Improved Analytical Model

Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct
Improved analytical model to predict the effective elastic properties

of 2.5D interlock woven fabrics composite
Ali Hallal a,b, Rac Younes a,b,, Farouk Fardoun a, Samer Nehme c
a
L3M2S, Lebanese University-Rac Hariri campus, Hadath, Beirut, Lebanon

LISV, University of Versailles Saint-Quentin, 45 avenue des Etats Unis, F78035 Versailles, France
c
Universit de Technologie de Compigne, Laboratoire Roberval, UMR 6253, France
b
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Available online 21 April 2012
Keywords:
Woven
Interlock
Analytical
Homogenization
Modeling
a b s t r a c t
An improved analytical modeling, three stages homogenization method 3SHM, of a 2.5D interlock
woven composite is proposed. The development of the analytical model based on mixed iso-strain and
iso-stress assembling models (the stiffness and the compliance averaging models) is presented. A nite
element (FE) modeling is carried out in order to use its results in the development of the analytical model.
It is proved that a model based only on an iso-strain condition could not give accurate results, while a
mixed iso-strain and iso-stress model yields more accurate estimations. the developed homogenization
method as well as the geometrical modeling, that takes into account the real geometry of undulated
yarns, proposed by the analytical model leads to very good agreement in comparing with results obtained
from FE models and available experimental data from the literature.
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The use of 3D ber reinforced in high-tech industrial domains
(spatial, aeronautic, automotive, naval, etc.) has been expanded
in recent years. While the 2D ber reinforced composites, such
as 2D laminate composites and the 2D woven composites, show
very good in plane mechanical properties, they suffer from weakness in the out of plane direction, as known by the through thickness direction. The better physical, thermal and mechanical
properties, such as interlaminar shearing force, mechanical and
thermal stability along all three axes of space of 3D ber reinforced
fabrics, had given it more advantages over the unidirectional and
bi-dimensional composites. However, the 3D woven composites
can produce complex near-net shaped performs, also with a complex geometry they can be less expensive to produce. They show
better delamination resistance, damage tolerance, high impact
resistance and higher tensile strain-to-failure values. Also, 3D woven composites exhibit higher interlaminar fracture toughness
properties [13]. In addition, 3D weaving allows the tailoring of
properties for specic applications. 3D woven composites are divided into two main types: the 3D orthogonal fabrics and the
2.5D angle interlock fabrics (Fig. 1). The latter which are the main
objective of this work could be divided into two types: throughthe-thickness fabrics and the layer-to-layer fabrics.
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: rac.younes@lsis.org (R. Younes).
0263-8223/$ - see front matter 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2012.03.019
This kind of composite is characterized by its complex architecture. The unit cell contains warp weaver and weft yarns interlaced
at 90 in the (xy) plane (Fig. 1). The 2.5D angle interlock woven
composite involves the binding of straight warp yarns by interlocking warp yarns. Warp yarns can be bound to different depth where
various arrangements of yarns placement which can be used to
produce a wide range of these types of composites. The throughthe-thickness fabric is a multilayered fabric in which warp weavers
travel from one surface of the fabric to the other, holding together
all the layers. The layer-to-layer fabric is a multilayered fabric in
which warp weavers travel from one layer to the adjacent layer,
and back. A set of warp weaves together hold all the layers of the
fabric. In addition of the complex geometry, the volume fraction
of bers, volumes of yarns and the inclination angle of the undulated warp yarns allow the tailoring of properties for specic applications. In other words, designers could produce the optimal
perform of fabrics for a required mechanical properties [4].
While experimental test made to determine the effective elastic
properties Youngs and Shear moduli (Ex, Ey, Ez, Gxy, Gxz, Gyz) and
Poissons ratios (mxy, mxz and myz) of composites are expensive in
terms of money and time, analytical and numerical modeling could
present a good alternative solution for industries. In which concern
numerical modeling, the obtained results are supposed to be more
accurate. These methods have the disadvantages of the time consumed on the tasks of dening the geometry of the composite,
meshing and the calculation procedures, besides the need of super
computers to make the computation. Analytical modeling presents
more exible and easier tool in terms of geometric modeling and
3010
A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028
Fig. 1. Different types of 3D woven fabrics: layer-to-layer angle interlock, through-the-thickness angle interlock and 3D orthogonal woven composites.
the time saved in calculation, without the need of super

computers.
In this work, the effective elastic properties are evaluated using
an analytical model based on mixed iso-strain and iso-stress
homogenization method. The development of the proposed method is presented and carried out with the aid of numerical modeling
results. Concerning the modeling of 2.5D angle interlock woven
composites, few research works have been found in comparison
to those of 2D woven composites and 3D orthogonal woven composites. The analytical slice array model presented by Naik et al.
[5] and the ZXY and ZYX models of Tan et al. [6] are used in modeling a through-the-thickness angle interlock woven composite.
Both models are based to be used with an idealized structure of
composite. With angle interlocks, irregularities could be found, in
addition to the complex geometry, which lead to difculties in
the geometrical modeling for both models. Pochiraju and Chou
[7,8] proposed a model for the prediction of anisotropic elastic
stiffness of 3D textiles. The Representative Elementary Volume
(REV), is decomposed into smaller elements where the macroscopic stiffness is evaluated using an Effective Response comparison (ERC) Technique. Concerning the angle interlocks the model
gives good agreement with experimental data. However, the model
still need to be more investigated when applied for interlocks having high ber volume fraction in the REV for the undulated warp
weaver yarns. Also analytical models, using only the iso-strain
assumption as a homogenization method, could be used to evaluate the elastic properties of this kind of composite [9]. In this work,
it will be shown that this model yields inaccurate results where the
contribution of the undulated yarns in the stiffness of the composite is important.
The development of the proposed homogenization method
starts by using a mixed iso-strain and iso-stress model applied to
the whole composite. A more sophisticated approach, based on
the fact that a parallel system is assembled under iso-strain condition, a series system is assembled under an iso-stress condition and
using numerical modeling results, is developed. The proposed analytical model, the three stages homogenization method 3SHM,
could give better estimations of the effective elastic properties.
Firstly, a geometrical modeling of the REV and yarns is done. The
undulated parts of yarns are modeled with sinusoidal function.
Each yarn is decomposed into sub-volumes. Then, in the rst stage
of homogenization method, volumes and the stiffness matrices of
sub-volumes are evaluated using a micromechanical model from
the literature. In the second stage, the stiffness of the yarns is calculated. A developed scheme of assembling in parallel and in series
of sub-volumes of subdivided undulated yarns is used. Here, the

numerical modeling results of three angle interlock composites
are used to develop that scheme. A weighting parameter for weaver warp yarns for the best agreement Pba
cw is introduced in undulated yarns homogenization. The assembling in parallel and in
series of sub-volumes is affected by the corresponding value of
ba
Pba
cw .P cw is evaluated in terms of the mean value of the inclination
angle of sub-volumes
h of a subdivided undulated yarn
P
h
(
h n i ; with hi the inclination angle of each sub-volume and n
the number of sub-volumes). Thus the stiffness matrix of the undulated yarns is calculated. Then, in the nal stage, the stiffness matrix of the REV is deduced by the stiffness averaging method in
terms of volumes and stiffness matrices of yarns and the matrix
previously evaluated. With yarns treated apart, the proposed model has the exibility to be easily used in modeling complex architecture of 2.5D interlock woven composite. Also this gives the
availability to model different types or geometries of undulated
and straight yarns, if found in an irregular composite.
In the second section of this paper, an extensive review of analytical models found in literature, used to predict the mechanical
behavior of 2D and 3D woven composites is presented. Also a brief
review of numerical models is found in this section. In the third
section, the geometry of three angle interlocks which will be
numerically and analytically modeled is introduced. The fourth
and fth sections present the numerical FE modeling and the analytical modeling sections respectively. In the nal section, the proposed analytical model will be applied on two angle interlocks
found in the literature [79] to validate the model results. The obtained analytical results are compared with corresponding experimental data, where a good agreement is observed.
2. Review of analytical and numerical modeling approaches

According to the outstanding properties of woven composites,
modeling of 2D and 3D woven composites has been the main objective of many researches. Thus, many works had been made to analytically model the bi-dimensional woven fabrics where some of
these models can be extended to the three-dimensional woven fabrics. Ishikawa and Chou [1015] were the rst who try to nd an
analytical model for 2D woven composites. They proposed three
basic models: the mosaic model, the undulation model and the
bridging model. In the mosaic model the undulation of the yarns
is not considered while the undulation model use a sinusoidal
function to describe the undulation of the yarns. The classical
3011
laminate theory CLT is used to evaluate the elastic properties of

the composite. Naik and colleagues [5,1620] developed an analytical model which describe the actual geometry of the composite.
The REV is divided into arrays that are decomposed into slices. Subdivided arrays contains both warp and weft yarns and in some cases
could also contain stuffers yarns. Slices and arrays are assembled in
series or in parallel under iso-strain and iso-stress averaging
scheme respectively. The model is used for 2D and 3D orthogonal
and angle interlocks woven composites. This model represents an
important attempt in predicting the effective elastic properties of
woven composites. Another attempt is made by Sankar et al. [21]
who proposed the selective averaging method (SAM). This model
is used for the prediction of thermoelastic properties of textile composites. The REV is divided into slices which are subdivided into
smaller elements. The iso-stress and iso-strain are used in the
homogenization method. This model, applied to 2D plain weave
and 5-harness satin weave, show good estimations for the in plane
Youngs moduli. Hahn and Pandey [22] proposed a 3-D model taking into account the undulation in both warp and weft directions
where the effective elastic properties are obtained under an isostrain assumption. The model is easy and simple to use with complex geometries, but the efcacy of the iso-strain assumption still
need to be investigated with 3D angle interlock woven composites.
An extensive geometric work has been made by Vendeurzen et al.
[23,24] to describe the woven composite fabric. An iso-stress and
iso-strain assumptions are used to evaluate the effective elastic
properties. Scida et al. [25] developed an analytical model called
MESOTEX (Mechanical Simulation Of TEXtiles) based on classical
laminate theory CLT to predict the 3D elastic properties, continuous damage evolution, and strength of woven fabric composites.
Baystrom et al. [26] made an evaluation of different semi-analytical
models and found that a model based on an iso-strain assumption
for the in plane and an iso-stress assumption for the out of plane
components is in very good agreement with both experimental data
and reiterated homogenization method. A model presented by Jiang
et al. [27] based on a stress and strain averaging procedure for local/
global analysis of plain-weave fabric composites gives good results
with numerical and experimental data. Donadon et al. [28] has proposed a model which is an extension of the Naik and Shembekars
2-D model [17,18] that takes into account the undulations in a hybrid plain weave and predict the effective material proprieties
using CLT.
Some analytical modeling works had been conducted to study
the behavior of 3D woven fabrics. An orientation averaging method
developed and presented by Tarnopolskii et a1. [29] and Kregers
and Melbardis [30]. The composite is decomposed into sub-volumes and the effective properties of the composites can then be
determined by averaging the response of a representative body to
the externally applied loads under the assumption of either uniform stresses or uniform strain. A modication of this model has
been proposed by Cox and Dadkhah [31]. The modied model is
used to model 3D woven interlock composite, i.e. layer-to-layer
and through-the-thickness angle interlock and orthogonal interlock
weaves. They used a waviness knockdown factor to reduce the values of Youngs modulus in the tow direction. This model with the
introduced corrections seems to give reasonable predictions of
the in plane elastic properties while fair estimations is obtained
with elastic constants related to through thickness strains. Tan
et al. [6,3234] had developed analytical model (the ZXY and ZYX
models) and numerical FE model to determine the mechanical
properties and the thermal expansion coefcients of 3D orthogonal
and angle interlock woven fabrics. The models predict well the
effective elastic properties of orthogonal composites while less
agreement is obtained in estimating the longitudinal Youngs modulus of through-the-thickness angle interlock composite [6]. Yunjun et al. [35] proposed a model that predicts the effective elastic
properties of a 3D angle interlock woven fabric composite based

on the iso-strain assumption. The model yields good results when
applied on 3D angle interlock woven ceramic composite. The
MoriTanaka method is applied by Gommers et al. [36] to different
types of textile composite: woven, braided and knitted. Lomov et al.
[37] proposed a modeling strategy of modeling of textile composites. They dened the properties needed for the homogenization
at different levels starting by the bers and matrix properties. Lomov et al. [3739] put forward a symbolized method to characterize the construction of 3D textiles, including 3D woven fabrics.
Prodromou et al. [40] used the method of cell to evaluate the elastic
properties of a wide range of 2D and 3D woven fabrics. The method
is compared to experimental results and MoriTanaka inclusion
method and gives good results. It should be noted that, The previously described Pochiraju and Chou model [7,8] could be considered as the most practical to use with the angle interlock woven
composites. More development of a similar model could yield better predictions of elastic stiffness of interlocks with high ber volume fraction of the weaver yarns in the REV.
Concerning numerical models, Cox et al. [41] and Xu et al. [42]
developed a nite element model, the binary model, to predict the
mechanical properties of 3D interlock composites. Nie et al. [43]
have introduced the problem that represent the angle-interlock
fabric in a more concise and efcient way, which is a major problem for the computer-aided design (CAD) of multilayered angleinterlock woven fabric as referred by Ko [44]. In the approach of
Barbero et al. [45], a nite element model of plain weave fabrics
based on geometrical measurements from photographs was developed to determine the damage evolution using a meso-mechanical
continuous damage formulation under tensile loading. Also a multi
scale 3D mosaic model is applied for woven composite by
Bogdanovich [46] where stress and failure of 3D woven composites
is studied.
3. Materials
In this section, three 2.5D layer-to-layer angle interlock woven
composites are described. The same geometries are investigated
numerically and analytically in order to develop the analytical
homogenization method. The composites are made from carbon bers T300J and resin matrix RTM6 (Table 1). The architecture of
these composites involves only warp weaver yarns and weft
straight yarns.
These composites are previously studied by El Hage [9].
Geometrical parameters taken from the scanning electronic microscope SEM (JOEL JSM 6100 Scanning Microscope) are used to
determine the REV geometrical dimensions of each composite.
The composites are identied as composite 71, H2, and 69 (Fig. 2).
The REV of the composite-H2 (Figs. 2 and 3) is composed from 6
warp yarns and 12 weft yarns. The warp yarns have a linear plus
undulated longitudinal parts and a attened elliptical cross-section.
They are interlocked with weft yarns in two steps. Undulated parts
Table 1
Mechanical properties of carbon bers and matrix [9]. Carbon bers are assumed to
be transversly isotropic material which gives the following assumption:
Ef33 Ef22 ; Gf13 Gf12 ;
Carbon bers
v f13 v f12
and Gf23
E22
f
21v 23
Ef11 (GPa)
Ef22 (GPa)
Gf12 (GPa)
v f12
v f23
T300-J
230
15
50
0.278
0.3
Resin RTM6
Em (GPa)
vm
2.89
0.35
3012
Fig. 2. Composites H2, 71 and 69 in the (XZ) and (XY) plans.
Fig. 3. Perspective and Top views of the REV of three composites: (a) composite-71, (b) composite-H2 and (c) composite-69.
have a mean inclination angle h equal to 24. The weft yarns have
linear longitudinal part while its cross-section is a attened ellipse.
The REV of composite-71 (Figs. 2 and 3) has 12 warp yarns and
12 weft yarns. Warp and weft yarns have similar geometrical shape
of those for composite-H2. Warp yarns have the mean inclination
angle h equal to 12 of the undulated part of warp yarns. Both warp
and weft yarns have attened elliptical cross-section.
The REV of composite-69 (Figs. 2 and 3) contains 6 warp yarns
and 6 weft yarns. While warp yarns have a mean inclination angle
h equal to 29 for the longitudinal part of weft yarns is linear. Both
warp and weft yarns have attened elliptical cross-section.
The geometric parameters (Fig. 4) needed in the geometrical
modeling of the numerical and analytical models are dened as
follow:
Lx, Ly and Lz: the length, width and thickness of the REV.
aw and af: are the widths of the warp and weft yarns.
hw and hf: the thickness of the warp and weft yarns.
Cl: distance between two adjacent weft yarns

Ct: distance between two adjacent warp yarns.
In order to have similar analytical and numerical modeling of
yarns, the ber volume fractions in both warp and weft yarns is taken equal to 0.6 for all three composites. The ber volume fractions
in the composite and for the warp and weft yarns are calculated as
follows:
V fwc
V ffc
V fwy V w
Vc
V ffy V f
Vc
V fc V fwc V ffc
where
V fw=fy the bers volume fraction in warp or weft yarns.
Fig. 4. Geometrical parameters on the REV and the transversal section (cross-section) of the warp and weft yarns.
3013
V fw=fc the bers volume fraction of warp or weft yarns in the

composite.
V fc the bers volume fraction in the composite.
Vc/w/f volume of the composite, warp and weft yarns.
Fiber volume fractions of warp, weft yarns and the REV are
given in Table 3.
4. Finite element modeling
Firstly, a geometric model of previously described composites
71, H2 and 69 has been created in the ANSYS software; it requires
information in particular on the woven fabric, the shape and the
dimensions of the yarns and the size of the periodic pattern. Then
they are transferred into the HYPERMESH software to create the
meshing instruction. These dimensions are taken from the geometrical parameters previously described in the materials section
(Table 2). It should be noted that for composite 71, the value of
Ct is taken equal to 0.05 rather than 0 for meshing reasons.
Fig. 3 illustrates the REV of the three composites 71, H2 and 69.
The warp direction is made of two zones: the rst, where the yarn
is curved and remains tangent to the surface of the weft direction,
and the second, where the yarn is linear. The last zone is limited by
two points from which the warp direction leaves the weft direction
towards the other weft. The REV must be reliable on its representations level for total mechanical behavior of the reinforcement.
The objective is to dene a simple geometrical volume which can
represent the reinforcement and supports a hexahedral meshing.
4.1. Meshing
The FE geometrical models are exported to ANSYS through a
text le (.prp). While exporting, the element type is changed. Solid
92 and Solid 45 with three degree of freedom Ux, Uy and Uz at each
node are used in these models for matrix and yarns respectively.
Finally, the meshing consisted of tetragonal linear elements for the
matrix and hexagonal linear elements for the yarns (Fig. 5). We ensure
coincidence between the nodes of the triangular elements (skin of the
tetrahedral matrix) and the quadrangular elements (skin of the hexahedral yarns). Note that the dimension of elements used for the meshing is about 0.01 mm. The mesh is checked for distortion and a mesh
sensitivity analysis is performed in order to get accurate results. It
consists of 1,076,544 nodes and 1,017,874 elements for the composite-71, 328,503 nodes and 316,122 elements for the composite-H2
and 74,297 nodes and 71,726 elements for a quarter REV of composite-69 (Fig. 5). This meshing includes an important number of degrees
of freedom (3,083,212 for composite-71, 955,795 for composite-H2
and 208,224 for composite-69) higher that what the usual sequential
computers are able to accept actually. The use of servers with high
memory and capacity (2 Xeon quadri-core @ 2.67 GHz 48Go RAM)
is thus necessary.
Table 3
Fiber volume fractions of warp and weft yarns and of the composite, for composites
71, H2 and 69.
Fiber volume fraction
Composite-71
Composite-H2
Composite-69
Warp yarns
Weft yarns
REV
27.94%
11.04%
38.98%
17.92%
21.68%
39.60%
31.62%
13.48%
42.08%
trial package Ansys Academic Associate makes it possible to

visualize the local orthotropic constitutive axes on each element.
The properties determined previously are those in the principal
direction of the yarns as it is assembled (Fig. 6). The properties
are obtained for the warp and weft yarns elements using a micromechanical model. In this study, the Generalized Self-Consistent
Method GSCM model of Christensen [47] and Chamis [48] models are used (Appendix B).
4.3. Boundary and periodicity conditions
In a static problem, the boundary conditions must be employed
to prevent the model from moving in any direction. We applied to
each stage the boundary conditions necessary to maintain the
structure in a state of balance. Then we imposed conditions of periodicity on the REV that can be applied by using constraint equation
in ANSYS. However, periodicity conditions are not easy to apply to
the FEM discretizations when we generate a free-mesh, because
nodes on opposite sides of the REV cannot be found in pairs with
two identical coordinates. Nine constraint equations can be imposed between all the pairs of periodic points on the face of the
REV except on the edges and vertices. We supposed that the REV
has the dimensions (x = 2a1, y = 2a2, z = 2a3) with the origin at the
centre of the REV. For example, the computation of Youngs modulus Ex and in plane shear modulus Gxy requires the following
boundary conditions on a periodic RVE.
4.4. Boundary conditions for the computation of Ex
On the faces x = a1 we used tensor notation for strains, as
follows:
U 1 a1 ;y;z K; U 1 a1 ;y;z 0; U 2 a1 ; y; z U 2 a1 ;y; z 0;

U 3 a1 ;y;z U 3 a1 ; y; z 0
On the faces y = a2 we used tensor notation for stains, as
follows:
U 1 x; a2 ; z U 1 x; a2 ; z 0;
U 2 x; a2 ; z U 2 x; a2 ; z 0;
U 3 x; a2 ; z U 3 x; a2 ; z 0
On the faces z = a3 we used tensor notation for stain, as
follows:
U 1 x; y; a3 U 1 x; y; a3 0;
U 2 x; y; a3 U 2 x; y; a3 0;
4.2. Material orientation

To ensure the elements material orientation in the yarns, all the
elements of the same group have the same connectivity. The indus-
U 3 x; y; a3 U 3 x; y; a3 0
With U2 = U3 = 0 at the centre of the face x = a1.
Table 2
Geometric properties of the composites-71, H2 and 69 [9], in addition to the calculated mean inclination angle of undulated parts of warp yarns.
Composite
71
H2
69
Distance between yarns
Mean inclination angle
Width
aw (mm)
Warp yarns
Thickness
hw (mm)
Weft yarns
Width
af (mm)
Thickness
hf (mm)
Weft yarns
Cl (mm)
Warp yarns
Ct (mm)

h ()
2.8 0.123
1.9 0.11
4.4706 0.3533
0.49 0.059
0.18 0.03
0.6471 0.0133
3.5 0.288
1.7 0.06
3.163 0.427
0.35 0.037
0.28 0.03
0.5882 0.1084
2.822 0.2007
0.4 0.12
2.8235 0.5087
0 0.069
0.2 0.08
0.00 0.06
11.61
24.09
29.21
3014
Fig. 5. Meshing of composites: (a) composite-71, (b) composite-H2 and (c) composite-69.
Fig. 6. Orientation axis according to the direction of yarns.
4.5. Boundary conditions for the computation of Gxy

On the faces x = a1 we used tensor notation for strains, as
follows:
U 1 a1 ; y; z U 1 a1 ; y; z 0;
U 2 a1 ; y; z U 2 a1 ; y; z 0;
U 3 a1 ; y; z U 3 a1 ; y; z 0
On the faces y = a2 we used tensor notation for stains, as
follows:
U 1 x; a2 ; z K; U 1 x; a2 ; z 0;
Ex
F x a1
2 a2 a3 K
With Fx evaluated on the (x = +a1) face.

Gxy is calculated from the following equation:
Gxy
F x a2
2 a1 a3 K
With Fx evaluated on the (y = +a2) face.

In the same manner other engineering constants are calculated.
The obtained results using different micromechanical models, the
GSCM and the Chamis models are displayed in Tables 4 and 5.
Fig. 7 shows the Von-Mises stress distribution with tensile traction
along x and y directions of composites 71 and H2.
U 2 x; a2 ; z U 2 x; a2 ; z 0;
U 3 x; a2 ; z U 3 x; a2 ; z 0
On the faces z = a3 we used tensor notation for stain, as
follows:
U 1 x; y; a3 U 1 x; y; a3 0;
U 2 x; y; a3 U 2 x; y; a3 0;
U 3 x; y; a3 U 3 x; y; a3 0
With U2 = U3 = 0 at the centre of the face y = a2.
Where Ui (i = 1, 2, 3) are the displacement components along x,
y and z directions respectively, and K an arbitrary constant. The
constraints described by thus equations can be applied using constraint equations in ANSYS. However, periodicity conditions such
as described by thus equations are not easy to apply to FEM discretizations because nodes on opposite faces of the RVE cannot
be found in pairs with two identical coordinates (yz on warp faces
and xz on ll faces), but rather they are arbitrarily located as dictated by the free-mesh generation process.
5. Analytical modeling
The main objective of the proposed analytical model is to nd a
simple modeling method that could deal with woven composites,
especially the angle interlock type, giving accurate results in comparing with those numerically and experimentally obtained. The
proposed analytical model is based on geometrical modeling that
takes into account the undulated shape of yarns and a homogenization method based on mixed iso-strain and iso-stress assumption. A description of the geometric modeling is given in the
following section. In the homogenization method section an extensive work is made in order to develop a new assembly homogenization scheme. Numerical Finite Element modeling results are used
in order to develop and improve the analytical model. It will be
shown that a homogenization method based on both iso-strain
and iso-stress assumption, or a combined parallelseries model,
could give better results. In addition involving the effect of the
mean inclination angle of warp yarns could improve the prediction
of the longitudinal Youngs modulus.
5.1. Geometrical modeling
4.6. Results of numerical modeling

Ex is then calculated from this equation:
In the three studied composites, described in Section 2, warp

yarns have undulated and linear longitudinal parts while weft
3015

Table 4
Finite element numerical results of three composites 71, H2 and 69, using Christensen micromechanical model.
Numerical results
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Composite-71
Composite-H2
Composite-69
40.20
25.51
28.86
33.07
58.76
41.06
7.82
7.78
9.37
2.75
2.76
2.83
2.97
2.87
4.65
2.19
2.36
1.95
0.058
0.033
0.085
0.463
0.475
0.437
0.506
0.435
0.490
Table 5
Finite Element numerical results of three composites 71, H2 and 69, using Chamis micromechanical model.
Numerical results
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Composite-71
Composite-H2
Composite-69
40.70
25.93
28.98
31.21
54.82
37.23
7.57
7.87
8.99
3.14
3.22
3.41
2.93
2.94
4.81
2.21
2.24
2.16
0.065
0.027
0.051
0.411
0.427
0.238
0.508
0.468
0.350
Fig. 7. Von-Mises stress. (a) Tensile traction along x direction of composite-H2. (b) Tensile traction along y direction of composite-H2. (c) Tensile traction along x direction of
composite-71. (d) Tensile traction along y direction of composite-71.
Fig. 8. Longitudinal and transversal sections of an undulated warp yarn.
yarns are simulated by a straight yarns (Fig. 8). The cross-section of

warp and weft yarns is modeled by a attened ellipse, which is an
ellipse plus a rectangle (Fig. 8). The cross-section areas of warp and
weft yarns are calculated as follows:
Aw=f
aw=f hw=f aw=f hw=f
8
2
The undulated part of warp yarns is modeled by its centerline.

The centerline is simulated by a sinusoidal function:
Zx a cos
where

2px
T
3016
Left undulated section: T/2 6 x 6 T;

Right undulated section: 0 6 x 6 T/2;
With a and T are the amplitude and the period respectively.
They are calculated in terms of geometric parameters according to
the composite architecture.
The undulated part of the warp yarn is divided into n
sub-volumes, where each sub-volume represents a unidirectional
lamina with long bers (Fig. 9). Each sub-volume has its local coordinate system (1 2 3), with 1 is along the bers. While the global
coordinate system (x y z) is dened as x, y and z are along warp,
weft and thickness directions respectively.
5.1.1. Volume calculation of warp yarn
The volume of the entire undulated part:
V undw Aw Lundw
The volume for each micro volume:
V iundw Aw Liundw
With the length of the centerline of the undulated part:
Lundw
T=2
Lundw
s
2
dz
1
dx
dx
s
2
Z T
dz
1
dx
dx
T=2
With
2
dz
dx
for right undulated part
for left undulated part

2
a 2Tp sin 2Tpx .
and for each sub-volume:
Liundw
5.2. Homogenization method

5.2.1. Developing the homogenization method
The development of the proposed homogenization method, the
3SHM, has passed through different stages. It starts by using an
iso-strain model. It will be proved that this model yields inaccurate
results when it is used with angle interlocks. Thus, the iso-stress
model is introduced with a mixed model (iso-strain and iso-stress
model). The results obtained from this model compared with
numerical results show that the use of mixed model could give
good better estimations. Then, a more developed model, the
3SHM, based on assembling sub-volumes in series or in parallel
along a specic direction is presented.
The development procedure is based on assembling
sub-volumes in parallel or in series. When assembling in parallel
The Voigt model or the stiffness averaging model is used, while
when assembling in series a Reuss model or the compliance
averaging model is used. It is useful at rst to introduce these
two basics models.
Assembling a parallel system formed by n sub-volumes by the Voigt model or the stiffness averaging model, the stiffness matrix of the
system is averaged under an iso-strain assumption as follows (Fig. 10):
The average stress tensor throughout the composite is given by:
frc g
1
Vc
ZZZ
frc g dV
With {rc} is the true stress tensor in is the composite of volume Vc.
The average stress tensor can be expressed in terms of the average stresses tensors in sub-volumes:
frc g
n
1X
fr1 g V 1 fr2 gV 2 frn g V n
Vc 1
The stressstrain relation gives according to the Hooks law

gives:
s
2
Z xi1
dz
1
dx
dx
xi
C c fec g V c C 1 fe1 g V 1 C 2 fe2 g V 2 C n fen g

Vn
The volume of the linear parts:
V linw Aw Llinw
With Llinw is length of linear part.
Thus the volume of the warp yarn is calculated from the volumes of left and right undulated parts and the linear part.
where fec g; fe1 g; fe2 g; . . . ; fen g are the average strain in the composites and the n sub-volumes, and [Cc], [C1], [C2], . . . , [Cn] are the effective stiffness matrices of the composite and the n sub-volumes.
The assumption of iso-strain condition throughout the composite fec g fe1 g fe2 g fen g leads to the following equation
known by the Voigt model
Pin
5.1.2. Volume of weft yarn
The volume of the linear part of weft yarns is:
V linf Af Llinf
With Llinf is length of linear part.
C cVoigt
i1 C i
Vi
Vc
Assembling a series system formed by n sub-volumes by the

Reuss model or the compliance averaging model, the compliance
matrix of the system is averaged under an iso-stress assumption
as follows (Fig. 10):
Fig. 9. undulated part simulated by a sinusoidal function and subdivided into sub-volumes.
3017
Fig. 10. The assembling of n sub-volumes in parallel and in series.
The average strain tensor throughout the composite is given by:
1
fec g
Vc
ZZZ
fec g dV
With {ec} is the true strain tensor in the composite of volume Vc.
The average strain tensor can be expressed in terms of the average strain tensors in sub-volumes:
n
1X
fec g
fe1 g V 1 fe2 gV 2 fen g V n
Vc 1
The stressstrain relation, according to the Hooks law gives:
Sc frc g V c S1 fr1 g V 1 S2 fr2 g V 2 Sn

frn g V n
where frc g; fr1 g; fr2 g; . . . ; frn g are the average stress in the composites and the n sub-volumes, and [Sc], [S1], [S2], . . . , [Sn] are the
effective compliance matrices of the composite and the n subvolumes.
The assumption of iso-strain condition throughout the composite frc g fr1 g fr2 g frn g leads to the following equation
known by the Reuss model:
Pin
ScReuss
i1 Si
Vi
Vc
5.2.2. Modeling with iso-strain model

After decomposing the yarns into sub-volumes, the linear parts
of warp and weft yarns in addition to sub-volumes in undulated
warp yarns are treated as unidirectional lamina with long bers.
Their effective elastic properties in the global coordinate system
are evaluated using a micromechanical model from the literature,
in terms of mechanical properties of bers and matrix and the ber
volume fraction in each yarn. In this study we have used two
micromechanical models the Chamis model and Christensen, generalized self-consistent method (GSCM), model [2,47,48] (Appendix). The stiffness and compliance matrices are evaluated in the
(1 2 3) coordinate system. A transformation matrix (Appendix A)
is used to nd the stiffness and compliance matrices in the (x y z)
coordinate system.
C xyz T c C 123 T 0c
Sxyz T s S123 T 0s
In a rst attempt in the development procedure, the iso-strain
model is used to evaluate the effective elastic properties of the
composite. In other words, the sub-volumes of undulated warp
yarns, the weft yarns and the matrix are assembled in parallel.
Thus, the stiffness matrix of the woven composite is given by the
Voigt-model:
Pin
C cVoigt
i1 C ixyz
Vi
Vc
With 2D woven composites, this model has proved to give quite

accurate results [25,49]. Also the elastic properties for 3D orthogonal woven composites are well estimated by an iso-strain model as
observed by [50]. With angle interlocks, The obtained results
(Table 6) for the three previously described composites, show reasonable agreement for Ey, Ez and Gxy. However, much less agreement is obtained for the remaining properties. Especially for the
longitudinal Young modulus Ex, where an important percentage
difference (between 30% and 50%) is noticed.
5.2.3. Modeling with a Mixed VoigtReuss model (iso-strain iso-stress
model)
While the Voigt and Reuss models represent the upper and lower bounds respectively for the elastic properties, as demonstrated
by Hill [51], it is assumed that the real effective properties of a
composite lie between those predicted by these two models. This
concept has been also veried by Gommers et al. [52,53] where
they used Voigt and Reuss models to predict the effective elastic
properties of knitted composites. The experimental results have
been proven to be between those two bounds.
In the current study, this concept represents the basic scheme
in developing the proposed analytical homogenization method.
Analytical results are obtained from a mixed VoigtReuss model
where they are compared to those obtained from numerical modeling made in previous section of three different angle interlock
composites.
The analytical results are obtained from the following mixed
VoigtReuss model:
C C Pc C CVoigt 1 Pc S1
CReuss
where
Pc is a macro weighting parameter vary between 0 and 1,
Pn
Pn
C V
i1 wi wi
Vw
C v oigt
S V
i1 wi wi
SReuss
Vw
Cf V f Cm V m
Vc
Sf V f Sm V m
Vc
3018
Table 6
Analytical results of the iso-strain model compared to numerical results for the three composites 71, H2 and 69.
Effective elastic properties
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Composite-71
Numerical
Iso-strain model
Percentage difference
40.2
61.22
52.29%
33.07
30.60
7.47%
7.82
8.19
4.73%
2.75
2.92
6.18%
2.97
4.63
55.89%
2.19
2.27
3.65%
0.058
0.031
46.55%
0.463
0.693
49.68%
0.506
0.529
36.96%
Composite-H2
Numerical
Iso-strain model
25.51
33.90
32.28%
58.76
54.35
7.51%
7.78
8.68
11.57%
2.76
2.93
6.16%
2.86
5.75
101.05%
2.36
2.58
9.32%
0.033
0.014
57.58%
0.475
0.778
63.79%
0.435
0.445
2.3%
Composite-69
Numerical
Iso-strain model
28.86
39.67
37.46%
41.06
37.06
9.74%
9.37
10.61
13.23%
2.83
2.84
0.35%
4.65
10.78
131.82%
1.95
2.438
25.02%
0.085
0.0136
84%
0.437
0.92479
111.62%
0.49
0.375
23.47%
Pc has the role of determining the contribution of the Voigt and

Reuss models in evaluating the stiffness of the composite. For Pc =
1, the stiffness of the composite is evaluated only by the Voigt
model, while for Pc = 0, it is evaluated only by the Reuss model.
Analyzing of obtained analytical and numerical results will be
important to understand the effect of assembling the sub-volumes
in series or in parallel for the evaluation of effective elastic
properties.
Evaluated effective properties are given in terms of Pc for composites 71, H2 and 69 in Tables 7 and 8 respectively (Tables 7 and 8).
In comparing with numerical results, its shown that the use of
mixed VoigtReuss model could lead to the development of more
precise analytical model. Its shown that each engineering constant
has its own Pc value for the best agreement P ba
c with the numerical results. Best predictions of Ex are made for Pc P ba
c 0:6; 0:7
and 0.7 for composites 71, H2 and 69 respectively. However, for
Ez ; Pc P ba
c 0:8; 0:7 and 0.7 for composites 71, H2 and 69 respectively. It is shown, in Table 9, for Ex, that Pc increases with theta increases while it decreases with theta for Ez. In which concern Ey, for
Pc P ba
c 1, the best agreement is obtained for the three composites. This means that for Ex and Ez the model should use mixed
VoigtReuss model in evaluating these properties, while only Voigt
model is needed in evaluating Ey.
The problem encountered in the development of this model is in
the determination of the best agreement Pba
c value for each one of
the nine effective elastic properties. Also, it could be clearly noticed
that the evaluated results are very sensitive for a small variation of
the Pc value (see Appendix A). However, this model proves the
enhancement of the evaluated results by using a mixed VoigtReuss
model. In addition, the evaluation of Ex and Ez are highly dependent
on well modeling of the warp weaver yarn. thus, a more sophisticated approach for assembling sub-volumes in parallel and in series
could lead to better predictions for these and the other elastic properties, which will lead to the next development procedure of the
model.
5.2.4. 3SHM (3 Stages Homogenization Method)
After analyzing analytical results in the previous section, some
enhanced remarks could be summarized as follows:
Using a mixed VoigtReuss model yield good results.

For Ex, Pc value for best agreement P ba
c increases with h, while
it decreases for Ez.
Better evaluation of the stiffness of the warp yarn is thought to
give better results.
Ey is better predicted with only Voigt model.
Based on these remarks, a better evaluation of the stiffness of
the warp weaver yarn, by assembling of sub-volumes using mixed
Voigt and Reuss models, is believed to yield more precise evaluation of all effective elastic properties of the angle interlock composite. A homogenization scheme, the 3SHM, is then suggested and
presented in this section.
In the 3SHM, the homogenization scheme is done in three
stages: microlevel stage, mesolevel stage and macrolevel stage. In
the rst stage the stiffness matrices of sub-volumes, of sub-divided
yarns, in the local coordinate system are calculated. The stiffness
matrices of warp and weft yarns as well as the stiffness of the matrix are evaluated in the global coordinate system in the second
stage. At the third stage, the stiffness of the composite is evaluated
Table 7
Analytical results of the mixed VoigtReuss model for composite-71 in terms of Pc compared to numerical results.
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Numerical
40.2
33.07
7.82
2.75
2.972
2.192
0.058
0.463
0.506
Pc
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
P ba
c for best agreement
Analytical modeling results

61.219
30.600
8.192
55.813
28.125
7.975
50.401
25.648
7.750
44.984
23.170
7.515
39.559
20.690
7.2674
34.124
18.206
7.001
28.678
15.717
6.711
23.216
13.220
6.384
17.728
10.705
6.003
12.196
8.152
5.530
6.573
5.471
4.880
0.6
1
0.8
2.924
2.834
2.745
2.655
2.565
2.475
2.385
2.295
2.205
2.115
2.025
0.8
4.631
4.3636
4.095
3.827
3.558
3.290
3.022
2.753
2.485
2.217
1.949
0.4
2.2686
2.2198
2.171
2.122
2.0736
2.024
1.976
1.927
1.878
1.830
1.781
0.8
0.0309
0.0364
0.04303
0.05102
0.0609
0.07355
0.09014
0.1129
0.1461
0.1989
0.2961
0.6
0.693
0.6777
0.6605
0.6420
0.6218
0.5995
0.5743
0.5449
0.5089
0.4611
0.3876
0.1
0.5293
0.5287
0.5278
0.5264
0.5245
0.5217
0.5175
0.5108
0.4994
0.4772
0.4188
0.3
Percentage difference for the best agreement P ba

c
1.59%
0.18%
1.68%
0.96%
5%
0.41%
0.95%
Composite-71
7.47%
0.9%
3019

Table 8
Analytical results of the mixed VoigtReuss model for composites H2 and 69 in terms of Pc compared to numerical results.
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Composite-H2
Numerical
25.51
58,76
7,78
2.76
2.866
2.362
0.033
0.475
0.435
Pc
1
0
Best Pc
Result for best Pc

33.90
54.35
5.75
6.29
0.7
1
25.67
54.35
6.4%
7.51%
8.68
4.96
0.7
7.85
0.87%
2.93
2.04
0.8
2.75
0.36%
5.75
1.890
0.3
3.049
6.39%
2.58
1.903
0.7
2.377
0.64%
0.014
0.260
0.6
0.0321
2.73%
0.778
0.413
0.1
0.509
7.2%
0.445
0.389
0.1
0.429
1.4%
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Composite-69
Numerical
28.86
41.06
9.37
2.83
4.65
1.95
0.085
0.437
0.49
Pc
1
0
Pc
Result for best Pc
Percentage differences

39.67
37.06
6.99
6.12
0.7
1
30.29
37.06
4.95%
9.74%
10.61
5.39
0.7
9.25
1.28%
2.84
2.18
1
2.84
0.35%
10.78
2.27
0.3
4.82
3.66%
2.438
1.95
0
1.95
0%
0.0136
0.2855
0.3
0.0733
13.76%
0.92479
0.408
0.1
0.534
6.64%
0.375
0.4109
0.2
0.435
11.22%
Table 9
Comparison of P ba
c for the three composites 71, H2 and 69.
Composite
results
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz

h ()
Composite-71
Num.
40.2
0.6
33.07
1
7.82
0.8
2.75
0.8
2.972
0.4
2.192
0.8
0.058
0.6
0.463
0.1
0.506
0.3
11.61
1.59%
7.47%
0.9%
0.18%
1.68%
0.96%
5%
0.41%
0.95%
25.51
0.7
58.76
1
7.78
0.7
2.76
0.8
2.866
0.3
2.362
0.7
0.033
0.6
0.475
0.1
0.435
0.1
6.4%
7.51%
0.87%
0.36%
6.39%
0.64%
2.73%
7.2%
1.4%
28.86
0.7
41.06
1
9.37
0.7
2.83
1
4.65
0.3
1.95
0
0.085
0.3
0.437
0.1
0.49
0.2
4.95%
9.74%
1.28%
0.35%
3.66%
0%
13.76%
6.64%
11.22%
P ba
c
Diff.
Composite-H2
Num.
P ba
c
Diff.
Composite-69
Num.
P ba
c
Diff.
in terms of previously evaluated stiffness matrices of yarns and

matrix. Then the effective elastic properties could be deduced.
5.2.4.1. Stage1 Microlevel homogenization. The discritized sub-volumes, in addition to the straight weft yarn, are considered as unidirectional lamina with long bers. They represent a transversely
isotropic material. A micromechanical model from the literature,
e.g. GSCM and Chamis models [47,48], is used to evaluate their
micromechanical effective elastic properties. The effective properties are found in terms of mechanical properties of bers and matrix and the ber volume fraction in each yarn. Then stiffness
h
i
matrices of sub-volumes of warp yarns C 123
and weft yarns
wi
h
i
123
are known in the local coordinate system (1 2 3) in terms
Cf
of compliance matrix.
h
i h
i1
C 123
S123
wi
wi
h
i h
i1
C 123
S123
f
f
1=E11
6 m =E
6 12 11
6
6 m12 =E11
S 6
6
0
6
6
4
0
0
m12 =E11
m12 =E11
1=E22
m23 =E22
m23 =E22
1=E22
0
0
0
0
1=G23
0
0
1=G12
0
0
1=G12
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
29.21
[S] is the compliance matrix of a transversely isotropic material.

5.2.4.2. Stage 2 Mesolevel homogenization. In this level, the stiffness of the matrix, warp yarns and weft yarns are evaluated as
follows:
5.2.4.3. Matrix stiffness. The matrix represents an isotropic materiel
where its stiffness matrix [Cm] can be simply derived from the
compliance matrix [Sm] in terms of Young modulus Em and the
Poissons ratio mm.
2
1=Em mm =Em mm =Em

0
0
6
6 mm =Em 1=Em mm =Em
0
0
6
6
6
6 mm =Em mm =Em 1=Em
0
0
6
Sm 6
6
=21
0
0
0
0
E
m
m
6
6
6
6
0
0
0
0
Em =21 v m
4
0
24.09
0
0
0
0
0
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
Em =2 1 v m
5.2.4.4. Warp yarn stiffness. The warp yarns in the angle interlock
woven composites have left and right undulated parts and often
an additional linear longitudinal parts (Fig. 11a).
The stiffness of the warp yarn is evaluated using iso-strain and
iso-stress assumptions when assembling these sub-volumes in
parallel or in series respecting the following scheme:
3020
Fig. 11. Homogenization scheme of the undulated warp yarn.
1. The stiffness of sub-volumes in the (x y z), global coordinate

system, is given by:
123
t
C xyz
wi T c C wi T c
With Tc is the 3D transformation matrix (see Appendix A).

2. The sub-volumes of left and right undulated parts are
assembled in parallel along the warp direction (the x direction) (Fig. 11b). Voigt model is used to evaluate their stiffness matrices.
C xyz
wLund
C xyz
wRund
Pn
i1 V wLundi

V Lundw
Pn
i1 V wRundi
C xyz
w
C xyz
wRundi
xyz
2 V wund C xyz
wund V wlin C wlin
V warp
2 Pn
C xyz
wLundi
6
2 V wund 6
4
C xyz
w
xyz
V
C
i1 wLundi wLundi
V wund
1 Pn
xyz
V
C
i1 wRundi wRundi
V wund
1 31
7
7
5
V wlin C xyz
wlin
V warp
V Rwund
Noting that VLwund = VRwund = Vwund.

It should be noted that the use of only a Voigt model is more
discussed later where a combined VoigtReuss model is
used to more improve the evaluated Ex.
3. Now the warp yarn is composed from left and right parts and
linear parts. The homogenized left and right undulated warp
parts form a series system when assembled along warp
direction (Fig. 11c). The Reuss model is then used to evaluate
the stiffness of the undulated part of warp yarn (left + right).
With the volume of the left and right undulated parts are
equal; the stiffness matrix is given as follows:
Sxyz
wund
4. In the nal step, the homogenized undulated part (left + right) and the linear parts form a parallel system when
assembled along the warp direction (Fig. 11.d). The Voigt
model is used to evaluate the stiffness of the system; undulated (left + right) and linear parts.
1
1
C xyz
C xyz
wLund
wRund
2
1
xyz
C xyz
wund Swund
5.2.4.5. Weft yarn stiffness. The stiffness of the weft yarns is easier
to be evaluated considering their straight prole. The stiffness of
weft yarns in the global coordinate system is given in terms of that
in the local coordinate system, which has been already calculated
in the micro level homogenization stage.
C xyz
T c C 123
T tc
f
f
Noting that in some cases, weft yarns could have a quite low
undulated prole. In this case, the assembling of sub-volumes is
made along the x direction, where the sub-volumes are assumed
to form a parallel system. Voigt model is used to evaluate the stiffness of the weft yarns.
5.2.4.6. Stage 3 Macrolevel homogenization. At the macro level
homogenization stage the stiffness of the composite is evaluated
3021

Table 10
Analytical results of the 3SHM, using GSCM micromechanical model, in comparing with numerical results for three composites 71, H2 and 69.
Composite
Method
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Composite-71
Numerical
Analytical
40.2
43.944
9.31%
33.07
30.471
7.86%
7.82
8.190
4.73%
2.75
2.913
5.93%
2.972
3.142
5.72%
2.192
2.261
3.15%
0.058
0.0636
9.66%
0.463
0.5194
12.18%
0.506
0.5249
3.74%
Composite-H2
Numerical
Analytical
25.51
27.393
7.38%
58.76
53.913
8.25%
7.78
8.497
9.22%
2.76
2.907
5.33%
2.866
3.134
9.35%
2.362
2.566
8.64%
0.033
0.039
18.18%
0.475
0.512
7.79%
0.435
0.474
8.97%
Composite-69
Numerical
Analytical
28.86
31.72
9.91%
41.06
35.99
12.35%
9.37
9.317
0.57%
2.83
2.79
0.141%
4.65
4.14
10.97%
1.95
2.40
23.08%
0.085
0.0716
15.76%
0.437
0.451
3.2%
0.49
0.481
1.84%
Table 11
Analytical results of the 3SHM, using Chamis micromechanical model, in comparing with numerical results for three composites 71, H2 and 69.
Composite
Method
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Composite-71
Numerical
Analytical
40.7
44.94
10.42%
31.21
30.49
2.31%
7.57
6.95
8.19%
3.14
3.21
2.23%
2.936
3.42
16.49%
2.21
2.55
15.38%
0.065
0.059
9.23%
0.411
0.414
0.73%
0.508
0.375
26.18%
Composite-H2
Numerical
Analytical
25.93
27.54
6.21%
54.82
53.92
1.64%
7.87
7.23
8.13%
3.22
3.212
0.25%
2.94
3.379
14.93%
2.242
2.868
27.92%
0.027
0.037
37.04%
0.427
0.3616
15.32%
0.468
0.3691
21.13%
Composite-69
Numerical
Analytical
28.98
31.81
9.77%
37.23
36.07
3.12%
8.99
7.98
11.23%
3.41
3.15
7.62%
4.81
4.41
8.32%
2.16
2.78
28.7%
0.051
0.058
13.73%
0.238
0.298
25.21%
0.35
0.324
7.43%
Fig. 12. The 3SHM applied on an angle interlock woven composite.
Fig. 13. The assembling of sub-volumes of warp yarn is affected by the mean inclination angle
h.
in terms of those previously evaluated of the matrix, warp and weft

yarns. In this level, the composite is treated as composed of three
homogenized volumes corresponding to three phases: the matrix,
warp and weft yarns. Knowing the volumes and the stiffness matrices of each phase in the xyz system, the stiffness matrix of the composite could be calculated. The three volumes are assumed to
3022
Table 12
Analytical results, for the 3SHM with Pcw using GSCM micromechanical model, in comparing with numerical results for composite-71.
Composite-71
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Numerical
Pcw = 1
Pcw = 0.9
Pcw = 0.8
Pcw = 0.7
Pcw = 0.6
Pcw = 0.5
Pcw = 0.4
Pcw = 0.3
Pcw = 0.25
Pcw = 0.2
Pcw = 0.1
Pcw = 0
40.2
43.944
43.453
42.962
42.472
41.981
41.491
41.001
40.510
40.282
40.020
39.529
39.039
0.20%
33.07
30.471
30.469
3.046
30.466
30.465
30.463
30.461
30.459
30.463
30.458
30.4561
30.454
7.88%
7.82
8.190
8.183
8.177
8.170
8.162
8.155
8.148
8.140
8.377
8.132
8.1242
8.115
7.12%
2.75
2.913
2.913
2.912
2.912
2.912
2.912
2.912
2.912
2.910
2.912
2.9119
2.9117
5.82%
2.972
3.142
3.107
3.072
3.037
3.002
2.967
2.932
2.896
2.870
2.861
2.8253
2.789
3.43%
2.192
2.261
2.260
2.260
2.260
2.260
2.260
2.260
2.260
2.238
2.260
2.260169
2.260
2.09%
0.058
0.0636
0.06372
0.06380
0.06388
0.0639
0.0640
0.0641
0.0642
0.0650
0.0642
0.06436
0.06444
12.07%
0.463
0.5194
0.5197
0.5201
0.5205
0.5209
0.5213
0.5218
0.5222
0.5358
0.5226
0.5230
0.5234
15.72%
0.506
0.5249
0.5247
0.5244
0.5242
0.5240
0.5237
0.5235
0.5232
0.5420
0.5230
0.5227
0.5225
7.11%
Table 13
Analytical results, for the 3SHM with Pcw using GSCM micromechanical model, in comparing with numerical results for composite-H2.
composite-H2
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Numerical
Pcw = 1
Pcw = 0.45
Pcw = 0
25.51
27.393
25.472
23.896
0.15%
58.76
53.913
53.899
53.883
8.27%
7.78
8.497
8.357
8.221
7.42%
2.76
2.907
2.905
2.903
5.25%
2.866
3.134
2.908
2.675
1.46%
2.362
2.566
2.564
2.563
8.55%
0.033
0.039
0.03836
0.0373
16.24%
0.475
0.512
0.5291
0.5428
11.39%
0.435
0.474
0.4741
0.4742
8.99%
Table 14
Analytical results, for the 3SHM with Pcw using GSCM micromechanical model, in comparing with numerical results for composite-69.
Composite-69
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Numerical
Pcw = 1
Pcw = 0.5
Pcw = 0
28.86
32.28
28.77
25.21
0.31%
41.06
36.08
36.05
35.99
12.20%
9.37
9.45
9.11
8.69
2.77%
2.83
2.84
2.83
28.30
0%
4.65
4.215
3.85
3.33
17.20%
1.95
2.43
2.43
2.42
24.61%
0.085
0.0725
0.066
0.0611
22.35%
0.437
0.450
0.495
0.5409
13.27%
0.49
0.481
0.484
0.489
1.22%
Table 15
Analytical results, for the 3SHM with Pcw using Chamis micromechanical model, in comparing with numerical results for composite-71.
Composite-71
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Numerical
Pcw = 1
Pcw = 0.1
Pcw = 0
40.7
44.958
40.73
40.27
0.07%
31.21
30.490
30.481
30.48
2.33%
7.57
6.973
6.939
6.93
8.33%
3.14
3.212
3.210
3.210
2.22%
2.936
3.417
3.110
3.075
5.93%
2.21
2.549
2.548
2.548
15.29%
0.065
0.060
0.05975
0.05971
8.08%
0.411
0.417
0.4136
0.4132
0.63%
0.508
0.379
0.37940
0.3793
25.31%
Table 16
Analytical results, for the 3SHM with Pcw using Chamis micromechanical model, in comparing with numerical results for composite-H2.
Composite-H2
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Numerical
Pcw = 1
Pcw = 0.5
Pcw = 0
25.93
27.556
25.868
24.177
0.24%
54.82
53.92
53.91
53.90
1.66%
7.87
7.25
7.173
7.073
8.85%
3.22
3.211
3.209
3.207
0.34%
2.94
3.373
3.183
2.946
8.26%
2.242
2.864
2.863
2.861
27.70%
0.027
0.03701
0.0361
0.0351
33.70%
0.427
0.366
0.380
0.395
11.01%
0.468
0.372
0.372
0.373
20.51%
Table 17
Analytical results, for the 3SHM with Pcw using Chamis micromechanical model, in comparing with numerical results for composite-69.
Composite-69
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Numerical
Pcw = 1
Pcw = 0.6
Pcw = 0
28.98
31.836
29.199
25.198
0.756%
37.23
36.07528
36.063
36.035
3.13%
8.99
8.0056
7.821
7.457
13.00%
3.41
3.155
3.152
3.147
7.56%
4.81
4.409
4.146
3.586
13.80%
2.16
2.780
2.777
2.77
28.56%
0.051
0.0584
0.0552
0.0504
8.23%
0.238
0.3018
0.338
0.3940
42.02%
0.35
0.3282
0.3304
0.336
5.60%
3023
represent a parallel system when they are assembled along x direction (Fig. 12). The Voigt model is used to evaluate the stiffness of
the composite as follows:
C REV
V w Cw V f Cf V m Cm
V REV
The stiffness matrix of the REV is orthotropic. The effective

elastic properties could be easily derived from the compliance
matrix.
S11
6
6 S12
6
6
6 S13
6
SREV 6
6 0
6
6
6 0
4
0
2
S12
S13
S22
S23
S23
S33
S44
S55
1=Ex
6
6 myx =E2
6
6
6 mzx =Ez
6
6
6
0
6
6
6
0
4
1
;
S11
v xy
Gxy
Ey
S12
;
S11
1
;
S66
7
0 7
7
7
0 7
7
7
0 7
7
7
0 7
5
S66
mxz =Ex
1=Ey
myz =Ey
mzy =Ez
1=Ez
1=Gyz
1=Gxz
1=Gxy
1
;
S22
v xz
Gxz
mxy =Ex
0
Ex
1
;
S55
Ez
S13
;
S11
3
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
5
1
;
S33
v yz
Gyz
S23
;
S22
1
;
S44
5.2.4.7. Comparison with numerical modeling results. Results of analytical modeling using the 3SHM model of the three angle interlock
composites described in the material section are compared to
those of numerical modeling. The results are evaluated with a
two different micromechanical models; the GSCM of Christensen
and Chamis model.
Tables 10 and 11 show good agreement between analytical and
numerical results. Concerning the Young moduli, the percentage
difference is around 10%. The shear moduli and the Poissons ratio
are also very well estimated with a small error, in some cases below 5%. It is shown that micro models could have an important
inuence on predicting the elastic properties. With Chamis model
Ey is better estimated, while shear moduli are better evaluated
using the GSCM model.
The results (Tables 10 and 11) show that the longitudinal Young
modulus Ex is always overestimated while the transversal modulus
Ey is always underestimated. It is believed that, the overestimation
of Ex is due of only using Voigt model in the homogenization of
sub-volumes of the undulated parts. This case is discussed on the
next section where an improvement of the proposed model is
suggested. Moreover, its shown that when Chamis model is used,
Table 18
Best agreement weighting parameter for weaver warp yarn Pba
cw in terms of the
mean inclination angle
h for GSCM and Chamis micromechanical models.

h ()
P ba
cw (GSCM)
0
0
11.61
0.25
24.09
0.45
29.21
0.5
90
1
P ba
cw (Chamis)
0.1
0.5
0.6
Average P ba
cw
0.175
0.5
0.55
Ey is better estimated with a low percentage difference ranging

between 1.64% and 3.12%. Shear moduli and Poissons ratios are
also well predicted with the GSCM model.
In general, this model proves to have the ability to yield more
accurate estimations of the effective elastic properties in comparing with the iso-strain model. More improvement of this model
is carried out in the next section, where the evaluated properties
are better predicted.
5.2.4.8. Improvement of the 3SHM. The presented scheme of the
3SHM in the previous section gives better results in comparing
with the iso-strain model. Moreover, an improvement of the model
could be carried out in order to obtain better estimation of the
effective elastic properties and especially for the longitudinal
Youngs modulus Ex. The evaluation of the stiffness matrix of the
warp yarn, as shown in the previous section, didnt take into account the inuence of the mean inclination angle
h. Since the
sub-volumes of the warp yarns do represent neither a parallel system nor a series system. Thus, more representative assembling
procedure is suggested, that takes into account the inuence of
h.
Using numerical results and analytical assumptions, an expression
of a weighting parameter of warp weaver yarns Pcw is introduced in
terms of
h. Pcw has the role of determining the contribution of the
Voigt and Reuss models in evaluating the stiffness of the left and
right undulated parts of warp weaver yarns respectively.
In this work, the modeling of the three angle interlocks with different mean inclination angles gives the opportunity to check the
inuence of theta on the stiffness evaluation of the warp weaver
yarns. Based on the geometrical form of the warp weaver yarn, it
could be noticed that as
h increases the sub-volumes will tend to belong more to the parallel system rather than to the series one
(Fig. 13). In the case where
h is equal to 90, the sub-volumes of
the warp weaver yarn belong clearly to the parallel system, While
when
h is equal to 0, it is clear that the sub-volumes tend to form
a series system. In the angle interlock case, the value of
h is between
0 and 90, where these two values represent the limit cases. Therefore, Pcw = 0 for
h 0 and Pcw = 1 for
h 90. Thus, the stiffness matrices of left and right undulated parts are suggested to be given by:
Pn
Pn
1
xyz
xyz
i1 V wLundi C wLundi
i1 V wRundi SwLundi
C xyz
1 P cw
wLund P cw
V Lundw
V Rundw
C xyz
wRund P cw
Pn
xyz
i1 V wRundi C wRundi
V Rundw
1 P cw
Pn
1
xyz
i1 V wRundi SwRundi
V Rundw
Analytical results (Tables 1217) are evaluated with Pcw ranging

from 0 to 1 using two micromechanical models, the GSCM and
Chamis models. Evaluated results compared to those numerical
show that only Ex is varying with Pcw with both micromechanical
models. However, the other elastic properties remain almost the
same, independent of Pcw value. It could be noticed that the variation of the evaluated effective elastic properties is much smaller
than that found in the mixed iso-strain and iso-stress model, which
means that the model is far less sensetive to the variation of Pcw.
A sensitivity study is conducted for the variation of the effective
elastic properties with Pc and Pcw for both mixed VoigtReuss model and the 3SHM model respectively (see Appendix A). Consequently, for each composite; for each
h there is one Pcw that gives
ba
the best agreement P ba
cw with the numerical results. hence, P cw
could be identied in terms of
h.
The obtained Pba
cw , corresponding to the best agreement with the
numerical results, for three composites, in addition to the two limiting points
h 0; P cw 0 and
h 90; Pcw 1, are used to nd
ba

the expression of P ba
cw in terms of h. The P cw values, for both micromechanical models are quite close, and thus the average values are

used to determine the expression of Pba
cw in terms of h.
3024

Fig. 14. Best agreement weighting parameter for weaver warp yarn P ba
cw in terms of the mean inclination angle h for GSCM and Chamis micromechanical models.
Fig. 15. Geometrical representation of the layer-to-layer angle interlock (LTL1).
Table 19
Fiber volume fractions of warp, stuffer and weft yarns and the composite, for
composite LTL1.
Fiber volume fraction in the REV
Warp
Stuffers
Weft
Composite
4.9%
25.6%
27.2%
57.6%
Table 18 and Fig. 14 show the values of P ba

cw that gives the best
agreement for Ex with their corresponding
h. Using the polyt function in MATLAB software, an expression of Pba
cw is evaluated for

3SHM. P ba
cw in function of h is given by:
Pba
cw 0:000137;
h2 0:023724;
h 0:025432:
yarns have straight prole while the warp weaver yarns have an
undulated prole. While the direct values of the geometrical
parameters of yarns, the width and the thickness, are not given.
The available data of lineal spacing of yarns and the macro-cell
dimensions [7,8] are used to derive the needed dimensions. Knowing that the composite contains 5 stuffer, 6 warp weaver and 4
weft yarns in the thickness direction and by determining of number of yarns in Ly and Lx directions, a geometrical representation of
the composite is given (Fig. 15).
Ns = W Sl = 1; there is approximately 1 stuffer in a distance W.
Nw = W Wl = 0.4; there is approximately a half warp weaver
yarn in a distance W.
Nf = P Fl = 1.8; there is approximately 2 weft yarns in a distance
P.
6. Validation and comparison with experimental data

In this section, experimental results of two composites found in
the literature, a layer-to-layer angle interlock (LTL1) [7,8] and the
composite-71 [9], previously described, are used to validate the
proposed analytical model. Both composites are made from carbon
ber/epoxy materials.
6.1. Layer-to-Layer angle interlock woven composite (LTL1)
This composite studied by Chou, contains three yarn types:
Stuffer yarns, warp weaver yarns and weft yarns. Stuffer and weft
where Ns, Nw and Nf are the numbers of stuffer, warp and weft
yarns in Ly and Lx directions respectively. P and W are the Pitch and
Width of the macro-cell given in [7,8]. Sl, Wl and Fl are the lineal
spacing of Stuffer, warp and weft yarns respectively [7,8]. Then,
the dimensions of the REV dened by the length Lx (along stuffer
direction) and Ly (along weft direction) and Lz (the thickness direction) are determined (Fig. 15).
The thickness of yarns are assumed to be equal:
hs hf hw
with
3025

Table 20
Geometrical parameter of the two cases A and B, for the composite LTL1.
Geometrical parameters
aw
hw
as
hs
af
hf
Lx
Ly
Lz
V fw=y
V fs=y
V ff =y
Case A
Case B
0.74
0.54
0.45
0.45
1.1
1.2
0.45
0.45
1.5
1.5
0.45
0.45
3
3
1.47
1.47
4.064
4.064
0.6880
0.8915
0.8664
0.7511
0.6879
0.6879
ber volume fraction in yarns V fw;s;f =y < 0:91; maximum packing

density of bers for hexagonal array) the ber volume fraction
V fw;s;f =y is evaluated as follows:
Table 21
Mechanical properties of carbon ber and epoxy.
Carbon bers
Ef11 (GPa)
Ef22 (GPa)
Gf12 (GPa)
v f12
v f23
Hercules-AS4
235
17
55
3 M-PR 500 epoxy resin
Em (GPa)
vm
0.25
0.27
3.45
0.3
V fw;s;f =y
V fw;s;f V c
V w;s;f
where
hf hs Lz
T9 (T is the thickness of the composite [7,8]).
9
for weft yarns the width af is calculated as follows:
af 2p (assuming that the spacing between adjacent weft yarns
is negligible).
The problem encountered in the determination of the exact
geometrical parameters, width values of the stuffer and warp
yarns, makes necessary to take some assumptions. Noting that as
and aw are related with the width of the REV by this relation:
W as 1=2aw
Ly as aw
aw Ly as
Different values have been suggested for both as and aw in such
a way that conserves the ber volume fraction of the yarns in the
REV as calculated by Chou, and in the same time gives reasonable
V fw;s;f ber volume fraction of the yarn in the REV.

Vw,s,f volume of yarns in the REV.
Vc volume of the composite (REV).
Two cases with different as and aw values are studied, where the
corresponding ber volume fractions and the geometrical parameters are listed in Tables 19 and 20 respectively.
Calculated
h of warp weaver yarn is equal to 31. Thus according
ba
to the Pba
cw equation, the P w used in the analytical model is found to
be equal to 0.574. Chamis model is used as a micromechanical
model. The bers and the matrix properties are given in Table 21.
The obtained results for the 2 cases show that the predicted
effective elastic properties are almost the same, except the in plane
shear modulus Gxy. In comparing with experimental results (Table 22), the in plane Youngs moduli Ex and Ey are well predicted
by a percentage difference below 5%, while the estimated in plane
Table 22
Comparison between analytical and experimental results for composite LTL1 for the two cases A and B.
Composite-LTL1
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Exp. [8]
Analytical [8]
Iso-strain model case A
MT case A
3SHM Case A
Percentage difference (3SHM case A vs Exp)
Iso-strain model case B
MT case B
3SHM Case B
Percentage difference (3SHM case B vs Exp)
71.32
73.73
69.56
78.96
68.08
4.54%
69.72
80.89
69.09
3.13%
66.33
65.64
69.91
84.87
70.18
5.80%
69.79
87.22
69.97
5.20%
Ez (GPa)
11.38
12.15
10.59
11.29
12.66
10.58
Gxy (GPa)
7.74
6.97
5.64
8.76
7.75
0.13%
5.28
8.28
6.56
15.24%
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
6.92
5.28
6.86
4.33
3.44
4.94
6.506
5.17
5.59
4.32
3.44
4.89
vxy
0.046
0.080
0.028
0.049
0.037
19.56%
0.029
0.046
0.038
17.39%
vxz
vyz
0.433
0.56
0.297
0.258
0.01
0.304
0.426
0.461
0.267
0.255
0.19
0.299
Table 23
Comparison between analytical and experimental results for composite 71.
Composite-71
Ex (GPa)
Ey (GPa)
Ez (GPa)
Gxy (GPa)
Gxz (GPa)
Gyz (GPa)
vxy
vxz
vyz
Exp.
Iso-strain model
MT
Analytical Chamis (3SHM)
Percentage difference (3SHM vs Exp.)
49.02
61.22
69.59
49.04
0.04%
35.28
30.60
37.86
33.75
4.33%
8.19
6.79
7.323
2.92
5.62
3.498
4.63
3.26
3.379
2.27
2.30
2.73
0.081
0.031
0.015
0.056
29.62%
0.693
1.061
0.408
0.529
0.185
0.372
Table 24
Sensitivity of effective elastic stiffness constants with models 1 and 2.
Composite
Model
DC11
DC22
DC33
DC44
DC55
DC66
Composite-71
Model 1
Model 2
0.137
0.009
0.07
0.003
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.015
0.09
0.010
0.032
0.02
Composite-H2
Model 1
Model 2
0.117
0.019
0.080
0.000006
0.031
0.0003
0.028
0.00007
0.134
0.01
0.032
0.00009
3026
Poissons ratio has a percentage difference of 19.56% and 17.39% for

case A and B respectively. The in plane shear modulus Gxy is very
well estimated for case A with only 0.13% of difference while is less
well predicted for case B with 15.24% of difference. in reality, modeling of this composite couldnt give a good idea on the potential of
the proposed model, because the volume fraction of warp weaver
yarn is not important in comparing to straight stuffer and weft
yarns. Also Table 22 shows analytical results from [8]. Analytical
model[7,8] gives an overestimation of the value, while it better
predicts the Ey in comparing with bothe cases of 3SHM A and B.
Better prediction of Gxy and vxy is given, in comparing with Analytical, by 3SHM case A and 3SHM cases A and B respectively. Note
that 3SHM results are also compared to the iso-strain model and
an analytical MoriTanaka method (MT) applied for textiles. The
latter is presented in [36].
6.1.1. Composite-71
Modeling this composite gives a better idea of the improvement
made by the proposed analytical model. In fact, there is no stuffer
yarns and the warp weaver yarn contribute more in the mechanical properties of the composite as it represents 70% from the total
ber volume fraction. The geometrical parameters are given in Table 2. Results are slightly different from previously evaluated for
the comparison with numerical modeling, as the Ct is now taken
0 to preserve the actual geometry of the composite. Calculated
h
is a bit different with a value of 10.40, thus the used Pba
cw is equal
to 0.2066.
Table 23 shows, in comparison with experimental results, that
the longitudinal Youngs modulus Ex are very well estimated with
a percentage difference of 0.04%. The transversal Youngs modulus
Ey is also well estimated with 4.33% of difference while the in plane
Poissons ratio is not well predicted with a percentage difference of
29.62%. in comparing with analytical iso-strain model, the 3SHM
proves clearly to gives best estimations, where the iso-strain model
overestimate Ex by 24.8% and underestimate Ey and vxy by 13.3%
and 61.7% respectively. Also comparing the 3SHM results to those
predicted by the MT method, Ex is widely better predicted by the
proposed model. The 3SHM model proves that it gives the opportunity to better estimating Youngs modulus of composites with
weaver yarns. It is shown that there is a problem with the estimation of the Poissons ratio and the shear moduli which could be the
result of the micromechanical model used.
7. Conclusion
In this paper, the development of an analytical model was
presented. It is shown that an analytical model based only on
an iso-strain assumption for the whole composite will not yield
the best results, especially with the angle interlock types. The
contribution of the iso-stress assumption in the homogenization
method proved to be crucial in evaluating the effective elastic
properties. A geometrical modeling with sinusoidal function is
adopted to describe the undulated yarns. Finite Element numerical modeling is employed for three angle interlock woven composites to assist the development of the homogenization method
in the proposed analytical model. A mixed iso-strain and isostress model is used at rst, to show the signicant inuence
of the iso-stress assumption that could affect the estimation of
the elastic properties. The comparison between numerical and
analytical results reveals that better evaluation of the stiffness
of the warp yarn is vital in estimating Ex, while using different
micromechanical models could affect, to a certain extent, the
estimation of Ey and shear moduli. Thus, a homogenization
method, the three stages homogenization method 3SHM, is
developed and proposed. An assembling scheme, in parallel or
in series using iso-strain and sio-stress assumption respectively,

of sub-volumes of subdivided undulated warp yarns is used. Furthermore, the obtained numerical results are used to nd an
approximate expression of a parameter , the weighting parameter of weaver yarns for the best agreement, in terms of the
mean inclination angle of sub-volumes of undulated warp yarns.
has the role to determine the assembling of sub-volumes of
undulated parts of warp yarns in parallel or in series. The proposed model shows the potential of enhancing better estimations of the effective elastic properties of angle interlock
woven composites. The comparison with experimental data
available in the literature for two angel interlock composites
shows that the proposed analytical model gives very good predictions for almost all elastic properties, and especially the in
plane Youngs moduli.
Appendix A. Sensitivity study
The sensitivity of the effective elastic properties for Pc and Pcw is
studied, in the following formulation:
DC
C perturbed C non perturbed

C non perturbed
Epsilon e is a constant value taken equal to 0.1

Sensitivity of the mixed VoigtReuss model, refered by model 1:
DC
1
P c e C cVoigt 1 P c e S1
CReuss P c C cVoigt 1 P c SCReuss
DC
C non perturbed
e C cVoigt S1
CReuss
C non
perturbed
Sensitivity of 3SHM, refered by model 2:
02h
2V wund
V REV
B6
@4
i1 31
i1 h
cxyz
wLundp
C xyz
7
5
wRundp
DC
C non
1
xyz 1 xyz 1
1
cwLund C wRund
C

A
2
perturbed
with
C xyz
wLund P cw
C xyz
wLund P cw
Pn
xyz
V Lundw
1 P cw
Pn
xyz
C xyz
wLundp P cw e
C xyz
wLundp P cw e
V Lundw
Pn
i1 V wLundi
1 P cw
C xyz
wLundi
V Lundw
Pn
i1 V wLundi
C xyz
wLundi
V Lundw
Pn
1
xyz
V Rundw
Pn
1
xyz
V Rundw
1 Pcw e
1 Pcw e
Pn
i1 V wLundi
C xyz
wLundi
1
V Rundw
Pn
i1 V wLundi
C xyz
wLundi
1
V Rundw
The comparison shows that the effective elastic stiffness constants are much less sensitive for 3SHM with Pcw than for the
mixed VoigtReuss model with P c (Table 24). This means that
3SHM is more stable when using the Pba
cw values evaluated in terms
of the mean inclination angle.
Appendix B. Micromechanical models
Generalized self-consistenet
Christensen [47]:
method
(GSCM)
model
of
3027
E11 V f Ef11 V m Em
4 V f V m v f12 v m 2
Vf
Km
f
v 12 V f v f12 V m v m
G12 Gm
V V v
1
Gm
f
12
Vf
km
Vm
Kf
v
1
Gm
1
km
Appendix C. Transformation matrix
1
kf
m
v
kf
Gf 1 V f Gm V m
Gf V m Gm 1 V f
G23 is the solution of the following equation:
2

G23
G23
C 0
A
2B
Gm
Gm
with
!
!
Gf23
Gf23
A 3V 1 V
1
gf
Vm
Gm
"
! #
3
Gf23
Gf23
g gf gm m gm gf V f
Gm m
G
"
!
!#
Gf
Gf23

1

g
1
V f gm 23
Gm
Gm m
f 2
B 3V f V m
Gf23
1
Gm
Gf23
gf
Gm
!
vf
!"
! #
Gf23
Gf23
Gf23
f3
m 1
m gf
m gm gf V
G
G
G
!
! #)
Gf
Gf
f3
1 23
2 23
m gf
m gm gf V
G
G
gm 1
2
# "
( "
1 Gf23
Gf
g 23
1 V f 1 gf
2 Gm m
Gm
!
!
Gf23
Gf23
C 3V V
1
gf
Gm
Gm
! #
"
!
#"
Gf
Gf23
Gf23
Gf23
f
f3
23
g

1
V
g
g

g
f
f V
Gm m
Gm
Gm
Gm m
f
m2
with
gm 3 v m ; gf 3 v f23
E
K f 212v f1v and K m 212vEmm1v m are the bulk modulus of

f
f
the ber and the matrix under longitudinal strain respectively.
v 23
K m G23
;
K m G23
with m 1 4K
v 212
E11
K is the bulk modulus of the composite under longitudinal

strain
K
E22
K m K f Gm V m K f K m Gm V f
K f Gm V m K m Gm V f
2 1 v 23 G23
Chamis model [48]:
E11 V f Ef11 V m Em
Em
E22
p
1 V f 1 Em =Ef22
V 12 V f v f11 V m v m
Gm
p
1 V f 1 Gm =Gf12
Gm
p
1 V f 1 Gm =Gf23
G12 G13
G23
Tc and Ts are two coordinate transformation matrices from local

(1 2 3) to global (x y z) coordinate system [54]:
3
2
2
2
2
l1
l2
l3
2l2 l3
2l3 l1
2l1 l2
7
6 2
6 m1
m22
m23
2m2 m3
2m3 m3
2m1 m2 7
7
6
7
6 2
2
2
n2
n3
2n2 n3
2n3 n1
2n1 n2
7
6 n
T c 6 1
7
6 m1 n1 m2 n2 m3 n3 m2 n3 m3 n2 n3 m1 n1 m3 m1 n2 m2 n1 7
7
6
7
6
l2 n3 l3 n2
n3 l1 n1 l3
l1 n2 l2 n1 5
4 n1 l1 n2 l2 n3 l3
l1 m1 l2 m2 l3 m3 l2 m3 l3 m2 l1 m3 l3 m1 l1 m2 l2 m1
3
2
2
2
l2
l3
l2 l3
l3 l1
l1 l2
l
6 12
7
6 m1
7
m22
m23
m2 m3
m 3 m1
m1 m 2
6
7
6
7
n22
n23
n2 n3
n 3 n1
n1 n2
6 n21
7
T s 6
7
6 2m1 n1 2m2 n2 2m3 n3 m2 n3 m3 n2 n3 m1 n1 m3 m1 n2 m2 n1 7
6
7
6
7
l 2 n3 l 3 n2
n3 l 1 n1 l 3
l 1 n2 l 2 n1 5
4 2n1 l1 2n2 l2 2n3 l3
2l1 m1 2l2 m2 2l3 m3
l 2 m3 l 3 m 2
l1 m3 l3 m1
l1 m2 l2 m1
where li = cos(ki, x), mi = cos(ki, x) and ni = cos(ki, x) with i = 1, 2

and 3.
K 1 1;
K 2 2;
K 3 3:
References
[1] Tong L, Moritz AP, Bannister MK. 3D ber reinforced polymer. Oxford: Elsevier;
2002.
[2] Kaw AK. Mechanic of composite materials. 2nd ed. LLC, New York: Taylor &
Francis Group; 2006.
[3] Hu J. 3-D brous assemblies properties applications and modelling of threedimensional textile structures. Woodhead Publishing Limited; 2008.
[4] Younes R, Zaki W. Optimal weaving for 2.5D interlocks. Compos Struct
2011;93:125564.
[5] Naik NK, Azad Sk NM, Durga Prasad P. Stress and failure analysis of 3D angle
interlock woven composites. J Compos Mater 2002;36:93.
[6] Tan P, Tong L, Steven GP. Micromechanics models for mechanical and
thermomechanical properties of 3D through-the-thickness angle interlock
woven composites. Composites: Part A 1999;30:63748.
[7] Pochiraju K, Chou TW. Three-dimensionally woven and braided composites. I:
A model for anisotropic stiffness prediction. Polym Compos 1999;20(4).
[8] Pochiraju K, Chou TW. Three-dimensionally woven and braided composites. II:
An experimental characterization. Polym Compos 1999;20(6).
[9] El Hage C. Modlisation du comportement lastique endommageable de
matriaux composites renfort tridimensionnel. PhD thesis. Universit de
Technologie de Compigne; 2006.
[10] Ishikawa T, Chou TW. Elastic behaviour of woven hybrid composites. JComput
Mater 1982:1629.
[11] Ishikawa T, Chou TW. Stiffness and strength behaviour of woven fabric
composites. J Mater Sci 1982;17:321120.
[12] Ishikawa T, Chou TW. One-dimensional micromechanical analysis of woven
fabric composites. AIAA J 1983;21:171421.
[13] Ishikawa T, Chou TW. In-plane thermal expansion and thermal bending
coefcients of fabric composites. J Comput Mater 1983;17:92104.
[14] Ishikawa T, Chou TW. Nonlinear behaviour of woven fabric composites. J
Comput Mater 1983;17:399413.
[15] Ishikawa T, Matsushima M, Hayashi Y. Experimental conrmation of the
theory of elastic moduli of fabric composites. J Comput Mater
1985;19:44358.
[16] Naik NK, Ganesh VK. Prediction of on-axes elastic properties of plain weave
fabric composites. Compos Sci Technol 1992;45:13552.
[17] Naik NK, Shembekar PS. Elastic behaviour of woven fabric composites: I Naik
lamina analysis. J Comput Mater 1992;26:2197225.
[18] Naik NK, Shembekar PS. Elastic behaviour of woven fabric composites:
111-laminate design. J Comput Mater 1992;26:252341.
[19] Naik NK, Sridevi E. An analytical method for thermoelastic analysis of 3D
orthogonal interlock woven composites. J Reinf Plastics Compos
2002;21:1149.
[20] Naik NK, Kuchibhotla R. Analytical study of strength and failure behavior of
plain weave fabric composites made of twisted yarns. Composites: Part A
2002;33:697708.
[21] Sankar BV, Marrey R. Analytical method for micromechanics of textile
composites. PII:SO266.3538(97)00030-4.
[22] Hahn H T, Pandey R. A micromechanics model for thermoelastic properties of
plain weave fabric composites. J Eng Mater Technol 1994:116517423.
3028
[23] Vandeurzen Ph, Ivens J, Verpoest I. A three-dimensional micromechanical

analysis of woven-fabric composites: I. Geometrical analysis. Compos Sci
Technol 1996;56:130315.
[24] Vandeurzen Ph, Ivens J, Verpoest I. A three-dimensional micromechanical of
woven-fabric composites: II. Elastic. Compos Sci Technol 1996;56:
131727.
[25] Scida D, Aboura Z, Benzeggagh ML, Bocherens E. A micrromechenics model for
3D elasticity and failure of woven-bre composite material. Compos Sci
Technol 1999;59(4):50517.
[26] Bystrom J, Jekabsons N, Varna J. An evaluation of different models for
prediction of elastic properties of woven composites. Composites: Part B
2000;31:720.
[27] Jiang Y, Tabiei A, Simitses GJ. A novel micromechanics-based approach to the
derivation of constitutive equations for local/global analysis of a plain-weave
fabric composite. Compos Sci Technol 2000;60:182533.
[28] Donadon VM, Falzon BG, Iannucci L, Hodgkinson JM. A 3-D micromechanical
model for predicting the elastic behavior of woven laminates. Compos Sci
Technol 2007;67:246777.
[29] Tarnopolskii YM, Polyakor VA, Zhigun LG. Composite materials reinforced
with a system of three mutually orthogonal bres. I: Calculation of elastic
characteristics. Polym Mech 1973;5:85360.
[30] Kregers AF, Melbardis YG. Determination of three dimensional reinforced
composites by the stiffness averaging method. Polym Mech 1978;1:38.
[31] Cox BN, Dadkhah MS. The macroscopic elasticity of 3D woven composites. J
Comput Mater 1995;29:785819.
[32] Tan P, Tong L, Steven GP, Ishikawa T. Behavior of 3D orthogonal woven CFRP
composites. Part I. Experimental investigation. Composites: Part A
2000;31:25971.
[33] Tan P, Tong L, Steven GP. Behavior of 3D orthogonal woven CFRP composites.
Part II. FEA and analytical modeling approaches. Composites: Part A
2000;31:27381.
[34] Tan P, Tong L, Steven GP. Mechanical behavior for 3-D orthogonal woven
E-glass/epoxy composites. J Reinf Plastics Compos 2001;20(04).
[35] Yanjun C, Guiqiong J, Bo W, Wei L. Elastic behavior analysis of 3D angleinterlockwoven ceramic composites. Acta Mech Solida Sinica 2006;19(2).
[36] Gommers B, Verpoest IV, Houtte P. The MoriTanaka method applied to textile
composite materiels. Acta Mater 1998;46(6):222335.
[37] Lomov SV, Huysmans G, Luo Y, Parnas RS, Prodromou A, Verpoest I, et al.
Textile
composites:
modelling
strategies.
Composites:
Part
A
2001;32:137994.
[38] Lomov SV, Gusakov AV, Huysmans G, Prodromou A, Verpoest I. Textile

geometry preprocessor for meso-mechanica models of woven composites.
Compos Sci Technol 2000;60:208395.
[39] Lomov SV, Huysmans G, Verpoest I. Hierarchy of textile structures and
architecture of fabric geometric models. Texle Res J 2001;71(6):53443.
[40] Prodromou A, Lomov S, Verpoest I. The method of cells and the mechanical
properties of textile composites. Compos Struct 2011;93:12909.
[41] Cox BN, Carter WC, Fleck NA. A binary model of textile composites I.
Fromulation. Acta Metall Mater 1994;42(10):346379.
[42] Xu J, Cox BN, McGlockton MA, Carter WC. A binary model of textile
composites II. The elastic regime. Acta Metall Mater 1995;43(9):351124.
[43] Nie J, Lu S, Gu B. Fractional formula description of angle-interlock woven fabric
construction. J Ind Text 2006;36(2):12532.
[44] Ko FK. 3D textile reinforced in composite materials. 3-D textile reinforcements
in composite materials. Woodhead Publishing, CRC Press; 1999. p. 940.
ISBN:1 85573 376 5.
[45] Barbero EJ, Trovillion J, Mayugo JA, Sikkil KK. Finite element modelling of plain
weave fabrics from photomicrograph measurements. Compos Struct
2006;73:4152.
[46] Bogdanovich AE. Multi-scale modeling, stress and failure analyses of 3-D
woven composites. J Mater Sci 2006;41:654790.
[47] Christensen RM. A critical evaluation for a class of micromechanics models. J
Mech Phys Solids 1990;38(3):379404.
[48] Chamis CC. Mechanics of composite materials: past, present, and future. J
Compos Technol Res ASTM 1989;11:314.
[49] Angioni SL, Meoa M, Foreman A. A comparison of homogenization methods for
2-D woven composites. Composites: Part B 2011;42:1819.
[50] El Hage C, Younes R, Aboura Z, Benzeggagh ML, Zoaeter M. Analytical and
numerical modeling of mechanical properties of orthogonal 3D CFRP. Compos
Sci Technol 2009;69:1116.
[51] Hill R. Theory of mechanical properties of bre-strengthen materials 111.
Self consistent model. J Mech Phys Solids 1965;13:18998.
[52] Gommers B, Verpoest IV, Houtte P. Modeling of the elastic properties of
knitted fabric-reinforced composites. Compos Sci Technol 1996;56:68594.
[53] Gommers B, Verpoest IV, Houtte P. Analysis of knitted fabric reinforced
composites: Part II. Stiffness and strength. Composites: Part A 1998;29A:
1589601.
[54] Huang ZM, Ramakrishna S. Micromechanical modeling approaches for the
stiffness and strength of knitted fabric composites: a review and comparative
study. Composites: Part A 2000;31:479501.

Improved Analytical Model

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Improved Analytical Model

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Improved analytical model to predict the effective elastic properties

L3M2S, Lebanese University-Rac Hariri campus, Hadath, Beirut, Lebanon

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

the time saved in calculation, without the need of super

of sub-volumes of subdivided undulated yarns is used. Here, the

2. Review of analytical and numerical modeling approaches

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

laminate theory CLT is used to evaluate the elastic properties of

properties of a 3D angle interlock woven fabric composite based

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Fig. 2. Composites H2, 71 and 69 in the (XZ) and (XY) plans.

Cl: distance between two adjacent weft yarns

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

V fw=fc the bers volume fraction of warp or weft yarns in the

trial package Ansys Academic Associate makes it possible to

U 1 a1 ;y;z K; U 1 a1 ;y;z 0; U 2 a1 ; y; z U 2 a1 ;y; z 0;

4.2. Material orientation

Distance between yarns

Mean inclination angle

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Fig. 6. Orientation axis according to the direction of yarns.

4.5. Boundary conditions for the computation of Gxy

With Fx evaluated on the (x = +a1) face.

With Fx evaluated on the (y = +a2) face.

4.6. Results of numerical modeling

In the three studied composites, described in Section 2, warp

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Fig. 8. Longitudinal and transversal sections of an undulated warp yarn.

yarns are simulated by a straight yarns (Fig. 8). The cross-section of

aw=f hw=f aw=f hw=f

The undulated part of warp yarns is modeled by its centerline.

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Left undulated section: T/2 6 x 6 T;

for right undulated part

for left undulated part

and for each sub-volume:

5.2. Homogenization method

The stressstrain relation gives according to the Hooks law

C c fec g V c C 1 fe1 g V 1 C 2 fe2 g V 2 C n fen g

The volume of the linear parts:

Assembling a series system formed by n sub-volumes by the

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Fig. 10. The assembling of n sub-volumes in parallel and in series.

The average strain tensor throughout the composite is given by:

The stressstrain relation, according to the Hooks law gives:

Sc frc g V c S1 fr1 g V 1 S2 fr2 g V 2 Sn

5.2.2. Modeling with iso-strain model

With 2D woven composites, this model has proved to give quite

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Pc has the role of determining the contribution of the Voigt and

Analytical modeling results

Percentage difference for the best agreement P ba

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Analytical modeling results

Analytical modeling results

in terms of previously evaluated stiffness matrices of yarns and

[S] is the compliance matrix of a transversely isotropic material.

1=Em mm =Em mm =Em

A. Hallal et al. / Composite Structures 94 (2012) 30093028

Fig. 11. Homogenization scheme of the undulated warp yarn.

1. The stiffness of sub-volumes in the (x y z), global coordinate

With Tc is the 3D transformation matrix (see Appendix A).