Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here


Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Hi all,
thanks for the previous answers!

I have a new proble mand I'm not sure the approach is correct. I have a sandwich panel layed up as follows:

Inconel 625 (E=29700 ksi, yield 66 ksi thickness 0.013 in)
Steel Honeycomb
Inconel 718 (E=29000 ksi, yield 160 ksi thickess 0.010 in)

(I modelled this as a composite - I use Patran and Nastran)

I was asked to find the what would be the thickness of 625 at the bottom (replacing 718) to obtain the same strength.

This was my approach: I calculated the load until I reached yield (3500 lbf). Then, I kept the load constant and I started increasing the thickness of the bottom layer until I reached 66 ksi (yield of 625). In this way though, I got a thickness of 0.3 in! I don't think this is the right approach.



RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

So your failure criterion is skin yielding, right ? And you only check stresses in the skins, not in the core ? Then for the first part you should compare stresses with strength of weaker skin (625) because it will fail first. Then if you replace stronger skin (718) with 625, nothing will change because that unchanged (top) 625 skin will still fail first. Assuming similar stress levels in both skins, of course. What are your loading conditions ?

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Thanks for you reply, FEA way. I have a concentrated load at the center of the plate, and the plate is simply supported. In real scenario, the load would be dynamic (a weight dropped) but I'm modelling only the static case for simplicity. I started recently this job and they have a sample of this structure that failed at the bottom (the BC though were way different in the real case). They want to change the thickness and material at the bottom for other reasons.

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

So it’s typical bending test. Stress willbe highest at the top and at the bottom in this case. Thus both skins will experience very similar level of stress and my considerations from previous post should apply. Focus on the weaker skin or choose another failure criterion.

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Well, the bottom skin will fail first because there is a stretching component that top top skin doesn't have (both skins are glued to the honeycomb).

I tried with only the panel (without honeycomb) but that problem gets more complicated because with such a low thickness, there is a large deformation of the plate and the problem becomes non-linear.

Also, Nastran doesn't distinguish what happens to the top and bottom skin since it's a 2D surface.


RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Yes, adhesive bond strength is another factor to consider but in order to evaluate its failure you would have to perform an analysis using cohesive zone approach.

Could you show how your model looks like ? Can you replace that honeycomb with homogenized solid equivalent ?

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

As I said, the model is very simple, the sandwich is modeled with a 2D surface only. The honeycomb is actually a material with the same E11,22 and 33 of the honeycomb

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Ok, so it's actually a composite section shell with point load. I suggest trying other methods of modeling sandwich composites to verify results such as continuum shell (solid shell) and, especially, regular solid elements (be careful with point load applied on solid elements - stress singularity may influence your results). Traditional shell elements often produce inaccurate output.

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Ok, I will try different option. Would my approach in terms of finding the right thickness be valid? I mean, would you change the thickness until you find the yield strength of 625?

Thanks for all the feedback!

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Yes, just make sure that you read stresses from appropriate layer.

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

Why do you need a FEM to do this calc?

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

I've never dealt with honeycomb until now and I thought it was easier via FE modelling. If you have equations that can help me, please share!

RE: Sandwich Yield Strength Modelling

See Composite Materials Handbook-17 Volume 6 and/or ASTM D7249.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


White Paper – Your Construction ERP RFP Checklist
Selecting business software for a medium to enterprise-sized construction concern is extremely challenging in large part because most enterprise resource planning (ERP) suites originated in the world of repetitive manufacturing and are therefore a poor fit for a project and asset-centric business. However, midsize to large contractors need the predictable, auditable processes that ERP delivers. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close