Application of the strain invariant failure theory (SIFT) to metals and fiber–polymer composites
Source abstract
Abstract
The strain invariant failure theory (SIFT) model, developed to predict the onset of irreversible damage of fiber–polymer composite laminates, may be also applied to metals. Indeed, it can be applied to all solid materials. Two initial failure mechanisms are considered – distortion and dilatation. The author's experiences are confined to the structures of transport aircraft; phase changes in metals and self-destruction of laminates during curing are not covered. Doing so would need additional material properties, and probably a different failure theory. SIFT does not cover environmental attack on the interface between fibers and resin; it covers only cohesive failures within the fibers or resin, or within a homogeneous piece of metal. In the SIFT model, each damage mechanism is characterized by its own critical value of a strain invariant. Each mechanism dominates its own portion of the strain domain; there is no interaction between them. Application of SIFT to metals is explained first. Fiber–polymer composites contain two discrete constituents; each material must be characterized independently by its own two invariants. This is why fiber–polymer composites need four invariants whereas metals require only two. There is no such thing as a composite material, only composites of materials. The “composite materials” must not be modeled as homogeneous anisotropic solids because it is then not even possible to differentiate between fiber and matrix failures. The SIFT model uses measured material properties; it does not require that half of them be arbitrarily replaced by unmeasurable properties to fit laminate test data, as so many earlier composite failure criteria have. The biggest difference in using SIFT for metals and fiber-reinforced materials is internal residual thermal and moisture absorption stresses created by the gross dissimilarity in properties between embedded fibers and thermoset resin matrices. These residual stresses consume so much of the strength of unreinforced polymers for typical thermoset resins cured at high temperature, like epoxies, that little strength is available to resist mechanical loads. (Thermoplastic polymers suffer far less in this regard.) The paper explains how SIFT is used via worked examples, which demonstrate the kind of detailed information that SIFT analyses can generate.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Epoxy Resin Curing Processes · Fiber-reinforced polymer composites
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. L.J. Hart-Smith,What the text books won’t teach you about interactive composite failure criteria, Boeing Paper MDC 99K0049B, in ASTM STP 1383,Composite Structures, Theory and Practice, ASTM, 2000, pp.413–436.10.1520/STP14523S ↗
2. Waddoups ME · 1968 · 254
3. 10.1016/0010-4361(93)90273-B10.1016/0010-4361(93)90273-B ↗
4. L.J. Hart-Smith, Industry's need for, and the benefits from, physics-based fiber–polymer composite failure criteria, Boeing Paper PWDM02-0161, inProceedings of the 10th US-Japan Conference on Composite Materials Conference, F.K. Chang, ed., DEStech Publications, Pennsylvania, 2002, pp.1019–1043.
5. J.H. Gosse,Strain invariant failure criteria for fiber-reinforced polymeric composite materials, paper presented at13th ICCM Conference, Beijing, China, 2001, paper ID 1687.10.2514/6.2001-1184 ↗
6. 10.1177/00219983710050010610.1177/002199837100500106 ↗
7. 10.1177/00219983730070040410.1177/002199837300700404 ↗
8. 10.1016/0263-8223(93)90146-H10.1016/0263-8223(93)90146-H ↗
9. 10.1016/S0266-3538(96)00141-810.1016/S0266-3538(96)00141-8 ↗
10. 10.1016/S0266-3538(01)00205-610.1016/S0266-3538(01)00205-6 ↗
11. Tsai SW · 1988
12. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.10.02210.1016/j.compscitech.2004.10.022 ↗
13. L.J. Hart-Smith, Generation of higher composite material allowables using improved test coupons, Douglas Paper 8557, inProceedings of 36th International SAMPE Symposium and Exhibition, San Diego, California, April 15–18, Society for the Advancement of Material and Process Engineering (SAMPE), 1991, pp.1029–1044; modified and republished in Aerospace Compos. Mater., 3(3) (1991), pp.26–30, 58; 3(4) (1991) pp.13–16, 18.
14. Love AEH · 1927
15. 10.1007/BF0054038910.1007/BF00540389 ↗
16. 10.1007/BF0111229810.1007/BF01112298 ↗
17. L.J. Hart-Smith,Fibrous composite laminate strength predictions demystified, Douglas Paper 8430, inProceedings of 11th European SAMPE Meeting, H.L. Hornfeld, ed., SAMPE European Chapter, Niederglatt, Switzerland, 1990, pp.365–380.
18. L.J. Hart-Smith,Design and analysis of bolted and riveted joints in fibrous composite structures, Douglas Paper 7739, inJoining Fiber-Reinforced Plastics, F.L. Matthews, ed., Elsevier Applied Science, 1987, pp.227–269.
19. 10.1098/rsta.1980.006010.1098/rsta.1980.0060 ↗
20. Timoshenko SP · 1983
21. Hill, R. 1971.The Mathematical Theory of Plasticity, 317–340. London: Oxford University Press.
22. L.J. Hart-Smith,The first fair dinkum macro-level fibrous composite failure criteria, McDonnell Douglas Paper MDC 97K0009, inProceedings 11th ICCM Conference, Vol. I, Woodhead Publishing, 1997, pp.I-52–I-87.
23. Jones RM · 1975
24. Puck A · Kuntstoffe · 1960 · 59 · 780
25. Hart-Smith LJ · SAWE J. (Winter) · 1992 · 29
26. 10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00092-110.1016/S0266-3538(02)00092-1 ↗
27. R.M. Christensen, inProceedings of the 20th International Congress of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 27 August–2 September 2000, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001, pp.25–40.10.1007/0-306-46956-1_2 ↗
28. 10.1016/S0266-3538(98)00082-710.1016/S0266-3538(98)00082-7 ↗
29. 10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00093-310.1016/S0266-3538(02)00093-3 ↗