Advertisement

Material and Failure Models for Textile Composites

  • Raimund Rolfes
  • Gerald Ernst
  • Matthias Vogler
  • Christian Hühne
Part of the Computational Methods in Applied Sciences book series (COMPUTMETHODS, volume 10)

Abstract

The complex three-dimensional structure of textile composites makes the experimental determination of the material parameters very difficult. Not only the number of constants increases, but especially through-thickness parameters are hardly quantifiable. Therefore an information-passing multiscale approach for computation of textile composites is presented as an enhancement of tests, but also as an alternative to tests. The multiscale approach consists of three scales and includes unit cells on micro- and mesoscale. With the micromechanical unit cell stiffnesses and strengths of unidirectional fiber bundle material can be determined. The mesomechanical unit cell describes the fiber architecture of the textile composite and provides stiffnesses and strengths for computations on macroscale. By comparison of test data and results of numerical analysis the numerical models are validated.

To consider the special characteristics of epoxy resin and fiber bundles two material models are developed. Both materials exhibit load dependent yield behavior, especially under shear considerable plastic deformations occur. This non-linear hardening is considered via tabulated input, i.e. experimental test data is used directly without time consuming parameter identification. A quadratic criterion is used to detect damage initiation based on stresses. Thereafter softening is computed with a strain energy release rate formulation. To alleviate mesh-dependency this formulation is combined with the voxel-meshing approach.

Epoxy resin is modeled with the first, isotropic elastoplastic material model regarding a pressure dependency in the yield locus. As the assumption of constant volume under plastic flow does not hold for epoxy resin, a special plastic potential is chosen to account for volumetric plastic straining.

To describe the material behavior of the fiber bundles, the second, transversely isotropic, elastoplastic material model is developed. The constitutive equations for the description of anisotropy are formulated in the format of isotropic tensor functions by means of structural tensors. Opposed to the isotropic case the hardening curves are not obtained by experiment but by simulations performed done with the micromechanical model. So the hardening and softening curves from the micro model simulation, reflecting the homogenized material parameters from the micro model, are submitted to the next scale, the mesomechanical model.

Keywords

Failure Criterion Representative Volume Element Strain Energy Release Rate Micro Model Multiscale Analysis 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1. Boehler JP (ed) (1987) Applications of Tensor Functions in Solid Mechanics. CISM No. 292, Springer, WienGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cox BN, Carter WC, Fleck NA (1994) A binary model of textile composites - I. Formulation. Acta Metall Mater 42:3463-3479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ehrenstein GW (2006) Faserverbund-Kunststoffe. Hanser Fachbuch, M ünchenGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eidel B (2004) Anisotropic Inelasticity - Modelling, Simulation, Validation. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universit ät DarmstadtGoogle Scholar
  5. 5. Ernst G, H ühne C, Rolfes R. (2006) Micromechanical voxel unit cell for strength analysis of fiber reinforced plastics. Proceedings of the CDCM06Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fiedler B, Hojo M, Ochiai S, Schulte K, Ando M (2001) Failure behavior of an epoxy matrix under different kinds of static loading. Compos Sci Technol 61:1615-1624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gunnion AJ (2004) Analytical assessment of fibre misalignment in advanced composite materials. Ph.D. thesis, RMIT UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haasemann G, Ulbricht V (2006) On the simulation of textile reinforced composites and structures. Proc Appl Math Mech 6:479-480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Haufe A, Du Bois PA, Kolling S, Feucht M. (2005) A semi-analytical model for polymers subjected to high strain rates. In: 5th European LS-DYNA Users’ Conference, Birmingham, ARUP, UKGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hillerborg A, Modeer M, Petersson PE (1976) Analysis of crack formation and crack growth in concrete by means of fracture mechanics and finite elements. Cem Concr Res 6:773-782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hinton MJ, Kaddour AS, Soden PD (eds) (2004) Failure Criteria in Fibre Reinforced Polymer composites: The World-Wide Failure Exercise. Elsevier Science, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hughes TJR (2003) Efficient and simple algorithms for the integration of general classes of inelastic constitutive equations including damage and rate effects. In: Hughes TJR, Belytschko T (eds) Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis Course Notes, Zace Services Ltd., LausanneGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Juhasz TJ, Rolfes R, Rohwer K (2001) A new strength model for application of a physi-cally based failure criterion to orthogonal 3D fiber reinforced plastics. Compos Sci Technol 61:1821-1832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Karkkainen RL, Sankar BV (2006) A direct micromechanics method for analysis of failure initiation of plain weave textile composites. Compos Sci Technol 66:137-150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim HJ, Swan CC (2003) Voxel-based meshing and unit-cell analysis of textile composites. Int J Numer Methods Eng 56:977-1006MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16. Lemaitre J, Chaboche JL (1988) M écanique des mat ériaux solides. DunodGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lomov SV, Belov EB, Bischoff T et al. (2002) Carbon composites based on multiaxial multiply stitched preforms. Part I - Geometry of the preform. Compos Part A 33:1171-1183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rogers TG (1987) Yield criteria, flow rules and hardening in anisotropic plasticity. In: Boehler JP (ed) Yielding, Damage and Failure of Anisotropic Solids, Volume 5, pages 53-79. EGF Publication, Mechanical Engineering Pubns Ltd., Bury St. EdmundsGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rolfes R, Ernst G, Hartung D, Teßmer J (2006) Strength of textile composites - A voxel based continuum damage mechanics approach. In: Mota Soares CA, Martins JAC, Rodrigues HC, Ambrosio JAC (eds) Computational Mechanics - Solids, Structures and Coupled Problems, pages 497-520. Springer, LisbonGoogle Scholar
  20. 20. Schr öder J(1995) Theoretische und algorithmische Konzepte zur ph änomenologischen Beschreibung anisotropen Materialverhaltens. Ph.D. thesis, Universit ät HannoverGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Simo JC, Hughes TJR (1998) Computational Inelasticity. Springer, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Takano N, Uetsuji Y, Kashiwagi Y, Zako M (1999) Hierarchical modelling of textile composite materials and structures by the homogenization method. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 7: 207-231CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raimund Rolfes
    • 1
  • Gerald Ernst
    • 1
  • Matthias Vogler
    • 1
  • Christian Hühne
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Structural AnalysisLeibniz University of HannoverHannoverGermany

Personalised recommendations