DOS; as illustrated in Fig. 10, in general, for the all DOS groups: L1 [20], M1 [10], N1 [5],
O1 (10 × 10) and P1 (5 × 5), the NL displacement points are close to each other and appear near
the maximum load point, and test specimens show similarity in respect of their delamination
and crack propagation behaviour. When they reached their maximum load, they decreased
sharply at each stitching point. Hence, the load–displacement curves for all the DOS groups
have a jagged shape. The gradient in the linear region for the L1 [20], N1 [5], O1 (10 × 10), and
P1 (5 × 5) were similar and also show similarity with the UNS composite group. Among all the
DOS groups the gradient of M1 [10] in the linear region was smaller than the others. Sample
groups L1 [20], M1 [10], and N1 [5] have similar values of maximum average load and
displacement, and among these groups, N1 [5] has the highest maximum average load of
323.0 N with a displacement value of 20.8 mm. The particular characteristic of these three
groups is that they were stitched in one column through the specimen length. However, sample
groups O1 (10 × 10), and P1 (5 × 5) were stitched in two columns through the specimen length,
and of these, P1 (5 × 5) has by a considerable margin, the highest value of maximum average
load 417.9 N with a displacement of 27.5 mm. It can be stated that the maximum average load
values increase with reducing stitch length and with an increased number of columns of stitches.

4.2 R-Curves and GIC - Energy Release Rates

UNS; as shown in Fig. 11 the initiation GIC-NL points for the sample group A1 (0) appeared later
than the other MLS specimens and the crack propagation GICP was continuous and stable.
Therefore, crack growth proceeded relatively easily and specimens were smoothly delaminated
throughout the entire specimen length. Hence, group A1 (0) has a low GICP value of 1.82 (kJ/m2).
MLS; Fig. 11 gives R-Curves and Fig. 12 illustrates initiation GIC-NL and propagation GICP
values. Whilst the GIC-NL values are varied for all the MLS specimens, only the GIC-NL of
sample group C1 [10] appeared similar to those of the unstitched sample group A1 (0), yet
they still showed higher GIC-NL values than those of A1 (0) group. The GIC-NL values for

A1 (0-UNS) - Loading
450 A1 (0-UNS) - Crack Growth
L1 (20-DOS) - Loading
L1 (20-DOS) - Crack Growth
400 M1 (10-DOS) - Loading
M1 (10-DOS) - Crack Growth
N1 (5-DOS) - Loading
N1 (5-DOS) - Crack Growth
350
O1 (10x10-DOS) - Loading
O1 (10x10-DOS) - Crack Growth
P1 (5x5-DOS) - Loading
300 P1 (5x5-DOS) - Crack Growth
Load (N)

250

200

150

100

50

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Displacement (mm)
Fig. 10 Typical load–displacement curves for groups of UNS and DOS stitched samples
 Appl Compos Mater

4
GIC (kJ/m )
2

A1 (0-UNS)
B1 (20-MLS)
1 C1 (10-MLS)
D1 (5-MLS)
E1 (10x10-MLS)
F1 (5x5-MLS)
0
50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Delamination-a (mm)
Fig. 11 Typical R-curves for groups of UNS and MLS stitched samples

sample group B1 [20], and D1 [5] appeared similar to one another, likewise, the GIC-NL points
for sample group E1 (10 × 10) and F1 (5 × 5) also appeared similar to one another. Amongst
the specimens tested, B1 [20], C1 [10] and D1 [5] which were all stitched in one column, D1
[5] demonstrated the highest GICP figures with the value of 2.81 (kJ/m2), by showing gradual
crack growth. However, sample group B1 [20] has the lowest GIC-NL and GICP value amongst
the all MLS groups, with the value of 1.42 (kJ/m2) and 1.67 (kJ/m2) respectively, as it was
stitched with the longest stitch length (20 mm). Group D1 [5] is 54.4 % higher than the
unstitched group A1 (0) and 68.3 % higher than group B1 [20]. It can be concluded that the
concentrated stitch density has improved the Mode I-IFT. Groups of samples E1 (10 × 10) and
F1 (5 × 5), were stitched in two columns, and both showed gradual crack growth and their
GICP values are almost identical to one another. The propagation points of F1 (5 × 5) showed a

GIC values for UNS and MLS

4.00

3.50

3.00
GIC (kJ/m )
2

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
Sample A1 Sample B1 Sample C1 Sample D1 Sample E1 Sample F1
(0) (20) (10) (5) (10x10) (5x5)
GIC-NL 1.17 1.42 1.54 1.70 2.45 2.43
GIC-Prop. 1.82 1.67 1.92 2.81 3.51 3.54

Fig. 12 A comparison of GIC-NL and GICP values for UNS and MLS stitched samples
Appl Compos Mater

higher degree of dispersal and this group has the highest GICP with the value of 3.54 (kJ/m2).
They produced a better fracture toughness, greater than any of the other MLS groups. F1 (5 ×
5) is 94.5 % higher than the unstitched samples group A1 (0) and 26 % higher than group D1
[5]. It can be concluded that the concentrated stitch density and also the number of columns of
stitching have significantly improved the Mode I-IFT. In general, the standard deviation (S.D.)
values of initiation and propagation are small. But, in particular sample groups D1 [5], E1
(10 × 10), and F1 (5 × 5) show the largest deviations for the initiation values. Table 6 gives the
initiation GIC–NL and the average propagation GICP values for the UNS and MLS groups along
with the standard deviations (S.D.) and coefficient of variation (C.V.).
The SEM photomicrographs in Fig. 13 shows the cross-section of F1 (5 × 5) along the crack
propagation path of the specimen after testing. This specimen was stitched in two columns with the
highest stitch density. As this group has more stitches in two columns than the other groups, it
presented the highest fracture toughness value of all the MLS groups. For this heavily stitched
specimen, during DCB testing, the nylon 6.6 yarn which was originally on its top surface was pulled
down into the body of the laminate by the stitch legs of the E-glass yarn in the through thickness
direction. As can be seen in Fig. 13, most stitches remained unbroken, but more fibre damage was
created in the midplane of the sample. It can also be seen that there are resin-rich areas at the
interlacement points of the stitching yarns on the surface of the specimen and at the separation points
of the E-glass yarn’s stitching legs on the upper surface of the bottom part of the fractured specimen.
SOS; Fig. 14 gives the R-Curves and Fig. 15 illustrates crack initiation GIC-NL and
propagation GICP values. As can be seen in Fig. 14, in general, the crack growths of all the
SOS composite samples demonstrate similar behaviour on the R-curve and they have similar
GIC-NL initiation values, and also relatively similar GICP propagation values. Among the

Table 6 Mode I-IFT, GIC values

of UNS and MLS Stitching Mode I–DCB GIC-NL GICP
techniques composite initiation propagation
specimen label (kJ/m2) (kJ/m2)

UNS A1 (0) 1.17 1.82 Ave.

0.10 0.05 S.D.
0.09 0.03 C.V.
MLS B1 (20) 1.42 1.67 Ave.
0.07 0.02 S.D.
0.05 0.01 C.V.
C1 (10) 1.54 1.92 Ave.
0.13 0.06 S.D.
0.08 0.03 C.V.
D1 (5) 1.70 2.81 Ave.
0.43 0.03 S.D.
0.25 0.01 C.V.
E1 (10 × 10) 2.45 3.51 Ave.
0.80 0.27 S.D.
0.33 0.08 C.V.
F1 (5 × 5) 2.43 3.54 Ave.
0.52 0.32 S.D.
0.21 0.09 C.V.
 Appl Compos Mater

Fig. 13 SEM images of the cross-section along the crack propagation path of sample F1 (5 × 5)

sample groups G1 [20], H1 [10], and I1 [5] which were stitched in one column through the
specimen length, I1 [5] has the highest GICP with a value of 2.18 (kJ/m2). Furthermore,
amongst the all composite specimen groups to which the SOS technique was applied, G1
[20] has the lowest GIC-NL and GICP with a value of 1.34 (kJ/m2) and 1.81 (kJ/m2) respectively;

3
GIC (kJ/m )
2

1
A1 (0-UNS)
G1 (20-SOS)
H1 (10-SOS)
I1 (5-SOS)
J1 (10x10-SOS)
K1 (5x5-SOS)
0
50 60 70 80 90 100
Delamination-a (mm)
Fig. 14 Typical R-curves for groups of UNS and SOS stitched samples
Appl Compos Mater

GIC values for UNS and SOS

3.00

2.50

2.00
GIC (kJ/m )
2

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
Sample A1 Sample G1 Sample H1 Sample I1 Sample J1 Sample K1
(0) (20) (10) (5) (10x10) (5x5)
GIC-NL 1.17 1.34 1.52 1.64 1.64 1.80
GIC-Prop. 1.82 1.81 2.05 2.18 2.16 2.36

Fig. 15 A comparison of GIC-NL and GICP values for UNS and SOS stitched samples

and it has the longest stitch length at 20 mm. Sample group I1 [5] has 19.8 % higher Mode I-
IFT values than the A1 (0) group and 20.4 % higher than G1 [20] group which has the longest
stitch length. It can therefore be concluded that a higher stitch density bestows much improved
Mode I-IFT figures. Likewise, considering the sample groups J1 (10 × 10) and K1 (5 × 5)
which were stitched in two columns through the specimen length; K1 (5 × 5) has the highest
GIC-NL and GICP figure with the value of 1.80 (kJ/m2) and 2.36 (kJ/m2) respectively. The slope
of the crack propagation points rises slightly, and the R-curve plateau demonstrates a rise that
is smaller than any of the other SOS specimens. Sample group K1 (5 × 5) is 29.7 % higher in
respect of its Mode I-IFT results than the A1 (0) group and 8.3 % higher than the I1 [5] group.
It is clear that the high stitch density and also the increased number of columns of stitching
give significantly improved Mode I-IFT figures. The S.D. values of initiation and propagation
were, in general, very small. But, in particular sample groups H1 [10], J1 (10 × 10), and K1
(5 × 5) show the largest deviations for the initiation values. Table 7 illustrates the initiation
GIC–NL and the average propagation GICP values for the UNS and SOS groups together with
the standard deviations (S.D.) The SEM images in Fig. 16 show a cross section of the crack
propagation path of K1 (5 × 5) after DCB testing. The specimen was stitched in two columns
using the SOS technique. As can be seen, delamination continues throughout the main body of
the specimen without destroying the stitches. The stitch geometry in the thickness direction
remained unaltered. The crack propagation was decelerated by the stitching. But along the
crack propagation path, as might be expected, midplane distortion and matrix cracks can be
seen. Figure 16a–d shows stitching points along the length of the composite specimen.
DOS; Fig. 17 gives R-Curves and Fig. 18 illustrates initiation GIC-NL and propagation
GICP values. All the GIC-NL points appeared similar to one another by varying the initiation
values for the DOS specimens. As demonstrated in Fig. 17, among the groups comprising
L1 [20], M1 [10] and N1 [5] which were all stitched in a single column through the
specimen length, L1 [20] and M1 [10] show similar performances in respect of their R-
curves. Conversely, N1 [5] shows more dispersed propagation points than these two
groups. In the column-wise comparison, the lowest GICP value belongs to the L1 [20]
group and the highest GICP value belongs to the N1 [5] group, being 1.94 (kJ/m2) and 2.56
 Appl Compos Mater

Table 7 Mode I-IFT, GIC values

of UNS and SOS stitched samples Stitching Mode I–DCB GIC-NL GICP
techniques composite initiation propagation
specimen label (kJ/m2) (kJ/m2)

UNS A1 (0) 1.17 1.82 Ave.

0.10 0.05 S.D.
0.09 0.03 C.V.
SOS G1 (20) 1.34 1.81 Ave.
0.09 0.05 S.D.
0.07 0.03 C.V.
H1 (10) 1.52 2.05 Ave.
0.35 0.12 S.D.
0.23 0.06 C.V.
I1 (5) 1.64 2.18 Ave.
0.07 0.04 S.D.
0.04 0.02 C.V.
J1 (10 × 10) 1.64 2.16 Ave.
0.20 0.03 S.D.
0.12 0.02 C.V.
K1 (5 × 5) 1.80 2.36 Ave.
0.25 0.17 S.D.
0.14 0.07 C.V.

(kJ/m2) respectively. The propagation values increase progressively and it can be said that
the increment depends predominantly on the increase in stitch density. Sample group N1
[5] is 40.7 % higher than the A1 (0) group and 32 % higher than the L1 [20] group. It may
be concluded that the higher the stitch density, the higher is the Mode I-IFT figures.
Between sample groups O1 (10 × 10), and P1 (5 × 5) which were stitched in two columns,
both showed gradual crack growth, but their GICP values differ significantly from one
another. The propagation points of group P1 (5 × 5) showed a higher degree of scatter and
these specimens return the highest GICP figure of all the DOS groups with a value of 3.64
(kJ/m2). Sample P1 (5 × 5) is 100 % higher than the A1 (0) sample and 42.2 % higher than
the N1 [5] sample. It should be noted that the conspicuously high GICP value probably
derives from the high stitch density, the number of columns and furthermore, particularly
depends on the use of the DOS technique. Hence, the P1 (5 × 5) sample group produced a
greater Mode I-IFT than all the other sample groups. The S.D. values for the initiation and
propagation values were small in general. But, in particular the P1 (5 × 5) group shows the
largest deviations for the initiation values. Table 8 shows the initiation GIC–NL and the
average propagation GICP values for the UNS and DOS sample groups with their standard
deviations (S.D.) and coefficient of variation (C.V.).
The SEM image in Fig. 19 shows the cross section of the crack propagation path of
sample P1 (5 × 5) after testing. The specimen was stitched in two columns with the DOS
technique. As the specimen was stitched with a double E-glass yarn and in addition was
stitched with the highest stitch density, this specimen group demonstrates improved
fracture toughness by resisting delamination. Figure 19a–e shows delamination at each
stitch point in the midplane.
Appl Compos Mater

Fig. 16 SEM images of the cross-section along the crack propagation path of sample K1 (5 × 5)

5 Discussions

Correlation has been used as a statistical analytical tool to reveal the relationship, if any,
between two or more variables. A correlation is a measure of the linear relationship between

3
GIC (kJ/m )
2

A1 (0-UNS)
1 L1 (20-DOS)
M1 (10-DOS)
N1 (5-DOS)
O1 (10x10-DOS)
P1 (5x5-DOS)
0
50 60 70 80 90 100
Delamination-a (mm)
Fig. 17 Typical R-curves for groups of UNS and DOS stitched samples
 Appl Compos Mater

GIC values for UNS and DOS

4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
GIC (kJ/m2)

2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
Sample A1 Sample L1 Sample M1 Sample N1 Sample O1 Sample P1
(0) (20) (10) (5) (10x10) (5x5)
GIC-NL 1.17 1.39 1.61 2.21 2.45 2.33
GIC-Prop. 1.82 1.94 2.07 2.56 2.70 3.64

Fig. 18 A comparison of GIC-NL and GICP values for UNS and DOS stitched samples

variables [31] and the correlation coefficient measures the strength and direction of the
relationship between two variables as shown in Table 9.
In this study, the UNS group was taken as a reference to help compare the various stitching
techniques. The different stitching geometries have been classified as MLS, SOS, and DOS
techniques. The differing stitch forms and differing stitching techniques were compared with
each other, and detailed examination showed the effect of stitching and also the effectiveness

Table 8 Mode I-IFT, GIC values

of UNS and DOS Stitching Mode I–DCB GIC-NL GICP
techniques composite initiation propagation
specimen label (kJ/m2) (kJ/m2)

UNS A1 (0) 1.17 1.82 Ave.

0.10 0.05 S.D.
0.09 0.03 C.V.
DOS L1 (20) 1.39 1.94 Ave.
0.30 0.23 S.D.
0.22 0.12 C.V.
M1 (10) 1.61 2.07 Ave.
0.26 0.22 S.D.
0.16 0.11 C.V.
N1 (5) 2.21 2.56 Ave.
0.30 0.02 S.D.
0.14 0.01 C.V.
O1 (10 × 10) 2.45 2.70 Ave.
0.32 0.06 S.D.
0.13 0.02 C.V.
P1 (5 × 5) 2.33 3.64 Ave.
0.85 0.14 S.D.
0.37 0.04 C.V.
Appl Compos Mater

Fig. 19 SEM images of the cross-section along the crack propagation path of sample P1 (5 × 5)

of each stitching technique by observing the IFT individually for Mode I. It was found that the
variables, stitching technique, stitch density and the number of columns of stitching, have an
effect on the GICP value, and the correlation was further examined to expose the relationship
between the variables. To reveal the relationship between the variables, correlation was applied
between the number of stitches per unit width and the GICP values, and between the stitch
density per unit area and the GICP values. To calculate the stitches per unit width (m) and the
stitch density per unit area (m2), the average dimensions of Mode I-DCB specimens were used.
For the DCB specimens the average width, 0.0248 m and the average stitched area length,
0.0644 m was used as shown in Table 10.

5.1 Correlation Between Stitches per Unit Width and GICP

As shown in Fig. 20 for the UNS-MLS property, a strong relationship (r = 0.8) between stitches per
unit width and GICP can be detected. However, in particular, the GICP values for the groups in which
the stitch type was applied vertically in a single column are more widely spread than those of the
other groups. The general trend is that the GICP values increase with an increase in the number of

Table 9 Correlation strength

categorisation Strength Negative Positive

Weak −0.3 to −0.1 0.1 to 0.3

Medium −0.5 to −0.3 0.3 to 0.5
Strong −1.0 to −0.5 0.5 to 1.0
 Appl Compos Mater

Table 10 Average dimensions of

Mode I-DCB composite test Average dimensions
specimens
Length (L) Width (W) Initial delamination Stitched area
length (a0) length

125.6 mm 24.8 mm 48.2 mm 64.4 mm

0.1256 m 0.0248 m 0.0482 m 0.0644 m

stitches per unit width. For the UNS-SOS property, the analysis shows a strong relationship (r = 0.7)
between stitches per unit width and GICP. The general trend is that the GICP values increase with an
increase in the number of stitches per unit width as for the MLS technique. Similarly to the previous
correlations, a strong relationship (r = 0.8) between the number of stitches per unit width and GICP is
found for the UNS-DOS property. The general trend is that the GICP values increase with an increase
in the stitches per unit width as with the MLS and SOS techniques. It should be noted that the reason
for the strong relationship between the number of stitches per unit width and the GICP values is
convincingly associated with the intensive stitch density, the number of columns of stitching and
furthermore, particularly depends on the use of the DOS stitch formation.

5.2 Correlation Between Stitch Density per Unit Area and GICP

As can be seen in Fig. 21 a very strong relationship (r = 0.9) between stitch density per unit area and
GICP can be detected for the UNS-MLS property. As a general trend the GIC-PROP values increase
with an increase in the stitch density per unit area. The strong relationship between the stitch density
per unit area and GICP values for the MLS technique seems to be significantly influenced by high
stitch density and by the stitch formation technique. Similarly to the results for UNS-MLS, the
calculations for the UNS-SOS property show a very strong relationship (r = 0.9) between the stitch
density per unit area and GICP. It is clear that the strong relationship between the stitch density per
unit area and the GICP values of the SOS technique is influenced by the stitch formation technique
and is significantly influenced by high stitch density and by the number of columns of stitch lines.

4.0

3.5
R² = 0.67

3.0 R² = 0.64
GICP (kJ/m2)

2.5
R² = 0.54
2.0

1.5

1.0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
Stitch/unit width (m)

MODE I - (UNS-DOS) MODE I - (UNS-MLS) MODE I - (UNS-SOS)

Fig. 20 Correlation between stitches per unit width and GICP for UNS-MLS-SOS-DOS samples
Appl Compos Mater

4.0
R² = 0.76
R² = 0.95
GICP (kJ/m2) 3.5

3.0

2.5
R² = 0.80

2.0

1.5

Stitch density/unit area (m2)

MODE I - (UNS-DOS) MODE I - (UNS-MLS) MODE I - (UNS-SOS)

Fig. 21 Correlation between stitch density per unit area and GICP for UNS-MLS-SOS-DOS samples

For the UNS-DOS property, a very strong relationship is indicated (r = 1.0) between the stitch
density per unit area and GICP. There is a general trend that the GICP values rise with an increase in
the stitch density per unit area, as for the MLS and SOS techniques. It should be noted that the reason
for the strong relationship between the stitch density per unit area and the GICP values is convinc-
ingly associated with the intensive stitch density, the number of columns of stitching and further-
more, it particularly depends on the use of the DOS stitch geometry.

6 Conclusions

This investigation has shown the effect of inserting stitching into textile composites and has
identified effective stitching techniques by observing the interlaminar delamination resistance of a
number of laminated composite samples. Table 11 compiles an overall comparison of average Mode
I-IFT, GICP values which derive from unstitched and stitched groups. As can be seen in Table 11 the
UNS sample group A1 (0) returns the lowest average GICP values. The composite sample group K1
(5 × 5) using the SOS technique demonstrates the second highest average GICP values with a 29.7 %
increment over the UNS results. And the composite group F1 (5 × 5) using the MLS technique has
the third highest GICP values with a 50 % increment over the SOS results and a 94.5 % increment

Table 11 Overall comparison of average GICP values for DOS-MLS-SOS-UNS stitched samples

DOS MLS SOS UNS

P1 (5 × 5) F1 (5 × 5) K1 (5 × 5) A1 (0)
3.64 (kJ/m2) 3.54 (kJ/m2) 2.36 (kJ/m2) 1.82 (kJ/m2)
2.8 % higher than 50 % higher than 29.7 % higher than The lowest value
F1 (5 × 5) K1 (5 × 5) A1 (0)
54.2 % higher than 94.5 % higher than
K1 (5 × 5) A1 (0)
100 % higher than
A1 (0)
 Appl Compos Mater

over the UNS results. Of all the stitching techniques used, composite group P1 (5 × 5) using the
DOS technique notably returns higher GICP values with a 2.8 % increment over the MLS technique,
and 54.2 % increment over the SOS technique and a 100 % increment over the UNS results. The
reason for the high GICP values of the DOS technique, which is greater than for the MLS and SOS
techniques seems to be influenced by the stitch formation technique and is significantly influenced
by high stitch density and by the number of columns of stitch lines.

& It was found in every case that stitching through thickness reinforcement into composite
laminates provides significant resistance against interlaminar cracking (delamination) and
generates high GICP values under Mode I loading, the absolute values depending on the
stitching technique employed, on the stitch density and on the number of columns of
stitching in the composite specimen.
& The orthogonal-stitch (ISO-205) type DOS technique showed the best performance for Mode I-
IFT. The reason for the excellent GICP capabilities of the DOS stitch form, which is greater than
for the MLS and SOS stitch forms, seems to be significantly influenced by the stitch geometry.
& The delamination resistance of the orthogonal-stitch (ISO-205) clearly improves as the
stitch density of the reinforcement is increased, as a consequence of reduced stitch length
and decreased separation between adjacent seams.
& Among all of the stitching patterns used for Mode I, the 5 × 5 mm stitch pattern demonstrated
very good performances with a 74.5 % increment over the UNS results. The reason for the
high GICP capability of the 5 × 5 mm stitch pattern, which is greater than any of the other
tested stitching formations under Mode I, seems to be significantly influenced by the high
stitch density and by the number of columns of stitching. As the stitching has a good ability to
prevent crack growth, short stitch length delays fast crack growths and increases the IFT.
Hence, it may be concluded that the 5 × 5 mm stitch pattern produces the highest mechanical
delamination resistance performance of all the tested stitch formations even though creating
more fibre damage by increasing the number of stitch penetration points, producing more
fibre distortions around the inserted stitching yarns while piercing the stitching needle into the
preform panels, thus causing more resin rich regions in the specimens. These factors tend to
compromise the tensile properties of the specimens, however, the inserted stitching thread
acts to enhance the tensile properties, so research in this area is rendered complex [32, 33].

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and repro-
duction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a
link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

References

1. Mouritz, A.P., Cox, B.N.: A mechanistic approach to the properties of stitched laminates. Compos. Part A
Appl. Sci. Manuf. 31(1), 1–27 (2000)
2. Tong, L., Mouritz, A.P., Bannister, M.K.: 3D fibre reinforced polymer composites. Elsevier (2002)
3. Dransfield, K., Baillie, C., Mai, Y.-W.: Improving the delamination resistance of CFRP by stitching—a
review. Compos. Sci. Technol 50(3), 305–17 (1994)
4. Mouritz, A.P., Baini, C., Herszberg, I.: Mode I interlaminar fracture toughness properties of advanced textile
fibreglass composites. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 30(7), 859–70 (1999)
5. Dransfield, K.A., Jain, L.K., Mai, Y.-W.: On the effects of stitching in CFRPs-I. mode I delamination
toughness. Compos. Sci. Technol. 58(6), 815–27 (1998)
Appl Compos Mater

6. Jain, L.K., Mai, Y.-W.: On the effect of stitching on mode I delamination toughness of laminated
composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 51(3), 331–45 (1994)
7. Shu, D., Mai, Y.-W.: Effect of stitching on interlaminar delamination extension in composite laminates.
Compos. Sci. Technol. 49(2), 165–71 (1993)
8. Velmurugan, R., Solaimurugan, S.: Improvements in Mode I interlaminar fracture toughness and in-plane
mechanical properties of stitched glass/polyester composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 67(1), 61–9 (2007)
9. Solaimurugan, S., Velmurugan, R.: Influence of in-plane fibre orientation on mode I interlaminar fracture
toughness of stitched glass/polyester composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 68(7-8), 1742–52 (2008)
10. Tan, K.T., Watanabe, N., Sano, M., Iwahori, Y., Hoshi, H.: Interlaminar fracture toughness of vectran-
stitched composites—experimental and computational analysis. J. Compos. Mater. 44(26), 3203–29 (2010)
11. Morales, A.: Structural stitching of textile preforms. Proc. 22nd Int. SAMPE Tech. Conference, (6–8
November). p. 1217–30. (1990)
12. ISO 4915: Textiles-seam types-classification and terminology. International Organization for
Standardization. (1991)
13. Ogo, Y.: The effect of stitching on in-plane and interlaminar properties of carbon-epoxy fabric laminates.
MSc Thesis, University of Delaware (1987)
14. Mouritz, A.P.: Flexural properties of stitched GRP laminates. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 27(7),
525–30 (1996)
15. Dransfield, K., Bader, M., Baillie, C., Mai, Y.: The effect of cross-stitching with an Aramid yarn on the
delamination fracture toughness of CFRPs. Proc 3rd Int Conf on Deformation and Fracture of Composites.
p. 414–23. (1995)
16. Tan, K.T., Watanabe, N., Iwahori, Y.: Stitch fiber comparison for improvement of interlaminar fracture
toughness in stitched composites. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 30(2), 99–109 (2011)
17. Jain, L.K., Mai, Y.-W.: Determination of mode II delamination toughness of stitched laminated composites.
Compos. Sci. Technol. 55(3), 241–53 (1995)
18. Jain, L.K., Dransfield, K.A., Mai, Y.-W.: On the effects of stitching in CFRPs-II. Mode II delamination
toughness. Compos. Sci. Technol. 58(6), 829–37 (1998)
19. Sharma, S.K., Sankar, B.V.: Effect of stitching on impact and interlaminar properties of graphite/epoxy
laminates. J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 10(3), 241–53 (1997)
20. Sankar, B.V., Sharma, S.K.: Mode II delamination toughness of stitched graphite/epoxy textile composites.
Compos. Sci. Technol. 57(7), 729–37 (1997)
21. Mouritz, A.P.: Comment on the impact damage tolerance of stitched composites. J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 22(7),
519–21 (2003). Springer Netherlands
22. Liu, D.: Delamination resistance in stitched and unstitched composite plates subjected to impact loading. J.
Reinf. Plast. Compos. 9(1), 59–69 (1990)
23. Kang, T.J., Lee, S.H.: Effect of stitching on the mechanical and impact properties of woven laminate
composite. J. Compos. Mater. 28(16), 1574–87 (1994)
24. Sigmatex Ltd. UK, Unit G, Royle Pennine Trading Est., Lynroyle Way, Rochdale OL11 3EX
25. Mallick, P.: Fiber-reinforced composites: materials, manufacturing, and design. CRC Press (1993)
26. ASTM D5528-01: Standard test method for Mode I interlaminar fracture toughness of unidirectional fiber-
reinforced polymer matrix composites. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 15.03. (2002)
27. Hull, D., Clyne, T.W.: An introduction to composite materials. Cambridge University Press (1996)
28. PPG Industries: UK, 400 Guys Run Road Cheswick, PA 15024
29. BS EN ISO 2062: Textiles-Yarns from packages. Determination of single-end breaking force and elongation
at break. International Organization for Standardization. (1995)
30. Huntsman International LLC: datashet: two component epoxy paste adhesive. Araldite® 2011, 2011/A,
2011/B. (2007)
31. Field, A.: Discovering statistics using SPSS for windows sage publications. London (2000)
32. Mouritz, A.P.: Fracture and tensile fatigue properties of stitched fibreglass composites. Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng. Part. L J. Mater. Des. Appl. 218(2), 87–93 (2004)
33. Karahan, M., Karahan, N., Ulcay, Y.: Investigation into the tensile properties of stitched and unstitched
woven aramid/vinyl ester composites. Text. Res. J. 80(10), 880–91 (2010)