Micromechanics Macromechanics

Fibers Lamina Laminate Structure Matrix

Micromechanics
The analysis of relationships between effective composite properties (i.e., stiffness, strength) and the material properties, relative volume contents, and geometric arrangement of the constituent materials.

Micromechanics - Stiffness
1. Mechanics of materials models Simplifying assumptions make it unnecessary to specify details of stress and strain distribution fiber packing geometry is arbitrary. Use average stresses and strains.

Micromechanics - Stiffness
2. Theory of elasticity models -

Actual stress and strain distributions are used fiber packing geometry taken into account. a) Closed form solutions b) Numerical solutions c) Variational methods (bounds)

Volume Fractions
Vc V vm = m = matrix volume fraction Vc V vv = v = void volume fraction Vc vf = Vf = fiber volume fraction

Where

v f + vm + vv = 1

(3.2)

Vc = V f + Vm + Vv = composite volume

Weight Fractions
wf = wm =
Where

Wf Wc

= fiber weight fraction

Wm = matrix weight fraction Wc

Wc = W f + Wm = composite weight
Note: weight of voids neglected

Densities
=
W = density V Wc = W f + Wm

cVc = f V f + mVm c = f v f + m vm
Rule of Mixtures for density

Alternatively,

c =

1 wf

wm

(3.8)

Eq. (3.2) can be rearranged as

wf vv = 1

( wc w f )

wc

(3.9)

Above formula is useful for void fraction estimation from measured weights and densities.

Typical void fractions: Autoclaved cured composite: 0.1% - 1% Press cured w/o vacuum: 2 - 5%

Representative area elements for idealized square and triangular fiber packing geometries.
Fiber

s s d s d s Square array Triangular array

Fiber volume fraction packing geometry relationships

Square array:

vf =

d
4s

(3.10)

When s=d, v f = v f max =

= 0.785

(3.11)

Fiber volume fraction packing geometry relationships

Triangular Array:

vf =

2 3 s

(3.12)

When s=d, v f = v f max =

2 3

= 0.907

(3.13)

Fiber volume fraction packing geometry relationships

Real composites: Random fiber packing array Unidirectional: 0.5 v f 0.8 Chopped: 0.05 v f 0.4 Filament wound: close to theoretical

Photomicrograph of graphite/epoxy composite showing actual fiber packing geometry at 400X magnification

Voronoi cell and its approximation (From Yang and Colton, 1994)
Random nature of fiber packing geometry in real composites can be quantified by the use of the Voronoi cell. Each point within the space of a Voronoi cell for a particular fiber is closer to the center of that fiber than it is to the center of any other fiber

s Voronoi cells Equivalent square cells, with Voronoi cell size, s

Histogram of Voronoi distances and corresponding Wiebull distribution for a thermoplastic matrix composite. (From Yang and Colton, 1994)

Elementary Mechanics of Materials Models for Effective Moduli

Fiber packing array not specified RVE consists of fiber and matrix blocks. Improved mechanics of materials models and elasticity models do take into account fiber packing arrays.

Assumptions: 1. Area fractions = volume fractions 2. Perfect bonding at fiber/matrix interface no slip 3. Matrix is isotropic, fiber can be orthotropic 4. Fiber and matrix linear elastic 5. Lamina is macroscopically homogeneous, linear elastic and orthotropic

Concept of an Effective Modulus of an Equivalent Homogeneous Material.

Heterogeneous composite under varying stresses and strains

x3

x3

2 L

2
Stress, 2 Strain, 2

Equivalent homogeneous x 3 material under average stresses and strains

x3

2
Stress Strain

Representative volume element and simple stress states used in elementary mechanics of materials models

10

Representative volume element and simple stress states used in elementary mechanics of materials models

Longitudinal normal stress Transverse normal stress

In-plane shear stress

Average stress over RVE:

= = =

1 1 dV = dA VV AA 1 1 dV = dA VV AA 1 1 dV = dA VV AA

(3.14)

Average strain over RVE:

(3.15)

Average displacement over RVE:

(3.16)

11

Longitudinal Modulus RVE under average stress c1 governed by

longitudinal modulus E1. Equilibrium:

c1 A1 = f 1 A f + m1 Am

(3.17)

Note: fibers are often orthotropic. Rearranging, we get Rule of Mixtures for longitudinal stress
Static Equilibrium

c1 = f 1v f + m1vm

(3.18)

Hookes law for composite, fiber and matrix

Stress strain Relations

c1 = E1 c1

f 1 = E f 1 f 1
m1 = Em m1

(3.19)

So that:

E1 c1 = E f 1 f 1v f + Em m1vm

(3.20)

12

Assumption about average strains:

Geometric Compatibility

c1 = f 1 = m1

(3.21)

Which means that,

E1 = E f 1v f + Em vm

(3.22)

Rule of Mixtures generally quite accurate useful for design calculations

Variation of composite moduli with fiber volume fraction

Predicted E1 and E2 from elementary mechanics of materials models

13

Variation of composite moduli with fiber volume fraction

Comparison of predicted and measured E1 for E-glass/polyester. From Adams(3.29)

Strain Energy Approach

Uc = U f +Um
1 1 2 dV = E c1 Vc 1 1 1 c c 2V 2 c 1 1 2 U f = f 1 f 1dV = E f 1 f 1 V f 2 Vf 2 Uc =
Um = 1 1 2 dV = E Vm 1 m m1 m1 m1 2 V 2 m
(3.23)

Where strain energy in composite, fiber and matrix are given by,
(3.24a)

(3.24b)

(3.24c)

14

Strain energy due to Poisson strain mismatch at fiber/matrix interface is neglected. Let the stresses in fiber and matrix be defined in terms of the composite stress as:

f 1 = a1 c1 m1 = b1 c1 c1 = f 1v f + m1vm

(3.25)

Subst. in Rule of Mixtures for longitudinal stress:

(3.18)

c1 = (a1v f + b1vm ) c1
Or

a1v f + b1vm = 1

(3.26)

Combining (3.25), (3.19) + (3.23),

1 2 v 2 vf = a1 + b1 m E1 Ef1 Em1

(3.27)

Solving (3.26) and (3.27) simultaneously for E-glass/epoxy with known properties: Find a1 and b1, then

f1 = 1.00 m1

15

Representative volume element and simple stress states used in elementary mechanics of materials models

Longitudinal normal stress Transverse normal stress

In-plane shear stress

Transverse Modulus RVE under average stress c 2

Response governed by transverse modulus E2 Geometric compatibility:

c2 =

f2

+ m2

(3.29)

From definition of normal strain,

c 2 = c 2 L2 f 2 = f 2Lf m 2 = m 2 Lm

(3.30)

16

Thus, Eq.(3.29) becomes Or

c 2 L2 = f 2 L f + m 2 Lm

(3.31) (3.32)

c 2 = f 2 v f + m 2 vm
Lf L2 = vf ,
Lm = vm , L2

Where

1-D Hookes laws for transverse loading:

c 2 = E2 c 2 f 2 = E f 2 f 2 m 2 = Em m 2

(3.33)

Where Poisson strains have been neglected. Combining (3.32) and (3.33),

c2
E2
We get

f2

Ef 2

vf +

m2
Em
f2

vm

(3.34)

Assuming that

c2 =

= m2
(3.35)

vf v 1 = + m E2 E f 2 Em

17

- Inverse Rule of Mixtures Not very accurate - Strain energy approach for transverse loading, Assume,

f 2 = a2 c 2 m 2 = b2 c 2

(3.36)

Substituting in the compatibility equation (Rule of mixture for transverse strain), we get

a1v f + b1vm = 1

(3.37)

Then substituting these expressions for m 2 in

f2

and

Uc = U f +Um
2

(3.23)

We get

E2 = a2 E f 2 v f + b2 Em vm
2

(3.38)

Solving (3.37) and (3.38) simultaneously for a2 and b2, we get for E-glass/epoxy,

f2 = 5.63 m2

18

Representative volume element and simple stress states used in elementary mechanics of materials models

Longitudinal normal stress Transverse normal stress

In-plane shear stress

In-Plane Shear Modulus, G12 Using compatibility of shear displacement and assuming equal stresses in fiber and matrix:

vf vm 1 = + G12 G f 12 Gm

(3.42)

(Not very accurate) Major Poissons Ratio, 12 Using compatibility in 1 and 2 directions:

12 = f 12 v f + m vm

(3.40)

(Good enough for design use)

19

Design Equations
E1 = E f 1v f + Em vm

12 = f 12 v f + m vm
Elementary mechanics of materials Equations derived for G12 and E2 are not very useful need to develop improved models for G12 and E2.

Improved Mechanics of Materials Models for E2 and G12

Mechanics of materials models refined by assuming a specific fiber packing array. Example: Hopkins Chamis method of sub-regions

RVE

20

Convert RVE with circular fiber to equivalent RVE having square fiber whose area is the same as the circular fiber.
RVE A d s B A sf sf A B A
Sub Region A Sub Region B Sub Region A

Division of representative volume element into sub regions based on square fiber having equivalent fiber volume fraction.

Equivalent Square Fiber:

sf =

(from

sf =
2

d2)

(3.43)

Size of RVE:

s=

4v f

d
s sf sf

(3.44)

For Sub Region B:

21

Following the procedure for the elementary mechanics of materials analysis of transverse modulus:

1 1 sf 1 sm = + E B 2 E f 2 s Em s

(3.45)

but

sf

sm = 1 v f ; = vf ; s s
EB 2 = Em 1 v f (1 Em E f 2 )

(3.46)

So that

(3.47)

For sub regions A and B in parallel,

E2 = E B 2
Or finally

sf s

+ Em

sm s

(3.48)

vf E2 = Em 1 v f + 1 v f (1 Em E f 2 )

(3.49)

Similarly,

vf G12 = Gm 1 v f + 1 v f (1 Gm G f 2 )

22

Simplified Micromechanics Equations (Chamis) Only used part of the analysis for sub region B in Eq. (3.47):

EB 2
G12

Em 1 v f (1 Em E f 2 )

(3.47)

Gm 1 v f (1 Gm G f 12 )

Fiber properties Ef2 and Gf12 in tables inferred from these equations.

23

Semi empirical Models Use empirical equations which have a theoretical basis in mechanics Halpin-Tsai Equations

Where

E2 1 + v f = E m 1 v f

(3.57)

( E = (E

Em ) +

Em ) 1

(3.58)

24

And

= curve-fitting parameter = 2 for E2 of square array of

circular fibers

= 1 for G12
As As

Rule of Mixtures Inverse Rule of Mixtures

Tsai-Hahn Stress Partitioning Parameters

let Get

m 2 = 2

f2

v f 2 vm 1 1 = + E 2 v f + 2 vm E E m f

(3.60)

Where 2 (when

= stress partitioning parameter

get inverse Rule of Mixtures)

2 = 1.0,

25

Transverse modulus for glass/epoxy according to TsaiHahn equation (Eq. 3.60). From Tsai and Hahn (3.8)

Micromechanical analysis of Composites Materials Using Elasticity Theory

Micromechanical analysis of composite materials involve the development of analytical models for predicting macroscopic composite properties in terms of constituent material properties and information on geometry and loading. Analysis begins with the selection of a representative volume element, or RVE, which depends on the assumed fiber packing array in the composite.

26

Example: Square packing array RVE Matrix Fiber Due to double symmetry, we only need to consider one quadrant of RVE Fiber Matrix

The RVE is then subjected to uniform stress or displacement along the boundary. The resulting boundary value problem is solved by either stress functions, finite differences or finite elements. We will now discuss specific examples of finite difference solutions and finite element solutions for micromechanics problems.

27

One quadrant of representative volume element from Adams and Doner elasticity solution for shear modulus G12. From Adams and Doner [3.19].
y a

xz
b x

w*

Problem: For a square array of circular fibers, find the longitudinal shear modulus y Gxz or Gyz.

Reference: Longitudinal shear loading of a Unidirectional Composite, D. F. Adams and D. R. Doner, J. Composite Materials, Vol.1, 1967, pp. 4-17

28

Solution: Solve displacement boundary value problems on one quadrant of RVE as shown:
y a b z

zx

zx , zy

u, v, w = displacement along x, y, z axes = Average shear stresses along boundaries

w*

Displacement: u=v=0, w= w(x,y)

(3.52)

where w = wf for fiber and w = wm for matrix Strain-Displacement Relations:

v u = 0, xy = 0 = 0, e y = y x w w u w = 0, xy = ez = + = z x z x w v w yz = + = y z y
ex =

29

Hookes Law:

xy = G xy = 0, zx = G zx = G
w x w y

x =y =z = 0

(3.53)

zy = G zy = G

where G = Gf or Gm for fiber or matrix

Equilibrium: No body force

x xy xz + + =0 x y y y xy yz + =0 + x z y z xz yz + + =0 z x y

only non-trivial
equation is,
xz yz + =0 x y

Thus, the governing partial differential equation is, 2w 2w (3.54) G x 2 + y 2 =0

30

Or

2 w = 0 , Laplacian Equation subject to

boundary conditions.

Boundary conditions: specify uniform displacement w = w along x = 1. @ 2. @ 3. @ 4. @

a
(3.55)

x = 0, w = 0

x = a, w = w

y = 0, yz = G

y = a, yz

w w =0 =0 y y w w =0 =G =0 y y

Finite difference solution of 2 w = 0,

2 0 1 4 h

h mesh size

Central differences:

2w

4 w0 1 ( ) w + w + w + w =0 1 2 3 4 h2 h2

at node point 0.

31

 Get similar difference equations for each node point and solve the set of simultaneous equations using matrix methods. Also need finite difference approximations for other partial derivatives like w , w . x y In addition to the shear moduli, the stress concentration factors were found see reference for details.

Continuity conditions at fiber/matrix interface displacement: w f = wm Shear stress: G f m f The effective shear modulus for xz loading is then xz

w n

= Gm

w n

n = normal at point on interface

Gxz =

w a
*

(3.56)

32

where xz is found by solving 2 w = 0, using finite difference, then using resulting displacements w to find xz along x = a, (where xz = G average value xz .

w ) then calculating x

Similarly, for xz loading only, G yz =

yz
w** b

where xz is found by solving analogous problem for w = w** along y = b. The problem of combined loading can be solved using superposition.

For similar analysis of transverse modulus, Ex or Ey see Transverse Normal Loading of a Unidirectional Composite, D. F. Adams and D.R. Doner, J. Composite Materials, Vol. 1, 1967, pp. 152-164.

33

Normalized composite shear stiffness (G12/Gm) versus shear modulus ratio Gf/Gm for circular fibers in a square array. From Adams and Doner [3.19]

Normalized composite transverse stiffness (E2/Em) versus modulus ratio Ef/Em for circular fibers in a square array. From Adams and Doner [3.19]

34

Stress concentration factor (SCF) for circular filaments in a square array subjected to longitudinal shear loading (XZ).

Composite shear stiffness (G/Gm) for circular filaments in a square array subjected to longitudinal shear loading (XZ).

35

Stress concentration factors (SCF) for boron filaments of various shapes in an epoxy matrix (Gf/Gm=120) subjected to longitudinal shear loading (XZ).

Composite shear stiffness (G/Gm) for boron filaments of various shapes in an epoxy matrix (Gf/Gm=120) subjected to longitudinal shear loading (XZ).

36

Finite element micromechanical models

Effective Youngs modulus, Ex

x dV x V Ex = = x x dV
V

Quarter domain of representative volume element under transverse normal loading. (From Finegan and Gibson, 1998)

Predicted and measured longitudinal modulus and loss factor of PVC-coated copper wires in epoxy matrix (Finegan and Gibson, 2000)

37

Effect of FEA model aspect ratio on effective transverse modulus (from Finegan and Gibson, 1998)

Two dimensional finite element models of representative volume elements. From Schroeder [3.22].

Model 1

38

Two dimensional finite element models of representative volume elements. From Schroeder [3.22].

Model 2

Comparison of predicted transverse modulus for E-glass/ epoxy from two-dimensional finite element models with other predictions. From Schroeder [3.22].

39

Three dimensional finite element models of representative volume elements. From Caruso and Chamis [3.17].

The single cell model for the SC calculation

Three dimensional finite element models of representative volume elements. From Caruso and Chamis [3.17].

The multi cell model which is used for the MC calculation

The multi cell model of which only the center cell is used for the CCMC calculation

40

Comparison of three-dimensional finite element results for lamina elastic constants with predictions from simplified Micromechanics Equations for graphite / epoxy. From Caruso and Chamis [3.17].

Comparison of three-dimensional finite element results for lamina elastic constants with predictions from simplified Micromechanics Equations for graphite / epoxy. From Caruso and Chamis [3.17].

41

Comparison of three-dimensional finite element results for lamina elastic constants with predictions from simplified Micromechanics Equations for graphite / epoxy. From Caruso and Chamis [3.17].

Comparison of three-dimensional finite element results for lamina elastic constants with predictions from simplified Micromechanics Equations for graphite / epoxy. From Caruso and Chamis [3.17].

42

RVEs for other Finite Element Micromechanical Models

Quarter domain of RVE for composite with fiber coating or interphase

RVE for composite with woven fabric reinforcement

43