A4: Tensile test result on resin B (bulk samples)

<figure><img src="image_212.png" /><figcaption>Figure A4.1: Tensile test result on resin B, Load/displacement curves (provided by NavalGroup).</figcaption></figure>

<table><caption>Table A4.1: Tensile test result on resin B, material properties (provided by NavalGroup).</caption><thead><tr><th>Specimen</th><th>Maximum Stress (Mpa)</th><th>Maximum strain (%)</th><th>Young modulus (Mpa)</th><th>Poisson's coefficient</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Resin B-1</td><td>75,44</td><td>5,54</td><td>3225</td><td>0,42</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-2</td><td>48,35</td><td>4,68</td><td>3298</td><td>0,31</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-3</td><td>61,08</td><td>2,32</td><td>3296</td><td>0,38</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-4</td><td>75,30</td><td>4,62</td><td>3347</td><td>0,39</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-5</td><td>54,78</td><td>1,93</td><td>3381</td><td>0,33</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-6</td><td>62,44</td><td>2,35</td><td>3245</td><td>0,43</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-7</td><td>57,90</td><td>2,06</td><td>3301</td><td>0,44</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-8</td><td>53,46</td><td>1,87</td><td>3243</td><td>0,57</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-9</td><td>53,82</td><td>1,90</td><td>3240</td><td>0,6</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-10</td><td>36,79</td><td>1,22</td><td>3221</td><td>0,43</td></tr><tr><td>Average</td><td>57,94</td><td>2,55</td><td>3280</td><td>0,43</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-9</td><td>11,06</td><td>1,32</td><td>54,39</td><td>0,09</td></tr><tr><td>Resin B-10</td><td>19%</td><td>52%</td><td>2%</td><td>20%</td></tr></tbody></table>
A5: VCCT routine

Step 1:

The nodes and elements along the interface (so where the crack would propagate) are put in a
group.

Step 2:

Pick the direction the crack would propagate.

Step 3:

Renumber the nodes at the interface (based on the crack direction) so that the crack would propagate in the order of the nodes.

Step 5:

Unzip all the nodes and create constraint equations so that the nodes from both materials along
the interface will still have the same displacements.

Step 6:

Copy the original constraint set but delete the first 3 constraint equation (the equation will be
x, y and z displacements of both nodes at the crack tip). That means the crack will propagate 1
element. Since the nodes were renumbered, the constraint equations are also ordered so that it
is easier to know which one to delete.

Step 7:

Do a loop to create as many constraints set as there are elements on the crack.

Step 8:

Create a multi-case analysis where each case will perform the simulation for 1 constraint set.

Step 9:

Run the analysis.

A post-process routine (that needs mode I and mode II direction to input) then recovers only the constraint forces and displacements from the nodes at the edge of the crack in order to use the VCCT, where the rest of the calculations were done with a Python script.

This routine greatly improved the time of modeling and post processing. If done manually, the evolution of the ERR as the crack propagates took half a day, since a lot of simulations had to be performed and post-processed. Moreover, the ERR was not calculated at each element (several elements were unzipped between 2 simulations). With the routine, all the simulations were done really fast, depending on the length of the entire crack the simulations alone took from 5 to 20 minutes to perform (from 100 to 500 nodes unzipped so the same number of cases), while it took 35 seconds for each manual simulation. The routine was especially efficient since the stiffness did not have to be recalculated at each case. The post-process was also immediate based on the API and the Python script.
A6: Full size tension and bending tests – observations after failure

<figure><img src="image_213.png" /><figcaption>Figure A6.1 Full size tension failure mode.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_214.png" /><figcaption>Figure A6.2 Full size bending failure mode.</figcaption></figure>