Advertisement

Stochastic impact responses analysis of functionally graded plates

  • P. K. KarshEmail author
  • R. R. KumarEmail author
  • S. Dey
Technical Paper
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

The present paper portrays the mapping for stochasticity in low-velocity impact responses of functionally graded material (FGM) plates by employing multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS) surrogate model in conjunction with finite element (FE) approach. The unavoidable stochastic variabilities (caused due to numerous errors involved in manufacturing processes) in material properties of FGM plates are considered in order to map the effect of elemental variabilities on global response of the structure. The material properties of FGM plates are considered to follow the rule of mixture in conjunction to power law. The Newmark’s time integration scheme and modified Hertzian contact law are employed to solve the time-dependent equation. The present FE formulation is based on an eight noded isoparametric element in which each element has five degrees of freedom. The effects of variability in temperature and power-law exponent on stochastic low-velocity impact responses are also portrayed. The maximum contact force, plate and impactor displacement are considered as the response parameters. The present MARS model is coupled with the finite element to achieve the higher efficiency with adequate accuracy as compared to the FE-based full-scale Monte Carlo simulation. The statistical results illustrate that the stochasticity in material properties significantly influences the low-velocity impact responses of FGM plates.

Keywords

Monte Carlo simulation Functionally graded materials Low-velocity impact Multivariate adaptive regression splines Stochastic analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgements

First and second author would like to acknowledge the financial support received from MHRD, GOI, during this research work.

References

  1. 1.
    Karsh PK, Kumar RR, Dey S (2019) Radial basis function based stochastic natural frequencies analysis of functionally graded plates. Int J Comput Methods.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219876219500610
  2. 2.
    Brush DO, Almroth BO, Hutchinson JW (1975) Buckling of bars, plates and shells. J Appl Mech 42:911zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hoff NJ (1945) The buckling of sandwich-type panels. J Aeronaut Sci 12(3):285–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pearce TRA, Webber JPH (1973) Experimental buckling loads of sandwich panels with carbon fiber faceplates. Aeronaut Q 24(4):295–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ko WL (1994) Mechanical and thermal buckling analysis of rectangular sandwich panels under different edge conditions, NASA 4585Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lin CC (1996) Local buckling of delaminated composite sandwich plates. AIAA J 34(10):2176–2183zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hahn EK, Carlsson LA, Westerlind BS (1992) Edge-compression fixture for buckling studies of corrugated board panels. Exp Mech 32(3):252–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hansen U (1998) Compressive behavior of FRP sandwich specimen with interface debonds. J Compos Mater 32(4):335–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carlsson LA (1991) On the design of cracked sandwich beam specimen. J Reinf Plast Compos 10(4):434–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rucevskis S, Sumbatyan MA, Akishin P, Chate A (2015) Tikhonov’s regularization approach in mode shape curvature analysis applied to damage detection. Mech Res Commun 65:9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu Q (2015) Analytical sensitivity analysis of frequencies and modes for composite laminated structures. Int J Mech Sci 90:258–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Roy K, Ray-Chaudhuri S (2013) Fundamental mode shape and its derivatives in structural damage localization. J Sound Vib 332(21):5584–5593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Narita Y, Leissa AW (1992) Frequencies and mode shapes of cantilevered laminated composite plates. J Sound Vib 154(1):161–172zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Farooq U, Myler P (2014) Ply level failure prediction of carbon fibre reinforced laminated composite panels subjected to low velocity drop-weight impact using adaptive meshing techniques. Acta Astronaut 102:169–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Luo H, Yan Y, Zhang T, He Z, Wang S (2017) Progressive failure numerical simulation and experimental verification of carbon-fiber composite corrugated beams under dynamic impact. Polym Test 63:12–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maimı P, Camanho PP, Mayugo JA, Turon A (2011) Matrix cracking and delamination in laminated composites. Part I: ply constitutive law, first ply failure and onset of delamination. Mech Mater 43(4):169–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pandey S, Pradyumna S (2018) Analysis of functionally graded sandwich plates using a higher-order layerwise theory. Compos B Eng 153:325–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kurşun A, Şenel M, Enginsoy HM, Bayraktar E (2016) Effect of impactor shapes on the low velocity impact damage of sandwich composite plate: experimental study and modelling. Compos B Eng 1(86):143–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yang P, Shams SS, Slay A, Brokate B, Elhajjar R (2015) Evaluation of temperature effects on low velocity impact damage in composite sandwich panels with polymeric foam cores. Compos Struct 1(129):213–223Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dogan A, Arikan V (2017) Low-velocity impact response of E-glass reinforced thermoset and thermoplastic based sandwich composites. Compos B Eng 15(127):63–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Atas C, Potoğlu U (2016) The effect of face-sheet thickness on low-velocity impact response of sandwich composites with foam cores. J Sandw Struct Mater 18(2):215–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chen Y, Hou S, Fu K, Han X, Ye L (2017) Low-velocity impact response of composite sandwich structures: modelling and experiment. Compos Struct 15(168):322–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fan H, Zhou Q, Yang W, Jingjing Z (2010) An experiment study on the failure mechanisms of woven textile sandwich panels under quasi-static loading. Compos B Eng 41(8):686–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Deshpande VS, Fleck NA (2003) Energy absorption of an egg-box material. J Mech Phys Solids 51(1):187–208zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rizov V, Shipsha A, Zenkert D (2005) Indentation study of foam core sandwich composite panels. Compos Struct 69(1):95–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Al-Shamary AK, Karakuzu R, Özdemir O (2016) Low-velocity impact response of sandwich composites with different foam core configurations. J Sandwich Struct Mater 18(6):754–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ruiz C, Rollins MA, Hillsdon GK (1994) On the impact behaviour of Ti-alloy superplastically deformed and diffusion bonded sandwich panels. Le J Phys IV 4(C8):C8–C583Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bandak M, Bitzer T (1990) Honeycomb, a lightweight energy absorbing material. In: International SAMPE technical conference, 22nd, Boston, MA, pp 1250–1263Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Goldsmith W, Sackman JL (1992) An experimental study of energy absorption in impact on sandwich plates. Int J Impact Eng 12(2):241–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Timoshenko SP, Woinowsky-Krieger S (1959) Theory of plates and shells. McGraw-Hill, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Malekzadeh P, Dehbozorgi M (2016) Low velocity impact analysis of functionally graded carbon nanotubes reinforced composite skew plates. Compos Struct 140:728–748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fan Y, Xiang Y, Shen HS, Hui D (2018) Nonlinear low-velocity impact response of FG-GRC laminated plates resting on visco-elastic foundations. Compos B Eng 144:184–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fallah M, Daneshmehr A, Zarei H, Bisadi H, Minak G (2018) Low velocity impact modeling of functionally graded carbon nanotube reinforced composite (FG-CNTRC) plates with arbitrary geometry and general boundary conditions. Compos Struct 187:554–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Habibi M, Laperrière L, Hassanabadi HM (2018) Influence of low-velocity impact on residual tensile properties of nonwoven flax/epoxy composite. Compos Struct 186:175–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Cheng X, Zhang J, Bao J, Zeng B, Cheng Y, Hu R (2018) Low-velocity impact performance and effect factor analysis of scarf-repaired composite laminates. Int J Impact Eng 111:85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dey S, Karmakar A (2014) Effect of oblique angle on low velocity impact response of delaminated composite conical shells. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci 228(15):2663–2677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dey S, Adhikari S, Karmakar A (2015) Impact response of functionally graded conical shells. Lat Am J Solids Struct 12(1):133–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Prem PR, Verma M, Murthy AR, Rajasankar J, Bharatkumar B (2017) Numerical and theoretical modelling of low velocity impact on uhpc panels. Struct Eng Mech 63(2):207–215Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dey S, Karmakar A (2014) Time dependent response of low velocity impact induced composite conical shells under multiple delamination. Mech Time Depend Mater 18(1):55–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ansari MM, Chakrabarti A (2016) Behaviour of GFRP composite plate under ballistic impact: experimental and FE analyses. Struct Eng Mech 60(5):829–849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Dey S, Karmakar A (2013) Dynamic analysis of delaminated composite conical shells under low velocity impact. J Reinf Plast Compos 32(6):380–392CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Khodaparast HH, Adhikari S (2016) Fuzzy uncertainty propagation in composites using Gram–Schmidt polynomial chaos expansion. Appl Math Model 40(7–8):4412–4428MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Spickenheuer A, Adhikari S, Heinrich G (2016) Bottom up surrogate based approach for stochastic frequency response analysis of laminated composite plates. Compos Struct 140:712–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Dey S, Naskar S, Mukhopadhyay T, Gohs U, Spickenheuer A, Bittrich L, Sriramula S, Adhikari S, Heinrich G (2016) Uncertain natural frequency analysis of composite plates including effect of noise—a polynomial neural network approach. Compos Struct 143:130–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S (2015) Stochastic free vibration analysis of angle-ply composite plates—a RS-HDMR approach. Compos Struct 122:526–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S (2015) Stochastic free vibration analyses of composite shallow doubly curved shells—a Kriging model approach. Compos B Eng 70:99–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Khodaparast HH, Adhikari S (2015) Stochastic natural frequency of composite conical shells. Acta Mech 226(8):2537–2553MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Khodaparast HH, Kerfriden P, Adhikari S (2015) Rotational and ply-level uncertainty in response of composite shallow conical shells. Compos Struct 131:594–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Sahu SK, Adhikari S (2016) Effect of cutout on stochastic natural frequency of composite curved panels. Compos B Eng 105:188–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mukhopadhyay T, Naskar S, Dey S, Adhikari S (2016) On quantifying the effect of noise in surrogate based stochastic free vibration analysis of laminated composite shallow shells. Compos Struct 140:798–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Chakraborty D (2005) Artificial neural network based delamination prediction in laminated composites. Mater Des 26(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lee SP, Jin JW, Kang KW (2014) Probabilistic analysis for mechanical properties of glass/epoxy composites using homogenization method and Monte Carlo simulation. Renew Energy 65:219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Liu PF, Zheng JY (2006) A Monte Carlo finite element simulation of damage and failure in SiC/Ti–Al composites. Mater Sci Eng A 425(1–2):260–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Wang XF, Zhao JH (2001) Monte-Carlo simulation to the tensile mechanical behaviors of unidirectional composites at low temperature. Cryogenics 41(9):683–691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Lv Z, Liu H (2018) Uncertainty modeling for vibration and buckling behaviors of functionally graded nanobeams in thermal environment. Compos Struct 184:1165–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Chandrashekhar M, Ganguli R (2010) Nonlinear vibration analysis of composite laminated and sandwich plates with random material properties. Int J Mech Sci 52(7):874–891CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Xu Y, Qian Y, Song G (2016) Stochastic finite element method for free vibration characteristics of random FGM beams. Appl Math Model 40(23):10238–10253MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Balokas G, Czichon S, Rolfes R (2018) Neural network assisted multiscale analysis for the elastic properties prediction of 3D braided composites under uncertainty. Compos Struct 183:550–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kumar CS, Arumugam V, Sengottuvelusamy R, Srinivasan S, Dhakal HN (2017) Failure strength prediction of glass/epoxy composite laminates from acoustic emission parameters using artificial neural network. Appl Acoust 115:32–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Lefik M, Boso DP, Schrefler BA (2009) Artificial neural networks in numerical modelling of composites. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 198(21–26):1785–1804zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Malik MH, Arif AFM (2013) ANN prediction model for composite plates against low velocity impact loads using finite element analysis. Compos Struct 101:290–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Mallela UK, Upadhyay A (2016) Buckling load prediction of laminated composite stiffened panels subjected to in-plane shear using artificial neural networks. Thin-Walled Struct 102:158–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Samanta S, Mandal A, Singh TJ (2014) Application of ANN in identifying defects in impacted composite. Procedia Mater Sci 6:926–930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Zhang Z, Klein P, Friedrich K (2002) Dynamic mechanical properties of PTFE based short carbon fibre reinforced composites: experiment and artificial neural network prediction. Compos Sci Technol 62(7–8):1001–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Al-Assaf Y, El Kadi H (2007) Fatigue life prediction of composite materials using polynomial classifiers and recurrent neural networks. Compos Struct 77(4):561–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ying ZG, Ni YQ, Duan YF (2017) Stochastic vibration response of a sandwich beam with nonlinear adjustable visco-elastomer core and supported mass. Struct Eng Mech 64(2):259–270Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Sahu SK, Adhikari S (2018) Stochastic dynamic stability analysis of composite curved panels subjected to non-uniform partial edge loading. Eur J Mech A/Solids 67:108–122MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Chavan SG, Lal A (2018) Stochastic bending characteristics of finite element modeled nano-composite plates. Steel Compos Struct 26(1):1–15Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Spickenheuer A, Gohs U, Adhikari S (2016) Uncertainty quantification in natural frequency of composite plates—an Artificial neural network based approach. Adv Compos Lett 25(2):43–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Karsh PK, Mukhopadhyay T, Dey S (2018) Spatial vulnerability analyses for the first ply failure strength of composite laminates including effect of delamination. Compos Struct 184:554–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Kumar RR, Mukhopadhyay T, Pandey KM, Dey S (2019) Stochastic buckling analysis of sandwich plates: the importance of higher order modes. Int J Mech Sci 152:630–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kumar RR, Pandey KM, Dey S (2019) Probabilistic assessment on buckling behavior of sandwich panel: a radial basis function approach. Struct Eng Mech 71(2):197–210Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Kumar RR, Karsh PK, Pandey KM, Dey S (2019) Stochastic natural frequency analysis of skewed sandwich plates. Eng Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1108/EC-01-2019-0034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Naskar S, Dey TK, Chalak HD, Adhikari S (2019) Probabilistic characterisation for dynamics and stability of laminated soft core sandwich plates. J Sandw Struct Mater 21(1):366–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Mukhopadhyay T (2018) A multivariate adaptive regression splines based damage identification methodology for web core composite bridges including the effect of noise. J Sandw Struct Mater 20(7):885–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Mukhopadhyay T, Chakraborty S, Dey S, Adhikari S, Chowdhury R (2017) A critical assessment of Kriging model variants for high-fidelity uncertainty quantification in dynamics of composite shells. Arch Comput Methods Eng 24(3):495–518MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Loy CT, Lam KY, Reddy JN (1999) Vibration of functionally graded cylindrical shells. Int J Mech Sci 41(3):309–324zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Touloukian YS (1967) Thermophysical properties of high temperature solid materials. McMillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Sun CT, Chen JK (1985) On the impact of initially stressed composite laminates. J Compos Mater 19(6):490–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Shariyat M, Nasab FF (2014) Low-velocity impact analysis of the hierarchical viscoelastic FGM plates, using an explicit shear-bending decomposition theory and the new DQ method. Compos Struct 113:63–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Bathe KJ, Saunders H (1984) Finite element procedures in engineering analysis, pp 421–422Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Friedman JH (1991) Multivariate adaptive regression splines. Ann Stat 19:1–67MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Mukhopadhyay T (2017) A multivariate adaptive regression splines based damage identification methodology for web core composite bridges including the effect of noise. J Sandw Struct Mater.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1099636216682533 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Dey S, Mukhopadhyay T, Adhikari S (2017) Metamodel based high-fidelity stochastic analysis of composite laminates: a concise review with critical comparative assessment. Compos Struct 171:227–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Kiani Y, Sadighi M, Salami SJ, Eslami MR (2013) Low velocity impact response of thick FGM beams with general boundary conditions in thermal field. Compos Struct 104:293–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Karsh PK, Mukhopadhyay T, Dey S (2018) Stochastic dynamic analysis of twisted functionally graded plates. Compos B Eng 147:259–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringParul Institute of Engineering and TechnologyVadodaraIndia
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringNational Institute of Technology SilcharSilcharIndia
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical EngineeringChandigarh Engineering CollegeMohaliIndia

Personalised recommendations