DEVELOPMENTS IN

LAMINATED

N93-30857IMPACT DAMAGE MODELING VO'l_

COMPOSITE STRUCTURES 1

Ernest F. Dost, William B. Avery, and Gary D. Swanson /The Boeing Company, Seattle, Washington

and

Kuen Y. Lin

University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

Introduction

Damage tolerance is the most critical technical issue for composite fuselage structures studied inATCAS. The ATCAS program goals in damage tolerance include the characterization of impactdamage, models for impact damage simulation, and understanding the behavior of notches anddelaminations.

The characterization of potential impact damage states in fuselage is being accomplished through test.Configured structure will be impacted in different locations with a number of different impactorvariables. Thc damage states will be assessed both nondestructively and destructively.

An approach for predicting the post-impact compressive behavior of laminated composites has beendeveloped at Boeing over the past several years. Dr. K.Y. Lin and Dr. Z.Q. Chen at the University ofWashington will be enhancing and generalizing this approach to account for the different potentialdamage states and failure modes found in the test program described above.

Tension damage tolerance is currently being addressed through a test program and analysisdcvclopmcnt by Dr. F.K. Chang at Stanford University. Future work with Dr. P.A. Lagace and Dr.M.J. Graves at Massachusetts Institute of Technology will address dynamic fracture including pressureeffects.

Objectives

The objective of the work being presented is to understand both the impact damage resistance andresidual strength of laminated composite fuselage structure. An understanding of the different damagemechanisms which occur during an impact event will (a) support the selection of materials andstructural configurations used in different fuselage quadrants and (b) guide the development ofanalysis tools for predicting the residual strength of impacted laminates. Prediction of the damagestate along with a knowledge of post-impact response to applied loads will allow for "engineered"stacking sequences and structural configurations; intelligent decisions on repair requirements will alsoresult.

] This work is being funded by Contract NAS1-18889, under the direction of J.G. Davis and W.T.Freeman of NASA Langley Research Center.

721

Potential Impact Damage States

A schematic diagram classifying characteristic damage states (CDS) that have been observed in flatlaminates following low-velocity impact by spherical objects is shown. Planar and cross-sectionalviews of CDS are given in the figure. Three classes of CDS consisting of symmetric damage throughthe laminate cross section are shown in this figure. Damage size and type (fiber, matrix, or combined)depend on variables such as delamination resistance and impact energy. The most common damageobserved in experiments with a stacking sequence used for material screening tests (i.e.,[45,0,-45,90,]nS) was matrix damage [1, 2].Plate boundary conditions, laminate thickness, and material form are among the variables which maysuppress delamination, causing damage dominated by fiber failure. Fiber damage, when present, tendsto concentrate at the impact site. Matrix damage is also centered at the impact site, but tends to radiateaway from this point to a size dependent on delamination resistance. The most general classificationof symmetric damage involves both fiber and matrix failure.

Many factors can affect the CDS symmetry. Test observations have indicated thin laminates andheterogeneous stacking sequences tend to have unsymmetric CDS with damage concentrated oppositethe impacted surface. Very thick laminates are also expected to have unsymmetric damage, but withdamage concentrating closer to the impacted surface. Work by the current authors has indicated thatdelamination resistant materials have a stronger tendency for unsymmetric CDS than brittle materialstested with the same impact variables [3].

Impact Event

Impact Damage

.P_lamat_Yie,w_

Potential Impact Damage States

= f ( Material, Laminate, Structural, and Extrinsic Variables)

@ Fiber Damage Matrix Damage Fiber & Matrix Damage

Cross-sectional View

SymmetricDamage

UnsymmetricDamage

Ill I ===

722

Damage Modeling Applications

The panel shown below is a carbon fiber reinforced plastic (CFRP) wing gauge panel impacted on thestiffener cap. The impact damage located on this stiffener cap was nonvisible. An identical panel hadbeen impacted on the stiffener attachment flange edge. Both panels had significant reductions instrength from their undamaged strength. Analytical tools developed to predict the post-impactresponse of CFRP structure must have enough generality to account for different failure modes whichoccur during impact. The approaches presented take into account both stress redistribution andchanges in panel postbuckling response due to sublaminate buckling [ 1-3]. The prediction ofpost-impact response due to local fiber failures was presented by Cairns [4].

Impact Damage Discrete Modeling

Wing Structure with Integral StiffenersImpacted on Free Flange

.._ L-7

////

_LIII

'///,r/rji/j!!! _

Jtli'jcl#[[/3.. I II ," i I I I ! ;

'/L/1/i,'////rliil[llllll// I [F// t[ l r/1// f/l/I/ il

/Ill

'///,1#1t'lll

/fill

'/.ill I '

t..lll'/II-IllJ

IIIf'111

11111111111"//I////IIIlillllllll --

llllllllj/ --'ll/ll/ , l l --,/,,///M.--'I,'III/tl#_t # Ii117 --r1711111/ if# /illI /v t i11_

Global/Local Nonlinear Post-Buckling Analysis

723

Experimental Data ShowingPost-impact CompressionPerformance as a Function or Laminate Stacking Sequence

Compression after impact (CAI) data axe shown as a function of the drop weight impact energy (i.e.,drop height x drop weight). Data scatter for each type of laminate layup was small compared to thetotal range of results. This indicated that laminate stacking sequence is critical to CAI. Note that allother material, laminate, structural, and extrinsic variables were held constant for the tests. The oneexception was for the [452,902,-452,0212S laminate which had 32 plies instead of 24 plies. Despite theadditional thickness, this laminate did not have the highest CAI for a given impact energy, againindicating the importance of stacking sequence. These data illustrate that models to predict residualstrength of impacted laminates must include stacking sequence dependent CDS details [3].

Experimental Data Showing Post-Impact CompressionPerformance as a Function of Laminate Stacking Sequence

...... t_ 638 MPa50O

400_-_:_----- --_

_ + .... :...Q_

u) 300 -LUrrt--03UJrr

x

_< 200 LL

+

V

100O

A

V VX X v

z_ xv

+

&

Legend .[

[45,90,-45,0] 3S[452 ,902 ,-4F;2 ,02] 2S[453'903"453 '03] S

[3o,so,se,-so,-3o,o]2s

[3o,6o,9o,-3o,-6o,o] 2s[45,(90,-45)3 ,(0,45)2,0] S

[45,(0,-45)3,(_,45)2,90]Sl

Material: IM7/8551-7

Ply Thickness = 0.188 mm

Specimen Width = 10.2 cm

xv

A

v v

v

o

AA d A

+ L_

+ *

V

Note

I ....... Marks Undamaged Specimen Stability Limit forStacking Sequence With Associated SymbolI

22.6

(200)Drop Weight Impact Energy, J (in Ib)

!

45.2

(400)

724

SUBLAMINATE STABILITY/REDUCED STIFFNESS CAIMODELING

The CDS for a set of impact variables used in material screening tests was described in earlier work[ 1,2,5]. These tests use a [45,0,-45,90]nS laminate stacking sequence. As discussed earlier, any fiberdamage caused by impact tends to concentrate at the core of the CDS. A network of matrix cracks anddelaminations comprise the remainder of the CDS. Delaminations at each ply interface are connectedto those at neighboring ply interfaces by transverse matrix cracks. In a planar view, double-lobeddelaminations formed at each interface. These delaminations are wedge shaped due to the re/4difference in orientation of neighboring plies, breaking the CDS into octants. The ply orientationangles increase in n/4 increments from the impacted surface to the center. The stacking sequence andCDS is reflected at the center. Ply orientations decrease by n/4 with each ply from the center to theback side. This pattern causes a CDS with interconnected delaminations spiraling toward the center,reversing direction, and proceeding out toward the back side.

The CDS described above splits the laminate into separate sublaminates. These sublaminates areconnected in a fashion similar to a spiral staircase, but are conceptualized as circular disks to simplifythe analysis. The sublaminates near the outer surfaces vary in thickness from 2 to 5 plies. The next setof sublaminates are 4 plies in thickness with stacking sequence varying stepwise around the damage.This type of sublaminate can repeat several times, depending on the number of plies in the stackingsequence. Damage that occurs approaching both sides of the laminate midplane results in twodiscontinuous sublaminates and a symmetric core sublaminate that varies in thickness from 2 to 8plies. The total number of sublaminates for a [45,0,-45,90]n s laminate stacking sequence is (2n+1).This can be generalized for other repeating stacking sequences which increment by either decreasingor increasing ply angles if a sum of the difference between adjacent angles in the repeat element equalszero (i.e., [ct, lg,t_..... 0]n S where {13-o_}+ {t)-_ }+ ... + {ix-0 } = 0.0). Absolute values of each differenceshould also not exceed 90 .

The analysis method used for comparison with experiments is documented in [1,2]. In summary, fivebasic steps are followed in applying the method. First, the CDS is identified and simulated as asublaminate with ply stacking sequence and thickness representing an average of those appearing inthe real CDS. Second, a sublaminate stability analysis is performed using damage diameter as anindependent variable characterizing the planar size of the CDS. This is done using a modification tothe buckling analysis method described in [6]. The modification accounts for sublaminates withunsymmetric ply stacking sequences [ 1,2]. Third, effective reduced stiffness of the impact damagezone is calculated using results from sublaminate stability analysis. Fourth, the inplane stressconcentration associated with the reduced stiffness is determined. Finite elements are used for thisstep in order to account for specimen width/damage size interactions. Finally, a maximum strainfailure criteria is applied to predict CA1.

Note that steps 2 through 4 of the sublaminate stability analysis method should be modified for themost general CDS in which sublaminate parameters (e.g., diameter, thickness and stacking sequence)vary significantly through the laminate thickness. The more general model is currently beingdeveloped.

725

Experimental Determination of Sublaminate Bucklingand Strain Distribution of Impacted Laminates

Sublaminate stability and subsequent load redistribution of compressively loaded impact damagedcoupons are being examined experimentally. Moire interferometry was employed to measure bothin-plane and out-of-plane displacements of impacted coupons as a function of load. A micro-Moiregrid (600 lines/millimeter) used to measure inplane displacements was applied to the tool side whilethe other side used shadow Moire (60 lines/cm) to measure out-of-plane displacements. A typicalMoire fringe pattern displaying out-of-plane displacements for a [45,0,-45,90] 3S specimen with adamage diameter of 1.28" is shown. The in-plane u-displacements are shown next to it. Byexamination of the in-plane displacement contours, one can discem that an inplane strain concentrationoccurs near the damage area.

Out-of-Plane Displacement Contours In-Plane Displacement Contours

726

E Sublaminate Stability/Reduced Stiffness andxperimental Results for AS6/3501-6, (45,0,-45,90)ss

This figure shows good comparisons between predictions and experimental results using agraphite/epoxy material (AS6/3501-6). The undamaged compressive strength was measured as 501MPa (72.7 Ksi). Damage was created by both static indentation and drop weight impact. Finitespecimen width becomes important as damage diameters increase. As shown, the model accuratelypredicted CAI throughout the range studied. The CAI lower limit for infinitely wide coupons wouldcorrespond to the maximum stress concentration of three for a quasi-isotropic laminate (i.e., 167 MPa).

Sublaminate StabilityReduced Stiffness Predictionsand Experimental Results for AS6/3501-6, (45,0,-45,90) 5s

vv

_Jn