Micromechanics: For Short and Long Fibre Composites

IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Institut fr Flugzeugbau, University Stuttgart
Composites modelling:
Micromechanics of short and long fibre composites
Micromechanics: For short and long fibre

composites
Short fibre composites:
o Load transfer mechanisms in short fibre composites
o The critical fibre length Lc for short composites
o Models for stiffness and failure
Long (continuous) fibre composites:
o Some basic definitions
o Law of mixtures for stiffness prediction
o Micromechanics laws for failure prediction
Tutorial example on micromechanics
1
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Short fibre composites
Reinforcement types for short fibre composites
Mechanisms of load trasfer (matrix-to-fibre). Applicable to:

1. Stress build-up in a broken continuous fibre
2. Short fibre reinforced composites
Short fibre reinforced composites:

1. Mechanical properties and the critical fibre length (Lc)
2. Relationship between failure and fibre-matrix properties
3. Relationship between modulus and fibre length
Examples
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Three types of short fiber composites are common
b) Off-axis aligned
a) Aligned
c) Randomly orientated
Short fiber reinforced composites use short fibers or whiskers to reinforce the matrix.
They are an important group of composites and widely used in industry.
Their mechanical performance is lower than continuous reinforced composites, but they
have other advantages:
o Suitable for injection type processes (rapid and cost effective).
o Suitable for complex geometries.
o Suitable for low to medium load bearing applications.
o Especially appropriate for low cost applications.
IFB
o Examples include Automotive trim and many other semi-load

bearing applications.
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Spraying and injection equipment for short fibre composites

Spaying
Injection
Example of spraying short fibres

mixed with resin.
Fibres are usually random, although
methods have been developed to
give preferential alignment.
Resin is a thermoset.
4
Typical injection equipment for thermoplastic

composites that may include short fibres.
Fibres are usually random, but there are some
preferential directions due to the flow process.
Resin is a thermoplastic.
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Mechanisms of load transfer in a short fibre

fibre
matrix
Matrix-fibre interface shear stress = 0
fibre
Matrix-fibre interface
shear stress 0
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Load transfer mechanisms in a fibre-polymer composite

Functions of the constituents:
1. The fibres have the function to carry loads
2. The matrix protects the fibres and transfer
external loads to the fibres. It also plays an
important role when weak fibres break.
Mechanism of load transfer:
Interfacial
shear stress
Axial stress
in fiber
These are the same for short fibre composites

and composites with a broken fibre:
Direct load transfer between the ends of two
short fibres via the matrix is not possible
(area too small and matrix to weak).
Instead interfacial shear stresses develop at
the (free) end. This has a maximum near the
end and reduces as shown.
This shear causes axial stress in the fibre to

increase from zero to fo at a length x=. At
this point the fibre carries the same axial
stress as the adjacent fibres (hence the
interfacial shear stress is zero).
Axial stress
in fiber
Interfacial
shear stress
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Load transfer of a single fiber in a matrix

The single fiber (length L) is embedded in a
matrix (assuming 2 free ends).
The fiber has zero axial stress at the ends which
increases until it has the same axial strain as the
surrounding matrix (only when it is long enough,
at which point interface shear stresses are zero).
For a fiber (Radius R) the loadings over an
element dz are shown. Shear is assumed
constant over length dz.
dz
'f
'f
d 'f
dz
dz
d 'f 2
'f R 2 2Rdz 'f
dz R
dz
d 'f 2 = Gradient of fiber
dz
R
axial stress
'f
7
IFB
2
R
dz
Rearranging gives the stress along the fiber

as function of z; Note this varies with z and
depends on R and the interface shear stress.
Integrating gives relationship between f and ( is not known)

f is inversely proportional to R; but fibre load increases due to
area (R^2)
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Expressions for matrix and fibre stress

From the previous slide
'f
2
R
dz
The variation of the interface shear stress is complex

and two limiting models are commonly used:
1. Cox assumes a linear elastic (matrix) behaviour.
2. Kelly assumes a rigid-perfectly plastic behaviour.

Cox model for prediction of elastic (E) properties
Matrix shear
The Cox model is (mathematically) complex and

gives the matrix shear stress and fibre axial stress
di t ib ti
distributions
assuming
i linear
li
elastic
l ti materials
t i l
Kelly model for prediction of failure properties
The Kelly model is easiest since we can assume
the matrix has a constant plastic stress along its
length
y constant
Possible
matrix stressstrain laws
laws.
Fibres are
elastic only
Axial fibre
z
Matrix shear
f 2 y z / R
Axial fibre
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

IFB
The critical fibre length Lc for short fibre

composites (assuming Kelly model)
matrix
f 2 y z / R
y
f
At a critical length z=L/2 the maximum fibre

stress is reached
fibre
f max L y / R
f max
If the maximum stress is equal to the fibre

failure stress then this length is called the
critical length L= Lc
Lc
Significance of the critical length Lc
Lc R f max / y
Note the critical length Lc depends on:

1. Fiber radius R (Large R larger Lc !)
2. Fiber axial strength f max
3. The matrix interface shear stress y (= matrix yield shear stress)

Example: For a Glass fiber (R= 0.005mm, fmax=1750MPa) embedded in a
polyester matrix (y=25MPa) gives:
Lc=0.35mm
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Cases for critical length Lc

For short fiber composites there are three conditions regarding the effectiveness of the
fibre lengths:
Fibre stress f
Case 1
Short fibre lengths
Case 2
Optimal fibre lengths
L<Lc
Insufficient shear stress
transfer to allow fibers to
reach their maximum load.
AFS
L=Lc
Large internal shear
stress active,
active fibers just
at maximum stress.
This composite would fail at a

lower load. Matrix failure/fibre
pullout with fibres loaded below
their max possible failure stress
10
Lc/2
Lc/2
f= f ult
Case 3
Long fiber lengths
AFS
L>Lc
Limited shear, most loads
carried by fibers that have
reached their maximum load.
These two composites would show fibre failure when

loaded to failure.
The composite failure load is not the same for each
since each case carries a different Average Fibre
Stress (AFS) when the composite reaches failure load.
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Kelly model: Formulae for failure in short fibre composites

Two possible cases can occur
1. Fibres debond and pull out of the resin (L < Lc)
This assumes the matrix is ductile

and does not break first!
2. The fibres break without pullout (L Lc)
App
plied stress
Fibre pull-out
Fibre breakage
(no pull out)
f composite
P=Pfail
P=Pc
L Lc
L
Fibre length
11
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Formulae for failure in short fibre composites
Case 1 - Matrix breaks first (=fibre pull-out)

Case 2 - Fibres reach their failure stress
The contributions of stress from fibres

and matrix can be combined with the law
of mixtures
C1 *f 1 Vf *m (1 Vf )
Fibre stre
ess f
Failure (is usually based on Kellys law). There are two possible failure cases to consider:
Case 1
Case 2
L<Lc
LLc
For Case 1
*m ult
and *f 1 ult
m
f1
For Case 2
*
ult
*f 1 ult
f 1 and m m
Formulae are available in the literature for both cases.
12
We shall look at this again in micro-mechanics; a simple alternative is to use the

Leuven software.
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Aligned short fibre verssus aligned continuous (stiffness)

Practical limits of compaction (Vf max
about 0.7-0.8; short fibers 0.6
Non Crimp Fabrics

(no crimp) is 50% of
the UD stiffness.
Woven and q
quasiisotropic fabrics 3540% of UD stiffness.
3D fabrics are about
20% of UD stiffness.
13
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Cox model: Formulae for elastic stresses and stiffness in short fibre
composites
Idealised unit cell
D= RVE diameter
d= fibre diameter
Detailed theory gives the stress build-up
in the fibre. The Composite modulus EC1 is
tanh( L / 2)
EC1 E f 1 1
V f EmVm
L / 2
Stiffness fibre part =f(L)
where
2Gm
A f E f 1 ln(D / d)
Stiffness matrix part (=constant)
Notation:
f and m denote the usual fibre and matrix quantities
Vf and Vm and the fibre and matrix volume fractions
14
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

IFB
Finite Element analysis of fiber in a matrix
FE idealisation of broken
fibre in a matrix
25mm
Assume plain strain
thickness 1mm. Use an
imposed displacement of
1mm at the loaded end
Gfibre = 5.5 GPa,
v = 0.3
Ematrix = 3 GPa,
Gmatrix = 1.5 GPa,
v = 0.3
Perform an FE analysis to investigate the stress distributions in the fibre

(axial) and matrix (shear)
15
IFB
5mm (fibre 1mm)
Efibre = 70 GPa,
Exercise:
Broken fibre
LOAD CASE 2013-2014

=
1
A.K. Pickett,
Loadcase 1
Institut
fr Flugzeugbau,
University Stuttgart
RESULTS
FILE =
1
DISPLACEMENT
CONTOURS OF RSLT
0
0.06 2515 5
0.12 5031
0.18 7547
0.25 0062
0.31 2578
0.37 5093
0.43 7609
0.50 0124
0.56 264
0.62 5155
0.68 7671
0.75 0186
0.81 2702
0.87 5217
0.93 7733
Axial stress in fibre
LOAD CASE
Loadcase 1
Max 1.000 at Node 1

Min 0.0000E+00 at Node 2
LOAD CASE
Loadcase 1
RESULTS FILE =
1
STRESS
CONTOURS OF SXY
-0. 3936 52
-0. 3444 45
-0. 2952 39
-0. 2460 32
-0. 1968 26
-0. 1476 19
-0. 0984 13
-0. 0492 065
0
Y
0.04 9206 5
0.09 8413
0.14 7619
0.19 6826
0.24 6032
0.29 5239
0.34 4445
16
Max 0.3937 at Node 295

Min -0.3937 at Node 119
RESULTS FILE =
STRESS
CONTOURS OF SX
1
1
0
0.11 1466
0.22 2932
0.33 4397
0.44 5863
0.55 7329
0.66 8795
0.78 0261
0.89 1726
1.00 319
1.11 466
1.22 612
1.33 759
1.44 906
1.56 052
1.67 199
Free end
displ !!.
x= ((1-0.4)/25)*70
1.7GPa
Lc= 1.0*1.7/0.39 = 4.3mm
Use ave 0.195 to get a
good value ca. 8.6mm
Max 1.788 at Node 238

Min 0.4737E-02 at Node 295
Shear stress in matrix

Note: the numbers and lengths
are high due to the large strain
applied in this illustrative example
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Exercise (for modulus and faulre):
Try the Leuven software and

convince yourself it is
reasonably correct compared to
the analytical solutions below:
Use carbon T800 and epoxy

for variation 2 (below)
Use E-Glass and epoxy for

variation 1.
You could also try Coxs

formula
Published data
from the book:
RF Gibson
17
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Other possibilities for RVE and analysis of short fiber composites
The principles of this model and the basic ideas presented so far can be used to:
Develop models for mechanical properties (E1) for aligned, off-axis aligned
and random short fire composites (see Cox, Kelly and Rosen models for
example). These are not very reliable due to the underlying assumptions that
must be made.
Develop failure models for the same (but these are even less reliable).
18
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Long (continuous) fibre composites:

Some definitions
Micromechanical models for stiffness prediction
Micromechanical models for failure prediction
Software tools for micromechanics
Some limitations of micromechanics
19
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Outline of presentation on Micromechanics:

Some definitions
Limitation of micromechanics
20
10
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Scales usually used in composites analysis
ca. 7m
ca. 4-20+ mm
ca. meters
Multiscale modelling
21
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Levels at which Composites can be analysed

Micro-mechanics: Idealisation
(fibre/matrix) at the unit cell level, can
be used to develop:
Idealised
unit cell
Micro-mechanical models for stiffness

Micro-mechanical
Mi
h i l models
d l for
f failure
f il
Macro-mechanics: Idealisation at the
ply level. Macro data (E1, E2, G12 )
and failure data are usually obtained
via micro-mechanical models or (more
likely) experimental testing of coupons
Laminate (Classical Laminate
Analysis/Theory - CLT): At the
laminate level. Summation of individual
plies to give laminate stiffness and
failure (Ex, Ey, Gxy, failure)
Structural analysis using:
Classical solutions (analytical
solutions + CLT..)
22 Finite Element techniques
11
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Some basic definitions

Homogeneous versus Heterogeneous materials:
Homogeneous materials have the same properties (e.g mechanical) at all points (steels)
Heterogeneous materials have different properties from point-to-point
Micromechanics and Macromechanics:

Micro-mechanics is the science to try and predict the macro-properties of the composite
from the individual constituent properties :
1. Elasticity behaviour based on elasticity properties of the constituents.
2. Failure behaviour based of failure properties of the constituents.
Homogenisation
Heterogeneous material
Homogeneous material
Micromechanics:
Macromechanics:
Develops constitutive laws for stiffness

and strength based on the individual fibre
and matrix properties.
Ideally micromechanics give constitutive

laws (that agree with tests) that can be
used for an equivalent homogeneous
material suitable for the design process.
The material is treated as heterogeneous.
DESIGN &
ANALYSIS
23
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Some basic definitions: Unit Cell or Representative Volume Element (RVE)

A RVE is a simplified model of the composite: The RVE is the smallest repetitive cell that
includes all the features of the material (fibres and matrix).
The RVE has a complex stress and strain distribution due to the interaction of the stiff fibres
with the soft matrix: At this level the composite is a heterogeneous material.
The aim is to determine an equivalent cell which can be treated as a homogeneous material
having the same mechanical properties as the heterogeneous fibre-matrix RVE it represents.
Fig: Typical RVEs for:

a) Rectangular packing array
b) Hexagonal packing array
Textile Composites
24
Note: An RVE can

also refer to a
repetitive volume in
2D/3D textiles and
is quite different
Twill 2*2 weave
12
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014


Some definitions
25
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Micromechanics: Models for stiffness
This discipline attempts to define macro- behaviour of the composite from the individual
resin and fiber constituents at the micro-level: That is we try to determine macroproperties (Qij) for the plies in terms of:
1. Constituent properties (Ef, Em,)
2 Fibre-matrix content (Vf..))
2.
3. Reinforcing arrangement (spacing S, array A)
E2
1 Q11 Q12

2 Q21 Q22
0
0
12
26
0 1

0 2
Q66 12
E1
Qij f ( E f , E m , f , m , V f , Vm , S , A....)
Generally theories have been developed for UD plies, but are also available for woven and
more complex fabric textile composites. Numerous approaches include:
1. Mechanics of materials
2. Elasticity theories
3. Numerical (Finite Element, Finite Difference, Boundary Element)
4. Experimental and semi-empirical methods
Useful references
1. I.M. Daniel and O. Ishai, Engineering mechanics of composite materials.
2. Robert M. Jones, Mechanics of composite materials, Chapter 3.
13
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Some basic definitions: Volume and weight fractions

Properties (stiffness, strength, etc ...) are controlled by the relative volumes of fibers and
matrix. Methods are needed to compute the relative percentages of fibers and matrix.
Fiber and matrix weights are easily measured during manufacturing (processing).
From these and the constituent densities the volume fractions can be found.
The fibre volume fraction is
The matrix volume fraction is Vm

The total gives (asuming no voids)
volume of fibre ( v f )
total volume ( v c )
volume of matrix ( v m )
total volume ( v c )
V f Vm 1
and
vf
vc
vm
vf vm vc
Similar fractions are sometimes used in terms of weight:
Wf
The total gives
27
IFB
weight of fibre (w f )
Wm
total weight (w c )
W f Wm 1
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

and
weight of matrix (w m )
total weig ht (w c )
wf wm wc
Volume fractions from measured weights and constituent densities

Fibre volume fraction:
fabric
wF
VF
vol of fibre
F
total volume w F w R
Resin volume fraction:
resin
where: VF : fibre volume fraction (= ratio)
VR : resin volume fraction (= ratio)
wF : fibre weight
wR : resin weight
wR
vol of resin
R
VR
wF wR
totall volume
l
rF : fibre density
rR : resin density
VF V R 1
Note we assume
no voids!
Composite density (can be used to compute ply thickness if fabric weights are known per
unit area)
28
C FVF RVR
Law of mixtures for density
14
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Micromechanics: Concept of mechanics (or strength) of materials

Micro-mechanical models:
These usually use a mechanics of materials approach to transform the heterogeneous
material to a set of equivalent spring elements:
2
Ef1
v
V f
f vc
So-called Voigt model:

Parallel springs: Equal strains
per part (ISO-STRAIN
i )
assumption)
Represents well the fibrematrix stress-strain system
Ef2
Em2
So-called Reuss model:

Series springs: Equal stresses per
part (ISO-STRESS assumption)
Poorly represents the true fibrematrix stress-strain distributions
29
IFB
Em1
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Micro-mechanical models: Some assumptions

Idealisation
(Representative Volume
Element - RVE)
Properties and notation:
E1
E2
12
G12
Modulus in the fiber direction (1)

Modulus in the transverse fiber direction (2)
Poisson's ratio (12)
Modulus in the direction (12)
c :
m:
f :
1 :
2 :
2
matrix
fibre
matrix
Composite
Matrix
Fiber
Fibre direction
Transverse direction
Am= matrix
area
Basic assumptions:
The Lamina is:
The fibres are:
The matrix is:
Others:
Macroscopically homogeneous
Macroscopically
p
y orthotropic
p
Linear elastic
Initially stress free
Homogeneous
Linear elastic
Isotropic or Orthotropic
Regularly spaced
Perfectly alligned
Homogeneous
Linear elastic
Isotropic
Perfect fibre/matrix bond

No voids
Example properties: Materials
30
A= total
area
Af= fibre
area
Matrix
Glass Fibres (typical)
Carbon Fibres (typical)
E1
E2
E1/E2
Type
3-5 GPa
72-86 GPa
200-400 GPa
3-5 GPa
72-86 GPa
15-25 GPa
1
1
ca. 14
Isotropic
Isotropic
Orthotropic
15
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Poissons effect deformed
Longitudinal Modulus E1
The longitudinal modulus E1 for the RVE is
given by the Rule (Law) of Mixtures (ROM)
E1 E f V f Em (1 V f )
L
Proof
oo of
o Rule
u of
o Mixtures
u
Vf A
A A f Am
Assume strains (in dir 1) are equal in matrix and fiber (ISO-STRAIN ASSUMPTION) 1
m Em 1
The stress in each part is
f E f 1
The total applied load is
P 1 A f A f m Am
Af
A
1 f
m m f V f mVm
A
A
1 1 ( E f V f EmVm ) 1
For the equivalent homogeneous material

Combining
and
1 = average stress ( P / A)
1 E1 1
L
L
where Vf and Vm are the

fibre and matrix volume
(=area) ratios
V f Vol f / Vol A f / A
Vm Volm / Vol Am / A
E1 E f V f EmVm E f V f Em (1 V f )
Note: E1 varies linearly with Vf . In practice Vf ranges from 40% (low quality) to about
65% for high performance composites depending on the processing method.
Usually Ef >>Em therefore E1 is mostly dependent on Ef
31
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Example for E1
Selected proprerties of fibres and bulk metals

Type
E-glass
S-glass
Corning
Corning
Carbon fibres
AS4
T300
HTS
Hercules
Union Carbide
Hercules
+15%
+31%
type
3450
4480
72.5
85.6
2.54
2.49
3730
2760 - 3450
2830
235
228
248
1.81
1.76
1.82
Compressive Strength
Vf = 0.60 E1= 138.3GPa
Density
(g/cm^3)
Ref: Enginnering Mechanics of Composite Materials (Isaac M. Daniel and Ori Ishai)
E1 E f V f E m Vm
Vf = 0.45 E1= 104.7GPa
Modulus
(GPa)
Tensile Strength
b) Hi
High
h quality
li manufacturing
f
i
process Vf=60%
Tensile strength
(MPa)
Poisson's ratio
a) Low quality manufacturing

process Vf=45%
Manufacturer
Modulus of Elasticity
Compute E1 for Carbon fibre UD

(T300) and LY3505 Epoxy resin:
Density
IFB
(g/cm^3)
E (GPa)
(v12)
(MPa)
F1c (MPa)
( %)
1.22
1.27
1.28
1.09
1
3.76
3.06
3.5
3.35
38
3.8
3.45
0.39
34.9
290
175
0.35
49
70
68.9
8.41
9.2
5
1.5 -5.9
3 8-4
3.8
4.9
9
4.0 - 5.0
from: Material Suppliers
920 Epoxy
M20 Epoxy
M21 Epoxy
LY 5052 Epoxy
LY 3505 Epoxy
Vinyl ester
125 C curing -Hexcel

Araldite - Vantico
Araldite - Vantico
Derakane 510C-350
Note: These ROM formulae are for UD composites. For woven fabrics you could
assume 50% fibre only contribution (for balanced fabrics) and include a
knockdown factor (e.g. 5-10%) for crimp. BUT really these estimates should
be supported with some experimental testing, or see specialised literature*.
* 1. Chou TW, Ishikawa T, Analysis and modelling of two-dimensional fabric composites, Chapter 7 of Textile structural
32
composites, Composites materials Series, Vol 3, 1989.

2. Ishikawa T, Chou TW, Stiffness and strength behaviour of woven fabric composites, Journal of material science, 1982.
16
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

IFB
Longitudinal modulus: Effect of fibre length and orientations (crimp)
E = L o Ef Vf + Em (1-Vf )
Reduction factor due to fibre length (L)
Correction formulae for length:
See Cox formulae for short fibres
tanh L / 2
L 1
L / 2
Reduction factor due to

orientation/curvature (o)
a) Crimp effect
8G m
E f D 2 ln2R D
1
0,95
0,9
0,85
0,8
length correction factor
1
0,9
0,75
0,8
0,7
0
0,7
0,6
10
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
0
0,5
15
1,5
b) Orientation
33
The stress 2 in the matrix and fibre parts across the

RVE are assumed to be the same (ISO-STRESS
assumption).
W
Vf W
Note the cylindrical fibre is assumed to be rectangular

ac oss the ffullll width
across
idth with
ith an equivalent
eq i alent area.
a ea
The fibre and matrix strains are:
2
E2 f
2
Vf
E2f
2
Em
2
Vm
Em
Important Ef should now

be the transverse
modulus E2f of the fibre
(not the axial value)!
NB Carbon & Aramid are
orthotropic, Glass is
approximately isotropic.
Vm
Finally, using Hookes law for the equivalent material

Gives the Inverse Rule of Mixtures:
2 m f
2 f m
Vf
o
1.0
0.5
0.25
0.375
0.2
Transverse Modulus E2
Gives
30
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

The total strain
25
unidirectional
biaxial
biaxial at 45o
random (in-plane)
random (3D)
fibre length (mm)
IFB
20
Crimp angle (degrees)
For long fibres

(>10mm)
L=1.0
0,5
2 E 2 2
Vf
V
1
m
E2 E2 f Em
or
E2
E2 f Em
Vm E2 f V f Em
Note: Since E2f is usually large it only has a small effect on E2, ie E2 is matrix dominated.
Prediction of E2 is lower bound (underestimated) due to the assumptions of fibre
geometry. There are better formulae for E2 .
34
17
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Summary of Rule of Mixtures for the four orthotropic elastic constants:

All derived from elementary mechanics of materials models
Name
Formula
Accuracy
Rule of Mixtures for the

Longitudinal Modulus
E1 E f V f Em Vm
Inverse Rule of Mixtures

for Transverse Modulus
Vf
V
1
m
E2 E2 f Em
GOOD
POOR a lower bound
estimate of E2 there
are better formulae later
12 f 12 V f m Vm
Rule of Mixtures for

Poissons ratio
mf12) - OK for design
Vf
V
1
m
G12 G f 12 Gm
POOR underestimates
G12 there are better
formulae presented later
Major
Mi
Minor
21
Inverse Rule of Mixtures

for Shear Modulus
Reasonable (since
Vm
Vf
21 f
purposes
21 f
Note: Measuring Ef, Em etc. is not that straightforward. E.g. mechanical properties of bulk
resin is different to the in-situ resin, and individual fibers are difficult to test.
35
Often data is inferred from the formulae and coupon testing.
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Variation of E1 and E2 with the Rule of Mixtures

Composite Modulus
Voigt Model: So called upper bound
E1 E f V f Em Vm
**
*
Em
0.0
36
Ef
E2
E1
*
*
Reuss Model: So called lower bound
Vf
V
1
m
E2 E2 f Em
0.5
Fibre volume fraction (Vf)
1.0
The Rule Of Mixtures (ROM) gives a linear variation for E1, whereas the inverse ROM is
non-linear. The two formulae coincide at the two extremities (Vf = 0 and 1.0); drawn
above for the case of isotropic fibres (Ef=E1f=E2f)
18
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Example using Finite Elements to compute E2: Comparison of rectangular

and circular fibres embedded in a matrix
For a glass/epoxy composite:
E2f = 73GPa, Em=3,2GPa
Imposed displacement = 0,1mm (full model)
=0,05mm
0 05mm (quarter model)
E= stress/strain = Force(=reaction force) / Area
strain (= L/L))
Low
stress
LOAD CASE =
1
Loadcase 1
RESULT S FILE =
1
REACT ION STRESS
CONTOURS OF P y
LOAD CASE =
1
Loadcase 1
RESULTS FILE =
1
STRESS
CONTOURS OF S Y
-0, 6628 79
-0, 5800 2
-0, 4971 6
-0, 4143
-0, 3314 4
-0, 2485 8
-0, 1657 2
-0, 0828 599
0
0,0 8285 99
0,1 6572
0,2 4858
0,3 3144
0,4 143
0,4 9716
0,5 8002
Max 0.6629 at No de 239
Min -0.6 629 at Node 7
37
IFB
0,1 3280 3
0,2 6560 6
0,3 9840 9
0,5 3121 1
0,6 6401 4
0,7 9681 7
0,9 2962
1,0 6242
1,1 9523
1,3 2803
1,4 6083
1,5 9363
1,7 2644
1,8 5924
1,9 9204
2,1 2485
Reaction = 0.64kN (full model)

E2 = stress/strain
=0.64/(1*1) / (0.1/1.0)
=6.4kN/mm2
Y
Z
Max 2.273 at Nod e 20

Min 0.1481 at Node 182
Reaction = 0.454kN
(quarter model)
E2 = 0.454/(0.5*1) / (0.05/0.5)
=9.08kN/mm2
Y
Z
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

High
stress
Finite element solutions

Improved fibre
idealisation
Conventional
ROM idealisation
E.g. Glass/Epoxy composite:

E2f=73GPa, Em=3,2GPa, Vf = 0.5
10mm*10mm*5mm unit cell
Imposed displacement=0.5mm
E2 = Stress/Strain
= (Reaction Force/Area)/Strain
= 9.1 kN/mm2
E2 = Stress/Strain
= (Reaction
Force/Area)/Strain
= 6.9 kN/mm2
Improving reality (edge conditions)
E2=9.1 kN/mm2
38
E2=9.7 kN/mm2
E2=10.2 kN/mm2
Reality somewhere between these limits (?)
19
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

IFB
The Rule of Mixture formulae for E2

The previous FE models show that the approximate rectangular fiber smeared over the full
volume width (= Rule of Mixtures approach) gives a significantly lower estimate for E2
compared to the (more correct) cylindrical fiber representation: See summary table below.
The stress distributions in both models is very different due to the stress concentrations
introduced by the stiff cylindrical fiber. The greater proportion of stiff fiber material at location
A (compared to the ROM assumption) leads to less deformation here and a greater (more
correct) estimate for E2.
The standard ROM gives a lower bound value for E2
Y
Method
E2 kN/mm2
Y
Z
ROM
39
Vf
1
V
m
E2 E2 f Em
6.13
FE (Rect. Mesh)
6.4
FE (Cyl. Mesh)
9.08
Y
Z
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Improved formulae for E2: The Hopkins-Chamis model

A mechanics of materials approach is used to better represent the cylindrical fibre as a square.
1
2
sf
A
B
sf
d
2
Section(s) A
E A 2 Em
Combining A
and B using
the ROM
E2 E B 2
E A2
The true fiber has diameter

d, giving the equivalent
square as:
Series
ROM
Section B using
Inverse ROM
sf
1
1 sf
1 sm
E B 2 E f 2 s Em s
sf
Paralle
l ROM
40
sm/2
sf
EB 2
Em
1 V f (1 Em E f 2 )
s2
sf
Vf
Vf
s
sm
1 Vf
s
Vf
sm
Em (1 V f )
s
1 V f (1 Em E f 2 )
20
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Improved formulae for E2: The Hopkins-Chamis model

The previous inverse ROM model for E2 did not consider (properly) the fiber geometry.
Consequently, the model gives a poor approximation of stress and strain distributions
compared to the RVE in the true composite. This improved model uses a simple, but better
representation of the fiber as a simple square.
1
A
2
sf
sf
1
1 sf
1 sm
E B 2 E f 2 s Em s
Section(s) A
E A 2 Em
Combining A
and B using
the ROM
E2 E B 2
sf
s
The true fiber has diameter

d, giving the equivalent
square as:
B
A
Section B using
Inverse ROM
41
sm/2
E A2
EB 2
Em
1 V f (1 Em E f 2 )
sf
sf
s2
sf
Vf
Vf
s
sm
1 Vf
s
Vf
sm
Em (1 V f )
s
1 V f (1 Em E f 2 )
Note: There is an equivalent derivation and expression for G12
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Semi-empirical formulae for E2, G12: The Halpin-Tsai relations

For E2
For G12
1 11V f
E2 Em
1 1V f
( E 2 f / Em ) 1
where 1
( E2 f / Em ) 1
where 1 is an empirical curved fitting
1 2 2V f
G12 Gm
1 2V f
(G2 f / Gm ) 1
where 2
(G2 f / Gm ) 2
where 2 is an empirical curved fitting
parameter (between 12) obtained from an

analytical solution (or testing); 1 = 2 is a
good estimate for round fibers.
parameter (between 12) obtained from an

analytical solution (or testing); 2= 1 is a
good estimate for round fibers.
For the previous example using Halpin-Tsai ( = 2).

Method
E2 kN/mm2
Inverse ROM
6.13
FE (Rect. Mesh)
6.4
FE (Cyl. Mesh)
9.08
Hopkin-Chamis
7.93
42Halpin-Tsai ( = 2)
10.7
Trends of this
simple study
appear to agree
with published
results (e.g.
Introduction to
composite
materials design,
E.J. Barbero)
21
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Example results: Stiffness (E2)

Materialproperties
Stiffness:Homogenisedelastic
propertiesforspecifiedVf
Update
Tables/
Curves
MaterialsSelection
Fibreproperties
Name
Density(kg/dm3)
E11Long.
g
E22Transv.
G12Long.
G21Transv.
12Long.
21Transv.
F11T_Fibre(ult.Stress)
F11C_Fibre(ult.Stress)
F12_Fibre(ult.Stress)
80,00
70,00
60,00
50,00
E2
WWEIM7(**)
1,800
72,500
,
72,500
31,000
31,000
0,200
0,2
5,18
3,2
RuleofMixtures
Vf
E11Long.
E22Transv.
G12Long.
G21Transv.
12Long.
21Transv.
0,60
44,78
7,50
3,45
19,19
,
0,26
0,24
E22(ILOM)
E22(Chamis)
E22(Halpin)
ChamisRule
Vf
E22Transv.
G12Long.
0,60
10,27
4,70
40,00
MatrixProperties
Name
Density(kg/dm3)
E(GPa)
G(GPa)
FT_Resin(ult.Stress)
FC_Resin(ult.Stress)
F12_Resin(ult.Stress)
30,00
20,00
WWE85517(**)
1,8
3,2
1,478
0,35
0,099
0,13
0,057
HalpinTsai
Vf
E22Transv.
G12Long.
0,60
13,90
6,31
10 00
10,00
Fibrevolumeratio
Vf
0,600
0,00
Additionalinputparameters
HalpinTsaiETA
0,00
0,20
0,40
Author:AnthonyPickett,IFB,Stuttgart
Date:Summer2011
Stiffness:Homogenisedmechanicalproperties(forVf=0>1)
Failure:HomogenisedcompositeforspecifiedVf
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
,
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
E11(LOM)
3,20
10,13
17,06
23,99
30,92
37,85
44,78
,
51,71
58,64
65,57
72,50
E22(ILOM) G12(ILOM) G21(LOM)

3,20
1,48
1,48
3,54
1,63
4,43
3,96
1,83
7,38
4,49
2,07
10,33
5,18
2,39
13,29
6,13
2,82
16,24
7,50
,
3,45
,
19,19
,
9,67
4,43
22,14
13,60
6,21
25,10
22,90
10,34
28,05
72,50
31,00
31,00
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
E22(ILOM) E22(Chamis) E22(Halpin) G12(ILOM) G12(Chamis) G12(Halpin)

3,20
3,20
3,20
1,48
1,48
1,48
3,54
3,64
4,12
1,63
1,68
1,90
3,96
4,27
5,25
1,83
1,97
2,41
4,49
5,13
6,63
2,07
2,36
3,04
5,18
6,29
8,40
2,39
2,89
3,84
6,13
7,92
10,72
2,82
3,63
4,89
7,50
10,27
13,90
3,45
4,70
6,31
9,67
13,89
18,52
4,43
6,33
8,37
13,60
20,07
25,89
6,21
9,08
11,61
22,90
32,74
39,42
10,34
14,60
17,43
72,50
72,50
72,50
31,00
31,00
31,00
Method
Inverse ROM
E2 kN/mm2
2,648
1,123
0,052
0,069
,
0,030
6.13
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
F11T
0,229
0,724
1,219
1,714
2,209
2,704
3,199
3,695
4,190
4,685
5,175
6.9
Mode
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0,20
0,40
0,80
0,60
0,80
1,00
F11C_Min.
0,068
0,261
0,454
0,648
0,841
1,034
1,227
1,420
1,614
1,391
0,755
35,00
E22(ILOM)
E22(Chamis)
E22(Halpin)
30,00
1,00
0,20
0,60
0,80
7.93
10.7
1,00
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

F22_Composite
F22T
F22C
0,100
F12
1,000
0,150
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,200
0,20
0,40
(E 2 f / Em ) 1
(E 2 f / Em ) 1
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,250
http://www2.ifb.unistuttgart.de/FEM/TutorialsAnd
MaterialCalibration.htm
0,00
0,80
F12
0,057
0,043
0,039
0,037
0,036
0,034
0,030
0,025
0,014
0,011
0,088
0,000
2,000
G12(ILOM)
G12(Chamis)
G12(Halpin)
20,00
F22C
0,130
0,097
0,090
0,085
0,081
0,076
0,069
0,055
0,029
0,031
0,227
0,050
0,0500,00
0,00
1,00
F22T
0,099
0,074
0,068
0,065
0,062
0,058
0,052
0,042
0,022
0,023
0,173
0,100
3,000
G12_Composite
25,00
0,150
F11C_Min.
where
5,00
0,60
F11T
0,000
0,40
10,00
0,40
F11T_Composite
5,000
Mode
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Split
Split
9.1
1 11 Vf
E 2 Em
1 1 Vf
12(LOM)
21(ILOM)
0,00
E22_Composite
0,20
6,000
4,000
Vf
6,08
6,08
,
5,96
Failure:Homogenisedproperties(forVf=0>1)
Halpin Tsai
12_Composite
0,40
0,35
,
0,30
0,25
0,20
0,15
0,10
0,05
0,00
1,00
43
IFB
F22T_Composite=
F22C_Composite=
p
F12_Composite=
Informationonmode
LOMFibredominatedfailure
*InsufficientfailuredatatocomputeF11C
Forcompression:Transversesplitting
Forcompression:Shear
UsingChamisforE22;computedSCF=
g
;
p
UsingChamisforG12;computedSCF=
FE (Rect. Mesh)
15,00
0,00
Value
0,60
3,199
Halpin-Tsai ( = 2)
0,60
80,00
70,00
60,00
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
Mode
Vf
F11T_Composite=
F11C_Composite=
Hopkin-Chamis
E11(LOM)
G21(LOM)
0,00
21(ILOM)
0,35
0,33
0,30
0,29
0,27
0,25
0,24
,
0,23
0,22
0,21
0,20
FE (Cyl. Mesh)
E11_,G21_Composite
80,00
70,00
60,00
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
12(LOM)
0,35
0,34
0,32
0,31
0,29
0,28
0,26
,
0,25
0,23
0,22
0,20
Micomechanical models for shear (in plane and interlaminar)
a) Inplane shear G12
b) Interlaminar shear G23
A rule of mixture approach gives in

plane shear modulus as:
Vf
1
V
m
G12 Gm G f
G12
Gm
Vm V f Gm / G f
The Hopkins-Chamis and Halpin-Tasi

models are better.
For a UD ply assume G13=G12
E.J. Babero cites the following formula for

G23 using the semi-empirical Stress
Partitioning Parameter (SPP):
G23 Gm
where
V f 23 (1 V f )
23 (1 V f ) V f Gm / G f
23
3 4 m Gm / G f
4(1 m )
44
22
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014


Some definitions
45
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Micromechanics: Models for failure

This discipline attempts to determine macro- failure criteria (F1, F1C, F2) for the ply in
terms of the constituent failure properties (f, m,) and fiber/matrix content (Vf..) and
reinforcing arrangement (spacing S, array A).
Fij f ( f max , m max , V f , Vm , S , A....)
2
1
Generally theories have been developed for UD plies using simple mechanics of materials
approaches. This has not been as successful as micromechanics stiffness models since
accurate modeling
g of stress and strain distributions is not possible.
p
Most work has considered different models for tension (fiber/matrix) failure and
compression (crushing and fiber buckling):
Useful references
1.
2.
3.
I.M. Daniel and O. Ishai, Engineering mechanics of composite materials.

Ever J. Barbero, Introduction to composite materials design, Chapt 4.
Robert M. Jones, Mechanics of composite materials, Chapt 3.
46
23
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Strength models based on micro-mechanics considerations

Micromechanics can be used to develop failure (strength) models for composites. These
are not very reliable and usually macro-mechanical failure models with coupon test data
are used (we shall cover this later). Never-the-less micromechanical models can be useful.
Longitudinal failure:
T
Transverse
ffailure:
il
F1t tensile crack
F2t tensile crack
F1c compressive
F2c comp. crushing
crushing/buckling
The main failure modes possible are:

1. Longitudinal tensile strength
F1t
2. Longitudinal compressive strength F1c

3. Transverse tensile strength
4. Transverse compressive strength
5. In plane shear strength
6. Inter-laminar shear strength
F2t
F2c
F6(=12)=F5(=13)
F4(=23)
1
In plane shear F6
Probably either:
A tensile type failure
on a 45 plane
Or shear in the weak
matrix
47
IFB
In plane shear F4
Probably would give
a tensile type failure
on a 45 plane as
shown
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Intra-ply (in the ply) and inter-ply (between plies delamination)

failure mechanisms
Mechanical Loading
Fractographs of the Failure
Throughthickness
Fibre direction (1)

a) Micrograph of a unidirectional
carbon/epoxy
b) Macro-mechanical definition of an
orthotropic ply
Principle in-plane (intra-ply) failure

mechanisms for a UD composite
Delamination ((inter-ply)
p y) failure between plies
p
Fib
bre Failure
Transverse
direction (2)
Intra-laminar Failure
e
11
Fibre tensile
rupture
11
3
22
22
Transverse tension /
compression
3
1
Matrix transverse tensile cracking
Inter-laminar
Failure
Fibre compression
kink band
Matrix Failure
M
Fibre-= of 8m, vf = 70%
12
12 12
In-plane shear
23
23
Delamination
(Mode-I, II, mixed)
Matrix shear cracking
Out-of-plane shear
Ply separation
48
24
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Fiber dominated and matrix dominated failure modes

f
F1t
Fibre
stress
stress
Fibre
Composite
F1t
m
m
m*
Matrix
uf
Composite
Matrix
mu
strain
mu
Type 1 Fiber dominated failure

matrix will provide some strength
contribution (usual case of stiff
strong fibers in ductile soft matrix)
uf
strain
Type 2 Matrix dominated failure

(e.g. ceramics matrix composites) in
practice the composite has effectively
failed once the protective matrix fails
Assumptions for simple model (Type 1 failure case):

All fibers have the same tensile strength = f (average value).
Both fibers and matrix are linear elastic to failure.
Fibers are stiffer and more brittle than the matrix.
The fiber, matrix and composite carry equal strain in the 1 (Load) direction.
49
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

stress
Micro-mechanics: Failure model for F1t (type

1 failure)
2
1
Case for fibre dominated failure
Fib
Fibre
F1t
F1t f V f m* Vm
Matrix
uf
f m
Composite will fail when longitudinal strain

reaches the fibre failure strain. The longitudinal
failure strength using the law of mixtures is:
Composite
m
m*
strain
mu
Typical
yp
strength
g
notation indicating
direction (1) and
mode (t=tension)
Dominating term
for composites
with strong fibres
Matrix stress at
the time fibres
fail
f
Em
Ef
Note: Straightforward to reverse roles and get similar expression for Type 2 matrix
dominated (fails first) composites m f .
50
For compression strength this approach could be used with material compression
failure stress data (if available). But also see later slides as there are other failure
modes (buckling, shear and splitting).
25
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Failure in a UD ply: Consideration of the Vf ratio

There are 2 possible failure cases:
Case 1: For high Vf once the fibres break the matrix cannot sustain the load and the
composite fails (Fibre dominated failure).
Case 2: For low Vf after fibres break the matrix can sustain the load and the composite
only fails once the matrix reaches its maximum load (m) (Matrix dominated failure).
failure)
Case 1:
F1t
F1t f V f m* (1 V f )
Matrix controlled
Fibre controlled
Case 2:
F1t m (1 V f )
m*
Vmin

m
f
*
m
*
m
Think of this case as a

matrix with failed fibres
(just holes are left)
1.0
0.0
Vf
Computing Vmin determines the criteria to be used. But in practical composites Vf is usually
well above Vmin. The method does depend on representative values for f and m.
51
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Longitudinal Compressive Strength F1c

Three main modes of failure are possible in
compression which are very different to the
previous tension mode.
All three criteria should be considered and the
minimum failure load used:
1. Fiber micro-buckling
Often triggered by fiber
Gm
F1c
G12
misalignment from
1Vf
manufacturing. The stiffness
F1c 2V f V f Em E f 3 1 V f
properties of the composite
(especially the supporting resin)
and Vf control buckling load.
In phase (shear) mode
Out of phase (extensional mode)
- most likely
- unlikely, but possible for low Vf
The in-phase mode will always occur at lower stress (the extensional mode can only occur
in very low Vf composites). The above theoretical formulae have been developed using a
stability analysis of an elastic fiber laterally supported by an elastic matrix.
52
26
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

2. Transverse tensile rupture due to Poissons effect

1
The longitudinal strain for an applied stress
The transverse strain due to Poissons effect is
2 12
Assuming a maximum strain failure criteria. The

failure stress F1C is reaches when 2=2Tult
(which is the matrix tensile failure strain)
E1
Deformed
shape under
loading
1
E1
F1c
E1 2T ult
12
F1c
3. Shear failure without buckling
12 ult f ultV f m ultVm
The composite shear strength is given by

the ROM considering the ultimate fibre
and matrix shear strengths
g
and the
volume fibre content.
F1c
The maximum shear stress under a

longitudinal compressive failure stress F1c
is F1c /2 at 45 (application of Mohrs
circle).
F1c/2
F1c 2( f ultV f m ultVm )
Finally: The longitudinal compressive failure strength F1c is the minimum

of the 3 cases presented above.
53
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Transverse Tensile Strength F2t (and F2c): Estimation of failure criteria

The transverse tensile strength is controlled by:
1. The matrix strength.
2. The fibre-matrix interface (bond) strength.
3. Initial defects in the matrix such as voids and microcracks.
4. Stress concentrations are generated at the fibre matrix interface (due
to stiff/soft material interaction).
Micro-mechanical failure models attempt to determine the stress concentration factor

(SCF>1) in the matrix. And then use this, together with the matrix failure strain m ult, to
determine limiting failure loads (F2t and F2c)
54
27
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Transverse Tensile Strength F2t : Estimation for failure criteria
The micro- model of a fibre in a matrix has a complex stress

distribution and high stress concentrations.
g ) strain
The overal ((average)
= 2
The strain at the notch (strain concentration)

= 2 * SCF
where SCF is the stress/strain concentration factor
2* SCF
See next slide to

estimate this
The equivalent macro- model is in effect a
simple elastic spring.
2 E 2 2
For failure set
where
m _ ult
2 m _ ult / SCF
F2t E2 m _ ult / SCF

is the resin bulk failure strain
Allowable (breakage) stress
55
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Transverse Tensile Strength F2t: The Stress Concentration Factor (SCF)

Using a mechanics of materials approach the deformation in a composite element is the
sum of the fibre and matrix parts
c f m
where
h
c s c , f d f , m ( s d ) m
c
Combining gives
d
d
f 1 m
s
s
For equlibrium of stresses in

the fibre and matrix parts
s
The composite strain in terms of matrix strain is
Finally the stress concentration

factor (F) is defined as the ratio
d Em d
1 m
s E f s
1
m
c d Em
1 1
s E f
56
Term similar to Vf
E f f E m m
Typical strength
of materials
assumption this
is not really
correct!!
Ratio of stiffnesses
28
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

How the Stress Concentration Factor (SCF) varies

The following mechanics of materials
expression gives F in terms of the spacings
(d, s) and the ratio of matrx/fibre stiffness
(see previous slide for derivation)
SCF F
d
s
1
Em
1 1
E
f 2
2t m ult / F
d E
m
2t m ult
s E f 2
Failure stress

1 1
F2t E2 2t
Composite modulus
Note: F increases with Vf: Thus longitudinal strength F1t increases with Vf but the
transverse strength F2t will decrease!!
57
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Transverse Compression Strength F2c

The same is done for F2c as F2t with (probably) a different value for m ult. The stress
concentration factor F is the same for both tension and compression cases.
In plane shear strength (F6)

This uses an identical approach and formulae as those used to derive F2t:
Stress concentration factor
Fs
m12
1
c12 d Gm12
1 1
s G f 12
Shear failure strains
12 m12 ult / Fs

d G
12 m12 ult m12 1 1
s G f 12
Shear failure stress
Failure stress
F6 G12 12
58
29
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Micromechanics: Summary of models for failure

F2T,F2C
F1T (Tension Law of mixtures)
F1T,F1C
F12 (=F6)
F2T (Matrix tensile failure)
d E
m
2t m ult
s E f 2
Vf
F1C (Compression fibre)

Minimum of three possible
modes:
1. Buckling
2. Splitting
3. Transverse Shear
1
1.

1 1

F1c
Gm
G12
1Vf
F2t E2 2t
3
3.
2
2.
F1c =
E1 2T ult
12
F1c 2( f ultV f m ultVm )
12 m12 ult / Fs
59 F6 (In plane shear is similar to F2T)
IFB
Stress Concentration Factor (F)

due to stiff fibre in a soft resin
Resin failure strain

2t m ult / F
SCF (F)
F1t f V f m* (1 V f )
F6 G12 12
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Example results: Failure

Materialproperties
Update
Tables/
Curves
MaterialsSelection
Fibreproperties
Name
D i (k /d 3)
Density(kg/dm3)
E11Long.
E22Transv.
G12Long.
G21Transv.
12Long.
21Transv.
0,150
0,100
WWEIM7(**)
1 80
1,80
72,50
72,50
30,00
30,00
0,20
0,20
0,050
MatrixProperties
Name
Density(kg/dm3)
E(GPa)
G(GPa)
0,000
WWE85517(**)
1,8
3,2
1,185
0,35
0,075
0,13
0,057
0,00
0,050
0,100
Fibrevolumeratio
Vf
0,500
0,150
HalpinTsaiETA
RuleofMixtures
Vf
E11Long.
E22Transv.
G12 L
G12Long.
G21Transv.
12Long.
21Transv.
0,50
37,85
6,13
2 28
2,28
15,59
0,28
0,25
ChamisRule
Vf
E22Transv.
G12Long.
0,50
7,92
2,96
HalpinTsai
Vf
E22Transv.
G12Long.
0,50
10,72
4,04
0,50
E11(LOM)
3,20
10,13
17,06
23,99
30,92
37 85
37,85
44,78
51,71
58,64
65,57
72,50
F12
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00

3,20
3,20
3,20
1,19
1,19
1,19
3,54
3,64
4,12
1,31
1,35
1,53
3,96
4,27
5,25
1,47
1,58
1,96
4,49
5,13
6,63
1,66
1,91
2,48
5,18
6,29
8,40
1,92
2,34
3,15
6,13
7,92
10,72
2,28
2,96
4,04
7,50
10,27
13,90
2,80
3,85
5,26
9,67
13,89
18,52
3,62
5,24
7,06
13,60
20,07
25,89
5,12
7,65
9,98
22,90
32,74
39,42
8,74
12,72
15,51
72,50
72,50
72,50
30,00
30,00
30,00
60
80,00
70,00
60,00
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
21(ILOM)
0,35
0,33
0,30
0,29
0,27
0 25
0,25
0,24
0,23
0,22
0,21
0,20
1,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
12_Composite
0,40
0,35
0,30
0,25
0,20
0,15
0,10
0,05
0,00
E11(LOM)
G21(LOM)
0,00
12(LOM)
0,35
0,34
0,32
0,31
0,29
0 28
0,28
0,26
0,25
0,23
0,22
0,20
Vf
E11 G21 C
E11_,G21_Composite
it
80,00
70,00
60,00
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
0,200
0,250
E22(ILOM) G12(ILOM) G21(LOM)

3,20
1,19
1,19
3,54
1,31
4,07
3,96
1,47
6,95
4,49
1,66
9,83
5,18
1,92
12,71
6 13
6,13
2 28
2,28
15 59
15,59
7,50
2,80
18,47
9,67
3,62
21,36
13,60
5,12
24,24
22,90
8,74
27,12
72,50
30,00
30,00
Brittle
matrix/Fibre
properties
F2T = 0.40
F22T
F22C
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0 50
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
1,00
Mode
Vf
F11T_Composite=
F11C_Composite=
Value
0,50
2,648
1,123
0 044
0,044
0,076
0,033
F22T_Composite=
F22T
C
i
F22C_Composite=
F12_Composite=
Informationonmode
*InsufficientfailuredatatocomputeF11T
U i Ch i f E22
d SCF
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
F11T
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Mode
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1,800
1,600
F11T_Composite
1,400
1,200
1,000
F11T
F11C_Min.
0,068
0,261
0,454
0,648
0,841
1,034
1,227
1,420
1,614
1,391
0,755
0,150
E22_Composite
35,00
E22(ILOM)
E22(Chamis)
E22(Halpin)
30,00
0,20
0,40
0,80
1,00
F22C
0,130
0,097
0,090
0,085
0,081
0,076
0,069
0,055
0,029
0,031
0,227
F12
0,057
0,043
0,039
0,037
0,035
0,033
0,030
0,024
0,011
0,017
0,119
F22_Composite
F22T
0,100
0,0500,00
F22C
F12
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,100
0,400
0,200
0,60
F22T
0,075
0,056
0,052
0,049
0,047
0,044
0,040
0,032
0,017
0,018
0,131
0,000
0,150
0,200
0,000
0,00
Mode
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Split
Split
0,050
F11C_Min.
0,800
0,600
12(LOM)
21(ILOM)
4 21
4,21
4,21
4,28
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,250
G12_Composite
G12(ILOM)
G12(Chamis)
G12(Halpin)
25,00
20,00
15,00
10,00
5,00
0,00
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
30
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014


Some definitions
61
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Typical micromechanical data for fibres and matrix: From the World
Wide Exercise
62
31
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

IFB VBA Excel program for micromechanical analysis

Materialproperties
Update
Tables/
Curves
MaterialsSelection
Fibreproperties
Name
Density(kg/dm3)
E11Long.
E22Transv.
G12Long.
G21Transv.
12Long.
21Transv.
MatrixProperties
Name
Density(kg/dm3)
E(GPa)
G(GPa)
WWEIM7(**)
1,800
276,000
19,000
27,000
7,000
0,200
0,2
5,18
3,2
WWE85517(**)
1,8
4,08
1,478
0,3
0,099
0,13
0,057
RuleofMixtures
Vf
E11Long.
E22Transv.
G12Long.
G21Transv.
12Long.
21Transv.
0,60
167,23
7,71
3,41
4,79
0,24
0,23
ChamisRule
Vf
E22Transv.
G12Long.
0,60
8,99
4,61
HalpinTsai
Vf
E22Transv.
G12Long.
0,60
10,10
6,12
E11(LOM)
4,08
31,27
58,46
85,66
112,85
140,04
167,23
194,42
221,62
248,81
276,00
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00

4,08
4,08
4,08
1,48
1,48
1,48
4,43
4,51
4,79
1,63
1,63
1,89
4,84
5,07
5,59
1,82
1,84
2,39
5,34
5,77
6,50
2,06
2,09
3,00
5,95
6,63
7,53
2,38
2,41
3,77
6,72
7,68
8,72
2,80
2,80
4,77
7,71
8,99
10,10
3,41
3,28
6,12
9,06
10,62
11,73
4,37
3,88
8,03
10,97
12,69
13,68
6,06
4,65
10,97
13,91
15,39
16,05
9,90
5,65
16,06
19,00
19,00
19,00
27,00
7,00
27,00
HalpinTsaiETA
Mode
Vf
F11T_Composite=
F11C_Composite=
Value
0,60
3,139
2,648
1,123
0,068
0,090
0,031
F22T_Composite=
F22C_Composite=
F12_Composite=
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
F11T
0,099
0,587
1,097
1,608
2,118
2,628
3,139
3,649
4,159
4,670
5,175
Mode
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
F11C_Min.
0,068
0,261
0,454
0,648
0,841
1,034
1,227
1,420
1,614
1,391
0,755
F11T
F11C_Min.
0,25
3,000
,
0,15
0,05
0,00
0,20
20,00
15,00
0,40
0,60
0,80
F22T
0,099
0,079
0,074
0,072
0,071
0,070
0,068
0,067
0,064
0,060
0,053
F22C
0,130
0,103
0,097
0,095
0,093
0,091
0,090
0,088
0,084
0,078
0,069
F12
0,057
0,043
0,040
0,038
0,036
0,034
0,031
0,026
0,015
0,006
0,068
F22_Composite
F22T
F22C
F12
0,050
0,000
0,00
1,000
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,050
0,000
0,00
1,00
3,19
3,19
5,75
0,100
2,000
12(LOM)
21(ILOM)
0,10
0,00
Mode
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Shear
Split
Split
0,150
F11T_Composite
4,000
12_Composite
Informationonmode
LOMFibredominatedfailure
5,000
50,00
0,00
Author:AnthonyPickett,IFB,Stuttgart
Date:Summer2011
21(ILOM)
0,30
0,29
0,27
0,26
0,25
0,24
0,23
0,22
0,21
0,21
0,20
0,20
150,00
100,00
12(LOM)
0,30
0,29
0,28
0,27
0,26
0,25
0,24
0,23
0,22
0,21
0,20
0,30
0,35
E11(LOM)
G21(LOM)
200,00
0,600
G21(LOM)
1,48
2,03
2,58
3,13
3,69
4,24
4,79
5,34
5,90
6,45
7,00
6,000
E11_,G21_Composite
300,00
250,00
Fibrevolumeratio
Vf
E22(ILOM) G12(ILOM)
4,08
1,48
4,43
1,63
4,84
1,82
5,34
2,06
5,95
2,38
6,72
2,80
7,71
3,41
9,06
4,37
10,97
6,06
13,91
9,90
19,00
27,00
Vf
0,00
0,10
0,20
0,30
0,40
0,50
0,60
0,70
0,80
0,90
1,00
E22_Composite
30,00
E22(ILOM)
E22(Chamis)
E22(Halpin)
25,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,100
G12_Composite
G12(ILOM)
G12(Chamis)
G12(Halpin)
20,00
15,00
10,00
10,00
5,00
5,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0,80
1,00
63
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Input data
Materialproperties
Update
Tables/
Curves
MaterialsSelection
Orthotropic
fibre data:
Elastic and
failure
Isotropic
resin data:
Elastic and
failure
Fibreproperties
Name
Density(kg/dm3)
g
E11Long.
E22Transv.
G12Long.
G21Transv.
12Long.
21Transv.
MatrixProperties
Name
Density(kg/dm3)
E(GPa)
G(GPa)
WWEIM7(**)
1,800
276,000
,
19,000
27,000
7,000
0,200
0,2
5,18
3,2
WWE85517(**)
1,8
4,08
1,478
0,3
0,099
0,13
0,057
Fibrevolumeratio
Vf
64
HalpinTsaiETA
RuleofMixtures
Vf
E11Long.
E22Transv.
G12Long.
G21Transv.
12Long.
21Transv.
0,60
167,23
7,71
3,41
4,79
,
0,24
0,23
Press to
activate new
results if the
input is
modified
Some specific
results for the
defined Vf
ChamisRule
Vf
E22Transv.
G12Long.
0,60
8,99
4,61
HalpinTsai
Vf
E22Transv.
G12Long.
0,60
10,10
6,12
0,600
32
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Graphical
output (Vf
= 01)
Tabular
form
Graphical
form
Stiffness
variations
(Vf = 01)
Failure variations
(Vf = 01)
65
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

A simple program (Courtesy University Leuven) for micro-mechanics

analysis: Stiffness and strength of short and long fibre composites
The fibre and matrix data
are set in the program
input files.
Fibre data
#
Matrix data
Data corresponds to
tutorial numbers; except
those marked (#) where
new guesses have had
to be made.
The CADEC software is
also useful for this
purpose.
66
http://sirius.mtm.kuleuven.be/Research/C2/poly/
NewWWW/research/sl_software_simple_mm.ht
l
33
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014


Some definitions
67
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Some problems for estimating Transverse Tensile Strength F2t (and F2c)
Transverse tensile strength is controlled by:
1. The matrix strength.
2. The fibre-matrix interface (bond) strength.
3 Materials
3.
M
i l plasticity/ductility
l i i /d ili
4. Initial defects in the matrix such as voids and microcracks.
5. Stress concentrations generated at the fibre matrix interface.
Localised
failure
Reality
68
Idealised model
The true stress distribution is far more

complex than in the idealised unit cell model
Mode of failure: This is scattered and

must localise before final rupture
34
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Micromechanics: Real failure modes

Failure models for compression (fibre buckling case), transverse and shear directions are
also available, but have limited reliability. Never-the-less they may be useful for first
estimates of failure if mechanical coupon testing is not possible.
Main problem is the complex stress distributions at the micro level in real composites,
complex interactions of fibre and matrix failure (which occur at different strains) and
statistical variations in materials properties.
Localisation
of failure
Reality
It is better to resort to testing at the coupon level and use macro- failure models such as:
Maximum stress, Maximum strain, Tsai-Hill, Tsai-Wu. (SEE LATER SLIDES).
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Evolution and sources of damage
Localisation
of failure
1600
Num
mber of tests
69
Failure initiates at weak locations (fibres or matrix)

and will localise as stress concentrations localise.
Micro-models cannot account for this process.
Idealised model
Sources
750
1500
Fibre failure strength

Fibre tensile strength vary
considerably especially with
low quality fibres.
Failure initiates at weak locations (fibres or matrix)
and
d eventually
ll will
ill localise
l
li as stress concentrations
i
localise.
Voids may also be

another source
The localised failures will essentially coalesce (start

to join up) and lead to local rupture.
70
35
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Some real fibre-matrix failure modes in tensile composites
a)
Boron Epoxy failure: Stiff fibres and

limited fibre matrix debonding
g
b)
S-Glass Epoxy failure: Fibres have

large strain to failure giving
extensive fibre matrix debonding
c)
a) Transverse crack in a brittle matrix with strong

fibre-matrix interface.
b) Fibre-matrix debonding in at a weak interface
or at a stiff fibre.
Usually damage is arrested and loads

are redistributed to adjacent fibres
(via the matrix)
c) Local matrix shear damage in a ductile

matrix.
71
IFB
A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014

Summary
Micro-mechanics laws for UD composite plies we can say:

They work well for prediction of E1 and and Poisson's ratio, but are less
successful for other stiffness's E2 (or E3), G12, G23, G13.
Micro-mechanics failure criteria have also been developed, but can only give
approximate estimates of failure. Ideally these should be backed up with
some actual tests.
However, for a given micromechanical model calibrated against a test they
can be valuable to help extrapolate and investigate properties of similar
composites. For example, by varying the fibre volume ratio.
72
36

Micromechanics: For Short and Long Fibre Composites

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Micromechanics: For Short and Long Fibre Composites

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IFB

A.K. Pickett, 2013-2014