Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 41, Issue 20, pp 6725–6736 | Cite as

Meso-modelling of Non-Crimp Fabric composites for coupled drape and failure analysis

  • G. Creech
  • A. K. PickettEmail author


To date macro-analysis methods have been invariably used to analyse textile composite structures for forming and mechanical performance. Techniques such as geometric ‘mapping’ for the draping of textile fabrics and classical laminate analysis combined with simplified failure criteria to determine mechanical performance have formed the basis of most of these methods. The limited accuracy of the physical laws applied is appropriate to macro-analysis methods in which the fibre-matrix composite is treated as homogeneous medium. Today, however, modern high performance computers are opening new possibilities for composites analysis in which far greater detail of the composite constituent materials may be made. This paper presents Finite Elements techniques for the draping simulation of textile composites, specifically biaxial Non Crimp Fabrics, in which the complex deformation mechanisms of the dry tows and stitching may be properly modelled at the individual tow and stitch meso-level. The resulting ‘deformed’ Finite Element model is then used to provide a basis for accurate simulation of the impregnated composite structure. The modelling techniques for both draping and structural analysis are present, together with validation results for the study of a relatively large-scale hemisphere composite part.


Shear Angle Mesoscopic Model Negative Shear Bias Extension Bias Extension Test 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors wish to gratefully thank ESI Software France and the EPSRC UK for their support of this research.


  1. 1.
    Mack C, Taylor HM (1956) J Textile Inst 47(8):477Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Long AC (2001) The 4th International ESAFORM Conference on Material Forming. Liege, Belgium, p 99Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Long AC, Wiggers J, Harrison P (2005) The 8th International ESAFORM Conference on Material Forming. Vol. 2, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, p 939Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pickett AK, Cunningham JE, de Luca P, Johnson AF, Lefebure P, Mallon P, Sunderland P, Ó Brádaigh CM, Vodermeyer A, Werner W (1996) Numerical Techniques for the Pre-Heating and Forming Simulation of Continuous Fibre Reinforced Thermoplastics. SAMPE, Basel, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boisse P, Gasser A, Hivet G (2001) Composites: Part A 32:1395Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Creech G, Pickett AK, Greve L (2003) The 6th International ESAFORM Conference on Material Forming. Salerno, Italy, p 863Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wiggers J, Long A, Harrison P, Rudd C (2003) The 6th International ESAFORM Conference on Material Forming. Salerno, Italy, p 851Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harrison P, Clifford MJ, Long AC (2004) Composites Sci Technol 64:1453Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    PAM-CRASH Theory Manual 2000, ESI Group, 99 Rue des Solets, Silic 112, 94513 Rungis-Cedex, FranceGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    ASTM D1388–96E1. Standard test for Stiffness of FabricsGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    PAM-FORM, ESI Group, 99 Rue des Solets, Silic 112, 94513 Rungis-Cedex, FranceGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pickett AK, Creech G, de Luca P (2005) Revue Européenne des Éléments finis (REEF). 14(6–7):677Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaw K (1997) Mechanics of composite materials. CRC Press LLC, FloridaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cranfield University, School of Industrial and Manufacturing Science Bedfordshire UK

Personalised recommendations