Composite Structures 86 (2008) 291–298

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Fastener pull-through in a carbon fibre epoxy composite joint

D.J. Elder a,*, A.H. Verdaasdonk b, R.S. Thomson a
a
Cooperative Research Centre for Advanced Composite Structures Limited, 506 Lorimer Street, Fishermans Bend, Victoria 3207, Australia
b
Delft Technical University, P.O. Box 5058 2600 GB, The Netherlands

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 29 March 2008 This paper considers the capability of finite element (FE) modelling to accurately predict fastener
pull-through failure of composite laminates. Such failures are dominated by inter-ply delamination
Keywords: and through-thickness shear failure of the laminate and the common modelling approach is to use com-
Fastened joints putationally expensive, detailed three-dimensional models that include delamination for every ply inter-
Cohesive fracture face, fastener contact and prestress. This paper considers a simplified FE modelling strategy achieved
Composite failure through judicious use of symmetry boundary conditions, hybrid shell/solid modelling and reduced num-
bers of interfaces for delamination. The LS-DYNA FE software was used for this study using the available
composite material and cohesive failure models. The conclusion drawn from this work is that the use of
simplified FE models does have merit in modelling fastener pull-through provided the material is quasi-
isotropic and the boundary conditions are uniform around a circular perimeter. Additional work is how-
ever required to determine suitable cohesive properties and progressive shear failure parameters.
Ó 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction which is a collaborative program between the Cooperative

The requirement for cheaper and more efficient civil aviation
transport has seen that each new generation of aircraft is con-
structed with increasing use of carbon fibre composite materials,
which in general out perform their metal counterparts with respect
to specific strength, corrosion resistance and fatigue. Despite the
various benefits of adhesive bonding, these structures still depend
heavily on mechanical fastening due to certification issues with
bonded joints and other factors including the ability to remove fas-
teners for inspection purposes. One significant drawback of com-
posite materials is the relatively brittle nature and complex
failure mechanisms. As a result, the deterministic prediction of fas-
tened joint strength is currently not well understood and industry
relies heavily on semi-empirical methods in design coupled with
extensive testing for verification. This design information is gener-
ally simplified into beam elements with a mode interaction crite-
rion that can be applied to large finite element (FE) models used
in design with minimal computational expense.
The development of improved predictive methods promises a
significant reduction in design time and costs by reducing the
number of physical tests required for the characterisation of the
large number of joint geometries and load cases required to be
considered in practice. This research represents an initial step of
a far reaching program into the deterministic prediction of multi-
fastener failure in composite structures under arbitrary loading,
Research Centre for Advanced Composite Structures (CRC-ACS)
and the German Aerospace Centre (DLR). The research aims are
to determine computationally efficient methods that can accu-
rately predict the complex failure progression of joints for static
load cases and high strain rate crashworthiness applications. The
use of highly detailed three-dimensional FE models that include
the full geometry, ply definition, inter-ply delamination for every
interface, fastener contact and prestress are encumbered with
excessive computation times [1], particularly for crash modelling
using explicit FE codes.
The scope of the work presented in this paper is to develop a
simplified FE modelling strategy through the judicious use of sym-
metrical boundary conditions, hybrid shell/solid modelling and re-
duced numbers of interfaces with inter-ply delamination. Integral
to this trial is the estimation of associated errors that are incurred
by the simplifications. This error estimate is achieved by compar-
ing the simplified models with two more detailed models (one
3-D and one 2-D). The findings are presented for one quasi-static
fastener pull-through case modelled using the explicit FE code
LS-DYNA, and compared to experimental data. The FE model uses
cohesive fracture and material shear softening to model the failure
modes in a simplified model allowing realistic computation times
to be obtained on a single CPU computer.
2. Fastener pull-through testing

* Corresponding author. Quasi-static pull-through tests on seven joint geometries using

E-mail address: d.elder@crc-acs.com.au (D.J. Elder). quasi-isotropic composite laminates manufactured from CYCOM

0263-8223/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2008.03.041
292 D.J. Elder et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 291–298
Fig. 1. Test apparatus and failed specimen, from Körber [3].
970 plain weave carbon fibre epoxy prepreg in conjunction with
protruding and flush head HiLokÒ fasteners have been preformed
and reported in Gunnion [2] and Körber [3]. Variables considered
in the test programme included laminate thickness, fastener diam-
eter and fastener head type (protruding or flush). The main failure
mechanism was reported to be diagonal shear cracking and inter-
ply delamination in the vicinity of the fastener head. The failure
mode was consistent throughout the test program and for the pur-
poses of this study, the joint configuration selected was for a
2.42 mm thick quasi-isotropic laminate of 12 plies and a 4.8 mm
shank diameter, 9.3 mm protruding head diameter, HiLokÒ fas-
tener. The test rig is shown in Fig. 1 with experimental force versus
stiffness results for the chosen joint presented in Fig. 2. The initial
linear part of the force–displacement curve is associated with elas-
tic deformation, the second linear part is associated with irrevers-
ible damage (delamination and through-thickness shear cracking)
while the final load drop is associated with the fastener head pull-
ing through the laminate.
The front face of the specimen (directly under fastener head)
showed no visible damage with the exception that the fastener
Fig. 2. Force versus deflection graph of a typical joint [3].
Fig. 3. Failure specimen viewed from above and below after failure, from Gunnion
[2].
hole being enlarged to the head size, allowing pull-through to oc-
cur. The back face showed material membrane failure and exten-
sive delamination of the underlying plies as per Fig. 3. This type
of failure is consistent with the experimental results reported by
Banbury et al. [4,5] who used microscopy to determine that failure
was a result of diagonal shear cracking and delamination. This fail-
ure was initiated directly under the fastener head and progressed
in a 45° cone through the thickness as per Fig. 4.
3. Modelling strategy
In order to accurately predict fastener pull-through failure, the
failure modes must be captured. To enable this, the capabilities of
LS-DYNA materials and cohesive fracture were first reviewed at an
elementary level and then combined into a working simplified
joint model that reduces the computational expense to an accept-
able level.
3.1. Cohesive fracture models
Compared with previous versions, LS-DYNA version 971 has an
increased capability for modelling cohesive fracture. While version
970 contained one cohesive contact model, namely *CON-
TACT_AUTOMATIC_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE Type 6 that allowed
 D.J. Elder et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 291–298
Fig. 4. Typical failure, from Körber [3].
cohesive fracture to be implemented between solid elements [6],
version 971 added an additional surface contact cohesive model
to be used for stacked shells with an offset (*CONTACT_AUTO-
MATIC_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE Type 8) and four material models
*
MAT_184, 185 and 186 are included as listed in Table 1. All of
the above cohesive fracture models are available for 3-D explicit
analysis only.
To investigate the attributes and accuracies of the available
cohesive fracture models in LS-DYNA, a number of interface mod-
els were developed with both single and multiple element faces.
Two FE planes were produced with a common cohesive interface
and relative motion applied such that their behaviour could be
compared to the theoretical values. This also included a residual
friction load produced from the inclusion of a coefficient of friction
applied to the interface.
The contact models were tested in shear, tension and combined
loading. It was found for these contact models the cohesive failure
shape was limited to triangular, while the initial slope of the model
could only be partially controlled by the penalty contact stiffness
factor (SFS), as shown in Fig. 5. The accuracy of the models to pro-
vide the correct peak stress and fracture energy were compared to
the user defined values. Type 6 showed good accuracy and was
within 5% while Type 8 provided poor accuracy for the offset shell
model and generally underestimated the peak stress and failure
energy to approximately 65% of the requested magnitude. The
application of both Types 6 and 8 in the pull-through models used
in this study resulted in pathological hourglassing developing in
the models under fast loading regimes.
The three new cohesive materials *MAT_184, 185 and 186 are
compatible with two new eight node element formulations that
can accommodate a finite or zero thickness where both solid and
offset shell interfaces are allowed. The most capable material is
*
MAT_186 and allows mixed mode interaction using the common
power law or alternatively Benzeggah–Kenane [7] can be specified.
In addition the cohesive failure shape in *MAT_186 is user defined
through a tabular format. The trialling of *MAT_186 through the
Table 1
Cohesive fracture implemented in LS-DYNA 971 [6]
Fracture model LS-DYNA definition
*
1 CONTACT_AUTOMATIC_ONE_WAY_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE Type 6
*
2 CONTACT_AUTOMATIC_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE Type 8
*
3 MAT_184
*
4 MAT_185
*
5 MAT_186
293
Fig. 5. Contact cohesive fracture behaviour for: (a) Type 6 (solid–solid) and (b) Type
8(offset shell).
interface models found that the material had high accuracy, mini-
mal spurious noise and when applied to the pull-though models
used in this study resulted in no hourglassing problems under high
loading rate regimes. The only limitation found with this model
was when it was applied in conjunction with contact to provide
a friction capability. Under this scenario the material functionality
was perverted.
3.2. Constitutive material models
The application of 3-D composite material to the pull-through
model requires that the material in the vicinity of the fastener head
can account for the progressive material softening from shear or
the combination of shear and tension. The inclusion of material
with brittle failure into the pull-through model resulted in an
unstable cascade of element failure and unrealistic force versus
deformation characteristics. Most of the indigenous 3-D composite
material models in LS-DYNA were trialled using unit cell models as
per Table 2 and [8] that allowed different strain regimes to be ap-
plied and the materials corresponding stresses to be determined.
This methodology allowed the suitability of the material for this
application to be determined.
Due to the brittle nature of materials 22 and 59, and the incom-
patibility of 58 with cohesive fracture, the remaining materials 26,
40 and 161/162 were short listed for implementation in the fas-
tener pull-though model. For this paper, the honeycomb material
was chosen due to its user defined softening capability imple-
mented in a tabular format. The material is defined as a fully
uncoupled material with real anisotropic behaviour [6]. Using the
tabular format an elasto-plastic-brittle material was developed to
represent the composite material with damage initiated by the
Stacked shell with offset Stacked solid Zero thickness capability
No Yes Yes
Yes N/A N/A
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Yes Yes Yes
294 D.J. Elder et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 291–298

Table 2
LS-DYNA 3-D composite material models with failure

LS-DYNA definition Element Suitability for pull-through modelling

type
*
MAT_22 (*MAT_COMPOSITE_DAMAGE) SOLID Unsuitable due to brittle failure
TSHELL
* *
MAT_26 ( MAT_HONEYCOMB) SOLID Can be implemented as a maximum stress failure criterion and with a user define damage softening
*
MAT_40 (*MAT_NONLINEAR_ORTHOTROPIC) SOLID Not evaluated due to advice from [6]
*
MAT_58 (*MAT_LAMINATED_COMPOSITE_FABRIC) TSHELL Has progressive failure, however was problematic when used in conjunction with cohesive failure
interfaces
*
MAT_59 SOLID Unsuitable due to brittle failure
(*MAT_COMPOSITE_FAILURE_SOLID_MODEL)
*
MAT_161/162 SOLID Considered a suitable 3-D material [9]

maximum stress failure criterion, allowing a progressive damage
with shear softening to occur in the vicinity of the fastener head.
A deficiency of this material is that it does not comply with the
plastic flow law. However, as only a limited area of the model in
the vicinity of the fastener head was equipped with this material,
the error introduced was negligible.
3.3. Element formulations
The appropriate element choice is essential for efficient and
accurate explicit FE simulations. The adoption of the honeycomb
material resulted in two possible eight node, constant strain ele-
ment formulations being considered: the under integrated (UI) sin-
gle gauss point element; and the selectively reduced (S/R)
integrated element. Although both elements are constant strain
formulations and do not accommodate accurate bending strains
in single through-thickness element configurations, the S/R ele-
ments performed well in representing bending stiffness with this
configuration.
4. Simplified fastener pull-through model development
4.1. Model description
which allowed the number of solid elements through the thickness
to be reduced from 12 to four.
The resulting model for this study was a 5° 3-D axisymmetric
hybrid solid/shell model with three cohesive fracture planes [10]
as shown in Fig. 7. The adopted materials included a triangular
cohesive fracture model (*MAT_186) and a honeycomb material
implemented with user defined orthotropy and a maximum stress
failure criterion (*MAT_26). This model was approximated from the
actual test configuration as per Fig. 6. The bolt preload was initi-
ated by nodal temperatures applied to a temperature dependent
orthotropic material such that the shank of the fastener contracted
in the Z-direction only inducing the preload into the fastener [11].
A sensitivity analyses of the model proved that at the point of
delamination, the non-linear membrane stress governed and so
the adoption of a constant S/R element was considered suitable
in terms of accuracy and computational efficiency. The pull-
through load was applied to the fastener centreline as a constant
velocity (with initial ramp-up), with constraints as indicated in
Fig. 7 applied. To allow accelerated loading of the structure to fur-
ther shorten the analysis time, various linear damping elements
were applied to minimise unwanted vibration. The final model
was analysed successfully with a run time of 20 min on a single
CPU computer.

The aim of the modelling strategy was to produce a model con-
taining a realistic prediction of fastener pull-through failure with
an analysis time under 30 min on a single CPU computer. This
would allow the fast turnaround of analyses and the future use
of the optimisation tool LS-OPT for system identification of the
cohesive fracture and material parameters. Although LS-DYNA is
a general finite element code with both implicit and explicit capa-
bilities, it is strongly orientated toward the simulation of large ex-
plicit 3-D crash scenarios, occupant safety and metal forming. This
generally results in advancements in LS-DYNA being first imple-
mented for 3-D explicit analysis, which is the case for the cohesive
fracture models implemented in the current version of LS_DYNA.
However, a full 3-D explicit analysis was considered infeasible
due to the extremely long computation times required. It was esti-
mated that a full 3-D analysis of fastener pull-through would re-
quire run times in excess of 24 h on a single CPU computer.
This necessitated the consideration of various means to simplify
the model to reduce computation time. Firstly, the approximate
axisymmetry of the test specimen was utilised which allowed only
a 5° section to be modelled with axisymmetric boundary condi-
tions. To avoid computational problems toward the centre of the
fastener, a 15° slice of the fastener shank was modelled. Secondly,
as material through-thickness shear failure and inter-ply delami-
nation is dominant in the region around the fastener, only the cen-
tral area of the laminate and fastener was modelled using solid
elements, while the outer region was modelled using more compu-
tationally efficient shell elements. Lastly, the number of interfaces
at which delamination was allowed was reduced to only three
4.2. Error assessment
Pivotal in producing a workable model with a minimal compu-
tation time was the use of symmetry. Gaining model size reduction
by the use of geometric symmetry generally produces errors for
composite materials owing to the through-thickness non-homoge-
neity of composite lay-ups producing non-zero rotational deforma-
tions at the lines of geometric symmetry [12]. The error estimation
associated with the adopted model configuration includes mate-
rial, boundary fixity and the use of a dynamic explicit computa-
tional process to model a quasi-static loading regime. The error
magnitudes were determined by comparing the results of two dif-
ferent implicit analyses that considered geometric nonlinearity
only. A full 3-D model was developed where each ply was mod-
elled with eight node continuum shell elements. This element for-
mulation allowed high aspect ratios to be used and accordingly
reduced the model size considerably when compared to the tradi-
tional solid formulation that is restricted to aspect ratios of approx-
imately 10. The model assumed that the fastener provided full
rotational restraint to the area under the top and bottom fastener
flanges as per Fig. 8. This model allowed the magnitude of errors to
be determined for stiffness, stress and boundary conditions. In
addition, a 2-D axisymmetric model with contact and fastener pre-
stress was considered as per Fig. 9 and allowed the sensitivities of
bolt pretension to be explored.
When considering unified perimeter boundary conditions, all
models produced peak stiffness within 15%, while bending and
membrane stresses showed similar variations. The largest and
 D.J. Elder et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 291–298 295

Fig. 6. (a) Plan view of actual test configuration and (b) adopted 5° 3-D axisymmetric model.

Fig. 7. 3-D axisymmetric model.

perhaps most critical stress variation was associated with the shear
stress with approximately 30% variation. Of particular interest was
the error in material definition associated with the application of
geometric symmetry. When comparing the true orthogonal lami-
nate definition with the radial (axisymmetric) definition used in
the simplified model as shown in Fig. 10, the difference between
the two was 5% for membrane and bending and 10% for shear.
These variations between models tended to decrease as the non-
linear membrane load path became more dominant with increas-
ing deformation.
The error associated with the accelerated load was minimised
using a ramped velocity loading at the fastener centreline with
an associated variable acceleration applied to the composite sec-
tion and damping elements to reduce spurious noise. The effective
combination of these attributes resulted in insignificant errors
associated with dynamic considerations.
The dominant uncertainty in the experiment was associated
with the perimeter boundary conditions. It was intended in the
experiment design that the perimeter boundaries were to be firmly
clamped such that vertical and rotational constraint was estab-
lished. This was achieved by an annulus shim plate and a screw
clamping collar (refer Figs. 6 and 7). However, the conclusion
drawn from all analytical methods, including classical and numer-
ical, was that the perimeter boundary was closer to simply sup-
ported than clamped. The effect of the extremes of boundary
conditions from simply supported to fully restrained is shown in
Fig. 11. To normalize the model boundary conditions to the exper-
imental results, a partial restraint system was added to the simply
296 D.J. Elder et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 291–298

Fig. 8. Implicit 3-D LS-DYNA model with continuum shell elements used for error determination.

Fig. 9. Implicit 2-D axisymmetric LS-DYNA model with fastener prestress included.

Fig. 10. Material direction: (a) as defined in the axisymmetric model compared with (b) the actual definition.

supported model, increasing its initial stiffness. This was intended
to allow point A in Fig. 11 to be relocated to point A0 such that the
experimental and analysis results had common stiffness at the
elastic limit.
4.3. Effect of delaminations
To explore the sensitivity of the model stiffness to the cohesive
shear parameter, a model with delamination (WD) was compared
to a model with no delamination (ND) as per Fig. 12. The compar-
ison between these two extremes indicated that at low deforma-
tions, the tangent stiffness of the WD model was approximately
60% that of the ND model, which was consistent with 2-D axisym-
metric implicit solutions as per Fig. 13. In this area of deflection,
the structure is governed by bending stiffness. As the deflection in-
creases the membrane stiffness becomes the predominate compo-
nent and at the failure limit of 3.9 mm the tangent stiffness of both
models are approximately equal. The ND model is approximately
 D.J. Elder et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 291–298 297

Fig. 13. Force versus stiffness for the explicit and implicit ND and WD models and
Fig. 11. Force versus deformation behaviour from experiment and analysis showing experiment.
the effect of boundary conditions.

Fig. 14. Deflected shape of ND and WD structures.

Fig. 12. Models (a) with and (b) without delaminations.

20% stiffer and has a 30% greater stress when compared to the WD
model. From the comparison of the WD and ND models it can be
clearly seen that for the experimental curve to evolute from point
A0 to point B0 , material damage must be occurring in addition to the
delamination.
The deflected shape of the ND and WD models shows a signifi-
cant difference, with the WD model having a longer cord length be-
tween points 1 and 2 with greater curvature at point 1 as shown in
Fig. 14.

4.4. Results and discussion

The fastener pull-through failure predicted by the proposed
simplified 3-D axisymmetric model is compared with the experi-
mental behaviour in Fig. 15, and the predicted failure mode just
prior to complete failure is presented in Fig. 16. The proposed FE
modelling strategy has credence in producing reasonable elastic
force versus deflection characteristics. The use of a honeycomb
Fig. 15. Comparison of experimental force-deflection behaviour with the simplified
FE model with shear and cohesive failure.
material *MAT_26 and the new *MAT_186 cohesive fracture mate-
rial provides good convergence properties and the required user
control to allow the possibility of reverse engineering the shear
298 D.J. Elder et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 291–298
Fig. 16. Predicted failure mode near the fastener head at time equals 0.0031 s
(point B).
and fracture toughness material properties to provide a suitable
deterministic model. It was found that the elastic stiffness was ini-
tially associated with plate bending, however relatively small
deformations resulted in membrane stiffening induced from in-
plane radial and circumferential strains that resulted in substantial
non-linear increase in stiffness with increasing deformation. While
the bolt clamping force had little overall effect on plate stiffness, it
was highly sensitive to local stresses that proved to be pivotal in
the pull-through failure. The results in general show reasonable
agreement with the test data, but require improvement in a num-
ber of areas.
The main limitation of the current modelling strategy is consid-
ered to be the elastic compliance of the cohesive model used. With
the current values used (based on typical values found in the liter-
ature) this compliance dominates the model in its elastic region.
The experimental results produce near linear elastic behaviour be-
tween points O and A0 as shown in Fig. 15. This compares to the
models elastic performance (between points O and C) which is
an order of magnitude less than the experimental results. After this
point (C) the model acts as if it were fully delaminated until mate-
rial shear and cohesive failure is encountered. Finally this results in
a catastrophic shear failure at point B, with the failure mode as per
Fig. 16. It is considered that in order for the model to be represen-
tative of the experimental results, the cohesive failure model re-
quires a near infinite slope in its elastic region. In addition,
further improvement could be gained by changing the current
shear softening regime uses for the laminate from elasto-plastic-
brittle to a smoother degradation model.
5. Conclusion
This paper presents the results of a study to develop a simpli-
fied, computationally efficient modelling method to simulate fas-
tener pull-through failure of composite laminates. The purpose
was to identify techniques to enable explicit FE simulations that
capture the key behaviour and failure modes to be performed in
less than 30 min. This was accomplished using a combination an
axisymmetric, solid/shell hybrid model with accelerated loading
that utilised LS-DYNA material models to simulate through-thick-
ness shear failure of the composite laminate and cohesive fracture
at selected interfaces. Run times on a single CPU of 20 min were
achieved using the proposed modelling technique, compared with
an estimate of over 24 h for full 3-D analyses. The estimated errors
associated with the modelling simplifications varied, with axisym-
metry affecting the predicted stresses in the laminate by 30% in the
case of shear stress, but 15% or less for other stress components.
The dominant error was associated with uncertainty of the exper-
imental perimeter boundary conditions.
The force versus deformation characteristics of a pull-through
specimen with a protruding head fastener were compared against
the numerical result using the proposed modelling technique. The
results indicated generally reasonable agreement, but highlighted
some areas needing improvement. The laminate and cohesive
material models appear to be suitable for this highly non-linear
problem and provided good convergence and user control. How-
ever, implementation of a smoother degradation model for the
laminate material and a near infinite slope in the elastic region
for the cohesive material is recommended. The conclusion drawn
from this work is that the use of simplified FE models does have
merit in modelling fastener pull-through provided the material is
quasi-isotropic and the boundary conditions are uniform around
a circular perimeter. The modelling method will be further refined
in subsequent work to improve correlation with a wide range of
test data.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the support and technical
contribution from Dr. Alastair Johnson (DLR), Dr. Andrew Gunnion
(CRC-ACS), Dr. Stefanie Feih (Royal Melbourne Institute of Technol-
ogy), Mr. Hannes Körber and Mr. Thomas Breitweg who performed
the experimental testing while at the CRC-ACS, and Prof. Eelco Jan-
sen (Delft Technical University). The financial support of the ‘‘Inter-
national Science Linkages” programme established under the
Australian Government’s innovation statement, ‘‘Backing Austra-
lia’s Ability” is kindly acknowledged.
References
[1] Caccese V, Kabche JP, Berube KA. Analysis of a hybrid composite/metal bolted
connection subject to flexural loading. Compos Struct 2007;81:450–62.
[2] Gunnion AJ, Körber H, Elder DJ, Thomson RS. Development of fastener models
for impact simulation of composite structures. In: Proceedings of 25th
congress of the international council of the aeronautical sciences (ICAS
2006), Hamburg, Germany, 3–8 September, 2006.
[3] Körber H. Failure of bolted single lap joints in composite materials. Stuttgart,
Germany: University of Stuttgart; 2006.
[4] Banbury A, Kelly D, Jain S. A study of fastener pull-though failure of composite
laminates. Part 1: failure prediction. Compos Struct 1999;45:241–2540.
[5] Banbury A, Kelly D, Jain S. A study of fastener pull-though failure of composite
laminates. Part 2: failure prediction. Compos Struct 1999;45:255–70.
[6] LS-DYNA Keyword User’s Manual Version 971, Livermore Software Technology
Corporation, Livermore, 2007.
[7] Benzeggah ML, Kenane M. Measurement of mixed-mode delamination fracture
toughness of unidirectional glass/epoxy composites with mixed-mode bending
apparatus. Compos Sci Technol 1996;56:439–49.
[8] Schweizerhof K, Weimar K, Munz T, Rottner T. Crashworthiness analysis with
enhanced composite material models in LS-DYNA – merits and limits. In:
Proceedings of the LS-DYNA world conference, Detroit, Michigan; 1998.
[9] Yen CF, Cassin T, Patterson J, Triplett M. Analytical methods for assessing
impact damage in filament wound pressure vessels. In: Proceedings 44th
international SAMPE symposium and exposition, Long Beach, CA; 1999.
[10] Elder DJ, Thomson RS, Nguyen MQ, Scott ML. Review of delamination
predictive methods for low speed impact of composite laminates. Compos
Struct 2004;66(1–4):677–83.
[11] Nassar SA, Virupaksha VL, Ganeshmurthy S. Effects of bolt tightness on the
behaviour of composite joints. J Press Vess Technol 2007;129:43.
[12] Elder DJ, Thomson RS, Scott ML. Comparison of composite damage between a
2-D, 3-D LS-DYNA simulation and experimental results for a low speed impact
event. In: 10th Australian international aerospace congress, Brisbane,
Australia, 29 July–1 August, 2003.