General Techniques For Exploiting Periodicity and Symmetries

General Techniques for Exploiting
Periodicity and Symmetries

in Micromechanics Analysis
of Textile Composites
XIAODONG TANG AND JOHN D. WHITCOMB*

Center for Mechanics of Composites
Department of Aerospace Engineering
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX 77843-3141, USA
(Received July 8, 2002)

(Revised December 10, 2002)
ABSTRACT: General formulas for obtaining boundary conditions for micro-

mechanics analysis of textile composites are developed based on the concept of
equivalent subcell, which is the smallest region that has to be modeled. The
equivalent subcell is identified by exploiting the periodicity and symmetries exhibited
in the material microstructures and loading. The conventional formulas for the full
unit cell of periodic structures and the formulas for the subcell are unified by
introducing the subcell vector d and a constant vector R that accounts for the
mismatch in the local displacement perturbations between two equivalent subcells.
The usually lengthy derivation process required to obtain boundary conditions has
been significantly simplified by shifting the effort from deriving to substituting the
parameters established for the equivalent subcells into the formulas. The applications
of these formulas are illustrated by generating boundary conditions for the smallest
subcells of 4-harness satin weave and plain weave.
KEY WORDS: boundary conditions, multipoint constraints, computational micro-

mechanics, finite element method, textile composites, periodic structure, unit cell.
INTRODUCTION
HEN TEXTILE COMPOSITES are applied to primary structural applications,

W micromechanics analyses are required to obtain the effective engineering properties
such as effective moduli, diffusivity or conductivity. They are also needed to predict
detailed local stress distributions in the local microstructure in order to understand
the local damage mechanisms, which could affect the macrostructural response.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: whit@aero.tamu.edu
Journal of COMPOSITE MATERIALS, Vol. 37, No. 13/2003 1167

0021-9983/03/13 116723 $10.00/0 DOI: 10.1177/002199803033467
2003 Sage Publications
Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

1168 X. TANG AND J. D. WHITCOMB
Micromechanics models for textile composites can be categorized into two classes, i.e., the
simple analytical models based on modified laminate theory, and the numerical models
based on finite element methods [13]. The three-dimensional finite element based
computational micromechanics modeling of textile composites offers several benefits over
simple analytical models. Firstly, it allows more faithful approximation of the complex
geometry of the textile microstructure and can provide much more insight into the detailed
load transfer and the damage mechanisms. It also allows for numerical experiments on a
wide variety of material systems, tow (or yarn) geometries, and load conditions. Finally, it
can be used to validate the simple models and help develop simple models that are based
on thorough understanding of the dominant characteristics that govern the behavior of a
textile composite. The biggest challenges related to establishing a robust finite element
based computational micromechanics strategy for textile composites are (1) identification
of the smallest representative region and derivation of appropriate boundary conditions;
and (2) rapid and automated mesh generation for a wide variety of textile architectures.
Textile composites, such as those shown in Figure 1, exhibit periodicity and symmetries
in their microstructures and can be constructed from a single unit cell. The term unit cell is
widely used in crystallography [5,6], and is defined by the requirement that the entire
material can be constructed from spatially translated copies of it, without the use of
rotation or reflection [2]. Figure 2 shows examples of periodic structures and unit cells. In
each case, the distance betweenPequivalent points in any two unit cells can be characterized
by the periodicity vector D ki Di , where D(i) are the basic periodicity vectors of the
material, and k(i) are arbitrary integers. The choice of unit cell is not unique. Figure 3
shows three options for the unit cell for 8-harness satin. For micromechanics analysis of
textile composites, there are two guidelines for defining the unit cell: (1) The unit cell
Figure 1. Typical textile material architectures.

General Techniques for Exploiting Periodicity and Symmetries 1169
2D(1) -D(2)
D(2) D(1) +D(2)

D(1)
D(1) -D(2)
D(2) D(1)
D(2) D(1) +D(2)

D(2) D (1) +D(2)
D(1)
D(1)
Figure 2. Examples of periodic structures and periodicity vectors.
should possess symmetries, which can be exploited in order to reduce the size of analysis
model (this makes C in Figure 3 a bad choice) and (2) The shape of unit cell should
facilitate mesh generation. For example, in Figure 3, both options A and B have rotation
symmetry about the center of unit cell. But option B is easier for mesh generation as it has
no beveled edges. In spite of the many possibilities of choosing a unit cell for a textile, if
correct boundary conditions are imposed, all choices for the unit cell must yield identical
analysis results. Figure 4 shows that the 11 stress distribution in the warp tow for an
8-harness satin weave under uniaxial extension loading is the same for all three definitions
of the unit cell.
While the boundary conditions for a full unit cell can be described easily from the
periodic conditions [12] for periodic structures like those in Figures 1 and 2, the symmetries
exhibited in the unit cell can also be exploited to further reduce the size of the analysis
models. Symmetry has been thoroughly studied in science and art [7,8] and has been an
indispensable part of crystallography [5,6]. A unit cell can be divided into several
equivalent regions after exploiting all the symmetries (i.e. translation, rotation, reflection
and their combinations) within the unit cell. Such equivalent regions are called asymmetry
units in crystallography, or fundamental regions in group theory [6]. In mechanics
problems, an equivalent region can then be used to develop a partial unit cell model with
correctly imposed boundary conditions.
Whitcomb et al. [9] developed a systematic procedure for deriving the boundary
conditions for the partial unit cell models of plain and satin weave composites. The

A
C
Figure 3. Periodic structures of 8-harness satin weave. The choice of unit cell is not unique.
11
4.12
1.57
Option A Option B Option C
Figure 4. Stress contours in warp tows using three different definitions of the 8-harness satin unit cell.
fundamental concepts involved in [9] for deriving the basic equations are the Periodic
Conditions (PC) and the Equivalent Coordinate System (ECS) that is attached to each
equivalent region in the unit cell. Equivalence conditions are established between two
ECSs for the coordinates, displacements, stresses and strains, and boundary conditions are
then derived in terms of the displacements and surface tractions. This approach has so far
been successfully applied to the equivalent regions identified by symmetry operations that
only involve rotations and reflections that leave at least one point in the unit cell
unchanged or fixed. In such cases, all the ECSs in the unit cell can have their origins
attached to the same fixed point, and the equivalence conditions between the ECSs can
be easily utilized together with the periodic conditions to yield the required boundary
conditions. However, general symmetry operations for the unit cell can also involve
combinations of translation with rotation and reflection (i.e. symmetries described by the
space symmetry group [7]), and there is no common point that can be used to define
origins for all the ECSs attached to the equivalent regions identified by all such
symmetries. Therefore, special treatment must be implemented in utilizing the equivalence
conditions between the ECSs, since there can be a mismatch in the local displacement
perturbations between the origins of two ECSs. Such a mismatch, if present, must be

included in the boundary conditions for the partial unit cell model of certain weaves, such
as the 4-harness satin.
In this paper, the equivalent regions identified by exploiting all the possible symmetries
in the unit cell are termed as equivalent subcell to reflect the fact that equivalence is
defined not only in terms of the geometry and material distribution, but also the load
condition. The general formulas for obtaining boundary conditions in micromechanics
analysis of textile composites are derived for the subcell model. The ECSs attached to each
equivalent subcell need not share a common origin. A novel technique is employed to
accommodate the mismatch in the local displacement perturbations between the origins
of two ECSs. The procedures for using these formulas will be demonstrated through
examples for 4-harness satin and plain weaves.
NOTATION
All quantities in the paper are defined in three dimensional Cartesian coordinate
systems. The bold letter is always either a vector (3 1) or a matrix (3 3), as explained in
the text. Matrix multiplication is denoted by the dot product symbol , such as in
X0 c X d, whose index form is Xi0 cij Xj di and the repeated index is summed.
BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR UNIT CELL

AND SMALLEST ANALYSIS REGION
Structures with inhomogeneities at the microstructural scale are conventionally

analyzed with equivalent homogeneous (homogenized or effective) properties [1115].
The homogenized properties are obtained by volume averaging the response of a
representative volume element (RVE). The length scale of the RVE must be small enough
as compared to the length scale of the structure so it can be treated as a typical point in the
structure under study. On the other hand, the RVE should be large enough to be truly
representative of the microstructure of material. For the material with periodic
microstructure, the RVE is the unit cell. The effective properties for an inhomogeneous
material are defined in terms of volume averaged variables, which are defined as follows
for a simply connected region.
Z
1
h i dV 1
V V
where is the variable of interest. If there are cracks or holes in the region, then this
equation should be modified.
For solid mechanics, according to the HillMandel hypothesis [14], the condition for
macroscopic homogeneity assumes equivalence of strain energy for the actual inhomo-
geneous media and the equivalent homogenized media. Thus, for an admissible stress field
r and kinematically admissible strain field e,

ij "ij ij "ij 2

where the repeated index is summed. The microscopic stress r and strain e fields satisfying
the homogeneity condition may be obtained by solving boundary value problems for the
RVE with one of the following three boundary conditions [12,13], which will give different
answers.
Uniform traction: T hri n on @V 3a
Uniform strain: U hei X on @V 3b
D-periodicity: U hei X U X and U X U X D on @V 3c
where V is the volume of body under consideration and the @V is the boundary of V; D is
the period of a D-periodic displacement function U*, interpreted as local perturbations to
macroscopic strain based displacement fields.
There are two goals when analyzing the RVE. The first is to obtain the microscopic r
and e fields for a given hri or hei using a localization process. The second is to obtain
effective properties by determining the relationship between the volume-averaged stresses
and strains. The following will derive the basic formulas describing the boundary
conditions for both full unit cell and partial unit cell micromechanics analysis of textile
composites.
Periodic Conditions
For a general periodic structure, if the length scale of variation in loads applied to the
structure is much larger than the dimension of unit cell, the local deformation, strain and
stress fields will be approximately periodic. This approximation can be expressed as
follows:

UX @U=@X X U X and U X U X D
eX hei e X and e X e X D 4
rX hri r X and r X r X D
where X is the coordinate vector in the global coordinate system; D is the periodicity
vector; UX, eX and rX are the displacement vector, strain matrix and stress matrix,
respectively, with respect to the global coordinate system; @U=@X is the matrix of
displacement gradients; U , e and r are the periodic
displacement
vector, strain matrix
and stress matrix in the unit cell, respectively, and @U =@X 0, he i 0 and hr i 0,
where hi denotes the volume averaging operator over the volume of the unit cell as
defined in Equation (1).
Using periodicity between point X and X D, Equation (4) can be rewritten as

UX D UX @U=@X D
eX D eX 5
rX D rX

which describes the relationships for equivalent points in the two unit cells. If the full unit
cell is to be analyzed, it is easy to use the displacement constraint in Equation 5 to impose
all the boundary conditions.
Symmetries in the Unit Cell and the Equivalent Subcells
Symmetry presented in unit cell can involve translation, rotation, reflection or

combination of the three, and equivalent regions can be identified by fully exploiting all
the symmetries in the unit cell. The Equivalent subcell is defined as an equivalent region
whose geometry, material distribution, and the load condition can be brought identical to
those of another region in the unit cell by symmetry operations. Figure 5 shows two
periodic structures whose unit cell contains two subcells with equivalent points labeled
as A and B. The subcells are also referred to as subcell A and subcell B. Two local
coordinate systems (i.e. the ECSs), x and y, are associated with the two subcells,
respectively. In Figure 5(a), the two subcells can be brought equivalent by a 180-degree
rotation about the center of the line joining the two local origins ox and oy. While in
Figure 5(b), the two subcells must be brought equivalent by two operations: a mirroring
operation about x1 0, and then a translation that brings the local origins ox and oy
coincident. The following describes the relationships between two general equivalent
subcells.
(a) x1 ox
x2
X2 A
Subcell A
B
y2
Subcell B
oy
y1
O X1
(b) A
x2
Subcell B
X2 x1 ox B
Subcell A
y2
Subcell B
oy y1
O
X1
Figure 5. Equivalent subcells.

If two subcells with local coordinate systems x and y are equivalent, then for points A
and B whose coordinates are identical in the two subcells, xA yB (i.e., xA B A B
1 y1 , x2 y2
A B
and x3 y3 ), the response is equivalent. For example
exA eyB 6a
rxA ryB 6b
uxA uyB 6c
where u, e and r are the displacement, strains and stresses, and are defined in the
coordinate system used to specify the variable. For example, the strains ex are defined in
the x coordinate system, but the strains ey are specified in the y coordinate system,
and they are not the same function. The local displacement field ux and uy satisfy the
conditions uxA 0 uyB 0 0. is the load reversal factor, which is introduced if
load reversal is required to enforce Equations (6a) (6c). Specifically, 1 if load
reversal is required and otherwise 1. The load reversal factor is similar to the time
reversal operation in describing the magnetic symmetry groups, which is sometimes
required to reverse the magnetic polarity [16]. However, the load reversal is only
permissible if the constitutive relations of the material are insensitive to the sign of the
loads. For elasticity problems, this requires tensile properties to be identical to the
compressive properties. The determination of depends on both the load condition and
the symmetry operations and will be discussed in more detail in the following sections.
Equations (6a) (6c) describe the relationships between variables in different local
coordinate systems. They can be transformed so that all quantities are expressed in terms
of the same coordinate system, the global coordinate system X. This will allow derivation
of general formulas for obtaining the boundary conditions. The first step is to define the
relationships between the coordinate systems in the next section and then to derive
relationships between the various field variables (displacements, stresses and strains).
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COORDINATE SYSTEMS

The relationships between the local coordinate system x or y and the global coordinate
system X are given by

xA a XA Xox
7
yB b XB Xoy
where XA and XB are the global coordinates of two equivalent points A and B in the
equivalent subcells; and Xox and Xoy are the global coordinates of the origins of the local
coordinate systems, x and y, which are attached to the equivalent subcells (see Figure 5); a
and b are the transformation matrices between the global coordinate system and the local
coordinate systems and are orthogonal such 1 T
A thatoxa a and b1 bT .
Since x y , Equation (7) yields a X X b X Xoy . Rearranging gives
A B B
XA c XB Xox c Xoy 8

where
c a1 b aT b 9
Equation (8) simply means that for all equivalent pairs of points A and B in the two
subcells, the vector XA c XB is a constant, which is defined to be d
d Xox c Xoy 10
Using Equations (8) and (10), XA can be expressed in terms of XB and d.
XA c XB d 11
The vector d is analogous to the unit cell vector of periodicity D. The difference is that D
describes the offset between regions that are equivalent in terms of a single coordinate
system. The distance between equivalent subcells is Xox Xoy , but because of the
transformations required to reveal the equivalence, we cannot use this distance directly.
Instead, the subcell periodicity vector (using the term loosely!) is defined in terms of Xox
and Xoy , but is not equal to the distance between equivalent points. For this reason, the
vector d will be simply referred to as the subcell vector.
Equations (6a) (6c) list some ways in which subcells are equivalent in terms of the usual
field variables. However, there is an equivalence that is easily overlooked that is related to
the subcell coordinate systems themselves. Suppose we choose point XB in subcell B such
that it is coincident with point Xox , the origin of subcell A. The equivalent point XA must
then be at the origin of another subcell that is equivalent to subcell A. . . i.e. XA must be at
the origin of a B type subcell. Figure 5 illustrates the two possibilities.
The equivalence in the first case (Figure 5a) is fairly simple. The vectors to points A
and B relative to the origin are simply the negatives of each other. That is,
XA Xox XB Xoy . For such cases the transformation between the equivalent
subcell coordinate systems is a 180-degree rotation about the center of the line joining the
two subcell coordinate systems. There is no need for any other type of transformation. In
particular, no translation is required to bring the two coordinate systems into coincidence.
The periodicity is a bit more complex for the second case (Figure 5b). In this case the
point XA mentioned above is at the origin of a subcell of type B, but it is not one of the
original two subcells being examined, but a third one, which will be referred to as subcell
B0 . The vector from the origin of subcell B to the origin of subcell B0 is equal to the vector
D, the unit cell periodicity vector. In this case, the transformation from one equivalent
subcell coordinate system to another involves both a translation and a rotation or
mirroring transformation.
These observations can be expressed as follows
( oy
B ox A
X (if translation not required)
If X X , then X 12
Xoy D (if translation is required)
Combining Equations (8) and (12) yields

(
0 (if translation not required)
Xox Xoy c Xox Xoy 13
D (if translation is required)

When translations (Xox Xoy ) are required, Equation (13) provides guidelines for what is
permissible. For example, consider the case when c aT b is
2 3
1 0 0
ca b4 0
T
1 05
0 0 1
Substitution of this c into Equation (13) gives

2 3 8 9 8 ox oy 9
0 0 0 < D1 >
> < 0 X1 X1 >
= > =
6 7
40 2 0 5 Xox Xoy D ) D2 2 X2ox X2oy 14
>
: >
; >
: >
;
0 0 2 D3 2 X3ox X3oy
which means that for these subcells, there is no restriction on translation in the X1
direction, but in the X2 and X3 directions, the translation can only be one half of the
periodicity vector in the corresponding directions. Table 1 summarizes the non-zero
translations that two equivalent subcells can take.
STRAINS AND STRESSES

For strains and stresses, the relationships between the global and local coordinate
systems are given as:
exA a eXA aT
15
eyB b eXB bT
rxA a rXA aT
16
ryB b rXB bT
Using Equations (6a), (15), (6b), (16) and (9) gives:
eXA aT b eXB bT a

17
c eXB cT
rXA aT b rXB bT a

18
c rXB cT
Table 1. Non-zero translations between two equivalent subcells.

m1 m2 m3 r1 r2 r3
8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9
< any = < D1 =2 = < D1 =2 = < D1 =2 = < any = < any =
ox oy
X X D =2 any D =2 any D =2 any
: 2 ; : ; : 2 ; : ; : 2 ; : ;
D3 =2 D3 =2 any any any D3 =2

mi mirroring about plane Xi 0; ri 180-degree rotation about Xi axis.

Taking the volume average of both sides of the Equations (17) and (18) over the volume of
the unit cell yields
hei c hei cT 19
hri c hri cT 20
T
Using e 1=2 @U=@X @U=@XT and imposing @U=@X @U=@X to prevent rigid
body rotations gives

@U
he i 21
@X
Using Equation (21), Equation (19) becomes:

@U @U
c cT 22
@X @X
Equation (20) or (22) can be used to determine the load reversal factor . Suppose
c aT b is mirroring about X1 0:
2 3
1 0 0
c aT b 4 0 1 05
0 0 1
Plugging c into Equation (20) gives
hri c hri cT
2 3
h11 i h12 i h13 i 23
6 7
4 h12 i h22 i h23 i 5
h13 i h23 i h33 i

For Equation (23) to hold, is determined for each ij as follows:
Stress> h11 i h22 i h33 i h12 i h23 i h13 i

1 1 1 1 1 1
It is seen that, under mirroring transformation about X1 0, for loading cases h11 i,
h22 i, h33 i and h23 i, 1, while for loading cases h12 i and h13 i, 1. If h11 i and
h12 i are applied at the same time, then the mirroring symmetry operation about X1 can
not be exploited, since there are conflicting factors. Therefore, equivalent subcells can
only be exploited if the loading condition gives compatible load reversal factor . The

Table 2. Load reversal factor c for different loading cases.

Transformation h11 i h22 i h33 i h12 i h23 i h13 i
Mirror about X1 1 1 1 1 1 1
rotation about X1 1 1 1 1 1 1
values of for six symmetry operations and the six loading cases are listed in Table 2 [9].
These same values would be used for hei or @U=@X type loading.
DISPLACEMENTS
The relationships between the local displacement ux or uy and the global
displacement UX are as follows:

uxA a UXA UXox
24
uyB b UXB UXoy
Combining Equations (6c) and (24) yields,

a UXA UXox b UXB UXoy 25
Pre-multiplying by aT and exploiting the fact that a1 aT , Equation (25) becomes,

UXA UXox aT b UXB UXoy 26
Using the definition of c from Equation (9) gives

UXA c UXB UXox c UXoy 27
which establishes the relationship between displacement UXA and UXB in terms of
displacement at the origins of the two equivalent subcells, UXox and UXoy , in the global
coordinate system. In certain circumstances, Equation (27) may be used to specify the
multipoint constraints provided that UXA and UXB are on the boundaries of the same
subcell, and UXox c UXoy can be either prescribed or solved as unknowns.
However, the difficulty in using Equation (27) is that frequently UXox c UXoy
cannot be easily prescribed such that it corresponds to the desired macroscopic loading
conditions. A better way to prescribe the macroscopic
loading
conditions is through the
volume-averaged global displacement gradients @U=@X . The following will establish the
relationship between UXox c UXoy and the volume-averaged global displacement
gradients.

Using Equation (4) gives

ox @U
UX Xox U Xox
@X
28
@U
UXoy Xoy U Xoy
@X
By virtue of Equation (28), Equation (27) becomes

@U @U
UXA c UXB Xox U Xox c Xoy c U Xoy 29
@X @X
Exploiting Equations (10) and (22) and noting that cT c I, Equation (29) becomes

A B @U
UX c UX Xox c Xoy U Xox c U Xoy
@X
30
@U
c UXB d U Xox c U Xoy
@X

Since the values of d, UXA , UXB and @U=@X in Equation (30) are independent of the
choice of Xox and Xoy , Equation (30) states that U Xox c U Xoy is a constant
vector, which will be referred to as R. Therefore, for any two equivalent points Xox and
Xoy , or XA and XB , the following equation holds
R U Xox c U Xoy
31
or R U XA c U XB
Combining Equations (30) and (31) gives

A @U B
UX c UX dR 32
@X
The next section describes how the vector R is determined.
DETERMINATION OF CONSTANT VECTOR R

As observed in Equation (13), the two equivalent subcells can be brought together by a
symmetry operation (mirroring or -rotation) with or without a translation. For the case
that translation is not required, Equation (13) gives:
Xox Xoy c Xox Xoy 0
A trivial solution to this equation is Xox Xoy . Because of the symmetry condition at the
point Xox Xoy , the following equation holds
U Xox c U Xoy 33

Substituting Equation (33) into Equation (31) yields
R U Xox c U Xoy 0 34
For the case that translation is required, let XB coincide with Xox , the origin of the
subcell A. From Equation (12), XA Xoy D. Therefore the following holds:
U XB U Xox
35
U XA U Xoy U Xoy D
Substituting Equation (35) into Equation (31) yields
U Xoy c U Xox U Xox c U Xoy R
Rearranging gives
c R R 36
Using Equation (36), the possible non-zero components of R can be determined for
various transformations. These are summarized in Table 3. For example, for mirroring
about X1 0 and 1, there is one possible non-zero component in R. The non-zero
components of R become additional unknowns in the finite element model and are solved
for along with the nodal displacements.
Summary of the Formulas
Summarizing Equations (10), (11), (17), (18) and (32) gives
d Xox c Xoy 37a
XA c XB d 37b

@U
UXA c UXB dR 37c
@X
Table 3. Constant vector R for non-zero translation.

m1 m2 m3 r1 r2 r3
8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9
< R1 = < 0 = < 0 = < 0 = < R1 = < R1 =
1 0 R 0 R 0 R
: ; : 2; : ; : 2; : ; : 2;
0 0 R3 R3 R3 0
8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9 8 9
< 0 = < R1 = < R1 = < R1 = < 0 = < 0 =
1 R 0 R 0 R 0
: 2; : ; : 2; : ; : 2; : ;
R3 R3 0 0 0 R3

eXA c eXB cT 37d
rXA c rXB cT 37e
Equations (37a) (37e) concisely describe the relationships between two equivalent
subcells, and resemble Equation (5) that describes the relationships between the two unit
cells when d D, c I, 1, and R 0. The following will demonstrate the application
of Equations (37a) (37e) through examples.
APPLICATION OF GENERAL FORMULAS
Equations (37a) (37e) provide general formulas for obtaining the boundary conditions
for both full unit cell and partial unit cell (subcell) models of materials with periodic
microstructures such as textile composites. The following illustrates the application of
these formulas to obtain the boundary conditions for some typical forms of textile
composites. First, the BCs for the smallest subcell of 4-harness satin weave, which have
not been published previously in the literature, are obtained using the derived formulas.
The main objective of choosing 4-harness satin weave is to demonstrate the determination
of the non-zero R vectors in Equation (37c). Then, the formulas are used to generate the
BCs for the smallest subcell of the plain weave. The BCs for the plain weave model have
been presented in many published papers for the partial unit cell model. However, the
derivation procedure is lengthy [9] and requires a redefinition of the global coordinate.
The main purpose of including the plain weave herein is to illustrate the straightforward
one-step approach for obtaining the BCs for such a widely used weave type. Also, the
generation of hybrid BCs involving both essential (displacement) type and natural
(traction) type on the same face will be illustrated by using both Equations (37c) and (37e).
To shorten the discussion, the boundary conditions will be given for only part of the
boundary faces to show the steps in using the formulas, and only a single textile mat will
be considered which leaves the top and bottom surfaces of the mat free of traction. The
textile mat is infinite in in-plane directions and subject to uniform macroscopic loading.
Complete sets of boundary conditions for more weave types are given in [10].
Procedures for using Equations (37a) (37e)
The basic procedures for using Equations (37a) (37e) to derive the boundary conditions
for the smallest analysis region (subcell) are as follows:
1. Identify the smallest repeated full unit cell from the periodic structure.
2. If the full unit cell possesses certain symmetries in geometry, material and loading
conditions, identify the smallest equivalent subcells. Otherwise, the full unit cell is the
smallest subcell.
3. Select a subcell to be modeled and find its neighboring subcells. Determine the
parameters (i.e. the transformation matrix c aT b, the load reversal factor , and
the subcell vector d) that describe the equivalence between the subcell and each of its
neighboring subcells.
4. Use Xox Xoy c Xox Xoy , c R R and Table 3 to determine the possible
non-zero components of constant vector R.

5. Let XB be on the boundary of the subcell. Hence, XA is also on the boundary due to
equivalence between the two subcells. Apply the c, , d, and R to Equations (37a)
(37e). The boundary conditions for the boundary described by XB (master boundary)
and XA (slaved boundary) are then obtained. The non-zero components in R will be
solved as unknowns along with the nodal displacements.
Boundary Conditions for 4-Harness Satin Weave
Shown in Figure 6 is a full unit cell for 4-harness satin weave. Four subcells are
identified by examining the symmetries exhibited in the unit cell, and are labeled M, M1,
M2 and R3. The boundary conditions (BCs) will be derived for the four vertical
boundaries of the subcell M, which reduces the analysis region to th of the original full
unit cell model. The neighboring equivalent subcells of M are M1 and M2. The local
coordinate systems associated with subcell M, M1 and M2 are also shown in Figure 6,
with type B subcell having y1 y2 y3 system and type A subcells having x1 x2 x3
system. The material is subjected to transverse shear loading h13 i. First, the geometric
parameters Xox , Xoy , a, b, c aT b, d Xox c Xoy , XB and XA c XB d are
determined for each pair of equivalent subcells. Then the load reversal factor and
constant vector R are determined in terms of the loading condition and the transformation
relations between the equivalent subcells. Finally, substituting these parameters into
Equations (37a) (37e) yields the BCs for required boundary. In the following derivation,
subcell M plays the role of subcell B in Equations (37a) (37e) and M1 and M2 play the
role of subcell A. The parameters describing the relationships among M, M1 and M2 are
determined from Figure 6 and tabulated in Table 4.
Substituting the c and determined for each pair of equivalent subcells and for the
specified loading condition into Equation (22) identifies the non-zero displacement
gradients to be
2 3
@U1
0 0
66 @X3 7
7
@U 6 7
6 0 0 0 7
@X 6 7
4 @U1 5
0 0
@X3
where the rigid body rotations were prevented by imposing

@Ui @Uj
:
@Xj @Xi
Let XB be a point along the boundary of subcell M. Due to the equivalence of two
subcells, XA is also a point along the subcell boundary. If we consider XB to be the master
point, then XA is the slave point of XB and is related to XB by XA c XB d. The
relationship between the displacements at the two points is given by Equations (37a)
(37e). The point-to-point relationships in displacements are called multipoint constraints
(MPC).

(a) X3
X2
R3
M2 M1
X1
t
a b
x3
(b) x3
x2
x1
ox
ox
x2 x1
y3
y2 Subcell M1
Subcell M2
oy
y1
Subcell M
Figure 6. Schematic of full and partial unit cell of 4-harness satin weave: (a) Global coordinate system and
equivalent subcells identified in the unit cell; (b) Local coordinate systems.
For the faces specified by XB fX1 , b, X3 g and XA c XB d fX1 a, 0, X3 g

the boundary conditions obtained by substituting the parameters c, d, XA XB , and R
determined for the equivalent subcell pair M and M1 into Equation (37c) are
X3
X2
XA
U1 X1 a, 0, X3 U1 X1 , b, X3
U2 X1 a, 0, X3 U2 X1 , b, X3 RM1
X1 2
@U1
U3 X1 a, 0, X3 U3 X1 , b, X3 a RM1
3
@X3
XB

Table 4. Parameters describing the relationships between each

pair of equivalent subcells of 4-harness satin weave under
loading condition hr13 i.
Parameters M and M1 M and M2
2 3 2 3
1 0 0 1 0 0
a 4 0 1 05 4 0 1 0 5
0 0 1 0 0 1
2 3 2 3
1 0 0 1 0 0
c aT b* 4 0 1 05 4 0 1 0 5
0 0 1 0 0 1

a b a b
Xox 0 0
2 2 2 2

a b a b
Xoy 0 0
2 2 2 2

d Xox c Xoy a b 0 a b 0
XB fX1 ; b; X3 g fa; X2 ; X3 g
XA c XB d fX1 a; 0; X3 g f0; X2 b; X3 g
ox oy ox oy

X X c X X 0 2b 0 2a 0 0
1 1

R 0 R2M1 R3M1 0 R2M2 0
*b Identity matrix for both cases.
Substituting the parameters c, d, XA XB , and R determined for the equivalent subcell pair
M and M2 into Equation (37c) yields the boundary conditions for the faces
XB fa, X2 , X3 g and XA c XB d f0, X2 b, X3 g.
X3
X2 U1 0, X2 b, X3 U1 a, X2 , X3
U2 0, X2 b, X3 U2 a, X2 , X3 RM22
XA
X1
@U1
U3 0, X2 b, X3 U3 a, X2 , X3 a
XB @X3
For the subcells and loading condition considered in this case, it can be shown that
8 M1 9 8 9 8 9 8 9
2 3 > R > > RM21 > > 0 > > 0 >
1 0 0 < 1 >
> = > < >
= > < >
= > < >
=
RM1 4 0 1 0 5 RM2 0 ) RM1 R M2 R M1
R M2
0
>
>
2 > > 2 > > 2 > > 2
>
0 0 1 : M1 >
; > : M2 > ; > : M1 > ; > : >
;
R3 R3 R3 0

This requirement reveals that RM13 0 and RM1 M2

2 R2 . One can leave out R3
M1
from the
M1
BCs. But if solved as part of the solution, R3 will be shown to be zero. However,
RM1 M2
2 (R2 ) is NOT equal to zero and must be determined as part of the solution. Partial
unit cell models of the 4-harness satin were developed using boundary conditions with the
non-zero R components obtained by Equation (37c). The results from the subcell model
were identical to the results from the full unit cell model.
Boundary Conditions for Plain Weave
Figure 7 shows a full unit cell for a plain weave. Sixteen subcells are identified by
examining the symmetries in the unit cell. Five subcells labeled M, M1, M2, R1 and R2 will
be used to derive the BCs of the four vertical faces of subcell M for the loading condition
h11 i. The geometric parameters Xox , Xoy , a, b, c aT b, d Xox c Xoy , XB and
XA c XB d, together with the load reversal factor and constant vector R, will be
determined in terms of the transformation relations between each pair of equivalent
subcells and the specified loading condition. Again, in the following derivation, subcell M
plays the role of type B subcell in Equations (37a) (37e) and all other subcells play the
role of type A subcell. The parameters describing the relationships for each pair of
equivalent subcells are determined from Figure 7 and tabulated in Table 5. Moreover,
substituting the c and determined for each pair of equivalent subcells into Equation
(22)

gives
the non-zero
displacement
gradients for this loading case, which are @U 1 =@X 1 ,
@U2 =@X2 and @U3 =@X3 . It is also seen from Table 5 that the constant vector R is
identically zero for all pairs of equivalent subcells.
On the faces X1 a and X2 b, because of the particular symmetries exhibited, some
of the displacement constraint equations are trivially satisfied. As a result, the constraints
on the tractions (Ti ) must also be considered. The traction can be determined from
Equation (37e) along with Cauchys stress formula Ti nj ji .
The boundary conditions for the face X1a are then obtained as follows. Substituting
the parameters listed in Table 5 for the pair of M and M1 into Equation (37c) yields only
one non-trivial equation

@U1
U1 a, X2 , X3 a
@X1
and substituting the parameters into Equation (37e) yields

2 3
11 0 0
ra, X2 , X3 4 0 22 0 5
0 0 33
Noting that the normal on the face X1 a is n f1, 0, 0g and using Cauchys stress
formula Ti nj ji gives the following non-trivial equations
T2 a, X2 , X3 0
T3 a, X2 , X3 0

(a) X3
X2
M1 R1
M
M2 R2
t
b
a X1
b
a
b
a
a b
(b) x3
x1 Subcell R1
x2
ox
ox
y3
x1
x2
y2 x3
Subcell M1
oy y1 x 1 x2
x3
ox
Subcell M
ox
x2 x1 Subcell R2 x3
Subcell M2
Figure 7. Schematic of full and partial unit cells of plain weave: (a) Global coordinate system and equivalent
subcells identified in the unit cell; (b) Local coordinate systems.
Similarly, on the face X2 b, substituting the parameters listed in Table 5 for the pair of
M and M2 into Equations (37c) and (37e) and using Cauchys stress formula Ti nj ji yields
T1 X1 , b, X3 0

@U2
U2 X1 , b, X3 b
@X2
T3 X1 , b, X3 0

Table 5. Parameters describing the relationships between each pair of equivalent subcells
of plain weave under loading condition hr11 i.
Parameters M and M1 M and M2 M and R1 M and R2
2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3
1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
a 4 0 1 05 4 0 1 0 5 4 0 1 0 5 4 0 1 0 5
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
2 3 2 3 2 3 2 3
1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
ca b T * 4 0 1 05 4 0 1 0 5 4 0 1 0 5 4 0 1 0 5
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1

Xox 2a 0 0 0 2b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Xoy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

d Xox c Xoy 2a 0 0 0 2b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
XB fa1 ; X2 ; X3 g fX1 ; b; X3 g fX1 ; 0; X3 g f0; X2 ; X3 g
A B
X cX d fa1 ; X2 ; X3 g fX1 ; b; X3 g fX1 ; 0; X3 g f0; X2 ; X3 g
ox oy ox oy

X X c X X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1
R 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
*
b Identity matrix for all cases.
The boundary conditions for the face X1 0 and face X2 0 can be obtained by
substituting the parameters for the M and R2 pair and M and R1 pair into Equation (37c).
The result is
Face X1 0 Face X2 0
U1 0, X2 , X3 U1 0, X2 , X3 U1 X1 , 0, X3 U1 X1 , 0, X3
U2 0, X2 , X3 U2 0, X2 , X3 U2 X1 , 0, X3 U2 X1 , 0, X3
U3 0, X2 , X3 U3 0, X2 , X3 U3 X1 , 0, X3 U3 X1 , 0, X3
CONCLUDING REMARKS
General formulas were developed based on the Equivalent Subcell concept for
specifying the boundary conditions for both full and partial unit cell micromechanics
models of material with periodic microstructures, such as textile composites. The
equivalent subcell is the smallest region that has to be modeled in the micromechanics
analysis and is identified by fully exploiting the periodicity and symmetries exhibited in the
material microstructure and loading. The conventional formulas for the full unit cell of
periodic microstructures and the formulas for the subcell were unified by introducing the
subcell vector, d, and a constant vector, R, that accounts for the mismatch in the local
displacement perturbations between two equivalent subcells. Procedures for using these
formulas were outlined and examples were provided to illustrate the application of the

formulas. The formulas were validated by comparing the results for the partial unit cell
models with those for the full unit cell models. The results were identical. Although the
examples are only for 2D weaves, the general formulas can certainly be applied for 3D
textile composites provided that a repeated unit cell can be identified in the textile
architecture.
With these formulas, the usually lengthy derivation process required to obtain boundary
conditions for the partial unit cell micromechanics model can be significantly simplified
by shifting the effort from deriving to substituting the parameters determined for the
equivalent subcells into a few formulas. The formulas can be programmed so that complex
boundary conditions can be generated automatically.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The material is based upon work supported by the AFOSR under Grant No. F49620-
98-1-0149. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed
in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
AFOSR.
REFERENCES
1. Chou, T.-W. and Ko, F.K. (1989). Composite Materials Series 3 Textile Structural Composites,
Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.
2. Cox, B.N. and Flanagan, G. (1997). Handbook of Analytical Methods for Textile Composites,
NASA CR 4570.
3. Tan, P., Tong, L. and Steven, G.P. (1997). Modelling for Predicting the Mechanical Properties
of Textile Composites A Review, Composites Part A, 28A: 903922.
4. Poe, C.C. Jr., Dexter, H.B. and Raju, I.S. (1997). A Review of the NASA Textile Composite
Research, AIAA-97-1321.
5. OKeeffe, M. and Hyde, B.G. (1996). Crystal Structures I. Patterns and Symmetry, Mineralogical
Society of America, Washington DC.
6. Hahn, T. (ed.), (1996). International Tables for Crystallography, Volume A: Space-Group
Symmetry, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
7. Shubnikov, A.V. and Koptsik, V.A. (1974). Symmetry in Science and Art, Plenum Press,
New York.
8. Loeb, A.L. (1971). Color and Symmetry, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York.
9. Whitcomb, J.D., Chapman, C.D. and Tang, X. (2000). Derivation of Boundary Conditions for
Micromechanics Analyses of Plain and Satin Weave Composites, Journal of Composite
Materials, 34(9): 724747.
10. Tang, X. (December 2001). Micromechanics of 2D Woven Composites, Ph.D. Dissertation,
Department of Aerospace Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas.
11. Nemat-Nasser, S. and Hori, M. (1993). Micromechanics: Overall Properties of Heterogeneous
Solids, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
12. Suquet, P. (1987). Elements of Homogenization Theory for Inelastic Solid Mechanics,
In: Sanchez-Palencia, E. and Zaoui, A. (eds), Homogenization Techniques for Composite
Media, pp. 194275, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
13. Ghosh, S., Lee, K. and Raghavan, P. (2001). A Multi-Level Computational Model for Multi-
Scale Damage Analysis in Composite and Porous Materials, International Journal of Solids and
Structures, 38: 23352385.

14. Hill, R. (1965). A Self Consistent Mechanics of Composite Materials, Journal of Mechanics and
Physics of Solids, 13: 213222.
15. Markov, K. and Preziosi, L. (2000). Heterogeneous Media: Micromechanics Modeling Methods
and Simulations, Birkhaeuser, Boston.
16. Juretschke, H.J. (1974). Crystal Physics, W. A. Bejamin, Inc, Reading, MA.

General Techniques For Exploiting Periodicity and Symmetries

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

General Techniques For Exploiting Periodicity and Symmetries

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

General Techniques for Exploiting

Periodicity and Symmetries

XIAODONG TANG AND JOHN D. WHITCOMB*

(Received July 8, 2002)

ABSTRACT: General formulas for obtaining boundary conditions for micro-

KEY WORDS: boundary conditions, multipoint constraints, computational micro-

HEN TEXTILE COMPOSITES are applied to primary structural applications,

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: whit@aero.tamu.edu

Journal of COMPOSITE MATERIALS, Vol. 37, No. 13/2003 1167

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Figure 1. Typical textile material architectures.

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

D(2) D(1) +D(2)

D(2) D(1) +D(2)

Figure 2. Examples of periodic structures and periodicity vectors.

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR UNIT CELL

Structures with inhomogeneities at the microstructural scale are conventionally

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Uniform traction: T hri  n on @V 3a

Uniform strain: U hei  X on @V 3b

D-periodicity: U hei  X U X and U X U X D on @V 3c

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Symmetries in the Unit Cell and the Equivalent Subcells

Symmetry presented in unit cell can involve translation, rotation, reflection or

Figure 5. Equivalent subcells.

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COORDINATE SYSTEMS

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Using Equations (8) and (10), XA can be expressed in terms of XB and d.

Combining Equations (8) and (12) yields

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Substitution of this c into Equation (13) gives

STRAINS AND STRESSES

Using Equations (6a), (15), (6b), (16) and (9) gives:

eXA aT  b  eXB  bT  a

rXA aT  b  rXB  bT  a

Table 1. Non-zero translations between two equivalent subcells.

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Using Equation (21), Equation (19) becomes:

Plugging c into Equation (20) gives

Stress> h11 i h22 i h33 i h12 i h23 i h13 i

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Table 2. Load reversal factor c for different loading cases.

Combining Equations (6c) and (24) yields,

Pre-multiplying by aT and exploiting the fact that a 1 aT , Equation (25) becomes,

Using the definition of c from Equation (9) gives

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Using Equation (4) gives

By virtue of Equation (28), Equation (27) becomes

Combining Equations (30) and (31) gives

The next section describes how the vector R is determined.

DETERMINATION OF CONSTANT VECTOR R

Xox Xoy c  Xox Xoy 0

Downloaded from jcm.sagepub.com at WEST VIRGINA UNIV on April 17, 2015

Substituting Equation (33) into Equation (31) yields

Substituting Equation (35) into Equation (31) yields

U Xoy   c  U Xox U Xox   c  U Xoy R

Summary of the Formulas

Summarizing Equations (10), (11), (17), (18) and (32) gives

d Xox c  Xoy 37a

Table 3. Constant vector R for non-zero translation.

Uniform traction: T hri n on @V 3a

Uniform strain: U hei X on @V 3b

D-periodicity: U hei X U X and U X U X D on @V 3c

eXA aT b eXB bT a

rXA aT b rXB bT a

Pre-multiplying by aT and exploiting the fact that a1 aT , Equation (25) becomes,

Xox Xoy c Xox Xoy 0

U Xoy c U Xox U Xox c U Xoy R

d Xox c Xoy 37a

eXA c eXB cT 37d

rXA c rXB cT 37e

For the faces specified by XB fX1 , b, X3 g and XA c XB d fX1 a, 0, X3 g