© 2012 Autodesk Bridging the Gap between Autodesk Moldflow and Nonlinear FEA of Reinforced Plastic...

© 2012 Autodesk

Bridging the Gap between Autodesk Moldflow and Nonlinear FEA of Reinforced Plastic PartsDr. Roger A. AssakerCEO, e-Xstream engineeringChief Material Strategist, MSC Software

© 2012 Autodesk

Class Objectives

To learn about the latest developments in modeling nonlinear behavior

of structures made of fiber reinforced plastics, including:

Long Fibers & MuCell Materials

Injection and Compression Molding Compression

Fatigue and Creep Performance

High Performance Computing

© 2012 Autodesk

Class Structure

Introduction & Motivation

Compression Molding

Long Fiber Reinforced Plastics

MuCell

Fatigue

Creep

Hybrid Solution Procedure

© 2012 Autodesk

Introduction & Motivation

© 2012 Autodesk

Composites in Automotive

© 2012 Autodesk

Opportunities: Weight Reduction Average/Indicative Facts: 1995 2005: +17% of mass (1118 kg1310kg) +200 kg +18% of Fuel consumption (4.8 l/100km 5.7 l/100km)

Objective : -200 kg or -15 to 20 g CO2/km by 2020

Plastic parts: interior, under the hood, … Optimize using advanced CAE/Material Modeling

Optimize design: e.g. engine mount: -40% weight & -15% in cost Reduce thickness

Part consolidation

Metallic parts: Platform, Cabin Frame, Skin,… Optimal mix of materials : Plastics, Composites, …

6

© 2012 Autodesk

Mutli (Composite) Materials

© 2012 Autodesk

Chopped Fibers/Injection Molding

Fully aligned flow

Flow lines

Weld lines

© 2012 Autodesk

Challenges of Reinforced Plastics

Process-dependent (Local)

Moldflow (Fiber orientation)

Nonlinear

Stain-rate dependent

Anisotropic

9

© 2012 Autodesk

Process Material Structure

Material Processing• Injection molding• Compression

modling• D-LFT

Material Microsturcure• Chopped fibers• Nano, ...

Material Chracteristics• Mechanical• Thermal• Electric, ...

Structural Performance

Stiffness

Strength

Fatigue, …

…

© 2012 Autodesk

Material Behavior: Measured

11

Source:

LKT, Prof. DrummerFriedrich-Alexander-Universität

Erlangen-Nürnberg

Skin-core effect

Source:

DatapointLabse-Xstream Users‘ Meeting 2011

© 2012 Autodesk

Material properties from ISO 527 specimen Average orientation

OT{Trace} = [ 0.80 | 0.15 | 0.05 ] Scaling (factor = 0.6 – 0.8)

Material properties from injection molded plate 0° properties Scaling (factor = ???)

Material properties from injection molded plate 0° / 30° / 45° / 60° / 90° properties Reverse engineering Skin-Core effect

OT = [ multi-layer RVE ]

Measured Properties FEA ?

Globalisotropic

Localanisotropic

© 2012 Autodesk

Local, Nonlinear, Anisotropic Material

ISO 527100%

IM 22%

2D 36%

Loading

© 2012 Autodesk

Local Results: Plastic Strain

14

anisotropic

isotropic

equivalent scaling

Without Moldflow & Digimat)

With Moldflow & Digimat)

© 2012 Autodesk

Local Results: Weldline

15

Accumulated plastic strain in material matrix

Fiber orientations

© 2012 Autodesk

Materials: Long Fiber Thermoplastics (LFT)

© 2012 Autodesk

LFT – Effect of Fiber Waviness

Tortuose

Straight

© 2012 Autodesk

LFT – Effect of Fiber Bundling

Without bundling

With bundling~ 2300 MPa

~ 2800 MPa

+ ~ 500 MPa

s11 [MPa]

e11

© 2012 Autodesk

LFT - Effect of Bundling in Digimat-MF

+ 5% fibers 5% bundling

ar = 50

ar = 5

s11 [MPa]

e11

© 2012 Autodesk

Materials: MuCell

© 2012 Autodesk

MuCell RVE Generation

Source: http://www.genesisllc.com/gpe/images/mucell_glass.gif

15 % fibers

20 % voids

© 2012 Autodesk

Strain Distribution in the Microstructure

TensileDirection mean

local

TensileDirection

© 2012 Autodesk

MuCell: Effect of Void on the Material Stiffness

aligned

© 2012 Autodesk

MF vs FE modeling of MuCell

7.8% voids

15% voids

© 2012 Autodesk

MuCell: Distribution of the VF of Air Inclusions

© 2012 Autodesk

MuCell: 3-Point Bending Beam

© 2012 Autodesk

MuCell: Armrest Vertical Load

© 2012 Autodesk

MuCell: Horizontal Side Impact

© 2012 Autodesk

MuCell: Horizontal Impact CAE Performance Curves

© 2012 Autodesk

Performance: Fatigue

© 2012 Autodesk

Chopped Fiber Reinforced Plastics: Fatigue Analysis Workflow DIGIMAT reinforces the fatigue life computation at two levels:

Computation of the unit load case (Digimat-CAE/Structural) Computation of the fatigue life prediction (Digimat-CAE/Fatigue)

DIGIMAT Fatigue software

Digimat Material File (.daf)

Orientation data

Fatigue data(SN curve)

Static tests data

DIGIMAT interface to fatigue software

Element ID, critical plane orientation, ...

S-N curve, damage accumulation, ...

Digimat to CAE

FEA result file(odb,rst, …)

FE model

Fatigue model

Fatigue loadingFatigue modeling

options

Resolution of FEA on « unit load test cases »

DIGIMAT including new fatigue modeling capabilities

Fatigue results

Including new capabilities to call DIGIMAT for material computations

Fatigue data

© 2012 Autodesk

Fatigue: Chopped Fiber Reinforced Plastics

© 2012 Autodesk

First Pseudo Grain Fatigue (FPGF) Model Ply composite

Using fatigue failure criteria (i.e. Tsai-Hill) Pros : Different « strengths » per direction, multi-axial Cons : Purely meso/macro if not coupled with multi-scale methodology

Tsai-Hill

S: Fatigue strengths depending over N (nb cycles to failure) 1/L: Fiber direction 2/T: Transverse direction

Users workflow Exp measurement: S-N curves measured for 0°, 45° 90° UD specimens Material modeling: Define the measured S-N curves and corresponding microstructure (0° vs 90°) Fatigue solution: Prediction of local S-N curves in each integration point (ply in each element) of the FE model, accounting for any

• Stress amplitude • Mean stress• Loading direction / Fiber alignment

Damage accumulation: Miner’s rule

Tensile 0°

Tensile 90°

© 2012 Autodesk

Fatigue of Chopped Fiber Reinforced PlasticsUnit Load: Stress S11

Fatigue life

© 2012 Autodesk

Creep & Relaxation

© 2012 Autodesk

Creep & Relaxation

© 2012 Autodesk

Creep: Affine vs General vs Spectral vs FE

© 2012 Autodesk

Thermo-ViscoElasticity

© 2012 Autodesk

Thermo-ViscoElastic Relaxation

© 2012 Autodesk

CPU Optimization: Digimat Hybrid

© 2012 Autodesk

Hybrid Solution Procedure

© 2012 Autodesk

Crush Simulation: Digimat-CAE/LS-Dyna

© 2012 Autodesk

2012 DIGIMAT Users’ Meeting 43

Bumper Beam impact Material definition

Digimat v4.3.1 Viso-plastic propety FPGF failure

Tsai-Hill-2D strains§ Micro: strain base§ Hybrid: stress base

Mircostructure Morphology Orientation Length: Short Fibers (AR=20) Weight Fraction of Fibers

Isotropic Use MD property from Digimat-MF result Viso-plastic property Failure : end point of MF curve

MD

TD

FP

GF

failu

re d

efin

ed

at t

his

st

rain

-ra

te

Digimat Nonlinear Micro Material Model

© 2012 Autodesk

Optimization Decomposition• Default decomposition

Digimat elements in 3 domains

29 domains have no Digimat elements

• Improved decomposition

Digimat elements in 22 domains

10 domains have no Digimat elements

•Optimized decomposition–Almost same as improved but all domain has Digimat elements.

Optimal Domain Decomposition

© 2012 Autodesk

16 cores 32 cores 64 cores

Iso(improved)

17 h 59 m 9h 17m 10h 0m

Hybrid(default)

- 42h 31m -

Hybrid(improved)

26 h 37 m 14h 16m 8 h 15 m

Hybrid(optimized)

- 12h 5m -

Micro(improved)

-152 h 51 m(6.4 days)

-

Iso

Hybrid

Iso

Hybrid

CPU Performance: Digimat vs Isotropic

© 2012 Autodesk

Conclusions Reinforced Plastics is a light weight alternative to metals Advanced CAE, including nonlinear multi-scale material modeling ,

enables effective & efficient design of reinforced plastic parts by Taking advantage the process simulation done with Moldflow

The latest developments in Multi-Scale Material & Structural Modeling support: Long Fiber and MuCell Fatigue and Creep Performance

Hybrid Solution Procedure and HPC make Nonlinear Multi-Scale a efficient solution procedure for accurate part and system simultion

© 2012 Autodesk

Autodesk, AutoCAD* [*if/when mentioned in the pertinent material, followed by an alphabetical list of all other trademarks mentioned in the material] are registered trademarks or trademarks of Autodesk, Inc., and/or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates in the USA and/or other countries. All other brand names, product names, or trademarks belong to their respective holders. Autodesk reserves the right to alter product and services offerings, and specifications and pricing at any time without notice, and is not responsible for typographical or graphical errors that may appear in this document. © 2012 Autodesk, Inc. All rights reserved.