18 views

Uploaded by tonmoy

Macro Mechanix

- ARMA-99-0415_Experimental Study on the Mechanical Behavior of Single Joint Under a Constant T-o Loading Condition and Its Application to Mechanical Modeling
- Sub-Sea_conductor_study.pdf
- Bostrom 2009
- 23 Strength (1)
- PUNCHING SHEAR.pdf
- Corte directo
- DirectshearTest
- gate 2017 answer key me session 1 engineers academy.pdf
- Lab 7 - Triaxial (Uu)
- 267123806-Unconfined-Compression-Test.docx
- Report #4
- ARMA-91-549_Stress and Behavior of Material Under Direct Shear
- Shear Test
- PLAXIS 2D 2017 Tutorial Lesson13
- 11th Int Conf Dfi-effc_2010
- a06v10n5.pdf
- C5
- Conlusion n Basic Concept Soil Shear Stress
- Ar7202 Mos i
- STANDAR desain pondasi tangki (Tank Foundation)

You are on page 1of 80

Joyce

Macromechanical Analysis of a

Lamina

ij = Cijkl ij

Cijkl is a 9 x 9 matrix!

2003, P. Joyce

Hookes Law

Assume

linear elastic behavior

small deformations

= E

Uniaxial loading

2003, P. Joyce

Similarly

the deformations

Uniaxial:

in the y- xzyand

yx = for

dx

x

xz

y = xx + xy + Shears

are

z-directions

yz x

zy

omitted

x

xy yy x

y

=dx= dx

dx

dy

zdy

xx

xz

xy

= x dx = 1dx xy

dx= x

dxzyydx

E

E

z y E= [ y E(Consider

E

shear

x + z )]

yx

E

y zx

separately

y zy

xz yx

x

y

dyxz dy

= = dy

dy

yy =

yz

=

E

E

E

E

E Superimpose

1 x

y

]

)

z = [z ( xthree

+

y uniaxial

z x dz

=

dz

=

zx

=

= = dz

dz

zy

y dz

Ezx

1y

x

zz =

z dz

E

= [ x zz( y + z )] stresses E

E

xx

xzE

2003, P. Joyce

Strain-Stress Relations

1

x = [ x ( y + z )]

E

1

y = [ y ( x + z )]

E

1

z = [z ( x + y )]

E

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations

E

[

x =

(1 ) x + ( y + z )]

(1 + )(1 2)

E

[

y =

(1 ) y + ( x + z )]

(1 + )(1 2)

E

[

z =

(1 )z + ( x + y )]

(1 + )(1 2)

2003, P. Joyce

2003, P. Joyce

Shear stresses are independent of each other

and all axial stresses

Shear strains are independent of each other

and all axial strains

Each obeys a simple linear elastic model

= G

G Shear Modulus

E

G=

2(1 + )

2003, P. Joyce

xy = G xy

E

=

xy

2(1 + )

xz = G xz

E

=

xz

2(1 + )

yz = G yz

E

=

yz

2(1 + )

2003, P. Joyce

Compliance matrix

1

E

x

E

y

z

= E

yz 0

zx

xy 0

E

1

E

E

1

E

1

G

1

G

0 x

y

0

z

0 yz

zx

0 xy

1

2003, P. Joyce

Stiffness matrix

E (1 )

x (1 2 )(1 + v)

E

y (1 2 )(1 + v)

z

E

=

yz (1 2 )(1 + v)

zx

0

0

xy

E

(1 2 )(1 + v)

E (1 )

(1 2 )(1 + v)

E

(1 2 )(1 + v)

E

(1 2 )(1 + v)

E

(1 2 )(1 + v)

E (1 )

(1 2 )(1 + v)

0

0

0

0

0

x

0 0 0 y

z

0 0 0

yz

G 0 0 zx

0 G 0 xy

0 0 G

0

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations in

Composite Materials

Material

No. of independent

elastic constants

81

symmetry of stress and strain tensors)

36

considerations

21

Isotropic material

2

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations in

Composite Materials

Orthotropic material ~ has three mutually

perpendicular plans of material symmetry

Specially orthotropic material ~ when the

reference system of coordinates is selected

along principal planes of material symmetry

Transversely isotropic material ~ one of its

principal planes is a plane of isotropy

(properties are the same in all directions.)

2003, P. Joyce

Contracted Notation

Thanks to symmetry of the stress and strain

tensors, the compliance matrix reduces to a

6 x 6 matrix, introduce a contracted notation.

11 = 1, 22 = 2 , 33 = 3 ,

23 = 4 , 31 = 5 ,12 = 6

11 = 1, 22 = 2 , 33 = 1,

2 23 = 4 ,231 = 5 ,212 = 6

C1111 = C11, C1122 = C12, C1133 = C13, C1123 = 2C14, C1131 = 2C15, C1112 = 2C16

C2211 = C21, C2222 = C22, C2233 = C23, C2223 = 2C24, C2231 = 2C25, C2212 = 2C26

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations

for Thin UD Lamina

Assumed to be under a state of plane stress

1 Q11 Q12 0 1

= Q Q

0

22

2 12

2

6 0

0 Q66 6

Fully characterized by 4 independent constants,

Qij ~ reduced stiffnesses

2003, P. Joyce

If the stiffness matrix is the inverse of the

compliance matrix, what is the reduced

stiffness matrix?

Qij = Cij

C i 3C j 3

C33

(i, j = 1, 2, 6)

2003, P. Joyce

and Engineering Constants

Q11 =

Q22 =

E1

1 12 21

E2

1 12 21

21 E1

12 E2

Q12 =

=

1 12 21 1 12 21

Q66 = G12

2003, P. Joyce

Constants?

From symmetry of the compliance matrix

ij

Ei

ji

Ej

reciprocal law according to which transverse

deformation due to a stress applied in the

longitudinal direction is equal to the longitudinal

deformation due to an equal stress applied in the

transverse direction.

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations

Also expressed in terms of compliances

1 S11

= S

2 12

6 0

S12

S 22

0

0 1

0 2

S 66 6

2003, P. Joyce

and Engineering Constants

S11 =

1

E1

S 22 =

1

E2

S12 =

S 66 =

12

E1

21

E2

1

G12

Thats Better!

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

For a graphite/epoxy UD

laminate, find the following:

2.) Minor Poissons ratio

3.) Reduced Stiffness Matrix

4.) Strains in the 1-2 coordinate

system if the applied stresses are

12

1

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Data

Property

Symbol Units

epoxy /epoxy /epoxy

Fiber

volume

fraction

Vf

0.45

0.50

0.70

Long.

elastic

modulus

E1

GPa

38.6

204

181

Trans.

elastic

modulus

E2

GPa

8.27

18.50

10.30

Major

Poissons

ratio

12

0.26

0.23

0.28

Shear

Modulus

G12

GPa

4.14

5.59

7.17

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

The compliance matrix elements are

calculated as follows:

S11 =

S12 =

1

1

11

=

=

0

.

5525

(

10

)

9

E1 181(10 )

12

E1

0.28

= 0.1547(10 11 )

9

181(10 )

S 22 =

1

1

10

=

=

0

.

9709

(

10

)

9

E1 10.3(10 )

S 66 =

1

1

9

=

=

0

.

1395

(

10

)

9

G12 7.17(10 )

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

From Bettis reciprocal law:

21

E2

21 =

12

E1

(0.28)

9

(

10

.

3

)(

10

) = 0.01593

181(109 )

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

The stiffness matrix elements are calculated

as follows:

Q11 =

E1

1 12 21

181(109 )

=

= 181.8(109 )

1 (0.28)(0.01593)

12 E2

21E1

(0.28)(10.3)(109 )

Q12 =

=

=

= 2.897(109 )

1 12 21 1 12 21 1 (0.28)(0.01593)

Q22 =

E2

1 12 21

10.3(109 )

=

= 10.35(109 )

1 (0.28)(0.01593)

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

The stiffness matrix can also be calculated

by inverting the compliance matrix of Part 1:

0.5525 (10 11 )

[Q ] = 0.1547 (10 11 )

0.1547 (10 11 )

0.9709 (10 10 )

0

9

0.1395 (10 )

0

0

Pa

9

0

0

7

.

17

(

10

)

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

The strains in the 1-2 coordinate system are

calculated as follows:

1 S11

= S

2 12

12 0

S12 )

S 22

0

0 1

0 2

S 66 12

11

1 0.5525 (10 )

= 0.1547 (10 11 )

2

12

0

1 15 .69

= 294 .4 (10 -6 )

2

12 557 .9

0.1547 (10 11 )

0.9709 (10 10 )

0

2(10 6 )

3

(

10

)

0

(10-6 is microstrain)

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations

for Thin Angle Lamina

Generally, a laminate does not consist only of UD laminae because

of their stiffness and strength properties in the transverse direction.

Hence, in most laminates, some laminae are placed at an angle.

2

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations

for Thin Angle Lamina

The axes in the x-y coordinate system are called the global

axes of the off-axes.

The axes in the 1-2 coordinate system are called the

material axes or the local axes, where direction 1 is parallel

to the fibers (also called the longitudinal direction) and

direction 2 is is perpendicular to the fibers (also called the

transverse direction.)

The angle between the two axes is denoted by the angle .

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations

for Thin Angle Lamina

The stress-strain relationship in the 1-2 coordinate system has already

been established.

From Mechanics of Materials, the stresses in the global and material

axes are related to each other through the angle of the lamina, .

x

1

1

[

]

=

T

(

)

y

2

xy

12

c2

[T ( ) ] = s 2

sc

s2

c2

sc

c 2

2 sc

1

2 sc thus [T ( ) ] = s 2

sc

c 2 s 2

2003, P. Joyce

s2

c2

sc

2 sc

2 sc = [T(- ) ]

c 2 s 2

Stress-Strain Relations

for Thin Angle Lamina

Using the stress-strain equation in the

material axes together with the

transformation equation we obtain:

x

1

1

[

]

[

]

T

Q

=

y

2

xy

12

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations

for Thin Angle Lamina

Similarly, the strains in the global and material coordinate

axes are related through the transformation matrix

x

1

= [T ]

y

2

12 xy

12 12

x

1

= [R ][T ][R ]1

y

2

12 xy

12 12

1 0 0

[R ] = 0 1 0

0 0 2

2003, P. Joyce

Stress-Strain Relations

for Thin Angle Lamina

Multiplying out the first five matrices on the RHS of the previous

equation we obtain the transformed reduced stiffness matrix, [Qxy ]

Thus, [ ]x , y = [Q ]x , y [ ]x , y

Summarizing,

Q yy = s 4Q11 + c 4Q22 + 2c 2 s 2Q12 + 4c 2 s 2Q66

Qxy = c 2 s 2Q11 + c 2 s 2Q22 + (c 4 + s 4 )Q12 4c 2 s 2Q66

Qxs = c 3 sQ11 cs 3Q22 + (cs 3 c 3 s )Q12 + 2(cs 3 c 3 s )Q66

Q ys = cs 3Q11 c 3 sQ22 + (c 3 s cs 3 )Q12 + 2(c 3 s cs 3 )Q66

Qss = c 2 s 2Q11 + c 2 s 2Q22 2c 2 s 2Q12 + (c 2 s 2 ) 2 Q66

The subscript s corresponds to shear stress or strain components in the

x-y system, i.e., s = xy and s = xy

2003, P. Joyce

Angle Lamina

Similarly, the transformed compliance can be obtained:

S xx = c 4 S11 + s 4 S 22 + 2c 2 s 2 S12 + 4c 2 s 2 S 66

S yy = s 4 S11 + c 4 S 22 + 2c 2 s 2 S12 + 4c 2 s 2 S 66

S xy = c 2 s 2 S11 + c 2 s 2 S 22 + (c 4 + s 4 ) S12 4c 2 s 2 S 66

S xs = 2c 3 sS11 2cs 3 S 22 + 2(cs 3 c 3 s ) S12 + (cs 3 c 3 s ) S 66

S ys = 2cs 3 S11 2c 3 sS 22 + 2(c 3 s cs 3 ) S12 + (c 3 s cs 3 ) S 66

S ss = 4c 2 s 2 S11 + 4c 2 s 2 S 22 8c 2 s 2 S12 + (c 2 s 2 ) 2 S 66

Thus, [ ]x , y = [S ]x , y [ ]x , y

2003, P. Joyce

Angle Lamina

How about in terms of Engineering Constants?

If we imagine a series of simple experiments on an element

with sides parallel to the x- and y-axes, we obtain:

1

E

x x

= xy

y E

x

s

xs

Ex

yx

Ey

1

Ey

ys

Ey

2003, P. Joyce

sx

Gxy

x

sy

y

Gxy

s

Gxy

Angle Lamina

What is ? shear coupling coefficient

xs , the first subscript denotes normal

loading in the x-direction; the second

subscript denotes shear strain.

xs = s x

ys = s y

sx = x s

sy = y s

2003, P. Joyce

Angle Lamina

Comparison of equivalent strain-stress relations yields the

following relationships:

S xx =

1

Ex

Ex =

1

S xx

S yy =

1

Ey

Ey =

1

S yy

S ss =

1

G xy

G xy =

1

S ss

S xy = S yx =

S xs = S sx =

S ys = S sy =

xy

Ex

xs

Ex

ys

Ey

=

=

sx

G xy

sy

G xy

yx

Ey

xy =

S yx

S xx

xs =

S sx

;

S xx

ys =

S sy

2003, P. Joyce

S yy

; yx =

S xy

S yy

sx =

S xs

S ss

; yx =

S ys

S ss

Sample Calculation

Find the following for a 60 angle lamina of

graphite/epoxy.

Transformed compliance matrix

Transformed reduced stiffness matrix

Global strains

Local strains

If the applied stresses are x = 2 MPa, y = -3MPa, xy = 4 MPa

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

From the previous example:

S11 = 0.5525(10 11 )

S12 = 0.1547(10 11 )

S 22 = 0.9709(10 10 )

S 66 = 0.1395(10 9 )

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

The transformed compliance matrix elements are calculated as

follows:

S xx = c 4 S11 + s 4 S 22 + 2c 2 s 2 S12 + 4c 2 s 2 S 66 = 0.8053(10 10 )

S yy = s 4 S11 + c 4 S 22 + 2c 2 s 2 S12 + 4c 2 s 2 S 66 = 0.7878(10 11 )

S xy = c 2 s 2 S11 + c 2 s 2 S 22 + (c 4 + s 4 ) S12 4c 2 s 2 S 66 = 0.3234(10 10 )

S xs = 2c 3 sS11 2cs 3 S 22 + 2(cs 3 c 3 s ) S12 + (cs 3 c 3 s ) S 66 = 0.3475(10 10 )

S ys = 2cs 3 S11 2c 3 sS 22 + 2(c 3 s cs 3 ) S12 + (c 3 s cs 3 ) S 66 = 0.4696(10 10 )

S ss = 4c 2 s 2 S11 + 4c 2 s 2 S 22 8c 2 s 2 S12 + (c 2 s 2 ) 2 S 66 = 0.1141(10 9 )

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

Next, invert the transformed compliance matrix [S] to

obtain the transformed reduced stiffness matrix [Q].

0.8053(10 10 ) 0.7878(10 10 ) 0.3234(10 10 )

[Q] = [S ]1 = 0.7878(1010 ) 0.3475(1010 ) 0.4696(1010 )

0.3234(10 10 ) 0.4696(10 10 ) 0.1141(10 9 )

[Q] = 0.3246 1.094 0.5419(1011 )

0.2005 0.5419 0.3674

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

The global strains in the x-y plane are given

by [ ]x, y = [S ]x, y [ ]x, y

x 0.8053(10 10 ) 0.7878(10 10 ) 0.3234(10 10 ) 2

(106 )

10

10

10

0

.

7878

(

10

)

0

.

3475

(

10

)

0

.

4696

(

10

)

3

10

10

9

xy 0.3234(10 ) 0.4696(10 ) 0.1141(10 ) 4

x 0.5534(10 4 )

3

0

.

3078

(

10

)

=

y

xy 0.5328(10 3 )

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

The local strains in the lamina can be calculated using the

Transformation equation.

x

1

= [T ]

y

2

12 xy

12 12

sin 2 60

2 cos 60 sin 60 0.5534(10 4 )

1 cos 2 60

= sin 2 60

2

3

0

.

3078

(

10

)

cos

60

2

cos

60

sin

60

2

12 12 cos 60 sin 60 cos 60 sin 60 cos 2 60 sin 2 60 0.5328(10 3 ) / 2

4

1 0.1367(10 )

= 0.2662(10 3 )

3

12 0.5809(10 )

2003, P. Joyce

Transformation of

Engineering Constants

Flow chart for determination of transformed

elastic constants of UD lamina.

[S]x,y

[S]1,2

[E]1,2

[E]x,y

[Q]x,y

[Q]1,2

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Strength

Parameters

From a macromechanical POV, the strength

of a lamina is an anisotropic property.

It is desirable, for example, to correlate the

strength along an arbitrary direction to some

basic strength parameters (analogous to

micromechanic definitions before.)

2003, P. Joyce

Angle Lamina

Various theories have been developed for studying the failure of an

angle lamina.

Generally based on the normal and shear strengths of a UD lamina.

Need to consider tension and compression

UD lamina has 2 material axes, 1-direction parallel to the fibers and

2-direction which is perpendicular to the fibers.

Hence there are 4 normal strength parameters for UD lamina.

Transverse tensile strength

Compressive strength in fiber direction

Transverse compressive strength

2003, P. Joyce

Angle Lamina

Unlike the stiffness parameters, these strength parameters

cannot be transformed directly for an angle lamina.

Hence, the failure theories are based on first finding the

stresses in the material axes and then using these five

strength parameters of a UD lamina to find whether the

lamina has failed.

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Strength

Parameters

Also predict transverse compressive strength and in-plane

shear strength using micromechanics. . .

Failure mechanisms vary greatly with material properties

and type of loading.

Even when predictions are accurate with regard to failure

initiation at critical points, they are only approximate as far

as global failure of the lamina is concerned.

Furthermore, the possible interaction of failure

mechanisms makes it difficult to obtain reliable strength

predictions under a general type of loading.

A macromechanical or phenomological approach to failure

analysis may be preferable.

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Strength

Parameters

This characterization recognizes the fact that most

composite materials have different strengths in tension and

compression.

By convention the sign of the shear stress is immaterial, as

long as the shear strength is referred to the principal

material directions.

Exception, refers to the case when the shear stress is

applied at an angle wrt the principal material directions.

Since most composites have different tensile and

compressive strengths and they are weakest in transverse

tension, it follows that in this case the lamina would be

stronger under positive shear.

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Strength

Parameters

= 6

x = -6

Positive shear stress

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Strength

Parameters

= 6

x = -6

Negative shear stress

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Strength

Parameters

= 6

2 = -s

Positive shear stress

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Strength

Parameters

= -s

2 = s

Negative shear stress

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Failure

Theories

Given a state of stress, the principal stresses and their

directions are obtained by stress transformation

(independent of material properties.)

The principal strains and their directions are obtained by

using the appropriate anisotropic stress-strain relations and

strain transformation.

In general, the principal stress, principal strain, and

material symmetry directions do not coincide.

Since strength varies with orientation, maximum stress

alone is not the critical factor in failure.

2003, P. Joyce

Macromechanical Failure

Theories

An anisotropic failure theory is needed.

Failure criteria for homogeneous isotropic materials, such as

Maximum shear stress (Tresca),

Maximum distortional energy (von Mises),

and so forth are well established.

four most widely used.

2003, P. Joyce

Related to the Maximum Normal stress theory by Rankine and the

Maximum Shear stress theory by Tresca.

The stresses acting on a lamina are resolved into the normal and shear

stresses in the material axes.

Failure is predicted in a lamina, if any of the normal or shear stresses

in the material axes are equal to or greater than the corresponding

ultimate strengths of a UD lamina.

( )

1C

ult

( )

< 1 < 1T

ult

( )

, 2C

ult

( )

< 2 < 2T

ult

and hence does not have an interaction with the others.

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

Find the off-axis shear strength of a 60 graphite/epoxy

lamina using the Maximum Stress failure criteria.

Assume the following stress state

x = 0, y = 0, xy = ,

the Transformation Equation.

1 0.2500 0.7500

= 0.7500 0.2500

2

12 0.4330 0.4330

1 0.866

= 0.866

2

12 0.500

2003, P. Joyce

0.8660 0

0.8660 0

0.5000

Sample Calculation

Applying the Maximum Stress Failure Criteria together with strength

data for graphite/epoxy composites from the Data Sheet,we have

246 < 0.866 < 40

68 < 0.500 < 68

or

1732 < < 1732

46.19 < < 284.1

136.0 < < 136.0

2003, P. Joyce

Sample Calculation

The off-axis shear strength of a lamina is defined as the minimum of the

positive and negative shear stress which can be applied to an angle lamina

before failure.

Calculations show that xy = 46.19 MPa is the largest magnitude of shear

stress one can apply to the 60 graphite/epoxy composite.

However, the largest positive shear stress one could apply is 136.0 MPa,

and the largest negative shear stress one could apply is 46.19 MPa.

This shows that the maximum magnitude of allowable shear stress in other

than the material axes direction depends on the sign of the shear stress.

This is because the tensile strength perpendicular to the fiber direction is

much lower than the compressive strength perpendicular to the fiber

direction.

2003, P. Joyce

Failure Envelopes

A failure envelope is a 3D plot of the combinations of normal

and shear stresses which can be applied to an angle lamina

before failure.

Drawing 3D graphs is time consuming. . .

One may develop failure envelopes for constant shear stress,

xy, and then use the 2 normal stresses x and y as the 2 axes.

If the applied stress is within the failure envelope, the lamina is

safe; otherwise it has failed.

2003, P. Joyce

Failure Envelopes

For a UD lamina at a given

shear stress loading, the failure

envelope takes the form of a

rectangle as shown.

shear stress loading, the failure

envelope takes the form of a

rectangle as shown.

2

2

( )

( )

2T

2T

ult

( )

1C

( )

1T

ult

ult

( )

1C

( )

1T

ult

ult

( )

2C

xy

( )

ult

2C

2003, P. Joyce

ult

ult

Based on the Maximum Normal Strain Theory by St. Venant and the Maximum

Shear Stress Theory by Tresca.

The strains applied to a lamina are resolved into the normal and shear stresses in

the material axes.

Failure is predicted in a lamina, if any of the normal or shear strains in the

material axes are equal to or greater than the corresponding ultimate strains of a

UD lamina.

( )

1C

( )

T

<

<

1

1

ult

( )

C

,

2

ult

( )

T

<

<

2

2

ult

ult

The ultimate strains can be found directly from the ultimate strength parameters

and the elastic moduli, assuming the stress-strain response is linear until failure.

Each component of strain is compared with the corresponding ultimate strain

and hence does not have an interaction with the others.

Yields different results from Maximum Stress Failure Theory, because the local

strains in a lamina include the Poissons ratio effect (allows some interaction of

stress components.)

2003, P. Joyce

Assume a general biaxial state of stress

on an angle lamina.

2

1

stress transformation.

x

1

1

[

]

=

T

(

)

y

2

xy

12

2003, P. Joyce

Then the corresponding strain components can be

calculated by means of the lamina stress-strain relations:

1 =

2 =

6 =

21

E1

12

E2

2

E2

1

E1

6

G12

( ) = (E ) , ( )

T

1 ult

T

1 ult

1

C

1 ult

( ) , ( )

=

E

C

1 ult

1

T

2 ult

( ) , ( )

=

E

T

2 ult

2

2003, P. Joyce

C

2 ult

( ) , ( )

=

E

C

2 ult

12 ult

( 12 )ult

G12

Failure subcriteria restated in terms of the

stresses:

( ) when > 0

=

( ) when < 0

( ) when > 0

=

( ) when < 0

1

12

21

T

1 ult

C

1 ult

T

2 ult

C

2 ult

2003, P. Joyce

For a 2D state of stress with 6 = 0, the failure envelope takes

the form of a parallelogram with its center off the origin.

y

x

( )

2T

2 21 1 = ( 1T )

ult

( )

1C

( )

1T

ult

( )

1 12 2 = (

C

1

C

2 ult

ult

2 21 1 = ( 1C )

2003, P. Joyce

1 12 2 = ( 1T )

Based on the deviatoric or distortional energy failure

theory of von Mises.

Adapted to anisotropic materials by Hill.

Then adapted to a UD lamina by Tsai.

2

2

2

1 1 2 2 12

<1

T T 2 + T +

(

)

( )

( )

( )

local stresses in a lamina and apply the above failure

theory to determine whether or not the lamina has

failed.

2003, P. Joyce

The failure envelope described by the Tsai-Hill criterion is a closed

surface in the 1, 2, 12 space.

Failure envelopes for constant values of

12 22 1 2

have the form

+ 2 2 = 1 k 2

2

F1

Where:

(

(

(

(

F2

)

)

)

)

k = 12 ( 12 )ult

F1

F1 = C

1 ult when 1 < 0

2T ult when 2 > 0

F2 = C

2 ult when 2 < 0

2003, P. Joyce

Considers the interaction between the 3 UD lamina

strength parameters, unlike the Maximum Stress and

Maximum Strain Theories.

Tsai-Hill Failure Theory is a Unified Theory and hence

does not give the mode of failure like the Maximum Stress

and Maximum Strain Theories.

2003, P. Joyce

Based on a general failure theory for anisotropic materials

first proposed by Goldenblat and Kopnov (1965).

Capable of predicting strength under general states of

stress for which no experimental data are available.

Uses the concept of strength tensors.

Has the form of an invariant formed from stress and strain

tensor components

Has the capability to account for the difference between

tensile and compressive strengths

2003, P. Joyce

Tsai and Wu (1971) proposed a modified tensor polynomial

theory by assuming the existence of a failure surface in the

stress space of the form

2

conditions to the lamina. Thus

H1 =

H11 =

( )

T

1 ult

( )

C

1 ult

( ) ( )

T

1 ult

C

1 ult

H2 =

H 22 =

( )

T

2 ult

( )

C

2 ult

( ) ( )

T

2 ult

C

2 ult

2003, P. Joyce

H6 = 0

H 66 =

( 12 )ult 2

The remaining coefficient H12 must be obtained by

some type of biaxial testing.

Direct biaxial testing is not easy or practical to

perform.

An easier test producing a biaxial state of stress is

the off-axis tensile test.

For = 45 we can measure the off-axis tensile

strength, .

Then, H12 = 2 (H1 + H 2 ) 1 (H11 + H 22 + H 66 )

2003, P. Joyce

2003, P. Joyce

2003, P. Joyce

2003, P. Joyce

2003, P. Joyce

Observations

The difference between the Maximum Stress and

Maximum Strain Failure Theories and the experimental

results is quite pronounced.

Tsai-Hill and Tsai-Wu Failure Theories are in good

agreement with experimentally obtained results.

The cusps observed in the Maximum Stress and

Maximum Strain Failure Theories correspond to the

change in failure mode.

The variation of the strength as a function of angle is

smooth in the Tsai-Hill and Tsai-Wu Failure Theories.

2003, P. Joyce

Theory

Physical Basis

Operational

Convenience

Reqd experimental

characterization

Maximum Stress

material

Inconvenient

Few parameters

By simple testing

Inconvenient

Few parameters by

simple testing

Biaxial testing is

needed in addition to

uniaxial testing

No stress interaction

Maximum Strain

material

Some stress interaction

Deviatoric strain

energy

Ductile behavior of

anisotropic materials

Can be programmed

(Tsai-Hill)

Curve fittingfor

heterogeneous brittle

composites

Different functions

required for tensile and

compressive strengths

Interactive tensor

polynomial

Mathematically

consistent

General and

comprehensive;

operationally simple

Tsai-Wu

2003, P. Joyce

Numerous parameters

Comprehensive

experimental program

needed.

References

Engineering Mechanics of Composite Materials, Daniel, I.M. and Ishai, O., 1994.

Mechanics of Composite Materials, Kaw, A.K., 1997.

Introduction to Composite Materials, Tsai, S. W. and Hahn, H. T., 1980.

Application of Advanced Composites in Mechanical Engineering Designs, Zweben, C.,

Proceedings of the 31st International SAMPE Technical Conference, 1999.

2003, P. Joyce

- ARMA-99-0415_Experimental Study on the Mechanical Behavior of Single Joint Under a Constant T-o Loading Condition and Its Application to Mechanical ModelingUploaded bycastille1956
- Sub-Sea_conductor_study.pdfUploaded byBruce
- Bostrom 2009Uploaded bysaifulislam9442
- 23 Strength (1)Uploaded bymohitaggarwal123
- PUNCHING SHEAR.pdfUploaded bymohamedadel100
- Corte directoUploaded bycusianel02spg
- DirectshearTestUploaded byNani Tirumalasetti
- gate 2017 answer key me session 1 engineers academy.pdfUploaded byvikas
- Lab 7 - Triaxial (Uu)Uploaded byNurulAdilah
- 267123806-Unconfined-Compression-Test.docxUploaded byMc CyHew
- Report #4Uploaded byAbhishek Ray
- ARMA-91-549_Stress and Behavior of Material Under Direct ShearUploaded bycastille1956
- Shear TestUploaded byAhmadGhanem
- PLAXIS 2D 2017 Tutorial Lesson13Uploaded byBeby Rizcova
- 11th Int Conf Dfi-effc_2010Uploaded byAnonymous D5s00DdU
- a06v10n5.pdfUploaded bydhans20051
- C5Uploaded byVilma Puma Inostroza
- Conlusion n Basic Concept Soil Shear StressUploaded bySyed Zulfaizzuan Aljufri
- Ar7202 Mos iUploaded byanbarasan0
- STANDAR desain pondasi tangki (Tank Foundation)Uploaded bySoedirman
- Tutorial 22 SSR Polygonal Search AreaUploaded byDaniel Ccama
- ShearCapacityofRCMembraneElementsSubjectedtoPureIn-PlaneShearStressesUploaded byLucas Marques
- Design of 20 m Deep Excavation With Permanent AnchoredUploaded byadiccto87
- H1998b.pdfUploaded byDiana Cristina
- Completion Report FinalUploaded bySandra Gupta
- Irvine Etal 2015 Pile Design in Weak RockUploaded bymikollim
- Sample Tehnical Report_Fax Machines(Sample of a Technical Report)Uploaded byAsh
- C367Uploaded bydinhtung2210
- Slope Stability Vol2Uploaded byJames Laurent
- Spandrel Strength ES Incl Figures OnlineUploaded bys_murugan02

- FE_CivilUploaded byM Anwar Hanfy
- CE579 Half Course SummaryUploaded bySwarna Rk
- Wrd Ot Do and Bod Analysis 445265 7Uploaded bytonmoy
- Math 1 SlidesUploaded bytonmoy
- EIT ReviewUploaded byoosinoo
- TP-110T-02Uploaded bytonmoy
- Golpo Somogro - Humayun AhmedUploaded bySazzad Hossain Lemon
- User's_Guide_3DUploaded byCarl Kohler

- Giving-constructive Feedback HandoutUploaded bykjgc_06271990
- Sphet Heteroskedastic Spatial ModelsUploaded byCynthia Nguyen
- 6th Sunday in Ordinary Time_2015Uploaded byRaffy Roncales
- Introduction au droit civilUploaded bytom
- The Notion of Race in TheosophyUploaded byGcmarshall82
- Method of Teaching English.docxUploaded byMuhammad Nawaz Khan Abbasi
- Milroy&Milroy-Linguist Change Social Network and Speaker InnovationUploaded bySidhantha Jain
- Yoga (Astanga Marga)Uploaded byRamachandra Raju Kalidindi
- b008448.pdfUploaded byShanaia Bual
- Unit - 42 (1)Uploaded byUmair Gaba
- t Svar IntroUploaded byTrinh Zit
- Brochure Fears - Ingrid Auer - Angels for FearsUploaded byJoanne Jackson
- Beside Every Successful Man by Megan Basham - ExcerptUploaded byCrown Publishing Group
- final summative strategiesUploaded byapi-295321202
- Summer Solstice.pdfUploaded byYoudont Careatall
- 1 Identification of Key Circuit ParametersUploaded byketan
- PROVA 2º Ano 2º TRIUploaded byCamila Veilchen Oliveira
- Index ThesisUploaded byChetan Kotwal
- December 21 ReadingUploaded byLazarous123
- 1a- Concepts vs Principles vs Theory [Compatibility Mode]Uploaded bySharul Hadfizrullah
- Novo Institucionalismo Hall&TaylorUploaded byAna Paula Volpe
- Beating Children...NO!Uploaded byFabel Edujie
- Grade 1 12 Exam Portion Islamic Non ArabUploaded byMuhammad Iqbal
- Space Mechanics for EngineersUploaded byMohamed Hamdi Omer
- Lecture Notes MerpUploaded byben
- “The Reign of God Has Come”: Eschatology and Empire in Late Antiquity and Early IslamUploaded byMomo
- 3341104Uploaded byVani Yamani
- The Power of PurposeUploaded bysilntrunin
- team jay group project edid 6511Uploaded byapi-399872156
- 1916 Gregg Shorthand ManualUploaded byRacent Ocampo