You are on page 1of 2


Hannes Koerber 1, Pedro P. Camanho 1
DEMEGI, Faculdade de Engenharia, Universidade do Porto
Rua Dr. Roberto Frias, 4200-465 Porto, Portugall

KEYWORDS: Failure Criteria, Progressive Damage Modelling, Bolted Composite Joints

Recently, a continuum based progressive damage model for fiber-reinforced composites
became available in the commercial finite element code ABAQUS. The implemented model
uses the Hashin damage initiation criteria [1,2] and damage evolution is based on the work of
Matzenmiller [3] and Camanho and Davila [4]. The “ABAQUS damage model” provides a
simple tool for structural analysts and designers since the Hashin criteria is very popular and
widely used in the industry. However, studies have shown that the prediction of damage
onset is not always correct, especially in the case of fiber and matrix compression [5,6].
Furthermore, a linear type material degradation law is applied, originally proposed for the
cohesive zone model described in reference [4]. This approach may lead to load over-
prediction for damage modes with high amounts of dissipated energy, such as the fiber
damage mode. The aim of this study is to compare the progressive damage model
implemented in ABAQUS with a model recently developed by Maimí et al. [7]. The later is
based on the LaRC04 failure criteria and uses a linear-exponential type material degradation
law. The LaRC failure criteria showed excellent agreement with test results of the World-
Wide Failure Exercise [6] and the model was implemented into an ABAQUS UMAT user
Three-dimensional finite element models for the simulation of damage in bolted composite
joints were developed. In particular a bearing failure and net-section failure test, were
selected. The LaRC04 based UMAT damage model can either be used in a 2D or 3D
formulation. Therefore the consideration of a complex 3D stress field, characteristic for
bolted joints in quasi-isotropic lay-ups can be investigated in detail. By comparison, the
ABAQUS damage model is limited to elements with plane-stress formulation. To enable a
comparison using the same finite element mesh, “continuum shell” elements where used in
the case of the ABAQUS damage model. These elements resemble a shell formulation for a
standard 8-node solid element.
Thermal residual stresses are considered in the analysis and due to the 3D formulation of the
UMAT damage model it is possible to carry out a detailed study of the influence of bolt
clamping pressure on the bearing and tensile strength of the selected specimens.
The results of the finite element models are assessed by comparing the numerical results of
both formulations with experimental data. Figure 1 shows the predicted fiber damage (in
compression ) in the 0º layer of the bearing failure model, and Figure 2 shows the predicted
bearing stress-bearing strain relation as well as the mean value of the experimentally
measured bearing strength.

000 0. J.. Lapczyk.010 0. M.020 0. Camanho.L.2007. J. Maimí.A. NASA/TM-2002-211737 5. Elsevier Science and Technology Books. P.. Matzenmiller. Mechanics of Materials. 897- 908.. 1980 3.G. Z.S. “Failure Criteria for Unidirectional Fiber Composites”. A. Failure Criteria for Unidirectional Fiber Composites.A.01. Dávila. I. J. 2004 7.. doi:10. Kaddour A. Hashin.. “A Constitutive Model for Anisotropic Damage in Fiber-Composites”.D... Mayugo... 39. Journal of Composite Materials..015 0. Hinton. 2007 ..G. Hashin.017 6.P. R. 0°.compositesa. “Fatigue Failure Criterion for Fiber Reinforced Materials”. 329-334. “A continuum damage model for composite laminates: part I.005 0. Davila.. Z. Taylor. 1973 2.1016/j. 1995 4. A.P.. “Progressive damage modelling in fiber-reinforced materials”. P. 1: Fiber compression damage in 0° layer (ABAQUS damage model) 900 800 700 bearing stress [MPa] 600 mean average 500 bearing strength (experiment) 400 300 200 100 0 0. 2: Bearing stress-bearing strain relation (ABAQUS damage model) REFERENCES 1. “Failure Criteria in Fibre-Reinforced Polymer Composites: The World-Wide Failure Exercise”.. P. C. 125-152. loading direction Fig.025 bearing strain [-] Fig. Camanho. Lubliner. 448-464. P.. Soden. Composites: Part A (2007).constitutive model”. 47.. 7. Hurtado. Mechanics of Materials. “Mixed-Mode Decohesion Finite Elements for the Simulation of Delamination in Composite Materials”. C. 20. Rotem..