(c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
42nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures
A01 -25005 Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference
Seattle, WA
and Exhibit
STRAIN INVARIANT FAILURE CRITERIA FOR POLYMERS IN
COMPOSITE MATERIALS
Jon H. Gosse
Stephen Christensen
The Boeing Company
Phantom Works
Seattle, Wa. 98124
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184
Abstract
We introduce strain invariant failure for analyzing
damage initiation within the polymer of a composite
material. The method is mechanistic in that it relates
effective strength properties to composite failure. As a
result, the strain invariant failure criteria apply to the
general condition. The general condition includes
variable geometry, any lamina stacking sequence and
all possible boundary and loading conditions. The
effective strength properties utilized in the strain
invariant failure criteria are the effective volumetric
and equivalent strains of the lamina. The volumetric
strain is the first invariant of the strain tensor and the
equivalent strain is a function of the second invariant
of the strain deviator. Verification of the criteria is
established through the numerical reduction of
mechanical test data. Tested configurations include
laminates subjected to flexural, tensile and
compressive loads. We show that for all modes of
loading, damage initiation is initiated by either the
effective critical volumetric or equivalent strain of the
lamina. The authors have extended the strain invariant
failure criteria to advanced topics such as damage
propagation and ultimate failure and will report the
results of these efforts in future articles.
Introduction
Several theories exist for the prediction of the
performance of composite materials that include
damage initiation, crack propagation and the ultimate
failure of composite materials. None are able to
predict the onset of the above-mentioned conditions
for all possible lamina orientations, stacking
sequences and modes of loading. In order to predict
performance for any situation, the method used must
be based on the physical events controlling material
1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Copyright © 2001 by The Boeing Company. Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
Inc., with permission.
16-19 April 2001 AIAA-2001-1184
behavior rather than a mathematical description of
some observed phenomena and an extrapolation to the
general case. For example, methods based on
maximum principal strain, strain softening laws or
energy dissipation are not load path independent and do
not apply for all cases because the measured qualities
are not intrinsic to the constituents or effective
composite material performance.
The purpose of this paper is not to develop an
understanding of the relation between the observed
mechanical response of a polymer and its molecular
structure but to establish an appreciation of the role
played by polymer morphology that will help explain
the basis for the Strain Invariant Failure Criteria.
Unlike most metals, the critical deformation of
polymers can either be dilatational or distortional
dominant. Failure will be governed by either
volumetric expansion or strain bias-induced flow of the
polymer. Structural features such as chain stiffness and
connectivity, crosslinks or entanglements and others
will influence the macroscopic load-strain behavior of
polymers. For example, the unique structural
arrangement of polymers has the effect of limiting
molecular mobility so that the polymer chains under the
influence of a tensile or shear load will align with the
direction of maximum principal strain. Polymers
within composites will have additional restrictions on
plastic flow due to the presence of the fibers. Non-
linear material behavior will be suppressed and the
initiation of fracture will be brittle in nature.
Effective lamina properties are used for all analysis in
this paper. These include the three Young's moduli, the
three shear moduli, the three Poisson's ratios and three
coefficients of thermal expansion of the lamina. The
properties are effective because the measured
deformation includes the "effect" of the polymeric
matrix, the interface and the fiber reinforcement. The
scope of the analysis discussed herein will be concerned
only with laminates with continuous filament laminae
 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
and the failure assessment will be restricted to
damage initiation within the lamina. As a result the
analysis of damage initiation is at the lamina-level.
Damage initiation is defined here as the
development of intralaminar (trans-lamina) and
interlaminar cracks. Methods involving failure
mechanisms of the fiber phase can be found in the
accompanying paper [1]. The critical effective
properties of the lamina that control damage initiation
are the effective volumetric and equivalent strains of
the lamina. Both the volumetric strain (the first
invariant of the strain) and the equivalent strain (a
function of the second invariant of the strain deviator
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184
tensor) are strain invariants. An invariant is an entity
whose magnitude remains unchanged with coordinate
system transformation. For example, a change in
volume, as described by the first invariant of strain,
must remain constant for all coordinate systems and
transformations within these coordinate systems. The
strain invariants are functions only of the three
principal strains that includes the applied mechanical
and environmental contributions. Strains generated
by stresses (including Poisson' effects) are
considered, free expansion without the development
of stresses is not. Expressions for both strain
invariants, written with respect to the three principal
strains are,
Volumetric Strain = ^ + J2 + J3 (1)
Where,
J, = 81 + 82 + £3
12 = 8182 + 8183 + 8283
J3 = 8i8283
81, £2, and 83 are the three principal strains
Ji are the invariants of the strain tensor
the reduced form of the volumetric strain is
11 = 61+62+63 (2)
8eqv = {0.5[(8r82)2 + (8r83)2 +(82-83)2]}0 5 (3)
where,
8eqv = Equivalent Strain.
Equation (1) includes the three invariants of the
strain tensor. In practice, we have found that the
most significant component of the volumetric strain
is the first invariant of the strain tensor. Throughout
this paper we will use the reduced form of the
volumetric strain, equation (2). Equation (3) involves
only strain bias and does not include a term
addressing the effects of pressure on yield. If needed,
equation (3) can be modified for the effects of
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
pressure on yield if so desired. Equations (2) and (3)
succinctly express the fundamental basis for the Strain
Invariant Failure Criteria with respect to the initiation
of damage within polymers. Damage initiates when the
dilatational or distortional dominant effective strain
exceeds a critical value. Verification of the strain
invariant failure criteria was accomplished through
extensive numerical reduction of mechanical test data.
Portions of the results of the method verification,
relevant to the present paper, will be presented in
sections two through five. All analysis, test boundary
and loading conditions specific to a given section are
discussed within that section.
Section two presents the application of the strain
invariant failure criteria to describe the locus of critical
dilatational or distortional strain for an unreinforced
polymer. Using only uniaxial tension and compression
failure strains, and equations (2) and (3), we
numerically derived the failure envelope for the
thermoplastic polymer, K3B. We show that either the
volumetric or equivalent strain, and not the maximum
principal stress or strain, are intrinsic material
properties of the polymer. The section concludes with a
discussion of the micromechanical modification of the
homogenized finite element lamina solution. In sections
three through five failure initiation is defined by the
onset of transverse crack initiation within the lamina.
The transverse crack of interest has completely
propagated through the lamina thickness.
In the third section, verification of the strain invariant
failure criteria is established with IM7/5250-4 laminates
with different lamina stacking sequences, boundary and
loading conditions. The first loading condition involves
unidirectional laminates (with fabric surface laminae)
loaded in transverse tension (transverse with respect to
the lamina fiber direction). The second loading
condition involves a clamped plate loaded with a one
inch diameter tup normal to its surface. For both
loading conditions verification of the strain invariant
failure criteria was accomplished by numerically
analyzing the laminates with the damage initiation
loads. Verification is established by comparing the
relatively large scatter in maximum principal strain
with the agreement of the coincident effective Jj for
damage initiation.
In the fourth section, the strain invariant failure
criteria are verified with quasi-isotropic laminates of
IM7/PETI-5 loaded by in-plane compression. Failure
in these laminates was catastrophic due to matrix
damage initiation within the laminae with the greatest
fiber compression strain. The location of maximum Ji
coincided with the location of maximum fiber
compression strain. Instability of the compressed fibers
was instigated by the simultaneous initiation of matrix
damage resulting in loss of fiber support. Verification
is demonstrated by comparing the high variation in
 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
fiber compression strain (at failure) to the low
variation in the effective Ji in the matrix supporting
the most highly compressed fibers.
The fifth section establishes verification of the strain
invariant failure criteria through the analysis of
tensile loaded unidirectional 10° and 30° T300/5208
off-axis laminae [3]. Unlike the previous two sections
the 10° and 30° laminae in this section have failure
initiation determined by the critical equivalent strain.
Verification is established by comparing both the
maximum principal strain and the effective
equivalent strain at failure for the two lamina fiber
orientations.
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184
The finite element code ANSYS (rev. 5.6) was used
for all analysis presented in this paper. Submodeling
was used extensively to reduce the computational
effort [2]. The appropriate element formulation
(isotropic, orthotropic or laminated) was utilized for
all materials involved in this paper. Laminated
elements utilized lamination theory in their
formulation [3]. Both h and p elements were used.
The p elements were used to determine the
superimposed thermal strains and the mechanical
strain amplification factors for use in the
micromechanical modification of the homogenized
lamina finite element solution (see section 2). All
effective elastic and thermal lamina properties were
determined using standard methods [4].
In this paper a set is defined as a group of test data
values that are identical with respect to lamina
stacking sequence, geometry, loading and boundary
conditions. Mechanical test data in all sections
involved two to five replicates per set to ensure
reproducibility. All data utilized in this paper
exhibited low variability with coefficients of
variation between 4% and 8% within each set. Since
sections three through five are concerned with
verification only the peak values of each set were
utilized to ensure maximum material quality. All
laminates were autoclave-processed. Numerical
convergence of the finite element models was
achieved using standard procedures [2] (less than or
equal to 5% with respect to the invariants) and
always involved applied mechanical and
environmental strains for every step in the
convergence process.
In the present study, the composite laminates were
fabricated using unidirectional prepreg tape consisting
of carbon fibers and either a thermosetting or a
thermoplastic matrix material. They include: A Cytec-
Fiberite epoxy known as IM7/977-3, a NASA
developed polyimide system known as IM7/PETI-5,
and a bismaleimide from Cytec-Fiberite referred to as
IM7/5250-4. The carbon fiber laminates all contained
Hexcel's IM-7 fiber and is commercially available.
The unidirectional prepreg materials were placed by
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
hand on a tool, bagged and cured in an autoclave per
industry standard practice with a temperature and
pressure cycle appropriate for the particular material.
The resulting laminates were inspected for quality, cut to
the correct dimensions and tested. Data recorded include
specimen dimensions, load at failure and strain history as
measured by an extensometer.
Development of the Strain Invariant Failure
Criteria
The construction of a failure surface for polymers
undergoing generalized biaxial loading, involves both
dilatational (volume change) and distortional (shape
change) deformations. Critical dilatational deformation
of polymers involves crazing in thermoplastic polymers
and cavitation in thermosetting polymers. Since 1969,
investigators have experimentally determined the locus
of points that describe a failure surface for several
thermoplastic and thermosetting polymers [5-7]. Most
of the investigations involved biaxial plane stress
loading of thin square plates. A representative example
of a biaxial failure surface for polymers is given in
Figure 1. All of the investigators found a reproducible
deviation from the ellipse, described by the critical
equivalent strain, in the first quadrant and parts of the
second and fourth (see Figure 1). It was recognized by
Asp [6-7], that the truncation of the critical equivalent
strain ellipse was probably dominated by dilatational
deformation. Asp suggested the use of both a critical
dilatational strain energy density for volume-critical
deformation and the use of a shear yielding criterion for
distortional-critical deformation. Similar energy-based
criteria (involving dilatational and distortional
deformation) have been discussed by Lemaitre and
Chaboche [8].
With respect to damage initiation, the deformation of
constrained polymers should be considered essentially
brittle in nature. Although unreinforced polymers can
shear yield or even exhibit material nonlinearity after
crazing or microcavitating [9], such material
nonlinearity in deformed polymers that are constrained
(such as polymers used as binders in composite
materials) is significantly suppressed prior to brittle
fracture. The investigation of polymeric deformation in
unidirectional laminates loaded in transverse tension,
shows consistent macroscopic brittle behavior for both
thermosetting and thermoplastic matrices with limited
polymeric yielding confined to the vicinity of the
nearest fiber [10]. Fractographic evidence of bonded
joints loaded in shear exhibit little or no indication of
polymeric yielding at failure [11-12]. Additionally,
studies of energy release rates for bonded joints
demonstrate a consistent convergence of GHC and GHIC
to Gic as the bondline thickness is reduced to a relative
 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
volume consistent to that found within the polymeric
matrices of composite materials [13-14]. Polymeric
shear yielding was not evident for the two shear
loading conditions investigated (modes II and III).
Although either invariant (Jj or £eqv) can initiate the
quasi-brittle fracture of the constrained polymer, it is
the maximum principal strain (positive value) that
determines the orientation of the crack. Therefore,
the modeling of damage initiation in constrained
polymers is greatly simplified by omitting a material
nonlinear analysis of an event that essentially never
occurs. However, it is our intent to investigate the
influence the test temperature and saturated aqueous
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184
environment on material behavior.
The equivalent strain is used to determine the onset
of shear yielding in polymers and will always be
greater than or equal to zero (equation 3). The
dilatational strain energy density will also be greater
than or equal to zero since strain energy is never
negative. This creates a problem with respect to
failure assessment since the strain energy density of
hydrostatic tension and hydrostatic compression
could yield identical values. One condition could lead
to failure and the other may not. Dilatational
deformation is a function of volume change defined
by the first invariant of the strain tensor (equation 2).
To remove the limitations of using a critical
dilatational strain energy density, the authors
proposed that a critical first invariant of the strain
tensor be used to indicate dilatational failure
initiation. Phenomenological variations of this
approach have been introduced elsewhere [8]. Once
the critical first invariant of the strain tensor is
exceeded, crack orientation will be normal to the
direction of the maximum principal strain. Effective
critical values of the first invariant of the strain tensor
(Ji) and the equivalent strain (eeqv) are the effective
critical material properties used in the strain invariant
failure criteria.
The authors numerically derived a failure envelope
for K3B, shown in Figure 2, using the strain invariant
failure criteria and conservative values of the critical
invariants. The derived failure envelope is presented
in stress space so as to be consistent with reported
experimental results [5-7]. The conservative invariant
values were determined from a 0.2% offset of the
tensile and compressive stress-strain plots obtained
from bulk polymer specimens loaded in uni-axial
tension and compression respectively. Comparison of
Figure 2 with the experimentally determined failure
envelopes [5-7] provides strong evidence that a strain
invariant-based approach to the prediction of polymer
failure has merit. In addition, simulations comparing
equations (1) and (2) were conducted to assess the
contributions of the second and third invariants of the
strain tensor on the critical volumetric strain. The
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
differences were determined to be minor. Establishing
that the strain invariants are the critical material
properties that should be used for assessing critical
deformation in polymers allows the strain invariant
failure criteria to be applied to more complex
environments such as those found within the
constrained polymers of composite materials.
The differences in material properties between the
polymeric phase and the reinforcement phase
complicates the residual environmental and applied
mechanical strain distributions throughout the
constrained polymer. The explicit modeling of the
strain distributions resulting from the presence of the
reinforcement (micromechanics) is not practical for
most structural applications of composite materials. All
nodal solutions of the homogenized lamina finite
element solution must therefore be appropriately
modified to account for these micromechanical effects.
The homogenized finite element lamina solution does
not reflect the presence of environmental residual
strains between the constituents or the mechanical
amplification of strain within the matrix between the
fibers. An analysis of strain within the polymeric
matrix of composite materials must include an
appreciation of these micromechanical effects for the
analysis to be applicable to the general condition. In
this paper, the micromechanical thermal residual strains
are determined for the six thermal strain tensor
components of the thermal strain tensor. In addition, the
mechanical strain amplification factors are determined
for five of the six mechanical strain components of the
mechanical strain tensor (strain along the fiber length
within the matrix is not amplified).
These micromechanical thermal residual strains and
mechanical strain amplification factors are determined
from three dimensional finite element micromechanical
models [2-3]. The thermal finite element
micromechanical model utilizes p-elements and is
loaded with a change in temperature to determine the
residual thermal strains. Unit displacements are applied
to the mechanical finite element micromechanical
model to determine the strain amplification factors. The
determination of the strain amplification factor for the
transverse direction (2-direction) is illustrated in Figure
3. The micromechanical thermal strains and mechanical
strain amplification factors are extracted only once for a
given composite product using an assumed fiber
distribution pattern and fiber volume. Several
extractions have determined that of these two
parameters, the numerical assessments of thermal
residual strains and mechanical amplification factors is
most sensitive to fiber volume.
The micromechanical modification of the
homogenized lamina finite element solution consists of
six steps. Obtain both the nodal environmental
(thermal) and applied mechanical homogenized lamina
 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
finite element solutions (identical finite element
models). Transform both solutions into the material
coordinate system. Superimpose the micromechanical
thermal residual strains onto the nodal transformed
thermal homogenized lamina finite element solution.
Multiply the nodal transformed mechanical
homogenized lamina finite element solution by the
micromechanical strain amplification factors.
Transform the modified homogenous lamina finite
element solutions back into the global coordinate
system. Superimpose the modified thermal and
applied mechanical homogenized lamina finite
element solutions to form the total modified finite
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184
element solution. The entire micromechanical
modification is conducted in post-processing and is
determined for both interstitial and inter-fiber
locations (points A and B respectively in Figure 3).
For any given homogenized lamina finite element
solution, the most critical location (A or B) governs
the final modified solution for each node. All
micromechanical modifications of the homogenized
lamina finite element solution are conducted in post-
processing with virtually no computational penalty.
We assumed a fiber volume of 60% and a uniform
fiber array for all analyses conducted in this paper. In
sections three through five both the effective first
invariant of the strain tensor and the effective
equivalent strain are assessed at the damage initiation
loads.
Transverse Tensile and Static Indentation
Loaded IM7/5250-4 Laminates
In this section, we demonstrate good correlation
between intralaminar (or trans-lamina) crack
formation and the critical value of Ji for two
laminates with different lamina stacking sequences,
boundary and loading conditions. All part
dimensions, boundary and loading conditions are
given in Figure 4. The strain-free temperature for
IM7/5250-4 was assumed to be 440°F.
The lamina stacking sequence for the in-plane
tensile loaded IM7/5250-4 laminate was
(fabric/(90)io/fabric). Loading was applied until
transverse intralaminar cracks spanning the 90°
laminae were initiated. Transverse crack initiation in
the laminate was detected by either the initial load
drop from the load-stroke plot or by a change in the
load-slope relationship. The numerical simulation of
the laminate deformation exhibited free-edge effects
leading to numerical singularities from the total
micromechanical modified finite element solution.
The free-edge effect is accompanied by the classical
depressed values of the out-of-plane stresses and
strains adjacent the free-edge [15]. It can be shown,
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
that the presence of the numerical singularity at the
laminate free-edge will vanish if an explicit
micromechanical analysis of the laminate is conducted.
The solution must include both the thermal and
mechanically applied loads and convergence must be
established with respect to the invariants. The results of
such an analysis have clearly show that the true peak
value of the first invariant of the strain tensor exists
away from the free-edge and towards the interior. As a
result, whenever a numerical singularity appears at the
free-edges of the total micromechanical modified finite
element solution (with accompanying depressions of
the out-of-plane stresses and strains adjacent the free
edge) convergence can be established anywhere away
from the free-edge boundary of the micromechanical
modified finite element solution.
Static indentation of a laminate is an example of a
loading condition in which free-edge effects do not
initiate transverse cracks. Studies conducted at the
Boeing Co. have shown that the initial load drop of a
statically indented quasi-isotropic laminate coincides
with extensive crack networking. The crack networking
also results in the development of delaminations
originating from the transverse crack network. This
nearly coincident behavior allows statically indented
quasi-isotropic laminates to be used to verify the strain
invariant failure criteria for damage initiation.
In this paper, statically indented laminates, with a
lamina stacking sequence of (-45/0/45/90)3s were
analyzed at first load drop to determine if the initiated
damage resulted in similar critical values of Ji to that
determined for the intralaminar cracks initiated with in-
plane tensile loading. The laminates were ultrasonically
scanned (pulse-echo C-scans) before and after static
indentation. The global model of the statically indented
laminate was modeled with laminated shell elements.
The damage initiation load (first load drop) was
numerically applied to a 3-D model of a 1.0 in.
diameter hemispherical tup oriented normal to the
laminated shell model. Placed between the tup and the
laminate were solid elements with variable Young's
moduli. These elements represented low modulus
contact material. Due to the simplicity of the structure,
boundary and loading conditions, this procedure was
used instead of contact finite elements to reduce
computational effort. The moduli of the solid elements
between the tup and the laminate surface were adjusted
appropriately to just approach nodal pass-through. In a
finite element model, nodes from one element can "pass
through" another element if the elements are not
connected or the stiffness of one of the elements is too
low. The validity of this technique was established
with analyses conducted with contact elements.
Techniques described in reference 16 were used to
estimate the footprint of the impinging tup. The tup
footprint is the projected area on the surface of the
 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
laminate that represents the physical contact between
the tup for a given applied load. The variation in
nodal displacements within the footprint on the shell
surface was relatively small. The nodal displacements
from the footprint were then applied to a 3-D
converged submodel of the loaded laminate (one
element per lamina was sufficient to achieve
convergence). The coordinates of the applied
displacements on the submodel were identical to
those from the footprint of the global shell model.
Analysis of the submodel revealed that the critical Jj
existed within the surface lamina opposite the tup
footprint.
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184
The results of this section are presented in Table 1.
The damage initiation loads for the tensile loaded
unidirectional laminate and the statically indented
quasi-isotropic laminate are nearly the same. The
maximum principal strains associated with these
damage initiation loads are significantly different.
This is not surprising if one reviews Figures 1 and 2.
If the maximum principal strain was intrinsic to the
polymeric material, then the shape of the failure
envelopes of Figures 1 and 2 would be rectangular in
the first quadrant rather than sloped as observed by
experiment [5-7]. Similar values for the first invariant
of strain were determined for both.
Additional verification of the strain invariant failure
criteria has since been provided by the U.S. Navy
independent of the Boeing Co. In the summer of
1998 the strain invariant failure criteria were
introduced to Dr. Hsi Tsai, Dr. Jim Alper and Dr.
David Barrett of the Naval Air System Command
(Structures Division), Patuxent River, Maryland. Drs.
Tsai, Alper and Barrett investigated the method
independent of the Boeing Co. and verified the
method within the scope of their study [17]. The
method was verified with a numerical assessment of
delamination initiation within the IM7/977-3
laminated adherends of bonded double lap-shear
joints.
In-Plane Compression Loaded IM7/PETI-5
Laminates
In this section, verification of the strain invariant
failure criteria is established with in-plane
compression loaded quasi-isotropic IM7/PETI-5
laminates. All analysis involved converged 3-D
global models resulting in one element per lamina, a
condition sufficient to obtain convergence. A
description of the laminate geometry is given in
Figure 5. All specimens in this section were identical
except for the lamina stacking sequences. The failure
loads, lamina stacking sequences, maximum fiber
compressive strains and the first invariants of the
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
strain tensor at failure for each of the four quasi-
isotropic laminates analyzed, are given in Table 2. The
strain-free temperature for IM7/PETI-5 was assumed to
be 520°F.
The test data for this exercise came from the High-
Speed-Civil-Transport Program. All laminates were
carefully prepared (as described earlier) and supported
during testing to prevent laminate instability prior to
fiber kinking. The analysis showed that the maximum
fiber compression strains existed in those laminae with
fiber reinforcements most in-line with the applied
compression load. Laminae with the maximum fiber
compression strains were also the laminae with the
maximum matrix expansion. The mechanism for
catastrophic failure was fiber instability (kinking)
initiated by matrix failure (the matrix having failed in
expansion after expanding beyond the critical Ji). The
maximum fiber compression strain and the maximum Ji
within the matrix, occurred at locations coincident with
observed failure initiation sites (see Figure 5). All
maximum values of Ji existed at the laminate free edge.
Since the analysis did not produce a numerical
singularity at the free-edge convergence was achieved
using standard methods [2].
The variation of the fiber compression strain within
the laminae with the maximum fiber compression strain
was fairly uniform resulting in the observed
catastrophic failures. The location of the peak values of
the first invariant of the strain tensor coincided with the
locations of the maximum fiber compression strain for
all four laminates assessed. Variation of the numerically
determined values of the critical Ji at failure was fairly
low relative to the higher variation of the fiber
compression strain. What is not obvious is the fact that,
within the laminae where failure is initiated in-plane
compression loading leads to a state of polymeric
expansion. The polymeric matrix is failing in tension
and reducing the lateral support needed to maintain
fiber stability. The initial fiber instabilities led to the
observed catastrophic failure. Without the
micromechanical modification of the homogenized
lamina finite element solution, the agreement shown in
Table 2, with respect to the first invariant of the strain
tensor at failure, could not have been realized.
Tensile Loading of Off-Axis T300/5208
Laminates [3]
In this final section, verification of the strain invariant
failure criteria is established for structural
configurations where eeqv is the critical invariant
dictating the onset of damage initiation rather than Ji.
Damage initiation in off-axis laminates ((10)g and (30)g,
see Figure 6) of T300/5208 loaded in longitudinal
tension, yielded volumetric expansions too low to
 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.
instigate damage initiation. The ]{criiical for T300/5208
was determined to be 0.0105 by analyzing transverse
tension loaded (90)8 laminates [3]. As a result, the
8eqv at failure for the two laminates, (10)8 and (30)8),
are nearly identical, as shown in Table 3. Also shown
in Table 3, is the relatively low value of 8eqv at failure
for the (90)8 laminate, indicating that the critical
invariant for this laminate was Ji. Details regarding
specimen fabrication, testing and lamina properties
can be found in reference 3. The strain-free
temperature for T300/5208 was assumed to be 350°F.
To date, all J i initiated damage has had peak values
(for the applied damage initiation loads) at the
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184
interstitial locations within the laminates (indicated
as location A in Figure 3). However, the maximum
values for eeqv at failure for the off-axis laminates
were located at location B (the inter-fiber location).
Therefore, a complete analysis of damage initiation
must include an assessment of the invariants for both
the interstitial and inter-fiber locations. As was the
case in sections three and four, there is little
agreement between the two cases, (10)8 and (30)8),
with respect to the maximum principal strain.
Conclusions
A physics-based mechanistic failure criteria for
constrained polymers used as binders for composite
materials has been introduced. The criteria link
effective critical material properties to failure
mechanisms. As a result, the criteria are valid for the
general condition (geometry, lamina stacking
sequences, boundary and loading conditions). The
method has been validated for several structural
configurations utilizing tape-layed construction.
Analysis of test results consistently demonstrated a
low variation in critical invariants (coefficients of
variation less than 5%) at the onset of damage for
several laminate geometries, lamina stacking
sequences, boundary and loading conditions.
Validation continues with respect to damage
initiation and has been expanded to include advanced
topics such as damage propagation and ultimate
failure. Included in this effort is the failure
assessment of open-hole tension, notched tension,
open-hole compression, tension bearing, low-velocity
impact and compression-after. The results of these
advanced topics will reported in future articles.
REFERENCES
1. L. J. Hart-Smith. " Mechanistic Failure Criteria
for Carbon and Glass Fibers Embedded in
Polymer Matrices". AIAA-2001-1183.
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
2. Cook R. D. 1995. Finite Element Modeling for
Stress Analysis. New York, New York. John
Wiley & Sons.
3. C. T. Herakovich. 1998. Mechanics of Fibrous
Composites. New York, New York. John Wiley
& Sons.
4. Carlsson L. A. and R. B. Pipes. 1987.
Experimental Characterization of Advanced
Composite Materials. New Jersey. Prentice-Hall.
5. Sternstein, S.S. and L. Ongchin. 1969. "Yield
Criteria for Plastic Deformation of Glassy High
Polymers in General Stress Fields". Polym.
Prepr., 10(2).
6. Asp, L. E., Berglund, L.A. and R. Talreja. 1996.
"Prediction of matrix-Initiated Transverse
Failure in Polymer Composites". Composites
Science and Technology. 56:1089-1097.
7. Asp, L. E., Berglund, L. A. and R. Talreja. 1996.
"A Criterion for Crack Initiation in Glassy
Polymers Subjected to a Composite-Like Stress
State". Composites Science and Technology.
56:1291-1301.
8. Lemaitre, J. and J.-L. Chaboche. 1994.
Mechanics of solid materials. New York, New
York: Cambridge University Press.
9. Puck A., TUD - Darmstadt University of
Technology, Private Communication.
10. Briancon C., Sigett P. and C. G'Sell. 1996. "In-
Situ study of the Matrix Strain in Carbon/Resin
Composite Materials", Composites Science and
Technology, 56:835-840.
11. Ripling E. J. and S. Mostovoy. 1971. "Fracture
Mechanics: A Tool for Evaluating Structural
Adhesives". J. Adhesion. 3:107-123.
12. Ripling E. J. and S. Mostovoy. 1971. "Fracture
Toughness of Adhesive Joints". J. Adhesion.
3:125-144.
13. Herzl Chai. 1988. "Shear Fracture". International
Journal of Fracture. 37:137-159.
14. Herzl Chai. 1993. "Observation of deformation
and damage at the tip of cracks in adhesive bonds
 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

loaded in shear and assessment if a criterion
for fracture". International Journal of
Fracture. 60:311-326.
17.
15. Pipes, B. P. And N. J. Pagano. 1970.
"Interlaminar Stresses in Composite Laminates
Under Uniform Axial Extenstion". J.
Composite Materials. 4.
Impact Dynamics. New York, New York. John
Wiley & Sons.
Tsai, H. S., Alper, J. and D. Barrett. "Failure
Analysis of Composite Bonded Joints". AIAA-
2000-1428.

16. Zukas, J. A., Nicholas, T., Swift H. F.,

Greszczuk L. B. and D. R. Curran. 1982.
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184

Table 1: Comparison of applied loads, maximum principal strain and the first invariant
of the strain tensor for the in-plane tensile loaded and statically indented IM7/5250-4
laminates.

Lamina Loading Load Maximum First Invariant

Stacking Sequence Condition (Ibf) Principal Strain of the Strain Tensor

(fabric/(90)i0/fabric) In-Plane 1460 0.0160 0.0160

Tension
(-45/0/45/90)3s Static 1400 0.0287 0.0171
Indentation

Table 2: Comparison of applied loads, maximum fiber compression strain and the
first invariant of the strain tensor for the in-plane compression loaded IM7/977-3 laminates.

Lamina Load Maximum Fiber First Invariant

Stacking Sequence (lbf) Compression Strain of the Strain Tensor

(60/0/-60)3s 7940 -0.0239 0.0216

(30/-30/0)3s 7560 -0.0176 0.0205
(0/-60/60)3s 7690 -0.0237 0.0205
(-30/90/30)3s 7690 -0.0173 0.0194

Table 3: Comparison of maximum principal strain, maximum equivalent strain and the first
Invariant of the strain tensor for Off-Axis laminae loaded in Longitudinal Tension [3].

Lamina Stacking Maximum Equivalent First Invariant

Sequence Principal Strain Strain of the Strain Tensor

(10)8 0.0173 0.0339 0.0048

(30)8 0.0193 0.0331 0.0086
(90)8 0.0123 0.0219 0.0105

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

Figure 1: Representative Failure Envelope for Polymers [5-7 J.

Crazing/Microcavitation £2
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184

Triaxial Compression

Figure 2: Numerically Derived Failure Envelope for the

Thermoplastic Polymer, K3B

E = 0.45 msi
D-0.34

Pure Shear

02

0.2% offset of the failure strain

American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

Figure 3: Micromechanical Strain Amplification for the

Transverse Direction (2-Direction)
3
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184

3D Finite Element Model Applied Unit Displacement

Mechanical Amplification Factor = 8A or B /(AL/ L0)

Figure 4: Laminate Geometry, Boundary and Loading

Conditions for the IM7/5250-4 Laminates

Transverse Static Indentation

Tension 1 in. Diameter Tup
~" GRIP
ftLAMPED,

12 in.
3.75 in.

GRIP
H—H 3.75 in.
1 in.

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 (c)2001 American Institute of Aeronautics & Astronautics or Published with Permission of Author(s) and/or Author(s)' Sponsoring Organization.

Figure 5: Laminate Geometry for the IM7 /PETI-5 Laminates

Radius = 4 in.

3 in.
Downloaded by UNIV OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO on June 2, 2017 | http://arc.aiaa.org | DOI: 10.2514/6.2001-1184

Observed Failure
Initiation Sites

Figure 6: Off-Axis T300/5208 Laminae

Longitudinal Tension

X
0=10°, 30° and 90°
1

11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics