journal article·2020-01

Characterization of Mode I and Mode II traction–separation laws for cohesive separation of uncured thermoset tows

Sreehari Rajan, Michael A. Sutton, William McMakin, Elsa Compton, Addis Kidane, Zafer Gurdal, Roudy Wehbe, Yasmeen Farzana

International Journal of Fracture· Volume 221· Issue 1
Publisher page

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 ↗