Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations waross on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Modelling Delamination Buckling of Damaged Composite Materials 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

BorisGeorgiev93

New member
Nov 1, 2015
20
0
0
GB
Hello, everyone!

My question is related to contact sections in Abaqus, when models of composite laminates are created and loaded only in compression at both ends.

First of all, here is a brief introduction of what I am doing:

I have created in Abaqus a model of a composite laminate which has experienced a low velocity impact with an object. My model represents a square plate. As a result of this impact, some of the layers have, in a certain region, been delaminated and hence the entire composite laminate can be considered to consists of 2 'parts': 1) The sublaminate, contains the delaminated layers and 2) the base laminate, where all the layers are flat (undamaged/intact). I apply only compressive loading and run a non-linear RIKS analysis in order to investigate the post-buckling response of the entire laminate. Regarding the sublaminate, I have modelled the delaminated region as a SIN half-wave that is clamped at its two ends. The delaminated region itself is circular with a diameter of 30mm.

The image below shows exaggerated delamination in order to facilitate observation. I hope you can also see the 2 element layers that are in the model. The bottom element layer represents the baselaminate, while the top one represents the sublaminate. Exactly the same mesh is used for both element layers. Also, I use 2D shell elements -> S8R5. If I analyse a laminate that has 21 plies, the sublaminate may contain maximum 5 or 6 layers( in other words, it is assumed that the delamination can reach only 25% of the total thickness of the laminate )

The region between the outermost circle and the 4 edges of the square plate is anti-buckling guide, meaning that buckling is only possible within the circular region. The whole idea behind the creation of this finite element model is to resemble, as accurately as possible, axil compression tests that are done by research groups. These test feature compression fixtures with anti-buckling guide.

128.8.2012_%C3%A3.-18.38.0808-08-2015-16.53.3523-09-2015-21.50.3628-02-2016-17.04.39_a1ykyf.jpg


Can someone give a piece of advice, whether I should include contact section OR contact interaction between the sublaminate and the baselaminate. If I have to do that, then in what region of the above model should this contact section be included -> 1) only the elements in the circular region (where buckling is allowed) OR 2) the entire model? All I want is to have as much accurate model as possible. A model that represents real compressive loading of a composite laminate coupon.

Thank you in advance for your time,attention and understanding!

I hope that I have made my explanation clear enough!

Really hope that someone can share his/her opinion on the matter.

With Respect!

Boris Georgiev
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Hello again!

Could somebody read the thread and try to help me with a piece of advice!

Thank you in advance for your time and attention!

With Respect!

Boris Georgiev
 
As far as I understand: You have two parts, apply a buckling load and the parts may contact each other. So why don't you define contact in all possible contact areas?
 
Mustaine3, thank you very much for the attention!

As far as I have managed to learn from the Abaqus Analysis User's Guide (online) Abaqus provides more than one approach for defining contact: 1) general contact algorithm 2) contact pairs and 3) contact elements.

From your experience, could you please recommend which of those 3 I should use. The User's Guide manual is quite long and after reading 2 sections I got lost and confused in some aspects.

In my first post I forgot to point out that the above two element layers also represent the middle of the sublaminate and baselaminate respectively. The distance between the two element layers has been selected so that the TOP ply of the baselaminate should just touch the BOTTOM ply of the sublaminate.

Thank you in advance!

With Respect!

Boris Georgiev
 
Forget contact elements. Try general contact first. It will account for shell thickness.
Contact pairs can do the same, but it depends on the correct settings.
 
Mustaine3 or somebody else.

Could you please provide feedback on the following matter:

If one has modelled two element layers(the first layer exactly below the second one) and then assigned each layer to an element surfaces, how Abaqus could know that these two surfaces cannot interfere ( go through each other ) as a result of a compressive loading? For instance, during an Abaqus *BUCKLE analysis, the element layer with lower axial stiffness can, theoretically, buckle in some buckling mode shape due to compressive loading. In real life, when buckling occurs, there would be no geometrical/physical interference between the two objects, but in Abaqus this is possible, unless certain constraints are applied. What should be these constraints?

I hope I have made myself clear enough!

Thank you in advance for the time and attention!

With Respect!

Boris Georgiev
 
I don't understand what you mean. When you have two regions of elements, then you can have changing contact situations in nonlinear analysis, as long as contact is activated.
In linear analysis you cannot have a change in the contact situation.

If you model the two layers with one element region, then these layers move always together.
 
Mustaine3, thank you for your response!

What I meant with my question is the following:

Here is a picture after *BUCKLE analysis has been executed and one the second buckling mode is this one.
128.8.2012_%C3%A3.-18.38.0811-10-2015-12.30.44_PM3-9-2016-11.00.32_PM_o8n8xa.jpg


I hope you can clearly see how the top element layer intersects the bottom element layer as a result of buckling. Clearly this is impossible to happen in reality.

ASIDE:

For additional clarification on the model I will say the following:

The region of this intersection is a circle with 30mm diameter. In the region between the circumference of this 30mm circle and the circle with the longest circumference, there are connector BEAM rigid elements between the first element layer and the second element layer. -> This is the reason why we do not observe any intersection there. The connector rigid elements force the two layers to move together when buckling happens, but as I said only in this region.

However, my problem is this strange unrealistic intersection in the 30mm circle.

Thank you in advance for the time and attention!

With Respect!

Boris Georgiev
 
*Buckle is a linear procedure, like *Frequency.
So the contact status cannot change and the deformation is just a scaled representation of the eigenmode.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top