A Machine Learning Boosted Data Reduction Methodology for Translaminar Fracture of Structural Composites
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This work explored a machine learning (ML) algorithm as a fast data reduction method for translaminar fracture energy in composite laminates. The method was validated with translaminar fracture tests on compact tension (CT) specimens on AS4/8552 and IM7/8552 cross-ply lay-ups. Experimental fracture energy and R-curves for both materials were determined using the most common data reduction methods, such as the compliance calibration (CC), the area (AM) and the Irwin relationship (IM). Our new data reduction method uses a surrogate model based on an artificial neural network (ANN) trained with synthetic data generated with the cohesive crack finite element model. Such a surrogate model maps the cohesive properties with the corresponding load–displacement, crack-displacement and energy-displacement curves with interrogation times in the order of 20 ms and relative errors in the load–displacement and crack growth less than 2%. Such performance enabled its encapsulation to approximate the inverse problem to infer the cohesive parameters with the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE) directly from the experimental load–displacement and crack-displacement curves. The results demonstrated the ability of the model to deliver cohesive parameter inference directly from the macroscopic tests carried out at the laboratory level.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Fatigue and fracture mechanics · Mechanical stress and fatigue analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. Herakovich, C.T.: On the relationship between engineering properties and delamination of composite materials. J. Compos. Mater. 15(4), 336–348 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1177/00219983810150040410.1177/002199838101500404 ↗
2. Camanho, P.: Numerical simulation of delamination growth in composite materials. NASA technical paper, NASA langley research center, (2001) https://books.google.es/books?id=Mf8UAQAAIAAJ
3. Camanho, P.P., Davila, C.G., de Moura, M.F.: Numerical simulation of mixedmode progressive delamination in composite materials. J. Compos. Mater. 37(16), 1415–1438 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1177/002199830303450510.1177/0021998303034505 ↗
4. González, C., LLorca, J.: Multiscale modeling of fracture in fiber-reinforced composites. Acta Mater. 54(16), 4171–4181 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2006.05.00710.1016/j.actamat.2006.05.007 ↗
5. Laffan, M., Pinho, S., Robinson, P., et al.: Translaminar fracture toughness testing of composites: A review. Polym. Testing 31(3), 481–489 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2012.01.002. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014294181200004910.1016/j.polymertesting.2012.01.002 ↗
6. Monticeli, F.M., Fuga, F.R., Donadon, M.V.: A systematic review on translaminar fracture damage propagation in fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Thin-Walled Structures 187(110), 742 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2023.110742. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026382312300220310.1016/j.tws.2023.110742 ↗
7. Abdullah, S.S., Iannucci, L., Greenhalgh, E.: On the translaminar fracture toughness of vectran/epoxy composite material. Compos. Struct. 202, 566–577 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.03.004. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263822318307190, special issue dedicated to Ian Marshall10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.03.004 ↗
8. Mocerino, D., Bruno, M., Monclus, M., et al.: Characterization of the interface in a fiber-reinforced polymer composite using a novel single-fiber microcantilever test. Compos. Sci. Technol. 242(110), 164 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2023.110164. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026635382300257910.1016/j.compscitech.2023.110164 ↗
9. Brunner, A.: Experimental aspects of mode i and mode ii fracture toughness testing of fibre-reinforced polymer-matrix composites. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 185(2), 161–172 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-7825(99)00257-1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004578259900257110.1016/S0045-7825(99)00257-1 ↗
10. Boyina, D., Banerjee, A., Velmurugan, R.: Mixed-mode translaminar fracture of plain-weave composites. Compos. B Eng. 60, 21–28 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.052. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135983681300782810.1016/j.compositesb.2013.12.052 ↗
11. Sela, N., Ishai, O.: Interlaminar fracture toughness and toughening of laminated composite materials: a review. Composites 20(5), 423–435 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-4361(89)90211-5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/001043618990211510.1016/0010-4361(89)90211-5 ↗
12. Chen, L., Sankar, B., Ifju, P.: A new mode i fracture test for composites with translaminar reinforcements. Compos. Sci. Technol. 62(10), 1407–1414 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00096-9. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026635380200096910.1016/S0266-3538(02)00096-9 ↗
13. de Moura, M., Campilho, R., Amaro, A., et al.: Interlaminar and intralaminar fracture characterization of composites under mode i loading. Compos. Struct. 92(1), 144–149 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2009.07.012. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026382230900247510.1016/j.compstruct.2009.07.012 ↗
14. Garg, A.C.: Intralaminar and interlaminar fracture in graphite/epoxy laminates. Eng. Fract. Mech. 23(4), 719–733 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-7944(86)90118-910.1016/0013-7944(86)90118-9 ↗
15. Pinho, S.T., Robinson, P., Iannucci, L.: Fracture toughness of the tensile and compressive fibre failure modes in laminated composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 66(13), 2069–2079 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.12.023. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026635380600011X10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.12.023 ↗
16. John, M., Slepetz, L.C.: Fracture of composite compact tension specimens. Tech. rep., Army Materials and Mechanics Research Center Watertown MA. (1975)10.1520/STP34796S ↗
17. Ortega, A., Maimı, P., Gonzalez, E., et al.: Characterization of the translaminar fracture cohesive law. Compos. A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 91, 501–509 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.01.019. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1359835X16000348, compTest 201510.1016/j.compositesa.2016.01.019 ↗
18. Furtado, C., Arteiro, A., Linde, P., et al.: Is there a ply thickness effect on the mode i intralaminar fracture toughness of composite laminates? Theoret. Appl. Fract. Mech. 107(102), 473 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2020.10247310.1016/j.tafmec.2020.102473 ↗
19. Sun, L., Ma, D., Wang, L., et al.: Determining indentation fracture toughness of ceramics by finite element method using virtual crack closure technique. Eng. Fract. Mech. 197, 151–159 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.05.001. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001379441830083310.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.05.001 ↗
20. Jandejsek, I., Gajdoś, L., Sperl, M., et al.: Analysis of standard fracture toughness test based on digital image correlation data. Eng. Fract. Mech. 182, 607–620 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.05.045. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001379441730579910.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.05.045 ↗
21. Begum, Y., Bharath, K.N., Doddamani, S., et al.: Optimization of process parameters of fracture toughness using simulation technique considering aluminum–graphite composites. Trans. Indian Inst. Met. 73(12), 3095–3103 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12666-020-02113-510.1007/s12666-020-02113-5 ↗
22. Fernández-León, J., Keramati, K., Garoz, D., et al.: A machine learning strategy for race-tracking detection during manufacturing of composites by liquid moulding. Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation 11(2), 296–311 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40192-022-00263-610.1007/s40192-022-00263-6 ↗
23. Liu, X., Tian, S., Tao, F., et al.: How machine learning can help the design and analysis of composite materials and structures? 2010.09438 (2020)10.1115/1.0004762V ↗
24. Liu, X., Athanasiou, C.E., Padture, N.P., et al.: A machine learning approach to fracture mechanics problems. Acta Mater. 190, 105–112 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2020.03.016. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135964542030203210.1016/j.actamat.2020.03.016 ↗
25. Mahmoodzadeh, A., Fakhri, D., Hussein Mohammed, A., et al.: Estimat ing the effective fracture toughness of a variety of materials using several machine learning models. Eng. Fract. Mech. 286(109), 321 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2023.109321. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001379442300279510.1016/j.engfracmech.2023.109321 ↗
26. Kazemi-Khasragh, E., Fernandez Blazquez, J.P., Garoz Gomez, D., et al.: Facilitating polymer property prediction with machine learning and group interaction modelling methods. Int. J. Solids Struct. 286–287(112), 547 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2023.112547. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002076832300444410.1016/j.ijsolstr.2023.112547 ↗
27. Kazemi-Khasragh E, Gonzaleza C, Haranczyk M (2024) Toward diverse polymer property prediction using transfer learning. 2401.0913910.1016/j.commatsci.2024.113206 ↗
28. Hexcel (2024) Hextow im7 carbon fibre. https://www.hexcel.com/user_area/content_media/raw/IM7_HexTow_DataSheet.pdf4
29. Hexcel (2024) Hextow as4 carbon fibre. https://www.hexcel.com/user_area/content_media/raw/AS4A_HexTow_DataSheet.pdf
30. Hexcel (2024) Hexcel 8552 epoxy resin. https://www.hexcel.com/user_area/content_media/raw/HexPly_8552_eu_DataSheet(1).pdf
31. Cowley, K.D., Beaumont, P.W.: The interlaminar and intralaminar fracture toughness of carbon-fibre/polymer composites: The effect of temperature. Compos. Sci. Technol. 57(11), 1433–1444 (1997)10.1016/S0266-3538(97)00047-X ↗
32. Czabaj, M.W., Ratcliffe, J.G.: Comparison of intralaminar and interlaminar mode I fracture toughnesses of a unidirectional IM7/8552 carbon/epoxy composite. Compos. Sci. Technol. 89, 15–23 (2013)10.1016/j.compscitech.2013.09.008 ↗
33. Haldar, S., Lopes, C.S., Gonzalez, C.: Interlaminar and intralaminar fracture behavior of carbon fiber reinforced polymer composites. In: Key Engineering, pp. 325–328. Trans Tech Publ, Materials (2016)
34. Jose, S., Kumar, R.R., Jana, M., et al.: Intralaminar fracture toughness of a cross-ply laminate and its constituent sub-laminates. Compos. Sci. Technol. 61(8), 1115–1122 (2001)10.1016/S0266-3538(01)00011-2 ↗
35. Slepetz, J. M., Carlson, L.: Fracture of composite compact tension specimens. In: Fracture Mechanics of Composites. ASTM International (1975)10.1520/STP34796S ↗
36. Truss, R., Hine, P., Duckett, R.: Interlaminar and intralaminar fracture toughness of uniaxial continuous and discontinuous carbon fibre/epoxy composites. Compos. A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 28(7), 627–636 (1997)10.1016/S1359-835X(97)00019-5 ↗
37. Dávila, C.G., Rose, C.A., Camanho, P.P.: A procedure for superposing linear 549 cohesive laws to represent multiple damage mechanisms in the fracture of 550 composites Int. J. Fract. 158(2), 211–223 (2009)10.1007/s10704-009-9366-z ↗
38. Garcìa-Carpintero, A., van den Beuken, B., Haldar, S., et al.: Fracture behaviour of triaxial braided composites and its simulation using a multi-material shell modelling approach. Eng. Fract. Mech. 188(1391), 268–286 (2017)
39. Xu, X., Sun, X., Wisnom, M.R.: Initial r-curves for trans-laminar fracture of quasi-isotropic carbon/epoxy laminates from specimens with increasing size. Compos. Sci. Technol. 216(109), 077 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2021.109077. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026635382100433410.1016/j.compscitech.2021.109077 ↗
40. Bergan AC, Dávila CG (2015) Cohesive laws for analysing through-crack propagation in cross-ply laminates. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Composite Materials (ICCM, Copenhagen, 19–24th July 2015)
41. Herráez, M., Gonzalez, C., Lopes, C.: A numerical framework to analyze fracture in composite materials: From r-curves to homogenized softening laws. Int. J. Solids Struct. 134, 216–228 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.10.03110.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.10.031 ↗
42. Lu, N., Cheng, J., Cheng, Y.: A dynamic model of bridging fiber pull-out of composite materials. Mech. Res. Commun. 32(1), 1–14 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechrescom.2003.11.001. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009364130300144710.1016/j.mechrescom.2003.11.001 ↗
43. Khan, R.: Fiber bridging in composite laminates: A literature review. Compos. Struct. 229(111), 418 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111418. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026382231834605110.1016/j.compstruct.2019.111418 ↗
44. Baudin, M., Christopoulou, M., Jean-Marc, Martinez, Y.: PyDOE, The experimental design package for Python. (2019) https://pythonhosted.org/pyDOE/
45. Chollet F, et al.: KERAS. (2015) https://github.com/fchollet/keras
46. Zeiler MD (2012) Adadelta: An adaptive learning rate method. ArXiv abs/1212.5701