0
ADVANCES IN IMPACT ENGINEERING

Computational Modeling of Damage Development in Composite Laminates Subjected to Transverse Dynamic Loading

[+] Author and Article Information
Alireza Forghani

Department of Civil Engineering, and Department of Materials Engineering, Composites Group, University of British Columbia, 6250 Applied Science Lane, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada

Reza Vaziri1

Department of Civil Engineering, and Department of Materials Engineering, Composites Group, University of British Columbia, 6250 Applied Science Lane, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canadareza.vaziri@ubc.ca

The results of this case study were presented at the 16th International Conference on Composite Materials in Kyoto, Japan (ICCM 16), 2007.

1

Corresponding author.

J. Appl. Mech 76(5), 051304 (Jun 15, 2009) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3129705 History: Received February 27, 2008; Revised May 13, 2008; Published June 15, 2009

This paper presents a robust computational model for the response of composite laminates to high intensity transverse dynamic loading emanating from local impact by a projectile and distributed pressure pulse due to a blast. Delaminations are modeled using a cohesive type tie-break interface introduced between sublaminates while intralaminar damage mechanisms within the sublaminates are captured in a smeared manner using a strain-softening plastic-damage model. In the latter case, a nonlocal regularization scheme is used to address the spurious mesh dependency and mesh-orientation problems that occur with all local strain-softening type constitutive models. The results for the predicted damage patterns using the nonlocal approach are encouraging and qualitatively agree with the experimental observations. The predictive performance of the proposed numerical model is assessed through comparisons with available instrumented impact test results on a class of carbon-fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) composite laminates. Force-time histories and other derived cross-plots such as the force versus projectile displacement and progression of projectile energy loss as a function of time are compared with available experimental results to demonstrate the efficacy of the model in capturing the details of the dynamic response. Another case study involving the blast loading of CFRP composite laminates is used to further highlight the capability of the proposed model in simulating the global structural response of composite laminates subjected to distributed pressure pulses.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Schematic showing a stack of shell elements each representing a sublaminate of the composite panel and connected together using tie-break contact interfaces

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Typical stress-strain curves produced by the material model MAT_81 in LS-DYNA under both monotonic loading and a complete load-unload cycle resulting in damage saturation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Typical traction-separation curves with (a) high initial stiffness and (b) low initial stiffness causing a local snap-back behavior

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Setup of the impact tests (36)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Schematic showing the structural model consisting of the spherical indenter and the target panel constrained at its edges by frictionless simple supports

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

The predicted damage pattern at the center of the impacted composite panel using (a) local and (b) nonlocal damage models on a regular structured mesh; and (c) local and (d) nonlocal damage models on an inclined mesh

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Comparison between the measured and predicted impact forces versus time relationships in a (a) low velocity–high-mass (v=4.29 m/s, E=58.2 J) and a (b) high velocity–low-mass (v=23.19 m/s, E=84.4 J) impact event

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison between the measured and predicted impact forces versus plate deflection in a (a) low velocity–high-mass (v=4.29 m/s, E=58.2 J) and a (b) high velocity–low-mass (v=23.19 m/s, E=84.4 J) impact event

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison between the measured and predicted histories of the projectile energy loss for a (a) low velocity–high-mass (v=4.29 m/s, E=58.2 J) and a (b) high velocity–low-mass (v=23.19 m/s, E=84.4 J) impact event

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Predicted energy absorbed in the damage process and measured energy loss in various (a) low velocity–high-mass and (b) high velocity–low-mass impact events

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Schematic of the test setup used for blast loading

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Pressure-time pulse generated by the CONWEP model at different locations on the plate (radial distances r from the center) corresponding to a charge of 50 g C4 at a stand-off distance of 140 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Predicted damage pattern in the composite plate under blast load using a (a) local and a (b) nonlocal material model

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Predicted time histories of the out-of-plane (a) displacement and (b) velocity of the various layers at the center of the plate

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In