1 DYNAmore Info Composites NewMaterials Hartmann

Neue Materialmodelle fr Composites
in LS-DYNA
Stefan Hartmann
DYNAmore GmbH, Stuttgart
Infotag:
Composite Berechnung mit LS-DYNA, 17. April 2013, Stuttgart
1
Outline
Introduction
- failure mechanisms / modeling possibilities / layer definition / remarks
Material models for intralaminar failure

- *MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_PINHO (*MAT_261)
- *MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_CAMANHO (*MAT_262)
- summary and comparison
Preliminary results
- three point bending of flat specimen / three point bending of a hat profile / shear specimen /
drop tower test
Summary and Outlook
Neue Materialmodelle fr Composites in LS-DYNA Infotag Composites, 17. April 2013, Stuttgart
2
Introduction
failure mechanisms in fiber reinforced composites
Transverse tensile fracture

3
Transverse compressive fracture

3
Longitudinal tensile fracture
Longitudinal compressive fracture
3
Introduction
modeling possibilities
intralaminar
- element: layered (thin/thick) shells
one solid element per ply
- material: plasticity / damage models
layered thin shell elements

+ numerical cheap (thickness does not
influence the critical time step size)
+ combination of single layers to sub-laminates
- no stresses in thickness dir. (no delamination)
layered thick shell elements interlaminar (delamination)

+ 3D stress state - cohesive elements
+ combination of single layers to sub-laminates - tiebreak contacts
- thickness influences the critical time step size
layered thin
solid elements shell element
stacked shells
+ 3D stress state cohesive element
- one element for every single layer (no layering)
numerical expensive layered thin
shell element
4
Introduction
layered thin shell definition with *PART_COMPOSITE(_TSHELL)
no *SECTION_SHELL-keyword card needed

different material models allowed
*PART_COMPOSITE(_TSHELL)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
PID ELFORM SHRF NLOC MAREA HGID ADOPT
Card 1
28 2 0.0 0.0
MID1 THICK1 BETA1 MID2 THICK2 BETA2
Card 2
1 0.2 0.0 2 0.4 45.0
Card 3
3 0.2 90.0

0.2
add as many cards are necessary to define 0.4
the whole layup (define two layers per card) 0.2
IP 3 90.0
IP 2 45.0
Listing of integration
IP 1 0.0
points begins from the bottom
5
Introduction
layered thin shell definition with *PART_COMPOSITE(_TSHELL)
need *SECTION_(T)SHELL-keyword card to define ELFORM

different material models allowed
*ELEMENT_(T)SHELL_COMPOSITE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Card 1 EID PID N1 N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 N7 N8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Card 2
1 0.2 0.0 2 0.4 45.0
Card 3
3 0.2 90.0

add as many cards are necessary to define 0.2

the whole layup (define two layers per card) 0.4
0.2
Now it is possible to define different
Lay-ups within the same PART
IP 3 90.0
IP 2 45.0
Listing of integration
IP 1 0.0
points begins from the bottom
6
Introduction
Outlook: ply based modeling with *ELEMENT_(T)SHELL_COMPOSITE8
definition of a Ply ID will allow an easier post-processing
new LS-PrePost versions will support ply based modeling
separate binary file for post-processing of composite parts
5 5
Ply IDs 4 4
4 3 3
3 3 2
2
2 2 1 1
Integration point IDs
7
Introduction
some remarks
extra history variables
many composite material models have extra history variables that help to track
modes of failure in each integration point (see material documentation in the LS-
DYNA Keyword Users Manual for details). A list of history variables is given here:
http://www.dynasupport.com/howtos/material/history-variables
NEIPS (shells) or NEIPH (solids) in *DATABASE_EXTENT_BINARY should be set
to the number of extra history variables needed. For example, if you want to track
the damage parameters (6 extra history variables) in *MAT_054, set NEIPS=6.
output of stresses and strains in the local material coordinate system (IPs)
set CMPFLG=1 in *DATABASE_EXTENT_BINARY
d3plot
binout global local *)
CMPLFG=0 Element KOS Global KOS Element KOS
CMPFLG=1 Material KOS Material KOS undefined
*) Formerly LSPP did not know about INN (information not written to d3plot), so transfromation
from Global KOS Element KOS might not be correct.
This is fixed with LS-DYNA Version R7 and later and newer LSPP versions (4.1).
8
*MAT_261: [1]
*MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_
DAIMLER_PINHO
*MAT_262: [2]
*MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_
DAIMLER_CAMANHO
(Development together with Daimler AG)
[1] Pinho, S.T., Iannucci, L.; Robinson, P.: Physically-based failure models and criteria for laminated fiber-reinforced
composites with emphasis on fiber kinking: Part I Development & Part II FE implementation,
Composites: Part A 37, 2006
[2] Maim, P., Camanho, P.P., Mayugo, J.A., Dvila, D.G.: A continuum damage model for composite laminates:
Part I Constitutive model & Part II Computational implementation and validation, Mechanics of Materials 39, 2007
9
*MAT_261 (*MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_PINHO):
constitutive law
4 damage parameter
= (1 d ) d mat ; d mac ; d kink ; d a
4 failure criteria
da 3 d kink 3
1 1
a) Longitudinal tensile fracture b) Longitudinal compressive fracture
d mat 3 d mac 3
2 2
c) Transverse fracture with =0 d) Transverse fracture with =53
10
physically based failure criteria
continuum damage model
3
2

1 e 2f = 11 1
XT
a) Tensile fibre mode
(maximum stress)
2 2
3 T L b + c b c
ec2 = + 1 ( n 0) n =
m
+
m
cos(2 ) + bmc sin(2 )
S
T
T n S
L
L n
2 2
1 bm c
2 2 2 T = sin(2 ) + bmc cos(2 )
2
b) Compressive fibre mode ec2 = n + L + T 1 ( n > 0) L = a mbm cos( ) + c am sin( )
YT S L ST
(3D-kinking model)
3
2 2 2

2 em2 = n + T + L 1
YT ST S L
c) Tensile matrix mode
(transf. fracture plane)
3
2 2
T L
2 ed2 = +
1
S
T
T n S
L
L n
d) Compressive matrix mode 0 : fracture plane for pure compression
(transf. fracture plane) : fracture plane under general loading
11
linear damage laws
0
= (1 d a )[11 , 22 ,12 , 23 , 31 ] 0
di = f
= (1 d kink )[11 , 22 ,12 , 23 , 31 ] ( f 0 )

= (1 d mat )[ 22 ,12 , 23 , 31 ]
L
= (1 d mac )[ 22 ,12 , 23 , 31 ]

0
f
a , kink , b , T , L :
fracture toughness from: CT, CC, 4-point bending, mode II interlaminar fracture (T,L)
L:
internal (characteristic) length for objectivity (localization!)
12
in-plane shear behavior
1D plasticity formulation with combined isotropic/kinematic hardening

coupled with linear damage model
Nonlinearity defined via

*DEFINE_CURVE
13
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
elastic,
orthotropic
Card 1 MID RO EA EB EC PRBA PRCA PRCB
parameters Card 2 GAB GBC GCA AOPT DAF DKF DMF EFS
material Card 3 XP YP ZP A1 A2 A3
coos Card 4 V1 V2 V3 D1 D2 D3 MANGLE
Card 5 ENKINK ENA ENB ENT ENL
model
parameter
Card 6 XC XT YC YT SL
Card 7 FIO SIGY LCSS BETA PFL PUCK SOFT
DAF: flag to control failure of an IP based on ENL: Fracture toughness for intralaminar matrix
longitudinal (fiber) tensile failure longitudinal shear failure
DKF: flag to control failure of an IP based on XC: longitudinal compressive strength
longitudinal (fiber) compressive failure XT: longitudinal tensile strength
DMF: flag to control failure of an IP based on YC: transverse compressive strength
transverse (matrix) failure YT: transverse tensile strength
EFS: Max. effect. Strain for element layer failure. SL: longitudinal shear strength
A value of unity would equal 100% strain FIO: fracture angle in pure transverse compression
ENKINK: Facture toughness for longitudinal (fiber) (in degrees, default=53.0)
compressive failure mode SIGY: In-plane shear yield stress
ENA: Facture toughness for longitudinal (fiber) LCSS: Load curve ID which defines the non-linear in-plane
tensile failure mode shear-stress as a function of in-plane shear-strain
ENB: Facture toughness for intralaminar matrix BETA: hardening parameter for in-plane shear plasticity
tensile failure PFL: Percentage of layer which must fail before crashfront
ENT: Fracture toughness for intralaminar matrix is initiated.
transverse shear failure PUCK: flag to post-process Pucks inter-fiber-failure criterion
SOFT: reduction factor for strength in crashfront elements
14
1-Element-Test, Single-Layer (SHELL, ELFORM=2)
Material Parameter:
EA= 132.0 [kN/mm]
XT= 1.95 [kN/mm]
XC= 1.35 [kN/mm]
ENA=0.05 [kN/mm]
ENKINK=0.02 [kN/mm]
EFS=0.05
2.0 2 E
B XT=1.95 XT=1.95 B F
I
1.5 1 damage,
linear degradation J
Stress-AA
Stress-AA
softening
A
1.0 0 L
K independent softening
H
in compr. & tens.
0.5 -1 G
D
XC=1.35
C
A C
0.0 -2
0.0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03
Strain-AA Strain-AA
15
Cyclic test with a +/-45 layup (A-M)
Material Parameter:
GAB= 4.6 [kN/mm]
ENT= 0.006 [kN/mm]
ENL= 0.006 [kN/mm]
SL= 0.149 [kN/mm]
0.15
SL=0.149 E F
0.10
B G
J
0.05
Stress-AB
K
M
0..00
A 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Strain-AB
-0..05 L
I shear non-linearity with *DEFINE_CURVE
-0.10
H
D
-0.15 C
0.0 0.05 0.10 0.15
Strain-AB
16
Extra History Variables ( set NEIPS in *DATABASE_EXTENT_BINARY)
SHELLS / TSHELLS / SOLIDS

1 fa damage activation function: fiber ternsile mode
2 fkink damage activation function: fiber compressive mode
3 fmat damage activation function: matrix mode
5 da damage variable: fiber tension
6 dkink damage variable: fiber compression
7 dmat damage variable: transverse direction
9 dam damage parameter (SOFT)
10 fmt_p Pucks inter-fiber-failure criterion: tensile matrix mode
11 fmc_p Pucks inter-fiber-failure criterion: compressive matrix mode
12 theta_p Pucks inter-fiber-failure criterion: angle of fracture plane
fa, fkink, fmat: 0 1-elastic; 1-failure criterion reached

da; dkink; dmat: 0-elastic; 1-fully damaged
dam: -1-intact; 0-failed; 10e-8-crashfront
fmt_p; fmc_p, theta_p: 0 1-elastic; 1-failure criterion reached
17
*MAT_262 (*MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_CAMANHO):
constitutive relation = H : = H 1 :
1 21 5 damage variables
0
(1 d1 ) E1 E2 d1 ( r1 , r1+ ) ; d1+ ( r1+ ) ; d 2 ( r2 ) ; d 2+ ( r2+ ) ; d 6 ( r2+ )
1
H = 12 0
E1 (1 d 2 ) E2 11 11
d1 = d1+ + d1

1
11 11
0 0
(1 d6 ) G12 22 22
d 2 = d 2+ + d 2
22 22
4 failure criteria (LaRC03/04)
F1- 3 F1+ 3
1 1
damage activation functions
a) Longitudinal tensile fracture b) Longitudinal compressive fracture F1 = 1 r1 0

F2- 3 F2+ 3
F2 = 2 r2 0
F1+ = 1+ r1+ 0
2 2
F2+ = 2+ r2+ 0
c) Transverse fracture with =0 d) Transverse fracture with =53
18
failure surface (assembly of 4 sub-surfaces)
19
physically based failure criteria
continuum damage model
3
11 12 22
1 1+ =
XT
a) Tensile fibre mode
(maximum strain LaRC04)
3
12m + L 22m
1 1 =
SL 22m = 11 sin 2 ( C ) + 22 cos 2 ( C ) 2 12 sin( C )cos( C )
b) Compressive fibre mode (LaRC03) 12m = ( 22 11 ) sin( C )cos( C ) + 12 ( cos 2 ( C ) sin 2 ( C ) )
(transf. fracture plane)
3 2 2
22

2+ = (1 g ) + g 22 + 12 ( 22 0)
2 YT YT S L
12 + L 22
c) Tensile matrix mode 2 + = ( 22 < 0)
(LaRc04) SL
3
2 2
2 Teff Leff
2 = +
S T SL Teff = 22 cos( 0 ) [sin( 0 ) T cos( 0 ) cos( )]
d) Compressive matrix mode (LaRC04)
(transf. fracture plane) Leff = cos( 0 ) 12 + L 22 cos( 0 ) sin( )
20
evolution of threshold (internal) variables ( r [1 ])
compression: r1n+/21 = max {1, r1n/2 ,1n+/21 }
no damage due to crack (tension);
crack closure
tension: r1n++/21+ = max {1, r1n+ /2+ , r1n+/21 ,1n++/21+ }
evolution of damage variables ( d [0 1])
m( X ,G) n ( X , m)
d (r ) = 1
E E ( r )
n
m
bi-linear in fiber direction linear in transverse direction
GXT , GXC , GYT , GYC , GSL

fracture toughness from: CT, CC, DCB, - , 4-ENF
: internal (characteristic) length for objectivity (lokalization!)

21
1D elasto-plastic formulation with combined iso/kin hardening coupled to a linear damage evolution law
12
SL GSL
l
12
22
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
elastic,
orthotropic
Card 1 MID RO EA EB EC PRBA PRCA PRCB
parameters Card 2 GAB GBC GCA AOPT DAF DKF DMF EFS
material Card 3 XP YP ZP A1 A2 A3
coos Card 4 V1 V2 V3 D1 D2 D3 MANGLE
Card 5 GXC GXT GYC GYT GSL GXCO GXTO
model
parameter
Card 6 XC XT YC YT SL XCO XTO
Card 7 FIO SIGY ETAN BETA PFL PUCK SOFT
DAF: flag to control failure of an IP based on XC: longitudinal compressive strength
longitudinal (fiber) tensile failure XT: longitudinal tensile strength
DKF: flag to control failure of an IP based on YC: transverse compressive strength
longitudinal (fiber) compressive failure YT: transverse tensile strength
DMF: flag to control failure of an IP based on SL: shear strength ab-plane
transverse (matrix) failure XCO: long. compr. strength at inflection point
EFS: Max. effect. Strain for element layer failure. XTO: long. tens. strength at inflection point
A value of unity would equal 100% strain FIO: fracture angle in pure transverse compression
GXC: Facture toughness for longitudinal (fiber) (in degrees, default=53.0)
compressive failure mode SIGY: In-plane shear yield stress
GXT: Facture toughness for longitudinal (fiber) ETAN: tangent modulus for in-plane shear plasticity
tensile failure mode BETA: hardening parameter for in-plane shear plasticity
GYC: Fracture toughness for transv. compr. fail. PFL: Percentage of layer which must fail before crashfront
GYT: Fracture toughness for transv. tens. fail. is initiated.
GSL: Fracture toughness for in-plane shear fail. PUCK: flag to post-process Pucks inter-fiber-failure criterion
GXCO: Frac. tough. long. compr. fail. bi-lin. damage SOFT: reduction factor for strength in crashfront elements
GXTO: Frac. tough. long. tens. fail. bi-lin. damage
23
fiber tensile load (A-D) fiber cyclic load (A-K)
Material Parameter:
EA= 132.0 [kN/mm]
XT= 1.95 [kN/mm]
XC= 1.35 [kN/mm]
GXT/GXC=0.015 [kN/mm]
GXTO/GXCO=0.01 [kN/mm]
XTO/XCO=0.4 [kN/mm]
2.0 2
B XT=1.95 XT=1.95 B
1.5 1 damage,
bi-linear degradation E
softening F H
Stress-AA
Stress-AA
J A
1.0 0 I
G
damage in compr.
leads to damage
0.5 C -1
D in tension
XC=1.35
C
A D
0.0 -2
0.0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03
Strain-AA Strain-AA
24
Material Parameter:
GAB= 4.6 [kN/mm]
GSL= 0.006 [kN/mm]
SIGY= 0.115 [kN/mm]
ETAN= 0.18 [kN/mm]
SL= 0.149 [kN/mm]
0.15 F
SL=0.149 E
B SIGY=0.115
G ETAN
0.10
SIGY=0.115
J
0.05
GAB
Stress-AB
M K
0..00
A 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
L Strain-AB
-0..05
I
-0.10
D H
-0.15 C
0.0 0.05 0.10 0.15
Strain-AB
25
Extra History Variables ( set NEIPS in *DATABASE_EXTENT_BINARY)
SHELLS / TSHELLS / SOLIDS
1 1+ damage activation function: fiber ternsile mode
2 1- damage activation function: fiber compressive mode
3 2+ damage activation function: tensile matrix mode
4 2- damage activation function: compressive matrix mode
5 d1+ damage variable: fiber tension
6 d1- damage variable: fiber compression
7 d2 damage variable: transverse direction
8 d6 damage variable: in-plane shear
9 dam damage parameter (SOFT)
10 fmt_p Pucks inter-fiber-failure criterion: tensile matrix mode
11 fmc_p Pucks inter-fiber-failure criterion: compressive matrix mode
12 theta_p Pucks inter-fiber-failure criterion: angle of fracture plane
i: 0 1-elastic; 1-failure criterion reached

di: 0-elastic; 1-fully damaged
dam: -1-intact; 0-failed; 10e-8-crashfront
fmt_p; fmc_p, theta_p: 0 1-elastic; 1-failure criterion reached
26
comparison between different material models

fiber tensile load (A-E) fiber cyclic load (A-K)
Material Parameter:
EA= 132.0 [kN/mm]
XT= 1.95 [kN/mm]
XC= 1.35 [kN/mm]
(model dependent)
2.0 2
*MAT_054
1.5 1
Stress-AA
Stress-AA
1.0 0
*MAT_058
*MAT_262
*MAT_022
0.5 -1
*MAT_022
0.0 -2
0.0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03
Strain-AA Strain-AA
27
comparison of the new material models (in-plane shear)

0.15
SL=0.149
SIGY=0.115
0.10
0.05
Stress-AB
0.00
-0..05
-0.10
-0.15
0.0 0.05 0.10 0.15
Strain-AB
28
*MAT_261 (Pinho) *MAT_262 (Camanho)

failure criterion may use 3D-stress state failure criterion based on plane stress assumption
fiber tension
maximum stress criterion maximum strain criterion
fiber compression
complex 3D-fiber kinking model, expensive use constant fiber misalignment angle based on
search for controlling fracture plane shear and longitudinal compressive strength
matrix failure: transverse tension

search for controlling fracture plane assume perpendicular fracture plane
matrix failure: transverse compression/shear

search for controlling fracture plane assume constant fracture plane angle (i.e. 53)
in-plane shear treatment

1D-plasticity model with combined (iso/kin) 1D-plasticity model with combined (iso/kin)
hardening based on *DEFINE_CURVE linear hardening
damage evolution
linear damage based on fracture toughness bi-/linear damage based on fracture toughness
29
summary
*MAT_261: (*MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_PINHO) (together with Daimler AG)

solid, shell, tshell (3,5)
linear elastic orthotropic
coupled failure criteria (plane stress) fracture plane:
fiber tens./compr., matrix tens./compr.
complex 3D fiber kinking model
1D plasticity formulation for in-plane shear
linear damage evolution based on fracture toughness
S.T. Pinho, L. Iannucci, P.Robinson:

Physically-based failure models and criteria for laminated fibre-reinforced composites with emphasis on fibre kinking:
Part I: Development & Part II: FE implementation, Composites: Part A 37 (2006) 63-73 & 766-777
*MAT_262: (*MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_CAMANHO) (together with Daimler AG)

solid, shell, tshell (3,5)
linear elastic orthotropic
coupled failure criteria (plane stress) fracture plane
1D plasticity formulation for in-plane shear
bi-linear damage evolution based on fracture toughness
P. Maim, P.P. Camanho, J.A. Mayugo, C.G. Dvila:

A continuum damage model for composite laminates:
Part I: Constitutive model & Part II: Computational implementation and validation, Mechanics of materials 39 (2007) 897-908 & 909-919
30
Problem der Objektivitt (Pinho und Camanho gleichermassen) 1D-Beispiel
L (vereinfacht mit
ges
el
= = 0,1 Ingenieurdehnungen)
L
L = 10 mm L = 1 mm
FE-Diskretisierung
2 Elemente 10 Elemente
Elastische Verformung
L L / 2 L L / 10
ges
el
= = 0,1 ele
el
= = 0,1 ges
el
= = 0,1 ele
el
= = 0,1
L L/2 L L / 10
Lokalisierung (Verformung
in einem Element)
L L L L
ges
el
= = 0,1 ele
el
= = 0, 2 ges
el
= = 0,1 ele
el
= = 1, 0
L L/2 L L / 10

0
Spannungen aus lokaler Skalierung mit charakteristischer
FE-Elementlnge
-Beziehung G
le

0
f
31
Problem der Objektivitt (Pinho und Camanho gleichermassen)

Gesamte Bruchenergie: 0
G 1 f 0 2G 2G
= f = l =
le 0 0 f G
e
le 2
le

Kriterium:
f 0
0
f
Daraus ergibt sich eine kritische, maximale Elementgre
2G
lecr =
0 0
Diese ist Abhngig von den Materialparametern und liegt meist < 1mm!
Lokalisierung: Anpassung der Materialparameter

Skalierung der Bruchenergie fr benutzte Elementgre
le
cr
l
e
32
Preliminary results
three point bending of flat specimen
single shell with a thickness of 4mm / carbon fibers in epoxy resin
- [0 ]5s (fibers in longitudinal direction of the plate)
- [90 ]5s (fibers in transverse direction of the plate)
33
Preliminary results
three point bending of a hat profile
- [90 /0 /45 /-45 /0 /90 /-45 /45 /0 /90 ]
Shell sublaminates
Local failure
Interfaces
Local failure matrix failure
34
Preliminary results
shear specimen
- [45/-45]3S
Shear plasticity
Experiment Simulation
tensile
test
35
Preliminary results
3-Punkt-Biegung
Auflager und Impaktor

als starre Krper
Spanngurte
Spanngurte durch Impaktor: V0
vorgespannte Balken
Schweller mit geschichteten
Schalenelementen (12 Schichten,
ELFORM=2) und Materialmodell
nach P. Camanho
Rigid Bodies
36
Preliminary results
3-Punkt-Biegung LS-DYNA mit Materialmodell

nach P. Camanho (UserMat)
Versuch
Simulation
t = 10 ms
t = 20 ms
t = 30 ms
37
Summary
two continuum damage models implemented into LS-DYNA
- advanced, coupled failure surfaces (transformation to fracture plane)
- bi-linear/linear damage evolution laws (based on fracture toughness)
- 1D elasto-plastic formulation for in-plane shear non-linearity
preliminary results
- material models able to represent general behavior, especially non-linearity in shear
Outlook
many detailed numerical studies necessary for further improvements
- comparison and parameter studies with experiments
- different element formulations and modeling techniques (stacked shells)
Acknowledgement
Thank for technical support to:
Prof. Pedro Camanho, Dr. Pere Maim & Dr. Silvestre Pinho
38
Thank you!
39

1 DYNAmore Info Composites NewMaterials Hartmann

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

1 DYNAmore Info Composites NewMaterials Hartmann

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Neue Materialmodelle fr Composites

Material models for intralaminar failure

Summary and Outlook

failure mechanisms in fiber reinforced composites

Transverse tensile fracture

Transverse compressive fracture

Longitudinal tensile fracture

Longitudinal compressive fracture

layered thin shell elements

layered thick shell elements interlaminar (delamination)

layered thin shell definition with *PART_COMPOSITE(_TSHELL)

no *SECTION_SHELL-keyword card needed

layered thin shell definition with *PART_COMPOSITE(_TSHELL)

need *SECTION_(T)SHELL-keyword card to define ELFORM

add as many cards are necessary to define 0.2

Outlook: ply based modeling with *ELEMENT_(T)SHELL_COMPOSITE8

definition of a Ply ID will allow an easier post-processing

new LS-PrePost versions will support ply based modeling

separate binary file for post-processing of composite parts

Integration point IDs

(Development together with Daimler AG)

a) Longitudinal tensile fracture b) Longitudinal compressive fracture

c) Transverse fracture with =0 d) Transverse fracture with =53

= (1 d kink )[11 , 22 ,12 , 23 , 31 ] ( f 0 )

1D plasticity formulation with combined isotropic/kinematic hardening

Nonlinearity defined via

SHELLS / TSHELLS / SOLIDS

fa, fkink, fmat: 0 1-elastic; 1-failure criterion reached

a) Longitudinal tensile fracture b) Longitudinal compressive fracture F1 = 1 r1 0

tension: r1n++/21+ = max {1, r1n+ /2+ , r1n+/21 ,1n++/21+ }

evolution of damage variables ( d [0 1])

bi-linear in fiber direction linear in transverse direction

GXT , GXC , GYT , GYC , GSL

: internal (characteristic) length for objectivity (lokalization!)

i: 0 1-elastic; 1-failure criterion reached

comparison between different material models

comparison of the new material models (in-plane shear)

*MAT_261 (Pinho) *MAT_262 (Camanho)

matrix failure: transverse tension

matrix failure: transverse compression/shear

in-plane shear treatment

*MAT_261: (*MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_PINHO) (together with Daimler AG)

S.T. Pinho, L. Iannucci, P.Robinson:

*MAT_262: (*MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_CAMANHO) (together with Daimler AG)

P. Maim, P.P. Camanho, J.A. Mayugo, C.G. Dvila:

Daraus ergibt sich eine kritische, maximale Elementgre

Lokalisierung: Anpassung der Materialparameter

Auflager und Impaktor

3-Punkt-Biegung LS-DYNA mit Materialmodell

Anda mungkin juga menyukai

MAT_261 (Pinho) MAT_262 (Camanho)

MAT_261: (MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_PINHO) (together with Daimler AG)

MAT_262: (MAT_LAMINATED_FRACTURE_DAIMLER_CAMANHO) (together with Daimler AG)