[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
42 views8 pages

Failure Criteria For Isotropic Materials

The document discusses different failure criteria for composite laminates and isotropic materials. It defines first ply failure and ultimate failure for composites. It then examines maximum normal stress, maximum shear stress, distortional energy, and maximum strain criteria for isotropic materials and compares the differences between criteria.

Uploaded by

Rasagya Mishra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
42 views8 pages

Failure Criteria For Isotropic Materials

The document discusses different failure criteria for composite laminates and isotropic materials. It defines first ply failure and ultimate failure for composites. It then examines maximum normal stress, maximum shear stress, distortional energy, and maximum strain criteria for isotropic materials and compares the differences between criteria.

Uploaded by

Rasagya Mishra
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 8

Failure criteria for laminated composites

• Defining “failure” is a matter of purpose.


• Failure may be defined as the first event that damages
the structure or the point of structural collapse.
• For composite laminates we distinguish between “first
ply failure” when the first ply is damaged and “ultimate
failure” when the laminate fails to carry the load.
• Ultimate failure requires “progressive failure” analysis
where we reduce the stiffness of failed plies and
redistribute the load.
Failure criteria for isotropic layers
• Failure is yielding for ductile materials and fracture
for brittle materials.
• Every direction has same properties so we prefer to
define the failure based on principal stresses. Why?
• We will deal only with the plane stress condition,
which will simplify the failure criteria. Then principal
stresses are      
2

 1,2  x y
 
x y
   xy
2

2  2 

• What about the third principal stress?


Maximum normal stress criterion
• For ductile materials strength is same in
tension and compression so criterion for
safety is  S   ,   S
y 1 2 y

• However, criterion is rarely suitable for ductile


materials.
• For brittle materials the ultimate limits are
different in tension and compression
 Suc   1 ,  2  Sut
Maximum strain criterion
• Similar to maximum normal stress criterion
but applied to strain.
• Applicable to brittle materials so tension and
compression are different.
 uc  1 ,  2   ut

What is wrong with the figure?


Maximum shear stress (Tresca) criterion
• Henri Tresca (1814-1885) French ME
• Material yields when maximum shear stress
reaches the value attained in tensile test.
• Maximum shear stress is one half of the
difference between the maximum and
minimum principal stress.
• In simple tensile test it is one half of the
applied stress. So criterion is
Sy
 12  or  1   2  S y and  1  S y and  2  S y
2
Distortional Energy (von Mises) criterion

• Richard Edler von Mises (1883 Lviv, 1953


Boston).
• Distortion energy (shape but not volume
change) controls failure.
• Safe condition
1   1  2
 1 2  2 3  3 1  
2 2 2
Ud              Sy
6E  3E
• For plane stress reduces to
 12   1 2   22  S y2
Comparison between criteria
• Largest differences when principal strains have
opposite signs
Maximum difference between Tresca and
von Mises
• Define
  stresses as . For what do we get the
maximum ratio between the two predictions
of critical value of ? Can assume 1. Why?
1. Positive . Tresca gives . Von Mises leads to .
Maximum for =0.5,
2. Negative . Tresca leads to . Von Mises still
same equation. Maximum ratio for =-1.
• Check!

You might also like