10 views

Uploaded by MoȠit Shuklä

wrk

- Introducción a la Simulation con Inventor
- Second Order Nonlinear Inelastic Analysis of Composite
- Section A - cable railing
- filament wound fiber-reinforced sandwich pipe
- FEM_TUDO
- Computer Aided Structural Design - Claudio Gianini
- tube Reinforced Composite ( CNTRC ) Cylinder Under Non-Ax
- Polyimide-Enhanced Stretchable Interconnects- Design, Fabrication, and Characterization.pdf
- KENLAYER
- Energy Methods
- 6th;8th;Mechanics of Composite Materials;Smojver
- Biot - (1941)
- TriAxial Procedure
- Finite Element Analysis of Excavation, Brown&Booker c&g, 85
- PO_24
- hw06
- Use of Strain Gauge Rosette to Investigate Stress concentration in Isotropic and Orthotropic Plate with Circular Hole
- 1-s2.0-S135943111400252X-main
- ESFUERZO-DE-COMPRESION-8A traducido.docx
- Viscous Flow Eqn

You are on page 1of 87

composites

Thiam Wai Chua

MT 10.19

Master of Science graduation project report

January, 2011

Supervisors:

dr.ir. Varvara Kouznetsova

dr.ir. Wouter Wilson

prof.dr.ir. Marc Geers

Mechanics of Materials

Computational and Experimental Mechanics

Department of Mechanical Engineering

Technische Universiteit Eindhoven

Abstract

In this project, a coupled multi–scale framework is developed for analysis of ﬁber–

reinforced composites. The developed framework is a versatile tool to study the mechan-

ical behavior at the macroscopic level and simultaneously the impact of the mechanical

behavior from the microscopic level to macroscopic level. In the framework, the macro-

scopic material constitutive behavior at each integration point is obtained through the

underlying microscopic composite structure. Abaqus subroutines are used to link the

microscopic level to the macroscopic level structural analyses and vice versa. The fo-

cus of this project is to document and present the development and added value of the

framework to the analysis of the textile composites. Thus, the quantitative comparison

between the analysis results and experimental data has not been attempted. However,

the qualitative comparison has been made successfully to verify the correctness of the

framework functionality. Multi–scale analyses on the tensile test of a cross–ply laminate

and compression test on a notched quasi–isotropic laminate are performed in order to

illustrate and demonstrate the power and utility of the framework. This framework can

be seen as a powerful and useful tool for future engineering analysis and design of com-

posite structure due to its ﬂexibility to apply on many textile composites which hardly

to be achieved using other analytical approaches. Thus, engineers enable to utilize this

framework at the beginning stage of the composite structures design and development

for the savings of cost and time.

Keywords: coupled multi–scale analysis, composites, Abaqus.

i

Contents

Abstract i

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Composite aerospace landing gear structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.2 Textile composites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.3 Modeling approaches for textile composites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.4 Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

1.5 Scope and outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

2 Multi–scale modeling framework description 6

2.1 Basic hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2.2 Microscopic level boundary value problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.3 Macro–micro levels coupling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2.3.1 Deformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

2.3.2 Stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

2.3.3 Internal work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.4 Numerical implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.4.1 Micro–structure boundary value problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.4.2 Macroscopic stress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.4.3 Macroscopic tangent stiﬀness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

2.5 Modeling framework implementation using Abaqus . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2.6 Modeling framework veriﬁcation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3 Micro–structural modeling 19

3.1 Textile and non–crimp composite models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.2 Material properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

3.3 Finite element model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.4 Microscopic level analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3.4.1 Tension test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

3.4.1.1 Uniaxial tension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

3.4.1.2 Biaxial tension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

3.4.2 Compression test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

3.4.3 Shear test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4 Application of the multi–scale modeling framework 31

4.1 Tensile test on a cross–ply laminate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

4.2 Compression test on a notched quasi–isotropic laminate . . . . . . . . . . 36

ii

Contents iii

5 Conclusions and recommendations 47

5.1 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

5.2 Recommendations for future work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

5.2.1 Multi–scale modeling framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

5.2.2 Micro–structural modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

5.2.3 Application of the multi–scale modeling framework . . . . . . . . 50

Bibliography 51

Appendices 58

A Literature survey 59

B Macro–micro levels coupling 64

C Microscopic level boundary value problem 67

D Macroscopic stress calculation 70

E Condensation of the microscopic stiﬀness 74

F Consistent tangent stiﬀness for the Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor 75

G Total matrix of the reduced stiﬀness matrix 78

H Incremental–iterative multi–scale modeling approach 80

I Multi–scale analyses of unidirectional ﬁber reinforced composite 82

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Composite aerospace landing gear structures

Composite materials are very attractive to engineers because of their advantages com-

pared with many conventional engineering materials (e.g. steel, aluminum, metallic al-

loys, etc.), such as high strength–to–weight ratio, dimensional stability, superior corrosion

resistance and relatively high impact resistance [62]. Besides that, the multi–phase and

multi–layer composites can be tailored through diﬀerent ﬁber directions, lamina thick-

nesses and stacking sequences for speciﬁc design requirements.

In the near future, the aerospace landing gear or undercarriage (Figure 1.1(a)) compo-

nents currently made of conventional engineering materials such as steel will be replaced

by the composite materials due to aforementioned advantages. Figure 1.1(b) shows a

trailing arm from a landing gear structure (at macro–level) made of textile composite

material (at micro–level). The macroscopic trailing arm structure can be assumed as ho-

mogeneous anisotropic composite materials, however, at micro–level, the structure has to

be treated as heterogeneous anisotropic due to the distinguishable constituents of ﬁbers

and resin.

(a)

macro–scale

micro–scale

(b)

Figure 1.1: (a) A landing gear (or undercarriage) layout for an aircraft, and (b) a homogeneous

anisotropic composite trailing arm structure after assembly of the steel wheel axle

and the wheel at the macro–level [76] with its heterogeneous anisotropic plain

weave pattern composite at the micro–level [4].

1

2 Chapter 1

1.2 Textile composites

Textile composites (also know as fabric composites) are a relatively new class of advanced

composites [89]. They oﬀer advantages and opportunities for designing and tailoring

the textile structures for aerospace structures in order to meet the strict design and

functional requirements. For instance, they provide an excellent impact resistance due

to the bidirectional ﬁber conﬁguration compared with the conventional unidirectional

ﬁber conﬁguration in a lamina [83]. In addition, the production of geometrically complex

textile composites becomes relatively eﬃcient and cost–eﬀective due to the signiﬁcant

development of the weaving manufacturing technology based on the loom technique [89].

Kamiya et al. [32] reviewed some of the recent advanced techniques in the fabrication and

the design of textile preforms. Some of the applications of the advanced textile composites

in aircraft, marine, automobiles, civil infrastructures as well as medical prosthesis were

reviewed by Mouritz et al. [53].

An enormous number of weave topologies for the textile composites. They can be

obtained by changing the interlacing style, repetitive pattern and the proportion of yarns

(also know as tows, consisting of ﬁbers bundle aligned in warp and weft (or ﬁll) directions)

embedded within matrix. Two of the textile composite types are shown in Figure 1.2.

In order to reduce the relatively expensive experimental time and costs on these newly

developed composites, the development of analytical and numerical models for predicting

the mechanical performance of these composites is indispensable.

x (warp)

y

z (weft)

(a)

x (warp)

y

z (weft)

(b)

Figure 1.2: Schematics of the common weaves used in the aerospace landing gear structures.

(a) Plain weave and (b) twill weave (The yarns, indicated in green color, are embedded

in the rectangular-cuboid-shape matrix; generated by TexGen [75]).

1.3 Modeling approaches for textile composites

Various analytical and numerical models has been developed for predicting overall prop-

erties of the plain weave textile composites in the past two decades. The simplest method

to determine the overall properties for a textile composite is based on rule of mixture and

classical laminate theory (CLT). King et al. [36] modeled the woven fabrics in macroscopic

continuum constitutive model to determine the macroscopic stresses based on both rela-

tively simple modeling approaches. A macroscopic landing gear structure ﬁnite element

(FE) model, documented in National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR) report written by

Thuis [76], the composite layered shell element type was used in the model for simpliﬁca-

tion. The applicability of these conventional analytical methods to a macroscopic textile

composite structure becomes questionable due to the complexity of yarn geometry in

Introduction 3

three–dimensional (3D) space at microscopic level and unable to describe the mechanical

behavior of a composite microscopically.

A relatively sophisticated one–dimensional (1D) mosaic model developed by Ishikawa

and Chou [27] for the plain weave textile composite. The major drawback of this model

is that the yarns continuity is not taken into account. To improve on this, Ishikawa

and Chou [29] proposed the crimp model as an extension of their mosaic model. This

model has taken into account the continuity and the undulation of yarns, however, only

along the loading direction were considered. The transverse yarn undulation and the

actual cross–sectional geometry should also be taken into account because they are the

important factors of the homogenized properties of textile composite.

Next, two two–dimensional (2D) slice array model (SAM) and element array model

(EAM) models proposed by Naik and Ganesh [54], for the plain weave textile composites.

In these models, the continuity and the undulation of yarns in warp and weft directions

as well as the presence of the gap between adjacent yarns were considered. The diﬀerent

materials and geometrical properties of warp and weft yarns can be modeled.

In order to extend to the 3D analysis and to include the detailed geometrical descrip-

tions of the yarns, the method of cell partition has been developed by many researchers

( [31, 70, 71, 79]). Through this method, the representative cell is discritized into subcells,

where the eﬀective properties of each subcell are obtained.

The limitation of the aforementioned analytical methods were developed speciﬁcally

applied on one type of the textile composite. Thus, they do not oﬀer ﬂexibility to be

applied on other textile composite types, i.e. the analytical methods need to be re–

modeled for each textile composite. Due to this consequence, a relatively ﬂexible analysis

approach is needed to analyze on any textile composite without the necessity of re–

modeling on the analysis approach.

In recent years, due to the advancement of structural and material modeling tech-

nology, a relatively accurate geometrical textile composites models have been developed

through computer–aided engineering (CAE) and textile geometric modeling software,

such as WiseTex [82], TechText CAD [24] and TexGen [63]. As a result, the analytical

textile model can be circumvented. Enormous number of research papers are available

regarding the geometric modeling using this approach and numerical analysis thereof

( [3, 34, 40, 59, 64, 65, 84, 87, 88, 93]).

By taking the advantage of FE method and the advancement of CAE and textile

geometric modeling software, an analysis approach for performing the analysis which link

the macroscopic and microscopic structures can be developed. The FE analysis approach

is known as global/local method, it was developed by Whitcomb [85]. This approach has

been further implemented by Srirengan et al. [66] and Xu et al. [90] for the 3D stress anal-

ysis of the textile composite structures and further improved by Whitcomb et al. [86], who

used homogenized engineering material properties to accelerate the global stress analysis

for the textile composites. Generally, a global FE analysis was performed on a global

region with the global coarse ﬁnite elements, followed by a detailed local FE analysis

performed in a local region with the independent 3D local ﬁne ﬁnite elements. However,

the main drawback of this approach is that the local level mechanical mechanisms can

only be studied on the region of interest (ROI) on global level.

To address this problem, multi–scale computational homogenization for heterogenous

materials is proposed by Kouznetsova et al. [38,39], Miehe et al. [50], Miehe [48], Moulinec

and Suquet [52], Miehe and Koch [49], Michel et al. [46], Feyel and Chaboche [13], Ter-

ada et al. [74]. This approach can be used to study the microscopic mechanical phe-

4 Chapter 1

nomenon within a macroscopic structure collectively and it provides a promising multi–

scale solution to many engineering materials with heterogeneous microscopic structures,

such as metal alloy systems, porous media, polycrystalline materials [16, 37]. Hence, it

is reasonable to expect that the multi–scale computational homogenization approach has

the capability to solve the relatively complex textile composites problems by bridging the

macroscopic and microscopic scales.

The multi–scale computational homogenization method as well as the global/local

method in the textile composites analysis have their own pros and cons. The selection

between both methods should be based on the descriptions of a speciﬁc engineering prob-

lem. The global/local method is essentially a FE analysis through the mesh reﬁnement

technique on a region of interest (ROI), e.g. crack tips or speciﬁc regions with high stresses

or strains. Whereas, the multi–scale computational homogenization approach is used op-

timally for predicting the macroscopic structure mechanical response with the underlying

microscopic structure phenomenon collectively, i.e. the micro–structural phenomenon at

each macroscopic region can be studied in detail. The comprehensive literature survey of

various modeling approaches for textile composites can be found in Appendix A.

1.4 Motivation

A numerical analysis framework for predicting the mechanical and physical responses of

composite landing gear materials macroscopically and microscopically is indispensable

for improving the structural design and integrity.

Therefore, based on the literature survey on various textile composite analysis ap-

proaches as discussed in Section 1.3, the multi–scale computational homogenization ap-

proach is utilized in this project, because the micro–structural phenomenon in various

macroscopic regions can be studied simultaneously for predicting the failure modes at the

microscopic level.

Besides that, another advantage of this approach is its ﬂexibility for adaptation. For

instance, the overall elastic properties for variation of geometrical parameters (volume

fraction, shape, orientations, etc.) of the constituents can be easily performed without

the necessity of re–implementing the analysis framework.

Furthermore, this framework has an additional advantage that the material properties

are deﬁned on the constituent scale, thereby the macroscopic constitutive equation is

unnecessary. Thus, the framework can be incorporated into the design and analysis

process at early stage.

1.5 Scope and outline

The aim of this project is to investigate the applicability of the coupled macro–micro

computational homogenization approach to the analysis of textile composite structures.

Hence, the approach is implemented within the FE framework and its power, utility and

limitation are demonstrated.

In chapter 2, the multi–scale computational homogenization approach is introduced

in brief. The concise descriptions of the microscopic boundary value problem and micro–

macro coupling framework are given. Then, the implementation of the computational

homogenization within FE framework is brieﬂy discussed. The quantitative compari-

son between numerical results with the analytical solutions and experimental data for

Introduction 5

unidirectional ﬁber–reinforced composite is performed to verify the correctness of the

framework.

Next, in chapter 3, the geometric modeling and material properties for the textile and

non–crimp composite representative volume elements (RVE) are presented. The textile

and non–crimp RVEs are modeled for the comparison purposes. Then, the analyses on

the RVEs are performed to exemplify the utility of the computational homogenization

approach at the microscopic level.

In order to illustrate the power and utility of the framework on textile composite,

chapter 4 presents the application of the framework on two types of macroscopic structures

coupled with textile RVEs. Firstly, the multi–scale framework is used to analyze the

macroscopic laminate [45

o

/−45

o

/45

o

/−45

o

]

S

with two diﬀerent material and geometrical

properties within RVEs to illustrates the ﬂexibility of the framework. Secondly, the

analysis on notched quasi–isotropic laminate [45

◦

/0

◦

/ − 45

◦

/90

◦

]

S

to demonstrate the

capabilities of the framework to analyze a relatively complex macroscopic structure.

Finally, in chapter 5, the limitation of the framework is discussed. Thus, several

solutions are recommended in order to reduce the computational time and cost of the

framework. Then, the future development of the framework for the beneﬁts of engineers

will be discussed.

Chapter 2

Multi–scale modeling framework

description

In the context of solving macroscopic composite structure problems, computational ho-

mogenization is used to obtain the overall macroscopic constitutive response from the un-

derlying microscopic heterogenous representative volume element (RVE). The advantage

of this approach is that the macroscopic constitutive description can be circumvented,

where the constitutive behavior at macroscopic level is determined through the micro-

scopic constitutive behavior. In this chapter, the crucial components of the multi–scale

computational homogenization scheme and its FE implementation within Abaqus are

treated in brief.

2.1 Basic hypotheses

A composite material is assumed to be macroscopically suﬃciently homogeneous but

microscopically inhomogeneous (consist of matrix and bundles of ﬁbers), as schematically

shown in Figure 2.1. Based on the principle of scale separation, the characteristic wave

length of RVE,

m

should be considerably smaller than the wave length of the macroscopic

loading or the characteristic size of the macroscopic structure counterpart,

M

, as follows

m

M

, (2.1)

where the subscript “M” and “m” refer to macroscopic and microscopic quantities, re-

spectively. Due to the morphology of composite materials in a landing gear structure, the

global periodicity can be assumed, where the ﬁbers bundle (yarns) pattern is repeated in

every macroscopic point, as shown in Figure 2.2

1

.

In the computational homogenization scheme [38], the macroscopic deformation gra-

dient tensor, F

M

is calculated at every macroscopic point, i.e. integration points of a

ﬁnite element (FE) meshed macrostructure. The F

M

of a particular macroscopic point

is imposed upon RVE (which is assigned to that macroscopic point) to prescribe its total

deformation. Upon the solution of the RVE boundary value problem, the macroscopic

stress tensor (e.g. macroscopic Cauchy stress tensor, σ

M

) is obtained through the micro-

scopic stress tensor (e.g. microscopic Cauchy stress tensor, σ

m

) using the RVE volume

1

Note that the selected periodic plain weave textile composite as shown in Figure 2.2 is only for

illustration and schematic purposes. Several possibilities of the periodic RVE for plain weave textile

composite exist.

6

Multi–scale modeling framework description 7

M

Figure 2.1: Continuum macrostructure of a drag brace component and heterogeneous RVE of

a composite at a macroscopic point, M.

weft yarn

warp yarn matrix (resin)

Figure 2.2: Schematic representative of a global periodic plain weave textile composite

macrostructure in two dimensional view.

averaging technique. Additionally, the local macroscopic consistent tangent (e.g. consis-

tent tangent deﬁned from Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor,

4

C

τ

M

) can be derived from the RVE

total stiﬀness. The explained computational homogenization framework is schematically

illustrated in Figure 2.3.

boundary value problem

MICRO

MACRO

F

M

σ

M

4

C

τ

M

Figure 2.3: Computational homogenization scheme.

2.2 Microscopic level boundary value problem

A RVE contains the geometrical and material properties of a composite micro–structure.

Figure 2.4 shows the corner nodes numbering of a RVE in three dimensional (3D) view

8 Chapter 2

and the Cartesian coordinate system with the position vector of node 1, x

1

from the

origin. The two dimensional (2D) views of a plain weave textile composite RVE from

yz-plane and xz-plane are depicted in Figure 2.5.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7 8

x

y

z

x

1

Figure 2.4: Schematic picture of the corner nodes numbering for a RVE in 3D view.

+

+

−

−

4 1

5 8

Γ

top

Γ

bottom

Γ

front

Γ

back

n

−

n

+

(a) yz-plane view

+

+

−

−

1 2

5 6

Γ

top

Γ

bottom

Γ

left

Γ

right

n

−

n

+

(b) xz-plane view

Figure 2.5: The schematic picture of a plain weave textile composite RVE in (a) yz-plane view

and (b) xz-plane view.

In the RVE deformation ﬁeld, a point with the initial position vector, x

0

in the initial

conﬁguration, V

0

and the current position vector, x in the current conﬁguration, V can

be described by microscopic deformation gradient tensor, F

m

=

_

∇

0

m

x

_

T

, where the

gradient operator

2

,

∇

0

m

is taken with respect to the V

0

and the superscript “T” indicates

transposition.

In the state of equilibrium, the equilibrium equation (in absence of the body forces)

for the RVE in terms of the microscopic Cauchy stress tensor σ

m

can be formulated as

∇

m

· σ

m

=

0 in V, (2.2)

Within Abaqus FE package, the constitutive law of linear elastic material behavior

for yarn and resin is deﬁned as

σ = D

el

:

el

, (2.3)

where D

el

is the fourth–order elasticity tensor, and

el

is the logarithm of strain tensor

in ﬁnite–strain problems.

Based on the assumption of global periodicity of a composite structure (Figure 2.2),

the BCs of its RVE should reﬂect periodicity characteristic. Terada et al. [74] and van

2

The gradient operator in Cartesian coordinate system is deﬁned as

∇ = e

1

∂

∂x

1

+e

2

∂

∂x

2

+e

3

∂

∂x

3

Multi–scale modeling framework description 9

der Sluis et al. [77] veriﬁed that for a given microstructural cell size, the periodic BCs

provide the better estimation for the overall properties, than the prescribed displacement

and prescribed traction BCs. An arbitrary periodic deformation of a textile composite is

illustrated in Figure 2.6.

Figure 2.6: Typical periodic deformation of the RVEs for a textile composite.

The general form of the periodicity conditions for a RVE are written as

x

+

−x

−

= F

M

·

_

x

+

0

−x

−

0

_

, (2.4a)

p

+

= − p

−

, (2.4b)

to represent the periodic deformation (2.4a) and antiperiodic tractions (2.4b) on the

RVE surfaces. The x

+

and x

−

are the current position vectors, x

+

0

and x

−

0

are the

initial position vectors at the corresponding nodes on the right, Γ

right

and left, Γ

left

(top,

Γ

top

and bottom, Γ

bottom

; front, Γ

front

and back, Γ

back

) surfaces, respectively. The unit

normal, n

+

and n

−

(n

−

= −n

+

) are deﬁned at the corresponding nodes on the opposite

surfaces, Γ

+

0

and Γ

−

0

, respectively (see Figure 2.5). Next, based on explained n

+

and n

−

deﬁnition, p

+

and p

−

are the tractions deﬁned at the corresponding opposite nodes.

The periodicity condition (2.4a) is prescribed on an initial periodic RVE surfaces in order

to preserve its periodicity at deformed state.

2.3 Macro–micro levels coupling

The macro–micro coupling is based on averaging theorems. In this section, the macro–

micro coupling of the deformation tensor and stress tensor based on volume averaging

theorem are discussed brieﬂy. The importance of the energy averaging theorem, known

as Hill–Mandel condition or macrohomogeneity condition is discussed in brief as well.

2.3.1 Deformation

The volume averaging theorem regarding to the macro–micro coupling of the kinematic

quantities state that the F

M

is the volume average of the F

m

as follow

F

M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

F

m

dV

0

. (2.5)

where V

0

is the initial RVE volume.

10 Chapter 2

According to the divergence (Gauss) theorem

_

V

∇· a(x) dV =

_

Γ

n(x) · a(x) dΓ, (2.6)

where a(x) is a vector function on domain V and n(x) is the outward pointing unit normal

to the surface Γ of the domain V . The application of the divergence theorem (2.6) and

F

m

=

_

∇

0

m

x

_

T

lead to the transformation of (2.5) from volume integral into surface

integral

F

M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

F

m

dV

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

xn

0

dΓ

0

. (2.7)

The utilization of the periodic BCs on a RVE leads to the satisfaction of (2.7), as shown

in Appendix B.

2.3.2 Stress

The averaging theorem for the ﬁrst Piola–Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor, P is given as

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

P

m

dV

0

. (2.8)

Next, through applying the relation (with account for microscopic equilibrium equation)

of,

∇

0m

·

_

P

T

m

x

0

_

= P

m

, the divergence theorem (2.6), and the deﬁnition of the micro-

scopic ﬁrst Piola–Kirchhoﬀ stress vector, p = n

0

· P

T

m

. The P

M

can be deﬁned on the

RVE surface as follow

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

px

0

dΓ

0

. (2.9)

Similarly, the application of the averaging theorem on the σ

m

over current RVE vol-

ume, V and the transformation from volume integral to surface integral can be elaborated

as follow

σ

∗

M

=

1

V

_

Γ

tx dΓ. (2.10)

where

t is the deﬁnition of the Cauchy stress vector (

t = n · σ

m

).

In the case for kinematic quantities, the nonlinearity between stress measures should

be taken with cautiousness, i.e. not all macroscopic stress quantities obtained from the

volume averaging theorem is valid. Therefore, the σ

M

should be deﬁned as

σ

M

=

1

det (F

M

)

P

M

· F

T

M

. (2.11)

However, in the case of periodic BCs, it can be shown that σ

∗

M

and σ

M

are equivalent, as

shown in Appendix D. The complete derivation of (2.9), (2.10) are shown in Appendix B,

and the derivation of (2.11) can be found in [45].

Multi–scale modeling framework description 11

2.3.3 Internal work

The averaging theorem for the micro-macro energy transition, known as Hill–Mandel or

macrohomogeneity condition [25, 26, 68] has to be satisﬁed for the conservation of speciﬁc

energy through the scale transition. This condition states that the microscopic volume

average for the variation of work performed upon RVE is equal to the local variation of

work at macro–level.The condition is given as

1

V

0

_

V

0

P

m

: δF

T

m

dV

0

= P

M

: δF

T

M

, ∀δx, (2.12)

which is formulated in terms of the work conjugated pair of (P and F). The left–hand

side of (2.12) can be deﬁned in terms of RVE quantities as follow

δW

0M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

P

m

: δF

T

m

dV

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

p · δx dΓ

0

, (2.13)

where the divergence theorem (2.6), microscopic equilibrium (2.2), the deﬁnition of the

microscopic ﬁrst Piola–Kirchhoﬀ stress vector, p = n

0

· P

T

m

have been used.

Next, the surface integral of the macroscopic ﬁrst Piola–Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor (2.9),

the periodic BCs (2.4a) and antiperiodic tractions (2.4b) have been used to prove the

satisfaction of Hill–Mandel condition (2.12), as shown in Appendix B.

2.4 Numerical implementation

2.4.1 Micro–structure boundary value problem

The RVE boundary value problem imposed with the periodic BCs can be solved nu-

merically using FE method. It is assumed that the FE discritization is performed upon

RVE, such that the corresponding opposite surfaces of the RVE are discretized into an

equivalent distribution of nodes due to the initial periodicity characteristic of compos-

ite (Figure 2.2). Thus, in order to perserve the periodicity in the deformed state, the

respective pair of nodes on the corresponding opposite surfaces can be written as

x

top

= x

bottom

+x

5

−x

1

, (2.14a)

x

right

= x

left

+x

2

−x

1

, (2.14b)

x

front

= x

back

+x

1

−x

4

, (2.14c)

where x

p

is the current position vector of the four prescribed corner nodes (also known

as control nodes, master nodes [11] or control vertices [78]), p (p = 1, 2, 4, 5), as shown in

Figure 2.4. The x

right

and x

left

, x

front

and x

back

, x

top

and x

bottom

are the current position

vectors for the respective pair of nodes on the right and left, front and back, top and

bottom surfaces of the RVE, respectively. The applied constraint equations (2.14) implies

that the total deformation of the RVE can be imposed by the displacement of the four

corner nodes.

Besides prescribing the position vectors for every respective pair of nodes, they can

be formulated in terms of displacements, u, as

u

top

= u

bottom

+u

5

−u

1

, (2.15a)

u

right

= u

left

+ u

2

−u

1

, (2.15b)

u

front

= u

back

+ u

1

−u

4

. (2.15c)

12 Chapter 2

The relation of u

p

with x

0

p

can be expressed as

u

p

= (F

M

−I ) · x

0

p

, p = 1, 2, 4, 5, (2.16)

where I is the identity tensor. Further details can be found in Appendix C.

2.4.2 Macroscopic stress

Next, The RVE volume averaged stress has to be extracted after analyzing the RVE. Of

course, the P

M

can be computed numerically through the volume integral (2.8). However,

it is computationally ineﬃcient because the RVE volume for a textile composite can be

typically several orders of magnitude larger than the unidirectional (UD) RVE volume,

i.e. the number of ﬁnite elements for the textile RVE can be considerably higher than

unidirectional RVE [33]. Therefore, it is computationally more eﬃcient to compute the

P

M

through the surface integral [37], from (2.9), the P

M

can be further simpliﬁed for

the case of the periodic BCs as

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

f

e

1

x

0

1

+

f

e

2

x

0

2

+

f

e

4

x

0

4

+

f

e

5

x

0

5

_

=

1

V

0

p=1,2,4,5

f

e

p

x

0

p

, (2.17)

where

f

e

p

is the reaction (resulting) external forces acted on four corner nodes, p (p =

1, 2, 4, 5), the derivation of (2.17) is shown in Appendix D. The (2.17) shows that only

the external forces at the four corner nodes (p = 1, 2, 4, 5) contribute to P

M

. As stated in

section 2.2, the stress measures for Abaqus is deﬁned in Cauchy stress tensor, therefore,

the computed P

M

(2.17) has to be transformed into σ

M

according to (2.11). In addition,

following the derivation steps for P

M

(as shown in Appendix D), the σ

M

can be computed

for the case of periodic BCs as

σ

M

=

1

V

_

f

e

1

x

1

+

f

e

2

x

2

+

f

e

4

x

4

+

f

e

5

x

5

_

=

1

V

p=1,2,4,5

f

e

p

x

p

, (2.18)

where V is the current RVE volume.

2.4.3 Macroscopic tangent stiﬀness

For the non–linear FE analysis framework, beside macroscopic stress, the stiﬀness matrix

at every macroscopic integration point is required. The stiﬀness matrix is determined

numerically from the relation between variation of the macroscopic stress and variation

of the macroscopic deformation at every macroscopic integration point. The method of

condense the microscopic stiﬀness to the local macroscopic stiﬀness [37, 38, 49] is dicussed

in Appendix E.

Within Abaqus FE scheme, the consistent tangent stiﬀness is deﬁned as

δτ

M

=

4

C

τ

M

: D

δM

, (2.19)

which related to the macroscopic Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor, τ

M

= det(F

M

)σ

M

and variation

in virtual rate of deformation, D

δM

=

1

2

_

L

δM

+L

T

δM

_

, where L

δM

is the symmetric rate

of deformation tensor. Then, the departure point of obtaining the

4

C

τ

M

is by varying the

Multi–scale modeling framework description 13

deﬁnition of the macroscopic Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor, τ

M

= det (F

M

) σ

M

= P

M

· F

T

M

from

(2.11), as shown in Appendix F. Next, the (2.19) is written as

δτ

M

=

_

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

(j)

_

LT

:

4

I

S

+

4

I · τ

M

_

: D

δM

. (2.20)

where K

(ij)

M

is the component of RVE reduced stiﬀness matrix, K

M

(Appendix G), with

x

(i)

and x

(j)

are the current position vectors for the corner nodes i and j (i, j = 1, 2, 4, 5).

The

4

I

S

and

4

I are the symmetric fourth–order unit tensor and fourth–order unit tensor,

respectively. The superscript “LT” denotes left transposition

3

.

After that, by comparing the (2.20) with (2.19), the tangent stiﬀness tensor,

4

C

τ

M

is

identiﬁed as

4

C

τ

M

=

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

(j)

_

LT

:

4

I

S

+

4

I · τ

M

(2.21)

The detailed derivation of

4

C

τ

M

is shown in Appendix F.

2.5 Modeling framework implementation using Abaqus

The numerical framework of the multi–scale modeling approach as explained in Section 2.4

has been implemented within Abaqus. The analyses of the macroscopic structure and

RVEs are executed in the Abaqus simultaneously in the nested manner. At the macro-

scopic level, the subroutine UMAT is used to deﬁne the material mechanical constitutive

behavior at integration points through coupling to their underlying RVEs.

Firstly, the deformation gradient tensor, F

M

will be computed by Abaqus at every

macroscopic integration point (IP) at each macroscopic incremental load and at each

macroscopic iteration. After that, the computed F

M

at a particular macroscopic IP will

be transferred to the RVE which is assigned to that macroscopic IP for prescribing the

RVE total deformation using subroutine DISP. Next, after the completion of the RVE

analysis at microscopic level, the σ

M

is computed within subroutine URDFIL and the

reduced stiﬀness matrix, K

M

is obtained through substructure generation [1]. Finally,

the computed σ

M

and K

M

have to be returned to UMAT where the macroscopic tangent

stiﬀness,

4

C

τ

M

will be calculated.

Figure 2.7 and Figure 2.8 show the utilization of subroutines UMAT, DISP and URD-

FIL working with the macroscopic structure and RVE models within Abaqus, as explained

brieﬂy above. The incremental–iterative approach for the macro–micro computational ho-

mogenization method is schematically illustrated in Appendix H. The complete coding

of the subroutines is documented in the technical report [7].

2.6 Modeling framework veriﬁcation

In this section, the veriﬁcation of the correctness of the developed coupled multi–scale

framework implementation is performed using unidirectional (UD) ﬁber–reinforced metal

matrix composite. This composite is selected for veriﬁcation purposes due to the avail-

ability of the experimental data and analytical solutions.

3

The left transposition for a fourth–order tensor,

4

T is deﬁned as T

LT

ijkl

= T

jikl

.

14 Chapter 2

MACRO

STEP 1: At the beginning of each increment and each iteration, Abaqus calculates the deforma-

tion gradient tensor F

M

at every macroscopic IP which is passed into UMAT. Then,

UMAT is programmed to write the received F

M

in FM.txt.

STEP 2: A new Abaqus job is initialized for the RVE analysis job.

MICRO

STEP 3: The written F

M

is read by the DISP for prescribing the RVE total deformation through

the displacements of the four corner nodes with the RVE imposed by the periodic bound-

ary conditions.

STEP 4: Solve the RVE boundary value problem.

STEP 5: At the RVE analysis level, the reduced stiﬀness matrix, K

M

of the RVE is generated

(through substructure generation) and written into KM.mtx.

STEP 6: The P

M

is calculated using (2.17), then, the σ

M

is calculated through the computed P

M

using (2.11) within subroutine URDFIL. The computed σ

M

is written into stressM.txt.

STEP 7: Besides K

M

, additional information needed for the computation of

4

C

τ

M

(2.21) within

UMAT has to be written in various text ﬁles, such as RVE initial volume, V

0

(written to

RVEvolume.txt), current coordinates of the four corner nodes, x

p

(written to Coords.txt)

and the Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor, τ

M

(written to KirchhoﬀstressM.txt).

MACRO

STEP 8: The σ

M

in stressM.txt and K

M

in KM.mtx (together with RVEvolume.txt, Coords.txt

and KirchhoﬀstressM.txt) are read by UMAT for updating the Cauchy stress tensor and

computing the macroscopic tangent stiﬀness, respectively.

Figure 2.7: Work ﬂow steps of the multi–scale modeling implementation within Abaqus using

subroutine UMAT, DISP and URDFIL.

Multi–scale modeling framework description 15

Abaqus

Macro-structure

Abaqus

Micro-structure

macro_structure.inp

UMAT.for

micro_structure.inp

user_subroutine.for

FM.txt

*Heading

...

*Boundary, user

*Substructure

Generate

*Substructure matrix

output, stiffness=YES

KM.mtx

subroutine DISP

subroutine URDFIL

*Heading

...

*user material

subroutine UMAT

execute Abaqus micro-

structure analysis job

STRESS(NTENS)

DFGRD1(I,J)

DDSDDE(NTENS,

NTENS)

CauchystressM.txt

KirchhoffstressM.txt

RVEvolume.txt

Coords.txt

Figure 2.8: Schematic view of the multi–scale numerical framework implemented within

Abaqus.

The UD RVE is shown in Figure 2.9 with the geometrical parameters given in Ta-

ble 2.2. The matrix and the ﬁber are aluminum and boron, respectively, with both

materials considered isotropic. The material properties of both constituents are given

in Table 2.3, which is taken from [35]. The ﬁber material with volume fraction of 0.47

is embedded centrally in the matrix material. Next, the matrix and ﬁber volumes are

meshed with the element type of C3D8 (8–node 3D linear brick element) with the equiv-

alent distribution of the nodes on the corresponding opposite surfaces for the application

of the periodic boundary conditions (Figure 2.10). The damage modeling with the co-

hesive behavior at the contacting interface is not included in the UD RVE because the

detailed study of this damage mode is out of scope for the framework veriﬁcation pur-

poses. Therefore, the contacting interface between matrix and ﬁber is tied together using

mesh tied constraints.

Table 2.2: Geometrical parameters for unidirectional RVE displayed in Figure 2.9 (all param-

eter values are shown in unit of millimeter).

Parameter Value Description

w

matrix

0.2 matrix width

t

matrix

0.1 matrix thickness

h

matrix

0.2 matrix height

d

ﬁber

0.1547 ﬁber diameter

16 Chapter 2

y

x

z

h

matrix

t

matrix

w

matrix

(a) matrix

y

x z

d

fiber

(b) ﬁber

Figure 2.9: The unidirectional RVE composed of (a) matrix and (b) ﬁber materials modeled

using Abaqus [1], with the geometrical parameters are given in Table 2.2.

Table 2.3: Material properties of constituent materials for the UD RVE model [35](the elastic

modulus, E is shown in unit of GPa).

Property E v

Boron 379.3 0.1

Aluminum 68.3 0.3

(a) matrix (b) ﬁber

Figure 2.10: The unidirectional RVE composed of (a) matrix and (b) ﬁber materials model

meshed with element type of C3D8 (8–node 3D linear brick element).

Multi–scale modeling framework description 17

The macroscopic structure (meshed with 8 elements) used to couple with the UD

RVE is shown in Figure 2.11, with the dimensions shown in Table 2.4. The x-, y- and

z-axis on the global coordinate system of the UD RVE and macroscopic structure are

oriented in parallel. The macroscopic longitudinal modulus, E

z

and Poisson’s ratio, v

xz

are obtained through tensile loading in z-direction. The macroscopic transverse modulus,

E

x

and Poisson’s ratio, v

xy

are obtained through tensile loading in x-direction. The

longitudinal shear modulus, G

xz

and the transverse shear modulus, G

xy

are obtained

through the longitudinal shear loading and transverse shear loading, respectively. The

detailed description of the boundary conditions to these loading cases are given in [67].

Table 2.4: Geometrical parameters for the macroscopic structure displayed in Figure 2.11 (all

parameter values are shown in unit of millimeter).

Parameter Value Description

W 20.0 width

L 40.0 length

H 0.4 height

X

Y

Z

y

x z

W

L

H

Figure 2.11: Macroscopic structure for the coupled multi–scale analyses meshed with 8 ele-

ments of type C3D8 with the dimensions shown in Table 2.4.

Sun et al. [67] used the UD RVE to predict its mechanical properties based on principle

of strain energy with applying the periodic BCs. Chamis [5] presented solutions based

on uniﬁed set of composite micromechanics equations. The analytical solution of Hashin

and Rosen [23] is based on energy variational principles which provides the bounds for

the elastic moduli. The analytical solutions and experimental data shown in Table 2.5

are obtained from [67].

The elastic moduli at micro–level and macro–level shown in Table 2.5, are computed

with the developed framework through prescribing the aforementioned BCs on UD RVE

individually and the macroscopic structure, respectively. Regarding to the analysis results

under longitudinal and transverse shear loadings at macro–level, the G

xz

and G

xy

are

computed from the maximum longitudinal and transverse shear stresses, respectively. In

general, good agreement is observed between the micro– and macro–scale computational

homogenization solutions, FE prediction [67], analytical solutions [5,23] and experimental

data [35].

In the case of elastic moduli solutions at the microscopic and macroscopic levels, a

small deviation is observed. This is due to a small numerical diﬀerence of the user-deﬁned

18 Chapter 2

F

M

for prescribing the BCs on UD RVE at micro–level and the F

M

computed by Abaqus

internally to impose its underlying UD RVE BCs in the multi–scale analyses. The stress

contour of the analyzed UD RVE and macroscopic structure are shown in Appendix I.

Lastly, through the comparison between analysis results, experimental data and the

analytical solutions, good agreement has been achieved. Thus, it can be concluded that

the correctness for the implementation of the framework has been veriﬁed.

Table 2.5: Elastic constants comparison for unidirectional RVE (the elastic modulus, E and

shear modulus, G are shown in unit of GPa)

Elastic UD RVE UD FE model strain energy Energy variation Experiment

constants (micro) (macro) [67] method [5] principle [23] [35]

E

z

214.5 214.9 215.0 214 215 216

E

x

142.9 143.4 144.0 156 131.4 - 139.1 140

G

xz

54.2 54.15 57.2 62.6 53.9 52

G

xy

45.6 45.8 45.9 43.6 50.0 - 54.6 -

v

xz

0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.195 0.29

v

xy

0.26 0.25 0.29 0.31 0.28 - 0.31 -

Chapter 3

Micro–structural modeling

3.1 Textile and non–crimp composite models

The geometrical plain weave textile composite and a 0

o

/90

o

non–crimp RVEs are mod-

eled using TexGen [75], as shown in Figure 3.1. The textile composite is characterized

by the interlacement of the warp and weft yarns orthogonal to each other, resulting in

crimp (undulation or waviness) in both directions. Both models are an open–packing

and unbalanced RVEs, i.e. spacings exist between two adjacent yarns in the same di-

rection and the geometrical dimensions are diﬀerent in both warp and weft yarns but

the material properties of the yarns are identical (Figure 3.1(a)). The 0

o

/90

o

non–crimp

RVE (Figure 3.1(b)) is modeled for the comparison purposes with the textile RVE in the

mechanical analyses.

x (warp)

y

z (weft)

(a)

x (warp)

y

z (weft)

(b)

Figure 3.1: (a) Plain weave textile composite RVE model and (b) 0

o

/90

o

non–crimp composite

RVE created by using TexGen [75].

In practice, the volume of a yarn is not entirely occupied by ﬁbers due to the ﬂow

of epoxy through the ﬁbrous preform (porous medium) during fabrication process such

as Resin Transfer Moulding (RTM). However, for the RVEs modeled in this project,

the ﬁbers within a yarn are not modeled individually, instead the yarns are represented

as a solid volume consisting of ﬁber bundle and matrix, because this representation is

considerably more practical for the computational eﬀort (in terms of the CPU processor

speed and memory) [63]. Therefore, the number of ﬁbers is represented by the volume

of a yarn, i.e. a higher yarn volume represents higher number of ﬁbers and vice versa.

In general, the cross-sections of yarns are not circular or perfect elliptical due to the

interlacing of the yarns and the processing of the composite, which can lead to yarn

ﬂattening [79]. Therefore, a lenticular shape is selected to describe the cross-section

of the yarns on the basis of microscopic observations by Vandeurzen et al. [79]. An

19

20 Chapter 3

accurate geometrical modeling of the textile RVE is beyond the scope of this project and

is not discussed in detail. The geometrical variables for the textile RVE are depicted in

Figure 3.2 and their values are tabulated in Table 3.1. The non–crimp composite RVE has

the identical geometrical parameters as textile one, except undulation. The constructed

RVEs have the yarn volume fraction of 0.2478 and 0.0348 in warp and weft directions,

respectively.

Both RVEs consisting of yarns and solid domain (matrix) volumes are imported into

Abaqus/Standard version 6.9 [1]. The matrix pocket is generated through cutting out

the solid matrix volume occupied by the yarns. After that, the individual parts of yarns

and matrix are assembled to produce a RVE model.

W

RVE

L

RVE

H

RVE

h

gap warp

W

warp

H

warp

V

gap

W

weft

h

gap weft

H

weft

Figure 3.2: The textile RVE with the geometrical parameters as given in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1: Geometrical parameters for the plain weave textile composite RVE displayed in

Figure 3.2 (all parameter values are shown in unit of millimeter).

Parameter Value Description Parameter Value Description

W

warp

0.3 warp yarn width W

weft

0.3 weft yarn width

H

warp

0.1514 warp yarn thickness H

weft

0.0757 weft yarn thickness

h

gap warp

0.09 warp yarn gap h

gap weft

1.2 weft yarn gap

L

RVE

3.0 RVE length V

gap

0.012 gap between yarns

W

RVE

0.8 RVE width

H

RVE

0.3 RVE thickness

3.2 Material properties

The matrix is considered as an isotropic elastic material and the yarns are considered as

transversely isotropic elastic material. The matrix material is described by two elastic

constants (elastic modulus E and Poisson’s ratio v). Whereas, the yarn material model

requires six elastic constants, i.e. E

1

, E

3

, G

12

, G

13

, v

12

, v

13

. These six elastic constants are

deﬁned with respect to the assigned material (or local) coordinate system in the yarns,

as shown in Figure 3.3. The longitudinal direction is deﬁned by 3-axis, which follows the

Micro–structural modeling 21

yarn path tangentially, the transverse plane is described by the 1-axis and 2-axis, which

are represent by the plane of isotropy (Note that the x-, y- and z-axis are used for the

global coordinate system, whereas, the local coordinate system is denoted by 1-, 2- and

3-axis.). Since the yarn is considered as transversely isotropic, hence,

E

1

= E

2

, G

13

= G

23

, v

13

= v

23

.

(a) weft yarns (b) warp yarns

Figure 3.3: The assigned material (or local) coordinate system for (a) weft yarns and (b)

warp yarns (1–2 plane is the plane of isotropy and 3–axis follows the yarn path

tangentially).

The material properties of the yarns (combination of carbon ﬁbers and epoxy resin)

and the matrix (epoxy resin) are tabulated in Table 3.2. These values are taken from [73],

where they are measured experimentally on a unidirectional carbon ﬁber–reinforced poly-

mer (CFRP) and pure epoxy resin, respectively.

Table 3.2: Material properties of constituent materials for the textile and non–crimp RVE

models with the carbon ﬁber–reinforced plastic (CFRP) on warp and weft yarns

and the epoxy on matrix [73] (the elastic modulus, E and shear modulus, G are

shown in unit of GPa).

Property E

1

E

2

E

3

G

12

G

13

G

23

v

12

v

13

v

23

Yarn (CFRP) 40.0 40.0 230.0 14.3 24.0 24.0 0.26 0.26 0.26

Property E v

Matrix (epoxy) 3.5 0.35

3.3 Finite element model

The warp and weft yarns are meshed using the swept meshing technique with the element

of type C3D8 (8-node 3D linear brick element). Whereas, the element of type C3D4 (4-

node linear tetrahedron element) is used to mesh the matrix volume due to its geometrical

complexity. According to the periodicity characteristic of the composite (Section 2.4.1),

the RVEs are meshed such that the corresponding opposite surfaces (left and right; front

and back; top and bottom) are discretized into equivalent distribution of nodes. Due to

22 Chapter 3

the incompatible element types of both volumes, the contacting interfaces between the

yarns and matrix are tied together with the mesh tie constraint.

In practice, the interfacial debonding between the ﬁber and matrix can occur during

the fabrication process (due to the mismatch of their thermal expansion coeﬃcients) [81].

However, the interfacial debonding between the ﬁber and matrix is not considered in this

project because the micro–structure constituted of the ﬁbers and the matrix within the

yarn is not modeled, as explained earlier. Therefore, the mesh tie constraint between the

yarns and matrix interfaces is used to simulate the perfect bonding between both volumes.

Moreover, the perfect bonding is justiﬁed to reduce the computational cost and time, since

the interface formulation can increase the cost and time dramatically [14, 92, 95].

Four levels of meshes are created for the textile RVE, from level 1 (coarse) to level 4

(ﬁne), for obtaining the optimum meshed RVE in terms of the accuracy of analysis results

and CPU time. Figure 3.4 shows the diﬀerent mesh densities of the matrix volume and

yarns volume and Table 3.3 shows the number of nodes, number of elements, total number

of degrees of freedom (DOF), and the relative CPU time for the analysis (tensile in x-axis)

in each mesh density level. The deformation gradient tensor, F of

F =

_

_

1 +

xx

γ

xy

γ

xz

γ

yx

1 +

yy

γ

yz

γ

zx

γ

zy

1 +

zz

_

_

=

_

_

1.02 0 0

0 1.0 0

0 0 1.0

_

_

is applied on the textile RVE for prescribing the RVE total deformation through the

displacement of the four corner nodes and imposed by the periodic boundary conditions

(BCs), where and γ are the normal strain and shear strain, respectively. The subscripts

“x”, “y” and “z” are denoted for the directions of the axes on the global coordinate

system (see Figure 3.1). The material properties of yarns and matrix are considered

as transversely isotropic elastic (CFRP) deﬁned on the local coordinate systems and

isotropic elastic (epoxy), respectively, as described in Section 3.2.

Figure 3.5 shows the analysis results (RVE volume averaged engineering stress in x-

direction) for varying mesh density levels and Table 3.3 tabulates the relative CPU time

for each mesh level. There is a clear diﬀerence between the coarse mesh (level 1) and

other three meshes, however the mesh density level 3 and level 4 (ﬁne) show very similar

results. The mesh density level 3 gives a relatively low relative CPU time compared

with the ﬁne meshed RVE. Thus, it can be concluded from the Figure 3.4 and Table 3.3

that the mesh density level 3 is suﬃcient to provide the accurate results. Moreover, the

maximum mises equivalent stress of each mesh density level is shown in Figure 3.6, it

shows that the maximum stress becomes constant through mesh reﬁnement and mesh

density level 3 is suﬃcient to provide the maximum mises equivalent stress proximity to

mesh density level 4. Hence, further simulations are performed using mesh density level

3. The non–crimp composite RVE is meshed with the identical mesh density level 3 due

to the same conclusion.

3.4 Microscopic level analyses

The mechanical behavior of the RVEs under uniaxial tensile strain in warp and weft

directions, diﬀerent prescribed biaxial tensile strains, compression strain and in–plane

shear strain are analyzed in this section. The material of yarns and matrix are considered

as CFRP and epoxy, respectively (Section 3.2).

Micro–structural modeling 23

(a) level 1 (coarse mesh) (b) level 2

(c) level 3 (d) level 4 (ﬁne mesh)

Figure 3.4: Textile composite RVE meshes with diﬀerent mesh density levels (matrix on the

left and yarns on the right).

Table 3.3: Textile RVE mesh statistics

Mesh density level Number of nodes Number of elements DOF Relative CPU time

1 (coarse) 2155 5429 6465 1.00

2 4662 13009 13986 3.93

3 18191 32905 54573 13.17

4 (ﬁne) 28901 61380 86703 41.67

24 Chapter 3

0 0.5 1 1.5 2

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

ε

x

(%)

P

M

x

(

M

P

a

)

Engineering stress in x−direction averaged over RVE volume for textile RVE

1 (coarse)

2

3

4 (fine)

Figure 3.5: Engineering stress in x-direction averaged over RVE volume versus strain in the

same direction for diﬀerent mesh densities of the textile RVE.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

x 10

4

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Degrees of freedom of the microscopic model

M

a

x

i

m

u

m

m

i

s

e

s

e

q

u

i

v

a

l

e

n

t

s

t

r

e

s

s

(

M

P

a

)

The maximum mises equivalent stress versus degrees of freedom for the mesh refinement

level 1 (coarse)

level 2

level 3

level 4 (fine)

Figure 3.6: The maximum mises equivalent stress for diﬀerent mesh densities of the textile

RVE.

Micro–structural modeling 25

3.4.1 Tension test

The characteristic of crimp of the yarns has a signiﬁcant inﬂuence on the mechanical

behavior of a composite structure. In the case of uniaxial tensile strain on a textile RVE,

yarns under tensile strain tend to straighten, whereas, the crimp of yarns in transverse

direction tend to increase. This phenomenon is called crimp interchange and it occurs in

the case of biaxial tensile strain as well, i.e. the yarns in one direction has an inﬂuence on

the behavior of the yarns in transverse direction. The nature of crimp interchange can be

inﬂuenced by the geometrical properties of the yarns and it has a signiﬁcant inﬂuence on

the strength of a composite structure [59]. The mechanical response of the RVEs under

uniaxial tension tests is studied ﬁrst, followed by the biaxial tension tests.

3.4.1.1 Uniaxial tension

The prescribed deformation applied on the RVEs for the uniaxial tension in warp and

weft directions are

F

uniaxial warp

=

_

_

1 +

xx

γ

xy

γ

xz

γ

yx

1 +

yy

γ

yz

γ

zx

γ

zy

1 +

zz

_

_

=

_

_

1 +

xx

0 0

0 unprescribed 0

0 0 unprescribed

_

_

,

and

F

uniaxial weft

=

_

_

1 +

xx

γ

xy

γ

xz

γ

yx

1 +

yy

γ

yz

γ

zx

γ

zy

1 +

zz

_

_

=

_

_

unprescribed 0 0

0 unprescribed 0

0 0 1 +

zz

_

_

,

respectively, where the “unprescribed” in the deformation gradient implied that the RVE

is free to contract or expand in the corresponding direction. The RVE is imposed by the

periodic boundary conditions.

Through the comparison between Figure 3.7(a) and Figure 3.7(b), the stress value in

warp direction is higher than the weft direction in the textile RVE because of the higher

volume fraction in warp yarns compared to weft yarns which characterizes the number of

ﬁbers. Moreover, the eﬀective longitudinal modulus for warp yarns is higher compared

with weft yarns due to the lower maximum undulation angle of warp yarns at the initial

state, i.e. the waviness of the weft yarns are higher than warp yarns [54]. Note that the

stress value for the non–crimp RVE is slightly higher than the textile RVE under uniaxial

tensile strain in warp and weft directions because of the aforementioned explanation.

Although the non-crimp RVE enables to sustain slightly higher stress compared with

textile RVE, the development and application of textile composites in aerospace structures

is tremendous successfully due to the cost eﬃcient and ease to produce a low-cost and

reliable composite structural components with complex shapes [2, 89].

3.4.1.2 Biaxial tension

The biaxial tensile strain can be achieved by applying the strain in the longitudinal

direction of warp and weft yarns in various biaxial strain ratios, k

k =

2

1

, (3.1)

where

1

is the primary textile strain direction and

2

is the secondary textile strain

direction. The primary and secondary textile strain directions correspond either to the

warp or weft yarn strain depending on whether warp or weft strain is plotted. The RVE

26 Chapter 3

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

ε

x

(%)

σ

x

x

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of xx−component averaged over RVE volume for uniaxial tensile in x−direction

textile RVE

non−crimp RVE

(a) uniaxial strain: warp

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

ε

z

(%)

σ

z

z

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of zz−component averaged over RVE volume for uniaxial tensile in z−direction

textile RVE

non−crimp RVE

(b) uniaxial strain: weft

Figure 3.7: The Cauchy stress averaged over RVE volume for uniaxial tensile strain of (a)

warp or (b) weft direction.

is free to contract in y-axis (thickness direction). The deformation gradient tensor for

the biaxial tension is

F =

_

_

1 +

xx

γ

xy

γ

xz

γ

yx

1 +

yy

γ

yz

γ

zx

γ

zy

1 +

zz

_

_

=

_

_

1 +

xx

0 0

0 unprescribed 0

0 0 1 +

zz

_

_

,

where either

xx

or

zz

is the primary strain for the particular k value. The RVE is

imposed by the periodic boundary conditions.

The mechanical behavior under biaxial strain tension with the primary strain direction

(

1

) either warp or weft is studied separately due to the unbalanced yarn nature in the

textile RVE. Figure 3.8 and Figure 3.9 show the computed volume averaged Cauchy stress

of xx- and zz-component for diﬀerent k values of weft and warp as primary direction,

respectively. By comparing both ﬁgures, the strain ratio has smaller inﬂuence on the

response of the warp yarns because the weft yarns are not able to impede the straitening

of warp yarns due to the higher crimp (i.e. higher waviness) of the weft yarns (Figure 3.8).

On the contrary, the behavior in the weft yarns is strongly inﬂuenced by the strain ratio,

i.e. the mechanical behavior of weft yarns is strongly depended on the mechanical behavior

of the warp yarns (Figure 3.9). Note that the stress value in warp direction (Figure 3.8(a)

and Figure 3.9(a)) is higher than the stress value in weft direction (Figure 3.8(b) and

Figure 3.9(b)) due to the aforementioned explanation (yarns waviness and yarn volume

fraction in warp and weft directions) in Section 3.4.1.1.

3.4.2 Compression test

The mechanical response of the RVEs under in–plane uniaxial compressive strain applied

in warp or weft direction is studied in this section. The applied uniaxial compression

deformation in warp and weft directions are

F

compression warp

=

_

_

1 +

xx

γ

xy

γ

xz

γ

yx

1 +

yy

γ

yz

γ

zx

γ

zy

1 +

zz

_

_

=

_

_

0.99 0 0

0 unprescribed 0

0 0 unprescribed

_

_

,

and

Micro–structural modeling 27

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

ε

x

(%)

σ

x

x

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of xx−component averaged over RVE volume for k=ε

warp

/ε

weft

k = 0

k = 0.5

k = 1

k = 2

(a)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

ε

z

(%)

σ

z

z

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of zz−component averaged over RVE volume for k=ε

warp

/ε

weft

k = 0

k = 0.5

k = 1

k = 2

(b)

Figure 3.8: The Cauchy stress of (a) xx- and (b) zz-component averaged over RVE volume

for diﬀerent biaxial strain ratio, k =

warp

/

weft

(primary strain in weft direction).

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

ε

x

(%)

σ

x

x

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of xx−component averaged over RVE volume for k=ε

weft

/ε

warp

k = 0

k = 0.5

k = 1

k = 2

(a)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

ε

z

(%)

σ

z

z

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of zz−component averaged over RVE volume for k=ε

weft

/ε

warp

k = 0

k = 0.5

k = 1

k = 2

(b)

Figure 3.9: The Cauchy stress of (a) xx- and (b) zz-component averaged over RVE volume

for diﬀerent biaxial strain ratio, k =

weft

/

warp

(primary strain in warp direction).

28 Chapter 3

F

compression weft

=

_

_

1 +

xx

γ

xy

γ

xz

γ

yx

1 +

yy

γ

yz

γ

zx

γ

zy

1 +

zz

_

_

=

_

_

unprescribed 0 0

0 unprescribed 0

0 0 0.99

_

_

,

respectively. The RVE is imposed by the periodic boundary conditions.

Figure 3.10 shows the Cauchy stress-strain response in compression. The compressive

stress value in the warp direction is higher than that in the weft direction. This is

attributed by the warp yarns are relatively straighter compared with the weft yarns at

the deformed geometrical state, as shown in Figure 3.11, and the diﬀerence of the yarn

volume fraction in the warp and weft directions in the RVE for sustaining the compression

loading in the corresponding direction.

Besides that, the results in Figure 3.10 indicate that the non–crimp RVE has higher

compression stress as compared to the textile one, as a result of the yarns waviness in the

textile RVE. This study only shows qualitatively that the compressive stress decreases

with increasing the yarn waviness. However, the study of the inﬂuence of waviness pa-

rameters, such as wavelength and amplitude, on the compressive mechanical response is

out of scope of this project.

−1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0

−1200

−1000

−800

−600

−400

−200

0

ε

x

(%)

σ

x

x

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of xx−component averaged over RVE volume for uniaxial compression in warp

textile RVE

non−crimp RVE

(a)

−1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0

−1200

−1000

−800

−600

−400

−200

0

ε

z

(%)

σ

z

z

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of zz−component averaged over RVE volume for uniaxial compression in weft

textile RVE

non−crimp RVE

(b)

Figure 3.10: The Cauchy stress averaged over textile and non–crimp RVEs under compressive

in (a) warp or (b) weft direction.

3.4.3 Shear test

In this section, the RVEs are analyzed to the in–plane shear strain (γ

xz

= 0.01 and

γ

zx

= 0.01) with the following applied deformation,

F =

_

_

1 +

xx

γ

xy

γ

xz

γ

yx

1 +

yy

γ

yz

γ

zx

γ

zy

1 +

zz

_

_

=

_

_

0 0 0.01

0 unprescribed 0

0.01 0 0

_

_

.

The RVE is imposed by the periodic boundary conditions.

The mechanical behavior of the RVE under tensile strain is yarn dominated (i.e. ﬁber

dominated). However, the mechanical behavior of the RVE is matrix dominated under

shear loading, which has less inﬂuenced by the yarns architecture [10]. It can be ob-

served that the stress-strain curves for textile and non-crimp RVEs are nearly coincide

(with the diﬀerence of 2.56% compared with 7.52% and 7.44% for unixial tension (Fig-

ure 3.7(a)) and compression (Figure 3.10(a)) in warp direction, respectively), as shown

Micro–structural modeling 29

(a) (b)

Figure 3.11: The von Mises equivalent stress of the yarns under uniaxial compressive strain

in (a) warp and (b) weft direction. (Stress contour plot values from 40 to 2950 MPa,

deformation scaled up ×15)

in Figure 3.12. Besides that, the stress contour of the textile (Figure 3.13(a)) and non–

crimp (Figure 3.13(b)) RVEs are comparable. This may indicate that the crimp eﬀect

plays a minor role in the mechanical response of the textile RVE under in–plane shear

loading. From Figure 3.14, it can be observed that the mechanical response of the RVE

is dominated by matrix where the maximum principal logarithmic strain in the matrix is

higher compared with yarn.

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

γ

xz

(%)

σ

x

z

(

M

P

a

)

Cauchy stress of xz−component averaged over RVE volume for in−plane shear ( γ

xz

& γ

zx

)

textile RVE

non−crimp RVE

Figure 3.12: The Cauchy stress averaged over RVE volume for the in–plane shear strain (

xz

and

zx

)

30 Chapter 3

(a) (b)

Figure 3.13: The von Mises equivalent stress of the (a) textile and (b) non–crimp yarns in the

RVE under in–plane shear strain (

xz

= 0.01 and

zx

= 0.01) (Deformation scaled

up ×15).

(a) (b)

Figure 3.14: The maximum principal logarithmic strain ﬁeld of the (a) matrix and (b) yarns

in the RVE under in–plane shear strain (

xz

= 0.01 and

zx

= 0.01) (Deformation

scaled up ×15).

Chapter 4

Application of the multi–scale

modeling framework

In this chapter, the applicability of the multi–scale framework to the analysis on the

macroscopic textile structures will be illustrated. It will be shown that this is a valuable

and powerful tool to redesign and improve the structural integrity of the textile structures

without costly prototyping and testing.

4.1 Tensile test on a cross–ply laminate

The applicability of the multi–scale framework to predict the initiation of failure modes

in the [45

o

/−45

o

/45

o

/−45

o

]

s

laminated composite under tensile load is evaluated. The

±45

o

tensile test is typically performed for the mechanical analysis of textile composites

to shear [60].

Figure 4.1 shows the twill weave laminated composite sample with stacking sequence of

[45

o

/−45

o

/45

o

/−45

o

]

s

under tensile test performed at the National Aerospace Laboratory

(NLR). It has been noted that the failure of the sample occurs near to the edge of gage

region. For the sake of simpliﬁcation, only the gage region of the composite sample is

modeled for the multi–scale analysis, as shown in Figure 4.2. Due to the symmetrical

ply lay–up sequence, only half of the thickness is modeled. The dimensions of the model

are shown in Table 4.1 which correspond to the dimensions of a standard tension testing

sample of textile composite [43]. The model is meshed with (Width)3 × (Length)5 ×

(Height)4 elements. The model is subjected to longitudinal extension loading (in x-

direction), where the nodes on surface at x=0 and x=L are restricted to the movement

in y- and z-directions to represent the clamping eﬀect, i.e. to restrict the composite

sample from rotation as in the actual composite testing sample. Symmetrical BCs are

applied at the bottom of xz-plane to represent the symmetrical ply lay–up sequence

of the macroscopic model. The BCs applied on the macroscopic model are shown in

Figure 4.3. Every integration point is assign to the textile representative volume element

(RVE) (Figure 3.4(c)). The textile RVEs are rotated to +45

o

or −45

o

with respect to

y–axis at the global coordinate system, corresponding to the +45

o

or −45

o

layer of the

macroscopic model, respectively. The material of yarns and matrix are considered as

carbon ﬁber–reinforced plastic (CFRP) and epoxy, respectively (see Table 3.2).

The Figure 4.4 shows the result of the simulation, where the high strain concentration

regions in the macroscopic model. By qualitatively comparing this high strain concen-

tration region with the region of failure of the tested composite sample (Figure 4.1), the

31

32 Chapter 4

tensile loading direction

Figure 4.1: The tested composite tension test sample with shear failure mode. (The marked

region represents shear failure mode dominated by matrix material (insert) of the

sample.) (Photo courtesy of Fokker Landing Gear B.V.)

X

Y

Z

y

x

L

W

H

z

layer 45

o

layer -45

o

layer 45

o

layer -45

o

Figure 4.2: The macroscopic structure model (with the dimensions shown in Table 4.1) for

the tensile test is meshed with (Width)3 × (Length)5 × (Height)4 elements. The

zoom in view shows the model is meshed with four elements through thickness

and the stacking sequence of the model.

Table 4.1: The dimensions of the tension test on a cross–ply composite laminate

[45

o

/−45

o

/45

o

/−45

o

]

s

(Figure 4.2).

width (W) length (L) height (H)

2.5mm 130.0mm 1.2mm

Application of the multi–scale modeling framework 33

y

x

z

boundary conditions of the side clamp

and tension

D

x

= 0.13

D

D

y

z

= 0

= 0

boundary conditions of the side clamp

D

x

= 0

D

D

y

z

= 0

= 0

boundary conditions of

the symmetrical plane

R

x

= 0

D

R

y

z

= 0

= 0

Figure 4.3: The applied boundary conditions of the [45

o

/−45

o

/45

o

/−45

o

]

s

composite model.

(The D and R indicate the displacement (in millimeter) and rotation (in radian), respec-

tively. The subscript “x”, “y” and “z” are the directions in x, y and z-axis at the global

coordinate system, respectively.)

high strain concentration region in the macroscopic structure correctly indicate the failure

initiation region, this illustrate the multi–scale framework in principle enables to predict

the regions of failure quantitatively, provided that the RVEs are adequate to represent

the actual textile microscopic structure. From Figure 4.4, the maximum principal loga-

rithmic strain of the RVE corresponding to macroscopic high strain region is shown. It is

shown that the local strain in the matrix is approximately 6 times higher than the macro-

scopic strain. Thus, the prediction of the mechanical response at the microscopic level

which may contribute to the macroscopic failure is considerably important and should be

investigated in order to improve the structural integrity.

Since the deformation of the sample is shear dominated within all layers for the ±45

◦

composite tensile test and mainly dominated by matrix [10,60]. This can also be observed

from Figure 4.1, where the sample failed mainly due to the shearing of matrix material.

Therefore, the initiation of this principal failure mode in the matrix by shearing should

be predicted ﬁrst, followed by the failure modes of yarns.

Figure 4.5(a) and 4.5(b) show the maximum principal logarithmic strain of the matrix

and yarns, respectively. It can be observed that the strain in the matrix is higher than in

the yarns, as matrix material has lower stiﬀness compared with yarns. The high strains

tend to concentrate in the matrix between the warp and weft yarns region (interlacing

region), as shown in Figure 4.6, because that region has relatively few matrix material to

bear the stress. This ﬁnding is consistent with Ref. [33] where it has been concluded the

high strains tend to occur between the yarns. Therefore, this may indicate the earliest

fracture initiation of the matrix in the interlacing region.

Recall that the yarn, in reality, is composed of matrix and ﬁbers, although both

constituents are not modeled distinguishably in the yarns (see Section 3.1). However,

the failure of matrix within yarn should be expected in actual textile composite sample.

Figure 4.5(b) shows the local high strain regions in the warp yarns. Note that the strain

value in the warp yarns is higher compared to the weft yarns, this is due to the diﬀerence

of the eﬀective shear stiﬀness, G of the warp and weft yarns. The eﬀective shear stiﬀness

is higher for the yarns with lower maximum undulation angle [54]. Hence, the eﬀective

shear stiﬀness is higher for the warp yarns due to the lower maximum undulation angle

(i.e. lower waviness) of the yarns. This is consistent with the studies of failure behavior

34 Chapter 4

macroscopic high strain region

macroscopic

structure

textile RVE matrix

textile RVE yarns

Figure 4.4: The maximum principal logarithmic strain contour for the macroscopic composite

model under tension test with the orientation of [45

o

/−45

o

/45

o

/−45

o

]

s

, coupled

with ±45

o

textile RVEs; inserts: the deformed +45

◦

textile RVE (matrix and

yarns), corresponding to the high strain region in the macroscopic structure. The

maximum principal logarithmic strain contour bar for the macroscopic structure

and RVE are shown at the position of lower left and upper right, respectively.

(The deformation scaled up ×400 and ×300 for the macroscopic structure and the RVE,

respectively.)

of the plain weave textile laminates under in–plane shear loading by Ganesh et al. [15].

As a result, in reality, micro–cracking of matrix within the yarns will exist in a ±45

o

composite tensile testing sample, the warp yarn may fail prior to weft yarn due to the

higher strain borne by the warp yarn [57, 58] (also known as intra–yarn micro–cracking).

The intra–yarn micro–cracking from the warp yarns may spread within the yarns results

in interfacial delamination between the matrix and the ﬁbers and spread into the matrix

rich part results in fracture of matrix.

Finally, with the prediction of the combination failures of the matrix (in the interlacing

region) and the yarns, the ﬁnal macroscopic catastrophic shear failure mode of the sample

(Figure 4.1) can be predicted through the multi–scale analysis.

In order to improve the structural integrity, the matrix with high strain in the in-

terlacing region (Figure 4.6) has to be reduced. According to the architecture of the

modeled plain weave textile RVE (Figure 3.1(a)), the warp yarns are considerably more

important than the weft yarns, because the warp yarns are able to sustain higher tensile

and compression stresses compared to the weft yarns. To achieve this, the weft yarn

volume fraction can be reduced, i.e. increase the matrix volume fraction, particularly

at the interlacing region. Thus, more matrix material in the interlacing region will be

available to bear the stress. Thus, the modiﬁed RVE has warp and weft yarn volume

fractions of 0.2478 and 0.0175, respectively (compared with the yarn volume fraction of

0.2478 and 0.0348 in warp and weft directions, respectively, before the reduction of the

weft yarn volume fraction). The modiﬁed RVE is coupled to the macroscopic composite

model (Figure 4.2) and the same boundary conditions (Figure 4.3) are applied on the

macroscopic structure model.

Figure 4.7 shows the maximum principal logarithmic strain in the matrix of which

Application of the multi–scale modeling framework 35

(a)

local high strain regions

in the warp yarns

(b)

Figure 4.5: The maximum principal logarithmic strain contour in (a) the matrix and (b) yarn

materials for the +45

◦

textile RVE in the macroscopic high strain region of the

±45

◦

composite model. (The region marked in (b) indicates the local high strain region

of warp yarns. The deformation scaled up ×300)

local high strain

region in the matrix

cross section plane

view side

Figure 4.6: The maximum principal logarithmic strain contour in a cross section view of the

+45

◦

textile RVE matrix material in the macroscopic high strain region of the

±45

◦

composite model. (The region marked in the ﬁgure indicate the local high strain

region; the deformation is scaled up ×300.)

36 Chapter 4

the volume fraction has been increased, the strain color bar has been re–set equivalent

to the color bar in Figure 4.6 for comparison purposes. As can be seen in Figure 4.7, the

high strain concentration in the interlacing region has been reduced due to the increase

of the matrix material in that region.

Next, as explained previously, since the warp yarns are considerably more important

than the weft yarns, the high strain concentration region within the yarns has to be shifted

from the warp to weft directions, such that the weft yarns preferably fail prior to warp

yarns. Therefore, glass ﬁbers–reinforced plastic (GFRP) is selected for the weft yarns to

substitute the carbon ﬁbers–reinforced plastic (CFRP) due to the lower shear stiﬀness

of the GFRP compared with CDFP, i.e. the strain in weft yarns is higher compared

with warp yarns. This may result the failure initiation in the weft yarns, as shown in

Figure 4.8. The material properties of the GFRP, CFRP and the matrix are shown in

Table 4.2.

By comparing the Figure 4.9 and Figure 4.4, as a result of improving the microscopic

structural integrity through the modiﬁcation of the RVEs, the structural integrity of the

macroscopic composite model has been improved. It can be seen that the maximum strain

of the composite model has been reduced with approximately 1.5%. This indicates that

the macroscopic composite model with the microscopic structural integrity improvement

will be able to fail later than the macroscopic composite model without the microscopic

structural integrity improvement.

Table 4.2: Material properties of constituent materials for the textile RVE models of carbon

ﬁbers–reinforced plastic (CFRP) on warp yarns [73] and glass ﬁber–reinforced plas-

tic (GFRP) on weft yarns [20](the elastic modulus, E and shear modulus, G are

shown in unit of GPa).

Property E

1

E

2

E

3

G

12

G

13

G

23

v

12

v

13

v

23

Warp yarn (CFRP) 40.0 40.0 230.0 14.3 24.0 24.0 0.26 0.26 0.26

Weft yarn (GFRP) 9.9 9.9 36.6 3.8 4.1 4.1 0.30 0.27 0.27

Property E v

Matrix (epoxy) 3.5 0.35

As a concluding remark to this section, it has been demonstrated that the modiﬁcation

of the RVE properties, e.g. material and geometrical properties in order to improve the

structural integrity can easily be done in the developed multi–scale framework. This

demonstrates the power, added value and the ﬂexibility of the framework. Next, the

multi–scale analysis will be performed on the notched laminate composite, to illustrate

the capabilities of the framework on a relatively complex composite structure.

4.2 Compression test on a notched quasi–isotropic

laminate

In this section, the multi-scale analysis is performed on a notched textile composite. In

many engineering structures, holes are required to be drilled or moulded–in into laminates

to facilitate bolting or riveting to the main load–bearing structures [18]. As a valuable

reference, Figure 4.10 and Figure 4.11 show the failure modes of the four–harness satin

Application of the multi–scale modeling framework 37

cross section plane

view side

Figure 4.7: The maximum principal logarithmic strain contour in a cross section view of the

+45

◦

textile RVE matrix material (after the increase of the matrix volume frac-

tion) in the macroscopic high strain region of the ±45

◦

composite model. (The

logarithmic strain contour bar is re–set equivalent to Figure 4.6 for comparison purposes;

the deformation is scaled up ×300.)

local high strain regions

in the weft yarns

Figure 4.8: The maximum principal logarithmic strain contour of the +45

◦

textile RVE yarn

material where warp yarns are the carbon ﬁbers-reinforced and weft yarns are

the glass ﬁbers-reinforced (from the macroscopic high strain region) for the ±45

◦

composite. (The region marked in the ﬁgure indicats the local high strain region of the

weft yarns; the deformation is scaled up ×300.)

38 Chapter 4

macroscopic high strain region

macroscopic

structure

Figure 4.9: The maximum principal logarithmic strain contour for the macroscopic compos-

ite model under tension test with the orientation of [45

o

/−45

o

/45

o

/−45

o

]

s

, cou-

pled with ±45

o

textile RVEs which the matrix volume fraction has been increase

and the weft yarns has been substituted from the carbon ﬁber–reinforced plastic

(CFRP) to glass ﬁber–reinforced plastic (GFRP). The properties of these materi-

als are shown in Table 4.2.

textile composite [41] and the quasi–isotropic eight–shaft satin cloth woven composite [18]

under compressive load. Notice that the macroscopic failure modes for a notched textile

composite are relatively complex. Therefore, it is interesting to understand the com-

pressive behavior of the textile composite materials microscopically and investigate the

applicability of the developed multi–scale framework on this structure under compression

loading.

Figure 4.12 shows the ﬁnite element (FE) model of a notched macroscopic laminated

structure with the lay–up sequence of [45

o

/0

o

/−45

o

/90

o

]

S

. Due to the symmetrical ply

lay–up sequence, only half of the thickness is modeled. The dimensions of the model

are shown in Table 4.3 which correspond to standard dimensions for a notched textile

composite testing sample [43]. A circular hole of 6.0mm in diameter is centrally positioned

in the model. A symmetrical quarter of the model cannot be modeled due to the existence

of ±45

o

lay–ups. The model is meshed with 64 elements of type C3D8 (8-node 3D

linear brick element). The model is subjected to longitudinal compression loading (in

x-direction), where the nodes on surface at x=0 and x=L are restricted in the movement

to y- and z-direction to represent the clamping eﬀect preventing the rotation of the

sample, as is the case in a standard testing of the composite. Due to the symmetrical

ply lay–up sequence, the symmetrical BCs are applied on the bottom of xz-plane (see

Figure 4.13). Every integration point of the notched quasi–isotropic composite is assigned

with the textile RVE (Figure 3.4(c)). the textile RVE is rotated to +45

o

, 0

◦

, −45

o

or 90

o

with respect to y-axis on the global coordinate system, to represent the +45

o

, 0

◦

, −45

o

or 90

o

–ply on the macroscopic model, respectively. The material of yarns and matrix

are considered as carbon ﬁber–reinforced plastic (CFRP) and epoxy, respectively (see

Table 3.2).

Figure 4.14 shows the stress contour of the model at each layer. At each layer, high

stress region near to the hole edge on the model may represent the initiation of the local

Application of the multi–scale modeling framework 39

localized

failure region

c

o

m

p

r

e

s

s

i

o

n

l

o

a

d

i

n

g

d

i

r

e

c

t

i

o

n

(a)

delamination

(b)

compression loading

direction

(c)

compression loading

direction

(d)

Figure 4.10: The failure modes of the notched four–harness satin weave textile composite

sample under compression load, which are (a) localized damage in the vicinity to

the hole edge, (b) delamination inside the edge of hole, and the ﬁnal catastrophic

failure of the sample from (c) in–plane view and (d) thickness view [41].

compression loading

direction

(a)

c

o

m

p

r

e

s

s

i

o

n

l

o

a

d

i

n

g

d

i

r

e

c

t

i

o

n

(b)

Figure 4.11: The failure modes near to the drilled hole for a quasi–isotropic eight–shaft satin

textile composite under compression loading, (a) thickness view and (b) in–plane

view [18].

40 Chapter 4

y

W

L

H

layer 45

o

layer -45

o

layer 0

o

layer 90

o

x

z

Figure 4.12: The meshed notched macroscopic structure for compression testing with dimen-

sions of (Width)36.0mm × (Length)36.0mm × (Height)1.2mm and the circular

hole of 6.0mm in diameter is located centrally in the model through the thickness.

Table 4.3: The dimensions of the compression test on a notched composite laminate

[45

o

/0

o

/−45

o

/90

o

]

S

(Figure 4.12).

width (W) length (L) height (H)

36.0mm 36.0mm 1.2mm

y

x

z

boundary conditions of the side clamp

and compression

D

x

= -0.036

D

D

y

z

= 0

= 0

boundary conditions of the side clamp

D

x

= 0

D

D

y

z

= 0

= 0

boundary conditions of

the symmetrical plane

R

x

= 0

D

R

y

z

= 0

= 0

Figure 4.13: The applied boundary conditions of the notched composite model with stacking

sequence of [45

o

/0

o

/−45

o

/90

o

]

S

. (The D and R indicate the displacement (in mil-

limeter) and rotation (in radian), respectively. The subscript “x”, “y” and “z” are the

directions in x, y and z-axis at the global coordinate system, respectively.)

Application of the multi–scale modeling framework 41

failure, as shown in Figure 4.10(a). Note, that the high stress regions on layer 45

◦

and

−45

◦

diﬀer due to diﬀerent ply direction, i.e. the high stress region contour for layer

45

o

and −45

o

have opposite directions (see Figure 4.14(a) and 4.14(c)). However, the

high stress region contour for layer 0

◦

and 90

◦

are comparable, except the stress value is

higher for layer 0

◦

compared to layer 90

◦

because the compressive stress in warp direction

is higher than weft direction due to the higher yarn volume fraction of the warp yarn. It

has been observed experimentally [41] that the localized failure region at the hole edge

contributed by the microscopic level failure and may lead to catastrophic failure, as shown

in Figure 4.10(c). Therefore, the analysis and prediction of failure modes through the

underlying textile RVE at the hole edge from each layer should be made. Figure 4.15

shows the stress contour for the cross sectional view (half of the model width through yz-

plane view) of the notched composite model with the underlying deformed textile RVEs

from the high stress region in every layer.

x

z

(a)

x

z

(b)

x

z

(c)

x

z

(d)

Figure 4.14: The von Mises stress contours of the notched macroscopic model of layer (a)

45

o

, (b) 0

o

, (c) −45

o

and (d) 90

o

from xz-plane view. The compression load is

applied in x-direction.

Figure 4.16 and Figure 4.17 show the displacement magnitude components for the 45

◦

,

0

◦

, −45

◦

and 90

◦

textile RVEs from the macroscopic high strain region. The displacement

magnitude components are computed through the displacements of the four corner nodes

(see Figure 2.4) and they are deﬁned on the global coordinate system (Figure 3.1(a))

for comparison purposes between textile RVEs. It can be seen that the displacement in

x-direction for the textile RVEs is higher than y- and z-directions due to the applied com-

42 Chapter 4

textile RVE of layer 45

o

textile RVE of layer 0

o

textile RVE of layer -45

o

textile RVE of layer 90

o

x

z

y

cross section plane

view side

Figure 4.15: The von Mises stress contour for the cross section view of the macroscopic

notched composite model under compression load with the orientation of

[+45

o

/0

o

/−45

o

/90

o

]

S

, coupled with ±45

o

, 0

o

and 90

o

textile RVEs. The de-

formed RVEs (matrix and yarn) from each layer, corresponding to the high stress

region vicinity to the hole edge on the macroscopic structure are shown. (The

von Mises stress contour bar for the macroscopic structure and RVE are shown at the

position of upper left and lower right, respectively. The deformation is scaled up ×15

for the textile RVEs)

pressive displacement in x-axis on the macroscopic model. Next, the magnitude of the

displacement of y-component for both textile RVEs is higher than the z-component, i.e.

the displacement in thickness direction is higher than the width direction. The displace-

ment magnitudes in the width direction (z-component) for the ±45

◦

, 0

◦

and 90

◦

RVEs are

not equivalent. Furthermore, the displacements in y-direction of the corner node 2 (see

Figure 2.4) for the 45

◦

, −45

◦

, 0

◦

and 90

◦

textile RVEs from the width view are shown in

Figure 4.18 (note: the displacement of the corner node 1 for all RVEs is zero because this

node is located at the origin of the coordinate system, (0, 0, 0)). It can be seen that the

displacement in y-direction of the corner node 2 for all RVEs are diﬀerent. Thus, these

may attribute to the inter–ply delamination around the hole at the macroscopic failure

(see Figure 4.10(b)). However, the prediction of delamination between layers due to the

aforementioned explanations has to be interpreted with caution, since the interaction of

the RVEs between layers has not been modeled and the characteristic thickness size of

the RVE is comparable to the macroscopic structure ply thickness.

In the actual textile composite sample, the buckling of the ﬁbers along the compression

loading direction may also be expected [9]. Due to the higher volume fraction of the warp

yarn for the 0

◦

textile RVE, it may be anticipated that the ﬁbers within warp yarn for the

0

o

textile RVE tend to buckle at the higher stress than the weft yarn in the 90

o

textile

RVE at the interlacing region (it is assumed that the undulation of the warp and weft

yarns at the interlacing region are considerably comparable), as shown in Figure 4.19(a)

and Figure 4.19(b). On the other hand, it is anticipated that the ﬁbers within weft yarn

for 90

◦

are buckled in higher strain due to the support provided by the ﬁbers in warp

yarn (with higher volume fraction). Besides that, the matrix material (surrounding the

ﬁbers) restrictes the buckling of the ﬁbers. Thus, the buckling strain for the ﬁbers within

Application of the multi–scale modeling framework 43

−0.4 −0.35 −0.3 −0.25 −0.2 −0.15 −0.1 −0.05 0

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

Displacement in compression direction for macro−structure (mm)

D

i

s

p

l

a

c

e

m

e

n

t

m

a

g

n

i

t

u

d

e

d

i

r

e

c

t

i

o

n

s

f

o

r

R

V

E

+

4

5

(

m

m

)

Displacement magnitude directions for RVE +45 vs macro−structure compression displacement

x−component (length)

y−component (thickness)

z−component (width)

(a)

−0.4 −0.35 −0.3 −0.25 −0.2 −0.15 −0.1 −0.05 0

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

Displacement in compression direction for macro−structure (mm)

D

i

s

p

l

a

c

e

m

e

n

t

m

a

g

n

i

t

u

d

e

d

i

r

e

c

t

i

o

n

s

f

o

r

R

V

E

−

4

5

(

m

m

)

Displacement magnitude directions for RVE −45 vs macro−structure compression displacement

x−component (length)

y−component (thickness)

z−component (width)

(b)

Figure 4.16: The displacements magnitude of x-, y-, and z-components for the (a) +45

◦

and

(b) −45

◦

textile RVE from the macroscopic high stress region of the notched

composite model. The displacement components are plotted against the applied

compressive displacement (x-direction) for the notched composite model.

44 Chapter 4

−0.4 −0.35 −0.3 −0.25 −0.2 −0.15 −0.1 −0.05 0

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

Displacement in compression direction for macro−structure (mm)

D

i

s

p

l

a

c

e

m

e

n

t

m

a

g

n

i

t

u

d

e

d

i

r

e

c

t

i

o

n

s

f

o

r

R

V

E

0

(

m

m

)

Displacement magnitude directions for RVE 0 vs macro−structure compression displacement

x−component (length)

y−component (thickness)

z−component (width)

(a)

−0.4 −0.35 −0.3 −0.25 −0.2 −0.15 −0.1 −0.05 0

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

Displacement in compression direction for macro−structure (mm)

D

i

s

p

l

a

c

e

m

e

n

t

m

a

g

n

i

t

u

d

e

d

i

r

e

c

t

i

o

n

s

f

o

r

R

V

E

9

0

(

m

m

)

Displacement magnitude directions for RVE 90 vs macro−structure compression displacement

x−component (length)

y−component (thickness)

z−component (width)

(b)

Figure 4.17: The displacement magnitude of x-, y- and z-component for the (a) 0

◦

and (b) 90

◦

textile RVEs from the macroscopic high stress region of the notched composite

model. The displacement component is plotted against the applied compressive

displacement (x-direction) for the notched composite model.

Application of the multi–scale modeling framework 45

X

Y

Z

0.0007279 mm

deformed

configuration

initial

configuration

(a)

0.0001425 mm

(b)

0.00015597 mm

(c)

0.0000275 mm

(d)

Figure 4.18: The displacement magnitude of the (a) +45

◦

, (b) 0

◦

, (c) −45

◦

and (d) 90

◦

textile

RVEs from the width view. The initial conﬁguration is shown in element line

plot, whereas, the deformed conﬁguration is shown without the element line plot.

The displacement in y-direction for the corner node 2 (see Figure 2.4) between

initial and deformed conﬁgurations is shown in every RVE. (Deformation scaled

up ×20)

46 Chapter 4

weft yarn and buckling stress for the ﬁbers within warp yarn will be increased, when the

stiﬀness of the matrix increases.

Next, the modiﬁcations of the textile RVE are possible in order to improve the micro-

scopic structural integrity, e.g. through usage of diﬀerent material for warp and weft yarns,

diﬀerent textile geometries, or diﬀerent textile composite type (such as three–dimensional

textile composite). However, it is out of the scope of the current analysis. The objective

of this section was to demonstrate the capability and applicability of the framework to the

analysis of notched textile composite. Besides that, the re–implementation of the frame-

work is unnecessary for various macroscopic (e.g. standard tensile test composite model,

notched composite, etc.) and microscopic models (textile RVEs with varying material

and geometrical properties), this demonstrates the ﬂexibility of the framework.

y

x

z

warp yarn

weft yarn

(a)

y

x

z

warp yarn

weft yarn

(b)

Figure 4.19: The von Mises stress of the matrix material for the (a) 0

o

and (b) 90

o

textile

RVEs from the high stress region of the notched macroscopic structure. (Stress

contour plot values from 96 to 3150 MPa, deformation scaled up ×15)

Chapter 5

Conclusions and recommendations

5.1 Conclusions

A framework for the multi–scale analysis of composite structures has been developed

and performed. The advanced micro–mechanics modeling approach has been combined

through the computational homogenization with the structural analysis capabilities of

Abaqus with its subroutines. The Abaqus subroutines enable to link the macro– and

micro–scale composites structure analysis down to the level of the ﬁber (for unidirectional

composite materials), yarn (for textile composite materials) and matrix constituents at

each integration point for each macroscopic loading and iteration. As a result, the mecha-

nisms of the microscopic composite materials in the macroscopic structure can be studied

in great detail collectively. Furthermore, the developed multi–scale computational ho-

mogenization framework circumvents the need for complex and anisotropic constitutive

models for composite materials analyses at the macroscopic and microscopic levels.

The correctness of the multi–scale framework for a heterogeneous material is demon-

strated and tested by performing the analysis on the unidirectional ﬁber–reinforced mi-

croscopic structure at the microscopic level analysis, as well as the macroscopic structure

(coupled with the unidirectional ﬁber–reinforced microscopic structure) for the multi–

scale analysis. The analysis results at both the microscopic level and the macroscopic

level (from multi–scale analysis) are considerably good in agreement with the analytical

solutions and the experimental data. Thus, the further multi–scale analyses on a rela-

tively complex microscopic composite structure (e.g. textile composite) can be performed

with a great level of conﬁdence.

Due to the unrealistic for the modeled microscopic plain weave textile composite, no

comparisons between the analysis results and experimental data are made. However, the

simulation results are compared with the tested textile composite sample qualitatively.

In general, the prediction of the failure regions in the macroscopic composite model have

been predicted correctly. Moreover, in the microscopic textile composite, the predictions

of the failure initiation in the matrix and the yarns which may contribute to the macro-

scopic failure are made based on the local high stress or strain in the matrix or the yarns.

The predictions are shown to be consistent with the simulation results and tested textile

composite samples qualitatively from various research papers.

The multi–scale analysis example problems successfully demonstrated the applicabil-

ity, power, added value and the ﬂexibility of the developed multi–scale analysis framework

to the analysis of textile composite structures. This development provides the opportu-

nities for the engineer to re–design and improve the structural integrity of the composite

47

48 Chapter 5

structures, macroscopically and microscopically, without costly prototyping and testing.

Therefore, this is one of the powerful and useful engineering tools for the future structural

analysis and design.

5.2 Recommendations for future work

While the conclusions of the current work were presented in the previous section, several

recommendations for further work will be discussed, as follow.

5.2.1 Multi–scale modeling framework

(i) The developed multi–scale framework only separates the structural length scale

into macroscopic (comparable to composite test sample) and microscopic (compa-

rable to the composite structure where the matrix constituent and yarn constituent

composed of ﬁbers and matrix, are distinguishable). However, the framework has

potential to be developed for the separation of macroscopic (comparable to com-

posite test sample), microscopic (comparable to the composite structure where the

matrix constituent and the yarn constituent composed of ﬁbers and matrix are dis-

tinguishable) and ﬁber–matrix level (comparable to the composite structure where

the matrix and ﬁbers are distinguishable) length scales, as shown in Figure 5.1.

This separation of length scales is interesting to an engineer because in this way

the mechanical and material mechanisms of the structure can be predicted through

the combination of diﬀerent matrix and ﬁber materials from various suppliers be-

fore placing the order of those materials. This should save the cost and time of

purchasing, shipping, fabrication, testing and experimental post–processing.

(ii) The developed multi–scale modeling framework enables the study of the local macro-

scopic mechanical and material behavior collectively. However, this approach is

considerably computationally expensive in terms of time and computer memory

and hard–disk space because the multi–scale analysis at every integration point in

the macroscopic structure has to be performed at each macroscopic loading incre-

ment and iteration. The advancement of the computer technologies, particularly

the speed of computing with the multi–core processor, has been improved signiﬁ-

cantly in the past decades, thus, the computational time of multi–scale analysis is

expected to reduce signiﬁcantly in the future and it will become a worthy tool for

the engineers and scientists. However, several solutions can be proposed in order to

improve the computational eﬃciency even further.

(a) The selective method [19] can be performed using the failure criterion, while on

the non–critical regions (e.g. elastic region), the stiﬀness tangent obtained from

the underlying RVEs can be kept constant throughout the analysis without per-

forming the multi–scale analysis. In the critical region (e.g. the failure criterion

is approaching the unity), the multi–scale analysis can be performed in order

to update the stiﬀness tangent. However, this method is unapplicable to the

analysis which interfacial delamination between the ﬁbers and matrix is mod-

eled (if the length scale separation shown in Figure 5.1 is simulated) because

the macroscopic critical region where the interfacial delamination occurs is rel-

Conclusions and recommendations 49

atively diﬃcult to predict. Therefore, the stiﬀness tangent has to be updated

at every macroscopic integration point.

(b) Parallel computing of the multi–scale analysis [13, 44] can be performed. In the

parallel computing of the multi–scale analysis, every RVE is analyzed simulta-

neously in multi–core processor.

(c) The subroutine UMAT is called for twice at the ﬁrst iteration of each increment.

The deformation gradient tensor, F

M

is equivalent to identity tensor, I for every

RVE at the ﬁrst iteration of ﬁrst increment in order to obtain the initial stiﬀness

tangent. By utilizing this advantage, the multi–scale analysis can be performed

upon one RVE once at the ﬁrst iteration of ﬁrst increment in order to obtain

the identical stiﬀness tangent to represent other equivalent RVEs.

(iii) The developed framework can be applied to the static loading problems without

the necessity of re-implementation because the assumption of the principle of scale

separation is valid. In addition, the principle holds and the re–implementation of the

framework is unnecessary for the dynamic loading problems where the characteristic

wave length is much larger than the length scale of the RVE, i.e. at the RVE length

scale, this dynamic loading can be treated as a quasi–static loading. However, for

the case of the macroscopic dynamic loading wave length comparable to the length

scale of the RVE, the principle of separation is no longer valid. As a result, the

framework should be re-implemented for this loading problem.

yarn

matrix fiber

macroscopic microscopic

fiber-matrix

Figure 5.1: The length scales separation of macroscopic, microscopic and ﬁber–matrix levels.

5.2.2 Micro–structural modeling

(i) In this work, the plain weave textile RVE has been generated using TexGen [75],

then, it is imported into Abaqus [1] for the meshing and analysis. It is worth

to mention that the modeled RVE is considerably idealized (i.e. the ﬁbers and the

matrix within the yarns are modeled as a single material and free of defects) and the

yarn volume fraction is lower than the actual textile composite (i.e. low ﬁber volume

fraction). These factors may cause the analysis results quantitatively incomparable

to the experimental data. In the actual fabricated textile composite, which has

higher ﬁber volume fraction (higher than 0.50 [76]), defects (may appear during

fabrication process) and delamination between the ﬁber and matrix interface exist.

However, such realistic RVE (especially the RVE with high yarn volume fraction) is

considerably time consuming and diﬃcult to mesh due to the decreasing of matrix

volume within RVE.

50 Chapter 5

(ii) The modeled RVE is assumed to be used for the structural analysis during in–

service period. However, if the framework is to be used to analyze the textile

composite during fabrication process with high temperature (more than 100

◦

[76])

is being applied to the ﬁber and matrix materials within composite. The thermo–

mechanical analysis should be performed on the RVE due to the diﬀerence of the

thermal expansion coeﬃcient for both materials.

(iii) The modiﬁcation of the RVE, such as geometrical and material properties, do not

require the re–implementation of the multi–scale framework, except time–dependent

material properties (e.g. visco–elastic) where the rate of the deformation gradient

tensor,

˙

F

M

has to be provided from the macroscopic structure to the RVE.

5.2.3 Application of the multi–scale modeling framework

The modeled macroscopic models coupled with the textile RVE are considerably ideal,

i.e. the stacking misalignment does not exist (Figure 5.2(a)). However, in reality, the

imperfection and the misalignment of the multi–layer composites exist during fabrication

process [93] (Figure 5.2(b) and Figure 5.2(c)). It is thought that the imperfection and the

misalignment may aﬀect the macroscopic structural mechanisms. The developed multi–

scale framework provides the opportunity to analyze the structure with the imperfection

and misalignment of the yarns. Then, the investigation of their eﬀects on the macroscopic

structure mechanisms can be made. The microscopic models for the yarn imperfection

and misalignment can be modeled for the multi–scale analysis as follow.

(i) From Figure 5.2(b), the RVEs with diﬀerent thicknesses can be modeled to represent

the imperfection type of diﬀerent layer thickness.

(ii) From Figure 5.2(c), the misalignment of the yarns is shown. the two layers with

the misalignment of yarns in a single RVE can be modeled. Then, the RVE can be

assigned to a single layer of the macroscopic structure.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 5.2: The typical yarn imperfections and misalignments, (a) ideal stacking, (b) diﬀerent

layer heights, (c) layers shifted by the half of the width of RVE (

W

RVE

2

) (see

Figure 3.2) [93].

Bibliography

[1] Abaqus/standard version 6.9. Analysis user’s manuals. developed by HKS Inc. of

Rhone Island, USA and marketed under SIMULIA brand of Dassault Systemes S.A.,

2009.

[2] M. Bannister. Development and application of advanced textile composites. Pro-

ceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L: Journal of Materials:

Design and Applications, 218:253–260, 2004.

[3] D. Bigaud and P. Hamelin. Stiﬀness and failure modeling of 2D and 3D textile–

reinforced composites by means of imbricates–type elements approaches. Computers

and Structures, 80:2253–2264, 2002.

[4] P. Boisse, A. Gasser, and G. Hivet. Analyses of fabric tensile behaviour: determi-

nation of the biaxial tension strain surfaces and their use in forming simulations.

Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 32:1395–1414, 2001.

[5] C. Chamis. Simpliﬁed composite micromechanics equations for hygral, thermal and

mechanical properties. Society for the Advancement of Material and Process Engi-

neering, April:14–23, 1984.

[6] R. Christensen. A critical evaluation for a class of micromechanics models. Journal

of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 38:379–404, 1990.

[7] T. Chua. A framework for performing multi–scale analysis on composite using

abaqus. Technical report, Fokker Landing Gear B.V., Helmond, The Netherlands,

October 2010.

[8] P. Chung, K. Tamma, and R. Namburu. Asymptotic expansion homogenization for

heterogeneous media: computational issues and applications. Composite: Part A,

32:1291–1301, 2001.

[9] B. Cox, M. DadKhah, W. Morris, and J. Flintoﬀ. Failure mechanisms of 3D woven

composites in tension, compression and bending. Acta Metallurgica et Materialia,

12:3967–3984, 1994.

[10] B. N. Cox and G. Flanagan. Handbook of Analytical Methods for Textile Com-

posites. Contractor Report 4750, National Aeronautical and Space Administration

(NASA), March 1997. Prepared for Langley Research Center under Contract NAS1-

19243.

[11] S. Demiray, W. Becker, and J. Hohe. Analysis of two– and three–dimensional hy-

perelastic model foams under complex loading conditons. Mechanics of Materials,

38:985–1000, 2006.

51

52 Bibliography

[12] J. Eshelby. The determination of the ﬁeld of an ellipsoidal inclusion and related

problems. Proceeding of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical & Engineering

Sciences, 241:376–396, 1957.

[13] F. Feyel and J. Chaboche. FE

2

multiscale approach for modelling the elastovis-

coplastic behaviour of long ﬁber SiC/Ti composite materials. Computer Methods in

Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 183:309–330, 2000.

[14] E. Fredrik, M. David, A. Leif E., and J. Varna. Formation of damage and its eﬀects

on non-crimp fabric reinforced composites loaded in tension. Composite Science and

Technology, 64:675–692, 2004.

[15] V. Ganesh and N. Naik. Failure behaviour of plain weave fabric laminates under

in–plane shear loading: eﬀect of fabric geometry. Composite Structures, 30:179–192,

1995.

[16] M. Geers, E. Coenen, and V. Kouznetsova. Multi–scale computational homogeniza-

tion of structural thin sheets. Modeling and Simulation in Materials Science and

Engineering, 15:S393–S404, 2007.

[17] M. Geers, V. Kouznetsova, and W. Brekelmans. Multi–scale computational homoge-

nization: trends and challenges. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics,

2009.

[18] M. Ghasemi Nejhad and T. Chou. Compresssion behavior of woven carbon ﬁbre–

reinforced epoxy composites with moulded–in and drilled holes. Composites, 21:33–

40, 1990.

[19] S. Ghosh, K. Lee, and P. Raghavan. A multi–level computational model for multi–

scale damage analysis in composite and porous materials. International Journal of

Solids and Structures, 38:2335–2385, 2001.

[20] E. Glaessgen, C. Pastore, O. Griﬃn, and A. Birger. Geometrical and ﬁnite element

modelling of textile composites. Composites: Part B, 27:43–50, 1996.

[21] B. Gommers, I. Verpoest, and P. van Houtte. The Mori–Tanaka method applied to

textile composite materials. Acta Materiallia, 46:2223–2235, 1998.

[22] Z. Hashin. The elastic moduli of heterogeneous materials. Journal of Applied Me-

chanics, 50:481–505, 1962.

[23] Z. Hashin and B. Rosen. The elastic moduli of ﬁber–reinforced materials. American

Society of Mechanical Engineers, 31:223–232, 1964.

[24] J. Hearle. Engineering design of textiles. Indian Journal of Fibres and Textile,

31:142–149, 2006.

[25] R. Hill. Elastic properties of reinforced solids some theoretical principles. Journal

of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 11:357–372, 1963.

[26] R. Hill. On constitutive macro-variables for heterogeneous solids at ﬁnite strain.

Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical,

326(1565):131–147, 1972.

Bibliography 53

[27] T. Ishikawa and T. Chou. Elastic behavior of woven hybrid composite. Journal of

Materials Science, 16:2–19, 1982.

[28] T. Ishikawa and T. Chou. Nonlinear behavior of woven fabric composites. Computers

& Structures, 17:399–413, 1983.

[29] T. Ishikawa and T. Chou. One–dimensional micromechanical analysis of woven fabric

composites. AIAA, 21:1714–1721, 1983.

[30] M. Ito and T. Chou. Elastic moduli and stress ﬁeld of plain–weave composites under

tensile loading. Composites Science and Technology, 57:787–800, 1997.

[31] I. Ivanov and A. Tabiei. Three–dimensional computational micro–mechanical model

for woven fabric composites. Composites Structures, 54:489–496, 2001.

[32] R. Kamiya, R. Cheeseman, P. Popper, and T. Chou. Some recent advances in the

fabrication and design of three–dimensional textile preforms: a review. Composites

Science and Technology, 60:33–47, 2000.

[33] R. Karkkainen and B. Sankar. A direct micromechanics method for analysis of failure

initiation of plain weave textile composites. Composites Science and Technology,

66:137–150, 2006.

[34] R. L. Karkkainen, B. V. Sankar, and T. T. Jerome. Strength prediction of multi–layer

plain weave textile composites using the direct micromechanics method. Composites:

Part B, 38:924–932, 2007.

[35] D. Kenaga, J. Doyle, and C. Sun. The characterization of boron/aluminum in the

nonlinear range as an orthotropic elastic plastic material. Journal of Composite

Materials, 27:516–531, 1987.

[36] M. King, P. Jearanaisilawong, and S. Socrate. A continuum constitutive model

for the mechanical behavior of woven fabrics. International Journal of Solids and

Structures, 42:3867–3896, 2005.

[37] V. Kouznetsova. Computational homogenization for the multi–scale of multi–phase

materials. PhD thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands, 2002.

[38] V. Kouznetsova, W. Brekelmens, and F. Baaijens. An approach to micro–macro

modeling of heterogeneous materials. Computational Mechanics, 27:37–48, 2001.

[39] V. Kouznetsova, M. Geers, and W. Brekelmans. Multi–scale second–order compu-

tational homogenization of heterogeneous materials. ICTAM, XXI:15–21, 2004.

[40] S. Lomov, I. Verpoest, T. Peeters, D. Roose, and M. Zako. Nesting in textile lam-

inates: geometrical modeling of the laminate. Composites Science and Technology,

63:993–1007, 2003.

[41] S. Mall, D. Katwyk, R. Bolick, A. Kelkar, and D. Davis. Tension–compression fa-

tigue behavior of a H–VARTM manufactured unnotched and notched carbon/epoxy

composite. Composite Structures, 90:201–207, 2009.

54 Bibliography

[42] R. Marrey and B. Sankar. Micromechanical models for textile structural composites.

Technical Report 198229, National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA),

Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, 1995.

[43] J. E. Masters and M. A. Portanova. Standard test methods for textile composites.

Lockheed Martin Engineering and Science Company, Hampton, Virginia, US, Con-

tract NASI-19000 edition, September 1996. NASA Contractors Report 4751.

[44] K. Matsui, K. Terada, and K. Yuge. Parallelized two–scale analysis with a PC clus-

ter for elastic–plastic heterogeneous media. Japan Society Mechanical Engineering

International Journal Series A, 44:584–593, 2001.

[45] W. Micheal Lai, D. Rubin, and E. Krempl. Introduction to Continuum Mechanics.

Butterworth Heinemann, 3rd edition, 1993.

[46] J. Michel, H. Moulinec, and P. Suquet. Eﬀective properties of composite materials

with periodic microstructure: a computational approach. Computer Methods in

Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 172:109–143, 1999.

[47] C. Miehe. Strain–driven homogenization of inelastic microstructures and composites

based on an incremental variational formulation. International Journal for Numerical

Methods in Engineering, 55:1285–1322, 2002.

[48] C. Miehe. Computational micro–to–macro transitions for discretized micro–

structures of heterogeneous materials at ﬁnite strains based on the minimization

of averaged incremental energy. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and En-

gineering, 192:559–591, 2003.

[49] C. Miehe and A. Koch. Computational micro–to–macro transition of discretized

microstructures undergoing small strain. Archive of Applied Mechanics, 72:300–317,

2002.

[50] C. Miehe, J. Schroder, and M. Becker. Computational homogenization analysis

in ﬁnite elasticity: material and structural instabilities on the micro– and macro–

scales of periodic composites and their interaction. Computer Methods in Applied

Mechanics and Engineering, 191:4971–5005, 2002.

[51] T. Mori and K. Tanaka. Average stress in the matrix and average elastic energy of

materials with misﬁtting inclusions. Acta Metallurgica, 21:571–574, 1973.

[52] H. Moulinec and P. Suquet. Numerical method for computing the overall response

of nonlinear composites with complex microstructure. Computer Methods in Applied

Mechanics and Engineering, 157:69–94, 1998.

[53] A. Mouritz, M. Bannister, P. Falzon, and K. Leong. Review of applications for

advanced three–dimensional ﬁbre textile composites. Composites: Part A, 30:1445–

1461, 1999.

[54] K. Naik and V. Ganesh. Prediction of on–axes elastic properties of plain weave fabric

composites. Composites Science and Technology, 45:135–152, 1992.

[55] N. Naik and P. Shembekar. Elastic behavior of woven fabric composites: I–lamina

analysis. Journal of Composite Materials, 26:2197–2225, 1992.

Bibliography 55

[56] N. Naik and P. Shembekar. Elastic behavior of woven fabric composites: III–laminate

design. Journal of Composite Materials, 26:2523–2541, 1992.

[57] G. Nicoletto and R. Enrica. Failure mechanicsms in twill–weave laminates: FEM

predictions vs. experiments. Composites: Part A, 35:787–795, 2004.

[58] S. D. Pandita, G. Huysmans, M. Wevers, and Verpoest. Tensile fatigue behaviour

of glass plain–weave fabric composites in on– and oﬀ–axis directions. Composites:

Part A, 32:1533–1539, 2001.

[59] P. Potluri and V. Thammandra. Inﬂuence of uniaxial and biaxial tension on meso-

scale geometry and strain ﬁelds in a woven composite. Composites Structures,

77:405–418, 2007.

[60] P. Rupnowski, M. Gentz, J. Sutter, and M. Kumosa. Mechanical response of a

woven graphite/polyimide composite to in-plane shear dominated loads at room and

elevated temperatures. Acta Materialia, 74:5603–5613, 2004.

[61] P. Shembekar and N. Naik. Elastic behavior of woven fabric composites: II–laminate

analysis. Journal of Composite Materials, 26:2226–2246, 1992.

[62] P. Shembekar and N. Naik. Notched strength of fabric laminates. II: Eﬀect of stacking

sequence. Composites Science and Technology, 44:13–20, 1992.

[63] M. Sherburn. Geometric and mechanical modelling of textiles. PhD thesis, The

University of Nottingham, England, 2007.

[64] S. Sihn, E. V. Iarve, and A. K. Roy. Three–dimensional stress analysis of textile com-

posites: Part I. Numerical analysis. International Journal of Solids and Structures,

41:1377–1393, 2004.

[65] S. Sihn and A. Roy. Development of a three–dimensional mixed variational model

for woven composites. II numerical solution and validation. International Journal of

Solids and Structures, 38:5949–5962, 2001.

[66] K. Srirengan, J. Whitcomb, and C. Chapman. Modal technique for three–

dimensional global/local stress analysis of plain weave composites. Composite Struc-

tures, 39:145–156, 1997.

[67] C. Sun and R. Vaidya. Prediction of composite properties from a representative

volume element. Composites Science and Technology, 56:171–179, 1996.

[68] P. Suquet. Local and global aspects in the mathematical theory of plasticity. Plas-

ticity Today: Modelling, Methods and Applications, pages 279–310, 1985.

[69] P. Suquet. Overall potentials and extremal surfaces of power law or ideally plastic

composites. Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 41:981–1002, 1993.

[70] A. Tabiei and Y. Jiang. Woven fabric composite material model with material non-

linearity for nonlinear ﬁnite element simulation. International Journal of Solids and

Structures, 36:2757–2771, 1999.

56 Bibliography

[71] A. Tabiei and W. Yi. Comparative study of predictive methods for woven fabric

composite elastic properties. Composite Structures, 58:149–164, 2002.

[72] N. Takano, Y. Uetsuji, Y. Kashiwagi, and M. Zako. Hierarchical modelling of textile

composite materials and structures by the homogenization method. Modelling and

Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering, 7:207–231, 1999.

[73] P. Tan, L. Tong, and G. Steven. A three–dimensional modelling technique for predict-

ing the linear elastic property of opened–packing woven fabric unit cells. Composite

Structures, 38:261–271, 1997.

[74] K. Terada, M. Hori, T. Kyoya, and N. Kikuchi. Simulation of the multi–scale conver-

gence in computational homogenization approaches. International Journal of Solids

and Structures, 37:2285–2311, 2000.

[75] TexGen version 3.3.0. TexGen textile composites modeling preprocessor user’s guide

manuals. developed at the University of Nottingham, UK and licensed under the

General Public License, 2008.

[76] B. Thuis. The development of composite landing gear components for aerospace

applications. unclassiﬁed NLR–TP–2004–141, Nationaal Lucht–en Ruimtevaartlab-

oratorium (NLR), The Netherlands, April 2004.

[77] O. van der Sluis, P. B. W. Schreurs, and H. Meijer. Overall behaviour of heteroge-

neous elastoviscoplastic materials: eﬀect of microstructural modelling. Mechanics of

Materials, 32:449–462, 2000.

[78] M. van Gils, O. van der Sluis, G. Zhang, J. Janssen, and R. Voncken. Analysis of

Cu/low–k bond pad delamination by using a novel failure index. Microelectronics

Reliability, 47:179–186, 2007.

[79] P. Vandeurzen, J. Ivens, and I. Verpoest. A three–dimensional micromechanical

analysis of woven–fabric composites: I. Geometric analysis. Composites Science and

Technology, 56:1303–1315, 1996.

[80] P. Vandeurzen, J. Ivens, and I. Verpoest. A three–dimensional micromechanical

analysis of woven–fabric composites: II. Elastic analysis. Composites Science and

Technology, 56:1317–1327, 1996.

[81] M. Venkat Rao, P. Mahajan, and R. Mittal. Eﬀect of architecture on mechanical

properties of carbon–carbon composites. Composite Structures, 83:131–142, 2008.

[82] I. Verpoest and S. Lomov. Virtual textile composites software wisetex: Integration

with micro–mechanical, permeability and structural analysis. Composites Science

and Technology, 65:2563–2574, 2005.

[83] X. Wang, B. Hu, Y. Feng, F. Liang, J. Mo, J. Xiong, and Y. Qiu. Low velocity impact

properties of 3D woven basalt/aramid hybrid composites. Composites Science and

Technology, 68:444–450, 2008.

[84] X. Wang, X. Wang, G. Zhou, and C. Zhou. Multi–scale analyses of 3D woven com-

posite based on periodicity boundary conditions. Journal of Composite Materials,

41:1773–1788, 2007.

Bibliography 57

[85] J. Whitcomb. Iterative global/local ﬁnite element analysis. Computers & Structures,

40:1027–1032, 1991.

[86] J. Whitcomb, K. Srirengan, and C. Chapman. Evaluation of homogenization for

global/local stress analysis of textile composites. Composite Structures, 31:137–149,

1995.

[87] C. Wong, A. Long, M. Sherburn, F. Robitaille, P. Harrison, and C. Rudd. Compari-

son of novel and eﬃcient approaches for permeability prediction based on the fabric

architecture. Composites: Part A, 37:847–857, 2006.

[88] K. Woo and J. D. Whitcomb. A post–processsor approach for stress analysis of

woven textile composites. Composites Science and Technology, 60:693–704, 2000.

[89] Z. Wu. Three–dimensional exact modeling of geometric and mechanical properties

of woven composites. Acta Mechanica Solids Sinica, 22:479–486, 2009.

[90] Y. Xu, W. Zhang, and D. Bassir. Stress analysis of multi–phase and multi–layer plain

weave composite structure using global/local approach. Composites Structures, 2009.

[91] Y. Yeong Moo, P. Sang Hoon, and Y. Sung Kie. Asymptotic homogenization of

viscoelastic composites with periodic microstructures. International Journal of Solids

and Structures, 35(17):2039–2055, 1998.

[92] M. Zako, T. Uetsuji, and T. Kurashiki. Finite element analysis of damaged woven

fabric composite materials. Composite Science and Technology, 63:507–516, 2003.

[93] J. Zeman and M. Sejnoha. Homogenization of balanced plain weave composites with

imperfect microstructure: Part I – Theoretical formulation. International Journal

of Solids and Structures, 41:6549–6571, 2004.

[94] Y. Zhang and J. Harding. A numerical micromechanics analysis of the mechanical

properties of a plain weave composite. Computers & Structures, 36:839–844, 1990.

[95] L. Zhao, N. Warrior, and A. Long. Finite element modelling of damage progression in

non-crimp fabric reinforced composites. Composite Science and Technology, 66:36–

50, 2006.

Appendices

58

Appendix A

Literature survey

Heterogeneous materials analytical modeling

Most of the available research works to determine the overall properties for heterogeneous

materials and structures were based on the particulate (spherical) inclusions embedded

in the matrix which both constituents were assumed to be isotropic. For example, Es-

helby [12] derived a method for determining the stress and strain ﬁelds induced by an

elastic ellipsoidal inclusion embedded in an inﬁnite elastic medium in two–dimensional

(2D) problem. It was further developed by Hashin [22], Mori and Tanaka [51]. The critical

evaluation and overview of various conventional analytical methods (Diﬀerential method,

Composite Spheres model, Self Consistent method, Generalized Self method and Mori–

Tanaka method) for predicting the eﬀective properties of particulate composites was done

by Christensen [6]. King et al. [36] modeled the woven fabrics in macroscopic continuum

constitutive model to determine the macroscopic stresses based on the rule of mixture

and classical laminate theory (CLT). However, the application of these conventional ana-

lytical modelings on the textile composites becomes diﬃcult and questionable due to the

complexity of yarns geometry evolves in three–dimensional (3D) space.

One–dimensional model

Ishikawa and Chou [27] developed a mosaic model for analyzing the elastic behavior of

woven hybrid composites. This model treats the composite as an assemblage of multiple

pieces of asymmetrical cross–ply laminates. And, the 2D lamina was simpliﬁed to two

one–dimensional (1D) models which were either parallel or series model depending on

the arrangement of the cross–ply laminate. Two major drawbacks of this model are the

yarns continuity and non–uniform stresses and strains were not taking into account. As

a result, 1D ﬁber undulation model (or crimp model) was proposed by Ishikawa and

Chou [29] which took into account the continuity and the undulation of yarns.

Next, the crimp model and bridging model were applied to analyze the nonlinear

elastic behavior of woven composites by Ishikawa et al. [28]. However, only the undulation

and the continuity of yarns along the loading direction were considered in these models.

The yarn undulation in transverse direction and the actual cross–sectional geometry are

not taken into account, which may be the important factors in a textile analytical model.

Zhang and Harding [94] utilized the strain energy equivalence principle with the aid of FE

method for the micromechanical analysis on a one–ply plain weave composite material

with an assumption of 1D yarn undulation only. They claimed that both crimp and

59

60 Appendix A

bridging models and this energy–based method should be extended to the case of 2D

undulation model after the comparison between numerical prediction and experimental

results.

Two–dimensional model

The 1D crimp model was extended to 2D crimp model for an elastic analysis of a 2D plain

weave composite by Naik and Shembekar [55, 56, 61]. This model is incorporated with

the yarn undulation and continuity in both warp and weft directions. The presence of

gap between adjacent yarns and the actual cross–sectional geometry of yarns is modeled

in this model as well.

Next, Naik and Ganesh [54] proposed two 2D reﬁned models, which are slice array

model (SAM) and element array model (EAM) for the plain weave textile composites.

The SAM and EAM are 2D models with the continuity and the undulation of yarns in

warp and weft directions as well as the presence of the gap between adjacent yarns were

considered. The diﬀerent materials and geometrical properties of warp and weft yarns

can be modeled.

Ito and Chou [30] developed the 2D iso–strain and ﬂexural analytical models for inves-

tigating the elastic properties and stress distribution of a plain weave textile composite

under in–plane tensile loading. Four 2D unit cells with diﬀerent yarn conﬁgurations

were developed which are single lamina, iso–phase laminate, out–of–phase laminate and

random–phase laminate. It was reported that the Young’s moduli and stress distribu-

tion for both single lamina and random–phase laminate conﬁgurations are adequately

predicted by iso–strain model.

Three–dimensional model

In order to extend the analysis on a plain weave composite into 3D problem, Tan et

al. [73] introduced the 3D analytical model for predicting the linear elastic property

of an open–balanced plain weave composite. It was claimed that this technique is an

eﬀective and eﬃcient method for reducing the eﬀort and time of FE meshing for the

complex textile composites. However, the yarns geometry are greatly simpliﬁed, i.e. the

undulated segment of both warp and weft yarns are idealized to be inclined straight yarns.

Next, in order to include the full and detail geometrical descriptions of a woven

textile composite which is important to predict the textile composite mechanical behavior.

Vandeurzen et al. published two research papers regarding to the geometrical analysis [79]

and the elastic analysis [80] on a woven textile composite. In geometrical analysis, an

extensive mathematical description of geometric parameters are used to describe a non–

traditional textile composite unit cell with various yarn sizes or special yarns such as

optical ﬁbers yarn and shape–memory alloy ﬁbers yarn. In elastic analysis, the textile

composite unit cell composed of four yarn systems developed in geometrical analysis was

analyzed analytically. The unit cell is partitioned into macro–cells (macro–partition)

and further each macro–cell is partitioned into micro–cells (micro–partition). However,

in micro–cells, the yarn geometry is greatly simpliﬁed into combi–cell model (CMM)

which composed of yarn layer and matrix layer although a relatively detailed geometrical

information for yarns in unit cell level is taken into account.

Sankar and Marrey [42] proposed a micromechanical analysis method on a unit cell

model for predicting the stiﬀness and strength properties of textile composites materials.

Literature survey 61

The unit cell is discretized with 3D ﬁnite elements, and the periodic boundary conditions

(BCs) are imposed on the opposite end–faces of the unit cell. Three linearly independent

deformations, namely, pure extension, pure bending and pure shear were applied to the

unit cell. The developed analytical method was then used to evaluate the stiﬀness coeﬃ-

cients of a plain weave composite which was modeled as a beam. However, this model is

not veriﬁed by experimental results. In addition, the application of this method to other

textile composite structures needs to be further investigated.

For computing the mechanical properties for the plain weave textile composite by

utilizing the micromechanical approach and the homogenization technique within FE

framework, Tabiei and Jiang [70] developed the micromechanical model for the compos-

ite by using the method of cells. The representative cell is then discretized into many

subcells. An averaging is then performed again by assuming the stress distribution is

uniform in each subcell to obtain the eﬀective properties of each subcell. Then, these

eﬀective properties are summed together to get the overall eﬀective properties in the

representative cell. Next, Ivanov and Tabiei [31] developed a micromechanical model

consists of four subcells. But, only two subcells were analyzed for the prediction of

elastic properties due to an anti–symmetry boundary. However, the method of cells is

relatively complicated and computational expensive. Later, Tabiei and Yi [71] developed

a simpliﬁed version for the method of cells which uses the same theory as the method

of cells but the methodology is much simpler. It was reported that the method of cells

becomes computational ineﬀective if the explicit ﬁnite element is used.

Besides the proposed plain weave composite model, Gommer et al. [21] developed

the 3D analytical model for calculating the elastic properties of woven, braided and

knitted textile composites by applying Mori–Tanaka method. The complex orientation

distribution of the yarn is simpliﬁed by utilizing the orientation tensors. This Mori–

Takana method is only veriﬁed experimentally of the in–plane elastic constants for textile

composites, therefore, the prediction of out–of–plane elastic constants needs to be veriﬁed.

Textile composite global/local analysis modeling

A brief description of the macroscopic landing gear structure FE modeling is available

in the National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR) report written by Thuis [76]. For the sake

of the simpliﬁcation, the model was not modeled in detail and the four nodes Stanley-

type shell elements were used in the model. Therefore, the model unable to describe the

mechanical behavior of the composite materials microscopically.

It is known that the properties of a composite can be characterized by its repre-

sentation volume element (RVE). But it is almost practically diﬃcult to incorporate all

geometrical and material parameters in a simple RVE due to the complexity of a textile

composite microstructure. Hence, in order to obtain the highly accurate predicted me-

chanical properties with minimum analysis eﬀort, a more computational eﬃcient method

for performing the analysis is essential.

Therefore, a FE analysis approach known as global/local method based on modal

analysis was developed by Srirengan et al. [66] for the 3D stress analysis of the plain

weave composite structures. Generally, a 3D global FE analysis was performed on a

global region with the 3D global coarse ﬁnite elements, followed by a detailed 3D local

FE analysis performs upon a local region of interest (ROI) with the independent 3D local

ﬁne ﬁnite elements.

62 Appendix A

Whitcomb [85] developed an iterative global/local FE analysis method. The basic

idea of this method was that the displacements or stresses on a global model with coarse

mesh can be obtained with an appropriate impose of the boundary conditions on the

global/local interfaces in a reﬁned local model. However, it was reported that there was

a potential problem due to the diﬀerences in stiﬀness on the global/local boundaries.

Later, Whitcomb et al. [86] proposed a global/local stress analysis procedure which

used homogenized engineering material properties to accelerate the global stress analysis

for the textile composites. The homogenized engineering properties is used owing to the

relatively large size of a unit cell for the textile composite compared with the unidirec-

tional laminated composites. However, this method was validated only in 2D problem,

thus, an application of this method in 3D problem needs to be further investigated. It

was reported that the accuracy of the calculated stress was poor for exterior unit cells in

a global model due to the free boundary eﬀects.

Takano et al. [72] named the global/local modeling as hierarchical modeling for the

textile composites because four–level hierarchy is considered from both material and

structural point of views. The hierarchy of structure consists of global and local levels,

whereas, the hierarchy of material consists of meso and micro levels. From the viewpoint

of heterogeneous material, a unit cell model of the textile composites consists of yarns

(ﬁber bundles) and matrix which is considered as a mesoscale model. In microscale

model, the yarns are modeled as a medium composed of mono–ﬁlament and matrix. In all

hierarchical levels, the homogenization analysis method is used for obtaining the relatively

good accuracy results. It was claimed that remarkable inexpensive computational eﬀort

in terms of central processing unit (CPU) time and memory especially ﬁnite element

generation can be achieved in this hierarchical context.

Multi–scale homogenization approach

For the past decades, vast amount of multi–scale modeling techniques for heteroge-

neous materials were proposed, such as analytical homogenization (Suquet [69]), asymp-

totic homogenization (Yi et al. [91], Chung et al. [8]), variational multi–scale methods

(Miehe [47]) and computational homogenization (Kouznetsova et al. [38, 39], Miehe et

al. [50], Miehe [48], Mouline and Suquet [52], Miehe and Koch [49], Michel et al. [46],

Feyel and Chaboche [13], Terada et al. [74]). Among these homogenization techniques,

the computational homogenization (also known as FE

2

method [13]) is probably one of

the most accurate techniques [17]. It depends on the nested solution algorithm for a

macrostructure at the microstructure boundary value problem. Therefore, it provides

an accurate multi–scale solution to many engineering materials with heterogeneous char-

acteristic, such as metal alloy systems, porous media, polycrystalline materials [16, 37].

Hence, it is reasonable to believe that the computational homogenization framework has

the capability to solve the relatively complex textile composites problems by bridging its

macro–scale and micro–scale.

However, the multi–scale computational homogenization method is not better or worse

than the widely used global/local method in the textile composites analysis. The selection

between both methods should base on the descriptions of a speciﬁc engineering problem.

The global/local method is no more than a FE analysis through the mesh reﬁnement

technique on a region of interest (ROI), e.g. crack tips or speciﬁc regions with high

stresses or strains. Whereas, the multi–scale computational homogenization approach

Literature survey 63

is used optimally for predicting the collective multi–phase response of a microstructure

collectively. Moreover, the multi-scale computational homogenization approach enables

to provide the detailed microstructural phenomenon at each macroscopic region. As a

result, the contribution of the mechanical mechanicsms from micro–level to macro–level

can be studied in detailed.

Appendix B

Macro–micro levels coupling

Deformation

The averaging theorem regarding to the macro–micro coupling of the kinematic quantities

state that the F

M

is the volume average of the F

m

as follow

F

M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

F

m

dV

0

. (B.1)

According to the divergence (Gauss) theorem

_

V

∇· a(x) dV =

_

Γ

n(x) · a(x) dΓ, (B.2)

where a(x) is a vector function on domain V and n(x) is the outward pointing unit normal

to the surface Γ of the domain V .

Therefore, the application of the divergence theorem and F

m

=

_

∇

0

m

x

_

T

lead to the

transformation of (B.1) from volume integral in undeformed state of the RVE into surface

integral

F

M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

F

m

dV

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

xn

0

dΓ

0

. (B.3)

The utilization of the periodic BCs on a RVE leads to the satisfaction of (B.3). The RVE

boundary is split into two opposite surfaces, Γ

+

0

and Γ

−

0

, with utlizing the divergence

theorem and

∇

0m

x

0

= I gives

F

M

=

1

V

0

_

¸

_

¸

_

_

Γ

+

0

x

+

n

+

0

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

−

0

x

−

n

−

0

dΓ

0

_

¸

_

¸

_

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

+

0

_

x

+

−x

−

_

n

+

0

dΓ

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

+

0

_

F

M

·

_

x

+

0

−x

−

0

__

n

+

0

dΓ

0

=

1

V

0

F

M

·

_

Γ

0

x

0

n

0

dΓ

0

=

1

V

0

F

M

·

_

V

0

_

∇

0m

x

0

_

T

dV

0

= F

M

(B.4)

64

Macro–micro levels coupling 65

Stress

The averaging theorem for the ﬁrst Piola–Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor, P is given as

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

P

m

dV

0

. (B.5)

In order to transform the volume integral of P

M

into surface integral, the microscopic

equilibrium,

∇

0

m

· P

T

m

=

0 and

∇

0m

x

0

= I are used with the following relation

∇

0m

·

_

P

T

m

x

0

_

=

_

∇

0m

· P

T

m

_

x

0

+P

m

·

_

∇

0m

x

0

_

= P

m

. (B.6)

Next, (B.6) is substituted into (B.5), and with the use of divergence theorem and the

deﬁnition of the microscopic ﬁrst Piola–Kirchhoﬀ stress vector, p = n

0

· P

T

m

. The P

M

can be deﬁned on the RVE surface

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

∇

0m

·

_

P

T

m

x

0

_

dV

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

n

0

· P

T

m

x

0

dΓ

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

px

0

dΓ

0

. (B.7)

Similarly, the application of the averaging theorem on the σ

m

over current RVE volume,

V and the transformation from volume integral to surface integral is elaborated as follow

σ

∗

M

=

1

V

_

V

σ

m

dV =

1

V

_

Γ

n · (σ

m

x) dΓ =

1

V

_

Γ

tx dΓ, (B.8)

with the used of divergence theorem (2.6), microscopic equilibrium,

∇

m

·σ

m

=

0, equality,

∇

m

x = I , the deﬁnition of the Cauchy stress vector,

t = n· σ

m

and the following relation

∇

m

· (σ

m

x) =

_

∇

m

· σ

m

_

x + σ ·

_

∇

m

x

_

= σ

m

. (B.9)

In the general case of large strains, large rotation and relatively complex structural to-

pography, the fact of the nonlinearity of the continuum mechanics relation between stress

measures should be taken with cautiousness, i.e. not all macroscopic stress quantities ob-

tained from the volume averaging theorem is valid. Therefore, the σ

M

should be deﬁned

as

σ

M

=

1

det (F

M

)

P

M

· F

T

M

. (B.10)

Internal work

The averaging theorem for the micro-macro energy transition, known as Hill–Mandel con-

dition or macrohomogeneity condition [25, 26, 68] has to be satisﬁed for the conservation

of the speciﬁc energy between micro–macro transition. This condition states that the

microscopic volume average of the variation of work performed upon RVE is equivalent

to the local variation of the work on the macro–level. The Hill–Mandel condition is given

as

1

V

0

_

V

0

P

m

: δF

T

m

dV

0

= P

M

: δF

T

M

, ∀δx, (B.11)

66 Appendix B

which is formulated in terms of the work conjugated pair (P and F). The left–hand side

of (B.11) can be deﬁned in terms of the RVE surface as follow

δW

0M

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

P

m

: δF

T

m

dV

0

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

P

m

:

_

∇

0m

δx

_

dV

0

=

1

V

0

_

V

0

∇

0m

·

_

P

T

m

· δx

_

dV

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

n

0

·

_

P

T

m

· δx

_

dΓ

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

p · δx dΓ

0

, (B.12)

where the divergence theorem (B.2), microscopic equilibrium (2.2), the deﬁnition of the

microscopic ﬁrst Piola–Kirchhoﬀ stress vector, p = n

0

· P

T

m

, and the following relation

have been used

P

T

m

:

_

∇

0m

δx

_

=

∇

0m

·

_

P

T

m

· δx

_

−

_

∇

0m

· P

T

m

_

· δx. (B.13)

Next, the surface integral of the macroscopic ﬁrst Piola–Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor (B.7), the

periodic BCs (2.4a) and antiperiodic tractions (2.4b) are used to verify the satisfaction

of Hill–Mandel condition (B.11), as follow

δW

0M

=

1

V

0

_

¸

_

¸

_

_

Γ

+

0

p

+

· δx

+

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

−

0

p

−

· δx

−

dΓ

0

_

¸

_

¸

_

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

+

0

p

+

·

_

δx

+

−δx

−

_

dΓ

0

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

+

0

p

+

_

x

+

0

−x

−

0

_

dΓ

0

: δF

T

M

=

1

V

0

_

Γ

0

px

0

dΓ

0

: δF

T

M

= P

M

: δF

T

M

. (B.14)

Appendix C

Microscopic level boundary value

problem

The RVE boundary value problem imposed with the periodic BCs can be solved numer-

ically with FE method. Following the FE method, the weak formulation procedure and

FE discretization are performed on the equilibrium equation (2.2) with account for the

constitutive relation (2.3) lead to a non–linear algebraic equations system

f

¯

internal

_

u

¯

_

= f

¯

external

, (C.1)

expressing the equilibrium in external forces, f

¯

external

and internal forces, f

¯

internal

in terms

of unknown nodal displacements, u

¯

. This system can be solved through imposing the

BCs. Therefore, the periodic BCs (2.4a) have to be rewritten into an appropriate format

for its application in the FE framework. Consider a 3D periodic RVE schematically

depicted in Figure 2.5. It is assumed that the FE discretization is performed such that the

corresponding opposite surfaces of the RVE is discretized into an equivalent distribution

of nodes. And, the surfaces of the RVE can be split into top, bottom, left, right, front

and back surfaces. Due to the initial periodicity of the RVE, the respective pair of nodes

on the top–bottom, right–left, and front–back surfaces in the undeformed state (or initial

conﬁguration) can be written as

x

0

top

−x

0

bottom

= x

0

5

−x

0

1

, (C.2a)

x

0

right

−x

0

left

= x

0

2

−x

0

1

, (C.2b)

x

0

front

−x

0

back

= x

0

1

−x

0

4

, (C.2c)

where x

0

p

is the initial position vector of the prescribed four corner nodes (also known

as control nodes, master nodes [11] or control vertices [78]), p (p = 1, 2, 4, 5), as shown in

Figure 2.4. The x

0

right

and x

0

left

, x

0

front

and x

0

back

, x

0

top

and x

0

bottom

are the initial position

vectors for the respective pair of nodes on the right and left, front and back, top and

bottom surfaces of the RVE, respectively. According to (2.4a), by considering the pairs of

respective nodes on the opposite surfaces, the periodic BCs in deformed state (or current

conﬁguration) can be written as

x

top

−x

bottom

= F

M

· (x

0

5

−x

0

1

) = x

5

−x

1

, (C.3a)

x

right

−x

left

= F

M

· (x

0

2

−x

0

1

) = x

2

−x

1

, (C.3b)

x

front

−x

back

= F

M

· (x

0

1

−x

0

4

) = x

1

−x

4

. (C.3c)

67

68 Appendix C

where the relation of the position vectors for the four corner nodes between deformed

and undeformed states as shown below has been used in (C.3)

x

p

= F

M

· x

0

p

. p = 1, 2, 4, 5 (C.4)

Then, the periodic BCs in deformed state can be rewritten as

x

top

= x

bottom

+x

5

−x

1

, (C.5a)

x

right

= x

left

+x

2

−x

1

, (C.5b)

x

front

= x

back

+x

1

−x

4

. (C.5c)

Besides prescribing the position vectors for every respective pair of nodes, they can be

formulated in terms of displacements, u

u

top

= u

bottom

+u

5

−u

1

, (C.6a)

u

right

= u

left

+ u

2

−u

1

, (C.6b)

u

front

= u

back

+ u

1

−u

4

. (C.6c)

The relation of u with x

0

can be expressed as

u

p

= (F

M

−I ) · x

0

p

, p = 1, 2, 4, 5, (C.7)

where I is the identity tensor.

Next, the (C.6) can be discretized and partitioned into a set of homogeneous con-

straints in matrix format

[C

i

C

d

]

_

u

¯

i

u

¯

d

_

= 0

¯

, (C.8)

where C is the matrix containing the coeﬃcients in the constraint relations and u

¯

is the

column with the degrees of freedom (DOF) involved in the constraints. The subscripts

“i” and “d” are denoted as independent and dependent for the respective parameter,

respectively. In the following, the procedure of eliminating of the dependent DOF from

the system of equations is used, i.e. the u

¯

i

has to be retained in the system and u

¯

d

has to

be eliminated from the system. Due to the equivalent total number of dependent DOF,

u

¯

d

as total number of constraint equations in (C.8). Thus, the matrix, C

d

is square and

non-singular. The solution for u

¯

d

yields

u

¯

d

= C

di

u

¯

i

, with C

di

= −C

−1

d

C

i

. (C.9)

Then, the column u

¯

in (C.8) may be further rewritten into

_

u

¯

i

u

¯

d

_

= T u

¯

i

, with T =

_

I

C

di

_

, (C.10)

where I is a unit matrix of size [N

i

×N

i

], with N

i

is the number of the independent DOF.

The non–linear system of equations (C.1) is linearized to a linear system in the it-

erative corrections, δu

¯

to the current estimation, u

¯

. This linearized system may be

partitioned as

_

K

ii

K

id

K

di

K

dd

_ _

δu

¯

i

δu

¯

d

_

=

_

f

¯

i

external

−

f

¯

i

internal

f

¯

d

external

−

f

¯

d

internal

_

=

_

δr

¯

i

δr

¯

d

_

, (C.11)

Microscopic level boundary value problem 69

with the residual nodal forces, δr

¯

at the right–hand side. The constraint equations in

(C.11) are linear. Thus, their linearization is straightforward and the application of the

(C.10) to the system (C.11) gives

_

I C

T

di

¸

_

K

ii

K

id

K

di

K

dd

_ _

I

C

di

_

δu

¯

i

=

_

I C

T

di

¸

_

δr

¯

i

δr

¯

d

_

, (C.12)

after rewritten the (C.12) gives

_

K

ii

+ K

di

C

di

+ C

T

di

K

di

+ C

T

di

K

dd

C

di

¸

δu

¯

i

=

_

δr

¯

i

+ C

T

di

δr

¯

d

¸

. (C.13)

The column u

¯

i

in (C.13) includes the displacement of the prescribed corner nodes, u

¯

p

.

Therefore, the boundary conditions (C.7) can be applied to the system (C.13).

Appendix D

Macroscopic stress calculation

The RVE volume averaged stress has to be extracted after analyzing the RVE. Of course,

the P

M

can be computed numerically through the volume integral (2.8). However, it is

computationally ineﬃcient because the unit cell volume for the textile composites can be

typically several orders of magnitude larger than the unit cell volume of the conventional

unidirectional laminated composites [33]. Therefore, it is computationally more eﬃcient

to compute the P

M

through the surface integral [37] which can be further simpliﬁed for

the case of the periodic BCs as discussed in this section.

First, consider that all the forces acting on the the RVE surface are subjected to the

periodic BCs (C.6) and (C.7). The reaction (resulting) external forces,

f

e

p

are acted at

the four prescribed corner nodes, p (p = 1, 2, 4, 5). In addition, there are forces involved

in every constraint (tying) relation C.6. For instance, each constraint relation of the

corresponding pairs of nodes on the top–bottom surfaces, there are tying forces, p

t

top

,

p

t

bottom

, p

t

B

1

, and p

t

B

5

at the nodes on the top surface, bottom surface, corner node 1, and

corner node 5, respectively. Similarly, there are tying forces, p

t

front

, p

t

back

, p

t

F

1

, and p

t

F

4

for

the front–back constraint relations and the tying forces, p

t

right

, p

t

left

, p

t

L

2

and p

t

L

1

for the

right–left constraint relations. All these forces are schematically depicted in Figure D.1.

Each constraint satisﬁed the condition of zero virtual work according to the principle of

virtual work which implies that tying forces applied to the RVE do no virtual work, thus

p

t

bottom

· δx

bottom

+ p

t

top

· δx

top

+ p

t

B

5

· δx

5

+ p

t

B

1

· δx

1

= 0, (D.1a)

p

t

left

· δx

left

+ p

t

right

· δx

right

+ p

t

L

2

· δx

2

+ p

t

L

1

· δx

1

= 0, (D.1b)

p

t

front

· δx

front

+ p

t

back

· δx

back

+ p

t

F

4

· δx

4

+ p

t

F

1

· δx

1

= 0. (D.1c)

Substitution of the variation of the periodic constraint relations (C.5) into (D.1) gives

_

p

t

bottom

+ p

t

top

_

· δx

bottom

+

_

p

t

B

1

− p

t

top

_

· δx

1

+

_

p

t

top

+ p

t

B

5

_

· δx

5

= 0, (D.2a)

_

p

t

left

+ p

t

right

_

· δx

left

+

_

p

t

L

1

− p

t

right

_

· δx

1

+

_

p

t

right

+ p

t

L

2

_

· δx

2

= 0, (D.2b)

_

p

t

front

+ p

t

back

_

· δx

back

+

_

p

t

F

1

+ p

t

front

_

· δx

1

+

_

p

t

F

4

− p

t

front

_

· δx

4

= 0. (D.2c)

These relations should hold for any δx

bottom

, δx

left

, δx

back

, δx

1

, δx

2

, δx

4

, δx

5

. Thus, the

relation between tying forces are

p

t

bottom

= − p

t

top

= − p

t

B

1

= p

t

B

5

, (D.3a)

p

t

left

= − p

t

right

= − p

t

L

1

= p

t

L

2

, (D.3b)

p

t

front

= − p

t

back

= − p

t

F

1

= p

t

F

4

. (D.3c)

70

Macroscopic stress calculation 71

4

1

5 8

f

e

4

f

e

1

f

e

5

p

t

top

p

t

bottom

p

t

front

p

t

back

p

t

F

1

p

t

F

4

p

t

B

1

p

t

B

5

(a) yz-plane view

1

2

6 5

f

e

1

f

e

2

f

e

5

p

t

top

p

t

bottom

p

t

right

p

t

left

p

t

L

2

p

t

L

1

p

t

B

1

p

t

B

5

(b) xz-plane view

Figure D.1: Schematic picture of the forces acting on the boundaries of a textile composite

RVE subjected to periodic BCs in (a) yz-plane view and (b) xz-plane view.

72 Appendix D

The (D.3) reﬂects the antiperiodicity of tying forces on the opposite surfaces which

satisﬁed the antiperiodic condition (2.4b).

By taking account all the forces acting on the RVE surfaces, the surface integral of

P

M

(2.9) from Figure D.1, the surface integral of P

M

can be written as

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

f

e

1

x

0

1

+

f

e

2

x

0

2

+

f

e

4

x

0

4

+

f

e

5

x

0

5

+

_

Γ

0

top

p

t

top

x

0

top

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

bottom

p

t

bottom

x

0

bottom

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

front

p

t

front

x

0

front

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

back

p

t

back

x

0

back

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

left

p

t

left

x

0

left

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

right

p

t

right

x

0

right

dΓ

0

+

_

_

Γ

0

bottom

p

t

B

5

dΓ

0

_

x

0

5

+

_

_

Γ

0

bottom

p

t

B

1

dΓ

0

_

x

0

1

+

_

_

Γ

0

front

p

t

F

1

dΓ

0

_

x

0

1

+

_

_

Γ

0

front

p

t

F

4

dΓ

0

_

x

0

4

+

_

_

Γ

0

left

p

t

L

1

dΓ

0

_

x

0

1

+

_

_

Γ

0

left

p

t

L

2

dΓ

0

_

x

0

2

_

. (D.4)

Making use of the relation between tying forces (D.3) gives

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

f

e

1

x

0

1

+

f

e

2

x

0

2

+

f

e

4

x

0

4

+

f

e

5

x

0

5

+

_

Γ

0

bottom

p

t

bottom

_

x

0

bottom

−x

0

top

_

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

front

p

t

front

(x

0

front

−x

0

back

) dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

left

p

t

left

_

x

0

left

−x

0

right

_

dΓ

0

+

_

_

Γ

0

bottom

p

t

B

5

dΓ

0

_

x

0

5

+

_

_

Γ

0

bottom

p

t

B

1

dΓ

0

_

x

0

1

+

_

_

Γ

0

front

p

t

F

1

dΓ

0

_

x

0

1

+

_

_

Γ

0

front

p

t

F

4

dΓ

0

_

x

0

4

+

_

_

Γ

0

left

p

t

L

1

dΓ

0

_

x

0

1

+

_

_

Γ

0

left

p

t

L

2

dΓ

0

_

x

0

2

_

. (D.5)

After that, inserting the conditions of the initial periodicity of the RVE (C.2) results

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

f

e

1

x

0

1

+

f

e

2

x

0

2

+

f

e

4

x

0

4

+

f

e

5

x

0

5

+

_

Γ

0

bottom

_

p

t

bottom

+ p

t

B

1

_

x

0

1

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

front

_

p

t

front

+ p

t

L

1

_

x

0

1

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

left

_

p

t

left

+ p

t

L

1

_

x

0

1

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

left

_

p

t

L

2

− p

t

left

_

x

0

2

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

front

_

p

t

F

4

− p

t

front

_

x

0

4

dΓ

0

+

_

Γ

0

bottom

_

p

t

B

5

− p

t

bottom

_

x

0

5

dΓ

0

_

. (D.6)

Macroscopic stress calculation 73

After substituting the remaining relations between tying forces (D.3) gives

P

M

=

1

V

0

_

f

e

1

x

0

1

+

f

e

2

x

0

2

+

f

e

4

x

0

4

+

f

e

5

x

0

5

_

=

1

V

0

p=1,2,4,5

f

e

p

x

0

p

. (D.7)

The (D.7) shows that when the periodic BCs are imposed on a RVE, all the terms with

the constraint forces involved in the periodicity constraint equations have been eliminated

from the surface integral (2.9). And, only the external forces at the four prescribed corner

nodes (p = 1, 2, 4, 5) contribute to the P

M

. As stated at section 2.2, the stress measures

for Abaqus is deﬁned in Cauchy stress tensor, therefore, the computed P

M

(D.7) has to

transform to σ

M

according to (B.10). However, for the case of periodic BCs, by following

the steps of derivation for (D.7), it can be shown that the macroscopic Cauchy stress

tensor can be deﬁned as

σ

M

=

1

V

_

f

e

1

x

1

+

f

e

2

x

2

+

f

e

4

x

4

+

f

e

5

x

5

_

=

1

V

p=1,2,4,5

f

e

p

x

p

. (D.8)

Appendix E

Condensation of the microscopic

stiﬀness

For the case of the periodic BCs imposed on a RVE, the point of departure is that

the linearized microscopic system of equations which the dependent DOF have been

eliminated

K

∗

δu

¯

i

= δr

¯

∗

, (E.1)

with K

∗

= K

ii

+ K

di

C

di

+ C

T

di

K

di

+ C

T

di

K

dd

C

di

,

δr

¯

∗

= δr

¯

i

+ C

T

di

δr

¯

d

.

Then, the linearized system (E.1) is further partitioned to

_

K

∗

pp

K

∗

pf

K

∗

fp

K

∗

ff

_ _

δu

¯

p

δu

¯

f

_

=

_

δf

¯

∗

p

0

¯

_

, (E.2)

where δu

¯

p

and δf

¯

∗

p

are the columns with iterative prescribed displacement (according

to the (2.16)) and the iterative external forces at the four prescribed corner nodes, re-

spectively. And, δu

¯

f

is the column with iterative displacements of the remaining nodes

(nodes on the surfaces and interior). The K

∗

pp

, K

∗

pf

, K

∗

fp

and K

∗

ff

are the corresponding

partitions of the RVE total stiﬀness matrix. Then, through the elimination of δu

¯

f

, the

RVE reduced stiﬀness matrix, K

∗

M

is obtained as

K

∗

M

δu

¯

p

= δf

¯

∗

p

, with K

∗

M

= K

∗

pp

−K

∗

pf

_

K

∗

ff

_

−1

K

∗

fp

, (E.3)

where K

∗

M

is a [12 ×12] matrix for a 3D RVE model (Appendix G).

74

Appendix F

Consistent tangent stiﬀness for the

Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor

Firstly, the resulting relation between variations of the displacement and force (E.3) needs

to be transformed in an expression relating the variations of the macroscopic stress and

macroscopic deformation tensors

δP

M

=

4

C

P

M

: δF

T

M

, (F.1)

where the fourth order tensor

4

C

P

M

is the required consistent tangent stiﬀness at a macro-

scopic integration point. In order to obtain

4

C

P

M

from K

∗

M

, the relation in (E.3) is rewritten

in vectorial/tensorial form

j

K

(ij)

M

· δu

(j)

= δ

f

(i)

, (F.2)

where the indices i and j are the prescribed corner nodes (i, j = 1, 2, 4, 5) for the case

of periodic BCs. The components of tensor K

(ij)

M

in (F.2) are constructed from the com-

ponents of matrix K

∗

M

at the rows and column of the DOF in the corner nodes i and j.

The total matrix format of the K

∗

M

is shown in Appendix G.

Next, the variation of nodal forces at the corner nodes in (F.2) is substituted into the

relation for the macroscopic stress variation from (D.7)

δP

M

=

1

V

0

i

j

_

K

(ij)

M

· δu

(j)

_

x

0

(i)

, with i, j = 1, 2, 4, 5. (F.3)

Substitution of the variation of the displacement, δu

(j)

= x

0

(j)

· δF

T

M

derived from (C.7)

into (F.3) gives

δP

M

=

1

V

0

i

j

_

K

(ij)

M

·

_

x

0

(j)

· δF

T

M

__

x

0

(i)

, (F.4a)

=

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

0

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

0

(j)

_

LT

: δF

T

M

, (F.4b)

where the expressions of (F.4a) and (F.4b) are equivalent and (F.4a) is rewritten into

(F.4b) in order to be comparable to (F.1). The superscript “LT” denotes left transpo-

sition

1

. Finally, by comparing the (F.4b) with δP

M

=

4

C

P

M

: δF

T

M

(F.1), the consistent

1

The left transposition for a fourth–order tensor,

4

T is deﬁned as T

LT

ijkl

= T

jikl

.

75

76 Appendix F

tangent stiﬀness can be identiﬁed as

4

C

P

M

=

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

0

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

0

(j)

_

LT

. (F.5)

Next, within Abaqus FE scheme, it requires the consistent tangent stiﬀness with

relating the variation in macroscopic Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor and variation in virtual rate

of deformation according to

δτ

M

=

4

C

τ

M

: D

δM

, (F.6)

then this consistent constitutive tangent can be obtained by varying the deﬁnition of the

macroscopic Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor derived from (B.10)

σ

M

=

1

det (F

M

)

P

M

· F

T

M

,

Jσ

M

= P

M

· F

T

M

,

τ

M

= P

M

· F

T

M

,

δτ

M

= δP

M

· F

T

M

+P

M

· δF

T

M

, (F.7)

where the initial and current volumes of a RVE are related according to volume ratio,

J

M

= det(F

M

) = V/V

0

and the deﬁnition of Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor, τ

M

= Jσ

M

have

been used.

Firstly, by using the deﬁnition of fourth–order right transpose identity tensor,

4

I

RT

:

A = A :

4

I

RT

= A

T

and relation of δP

T

M

=

4

C

P

LT

M

: δF

T

M

, the (F.7) can be further

rewritten in

δτ

M

=

4

I

RT

:

_

F

M

· δP

T

M

_

+P

M

· δF

T

M

,

=

_

4

I

RT

· F

M

_

: δP

T

M

+P

M

· δF

T

M

,

=

_

4

I

RT

· F

M

_

:

_

4

C

P

LT

M

: δF

T

M

_

+

_

4

I : P

M

_

· δF

T

M

,

=

_

4

I

RT

· F

M

:

4

C

P

LT

M

+

4

I · P

M

_

: δF

T

M

. (F.8)

Next, the variation of the macroscopic velocity gradient tensor, L

δM

has to introduce

into (F.8) in order to introduce its symmetric part tensor, i.e. rate of deformation tensor,

D

δM

. The L

M

is written as

L

δM

= δF

M

· F

−1

M

,

L

T

δM

= F

−T

M

· δF

T

M

,

F

T

M

· L

T

δM

= δF

T

M

. (F.9)

Then, the (F.9) is substituted into (F.8)

δτ

M

=

_

_

4

I

RT

· F

M

_

:

4

C

P

LT

M

+

_

4

I · P

M

_

_

:

_

F

T

M

· L

T

δM

_

,

= {(

4

I

RT

· F

M

_

:

4

C

P

LT

M

· F

T

M

+

_

4

I · P

M

_

· F

T

M

_

: L

T

δM

,

=

_

4

I

RT

:

_

F

M

·

4

C

P

LT

M

· F

T

M

_

+

4

I · τ

M

_

: L

T

δM

, (F.10)

Consistent tangent stiﬀness for the Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor 77

where the deﬁnition of Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor in (F.7) is used. Next, the (F.10) has to

rewrite according to relation δτ

M

=

4

C

τ

M

: D

δM

(F.6) where the condition of symmetric

has to satisfy at both sides

δτ

M

=

_

4

I

RT

:

_

F

M

·

4

C

P

LT

M

· F

T

M

_

+

4

I · τ

M

_

:

_

4

I

S

: D

δM

_

,

=

__

4

I

RT

:

_

F

M

·

4

C

P

LT

M

· F

T

M

_

+

4

I · τ

M

_

:

4

I

S

_

: D

δM

, (F.11)

where the symmetrical part of L

δM

is used, i.e. the symmetric rate of deformation tensor,

D

δM

which deﬁned as

D

δM

=

1

2

_

L

δM

+L

T

δM

_

. (F.12)

Next, the consistent tangent stiﬀness tensor,

4

C

P

M

(F.5) can be substituted into (F.11) for

the further derivation

δτ

M

=

__

4

I

RT

:

_

F

M

·

_

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

0

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

0

(j)

_

_

· F

T

M

_

+

4

I · τ

M

_

:

4

I

S

_

: D

δM

,

=

__

4

I

RT

:

1

V

0

i

j

_

F

M

· x

0

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

0

(j)

· F

T

M

_

+

4

I · τ

M

_

:

4

I

S

_

: D

δM

,

=

__

4

I

RT

:

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

(j)

_

+

4

I · τ

M

_

:

4

I

S

_

: D

δM

,

=

__

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

(j)

_

LT

+

4

I · τ

M

_

:

4

I

S

_

: D

δM

,

=

_

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

(j)

_

LT

:

4

I

S

+

4

I · τ

M

:

4

I

S

_

: D

δM

, (F.13)

where the deﬁnition of x = F

M

· x

0

= x

0

· F

T

M

and

4

I

RT

:

4

A =

4

A

LT

are used. Due to

the symmetrical characteristic of the Kirchhoﬀ stress tensor, τ

M

, thus, τ

M

= τ

M

:

4

I

S

.

Then, the (F.13) can be further simpliﬁed to

δτ

M

=

_

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

(j)

_

LT

:

4

I

S

+

4

I · τ

M

_

: D

δM

. (F.14)

Finally, by comparing the (F.14) with the δτ

M

=

4

C

τ

M

: D

δM

(F.6), The tangent

stiﬀness tensor,

4

C

τ

M

is identiﬁed as

4

C

τ

M

=

1

V

0

i

j

_

x

(i)

K

(ij)

M

x

(j)

_

LT

:

4

I

S

+

4

I · τ

M

. (F.15)

Appendix G

Total matrix of the reduced stiﬀness

matrix

The total matrix K

∗

M

for a 3D RVE model has the format as shown in (G.1) where the

superscripts and subscripts in round brackets refer to the nodes and the DOF at those

nodes, respectively. Each submatrix in (G.1) is considered as the representation of a

second–order tensor, K

(ij)

M

, which the indices i and j are the prescribed corner nodes

(i, j = 1, 2, 4, 5) for the case of periodic BCs.

78

T

o

t

a

l

m

a

t

r

i

x

o

f

t

h

e

r

e

d

u

c

e

d

s

t

i

ﬀ

n

e

s

s

m

a

t

r

i

x

7

9

K

∗

M

=

_

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(11)

11

K

(11)

12

K

(11)

13

K

(11)

21

K

(11)

22

K

(11)

23

K

(11)

31

K

(11)

32

K

(11)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(12)

11

K

(12)

12

K

(12)

13

K

(12)

21

K

(12)

22

K

(12)

23

K

(12)

31

K

(12)

32

K

(12)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(13)

11

K

(13)

12

K

(13)

13

K

(13)

21

K

(13)

22

K

(13)

23

K

(13)

31

K

(13)

32

K

(13)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(14)

11

K

(14)

12

K

(14)

13

K

(14)

21

K

(14)

22

K

(14)

23

K

(14)

31

K

(14)

32

K

(14)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(21)

11

K

(21)

12

K

(21)

13

K

(21)

21

K

(14)

21

K

(21)

23

K

(21)

31

K

(21)

32

K

(21)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(22)

11

K

(22)

12

K

(22)

13

K

(22)

21

K

(22)

22

K

(22)

23

K

(22)

31

K

(22)

32

K

(22)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(23)

11

K

(23)

12

K

(23)

13

K

(23)

21

K

(22)

23

K

(23)

23

K

(23)

31

K

(23)

32

K

(23)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(24)

11

K

(24)

12

K

(24)

13

K

(24)

21

K

(22)

24

K

(24)

23

K

(24)

31

K

(24)

32

K

(24)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(31)

11

K

(31)

12

K

(31)

13

K

(31)

21

K

(22)

31

K

(31)

23

K

(31)

31

K

(31)

32

K

(31)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(32)

11

K

(32)

12

K

(32)

13

K

(32)

21

K

(32)

24

K

(32)

23

K

(32)

31

K

(32)

32

K

(32)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(33)

11

K

(33)

12

K

(33)

13

K

(33)

21

K

(33)

24

K

(33)

23

K

(33)

31

K

(33)

32

K

(33)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(34)

11

K

(34)

12

K

(34)

13

K

(34)

21

K

(34)

24

K

(34)

23

K

(34)

31

K

(34)

32

K

(34)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(41)

11

K

(41)

12

K

(41)

13

K

(41)

21

K

(41)

24

K

(41)

23

K

(41)

31

K

(41)

32

K

(41)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(42)

11

K

(42)

12

K

(42)

13

K

(42)

21

K

(42)

24

K

(42)

23

K

(42)

31

K

(42)

32

K

(42)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(43)

11

K

(43)

12

K

(43)

13

K

(43)

21

K

(43)

24

K

(43)

23

K

(43)

31

K

(43)

32

K

(43)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

_

K

(44)

11

K

(44)

12

K

(44)

13

K

(44)

21

K

(44)

24

K

(44)

23

K

(44)

31

K

(44)

32

K

(44)

33

_

¸

_

_

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

¸

_

(G.1)

Appendix H

Incremental–iterative multi–scale

modeling approach

The Figure H.1 shows the schematic view of the incremental–iteration approach for the

macro–micro coupling computational homogenization method within Abaqus/Standard.

80

I

n

c

r

e

m

e

n

t

a

l

–

i

t

e

r

a

t

i

v

e

m

u

l

t

i

–

s

c

a

l

e

m

o

d

e

l

i

n

g

a

p

p

r

o

a

c

h

8

1

macro–structure micro–structure

1. Initialize

initialize the macrostructure

assign the RVE to every integration point, IP

at each element, EL

2. Current increment

2.1. First iteration

loop over all IPs

only at ﬁrst increment: F

M

= I

create and open ﬁle: write EL number,

IP number and F

M

(UMAT.for) EL, IP, and F

M

Initialize the RVE analysis

close ﬁle - open and read ﬁle: EL, IP, and F

M

prescribe the RVE deformation through F

M

(DISP.for)

generate the ﬁle of K

∗

obtain RVE initial volume, V

0

(URDFIL.for)

obtain current coordinates of the 4 corner nodes, x

(URDFIL.for)

calculate Kirchhoﬀ stress, τ

M

(URDFIL.for)

K

∗

, V

0

, x, and τ

M

open ﬁles: write V

0

, x, and τ

M

store K

∗

close ﬁles

end IPs loop

2.2. Next iteration

loop over all IPs

create and open ﬁle: write EL number,

IP number and F

M

(UMAT.for) EL, IP, and F

M

RVE analysis

close ﬁle - open and read ﬁle: EL, IP, and F

M

prescribe the RVE deformation through F

M

(DISP.for)

calculate the σ

M

(URDFIL.for)

generate the ﬁle of K

∗

obtain RVE initial volume, V

0

(URDFIL.for)

obtain current coordinates of the 4 corner nodes, x

(URDFIL.for)

calculate Kirchhoﬀ stress, τ

M

(URDFIL.for)

σ

M

, K

∗

, V

0

, x and τ

M

open ﬁle: write σ

M

, V

0

, x and τ

M

store σ

M

and K

∗

close ﬁle

end IPs loop

3. Check for convergence

if divergence, go to step 2.2

if convergence, go to step 2

Figure H.1: The macro– and micro–scale coupling numerical framework for the computational homogenization.

Appendix I

Multi–scale analyses of

unidirectional ﬁber reinforced

composite

Figure I.1 and Figure I.2 show the von Mises stress contour on the UD RVE and Cauchy

stress contour on the macroscopic structure coupled with the UD RVE, respectively, under

longitudinal tension, transverse tension, longitudinal shear and transverse shear loadings.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure I.1: The von Mises equivalent stress of the UD RVE (micro–scale analyses) under

(a) longitudinal tension, (b) transverse tension, (c) longitudinal shear, and (d)

transverse shear loadings.

82

Multi–scale analyses of unidirectional ﬁber reinforced composite 83

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure I.2: The Cauchy stress contour of the macroscopic structure coupled with the UD RVE

under (a) longitudinal tension, (b) transverse tension, (c) longitudinal shear, and

(d) transverse shear loadings.

- Introducción a la Simulation con InventorUploaded byAlexeis Companioni Guerra
- Second Order Nonlinear Inelastic Analysis of CompositeUploaded byjayanth
- Section A - cable railingUploaded byGeoffre14
- filament wound fiber-reinforced sandwich pipeUploaded byAhda Dapong Rizqy Maulana
- FEM_TUDOUploaded byVitor Fc
- Computer Aided Structural Design - Claudio GianiniUploaded byjuan carlos molano toro
- tube Reinforced Composite ( CNTRC ) Cylinder Under Non-AxUploaded byDEEPAK
- Polyimide-Enhanced Stretchable Interconnects- Design, Fabrication, and Characterization.pdfUploaded byAhmed Al Mubarak
- KENLAYERUploaded byMilton Juan Chambi Ticona
- Energy MethodsUploaded byY SAHITH
- 6th;8th;Mechanics of Composite Materials;SmojverUploaded byMuhammad Saleem
- Biot - (1941)Uploaded bydave
- TriAxial ProcedureUploaded byednsjah
- Finite Element Analysis of Excavation, Brown&Booker c&g, 85Uploaded byMarko
- PO_24Uploaded byHarold Taylor
- hw06Uploaded byDon Valentino
- Use of Strain Gauge Rosette to Investigate Stress concentration in Isotropic and Orthotropic Plate with Circular HoleUploaded byHako Khechai
- 1-s2.0-S135943111400252X-mainUploaded bySaeed
- ESFUERZO-DE-COMPRESION-8A traducido.docxUploaded byrubio
- Viscous Flow EqnUploaded byPhuong Le
- Aiyeru_SegunUploaded byPeng Ter
- Vibration Analysis of Rotating Composite Beam with Dynamic Stiffness Matrix MethodUploaded byIOSRjournal
- Relationship Stress and StrainUploaded byBunkun15
- Contact Modeeling With DynaUploaded byitzranjeeth
- Carcass Strength Relationships Conveyor BeltsUploaded byEduardo Martinez Chaban
- Strain Gauging and Composites_789Uploaded bypiececo

- 02_bolt_tightening_e.pdfUploaded byΔημήτρης Αντωνιάδης
- 5s Basic Training Ppt 204Uploaded bygalfar7
- Tolerances and FitsUploaded byDrmanal Amin
- 71316033 Hindi Song Guitar Chords BookUploaded byRavi Kaneria
- hindi a to z.pdfUploaded bySudharshan
- hindi a to z.pdfUploaded bySudharshan
- screenshotUploaded byMoȠit Shuklä
- 73 Free Designed Quality Excel Chart Templates - 2Uploaded byRamesh Radhakrishnaraja
- 73 Free Designed Quality Excel Chart Templates - 2Uploaded byRamesh Radhakrishnaraja
- Employee EngagementUploaded byAmrita Amu
- ebs 243 sum enUploaded byanon-825405
- Tolerances and FitsUploaded byDrmanal Amin
- ZusammenfassungBWLA.pdfUploaded byMoȠit Shuklä
- Digitaldruck DüsseldorfUploaded byMoȠit Shuklä
- Erste SchritteUploaded bydavidk1980
- 1-2 Cap2 Management TheoryUploaded byshashi2311
- Quality Food Safety Policy 08Uploaded byMoȠit Shuklä
- 07Hydrostatic Forces on Curved SurfacesUploaded byjrkling

- Masoneilan Control Valve Sizing HandbookUploaded bynajamsyed6754
- BSA Antenna Theory_modUploaded byCircle Triangle
- Nmdc Et AdvertisementUploaded bybecbellary
- Naturalism the Open BoatUploaded byBrandon Michaels
- Dosage for Renal DysfunctionUploaded byAmr Muhammed
- Fleming_et_al_74354Uploaded byAshri Ratnasari
- 12027-0130670227_ismSec6Uploaded bysindynovaperez
- SriDayitaDasPranatiPanchakamUploaded byDharani Dharendra Das
- sm-K1016585E(DX255LC)_LowResUploaded byElectromecanica Leon Electromecanica Leon Leon
- MDV1525Uploaded byabrk
- Intern Survival Guide (UIC)Uploaded bymedstick
- science paper mac test form 5Uploaded byyatie_jaafar
- The Feasts of IsraelUploaded byRecuperatedbyJesus
- Active Volcanoes in PHUploaded byMagma
- Mixed Integer Linear ProgrammingUploaded byAbdulrahman Aldeek
- INSTRUMENTAL ANALYSIS VIVA VOICE QUESTIONSUploaded byK.Selvaraj
- NHC Disease ManualUploaded byjessica mendez
- RespuestasUploaded byAndres Heredia
- Sony mvs8000 operation manualUploaded byIvan Petrof
- Dhammika Perera An economist par excellence though not trained formally as an economist.docxUploaded byThavam
- Differentiation of Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells Into Endoderm Without Embryoid Body Formation.Uploaded byJavier Lopez Beas
- Cosmological EpistemologyUploaded byerodcruz
- Unit8-SIUploaded byAli khan7
- 2009 Nitsch Ecological+Approaches+to+Sport+ActivityUploaded byLucas Savassi
- Tie DyeUploaded byAZIbloodwolf
- Ch 4 Well Cementing_part 1Uploaded byJacinto Siqueira
- lightbulb essayUploaded byapi-313451943
- BMW 5 Series (E39) Service Manual: 1997-2003 - ExcerptUploaded byBentley Publishers
- Zetpol_2010Uploaded byhenrycht
- Computer Graphics - Visibility and Hidden SurfaceUploaded bySyedkareem_hkg