Comparison of composite damage growth tools for static behavior of notched composite laminates
This paper provides overall comparisons of the static results of an Air Force Research Laboratory exploration into the state of the art of existing technology in composite progressive damage analysis. In this study, blind and re-calibration bench-marking exercises were performed using nine different...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of composite materials 2017-05, Vol.51 (10), p.1493-1524 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1524 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 1493 |
container_title | Journal of composite materials |
container_volume | 51 |
creator | Engelstad, Stephen P Clay, Stephen B |
description | This paper provides overall comparisons of the static results of an Air Force Research Laboratory exploration into the state of the art of existing technology in composite progressive damage analysis. In this study, blind and re-calibration bench-marking exercises were performed using nine different composite progressive damage analysis codes on unnotched and notched (open-hole) composite coupons under both static and fatigue loading. This paper summarizes the results of the static portion of this program. Comparisons are made herein of specimen stiffness and strength predictions against each other and the test data. Overall percent error data is presented, as well as a list of observations and lessons learned during this year-long effort. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0021998316675945 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>sage_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_0021998316675945</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0021998316675945</sage_id><sourcerecordid>10.1177_0021998316675945</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-609d6b4859c5ed152a280f970cbee918bbb779846bd7d91b9ff08220cdeff4b23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEtLxDAUhYMoOI7uXeYPRG_SR5KlFF8w4EbBlSXPaYe2GZKo-O9tGRciuLoczv0u9xyELilcUcr5NQCjUoqC1jWvZFkdoRWtCiBcFq_HaLXYZPFP0VlKOwDgtKxX6K0J417FPoUJB4_NrELqs8NWjWrr8DaGz9zhHMKQsA8Rp6xyb7B2nfroZz1DU8imc_YXPKixn1R26RydeDUkd_Ez1-jl7va5eSCbp_vH5mZDDBM0kxqkrXUpKmkqZ2nFFBPgJQejnZNUaK05l6KsteVWUi29B8EYGOu8LzUr1ggOd00MKUXn233sRxW_Wgrt0k_7t58ZIQckzTnbXXiP0_zh__vffh5nYg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of composite damage growth tools for static behavior of notched composite laminates</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Engelstad, Stephen P ; Clay, Stephen B</creator><creatorcontrib>Engelstad, Stephen P ; Clay, Stephen B</creatorcontrib><description>This paper provides overall comparisons of the static results of an Air Force Research Laboratory exploration into the state of the art of existing technology in composite progressive damage analysis. In this study, blind and re-calibration bench-marking exercises were performed using nine different composite progressive damage analysis codes on unnotched and notched (open-hole) composite coupons under both static and fatigue loading. This paper summarizes the results of the static portion of this program. Comparisons are made herein of specimen stiffness and strength predictions against each other and the test data. Overall percent error data is presented, as well as a list of observations and lessons learned during this year-long effort.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9983</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1530-793X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0021998316675945</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><ispartof>Journal of composite materials, 2017-05, Vol.51 (10), p.1493-1524</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-609d6b4859c5ed152a280f970cbee918bbb779846bd7d91b9ff08220cdeff4b23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-609d6b4859c5ed152a280f970cbee918bbb779846bd7d91b9ff08220cdeff4b23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0021998316675945$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0021998316675945$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21817,27922,27923,43619,43620</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Engelstad, Stephen P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clay, Stephen B</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of composite damage growth tools for static behavior of notched composite laminates</title><title>Journal of composite materials</title><description>This paper provides overall comparisons of the static results of an Air Force Research Laboratory exploration into the state of the art of existing technology in composite progressive damage analysis. In this study, blind and re-calibration bench-marking exercises were performed using nine different composite progressive damage analysis codes on unnotched and notched (open-hole) composite coupons under both static and fatigue loading. This paper summarizes the results of the static portion of this program. Comparisons are made herein of specimen stiffness and strength predictions against each other and the test data. Overall percent error data is presented, as well as a list of observations and lessons learned during this year-long effort.</description><issn>0021-9983</issn><issn>1530-793X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kEtLxDAUhYMoOI7uXeYPRG_SR5KlFF8w4EbBlSXPaYe2GZKo-O9tGRciuLoczv0u9xyELilcUcr5NQCjUoqC1jWvZFkdoRWtCiBcFq_HaLXYZPFP0VlKOwDgtKxX6K0J417FPoUJB4_NrELqs8NWjWrr8DaGz9zhHMKQsA8Rp6xyb7B2nfroZz1DU8imc_YXPKixn1R26RydeDUkd_Ez1-jl7va5eSCbp_vH5mZDDBM0kxqkrXUpKmkqZ2nFFBPgJQejnZNUaK05l6KsteVWUi29B8EYGOu8LzUr1ggOd00MKUXn233sRxW_Wgrt0k_7t58ZIQckzTnbXXiP0_zh__vffh5nYg</recordid><startdate>201705</startdate><enddate>201705</enddate><creator>Engelstad, Stephen P</creator><creator>Clay, Stephen B</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201705</creationdate><title>Comparison of composite damage growth tools for static behavior of notched composite laminates</title><author>Engelstad, Stephen P ; Clay, Stephen B</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-609d6b4859c5ed152a280f970cbee918bbb779846bd7d91b9ff08220cdeff4b23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Engelstad, Stephen P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clay, Stephen B</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Journal of composite materials</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Engelstad, Stephen P</au><au>Clay, Stephen B</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of composite damage growth tools for static behavior of notched composite laminates</atitle><jtitle>Journal of composite materials</jtitle><date>2017-05</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>51</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1493</spage><epage>1524</epage><pages>1493-1524</pages><issn>0021-9983</issn><eissn>1530-793X</eissn><abstract>This paper provides overall comparisons of the static results of an Air Force Research Laboratory exploration into the state of the art of existing technology in composite progressive damage analysis. In this study, blind and re-calibration bench-marking exercises were performed using nine different composite progressive damage analysis codes on unnotched and notched (open-hole) composite coupons under both static and fatigue loading. This paper summarizes the results of the static portion of this program. Comparisons are made herein of specimen stiffness and strength predictions against each other and the test data. Overall percent error data is presented, as well as a list of observations and lessons learned during this year-long effort.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/0021998316675945</doi><tpages>32</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-9983 |
ispartof | Journal of composite materials, 2017-05, Vol.51 (10), p.1493-1524 |
issn | 0021-9983 1530-793X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_0021998316675945 |
source | SAGE Complete A-Z List |
title | Comparison of composite damage growth tools for static behavior of notched composite laminates |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T10%3A47%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-sage_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20composite%20damage%20growth%20tools%20for%20static%20behavior%20of%20notched%20composite%20laminates&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20composite%20materials&rft.au=Engelstad,%20Stephen%20P&rft.date=2017-05&rft.volume=51&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1493&rft.epage=1524&rft.pages=1493-1524&rft.issn=0021-9983&rft.eissn=1530-793X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0021998316675945&rft_dat=%3Csage_cross%3E10.1177_0021998316675945%3C/sage_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0021998316675945&rfr_iscdi=true |