A comparison of analysis tools for predicting the inelastic cyclic response of cross-ply titanium matrix composites

1996-01-01
Kroupa, Joseph L.
Neu, Richard W.
Nicholas, Theodore
Çöker, Demirkan
Roberison, D. Dave
Mall, Shankar
Several micromechanical models that are currently being used for predicting the thermal and mechanical behavior of a cross-ply, [0/90], titanium matrix composite are evaluated. Six computer programs or methods are compared: (1) VISCOPLY; (2) METCAN; (3) FIDEP, an enhanced concentric cylinder model; (4) LISOL, a modified method of cells approach; (5) an elementary approach where the [90] ply is assumed to have the same properties as the matrix; and (6) a finite element method. Comparisons are made for the thermal residual stresses at room temperature resulting from processing, as well as for stresses and strains in two isothermal and two thermomechanical fatigue test cases. For each case, the laminate response of the models is compared to experimental behavior, while the responses of the constituents are compared among the models. The capability of each model to predict frequency effects, inelastic cyclic strain (hysteresis) behavior, and strain ratchetting with cycling is shown. The basis of formulation for the micromechanical models, the constitutive relationships used for the matrix and fiber, and the modeling technique of the [90] ply are all found to be important factors for determining the accurate behavior of the [0/90] composite.
Citation Formats
J. L. Kroupa, R. W. Neu, T. Nicholas, D. Çöker, D. D. Roberison, and S. Mall, “A comparison of analysis tools for predicting the inelastic cyclic response of cross-ply titanium matrix composites,” pp. 297–327, 1996, Accessed: 00, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=0030122921&origin=inward.