Lecture Notes: Composite Mechanics: Martin Fagerstr Om
Lecture Notes: Composite Mechanics: Martin Fagerstr Om
Lecture Notes: Composite Mechanics: Martin Fagerstr Om
Martin Fagerstrom
Elastic anisotropy
a = a1 e1 + a2 e2 + a3 e3 (1.1)
where ai , i = 1, 2, 3 are the vector components. This can of course also be written as a sum according
to:
3
X
a= ai ei (1.2)
i=1
Now, in order to simplify things, we can drop the summation sign whenever two indices are the same (i
in the vector form above). Thus, we use the short notation according to:
3
X
a= ai ei = ai ei (1.3)
i=1
meaning that any index (e.g. i) can take the numbers 1-3 and when two identical indices are present,
this implicitly means a summation over that index from 1 to 3.
We can also introduce the matrix representation of the vector a according to:
a1
[a]e1 ,e2 ,e3 = a2 (1.4)
a3
where the subscripts indicate that the representation is made with respect to the coordinate system with
base vectors ei .
In the same way, we can write a second order tensor T as
where is the so-called open product between two vectors (resulting in a second order tensor) defined as
A = a b, Aij = ai bj . (1.6)
3
Please note that on matrix form can be visualised as the multiplication of a column vector and a row
vector into a matrix. Furthermore, in Eq. (1.5) there are two indices i and j present precisely two times
meaning that a summation should be conducted both for i = 1, 2, 3 and j = 1, 2, 3. And consequently,
the matrix representation of the second order tensor T is given by:
T11 T12 T13
[T]e1 ,e2 ,e3 = T21 T22 T23 (1.7)
T31 T32 T33
A point P is subjected to the displacement field u with components in the x-direction u(x, y, z),
the y-direction v(x, y, z) and the z-direction w(x, y, z). To identify the normal (longitudinal) and shear
strains at this point, we study the change of length and angle of two infinitesimal and perpendicular line
segments P A and P B, cf. Figure 1.1.
The normal strain in the x-direction at point P is obtained as the ratio between the increase of
length of P A in the x-direction due to deformation and the original length of P A. Thus, we obtain the
longitudinal strain in the x-direction, x as:
0 0
|P A |x |P A|x x + u(x + x, y, z) u(x, y, z) x u(x, y, z)
x = lim = lim = (1.8)
x0 |P A|x x0 x x
In the same manner, we obtain the longitudinal strain in the y-direction, y , as the ratio between the
increase of length of P B in the y-direction due to deformation and the original length of P B:
0 0
|P B |y |P B|y y + v(x, y + y, z) v(x, y, z) y v(x, y, z)
y = lim = lim = (1.9)
y0 |P B|y y0 y y
Finally, we obtain the shear strain (or shear angle) as the sum of change of angles of P A and P B due
to deformation as:
u
v+ v
x x v u+ y y u v u
xy = yx = + = lim + = + (1.10)
x0, y0 x y x y
where it was used that tan , tan for small strains.
Now, generalising these results to three dimensions, the remaining strains are found as:
w(x, y, z)
z = (1.11)
z
w u
xz = zx = + (1.12)
x z
w v
yz = zy = + (1.13)
y z
4
Figure 1.2: Three-dimensional stress components (from Agarwal et al. figure A2-5).
Generally speaking, the strain is represented by a symmetric second order tensor = ij ei ej where
ei is the ith base vector. However, in this course we will restrict mainly to cartesian x,y,z-coordinate
systems thereby limiting ourselves to the fact that the strain tensor can be represented (with respect to
this coordinate system) by its cartesian matrix representation []xyz according to:
1 1
x xy xz x 2 xy 2 xz
1 1
[]xyz = xy y yz = 2 xy y 2 yz
(1.14)
1 1
xz yz z 2 xz 2 yz z
Please note that we in the following will omit the subscript xyz for convenience.
Please note that it in the last equality was used that the (Cauchy) stress tensor is symmetric, which
can be realised by studying the moment equilibrium of an infinitesimal parallelepiped element (at point
P (x, y, z)) with sides x, y and z respectively, cf. any basic course in solid mechanics or Appendix
A-2 in the course book.
5
1.4.1 Coordinate transformation of stress components by consideration of
force equilibrium
0 0 0
Figure 1.3: Definition of coordinate systems xyz and x y z where the latter has been rotated + degrees
0
around the common z axis (z axis) (from Agarwal et al., Figure A2-3).
In order to express the stress components in the x0 y 0 z 0 coordinate system (which is rotated + degrees
around the z axis relative to the xyz coordinate system, cf. Figure 1.3) in terms of the components with
respect to the xyz system, we consider the equilibrium of two infinitesimal triangular elements as in
Figure 1.4. Considering the left part of the figure, with the diagonal area A and Ax = A cos and
Ay = A sin we can via force equilibrium in the x0 direction conclude that:
0
x A = x cos Ax + y sin Ay + xy cos Ay + xy sin Ax
(1.17)
= A x cos2 + y sin2 + 2xy cos sin
0
x = x cos2 + y sin2 + 2xy cos sin (1.18)
0
In the same way, if we consider the equilibrium in the y direction we obtain:
0
xy A = x sin Ax + y cos Ay + xy cos Ax xy sin Ay
(1.19)
= A x sin cos + y cos sin + xy cos2 xy sin2
0
xy = (y x ) sin cos + xy cos2 sin2
(1.20)
Finally, if we do the same for the right part of the figure we obtain after some derivations:
0
y = x sin2 + y cos2 2xy sin cos (1.21)
0
(y x ) sin cos + xy cos2 sin2
xy = (1.22)
6
We see that Eq. (1.20) and Eq. (1.22) give the same result. Combining Eqs. (1.18),(1.21) and (1.22)
into Voigt matrix form we finally obtain:
0
x x
0
= [T1 ] y (1.23)
0y
xy
xy
where the stress transformation matrix [T1 ] is defined as:
cos2 sin2
2 sin cos
2
[T1 ] = sin cos2 2 sin cos (1.24)
sin cos sin cos cos2 sin2
It should be remarked that the coordinate transformation could just as well have been determined by
using the transformation laws of a second order tensor under change of basis, cf. Appendix A-1, which
yields the same transformation matrix as in Eqs. (1.24).
By restricting to plane stress, i.e. only accounting for components in the x- and y-directions, Eq. (1.38)
can be written on matrix form as:
0 0
xx xy cos() sin() xx xy cos() sin()
0 0 = (1.39)
yx yy sin() cos() yx yy sin() cos()
which, if in turn rewritten on contracted Voigt form, becomes identical to Eqs. (1.23)-(1.24) (show this!).
7
1.4.3 Coordinate transformation of strain components
Since the strain tensor is an ordinary second order tensor exactly as the stress tensor, they both follow
the same transformation laws. Hence, we can start by concluding that:
0
x = x cos2 + y sin2 + 2xy cos sin (1.40)
0
2
y = x sin + y cos2 2xy sin cos (1.41)
0
2 2
xy = (y x ) sin cos + xy cos sin (1.42)
0 0 0 0
Now, since we have that xy = 21 xy , xz = 12 xz and yz = 12 yz we also have that xy = 21 xy , xz = 12 xz
0 0
and yz = 21 yz which finally yields:
0
x = x cos2 + y sin2 + xy cos sin (1.43)
0
2 2
y = x sin + y cos xy sin cos (1.44)
0
2 2
xy = 2 (y x ) sin cos + xy cos sin (1.45)
or
0
x x
0
= [T2 ] y (1.46)
0y
xy
xy
with
cos2 sin2
sin cos
[T2 ] = sin2 cos2 sin cos . (1.47)
2 sin cos 2 sin cos cos2 sin2
Please note that it is often more convenient to use numbers rather than characters when indicating
the components of a vector or tensor. Hence, we will in the following use that the x-direction cor-
responds to the 1-direction (or the direction of base vector x1 ), the y-directions corresponds
to the 2-direction and the z-direction corresponds to the 3-direction. Consequently, we get
xx 11 , yy 22 , xy 12 etc.
8
Please distinguish between the matrix form of a tensor [] resulting in a 3x3 matrix and the Voigt
matrix form of the same tensor {} resulting in a 9x1 (or rather 6x1 due to symmetry) vector.
Please also note that the first row of Eq. (1.50) is the same as the expression for 11 in Eq. (1.49),
but with the terms in a different order. The index ordering of Eq. (1.50) is often used in the literature
and hence also adopted in the current course.
At a first glance it appears as if there in the most general elastic case are 81 elastic constants describing
the relation between stress and strain. Fortunately, due to symmetry arguments it can, cf. below, be
shown that in the most general elastically anisotropic case, 21 independent components are necessary to
describe the relation between and .
In order to see how this reduces the amount of independent constants of E, we first conclude that the two
first indices i and j can be combined in 9 different ways. Secondly, for each combination of i and j, we
can find three pairs of identical components of E (Eij12 = Eij21 , Eij13 = Eij31 , Eij23 = Eij32 ) whereby
three components (for each combination of i and j) can be replaced by their counterpart, leading to a
reduction of 9 x 3 = 27 constants (54 left).
With the respect to the first reduction we note that to two last indices (k and l) can be combined in six
independent ways. And for each of these combinations, there are as in the previous case three pairs of
equal components (E12kl = E21kl , E13kl = E31kl , E23kl = E32kl ). This leads to a reduction with another
18 constants (36 left).
U
= ij = Eijkl kl (1.53)
ij
U
= Eijkl (1.54)
kl ij
Interchanging order of taking the derivative results in:
U
= Eklij (1.55)
ij kl
which finally yields:
This results in a reduction with additionally 15 components. Thus, finally we end up with 21
independent components in the most general anisotropic case for linear elasticity.
9
1.6 Specially orthotropic material
Orthotropic materials have properties that exhibit symmetry with respect to certain planes. Or, as
an alternative interpretation, the elastic constants do not change when the direction perpendicular (or
normal) to the plane of symmetry is reversed.
An example is a composite laminate reinforced with fibres. Thus, we let x1 and x2 be two base vectors
in the lamina plane and x3 to be the base vector pointing out of plane. Then, it can be realised that
the lamina experience the same properties in the x1 -direction meaning that one plane of symmetry
is the x2 x3 -plane. In the same way it can be realised that the properties are also the same in x2 -
direction (x1 x3 -plane is plane of symmetry) and in the x3 -direction (x1 x2 -plane is plane of symmetry)
respectively. Based on these symmetry arguments, it can be shown that a total number of 9 elastic
constants are enough to describe the constitutive relation between stresses and strains, cf. the course
book. Hence, E can be expressed (with due consideration to the symmetry arguments) on Voigt form as:
E1111 E1122 E1133 0 0 0
E1122 E2222 E3322 0 0 0
E1133 E2233 E3333 0 0 0
[E] =
(1.57)
0 0 0 E2323 0 0
0 0 0 0 E1313 0
0 0 0 0 0 E1212
or equivalently with a more contracted notation as i = Cij j , i, j = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
1
C11 C12 C13 0 0 0
1
C12 C22 C23 0 0 0 2
2
3 C13 C23 C33 0 0 0
3
= (1.58)
23
0 0 0 C 44 0 0 23
13
0 0 0 0 C55 0 13
12 0 0 0 0 0 C66 12
Please note that the forms of Eqs. (1.57) and (1.58) are obtained when the coordinate axes are placed
along the normals to the symmetry planes. In general, if this is not the case, the [E] and [C] matrices
are full. But in this case, the components are not independent and there is still only necessary to have
nine independent material constants to describe the constitutive response.
C22 C23
C22 = C33 , C12 = C13 , C55 = C66 , C44 = (1.59)
2
whereby the Voigt form of the relation between the stresses and strains can be written as:
1 C11 C12 C12 0 0 0
1
C C22 C23 0 0 0 2
2 12
3 C12 C23 C22 0 0 0
3
= C22 C23 (1.60)
23
0 0 0 2 0 0 23
13 0 0 0 0 C66 0 13
12 0 0 0 0 0 C66 12
Thus, only five independent elastic constants are necessary to describe the constitutive response of a
transversely isotropic material.
10
1.8 Constitutive relations for a fibre reinforced lamina
In order to establish the constitutive relations for a unidirectional composite (or a single unidirectional
lamina/ply of a composite laminate), we make the basic assumption that it is in the state of plane
stress. Thus, if a coordinate system x1 x2 x3 is placed such that the x1 -axis points in the direction of
the fibres and the x3 -axis points out of the lamina plane we have 3 = 23 = 13 = 0 and Eq. (1.60) is
reduced to
1 Q11 Q12 0 1
2 = Q12 Q22 0 2 (1.61)
12 0 0 Q66 12
| {z }
[Q]
The plane stress assumption is generally a valid assumption since in the majority of the structural
applications, composite laminates are loaded in the plane of the laminate. And even if there are normal
stresses present in the out-of-plane direction (e.g. caused by internal or external pressure) these stresses
are often much smaller than the in-plane stresses.
To arrive at the general relation between stresses and strains, i.e. to establish the expressions for the
components of [Q] we note that it can be considered as the superposition of load cases in which only
one of the in-plane stress components are non-zero. Thus, as a starting point, we consider each of these
states individually.
Figure 1.5: Deformation due to nonzero longitudinal stress (from Agarwal et al., Figure 5-3).
The resulting strains when only the longitudinal stress L acts on the lamina are:
L
L = (1.63)
EL
L
T = LT L = LT (1.64)
EL
LT = 0 (1.65)
where EL is the longitudinal stiffness and LT is the so-called major Poissons ratio relating the longitu-
dinal stress to the transverse strain.
11
1.8.2 Transverse stress T nonzero
Figure 1.6: Deformation due to nonzero transverse stress (from Agarwal et al., Figure 5-3).
The resulting strains when only the transverse stress T acts on the lamina are:
T
T = (1.66)
ET
T
L = T L T = T L (1.67)
ET
LT = 0 (1.68)
where ET is the transverse stiffness and T L is the so-called minor Poissons ratio relating the transverse
stress to the longitudinal strain.
Figure 1.7: Deformation due to nonzero shear stress (from Agarwal et al., Figure 5-3).
The resulting strains when only the shear stress LT acts on the lamina are:
L = 0 (1.69)
T = 0 (1.70)
LT
LT = (1.71)
GLT
where GLT is the shear modulus of the lamina.
12
1.8.4 Total constitutive relation
If we superimpose the strains from these three states one obtains:
L T
L = T L (1.72)
EL ET
T T L
T = LT L = LT (1.73)
ET ET EL
LT
LT = (1.74)
GLT
or on Voigt matrix form
1
ETTL
L EL 0 L
LT 1
T = EL
ET 0 T (1.75)
LT 1 LT
0 0
GLT
T =
LT ET ET
T (1.76)
0
LT 1 LT T L 1 LT T L LT
0 0 GLT
| {z }
[Q]
If we make use of the fact that the lamina/ply is transversely isotropic we can also conclude that the
matrix [Q] is symmetric whereby
T L EL LT ET
= LT ET = T L EL (1.77)
1 LT T L 1 LT T L
where [T1 ] and [T2 ] are the stress transformation matrix and the strain transformation matrix respectively
defined in Eq. (1.24) and Eq. (1.47).
Thus, the relation between stresses and strains in the global coordinates is obtained as
x x
1
y = [T ] [Q][T2 ] y (1.80)
| 1 {z
xy xy
}
[Q]
13
Figure 1.8: UD lamina with fibres oriented + degrees.
14
Chapter 2
Lamina theory
wc = wm + wf (2.1)
and the weight fractions of matrix material (Wm ) and fibre material (Wf ) can be defined as:
wm wf
Wm = , Wf = (2.2)
wc wc
Consequently, the volume fractions of matrix material (vm ) and fibre material (vf ) can be defined as:
vm vf
Vm = , Vf = (2.4)
vc vc
Since the weight fractions are easier to determine from experiments, relations between these weight
fractions and the volume fractions are of importance. Introducing c , m and f for the density of the
composite material, the matrix material and the fibre material, the relation between the volume and
weight fractions are obtained as
wf f vf f
Wf = = = Vf (2.5)
wc c vc c
m
Wm = Vm (2.6)
c
15
Remains then to determine the density of the composite material (neglecting the existence of pores).
To do this, we first note that the total volume of the composite may be written as
wc wm wf wf m + f wm
vc = = + = . (2.7)
c m f f m
wc m f 1 1
c = = wf wm = . (2.8)
wf m + f wm wc f + wc m
(Wf /f ) + (Wm /m )
It should be remarked that in the presence of voids, the actual composite density is somewhat lower.
In general, this discrepancy might be rather small (less than 1% for a good composite) but a difference of
up to 5% can be expected for a poorly produced composite. However, the actual effect of a higher amount
of voids may have significant influence on some of the properties such as a lowered fatigue resistance and
strength.
f L = mL = cL (2.9)
This is in general homogenisation theory denoted the Voigt assumption which serves as an upper limit
of the possible stiffness of a composite in any direction, given a certain fibre volume fraction.
Based on the assumptions above, the longitudinal load Pc carried by the composite will be shared
between the fibres Pf and the matrix Pm so that
Pc = c A c = Pf + Pm = f A f + m A m (2.10)
where c , f and m are the stresses experienced by the composite, the fibres and the matrix respectively,
and where Ac , Af and Am are the corresponding total cross sectional areas. From Eq. (2.10), we can
get the expression for the composite stress c which, by using the fact that the area fractions equals the
volume fractions of a unidirectional composite, takes the form
Af Am
c = f + m = f Vf + m Vm . (2.11)
Ac Ac
16
Figure 2.1: Model for predicting longitudinal behaviour of unidirectional composite (from Agarwal et al.,
Figure 3-3).
If we now assume that both the fibres and the matrix behaves linear elastic ( = E) we obtain the
expression of the longitudinal elastic stiffness (modulus) of the composite as
EL = Ef Vf + Em Vm (2.12)
which generally is denoted the rule of mixtures (ROM). For a composite of n constituents, the expression
for the longitudinal stiffness can be generalised as
n
X
EL = Ei Vi . (2.13)
i=1
From Eqs. (2.12)-(2.13) and in Figure 2.2 it can be seen that, for the case of significantly stiffer fibres
(compared to the matrix), most of the (longitudinal) load is carried by the fibres already at rather low
fibre volume fractions.
It should be remarked that Eqs. (2.12)-(2.13) are only valid as long as both the matrix and the
fibre material behaves linear elastic. This may however constitute only a small portion of the stress-
strain behaviour and generally, the longitudinal deformation of a unidirectional composite proceed in
four stages:
2. The fibres still deform linear elastically whereas the matrix deforms nonlinearly elastic or even
plastically
Whereas stage 3 can be observed only for ductile fibres, stage 2 may occupy the largest portion
of the composite stress-strain curve (which is no longer linear) and the longitudinal composite stiffness
(modulus) relating an incremental change in strain to the corresponding change in stress (L = EL L )
must be predicted at each composite strain level c as
m
EL = Ef Vf + Vm (2.14)
m c
m
where is the slope of the matrix stress-strain curve at strain c . However, in practice, the
m c
non-linearity of the stress-strain curve for the matrix material has low effect on the composite stiffness,
especially at significant fibre fraction. Thus, in many cases Eq. (2.12) is a good approximation.
17
It should be remarked that the rule of mixtures is accurate for longitudinal tensile stiffness. But
when loaded in compression, the response of the composite observed in experiments may
deviate from the analytical predictions (ROM). This because the combined compressive properties
is strongly dependent on the matrix material properties, such as its shear stiffness (cf. buckling), whereas
the tensile response is much more governed by the fibre properties.
Figure 2.2: Graph showing the percentage of the total force carried by the fibres in a unidirectional
composite as function of fibre volume fraction (from Agarwal et al., Figure 3-5).
cu A = f u Af + (m ) Am
f
Af Am Af Am
cu = f u + (m ) = Vf , = Vm
A f A A A
n o Em
cu = f u Vf + (m ) Vm = matrix linear elastic up to f = f u Vf + Vm (2.15)
f Ef
where f u is the fibre fracture stress (or ultimate strength of the fibres) and (m ) is the stress in a
f
matrix subjected to the strain at which the fibres fail (f ), cf Figure 2.3.
It can be seen that Eq. (2.15) predicts a lower composite strength for the composite compared to the
unreinforced matrix material for a certain level of fibre volume fraction (below Vcrit ). Vcrit is defined as
when the failure strength of the composite equals the failure strength of the unreinforced matrix material,
i.e.
mu (m )
f
f u Vcrit + (m ) (1 Vcrit ) = mu Vcrit = . (2.16)
f | {z } f u (m )
f
Vm
However, for most practical applications (Vcrit ) is really small. Consider e.g. the common composite
material consisting of carbon fibres and epoxy matrix (or resin) material. From mean values of the
respective strength for carbon fibres (cf. Table 1-1 in Agarwal et al.) f u 2.3 GPa and epoxy (cf.
Table 2-11 in Agarwal et al.) mu 92.5 MPa and assuming that the epoxy is linear elastic up to the
18
Figure 2.3: Graph showing the composite longitudinal failure stress cu as function of fibre volume
fraction (from Agarwal et al., Figure 3-7).
9
failure strain of the fibres f = 2.3 109 /315 109 = 0.0073 (m ) = |3.425
{z 10} 0.0073 = 25 MPa, we
f
Eepoxy
can obtain Vcrit as:
92.5 106 25 106
Vcrit = 0.03 (2.17)
2.3 109 25 106
That is, the critical volume fraction of fibres Vcrit is about 3% which is considerably lower than in any
practical applications (50-60%).
Misorientation of fibres
Fibre orientation directly influences the properties of the composite. Naturally, the contribution
from the fibres is maximised only when the fibres are aligned with the loading direction. As a
consequence, the stiffness and strength will be reduced when the fibres are not parallel to the
loading direction. However, the discrepancy is small and no corrections have to be made if the
misalignment is small, i.e. limited to a few degrees. It should be remarked that in the general
case, a composite material is often composed of a number of unidirectional lamina with different
orientations stacked on top of each other. For this type of composite structure a laminate there
are several appropriate theories (co-called laminate theories) available to described the structural
response, cf. Chapter 3 and Chapters 6-8 in the course book.
Fibres of nonuniform strength
First of all, it should be remarked that any reduction of the fibre strength directly results in a
lowered strength of the composite material. Consequently, a composite of high strength is obtained
when the fibres are uniform in strength. Reasons for a non-uniform distribution may be due to at
least the following two reasons:
19
1. A variation of cross section as function of length
2. As a result of initial damage due to handling of the fibres before manufacturing the composite
In addition, the fibre strength decreases as the fibre length increases. This is due to the fact that
statistically, the existence of any strength reducing factor (flaw) increases with length and the fibre
will always first break at its weakest link. In any case, it should be remarked that fibres start
to break at loads lower than the composite strength and that this accumulates up to final failure.
Thus, for detailed predictions of the composite strength, statistical methods need to be incorporated
which, however, is considered as out of scope in the current course.
Discontinuous fibres
When the length of the fibres are in the same order of size as the length over which the load is
transmitted through the matrix material, we speak of discontinuous fibre reinforcements. In these
materials, the end effects (variation of stress along the fibre and stress concentrations) cannot be
neglected and must be dealt with. This is however not included in the current course. Interested
students are referred to Chapter 4 in the course book for reference.
Interfacial conditions
Residual stresses
Originates predominantly from the manufacturing process due to e.g.
a variation between thermal expansion coefficients for the fibre and the matrix material,
a significant difference in temperature at manufacturing and temperature at use, cf. also
Computer Assignment 1, and
chemical shrinkage in the manufacturing process
It should be remarked that the existence of residual stresses significantly impact the response
and the properties (strength) of the composite material and should be included in an advanced
assessment analysis of a composite structure. How this is to be incorporated practically is not always
straightforward, but this should definitively be kept in mind! The residual stresses in composites
is much more importance for the component performance than say in the case of traditional metal
components in which the residual stress often decrease with time due to local (and often harmless)
plastic deformations leading to stress relaxation.
c = cT L2 = f T Lf + mT Lm (2.18)
20
Figure 2.4: Model for predicting transverse stiffness of unidirectional composite (from Gibson, Principles
of Composite Material Mechanics 2nd ed., 2007).
where cT , f T and mT are the transversal strains in the composite RVE, the fibre materials and the
matrix material respectively. Furthermore, since the RVE do not change along the longitudinal direction,
the length fractions must equal the volume fractions such that
cT = f T Vf + mT Vm . (2.19)
By using Hookes law, (and neglecting any Poisson strains) this can be written as
c f m
= Vf + Vm . (2.20)
ET Ef Em
If we now finally assume that the stress in each of the constituents (fibre and matrix) is the same (the
so-called Reuss assumption), i.e. we have that
c = f = m , (2.21)
we end up with the inverse rule of mixtures for the transverse modulus as
1 Vf Vm
= + (2.22)
ET Ef Em
It should be remarked that by assuming equal stress in both fibres and matrix, the resulting expression
for the (transverse) stiffness can be shown to be the lower bound given a certain fibre volume fraction,
cf. also Figure 2.5.
Figure 2.5: Longitudinal and transverse stiffness as function of fibre volume fraction (from Agarwal et
al., Figure 3-9a). Please note that the rule of mixtures (Voigt assumption) serves as an upper limit of the
composite stiffness whereas the inverse rule of mixtures (Reuss assumption) serves as the lower bound
21
2.2.3.2 Halpin-Tsai semi-empirical model for transverse stiffness prediction
The inverse rule of mixtures may lead to poor predictions (and an underestimation of the transverse
stiffness) since, in reality, the stresses are not equal in the matrix and fibre material.
To improve the predictions, Halpin and Tsai developed simple and generalised equations to fit more
advanced micromechanical models for transverse stiffness. The Halpin-Tsai equation for the transverse
composite stiffness (modulus) can be written as
ET 1 + Vf (Ef /Em ) 1
= , = (2.23)
Em 1 Vf (Ef /Em ) +
in which is a measure of the reinforcements and relates to the fibre geometry. Please note the special
cases
1
=0: ET = Vm Vf
(inverse rule of mixtures) (2.24)
Em + Ef
=: ET = Vm Em + Vf Ef (Rule of mixtures) (2.25)
Thus, it is clear that can be viewed as a curve fitting parameter since the real transverse stiffness will
lie between the two limiting cases (closer to the inverse rule of mixture prediction). Halpin and Tsai have
proposed = 2 for circular or quadratic cross sections and = 2 ab for rectangular cross sections
in which a and b are side lengths of the cross section and where a is to be taken as the side length in the
loading direction.
Predictions made by the Halpin-Tsai equations have proven to be adequate in many practical situa-
tions, cf. Figure 2.6 for a comparison made against experimental data for a boron-epoxy lamina reported
by Whitney and Riley (J. IAAA, 4:1537, 1966), and it generally gives a better prediction than the pre-
diction obtained based on the equivalence of stress in the fibre and the matrix material (the inverse rule
of mixtures).
Figure 2.6: Transverse stiffness predicted by the inverse rule of mixtures and the Halpin-Tsai equation
compared with experimental data reported by Whitney and Riley for boron-epoxy (from Agarwal et al.,
figure 3-9b).
22
Figure 2.7: Stress distribution in matrix surrounding a single cylindrical inclusion EF /Em = 10, m =
0.35, f = 0.3 (from Agarwal et al., figure 3-12a).
in which S is a strength reduction factor. This reduction factor can be predicted by several methods.
1 Vf (1 (Em /Ef ))
SCF = 1/2
. (2.27)
1 (4Vf /) (1 (Em /Ef ))
Figure 2.8: Principal stress in matrix surrounding multiple fibres obtained by FEM by Chen and Lin
m = 0.35, f = 0.2 (from Agarwal et al., figure 3-12b).
23
2.2.4.1 Major results
Inverse rule of mixtures:
1
GLT = (2.28)
Vf /Gf + Vm /Gm
The longitudinal strain is the same in both constituents (as for the stiffness prediction)
The total transverse contraction is the sum of the transverse contraction of the fibres and matrix
respectively
Major Poissons ratio LT relating the longitudinal stress to the transverse strain:
LT = f Vf + m Vm (2.30)
Minor Poissons ratio T L relating the transverse stress to the longitudinal strain:
LT T L ET
= T L = LT (2.31)
EL ET EL
For the thermal case, the underlying assumptions (not explained in the text) in the derivations are:
The strains in the longitudinal direction are the same in the matrix and in the fibres (Voigt as-
sumption)
The stresses in the transverse direction are constant, i.e. the Reuss assumption is used
The homogenised macroscopic stresses in the lamina are zero, i.e. the assumption L = T = 0 is
used.
24
Major results
Thermal expansion coefficients (cf. Scharpery, J. Compos Mater., 2:280-404, 1968 for details):
1
L = (f Ef Vf + m Em Vm ) (2.32)
EL
T = (1 + f ) f Vf + (1 + m ) m Vm L LT (2.33)
L 0 (given that the fibres are much stiffer than the moisture absorbing matrix) (2.34)
c
T = (1 + m ) m (cf. e.g. Tsai and Hahn, Introduction to Composite Materials, 1980)(2.35)
m
Increased temperature of a polymer causes a gradual degradation of the stiffness up to a certain point,
the so-called glass transition temperature at which the matrix behaviour transforms from being glassy
to being rubbery, cf. also Figure 2.9
Figure 2.9: Variation of stiffness for a typical polymer showing the glass transition temperature Tg and
the effect of absorbed moisture on Tg . Note: Tg0 = dry, Tg0 = wet (from Gibson, figure 5.1.).
In addition, increased moist absorption in the matrix leads to a lowered glass transition temperature
and a decrease in stiffness. Moist saturation 3-4 % leads to a lowered glass temperature of approx 20%, c.f
also Figure 2.10 how the stress-strain curve for 3501-5 epoxy resin is affected by temperature and moist
and Figure 2.11 how this in turn influence the stress-strain of a AS/3501-5 graphite/epoxy composite
(same matrix material!) with fibre volume fraction Vf = 0.63.
The hygrothermal degradation of a composite strength and/or stiffness is often estimated by empirical
models. Chamis and Sinclair (Composite Materials: Testing and Design (Sixth Conference), ASTM STP
787, pp. 498512, 1982) and Chamis (Engineers Guide to Composite Materials, pp. 3-83-24, 1987)
have demonstrated such a procedure. In their approach, the degraded stiffness Em (or strength) is
0
approximated by the nominal stiffness Em multiplied by a degradation factor Fm such that:
0
Em Fm Em (2.36)
and the degraded value Em is then used in e.g. the Halpin-Tsai equation to approximate the temperature
and moisture dependent transverse stiffness of the composite. As for the degradation factor, the following
25
Figure 2.10: Stress-strain curves for 3501-5 epoxy resin at different temperatures and moisture contents
(from Gibson, figure 5.2.)
Figure 2.11: Stress-strain curves for AS/3501-5 graphite/epoxy composite with fibre volume fraction
Vf = 0.63 at different temperatures and moisture contents (from Gibson, figure 5.3.)
expression is proposed:
1/2
Tgw T
Fm = (2.37)
Tg0 T0
where Tg0 is the dry glass transition temperature of the matrix material (i.e. without moisture), Tgw
is the wet glass transition temperature that depends on the moisture concentration, T0 is the reference
temperature at which the nominal matrix stiffness is measured (E0 ) and T is the current temperature.
Furthermore, Chamis used data for six different epoxy resins to fit the parameters of an empirical curve
in order to get an approximate expression for Tgw for epoxy resin as:
2
32 50Mr2 10Mr
Tgw [C] = 50Mr 10Mr + 1.0 Tg0 [C] + . (2.38)
1.8
where Mr is moist contents in weight percent (4% Mr = 0.04), cf. also Figure 2.12 for tabulated
data for some matrix materials. Please note that the somewhat strange format of the expression for Tgw
stems from the fact that the parameters obtained by Chamis where found for temperatures measured in
Fahrenheit whereas the expression in Eq. (2.38) is valid for temperatures measured in Celsius. Thus, it
26
has been used that
T [F ] = T [C] 1.8 + 32 (2.39)
Figure 2.12: Hygrothermal properties of various polymer matrix materials (from Gibson, Table 5.1.).
27
28
Chapter 3
Laminate theory
Figure 3.2: Deformation during bending of the laminate in the xz plane (adapted from Agarwal et al,
figure 6-2.)
Consider first the deformation of a laminate in the xz-plane, cf. Figure 3.2. In this case, the displace-
ment u in the x-direction of a point C that is located on the undeformed normal ABCD, at a distance z
from the midplane, is given by
u = u0 z sin u0 z (3.1)
where u0 is the midplane displacement in the x-direction and is the slope of the deformed section
A0 B 0 C 0 D0 or the (negative) rotation of the normal ABCD around the y-axis due to deformation. Sim-
ilarly, the displacement v of a corresponding point when the laminate is deformed in the yz-plane, cf.
Figure 3.3, can be obtained as
v = v0 z (3.2)
29
where v0 is the midplane displacement in the y-direction and is the slope of the deformed section
A0 B 0 C 0 D0 or the (positive) rotation of the normal ABCD around the x-axis due to deformation in the
yz-plane).
Figure 3.3: Deformation during bending of the laminate in the yz plane (adapted from Agarwal et al,
figure 6-2.)
From these kinematical expressions for the displacements, we can derive the in-plane strains as
u u0
x = = z (3.3)
x x x
v v0
y = = z (3.4)
y y y
u v u0 v0
xy = + = + z + (3.5)
y x y x y x
or
{} = {0 } + z{k} (3.7)
u0
0
x
x
v0
0 0
{ } = = (3.8)
0y y
xy
u0 v0
+
y x
and
kx
x
{k} = ky = (3.9)
kxy
y
+
y x
It should be remarked that the definition (and notation) of the curvatures differs in the literature. In these
notes, we follow the notations used in the course book. Please note that we assume that adjacent
lamina across the thickness of the laminate do not slip over each other. Hence, the strain
varies linearly through the thickness even though the properties vary, cf. Figure 3.4. Please
also note that both 0 and k are functions of x and y only.
30
If we now assume that the normal ABCD remains planar and perpendicular to the midplane also after
deformation (the Kirchhoff assumption), it can be found that
w0
= (3.10)
x
w0
= (3.11)
y
Figure 3.4: Principal variation of stresses and strains in a composite laminate consisting of three unidi-
rectional laminae/plies with different orientation (from Agarwal et al, figure 6-3.)
31
3.3 Resultant forces and moments
For convenience, we define the stress resultants in terms of normal forces (per unit length) and moments
(per unit length), obtained by integration of stresses through the thickness of the laminate, as (cf. Fig-
ure 3.5 below for sign conventions):
Resulting moment per unit length, acting on the edge with normal in the x-axis direction causing a
(positive) rotation around the y-axis (integration of stress times moment arm):
Z h/2
Mx = x z dz (3.18)
h/2
Resulting moment per unit length, acting on the edge with normal in the y-axis direction causing a
(negative) rotation around the x-axis (integration of stress times moment arm):
Z h/2
My = y z dz (3.19)
h/2
Resulting moment per unit length, acting on the edge with normal in the x-axis direction causing a
(negative) rotation around the x-axis (integration of stress times moment arm):
Z h/2
Mxy = xy z dz (3.20)
h/2
Resulting moment per unit length, acting on the edge with normal in the y-axis direction causing a
(positive) rotation around the y-axis (integration of stress times moment arm):
32
Let us now consider an orthotropic laminate consisting of n laminae (plies), cf. Figure 3.6. Grouping
the normal forces (per unit length) in a vector one obtains:
Nx Z h/2 x Xn Z hk x
{N} = Ny = y dz = y dz (3.22)
Nxy
h/2
k=1 hk1
xy k
xy
where hk is the z-coordinate of the upper (in positive z-direction) part of lamina k.
Figure 3.6: Description of a multilayered laminate geometry (from Agarwal et al, figure 6-5).
Now, combining Eq. (3.14) and Eq. (3.22), N can be written as:
n Z
X hk 0
{N} = Q k + zk dz (3.23)
k=1 hk1
Realising that the midplane strains 0 , the curvatures k and the material properties Qij are constant
within each lamina, we can further rewrite the expression for the normal forces as:
n
!
X Z hk Z hk
0
{N} = Q k dz { } + Q k z dz {k}
k=1 hk1 hk1
" n # " n #
X 1 X (3.24)
Q k (hk hk1 ) {0 } + Q k h2k h2k1 {k}
=
2
k=1 k=1
= [A]{0 } + [B]{k}
where
n
" #
X
[A] = Q k (hk hk1 ) (3.25)
k=1
" n #
1 X 2 2
[B] = Q k hk hk1 (3.26)
2
k=1
(hk hk1 ) is always positive (equal to the thickness of the lamina), but that the
Please note that
term h2k h2k1 is positive for a lamina situated above the midplane and negative for a lamina situated
below the midplane. In this way, B = 0 for laminates where the laminae (plies) are placed symmetrically
around the midplane, thus in that case there is no coupling between curvatures and normal forces
which may occur in the general case.
Performing the same type of analysis for the moments, cf. e.g. Agarwal et al., one obtains:
33
Mx
{M} = My = [B]{0 } + [D]{k} (3.27)
Mxy
where " n #
1 X 3 3
[D] = Q k hk hk1 (3.28)
3
k=1
0
N A B
= (3.29)
M B D k
Figure 3.7: Sign convention for orientation of laminae in a laminate. Please note that in the figure, the
laminate is identical in both the left and the right part. The only difference is the orientation of the
coordinate axes (from Agarwal et al, figure A3-1).
With a given coordinate system at hand, the lay-up sequence of a laminate is easily defined according
to the following:
Each lamina is represented by a number representing the angle (in degrees) of rotation around the
z-axis
The laminae are listed in the sequence they are laid up.
Adjacent laminae with the same orientation are denoted by a numerical subscript.
Adjacent laminae with the same magnitude of orientation, but in the two different directions, are
denoted by a plus-minus () or minus-plus () sign.
For symmetric laminates, only half of the lay-up sequence needs to be defined followed by a subscript
S denoting symmetry.
For symmetric laminates, if the number of plies are uneven, the mid-lamina is denoted by an
overbar.
34
s
Figure 3.8: Four examples of lay-up sequences and their corresponding laminate orientation code (from
Agarwal et al).
1
0 (x0 , y0 )
A(x0 , y0 ) B(x0 , y0 ) N(x0 , y0 )
= (x0 , y0 , z) = 0 (x0 , y0 ) + zk(x0 , y0 )
k(x0 , y0 ) B(x0 , y0 ) D(x0 , y0 ) M(x0 , y0 )
(3.30)
35
cos2 k sin2 k
sin k cos k
[T2 ]k = sin2 k cos2 k sin k cos k (3.32)
2 sin k cos k 2 sin k cos k cos2 k sin2 k
Note that the stress varies linearly with z within the lamina!! Please also note that this is an
unnecessary step if you want to assess the strength of the lamina since you then would need the stresses
expressed in the fibre oriented coordinate system, obtained directly through
L L (x0 , y0 , z)
T = [Q]k T (x0 , y0 , z) (3.34)
LT (x , y , z)
k LT 0 0 k
cos2 k sin2 k
2 sin k cos k
[T1 ]k = sin2 k cos2 k 2 sin k cos k (3.36)
sin k cos k sin k cos k cos2 k sin2 k
Note that the stress varies linearly with z within the lamina!!
36
Figure 3.9: Concepts of thermal stresses and strains in a three-ply symmetric laminate (from Agarwal et
al, figure 6-19.)
To study the thermal and hygroscopic strains, the hygrothermal strains, we first consider the prop-
erties of an transversely isotropic material, such as an UD lamina. In this case, the coefficients of thermal
and moisture expansion change with direction, cf. e.g. Subsection 3.7.1 and 3.7.3 in Agarwal et al.. Thus,
changes in temperature and/or moist contents produce strains according to:
TL = L T (3.38)
TT = T T (3.39)
H
L = L C = 0 (since L is taken as 0, cf. Subsection 3.7.2) (3.40)
H
T = T C (3.41)
(3.42)
Since the thermal and hygroscopic strains transform in the same way as the total strain (using the
transformation matrix T2 ) it is clear that the coefficients of thermal and hygroscopic expansion transform
in the same way, i.e. we obtain for each lamina:
x L
1
y = [T2 ]k T (3.43)
xy 0
k k
x 0
1
y = [T2 ]k T (3.44)
xy 0
k k
Thus, the thermal and hygroscopic strains may be expressed in the global coordinate system as:
37
T
x x
T = y T (3.45)
Ty
xy xy
H k
x x
H
y = y C (3.46)
H
xy xy
k
For clarity, due to the similarities between hygroscopic and thermal strains, we will only consider
the thermal strains in the following. The derivations below can easily be extended to include also the
hygroscopic effects, cf. the book, but it involves more terms.
Given the expressions for the thermal strains, and neglecting any moist absorption/desorption, one
obtains the mechanical strains M of each lamina as:
M 0
x x + zkx x
M = 0 + zky y T (3.47)
yM 0y
xy k xy + zkxy xy k
Inserting this in the expression for the stresses in each lamina k, one obtains
0
x x0 + zkx x
y = Q k + zky Q k y T (3.48)
0y
xy k xy + zkxy xy k
Now, in order to obtain the relation between the total midplane strains and curvatures and the forces
produced by mechanical and thermal loads, we insert Eq. (3.48) in the expression for the stress resultants
(normal forces and moments due to mechanical loading) one obtains:
or equivalently
NxT
0 M
x Nx
0 NM NT
0y yT
YM
A B xy Nxy Nxy
= M + (3.51)
B D kx0
M x
MxT
M
k0 My MyT
0y
M
T
kxy Mxy Mxy
NxT Xn
x
{NT } = NT = T Q k y (hk hk1 ) (3.52)
yT
Nxy xy k
k=1
MxT 1 Xn
x
{MT } MyT h2k h2k1
= = T Q k y (3.53)
T 2
Mxy xy k
k=1
Remark. Please note that in Agarwal et al., the authors refer to something called thermal stresses
(denoted by a superscript T in e.g. Equation 6.62). This may be somewhat misleading since stresses are
always cased by mechanical straining ( = (M ) and nothing else. Stresses can not be anything but
mechanical. A more proper description would be thermally induced stresses.
38
Chapter 4
u u0 2 w0
x = = z
x x x2
v v0 2 w0
y = = z
y y y 2
u v u0 v0 2 w0
xy = + = + 2z
y x y x x y
It is worth pointing out the two contradiction that
1. the shear strains are assumed to be zero xz = yz = 0 although the corresponding shear stresses
are not (cf. Section 4.3 below), e.g.
u w0 w0 w0
xz = + = + =0
z x x x
2. A simultaneous state of plane stress and constant thickness (after deformation) of the laminate is
assumed.
39
out-of-plane shear forces Ryz and Rxz (note that these are resultants from the shear stresses yz
and xz respectively that previously have been neglected but now have to be considered to balance
the applied surface load)
in-plane normal and shear forces Nx , Ny and Nxy = Nyx and
moments Mx , My and Mxy = Myx .
In addition, the outer vertical force acting on the element is the distributed load p(x, y) (force per unit
area and positive in the positive z-direction).
z
y
y
Rxz
Nxy Nx Mx Mxy
Ryz + Ryz
Ryz
Nxy + Nxy Mx + Mx
Rxz+ Rxz
Nx + Nx
Mxy + Mxy
As before, the in-plane forces and moments are resultants of the stresses x , y and xy as follows:
Z h/2 Z h/2 Z h/2
Nx = x dz , Ny = y dz , Nxy = xy dz = Nyx
h/2 h/2 h/2
Z h/2 Z h/2 Z h/2
Mx = z x dz , My = z y dz , Mxy = z xy dz = Myx
h/2 h/2 h/2
Correspondingly, the internal shear forces per unit length are the resultants of the out-of-plane shear
stresses Z h/2 Z h/2
Rxz = xz dz, Ryz = yz dz (4.1)
h/2 h/2
We now study equilibrium of the small plate element
40
4.3.3 Force squilibrium in z-direction
(Rxz + Rxz )y Rxz y + (Ryz + Ryz )x Ryz x + pxy = 0
{divide by xy and let x 0,y 0}
(4.4)
Rxz Ryz
+ = p
x y
Nx Nxy
+ = 0 (4.7)
x y
Nxy Ny
+ = 0 (4.8)
x y
2 2 2
Mx Mxy My
+2 + = p (4.9)
x2 xy y 2
For future purposes, we note that we also can write the equations above in a contracted way as:
TN = 0
(4.10)
T
M = p (4.11)
T
T and defined as:
with
2
0
x x2
2
x
=
0 , =
= with = (4.12)
y
y 2
2
y
2
y x
xy
41
Please note that it is the exact same equilibrium equations as for an isotropic plate. How-
ever, in that case there is no coupling between in-plane loading and bending due to the
material symmetry (or rather isotropy).
with 2
u0
w0
x x2
2 w0
v0
=
{0 } = u , {k} = w0 = (4.15)
y
y 2
u0 + v0 2 w0
2
y x
xy
into the equilibrium equations Eqs. (4.7)-(4.9), one obtains the equilibrium equations in terms of the
displacements as:
2 u0 2 u0 2 u0 2 v0 2 v0 2 v0
A11 + 2A 16 + A 66 + A 16 + (A 12 + A 66 ) + A 26
x2 xy y 2 x2 xy y 2
3 3 3 3
(4.16)
w0 w0 w0 w0
B11 3B16 2 (B12 + 2B66 ) B26 =0
x3 x y xy 2 y 3
2 u0 2 u0 2 u0 2 v0 2 v0 2 v0
A16 2
+ (A12 + A66 ) + A26 2
+ A66 2
+ 2A26 + A22 2
x xy y x xy y
3 3 3 3
(4.17)
w0 w0 w0 w0
B16 (B12 + 2B66 ) 2 3B26 B22 =0
x3 x y xy 2 y 3
4 w0 4 w0 4 w0 4 w0 4 w0
D11 + 4D 16 + 2(D12 + 2D 66 ) + 4D 26 + D22
x4 x3 y x2 y 2 xy 3 y 4
3 3 3 3
u0 u0 u0 u0 3 v0
B11 3B 16 (B 12 + 2B 66 ) B 26 B 16 (4.18)
x3 x2 y xy 2 y 3 x3
3 3 3
v0 v0 v0
(B12 + 2B66 ) 2 3B26 B22 3 = p
x y xy 2 y
which are the general equilibrium equations for a laminated plate with any lay-up sequence.
2 u0 2 u0 2 u0 2 v0 2 v0 2 v0
A11 + 2A 16 + A 66 + A 16 + (A 12 + A 66 ) + A 26 =0 (4.19)
x2 xy y 2 x2 xy y 2
2 u0 2 u0 2 u0 2 v0 2 v0 2 v0
A16 + (A 12 + A 66 ) + A 26 + A 66 + 2A 26 + A 22 =0 (4.20)
x2 xy y 2 x2 xy y 2
4 w0 4 w0 4 w0 4 w0 4 w0
D11 + 4D 16 + 2(D 12 + 2D 66 ) + 4D 26 + D22 =p (4.21)
x4 x3 y x2 y 2 xy 3 y 4
42
Furthermore, specially orthotropic laminates (such as e.g. unidirectional laminates with all fibres
oriented with an angle of 0 or 90 or symmetric cross-ply laminates) the laminate that behave like a
single layer of an orthotropic material satisfy the following additional conditions:
2 u0 2 u0 2 v0
A11 2
+ A66 2
+ (A12 + A66 ) = 0 (4.24)
x y xy
2 2
u0 v0 2 v0
(A12 + A66 ) + A66 2
+ A22 2 = 0 (4.25)
xy x y
4 4
w0 w0 4 w0
D11 4
+ 2(D12 + 2D66 ) 2 2 + D22 = p (4.26)
x x y y 4
It should be remarked that since Bij = 0 the in plane and transverse motions can be treated separately
in this case. In the following, we will study a method for analytically solving the bending part for a simply
supported specially orthotropic plate.
dx
In this method, the deflection w0 is proposed to be of the following form (Fourier series expansion):
X
X m x n y
w0 (x, y) = wmn sin sin (4.27)
m=1 n=1
a b
where wmn are unknown (Fourier) coefficients. The boundary conditions for a fully simply supported
plate are (
w0 (0, y) = w0 (a, y) = 0 , w0 (x, 0) = w0 (x, b) = 0
(4.28)
Mx (0, y) = Mx (a, y) = 0 , My (x, 0) = My (x, b) = 0
The bending moments can, via (4.14) be expressed as
2 w0 2 w0
Mx = D11 D12 (4.29)
x2 y 2
2 w0 2 w0
My = D12 D22 (4.30)
x2 y 2
and with the assumed expression for w0 :
X X m 2 n 2 m x n y
Mx = wmn D11 D12 sin sin (4.31)
m=1 n=1
a b a b
43
X
X m 2 n 2 m x n y
My = wmn D12 D22 sin sin (4.32)
m=1 n=1
a b a b
Clearly, the adopted expression for w0 in (4.27) fulfills the boundary conditions since
sin (n ) = 0 , for n = 0, 1, 2, . . .
where the coefficients pmn can be found from the following expression
Z b Z a
4 m x n y
pmn = p(x, y) sin sin dx dy
ab 0 0 a b
4 p0 b a
Z Z m x n y
pmn = sin sin dx dy =
ab 0 0 a b
4 p0 a b h m x ia h n y ib
= cos cos
ab m n a 0 b 0
16 p0
= , m, n = 1, 3, . . .
mn 2
Please observe that, despite the fact that the sum in the Fourier series goes to infinity, it is often
for practical reasons sufficient to truncate these series (i.e. use a finite value for the upper limit of
the sum). It is generally the first modes (lowest values of m and n that have the most significant
contributions). As an example, please consider Figure 4.2 where the uniform pressure load is
approximated with truncated Fourier series with different maximum values.
4 p0 b a
Z Z m x n y
pmn = sin y sin dx dy =
ab2 0 0 a b
8 p0
= (1)n+1 , m = 1, 3, 5, . . . , n = 1, 2, 3, . . .
2 m n
44
0.2 0.2 0.2
p(x,y)
p(x,y)
p(x,y)
0.1 0.1 0.1
0 0 0
1 1 1
a) b) c)
Figure 4.2: Approximation of uniform pressure load p(x, y) = 0.2 using truncated Fourier series with
maximum values according to a) m = n = 3, b) m = n = 7 and c) m = n = 11
Point load Q0 at x0 , y0 . The distributed force can be described by impulse function (Dirac-delta)
p = Q0 (x x0 , y y0 ). With the property
Z bZ a
(x x0 , y y0 ) f (x, y) dx dy = f (x0 , y0 )
0 0
4 Q0 b a
Z Z m x n y
pmn = (x x0 , y y0 ) sin sin dx dy =
ab 0 0 a b
4 Q0 m x
0
n y
0
= sin sin , m, n = 1, 2, 3, . . .
ab a b
a) b)
c) d)
Figure 4.3: Views of the small plate element xy showing the contributions from in-plane forces Nx ,
Ny , Nxy and Nyx to the vertical equilibrium equation. a) Contribution from Nx , b) contribution from
Ny and c)-d) contribution from in Nyx (Nxy can be treated in the same way)
Moderate in-plane loads on a flat symmetric laminate cause in-plane displacements but no out-of-
plane displacements. However, it is known that in-plane compressive loads, when high enough, cause
45
out-of-plane displacements (deflections) that may be excessive and lead to failure. This is called elastic
instability or buckling. In buckling, out-of-plane displacements are caused by in-plane loads and, hence,
the classical Kirchhoff-Love equilibrium equations cannot be used to predict this behaviour because
interaction between in-plane loads and out-of-plane displacements were suppressed in the derivation (it
was assumed that the out-of-plane displacements are so small that the in-plane force resultants Nx , Ny
and Nxy act in their original direction in the xy-plane. Therefore, to study buckling, we need to modify
the governing equations to take into account the out-of-plane displacements and thereby the vertical
projection of the in-plane forces. To do so, we study the in-plane forces acting on the edges of the same
small plate element in Figure 4.1, now accounting for the effects of the out-of-plane deformations as
shown in Figure 4.3.
46
where it was used that
x2 y xy.
2w Nx w 2w Nyx w 2w
Nx xy + xy + N yx xy + xy + N xy xy
x2 x x xy y x xy
Nxy w 2w Ny w
+ xy + Ny 2 xy + xy = {Nyx = Nxy } =
y y y y y
2w 2w 2w (4.38)
=Nx 2 xy + 2Nxy xy + Ny 2 xy
x xy y
Nx Nyx w Nxy Ny w
+ + xy + + xy
x y x y y y
| {z } | {z }
=0(in-plane equilib.) =0(in-plane equilib.)
Adding the vertical contributions from in-plane force resultants to Eq. (4.4) yields (when x 0,
y 0):
Rxz Ryz 2w 2w 2w
+ + Nx 2 + 2Nxy + Ny 2 + p = 0 (4.39)
x y x xy y
2 Mx 2 Mxy 2 My 2w 2w 2w
+ 2 + + Nx + 2Nxy + Ny +p=0 (4.40)
x2 xy y 2 x2 xy y 2
4 w0 4 w0 4 w0
D11 4
2(D12 + 2D66 ) 2 2 D22
x x y y 4
(4.42)
2w 2w 2w
+ Nx 2 + 2Nxy + Ny 2 + p = 0
x xy y
4 w0 4 w0 4 w0 2w 2w
D11 + 2(D12 + 2D66 ) + D 22 = N x0 N y0 (4.43)
x4 x2 y 2 y 4 x2 y 2
For the special case of simply supported specially orthotropic laminates we can again use Naviers
solution. Hence, the deflection w0 is once again given by:
47
X
X m x n y
w0 (x, y) = wmn sin sin
m=1 n=1
a b
whereby the buckling equation can be rewritten as:
X
X m 4 mn 2 n 4 m x n y
4 wmn D11 + 2(D12 + 2D66 ) + D22 sin sin
m=1 n=1
a ab b a b
m 2 n 2 m x n y (4.44)
XX
= 2 wmn Nx0 + Ny0 sin sin
m=1 n=1
a b a b
m 4 mn 2 n 4 m 2 n 2
2
D11 + 2(D12 + 2D66 ) + D22 = Nx0 + Ny0 (4.45)
a ab b a b
48
Figure 4.4: Non-dimensional buckling load N = (N0 [m, 1]b2 )/( 2 D22 ) for a rectangular laminate with
properties D11 /D22 = 10 and (D12 + 2D66 )/D22 = 1 subjected to uniaxial compression.
0.1
w
0
1
0.5
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
y 0 0.2
0
x
a)
0.1
0
w
0.1
0.5
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
y 0 0.2
0
x
b)
0.1
w
0
1
0.5
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
y 0 0.2
0
x
c)
Figure 4.5: Buckling modes for a quadratic laminate (a = b) subjected to uniaxial compression. The first
three modes obtained for n = 1 and a) m = 1, b) m = 2 and c) m = 3.
49
50
Chapter 5
where x is the (positive) rotation around the y-axis 6= w/x. In the same way (if we would consider
deformation in the yz-plane) one obtains the displacement in the y-direction as
with y being the (negative!) rotation around the x-axis 6= w/y. Finally, the vertical displacement (in
the z-direction) is as before given by
w(x, y, z) = w0 (x, y). (5.3)
51
y x y
y
y y
v
Figure 5.1: Kinematics of Mindlin-Reissner plate deformed in the a) xz plane and b) yz plane (from J.N.
Reddy, Theory and Analysis of Elastic Plates and Shells (2nd ed.), CRC Press, 2007).
u u0 x
x = = +z (5.4)
x x x
v v0 y
y = = +z (5.5)
y y y
u v u0 v0 x y
xy = + = + +z + (5.6)
y x y x y x
u w w0
xz = + = x + (5.7)
z x x
v w w0
yz = + = y + (5.8)
z y y
or
52
or equivalently
xz Q55 Q45 xz
= . (5.13)
yz Q45 Q44 k
yz
Please note that in the last step, the order of the of the shear stresses and strains were reversed for
reasons that will be more clear below (cf. the contracted notation of the equilibium equations, the weak
formulation and in later sections also the FE formulation). Please note that this also means that elements
of the stiffness matrix needs to change place, cf. Eq (5.13).
In order to obtain Q44 , Q45 and Q55 we need to consider the coordinate transformation of the out-of-
plane shear stresses and strains due to a fibre orientation + around the positive z-axis. For this case,
the out-of-plane axis for the global coordinate system (the z-axis) and the out-of-plane axis for the fibre
0
oriented local coordinate system (the so-called T -axis) coincide, whereby the relation between transverse
stresses may be derived from either a standard change of basis or from equilibrium of forces in the vertical
direction as:
T T 0 cos sin yz
= . (5.14)
LT 0 sin cos xz
| {z }
[T1 ]
As a consequece, we can obtain Q44 , Q45 and Q55 , knowing that the shear strains z transform in the
same way
T T 0 cos sin yz
= , (5.15)
LT 0 sin cos xz
| {z }
[T1 ]
as
Q44 Q45 Q44 Q45
= [T1 ]1
k [T1 ]k (5.16)
Q45 Q55 k
Q45 Q55
where
T T 0 Q44 Q45 T T 0
= (5.17)
LT 0 Q45 Q55 LT 0
with
Q44 Q45 GT T 0 0 GT T 0 0 0
= = , GLT 0 = GLT (the T T plane is a plane of isotropy)
Q45 Q55 0 GLT 0 0 GLT 0
k
(5.18)
and where we need either experimental data or a model to predict GT T 0 .
Micromechanical models to predict GT T 0 generally are rather complicated and thereby out of scope
in this course1 . However, interested readers are referred to e.g. the book by Christensen (Mechanics of
Composite Materials, Krieger Publishing company, 1979). It should be known that GT T 0 depends on
fibre volume fraction and the shear properties of the two constituents (fibre and matrix material) and is
generally somewhat lower than the in-plane shear modulus GLT , cf. also Figure 5.2 in which predictions
of GT T 0 (denoted G23 in the figure) from a model developed at Swerea SICOMP denoted CCA (equivalent
to the Christensen model for a pure fibre-matrix material) is compared to the derived upper and lower
bounds by Hashin and the prediction of the in-plane shear modulus GLT using the Halpin-Tsai equations
0
with = 1. Since the T T plane is a plane of isotropy, we know for a fact that:
ET
GT T 0 = (5.19)
2 (1 + T T 0 ) .
As a rule of thumb for carbon fibre/epoxy composites, T T 0 normally lies in the interval 0.4-0.45.
1 As an alternative, FEM can also be used to predict the transverse shear modulus based on an analysis of a representative
volume element
53
Figure 5.2: Predicted values (obtained by Erik Marklund, Swerea SICOMP) for the transverse shear
modulus GT T 0 = G23 of a carbon fibre/epoxy composite based on the self-consistent model developed
at Swerea SICOMP (for this case equivalent to the model by Christensen, Mechanics of Composite
Materials, Krieger Publishing company, 1979) compared to the upper and lower bounds derived by
Hashin and predictions of the in-plane shear modulus GLT = G12 by the Halpin-Tsai equations with
= 1. Parameters used in the predictions are: Em = 3 GPa, m = 0.38, Ef L = 230 GPa, Ef T = 23
GPa, Gf LT = 20 GPa and f LT = f T T 0 = 0.2
Please note the slight modification compared to the course book in which the shear correction factor is
included in the Aij components!
By considering a homogeneous specially orthotropic plate and enforcing the condition that the work
done by the external forces Rxz and Ryz
2 2
Ryz
Z Z
1 1 Rxz
Rxz xz + Ryz yz dA = ... = + dA (5.21)
2 Aplate 2K Aplate A55 A44
equals the internal strain energy produced by the shear stresses and strains
h/2 2 2
Ryz
Z Z Z
1 3 Rxz
xz xz + yz yz dA dz = ... = + dA (5.22)
2 h/2 Aplate 5 Aplate A55 A44
the shear correction factor gets the value K = 5/6. It should be noted that even thought the value of 5/6
for K is derived only for a homogeneous orthotropic plate it generally provides good approximations also
for other types of laminates (except for sandwich structures with a thick middle layer for which K 1).
54
5.3 Governing equations for the Mindlin-Reissner theory
The governing plate equations (forces and moments) for the Mindlin-Reissner theory are the same as for
Kirchhoff-Love plate theory. But, since there are now five unknowns (u0 , v0 , w0 , x and y ) the vertical
equilibrium equation cannot be combined with the two moment equations. Thus, the governing equations
for the Mindlin-Reissner (or first-order shear deformation) theory are:
Nx Nxy
+ =0 (5.23)
x y
Nxy Ny
+ =0 (5.24)
x y
Rxz Ryz
+ = p (5.25)
x y
Mx Mxy
+ = Rxz (5.26)
x y
Mxy My
+ = Ryz (5.27)
x y
or on a contracted form:
TN
= 0 (5.28)
T
Rz = p (5.29)
T
M = Rz
(5.30)
with
0
x
Nx Mx
x
Rxz
N= N y , Rz =
Ryz
, M= My = , = 0 y
(5.31)
Nxy Mxy
y
y x
+ [B]
[A] 0 + [B] {k} = [A]u
N = (5.32)
{ z } = K[A]
Rz = K[A] ( + w0 ) (5.33)
+ [D]
0
M = [B] + [D] {k} = [B]u (5.34)
By insertion of Eqs. (5.32)-(5.35) into the governing equations, Eqs. (5.23)-(5.27), one obtains the equi-
librium equations in terms of the displacement and rotation fields. However, this yields rather lengthy
expressions that can be solved only for simple anisotropic conditions and boundary conditions (in analogy
with Naviers solution for the Kirchhoff-Love plate). Instead, to allow for the solution of more general
problems by FEM, we derive the weak (or variational) formulation of Eqs. (5.23)-(5.27).
55
5.5 Weak form of equilibrium for the Mindlin-Reissner theory
It is first noted that in order to obtain the weak form of the governing equations, each equation is
multiplied by an arbitrary test functions (u = {u v}T , w and = {x y }T ) (often also
denoted virtual displacements) and integrated over the domain . We treat the in-plane equations, the
vertical equation and the moment equations separately to obtain:
Z T Z Z T
N d
uT = uT P d
u N d = 0 (5.36)
Z Z Z Z
T
w T Rz d = wRn d
(w) Rz d = wp d (5.37)
Z T Z
Z T Z
M d
T = T Mn d
M d = T Rz d (5.38)
T
where P = {Px Py } is the external in-plane force (per unit length) acting on , Rn is the external
T
out-of-plane force (per unit length) and Mn = {Mnx Mny } is the external moment (per unit length).
Please note that P can be expressed in terms of the in-plane normal n and tangent m vectors as
Z h/2 Z h/2
P = Pn n + Pnm m, Pn = n dz, Pnm = nm dz (5.39)
h/2 h/2
where n is the in-plane normal stress acting on the surface and nm is the corresponding in-plane
shear stress (acting on ). In the same way, we have
Z h/2
Rn = nz dz (5.40)
h/2
Z h/2 Z h/2
Mn = Mnn n + Mnm m, Mnn = nn z dz, Mnm = nm z dz (5.41)
h/2 h/2
Z Z Z
Nx Nxy u u
u + d = (uNx ) + (uNxy ) d Nx + Nxy d = 0
x y x y x y
Z Z Z
Nxy Ny v v
v + d = (vNxy ) + (vNy ) d Nxy + Ny d = 0
x y x y x y
Please also note that this corresponds to the multiplication of Eq. (5.28) with u = {u 0}T and
u = {0 v}T respectively.
Utilising that
56
Z Z
d = nx d (5.42)
x
Z Z
d = ny d (5.43)
y
where n = {nx ny }T is the in-plane normal of the boundary of the expressions may be rewritten
as
Z Z
u u
u (Nx nx + Nxy ny ) d = Nx + Nxy d (5.44)
x y
Z Z
v v
v (Nxy nx + Ny ny ) d = Nxy + Ny d (5.45)
x y
Z Z
u u v v
u (Nx nx + Nxy ny ) +v (Nxy nx + Ny ny ) d = Nx + Nxy + Nxy + Ny d
| {z } | {z } x y x y
Px Py
or equivalently Z Z T
T
u P d =
u N d (5.46)
By taking the sum of Eqs. (5.44) and (5.45), it appears as if we reduced the number of in-plane
equations from two to one. However, as indicated in the beginning of this subsection, u is arbitrary and
by using both u = {u 0}T and u = {0 v}T we retain the two governing equations we started with.
In fact, we can use any two arbitrary combinations of u as long as they satisfy the condition uT1 u2 = 0
(vector multiplication).
In order to see
Px = Nx nx + Nxy ny , Py = Nxy nx + Ny ny
we utilise that P is the projection of the stress in the normal direction of the surface integrated over the
thickness, i.e. in 2D we have
Z h/2 Z h/2
Px x xy nx x nx + xy ny Nx nx + Nxy ny
P= = dz = dz =
Py h/2 xy y ny h/2 xy nx + y ny Nxy nx + Ny ny
57
Hence, the boundary term reduces to
Z Z
uT P d = uT P d (5.48)
N,u
whereby we can conclude that we can subdivide the boundary into two parts:
N,w on which the external out-of-plane force is prescribed: (Rn = Rn ) where Rn is the prescribed
vertical force (per unit length) in the z-direction acting on N,w .
whereby we can conclude that we can subdivide the boundary into two parts:
58
5.5.3 Final weak form
Rewriting the boundary terms and using the kinematical relations one obtains the weak form as:
such that:
Z T Z
u + [B]
[A]u d = uT P d, u Vu
N,u
Z Z Z
T
( + w) d =
K (w) [A] wp d + wRn d, w Vw (5.53)
N,w
Z T Z Z
[B]u + [D] d + T
K[A] ( + w) d = T Mn d, V
N,
u = u on D,u
w = w on D,w
= on D,
where
59
60
Chapter 6
6.1 Preliminaries
The point of departure is the weak (or variational formulation) of the governing equations for the Mindlin
plate as:
such that:
Z T Z
u
[A]u + [B] d = uT P d, u Vu
N,u
Z Z Z
T
( + w) d =
K (w) [A] wp d + wRn d, w Vw
N,w
Z T Z Z
+ [D]
[B]u d + ( + w) d =
T K[A] T Mn d, V
N,
u = u on D,u
w = w on D,w
= on D,
where
61
6.2 FE-approximations of fields
So far, we have considered only planar problems such that everything is just a function of x and y since
the xy-plane is placed in the plane of the plate. Proceeding in this way, are now in the position of
introducing the FE approximation of the different fields in terms of unknown node variables so-called
degrees-of-freedom (e.g. w
i for the out-of-plane displacement) and shape functions Ni (x, y) as:
nno
u0 (x, y) X ui
u(x, y) = = Ni (x, y) i =
ui , where u (6.2)
v0 (x, y) vi
i=1
nno
X
w(x, y) = w0 (x, y) = Ni (x, y)w
i (6.3)
i=1
nno
x (x, y) X
i , where
i = x,i
(x, y) = = Ni (x, y) (6.4)
y (x, y) y,i
i=1
or equivalently
u = N
u (6.5)
w = w
N (6.6)
= N (6.7)
with
N1 0 N2 0 ... Nnno 0 =
N= , N N1 N2 ... Nnno
0 N1 0 N2 ... 0 Nnno
T T (6.8)
=
u u
1 v1 u
2 v2 ... u
nno vnno , w
= w
1 w
2 ... w
nno
T
= x,1 y,1 x,2 y,2 ... x,nno y,nno
Pnno
where we dropped (x, y) for brevity. Please note that the sum i=1 is defined over all nodes (nno) in
the domain and that the shape functions have the properties
nno
1 in node i X
Ni = , Ni = 1 in any point of the domain (6.9)
0 in all other nodes j 6= i
i=1
Furthermore, from the weak form, we know that we also need u, which we, via the
w and
approximation above, obtain as:
u (N
= u) = B
u, B = N (6.10)
w w, = N
w = N =B B (6.11)
N
= = B, B = N (6.12)
since all degrees-of-freedom are constant nodal values and not functions of x or y.
62
we first note this should hold for all arbitrary test functions u Vu . By using the so-called Galerkins
method, and choosing u1 = {u 0}T and u2 = {0 v}T (where u and v can be arbitrary, given that
they satisfy the necessary restrictions in terms of e.g. boundary conditions) we will obtain two coupled
equations for the in-plane displacements. Furthermore, according to Galerkins method we use the shape
functions Ni to represent also the arbitrary test functions
u T
u1 = = Nc1 , c1 = c1,1 0 c1,2 0 ... c1,nno 0 (6.14)
0
0 T
u2 = = Nc2 , c2 = 0 c2,1 0 c2,2 ... 0 c2,nno (6.15)
v
whereby
1
u (Nc1 ) = Bc1 , B = N
= (6.16)
2
u (Nc2 ) = Bc2 , B = N
= (6.17)
Now, since we know that this should hold for arbitrary test functions, i.e. for any choice of c we must
have Z Z Z
T
B [A]B d u + T
B [B]B d NT P d = 0 (6.21)
N,u
| {z } | {z } | {z }
Kuu Ku f b,u
or
Kuu u = f b,u
+ Ku (6.22)
Again, since this should hold for arbitrary cT , we obtain the FE-formulation of the out-of-plane equilib-
rium as
Kww w + Kw = f b,w + f l,w (6.24)
with
Z Z Z Z
Kww = T [A]
KB B d, Kw = T [A]N
KB d, f b,w = T Rn d, f l,w =
N T p d (6.25)
N
N,w
63
6.3.3 FE formulation of moment equilibrium
T T
Again, we choose the arbitrary test function in two ways (1 = {x 0} and 2 = {0 y } ) which
results in
Z Z Z Z !
c T T
B [B]B du+ T
KN [A]B dw + T T
B [D]B + KN [A]N d T
N Mn d = 0
N,
(6.26)
again with
cT1
with cT = . (6.27)
cT2
Now, since we know that this should hold for arbitrary test functions, i.e. for any choice of c, we
must have:
+ Kw w
Ku u + K = f b, (6.28)
with:
Z Z
Ku = Ku = BT [B]B d, Kw = KTw = B
KNT [A] d
Z Z (6.29)
K =
BT [D]B + KNT [A]N d and f b, = NT Mn d
N,
where neno is the number of nodes associated with the element and u ei , w e are the associated
ie and i
degrees-of-freedom in node i. Considering the special case of a four node quadrilateral element, u e, w
e,
64
e , Ne and N
e take on the form shown in Figure 6.1 (one example):
u1
x1
v1 y1
u2 w1 x2
v2 w2 y2
e
=
u e
=
, w e
=
u3 w3 x3
v
w
y3
(6.34)
3 4
u4 x4
v4 y4
e N1 0 N2 0 N3 0 N4 0 e = N1
N = , N N2 N3 N4
0 N1 0 N2 0 N3 0 N4
and we have
e, B
Be = N e = N
e (6.35)
x4 x3
v4 v3
y4 y3
w4 u4 w3 u3
x1 x2
v1 v2
y1 y2
w1 u1 w2 u2
Figure 6.1: Ordering of the degrees of freedom for the prototype element according to Eq. (6.36)
This means that we can obtain the FE equations on one element as:
e
Keu e f eb,u
Kuu 0 u
0 Keww Kew e
w = f eb,w + f el,w (6.36)
Keu Kew T Ke e
f eb,
| {z }| {z } | {z }
Ke ae fe
where Keuu is obtained by replacing B by Be and so on in the equations above. Finally, the global
stiffness matrix and force vector are obtained by assembling the element contributions into the global
system, i.e. by adding the contributions of each element stiffness matrix and element force vector to the
corresponding positions in the global matrices, cf. any basic course in FEM.
Compatibility: The approximation of all fields is continuous across the common boundary of two
neighbouring elements
Completeness: The approximation over the element is able to represent both an arbitrary constant
gradient as well as an arbitrary constant value of any of the fields.
65
global domain (xy-plane) corresponds to an element in the so-called parent domain (-plane) with edges
parallel with the coordinate axes = 1 and = 1, cf. Figure 6.2 (right). Furthermore, there exist
a one-to-one mapping from the parent domain to the global domain such that any point (x, y) can be
found as:
x = x(, ), y = y(, ) (6.37)
Furthermore, if we differentiate x and y we obtain:
x x y y
dx = d + d, dy = d + d (6.38)
or
x x
dx d
= (6.39)
dy y y d
| {z }
J
In order for the mapping to be one-to-one, we need to be able to invert the Jacobian J in Eq. (6.39).
Thus we have the requirement that
det J > 0
Figure 6.2: Mapping of four-node isoparametric quadrilateral element from the parent domain to the
global (FE) domain. (from Ottosen and Petersson, Introduction to the Finite Element Method, Prentice
Hall, 1992)
x(, ) = N1e (, )x1 + N2e (, )x2 + N3e (, )x3 + N4e (, )x4 (6.40)
y(, ) = N1e (, )y1 + N2e (, )y2 + N3e (, )y3 + N4e (, )y4 (6.41)
or
e (, )xe , y(, ) = N
x(, ) = N e (, )ye (6.42)
with
x1 y1
e = N1 (, ) N2 (, ) N3 (, ) N4 (, ) , xe =
x 2
e y2
N x3 , y = y3
(6.43)
x4 y4
66
where xi , yi are the coordinates of node i numbered counter-clockwise and where the shape functions are
(considering the numbering according to Figure 6.2):
1
N1e = ( 1) ( 1) (6.44)
4
1
N2e = ( + 1) ( 1) (6.45)
4
1
N3e = ( + 1) ( + 1) (6.46)
4
1
N4e = ( 1) ( + 1) (6.47)
4
In the FE-formulation above, it is clear that we need the derivatives of the shape functions with
respect to x and y. By noting that
e e x N e y
e
N N x y N
x +
y x
= = (6.48)
N e N e x N e y x y N e
+
x y y
| {z }
JT
e
N e N e N2e N3e N4e
N
1
1
x x x x x
= T
e = J (6.49)
N e N1e N2e N3e N4
Ne
y y y y y
e
N N1e N2e N3e N4e
x1 y1
x2 y2
JT = xe ye = (6.50)
N e N e N2e N3e N4e x3 y3
1
x4 y4
It can be shown that by using the isoparametric mapping (x = x(, ) and y = y(, )) the integral can
be rewritten as: Z Z Z 1 Z 1
(x, y) dxdy = (, ) det Jdd (6.52)
1 1
Furthermore, in any textbook containing numerical integration, it is shown that the integral in one
dimension Z 1
f () d (6.53)
1
67
where a finite number (n) of so-called integration points i (in which the function to be integrated is
evaluated) is used, and where Hi is the integration weight associated with that point. This can be
expanded to two dimensions as:
Z 1 Z 1 n X
X m
f (, ) dd f (i , j )Hi Hj (6.55)
1 1 i=1 j=1
Figure 6.3: Location of integration points of the Gauss scheme for 1 x 1, 2 x 2 and 3 x 3 point integration
in the parent domain (, ). (from Ottosen and Petersson, Introduction to the Finite Element Method,
Prentice Hall, 1992)
For the Gauss integration scheme, it can be shown that for a 2D integration with n x n integration
points, we have the positioning of the integration points and the corresponding weights as:
For n = 1
Point 1 (n = 1, m = 1) : 1 = 0, 1 = 0, H1 = 2, H1 = 2
For n = 2
1 1
Point 1 (n = 1, m = 1) : (, ) = , , H1 = 1, H1 = 1
3 3
1 1
Point 2 (n = 1, m = 2) : (, ) = , , H1 = 1, H2 = 1
3 3
1 1
Point 3 (n = 2, m = 1) : (, ) = , , H1 = 1, H2 = 1
3 3
1 1
Point 4 (n = 2, m = 2) : (, ) = , , H2 = 1, H2 = 1
3 3
In order to derive the expression for the stiffness matrix and force vector for the laminate element, it was
convenient to arrange the degrees-of-freedom in the element degree-of-freedom vector (cf. also Figure 6.1)
68
ae as
u1
x1
v1 y1
u w1
2 x2
e
u
v2 w2
e
a =
w e e
=
with u e
=
, w =
e y2
e u 3 w3 x3
v w4 y3
3
u
4 x4
v4 y4
which yields the format of the element stiffness matrix Ke and element force vector f e as in Eq. (6.36).
However, for computational reasons, it is more convenient to number the degrees of freedom as for the
element in Figure 6.4. Please note that we keep the y degrees-of-freedom defined as positive
around the negative x-axis.
a 20 a 15
a 17 a 12
a 19 a 14
a 16 a 11
a 18 a 13
a5 a 10
a2 a7
a4 a9
a3 a1 a8 a6
Figure 6.4: Ordering of the degrees of freedom for the prototype element according to the global num-
bering.
Therefore, first determine the element contributions according to Eq. (6.36) and then reorder the rows
of the force vector and rows and columns of the stiffness matrix to meet the numbering in Figure 6.4.
This final step can in MATLAB be accomplished e.g. by:
Ke = Ke([1 2 9 14 13 3 4 10 16 15 5 6 11 18 17 7 8 12 20 19],...
[1 2 9 14 13 3 4 10 16 15 5 6 11 18 17 7 8 12 20 19])
fe = fe([1 2 9 14 13 3 4 10 16 15 5 6 11 18 17 7 8 12 20 19])
69
-x,2
z
x
-x,1
xz x
x,2
w2
x,1
w1
-w/x = -(w2 - w1 )/x
x
a) b)
Figure 6.5: Sketch explaining the cause of locking for bilinear quadrilateral Mindlin plate elements with
full integration. In a), the red curves indicate the linear approximation of the out-of-plane displacement
w for the plate which is sketched in black. Also the resulting rotations in the nodes are indicated by x,1
and x,2 . In b), the resulting x variation (black), w/x variation (red) and the resulting shear strain
xz are indicated together with the point in which xz = 0 can be obtained (black cross).
To generalise this discussion, it can be shown that in order to avoid locking, all parts of K involving
need to be integrated with a reduced order. Thus, if we subdivide
the out-of-plane shear stiffness ([A])
K as: Z Z
K = T
B [D]B d +
KNT [A]N d = K,1 + K,2 (6.56)
the order of integration should be like:
1 x 1 integration of:
K,2 , Kw , Kw , Kww
2 x 2 integration of:
K,1 , Kuu , Ku , Ku
Please note that selective (under) integration of the stiffness matrix may lead to spurious zero energy
modes under certain conditions. Therefore, one should always carefully investigate the results obtained.
The treatment (or stabilisation) of such behaviour is however considered as outside the scope of this
course.
70
Chapter 7
Failure in composites
The definition of failure depend on the application. This means that a component can be considered as
failing long before it breaks. As an example, if a laminated composite components main purpose is to
ensure a certain stiffness, it has failed already when the first ply breaks since this will have a direct impact
on the stiffness, cf. the first kink in the load-displacement curve in Figure 7.1. However, the component
may still be able to carry an increase in load, meaning that the function is lost whereas collapse or
catastrophic failure still can be avoided. On the other hand, some components, such as crash boxes or
other components intended for energy absorption during a car crash, are designed to fail in a reliable
way. In this case, failure is considered first when the component looses all load carrying capacity.
loss of stiffness
Figure 7.1: Load-displacement behaviour of a hypothetical laminate (from Agarwal et al., Figure 6-13).
In addition, in the case of composite materials, internal material failure occurs much before any change
in macroscopic behaviour can be observed. Examples of types of internal failure are:
Breakage of fibres (but not causing total ply-failure)
Microcracking of the matrix
Separation of fibres from the matrix (debonding)
Local separation of plies (local delamination)
The effects of such internal material failure is however only observable if it occurs to a large extent.
71
Loading type Possible failure modes
LU Longitudinal tension Brittle (concentrated fibre breakage)
Brittle + fibre pullout (stress concentration at fibre ends)
Brittle + interface shear failure or debonding
0
LU Longitudinal compression Micro-buckling
Shear failure
Fibre crushing
Splitting
T U Transverse tension Matrix tensile failure
Constituent debonding and/or fibre splitting
0
T U Transverse compression Shear failure of the matrix
-In combination with constituent debonding
-In combination with fibre crushing
LT U In-plane shear Matrix shear failure
Matrix shear failure + constituent debonding
Pure constituent debonding
occurs simultaneously. In the presentation material for this lecture, a number of different failure modes
(depending on loading type) is presented, cf. also a summary of these failure modes in Table 7.1.
Please note that, of course, the sign of the shear stress does not have an influence. According to this
theory, failure occurs when any of the inequalities are violated. Thereby, it is not really one fracture
criterion but five subcriteria not taking into consideration the effects of coinciding loads. Thereby, it
becomes non-conservative under certain conditions, e.g. combined tensile and shear loading.
72
According to this theory, failure occurs when any of the inequalities are violated. Thereby, it is neither
in this case really one fracture criterion but five subcriteria without consideration of interaction. This
criterion is indeed very similar to the maximum stress criterion, especially if we assume linear elastic
behaviour of the composite up to failure. Thereby, only minor differences can be noted that are attribute
to Poisson effects, cf Figure 7.2.
Figure 7.2: Off-axis strength predicted my maximum stress and maximum-strain theories of failure (from
Agarwal et al., Figure 5-13).
The criterion is derived on the basis of the theory for anisotropic plasticity according to Hill:
2 2
2 2
H (L T ) + F (T T 0 ) + G (T 0 L ) + LLT + M T2 T 0 + N LT
2
0 = 1 (7.8)
where F N are material constants. By adding the restrictions that
Failure in pure shear occurs when the shear stress reaches the maximum strength value (for all
2 2 2
three directions) L = (LT U ) , M = (T T 0 U ) , N = (LT 0 U )
Failure under uniaxial loading occurs when the normal stress reaches the maximum strength value
2 2
(for all three directions) H + G = (LU ) , H + F = (T U )
73
Figure 7.3: Visualisation of the Tsai-Hill criterion for zero shear stresses (from Zenkert and Battley,
0
Foundations of Fibre composites, Figure 4-10). 1c = LU , 2c = T0 U ,
1t = LU , 2t = T U
It should be realised that this criterion in its original form does not distinguish between the tensile
and compressive strength in longitudinal and transverse direction. Therefore, it cannot in this form
adequately model materials with different strength in tension and compression (as is the case for many
polymer composite materials). However, to improve the performance of the criterion, one should carefully
take into consideration the sign of L and T meaning that if any of these are negative, the
corresponding compressive strength should be used.
As an example, if the stress state is such that L > 0 and T < 0, the Tsai-Hill criterion should take
the form:
2 2 2
L T LT L T
+ 0 + <1 (7.10)
LU T U LT U LU LU
It should be remarked that the Tsai-Hill criterion indeed takes the interaction between different stress
components into account, but really without any micromechanical motivation to support the actual
interaction. Thereby, this criterion can be considered more in the form of a curve-fitting criterion which
matches the single-mode conditions. Generally, this criterion is more conservative than the maximum-
stress criterion (important in industrial applications) except in small regions in the third and fourth
quadrant (when T is negative (depending on the strength values).
where F12 is another material parameter that needs to be determined experimentally in addition to the
separate strength parameters. In order for the criterion to represent a closed ellipse (and not parallel
lines or a hyperbola) we need the restriction
q
1 < F12 LU LU0 0
T U T U < 1
It is very difficult to perform specific experiments to determine F12 and it is thereby often necessary
to combine several experiments to calibrate the most suitable value. It should however be remarked that
the parameter F12 influence both the slenderness ratio and the inclination of the major axis of the failure
ellipse described by the Tsai-Wu criterion, cf. Figure 7.4 for a visualisation of the Tsai-Wu criterion when
LT = 0.
74
Figure 7.4: Visualisation of the Tsai-Wu criterion for zero shear stresses (from Zenkert and Battely,
0
Foundations of Fibre composites, Figure 4-11).
1c = LU , 2c = T0 U ,
1t = LU , 2t = T U
As for the Tsai-Hill criterion, the Tsai-Wu criterion also takes multi-axial loading effects into account,
but also in this case without any real motivation for the interaction. Instead, it is a mathematically
easy-to-use criterion adapted for a limited number of measure points. This criterion is widely used, it has
however some significant limitations. Most important, if the transverse compressive strength is decreased,
the predicted strength in compressive-compressive loading is actually increased (unphysical!).
where LT 0 U in the last criterion is the out-of-plane shear strength and where is an additional material
parameter (representing the effect of shear on the longitudinal tensile failure) that needs to be calibrated
against experimental data. Often, however, is chosen as 1. I should also be pointed out that the two
matrix failure modes also comprise the loading case of pure shear, for which we set T = 0 such that
failure in pure shear occurs when the in-plane shear stress reaches the critical shear stress value LT U .
75
Models and Criteria for FRP Under In-Plane or Three-Dimensional Stress States Including Shear Non-
Linearity. NASA/TM-2005-213530. NASA Langley Research Center. Hampton, VA 23681, 2005). The
criteria are based on physical models for each failure mode and also take into consideration non-linear
matrix shear behaviour. Furthermore, the model for matrix compressive failure is based on the so-called
Mohr-Coulomb criterion and it predicts the fracture angle. Fiber kinking is triggered by an initial fiber
misalignment angle and by the rotation of the fibers during compressive loading. The plane of fiber
kinking is also predicted by the model. LaRC consists of 6 expressions that can be used directly for
design purposes. This set of criteria are however quite advanced and considered out-of-scope in the
current course. Interested readers are referred to the reference mentioned above (also available on the
course homepage).
76
Material state Material constants to be reduced (or set to zero)
No failure
Transverse matrix failure ET
Fibre failure (tension) EL
Fibre/matrix shear failure LT , GLT
Shear failure GLT
Matrix failure + fibre/matrix shear failure ET , LT , GLT
Fibre/matrix shear + shear failure ET , LT , GLT
Total failure EL , ET , LT , GLT
Table 7.2: Stiffness reduction scheme for progressive failure analysis (Reproduced from Zenkert and
Battley (Foundations of Fibre Composites, Paper 96-10, KTH, 2003).
Figure 7.5: Work flow for progressive failure analysis for laminated fibre composites (From Zenkert and
Battley (Foundations of Fibre Composites, Paper 96-10, KTH, 2003).
l m
E= EL + ET (7.16)
n n
which sometimes is denoted the primary modulus. Adopting the maximum-strain criterion, failure in the
plies will occur when the composite strain is equal to T U at which stage the composite stress C , defined
as the stress resultant force Nx divided by the laminate thickness h as
Nx
C = , (7.17)
h
becomes
C = A = ET U . (7.18)
Let us now first assume that there is no stress relaxation in the failing plies. Then, when the load
increase further, the transverse plies will fail and the remaining secondary modulus ES becomes (by
setting ET = 0)
l
ES = EL . (7.19)
n
77
Final fracture will then occur when the load is such that the composite fracture strain is reached ( = LU )
resulting in the composite failure stress F as:
F = A + ES (LU T U ) (7.20)
The total response can be illustrated by studying Figure 7.6. Based on the stress-strain curve in Figure 7.6,
we can also write the composite strain as:
C
E C A
= (7.21)
A + C A
A < C < F
E ES
C
C A
E
= (7.22)
C
A < C < F
Ee
where
E
Ee (C ) = (7.23)
1 + [(E/ES ) 1] [1 (C /A )]
Figure 7.6: Stress-strain diagram for a cross-ply laminate up to failure (from Agarwal et al, Figure 6-14).
It should be remarked that, due to the assumption made above that there is no stress relaxation
in the failing plies, the resulting composite stress-strain (or load-displacement) curve is continuous, cf.
Figure 7.6. However, in many relevant cases, (partial) stress relaxation will occur in the failing plies which
will yield a sudden change in the magnitude of the stress in the case of displacement (or strain) controlled
loading (path C) or the magnitude of the strain for load controlled loading (path B), cf. Figure 7.7. Please
also note that the intermediate path (path D) is possible.
The level of discontinuity in the laminate response will depend how pronounced the stress relaxation
in the failed plies is. If the plies were to be considered more or less independent of each other, full stress
relaxation would be expected. But in most real applications, when the interlaminar bond is strong the
adjoining 0 plies will restrain the failure in the 90 plies. As a result, the failure of a 90 ply is localised,
and only partial stress relaxation is to be expected.
Read the remaining part of Chapter 6.8 on your own! Pay special attention to the
experiments by Hahn and Tsai that better explains the true stress relaxation in failing
plies
78
Figure 7.7: Stress-strain diagram for a cross-ply laminate with (partial) stress relaxation in the plies that
have failed. (from Agarwal et al, Figure 6-15).
Figure 7.8: A model of the fracture-process zone (from Agarwal et al, Figure 8-11).
It should be remarked that for laminated composites, the direction of crack propagation will be
strongly affected by the fibre orientation (as opposed to metals where the crack propagation direction
is more or less entirely governed by the stress state in the vicinity of the crack tip). In fact, cracks
may very well propagate in different directions in different plies with alternating fibre
79
orientation. Another conclusion that can be made is that practically all laminates are highly notch
sensitive and that several of the following parameters may affect this notch sensitivity:
Fibre volume fraction
Fibre properties
Manufacturing conditions
Environmental conditions
There exists several methods to assess the notch sensitivity and strength of a notched composite of
which the approach proposed by Whitney and Nuismer is one of the more commonly used, partly because
it is simple to operate.
Figure 7.9: Sketch of the motivation behind the so-called hole-size effect, i.e. that larger holes causes a
greater strength reduction of the laminate (from Zenkert and Battley, Foundations of Fibre composites,
Figure 6-8).
As a starting point for the derivation of these criteria, let us consider an infinite orthotropic plate
with a hole with radius R subjected to a uniform load far away from the hole, as shown in Figure 7.10.
If the axes x and y are assumed to be normal to the planes of elastic symmetry (the laminate is specially
orthotropic with respect to in-plane loading, cf. Chapter 6.6.2 in the course book), the normal stress y
acting along the line y = 0 can be approximated by
( 2 4 " 8 #)
6
R R R R
y (x, 0) = 2+ +3 (kT 3) 5 7 (7.24)
2 x x x x
where index 2 relates to the loading (y) direction opposed to the way it is written in the book
where, in that case, 1 denotes the direction of the applied load. Please note that for a uni-
directional ply loaded in the longitudinal direction (in this case L = 2), the expression for the stress
80
concentration factor takes the form
v !
u r
u E L EL
kT = 1 + t2 LT + (Note the error in the course book!) (7.26)
ET GLT
Figure 7.10: An orthotropic plate with a circular hole of radius R (from Agarwal et al, Figure 8-17).
1. The point-stress criterion saying that failure will occur when the stress at a distance d0 from the
notch (hole edge or crack tip) reach the unnotched strength 0 of the material
2. The average stress criterion saying that failure will occur when the average value of the stress over
some fixed distance a0 from the notch (hole edge or crack tip) reach the unnotched strength 0 of
the material
For both cases, the underlying assumption is that d0 and/or a0 are laminate strength parameters which
are constant and applicable to any type of notch for a given material system, volume fraction of fibres
and lay-up sequence. Please note that, thereby, the in-plane strength of the laminate 0 will depend on
the material system as well as the orientation of the fibres.
According to the statement above, the point-stress criterion for holes states that failure occurs when the
stress at a distance d0 from the hole edge reach the unnotched strength 0 such that
y (R + d0 , 0) = 0 , (7.27)
N 2
= (7.28)
0 2 + p1 + 3p1 (kT 3)(5p61 7p81 )
2 4
where
R
p1 = . (7.29)
R + d0
Interesting to note is that, for very large holes p1 1 and consequently N /0 (1/kT ) whereas for
vanishingly small holes p1 0 and consequently N /0 1.
81
Figure 7.11: Illustration of the Whitney-Nuismer point-stress criterion for laminates with a hole (from
Zenkert and Battley, Foundations of Fibre composites, Figure 6-28).
cf. also Figure 7.12 for an illustration (where y is the averaged y -stress over the distance a0 and
1t = 0 ).
Figure 7.12: Illustration of the Whitney-Nuismer average-stress criterion for laminates with a hole (from
Zenkert and Battley, Foundations of Fibre composites, Figure 6-28).
Inserting this condition in Eq. (7.24) yields the relation between the notched (N ) and unnotched
(0 ) strength as
N 2(1 p2 )
= (7.31)
0 2 p22 p42 + (kT 3)(p62 p82 )
where
R
p2 = . (7.32)
R + a0
Interesting to note is that also in this case, for very large holes p2 1 and consequently N /0 (1/kT )
whereas for vanishingly small holes p2 0 and consequently N /0 1.
82
Figure 7.13: An orthotropic plate with a sharp crack of length 2c (from Agarwal et al, Figure 8-18).
x k1 x
y (x, 0) = =p x>c (7.33)
2
x c2 c (x2 c2 )
where, in the latter stage, the orthotropic stress intensity factor k1 was introduced as
k1 = c. (7.34)
By applying the two failure criteria to the case of a sharp crack, we get the following:
N
q
= 1 p23 (7.36)
0
where
c
p3 = . (7.37)
c + d0
p
Interesting to note is that, for very large cracks (N /0 ) 2d0 /c whereas for vanishingly small cracks
p3 0 and consequently N /0 1.
83
which yields the relation between the notched and unnotched strength (N ) as
r
N 1 p4
= (7.39)
0 1 + p4
where
c
p4 = (7.40)
c + a0
p
Interesting to note is that, for very large cracks (N /0 ) 0.5a0 /c whereas for vanishingly small
cracks p4 0 and consequently N /0 1.
Figure 7.14: Comparison of experimentally measured and theoretically predicted strengths of [0/
45/90]2S glass-epoxy laminates containing holes (from Agarwal et al, Figure 8-19).
Figure 7.15: Comparison of experimentally measured and theoretically predicted strengths of [0/
45/90]2S glass-epoxy laminates containing holes (from Agarwal et al, Figure 8-20).
84
Chapter 8
When applying a constant stress, the strain will vary over time. This is denoted creep and a
representative creep curve can be seen in Figure 8.1a. Of interest is that an initial elastic strain
is obtained at the time the stress is applied. Thereafter, the strain will gradually increase up to a
limiting value at infinite time.
When applying a constant strain, the stress will vary over time. This is denoted relaxation and
a representative relaxation curve can be seen in Figure 8.1b. Of interest is that an initial elastic
stress response is obtained at the time the constant strain is applied. Thereafter, the stress will
gradually decrease (relax) down to a limiting value at infinite time.
A viscoelastic material will dissipate energy when subjected to cyclic loading, characterised by the
hysteresis loop as shown in Figure 8.1c.
A viscoelastic material is strain-rate dependent such that a stiffer (and sometimes more brittle)
response is obtained when the strain-rate is increased, cf Figure 8.1d.
(t)
(t) = S(t)0 S(t) = (8.1)
0
The shape of the creep compliance as function of time will be the same as for the strain history shown
in Figure 8.1a (the scale factor 0 relates the two).
85
Figure 8.1: Characteristic behaviour of a viscoelastic material (from Gibson, Principles of Composite
Material Mechanics (2nd ed.), CRC Press, 2007, Figure 8.1).
(t)
(t) = C(t)0 C(t) = (8.2)
0
Please note that the shape of the creep compliance as function of time normally takes the same form
as the stress history curve shown in Figure 8.1b (the scale factor 0 relates the two).
Z t
d( )
(t) = C(t ) d (8.4)
d
The above equations are denoted as the Boltzman superposition principle and can easily be generalised
to
Z t
dj ( )
i (t) = Sij (t ) d (8.5)
d
Z t
dj ( )
i (t) = Cij (t ) d (8.6)
d
where Sij (t) and Cij (t) are the creep compliance tensor and the relaxation stiffness tensor respectively.
86
8.1.4 Basic models for viscoelasticity
A normal way to visualise the models for viscoelasticity is by a system of springs (to represent the elastic
response) and dashpots (for the rate-dependence causing energy dissipation). Below, three of the most
basic models for viscoelasticity will be presented and discussed.
= 1 + 2 (8.7)
Figure 8.2: The Maxwell model for viscoelasticity (from Gibson, Principles of Composite Material Me-
chanics (2nd ed.), CRC Press, 2007, Figure 8.8).
In order to determine the constant C1 we make use of the initial condition (0) = k0 (the stress is applied
so quickly that the dashpot has no chance to react). Thus, we obtain the strain as
0 0 0
= C1 (t) = t+ (8.14)
k k
87
and, consequently, the creep compliance as
(t) t 1
S(t) = = + (8.15)
0 k
which has the shape as shown in Figure 8.2b. Note that this does not match what is generally observed
in experiments, cf. Figure 8.1a, which leads to the conclusion that the Maxwell model is not adequate to
describe creep in a realistic way.
1 d
0= + . (8.16)
k dt
Integration and utilisation of the initial value (0) = k 0 (cf. motivation above) we end up with the
relaxation stiffness C(t) as:
(t)
C(t) = = k et/ (8.17)
0
where = /k is the so-called relaxation time. The resulting shape of C(t) can be seen in Figure 8.2c
and it is clear that it corresponds to what is generally observed in experiments, cf Figure 8.1b. Thus, it
can be concluded that the Maxwell model can represent relaxation in a physically realistic way.
= 1 = 2 (8.18)
and that the total stress will be the sum of the contributions from the spring and the dashpot. Thereby,
we directly obtain the differential equation to describe the Kelvin-Voight model as:
d
= k+ (8.19)
dt
Figure 8.3: The Kelvin-Voight model for viscoelasticity (from Gibson, Principles of Composite Material
Mechanics (2nd ed.), CRC Press, 2007, Figure 8.9).
1
S(t) = 1 et/ (8.20)
k
88
where = /k is the retardation time. Show this on your own! (use the same argumentation for the
dashpot as in the description of the Maxwell model). It can from Figure 8.3b be concluded that the shape
of the creep compliance is reasonable, cf. Figure 8.1a, except for the lack of an initial elastic response.
C(t) = k. (8.21)
It can from Figure 8.3c be concluded that the shape of the relaxation stiffness is unphysical (should
decrease and reach an asymptotic value), cf. Figure 8.1b. Thus, it can be concluded that the Kelvin-
Voight cannot represent creep in a physically realistic way.
As can be realised from the analysis of the two most basic models for viscoelasticity above, there is a
need for a somewhat more advanced model in order to have a model that can represent both limiting
cases (creep and relaxation) in a physically acceptable way. One such model is the Zener single relaxation
model (sometimes denoted the three-parameter model) as shown in Figure 8.4a. Thus, this model can
be described by the parallel coupling between one spring with stiffness k0 and one spring (k1 ) and one
dashpot (1 ) in series. Furthermore, it can be shown that the differential equation for this model can be
written as:
1 d 1 d
+ = k0 + (k0 + k1 ) (8.22)
k1 d t k1 dt
Figure 8.4: The Zener model for viscoelasticity (from Gibson, Principles of Composite Material Mechanics
(2nd ed.), CRC Press, 2007, Figure 8.10).
where the retardation time is given by 1 = k0 k1 1 (k0 + k1 ). From the shape of this curve, cf. Figure 8.4b,
it can be concluded that the Zener model can represent creep in a physically realistic way.
where the relaxation time is 1 = 1 /k1 . From the shape of this curve, cf. Figure 8.4c, it can be conclude
that the Zener model can represent also relaxation in a physically realistic way.
89
8.1.5 Viscoelastic material subjected to sinusoidal loading
In many practical structural applications, the response under oscillatory loading is of major importance.
Therefore, we will in the following section investigate the response of a viscoelastic material under sinu-
soidal loading
(t) = 0 sin (t) (in the following we use
(t) and (t) to denote sinusoidal variations in
time). We will use the Zener model as a representative of the viscoelastic response since it is the simplest
possible model with physically acceptable behaviour.
We start by noting that we can, by making use of complex numbers, write the time-varying stress as1 :
(t) = 0 eit
(8.26)
in the following. Furthermore, we realise that the resulting strain will oscillate with the same frequency,
but that it due to the rate-dependence may follow the stress with a certain delay, or phase-lag, such
that
(t) = 0 eit (t) = 0 ei(t)
(8.27)
If we insert the expression for
(t) and (t) into the differential equation of the Zener model, Eq. (8.22),
we obtain
1 1
(t) 1 + (i) = k0 + (k0 + k1 ) (i) (t) (8.28)
k1 k1
1
which, if we multiply by 1 k1 (i), can be reformulated to obtain the following relation between the
stress and strain:
k0 + 21 (k0 + k1 ) 2
1 k1
(t) = +i (t) (8.29)
1 + 21 2 1 + 21 2
or
(t) = E ()
(t) (8.30)
where E () is the complex Youngs modulus
E () = E 0 () + iE 00 () (8.31)
with
k0 + 21 (k0 + k1 ) 2
E 0 () = (8.32)
1 + 21 2
1 k1
E 00 () = . (8.33)
1 + 21 2
Here, E 0 () is the so-called storage modulus and E 00 () is the so-called loss modulus. By introducing
the frequency-dependent loss-factor (), which is a measure of the relative damping properties of the
material, Eq. (8.31) can be reformulated as
E () = E 0 () (1 + i()) (8.34)
90
Figure 8.5: Variation of storage modulus, E 0 (), and loss modulus, E 00 (), with frequency for the Zener
model (from Gibson, Principles of Composite Material Mechanics (2nd ed.), CRC Press, 2007, Figure
8.33).
at high loading-rates. In addition, it can be seen that the loss modulus is maximised for an angular
frequency of 1/1 .
It should also be noted that the complex Youngs modulus can be written as:
E () = |E ()| ei (8.36)
where
p
|E ()| = E 0 2 + E 00 2 (8.37)
00
E ()
= arctan (8.38)
E 0 ()
(t) = E ()
which, inserted into (t), yields
(t) = 0 eit = |E ()| ei 0 ei(t) (8.39)
00
E ()
= = arctan (8.40)
E 0 ()
0
0 = (8.41)
|E ()|
8.1.5.1 Generalisation
It can be shown that Eq. (8.30) can be generalised to the following form
i (t) = Cij ()
j (t) (8.42)
where
Cij () = iCij () (8.43)
in which Cij () is the Fourier transform of the relaxation stiffness tensor Cij (t) as
Z
Cij () = Cij ( ) ei d (8.44)
Thus, in the 1D case, E () can be directly obtained e.g. for the Zener model by taking the Fourier
transform of Eq. (8.24) as Z
E () = i k0 + k1 e /1 ei d (8.45)
1 Since 0 eit = 0 (cos(t) + i sin(t))
91
8.2 Application to fibre composites - damping
Making use of the derivations above, we can now address the dynamic response and damping properties
of a fibre composite laminate in which the fibres can be seen as more or less purely elastic whereas the
matrix material (if being a polymer) behaves viscoelastically.
First, we note that in order to enable a simple procedure for the combination of the material properties
(homogenisation of properties), the following conditions must be satisfied (cf. also Figure 8.6):
The fibre dimension (diameter) d must be much smaller than the characteristic length of the
laminate L, i.e. d << L. This is in fact a necessary condition also for the preceding discussion
regarding homogenisation of the elastic properties.
The dimension (diameter) d must be much smaller than the wave length of the oscillations, i.e.
d << , meaning that the applicability of the approach presented below is limited to sufficiently low
frequencies. What the actual limit is can only be determined by comparisons between the predicted
response and experimental measurements of the same.
Figure 8.6: Critical dimensions for the validity of the homogenisation (from Gibson, Principles of Com-
posite Material Mechanics (2nd ed.), CRC Press, 2007, Figure 8.6).
Assuming that the requirements specified above are met, we can continue to characterise the dynamic
response and damping properties of the laminate. First, we note that, when subjected to sinusoidal
loading, we have the following situation
in which [Q ij ]f is the normal tensor relating fibre strains to fibre stresses, C () is the complex
m,ij
stiffness for the matrix and Cc,ij () is the homogenised complex stiffness for the composite, which can be
obtained by the ordinary homogenisation rules used for the elastic properties. What this means is that
Em is replaced by Em in the models to predict the different moduli etc. Thus, the general procedure is
as follows:
0 00
1. Determine Em () = Em () + iEm ()
2. utilise Em , m , Ef , f , Vf to determine [Q ](EL , ET , GLT , LT
, T L )
0 00
3. For each ply k, transform [Q ] to obtain [Q ]k = [T1 ]1
k [Q ][T2 ]k = [Q () + iQ ()]k
92
4. Utilise [Q ]k to compute [A ] = [A0 () + iA00 ()], [B ] = [B0 () + iB00 ()] and
[D ] = [D0 ()+ iD00 ()] matrices
0 toobtain the relation
A B
N(t) (t)
=
M(t) B D
k(t)
5. Applied to a specific kinematical representation of e.g. a plate (e.g. Mindlin theory), also a complex
stiffness matrix can be computed on the structural level as
K = K0 () + iK00 ().
In this case, K00 () is nothing but a frequency dependent structural damping matrix Cmat () due
to internal (material) damping., cf. structural dynamics. Is should however be remarked that this
material damping due to the viscoelastic material response is only one part of the total structural
damping.
It should be remarked that it is not straightforward to realise or prove that the approach above holds,
but several experimental comparisons prove a very good agreement between predicted and experimentally
measured behaviour, cf. e.g. Figure 8.7.
a) b)
Figure 8.7: Predicted and measured a) off-axis storage modulus ratio, Ex0 /Em 0
and b) loss factor
of graphite/epoxy for various fibre orientations (from Suarez, Gibson, Sun, Chaturvedi. Experimental
Mechanics, 26(2):175184, 1986).
0 (t) = [A ]1 N(t)
(8.49)
0x (t) = A1
11 e
it
= |A1
11 | e
i(t11 )
(8.50)
0y (t) = A1
12 e
it
= |A1
12 | e
i(t12 )
(8.51)
0
xy (t) = A1
16 e
it
= |A1
16 | e
i(t16 )
(8.52)
As can be seen, the different strain component will oscillate with the same frequency but with different
amplitudes (e.g. |A1 0x (t)) and different phase-lags (e.g. 11 for 0x (t)) where the latter are defined
11 | for
93
as
Imag [A1
11 ]
11 = arctan (8.53)
Real [A1
11 ]
Imag [A1
12 ]
12 = arctan 1 (8.54)
Real [A12 ]
Imag [A1
16 ]
16 = arctan (8.55)
Real [A1
16 ]
In the present case, since the amplitude of the force is unity, the amplitudes of the strain components
correspond to the so-called amplification factors (|A1
ij |), which in general relate the amplitude in force
to the amplitude in strain.
To investigate the frequency dependency of the amplification factors, we consider the special case of
a [90/0/45]S -laminate of thickness h = 12 mm with volume fraction of fibres Vf = 0.6 with the following
properties:
Fibres:
Ef = 350 GPa, f = 0.2
It can be seen from Figure 8.8a that damping results in that the amplification factors decrease with
angular frequency giving the largest amplitudes for really slow loading. Furthermore, from Figure 8.8b,
the phase-lag of 0x (t) is evident (there is a time-shift between the oscillations in force and in strain) in
the plot showing the normalised force and normalised strain.
10
x 10 strain amplification factors 1
10
0.8 normalised strain
normalised force
0.6
8 H()
normalised force and strain
x 0.4
H()
y
0.2
H()[m/N]
H()xy
6 0
0.2
4 0.4
0.6
2 0.8
1
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01
time [s]
[rad/s]
a) b)
94
Using the following notation
1 1 1
D11 D12 D16
1 1 1 1
[D ] = D12 D22 D26
1 1 1
D16 D26 D66
kx (t) = D11
1 it 1 i(t11 )
e = |D11 |e (8.57)
1 it 1 i(t12 )
ky (t) = D12 e = |D12 | e (8.58)
1 it
kxy (t) = D16 1 i(t16 )
e = |D16 |e (8.59)
As can be seen, the different curvature component will oscillate with the same frequency but with
1
different amplitudes (e.g. |D11 | for kx (t)) and different phase-lags (e.g. 11 for kx (t)) where the latter
are (in the bending case) defined as
Imag [D1
11 ]
11 = arctan (8.60)
Real [D1
11 ]
Imag [D1
12 ]
12 = arctan 1 (8.61)
Real [D12 ]
Imag [D1
16 ]
16 = arctan (8.62)
Real [D1
16 ]
To investigate the lay-up dependency on the amplification factors (and thereby the damping proper-
ties), we consider two laminates with different lay-up but with the same total thickness of 8 mm and the
constituent properties:
Fibres:
Ef = 350 GPa, f = 0.2
4
x 10 curvature amplification factors
9
8 H()x [90/0]S
7 H()x [0/90]S
6
H()[m/N]
1
0 200 400 600 800 1000
[rad/s]
1
Figure 8.9: Predicted amplification factor (Hx () = |D11 |) for the [0/90]S and [90/0]S laminates.
What is interesting to note in Figure 8.9 is the expected weaker response when the upper and lower
plies has fibres in the 90 -direction ([90/0]S ), but also that a pronounced frequency dependency is obtained
1
whereas in the reversed case ([0/90]S ), the amplification factor H()x = |D11 | is more or less constant.
95
This means that more damping is obtained whenever plies with fibres oriented 90 are placed at (or
close to) the top and bottom of the laminate. Thereby, it can be concluded that, not only the stiffness
properties but also the damping properties may be tailored by changing the order of the plies.
96