Composites Science and Technology 58 (1998) 1209±1223

# 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Printed in Great Britain
PII: S0266-3538(97)00191-7 0266-3538/98 $Ðsee front matter

THE STRENGTH OF MULTILAYERED COMPOSITES UNDER

A PLANE-STRESS STATE

Peter A. Zinoviev,a* Sergei V. Grigoriev,a Olga V. Lebedevab & Ludmilla P. Tairovaa

a
Bauman's Moscow State Technical University, 2nd Baumanskaya Street 5, Moscow, 107005 Russia
b
Institute of Composite Technologies, Orevo, Dmitrovskii raion, Moskovskaya obl., 141814 Russia

(Received 15 May 1996; revised 30 April 1997; accepted 12 September 1997)

Abstract F+2, Fÿ2 ultimate transverse tensile and compres-

The paper presents a model that describes the deforma- sive stresses in the ply
tion and failure processes of multilayered hybrid compo- F12 ultimate shear stress in the ply
sites in a state of plane stress. The model, which can be [G] sti€ness matrix of the laminate
considered as a structural±phenomenological one, is a [G0 ] sti€ness matrix of the ply
coupled deformation/failure model (DFM). According to H thickness of the laminate
the model, except for two common states of the composite h relative thickness of the ply
laminateÐthe initial state (monolithic material) and the [T1 ] transformation matrix
®nal state (completely broken material)Ðthere exists a 12 major Poisson's ratio of the ply
group of intermediate states, namely the material with x; y coordinate axes of a composite laminate
cracks. Within the group, we can distinguish two further 1,2 coordinate axes of a unidirectional ply
sub-groups of material states: (1) with open cracks and
(2) with closed cracks. The total number of states equals Greek symbols
eight (four in the `open-crack' group). The algorithm of "x , "y ,
xy average strains in the laminate along the
successive stress loading is a natural one for the model. x,y axes and under shear
The low shear modulus of modern polymeric composites "1 , "2 , 12 longitudinal, transverse and shear strains
often results in signi®cant changes in the initial reinforc- in the unidirectional ply
ing angles of the plies as a consequence of shear strains, "2 modi®ed transverse strain in the ply
which is why the model considers the e€ects of the `struc- x , y , xy average stresses in the laminate along the
tural non-linearity' of the laminate. The algorithm is x,y axes and under shear
capable of predicting both stress/strain curves and failure 1 , 2 , 12 longitudinal, transverse and shear stresses
envelopes for multilayered composites under a variety of in the unidirectional ply
loading conditions. Theoretical predictions are presented 2 , 12

largest algebraic values of transverse and
for a number of cases provided by the organisers of the shear stresses in the ply during its defor-
failure exercise. # 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights mation
reserved
Keywords: composite laminates, failure, theoretical 1 INTRODUCTION
model, stress/strain curves, failure envelopes, predicted
strength The strength of laminated composites has been the
object of much attention of scientists for a considerable
NOMENCLATURE time. A part of the literature familiar to the authors,
which is directly related to the subject of the present
Ex , Ey e€ective moduli of elasticity (Young's paper, is given in the References. This is a central prob-
moduli) of the laminate in the x and y axes lem, interesting to both academic scientists and practical
E1 , E2 , G12 longitudinal, transverse and shear moduli engineers.
of the ply Scientists felt, time and again, that the problem had
E~ 2 , G~ 12 unloading transverse and shear moduli of been completely solved. We recall, for example, a ten-
the ply sor-polynomial criterion proposed by Goldenblat and
F+1, Fÿ1 ultimate longitudinal tensile and compres- Kopnov,1 which has received wide recognition, followed
sive stresses in the ply by the work by Tsai and Wu.2 There is no need now to
analyze the ¯aws in this very signi®cant step in describing
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. the strength of anisotropic solids; however, satisfaction
1209
1210 P. A. Zinoviev et al.
with e€orts to describe strength phenomenologically
with tensor polynomials of high order has long evapo-
rated, and the problem remains unsolved. However,
enthusiasts still hope to ®nd a universal approach.
Failure processes in real composite are of a great
variety, which is why papers describing the strengths of
particular types of composite are of special interest. The
present paper deals with a model for describing the
deformation and failure processes of multilayered
hybrid composites under a plane stress state. The model
was ®rst proposed by Zinoviev and Tarakanov:3 it was
then carefully checked experimentally,4 and has subse-
quently been further improved by the authors.5±7
2 WHAT SHOULD A MODEL DESCRIBE?
The behaviour of modern composites under a variety of
loading conditions has been much investigated. Some of
work is listed below.8±14 In our opinion, the available
results (i.e. primarily experimental results) can be con-
sidered as being neither exhaustive nor sucient for an
adequate theoretical description. Nevertheless, the main
features of composites under load are well determined.
While not claiming exhaustiveness, we list some of these
features.
Beginning from a very low load level, irreversible
changes arise and grow in modern composites: cracks
appear in the matrix, imperfections in the ®bre/matrix
interface grow, individual ®bres break, etc. These pro-
cesses signi®cantly govern not only the nature of the
deformation process in the composite, but they are also
responsible for the process commonly termed ®nal fail-
ure. It is evident that conventional theories which con-
sider two completely independent successive processes,
deformation and failure, (e.g. the linear theory of the
elastic behaviour of composites plus a tensor±poly-
nomial criterion of initial/®nal failure) do not have ser-
ious hope of success. Coupled deformation/failure
models (DFMs) seem to o€er better proposals.
Figure 1 schematically shows a typical stress/strain
curve for an angle-ply composite under loading,
unloading and repeated loading. The ®gures on the
curve correspond to the following stages:
1. sti€ness properties at the ®rst `linear' part of the
curve
2. conditions for appearance of `the ®rst-ply
failure'Ðthe `knee' of the curve
3. sti€ness characteristics of the material following
the ®rst stage
4. behaviour under unloading
5. residual strains
6. behaviour of the composite under repeated
loading
7. behaviour of the material following the point in
excess of the beginning of unloading
12 can be determined if one knows the stresses 1 ,
8. conditions of ®nal failure.
Fig. 1. Stress/strain curve of an angle-ply composite.
In the general case, a theoretical model must describe
the stages mentioned under a complex state of stress,
bending, complex loading, combination of force and
thermal factors. Unfortunately, this is not a complete
list of factors, which makes the problem more dicult.
We note several more features. Many modern com-
posites consist of rigid, high-strength ®bres bonded with
a ductile polymeric matrix. When loading the composite
in directions other than the ®bre direction, signi®cant
changes may arise in the ®bre orientation. This is a
manifestation of the e€ects of geometrical non-linearity
at the level of the composite internal structure which we
term `structural non-linearity'. Increase of the compo-
site tangent sti€ness in the ®nal stages of deformation
(Fig. 1, segment 7) is an example of such structural non-
linearity, which is not typical for common materials.
Another e€ect related to the above is the unstable
deformation of composites. This is an uncommon mode
of composite failure, when strains increase without
increasing loads. Figure 2 illustrates experimental stress/
strain curves for an angle-ply glass-®bre-reinforced
plastic (‹60 ) under uniform biaxial loading x =y =1/1.5
The term `failure', as such, should be expanded as
applied to these materials.
A model described below is the simplest model which
gives a means of describing the phenomena mentioned
above. The model can be considered as a structural±
phenomenological one. The base element of the model is
an individual unidirectional ply.
3 THE BEHAVIOUR OF AN ISOLATED
UNIDIRECTIONAL PLY: THE STRENGTH
CRITERION
The behaviour of the unidirectional lamina is con-
sidered to be linearly elastic up to failure. The strains "1 ,
"2 ,
2 , 12 applied to the ply and the sti€ness characteristics
 The strength of multilayered composites under a plane-stress state
Fig. 2. Stress/strain curve of ‹60 angle-ply glass ®ber reinforced plastic under biaxial tension, `unstable deformation': experimental
(solid line) and predicted (broken line) data.
of the ply, E1 , E2 , G12 , 12 . Directions 1 and 2 are for the
axes of the Cartesian co-ordinates in the ply plane, axis
1 being directed along the ®bres (Fig. A1 in Appendix).
It has been noted in some papers that stress/strain
curves of the unidirectional material (particularly under
shear) could not be completely linear. The real stress/
strain curves can be taken into account in computation
algorithms, but, as correctly pointed out by the authors
of Ref. 15, in many cases the results of considering the
non-linear e€ects do not justify the e€ort expended.
Within the model, the ply remains elastic when the
following conditions are ful®lled
Fÿ1  1  F‡1 ; Fÿ2  2  F‡2 ; j 12 j  F12 …1†
Here F‡1 , F‡2 are ultimate tensile stresses along and
transverse to the ®bres, respectively; Fÿ1 , Fÿ2 are the
equivalent characteristics in compression; and F12 is the
ultimate in-plane shear stress.
The conditions in eqn (1) determine a failure surface
in the shape of a rectangular parallelepiped in the co-
ordinates 1 , 2 , 12 . When the stress in an isolated ply
reaches any of the mentioned ultimate values, the ply
fails. Conditions (1), in addition to their obvious sim-
plicity, have a number of appreciable advantages in
comparison with other strength criteria, namely:
. the accuracy of approximation of known experi-
mental data (even in the worst case) is not inferior
to that obtained with other criteria
. criterion (1) clearly shows the causes of ply failure.
This is convenient for developing the models of ply
behaviour after the ®rst failure
. many studies have shown that a variety of essen-
tially di€erent failure mechanisms can take place
within the ply, e.g. matrix cracking, break-up of
the ®bre/matrix interface, rupture of the ®bres,
buckling of the ®bres, etc. During the loading
process, abrupt changes in the modes of failure
always take place. This is why a smooth strength
surface seems to be less physically convincing than
the simple rectangular parallelepiped each side of
which corresponds to a single failure mechanism.
1211
It is well known that modern unidirectional compo-
sites are highly anisotropic materials, e.g. the long-
itudinal tensile strength of unidirectional composites
exceeds the transverse tensile strength of the material by
approximately two orders of magnitude. The experi-
mental failure surface of such material is a highly elon-
gated surface of a `thin pencil' type, and it is probably
not very constructive to debate the form of the edges of
this long, thin pencil. In our opinion, it is of prime
importance that the strength criteria can adequately
describe di€erent modes of failure in composites rather
than re®ne the form of the elongated failure surface.
The `simple' criterion of maximum stresses copes with
the task.
4 THE BEHAVIOUR OF INDIVIDUAL UNI-
DIRECTIONAL PLY WITHIN THE LAMINATED
COMPOSITE
We assume that the unidirectional ply within the com-
posite laminate deforms as shown in Fig. 3. Deforma-
tion of the ply (both under tension and compression)
along the ®bre direction is completely elastic (Fig. 3(a)).
When longitudinal stresses reach their ultimate values,
F‡1 or Fÿ1 , the ply is assumed to be broken.
The behaviour of the ply in the transverse direction is
much more complicated (Fig. 3(b)). The ply is mono-
lithic and elastic under tension in the transverse direc-
tion within the ®rst stage (the 0±1 segment). The process
of cracking the matrix begins at point 1 and progresses
within the 1±2 segment of the diagram. The isolated
unidirectional ply fails at point 1. Unloading from any
point of the segment 1±2 occurs with the unloading
modulus E~ 2 which equals the secant modulus of the
diagram. Residual strains are zero, suggesting that the
cracks are completely closed. This is why on further
compression of the ply (segment 3±4 of the diagram),
the modulus of the ply completely regains its initial
value. Repeated deformation of the unidirectional ply
under transverse tension (positive 2 values) follows
along the 3±2 segment and further along the 2±20 seg-
ment of the diagram. The deformation diagram in
1212 P. A. Zinoviev et al.

Fig. 3. Behaviour of a unidirectional ply within a multilayered composite (a model).

Fig. 3(b) is plotted as a function of the modi®ed strain within the 3±4 segment also occurs with the unloading
"2 ˆ "2 ‡ 12 "1 (Appendix A1). The second equation modulus G~ 12 . Repeated deformation of the ply under
from eqn (A1) with consideration of eqn (A2) can be positive 12 values follows along the 4±3±2 segment and
written as further along the 2±20 segment where the process of
  matrix cracking resumes.
E1 12 E2
2 ˆ 21 "1 ‡ "2 ˆ "2 It is worth mentioning that the conditions of ply
1 ÿ 12 21 21 1 ÿ 12 21
unloading in one component of stresses need not be
related to unloading of the whole laminate. The change
The last equation is Hooke's law written in complex in the ratio between ply sti€nesses (along the ®bres,
or reduced form. Suppose that "2 ˆ 0 in the last equa- transverse to the ®bres, and in the ply plane) may result
tion. In this case it is always possible to increase 2 at in unloading in individual stress components even if the
the expense of increasing "1 up to any 2 value including mean stresses on the laminate increase. Figure 4 illus-
F‡2 when the cracks appear. Thus, the modi®ed strain, trates the plots of the changes in ply stresses 1 , 2 , 12
"2 , is the special strain which enables us to consider the under uniaxial tension of an angle-ply glass-®bre-
e€ect of deformation in the ®bre direction on the pro- reinforced plastic (GRP) with ' ˆ 42 . The plots were
cess of matrix cracking. predicted with the theoretical model described below
It follows from Fig. 3(b) that the unloading modulus, and the following initial data: E1 ˆ 46
5 GPa,
E~ 2 , is expressed as follows: E2 ˆ 7 GPa, G12 ˆ 7 GPa, 12 ˆ 0
25, F‡1 ˆ 1600 MPa,
  ÿ1 Fÿ1 =500 MPa, F‡2 ˆ 40 MPa, Fÿ2 ˆ 200 MPa,
" 2 2
E~ 2 ˆ 2 ‡ 12 ˆ  …2† F12 ˆ 60 MPa. Here, at "x  0
625%, shear stresses
2 E1 "2 ‡ 212 2 =E1 reach their ultimate value, F12 , and cracks appear in the
matrix. This is followed by unloading of the plies in the
where the starred values are the largest algebraic values transverse direction (
"2 < 0). So, the models of com-
during the history of deformation. If the stress 2 posites for describing the processes of deformation
reaches its ultimate value Fÿ2 (which is independent on under increasing loads should take into consideration
the history of previous loading), the ply is then con- the possibilities of ply unloading in one or more com-
sidered to be broken. ponents of the stress state.
The ply behaviour under shear is, in many ways, The processes of matrix cracking under shear and
similar to that under deformation in the direction transverse tension are interrelated. Assume that the
transverse to the ®bre direction (Fig. 3(c)). The stress/ cracks, whatever the cause of their appearance, simul-
strain curve of the ply is linear elastic within the 0±1 taneously a€ect ply behaviour under both shear and
segment. Segment 1±2 corresponds to the stage of transverse tension. The stresses 2 and 12

correspond to
matrix cracking. Unloading process (segment 2±3) takes the beginning of matrix cracking in the ply. In the pro-
place with the unloading shear modulus G~ 12 ˆ 12  
= 12 . cess, two variants are possible:
The process of shear deformation does not depend on

the sign of the stress 12 , which is why ply deformation j 12 jˆ F12 ; 2  F‡2 …3†
 The strength of multilayered composites under a plane-stress state 1213

Depending on the sign of the stress, 2 , the values of

the strains, "2 and 12 , and the sign of their increments,
the column matrix for the cracked ply has one out of six
possible values given in Table 1.
At the beginning of deformation (the ply is mono-
lithic) the column matrix is { 1 , 2 , 12 }={1, 1, 1},
while at the stage of the completely broken ply (the
conditions 1 ˆ F‡1 , or 1 ˆ Fÿ1 , or 2 ˆ Fÿ2 are ful-
®lled) all its components are zero: { 1 , 2 , 12 }={0, 0,
0}. Thus the total number of ply states equals eight.
In the calculations, it is convenient to take non-zero
but close values instead of zero values for the coe-
cients 2 and 12 in Table 1 (for example, 10ÿ3). It is
Fig. 4. Stresses vs average strain, "x , in ‹42 angle-ply glass- assumed that the Poisson ratio, 12 , remains constant
®ber-reinforced plastic (x ) and constitutive unidirectional during deformation and that the following relationship
plies (1 , 2 and 12 †: is true for tangent moduli of elasticity: E1 21 ˆ E2 12 . In
addition, by assuming that the 1 parameter equals
or unity for all ply states up to complete failure, one has
2 ˆ F‡2 ; j 12

j F12  

f12 g ˆ G0
f"12 g …5a†
Thus, according to the ply model, except for two com-
mon ply statesÐthe initial state (monolithic material) or
and the ®nal one (completely broken material)Ðthere 8 9
exists a group of intermediate ply states: the material <
1 >
> = 1
with cracks. Within that group, we can distinguish
2 ˆ
between two further sub-groups of material state: (1) >
: > 0 0
; 1 ÿ 12 21

12
with open cracks and (2) with closed cracks. The sign of 2 3
E 01 1 v012 E 02 2 0
2 governs the sub-groups: if 2 is positive, the cracks 6 7
are open, and if 2 is negative (compression), the cracks  4 021 E 01 2 E 02 2 0 5
ÿ

are closed. 0 0 1 ÿ 012 021 G012 12
Within the `open cracks' sub-group, the model dis- 8 9
tinguishes four ply states di€ering in the values of <
"1 >
> =
strains "2 and j 12 j as well as the signs of their incre- 
"2
ments
"2 and
j 12 j. Take the diagram in Fig. 3(b); >
: >
;

12 (5b)
here segment 1±2±20 corresponds to active (or `pioneer')
…5b†
deformation followed by crack formation (in the case,
"2 ˆ "2 and
"2 > 0). In contrast, ply deformation The components of the sti€ness matrix in eqn (5b)
within segment 2±3 (unloading and repeated loading), depend upon the current stress/strain state of the ply
"2 < "2 , is not followed by new irreversible changes in and the history of its deformation (Table 1).
the ply. Analogous segments can easily be seen in the Note that the structure interpretation of ply states
shear diagram (Fig. 3(c)). The total number of possible given above (e.g. the ideas of open and closed cracks) is
deformation stages of the ply under shear and trans- very schematic and simpli®ed. One need not resort to it
verse tension equals four in the open-crack sub-group. but consider the approach described as a phenomen-
If the ply is under transverse compression (2 < 0) ological model of deformation processes in unidirec-
and the cracks are closed, then, depending on the stage tional plies within the multilayered composite material.
of shear deformation, the model distinguishes two more
ply states. The ®rst corresponds to active crack forma-

tion under shear (
j 12 j ˆ j 12 j,
j 12 j > 0), and the 5 CALCULATION ALGORITHM
second to deformation within the `developed' strain

range (j 12 j < j 12 j). The model described in Section 3 was applied for the
The column matrix of the parameters of the e€ective analysis of deformation and failure processes in multi-
ply sti€ness { 1 , 2 , 12 } is de®ned as follows: layered composites including several plies of di€erent
orientation. Stress/strain relationships for the unidirec-
E1 E2 G12
1 ˆ ; 2 ˆ ; 12 ˆ …4† tional ply and the laminated composite are well-known
E 01 E 02 G012 (e.g. Ref. 16) and given in the Appendix.
Assume that the plies are ideally bonded at all stages
Here E 01 , E 02 , G012 are initial, and E1 , E2 , G12 are current of the deformation process, i.e. strains of the plies in the
values of tangent moduli. global co-ordinate system (co-ordinate system of the
1214 P. A. Zinoviev et al.

Table 1. Parameters of the e€ective sti€ness of the cracked ply

Parameters of the strain state
State of the ply c1 c2 c12
In the transverse direction Under shear
"2 < "2 
j 12 j < j 12 j 1 E~ 2 =E 02 G~ 12 =G012
Open cracks
"2 ˆ "2 1 0 G~ 12 G012
2 > 0
"2 > 0
1 0 0

j 12 j ˆ j 12 j
"2 < "2 1 E~ 2 =E 02 0

jg12j0}
Closed cracks "2 < 0 1 1 0
2 < 0
j 12 j < 
12 j 1 1 G~ 12 =G012

 …i†
laminate) are the same and equal to mean strains of the
f12 g…ni† ˆ G0 nÿ1
f"12 g…ni† ; f12 g…i† ˆ f12 g…nÿ1
i†
‡
f12 g…ni†
laminate (Fig. A1 in Appendix).
The algorithm of successive stress loading is the nat-
ural one for the model. Suppose that at the nth step of Now one knows all parameters of stress/strain states of the
loading mean
stresses
 in the laminate
increase by the plies, the parameters are necessary to de®ne the matrix of
step
xy n ˆ
x ;
y ;
xy . We de®ne the cor- the e€ective sti€nessfor each ply according to  the model
responding increments of mean strains in the laminate: (Table 1): f g…ni† ˆ f f12 g…ni† ; f"12 g…ni† ;
f"12 g…ni† .
 

"xy n ˆ ‰G Šÿ1
nÿ1
xy n …6† The parameters of the e€ective sti€ness
 …i† of the plies
are used to form sti€ness matrices G0 n according to
where the sti€ness matrix of the laminate [G] was calcu- eqn (5b).  …i†
lated at the previous step from eqn (A11) in Appendix. With sti€ness matrices of the plies G0 n we can cal-
Following the nth  loading
step,
 complete mean
strains culate re®ned values of stress increments  in …i† the plies
…i†
in the laminate are: "xy n ˆ "xy nÿ1 ‡
"xy n . Deter- (these have superscript i):
f12 gnI ˆ G0 n
f"12 g…ni†
mine corresponding ply strains in the co-ordinate and full stresses in the plies:
system related to the ply (1(i), 2(i)). For the ith ply
…i†T 
one obtains: f"12 g…ni† ˆ ‰T1 Šnÿ1 "xy n and
f"12 g…ni† ˆ
…i†
f"12 g…ni† ÿf"12 gnÿ1 .
…i†
Here the transformation matrix ‰T1 Šnÿ1 was found at
the previous step from eqn (A6).
Calculate the increments of stresses and full stresses
in the plies:

Fig. 6. Failure envelopes of quasi-isotropic glass ®ber

Fig. 5. Ultimate axial stresses, x , vs reinforcing angle, ' , for
angle-ply glass-®ber-reinforced plastics under biaxial tension.
Predicted data are shown by solid lines (®nal failure) and
broken line (initial failure); experimental data belong to
K. Kawata (&)11 and M. Uemura (*).12
reinforced plastic (‹30 /90 ).16 Experimental data are shown
by the circles (average values), predicted data are shown by
solid lines (®nal failure of the laminate) and broken lines
(appearance of the cracks in the plies); the causes of initials
and ®nal failure are given.
 The strength of multilayered composites under a plane-stress state 1215

f12 g…nIi† ˆ f12 g…nÿ1

i†
‡
f12 g…nIi† : tion of the sti€ness matrix of the laminate, [G]n, for the
nth step of loading (eqns (A11) and (A7)):
The low shear modulus of modern polymeric compo-
sites often results in signi®cant changes in the initial X
M  …i†
reinforcing angles of the plies as a consequence of shear ‰GŠn ˆ ‰T1 Š…ni† G0 n ‰T1 Š…ni†T h …i†
strains. As mentioned above, this type of non-linearity iˆ1
related to the changes in geometrical parameters of the
laminate is termed a structural non-linearity. The struc- We must now check whether the matrix ‰GŠn is posi-
tural non-linearity can be taken into account by cor- tively determined. To do this, we need only be sure that
…i† …i† …i†
recting the angles of the plies: 'n ˆ 'nÿ1 ÿ
12n =2. g11  0, g22 > 0, g66 > 0. We then move to the next step
…i†
New values of the reinforcing angles, 'n , are used in of loading.
…i†
calculation of the transformation matrix ‰T1 Šnÿ1 (eqn Loading (stress) steps continue to increase until the
…i†
(A6)), and matrix ‰T1 Šnÿ1 , in its turn, is used in calcula- laminate is broken. The multilayered composite is

Fig. 7. Biaxial failure stress envelope under transverse and shear loading (y  xy ) for the E-glass/LY556/HT907/DY063
unidirectional lamina.

Fig. 8. Biaxial failure stress envelope under longitudinal and shear loading (x  xy ) for the T300/BSL 914C unidirectional lamina.
1216 P. A. Zinoviev et al.

considered to be broken if only for a single ply the fol- ability. The laminated material is believed to be broken
lowing condition is ful®lled: if:
. linear strains in a single ply, "1 and "2 , exceed their
1…i† ˆ F …‡1
i†
; or 1…i† ˆ F …ÿ1
i†
; or 2…i† ˆ F …ÿ2
i†
:
ultimate values
. linear strains in the laminate, "x and "y , exceed
Experiments5 show that this suggestion is well justi®ed
their ultimate values
at least for composite laminates including a moderate
. shear strains in any ply, 12 , or the laminate, xy ,
number of the plies with di€erent reinforcing angles (up
exceed their ultimate values.
to 4±5 plies).
In the analysis, it is important that some con- Ultimate strain values are selected on the basis of
straints are imposed regarding the laminate deform- experimental studies. Ultimate strains determined from

Fig. 9. Biaxial failure stress envelope under longitudinal and transverse tension (2y  1x ) for the E-glass/MY750/HT907/
DY063 lamina.

Fig. 10. Biaxial failure stress envelope under longitudinal and transverse tension (2y  1x ) for the E-glass/MY750/HT907/DY063
(90 /‹30 /90 ) laminate. Ply orientation: 90 /+30 /ÿ30 /+30 /ÿ30 /90 ; ply thickness, h: h90 ˆ 0
172 mm, h‡30 ˆ 0
412 mm,
hÿ30 ˆ 0
412 mm; total laminate thickness H=2 mm.
 The strength of multilayered composites under a plane-stress state 1217

the tests in uniaxial tension of ‹45 laminates (this is
the most `yielding' structure) can serve as initial
approximation for "x and "y . Modern composite lami-
nates of ‹45 structure usually show ultimate strains
under uniaxial tension around 10±15%. These values
can be used as initial estimates for "x and "y .
Note that one should well understand ®nal objectives
of the theoretical prediction and have some experience
in predicting the behaviour of composite laminates.
For example, a designer of a composite construction
restricts its strains with assigned values of "x , "y and
xy . These values will then be taken as the ultimate ones,
and theoretical calculations will determine the condi-
tions (the state of stresses) when the constraints men-
tioned are ful®lled. In case one solves the problem of the
detailed non-linear analysis of the laminate behaviour,
the variation in the values of ultimate strains enables
one to realise the most successive investigation.
The algorithm described above can be used for pre-
dicting both stress/strain curves and failure envelopes
for multilayered composites under a variety of loading
conditions. Figures 5 and 6 give the examples of pre-
dicted results obtained with the model described.
The model can be easily expanded to accommodate
both mechanical and thermal loads.17 Thermal loads
may arise, for example, on cooling the laminates from
the curing temperature to the operating temperature, or
from a standard temperature to cryogenic temperatures.
Initial stresses arising on cooling can be taken into
account with the help of the present model.18

Fig. 11. Biaxial failure stress envelope under longitudinal tension and shear (x  xy ) for the E-glass/MY750/HT907/DY063 (90 /

Fig. 12. Biaxial failure stress envelope under longitudinal and transverse tension (2y  1x ) for the AS4/3501-6 (0 /‹45 /90 )
laminate. Ply orientation: 90 /‹45 /ÿ45 /0 /0 /ÿ45 /+45 /90 .
1218 P. A. Zinoviev et al.

Fig. 13. Stress/strain curves under uniaxial tensile loading in y direction (y =x =1/0) for the AS4/3501-6 (0 /‹45 /90 ) laminate.

A computer program was developed on the basis of the
model described above. This is the STRAN software.19
STRAN enables one to perform the detailed analysis of
the deformation and failure processes of composite lami-
nates. The program can predict and draw stress/strain
curves for the laminate under uni-axial and bi-axial
loading as well as the failure envelopes. In the process,
STRAN indicates the causes of material cracking and
®nal failure. One may restrict his analysis to the calcula-
tion of e€ective characteristics of the laminate (moduli of
elasticity, shear modulus, ultimate stresses). STRAN uses
both stress and strain loading of the laminates.
6 THEORETICAL RESULTS
Figure 8 illustrates the failure stress envelope for the
T300/BSL 914C lamina under combined longitudinal
and shear loading (x  xy ). Again, three modes of
failure are distinctly shown: longitudinal tension, long-
itudinal compression and in-plane shear.
The failure envelope for the E-glass/MY750 lamina
under direct biaxial tension (y  x ) is given in Fig. 9.
Here four modes of failure are predicted, namely long-
itudinal tension, longitudinal compression, transverse
tension and transverse compression. All three failure
envelopes for the unidirectional laminae are rectan-
gular. The rectangular form of the failure surfaces is
governed by the strength criterion used in the model
described above, i.e. the criterion of maximum stresses
(eqn (1)).

The theory described above was applied to predict the

behaviour of the laminates supplied by the organisers of
the `Failure Prediction of Composite Laminates' exer-
cise.20,21 In the analysis, the lamina properties of the
four materials (T300/BSL914C, AS4/3501-6, E-glass/
LY556 epoxy and E-glass/MY750 epoxy) were taken
from the data provided. The non-linear stress/strain
curves of unidirectional laminae provided by the orga-
nisers were not used. Four elastic constants (E1 , E2 , G12 ,
and 12 ) and ®ve strength values (F‡1 ˆ XT , Fÿ1 ˆ XC ,
F‡2 ˆ YT , Fÿ2 ˆ YC , and F12 ˆ S12 ) were used as initial
data for calculations.
Figures 7±9 give the failure stress envelopes predicted
for unidirectional laminae. Figure 7 shows the biaxial
failure stress envelope for the E-glass/LY556 unidirec-
tional lamina subjected to combined transverse and
shear loading (y  xy ). Three modes of failure are
predicted in the lamina depending upon the state of
stresses. They are transverse tension, in-plane shear and Fig. 14. Stress/strain curves for y =x ˆ 2=1 for the AS4/3501-6
transverse compression. (0 /‹45 /90 ) laminate.
 The strength of multilayered composites under a plane-stress state 1219

Figures 10 and 11 show the failure envelopes of the
90 /‹30 /90 E-glass/LY556 epoxy laminate under
combined direct stresses (y  x ) and combined direct
and shear stresses (x  xy ), respectively.
In the calculations, the laminate was loaded in 80
trajectories (paths) y =x =const and x =xy =const.
Both initial and ®nal failure envelopes are shown.
Di€erent modes of failure are distinctly seen in the ®g-
ures. Under biaxial direct loading of the laminate
(y  x ) in the 1st, 2nd and 4th quadrants (Fig. 10),
one observes initial failure due to transverse tension
(F‡2 ) and in-plane shear (F12 ) followed by ®nal failure
due to longitudinal tension (F‡1 ), longitudinal com-
pression (Fÿ1 ) and transverse compression (Fÿ2 ). For
example, in case of loading the laminate along the tra-
jectory y =x ˆ 2=1.5, the laminate ®rst cracks due to
transverse tension in ‹30 plies, then the same cracks
appear in 90 plies, and at last ®nal laminate failure is
caused by longitudinal tension of 90 plies. When loading
along the trajectory y =x ˆ ÿ1=1.5, ®rst cracks appear
in 90 plies due to transverse tension, then the cracks
appear in ‹30 plies due to shear, and ®nal failure occurs
due to longitudinal compression of 90 plies. As is seen,
corner points both on the initial and ®nal failure envel-
opes correspond to the changes in the modes of failure.
Analogous stages can be observed for the laminate
under combined longitudinal and shear loading
(Fig. 11). Take trajectory x =xy ˆ ÿ1=1. First cracks
appear in ÿ30 plies as a result of transverse tension
and cracks successively appear in 90 and +30 plies as

Fig. 15. Biaxial failure stress envelope (y  x ) for the E-glass/MY750/HT907/DY063 angle-ply (‹55 ) laminate.

Fig. 16. Stress strain curves under uniaxial tensile loading in y direction (y =x ˆ 1=0) for the E-glass/MY750/HT907/DY063
angle-ply (‹55 ) laminate.
1220 P. A. Zinoviev et al.

in a number of stages. The modes of failure are marked

Fig. 17. Stress/strain curves for y =x ˆ 2=1 for the E-glass/
MY750/HT907/DY063 angle-ply (‹55 ) laminate.
a result of shear; ®nal failure occurs by longitudinal
compression of ÿ30 plies. Trajectory by trajectory, one
is able to examine initial and ®nal failure stages of the
laminate along with the stresses responsible for speci®c
modes of failure.
Figures 12±14 are for the 0 /‹45 /90 AS4/3501-6
quasi-isotropic laminate. Figure 12 illustrates the pre-
dicted failure envelope for the laminate under biaxial
loading. In most of the compression±compression
quadrant, the initial and ®nal failure are identical
whereas in the other three quadrants, failure took place
in Fig. 12. Take the ®rst quadrant, for example,
y =x ˆ 2=5; prior to ®nal failure, one can observe
intensive cracking of the laminate due to successive
transverse tension in 0 , ‹45 and 90 plies; ®nal failure
is caused by longitudinal tension of 90 plies. For the
trajectory y =x ˆ ÿ2=5, the laminate cracks ®rst by
transverse tension in the 0 plies, then by in-plane shear
in the ‹45 plies, and ®nally failure takes place as a
result of longitudinal tension in the 90 plies.
Figures 13 and 14 show predicted stress/strain curves
under uniaxial tension (y =x ˆ 1=0) and biaxial
(y =x ˆ 2=1) loading for the 0 /‹45 /90 AS4/3501-6
quasi-isotropic laminate. The curve in Fig. 13 demon-
strates that initial deformation of the laminate is lin-
early elastic, until, at y ˆ 241 MPa, the transverse
tensile stresses in the 0 plies reach their ultimate values
(F‡2 ). The ®rst cracks appear in the laminate, and its
e€ective Young's modulus, Ey decreases slightly. Fur-
ther laminate cracking occurs at y ˆ 466 MPa when
cracks appear in the ‹45 plies as a consequence of in-
plane shear (12 ˆ F12 ). The e€ective Young's modulus
of the laminate decreases once more, and ®nal failure
takes place at y ˆ 728 MPa because of longitudinal
tension in the 90 plies (1 ˆ F‡1 ).
Initial deformation of the laminate under biaxial
loading (y =x ˆ 2=1; Fig. 14) is also linearly elastic.
Successive laminate cracking in 0 , ‹45 and 90 plies
(2 ˆ F‡2 ) results in a slight decrease in the slope of the
curve, and ®nal laminate failure takes place at
y ˆ 825 MPa when longitudinal tensile stresses in the
90 plies reach their ultimate values (1 ˆ F‡1 ).

Fig. 18. Stress strain curves under uniaxial tensile loading in x direction (y =x ˆ 0=1) for the E-glass/MY750/HT907/DY063
cross-ply (0 /90 ) laminate. Ply orientation: 0 /90 /0 ; ply thickness: h0 ˆ 0
26 mm, h90 ˆ 0
52 mm; total laminate thickness
H=1.04 mm.
 The strength of multilayered composites under a plane-stress state 1221

Figures 15±17 are for the ‹55 E-glass/MY750±
epoxy laminate. Figure 15 shows the failure envelope
for the laminate subjected to a variety of biaxial direct
stresses (y  x ). As before, one is able to identify the
stages of initial and ®nal failures and corresponding
stresses in the plies. The modes of failure are marked on
the envelope. The zone above FMA line is a zone of
unstable deformation (not shown here). Therefore, the
predicted envelope is not closed.
Figure 16 represents the stress strain curve for the
‹55 angle-ply laminate under uniaxial tensile loading
in the y direction (y =x ˆ 1=0), The predicted curve has
the well-marked knee after ®rst-ply failure, i.e. the
appearance of the cracks in the plies as a result of shear
stresses (12 ˆ F12 ). Following ®rst-ply failure, the
e€ective modulus of elasticity, Ey , decrease by approxi-
mately 1.5 times compared to its initial value. Final
failure of the laminate takes place at y ˆ 383 MPa and
is governed by transverse compression in ‹55 plies.
Figure 17 shows the stress/strain curves of the ‹55
angle-ply laminate for y =x ˆ 2=1. The curve has a
single knee (y ˆ 112 MPa) caused by transverse tension
of the plies. Final failure occurs at y ˆ 880 MPa when
the plies fail in longitudinal tension (1 ˆ F‡1 ).
The behaviour of 0 /90 cross ply laminate made of
E-glass/MY750 epoxy composite under uniaxial tensile
loading (y =x ˆ 0=1) is predicted in Fig. 18. The theo-
retical stress/strain curve shows that the laminate fails in
three stages. First fail the 90 plies (y ˆ 77
8 MPa)
resulting in slight decrease of the e€ective modulus Ex .

Fig. 19. Stress/strain curves for y =x ˆ 1=1 for the E-glass/MY750/HT907/DY063 angle-ply (‹45 ) laminate.

Fig. 20. Stress/strain curves for y =x ˆ 1= ÿ 1 for the E-glass/MY750/HT907/DY063 angle-ply (‹45 ) laminate.
1222 P. A. Zinoviev et al.
This is followed by failure of the 0 plies
(x ˆ 315 MPa) through transverse tension (2 ˆ F‡2 ),
and total failure of the laminate takes place at
(y ˆ 660 MPa when 0 plies fail in longitudinal tension
(1 ˆ F‡1 ).
Finally, stress/strain curves for the ‹45 angle ply E-
glass/MY750 epoxy laminate under biaxial loading are
given in Figs 19 and 20. Stress/strain curves for biaxial
tension (y =x ˆ 1=1) are shown in Fig. 19. The ®rst-ply
failure at x ˆ 68
4 MPa caused by transverse tension
(2 ˆ F‡2 ) results in a decrease in the slope of the curve,
and total failure of the laminate takes place as a con-
sequence of longitudinal tension of the cracked plies
(1 ˆ F‡1 ). Figure 20 illustrates stress/strain curves for
the case y =x ˆ 1= ÿ 1. As is seen, the curves are linear
up to (x ˆ ÿ73
0 MPa when ®rst-ply failure occurs
through in-plane shear. Total failure of the laminate
takes place at x ˆ ÿ90
1 MPa because of transverse
compression (2 ˆ Fÿ2 ).
Figures 7±20 clearly demonstrate that the developed
theoretical model predicts initial linear parts of the
stress strain curves, the ®rst-ply failure (appearance of
the `knees' on the curves), reduction of laminate sti€-
ness characteristics after material cracking (stages 1±3 in
Fig. 1, Section 2). With the model one is able to examine
coupled deformation and failure processes in composite
laminates and determine the stresses responsible for
speci®c modes of failure.
REFERENCES
1. Goldenblat, I. I. and Kopnov, V. A., Anisotropy of
Structural Materials. Mashinostroenie, Moscow, 1968 (in
Russian).
2. Wu, E. M., In Composite Materials, Vol. 2, Mechanics of
Composite Materials, ed. G. P. Sendecky. Academic
Press, New York and London, 1974, pp. 353±431.
3. Zinoviev, P. A., Tarakanov, A. I., On the non-linear
deformation of laminated composite materials, Primene-
nie Plastmass v Mashinostroenii. Trudy MVTU, 1978,
N16, pp. 72±80 (in Russian).
4. Zinoviev, P. A., Tarakanov, A. I. and Fomin, B. Ya.,
Deformation and Failure Processes in Composites under
Biaxial Tension, Primenenie Plastmass v Mashinostroenii.
Trudy MVTU, 1982, N19, pp. 33±58 (in Russian).
5. Alfutov, N. A., and Zinov'ev, P. A., Deformation and
failure of ®brous composites with brittle polymeric matrix
under plane stress. In Mechanics of Composites, ed I. F.
Obraztsov and V. V. Vasiliev. MIR Publishers, Moscow,
1982, pp. 166±185.
6. Zinoviev, P. A. and Lebedeva, O. V., Deformation and
failure processes in laminated composites under plane
stress state. In Proceedings of the VI National Congress on
Theoretical and Applied Mechanics. Varna, So®a, Bul-
garia, 1989, pp. 11±14 (in Russian).
7. Zinoviev, P. A., Lebedeva, O. V. and Sokolova, T. V.,
Modelling failure processes in glass ®ber reinforced plas-
tics under plane stress state. In Proceedings of the V
National Conference on Mechanics and Technology of
Composite Materials. Varna, So®a, Bulgaria, 1988, pp.
119±123 (in Russian).
8. Soden, P. D., Leadbetter, D., Griggs, P. R. and Eckold,
G. C., The strength of a ®lament wound composite under
biaxial loading. Composites, 1978, 9, 247±250.
9. Eckold, G. C., Leadbetter, D., Soden, P. D. and Griggs,
R. P., Lamination theory in the prediction of failure
envelopes for laminated wound materials subjected to
biaxial loading. Composites, 1978, 9, 243±246.
10. Partsevskii, V. V. and Kuznetsov, S. F. On the deforma-
tion and failure mechanisms of multilayered composite
materials. Mekhanika Kompozitnych Materialov, 1981, 16,
1006±1011 (in Russian).
11. Kawata, K., On the yielding-fracture criterion of angle-
ply FW laminates. In Mechanical Behaviour of Materials,
Proc. Int. Conf., Vol. 5, Tokyo, 1972, pp. 146±155.
12. Uemura, M. and Yamawaki, In Proc. 9th Int. Conf. Space
Technology and Science, Tokyo, 1971, pp. 215±223.
13. Guess, T. R., Biaxial testing of composite cylinders:
experimental±theoretical comparison. Composites, 1980,
11, 139±149.
14. Highton, J., Adeoye, A. B. and Soden, P. D., Fracture
stresses for ‹75 degree ®lament wound GFP tubes under
biaxial loads. J. Strain Anal., 1985, 20, 139±150.
15. Hahn, H. T. and Tsai, S. W., Nonlinear elastic behavior
of unidirectional composite laminate. J. Compo. Mater.,
1973, 7, 257±271.
16. Alfutov, N. A., Zinov'ev, P. A. and Popov, B. G., Ana-
lysis of Multilayered Composite Plates and Shells. Mashi-
nostroenie, Moscow, 1984 (in Russian).
17. Zinoviev, P. A. Thermoelasticity of Multilayered Hybrid
Reinforced Plastics, Primenenie Plastmass v Mashinos-
troenii. Trudy MVTU, Moscow, 1989, N526, pp. 29±40.
18. Zinoviev, P. A. and Lebedeva, O. V., Thermal strength
and stability of laminated composites. In Proceedings of
the VI National Conference on Mechanics and Technology
of Composite Materials, So®a, 1991, pp. 119±123 (in
Russian).
19. Grigoriev, S. V., Zinoviev, P. A., Tarakanov, A. I. and
Lebedeva, O. V., Strength Analyzer of Multilayered
Hybrid Composites. Software and User's Manual. Tech-
nomic, Lancaster±Basel, 1995.
20. Hinton. M. J. and Soden, P. D., Predicting failure in
composite laminates: the background to the exercise.
Compos. Sci. Technol., 1998, 58(7), 1001.
21. Soden, P. D., Hinton, M. J. and Kaddour, A. S., Lamina
properties, lay-up con®gurations and loading conditions
for a range of ®bre reinforced composite laminates.
Compos. Sci. Technol., 1998, 58(7), 1011.
APPENDIX
A1 Unidirectional ply in the `natural' coordinate system
The model of the composite laminate uses two types of
coordinates (Fig. A1). The ®rst coordinate system,
X±Y, is applied for the laminate as a whole, this is the
`global' coordinate system. The second group of coor-
dinate systems is a family of coordinates related to the
plies. Every individual ply has its own coordinate sys-
tem. Coordinates 1±2 are the `natural' (or local) coor-
dinates of the ply. There is an angle ' between axes X
and 1, ' is the reinforcing (orientation) angle.
The Hooke's law relating the stresses and strains in
the ith unidirectional ply under a plane stress state looks
as follows in the `natural' coordinate system:
 The strength of multilayered composites under a plane-stress state 1223

where 2 3
c2 s2 ÿ2sc
6 7
‰ T 1 Š ˆ 4 s2 c2 2sc 5;
sc ÿsc c2 ÿ s2
2 3 …A6†
c2 s2 ÿsc
6 2 7
‰T 2 Š ˆ 4 s c2 sc 5
Fig. A1. Composite laminate and constitutive unidirectional 2sc ÿ2sc c2 ÿ s 2
plies; `global' (X±Y) and `natural' (1±2) coordinate systems.
here s ˆ sin '; c ˆ cos '.
 0
 The relationship between mean stresses and strains in
f12 g ˆ G f"12 g; or the ply related to the axes (X±Y)
8 9 2 38 9  …i†   …i†
g011 g012 xy ˆ G "xy
< 1 >
> = 0 < "1 >
> = …A1†    0   …A7†
6 7 G ˆ ‰T1 Š G ‰T2 Šÿ1 ˆ ‰T1 Š G0 ‰T1 ŠT
2 ˆ 4 g012 g022 0 5 "2
>
: >
; >
: >
;
12 0 0 g066 12  
where G is the sti€ness matrix of the unidirectional
where [G0 ] is the sti€ness matrix of the ply, whose com- ply related to the axes (X±Y)
ponents are: 2 0 3
9   g 11 g 012 g 016
g011 ˆ 1ÿE121 21 ; g012 ˆ 1ÿ
E1 21
 ˆ E2 12
1ÿ  ; = G ˆ4 g 022 g 026 5
12 21 12 21
…A2† sym g 066
g022 ˆ 1ÿE122 21 ; g066 ˆ G12 : ;
There
  are the relationships between the coecients of
Here E1 , E2 , G12 , 12 are engineering elastic constants of G ] and [G0 ] matrices (see, for example, Ref. 16).
the ply material.
Inverting eqn (A1), one obtains A3 Stress/strain relationships for the composite
  laminates under plane stress state
f"12 g ˆ S 0 f12 g; or
Mean stresses arising in the composite laminate under
8 9 2 0 38 9
s11 s012 0 > plane stress state are calculated from the formulas:
< "1 >
> = < 1 >= …A3†
6 7 Xn X
n X
n
"2 ˆ 4 s012 s022 0 5 2
>
: >
; >
: >
; x ˆ x…i† h …i† ; y ˆ y…i† h …i† ; xy ˆ …i † …i †
xy h …A8†
12 0 0 s066 12 iˆ1 iˆ1 iˆ1

…i†
where [S 0 ] is the compliance matrix of the ply. where h ˆ h…i† =H is the relative thickness of the ith ply,
The coecients of the sti€ness matrix, [G0 ], are rela- and H is the total thickness of the laminate.
ted to the coecients of the compliance matrix [S 0 ] (see, Assume that the plies in the laminate are bonded
for example, Ref. 16). ideally, and the strains in all plies are equal to mean
strains of the whole laminate:
A2 Transformation of ply characteristics under
coordinate system rotation "x ˆ "…xi† ; "y ˆ "…yi† ; xy ˆ xy
…i †
…A9†
As one changes from `natural' coordinates 1±2 to `glo-
bal' coordinates X±Y, stress and strain matrices of the Substituting the Hooke's law for the ply, eqn (A7), into
ply are transformed. Transformation rules for stress and (A8) and considering eqn (A9), one obtains the rela-
strain matrices are: tionship between laminate mean stresses and strains
 …i† under plane state of stresses:
xy ˆ ‰T1 Šf12 g …A4†  
xy ˆ ‰G Š "xy
 …i†
"xy ˆ ‰T2 Šf"12 g …A5† or 8 9 2 38 9
 …i†  …i† < x = g11 g12 g16 < "x =
where xy , "xy are stress and strain column- y ˆ 4 g12 g22 g26 5 "y …A10†
matrices of the ply related to (X±Y) axes. : ; : ;
xy g16 g26 g66 xy
The formulas of inverse transformations:
where
 …i†
ÿ1
f12 g ˆ ‰T1 Š xy X
n
 …i† gij ˆ g …iji† h …i† …A11†
f"12 g ˆ ‰T2 Šÿ1 "xy iˆ1