Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites Part B
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/composites

Non-linear elastic longitudinal behaviour of continuous carbon fibres/epoxy

matrix composite laminae: Material or geometrical feature?
V. Keryvin a ,∗, A. Marchandise a,b , J.-C. Grandidier c
a Univ. Bretagne Sud, UMR CNRS 6027, IRDL, F-56321 Lorient, France
b
Avel Robotics, F-56100 Lorient, France
c
ISAE-ENSMA, F-86360 Chasseneuil-du-Poitou, France

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Carbon fibres and unidirectional continuous carbon fibre composites exhibit a non-linear elastic behaviour.
A. Carbon fibres There has long been a debate on the physical origins of such a behaviour for these materials. Indeed, two
A. Polymer–matrix composites (PMCs) main mechanisms have been proposed: either the reorientation of graphene sheets in the carbon fibre or that
B. Elastic behaviour
of the fibre itself due to initial fibre waviness arising from composite manufacturing. This paper addresses this
B. Non-linear behaviour
issue by performing, on the one hand, specific mechanical tests to extract the non-linear elastic coefficients
C. Elastic properties
in a reliable way, and, on the other hand, using specific finite element analyses with a non-local model. It
is shown first that the proposed experimental method is adequate. Besides, the simulations allow us to show
that, while both contributions for non-linear elasticity indeed come into play for the non-linear elasticity of
carbon fibres, the intrinsic behaviour of fibres can be considered as the main contributory factor. Composites
with glass fibres stay fully linearly elastic, due to the limited stiffness of these fibres.

1. Introduction an experimental protocol based on four-point bending tests to char-

The non-linear elastic behaviour of carbon fibres was reported as
early as the 1960’s [1] and then more recently [2]. This mechanism
is linked to the reorientation of graphene crystallites in the direction
of the tensile loading [3]. Unidirectional CFRP plies (UD) exhibit a
non-linear elastic behaviour under tension [4] (stiffening) or compres-
sion [5] (softening). The changes in axial moduli close to failure can be
dramatic reaching one-third of reduction in IM fibres for instance [6].
As stated by Murphey et al. [7], this is not taken into account for
the design of thick composite parts since they operate at relatively
low strains, but thin parts subjected to bending may undergo large
strains for example in deployable structures. This non-linear behaviour
has consequences on the bending behaviour and in some cases studies
have applied two different values of elastic moduli in tension and
compression [8,9].
The quantification of this UD non-Hookean behaviour has mostly
been addressed either with moduli depending progressively and lin-
early on the axial strain (most of the time) [5,7,10,11] and sometimes
in a non-linear way [12,13]. The characterisation of this behaviour is
usually carried out either in one step accounting for only one type
of non-linearity (tension or compression) but not the other (e.g. by
bending tests [10]), or in two steps by tension and compression tests [5]
or by tension and bending tests [12]. We have recently proposed
acterise simultaneously the non-linear elastic behaviour of UD both
in tension and compression [6]. The values of non-linear parameters
derived from UD plies are rarely compared to those determined from
single fibre tension tests [14]. This element of comparison is clearly
lacking.
The origins of the non-linear elastic behaviour of UD plies in tension
and compression have been the subject of debate. Indeed, since non-
linear behaviour has not been reported for GFRP [13], this non-linearity
should arise from the carbon fibre in CFRP. Yet, an additional factor
might come from the initial fibre waviness originating from the curing
step of the manufacturing process. We refer to fibre waviness as the
undulation of fibres inside a lamina. The misaligned fibres should
straighten during tension and contribute fully to the UD stiffness.
On the contrary, during compression, these fibres should bend more
and more, decreasing the UD stiffness during the loading. According
to Vandreumel and Kamp [4], for a given value of fibre waviness,
fibre misalignments have no influence on Young’s modulus in the case
of tension. Mrse and Piggott [15] concluded that fibre waviness does
not appear to be a major factor affecting the decreasing compressive
modulus with increasing fibre strain.
Hsiao and Daniel [16] proposed a model taking into account the
waviness, which they consider as being the origin of non-linearity.

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: vincent.keryvin@univ-ubs.fr (V. Keryvin).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2022.110329
Received 1 March 2022; Received in revised form 21 July 2022; Accepted 27 September 2022
Available online 1 October 2022
1359-8368/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
V. Keryvin et al.
However, these authors considered ply waviness instead of fibre wavi-
ness and used misalignment angles up to 15◦ . For Meng et al. [17], due
to the fibre misalignment and manufacturing defects, the compressive
modulus of continuous fibre composites is reasonably expected to differ
from the tensile modulus. These authors also add that this will be
more obvious in CFRP than GFRP composites since the diameter of
carbon fibre is normally smaller than that of glass fibre. This latter
point raises finally three factors that may come into play: (i) the
possibility of a material characteristic being derived from the intrinsic
non-linear behaviour of carbon or glass fibres; (ii) the possibility of a
geometrical feature originating from the initial fibre waviness; (iii) a
complementary possibility, due to the influence of fibre diameter, fibre
waviness and fibre stiffness (material/geometrical feature).
In this paper, we attempt to address two questions: (i) are the values
of the non-linear elastic parameters extracted with the experimental
bending protocol, as proposed by Keryvin et al. [6], in line with results
obtained by other testing methods on UD or single fibres? (ii) what are
the respective contributions to non-linear elasticity due to the type of
material (carbon fibre) and geometry (fibre waviness) ? For this pur-
pose, we first carried out mechanical experiments on different carbon
and glass fibres as well as on several carbon or glass fibres/epoxy resins
composite laminates. The non-linear elastic parameters measured from
these different tests are compared, as well as with results from the
literature. Then, we investigate the effect of geometrical features (fibre
waviness, fibre diameter) on unidirectional lamina stiffness by Finite
Element simulations with a specific non-local modelling.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
Each UD ply is composed of an epoxy resin matrix (Se84LV or
Se84nano with different nanofiller contents [18] from Gurit, M79 and
M81 from Hexcel, R374-1 from Structil or XB3515 from Vitech) and
either carbon fibres (intermediate modulus – IM – IM2C from Hexcel
and high modulus – HM – HR40 from Mitsubishi) or glass fibres (EC14
from Valmeria). The prepreg batch had a resin weight content of 35%
and fibre weight of 300 g/m2 on average for all composites. The ply
thickness is around 300 μm. The fibre volume fraction is 50% for GFRP
and 55% for CFRP.
For bending tests (see Section 2.2), the laminate is composed
of 11 blocks of plies with the following stacking sequence: [+45◦
|06 ◦ |+45◦ /−45◦ |04 ◦ |−45◦ |02 ◦ |]𝑆 . The plate was manufactured by
AVEL Robotics, the layup being performed by a C1-Coriolis Composites
Automated fibre Placement robot. The layup was made in a one-shot
sequence, and the sole compaction force of the robot head was used to
create adhesion between the plies, without any intermediate debulking.
The layup contact pressure was greater than 5 bars for all plies. The
stacking sequence used for materials from tool surface to bagging
materials was as follows: a 12 mm thick aluminium tool, a non porous
release-film, the prepreg carbon/epoxy stacking, another non-porous
release-film, a 3 mm thick aluminium caul plate, a polyester breather
and a vacuum sealant.
The curing cycle consisted of a one-shot curing. The prepreg stack
was monitored and did not undergo any exothermic reaction. The max-
imum pressure and temperature were respectively 7 bars and 120 ◦ C,
respectively, during the whole cycle. The plates did not suffer from any
warping during demoulding and conserved their planarity. The average
thickness of the plates, ℎ, was around 10 mm after curing.
Plates were precisely machined by water-jet cutting into 500 × 30
× 10 mm3 samples. For each sample, the thickness ℎ and the breadth
𝑏 were measured with a calliper. The thickness of each block of plies
were measured by optical microscopy. The samples were found to be
completely symmetric for this measurement accuracy.
2
Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329
2.2. Mechanical testing
Tensile tests on single carbon and glass fibres were carried out at
controlled conditions of temperature (23 ◦ C) and relative humidity
(48%) following the ASTM D3379 standard. Before the test, the fibre
is glued on a paper frame with vinyl paper glue. The latter is chosen
so as not to affect the mechanical response of the fibre in tension. The
paper frame is then clamped onto a universal MTS-type tensile testing
machine equipped with a 2 N capacity load cell, with an accuracy
of 0.01%. The gauge length is 50 mm. The tests are performed after
cutting the edges of the frame. The mechanical analysis of tension is
carried out using the engineering strain and the engineering stress,
since only small strains will be developed. The strain is 𝜖𝖿 = (l-l0 )/l0 ,
where l0 is the initial length measured before starting the test and l
the current length, adjusted to take into account the compliance of the
traction device (0.1246 mm/N). The stress is calculated from 𝜎𝖿 = F/S0 ,
where F is the measured force and S0 the initial cross-section area (the
diameters are measured by Scanning Electron Microscopy, Jeol JSM
6301 F). The accuracy of the displacement sensor is 1 μm. An adequate
number of experiments need to be performed to obtain meaningful
statistics for the mechanical behaviour. We therefore carried out ∼100
monotonic tensile tests at a constant displacement rate of 1 mm/min
(strain rate of 10−3 s−1 ). Other details can be found in Ref. [19]. The
initial modulus of fibre E𝑇𝖿 0 and the non-linear elastic parameter 𝛽𝑓 are
extracted according to Eq. (1) over the range of strain [0.1–0.5] %.
𝜎𝖿 = E𝖿𝑇 0 𝜖𝖿 (1 + 𝛽𝑓 𝜖𝖿 ) 𝖲𝖥𝖳 (1)
Uniaxial compression tests were carried out on [90/0]3𝑆 laminates
following the ASTM D3410 standard. 25 samples were tested. Fibre
glass tabs (±45◦ /thickness = 0.8 mm) were bonded at the end of
the sample with an epoxy adhesive to reduce the risk of breakage in
the jaws. The gauge length of the samples is 10 mm and the width
10 mm. Each face of each sample is equipped with a strain gauge
(Kyowa, length = 2 mm), to compare the strains and monitor any
bending behaviour. The loading rate is 1 mm/min. The compressive
C is determined as the mean value of the two strain gauges
strain 𝜖𝖴𝖣
while the compressive stress is calculated as for the tension tests. The
compressive stress of the 0◦ ply 𝜎𝖴𝖣 C is determined from the stress
applied on the laminate using Classical Laminate Theory. The initial
compressive modulus E𝐶0 𝖴𝖣 and the non-linear elastic parameter 𝛼 is
′
C .
extracted according to Eq. (2) over the range [0.1–0.5]% of strain 𝜖𝖴𝖣
This parameter for the unidirectional ply is the same as that for the
laminate by assuming that the 90◦ plies stay linearly elastic.
C
𝜎𝖴𝖣 = E𝐶0 C ′ C
𝖴𝖣 𝜖𝖴𝖣 (1 + 𝛼 𝜖𝖴𝖣 ) 𝖢𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇 (2)
Four-point bending tests (4PB) were carried out with a universal testing
machine (Instron 5567, 30 kN load cell) using a distance of 90 mm
between the upper rollers, where pure bending occurs, and a distance of
460 mm between the lower rollers. Polyethylene plates were put under
the rollers to minimise stress concentrations. Mono-axial strain gauges
(10 mm in length – Kyowa) were glued onto both the compression and
the tension sides. Eight to ten monolithic samples were tested. Other
details can be found in Ref. [20]. The force on the assembly and the two
strain gauges signals were recorded during loading and synchronised.
The thickness of each block of plies of the same nature were measured
by optical microscopy (OM, Olympus BX51). The position of the neutral
axis vis-a-vis the mid-axis is given by the two strain gauges signals on
the compressive side (𝜖𝑐𝑔 ) and the tensile side (𝜖𝑐𝑔 ).
𝑔 𝑔
ℎ 𝜖𝑐 + 𝜖𝑡
𝜆=− (3)
2 𝜖𝑐𝑔 − 𝜖𝑡𝑔
The procedure for extracting the elastic properties of the unidi-
rectional plies in the beam direction has been reported in Ref. [6]
and will not be reproduced here for sake of clarity. Let us note that
this procedure has also been validated by Finite Element Analyses [6].
It consists in minimising the relative error between the experimental
V. Keryvin et al. Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329

bending moment and an estimated value. The latter involves four
parameters: the initial moduli in tension, E𝑇𝖴𝖣0 , and in compression, E𝐶0
𝖴𝖣 ,
as well as the linear decreases of the elastic modulus in tension 𝛽 with
T and in compression 𝛼 with strain 𝜖 C . They are extracted
strain 𝜖𝖴𝖣 𝖴𝖣
according to Eq. (4) on the range [0.1–0.5]% of strain.
T
𝜎𝖴𝖣 = E𝑇𝖴𝖣0 𝜖𝖴𝖣
T (1 + 𝛽 ′ 𝜖 T )
𝖴𝖣
𝟦𝖯𝖡 − 𝖳𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇
C
𝜎𝖴𝖣 = E𝐶0 C ′ C
𝖴𝖣 𝜖𝖴𝖣 (1 + 𝛼 𝜖𝖴𝖣 ) 𝟦𝖯𝖡 − 𝖢𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇
In doing so, the coefficients 𝛼 ′ = 𝛼
and 𝛽 ′ = 𝛽
are introduced,
E𝐶0 E𝑇𝖴𝖣0
𝖴𝖣
with respect to Ref. [6].
To be able to compare the different fibres and the different mechan-
ical tests, the range of deformation is chosen to be [0.1–0.5]% for all
tests since CFRP with HM fibres fail at around 0.5% during bending
tests [21].
Instead of performing flexural tests, tension and compression tests
could have been carried out for addressing the objective of this paper.
The use of a single test (bending) with respect to two (tension and
compression) makes it possible to identify the non-linear behaviour
simultaneously on the same sample with the same manufacturing con-
ditions including curing. The stacking used for bending specimens
has some off-axis plies. It is representative of nautical uses for racing
yachts [22]. The same experimental studies could have used performed
on beams without off-axis plies. A previous study showed that their
influence is negligible on the elastic behaviour [6]. The compression
test could have also been performed on unidirectional coupons. In this
study, their results are only used for reasons of comparison. In all cases,
the low levels of strains (below 0.5%) limits possible spurious effects.
2.3. Numerical simulations – Beam Non Local model (BNL)
It is possible that geometry via fibre waviness could be the cause
of non-linear elasticity. This hypothesis is investigated by numerical
simulations. The idea of the model presented here is to take into
account local bending of fibres with beam elements linked to contin-
uum elements as in [23,24], but without describing each fibre. This
approach is similar to that proposed by Wisnom [25], but, in our study,
the concept is extended to the mesoscopic scale. In this formulation, the
equilibrium of the medium is characterised by the principle of virtual
works. A variational form of equilibrium equations for all kinematically
admissible displacement fields K.A. to zero is written in Eq. (5) as
proposed by Drapier et al. [26]:
{ }
− 𝑉𝑓 𝐸𝑓 𝑟2𝑔𝑓 𝑣′′ 𝛿𝑣′′ + 𝑆 ∶ 𝛿𝐸 𝑑𝛺 + 𝐹 ⋅ 𝛿𝑢 = 0 ∀ 𝛿𝑢 𝖪.𝖠. to 0 (5)
∫𝛺 ∼ ∼
where 𝑉𝑓 is the fibre volume fraction, 𝐸𝑓 , the fibre axial modulus,
√ scheme [28] for a unidirectional composite. The fibre volume fraction
𝐼𝑓
𝑟𝑔𝑓 = is the fibre gyration radius, 𝑆𝑓 the fibre cross-section
𝑆 𝑓
area and 𝐼𝑓 second moment of area of the section, 𝑣 the transverse
displacement, 𝑣′′ , the local fibre curvature field, 𝑆
∼
is the second Piola
Kirchhoff stress tensor and 𝐸∼
is the Green Lagrange strain tensor. 𝐹 and
𝑢 are the external load and displacement fields and 𝛿 is the variational
operator. Taking into account 𝑣′′ makes the model non-local.
The terms of integrals are estimated with (first part) quadratic three
nodes finite Timoshenko beam elements linked (using the same nodes)
to quadratic continuum elements (second part), to take better account
of the shape of initial waviness and to ensure the continuity of the
fields of displacement. In the Beam Non Local (BNL) model, beams
represents the bending and the tension/compression of the fibres in
their direction, and a continuum medium represents the behaviour of a
composite without bending and tension/compression of fibres (transverse
behaviour of the composite and its shear). It is possible to rewrite the
second term in the integral of Eq. (5) as follows:
𝑆 ∶ 𝛿𝐸 𝑑𝛺 = 𝑆 𝖢𝖬
∶ 𝛿𝐸 𝑑𝛺 + 𝑉𝑓 𝐸𝑓 𝑢′ 𝛿𝑢′ 𝑑𝛺
∫𝛺 ∼ ∼ ∫𝛺 ∼ ∼ ∫𝛺
where 𝑢 is the longitudinal displacement, 𝑢′ its spatial derivative and
𝖢𝖬
𝑆
∼
is the stress on the continuum medium.
Consequently, the strain energy inside the beams must be equal
to the strain energy of the fibres. For reasons of computation time
limitations, the simulations are performed in a two-dimensional frame-
work with a plane constraint assumption (additional motivations are
given in [24]). To generate a pure compression or tension state, one
side is blocked in one direction and the displacement is imposed
(4) on the opposite side and permits Poisson’s effect. The displacement
imposed on the model corresponds to a mesoscopic deformation of
0.5%. The macroscopic logarithm strain is deduced from the length of
the structure at the end of the loading and the mesoscopic Cauchy stress
is deduced from global force and transverse section.
To define the properties of beams, it is assumed that the ten-
sile/compressive modulus is equal to the tension modulus of fibres 𝐸𝑓 ,
which are assumed to have a linear elastic behaviour. The cross-section
area 𝑆𝐵 𝑖 and second moment of area 𝐼𝐵 𝑖 of beams 𝑖 can be defined to
obtain similar energy to compression/tension. The following relations,
Eq. (7), can be written as:
𝑛𝑏 𝑛
∑ 𝑙𝑖 ∑
𝑓
𝐸𝑓 𝑆𝑓 𝑙𝑖
𝑉𝑓 𝐸𝑓 𝑢′ 𝛿𝑢′ 𝑑𝛺 = 𝐸𝑓 𝑆𝐵 𝑖 𝑢′ 𝛿𝑢′ 𝑑𝑙𝑖 = 𝑢′ 𝛿𝑢′ 𝑑𝑙𝑖 (7)
∫𝛺 ∫0 𝐴 ∫0
𝑖=1 𝑖=1
where 𝑛𝑓 is the number of the fibres and 𝑛𝑏 the number of the beams
of length 𝑙𝑖 , 𝑢 is the displacement in the fibre direction and ()′ the
derivate operator in the fibre direction. A is a coefficient that depends
on Poisson’s ratio to obtain the stiffness of the unidirectional composite.
In the 2D framework, the number of beams is very close to the number
of fibres and is calculated in accordance to 𝑉𝑓 . The second moment of
area of beams is determined in the same manner. The following equality
concerns the bending energy:
𝑛𝑏
𝐼𝑓 ∑
𝑉𝑓 𝐸𝑓 𝑣′′ 𝛿𝑣′′ 𝑑𝛺 = 𝐸𝑓 𝐼𝐵 𝑖 𝑣′′ 𝛿𝑣′′ 𝑑𝑙𝑖 (8)
∫𝛺 𝑆𝑓 ∫𝑙𝑖
𝑖=1
The representative volume element (RVE) chosen here is a square
of 1.6 mm × 1.6mm, which is meshed with 6400 beams and 6480
plane stress elements, while the number of nodes is 19 763. The initial
default is assumed to be constant (fibres undulate in phase) in the
structure, being taken as sinusoidal and described by two parameters:
its amplitude and wavenumber. The wavenumber is chosen as equal
to 4 and the amplitude of the defect is equal to either 2.22 or 4.44
μm which corresponds to a maximum misalignment angle of 1 and 2◦
respectively.
The anisotropic properties of the 2D continuum medium (stiffness
tensor 𝐿≈
𝖢𝖬
) are defined through the composite cylinder assemblage
homogenisation scheme [27] with the determination of the in-plane
shear modulus being made following the generalised self consistent
is taken as 50% for GFRP and 55% for both CFRP. The fibre properties
are taken from datasheets (tensile modulus) and literature results [29].
The matrix is assumed to be a classical epoxy resin [21] with a Young’s
modulus of 3.5 GPa and a Poisson’s ratio of 0.4. In the fibre direction,
the contribution of the fibre on stiffness is supported by the beam and
should be subtracted from the 2D medium stiffness. All necessary pa-
rameters of the model are reported in Tables 1 and 2. The code Abaqus
v6.17 (Dassault Systèmes) is used with elements B22 (2D beams) and
CPS8 (plane stress continuum elements). A description of the model is
shown in Fig. 1. The nodes of the beams and the 2D medium are shared,
so the displacements are identical, only the rotations of the straight
sections of the beams are not related to the continuous medium, they
allow us to understand the micro-bending energy.
Within the framework of this article, where one wants to understand
the physical origins of the elastic non-linearity, it is necessary and
sufficient to build a model with the consideration of the fibres (stiffness
and diameter) and the initial defects at the ply scale. There were two
(6) possible ways to address this. Firstly, a 2D or 3D description of the
arrangement of fibres and matrix can be conducted on a representa-
tive elementary volume with necessarily conditions of periodicity and
a limited dimension [30–33], within the framework of the classical

3
V. Keryvin et al. Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329

Fig. 1. Description of the non-local model including boundary conditions, the connectivity between the continuum medium and the fibres (top). An example of output field (axial
stress here) in the continuum medium and the fibre (beam).

continuum mechanics. It requires a complete description of the mi- Table 1

𝖢𝖬
Properties of BNL homogeneous continuum media: stiffness tensor 𝐿 components in
crostructure with the modelling of the matrix, the fibres and their ≈
GPa. (Only necessary components are considered in the 2D numerical analysis; 1 is
connections. The mesh must be fine enough to describe the micro the fibre axis).
bending and wavinesses with 2D or 3D finite elements which are not L𝖢𝖬
1111
L𝖢𝖬
1122
L𝖢𝖬
2222
L𝖢𝖬
1133
L𝖢𝖬
2233
L𝖢𝖬
3333
L𝖢𝖬
1212
L𝖢𝖬
1313
L𝖢𝖬
2323
made for and which can lock in bending, Secondly, an alternative is CFRP (IM2C) 1.67 1.48 11.7 1.48 6.05 11.7 3.70 3.70 2.80
to position oneself in the context of non-local media by integrating a CFRP (HR40) 1.84 1.56 11.0 1.56 5.80 11.0 3.70 3.70 2.60
GFRP (EC14) 2.17 0.92 16.2 0.92 8.03 16.2 3.40 3.40 3.60
term of micro-curvature in the energy expression. It is important to GFRP (EC7) 2.17 0.92 16.2 0.92 8.03 16.2 3.40 3.40 3.60
emphasise here that the beams are not an exact representation of the
fibres, they are present to calculate this micro-curvature energy of the
Table 2
non-local model. Beams and solid elements share the same nodes. The Geometrical properties of BNL beams (thickness, fibre diameter in 2D and width) and
displacements at these nodes are strictly identical. The rotation part material properties: axial Young’s modulus for fibre (𝑓 ) and lamina elastic properties
in the beams only makes it possible to calculate the micro energy of of the ply (fibre axis L and transverse axis T).

curvature of the nonlocal medium; this is the reason for this choice of Property Beam Beam E𝑓 E𝐿 E𝑇 G𝐿𝑇 𝜈𝐿𝑇
Width Thickness
structural elements. This term of rotation is not related to the solid, it Material [μm] [μm] [GPa] [GPa] [GPa] [GPa] [–]
is indirectly related by the field of displacement and takes part in the CFRP (IM2C) 2.11 5.2 296 164 8.4 3.7 0.31
equilibrium like a Timoshenko beam where the rotation of the section CFRP (HR40) 1.58 7 360 200 7.8 3.7 0.31
is independent of the transverse displacement. However, it is this term GFRP (EC14) 0.71 14 80 42 11 3.4 0.32
GFRP (EC7) 1.42 7 80 42 11 3.4 0.32
which is necessary to account for the structural effect without having
to create a complete model describing the microstructure. That is the
key point of this second approach we have selected. Table 3
Papers [34,35] showed and mathematically demonstrated that this Initial UD moduli in tension E𝑇𝖴𝖣0 and compression E𝐶0
𝖴𝖣 for M81/IM2C, M81/HR40
(carbon fibres) and XB3515/EC14 (glass fibre) by 4PB tests.
description is consistent in the context of micromechanics. It is even
M81/IM2C M81/HR40 XB3515/EC14
capable of understanding boundary layer effects under compression and
E𝑇𝖴𝖣0 [GPa] 165 ± 4 195 ± 6 40 ± 1
bending, as shown by calculations on a complete microstructure. This
E𝐶0
𝖴𝖣 [GPa] 164 ± 3 195 ± 5 40 ± 2
homogeneous approach by the nature of the finite elements does not
raise questions about the quality of the numerical result; the calcula-
tions are short and above all it is possible to distribute the defects at
the mesoscopic scale in connection with the wavelengths observed in
different papers.

4
V. Keryvin et al. Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329

Table 4
Comparison between non linear elastic parameters (dimensionless numbers) extracted
by different mechanical tests on IM2C and HR40 fibres. SFT stands for single fibre
tension test, 4PB for four-points bending tests and COMP for compression tests.
Tension Compression
Test 4PB SFT 4PB COMP
Parameter 𝛽′ 𝛽𝑓 𝛼′ 𝛼′
Fibre
HR40 21.6 ± 4.4 17.7 ± 4.2 21.8 ± 3.6 n.d.
IM2C 13.7 ± 3.9 n.d. 8.0 ± 3.4 12.3 ± 1.3

Fig. 4. Compression test on [90/0]3𝑆 Se84LV/IM2C laminate used to determine the

parameter 𝛼 ′ using Eq. (2). The inset indicates the evolution of the secant modulus
(relative to E𝐶0,𝖫𝖠𝖬 ).

Fig. 2. Single fibre tensile tests on HR40 carbon fibre used to determine the initial
tensile modulus E𝑇𝖿 0 on [0–0,1] % of tensile strain and that of 𝛽𝑓 on [0.1–0.5] % of
strain, using Eq. (1). The inset indicates the evolution of the secant modulus (relative
to E𝑇𝖿 0 ).

Fig. 5. Four-point bending tests on M81/IM2C, M81/HR40 (carbon fibres) and

XB3515/EC14 (glass fibre): neutral axis position during the loading as defined
in Eq. (3).

Table 3 shows the initial moduli of three different composites

Fig. 3. Single fibre tensile tests on glass fibres EC14 used to determine the initial tensile
modulus E𝑇𝖿 0 on [0–0,1]% of tensile strain. A constant slope (modulus) is observed up
to 0.5%. The inset indicates the evolution of the secant modulus (relative to E𝑇𝖿 0 ).
3. Results
Examples of SFT results are presented in Fig. 2 (HR40 carbon
fibre) and Fig. 3 (EC14 glass fibre). Data analyses, using Eq. (1), give
an initial tensile modulus of 358 ± 22 GPa and a linear increase in
tension modulus 𝛽𝑓 = 17.7 ± 4.2 for HR40 carbon fibre. They also
give an initial tensile modulus of 81 ± 4 GPa for the glass fibre;
no noticeable changes in this modulus are detected in the range of
strains investigated (below 0.5%). Note that unlike the initial tensile
modulus, the determination of 𝛽𝑓 is not sensitive to uncertainties in
the measurement of fibre diameter.
Fig. 4 shows an example of the determination of 𝛼 ′ from single com-
pression tests (COMP) on Se84LV/IM2C. Data analyses, using Eq. (2),
give a linear decrease in compression modulus 𝛼 ′ = 12.3 ± 1.3.
introducing the three different fibres studied here. These moduli are the
same in tension and compression. Eq. (4) is used to determine the non-
linear parameters from four-point bending tests (4PB) on eight batches
of five different epoxy matrices and IM2C fibre (Se84LV, Se84 nano
Gen1, Se84 nano Gen 2, R374-1, M79, M81), giving a linear increase in
tension modulus 𝛽 ′ = 13.7 ± 3.9 and a linear decrease in compression
modulus 𝛼 ′ = 8.0 ± 3.4. For the other eight batches of six different
epoxy matrices (Se84 nano Gen1, Se84 nano Gen 2 with three different
nano-fillers contents, R374-1, M81) and HR40 fibre, Eq. (4) gives 𝛽 ′ =
21.6 ± 4.4 and 𝛼 ′ = 21.8 ± 3.6. It is important to specify that, for a
given fibre, we find no influence of the matrix on these latter values.
The position of the neutral axis during the loading, which was taken as
an indicator of non-linear elasticity in [6], is plotted in Fig. 5 for glass
fibre EC14 and carbon fibres IM2C and HR40. No evolution is observed,
for the glass fibre, in conformity with a linear elastic behaviour: the
neutral axis and the mid-axis coincide, as recently reported by Cocchi
et al. [13]. The shift towards the tensile zone is more pronounced for
HR40 than for IM2C, which is in agreement (see Table 4) with the
non linear parameters 𝛼 ′ and 𝛽 ′ which are higher for HR40 than for
IM2C. All non-linear parameters values are reported in Table 4 for
comparison.
Figs. 6 to 8 describe the evolution of the axial modulus of a UD
ply of epoxy/fibre composite in tension and compression for IM2C
carbon fibre, HR40 carbon fibre, and EC14 glass fibre. The moduli,

5
V. Keryvin et al. Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329

Table 5
Non linear elastic parameters (𝛽𝑓 from SFT, 𝛽 ′ from TUD and 4PB, 𝛼 ′ from CUD and 4PB) taken from the literature for
different types of carbon fibres. Acronyms are: SFT (single fibre tension), TUD (tension UD), CUD (compression UD), 4PB
(four-points bending). Mod. (modulus) denotes a tangential (T) definition of the modulus or a secant definition of the modulus
(S) [the coefficients determined by the tangent method are divided by two in this table]. |𝜖𝗆𝖺𝗑 | is the fracture strain .
Type Name Source Test Mod. 𝛽𝑓 𝛽′ 𝛼′ |𝜖𝗆𝖺𝗑 | [%]
SM T300 Hughes [2] Tension (Tow) T 8 1.6
T400 ′′ ′′ ′′ 8 1.9
T700 ′′ ′′ ′′ 8 1.7
T300 Kant and Penumadu [14] SFT T 13 1.2
′′ ′′ ′′
T400 13 1.6
′′ ′′ ′′
T700 13 1.4
T300 Allix et al. [10] 4PB S 19 1.2
T300 Djordjević et al. [11] TUD/4PB T 13 13 1.6
T300 ′′ TUD/4PB T 14 6 1.6
Thornel A ′′ TUD/4PB ′′ 12 1.6
′′ ′′
HTA SFT/TUD 8 13 1.6
′′ ′′ ′′
Grafil 9 1.6
XAS Wisnom [5] TUD/CUD S 4 14 1/0.5
IM T800 Hughes [2] Tension (Tow) T 9 1.7
T800 Kant and Penumadu [14] SFT T 13 1.7
IM6 Allix et al. [10] 4PB S 24 1.1
IM7 Murphey et al. [7] TUD/4PB T 11 12 1.3/1.5
′′ ′′ ′′
IM10 12 13 1.5/2
IM2C Keryvin et al. [6] 4PB S 5 22 1.2
IM2C This work 4PB S 14 8 0.5
′′
IM2C COMP S 12 0.5
HM M40 Hughes [2] Tension (Tow) T 12 0.6
M50 ′′ ′′ ′′ 14 0.5
M40 Kant and Penumadu [14] SFT T 13 1
′′ ′′ ′′
M50 14 1.2
HR40 This work SFT/4PB S 18 22 22 0.5
UHM M55 Murphey et al. [7] TUD/4PB T 11 14±134 0.5

for different fibre waviness levels, vary as a function of the out-of-

plane misalignment angle 𝜃, derived from the numerical simulations
described in Section 2.3. At 0.5% in strain for the highest angle of
2◦ considered here (a value beyond reported values, see [20,22,36]),
we find an increase of ∼0.5 h in tension and a decrease of ∼0.7 h
in compression are reported for the GFRP, which are non-significant
differences. On the contrary, at 0.5% of strain, UD with carbon fibres
show an increase in their tensile moduli by ∼0.7% for IM2C (compared
with 1% for HR40) and decreased their compressive moduli by ∼1.2%
for IM2C (respectively 1.8% for HR40), for the same 𝜃. Fig. 9 finally
compares the behaviour of these different fibres.

4. Discussion

4.1. Relevance of the values of the non-linear parameters extracted by 4PB

Fig. 6. Evolution of axial modulus for IM2C carbon fibre in an unidirectional
epoxy/fibre ply as given by the non-local numerical model.
Fig. 7. Evolution of axial modulus for HR40 carbon fibre in an unidirectional
epoxy/fibre ply as given by the non-local numerical model.
For HR40 carbon fibre, the increase in tensile modulus given by 4PB
is a little higher than that given by SFT (see Table 4), even if this result
is somewhat mitigated by the data scatter. Since the fibres are straight
in the SFT tests, we cannot exclude a possible contribution, even if
minimal, due to initial geometrical defects such as fibre waviness in the
UD plies. This is investigated in Section 4.2. For IM2C carbon fibre, the
decrease in compression modulus as given by 4PB is a little lower than
that given by COMP (see Table 4).
In Table 5, we have compared our data with literature results. For
four main reasons, it is problematic to compare the values for non-
linear elastic parameters to other literature sources. Firstly, there is a
large number of experimental methods for which comparisons are not
relevant. For instance, Kant and Penumadu [14] extracted 𝛽𝑓 by SFT
and compared it to previous results from Hughes [2] obtained from
tension tests on tows. While some fibres yield similar results (HM),
others show a large difference (Standard Modulus – SM). Secondly,
we should highlight that two different moduli can be extracted form
experimental data in the literature, i.e. the secant modulus, which is
the ratio of stress to strain [10], and the tangent modulus, which is the
derivative of stress versus the derivative of strain [7]. In the following,
we use only the secant modulus values from Table 5. The non-linear

6
V. Keryvin et al. Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329

Table 6
Contribution of fibre waviness to the increase of stiffness in tension and decrease in
compression for an epoxy/fibre UD composite at a strain of 0.5% (absolute value). All
values are in %. 4PB refers to experimental data determined by four-points bending
while BNL stands for numerical simulations with a fibre waviness 𝜃 of 1 or 2◦ . The
‘contribution’ is the ratio BNL to 4PB.
Strain 0.5% - 𝜃 = 1◦
Tension (increase in stiffness) Compression (decrease in stiffness)
Fibre 4PB BNL Contribution 4PB BNL Contribution
IM2C 7 0.2 3 4 0.3 8
HR40 11 0.25 2 11 0.5 5
EC14 ∼0 ∼0 n.d. ∼0 ∼0 n.d.
EC7 ∼0 ∼0 n.d. ∼0 ∼0 n.d.
Strain 0.5% - 𝜃 = 2◦
Tension (increase in stiffness) Compression (decrease in stiffness)
Fibre 4PB BNL Contribution 4PB BNL Contribution
IM2C 7 0.7 10 4 1.2 30
HR40 11 1 9 11 1.8 16
Fig. 8. Evolution of axial modulus for EC14 glass fibre in an unidirectional epoxy/fibre
EC14 ∼0 0.05 n.d. ∼0 0.07 n.d.
ply as given by the non-local numerical model.
EC7 ∼0 0.05 n.d. ∼0 0.07 n.d.

coefficients differ by a factor of 2 according to whether we use the

secant modulus or the tangent modulus. (Actually, this is the case only
if the stress is a second-order polynomial function of the strain. In
some studies, the non-linearity can be described as a power-law, again
making it difficult to make comparisons between sources.) Thirdly, to
our knowledge there are no data available for IM2C and HR40, so we
make some comparisons with similar types of fibres. Finally, the non-
linear elastic behaviour, described only in our case via 𝛼 ′ and 𝛽 ′ , may
vary depending on the strain level (see Figure 6 in Ref. [6]). Our value
of 𝛽𝑓 = 18 for the HM carbon fibre HR40 is comparable to the values
reported for HM fibres [2,14].
In terms of values obtained from composite plies, Allix et al. [10]
reported 𝛼 ′ of 24 for an IM carbon fibre, IM6. IM2C is similar to IM6,
so the 𝛼 ′ value of 8 ± 3 and the 𝛽 ′ value of 14 ± 4, obtained in our
study, are therefore very different from previous results. However, the
values found in [10] are determined over the entire range of strains Fig. 9. Evolution of axial modulus for IM2C and HR40 carbon fibres as well EC14
up to failure (at around 1.5%), which is very different from the range glass fibre in an unidirectional epoxy/fibre ply as given by the non-local numerical
model.
considered here (0.1–0.5%). Indeed over the entire range of strains up
to failure, Keryvin et al. [6] reported an 𝛼 ′ of 22 ± 2, consistent with
the literature [10]. Yet, Murphey et al. [7] reported 𝛼 ′ and 𝛽 ′ values
of the misalignment angle 𝜃 = 2◦ . Assuming a more relevant value of
of 11 and 12 for IM7 as well as 12 and 13, respectively, for IM10.
1◦ for this angle (see [20,22,36,37]), the increase and the decrease
The authors observed very high failure strains on thin composites in
are limited to ∼0.2 and 0.35%, respectively, so that geometry can
bending. This comparison with IM fibres is a classic example of the
explain 1/14th and 1/11th of the changes in stiffness in tension and in
need to pay special attention when comparing raw results: the fibres
compression, respectively.
may differ even if they are made from IM type; the range of maximum
For HR40 carbon fibre, geometry can explain up to 1/10th of the
strains differ and the assumption of a linear variation of elastic moduli
increase and up to 1/6th of the decrease, by taking an extreme value
may have an influence; the method used for the direct extraction of
of the misalignment angle 𝜃 = 2◦ . For a more relevant value of 1◦ for
parameters (as in this study) for the two coefficients or the use of
this angle, the increase and the decrease are limited to ∼0.25 and 0.5%,
different tests (and therefore different maximum strains) [7] has a clear respectively, in which case geometry can explain 1/50th and 1/20th of
impact on the values. the changes in stiffness in tension and in compression, respectively.
All these comparisons, as well as the numerous different epoxy Therefore, for a reasonable value of the misalignment angle, and
matrices studied (see Section 3), lead us to infer that the method used for a maximum strain of 0.5%, the (extrinsic) contribution of geometry
for the extraction of the non-linear parameters 𝛼 ′ and 𝛽 ′ is well-founded is of second order, but not negligible, with respect to the (intrinsic)
and that these properties are not resin-based. contribution of the carbon fibre.
The differences in response between the carbon and glass fibres are
4.2. Possible origins of elastic non linearity very marked. We might consider that the large diameter of the glass
fibres is the main cause of this difference, but a simulation with 7 μm
We attempt to discriminate here between possible contributions to in diameter fibres (see Tables 1 and 2) leads to the same linear response
elastic non-linearity due to the carbon fibre itself and its misalignment. (see Fig. 10). Consequently these differences cannot be attributed to the
Table 6 shows the relative contribution of geometry (misalignment diameter of the reinforcement, which is not the only parameter that
angle 𝜃) obtained with the BNL (Beam Non Local) model vis-à-vis defines the behaviour in tension and compression. While it is true that
experimental results in compression and in tension obtained by 4PB. the section contributes to the microbending stiffness of the fibres, it is
For IM2C carbon fibre, geometry can explain up to 1/10th of the essential to take into account of the non-linear geometric destabilising
𝐼
increase and up to 1/4th of the decrease, by taking an extreme value term 𝑉𝑓 𝐸𝑓 𝑆𝑓 (see Eq. (8)) in the analysis. If this term depends on
𝑓

7
V. Keryvin et al.
Fig. 10. Evolution of axial modulus for EC7 glass fibre in an unidirectional epoxy/fibre
ply as given by the non-local numerical model.
the initial defect as detailed in [26], it is also a function of the stress
applied in the direction of the fibres. However, for glass fibres, this
stress level is much lower than for carbon fibres at the same level of
deformation imposed on the ply. Consequently, the geometric nonlinear
term that generates the evolution of the stiffness in tension as well
as in compression will only be quantifiable at much higher levels of
deformation for glass fibres. These levels would be above the local
micro-plastic buckling instability. For the two types of carbon fibre, the
differences arise not only from the geometrical stiffness of the fibres,
but also from the stiffnesses in the other directions (differentiated
stiffnesses given in Tables 1 and 2).
4.3. Impact and relevance of this study
It might be strange to state that the non-linear elasticity of CFRP,
the very first behaviour required for design, is still either unknown
or not properly addressed by composite scientists and engineers. This
study is clearly an attempt to reappraise this topic, which is not yet
solidly grounded. If this non-linearity is not taken into account in
numerical simulations, stress-based approaches become meaningless. If
it is taken into account, one may be interested in knowing the levels of
non-linearity, in tension and compression, for a given composite ply.
This justifies, by the way, to compare our results to that of literature,
highlighting possible traps for a fast reader who could quickly pick
numbers without reading in details a given study. Besides, for force-
imposed boundary value problems, dimensioning in terms of deflection
or strength requires the elastic behaviour to be known. It is also the
case when comparing test results on composite parts or structures
with instrumentation, recording only kinematical data (displacements
or strains), to numerical simulations. Moreover, since the compressive
strength is often the key design parameter for composite structures,
the questions of its measurement and its estimation are at stake. In
both situations, one needs to calculate a stress, based on a modulus.
Untangling the possible contributions of this nonlinear elasticity is both
scientifically and pragmatically of interest. For the former, it permits
to study the mechanisms of nonlinearity at different scales, identifying
the ultramicrostructure of carbon fibres as the main contributor. For
the latter, it allows one to separate possible effects of matter (carbon
fibre) from that of manufacturing. Indeed, fibre waviness comes mostly
from the curing step in thermosets-based composites. For example,
the estimation of compressive strength proposed by Budiansky and
Fleck [38] separates the behaviour of the plies from that of the fibre
waviness.
8
Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329
5. Conclusion
To understand the origins of elastic non-linearity of continuous fibre
composites in tension and compression, we have performed four-point
bending experiments and numerical simulations. The former allows us
to extract the quantitative parameters of this non-linearity. Compared
to other experiments and literature results, we have shown that this
procedure is well-founded. The latter allows us to quantify the contri-
bution of fibre waviness to this non-linearity. Considering the interplay
between glass and carbon fibres on the one hand, and, the diameter of
these fibres, along with their initial waviness, on the other hand, we
can address the initial question on the origins of elastic non-linearity.
For the range of strains considered here (less than 0.5%):
1. The initial moduli are equal in tension and in compression
2. GFRP as well as single glass fibres are linear elastic
3. CFRP with IM or HM fibres as well as single fibres are non-linear
elastic
4. The non-linearity for HM carbon fibre in tension and compres-
sion is more pronounced than for IM carbon fibre
5. The non-linearity arising from fibre misalignment is almost nil
in GFRP and much larger for CFRP. The difference is shown to
be derived from the lower stress levels in glass fibres and not
from the larger diameter of glass fibres
6. Geometry can contribute to the global elastic non linearity,
using misalignment levels reported in the literature (∼ 1◦ ), with
changes up to 1/14th in tension and 1/11th in compression for
IM carbon fibres
7. The non-linearity of carbon fibres in tension and compression is
predominantly intrinsic to their nature
Besides, the non-local numerical model, used in this study, opens
some interesting perspectives. For instance, after accounting for the
nonlinearities in compression, it will finally be possible to understand
much more precisely the failure stress in compression with all the
potential to account for the material variabilities (defects, volume
fraction) at the mesostructure scale.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
V. Keryvin: Resources, Data curation, Conceptualization, Method-
ology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Supervision, Formal anal-
ysis. A. Marchandise: Writing – review & editing, Resources, In-
vestigation. J.-C. Grandidier: Software, Writing – review & editing,
Conceptualization, Investigation.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the French ANRT for partial funding of the
PhD grant of A. Marchandise (#2016/0114) as well as A. Boyer, P.-
Y. Méchin, I. Pillin, H. Bellegou (IRDL), F. Portanguen (UBS) and R.
Le Borgne (Avel Robotics) for their experimental assistance. Dr M.S.N
Carpenter post-edited the English style and grammar.
V. Keryvin et al.
References
[1] Curtis GJ, M. MJ, Reynolds WN. Non-hookean behaviour of strong carbon fibres.
Nature 1968;220(5171):1024–5.
[2] Hughes J. Strength and modulus of current carbon fibres. Carbon N Y
1986;24(5):551–6.
[3] Shioya M, Hayakawa E, Takaku A. Non-hookean stress-strain response
and changes in crystallite orientation of carbon fibres. J Mater Sci
1996;31(17):4521–32.
[4] Vandreumel WHM, Kamp JLM. Non-hookean behavior in fiber direction of
carbon-fiber composites and influence of fiber waviness on tensile properties.
J Compos Mater 1977;11(Oct):461–9.
[5] Wisnom MR. Limitations of linear elastic bending theory applied to four point
bending of unidirectional carbon fibre-epoxy. In: 31st struct. struct. dyn. mater.
conf.. Reston, Virigina: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics; 1990.
[6] Keryvin V, Marchandise A, Mechin P-Y, Grandidier J-C. Determination of the
longitudinal non linear elastic behaviour and compressive strength of a {cfrp}
ply by bending tests on laminates. Composites B 2020;187:107863.
[7] Murphey TW, Peterson ME, Grigoriev MM. Large strain four-point bending of
thin unidirectional composites. J Spacecr Rockets 2015;52(3):882–95.
[8] Mujika F, Carbajal N, Arrese A, Mondragon I. Determination of tensile and
compressive moduli by flexural tests. Polym Test 2006;25(6):766–71.
[9] Serna Moreno MC, Romero Gutiérrez A, Martínez Vicente JL. Different response
under tension and compression of unidirectional carbon fibre laminates in a
three-point bending test. Compos Struct 2016;136:706–11.
[10] Allix O, Ladevèze P, Vittecoq E. Modelling and identification of the mechan-
ical behaviour of composite laminates in compression. Compos Sci Technol
1994;51(1):35–42.
[11] Djordjević IM, Sekulić DR, Stevanović MM. Non-linear elastic behaviour of
carbon fibres of different structural and mechanical characteristic. J Serbian
Chem Soc 2007;72(5):513–21.
[12] Montagnier O. Compression characterization of high-modulus carbon fibers. J
Compos Mater 2005;39(1):35–49.
[13] Cocchi A, Montagnier O, Hochard C. Study of hourglass-shaped specimens for
the analysis of compression behaviour in fibre direction of FRP composites using
compression and four-point bending tests. Composites A 2021;144(November
2020).
[14] Kant M, Penumadu D. Dynamic mechanical characterization for nonlinear
behavior of single carbon fibers. Composites A 2014;66:201–8.
[15] Mrse A, Piggott M. Compressive properties of unidirectional carbon fibre lami-
nates: I. A compact flexure beam for compression testing. Compos Sci Technol
1993;46(3):213–7.
[16] Hsiao HM, Daniel IM. Effect of fiber waviness on stiffness and strength reduction
of unidirectional composites under compressive loading. Compos Sci Technol
1996;56(5):581–93.
[17] Meng M, Le HR, Rizvi MJ, Grove SM. The effects of unequal compressive/tensile
moduli of composites. Compos Struct 2015;126:207–15.
[18] Mechin P-Y, Keryvin V, Grandidier J-C. Effect of the nano-filler content on
the compressive strength of continuous carbon fibre/epoxy matrix composites.
Composites B 2021;224:109223.
[19] Keryvin V, Lan M, Bourmaud A, Parenteau T, Charleux L, Baley C. Analysis
of flax fibres viscoelastic behaviour at micro and nano scales. Composites A
2015;68:219–25.
Composites Part B 247 (2022) 110329
[20] Mechin P, Keryvin V, Grandidier J, Glehen D. An experimental protocol
to measure the parameters affecting the compressive strength of CFRP with
a fibre micro-buckling failure criterion. Compos Struct 2019;211(September
2018):154–62.
[21] Mechin P-Y, Keryvin V, Grandidier J-C. Limitations on adding nano-fillers to
increase the compressive strength of continuous fibre / epoxy matrix composites.
Compos Sci Technol 2020;192:108099.
[22] Grabow M. Contribution to the investigation of the compressive strength
and delamination of continuous fibre laminated composites in the context of
competitive sailing (Ph.D. thesis), Univ. Bretagne Sud (France); 2021.
[23] Grandidier J-C, Channakeshava AB, Mazziotta R. A non-local model to analyse
2D and 3D microbuckling of long carbon fibre epoxy material. Compos Struct
2021;277:114531.
[24] Bettadahalli Channakeshava A, Grandidier J-C. A non-local finite element model
to assess the compressive strength of composite structures. Eur J Mech A Solids
2022;93:104494.
[25] Wisnom MR. Analysis of shear instability in compression due to fiber waviness.
J Reinf Plast Compos 1993;12(11):1171–89.
[26] Drapier S, Grandidier J-C, Potier-Ferry M. A structural approach of plas-
tic microbuckling in long fibre composites: comparison with theoretical and
experimental results. Int J Solids Struct 2001;38(22–23):3877–904.
[27] Hashin Z. Analysis of composite materials—A survey. J Appl Mech
1983;50(3):481.
[28] Christensen R, Lo K. Solutions for effective shear properties in three phase sphere
and cylinder models. J Mech Phys Solids 1979;27(4):315–30.
[29] Guruprasad T, Keryvin V, Charleux L, Guin J-P, Arnould O. On the determination
of the elastic constants of carbon fibres by nanoindentation tests. Carbon N Y
2021;173:572–86.
[30] Pimenta S, Gutkin R, Pinho S, Robinson P. A micromechanical model for kink-
band formation: Part I - Experimental study and numerical modelling. Compos
Sci Technol 2009;69(7–8):948–55.
[31] Bishara M, Rolfes R, Allix O. Revealing complex aspects of compressive failure
of polymer composites – Part I: Fiber kinking at microscale. Compos Struct
2017;169:105–15.
[32] Naya F, Gonzalez C, Lopes CS, Van der Veen S, Pons F. Computational microme-
chanics of the transverse and shear behavior of unidirectional fiber reinforced
polymers including environmental effects. Composites A 2017;92:146–57.
[33] Sun WG, Li Z, Zhang Z, Mi Huang Y. Compressive failure analysis of unidirec-
tional carbon/epoxy composite based on micro-mechanical models. Chinese J
Aeronaut 2017;30(6):1907–18.
[34] Gardin C, Potier-Ferry M. Microflambage des fibres dans un materiau composite
a fibres longues : analyse asymptotique 2-D. C R L’Acad Des Sci Paris - Ser II
1992;315:1159–64.
[35] Drapier S, Gardin C, Grandidier J-C, Potier-Ferry M. Structure effect and
microbuckling. Compos Sci Technol 1996;56(7):861–7.
[36] Jumahat A. Effect of nanofillers on thermo-mechanical properties of polymers
and composite laminates (Ph.D. thesis), University of Sheffield, UK; 2011, p.
306.
[37] Lee J, Soutis C. A study on the compressive strength of thick carbon fibre–epoxy
laminates. Compos Sci Technol 2007;67(10):2015–26.
[38] Budiansky B, Fleck N. Compressive failure of fibre composites. J Mech Phys
Solids 1993;41(1):183–211.