Pres Boehm

COMPUTATIONAL
MICROMECHANICS
Helmut J. BOHM
hjb@ilsb.tuwien.ac.at
Institute of Lightweight Design and Structural Biomechanics

Vienna University of Technology
http://www.ilsb.tuwien.ac.at
First Summer School on Micromechanics

Rzeszow / Bezmiechowa, June 313, 2015
1
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Part I
Introduction
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Outline of Part 1 Introduction

Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Introductory Remarks
Present lecture deals with numerical approaches to modeling
the material behavior of inhomogeneous materials using
continuum methods
referred to as Continuum Micromechanics
Main emphasis is put on
composite materials
thermoelastic and thermoelastoplastic material behavior
evaluation by Finite Element method
(quasi)static behavior
Subject is treated from an engineering point of view
mainly aimed at modeling aspects
no in-depth discussion of continuum mechanics

no in-depth discussion of numerical methods involved
4
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Basics
basic assumptions of Continuum Micromechanics
material is inhomogeneous:
at least two distinct constituents (phases)
material shows at least two distinct length scales
behavior at all relevant length scales can be described by
continuum mechanics
central aims of Continuum Micromechanics
find structureproperty relations pertinent to

inhomogeneous materials
connect phase geometry to physical behavior
describe scale transitions
small large and large small
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Length Scales
Many inhomogeneous materials can be studied at a number of
different length scales
macroscale: sample or structure
microscale: distinguishable constituents
mesoscale(s): intermediate scale(s), e.g., laminae
MACRO (structural)
MICRO 1 (composite)
SUBMICRO 1 (nano)
MESO (laminate)
MICRO 2 (polycrystal)
SUBMICRO 2 (atomistic)
Length scales in hypothetical MMC

6
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Outline
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Classification of Inhomogeneous Materials
Composites
Polycrystals
consist of crystallites having different orientations

most metals, ceramics
Porous and cellular materials
man-made inhomogeneous materials

aim at combining desirable properties of a number of
constituents
fine-grained phase geometry (otherwise: compounds)
porous metals, ceramics

open cell, closed cell, hollow sphere, syntactic foams
many biomaterials (wood, trabecular bone)
Graded materials
statistics of phase geometry change with position
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview

Classification
by microtopology
matrixinclusion microtopologies, solid dispersions

only one contiguous phase (e.g., standard composites,
closed-cell porous materials)
interwoven microtopologies: more than one contiguous
phase (e.g., interpenetrating phases, open-cell porous
materials)
granular microtopologies (polycrystals)
layered microtopologies
by mesotopology (three or more length scales)
layered, laminated (composites)

woven, knitted, braided (composites)
clustered (general)
9
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview

Classification
by phase distribution statistics
statistically homogeneous phase distributions

statistically inhomogeneous phase distributions
by relative sizes of inhomogeneities
production related
(functionally) graded
monodisperse
bidisperse, polydisperse (described by size distribution)
by absolute sizes of inhomogeneities
standard composites, polycrystals

nanomaterials (interface dominated, size effects)
10
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview

Classification (composites)
by inhomogeneity shape
(typically described via aspect ratio a)
continuous fibers (LFRC; a )

short fibers (SFRC; 2.5 / a / 50),
columnar grains
particles (PRC; equiaxed, 0.4 / a / 2.5),
equiaxed grains
platelets (a / 0.4)
hybrids
Note: many micromechanical models use simplified shapes of

inhomogeneities
ellipsoidal vs. non-ellipsoidal reinforcements
11
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview

by inhomogeneity orientation
aligned, unidirectional (UD)

non-aligned
random
planar random
general (described via orientation distribution function,
ODF; texture)
by inhomogeneity material
carbon fibers, glass fibers, ceramic particles, carbon

nanotubes, . . .
12
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Classification of Composites
by matrix material
polymers (thermosets, thermoplastics, elastomers)

metals (MMC)
intermetallics (IMC)
ceramics (CMC)
carbon (CCC)
by matrix behavior
ductile matrix composites

brittle matrix composites
Note: All of the above descriptors/classificators are (in

principle) accessible to measurement (microscopy, tomography,
stereology . . .)
13
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Inhomogeneous Materials
Axial section through UD fiber reinforced MMC
14
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Cross section through UD fiber reinforced MMC
15
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Particle reinforced MMC
16
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Polycrystals
17
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Metallic foams
18
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Trabecular bone
19
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
2-dimensional microtopologies (computer generated arrangements)
20
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Nomenclature
(Elasticity-like) tensors of order 4:
E Eijkl
written as 66-quasi-matrices (Voigt/Nye notation)
symmetric (elasticities, . . .) or not (Eshelby tensors, . . .)
example: orthotropic elasticity tensor in principal
orientation
E11 E12 E13 0

0
0
E12 E22 E23 0
0
0
E13 E23 E33 0

0
0
E=
0
0
0 E44 0
0
0
0
0
0 E55 0
0
0
0
0
0 E66
21
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Nomenclature
Strain- and stress-like tensors of order 2:
ij
written as 6-quasi-vectors (Voigt/Nye notation)
strains use shear angles ij = 2ij
(engineering notation)

11
11
11
22 22
22

33 33
33

=
=
212 = 12
12

213 13
13
23
223
23
Note: different authors may use different ordering of
components
22
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Nomenclature
Conductivity-like tensors of order 2:
K kij
example: orthotropic conductivity tensor
k11 0
0
K = 0 k22 0
0
0 k33
Physical vectors:
n ni
23
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Nomenclature
Most tensor operations are treated as matrix/vector operations
example: energy product

P scalar1product
1 T
1 T
1
e = 2 = 2 = 2 k k k 2 ij ij
care required with tensors of order 4 and low elastic
symmetry
Additional operations
[a n]ij = ai nj (dyadic product)
[ ]ijkl =ij kl
[ n]i = ij nj (contraction)
24
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Nomenclature
Macroscopic and microscopic quantities
Meso/microlevel: phases denoted by superscripts
(m) (i)
, , ...
(p) (f)
phase averages denoted by brackets plus superscripts,

e.g., hi(i) , . . .
Macrolevel: macroscopic quantities denoted by

superscript asterisk, e.g., E , C , . . .
effective properties are representative of material

apparent properties are representative of some sample
volume averages denoted by brackets, e.g., hi, . . .
25
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Scale Transitions
Homogenization (coarse graining):
small scale large scale
reduce number of DOFs of system
find energetically equivalent homogeneous material
Localization (fine graining):
large scale small scale
find local response to macroscopic (load) state
26
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Scale Transitions
Homogenization relations: typically involve volume averaging
continuous displacements required for surface integral
formulation for hi

Z
Z
1
1
(x) d =
u(x) n + n u(x) d
hi =
s s
2s s
Z
Z
1
1
hi =
(x) d =
t(x) x d
s s
s s
Formal localization relations
(position dependent) concentration tensors A(x), B(x)
(x) = A(x) hi
(x) = B(x) hi
27
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Volume Elements
Homogenization volume s must be of suitable size
micro s macro (Hashin,1983)
in ideal case s is representative volume element
(RVE)
Representative volume elements
geometrical RVE:
depends solely on phase geometry
physical RVE:
depends on phase geometry and and physical parameter
considered
RVEs allow evaluating effective properties in strict sense
smaller volume elements: SVEs
28
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Outline
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
29
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Material symmetries play important role in description of
material behavior (constitutive behavior)
discussed in following for linear elastic behavior
elasticity and compliance tensors (order 4) link stress and
strain tensors (order 2)
order 4 tensors make for rich behavior in terms of

material symmetry
= E
= C
C = E1
thermal conduction (rank 2) tensors link temperature

gradient and heat flux vectors
q = Kd
d = grad T = Rq
R = K1
30
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Isotropic materials
2 independent elastic moduli required for elasticity tensor
1 CTE required for thermal expansion tensor

E11 E12 E12 0

0
0
E12 E11 E12 0

0
0
E12 E12 E11 0

0
0
=
E=
0
0
0
0 E44 0
0

0
0
0
0
0 E44 0
0
0
0
0
0
0 E44
1
E44 = (E11 E12 )
2
31
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Isotropic materials: elastic moduli
2
E11 (E11 + E12 ) 2E12
E =
E11 + E12
E12
=
E11 + E12
G = E44
1
K =
(E11 + 2E12 )
3
Isotropic materials: relations between moduli
E
G=
2(1 + )
32
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Isotropic materials: conduction, diffusion
conduction behavior described by 1 conduction coefficient
conductivity tensor:
k 0 0
K = 0 k 0
0 0 k
33
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Transversally isotropic materials
2 CTEs required for thermal expansion tensor
elasticity tensor in principal orientation:

A
E11 E12 E12 0
0
0
T
E12 E22 E23 0

0
0

T
E12 E23 E22 0
0
0

=
E=
0
0
0
0
E
0
0
44

0
0
0
0
0 E44 0
0
0
0
0
0
0 E66
1
E66 = (E22 E23 )
2
34
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Transversally isotropic materials: moduli
2
2E12
EA = E11
E22 + E23
2
2
2
E11 E23
+ E22 E12
2E12 E23
ET = E22
2
E11 E22 E12
E12
AT =
E22 + E23
2
E11 E23 E12
TT =
2
E11 E22 + E12
GAT = E44
GTT = E66
35
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Transversally isotropic materials: moduli
1
KT =
(E22 + E23 )
2
1
(E11 + 2E22 + 4E12 + 2E23 )
K =
9
Transversally isotropic materials: relations between moduli
ET
GTT =
2(1 + TT )
EA
KT =
2[(1 TT )(EA /ET ) 2AT 2 ]
36
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Hills (1964) connections for special case of (macroscopically
transversally isotropic) UD LFRC
3 instead of 5 independent parameters for transversally
isotropic elasticity
(f)
4(AT (m) )2
(f)
EA = EA + (1 )E (m) +
(f)
(m)
(1/KT 1/KT )2
(f)
AT =
A =
(f)
AT
with

+ (1 )
(f)
KT
1
(m)
KT
(m)
KT
AT (m)
(f)
(m)
1/KT 1/KT
37
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Transversally isotropic materials: conduction
conduction behavior described by 2 conduction
coefficients, kA and kT
conductivity tensor in principal orientation:
kA 0 0
K = 0 kT 0
0 0 kT
38
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Materials with cubic symmetry
isotropy condition not fulfilled in general:
E44 6= 21 (E11 E12 )
elastic moduli direction dependent

3 independent elastic moduli required
thermal expansion and conduction behavior as in isotropy
Two cases of direction dependence of stiffness in cubic material

39
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Tetragonal materials
transverse isotropy condition not fulfilled in general:
E66 6= 21 (E22 E23 )
transverse elastic moduli direction dependent

6 independent elastic moduli required
thermal expansion and conduction behavior as in

transverse isotropy
Cubic and tetragonal materials:

deviation from isotropy, transverse isotropy can be
quantified by Zener coefficient
2E66
Z=
E11 E12
40
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Orthotropic materials
3 CTEs required for thermal expansion tensor
3 conductivities required for conductivity tensor
elasticity tensor in principal orientation:

1
E11 E12 E13 0
0
0
E12 E22 E23 0

0
0
2
3
E13 E23 E33 0
0
0

=
E=
0
0
0
0 E44 0
0

0
0
0
0 E55 0
0
0
0
0
0
0 E66
normalshear coupling if not in principal orientation
41
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Orthotropic materials (contd.)
Direction dependence of stiffness in isotropic and orthotropic material
42
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
macroscopic statistically isotropic elastic symmetry typically
found in
composites reinforced by particles, randomly oriented
fibers, randomly oriented platelets
polycrystals with equiaxed, randomly oriented crystallites
materials containing equiaxed pores
Note: there are no isotropic monocrystals
43
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
macroscopic statistically transversally isotropic elastic
symmetry typically found in
composites reinforced by aligned or planar random fibers,
platelets; fibers with axisymmetric ODF
polycrystals with appropriate texture, aligned columnar
crystallites
materials containing aligned, columnar pores
some monocrystals
44
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
macroscopic statistically orthotropic elastic symmetry typically
found in
polycrystals with more general texture
biocomposites, e.g., bone, wood
some monocrystals
cubic and tetragonal elastic symmetry typically found in
some monocrystals
results from certain simply periodic unit cell models
(square arrays, cubic arrays . . .)
45
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Lower elastic symmetries typically found in
some monocrystals
numerical results from volume elements that are too small
to be proper RVEs
(hopefully) small values for off-orthotropic entries

(provided target behavior is sufficiently well behaved)
46
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Elastic symmetries of inhomogeneous materials tend to be
broken when inelastic regimes are entered
regions of different material behavior within materially
nonlinear phases, e.g., elastoplasticity with hardening
inhomogeneous microstresses give rise distributions of

plastic stain, damage variables that typically do not
follow elastic symmetries
distributions of plastic strains give rise to regions with

different flow stresses and tangent stiffnesses
changes in details of phase arrangements due to finite
strains
47
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Material Symmetries
Distribution of equivalent stress predicted for hexagonal arrangement of parallel cylindrical voids
48
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Outline
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
49
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Applications of Micromechanical Models

Materials characterization for inhomogeneous materials
response to simple load cases
e.g., stressstrain diagrams in elastoplastic case
uniaxial, simple shear, hydrostatic mechanical loading;

uniform temperature loads
Constitutive models for inhomogeneous materials

response to any load case, any loading history
e.g., complex, non-radial stress paths in elastoplastic

case
much more difficult than material characterization
50
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Applications of Micromechanical Models

Studies of local phenomena in inhomogeneous materials
microscopic stress and strain fields
microscopic temperature and flux fields
initiation and progress of damage
responses in neighborhood of crack tips, intersections
between macroscopic interfaces and free surfaces, . . .
in contrast to stiffness, strength of inhomogeneous
materials tends to depend on local details of
microgeometry
Central aim of continuum micromechanics:
predictive models
51
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Scale Transitions
In two-scale problems, fields can be split into
slow contributions (hi, hi) and fast contributions
(fluctuations, (x) and (x))
(x) = hi + (x)
(x) = hi + (x)
Length scales must differ sufficiently so that

fluctuating fields at lower length scale influence higher
length scale only via (phase) averages
gradients of fields at higher length scale, gradients of
composition are not felt at lower length scale
if not fulfilled, special methods may be required
e.g., homogenization to nonlocal effective behavior
52
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Scale Transitions
Standard continuum micromechanical models have no absolute
length scale
absolute length scale may be introduced via behavior of
constituents, interfaces
in numerical models discretization may implicitly
introduce length scale(s)
Relative length scales, e.g., different particle sizes, are fully
handled
53
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies in Micromechanics

Real inhomogeneous materials typically show
complex microgeometries
local fields can only be approximated
Macrosopic behavior depends on microscopic fields
Two major strategies for obtaining appropriate approximations
using statistical information to study microstructures in a
generic way
study specific volume elements, for which microfields are
evaluated in detail (full field models)
54
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies in Micromechanics

Main groups of micromechanical models
approximations based on statistical information on
microgeometries
Mean Field Approaches (MFAs)

bounding methods
approximations based on discrete microgeometries
Periodic Microfield Approaches (PMAs)

windowing approaches
Embedded Cell Approaches (ECAs)
models of whole (small) samples
55
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Mean Field Approaches

MFAs may be formulated in terms of phase averages of
microfields
microstructure described by inhomogeneity volume
fraction, microscale topology, generic descriptors of
inhomogeneity shape(s)
localization relations use phase averaged concentration
tensors
(p) hi
hi(p) = A
(p) hi
hi(p) = B
56
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Bounds

Most bounds use variational principles to obtain lower and
upper bounds for effective properties (elastic moduli, CTEs,
conductivities, . . .)
variational bounds, e.g., HashinShtrikman-like
bounds on nonlinear properties
bounds may account for different levels of statistical
information
two-point bounds, e.g., HashinShtrikman bounds

improved bounds, e.g., three-point bounds
require statistical information on microgeometry
57
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Periodic Homogenization

In periodic homogenization (PMAs) periodic (model) materials
are considered
require periodic volume elements and boundary conditions
unit cells
allow high resolution of microgeometry, microfields
wide range in geometrical complexity of unit cells
no boundary layers introduced into microfields
excellent theoretical basis
support materials characterization and constitutive
modeling
limitations due to periodicity
handling volume elements from experiments

damage, failure
58
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Periodic Microfields
PHASE ARRANGEMENT
PERIODIC APPROXIMATION
Microstructure and periodic model
59
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Windowing Approaches

Windowing approaches make use of randomly selected volume
elements of simple shape (windows)
specific, face-wise uniform boundary conditions
macrohomogeneous B.C. lower, upper estimates or

bounds for elastic tensors, moduli
mixed uniform B.C. estimates for linear thermoelastic
tensors
wide range in geometrical complexity

boundary layers at surfaces of volume elements
good theoretical basis (in linear regimes): rigorous
methodology for handling sub-RVE geometries
60
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Windowing Approaches
PHASE ARRANGEMENT
WINDOW
Microstructure and windowing model
61
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Embedding Approaches

Embedding approaches make use of an inhomogeneous core
embedded within a smeared-out embedding region
core plays role of volume element
allow high resolution of microgeometry, microfields within
core
wide range in geometrical complexity of core
boundary layers between core and embedding region
study of local phenomena, materials characterization
can handle very general (non-periodic) volume elements
can handle damage, macrocracks . . .
62
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Embedding Approaches
PHASE ARRANGEMENT
EMBEDDED CONFIGURATION
Microstructure and embedding model
63
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies
PHASE ARRANGEMENT
EMBEDDED CONFIGURATION
PERIODIC APPROXIMATION,
UNIT CELL
WINDOW
Discrete microstructure models
64
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Models of Whole Samples

Brute force methods: whole sample or structure is modeled
minimum number of approximations involved
at present doable only for small samples
may be required when no RVE can be identified
use boundary conditions appropriate for structures
no constraints that enforce behavior as a material
not micromechanical methods in strict sense
no scale transition
65
Definitions
Material Symmetries
Models Overview
Modeling Strategies: Multi-Scale Models

Multi-scale models require suitable intermediate length scales
(mesoscales) in phase geometries
multiple homogenization/localization steps
individual length scales should be well defined
appropriate combinations of MFAs, PMAs, ECAs,
windowing
sequential homogenization/localization steps
more efficient than single-step homogenization (provided

intermediate length scales are available)
66
Governing Equations Boundary Conditions Volume Elements Num.Engng.Methods FEM FEM i
Part II
Numerical Models
67
Outline of Part 2 Numerical Models

Governing Equations
Boundary Conditions
Volume Elements
Num.Engng.Methods
FEM
FEM in Micromechanics
Damage Modeling
68
General Remarks
Note: Full field methods can give individual high-quality
solutions, but they do not provide information on
microstructural parameters
model provides the dots

analyst has to know a way to connect the dots
(or find one)
69
General Remarks
Numerical micromechanics concentrates on studying
specific, discrete phase arrangements
by numerical continuum methods.
This requires
governing differential equations
appropriate volume elements
as close as possible to RVEs

not more complex than necessary
appropriate boundary conditions

suitable numerical methods
Numerical studies become more expensive with increasing

number of degrees of freedom (DOF)
Numerical micromechanics typically involves tradeoffs.
70
Outline
Governing Equations
Boundary Conditions
Volume Elements
Num.Engng.Methods
FEM
Damage Modeling
71
Governing Equations
Modeling of static mechanical behavior is based on
conservation of momentum, leading to stress equilibrium
in Cauchy stresses for static case, small strain regime, no
body forces
ij = 0 div (x) = o
xi
constitutive relations
ij = Eijkl kl
t
dij = Eijkl
dkl
t
ij = Eijkl
kl
work conjugate stress and strain measures must be used
straindisplacement relations (compatibility): ij = f (uk )
in small strain regime
kl =
1

uk +
ul
2 xl
xk
72
Governing Equations
Simplest case: mechanical behavior for small strain elasticity
(micromechanics: position dependent material behavior)
Eijkl
uk = 0
xi
xl
Well-known special case for homogeneous isotropic elasticity
with body forces:
NavierCauchy equations
G 2 uk
2 ui
(K + )
+G
+ bi = 0
3 xk xi
xk xk
More complex material behaviors (e.g., elastoplasticity) cannot
be denoted in closed form.
73
Governing Equations
Modeling of static thermal conduction without heat sources:
divergence-free heat flux q
qi = 0 div q(x) = 0
xi
Constitutive behavior links heat flux and negative temperature
gradient via the conductivity tensor K (Fouriers law)
T
qi = kij
xj
For isotropic conductivity the resulting differential equation in
terms of the temperature T is
k
T =0
xi xi
74
Governing Equations
Mathematical descriptions relevant to many problems of
continuum micromechanics are partial differential equations
(boundary value problems): mechanostatics, time-independent
conduction (and analogous diffusion problems)
Requirements on numerical methods
must be able to handle underlying PDEs
must be able to handle required boundary conditions
inhomogeneous material behavior must be accounted for
interfacial effects may have to be accounted for
75
Governing Equations
Variables in elastic and conduction problems
physical problem
direct variable
generalized intensity
generalized flux
generalized property
inverse property
elasticity
displacement field
u [m]
strain field
[]
stress field
[Pa]
elasticity
E [Pa]
compliance
C
thermal conduction
temperature field
T [K]
thermal gradient field
d [Km1 ]
heat flux field
q [Wm2 ]
thermal conductivity
K [Wm1 K1 ]
thermal resistivity
R
76
Outline
Governing Equations
Boundary Conditions
Volume Elements
Num.Engng.Methods
FEM
Damage Modeling
77
Boundary Conditions
Micromechanics of elastic materials is based on MandelHill
condition (Hill,1963)
hiT hi = h T i
Z
h1 Z
ih 1 Z
i
1
ij (x) d
ij (x) d =
[ij (x) ij (x)] d
s s
s s
s s
must be fulfilled to ensure energetic equivalence between

inhomogeneous material and homogenized continuum
analogous conditions must be fulfilled for other
mechanical material behaviors, diffusion-type problems,
etc.
78
Boundary Conditions
By using integral formulations for and , an integral form of
MandelHill condition can be obtained as
(Hazanov/Amieur,1995)
Z

T

t(x) hi n (x) u(x) hi x d = 0
formulated in terms of surface traction vectors t, surface

normal vectors n, and surface displacement vectors u
for elastic case: average fields and effective behavior are
fully determined by fields at surface of volume element
can be used to define appropriate boundary conditions

for VE
79
Boundary Conditions
Integral form of MandelHill condition
Z

T

t(x) hi n (x) u(x) hi x d = 0
can be fulfilled in general by

macrohomogeneous stresses / tractions (SUBC)
t(x) = a n (x)
macrohomogeneous strains (KUBC)

u(x) = a x
homogeneous fields within individual faces (MUBC)

T

[t(x) hi n (x) u(x) hi x d = 0
x k
periodicity B.C. (PBC)
80
Boundary Conditions
For use in micromechanics numerical methods must be
capable of handling the following boundary conditions
kinematically uniform BC are Dirichlet BC
statically uniform BC are Neumann BC
available for all relevant numerical methods

available for most relevant numerical methods
mixed uniform BC are piecewise Neumann and Dirichlet

BC
periodicity requires coupling of appropriate degrees of
freedom (DOF) on homologous faces of volume element
linear constraint equations between DOF required

note that requirement for pairs of homologous faces
limits shapes of periodic volume elements
81
Boundary Conditions
Boundary conditions (contd.)
for models involving structural elements (beams, plates,
shells) boundary conditions for rotational degrees of
freedom must be considered
requirements for handling BC in thermal conduction (and
other diffusion-type problems) are analogous to those
pertinent to mechanical problems
82
Outline
Governing Equations
Boundary Conditions
Volume Elements
Num.Engng.Methods
FEM
Damage Modeling
83
Volume Elements
structureproperty relationships play central role in continuum
micromechanics choosing suitable volume elements is of
major importance in numerical models
volume elements must reliably reproduce the
characteristics of microgeometry important for a given
problem
typically tradeoffs with computational costs
results obtained with volume elements involving major

approximations
may give valuable insight into qualitative aspects of

material behavior
cannot be expected to give quantitative agreement with
experiments
if quantitative agreement is found in such cases it is

probably due to cancellation of errors
predictive capabilities of model are questionable
84
Volume Elements
Volume elements used in numerical micromechanics take the
form of
synthetic phase geometries
generated by suitable computer codes

arrangements can be periodic or non-periodic
shapes of inhomogeneities are typically simplified
wide range of complexity
phase arrangements obtained from experiments

(real structures)
generated e.g., by tomography, serial sectioning, . . .

arrangements are typically non-periodic
phase geometries, shapes of inhomogeneities may be
highly complex
details of volume elements may depend on details of

experimental procedure (e.g., spatial resolution)
85
Volume Elements
Highly idealized VEs
describe artificial, usually periodic model material
useful for studying principles underlying behavior,
developing algorithms
no pretense of being representative of phase arrangements
of actual materials
aimed at limiting computational requirements
qualitative results, direct comparisons with experiments

difficult
typical representatives: hexagonal and square arrays of
fibers, cubic arrangements of particles
86
Volume Elements
Volume elements approaching realistic microstructures
aim at quantitative results and direct comparisons with
experiments
degree of representativeness and, consequently, size of the
volume element is an issue
tradeoff between representativeness and computational

cost
typical representatives: multi-fiber and multi-particle unit

cells
87
Volume Elements: RVEs

Assessment of adequacy of size of volume element
in spirit of geometrical RVE
depending only on phase geometry:

statistical descriptors of phase arrangements
in spirit of physical RVE
based on independence of results from actual boundary

conditions
dependence on physical behavior to be studied
elastoplastic behavior, damage typically require larger

volume elements than elastic behavior
macroscopic softening due to localization; failure: RVE
may not exist (Gitman et al.,2007)
elastic behavior more benign than other responses
88

Descriptors used for assessing geometrical RVEs
covariance, 2-point probability function S2 (r)
S2 is constant for uncorrelated systems

condition for extracting correlation length
minimum RVE size
radial distribution function g(r)
describes probability of finding centroid of inhomogeneity

within spherical shell between r and r + dr
Poisson process gives g(r)=1
correlation lengths from maxima (n-th nearest
neighbor shell), intersections with unity
89

Assessment of representativeness of given volume element
check if volume element gives same results for different
boundary conditions describing same physical situation
classical: SUBC and KUBC; difficult in practice

MUBC, PBC give results between the above
volume elements that contain statistical information on

phase arrangement but are too small to be proper RVEs:
Statistical Volume Elements (SVEs)
simple sign that volume element is SVE rather than

RVE: target elastic symmetry not reached
e.g., randomly positioned and oriented particles, but

some anisotropic contributions in elasticity tensor
conduction tensor much less sensitive
90
Volume Elements: SVEs

Working with SVEs
representativeness can be approached via ensemble
averages over sets of SVEs of comparable size
smaller VEs may reduce numerical burden
however, SVEs must be nontrivial
smaller SVEs require higher number nSVE of SVEs to

reach given quality
advantage: statistics from ensemble averaging can

provide information on representativeness
standard deviations of ensemble S(Y )

confidence intervals for ensemble (Kanit et al.,2003)
1.96 S(Y )
err(Y ) =
nSVE
91
Computer Generation of Volume Elements

Computer generation of synthetic volume elements for
composites
Random Sequential Addition (RSA)
add inhomogeneity at random position, random

orientation; reject if it overlaps with existing
inhomogeneity
aimed at random microgeometries
attainable volume fractions limited by geometrical
frustration
RSA plus compression and hard core shaking
modify volume element (often obtained from RSA) by

applying random displacements to inhomogeneities to
rearrange them
compress arrangement to increase volume fraction
aimed at random microgeometries
92

Additional approaches to computer generation of synthetic
volume elements for composites
dynamic models: particles moving and colliding in
shrinking box (collective rearrangement models,
MD-like)
eroding models: volume element first randomly tesselated
with Voronoi polyhedra which then are eroded away
heuristic models: stirring, deterministic shifts . . .
simulation of production processes
Note: phase arrangements in at least some actual composites
have been reported to be not completely spatially random
(Trias,2005)
93

Computer generation of synthetic volume elements for
composites
Most methods for synthesizing volume elements for
matrixinclusion microgeometries require algorithms for
detecting collisions between individual inhomogeneities
straightforward for circles and spheres
reasonably simple for ellipses and ellipsoids
expensive for more general shapes
separating plane algorithm for convex polygons and

polyhedra
94

Separating plane theorem: no overlap between convex
polygons or polyhedra if separating line or plane can be found
tin
ra
pa
Se
Se
pa
ra
tin
ax
is
ne
Li
Separating plane
95

Some examples of synthetic volume elements
periodic VEs containing equally sized particles, = 0.2 (Rasool/B

ohm,2012)
96

Arrangement statistics of synthetic volume elements depend
on generation method
Most powerful approach at present
statistical reconstruction of microstructures
aimed at approaching statistical descriptor(s) measured

for target composite
optimization problem
resulting volume elements are statistically equivalent
to target composite
statistical reconstruction can be carried out at pixel/voxel

level or inhomogeneity level (Rintoul/Torquato,1997)
97

Statistical reconstruction
typical approach: simulated annealing
search for minimum energy state

for energy use measure of difference between actual
and target descriptors
gradually reduce temperature and probability of
accepting moves that increase rather than decrease
energy
of limited use when number of inhomogeneities is small
insufficient geometrical DOFs to closely approach target

statistics
98
Volume Elements
Volume elements for other inhomogeneous materials
polycrystals
cellular materials
real structures: geometry (sections), orientation (EBSD)

from experiments
computer generated: (modified) Voronoi tesselations,
growth simulations . . .
real structures: tomography
computer generated: minimum energy surfaces
(SurfaceEvolver)
cancellous bone
typically via tomography (CT)
99
Outline
Governing Equations
Boundary Conditions
Volume Elements
Num.Engng.Methods
FEM
Damage Modeling
100
Numerical Engineering Methods

All but the simplest discrete microgeometries have been
studied by numerical engineering methods
Methods for directly solving for stress equilibrium
Finite Difference (FD) methods
local approximation by quadratic, biquadratic or

triquadratic polynomials
straightforward discretization, structured grid
awkward for complex geometries
spring lattice methods
continuum approximated by network of springs

structured discretization
damage and failure by removal of springs
difficulties with complex geometries, elastic symmetry
101

Methods for directly solving for stress equilibrium (contd.)
Finite Volume (FV) methods
based on integral formulations of balance equations:

approximate fluxes through surfaces of FV
capable of unstructured discretization
rather uncommon in continuum mechanics
Boundary Element (BE) methods
surface rather than volume of model is discretized

relatively small number of DOFs, but complex theory
good at handling complex geometries
very well suited for elastic materials, difficult for
path-dependent material behavior
102

Methods for directly solving for stress equilibrium (contd.)
Finite Element (FE) methods
can handle domains of complex shape, unstructured

meshes
mainstay of present treatment
methods specifically developed for micromechanics
Method of Cells (MOC) and developments

Transformation Field Analysis (TFA)
methods based on analytical two-inhomogeneity
formalisms
103

Alternative methods for solving for stress equilibrium
methods using Fast Fourier Transforms (FFT) and
Discrete Fourier Transforms (DFT): spectral methods
periodic homogenization, structured discretizations

can handle considerable range of material behaviors
numerically very efficient
at present hot field of research
Same set of standard numerical engineering methods can

also handle thermal conduction, diffusion problems.
104
Numerical Engineering Methods: FFT-based

FFT-based methods (Moulinec/Suquet,1994)
based on polarization formulations
(x) = E0 (x)+ (x)

div E0 (x)+ (x) = o
E0 : elasticity tensor of homogeneous reference material

(x): (stress) polarization tensor
fluctuating part of strain field, (x), can be obtained

from convolution integral using Greens operator of
homogeneous reference material, 0
Z
0 (x, y) (y)dy
(x) =
s
Z
0 (x, y) (y)dy
(x) = hi
s
105
Numerical Engineering Methods: FFT-based

FFT-based methods (contd.)
LippmannSchwinger equation in index notation
Z
0ijkl (x, y) kl (y)dy
ij (x) = hij i
s
convolution integral becomes product in Fourier space

0 () ()
() =
0 (), is known for all

Greens function in Fourier space,
material symmetries
efficient iterative algorithm
(x) evaluated from (x) in physical space

() from () in Fourier space
switching between physical and Fourier spaces by FFT

nonlinear behavior via incremental schemes
106
Outline
Governing Equations
Boundary Conditions
Volume Elements
Num.Engng.Methods
FEM
Damage Modeling
107
Numerical Engineering Methods: FEM

Basic concepts of FE (shown for 1D linear elasticity)
boundary value problem to be solved
d2
plus BC
E 2 u(x) + b(x) = 0
dx
Galerkin weighted residual method: approximation by
solving
Z L
Z L
d2

w(x)R(x) dx =
w(x) E 2 u(x) + b(x) dx = 0
dx
0
0
u
(x) trial function containing free parameters
R(x) residual (error)
w(x) weighting function, of same type as trial function
108

Basic concepts of FE (contd.)
weak form of weighted residual approach
Z L
Z L
u
dw d
dx = A
wb dx + w(x)F (x)|L0
EA
dx
dx
0
0
order of differentiation reduced

Neumann BC introduced in elegant way
special form of Ritz ansatz on subsets hei of problem

geometry (elements)
hei
hei
u(x) =
Xn
heii
N(x) i U
i=1
heii N (x):
iU :
shape functions
(unknown) values of displacements at nodal points
109

discretization and algebraization lead to equation
KU=F
K: stiffness matrix
U: vector of unknown nodal displacements
F: vector of nodal forces
elements of stiffness matrix are volume integrals

containing derivatives of shape functions, constitutive
matrix
elements of vector of nodal forces contains volume
integrals of shape functions and surface loads
110

problem is discretized into finite elements defined by
appropriate nodal points
contributions to stiffness matrix, vector of nodal forces

are obtained element by element
master elements in natural coordinates transformed into

actual elements in physical space
geometrical transformation carried out with shape
functions: isoparametric elements
numerical integration in natural coordinates using

GaussLegendre quadrature
element-wise contributions assembled into system

equations
equations are solved via matrix or iterative solvers
111

results output by FE codes typically are
displacements and forces output at nodal points
stresses, strains primarily output at integration points
displacements are continuous but not smooth

stresses and strains are discontinuous at element borders
estimates by extrapolation to nodes and averaging over
neighboring elements
no averaging over phase boundaries
Fully integrated 2D serendipity elements
112

Advantages of FEM:
can use unstructured meshes and is very flexible
geometrically
can include special elements, e.g., for handling interfaces
can handle material nonlinearities: wide range of material
models for constituents and interfaces
can handle geometrical nonlinearities: large deformations
can handle strain, stress discontinuities at phase
boundaries
supports (approximate) evaluation of volume averages,
phase averages via weighted sums
can handle all required BCs
can handle wide range of boundary value problems
113

Advantages of FEM (contd.):
wide range of element types that can be combined fairly
freely
continuum (solid) elements: discretize continuum

equations (e.g., stress equilibrium)
only translational DOFs
structural elements (shells, plates, beams): use

appropriate kinematics to describe structures that are
thin in one or two directions
translational plus rotational DOFs
interface elements: describe interface-specific behavior
contact, cohesive zone models for interfacial failure,

interfacial conductances
Note: same basic mesh may be used for mechanical and

thermal analysis
114

Weak point of FEM in context of continuum micromechanics:
meshing of microgeometries may be very tedious
application of periodicity BCs may be tedious

less efficient numerically than FFT
handling of marked nonlinearities, e.g., local failure, may
be difficult
preprocessing/meshing software in many cases not

geared towards handling microstructures
closely approaching inhomogeneities may give trouble,
especially if stress and strain fields are to be well resolved
in this respect explicit FE tends to be superior to

standard (implicit) FE
interpretation of stresses, strains at interfaces, free

surfaces requires some care
115
Outline
Governing Equations
Boundary Conditions
Volume Elements
Num.Engng.Methods
FEM
Damage Modeling
116
FEM in Micromechanics: Modeling Strategies

Different modeling strategies may be followed in using FEM
for complex phase geometries in micromechanics
standard FE meshes
meshing with inhomogeneous elements
pixel/voxel meshes
multiphase element meshes
structured meshes using XFEM
FE approaches used in continuum micromechanics
117

Standard FE meshes
phase boundaries coincide with element boundaries
full range of continuum and interface elements provided

by analysis program can be used
special techniques such as XFEM can be added for
microcracks, microdamage
Standard FE meshes
118

Standard FE meshes (contd.)
unstructured meshes, geometrically very flexible
full range of constitutive models for continua, interfaces

provided by analysis code can be used
high flexibility in boundary conditions
in principle any microgeometry can be described

mesh can be refined locally where needed
no anti-periodic stress BC required/available for

displacement based formulations
meshing may be be tedious or difficult

high number of DOFs may be required, especially in 3D
119

Inhomogeneous elements
complex elements making use of analytical
micromechanical descriptions
e.g., single inhomogeneity embedded in matrix
Inhomogeneous element
120

Inhomogeneous elements (contd.)
special elements are required
considerable range of constituent, interface behaviors can

be incorporated
limited flexibility, best for 2D problems
essentially encapsulate micromechanical solutions

high number of DOF per element
not in standard FE codes
specialized to microgeometries covered by implemented

model
can be easy to mesh and fairly efficient
e.g., Voronoi elements (Ghosh et al.,1994)
121

Pixel/voxel meshes
geometrically and topologically regular meshes with
elements that correspond to individual pixels/voxels
natural choice for microgeometries based on digital

data (e.g., geometries from tomography)
Pixel mesh
122

Pixel/voxel meshes (contd.)
structured meshes
can use full range of available continuum elements,
material models for phases
geometrically flexible, can do any microgeometry
mesh refinement runs counter to modeling philosophy
care required with phase volume fractions

when processing pixel/voxel data, volume fractions
depend on thresholds used in segmentation
ragged phase boundaries
overestimate surface area of interfaces between phases

interface normals not resolved correctly
not well suited for interface modeling
123

Pixel/voxel meshes (contd.)
small meshing effort, suitable for automation
also used for synthetic phase arrangements
special FE programs may be used

all elements have identical geometry, so geometrical
flexibility of FEM is not needed
strip down FE codes for efficiency, parallelizability
similar considerations hold for FFT models
124

Multiphase elements
geometrically and topologically regular meshes, standard
elements
allocation of material properties at integration point level
Multiphase elements
125

Multiphase elements (contd.)
not fully compatible with philosophy of FEM
geometrically flexible, can do any microgeometry
modeling of interface failure not supported
care required with phase volume fractions
mesh refinement runs counter to modeling philosophy
no well-defined interfaces
typical shape functions are not built to handle

intra-element inhomogeneity
in many cases issues of accuracy in macroscopic
properties can be handled by selective overintegration
phase regions ambiguous between integration points
small meshing effort, suitable for automation
126

Structured meshes using XFEM for phase boundaries
XFEM (eXtended Finite Element Method) uses enriched
shape functions for describing non-smooth displacements
or displacement jumps
can properly handle stress and strain jumps at prescribed
phase boundaries
XFEM mesh
127

Structured meshes using XFEM (contd.)
low meshing effort, but interfaces must be defined
explicitly
phase volume fractions well described
overall efficiency not yet clear

recent approach
128

Special modeling approach for complex fiber reinforced
composites: embedded element techniques
matrix described by regular, structured mesh
fibers are modeled independently by beam, shell or
continuum elements
DOFs of matrix and fibers are tied together by constraint
equations
Stress distribution evaluated with embedded element model (Matveeva,2014)

129

Embedded element techniques (contd.)
advantages
markedly reduces number of (matrix) DOFs, meshing

effort compared to classical FE models
however, constraint equations must be provided
can handle large numbers of wavy and twisty fibers with

reasonable effort
some interphase effects can be included
conceptually similar to rebar models in civil engineering

some FE codes are set up to generate constraints
automatically
modified fiber properties
can be used with periodic homogenization and

embedding
130

disadvantages
overlay technique adds artificial volume and thus

stiffness to models
can be corrected to some extent by modifying material

properties of phases
overlay modeling limited to low fiber volume fractions
cannot handle debonding
131

potentially useful for modeling nanotube reinforced

composites
Embedded element model of nanocomposite: general view and detail (Matveeva,2014)
132
FEM in Micromechanics: Postprocessing

Issues in postprocessing results in numerical micromechanics
evaluation of volume averages, phase averages of
microfields
extraction of effective elasticity and conductivity tensors
Note: even if you are set up for (semi-)automatic
postprocessing, try to have a look at raw results from time
to time.
133

Approximate evaluation of averages, phase averages of
microfields f (x) in context of displacement-based FE
flux and gradient variables (stresses and strains) are
processed at integration points of finite elements
integrals can be approximated by weighted sums over
function values at N integration points, fl
weights l are volumes associated with individual

integration points, accessible within some FE codes
1
hf i =
1X
fl l
f (x)d
l=1
gives satisfactory accuracy provided meshes are

sufficiently fine
134

Approximate evaluation of averages (contd.)
weighted sums can be used to evaluate statistical
moments of distributions of microfields
e.g., standard deviation at phase of global level
v
u N
u1 X
(fl hf i)2 l
S(f ) t
l=1
nonlinear functions must be evaluated at integration

points before doing sum
e.g., for effective stress heq i 6= hieq
care required when pores, displacement jumps, rigid

inhomogeneities are present
135

Approximate evaluation of averages (contd.)
Accuracy of approximation to phase averages of components
of microfields can be checked via mean field relations
X
(p) hf i(p) = hf i = f a
(p)
does not work for nonlinear functions of components,

e.g., equivalent stress
pores, cracks, rigid inhomogeneity may have to be
accounted for explicitly
136

Probability density distributions of microfields can be extracted
by binning volume weighted integration point values
PDF INHOMOG. SPH B
vol.avg.inh.
PDF MATRIX SPH B
vol.avg.mtx.
PROBABILITY DENSITY []
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0
10
12
14
NORMALIZED EQUIVALENT STRESS []

PDF for effective stresses in phases of PRC in hardening regime under tension
137
PDD MATRIX
vol.avg. MATRIX
PDD SPH
vol.avg. SPH
PROBABILITY DENSITY []
1.5
0.5
0
0
10
12
14
Predicted phase-level distributions of von Mises equivalent stress in both phases of PRC ( = 0.2) secondary
peak and corresponding matrix regions in model
138

Computing effective elastic and conductivity tensors requires
6 linearly independent load cases for linear elasticity
load controlled analysis may be more efficient than

displacement controlled analysis: only one inversion of
stiffness matrix required
1 load case for linear thermoelasticity

3 linearly independent load cases for linear conduction
Required macroscopic fields (stresses, strains, temperature
gradients, heat fluxes) can be obtained
by approximating volume integrals
from displacements or temperatures of master nodes
(periodic homogenization)
from asymptotic homogenization (homogenization
theory)
139

Evaluation of concentration tensors
evaluation of phase averages and volume averages can be
used to find approximations to concentration tensors etc.
concentration tensors for non-ellipsoidal inhomogeneities

can be extracted from results for 6 independent load
cases
or B
must be solved for
36 components of A
(non-symmetric tensors of order 4)
(i) hi
hi(i) = A
(i) hi
hi(i) = B
inhomogeneity averaged Eshelby tensors, Hill tensors can

be approximated from dilute concentration tensors

(i) = I SC(m) (E(i) E(m) ) 1 = I P(E(i) E(m) ) 1
A
dil
configurations of very low inhomogeneity V.F. should be

(i)
used for evaluating A
dil
140

Evaluation of compliance and stiffness contribution tensors
from numerical results on effective tensors of given
microgeometry
1
1
N(i,m) = (E E(m) )
H(i,m) = (C C(m) )
6 linearly independent load cases required

dilute (non-interacting) configurations, 0, require
care
from numerical results on stress and strain concentration

tensors
H(i,m) = (C(i) C(m) )B(i)
N(i,m) = (E(i) E(m) )A(i)
dilute contribution tensors from dilute concentration

tensors
141

Evaluation of compliance and stiffness contribution tensors
(contd.)
using full field models approximations to contribution

tensors can be obtained for general inclusion shapes
numerical errors tend to be a problem
Analogous procedures can be used to obtain conduction

equivalents of contribution tensors, concentration tensors, Hill
tensors and depolarization tensors (equivalents to Eshelby
tensors)
142

For SVEs, ensemble averages of SVEs elastic, conduction
tensors typically show anisotropic contributions even though
solution is known to have higher symmetry
2.2124
0.9226
0.9255
E =
0.0015
0.0163
0.0015
0.9226
2.2182
0.9257
0.0052
0.0000
0.0000
0.9255 0.0015 0.0163 0.0015

0.9257 0.0052
0.0000
0.0000
2.2302 0.0023
0.0028
0.0054
0.0094 0.0038
0.0023 0.6596
0.6623
0.0029
0.0028 0.0094
0.6550
0.0054 0.0038 0.0029
SVE with 20 tetrahedra, = 0.2, normalized w.r.t. E (m)
results from using SVE instead of RVE

possible way for improving solution: find
closest elasticity tensor of appropriate symmetry
algorithms available (Norris,2006, Moakher/Norris,2006)
Note: whenever possible go for elastic or conduction tensors

rather than individual moduli
143

Closest isotropic tensors: example for PRC
ensemble averaged elastic tensor with standard deviations
0.854 0.002 0.857 0.004

0.000 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.003
2.028 0.006 0.853 0.004
0.002 0.003
0.000 0.003
0.001 0.002
0.853 0.004 2.026 0.005 0.002 0.007 0.000 0.002

0.000 0.002
0.000 0.004 0.001 0.003

0.002 0.003 0.002 0.007 0.587 0.005
0.000 0.003 0.000 0.002

0.000 0.004
0.592 0.003 0.001 0.002
0.003 0.003 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.002 0.001 0.003 0.001 0.002 0.590 0.003
2.028 0.009
0.854 0.002
0.857 0.004
E =
0.000 0.002
0.003 0.004
Ensemble average (5 SVEs, each with 20 tetrahedra, = 0.2), normalized w.r.t. E (m)
corresponding closest isotropic elasticity tensor
E,iso
2.030
0.853
0.853
=
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.853
2.030
0.853
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.853
0.853
2.030
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.588
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.588
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.588
20 tetrahedra, = 0.2, normalized w.r.t. E (m)
144
FEM in Micromechanics: Notes

Notes on constitutive models
FE programs typically contain range of constitutive
models
FE programs typically support user defined constitutive

models
plasticity: incremental models required for following

general load paths
plasticity: flow surfaces for anisotropic plasticity are
often provided, but hardening models cannot handle
anisotropy
anisotropic plasticity: crystal plasticity models
often nontrivial to program
interface and similar elements also contain material

models
e.g., tractiondisplacement relations

145

Notes on FE meshes: typical trouble spots
narrow matrix bridges between inhomogeneities
awkward to mesh
additional information required for actual geometries at
(nearly) touching inhomogeneities
inhomogeneities closely approaching cell boundaries
low angle intersections between phase boundary and cell

surface
awkward to mesh
Typical trouble spots

146

Notes on FE meshes: phase arrangements
ways for limiting difficulties with meshing of matrix
bridges, low-angle intersections of phase boundaries with
cell surfaces
enforce minimum distances between neighboring

inhomogeneities, between inhomogeneities and RVE
boundaries
will influence distribution statistics

strong effect on percolation dominated behavior
avoid/minimize intersections between phase boundaries

and cell surfaces by appropriately shaping volume
elements
147

Notes on FE meshes: element types
choice of element type may markedly influence resolution
of local fields in narrow matrix bridges
avoid linear triangles, tetrahedra whenever possible:

constant strain approximation, unfavorable convergence
use multiple, quadratic elements where possible
limited influence on damage-free macroscopic behavior
Different elements in matrix bridge

148

Notes on pixel/voxel meshes
generation of pixel/voxel meshes typically involves image
processing operations
thresholding, segmenting of images/scans
features below voxel size are not resolved reliably
large, closely approaching inhomogeneities tend to merge

small inhomogeneities or pores tend to disappear
Pixel meshes of different resolution
extracting smooth surfaces and interfaces from

pixel/voxel geometries is nontrivial
149
Outline
Governing Equations
Boundary Conditions
Volume Elements
Num.Engng.Methods
FEM
Damage Modeling
150
Remarks on Modeling of Damage and Failure

Damage, failure, fatigue etc. in composites and inhomogeneous
materials can be modeled at different length scales
on macroscale: continuum damage mechanics (CDM)
and related models
on mesoscale: laminate level models
scalar-, vector-, or tensor-valued damage variables

semi-empirical models, e.g., crushable foam model
failure modes such as delamination, damage and failure
of laminae handled by appropriate submodels
on microscale
appropriate damage models at constituent level
composites: matrix, reinforcement, interfaces

polycrystal: intergranular, intragranular
all of the above are parameter hungry
151

Microscopic damage and failure models study the onset and
progress of damage within the microstructure.
appropriate constitutive descriptions at the phase level
required
interfacial damage/failure: specific interface models,

e.g., cohesive zone models (CZM)
damage and failure in fiber, matrix, grains . . .
requires model geometry with clearly resolved, realistic

interfaces
volume oriented models:
smeared-out damage within process zone (CDM . . .)
surface oriented models:
well-defined cracks (e.g., XFEM)
dominant failure process is determined by material

properties of phases and by microgeometry
152

Smeared-out damage models for use at phase level
continuum damage models in strict sense
(Kachanov,1958):
describe evolution of damage parameter which is used to
degrade phase properties
ductile rupture models, e.g., (Gurson,1977)
damage indicator triggered models
a damage indicator (e.g., a function of local stress and

strain variables) is integrated up as loading progresses
does not influence phase properties
some critical value of damage indicator triggers damage

initiation
subsequently, an independent damage evolution model
degrades phase properties
153

Smeared-out damage models for use at phase level (contd.)
strategy underlying damage indicator triggered models
allows using independent (sub-)models, independent
modeling parameters for damage initiation and damage
evolution
very flexible
parameter hungry (e.g., using tables of parameters in
terms of local stress triaxiality = vol /dev )
bit of a mixed blessing: which parameters are material
parameters and which are modeling parameters?
154

Smeared-out damage models for use at phase level (contd.)
Material softening due to damage causes loss of ellipticity of
PDEs mesh-dependence of solutions
mesh dependence can be counteracted by various
regularization strategies, e.g., nonlocal damage models,
rate effects
typically an absolute length scale is introduced
checking for mesh dependence in damage modeling is

typically a very good idea
155

Localized crack models for use at phase level
mainly for use with brittle phases
can be based on classical fracture mechanics
can be based on introducing large number of potential

fracture surfaces into model
crack initiation criterion needed

evolution of crack path may involve remeshing
by providing cohesive zone elements between many pairs

of volume elements (cohesive micromechanics), so
that element boundaries become potential crack paths
implicitly by using XFEM for describing phases
may introduce mesh dependence via availability of crack
paths
crack usually advanced element by element
new equilibrium must be found after advancing crack

156

Other localized crack models for inhomogeneities
crack initiation may be a statistical process (e.g., based
on presence of critical surface flaws in fibers)
possible model: Weibull-type criterion plus instantaneous
fracture of fiber segment or particle
open questions: where will crack actually appear, how

will it be oriented?
CT data show that cracks do not go though centers of

zirconia spheres in metal matrix uniaxial tension
(Babout et al.,2004)
157

Models involving multiple damage modes
very good parameters may be necessary to pick right
damage mode
Example: modeling of failure of UDLFRC
(Gonzalez/Llorca,2006)
Sketch of process zone for failure of UD LFRC (Gonzalez/Llorca,2006)

158

Modeling of fracture in fiber composites
Accumulated plastic strains ahead of notch in LFRC predicted by embedding model (Gonzalez/Llorca,2006)
159

Modeling of fracture in fiber composites
Longitudinal stress in fibers in LFRC predicted by embedding model (Gonzalez/Llorca,2006)
160
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Part III
Periodic Homogenization
161
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline of Part 3 Periodic Homogenization

Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
162
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
General Remarks
Periodic homogenization (Periodic Microfield Approach,
PMA)
uses unit cells (repeating unit cells, RUC): volume
elements describing periodic phase arrangements
appropriate boundary conditions must be applied
translational, mirror, line and point symmetries can be

made use of
translational symmetry is most general case for unit
cells, subsumes others
enforce periodicity of microfields
microfields in unit cell must be solved for, macroscopic

fields must be evaluated
analytical solutions only for very simple geometries
163
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Periodic Homogenization: Waves

Periodic homogenization (contd.)
special care required when wave-like phenomena are
involved: unit cells act as filters
dynamics, stability problems
Wave-like periodic functions in 2-dimensional periodic square arrangement of inhomogeneities
164
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Periodic Homogenization: Micro- and Macrofields

Field variables are split into 2 parts
uniform macroscopic contributions: slow variables
microscopic fluctuations: (periodic) fast variables
using microscopic coordinates z
(z) = hi + (z)
(z) = hi + (z)
corresponding expression for displacements

u(z) = hi z + u (z)
macroscopic displacements grow linearly over unit cells
same holds for temperatures in conduction analysis
165
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Periodicity implies that volume averages of fluctuations of
microfields vanish over unit cell
Z
1
(z) d = 0
UC UC
Z
1
(z) d = 0
UC UC
analogous behavior for temperatures, heat fluxes and

temperature gradients in thermal conduction
166
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

, u
<s >
s
us
< s> s
us
cu
A
s
Periodic microfields in one-dimensional case
167
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
168
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Periodic Homogenization: Selection of Unit Cells

Basic considerations
for any given periodic arrangement there is no unique unit
cell
shifted versions, multiple copies of periodic unit cells

also are unit cells
smallest periodic volume element (minimum unit cell)

is defined by translation vectors (periodicity vectors) pl
that describe translational periodicity
m linearly independent translation vectors in

m-dimensional problem
pl are not necessarily orthogonal
translation vectors are not unique (linear combinations)
shape of minimum unit cell is not unique (but volume is)
number of faces of minimum unit cell is not unique (but
must be even for translational symmetry)
169
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Periodic Homogenization: Unit Cells

p2
p1
p2
p1
Different minimum unit cells for a 2-dimensional periodic matrixinclusion medium with two (slightly)
non-orthogonal translation vectors p1 and p2
170
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

p2
p1
p1
p2
3 minimum unit cells for a 2-dimensional periodic matrixinclusion medium detail
171
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Basic considerations (contd.)
smaller unit cells can be generated in some cases by
making use of additional mirror or point symmetries of
microgeometry
typically available for simple, but less so for complex

phase arrangements
resulting unit cells do not show translational periodicity
and require appropriate boundary conditions
resulting unit cells can be interpreted as special cases of
periodicity
172
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Periodic Homogenization: Boundary Conditions

Types of boundary conditions used in periodic homogenization
periodicity boundary conditions
symmetry boundary conditions
require the presence of symmetry planes in

microgeometry (special case)
limited to load cases that do not break mirror symmetry
antisymmetry boundary conditions
most general BC in periodic homogenization

can handle any load case
require the presence of centers of antisymmetry (point

symmetry) in microgeometry (special case)
can handle any load case
free surface boundary conditions
cannot be used in directions with periodicity
173
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
B
A
E
C
G
F
periodic boundary
symmetry boundary
point symmetry boundary
symmetry center
(pivot point)
Some unit cells for a hexagonal arrangement of aligned fibers
174
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

BC must ensure strict compatibility between neighboring unit
cells
no gaps, no overlaps between neighboring cells
in undeformed and deformed states
Discussed for planar (2D) case
nomenclature can be easily generalized to 3D
uNW NW
NE
111111
000000
000000
111111
u
NE
z2
uSE
SW
z1
SE
1
0
0
1
u
0
1
0
1
NW
NW
1111
0000
u
0000
1111
0000
1111
0000 NE
1111
NE
E
uSE
SW
1
0
0
1
0
NW 1
uNW
111
000
000 NE
111
000
111
0000
1111
u
U
0000
1111
U
uP
u
11111
00000
00000L
11111
L
SE
SW
SE
Nomenclature for planar unit cells
175
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Nomenclature for 3D unit cells
Pairs of faces: WE, NS, BT

176
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

General properties of unit cells using periodicity BC
faces of cell come in pairs k
restriction on shape of volume elements
two faces making up a pair are parallel and of equal size

and shape
two faces making up a pair are separated by shift
vectors ck
ck are linear combinations of periodicity vectors pl
when discretizing numerical methods are used

discretizations (meshes) of faces making up a pair must
be compatible
faces making up a pair must have same number of nodes

at equivalent positions (pairs of homologous nodes)
necessary for applying periodicity BCs in node-by-node
fashion
177
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Translational symmetry must be maintained for all possible
load cases
two faces making up a pair must fit together seamlessly in
all deformed states
General formulation of periodicity boundary conditions in small
strain regime
define local coordinate systems
s with coordinates sk on
each face making up a pair k
pairs of homologous nodes have positions
sk and sk + ck ,
respectively, in undeformed state
for deformed states periodicity BC must enforce the
condition
u(sk + ck ) u(sk ) = uk
178
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Vectors linking pairs of homologous nodes
vectors between pairs of homologous nodes in undeformed
state: ck
vectors between pairs of homologous nodes in any
deformed state
ck = ck + uk
NE
NW
NE
~
s1
NW
N
c^1
c1
W
s~
E
s~2
~
s1
SW
W
S
c2
SE
c^2
SE
SW
Periodicity BC in 2D
179
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Vectors linking pairs of homologous nodes
ck = ck + uk = ck + hi ck
terms in detail for special case
c1 = xE (
s2 ) xW (
s2 ) = xSE xSW

c1 = xE (
s2 ) + uE (
s2 ) xW (
s2 ) + uW (
s2 )

= c1 + uE (
s2 ) uW (
s2 )

= c1 + uSE uSW
so that
hi ck = uSE uSW
macroscopic degrees of freedom of unit cell can be carried
by specific nodes (master nodes)
typical setting: uSE = 0

180
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Periodicity BC for rectangular unit cells in 2D
uN (
s1 ) = uS (
s1 ) + uNW
uE (
s2 ) = uW (
s2 ) + uSE
master nodes carry macroscopic DOFs (NW,SE)
anchor node: prohibits rigid body shifts (SW)

slave node: carries no free DOFs (NE)
uNE = uNW + uSE
master faces carry microscopic fluctuations (S,W)
slave faces: controlled by master faces (N,E)
periodicity BC typically formulated as linear constraint

equations (multipoint constraints) linking three
displacement D.O.F.s
181
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Symmetry BC
faces of cells must coincide with planes of mirror
symmetry
in 2D: rectangles
in 3D: right hexahedra
mirror symmetry must be maintained for all load cases

considered
deformed unit cells remain rectangles or right hexahedra

shear loads only via extensional shear
consequence: symmetry BC do not support general load
paths
Extensional shear
182
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Symmetry BC for unit cells in 2D
uE (
s2 ) = uSE
vN (
s1 ) = vNW
uW (
s2 ) = 0
vS (
s1 ) = 0
master nodes carry macroscopic DOFs (NW,SE)

zero fluctuations normal to faces
NW
NE
N
W
s~2
c1
E
~
s1
SW
NE
NW
c2
E
S
SE
SW
SE
Symmetry BC in 2D
183
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Symmetry BC for unit cells in 2D
can be used for fairly complex phase arrangements
inhomogeneities contained in cell face are mirrored

inhomogeneities crossing faces make sense only if they
have appropriate symmetry and their centers lie on face
not to be used with real structure VEs
node positions on faces can be chosen freely
Potential pitfalls in using symmetry BC

184
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Antisymmetry BC
cells do not have to be rectangles or hexahedra
faces must contain points or lines of antisymmetry
in 2D: symmetry point at center of cell side

in 3D: symmetry point at center of cell face or
line of symmetry bisecting cell face in suitable way
antisymmetry must be maintained for all load cases

considered
may have even or odd numbers of faces

cell faces do not have to be straight lines or planar
surfaces
general load paths are supported
nodal positions must have appropriate antisymmetry

rarely suitable for complex phase arrangements
185
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Antisymmetry BC for E-face of unit cell in 2D
uU (
sP ) + uL (
sP ) = 2uP
vN (
s1 ) = vNW = 2vP
vS (
s1 ) = 0
uW (
s2 ) = 0
master nodes carry macroscopic DOFs (P,NW)

upper half of face E is slaved to lower half
node SE controls node NE

NW
NE
N
W
~
s
c1
NW
E
~
s
~
sP
~
s1 S
SW
NE
N
E
c2
SE
SW
Antisymmetry BC on E-face in 2D
S
SE
186
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Periodicity, symmetry and antisymmetry BC can be defined in
FE packages as linear equations between degrees of freedom
(multi-point constraints)
U(N1 , d1 ) = 0
c1 U(N1 , d1 ) + c2 U(N2 , d2 ) = 0
c1 U(N1 , d1 ) + c2 U(N2 , d2 ) + c3 U(N3 , d3 ) = 0
typically cause increase in bandwidth of stiffness matrix

analogous considerations hold for conduction analysis
187
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Additional considerations on BCs required for
mechanical models using or containing structural Finite
Elements
rotational degrees of freedom for plates, shells, beams
identical rotations at homologous pairs of nodes for

periodicity BC
zero rotations at boundary nodes for symmetry BC
hybrid (not displacement-based) FE models in mechanics
periodicity BC for displacements are accompanied by

antiperiodicity conditions for tractions
188
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
189
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Periodic Homogenization: Application of Loads

Boundary displacements, tractions are not known a priori
application of prescribed macroscopic strains and/or
stresses is not trivial, especially in periodic
homogenization
boundary conditions designed to handle microscopic /

fluctuating displacements
macroscopic contributions to displacements are
unknowns
macroscopic stresses or macroscopic strains/
displacements must be prescribed to unit cell in
compatible way
190
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Periodic Homogenization: Application of Loads

Two major approaches to application of loads in periodic
homogenization
asymptotic homogenization
method of macroscopic degrees of freedom
highly developed mathematical theory

available for linear and nonlinear behaviors
can be extended to non-local macroscopic behavior
(second homogenization)
requires special FE codes
uses master nodes, relatively simple
for linear and nonlinear cases
can be extended to finite strain regime
can be used with standard FE codes
analogous considerations hold for thermal conduction

191
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Asymptotic Homogenization

Asymptotic homogenization:
explicitly formulated in macroscopic and microscopic
coordinates, Z and z, and scaling parameter = /L 1
L: characteristic length of macroscale

: characteristic length of microscale
zooming in from macro to micro: zi = xi /
chain rule for derivatives
f (Z(x), z(x), )
x
1
f+
f
Z
z
series expansion of displacements

(0)
(1)
(2)
ui (Z, z, ) = ui (Z)+ ui (Z, z)+2 ui (Z, z)
note: from homogenization conditions
(0)
z ui
+H.O.T.
=0
192
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
linear straindisplacement relations

1
ui +
uj
ij =
2 xj
xi
expand into
ij (Z, z, ) =
+
+
=

1 n (0)
(0)
(1)
ui +
uj
u +
+
2
Zj
Zi
zj i

(1)
(2)
n (1)
ui +
uj
u +
+
2
Zj
Zi
zj i
H.O.T.
(1)
(2)
ij (Z, z) + ij (Z, z) + H.O.T.

(1) o
u
zi j

(2) o
u
zi j
193
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
expanded strains of order O(0 )

(1)
(1)
(1)
ij (Z, z) = ij + ij
can be split into slow and fast contributions

1 (0)
(0)
(1)
ij =
u +
u
2 Zj i
Zi j

(1)
1 (1)
(1)
u +
u
ij =
2 zj i
zi j
194
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
equilibrium equations in 2-scale nomenclature

1
ij (Z, z, ) + bi (Z) = 0
+
Zj
zj
expansion of stresses
(1)
(2)
ij (Z, z, ) = ij (Z, z) + ij (Z, z)
+ H.O.T.
inserting and ordering by powers of
(1)
=0
zj ij
(order
1 )
(2)
(1)
ij +
+ bi = 0
Zj
zj ij
(order
0 )
hierarchical system of PDEs
order 1 : micro equation on unit cell

order 0 : macro equation (links scales)
195
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
ansatz for strains using characteristic function ijk (z)
elastic case: ijk (z) describes 6 linearly independent

deformation modes of unit cell
(1)
ij
(1)
ij
(1)
ij

imn (1)
= Iijmn +
mn
zj
characteristic function can be obtained from stress

equilibrium by displacement-based FE analysis
usually requires specialized codes

for linear problems stiffness matrix must be inverted only
once to get imn
196
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
microstresses in micro equation in terms of characteristic

function and microscopic elasticity tensor Eijkl (z)

(1)
kmn (1)
ij = Eijkl (z) Iklmn +
mn
zl
homogenized Zelasticity tensor

1
Eijkl =
Eijkl (z) Iklmn +
kmn (z) d
UC UC
zl
197
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Macroscopic Degrees of Freedom

Extension of asymptotic homogenization
first order homogenization as discussed above uses only
first gradient of macroscopic displacements
if microscale becomes comparable to macroscale, size

effects appear
classical (local) continuum on macroscale

depends on well-separated macro- and microscales
can be handled by incorporating second order gradients

of macroscopic displacement: second order
homogenization (Geers et al.,2001)
non-classical (local) continuum on macroscale
requirement on separation of scales relaxed
procedure results in nested boundary value problems
classical BVP on microscale

non-classical BVP on macroscale
198
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Method of Macroscopic Degrees of Freedom: forces or
displacements are applied and evaluated at master nodes
(Michel et al., 1999)
load controlled analysis: concentrated forces P applied to
master nodes
general approach: based on homogeneous surface

tractions on slave faces
ta (s) = a n (s)
nodal force acting on given master node by integrating
ta (s) over corresponding slave face (Smit et al.,1998),
e.g., in Z2D
Z
ta (s) d
PSE =
ta (s) d
PNW =
199
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Load controlled analysis for rectangular/hexahedral cells
small strain regime
uniform applied stress, constant normal vector

Z
Z
a
a
d F taF
t (s) d = t
F
lead to simple relations

PSE = E taSE
PNW = N taN
extension to large strains requires accounting for changes

in cross sections
large stain regime: extract macroscopic deformation

gradient, proceed via appropriate strain and stress
measures
200
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

a
2D Example: loading by macroscopic shear stress 12

a
0
1
0 12
a
a
tSE =
,
nE (s) =
=
a
a
12
0
12
0

Z
0
0
PSE =
d =
a
a
E 12
E 12

a
0
12
a
nN (s) =
tNW =
0
1

Z a
a
N 12
12
PNW =
d =
0
0
N
analogous in 3D case
201
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Displacement controlled analysis: prescribed displacements
corresponding to applied strain a applied to master nodes
general case for linear displacementstrain relations:

displacement of master node from relationship
uM = a cM
M denotes master node and associated master face,

respectively
202
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Strain controlled analysis for rectangular/hexahedral cells,
small strain regime (using linear displacementstrain relations):
example: 2D, loading by uniaxial strain

a
0
c1
11 0
a
, cW =
, cS =
=
c2
0
0 0

a

0
c1 11
u
, uNW =
=
uSE =
0
0
v SE
analogous in 3D case
203
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

evaluation of macroscopic stresses and strains
Z
Z
1
1
(z) d =
t s d
hi =
UC UC
UC UC
Z
Z
1
1
(z) d =
(u n + n u) d
hi =
UC UC
2UC UC
rectangular/hexahedral cells, small strain regime
average stress from reaction forces acting on master

nodes, area of cell faces, e.g.
hxx i = pNW /E
average strain from displacements of master nodes,

dimensions of unit cell
hxx i = uNW /c1
204
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
205
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Modeling Issues

Issues to be considered when using periodic homogenization
when assessing results do not restrict checks to one unit
cell; rather have a look at assemblies containing a number
of base cells
results that look O.K. for one unit cell do not necessarily
make physical sense for a periodic assembly
cracks obtained with periodicity BCs always come in

periodic patterns periodic homogenization cannot
handle localization to one main crack
when single-inhomogeneity unit cells are used particles
or fibers fail simultaneously
crack patterns obtained with symmetry BC typically do
not make physical sense
206
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Cracks and periodicity BC
Sketch of crack pattern formed with periodicity BC
207
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Cracks and symmetry BC
Sketch of crack pattern formed with symmetry BC
208
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Decohesion with single-fiber unit cell
Sketch of decohesion pattern obtained with single-fiber unit cell
209
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Layer-like inhomogeneous structures can be studied with
periodic homogenization by using free boundary conditions in
thin direction
homogenization gives layer-like behavior
macroscopic rotational DOFs under moment loading
modified symmetry or periodicity BC can be used in

periodic direction(s)
W
W
E
Homogenization of porous layer-like structure
210
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Homogenization to shells and beams: structures that are thin
in 1 or 2 directions: 2 modeling strategies
unit cell models using 1 or 2 pairs of faces with free
boundaries
modified symmetry or periodicity BC involving

macroscopic curvature tensor
fully periodic volume elements and homogenization to

nonlocal macroscopic behavior
for shells and plates in-plane shear may be difficult to

handle with either approach
microstructured shells and beams are of considerable
practical importance
211
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Additional points
underlying assumption: homogeneous statistics in any
direction that is modeled as periodic
models for graded materials must not use periodic

homogenization in direction of gradient
mechanics: nonlinearities typically depend on flux- or

gradient-type fields (, ), which do not accumulate from
cell to cell
conduction: nonlinearities typically depend on direct
variable T which does accumulate from cell to cell
nonlinear periodic analysis of conduction is not free of

contradictions
seems to work nevertheless
212
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Practical issues
periodicity BC increase bandwidth of stiffness matrix
tends to lead to some additional cost
specifying periodicity BC by hand tends to be error

prone
it is surprisingly easy to underconstrain or overconstrain

a unit cell, especially when tricky versions are used
Hexagonal array with special type of unit cell

213
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
214
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: UD Continuously Reinforced Composites

Periodic models of UD LFR composites
transversally isotropic overall elastic behavior
generalized plane strain (GPE) unit cells
simple periodic fiber arrangements
leads to 2D analysis
axial shear loading: inhomogeneous out-of-plane
deformations must be allowed
special GPE or 3D models required
modeling of fiber damage requires 3D volume elements
periodic hexagonal (PHA): elastically transversally
isotropic
periodic square (PSA): not transversally isotropic
multi-fiber arrangements
considerable number of fibers required for overall

(statistical) transverse isotropy
215
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
CH3
CS8
RH2
CH1
PH0
CS7
MS5
PS0
Simple periodic arrangements of fibers ( = 0.475)
216
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Multi-fiber arrangement using symmetry BCs ( = 0.453; Nakamura/Suresh,1993)
217
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Periodic models of UD LFR composites (contd.)
predictions for axial stiffness nearly independent of fiber
arrangement
predictions for transverse, shear stiffnesses show
considerable dependence on fiber arrangement
results for square arrangements may lie outside

HashinShtrikman bounds for transversally isotropic
composites
arrangement effects tend to be more marked in

elastoplastic than in elastic regime
many simple periodic arrangement have a clear tendency
for regions of increased plastic strain to run through the
whole material
in such cases macroscopic strain hardening tends to be

underestimated
218
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

fibers
matrix
HS
3PB
MTM
GSCS
DS
3PE
PH0
CH1
PS0/00
PS0/45
DN/00
DN/90
EA
[GPa]
180.0
67.2
118.8/119.3
118.8/118.9
118.8
118.8
118.8
118.8
118.8
118.7
118.8
118.8
118.8
118.8
ET
[GPa]
180.0
67.2
103.1/107.1
103.8/104.5
103.1
103.9
103.9
103.9
103.7
103.9
107.6
99.9
104.8
104.6
AT
[]
0.20
0.35
0.276/0.279
0.278/0.279
0.279
0.279
0.278
0.279
0.279
0.279
0.279
0.279
0.278
0.278
TT
[]
0.20
0.35
0.277/0.394
0.326/0.347
0.342
0.337
0.339
0.338
0.340
0.338
0.314
0.363
0.334
0.333
A
[K 1 106 ]
6.0
23.0
11.84/12.47
11.85/11.98
11.84
11.84
11.94
11.89
11.84
11.90
11.85
11.85
11.90
11.90
T
[K 1 106 ]
6.0
23.0
15.77/16.46
16.31/16.45
16.46
16.46
16.35
16.40
16.46
16.42
16.45
16.45
16.31
16.46
Predictions for effective thermomechanical properties of ALTEX/Al UD LFRC MMC ( = 0.453)
219
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PS/00
Fiber
DN
4.00E+01
PH
3.00E+01
PS/45
2.00E+01
Matrix
1.00E+01
APPLIED STRESS [MPa]
5.00E+01
6.00E+01
0.00E+00
DN/00
PS0/45
PS0/00
PH0/90
PH0/00
Al99.9 MATRIX
ALTEX FIBER
0.00E+00
5.00E-04
1.00E-03
1.50E-03
2.00E-03
2.50E-03
3.00E-03
3.50E-03
4.00E-03
STRAIN []
Predicted macroscopic uniaxial stressstrain diagrams of an ALTEX/Al UD LFRC MMC ( = 0.453)
220
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

ALTEX/Al UD LFRC MMC (CH1A/00, FVF=0.475)
CONTOUR PLOT
EPS.EFF.PLASTIC
Sx=50MPa
INC.22
4.0000E-02
3.0000E-02
2.0000E-02
1.0000E-02
1.0000E-08
SCALAR MIN: 0.0000E+00

SCALAR MAX: 3.5806E-02
(ACTIVE GEOMETRY)
FEPLOT (C) ILFB, TU WIEN
INSTITUT FUER LEICHTBAU

UND FLUGZEUGBAU - TU WIEN
FEPLOT A-7I
DATE: 06/02/95
G-SCALE:
19.5
1.2E-01
0.0E+00
Distribution of equivalent plastic strain in the matrix of an MMC under transverse uniaxial loading
(CH1, = 0.475)
221
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

MICRO-MMC ** ALTEX/AL * GPSS/46.0 * D10R/EPD1L5 ** RUN W46DSM1-X1/TE
CONTOUR PLOT
EPS.EFF.PLASTIC
Sx=100MPa
INC.800
1.5000E-02
1.2000E-02
9.0000E-03
6.0000E-03
3.0000E-03


FEPLOT A-8D DATE: 09/17/97
G-SCALE:
19.5
1.3E-01
0.0E+00
Distribution of equivalent plastic strain in the matrix of an MMC under transverse uniaxial loading
(DS, = 0.453)
222
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

MICRO-MMC ** ALTEX/AL * GPSS/46.0 * D10R/EPD1L5 ** RUN W46DSM1-X1/TE
CONTOUR PLOT
SIGMA-1
Sx=100MPa
INC.800
2.5000E+02
2.0000E+02
1.5000E+02
1.0000E+02
5.0000E+01
SCALAR MIN: -4.4228E+01

SCALAR MAX: 4.3316E+02

G-SCALE:
19.5
1.3E-01
0.0E+00
Distribution of maximum principal stress in the fibers of an MMC under transverse uniaxial loading
(DS, = 0.453)
223
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
x3
x2
Distribution of temperature gradients in a Gr/Al MMC under transverse thermal loading (DS, = 0.453)
224
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Cross-Ply Composites

Unit cell models of cross-ply laminates
for thin layers containing relatively thick aligned fibers
(monofilaments)
extension to more complex arrangements possible but
expensive
90 o plies
0o ply
Unit cells for cross-ply and angle-ply composites

225
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
226
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Woven Composites

Woven composites: reinforced by weave of fiber-rich bundles
(tows)
fiber-rich tows and pure matrix regions treated as
constituents
geometry of unit cells depends on type of weave
three-dimensional periodic arrangements
Plain weave (a). twill weave (b), Hercules braid (c)
227
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Unit cell models of woven composites
periodic arrangements suitable for periodic
homogenization
tows can be modeled as UD composites
meshing with volume elements typically complex due to

3D shapes of tows, matrix regions
Some unit cells for twill weave
228
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Unit cell models of woven composites (contd.)
Tows
Matrix
Composite
Mesoscopic unit cell for plain weave composite (volume model)
229
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

high-quality models can be built up with multi-layer shell
models (Gager/Pettermann,2012)
shells used for tows and matrix regions

shells coupled over thickness by multi-point constraints
varying shell thicknesses, appropriate offsets of shell
reference planes
Tow reference plane

Matrix reference plane
Cross section through shell model of twill weave (Gager,2013)
230
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

S, S11
(Ave. Crit.: 75%)
+1.916e+01
+8.424e+00
-2.308e+00
-1.304e+01
-2.377e+01
-3.450e+01
-4.524e+01
-5.597e+01
-6.670e+01
-7.743e+01
-8.817e+01
-9.890e+01
-1.096e+02
3
2
Maximum principal stress in tows (twill weave) under thermal loading (Marte,2004)
231
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
232
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Short Fiber Reinforced Composites

Unit cell models of SFR composites
macroscopic symmetry depends on fiber orientation
aligned fibers, axisymmetric ODFs (including planar

random fibers): overall transversally isotropic behavior
random fibers: overall isotropic behavior
other orientation distributions: lower symmetries
unit cells for SFRCs reinforced with aligned fibers
non-staggered and staggered fiber arrangements
3D models using periodicity or symmetry BC

axisymmetric cell models
unit cells for non-aligned SFRCs
3D unit cells using periodicity BC
233
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

3D unit cells for aligned SFRC (Levy/Papazian,1991)
3D unit cell models for aligned SFRC with non-staggered and staggered fibers
234
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Axisymmetric cells: basic geometries
Axisymmetric cell models for aligned SFRC with non-staggered and staggered fibers
235
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Boundary conditions for axisymmetric cells
cross section kept constant in fiber direction
non-staggered cells: symmetry-type BCs

staggered cells: consider pair of point-symmetric cells
P
A= const
236
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Boundary conditions for staggered axisymmetric cells
(rU + uU )2 + (rL + uL )2 = 2(rP + uP )2
vU + vL = 2vP
linearization for cylinder antisymmetry BC

uU + uL = 2uP
vU + vL = 2vP
NE
~s
NW
NE
N
NW
E
P
W
z
z
SW
L s
~
SE
r
undeformed
SW
SE
deformed
Axisymmetry BC in 2D (E-face only)
237
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Axisymmetric cell models for aligned SFRC
are not unit cells in proper sense
not space filling
are highly idealized

non-staggered cells even more than staggered ones
are limited to axial and axisymmetric loads

some flexibility can be gained by coupling two or more
cells
have been very successful in obtaining basic
understanding of nonlinear behavior
238
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Axisymmetric cells
CONTOUR PLOT
EPS.EFF.PLASTIC [%] 80MPa
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
Equivalent plastic strain in matrix of staggered aligned SFRC

239
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Modeling of SFRC with nonaligned fibers
require 3D unit cells
2D cells cannot provide realistic out-of-plane behavior
only periodicity BC make sense

generation of volume elements with elevated fiber volume
fractions is difficult
tendency towards grain-type microstructure
general orientation distribution functions can be handled
large unit cells required if fibers have aspect ratios

exceeding, say, 10
240
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Modeling of SFRC with nonaligned fibers
3D unit cells for SFRC reinforced by randomly oriented fibers ( = 0.15, a = 5) color coded for Weibull fracture
probabilities under uniaxial tension
241
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

4
MAX.PRINC.STRESS / APPL.STRESS []
MAX.PRINC.STRESS / APPL.STRESS []
SFRC with randomly oriented fibers: stresses in fibers

3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
UC mean
MTM
UC
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
ANGLE [deg]
70
80
90
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
UC mean
MTM
UC
0.5
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
ANGLE [deg]
70
80
90
Comparison of maximum principal stress in fibers predicted by extended MTM and 3D unit cell models
( = 0.15, a = 5, spheroids (left) and cylinders (right), uniaxial tensile loading)
242
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
x2
x1
x3
SFRC with planar randomly oriented fibers
3D unit cell for SFRC reinforced by (nearly) planar randomly oriented short fibers ( = 0.207, a = 10)
243
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

SFRC with planar randomly oriented fibers
2.069
1.800
1.533
1.264
0.995
0.729
0.460
x3
x2
x1
Distribution of temperature gradients in an MMC reinforced by (nearly) transversely oriented short fibers under
in-plane thermal loading (hot spots are marked)
244
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
245
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Particle Reinforced Composites

Particle reinforced composites typically are elastically isotropic
unit cells for PRC
axisymmetric cells
planar cells
staggered, non-staggered cells analogous to SFRC

limited in load cases that can be handled
plane stress too soft, plane strain and generalized plane
strain too stiff
3/D cells
cubic arrangements of particles: cannot achieve

macroscopic elastic isotropy
multi-particle unit cells containing randomly positioned
particles (non-spherical or anisotropic particles also
randomly oriented)
246
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

3D unit cells with cubic arrangements of particles
simple, but cubic elastic symmetry
isotropic in conduction
1-part.cell
1-particle
cell
2-particle cell
2-particle
cell
2-particle cell
Reference
Volume
1-particle cell
247
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

3D unit containing multiple particles
best models for periodic homogenization
Multi-particle unit cell ( = 0.2).

248
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

particles
matrix
HS
3PB
MTM
GSCS
DS
3PE
sc
fcc
bcc
axi/sc
axi/fcc
axi/bcc
2D PST
2D PSE
3D
E
[GPa]
429.0
67.2
90.8/114.6
91.4/93.9
90.8
91.5
92.7
91.8
95.4
88.1
87.9
85.5
98.7
92.4
E [100]
[GPa]
96.4
89.0
90.0
E [110]
[GPa]
90.5
91.7
90.6
[]
0.17
0.35
0.286/0.340
0.323/0.328
0.329
0.327
0.326
0.327
A
[K 1 106 ]
4.3
23.0
16.8/18.6
18.5/18.6
18.6
18.6
18.4
18.6
18.7
18.6
18.6
18.6/18.6
18.1/19.0
18.4/18.8
0.334
0.500
0.326
Predictions for effective thermomechanical properties of SiC/Al PRC ( = 0.2)
249
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

CONTOUR PLOT
ACC.DAMAGE.PAR. at 42MPa
1.0
0.8
a)
[110]
0.6
0.4
0.2
b)
[100]
Distribution of equivalent plastic strain predicted with unit cell model based on sc arrangement of spheres
250
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

SiC/Al6061-T0 PRC MMC * VF=0.20 *** SPHERICAL PARTICLES (MPS) * COOLED DOWN
SECTION FRINGE PLOT
EPS.EFF.PLASTIC
INC.8
5.0000E-02
4.0000E-02
3.0000E-02
2.0000E-02
1.0000E-02


G-SCALE:
11.5
0.25
0.0
Distribution of equivalent plastic strain predicted with multi-particle unit cell model
251
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Diamond particle reinforced aluminum
EPS.EQV.PLASTIC
0.005
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.001
Distribution of equivalent plastic strain due to thermal loading in diamond-aluminum composite

(Nogales/B
ohm,2008)
252
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Diamond particle reinforced aluminum (contd.)
Effective Conductivity [W/Km]
500
400
MTM, voids
MTM, perfect
MTM/RTA, hom
MTM/RTA, inh
3PB, hom
PMA
300
200
100
0
1
10
100
Particle diameter [um]
1000
10000
Macroscopic conductivity of diamond-Al PRC as function of particle size

253
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

NORMALIZED EFFECTIVE BULK MODULUS []
Composites reinforced by polyhedral particles

1.5
1.45
1.4
1.35
1.3
1.25
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2
2.1
NORMALIZED EFFECTIVE SHEAR MODULUS []
HSB
3PB
SPH
TKD
OCT
CUB
2.2
2.3
TET
Berryman plot of elastic moduli predicted for different particle shapes at volume fraction = 0.2 and elastic
contrast 10
254
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Composites reinforced by polyhedral particles (contd.)
comparison between multi-particle predictions and
analytical results using compliance contributions
evaluated via FE (Tsukrov/Drach,2012)
SPH
OCT
CUB
TET
/E (m)
ENI
GNI /G(m)
ERMT
/E (m)
GRMT /G(m)
EMPC
/E (m)
GMPC /G(m)
1.347
1.382
1.393
1.429
1.367
1.407
1.418
1.458
1.415
1.454
1.467
1.508
1.442
1.484
1.500
1.545
1.428
1.468
1.478
1.525
1.455
1.514
1.500
1.564
normalized moduli
255
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Composites reinforced by polyhedral particles (contd.)
ensemble averaging in elastoplastic analysis: puts
restrictions on loading schedules
fixed incrementation schedule in terms of macroscopic

stresses: values of macroscopic strains will differ among
realizations
fixed incrementation schedule in terms of macroscopic
strains: values of macroscopic stresses will differ among
realizations
auto-incrementing features of analysis programs must be
deactivated
probability densities of microfields at given state: carry

out binning over data from all realizations, relevant load
cases
256
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

NORMALIZED MACROSCOPIC STRESS []
Composites reinforced by polyhedral particles

SPH
0.5
-0.5
-1
-0.01
-0.005
0.005
0.01
0.015
OCT
0.5
-0.5
-1
0.02
-0.01
-0.005
CUB
0.5
-0.5
-1
-0.01
-0.005
0.005
0.01
MACROSCOPIC STRAIN []
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.015
0.02
0.015
0.02
TET
0.5
-0.5
-1
-0.01
-0.005
0.005
0.01
Predicted macroscopic responses of SiC/Al composites ( = 0.2) subjected to pure shear loading cycle
257
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
3.5
Composites reinforced by polyhedral particles:

some plots are interesting, but difficult to interpret
MATRIX SPH
INHOMOG. SPH
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.005
-0.004
-0.003
-0.002
-0.001
3.5
MATRIX OCT
INHOMOG. OCT
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.005
3.5
MATRIX CUB
INHOMOG. CUB
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.005
-0.004
-0.003
-0.002
-0.001
-0.004
-0.003
-0.002
-0.001
3.5
MATRIX TET
INHOMOG. TET
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.005
-0.004
-0.003
-0.002
-0.001
Predicted evolution of von Mises equivalent stress in both phases of SiC/Al composites ( = 0.2) during
volumetric loading cycle
258
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
259
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Polycrystals
Unit cell models of polycrystals
Voronoi microstructures may have to be modified
proper point clouds for starting must be chosen

polyhedra at boundaries of cell may be perturbed
meshing requirements
crystal plasticity required for elastoplastic modeling

not treated in depth here
Modified Voronoi volume element for polycrystal (Quey et al.,2011)

260
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Polycrystals
Polycrystal example (continued)
Meshes of different fineness polycrystals (Quey et al.,2011)

261
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Polycrystals
Polycrystal example (continued)
Critical resolved shear stresses in (partially remeshed) model of polycrystals under plane strain compression (Quey
et al.,2011)
262
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Outline
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
263
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
PMA: Porous and Cellular Materials

Unit cell models of porous materials
low void volume fraction
can be treated as special type of composite
equiaxed pores PRC

GASAR-like materials UDLFRC
with growing macroscopic strain changes of shape of
voids become increasingly important
Unit cell models of cellular materials

high void volume fraction
2D honeycombs
open cell foams: beam or solid models
closed cell foams: shell or solid models
264
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Unit cells for porous materials
can handle large macroscopic strains
Densification of voids in elastoplastic matrix using cubic arrangement
265
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Unit cells for cellular materials
small linear range, marked cell-level deformations
elastic or plastic buckling

brittle failure
models must be sufficiently large for non-trivial

deformation and buckling patterns
volume element boundaries that do not run within cell

walls or struts may be of advantage
may require virtual master nodes
buckling (stability) problems may have to be solved

in elasticity Bloch wave theory may be used to describe
large buckling eigenmodes (Gong et al.,2005)
macroscopic behavior may be strongly influence by details

of microgeometry
266
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

2D cellular materials
only closed cell geometries are possible: 2D honeycombs
can be modeled by planar arrangements of beams
under compressive loading compaction will take place
bands of cell collapse
periodic homogenization not optimum tool
contact between beams should be provided for
267
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

2D cellular materials: honeycombs
Unit cell for irregular honeycomb

268
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Closed cell foams
usually handled by shell models
unit cells for Kelvin foams or tetrakaidekahedral foams
relatively easy to generate
periodic homogenization not well suited for compaction
behavior
details of microstructure tend to be important:
defects, thickness distributions in cell walls
effects of compressible cell contents may also be modeled
269
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Closed cell foams
Idealized closed-cell foam microstructure modeled by regular tetrakaidekahedra (truncated octahedra)
270
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Open cell foams
usually handled by beam models
regular 3D lattice structures may be treated as open cell
foams
relatively cheap models, so brute force approach is

feasible for small structures
periodic homogenization not well suited for compaction

behavior
microstructures of some metallic sponges may be
rather complex
details of microstructure tend to be important:
distributions over beam cross sections along beam
beam models may involve additional material at nodes

due to overlap of beams
271
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Regular 3D lattice structures
Open cell lattice structures: structural and unit cell models (Luxner et al.,2005)
272
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Hollow strut foam
Hollow strut foam: solid shell details (Daxner et al.,2007)
273
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Hollow strut foam
Unit cell for hollow strut foam: undeformed, compressed, sheared (Daxner et al.,2007)
274
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular
Stress concentrations in hollow strut fame (Daxner et al.,2007)
275
Unit Cells
Loading
Issues
LFRC
Weaves
SFRC
PRC
Polycrystals
Cellular

Unit cells for cellular materials
cellular materials with special geometries
hollow sphere foams: consist of bonded hollow spheres
closed cell (spheres) and open cell (interstitial spaces)

characteristics
syntactic foams: consists hollow spheres embedded in a

matrix
have been modeled by both simple arrays of spheres and
multi-sphere arrangement
276
Windowing Models
Embedded Cell Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Part IV
Other Models
277
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Outline of Part 4 Other Models

Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
278
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Outline
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
279
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Basic idea of windowing models: estimate or bound
macroscopic properties on the basis of randomly selected
samples of microstructure that are too small to be RVEs:
windows
windows usually are of simple shape (rectangles, right

hexahedra)
windows are extracted from inhomogeneous materials at
random positions and in random orientations
analogous to actual sampling of inhomogeneous material
wide range in geometrical complexity

windowing methods have well-developed theoretical basis
for linear regimes and for nonlinear elasticity
rigorous methodology for handling sub-RVE geometries
280
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windows taken in transverse plane of UDLFRC
281
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
integral MandelHill condition can be fulfilled by
macrohomogeneous stresses (SUBC) and strains (KUBC)
t(x) = a n (x) or u(x) = a x
SUBC and KUBC lead to lower and upper estimates for

apparent macroscopic moduli
ensemble averages over compliances obtained with SUBC
from equivalent windows give lower mesoscale bounds
ensemble averages over elasticities obtained with KUBC
from equivalent windows give upper mesoscale bounds
282
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
mesoscale bounds obtained from volume elements of
different sizes give hierarchies of bounds
bounds get tighter as VE size increases

by definition lower and upper bounds are equal for RVEs:
rigorous way for identifying physical RVEs

equality of lower and upper mesoscale bounds difficult to
achieve in practice
283
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
alternative way of fulfilling integral MandelHill condition:
uniform stress or strain BC at level of individual faces
(MUBC)
T

[t(x) hi n (x) u(x) hi x d = 0
x k
MUBC lead to estimates for apparent macroscopic moduli

that always lie between the mesoscopic bounds
depending on dimensionality of problem, a considerable
range of MUBC exist
different sets of MUBC typically lead to different

estimates
284
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
a specific set of MUBC gives close agreement with
periodic homogenization for orthotropic or higher elastic
symmetry:
periodicity compatible mixed uniform boundary conditions
(PMUBC; Pahr/Zysset,2008)
formulated in strains and zero tractions, allowing

handling of cellular and porous materials
typically good choice for evaluating apparent elastic
tensors
cannot follow general load paths in nonlinear regimes
285
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
Tensile 1
Tensile 2
Tensile 3
Shear 12
Shear 13
Shear 23
Thermal
Loading
East
u1 = a11 c1 /2
a
2 = 3a = 0
u1 = 0
2a = 3a = 0
u1 = 0
2a = 3a = 0
u2 = a21 c1 /2
u3 = 0, 1a = 0
u3 = a31 c1 /2
u2 = 0, 1a = 0
u1 = 0
2a = 3a = 0
u1 = 0
2a = 3a = 0
West
u1 = a11 c1 /2
a
2 = 3a = 0
u1 = 0
2a = 3a = 0
u1 = 0
2a = 3a = 0
u2 = a21 c1 /2
u3 = 0, 1a = 0
u3 = a31 c1 /2
u2 = 0, 1a = 0
u1 = 0
2a = 3a = 0
u1 = 0
2a = 3a = 0
North
u2 = 0
= 3a = 0
u2 = a22 c2 /2
1a = 3a = 0
u2 = 0
1a = 3a = 0
u1 = a12 c2 /2
u3 = 0, 2a = 0
u2 = 0
1a = 3a = 0
u3 = a32 c2 /2
u1 = 0, 2a = 0
u2 = 0
1a = 3a = 0
1a
South
u2 = 0
= 3a = 0
u2 = a22 c2 /2
1a = 3a = 0
u2 = 0
1a = 3a = 0
u1 = a12 c2 /2
u3 = 0, 2a = 0
u2 = 0
1a = 3a = 0
u3 = a32 c2 /2
u1 = 0, 2a = 0
u2 = 0
1a = 3a = 0
1a
Top
u3 = 0
= 2a = 0
u3 = 0
1a = 2a = 0
u3 = a33 c3 /2
1a = 2a = 0
u3 = 0
1a = 2a = 0
u1 = a13 c3 /2
u2 = 0, 3a = 0
u2 = a23 c3 /2
u1 = 0, 3a = 0
u3 = 0
1a = 2a = 0
1a
Bottom
u3 = 0
= 2a = 0
u3 = 0
1a = 2a = 0
u3 = a33 c3 /2
1a = 2a = 0
u3 = 0
1a = 2a = 0
u1 = a13 c3 /2
u2 = 0, 3a = 0
u2 = a23 c3 /2
u1 = 0, 3a = 0
u3 = 0
1a = 2a = 0
1a
The 6 uniform strain load cases and the thermal load case defining PUBC in thermoelasticity
286
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing: analogous concepts hold for thermal conduction
SUBC, KUBC, PMUBC
Thermal 1
Thermal 2
Thermal 3
East
T = da1 l1 /2
q1a = 0
q1a = 0
West
T = da1 l1 /2
q1a = 0
q1a = 0
North
q2a = 0
T = da2 l2 /2
q2a = 0
South
q2a = 0
T = da2 l2 /2
q2a = 0
Top
q3a = 0
q3a = 0
T = da3 l3 /2
Bottom
q3a = 0
q3a = 0
T = da3 l3 /2
The 3 uniform gradient load cases defining PMUBC in thermoelasticity
287
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
Comparison of estimates for macroscopic elastic properties obtained by windowing and periodic homogenization for
a PRC
288
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
SUBC, KUBC, PMUBC give rise to boundary layers near
surface of volume elements
can be reduced by judiciously chosen,

non-rectangular/hexahedral volume elements (Salmi et
al.,2012)
influence on volume fractions difficult to handle
Different, similar windows
289
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
Unit cell with PBC and PMUBC under tensile transverse loading (G
andara,2008)
290
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Windowing Models
Windowing (contd.)
CT-based voxel model of window of cancellous bone two load cases using windowing with PMUBC (Pahr,2013)
291
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Outline
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
292
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
Basic idea: highly resolved core (kernel, motif) in
smeared-out embedding region
core: any spatially resolved, inhomogeneous phase
arrangement
RVE or SVE
embedding region must have (or approximate) appropriate

constitutive behavior, material symmetry of material
two flavors of embedding models
self-consistent evaluation of properties of embedding

region
use of pre-defined properties of embedding region
effective behavior from off-line homogenization using

mean field analysis, periodic homogenization . . .
effective behavior from coarsely described multi-phase
arrangement
closely related to submodeling techniques
293
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
Embedded cells (contd.)
loads are introduced via embedding region
analytical far-field solutions
(coarser) discretization of some sample or structure
e.g., tensile specimen
far fields loads via periodicity or PMUBC
can handle graded materials
e.g., fields around cracks
provided embedding material is suitably graded
no philosophical problems when handling nonlinear

conduction
294
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
Schematic of embedded cell model of compact tensile specimen
295
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
2
3
1
ECA model of open cell foam (beam model for core, continuum model for embedding
296
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
embedding cells always give rise to boundary layers close
to interface in both core and embedding regions
pure modeling effect: no physical background
due to mismatch between constituent and smeared-out

properties
depend on details of microgeometry at interface between

regions
must be accounted for in evaluation of microfields
boundary layers can be mitigated by shaping of core in

analogy to window models
297
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
S22
VALUE
-3.24E+02
-2.01E+02
-7.90E+01
+4.36E+01
+1.66E+02
+2.89E+02
+4.11E+02
+5.34E+02
+6.56E+02
+7.79E+02
+9.01E+02
+1.02E+03
2
3
ECA model of progressing crack tip in open cell foam, stresses in struts (Ableidinger,2000)
298
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
self-consistent evaluation of properties of embedding
region
can be based on averaged behavior of core alone or of

whole model
best suited to linear elasticity
purely core-based: boundary layers must be excluded

based on whole model: slower convergence
elastic tensors can be iterated
difficult to do properly for inelastic behavior
in elastoplasticity:
parameterizable homogenized material models only for

isotropic J2 plasticity
what load cases to use are monotonous uniaxial load
cases sufficient?
299
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
embedded cells using self-consistent embedding are
micromechanical method in the strict sense because they
involve a scale transition
embedded cells with prescribed embedding do not do

homogenization, but are very good at localization
analytical self-consistent models, especially generalized

self-consistent models (Christensen/Lo,1979), are very
closely related to numerical embedded cell models
300
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Embedded Cells
can provide highly resolved local models without
periodicity constraints
well suited to zooming in on local phenomena
can be used in presence of high gradients of fields

and/or microgeometry
neighborhood of tips of macrocracks

(local damage/failure model(s) required for modeling
crack progress)
neighborhood of intersections between material
boundaries
e.g., graded materials
such applications cannot use self-consistent evaluation of

properties of embedding region
301
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Outline
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
302
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Multi-Scale Models
Designator multi-scale modeling is used in different ways:
hierarchical models: sequential or concurrent
homogenization (and localization) for handling problems
involving multiple scale transitions
result is a material behavior
models involving concurrent, nested computations on at

least 2 length scales
typical: modeling of behavior of macroscopic structure

made of a microstructured materials
1 or more scale transitions
result is a structural behavior
303
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Multi-Scale Models
Hierarchical models for microgeometries with suitable
intermediate length scales
building block approach
suitable mean field or full field models for each scale

transition
most common: FE-based full-field model at upper scale
transition
most common: FE-based unit cells at highest mesoscale

comes in different flavors
Hierarchical models using sequential homogenization

results from analytical or numerical homogenization are
mapped onto a material model and used for one or more
constituents in the next higher scale transition
304
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Multi-Scale Models
Hierarchical models using concurrent homogenization
usually FE-based at higher length scale
at each integration point a micromechanical model is run
providing a stress answer for a given strain input
similar to sequential homogenization in linear elastic case

one independent model per integration point must be
run for nonlinear phases
this model my be numerical (periodic homogenization,

embedding . . .) or semi-analytical (e.g., incremental
MTM)
Typical applications: clustered, layered, woven, . . .

mesogeometries
305
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Multi-Scale Models
Hierarchical multi-Scaling
scale
transition
#2
scale
transition
#1
MACROSCALE
(sample)
MESOSCALE
(particle clusters)
MICROSCALE
(particles in matrix)
Schematic of hierarchical model for composite with clustered inhomogeneities
306
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Multi-Scale Models
Hierarchical multi-Scaling
EPS.EFF.PLAST.MTX.
3.5000E-03
3.0000E-03
2.5000E-03
2.0000E-03
1.5000E-03
SCALAR MIN: -6.8514E-04

Phase averaged microscopic equivalent plastic strains in matrix within inhomogeneity poor regions
307
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Multi-Scale Models
Two-sale models using nested FE computations at two length
scales
often called FE2 models (Feyel,1999)
concurrent evaluation at macroscale (structure) and
microscale (periodic homogenization with prescribed
strains from integration points of macromodel)
very flexible: give structural behavior without requiring

explicit material model required at higher length scale
can handle strong nonlinearities
microscale inherently parallelizable
not cheap computationally
second order homogenization is of this type
308
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Multi-Scale Models
Two-sale models using nested FE computations at two length
scales (contd).
depending on position within structure conditions may be
very different
try to use micromechanical method that is most efficient
for given conditions
an implementation might use
regions with small macroscopic gradients:

analytical/semi-analytical methods
elastoplastic regions with limited macroscopic gradients:
periodic homogenization
regions with marked macroscopic gradients:
embedding methods
switching by monitoring strain gradients
scheme of this type was proposed by Ghosh et al.(2001)

309
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Outline
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
310
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Checking of Models
Checking and debugging of models: Important issues
discretization: meshing and mesh resolution
boundary conditions, applied forces
how well are inhomogeneities resolved (voxel meshes)?

how well are thin matrix bridges between
inhomogeneities resolved (important for local fields)?
are there unconnected regions (e.g., in open cell foams)
are there awkward spots in the mesh?
do checking runs with homogeneous material properties:
microfields must be homogeneous, macroscopic response
must be equal to material input
solver problems (especially in nonlinear problems)
make sure to check control output for warning and error

messages
311
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Checking of Models
Two important aspects in verifying simulations:
simulations aim at closely approximating and helping in
explaining experimental data
comparison with experimental data: whole package is

checked: model, underlying approximations and
assumptions, material and modeling parameters
simulation models must be consistent in themselves and

correctly evaluated
issues of parameter identification and experimental

errors must be considered in assessment
comparison with other models: approximations and

assumptions are concerned to some extent, but modeling
parameters should be the same in all models
fulfilling either target does not automatically imply the

other is fulfilled
312
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Checking of Models
Checking and debugging of models (contd.)
comparisons with reference solutions
whenever pertinent HashinShtrikman bounds are

available compare numerical results to them
solutions for matrixinclusion materials should be close

to one of the bounds
HSB for macroscopically isotropic elastic, conduction
behavior: reinforcement by particles, randomly oriented
fibers
HSB for materials reinforced by continuous, aligned
fibers
HS/Willis bounds for materials reinforced by aligned
short fibers, platelets
violations of bounds unless very small ones, which
may be due to roundoff indicate problems
313
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Checking of Models
comparisons with reference solutions
whenever pertinent three-point bounds are available

compare numerical results to them
three-point estimates (Torquato,1998) tend to give very

good reference values
much tighter than HSB

three-point microstructural parameters, and are
available for a number of configurations (e.g., matrix
reinforced with randomly positioned, identical spheres)
at least for volume fractions up to = 0.3
PonteCasta
neda (1992) bounds and second order
secant schemes (PonteCasta
neda/Suquet,1998) can
give excellent reference values for monotonic
elastoplastic behavior
all bounds become slack at high phase contrasts
314
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
Checking of Models
General rule: given errors tend to have more marked
consequences in nonlinear than in linear regimes
accordingly, it is often worthwhile to check out models in

linear regime before going to nonlinear cases:
if model is not clean in linear elasticity, there may be
worse trouble in inelastic range
errors also tend to become larger with increasing phase
contrast
when hunting for difficult bugs, try to simplify the

model as far as possible
the same holds for testing new models and submodels
315
Windowing Models
Multi-Scale Models
Checking Models
General Issues
Models should be as complex as necessary and as simple as
possible
Sources of difficulties: free parameters
material parameters are required in general
material parameters may be difficult to obtain

experimentally, so inverse identification procedures may
be necessary
in such cases the material parameters should be checked
against different situations (load cases, volume fractions
. . .) than the ones they were obtained from
if model degenerates into a fit its range of validity may
be limited
316

Pres Boehm

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pres Boehm

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COMPUTATIONAL

Institute of Lightweight Design and Structural Biomechanics

First Summer School on Micromechanics

Outline of Part 1 Introduction

no in-depth discussion of continuum mechanics

basic assumptions of Continuum Micromechanics

central aims of Continuum Micromechanics

find structureproperty relations pertinent to

connect phase geometry to physical behavior

describe scale transitions

small large and large small

Length scales in hypothetical MMC

Classification of Inhomogeneous Materials

consist of crystallites having different orientations

Porous and cellular materials

man-made inhomogeneous materials

porous metals, ceramics

statistics of phase geometry change with position

Classification of Inhomogeneous Materials

matrixinclusion microtopologies, solid dispersions

by mesotopology (three or more length scales)

layered, laminated (composites)

Classification of Inhomogeneous Materials

statistically homogeneous phase distributions

by relative sizes of inhomogeneities

by absolute sizes of inhomogeneities

standard composites, polycrystals

Classification of Inhomogeneous Materials

continuous fibers (LFRC; a )

Note: many micromechanical models use simplified shapes of

Classification of Inhomogeneous Materials

aligned, unidirectional (UD)

carbon fibers, glass fibers, ceramic particles, carbon

polymers (thermosets, thermoplastics, elastomers)

ductile matrix composites

Note: All of the above descriptors/classificators are (in

Axial section through UD fiber reinforced MMC

Cross section through UD fiber reinforced MMC

Particle reinforced MMC

2-dimensional microtopologies (computer generated arrangements)

E11 E12 E13 0

E13 E23 E33 0

example: energy product

phase averages denoted by brackets plus superscripts,

Macrolevel: macroscopic quantities denoted by

effective properties are representative of material

order 4 tensors make for rich behavior in terms of

thermal conduction (rank 2) tensors link temperature

E11 E12 E12 0

E12 E11 E12 0

E12 E12 E11 0

E12 E22 E23 0

elastic moduli direction dependent

thermal expansion and conduction behavior as in isotropy

Two cases of direction dependence of stiffness in cubic material

transverse elastic moduli direction dependent

thermal expansion and conduction behavior as in

Cubic and tetragonal materials:

E12 E22 E23 0

normalshear coupling if not in principal orientation

Direction dependence of stiffness in isotropic and orthotropic material

(hopefully) small values for off-orthotropic entries

inhomogeneous microstresses give rise distributions of