Composites Light PDF

SAMCEF Mecano
The Best Way to Predict Non-Linear Flexible Dynamic Behavior

Composites and Advanced
Structural Analysis
Modeling and Simulation Seminar
FUNDAMENTAL OF
COMPOSITES STRUCTURES
1
Composites and Advanced Structural Analysis
2
LMS Samtech Composite Solution
3 copyright LMS International - 2012
LMS Samtech 35 years of experience in:
Engineering Service Activities
Software Development

Important reference customers in aeronautic field :

Reference in other sectors :

Numerous collaboration with top class research center

LMS offers for composite modeling
Laminates
Sandwiches
Continuous fibers
Short fibers
Filament
Winding
4
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

0
1
/
0
8
/
2
0
1
3

Comprehensive library of dedicated multi-layered elements

Composite Shell
Transverse shear deformable thick shell element
Based on Classical Lamination Theory
Can be used for sandwich constructions modeling within scope of CLT

Composite Volume
Classic formulation (3D Solid)
1 ply/element OR several/element
Composite Volumic Shell formulation (2D Solid) shell-like behavior

Composite Membrane (inflatable structures)

2D : Axisymmetric, Plane Stress, Plane Strain,

Multi-harmonic : When the loading or/and the structure response is non axi-
symmetrical
Composites Analyses in LMS SAMTECH Solver
Finite Elements
Multi Layer Element
Shell
Volume
Ply 1
Ply 2
Ply N
1 FE
Samtech Solvers package is a suite of several modules dedicated for specific applications
Composite modeling are standard capabilities of every LMS Samtech Solvers
Data exchange between solver are simplified :
Input data files are the same
Capabilities of chaining/ Co-simulation / Mapping data (ie thermal/structural)


Stress, Strain,
Frequencies,
Temperature
Strength Analysis

First-ply failure, Failure
Indices
Displayed : critical ply,
values, load case

Classic Failure Analysis
To collapse
From Linear Buckling to
Advanced non linear
algorithm : RIKS,
Buckling, Post Buckling

Classic criteria or
Automatic simulation of
material degradation to
model progressive Intra
laminar or Inter laminar
damage
Damage in composite
Independent tool or integrated in Caesam Framework : Multi-disciplinary, Multi-model
Design variables : Continuous, Discrete, Integer, Non numeric
Analysis Multidisciplinary & Response Any computable value

Optimization with
geometric non linarites
(buckling, post-buckling,
collapse)

Local Optimization

Optimization wrt ply
thickness & fibers
orientation

Local Optimization

Stacking Sequence
Optimization

Local Optimization
Very Large scale of
Optimization problems
(e.g. topological
optimization)
Global Optimization
Open System Design of Experiments Updating Gradient Optimization
Genetic Algorithm
LMS Samtech Linear Solver
Complete Family of Linear solvers:
Static
Modal Analysis
Stability Analysis
Response to a harmonic force
Response to an arbitrary excitation
Load
Displacement
Features :
Extended library of Finite Elements including composite (all), fracture mechanics
(static)
Can handle contact if relative displacements are small (static)
Chaining between solver is simplified (between solvers, same solvers)
Parallel Solver available

Stage #1
Stage #3
Stage #2
Stage #4
Reference
sector
Complete
3-D structure
LMS Samtech Non-Linear Solver
Non-linear flexible mechatronic simulation
Contact conditions
Large displacements and rotations
Library of material laws:
Classic linear behavior
Advanced behavior: Composite, plastic ...
Large library of kinematic joints: rigid and flexible
Multi-Body Simulation in Finite Elements Models
Multi-Body Simulation Non-linear capabilities Finite Element Analysis Digital Control
Rigid bodies
Flexible meshed parts
Contact
with friction
Flexible Dynamics ensures
Accurate dynamic loads
Vibration level assessment
Dedicated Graphic User Interface
Non Linear
Dedicated pre-processing, user friendly environment allowing easy definition and
interactive checking of:

Material properties (Linear or Non-linear)
Individual ply creation (material, angle, thickness)
Laminates creation (lay-ups)
Data library storage
Laminates assignment to FE mesh
Dedicated Graphic User Interface
Non Linear

Specific post-processing procedure :
Ply by ply result recovery (stress/strain/failure criteria)
Critical ply selection (large range of failure theories)
Critical load case
Damage distribution
Ply selection
(composite viewer)
Element selection
(cursor)
Results on the structure:

Composite Viewer
Display the value of the criteria in all
the laminate structure
Select 1 element
Solution:
SAMCEF solution, with our dedicated tool for composite
modeling
SAMCEF solution, with efficient solvers for modal analysis
Benefits:
Better knowledge of the composite structure, to support the
physical prototype
Influence of the design parameters on structural behavior
Challenges:
To build a model of the Metisse concept car, with a car
body made of composite
Evaluate the dynamic behavior and the torsional rigidity
Propose a modelling procedure to support the physical
prototype
Modal analysis of a concept car
Challenge:
Make forecasts of the future test results
(composite structure)
Develop composites FE methods
Solution:
Parametric Finite Element model
Use SAMCEF Linear solution & SAMCEF
Mecano solver
Benefits:
Good correlations with reference tests
Methods fully integrated in Airbus application
for certification (ISAMI)

Engineering Service : Airbus Composite Method
Development
Failure Criteria
Failure criteria are used to extend the use of strength data measured from tensile,
compressive and shear uni-axial tests, and that are compared to a combined stress states.

As far as failure for a laminated material are concerned, 2 failure levels can be considered :
1. the First Ply Failure (FPF) based on Failure Criteria

2D or 3D at the ply level:

2. Progressive Failure Analysis based on a Continuum Damage Mechanics
Progressive Ply Failure (UD or Fabric)
Delamination (Interface Model)
Cf Chapter 2

Maximum stress criteria
Stress ratio / Strain ratio
Rice and Tracey criterion
Hoffman criteria
Puck
Tsai Hill Quadratic
Tsai Wu
Hashin Multicriterion
Maximum total strain criteria
Maximum mechanical strain criteria
Failure Criteria
First Ply Failure leads to a very conservative design

Meanwhile, Progressive Failure Analysis is not widely used because of the difficulty to
achieve a design with a full confidence
The presence of cracks leads to a decrease of the stiffness of the matrix resulting to
a load transfer to the fibers or to the surrounding plies.
This stress redistribution assessment is the objective of a simulation that will
integrate the damage laws of the components of the composite structure
Last Ply Failure

Questions the designers face:

Whats the residual strength of the structure beyond the initiation of the damage?
How is the stress re-distribution within the structure?
Can the structure withstand the applied loads?

But How to do?

PROGRESSIVE FAILURE
SIMULATION
2
Composites and Advanced Structural Analysis
19
Scope of the presentation
1 Fundamental of Composites Structures
1.1 Definition & Advantages of Composites Structures
1.2 Modelling Aspects and Failure Criteria
2 Progressive Failure Simulation in Composites structures
2.1 Degradation Process Modelling
2.2 In-ply Damage Modelling
2.3 Delamination Modelling
2.4 Industrial Cases
3 Crack Propagation in Metallic Structure
3.1 The XFEM Method
3.2 Applications Cases
4 Optimization of Buckling/Post Buckling behaviour of a composite stiffened
Panel

20
Failure mechanisms in composite
A correct prediction of the damage in the composite structures is essential for the design
of their structural application

Because of their heterogeneous structure, different scales of analysis can be defined:
Fiber (~10 m)
Laminated structure (~1-10 mm)
Elementary ply (~100 m)

At the ply level, the degradation mechanisms are:
1. Fiber/Matrix decohesion with a limited diffusive damage
2. Transverse cracking of the matrix (through the thickness of the ply)
3. Fiber breaking

21 copyright LMS International - 2012 21 copyright LMS International - 2012
1 2
Between the ply, the degradation mechanisms are:
1. Limited diffusive delamination
2. Local delamination, induced by the transverse cracks

When the damage become significant, the interaction between these mechanisms
becomes essential in the evolution of the condition of the structure:
Their chaining generates a re-distribution of the stresses, which is at the origin of
the complete breaking

Often, these mechanisms happen within a significant range of the loading.

A good understanding and an accurate modeling of these degradation mechanisms is
thus a requirement for the design of composites structures.

The proposed approach is based on the Damage Modeling Theory and consider the
laminated structure as a stacking of elementary components with different nature:
Ply
Interface

For each degradation mechanism, a damage indicator is defined at the meso-scale
according to the assumptions:
Ply and Interface can be modeled as Continuum Elasto-plastic and Damage-able
Media.
The damage is constant through the thickness but can be different between each ply

In a first version, there is no interaction between damage in the ply and damage in the
interface
A new meso-model has been recently introduced.

Solutions available in SAMCEF, for
damage analysis of composites
Intra-laminar failure
Inter-laminar failure
Failure modes in laminated composites
Cohesive elements approach
Fracture mechanics approach (VCE)
User material
Damage model for the UD/woven ply
Progressive rupture of the ply
Advanced non local damage model, with strong
interaction with delaminatrion
Short fibers
Classical strength criteria
2. Damage model for UD/Fabric (P. Ladeveze - LMT Cachan)
Damage in composites ply model
2
3
Damage in 1st (fiber) direction
Damage in 3rd (matrix) direction (only in traction, not in compression)
Damage in 2nd (matrix) direction (only in traction, not in compression)
Damage in 12/13 directions (shear)
1
12
23
13
Thermodynamic forces Yi=E/di
2. Intra-laminar failure for the UD (Cachans model)
3 damage variables (11; 22; 12)
d11: Damage in the fiber direction (fiber breaking)
d22: Damage in transverse direction (matrix cracking in
traction)
d12: Damage in the shear plane, reflecting decohesion
between fiber/matrix
Very often: Plane stress assumption
Coupling between directions
Transverse Direction: Damage only in Traction, not in Compression

The damaged-material strain energy is :
A damage is computed and is a function of the thermodynamic forces:
11
=
0
11

11
+

11

11

1
11
>
11
+
,
11
> 0
11
>
11
,
11
> 0

12

12
0
12
12
0

12
1,
22
1,
12

12
22
12

12
1,
22
1,
22

22

1

\Y
11

Damage in the fiber direction d
11

d
11
=1
\Y
12

Damage in shear d
12
(d
22
)
\ Y
0
12
\ Y
c
12
\ Y
F
12
d
12
=1
Fragile/Brittle failure of the fibers
After a limit, which is not a macro-
value
Ductile failure of the matrix
Plasticity taken into account
Permanent deformation after unloading
Coupling is introduced:
Once d12 or d22 is equal to 1, then d22 or d12 respectively is set to 1
Once the ply is broken in the transverse direction bec. of too many cracks in the
matrix, the resistance in shear vanishes; the opposite is also true.
\ Y
0
11
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( )

o o o o o o
p K p R
p R R a p f
=
s + + + + = 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
,
~
0
2
33
2
22
2 2
23
2
13
2
12
Non linearity in the fiber direction
Plasticity in the matrix:
Definition of effective stresses (coupled with damage)
Introduction of yield criteria and hardening law
12
13
22
23
12
12
33
33
33
22
22
22
11
11
13
23
12
33
22
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
~
~
~
~
~
~
d
d
d
d
d
d
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
=

+
+
Traction test, with unloading, on a [45,-45]s lay-up
Material Testing and behaviour identification
Challenges:
The identification of the parameters of the model can be done
based on a set of simple tests at the coupon level

Solution:
LMS Samtech knowledge for parameter identification
Identification procedure is clearly defined

0
23 22
2
23
0
13 12
2
13
0
12 12
2
12
33 22
0
2
0
23
33 11
0
1
0
13
22 11
0
1
0
12
0
3 22
2
33
0
3
2
33
0
2
2
22
0
2 22
2
22
0
1 11
2
11
) 1 ( 2 ) 1 ( 2 ) 1 ( 2
) 1 ( 2 2 2 ) 1 ( 2 ) 1 ( 2
G d G d G d
E E E
E d E E E d E d
e
d
o o
o o
v
o o
v
o o
v

o o o o
o
+ + +
=
+ +
Benefits:
Virtual material testing, with the non linearities
Have accurate material models for the progressive
damage modeling, easy to use
Input for detailled sizing
Coupon level
30
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

-

2
0
1
1

Damage in composites parameters identification
[0/90]2s

[45/-45]2s

[0/90]2s

[67,5/-67,5]2s

Set of tests at the coupon level

Upper face
F
L
F
L

c
L_U

c
T
_
U

Lower face
F
L
F
L

c
L_L

c
T
_
L

Instrumentation of the coupons
+ tests on holed plates for non local parameters
The procedure to identify the parameters of each model is clearly identified
Traction/Compression
on a laminate at 0 and
90 for fiber direction
behavior
Test on 45/-45 for
the matrix properties
Test on 67.5/-67.5
for the coupling
between shear and
transverse damage
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

-

2
0
1
1

Example: [45/-45]2s

Virtual testing Procedure to
correlate the experimental tests
with simulation results
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

-

2
0
1
1

Loading_unloading scenarios
(6 to 7 cycles)
Identification of the damage/plasticity
Identification of the elastic properties
3. Intra-laminar failure for woven fabrics (Hochards model)
E = potential
E
i
0
, G
i
0
= initial moduli (undamaged)
d
ij
= damages e [0;1]

0
23
22
2
23
0
13
12
2
13
0
12
12
2
12
33 22
0
2
0
23
0
3
2
33
0
3
22
2
33
0
2
2
22
0
2
22
2
22
33 11
0
1
0
13
22 11
0
1
0
12
0
1
11
2
11
) 1 ( 2
) 1 ( 2 ) 1 ( 2 2 ) 1 ( 2
2 ) 1 ( 2 ) 1 ( 2
G d
G d G d E E E d
E E d E E E d
E
o

o o
o o
v o
o
o o
o o
v
o o
v
o
+ +
+
+
=
+
+
0
23
2
23
0
13
2
13
0
12 12
2
12
33 22
0
2
0
23
0
3
2
33
0
2 22
2
22
33 11
0
1
0
13
22 11
0
1
0
12
0
1 11
2
11
2
2 ) 1 ( 2 2
) 1 ( 2 ) 1 ( 2
G
G G d E E
E d E E E d
E
o
o o
o o
v o
o
o o
v
o o
v o
+
+
+ +
=
1
2
2.1 Degradation Process and Modelling
3.1 The XFEM Method
Panel

35
In SAMCEF
Damage in composites - interface
1. Fracture mechanics approach Which crack is dangerous ?
What is the propagation load ?
2. Cohesive elements approach
Which crack is dangerous ?
What is the propagation load ?
What is the maximum load ?
What is the residual stiffness during propagation ?
Inter-laminar failure: delamination
Automatic
crack
propagation
No automatic crack
propagation
Inter-laminar failure: delamination
Delamination = Separation of adjacent plies
at locations sensitive to transverse effects
G
I
G
IC

=> Crack propagation
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
0 5 10 15 20 25
Crack width (mm)
E
n
e
r
g
y

r
e
l
e
a
s
e

r
a
t
e

G
I

(
J
/
m
)
Computed values
Limiting value
At the crack front:
G
I

G
IC

Toughness reached
and exceeded
1. Fracture Mechanics approach for delamination : VCE Approach
2. Cohesive elements approach for delamination
Including an imperfect interface
between two plies
Properties of the interface
Tension
Opening
2
33
0
2
1
+
= c
I d
k Y
I
2
31
0
2
1
II d
k Y
II
=
2
32
0
2
1
III d
k Y
III
=
2. Thermodynamic forces ("forces in the interface")
3. Equivalent thermodynamic force (with the 3 modes effects)
o
o o o
t
/ 1
sup
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
+
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
s IIIC
III
IIC
II
IC
I
IC
t
G
Y
G
Y
G
Y
G Y
(
+ + + =
+
2
32
0 2
31
0
2
33
0
2
33
0
) 1 ( ) 1 ( ) 1 (
2
1
c c
III III II II I I I
d k d k d k k E
1. Potential in the interface elements
4. Only one resulting damage variable
d d d d
III II I
= = =
) (Y h d =
5. Evolution of the damage wrt the thermodynamic force
Y
d
1
Library of cohesive models
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Displacement w(mm)
L
o
a
d

(
N
)
Numerical results Analytical reference
Maximum load
Residual stiffness
Propagation
load
Crack propagation
Non linear analysis
Parameters of Material Law
Standard tests should be performed to define the material law coefficient
Example of DCB Test
016/016
Material Law Type of test required
Transverse stiffness of the interface: k
I
0
x Fit on DCB
First shear stiffness of the interface: k
II
0
x Fit on ENF
Second shear stiffness of the interface: k
III
0
x k
III
0
= k
II
0

GIc: fracture toughness in mode I x DCB
GIIc: fracture toughness in mode II X ENF
GIIIc: fracture toughness in mode III X GIIIc=GIIc
a: coupling parameter between the modes MMB
Threshold for thermodynamic force: Y
0t
(X) Fit on DCB and ENF
Exponent (X) Fit on DCB and ENF
Tau, Adel: parameters for the delay effect x Fit on DCB and ENF
DCB : Double Cantilever Beam
ENF : End Notched Flexure
MMB test (Mixed Mode Bending)
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

-

2
0
1
1

The procedure to identify the values for the model parameters is known
Properties of the interface (for delamination)
DCB
Double Cantilever Beam
MMB
Mixed Mode Bending
ENF
End Notched Flexure
Fracture mechanics approach
Application Damage in composites - interface
crack
Comparison between SAMCEF and other commercial FE code:
Academic Case: Propagation in Mode I DCB test
(Refined Mesh at the crack front)
2.1 Degradation Process and Modelling
3.1 The XFEM Method
Panel

47
Structural Components Design in Aeronautics

80mm
50mm
Existing crack
Existing cracks
20mm
Cap (4 plies)
[45/90/0/-45]
Skin (9 plies)
[0/90/45/0/-45/90/0/45/-45]
Imposed displacement
Flange- left part (4 plies)
[-45/90/0/45]
Clamp
Benefits
Non-Linear laws with damage for plies and
interfaces
Contact introduced between all interface to simulate
the closing of cracks Presence of initial cracks
Very large models : parallel procedure
Determination of the propagation load and the
maximum load

Location of initial cracks
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Displacement w (mm)
L
o
a
d

(
N
)
Propagation load
Maximum load
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

Composite T-Stiffener (Airbus Supplier France)
48
Element level
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

0
1
/
0
8
/
2
0
1
3

Energy release rates by mode: VCE
Evolution of the criterion: VCE

Most critical crack identification
Propagation Laods
IIIc
III
IIc
II
Ic
I
G
G
G
G
G
G
+ +
Full 3D case
Presence of the 3 modes
49
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Vertical displacement (mm)
R
e
a
c
t
i
o
n

(
N
)
112122 ddl
293332 ddl
553889 ddl
First damage d =
1 (propagation
load)
Interface elements
Deformation at collapse
Load - displacement curve for different element sizes
Cohesive elements approach: zoom in the center of the structure, to check the contacts
between layers
Multiple contact conditions
taken into account to manage
potential reclosure of cracks
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

0
1
/
0
8
/
2
0
1
3

Displacement = 1.38 mm
Load = 4450 N
Load = 6050 N
Load = 6100 N
Load = 3000 N
Evolution of the interlaminar damage during the loading
52
293,332 dof
19264 volume elements
1221 contact elements
12664 interface elments
112,122 dof
553,889 dof

2
2
3
7
4
1
1
1
553889
553889
293332
112122
6700
6700
6530
6720
285
854
524
44
Speed-up = 3
Efficiency = 75%
Mean l
e

(mm)

Number of
processors

Size of the
problem
(dof)

Maximum
load (N)

CPU to reach
2.35mm
(minutes)
Damage in composites
Bend specimen
4 points bending
Inter-laminar damage
AIRBUS GERMANY BENCHMARK
4 Points Bending Experimental device for a curved beam
Damage in Composites
1
st
delamination (violent)
Value in agreement with experimental
results (including dispersion)
Courtesy of Airbus
2
nd
delamination
Determination of the successive delamination loads
AIRBUS GERMANY BENCHMARK
c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

L
M
S

I
n
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

0
1
/
0
8
/
2
0
1
3

Identify the critical
interface
56
Example 1: AIRBUS GERMANY BENCHMARK
Delamination starts at the edges
Need a 3D modeling
If S33 Interlaminar decreases =
damage appears !
Understanding of the delamination process
57
Challenge:
Tail rotor blade with central notch
Rotor blade skin: glass fiber/ epoxy matrix with a 45 lay-up
Study made in collaboration with Eurocopter and EADS IW for
3rd ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on the Mechanical
Response of Composites
Solution:
Full model: all blade components modeled (foam, spar, etc.)
Combined bending/torsion loading
150000 multilayered solid elements
Damage model only in zone around the notch
Benefits:
Very good correlation with test
Better understanding of the non-linear behavior of the structure
Damage in a composite blade

Damage mesomodel
Elastic behaviour
- No delamination (in-situ tap test)
- No buckling (before fiber fracture)
Strain along blade axis
Tests
Simulation
Increasing loading
Damage Image Correlation
(strain in longitudinal direction)

Composites Light PDF

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Composites Light PDF

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

SAMCEF Mecano

The Best Way to Predict Non-Linear Flexible Dynamic Behavior

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi