Advertisement

Fundamental problem in optimizing the biaxial testing specimen

  • Haroon Imtiaz
  • YaoPeng Fang
  • JianBin DuEmail author
  • Bin LiuEmail author
Article Special Topic: Current Progress in Solid Mechanics and Physical Mechanics
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

Most of the elements in structural design are subjected to the complex loading conditions that need to be predicted in advance for a reliable design. The failure prediction of these structural elements is based on the failure theories that employ the experimental data of the uniaxial, the biaxial and the shear tests. Among these tests, the biaxial testing is used to model the behavior of the structure loaded in more than one direction. In this study, we discover an interesting fact for the biaxial tension specimen that the thickness reduction of the measuring region cannot increase the stress to a high level. This behavior of the biaxial testing is different from the uniaxial testing where the thickness reduction of the measuring region always increases its stress to a higher level. Therefore, we further investigate the biaxial testing specimen via related fundamental problem, i.e., an axisymmetric plate with varying thickness under axisymmetric tension. We perform the shape optimization based on our analytical solution and the FEM results. For an infinite axisymmetric disk, the optimized design should include a low slope diverging section connecting the inner to outer region. On the contrary, the larger inner measuring region for finite axisymmetric disk would result in higher corresponding stress. These conclusions can be used as a guideline for the design of a biaxial testing specimen.

uniaxial testing biaxial testing axisymmetric disk problem optimization 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Juhasz J, Rolfes R, Rohwer K. A new strength model for application of a physically based failure criterion to orthogonal 3D fiber reinforced plastics. Compos Sci Technol, 2001, 61: 1821–1832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaddour A, Hinton M. Maturity of 3D failure criteria for fibre-reinforced composites: Comparison between theories and experiments: Part B of WWFE-II. J Composite Mater, 2013, 47: 925–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camanho P P, Arteiro A, Melro A R, et al. Three-dimensional invariant-based failure criteria for fibre-reinforced composites. Int J Solids Struct, 2015, 55: 92–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Molker H, Wilhelmsson D, Gutkin R, et al. Orthotropic criteria for transverse failure of non-crimp fabric-reinforced composites. J Composite Mater, 2016, 50: 2445–2458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jones C, Greene R. Pulled in different directions. Materials World, 2001, 9: 19–21Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Makinde A, Thibodeau L, Neale K W. Development of an apparatus for biaxial testing using cruciform specimens. Exp Mech, 1992, 32: 138–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chen A S, Matthews F L. A review of multiaxial/biaxial loading tests for composite materials. Composites, 1993, 24: 395–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wu X D, Wan M, Zhou X B. Biaxial tensile testing of cruciform specimen under complex loading. J Mater Processing Tech, 2005, 168: 181–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tsai S W, Wu E M. A general theory of strength for anisotropic materials. J Composite Mater, 1971, 5: 58–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hashin Z. Failure criteria for unidirectional fiber composites. J Appl Mech, 1980, 47: 329–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li S, Sitnikova E, Liang Y, et al. The Tsai-Wu failure criterion rationalised in the context of UD composites. Compos Part A-Appl Sci Manufacturing, 2017, 102: 207–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoge K G. Influence of strain rate on mechanical properties of 6061-T6 aluminum under uniaxial and biaxial states of stress. Exp Mech, 1966, 6: 204–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guess T R. Biaxial testing of composite cylinders: Experimental-theoretical comparison. Composites, 1980, 11: 139–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Choo V K S, Hull D. Influence of radial compressive stress owing to pressure on the failure modes of composite tube specimens. J Composite Mater, 1983, 17: 344–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ohtake Y, Rokugawa S, Masumoto H. Geometry determination of cruciform-type specimen and biaxial tensile test of C/C composites. Key Eng Mater, 1998, 164: 151–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tasan C C, Hoefnagels J P M, Quaak G, et al. In-plane biaxial loading of sheet metal until fracture. In: Proceedings of the 2008 SEM XI International Congress and Exposition on Experimental and Applied Mechanics. Orlando, 2008Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yu Y, Wan M, Wu X D, et al. Design of a cruciform biaxial tensile specimen for limit strain analysis by FEM. J Mater Proces Tech, 2002, 123: 67–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smits A, Van Hemelrijck D, Philippidis T P, et al. Design of a cruciform specimen for biaxial testing of fibre reinforced composite laminates. Compos Sci Technol, 2006, 66: 964–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Baptista R, Claudio R A, Reis L, et al. Numerical study of in-plane biaxial fatigue crack growth with different phase shift angle loadings on optimal specimen geometries. Theor Appl Fract Mech, 2016, 85: 16–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Correa E, Barroso A, Pérez M D, et al. Design for a cruciform coupon used for tensile biaxial transverse tests on composite materials. Comos Sci Technol, 2017, 145: 138–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Upadhyay M V, Patra A, Wen W, et al. Mechanical response of stainless steel subjected to biaxial load path changes: Cruciform experiments and multi-scale modeling. Int J Plast, 2018, 108: 144–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Baptista R, Claudio R A, Reis L, et al. Optimization of cruciform specimens for biaxial fatigue loading with direct multi search. Theor Appl Fract Mech, 2015, 80: 65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Baptista R, Claudio R A, Reis L, et al. Optimal cruciform specimen design using the direct multi-search method and design variable influence study. Procedia Struct Integrity, 2017, 5: 659–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© © Science China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Engineering Mechanics, Applied Mechanics LabTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations