Effect of Matrix Plasticity on Ultimate Strength of Composite Laminates

Abstract

Prediction of ultimate strength of a multidimensional composite laminate subjected to arbitrary load condition is difficult in nature. A fundamental reason is that the load share by each lamina in the laminate depends on the lamina instantaneous stiffness matrix which is not a constant throughout in most cases. The lamina nonlinear response is mainly caused by the inelastic deformation of the matrix material in the lamina. The primary objective of the present paper is to investigate the effect of matrix plasticity on the progressive failure process in the laminate. The study is based on a recently developed micromechanics model, the Bridging Model, which provides the instantaneous stiffness of the lamina at any load level using its constituent properties and the fiber volume fraction only. Another purpose of this paper is to compare predictive capability of different failure criteria for the laminate ultimate strength. Two typical failure criteria, i.e., the Tsai-Wu criterion applied to the lamina level and the maximum normal stress criterion applied to the constituent level, are incorporated in this paper. It is found that the matrix plasticity affects heavily the laminate strength if the laminate does not have 0 lamina plies in the loading direction or if the stiffness of the matrix does not differ significantly from that of the fibers. It is also found that the maximum normal stress criterion is generally more efficient for composite failure analysis.

Keywords

fibrous composite multidirectional laminate mechanical property progressive failure analysis strength prediction micromechanical approach bridging model failure criterion

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. Kim, R. Y. , In-Plane Tensile Strength of Multidirectional Composite Laminate, in Failure Analysis of Composite Laminates, Technomic Publishing Co., Inc., Lancaster, 1985.

2. Hinton, M. J. and Soden, P. D. , 1998, Predicting Failure in Composite Laminates: The Background to the Exercise, Comp. Sci. & Tech., Vol. 58, pp. 1001-1010.

3. Rowlands, R. E. , 1985, Strength (Failure) Theories and Their Experimental Correlation, in A. Kelly & Yu. N. Rabotnov eds., Failure Mechanics of Composites, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 71-125.

4. Nahas, M. N. , 1986, Survey of Failure and Post-Failure Theories of Laminated Fiber-Reinforced Composites, J. Comp. Tech. & Res., Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 138-153.

5. Echaabi, J. , Trochu, F. , and Gauvin, R. , 1996, Review of Failure Criteria of Fibrous Composite Materials, Poly. Comp., Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 786-798.

6. Huang, Z.-M. , 2000, A Unified Micromechanical Model for the Mechanical Properties of Two Constituent Composite Materials. Part I: Elastic Behavior, J. Thermoplastic Composite Materials,Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 252-271.

7. Huang, Z.-M. , 2000, A Unified Micromechanical Model for the Mechanical Properties of Two Constituent Composite Materials. Part II: Plastic Behavior, J. Thermoplastic Composite Materials,Vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 344-362.

8. Huang, Z.-M. , Closed Form Equations for Composite Strengths, J. of Comp. Tech. & Res., ASTM (submitted).

9. Huang, Z.-M. , Ramakrishna, S. , and Tay, A. A. O. , 2000, A Micromechanical Approach to the Tensile Strength of a Knitted Fabric Composite, J. of Comp. Mater., Vol. 33, No. 19, pp. 1758-1791.

10.

10. Huang, Z.-M. , Ramakrishna, S. , and Tay, A. A. O. , 2000, Modeling of Stress-Strain Behavior of a Knitted Fabric Reinforced Elastomer Composite, Comp. Sci. & Tech., Vol. 60, No. 5, pp. 671-691.

11.

11. Huang, Z.-M. , Ramakrishna, S. , and Tay, A. A. O. , 2000, A Unified Micromechanical Model for Estimating Elastic, Elasto-Plastic, and Strength Behaviors of Knitted Fabric Reinforced Composites, J. of Reinf. Plast. & Comp., Vol. 19, No. 8, pp. 642-656.

12.

12. Huang, Z.-M. , Ramakrishna, S. , and Leong, K. H. , Modeling Tensile Behavior of Milano Rib Knit Fabric Composites, J. of Reinf. Plast. & Comp. (in press).

13.

13. Adams, D. F. , 1974, Elastoplastic Behavior of Composites, in Mechanics of Composite Materials, G. P. Sendeckyj ed., Academic Press, New York, pp. 169-208.

14.

14. Hyer, M. W. , 1997, Stress Analysis of Fiber-Reinforced Composite Materials, WCB, McGraw-Hill, Boston, pp. 120-124.

15.

15. Chamis, C. C. , 1989, Mechanics of Composite Materials: Past, Present, and Future, J. Comp. Technol. Res., Vol. 11, pp. 3-14.

16.

16. Tsai, S. W. and Hahn, H. T. , 1980, Introduction to Composite Materials, Technomic Publishing Co., Inc., Lancaster.

17.

17. Gibson, R. F. , Principles of Composite Mateiral Mechanics, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, 1994, pp. 201-207.

18.

18. Soden, P. D. , Hinton, M. J. , and Kaddour, A. S. , 1998, Laminate Properties, Lay-Up Configurations and Loading Conditions for a Range of Fiber-Reinforced Composite Laminates, Comp. Sci. & Tech., Vol. 58, pp. 1011-1022.

19.

19. Sendeckyj, G. P. , Richardson, M. D. , and Pappas, J. E. , 1975, Fracture Behavior of Thornel 300/5208 Graphite/Epoxy Laminates—Part I: Unnotched Laminates, Composite Reliability, ASTM STP 580, pp. 528-546.

20.

20. Soden, P. D. , Kitching, R. , Tse, P. C. , Tsavalas, Y. , and Hinton, M. J. , 1993, Influence of Winding Angle of the Strength and Deformation of Filament-Wound Composite Tubes Subjected to Uniaxial and Biaxial Loads, Comp. Sci. & Tech., Vol. 46, pp. 363-378.