Characterization of Mode I and Mode II traction–separation laws for cohesive separation of uncured thermoset tows
Source abstract
Abstract
As part of an effort to predict wrinkling of carbon-fiber tows during automated fiber placement, the cohesive zone traction–separation relations for two carbon fiber epoxy prepreg tows are quantified for Mode I and Mode II loading using a rigid double cantilever beam (RDCB) specimen. An explicit expression for normal traction versus normal separation ($$\upsigma \hbox { vs }\updelta _\mathrm{n}$$) and tangential traction versus tangential separation $$(\tau \hbox { vs }\updelta _\mathrm{t})$$ are derived using static equilibrium equations for an RDCB considering a compressive zone ahead of the process zone. The traction–separation relationships are in term of quantities that can be measured using a full field measurement technique (StereoDIC). The baseline traction–separation relationships in this work are obtained using conditions representative of those experienced by an uncured tow undergoing automated fiber placement (AFP) onto a substrate of a similar material with layup temperature $$\hbox {T} = 40\,{\circ }\hbox {C}$$, pressure p = 1 MPa and contact time t = 1 s. The RDCB specimen is loaded in displacement control at a constant load line displacement rate of 0.3 mm/min. Speckle images for StereoDIC are captured using stereo vision systems equipped for capturing images of the RDCB specimen with a field of view of $$100\hbox { mm }\times 75\hbox { mm}$$. Analysis of the data obtained for Mode I and Mode II loading shows that the Mode I energy release rate $${\varvec{\mathscr {{G}}}}_\mathrm{I }= 120\hbox { J}/\hbox {m}2$$ and Mode II energy release rate $${\varvec{\mathscr {{G}}}}_\mathrm{{II}} = 255\hbox { J}/\hbox {m}2$$, with the maximum normal traction $${\varvec{\upsigma }}_\mathrm{\mathrm{max}} = 0.50\hbox { MPa}$$ and the maximum shear traction $${\varvec{\tau }}_\mathrm{\mathrm{max}} = 0.35\hbox { MPa}$$.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Structural Analysis and Optimization · Optical measurement and interference techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Abdi F, Gürdal Z, Huang D (2017) Certification modeling of composites fuselage, considering effect of defects from fiber placement manufacturing processes. In: 55th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virginia10.2514/6.2017-0691 ↗
2. AERO-Boeing 787 from the ground up. 2016. http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/articles/qtr_4_06/article_04_2.html. Accessed 23 May 2019
3. Bakhshi N, Hojjati M (2018) An experimental and simulative study on the defects appeared during tow steering in automated fiber placement. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 113:122–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESA.2018.07.03110.1016/J.COMPOSITESA.2018.07.031 ↗
4. Barenblatt GI (1962) The mathematical theory of equilibrium cracks in brittle fracture, pp 55–12910.1016/S0065-2156(08)70121-2 ↗
5. Beakou A, Cano M, Le Cam J-B, Verney V (2011) Modelling slit tape buckling during automated prepreg manufacturing: a local approach. Compos Struct 93:2628–2635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2011.04.03010.1016/j.compstruct.2011.04.030 ↗
6. Chai H (1992) Experimental evaluation of mixed-mode fracture in adhesive bonds. Exp Mech 32:296–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0232558110.1007/BF02325581 ↗
7. Chen X, Wu Z, Nie G, Weaver P (2018) Buckling analysis of variable angle tow composite plates with a through-the-width or an embedded rectangular delamination. Int J Solids Struct 138:166–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJSOLSTR.2018.01.01010.1016/J.IJSOLSTR.2018.01.010 ↗
8. Creton C, Ciccotti M (2016) Fracture and adhesion of soft materials: a review. Rep Prog Phys 79:046601. https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/79/4/04660110.1088/0034-4885/79/4/046601 ↗
9. Crossley RJ, Schubel PJ, Warrior NA (2012) The experimental determination of prepreg tack and dynamic stiffness. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 43:423–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESA.2011.10.01410.1016/J.COMPOSITESA.2011.10.014 ↗
10. Dastjerdi AK, Pagano M, Kaartinen MT et al (2012) Cohesive behavior of soft biological adhesives: experiments and modeling. Acta Biomater 8:3349–3359. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ACTBIO.2012.05.00510.1016/J.ACTBIO.2012.05.005 ↗
11. Dastjerdi AK, Tan E, Barthelat F (2013) Direct measurement of the cohesive law of adhesives using a rigid double cantilever beam technique. Exp Mech 53:1763–1772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-013-9755-010.1007/s11340-013-9755-0 ↗
12. Dugdale DS (1960) Yielding of steel sheets containing slits. J Mech Phys Solids 8:100–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(60)90013-210.1016/0022-5096(60)90013-2 ↗
13. Freed Y, Banks-Sills L (2008) A new cohesive zone model for mixed mode interface fracture in bimaterials. Eng Fract Mech 75:4583–4593. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2008.04.01310.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2008.04.013 ↗
14. Gorman JM, Thouless MD (2019) The use of digital-image correlation to investigate the cohesive zone in a double-cantilever beam, with comparisons to numerical and analytical models. J Mech Phys Solids 123:315–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JMPS.2018.08.01310.1016/J.JMPS.2018.08.013 ↗
15. Gowrishankar S, Mei H, Liechti KM, Huang R (2012) A comparison of direct and iterative methods for determining traction–separation relations. Int J Fract 177:109–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-012-9758-310.1007/s10704-012-9758-3 ↗
16. Gürdal Z, Olmedo R (1993) In-plane response of laminates with spatially varying fiber orientations—variable stiffness concept. AIAA J 31:751–758. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.1161310.2514/3.11613 ↗
17. Gürdal Z, Tatting BF, Wu CK (2008) Variable stiffness composite panels: effects of stiffness variation on the in-plane and buckling response. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 39:911–922. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESA.2007.11.01510.1016/J.COMPOSITESA.2007.11.015 ↗
18. Högberg JL, Sørensen BF, Stigh U (2007) Constitutive behaviour of mixed mode loaded adhesive layer. Int J Solids Struct 44:8335–8354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2007.06.01410.1016/j.ijsolstr.2007.06.014 ↗
19. Lakrout H, Sergot P, Creton C (1999) Direct observation of cavitation and fibrillation in a probe tack experiment on model acrylic pressure-sensitive-adhesives. J Adhesion 69:307–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/0021846990801723310.1080/00218469908017233 ↗
20. Liechti KM, Wu J-D (2001) Mixed-mode, time-dependent rubber/metal debonding. J Mech Phys Solids 49:1039–1072. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5096(00)00065-X10.1016/S0022-5096(00)00065-X ↗
21. Matveev MY, Schubel PJ, Long AC, Jones IA (2016) Understanding the buckling behaviour of steered tows in Automated Dry Fibre Placement (ADFP). Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 90:451–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.08.01410.1016/j.compositesa.2016.08.014 ↗
22. Mohammed IK, Charalambides MN, Kinloch AJ (2016) Modeling the effect of rate and geometry on peeling and tack of pressure-sensitive adhesives. J Nonnewton Fluid Mech 233:85–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JNNFM.2016.01.01610.1016/J.JNNFM.2016.01.016 ↗
23. Needleman A (1987) A continuum model for void nucleation by inclusion debonding. J Appl Mech 54:525. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.317306410.1115/1.3173064 ↗
24. Qureshi Z, Swait T, Scaife R, El-Dessouky HM (2014) In situ consolidation of thermoplastic prepreg tape using automated tape placement technology: potential and possibilities. Compos Part B Eng 66:255–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESB.2014.05.02510.1016/J.COMPOSITESB.2014.05.025 ↗
25. Rajan S, Sutton MA, Fuerte R, Kidane A (2017) Traction–separation relationship for polymer-modified bitumen under Mode I loading: double cantilever beam experiment with digital image correlation. Eng Fract Mech. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2017.12.03110.1016/J.ENGFRACMECH.2017.12.031 ↗
26. Rajan S, Sutton MA, Wehbe R et al (2019a) Measured surface deformation and strains in thin thermoplastic prepreg tapes steered along curved paths without adhesion using StereoDIC. Exp Mech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-019-00478-310.1007/s11340-019-00478-3 ↗
27. Rajan S, Sutton MA, Wehbe R et al (2019b) Experimental investigation of prepreg slit tape wrinkling during automated fiber placement process using StereoDIC. Compos Part B Eng 160:546–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESB.2018.12.01710.1016/J.COMPOSITESB.2018.12.017 ↗
28. Silva DFO, Campilho RDSG, Silva FJG, Carvalho UTF (2018) Application a direct/cohesive zone method for the evaluation of scarf adhesive joints. Appl Adhes Sci 6:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40563-018-0115-210.1186/s40563-018-0115-2 ↗
29. Sørensen BF, Jacobsen TK (2003) Determination of cohesive laws by the J integral approach. Eng Fract Mech 70:1841–1858. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7944(03)00127-910.1016/S0013-7944(03)00127-9 ↗
30. Sutton MA (2013) Computer vision-based, noncontacting deformation measurements in mechanics: a generational transformation. Appl Mech Rev 65:050000. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.402498410.1115/1.4024984 ↗
31. Sutton MA, McNeill SR, Helm JD, Chao YJ (2000) Advances in two-dimensional and three-dimensional computer vision. In: Rastogi PK (ed) Photomechanics. Springer, Berlin, pp 323–37210.1007/3-540-48800-6_10 ↗
32. Sutton MA, Orteu J-J, Schreier HW (2009) Image correlation for shape, motion and deformation measurements. Springer, Berlin. ISBN 978-0-387-78746-6
33. Sutton MA, Matta F, Rizos D et al (2017) Recent progress in digital image correlation: background and developments since the 2013 W M Murray Lecture. Exp Mech. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-016-0233-310.1007/s11340-016-0233-3 ↗
34. Thouless MD, Jensen HM (1992) Elastic fracture mechanics of the peel-test geometry. J Adhes 38:185–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/0021846920803045410.1080/00218469208030454 ↗
35. Thouless MD, Yang QD (2008) A parametric study of the peel test. Int J Adhes Adhes 28:176–184. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJADHADH.2007.06.00610.1016/J.IJADHADH.2007.06.006 ↗
36. Ungsuwarungsri T, Knauss WG (1987) The role of damage-softened material behavior in the fracture of composites and adhesives. Int J Fract 35:221–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0001559010.1007/BF00015590 ↗
37. Vossen BG, Schreurs PJG, van der Sluis O, Geers MGD (2014) Multi-scale modeling of delamination through fibrillation. J Mech Phys Solids 66:117–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JMPS.2014.01.00910.1016/J.JMPS.2014.01.009 ↗
38. Watson B, Liao C-H, Worswick MJ, Cronin DS (2018) Mode I traction-separation measured using rigid double cantilever beam applied to structural adhesive. J Adhes. https://doi.org/10.1080/00218464.2018.150266610.1080/00218464.2018.1502666 ↗
39. Wei Y, Hutchinson JW (1998) Interface strength, work of adhesion and plasticity in the peel test. Int J Fract 93:315–333. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:100754520031510.1023/A:1007545200315 ↗
40. Wu C, Gowrishankar S, Huang R, Liechti KM (2016) On determining mixed-mode traction-separation relations for interfaces. Int J Fract 202:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-016-0128-410.1007/s10704-016-0128-4 ↗
41. Wu Z, Raju G, Weaver PM (2018) Optimization of postbuckling behaviour of variable thickness composite panels with variable angle tows: towards “Buckle-Free” design concept. Int J Solids Struct 132–133:66–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJSOLSTR.2017.08.03710.1016/J.IJSOLSTR.2017.08.037 ↗
42. Zhu Y, Liechti KM, Ravi-Chandar K (2009) Direct extraction of rate-dependent traction–separation laws for polyurea/steel interfaces. Int J Solids Struct 46:31–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.08.01910.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.08.019 ↗