4.7 Article

Adaptive multi-fidelity (AMF) modelling of progressive damage in notched composite laminates

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2021.106790

Keywords

Multi-fidelity modelling; Progressive damage; Notched composites; Multi-scale modelling

Funding

  1. NUS Research scholarship
  2. National University of Singapore

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes an adaptive multi-fidelity (AMF) modelling approach that combines high-fidelity 3D elements with discrete cracks for actively damaging areas, and lower-fidelity shell elements with smeared cracks for dormant and inactive sites. The transition criteria between these levels of modelling are studied to balance fidelity to physics with computational efficiency. Results are benchmarked against high-fidelity simulations and experimental data, showing accurate modeling of progressive failure in composite laminates.
In recent years, high-fidelity simulations with discrete crack modelling techniques have been shown to accurately model the mechanics of progressive failure in composite laminates. However, these require high computational effort and are currently not practical beyond small coupon-sized specimens with a few tens of plies. In this paper, an adaptive multi-fidelity (AMF) modelling approach is proposed, wherein actively damaging areas are modelled with high-fidelity three-dimensional (3D) brick elements and discrete cracks, while dormant and inactive sites are modelled with lower-fidelity shell elements and smeared cracks. The transition criteria between the two levels of modelling are studied in order to preserve as much fidelity to the physics as necessary while improving computational efficiency. The results are benchmarked with that of high-fidelity simulations and experimental data of open-hole tension (OHT) of cross-ply and quasi-isotropic laminates in the literature.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available