Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266

www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesa

Micromechanical FE analysis of UD fibre-reinforced composites

with fibres distributed at random over the transverse cross-section
A. Wongsto, S. Li*
School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, The University of Manchester, Sackville Street, Manchester M60 1QD, UK

Received 27 July 2004; accepted 23 January 2005

Abstract
A methodology is established in this paper for the micromechanical finite element analysis of unidirectionally fibre-reinforced composites
having fibres distributed at random over the transverse cross-section, a characteristic that most UD composites in engineering applications
bear. Regular packing is often assumed in micromechanical analyses. While this simplifies the analysis greatly, it will never provide
understanding of aspects of material’s behaviour directly related to the distributions of fibres, such as clustering of fibres over the transverse
cross-section. Within the limited results available in the literature, it appears to be difficult to assess the errors due to unrealistic boundary
conditions prescribed to the representative volume element (RVE) under consideration, as a uniform displacement or traction along the
border of a regularly shaped RVE would not be realistically achievable in general. According to the St Venant’s principle, one would expect
the effects of such incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions affect only a limited zone next to the boundary. A quantitative analysis on the
effects of such incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions is provided in this paper using a numerical means. It has been found that the error
due to incorrect boundary conditions diminishes over a couple of times of the distance of fibre spacing (centre-to-centre). It is generally true
that uniformly prescribed displacement gives a short decay length than that associated with uniformly prescribed traction. Applying this to
the analysis of UD composites with fibres distributed at random over the transverse cross-section, an RVE can be introduced and analysed,
within which a sub-domain is defined appropriately distant to the boundary. The deformation and stresses obtained in this sub-domain can be
considered to be free from the effects of incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions for the RVE analysed and the results extracted only from
this sub-domain can, therefore, be considered correct representation of the behaviour of materials of this type. Examples of application of
such a procedure are shown in the paper, through which some interesting perspectives of UD composites with fibres distributed at random
over the transverse cross-section have been revealed. A significant improvement in predicted transverse Young’s modulus has been obtained
as compared with those by assuming regular packing in relation to experimental data. Rather different hardening characteristics between the
UD composites with regular and random fibre packing have been found in the plastic regime.
q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Micromechanical FE analysis

1. Introduction direction but their arrangement in the matrix over the

Unidirectional (UD) fibre-reinforced composites have
been studied probably the most extensively among all
composites in a micromechanical sense in order to
understand the behaviour and mechanical properties of
such materials so that their performances under loads can
be predicted. In most practical UD fibre-reinforced
composite materials, fibres are aligned in their longitudinal
* Corresponding author. Tel.: C44 161 306 3842; fax: C44 161 306
4537.
1359-835X/$ - see front matter q 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.01.010
transverse cross-section is usually at random. In most
micromechanical analyses of these materials, regular fibre
packing has been assumed, typically, in a square or
hexagonal layout. This offers great simplicity to the
analysis of the problem while maintaining a reasonable
extent of approximation to the reality in many aspects.
With regular packing, due to the periodicity present on the
transverse plane, symmetry conditions can be made use of
to introduce unit cells with appropriate boundary con-
ditions (displacement and/or traction). Analyses on such
idealised systems can be found in many publications, e.g.
[1–7], to name but a few. An overview has also been
provided in [8] and general unit cells have been proposed
in [8,9], where unit cells of various shapes have been
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266
unified. However, there are also aspects of the composites’
behaviour which cannot be reasonably represented with a
regular system, such as effects of fibre clustering and
contiguity as well as discrepancies between experimental
data obtained from composites having random fibre
distribution and predictions based on regular fibre packing.
A stress analysis of UD composites of randomly distributed
fibres over the transverse cross-section is of great
significance in understanding these. Through a recent
study [10], it has been found that the stress state at the
contacting point of fibres remains regular provided that
both the fibre and matrix are of finite elastic moduli,
although a high stress concentration is present. The
implication is that the behaviour of the composite, such
as the onset of any inelastic deformation, is still determined
by the local stresses rather than any non-local measure
such as stress intensity factor even in the present of fibre
contiguity. There is a lack of understanding of the effects
of random fibre distribution over the transverse cross-
section of UD composites, given the efforts made in this
respect in Refs. [11–15]. The influence of fibre packing
geometry on the transverse creep behaviour of a uni-
directional composite with regularly spaced missing fibres
from hexagonal packing was studied in [16]. Given the
regularity of the irregularities introduced, unit cells can
still be introduced precisely according to the symmetries
present, although the unit cell may involve more than one
fibre. A unit cell in the context of particulate-reinforced
composites was proposed [17], which allowed a large
degree of randomness in the distribution of the reinforce-
ments within the unit cell but periodicity was imposed in
order to obtain boundary conditions precisely for the unit
cell from translational symmetry conditions. The same can
be done in a 2D case pertinent to UD composites.
However, the periodicity introduced in both accounts
[16,17] undermines the randomness to different extents. A
representative volume element (RVE) containing randomly
distributed fibres represented by square cylinders was
analysed in [18] and compared with the results from its
counterpart with regular packing and, later, a more realistic
case [19] was considered. In such an analysis, precise
prescription of boundary conditions is no longer possible,
since there is in general no symmetry about the border of
the RVE and therefore neither displacements nor tractions
are distributed uniformly or with any other regularity along
the boundary of the RVE. The prescription of a uniform
displacement or traction as in [18,19] represents only an
approximation of some kind. The approximate nature, in
particular, in the stress distribution, has not been appro-
priately acknowledged in the literature, let alone any
assessment on accuracy of the approximation. Most
attention has been paid to the bounds of effective
properties, e.g. [20,21]. It is obvious that there is a lack
of consistent and comprehensive approach for addressing
the problem. The objective of this paper is to establish a
methodology that provides a reliable means of
1247
micromechanical analysis of UD composites with fibres
distributed at random over the transverse cross-section
using an RVE assisted with appropriate treatment and
results processing technique.
The proposed approach is based on the St Venant’s
principle, according to which the results obtained in regions
within the RVE sufficiently distant from the boundary where
incorrect boundary conditions are prescribed should be
close enough to the exact solution as if the boundary
conditions had been prescribed correctly, provided that the
forces associated with such approximate boundary con-
ditions are statically equivalent to those in the exact system.
However, the St Venant’s principle itself does not tell how
distant is sufficiently distant. In fact, it varies from problem
to problem in general and the decay length will have to be
determined in an ad hoc manner for a given type of
problems. To proceed from what has been achieved in the
literature, the following strategy has been adopted in this
paper in order to establish a systematic procedure.
A composite with regularly packed fibres is considered
first. However, some incorrect ‘unit cells’ (not complying
with the periodicity) are introduced deliberately in order to
appreciate the cause for error and magnitude of possible
errors resulting from an incorrectly prescribed boundary
condition by comparing with exact (to the accuracy of the
numerical solver, i.e. FE) solutions which can be obtained
after analyses of appropriately defined unit cells. Then,
some more ‘unit cells’ will be introduced consisting of an
array of periodic cells but with an irregularly truncated,
incomplete part of the periodic cell placed on the top of the
array to form an ‘unit cell’. Uniformly prescribed displace-
ment or traction along these borders in absence of symmetry
will not be correct any more while the forces involved
remain statically equivalent to the correct ones. By
comparing with correct results, conclusions can be reached
with regard to the possible errors due to the incorrect
boundary conditions and the decay length of the effects of
incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions.
With the outcome for the decay length from the above
described analysis as a guideline, micromechanical FE
analysis can then be performed on a UD composite with
random fibre distribution in its transverse cross-section using
a ‘unit cell’ of a domain, which should contain sufficiently
large number of fibres so that the uniformity in a statistical
sense can be assumed reasonably. The ‘unit cell’ is loaded
under uniformly prescribed displacement or traction along its
boundary, despite that the deformation and stress field
obtained in the neighbourhood of boundary are known to be
incorrect. Use the decay length obtained in the manner
described above, a sub-domain can be defined in the middle of
the ‘unit cell’ by a decay length away from the boundary.
Based on the St Venant’s principle, it is expected that the
deformation and stress field in this sub-domain give a close
approximation to the exact solution, while those from outside
of the sub-domain will be disregarded completely. The
behaviour of the composite can be obtained from that of
1248 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266
the sub-domain correctly. The present approach will guaran-
tee a correct stress analysis to be made to UD composites even
the fibres are distributed at random over the transverse cross-
section and therefore highly relevant to the move towards a
better understanding of the behaviour of such materials.
In order to illustrate the implementation of such a
procedure, analyses will have to be made on UD composites
with fibres distributed at random over the transverse cross-
section. A scheme which generates randomly distributed
circles representing fibres at a given fibre volume fraction
was devised, so that different cases could be generated for
analysis. ABAQUS CAE [22] was employed for generating
finite element meshes, performing the analyses and post-
processing the results.
2. A generalized plane-strain problem
For the presentation of the problem, the coordinate
system, x, y, and z, for a unidirectionally fibre-reinforced
composite is introduced so that the x-axis lies in the fibre
direction and the y and z-axes lie in the transverse cross-
section. A UD composite is homogeneous in the x-direction
and, therefore, it is rational to assume that the material
undergoes a uniform deformation in the x-direction
microscopically when subjected to macroscopic loads.
Owing to the homogeneity and the uniformity of the
material and its deformation in the x-direction, a two-
dimensional presentation, i.e. generalized plane-strain
problem in the y–z plane [4], can be employed to describe
such an otherwise three-dimensional problem. In this
generalised plane-strain problem, all strain components
may be present but they are all functions of y and z only, i.e.
3 Z 3ðy; zÞ (1)
where 3Z{3x, 3y, 3z, gyz, gxz, gxy}.
The displacement field for the interest of present study
can be given as
Uðx; y; zÞ Z uðy; zÞ C x30x ;
Vðx; y; zÞ Z vðy; zÞ; (2)
Wðx; y; zÞ Z wðy; zÞ
where 30x is the macroscopic longitudinal direct strain and u,
v and w are the displacements in x, y and z-directions,
respectively, in this generalised plane-strain problem.
Finite element analyses of this generalized plane-strain
problem can be carried out using a commercial code,
ABAQUS [22] with unit cells established as two-dimen-
sional entities lying in the y–z plane, i.e. perpendicular to the
fibres. The loading cases include longitudinal and transverse
tension and/or shear in this study. Loads are applied to extra
degrees of freedom f30x ; 30y ; 30z ; g0yz ; g0xz ; g0xy g, corresponding to
the macroscopic strains in the composite, introduced through
the boundary conditions. The generalized plane-strain
elements in ABAQUS are sufficient to deal with longitudi-
nal/transverse tension and transverse shear deformation
described by v, w and u0. The active extra degrees of freedom
in this problem are 30x ; 30y ; 30z and g0yz . The longitudinal shear
deformation described by out-of-plane displacement, u, is
uncoupled from v, w and u0 and, hence, can be treated
separately. However, there is not an appropriate type of
element for this anticlastic problem directly. An analogy to
the steady state heat transfer problem must be used as both
problems are governed by the same Laplace equation.
Consequently, the heat transfer elements in ABAQUS can
be used with the same meshes generated for the analysis in
the ABAQUS generalized plane-strain problem. The shear
modulus is inputted in lieu of heat conductivity and
concentrated force in lieu of concentrated heat flux. In the
output, the heat flux components should be interpreted as
negative longitudinal shear stresses and temperature as
displacement. The active extra degrees of freedom for this
analysis are g0xz and g0xy . Full details can be found in [9].
3. Effects of incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions
Unit cells from regular fibre packing systems, viz.,
square and hexagonal, as shown in Fig. 1, can be analysed
precisely. The prescription of boundary conditions and
results obtained from such analyses can be found in Li [8,9].
In order to demonstrate the effects of incorrectly prescribed
boundary conditions on the analysis made, an incomplete
cell truncated at each of the three different locations is
attached to a complete cell to form a ‘unit cell’ to be
analysed, as shown in Fig. 2. These truncations bear some
similarity to those as will be encountered inevitably when an
RVE from a UD composite with fibres distributed at random
over the cross-section is dealt with.
In the ‘unit cells’ involving an incomplete part as shown
in Fig. 2, material symmetries are maintained about three
out of four borders, viz., the bottom, left and right, but there
is no symmetry about the top border. Prescriptions of a
uniformly distributed displacement or traction along the top
border are doomed to be erroneous. However, it is the
interest of the present study as a first step to show how
wrong the solutions obtained could be. This will then lead to
a systematic approach to be presented later.
For the purpose of illustration, only the loading
conditions of uniaxial tension in the x and z directions will
be made, respectively. The boundary conditions for the ‘unit
cells’ to be analysed are listed in Table 1, where l, b and h
are the dimensions of the cell in the x, y and z directions,
respectively. 30x ; 30y ; 30z are macroscopic strains, referred to as
extra degrees of freedom as introduced in [9] for the
convenience of applying boundary conditions in terms of
macroscopic strains. Alternatively, concentrated forces Fx,
Fy and Fz can be prescribed to these extra degrees of
freedom corresponding to macroscopic stresses. Sz is the
traction component in the z-direction on the top border.
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266 1249

Fig. 1. Appropriate unit cells (a) square and (b) hexagonal fibre packing.

Assume the fibre and the matrix are both isotropic,
homogeneous and linearly elastic with mechanical proper-
ties as follows. For the matrix: EmZ1 GPa, vmZ0.3 and for
the fibre: EfZ10 GPa, vfZ0.2. The fibre volume fraction,
Vf, of both systems is 60%. The radius of the fibre can be
expressed in terms of the fibre volume fraction as
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
rffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Vf 2 3Vf
r Z 2b and b
p p
for square and hexagonal packing, respectively. At the given
fibre volume fraction, rZ0.87404b for the square unit cell
and rZ0.81338b for the hexagonal unit cell. In subsequent
analysis, both b and l will be assumed to be unity.
Among the cases analysed, Case-0 represents a correct
prediction for the given packing systems when it is under
uniformly prescribed displacement w, while Cases-1–3
contain an error due to the incorrectly prescribed boundary
conditions on the top borders of the ‘unit cells’. As a
qualitative illustration of the error, the von Mises stress
contour plots for the part corresponding to complete
periodic cell of each ‘unit cell’ for square and hexagonal
packing, respectively, were generated and are shown in
Figs. 3 and 4. The two columns of contour plots correspond
to two types of prescribed boundary conditions on the top
border, viz., uniform normal displacement and traction.
Compared with the correct solution as shown for Case-0
under prescribed displacement, i.e. Column (b) of Case-0,

Fig. 2. ‘Unit cells’ involving a truncated part (a) square and (b) hexagonal fibre packing.
1250 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266

Table 1
Displacement boundary conditions and loading

Boundary Conditions
Displacement yZ0 vZ0
zZ0 wZ0
yZb vZ b30y
Loading Point O u0 Z l30x or concentrated Fx
Top border wZ h30z or traction SzZFz/bl

results obtained from prescribed traction as given in column

(c) represent worse approximations in general than those
from prescribed uniform displacement as given in column
(b). In each of columns (b) and (c), approximation improves
from Case-1 to 3. This observation is important and its
implications will be elaborated in Section 4. It is clear that
incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions in terms of
uniform displacement or traction along a border where
material symmetry is not present could have a significant
effect on the obtained deformation and stress distribution.
Prescription of uniform traction boundary conditions along
a border is doomed to be prone to error either in presence,
viz., Case-0, column (c), or absence, viz., Case-1–3, column
(c), of a material symmetry about the border.

Fig. 4. von Mises stress contours in the regular part of the ‘unit cells’ from
hexagonal packing (a) the domain analysed, (b) under prescribed uniform
displacement and (c) under prescribed uniform traction.

To illustrate the error due to incorrectly prescribed

boundary conditions quantitatively, the effective longitudi-
nal and transverse Young’s moduli were calculated from
each case and listed in Table 2. These effective moduli were
evaluated from the ratios of applied macroscopic stresses
s0x Z Fx =A or s0z Z Fz =A, A being the area of the domain
analysed [9], and macroscopic strains obtained as the extra
degrees of freedom, 30x or 30z . In general, quantities such as

Table 2
Longitudinal and transverse Young’s moduli

Case-0 Case-1 Case-2 Case-3

Square Ex0 (GPa) 6.4033 5.5950 5.7326 6.0669
Packing (Correct)
Ez0 (GPa) 3.2952 2.5889 2.7559 3.0154
(Correct)
Hexagonal Ex0 (GPa) 6.4029 6.7146 6.4033 6.1805
packing (Correct)
Fig. 3. von Mises stress contours in the regular part of the ‘unit cells’ from Ez0 (GPa) 2.8553 3.3164 3.1250 2.6549
square packing (a) the domain analysed, (b) under prescribed uniform (Correct)
displacement and (c) under prescribed uniform traction.
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266 1251

effective elastic properties are not extremely sensitive to the the error amounts to as high as around 20% in some
exact stress distribution in the unit cell, since they represent cases. Interestingly, the improving trend from Case-1 to 3 as
some overall measures, often in a kind of average sense. compared with Case-0 is observed once again to a certain
Nevertheless, the differences are still appreciable and extent in the computed effective Young’s moduli as

Fig. 5. Arrays of periodical cell (a) square packing, (b) hexagonal packing.
1252 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266
shown in Table 2, with the only exception of Ex0 from the
hexagonal packing case, which is due to the significantly
reduction of fibre volume fraction in the ‘unit cells’
analysed as Ex0 is dominated primarily by fibre volume
fraction. The results presented in Table 2 have all been
produced under the boundary condition of prescribed
uniform displacement.
The analysis made and results obtained in this section
suggest that incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions
could have a significant effect on the accuracy of the
outcome. Using the results without appropriate treatment
could be misleading. This applies equally to the analyses
made on RVEs for UD composites with fibres distributed at
random over the transverse cross-section, such as that in
[18]. However, the magnitude of the error can be minimised,
if not effectively eliminated, after an appropriate treatment
is introduced, which will be developed in the sections to
follow.
Fig. 6. von Mises stress contours for each complete periodic cell from the square packed arrays (a) under prescribed uniform displacement, (b) under prescribed
uniform traction.
4. Decay of the effects of incorrectly prescribed
boundary conditions
Either the prescribed uniform displacement or traction
results in a force system imposed to the ‘unit cells’, which is
expected to be statically equivalent to that in exact solution
By applying the St Venant’s principle, one would expect the
effects due to incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions
decay away from the boundary where incorrect boundary
conditions are prescribed. To demonstrate this decaying
trend, periodical cells have been stacked together. On the
top, an incomplete chunk is added, as in the cases in Section
3, to form ‘unit cells’ to be analysed in this section. They
have been schematically shown in Fig. 5 for square and
hexagonal fibre packing systems, respectively. Through
such analyses, a clear trend with regard to the decaying
characteristics can be obtained, which would serve as a
guideline for subsequent development of the approach to
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266
analysis of UD composites with fibres distributed at random
over its transverse cross-section.
By applying the loads and boundary conditions in a
similar way to that for the cases in Section 3, the ‘unit cells’
constructed here can be analysed. Same as before, Case-0 in
both packing systems produce correct results under
prescribed uniform displacement in consistence with those
in Section 3.
The von Mises stress contour plots for every periodical
cell involved in Case-1–3 in those arrays are shown in
Figs. 6 and 7 for the two packing systems, respectively. The
extra incomplete part added on the top in each case is not
included in these contour plots as it represents a zone
severely affected by the boundary effects and, therefore, the
deformation and stress distribution in such an asymmetri-
cally truncated part are doomed to be incorrect and do not
represent the actual response of material. All complete cells
as shown in Figs. 6 and 7 are labelled from No. 1 to 5 for
the cells from top to bottom. The contour plots in Figs. 6(a)
and 7(a) were generated under uniformly prescribed
Fig. 7. von Mises stress contours for each complete periodic cell from the hexagonally packed arrays (a) under prescribed uniform displacement, (b) under
prescribed uniform traction.
1253
displacement on the top while those in Figs. 6(b) and 7(b)
were produced under uniformly prescribed traction on the
top. The pattern of contour plots in the column of Case-0 in
Fig. 6(a) is identical for every cell as Case-0 represents a
correct solution to the problem. Comparing the patterns in
Case-1–3 with that in Case-0, it can be observed that as the
cells locate further away from the top border where
incorrect boundary conditions are prescribed, i.e. from No.
1 to 5, the patterns of contours get closer to that in Case-0. In
fact, no noticeable difference can be spotted from cell No. 2
onwards. Relatively, it takes longer distance for the
boundary effects to decay, if a uniform traction is prescribed
on the top as is obvious in Fig. 6(b), by comparing with
Case-0 in Fig. 6(a), although disturbances settle down
eventually by No. 4 or so. The same trends repeated in Fig. 7
for hexagonal packing where arrangements of the plots have
been made in exactly the same order as that in Fig. 6.
The results shown in Section 3 suggest that the boundary
condition of uniformly prescribed displacement represents a
better approximation than that of uniformly prescribed
1254 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266

traction. In the subsequent analyses and discussion of this (a) 0.2

paper, only the prescribed displacement boundary condition 0.18 Square packing

Normalised normal traction

will be employed. 0.16
To have a quantitative assessment on the decay of the 0.14
boundary effects of the incorrectly prescribed boundary 0.12
conditions, displacements and tractions along the borders 0.1
from L1 to L5 between cells as indicated in Figs. 4 and 5
0.08
were obtained from the results of the analyses and plotted in
0.06
Figs. 8–11. In the case of square packing, the tangential and L1-L5 for Case-0
0.04 L1 for Case-1-3
normal displacements are plotted in Fig. 8(a) and (b), L2-L5 for Case 1-3
0.02
respectively, and they have been normalised with respect to
0
the corresponding displacements at right end of the same 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
y
border but obtained in Case-0 under uniform displacement
boundary condition. All the curves for border L1–L5 from (b) 0.006
Square packing
Case-0, representing correct results, are identical as 0.005

Normalised tangential traction

expected as indicated by the solid line. For Case-1–3, the 0.004 L1 of Case-1
displacements exhibit noticeable discrepancy from the 0.003
L1 of Case-2
correct distribution only at L1 (shown as long dashed
0.002
lines). Those along all other borders from L2 to L5, shown L1 of Case-3
as short dashed lines, are clustered within a tiny neighbour- 0.001
L2-L5 for all cases L1 of Case-0
hood of the correct solution, bearing in mind of the small 0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
scale for the normal displacement. The tangential and –0.001
normal tractions along the same borders are plotted in L1-L5 for Case-0
–0.002 L1 for Case-1-3
Fig. 9(a) and (b). They have been normalised with respect to L2-L5 for Case 1-3
–0.003
y
(a) 1.4
Normalised tangential displacement, v

Fig. 9. Traction along L1–L5 for different cases of square array unit cell.
1.2 Square packing

1
L1 of Case-3 the applied macroscopic stress. The trend as observed from
L1 of Case-2 the displacements as discussed above applies unanimously.
0.8 L1 of Case-1 The only tiny inconsistence is in the traction along L1 in
Case-0. As L1 was a part of the traction boundary and
0.6
tractions at the boundary can only be evaluated as accurate
0.4 as the energy minimisation, i.e. FE approximation, allows, a
L1-L5 for Case-0
L1 for Case-1-3
tiny non-vanishing distribution for L1 of Case-0 is observes
0.2 L2-L5 for Case 1-3 in Fig. 9(b). However, this is insignificant and will diminish
as the mesh refines.
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 The distributions of the same displacements and tractions
y
in the case of hexagonal packing are shown in Figs. 10 and 11.
(b) 0.025
There is a slightly different arrangement in the presentation
Normalised normal displacement, w

Square packing of the data. The results along borders L2 and L4 have been
0.02
reflexed between left and right for the ease of comparison
L1-L5 for Case-0 with those along L1, L3 and L5. The decaying trend is similar
0.015 L1 for Case-1-3 L1 of Case-1
L2-L5 for Case 1-3
to that for the square packing, in general, although the two
L1 of Case-2
packing systems are distinctly different. The sharp bends in
0.01
Fig. 10 and the discontinuities in Fig. 11(a) coincide with the
L1 of Case-3
interface between the fibre and matrix.
0.005
In all the cases as shown in Figs. 8–11, it is consistent
that differences between the results obtained with incorrect
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 boundary conditions (Cases-1–3) and those with correct
L1 - L5 of Case-0 boundary conditions (Case-0) are significant only up to
–0.005
y
border L1. In other words, the effects due to incorrectly
prescribed boundary conditions diminish over the length of
Fig. 8. Displacement along L1–L5 for different cases of square array unit a complete periodic cell, which is directly related to
cell. the centre-to-centre spacing between fibres. By the distance
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266 1255

(a) (a) 0.16

1.2 L1-L5 of Case-0
Normalised tangential displacement, v

Hexagonal packing 0.14

Normalised normal traction

1 0.12
L1 of Case-2
0.1
0.8
L1 of Case-1
0.08
L1 of Case-3 L1-L5 for Case-0
0.6
0.06 L1 for Case 1-3
L2-L5 for Case 1-3

0.4 L1-L5 for Case-0 0.04

L1 for Case 1-3
L2-L5 for Case 1-3 0.02 Hexagonal packing
0.2
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0 0.02
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 y
y
(b) 0.005 (b) 0.02
L1-L5 for Case-0
Normalised normal displacement, w

0.018 L1 for Case 1-3 Hexagonal packing

Normalised tangential traction

L1-L5 for Case-0 L2-L5 for Case 1-3
L1 of Case-3 0.016
0 L1 of Case-2
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 0.014
L2-L5 for Case-3
0.012
L1 of Case-1
–0.005
0.01
L2-L5 for Case-2
0.008
–0.01 L2-L5 for Case-1 0.006 L2-L5 for all cases
L1 of Case-1
0.004
L1-L5 for Case-0 L1 of Case-0
L1 for Case 1-3 L1 of Case-3
–0.015 L1 of Case-2 0.002
L2-L5 for Case 1-3
0
Hexagonal packing 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
0.002
–0.02 y
y

Fig. 10. Displacement along L1–L5 for different cases of hexagonal array Fig. 11. Traction along L1–L5 for different cases of hexagonal array unit
unit cell. cell.

Take a border labelled as L for example. After the complete

of a couple of times of fibre spacing, the deformation in the
model had been analysed, the distributions of displacement
inner domain is hardly affected by the incorrectly prescribed
and traction along L could be obtained from their nodal
boundary conditions. This applies to the cases where
values. Over the side of each element along the boundary, a
uniform displacements are prescribed. In the cases where
quadratic function could be interpolated for numerical
uniform tractions are prescribed, although the general trend
integration, using a Simpson’s rule for instance, in order to
holds true, the decay length would be slightly greater. In
obtain the average stress save ave
z and average strain 3z .
whichever case, the farther away from the boundary, the less
influence of the incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions.
This is why an improving tendency is observed from Case-1
ðb
to 3. The same explanation applies to the similar 1
observation in Section 3. If the results from the domain save
z Z sLz dy (3)
b 0
beyond the influence of the boundary effects are used as the
an approximation, the discrepancies between the solid
Table 3
curves (correct ones) and the clusters of the short dashed Transverse Young’s moduli
curves (corresponding to borders L2–L5) would serve as a
measure of the magnitude of possible errors left behind in Case-0 Case-1 Case-2 Case-3
such an approximation. The accuracy of the approximation Square L1 3.2879 3.2668 3.2795 3.2804
improves as the number of complete periodic cells (there are packing L2 3.2879 3.2793 3.2793 3.2824
L3 3.2879 3.2793 3.2793 3.2824
five of them in the cases analysed here but only one in the
L4 3.2879 3.2793 3.2793 3.2824
cases in Section 3) increases in general as one would expect. L5 3.2879 3.2793 3.2793 3.2824
As another quantitative assessment, the effective trans- Hexagonal L1 2.8529 2.8708 2.8657 2.8438
verse Young’s moduli have been calculated and are packing L2 2.8529 2.8697 2.8656 2.8436
presented in Table 3. They were computed in the following L3 2.8529 2.8697 2.8656 2.8436
L4 2.8529 2.8697 2.8656 2.8436
manner. The displacement and traction along the borders
L5 2.8529 2.8697 2.8656 2.8433
(L1–L5) between complete periodic cells were obtained first.
1256 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266

ðb
1 and effective properties are predicted based on the
3ave
z Z wL dy (4)
bh 0
where superscript L indicates the border under consideration
which could be any of L1–L5 in the ‘unit cells’ analysed. b is
the width of array unit cell which is equal to 1 in this study and
h is the distance from the bottom to border L. The effective
transverse Young’s modulus in the z-direction associated
with border L can be obtained from
save
z
Ez0 Z : (5)
3ave
z 5.1. Generation of random fibre distribution
In Table 3, Case-0 gives correct answer from each
concerned. For other cases, results show their convergence
from L2 onwards. It can be noticed that the converged values
tend to leave a tiny margin to the correct ones, amounting to
an error below 0.5%. These are coincident with the
discrepancies as observed in the distributions of displace-
ments and traction along those borders as mentioned earlier
in relation to Figs. 8–11. It is expected that the margin would
narrow, as the number of complete periodic cells are included
in the array of the ‘unit cells’.
From the analysis made and results obtained above, it can
be concluded that the effects of incorrectly prescribed
displacement boundary conditions take a distance of a few
times of fibre spacing to decay. Beyond the decay length, the
deformation and stress and strain fields in the composites
give a good approximation of the correct material responses,
provided that the RVE contains a sufficient number of fibres.
5. Analysis of UD composites with fibres distributed
at random over the transverse cross-section
Regularly packed fibre-matrix systems, such as square
and hexagonal, are mostly simplistic idealisations. Majority
of UD composites have fibres distributed at random over the
transverse cross-section. When carrying out a micromecha-
nical analysis on any of such materials using a regularly
shaped RVE, e.g. a square, containing sufficient number of
fibres to maintain the characteristics of the random
distribution [23], the boundary of the RVE will not coincide
with any symmetry. Along the boundary of such an RVE,
accurate prescription of boundary conditions is impossible
in general. Prescribing uniform displacements along the
boundary could be an approximation but the obtained
deformation in the neighbourhood of boundary could be
subject to a significant distortion, as demonstrated in
Sections 3 and 4 of this paper earlier. However, making
use of the outcome obtained in Section 4, it can be expected
that sufficiently accurate prediction of the deformation can
be obtained from an inner sub-domain of the RVE, provided
that inner sub-domain is sufficiently away from the external
boundary, by a couple of times of a typical fibre spacing
according to the outcome of Section 4 on the study of
decaying characteristics. If the behaviour of the composite
deformation within this sub-domain, reliable results can
be obtained, despite the fact that the analysis has been made
under incorrect boundary conditions. This approach will be
developed and illustrated in this section. It will also be
shown that noticeable errors could find their way to the
results without such a sub-domain treatment. Such a sub-
domain approach has been employed in [15]. However,
neither procedure nor justification had been provided there.
In order to facilitate analyses on UD composites having
random fibre distribution over its transverse cross-section, a
means of generating such a random distribution is desirable.
The process is equivalent to generating randomly spaced,
non-overlapping circular discs in a plane within a domain,
given the generalised plane-strain idealisation. There could
be different approaches to achieve this goal. Digitising
microscopic photographs such as that given in Fig. 12 is an
obvious one but the procedure could be costly and time
consuming. A theoretical way would be beneficial. One
possibility is to adopt a ‘coin-dropping’ or random insertion
process, avoiding any overlap by removing overlapping
ones. A process of this type was performed in [13]. While
the random nature of the obtained distribution is obvious, it
may be difficult to achieve a specified disc (fibre) volume
fraction, especially higher volume fractions. Fibre volume
fraction is often a dominant parameter in determining the
performance of the composite and a reasonable control of it
is essential. A different process was employed in [14]. An
alternative scheme is proposed as follows, which is capable
of achieving any possible volume fraction and yet main-
taining the random nature in distribution.
Starting from a set of regularly, e.g. hexagonally, packed
discs of radius R in the y–z plane as shown in Fig. 13. The
spacing between discs 2b can pffiffiffi be calculated from volume
fraction Vf as b2 Z pR2 =2 3Vf . Introduce two frames,
Frame 1 and 2, the latter being a sub-domain of the former.
The distance from the border of Frame 2 to that of Frame 1
is a few times of b, according to the conclusion reached in
Fig. 12. Random fibre distribution observed from the real composites.
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266 1257

Z the scheme outlined above, three cases have been generated

at a volume fraction of 65% as shown in Fig. 15(a–c). They
are of the similar volume fraction to that shown in Fig. 12
Frame-1 and share all the features present in Fig. 12. A further case
was generated at VfZ60% as shown in Fig. 15(d) at which
some experimental data are available [24]. It takes only
Frame-2 seconds to run on an ordinary PC in order to generate any of
these cases. Cases as generated in Fig. 15 will be meshed
and analysed in Section 5.2.

5.2. Micromechanical FE analysis

Considering the randomly distributed discs as generated

Y finite element analysis. Quadratic quadrilateral and triangu-
Fig. 13. Hexagonal packed discs at VfZ65% involving 105 discs.
Section 4. For the present analysis, it will be about 4b. These
frames do not have to be perfect squares but they both have
to contain sufficient number of discs. They have been
chosen to be square as shown in Fig. 13 for the present
study. Both frames are fixed in the plane. Then each disc
will be relocated in a random manner as illustrated in
Fig. 14. A random angle q between 0 and 3608 is generated
first to determine the direction for the disc to shift. Along
this direct, a maximum distance of shift can be found, which
is the smaller of the distance to the border of Frame 1 and
that to the point when the disc hits another, shown as r in
Fig. 14. Then a second random number k is generated
between 0 and 1 and the actual distance of shift is given as
kr. This process is performed for every disc to complete one
iteration. At least 250 iterations will be performed. After
that, a check on the volume fractions in both frames will be
made after each iteration. The iteration terminates when the
volume fractions in both frames are close enough to the
original one. In the present analysis, an allowance of 2%
was used as the criterion for terminating iteration. The
procedure can be easily programmed and, given parameters
of R, Vf and the number of discs to be involved, a set of
coordinates can be obtained as the centres of the randomly
distributed discs. As examples of the applications of
ρ
kρ θ force can be applied to the extra degree of freedom 30z . The
z applied concentrated force is related to the macroscopically
y planar area of the unit cell [9].
Fig. 14. Schematic diagram for perturbation process.
in Section 5.1 as fibres and the surrounding area is filled
with matrix, simulated transverse cross-sections of UD
composites are obtained. Frame 1 as defined in Section 5.1
will be taken as the RVE for subsequent micromechanical
lar elements were used to generate meshes. For the ease of
extracting and processing the results later, the areas inside
and outside Frame 2 are meshed individually while
maintaining the compatibility of the mesh across the border
of Frame 2. Examples of these meshes are shown in Fig. 16
for cases (a) and (d) in Fig. 15. As long as there is a gap
between two neighbouring fibres and there are at least two
elements to fill the gap. The analysis of the generalised
plane-strain problem as described in Section 2 using
ABAQUS has been established in [5]. The quadratic
triangular and quadrilateral generalized plane-strain
elements CPEG6 and CPEG8 of ABAQUS [22] were used
for the longitudinal/transverse tension and transverse shear
deformation while heat transfer elements DC2D6 and
DC2D8 were adapted for the anticlastic problem of
longitudinal shear based on an analogy to the problem of
steady state heat transfer in order to keep the analysis two-
dimensional, as ABAQUS does not have an appropriate
procedure for the analysis of such an anticlastic problem.
Detailed procedure can be found in [9].
According to what has been established in Section 4, a
uniform normal displacement was imposed along each side
of the boundary for the analyses while the boundary is
free to slide in the tangential direction. Without losing
generality while having the rigid body motions constrained,
the left-hand side boundary was constrained from displace-
ment v while the bottom boundary from displacement w.
The right-hand side boundary is free to displace in the y-
direction but only by a constant displacement a30y and the
top boundary by a30z in the z-direction, a being the side
length of Frame 1. To achieve a macroscopically uniaxial
stress state in the z-direction, for instance, a concentrated
uniaxial stress s0z and given by As0z , where AZa2 is the
The transverse shear is imposed through the boundary
conditions which are prescribed such that all four edges will
1258 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266

Z Z

Y Y

(b)
(a)

Z Z

Y Y

(c) (d)

Fig. 15. Random fibre distribution obtained after. (a) 265 iterations, Vf1 Z 65:69%, and Vf2 Z 64:17% in Frame 1 and 2 with original VfZ65%, (b) 286 iterations,
Vf1 Z 65:84% and Vf2 Z 64:26% in Frame 1 and 2 with original VfZ65%, (c) 382 iterations, Vf1 Z 66:38% and Vf2 Z 64:59% in Frame 1 and 2 with original VfZ
65%, (d) 262 iterations, Vf1 Z 61:00% and Vf2 Z 59:40% in Frame 1 and 2 with original VfZ60%.

remain straight but allowing a pattern of deformation like a
four-bar mechanism to fulfil a macroscopic pure shear state.
This was implemented in ABAQUS through a simple user
subroutine MPC (multiple point constraints). Through this
mechanism, an extra degree of freedom g0yz can be
introduced. In order to apply a microscopic shear stress of
s0yz , a concentrate force of As0yz can be prescribed to this
extra degree of freedom.
The fibre and matrix are both assumed to be isotropic and
homogeneous with elastic properties, EmZ1 GPa, nmZ0.3,
EfZ10 GPa and nfZ0.2, with subscripts f and m indicating
the phase of the constituent, for all the cases with 65% fibre
volume fraction. For the case with 60% fibre volume
fraction, material properties of both fibre and matrix are
listed in Table 5 [24].
The analyses were made on the domain Frame 1. The
results from the sub-domain Frame 2 were extracted and
considered to represent the correct responses of the material
free from the effects of incorrectly prescribe boundary
conditions along the border of Frame 1.
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266 1259

Fig. 16. Meshes for unit cells with fibres distributed at random (a) VfZ65%, (b) VfZ60%.

5.3. Results and discussion
Analyses have been carried out for all the four cases as
shown in Fig. 15. The data extraction process as described
above has been applied to each of them. The results are
presented and discussed below.
5.3.1. Deformations and stress distributions
To show the pattern of deformation and stress distri-
bution in the unit cell, a load which results in 1 MPa uniaxial
stress state in the y-direction macroscopically is applied to
the RVE, Frame 1. The results were extracted from Frame 2,
where the effects of incorrectly prescribed boundary
conditions are expected to have diminished.
The von Mises stress contour plot for one of the three
cases at 65% fibre volume fraction is shown in Fig. 17 where
only the sub-domain, Frame 2 as defined in Fig. 15(a) is
displayed while the analysis was performed on the whole
RVE, i.e. Frame 1. The contour plots were shown in a
deformed configuration with the magnitude of deformation

Fig. 17. Contours of von Mises stress in Frame 2 as a part of RVE for Case-1 under macroscopically uniaxial transverse tension.
1260 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266
Fig. 18. Frame 2 alone analysed with incorrect boundary conditions.
amplified by a constant factor of 300. The most highly
stressed areas are always found at interfaces, especially in
areas where fibres are close to each other in the direction of
loading. The distortion of the shape of fibre cross-section is
small relative to overall deformation because of the higher
stiffness than that of the matrix. The deformation is mostly
taken by the matrix although stresses in the fibres tend to
show higher levels than those in the matrix. This explains
why observed stress concentrations are so located. As a
result of deformation, the edges of Frame 2 do not remain
straight. This provides an indication how wrong it would be
if Frame 2 was analysed alone and straight edges had been
assumed in prescribing displacement boundary conditions.
In fact, a case is shown in Fig. 18 with the same deformation
magnification factor of 300, which was from the analysis
made directly on Frame 2 with uniform displacements
prescribed along the edges of Frame 2. Compared with the
more accurate analysis made on Frame 1 from which Frame
2 was extracted, as shown in Fig. 17, significant difference
can be found. The maximum von Mises stress in the
incorrect analysis is 9.879 MPa in the fibres and 4.501 MPa
in the matrix while in the more accurate analysis they are
14.371 and 10.997 MPa, respectively. Using the von Mises
criterion with a given yield stress for the matrix, the
incorrect analysis would overestimate the load for the onset
of plastic deformation in the matrix, for instance, by about
2.5 times in this particular example.
Given the erroneous analysis as shown in Fig. 18,
reasonable accuracy can still be conceived in the
sub-domain Frame 3 as indicated in Fig. 15(a). To
demonstrate this, the von Mises stress contour plots for
this same sub-domain, Frame 3, but from different analyses,
one on Frame 1 and the other on Frame 2, are shown in Fig.
19. Both plots share many common features, although the
distance between the borders of Frame 2 and 3 is not quite to
a decay length yet (at least, not as much as that between
Frame 1 and 2). The consistence in their trends reinforces
the justification made to the proposed methodology in this
paper.
5.3.2. Effective properties
As explained previously, effective properties describe the
overall behaviour and are not extremely sensitive to the
precise distributions of stresses and strains resulting from
the macroscopic load applied. However, as an important
aspect of micromechanical analysis, some results obtained
from the analyses made will be presented here.
The evaluation of the longitudinal Young’s modulus,
Ex0 , will not performed, since this would require
computation of average of stress sx over the domain of
Frame 2, which is time consuming. A relative simpler
way to work out Ex0 is from the strain energy, which is
more straightforward. However, this only produce an up
bound which is not necessarily better than other bounds.
Given the fact that this particular effective property can be
evaluated with excellent accuracy using even a crude
means, e.g. the rule of mixtures, it is not worthwhile to
pursue it further here.
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266 1261

Fig. 19. Frame 3 extracted from (a) Fig. 17 and (b) Fig. 18, both with a deformation magnification factor of 300.

In order to obtain effective transverse Young’s moduli, where y1 and yr are the y-coordinates of the left and right
for instance, that in the z-direction, the average tractions on edges and zb and zt are the z-coordinates of the bottom
the top and bottom borders of Frame 2 are found to produce and top edges of Frame 2, respectively. The effective
an average stress save ave
z and the average strain 3z is obtained Young’s modulus can be obtained from (5). The similar
from displacement w along these borders as follows procedure applies to other effective elastic properties
ð y ð yr  when the RVE is under appropriate macroscopic uniaxial
ave 1 r
top bot
sz Z s dy C sz dy (6) stress state.
2ðyr K yl Þ yl z yl The results from all three cases at 65% fibre volume
ð y ð yr  fraction (Case-1–3 as shown in Fig. 15) have been obtained
1 r
3ave
z Z top
w dy C w bot
dy : (7) and listed in Table 4 for comparison with their counterparts
ðyr K yl Þðzt K zb Þ yl yl from regular hexagonal packing. The differences between
1262 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266

Table 4
Effective properties of UD composites with regular and random fibre packing (65% fibre volume fraction)

Effective prop- Hexagonal Random packing of fibres

erties of UD packing of fibres Case-1 Case-2 Case-3
fibre-reinforced
composite Frame 1 Frame 2 Frame 1 Frame 2 Frame 1 Frame 2

Ey0 (GPa) 3.2077 3.5407 3.3794 3.5427 3.4139 3.6335 3.5419

Ez0 (GPa) 3.2077 3.5348 3.3647 3.5957 3.3046 3.5666 3.4345
G0xy (GPa) 1.2959 1.4956 1.4410 1.4913 1.4149 1.5499 1.4938
G0xz (GPa) 1.2959 1.4679 1.3415 1.4279 1.3300 1.4740 1.4169
G0yz (GPa) 1.2270 1.4984 1.4228 1.5200 1.4319 1.5773 1.5219
n0yz 0.30713 0.29750 0.29798 0.29051 0.28616 0.29969 0.28174
n0zy 0.30713 0.29700 0.30561 0.29485 0.30984 0.29417 0.27481
n0xy 0.22874 0.22496 0.22460 0.22539 0.22861 0.22375 0.22352
n0xz 0.22874 0.22507 0.22766 0.22447 0.22478 0.22489 0.22507

cases give an indication whether sufficient number of fibres n0yz n0zy

has been included in the RVE. In order to reduce these Z : (8)
Ey0 Ez0
differences, more fibres will have to be included to represent
the statistic characteristics better and consequently the cost Once all the effective properties have been obtained, the
of analysis will increase dramatically. It is believed that the transverse isotropy described by the following relationships
number of fibres included in the cases analysed are already
reasonably large, as these differences between the results Ey0 Z Ez0 ; G0xy Z G0xz ; n0xy Z n0xz ; (9)
from these cases are not excessive.
and
The differences between the effective properties
obtained directly from Frame 1 and those from Frame 2 Ey0
are purely because of the effects of use of incorrect G0yz Z (10)
2ð1 C n0yz Þ
boundary conditions for the analysis of Frame 1. The
magnitudes should give an indication of the errors of the can be checked and they have been found to be fairly
predicted effective properties if a proper treatment had not accurately observed. Better approximations in these
been performed, even though these properties are relationships are expected when a larger number of fibres
relatively insensitive to the effects of incorrect boundary are included with an increased size of the RVE to be
conditions. The appropriate treatment is to extract results analysed. Although it is well-known that the transverse
from Frame 2. The results obtained from Frame 2 are isotropy can be achieved through random distribution of
more reliable and therefore will be subjected to sub- fibres over the transverse cross-section, it is probably the
sequent discussion. first time when numerical results supporting this proposition
Compared with the results from regular hexagonal are shown, based on an analysis of really randomly
packing, the transverse Young’s moduli and shear moduli distributed fibres.
obtained in the present analysis all tend to be higher to For the case of random packing of fibres at 60% fibre
different extents. This trend is particularly relevant in volume fraction, whose constituents properties are given in
explaining the discrepancy between predictions based on Table 5 [24], the results obtained from the present analysis
regular fibre packing and experimentally measured values. are compared with those obtained by other approaches,
The random distribution of fibres tends to result in higher including experimentally measured data in Table 6 [25].
transverse Young’s modulus and transverse and longitudi- The transverse Young’s modulus, Ey0 obtained here is
nal shear moduli. The trend is seen consistently through all Table 5
the four cases analysed. The implication is that the random Constituents material properties of the composites at
distribution of fibres plays a part in exhibiting higher values
Silenka E-glass 1200 tex and epoxy UD composite
of the measured moduli than those predicted with regular
fibre packing. Matrix Young’s modulus 3.35 (GPa)
Matrix Poisson’s ratio 0.35
All analyses made in this paper are numerical in nature Fibre longitudinal Young’s modulus 74 (GPa)
and based on approximations. However, the consistency in Fibre transverse Young’s modulus 74 (GPa)
the procedures taken and results obtained are not to be Fibre longitudinal Poisson’s ratio 0.2
undermined. As an example, independently evaluated Ey0 , Fibre longitudinal shear modulus 30.8 (GPa)
Fibre transverse shear modulus 30.8 (GPa)
Ez0 , n0yz and n0zy satisfy the following relationship (symmetry
Fibre volume fraction 60%
of the compliance matrix of the composite) reasonably well
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266 1263

Table 6
Comparison of effective properties of UD composites obtained from various methods with those from the case of randomly packed fibres (60% fibre volume
fraction)

Effective properties Experimental [24] Hashin and Rosen [1] Li and Zou [25,26] McCartney [27] Present
Ex (GPa) 45.6 45.85 45.76 45.76 N/A
Ey (GPa) 16.2 9.740 (lower bound); 11.80 12.034 14.544
13.106 (upper bound)
Gxy (GPa) 5.83 4.318 4.339 4.3179 4.7186
nxy 0.278 0.2517 0.2515 0.2517 0.2447
nyz 0.4 0.3346 (lower bound); 0.4020 0.3889 0.3732
0.5055 (upper bound)
Gyz (GPa) 5.786a 3.235 (lower bound); 4.208 4.332a 4.863
4.910 (upper bound)
a
Values were worked out assuming transverse isotropy.

significantly higher than any other theoretically predicted
ones, closer to the experimental results. It should be noted
that the upper or lower bounds of Hashin and Rosen [1] are
the bound only for the fibre-matrix system which can be
represented by concentric cylinders (though called
‘random’ there) as assumed in their work and they are
not necessary to be the bounds for different systems, e.g.
that with fibres distributed at random as presented in this
paper. Results in [27] were based on a concentric cylinder
model, which is similar to that of [1] and not a precise
representation of the real physical problem. In the results
obtained here as shown in Table 6, improvements are
found for all moduli, the transverse Young’s modulus in
particular, except some slight drift away from the
experimental data in Poisson’s ratios. This is believed to
bring forward some explanations to the discrepancies in the
transverse Young’s modulus between experimental data
and almost all theoretical predictions based on regular fibre
packing.
5.3.3. Behaviour in plastic regime
The analysis of the case of 60% fibre volume fraction
was run beyond the limit of linear elasticity by assuming a
perfectly plastic behaviour for the matrix beyond elastic
limit, while the fibres were assumed to remain elastic. The
yield stress of the matrix was assumed to be syZ80 MPa
and the von Mises yield criterion was employed. The von
Mises stress contour plots is shown in Fig. 20 corresponding
to the linear elastic limit or the onset of plastic deformation,
which usually takes place at a very low load level due to the
high stress concentrations in regions where fibres become
almost contiguous. Two equivalent plastic strain contour
plots are presented in Fig. 21 at macroscopic strain levels of
0.7 and 1.5%, respectively. Fully plastic deformation

Fig. 20. Distribution of von Mises stress in Frame 2 at the onset of plastic deformation.
1264 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266

Fig. 21. (a) Equivalent plastic strain (von Mises) for Frame 2 at 0.7% overall strain applied. (b) Equivalent plastic strain (von Mises) for Frame 2 at 1.5% overall
strain applied.

establishes as the slip-lines through the matrix become more is irregular as shown in Fig. 21(a), the established slip-lines
or less interconnected. Plastic deformation localises along possesses a fairly regular pattern in Fig. 21(b).
the slip-line. Although the fibres are distributed entirely at The macroscopic stress–strain curve can also be obtained
random and indeed the plastic deformation at its early stage through such a micromechanical analysis, as shown in solid
 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266
140
120 Frame 1
100
Stress (MPa)
80 Hexagonal unit cell loaded in z-direction
Hexagonal unit cell loaded in y-direction
60
40
20 Correct results: Frame 2 extracted from Frame 1
0 mesh can be greatly distorted there. To perform the analysis
0 1 2 3
Strain (%)
Fig. 22. Macroscopic stress–strain curve.
line in Fig. 22. The data for this curve were extracted from
Frame 1 for simplicity, i.e. they contain errors due to
incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions. A stress–strain
curve could be obtained after similar treatment as performed
previously by extracting information from Frame 2.
However, it was found very time consuming, given the
great number of increments required for this nonlinear
analysis. Only two stages corresponding to the states of
deformation at the onset and full establishment of
plasticity have been processed in this way. The stresses
and strains after the treatment are presented in Fig. 22 in
blobs. In this particular aspect, the difference between data
obtained from Frame 1 and those extracted from Frame 2
does not seem to be significant.
Also included in Fig. 22 are two stress–strain curves for
the same but based on regular, hexagonal packing, shown in
dashed lines. They correspond to loading in the y and z
directions, respectively. The two curves are identical mostly
owing to the transverse isotropy the geometry possesses.
The bifurcation at early stages of plastic regime is due to the
loss of similarity between the two cases and hence loss of
the isotropy at the onset plastic deformation because of the
emergence of isolated plastic zones [28]. This is soon
superseded by consistent responses as the isotropy resumes
when the plasticity is fully developed.
From the analysis, it can be seen that, while the onset of
plastic deformation takes place as early as around 7 MPa of
the applied macroscopic stress, the state of fully plastic yield
of the composite is not established until around 110 MPa of
the applied macroscopic stress as can be seen from the
stress–strain curve as shown in Fig. 22. The latter
corresponds to a situation of full establishment of slip-
lines in the matrix.
It is interesting to notice that the composite with
regularly packed fibres tends to reproduce the elastic,
perfectly plastic behaviour as assumed for the matrix, while
noticeable strain hardening can be observed for the
composite with fibres distributed at random over
the cross-section. The random distribution of the fibres
1265
is the only reason responsible for this characteristic
difference. In fact, fibre clustering and contiguity is believed
to play a significant part in this respect. Further investigation
into this would be seen as a future development and,
therefore, will not be pursued here.
The analysis made here was based on a small
deformation assumption for the sake of simplicity, which
is probably just sufficient for the levels of deformation
involved. At higher levels of the deformation, appropriate
consideration of the effects of geometric change of the mesh
needs to be made since strain levels in local zones, where
slip-lines are developed can be significantly high and the
satisfactorily, one might have to use some kind of re-
meshing facility in these local zones. This is obviously
beyond the scope of the present paper.
The analyses in this section are only presented as
examples of application. Through them the implementation
of the methodology as proposed in this paper for analyses of
UD composites with fibres distributed at random over the
transverse cross-section has been demonstrated, in which
the effects of incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions
have been minimised if not eliminated. The results also
show some interesting perspectives of UD composites
purely due to the random distribution of fibres over the
transverse cross-section.
6. Conclusions
In micromechanical finite element analyses of UD
composites of fibres distributed at random over the
transverse cross-section using ‘unit cells’, boundary con-
ditions for such ‘unit cells’ can no longer be prescribed
precisely due to the lack of symmetry about the boundary.
Through the analyses as presented in this paper, the effects
of incorrectly prescribed boundary conditions for such
RVEs on the predicted behaviour of the composite
represented by the ‘unit cells’ have been studied. The
decaying characteristics of such effects away from the
boundary have also been examined. A decay length has been
found to amount to a couple of times of the centre-to-centre
fibre spacing. Using the decay length obtained, analyses
have been made to UD composites in which fibres are really
distributed at random over the transverse cross-section.
Although, the prescribed uniform normal displacement
along the boundary represents an incorrect boundary
condition, correct deformation and stress distribution can
be obtained from a sub-domain of the unit cell away from
the boundary by a number of times of average fibre spacing.
This provides a practical methodology for micromechanical
finite element analysis of such composites. The method-
ology can certainly be generalised to 3D problems, pertinent
to the micromechanical analysis of particulate-reinforced
composites. Results from the examples included show some
interesting aspects of UD composites of fibres distributed
1266 A. Wongsto, S. Li / Composites: Part A 36 (2005) 1246–1266
at random over the cross-section. In particular, the predicted
transverse Young’s and shear moduli from UD composites
with fibres distributed at random over the transverse cross-
section tend to give noticeably higher values than those
obtained with regular packed fibres and, therefore, they
would help to narrow the gap between experimental data
and existing theoretical predictions. The random distri-
bution of fibres also tends to enhance the strain hardening of
the material significantly in the plastic regime when it is
subjected loads transverse to the fibres, which cannot be
predicted with a regularly packed fibre arrangement.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to an
anonymous referee of Journal of Computational Materials
for his/her comments on the manuscript submitted to that
journal as an earlier attempt of publication of the work as
presented in this paper.
References
[1] Hashin Z, Rosen BW. The elastic moduli of fiber-reinforced materials.
ASME J Appl Mech 1964;31:223–32.
[2] Adams DF, Doner DR. Longitudinal shear loading of a unidirectional
composite. J Compos Mater 1967;1:4–17.
[3] Adams DF, Doner DR. Transverse normal loading of a unidirectional
composite. J Compos Mater 1967;1:152–64.
[4] Adams DF, Crane DA. Finite element micromechanical analysis of a
unidirectional composite including longitudinal shear loading.
Comput Struct 1984;18:1153–65.
[5] Chen CH, Cheng S. Mechanical properties of fiber reinforced
composites. J Compos Mater 1967;1:30–41.
[6] Nedele MR, Wisnom MR. Finite element micromechanical modeling
of a unidirectional composite subjected to axial shear loading.
Composites 1994;25:263–72.
[7] Li DS, Wisnom MR. Finite element micromechanical modeling of
unidirectional fibre-reinforced metal–matrix composites. Compos Sci
Technol 1994;51:545–63.
[8] Li S. On the unit cell for micromechanical analysis of fibre-reinforced
composites. Proc R Soc London, A 1999;455:815–38.
[9] Li S. General unit cells for micromechanical analyses of uni-
directional composites. Composites Part A 2000;32:815–26.
[10] Zou Z, Li S. Stresses in an infinite medium with two similar circular
cylindrical inclusions. Acta Mech 2002;156:93–108.
[11] Fang D, Liu T. Transverse plastic deformation of metal-matrix with
randomly arranged continuous fibers. Comput Mater Sci 1997;7:
343–50.
[12] Zohdi T, Feucht M, Gross D, Wriggers P. A description of
macroscopic damage through microstructural relaxation. Int
J Numer Methods Eng 1998;43:493–506.
[13] Bulsara VN, Talreja R, Qu J. Damage initiation under transverse
loading of unidirectional composites with arbitrarily distributed fibers.
Compos Sci Technol 1999;59:673–82.
[14] Gusev AA, Hine PJ, Ward IM. Fiber packing and elastic properties of
a transversely random unidirectional glass/epoxy composite. Compos
Sci Technol 2000;60:535–41.
[15] Sautter M, Dietrich Ch, Poech MH, Schmauder S, Fischmeister HF.
Finite element modelling of a transverse-loaded fibre composite.
Effects of section size and net density. Comput Mater Sci 1993;1:
225–33.
[16] Zhang L, Ernst LJ, Brouwer HR. Transverse behaviour of a
unidirectional composite (glass fibre reinforced unsaturated polye-
ster). Part I. Influence of fibre packing geometry. Mech Mater 1998;
27:13–36.
[17] Segura do J, Llorca J. A numerical approximation to the elastic
properties of sphere-reinforced composites. J Mech Phys Solids 2002;
50:2107–21.
[18] Brockenbrough JR, Suresh S. Plastic deformation of continuous fiber-
reinforced metal-matrix composites: effects of fiber shape and
distribution. Scripta Metall Mater 1990;24:325–30.
[19] Brockenbrough JR, Suresh S, Wienecke HA. Deformation of metal-
matrix composites with continuous fibres: geometrical effects of fibre
distribution and shape. Acta Metall Mater 1991;39:735–52.
[20] Hazanov S, Huet C. Order relationships for boundary conditions effect
in heterogeneous bodies smaller than the representative volume.
J Mech Phys Sol 1994;41:1995–2011.
[21] Jiang M, Ostoja-Starzewski M, Jasiuk I. Scale-dependent bounds on
effective elastoplastic response of random composites. J Mech Phys
Sol 2001;49:655–73.
[22] HKS. ABAQUS user’s manual 2002; Version 6.2.
[23] Drugant WJ, Willis JR. Micromechanics-based nonlocal constitutive
equation and estimates of representative volume element size for
elastic composites. J Mech Phys Sol 1996;44:497–524.
[24] Soden PD, Hinton MJ, Kaddour AS. Lamina properties, lay-up
configurations and loading conditions for a range of fibre-
reinforced composites laminates. Compos Sci Technol 1998;58:
1011–22.
[25] Li S, Zou Z. Unit cells and micromechanical finite element analysis of
unidirectionally fibre-reinforced composites. ECCM9, Composites:
from fundamentals to exploitation. In: Eur Conf Compos Mater. 9, 4–
7 June 2000, Brighton, UK.
[26] Zou Z, Li S. Backing out fibre properties from effective properties of
composites using unit cells. FRC 2000, Composites for the
Millennium. In: Proceedings of the eighth conference fibre reinforced
composites.
[27] McCartney LN. Analytical method of calculating the thermo-elastic
constants of a multi-phase unidirectional composite. NPL Report
DMM(A); 1992.
[28] Boehm HJ. Institute of Lightweight Design and Structural Biome-
chanics, The Vienna University of Technology. Private communi-
cation; 1999