Improved Multiscale Computational Strategies for Delamination

  • O. AllixEmail author
  • P. Gosselet
  • P. Kerfriden
Part of the Lecture Notes in Applied and Computational Mechanics book series (LNACM, volume 55)


We propose a three-scale computational strategy for the simulation of laminated composite parts modelled at the meso-scale. Two nested domain decompositions are used: a LaTIn method is employed in the inner substructuring so that the debounding behaviour is bore by the interfaces between subdomains (first scale) while the outer decomposition permits to solve in parallel the LaTIn macro (second scale) problem which grants the method its scalability, a super-macro problem (third scale) is introduced to accelerate the transmission of largest wavelength numerical information. The strategy thus teams up various levels of parallelism, which makes it well suited to modern hardware architectures.

Key words

Delamination domain decomposition LaTIn method three-scale approach parallel processing 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    O. Allix and P. Ladevèze. Interlaminar interface modelling for the prediction of delamination. Computers and structures, 22:235–242, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    O. Allix, D. Lévèque, and L. Perret. Identification and forecast of delamination in composite laminates by an interlaminar interface model. Composites Science and Technology, 58:671–678, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. De Borst and J.C. Remmers. Computational modelling of delamination. Composites Science and Technology, 66:713–722, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    F. Feyel and J.-L. Chaboche. Fe2 multiscale approach for modelling the elastoviscoplastic behaviour of long fibre sic/ti composite materials. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 183:309–330, 2000.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Fish, K. Shek, M. Pandheeradi, and M.S. Shephard. Computational plasticity for composite structures based on mathematical homogenization: Theory and practice. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 148:53–73, 1997.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Ghosh, K. Lee, and P. Raghavan. A multi-level computational model for multi-scale damage analysis in composite and porous materials. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 38:2335–2385, 2001.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Gosselet and C. Rey. Non-overlapping domain decomposition methods in structural mechanics. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 13:515–572, 2006.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. Guedra Degeorges and P. Ladevèze (Eds.). Course on Emerging Techniques for Damage Prediction and Failure Analysis of Laminated Composite Stuctures. Cepadues Editions, 2007.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    T. Hettich, A. Hund, and E. Ramm. Modeling of failure in composites by X-FEM and level sets within a multiscale framework. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 197(5):414–424, 2008.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    T.J.R. Hughes, G.R. Feijoo, L. Mazzei, and J.-B. Quincy. The variarional multiscale - A paradigm for computational mechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 166:3–24, 1998.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Kerfriden, O. Allix, and P. Gosselet. A three-scale domain decomposition method for the 3d analysis of debonding in laminates. Computational Mechanics, 3(44):343–362, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. Ladevèze. Multiscale computational damage modelling of laminate composites. In Multiscale Modelling of Damage and Fracture Processes in Composite Materials, T. Sadowski (Ed.). Springer-Verlag, 2005.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Ladevèze and G. Lubineau. An enhanced mesomodel for laminates based on micromechanics. Composites Science and Technology, 62(4):533–541, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. Ladevèze and A. Nouy. On a multiscale computational strategy with time and space homogenization for structural mechanics. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 192:3061–3087, 2003.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. Le Tallec. Domain decomposition methods in computational mechanics. In Computational Mechanics Advances, Volume 1. Elsevier, 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. Lubineau and P. Ladevèze. Construction of a micromechanics-based intralaminar mesomodel, and illustrations in Abaqus/standard. Computational Materials Science, 43(17/18):137–145, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    G. Lubineau, P. Ladevèze, and D. Marsal. Towards a bridge between the micro- and mesomechanics of delamination for laminated composites. Composites Science and Technology, 66(6):698–712, 2007.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    G. Lubineau, D. Violeau, and P. Ladevèze. Illustrations of a microdamage model for laminates under oxidizing thermal cycling. Composites Science and Technology, 69(1):3–9, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Mandel. Balancing domain decomposition. Communications in Numerical Methods in Engineering, 9:233–241, 1993.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    J. Melenk and I. Babuška. The partition of unity finite element method: Basic theory and applications. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 39:289–314, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    J.T. Oden, K. Vemaganti, and N. Moës. Hierarchical modeling of heterogeneous solids. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 172:3–25, 1999.zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    J.C.J. Schellekens and R. de Borst. Free edge delamination in carbon-epoxy laminates: A novel numerical/experimental approach. Composite structures, 28(4):357–373, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LMT-Cachan (ENS-Cachan/CNRS/UPMC/Pres UniverSud Paris)CachanFrance

Personalised recommendations