Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
FOUR
MICROMECHANICS
Micromechanics is the study of composite materials taking into account the interaction
Micromechanics can be used to predict stiffness (with great success) and strength
(with lesser success). There are several approaches, increasingly complex, to derive
micromechanics formulas. To fix ideas, the simplest and most intuitive approach (the
Composite materials are the first class of materials that are designed concurrently
with the structure. When designing with metals, the only choices are the type of
alloy and the thermal treatment, followed by the design of the geometry. Composite
materials are produced as combinations of various fibers with various matrices. The
designer can change fibers, matrices, the relative amount of each constituent, and
the geometry of the part, simultaneously. The relative amount of fiber and matrix is
expressed in terms of fiber and matrix volume fractions, which can be varied over a
Basic concepts and definitions used in the rest of this chapter are described in this
section.
61
62 INTRODUCT!ON TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
anisotropic material
The properties of a composite are controlled by the relative volume of fiber and matrix
volume of fiber
V¡------
total volume
volume of matrix
Vm =
total volume
Since the total volume is the sum of the fiber volume plus the matrix volume,
V¡+ Vm = 1 (4.1)
Toe amount of fiber by weight in the composite is the fiber weight fraction
weight of fiber
W¡=----
total weight
Toe amount of matrix by weight (or mass) is the matrix weight fraction
weight of matrix
Wm=-----
total weight
Since the total weight is the sum of the fiber weight plus the matrix weight,
W¡ + Wm = 1 (4.2)
MICROMECHANICS 63
The mass of any material (fiber, matrix, and composite) is equal to the product of
the density times the volume. Therefore, the density of the composite can be computed
as
Pe = Pf V¡ + Pm Vm (4.3)
The volume of any material (fiber, matrix, and composite) can be written as the
mass divided by the density. Therefore, the density of the composite can be computed
also as
1 W¡ Wm
- = - + (4.4)
Pe Pf Pm
In design of composite structures, volume fractions are used because they enter
directly into the computations of stiffness, etc. But during processing, weight fractions
are used because it is much easier to weigh components to be mixed than to measure
their volumes. The conversion from one to another is simple if the density of the
omposite has been computed. In this case, by writing the definition of weight fraction
in terms of density times volume, the relationship between volume and weight fraction
becomes
W¡ = PJ V¡ (4.5)
Pe
Pm
Wm = -Vm
Pe
When more than two constituents enter in the composition of the composite
P e = ¿p;V;
i=l
_!_ = t W;
Pe i=I Pi
p¡
W; =-V; (4.6)
Pe
where n is the number of constituents. Toe computed composite density may differ
from the experimental value Pe,exp because of voids. Toe volume fraction of voids Vv
here Pe is computed with (4. 3 ) and Pe,exp is measured experimentally (ASTM D792).
The fiber weight fraction can be measured by weighting a composite sample, then
removing the resin and weighting the fibers. The resin can be removed by matrix
64 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOS!TE MATERIALS DESIGN
in an oven.
r¡ TEX
V¡=----- (4.8)
1 0 , 000 PJ te
where r¡ is the number of tows per unit width (tows per cm) perpendicular to the fiber
direction, TEX is the weight of the tow (in g/km), p¡ is the density of the fibers in
w
V¡=---- (4.9)
1 , OOOp¡te
2],
where w is the weight in grams of a square meter of mat [g/m p¡ is the density of
the fibers in g/cc, and te is the thickness of the composite layers in mm. Conversions
Example 4.1 Compute the fiber volume fraction of a unidirectional layer with 5 tows
per cm, each tow is E-glass of 1 1 3 yield, and the final layer thickness is 2.0 mm.
(5)4391
V¡ = = 0.439 = 43.9%
1 0 , 0 00 ( 2 . 5 ) 2 . 0
Example 4.2 Compute the fiber volume fraction of a laminate 12.7 mm thick built
2
with 22 layers of double bias [±45] stitchedfabric (Hexcel DB243) having 2 3 . 7 oz/yd
oz 2 8 . 3 5 g/oz 2
w = 23.7- = 23.7(33.9) = 8 0 3 . 5 glm
2 2
yd ( 0 . 9 1 4 4 m!yd)
803.5(22)
V¡ = = 0.556 = 55.6%
1000(2.5) 1 2 . 7
- ""-
MICROMECHANICS 65
(a) (b)
Figure 4.2 Typical RVEs for (a) rectangular packing array and (b) hexagonal packing
arra y.
The fiber volume fraction V¡ can take any value over a broad range allowed by
the particular manufacturing process (e. g . , by hand lay-up between 0% and 60%
by volume). To test for the properties (mechanical, thermal, etc.) of ali these possible
apparent.
on the known (tested) properties of the constituents (fiber and matrix). Microme
chanics analyzes the material considering the matrix and the fiber properties and the
geometry of the microstructure. This is done once and for all, so that the designer is
not concerned with the microstructure during the structural design process.
To avoid considering ali the fibers included in a composite during the derivation
of the equations, micromechanics uses the concept of an RVE. An RVE (Figure 4.2) is
the smallest portion of the material that contains ali of the peculiarities of the material;
therefore, it is representative of the material as a whole. Toe stresses and strains are
nonuniform over the RVE because the composite is a heterogeneous material (see
equivalent homogeneous material (see section 4.1.4) without affecting the state of
stresses around the RVE (see Figure 4 . 3 ) . In fact, the state of stresses in the rest of
the structure will not change as long as the designer looks at a scale larger than the
dimensions of the RVE. Toe fiber spacing and the )ayer thickness are typical RVE
Heterogeneous materials have properties (mechanical, etc.) that vary from point to
point. Consider a cross section of a tree, where each growth ring is different from the
rest. The lighter rings (summer wood) are softer, and the darker rings (winter wood)
are stiffer. In contrast, a homogeneous material (e.g., steel) has the same properties
everywhere.
INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
66
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.3 (a) RVE replaced by equivalent homogeneous material and (b) ali structure
Isotropic materials (e.g., aluminum) have the same properties in any direction. Aniso
tropic materials have properties (mechanical, etc.) that vary with the orientation.
on the orientation along which the property is measured. A typical example is the
modulus of elasticity of wood, which is higher along the length of the tree and lower
across the growth rings. Although wood is a heterogeneous material (each growth
ring is different from the rest; see section 4 . 1 . 3 ) , when looking at a large piece of
wood, the material is assumed homogeneous. That is, for simplicity, the peculiarities
of the growth rings are ignored. However, the differences in the modulus along various
An orthotropic material has three planes of symmetry (Figure 4.4) that coincide with
and the other two can be any pair of planes orthogonal to the fiber direction and
among themselves. Only nine constants are required to describe an orthotropic ma
terial.
MICROMECHANICS 67
ººººº
ººººº -- - - - - -
A transversely isotropic material has one axis of symmetry. For example, the fiber
symmetry if the fibers are randomly distributed in the cross section. In this case, any
The most common materials of industrial use are isotropic, like aluminum, steel,
etc. Isotropic materials have an infinite number of planes of symmetry, meaning that
· the properties are independent of the orientation. Only two constants are needed to
represent the elastic properties of isotropic materials. These two properties can be the
Young modulus E and Poisson's ratio v, but severa! other pairs of properties have to
be related to any other pair. For example, isotropic materials can be described by E
E
G=--- (4.10}
2(1 + v)
4.2 STIFFNESS
In the mechanics of materials approach, both fibers and matrix are assumed to be
resented by two properties: the modulus of elasticity E and Poisson's ratio v. Using
68 INTRODUCT/ON TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
1.0
0.9
0.8
--o- E1/Et
0.7
� -v- E2/Et
Q)
0.4
!
� 0.3
0.2
0.1
o.o
o.o 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Figure 4.5 Micromechanics predictions as a function of the fiber volume fraction [2].
micromechanics, the combination of two isotropic materials (fiber and matrix) is rep
The longitudinal modulus, or modulus of elasticity .in the fiber direction, can be pre
dicted very well by (4.15), called the rule of mixtures (ROM) formula. The main
assumption in this formulation is that the strains in the direction of the fibers are the
same in the matrix and the fiber. This implies that the fiber-rnatrix bond is perfect.
When the material is stretched along the fiber direction, the matrix and the fibers will
elongate the same, as shown in Figure 4.6. This basic assumption is needed to be
able to replace the heterogeneous material in the RVE by a hornogeneous one (Fig
ure 4 . 3 ) while satisfying compatibility of displacements with the rest of the body. Or
vice versa, replace everything but the RVE by an equivalent material while satisfying
compatibility.
MICROMECHAN/CS 69
Poisson Effect
··········¡··············· . . . . · - · .----.
Matrix
� a;
�
;
... 1
By definition of strains,
b. L
E ¡ = -
Since both fiber and matrix are isotropic and elastic, their stress-strain law is
ºf = E¡E¡
The average stress cr¡ acts on the entire cross section of the RVE with area
A = A ¡ + Am
Toen
where
E¡=E¡V¡+EmVm (4.14)
According to the ROM, the property E 1 depends linearly on V¡ and the properties
of the constituents, as shown in Figure 4.5 for an E-glass composite (E¡ = 72.3
GPa, Em = 5.05 GPa, v¡ = 0.22, Vm = 0.35). In most cases, the modulus of the
fibers is much larger than that of the matrix (see Tables 2.1 and 2.4-2.5). Toen
the first term dominates, making the contribution of the matrix to the composite
a fiber dominated property. Also note that V¡ cannot reach all the way to 100% as
Figure 4.5 may suggest. To begin with, the best packing of cylindrical fibers is the
hexagonal array (Figure 4.2) with V¡ about 90%. Furthermore, processing conditions
usually limit V¡ to values much lower than that (e.g., for pultrusion to about 45%).
In the determination of the modulus in the direction transverse to the fibers, the main
assumption is that the stress is the same in the fiber and the matrix. This assumption is
needed to maintain equilibrium in the transverse direction. Once again, the assumption
implies that the fiber-matrix bond is perfect. Toe RVE, subject to a uniform transverse
stress, is shown in Figure 4.7. Note that, for simplicity, a cylindrical fiber has been
advanced formulations [2]) do not represent the actual geometry of the fiber at ali.
Since fiber and matrix are assumed to be linear elastic materials, the strains in
a2
Ef =
E¡
while the average strain E2 acts o ver the en tire width W . Toe total elongation is
E2 W = Ef V¡ W + Em Vm W (4.16)
Cancelling W and using Hookes law for the constituents, which are assumed to
be isotropic, a¡ am
E2 = - V ¡ + -Vm (4.17)
E¡ s;
Since the stress is the same in the fiber and the matrix (a¡ = am = a2),
MICROMECHANICS 71
T
w
l
¡ ¡ (j2 ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡ ¡
Toen, comparing with Hookes law for the equivalent material (a2 = E2E2), the
1 Vm V¡
- = - + (4.18)
E2 z; E¡
Equation (4 . 1 8 ) is known as the in verse ROM. Toe fibers do not con tribute ap
preciably to the stiffness in the transverse direction unless V¡ is very high (see Figure
4.5), in which case the assumptions made in this section are not valid. Therefore, it
a lower bound, and it is not accurate in the majority of cases. A lower bound means
that the property is underestimated. Toe inverse ROM is a simple equation to be used
for qualitative evaluation of different candidate materials but not for design calcula
tions.
A better prediction can be obtained with the semiempirical Halpin-Tsai [3] for
mula
1 + {r¡V¡ J
E2 = Em
[
1 - r¡V¡
(E¡/Em)-1
r¡ = (4.19)
(E¡/Em)+t
72 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
6 � Halpin-Tsai
- Periodic Microstructure
CJ Experimental Data
E
w
..._ 4
C\J
w
o ...._._........._._..........._._...,._._...._._.._._................................_._......................_._...._._.._.__.__.................
Figure 4.8 Comparison of predicted values of E2/ Em with experimental data for
glass-epoxy.
gives good fit for the case of circular or square fibers. For rectangular fibers, a good
estimate is { = 2a/b, where a and b are the dimensions of the rectangle in the
model (PMM, [2]) leads to accurate formulas for E2 and also G 12, G23, v12, and E ¡ .
Since the PMM formulas are relatively complex, they have been prograrnmed in the
Any Poisson's ratio is defined as minus the quotient of the resulting strain over the
applied strain:
(4.20)
That is, in a test in which load is applied in the i-direction, strain is induced by
V12 = v¡ V¡ + Vm Vm (4.21)
MICROMECHANICS 73
o
2
o
Fiber
0 0
't
Poisson's ratio for the matrix and the fibers are not very different, (4.21) predicts also
a similar value for the composite. Poisson's ratios are difficult to measure, mainly
that of the fiber. Sorne fibers like carbon fibers are not even isotropic. Finally, Poisson
effects are usually secondary effects. For ali these reasons, ( 4 . 2 1 ) is generally ade-
quate for design. Since Poisson's ratio is predicted by a ROM equation ( 4 . 2 1 ) , the "
plot as a function of fiber volume fraction is similar to the plot of the longitudinal
modulus.
3
The inplane shear stress ª6 = r12 = r21 deforms the composite as in Figure 4.9a. The
strength of material approach leads to an inverse ROM equation [4] for the inplane
shear modulus
_l_ = Vm + V¡
(4.22)
G12 o; G¡
Equation (4.22) predicts that the inplane shear modulus is a matrix dominated
property in the case of stiff fibers. Toe inverse ROM can be rewritten as
Gm
G12=------ (4.23)
Vm + V¡Gm/G¡
3
See section 5 . 1 for the definition of the material coordinate system.
74 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
If the fibers are much stiffer than the matrix (Gm « G¡), the inplane shear
rv Gm
G12=-- (4.24)
l - V¡
Once again, the inverse ROM gives a simple but not accurate equation for the
prediction of the inplane shear modulus. The cylindrical assemblage model (CAM,
(1 + V¡) + (1 - V¡) G m / Gf J
G 1 2 = Gm (4.25)
[
(1 - V¡)+ ( 1 + V¡)Gm/G¡
+ V¡) (4.26)
G12�Gm ---
(1
1 - V¡
Equation (4.26) deviates slightly from the results of (4.25) as shown in Figure
G12
.
= Gm
[
1 + V¡ ( 1 - G m / Gf)
( _J (4.27)
Gm/G¡ + S3 1 - Gm/G¡)
where
(4.29)
Equation (4.29) gives almost the same results as (4.27) and good agreement
with experimental data for most common materials. Experimental data and predicted
In this section, the matrix and the fibers are assumed to be isotropic. Therefore, the
shear modulus of the fiber and the matrix can be computed from known elastic modulus
and Poisson's ratio using the following formula, valid for any isotropic material:
E
G=--- (4.30)
2(1 + v)
MICROMECHANICS 75
-- Rule of Mixtures
O Experimental Data
E 4
o
..._
(\J
c5' 3
F i b e r Volume Fraction
The interlaminar stress a4 = r23 = r32 acts across the thickness of the composite
4
as shown in Figure 4.9b. The interlaminar shear modulus can be computed with the
V¡ + r123 ( 1 - V¡)
G23 = e: ( )
r123 1 - V¡ + V¡Gm/G¡
3 - 4vm + Gm/G¡
23 (4.31)
T/ = 4 ( 1 - Vm)
The PMM [2] that accounts for the exact geometry of the fibers gives similar
through the thickness of the composite, which is similar to that in Figure 4.9a. There
which is exact for a transversely isotropic material (section 4 . 1 . 6 ) with the axis of
4
See section 5 . 1 for the definition of the material coordinate system.
76 INTRODVCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
rection for an otherwise not accurate formula. This approach is used often in the field .
of composite materials. When an accurate formula is not available, the obvious al
ternative is to test all the possible volume fractions to be encountered during design
and fit the data with a curve fit. This curve-fitting approach is too expensive because
method, all the good information that was built in the original formula is preserved
while enhancing it with experimental data. The SPP can be used to correct both the
In the derivation of the inverse ROM equation for E2 (section 4.2.2), it was
assumed that the stress in the fiber and the matrix were the same
Figure 4.7, while actually the fiber is cylindrical. To obtain a better approximation for
E2, a cylindrical fiber is considered. For a cylindrical fiber, the stresses a¡ and ªm are
not uniform, but they can be represented by their average values. Note that in reality
the average stress in the matrix is lower than in the fiber, because Em < E¡. Without
actually computing the real stress field, the SPP value rJe can be defined as the ratio
of the average stress in the matrix to the average stress in the fiber
where the average stresses are defined by averaging the actual stress distribution over
ci¡ = _.!.._ { a¡ d V
V¡ Jv1
'i'fm = _1_ { ªm dV
Vm Jvm
(4.34)
where V¡, Vm, and Ve are the volume of fiber, matrix, and composite, respectively.
_ V¡
O' e = - -
1 f Vm
a ¡ d V + - -
1 f O' m d V (4 . 3 5 )
Ve V¡ V¡ Ve Vm Vm
MICROMECHANJCS 77
(4.36)
(4.37)
Now, rewrite ( 4 . 1 7 ) using (4.33) and recognizing that in (4.17) a¡ and am are
af r/eª f
E2 = -V¡ + - - V m (4.38)
E¡ e;
(4.39)
Now recognize a2 from (4.37) and divide by it to get the corrected ROM equation
for E2
1 E2 (V¡ r/ e V m ) 1
(4.40)
E2 = a2 = E¡+ Em ( V ¡ + r¡eVm)
From this experiment, the correction r/e can be calculated from (4.40), or writing r/e
explicitly as
V¡Em(E2 - E¡)
r/ e = - --'-- - - - - � (4.41)
VmE¡(E2 - Em)
The next step is to assume that the correction factor n¿ is independent of V¡ for
V¡ + n, ( 1 - V¡)
E2 = Em -�----'-----'------- (4.42)
r/e (1 - V¡) + V¡ Em/E¡
can be used to accurately predict the transverse stiffness E2. Equation (4.42) matches
experimental data for values of V¡ other than the one at which r/e was obtained, as
(4.43)
78 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
V¡ + n, ( 1 - V¡)
G12 = e; ( (4.44)
n, 1 - V¡)+ V¡ Gm/G¡
can be used to accurately predict the inplane shear modulus G 1 2 . Finally, the SPP for
1 ( Gm)
rJs = 2 1 + G¡
A continuous strand mat (CSM) is a fiber system containing randomly placed, con
tinuous rovings held together by a binder (section 2.1.2). CSM is used to obtain
ings constitute the main reinforcement. Since CSM is produced with unidirectional
roving, it is more expensive than chopped strand mat, which is produced directly from
the glass furnace, thus saving the intermediate step of making a roving. Furthermore,
better quality E-glass is commonly used for CSM, while the chopped version is usually
made of lower quality glass. CSM has, in general, better mechanical properties than
chopped strand mat, but it is more expensive. Therefore, hand lay-up production of not
so critica! structures (e.g., small boats) may use chopped strand mat. The interlaminar
shear strength F4 and Fs (section 4.4.6) are usually lower in composites made with
lower quality glass. If these properties are critical, E- or S-glass should be used.
Toe elastic properties of both CSM and chopped strand mat can be predicted
assuming that they are random composites. A ]ayer of composite with randomly ori
ented fibers can be idealized as a laminate with a large number of thin unidirectional
layers, each with a different orientation from Oº to 1 8 0 º . Toe properties of the random
composite are the average properties of this fictitious laminate. Each fictitious unidi
rectional layer has a reduced stiffness matrix [ Q ] given by (5.23). The orientation of
each !ayer is accounted for by rotating the matrix [ Q ] to a common coordinate system
(4.45)
which leads to
CSM 3 1 3 1
Qll = 8Q¡¡ + 4Q12 + 8Q22 + 2º66
CSM 1 3 1 1
Q¡z = + + -
8Q11 4Q12 8Q22 2Q66
CSM 1 1 1 1
º66 = 8Q¡¡ - 4Q12 + 8Q22 + 2º66
_ QCSM _ Ü
QCSM (4.46)
16 - 26 -
MICROMECHANICS 79
Using (5.23) to write the coefficients of both [Q] and [QCSM], the isotropic
properties E, G, and v of the random composite can be obtained from the known
vE
2
1 - v
(4.47)
with ó = 1 - v12 v 2 1 - Solving the above three equations for E, G, and v results in
E¡ - 2 v 1 2 E 2 + E2 + 4G12ó
G = �����������
8ó
E ¡ + 6v12E2 + E2 - 4 G 1 2 ó
V = �����������- (4.48)
3 E ¡ + 2v12E2 + 3E2 + 4G12ó
where ó = 1 - v12 vzi lt can be verified that the equation above satisfies the isotropic
3 5
E = - E ¡ + -E2
8 8
1 1
G = - E ¡ + -E2
8 4
E
V = - - 1 (4.49)
2G
where E 1 and E2 are the longitudinal and transverse moduli of a fictitious unidirec
tional !ayer having the same volume fraction as the CSM !ayer. Toe approximation for
E is obtained dividing the equation for E by ( 1 - v2) and using the same assumptions.
and ( 4 . 1 9 ) to obtain E¡ and E2) is presented in Table 4 . 1 for vinyl ester reinforced
2
with E-glass CSM (Owens Corning 457.5g/m ). E-glass properties are given in Table
2.1 and vinyl ester properties, including the matrix modulus Em, are given in Table
2.4. From the experimental data it can be seen that the reinforcement is not truly
random. The direction along the length of the CSM roll is called longitudinal. Along
the transverse direction, the stiffness of the composite is about 13% lower because
of a slightly preferential orientation along the length of the roll. The predicted values
80 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
E-glass CSM
Predicted Experimental
Longitudinal Transverse
are higher than expected, perhaps because the predictions are based on the nominal
Severa! restrictions on the possible values for the various elastic constants presented
in this chapter can be derived from elasticity theory. The most useful relationship is
(4.50)
This relationship is routinely used to compute Poisson's ratio v z ¡ . This and other
restrictions [ 4, p. 43) are also used to check the validity of experimental data, as in
Example 4.3 The elastic properties E¡ = 19.981 GPa and v¡z = 0.274 were mea
sured in a longitudinal test (fibers in the direction of loading) by using ™{O strain
gages: one longitudinal and one transverse. The elastic properties Ez = 1 1 . 3 8 9 GPa
and v21 = 0.153 are measured in a transverse tensile test (fibers perpendicular to
loading] in the same way. For the test procedure to be valid, all four data values E 1 ,
E2, v ¡ z , and vz¡ must conform to (4.50), within the experimental error.
E¡ 19.981
- = -- = 7 2 . 9 GPa
V¡z 0.274
E2 1 1. 3 8 9
- = -- = 74.4 GPa
Vz¡ 0.153
The difference is small taking into account that there may be sorne experimental
linear relationship
where Lo is the initial length, fJ is the coefficient of moisture expansion, and a is the
6
The thermal expansion coefficient of ali resins are positive (about 30 to 100 10- /ºC)
6
and higher than steel alloys ( 1 0 to 20 10- f°C). The coefficient of thermal expansion
6
of E-glass is low (5.04 10- /ºC). Carbon fibers have a negative expansion in the fiber
6
direction (-0.99 10- f°C) and a relatively large expansion in the transverse direction
6
(16.7 10- f°C). This means that depending on the arnount of fibers (fiber volume
very low coefficient of thermal expansion, which is useful when dimensional stability
of the fibers, the thermal expansion behavior is dominated by the fibers, and the
1
a ¡ = -- [a¡E¡(T)V¡ + <X m E m ( T ) V m ] (4.52)
E¡(T)
the matrix material. In this case the thermal expansion coefficient is computed from
[7, 27]
(4.53)
Equations (4.52) and (4.53) have been correlated to experimental values and they
are reported to be quite satisfactory for the prediction of thermal properties. It must be.
noted that carbon fibers have a different coefficient of thermal expansion in the longi
tudinal and transverse directions. The former should be used in (4.52) and the later in
(4.53). Note that the elastic moduli used in both equations depend on the temperature.
Because of this, these formulas cannot be used over a large range of temperatures [7].
Figure 4 . 1 1 .
Since a !ayer of random composite is isotropic in the plane of the !ayer, the
a¡ + a2 a¡ - a2 E¡ - E2
<Xq = + --- -------- (4.54)
2 2 E ¡ + (1 + 2v21)E2
82 /NTRODUCTION TO COMPOS!TE MATERIALS DES!GN
-O- a ¡ / a m
4 ��lam
� 3
Q)
-0-- K¡ / 1Cm
a.
o
....
a..
2
ca
·;::
Q)
�
�
o.o 0.1 0.2 o.3 0.4 o.s o.e o.7 o.a o.9 1.0
where a ¡ , a2, E¡, E2, v21 are the properties of a fictitious unidirectional composite
with the same fiber volume fraction of the random composite, computed with the equa
tions described earlier in this chapter. It must be noted that experimental values of aq
are very scattered and the formula for aq may underestimate or overestimate the ex
Example 4.4 Select the materials and processing technique to produce a square tube
that will bend the least under a temperature gradient 6. T . The top face of the tube
will be exposed to the sun, while the bottom and the sides will be in the shade. The
temperature differential between the top and bottom fiange is 6. T . Two fabrication
techniques are available: hoop filament winding which lays the fibers at 90º with
respect to the axis of the tube and pultrusion that aligns the fibers at Oº.
First, select the resin with the least thermal expansion that is compatible with
fibers. The required values of E¡ and E2 were computed using the ROM. Two values
of fiber volume fraction are selected, which can be achieved with both processes. The
results are shown in Table 4.2, from which it is clear that the least thermal expansion
is in the fiber direction. So the fibers should be aligned along the axis of the tube
(pultrusion). Carbon fibers should be used for optimum performance since they yield
Example 4.4
Fiber aq a2 a¡ a2
6
¡ 1 0 - 6 /ºC] ¡10- /ºCJ ¡ 1 0 - 6 /ºC] ¡10-6 /ºCJ
Moisture is absorbed primarily by the polymer matrix with the exception that aramid
fibers can also absorb moisture. Once moisture is absorbed, it produces swelling of
the polyrner. Moisture is absorbed in a Fick:ian process, and the absorption rate is
much slower than thermal conduction. When exposed to a changing environment, the
material will reach thermal equilibrium much faster than moisture equilibrium.
moisture weight
m = -------�
dry composite weight
samples. However, careful consideration should be given to the void content, since -
water going to fill up voids <loes not contribute to the swelling. If the void content is
known, and if it can be assumed that ali voids will be filled by water, the weight of
the water in the voids can be subtracted to get the weight of water really absorbed
by the polymer. The void content per volume Vv can be estimated by (4.7). Toen the
density p of the material can be found as the weight of a sample divided by its volume
While organic fibers (e.g., aramid) absorb water, inorganic fibers (e.g., glass,
carbon) do not absorb moisture. In the case of inorganic fibers, the coefficients of
moisture expansion in the longitudinal and transverse direction of the composite [7]
reduce to
e; J Pe
fh = fh = (1 + Vm) - - ( v 1 2 ) -f3m (4.55)
[ E¡ Pm
84 /NTRODUCT/ON TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
where Pe and Pm are the densities of the composite and the matrix, respectively, and
f3m is the moisture expansion coefficient of the matrix. Predictions using (4.55) are
shown in Figure 4 . 1 1 .
fibers can be computed in the same way as the coefficient of thermal expansion in the
where {3 ¡ , f32, E¡, E2, and v12 are the properties of a fictitious unidirectional !ayer
with the. same fiber volume fraction of the random composite. This formula has not
Thermal and electrical conductivities and mass diffusivity all are computed by the same
or mass diffusivity, of the fiber and matrix, respectively. In the fiber direction, the
k, = k¡ V¡ + km Vm (4.57)
1 + �17V¡ J
k2 = km
[
1 - 17V¡
(k¡ / km) - 1
11 = � - - - -
(k¡ / k m ) + �
1
� = l o g - -fi" I o g � (4.58)
where a/b is the aspect ratio of the cross-sectional dimensions of the fiber, a along
the direction of heat (electrical) conduction, and b transverse to it. For circular fibers,
a/b = 1 and � = l . These formulas predict well the thermal and electrical conductiv
4.4 STRENGTH
Predictive models for composite strength are not nearly as successful as sorne of the
stiffness models presented earlier. The reasons are many, and research is very active in
this area. There are two issues of concern. One is how to establish ultimate strengths
MICROMECHANICS 85
70
60
� 50
n,
e.
(/) 40
(/)
(!)
....
éi5 30
....
ctl
(!)
.e:
(/) 20
• Gage #1
O Gage#2
-- Data Fil
10
o
o.o 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
% strain
(strains) using micromechanics, which is the purpose of this section. The other is how
to use the strength values in conjunction with stress analysis, which is the objective
of Chapter 7.
derived by assuming that ali the fibers have the same tensile strength. -Actually, the
distribution [13]. But as a first approximation, it is assumed that ali the fibers have
the same strength, equal to the average of the distribution, which is the fiber average
strength u¡ a .
Toe second assumption is that both the fibers and the matrix behave linearly up to
failure. This is not true for most polymer matrices that exhibit either elastic nonlinear
is further complicated by their load-rate dependency. That is, polymers are viscoelastic
The third assumption is that the fibers are brittle with respect to the matrix. As it
can be seen in Tables 2 . 1 and 2.4, E-glass has actually more elongation to failure than
most resins, invalidating this assumption. However, such large elongations to failure
for fibers hold only in ideal conditions, with sorne fibers breaking at much lesser strain
levels.
86 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
Fiber Failure
Matrix Failure
<J;,,u
E
Eta tmu
Toe fourth assumption is that the fibers are stiffer than the matrix. This is valid
Under the assumptions listed, the composite will usually break when the stress
in the fibers reaches their strength ªfa. After the fibers break, the matrix is unable to
carry the load. Therefore, the composite elongation to failure Ecu is equal to the fiber
elongation to failure Efu. At this strain leve!, the matrix has not failed yet because it is
more compliant and can sustain larger strains (Figure 4 . 1 3 ) . Under these conditions, it
can be assumed that the longitudinal tensile strength is controlled by the fiber strength
and is represented by
(4.60)
This equation assumes that the strain in the matrix and the fibers are the same,
which is true if the fiber-matrix bond is perfect. The ultimate strain or stress of the
matrix is not realized, because the fibers are more brittle ( i . e . , fail at a lower strain,
88 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
been obtained from tests on single fibers in ideal conditions, usually represent the
maximum attainable rather than the typical strength and, therefore, cannot be used in
design.
Since fibers are damaged during processing, it is more advisable, and often done,
to use (4 . 6 1 ) with experimental average ten sil e strength values af a . These average
values (afa) have been back calculated, using (4.61), from experimental data on
composites rather than from tests on single fibers. Therefore, the data does represent
the fiber material in the real application. If sorne testing can be afforded, an average
fiber strength value can be determined far a given Vf. Then it can be used for other
Example 4.5 Compute the tensile strength of a Ti-alumina metal matrix composite
(MMC) with a fiber volume fraction of 27%. The titanium matrix is Ti 6-4, which
at 427ºC has Em = 87.5 GPa, Vm = 0.3. The alumina fibers have a diameter of
df = 140 microns, and at 427ºC have Ef = 379 GPa, Vf = 0.27, and average
* Em 87.5
ªm = ª f a - = 2614-- = 603 MPa
Ef 379
is lower than the tensile strength, about one half or less. Toe mode of failure is usually
triggered by fiber microbuckling, when individual fibers buckle inside the matrix (Fig
Fiber rnisalignment measures the waviness of the fibers in the composite. Fiber
waviness is always present to sorne extent, even when great care is taken to align
the fibers during processing. Waviness occurs because of severa! factors. Toe fibers
are wound in spools as soon as they are produced, which induces a natural curvature
in the fibers. Then fibers tend to curl when stretched on a flat mold. Furthermore,
many fibers are wound together over a spool to form a tow or roving during fiber
production. The fibers wound on the outside of the spool are longer than those wound
in the inside. When the tow is stretched, the longer fibers are loose and microcatenary
is formed.
longer fibers hang under their own weight. Toe longer fibers hang in a catenary shape,
just as electrical power lines do. In the final composite part, microcatenary appears as
fiber misalignment.
MICROMECHANICS 89
Fiber
Fiber
buckling
Finally, there is the shrinkage of the polymer. During cure, most thermoset poly
mers shrink 3 to 9% by volume, that is, 1 to 3% on any direction. Along the fiber
direction, it means that the fiber, which <loes not shrink during cure, must accommo
The amount of fiber misalignment varíes from fiber to fiber, and it can be accu
in Figure 4 . 1 6 . After polishing the sample and looking at it with a microscope, each
fiber shows as an ellipse. Toe longer dimension of the ellipse b is proportional to the
. d¡
sm(w) = b
a = w - cp (4.64)
wheEe q is tbe jj!JeE dúme/e¡; Tbo average, DI mean vaJut/ of aJJ the measured angles
will be zero since fibers are misaligned equally at positive and negative angles with
respect to the nominal fiber orientation. The experimental data of fiber angle can
be fitted accurately with a normal distribution [12]. The standard deviation of the
Ll = (4.65)
n(n - 1)
shown in Figure 4 . 1 7 represents the observed data and indicates the probability of
. a .
composite
sample �
0.15 ,-------------;::::==========�
- Probability Density
�
Q.
� 0.10
·¡¡;
e:
Q)
�
zs
_g o.os
e
a.
Figure 4.17 Probability density function p(a), p r o p o r t i o n a lto the number of fibers
The first formula for compressive strength was proposed by Rosen [ 1 6 ] , recogniz
ing the fact that compression failure is triggered by fiber microbuckling. When fibers
buckle, they can ali buckle in phase (shear mode, Figure 4 . 1 5 a ) or out of phase (ex
tension mode, Figure 4 . 1 5 b ) . It can be demonstrated that the shear mode will always
occur at a lower compressive stress for PMCs having practica! values of fiber volume
fraction.
The first approximation to the problem is to assume that the buckling load of
the fibers is the limiting factor for compressive strength. To obtain the buckling load,
matrix. Furthermore, the shear stress-strain law of the composite was assumed to be
(4.66)
Even though fibers are wavy, they are assumed to be straight in Rosen's model
because this is the simplest approach to stability problems. The stability analysis is
performed on what is called the perfect system (straight fibers) [26]. The buckling
load is found for the perfect system, and it is assumed that the load capacity of the
imperfect system (wavy fibers) is lower than the buckling load of the perfect system.
Gm �
0-CR = --- = G12 (4.67)
1 - V¡
this model, the buckling stress is numerically equal to the matrix dominated approxi
mation of the composite shear modulus (4.24). An empírica! correction of (4.67) can
be made by adding a factor k, which is determined from one test at one particular
value of the fiber volume fraction, and assuming that the value of the factor k does
kGm
ªCR = --- � k G 1 2 (4.68)
1 - V¡
This approach has been validated for boron-epoxy composites [ 17]. Toe main
problem with using the empirical correction is that testing must be done, and testing
for compressive strength is very difficult. In fact, no single test method can be used for
ali materials, or even for various thicknesses of samples of the same material. Further
more, composites from actual production have vastly different values of compressive
strength than composites made in the lab, even if the same materials are used. Also,
damage that affects the results. Therefore, there is a strong motivation for deriving a
92 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
1.0
o.a
-- Applied Stress
-t)
0.4
0.2
o.o
o 2 3 4 5 6
Figure 4.18 Buckling stress and applied stress as a function of fiber misalignment.
formula that can be related to parameters that can be easily measured on composites
manufactured in the shop rather than from samples made in the lab.
A better estímate of the buckling stress can be made by taking into account the
initial misalignment of the fibers and the nonlinear stress-strain law given by (4.66).
The buckling stress of a fiber bundle in which ali the fibers have the same misalignment
is given by [ 1 2 ]
2 2
F6 (,/2 - l ) ( e ../2 g - e g) + (,/2 + l)(e< +../2)g - 1 )
g = y G 1 2 / F6 (4.69)
where G12 and F6 are the inplane shear modulus (section 4.2.4) and inplane shear
Toe stress in the composite is a function of the misalignment a and the shear
strain y , induced when the fibers buckle in phase (Figure 4 . 1 5 a ) . The maximum value
of (4.69) is the buckling stress u(a) of a material in which fibers have the same
misalignment a (Figure 4 . 1 8 ) . However, in a real composite not ali the fibers have the
A formula for the compressive strength of the composite can be derived by taking
into account that the fibers with larger value of misalignment will buckle first during
the loading process. Once a fiber has buckled, it carries negligible stress, thus over-
MICROMECHANICS 93
loading those fibers that have lower misalignment. Toe unbuckled fibers are able to
carry the extra load only up to a certain point. With reference to Figure 4 . 1 8 , buckling
of the fibers proceeds from large values of misalignment, both positive and negative,
to the area under the probability density curve (Figure 4 . 1 7 ) , which is given by
tx
z=-- (4.70)
vrin
where erf(z) is the error function [18, 19] and Q is the standard deviation of fiber
misalignment given by (4.65). At any given point in the loading process, the applied
stress (see Figure 4.18) is equal to the product of the actual stress carried by the
unbuckled fibers (and surrounding matrix) times the area of the unbuckled fibers (and
surrounding matrix)
a= u(a)F(a) (4.71)
where the buckling stress u(a) is shown by Figure 4 . 1 8 . The maximum stress that
F1c X a
=
G12 24rr b
103961
2 4 3
a = -10979.6 - 8432.03x - 19037.205 x - 124.653 x - � x
2 3
x2
+ (12191.01 + 1881.87 x + 176.286 x + 7979.978x) + 2.356x
2
3 2
x2
b = (-7.146x - 41.298x + 5.608x) +2.356x
2
2
2
+ ( 10.106 x + 34.594x - 6 1. 3 8 9 ) ( x2 + 2.356 x ) (4.73)
(4.74)
94 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATER/ALS DESIGN
Material V¡ G12 F6 n X
Exp, (4.75)
Taking into account that the dimensionless compressive strength can be modeled
(4.75)
where a = 0.21 and b = -0.69 are two constants chosen to fit the explicit equation
(4.73). Note that (4.75) is not an empirical equation, since no experimental data of
compressive strength has been used in its derivation. Comparison between experimen
tal data and values obtained with (4.75) is shown in Table 4 . 3 . Note that (4.75) and the
procedure explained in this section do not apply to MMC or when the misalignment
of different fixtures, including those described in ASTM D3410, D695 and SACMA
modified D695 among many others. An extensive evaluation of most of the existing
and oven cured. Sample A was fabricated under controlled laboratory conditions,
fiber is carbon AS4-D (V¡ = 0 . 5 ) and the matrix is epoxy with V¡ = 0.6.
From Tables 2.1 and 2.4, the properties of the carbon AS4-D fiber and the epoxy
and (4.75). Therefore, the inplane shear stiffness and strength must be determinedfirst.
!
·[
MICROMECHANICS 95
241
G¡ = = 100 GPa
2(1 + 0.2)
3.12
Gm = = 1 . 1 3 GPa
2(1 + 0.38)
+ 0.6) + ( 1 - 0 . 6 ) 1. 1 3 / 1 0 0 ] G
G 1 2 = 1. 1 3 = 4 . 34 Pa
[(l
1 - 0.6) + (1 + 0.6)1.13/100
The shear strength can be estimated by (4.79), but the transverse modulus E2
241/3.12 - 1
9 62
n = 241/3.12 + 2 = º·
1 + 2 x 0.962 x 0 . 6 ] GP.
E2 = 3 . 1 2 = 1 5 .9 a
[
1 - 0.962 X 0.6
Then, using (4.79), assuming Vmu = O"mu and no voids (Cv = 1.0),
11·�)
F6 = 75.8 [1 + ( o . 6 - Jo.6 ) ( 1 - J = 62.7 MPa
Far sample A, using (4.74) and (4.75), the compression strength F1c is
1.22 )-0.69
F1c = 4, 340
(
- + 1 = 1, 155 GPa
0.21
Far sample B, X = 1 . 7 0 and F1c = 945 GPa. These values are clase to typical
experimental data.
The tensile strength in the direction perpendicular to the fibers F21 is controlled by the
matrix strength, the fiber-matrix interface strength, and defects in the matrix phase,
such as voids and microcracks. The transverse strength of the composite can be higher
or lower than the tensile strength of bulk matrix. It can be higher because many
defects, such as voids and cracks, are present in bulk matrix, thus making the bulk
matrix appear as a brittle and weak material. When the composite is made, defects
96 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
in the matrix between the fibers can be less than in bulk because the small space
between the fibers <loes not leave space for nucleation of voids. But, depending on
the manufacturing conditions, defects can still be present. Since the fibers are usually
much stiffer than the matrix, and they may be very close or even touching each other,
they induce stress concentrations in the matrix that may cause premature failure. In
this case, the strength of the composite can be lower than that of the bulk matrix.
None of the analytical models in the literature can predict the transverse strength
accurately. Two empirical formulas are presented here because of the lack of more
accurate formulas. The empirical formula proposed by Nielsen [24] can be further
(4.76)
where Umu is the tensile strength of the bulk matrix, E2 is the transverse modulus of
the composite, and Em is the elastic modulus of the matrix. The reduction coefficient
is also empirical [ 1 O]
e; = 1 - (4.77)
n (1 - V¡)
where Vv is the void volume fraction. Another empirical formula, proposed by Chamis
[22], can also be modified to account for voids using the same empirical coefficient
Cv, resulting in
(4.78)
where E¡ is the elastic modulus of the fiber. Both equations usually predict values
lower than the strength of the matrix, and (4.76) yields lower values for most materials.
The effect of voids is very detrimental to the transverse strength and this is reflected
by the empirical formulas. The results provided by these formulas can be used for
preliminary design, but experimental data are usually required if transverse strength is
the controlling mode of failure of the component. Experimental values can be obtained
by ASTM 03039.
The same comments made for transverse tensile strength (section 4.4 .3) apply in this
case. Only empirical formulas are available and these may not yield accurate predic
tions. For preliminary design, the compressive strength in the direction perpendicular
to the fibers F2c may be estimated using the same equations as the previous section
(4.4.3), replacing the bulk tensile strength of the matrix Umu by the bulk compres
sive strength of the matrix O-mue [28]. Transverse compressive strength values are
higher than tensile strength for both matrix and composite. Experimental values can
(a)
(b)
(e)
Figure 4.19 Shear components and their relationship to shear failure modes.
Clear distinction between the various shear stress components, illustrated in Figure
4.19, must be made. The first subscript of a shear stress indicates the direction of
the normal to the plane on which the stress acts. The second subscript indicates the
direction of the stress. In Figure 4. l 9a, the normal to the plane considered is along
the 1-axis. Both r12 and r13 would have to shear off the fibers to produce failure,
which is very unlikely to occur. In Figure 4 . 1 9 b , the normal to the plane considered is
along the 3-axis. Both r31 and r32 produce splitting of the matrix without shearing off
any fibers. In Figure 4 . 1 9 c , both r21 and r23 produce splitting of the matrix without
Since the stresses r21 are always equal to r12 to satisfy equilibrium, both stresses
are called ª6· The corresponding shear strength, called inplane shear strength, is F6.
The composite fails when the inplane stress r21 reaches its ultimate value F6 = r21u
in Figure 4.20, with the fibers oriented at 45° with respect to the loading direction. lt
is well known that at 45° the shear stress is half of ax. Along the planes AB and CD,
98 INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
Figure 4.20 Tensile test of [ -45] !ayer illustrating the most likely plane of shear
failure.
the material fails when 1 0'6 1 > r21u. Along AD and BC, the material would fail at a
Toe same comments made for transverse tensile strength (section 4.4.3) apply in
this case. Only empirical formulas are available, and these may not yield accurate
predictions. For preliminary design, the inplane shear strength F6 may be estimated
using an equation similar to (4.78), replacing the bulk tensile strength of the matrix
O'mu with the bulk shear strength of the matrix !mu as follows
(4.79)
5
1 1 denotes absolute value, which is used because the shear strength is independent of the sign of
the shear stress in the material coordinate system. Interaction between U6 = ox /2 and normal stresses
cr¡ = cr2 = ox /2, which are also present, will be addressed in Chapter 7.
MICROMECHANICS 99
Lacking experimental values for Tmu, (4.79) works reasonably well assuming
Tmu = <Jmu· Of course, (4.79) can be used to back calculate an effective value of Tmu
from composite shear strength data F6 at a particular value of fiber volume fraction V¡.
Then (4.79) can be used to predict F6 for other values of V¡ as long as the processing
Following the discussion in section 4.4.5, the shear strengths F4 and F5 are discussed
in this section. As it is clear from Figure 4 . 1 9 , the shear stresses r23 and r32 cause
splitting of the matrix without shearing off any fibers. Since, by equilibrium, the shear
stresses r23 and r32 are numerically equal, both are called <J4. The corresponding shear
strength is F4.
shear acts on a plane perpendicular to the fiber direction. In this case the fibers do not
resist shear. On the contrary, the cross sections of the fibers can be viewed as circular
inclusions creating stress concentrations in the matrix, thus debilitating the composite.
It can be seen in Figure 4 . 1 9 that the shear stress r3¡ tends to split the matrix
along the fiber direction. This is the usual mode of failure under stress <J5. On the
other hand, the fibers would have to be sheared off by stress r¡3 to produce failure,
which is unlikely. Since, by equilibrium, the shear stresses rrs and r3¡ are numerically
equal, both are called <J5. The corresponding shear strength is F5, which is numerically
equal to the ultimate value of r31u. The shear stress <J5 applies shear along the fiber
bond strength.
Because of the lack of predictive formulas, both values (F4 and Fs) are approxi
mated in preliminary design by the shear strength of bulk matrix. Experimental values
there should be no difference between Fs and F6. This is true for a single !ayer of uni
shear (<J4 or <J5) is applied to a laminate with distinct interfaces between layers (such
as prepreg lay-up), the resin rich interfaces may fail first. In this case, the interlaminar
shear strength values F4 and Fs may be lower than the inplane shear strength F6.
Chopped strand mat and continuous strand mat (CSM) are considered randomly ori
ented composites, even if in practice there is sorne preferential orientation of the fibers.
is, the properties are the same along any orientation on the surface of the layers. The
Fcsm-t = --
4aF21 [
1 +
1
-In
(
-
F11 )] for a <
2
- -
n 2 a F21
Fcsm-t = --
4F21 !fii
--
1 for Cl >
!fii1
-
n F21 F21
(4.80)
where F¡1, F21, and F6 are the longitudinal tensile, transverse tensile, and inplane
shear strength of a fictitious unidirectional material containing the same fiber volume
fraction as that of the CSM material. The formula compares well with experimental
data for sorne PMC with fiber volume fraction up to 20% [25].
There are no formulas available for compressive, inplane shear, and interlaminar
shear strengths of random composites. The accompanying software allows the user to
input experimental values, but as a default it assumes the following: the compressive
strength is assumed to be egua! to the tensile strength, the inplane shear strength is
taken as one-half of the tensile strength, and the two interlaminar shear strengths are
EXERCISES
4.1 Draw a representative volume element (RVE) for an epoxy matrix filled with cylindrical
steel rods arranged in a rectangular array. Compute the volume fraction V¡ as a function
of the fiber diameter d¡ and the spacing between the centers of the fibers ax and ay in
4.2 Write a definition for representative volume element. Draw a set of fibers in a hexagonal
array: six fibers at the vertices of an hexagon plus one in the center, with the fibers
touching each other. Draw the smallest RVE for this arrangement. Compute the fiber
volume fraction.
4.3 Consider the following material called carbon-epoxy with a fiber volume fraction of
E 2, v 1 2 , and G12 using both the rule of mixtures (ROM) and more accurate formulas
recommended in this chapter. Consider the results and comment on which values are
lower or upper bounds to the real value of each elastic property and what seems to be
4.4 The amount of fibers in a composite sample can be determined by a bum-out test. The
bum-out eliminates ali the resin and only the fibers remain. A composite sample plus
its container weighs 5 0 . 1 8 2 grams befare bum-out and 49.448 grams after bum-out.
The container weighs 47 .650 grams. Compute the fiber weight fraction WF and matrix
weight fraction WM .
MICROMECHANICS 101
4.5 Compute E¡, E2, G12, and V¡z given E¡ = 230 GPa, Em = EJl50, GJ = EJ/2.5,
Gm = Em/2.6, VJ = 0.25, Vm = 0.3, and VJ = 40%. The fibers have circular cross
4.6 Compute ali the elastic properties ( E 1 , E2, G 1 2 , G23, V12) for a unidirectional lamina
(a) E-glass-polyester(isophthalic),
with VJ = 0.55. If actual data of Poisson's ratio for either fiber or matrix is not
available, take VJ = 0.22, and/or Vm = 0 . 3 8 . Compare the results using the strength of
materials (ROM) formulas (except for G23) and other formulas recommended in this
chapter.
4.7 Estímate F¡1 and F21 of AS4-D/PEEK with VJ = 0.5 and negligible void content.
4.8 Estímate the tensile strength of Kevlar-epoxy composite with VI = 0.5 at two tempera
tures, 2 1 ºC and 149ºC, using the strength of materials approach. Use data from Tables
2.1 and 2.4 and section 2 . 1 . 1 . Assume that Em decreases linearly with temperature up
4.9 With reference to Example 4.6, s e l e c t a different matrix in arder to achieve a compressive
strength of at least 1 , 100 MPa. Assume that the standard deviation of fiber misalignment
remains constant at the production value of 1 . 4 1 degrees. The fiber type and fiber volume
4.10 Toe following data have been obtained experimentally for a composite based on an
4.11 S e l e c t a m a t ri x , fiber, and fiber volume fraction to obtain a material with E 1 > 3 0 GPa
E1/E2<3.5.
4 . 1 2 Give an approximate value for the compressive strength of an Al-boron composite with
VJ = 0.4. Aluminum 2024 has E = 71 GPa, Poisson = 0.334, G = 26.6 GPa, yield
strength = 76 MPa, fatigue limit = 90 MPa, elongation = 22%. Boron fibers have
E = 400 GPa, ultimate strength = 3 . 4 GPa, Poisson = 0.25. Note that boron fibers
tend to be perfectly straight and that alumin um has a linear shear stress-strain plot
befare it yields.
102 INTRODUCT/ON TO COMPOSITE MATERIALS DESIGN
4.13 Compute approximate values of E 1 , E2, G12, v 12 for the composite of Exercise 4 . 1 2 .
Compare the results obtained using the strength of materials approach with the results
obtained using more accurate formulas which are programmed in the accompanying
4.14 Compute the tensile strength for the composite of Exercise 4 . 1 2 assuming that ali the
REFERENCES
[l] Mase, G. E., and Mase, G. T., Continuum Mechanics for Engineers, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL
(1992).
[2] Luciano, R., and Barbero, E. J . , Formulas for the stiffness of composites with periodic microstruc
[3] Halpin, J., and Tsai, S. W., Effects of Environmental Factors on Composite Materials, Air Force
[4] Jones, R. M . , Mechanics of Composite Materials, Taylor & Francis, Washington, D.C. (1975).
[5] Hashin, Z., and Rosen, B . W., The elastic moduli of fiber-reinforced materials, J. Applied Me
[7] Tsai, S. W., and Hahn, H. T., Introduction to Composite Materials, Technomic, Lancaster, PA
(1980).
[8] Hull, D., An Introduction to Composite Materials, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
(1981).
[9] Halpin, J . , and Pagano, N. J., The laminate approxirnation for random oriented composites, J.
[10] Agarwal, B. D., and Broutman L. J . , Analysis and Performance of Fiber Composites, 2nd Ed.,
[11] Kelly, K., and Barbero, E. J., The effect of fiber damage on the longitudinal creep of CFMMC,
[12] Barbero, E. J., and Tomblin, J. S., A damage mechanics model for compression strength of
[13] Hahn, G. G . , and Shapiro, S . S., Statistical Models in Engineering, John Wiley, New York (1967).
[14] Yurgartis, S. W., Measurement of small angle fiber misalignment in continuous fiber composites,
[15] Rosen, B . W., The tensile failure of fibrous composites, AIAA J . , 2, 1 9 8 5 - 1 9 9 1 (1964).
[16] Rosen, B . W., Fiber Composite Materials, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH (1965).
[17] Lager, J. R., and June, R. R., Compression strength of boron-epoxy composites, J. Composite
[18] Spiegel, M. R., Math Handbook, Schaum's Series, McGraw-Hill, New York (1968).
[19] Erdelyi, A., Higher Transcendental Functions, Vol. 2, McGraw-Hill, New York ( 1 9 5 3 ) .
[20] Haberle, J. G., Strength and Failure Mechanisms of Unidirectional Carbon Fibre-Reinforced
[21] Daniels, J. A,, and Sandhu, R. S . , Evaluation of compression specimens and fixtures for testing
unidirectional composite laminates, pp. 103-123 in Composite Materials: Testing and Design,
Vol. 1 1 , ASTM STP 1206, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA (1993).
[22] Chamis, C. C., Simplified composite micromechanics equations for hygral, thermal, and mechan
[23] Barbero, E. J., Prediction of compressive strength of polymer matrix composites, J. Composite
1 0 0 - 1 1 9 (1967).
MICROMECHANICS 103
[25] Hahn, H. T., On approximation for strength of random fiber composites, J. Composite Materials,
9, 316-326 (1975).
[26] Godoy, L. A., Theory of Stability: Analysis and Sensitivity, McGraw-Hill, New York (1999).
(27] Schapery, R. A . , Thermal expansion coefficients of composite materials based on energy princi
[28] Chamis, C. C., Simplified composite micromechanics equations for mechanical, thermal, and
Peters, and K. L. Thomas, eds., American Society for Metals, Metals Park, OH (1987).