40

CHAPTER 3 Braided Composite Coupon Tests

In this chapter material characterization tests of the coupons cut from one of the braided
composite frames will be presented and discussed. Preliminary measurements and charac-
terization of the material used in the current research are presented in Section 3.1. Previ-
ous tests on 2x2 2D triaxial braided composite specimens are presented in Section 3.2.
The fiber volume fraction tests are covered in Section 3.3. The tensile tests are presented
and discussed in Section 3.4. The flexure tests are presented and discussed in Section 3.5.
A comparison between tensile and flexure tests results is discussed in Section 3.6. A cor-
relation between the tensile and flexure test results with the analysis code TEXCAD is
presented in Section 3.7.
3.1 2x2 2D triaxially braided composite material coupons
The rectangular coupons used in the fiber volume fraction, tensile, and flexure tests are cut
from the web of the frame labeled A, one of the frames manufactured by Lockheed and
provided to NASA for this research. An advantage of manufacturing fuselage frames
using 2D triaxial braiding is that the fibers can be made to follow the curvature of the part
(Barrie and Skolnik, 1993). Consequently, the axial and bias yarns in the braided material
follow the curvature of the frame. This manner of fabrication means that the axial yarns
are not aligned with the straight edges of the coupon over its entire length. Special care is
taken in cutting the coupons from frame A so that the longitudinal axis of the rectangular
coupon is parallel to the chord of the circular arc of the frame. Since the average radius of
41
the frame A is about 120 inches
1
, and the maximum longitudinal dimension of a coupon is
ten inches, the maximum change in the angle tangent to the axial yarns from one end of
the coupon to the other end is less than five degrees. This method of extracting the cou-
pons from the frame means that the axis perpendicular to the longitudinal direction at cen-
ter of the coupon is an axis of symmetry for the material and the geometry of the coupon.
For the braided material of these frames, the yarn filament count of the axial yarns n
o

= 18k, and the yarn filament count of the braider yarns n
b
= 6k. Two additional and impor-
tant parameters related to the braided material are measured. One of them is the axial yarn
spacing d
o
, that is defined as the reciprocal of the distance between the centerline of two
adjacent axial yarns. This distance is found to be about 0.53 cm, so d
o
= 1.87 yarns/cm.
The second parameter of paramount importance in defining this textile composite is the
braid angle
b
, defined as the angle that the braid yarns make with respect to the longitudi-
nal axis. The measurements of the braid angles varied between 61 and 68. An average
value for the braid angle of
b
= 64 is selected for subsequent computations of effective
material properties using the TEXCAD code. A photograph of the braided composite
taken from one of the coupons is shown in Fig. 3.1.
The percentage of axial yarns is another important parameter characterizing the mate-
rial. To obtain the percentage of axial yarns, we use the formulas given by Naik (1994a).
Let L
o
, A
o
, and V
o
denote the length, cross-sectional area, and volume of the axial yarns in
the representative unit cell (RUC), and let L
b
, A
b
, and V
b
denote the length, cross-sectional
area, and volume of the braider yarns in the RUC. If V
t
is the total volume of yarns in the
RUC, then the percentage of axial yarns is calculated as the ratio V
o
/V
t
multiplied by 100.
In the formulas to follow, it is necessary to assume that the yarn packing density
d
= 0.75,
and the yarn filament diameter d
f
= 7 m. The formulas from Naik (1994a) to calculate
percentage of axial yarns are
1. Detailed measurements of the braided frames are presented in Chapter 4.
42
(3.1)
(3.2)
(3.3)
(3.4)
(3.5)
(3.6)
(3.7)
Substituting the measured and assumed quantities for the material in the above formulas,
the percentage of axial yarns is calculated to be 39.67%.
Fig. 3.1 Close-up photograph of the braided composite taken
from one of the coupons cut from frame A.
L
0
8d
0

b
tan
------------- =
L
b
2d
0

b
sin
------------- =
A
0
d
f
2
n
0
4
d
--------------- =
A
b
d
f
2
n
b
4
d
--------------- =
V
0
A
0
L
0
=
V
b
8A
b
L
b
=
V
t
V
0
V
b
+ =
43
In summary, the architecture of the 2x2 2D triaxially braided composite material of the
frames in this study is described by the notation [0
18k
/ 64
6k
] 39.7% axial.
3.2 Other sources of material property data
Material property data obtained from Lockheed, and data published by Masters and
Ifju (1996), for architectures similar to the [0
18k
/ 64
6k
] 39.7% axial braided material in
this study are presented here for comparative purposes. Coupon test data evaluated by
Lockheed on the 2x2 2D braided architectures of [0
12k
/60
6k
] 33.3% axial, and [0
24k
/
60
6k
] 50.0% axial, are summarized in Tables 3.1 and 3.2, respectively. Using PR500
epoxy resin, the specimens were fabricated by resin transfer molding (RTM) at Lock-
heeds facility in Marietta, Georgia (Masters and Portanova, 1996; Barrie and Skolnik,
1993).
Table 3.1 Material properties of the 2x2 2D triaxially braided composite [0
12k
/
60
6k
] 33.3% axial (Lockheed).
Measured
values
Material characterization test
longitudinal
unnotched
tension
transverse
unnotched
tension
longitudinal
unnotched
compression
transverse
unnotched
compression rail shear
specimen
thickness
D, in.
0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.16
fiber volume
fraction V
f
,%
54.94 56.63 54.94 56.63 59.39
modulus E or
G, msi
7.15 6.97 7.13 6.30 2.47
ultimate
strength
u
or

u
, ksi
72.78 58.66 65.40 49.01 30.14
ultimate strain

u
,
9893 8697 10416 8359 ---
Poisson's ratio,

0.30 0.29 --- --- ---

44
Masters and Ifju (1996) conducted an experimental program to define the mechanical
response of three 2x2 2D triaxially braided textile composite materials for tensile loading.
These specimens are triaxially braided AS4 graphite fiber preforms impregnated with
Shells 1895 epoxy system, a resin specifically developed for resin transfer molding. The
three braided architectures investigated in this study are defined in Table 3.3. Fiber vol-
Table 3.2 Material properties of the 2x2 2D triaxially braided composite [0
24k
/
60
6k
] 50.0% axial (Lockheed).
Measured
values
Material characterization test
longitudinal
unnotched
tension
transverse
unnotched
tension
longitudinal
unnotched
compression
transverse
unnotched
compression rail shear
specimen
thickness
D, in.
0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.16
fiber volume
fraction V
f
,%
64.97 56.81 64.97 56.81 57.41
modulus E or
G, msi
9.94 5.56 9.87 5.07 1.89
ultimate
strength
u
or

u
, ksi
96.90 40.66 77.70 40.36 25.62
ultimate strain

u
,
9530 7613 8527 8443 ---
Poisson's ratio,

0.28 0.15 --- --- ---

Table 3.3 Triaxial braid configurations from Masters and Ifju (1996).
material architecture
0 yarn
spacing
(yarn/cm)
braid yarn
spacing
(yarn/cm)
[0
24k
/63
12k
] 31.5% axial 1.64 3.61
[0
18k
/66.5
6k
]37.6% axial 1.88 4.72
[0
18k
/70
6k
] 34.0% axial 1.72 5.02
45
ume fractions were measured on samples cut from the same panels used to make the ten-
sile test coupons.
Experimental measures of fiber and resin content were conducted in accordance to
ASTM D3171 (matrix digestion method). The density values used for AS4 was 1.80 g/
cm
3
, and for the resin it was 1.18 g/cm
3
. These results are summarized in Table 3.4. The
mechanical properties of the three material systems were determined in the longitudinal
direction, denoted by the subscript Y, and in the transverse direction, denoted by the sub-
script X. Tensile tests results from Masters and Ifju (1996) are shown in Fig. 3.5. All tests
were conducted in displacement control at a ramp rate of 0.01 in./min., in a 50000 lb.
servo-hydraulic test machine. The longitudinal tension specimens were 1.5 in. wide and
10 in. long. They had 2.25 in. long fiberglass tabs at the ends yielding a 5.5 in. test section.
The transverse tension specimens were 1.5 in. wide and 7 in. long. They featured 1.25 in.
long tabs to provide a 4.5 in. long test section. Axial and transverse strain gages were
mounted at the center of the specimens test sections. Two strain gage lengths, 0.5 in. and
1.0 in., were used in these tests. The moduli and Poissons ratios were computed over the
0-3000 region of the stress-strain curves. The slopes of the curves were established
through linear regression of the data.
Table 3.4 Material fiber and resin content (Masters and Ifju, 1996).
material architecture
panel
number
density,
g/cm
3
thickness,
in.
resin
content,
vol%
fiber
content,
vol%
[0
24k
/63
12k
] 31.5% axial 1U
6L
1.51
1.51
0.137
0.137
45.7
45.6
54.0
54.0
[0
18k
/66.5
6k
]37.6% axial 2L
3U
4U
1.48
1.50
1.50
0.136
0.127
0.126
52.8
47.4
46.7
48.2
52.3
52.8
[0
18k
/70
6k
] 34.0% axial 11L
11U
1.48
1.52
0.137
0.138
50.9
44.7
48.9
55.2
46
3.3 Fiber volume fraction of the [0
18k
/ 64
6k
] 39.7% axial material
Variations in the RTM process can alter the panels resin content and changed their fiber
volume. Since fiber and resin content affect the materials mechanical response, they
should be measured for each material tested and accounted for in predicting mechanical
response. Fiber volume fraction is measured experimentally on specimens cut from one of
the samples used for the flexure test. Experimental measurements of the fiber content were
conducted by the density method (Broyles et al., 1998). This method is not recommended
Table 3.5 Tensile moduli and Poissons ratio test results (Masters and Ifju, 1996).
Measured value
Material architecture
[0
24k
/63
12k
]
31.5% axial
[0
18k
66.5
6k
]
37.6% axial
[0
18k
66.5
6k
]
37.6% axial
[0
18k
/70
6k
]
34.0% axial
thickness
D, in.
0.136 0.136 0.127 0.138
fiber content
V
f
, vol. %
54.0 48.2 52.3 48.9
Longitudinal modulus
E
Y
, msi
6.61 6.56 7.22 6.58
Longitudinal strength

Y
, ksi
62.68 80.68 87.28 57.09
Longitudinal strain

Y
,
10600 13600 12600 9500
Major Poisson's
ratio
YX
0.300 0.268 0.227 0.155
Transverse modulus
E
X
, msi
5.64 --- 6.34 7.12
Transverse strength

X
, ksi
36.10 --- 41.90 44.99
Transverse strain

X
,
6500 --- 7000 6700
Minor Poisson's
ration
XY
0.264 --- 0.214 0.191
47
for materials with high porosity, like ceramics. Assuming the porosity of the material is
low, the fiber volume fraction obtained by this method can give a quick and good estimate,
and provide a lower bound for the fiber volume fraction value. The density used for AS4
fiber is 1.80 g/cm
3
, and for the PR-500 resin it is 1.18 g/cm
3
(Masters et al., 1993).
The fiber volume fraction of the braided composite specimens used in this research is
calculated by measuring the density of the composite in air and in 2-propanol (an alcohol).
Five samples weighing about 4 g each are cut from the braided composite frame labeled
A. Each sample is dried and weighed in air. Each sample is then immersed in 2-propanol
and weighed in the propanol fluid. The density of the composite is calculated by
Archimedes Principle using the following equation:

c
= W
air

2-propanol
/ (W
air
- W
2-propanol
) (3.8)
where
c
is the density of the composite,
2-propanol
is the density of 2-propanol = 0.782 g/
cm
3
, W
air
is the weight of the sample in air, and W
2-propanol
the weight of the sample in 2-
propanol.
The fiber volume fraction is then calculated by using the rule of mixtures:
V
f
= (
c
-
resin
) / (
fiber
-
resin
) (3.9)
where V
f
is the fiber volume fraction,
fiber
is the density of the carbon fiber = 1.8 g/cm
3
,

resin
is the cured resin density = 1.18 g/cm
3
, and
c
is the composite density calculated
from Eq. (3.8).
The fiber volume fractions of the samples ranged from 54.8% to 55.6%; the value
obtained for the density of the composite was 1.52 g/cm
3
. The results obtained for the
fiber volume fraction were very uniform, yielding a coefficient of variation of less than
1%. These results are summarized in Table 3.6. The density of the composite is very close
to values reported for the same material by Masters and Ifju (1996) by using the matrix
digestion method (presented in Table 3.4), and is in agreement with the values reported in
48
Section 3.5, in which the density of the composite is calculated directly by using the
weight and the volume of the flexure test specimens (Table 3.10).
3.4 Tensile tests of the [0
18k
/ 64
6k
] 39.7% axial material
The uniaxial tensile test is the most widespread and the most studied mechanical test for
composites. The popularity of this test method is explained mainly by its and ease of pro-
cessing, and analysis of the test results. The characteristics obtained from uniaxial tensile
tests are used both for material specifications and for estimation of load-carrying capacity.
Practically all strength criteria include tensile strength. Only flexure tests on simply sup-
ported bars can compete with uniaxial tensile tests in simplicity, but not in processing of
the test results.
Despite its apparent simplicity, the tensile test is subject to a series of problems due to
the structure and properties of fibrous polymeric composites. Tarnopolskii and Kincis
(1985) explain that the main difficulty of tensile testing of fibrous polymeric composites is
in establishing a uniform state of stress over the entire gage length. In the determination of
elastic constants and of strength, the requirements for a uniform state of stress are differ-
ent. For anisotropic materials, Saint Venants principle is satisfied more poorly than for
isotropic materials. So, to obtain reliable data on stiffness for composite materials it will
be necessary to increase the specimen length. This, in turn, causes a possibility of a transi-
Table 3.6 Fiber volume fraction measured by the density method
for the [0
18k
/64
6k
] 39.7% axial braided composite material.
sample
W
air
,
g
W
2-prop
,
g

c
,
g/cm
3
V
f
,
%
1 4.3554 2.1164 1.521 55.0
2 4.5213 2.2007 1.524 55.4
3 3.9034 1.9003 1.524 55.5
4 3.8827 1.8850 1.520 54.8
5 4.2775 2.0832 1.524 55.6
average --- --- 1.523 55.3
CoV,% --- --- 0.00128 0.570
49
tion from one type of failure to another. The formula for the calculation of tensile strength
as the maximum load per unit of cross-sectional area of the gage section assumes one fail-
ure mode: breaking of the specimen perpendicular to its longitudinal axis. However, in
practice, the specimen often fails by longitudinal delamination (i.e., peeling of a number
of layers), shearing or breaking outside the gage section in the test machine grips. These
errors, often encountered in tension, should be eliminated by a proper selection of a speci-
men size and by proper clamping.
Tensile tests are conducted following the ASTM Test Method D3039 on five samples
cut from frame A. All tests were conducted in displacement control at a ramp rate of 0.035
in./min., using a 30,000 lb. servo hydraulic test machine (INSTRON model 4206). The
specimens are 1 in. wide, as suggested by Masters and Portanova (1996), and 10 in. long.
They have two-inch-long fiberglass tabs bonded at each end, yielding a 6 in. gage length.
The fiberglass plate from which the tabs are cut is 0.12 in. thick. The adhesive used to
bond the tabs to the specimen is EA 9394, that has a lap shear strength at 77F of 4200 psi.
The tab bevel angle is 45. The average dimensional measurements of the specimens used
in the tensile tests are listed in Table 3.7.
Two extensometers are attached to the specimen. A one-inch extensometer (MTS
model 632.11B-20) is located close to the tab on the top end of the specimen. A two-inch
INSTRON strain gage extensometer is located in the center of the specimen. A large
three-element, 45, single plane strain gage rosette (Micro Measurements Model Number
Table 3.7 Dimensions of the tensile specimens for the [0
18k
/64
6k
] 39.7% axial
braided composite material.
Specimen
No.
Width
b, in.
Thickness
D, in.
Overall
length
l, in.
Gage
length
L, in.
1 1.00 0.166 10.0 6.00
2 1.00 0.168 10.0 6.00
3 1.00 0.164 10.0 6.00
4 1.00 0.166 10.0 6.00
5 1.00 0.165 10.0 6.00
50
CEA-06-250UR-350) is bonded in the center on one side of the specimen. The gage length
of all three strain gages of the rosette is 0.25 in., the width of each one was 0.12 in., the
matrix size is 0.65L x 0.80W, and the resistance is 350 . On the opposite side and in the
center of the specimen, two general purpose uni-directional gages (CEA-06-250UW-350)
are placed at a distance of 0.25 in. from the edges of the specimen, as shown in Fig. 3.2.
The gage length for these gages is 0.25 in., the gage width is 0.18 in., the matrix size is
0.55L x 0.27W, and the resistance is 350 .
The measured data from the tests are used to calculate ultimate tensile strength (
Y
),
the longitudinal modulus of elasticity (E
Y
), and the major Poissons ratio (
YX
) using the
following equations (Masters and Portanova, 1996):

BACK VIEW


rosette
strain gage location of
2 in. extensometer

tab
Fig. 3.2 Gage locations on tensile test specimens for the [0
18k
/64
6k
]
39.7% axial material.
FRONT VIEW
6 in.
10 in.
location of 1 in.
extensometer

1 in.
0.5 in.
0.25 in.



Z


bottom
end
top
end
Y
X
51
(3.10)
(3.11)
(3.12)
In these equations, P is the maximum load, b is the specimens width, D is the specimens
thickness, / is the slope of the linear region of the stress-strain curve (determined
by evaluating the linear range of the strain between 1000 and 3000 ), and
X
/
Y
is
the slope of the transverse strain with respect to the longitudinal strain in the linear region.
The following statistical measurements are also calculated from the results of the tests:
(3.13)
(3.14)
(3.15)
where x = sample mean (average), n = number of specimens, x
i
= measured or derived
property, s
n-1
= sample standard deviation, and CoV = sample coefficient of variation in
percent.
The stress-strain curves from the tensile tests for the five specimens of the braided
material ([0
18k
/64
6k
] 39.7% axial) are shown in Figs. 3.3 to 3.7. The stress-strain
curves of all specimens show a linear trend almost up to the failure. The results for the
modulus of elasticity, Poissons ratio, tensile strength, ultimate strain, and failure mode
and location from each test are summarized in Table 3.8. The moduli and Poissons ratios
were computed over the 1000 to 3000 region, as suggested by the ASTM standard
D3039, and by Masters and Portanova (1996). The slopes of the curves were established
by linear regression of the data. To describe and identify the failure mode and location, the
standard three-part failure mode code presented in the ASTM standard D3039 is used. The

Y
P bD ( ) =
E
Y
=

YX

X
( )
Y
( ) =
x
1
n
--- x
i
i 1 =
n

=
s
n 1
x
i
2
i 1 =
n

nx
2
n 1 ( ) =
CoV 100 s
n 1
x ( ) =
52
tensile test failure codes listed in the ASTM standard are shown in Table 3.9; for more
details and examples refer to the ASTM standard.
-5000 0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
transverse strain
longitudinal strain
shear strain
strain, microstrain
s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
Fig. 3.3 Stress-strain curves from specimen 1.
-5000 0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
transverse strain
longitudinal strain
shear strain
strain, microstrain
s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
Fig. 3.4 Stress-strain curves from specimen 2.
53
-5000 0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
transverse strain
longitudinal strain
shear strain
strain, microstrain
s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
Fig. 3.5 Stress-strain curves from specimen 3.
-5000 0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
transverse strain
longitudinal strain
shear strain
strain, microstrain
s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
Fig. 3.6 Stress-strain curves from specimen 4.
54
Table 3.8 Tensile test series results.
Specimen
No.
E
Y
,
msi

Y
,
ksi

Y
,

YX
failure
mode
a
a. See Table 3.9 for description of this code.
1 6.66 82.07 12197 0.267 LAT
2 7.04 70.87 9930 0.272 AGM
3 6.89 72.78 10125 0.217 LGM
4 7.42 74.80 9826 0.336 AGM
5 7.42 83.88 10864 0.207 AGM
average 7.09 76.88 10588 0.260 ---
std. dev. 0.334 5.77 986 0.0517 ---
CoV,% 4.72 7.51 9.32 19.9 ---
-5000 0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
transverse strain
longitudinal strain
shear strain
strain, microstrain
s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
Fig. 3.7 Stress-strain curves from specimen 5.
55
The average values of the modulus of elasticity (E
Y
), and the Poissons ratio (
YX
)
obtained from the tensile tests are close to those reported by Masters and Ifju (1996),
shown in Table 3.5, for three similar braided materials, and for the [0
24k
/63
12k
] 31.5 %
axial braided material. These values are also close to the ones reported by Lockheed for
the [0
12k
/60
6k
] 33.3 % axial braided material (Table 3.1), but are different from the
ones reported by Lockheed in Table 3.2. These similarities among materials of different
yarn sizes are due to the fact that all of them have similar braid angles and axial yarn con-
tent. Naik et al. (1994) found that the stiffness properties in 2x2 2D triaxial braided com-
posites were not a function of yarn size, but were strongly influenced by the braid angle
and the axial yarn content.
In the series of tensile tests conducted for this research, the material property with the
lowest coefficient of variation is the modulus of elasticity, followed by the ultimate
strength. This is consistent with the investigations performed by Minguet et al. (1994).
Masters et al. (1995) did not report the coefficients of variation. The coefficient of varia-
tion of the Poissons ratio, almost 20%, looks unusually high, but this is not surprising.
Table 3.9 Tensile test failure codes from ASTM D3039.
First Character Second Character Third Character
Failure Type Code Failure Area Code Failure Location Code
Angled A Inside grip/tab I Bottom B
edge Delamination D At grip/tab A Top T
Grip/tab G < 1Width from grip/tab W Left L
Lateral L Gage G Right R
Multi-mode M(xys) Multiple areas M Middle M
long. Splitting S Various V Various V
eXplosive X Unknown U Unknown U
Other O
56
Minguet et al. (1994), who conducted an extensive investigation (including several types
of tension, shear, and compression tests) on braided composite materials with different
braid characteristics and coupon sizes, reports coefficients of variation for the Poissons
ratio as high as 27%. They state that this property is very difficult to measure correctly in
braided composite materials, and that more testing is needed to evaluate this property cor-
rectly. It would be also appropriate in this case to consider that the unit cell of many
braided composites seems to be wider than long, so a strain gage length that would be
appropriate in the longitudinal direction may not be necessarily appropriate in the trans-
verse direction; larger gages are more appropriate than smaller ones. Minguet et al. (1994)
used gages 0.5 in. long, and we used gages of only 0.25 in. in length. Minguet et al. (1994)
also found an optimal coupon width of 1.5 in., from which the coefficient of variation
was lower than using coupon widths of either 1 in. or 2 in. (although the average numeri-
cal values of the properties determined for each of the three coupon widths were basically
the same). With coupons of 1 in. width, like the ones used for the current research, it is
expected that the coefficients of variation will be slightly higher than using coupons of 1.5
in. wide.
A photograph of the tension specimens after failure is shown in Fig. 3.8. To describe
and identify the failure mode and location, the standard three-part failure mode code pre-
sented in the ASTM standard D3039 is used, which is summarized in Table 3.9 on
page 55. The first character of this code denotes the failure type, the second the failure
area, and the third denotes the failure location. The failure mode and locations vary
slightly from specimen to specimen. Specimen 1 failed as a LAT (Lateral - At grip/tab -
Top). The failure type is lateral (meaning that the fracture goes from one side to the other
across the width of the specimen). It is the only specimen that failed at the tab. It is sug-
gested in the ASTM standard D3039 that when a significant fraction of failures in a sam-
ple population occurs within one specimen width from the tab the means of load
introduction into the material, like the tab alignment, tab material, tab angle, tab adhesive,
grip type, grip pressure, and grip alignment, should be re-examined. It is possible that in
this case the problem is related to grip pressure and alignment. The failure in specimen 1 is
located at the top of the specimen. Specimens 2, 4 and 5 failed as AGM (Angled - Gage -
57
Middle). The failure type is angled; in case of specimen 5 the angle almost describes a line
running from one side of the specimen to the other along the width. In specimens 2 and 4,
the fracture is initially lateral, and ends angular. The failure area code G means that the
failure is in the gage zone, close to the center of the specimens. Specimen 4 failed
exactly in the center; specimen 2 about half an inch from the center to the top; specimen 5
about half an inch from the center toward the bottom. The failure location code M means
that the failure is in the middle of the specimen. Specimen 3 failed as an LGM (Lateral -
Gage - Middle); the fracture describes a line perpendicular to the longitudinal direction,
dividing the specimen in two equal parts.
The failures on the specimens are sudden and catastrophic, and confined to the vicinity
of the break. Cracking in the axial yarns, and cracking in and between the braider yarns is
observed. From surface inspection of the failed coupons, it is noticed that fracture tends to
follow the path of the braid yarns across the width of the coupon.
Fig. 3.8 Photograph of the five, failed tensile test specimens. From top to
bottom in the photograph are specimens 1 to 5.
1
2
3
4
5
bottom end top end
58
3.5 Flexure tests
The three-point flexure test is one of the most common tests for composite materials.
Because of its simplicity and economy, it is widely used to screen materials, and fre-
quently to define material properties. In flexure tests, the modulus of elasticity , thick-
ness shear modulus , strength with respect to normal stress
Y
B
, and interlaminar
shear strength

can be determined. Despite the large amount of information obtained,
flexure tests are frequently considered secondary, and many authors do not recommend
their use in the analysis of composite structures. The main difficulty in flexure tests is con-
nected with processing of the test results. Analysis of flexure test results for anisotropic
materials is not so simple and obvious as in the uniaxial tensile test. A good test for a
material mechanical property should have a single, uniform stress component in the gage
section; the flexure test does not satisfy either criteria. It is fair to say that the test mea-
sures flexural properties of laminates rather than material properties (Zweben et al., 1979).
A schematic representation of the test, which is covered by ASTM Test Standard D790, is
shown in Fig. 3.9.
The elementary theory of bending uses a number of simplifying assumptions. First, the
material of a bar is assumed to be isotropic, homogeneous, and of equal tensile and com-
pression strengths. According to simple Bernoulli-Euler elastic beam theory, the state of
stress is as shown in Fig. 3.9. The extensional stress varies linearly from compression on
the top face to tension on the bottom. In addition, there is a parabolic distribution of shear
stress through the thickness of the beam. The actual state of stress, particularly in the
region of the supports and central load, is far more complex (Berg et al., 1972). Second,
we know that simple beam theory only applies for small deflections. Deflection d of the
bar is assumed to be small compared with the span L (i.e. d << L). It is also assumed that
the material has an infinite shear modulus ( ) and transverse modulus of elastic-
ity . The errors introduced by these assumptions essentially increase with thick-
ness-to-span ratio and anisotropy of the mechanical properties. (When deflections are
E
Y
B
G
YZ
B

YZ
B
G
YZ
B

E
Z
B

59
large, as is frequently the case for long beams, the simple formulas for stress must be cor-
rected, as discussed in ASTM Test Standard D 790).
In a flexure test, the specimen can fail in tension in the bottom face, compression on
the top face, by shear, or by some interaction of these stresses (Fig. 3.9). The mode of fail-
ure is strongly dependent on span-to-thickness ratio (sometimes called aspect ratio) L/D
(Zweben et al., 1979).
For testing of specimens of isotropic materials, the three-point loading method, i.e., a
simply supported bar loaded with a concentrated force P in the middle of span L (Fig. 3.9),
is used almost exclusively (Tarnopolskii and Kincis, 1985). This loading method is also
support
specimen
applied load P
roller
L/2
D
b
bending
shear
compression

tension

max
=3PL / 2bD
2

max
=3P / 4bD
NA
NA
Fig. 3.9 Three-point loading flexure test (Zweben et al., 1979).
60
the most widely used in flexure tests of composite materials, but for composites the three-
point scheme is complicated: the state of stress in the specimen varies over the length and
thickness of the specimen. The three-point flexure test can also be used for the determina-
tion of interlaminar shear strength in laminate composite beams.
Two series of flexure tests are conducted in this research. Six specimens cut from
frame A are tested at two different span-to-thickness (L/D) ratios to determine the flexural
properties of the material, following Test Method I of the ASTM D790. All tests were
conducted in displacement control at a ramp rate of 0.01 in./min. using a 10000 lb. servo-
hydraulic test machine (INSTRON model 4204). The average dimensional measurements
of the flexural test specimens are listed in Table 3.10.
The data from the tests were used to obtain the flexural modulus and flexural strength
according to the procedures detailed in ASTM Standard D790. Denote the flexural modu-
lus as E
Y
B
, which is given in the standard as
(3.16)
where L is the distance between supports, b is the width of beam, D is thickness of beam,
and m is the slope of tangent to the initial straight-line portion of the load-deflection curve.
The flexural strength,
Y
B
, is given by
Table 3.10 Average measurements of the flexural test specimens.
Specimen
No.
Mass
m, g
Width
b, in.
Thickness
D, in.
Length
l, in.
Span
L, in.
density

c
,
g/cm
3
1 17.1 1.00 0.169 4.00 3.00 1.54
2 16.6 1.00 0.166 4.00 3.00 1.53
3 16.4 1.00 0.166 4.00 3.00 1.51
4 42.3 1.00 0.170 10.0 8.00 1.52
5 43.0 1.00 0.171 10.0 8.00 1.53
6 42.0 1.00 0.168 10.0 8.00 1.53
E
Y
B
L
3
m 4bD
3
( ) =
61
(3.17)
where P is the maximum load of the load-deflection curve. This equation does not take
into account the additional bending moment due to the horizontal components of the sup-
port reactions. To eliminate this error, with d > 0.1 L, the following equation is recom-
mended:
(3.18)
where
Y
B
(corr)
is the maximum fiber stress corrected for beams with large support spans,
and d is the maximum deflection of the center of the beam. The maximum strain,
Y
B
, is
given by:
(3.19)
and the interlaminar shear strength is given by:
(3.20)
In isotropic materials is large, and failure due to transverse shear is practically
impossible. On the other hand, laminated composites are more sensitive to manufacturing
defects which reduce the interlaminar shear strength, and their failure due to tangential
stresses can take place at large L/D values.
The stress-strain curves for each specimen, plotted with the flexural stress on the ordi-
nate, are shown in Figs. 3.10 to 3.15. Test results for the modulus of elasticity, flexural
strength, shear strength, and ultimate strain are shown in Table 3.11. The moduli were
computed for strains in the range of 1000 to 3000 . The slopes of the curves are
established by linear regression of the data.
The stress-strain behavior of all the tests is linear close to the origin, followed by a
portion of decreasing slope up to the point at which the maximum load is attained. After
the maximum load, the material fails and a dramatic drop in the load is observed, an effect
that is more pronounced in the long (L/D = 47) specimens.

Y
B
3PL 2bD
2
( ) =

Y corr ( )
B

Y
B
1 6 d L ( )
2
4 d L ( ) D L ( ) + [ ] =

Y
B
6Dd L
2
=

YZ
B
3P 4bD ( ) =

YZ
B
62
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
1.2 10
5
0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
2 10
4

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
strain, microstrain
Fig. 3.10 Stress-strain curve from flexure test 1 (L/D = 18).
Fig. 3.11 Stress-strain curve from flexure test 2 (L/D = 18).
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
2 10
4

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
strain, microstrain
63
Fig. 3.12 Stress-strain curve from flexure test 3 (L/D = 18).
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
2 10
4

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
strain, microstrain
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
2 10
4

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
strain, microstrain
Fig. 3.13 Stress-strain curve from flexure test 4 (L/D = 47).
64
Fig. 3.14 Stress-strain curve from tension test 5 (L/D = 47).
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
2 10
4

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
strain, microstrain
Fig. 3.15 Stress-strain curve from flexure test 6 (L/D = 47).
0
2 10
4
4 10
4
6 10
4
8 10
4
1 10
5
0 5000 1 10
4
1.5 10
4
2 10
4

s
t
r
e
s
s
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
strain, microstrain
65
The stress-strain curves of the short (L/D = 18) specimens is almost linear all the way
to failure. After the failure, fracture is observed in both the axial and the braid yarns in the
tension side of the skin. Small cracks in the compression side of the specimens can
also be observed (the compression side of the specimen is the side in contact with the
roller that applies the load). It is interesting to note that these cracks appear to be spaced at
equal intervals. The widths of the cracks also look roughly the same. From this relative
uniformity in the cracking pattern in the compression side, it appears that the axial yarns
are the ones that are failing in compression. Looking at the area where the failure occurred
from the side of the specimen, the largest cracks that can be observed are located close to
the center of the specimen and are not longer than 1/3 in.
The strength of the longer specimens is lower than the shorter ones, and the modulus
of elasticity is higher. Also, the stress-strain curves of the longer specimens show more
nonlinearity than the shorter ones. In contrast with the shorter specimens, the longer ones
Table 3.11 Flexure tests results for the [0
18k
/64
6k
] 39.7% axial braided composite
material.
Specimen
No.
L/D
E
Y
B
,
msi

Y
B
,
ksi

Y
B
(corr)
,
ksi

YZ
,
ksi

Y
B
,

1 17.8 6.03 107.07 107.60 3.01 17914

2 18.1 5.76 93.16 93.53 2.57 16600
3 18.1 5.41 91.91 92.37 2.54 17485
average 18.0 5.73 97.38 97.83 2.71 17333
std. dev. 0.173 0.314 8.42 8.42 0.264 670
CoV,% 0.962 5.47 8.64 8.67 9.75 3.87
4 47.2 5.87 86.72 95.50 0.918 17483
5 46.8 6.28 87.30 94.82 0.933 16304
6 47.8 6.89 90.86 97.53 0.951 14852
average 47.3 6.35 88.29 95.95 0.934 16213
std. dev. 0.503 0.516 2.24 1.41 0.0165 1318
CoV,% 1.06 8.14 2.53 1.47 1.77 8.13
66
failed only in the tension side, and the fracture was more catastrophic, involving more
material in the process than occurs in the shorter specimens. Looking at the longer speci-
mens from the side, the damage is very extensive, involving fractures in both axial and
braid yarns. The largest crack that can be observed from the side is located close to the
specimens center, and extends as much as 1 in. on each side (Fig. 3.16).
Failure modes and their associated stress-strain curves for graphite/epoxy short beam
specimens are shown in Fig. 3.17. The fractures of both the short specimens and the long
specimens look like the complex type (a mixture of shear and tension), although it can
be said that the short specimens exhibit more of a tensile failure, and the long ones more of
a shear failure. As in the tensile tests, cracking in the axial yarns, and cracking in and
between the braider yarns is observed, and the surface fractures tend to follow the zigzag
path of the braid yarns across the width of the coupon.
3.6 Discussion of the tensile and flexural test results
The significance of the flexural data developed in this investigation may be more mean-
ingful if put in the context of the work done by others on flexural testing. In general, the
data given in Table 3.11 tends to support the findings on flexural strength discussed by
Bullock (1974), Whitney et al. (1974), Zweben et al. (1979), and Macander et al. (1986).
The average flexural strength of the specimens is 20% greater than the average tensile
strength. Several investigators have shown that, in general, the flexural strength is greater
than the tensile or compressive strength of the material from which it is made. This behav-
Fig. 3.16 Photograph of the edge of a fractured flexure specimen (L/D = 47).
67
ior is explained to be a consequence of the nonuniform stress distribution through the
thickness of the flexural specimen. In the flexural specimen, the maximum stress occurs
only in the outermost fibers and thus the probability of a flaw to be located within this
region of higher stress and thus contributing to failure, is lower than it would be for the
entire specimen. On the other hand, in tensile and compressive specimens, the entire
cross-section of the specimen is assumed to experience an average stress. Thus, the proba-
bility of a flaw existing in this net section and contributing to failure and reduced strength
is greater than for the flexural specimens (Zweben et al., 1979).
Zweben et al. (1979) indicates that a laminate whose plies are uniformly spaced and
oriented and whose tensile and compressive moduli are equal should have a flexural mod-
ulus whose value would equal the tensile modulus. Deviations from this may results from
several sources. The most probable reasons would appear to be non uniformity of rein-
forcement spacing (like in the case of a laminate with resin-rich surfaces) and improper
test procedures (improper span-to-thickness ratios of test specimens). Zweben et al.
(1979) give an extensive review of the flexural test method used in this investigation and
cautions that the shorter span specimens recommended by ASTM D790 may actually give
shear failure complex failure tensile failure

Fig. 3.17 Failure modes the associated stress-strain curves obtained from
graphite/epoxy short beam specimens (Hanna and Steingiser, 1969).
68
reduced flexural modulus values. This is because there is no consideration of the contribu-
tion of shear deflection to total beam deflection. The significance of shear deflection in
composite materials loaded in three-point flexure has been considered theoretically (Mul-
lin and Knoell, 1970; Mallick and Broutman, 1975), but does not appear to be widely rec-
ognized. A review of the theory presented by Zweben et al. (1979) is summarized in the
following paragraph.
As discussed earlier, both shear and flexural stresses exist in a beam loaded in three
point flexure. Both types of stress contribute to beam deformation. According to the Ber-
noulli-Euler theory, the deflection from flexural stress in a rectangular beam is

f
= PL
3
/ 4E
Y
bD
3
(3.21)
where P is load applied at center, L is span length, b is beam width, D is beam thickness,
and E
Y
is beam extensional modulus. Shear deflection in a centrally-loaded beam is given
by (Flugge, 1962)

s
= PL / 4G
YZ
A
s
(3.22)
where G
YZ
is the shear modulus in a plane defined by the beam axis and the normal to the
beam mid-plane (transverse shear modulus), and A
s
is effective cross-sectional area for
shear deformation. For a rectangular beam, A
s
= bD / 1.2, so that

s
= 0.3 PL / G
YZ
bD (3.23)
Because the ratio of transverse shear modulus-to-extensional modulus is much lower for
composites, shear deformation is more important for composites than for isotropic materi-
als like metals.
The formula for computing flexural modulus presented in ASTM Test D790 is based
on Eq. (3.16), which implicitly assumes that all deformation results from bending, and
ignores shear deflection. In a flexure test we measure total deflection at the center, d,
which is the sum of bending and shear components, that is, d =
f
+
s
. The apparent flex-
ural modulus is given by
69
E
a
= PL
3
/ [4bD
3

f
(1 +
s
/
f
)] (3.24)
To assure that the apparent flexural modulus is equal to the true flexural modulus, shear
deflection must be small compared to flexural deflection. This requires that

s
/
f
= 1.2 (E
Y
/G
YZ
) (D/L)
2
<< 1 (3.25)
This term depend on the ratio of composite extensional modulus to transverse shear mod-
ulus, which is significantly greater for composites made from high modulus fibers, such as
graphite and aramid, than for glass fibers. This means that span-to-thickness ratios (L/D)
must be greater for advanced fiber composites.
Zweben et al. (1979), using a L/D ratio of 16:1, reports a flexural modulus for a unidi-
rectional Kevlar 49/polyester composite that is 35% lower than a modulus obtained with a
L/D ratio of 60:1. Zweben shows that as the L/D ratio increases, the flexural modulus
asymptotically approaches the tensile modulus.The variation of flexural modulus, as
defined by Zweben et al. (1979), with span-to-thickness ratio (L/D) for the specimens used
in this research is shown in Fig. 3.18. As the L/D ratio increases, the apparent flexural
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 20 40 60 80 100
m
o
d
u
l
u
s

o
f

e
l
a
s
t
i
c
i
t
y
,

l
b
/
i
n
.
2
span-to-depth ratio
tensile modulus
apparent flexural modulus
Fig. 3.18 Apparent flexural modulus as a function of span-to-thickness
ratio (L/D).
test data
m
s
i
70
modulus asymptotically approaches the tensile modulus, as predicted by theory. ASTM
Test D790 suggests L/D ratios of as low as 16:1. For L/D = 18, the apparent flexural mod-
ulus is only about 80 percent of the true value.
In summary, Zweben et al. (1979) found that the procedures described in ASTM Test
D790 are adequate for determining flexural strength, but, because the influence of shear
deformation is not considered, they can give misleading flexural moduli if short spans are
used. Correct values can be obtained by using large span-to-thickness ratios or a shear
deformation correction. Zweben et al. (1979) recommends that flexural modulus values
should be determined using at least a L/D ratio of 60:1, that significantly minimizes the
deflection contribution due to shear effects. To obtain good strength values, the same spec-
imens can then be broken at L/D ratio of 16:1.
Using Eq. (3.24), Tarnopolskii and Kincis (1985) presented the following equations to
calculate the modulus of elasticity when flexural tests from two different L/D ratios are
available:

2
= E
Y
B
/ G
YZ
B
= (E
f1
- E
f2
) / 1.2 [E
f2
(D/L)
2
2
- E
f1
(D/L)
1
2
] (3.26)
E
Y
B
= E
fi
[ 1 + 1.2
2
(D/L)
i
2
] (3.27)
where
2
is the ratio of extensional modulus to transverse shear modulus, E
f1
is modulus
of elasticity of the first series of flexure tests, and E
f2
is the modulus of elasticity of the
second series of flexure tests. Using the data from Table 3.10 and the results from Table
3.11, Eqs. (3.26) and (3.27) yields E
Y
B
= 6.61 msi. This value is closer (93%) to the aver-
age value obtained from the tensile tests, E
Y
= 7.09 msi, than the average values obtained
from each series of flexure tests. ASTM D790 recommends to test at least five specimens
of each series; in this investigation only three tests were conducted for each series of bend-
ing tests.
3.7 Correlation of test results with analysis code TEXCAD
The Textile Composite Analysis for Design (TEXCAD) code (Naik, 1994a; Naik, 1994b;
Naik, 1994c) was developed to provide engineers with a design tool to analyze several
71
types of composite materials, including braided composites. This code has been used in
the past by several authors, among them Masters et al. (1995), and it has been found that it
yields good predictions of the strength and stiffness characteristics of braided composites.
The braided composite material studied in this research, a 2D 2x2 triaxial braid, can be
modeled using TEXCAD Analysis Option No. 5. A generic graphical representation of the
2D 2x2 triaxial braid RUC architecture and analysis model is shown in Fig. 1.10 on
page 12, which also contains the yarn numbering used by TEXCAD for the output of yarn
slice stresses/strains. Note that the four axial yarns in the RUC have the same yarn num-
ber.
3.7.1 Summary of TEXCAD geometric discretization and analysis
In TEXCAD, the 2x2 2D triaxial braided composite is specified by the braid angle, axial
yarn spacing, yarn filament counts of the axial and braider yarns, yarn packing density, fil-
ament diameter, and overall fiber volume fraction. A detailed description of the geometric
modelling approach used for this type of composite is covered in detail in Naik (1994b),
and Naik et al. (1993).
The effective properties of the composite are determined by discretization the yarns
within the RUC. The straight portion of each yarn is modeled as a single yarn slice. The
undulating portion is approximated by n interconnected straight yarn slices. The intersti-
tial matrix is represented as an isotropic material slice. The orientation of each slice is
specified by the braid angle
b
, and the angle, called , with respect to the XY plane.
3.7.1.1 Calculation of three-dimensional effective stiffnesses
To calculate the overall composite properties, the RUC is treated as a spatially-oriented
fiber composite consisting of yarn slices with transversely isotropic material properties. A
three-dimensional stress averaging technique (Naik, 1994a) is used to compute the overall
stiffness matrix [C
eff
]. This matrix is written as a summation over all the N yarn slices in
the RUC in terms of the yarn slice stiffness matrix [C]
m
, transformation matrix [T]
m
, and
yarn slice volume fraction V
m
, as (Naik, 1994b)
72
(3.28)
The 6x6 stiffness matrix [C]
m
defines the three-dimensional stress-strain relationship for
the m-th yarn slice. Five independent material constants (E
11
, E
22
, G
12
,
12
, and
23
,
where subscript 1 indicates the axial fiber direction) are required to define the [C]
m

matrix. The transformation matrix [T]
m
is used to transform the strains from the global
RUC coordinates (XYZ) to the yarn slice material coordinates (123). Naik (1994b) per-
formed a convergence study to determine the appropriate number of slices (in the undulat-
ing portions of the yarns) required to yield converged values for the overall stiffness [C
eff
].
It was found that the stiffnesses were unchanged for . A value of n = 12 is used for
all the analyses in this study.
3.7.1.2 Failure criteria
Fiber dominated failure of the yarn slices is predicted using a maximum strain criterion for
both tension and compression axial yarn stresses (
11
). Matrix dominated failure within
the yarn slices is predicted using a maximum stress criteria for each fiber dominated fail-
ure mode: transverse tension (
22
,
33
), transverse shear (
23
), and longitudinal shear (
12
,

13
). Matrix material slice failure is predicted by using two failure criteria: a principal
stress criterion (used in the absence of applied shear stresses), and a maximum octahedral
shear stress criterion (used in the presence of shear stresses). Composite failure is pre-
dicted when (i) axial yarn failure is detected anywhere in the RUC, or (ii) all yarn slices
fail in the same failure mode and failure is detected in the interstitial matrix material slice.
3.7.1.3 Stiffness reduction
TEXCAD implements the stiffness reduction scheme used by Blackketter et al. (1993).
The stiffness of each yarn slice is reduced based on the predicted mode of failure. For
transverse tension failure, the corresponding shear modulus is reduced by 99%, and the
shear moduli G
12
and G
13
by 80%. For transverse shear failure (under the action of
23
),
the transverse moduli E
22
and E
33
, and the shear modulus G
23
are reduced by 99%, and
the longitudinal shear moduli G
12
and G
13
are reduced by 80%. For longitudinal shear
C
eff
[ ]
m
V
m
T [ ]
m
T
C [ ]
m
T [ ]
m
) (
m 1 =
N

=
n 12
73
failures (under the action of
12
), E
22
and G
12
are reduced by 99%. Finally, for longitudi-
nal shear failures (under the action of
13
), E
33
and G
13
are reduced by 99%. All the stiff-
nesses of the matrix material slice are reduced by 99% when matrix failure was predicted.
3.7.2 TEXCAD analysis for the braided composite coupons
A sample problem of a TEXCAD run is shown in Appendix 2. Our model is a 2D 2x2 tri-
axial braided composite which has a braid angle of 64 with 6k braider yarns and 18k axial
yarns. It is assumed that the yarns are made of AS4 graphite filaments and impregnated
with 3501-6 epoxy resin. The properties of these materials are stored in a file called
MATERIAL.DAT within TEXCAD, and are listed for reference in Table 3.12. Also, it will
be assumed that the impregnated yarns have a packing density (fiber volume fraction) of
0.75. The actual spacing between two axial yarns is roughly 0.53 cm. The diameter of the
AS4 fibers is 7 m (Masters et al., 1995) . From the fiber volume fraction tests conducted
on specimens taken from braided frame A, the value of the overall composite fiber volume
fraction is assumed to be 55.26%. After entering the analysis option number (5 in this
Table 3.12 Material properties used in TEXCAD (Naik, 1994c).
property
AS4/3501-6
V
f
= 0.75
3501-6 resin
E
11
, msi 21.00 0.500
E
22
, msi 1.70 0.500

12
0.230 0.350
G
12
, msi 0.800 0.185

23
0.300 0.350

11
T
0.0140 0.0246

11
C
0.0100 0.0246

22
T
, ksi
3.77 12.31

22
C
, ksi
29.88 12.31

12
, ksi 12.69 14.26

23
, ksi 14.85 14.26
74
case), the analysis title, the output and material data filenames, TEXCAD requires the fol-
lowing input:
Based on this input, TEXCAD calculates the volume fraction of the yarns and the intersti-
tial matrix in the unit cell, layer thickness, yarn crimp angle, yarn cross-sectional areas,
yarn projected lengths, yarn thicknesses, overall 2D 2x2 triaxial braided composite mod-
uli, Poissons ratios, coefficients of thermal expansion, overall stiffness matrix, etc. The
sample execution run and the corresponding output for the above sample problem are
included in the files SAMPLE.RUN and SAMPLE.OUT, respectively, in Appendix 2.
3.7.3 Correlation between TEXCAD analysis and test results
The results from the material characterization tests are compared with the predictions
from the computer code TEXCAD for longitudinal tensile loading in Table 3.13. Under
longitudinal tensile loading, transverse failures are predicted in the braider yarns at about
21.76 ksi, followed by a longitudinal tensile failure in the axial yarns at about 91.37 ksi,
that led to the final failure of the composite. Under longitudinal compressive loading, a
longitudinal compressive failure in the axial yarns is predicted at 71.07 ksi, that led to the
final failure of the composite. Other properties predicted by TEXCAD for the [0
18k
/
64
6k
] 39.7 % axial braided composite material are shown in Table 3.14.
Due to the sudden and catastrophic nature of the failure, it is very difficult to assess in
detail what is happening at failure during a tensile test. However, it is observed that both
Input parameters for the 2x2 2D triaxial braid ([0
18k
/ 64
6k
] 39.7% axial)
Value
(i) braid angle, in degrees 64
(ii) axial yarn spacing, in mm) 5.3
(iii) the fiber volume fraction within the yarns 0.75
(iv) braider yarn filament count, in thousands (k) 6
(v) axial yarn filament count, in thousands (k) 18
(vi) filament diameter, in mm 0.007
(vii) overall composite fiber volume fraction, in percent 55.26
(viii) number of equal yarn slices for undulating regions 12
75
braider and axial yarns fail. In the flexure tests, where both tensile and compressive zones
develop during the test, the same can be said about the tensile zone. In the compres-
sive zone (the zone in contact with the roller used to apply the load) some formations like
creases are observed across the width, at the center of the specimen. These creases appear
to be roughly of the same length, as well as having equal spacing between them. It is inter-
esting to note that this length is roughly the size of the width of an axial yarn. Apart from
Table 3.13 TEXCAD predictions for [0
18k
/64
6k
] 39.7 % axial braided composite
material under longitudinal tensile loading.
Property
TEXCAD
Flexure
tests
L/D = 18
Flexure
tests
L/D = 47
Tensile
tests
E
X
, msi 6.59 - - -
E
Y
, msi 7.06 5.73 6.34 7.09
G
YX
, msi 1.91 - - -

YX
0.231 - - 0.260

Y
, ksi 91.37 97.38 88.29 76.88

Y
, 14071 17333 16213 10588
Table 3.14 Properties predicted by TEXCAD for the [0
18k
/64
6k
] 39.7 % axial
braided composite material.
Moduli value
Poissons
ratios value Strengths
a
a. The superscripts T and C mean in tension and in compression, respectively.
value
E
Y
, msi 7.06
YX
0.231

Y
T
, ksi
91.37
E
X
, msi 6.59
XY
0.216

Y
T
,
14071
E
Z
, msi 1.53
YZ
0.256

Y
C
, ksi
71.07
G
YX
, msi 1.91
XZ
0.298

Y
C
,
10108
G
YZ
, msi 0.601
YX
, ksi 30.46
G
XZ
, msi 0.645
76
these creases, no other damage is observed in the compressive side of the flexure test
specimens. Cracking in the axial yarns, and cracking in and between the braider yarns is
observed in both tensile and flexure specimens after testing.
As discussed in the previous section, the magnitudes of the modulus of elasticity were
lower and the magnitudes of the strength were higher in the flexure tests than in the tensile
tests. The reason of this was also discussed in the previous section. The modulus of elas-
ticity obtained from the tensile tests (7.09 msi) correlates very well with the analysis (7.06
msi). The strength values obtained from the flexure tests also correlate relatively well with
the predicted strength. However, the strength obtained from the tensile tests is about 15%
lower than the predicted value. There could be several possibilities for this. First, in tensile
tests there is more material subjected to the maximum stress than in flexure tests, which
makes the tensile specimens more likely to fail by crack propagation due to presence of
voids and other defects. A second reason that can be as important is that in TEXCAD, as
in many of other computer codes for woven and braided composites, the axial yarns are
assumed to be perfectly straight and perfectly flat. Nevertheless, this is rarely true. Naik
(1994b), based on micrographs of the cross-section of 2x2 2D triaxial braided composites,
states that some crimp in the axial yarns is apparent in the longitudinal cross-sectional
view. This axial yarn crimp will led to a reduced longitudinal tensile strength with respect
to a model that assumes perfectly straight axial yarns. Naik (1994b) modified TEXCAD
and ran it for axial yarn crimp variations ranging from 0 to 12. The tensile strength data
from Masters et al. (1992), that is the same data given by Masters and Ifju (1996), were
found to be within the range of tension strengths predicted after accounting for axial yarn
crimp.