44th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Confere AIAA 2003-1603

7-10 April 2003, Norfolk, Virginia

MODELING OF CRACK OPENING DISPLACEMENT DUE TO DELAMINATION

USING FIRST-ORDER SHEAR LAMINATE THEORY

Samit Roy* and Michael Benjamin**

Dept. of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering

Oklahoma State University
Stillwater, OK 74078-5012

Abstract Introduction

In the present paper the crack Composite laminates are ideal for
opening displacement associated with aerospace structural applications, such as
delaminations that initiate from a matrix cryogenic fuel tanks for reusable launch
crack in a graphite-epoxy laminate (IM- vehicles (RLV), where high strength-to-
6/3501-6) subjected to mechanical and/or weight ratios are required. However, it is
thermal loading is calculated using the feasible that when subjected to extreme
sublaminate-wise first-order shear laminate temperature variations combined with
theory and verified using a two-dimensional dynamic structural loading, micro cracks
finite element analysis. The delamination may evolve in the polymer matrix that could
induced crack opening displacement (DOD) eventually make the tank wall permeable to
for known delamination length and crack the cryogenic fuel. As shown in Fig.1, the
density is predicted for [0/902]S laminate crack opening displacement induced by
system with a matrix crack in the 90º plies delaminations initiated at the tip of the
and delaminations growing uniformly from transverse matrix cracks could overlap to
the matrix crack tip in the 0/90 interfaces. form a path through the thickness of the
The effect of immediate neighboring ply laminate, thereby allowing fuel to permeate.
orientation on DOD is studied by predicting Because of the potentially mission-
DOD for the [θ/902]S (θ =0º to 90º) laminate critical implications of the permeation
system. In order to study the effect of problem, many researchers have studied the
stacking sequence on DOD, two laminate permeation or leakage of cryogenic fuel
stacking sequences, [0/θ/902]S and [θ/0/902]S through composite laminates through
(θ =0º to 90º) are examined. It is seen for the experiments [1-3]. McManus et al [1] found
examined laminates that the lay-up that permeability is strongly influenced by
orientation of the ply adjacent to the 90º- loading conditions, crack density and ply
plies affects the DOD, whereas the stacking orientation. Kumazawa et al [2] developed
sequence of the neighboring ply groups do leak analysis based on the opening
not influence the DOD significantly. displacements of matrix cracks and found
____________________ that enlargement of crack opening
displacement (COD) due to mechanical and
* Associate Professor thermal loads can cause increase in leak rate.
** Graduate Research Assistant. Varna et al [4] predicted average COD

Copyright © 2003 by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc. All rights reserved.
based on shear-lag model and variational
approach and found that the stiffness
reduction in the uncracked layer influences
the COD of the interior layer. Roy and
Benjamin [5] developed a simple expression
for calculating the COD based on shear lag
analysis. The problem with the shear lag
analysis is that the constraining layers are
assumed as a homogenous medium without
taking into account the stacking sequence
effects. Further, it can be seen from Fig.1
that the main factor associated with the
permeation of cryogenic fuel is the
delamination induced opening displacement
(DOD) in addition to COD. So in order to
develop a mathematical model for
calculating the permeation through
composite laminate it is essential to predict
the opening displacement induced by
delamination (DOD), apart from predicting
COD.
In this study, an analytical methodology
based on first-order shear laminate theory
[6] is developed to predict DOD in the 90o
layers in a graphite-epoxy laminate (IM-
6/3501-6) subject to varying thermal and
mechanical loading conditions and specified
delamination length and crack density. The
five-layer model (FLM) presented in this
paper is based on the work published by
Zhang et al [7], but has been enhanced to
include thermal loads. The DOD obtained
using the five-layer model is verified using a
two-dimensional finite element analysis.
Similar analyses are repeated for different
laminate lay-ups in order to study the
influence of orientation and stacking
sequence of the neighboring ply groups on
DOD.
Delamination Induced Crack Opening
Displacement
In this section, an expression for
DOD is derived based on first-order shear
laminate theory, applied to the five-layer
model (FLM) laminate shown in Fig.2. Due
to symmetry of geometry and loading, only
one quarter of the five-layer model laminate
is modeled as shown in Fig.3. The matrix
cracks are assumed to exist in the 90º plies
with the uniform crack spacing of 2S. Local
delaminations are assumed to initiate and
grow symmetrically from both tips of each
matrix crack and span the entire width of the
laminate. The modeled portion of length S
is divided into six sublaminates as shown in
Fig.3. Plain strain conditions are assumed in
the width direction of the model. Three local
coordinates are used for the model as shown
in Fig.3. The displacements in y and z
directions within each sublaminate is given
by,
v( y, z) = V( y) + zβ( y) (1)
w = W ( y) (2)
The equilibrium equations for each sub-
laminate are,
N, y +Tt − Tb = 0 (3)
h
M , y −Q + (Tt + Tb ) = 0 (4)
2
Q, y + Pt − Pb = 0 (5)
Where N, Q and M are axial force, shear
force and bending moment resultants. P and
T denote interlaminar peel and shear stresses
with subscripts t and b denoting top and
bottom surfaces. Using the strain-
displacement relations, eqns (1) and (2) and
the in-plane stress-strain relationships of a
lamina, the constitutive relationships of a
sublaminate in terms of the force and
moment resultants are,
N M = A 22V, y + B 22 β, y − Q 22 α y h∆T
M M = B 22V, y + D 22 β, y − Q 22 α y hZ∆T (7)
Q = A 44 (β + W, y )
where, A22, B22, D22 and A44 are components
of the [A],[B] and [D] matrices from
classical lamination theory; h is the
thickness of the lamina; α y is the coefficient
of thermal expansion; Z is centroidal
distance of the lamina and ∆T is thermal
load. For the one-dimensional model the
other stiffness components of the anisotropic
sublaminate do not appear in the constitutive
equations due to the assumption of plane
strain with respect to the width of the
specimen. By following the procedure given
by Zhang et al [7], the solutions for
displacement in y direction of sublaminate 4
and 5 can be shown to be,
v ( 4) ( y, z) = V ( 4) ( y) + z ( 3) β ( 4) ( y)
v ( 5) ( y, z) = V ( 5) ( y) + z ( 2 ) β ( 5) ( y)
Where,
V ( 4) = ψ 3 y + ψ 4
( )
V ( 5) = − k 1 θ1e ωy + θ 2 e − ωy + θ 5 y + θ 7
β ( 4) = ψ1
β ( 5 ) = θ1 e ω y q + θ 2 e − ω y q + θ 3 y + θ 4 (14)
The detailed solution procedure for solving
laminate constants ki, θi, ψi, and ω is given
in Zhang et al [7].
The delamination induced opening
(6) displacement (DOD) calculated at the
interface of sublaminates 4 and 5 at y=S for
a given delamination length L and crack
density 1/2S is given by,
(8)
h ( 3) − h ( 2)
DOD = v ( 4) (S, ) − v ( 5) (S, ) (15)
2 2
Using equ.15, DOD for any given
delamination length, crack density and
loading condition (mechanical and/or
thermal) can be obtained.
Finite Element Model
A two-dimensional finite element
model as shown in Fig.4 was constructed to
compute DOD occurring in laminates
subjected to thermal or mechanical loads.
Finite element analyses were performed
using the commercial finite element
software, IDEAS. Due to symmetry of
geometry and loading, only one half of the
(9) specimen was modeled as shown in Fig.4.
Because the entire cross-section of the
laminate parallel to XY plane deform in the
(10)
same manner, a two-dimensional mesh
consisting of 8-noded plane strain elements
was used instead of a full 3-D finite element
analysis.
(11) First, the FE analysis was performed
for [0/902]S laminate and the DOD along the
(12) crack face was obtained from the computed
displacement of the node at the 0/90
interface. The finite element analyses were
(13)
performed for both thermal and mechanical
loading conditions with the delamination
length varying from 0.05 inch to 0.2 inch.
The DOD value was used to compare with
results obtained from the five-layer model.
Similar analysis was performed for different
laminate lay-ups, namely [15/902]s,
[30/902]s, [45/902]s, [60/902]s, [75/902]s, and
[90/902]s in order to study the effect of
orientation of the constraining layer on
DOD. In order to study the effect of stacking
sequence on DOD, two laminate stacking
sequences, [0/θ/902]S and [θ/0/902]S , were
analyzed and the results were used to verify
the analytical five-layer model.
Results and Discussions
The IM-6/3501-6 graphite/epoxy
laminate system is examined here. The basic
material properties of the composite lamina
are given in Table 1. Firstly, the DOD found
using the five-layer model is compared with
the finite element analysis for mechanical
and thermal loading conditions, respectively.
The mechanical load applied is a tensile
force, N=800 lbs and thermal load applied is
∆T=-238ºF. The [0/902]S lay-up is chosen to
conduct the comparison. For all the analyses
the transverse ply crack half-spacing S was
0.5 inch, which corresponds to a crack
density of 1.0 inch-1. Fig. 5 shows the DOD
for a delamination at 0/90 interface in the
[0/902]S laminate calculated using the five-
layer model (FLM) and finite element
analysis (FEA) plotted as a function of
delamination length. A mechanical load of
N=800 lbs was applied to the laminate, and
the delamination length was varied from
0.05 inch to 0.2 inch. Fig.6 shows a similar
comparison for a thermal loading of ∆T = -
238ºF. The generally good agreement
between the two results suggests that the
five-layer model can accurately predict the
DOD for the given range of delamination
lengths and loading conditions.
In order to examine the effect of
constraining layer’s orientation on DOD,
similar analyses were performed for [θ/902]S
laminate system with θ varying from 0º to
90º. The delamination length L was 0.2 inch.
In Fig.7, the DOD, calculated by the five-
layer model and finite element model for
mechanical loading is plotted vs. the angle
of constraining layer’s orientation for
[θ/902]S laminate system where θ=
0º,15º,…….90º. It can be seen from Fig.7
that the DOD increases as the constraining
layer’s ply angle changes from 0º to 90º. As
the constraining layer’s stiffness is reduced,
its deformation increases, resulting in
increased DOD. Fig.8 shows the same
comparison for thermal loading. It can be
seen that DOD reduces as the ply angle
changes from 0 to 90 degree. This is due to
the fact, when ply angle changes from 0º to
90º, the mismatch in coefficient of thermal
expansion between adjacent plies gradually
disappears, and so does residual stresses.
In order to study the effect of
stacking sequence on DOD, two laminate
lay-ups [0/θ/902]S and [θ/0/902]S (θ varies
from 0º to 90º) were examined. In first lay-
up the primary constraining layer’s
orientation was changed from 0º to 90º and
the DOD was calculated using five-layer
model and finite element model for both
mechanical and thermal loading. Similarly,
the secondary constraining layer’s
orientation of the [θ/0/902]S lay-up was
changed and examined for both loading
conditions. In Fig.9, DODs calculated by
both five-layer and finite element model for
both lay-ups for the case of mechanical
loading are plotted vs. the angle of the
constraining layer. No notable difference
between the two lay-ups is observed. It is
implied from FLM that the stacking
sequence of the constraining layers has no
significant influence on DOD. Similar
results were observed for the thermal
loading as well (Fig.10).
For all of the above analyses good
agreement between five-layer model and
finite element analysis was observed. It must
be stated that this study was performed
based on the assumption that the laminate
consists of pre-existing cracks with
delaminations before the load is applied.
Damage evolution is not included in the
current model. Both the analyses were used
to predict the DOD in transverse 902 ply
only. In order to accurately quantify the
permeation behavior of crygenic fule
through composite laminates it is necessary
to predict the DOD for all layers. An
expression for permeability through
composite laminates will be developed
based on the results obtained from this
study.
Conclusions
In the present paper, an expression for
predicting delamination induced opening
displacement (DOD) was derived based on
first-order shear laminate theory applied to a
five-layer model. Using this expression, the
DOD can be calculated for any laminate lay-
up for a given delamination length, crack
density and loading conditions. The DOD
predictions showed excellent agreement
with finite element analysis results. It was
seen for the examined laminates that the
orientation of the nearest neighboring ply
group of the 90º plies primarily affects the
DOD whereas the influences of the stacking
sequence are ignorable. So it can be
concluded from the analyses that the DOD is
sensitive to neighboring ply orientation and
not stacking sequence. It should be noted
that these observations were made for IM-
6/3501-6 graphite-epoxy laminate system
and these conclusions may not be
transferable to other type of material
systems.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported through
Grant No. NAG-1-02016 from NASA
Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA.
The authors are grateful to Dr. Thomas
S.Gates for materials data and for his
valuable advice. Any opinions, findings and
conclusions or recommendations expressed
in this material are those of the authors and
do not necessarily reflect the views of
NASA.
References
1. McManus, H.L., Faust, A. and
Uebelhart, S., “Gas Permeability of
Thermally Cycled Graphite-Epoxy
Composites”.
2. Kumazawa, H., Aoki, T., Ishikawa, T.
and Susuki, I., “Modeling of Propellant
Leakage through Matrix Cracks in
Composite Laminates”, AIAA paper
AIAA-2001-1217, April 2001.
3. Rivers, H., Sikora, J. and Sankaran, S.,
“Detection of Micro-Leaks through
Complex Geometries under Mechanical
Load and at Cryogenic Temperature”,
AIAA paper AIAA-2001-1218, April
2001.
4. Varna, J., Berglund, L.A., Talreja, R.
and Jakovics, A., “A Study of the
Opening Displacement of Transverse
Cracks in Cross-Ply Laminates”,
International Journal of Damage
Mechanics, Vol. 2, 1993, pp. 272-289.
5. Roy, S. and Benjamin, M., “Modeling of
Opening Displacement of Transverse
Cracks in Graphite-Epoxy Laminates
using Shear Lag Analysis”, American
Society for Composites, Paper 023, Oct
2002 (CD-ROM).
 6. Armanios, E.A., Sriram, P. and Badir, Composite Laminates”, International
A.M., “Fracture Analysis of Transverse Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol.
Crack-Tip and Free-Edge Delamination 36, 1999, pp. 813-846.
in Laminated Composites”, Composite
Materials: Fatigue and Fracture, ASTM
STP 1110, 1991, pp. 269-286.
7. Zhang, J., Fan, J., and Herrmann, K.P.,
“Delaminations Induced by Constrained
Transverse Cracking in Symmetric

Table 1. Material Properties of IM-6/3501-6

E11 E22 E33 G12 G13 G23 ν12 ν 13 ν 23 α1 α2

(Msi) (Msi) (X 10-6 ε/ºF)

24.09 1.395 1.395 0.916 0.916 0.5198 0.2965 0.2965 0.3428 -0.2557 10.86

Figure 1. Permeation path at overlap of two transverse cracks with delaminations.

 Figure 2. Five-layer model for the cracked and delaminated laminates.

Figure 3.Quarter of the repeating interval of the five-layer model laminate.

Figure 4.Finite element model of a laminate with delaminated transverse cracks.
 6.0E-04

DOD (in) 4.0E-04

2.0E-04
DOD(FLM)
DOD(FEA)
0.0E+00
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Delam.Length (in)

Figure 5. A Comparison between FLM and FEA in terms of DOD Vs Delam. Length for
Mechanical Loading in the [0/902]S Laminate

6.0E-04

4.0E-04
DOD (in)

2.0E-04
DOD(FLM)
DOD(FEA)
0.0E+00
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Delam.Length (in)

Figure 6. A Comparison between FLM and FEA in terms of DOD Vs Delam. Length for
Thermal Loading in the [0/902]S Laminate
 9.0E-03 DOD(FLM)
DOD(FEA)

6.0E-03
DOD (in)

3.0E-03

0.0E+00
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Angle of Constraining Layer

Figure 7. DOD vs. Angle of constraining layer’s orientation for mechanical loading.

6.0E-04
DOD(FLM)
DOD(FEA)
4.0E-04
DOD (in)

2.0E-04

0.0E+00
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Angle of Constraining Layer

Figure 8. DOD vs. Angle of constraining layer’s orientation for thermal loading.
 6.00E-04

4.00E-04
DOD (in)

[0/θ/90/90]s-FLM
[θ/0/90/90]s-FLM
2.00E-04
[0/θ/90/90]s-FEA
[θ/0/90/90]s-FEA

0.00E+00
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Angle of Constraining Layer

Figure 9. DOD vs. Angle θ of [0/θ/902]S and [θ/0/902]S lay-up for mechanical loading.

6.00E-04

5.00E-04
DOD (in)

4.00E-04
[0/θ/90/90]s-FLM
[θ/0/90/90]s-FLM
3.00E-04 [0/θ/90/90]s-FEA
[θ/0/90/90]s-FEA

2.00E-04
0 15 30 45 60 75 90
Angle of Constraining Layer

Figure 10. DOD vs. Angle θ of [0/θ/902]S and [θ/0/902]S lay-up for thermal loading.