FeResPost Web Site                     FeResPost Online User Manual

II.1.10 Failure theories

When stresses and strains have been calculated in plies (or some of the plies), the failure indices can be estimated too. The different failure theories proposed in FeResPost, and how they can be used to estimate laminate reserve factors, are presented below.

In this section, integer subscripts are conventionally used to denote that tensor components are given in ply axes and Roman subscripts to indicate principal components. Often, only in-plane components of ply stress or strain tensors are used to estimate criteria. Then, the principal components are estimated as follows:

σI,II = 1 2 (σ11 + σ22) ±1 4 (σ11 + σ22) 2 + τ122.

In the rest of this section all the allowables used in failure criteria have positive values. Even the compressive allowables are ≥ 0.

Table II.1.2 summarizes the criteria available in FeResPost. For each criterion, the Table provides:

1.

A String corresponding to the argument that identifies the selected criterion when a derived value is requested.

2.

A description of the type of material (metallic or isotropic, unidirectional tape, fabric,...).

3.

A reference to the section in which the criterion is presented and discussed.

4.

Specification of whether an equivalent stress for this criterion can be derived in FeResPost or not.

5.

Specification of whether a failure index can be derived with FeResPost. Generally, the failure index is calculated according to the “usual” definition in the literature. When no such standard failure index definition is available, a default definition is provided which corresponds to the inverse of the reserve factor calculated with FoS = 1.

6.

Specification of whether a reserve factor and/or strength ratio can be calculated with FeResPost:


Table II.1.2: Summary of failure criteria available in FeResPost and information on what can be calculated.
Criterion Material Section Derived
Name Type Number Stress F.I.R.F. and S. R.
“Tresca2D” metallic II.1.10.1 yes yes yes
“VonMises2D” metallic II.1.10.2 yes yes yes
“VonMises3D” metallic II.1.10.3 yes yes yes
“MaxStress” tape or fabricII.1.10.4 no yes yes
“MaxStress3D” tape or fabricII.1.10.5 no yes yes
“MaxStrain” tape or fabricII.1.10.6 no yes yes
“MaxStrain3D” tape or fabricII.1.10.7 no yes yes
“CombStrain2D” tape or fabricII.1.10.8 no yes yes
“MaxTotalStrain” tape or fabricII.1.10.6 no yes yes
“MaxTotalStrain3D” tape or fabricII.1.10.7 no yes yes
“CombTotalStrain2D”tape or fabricII.1.10.8 no yes yes
“TsaiHill” fabric II.1.10.9 no yes yes
“TsaiHill_b” fabric II.1.10.10 no yes yes
“TsaiHill_c” fabric II.1.10.11 no yes yes
“TsaiHill3D” fabric II.1.10.12 no yes yes
“TsaiHill3D_b” fabric II.1.10.13 no yes yes
“TsaiWu” fabric II.1.10.14 no yes yes
“TsaiWu3D” fabric II.1.10.15 no yes yes
“Hoffman” fabric II.1.10.16 no yes yes
“Puck” tape II.1.10.17 no yes yes
“Puck_b” tape II.1.10.18 no yes yes
“Puck_c” tape II.1.10.19 no yes yes
“Hashin” tape II.1.10.20 no yes yes
“Hashin_b” tape II.1.10.20 no yes yes
“Hashin_c” tape II.1.10.20 no yes yes
“Hashin3D” tape II.1.10.21 no yes yes
“Hashin3D_b” tape II.1.10.21 no yes yes
“Hashin3D_c” tape II.1.10.21 no yes yes
“YamadaSun” tape II.1.10.22 no yes yes
“YamadaSun_b” fabric II.1.10.23 no yes yes
“Honey3D” honeycomb II.1.10.24 no yes yes
“HoneyShear” honeycomb II.1.10.25 no yes yes
“HoneyShear_b” honeycomb II.1.10.26 yes yes yes
“Ilss” all II.1.10.27 yes yes yes
“Ilss_b” all II.1.10.27 yes yes yes

Note that many of the criteria presented here are particular cases of a general quadratic criterion that requires first the calculation of a failure index:

f = F11σ112 + F 22σ222 + F 33σ332 + F 44σ232 + F 55σ312 + F 66σ122 + 2F12σ11σ22 + 2F23σ22σ33 + 2F31σ33σ11 + F1σ11 + F2σ22 + F3σ33 + F4σ23 + F5σ31 + F6σ12, (II.1.115)

A test is then performed on the calculated value:

f ≤ 1.

This means that no failure occurs if f ≤ 1 (ply or laminate passes the failure test) and failure occurs if f > 1.

Several failure theories discussed below are obtained by expressing the coefficients in the expressions above by expressions depending on the material allowables. Also for the Tsai-Wu criteria discussed in section II.1.10.14 and II.1.10.15, the parameters Fij are directly characterized for the material.

Note that the 2D criteria defined in this section often correspond to the failure criteria defined in ESAComp.


Table II.1.3: Correspondence between the ESAComp failure criteria and the failure criteria defined in CLA module.
ESAComp failure criterion CLA criterion ID section
“Maximum Shear Stress (Tresca)” “Tresca2D” II.1.10.1
“Von Mises” “VonMises2D” II.1.10.2
“Maximum Strain” (in ply axes) “MaxStrain” II.1.10.6
“Maximum Stress” (in ply axes) “MaxStress” II.1.10.4
“Tsai-Wu” “TsaiWu” II.1.10.14
“Tsai-Hill” “TsaiHill” II.1.10.9
“Hoffman” “Hoffman” II.1.10.16
“Simple Puck” “Puck” II.1.10.17
“Modified Puck” “Puck_b” II.1.10.17
“Hashin” “Hashin” II.1.10.20

II.1.10.1 Tresca criterion (2D)
II.1.10.2 Von Mises criterion (2D)
II.1.10.3 Von Mises criterion (3D)
II.1.10.4 Maximum stress criterion
II.1.10.5 Maximum stress criterion (3D)
II.1.10.6 Maximum strain criteria (2D)
II.1.10.7 Maximum strain criterion (3D)
II.1.10.8 Combined strain criterion (2D)
II.1.10.9 Tsai-Hill criterion
II.1.10.10 Tsai-Hill criterion (version b)
II.1.10.11 Tsai-Hill criterion (version c)
II.1.10.12 Tsai-Hill criterion (3D)
II.1.10.13 Tsai-Hill criterion (3D version b)
II.1.10.14 Tsai-Wu criterion
II.1.10.15 Tsai-Wu criterion (3D)
II.1.10.16 Hoffman criterion
II.1.10.17 Puck criterion
II.1.10.18 Puck “b” criterion
II.1.10.19 Puck “c” criterion
II.1.10.20 Hashin criteria
II.1.10.21 Hashin criteria (3D)
II.1.10.22 Yamada-Sun criterion
II.1.10.23 Yamada-Sun criterion (version b)
II.1.10.24 3D honeycomb criterion
II.1.10.25 Honeycomb shear criterion
II.1.10.26 Honeycomb simplified shear criterion
II.1.10.27 Inter-laminar shear criterion