P. 1
Multi Axial Fatigue Experiments-I Modelling

Multi Axial Fatigue Experiments-I Modelling

|Views: 43|Likes:
Published by Gennaro Mozzillo

More info:

Published by: Gennaro Mozzillo on Sep 14, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/14/2011

pdf

text

original

ELSEVIER

Int. J. Fatigue Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 201-207, 1997 © 1997 Elsevier Science Limited. All rights reserved Printed in Great Britain 0142-1123/97/$17.00+.00

PII: 0142-1123(96)00074-6

Multiaxial fatigue behaviour of unidirectional plies based on uniaxial fatigue experiments m I. Modelling
M a h m o o d M. Shokrieh and Larry B. Lessard
Department of Mechanical Engineering McGill University, 817 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2K6 (Received 15 October 1995; revised 9 June 1996; accepted 23 September 1996)
The fatigue behaviour of a unidirectional composite lamina is examined from theoretical and experimental viewpoints. The goal is to establish a technique to use experimental data from a unidirectional ply under uniaxial fatigue to simulate the behaviour of that ply in multiaxial fatigue loading. Traditional polynomial failure criteria for fatigue are of limited use because fatigue strength is a function of number of cycles and applied fatigue stress ratio. In practice, a problem such as a fatigue-loaded complex composite structure containing stress concentrations, is subjected to varying stress ratios at different points, especially if material or geometric nonlinearities are involved. However, fatigue testing under a wide range of stress ratios is time consuming and expensive. Therefore it is important to establish a technique to consider fatigue damage due to arbitrary stress ratio without having to perform excessive amounts of testing. Here the theoretical basis of a new model, called the generalized residual material property degradation model is explained in detail. Copyright © 1997 Elsevier Science Limited. All rights reserved
(Keywords: composites, fatigue, strength degradation, biaxial; failure criteria, life, stress ratio)

INTRODUCTION Although there is an extensive amount of research on biaxial/multiaxial fatigue of metals l, research in the same field on composite materials 2-8 is less complete. Literature reviews of multiaxial and biaxial fatigue loading of composite materials have been presented by Found 7, and Chen and Matthews 8, and these papers state that further research is needed. The idea of using polynomial failure criteria for predicting fatigue failure of composite laminates has been used by many authors 9-2°, however, the application of this idea, due to experimental difficulties, is limited to special cases. A deep understanding of the behaviour of a composite lamina under m0]tiaxial fatigue loading, with arbitrary stress ratios, is a key point to study the behaviour of a complicated problem. In this research, after a review of different residual strength models proposed in the literature, a suitable model to simulate the behaviour of a unidirectional lamina under a uniaxial state of stress is selected. Then a procedure to find the fatigue life of a unidirectional lamina under a uniaxial state of stress, with an arbitrary stress ratio, is explained. Finally, based on the previous sections, a model to simulate the behaviour of a unidirectional ply under multiaxial fatigue loading, with arbitrary state of stress, and stress ratio is established.

STRENGTH DEGRADATION UNDER FATIGUE LOADING There are two major approaches to simulate the residual strength of laminated composites under uniaxial fatigue loading 21, which are called the statistical (probability-based damage) and mechanistic/phenomenological (emphasis on damage mechanics) approaches. Works of Haplin et al. 22"23 and Broutman and Sahu 24 are the two earliest examples of statistical and mechanistic approaches, respectively. Investigations by Hahn and Kim 25, Chou and Croman 26,27, Whitney 28, Sendeckyj 29, Radhakrishnan 3°, and works of Yang and his co-workers 3~-38 are some examples in the statistical category. On the other hand, Reifsnider and Stinchcomb 39, Reifsnider 4°-42, Ryder and Crossman 2~, Daniel and Charewicz 43.44, Rotem 45, Whitw o r t h 46, Spearing and Beaumont 4v, and Harris and his c o - w o r k e r s 48'49 presented different mechanistic/ phenomenological models. In both categories, statistical and mechanistic/phenomenological, no comprehensive study of the behaviour of unidirectional plies under multiaxial fatigue loading has been conducted.

Residual strength degradation models under uniaxial loading Consider a unidirectional lamina under a constant uniaxial fatigue loading. Under static loading, or equivalently at n = 0.25 cycles (quarter of a cycle) in fatigue,

201

T h e w e a r out model 23 has been used to present this behaviour. Equation (3) reduces to: Rm(n) = R ' ( O ) Rm(O) ... 23. only the mechanistic characteristics are considered here..B. 0.. It must be mentioned that in this paper there is no attempt to study the probabilistic features of the residual strength of composite materials. therefore to fully characterize a material. under high level state of stress..N curve passes through the end point (catastrophic failure point) of the residual strength curve.. at low level state of stress the residual strength of the lamina.. it is clear that for each state of stress the S ... m has different values. degrades gradually (Figure 2).25 Nf n Figure 1 Strength degradation of a unidirectional lamina under a constant uniaxial fatigue loading (strength vs log cycles) the strength of the unidirectional lamina is R(0) (Figure 1).A ( o ) ( n l . However. and impossible in practice.. the residual strength as a function of number of cycles is nearly constant and it decreases drastically at the number of cycles to failure (Figure 2). Rm(n) Rm(O) o "m + o an n Nt[ Nil I Rm(O) ...202 M. As shown... In the w e a r out model. The strength of the composite lamina is constant until the number of cycles to failure (Nf). fatigue strength (R(n)) decreases. the models and equations used by other authors are only considered from our point of view... where the composite lamina fails catastrophically. =::::SS:::::S::::"i 0.25 i . By considering that at the number of cycles to failure (Nf).Nf (6) Equation (5) reduces to: . the residual strength (R(n)) is equal to the applied stress (o-). For comparing between different models proposed by different authors. In Figure 1 the residual strength and S . Therefore in the following. and the change of the residual strength is approximated by a power-law growth equation.. and m is a constant.. dR(n) _ . The sudden death model is very simple and straightforward. Also m is a constant which is found experimentally.. In practice designers must deal with a wide range of states of stress... Equation (4) expresses the residual strength (R(n))... Different models have been presented in the litera- in which A(o-) is a function of the maximum cyclic stress (o'). Realizing that various notations have been used by different authors.. which was initially presented by Haplin et al.R ' ( O ) Rm(O) 0 an - n Nf (5) O. This is expensive.. In the following a comparison between different models is made. Lessard ture to simulate the residual strength of composite laminates under fatigue loading. the magnitude of the strength decreases to the magnitude of the applied stress.. as a function of static strength (R(0)). Shokrieh and L. therefore a model to present the behaviour of composite laminates under a general state of stress is essential. ii v and by the following algebraic operation.. R'n(n) ..~ R(O) \ % ~n low level stress ut. number of cycles (n).n o ) (2) (3) with no = 0 and nl = n.M.A ( o')/m [R(n)] m-1 dn (1) R(n) I R(°)~~ur k ~ s residual strength v e ~ ~ catastrophic failure point cu~e.N curves are shown in one graph.. for simplicity a unified notation has been applied here in order to present the models of other authors in an informative manner. It should be mentioned that there are numerous details in these models which are not discussed here. By increasing the number of cycles. This model has been used by many authors 25-38 in probabilistic and mechanistic models. At this point the composite lamina fails catastrophically. varying from low to high. For different states of stresses. under a constant applied stress (o'). By integrating Equation (1) from no to nl cycles...a " Figure2 Strength degradation under different states of stress (strength vs log cycles) .. For instance. large number of experiments should be performed. Equation (2) reduces to: Rm(n) = Rm(O) .~~/n 0. T h e sudden death m o d e l 26'27 has been used to describe this behaviour...a m n Nf (4) R(n) . and number of cycles to failure (N0.... Finally. These two models represent extremes in the observations of fatigue degradation representing sudden and more gradual behaviour. The fatigue behaviour of a composite lamina varies under different states of stress.. thus are not implied to be a comprehensive list of failure modes. it is assumed that the residual strength (R(n)) is a monotonically decreasing function of number of cycles (n)...... as a function of number of cycles.. time consuming.. after a certain number of cycles which is called number of cycles to failure (Nf). Equation (4) can be rewritten in the following form. R " ( n O = Rm(no) .a(o')n where R(0) is the static strength.

an undefined function of normalized number of cycles "g" is introduced. and Sendeckyj 29 applied exactly the same model proposed by Haplin et al. This assumption is not consistent with the experimental evidence of strength degradation at low level state of stress nor at high level state of stress. like the model proposed by Fong s°. In the algebraic equation we will use to represent a reduced form of the integral equation proposed by Reifsnider and Stinchcomb 39 and Reifsnider 4°~2. They emphasized that stress-independent models. the equivalent number of fatigue cycles for a static loading condition is assumed to be 0. C= (not derived by him 29) . 43.dr) + ¢r (8) By having static strength (R(0)).1 Rm(0)-o ~ n Nt Explanations 'm' is a curve fitting parameter. O~uS~s=~t~=R(0) (for one state of stress) Daniel et aL 43. 23 Broutman and Sahu 24 assumed a linear relationship between the fatigue strength and number of cycles. from w e a r out to sudden death.g R(n)-o-[n~' R(0)-tr 1 - Linear strength degradation fk(~ ) {R(n)-trl" = (log(n)-log(0. 48'49 presented a normalized equation consisting of two curve fitting parameters (Table 1). For use in this research.25 Figure 3 Normalized strength degradation curve [Equation (8)] Table 1 A summary of different strength degradation models Models R"(n)-am. this model is called the normalized residual strength model.5)] Nf) is undefined function a curve fitting parameter.43'44 Reifsnider and Stinchcomb 39 Reifsnider4~2 Harris e t a / ? 8.5.f=~.27 Sendeckyf 9 Broutman and Sahu 24 Daniel etal. 1/S=m. for different states of stress.a m Rm(O) 203 n .1 - -- am Nf (7) Equation (7) is a normalized form of Equation (4) which can be used for the purpose of comparing different models. state of stress (o'). 3L38 Chou and Croman 26. N=Nf Reifsnider and Stinchcomb 39 use Sr(n)=R(n). which is based on the assumption that the fatigue process is controlled by a single primary damage mechanism is not realistic. found experimentally References Haplin et al.l~g(O~5-)/ JS (R(0) . Yang e t al. and the curve fitting parameters (a and /3).log(0. Chou and Croman 26'27. a summary of the residual strength models is presented in Table 1.o-) : [1 ( l o g ( n ) . is found. by considering that a static loading is a quarter of a cycle.5) ] 0 \R(O)-o-] 1 -\log(Nf)-log(0. the equation presented by Harris et al. o'f=R(n). the equivalent number of cycles should be changed to 0. Harris et at. 'K' is a curve fitting parameter which must be found experimentally. a and/3 are stress independent parameters. as a function of number of cycles (n). found experimentally ' a ' and '/3' are two curve fitting parameters. A shown in Table 1.25)/t311 . In a model presented by Daniel e t al. 23 Hahn and Kim 25 Yang eta/. Since in Equation (8). by the adjustment of the curve fitting parameters a and /3.44 use f=R(n). However number of cycles to failure (Nf) is a function of the state of stress (~r) and the 1 0 1 lo2n-log.25. o-)). i=k (used in the critical model) Harris et aL 48'49 use f=R(n). Sa=o-. residual strength (R(n. found experimentally Sendeckyj 29 uses tra=tr. In their studies.49 Notes: Hahn and Kim 25 use F=R(n). 23 use m=c. however.s=cr.N=Nf Chou and Croman 26. Su=R(0). They showed that 'a' and '/3' are stress independent curve fitting parameters which must be found experimentally. 31-38.27 use S=tr. s=cr. By using the normalization technique all different curves.25 logNt-log. o-e=R(0).\log~Nff) . Hahn and Kim 25.Multiaxial fatigue behaviour of unidirectional plies--I Rm(n) . By using a unified notation and applying similar algebraic operations to the other models proposed in the literature. in Figure 2 collapse to a single curve (Figure 3).t=n Yang et al. n Broutman and Sahu 24 use tr~=R(n). N=Nf. 48'49 is changed to the following form: R(n. N=Ne .N=Nr R(n)-~_ 1 n R(O)-~ Nr e(n)-o-(Nf) R(0)-tr. s=o-. and the state of stress (o-). They postulated that their model permitted the incorporation of all modes of damage accumulation. number of cycles to failure (Nf) related to the state of stress. There is no effort in their paper 43 to define this function (Table 1).

state of stress and stress ratio is needed. the normalized fatigue life model was modified by Harris and his co- where. Then by rearranging Equation (12) the following equation is derived. Experimental results by Harris and his co-workers 56 showed that the previous quadratic model 53 is inappropriate for the constant life curve especially in both low and high mean stress regions (Figure 4).25)/t~] '~ 1.204 M. the severe restriction of using a special stress ratio in fatigue analysis of composite laminates is avoided.lo-t. an analytical method has been proposed to present all data from a constant life diagram in a single two-parameter fatigue curve.05 in tension (20 in compression) Figure 4 0. A and B are the curve fitting constants. u and v = curve fitting constants.1 -1 to establish failure criteria 0. First.. c and q are not new variables.\~)-~ ] j (9) (R(0) .q)(e + q)] (13) In Figures 5 . However there are some analytical methods 52-54 for predicting the effect of mean stress on fatigue life based on a limited number of experiments.B.5 0 /~:f[(1-q~)(c*q)~ ÷m 0.cr.5 Normalized m e a n stress (q) Typical constant life diagram . but regroupings of other variables and constants. Then by coupling the following procedure into the normalized residual strength model [Equations (8) and (9)]. + O'min)/2 = m e a n stress. PREDICTION OF FATIGUE LIFE BY USING NORMALIZED GOODMAN TYPE DIAGRAMS The effect of mean stress ((~max + O'min)/2) on the fatigue life. K) = [ ( l o g ( n ) .~7. this technique is explained in detail.. O" a • (O" . a o--logNf curve for different stress ratios (~: = O'min/O'max) should be established experimentally (Figure 5).3 Normalized alternating stress (a) K=7 K=-. 56 it was shown that the exponents u and v determine the shapes of the left end right wings of the bell-shaped curve. and the compressive strength (o-c) by the tensile strength (o't). To overcome this difficulty. In the following section a model to simulate the fatigue life for arbitrary stress ratios is explained.1 0 -0. u= ln(a/f) = A + BlogNf ln[(1 . the following equation is obtained: a = ~ ( 1 . A typical curve for a fatigue life of 106 cycles is shown in Figure 4.. Lessard workers 55"56 for more general cases. many authors restricted their failure criteria to a certain stress ratio..7 this procedure has been applied to Table 2 Stress ratios used by other authors I I I I References Sims and Brogdon 9 Stress ratios (K) 0. it was also shown 56 that the degree of curve-shape asymmetry was not very great. following steps must be performed. arbitrary stress ratio.313 0 0. u = v = A + BlogNf (11) where.818 0.18 0.. can be presented efficiently by using constant life (Goodman-type) diagrams 51. and c=o-dcr. where q=O-m/O't.2 0. therefore they assumed u and v are equal and are linear functions of fatigue life (N0. Recently. However. ~3 15 and Ellyin and E1-Kadi 16 Tennyson et a1.q)"(c + q)V (1 O) stress ratio (K = ITmin]O'max). this model is called the normalized fatigue life model.o-) + ~r By considering that for each combination of the state of stress and stress ratio there is a fatigue life for a unidirectional ply. In a paper by Gathercole et al. an empirical interaction curve may be derived55"56: Note that a. In the following.log(0. O" m : ((3" . assuming a certain stress ratio for the fatigue analysis of composite laminates is not always a realistic assumption.~2 Rotem et al. Here. an infinite number of experiments must be performed.3 Hahn Io Hashin ~~. Establishing and interpolation of constant life diagram data in traditional form is a tedious task. a = f(1 . they introduced a power law model [Equation (10)] that produces a bell-shaped curve. Equation (8) is changed to the following form: R(n. It is obvious that testing at more states of stress will result in more accuracy. The bell-shaped curve is the normalized fatigue life curve. Therefore. However.5 1 IN! .q)(c + q)]a+BlogNf (1 2) To predict the fatigue life.4 0..e. i. Shokrieh and L.O'min)/2 : alternating stress.. a=~r. A summary of different load ratios utilized by authors is presented in Table 2. which corresponds closer to the material behaviour under fatigue loading. In a paper by Adam et aL 52. which can reduce the number of needed experiments drastically.5 0. Introducing non-dimensional stresses by division of the mean stress (~rm) the alternating stress (~a). as previously discussed. .M. Therefore to simulate the residual strength of a unidirectional ply under a general uniaxial fatigue loading (arbitrary state of stress and stress ratio). a suitable relationship between the fatigue life (Nf). By substituting Equation (11) into Equation (10). it seems that to characterize the residual strength of a unidirectional ply under arbitrary state of stress and stress ratio. For the general case.1 for experiments 0.1 0. f..

$ 0 (.08 (GPa). 6 ~ 1. and the normalized fatigue life model.56). By using this generalized model.2 2 ='~ uJ= 1 . the definitions of tensile strength and compression strength are meaningless. the constant life diagram for different number of cycles to failure is predicted. Clearly. a simple case is studied here.5 Normalized alternating s t r e s s (a) 1£=7 Nf=10^6 Nf=10^5 Nf=10^4 Nf=10^3 0.06 (suggested by Gathercole et al. a model is established which is called the gen- 2.45 0. In(a/J) u = log]o(ln[( 1 _ q)(1 + q)] = A + BlogNf (14) In the following section. however. For a unidirectional ply under shear.= eralized residual material property degradation model. and trc=l. in the denominators of failure criteria instead of the static strength of the material. Also after applying fatigue load. original fatigue data is presented.3 =. In Figure 7.5 Normalized Figure 7 Predicted constant life diagram numerical data from the paper by Adam et al. The left-hand-side of Equation (14) is denoted by 'u' for brevity. from which A and B are found. They used the fatigue strength.I X 1. by coupling the normalized residual strength model. stresses redistribute during the fatigue loading.2 0. therefore the stress ratio and the state of stress are not constant at each point.e. Therefore Equation (13) is changed to the following form for the simulation of fatigue life of the unidirectional ply under shear loading conditions. presented in the previous section. at different stress ratios. and Equation (13).4 I I L I 2.3 o X 0. based on the data from Figure 5.4 0. In Figure 5. as a function of number of cycles.7 0. For example the analysis of a pin/bolt fatigue loaded composite laminate. For the simulation of the fatigue life of the unidirectional ply under shear fatigue loading conditions. However.0 A AA ! 0. the method explained by Equations (10)-(13) must be modified.Multiaxial fatigue behaviour of unidirectional plies--I CFRP 205 Modification of the model for shear °0 A 1. 52. Then. . setting f = 1. This strategy is potentially beneficial.6 i i i [] 1<=-.5 stress 1 (q) . i. using a constant stress ratio leads to incorrect results. To explain the fundamentals of the model. In practice.=1. Also the experimental results for unidirectional plies under in-plane shear loading conditions. This restriction has been applied to overcome the difficulties arising from the large number of experiments required.S 0 I 0 I 1 I 2 I 3 Log Nf I II I 5 I 6 7 Figure5 S-logN.5 0 mean 0. 8 . curve. in the form of Equation (9).2 2 3 4 5 6 7 Log Nf Figure 6 u vs logNr curve MULTIAX1AL FATIGUE BEHAVIOUR OF UNIDIRECTIONAL PLIES Many investigatiors 9-21 have used polynomial failure criteria to predict the life of a composite laminate under fatigue loading. in practice their models are restricted to a specific stress ratio. (52) (GPa).1 0 -0. fatigue behaviour of unidirectional plies under arbitrary stress ratios is studied. this severe restriction can be eliminated. ~. This model will use the results of the curve-fitted data from the uniaxial fatigue tests in a multi-axial model without introducing new constants. the parameter 'c' in Equation (13) is equal to one ( c = 1) for shear fatigue conditions.. to characterize the material. I I I I ~== 1 . By considering this. by coupling the normalized residual strength and the normalized fatigue life models. the u=ln(a/J)/ln[(1-q)(c+q)] vs logNf curve is extracted (Figure 6). failure initiates near the stress concentrations and the material property degrades. into a model called the generalized residual material property degradation model. Therefore the word strength is used instead.. Consider a unidirectional ply under a biaxial state of fatigue stress in the matrix © 0. based on all previous information.4 1.91 Ref. Nevertheless this assumption is too restrictive for the general case. there is no difference between positive and negative shear. presented in part two of this paper 58. for this problem there are different states of stress at different points in the material. show that a better curve fitting is achieved by adding a 'log~o' to the left hand side of Equation (13).

like Equations (15) or (19) can not be used directly to find the fatigue life. and cq2. /322 = experimental parameters measured from transverse tensile fatigue tests. To predict the matrix failure mode of the unidirectional ply under two-dimensional plane stress fatigue loading conditions.0-. stress ratios. at different points are not constant.B.l ~ 2 ~ _ _ I (log .25) ~t%]~ ] 1- 0"22 + By applying a similar procedure to that which ended with Equation (18). For instance in three-dimensional cases the suitable failure criterion for fiber breakage can have the following form (adapted from Hashin11): (R 0-11 ) 2 ( O-12 O.2(R12(0)- O'12)n O.K) = in-plane shear fatigue strength By using Equation (9). For a multiaxial case suitable equations can be derived by a similar procedure. " ] .0-22) + 0-22 and (16) 1 R12(n.K)/ + \R12(n. the internal stresses and stress ratio.M.o'.\log(Nf22) _ 10g(0. the associated fatigue strength for each state of stress (0-22 and 0-.0-. 0-22/2(0-12t R22(~. and normalized fatigue life [Equation (10)-(14)]. the application of polynomial failure criteria in fatigue analysis is limited to certain cases. the idea of progressive damage modeling must be modified to fatigue progressive damage modeling. under multiaxial states of stress and general stress ratio.10g(0. and the severe restriction of application of polynomial failure criteria to certain state of stresses and stress ratios is avoided. Therefore a failure criterion.1 -.(n-.log(0.0-.25) ~. due to stress concentrations.) q 1 ~ ) (17) (RI2(0) . the severe restriction of application of fatigue failure criteria [like Equation (15)] to a special stress ratio is avoided. 0-22 { log(n).21a35. analysis of the behaviour .2) are in the following form: R22(n.K) J "Jr-\R12(n.K ) = transverse tensile fatigue strength of unidirectional composite laminates under multiaxial fatigue loading is possible.~. a new model is established which is called the generalized residual material property degradation model..1og(0. and applying a nonlinear iterative technique (e.0-.K ) = ( l o g ( n ) . Clearly. helps to simulate the fatigue behaviour of a composite laminate under complicated states of stress. In a complex fatigue-loaded structure.e. In other words. the number of cycles to failure for each uniaxial state of stress (Nf22 and Nf12) are extracted from the curves derived by Equations (13) and (14). each point is under a redistributing state of stress and varying stress ratio. which has been published elsewhere 57. By substituting Equations (16) and (17) into Equation (15). static numerical properties.0-. By using this model the number of experiments to characterize the material properties of a composite lamina can be minimized.K) ~ = 1 where Rz2(n. by doing a limited number of simple unidirectional experiments.K ) = out of plane shear fatigue strength. A biaxially loaded fatigue test can be modelled and predicted based on data taken from only uniaxial fatigue characterization tests. a=. Newton-Raphson technique).K)/ (19) 12( (15) where R13(n. and by using Equations (10)(14).25) / ~22]a22 1 .12)) = 1 t2 (18) By having the state of stress. respectively.o'. This type of expression has been used previously by Sims and Brogdon 9 and Rotem et aL 13-15 among others. R12(n.K) ---.13 )2 =1 . Hashintype polynomial failure criterion 11 can be used. The established model is one of the important components of fatigue progressive damage modelling that is capable of fatigue analysis of complicated problems. the following equation is derived. a relevant equation for this case can be derived.g. and a cycle by cycle study of the material property degradation and redistribution of the state of stresses and stress ratios is needed. CONCLUSIONS Due to expensive and time consuming experiments needed to characterize the material properties of a composite lamina in a wide range of the state of stress and stress ratios. although the external fatigue load ratio (Fmin/Fmax) may be constant. The capability of the generalized residual material property degradation model to simulate the residual strength of a unidirectional ply under an arbitrary uniaxial state of stress and stress ratio can be used in the analysis of a complicated problem. For the purpose of simulating the behaviour of the composite laminate under a complicated fatigue load. Equation (18) is an example of a very simple case of biaxial fatigue loading in plane stress.25)} ] (R22(0) .0-12) + o'12 where each uniaxial direction has a different set of constants c~ and /3. non-linearities and failure. Then by having all necessary information. i. Lessard (0"22) and shear (0-12) directions. By coupling the normalized residual strength and the normalized fatigue life models. 0"12 - ( log(n). the number of cycles to failure for a multiaxial case can be found by applying a numerical iterative technique as was proposed for the plane stress case. Shokrieh and L. the number of cycles to failure for the multiaxial case (n = N~f) is found.0-. by coupling these two techniques. /312 = experimental parameters measured from shear fatigue tests. log 02 . (normalized residual strength model [Equation (9)]. Understanding the behaviour of a unidirectional ply.206 M. It should be noted that the denominators of the following equation are not constants but functions of number of cycles. Consequently. state of stress and stress ratio.K)/ + \RI3(n. Then by substituting all the previous information into Equation (18).

Reifsnider and K. H. 152-173 Ellyin.C. June. D. G.. Testing and Design (Second Conference)'. pp.E. 511-526. part c: Mechanical Engineering Science'. R. Mech. A. 'Analysis of the Test Methods for High Modules Fibers and Composites'. P. Fernando. and Reiter. P. 'Fatigue of Fibrous Composite Materials'. 25.T.F.N. pp.J.F. P. Mabson. K. T. T.C. Dickson. ECCM 5th. A. and Lessard. Philadelphia. France. Technol. and Jones. Y. 2t 3-232 Yang. 8. Ottawa.. 272-295 Yang. T. Fracture Mechanics'. L. and Sahu. 523-532 Shokrieh. N.W. pp. ASTM STP 521. and Wharram. "CANCOM Second International Composites Conference and Exhibition'. Ottawa. Transact. 1977. 1984.W. Wu. and Johnson. Found. Philadelphia. J . 'Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. 25. 12. 232-242 Gathercole. Vol. 'Fatigue of Fibruous Composite Materials'. Wharram.. (Ed. 21.. H. Philadelphia. American Society for Testing and Materials. R. ASTM STP 674 (Ed. Composite Mater.N. 25. 19.J. Elzey. Amsterdam. Philadelphia. Fatigue 1994. S. R..L.L. 'Composite Materials. 19-39 Yang. T. D. 1990. D. 23-26 Gathercole. Philadelphia. Reiter. Mechanics of Composite Materials. Adam. 3-10 Makinde. and Harris. ASTM STP 723. 1981. M. pp. 1976.. 1982.S. Philadelphia. A.M. 12. and Neale.M. 133-151 Sendeckyj. Heppler. J. DND Composite Workshop'. American Society for Testing and Materials. Composite Mater. J. 1979. pp. 1986.. Miller. pp. and Matthews. Composite Mater.H. IMechE Conference Publications (Institute of Mechanical Engineers). 'Test Methods and Design Allowable for Fibrous Composites'. D. 739-749 Reifsnider. Dickson. 'Multiaxial Fatigue'. and Harris. J.M.L.. J. and Du. 'IUTAM Symposium on Mechanics of Composite Materials. 1982. M.M. Reifsnider). 846-852. 631~538 Rotem. ASTM STP 734 (Ed. Jerina. 2. and Daniel. T. Am. J. Z. T. Ayar. and E1-Kadi. H. S. 1989. July 1983. J. 176-202. Composite Structures. Ontario. T. Composite Mater. Elsevier. Dickson. 1992. and Croman. K. and Loewy. H. Int. Composite Mater. ASTM STP 775 (Ed. pp. Jones. J. N.W. F. pp. pp. 'Second International Composites Conference and Exhibition'. and Nelson. pp. 1981.W. ASTM STP 853 (Eds K. 395406 Sims. 131-13-35. G. 61-74 Tennyson. 1977. Haplin. and Croman. and Stinchcomb. 421-435 Rotem. 'Fatigue of Filamentary Materials'. pp.. B. ASTM. Appl. 1981. 14-1-14-17 Tennyson. 205223 Daniel. Philadelphia. and Hams. R. 14 (4). I. D. Philadelphia. Sims. 1978.Multiaxial fatigue behaviour of unidirectional plies--I ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The support of the Structures and Materials Laboratory of the National Research Council of Canada through a grant (31946-1-0008/01) is gratefully acknowledged. B.. W. Fracture. E. 5-64 Broutman. H. Philadelphia. Technol. K. American Society for Testing and Materials.T. American Society for Testing and Materials. Harris. Johnson. Residual Strength and Fatigue Life Relationships for Composite Laminates'. Philadelphia.. Philadelphia. 'Composite Materials: Testing and Design (Fifth Conference)'. J. B. Reiter.N. ASTM STP 907 (Ed. 1981.L. 9.S. pp.C. 1973. AIAAJ. Canada. 'A Study of Stiffness. 44. 170188 Hahn. 381-395 Chen. Engng Mater. J. Adv. H. 1981.F.T. 1983 Haplin. 18. Hahn).T.M. 1993. 14. 1979. 177-194 Chou.K.. 355 1983. American Society for Testing and Materials. REFERENCES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Garud. C. Int. 298-313 Reifsnider.L. 1957.. R. 819-827 Whitworth.J. 1993. J. Vol 200 n C3. American Society for Testing and Materials.J. H.N. pp. 1986. J.L.L. American Society for Testing and Materials. S. 17. 101-109 Rotem. 93-99. 'The Fatigue Behaviour of Kevlar/Carbon Hybrid Composites'. 1985. 48. and Lessard. B.N. Dickson.N. M. 1972. D. 1. ASTM STP 723. 793-808 Charewicz.L. H. 21-31 Yang. Int. 1988. K. pp. Adam.C. July.B. Chamis) American Society for Testing and Materials. Composites Lett. and Beaumont. 1986. and Liu. Hashin and C. 1980..J.L. C. K. Composite Mater. J. 1986.. M.B.. 'Fatigue of Fibrous Composite Materials'. 'Composite Materials: Testing and Design (Tenth Volume)'. J.. 111. Reifsnider). ASTM STP 674 (Ed.F. K. 14. 13-25 Krempl.N. European Conference on Composite Materials'. R. Composite Mater. 'Proc. J. and Sun. Testing Evaluation 1981.S. 1989. M.J. Lauraitis). 1977.L. H. 209-217 .. H. ASTM STP 1120 (Ed. J.W. B. V. K. G.N.. J.J. Fawz.H.W. pp. 89-94 Adam. R. H. Yang. 371-289 Yang. G. 2-13 Spearing. and Nelson. D. K. G. 1978. 'Fatigue of Composite Materials' (Ed. ASTM STP 723.M.J. 329-335 Adam. and Hashin. F. B. Hahn) American Society for Testing and Materials.W. D. Z. Brown) American Society for Testing and Materials. and Neale. Bordeaux.J. Philadelphia.E. and Rice.R. 11. H. G. Reifsnider. American Society for Testing and Materials. G. 465-468.. ASTM STP 497. 11. pp. C.F..C. 9(3). K. R.. Int. Femando. Helicopter Soc.A..L. R. Composites 1981. 1982. Herakovich) Blacksburg. Hams. 'Computation of Influence of Defects on Static and Fatigue Strength of Composites'. 1986. A. Philadelphia. Composites 1990. J. 488-501 Owen. pp. Reiter.J.H.W. Crimes) American Society for Testing and Materials. J. T. 1986. J. 9-12 June. Composites Sci.N. American Society for Testing and Materials.. Modern Plastics.C. 'Composite Materials: Fatigue and Fracture'. L. and Fernando. and Waddups.N. 11-77 Reifsnider. J.M. 24. 155-166 Fong. 1986. and Kim. Z. Composites 1993. F. S. American Society for Testing and Materials. Recent Advances'. 1991 pp.C. 185-205 Hahn. 'Developments in the Science and Technology of Composite Materials.. Gathercole. Philadelphia. P. Miller and M.. Composite Mater.F. G. 'Int. and Reiter. 'Fatigue of Fibrous Composite Materials'. 233-237 Harris.M. pp. R.ASTM STP 907. and Crossman. AGARD-CP355. Tsai). 'Composite Materials: Testing and Design (Fourth Conference)'. R. 17 (2). Walrath.C.. 299-307 Adam. and Street. pp. Tratt. Adam. J. K. 245-260 Radhakrishnan. pp. 1972. 1982. 297312 Chou. Victoria.A. H. 21.J. 1975. 'Damage in Composite Materials'. 163-293 Adam. Fatigue.J. K. A. Hansen. Composite Mater. 871-877 Shokrieh. VA. 82-94 Yang.L. 263-269. Philadelphia. C. 165-178 Francis. 1980. ASTM STP 636 (eds K. K. H. T. M. Philadelphia. G. Canada.. 1978. 1981.R. Fatigue 1997. 168-176 Yang. pp. 'Composite Materials: Testing and Design (Fifth Conference)'. ASTM STP 617. 1981.Y. 1987. Mabson. Tsai). D . Ontario.. T.T. 383417 Hashin.C. 243-266 Boller. pp. Hashin. and Sun. American Society for Testing and Materials. B. Z. pp. 14.N. 152-173 Ryder. Composite Mater.S.G. 15. G. 12.P. Jan..J.J. pp. NASA Contract Report CR-172211. S. and Brogdon. A. and Charewicz. 1983. 431-454 28 207 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 8 9 38 39 10 40 41 42 11 12 13 14 43 44 15 16 17 45 46 47 48 18 19 20 49 21 50 22 23 51 52 53 54 24 55 56 57 25 26 27 58 Whitney. B. I. 11.T. H. 1992. L. 'Composite Materials: Fatigue and Fracture'.T. R. 1977.W. Engng Fracture Mech. J. Composite Mater.G. 16. 274297 Rotem. C. M .T...J. and Hams. J. B..Z. A. (Eds Z.G. Hong. A. CSME 1990. Reiter. Engng Fracture Mech. Reiter. and Weed. N. Engng Fracture Mech. and Jones. ASTM STP 723. 868-872 Rotem A.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->