Experimental and numerical investigation of fatigue damage accumulation in composite laminates
Source abstract
Abstract
In this study, a three-dimensional finite element model was developed to predict the fatigue life of composite bolted joints. In this model, progressive damage theory was used. The fatigue characterization was based on Hashin’s failure criteria which recognize the failure modes. To decrease the number of unidirectional tests, the effects of load ratio were considered based on Kawai’s criterion. A modified form of Miner’s rule was proposed to calculate the damage parameter. This equation corrected the effects of the fatigue failure cycles and included the effects of different load ratios. Also, this model could decrease the overestimation of the fatigue life predictions. All of the formulations were combined and used in a step-by-step solution. In this respect, a new iterative algorithm was developed so that at each step of solution, the material properties of all failed layers of each element were reduced according to the failure mode and sudden degradation rules. The estimated fatigue life was compared to the experimental data, and an excellent correlation between the results was observed. This model could monitor the damage propagation in fabricated joints.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Textile materials and evaluations · Fatigue and fracture mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Tabriz, Iran
References (25)
Show source-provided references
1. ASTM D3039 (2000) Standard test method for tensile properties of polymer matrix composite materials.
2. Awerbuch J and Hahn HT (1981) Off-axis fatigue of graphite/epoxy composite. In: Lauraitis KN (ed.) Fatigue of Fibrous Composite Materials, ASTM STP 723. Philadelphia: ASTM, pp. 243–273.10.1520/STP27624S ↗
3. 10.1007/BF0232629210.1007/BF02326292 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2008.06.00310.1016/j.compstruct.2008.06.003 ↗
5. 10.1520/STP27746S10.1520/STP27746S ↗
6. 10.1177/00219983910250010110.1177/002199839102500101 ↗
7. Hamed AF · ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences · 2008 · 4 · 76
8. Harris B · 2003
9. 10.1177/00219983730070040410.1177/002199837300700404 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.05.01110.1016/j.compstruct.2009.05.011 ↗
11. 10.1016/S0263-8223(98)00103-210.1016/S0263-8223(98)00103-2 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.01.00410.1016/j.compositesa.2004.01.004 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2005.02.00410.1016/j.compstruct.2005.02.004 ↗
14. 10.1177/00219983950290050710.1177/002199839502900507 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2004.09.02310.1016/j.compstruct.2004.09.023 ↗
16. 10.1201/978142000598110.1201/9781420005981 ↗
17. 10.1016/S0263-8223(02)00126-510.1016/S0263-8223(02)00126-5 ↗
18. MIL-STD-1312-21 (1967) Fastener test methods.
19. Mischke CR · 2008
20. 10.1016/j.matdes.2008.09.01210.1016/j.matdes.2008.09.012 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2012.11.00510.1016/j.ijfatigue.2012.11.005 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2012.01.01610.1016/j.compstruct.2012.01.016 ↗
23. 10.1016/S0142-1123(96)00074-610.1016/S0142-1123(96)00074-6 ↗
24. 10.1520/STP27978S10.1520/STP27978S ↗
25. 10.1007/978-1-84996-181-310.1007/978-1-84996-181-3 ↗