Advertisement

Fiber Reinforced Laminates: Progressive Damage Modeling Based on Failure Mechanisms

  • C. SchueckerEmail author
  • H. E. Pettermann
Article

Abstract

In the present article, computational modeling of progressive damage in continuous fiber reinforced laminates is considered. After a general review of modeling approaches and experimentally observed behavior of laminates, the focus is laid on predicting non-linear laminate behavior by models based on continuum damage mechanics. The wide variety of continuum damage models is demonstrated by example of three different damage models from the literature which are described in more detail. Finally, a ply level damage model developed by the authors is presented. The model is based on brittle failure mechanisms postulated by Puck and is able to capture several characteristics of the damage behavior of laminates. Furthermore, this brittle damage model is extended to include plastic shear deformations. It is shown, that the extended model capturing brittle damage and plastic strains leads to significant improvements in the prediction of the non-linear laminate behavior.

Keywords

Fiber reinforced laminates Computational mechanics Non-linear material behavior Continuum damage Plasticity Puck failure hypothesis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Allen DH (1994) Damage evolution in laminates. In: Talreja R (ed) Damage mechanics of composite materials. Composite Materials series, vol 9. Elsevier Science, Oxford, Chap. 3 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen DH, Yoon C (1998) Homogenization techniques for thermoviscoelastic solids containing cracks. Int J Sol Struct 35(31–32):4035–4053 CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Allix O, Daudeville L, Ladevèze P (1991) Delamination and damage mechanics. In: Baptiste D (ed) Mechanics and mechanisms of damage in composites and multi-materials. Mechanical Engineering Publications, London, pp 143–158 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Allix O, Feissel P, Thévenet P (2003) A delay damage mesomodel of laminates under dynamic loading: basic aspects and identification issues. Compos Struct 81:1177–1191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Allix O, Ladevèze P (1996) Damage mechanics of interfacial media: Basic aspects, identification and application to delamination. In: Allen DH, Vajiadjis GZ (eds) Damage and interfacial debonding in composites. Studies in applied mechanics, vol 44. Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp 167–188 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barbero EJ, Lonetti P (2002) An inelastic damage model for fiber reinforced laminates. J Compos Mater 36(8):941–962 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bednarcyk BA (2002) A fully coupled micro/macro theory for thermo-electro-magneto-elasto-plastic composite laminates. Technical Report NASA/CR—2002-211468, NASA Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Benveniste Y (1987) A new approach to the application of Mori-Tanaka’s theory in composite materials. Mech Mater 6:147–157 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berbinau P, Soutis C, Goutas P, Curtis PT (1999) Effect of off-axis ply orientation on 0°-fibre microbuckling. Composites A 30:1197–1207 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Böhm HJ (ed) (2004) Mechanics of microstructured materials. CISM courses and lectures, vol. 464. Springer, New York zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Camanho PP, Dávila CG, Maimí P, Mayugo JA (2005) A continuum damage model to predict ultimate failure of composite structures. In: Proc. of 15th international conference on composite materials (ICCM 15), Durban, South Africa, 27 June–1 July 2005, pp P–07f Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Camanho PP, Dávila CG, Pinho ST, Iannucci L, Robinson P (2006) Prediction of in situ strengths and matrix cracking in composites under transverse tension and in-plane shear. Composites A 37:165–176 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Caron JF, Ehrlacher A (1997) Modelling the kinetics of transverse cracking in composite laminates. Compos Sci Technol 57:1261–1270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cauvin A, Testa RB (1999) Damage mechanics: basic variables in continuum theories. Int J Solids Struct 36:747–761 CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dávila CG, Camanho PP (2003) Failure criteria for FRP laminates in plane stress. Technical Report TM-2003-212663, NASA Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Halm D, Dragon A (1998) An anisotropic model of damage and frictional sliding for brittle materials. Eur J Mech A/Solids 17(3):439–460 CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hampel S (2002) Implementierung eines Schalen-Degradationsmodells für unidirektionale Faserverbundlaminate in ein Finite Elemente Programm. Master’s thesis, Institute of Lightweight Structures and Aerospace Engineering, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hashin Z (1980) Failure criteria for unidirectional fiber composites. J Appl Mech 47:329–334 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Herakovich CT, Schroedter III RD, Gasser A, Guitard L (2000) Damage evolution in [±45]s laminates with fiber rotation. Compos Sci Technol 60:2781–2789 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hinton M, Kaddour AS, Soden PD (2004) Failure criteria in fibre-reinforced-polymer composites: the world-wide failure exercise. Elsevier science & technology books. Elsevier, Amsterdam Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Joffe R, Krasnikovs A, Varna J (2001) COD-based simulation of transverse cracking and stiffness reduction in [S/90n]s laminates. Compos Sci Technol 61:637–656 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Joffe R, Varna J (1999) Analytical modeling of stiffness reduction in symmetric and balanced laminates due to cracks in 90° layers. Compos Sci Technol 59:1641–1652 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson AF, Pickett AK, Rozycki P (2001) Computational methods for predicting impact damage in composite structures. Compos Sci Technol 61:2183–2192 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jones RM (1999) Mechanics of composite materials, 2nd edn. Taylor & Francis, Philadelphia Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Juhasz J, Rolfes R, Rohwer K (2001) A new strength model for application of a physically based failure criterion to orthogonal 3D fiber reinforced plastics. Compos Sci Techol 61:1821–1832 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kaddour AS, Hinton MJ, Soden PD (2003) Behaviour of ±45° glass/epoxy filament wound composite tubes under quasi-static equal biaxial tension–compression loading: experimental results. Composites B 34:689–704 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kashtalyan M, Soutis C (2002) Analysis of local delaminations in composite laminates with angle-ply matrix cracks. Int J Solids Struct 39:1515–1537 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kilic H, Haj-Ali R (2003) Progressive damage and nonlinear analysis of pultruded composite structures. Composites B 34:235–250 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kyriakides S, Arseculeratne R, Perry EJ, Liechti KM (1995) On the compressive failure of fiber reinforced composites. Int J Solids Struct 32(6/7):689–738 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ladevèze P (1991) On a damage mechanics approach. In: Baptiste D (ed) Mechanics and mechanisms of damage in composites and multi-materials. Mechanical Engineering Publications, London, pp 119–142 Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ladevèze P (1994) Inelastic strains and damage. In: Talreja R (ed) Damage mechanics of composite materials. Composite materials series, vol 9. Elsevier Science, Oxford, Chap. 4 Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ladevèze P (2001) A damage mesomodel of laminate composites. In: Lemaitre J (ed) Handbook of materials behavior models. Academic Press, London, pp 1004–1014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ladevèze P, Lubineau G (2001) On a damage mesomodel for laminates: micro–meso relationships, possibilities and limits. Compos Sci Techol 61:2149–2158 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lafarie-Frenot MC, Hénaff-Gardin C, Gamby D (2001) Matrix cracking induced by cyclic ply stresses in composite laminates. Compos Sci Techol 61:2327–2336 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lee CS, Hwang W, Park HC, Han KS (1999) Failure of carbon/epoxy composite tubes under combined axial and torsional loading 2. Fracture morphology and failure mechanism. Compos Sci Techol 59:1789–1804 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lemaitre J (1992) A course on damage mechanics. Springer, Berlin zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Leukart M, Ramm E (2003) A comparison of damage models formulated on different material scales. Comput Math Sci 28:749–762 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Lo DC, Coats TW, Harris CE, Allen DH (1996) Progressive damage analysis of laminated composite (PDALC)—a computational model implemented in the NASA COMET finite element code. Technical Report TM 4724, NASA Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Meraghni F, Desrumaux F, Benzeggagh ML (2002) Implementation of a constitutive micromechanical model for damage analysis in glass mat reinforced composite structures. Compos Sci Technol 62:2087–2097 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Moncel L (1999) Etude des mécanismes d’endommagement d’un assemblage cuivre/composite carbone-carbone sous chargement thermomécanique. Ph.D. thesis, Université Bordeaux I, Ecole Doctorale des Sciences Physiques et de L’Ingenieur, Bordeaux, France Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mori T, Tanaka K (1973) Average stress in the matrix and average elastic energy of materials with misfitting inclusions. Acta Metall 21:571–574 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Nairn JA, Hu S (1994) Matrix microcracking. In: Talreja R (ed) Damage mechanics of composite materials. Composite materials series, vol 9. Elsevier Science, Oxford, Chap. 6 Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Nettles AT, Biss EJ (1996) Low temperature mechanical testing of carbon-fiber/epoxy-resin composite materials. Technical Report TP 3663, NASA Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Okabe T, Takeda N, Kamoshida Y, Shimizu M, Curtin WA (2001) A 3D shear-lag model considering micro-damage and statistical strength prediction of unidirectional fiber-reinforced composites. Compos Sci Technol 61:1773–1787 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Padhi GS, Shenoi RA, Moy SSJ, Hawkins GL (1998) Progressive failure and ultimate collapse of laminated composite plates in bending. Compos Struct 40(3–4):277–291 Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pagano NJ, Schoeppner GA (2000) Delamination of polymer matrix composites: Problems and assessment. In: Comprehensive composite materials, vol 2. Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp 433–528, Chap. 2.13 Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Pahr DH, Rammerstorfer FG (2004) A fast mutiscale analysing tool for the investigation of perforated laminates. Compos Struct 82(2–3):227–239 Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Palanterä M (1999) Theoretical background of ESAComp analyses, version 1.5. Helsinki University of Technology, Finland Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Phillips EA, Herakovich CT, Graham LL (2001) Damage development in composites with large stress gradients. Compos Sci Technol 61:2169–2182 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Pinho ST, Dávila CG, Camanho PP, Iannucci L, Robinson P (2005) Failure models and criteria for FRP under in-plane or three-dimensional stress states including shear non-linearity. Technical Report TM-2005-213530, NASA Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Puck A (1996) Festigkeitsanalyse von Faser-Matrix-Laminaten. Carl Hanser, München Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Puck A, Kopp J, Knops M (2002) Guidelines for the determination of the parameters in Puck’s action plane strength criterion. Compos Sci Technol 62(3):371–378 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Puck A, Schürmann H (1998) Failure analysis of FRP laminates by means of physically based phenomenological models. Compos Sci Technol 58:1045–1067 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Puck A, Schürmann H (2002) Failure analysis of FRP laminates by means of physically based phenomenological models. Compos Sci Technol 62:1633–1662 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rabotnov JN (1969) Creep problems in structural members. North-Holland series in applied mathematics and mechanics, vol 7. North-Holland, Amsterdam zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rammerstorfer FG, Starlinger A (1994) Engineering mechanics of fiber reinforced polymers and composite structures. In: Lamination theory and failure mechanisms in composite shells. CISM courses and lectures, vol 348. Springer, New York Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Schuecker C (2005) Mechanism based modeling of damage and failure in fiber reinforced polymer laminates. Ph.D. thesis, Institute of Lightweight Structures and Aerospace Engineering, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria. Also published In: Fortschritt-Berichte VDI Reihe 18 Nr. 303. VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Schuecker C, Pahr DH, Pettermann HE (2006) Accounting for residual stresses in FEM analyses of laminated structures using the Puck criterion for three-axial stress states. Compos Sci Technol 66(13):2054–2062 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Schuecker C, Pettermann HE (2007) Constitutive ply damage modeling, FEM implementation, and analyses of laminated structures. Comput Struct. doi: 10.1016/j.compstruc.2007.04.021
  60. 60.
    Schuecker C, Pettermann HE (2006) A continuum damage model for fiber reinforced laminates based on ply failure mechanisms. Compos Struct 76(1–2):162–173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Schultheisz CR, Waas AM (1996) Compressive failure of composites, part I: Testing and micromechanical theories. Prog Aerosp Sci 32:1–42 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Schürmann H (2005) Konstruieren mit Faser-Kunststoff-Verbunden. Springer, Berlin Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Smith PA (2000) Carbon fiber reinforced plastics—properties. In: Comprehensive composite materials, vol 2. Elsevier Science, Oxford, pp 107–150, Chap. 2.04 Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Soden PD, Hinton MJ, Kaddour AS (1998) Lamina properties, lay-up configurations and loading conditions for a range of fibre-reinforced composite laminates. Compos Sci Technol 58:1011–1022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Soden PD, Hinton MJ, Kaddour AS (2002) Biaxial test results for strength and deformation of a range of E-glass and carbon fibre reinforced composite laminates: failure exercise benchmark data. Compos Sci Technol 62:1489–1514 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Soden PD, Kaddour AS, Hinton MJ (1998) Compos Sci Technol 58:7. Special issue Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Soden PD, Kaddour AS, Hinton MJ (2002) Compos Sci Technol 62:12–13. Special issue CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Soden PD, Kaddour AS, Hinton MJ (2004) Compos Sci Technol 64:3–4. Special issue CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Soutis C, Smith FC, Matthews FL (2000) Predicting the compressive engineering performance of carbon fibre-reinforced plastics. Composites A 31:531–536 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Stiftinger MA (1996) Semi-analytical finite element formulations for layered composite shells with consideration of edge effects. Ph.D. thesis, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria. also published in: Fortschritt-Berichte VDI Reihe 18 Nr. 203. VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sun Z, Daniel IM, Luo JJ (2003) Statistical damage analysis of transverse cracking in high temperature composite laminates. J Mater Sci Eng A 341:49–56 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Talreja R (1994) Damage characterization by internal variables. In: Talreja R (ed) Damage mechanics of composite materials. Composite materials series, vol 9. Elsevier Science, Oxford, Chap. 2 Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Talreja R, Yalvac S, Yats LD, Wetters DG (1992) Transverse cracking and stiffness reduction in cross ply laminates of different matrix toughness. J Compos Mater 26(11):1644–1663 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Tandon GP, Kim RY (2001) Damage evolution and failure modeling in unidirectional graphite/epoxy composite. In: Proc. of 2001 ASME international mechanical engineering congress and exposition, New York, USA, 11–16 November 2001 Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Tandon GP, Weng GJ (1984) The effect of aspect ratio of inclusions on the elastic properties of unidirectionally aligned composites. Polym Compos 5:327–333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Van Paepegem W, De Baere I, Degrieck J (2006) Modelling the nonlinear shear stress–strain response of glass fibre-reinfroced composites. Part I: Experimental results. Compos Sci Technol 66(10):1455–1464 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Varna J, Joffe R, Akshantala NV, Talreja R (1999) Damage in composite laminates with off-axis plies. Compos Sci Technol 59:2139–2147 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Varna J, Joffe R, Talreja R (2001) A synergistic damage-mechanics analysis of transverse cracking in [±θ/904]s laminates. Compos Sci Technol 61:657–665 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Yousefpour A, Ghasemi Nejhad MN (2004) Design, analysis, manufacture, and test of APC-2/AS4 thermoplastic composite pressure vessels for deep water marine applications. J Compos Mater 38(19):1701–1732 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CIMNE, Barcelona, Spain 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Austrian Aeronautics Research (AAR)/Network for Materials and Engineering, Institute of Lightweight Design and Structural BiomechanicsVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria
  2. 2.Institute of Lightweight Design and Structural BiomechanicsVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations