82025

FAILURE MODES OF FIBRE REINFORCED LAMINATES

1. NOTATION

x, y, z coordinates of laminate (see Sketch 3.1b)

α, β, z coordinates of individual layer (see Sketch 3.1a)

ψ orientation of fibre to chosen reference x-axis (see Sketch 3.1b)

2. INTRODUCTION
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

This Item presents the failure modes of fibre reinforced laminates in which the individual layers consist of
continuous fibres that are strong and stiff along their length in a more flexible surrounding matrix. The
fibres and matrix are designed to perform complementary functions and therefore react to the various
loading conditions in different ways. Additionally the orientation of the fibres usually varies from layer to
layer through the laminate thickness. Consequently there are many more potential failure modes for these
laminates than for metallic materials. There are two principal ways of considering the failure of such
laminates: (1) based on the behaviour of the individual layers and the interfaces between them, (2) based
on the laminate as a whole. This Data Item deals with the first of these approaches.

3. GENERAL COMMENT ON FAILURE MODES

In each layer of a laminate the principal function of the fibre is to transmit loads in its longitudinal direction
( α , see Sketch 3.1a) although it will also transmit transverse and shear loads. The resin matrix connects
the fibres, maintaining their relative position while distributing the load among the fibres and ensuring
continuity of transverse and shear loading in the laminate. The typical laminate will be composed of a
number of individual layers, as shown in Sketch 3.1b. The laminate may be subjected to any combination
of loading though the layers are most efficient taking in-plane longitudinal direct load. The failure modes
are best understood by dealing first with the modes for a single layer under simple loading, as given in
Section 4, and then relating these to more complex configurations, as given in Section 5. It should be noted
that laminate strength may be significantly affected by the residual stresses that are present after curing.
These stresses can be high enough to cause premature cracking of the matrix. Voids may also be present
as a result of imperfect manufacturing processes and these will affect the stresses in the laminate. In addition
the effect of environmental conditions, particularly of the temperature and moisture content, will also
significantly affect the matrix behaviour and consequently those modes that are heavily matrix dependent.
(References 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10.)

Issued October 1982

With Amendment A
1
  82025
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

Sketch 3.1a Individual layer

Sketch 3.1b Multidirectional laminate

2
  82025
4. UNIDIRECTIONAL LAMINATES AND INDIVIDUAL LAYERS UNDER SIMPLE LOADING

The failure modes for unidirectional laminates under uniaxial direct and shear loading are presented in
Table 4.1. The following notes amplify the information therein. The information given in Table 4.1 applies
also to individual layers. lnterlaminar and delamination effects, though not strictly applicable to an
individual layer, will be applicable to it in the practical case where layers are combined. Some of the modes
listed in Table 4.1 are much more likely to occur than others; modes 1, 2, 3, 4, 10 and 11 are such modes.
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

3
  82025
TABLE 4.1 Failure Modes of Unidirectional Laminates
This table applies to individual layers as well as laminates (except for interlaminar effects).

Mode of failure Nature of loading Primary factors Secondary factors Notes

1. Fibre failure transmitted Longitudinal (–) Fibre tensile strength (–) Cure shrinkage stresses See Section
laterally (brittle failure) tension (–) Fibre volume fraction 4.1.1 and
(+) Matrix stiffness and strength Sketch 4.1
(+) Interface bond strength
2. Fibre failure transmitted (–) Fibre tensile strength (+) Fibre strength variability See Section
longitudinally and (–) Fibre volume fraction 4.1.1 and
laterally (brushing) (–) Matrix stiffness and strength Sketch 4.2
(–) Interface bond strength
(+) Cure shrinkage stresses
3. Brittle fibre failure Longitudinal (–) Fibre Strength and volume See Section
(inclined shear) compression fraction 4.1.2 and
(+) Local and overall stability Sketch 4.3
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

(–) Local distortion/eccentricity

4. Kink band failure (–) Matrix shear stiffness (–) Fibre shear stiffness See Section
(timber-like) (+) Local distortion/eccentricity (–) Fibre volume fraction 4.1.2 and
(–) Fibre diameter (+) Moisture and temperature Sketch 4.4.
(matrix)
5. Fibre microbuckling (–) Matrix transverse stiffness (+) Moisture and temperature See Section
(–) Fibre diameter and volume (matrix) 4.1.2 and
fraction Sketches 4.5a
(–) Fibre Young’s modulus and 4.5b
6. Locally originated (+) Local distortion/eccentricity (–) Matrix shear stiffness See Section
delamination (–) Fibre diameter and modulus (+) Moisture and temperature 4.1.2
(–) Matrix tensile strength (matrix)
7. Matrix/bond-line tension Transverse (–) Matrix/fibre average failing (+) Disparity between fibre See Section
fracture tension strain and matrix stiffnesses 4.1.3
(–) Fibre/matrix bond strength (–) Matrix strength
(+) Cure shrinkage stresses (+) Fibre distribution
irregularity
(+) Fibre volume fraction
As above (delamination Short transverse As above As above See Section
possible) tension (normal) (+) Curved laminate bending 4.1.3
8. Matrix/bond-line Transverse As for mode 7 As for mode 7 See Section
(inclined shear) fracture compression 4.1.3
9. Transverse layer (–) Matrix/fibre transverse (+) Fibre volume fraction
buckling modulus
(–) Matrix/fibre shear modulus
10. Shear in matrix, Longitudinal/ (–) Matrix shear strength (+) Fibre volume fraction See Section
fibre/matrix debonding, short transverse (–) Fibre-matrix adhesion (+) Cure shrinkage stresses 4.1.4 and
interlaminar shear in shear (+) Moisture and temperature Sketch 4.6a
laminate (resin)
11. Shear in matrix, Longitudinal/ (–) Matrix shear strength (+) Cure shrinkage stresses See Section
interlaminar shear in transverse shear (+) Moisture and temperature 4.1.4 and
laminate (matrix) Sketch 4.6b
12. Shear in matrix (cross Transverse/short As for mode 10 As for mode 10 See Section
fibre shear), interlaminar transverse shear 4.1.4 and
shear in laminate Sketch 4.6c
(+) the greater the quantity, the more likely the failure.
(–) the lower the quantity, the more likely the failure.

4
  82025
4.1 Notes on Table 4.1

4.1.1 Longitudinal tension failure modes 1 and 2

As the tensile load develops fibre fractures occur. Initially the matrix is able to cope with this by
redistributing individual fibre loading by matrix shear across the fibre gap to the same fibre and to adjacent
fibres. When a number of such fibre failures are grouped in transverse alignment a crack starts to grow in
the layer. If the matrix is capable of containing the local shear stresses the crack spreads across the layer
as a clean continuous tensile failure of the fibres and matrix, as shown by Sketch 4.1. If the matrix is unable
to take the local shear stresses it fails in shear in a direction parallel to the fibres. In addition fibre-matrix
debonding may occur. By linking up with other transverse fibre failure groups the crack spreads in an
erratic fashion across the width of the layer as a total brush type failure, as shown by Sketch 4.2. If the
matrix is comparatively brittle the cracks can also cause matrix disintegration; in this case the unsupported
fibres fracture under local distortions and total brittle matrix failure results. Identification of brittle matrix
failure as a third primary tensile failure mode is considered in detail in Reference 9. (For additional
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

information on failure modes 1 and 2, see References 4, 5, 7 and 10.)

4.1.2 Longitudinal compression failure modes 3, 4, 5 and 6

If the fibre is relatively thick (typically boron fibres) and rigidly supported, the usual (metallic) shear
compression failure can occur in individual fibres (mode 3, see Sketch 4.3) followed by matrix
disintegration. More usually under longitudinal compression load the fibres start to buckle. This initially
takes the form of a short wavelength instability which is known as microbuckling. Here the fibres may be
considered to act as infinite columns upon an elastic foundation. Two forms of microbuckling model are
usually considered: (1) in-phase buckling, in which the matrix shear stiffness is inadequate and the whole
layer shears sideways (see Sketch 4.5b) and (2) out-of-phase buckling in which the matrix direct transverse
extensional stiffness is inadequate (see Sketch 4.5a). In practice, while (1) is more likely to occur, the
ultimate failure mode is usually a gross form of instability known as ‘kink band’ failure, where a whole
block of the layer material shears sideways across either the width or thickness of the layer (see Sketch
4.4). This may be initiated by fibre microbuckling or local defects, voids and eccentricities. For certain
fibre/matrix combinations fibre microbuckling (mode 5 similar to Sketch 4.5a) will lead to layer collapse.
In multilayer laminates, particularly where local distortions or offset loading is present, delamination may
consequently occur (mode 6) though this is unusual in unidirectional laminates. (For additional information
on failure modes 3, 4, 5 and 6, see References 5, 6, 8, 10 and 11.)

4.1.3 Transverse and short transverse tension and compression failure modes 7, 8 and 9

The effects of transverse tension or compression are taken principally by the matrix. In the case of transverse
tensile loading (mode 7) the failure occurs as a through layer crack running parallel to the fibres which may
be initiated by a matrix stress concentration and/or local matrix-fibre debonding. The effects of short
transverse tension, usually induced by curvature or bending, are similar though in this case delamination
may occur. Transverse compression loading, where the layer or laminate is stiff enough to resist buckling,
will result in transverse shear failure (mode 8) or matrix disintegration (which may occur at a load level
much greater than that for transverse tension). Short transverse compression will have a similar effect.
When the layer or laminate is not stiff, transverse compression loading is likely to result in transverse overall
buckling (mode 9).

5
  82025
4.1.4 Matrix shear failure and interlaminar shear failure modes 10, 11 and 12

These modes depend mainly on the matrix shear strength. In the case of longitudinal/short transverse shear
(mode 10) a crack forms parallel to the fibres (see Sketch 4.5b), and fibre-matrix debonding may occur. In
the case of longitudinal/transverse shear (mode 11, Sketch 4.6b) matrix shear failure may be accompanied
by a failure of the interlaminar bond. Transverse/short transverse (cross-fibre) fibre-matrix shear failure
(mode 12, Sketch 4.6c) usually occurs at a higher stress than longitudinal/short transverse shear, and it is
only likely to occur in multidirectional laminates, in particular ±45° laminates under tensile loading.
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

Sketch 4.1

Sketch 4.2

6
  82025
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

Sketch 4.3 Individual layer in longitudinal compression. Diagonal shear failure form for
individual fibres, mode 3 of Table 4.1

Sketch 4.4 ‘Kink band’ failure of individual layer or unidirectional laminate in compression
(mode 4 of Table 4.1). This example shows the compressive side of a three point loaded beam with
the crack running from the edge towards the neutral axis. (Reference 11.)

7
  82025
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

Sketch 4.5a Fibre microbuckling, mode 5 of Table 4.1, is initially similar to the out-of-phase fibre
buckling shown here

Sketch 4.5b Fibre microbuckling. The in-phase fibre buckling shown here often precedes ‘kink
band’ failure, mode 4 of Table 4.1

Sketch 4.6a Longitudinal/short transverse shear failure, mode 10 of Table 4.1

8
  82025

Sketch 4.6b Longitudinal/transverse shear failure, mode 11 of Table 4.1

ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

Sketch 4.6c Transverse/short transverse shear failure, mode 12 of Table 4.1

9
  82025
5. MULTIDIRECTIONAL LAMINATES UNDER IN-PLANE LOADING

Multidirectional laminates can experience all the failure modes for individual layers under simple loading
listed in the previous section but, in addition, layers of differing orientations provide mutual restraint against
Poisson’s deformations, also significant interlaminar load transfer occurs at boundaries and edges. The
different loading conditions in adjacent layers can therefore cause delamination. Even unidirectional
loading on these laminates will therefore result in a complex distribution of shear and direct stresses in the
fibres and matrix of the various layers. Although initially layers are not particularly susceptible to the
effects of cracks that exist in the laminate’s unloaded state, such cracks may affect adjacent layers across
the interlayer boundary.

Laminate failure modes are therefore combinations of the modes for individual layers with addition of the
delamination mode and layer interactive effects. In Table 5.1 principal failure modes for multidirectional
laminates are given. Prediction of the precise mode of failure for a multidirectional laminate under
combined loading will depend on the fibre-matrix combination, the layer configuration and the relative
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

proportion of the particular loads. Where a particular load predominates, the likely failure may appear
relatively easy to predict but it should be borne in mind that the secondary loading or stresses, though small,
may significantly affect or even determine the failure mode, for example the effect of shear on compression
loading. Where the different load components are of comparable importance or magnitude, identification
of the failure mode is more difficult. The likely behaviour of the resin matrix is frequently the dominant
factor in such circumstances. In the following subsections the delamination mode is first discussed and
then particular examples of laminates under uniaxial loading are given (References 5 and 9).

TABLE 5.1 Failure Modes of Multidirectional Laminates

Nature of loading
Mode of failure Primary factors Secondary Factors
on laminate

Layer transverse Tension, shear, (+) Transverse tensile strain Some effective transverse and shear
tension cracking compression components in layer, crack stiffness retained initially via
(regularly spaced frequency increases with strain uncracked zones
crack through (+) Cure shrinkage stresses
independent layers)

Layer longitudinal As unidirectional longitudinal Laminate layup and stacking

tensile fracture tensile (Table 4.1) sequence

(+) Stress concentration from (+) Cure shrinkage stresses

adjacent cracked layers

Delamination from (–) Inter-layer shear strength In tension or shear, delamination

free edges or notches (+) Moisture and temperature often local to stress raisers.
(resin matrix) Varies with layup Usually catastrophic in compression
and stacking sequence

Delamination/layer (+) Local layer distortion (–) Matrix shear stiffness

buckling (+) Layer thickness (+) Moisture and temperature
(–) Longitudinal fibre modulus (resin matrix)
(–) Matrix tensile strength

Interlaminar shear Short transverse As for modes 10 and 12, Table 4.1. As for modes 10 and 12, Table 4.1.
shear (normal) Will vary with layer stacking
sequence.

Interlaminar tension Normal tension As for mode 7, Table 4.1. Will vary As for mode 7, Table 4.1.
with layer stacking sequence.

(+) the greater the quantity, the more likely the failure.
(–) the lower the quantity, the more likely the failure.

10
  82025
5.1 Interlaminar Effects: Delamination Failure Mode

Away from the boundaries of a laminate the bulk of the load in each layer is taken by the fibres. Near free
boundaries loads are transmitted from layer to layer by matrix shear. There are therefore high interlaminar
shear and peel stresses near free boundaries or at points of stress concentration which can cause
delamination. It has been shown that these stresses vary through the depth of the laminate depending on
layer orientation and that laminates in which layers of similar orientation are grouped or in which layer
thickness variations occur may be more susceptible to this phenomenon (see Sketch 5.1). (References 1,
2, 3, 5 and 9.)

5.2 Individual Examples of Multidirectional Laminates

5.2.1 Uniaxial tension on 0°/90° laminates

In this configuration, while tension in the 0° layers is taken by the longitudinal fibres, tension in the 90°
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

layers is taken only by the matrix. Cracking therefore occurs in the 90° layers at approximately their
transverse (unidirectional) failure strain. Fibre failures occurring in the 0° layers therefore find less support
from the 90° layers. Less significantly the effect of cracks in 90° layers is to create stress concentrations
in the 0° layers and consequently the 0° layers have lower strength than 0° layers on their own (with 90°
layers removed). Finally total failure of the 0° layer fibres or disintegration of its matrix occurs.

5.2.2 Uniaxial compression 0°/90° laminates

Failure of multidirectional laminates in compression is not fully understood due to difficulties in testing
for this condition (for example post failure compaction may obscure fracture study). Most failures appear
to be of the same form as those of unidirectional laminates, that is ‘kink band’ failure. Kinks may also
occur in the 0° layers due to varying density of fibres in the 90° layers. The 90° layers generally lend
additional stability to the 0° layer fibres and while strengths are significantly below tensile strengths they
are slightly higher than those for equivalent unidirectional laminates.

For certain fibre/matrix combinations interlayer delaminations have occurred, originating from the edges
or from internal cracking. These lead to longer wavelength (out-of-plane) Euler type buckling.

5.2.3 Failure in ± 45° laminates under uniaxial and biaxial tension and compression

In this type of laminate the uniaxial tensile loading on the laminate is resolved as longitudinal direct and
cross-fibre shear loading in the fibres and shear in the resin matrix. There are three modes of failure for
this configuration: (1) clean cross-fibre matrix shear (see Sketch 5.2), (2) delamination, usually originating
with the high interlaminar shear and peel stresses at the free edges (see Sketches 5.1 and 5.2), (3) matrix
disintegration (principally with the brittle matrices) followed by a tearing apart of the fibres which fail in
a combination of flexure and tension.

Under biaxial tension for applied stress ratios approaching 1:1 a change of failure mode occurs from shear
to layer longitudinal tensile failure. As the layer shear component is reduced the laminate exhibits a
consequent increase in strength. For an applied stress ratio of 1:1 the matrix strains are extremely high and
ultimate failure can be initiated by matrix disintegration. This laminate exhibits similar behaviour under
compressive loading, although for a stress ratio of 1:1 the layer longitudinal compression strength is
normally realised, since the matrix stresses are compressive. For applied shear loading the stresses can be
resolved to the fibre axes and the failure mode is usually one of layer longitudinal compression.
(Reference 9.)

11
  82025
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

Sketch 5.1 Uniaxial tension delamination failure in a ± 45° laminate having layers of similar
orientation grouped or layers of varying thickness

Sketch 5.2 Fibre/matrix shear failure in a ± 45° laminate under tensile loading. The main
cross-fibre shear crack in a +45° layer is accompanied by secondary cross-fibre cracks in the –45°
layers. Delamination has occurred within the cracked area and further cracks originating at the
edges are present. This X-radiograph is enhanced by the use of radio opaque liquid penetrant.
(Reference 11.)

12
  82025
6. REFERENCES

1. PIPES, R.B. Interlaminar stresses in composite laminates under uniform axial

PAGANO, N.J. extensions, Jnl Composite Materials, Vol. 4, pp. 538-548, October
1970.
2. PAGANO, N.J. The influence of stacking sequence on laminate strength, Jnl
PIPES, R.B. Composite Materials, Vol. 5, pp. 50-57, January 1971.
3. PIPES, R.B. Moiré analysis of the interlaminar shear edge effect in laminated
DANIEL, I.M. composites, Jnl Composite Materials, Vol. 5, pp. 255-259, April
1971.
4. ROSEN, W.B. Tensile failure criteria for fibre composite materials. NASA CR
ZWEBEN, C.H. 2057, August 1972.
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

5. JONES, R.M. Mechanisms of composite materials, McGraw Hill Book Co., New
York, 1975.
6. MINDERHOUD, P. Failure and fatigue of carbon fibre epoxy composites,
Fokker-VFW, Report No. 5146, July 1977.
7. TSAI, W.S. Introduction to Composite Materials, Technomic Pub., Co., 1980.
HAHN, H.T.
8. WOOLSTENCROFT, D.H. The compressive behaviour of unidirectional carbon fibre
reinforced plastic. PhD Thesis, Preston Polytechnic, June 1981.
9. SANDERS, R.C. The strength of laminated plates under in-plane loading, Part 1 –
GRANT, P. Failure Criteria, BAe Report No. SOR (P) 130, January 1982.
10. GRANT, P. Private communication from British Aerospace plc, Warton
Division, March 1982.
11. BADER, M.G. Private communication from University of Surrey, October 1982.

13
  82025
THE PREPARATION OF THIS DATA ITEM

The work on this particular Item was monitored and guided by the Aerospace Structures Committee which
has the following constitution:

Chairman
Dr T.W. Coombe – British Aerospace Public Ltd Co., Weybridge-Bristol Division

Vice-Chairman
Prof. J.G. ten Asbroek– Fokker-VFW N.V., Schiphol-Oost, The Netherlands

Members
Dr P. Bartholomew – Royal Aircraft Establishment
ESDU Copyright material. For current status contact ESDU.

Mr J.K. Bennett – British Aerospace Public Ltd Co., Space and Communications Division
Mr H.L. Cox – Independent
Mr G. Geraghty – Westland Helicopters Ltd
Mr K.H. Griffin – Cranfield Institute of Technology
Prof. W.S. Hemp – University of Oxford
Mr K.R. Obee – British Aerospace Public Ltd Co., Hatfield-Lostock Division
Mr I.C. Taig – British Aerospace Public Ltd Co., Warton Division
Mr K. van Katwijk* – European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.
*
Corresponding Member

The work on this Item was carried out in the Strength Analysis Group under the supervision of
Mr M. E. Grayley, Group Head. The member of staff who undertook the technical work involved in the
initial assessment of the available information and the construction and subsequent development of the
Item was

Mr R.L. Penning – Senior Engineer.

14