Viscoelasticity and Reisdual Stress

V I S C O E L A S T I C C O N S T I T U T I V E M O D E L S FOR E V A L U A T I O N OF RE S I D U A L S TRES S ES I N
T H E RMO S E T COMP OS I T E S D U RI N G C U RE
by
N I M A Z O B E I RY
B. Sc . ( Ci v i l Engineering), Uni versi ty of Tehran, 1997
M. S c . ( Ci v i l Engineering/Structural Engineering), Uni versi ty of Tehran, 1999
A THESI S S U B MI T T E D I N P A RT I A L FU L FI L M E N T OF
T H E RE Q U I RE ME N T S FOR T H E D E G RE E OF
D O C T O R OF P H I L O S O P H Y
i n
T H E F A C U L T Y OF G RA D U A T E S TUDI ES
( Ci v i l Engineering)
The Uni versi ty of Bri ti sh Col umbi a
July 2006
Ni maZ ob ei r y , 2006
A b s t r ac t
A particularly important aspect i n the behaviour of thermoset matrix composite materials during the
manufacturing process is the development of mechanical properties of the matrix and the resulting bui l d-
up of stresses. The behaviour of the matrix is generally acknowledged to be viscoelastic, and as both
temperature and degree of cure vary wi th time, the characterization and representation of the behaviour is
both critical and complex. Different approaches have been suggested for model i ng this behaviour. The
common approaches that invoke the simple linear elastic cure hardening model have been shown to
provide good predictions but have not been studied for their accuracy and applicability. More
sophisticated representations of viscoelastic behaviour are the Prony series of Maxwel l elements
implemented i n finite element codes i n 3D hereditary integral forms.
In this thesis, different constitutive models are considered and their suitability for representing the
behaviour of composite materials during cure is studied. The presented models provide the user with a
range of options depending on whether costs or accuracy of solutions are of primary concern.
For elastic hardening models, it is shown that the full viscoelastic formulations can be progressively
simplified, and that these simplifications are val i d for the typical cure cycles. It is shown that i n general i f
these models are properly calibrated they are val i d and efficient pseudo-viscoelastic models. It is also
noted that these models are not always applicable and an efficient viscoelastic model is needed.
For such cases, viscoelastic behaviour of the polymer is represented using a differential form approach. It
is shown that this form is equivalent to the more common integral form, but has significant benefits i n
terms of extension to more general descriptions, ease of codi ng and implementation, and computer run-
times. This formulation is extended to composite materials, using an appropriate micromechanical
approach, and to 3D behaviour wi th finite element implementation such that it can be used wi th an
existing code. Some important features are included, such as time-variability of all material properties,
methods for calculating polymer and fibre stresses, and considering thermoelastic effects. Several case
studies are presented for verification/validation purposes and to highlight various features of the models.
i i
Table of Contents
Tab l e of C ont ent s
Abstract
Table of Contents "i
List of Tables . vii
List of Figures ix
List of Symbols xvi
Acknowledgements xxi
Chapter 1. Introduction and Background 1
1.1. Processing and Process Model i ng 1
1.2. Research Objectives and Thesis Outline 4
Chapter 2. Review of Constitutive Models 8
2.1. Mechani cal Behaviour of Thermoset Polymers during Cure 8
2.2. Elastic Model s 9
2.3. C H I L E Model s 9
2.4. Viscoelastic Model s 10
2.4.1. Integral Form of Viscoelasticity 12
2.4.2. Fractional models 17
2.4.3. Differential Form of Viscoelasticity 17
2.5. Summary 19
Chapter 3. Pseudo-Viscoelastic Models 24
3.1. Revi ew of Two Viscoelastic Model s 24
3.1.1. Material 1 24
3.1.2. Material II. 26
3.2. Pseudo-Viscoelastic Model Derivation 28
3.2.1. Simplification of Viscoelastic Formulations 29
i i i
Table of Contents
3.2.2. Different Forms ofPVE 35
3.3. Case Studies 37
3.3.1. Material 1 37
3.3.2. Material II. 39
3.3.3. Comparison of Efficiency 41
3.4. Summary and Discussion 42
Chapter 4. Differential Form of Viscoelasticity in ID 56
4.1. Governing Equations in I D 56
4.1.1. Differential Equations for Non-Curing Materials 56
4.1.2. Differential Equations for Curing Materials 59
4.1.3. Numerical Solution of Differential Equations 65
4.1.4. Comparison of Differential Form and Integral Form 66
4.2. Summary 67
Chapter 5. Micromechanics 73
5.1. Fundamental Equations 73
5.2. Mi cromechani cal Model for Elastic Materials 74
5.3. Mi cromechani cal Model for Viscoelastic Materials 77
5.3.1. Correspondence Principle 78
5.3.2. Virtual Material Characterization 80
5.3.3. Material Properties 84
5.3.4. Thermoelastic effects 85
5.3.5. Summary of the proposed approach 89
5.4. Numeri cal examples 90
5.4.1. Isothermal Case 90
5.4.2. Different Temperatures and Degrees of Cure 92
Chapter 6. Differential Form of Viscoelasticity in 3D 103
6.1. Governing Equations in 3D 103
6.1.1. Choice of Material Properties and Development of the Differential Form 103
6.1.2. Equations for Thermal Expansion and Cure Shrinkage 112
6.2. Finite Element Formulation 114
iv
Table of Contents
6.2.1. Numerical Solution of Differential Equations 114
6.2.2. Development of the FE Formulation 116
6.2.3. Summary and Discussion 120
6.3. Reverse Micromechanics 123
6.3.1. Proposed Method 123
6.4. Summary 125
Chapter 7. Implementation and Verification 126
7.1. Implementation in a code 126
7.1.1. Code AIgorithm andPseudo Code 127
7.1.2. Code Features 128
7.2. Veri fi cati on Problems 128
7.2.7. Transversely Isotropic Cases 129
7.2.2. Isotropic Cases 131
7.2.3. Reverse Micromechanics Examples 135
7.2.4. Thermoelastic behaviour 137
7.2.5. Summary 139
Chapter 8. Numerical Applications 156
8.1. Material Properties 157
8.2. Single Element Cases 160
8.2.1. Standard Cure Cycles 160
8.2.2. Other Cure Cycles 165
8.3. More Compl ex Cases 168
8.3.1. Standard Cure Cycles 168
8.3.2. Non-Standard Cure Cycles 173
8.4. Summary 177
Chapter 9. Conclusions and Future Work 211
9.1. Summary 211
9.2. Conclusions 211
9.3. Future work 212
9.4. Contributions 214
v
Table of Contents
References 216
Appe ndi x A. Mat he mat i c a Not ebooks 232
Appe ndi x B. Ps e udo- Code for the Di fferent i al Fo r m Impl ement at i on 245
Appe ndi x C. A B A Q U S Vi scoel ast i c Mode l 251
vi
List of Tables
L i st of T ab l es
Table 3.1 Relaxation times and weight factors for 3501-6 resin for a = 0.98 44
Table 3.2 Relaxation times and weight factors for 8551-7 resin.. 44
Table 3.3 Comparison of run times for integral form VE and PVE for a cured resin 44
Table 3.4 Comparison of run times for integral form VE and PVE for a curing resin in a one-hold cure
cycle 45
Table 3.5 Comparison of the features of the different models 45
Table 4.1 Comparison of Run-times for Thermoplastic Matrix (or constant degree of cure in athermoset
matrix) 69
Table 4.2 Comparison of Run-times for Thermoset Matrix (increasing degree of cure) 69
Table 4.3 Comparison of DF and IF models 70
Table 5.1 Material properties of fibre and resin for the numerical example 93
Table 5.2 Relaxation times and weight factors used in the numerical example 93
Table 5.3 Relaxation times and weight factors for different material properties in the example 93
Table 5.4 Values of the unrelaxed and relaxed moduli of the composite obtained from the VE
micromechanics in Mathematica 94
Table 7.1 Comparison of the features of the added UMAT and the ABAQUS built-in VE model 140
Table 7.2 Summary of examples to be analyzed 140
Table 8.1 Mechanical properties of fibre and resin used for case studies 180
Table 8.2 Thermal and cure shrinkage coefficients obtained for 3501-6 resin for the case studies 180
Table 8.3 Unrelaxed and relaxed values of different material properties obtained for AS4/3501-6 180
Table 8.4 Relaxation times and corresponding weight factors for different material properties of
AS4/3501-6 180
Table 8.5 Thermo-chemical properties of AS4/3501-6 181
Table 8.6 Properties of the tooling materials used in the case studies 181
Table 8.7 Summary of single-element cases to be analyzed 181
v i i
List of Tables
Table 8.8 Results of spring-in angle i n degrees for an L-shaped part on different tooling, analyzed wi th
the Differential Form of Vi scoel asti ci ty and Pseudo-Viscoelasticity 182
Table 8.9 Compari son of runtimes in a standard cure cycle for an L-shaped composite on different tool i ngl 82
Table 8.10 Spring-in and runtimes from the analysis on a unidirectional part shown i n Figure 8.29 182
Table 8.11 Spring-in from the analysis on the part shown i n Figure 8.29 wi th different lay-ups 182
Table 8.12 Spring-in results for a C-shaped composite part under a cure cycl e wi th a post cure heat-up 183
Table 8.13 Spring-in results for a C-shaped composite part under a cure cycl e wi th secondary cure of a
partially cured material 183
Table 8.14 Results of spring-in for cycles i n the form of secondary cure of partially cured parts 183
v i i i
List of Figures
L i s t of Fi gur es
Figure 1.1 Integrated sub-model approach in process modeling (adapted from Johnston et al . , 2001) 7
Figure 2.1 A typical temperature/pressure cycle used to cure thermoset polymers i n an autoclave 21
Figure 2.2 Joi ni ng of molecules as a result of curing i n a thermoset polymer ; 21
Figure 2.3 Pol ymer changes form as it goes through the cure cycle : 21
Figure 2.4 Undeformed and deformed shapes i n a typical U-shaped composite part after cure 22
Figure 2.5 Schematic of time-temperature superposition 22
Figure 2.6 A Maxwel l element 22
Figure 2.7 A Kel v i n element 22
Figure 2.8 A generalized Maxwel l element 23
Figure 2.9 Different levels of constitutive modeling 23
Figure 3.1 Compari son of shift factors for 8551-7 resin using two different equations (with ot=0.99) 46
Figure 3.2 Compari son of reduced times for P V E and V E models for 3501-6 resin (with a=0.99) for
different values of cool -down rates 46
Figure 3.3 Compari son of modul i for P V E and V E models for 3501-6 resin (with a=0.99) for different
values of cool -down rates 47
Figure 3.4 Schematic of a typi cal variation of shift factor as a function of time during a hold 47
Figure 3.5 Temperature and degree of cure for the cure cycle used for 3501-6 resin 48
Figure 3.6 Compari son of two definitions of modulus, based on storage modulus and relaxation modulus,
for 3501-6 resin 48
Figure 3.7 Compari son of two definitions of modulus, based on storage modulus and relaxation modulus,
for 8551-7 resin 49
Figure 3.8 El asti c modulus profile based on a variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic model for the one- cure
cycle i n Figure 3.5 (3501-6 resin) 49
Figure 3.9 Compari son of stress profiles for variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic models
for the cure cycl e in Figure 3.5 (3501-6 resin) 50
Figure 3.10 Temperature and degree of cure profile for the two-hol d cycle used i n the case study for
3501-6 resin 50
ix
List of Figures
Figure 3.11 El asti c modulus profiles for different constant frequency Pseudo-Viscoelastic models for the
cure cycle i n Figure 3.10 (3501-6 resin) 51
Figure 3.12 Compari son of stress profiles from the constant frequency Pseudo-Viscoelastic models and
the Viscoelastic model for the cure cycle i n Figure 3.10 (3501-6 resin) 51
Figure 3.13 Residual stress as a function of frequency for the constant-frequency P V E model, the cure
cycle i n Figure 3.10 (3501-6 resin). Al so shown is the V E model prediction 52
Figure 3.14 Predicted residual stress for variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Vi scoel asti c models for
different cool i ng rates for a one-hold cycle wi th Th
o
id
=
180 C (3501-6 resin) 52
Figure 3.15 Predicted residual stress for variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Vi scoel asti c models for
different cool i ng rates, m , for a one-hold cycle wi th T
h o
i d
=
160 C (3501-6 resin)
v
. . 53
Figure 3.16 Predicted residual stress for constant time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic models for
different cool i ng rates, m , (and corresponding times) for a one-hold cycl e wi th T
h o
i d
=
180 C (3501-
6 resin) 53
Figure 3.17 Predicted residual stress for constant time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Vi scoel asti c models for
different cool i ng rates (and corresponding times) for a one-hold cycl e wi th T
h o
i d
=
160 C (3501-6
resin) 54
Figure 3.18 Vari abl e time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic stress predictions for a wide range of
different cure cycles (8551-7 resin) 54
Figure 3.19 Constant frequency Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic stress predictions for a wide range
of different cure cycles (8551-7 resin) 55
Figure 4.1 (a) Maxwel l element (b) Generalized Maxwel l model 71
Figure 4.2 Cure cycles used to compare IF and DF stress predictions 71
Figure 4.3 Compari son of predicted stress histories using IF and DF approaches. Note that the two
approaches give identical results for each case and therefore cannot be distinguished 72
Figure 5.1 Concentric Cyl i nder Assembl y ( CCA) model 95
Figure 5.2 Schematic illustration of the micromechanical approach 95
Figure 5.3 Verti cal shift factor for thermorheologically complex behaviour of 3502 resin 95
Figure 5.4 Flowchart of the micromechanical analysis used 97
Figure 5.5 Compari son of the value of composite modulus from different methods: micromechanics,
Prony series fit to micromechanics, and Prony series wi th the resin weight factors 98
Figure 5.6 Compari son of the value of composite Poisson's ratio from different methods:
micromechanics, Prony series fit to micromechanics, and Prony series wi th the resin weight factors98
x
List of Figures
Figure 5.7 Comparison of the value of composite modulus from different methods: micromechanics,
Prony series fit to micromechanics, and Prony series with the resin weight factors 99
Figure 5.10 Comparison of the value of composite Poisson's ratio from different methods:
micromechanics, Prony series fit to micromechanics, and Prony series with the resin weight factorslOO
Figure 5.11 Comparison of the value of composite coefficient of thermal expansion different methods:
micromechanics and Prony series fit to micromechanics 101
Figure 5.12 Comparison of the value of composite coefficient of thermal expansion different methods:
micromechanics and Prony series fit to micromechanics 101
Figure 5.13 Comparison of the values of composite modulus for different shift factors 102
Figure 5.14 Comparison of the values of composite modulus for different shift factors 102
Figure 7.1 Schematic form of the relationship between the DF code and an available commercial code 141
Figure 7.2 Algorithm of the Differential Form code for a given time step 142
Figure 7.3 Specifications for Example 1 143
Figure 7.4 Comparison of a
n
as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and analytically for Example
1 144
Figure 7.5 Comparison of c
2 2
1 144
u
2 145
Figure 7.7 Comparison of <x
22
2 145
Figure 7.8 Specifications for Example 3 146
Figure 7.9 Comparison of "
22
as predicted by the Differential Form, ABAQUS, and analytically for
Example 3 146
Figure 7.10 Comparison of <r
n
as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and analytically for
Example 4 147
xi
List of Figures
Figure 7.11 Compari son of the exact cure shrinkage and the si mpl i fi ed linear model, used i n Example 5147
Figure 7.12 Temperature cycl e and the resulting degree of cure used i n Exampl e 5 148
Figure 7.13 Compari son of stresses as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and the previously
verified I D code i n Exampl e 5 148
Figure 7.14 Geometry of Exampl e 6 149
Figure 7.15 Standard mesh used in Example 6 150
Figure 7.16 Compari son of radial stresses at different times t=0.1 to 10 as predicted by the Differential
Form U M A T (dots) and analytically (lines) using a standard mesh i n Exampl e 6 150
Figure 7.17 Refined mesh, used for Example 6 151
Figure 7.18 Compari son of radial stresses at different times t=0.1 to 10 as predicted by the Differential
Form U M A T (dots) and analytically (lines) for a refined mesh i n Exampl e 6 151
Figure 7.19 Compari son of matrix stresses as predicted by the Differential Form and analytically for
Exampl e 7 152
Exampl e 7 152
Exampl e 8 153
Exampl e 8 153
Figure 7.23 Compari son of strains as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and analytically for
Exampl e 9 154
Figure 7.24 Compari son of strains as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and analytically for
Exampl e 9 154
Figure 7.25 Compari son of strains as predicted wi th and without thermoelastic effects by the Differential
Form U M A T for Exampl e 9 155
Figure 7.26 Compari son of strains as predicted wi th and without thermoelastic effects by the Differential
Form U M A T for Exampl e 9 155
Figure 8.1 Evol uti on of the volume change for 3501-6 resin i n a cure cycl e, used to find thermal and cure
shrinkage properties 184
Figure 8.2 Temperature cycle and the resulting degree of cure used i n Case 1 to Case 6 184
Figure 8.3 Compari son of <J
U
as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and P V E for Case 1 185
xn
List of Figures
Figure 8.4 Compari son of <x
22
Figure 8.5 Compari son of axi al stresses as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and P V E for Case 2186
Figure 8.6 Compari son of axi al stresses as predicted by the Differential Form, wi th and without
thermoelastic behaviour for Case 3 186
Figure 8.7 Compari son of axial forces as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and P V E for Case 4187
Figure 8.8 Compari son of axi al forces as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and P V E for Case 5187
Figure 8.9 Compari son of axial forces as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T wi th different
element types for Case 5 188
Figure 8.10 Schematic of the boundary conditions i n Case 6 to avoid ri gi d body movements 189
Figure 8.11 Compari son of axi al forces as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and P V E for Case 6189
Figure 8.12 Undeformed (solid line) and deformed (dashed line) shapes, using a layered element in Case
6 190
Figure 8.13 Undeformed (unshaded) and deformed (shaded) shapes, using single element per layer in
Case 6 190
Figure 8.14 Cure cycle used in post cure heat-up of the material i n Case 7 191
Figure 8.15 Temperature cycl e and the degree of cure used to model a post-cure heat-up i n Case 7 191
Figure 8.16 Compari son of cr,, as predicted by the Differential Form U M A T and P V E for Case 7 192
Figure 8.17 Compari son of <x
22
Figure 8.18 Complete cure cycle i n secondary cure of a partially-cured material i n Case 8 193
Figure 8.19 Temperature cycle and the degree of cure used to model a secondary cure of partially-cured
material i n Case 8 193
Figure 8.20 Compari son of cr
n
Figure 8.21 Compari son of cr
22
Figure 8.22 Mesh of an L-shaped composite part on a convex moul d used i n case studies 195
Figure 8.23 Mesh of an L-shaped composite part on a concave moul d used i n case studies 195
Figure 8.24 Cure cycle used for case studies on AS4/3501-6 composite material 196
Figure 8.25 Distribution of longitudinal stresses for an L-shaped unidirectional composite on a convex
steel moul d from Differential Form of Viscoelasticity 196
xi i i
List of Figures
Figure 8.26 Distribution of longitudinal stresses for an L-shaped unidirectional composite on a convex
steel moul d from Pseudo-Viscoelasticity 197
Figure 8.27 Di stri buti on of transverse stresses for an L-shaped unidirectional composite on a convex steel
mould from Differential Form of Viscoelasticity 197
Figure 8.28 Distribution of transverse stresses for an L-shaped unidirectional composite on a convex steel
mould from Pseudo-Viscoelasticity 198
Figure 8.29 FE mesh of an L-shaped AS4/3501-6 part on an al umi ni um tool used i n the case studies ... 198
Figure 8.30 Deformed part after tool removal i n a cure cycl e, along wi th the undeformed shape 199
Figure 8.31 Evol uti on of temperature and residual stresses at the point shown i n Figure 8.29 199
Figure 8.32 Evol uti on of moments i n an L-shaped composite part for a cross-section passing through the
point shown i n Figure 8.29 200
Figure 8.33 Evol uti on of axial forces i n an L-shaped composite part for a cross-section passing through
the point shown i n Figure 8.29 200
Figure 8.34 Di stri buti on of final axi al residual stresses through the thickness for a cross-section passing
through the point shown i n Figure 8.29 201
Figure 8.35 Distribution of moments along the length of the part shown i n Figure 8.29 201
Figure 8.36 Evol uti on of composite and matrix stresses i n the fibre direction at the point shown i n Figure
8.29 202
Figure 8.37 Evol uti on of composite and matrix stresses perpendicular to the fibre direction (in-plane) at
Figure 8.38 Di stri buti on of moments along the length of the part shown in Figure 8.29for two analyses
wi th and without thermoelastic effects 203
Figure 8.39 FE mesh of a C-shaped AS4/3501-6 part on an al umi ni um tool used i n the case studies 204
Figure 8.40 Cure cycle applied to a C-shaped composite shown i n Figure 8.29 204
Figure 8.41 Evol uti on of temperature and residual stresses at the point for a C-shaped part shown i n
Figure 8.29 205
Figure 8.42 Di stri buti on of moments along the web of the C-shaped part before tool removal, as i n Figure
8.40 205
Figure 8.43 Di stri buti on of moments along the web of the C-shaped part shown i n Figure 8.29 at the end
of post cure heat-up 206
Figure 8.44 Evol uti on of composite and matrix stresses i n the fibre direction for a C-shaped composite at
the point shown i n Figure 8.29 under the cure cycle i n Figure 8.40 206
xiv
List of Figures
Figure 8.45 Evol uti on of composite and matrix stresses perpendicular to the fibre direction for a C-shaped
composite at the point shown i n Figure 8.29 under the cure cycl e i n Figure 8.40 207
Figure 8.46 Cure cycle applied to a C-shaped composite shown i n Figure 8.29 207
Figure 8.47 Evol uti on of temperature and residual stresses at the point for a C-shaped part shown i n
Figure 8.29 208
Figure 8.48 Distribution of moments along the web of the C-shaped part before tool removal, cure cycle
shown i n Figure 8.46 208
Figure 8.49 Distribution of moments along the web of the C-shaped part at the end of cycle, cure cycle
shown i n Figure 8.46 209
Figure 8.50 Evol uti on of composite and matrix stresses in the fibre direction for a C-shaped composite at
Figure 8.51 Evol uti on of composite and matrix stresses perpendicular to the fibre direction for a C-shaped
composite at the point shown i n Figure 8.39 210
Figure 8.52 Different cure cycles i n the form of secondary cure of partially cured parts 210
xv
List of Symbols
Parameter used to define the shift factor for 3501-6 resin
Parameter used to define the shift factor for 3501-6 resin
Verti cal shift factor
Hori zontal Shift factor
Materi al stiffness
Thermal expansion coefficient
Longi tudi nal coefficient of thermal expansion
Transverse coefficient of thermal expansion
Transverse coefficient of thermal expansion
Fiber coefficient of thermal expansion
Gl assy coefficient of thermal expansion
Matri x coefficient of thermal expansion
Rubbery coefficient of thermal expansion
Thermal expansion coefficient i n the radial direction
Thermal expansion coefficient i n the circumferential direction
Creep compliance
Materi al stiffness matrix
Materi al stiffness matrix for fibres
Materi al stiffness matrix for matrix material
Materi al stiffness matrix, for a viscoelastic material
Initial value of creep compliance
Young' s modulus
Laplace transformed modulus
Longi tudi nal Young' s modulus i n an orthotropic media
Transverse Young' s modulus i n an orthotropic media
Transverse Young' s modulus i n an orthotropic media
xvi
' j
List of Symbols
E Rel axed Young' s modulus
E
m
Young' s modulus of the matrix
E, Young' s modulus of the fibre
E
r
Rel axed Young' s modulus
E
u
Unrel axed Young' s modulus
F Load vector
G Shear Modul us
G,
2
In-plane shear modulus i n an orthotropic media
In-plane shear modulus i n an orthotropic media
G
2 3
Transverse shear modulus in an orthotropic media
G Storage shear Modul us
G" Loss shear Modul us
Si
Weight factors, to define bulk modulus
I Number of Maxwel l elements to define relaxation modulus
k Spri ng stiffness i n an analogue element, e.g. Maxwel l element
k Spri ng stiffness rate, for thermoelastic effects
k, Spri ng stiffness of any of the Maxwel l elements i n a model
k" Unrelaxed modulus
K Bul k modulus
K
T
Gl obal stiffness matrix
K
2
Plane strain bulk modulus in a transversely-isotropic medi a
K
g
Gl assy bulk modulus
Rubbery bulk modulus
m Cool -down rate i n a cure cycle
n Ti me step number
N Number of Maxwel l elements to define relaxation modulus
N Number of Maxwel l elements for material property p
P
A number, associated wi th one the material properties
P Denoti ng any material property
x v i i
List of Symbols
t Ti me, current time
t' Dummy time (for time integration)
t
x
A measure of the variable time, used i n the pseudo-viscoelastic model
t
2
A parameter, used to evaluate the variable time i n the pseudo-viscoelastic model
t
e
Vari abl e time, used i n the pseudo-viscoelastic model
t
f
Ti me at the onset of cool-down i n a cure cycle
T Temperature
T Reference temperature
T Glass transition temperature
T
g0
Glass transition temperature of the monomer
T
ga>
Gl ass transition temperature of the fully cured polymer
u Displacement vector
v
f
Fibre vol ume fraction
V Vol ume of the composite
Vj Vol ume of the fibres
V Vol ume of the matrix
m
w
j
Weight factors, to define relaxation modulus
w Weight factors, to define relaxation modulus
a Degree of cure
a
0
Reference degree of cure
a
f
Val ue of the degree of cure at the onset of cool -down i n a cure cycle
P A small number, used to evaluate the variable time i n the pseudo-viscoelastic model
Force vector increment
AF_
f
Force vector increment, from thermo-chemical strains
AF_
a
Force vector increment, from internal stresses
As Strain increment
ASf Free strain increment
Ad Change of angle i n a composite part (spring-in)
xviii
List of Symbols
At Ti me increment
AT Temperature increment
A C T Stress increment
Strain
Strain rate
Laplace transformed strain
Volume-averaged strain of the composite
G
Devi atori c strain vector
H
Strain, i n tensor form
K
Vol umetri c strain vector
Volume-averaged strain of the fibres
IL
Volume-averaged strain of the matrix
Strain, associated wi th material property p
Free strain, associated wi th material property p
s'
c
Thermo-chemical strain
,o,a,
Total strain
r Modul us, i n Laplace space
Dashpot viscosity i n an analogue element, e.g. Maxwel l element
n,
Dashpot viscosity of any of the Maxwel l elements i n a model
i A material property i n a transversely-isotropic materials
V Poi sson's ratio
V
X2
Major Poi sson's ratio in an orthotropic media
"13
Major Poisson's ratio i n an orthotropic media
Major Poi sson's ratio
(9 Initial angle i n a composite part
cr Stress
fj Stress rate
a Laplace transformed stress
Volume-averaged stress of the composite
xi x
List of Symbols
a
f
Volume-averaged stress of the fibres
_
G
Devi atori c stress vector
cr. Stress i n any of the Maxwel l elements i n a model
ov Stress, i n tensor form
q_
K
Vol umetri c stress vector
a Volume-averaged stress of the matrix
tn CT
a
pl
Stress i n Maxwel l element i, associated wi th material property p
T Dummy time (for time integration)
r
0
Reference relaxation time
T Equivalent relaxation time, for thermoelastic effects
T
CI
Rel axati on times, associated wi th shear behaviour
r, Rel axati on times, to define relaxation modulus
r
Ki
Rel axati on times, associated wi th bulk behaviour
T
P
Peak relaxation time, used for 3501-6 resin
r . Rel axati on times, associated wi th material property p
T
A
Rel axati on times, to define relaxation modulus
co Frequency of a dynamic test
Reduced time, at current time (t)
Reduced time, at dummy time ( r )
xx
Ac know ledgements
A c knowl e dge me nt s
I woul d like to acknowledge several individuals who truly made this work possible. First, I woul d like to
thank my supervisors Dr. Reza Vazi ri and Dr. Anoush Poursartip. I really appreciate the guidance and
help they gave me during the course of my PhD.
Many thanks to several past and present U B C Composites Group Members for their friendship and help.
Especi al l y, I woul d l i ke to thank Mr. Ahamed Arafath and Mr. Ami r Osool y for our fruitful discussions
and their assistance on many occasions during the course of my degree.
I truly value the friendship of several close friends that I found i n Vancouver. I appreciate their
enthusiasm, support, and encouragements during the highs and lows of my degree.
Last but not least, I woul d l i ke to thank my mother, father, and brother who were wi th me every step of
the way and their love and affection was always what gave me the strength to continue. I thank Hi va, who
in the past several months was always by my side and her words of kindness and support were my
constant source of motivation.
x x i
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background
Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKG ROUND
1.1. PROCE SSI NG AND PROCE SS MODE L I NG
Fibre reinforced polymer matrix composite materials are increasingly finding new applications in
industry. The growi ng popularity of these materials has been due to their advantages to other available
materials, e.g. their high strength to weight ratio, high stiffness to weight ratio, and durability. At the
same time, i n using these materials i n the industry it has been critical to optimize their manufacturing for
the purpose of reducing the cost of production, an important and sometimes prohibitive proposition,
whi ch i f done properly can work as an advantage for these materials. Al so, it has been essential to have a
proper understanding of the manufacturing process to be able to control the final shape of the material.
For this reason, model i ng of the manufacturing process of composite materials or process modeling has
gained popularity as a tool able to meet the above demands, i n addition to its ability to predict residual
stresses generated i n the material during the manufacturing, an important factor in designing composite
structures.
Process model i ng has been the topic of many research works i n the literature. One of the first models
presented is the work done by Hahn and Pagano (1975). Thi s work is si mpl i fi ed i n several aspects, e.g. it
uses a linear elastic constitutive model and assumes a stress-free state prior to cool-down. Since this
work, many studies have been carried out on this topic, whi ch have taken various complexities of the
process into account and have used different approaches.
Due to the complexity of process modeling, composite materials have generally been modelled using the
'integrated sub-model' approach. Based on this approach, a compl ex process model is divided into
several simpler sub-models, whi ch can be studied more or less independently, as shown schematically i n
Figure 1.1, presented by Johnston (2001) and used i n the development of the composite process modeling
code, C O MP RO . Accordi ng to the schematic of the sub-model approach, the modeling procedure
includes several modules, each one responsible for one aspect of the material behaviour. The module that
is of interest i n this work is the stress module, i.e. the module responsible for calculation of the residual
stresses and deformations. In most of this thesis we restrict our attention to this module i n the process
model. This approach was first applied to process modeling by Loos and Springer (1983). Since then,
many other researchers have used this methodology more comprehensively and for different processes.
Some examples for autoclave processing are Bogetti and Gi l l espi e (1991, 1992), Whi te and Hahn (1992a,
1992b), Ki asat (2000), Johnston et al . (2001), Ki m et al . (2002), Zhu et al . (2003), Wijskamp et al .
(2003), Antonucci et al . (2006), and Cl i fford et al . (2006) and for other processing methods are Ki m and
White (1998) for filament wi ndi ng, Yang et el . (2004a) for map-mould process, and Douven et al . (1995)
for injection moul di ng.
In earlier works on process modeling, the researchers modeled onl y the final cool -down section of the
curing process. Thi s was due to the fact that (according to Adol f and Marti n, 1996) the majority of the
studies assumed that the only source of residual stress i n the material was thermal strains (e.g. Gri ffi n,
1983; Loos and Springer, 1983). For this reason, a stress-free temperature was considered and it was
assumed that stresses generated by cool i ng down from this temperature. Some examples, using elastic
constitutive models include Flaggs and Crossman (1981), Hahn (1984); Hahn and Pagano (1975), and
wi th viscoelastic constitutive models are Weitsman (1980) and Harper and Weitsman (1981). The recent
works model the entire cure cycl e for the calculation of stresses and take into account other sources of
residual stress generation, such as cure shrinkage strains or tool-part interaction, thus making for more
complex and accurate models. More information on the sources of residual stress can be found i n
Johnston etal . (2001).
Another aspect of the models is their dimensionality. The majority of the studies have used one-
dimensional models i n their analyses (e.g. Loos and Springer, 1983; Prasatya et al . , 2001; Djoki c et al . ,
2001; Adol f and Marti n, 1996; Lange et al . , 1995, 1997). Some others have assumed that the effect of one
of the directions does not significantly change the behaviour of the material and modeled the material by
2-D analyses (e.g. Bogetti and Gi l l espi e, 1991, 1992; Johnston et al . , 2001). At the same time, more
recent studies have modeled the material i n 3-D (e.g. Zhu et al , 2003; Poon et al . , 1998) to be able to
analyze composite parts of any shape. These models offer a better representation of the geometry and the
state of stress i n the material and therefore are more desirable. It should be noted, however, that due to the
complexity of the constitutive models employed i n the available research works these approaches have
normally been very time-consuming.
A n important consideration i n process modeling is the method used to solve the relevant equations over
the domain of interest. Some people have used Laminated Plate Theory ( LPT) based models for stress
analysis. LPT-based models are simpler methods and, as clear from their names, are based on the theory
of thin plates. Thi s approach can be used to model different lay-ups and material behaviour, but is not
able to model compl ex shapes or boundary conditions. Hahn and Pagano (1975) applied this approach to
calculate the stresses i n cool -down only. Bogetti and Gi l l espi e (1992), however, modeled the whole cure
cycle for this purpose. Some other examples of this approach are Loos and Springer (1983) and White
and Hahn (1992). Finite difference has also been used to analyze fairly compl ex cases (Bogetti and
Gi l l espi e, 1992). The method of choice for most studies done recently on composite materials, however,
is the finite elements ( FE) method. This method enables model i ng of more compl ex cases and is not
limited to the assumptions made by L P T . Several researchers have used elastic FE analysis to calculate
the cool-down stresses (e.g. Gri ffi n, 1983; Stango and Wang, 1984). However, modeling the whole cure
cycle has been more l i mi ted i n the literature. This is perhaps due to the complexity and requirement of
larger computation of FE-based methods. Some examples of this approach include Bogetti (1989),
Johnston et al . (2001), and Svanberg and Hol mberg (2004a, b).
Different aspects of residual stress calculation in process model i ng were discussed above and some of the
complexities of the problem were mentioned. Taki ng such complexities of the behaviour into account, we
need a suitable approach to properly simulate the response of composite materials during processing. This
underlines the importance of the accuracy of the employed models and their ability to take into account
different complexities of the process i n a comprehensive fashion.
In addition, process models usually involve significant numerical runs, consistent wi th the size and
complexity of the industrially relevant composite parts. Thi s makes efficiency of the model a crucial
factor i n controlling the model i ng costs.
1.2. RE SE ARCH OBJ E CTI VE S AND TH E SI S OU TLI NE
The objective of this thesis is to develop accurate yet more efficient approaches for modeling residual
stresses i n thermoset polymer matrix composite materials during cure. Thi s is accomplished by studying
the available modeling options and further expanding these capabilities by:
Studying simpler constitutive models available i n the literature, as efficient models
Development of a more accurate constitutive model that is also efficient
Improving upon other features available i n existing constitutive models
Implementing the constitutive models in a functional form wi th Fi ni te Element method
Eval uati ng different models studied for their benefits, limitations, and costs
I f these objectives are achieved, a variety of constitutive models for composite materials during cure wi l l
be available. Thi s wi l l provide different modeling options i n cost vs. accuracy decisions i n process
modeling of composites. It woul d also offer new modeling features not currently available i n the
literature.
Based on these objectives, this thesis is organized as follows:
Chapter 2 - Review of Constitutive models:
A review of constitutive models available i n the literature for polymers and composites is presented.
Elastic, instantaneously elastic, and viscoelastic models are discussed.
Chapter 3 - Pseudo-Viscoelastic Model:
Instantaneously elastic models are studied as efficient and simple models. The bound of validity and
accuracy of these models is discussed and the concept of pseudo-viscoelastic model is introduced.
Chapter 4 Differential Form of Viscoelasticity in ID:
A viscoelastic approach based on sol vi ng governing differential equations is introduced and the equations
for polymer materials in one-dimensional form are derived. The effects of temperature and degree of cure
on material behaviour are considered. Al so, a comparison wi th other models i n the literature is conducted.
Chapter 5 - Micromechanics:
Mi cromechani cs is used to combine the polymer and fibre mechanical properties i n order to obtain the
composite properties. The micromechanical approach employed in this thesis for viscoelastic materials is
described.
Chapter 6 - Differential Form of Viscoelasticity in 3D:
Havi ng established the constitutive equations i n I D along wi th a micromechanical model, the equations
for a three-dimensional state of stress are derived. The relevant finite element equations are developed.
Chapter 7 - Implementation and Verification:
The procedure to implement the derived formulation i n a code and the codi ng itself are discussed. Some
simple examples to verify the implementation are presented.
Chapter 8 - Numerical Applications:
Chapter 1: Introduction and Background '
Some case studies are presented to show the capability of different constitutive models, their validity, and
their efficiency. First some simple examples are analyzed to show the behaviour of the models more
clearly. These are then confirmed by looking at more complex cases.
Appendix A Mathematica Notebooks:
The Mathematica notebooks, used to obtain analytical solutions for a number of examples are presented.
Appendix B - Pseudo Code for the Differential Form Implementation:
The detailed algorithm for implementation of this constitutive model in a code is presented.
Appendix C - ABAQUS Viscoelastic Model:
The viscoelastic model available in the commercial code ABAQUS is discussed. It is also compared to
the model implemented in this thesis.
Chapter I: Introduction and Background
Chapter 2: Review of Constitutive models
Chapter 2. REVIEW OF CONSTITUTIVE MODELS
A suitable constitutive model for the material is an important part of any process model. In this chapter,
constitutive models used i n the literature i n residual stress model i ng for polymers and polymer composite
during cure are reviewed. Al so, since some of the details related to these models are needed for the future
chapters, some background information is also presented.
First, the mechanical behaviour of the polymer during a curing process is discussed. Then, a review of
different models used i n the literature to model the polymer and/or composite materials is presented.
2.1. MECHANICAL BEHAVIOUR OF THERMOSET POLYMERS DURING CURE
As mentioned i n the previous chapter, polymers are taken through a curing process wi th elevated
temperature and pressure, e.g. Figure 2.1 for an autoclave. As a result, the molecules joi n and form a 3-D
network, i.e. they cure, as shown schematically in Figure 2.2. Duri ng processing, the material transforms
from a l i qui d state at the beginning of the process to a gel type material (gelation) as cure advances and
subsequently to a sol i d state (vitrification) by the end of the cure; Figure 2.3 shows these phases i n a
typical cure cycl e.
As a result of changes taking place i n the polymer, mechanical properties of polymers vary as a function
of temperature and the advancement of cure. In addition, there are ample indications in the literature that
polymers show viscoelastic behaviour, whi ch is even more pronounced at higher temperatures. There are
numerous studies i n the literature that show the viscoelastic properties of polymers; examples of some
prominent works are Tobol sky (1958), Leaderman (1958), and Ferry (1980).
Taki ng into consideration the complexities of the materials, a proper constitutive model is needed i n
residual stress model i ng of the composite. As discussed i n the previous chapter, such a model needs to be
accurate i n taking into account different aspects of the material behaviour and also efficient, due to the
size of the problems normally encountered i n real worl d applications.
Different models i n the literature have been used to describe the behaviour of thermoset polymers during
cure. A review of the common models available i n the literature is presented below.
2.2. ELASTIC MODELS
In earlier process models, some researchers used purely elastic models to describe the behaviour of the
material (e.g. Harper and Weitsman, 1981; Loos and Springer, 1983; Stango and Wang, 1984; Nel son and
Cairns, 1989). Al though a purely geometric approach, the work by Nel son and Cairns is noteworthy here.
They showed that when a curved composite part undergoes a temperature change it woul d deform due to
the difference between through-thickness and in-plane properties. Thi s phenomenon, shown i n Figure 2.4,
is called "spri ng-i n".
For this simple geometry, they showed that the spring-in can be calculated as fol l ows:
A6 = G
(CTE
e
- CTE
R
) AT
1 + CTE
R
AT
(2.1)
where A6 is the change i n the included angle, 9 is the original angle, CTE
g
and CTE
R
are the laminate
thermal expansion coefficients in the circumferential and radial directions, and AT is the temperature
change. By assuming a stress-free temperature i n a cure cycle, the residual deformations are calculated by
cool i ng down from this temperature and taking advantage of the above equation.
Elastic models offer good insight i n general, but are not sophisticated enough to capture the complexity of
the problem or give quantitatively good results i n real cases.
2.3. CH I LE MODELS
Some researchers have used C H I L E models (this term was coined by Johnston et al . , 1996, to denote
Cure Hardening Instantaneously Li near Elastic) to analyse the polymer as it goes through the curing
process (e.g. Bogetti and Gi l l espi e, 1992; Lange et al . , 1995; Johnston et al . , 2001; Fernlund, 2002a,
200b, 2003; Svanberg and Hol mberg, 2004a, b; Antonucci et al , 2006). These models are essentially
elastic, i n whi ch the modulus of elasticity changes as a function of temperature and degree of cure. In
other words:
In whi ch, a is the stress, E' is the instantaneous elastic modulus, s is the strain, t is the current time, x
is the time integration variable, T is the temperature, and a is the degree of cure.
C H I L E models have been popular i n the literature due to the ease of their characterization, and finite
element implementation.
As mentioned, polymers generally exhibit viscoelastic ( VE) behaviour. Consi deri ng the behaviour of the
material it is expected that only using a V E formulation for polymers provide accurate prediction for
deformations and stresses. However, the accuracy of the C H I L E model has not been comprehensively
investigated before nor have there been enough experimental studies done i n the literature to verify the
results of either of the models. In general, the C H I L E constitutive models for thermoset polymers have
been shown to provide good predictions i n analysing the behaviour of composite materials (Fernlund et
al . , 2002a, 2002b, 2003). Nevertheless, the fundamental val i di ty and applicability of these models have
not been proven. A n investigation of this issue, by Zobeiry et al . (2006), wi l l be presented in detail i n this
thesis.
2.4. VISCOELASTIC MODELS
It is known that polymers i n general show viscoelastic behaviour (e.g. Ferry, 1980). Thi s behaviour is
especially pronounced for partially cured polymers at high temperatures i n a cure cycl e. For this reason,
Aa = E'(T,a)Ae (2.2)
Or i n integral form:
(2.3)
- 10-
the trend of the literature for residual stress modeling of polymers and polymer composites has been
towards empl oyi ng V E constitutive equations (e.g. Douven et al . , 1995; Ki m and Whi te, 1996; Adol f and
Marti n, 1996; Poon et al . , 1998; Wi ersma et al . , 1998; Prasatya et al . , 2001; O' Bri en et al . , 2001; Zhu, et
al . , 2003).
The modeling of V E materials wi th Finite Element Method ( FE M) spans around four decades. The
research on this area has not been limited to only polymers or polymer composites. For a review of
modeling V E materials using FE M , the reader can refer to Zocher et al . (1997).
Earl y works on composite materials, such as Morl and and Lee (1960), established the fundamental
equations for composite V E behaviour wi th temperature change. Most V E works on composites in the
past focused on the behaviour of the material wi th or without change of temperature and sometimes wi th
environmental effects. Some examples of the earlier works are Schapery (1974), Flaggs and Crossman
(1981), Nakamura et al . (1988), and L i n and Hwang (1989) and some recent studies include Chen et al .
(2000) , Y i et al . (2002), and Ernst et al . (2003). However, it was not until recently that process modeling
of composites considered V E behaviour (taking the effects of cure into account as wel l ), perhaps due to
the complexity of the analysis. The analyses of composites during cure started wi th such works as Marti n
and Adol f (1990) and White and Hahn (1992a, 1992b). Since then, other researchers have performed V E
modeling of composites during processing. Some important references are Douven et al . (1995), Adol f
and Marti n (1996), Kokan (1997), Ki m and White (1997, 1998), Lange et al . (1997), White and Ki m
(1998), Poon et al . (1998), Wi ersma et al . (1998), Park (2000), Prasatya et al . (2001), O' Bri en et al .
(2001) , Djoki c et al . (2001), Ki m et al . (2002), Zhu, et al . (2003), Wi jskamp et al . (2003), Lahtinen
(2003), Svanberg and Hol mberg (2004a, b), Yang et al . (2004a), and Cl i fford et al . (2006).
Most of these studies on composite materials have assumed a linear V E behaviour. In some works,
however, the behaviour of materials has been considered to be nonlinear (e.g. Qi ao et al . , 1994; Chen et
al. , 2001; Y i et al . , 2002) and there is experimental evidence to support this (Schapery, 1969; Qi ao et al . ,
1994; Xi ao et al . , 1994; Xi a et al . , 1998). Thi s assumption results i n a compl ex constitutive model, whi ch
can be very time consuming both i n computer implementation and runtime. In addition, most of these
models have not modeled the composite behaviour during cure. Al ternati vel y, a linear V E model is easier
when modeling the behaviour of composite materials during cure.
In the fol l owi ng sections, a review of different mathematical representations of the V E behaviour used in
the literature wi l l be presented.
2.4.1. Integral Form of Viscoelasticity
In almost al l V E models i n the literature, the constitutive equations have been based on the integral form
of viscoelasticity, the so-called Integral Form (IF). This includes almost al l the references given above
that use V E models for composite process modeling.
To describe the behaviour of a linear V E material i n 1-D wi th IF, the Bol tzmann superposition principle
(see e.g. Ferry, 1980) is used. As a result, the constitutive equation for such a material under isothermal
conditions can be written as fol l ows:
In whi ch, E is the relaxation modulus. This equation can be used i n homogeneous, non-ageing materials,
wi th no change i n temperature. Alternatively, i n 3-D we can write:
where, C
iJkl
is the material stiffness tensor.
Under non-isothermal conditions, the best way to incorporate the temperature changes i n the constitutive
equation is by using time-temperature superposition (see e.g. Ferry). Thi s principle, used i n almost all of
the recent research works on viscoelasticity, is based on the idea that the effects of temperature and time
(2.4)
(2.5)
- 12-
on the polymers are similar. In other words, the behaviour of the material, for instance, at increased
temperature is equivalent to that after a longer time wi th the original temperature. In effect, a change i n
temperature can be replaced by a shift i n time. Considering a relaxation modulus vs. time graph, this idea
can be shown more clearly by showing the effect of different temperatures, T ,on the modulus, whi ch is a
shift in time marked by the shift factor a
r
, as seen i n Figure 2.5. In this figure, E" is the unrelaxed
modulus, and E" is the relaxed modulus.
This principle has been extensively used i n the literature, especially for the characterization of materials.
The behaviour of polymers can span through 10, 15, or 20 decades of time (Tschoegl, 2002b), whi ch can
make the characterization difficult or impractical. However, by appl yi ng increased or decreased
temperature, the behaviour of material for different time scales can be characterized. Examples of this
approach are ample, but some include Yee and Takemori (1982), Adol f and Marti n (1990), Douven et al .
(1995), Si mon et al . (2000), O' Bri en et al . (2001), Sane and Knauss (2001b), Ernst et al . (2003),
Svanberg and Hol mberg (2004a, b), Mel o and Radford (2004), and Hojjati et al . (2004). There are cases,
such as Plazek (1991, 1996) and He et al . (2004), where time-temperature superposition has not been
used. In this reference, creep and recovery data have been combined to construct the entire creep curve.
Al so, Heymans (2003) has dealt wi th this using hierarchical models.
Most recent studies on V E residual stresses have applied this established principle to combine the degree
of cure wi th time and temperature (time-temperature-cure superposition). However, the proof of validity
of this approach does not seem to be present i n the literature. Some researchers (e.g. Adol f and Marti n,
1996; Lange et al . , 1997) have not taken advantage of time-temperature-cure superposition and have
made other assumptions i n their analyses.
The constitutive equation i n 1-D for a polymer i n a cure cycle is:
- 13 -
cr(f)= \E(t-T,T,a)dr (2.6)
Another important assumption made on the behaviour of polymers i n most studies is that the material is
thermorheologically simple (see e.g. Schapery, 1974). Thi s means that the constitutive model presented
above wi l l become:
Put differently, this assumption i n effect means that only a horizontal shift i n modulus vs. time graph is
sufficient to superpose the material properties under different temperatures, whi ch also means that the
unrelaxed and relaxed modul i are constant with temperature and degree and cure, as shown in Figure 2.5.
Many studies i n the literature have used this assumption on different materials (e.g. Ki m and White, 1996,
Prasatya et al . , 2001). For a review of literature on the effects of temperature (and pressure) on
thermorheologically simple polymers, one can refer to Tschoegl et al . (2002b). It should also be noted
that there are studies i n the literature showing thermorheologically compl ex behaviour for the resin
material. Even though most of the work i n this thesis wi l l be done on thermorheologically simple, spme
discussion on the other types of materials wi l l be presented, e.g. refer to Sections 4.1.2 and 5.3.4.
The conventional and most commonly used method of representing the V E material behaviour is to use
linear spring and dashpot elements. By combining springs and dashpots virtually unlimited forms of
material behaviour can be modelled. These rheological analogue models have been wi del y used in the
literature to model the curing behaviour of polymer resins. Examples of simple forms of these elements
are given i n Figure 2.6, Maxwel l element, and Figure 2.7, Kel v i n element.
(2.7)
In this equation, and are called the reduced time and are calculated as follows:
(2.8)
- 14-
In most available V E models (e.g. Ki m and White, 1996; Prasatya et al . , 2001), a number of Maxwel l
elements i n parallel are used to model the behaviour of the material, i.e. Figure 2.8. The relaxation
modulus of such a material is of the fol l owi ng form, i.e. Prony series:
E(t) = E
r
+(E
U
-E
r
)JTw
f
e^ (2.9)
;=1
In whi ch, w
t
are the weight factors, and r
i
are the relaxation times and N is the number of Maxwel l
elements.
Another form of modulus commonly used in the literature called the power l aw (e.g. Djoki c, 2001), is as
follows:
E(t) = E
r
+(E
U
-E
r
)e~^
y
' (2.10)
2.4.1.1. Integration techniques
Looki ng at the IF constitutive model, clearly an integration scheme is needed i n order to calculate the
stresses from strains. Harper (1981), White and Hahn (1992a, 1992b), and Kl asztomy and Wi l czynski
(2004) simply used a direct integration between time zero and the current time, / . This method, when
applied to the hereditary integral shown above, woul d require a re-calculation of this integral at every
point i n time from time zero. Evi dentl y, this approach, i f applied to process modeling, woul d be very time
consuming and impractical for real worl d examples.
For this reason, some researchers have developed other, mostly recursive, integration techniques. In these
approaches, knowledge of the values of the parameters (e.g. stresses) i n only one or two previous steps is
required for the calculation of their new values, i.e. at current time, during the analysis. Thi s eliminates
the need for the history dependent integration. The most common of these approaches was developed by
Tayl or et al . (1970) and has been used i n numerous works, such as L i n and Hwang (1989) and Zhu et al .
(2001).
- 15 -
Zak (1967) and Whi te (1968) presented two other integration methods. Accordi ng to Hammerand and
Kapani a (1999), the integration method developed by Tayl or et al . is more accurate than these two, due to
the way the integrals are evaluated i n the approach. Even though these methods are much more efficient
than the direct integration approaches mentioned above, they are sti l l very time-consuming. More
importantly, l ooki ng at these formulations and considering the complexity of these approaches it is clear
that their implementation i n a finite element code is very difficult.
Another approach was used by Zocher et al . (1997) and also si mi l arl y by Kal i ske and Rothert (1997),
Poon and Ahmad (1998), and Kiasat (2000). The application of this method, sometimes called the internal
variable approach, i n different studies has been reviewed by Johnson (1999). In this approach, some
internal variables, say stresses, are chosen and their values are stored at each time step. These values are
then used to calculate the stresses i n the next time step. Accordi ng to Poon et al . (1998), this approach is
easier to implement i n an available finite element code, since it only requires the manipulation of the code
at the integration point l evel , unlike other established methods such as by Y i et al . (1995) and Ki m and
White (1997), whi ch 'requires manipulation of the finite element equations at the global l evel ' . It is noted
that not all models i n this category have written the equations i n this way; for example, Zocher et al .
appear to have developed the formulation such that it requires manipulation at the global l evel . Even
though these techniques are more efficient than the others mentioned above, there are simplifications
involved i n most derivations. For example, i n these works the reduced time, instead of real time, is
discretized. Thi s woul d require assumptions on the form of the shift factor. Thi s wi l l be discussed more
later on.
It is important to note that these methods have been developed for polymers modeled wi th Prony series.
Accordi ng to Si mo and Hughes (1998) it appears that similar method for power law or other forms of
modulus have not been developed, whi ch woul d require the use of history dependent integration.
- 16-
2.4.2. Fractional models
A n alternative approach to V E modeling as reported i n the literature is to use fractional models (e.g.
Al coutl abi and Marti nez-Vega, 1998; Schmidt and Gaul , 2002). Al though these models have not been
extensively applied to process model i ng their popularity has been on the rise. These models are based on
fractional calculus and they are able to model the behaviour of materials using fewer material parameters.
Therefore, the characterization of the model parameters is easier. However, it is acknowledged by
Schmidt and Gaul that such methods, however elegant, are not numerically efficient i n implementation.
2.4.3. Differential Form of Viscoelasticity
Another approach to viscoelastic modeling is to use the governing differential equations as the
constitutive model ; this approach wi l l be called the Differential Form ( DF) of V E . Thi s form of V E is i n
fact fundamentally the same as the IF, with a different mathematical representation. A n example of these
equations for a Maxwel l element (Figure 2.6) is as follows:
+
(2-11)
k n
where, k and n are the spring stiffness and the dashpot viscosity, respectively.
It appears that this form of viscoelastic modeling has been used for model i ng the fl ow of polymers i n the
field of rheology (see, e.g. Bi rd et al . , 1987 and Macosko, 1994). However, studying these models is
outside the scope of this thesis, limited to modeling V E materials i n a sol i d mechanics framework, and
they wi l l not be discussed here.
It is noted that when the number of spring/dashpot elements i n the analog model are increased to better
represent the real behaviour of material, the order of the differential equation grows and can make
implementation of this formulation very difficult or even impractical. For the widely-used model
- 17-
consisting of N Maxwel l elements i n parallel, e.g. Figure 2.8, the differential equation takes the
fol l owi ng general form:
da d'a d"a , ds , d's , d"s
a
n
a + a, +... + a, - +... + a = b
n
s + b, +... + h - +... + b (2.12)
0
' dt ' dt' " dt"
0 1
dt ' dt' " dt"
where, al l a. and b
i
are constants, wi th i = l,...,n.
Even though there are examples of the DF present i n the literature, this form of constitutive modeling has
not been wi del y used for calculation of stresses i n V E solids; the rapidly increasing complexity of the
above equation (as for instance used by Wi ersma et al . , 1998 and Mokeyev, 2001) is the apparent reason.
Zi enki ewi cz (1968), Bazant (1972, 1974a, 1974b), and Carpenter (1972) first looked at DF for analysis of
the behaviour of viscoelastic materials. Some more recent references for general use of the DF include
Jurkiewiez (1999), Idesman et al . (2000, 2001), Mesqui ta et al . (2001), and Mesqui ta and Coda (2003).
Appl i cati on of this approach for residual stress modeling of composite materials during processing is
even more l i mi ted. The studies that coul d be found i n the literature are those by El l y i n et al . (e.g. Xi a and
El l yi n, 1998; Chen et al . , 2001) on non-curing composites, Kokan (1997) on the filament wi ndi ng
process, and Wi ersma et al . (1998). Another model, by Zobeiry et al . (Submitted), wi l l be discussed in the
coming sections.
El l y i n et al . analyzed the material wi th a mul ti pl e-Kel vi n nonlinear V E model i n cool-down, assuming a
stress-free temperature. Wi ersma et al . modeled the material properties wi th a simple combination of a
single Maxwel l element and a spring. Kokan analyzed a composite cyl i nder under cure. He assumed
multiple Kel v i n elements for representation of the transverse behaviour of the material. The material
parameters i n this study were assumed to be dependent on the degree of cure, but not on temperature.
- 18-
2.4.3.1. Solution techniques
In a similar way to the IF, a solution to the constitutive model is required to relate stresses and strains at
each point i n time. Since the equations are i n the form of differential equations the solutions available i n
the literature for ordinary differential equations can be used (a review of these solutions can be found i n
Butcher, 2000).
Bazant (1972) and Carpenter (1972) used Runge-Kutta solutions i n their V E analysis (see e.g. Butcher,
1996, 2003). However, the method of choice for the majority of studies on DF has been the finite
difference method (see Hughes, 1987). The studies mentioned above have also used different finite
difference schemes, e.g. Kokan, and Mesqui ta and Coda used a backward Eul er method, while
Zi enki ewi cz, Bazant, Jurkiewiez, and Idesman et al . used an exponential form of solution.
In general, the finite difference schemes, no matter how different they may seem, i n effect update the
stress based on the values of stress at the previous time step. Thi s is i n fact very similar to the internal
variable approach used i n some IF studies, as mentioned i n Section 2.4.1.1. These approaches are easier
to implement in an available code, since they operate at the integration point level (Poon et al . , 1998).
Al so, due to the nature of finite difference schemes, only knowledge of variables at the previous time-step
is needed, unlike the prevalent IF methods, such as Tayl or et al . (1970), where knowledge of variables
from the previous two time steps is required.
2.5. SUMMARY
Different constitutive models available in the literature for model i ng the behaviour of composite materials
during cure were discussed i n this chapter. The simplest formulations, i.e. elastic models, are not complex
enough to provide accurate results for our applications.
The simplest model that seems to be adequate i n process modeling is the C H I L E model. It was mentioned
that the C H I L E models have been shown to provide good predictions, and are fast and easy to implement.
- 19-
i
Chapter 2: Reviewof Constitutive models
In addition, characterization of material behaviour for input i n the codes using this approach, such as
C O MP RO (Johnston, 2001), is fairly easy and runtimes are short even on personal computers. However,
the formulations based on this model have not been studied carefully for their general validity and
accuracy. As a result, there is a need to reconcile what we might cal l the pragmatic and economical
C H I L E approach wi th the fundamentally sound viscoelastic approach. Thi s can prove valuable, when
efficiency of the model is important. For this reason, a study of this model and its bounds of accuracy and
validity wi l l be performed i n the next chapter.
At the same time, when a more accurate model is needed or when an analysis falls outside the bounds of
validity of the C H I L E models, a viscoelastic formulation is needed. Most models available in the
literature are very time consuming and complex for implementation i n finite element codes. Differential
form of viscoelasticity has a simpler form than the integral form commonl y used in residual stress
modeling of composite materials during processing. In addition, these models can be easily implemented
in FE codes, since they only need manipulations at the integration point l evel . There is an apparent lack of
models based on differential form of viscoelasticity i n this fi el d, but due to their promise of efficiency and
simple form they seem to be the best choice for residual stress model i ng of composite materials during
cure, especially when accuracy of the model is of importance.
Study of different models i n subsequent chapters wi l l demonstrate a range of constitutive relations that
can be used i n model i ng and demonstrates that there is a continuum of trade-off of investment versus
accuracy as we go from a full viscoelastic approach to the simplest elastic approach. A schematic
relationship between different models, i.e. elastic, C H I L E , and V E , i n general terms is illustrated in
Figure 2.9.
- 20-
2 3 4 5 6
Cur e cycl e t i me (hours)
- Autoclave temperature Autoclave pressure |
Figure 2.1 A typical temperature/pressure cycle used to cure thermoset polymers in an autoclave
- \ \ . ,
s
1
/ 1 /_
Cure
Figure 2.2 Joining of molecules as a result of curing in a thermoset polymer
200
100 150 200 250
Time (min)
Figure 2.3 Schematic of changes in the state of a polymer as it goes through a typical cure cycle
-21 -
Chapter 2: Reviewof Constitutive models
LU-I
Dash = Initial shape
Solid = Final shape
Figure 2.4 Undeformed and deformed shapes in a typical U-shaped composite part after cure
log(time)
Figure 2.5 Schematic of time-temperature superposition
1 k
W W -
Figure 2.6 A Maxwell element
D
M
Figure 2.7 A Kelvin element
-22-
A/WV-,
0 WW-
1
Tin K
Figure 2.8 A generalized Maxwell element
Figure 2.9 Different levels of constitutive modeling
-23 -
Chapter 3: Pseudo-Viscoelastic Model
Chapter 3.
PSEUDO-VISCOELASTIC MODELS
In this chapter we compare the CHILE approach to the 'gold standard' of the viscoelastic approach,
discuss why and when CHILE can work well, and determine the bounds of its validity and accuracy. In
order to do this, it will be shown that there are approximations that allow the full viscoelastic approach to
be simplified to a form of CHILE model, and that these approximations are appropriate for the typical
cure cycle that a thermoset polymer undergoes. First, a summary of the viscoelastic models for two
different materials will be presented. Then, the necessary equations will be derived and finally, some case
studies will be presented. This study can also be found in the reference by Zobeiry et el. (Submitted).
3.1. REVIEW OF T wo VISCOELASTIC MODELS
In this section, we present a summary of two similar viscoelastic models that have recently been
developed for curing thermoset polymers. These formulations are based on the works of Kim and White
(1996) and Prasatya et al. (2001).
3.1.1. Material I
Recall the integral form of a viscoelastic constitutive model as follows:
Where e""" and s'
c
are the total strain and free thermo-chemical strains, respectively.
Kim and White proposed a VE constitutive model for 3501-6 epoxy resin that is formally identical to this
equation, in which the relaxation modulus is expressed as:
0
(3.1)
( , ) = ET (a) + [E
u
(a) - ET ( ) ] W (a) exp (3.2)
- 24-
where E and E" are the relaxed and unrelaxed modulus, respectively, and W
a
and r
a
are the weight
factors and discrete stress relaxation times for the co'
h
Maxwel l element (in an assembly of / parallel
Maxwel l elements), respectively.
Based on the experimental results for this material, it is assumed that E and E" are constants and
independent of the degree of cure and temperature. Al so, the weight factors are assumed to be constant
throughout the cure process. The relaxation times, however, change wi th the degree of cure according to
the fol l owi ng equation:
log(r
ffl
(a)) = log(r
ffl
(a
0
)) + [/' ( a) - ( a - a)logfX)] (3.3)
where, a
0
is the reference degree of cure (0.98 i n this case) and:
f\a) = -9. 3694 + 0. 6089a + 9. 1347a
2
(3.4)
(3.5)
where, r
p
is the peak relaxation time shown in Table 3.1 along wi th other relaxation times and weight
factors for the reference degree of cure.
The reduced time, cf , is calculated as follows:
(3.6)
where, a
T
is the shift function calculated from the fol l owi ng equation:
l og( a
r
) = c,( a)T + c
2
( a) (3.7)
in whi ch:
- 25-
c, (a) = -a
x
exp(-^) - a
2
(3.8)
a- \
c
2
(a) = -T
0
C]
(a) (3.9)
In these equations, for 3501-6 epoxy resin, a
l
=lA/C, a
2
= 0. 0712/ C , and T is the reference
temperature (in this case T =30C).
3.1.2. Materi al II
Simon, Mc Kenna, and co-workers (Si mon et al . , 2000 and Prasatya et al . 2001) have presented a similar
V E model for the bulk behaviour of Hexcel 8551-7 epoxy resin. The form of the bulk relaxation modulus
is as follows:
K(,T,t) = K
r
+[K
g
-K
r
]
g!
exp (3.10)
where, K is the bulk modulus, K
r
and K
g
are the rubbery and glassy values of the bulk modulus, both
of whi ch are assumed to be independent of temperature and degree of cure, T, is the i'
h
relaxation time
and g
t
is the corresponding weight factor, such that _ ^g, =1. 0. Both parameters are assumed to be
constant throughout the cure cycl e. The values for these parameters are listed i n Table 3.2.
In this model, the shift factor, a
Ta
, is also used to account for the dependence of the relaxation time r, on
temperature and degree of cure and is evaluated as follows:
T-T^ T
g
(a)-T
i n whi ch, C and T
m
are constants and T
g
is the glass transition temperature taken to be a function of the
degree of cure as fol l ows:
- 26-
T.-To Aa
(3.12)
T
g
-T
ga
1-(1-A)
where T
g0
is the T
g
of the monomer, T
gai
is the T
g
of the fully cured material, and X is a material
constant.
The major difference between this model and the previous one lies i n the form of the shift factors
(Equation (3.7) vs. Equation (3.11)). For the purpose of deri vi ng the equations i n the next section,
however, it is desirable to represent the shift factor in the form of Equation (3.7). It can be shown that the
difference between these two forms i n representing the results of the experiments is mi ni mal (This
comparison is only made to show that the two material models are si mi l ar and the same derivation
procedure can be used for both materials; the actual formulation wi l l not be changed). The graph that is
used i n Prasatya et al . to derive the shift factor parameters is reproduced here and shown in Figure 3.1. It
is clear that Equation (3.7) is a good fit to the results, and thus the same approximation approach wi l l be
val i d for both materials. For this material the parameters for a fully cured resin are c
x
(a) = -0. 2298 and
T
0
=160C .
There is another difference between the two models. In the reference paper, the stress is calculated from
the fol l owi ng formulation:
OO 7
o- = -\K(t-t',T,a)dt' (3.13)
v<
This equation i mpl i ci tl y assumes a simple definition of reduced time, namely the ratio of time to shift
factor, , as opposed to the integral i n Equation (3.6). Such a definition does not correspond to the
wi del y used form of Equation (3.6) (see e.g. Schapery, 1974 and also Section 4.1.2 for mathematical
derivation). It is unclear how much difference such a definition woul d make i n the results (for examples
of some sample cure cycles and a discussion, see Section 3.3.2) but there is nothing to prevent us from
- 27-
using the modulus i n Equations (3.10) and (3.11), wi th the shift factor of Equation (3.6), in the
constitutive equation, i.e. Equation (3.1), instead. Thi s approach is adopted here i n order to keep the
viscoelastic formulation consistent (and correct) for both materials.
3.2. PSEUDO-VISCOELASTIC MODE L DERIVATION
As stated i n Chapter 2, a C H I L E model is essentially an elastic model i n whi ch the modulus is assumed to
be constant at each instant of time, but changing as a function of temperature and degree of cure.
However, since the real behaviour of the material is viscoelastic, i n order to use an essentially elastic
model one needs to have a proper definition of the elastic modulus. In order to do this, one can perform
dynamic tests at some pre-determined frequency (or static tests at a certain time), and the resulting
modulus wi l l be a function of this frequency (or time). Note that for si mpl i ci ty, where appropriate the
term frequency or time wi l l be used interchangeably from here on. To date, there has been little or no
rationalization on how this frequency should be selected; and typi cal l y a l ow frequency, say OA Hz, is
used. Al though such values are intuitively val i d their selection is relatively arbitrary (e.g. Johnston,
2001). Here, it wi l l be shown that one can define, a priori, an elastic modulus for a C H I L E model as
being the viscoelastic relaxation modulus at a specific time, or the viscoelastic storage modulus at a
certain frequency, as obtained from a cycl i c loading test, e.g., a dynamic mechanical analyzer ( DMA) .
Wi th this elastic modulus as input to a C H I L E model, the results wi l l be approximately equivalent to the
viscoelastic approach. Thus this special case of an appropriately calibrated C H I L E model wi l l be called a
"Pseudo-Vi scoEl asti c ( P VE ) " model.
Recal l i ng the C H I L E constitutive equation, we can write:
(3.14)
In this equation, E' is the instantaneous elastic modulus evaluated at some frequency.
- 28-
Since temperature and degree of cure can be described as functions of time, E' can be thought of as an
i mpl i ci t function of time and therefore Equation (3.14) may be rewritten as:
c r ( 0 = W>^ r (3.15)
3.2.1. Simplification of Viscoelastic Formulations
We wi l l now determine the conditions under whi ch the V E formulation simplifies to a corresponding
P V E formulation for a wide range of conventional cure cycles.
In a viscoelastic material, rewriting Equation (3.1) here i n a more convenient form, stress can be
calculated as fol l ows:
<T(t)=lE(-?)^-dT (3.16)
dr
i n whi ch,
' 1
r
1
cf = \dt' and cf' = \dt' (3.17)
0
a
T 0
a
T
The objective here is to determine how Equation (3.16) can be si mpl i fi ed so that the stress can be
calculated from Equation (3.15).
Now, i f the fol l owi ng identity:
E'(r) = E(-?) (3.18)
can be enforced, the resulting stress from Equations (3.15) and (3.16) wi l l necessarily be equal.
This equality may seem odd, since the right-hand side is a viscoelastic modulus that is a function of both
t (current time) and r (integration time), whi l e the left-hand side is an elastic modulus that is only a
function of a specific instant of time r . For this purpose, E' is defined such that it coincides wi th the
- 29-
value of the relaxation modulus, E , at a suitable and as yet undetermined time, say t
e
, that is appropriate
for the temperature and degree of cure at time r , i.e. T(r) and a(x). Accordi ng to this definition, we
can write:
E'(T) = E(t
e
,T(r),a(T)) . (3.19)
Invoking the time-temperature superposition and noting that i n this case r represents a fixed instant of
time and not a dummy integration variable, the reduced time becomes [- = - , and the relaxation
J
0
a
r
(r) a
T
(r)
modulus can be expressed as:
a
T
(r)
From Equations (3.18) - (3.20), we have:
E(t
e
,T,a) = E(-^-) (3.20)
a
T
(r)
This equation can only be val i d i f the arguments of E are equal, i.e
(-4-r) = (3.21)
a
T
(r)
Substituting Equation (3.17) here, we obtain:
(3.22)
J ^ J f - J f - J f L
( 3
. 23)
a
r(
T
) o
a
r o
a
T t
a
T
In order to find suitable values of t
e
, simplifications i n the V E formulation are made by considering two
distinct temperature regimes wi thi n the cure cycl e: the cool -down, i n whi ch the temperature varies
(reduces) linearly wi th time, and the hold, i n whi ch the temperature is constant. These temperature
regimes are characteristic of all conventional cure cycles.
- 30-
3.2.1.1. Simplification during cool-down
The temperature-time relationship in the cool-down segment can be written i n a generic form as follows:
T(t') = -m(t'-p) + q (3.24)
i n whi ch, m is the cool i ng rate, t' is the time, and p and q are constants.
Now, using Equation (3.7) for the shift factor we can write:
a
T
=
w r + c
>
w
= exp(
C | r + C 2
) (3.25)
log(e)
By substituting these two equations into Equation (3.23), assuming that the degree of cure is constant
during the cool-down (a val i d assumption), say a
f
, performing the integral, and si mpl i fyi ng, we obtain:
a
r
(r)
where
1 1
a
T
(r) a
T
(t)
(3.26)
t ]
= - - ^ L (3.27)
c^(a
f
)m
Note that c,(a) is a negative number. Now, since the shift factor changes exponentially, its final value is
much greater than its value at any other instant during the cool -down. In other words, - - and
a
T
(t) a
T
(r)
consequently, t
e
at
l
.
The assumption that the shift factor at t is much greater than that at r is particularly true when t is the
duration of the cure cycl e and the final residual stress is being calculated. When r approaches t in the
cool-down regime the error resulting from such an assumption increases. However, this wi l l not cause a
significant error i n the calculations, because when r approaches t, the value of tends to zero and
-31 -
the relaxation modulus at time t
e
wi l l be equal to the unrelaxed modulus. Thus, an error i n evaluating the
shift factor wi l l not affect the results significantly, as the modulus wi l l almost be equal to the unrelaxed
modulus.
Thus using the fol l owi ng simple equation wi l l yi el d stresses that are equivalent to those predicted by the
full V E model for the cool -down:
To show the effect of this simplification, the reduced times and modul i from the P V E and full V E
methods are compared for a cure temperature of 180C, a * l , and cool -down to room temperature at
three different cool i ng rates, namely for m = \, 3, and 5 C / mi n. The results for and modul i
development are plotted versus r (for t equal to the time at the end of the cure cycl e) i n Figure 3.2 and
Figure 3.3, respectively. It can be seen that the reduced times obtained from the two methods are very
close. Some errors occur, as r approaches t. But, as explained before and shown in Figure 3.3, this error
i n evaluating the reduced time does not result i n a large difference i n the predicted modulus. These
figures clearly indicate that by using the P V E method i n cool -down the predicted stresses should closely
match those calculated by the far more computationally intensive V E model . It is also noted that the slight
waviness i n Figure 3.3 is due to discrete relaxation spectrum of the modulus, i.e. the relaxation modulus
consists of several Maxwel l elements that relax i n different time frames and cause the waviness.
A n important observation is that the value of t
e
is a function of the cool i ng rate m . This means that for
any given cure cycl e, the appropriate time should be calculated and used.
3.2.1.2. Simplification during temperature hold
On the hold, Equati on (3.23) can be written as:
(3.28)
-32-
J _ _ _
,
f _ _ _
, /
f _ _ +
,
f _ _ (3.29)
a
T
(r) ia
r
\ a
r
J a
T
where, t
f
denotes the time at the end of the hol d and beginning of the cool -down regime. The second
integral pertaining to the cool -down has already been evaluated i n the previous section. Therefore, we
merely need to simplify the first integral.
We note that during the hol d the variation of shift factor as a function time is at the l i mi t either the form
shown in Figure 3.4, or constant wi th time. To evaluate the integral, whi ch is the area under the curve, we
define a time t
2
, prior to whi ch decreases linearly wi th time, and thereafter it is constant:
a
T
1
=P! + ( !-/ *)? (3.30)
a
T
(t
2
) a
r
(r) a
T
(t
f
)
The form of the above equation captures both limits of the variation of , i f (5 is chosen to be an
a
T
appropriately small number. Generally, the observed behaviour is closer to the curve i n Figure 3.4, where
^
1 1
after time t
2
, we have .
a
T
{t') a
r
(r)
The area under the curve can then be found as:
/
f ^
=
i ( ,
2
_
r
) | _ ^
+
_ ^ ]
+
( ,
/
-
? 2
) _ ^ (3.3D
a
T
2
V
67
r
(r) a
T
(t
2
) j a
T
(t
f
)
In the cases where is not constant past t
2
, there wi l l be some error in evaluating the integral.
a
r
However, this error is not significant since the first term is dominant. Now, using Equations (3.29) and
(3.31) we have:
-33 -
' - - V' > f i
+
? V ( < , - ' . ) ? , <"
2
>
V
a
T
(t
2
) a
T
(t
f
)
This gives us the value of time to evaluate the modulus during the hol d. We note that /? is chosen to be a
small number, but it should not be so small that the approximately linear form of between times r
a
r
and t
2
is undermined. A value of 0.1 has been observed to work wel l .
It should be noted that i n order to use the above equations it is assumed that the degree of cure is known
at every time step during the hol d. These values are needed i n order to compute t
2
from Equation (3.30).
As a result, one needs to perform the thermo-chemical analysis on the model first before the residual
stress analysis.
I f the values of the degree of cure cannot be calculated beforehand, one can assume t
2
= T and therefore
use a simpler form of the above equation as follows:
0.33)
In this equation, only the knowledge of the degree of cure at time /
/ ;
i.e. the onset of cool-down, is
sufficient.
3.2.1.3. Summary of equations
Here, a summary of the P V E equations is presented. The stresses are calculated as follows:
er(0 = )E(t
e
,T(T),a(T))^dT (3.34)
Where there are two regimes to calculate t
e
, during cool-down and during temperature hold.
Duri ng cool -down:
- 34-
r . = / , = - ^ f (3.35)
c, {a
f
)m
Where a
f
is the degree of cure at the onset of cool-down and m is the cool -down rate.
Duri ng temperature hol d:
,
#
= I ( ,
2
-
r
) 1
+
r M
+
(, -
+
,
( 3
. 36)
a
r
(t
f
)
Where t
f
is the time at the onset of cool-down and t
2
is a time, defined as fol l ows:
1
=P
{
+ (\-p)-^ (3.37)
a
T
(t
2
) a
T
(r) a
r
(t
f
)
P is chosen to be a smal l number.
I f the values of the degree of cure cannot be determined beforehand, the fol l owi ng can be used during the
temperature hol d:
3.2.2. Different Forms of PVE
The above simplification assumes that the material is fully characterized viscoelastically, but that we wi sh
to be computationally efficient. From now on, this simplification procedure wi l l be called the 'variable
time' P V E method, where the instant of time at whi ch the elastic modulus is calculated varies throughout
the cure cycl e. Thi s value of time clearly comes from a direct simplification of the V E constitutive model.
Alternatively, i f one wishes to be even more efficient and simple, a single, constant time can be defined at
whi ch the modulus is calculated at all points in the cure cycl e. One coul d then save significantly on
characterization costs. Thi s can also be done using a constant value of frequency. The incentive for the
latter is to be able to use the results of cycl i c loading tests, such as D M A (Dynami c Mechani cal
-35 -
Anal yzer), used for material characterization. These additionally si mpl i fi ed procedures wi l l be called the
'constant ti me' or 'constant frequency' P V E method, noting that the added si mpl i fi cati on comes at a cost
of reduced accuracy.
The best estimate for this constant value of time is the one that applies to the cool -down, as calculated by
Equation (3.27). I f use of a constant frequency is desired we note from Ferry (1980) that:
G(t) = G'{(o) - 0.40G"(0.40<y) + 0.014G"(10<y) (3.39)
in whi ch G is the relaxation modulus, G' is the storage modulus, and G" is the loss modulus when co ,
the circular frequency, is equated to j/^. This shows the relationship between the time- and frequency-
dependent modul i . Thi s equation can be simplified even more. Accordi ng to Adol f and Marti n (1996) for
most thermoset polymers G" is small and the above equation can be converted to the fol l owi ng simple
form:
G(t) = G'(o) = ^) (3.40)
Therefore, the relaxation modulus evaluated at a specific time is equivalent to the storage modulus at a
relevant frequency. In other words, the fol l owi ng value of frequency
1 c.(a
f
)m
a> = - = - '
1
(3.41)
h log(e)
To check the val i di ty of this equation, the values of the moduli on both sides of the equation for both
materials presented previously were compared, using the sample cure cycl e shown i n Figure 3.5. The
results are shown in Figure 3.6 and Figure 3.7. It can be seen that the difference between the two moduli
after vitrification is less than 15%, and the two sides gradually converge as the polymer is cooled down.
As a result, the difference between the stresses calculated from the two definitions of modulus wi l l be
mi ni mal .
- 36-
It should be noted that i f Equation (3.27) is not used, and an intuitive or arbitrary value of frequency is
used instead, then we have the classical C H I L E model availabel i n the literature (e.g. Johnston et al .
2001).
3.3. CASE STUDIES
To evaluate the val i di ty of the simplification procedure introduced i n the previous section and the
different forms of P V E some case studies are presented here. For si mpl i ci ty, a fully constrained block of
polymer undergoing a given cure cycle is considered. Negl ecti ng the influence of external mechanical
loads (e.g. autoclave pressure) the induced strain wi l l consist onl y of thermal and cure shrinkage
contributions. The advancement of cure must be taken into account using an appropriate thermo-chemical
model. To perform the analysis, a simple FO RT A N code was written. Thi s program analyses a 1-D
structure (i.e. a bar) using a P V E and/or a full V E formulation as it undergoes the cure cycle and
calculates the residual stress at each instant. It is noted that the bar is held at fixed length and the end
effects are not examined.
3.3.1. Material I
The temperature profile for a conventional one-hold cure cycle and the resulting degree of cure are shown
i n Figure 3.5. The thermo-chemical model is based on the work by Lee et al . (1982). The time histories
of the elastic modulus of the P V E , and stress resulting from a variable time P V E and V E are presented in
Figure 3.8 and Figure 3.9, respectively. The agreement between the stress predictions of variable-time
P V E and the full V E methods is excellent. It is noted that the relaxed modulus is assumed to be present
throughout the cure cycl e and hence it also exists before gelation. Thi s is necessary, as the material is
assumed to be a viscoelastic sol i d, whi ch has a non-zero relaxed modulus.
The temperature profile for a two-hold cure cycle and the resulting degree of cure are shown i n Figure
3.10. A constant frequency P V E analysis at frequencies of 0.1 Hz, 0.001 Hz, and 0.0001 Hz was
- 37-
performed and the results are presented i n Figure 3.11 and Figure 3.12. Al so shown i n Figure 3.12 are
the stresses predicted by the V E model. Cl earl y an accurate prediction results i f the selected frequency is
somewhere between 0.001 Hz and 0.0001 Hz .
To investigate the effect of frequency on residual stress prediction, the P V E predictions are plotted versus
frequency i n Figure 3.13 and compared wi th the unique (frequency independent) value of the stress
obtained from the V E model. A frequency of around 2.7 xl O ^T / z yields a residual stress that closely
matches the V E predicted stress. Use of Equations (3.27) and (3.40) gives 9.0 x 10"
4
Hz, whi ch leads to a
P V E prediction of only about 1 MP a higher than the V E prediction, thus suggesting that Equation (3.40)
is a good estimate of the appropriate frequency to characterize a material. It should be noted that these
frequencies are quite l ow, and thus higher frequencies, as used i n a large number of cases i n the literature,
wi l l result i n slightly higher stresses. Thi s is perhaps unavoidable since the required frequencies are
experimentally impractical.
To evaluate the effect of the cool i ng rate on the residual stresses, several one-hold cure cycles wi th
varying cool i ng rates have been analyzed. Figure 3.14 and Figure 3.15 show the variable time P V E and
V E predicted residual stress as a function of cool i ng rate for these cycles at two different hold
temperatures. Note that i n each case the temperature hold continues until complete cure prior to cool -
down. In all cases, very good agreement is obtained between the V E and P V E results. Furthermore, these
results show that the effect of cool i ng rate on the residual stress is onl y significant at very l ow rates of
cool i ng (between 0.1 to 1 C / mi n) .
Constant time P V E predictions for these case studies are presented i n Figure 3.16 and Figure 3.17. The
appropriate time for each cool i ng rate is calculated using Equation (3.40). Whi l e the correlation between
these P V E predictions and the V E predictions is not as good, wi th a maxi mum error of 8%, it is still quite
acceptable. Thi s suggests that when we use an appropriately calculated constant time to evaluate the
modulus i n a P V E model, a reasonable estimate of residual stresses is obtained. Note that the biggest
-38-
contributor to error is the stress bui l d up during hold. In fact, the stresses generated during cool-down are
observed to match closely.
3.3.2. Materi al II
In Prasatya et al . (2001), V E analyses were performed for a wide range of cure cycles to obtain a large
variation i n predicted residual stress: This set of cure cycles is therefore particularly useful i n determining
the robustness of the P V E approach. Figure 3.18 compares the variable time P V E predictions wi th the V E
predictions.
Note that because of the discussion presented i n Section 3.1.2, the definition of the reduced time was
changed and the V E results for al l the cure cycles (27 i n total) presented i n the reference were obtained
from the I D code. It is noteworthy here that the results were also obtained for a simple definition of
reduced time (Section 3.1.2) to evaluate the difference that this definition can make. It was observed that
even though the definitions of the reduced time are fundamentally different the difference i n the results
were not significant, e.g. stresses range from -7.1 to 37.4 MP a at the cure temperature and from 69.7 to
98.5 MP a at room temperature for this definition of reduced time, whi l e these ranges for the integral
definition of reduced time are -7.3 to 39.6 MP a and 73 to 102.6 MP a, respectively. To explain the reason
why the difference between the results is not large, consider the fol l owi ng thought experiment. Assume
that a unit of strain is applied to a thermoplastic (no cure) at time / = 0 and the resulting stress is
monitored. The temperature is held at 7], except that for a period it is increased to T
2
. Thi s is shown
schematically i n Figure 3.19. Consider the difference i n predictions from the two definitions of reduced
time at times t
A
, t
B
, and t
c
:
At t
A
, both definitions wi l l give the same relaxation modulus and the correct answer. This is
obviously the classical (and trivial) constant temperature stress relaxation problem.
- 39-
At t
B
, the non-integral reduced time wi l l over-estimate the relaxation, as the temperature wi l l be
assumed to have been T
2
al l the time.
At t
c
, the non-integral reduced time wi l l under-estimate the relaxation, as the temperature wi l l be
assumed to have been 7j al l the time.
Gi ven the above discussion, it seems the reason why the two definitions give relatively close answers is
the same as why the P V E approach works. In general, tends to zero for cure problems, as either cure
progresses and/or temperature decreases. Therefore, the relevant relaxation for a unit of strain that is
introduced at a gi ven time occurs wi thi n a short wi ndow after that. So l ong as that is captured reasonably
wel l , the error is smal l .
Even though the difference between the two definitions of reduced time is not large, the integral
definition wi l l be used from now on. It should also be noted that for al l other parameters (e.g. shift factor
and glass transition temperature) were calculated from the formulations presented i n the reference, i.e. as
i n Section 3.1.2.
In Figure 3.18, excellent agreement between V E and variable time P V E can be observed over a very wide
range of predicted stresses, corresponding to very different cure cycles. In si mi l ar fashion, Figure 3.20
compares the constant frequency P V E predictions wi th the V E predictions. The appropriate frequency can
be calculated from Equations (3.27) and (3.40), i.e. :
1 c,(a
f
)m
a = - = - '
f
(3.42)
h log(e)
whi ch for this case it is 1. 33xl 0~
2
/fe. As before, the agreement is not as good, but it is sti l l very
acceptable. In addition, it is observed that a few points deviate noticeably from the line. A l l but one of
these stresses represent cure cycles where the hold temperature is l ow ( 130' C - 140 C ) and the P V E
- 40-
stresses at the end of hol d show considerable error i n prediction. In one case, the deviation is due to the
fact that the material is heated-up after it is sufficiently solidified, whi ch is against the assumption of
cool-down in the si mpl i fi cati on of V E to P V E . In all these cases, however, the P V E predictions for the
stresses generated i n cool -down are very close to those from the V E analysis.
3.3.3. Compari son of Effi ci ency
As mentioned previously, one of the advantages anticipated for the P V E model i n comparison to the
integral form of V E is efficiency. In order to quantity this, the run-times for both methods can be
measured and compared. For this purpose, a one-hold cure cycle has been analyzed wi th the I D code
mentioned previously, using different number of time steps. To make an objective comparison, the run
times have been measured for the stress calculation core of the code only. Al so, to get tangible runtime
numbers, the core section has been repeated multiple times.
First, to discount the effect of thermo-chemical calculations on the run times and to compare only the
stress constitutive models, a completely cured resin has been analyzed. The cure cycle has been analysed
wi th different number of time steps and for each the core of the code has been repeated a specific number
of time. The results for this case are shown in Table 3.3. It is observed that P V E runs approximately 15
times faster than the ful l V E formulation.
Now, i f the runs are repeated wi th the thermo-chemical model included, since calculation of cure takes
significant time the absolute benefit of the P V E approach becomes smaller i n this case. Nevertheless, the
P V E model is sti l l significantly faster (approximately 5 times) than the integral form. The results for this
case are presented i n Table 3.4.
These examples show a large difference i n the run times for the two models even for the 1-D system
considered here. Cl earl y, this difference wi l l be magnified considerably when analysing larger problems
requiring 2-D or 3-D numerical solutions.
-41 -
3.4. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
In this chapter, based on a 1-D closed form analysis and simplification procedure, it has been shown that
for conventional cycles consisting of temperature holds and cool -down ramps:
A Vi scoel asti c formulation for the cure of thermoset polymer composite material can be
si mpl i fi ed to a variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic formulation, wi th excellent agreement i n the
predicted residual stress, for a wide range of cure cycles. A variable time P V E formulation
requires a full V E material characterization, but permits a much more efficient numerical
implementation.
A V E formulation can be simplified even further to a constant time/frequency P V E formulation,
wi th slightly reduced agreement, but still wi thi n acceptable l i mi ts. The major benefit of this
additional simplification is that characterization tests can be performed at a single frequency or
time, depending on the cure cycle being used. Thi s leads to efficiencies i n both material
characterization and numerical analysis.
The C H I L E models i n the literature are clearly constant time/frequency P V E formulations, except
that the frequency or time at whi ch the material is characterized is relatively arbitrary. However,
so long as a relatively l ow test frequency has been used, the results should be reasonably
accurate.
Table 3.5 provides a summary of the trade-offs between the different options. Note that P V E
approximations for temperature holds and cool-down ramps have been presented. Si mi l ar P V E
approximations can be derived for heat-up ramps or other permutations and variations of temperature
cycles for even more generalized processing cases.
It must be noted that the simplifications and the relevant conclusions presented i n this chapter are val i d
for typical cure cycles. Therefore, i f unconventional cure cycles are to be analyzed or when the accuracy
- 42-
of the model is of importance, a V E analysis is necessary. As mentioned before, one the main problems i n
using the available V E models i n the literature is that they are very inefficient i n runtimes. Therefore, i f
an efficient V E model can be developed it wi l l be a very desirable model i ng option that can complement
the P V E approaches i n presenting modellers wi th different choices of analysis tools. The next chapter wi l l
therefore deal wi th developing a viscoelastic model i n differential form, whi ch looks promising i n this
regard.
-43 -
Table 3.1 Relaxation times and weight factors for 3501-6 resin for a
0
= 0.98
(0 T<,(min)
1 2.92E+01 0.059
2 2.92E+03 0.066
3 1.82E+05 0.083
4 140E+07 0.112
5 2.83E+08 0.154
6(t
p
) 7.94E+09 0.262
7 1.95E+11 0.184
8 3.32E+12 0.049
9 4.92E+14 0.025
Table 3.2 Relaxation times and weight factors for 8551-7 resin
gi
logfr/s)
gi
log(ii/s)
0.0215 -7.0 0.1160 -1.0
0.0215 -6.5 0.1653 -0.5
0.0215 -6.0 0.0561 0.0
0.0215 -5.5 0.0561 0.5
0.0267 -5.0 0.0199 1.0
0.0267 -4.5 0.0119 1.5
0.0375 -4.0 0.0055 2.0
0.0405 -3.5 0.0028 2.5
0.0630 -3.0 0.0008 3.0
0.0630 -2.5 0.0002 3.5
0.1054 -2.0 0.0003 4.0
0.1160 -1.5 0.0003 5.0
Table 3.3 Comparison of run times for integral form VE and PVE for a cured resin
Pseudo Viscoelastic Integral fa rm
Repetitions Steps Total core run-time Core run-time Total core run-time Core run-time IF/PVE
200 500 0.13 0.00065 1.95 0.00975 15.00
100 5000 0.64 0.0064 9.8 0.098 15.31
20 20000 0.51 0.0255 7.9 0.395 15.49
20 40000 1.04 0.052 15.8 0.79 15.19
- 44-
Tabl e 3.4 Compar i son of r un times for i ntegral for m V E and P V E for a cur i ng resin i n a one-hol d
cure cycle
Pseudo Viscoelastic Integral form
Repetitions Steps Total core run-time Core run-time Total core run-time Core run-time IF/PVE
100 500 0.27 0.0027 1.29 0.0129 4.78
100 5000 2.67 0.0267 12.89 0.1289 4.83
20 20000 2.15 0.1075 10.3 0.515 4.79
20 40000 4.29 0.2145 20.56 1.028 4.79
Tabl e 3.5 Compar i son of the features of the di fferent model s
Constitutive Model Material Characterization Accuracy
Characterization
Costs
Run-time
Integral formVE
Viscoelastic characterization of
materials using methods such as
relaxation tests
Baseline High Baseline
Variable time PVE based on
simplification of VE
Same as above
Excellent, especially for
predicting the final
residual stresses
High 15 times less*
Constant time/frequency PVE
based on further simplification
ofVE
Dynamic tests at a constant frequency
calculated from shift factor behaviour
Good Low 15 times less
CHILE model
Dynamic tests at a constant frequency
selected essentially arbitrarily
Good, given a proper
selection of the test
frequency
Lowest 15 times less
* numbers for a fully cured thermoset
- 45-
8 1.E+05
3
0 1
1.E+03
1.E+01 H
1.E-01 60 80 100 120 140
Cool-down time from 180C (min)
160 180
Figure 3.2 Comparison of reduced times for PVE and VE models for 3501^6 resin (with a=0.99) for
different values of cool-down rates
- 46-
3500 -i
180
Cool-down Time from 180C(min)
Figure 3.3 Comparison of moduli for PVE and VE models for 3501-6 resin (with a=0.99) for
different values of cool-down rates
1/Uy
Figure 3.4 Schematic of a typical variation of shift factor as a function of time during a hold
- 47-
t(min)
Figure 3.5 Temperature and degree of cure for the cure cycle used for 3501-6 resin
-- 0.55
1 -I - n 1 i 1 1- 0.5
0 50 100 150 200 250
Time(min)
Figure 3.6 Comparison of two definitions of modulus, based on storage modulus and relaxation
modulus, for 3501-6 resin
- 48-
10000
a.
E
= 1000
a
o
E
100
20 40
Time(min)
60
1
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.5
80
G"fc>)
E(t=1/
ffi
)
E/G'
Figure 3.7 Comparison of two definitions of modulus, based on storage modulus and relaxation
modulus, for 8551-7 resin
- 49-
25
20
~ 15 H
ra
a.
50
VE
/
PVE
100 150 200
t(min)
250
Figure 3.9 Comparison of stress profiles for variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic
models for the cure cycle in Figure 3.5 (3501-6 resin)
t(min)
Figure 3.10 Temperature and degree of cure profile for the two-hold cycle used in the case study for
3501-6 resin
- 50-
3500 n
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
t(min)
Figure 3.11 Elastic modulus profiles for different constant frequency Pseudo-Viscoelastic models
for the cure cycle in Figure 3.10 (3501-6 resin)
Figure 3.12 Comparison of stress profiles from the constant frequency Pseudo-Viscoelastic models
and the Viscoelastic model for the cure cycle in Figure 3.10 (3501-6 resin)
-51 -
2.7x10-
4
-3 -2
Log(Frequency)
Figure 3.13 Residual stress as a function of frequency for the constant-frequency PVE model, the
cure cycle in Figure 3.10 (3501-6 resin). Also shown is the VE model prediction
25
20
15
w
2 10
5
0 p. X
4 6 8
m (C/min)
10
PVE g T(room)
V E @ , T(room)
A PVE @ T(hold)
WE < T(hold)
12
Figure 3.14 Predicted residual stress for variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic models
for different cooling rates for a one-hold cycle with Thoi
d
=180 C (3501-6 resin)
-52-
25
20
15
in
01
2 10 H
5
0
UA A
4 6 8
m (C/min)
10
PVE @ T(room)
VE @ T(room)
A PVE @ T(hold)
VE @ T(hold)
12
Figure 3.15 Predicted residual stress for variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic models
for different cooling rates, m, for a one-hold cycle with T
ho
i
d
=160 C (3501-6 resin)
ro
a.
25
20
15
(0
10
V)
5
0
aat A
3.05
Constant Time (min)
1.53 1.02 0.76
6 8
m (C/min)
0.61
:
10
0.51
PVE @ T(room)
VE @ T(room)
A PVE @ T(hold)
XVE@ T(hol d)
PVE for cooldown
+ VE for cooldown
12
Figure 3.16 Predicted residual stress for constant time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic models
for different cooling rates, m , for a one-hold cycle with T
ho
id=180 C (3501-6 resin)
-53-
25
20
k 15
10
5
0
3.05
Constant Time (min)
1.53 1.02 0.76
~ i
2

a

i
4
- 1
6
m (C/min)
0.61
10
0.51
12
PVE @ T(room)
VE @ T(room)
PVE @ T(hold)
X VE @ T(hold)
PVE for cooldown
i VE for cooldown
Figure 3.17 Predicted residual stress for constant time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic models
for different cooling rates, m, for a one-hold cycle with T
hO
id
=
160 C (3501-6 resin)
PVE Stresses (MPa)
Figure 3.18 Variable time Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic stress predictions for a wide range
of different cure cycles (8551-7 resin)
-54-
T
t
Figure 3.19 Schematic of a temperature cycle for the discussion in Section 3.3.2.
PVE Stresses (MPa)
Figure 3.20 Constant frequency Pseudo-Viscoelastic and Viscoelastic stress predictions for a wide
range of different cure cycles (8551-7 resin)
- 55-
Chapter 4: Differential Form of Viscoelasticity in ID
Chapter 4. DIFFERENTIAL FORM OF VISCOELASTICITY IN ID
In this.chapter, the differential form ( DF) of V E is presented as an efficient and accurate alternative
method to the common integral form (IF) i n modeling the viscoelastic behaviour of composites during
cure. For this purpose, only the one-dimensional behaviour, effectively the longitudinal behaviour of a
polymer, is considered i n order to develop the model i n a simple form and be able to compare the two
approaches. First, the governing differential equations for a linear viscoelastic material in 1-dimensional
( I D) cases, using spring and dashpot elements and in particular wi th a number of Maxwel l elements in
parallel, during cure are derived. Then, the constitutive model is compared to the IF of viscoelasticity.
This is achieved by using some numerical examples i n I D to compare the methods' results and
efficiency.
4. 1. GOVERNING EQUATIONS IN ID
In this section, spring and dashpot elements are used to derive the governing V E differential equations in
I D for isothermal and non-isothermal (and curing) materials.
4.1.1. Differential Equations for Non-Curing Materials
4.1.1.1. Single Maxwell element
For a single Maxwel l element, the constitutive equation is:
where, k is the spring stiffness and rj is the dashpot viscosity. Written differently, the equation is:
= +
k n
(4.1)
ke = & H
r
(4.2)
- 56-
It is generally understood i n the literature that the DF and IF formulations are equivalent and are merely
two different forms to represent the same behaviour. This can be shown for a single Maxwel l element i n
the above equation. Recal l that i n the IF:
a(t)=\E(t-t')^dt' (4.3)
J
dt'
where for a single Maxwel l element the relaxation modulus is:
E(t) = kexp(--) (4.4)
T
In order to show that the two forms are equivalent, we take the Laplace transform of both sides of
Equation (4.2). Taki ng advantage of the Laplace transform of a convol uti on integral and using the
Laplace transformation of derivative of a function, we wi l l have:
oo CO
k \se-"dt = J(<T + -)e~
s
'dt (4.5)
0 0
T
Or:
k[ss(s) - s(0)] = [sa(s) - o-(O)] + (4.6)
r
where
A
over a parameter denotes a transformed function i n the Laplace space.
By putting <r(0) = E(0) = 0 and rearranging, we obtain:
' &(s) = s^ji(s) (4.7)
s +
r
Taki ng an inverse Lapl ace transform, the result is:
- 57-
a{f) =
1- 1
k
*r ' (ss(s)) (4.8)
1
s + -
V TJ
where I ' ( ) is the inverse Laplace transform of ( )and * represents a convolution integral
Taki ng advantage of some common rules for Laplace transform and noting that s(Q) = 0 , we wi l l have:
dt dt'
v
'
whi ch is equivalent to the IF i n Equation (4.4).
4.1.1.2. Generalized Maxwell model
As mentioned before, to represent the real behaviour of materials, several Maxwel l elements i n parallel
are used. By adding more Maxwel l elements, it is evident that the order of the differential equation grows
and can make implementation of this formulation very difficult or even impractical (see Chapter 2).
However, the alternative approach is to write multiple, simpler differential equations. For the mechanical
analog model presented i n Figure 4.1 (b), the generalized Maxwel l model, it is obvious that:
(4.9)
s
l
=e
2
=... = s
ll
=e
(4.10)
Recal l i ng Equation (4.2), we can write the fol l owi ng equation for each Maxwel l element:
o- , = M -
(4.11)
r,
i n whi ch, the subscript / denotes the Maxwel l element number and:
(4.12)
where r, 's are the relaxation times.
- 58-
Now, since we have:
* = X >, (4.13)
The governing differential equation becomes:
(4.14)
where k" - ^k. is the unrelaxed modulus of the material. Equations (4.13) and (4.14) constitute the V E
constitutive equations for non-curing materials.
Note that since the material is a viscoelastic sol i d, the relaxed modulus is non-zero and as a result, one of
the elements i n Figure 4.1 is merely a spring, representing the relaxed modulus, i n parallel to the Maxwel l
elements. Since this element is equivalent to a Maxwel l element wi th a dashpot constant of infinity, the
general form of the above equation wi l l not change. It should only be kept i n mi nd that one of the
relaxation times woul d be considered infinitely large to account for the lone spring element.
4.1.2. Differential Equations for Curing Materials
In this section, the constitutive model for a spring and a dashpot wi th changes of temperature and cure are
studied separately.
4.1.2.1. Thermoelastic effects
Assume that a spring, essentially an elastic material, wi th a temperature-dependent stiffness is undergoing
a cycle of variable load and temperature and the constitutive model of the material is to be found. Change
of temperature i n elastic materials is a reversible process and as such only knowledge of the current value
of strain and the temperature-dependent modulus is needed, independent of the history. Thi s is due to the
- 59-
fact that a reversible process path independent of and depends only on the i ni ti al and final values of the
parameters. In other words the constitutive equation for this case can be written as fol l ows:
a(t,T) = k(t,T).8(t,T) (4.15)
In whi ch, k and s are the final values for the spring stiffness and the strain at the current temperature,
regardless of their intermediate values.
To explain this equation, an example for a special hypothetical case is presented here:
Consider an elastic bar compressed by a strain of E
0
. Assume that the stiffness of the bar is k
0
. So, we
have:
a
0
=k
0
.
0
(4.16)
Now assume that the bar undergoes a change in temperature, during whi ch its mechanical strain is kept
constant at e
0
. Further assume that as a result of this process the modulus of elasticity becomes zero.
Now, i f there is any stress remaining in the bar and the bar is released, since there is no modulus it wi l l
stretch to infinity, whi ch does not agree wi th common sense. The real behaviour is that of Equation (4.15)
according to whi ch the stress wi l l be zero (the expected value).
The above constitutive equation can also be presented i n incremental form. By differentiating Equation
(4.15) wi th respect to time, we obtain:
d ,, . , ds dk dT , . .. ,
cr = (k.e) = k. + s.. = k + k (4.17)
dt dt dT dt
For the case of a dashpot, though a change i n temperature is not a reversible process for strains it can be
said that it is reversible for the strain rate, . Thi s argument, although may not be physically meaningful,
wi l l help us establish the constitutive model. Thus:
<r = n(T).e (4.18)
- 60-
i n whi ch, all the values are the current values and independent of the history.
Havi ng the behaviour of a spring and dashpot, the differential equation for a single Maxwel l element,
according to the parameters i n Figure 4.1, can be written as:
E
~
+
~ d r k
) +
n'^k k
2 ) +
Thus, the constitutive equation i n this case is:
(4.19)
& = k(T(t))E
1 (7X0)
r(7/(0) k(T(t))
Defi ni ng an equivalent relaxation time, r , as follows:
(4.20)
r r k
The constitutive equation (Equation (4.20)) can now be written i n a more convenient form:
(4.21)
a = ks (4.22)
This is very similar to Equation (4.2) for a single Maxwel l element, but both k and r are functions of
temperature. At the same time, as mentioned before, most researchers have assumed that the unrelaxed
and relaxed modul i are constant wi th temperature. That translates to assuming a constant k, whi ch wi l l
convert the above equation to the same form to those for a non-curing material, wi th the exception that
now r = r wi l l vary wi th temperature.
For the case of a constant k, we wi l l show here that the DF wi l l result i n a similar modulus to the one
used for the IF i n the literature. Recal l that for generalized Maxwel l model, the relaxation modulus is:
E(t) = + (E
u
- E
x
) J W, exp (4.23)
-61 -
The definition of relaxation modulus is the stress resulting from a constant applied unit strain. Assuming
a constant strain, Equation (4.22) becomes:
&+
a
= 0 (4.24)
T(T(t))
The solution to this differential equation is:
-if
a = E(t) = Ce " (4.25)
i n whi ch, C is the integration constant and t' is a dummy integration variable. Since at time? = 0, the
stress should be equal to k , then C = k and:
- i f
a = E(t) = ke
0
(4.26)
Now, i n a thermorheologically simple material, the relaxation times can be found using the time-
temperature superposition:
z(T) = a
T
(T).r
0
(4.27)
where a
T
is the shift factor and r
0
is the reference relaxation time at a reference temperature T
0
. Usi ng
this equation we wi l l have:
1 f dt'
E(t) = k.e
T
<
aAm)
' (4.28)
Usi ng the definition of the reduced time:
the relaxation modulus then becomes:
- 62-
E(t) = k.e
r
" (4.30)
This is the relaxation modulus i n Equation (4.23) for a single Maxwel l element.
4.1.2.2. Effect of cure
Cure in elastic materials, unlike change of temperature, is an irreversible process and as a result the
material behaviour during cure is history dependent. To demonstrate the effect of cure on the constitutive
equation, consider the example used i n the previous section: an elastic bar under compression. This time,
suppose that it starts to cure under constant temperature and its modulus changes i n the meantime.
Al though the modulus is changing the change is due to a transformation i n the material itself and the new
modulus wi l l not contribute to bearing the load. In fact, it is similar to adding another bar to the first one,
such that the structure wi l l be stiffer, but the new material wi l l not help i n carrying any of the current
stress. Therefore, the constitutive equation i n this case i n differential from wi l l be:
& = k.s (4.31)
The obvious difference between cure and temperature change is whether or not a second term is added to
it: changes i n elastic modulus due to temperature change contribute to stress but not the ones resulting
from cure. Thi s understanding of the material behaviour has also been realized i n molecular network
theories, e.g. Wi neman and Shaw (2002), where network changes as a result of scission and healing
(similar to cure) have been represented by similar equations. It should emphasized that this discussion
applies only to the changes of modulus and its effects on the stresses and does not suggest that thermo-
chemical strains themselves do not lead to stress development. In fact, cure shrinkage strains generate
stress i n the same manner as thermal strains.
Combi ni ng both temperature and cure effects, the constitutive equation for a spring can be written as
follows:
- 63-
. , . dk dT d , dk da
cr-k.s + = (ke) - s
dT dt dt da dt
(4.32)
For the case of a dashpot, unlike that of a spring, there is no need to distinguish between the effects of
temperature and cure. Consider the bar example: i f the bar, subjected to a constant rate of strain, sees a
viscosity change due to cure it is the new viscosity that wi l l govern the behaviour of the bar. Therefore,
the effect of cure on the behaviour of the dashpot is similar to that of temperature and the performance of
the dashpot is only a function of the final value of the viscosity. The constitutive model i n this case can be
written as:
a = n(a). (4.33)
To obtain the constitutive equation for a Maxwel l element, Equations (4.32) and (4.33) can be combined.
The result is:
(4.34)
. d d "l
(
a a
+ = + +
dt
7
dt r [k
where,
1 dk dT
(4.35)
k dT dt
It can be seen that the constitutive equation for a variable stiffness is quite complicated. A n important
observation is that when the stiffness is constant throughout cure, the equations available i n the literature
for temperature-dependent material processes can be extended to include cure as wel l , as done by Ki m
and White (1996) and Zhu et al . (2001). However, i f the stiffness is not constant, this generalization
cannot be made directly and a more rigorous scheme has to be adopted. It is noted that i n such a case,
using IF may be impractical, but the DF can still be used to solve the constitutive equation.
- 6 4-
4.1.3. Numerical Solution of Differential Equations
To implement the DF i n its current I D form, differential equations need to be solved to relate the stresses
and strains at each point i n time. Thi s wi l l be done here for a model where the moduli are constant. For
this purpose, the unconditionally stable, 2
n d
order accurate Crank-Ni chol son or central difference scheme
(Hughes, 1987) wi l l be employed. As a result, the stress i n Maxwel l elements / , through solving
Equation (4.22), can be obtained as follows:
*r=
l A {
" (4-36)
1 +
2 ^ r
where, cr"
+1
and s"
+l
are the new stresses and strains, cr" and s" are the current stresses and strains, and
At is the increment of time. Havi ng all the element stresses, the stress i n the material can be obtained
from Equation (4.13).
4.1.3.1. Remarks
Note that i n the DF approach all the Maxwel l stresses from the previous time-step need to be
stored. These values effectively account for the loading history.
Thi s solution for the differential equations is in fact si mi l ar to the internal variable technique
(Johnson, 1999) used i n the IF, as mentioned before. Al though the internal variable method,
whi ch can have different forms, and a finite difference solution, such as the one used here, are not
identical the fundamental concept behind them is the same; both save some internal variables
equal in the number to number of Maxwel l element to account for the loading history. However,
it is observed that arri vi ng at such an equation is more intuitive and easier to obtain wi th the DF.
Al so, it appears that al l internal variable approaches are developed for discretization of the
reduced time, i.e. i n a simple form as follows:
-65 -
cr(r
+1
) = cr(r) + AtT (4.37)
Thi s means that either the reduced time ( ) instead of the real time (t) has to be discretized,
whi ch is very inconvenient i n process modeling, or some si mpl i fyi ng assumption on the
relationship between the reduced time and the real time has to be made, whi ch can generate errors
i n the results. Overal l , it appears that despite similarities between the two approaches, the DF has
clear advantages to the internal variable approach.
4.1.4. Comparison of Differential Form and Integral Form
In this section, the DF and IF approaches wi l l be compared based on their I D forms. Though simple
cases, this wi l l give us a better understanding of the similarities and differences between the two methods.
4.1.4.1. Comparison of the stresses
To compare the DF approach to the IF and evaluate its efficiency, the simple FO RT RA N code used i n
Chapter 3 was expanded. The program therefore calculates the stresses using the DF and IF approaches
from Equations (4.14) and (4.3). The material model presented by Ki m and Whi te (1996) is again used
here for the examples.
For the purpose of comparing the stresses resulting from the two methods, two practical and one
theoretical cure cycles are used. The temperature cycles are shown i n Figure 4.2 and the resulting stress-
time histories from the IF and DF approaches are shown i n Figure 4.3. As expected, the results from the
two methods are identical: it is not possible to distinguish the results from each other.
4.1.4.2. Comparison of efficiency
To compare the efficiency of the DF to the IF, similar to the comparison of P V E and IF in Chapter 3, two
different cases have been considered: a fully cured/constant cure thermoset matrix (essentially a
thermoplastic), where there is no computation of degree of cure, and a thermoset matrix, where cure is
- 66-
computed at every time step. In each case, a sample cure cycle is run wi th different number of time steps,
using DF, IF, and P V E approaches. The results are presented i n Table 4.1 and Table 4.2.
The results for the fully cured (thermoplastic) matrix are shown i n Table 4. 1. It is observed that the DF is
13 times faster than the I F. At the same time, interestingly the DF approach is only slightly slower than
the variable-time P V E approach (only around 20%). Table 4.2 shows the results for a curing thermoset
matrix. In this case, calculation of cure takes significant time, and thus the absolute benefit of the DF
approach is smaller. Nevertheless, even for this simple I D case, the D F approach is approximately 5
times faster than the IF approach. Agai n, the DF is only nomi nal l y slower than the P V E .
4.2. SUMMARY
The DF of viscoelasticity for a linear viscoelastic polymer during cure is developed and studied i n this
chapter. The DF and IF are i n fact equivalent and merely two different forms to describe the same
behaviour, as discussed previously and shown i n the numerical examples above. Despite similarities, the
two approaches have major differences as wel l . Note that using internal variable approaches for
implementation of the IF is advantageous to the si mpl i fi ed integration techniques of the IF, e.g. Taylor et
al . (1970), i n terms of ease of implementation, and runtimes. However, as discussed i n this chapter there
are assumptions needed i n order to use these approaches i n process modeling. As a result, the comparison
of DF to IF wi l l be performed for simplified integration techniques. Differences of the IF and DF are
explained as fol l ows:
The DF approach appears to provide a better framework for understanding the fundamental assumptions
made regarding the behaviour of the material, such as thermorheologically simple behaviour and the
concept of time-temperature superposition. As mentioned before, due to the complexity of the IF
approach, it is also more difficult to expand the IF formulation to more compl ex cases, such as modeling
thermoelastic effects, unlike the DF approach whi ch was extended to more general cases sections.
- 67-
The IF approach is a more compl ex formulation and therefore is more difficult to implement i n a
numerical code even using the common integration techniques used i n the literature, the most common of
whi ch is by Tayl or et al . (1970). Furthermore, due to the form of the integral equation the IF is much
more time consuming i n analysis than the DF approach.
When using available si mpl i fi ed methods, it was shown that the DF approach is much faster when
implemented i n a Finite Elements ( FE) code. The main reason is the existence of multiple integrations i n
those methods. Moreover, the efficiency of the DF is more evident i n comparison of run times wi th P V E ,
where the DF is onl y marginally slower. Regarding computational storage requirements, while both
models need to store intermediate values for each Maxwel l element, the IF needs to keep data for two
time steps.
One possible drawback to using the D F approach coul d be that it is bound to the differential equation that
results from the spring/dashpot model. Therefore, in the case that a relaxation modulus is characterized
using experiments that do not make use of these elements, it may not be easy to use the DF, since finding
the differential equation may not be possible. Of course, i n such a case the si mpl i fi ed integration
methods cannot be applied to the IF approach either, forcing history-dependent integration and maki ng
the IF run times prohibitively long. A summary of the different aspects of the two models is provided i n
Table 4.3.
Havi ng the DF for I D polymers, the next step is to expand this formulation to 3D behaviour of composite
materials. For this purpose, a proper micromechanical approach is needed i n order to combine the
polymer and fibre mechanical properties to obtain the composite properties. The procedure to find and
apply such a micromechanical approach wi l l be presented in the next chapter.
-68-
Tabl e 4.1 Compari s on of Run-t i mes for Thermopl ast i c Mat ri x (or constant degree of cure in a thermoset matri x)
Pseudo Viscoel astic Differential For m Integral For m
Repetitions Steps
Tot al core
run-time
Cor e run-
time
Tot al core
run-time
Core run-time
Tot al core
run-time
Core run-
time
I F/ DF
Rati o
D F / P VE
Rati o
200 500 0.13 0.00065 0.15 0.00075 1.95 0.00975 13 1.15
100 5000 0.64 0.0064 0.74 0.0074 9.80 0.098 13.24 1.16
20 20000 0.51 0.0255 0.63 0.0315 7.90 0.395 12.54 1.24
20 40000 1.04 0.052 1.23 0.0615 15.80 0.79 12.85 1.18
20 5000 0.12 0.006 0.15 0.0075 2.00 0.1 13.33 1.25
Tabl e 4.2 Compari s on of Run-t i mes for Thermoset Mat ri x (increasing degree of cure)
Pseudo Viscoel astic Differential For m Integral For m
Repetitions Steps
Tot al core
run-time
Core run-
time
Tot al core
run-time
Core run-time
Tot al core
run-time
Core run-
time
I F/ DF
Rat i o
DF/ PV1
Rati o
100 500 0.27 0.0027 0.27 0.0027 1.29 0.0129 4.78 1
100 5000 2.67 0.0267 2.78 0.0278 12.89 0.1289 4.64 1.04
20 20000 2.15 0.1075 2.24 0.112 10.3 0.515 4.6 1.04
20 40000 4.29 0.2145 4.47 0.2235 20.56 1.028 4.6 1.04
Table 4.3 Comparison of DF and IF models
Item Differential Form (DF) Integral Form (IF)
Formulation Fairly easy in a variety of cases
May be difficult in some cases; e.g.
thermoelastic effects
Implementation Relatively easy Difficult
Solution
Needs to solve the differential
equations
Uses simplified integration methods
Storage
(for a multiple-
Maxwell model)
Needs to store the stresses in each
Maxwell element
For Taylor et al. (1970) needs to store a set
of parameters which correspond to each
Maxwell element and some parameters
from the previous time-step
Speed
Fast. Even comparable to that of
CHILE
Very time consuming even with the
available simplified integration method
-70-
Chapter 4: Differential Formof Viscoelasticity in ID
^ k
H] W W -
(a)
a
H ] W V V ^
{] wvvH
^
n
k
n
(b)
Figure 4.1 (a) Maxwell element (b) Generalized Maxwell model
Cycle 2
50 10 0 150 20 0
Time(Min)
250 30 0
Figure 4.2 Cure cycles used to compare IF and DF stress predictions
350
-71 -
Chapter 4: Differential Formof Viscoelasticity in ID
-5
J
Time(min)
350
Figure 4.3 Comparison of predicted stress histories using IF and DF approaches. Note that the two
approaches give identical results for each case and therefore cannot be distinguished.
-72-
Chapter 5: Micromechanics
Chapter 5. MICROMECHANICS
Mi cromechani cal models are used to combine the mechanical and physical properties of the phases at the
micro level to model the response of a composite at the macro level as a homogeneous material. In doing
so, different aspects of the material behaviour need to be considered; such as the fact that the resin is a
curing viscoelastic material and that the fibres are not isotropic. These issues and others wi l l be dealt wi th
in this chapter to obtain a (virtual) characterization of the V E behaviour of composite materials wi th a
micromechanics ( MM) approach, whi ch wi l l be an essential part of process model i ng of the composite
materials.
First the fundamental equations of micromechanics are presented. Next, micromechanical equations for
elastic materials are discussed. Based on these, V E material properties are derived and presented along
wi th discussions on the different issues concerning the material behaviour, such as thermoelastic effects.
At the end, numerical examples are presented to clarify the approach.
5. 1. FU N D A ME N T A L E QUAT I ONS
In this section, some fundamental equations for heterogeneous materials are presented. These equations
are general and do not depend on any specific micromechanics model (Hashin, 1972). These equations
can be written for homogeneous and multi-phase materials, but wi l l be presented for the case of two-
phase bodies that are of interest here.
The volume average stress q_
c
of <r i n the composite is written as:
v
(5.1)
where the stress vector, a, for the purpose of FE implementation is as fol l ows:
22'
(5.2)
-73-
Rewri ti ng this equation i n terms of the constituent volumes, we wi l l have:
v
c
=j(j<LdV+ \dV) (5-3)
V
m
V
f
where V is the total volume of the composite, and V
m
and V
f
are the volumes of the matrix and fibre,
respectively.
Thus,
= ^(V
m
m
+ V
s
g_j) =(1 - v
f
)a
m
+ v
f
a
f
(5.4)
where v
f
denotes fibre vol ume fraction.
In a similar fashion, the strains can be written as follows:
l c = ^ { K l m + Vflf) = (1 - v
f
)L + v , , (5-5)
Equations (5.4) and (5.5) are two fundamental equations of M M , whi ch are derived from definitions of
stress and strain and can be universally used i n any M M model for two-phase bodies.
These two equations, along wi th the constitutive equations for the two phases wi l l be used i n the analysis
of composite materials. In addition to these, another equation is needed, whi ch should describe the stress-
strain relationship i n the material, i.e. its constitutive model. These, along wi th the finite elements
equation wi l l provide adequate number of equations to find the stresses and strains i n the material, as wi l l
be shown i n the fol l owi ng sections.
5.2. MICROMECHANICAL MODE L FOR ELASTIC MATERIALS
Mi cromechani cs has been the subject of many research studies i n the literature and numerous approaches
have been proposed. Mi cromechani cal models are normally developed for cases where both phases are
-74-
Chapter 5:. Micromechanics
elastic. Some of these models are mentioned here for reference. Mori & Tanaka (1973) developed a
model that is named after them. Christensen (1990) worked on a generalized self-consistent method.
Homogenization method has been studied by many researches. Suquet (1987) used this approach for both
elastic and viscoelastic materials. Aboudi (2001, 2002) used the Method of Cel l s or the Generalized
Method of Cel l s, whi ch analyze a repeating unit of a structure (unit cel l ). Some other examples of this
method are Banks-Si l l s et al . (1997) and Gui novart-Di az et al . (2002), who used an asymptotic
homogenization method. Some people have also used finite element-based approaches to model the
properties of composites, e.g. El l y i n et al . (2002).
Another elastic method that has been wi del y used in the literature has been developed by Hashin & Rosen
(1964) and, also discussed by Hashin (1972) and Hi l l (1964). Thi s model is based on modeling a
representative volume element of the structure, whi ch i n the case of unidirectional fibre reinforced
polymers takes the shape of concentric cylinders representing resin and fibre wi th their volumes
proportional to the actual volume fraction of each phase (Figure 5.1). In this case, the model is also called
the Concentric Cyl i nder Assembl y ( CCA) . Choosi ng a representative volume element in this model is
val i d for a statistically homogeneous material (for a comprehensive discussion on this issue see Hashin,
1972).
Some researchers have compared different micromechanical methods, notably Christensen (1990),
Hol l i ster and Ki kuc hi (1992), Nguyen Vi et et al . (1995), Bri nson and L i n (1998), and Herakovi ch (1998).
The understanding from these works is that although there are arguments for or against different methods,
most methods show good representation of the behaviour of the material for the standard case of fibre-
reinforced polymers.
Since we wi l l be dealing wi th unidirectional long-fibre laminae and due to relative si mpl i ci ty of the
model developed by Hashi n and Rosen it wi l l be used here. It should be noted that even though a specific
-75 -
model wi l l be used here, the proposed approach is not dependent on its specific form and using it does not
preclude us from using a different elastic M M model.
By applying unit strains to this model and taking into account the isotropic behaviour of polymer and
transversely isotropic behaviour of fibres, one can obtain the transversely isotropic elastic mechanical
properties of the composite, using elasticity equations. The corresponding modul i of the composite are
presented for reference as fol l ows (Bogetti and Gi l l espi e, 1992). In these equations, the properties of the
composite, fibre, and matrix have subscripts c, / , and m, respectively. Note that a typi ng error existed
i n the reference i n calculation of the longitudinal Young' s modulus, whi ch has been corrected here.
The longitudinal Young' s modulus:
l c
=
1 /
v
/
+
l m
( l - v
/
) +
4 0 m -v1 2 f
)k
m
k
2 f
G
m
(\-v
f
)v
}
(K
f
+ G
m
)k
m
+(k
2f
- k
m
)G
m
v
f
where k
m
is the plane strain bulk modulus of polymer and is calculated as fol l ows:
(5.6)
k =
2(\-v
m
-2vl)
The major Poi sson's ratio:
Vnc=
v
nc=Vn
f
v
f
+V
m
Q-v
f
) +
i,
V
m ~
V
l2f X* -
k
2f )
G
m 0 ~
V
f >/
(k
2f
+G
m
)k
m
+(k
2/
-k
m
)G
m
v
f
The inplane shear modulus:
(5.7)
(5.8)
G
l 2c =
G
Uc =
G
m
{G
aI
+G
m
)HG
x2f
-G
m
)v
f
( G ,
2 /
+G J - ( G
1 2 /
- G J v
/
(5.9)
-76-
The transverse shear modulus:
G
m
[k
m
(G
n+
G
21/
)
+
2G
23/
G
m+
k
m
(G
23/
-G
m
)v
f
]
C J
9
, _ = p.lu)
K(G
m
+ G
2 3 /
) + 2G
2 3 /
G
m
-(k
m
+ 2G
m
)(G
23f
-G
m
)v
f
The plane strain bulk modulus:
K
JK
2/
+G
m
)K
m+
(K
2/
-KJG
m
v
f
(K
2/+
G
m
)-(K
2f
-K
m
)v
f
The transverse Young' s modulus:
E
2 c =
E
3 c = , n -(
5
-
12
)
(\lAK
2c
)
+
(\lAG
2
,
c
)
+
(v,\jE
Xc
)
The transverse Poi sson's ratio:
2E
lc
K
2c
-E
lc
E
2c
-4vf
2c
K
2c
E
2i
2E
lc
K
2c
(5.13)
The coefficients of thermal expansion ( CTE' s) i n the three pri nci pal directions can be written as:
CTE
lf
E
lf
v
f+
CTE
m
E
m
(l-v
f
)
E
u
v
f
+ E
~\}-
V
f) (5-14)
CTE
2c
= CTE
3c
= (CTE
2f
+ v
l2/
CTE
if
) v
f
+ CTE
m
( l + v
m
)( l - v
f
) - [v
X2f
v
f
+ v
m
(\- v, )]CTE
ic
5.3. MICROMECHANICAL MODEL FOR VISCOELASTIC MATERIALS
In contrast to the case of elastic materials, there are not many studies done i n the literature on
micromechanics of viscoelastic materials.
In some works, this is dealt wi th using approximations, e.g. Whi te and Ki m (1998). However, i n general,
most researchers who have modeled the viscoelastic materials have done so using the Correspondence
Principle. Accordi ng to this principle (to be discussed more below), a Laplace transformation converts a
-77-
linear viscoelastic problem to a linear elastic problem i n Laplace space, whi ch then enables one to use the
elastic micromechanical models. After obtaining the material properties i n this space, applying an inverse
Laplace transformation brings the material properties back to the time domain, i.e. the required result (e.g.
see Matzenmi l l er and Gerl ach; 2001). Some examples of this approach are: Schapery (1967), Bri nson and
Knauss (1992), Barbero and Luci ano (1995), Y i et al . (1998), Harris and Barbero (1998), Kumar and
Singh (2001), Noh and Whi tcomb (2003), Matzenmi l l er and Gerl ach (2004), Zocher et al . (2004), L i u et
al . (2004), and Yang et al . (2004a).
In general, there does not seem to be a comprehensive work on this subject that includes all the required
aspects of the material behaviour without unnecessary simplifications. Most researchers have used
approximate inverse Laplace transformations, e.g. Schapery, Noh and Whi tcomb, and Zocher et al .
Consideration of temperature changes and cure has not been wi del y done. There are few works, i n whi ch
this process has been carried out completely, but even i n those cases some other assumptions have been
made. For example, Barbero and Luci ano, and Y i et al . made the incorrect assumption that the Poisson's
ratio is constant wi th time (see Tschoegl et al . (2002a) and Hi l ton (2003)).
Taki ng advantage of the available models i n the literature and taking into account al l necessary aspects of
the material behaviour, i ncl udi ng consideration of temperature changes and cure, variability of al l resin
properties wi th time, and al l owi ng the coefficients of thermal expansion of the composite to be time
dependent even i f they are constant in the phases, we can obtain the material properties of the composite.
This wi l l be explained in the subsequent sections.
5.3.1. Correspondence Principle
This principle can be used to find the stresses and strains in V E materials, by taking advantage of Laplace
transforms. For a simple description of this principle, consider the I D integral form of V E i n a material,
as follows:
-78-
a(t)=JE(t-T)dr (5.15)
o dr
If we apply the Lapl ace transformation to this equation, i.e. a convolution integral, the result wi l l be:
(a(t)) = &(s) = t(E * ^f) = E(s) I A (5.16)
dt dt
We wi l l then have:
6(s) = E(s)-[si(s)-s(0)] (5.17)
And by putting e(0) = 0 , we obtain:
&(s) = sE(s)-s(s) (5.18)
This describes an elastic behaviour i n Laplace space, i n whi ch the modulus of elasticity is:
f(s) = sE(s) (5.19)
This is the basis for the Correspondence Pri nci pl e, whi ch states that a V E problem is equivalent to a
corresponding elastic problem, i n whi ch the boundary conditions are the Lapl ace transformation of those
i n the V E problem (with the assumption that boundaries are independent of time) and the moduli are
found from the above equation. This principle is also sometimes cal l ed "Static Correspondence
Pri nci pl e", as opposed to a similar principle for dynamic loading (see e.g. Bri nson and Knauss, 1992)
Havi ng the corresponding elastic problem, it can be solved i n Lapl ace space to find the stresses and
strains. Then, the stresses and strains i n time space can be obtained by applying inverse Laplace
transformations to these values as follows:
*0 = r'(*(-))
-79-
5.3.2. Vi rt ual Mat eri al Characteri zati on
5.3.2.1. Isothermal Conditions
Taki ng advantage of the C C A approach for elastic materials and the Correspondence Principle we wi l l be
able to find the V E modul i of the composite material as functions of time. The step-by-step procedure is
explained below.
First, the modul i of the constituents are obtained i n Laplace space. Showi ng the longitudinal relaxation
moduli of the fibre and matrix as an example, we have:
For fibre: f
f
(s) = sE
f
(s) = s(E
f
) (5.21)
For matrix: f
m
(s) = sE
m
(s) = s(E
m
(t)) (5.22)
Assume that the elastic Mi cromechani cal ( MM) equations are written i n the fol l owi ng generic form:
E
c
= MM{E
f
,E
m
,v
f
) (5.23)
By substituting the corresponding elastic moduli of Equations (5.21) and (5.22) i n the M M model,
Equation (5.23), we wi l l obtain the corresponding elastic modulus of the composite:
t
c
(s) = MM{t
f
(s),t
m
(s),v
f
) (5.24)
By applying the inverse Laplace transformation to this modulus, we wi l l find the composite modulus in
time domain:
-.,r
c
(*)
E
c
(t) = C\ - ^ - ) (5.25)
5
A proper method of appl yi ng the inverse should be used here. Both approximate inversions (e.g. Noh and
Whitcomb, 2003; Zocher et al . , 2004) and exact algorithms (e.g. Barbero and Luci ano, 1995; Y i et al . ,
1998) have been used i n the literature.
-80-
Havi ng the V E modulus of the composite material as a function of time, it can then be described using a
mathematical function, such as the Prony series:
In order to do this, a regression algorithm can be used to fit the results to the above equation. In general,
one should assume al l the parameters i n the above equation, i.e. relaxation times, weight factors, and
unrelaxed and relaxed modul i , as variable (see e.g. Baumgaertel and Winter, 1989). Thi s wi l l result i n a
nonlinear regression problem (see Bates and Watts, 1988). However, a more common approach i n the
literature, e.g. Y i et al . , 1998; Si mon et al . , 2000; Arzoumani di s and Li echti , 2003, is to choose the
relaxation times, typi cal l y spaced equally at one per each decade of logarithmic scale of time, and then
perform a linear regression analysis to find the other unknowns. Havi ng these values one can then test for
a goodness of fit (e.g. Si mon et al.) or compare the fit and actual modul i (e.g. Ki m and Whi te, 1996). It is
noted, however, that since the material properties are smooth functions rigorous statistical tests are not
required. Some other notable references on finding these relaxation modulus variables are Maztenmi l l er
and Gerl ach (2001) and especially Emri and Tschoegl (1995).
The approach explained above is also used i n experimental characterization of polymers. In a way, by
combining the properties of the phases into the composite we are characterizing the composite materials
i n a virtual environment. For this reason, this procedure is here referred to as "virtual material
characterization". Summary of the proposed M M approach is shown schematically i n Figure 5.2.
5.3.2.2. Non-isothermal conditions
The procedure presented above can be used to characterize a composite material for constant temperature
and degree of cure. Thi s is due to the fact that i n fitting a Prony series to the composite moduli the
relaxation times, r
c i
, i n Equation (5.26) need to be constant wi th time.
(5.26)
-81 -
To include temperature changes and cure i n the M M approach, time-temperature-cure superposition, as
described in Chapter 2, can be uti l i zed. In other words, the goal here wi l l be to find the composite shift
factor, whi ch may be different from that of the polymer. The relation between these two factors is
discussed below.
Consider the I D V E integral form for a thermorheologically simple polymer as fol l ows:
<T{t)='\E(g-?)^dT (5.27)
in whi ch the reduced times are:
' 1
T
1
<f = j dt' and ? = jdt' (5.28)
0
Q
T 0
a
T
Cl earl y, Equation (5.27) can be written in an alternative form as fol l ows:
<7(0 = W- O- TJ ^' (5-29)
This equation has also been mentioned i n the literature, e.g. Kumar and Talreja (2003).
The above equation means that the form of the governing equation for composite materials under non-
isothermal condition remains the same as the isothermal condition, wi th the stipulation that time should
be replaced wi th reduced time, . As a result, to find the properties of composite as a function of
temperature and degree of cure one can use the same process described i n previous section, wi th the
difference that al l the calculations should be performed i n 'reduced time space' instead of 'time space',
e.g. Laplace transformation should be applied wi th respect to . The result wi l l be the moduli of
composite under non-isothermal conditions, whi ch are identical i n form to that of the isothermal
conditions, but a function of the reduced time. Symbol i cal l y:
n o n
- , o= ,,,( #) (5-30)
-82-
This is the same relationship that is written for the polymer and it effectively means that the definition of
the reduced time i n composite and polymer are the same. Then, it fol l ows that the corresponding shift
factors are identical. In other words, to model behaviour of composite as a function of time and
temperature one needs to employ the time-temperature-cure superposition using the polymer shift factor.
Symbol i cal l y:
(
a
T ) composite
=
(
a
T ) matrix (5-31)
The underlying assumptions here are that:
The material is thermorheologically simple
Relaxation times are constant (i.e. assuming that temperature and cure dependence is captured only
through the shift factor)
The shift factor for al l the material properties i n the matrix is unique, e.g. longitudinal and shear
relaxation modul i can be described wi th the same shift factor.
The above approximations cover most typical cases. However, there are cases where the above
assumptions are not val i d, e.g. Deng and Knauss (1997) and Sane and Knauss (2001) have reported more
than one shift factor. For the cases where any of these conditions does not hold, the fol l owi ng discussion
is presented to show how the material can be characterized. The issue of thermorheologically complex
materials wi l l be discussed i n the next section.
I f any of the above assumptions is not val i d, the problem that we wi l l face is only i n fitting the Prony
series to the modul i as functions of time. At that point, the problem becomes a characterization problem
where the shift factor is unknown. In other words, it is similar to the characterization of the material from
experimental results and as such, similar approaches can be taken. The details of the approaches can be
found i n such works as K i m and White (1996) and Si mon et al . (2000). Put si mpl y, one can proceed as
follows: a pair of constant temperature and degree of cure is assumed. For these values, the material can
-83-
be characterized as explained before for the isothermal case. As a result, relaxation times, weight factors,
unrelaxed and relaxed modul i wi l l be obtained. Then, this procedure wi l l be repeated for other
temperatures and degrees of cure. Thi s does not have to be done for al l possible values of temperature and
degree of cure; we only need enough values to construct the master curve for the material, similar to
experimental procedures. Then, based on these values the shift factor and the relaxation times can be
obtained. The exact details of the procedures wi l l depend on the specific material under study and one can
refer to the references mentioned above.
5.3.3. Material Properties
The characterization procedure explained above showed only the longitudinal modulus for si mpl i ci ty.
However, knowledge of other mechanical properties of the phases is needed and other composite
properties should be characterized. The fibres are elastic and normally transversely isotropic, whi ch
means that five material properties are needed to describe them; these properties are known for a given
fibre.
The polymers, on the other hand, are normally isotropic and therefore two material properties are required
to describe them, whi ch are chosen out of the four common values of Young' s modulus (E), shear
modulus ( G ) , bulk modulus (K), and Poisson's ratio (v). Due to the compl exi ty of characterizing two
of these properties at the same time some researchers have characterized one and made assumptions on
another, e.g. Ki m and White (1997) who measured G and assumed that v has a constant value. In
several studies a time independent Poisson's ratio has been assumed for the resin, e.g. Poon et al. (1998),
Y i et al . (1998), Ki m et al . (2002), and Mel o and Radford (2003). However, there is enough evidence i n
the literature to the contrary, e.g. Hi l ton (2003) makes the argument that such an assumption is i nval i d.
There are many other works i n the literature on this topic. A review of the literature on this issue can be
found i n Hi l ton (2001) and Tschoegl et al . (2002a). Some other researchers have assumed a constant bulk
behaviour wi th time, e.g. Garni ch and Hansen (1997) and Idesman et al . (2000).
-84-
There are several works in the literature, where time dependent bulk and shear behaviour have been
considered, e.g. Adol f and Marti n (1996), Hol zapfel and Si mo (1996), and characterized wi th
experiments, e.g. Yee and Takemori (1982), Park (2000), Arzoumani di s and Li echti (2003), and Yang et
al . (2004 a,b); a comprehensive study of P M M A resin on this topic has been done by Sane and Knauss
(2001a, 2001b).
In summary, although some researchers have assumed time-independent bulk behaviour or Poisson's
ratio, it seems to be more because of the complexities i nvol ved i n their measurement than the actual
material behaviour. Based on the evidence i n the literature, al l material properties should be assumed time
dependent. Here, the micromechanical calculations wi l l be done as such, wi th a Prony series representing
each material property (modulus or Poisson's ratio). Cl earl y, model i ng a material wi th a constant material
property for resin wi l l be quite easy, by simply assuming a constant value for that property.
Another issue to keep i n mi nd is the form of the coefficients of thermal expansion and cure shrinkage for
the composite. Accordi ng to Equation (5.14) these two are functions of the material properties and as
such are time dependent. A n assumption of time independency on these parameters woul d therefore be a
mere simplification without insight into the material behaviour. It wi l l be seen i n the fol l owi ng sections
that i n fact the variability of these parameters is not negligible. It should be noted that this dependence on
time is the result of mechanical interaction between phases, and as a result is si mi l ar i n form to that of the
modul i . Therefore, the relationship between thermal strains of the composite and temperature changes is
similar i n form to that of the stress-strain relationship, where thermal strains act as stresses and
temperature as strains i n this analogy. Consequently, the coefficients of thermal expansion and cure
shrinkage can be represented by Prony series. This wi l l be considered i n the fl l owi ng sections.
5.3.4. Thermoelastic effects
In most of the discussions i n this and the previous chapter, a thermorheologically simple behaviour for
the polymer was assumed. Thi s implies that the unrelaxed and relaxed values of the relaxation modulus
-85-
are temperature and cure independent. Thi s is based on some of the works i n the literature, i n whi ch these
values were measured experimentally, e.g. Ki m and Whi te (1996) and Si mon et al . (2000).
However, there is evidence in the literature that some materials do not behave this way. The experiments
done separately and on different materials by Mc Crum and Pogany (1970), Weitsman (1982), Harper and
Weitsman (1985), and Adol f and Marti n (1990) all showed that thermorheologically simple assumptions
for the material of their study is not val i d and a simple horizontal shift is not adequate to construct a
master curve. A review of some prominent works i n this area is presented here to show how thermoelastic
effects have been modeled i n the literature and to get some ideas on specific values that may be assumed
in representing the material properties.
Schapery (1974) used the term "thermorheologically complex materials" ( T C M) for the materials that di d
not fol l ow the thermorheologically simple ( TSM) assumption. Obvi ousl y, this is a very general term and
the material properties can be modeled i n different forms. To formulate such behaviour, Schapery defined
T C M- 2 material, wi th T C M- 1 being a composite consisting of different T S M materials, whi ch has the
fol l owi ng constitutive equation i n integral form:
where D refers to the creep compliance, D, is the initial value of creep compliance, and and are
the reduced times, si mi l ar to the values defined i n Chapter 2, i.e.:
(5.32)
(5.33)
Schapery showed that i f the i ni ti al value of creep compliance is assumed to be as follows:
D,=D,(T
0
)la
G
(T) (5.34)
where, T
0
is a reference temperature, then the constitutive model wi l l take the fol l owi ng form:
-86-
a = a,
o ^'
(5.35)
whi ch means that the temperature dependent relaxation modulus ( E
T
) i n this case is:
E
r
=a
G
(T)E()
(5.36)
In other words, these equations define a vertical shift factor (i.e. a
a
), whi ch i n addition to the horizontal
shift factors can be used to construct a master curve. As shown by Mc Crum and Pogany, different forms
of initial creep compliance and vertical shift factors can be defined to shift the data points to a master
curve.
A more general form of T C M- 2, obtained experimentally by Harper and Weitsman for 3502 resin, was
later simplified and used by Hashi n et al . (1987), and Sadkin and Aboudi (1989). The latter approach is
consistent wi th T C M- 2 and Equation (5.32) and values of both shift factors have been obtained i n these
works.
It wi l l be shown here that assuming the spring stiffness i n the Maxwel l model as a function of
temperature, as shown i n Chapter 4, is consistent wi th T C M- 2 and the form used by Hashi n et al . , and
Sadkin and Aboudi . Recal l from Equation (4.22) that the DF for a Maxwel l element wi th variable spring
stiffness is as fol l ows:
Then, by applying a constant strain for a relaxation test, we need to solve the fol l owi ng equation:
& = ks -
x
(5.37)
(5.38)
T
where
-87-
r r k
The solution, similar to Equations (4.26) and (4.28), is:
(5.39)
o-(0 = Cexp(-j4) = Cexp[ - J + J(
o
r
V o
r
o
r
' dt' V,i flfit
= C.exp
- - + ln[(7X0)]
Or:
cr(0 = Cexp(l n[/t(T)])exp = c*(r) ( )
Since at time ? = 0, the stress should be equal to the spring stiffness. Thus,
k(T
a
) = Ck(T
0
)k(T
a
)->C =
k(T
0
)
where, k(T
Q
) is the spring stiffness at time zero.
Since the stress for an applied unit strain is equal to the relaxation modulus, we get:
(5.40)
(5.41)
(5.42)
k(T)
KT
0
)
(5.43)
k(T)
The above equation is consistent wi th Equation (5.36), where the ratio acts as the vertical shift
k(T
0
)
factor. Thi s shows that the assumption of temperature variability of the spring stiffness is consistent wi th
the form of T C M- 2 discussed before.
The experiments done by Harper and Weitsman (1985) and later used by Hashi n et al . (1987) were
performed on 3502 resin. Even though this is different from the materials that have been discussed in this
thesis, due to lack of information i n this area, the vertical shift factor function provided by Hashin et al .
wi l l be used here as a guide. Then, some reasonable assumptions on the unrelaxed and relaxed values of
moduli as functions of temperature can be made here. These values wi l l then be used i n modeling
thermoelastic effects i n Chapter 8, as needed.
The horizontal and vertical shift factor for 3502 resin are as fol l ows (Hashin et al.):
The vertical shift factor has been represented by an exponential function, but can easily be represented by
a linear function, as shown i n Figure 5.3. The linear function wi l l be used here, due to its simpler form.
The linear vertical shift function can be shown as follows:
This equation defines a shift factor that has a value of unity around 30 C , the reference temperature, and
reduces the unrelaxed and relaxed moduli to 0.66 of this value at temperature of 180' C . Agai n, although
this has been obtained for a specific resin, due to lack of other experimental results, it wi l l be used i n
Chapter 8.
5.3.5. Summary of the proposed approach
The procedure to find the mechanical properties of composite materials was discussed i n the previous
sections. Through this approach one can combine the properties of the fibre and the polymer under
changes of temperature and advancement of cure. Di scussi on on each part of this process along wi th
characteristics and l i mi tati on of each was given before. The approach is shown schematically in Figure
5.4, i n conjunction wi th a summary of comments regarding each part of the process.
(5.44)
a
G
=1. 0591-0. 00227 (5.45)
-89-
5.4. NUMERICAL EXAMPLES
In this section, some examples wi l l be presented to show the virtual characterization procedure used to
find the material properties of the composite under isothermal and non-isothermal conditions. For this
purpose, the mathematical package Mathemati ca has been used to perform the calculations.
A l l the calculations needed for M M analysis are performed using the internal functions of Mathematica,
except for the inverse Laplace transformation, where an add-on package called "numerical inversion" has
been used. Thi s package is capable of applying the inverse Laplace wi th five different methods. Here, the
method developed by Stehfest (1970) has been used.
5.4.1. Isothermal Case
This example involves virtual characterization of a composite wi th an isotropic matrix and transversely
isotropic fibres under isothermal conditions. The material properties are listed i n Table 5.1 and Table 5.2.
The properties of the fibre are those of AS 4 carbon, and shear properties of the polymer are taken from
the work of Whi te and Ki m (1998) for 3501-6 resin and fiber volume fraction (v
f
) is taken to be 0.6. Due
to lack of knowledge of the bulk behaviour, some reasonable values of unrelaxed and relaxed modul i
were assumed. Al so, the relaxation times and weight factors for bul k modulus were assumed to be equal
to those of the shear behaviour. The shift factor for this example is assumed to be a nominal value of
10"
s
. The form of the modul i are as follows:
K
m
(a,T,t) = K
r
m+
[K"
m
-/C]g exp
-t
(5.46)
G
m
(a,T,t) = G
r
m+
[G"
m
-G
r
m
]}Zg
a
^P
-t
(5.47)
The micromechanical model of choice here is the C C A . The Mathematica notebook is provided i n
Appendi x A . l . In this example, the number of the Maxwel l elements and the relaxation times of the
-90-
composite have been assumed to be the same as those of the resin and based on these, the weight factors
have been obtained. The results are shown i n Table 5.3. To check the goodness of fit the coefficient of
determination has been calculated and shown i n the notebook. The value of this coefficient for all
properties is very close to one and therefore excellent fit is achieved.
To show the results, first the values of unrelaxed and relaxed modulus of the composite, presented i n
Table 5.4, are noted. These values, obtained from the viscoelastic micromechanical method in
Mathematica are identical to those obtained directly by combi ni ng the properties of the fibre and
unrelaxed and relaxed properties of the polymer through elastic micromechanics [Equations (5.6)-(5.14)],
whi ch shows consistency of the results.
To illustrate the goodness of fit the mechanical properties based on the micromechanical analysis and the
fitted Prony series versus reduced time, (in this case f = ) , have been compared i n Figure 5.5-
Figure 5.12. To show the effects of micromechanics on the weight factors of the material, another curve
has been added to these figures, whi ch i n each case has the same unrelaxed and relaxed values as the
other two, but uses the resin weight factors instead. It is observed that i n al l cases the Prony series fit
matches the functions it is fitted to, i.e. the result of the micromechanical analysis, exactly. It is also
evident from the graphs that using resin weight factors for composite has a significant effect on the results
(expect for the longitudinal modulus, where dominance of fibres results i n a practically constant
modulus). Al though some of the values used here are only assumed and do not represent experimental
values, the results show that using the resin properties for composite can be a source of considerable
error. Usi ng the method presented here, the parameters for the composite can be easily obtained and no
si mpl i fyi ng assumptions, as done by White and Ki m (1998), need to be made.
-91 -
5.4.2. Different Temperatures and Degrees of Cure
It was shown i n Section 5.3.2 that the polymer and composite have the same shift factor (Equation (5.31)
). In this section, an example is used to show the validity of this equation.
For this purpose, the same material properties as i n the previous example are used. In addition to the shift
factor of 1CT
6
used i n that example, two other shift factors of values 10"
2
and 10~
10
(whi ch correspond to
a different set of temperatures and degrees of cure) for the polymer are assumed. For each shift factor, the
micromechanical procedure presented before is repeated and the composite material properties are
obtained. The results for two of these material properties, G
n
and E
2
(the others are omitted to avoid
repetition), are presented i n Figure 5.13 and Figure 5.14. The figures show that the values needed to shift
a curve i n order to superpose it wi th another curve (i.e. the relative value of the composite shift factors for
the two curves) is equal to the relative values of the resin shift factors for those curves. Thi s means that
the same factors as the resin can be used for the composite.
-92-
Table 5.1 Material properties of fibre and resin for the numerical example
Property AS4 fibre Property 3501-6 resin
v i 2=v
13
0.2 G
u
(Gpa) 1.185
v
2 3
0.25
G
r
(Gpa) 0.018
E,(Gpa) 210 K
u
(Gpa) 3.556
E
2
(Gpa) 17.2
K
r
(Gpa) 0.80
G
12
=G
13
(Gpa) 27.6 CTE(ue/C) 58
CTE! (1/C) -0.9
CTE
2
(1/C) -7.2
Table 5.2 Relaxation times and weight factors used in the numerical example
CO xjmin)
Sat
1 2.92E+01 0.059
2 2.92E+03 0.066
3 1.82E+05 0.083
4 1.10E+07 0.112
5 2.83E+08 0.154
6 7.94E+09 0.262
7 1.95E+11 0.184
8 3.32E+12 0.049
9 4.92E+14 0.025
Table 5.3 Relaxation times and weight factors for different material properties in the example
Maxwell element Relaxation time E, Vl 2 G2 3 G
1 2 E
2
V2 3
a. a
2
1 2.92E+01 0.057 0.009 0.041 0.052 0.038 0.009 0.058 0.014
2 2.92E+03 0.064 0.012 0.048 0.059 0.045 0.011 0.065 0.018
3 1.82E+05 0.080 0.017 0.063 0.076 0.059 0.016 0.081 0.025
4 1.10E+07 0.109 0.029 0.090 0.105 0.084 0.026 0.110 0.039
5 2.83E+08 0.150 0.048 0.132 0.148 0.124 0.044 0.152 0.063
6 7.94E+09 0.259 0.150 0.266 0.270 0.254 0.122 0.262 0.177
7 1.95E+11 0.193 0.347 0.240 0.206 0.245 0.301 0.190 0.339
8 3.32E+12 0.058 0.255 0.080 0.057 0.098 0.294 0.054 0.216
9 4.92E+14 0.030 0.133 0.041 0.029 0.053 0.176 0.028 0.109
-93-
Table 5.4 Values of the unrelaxed and relaxed moduli of the composite obtained from the VE
micromechanics in Mathematica
Property E^MPa) v
t 2
G
12
(MPa) K
2
(MPa) G
23
(MPa) E
2
(MPa) v
2 3
CTEû/C) CTE
2
(uVC)
Unrelaxed 127410 0.253 4068.0 6405.5 2726.2 7619.8 0.398 -0.311 27.0
Relaxed 126014 0.314 71.8 1831.1 70.2 270.3 0.926 -0.890 30.4
-94-
Resin
Figure 5.1 Concentric Cylinder Assembly (CCA) model
Figure 5.2 Schematic illustration of the micromechanical approach
aG Linear fit
1.2 i
S 0.6-
0.4 -
0.2 -
0 -I 1 1 1 1 1
:
1 1 1 1 1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Temperature (C)
Figure 5.3 Vertical shift factor for thermorheologically complex behaviour of 3502 resin
-95-
P r o p e r t i e s n e e d e d :
- Unrelaxed and relaxed moduli (constant moduli)
- Relaxation times (rt), weight factors (w;), and number of
Maxwell elements (A^ can be different for shear and
bulk behaviour, except r('s that are chosen equal
- Coefficient of thermal expansion and cure shrinkage
- Dependence on a and T shift factor
\^Possible dependence of constant moduli on T y
C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s :
- It models two behaviour (e.g. shear andbulk )-> Poisson's ratio functions of
time; so are coefficients of thermal expansion and cure shrinkage
- The material behavior is modeled with multiple Maxwell elements moduli
are Prony series
- The temperature (7) anddegree of cure (a) change time-temperature-cure
superposition
- The constant moduli, can be constant (thermorheologically simple) or variable
v^with T(Thermoelastic behavior, thermorheologically complex) J
Fiber properties
Characteristics:
- Orthotropic behavior
- Canmodel thermoelastic behavior
P r o p e r t i e s n e e d e d :
- Material properties
- Fiber volume fraction
'Laplace Transform (LT)^
a.T constant
Using Correspondence Principle
Converts both phases to elastic materials, with all parameters functions of the
variables
InLaplace space, other matrix parameters (such as E, v) can be calculated
O S
Combining the
using MM
- A suitable micromechanics (MM) model should be chosen -> can be virtually
any model
- The result will be the material properties inall directions (assuming
orthotropic behaviour)
A method of numerical inversion of LT is chosen
The result of the inversion is the material properties as functions of time
The accuracy of the inversion should be verified
Fit Prony series to all^
properties
Properties will be functions of a,T
The procedure is similar towhat is
done for experimental data
-(Test for goodness o
V ^ f i t
The test can be statistical or
only include comparison of
data: the moduli are smooth
and rigorous statistical tests are
\ ^ not normallyrequired
Ingeneral, anonlinear regression is
required to find r, and u^s
- r('s canbe assumed alinear
regression will be required
- It can be shown that the shift factor is
not affected through MM
Result: VE
constitutive model of ]
\Composite material
Fi gure 5.4 Flowchart of the micromechanical analysis used
127600 i
125800 -I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1E-11 1E-08 0.00001 0.01 10 10000 1E+07 1E+10 1E+13
Reduced time (min)
Figure 5.5 Comparison of the value of composite modulus from different methods:
micromechanics, Prony series fit to micromechanics, and Prony series with the resin weight factors
0.35
0.3
0.25 -\
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
Micromech.
Fit
Resin
0
1E-11 1E-08 0.00001 0.01 10 10000 1E+07 1E+10 1E+13
Reduced time (min)
-98-
4500
4000
3500
3000
J-2500
Is 2000 H
1500
1000
500
0
1E 11 1E-08 0.00001 0.01 10 10000 1E+07 1E+10 1E+13
Reduced time (min)
3000 i
0 "I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1E-11 1E-08 0.00001 0.01 10 10000 1E+07 1E+10 1E+13
Reduced time (min)
-99-
9000 -1
8000 -
0 -I . 1 1 -i 1 1 : 1 1
1E-11 1E-08 0.00001 0.01 10 10000 1E+07 1E+10 1E+13
Reduced time (min)
1 1
0.3 -
0.2 -
0.1 -
0 -I 1 . 1 1 . 1 1 1
1E-11 1E-08 0.00001 0.01 10 10000 1000000 1E+10 1E+13
0
Reduced time (min)
- 100-
O.E+00
-1.E-06
J
Reduced time (min)
Figure 5.11 Comparison of the value of composite coefficient of thermal expansion different
methods: micromechanics and Prony series fit to micromechanics
3.1E-05 -j
3.1E-05 -
2.7E-05 -I 1 1 1 1 1 1 * 1
1E-11 1E-08 1E-05 0.01 10 10000 1E+07 1E+10 1E+13
Reduced time (min)
Figure 5.12 Comparison of the value of composite coefficient of thermal expansion different
methods: micromechanics and Prony series fit to micromechanics
- 101 -
% 2500
2 2000
1E-08 0.00001 0.01 10000 1E+07 1E+10 1E+13
Reduced time (min)
Fi gure 5.13 Compar i son of the values of composite modul us for di fferent shift factors
9000 -i
8000 -
7000 -
6000 -
Q . 5000 -
5
CM
I D
4000 -
3000 -
2000 -
1000 -
10
4
\ 10
4
* *r*
aT=10M0
--aT=10A 6
aT=10A 2
0
1E-11 0.0000001 0.001 10 100000 1E+09 1E+13
Reduced time (min)
Fi gur e 5.14 Compar i son of the values of composite modul us for di fferent shift factors
- 102-
Chapter 6: Differential Form of Viscoelasticity in 3D
Chapter 6. DIFFERENTIAL FORM OF VISCOELASTICITY IN 3D
Havi ng the differential form ( DF) of viscoelasticity i n one-dimensional form and the composite materials
characterization from previous chapters, we can develop the DF i n a general 3D form for composite
materials during cure.
The development of the constitutive model and the finite element equations are presented i n this chapter.
First, the constitutive equations for 3D behaviour are derived. Then, based on these the finite element
equations are developed. In the last section, the reverse micromechanics equations, i.e. the formulation to
obtain the phase stresses and strains from the composite stresses and strains, are presented.
6.1. GOVERNING EQUATIONS IN 3D
6.1.1. Choice of Material Properties and Development of the Differential Form
In this section, the governing differential equations for composite materials i n 3D are derived. In order to
explain the procedure better, first the isotropic form of V E materials are derived and then the DF
equations for transversely isotropic V E materials are developed. As it wi l l be explained, a proper choice
of material properties i n representing the material behaviour is important i n both cases and wi l l be
discussed as fol l ows.
6.1.1.1. Isotropic viscoelastic materials
The stress-strain relationship for an elastic isotropic material, considering only infinitesimal strains, is
written as fol l ows:
a = Ds (6.1)
where matrices are designated wi th double underlines and vectors wi th a single underline and:
D = EA~
l
- 103 -
where E is the elastic modulus and A includes the effect of the Poi sson's ratio, v, as fol l ows:
1 -v -v 0 0 0
-V 1 -V 0 0 0
-V V 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 2(1 + v) 0 0
0 0 0 0 2(1 + v) 0
0 0 0 0 0 2(1 +
Al so the fol l owi ng stress and strain vectors are introduced for the purposes of FE implementation:
<? = <
u
a
22
22
0-33
< ,e =
33
>
C T1 2
2^12
=
/l2
<7| 3
2
13
=
X\3
CT
23.
2s
23
= y
23
(6.3)
However, i f the material is viscoelastic E and v wi l l both be functions of time and the above equations
cannot be directly generalized. For example, for a material modeled wi th a single Maxwel l element we
cannot simply write:
& = >-a
T
(6.4)
because the fact that v is time dependent, like a Prony series, is not taken into account i n this equation,
e.g. the relaxation time associated wi th the Poisson's ratio, say xv, is not included i n the equations.
As wi l l be shown shortly, the volumetric-deviatoric form of the equations can be used to overcome this
problem. For an elastic material, the equations i n tensor form can be written as fol l ows:
a = 2Ge +Ks =0 +a
= =G =K =G =K
(6.5)
where G and K are the shear and bulk modul i , respectively, and:
- 104-
e =e-=*-I
=o = 3 =
(6.6)
i n whi ch, s and s are the deviatoric and volumetric strain tensors, respectively, s
kk
is the trace of the
strain tensor and / is the identity matrix.
In other words, our constitutive equation i n tensor form becomes:
cr =2Gs
| = G = G
\a =Ke
(6.7)
where indices indicate the material property the stress or strain is associated wi th, e.g.
G
is the stress
associated wi th the shear modulus, G.
Therefore, i n this case we wi l l have two equations that are similar i n form to, but simpler than, Equation
(6.1). We can write these i n vector form as follows:
2La =
Ge
-c
2L
K
=
k
1K
(6.8)
Now, using the above concept it wi l l be easy to write the equations for a V E material. Since both shear
and bulk behaviour are represented by Prony series (Chapter 5), si mi l ar to Equation (6.4) and
generalizing to multiple Maxwel l elements (Chapter 4), we can write:
/=1
T
Gi
<=1
T
Ki
(6.9)
where r
Gi
and r
Kj
are sets of relaxation times and N
G
and N
K
are the number of Maxwel l elements,
associated wi th modul i G and K , respectively. The idea of decomposing the V E behaviour into two,
- 105-
normally shear and bulk, behaviour has been used previously in such works as Adolf and Martin (1996)
and Wijskamp (2005).
Similar to Equation (6.5), we have:
(6.10)
Therefore:
Na 1
T - i 1
& = (G e
G
+K"e
K
)- a
G i
- <r
i=l i = i TKi
(6.11)
Due to the fact that the terms in the brackets are equivalent to the stress in an elastic material, as in
Equation (6.5), we can write:
=
B" - Z Gi ~~ Z ^Ki
'=1 Gi i=\
l
Ki
(6.12)
where as is the case in any elastic material:
D"
K" - f G " K" -jG" 0 0 0
G"+K" K"-G" 0 0 0
G"+K
U
0 0 0
G" 0 0
Sym. G" 0
G"
The above equation can be written in the following more simplified form:
(6.13)
(6.14)
where p is a number representing the material property G or K, and r . and a
pj
are the relaxation
times and stresses associated with that material property for Maxwell element /. This is the governing
- 106-
differential equation for the isotropic V E material. The differential equation for each Maxwel l element i n
the assembly is:
(6.15)
i n whi ch P
t
is the spring stiffness i n Maxwel l element i for either of the material properties G or K .
Note that the stress and strain vectors associated wi th material properties, i.e. a
pi
, are complete vectors,
i.e. 6x1 for 3D stresses as i n Equation (6.3). However, due to the fact that there wi l l be some repetitions,
e.g. the bulk strains are the same, we do not need to keep al l the stresses and strains. Here, we only need
to save five strains and five stresses for the shear behaviour, because the other strain and stress
components can be calculated as follows:
( ^ 3 3 ) 0 ~ (^11
+
2I)G
( " 3 3 ) G =- (
< J
l l
+
" 2 2 ) G
(6.16)
A similar argument is val i d for the bulk modulus, where only one strain (bulk strain) and stress (pressure)
is needed to describe the behaviour.
Usi ng Equations (6.5) and (6.6), the stresses and strains associated wi th different material properties can
be related as fol l ows:
\(2s
u
s
22
3 3 )
j(2f
22
f n 3 3 )
2
12
2,
3
2s
n
~ {
U
+
^ 2 2
+
^ 3 3 }
(6.17)
-> K ={
Cr
il
= 0
" 2 2
= 0
" 3 3 } A :
Note that from now on, the above definitions for isotropic stresses and strains wi l l be used.
- 107-
Having the material associated stresses from above, the stresses in any direction are obtained by adding
all the stresses associated with different material properties in that direction. In other words:
[ K )
G
+K ) K
<7
XN
(6.18)
6.1.1.2. Transversely isotropic materials
Similar to isotropic materials, first elastic materials will be considered. We know that in order to describe
the behaviour of elastic transversely isotropic materials five properties are needed. Similar to isotropic
materials, these properties should be chosen properly. In other words, the choice should be such that in
the stress-strain relationship those moduli become decoupled, e.g. Equation (6.5). Hashin (1972) presents
such a decoupled form of stress-strain relationship for use in micromechanics, which can be utilized here.
The properties to be used in this case are the plane strain bulk modulus K
2
, shear modulus G
1 2
, and shear
modulus G
2 3
, where plane 2 - 3 is considered to be the plane of isotropy. Two new moduli n and are
introduced as follows:
I ^'
+ 4
^ (6.20)
\l = 2K
2
v
n
where , and v
12
are the longitudinal modulus and the major Poisson's ratio.
Note:
These two moduli can be evaluated by applying a unidirectional strain to a cylinder of the material, with
its axis along the 1 direction, as in the CCA approach by Hashin, i.e.
- 108-
s,, ^ 0, all other e. = 0
The moduli can then be calculated as follows:
(6.21)
=
a
2 2 =
a
33
The stress-strain relationship can now be written as:
a = ne+ g
(
+ K
2
g + G
x2
e + G
2i
s
Or:
a = a +a +a +o~ +<r = Vcr
= = n = t = K 2 = G 1 2 = G 2 3 * - ' = P
(6.22)
(6.23)
(6.24)
In which the indices associate each stress or strain with a material property. In expanded form, the above
equations are:
0 0"
22
33
0 0 0 0 0
a = n 0 0 0 + 0 0 + K
2
0 E
22
+
^ 3 3
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 2
+ fjj
"0 0 0 " 0 2e
X2
2EX;
+G
23
0
22 ~ ^ 3 3
2s
23 +
G
1 2
2s
]2
0 0
0 2s
23 k
f
22
f
33
) _2s
n
0 0
(6.25)
For VE materials, similar to the isotropic case, we can write a differential equation for each material
property:
- 109-
'=1
T
ni
N
< 1
<=i
T
ti
2
K l
= K l s
K 2
- a
K i
, (6.26)
>=1
T
K2i
"on !
w
c 2
/=1
Z
G I 2 ;
where the superscript u denotes the unrelaxed value of the modulus. These equations can be written i n
fol l owi ng generic form:
2
P
=P"l
p
-tz-2
pi
(6-27)
where, P" represents any of the unrelaxed moduli and N is the number of Maxwel l elements associated
wi th material property .
In order to find the overall governing differential equation, we combine Equations (6.24) and (6.26):
tt = ife
n
+ fs
t
+ K\e
Ki
+ G'
2
\s
Gn
+ - < r (
6
-
28
)
- ' , =1 /=! ^
The terms covered i n (*) represent an elastic behaviour with the unrelaxed modul i . Therefore, they can
be replaced by D" i, where D" is the unrelaxed elastic material stiffness matrix. In other words:
^ = = 2 ^ - Z Z - ^ (
6
-
29
)
P=\ /=i
r
Pi
where:
- 110-
D =
r f 0 0 0
K
2 +
G
23 K ~
G
23
0 0 0
+
G"
23
0 0 0
G"
2
0 0
Sym. G"
2
0
G
23
(6.30)
The differential equation for a Maxwel l element is:
1
P
,=P,
P
-Z.
pl
Pi
(6.31)
where P, is the stiffness of Maxwel l element i corresponding to the material property P. The above
three equations (Equations (6.29) to (6.31)) describe the behaviour of the material completely and are
needed i n the implementation of the DF.
The stresses and strains associated wi th different material properties are also calculated from Equation
(6.25). Si mi l ar to the isotropic case, only some of the stresses and strains for each material property are
needed to describe the behaviour of the material. The strains and the resulting stresses are as follows:
^K ,
22
+
3 3 }
2fiV
\2s
]:
2e
"1
[
(T
22 =
CT
33 J t
&K2 ={
a
22
= a
n} K 2
f cr = - c r
r
1
r
23 Jc ,
"1
(6.32)
- G ] 2
'22
"33
cr..
and for stresses, we have:
- I l l -
(J = <
(o-
22
)
(
+(a
22
)
K2
+(a
22
\
(6.33)
Accordi ng to these equations, for a transversely isotropic material there are 8 equations for each
Maxwel l element. Therefore, i f the material properties al l have equal numbers of Maxwel l elements,
designated as N, we wi l l have %N equations.
Note:
To account for thermoelastic effect, i.e. i f the Maxwel l stiffness changes wi th temperature as discussed in
Section 4.1.2, we need to replace \jx
pi
by \jx
pj
, everywhere i n the equations where:
1 1
(34)
pi p> '
Here P
j
= P^TQ)) i n a cure cycl e.
6.1.2. Equati ons for Thermal Expansi on and Cure Shri nkage
As discussed i n Chapter 5, the thermal expansion and cure shrinkage coefficients change with time i n a
similar way to the other material properties and therefore their form is represented by a Prony series just
like the modul i . In a way, the relationship between thermal (or cure shrinkage) strain and temperature (or
degree of cure) is the same as between stress and strain. In this analogy, thermal strain acts like stress and
temperature is l i ke strain.
The DF for calculation of the thermal expansion wi l l then be identical i n form to the other material
properties, as fol l ows:
- 112-
s
T
= CTE
dt
(6.35)
Where, e
T
is the thermal strain vector, CTE" includes the values of C T E at time zero (the "unrelaxed
values"), and r
Tj
are the relaxation times i n each Maxwel l element for thermal strains, obtained from
micromechanics characterization. These values for a transversely isotropic material are:
CTE,'
2 2 CTE
2
f
22
<
0
;CTE"=-
CTE
2
0
0 0
0 0
(6.36)
Note that only two values i n the above vectors are needed i n the calculations and the entire vectors do not
have to be saved or calculated.
A similar approach can be taken for other types of free strains generated i n the composite (e.g. cure
shrinkage). Thus, the equation governing free strains can be written as the fol l owi ng generic differential
equation:
u
df 1
a l
f i ~fl
(6.37)
Where, s
fl
are the free strains i n each Maxwel l element, c" are the unrelaxed values of the coefficients
(such as a"), and / are the parameters, such as temperature or the degree of cure and we have:
(6.38)
- 113 -
Effectively, this form means that i n an FE code it is required to calculate the free strain i n each time-step
by sol vi ng the above differential equation, i.e. identical to what is done for the stresses and strains, and
then save the values for the next time-step.
6.2. FINITE ELEMENT FORMULATION
The formulation developed i n the previous sections can be implemented i n a Fi ni te Element (FE) code.
For this purpose the FE equations wi l l be developed here, keeping in mi nd the efficiency and convenience
of the implementation.
6.2.1. Numerical Solution of Differential Equations
Si mi l ar to the I D case, we need to solve the governing differential equation to calculate the stresses i n a
time step. Rewri ti ng Equation (6.31) for a Maxwel l element and i ncl udi ng the thermoelastic effects,
<L
P
,=m
p
-e
B
r)-<L
pi
(6.40)
where, s
pf
is the free strain rate associated wi th material property p and can be obtained from the free
strains using Equation (6.32).
Usi ng the finite difference method, e.g. as presented by Hughes (1987), wi th a Crank-Ni chol son (central
difference) scheme we can write:
./i+l rt+K 1 n+1
L
pi
= P,(e
p
-
pf
)--^gL
pi
V
At, . n+1 . n
L
pi
=v
pi
+(L
pi
+2L
pi
)
where the first two equations are the differential equations at time steps n and n +1 and the third comes
from the finite difference method.
- 114-
Substituting the first two equations i n the third and rearranging, we get:
0 + T
1 At
(6.42)
At this point, we need to distinguish between the cases wi th thermoelastic effects and no-thermoelastic
effects. The reason is that this effect makes the equations more complex and there is no need to include
those complexities i n the cases where the effect is not present.
6.2.1.1. No thermoelastic effects
In this case, the stiffness remains constant. Therefore, the last terms on the right hand side of Equation
(6.42), become:
where the last equation follows from the finite difference scheme si mi l ar to the third equation i n (6.41).
Therefore the stresses i n each Maxwel l element can be calculated from Equations (6.42) and (6.43) as
follows:
ycr'C+fee'+) =/5(sr'-o
(6.43)
r / n+l n \ , /i+l n x n
(6.44)
The total stress at time step n + l can be calculated by summing the above:
2i =LL
n+l
pi
(6.45)
p i
6.2.1.2. With thermoelastic effects
For a general function / , from the definition of the central difference method we can write:
- 115 -
f
n r
x
-f
n
2At
(6.46)
Using this and the third equation in (6.41), the terms on the right hand side of Equation (6.42) become:
(
n+l n-\ \
)
At
{ p
~
p) { i
'
)
2At
}
t
iipr +*pr)(C-z
n
P
)--
A
(pr-p:){c-*r)]
(6.47)
Thus,
I 4'
-p
As"
1 At
n+l .. .
=
1 At ^*
+
1 +
2r; _ (j/> "' + {7f )(A
", -As
n
p f
)- \ AP{As"; -As"
p
}
}
)
1 A?
(6.48)
1 + -
2F;
+ I
2F;
+
Again, the total stresses are calculated from Equation (6.45).
6.2.2. Development of the FE Formulation
In this part, the differential equations presented in the previous sections will be used to develop the FE
equations. The general FE equation can be written as:
JB
T
adV = F
v
In which V is the volume of the material, F is the external load, and:
(6.49)
s = Bu
Rewriting the equation in incremental form for time step n:
(6.50)
\l?Aa
n
dV = AF" (6.51)
- 116-
where from Equation (6.45) we have:
A f f W ' - ^ (6.52)
P >
Now, similar to the previous section the FE equations wi l l be derived for two different cases, depending
on the presence of thermoelastic effects.
6.2.2.1. No thermoelastic effects
Taki ng advantage of the solution of the differential equations, Equation (6.44), and the above equations
we can write:
1 Af 1 Af
P i 1 + P i 1 +
2r "
+ 1
2r "
+ 1
pi pi
The first term on the right hand side is equivalent to the calculation of stresses i n an elastic material, wi th
a modified unrelaxed modulus. Therefore, similar to Equation (6.28) we can write this as follows:
Z KfV
A
^
) =
^
( i ? A
^
) a s
^
A
"
( 6
-
54)
P i 1 + P
2r "
+ 1
pi
Where, I? is a form of material stiffness matrix closely related to an elastic material stiffness matrix
based on the unrelaxed values of the modul i , i.e. P], modified according to current time-step size and
relaxation times, i.e. P
r
".
Therefore the stresses, after i ncl udi ng the free strains, wi l l be:
A C T " = ^ ( A " - t e f ) - Y L P i (
6
-
55
)
p i
where,
- 117-
\_At_ 1 At
2 T"
+
2 r
n+l
pi pi "
, 1 At -
p i
1 +
2 ^
(6.56)
Substituting i n the FE equation, i.e. Equation (6.51), we obtain:
JB
T
D"
r
(BAu" -As"
f
)dV- \B
T
\ Y L ^ dV = AF"
V P J
(6.57)
Thus,
\}f [f
T
BdV \AU" = AF" + JB
r
D
u
T
Ae"
f
dV + \g
\v J v v V P ' J
Therefore, the governing FE equation at a given time step is:
dV (6.58)
K
T
Au = AF + AF
f
+AF
a
(6.59)
where,
K
T
= JB
T
r?
T
BdV
v
AF
f
= JB
r
lf
T
A
f
dV
dV
v p J
(6.60)
where D", is formed as an elastic stiffness matrix, using the fol l owi ng material properties:
1 +
At =
T
2r"
(6.61)
- 118-
6.2.2.2. With thermoelastic effects
To develop the FE equations for this case, thermoelastic effects i n an elastic material are considered first
for si mpl i ci ty. In this case, according to the discussion presented i n Section 4.1.2 the constitutive equation
is:
A C T = EAs + AEs (6.62)
Direct implementation of this equation woul d result in an FE equation i n the fol l owi ng generic form:
KAu + AKu = F (6.63)
However, the standard form of the FE equation used i n commerci al codes such as A B A Q U S , is as
follows:
KAu = F (6.64)
Gi ven that this is an approximation, unless sufficiently small time steps are used i n the analysis, an
iterative scheme is needed to analyze a case wi th thermoelastic effects. We know that i n iterative schemes
using the exact tangent matrix (in this case, the stiffness matrix) i n iterations is not a necessity. In other
words, i f a proper stiffness matrix combined wi th the correct constitutive equation, i.e. Equation (6.62), is
used to calculate the stresses the iterative scheme woul d converge to the correct results. Cl earl y, the key
i n successful convergence of the results is the choice of the stiffness matrix.
For V E materials, a si mi l ar argument is val i d. Looki ng at Equation (6.48), a direct implementation woul d
result in a term, si mi l ar to AEs i n Equation (6.62) due to presence of the term AP" in the equation.
However, maki ng use of the discussion presented above and fol l owi ng a procedure similar to the one i n
the previous section, we can write:
K
r
Au = AF + AF
f
+AF
rr
(6.65)
- 119-
where all the parameters are the same as what was presented previously, except that r should be replaced
by T and the material stiffness matrix is calculated as follows:
(i P
n+1
i p"l
+
y< UD" (6.66)
V , 1 At =T
V
'
1 + r
2 r "
+ 1
pi
It should be noted, however, that the convergence of the iterative scheme wi th this equation has not been
studied completely and the convergence of the results needs to be carefully monitored. Havi ng said that,
since the temporal solution scheme is based on a stable and accurate finite difference technique it seems
reasonable to expect convergence i n most standard cases.
6.2.3. Summary and Di scussi on
The equations for the DF i n 3D were developed i n this section. From these equations, the stresses and
strains i n the composite can be obtained as follows: sol vi ng the FE equation (Equation (6.60)) gives the
values of displacements, from whi ch the strains are evaluated (Equation (6.50)). Then, the solution of the
DF (Equation (6.42) or (6.48)) is utilized to give the stresses. Some relevant remarks on this procedure
are as follows:
The form of Equation (6.59) is fairly similar to that of an elastic material. As a result, it is expected
that the V E formulation can be easily implemented i n an available elastic code. As mentioned i n
Chapter 2, it is very desirable to write the formulations i n a way that they can be implemented at
the integration point l evel , so that no knowledge of the mesh and other space-related parameters is
needed. Here, we wi l l discuss how an elastic code can be used to model V E materials wi th mi ni mal
modifications, i.e. by appl yi ng changes only at integration point l evel .
For this purpose, it is noted that the form of the stiffness matrix here and i n an elastic code are
identical. Therefore, to form the V E stiffness matrix the material stiffness matrix in an elastic code
can be changed to that of Equation (6.59); i.e. merely a change of the definition of the material
- 120-
stiffness matrix is sufficient. A similar argument applies to the calculation of both the stresses, and
AF
f
for whi ch only the definition of the free strains need to be changed and assembly of values
for the elements i n the model can be done by the original code. However, calculation of AF_
a
,
Equation (6.60), cannot be directly carried out at the integration point l evel , since integration over
the volume of the material is required. To overcome this problem, we re-write this equation as
fol l ows:
Thi s means that by adding the above equivalent strains to the free strains, the force vector that the
code calculates wi l l i n fact be the sum of the forces AF_
f
and AF
a
. In this manner, al l the
calculations for the V E model i ng can be done at the integration point level and no knowledge of
the meshing or other global attributes of the model is necessary.
The dependence on the value of t/r
j
is evident from the equations presented i n the previous
section. These values clearly play an important role i n the accuracy of the solution of the
differential equation. One very simple way of discussing the accuracy of the solution is to consider
that i n each time step these values are constant. Then, using the actual values of these variables and
the value of time steps, the ratio can be calculated. Exami ni ng the values presented i n different
works (e.g. Prasatya et el . , 2001; Ki m and White, 1996) shows that this ratio is often a very small
number.
(6.67)
Then, we can define an equivalent free strain increment:
(6.68)
p
- 121 -
Al though the stiffness matrix changes through the cure cycle depending on the material properties,
it can be seen that the changes are not dramatic and the values fluctuate around a constant value.
Considering the fact that the ratio t/r
i
is generally a small number, the material stiffness matrix
from Equation (6.61) wi l l be:
IY-TrY.r, =r
u
^tf (6.69)
' 1 + r '
2 r"
+ 1
p>
where, P" is the unrelaxed value of modulus. Al though there is no need to use this simplification,
this shows that the stiffness matrix wi l l be close to an elastic stiffness matrix corresponding to the
unrelaxed value of modulus.
The term AF_
a
clearly corresponds to such forces that arise from internal stresses, but are applied
as external loads. In addition, this term in a way accounts for the difference between elastic and
viscoelastic material, especially that as mentioned the material stiffness matrix is more or less
constant. The behaviour of V E materials can be explained further as fol l ows:
In a V E material wi th existing stresses and strains, when a new load is applied to the material it
reacts by showi ng two distinct behaviour:
1. Increments of stress and strain wi l l be generated based on material's elastic behaviour, the
basis of whi ch wi l l be a parameter close to the unrelaxed value of modulus.
2. The current stresses and strains change due to V E relaxation and/or creep. This part is
represented by the term AF_
a
.
This understanding of the material behaviour is also reflected by material's constitutive equation.
Recal l that for a Maxwel l element:
- 122-
k /i
Consi deri ng the increment of strain as external load, the first term represents the elastic behaviour
and the second one includes the current stresses.
6.3. REVERSE MICROMECHANICS
In Chapter 5 the micromechanics approach for characterization of composite materials was presented.
Based on this approach and the formulations derived i n this chapter, composite material is modeled using
combined properties of the phases, without any knowledge of the stresses and strains i n those phases.
However, evaluating these values can be very important i n other applications, especially i n the design of
composite materials where knowledge of the stresses i n the constituents is necessary.
In this section, a procedure wi l l be developed to calculate stresses and strains of the phases from the
stresses and strains i n the composite, as obtained from the FE model. Thi s process wi l l be called 'reverse
micromechanics'.
6.3.1. Proposed Method
The composite stresses and strains, a
c
and s
c
, are calculated i n an FE code from the equations presented
i n the previous sections.(strain from (6.50) and stress from (6.44) or (6.48)). We now need to calculate
these values for the phases, namely q_
m
, s
m
, a
f
, and s
f
, where m and / indices indicate the values i n
matrix and fibre, respectively. Havi ng the constitutive equations for both phases and recalling phase
average equations of micromechanics (Equations (5.4) and (5.5)) we wi l l have four equations wi th four
unknowns to evaluate.
Rewri ti ng equations, we wi l l have:
- 123 -
P <
T
pi
(6.71)
where, p and / range from (p = 2or5) and i = 1,...,N
p
. Al so, s
mf
and s_
ff
denote the free strains in the
matrix and fibre, respectively. Note that the over bars have been omitted for si mpl i ci ty.
We start by combi ni ng the last three equations:
2c =(
1
- ^/ ) o:
m
+v
/
o:
/
=(\-v
f
)a
m
+v
f
D
f
(e
f
-s
ff
) = (\-v
f
)a
m
+ D
f
[s
c
-v
f
ff
-(\-v
f
)s
m
]
(6.72)
Usi ng the incremental form of this equation at time step n:
Ao: : = (1 - v
f
)Acr"
m
+ D
f
[As"
c
-v
f
Ae"
ff
- (1 - v
f
)Ae"
m
] (6.73)
At the same time, recalling Equation (6.55) for the matrix, the first equation written i n incremental form
is:
p >
Combi ni ng these two equations, we obtain the increment of strains i n the matrix as:
(6.74)
(6.75)
where all the values on the right hand side are either given as input or have been calculated in the
previous time step. In addition, despite the size of the above equation, the calculation is relatively straight
forward, since it mostly consists of simple matrix manipulation on integration point l evel .
- 124-
Havi ng the value of strain i n the matrix, the matrix stress can be found by sol vi ng the first equation i n
(6.71), fol l owi ng a si mi l ar procedure to the one used for composites, i.e. Equations (6.42) and (6.45).
Al so, the fibre strain can be easily calculated as follows:
It should be noted that since these calculations are not needed i n the analysis of the composite, calculation
of the phase stresses and strains can be controlled wi th a switch i n an FE code to decide i f and when they
are needed.
6.4. SUMMARY
In this chapter, the equations for DF of viscoelasticity i n 3D were developed and the finite element
equations for the analysis of composite materials during cure were obtained. The advantage of such a
formulation is that it applies only at the integration point l evel . Therefore, it can be implemented i n any
available FE code. The formulation is developed for both isotropic and transversely isotropic materials,
where all material properties have been assumed time-dependent; thermal expansion and cure shrinkage
coefficients are also assumed to vary wi th time, similar to other material properties. In addition, reverse
micromechanics equations were developed to calculate the phase stresses and strains from those of the
composite materials. Furthermore, the formulation allows for model i ng thermoelastic effects of the
materials.
In the next chapter, the discussion on implementation of these formulations i n an available FE code and
verification of this implementation wi l l be presented.
(6.76)
- 125 -
Chapter 7: Implementation and Verification
Chapter 7. IMPLEMENTATION AND VERIFICATION
The formulations for the Differential Form ( DF) of viscoelastic ( VE) material behaviour were developed
i n the previous chapter. In this chapter, the discussion on implementing this formulation i n an available
code and some examples to verify this implementation wi l l be presented. For this purpose, first the details
of the implementation procedure, i ncl udi ng the algorithm and the "pseudo code" written for the
implementation, are discussed and the features covered i n the code are listed. Then, some simple
examples are shown to verify the code implementation of the differential form of viscoelasticity.
7. 1. IMPLEMENTATION IN A CODE
The DF model developed i n the previous chapter can be easily implemented i n an available finite element
(FE) code. Thi s is due to the fact that the DF formulation developed here onl y applies at the integration
point l evel . Thi s way, an available code can be expanded to include the capability to model V E materials
wi th few changes. Furthermore, theses changes can be carefully structured such that the general nature of
the formulation can be maintained. Thi s way, the formulation woul d not bind the user to any specific
code and i n principle any commercial code whi ch allows for insertion of external (user) subroutines can
be used for implementation of the DF.
In order for the implementation to be general, it wi l l consist of a number of separate subroutines, each
responsible for an aspect of the calculations for a V E material, to be called "DF code". These subroutines
can then be l i nked to the "mai n" code using an interface. This interface wi l l transfer information between
the main FE code and the DF code and wi l l normally consist of one (or more) subroutine(s). This
relationship is schematically shown i n Figure 7.1. This structure wi l l al l ow us to use the DF code i n
virtually any code. I f a code does not al l ow user routines, since the subroutines are modular they can be
called internally from the mai n code,.
- 126-
In the next sections the details of the DF implementation will be discussed. It should be noted that for the
implementation model in this thesis, the commercial FE software ABAQUS has been used. As a result,
the discussions on implementation, naming of the interface subroutines, etc., in the following sections
will be specific to ABAQUS.
7. 1 . 1 . Code Al gori thm and Pseudo Code
In ABAQUS, user subroutines, UMAT and UEXPAN, allow for defining new constitutive models and
user-defined thermal strain calculations, respectively, and will act as the interface between ABAQUS and
the DF code. The DF subroutines are therefore called through these user subroutines. In addition to
calling the subroutines, these user subroutines are utilized to translate the variables to what the main code
expects and to save the parameters required in calculations in each time step, e.g. the internal stresses in
the Maxwell elements. A schematic of the algorithm, developed for ABAQUS, is shown in Figure 7.2.
A brief description of different subroutines is given below:
In subroutine UEXPAN, CURE_MOD is called to calculate the degree of cure based on
thermochemical model of choice. Based on this parameter and temperature value at the
integration point CalcEFree is called to calculate the free strains. Then CalcESigma is called to
calculate the equivalent free strains, representing the effect of the current stresses. These are then
passed on to ABAQUS for the calculation of the global force vector. It should be noted that since
the calculation of the equivalent free strain, i.e. calculation of &F_
a
, is carried out in subroutine
UEXPAN this subroutine needs to be called, even if there is no change in temperature or cure.
The subroutine UMAT serves two functions. First, the material stiffness matrix is calculated by
calling CalcDT and passed on to the main code for calculation of the global stiffness matrix.
Then, after the ABAQUS engine solves the FE equations, i.e. it calculates the displacements and
strain, and subsequently passes them on to UMAT subroutine, the routine SolveStress is called to
- 127-
solve the differential equations and calculate stresses i n the Maxwel l elements and consequently
i n the composite. Al so, i f needed, ReverseMM is called i n this routine for the reverse
micromechanics computations.
Based on the written algorithm, a so-called 'pseudo code' was written to give a better insight into the
code structure. Thi s i n fact is a detailed written form of the code algorithm and provides a more
comprehensive description for it. The pseudo code written for the DF code is presented i n Appendi x B .
7.1.2. Code Features
Based on the algorithms presented i n the previous section, the DF subroutines have been written in
FO RT RA N language and implemented through U M A T and U E X P A N subroutines i n A B A Q U S . The DF
code is capable of model i ng an isotropic or transversely isotropic viscoelastic composite material in 3D
under temperature change and cure. It models all the mechanical material properties, and thermal
expansion and cure shrinkage coefficients as being time-dependent wi th Prony series representation. The
viscoelastic behaviour can be thermorheologically simple or complex. It is also capable of using reverse
micromechanics to calculate the average matrix and fibre stresses and strains.
The features available i n the DF code and internal V E model of A B A Q U S have been compared i n Table
7.1. A more detailed look at the internal V E model of A B A Q U S and its similarities and differences wi th
the DF code is presented i n Appendi x C.
7. 2. VE RI FI CATI ON PROBL E MS
In this section, some examples are used to debug and verify the implementation of the DF code. These are
simple examples for whi ch there are known, mostly analytical, solutions. In order to verify different parts
of the code, 9 examples have been designed to verify different aspects of the implementation. These
examples along wi th the results from both the code and the exact solution wi l l be presented here. A
summary of the examples is presented i n Table 7.2.
- 128-
Chapter 7:Implementation and Verification
7.2.1. Trans vers el y Isot ropi c Cases
Example 1. Rod under uniaxial strain
G eneral Description
In this example, a single sol i d element wi th a transversely isotropic behaviour is modeled. The loading is
a simple relaxation test, wi th a longitudinal strain of 1, i.e. strains i n the two other directions are zero. The
dimensions of the element are shown i n Figure 7.3.
Properties
Recal l i ng the stress-strain relationship from Chapter 6, shown below, the only parameters needed are n
and t,
~
n
0 0"
22
+
33
0 0 0 0 0
g =T] 0 0 0 + 0
n
0 + K
2
0 S22 +33 0
0 0 0 0 0 s
lK
0 0 2 2 + 33
"0 0 0 " 0 2e
l2
2,
3
"
+G
23
0
22 ~~
33
+ G
1 2
2e
n
0 0
0 2E - [f
22
33)
_2*
13
0 0 ^
(7.1)
These properties have been assumed as follows:
77 = 1260 + 10exp(-0
* = 22 + 44exp(-f/1. 5)
(7.2)
Note:
The properties assumed above come from a consistent set of fibre and resin properties and the
resulting composite properties are wi thi n physical bounds, e.g. the Poi sson's ratio is 0 < v < 0.5 .
Anal yti cal Solution
Accordi ng to Equati on (7.1), we have:
- 129-
cr
n
=ns
n
=1260 + 10exp(-0
a
2i
= C R
3 3 =
l
w =22 + 44exp( -f/1. 5)
(7.3)
Results
Vari ati on of the stresses cr,, and a
22
versus time, resulting from the user material and the analytical
solution are compared i n Figure 7.4 and Figure 7.5. It can be seen that the results match very wel l and the
curves are indistinguishable.
Example 2. Fully constrained rod under temperature change
General Description
The solid element from the previous example is completely confined and subjected to a constant change
of temperature, equal to 10". Here, the U M A T is tested i n model i ng a transversely isotropic material
under temperature changes.
Properties
Accordi ng to Equation (7.1), i n addition to the properties provided i n the previous example, we need K
2
,
whi ch is assumed to be:
Analytical Solution
The C T E is assumed constant for the analytical solution, since this assumption wi l l not change the results
significantly, whi l e a variable C T E modeled i n the code verifies the implemented formulation. Accordi ng
to Equation (7.1), we wi l l have:
K
2
=18 + 46 exp(- 0
(7.4)
C T E is also assumed to fol l ow a Prony series as:
(7.5)
- 130-
cr,, =ns
n
+ (s
22
+
3 3
) = 130.4 +1 Oexp(-f) +8.4 exp(-f/1.5)
a
22
= te
u
+ K
2
(e
22
+ 3 3 ) = 5.8 + 9.2exp(-/) + 4.2exp(-r/1.5)
(7.6)
Results
The principal stresses from the user material and the analytical solution are compared in Figure 7.6 and
Figure 7.7. Again, it is seen that the results match perfectly.
7.2.2. Isotropic Cases
Example 3. Rod under uniaxial stress
General Description
This example is taken from the ABAQUS Benchmark Manual Version 6.4, Section 3.1.1. Similar to
previous examples, a single solid element is modeled, but this time with isotropic behaviour. The
dimensions of the element are 10*1*0.5 and it is subjected to a creep test with a longitudinal stress of
100, as shown in Figure 7.8. Note that the longitudinal direction in this example is 2.
Properties
The material properties are as follows:
Results
The element was analyzed through the user material. Also, to compare the DF to the formulation
available in ABAQUS, time step sizes were not assumed in ABAQUS, which means the code itself would
(7.7)
Analytical Solution
The solution, according to the ABAQUS Benchmark Manual is:
e
22
=0.1(1 -0.9 exp(-r/10))
- 131 -
choose the appropriate size of the time steps. The resulting longitudinal strains are compared in Figure
7.9. It can be seen that even though both sets of results are very close to the analytical solution, only the
result from the user material can be said to match the exact solution. A look at the two sets of results
shows that the internal VE model in ABAQUS uses more time steps (14 vs. 9 time steps) but the results
are less accurate. In addition, UMAT is about 20% more efficient in runtime than the internal engine.
Example 4. Fully constrained rod under temperature change
Gener al Descri pt i on
For this example, a single isotropic solid element is completely confined and subjected to a change of
temperature of 10.
Properti es
The material properties are assumed to be:
K = 7000 + 3000 exp(-f/l)
K V
' (7.8)
CTE = 0.01 + 0.0001 exp(-f / 2)
Anal yt i cal Sol ut i on
The stress-strain relationship for an isotropic material, as derived in the previous chapter, is as follows:
a = Gg
G
+ Ke
K
=G(g-^-IJ + K(s
a
r) (7.9)
Therefore in this example:
<7 =a
22
=o-
33
=3^,, =2100 + 900exp(-f/l). (7.10)
Similar to Example 2, changes in free strains with respect to time are not significant and for the analytical
solution a constant CTE has been assumed. In the numerical modeling of this example, the actual CTE is
assumed.
- 132-
Results
The principal stresses resulting from the user material and the analytical solution are compared i n Figure
7.10. Cl earl y, the two sets of stresses are identical.
Example 5. Fully constrained polymer rod in a cure cycle
General Description
This example is designed to compare the results from the code to the type of results generated by the I D
code i n Chapter 3. In includes a single isotropic sol i d element, completely confined and subjected to
temperature changes and advancement of cure. The dimensions are 10*1*1.
Properties
The material properties are chosen such that the resulting longitudinal relaxation modulus corresponds to
the data provided by Ki m and White [1996] for 3501-6 resin. For this reason, the same set of relaxation
times and weight factors are assumed for the shear and bulk modulus. The resulting modulus along wi th
the C T E are as fol l ows:
= 31 + 186.97 exp( -r / 29.2) + 209.15 exp(-f / 2. 923) + 263.03 exp( -f /1. 8255) +
354.93 exp(-r /1. \ET) + 488.03 exp(-r / 2. 838) + 830.28 exp( -f / 7. 949) + (7.11)
583.1 exp(-r /1. 9511) +155.28 exp(-r / 3. 3212) + 79.23 exp( -f / 4. 9214)
CTE = 5.E-5 (7.12)
It must be noted that i n the above reference a linear relationship between volumetric cure shrinkage and
cure is assumed, whi ch corresponds to a cubic relationship between the cure shrinkage strain and cure
parameters. However, to be able to use the current Prony series model i n the code, we need a linear
relationship between these two parameters. For this reason, the model provided is plotted vs. degree of
cure and compared to a line i n Figure 7.11. It is seen that the difference between the two models is
- 133 -
negligible and the linear relationship can therefore be used i n the user material. The slope of the line, i.e.
the coefficient of cure shrinkage to be used i n the DF code, is -0. 1695.
For this example, the cure cycle and the resulting degree of cure used i n the calculations are shown i n
Figure 7.12.
Results
The results of the user material and the I D code are compared i n Figure 7.13 and they match perfectly.
Example 6. Reinforced cylinder under internal pressure
General Description
This example is taken from Zi enki ewi cz et al . [1968]. A hol l ow isotropic viscoelastic cylinder, reinforced
by an isotropic elastic material on the outside is subjected to internal pressure. The structure is assumed to
be i n a state of plane strain.
Properties
The V E cylinder has an inner ( a) and outer (b) radii of 2" and 4", respectively. The elastic material
has a thickness of , as shown i n Figure 7.14. The internal pressure ( p) is 1.
The properties of the elastic material are:
= 3. 7; v = 0.3015 (7.13)
The properties of the V E material are:
G = 37500 exp( -r/l )
K = 1E5
(7.14)
- 134-
Analytical Solution
The exact solution for this problem was given by Lee et al . [1959]. In this reference, the problem was first
solved for elastic materials and then the correspondence principle was used to find the solution for the V E
problem. Since neither of the references provides the final result, Mathematica was used to obtain the
analytical solution. The Mathematica notebook is provided i n Appendi x A. 2.
Results
In modeling the material, a quarter of the cylinder was meshed using sol i d elements. To be able to model
the cylinders wi th 3D element, a nominal out-of-plane thickness was assumed. Al so, to make the structure
plane strain the corresponding nodes on the two sides of the cylinder (through the thickness) were
constrained together. The mesh, plotted by A B A Q U S , is shown i n Fi gure 7.15.
The normalized radial stresses at different time intervals resulting from the user material and the exact
solution are compared i n Figure 7.16. In the figure the lines represent the analytical solution and the dots
are the A B A Q U S results. The results show excellent agreement. There is a slight difference between the
two sets of results. Thi s difference is due to the element sizes chosen for the example; a similar trend can
be seen i n the results gi ven by Zi enki ewi cz et al . To show that refining the mesh improves the results, a
finer mesh is made that has 4 times the number of elements as the previous one and is illustrated in Figure
7.17. The stresses resulting from this mesh are shown i n Figure 7.18. These results show better
agreement, whi ch indicates convergence of the stresses to the analytical solution.
7.2.3. Reverse Micromechanics Examples
In this part, two examples are provided to verify the reverse micromechanics model implemented i n the
user material code.
- 135-
Example 7. Transversely isotropic rod under uniaxial strain
General Description
To verify this aspect of the code, the sol i d element modeled i n Exampl e 1 is again used here to calculate
the matrix stresses and strains.
Properties
The composite properties are the same as i n Exampl e 1. The constituent properties, whi ch are consistent
with the composite properties, are assumed as follows:
Matri x properties:
Analytical Solution
The analytical solution has been obtained using the correspondence pri nci pl e i n Mathematica. The
Mathematica notebook is presented i n Appendi x A. 3, wi th the resulting stresses and strains at two points
i n time shown as example.
Results
The results of the matrix principal stresses (in directions 1 and 2) are compared to the analytical results i n
Figure 7.19 and Figure 7.20. The results match perfectly.
G
m
= 0.18 + 11.67 exp( -f/l )
K
m
= 8 + 27. 56exp(-//1. 5)
(7.15)
Fibre properties:
(7.16)
The fibre volume fraction is assumed to be 0.6.
- 136-
Example 8. Transversely isotropic fully constrained rod under temperature change
General Description
In this example, the second on reverse micromechanics, matrix stresses and strains for Example 2 are
calculated and compared to the analytical solution.
Properties
The composite properties are the same as i n Exampl e 1, and those of the constituents are the same as
Example 7. The C T E of the resin and fibre are as follows:
Analytical Solution
Agai n, using correspondence principle i n Mathematica the analytical solution is obtained and is shown i n
Appendi x A. 4. The sections containing the constituent properties are omitted to avoi d repetition.
Results
The results of matrix stresses i n directions 1 and 2 are compared i n Figure 7.21 and Figure 7.22 and are
identical.
7.2.4. Thermoelastic behaviour
In this part, an example is used to verify modeling of thermoelastic behaviour i n the DF user material.
The formulation for this model was derived i n Chapter 6.
(7.17)
and:
(7.18)
- 137-
Example 9. Isotropic rod under uniaxial strain
General Description
To verify this part of the code, the solid element modeled i n Exampl e 3 is used here again to calculate the
stresses and strains. Due to the difficulty i n finding an analytical solution for a transversely isotropic
material the material is assumed to be isotropic.
Properties
For the material properties some nominal, but consistent, values were assumed. The material properties
are as follows:
Thermoelastic effects are assumed to affect the modul i by a linear function of temperature, as discussed
i n Section 5.3.4, as fol l ows:
Where, P represents both K and G, i.e. a single function of temperature is assumed to govern the
changes i n the unrelaxed bulk and shear modul i .
The temperature is held constant throughout the creep test; a varyi ng temperature makes it difficult to
solve the problem analytically, while an isothermal creep test is a suitable problem for verifying the
implementation of the code.
Analytical Solution
To obtain the analytical solution, we note that according to Schapery (1974) for T C M- 2, the isothermal
creep compliance is as fol l ows:
G = 375 + 3375exp( -//l )
K = 7000 + 3000 exp(-f /1.5)
(7.19)
P" (T) = P
u0
(1.0591 - 0.0022 T) (7.20)
D
T
=D(t)/a
G
(T) (7.21)
- 138-
where, D
r
is the compliance for T C M- 2, >() is the compliance for T S M, and a
G
is the vertical shift
factor. The solution, using Mathematica, is shown i n Appendi x A. 5.
Results
The strains i n 1 and 2 directions are compared i n Figure 7.23 and Figure 7.24. The longitudinal direction
i n this example is 2. Agai n, the results from DF code and analytical solution match.
One may want to compare these results to strains from a non-thermoelastic analysis. For this purpose, a
second analysis has been performed, assuming that the values of the unrelaxed modul i provided above do
not change, i.e. a value of P = 1. The resulting strains from the two models are compared i n Figure 7.25
and Figure 7.26. Some clear differences i n the results can be observed. In thermoelastic analysis, the
unrelaxed and relaxed modul i at this temperature are less than the non-thermoelastic one by
approximately 20% and that is consistent wi th the difference between the two sets of results throughout
the test at this temperature.
7.2.5. Summary
In this chapter, it was discussed how the differential form of viscoelasticity can be implemented i n a code
and subsequently its implementation i n A B A Q U S was examined. Then, through the examples presented,
different aspects of the differential form code were verified. These aspects include the transversely
isotropic and isotropic behaviour of materials wi th time-dependent material properties, wi th temperature
changes and advancement of cure. In addition, by using these examples implementation of the
formulations developed previously for reverse micromechanics and thermoelastic effects were verified.
As a result, we have a worki ng implementation of the differential form of viscoelasticity i n A B A Q U S
that is capable of model i ng composite materials during cure. Taki ng advantage of this tool, some
numerical applications wi l l be studied and presented i n the next chapter.
- 139-
Table 7.1 Comparison of the features of the added UMAT and the ABAQUS built-in VE model
Features U M A T
A B A Q U S b ui l t-i n
V E model
Isotropic behaviour
Temperature-dependent behaviour
Transversely isotropic behaviour
Cure kinetics
</
Time-dependent CTE' s
/
Reverse Mi cromechani cs
Thermoelastic effects
Table 7.2 Summary of examples to be analyzed
Exampl e Part Load Type Note
1 Transversely-isotropic rod Axi al strain
2 Transversely-isotropic rod Temperature Ful l y constrained
3 Isotropic rod Axi al strain
4 Isotropic rod Temperature Ful l y constrained
5 Isotropic rod Cure cycle Ful l y constrained
6 Reinforced cylinder Internal pressure
7 Transversely-isotropic rod Axi al strain Example 1 wi th Reverse Micromechanics
8 Transversely-isotropic rod Temperature Exampl e 2 wi th Reverse Micromechanics
9 Isotropic rod Strain/Temperature Example 3 wi th thermoelastic effects
- 140-
Available Commercial Code
Interface
DF Subroutines
Figure 7.1 Schematic form of the relationship between the DF code and an available commercial
code
- 141 -
Call CURE_MOD
Calculate degree of cure
Call CalcESigma
Calculate equivalent free
strain increment, add to
free strains
Call CalcDT
Calculate material
stiffness matrix
Call SolveStress
Calculate Maxwel l
stresses
Call CalcEFree
Calculate free strain
increment
UMAT
Call ReverseMM
^ Mai n subroutine for
reverse micromechanics.
Parts of ABAQUS The DF Code added
Figure 7.2 Algorithm of the Differential Form code for a given time step
3
2 j
1 0
Figure 7.3 Specifications for Example 1
- 143-
130
125 -j
120
in
in
115 H
tn
110 H
105
100
6
Time
10
S11(UMAT)
- - s11 (Analytical)
12
u
Example 1
6
Time
10
-^s22(UMAT)
--s22(Analytical)
12
Figure 7.5 Comparison of cr
22
Example 1
- 144-
145 -j
140 '
135 -
130 -
m
in
125 -

120 -
115 -
110 -
105 -
100 -
-s11(UMAT)
-s11 (Analytical)
6
Time
10 12
Figure 7.6 Comparison of <r, , as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and analytically for
Example 2
25 n
- s22(UMAT)
s22(Analytical)
6
Time
10 12
Figure 7.7 Comparison of <x22 as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and analytically for
Example 2
- 145 -
1 3
'22
100
0 .5
10
Figure 7.8 Specifications for Example 3
0.12
10 20 30
Time
40 50
e 22(UMA T)
e 22(A nalytical)
- -e 22(A BA QUS)
60
Figure 7.9 Comparison of s
22
as predicted by the Differential Form, ABAQUS, and analytically for
Example 3
- 146-
6
Time
10
- s11(UMA T)
- s11 (A nalytical)
12
Figure 7.10 Comparison of <J
U
Example 4
Degree of cure
Figure 7.11 Comparison of the exact cure shrinkage and the simplified linear model, used in
Example 5
- 147-
w
-s11(UMAT)
-s11(1Dcode)
50 100 150 200 250
T i me (mi n)
Figure 7.13 Comparison of stresses as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and the
previously verified ID code in Example 5
- 148-
\ \ V '
r
\\
l - l T * 4 i-i
Figure 7.15 Standard mesh used in Example 6
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 I > 1 1 1 1
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
r/b
Figure 7.16 Comparison of radial stresses at different times t=0.1 to 10 as predicted by the
Differential Form UMAT (dots) and analytically (lines) using a standard mesh in Example 6
- 150-
Figure 7.17 Refined mesh, used for Example 6
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 I , 1 1 1 1
0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
r/b
Figure 7.18 Comparison of radial stresses at different times t=0.1 to 10 as predicted by the
Differential Form UMAT (dots) and analytically (lines) for a refined mesh in Example 6
- 151 -
-s11(UMAT)
s11 (Analytical)
6
Time
10 12
Figure 7.19 Comparison of matrix stresses as predicted by the Differential Form and analytically
for Example 7
for Example 7
- 152-
25 n
in
m

-s11(UMAT)
-s11 (Analytical)
6
Time
10 12
for Example 8
-- -s 22(UMA T)
-s 22(A nalytical)
6
Time
10 12
for Example 8
- 153 -
0
-0.01
-0.02
in
| -0.03
-0.04
-0.05
-0.06
10 20 30 40 50
x
Time
60
-e11(UMAT)
e11 (Analytical)
Figure 7.23 Comparison of strains as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and analytically
for Example 9
0.12
0.1
0.08
in
c
2 0.06
CO
0.04
0.02
0
10 20
- e22(UMAT)
- e22(Analyticai;
30
Time
40 50 60
Figure 7.24 Comparison of strains as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and analytically
for Example 9
- 154-
e11(With Thermoelastic)
- e11 (no Thermoelastic)
Time
Figure 7.25 Comparison of strains as predicted with and without thermoelastic effects by the
Differential Form UMAT for Example 9
0.12
10
e22(With Thermoelastic)
- e22(no Thermoelastic)
20 30
Time
40 50 60
Figure 7.26 Comparison of strains as predicted with and without thermoelastic effects by the
Differential Form UMAT for Example 9
- 155 -
Chapter 8: Numerical Applications
Chapter 8. NUMERICAL APPLICATIONS
The formulation to model the material with a Differential Form (DF) of Viscoelasticity (VE) or Pseudo-
Viscoelastic (PVE) formulation was developed and implemented in the previous chapters. These tools can
be utilised for process modeling of composite materials to find the stresses and deformations. Here, we
will show the capabilities of these models and how they compare to each other and also other existing
results in the literature.
It is noted that there are only a few VE models in the literature whose results can be used for comparison
here. There are also very few experimental data in the literature measuring VE residual stresses to
validate these models. Furthermore, comparing the residual stresses from the models developed in this
thesis to other models or experimental results may not yield a meaningful evaluation of the material
models, since a difference in the results may be due to inaccurate representation of aspects of the model
other than the material model, e.g. behaviour of the tool-part interface. For these reasons, in addition to
the comparison of DF, PVE, and IF made in Chapter 3 and Chapter 4 a general validation of the models
will be carried out by looking at trends and qualitative comparison of the results. Overall, this chapter
outlines some case studies, where the goals are:
To show that the predictions made by the models developed in this thesis agree with general
understanding of the material behaviour and compare well qualitatively with existing models in
the literature.
To show cases where different models give similar predictions and studying in detail their
similarities and differences in simple and more complex cases, with a general comparison to
elastic models.
To show cases where simpler PVE model cannot give accurate results and a VE model would be
necessary.
- 156-
To showcase capabilities developed for the models i n this work and not available or achievable
through other models i n the literature, e.g. RM M , thermoelastic effects, and efficiency.
To discuss the advantage of these models i n their ability to represent the material behaviour more
accurately.
To achieve these, first some simple examples consisting of only one element wi l l be analyzed i n order to
gain a better understanding of the material behaviour. Then, some more realistic cases wi l l be analyzed to
confirm these findings.
8.1. MATERIAL PROPERTIES
The formulations presented i n the previous chapters are general and not l i mi ted to a specific material.
However, i n anal yzi ng the fol l owi ng examples a choice of a specific material is needed. For this purpose,
the material properties for the resin and fibre provided by K i m and Whi te [1996] combined wi th the
micromechanical model of Bogetti and Gi l l espi e [1992] wi l l be used here.
For the P V E analysis, the definition of the elastic modulus based on the formulations derived i n Chapter 3
is used. To model the P V E i n 3D the A B A Q U S user material routine written by Arafath (2004) was used.
For this purpose, the code that was originally written wi th a C H I L E constitutive model was slightly
modified to al l ow for a P V E models.
For the DF analysis, the mechanical properties derived by Ki m and Whi te for the composite materials can
be used here. However, i n that work some assumptions on the relaxation times and the weight factors
were made (the difference arising from such assumption has been Uustrated i n Section 5.3.2). In addition,
some inconsistencies were observed i n their material properties; speci fi cal l y, the values of relaxed and
unrelaxed modul i provided i n the article do not match the properties obtained by combining the
fibre/resin properties through the elastic micromechanics, i.e. the approach used i n the work. For these
reasons and due to si mpl i ci ty and accuracy of the micromechanical approach presented i n Chapter 5, this
- 157-
approach can be used to obtain the material properties for AS4/3 501-6 composite. For this purpose, the
fibre and resin properties are taken from Ki m and Whi te's work, and listed i n Table 8.1 and the constants
for the viscoelastic model of Ki m and White have already been listed before i n Table 5.2.
We also note that polymers are known to have two regimes of thermal expansion behaviour: above and
below the glass transition temperature (T
g
). However, i n the aforementioned reference a single
coefficient of thermal expansion ( CTE) has been assumed. In order to have a more realistic material
model the C T E of the material has been assumed to have two different, but constant, values below and
above T
g
. To have a proper estimate of these values, the work of Russel l et al . (2000) was used. In this
work, the total volume change of the 3501-6 resin in a cure cycle was experimentally measured. In order
to obtain the values of the required parameters, C T E (two values) and the coefficient of cure shrinkage
(one value) were assumed as unknowns and the total volume change of the polymer i n the given cure
cycle was calculated by adding the volume change due to variation of temperature and advancement of
cure. Then by using the Solver Add-i n i n Microsoft Excel , the unknowns were found such that the
overall shape of the volume change vs. time corresponded closely to that of the experiment. The fitted
result is shown i n Figure 8.1. The C T E ' s and coefficient of cure shrinkage are listed i n Table 8.2.
By combi ni ng the material properties of the phases through micromechanics, the viscoelastic properties
of the composite was obtained. The process is identical to the one presented i n Section 5.4.1, except that
the calculations for the C T E have to be done twice to obtain the two composite C T E ' s i n the rubbery and
glassy regimes. Note that as in Section 5.4.1, the relaxation times have been taken to be the same for all
material properties and the weight factors have been obtained based on regression analyses. Al so, the
variability of the fol l owi ng material properties with time is mi ni mal (see Table 8.3) and therefore they
have been assumed to be constant i n time: n, the first modulus, CTE
2
the transverse C T E , and cs
2
, the
transverse coefficient of cure shrinkage. The results of the unrelaxed and relaxed values of different
material properties are presented i n Table 8.3. The relaxation times and corresponding weight factors for
- 158-
those material properties variable wi th time are listed i n Table 8.4. Note that CTE
g
and CTE
r
are the
glassy and rubbery C T E ' s.
Thermoelastic behaviour of the polymer material was discussed i n Section 5.3.4. It was also explained i n
the same chapter how the composite material properties i n such a case can be obtained. Since here we do
not have the exact material property for thermoelastic effect and onl y a reasonable assumption was made,
the same wi l l be done for the composite properties. It is expected that each material property of the
composite, i.e. five modul i , two C T E ' s and two cure shrinkage coefficients, have a vertical shift factor. It
seems reasonable to expect that the material properties i n the matrix-dominated directions behave more or
less the same as the matrix, whi l e fibre-dominated direction are affected to a lesser degree. In other
words, material properties that are clearly viscoelastic wi l l have a vertical shift factor close to the matrix,
while the other properties that are not time-dependent wi l l need much smaller vertical shifts. To confirm
this, the matrix modul i at a specific temperature, e.g. at 120C where the polymer vertical shift factor
from Section 5.3.4 is 0.8, were used to find the unrelaxed and relaxed values of all material properties. It
was observed that the time dependent properties needed a vertical shift factor of around 0.8, while the
other ones needed a value closer to 0.95. Based on these, i n the examples that thermoelastic effects are
modeled i n this chapter, the vertical shift factor for the time-dependent properties wi l l be assumed to be
0.8 at a temperature of 120C and 0.95 for the time-independent properties at the same temperature.
Cl earl y, the unit value of the shift factor occurs at approximately 27 C , as before.
The composite cure kinetics equation is taken from Lee et al . (1982) and is as fol l ows:
da
= (k
l
+k
2
a)(l-a)(0Al-a) ( <0. 3)
f (8.-1)
= Ul-a) (a>0.3)
dt
3
where:
- 159-
k, =A
i
sxp(-AE
i
/RT) (8.2)
where R is the universal gas constant, A. the frequency factors, and AE
i
the activation energies. The
thermo-chemical properties of AS4/3501-6 composite are listed i n Table 8.5 and thermal properties of the
tooling materials are given i n
Table 8.6.
8.2. SINGLE ELEMENT CASES
In this section, some simple examples wi l l be modeled using the DF and P V E models i n a single element.
This way, a better understanding of the similarities and differences between the two models can be gained
before investigating larger scale cases, where dimensional complexity of the problems makes it difficult
to recognize these effects. For this purpose, a single 3D composite bri ck element wi th different lay-ups
and cure cycles wi l l be analyzed. For each case, the analysis wi l l be done using the A B A Q U S U M A T
developed here for the DF and the modified user material routine, written by Arafath (2004) for
A B A Q U S , for the P V E . A summary of the cases is provided i n
Table 8.7 for reference.
8.2. 1. Standard Cure Cycles
Case 1. Fully constrained unidirectional laminate
General description
In this example, a single unidirectional laminate that is completely confined is taken through a cure cycle.
The cure cycle and the resulting degree of cure are shown i n Figure 8.2. The dimensions of the element
are 10*1*1.
- 160-
Results
The material is analyzed and the resulting residual stresses i n longitudinal (<x
n
) and transverse directions
(~22
=
"33)
n a v e
been calculated using both P V E and DF. The results are shown i n Figure 8.3 and Figure
8.4. The figures show excellent agreement between the two approaches, wi th a maxi mum difference of
5% at the end of cure.
Case 2. Axially constrained unidirectional laminate
General description
The previous example is analyzed here, wi th the only difference that the rod is now only axi al l y
constrained, i.e. it is free to move i n the local 2 and 3 directions. The cure cycle and the other properties
remain the same.
Results
The DF and P V E residual stresses for the axi al direction are illustrated i n Figure 8.5. Agai n, the two
approaches compare very wel l . The slight difference between the two cases mostly comes from the
prediction of stresses on the heat-up. As mentioned i n Chapter 3, P V E estimate of modulus i n a heat-up is
not accurate, whi ch i n this case results i n a slight error, as compared to the DF. Regardless of the reason,
this difference is very small and does not affect the assessment of the results.
Case 3. Axially constrained unidirectional laminate with thermoelastic effects
General description
The previous example is analyzed here wi th the assumption of thermoelastic effects. The cure cycle and
the other properties remain the same.
- 161 -
Results
The DF residual stresses i n the axi al direction wi th and without the thermoelastic effects are illustrated i n
Figure 8.6. The difference between the two sets of results, and therefore the effect of thermoelastic
behaviour is clear from the figure. The figure shows reduced slopes for both stress increase on heat-up
and stress decrease i n cool -down, for the thermoelastic run. Thi s is obviously due to the reduced modulus,
as a result of thermoelastic behaviour.
Case 4. Fully constrained [30 ] laminate
General description
For this example, a fully constrained laminate wi th a lay-up of [30] is modeled. The other parameters
used i n the model are the same as the previous examples. Thi s example wi l l show the response of an
angle ply laminate i n a cure cycl e.
Results
It is noted that i n cases where a local orientation, i.e. the fibre direction, is defined A B A Q U S outputs the
residual stresses onl y i n the local direction. Therefore, to compare the D F and P V E method the resultant
axial forces (N
x
) are calculated. Thi s way, the stress resultants, whi ch are better measures of the laminate
behaviour especially i n compl ex lay-ups, are compared. The two sets of results are shown i n Figure 8.7
and agree very wel l .
Case 5. Axially constrained cross-ply laminate
General description
For this example, a [0 I90"\
s
axi al l y constrained laminate is modeled. It should be noted that i n a
completely confined laminate the layers do not interact. As a result, the layers behave identically to a
unidirectional laminate i n their local direction. Evi dentl y, this wi l l not provide us with any new
- 162-
information. On the other hand, axial constraint allows interaction of the layers. For this reason, only
axial boundary conditions are applied.
Another issue to note is the type of element used in modeling the composite materials in ABAQUS. The
approach normally employed is to use a single multi-layered solid element, as opposed to a single solid
element per layer of the composite. This is advantageous, especially in complex cases, since it eases the
mesh generation and simplifies the mesh itself.
However, the inherent difference between the two elements should be taken into consideration. Single
layered element approximates the displacements through the thickness of the layer using shape functions,
as opposed to the single element per layer model, where obviously a node is considered for each layer.
Also, it should be kept in mind that in ABAQUS the layered elements use Simpson's rule to integrate
through the thickness using an odd number of integration points per layer, while an 8-noded brick
element uses Gauss integration through the thickness with 2 integration points. These differences can
generate some differences in the results and should be kept in mind when modeling.
Here, both types of elements will be used to model the material in this and the next example to show the
similarities and differences between them.
Results
Based on the analysis with a single layered element, the resulting axial forces from the DF and PVE have
been compared in Figure 8.8. The results from the two methods compare very well. Also, due to the fact
that the laminate is symmetric no bending moment is generated.
The resulting axial forces for two element types using the DF model have been compared in Figure 8.9. A
small difference in the final residual stresses can be observed. This is most probably due to the fact that
the model with multiple solid elements is more flexible, due to having more nodes. Therefore, its residual
stresses are slightly lower than those of the layered composite model.
- 163 -
Case 6. Axially constrained quasi-isotropic laminate
General description
A symmetric quasi-isotropic laminate is used for this example. Agai n, the rod is only axi al l y constrained.
Due to the fact that the number of plies is twice as the previous example the thickness of the rod is
increased from 1 to 2.
Agai n, the material is first modeled using a layered element to compare DF and P V E . Then, it is modeled
using single sol i d elements per layer to compare the DF results for the two element types. For reference,
the same boundary conditions have been applied to both cases: A l l longitudinal displacements have been
constrained. To avoi d ri gi d body motions, node 1 i n all directions and node number 9 i n direction 2 have
been constrained, as illustrated i n Figure 8.10.
Results
The axial forces obtained from the DF and P V E approaches have been compared i n Figure 8.11. Agai n,
the results agree very wel l .
In comparing the results of the two different element types, very different behaviour is observed. This is
clear by l ooki ng at their deformed shapes as shown in Figure 8.12 and Figure 8.13.
It is seen i n the above figures that the layered element shows shrinkage i n transverse directions. Note that
the shrinkage i n the direction 1 is smal l , due to presence of fibres, especially as compared to the thickness
direction that is dominated by the polymer. However, i n the single-element-per-layer approach in addition
to the shrinkage a torsion effect is seen. This does not seem unreasonable; whi l e the laminate does not
bend under temperature changes because of symmetry through the thickness it coul d go under torsion
when subjected to temperature changes, since it is not symmetric for torsional effects. On the other hand,
the layered element is modeled wi th a single shape function through the thickness and does not show
torsional effects wi th change of temperature.
- 164-
This example underscores more of the differences between these two element types. Al though most of the
time the two approaches are expected to show the same behaviour, it is not always the case. As a result,
choosing the proper model i ng approach should be done in tandem wi th consideration for the properties of
each approach.
8.2.1.1. Summary
In this section, some simple examples were presented to compare the results from the DF and P V E . The
overall conclusion, consistent wi th what was discussed i n Chapter 3, is that the two approaches give very
close results for the standard cure cycle that was used for these examples.
In addition, it is noted that there are two element types i n model i ng the composite materials, i.e. layered
elements and single element per layer. The results from these two are not always the same and care
should be taken i n model i ng to choose the proper approach.
8.2.2. Other Cure Cycles
In this section, two examples are chosen to show cases where the P V E approach does not give answers
close to those of the DF.
Case 7. Post-cure heating of completely confined unidirectional laminate
General description
This case consists of a single unidirectional composite modeled as a completely confined sol i d element,
e.g. similar to Case 1. The material is taken through a cure cycle and is then subjected to post-cure
heating, i.e. as shown i n Figure 8.14.
In reality, i f a composite part is to go through such a temperature cycl e, before being subjected to the
heat-up, i.e. whi l e at room temperature, it wi l l be removed from the tool . This means that the residual
stresses i n the material wi l l be partly released. In order to have a single element model that closely
- 165 -
corresponds to this behaviour the stresses need to be released at room temperature. Thi s wi l l cause the
stresses to reduce to zero. Thi s, i n effect is equivalent to subjecting the cured material to a heat-up from
time zero. In other words, the heat-up cycle can be modeled by appl yi ng the cycle i n Figure 8.15 to the
material, wi th the resulting degree of cure shown i n the same figure. Note that after releasing the stresses,
the element wi l l be completely confined again.
Results
The resulting stresses from the DF and P V E approaches i n two pri nci pal directions 1 and 2 are shown in
Figure 8.16 and Figure 8.17. The results show that even though the two models show a similar trend of
stresses at the very beginning, they start to diverge qui ckl y. Thi s was expected, due to the fact that the
P V E formulation has been designed with a cool -down i n mi nd and it does not give reasonable results in
heat-up.
Notes
The DF stresses show two different regimes i n the figures. First, the compressive stresses
increase, due to the fact that the temperature is increasing. In the second part, the stresses start to
decrease dramatically and i n the case of a
u
, it wi l l go into tension. The reasons for this are as
follows: First, the relaxation i n the resin causes the stresses i n the material to decrease. Thi s has
more effect i n the resin-dominated directions, i.e. c r
2 2
. Second, the relaxation of the resin affects
the C T E of the composite. Looki ng at the material properties i n Table 8.3, it is seen that the C T E
of the composite i n the fibre direction, i.e. CTE
]
, is negative and also changes dramatically wi th
time. When the resin relaxes, the C T E has a larger negative value, as evident i n the first region of
the stresses. However, when resin relaxes the value of CTE
X
becomes even a smaller negative
number and wi l l put the material into tension, even though temperature is increasing.
- 166-
It was mentioned above that two phenomena affect the behaviour of a viscoelastic material i n
heat-up: relaxation of stresses and changes of C T E . In the P V E model, it is observed that the
model is able to show the variability of C T E at least qualitatively, e.g. i n Figure 8.16 the stresses
reach a maxi mum value and then start to decrease from this point on. Thi s is expected, since the
C T E of the material is calculated through micromechanics and this wi l l i n part ensure that the
relaxation of the resin is taken into account i n this aspect of the behaviour. However, as we know
no stress reduction can be predicted by P V E , as also observed i n the figures.
Case 8. Curing partially-cured and completely confined, unidirectional laminate
General description
The geometry and material properties for this example are identical to the previous case. A different cure
cycle is chosen here to investigate more of the difference between the DF and P V E models. In practical
applications, it is sometimes desirable to perform cure i n two parts (e.g. George, 2004). First, the
temperature cycle is applied until the material gels and can hold itself. After that, it is cooled down and
the tool is removed. The remainder of the cure cycle is applied off the tool . Thi s secondary cure of a
partially cured material can be useful i n reducing residual stresses. A sample temperature cycle and the
resulting degree of cure for this case are shown in Figure 8.18.
Recal l i ng the discussion gi ven for the previous case and keeping i n mi nd that the stresses are relaxed
between the primary and secondary cycles we can model the material as it goes through only the
secondary cure cycl e by merely changing the initial degree of cure to its value at the beginning of the
secondary cycl e, whi ch is 0.79. Thi s equivalent cycle and the resulting degree of cure are presented i n
Figure 8.19.
Results
The stresses predicted by the two approaches are illustrated i n Figure 8.20 and Figure 8.21.
- 167-
Agai n, large differences between the results of the two models are seen, whi ch points to failure of the
P V E model i n predicting the V E stresses. It is also clear that the difference i n the results mostly comes
from heat-up. I f the difference i n stresses at the end of heat-up is set aside, the trend of the P V E results
woul d be closer to the DF stresses.
8.2.2.1. Summary
Through the two cases presented above, it is obvious that although P V E has worked very wel l i n many
cases (e.g. standard cure cycles) it cannot predict the V E stresses i n every possible case. Specifically, i n
the cure cycles where some heating occurs after gelation point of the resin the P V E model cannot
correctly predict the residual stresses. It must be noted here that P V E can conceivably be generalized to a
formulation that can cope wi th such conditions, a simple example of whi ch was presented by Svanberg
and Hol mberg (2004 a, b). However, such a formulation is not available at this point.
8.3. MORE COMPLEX CASES
In this part, examples of some more realistic composite parts on tool i ng materials have been chosen and
the result of appl yi ng the curing process wi l l be studied. First, the results for standard cure cycles are
studied, fol l owed by non-standard cure cycles.
8.3.1. Standard Cure Cycles
8.3.1.1. Small thin L-shaped composite part
This part was ori gi nal l y modeled by Wi ersma et al . (1998) and later by Zhu et al . (2001). It is noted that
because of the differences i n material properties and aspects of model i ng other than the composite
constitutive model, a direct comparison of the results wi th theirs is not possible. However, a qualitative
comparison of the results wi l l be made i n order to gain more confidence i n the-validity of the present
approach.
- 168-
The part is a unidirectional L-shaped composite and is placed on two different tool shapes, i.e. convex
and concave as shown i n Figure 8.22 and Figure 8.23, respectively and different tool materials, i.e. steel,
aluminium, and invar. Due to symmetry, only hal f of the part has been modeled. The length of the straight
part is 16mm , the thickness of the part is 4mm, and the corner radius is 5mm .
This part is taken through a cure cycl e, shown i n Figure 8.24, and analyzed wi th both the DF and P V E .
After the completion of the cure cycle the tool is removed and the spring-in angle is measured wi th a
similar procedure to the one used by Al bert and Fernlund (2002). The results from the DF analysis and
comparison to P V E are presented in Table 8.8. It is observed that i n both convex and concave mould
shapes the final spring-in is a function of the C T E of the moul d material. A specific trend is seen i n the
results, where the values of spring-ins for the two moulds converge as the mould C T E reduces.
Furthermore, spring-ins for the convex mould increase wi th increasing moul d C T E , whi l e for the concave
mould they decrease. Thi s is consistent with the results reported by Al bert and Fernlund. In that work, it
is shown that the total spring-in i n an L-shaped part can be broken into two parts: warpage of the straight
arm and corner spring-in. The warpage of the straight section of the part is mostly due to tool-part
interaction (see Twi gg et al . , 2004).
The corner component of the spring-in arises from the mismatch between the longitudinal and transverse
C T E of the composite part. Thi s was also discussed by Nel son and Cairns (1989) and mentioned i n
Chapter 2, where the spring-in for an L-shaped part can be calculated as fol l ows:
A9 = 9
(CTE
g
- CTE
R
) AT
1 + CTE
R
AT
(8.3)
I f the part is modeled as a plane-strain problem, then the above equation woul d have to be modified as
follows:
- 169-
A9 = 9
^-v
eR
CTE
R
+ CTE
e
-( 1 + v
eR
)CTE
R
AT
(8-4)
l + (l + v
eR
)CTE
R
AT
Where E
R
and E
g
are the modulus of elasticity i n the radial and hoop directions, and v
gR
is the
Poisson's ratio.
From this equation, the corner part of the spring-in for this case is 0. 60. Thi s value is consistent wi th the
value of spring-in that the convex and concave tools converge to. In other words, by reducing the tool
C T E to zero we eliminate the warpage and the value of the spring-in wi l l onl y consist of the corner effect.
These results are also consistent wi th the findings by Wi ersma et al . and Zhu et al .
The spring-in results of P V E i n Table 8.8 closely agree wi th the DF prediction; the maxi mum difference
between the results being 5%. Even though the difference between the two models changes between the
runs, due to their small size, these differences do not seem to be attributable to a meaningful trend. The
runtimes of the two models have also been compared i n Table 8.9 and they show that the DF is only
approximately 1.7 times slower than the P V E i n these cases. Thi s is consistent wi th the comparisons
presented i n previous chapters and confirms the efficiency of the DF.
The final residual stresses, i.e. just before tool removal, for the P V E and DF can be compared through
their contours, as shown i n Figure 8.25 to Figure 8.28 for the longitudinal and transverse stresses for a
convex steel moul d. Exami nati on of the figures shows that the stress distribution for the two methods is
very similar. The maxi mum longitudinal stresses for DF and P V E are 194.3 and 189.5 MPa, respectively,
whi ch is a 2. 5% difference between the two models. The maxi mum transverse stress predicted by DF and
P V E are 89AMPa and 87. 7MPa, respectively (1.5% error for P V E ) and they both occur at the inner
side of the curved section. Thi s shows that the two predictions made by the models are very close,
although some differences are seen.
- 170-
side of the curved section. Thi s shows that the two predictions made by the models are very close,
although some differences are seen.
8.3.1.2. Long L-shaped composite part
In this section, a different geometry wi l l be analyzed to perform a more detailed comparison of the DF
and P V E . The length of the straight sections for this part is 100mm, the thickness is 4mm, and the corner
radius is 5mm . The cure cycl e is the same as the previous example, i.e. shown i n Figure 8.24. The part is
a unidirectional composite and the tool is aluminium. FE mesh of this part is shown i n Figure 8.29,
consisting of 8-noded sol i d elements under plane-strain condition. A test of convergence of the results
wi th mesh refinement was not performed, however the number of elements used i n this model seems
adequate for the finite element code to give accurate results. Therefore, the results may not be most
accurate, but due to the fact they are only being used for comparison of the DF and P V E and no other
quantitative comparison is being made this wi l l not be of concern. Instead, we wi l l avoi d very long run-
times associated wi th models containing large number of elements.
The deformation of the part after the tool removal is shown i n Figure 8.30. The spring-in and runtimes for
the DF and P V E have been shown i n Table 8.10. The results are very close, wi th negligible differences.
The relatively large spring-in values predicted for this run are noteworthy. Thi s is due to the fact that
complete bonding between the part and the tool has been assumed and this greatly increases the tool-part
interaction, whi ch results i n hi gh warpage values, especially for longer parts such as this (see Twi gg et
al . , 2004). The corner components of the spring-ins have also been presented i n the table and show
reasonable values. The runtimes also compare very wel l , wi th the DF being 1.8 times slower than P V E .
In order to gain a better understanding of the stresses predicted by the two approaches, the values have
been compared in several ways. First, the history of stresses at a specific point, i.e. the point indicated by
a dot i n Figure 8.29, are compared i n Figure 8.31, along wi th air and the l ocal temperature at the point.
- 171 -
Note that these are stresses before tool removal. The two approaches fol l ow the same trend, although the
values show some differences and are 6% different at the end of cure.
We can also look at the moments and axial forces i n cross-sections of the part. For this purpose, first the
evolution of moments and axial forces acting on a cross-section, passing through the reference point,
throughout the cure are compared i n Figure 8.32 and Figure 8.33. The results from DF and P V E are very
close i n this case and the differences are mi ni mal , i.e. 3% for final residual moments and 2% for forces.
To show the stresses i n the cross section, the distribution of axi al stresses at the end of cure (before tool
removal) are plotted and compared i n Figure 8.34. The figure confirms the findings that DF and P V E
results agree wel l .
We know that the deformations after the tool removal come from the residual stresses i n the material,
mainly i n the form of moments i n the cross section. For this reason, a comparison of the distribution of
moments along the length of the part has been presented i n Figure 8.35. In this figure, the ori gi n of the
length is the mi ddl e of the curved corner (plane of symmetry of the part). The results again show a very
good comparison of the two models. The difference i n the maxi mum moments shown i n this figure is 4%.
In order to investigate the results for other lay-ups, the same part has also been modeled wi th cross-ply
and quasi-isotropic lay-ups. The spring-in results for these cases are shown i n Table 8.11. The results
show a good comparison of the DF and P V E . It is also seen that the spring-in values for the two lay-ups,
while different from the unidirectional result, are not very different from each other.
8.3.1.3. Reverse micromechanics and thermoelastic behaviour
At this point, the reverse micromechanics ( RMM) procedure is used to calculate the phase stresses for the
unidirectional laminate on al umi ni um tool. The evolution of matrix and composite stresses at the point
shown i n Figure 8.29 along two directions are compared i n Figure 8.36 and Figure 8.37. For the stresses
i n the fibre direction, i.e. Figure 8.36, the fibres take most of the load and therefore the stresses i n the
- 172-
matrix are close to zero. Thi s changes near the end of the cure cycl e (i n cool-down), where the matrix has
hardened and takes some of the total stress. The value of matrix stress at the end of cure is 213MPa . The
stresses perpendicular to the fibre direction and out of plane, shown i n Figure 8.37 as S
3i
, however,
behave differently. It is observed that the stresses i n the matrix approximately fol l ow the same trends as
the composite. The values of the stresses, unlike the previous case, are comparable to those in the
composite and reach a maxi mum of 27MPa at the end of cure. Thi s is consistent wi th the fact that values
of fibre transverse modulus ( E
2
) and apparent modulus of the matrix are comparable.
In order to see the results of analysis wi th thermoelastic effects, this case is analyzed again wi th relevant
material properties. The spring-in result for this case is 3. 50, i.e. 5% less than the model without
thermoelastic effect. It is seen that the predictions from the two different analyses are not very different,
even though the input modul i are not close. Thi s can also be observed i n Figure 8.38 where the
distributions of moments along the length of the part for the two analyses are compared.
8.3.2. Non-Standard Cure Cycles
As discussed i n the previous chapters and shown i n Section 8.2.2, the P V E cannot be used for al l cure
cycles. In this part, some composite parts are taken through non-standard cure cycles i n order to show a
distinct difference between the results predicted by the DF and P V E . For this purpose, some C-shaped
composite parts are chosen. Due to the symmetry of a C-shaped part, onl y hal f of it needs to be modeled.
Therefore, the modeled geometry wi l l be similar to an L-shaped part, wi th the only difference being i n the
boundary conditions; i n this case the symmetry boundary conditions are applied. The geometry used for
the examples here is the same as the L-shaped part i n Figure 8.39.
8.3.2.1. Post cure heat-up
In some applications, a heat-up of the part after cure may be needed. For this purpose, a cure cycle
reflecting such a case wi l l be modeled here. The cure cycle is shown i n Figure 8.40. In this cycle, after
- 173-
applying a standard cycl e and removing the tool, the part is heated up again. The results of the DF and
P V E deformations are then compared i n Table 8.12. It is seen that the results of the two methods are i n
close agreement right after the tool removal. Wi th the results at the end of heat-up, it may appear that the
two methods give comparable results, since the difference i n the spring-ins are onl y 2%. However, the
proper way of evaluating the two constitutive models is to consider the deformations generated during the
heat-up only. Then it is seen that as expected the results from the two methods are i n fact very different
and the difference i n their predictions for this case grows to 14%. Agai n, the difference between the
runtimes shows a favourable confirmation of the DF efficiency; the D F is only 1.9 times slower than
P V E .
In order to a get a better understanding of the differences between the two models, some comparison of
stresses, similar to the L-shaped part i n the previous section, wi l l be made. First the history of stress i n the
fibre direction for the point shown i n Figure 8.29 is presented i n Fi gure 8.41. The comparison shows that
the DF and P V E are fairly si mi l ar and a maximum difference of 6% between the stresses is observed.
After the tool removal, i.e. during the secondary heat-up, the DF stress at this point is relatively constant,
but as the temperature increases it starts to drop. However, no such drop i n the P V E stresses is observed.
The distributions of moments along the length of the web just before tool removal have been shown i n
Figure 8.42. Si mi l ar to the L-shaped part, the two models predict fairly similar values and the
distributions are very close, i.e. maxi mum error is 8%. Thi s emphasizes the good correlation between the
two models for a standard cycl e. The moment distribution at the end of heat-up is shown i n Figure 8.43.
The curves for DF and P V E look rather similar in this case as wel l . However, the absolute values reveal
more difference; the maxi mum difference i n this case being 24%. A n interesting point observed i n these
graphs is that even though after the tool removal P V E is greater than the DF at al l points (a less negative
value), at the end of heat-up this monotonic difference changes; the moments predicted by DF and P V E
switch places i n being the higher value along the length. Thi s is consistent wi th the fact that P V E does not
- 174-
relax the material and its reduction of stresses, and therefore leads to moments that are higher than the
DF.
Agai n, by performing the R M M analysis the stresses i n the phases are obtained. The composite and
matrix stresses for the point shown in Figure 8.29 along and perpendicular to the fibre direction are
presented i n Figure 8.44 and Figure 8.45, respectively. For the stresses along the fibre direction, the trend
is similar to the L-shaped part, where the matrix stress remains close to zero relative to the composite
stress until cool -down, and then starts to increase. It is also observed that the matrix stress i n the heat-up
decreases, even though the composite stress remains relatively constant. Thi s is not surprising, as during
the heat-up the composite can move freely, but the matrix and fibre expand differently and hence internal
stresses are generated. Perpendicular to the fibres, the matrix stresses are comparable to those of the
composite, similar to the L-shaped part. Agai n, after tool removal the matrix stress decreases wi th
increasing temperature, whi l e the composite stress does not change significantly. Note that these
transverse stresses are lower i n value (7.6MPa) than the fibre direction stresses (\0.2MPa). It is also
observed that near the end of heat-up both matrix stresses taper off, whi ch is a result of relaxation of the
resin.
8.3.2.2. Secondary cure of a partially cured composite
It has recently become common practice i n the industry (e.g. George, 2004) to partially cure the material
until it develops sufficient stiffness, after whi ch it is removed from the tool , and the cure is completed off
the tool. Thi s is primarily done to reduce the cost, by enabling re-use of the tools and the autoclave. To
study this type of cycl e, an example of such a non-standard cure cycl e, shown i n Figure 8.46, is analyzed
here.
The results of spring-in for the C-shaped part under this cycle are presented i n Table 8.13. It is seen that
the predictions from the DF and P V E models are identical after the tool removal . However, when the
results at the complete cure are considered, no correspondence between P V E and DF is observed. Thi s
- 175-
shows the difference between the DF and P V E i n a non-standard cure cycl e more clearly. It also
emphasizes that the P V E model fails to give reasonable results when the part is heated-up after the
polymer has hardened enough to carry loads, i.e. it has gelled.
The stress history plotted for a specific point is shown i n Figure 8.47. It is seen that even though the P V E
model predicts higher stresses on the first temperature hold it gives a higher stress drop in the first cool -
down and the results from the two models reach a similar value, as also reflected by the spring-in results.
In other words, close correspondence between the DF and P V E results at tool removal happens more or
less accidentally. In the second part of the cycl e, it is seen that P V E does not behave i n anyway si mi l arl y
to the DF and the results are very different. The main difference in the figure is that the DF stresses
decrease, i.e. the DF relaxes the stresses, whi l e i n the P V E they stay constant, since P V E is not able to
relax the stresses i n its current form.
Si mi l ar conclusions can be drawn for the distribution of moment along the length of the part web. The
distributions for the two models before tool removal are presented i n Figure 8.48. The DF and P V E
moments are similar i n trend, wi th an error of 9% for the P V E . However, after removing the tool and
applying the second part of the cure cycle the DF wi l l relax the values to give a zero value for spring-in,
whi l e P V E wi l l not, as illustrated i n Figure 8.49.
Usi ng R M M procedure, the composite and matrix stresses for the point shown i n Figure 8.29 along and
perpendicular to the fibre direction are computed and shown i n Figure 8.50 and Figure 8.51, respectively.
For the fibre direction, the matrix stresses remain close to zero until after the tool removal and beginning
of the second part of the cure cycl e. In the second part, one can see that the matrix stresses increase and
then decrease, i n fact fol l owi ng the temperature. At the end, even though the stress i n the composite is
negligible (close to zero), the matrix stress is not small (\6.SMPa) and should be taken into account. The
transverse direction stresses have a more complex behaviour. In this case, the matrix stress follows the
trend of the composite stress fairly closely until the end of the first part of the cycle and tool removal. In
- 176-
the second part, the composite stress remains close to zero, as a free standing material under changes of
temperature. The changes of the matrix stress can be explained as fol l ows: during heat-up, the cure
shrinkage and thermal expansion act i n different directions and the result, as appears i n the figure, is that
they cancel each other out and the stress does not change considerably. On the hol d, however, only cure
shrinkage acts on the matrix and generates stresses. Thi s is partially countered by the effect of thermal
shrinkage i n the cool -down, whi ch results in a residual stress i n the matrix. It is worth noting that the
matrix stress i n this direction (5AMPa) is much smaller than the one i n the fibre direction ( 16. 8MPa ).
The interesting fact seen i n the results for this cycle is the near zero residual spring-in of the part at the
end of the cycl e. In other words, such a cure cycle is clearly able to reduce the spring-in value. This is
consistent wi th the results of available experiments done by George (2004). To test the capability of
similar cure cycles to reduce the spring-in to the same degree, two other temperature cycles were
analyzed. These cycles, shown i n Figure 8.52, all consist of two parts, i.e. a first part to bring the part to
gelation, and a second part to complete the cure off the tool . The difference between these cycles is the
hold temperature i n the first part of the cycl e, where temperatures of 100C, 120C , 150C have been
used. The result of predicted spring-ins for these cycles is shown i n Table 8.14. It is seen that the spring-
i n at tool removal differs significantly depending on the hol d temperature. However, all three cycles
predict the same spring-in at the end of cure and the first hold temperature does not have any effect on the
final deformation. Thi s is perhaps due to the fact that during the heat-up i n the second part of the cycle
the part stresses are relaxed and the final deformation is generated only during the hol d and cool-down in
the second part of the cycl e.
8.4. SUMMARY
In this chapter, some numerical examples were presented where different constitutive models developed
in this thesis, i.e. the DF of VE and PVE models, were used to analyze the material as they go through
different cure cycles. First, some simple examples, consisting of only a single element, were shown to
- 177-
facilitate the study of available constitutive models. Then, some more realistic cases were presented to
confirm these findings. Due to unavailability of experimental results in these cases, where both a VE
material model and residual stress measurements are available, a qualitative validation of the results was
carried out. Then, the results from available constitutive models were compared to give a better
understanding of their characteristics. Those aspects of these constitutive models developed in this thesis,
and not available in other works in the literature, were also showcased and the results were studied for
qualitative validation of the procedures.
Overall, the following conclusions can be drawn from the examples illustrated in this chapter:
The material properties used for the examples were chosen such that they represent more of the
real material behaviour; all material properties were assumed to be time-dependent. This included
the moduli and the Poisson's ratios as well as the cure shrinkage coefficient of the composite. In
addition, the resin material was assumed to have two different regimes of thermal expansion
behaviour, each of which caused separate time-dependent thermal expansion behaviour for the
composite material. The material properties can be found and handled easily, by taking advantage
of the micromechanical and the differential form modeling.
Small L-shaped parts were used to show that the predictions by both the DF and PVE models are
consistent with experiments and real physical behaviour. The spring-in values could be broken
into two components, i.e. corner spring-in and warpage. The corner component is the value that
the spring-in of the part on convex and concave tools converges to, as the warpage value is
reduced for tools of lower CTE value. This is consistent with experiments available in the
literature (e.g. Albert and Fernlund, 2002).
The PVE model predicts results close to the DF baseline in the standard cure cycles. This
confirms the validity of the PVE for use in a majority of cure cycles. However, the PVE does not
- 178-
work for the non-standard cure cycles presented in this chapter. In cases like these, where the
material underwent heating after the polymer had gelled, the PVE cannot be used.
The DF model is very efficient, as compared to the PVE. This compares favourably with the
much longer times that the common integral form models consume, as discussed in Chapter 3. In
addition, in cases where the PVE does not work or a more, albeit slightly, accurate model is
needed, the DF is the only viable choice.
Reverse micromechanics model used for these examples is a necessary tool in the design of
composite materials, since it gives insight into the stresses and strains of the phases, not
previously available in the literature. The results of such analyses were consistent with common
sense and show that in the cure cycle large stresses may be generated in the polymer.
Using the DF, a set of thermoelastic material properties was assumed and the material was
analyzed with this effect. This can be a useful tool, if such effects in the material are deemed
significant. In the cases studied here, the effect of thermoelastic properties was variable, i.e.
where in one case they resulted in significant changes to the results, in another case this effect
was diminished. However, it must be noted that without such an analysis it may not be possible to
know a priori how much effect thermoelasticity would have.
- 179-
Table 8.1 Mechanical properties of fibre and resin used for case studies
Property AS4 fibre Property 3501-6 resin
v
1 2
=v
1 3 0.2 E
u
( Gpa) 3.2
V2 3
0.3
E
r
( Gpa)
0.031
E,(Gpa) 207
V
0.35
E
2
( Gpa) 20.7
G
1 2
=G
1 3
( Gpa) 27.6
CTE! (u/C) -0.9
C T E
2
(u/C) 7.2 Vf 0.58
Table 8.2 Thermal and cure shrinkage coefficients obtained for 3501-6 resin for the case studies
Parameter Value
, , / Gl assy(T<T
g
) 57.6
Coeri . thermal expansion (ue CI
Rubbery(T>T
g
) 185.4
Coeff. cure shrinkage (us) 18639
Table 8.3 Unrelaxed and relaxed values of different material properties obtained for AS4/3501-6
Property ri(MPa) i(MPa) K2(MPa) GZ3(MPa) Gi2(MPa) CTE1 n (n/C) CTE1 r (n/C)CTE2 B (n/C)CTE2 r (n/C] CS,(M/C) CS2(H/C)
Unrelaxed 123300 3483.0 6817.8 2744.5 3861.6 -0.26 1.15 37.0 105.7 202.4 10568
Relaxed 120100 49.3 97.6 36.8 43.2 -0.89 -0.88 36.8 105.1 2.0 10516
Table 8.4 Relaxation times and corresponding weight factors for different material properties of
AS4/3501-6
Maxwell element Relaxation time
t
K
2 G"23
G
1 2
CTE
l g
CTE
l r
CSj
1 2.92E+01 0.041 0.041 0.043 0.052 0.052 0.059 0.059
2 2.92E+03 0.048 0.047 0.050 0.059 0.059 0.066 0.066
3 1.82E+05 0.063 0.062 0.066 0.075 0.075 0.083 0.083
4 1.10E+07 0.091 0.090 0.094 0.105 0.105 0.112 0.112
5 2.83E+08 0.133 0.132 0.137 0.148 0.148 0.154 0.154
6 7.94E+09 0.271 0.272 0.272 0.270 0.270 0.264 0,264
7 1.95E+11 0.242 0.244 0.234 0.206 0.206 0.187 0.187
8 3.32E+12 0.074 0.075 0.070 0.057 0.057 0.050 0.050
9 4.92E+14 0.037 0.037 0.035 0.029 0.029 0.025 0.025
- 180-
Table 8.5 Thermo-chemical properties of AS4/3501-6
AT (min"
1
)
2.102 x 10
a
P (Kg/m
a
)
1578
A
2
(min"
1
)
-2.014 x 1
1 0
C
p
(J/Kg. K) 862
A
3
(min"
1
)
1.960 x 10
5
k
T
(W/m. K) 0.4135
AEi (J/mol)
8.07 x 10" k
L
(W/m.K) 12.83
AE
2
(J/mol)
7.78 x 10
4
H
r
( J/Kg)
198.6 x 10
3
AE
3
(J/mol)
5.66 x 10"
R (J/mol.K) 8.13
Table 8.6 Properties of the tooling materials used in the case studies
Tool Materi al E ( GPa) v CTE( | J/
0
C)
p(kg/m
3
)
C
p
( J / Kg. K) k( W/m. K)
Steel 210 0.300 12.0 7833 434 60.5
Al umi num 69 0.327 25.0 2707 896 167.0
Invar 150 0.280 0.0 8000 515 110.0
Table 8.7 Summary of single-element cases to be analyzed
Case Boundary Conditions Lay-up Note
1 Fully constrained
[0]
2 Axially constrained
[0]
3 Axi al l y constrained
[0]
With thermoelastic effects
4 Fully constrained [30]
5 Axi al l y constrained [0/90]
s
Two different A B A Q U S elements used for comparison
6 Axially constrained [0/45/90/-45]
s
Two different A B A Q U S elements used for comparison
7 Fully constrained
[0]
Heat-up after complete cure
8 Fully constrained
[01
Secondary cure of partially-cured material
- 181 -
Table 8.8 Results of spring-in angle in degrees for an L-shaped part on different tooling, analyzed
with the Differential Form of Viscoelasticity and Pseudo-Viscoelasticity
CTE
mo I d
(u/C) DF PVE
Convex mold
0 0.65 0.62
Convex mold
12 0.74 0.71
25 0.89 0.90
CTE
mo l d
(u/C) DF PVE
Concave mold
0 0.61 0.61
Concave mold
12 0.41 0.41
25 0.16 0.18
Table 8.9 Comparison of runtimes in a standard cure cycle for an L-shaped composite on different
tooling
CTE
mo l d
(u/C) DF (Sec) PVE (Sec) Ratio (DF/PVE)
0 907 496 1.83
Convex mold 12 839 526 1.60
25 899 500 1.80
0 805 513 1.57
Concave mold 12 820 464 1.77
25 884 530 1.67
Table 8.10 Spring-in and runtimes from the analysis on a unidirectional part shown in Figure 8.29
Description DF PVE
Total spring-in () 3.69 3.66
Corner spring-in () 0.58 0.58
Runtime (Sec) 10551 5787
Table 8.11 Spring-in from the analysis on the part shown in Figure 8.29 with different lay-ups
Lay-up Spring-in(DF) Spring-in(PVE) PVE error
[[0/90]
4
]
s
4.29 4.24 -1.2%
[[0/45/90/-45]
2
]
s
4.17 4.09 -1.8%
- 182-
Table 8.12 Spring-in results for a C-shaped composite part under a cure cycle with a post cure
heat-up
Spring-in () DF PVE PVE Error
After tool removal 3.75 3.74 -0.3%
End of heat-up 3.32 3.25 -2.1%
Only heat-up 0.43 0.49 14%
Table 8.13 Spring-in results for a C-shaped composite part under a cure cycle with secondary cure
of a partially cured material
Spring-in () DF PVE
After tool removal 0.70 0.70
End of cycle -0.08 0.42
Table 8.14 Results of spring-in for cycles in the form of secondary cure of partially cured parts
First Hold Temperature Spring-in(Tool removal) Spring-in(End of cycle)
100 0.70 -0.08
120 0.76 -0.08
150 1.03 -0.07
- 183 -
TEMP. - " - Vol. Change
200
_ 150
O
2 100
a>
Q .
E
50
100
i i i i i i
200 300
Time (Min)
1 r-
400
T 6
O)
2 S
O
O
0 I
o
>
500
Figure 8.1 Evolution of the volume change for 3501-6 resin in a cure cycle, used to find thermal and
cure shrinkage properties
- 184-
50 -1
40 -
30 -
(
M
p
a
)

20 -
in
to
0 )
10 -
CO
-10 -
-20 -
-s11(DF)
-s11(PVE)
250
Time (Min)
Figure 8.3 Comparison of er
u
as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and PVE for Case 1
80
70
60
50
| 40 1
8
3 0
20
10
0 + 1
-10
-20
4
S22(DF)
s22(PVE)
50 100 150 200 250
Time (Min)
Figure 8.4 Comparison of cr
22
- 185 -
20 -i
Time (Min)
Figure 8.5 Comparison of axial stresses as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and PVE for
Case 2
s11 (Thermoelastic) s11 (No Thermoelastic)
20 -i
/ \
-
A
//
/
/ /
0
i
50
i
100 150 200 250
Time (Min)
Figure 8.6 Comparison of axial stresses as predicted by the Differential Form, with and without
thermoelastic behaviour for Case 3
- 186-
Nx(DF)
- Nx(PVE)
250
Time (Min)
Figure 8.7 Comparison of axial forces as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and PVE for
Case 4
Nx(DF)
Nx(PVE)
250
Time (Min)
Case 5
- 187-
Nx(DF, layered solid elements) Nx(DF, single element per layer)
100 150 200 250
Time (Min)
Figure 8.9 Comparison of axial forces as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT with different
element types for Case 5
- 188-
3 2
\L
Figure 8.10 Schematic of the boundary conditions in Case 6 to avoid rigid body movements
25
20
15
n
Q .
8
1 0
0)
**
CO
Nx(DF)
Nx(PVE)
100 150 200 250
Time (Min)
Case 6
- 189-
Figure 8.12 Undeformed (solid line) and deformed (dashed line) shapes, using a layered element in
Case 6
Figure 8.13 Undeformed (unshaded) and deformed (shaded) shapes, using single element per layer
in Case 6
- 190-
Figure 8.14 Cure cycle used in post cure heat-up of the material in Case 7
Figure 8.15 Temperature cycle and the degree of cure used to model a post-cure heat-up in Case 7
- 191 -
- 192-
- 193 -
s11(DF)
s11(FVE)
Time (Min)
Figure 8.20 Comparison of cr,, as predicted by the Differential Form UMAT and PVE for Case 8
-s22(DF)
s22(PVE)
Time (Min)
n
- 194 -
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
time (min)
Fi gure 8.24 Cur e cycle used for case studies on AS4/3501-6 composite mat eri al
Fi gure 8.25 Di st r i but i on of l ongi t udi nal stresses for an L-shaped uni di rect i onal composite on a
convex steel moul d from Di fferenti al For m of Vi scoel asti ci ty
- 196-
SS, 311
CAve. Grit.: 75*)
+8.766+01
46.475*401
41.889*401
-4.045*400
-Z.698*401
-4.991*401
-7.284e+01
-9.S7?e401
-1.187e+02
-1.416*402
-1.646e402
-1.875*402
Figure 8.26 Distribution of longitudinal stresses for an L-shaped unidirectional composite on a
convex steel mould from Pseudo-Viscoelasticity
- 197-
Figure 8.28 Distribution of transverse stresses for an L-shaped unidirectional composite on a
convex steel mould from Pseudo-Viscoelasticity
M
Figure 8.30 Deformed part after tool removal in a cure cycle, along with the undeformed shape
S11 (DF) S11 (PVE) Air Temp. Node Temp.
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Time (Min)
400
Figure 8.31 Evolution of temperature and residual stresses at the point shown in Figure 8.29
- 199-
- Moment (DF) Moment (PVE) A ir Temperature
E
E
c
0>
E
o
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Time (Min)
400
Figure 8.32 Evolution of moments in an L-shaped composite part for a cross-section passing
through the point shown in Figure 8.29
Force (DF) Force (PVE) A i r Temperature
8 -500
00 150 200 250, \ 300 350
4io
1
200
180
160
140
20
100
o
80 |
0)
60 *"
40
20
0
Time (Min)
Figure 8.33 Evolution of axial forces in an L-shaped composite part for a cross-section passing
through the point-shown in Figure 8.29
- 200-
DF PVE
S11 Stress (MPa)
Figure 8.34 Distribution of final axial residual stresses through the thickness for a cross-section
passing through the point shown in Figure 8.29
-M (DF) M (PVE)
3000
2000
1000
? 0
E
z -1000
| -2000
S -3000
^1000
-5000 4
-6000
Distance from the part plane of symmetry (mm)
Figure 8.35 Distribution of moments along the length of the part shown in Figure 8.29
-201 -
S11 (Composite) S11 (Matrix)
500
400
~ 300
D.
s
in
(A
d)
1_
10
200
100
0
-100
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Time (Min)
Figure 8.36 Evolution of composite and matrix stresses in the fibre direction at the point shown in
Figure 8.29
- S33 (Composite) S33 (Matrix)
50
40
30 ^
20
re
Q.
s
CO
in
10
to
0
-10
-20
- t ee- ^ 150 200
Time (Min)
0/ 300 350 400
Figure 8.37 Evolution of composite and matrix stresses perpendicular to the fibre direction (in-
plane) at the point shown in Figure 8.29
- 20 2-
M (Thermoelastic) M (No Thermoelastic)
3000
2000
1000
0
-2000
-3000
-4000
-5000
-6000
^ \
20
i
40
60// 80 100
I
120
-
J
Distance from the part plane of symmetry (mm)
Figure 8.38 Distribution of moments along the length of the part shown in Figure 8.29for two
analyses with and without thermoelastic effects
-203 -
Symmetry
Figure 8.39 FE mesh of a C-shaped AS4/3501-6 part on an aluminium tool used in the case studies
Temperature DoC
+ , , , V0
0 100 200 300 400 500
Time (Min)
Figure 8.40 Cure cycle applied to a C-shaped composite shown in Figure 8.29
-204-
-S11 (DF) S11 (PVE) A ir Temp. Node Temp.
100 200 300 400
Time (Min)
500
Figure 8.41 Evolution of temperature and residual stresses at the point for a C-shaped part shown
in Figure 8.29
M (DF) M(PVE)
-6000
J
Distance from part comer along web (mm)
Figure 8.42 Distribution of moments along the web of the C-shaped part before tool removal, as in
Figure 8.40
-205 -
M (DF) - - M (PVE)
400 i
300
? 200
E
- 100
cu
E
o
S 0
-100
-200
20 40 60 80 100 120
Distance from part corner along web (mm)
Figure 8.43 Distribution of moments along the web of the C-shaped part shown in Figure 8.29 at
the end of post cure heat-up
500
500
Figure 8.44 Evolution of composite and matrix stresses in the fibre direction for a C-shaped
composite at the point shown in Figure 8.29 under the cure cycle in Figure 8.40
- 206-
500
Time (Min)
Figure 8.45 Evolution of composite and matrix stresses perpendicular to the fibre direction for a C-
shaped composite at the point shown in Figure 8.29 under the cure cycle in Figure 8.40
Figure 8.46 Cure cycle applied to a C-shaped composite shown in Figure 8.29
-207-
250
200
~ 150
ns
(o 100
in
o
CO
50
0
-50
S11 (DF) S11 (PVE) A ir Temperature Node Temperature
100 200 300 400 500
Time (Min)
600 700 800
220
170
o
120
3
+->
RJ
L_
d>
70 |
20
-30
Figure 8.47 Evolution of temperature and residual stresses at the point for a C-shaped part shown
in Figure 8.29
M (DF) M (PVE)
100 120
-1200
J
Figure 8.48 Distribution of moments along the web of the C-shaped part before tool removal, cure
cycle shown in Figure 8.46
- 208-
M (DF) M (PVE)
80
60
^ 40
E
I 20
| 0
o

-20
-40
-60
20 40 60 80 100 120
Figure 8.49 Distribution of moments along the web of the C-shaped part at the end of cycle, cure
cycle shown in Figure 8.46
[ S11 (Comp) S11 (Matrix) A ir Temperature
250 i
Time (Min)
Figure 8.50 Evolution of composite and matrix stresses in the fibre direction for a C-shaped
composite at the point shown in Figure 8.39
-209-
S33(Comp) S33 (Matrix) A irTemperature
re
2
</>
(A

V)
8
6
4
2
0
-2
-4
-6
-8
-10
100 200 300 400
Time (Min)
800
200
150
100
50
,0
50
100
150
200
o
o
i _
3
re
a>
a.
E
Figure 8.51 Evolution of composite and matrix stresses perpendicular to the fibre direction for a C-
shaped composite at the point shown in Figure 8.39
Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3
100 200 300 400 500
Time (Min)
600 700 800
Figure 8.52 Different cure cycles in the form of secondary cure of partially cured parts
- 210-
Chapter 9: Conclusions and Future Work
Chapter 9. CONCLUSI ONS AND FU TU RE WORK
9.1. SUMMARY
Different constitutive models for calculation of residual stresses i n composite materials during cure were
developed i n this work. For this purpose, the models were first derived i n simple I D form and their
validity was demonstrated. It was shown that the Pseudo-Viscoelastic model ( P VE) and the Differential
Form ( DF) of viscoelasticity have different characteristics and may be used according to the objectives of
the modeller.
In order to have a worki ng model for practical cases, a micromechanical approach was presented to
combine the properties of the viscoelastic ( VE) polymer and the fibres into a V E model for the composite.
Then, this was uti l i zed to develop the Finite Element ( FE) solution for the DF formulation. Some specific
capabilities were deemed important in material modeling and were built into this approach. These are:
modeling all the material properties as functions of time; ability to simulate the thermoelastic behaviour
in the material; and the option to back calculate the phase stresses from the composite stresses, i.e. reverse
micromechanics.
This model was implemented i n the commercial general-purpose FE code, A B A Q U S , and the validity of
this implementation was verified. Some case studies were presented to show the capability of the models
developed i n this work and highlight the similarities and differences between them i n order to help wi th
the choice of a model to achieve either accuracy or efficiency of the solution.
9.2. CONCLUSIONS
The conclusions based on the work presented i n this thesis are as fol l ows:
-211 -
The P V E is a val i d simplification of the available V E models i n the literature for the cure of
thermoset composite material for a wide range of cure cycles and can be used as an efficient
alternative to V E models i n many cases.
The micromechanical approach presented here can be used for obtaining the V E mechanical
properties of the composite from those of the phases, especially by using available mathematical
computer packages.
The DF is an efficient modeling form of viscoelasticity that is easier to develop than the more
common integral form models currently used i n the literature. Thi s approach provides a better
framework for extending the constitutive model to include aspects such as reverse
micromechanics. The DF is also easy to implement, due to the fact that the developed
formulation operates at the integration point level of an element.
A l l material properties were assumed to be time dependent. It was shown that modeling al l the
material properties as time-dependent, i ncl udi ng coefficients of thermal expansion and cure
shrinkage, is failry straightforward with the DF.
The reverse micromechanics model developed in this thesis is a helpful tool for calculation of
stresses i n the constituents. Cal cul ati on of these stresses can be essential i n monitoring the state
of the polymer when designing composite materials.
Thermoelastic behaviour of the polymer can be an important factor i n the response of the
composite material and its cure induced residual stresses. One form of this behaviour was
implemented and verified here.
9.3. FUTURE WORK
The fol l owi ng are areas i n whi ch the work i n this thesis can be advanced:
- 212-
To be practical, the DF needs a proper characterization of the material. There are only a few
materials characterized for their V E behaviour and characterization of more materials is needed.
In addition, i n these experiments the possibility of the nonlinear behaviour of the material should
be explored.
Experiments to measure the cure induced residual stresses i n the composite materials are also
currently l acki ng in the literature. The measurements i n compl ex cases provide useful validation
of the finite element models used i n simulating the overall behaviour of the composite structure;
however, simpler forms of the experiments may be designed to only verify the mechanical
behaviour model.
The DF was developed based on the assumption that the material is sol i d. A general model that
spans the whole cure cycle and takes into account the transition of the polymer from l i qui d to gel
to sol i d needs to be developed to properly predict the final shape and stresses of the composite
material.
The P V E model was developed wi th the specific assumptions that only cool -down after gelation
was considered. The possibility of generalizing the current P V E model to other cases, such as
heat-up after cure, needs to be explored.
Experimental investigation of the thermoelastic behaviour of available polymers woul d be useful.
In the experiments, possible dependence of the unrelaxed and relaxed modul i on the degree of
cure should be checked. Based on these, the model development and implementation of the
formulation presented i n this thesis may need to be modified. Al so, the procedure for finding the
composite properties through micromechanics model was described i n this thesis, however, the
results should be validated wi th corresponding experimental measurements.
-213 -
9.4. CONTRIBUTIONS
The fol l owi ng contributions are made i n this thesis:
Different forms of the P V E model, as efficient alternatives to V E models, were developed. This
approach shows how a C H I L E formulation can be properly calibrated to be a true P V E model.
These provide the user wi th modeling options wi th a characterization cost versus accuracy trade-
off.
A micromechanical approach was presented that can be used to obtain the V E mechanical
properties of the composite from those of the phases. Al though based on the concepts available i n
the literature, this provides the user wi th a consistent and modular approach where few
assumptions on the specific form of elastic micromechanics model are made.
A DF of viscoelasticity was developed that is easier to develop and more efficient than the
integral models i n the literature that are most commonl y used. Thi s provides the user wi th an
approach that is easier to understand and generalize to more compl ex cases. The algorithm for
this implementation was designed i n such a way that it can be used wi th virtually any finite
element code.
In this thesis, material properties are modeled i n a more general way, (e.g. al l properties including
coefficients of thermal expansion and cure shrinkage are assumed to be time-dependent), than
previous works i n the literature. As a result, no simplifications are needed i n either the model
development or numerical runs.
A reverse micromechanics approach, calculation of stresses i n the constituents from those i n the
composite, for viscoelastic materials was developed and implemented i n the FE framework. The
formulations that exist i n the literature only apply to elastic materials.
- 214-
A model that accounts for thermoelastic effects was developed and implemented wi thi n an FE
framework. Al though previous researchers have developed equations that incorporate these
effects, they generally do not go as far as FE implementation and application of such
formulations.
-215 -
References
RE FE RE NCE S
A B A Q U S Theory Manual , Versi on 6.4, A B A Q U S Inc., 2003.
ABAQUS/Standard User's Manual , Versi on 6.4, A B A Q U S Inc. 2003.
Aboudi ,J. , "Mi cromechani cal Prediction of the Fi ni te Thermoelastic Response of Rubberlike Matri x
Composites", Journal of Appl i ed Mathematics and Physics, 52(5), pp. 823-846,2001.
Aboudi ,J. , "Mi cromechani cal Anal ysi s, of the Ful l y Coupl ed Finite Thermoelastic Response of Rubber-
Li ke Matri x Composites", International Journal of Solids and Structures, 39(9), pp. 2587-2612,2002.
Adol f,D. and Marti n,J. E. , "Ti me-Cure Superposition Duri ng Cross-Li nki ng", Macromol ecul es, 23, pp.
3700-3704,1990.
Adol f,D. and Marti n,J. E. , "Cal cul ati on of Stresses i n Crossl i nki ng Pol ymers", Journal of Composite
Materials, 30(1), pp. 13-34,1996.
Al bert,C. and Fernl und,G. , "Spri ng-i n and Warpage of Angl ed Composite Laminates", Composites
Science and Technol ogy, 62(14), pp. 1895-1912,2002.
Al c outl abi ,M. and Marti nez-Vega,J. J. , "Appl i cati on of Fractional Cal cul us to Viscoelastic Behaviour
Model l i ng and to the Physi cal Agei ng Phenomenon i n Gl assy Amorphous Polymers", Polymer,
39(25), pp. 6269-6277,1998.
Antonucci ,V. , Cusano,A. , Gi ordano,M. , et al . , "Cure-Induced Resi dual Strain Bui l d-Up i n a Thermoset
Resi n", Composites - Part A : Appl i ed Science and Manufacturing, 37(4), pp. 592-601,2006.
Arafath,A. A. , PhD thesis, U B C , Canada, 2004 (in progress).
Arzoumani di s,G. A. and Li ec ht i , K. M. , "Linear Viscoelastic Property Measurement and Its Significance
for Some Nonl i near Vi scoel asti ci ty Model s", Mechani cs of Time-Dependent Materials, 7(3-4), pp.
209-250,2003.
- 216-
References
Banks-Si l l s,L. , Lei derman,V. , and Fang,D. , "On the Effect of Particle Shape and Orientation on Elastic
Properties of Metal Matri x Composites", Composites: Part B , 28(4), pp. 465-481,1997.
Barbero,E. J. and Luci ano,R. , "Mi cromechani cal Formulas for the Relaxation Tensor of Li near
Viscoelastic Composites Wi th Transversely Isotropic Fibers", International Journal of Solids and
Structures, 32(13), pp. 1859-1872,1995.
Baumgaertel ,M. and Wi nter,H. H. , "Determination of Discrete Rel axati on and Retardation Ti me Spectra
From Dynami c Mechani cal Data", Rheol ogi ca Acta, 28, pp. 511-519,1989.
Bazant,Z. , "Matri x Differential Equation and Higher-Order Numeri cal Methods for Problems of Non-
Li near Creep, Vi scoel asti ci ty and Elasto-Plasticity", International Journal for Numeri cal Methods i n
Engineering, 4, pp. 11-15,1972.
Bazant,Z. and Wu,S. T. , "Rate-Type Creep Law of Agi ng Concrete Based on Maxwel l Chai n", Materiaux
et Constructions (Materials and Construction), 7(37), pp. 45-60,1974.
Bi rd,R. B. , Armstrong,R. C. and Hassager,0. , "Dynami c of polymeric liquids", John Wi l ey & Sons, New
York, 1987.
Bogetti ,T. A. and Gi l l espi e,J. W. , "Two-Di mensi onal Cure Si mul ati on of Thi ck Thermosetting
Composites", Journal of Composite Materials, 25(3), pp. 239-273,1991.
Bogetti ,T. A. and Gi l l espi e,J. W. , "Process-Induced Stress and Deformation i n Thi ck-Secti on Thermoset
Composite Laminates", Journal of Composite Materials, 26(5), pp. 626-660,1992.
Bri nson,L. C. and Knauss,W. G. , "Finite Element Anal ysi s of Mul ti phase Viscoelastic Solids",
Transactions of the A S M E , 59, pp. 730-737,1992.
Bri nson,L. C. and Li n, W. S. , "Comparison of Mi cromechani cs Methods for Effective Properties of
Multiphase Vi scoel asti c Composites", Composite Structures, 41(3-4), pp. 353-367,1998.
- 217-
References
Butcher,J. C, "A Hi story of Runge-Kutta Methods", Appl i ed Numeri cal Mathematics, 20, pp. 247-
260,1996.
Butc herJ. C, "Numeri cal Methods for Ordinary Differential Equations i n the 20th Century", Journal of
Computational and Appl i ed Mathematics, 125, pp. 1-29,2000.
Butcher,J. C, "Implicit Runge-Kutta Processes", Mathematics of Computation, 18, pp. 50-64,2003.
Carpenter,W.C., "Vi scoel asti c Stress Anal ysi s", International Journal for Numeri cal Methods in
Engineering, 4, pp. 357-366, 1972.
Chen,X. , L am, Y . C , and L i , D. Q. , "Anal ysi s of Thermal Residual Stress i n Plastic Injection Mol di ng",
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 101(1-3), pp. 275-280, 2000.
Chen,Y. , Xi a, Z. , and El l yi n, F. , "Evol uti on of Residual Stresses Included Duri ng Curi ng Processing
Usi ng a Vi scoel asti c Mi cromechani cal Model ", Journal of Composite Materials, 35(6), pp. 522-
542,2001.
Chri stensen,R. M. , "A Cri ti cal Evaluation for a Class of Mi cromechani cs Model ", Journal of the
Mechanics and Physics of Solids, 385(3), pp. 379-404, 1990.
Cl i fford,S. , Jansson,N., Yu, W. , et al , "Thermoviscoelastic Ani sotropi c Anal ysi s of Process Induced
Residual Stresses and Di mensi onal Stability i n Real Pol ymer Matri x Composite Components",
Composites - Part A : Appl i ed Science and Manufacturing, 37(4), pp. 538-545, 2006.
Deng,T. H. and Knauss, W. G. , "The Temperature and Frequency Dependence of the Bul k Compliance of
Pol y( Vi nl y Acetate). Are-Exami nati on", Mechanics of Time-Dependent Materi al s, 1, pp. 33-49, 1997.
Djoki c,D. , Hojjati ,M. , Johnston,A., et al , "Process Opti mi zati on for Reduction of Composite Patch
Repair Resi dual Stresses", Vol . 33, pp. 356-368, 2001.
- 218-
References
Douven,L. F. A. , Baai jens,L. F. B. , and Mei jer,H. E. H. , "The Computation of Properties of Injection-
Moul ded Products", Progress i n Pol ymer Science, 20(3), pp. 403-457,1995.
El l yi n,F. , Xi a, Z. , and Chen,Y. , "Viscoelastic Mi cromechani cal Model i ng of Free Edge and Ti me Effects
i n Glass Fi ber/Epoxy Cross-Pl y Laminates ", Composites: Part A , 33(3), pp. 399-409, 2002.
Ernst,L. J. , Zhang,G. Q. , Jansen,K. M. B. , et al , "Ti me- and Temperature-Dependent Thermo-Mechanical
Model i ng of a Packagi ng Mol di ng Compound and Its Effect on Packagi ng Process Stresses", Journal
of Electronic Packagi ng, 125(4), pp. 539-548, 2003.
Fernlund,G. , Gri ffi thJ. , Courdji ,R. , et al , "Experimental and Numeri cal Study of the Effect of Caul -
Sheets on Corner Thi nni ng of Composite Laminates", Composites - Part A : Appl i ed Science and
Manufacturing, 33(3), pp. 411-426, 2002a.
Fernlund,G. , Rahman,N. , Courdji ,R. , et al, "Experimental and Numeri cal Study of the Effect of Cure
Cycl e, Tool Surface, Geometry, and Lay-Up on the Di mensi onal Fi del i ty of Autoclave-Processed
Composite Parts", Composites - Part A : Appl i ed Science and Manufacturing, 33(3), pp. 341-
351,2002b.
Fernlund,G. , Osool y,A. , Poursartip,A., et al , "Finite Element Based Predi cti on of Process-Induced
Deformation of Autocl aved Composite Structures Usi ng 2D Process Anal ysi s and 3D Structural
Anal ysi s ", Composite Structures, 62(2), pp. 223-234,2003.
Ferry,J. D. , "Vi scoel asti c properties of polymers", John Wi l ey & Sons Inc., New York, 1980.
Fl aggs,D. L. and Crossman,F. W. , "Anal ysi s of the Viscoelastic Response of Composite Laminates
Duri ng Hyfgrothermal Exposure", Journal of Composite Materials, 15, pp. 21-40,1981.
Garni ch,M. R. and Hansen, A. C, "A Mul ti conti nuum Approach to Structural Anal ysi s of Linear
Viscoelastic Composite Materials", Journal of Appl i ed Mechani cs, 64(Dec), pp. 795-803,1997.
George,P., The Boei ng Company, private communications, 2004.
-219-
References
Gri ffi n,O. H. , "Three-Dimensional Curi ng Stresses i n Symmetric Cross-Pl y Laminates Wi th
Temperature-Dependent Properties", Journal of Composite Materials, 17, pp. 449-463,1983.
Gui novart-Di az,R. , Bravo-Casti l l ero,J. , Rodriguez-Ramos,R. , et al , "Model i ng of Elastic Transversely
Isotropic Composite Usi ng the Asymptoti c Homogenization Method. Some Comparisons Wi th Other
Model s", Materials Letters, 56(6), pp. 889-894,2002.
Hahn,H. T. and Pagano,N.J., "Curi ng Stresses i n Composite Laminates", Journal of Composite Materials,
9, pp. 91-106,1975.
Hahn,H. T. , "Effects of Residual Stresses i n Pol ymer Matri x Composites", The Journal of the
Astronautical Sciences, 32(3), pp. 253-267,1984.
Hammerand,D. C. and Kapani a,R. K. , "Thermoviscoelastic Anal ysi s of Composite Structures Usi ng a
Triangular Flat Shel l Element", A I A A Journal, 37(2), pp. 238-247,1999.
Harper,B. D. and Wei tsman,Y. , "Residual Thermal Stresses i n an Unsymmetri cal Cross-Pl y
Graphite/Epoxy Laminate", 1981, pp. 325-332.
Harper,B. D. and Wei tsman,Y. , "Characterization Method for a Class of Thermorheologically Compl ex
Materials", Journal of Rheol ogy, 29(1), pp. 49-66,1985.
Harris,J. S. and Barbero,E. J. , "Predictions of Creep Properties of Laminated Composites From Matri x
Creep Data", Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 17(4), pp. 361-379,1998.
Hashi n,Z. and Rosen,B. W. , "The Elastic Modul i of Fiber-Reinforced Materials", Journal of Appl i ed
Mechani cs, 31, pp. 223-232,1964.
Hashi n,Z. , "Theory of Fi ber Reinforced Materials", N A S A CR-1974, 1972.
Hashi n,Z. , Humphreys,E. A. , and Goering,J. , "Anal ysi s of Thermoviscoelastic Behaviour of
Unidirectional Fi ber Composites", Composites Science and Technology, 29, pp. 103-131,1987.
-220-
References
H e, C , Wood-Adams,P. , and Deal y J. M. , "Broad Frequency Range Characterization of Mol ten
Polymers", Journal of Rheol ogy , 48(4), pp. 711-724,2004.
Herakovi ch,C. T. , "Mi cromechani cs", In: Mechani cs of Fibrous Composites, ed. C T . Herakovi ch, John
Wi l ey & Sons, Inc., New York, pp. 402-448, 1998.
Heymans,N. , "Constitutive Equations for Polymer Vi scoel asti ci ty Deri ved From Hierarchical Model s in
Cases of Failure of Time-Temperature Superposition", Signal Processing, 83(11), pp. 2345-2357,
2003.
Hi l l , R. , "Theory of Mechani cal Properties of Fibre-Strengthened Materi al s: I. Elastic Behaviour",
Journal of the Mechani cs and Physics of Solids, 12, pp. 199-212,1964.
Hi l ton,H. H. , "Implications and Constraints of Time-Independent Poi sson Ratios i n Li near Isotropic and
Ani sotropi c Vi scoel asti ci ty", Journal of El asti ci ty, 63(3), pp. 221-251,2001.
Hi l ton,H. H. , "Comments Regarding "Viscoelastic Properties of an Epoxy Resi n Duri ng Cure" by D. J.
O'Bri en, P. T. Mather and S. R. Whi te", Journal of Composite Materials, 37(1), pp. 89-94,2003.
Hojjati . M. , Johnston,A., Hoa,S. V. , et al , "Viscoelastic Behavi or of Cytec FM73 Adhesi ve Duri ng Cure",
Journal of Appl i ed Pol ymer Science, 91(4), pp. 2548-2557,2004.
Hol l i ster,S. J. and Ki kuc hi , N. , "A Compari son of Homogeni zati on and Standard Mechani cs Analyses for
Periodic Porous Composites", Computational Mechani cs, 10, pp. 73-95,1992.
Hol zapfel ,G. A. and Si mo, J. C, "A New Viscoelastic Constitutive Model for Continuous Medi a at Finite
Thermomechanical Changes", International Journal of Solids and Structures, 33(20-22), pp. 3019-
3034,1996.
Hughes,T.J., "Al gori thm for Parabolic Problems", In: The Finite Element Method: Li near Elastic and
Dynami c Fi ni te Element Anal ysi s, ed. T.J.Hughes, Prentice Hal l , Inc., Engl ewood cliffs, NJ, 1987,
pp. 459-489.
-221 -
References
Idesman,A., Ni ekamp,R. , and Stein,E. , "Continuous and Discontinuous Gal erki ng Methods Wi th Finite
Elements i n Space and Ti me for Parallel Computi ng of Vi scoel asti c Deformation", Computer Methods
i n Appl i ed Mechani cs and Engineering, 190, pp. 1049-1063,2000.
Idesman,A., Ni ekamp,R. , and Stein,E. , "Finite Elements i n Space and Ti me for Generalized Viscoelastic
Maxwel l Model ", Computational Mechani cs, 27(1), pp. 49-60,2001.
Johnson,A. R. , "Model i ng Vi scoel asti c Materials Usi ng Internal Vari abl es", Shock and Vi brati on Digest,
31(2), pp. 91-100,1999.
Johnston,A., "An Integrated Model of the Development of Process-Induced Deformation i n Autoclave
Processing of Composite Structures", U B C , Canada, 1996.
Johnston,A., Vazi ri ,R. , and Poursartip,A., "A Plane Strain Model for Process-Induced Deformation of
Laminated Composite Structures", Journal of Composite Materials, 35(16), pp. 1435-1469,2001.
Jurki ewi ez,B. , Destrebecq,J.F., and Vergne,A. , "Incremental Anal ysi s of Time-Dependent Efects in
Composite Structures", Computers and Structures, 73(1-5), pp. 425-435,1999.
Kal i ske, M. and RothertH. , "Formulation and Implementation of Three-Dimensional Viscoelasticity at
Smal l and Finite Strains", Computational Mechanics, 19(3), pp. 228-239,1997.
Ki asat,M. S. , 2000, "Curi ng Shrinkage and Residual Stresses i n Vi scoel asti c Thermosetting Resings and
Composites", Delft Uni versi ty of Technology.
Ki m, B. S . , Bernet,N. , Sunderland,P., et al , "Numeri cal Anal ysi s of the Di mensi onal Stability of
Thermoplastic Composites Usi ng a Thermoviscoelastic Approach", Journal of Composite Materials,
36(20), pp. 2389-2403,2002.
Ki m, Y . K. and Whi te,S. R. , "Stress Relaxation Behaviour of 3501-6 Epoxy Resi n Duri ng Cure", Polymer
Engineering and Science, 36(23), pp. 2852-2862,1996.
- 222-
References
Ki m, Y . K. and Whi te,S. R. , "Process-Induced Stress Relaxation of AS4/3501-6 Laminate", Journal of
Reinforced Plastics and Composites, 16(1), pp. 2-16,1997.
Ki m, Y . K. and Whi te,S. R. , "Cure-Dependent Viscoelastic Residual Stress Anal ysi s of Fi l ament-Wound
Composite", Mechani cs of Composite Materials and Structures, 5, pp. 327-354,1998.
Kl asztorny,M. and Wi l c zynski ,A. P. , "Viscoelastic Model l i ng of Fibre-Reinforced Resi n Matri x
Composites", Ac ta Mettalurgica, 2004.
Kokan,D. R. , 1997, "Development and Use of an Improved Fi l ament-Wi ndi ng Process Model ", Georgi a
Institute of Technology.
Kumar,R. S. and Talreja,R., "A Continuum Damage Model for Li near Vi scoel asti c Composite Materials",
Mechanics of Materials, 35(3-6), pp. 463-480,2003.
Kumar,S. and Si ngh,R. N. , "The Creep Response of Uni -Di recti onal Fiber-Reinforced Ceramic
Composites: a Theoretical Study", Composites Science and Technol ogy, 61(4), pp. 461-473,2001.
Lahti nen,H. , "Cal cul ati on of Residual Stresses of Cross-Pl y Laminates", Journal of Composite Materials,
37(11), pp. 945-966,2003.
Lange,J., Tol l ,S. , Manson,JA. E. , et al , "Residual Stress Bui l d-Up i n Thermoset Fi l ms Cured Above
Their Ultimate Glass Transition Temperature", Polymer, 36(16), pp. 3135-3141,1995.
Lange,J., Tol l ,S. , Manson,JA. E. , et al , "Residual Stress Bui l d-Up i n Thermoset Fi l ms Cured Bel ow
Their Ultimate Glass Transition Temperature", Polymer, 38(4), pp. 809-815,1997.
Leaderman,H., "Vi scoel asti ci ty Phenomena i n Amorphous Hi gh Pol ymeri c Systems", In: Rheology,
Theory and Appl i cati ons, ed. F. R. Ei ri ck, Academi c Press, Inc., New York, 1958, pp. 1-61.
Lee,E. H. , Radok. J. R. M. , and Woodward,W. B. , "Stress Anal ysi s for Li near Viscoelastic Materials",
Transactions of the Society of Rheology, 3, pp. 41-59,1959.
-223 -
References
Lee,W. I . , L oos, A . C , and Springer,G. S. , "Heat of Reaction, Degree of Cure, and Vi scosi ty of Hercules
3501-6 Resi n", Journal of Composite Materials, 16, pp. 510-520,1982.
L i n, K. Y . and Hwang,I . H. , "Thermo-Viscoelastic Anal ysi s of Composite Materials", Journal of
Composite Materi al s, 23, pp. 554-569,1989.
Li u,S. , Chen,K. Z. , and Feng,X. A. , "Prediction of Viscoelastic Property of Layered Materials",
International Journal of Sol i ds and Structures, 41, pp. 3675-3688,2004.
Loos, A. C. and Springer,G. S. , "Curi ng of Epoxy Matri x Composites", Journal of Composite Materials,
17(2), pp. 135-169,1983.
Mabson,G. E. and Neal l ,E. P. , "Anal ysi s and Testing of Composite Ai rcraft Frames for Interlaminar
Tension Fai l ure", 1988.
Macosko,C. W. , "Rheol ogy: principles, measurements, and applications", Wi l ey - VC H, New York, 1994.
Marti n,J. E. and Adol fi D. , "Constitutive Equation for Cure-Induced Stresses i n a Viscoelastic Materi al ",
Macromol ecul es, 23, pp. 5014-5019,1990.
Mathematica, Versi on 5, Wol fram Research Inc.
Matzenmi l l er,A. and Gerl ach,S. , "Determination of Effective Materi al Functions for Li near Viscoelastic
Fibrous Composites Wi th Mi cromechani cal Model s", 2001.
Matzenmi l l er,A. and Gerlach,S. , "Mi cromechani cal Model i ng of Vi scoel asti c Composites Wi th
Compl i ant Fi ber-Matri x Bondi ng", Composite Materials Science, 29(3), pp. 283-300,2004.
Mc Crum, N. G. and Pogany,G. A. , "Time-Temperature Superposition i n the a Regi on of an Epoxy Resi n",
Journal of Macromol ecul ar Science. Part B , Physics, 4(1 ), pp. 109-126,1970.
Mel o,J. D. D. and Radford,D. H. , "Viscoelastic Characterization of Transversely Isotropic Composite
Laminate", Journal of Composite Materials, 37(2), pp. 129-145,2003.
-224-
References
Mel o,J. D. D. and Radford,D. H. , "Time and Temperature Dependence of the Viscoelastic Properties of
P E E K/ I M7", Journal of Composite Materials, 38(20), pp. 1815-1830,2004.
Mesqui ta,A. D. , Coda,H. B. , and Venturi ni ,W. S. , "Alternative Ti me Marchi ng Process for B E M and F E M
Viscoelastic Anal ysi s", International Journal for Numeri cal Methods i n Engineering, 51(10), pp.
1157-1173,2001.
Mesqui ta,A. D. and Coda,H. B. , "A Simple Kel v i n and Bol tzmann Vi scoel asti c Anal ysi s of Three-
Di mensi onal Sol i ds by the Boundary Element Method", Engineering Anal ysi s wi th Boundary
Elements, 27(9), pp. 885-895,2003.
Mokeyev, V. V. , "A Generalized Compl ex Eigenvector Method for Dynami c Anal ysi s of Heterogeneous
Viscoelastic Structures", International Journal for Numeri cal Methods i n Engineering, 50(9), pp.
2271-2282,2001.
Mori , T. and Tanaka,K. , "Average Stress i n Matri x and Average El asti c Energy of Materials Wi th
Mi sfi tti ng Inclusions", Ac ta Mettalurgica, 21, pp. 571-574,1973.
Morl and,L. W. and Lee, E. H. , "Stress Anal ysi s for Li near Vi scoel asti c Materials Wi th Temperature
Vari ati on", Transactions of the Society of Rheology, 4, pp. 233-263,1960.
Nakamura,S., Mi y ano, Y. , Sugi mori ,S. , et al, "Thermoviscoelastic Anal ysi s of Residual Stresses in a
Thermosetting Resi n/Metal Laminated Beam Caused by Cool i ng", J S ME International Journal, Series
1., 31(1), pp. 126-131,1988.
Nallainathan,L. , L i u, X. L . , Chi u, W. K. , et al , "Model l i ng Orthotropic Vi scoel asti c Behaviour of
Composite Laminates Usi ng a Coincident Element Method", Polymers and Pol ymer Composites,
11(8), pp. 669-677,2003.
Nel son,R. H. and Cai rns,D. S. , "Prediction of Di mensi onal Changes i n Composite Laminates Duri ng
Cure", 1989, pp. 2379-2410.
-225 -
References
Nguyen Vi et, H. , Pastor,J., and Mul l er,D. , "A Method for Predicting Li near Viscoelastic Mechani cal
Behavior of Composites, a Compari son Wi th Other Methods and Experimental Val i dati on", European
Journal of Mechani cs, A/Sol i ds, 14(6), pp. 939-960,1995.
Noh,J. and Whi tcomb,J. , "Efficient Techniques for Predicting Vi scoel asti c Behavi our of Sublaminates",
Composites: Part B , 34, pp. 727-736,2003.
0' Bri en,D. J. , Mather,P. T. , and Whi te,S. R. , "Viscoelastic Properties of an Epoxy Resi n Duri ng Cure",
Journal of Composite Materials, 35(10), pp. 883-904,2001.
Park,J. "Process Induced Residual Stresses Anal ysi s Inplastic Excapsulated Integrated Ci rcui t Packages",
University of Cal i forni a, Los Angeles, 2000.
Pl azek,D. J. , " A My opi c Revi ew of the Viscoelastic Behavi or of Pol ymers", Journal of Non-Crystal l i ne
Solids, 131, pp. 836-851, 1991.
Pl azek,D. J. , "1995 Bi ngham Medal Address: Oh, Thermorheological Si mpl i ci ty, Wherefore Art Thou?",
Journal of Rheol ogy, 40(6), pp. 987-1014, 1996.
Poon,H. and Ahmad,M. F. , "A Materi al Point Ti me Integration Procedure for Ani sotropi c, Thermo
Rheol ogi cal l y Si mpl e, Vi scoel asti c Sol i ds", Computational Mechani cs, 21(3), pp. 236-242,1998.
Prasatya,P., Mc Kenna, G. B. , and Si mon,S. L. , "A Viscoelastic Model for Predicting Isotropic Residual
Stresses i n Thermosetting Materials: Effects of Processing Parameters", Journal of Composite
Materials, 35(10), pp. 826-848,2001.
Qiao,P. , Barbero,E. J. , and Daval osJ. F. , "On the Linear Vi scoel asti ci ty of Thi n-Wal l ed Laminated
Composite Beams", Journal of Composite Materials, 34(1), pp. 39-68,2000.
Russel l ,J. D. , Madhukar,M. S. , Geni dy,M. S. , et al , " A New Method to Reduce Cure-Induced Stresses i n
Thermoset Pol ymer Composites, Part III: Correlating Stress History to Vi scosi ty, Degree of Cure, and
Cure Shrinkage", Journal of Composite Materials, 34(22), pp. 1926-1947,2000.
-226-
References
Sadki n,Y. and Aboudi ,J. , "Vi scoel asti c Behavi or of Thermo-Rheol ogi cal l y Compl ex Resi n Matri x
Composites", Composites Science and Technology, 36, pp. 351-365,1989.
Sane,S.B. and Knauss,W. G. , "On Interconversion of Vari ous Materi al Functions of P M M A " , Mechanics
of Time-Dependent Materials, 5(4), pp. 325-343,2001.
Sane,S. B. and Knauss,W. G. , "The Time-Dependent Bul k Response of Pol y ( Methyl Methacrylate)",
Mechanics of Time-Dependent Materials, 5(4) , pp. 293-324,2001.
Schapery,R. A. , "Stress Anal ysi s of Viscoelastic Composite Materials", Journal of Composite Materials,
1, pp. 228-267,1967.
Schapery,R. A. , "On the Characterization of Nonl i near Vi scoel asti c Materials", Pol ymer Engineering and
Science, 9(4), pp. 295-310,1969.
Schapery,R. A. , "Vi scoel asti c Behaviour and Anal ysi s of Composite Materi al s", In: Mechanics of
Composite Materials, ed. G. P. Sendeckyj, Academi c press, New York, pp. 85-168, 1974.
Schmi dt,A. and Gaul ,L. , "Finite Element Formulation of Vi scoel asti c Constitutive Equations Usi ng
Fractional Ti me Derivatives", Nonl i near Dynami cs, 29(1-4), pp. 37-55,2002.
Si moJ. C. and Hughes,T. J. , "Computational inelasticity", Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998.
Si mon,S. L. , Mc Kenna, G. B. , and Si ndt,0. , "Model i ng the Evol uti on of the Dynami cal Mechani cal
Properties of a Commerci al Epoxy Duri ng Cure and Gel ati on", Journal of Appl i ed Polymer Science,
76(4), pp. 495-508,2000.
Stango,R.J. and Wang,S. S. , "Process-Induced Residual Thermal Stresses i n Advanced Fiber-Reinforced
Composite Laminates", Journal of Engineering for Industry, 106, pp. 48-54,1984.
Stehfest,H., "Numeri cal Inversion of Laplace Transform", Communications of the A C M , 13(1), pp. 47-
49,1970.
-227-
References
Suquet,P. M. , "Elements of Homogenization for Inelastic Sol i d Mechani cs", In: Homogenization
Techniques for Composite Medi a, eds. E. Sanchez-Palencia and A. Zaoui , Springer-Verlag, Berl i n,
1987, pp. 193-278.
Svanberg,J. M. and Hol mberg,J. A. , "Prediction of Shape Distortions. Part II. Experimental Val i dati on and
Anal ysi s of Boundary Conditions", Composites: Part A , 35(6), pp. 723-734, 2004a.
Svanberg,J. M. and Hol mberg,J. A. , "Prediction of Shape Distortions Part I. FE-Implementation of a Path
Dependent Constitutive Model ", Composites: Part A , 35(6), pp. 711-721, 2004b.
Tayl or,R. L. , Pi ster,K. S. , and Goudreau,G. L. , "Thermomechanical Anal ysi s of Viscoelastic Solids",
International Journal for Numeri cal Methods i n Engineering, 2, pp. 45-59,1970.
Tobol sky,A. , "Stress Rel axati on Studies of the Viscoelastic Properties of Polymers", In: Rheol ogy:
Theory and Appl i cati ons, ed. F. R. Ei ri c k, Academi c Press, Inc., New York, 1958, pp. 63-81.
Tschoegl ,N. W. , Knauss,W. G. , and Emri ,L, "Poisson's Ratio i n Li near Vi scoel asti ci ty - A Cri ti cal
Revi ew", Mechani cs of Time-Dependent Materials, 6(1), pp. 3-51,2002a.
Tschoegl ,N. W. , Knauss,W. G. , and Emri ,I . , "The Effect of Temperature and Pressure on the Mechani cal
Properties of Thermo- and/or Piezorheologically Simple Pol ymeri c Materials i n Thermodynamic
Equi l i bri um - A Cri ti cal Revi ew", Mechanics of Time-Dependent Materi al s, 6(1), pp. 53-99,2002b.
Twi gg,G. , Poursartip,A. , and Fernl und,G. , "Tool-Part Interaction i n Composites Processing, Part I:
Experimental Investigation and Anal yti cal Model ", Composites: Part A , 35(1), pp. 121-133,2004.
Wei tsman,Y. , "Optimal Cool -Down i n Li near Vi scoel asti ci ty", Journal of Appl i ed Mechani cs, 47, pp.
35-39,1980.
Wei tsman,Y. , "On the Thermoviscoelastic Characterization of Adhesi ves and Composites", 1982.
-228-
References
Whi te,J. L. , "Fi ni te Elements i n Li near Vi scoel asti ci ty", Proceedings of 2 Conference on Matri x
Methods i n Structural Mechani cs, U. S. Ai r Force Fl i ght Dynami cs Lab. , AFFDL -T R-68-' 50, Wri ght
Patterson A FB , Dayton, O H , 1968, pp. 489-516.
Whi te,S. R. and Hahn,H. T. , "Process Model i ng of Composite Materi al s: Resi dual Stress Development
Duri ng Cure. Part II. Experimental Val i dati on", Journal of Composite Materials, 27 (16), pp. 2423-
2453,1992.
Whi te,S. R. and Hahn,H. T. , "Process Model i ng of Composite Materi al s: Resi dual Stress Development
Duri ng Cure. Part I. Model Formulation", Journal of Composite Materials, 26(16), pp. 2402-
2422,1992.
Whi te,S. R. and Ki m, Y . K. , "Process-Induced Residual Stress Anal ysi s of AS4/3501-6 Composite
Materi al ", Mechani cs of Composite Materials and Structures, 5(2), pp. 153-186,1998.
Wi ersma,H. W. , Peeters,L. J. B. , and Akkerman,R. , "Prediction of Springforward i n Continuous-
Fibre/Polymer L-Shaped Parts", Composites: Part A , 29(11), pp. 1333-1342,1998.
Wijskamp,S. , Akkerman,R. and Lamers,E. A. D. , "Residual Stresses i n Non-Symmetri cal Carbon/Epoxy
Laminates", 2003.
Wijskamp,S. , "Shape Distortions i n Composite Formi ng", PhD Thesis, Uni versi ty of Twente, 2005.
Wi neman,A. S. and Shaw,J. A. , "Scission and Heal i ng i n a Spi nni ng Elastomeric Cyl i nder at Elevated
Temperature", Transactions of the A S M E , 69, pp. 602-609,2002.
Xi a, Z. and El l yi n,F. , "Time-Dependent Behaviour and Vi scoel asti c Constitutive Model of an Epoxy
Polymer", Polymers and Pol ymer Composites, 6(2), pp. 75-83,1998.
Xi ao, X. R. , H i el , C . C , and Cardon,A. H. , "Characterization and Model i ng of Nonl i near Viscoelastic
Response of P E E K Resi n and P E E K Composites", Composites Engi neeri ng, 4(7), pp. 681-702,1994.
-229-
References
Yang,D. G. , Jansen,K. M. B. , Wang,L. G. , et al , "Mi cromechani cal Model i ng of Stress Evol uti on Induced
Duri ng Cure i n a Parti cl e-Fi l l ed Electronic Packaging Pol ymer", I E E E Transactions on Components
and Packagi ng Technologies, 27(4), pp. 676-683, 2004a.
Yang,D. G. , Jansen,K. M. B. , ErnsfL. J. , et al , "Model i ng of Cure-Induced Warpage of Plastic I C
Packages", Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Thermal and Mechani cal Simulation
and Experiments i n Mi croel ectroni cs and Microsystems, pp. 33-40, 2004b.
Yee, A. F. and Takemori ,M. T. , "Dynami c Bul k and Shear Rel axati on i n Gl assy Polymers. I. Experi -
Mental Techniques and Results on P M M A " , Journal of Pol ymer Science: Pol ymer Phsyics Edi ti on,
20, pp. 205-224,1982.
Yi , S . , Hi l ton,H. H. and Ahmad,M. F. , "Curi ng Process Induced Vi scoel asti c Resi dual Stresses i n Pol ymer
Matri x Laminated Composites", A S M E International Mechani cal Engi neeri ng Congress, Proceedings
of the A S M E Materials Di vi si on, pp. 65-76, 1995.
Yi , S . , Chi an,K. S. , and Hi l ton,H. H. , "Nonlinear Viscoelastic Fi ni te Element Anal yses of Thermosetting
Pol ymeri c Composites Duri ng Cool -Down After Curi ng", Journal of Composite Materials, 36(1), pp.
3-17,2002.
Y i , Y . M . , Park,S. H. , and Youn,S. K. , "Asymptotic Homogenization of Vi scoel asti c Composites Wi th
Periodic Microstructures", International Journal of Solids and Structures, 35(17), pp. 2039-
2055,1998.
Zhu,Q. , Geubel l e,P. H. , L i , M . , et al , "Dimensional Accuracy of Thermoset Composites: Simulation of
Process-Induced Resi dual Stresses", Journal of Composite Materi al s, 35(24), pp. 2171-2205,2001.
Zi enki ewi c z, O. C, Watson,M. , and Ki ng,I . P. , "A Numeri cal Method of Vi sco-El asti c Stress Anal ysi s",
International Journal of Mechani cal Science, 10, pp. 807-827,1968.
-230-
References
Zak,A. R. , "Structural Anal ysi s of Realistic Solid-Propellant Materi al s", Journal of Spacecrafts and
Rockets, 5(3), pp. 270-275, 1967.
Zobei ry,N. , Vazi ri ,R. , and Poursartip,A., "Differential Implementation of the Viscoelastic Response of a
Curi ng Thermoset Matri x for Composites Processing", A S M E Journal of Engineering Materials and
Technology, 128(1), pp. 90-95, 2006.
Zobei ry,N. , Vazi ri ,R. , and Poursartip,A., "An Efficient Pseudo-Viscoelastic Model for Evaluation of
Residual Stresses i n Thermoset Composites during Cure", Composites: Part A , submitted.
Zocher,M. A. , Groves,S. E. , and Al l en, D. H. , "A Three-Dimensional Fi ni te Element Formulation for
Thermoviscoelastic Orthotropic Medi a", International Journal for Numeri cal Methods in Engineering,
40(12), pp. 2267-2288,1997.
Zocher,M. A. , Al l en, D. H. , and Groves,S. E. , "Stress Anal ysi s of a Matri x-Cracked Viscoelastic
Laminate", International Journal of Solids and Structures, 34(25), pp. 3235-3257,2004.
-231 -
Appendix A: Mathematica Notebooks
Appendi x A . MATHEMATICA NOTEBOOKS
A.l Notebook for the example in Section 5.4.1.
Defining the properties in time domain
Matrix properties
The Matrix properties are defined with two properties, each in Prony series. Shift factor is defined az an input.
Off[General::spell]
Off[General::unfl]
G
u
m
= 1185; G"
m
= 18; M = 9; a
T
= 10
A
-2; <x = 5.8 10
A
-5;
To = {2.92 10
A
l , 2.92 10
A
3, 1.82 10
A
5, 1.10 10
A
7, 2.83 10
A
8, 7.94 10
A
9, 1.95 10
A
11,
3.32 10
A
12, 4.92 10
A
14} ;
w
G
= {0.059, 0.066, 0.083, 0.112, 0.154, 0.262 , 0.184, 0.049, 0.025} ;
H ' . .
G
m
[t_] :=G
r
m
+ (G
u
m
-G
r
m
) 2
1 ,
&"
i
H
E 5 i p [
-
t / I | 3 t [ i ] ] / a T : 1
1=1
K\
l
= 3556;K
I
m
= 800;P = 9;
i
K
= {2.92 10
A
l , 2.92 10
A
3, 1.82 10
A
5, 1.10 10
A
7, 2.83 10
A
8, 7.94 10
A
9, 1.95 10
A
11,
3. 32 10
A
12, 4.92 10
A
14} ;
w
K
= {0.059, 0.066, 0.083, 0.112, 0.154, 0.262, 0.184, 0.049, 0.025}; v
f
= 0.6;
KnltJ : = K
r
m +
(K^-K^) 2
W k[ [ 11
Exp[-t/r
K
[[i])/a
T
]
i = l
Fiber properties
Eif = 210000; v
1 2f
= 0.2; G^f = 27600; v
2 3 f
= 0.25; E
2 f
= 17200; a
i f
= -0.9 10
A
-6;
a
2f
= -7.2 10
A
-6;
<hic = E
2
/ (2 (l + v
23f
)) ;
K
2 f
= 1/ ( 4/ E
2 f
-l / G
2 3 f
-4v
1 2 f
A
2/ E
l f
) ;
Transformation to Laplace space
Transforming moduli and calculating other parameters
:
'
;
i The other material parameters are calculated in Laplace space.
: : :
G
m
[s_] : = s LaplaceTransform[G
m
[ t] , t, s]
K
m
[s_] : = sLaplaceTransformCK^[t] , t, s]
E[s_] G
m
[s]/ (3^(8] + G
m
[s])
v
m
[s_] := {l^\s\ -2G
m
[s]) / (eiÎs] +2G
m
[s])
-232-
A pplying micromechanics t
Calculation of parameters using micromechanics
The CCA model is used in the Laplace space. Any other model can be used as well.
Ei[s _] : =
EifV
f
+Em[s ] ( l -v
f
) + (4 (v
m
[sj -v
1 2 f
) K
2 f
KJ s] Gm[s ] ( l -v
f
) v
) /
((K
2f
+ m[s ] ) K,[s ] +( K 2 f - l U s n v
f
)
Vi 2[s_] : = vi
2f
v
+v
m
[s] ( l -v
f
) +
(<vm[s ] -v
u f
) (K[s ] -K
2
) Gm[s ] <l-v
) v
f
)/((K
2 +
Gm[s ])K[s ] + (K
2f
-iiW[s]) Gm[s ] v
f
)
G12[s _] := G
m
[s] ((G
1 2 f
+Gm[s ] ) + (G
12f
-G
m
[s]) v
f
) / ( (G
12
+Gm[s ] ) - (G
1 2 f
- Gm[s ] ) v
f
) '
:= ((K
2 +
Gm[s ] ) K[s] * (K
2 f
-K[s] ) f) / (( 2 f +Gm[s J) - (K
2 f
-K^ s ] ) v
f
) '
6
23
[s_] := (G
m
[s] [KÎB] feft,[!])*2C
!Jf
^[!]*K[s] (G
23f
- G
m
[s ]) v
f
)) /
( i Us ] (G2j +Gm[s ] ) + 2G
2 3
Gm[ s ] - (K^s ] + 2Gm[s J) (G
23
- G [s ] ) v
)
E2[s _] : = 1/ (1/ (4 K
2
[ i | ) + 1/ (4 G2 3 [s ] ) + (v12 [s ]
A
2/E [ s ] ) ) '
v
23
[s_] := (2Ei[s ]K2[s ] - Ex[s ] E
2
[s ] - 4 [s ] 2 K2[s ] E
2
[s ] ) / (2 Ei[s ] K
2
[s ] ) '
i[s_] := (aifEirVf + oÊ^rs] (1 - v
)) / (E
1
v
f
+ E
m
[s] ( l-v
)) *
2[s _] := (a
2
+ <*i
v
u
) v
*a, (l+vm[s ] ) (1 - v
) - ( vi 2 v
+ v
m
[s] ( l-v
))Si[s ]
Inverse Laplace transform
Applying the inverse Laplace transform
A number of available models can be used to transform the parameters to time domain. The Stehfest method is used here to give the "exact" values
of moduli. The "Numerical Inversion" package was obtained from Wolfram's website.
Remove[Stehfest]
Remove[f]
<< HumericalHath Humericallnversion'
Ei[t_] : = Stehfest[Ei[s]/s, s, t]
V] 2[t_] : = Stehfest[s]/s, s, t]
G 12 [t_] : = Stehfest [612 [s] }s, s, t]
K
2
[t_] : = Stehfest[K
2
[s] fs, s, t]
G
23
[t_] : = Stehfest[S
23
[s]/s, s, t]
E
2
[t_] : = Stehfest[E
2
[s] /s, s, t]
v
23
[t_] : = Stehfest [v
23
[s] / s, s, t]
ai[t_] : = Stehfest[&i[s] Is, s, t]
a
2
[t ] : = Stehfest[o
2
[s] Is, s, t]
-233 -
Evaluation of the constant moduli
zero = 10
A
-12; inf = 10
A
12;
E X t = E i [inf] ;
E l u = E ! [zero] ;
Em =Gi2 [inf ] ;
G i 2u = &12 [zero] ;
K
2 l
= K
2
|inf] ;
K
2 u
= K
2
[zero] ;
<523t =G2
3
[inf ].;.
G?3u =<23 [zero] ;
E 2 r = E
2
[inf] ;
E 2 u = E 2 [zero] ;
vi 2r = [inf] ;
: : V]2 = V J J [zero]
v
2 3 r
= v
23
[inf ] ;
v2 3u = v
23
[zero] ;
i r = <i [inf];
i u = <i [zero];
a
2 r
= a
2
[inf]:
a
2
= a
2
[zero] ; :
Curve fitting
Data generation
Assuming the resinrelaxation times as give, the weight factors are calculated using a linear regression analysis. In this part, a number of points for
each material parameter profile are generated to be used in curve fitting.
Tin[i_] := 10
A
<-11 + 0.5i)
[m_, n_] : = If [Time[m]7i
K
[[n]] < -Log[SliinHui*er], Ej5>[-Tiiiie[m] / z
K
[[n]] / a
T
] , 0]
X= Table[A[m, n], {m, 0, 45}, {n, 9}];
dataEi = TaJ)le[(E
x
[Time[i] ] - E
l t
) / ( E
l u
- E
l r
) , {i, 0, 45}] ;
datav^ =Table[(v
i2
[Time[i] ] -v^,) / (v
1 2 u
- Vi
2r
), {i, 0, 45}] ;
dataGu = Table[(G
12
[Time[i] ] - G ^) / (G
12
- G
1 2r
), {i, 0, 45}] ;
tlataKj =Table[(K
2
[Time[i] ] - K
2 l
) / (K
2u
- K
2 r
), {i, 0, 45} ] ;
dataG^ = Table[(G
23
[Time[i] ] - G
2 3 t
) / (G
23 u
- G
2 3r
), {i, 0, 45}] ;
dataE
2
=Table[(E
2
[Time[i] ] - E
2 l
) / (E
2 u
- E
2 r
), {i , 0, 45} ] ;
datav
23
= Table[(v
23
[Time[i] ] - v
2 3 t
) / ( v
2 3
- v
2 3
, {i, 0,45}];:
dataoi! = Table[(! [Time[i] ] - a
lz
) I (ai
u
- a
r
), {i , 0 , 45} ] ;
dataa
2
= Table [(a
2
[Time [i] ] - a
2
) / (a
2 u
- a
2 r
), {i , 0, 45} ] ;
-234-
Curve fitting
: The curve fitting is done: using a linear regression analysis for each material parameter. '
:
fi tEi = Inverse [Transpose [X]. X] . Transpose [X] :dataEi;;
fitvi2 = Inverse [Transpose [X] .X]. Transpose [X] ^ datavi^;
fitGu .'=Inverse [Transpose [X]. X]. Transpose [X]. dataG^ r
f itK
2
= Inverse [Transpose [X].X]:. Transpose [X].dataK
2
; .:
fitG^j = Inverse [Transpose [X] .X]. Transpose [X]. dataG23;
fi t E
2
- Inverse [Transpose [X]. X] . Transpose [XI. dataE
2
;
fi t v
2 3
= Inverse [Transpose [X]. X]. Transpose [X]. datav
23
;
fi tai = Inverse [Transpose [X] . X] . Transpose [X] ^dataax;: :
fi t a
2
= Inverse [Transpose [X] . X] . Transpose [X] . dataa
2
;
Checking goodness of fit
The coefficient of deternunaticn is calculated fci each parameter to check the goodness of fit.
t ot al di f f = dat aEi - Table [Mean[dataEi]:,- {i , 0> 45}:] ;
sst = t ot a l di f f . t ot a l di f f ;
sse = ( dat aEi - X. f i t E. J. (dataE
- X. f i t E
) ;
Rsquared = 1 - (sse / (46- (P + 1) )) / (sst / (46- 1))
totaldiff = datavii - Table [lfcanldatavu], {i, 0,45}];: :
sst = totaldiff .totaldiff; .:
sse = (datavu-X. f itvi2). (datavu - X. f itvi2);
Rsguared=l- (sse/(46:- (P + l))):/:(sst 7(46 -1))
totaldiff = dataGx2 - Table[Mean[dataG12:]v{i> 0, 45}];
sst=total di ff.total di ff;
sse = (data&u - X. fitfr^) . (dataG^- X. fit&tj) ; : ::
Rscjuared =1- (sse / (46 - (P * 1))) / (sst / (46 - 1))
0.999999
totaldiff = dataK
2
- Table [Mean[dataK
2
] , {i, 0, 45}] ;
sst = total di ff.total di ff;
sse = (dataK
2
- X. fitK
2
) . (dataK
2
- X. fitK
2
) ;
Rsquared = 1- (sse / (46 - (P + 1))) / (sst / (46 - 1))
:i:i:Lp:?^998?;;;:i:;
:
:
:
v
totaldiff = dataG^ - Table[Kean[dataG
23
], {i, 0, 45}];
sst = total di ff.total di ff;
sse = (dataGis - X.fitG?
3
). (dataG^ - X. fi tG^);
Rsquared =1- (sse / (46 - (P + 1))) / (sst / (46 - 1))
0.999989
-235 -
totaldif f .= dataE2 - Table[Hean[dataE2], {1, 0, 45}];
sst = totaldiff.totaldiff
sse = (dataE2 - X. fitE2) (dataE2 - X. fitE2);
Rsquarecl= 1- (sse / (46 - (P + 1))) / (sst/ (46 - 1))
0.999981
totaldif = datav23 - Table[Hean[datav23]; {1; 0, 45}];
sst = totaldiff.totaldiff;
sse = (datav23 - X. f itv23). (datav23 - X. fitv23); ;
Rs(juared = 1- (sse:/(46 - (P + 1)))/(sst / (46 - 1))
totaldiff = dataai : - Table[Mean[dataai]> {i;: 0> 45}];
sst=totaldiff.totaldiff;
sse = (dataai - X. fitax) . (dataox - X. fitoi);:
Rsquared = 1- (sse / (46 - (P + 1))) / (sst / (46 - 1))
totaldif f = dataa2 - Table[Mean[dataoc2], {i, 0, 45}];
sst =: totaldiff .totaldif f;
sse = (dataa2 - X; fita2). (dataa2 - X. f itotj);
Rscjuared = 1- (sse/ (46 - (P + 1))) / (sst / (46 - 1))
0.999708
Output
Calculating the values of the moduli in time
In this part, the "exact" moduli profiles vs. time are generated, which can be used for comparison.
resultsEi = Table[{Time[i] , Ei[Time[i]]} , {i, 0, 45} ] ; MatrixForm[resultsEi] ;
resultsv^ = Table [{Time [i] ; Vi2:[Time [i] ]}, {i, 0 , 45} ] ^MatrixFormliesultsvi^];
result sGu = Table [{Time [i], [Time[i]] }, {i , 0, 45} ] ; MatrixFormJresultsGi^];
resultsK2 = Table [{Tine [i] , K2 [Time[i]]} , {i, 0, 45}] ; MatrixForm[resultsK2];
resultsG^ = Table [{Time [i], G^ [Time[i]]}, {i, 0, 45}] ; MatrixFoxm [resul ts^ ];
: result sa^ = Table[{Time[i], y.a [Time [i]]} ,:{i > 0, 45} ] ; MatrixForm[resultso<i];
: : : result sa2 = Table[{Time[i], a2 [Time [i] ]}, {i , 0 > 45}] ; MatrixForm[resultsa2];
-236-
Exporting the values
(* Exporting the fit parameters *)
Export["fitel.txt", fitEi, "Table'];
Export [" fitnl2.txt
1
', fitv^, "Table"];
Export['fitgl2.txt", f i t G r ^ , "Table"];
Export["fitk2.txt", fitK
2
,"Table"];
Export["fitg23.txt", fitG2
3
, "Table"];
Export["fital.txt"yfitai, "Table"];
Export! "fita2.txt", i t a
2
, "Table"];
(* Exporting tne:exact values *) ^^^: :
Export [" resultse l.txt", re suit sE
x
, "Table"];
Export["resultsnl2.txt" > resultsvi2,"Table" ];
Export["resultsgl2.txt", resultsGu, "Table"];
Export["resultsk2.txt" , resultsK
2
, "Table" ];
: Export["resultsg23.txt", resultsG2
3
,"Table"];
Export["resultsal.txt" / resultsai, "Table"];
Export["resultsa2.txt" , resultsa
2
, "Table"];
-237-
A.2 Notebook for the exampl e i n Section 7.2.2.
a= 2; b =4; h = 4/ 33;
A A = 4 / 3 * 10"
5
; BB =4/ 3* 10"
5
; CC = 3*10
5
;
E
a
= 3*10
7
; v
E
= .3015;
a- E
a
* h / ( 1- V E
a
2 ) / b ;
rr[r_s_] := V:;."; /.';
- P V' S ' * ; " ' . : ' ;
V
' :
:
; V : ' ' . ^
;
V '
;
; ; .
:
- V : ' '
:
( ( ( l - b
A
2 / r
A
2 - a A A ) ( 2 A A C C + l ) - 3 a A b
A
2 / r
A
2 ) s
A
2 +
((1-1>
A
2 / r
A
2) 2BBCC- a BB( 3b
A
2/ r
A
2+4A A CC + l ) ) 8 - 2 a BB
A
2 CC) /
( ( ( l - b
A
2 / a
A
2 - a A A ) (2A A CC + l ) - 3a A A b
A
2 / a
A
2 ) s
A
2 +
( (1 - b
A
2/ a
A
2) 2 BB CC - o BB (3 b
A
2 / a
A
2 '+ 4 A A CC + 1) ) s - 2 a BB
A
2 CC)
5[ t _sJ := '"X'?.
;
';:-.
:
:
;
-.
;
:'
;
:':V.:':'vV.7:'^ :
- P / s * '.v:
:
': v.\v ;
;
- '; ''/:';-::
( ( ( l +b
A
2/ r
A
2- a A A ) (2A A CC+1) + 3a BA b
A
2 / r
A
2 ) s
A
2 +
( (1 + b
A
2 / r
A
2) 2 BB CC - a BB (-3 b
A
2 / r
A
2 + 4 A A CC + 1) ) S - 2 a BB
A
2 CC) /
( ( ( 1- b
A
2 / a
A
2 - a A A ) (2A A CC+1) - 3 a A A b
A
2 / a
A
2) s
A
2 +
( ( I - b
A
2/ a
A
2) 2BBCC - BB ( 3b
A
2/ a
A
2+4A A CC + l ) ) s - 2a BB
A
2CC)
5rr[rs] .:
:
"\-\.
:
-~ ' '-"
:
-V'.v". /''.''.':'''
'; 1. ( - 106. 666^( 9( 1- i f ) - 13,3332 (17 + 4 ) ) 3+;(9 (-12/3332 - if-) - 12Li )
g
)
3 (-106.666 - 410.664 3 -306.998 3') .
1. (-106.666+ (-13.3332 (17 - **-)
+
8 (l V ^ ) ) s
+
(9 (-12. 3332
+
if)';+ m^ll.) V)
3 (-106.666 - 410.6643- 306.998 s
J
)
I nverseLaplaceTransform [ d
I C
[r s ] , s , t ]
- 1. ( l .
+ e
- ^^( - 0. 00536292 , " ^
1 7
) , (-0. 633074 ))
I nverseLaplaceTrans form [ free [r s ] , s , t ]
-1. 1. +e
-0. 3S 7VS t
2.5323 v j, cUgot t. t' 0.0214517
n
(-0.633074- - J + e
-
*: * (-0.00536292 - J J
-238-
A .3 Notebook for the example in Section 7.2.3.
Defining the properties in time domain
Matrix properties
:: the Matrix properties are defined with two properties;each in Prony series. Shift factor is defined ez an input
Off[General::spell]
:
Off [General: :tinfl]
G" - 11.85; G
r
.- .18; is - 1.: <x - 5.8 10"-S:
K" = 35.56;K'
1
. = 8.,- I
K
= 1.5:
H , [ t J :=G
r
. (G"-G
r
.) Ex[-t/7
S
]
H[t_] : = K
r
.* (K"-K') Ex[-t/7
K
J
E" = 9 K"G\, / (3 K" 0".); . .
v"= |3K\-Z6*,)/ [SK\. 2t M;
! '. = ! lf.l?./ PIC^GM;
v.= (3K-.-2C",|/(6lf.2i;V);
; Fiber properties .. .
Eic = 2100. ; V12
f
= 0.2; On, = 276-. ; v
2JC
= 0.25; E
2C
= 172. ; a
X
c = -0.9 10--6; a
2
= -7.2 10"-6;
vc * 0.6;
G2
5
r=E
2r
/ (2 (l+v
23r
));
K
2f
= 1/ (4 / E
2f
- 1 / Gj,, - 4 v
12f
A
2 / E
lr
) ;
: :*:-El* '.4.:KlfVta(.2) ::
f = 4. K
2
f ^r
Composite variables
e [ t _ ] : =
126. t 1. Exv|-t /l.]
2.2*4.2Exp[-t/1.3]
2.2*4.2Ex[-t/1.5]
0
Gjn[s_] '
s
LaplaceTransforri[G^ [ t ] , t, fl J
fe[s_j]: := s LaplaceTzansf oxm[K
I I I
[ t ] , t, a]
.:.:.::: c[s:]:: - LaplaoeTxansorjn[e [ t ] t, :a\
als-J: - LaplaoeTxansf oxm[o~[ t ] , t a].-.
Stiffness moduli
D
m
[s_] :-
4G[s]/3*KIs] feMfe[s|i-2 [fl]/3
K|s] -2G^[s]/3:4G[s]/3*Ki,[B| fe[sJ - 2 [s]/3
fell -2G[s]/3 fe[s]-!C[]/3:4e[s]/!.;K,||
It
1 t 0 0 0
s
Kit +G^f. K 2 f - G23
0 : 0 0
s
K 2 C - G23f K 2 C +G23
0 0 0:
0 0 0
G uf
0: 0
0 0 0 0 0::
: 0: 0 0 0 0
Gwf
:n:.:;.
0
: 0
0
0
::: 0. .'
G[s]
0
0
0
-239-
Reverse micromechanics
Dinc[s_] : = Df-D[s]
e
m
[s^] i:= (1/(1 -v
c
)) Inverse [Dine [s]].(D
f
. e[s] -S[s])
5m[s_] : = D
m
[s].e
m
[s]
Ef [ s_] := (l/v
r
) <e[s] -<l-v
r
) i
m
[s])
9
f
[s_] : = (l/vr) <8[s] - (1 - vd 8
m
[s])
A pplying the inverse Laplace transform
A number of available models;can be used to transformthe parameters to time domain. The Stehfest method is used here.
: Remove [Stehfest]::.
Remove [Durbin] . ..
. Remuve[t] . . .. .
< <HumericalHath ' Humerlcallnversion'
m[t_] := Stehfest [ i
m
[s] , s, t]
[t_] : = Stehfest[S[s], s, t]
ef[t_] : = Stehfest [ i f [sj,s,t]
"t[t_] : = Stehfest[Sf[s], s, t]
e[.001]
<r[.001]
{{0.102413}, {0.0032590!.)}, {(i .C~32S909), {0.}, {0.}, {0.}}
{{S.4366S}, (3.089CS}, (3.089CS), (0.), {0.}, {0.}}
!3i
i
e
m
[1.3
*3T
{{0.1Qp333}/:{0.0280328}>:.{0.0280328}, {0. }, {0. }, {0. }}
3
((4 .0374 6), {3.52594}, {3.52594}, ( 0.) , {0.}, {0.}}
1
-240-
A.4 Notebook for the example in Section 7.2.3.
Composite variables
E[t ] : = : o[ t _] : =
131.7 1. 01Expt - t /l . ] * 8.484 Exp[-t/ 1.51 '
5.858 4.242 Expt-t/1.5] +9.292 Ej ppl - t /l . ]:
5.858 . 4. 242ExrJ[-t/l:5] +9.292ExrJ[-t71.]
0
0
C [H_] : = s Lai)laceTransform[G [ t ] , t , :]::.
: K^l s^] : = s Lapl aceTxansf orm[K|t) , t , s)
i[8_] : = Lapl ac eTr ansf or m[ e|t ], t ; s]:
8[jj]:::. Lapl aceTr ansf o r m [ o [ t ] t , s]
Stiffness moduli
f4C^[s] /3 + K[ s] i L l s] - 2 k [ ! ] / 3 i L l s] - 2Gt s]/3 0
2G
m
[ s]/3 4G r 8]/ 3 . K I s) i ^( s| - 2 B[ s]/3 0
2C, [ s]/3 K[ s) - J G[ s]/3 4 G^s]/ 3 . K |s | 0
Df
If
7
n 0 0
0 0 0
s
K
2
f r G23 r K
2
1 + G23 f 0 0 0
0 0 .:: 0 0. 0
0 0 0 ' 0 Gl f ; 0;.:
0 0 0 0: 0 &23f
Err = i T
<>2
0
0
0
:::0: :::.;;::0:;;::
0 0
e
m
[s] 0 0
0 e[s] 0
0 0 e^tsi
Reverse micromechanics
Dinc[s_] : = D
- D [ s]
e^[s_] : = I nver se[ Diiic[ s]]. <( l /( I - v
c
) ) ( D
c
. ( E[S] - v
r
e
f f
) - 8[ s]> - D
w
[s]. e^)
5r,[s_] : = D[s]. (S,[s] - e
r f
)
8
f
Cs_] : =( l / v
f
> (e[s] - (1 - v
f
) e
m
[s])
-241 -
A number of available models can be used to transform the parameters to time domain. The Stehfest method is used here.
Remove[Stehfest]
Remove[Durbin]
Remove[f]
<<Himcricalllath Numerical Inversion
En[t_] : = Stehfest[e
m
[s], s, t]
"
m
[t_] : = Stehfest[S
m
[s], s, t]
e
f
[t_]: = Stehfest [e
f
[s],s,t]:
Of [t_] : = Stehfest[Of [s], s, t]
EmtOOl ]
o^[001]
{{-21.8338), (-24.1193), (-24.1193), (0. ), {0.), {0.))
{{-0.154928), {-0.251698), (-0.251698), (0. ), {0.), (0.))
]
]
e
m
[1.001]
o
m
[1..001]
{{-6.51169), (-5.02325), (-5.02325), {0.}, (0. ), {0.})
{{-0.15684}, (-0.0826977), {-0.0826977), (0. ), {0.}, {0.})
1
-242-
A.5 Notebook for the example in Section 7.2.4.
Defining the properties in time domain I
Material properties
The Matrix properties are defined with two properties, each in Prony series. Shift factor is defined az an input.
Off[General::spell]
Off[General::unfl]
T[t_] :=120;P[t_] : = 1. 0591 - 0. 0591T[t] / 26. 86
G\ = 3750.;G
i
"
f
m
= 375. ; T
g
= 1.;
cin = 0.0001;
K
u
= 10000. ; K
i
"
m = 7000. ; i K = 1.5; *
G^t] : = G^
f
m
* (G
u
m
- G
inf
m
) Exp[-t / 7
G
] ]
K[t_] : = lf"
f
m* (k
u
m
-i e
n f
m
) E*p[-t/
lK
] ^
External Load variables
"m[t_l :=
f 100.
0
0
0
0
0
; E R F [t_] : = etn
T[t] - 120 '
T[t] - 120
T[t] - 120
0
0
0
G
m
[s_] : = s LaplaceTraj\sform[G
m
[t ] , t, s]
K
m
[s_] : = s LaplaceTransform[K,[t] , t, s]
5
m
[s_] : = LaplaceTransform[ff
m
[t] , t, s]
Stiffness moduli
D
m
[s ] : =
4G
m
[s]/3
+
K
m
[s] K[s] -2G
m
[s]/3 K[s] -2G
m
[s]/3 0
K[s] -2G
m
[s]/3 4G
m
[s]/3 + K
ri
[s] i^Js] - 2 G
m
[s]/3 0
Kls] -2G
m
[!]/3 K[s] -2G[s]/3 4 G[s]/3 + |s] 0
0 0 0 G^[s]
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
G
m
[s]
0
0
0
0
0
G[s]
Calculating the strains
E[s ] := Inverse [D
m
[s]] Is
-243 -
A number of available models can be used to transformthe parameters to time domain. The Stehfest method is used here.
Remove[Stehf est]
Remove [Durbi n]
Remove[f]
<< Humeri calHath Humeri callnversi on
E m [ t _ ] : = Stehf est [e[s], s, t ].om [ t ] /P[ t] + e r f [ t ]
em[.001]
-244-
Appendix B: Pseudo-Code for the Differential Form Implementation
Appendi x B. PSE U DO- CODE FOR TH E DI FFE RE NTI AL F ORM
I MPLE ME NTATI ON
In this Appendi x, the algorithm for the implementation of the Differential Form ( DF) of viscoelasticity i n
a finite element code wi l l be presented. Thi s wi l l consist of text description of the command lines of the
code, i.e. what is called the 'pseudo-code', and wi l l be presented for the mai n subroutines of the DF code.
Each includes an explanation of the function of the subroutine, fol l owed by the actual pseudo-code.
Subroutine CaicDT:
This subroutine calculates the material stiffness matrix, D " , at a single integration point. The subroutine
is currently written for both transversely isotropic and isotropic V E materials. The possibility of
additional models has also been provided.
1) Check the material type; i f not viscoelastic, RETURN
2) Call Relaxation to calculate the current value of relaxation times, T"^ , e.g. from Equation (4.27)
3) Check whether thermoelastic effect is present; i f it is,
a. Call Thermoelastic to calculate the current and previous values of the modul i based on
the temperature, e.g. Equation (5.45)
b. Calculate Maxwel l stiffness by combining the above values, i.e. Equation (6.48)
4) Loop over the number of material properties, 2 for isotropic and 5 for transversely isotropic
5) Loop over the number of Maxwel l elements for this material property, N
6) Add contribution of the material stiffness, i.e. P". i n Equation (6.54)
7) Check the material behaviour type, e.g. transversely isotropic or isotropic
-245 -
A ppendix B: Pseudo-Code for the Differential Form Implementation
a. Calculate the arrays of the stiffness matrix, D", from material properties
Subroutine CalcEfree:
This subroutine calculates the free strain increment vector, As
f
, for an integration point. This subroutine
is written for the case where thermal expansion and cure shrinkage exist and that behaviour of both is
characterized by a Prony series.
1) Check the material type; i f not viscoelastic, RETURN
2) Call Relaxation to calculate thermal expansion relaxation times for the current and previous
temperature (T"
+]
and T") and degree of cure ( a"
+ 1
and a"), e.g. from Equation (4.27)
3) Check whether thermoelastic effect is present; i f it is
a. Call Thermoelastic to calculate the current and previous values of the thermal expansion
modul i , e.g. Equation (5.45)
4) Loop over the size of the thermal strain vector, i.e. 1 for isotropic and 2 for transversely isotropic
5) Loop over al l Maxwel l elements of the thermal expansion strain model
6) Call DiffSolve to solve for the thermal expansion strain
7) Calculate the thermal expansion strain increment vector, As
T
si mi l ar to stress i n Equation (6.45)
8) Call Relaxation to calculate cure shrinkage relaxation times for the current and previous
temperature (T"
+i
and T") and degree of cure (a
n+i
and a"), e.g. from Equation (4.27)
9) Check whether thermoelastic effect is present; i f it is
a. Cal l Thermoelastic to calculate the current and previous values of the moduli for cure
shrinkage, e.g. Equation (5.45)
-246-
10) Loop over the size of the cure shrinkage vector, i.e. 1 for isotropic and 2 for transversely
isotropic
11) Loop over al l Maxwel l elements of the cure shrinkage strain model
12) Call DiffSolve to solve for the cure shrinkage strain
13) Calculate the cure shrinkage strain increment vector, As
a
14) Call RearrFree function to rearrange the strain increments into vector form
15) Add the strain vector to calculate the free strain increment vector
Subroutine CalcEsigma:
This subroutine calculates an equivalent free strain increment associated wi th internal stresses, Ae
a
, for a
single integration point. In this subroutine; calculation of the material compliance matrix depends on the
material behaviour, but the rest of the subroutine is generic for any material.
1) Call Relaxation to calculate the current and previous values of relaxation times, r"
p
f and r"
pj
,
respectively, e.g. from Equation (4.27)
a. Call Thermoelastic to calculate the current and previous values of the moduli based on
the temperature, e.g. Equation (5.45)
b. Calculate Maxwel l stiffness by combining the above values
p
5) Add contribution of the material stiffness, Pj
-247-
6) Calculate the arrays of the material compliance matrix, C"
T
, from material properties.
8) Loop over the size of the stress vector for this material property, from Equation (6.17) or
(6.32)
p
10) Calculate A,, from Equation (6.56)
11) Add contribution of the above value to X X ! / "
p
12) Call RearrangeStress to rearrange the above values into a vector, from Equation (6.18) or (6.33)
13) Multiply matrices from steps 6) and 12) to calculate the equivalent free strain increment
Subroutine SolveStress:
This subroutine calculates the new total stress and also stresses for al l the Maxwel l elements. This is done
for an integration point, using the current strain increment and stress values. Thi s routine is generic, but
depends on whether thermoelastic behaviour exists or not.
1) Call Relaxation to calculate the current and previous values of relaxation times, r"
p
f and r"
pj
,
respectively, e.g. from Equation (4.27)
2) Call RearrangeStrain to calculate the current value of strain increments associated wi th
different material properties by rearranging the arrays of the mechanical strain matrix, from
Equation (6.17) or (6.32)
-248-
a. Call Thermoelastic to calculate the current and previous values of the modul i , e.g.
Equation (5.45)
b. Call RearrangeStrain to calculate the previous value of strain increments associated
wi th different material properties, from Equation (6.17) or (6.32)
5) Loop over the size of the stress vector for this material property, from Equation (6.17) or
(6.32)
p
7) Call DiffSolve to solve the differential constitutive equation to get <r
pj
,
8) Add contribution of the above value to g_
p
9) Call RearrangeStress to calculate the composite stresses by rearranging elements of q_ , from
Subroutine ReverseMM:
This subroutine is the main subroutine for reverse micromechanics. It calculates the matrix strains and
stresses. Currently, this subroutine works based on the assumption that no thermoelastic effect is present.
1) Check whether thermoelastic effect is present. I f it is RE T U RN
2) Check the material type; i f not viscoelastic, RE T U RN
3) Call CalcDT to calculate the matrix material stiffness matrix, i.e. D" from Equation (6.61)
-249-
4) Call RMMStiffF to calculate the fibre material stiffness matrix, i.e. D
5) Call RMMInverse to calculate the inverse of D - D"
T
6) Call RMMFree to calculate the free strains i n matrix and fibre, s
mf
and s
ff
, respectively
7) Call Relaxation to calculate the current and previous values of relaxation times for matrix
8) Loop over the number of material properties of the matrix (2)
9) Loop over the size of the stress vector for this material property, from Equation (6.17)
p
11) Calculate A ,, from Equation (6.56)
12) Add contribution of the above value to /
P
1
13) Call RearrangeStress to rearrange the above values into a vector, from Equation (6.18)
14) Calculate the other variables needed for the matrix strain increment i n Equation (6.75)
15) Calculate the matrix strain from 13) and 14) and strain increment, i.e. Equation (6.75)
16) Call SolveStress to calculate the value of stress i n matrix, from Equati on (6.44)
-250-
Appendix C: ABAQUS Viscoelastic Model
Appendi x C. A B A Q U S VISCOELASTIC MODE L
In this Appendix, the available Viscoelastic (VE) model in the commercial code ABAQUS will be
described and its characteristics will be discussed. This will be done to compare the Differential Form
(DF) developed in this thesis to another available model in the literature. For this purpose, first the
formulations developed by ABAQUS in its Theory Manual are presented. After that, the relations
between these and the DF,' with their similarities and differences, are discussed. Note that in explaining
the ABAQUS VE model the notation used in the Theory Manual Version 6.4is adopted.
The basic VE integral equation is:
where e and ^ are the mechanical deviatoric and volumetric strains, K and G are the bulk and shear
moduli, dot represents derivative with respect to t', and r is the reduced time, defined as follows:
- I
dt'
A(9(t'))
Here 6 is the temperature and A
g
is the shift factor, calculated from the WLF equation:
-\ogA
e
=h(9) =
cf(e-eg)
ci+(0-0
g
)
where Cf and Cf are constants and 9
g
is the glass transition temperature.
The moduli are assumed as equivalents of multiple Maxwell elements in parallel:
K(T) = K
+
Y
j
K,e
G(T) = G
tD+
f
j
G
i
e
-251 -
In A B A Q U S , it is assumed that the relaxation times for both modul i are the same, but the number of
Maxwel l elements can be different.
To develop the finite element implementation, the deviatoric behaviour is considered. Bul k behaviour can
be modeled i n a si mi l ar way. The deviatoric stresses can be written as:
ft I
N
G 1 ("T /
N
G
JO l i=\ j xi l ,_]
Note:
The integration parameter has been changed. Wi th this manipulation, from this point on all the
calculations are performed i n the reduced time space ( r ) and not the real time (t).
The above equation is rewritten i n the fol l owi ng form:
S = 2G
"a
V /= J
where G
0
is the instantaneous shear modulus, = , and
l-e
/ !
v J
dt'
(C.l)
is the viscous (creep) strain i n each Maxwel l element.
Now, assume that i n a given time step this strain varies linearly wi th the reduced time, i.e.
de/dr' = A e / A r . Wi th this assumption and some manipulation on the above equation the recursive
equation for the calculation of the viscous stresses is obtained:
-252 -
Ae,=- <-
Ar
Ar'
+ e
- Ar / r , _ j
Ae + ( l - e-
A r A
' ) ( e"- e; ) (C.2)
Havi ng these values, the increment of stresses can be calculated from the fol l owi ng equation:
(C.3)
AS = 2G
0
A e - X , ( e ;
+
' - e ; )
The combination of these two equations provides us wi th stress i n a time step.
Differentiating this equation wi th respect to the deviatoric strain increment ( ^^- ) wi l l give the tangent
dAe
modulus:
G =G
n
i-E/
tT AT
AT
+ e-
Arh
-1 (C.4)
Ar
Note that A B A Q U S simplifies these equations for 1 and considers it separately. But, this wi l l not
be shown here for si mpl i ci ty.
Now, since al l these calculations are done i n reduced time space and because it is the real time that wi l l
be eventually discretized, a relationship between the two time scales is needed. In A B A Q U S , the function
h(0) is assumed to vary linearly as a function of temperature. Note that, albeit a good approximation for
many cases, this is merely a simplification. From this assumption, it can be proven that:
h(0
n+]
)-h(0")
(C.5)
-253 -
Discussion
1. We claim that the solution to the integral equation in reduced time space presented above is in fact
equivalent to a form of finite difference solution to the governing differential equation.
Looking at the viscous strain in Equation (C.l), we can rewrite it as:
The integral on the right-hand side is in fact nothing but a form of stress in Maxwell element i. In other
words:
Substituting this value of viscous strain in the recursive equation strains (Equation (C.2)) we will get:
This is in fact a recursive equation for the calculation of Maxwell stresses, i.e. similar to the equations
derived in Chapter 4, e.g. Equation (4.36). This equation is not similar to the classic cases of the finite
difference normally used to solve the differential equations. However, it shows that the method used by
ABAQUS is practically equivalent to a differential form solution, although using an exponential form of
finite difference discretization. This approach is in fact similar to the formulation developed by Bazant
and Wu (1974) adopted for the DF. The difference between the ABAQUS approach and the one used in
Rearranging this equation:
AS, = 2G, -^-(l - e~
Ar/r
') Ae - (l - e'
AT/r
') S,
AT
-254-
the reference to a large degree is the choice of the internal variable used; A B A Q U S uses the Maxwel l
viscous strains for this purpose whi l e the one by Bazant and Wu employs the Maxwel l stresses.
2. The similarity between the A B A Q U S approach and the present differential form is obviously val i d
when the problem is solved i n the reduced time space. Put differently, these two formulations are similar
for isothermal cases. However, when temperature changes are present the A B A Q U S relates the two times
using an approximation (Equation (C. 5)), whi l e the differential form does not make any assumptions. Due
to the similarity between the two approaches, it might be possible to modify the A B A Q U S formulation
for non-isothermal cases to avoid any assumption on the solution. However, the complexity of the
integral formulation as the basis for the A B A Q U S approach wi l l complicate this development.
3. The A B A Q U S formulation modifies the tangent modulus wi th Equation (C. 4), i n a similar way to the
DF formulation. However, no modification to the force vector i n the FE equations is done, unlike the DF
approach (e.g. Equation (6.59)). The current A B A Q U S implementation wi l l clearly generate errors, the
magnitude of whi ch wi l l depend on the time step sizes and conditions of the case under study.
Summary
A comparison of features available i n the two forms of V E models, namely the present DF and A B A Q U S
internal model, was shown i n Table 7.1. In this appendix, a comparison of the details of the V E models
for A B A Q U S and the DF was shown. Through the discussion presented above, it is clear that the
viscoelastic model present i n A B A Q U S has some similarities to the DF of viscoelasticity i n the
calculation of stresses and modification of the stiffness matrix. However, due to the simplifications made
in A B A Q U S the results obtained through this code wi l l lead to inaccuracies. In addition, due to lack of
modification of the force vector i n A B A Q U S , this method wi l l need smaller time-steps for the same level
of accuracy as the DF, as shown i n Section 7.2.2.
-255 -

Viscoelasticity and Reisdual Stress

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Viscoelasticity and Reisdual Stress

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

V I S C O E L A S T I C C O N S T I T U T I V E M O D E L S FOR E V A L U A T I O N OF RE S I D U A L S TRES S ES I N

Вам также может понравиться