Anda di halaman 1dari 10

1. Mech. Phys. Solids, 1965, Vol. 13, pp. 213 to 222. Pergamon Press Ltd. Printed in Cleat Britain.




Ry R. HILL lhzpartrncnt of Applied Nuthenlutics and Theoretical



of Cambridge


elastic nloduli




arc tstimated neolotropic

by a method that takes theory IMailed

account of the inhomogeneity of crystalline aggregates.

of stress and strain in a way similar to the Hershey-Kriiner ellipsoidal inclusions.

The phases may be arbitrarily

and in any concentrations,

but are required to have the character of 8 matrix and cffcctivcly results arc given for an isotropic dispersion of sphcrcs.

hkx~~cwoxs of macroscopic properties of two-phase solid composites have mostly been restrict4 to stating universal bounds on various overall elastic moduli (I-las~r~ 1 C%-$ ; 1 O65 ; HILL 1963). Such hounds depend only on the relative volumes and do not reilect any particular continuous aligned fibres (H~srrrs

geometry, except and ROSES 1964; inclusions, This is the

when one phase consists

HILL 19(X). HoweT-er,



phase is a dispersion direct approach

(I 054)

of ellipsoidal

not necessarily


a much


is availahlet.





In &at

and KWSNEIL(LX%), origirlally proposed for aggregates of crystals. connexion it has recently been reviewed and elaborated by the writer

(1065a). The method draws on the familiar solution to an auxiliary elastic prohlem, namely a uniformly loaded infinite mass containing an ellipsoidal inhomogeneityy. In applying this solution the properties and oriel~tation of a typical crystal are assigned to the inchtsion, and the macroscopic properties of the polycrystal to the matrix. For self-consistency the orientation average of the inclusion stress or strain is set equal to the overall stress or strain. The result is an implicit tensor formula for the macroscopic moduli. The analysis for the composite proceeds in similar spirit but necessarily tliffcrs in an important respect : only the particulate phase can reasonably be treated on this footing. However, as is well known (op. cit. 1063; 5 2 (iii)), a knowledge of average stress or strain in this one phase sull?ces to determine the overall properties when the matrix is I~oinogeI~co~~s. As a matter of fact, not~itlistanclii~g this difference in viewpoint, the entire analysis is found to remain strurturally to that for a crystal aggregate (as given in 011. cit. 1965a, $ 3 and 4). close

tNo mentionof it in this context has been traced in the literature. But Professor B. Budiaasky recently informed me that he tried the npprowh in 1961; his conclusions appear elserhere in this issue of the Journal. My own invest@ tion dates from March 1962. when prelimituiry results were given in a letter to Dr. J. D. Eshctby.


214 2. For brevity Cartesian tensors

It. HILL SYMBOLIC NOTATION of second order are denoted simply by their

kernel letter, u say, set in lower case bold face as if for a vector. Correspondingly, their tensor components are considered to be arranged in some definite sequence as a 9 X 1 column. Tensors of fourth order are denoted by an ordinary capital, A say, and are regarded as 9 x 9 matrices. More precisely, the leading pair of indices is set in correspondence with rows, and the terminal pair with columns (both in the chosen sequence), so that the second-order inner product of tensors -4 and u can be written as the matrix product Au. Similarly, AR can stand for the fourth-order inner product of A and B. We shall only be concerned with fourth-order tensors that are symmetric! with

respect to interchange of the leading pair of indices and also of the terminal pair. The representative matrices are consequently singular, with rank < 6. Nevertheless, equations of type u = Au are compatible when u and v are any symm&ric second-order tensors and matrix A has rank 6. In this sense we can define a unique inverse A-1 as the solution of AA-1 where I is the suitably symmetric = I or d-1 A = I

unit tensor

Ii/k2 = !? (&lc s/1 + &1 &c) formed with the Kronecker delta. One can then verify that

A-u=A-Av=~v=v as required, for any A, u and v with the stated 3. properties.




-4 single inclusion, arbitrarily ellipsoidal in shape, is imagined to be embedded in a homogeneous mass of some different material. The tensors of elastic moduli. not necessarily isotropic, are denoted by L, and L, respectively, and their inverse compliances by Jf, and ~11. In addition to the symmetries mentioned already in 5 2, the representative matrices have full diagonal moduli and compliances are pairwise equal. symmetry so that all cross-

The displacement at infinity is prescribed to correspond to a uniform overall and traction are required strain 2. Across the phase interface both displacement to be continuous. The solution, certainly unique when the tensors of moduli are positive definite, has the character of a uniform field locally perturbed in the In particular the overall average, or macroscopic. neighbourhood of the inclusion. stress 0 is equal to L;i, since the contribution from the inclusion is vanishing11 small; furthermore, ti and Z are also the local field values at infinity. The principal feature of the solution is that the inclusion is strained uniformly, though not necessarily coaxially (ESHELBY 1957 ; 1961). This property prompts t,he introduction of an overall constraint tensor L* for the L phase. with inverse ilJ*, in respect of loading over the interface by

A self-consistent mechanics of composite materials any distribution That of traction-rate compatible uniform L* 2*, with a uniform M*o*. is, if E* is the accompanying o* = strain of the ellipsoid,


field of stress, u* say.

l = *


The corresponding matrices naturally have diagonal symmetry, as may be shown by Rettis reciprocal theorem, and are functions of L or 111 and the aspect ratios of the ellipsoid. Once L* and M* have been determined, the solution of the auxiliary problem follows by superimposing the uniform fields 0 and Z, and identifying u* with crl Then
=1 6 =

5 and l with c1 *

Z where o1 and s1 are the actual fields in the inclusion. L* (Z q), q c = At* (a UJ, (2) (8)

and so (L* + L,) E1 = (L* + L) z, (Al* + M,) a71 (Au* + M) 0, =

which furnish the required stress and strain in the inclusion scopic quantities (HERSHEY 1954).

in terms of the macro-

In an alternative approach (ESHELBY 1957), seemingly adopted by all later writers, attention is focussed first on a certain transformation problem for an infinite homogeneous elastic continuum with stiffness tensor L. In this, an ellipsoidal region would undergo a transformation strain e if free, but attains only the strain Se in situ. The components of tensor S, being dimensionless, are functions of the moduli ratios and of the aspect ratios of the ellipsoid and its orientation in the frame of reference. When L is isotropic, explicit formulae for the components on the principal axes have been given by Eshelby (op. cit.). When L is orthotropic and the transformed region is an elliptic cylinder whose axes coincide with the material axes, explicit formulae have been given by BHARGAVA and RADHAKRISHNA (1964); when L has cubic symmetry equivalent results have also been given by WILLIS (1964). The general connexion with L* or M* is most easily obtained by imagining the transformation problem solved from the viewpoint of (1). That is, we substitute E* = Se, Then, since these hold L* u* = L (c* e) in U* = L* f*.

for all e,

s = L (I-s), (I-s) nI*=s,u,


for L*

where 1 is the unit tensor defined in $2. These are equivalent or ill* in terms of S. Or they can be put inversely as s = (L* + L)-L for S in terms of L* or M*. Another on this dimensionless Set JI* T = SM = P, say, TL=L*S=Q, so that iIf* T = M (I and T), (I T) L* = TL, say, = x* (M* + Al)-1

tensor T, the dual of S, could just as well be admitted


(5) >

T = L* (L* + L)-

= (M* + Al)-1 M.

(6) >



The significance of T is that the stress U* in the transformed as Ts, where s is the stress that would remove the strain P and Q haI-e been introduced for the products hereafter. We note thr further connexions PI, -1 JfQ I : and P-1 .lf (I 2).

region can be written e. Separate symbols in (5) since these appear frequently

I. y == I4 (f -- S),

-l (7) i

= L* -r I,,

Q-1 = df * -I- Jf.

From the latter pair one sees that matrices P and Q have the diagonal symmetry stipulated for the moduli and compliances (while S and T generally do not). This can of course also be established purely within the context of the transformation problem by means of Uettis reciprocal theorem. The interpretation of Q is that an ellipsoidal cavity in a medium under stress QE at infinity amount E : a dual intrrprctntion may be gi\-en for 1. wo111d deform by


S1:I.l~'-CO~SISTl~~'~ ~IIEOILY
homogeneous dispersions in which the inclusions or as similar can splleres ellipsoids

We consider


be treated, on average, either as variously-sized with corresponding axes aligned?. Each phase but is assumed homogeneous i/Lai2u. Consequently,

may be arbitrarily anisotropic in a common frame of reference,

every tensor in the generic auxiliary problem has the same components for all inclusions. Let the respecti\-e phase properties be distinguished by subscripts 1 and 2, and let c1 and c2 be the fractional concentrations by vohm~, such that c1 + c2 = 1. The clemcntnry relations bctwcen the phase and o\-crall averages of stress and strain arc

(ii1 (Z1 -

a) +


(;iz -

5) = 0, a) = 0.


Z) + cg (Z, -

These incidentally or strain :

imply tlir \,nnisliing of the n\crages of the polarization




Cl (tT1El (Z, since 0 = LZ and Z =- JfO. Now, according to tlic basic


$mc2 (52 -

LE*) = 0, MO,) : 0, (9)

*Ifi?,) + c2 (Z, postulate

of the srlf-consistent q,

method. (10)

o1 from the leading

ecjlliltioll (2). It

a = IA* (Z follows

alltomatically Z,),

from (X) that (11)

o2 -

0 = L* (E -

and vice rewn. Thus. right at the outset, subsequent formulae on the same footing.
+Fibren of elliptic section direct analysis is given rlarwlwrc (1111.r. 1!)65b).

it is evident that both phases will enter However. this does not imply that the
raw in which one prinripal axis beromes infinite. :\

may be c~rrvisagrd as R limiting

A self-consistent mechanics of composite materials



phase also is treated

as particulate

in the theory,


a kind of con-

ceptual fragmentation. for another composite

It simply means that the same overall moduli are predicted in which the roles of the phases are reversed

: that is, where


the first phase fortis a coherent matrix inclusions shaped and oriented as before,
(10) and

and the second phase is distributed both in their original concentrations.

It is also obvious that either of (8) would imply the other, and then (9), if both (11)were postulated. This, indeed. is the standpoint in the polycrystal theory, where an equation corresponding to (2) is assumed for grains of all orientations. But, as already remarked, such an a priori standpoint for a dispersion would seem unconvincing. Equations (10)and (ll), re-arranged or dually as (AU* + 31,) Q1 = (Ill* + -11,) Gz =7 (111* +
ill) Cr

which may

as well now be taken


can be

as (L* + L,) 2, = (L*

$- L,) 5, = (L* + L) z
(12) 1 for the formulae

as in (3). Combining these with (8) yields a pair of equivalent overall stiffness and compliance tensors L and Jf :

(L* + L,)-1
+ 111,)-l

+ c* (L* + L,)-1 = (L* + L)-1 = I,

+ r2 (Jf* + ;II,)- = (*II* + N-1 :Q.

rl (Al*

Since the constraint


L* and its inverse

&II* are themselves Variants




L and AI, these formulae are actually the help of the last pair in (7) are

quite complex.




- L)-1

PI-1 +
+ Q]-


[(L, - L)-

+ PI-

0. = 0,

c1 [(M,

+ c2 [(ill,


+ e]-1

which are essentially

in the form (9).


An inversion



(L -

L,)-1 + Jf,)-1 +

(L -- 45,)-l = P.

c, (Ill

(flf -


= Q,
at least.

which seem to be the simplest



1 1



Finally, we can read off from (12) the phase concentration-factor A, and A, for strain, B, and B, for stress, which are defined bj


z, = A,- f/-l A,-1 f&-l f&-l

z, = z,

B,-1 ii1 = B,-l OS = o.

= f + P (L, = f i- P (L, = f + Q (iif, = f f Q (Jf, L), L), N), ill).

Thus : = P (L* + L,) = P (L* + L*) = Q (M* = Q (Jf* + Jfl) + Jf,)


(13) are of course

an expression

of the basic connexions

c1 A, + C2A, = I = C1II, -t C2II,.

When the dispersion L M -

is dihlte, with cr small, (14) reduces to L, = Cl (L, M, 2: c1 (M, L,) [I M,) [I + p, (L, &)I-, A&)]-, (16)

+ Q2 (M, -

correct to first order. These can alternatively substituting the zeroth order approximation

be obtained (HILL 1962, 5 7) by for the concentration factors in

L - L, = c, (L, - L,) A,,

which are exact relations.

M - M, = Cl (W, - M,) R,,




Suppose that the inclusions are spheres distributed in any way such that the composite is statistically isotropic overall. The first equation (15) then reduces to a pair of scalar formulae for the bulk and shear moduli, K and p : (17)

X=3--/?=K/(K+$& (19)

The dimensionless quantities a and /3 are those that appear in the specific form of Eshelbys S tensor in the auxiliary problem for a sphere (cf. HILL 1965a, 3 4 (ii)) :



for CL,(17) can be solved



in terms of

t.~,for instance

in the form

It is noteworthy with arbitrary

that this is identical

with the known exact solution

for composites

geometry, when the phases have equal shear moduli (HILL 1963, 4; 1964, $6),and also with the solution for a spherical composite element whose in view of its

shell has rigidity p. To discuss (18)in general terms one may retain /l as a parameter restricted range, namely 8 < fl < 1 Then, clearing (1 fractions, P) CL2 (P (P1 + PZ) + to be positive Voigt (c1
IL1 + c2 P2)) CL B Pl Pz =
When K, p > 0.


The left side is found in turn to the so-called

or negative


when p is put equal

and Reuss estimates

A self-consistent mechanics of composite materials Consequently, certainly relation the required root lies between between these limits. It follows that bounds

219 K is for in the monotonic

in the interval


by substituting

~LB and fir

(20), and hence a fortiori

the rigorous


arbitrary geometry, which are known to correspond to pL1and p2 in (20) (HILL 1963, 5 5). These are further satisfactory features of the theory. To derive the explicit equation for p in its most convenient form, however, we express both sides of the first of (19) in terms of (L with the help of (18) and (20). The result is Cl KI Kl ++cL

P -

-+Cl Pz

c2 Pl



CL -

[This could be multiplied out as a quartic but is far better left as it stands for iterative or graphical solution, by tabulating ci or c2 as a function of TVbetween PI and p2]. As to increases from 0 to co, the first bracketed function decreases monotonically to zero from 1 if pi ~~ # 0, from c1 if ~~ = 0, from c2 if or = 0, and vanishes if both pi and K2 are 0. If pi p2 # 0, with p1 > cl2 say, the second bracketed function decreases monotonically from - 1 to - 00 in the range (0, p2); from + co to - co in (p2, pl), with values 6 and - 1 at tan and PV; and from + co to o in (pi, co). It is thereby confirmed again, provided neither phase rigidity vanishes, that there is precisely one positive root and that it lies between the Reuss and Voigt estimates. This root can be stated explicitly ci Q 1, we find p z p2 (1 -+ A ci) where 1
-= A


the dispersion

is dilute.





(2 + Qz)

Pl -

from (21), correct to zeroth order.

That is,

JYK=!s21 [l+&(;-l)]-lcl,
Pl CL2

which is a special case of (16). This coincides with formulae of OLDROYD (1956, equation (40)) and ESHELBT (1957, $ 5; 1961, equation (6.10)). When one phase is vacuous, say ~~ and p2 + 0, equation (21) has a positive root when and only when the concentration of this phase is less than ?J; for instance the root is CL,(1 - Zc,)/(l phases are incompressible - f q,) when K1 -+ co. ( K~, ~~ + co), equation On the other hand, when both (21) can be reduced to

which gives either volume 3~~ + { (2 giving levant



in terms of IL, or to SC,) p2} P 2~~ p2 = 0

5~) p1 + (2 -

p as a function of concentration. In particular, when pi/p2 --f co, the reroot of this quadratic behaves asymptotically like
2P2/@ -

5c,), 2)/3,

Cl <

P" p1

(5~~ -

Cl > g.



A study of these examples makes it plain that the theory is unreliable under extreme conditions, except when the dispersed phase is .mJkiently dilute. Some such restriction on the range of validity was already to be expected : the general formulae in 3 4 do not distinguish between the phases and yet the actual overall properties arc totally different according to which of two disparate materials is the matrix. With this proviso it appears that. in practice, the theory should be useful when rigorous bounds arc either not known or are too far apart for empirical interpolation. This conclusion, already indicated for the bulk modulus, is reinforced by consideration of the only non-trivial bounds presently available for the rigidity moduhls. These have been given by HASIIIN and SHTRIKMAPU (1963). It is convenient to re-arrange their formular so as to isolate the volume fractions :

where CLis the upper and p the lower bound

when the materials

are numbered

so that j+ > p2, and where p1 and fi2 denote the phase values of #I in (19). The coefficients of the volume fractions are thr shear-strain concentration factors in the respective phases. These bounds were derived under the apparently essential restriction K, ,I +. We now recast (IX) similarly in thr alternative ways

These, of course, are scalar counterparts of the matrix formulae in 5 4. Our plan is to compare the respective values of c1 and cZ defined by (23) and (24) when P an d p are fornbally set equal to any chosen value of p between p1 and p2. That is, we take a horizontal section of the respective (modulus ~1.concentration) relations, in preference to a vertical section which would here be unprofitable.


we note the identity


with a similar one in the second


Now (25)

is a monotonically bracket



of both

K and p.


the right-hand
K1 >, K2, b)

in the identity

is positive

when K~ 3

(as is the case when

self-consistent mechanicsof composite materials


what was proved before). It follows that each bracketed factor on the left of the identity exceeds the reciprocal of the other, and thus that the value of c1 defined in (24) is greater than that defined in (23) when TV= CL.Similarly, the value of c2 in (24) is greater than that in (23) when CL= p. K2) > 0, the theoretical rigidity It may be concluded that, when (pi - pLz) (K1 lies between the Hashin-Sktriknzan bounds at any concentration. More especially, for a dilute dispersion, (22) coincides with the first-order approximation to one of the bounds (namely CLwhen c1 is small). On the other hand, when (pi - pg) (K1 K2) < 0, nothing can be concluded from the identity by this line of argument, just as the status of the Hashin-Shtrikman expressions themselves is then also undecided. Indeed, their difference is given by

its sign being controlled by a precisely similar factor in the right-hand numerator. Finally, it should be observed that the modulus (25) has a precise mechanical significance. The overall constraint tensor of an isotropic continuum with a spherical cavity is

from the first of (4) and the components of S given in 5 5 (cf. Hill 1965a, equation (20)). That is, by the definition (l),

Consequently, a unit fractional increase in radius calls for an internal pressure 4 CL, while a unit shear of the cavity calls for tractions corresponding to an internal field of shear stress 2 TV - /3)/p. (1
ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work is part of a programme of research on mechanics of materials which is supported by a grant from the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

REFERENCES Ba.~cava, R. D. and RADHAKRIRRNA, ESHELBY, J.D. H.C. 1964 1957 1961 J. Phys. Sot. Japan 19, 396. Proc. Roy. Sot. A 241, 376. Progress in Solid Mechanics (Edited by I. N. SNEDDON and FL HILL) Vol. 2, Chap. III (North-Holland Pub. Co.). Appl. Mech. Rev. 17, 1. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 13, 119. J. Appl. Mech. 31, 223. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 10, 335. J. Appl. Mech. 21, 236.



1984 1965 1964 1963


HILL, II 1962 1963 1964 1965e 1965b 1958 1956 1964

R. HILL Brit. Iron SL Res. Ass., Rep. P/19/62. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 11, 357. Ibid. 12, 199. Ibid. 13, 89. Ilki. 13, to appear. 2. Physik 151, 504. DeJmmation andFlow ofSolids (Edited by IL. Grmn~~el), p. 304 (Springer, Berlin). Quart. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 17, 157.