## Calculation Module » History » Version 12

*Andreas Hauffe, 09/14/2021 05:15 PM *

1 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | h1. Calculation Module |
---|---|---|---|

2 | |||

3 | h2. Generall |
||

4 | |||

5 | 10 | Andreas Hauffe | The calculation module is used to calculate loads or strains, as well as stresses within the specified laminate according to the classical laminated plate theory (!cite{Redd2003},!cite{Schu2004}). In order to be able to directly output the effects of the laminate stacking sequence on the stiffness matrix, the loads or strains and the stresses of the layers, the calculations are updated automatically. Among other things, hygrothermal effects can also be taken into account !cite{Barth2009}. |

6 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

7 | 10 | Andreas Hauffe | During a calculation, the system of linear equations listed below is solved with the help of the Gaussian elimination method. The calculated unknowns are entered in the fields of the loads and strains. In addition, the stresses and strains in each laminate layer are calculated. These can be viewed in the internal forces subwindow in the local fiber coordinate system. |

8 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

9 | 10 | Andreas Hauffe | h2. Windows Layout |

10 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

11 | 5 | Andreas Hauffe | p=. {{thumbnail(berechnung.png,size=500,title=calculation window)}} |

12 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

13 | 11 | Andreas Hauffe | h3. 1 - ABD matrix |

14 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

15 | 10 | Andreas Hauffe | Based on the stiffness matrices of the individual layers, the membrane stiffness matrix $\mathbf{A}$, coupling stiffness matrix $\mathbf{B}$ and bending stiffness matrix $\mathbf{D}$ of the laminate are automatically calculated with repect to the classical laminated plate theory and the three matrices are shown separately and color-coded within the ABD matrix. |

16 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

17 | 10 | Andreas Hauffe | h3. 2 - Internal Loads, Strain and hygrothermal loads |

18 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

19 | 11 | Andreas Hauffe | Both membrane internal loads and moments as well as strain and curvatures can be specified as loads on the defined laminate. Either the load or the strain can be specified in the input fields under 2a and 2b for each coordinate direction. In addition, a temperature difference and the percentage change in the relative humidity can be specified in the fields in window section 2c. According to the classical laminated plate theory applies to mechanical and hygrothermal loads and strains |

20 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

21 | 6 | Andreas Hauffe | $$\begin{pmatrix} \underline{n} \\ \underline{m} \end{pmatrix}_{mech} = \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{A} & \mathbf{B} \\ \mathbf{B} & \mathbf{D} \end{bmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} \underline {\varepsilon} \\ \underline {\kappa} \end{pmatrix} - \begin{pmatrix} \underline{n} \\ \underline{m} \end{pmatrix}_{hygrotherm}$$ |

22 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

23 | If no effects of the hygrothermal loads are to be considered, the fields for the temperature difference and the percentage humidity difference must be filled with the values zero. This view is the standard setting in the calculation module of eLamX². |
||

24 | |||

25 | 11 | Andreas Hauffe | h3. 3 - hygrothermal internal loads |

26 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

27 | 11 | Andreas Hauffe | At this point, the resulting hygrothermal internal loads are output based on the specified temperature difference and the percentage difference in humidity on the entire laminate. They are not input data. The selection of the check boxes for mechanical loads and the resulting distortions has no influence on the hygrothermal cutting loads. They result from the direction-dependent thermal conductivity and swelling coefficients of the individual layers as well as their stiffness matrices and the specified temperature and humidity difference. |

28 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

29 | h3. 4 - Stress and strain distribution button |
||

30 | |||

31 | 12 | Andreas Hauffe | This button can be used to display the stress and strain distribution within the laminate in local and global coordinates for the coordinate axes of the laminate plane. The output is only qualitative. The specified coordinate directions relate to the fiber angle, the specified x-value reflecting the size in the 0° direction and the y-value reflecting the size in the 90° direction of the laminate. The fiber orientations of the individual layers are shown by the hatching. Horizontal lines correspond to zero degrees and vertical lines to 90 degrees fiber angles. If the fiber angles of adjacent layers are very close together, the hatching is output in different colors. |

32 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

33 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | p=. {{thumbnail(spannungsverteilung.png,size=500,title=call up 3D failure body of the single layer)}} |

34 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

35 | h3. 5 - Delete button |
||

36 | |||

37 | 12 | Andreas Hauffe | Pressing the button deletes the specified loads and the calculated unknown internal loads and distortions, as well as the calculated stress distribution. |

38 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

39 | 12 | Andreas Hauffe | h3. 6 - Representation of the strains and curvatures on the basis of a square plate |

40 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

41 | This button can be used to open a window in which the calculated strains and curvatures are visualized on a square plate. This is used for a better understanding of the coupling effects within the ABD matrix. |
||

42 | |||

43 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | p=. {{thumbnail(darstellung_eps_kappa.png, size=500, title=call up 3D failure body of the single layer)}} |

44 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

45 | 12 | Andreas Hauffe | h3. 7 - Layer data in the local fiber coordinate system |

46 | 1 | Andreas Hauffe | |

47 | 12 | Andreas Hauffe | After a calculation, the stresses or strains of each layer of the composite are calculated in this part of the window, depending on the selection. The evaluation is carried out on the top and bottom of each individual layer. The stresses in each layer are compared with their strengths and a reserve factor is calculated on the top and bottom of the layer using the selected failure criterion. In addition, the type of failure to be expected is specified with regard to the failure criterion selected for each layer. |

48 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

49 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | p=. {{thumbnail(aufruf_3d-versagenskoerper_einzelschicht.png, size=500, title=calling up 3D failure body of the single layer)}} |

50 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

51 | In addition to displaying the failure criteria using the reserve factors, right-click on a layer to call up the Failure Criteria module and display the failure body of the individual layer together with the stress state in the stress area (see figure). The current stress on the composite layer is entered as a red point. If the calculated stress vector lies within the selected failure body, only its line is visible. This makes it clear which tension combination prevails in each layer. |
||

52 | |||

53 | h2. Laminate information / engineering constants |
||

54 | |||

55 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | p=. {{thumbnail(laminatinformationen.png, size=500, title=call up 3D failure body of the single layer)}} |

56 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

57 | This window can be opened by right-clicking on a laminate and then selecting engineering constants. |
||

58 | |||

59 | 11 | Andreas Hauffe | h3. 1 - ABD matrix |

60 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

61 | 11 | Andreas Hauffe | Based on the stiffness matrices of the individual layers, the membrane stiffness matrix $\mathbf{A}$, coupling stiffness matrix $\mathbf{B} $ and bending stiffness matrix $\mathbf{D} $ of the composite are automatically calculated and color-coded when the calculation module is called up on the basis of classical laminate theory shown separately within the ABD matrix. This matrix is shown in the form of a table so that all values can be copied out. |

62 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

63 | h3. 2 - Compliance matrix of the composite |
||

64 | |||

65 | The inverse of the stiffness matrix of the laminate is displayed here. It may be that for symmetrical laminates, terms of the inverse coupling stiffness matrix (b) are different from zero, but very small. This results from numerical inaccuracies in the double precision calculation within the program. This matrix is shown in the form of a table so that all values can be copied out. |
||

66 | |||

67 | h3. 3 - engineering constants of the multilayer composite |
||

68 | |||

69 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | The engineering constants of the multi-layer composite are also automatically calculated according to !cite{Schu2004} for membrane and bending loads. This is done both with and without consideration of transverse contraction hindrance (QKB). In the case of asymmetrical laminates, in which there is a coupling between membrane and bending deformation, the engineering constants determined in this way have little meaning and should be used with caution. |

70 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

71 | h3. 4 - Coefficient of expansion of the multilayer composite for heat and moisture |
||

72 | |||

73 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | In this part of the window the thermal expansion coefficients $\alpha^T_i$ and the swelling coefficient $\beta_i$ of the total composite are output according to the system of units that was selected for specifying the values of the individual layer. Here, too, the definition according to !cite{Schu2004} applies and thus |

74 | \begin{equation} |
||

75 | \left( |
||

76 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

77 | \epsilon_x \\ |
||

78 | \epsilon_y \\ |
||

79 | \gamma_{xy} |
||

80 | \end{array} |
||

81 | \right)_{T+H} = |
||

82 | \Delta T |
||

83 | \left( |
||

84 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

85 | \alpha^T_x \\ |
||

86 | \alpha^T_y \\ |
||

87 | \alpha^T_{xy} |
||

88 | \end{array} |
||

89 | \right) + |
||

90 | \Delta c |
||

91 | \left( |
||

92 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

93 | \beta_x \\ |
||

94 | \beta_y \\ |
||

95 | \beta_{xy} |
||

96 | \end{array} |
||

97 | \right) |
||

98 | \end{equation} |
||

99 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

100 | |||

101 | h2. Notes on the engineering constants |
||

102 | |||

103 | The engineering constants can be determined for two types of stress. On the one hand for a membrane stress and on the other hand for a bending stress. In both cases, this is possible with and without hindrance to lateral contraction. |
||

104 | |||

105 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | The procedure is explained on the basis of the explanations in !cite{Schu2004} for symmetrical laminates. For the membrane state, the ABD matrix becomes |

106 | \begin{equation} |
||

107 | \left( |
||

108 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

109 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | n \\ |

110 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | m |

111 | \end{array} |
||

112 | \right) = |
||

113 | \left[ |
||

114 | \begin{array}{cc} |
||

115 | A & B \\ |
||

116 | B & D |
||

117 | \end{array} |
||

118 | \right] |
||

119 | \left( |
||

120 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

121 | \epsilon \\ |
||

122 | \kappa |
||

123 | \end{array} |
||

124 | \right) |
||

125 | \end{equation} |
||

126 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | only the A-matrix is used, which is permissible with symmetrical laminates ($ B = 0 $). This results in |

127 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{equation} |

128 | \left( |
||

129 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

130 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | n_x \\ |

131 | n_y \\ |
||

132 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | n_{xy} |

133 | \end{array} |
||

134 | \right) = |
||

135 | \left[ |
||

136 | \begin{array}{ccc} |
||

137 | A_{11} & A_{12} & A_{13} \\ |
||

138 | A_{21} & A_{22} & A_{23} \\ |
||

139 | A_{31} & A_{32} & A_{33} |
||

140 | \end{array} |
||

141 | \right] |
||

142 | \left( |
||

143 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

144 | \epsilon_{x} \\ |
||

145 | \epsilon_{y} \\ |
||

146 | \gamma_{xy} |
||

147 | \end{array} |
||

148 | \right) |
||

149 | \end{equation} |
||

150 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | The aim is now to come up with an equation for the stress $ \ sigma_ {x} $, which corresponds to the uniaxial elasticity law $ \ sigma = E \ epsilon $. To do this, the equation is divided by the total thickness of the laminate. This corresponds to a homogenization of the material and one obtains: |

151 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{equation} |

152 | \left( |
||

153 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

154 | \sigma_x \\ |
||

155 | \sigma_y \\ |
||

156 | \tau_{xy} |
||

157 | \end{array} |
||

158 | \right) = \frac{1}{t_{ges}} |
||

159 | \left[ |
||

160 | \begin{array}{ccc} |
||

161 | A_{11} & A_{12} & A_{13} \\ |
||

162 | A_{21} & A_{22} & A_{23} \\ |
||

163 | A_{31} & A_{32} & A_{33} |
||

164 | \end{array} |
||

165 | \right] |
||

166 | \left( |
||

167 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

168 | \epsilon_{x} \\ |
||

169 | \epsilon_{y} \\ |
||

170 | \gamma_{xy} |
||

171 | \end{array} |
||

172 | \right) \ . |
||

173 | \end{equation} |
||

174 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | This equation corresponds to a single anisotropic layer across the entire thickness. There are two ways to come up with an equation according to the uniaxial law of elasticity. On the one hand, $ \ epsilon_ {y} $ and $ \ gamma_ {xy} $ are set to zero, which corresponds to a transverse contraction hindrance, and the following equations are obtained: |

175 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{equation} |

176 | \left( |
||

177 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

178 | \sigma_x \\ |
||

179 | \sigma_y \\ |
||

180 | \tau_{xy} |
||

181 | \end{array} |
||

182 | \right) = \frac{1}{t_{ges}} |
||

183 | \left[ |
||

184 | \begin{array}{ccc} |
||

185 | A_{11} & A_{12} & A_{13} \\ |
||

186 | A_{21} & A_{22} & A_{23} \\ |
||

187 | A_{31} & A_{32} & A_{33} |
||

188 | \end{array} |
||

189 | \right] |
||

190 | \left( |
||

191 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

192 | \epsilon_{x} \\ |
||

193 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | 0 \\ |

194 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | 0 |

195 | \end{array} |
||

196 | \right) \ . |
||

197 | \end{equation} |
||

198 | \begin{equation} |
||

199 | \sigma_x = \frac{A_{11}}{t_{ges}}\epsilon_{x} |
||

200 | \end{equation} |
||

201 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | In order to obtain a modulus of elasticity without hindrance to transverse contraction, the equation has to be transformed and $ \ sigma_ {y} $ and $ \ tau_ {xy} $ are set to zero. |

202 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{equation} |

203 | \left( |
||

204 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

205 | \epsilon_{x} \\ |
||

206 | \epsilon_{y} \\ |
||

207 | \gamma_{xy} |
||

208 | \end{array} |
||

209 | \right) |
||

210 | = t_{ges} |
||

211 | \left[ |
||

212 | \begin{array}{ccc} |
||

213 | A_{11} & A_{12} & A_{13} \\ |
||

214 | A_{21} & A_{22} & A_{23} \\ |
||

215 | A_{31} & A_{32} & A_{33} |
||

216 | \end{array} |
||

217 | \right]^{-1} |
||

218 | \left( |
||

219 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

220 | \sigma_x \\ |
||

221 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | 0 \\ |

222 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | 0 |

223 | \end{array} |
||

224 | \right) |
||

225 | \ . |
||

226 | \end{equation} |
||

227 | \begin{equation} |
||

228 | \sigma_x = \frac{1}{(A^{-1})_{11} \cdot t_{ges}}\epsilon_{x} |
||

229 | \end{equation} |
||

230 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | In this way, all engineering constants can now be determined. The constants without hindrance to transverse contractions result from: |

231 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{eqnarray} |

232 | E_x & = & \frac{1}{(A^{-1})_{11} \cdot t_{ges}} \\ |
||

233 | E_y & = & \frac{1}{(A^{-1})_{22} \cdot t_{ges}} \\ |
||

234 | G_{xy} & = & \frac{1}{(A^{-1})_{66} \cdot t_{ges}} \\ |
||

235 | \nu_{xy} & = & -\frac{(A^{-1})_{12}}{(A^{-1})_{11}} \\ |
||

236 | \nu_{yx} & = & -\frac{(A^{-1})_{12}}{(A^{-1})_{22}} |
||

237 | \end{eqnarray} |
||

238 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | The constants with transverse contraction obstruction result from: |

239 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{eqnarray} |

240 | E_x & = & \frac{A_{11}}{t_{ges}} \\ |
||

241 | E_y & = & \frac{A_{22}}{t_{ges}} \\ |
||

242 | G_{xy} & = & \frac{A_{66}}{t_{ges}} \\ |
||

243 | \end{eqnarray} |
||

244 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

245 | If a transverse contraction hindrance is taken into account, transverse contraction numbers are not useful and are therefore not included. |
||

246 | |||

247 | 9 | Andreas Hauffe | These homogenized material parameters are only permissible for membrane loads. An equivalent procedure using the D-matrix is necessary for bending, since the position of the layers has a great influence in the case of bending stresses in contrast to membrane stresses. The derivation of the calculation rule is taken from !cite{Schu2004}. |

248 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

249 | The analogy to the beam is used for bending. Since the laminate board has a rectangular cross-section, it is compared with the bending elasticity law of a rectangular beam and the following applies: |
||

250 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{equation} |

251 | M = -EI \cdot w'' = - E \frac{b t^3}{12} \cdot w'' \rightarrow m = -E \frac{t^3}{12} \cdot w'' \ . |
||

252 | \end{equation} |
||

253 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

254 | In addition, $ w '' = - \ kappa $ applies. |
||

255 | |||

256 | Bending loads with the D-matrix are described for the laminate board. |
||

257 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{equation} |

258 | \left( |
||

259 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

260 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | m_x \\ |

261 | m_y \\ |
||

262 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | m_{xy} |

263 | \end{array} |
||

264 | \right) = |
||

265 | \left[ |
||

266 | \begin{array}{ccc} |
||

267 | D_{11} & D_{12} & D_{13} \\ |
||

268 | D_{21} & D_{22} & D_{23} \\ |
||

269 | D_{31} & D_{32} & D_{33} |
||

270 | \end{array} |
||

271 | \right] |
||

272 | \left( |
||

273 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

274 | \kappa_{x} \\ |
||

275 | \kappa_{y} \\ |
||

276 | \kappa_{xy} |
||

277 | \end{array} |
||

278 | \right) |
||

279 | \end{equation} |
||

280 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | Now the procedure is equivalent to stressing the membrane. Assuming a transverse contraction hindrance (in this case a transverse curvature hindrance) results: |

281 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{equation} |

282 | \left( |
||

283 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

284 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | m_x \\ |

285 | m_y \\ |
||

286 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | m_{xy} |

287 | \end{array} |
||

288 | \right) = |
||

289 | \left[ |
||

290 | \begin{array}{ccc} |
||

291 | D_{11} & D_{12} & D_{13} \\ |
||

292 | D_{21} & D_{22} & D_{23} \\ |
||

293 | D_{31} & D_{32} & D_{33} |
||

294 | \end{array} |
||

295 | \right] |
||

296 | \left( |
||

297 | \begin{array}{c} |
||

298 | \kappa_{x} \\ |
||

299 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | 0 \\ |

300 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | 0 |

301 | \end{array} |
||

302 | \right) |
||

303 | \end{equation} |
||

304 | \begin{equation} |
||

305 | m_x = D_{11} \kappa_x |
||

306 | \end{equation} |
||

307 | \begin{equation} |
||

308 | E_{x,b} = \frac{12}{t_{ges}^3}D_{11} |
||

309 | \end{equation} |
||

310 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

311 | Thus, all engineering constants with cross-contact obstruction result in: |
||

312 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{eqnarray} |

313 | E_{x,b} & = & \frac{12}{t_{ges}^3}D_{11} \\ |
||

314 | E_{y,b} & = & \frac{12}{t_{ges}^3}D_{22} \\ |
||

315 | G_{x,b} & = & \frac{12}{t_{ges}^3}D_{66} \\ |
||

316 | \end{eqnarray} |
||

317 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | and without hindrance to transverse contraction: |

318 | 8 | Andreas Hauffe | \begin{eqnarray} |

319 | E_{x,b} & = & \frac{12}{(D^{-1})_{11} \cdot t_{ges}^3} \\ |
||

320 | E_{y,b} & = & \frac{12}{(D^{-1})_{22} \cdot t_{ges}^3} \\ |
||

321 | G_{x,b} & = & \frac{12}{(D^{-1})_{66} \cdot t_{ges}^3} \\ |
||

322 | \end{eqnarray} |
||

323 | 3 | Andreas Hauffe | |

324 | At this point, too, transverse contraction numbers are not very useful, as these correspond more to transverse curvature numbers. |
||

325 | |||

326 | This procedure generally only applies to symmetrical laminates. In the case of asymmetrical laminates, the inverse of the entire ABD matrix must be formed and then the corresponding terms must be used. |
||

327 | |||

328 | !putbib{} |