Composite Modeling Handbook For Femap NX Nastran and Ls-Dyna 2015 PDF

CompositeLaminateModeling
HandbookforFemap,NXNastranandLSDYNAUsers

VenkataBheemReddy,SeniorStaffMechanicalEngineer
AdrianJensen,PE,Senior StaffMechanicalEngineer
GeorgeLaird,PhD,PE,PrincipalMechanicalEngineer

PredictiveEngineeringWhitePaper
2015

WHATTHISHANDBOOKCOVERS
Thisnoteisintendedfornewengineersinterestedinmodelingcompositesandexperiencedengineerswhowouldliketo
getacquaintedwiththeFemapinterface.
Thefollowingtopicsarecovered:
o Alittlebackgroundonthemechanicsofcompositesandhowmicromechanicscanbeleveragedtoobtain
compositematerialproperties
o 2Dcompositelaminatemodeling
Definingamaterialmodel,layup,propertycardandmaterialangles
Symmetricvs.unsymmetriclaminateandwhythisisimportant
Resultspostprocessing
o 3Dcompositelaminatemodeling
Definingamaterialmodel,layup,propertycardandply/stackorientation
Whenisa3Dmodelpreferredovera2Dmodel
o Modelingasandwichcomposite
Methodsofmodelingasandwichcomposite
3Dvs.2Dsandwichcompositemodelsandtheirprosandcons
o Failuremodelingofa2Dcompositelaminate
Definingalaminatefailuremodel
Postprocessinglaminateandlaminafailureindices
o Additionalexamplesandtheory

PredictiveEngineeringDocument,FeelFreetoShareWithYourColleagues Page2of110
2015

TABLEOFCONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................................7
1.1 TERMINOLOGY..................................................................................................................................................................................................7
1.2 TYPESOFMATERIALS.........................................................................................................................................................................................8
1.2.1 AnisotropicMaterial...........................................................................................................................................................................8
1.2.2 OrthotropicMaterial..........................................................................................................................................................................9
1.2.3 IsotropicMaterial...............................................................................................................................................................................9
2. COMPOSITEMICROMECHANICS...................................................................................................................................10
2.1 RULEOFMIXTURES........................................................................................................................................................................................10
2.1.1 ApplicationExample........................................................................................................................................................................10
3. LAMINATEMODELINGINFEMAP.................................................................................................................................12
3.1 IMPORTANTENTITIES......................................................................................................................................................................................13
3.2 DEFININGANORTHOTROPICMATERIAL..............................................................................................................................................................14
3.3 UNDERSTANDINGTHELAYUPEDITOR.................................................................................................................................................................15
3.4 PROPERTYCARD:2DLAMINATEMODELING........................................................................................................................................................17
3.5 ASSIGNINGMATERIALANGLES..........................................................................................................................................................................18
3.5.1 DefiningaMaterialAngleontheElement......................................................................................................................................19
3.5.2 DefiningaMaterialAngleinthePropertyCard..............................................................................................................................21
3.5.3 AdvancedApplicationExampleofAssigningMaterialAngletoaComplexGeometry...................................................................22
3.6 PROPERTYCARD:3DLAMINATEMODELING........................................................................................................................................................27
3.7 MULTIMATERIALANGLEEXAMPLEOFA3DCOMPOSITEMODEL...........................................................................................................................28
4. EXAMPLE1:CREATINGA2DLAMINATEMODELINFEMAP..........................................................................................31
4.1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................................................................31
2015

4.2 CREATINGTHEMATERIALPROPERTY..................................................................................................................................................................31
4.3 DEFININGTHELAYUP......................................................................................................................................................................................32
4.4 DEFININGTHELAMINATEPROPERTY(PCOMP)...................................................................................................................................................33
4.5 SPECIFYINGMATERIALANGLES.........................................................................................................................................................................34
4.6 ANALYSISSETUPANDPOSTPROCESSING.............................................................................................................................................................34
4.6.1 AnalysisSetManagerSetupforComposites...................................................................................................................................36
4.6.2 PostProcessingtheResults.............................................................................................................................................................37
5. EXAMPLE2:CREATINGA3DLAMINATEMODELINFEMAP..........................................................................................41
5.1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................................................................41
5.4 DEFININGTHELAMINATEPROPERTY(PCOMPS).................................................................................................................................................42
5.5 SPECIFYINGMATERIALANGLES.........................................................................................................................................................................43
5.6 POSTPROCESSINGTHERESULTS........................................................................................................................................................................43
6. EXAMPLE3:MODELINGASANDWICHCOMPOSITE.....................................................................................................45
6.1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................................................................45
6.4 DEFININGTHEPROPERTYCARDS.......................................................................................................................................................................45
6.5 POSTPROCESSINGTHERESULTS........................................................................................................................................................................46
6.6 OTHERMETHODSFORSANDWICHCOMPOSITEMODELING....................................................................................................................................48
7. LAMINATEFAILURETHEORIESINFEMAP.....................................................................................................................50
7.1 INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................................................................50
7.2 HILLSTHEORY...............................................................................................................................................................................................50
2015

7.3 HOFFMANSTHEORY.......................................................................................................................................................................................51
7.4 TSAIWUTHEORY..........................................................................................................................................................................................52
7.5 MAXIMUMSTRAINTHEORY..............................................................................................................................................................................52
7.6 ONSETFAILURETHEORY..................................................................................................................................................................................53
8. EXAMPLE4:MODELINGTHEFAILUREBEHAVIOROFCOMPOSITELAMINATES...........................................................53
8.2 DEFININGTHELAMINATEPROPERTY...................................................................................................................................................................54
8.3 RESULTS.......................................................................................................................................................................................................54
9. ADDITIONALREADING..................................................................................................................................................59
10. MATERIALDATABASE....................................................................................................................................................60
11. FOURPOINTBENDINGOFASANDWICHCOMPOSITEUSINGFEMAPANDNXNASTRAN............................................63
11.1 HANDCALCULATION..................................................................................................................................................................................64
11.1.1 BasicLaminate.................................................................................................................................................................................64
11.1.2 SandwichComposite.......................................................................................................................................................................74
11.2 FINITEELEMENTSIMULATION......................................................................................................................................................................80
11.3 SUMMARYOFRESULTS...............................................................................................................................................................................89
12. ADDENDUM..................................................................................................................................................................91
12.1 EXAMPLE1(2DLAMINATEWITHAHOLE)......................................................................................................................................................91
12.1.1 DisplacementContour.....................................................................................................................................................................91
12.1.2 MajorPrincipalStressinPly4(0)...................................................................................................................................................92
12.1.3 UnsymmetricLaminate....................................................................................................................................................................93
12.2 EXAMPLE2(3DLAMINATEWITHAHOLE)......................................................................................................................................................94
12.2.2 MajorPrincipalStressinPly4(0)...................................................................................................................................................95
2015

12.2.3 3DSolidLaminatewithOneElementforEachLayerThroughThickness.......................................................................................96
12.3 EXAMPLE3(3DSANDWICHCOMPOSITE).......................................................................................................................................................98
12.3.2 TransverseShearStress(ZX)inCore...............................................................................................................................................99
12.4 EXAMPLE4(2DLAMINATEWITHFAILURE)...................................................................................................................................................100
12.4.1 LaminateFailure............................................................................................................................................................................100
12.4.2 FailureinLongitudinalTension......................................................................................................................................................101
12.4.3 FailureinTransverseTension........................................................................................................................................................102
13. APPENDIX....................................................................................................................................................................103
13.1 CLASSICALLAMINATIONTHEORY.................................................................................................................................................................103
13.1.1 KinematicEquations......................................................................................................................................................................103
13.1.2 ConstitutiveEquations...................................................................................................................................................................103
13.1.3 Resultants......................................................................................................................................................................................104
13.1.4 EquilibriumEquations....................................................................................................................................................................104
13.1.5 StiffnessMatricesA,B,andD........................................................................................................................................................104
13.2 UNSYMMETRICLAYUP..............................................................................................................................................................................106
13.3 CHAMISMODEL......................................................................................................................................................................................108
13.4 ONSETFAILURETHEORY...........................................................................................................................................................................108
2015

CompositeLaminateModelingUsingFemap
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 TERMINOLOGY
Compositematerial:Acombinationoftwoormorematerialstoformanewmaterialsystemwithenhanced
materialproperties.

Examplesofreinforcementsareglassfibers,carbonfibers,siliconcarbidefibersetc.
Examplesofmatrixmaterialsareepoxy,polyurethane,siliconcarbideetc.

Lamina:Alaminaisathinlayerofcompositematerial.Thethicknessofthelaminaisusually0.1to1mm.Itisalso
referredtoasaply.
2015

Laminate:Alaminateisconstructedbystackinganumberoflaminae.Thebuildingblockforalaminateislamina.

1.2 TYPESOFMATERIALS
Inengineeringapplications,materialscanbebroadlyclassifiedasanisotropic,orthotropic,andisotropic.Ananisotropic
materialhasthegeneralizedformulation,whileothertwoarederivedbysomesimplifications.
1.2.1 ANISOTROPICMATERIAL
Ananisotropicmaterialhasnoplanesofmaterialsymmetry.Examplesofanisotropicmaterialsarefemur,shortfiber
compositesetc.Thenumberofconstantsrequiredtodescribeanisotropicmaterialsis21.Thestiffnessmatrixshown
belowissymmetricaboutthediagonalterms.Accordingly,allthediagonaltermsandthetermsabove/belowthe
diagonaltermshavetobedefinedinthematerialmodel.
1 C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 1
C C 22 C 23 C 24 C 25 C 26 2
2 12
3 C13 C 23 C33 C 34 C 35 C 36 3

23 C14 C 24 C 34 C 44 C 45 C 46 23
13 C15 C 25 C 35 C 45 C 55 C 56 13

12 C16 C 26 C 36 C 46 C 56 C 66 12
2015

1.2.2 ORTHOTROPICMATERIAL
Anorthotropicmaterialhasthreeplanesofmaterialsymmetry.Examplesoforthotropicmaterialsarewood,
unidirectionallaminaetc.Thenumberofconstantsrequiredtodescribeorthotropicmaterialsis9.Thestiffnessmatrixis
symmetricandallthediagonaltermsandtermsabove/belowthediagonaltermshavetobedefined.However,
commercialfiniteelementsoftwareallowdefiningtheelasticmoduli(E1,E2,E3),shearmoduli(G12,G13,G23),and
Poissonsratio(12,13,23)insteadofcalculatingeachofthestiffnessterms.Thefiniteelementsoftwarecaninternally
evaluatethesestiffnessterms.
1 C11 C12 C13 0 0 0 1
C C 22 C 23 0 0 0 2
2 12
3 C13 C 23 C33 0 0 0 3

23 0 0 0 C 44 0 0 23
13 0 0 0 0 C55 0 13

12 0 0 0 0 0 C 66 12
1.2.3 ISOTROPICMATERIAL
Allplanesareplanesofsymmetry.Examplesofisotropicmaterialsaremetalslikesteel,aluminumetc.Thereareonly
2independentconstants(C11andC12)foranisotropicmaterial.Similartotheorthotropicmaterialmodel,onecandefine
Eandinsteadofcalculatingthestiffnessterms.
C11 C12 C12 0 0 0
1 C12 C11 C12 0 0 0 1

2 C12 C12 C11 0 0 0 2
3 C11 C12
0 0 0
2
0 0 3

23 23
C11 C12
13 0 0 0 0 0
2 13
12 0 0 0 0 0
C11 C12 12
2

2015

2. COMPOSITEMICROMECHANICS
Studyofcompositematerialbehaviorwhereintheinteractionofconstituentmaterialsareexaminedona
microscopicscaletodeterminetheireffectonthepropertiesofthecompositematerial.
Predictthepropertiesofcomposite,giventhecomponentpropertiesandtheirgeometricarrangement.
Themechanicalpropertiesofthecompositedependonthepercentagesoffibersandmatrix.
2.1 RULEOFMIXTURES
Ifthefiberandmatrixpropertiesareavailable,areasonableestimationofthelaminapropertiescanbeobtained
usingtheruleofmixtures(strengthofmaterialsapproach).
E L E f Vf E m Vm
1 V V
f m
ET Ef Em
1 V V
f m
G LT G f G m
LT f Vf m Vm
Here,ELandETcorrespondtolongitudinalandtransversemoduliofthecompositelamina,GLTandLTcorrespondto
inplaneshearmodulusandPoissonsratio,respectively.Suffixfcorrespondstofiberpropertyandmcorresponds
tomatrixproperty.Intheaboveequations,Vcorrespondstovolumefraction.
2.1.1 APPLICATIONEXAMPLE
Wewillconsiderthemechanicalpropertiesofacarbonfiberandanepoxyresintoapplytheruleofmixturesand
estimatethelaminamechanicalproperties.Forthisexample,wewillconsiderafibervolumefractionof56%.For
moststructuralapplications,afibervolumefractiongreaterthan55%istypicallyused.Increasingthefibervolume
fractioncanfavorintermsoftheloadcarryingcapacityasfiberstakemajorityoftheload.However,fibervolume
fractioncannotbeincreasedbeyondacertainlimit(typicallyaround65%).Justasanote,thetheoreticalmaximum
volumefractionforafiber(cylinder)is78%forsquarepacking.Astheresincontentisreduced,fibersarenot
2015

completelywetduringthemanufacturingprocessandcanresultinincreaseddryspots(partqualityisreduced).This
willresultinreducedloadtransferbetweenthefibers.
Constituent EL(GPa) ET(GPa) G(GPa) Vf(%)
Carbonfiber 220 22 0.15 25 56
Epoxyresin 3.3 3.3 0.37 1.2
Thecarbon/epoxylaminapropertiesarecalculatedusingtheruleofmixturesasshownbelow.
EL=220*0.56+3.3*0.44=125GPa
1/ET=(0.56/220)+(0.44/3.3)=0.14GPa>ET=7.4GPa
1/GLT=(0.56/25)+(0.44/1.2)=0.39GPa>GLT=2.6GPa
LT=0.56*0.15+0.44*0.37=0.25
Themechanicalproperties(2Dorthotropic)obtainedusingtheruleofmixturesforacarbon/epoxylaminaareshown
below.
Carbon/epoxylamina EL(GPa) ET(GPa) GLT(GPa) LT
Ruleofmixtures 125 7.4 2.6 0.25
Chamismodel 125 9.1 4.2 0.25
Experimental[1] 125 9.1 5 0.34
2015

3. LAMINATEMODELINGINFEMAP
Inthissection,weprovidedetailsonmodelingcompositelaminatesinFemap.Therearefourimportantentitiesinwhich
modelinglaminatesdiffersfromconventionalmetalliccomponents.Compositelaminatemodelingdealswiththe
followingmodifications:
anorthotropic/anisotropic(typically)materialconfiguration
laminateshavealayeredconfiguration,soalayupconfigurationhastobespecifiedwiththethicknessofeach
layerandtheirorientationanglesw.r.tareferenceaxis
anelement/propertytypethataccountsforthelayeredconfigurationhastobeused
referenceaxis(materialangle)specification
EachoftheaboveentitiesandtheirdefinitioninFemapissummarizedinthefollowingsubsections.Therearetwowork
flowsthatcanbefollowedtomodelalaminateinFemapdependingonwhetherthelaminatemodelisa2Dor3D.
Definingthematerialcards,layup,andpropertycardsiscommonbetween2Dand3Dmodels;however,materialangles
canbespecifiedusingtwoapproachesina2Dmodelwhileonlyoneapproachisusedfora3Dmodel.In2Dmodels
materialanglescanbespecifiedatelementlevelordirectlyinthepropertycards.Specifyingmaterialanglesonelements
isaconvenientapproachespeciallyforcomplexgeometries;wecanselectasetofelementsandapplythematerialangle
insteadofassigningaspecificmaterialangletoallelementsinapropertycard.For3Dmodels,wehavetodefine
materialanglesinthepropertycardandsoweneedtocreatemultiplepropertycardsforcomplexgeometries.Inthe
followingsubsections,anoverviewofFemapinterfaceforlaminatemodelingisprovidedaccompaniedbyworked
examples.
Workflow1 Workflow2
laminate (2D) laminate(2D)andsolidlaminate(3D)
materialmodel materialmodel
layup layup
propertycard propertycardwithmaterialangle
definematerialangleonelement
2015

3.1 IMPORTANTENTITIES
Modelingcompositescanbeeasierifthefollowingentitiesarecarefullyassigned.

2015

3.2 DEFININGANORTHOTROPICMATERIAL
Noticethatwehavedifferentpropertiesinlongitudinal(E1)andtransverse(E2)directions,whereE1isalignedto
theanglespecifiedwithinthelayup.
Dependingonthetypeofanalysis,variousmaterialpropertiesarerequired.
2015

3.3 UNDERSTANDINGTHELAYUPEDITOR

2015

2015

3.4 PROPERTYCARD:2DLAMINATEMODELING
2015

3.5 ASSIGNINGMATERIALANGLES
Although,orientationanglesarespecifiedforeachlaminaindividuallyinthelayupeditor,Femapwillnotunderstandas
towhichreferencedirectiontheseorientations(angles)correspond.So,weneedtospecifyamaterialanglesuchthatall
orientations(specifiedinlayup)takethisvectorasthereference.Forexample,ifthematerialangleisdefinedinthe
globalxdirectionthenalltheorientationswilluseglobalxdirectionasthereference.Oneshouldnotbeconfusedwith
theterminologiesmaterialangleandorientationangleinthelayupeditor.Materialangleisareferenceaxisthatwe
assigntotheelementandisindependentoftheshapeoftheelement.Orientationangleistheorientationofthelamina
(fiberdirection).Bydefault,Femapassignsnomaterialangle.Useanyofthefollowingmethodstospecifythematerial
angle.

Imagesource:https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aircraft/amt_airframe_handbook/media/ama_Ch07.pdf
2015

3.5.1 DEFININGAMATERIALANGLEONTHEELEMENT
Onecandefine/updatethematerialanglesusingtoolbarModify>UpdateElements>MaterialOrientation.

Thismethodallowsonetodefineamaterialangletoaselectedsetofelementsoralltheelementsatatime.Itis
importanttonotethatthematerialangleisindependentoftheelementcoordinatesystemandtheelementshape.For
example,theimagebelowshowselementsthataredistorted.However,thematerialanglesareallalignedtotheglobalx
direction.Ifamaterialangleisnotdefined,Femapwillshowanerrormessage.Ifyoumissdefiningamaterialanglefora
fewelementsinthemodel,itcanbequitedifficulttotracetheelementswithmissingdefinitions.Wehavedevelopedan
APItofiltertheseelementswithmissingelementsandgroupthem.Byaccessingthisnewlycreatedgroup,onecan
assign/updatethematerialanglestotheseelementsonly.TheAPIiscalledCompositesMaterialAngleChecker,andcan
bedownloadedfromourwebsiteathttp://www.appliedcax.com/supportandtraining/apis/apis.html.Onecanverifythe
materialanglesinthelaminateelementsbyselectingthefollowingoptionsunderF6orViewOptions.
2015

3.5.2 DEFININGAMATERIALANGLEINTHEPROPERTYCARD
Inthisapproach,wecandefineamaterialangledirectlyinthepropertycard.However,thiswillassignthematerialangle
toalltheelementsthatthepropertyidisassociatedwith.Onecanalsochecktheassignedmaterialanglesandupdate
them(incaseofanyincorrectmaterialangles)accordinglyusingtheprocedureinapproach1.
2015

In case of a complex geometry with curved surfaces, material angles can be effectively defined using the cylindrical
coordinatesystembyusingthetangentdirectionifthevectorhastofollowacurvedsurface.Alwaysremembertoverify
yourmaterialangles!
3.5.3 ADVANCEDAPPLICATIONEXAMPLEOFASSIGNINGMATERIALANGLETOACOMPLEXGEOMETRY
Theexamplebelowshowsacompositewingleadingedge.The0materialangleneedstofollowthecurvatureofthe
leadingedge.However,wecanseefromthepicturethatthevectors(representativeofthematerialangles)donot
followthecurvature.

2015

Vectorsdonotfollowthe
curvatureoftheleadingedge

In order to assign the material angle accurately, we can use the cylindrical coordinate system (R, T, Z) instead of a
rectangular coordinate system (X, Y, Z). We want to create a new cylindrical coordinate system (instead of an existing
cylindricalcoordinatesystem)thatwilldoabetterjobinaccuratelyassigningthematerialangles.Followthestepsbelow
tocreateanewcylindricalcoordinatesystem.
2015

Thenewcoordinatesystemisshownbelow.

2015

Wewill usetheproceduredetailedinsection3.5.1(Definingamaterialangleontheelement)to updatethematerial

angle.GototoolbarModify>UpdateElements>MaterialOrientation.
Thiswillpromptyoutoselecttheelementsforwhichthematerialanglehastodefined/updated.Forthisexample,we
willselectallthelaminateplateelements.Next,youwillbepromptedtoselectthematerialorientationdirection(shown
below).

Theaboveprocedurewillorienttheallthematerialanglesalongthecurvatureoftheleadingedge.
2015

3.6 PROPERTYCARD:3DLAMINATEMODELING

In3Dlaminatemodeling,wedefineaply/stackdirectioninsteadofamaterialangle.Forexample,ifthematerialangleis
inglobalxandthelayupstackinginglobalz,thenwespecifytheply/stackdirectionasXZ(13).Unlike2D,wecannotuse
approach1(Modify>UpdateElements>MaterialOrientation)for3Dsolidlaminateelements.Wecancreatemultiple
propertycards(ifnecessary)withdifferentply/stackdirectionsforsectionsofyourgeometry.Andtrytoexploreother
coordinatesystemsforspecifyingtheply/stackdirection.

2015

3.7 MULTIMATERIALANGLEEXAMPLEOFA3DCOMPOSITEMODEL
Thisexampleshowsacompositecomponentwithsectionsorientedindifferentdirections.Thecomponentismodeled
usinglaminatesolidelements.Here,wecannotuseasingleply/stackdirectionforallthesectionsofthecomponent.
2015

In this example, we will create three property cards (identified by color as shown above) to define ply/stack direction
separately for each of the three sections of the composite component. The following images will show how ply/stack
directionshavebeendefinedforthesesections.
2015

2015

4. EXAMPLE1:CREATINGA2DLAMINATEMODELINFEMAP
4.1 INTRODUCTION
Inthisexample,wewillanalyzeasimplecompositelaminatewithaholesubjectedtouniaxialtension.Composite
laminatesareoftenstudiedforopenholetensionintheaerospaceindustry.Thematerial,layup,andthethicknesses
usedinthisexamplearefromarealworldcompositepart.Here,wewillstudytwotypesoflayupswiththesamenumber
oflayersandsameorientationsbutstackedindifferentways.Wewillanalyzethedifferencesintheresultsjustby
alteringthelayupstackingorder.Wewilllearnthisuniquebehaviorofcompositesbyworkingoutthisexample.With
multiplepliesinthelayup,thisisalsoagoodexampleforpostprocessing.
4.2 CREATINGTHEMATERIALPROPERTY
Thematerialpropertiesusedforthelaminatecorrespondtoaunidirectionalcarbon/epoxylamina.Accordingly,the
materialtypeneedstobe2DOrthotropicforthisproblem.ThematerialpropertiesareshowninTable1.
Table1:MechanicalpropertiesofaunidirectionalT800S/39002lamina
Property Unit T800S/39002

Longitudinalelasticmodulus(E1) GPa 147
Transverseelasticmoduli(E2=E3) GPa 7.58
Inplaneshearmodulus(G12)=Interlaminarshearmodulus(G13) GPa 3.96
Interlaminarshearmodulus(G23) GPa 3.00
InplanePoissonsratio(12)=InterlaminarPoissonsratio(13) 0.33
InterlaminarPoissonsratio(v23) 0.38
Longitudinaltensilestrength(Xt)=Longitudinalcompressivestrength(Xc) GPa 2.86
Transversetensilestrength(Yt)=Transversecompressivestrength(Yc) GPa 1.55
Shearstrength(S) GPa 0.104
2015

Sincethelaminatemodelis2D,thedirection3propertiescanbeignoredforthisproblem.

4.3 DEFININGTHELAYUP
Wewillanalyzetwotypesoflayupsinthismodel.Theideaistoobservehowthelayupcanaffectyouranalysisevenif
thelaminateeffectivelyhasthesamenumberoflayers,sameorientationangles,butstackedupinadifferentsequence.
Layup1:[45/90/45/0]switheachlayerat0.195mmthickness.Thesubscriptsinthelayupdefinitionshowsthatitis
symmetriclaminate.Thisimpliesthatthelayupconfigurationis[45/90/45/0/0/45/90/45].
2015

Layup2:[45/90/45/0/45/90/45/0].Layup2has8layersaslayup1exceptthatthelayupconfigurationisno
longersymmetricaboutlaminatesmidplane.
ThelayupeditorwithLayup1definedisshownbelow.Layup2canbedefinedinasimilarmannerbychangingthe
orientationangles.

4.4 DEFININGTHELAMINATEPROPERTY(PCOMP)
TheNastranpropertycardfor2DlaminatesisPCOMP.DetailedinformationonthePCOMPcardisavailableinthe
NastranUserGuide.The2Dlaminateformulationisbasedonclassicallaminationtheory.SelecttheLaminate
element/propertytypeinthepropertycard.Bydefault,Femapassignsplateelementtypefor2Dmodels.Thelayup
definedinthepreviousstepcanbeassignedinthepropertycard.Sincewehavedefinedallthe8layersinthelayup,
optionsislefttoitsdefaultAsSpecifiedinthepropertycard.Alternatively,wecandefine4layersonlyinthelayupand
useSymmetricoption.However,thisoptionhastobeusedwithcautionasitcannotbeusedforunsymmetric
2015

laminates.Ideally,onecandefineallthelayersinthelayupeditorunlesstherearealargenumberoflayers(e.g.,thick
composite).

4.5 SPECIFYINGMATERIALANGLES
Forthisproblem,wewilluseglobalxdirectionasourmaterialangle.Wecanuseoneoftheprocedureswhichwere
introducedearlier.
4.6 ANALYSISSETUPANDPOSTPROCESSING
Forthismodel,aforceof10kNisappliedonthenodesononeendandfixedconstraintsareappliedontheotherendas
shownbelow.Tosimulatetheexperimentalloadingbehavior,the10kNloadisappliedonanindependentnodeandthis
nodeisrigidlylinkedtonodesontherightendofthelaminatemodel(shownbelow).Whentheloadisappliedonthe
independentnode,theresultingdisplacementistranslatedtothedependentnodes.
2015

Themodelisreadytobeanalyzedandissolvedforalinearstaticcase.Themodelisanalyzedforthetwolayupsandthe
deformationsobservedinboththesecasesarediscussed.

2015

4.6.1 ANALYSISSETMANAGERSETUPFORCOMPOSITES
SRCOMPScontrolsthecomputationandprintoutofplystrengthratios.Whenon,plystrengthratiosareoutputfor
compositeelementsthathavefailureindicesrequested.
NOFISRcontrolstheprintoutofthecompositefailureindicesandstrengthratios.Whenon,thefailureindicesand
strengthratioswillnotbeprinted.

2015

4.6.2 POSTPROCESSINGTHERESULTS
Initially,themodelwiththesymmetriclaminate([45/90/45/0/0/45/90/45])wasanalyzed.Thetotaltranslation
inthismodelisshownbelow.Thedeformationsaresymmetricaboutthexaxis.Undertheapplieduniaxialtensileload,
deformationswereinplaneasexpected.Nooutofplanedeformationswereobserved.
Next,themodelwithunsymmetriclaminate([45/90/45/0/45/90/45/0])wasanalyzed.Fromthecontours(shown
below),itcanbeobservedthatthedeformationswerenotsymmetricaboutthexaxis.Also,wecannowseethatthe
unsymmetriclaminateresultedinanoutofplanedeformationalthoughtheloadingwasuniaxial.
SymmetriclaminateNo
outofplanedeformations
2015

Unsymmetriclaminatewith
outofplanedeformations

Thiskind ofbehavioris unique infiberreinforcedcompositelaminatesandoften notexploreddueto inherent design
challenges. An unsymmetric layup can result in warping of the laminate as early as during the manufacturing process
whenthelaminateiscuredathightemperatures.Thus,itisquitechallengingtodesignanunsymmetriclaminatetosuita
specific loading environment. One practical example of an unsymmetric laminate application is in the forward swept
compositewingsoftheX29aircraft[2].
2015

X29aircraft
PhotocourtesyofStructuralMechanicsCorporation
http://structuralmechanics.com/about/resources/newsletter/articles/youpullittwiststailoredcomposites/
Ifthissubjectinterestsyou,pleaseseetheAppendix.Next,weproceedtostressdistributionsintheindividualplies.For
thisdiscussion,wewillusethesymmetriclaminateresults.
2015

Thestresscontourshownabovecorrespondstothemajorprincipalstressinply4(0layer).Similarly,wecanplotstress
distributioninotherlayers.Femaphasbunchofoutputoptionsandsometimesitcanbedifficulttofindthesameoutput
vectorforanotherply.TherearesomecustomtoolsavailableinFemapwhichcanbeeffectivelyusedforlaminates.For
example,wecanusetheLaminatePrevPlytooltoplotply3MajorPrincipalStress(providedwehaveaplotofply4
Major Principal Stress) without putting effort in finding the output vector amongst large set of results. This will be
particularlyusefulifyouhavealargenumberoflayersinthelaminate.Someofthetoolswhicharespecifictolaminates
areshownbelow.ThesetoolscanbeaccessedfromCustomTools>PostProcessing.
2015

IfyouwouldliketousetheseAPIsfrequently,wecancreateacustomizedtoolbarwiththesecommands.Itiseasierthis
waytofindacommandinthetoolbarratherthansearchingforthesecommandsintheCustomTools.Wehavecreateda
videooncreatingacustomizedtoolbarandcanbeaccessedfromhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT_7uIor6Ww
5. EXAMPLE2:CREATINGA3DLAMINATEMODELINFEMAP
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Inthisexample,wewilldevelopa3Dlaminatemodeltoanalyzeasimplecompositelaminatewithaholesubjectedto
uniaxialtension.Thisisanextensionofexample1toa3Dlaminatemodel.Thegoalistounderstandtheapplicabilityof
boththemodels.Thematerial,layup,thicknesses,andtheapproachusedinthisexamplearesameasintheexample1.
Amajordifferencebetweenthe2Dlaminatemodelandthe3Dlaminatemodelisthattheformerwillnottakeoutof
planestressesintoaccountwhilethelatterwill.The3Dlaminatemodelswillbeusefulifyouaremodelingacomposite
structurewithfreeedgeslikeholeswheretheoutofplaneshearstressescanbeimportant.
2015

Definingthematerialpropertiesfora3Dlaminatemodelissimilartothe2Dmodelexceptthatthematerialtypeisnow
3Dorthotropic.Accordingly,direction3propertiesshouldalsobedefined.Alltherequiredpropertiesaredefinedin
Table1.
Specifyingthelayupconfigurationissimilartothe2Dcase.However,thematerialproperty(3Dorthotropic)createdin
thepreviousstephastobeusedinsteadof2Dorthotropicpropertiesasinexample1.
5.4 DEFININGTHELAMINATEPROPERTY(PCOMPS)
2015

TheNastranpropertycardfor3DlaminatesisPCOMPS.DetailedinformationonthePCOMPScardisavailableinthe
NastranUserGuide.SelecttheSolidLaminateelement/propertytypeinthepropertycard.Bydefault,Femapassigns
Solidelementtypefor3Dmodels.Thelayupdefinedinthepreviousstepcanbeassignedinthepropertycard.The
interfaceforthe3Dlaminatepropertycardisslightlydifferentfromthe2Dcase.HerePly/StackDirectionhastobe
assigned.Forexample,forthe3DlaminatemodelthePly/StackDirectionisspecifiedasXZ(13).Here,Xcorrespondsto
thedirectionofthematerialangle(asdefinedin2Dcase)andZcorrespondstothestackingdirection.Unlikethe2D
laminates,the3Dlaminateformulationisnotbasedonclassicallaminationtheory.
5.5 SPECIFYINGMATERIALANGLES
Theonlydifferencebetweenspecifyingmaterialanglesfora2Dcaseand3Dcaseisthatthe3Dmodelrequiresspecifying
thePly/StackDirection.Theoverallconceptisstillthesame.
5.6 POSTPROCESSINGTHERESULTS
Theimagebelowshowsthefiniteelementmeshofthe3Dlaminatemodel.Inthisexample,onlyonesolidelementis
definedthroughthethickness.Thethicknessoftheelementcorrespondstothetotalthicknessofthelaminate1.56
mm.
Topview Frontview
1.56 mm
2015

The3Dlaminatemodelisanalyzedwiththesymmetriclayupconfiguration.Theobserveddisplacementsandstressesare
shownbelow.Thedisplacementresultsarequitesimilartothe2Dcase.

Themajorprincipalstressdistributioninply4(0layer)isshownbelow.

2015

6. EXAMPLE3:MODELINGASANDWICHCOMPOSITE
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Inthisexample,a3Dsandwichcompositemodelisanalyzedforauniformpressureloading.Thesandwichcomposites
haveacore(e.g.,honeycomb,foam,etc.)sandwichedbetweentwofacesheets.Typically,thefacesheetscarrythe
majorityoftheinplaneandbendingloadswhilethecoretakesshear.Asandwichcompositecanbeconveniently
modeledusingthe2Dlaminatelayupbydefiningthecoreasoneofthelayersinthelayupeditor(shownattheendof
thisexample).Whilethisprocedureiseasy,interlaminarshearstresses(aroundfreeedges)becomeimportantin
sandwichcompositesand2Dlaminatemodels(basedonclassicallaminationtheory)donotaccountfortheoutofplane
stresses.
Twomaterialmodels,eachforthecompositefacesheetandcorearedefined.Thecompositefacesheetismodeledasa
3DorthotropicmaterialandthepropertiesareshowninTable1(example1).Thecoreismodeledasanisotropic
materialwithE=4GPaand=0.25[3].
Definingthelaminatelayupforthefacesheetsissameasinexample2.However,itshouldbenotedthatwehavetwo
facesheetsandsowehavetocreatetwosolidlaminatepropertycards,oneforthetopfacesheetandoneforthebottom
facesheet.Iftwolayupsarenotcreatedseparatelyforeachofthefacesheets,wewillseeoutputvectorscorresponding
to8pliesonlyintheresultsset.Iftwolayupsarecreated,thenwecanseeoutputvectorsfor16plies,8forthebottom
facesheetand8forthetopfacesheet.
6.4 DEFININGTHEPROPERTYCARDS
Threepropertycardshavetobecreated,twoofsolidlaminatetypeforfacesheetsandonesolidtypeforthecore.Each
ofthesolidlaminatepropertycardshavetobeassignedtothecorrespondingfacesheets.Thematerialangles
specificationforthesolidlaminatesissimilartothepreviousexample.

2015

6.5 POSTPROCESSINGTHERESULTS
Clampedboundaryconditionshavebeenappliedonthesandwichcompositeedgesandapressureloadof1MPais
appliedonthetopsurface.
Topview Frontview
2015

Thedeformationplotofthesandwichcompositeduetotheappliedpressureloadisshownbelow.

The interlaminar shear stress distribution in the core is shown below. One can mask the facesheet elements while
plottingtheshearstressdistributioninthecore.

2015

Thebondbetweenthecoreandfacesheetsisoneofthecriticalregionsfordelaminationinsandwichcomposites.These
interlaminarshearstressesarehigheratthefreeedgesandtheseareasarepotentialregionsfordelaminationinitiation.
One can compare the interlaminar shear stresses to the coretofacesheet bond shear allowable and analyze for any
possibledelaminations.
6.6 OTHERMETHODSFORSANDWICHCOMPOSITEMODELING
Inthisexamplewehavedevelopeda3Dsandwichcompositemodelinwhichthefacesheetsandthecorearemodeledas
solids.Othermethodsbywhichtheaboveproblemcanbeanalyzedare:
1. 2Dsandwichcompositemodelinginwhichthefacesheetsandthecoreareall2Dandcanbedefinedinasingle
layupdefinition.Thisisaconvenientapproachhowever,asdiscussedearlier,the2Dlaminatemodelsarebasedon
classicallaminationtheoryanddonotaccountfortheoutofplanestresses.Secondarymethodsareusedto
estimatetheinterlaminarstresses.

2. Amixof2Dlaminatesand3Dcore.Inthismethod,thefacesheetscanbemodeledas2Dandthecorecanbe
modeledasasolid.Oneshouldbecarefulaboutdefiningthelaminatesforthisconfiguration.Boththefacesheets
havetobeplacedatanoffsetofhalfthelaminatethicknessfromthesolidcore.
2015

3. Usingtheclassicalplatetheorytomodelsandwichcomposites.Thismodelrequiressomehandcalculationtobe
doneandiscomplexascomparedtothe2Dlaminatemodel.TheNastranpropertycardcorrespondingtotheplate
modelisthePSHELLcard.Inthemethod1describedabove,NastranconvertsaPCOMPpropertyintoan
equivalentPSHELL.So,bothmethod1andmethod2shouldgivesimilarresultsifallthepropertiesareaccurately
defined.Toavoidconfusion,method1ispreferredovermethod2asbotharethesameintermsofhowNastran
interpretsthepropertycard.Alternatively,Femaphasacustomtooltodefineasandwichcompositeusingthe
PSHELLmethod.OnecandohandcalculationsandcomparetheirvalueswiththeFemapcalculatedvalueasshown
below.ThiscustomtoolforsandwichcompositescanbeaccessedfromCustomtools>HoneycombPSHELL>
HoneycombPSHELLProperty.
2015

7. LAMINATEFAILURETHEORIESINFEMAP
7.1 INTRODUCTION
Thebehaviorofcompositesiscomplex(asaresultofheterogeneousproperties)whencomparedtomonolithic
materials.Understandingthebehaviorofcompositesunderextremeconditionsofmechanicalloading,temperature,and
otherenvironmentalfactorsposesagreatchallenge.Theeffectoftheseserviceconditionsonthecompositecanrange
fromaminorlossofstiffnessatmicroleveltocatastrophicfailuresatstructurallevel.Themicrostructureofthe
compositeevolvesinmultiplewaysbeforeevidencingmeasurabledegradation.Typicalformsofmicromechanical
failuresincludefiberbreaking,matrixcracking,fiber/matrixinterfacedebondingetc.Factorssuchasmicrocracking
(typicallyinamatrix)areunavoidableandcanbeinherentinthemanufacturedcompositepart.Microcrackingcanresult
fromprocessingthecompositesathightemperatures(curecycle),duetodifferencesofthermal
conductivities/coefficientsofthermalexpansionbetweentheconstituents(fiber,matrix).Otherformsofcomposite
materialpropertydegradationcanresultfromhygrothermalloadingandoxidation.
Inthissection,wewilldealwiththefailureatplylevelandnotthemicromechanicalfailures.Severalfailuretheorieshave
beendevelopedtostudyfailureenvelopesofcompositelaminates.ThefailuretheoriesthatareavailableinFemapare
discussedbelow.Someofthesemodels(maximumstresstheory,maximumstraintheory)arebasedonpurecomparison
ofobservedstresses/strainsinthelaminatewiththeirrespectiveallowables.OthermodelssuchasHillstheory,TsaiWu
theory,andHoffmanstheoryconsiderinteractionoflongitudinal/transversestresses/strainstopredictthefailure
envelope.Althoughfailuretheoriescanbehandytocheckthefailureindicesanddecideiffailureoccursinthelaminate,
itisimportanttounderstandthestressdistributioninthemodel,interlaminarstressesandtheireffectsondelamination,
ABDmatricesetc.
7.2 HILLSTHEORY
Hillsfailuretheoryisapplicablefororthotropicmaterialsthathavethesamestrengthintensionandcompression,
i.e.,Xt=XcandYt=Yc.FailureIndex(FI)isgivenby:
2015

Xisallowablestressin1direction
Yisallowablestressin2direction
Sisallowablestressinshear
Xt=Allowabletensilestressin1direction
Xc=Allowablecompressivestressin1direction
Yt=Allowabletensilestressin2direction
Yc=Allowablecompressivestressin2direction

X=Xtif1ispositiveorX=Xcif1isnegativeandsimilarlyforYand2.Fortheinteractionterm12/X2,X=Xtif
12ispositiveorX=Xcif12isnegative.

StrengthRatio(SR)isgivenby,

7.3 HOFFMANSTHEORY
Hoffmanstheoryforanorthotropiclaminainageneralstateofplanestresswithunequaltensileandcompressive
strengthsisgivenby,

Thefailureindexisobtainedbyevaluatingthelefthandsideoftheaboveequation.

2015

7.4 TSAIWUTHEORY
ThetheoryofstrengthforanisotropicmaterialsproposedbyTsaiandWuspecializedtothecaseofanorthotropic
laminainageneralstateofplanestresswithunequaltensileandcompressivestrengthsis,

Thefailureindexisobtainedbyevaluatingthelefthandsideoftheaboveequation.
F12istobeevaluatedexperimentally.Bydefault,thistermissettozeroinFemap(TsaiWuinteractionterm).
7.5 MAXIMUMSTRAINTHEORY
Themaximumstraincriterionhasnostraininteractionterms.Thefailureindexiscalculatedusing,

X,Y,andSareallowablestrainsinlongitudinaldirection,transversedirectionandinplane,respectively.
Afailureindexformaximumstresstheory(availablefor3Dlaminatemodeling)canbederivedsimilartomaximum
straintheory.
2015

7.6 ONSETFAILURETHEORY
TheOnsetfailuretheoryortheStrainInvariantFailureTheory(SIFT)iswidelyusedintheaerospaceindustry.Abrief
overviewofthisfailurecriterionisprovidedintheappendix.
8. EXAMPLE4:MODELINGTHEFAILUREBEHAVIOROFCOMPOSITELAMINATES
Forthisexample,wewillusethe2Dlaminatemodelfromexample1.Allthemodelingprocedurethatwehavedonefor
the2Dlaminatemodelwillbesupplementedbydefiningfailurestrengthsofthelaminaandafailurecriterion.Thegoalis
tostudythefailureincompositelaminatesandalsoexploretheoutputvectorsthatcanbehandyinvisualizingthe
failureatplylevelandlaminatelevel.
2015

8.2 DEFININGTHELAMINATEPROPERTY
Thelaminatelayupisthesameasinexample1.Thelaminatepropertycardisalsodefinedinasimilarmanner.
Additionally,wespecifyafailurecriteriontocalculatethefailureindicesatplylevelandforthewholelaminate.Forthis
example,wewillusetheHoffmansfailurecriterion.Thebondshearallowabletermisdefinedtopredictinterlaminar
bondfailure.Ifoneisnotinterestedintheinterlaminarfailure,thistermcanbelefttoitsdefaultvalue0.

Thespecificationofmaterialanglesfollowsthesameapproachasinexample1.
8.3 RESULTS
Inthisexample,wearemainlyinterestedatlookingintothefailureindicesandevaluatethelaminateandindividual
lamina.Auniaxialtensileloadof50kNisapplied.Thecontourbelowshowsthelaminatefailureindexandcanbe
accessedfromtheoutputvector6060LaminateMaxFailureIndex.Thisoutputvectorshowstheoverallfailureindex
ofthelaminate.Acontourvalue(failureindex)greaterthanorequalto1impliesfailure.Basedonthisinformation,one
canassumethatthereareoneormorelayersinwhichthefailurehasoccurred.
2015

Next,wecancheckthefailureindexoutputvectoronaplybyplybasistofindoutthelayersinwhichthefailurehas
occurred. We can contour the output vector Lam Ply Fib Fail Index for a particular ply and then use the custom tool
optionsLaminateNextPlyorLaminatePrevPlyandcheckthefailureindices.
Within Custom Tools > PostProcessing, Femap has an API for Laminate Envelope Failure Indices. Currently, this API
generatesthesameoutputvectoras6060LaminateMaxFailureIndex.However,thisAPIcanbecustommodifiedto
envelopotheroutputvectors(e.g.,bondfailureindices).
Instead,ifyouareinterestedinmanuallyselectingtheoutputvectorsandenvelopingthemtoasingleoutputvector,you
canuseModel>Output>Process
2015

An example of enveloping major principal stresses in all the plies is shown below. This procedure can be followed to
envelopeanyoutputvector.
Iftheanalysishasonlyoneoutputset,thenwecanenvelopetheoutputvectorsfromthatoutputset.However,ifwe
havemultipleoutputsets,thenweneedtoselectoneormoreoutputsetsfromwhichwewouldliketoenvelopethe
outputvectors.

2015

2015

Thiswillcreatenewoutputvectorsasshownbelow.

2015

Other output vectors are also created which allow finding the location info (ply and element) of the maximum major
principalstress.Forexample,fromtheabovecontour,wecanseethelocationoftheelementwiththemaximummajor
principalstress.However,wedonotknowtherespective plythathasthismaximumvalue.Thenewlycreatedoutput
vectorEnvelopeLocationInfowillhavethisinformation.Onecanmodifythecontour/criteriastyletodisplayonlythe
maxvalue,minvalueorboth.Because,weareinterestedinmaxvalueonly,requiredchangesweredoneusingF6(View
Options)>PostProcessing>Contour/CriteriaStyle>MaxOnly.Fromthecontourbelow,wecanseethatthemaximum
valueofmajorprincipalstressisobservedinply4.

9. ADDITIONALREADING
Chapter24:Laminates,NXNastranUsersGuide
PCOMPandPCOMPSinNXNastranQuickReferenceGuide
Chapter6:ElementReferenceLaminateElementandSolidLaminateElementinFemapUserGuide
I.M.DanielandO.Ishai,EngineeringMechanicsofCompositeMaterials,2ndEdition,2005.
R.M.Jones,MechanicsofCompositeMaterials,2ndEdition,1998.
B.D.Agarwal,L.J.Broutman,andK.Chandrashekhara,AnalysisandPerformanceofFiberComposites,3rdEdition,
2006.

2015

10. MATERIALDATABASE
Thissectionprovidesmaterialpropertiesofsomecommonlyusedfibers(Table2),polymerresins(

2015

Table3),andfiberreinforcedpolymercompositematerials(Table4).Typicallyfibersareassumedtobeisotropic.
However,somereferencesalsoconsideredtransverselyisotropicproperties(differentpropertiesinlongitudinaland
transversedirections)forcarbonfibers.Matrixmaterialsaretypicallyisotropicinnature.
Table2:Mechanicalpropertiesofcommonlyusedfibers[4]
Fiber TensileModulus(GPa) TensileStrength(MPa) Density(kg/m3)
EGlass 72.5 3500 2630
SGlass 88 4600 2490
AS4Carbon 245 4000 1800
IM7Carbon 317 4900 1744
Kevlar29 64 2860 1440
Kevlar49 124 3650 1440
Boron 400 3620 2574

2015

Table3:Mechanicalpropertiesofcommonlyusedpolymerresins[5]
Resin TensileModulus(GPa) TensileStrength(MPa) Density(kg/m3)
Epoxy 3.5 45 1200
Polycarbonate 2.7 77 1200
Polyethylene 0.7 33 950
Polyurethane 0.025 30 1200
PolyvinylChloride 1.5 60 1400
Table4:Mechanicalpropertiesofcommonlyusedfiberreinforcedpolymercompositematerials
2015

11. FOURPOINTBENDINGOFASANDWICHCOMPOSITEUSINGFEMAPANDNXNASTRAN
Inthissection,thesimulationoffourpointbendingtest(ASTMStandardD7249)ofasandwichcompositeispresented.A
detailedhandcalculationispresentedtoobtaintheplylevelstressesandstrains.Thesimulationresultsarealso
comparedwithexperimentaldataandhandcalculation.
Thegeometryandloadingconfigurationofthefourpointbendspecimenareshownbelow.Table5providestheapplied
loadandthespecimengeometryusedinthefourpointbendtest.
Carbon/epoxy Honeycomb
facesheet P/2 P/2 core
(SL)/2 L (SL)/2 b
tf
tc t
tf
S
0/90/0/90/Core/90/0/90/0

Table5:Geometryandloadingconfigurationofthefourpointbendspecimen
Parameter Symbol Value
Load P 900.9lbf
SupportSpan S 22in.
LoadSpan L 4in.
BeamWidth b 3in.
BeamThickness t 1in.
FacesheetThickness tf 0.02in.
CoreThickness tc 0.96in.
IndividualPlyThickness tply 0.005in.
2015

11.1 HANDCALCULATION
Wewillfirstshowthehandcalculationsforabasiclaminatewhichwillprovideagoodfoundationforsandwich
composites.Forsandwichcomposites,theconceptandtheequationsaresimilarexceptthatwehavetoaccountfor
facesheetoffsetfromthemidplaneduetothecorethickness.
11.1.1 BASICLAMINATE
Consideraneightplycompositelaminatewith[0/90/0/90]slayupconfiguration( =8).Wehaveanindividualply
thickness =0.005in.Wewillusexyzaxisnotationformaterialaxis(plylevel,localaxis)and123axisforlaminate
axis(globalaxis).Thisconventionisconsistentwiththenotationusedinthetextbook,IntroductiontoComposite
Materials,byStephenW.TsaiandH.ThomasHahn.Thistextbookwasreferredforthetheoryonflexuralloadingof
compositelaminatesandsandwichcomposites.
y x
2015

Wecancalculatethestiffnessterms foreachplybyusingthefollowingtransformation.
2 4
2 4
cos , sin
Tobetterunderstandthestiffnesstermsinmaterialcoordinatesystem,thefollowingrelationsareprovided.Here,
correspondstotheinplaneshearstress .
2015

Theaboverelationsareprovidedintermsofthecompliancematrixasshownbelow( ).

Itiseasiertocalculatethecompliancematrix( )ratherthanthestiffnessmatrix( ).Thecompliancematrixtermscan
becalculatedfromtheelasticpropertiesofaunidirectionallamina( 20.6 , 1.3 ,
0.55 , 0.326)asshownbelow.
1 1
4.85 10
20.6 10
1 1
7.69 10
1.3 10
0.326
1.58 10
20.6 10
1 1
1.82 10
0.55 10
Now,thestiffnessmatrixcanbeeasilycalculatedbyinvertingthecompliancematrix.
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
2015

Weget,
20.7 10
1.31 10
4.27 10
5.50 10
Usingtheoffaxistransformationrelations(providedearlier),wecancalculatethestiffnessterms i,j=1,2,6.
Stiffnessterm 0 90
20.7 10 1.31 10
1.31 10 20.7 10
4.27 10 4.27 10
5.50 10 5.50 10
0 0
0 0
Whenacompositelaminateissubjectedtoflexuralloading,themomentcurvaturerelationsareofinterestratherthan
forcestrainrelations(inplaneloadingcase).Themomentsandcurvaturesarerelatedbyanequivalentbendingstiffness
matrixforamultidirectionalcompositelaminate.Wecancalculatethebendingstiffnessmatrix i,j=1,2,6.Fromthe
equationwecaninferthat isdependentonthestackingsequence.
2
1
3

2015

Weget,
0 78.2 2.28 0
0 2.28 39.4 0
0 0 0 0 2.93
Wecancalculatethebendingcompliancematrixbyinvertingthebendingstiffnessmatrix .
0 1.28 10 7.40 10 0
0 7.40 10 2.54 10 0
0 0 0 0 3.41 10
Both and matricesarecomparedwiththevaluescomputedbyFemapandtheywerematchingquitewell.One
canalwaysverifytheirhandcalculationswiththecomputedvaluesfromFemaptodebuganyerrors.Asnapshotofthe
layupconfigurationinputtoFemapisshownbelow.
2015

Thecomputed and matricesfromFemaparecomparedwiththehandcalculations(shownbelow).
MatrixTerms HandCalculation Femap
78.2 78.2
BendingStiffnessMatrix 39.4 39.4

2.28 2.28
2.93 2.94
1.28 10 1.28 10
BendingCompliance 2.54 10 2.54 10
Matrix
7.40 10 7.40 10
3.41 10 3.40 10
Next,wewouldliketoanalyzeplylevelstressesfortheloadingconfigurationshownbelow.Themomentappliedhereis
derivedfromafourpointbendingloadconfigurationwithatotalloadof2lbf.Fromthebendingmomentdiagram,the
momentathalfthelengthofthespecimenis9lbfin.Theplylevelstressevaluationinhandcalculationdoesnotaccount
forthelengthofthespecimen.However,themomentappliedattheendwillbeusedincalculatingthestresses.
1lbf 1lbf
L=11in.
9in. 4in. 9in. M=9lbfin.

2015

Inordertocalculatetheplylevelstressesandstrains,weneedtocalculatethecurvaturesusingthemomentsand .
Fromcurvatures,wecancalculatethestrainsandthenstressesfromstrains.Themomentcurvaturerelationisshown
below.Herethemoment isdefinedasthemomentperunitwidth.
Theaboverelationcanbeexpressedintermsofcomplianceasshownbelow([ ]=[ ]1)
Inourexample,wehave = / , =0and =0. isthetotalmoment.Weknowthemomentsandwecan

calculatethecurvaturesasshownbelow.
1.28 10 7.40 10 0 /
7.40 10 2.54 10 0 0
0 0 3.41 10 0
Themomentis 9lbfin.andthewidthofthespecimenis 3in.
1.28 10 7.40 10 0 3 3.84 10
7.40 10 2.54 10 0 0 2.22 10
0 0 3.41 10 0 0
Wecancalculatestrainsfromcurvatures.
Here, correspondstothedistancefromthemidplaneofthelaminatelayuptomidplaneofaply.
Forthetopmostply(0ply), =0.0175in.Thestrainsinthe0plyareshownbelow.
2015

3.84 10 6.72 10
0.0175 2.22 10 3.89 10
0 0
Wecancalculatestressesinthisplyusingthefollowingrelation.
20.7 10 4.27 10 0 6.72 10
4.27 10 1.31 10 0 3.89 10
0 0 5.50 10 0
13.9
0.24
0
Thestressescomputedaboveareforthetopplyandweseecompressivestresses.Followingtheaboveprocedure,we
cancalculatethestressesinalltheotherplies.Thedisplacementforthisloadingconfigurationiscalculatedasshown
below.

2 2
Fromhandcalculations,thedisplacementwas2.3in.

2015

Table6providestheplylevelstressesfromhandcalculations.
Table6:Plylevelstressescomputedfromtheclassicallaminationtheoryfora[0/90/0/90]slayup
PlyStresses(ksi) HandCalculation
13.9
Ply1
0.24
0.62
Ply2
0.37
5.97
Ply3
0.10
0.12
Ply4
0.07
2015

11.1.2 SANDWICHCOMPOSITE
Intheprevioussection,alltherequiredbasicsarediscussedforanalyzingtheflexuralbehaviorofsandwichcomposite.
Here,weareaddingacoreandseparatingthelaminatedfacesheets.Wewillshowthehandcalculationsforasandwich
compositewithlayupconfiguration[0/90/0/90/Core/90/0/90/0].Thestiffnessmatrices( i,j=1,2,6)willremainthe
sameasweareusingthesameorientations(calculatedintheprevioussectionfora[0/90/0/90]Slayup).Sincethe
stackingsequencenowincludesacore,wehavetoaccountthecorethickness(facesheetseparation)inthebending
stiffnessmatrix( )calculation.
Whenwehaveacoreinthelayup,itistreatedasanequivalentnumberofplies.Accordingly,thelimitsonthe
summationinthebendingstiffnessmatrix[ ]aremodifiedasshownbelow.
2
1
3
Here, isthetotalnumberofequivalentpliesinthesandwichcompositeand isthenumberofequivalentpliesina

core.Inourexample,wehaveatotalthicknessof1in.forthesandwichcompositeand0.96in.forthecore.Wehavean
individualplythickness =0.005in.So, =1/0.005=200and =0.96/0.005=192.Intheaboveequation, istheply
numberandrangesfrom97to100.Wecanalsoseethatthebendingstiffnessmatrixaccountsforthestiffnessofthe
facesheetonly.
Substituting of0and90pliesfromtheprevioussection,weget,
0 1.07 10 4.10 10 0
0 4.10 10 1.05 10 0
0 0 0 0 5.28 10

2015

Wecancalculatethebendingcompliancematrixbyinvertingthebendingstiffnessmatrix .
0 9.37 10 3.66 10 0
0 3.66 10 9.54 10 0
0 0 0 0 1.89 10
Similartotheprevioussection,wewouldliketoverifythehandcalculationswiththeFemapcomputedvalues.Thelayup
configurationinputtoFemapisshownbelow.
2015

Thecomputed and matricesfromFemaparecomparedwiththehandcalculations(shownbelow).
MatrixTerms HandCalculation Femap
1.07 10 1.07 10
BendingStiffnessMatrix 1.05 10 1.05 10

4.10 10 4.10 10
5.28 10 5.30 10
9.37 10 9.37 10
BendingCompliance 9.54 10 9.54 10
Matrix
3.66 10 3.66 10
1.89 10 1.89 10
Next,wewouldliketoanalyzeplylevelstressesfortheloadingconfigurationshownbelow.Themomentappliedhereis
derivedfromafourpointbendingloadconfigurationwithatotalloadof900.9lbf.Fromthebendingmomentdiagram,
themomentathalfthelengthofthespecimenis4054lbfin.
450.45lbf 450.45lbf
L=11in.
9in. 4in. 9in. M=4054.05lbfin.

2015

Themomentcurvaturerelationisshownbelow.Herethemoment isdefinedasthemomentperunitwidth.
Theaboverelationcanbeexpressedintermsofcomplianceasshownbelow([ ]=[ ]1)
Inourexample,wehave = / , =0and =0. isthetotalmoment.Weknowthemomentsandwecan

calculatethecurvaturesasshownbelow.
9.37 10 3.66 10 0 /
3.66 10 9.54 10 0 0
0 0 1.89 10 0
Themomentis 4054lbfin.andthewidthofthespecimenis 3in.
9.37 10 3.66 10 0 1351.35 1.27 10
3.66 10 9.54 10 0 0 4.95 10
0 0 1.89 10 0 0
Wecancalculatestrainsfromcurvatures.
Here, correspondstothedistancefromthemidplaneofthesandwichcompositetomidplaneofthecorrespondingply
layer.

2015

Forthetopmostply(0ply), =0.4975in.Thestrainsinthe0plyareshownbelow.
1.27 10 6.30 10
0.4975 4.95 10 2.46 10
0 0
Wecancalculatestressesinthisplyusingthefollowingrelation.
20.7 10 4.27 10 0 6.30 10
4.27 10 1.31 10 0 2.46 10
0 0 5.50 10 0
131
2.37
0
Sinceitisthetopmostply,thestressesarecompressive.Similarly,wecancalculatethestressesinotherpliesby
changingthedistance andalsoaccountingforoffaxistoonaxistransformation.

2015

Table7providestheplylevelstressesfromhandcalculations.
Table7:Plylevelstressescomputedfromtheclassicallaminationtheoryfora[0/90/0/90/Core/90/0/90/0]layup
PlyStresses(ksi) HandCalculation
131
Ply1
2.37
8.06
Ply2
2.39
128
Ply3
2.32
7.90
Ply4
2.34
Forthefourpointbendingproblem,thedeflection .Here, canbeexpressedas (refertothe

textbook)
3
2 0.6 .
48

2015

11.2 FINITEELEMENTSIMULATION
Ahalfsymmetricmodelofthefourpointbendingspecimenwasusedinthefiniteelementsimulation.Itisimportantto
notethishalfsymmetryapproachwillnotbeapplicablewhenwehaveplyorientationanglesotherthan0and90.The
sandwichcompositeismodeledusinglaminateplateelements(procedurediscussedinsection6.6method1).The
screenshotsofthematerialpropertiesusedforthefacesheetandthecoreareprovidedbelow.Imperialunitsystemwas
usedforthisexample.Theclassicallaminationtheoryassumesthelaminatedplateisnonsheardeformable.Accordingly,
thetransverseshearmoduliofthecorearesettoahighvalue.
2015

Ascreenshotofthelayupconfigurationusedinthefiniteelementmodelisshownbelow.

Theboundaryconditionsusedinthefiniteelementmodelareshownbelow.

2015

Therequiredload(P/2=450.45lbf)wasappliedonthenodesusingacombinationofGAPelementsandRBE2sasshown
below.Thisprocedureallowsforabetterdistributionofloadsonthenodes.Anewsetofnodeshavebeencreatedby
duplicatingandoffsettingthenodesalongtheloadingregionbyafinitedistance(here0.1in.).Thesenewsetofnodes
areconnectedtothecorrespondingnodesontheloadingregionusingGAPelements.TheGAPelementproperties(i.e.,
compressionstiffnessisadjustedinanincreasingfashionuntilthereisaminimalchange(~0.01%)intheforces
distributedonthenodes.AsnapshotoftheGAPelementpropertiesisshownbelow.
2015

Theloadapplicationprocedureisillustratedbelow.Thefreebodydiagramshowsthenodalforcedistribution.Onecan
manuallycalculatetheforceateachnode(accountingfordifferenceinthecontributionofforceatendnodesandmid
nodes) and compare them with the values obtained using the GAP elements. The latter procedure will give a more
gradualdistributionofforcesascomparedtotheformercase.Anonlinearstaticanalysisisusedinthiscase(withGAP
elements).Thisprocedureisusedasaninitialsteptogettheloaddistributionateachnode.GAPelementsarenonlinear
elementsandwillinvolvestiffnessupdatesduringtheanalysisdependingontheGAPstatus(i.e.,openorclosed).These
GAPstiffnessupdateswillmodifytheglobalstiffnessmatrix.
2015

InthisexampleGAPelementsareusedonlytogettheloaddistributiononthenodes.Alinearstaticanalysisisperformed
withthenodalforcesobtainedfromanonlinearstaticanalysis.Inthiscase,noGAPelementsareusedandtheforcesare
directlyappliedonthenodes.
Fromthefiniteelementsimulation,themaximumdisplacementinthesandwichcompositeunderfourpointbendingis
0.6in.

2015

Themaximumtensilestressinthebottomply(0ply1)is131ksi.

Animportantnoteonpostprocessingthesimulationresultsforoffaxisplies(otherthan0forexample90,45etc.)is
thatNXNastranprintsoutstressesinthefiberandmaterialdirectionsandnottheelementcoordinatesystem(aswith
anisotropicmaterial).Wecancheckthisbyprintingthestressesinthe.fo6file.

2015

Asnapshotofthestressesprintedinthe.fo6fileisshownbelow.

NoticethatNormal1andNormal2conventionisusedunlikeNormalXandNormalY.However,whilepostprocessing
FemapusesthesestressesandstoresthemintheoutputvectorLamPlyXNormalStressandLamPlyYNormalStress.
AlthoughFemapcallsitXNormalStressandYNormalStress,theycorrespondtoNormal1andNormal2respectively.
This implies that Lam Ply X Normal Stress is in the ply fiber direction and Lam Ply Y Normal Stress is in the ply matrix
direction(transversedirection).Ifoneiscomparingwiththehandcalculations,thesestresseshavetobetransformedas
hand calculations correspond to global X and Y directions (or 0 angle for the entire laminate as specified in the
propertycard).Inthisexamplethematerialangle(specifiedonelementpropertycard)isintheglobalXdirection(shown
below).
2015

Sinceply1is0(inthisexample),notransformationisrequired.Ply2is90andrequirestransformation.Accordingly,the
stressescanbetransformedtoglobalXandYasshownbelow.Thesetransformationshavetobeusedcarefullyasthey
would significantly change the results. Another option is to transform the stresses in the hand calculations to the ply
orientationangle(notransformationinFemapisrequiredinthatcase).
2015

11.3 SUMMARYOFRESULTS
Fromthefourpointbendingexperimentaltesting,themaximumdeflectionfortheappliedloadwas0.85in.Fromthe
finiteelementsimulationandhandcalculations,thecalculateddisplacementsforthe[0/90/0/90/Core/90/0/90/0]layup
were0.6in.each.Itshouldbenotedthatthethicknessofeachplyusedinhandcalculationsandfiniteelement
simulationwas0.005in.Accordingly,thesandwichintoanequivalentnumberofpliesgivingaroundnumberforthe
handcalculation.Ifanactualthicknessfromtheexperimentwasused,adeflectionwithin10%differencefromthe
experimentalvaluecouldbeobtained.
Thestressescalculatedusingthefiniteelementsimulationandhandcalculationsareshownbelow.Thefiniteelement
simulationwasrepeatedfor[0/45/0/45/Core/45/0/45/0]usingafullmodel(nosymmetrydueto45plies)andthe
stressesarecomparedwithhandcalculations.Itshouldbenotedthattheclassicallaminationtheorydoesnotaccount
forplylevelstressdistributioninthespecimenwidthdirection.Whena[0/90/0/90/Core/90/0/90/0]wasused,the
stressesareuniforminthewidthdirection.However,fora[0/45/0/45/Core/45/0/45/0]layup,thestressesvaryinthe
widthdirectionduetotheoffaxisplies.Asaresult,thesimulatedstressesdeviatefromthehandcalculationswhen
actualspecimenwidthsareusedinthefiniteelementmodel.Toreducethiseffect,aninfinitesimallythinwidthspecimen
hastobemodeledwhenoffaxispliesareusedsuchthatthemodelconformstotheclassicallaminationtheory
assumptionsandsodoestheplylevelstresses.

2015

Table8providesthecomparisonoftheplylevelstressescomputedusinghandcalculationsandfiniteelement
simulations.
Table8:ComparisonofplylevelstressesbetweenhandcalculationsandFEAresults
0/90/0/90/Core/90/0/90/0 0/45/0/45/Core/45/0/45/0
Finite Finite
Ply Hand Difference Hand Difference
Element Element
Calculation (%) Calculation (%)
Analysis Analysis**
(ksi) 131 131 0 124 124 0
Ply1
(ksi) 2.37 2.38 0.4 3.26 3.26 0
(ksi) 2.39 2.40* 0.4 16.5 16.5* 0
Ply2
(ksi) 8.06 8.10* 0.5 1.38 1.39* 0.7
(ksi) 128 129 0.8 121 121 0
Ply3
(ksi) 2.32 2.33 0.4 3.20 3.20 0
(ksi) 2.34 2.36* 0.8 16.6 16.7* 0.6
Ply4
(ksi) 7.90 7.94* 0.5 1.34 1.33* 0.7
*TransformedstressesintofiberandmatrixdirectionstobeconsistentwithFemapoutputvectors
**FEAresultsforthislayuparebasedonalaminatewiththinwidth(0.1in.)

Note:ASTMStandardD7249isoftenusedforevaluatingtheflexuralbehaviorofsandwichcomposites.Thisstandard
providesequationsforcalculatingthestressesinthefacesheetcorrespondingtoamaximumload.However,itshouldbe
notedthatthestandardisnotidealforcalculatingstressesinthefacesheetwithdifferentplyorientations.Rather,the
standardisapplicableforfacesheetswithunidirectionalplyorientationandhomogeneousfacesheets(e.g.aluminum).

2015

12. ADDENDUM
Inthissection,theexamplespresentedinthewhitepaperwiththeNXNastranSolverarereplicatedusingtheLSDYNA
solver.FemapisthepreprocessorhoweversomemodificationsweredoneinLSPrePostforTSHELL(LSDYNAslayered
solid)elements.ThefollowingisthesummaryofresultsusingtheLSDYNAsolver.Abriefcomparisonoftheresultswas
alsopresentedtounderstandtheapplicabilityofboththesolvers.
12.1 EXAMPLE1(2DLAMINATEWITHAHOLE)
12.1.1 DISPLACEMENTCONTOUR

LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:Displacementplotsmatchquitewell
2015

12.1.2 MAJORPRINCIPALSTRESSINPLY4(0)
LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:MajorPrincipalStressplotsmatchwell.Inordertoanalyzeplylevelstresses,thenumberofintegrationpoints
(plies)inthelaminatehastobeenteredinDATABASE_EXTENT_BINARY(MAXINT=8forthisexample).

2015

12.1.3 UNSYMMETRICLAMINATE

LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:Theoutofplanedeformationsobservedfromboththesolversaresimilar.Althoughthisexampleusesshell
elements,whenmodelinganunsymmetriclaminateinLSDYNA,themoduliandPoissonsratioindirection3(outof
plane)shouldalsobeentered.Otherwise,erroneousresultscanbeencountered.Thereasoningbehindtheoutofplane
deformationsobservedinanunsymmetriclaminatedespitetheuniaxialloadisdetailedintheAppendix.

2015

12.2 EXAMPLE2(3DLAMINATEWITHAHOLE)

LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:Displacementplotsmatchquitewell

2015

12.2.2 MAJORPRINCIPALSTRESSINPLY4(0)

LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:Thecontourofthemajorprincipalstressforply4lookssimilarbetweenLSDYNAandNXNastran.However,the
resultsdeviate(maxresultvariesby~19%).TheLSDYNAresultwithTSHELL(thickshell)wasobservedtobesimilarto
shellformulation(example1).

2015

12.2.3 3DSOLIDLAMINATEWITHONEELEMENTFOREACHLAYERTHROUGHTHICKNESS

Remark:Here,onesolidelementforeachplyisexplicitlydefinedasshownabove.Thisisacomputationallyexpensive
procedurewhichisparticularlysignificantwhenmodelingcompositelaminateswithseverallayers(e.g.,>50).Thisledto
thedevelopmentofaTSHELLelement(discussedpreviously)usingwhichallthepliescouldbedefinedinasingle
elementlayerthroughthelaminatethickness.

2015

Displacement
contour
MajorPrincipal
StressinPly4(0)

LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:Forthisexample,thedisplacementandstressplotsaresimilarbetweentheregularsolidelementandNX
NastransLaminateSolidelement.

2015

12.3 EXAMPLE3(3DSANDWICHCOMPOSITE)

LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:Displacementplotsmatchwell

2015

12.3.2 TRANSVERSESHEARSTRESS(ZX)INCORE
LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:Thetransverseshearstressplotsonthecorelooksimilarhowevertheyvaryby~10%.

2015

12.4 EXAMPLE4(2DLAMINATEWITHFAILURE)
12.4.1 LAMINATEFAILURE

LSDYNA NXNASTRAN
Remark:Thefailureregionpredictedbyboththesolversissimilar.InLSDYNAaflag=1impliesnofailureandflag=0
impliescompletefailure.Weseethatintheregionsotherthanred,failurehasinitiatedinsomeplies.Theminimalvalue
isnotzeroimplyingthattheelementdidnotfailcompletely.Thismeansthatinsomeplies,forthesameelement,failure
didnotoccur.Forplylevelfailures,LSDYNAcanexplicitlyspecifythemodeoffailurewhereasinNXNastranwesawthat
itonlyindicatesifaplyhasfailedornot(butnotthefailuremode).Inordertoanalyzeplylevelfailures(failuremodes),
additionalhistoryvariablesneedtoberequestedinadditiontospecifyingthetotalnumberofintegrationpoints.The
NEIPSparameterinDATABASE_EXTENT_BINARYissetto6forthisexample.Theoutputvectorcorrespondingtoeachof
thesehistoryvariablesislistedintheLSDYNAmanuals.Forthisexample,wehaveusedMAT_54asourmaterialmodel.
Historyvariable5(forMAT_54)givesthelaminatefailureindex.
2015

12.4.2 FAILUREINLONGITUDINALTENSION

Remark:Ply4andPly5(0)havepartiallyfailedinlongitudinaltension.Thisisoutputusinghistoryvariable1.
Noneoftheplieshavefailedinlongitudinalcompression(historyvariable2).

2015

12.4.3 FAILUREINTRANSVERSETENSION

Remark:Plies1,8(45)andPlies3,6(45)havepartiallyfailedintransversetension.Thisisoutputusinghistoryvariable
3.
Noneoftheplieshavefailedintransversecompression(historyvariable4).

2015

13. APPENDIX
13.1 CLASSICALLAMINATIONTHEORY
Theclassicallaminationtheory(CLT)issimilartotheclassicalplatetheory(CPT),theonlydifferenceisthatCPTassumes
thatthematerialisisotropic,whiletheCLTisanextensiontofiberreinforcedcompositelaminateswithmultiplelayers
resultingincomplicatedstressstrainrelations[6].SimilartotheEulerBernoullibeamtheoryandtheplatetheory,the
CLTisonlyvalidforthinlaminates(spanandwidth>10thinckness)withsmalldisplacementsinthetransversedirection.
ThefourcornerstonesoftheCLTarethekinematic,constitutive,forceresultant,andequilibriumequations.
13.1.1 KINEMATICEQUATIONS

Here,u0,v0,andw0arethedisplacementsofthemiddleplaneinthex,y,andzdirections.Similarly,x0,y0,andxy0are
themidplanestrains,andx,y,andxyarethecurvatures.
13.1.2 CONSTITUTIVEEQUATIONS

th
wherethesubscriptkindicatesthek layercountingfromthetopofthelaminate.
2015

13.1.3 RESULTANTS

Thetermsonthelefthandsideareforceandmomentresultants.
13.1.4 EQUILIBRIUMEQUATIONS

13.1.5 STIFFNESSMATRICESA,B,ANDD
The relations between the resultants (forces N and moments M) and the strains (strains and curvatures ) are of
interest in composite laminates. By replacing the stresses in the force and moment resultants with strains via the
constitutiveequations,wehave
2015

Byapplyingthesummationandintegrationoperationstotheirrespectivecomponents,theforceandmomentresultants
canbeexpressedas,

Theaboveequationscanbeexpressedas,

whereAiscalledtheextensionalstiffness,Biscalledthecouplingstiffness,andDiscalledthebendingstiffnessofthe
laminate.Thecomponentsofthesethreestiffnessmatricesaredefinedasfollows:
2015

Heretkisthethicknessofthekthlayerand isthedistancefromthemidplanetothecentroidofthekthlayer.
13.2 UNSYMMETRICLAYUP
Fromtheclassicallaminationtheory,wehavethefollowingrelationbetweenforce/momentresultants,andthestrains
andcurvatures.

Forexampleconsideronlytheaxialforcecomponent .Wehave,
2
Foranisotropicmaterial,wehaveonly and .Theremainingcomponents , , ,and areallzero.Thus,
theaxialforcecomponentinanisotropicmaterialisrelatedtoinplanestrainsonly.However,forcompositelaminates,
2015

thecomponents , , ,and canexistandwillinfluencethedeformationbehavior.Thecomputeoptionin

layupeditorcanbehandyincheckingthesecomponents.
ForthesymmetriclaminateinExample1,thefollowinginformationisobtainedwhenthecomputeoptionisselected.
WecanseethatallthecomponentsintheBmatrix(couplingstiffnessmatrix)arezero.Thus,wedonotseeanyoutof
planedeformationinthesymmetriclaminatecase.
A Matrix
9.48215E+7 3.01204E+7 0.00000E+0
3.01204E+7 9.48215E+7 0.00000E+0
0.00000E+0 0.00000E+0 3.23506E+7
B Matrix
0.00000E+0 0.00000E+0 0.00000E+0
0.00000E+0 0.00000E+0 0.00000E+0
0.00000E+0 0.00000E+0 0.00000E+0
D Matrix
1.09875E+1 8.07952E+0 5.17406E+0
8.07952E+0 2.34052E+1 5.17406E+0
5.17406E+0 5.17406E+0 8.53069E+0
Similarly,fortheunsymmetriclaminate,
A Matrix
9.48215E+7 3.01204E+7 0.00000E+0
3.01204E+7 9.48215E+7 0.00000E+0
0.00000E+0 0.00000E+0 3.23506E+7
B Matrix
-1.3176E+4 2.54946E+3 5.31327E+3
2.54946E+3 8.07707E+3 5.31327E+3
5.31327E+3 5.31327E+3 2.54946E+3
D Matrix
2.12521E+1 6.09339E+0 1.03481E+0
6.09339E+0 1.71129E+1 1.03481E+0
1.03481E+0 1.03481E+0 6.54455E+0
Now, we see that the B matrix has finite values and as a result, we see outofplane deformation in the unsymmetric
laminate case. This information is quite useful in designing unsymmetric laminates, by tailoring the layup orientation
anglestoretainrequiredmatrixcomponents(ABDmatrices)only.

2015

13.3 CHAMISMODEL

13.4 ONSETFAILURETHEORY
Theonsettheory[79]assumesthatthecriticaleffectivepropertiesofthelaminathatcontroldamageinitiationarethe
effective volumetric and equivalent strains of the lamina. Both the volumetric strain and the equivalent strain of the
lamina are defined using strain invariants. The volumetric strain (critical dilatational strain invariant) is defined by the
first invariant of the strain and the equivalent strain (critical distortional strain invariant) is a function of the second
invariantofthestrain.Thestraininvariantsarefunctionsofthreeprincipalstrains.Thevolumetricstrainisgivenby,

1
Where,

2015

1,2,and3arethethreeprincipalstrains
J1,J2,andJ3aretheinvariantsofthestraintensor

Thesignificantcomponentofthevolumetricstrainisthefirstinvariantofstraintensor.Thereducedformofvolumetric
strainisgivenby,
2
Theequivalentstrain(distortionalstraininvariant,changeinshape)isgivenby,
3
2
Fordetailsontheimplementationoftheonsettheory,itisrecommendedtoreadthereferences[79].
REFERENCES
1. H. Altenbach, J. Altenbach, and W. Kissing, Mechanics of Composite Structural Elements, SpringerVerlag Berlin
Heidelberg,NewYork,2004.
2. http://structuralmechanics.com/about/resources/newsletter/articles/youpullittwiststailoredcomposites/
3. R. Seemann and D. Krause, Numerical Modeling of Nomex Honeycomb Cores for Detailed Analyses of Sandwich
PanelJoints,11thWorldCongressonComputationalMechanics,pp.112,Barcelona,Spain,July2025,2014.
4. http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/polymercompositefibersd_1226.html
5. http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/materialsscienceandengineering/311mechanicsofmaterialsfall
1999/modules/props.pdf
6. http://www.efunda.com/formulae/solid_mechanics/composites/comp_laminate.cfm
2015

7. J. Gosse and S. Christensen, Strain Invariant Failure Criteria for Polymers in Composite Materials, 42nd AIAA
Structures,StructuralDynamics,andMaterialsConferenceandExhibit,Seattle,WA,pp.111,2001.
8. L.HartSmith,MechanisticFailureCriteriaforCarbonandGlassFibersEmbeddedinPolymersinPolymerMatrices,
42ndAIAAStructures,StructuralDynamics,andMaterialsConferenceandExhibit,Seattle,WA,pp.111,2001.
9. S. McNaught, Implementation of the Strain Invariant Failure Theory for Failure of Composite Materials, Thesis,
October2009.
10.S.TsaiandH.Hahn,IntroductiontoCompositeMaterials,TechnomicPublishingCompany,Westport,Connecticut,
1980.

Equivalentlaminatemodelsareusefulwhenonlydisplacements,bucklingloadsandmodes,orvibrationfrequenciesand
modesarerequired(Barberobook).


Composite Modeling Handbook For Femap NX Nastran and Ls-Dyna 2015 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

Composite Modeling Handbook For Femap NX Nastran and Ls-Dyna 2015 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CompositeLaminateModeling

Constituent EL(GPa) ET(GPa) G(GPa) Vf(%)

Carbonfiber 220 22 0.15 25 56

Epoxyresin 3.3 3.3 0.37 1.2

Carbon/epoxylamina EL(GPa) ET(GPa) GLT(GPa) LT

Ruleofmixtures 125 7.4 2.6 0.25

Chamismodel 125 9.1 4.2 0.25

Experimental[1] 125 9.1 5 0.34

Wewill usetheproceduredetailedinsection3.5.1(Definingamaterialangleontheelement)to updatethematerial

Property Unit T800S/39002

Thecomputed and matricesfromFemaparecomparedwiththehandcalculations(shownbelow).

MatrixTerms HandCalculation Femap

BendingStiffnessMatrix 39.4 39.4

9in. 4in. 9in. M=9lbfin.

Theaboverelationcanbeexpressedintermsofcomplianceasshownbelow([ ]=[ ]1)

Inourexample,wehave = / , =0and =0. isthetotalmoment.Weknowthemomentsandwecan

Here, isthetotalnumberofequivalentpliesinthesandwichcompositeand isthenumberofequivalentpliesina

Thecomputed and matricesfromFemaparecomparedwiththehandcalculations(shownbelow).

MatrixTerms HandCalculation Femap

BendingStiffnessMatrix 1.05 10 1.05 10

9in. 4in. 9in. M=4054.05lbfin.

Theaboverelationcanbeexpressedintermsofcomplianceasshownbelow([ ]=[ ]1)

Inourexample,wehave = / , =0and =0. isthetotalmoment.Weknowthemomentsandwecan

Forthefourpointbendingproblem,thedeflection .Here, canbeexpressedas (refertothe

thecomponents , , ,and canexistandwillinfluencethedeformationbehavior.Thecomputeoptionin

You might also like