Keep every engineering decision connected and traceable.
CDS solves fragmented composite data by keeping source records, model inputs, assumptions, analyses, and results together in one reusable engineering workspace.
Simulation setup connects reusable records to the selected analyses.
Workbench capture · September 7, 2026. Representative interface and demo data, not a new solver run or validation certificate. Control locations may differ in later releases.Trace the selected input path
Stored ply properties bypass Micro. Mixed stacks keep both paths. Gray blocks are not selected. Geometry, process schedules and other model records are omitted here for clarity; a real run must include all required references.
Fatigue uses intact CLT endpoint stresses and measured S–N calibration. It is evaluated separately from Run and progressive failure. The dashed handoff is not active: optimization still uses current properties until a degradation law is supplied.
Materials → Micro → Laminate.
02.1 / How CDS solves it
From engineering question to evidence
01
Navigate the model tree
Use the left-hand tree to create and organize experiments, materials, laminas, laminates, analyses, and sources. The available commands adapt to the selected entity.
02
Work with one or many records
Right-click an item to create, rename, duplicate by a selected count, delete, load, save, move, or export it. Shift and Control selection apply compatible operations to multiple records, with a searchable destination and confirmation for grouped moves.
03
Load and preserve data
Open the shared training catalog or a saved CDS database. Create a working copy for edits and preserve the selected simulation with its dependencies.
InputsConstituents, architecture, fractions and calibrated modifiersResults / handoffReference ply properties for each linked laminate ply
One compatible homogenization model per Micro recipe. Use separate recipes for comparisons; they are not combined in a single ply.
Formulations and study choices
Halpin–Tsai
Rule of mixtures
Modified rule of mixtures
Chamis
Mori–Tanaka
Hashin–Rosen
Self-consistent scheme
Woven fabric bridging
Cox shear-lag elastic
∑ Cure, crystallization & material transport
Models → material-model folders · assigned through Materials
InputsCalibrated kinetics, modulus or transport laws and material assignmentResults / handoffMaterial laws consumed by compatible Micro or transport calculations
Independent model records can be linked together through material inputs. A saved model must be assigned to a material before it contributes to a simulation.
Formulations and study choices
Kamal–Sourour autocatalytic
Kamal–Sourour with diffusion control
Nth-order Arrhenius
CHILE (degree of cure)
UV intensity-dependent cure
Nakamura–Avrami
Temperature-dependent tabular
1D Fickian diffusion
∑ Thermal transport
Models browser → Thermal transport · source: CASES / Thermal
InputsLaminate transport properties, initial state and the thermal case’s own surface cycleResults / handoffTemperature and supported polymer-state histories; mapped fields only when coupling is enabled
One transport formulation per thermal case. Select its laminate and configure its own initial conditions and surface cycle; pultrusion additionally requires a distance-based die schedule and pulling velocity.
Formulations and study choices
1D transient heat transfer
1D steady-state heat transfer
1D pultrusion thermal cure
∑ Moisture transport
Models browser → Moisture transport · source: CASES / Moisture
InputsLaminate diffusion properties, initial moisture and its own boundary scheduleResults / handoffMoisture history and enabled swelling contribution
One formulation per moisture analysis. Thermal and moisture analyses can both be linked in Simulation; each needs its own boundary conditions.
InputsLaminate stiffness, finite plate dimensions, supported edges and study choiceResults / handoffFSDT static bending or selected buckling / modal results; not progressive damage
Choose a formulation and study. Buckling and modal can be requested together; static bending requires FSDT. These are reference-elastic studies, separate from coupled process or progressive failure.
Formulations and study choices
CLT
FSDT
Static bending
Modal
Buckling
Buckling and modal
∑ Cylinder
Structural models → Cylinder models
InputsLaminate, cylinder dimensions and formulation-compatible pressure / axial loadingResults / handoffThin-wall membrane response or layerwise radial fields, with distinct assumptions
Choose one cylinder formulation per case record. Geometry and plies remain shared; thick-wall radial results exclude torsion and process strains.
InputsLaminate, compatible section and static or Euler load caseResults / handoffMembrane / bending response or separate Euler buckling result
Geometry and the case determine the membrane or beam-test interpretation. Euler buckling requires a compatible beam section and a separate reference-elastic study; it is not a strength or local-buckling pass.
Formulations and study choices
Linear static
Linear static with failure indices
Beam Euler buckling
∑ Layerwise sections, joints & delamination
Structural models → Layerwise sections & joints
InputsSection or lap geometry, laminate, loads and calibrated interface propertiesResults / handoffx–z fields; coupled ply damage and delamination only for the supported layerwise plate path
Coupled delamination is available only for the layerwise Plate section and needs calibrated interface and ply properties. Lap-shear uses its separate joint geometry and perfectly bonded elastic formulation.
Formulations and study choices
Layerwise x-z plane strain
Single-lap x-z plane strain
Coupled delamination growth
∑ Sandwich bending
Structural models → Sandwich bending
InputsFaces, core, dimensions and three-point-bend loadResults / handoffDeflection and separate face, core and nominal bond-shear screening
Dedicated sandwich screening. Check core, faces and nominal bond shear separately; peel, mixed-mode debonding and crack growth are not assessed.
InputsEligible CLT load case, strengths / strain limits and selected criterionResults / handoffFirst-ply envelopes or supported progressive ply-damage histories; criteria are not blended
One primary failure criterion per load. In Response → Failure, compare all eligible theories or a custom selection in the envelope controls. Each theory runs independently; criteria are not blended.
Formulations and study choices
Maximum stress
Maximum strain
Tsai–Hill
Tsai–Wu
Hashin
∑ Fatigue S–N
Structural models → Laminate mechanics → Fatigue
InputsIntact ply stresses, cyclic loads and measured S–N calibrationResults / handoffSeparate life assessment; no automatic laminate degradation
Select calibrated S–N curves for each material, direction and stress sign in Fatigue. Different sources can use different models. S–N life does not define residual stiffness or strength.
Formulations and study choices
Kim–Zhang
Sendeckyj
Weibull S–N
Kohout–Vechet
Basquin
∑ D6641 · Compression coupon
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffUniform small-strain compression using linked laminate Ex and thickness. Measured compressive strength supplies a screening ratio; fixture, tabs, buckling and failure evolution are not simulated.
Uniform small-strain compression using linked laminate Ex and thickness. Measured compressive strength supplies a screening ratio; fixture, tabs, buckling and failure evolution are not simulated.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · compression coupon
∑ D5379 / D7078 · Shear coupon
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffUniform nominal shear between notches using linked laminate Gxy and thickness. Not a notch/fixture stress field or nonlinear shear solution. Gauge length is the effective shear deformation length, not crosshead travel.
Uniform nominal shear between notches using linked laminate Gxy and thickness. Not a notch/fixture stress field or nonlinear shear solution. Gauge length is the effective shear deformation length, not crosshead travel.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · nominal shear coupon
∑ D5528 · DCB opening
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffIdeal Euler–Bernoulli DCB with equal homogeneous 0° arms, each half the linked laminate thickness. No root rotation, shear, large displacement or cohesive growth. Critical load is an initiation estimate from supplied GIc.
Ideal Euler–Bernoulli DCB with equal homogeneous 0° arms, each half the linked laminate thickness. No root rotation, shear, large displacement or cohesive growth. Critical load is an initiation estimate from supplied GIc.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · DCB beam compliance
∑ D7905 · ENF sliding
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffIdeal equal-arm, homogeneous 0° ENF beam; support span is twice the half-span. Crack must be shorter than the half-span. No shear/root correction or unstable crack growth. GIIc is supplied, not fitted automatically.
Ideal equal-arm, homogeneous 0° ENF beam; support span is twice the half-span. Crack must be shorter than the half-span. No shear/root correction or unstable crack growth. GIIc is supplied, not fitted automatically.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · ENF beam compliance
∑ D6671 · Mixed-mode fracture envelope
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffBenzeggagh–Kenane envelope from calibrated GIc, GIIc and exponent. Supplied GI/GII are energy-release rates from a separate test reduction or analysis. This does not resolve the MMB lever fixture or propagate a crack.
Benzeggagh–Kenane envelope from calibrated GIc, GIIc and exponent. Supplied GI/GII are energy-release rates from a separate test reduction or analysis. This does not resolve the MMB lever fixture or propagate a crack.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · BK mixed-mode envelope
∑ D5229 · Moisture uptake calibration
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffHomogeneous slab, initially dry, both faces held at equilibrium moisture. Fits diffusivity from two early uptake measurements (both ≤50% saturation) using the square-root-time approximation. Edge ingress and temperature dependence are excluded. Does not overwrite material properties.
Homogeneous slab, initially dry, both faces held at equilibrium moisture. Fits diffusivity from two early uptake measurements (both ≤50% saturation) using the square-root-time approximation. Edge ingress and temperature dependence are excluded. Does not overwrite material properties.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · Fickian uptake calibration
∑ D5961 · Bearing / bypass screening
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffSingle-pin nominal bearing, net-section and shear-out checks with independent measured allowables. Bypass tension is added to net-section load only. No contact, bolt preload, load redistribution or validated bearing–bypass interaction envelope.
Single-pin nominal bearing, net-section and shear-out checks with independent measured allowables. Bypass tension is added to net-section load only. No contact, bolt preload, load redistribution or validated bearing–bypass interaction envelope.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · bearing bypass screening
∑ D6484 · Open-hole compression
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffNominal gross/net stress and demand relative to measured open-hole compressive strength for this geometry and layup. This is test-data screening, not an uncalibrated notch-strength prediction. No local buckling or kink-band simulation.
Nominal gross/net stress and demand relative to measured open-hole compressive strength for this geometry and layup. This is test-data screening, not an uncalibrated notch-strength prediction. No local buckling or kink-band simulation.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · measured open-hole compression
∑ D6742 · Filled-hole comparison
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffCompares user-measured open- and filled-hole compressive strengths using gross-section stress. Use matched layup, hole, environment and fastener condition. Filling a hole does not automatically recover strength; no fastener contact/preload model is applied.
Compares user-measured open- and filled-hole compressive strengths using gross-section stress. Use matched layup, hole, environment and fastener condition. Filling a hole does not automatically recover strength; no fastener contact/preload model is applied.
Formulations and study choices
Virtual test · measured filled-hole comparison
∑ D7136 / D7137 · Impact & CAI assessment
Models → Structural models → ASTM · Virtual Test Lab
InputsLinked laminate and explicit specimen, load or measured calibration inputsResults / handoffIncident energy from measured impact velocity; residual compressive strength from measured peak CAI force. Rebound energy estimates energy not returned to the striker, NOT damage energy. No impact/contact solver, damage-area prediction or energy-to-strength extrapolation.
Incident energy from measured impact velocity; residual compressive strength from measured peak CAI force. Rebound energy estimates energy not returned to the striker, NOT damage energy. No impact/contact solver, damage-area prediction or energy-to-strength extrapolation.
InputsSpecially orthotropic laminate, hole radius, unnotched strength and calibrated distancesResults / handoffPoint / average stress strength screening and radial stress profile
Infinite-width, specially orthotropic tension screening. Point and average stress distances must be calibrated independently for this laminate. Not compression, bearing or a joint allowable.
InputsLaminate Ex, Prony fractions / times and held stress or strain at calibration temperatureResults / handoffSeparate axial creep and relaxation curves with time-refinement safeguards
Linear uniaxial response at the calibration temperature. Reference Ex is the instantaneous modulus. Three Maxwell branches; creep is solved from stress equilibrium, not the reciprocal relaxation modulus. No thermal shifting or nonlinear creep.
InputsIdentical equivalent-elastic adherends, adhesive, overlap, width and tensile forceResults / handoffVolkersen shear and Goland–Reissner shear / peel; no debond growth
Identical equivalent-elastic adherends, long free arms and a thin elastic adhesive. Compare shear-only Volkersen with eccentric single-lap shear and peel. Not a debonding, plasticity or strength calculation.
InputsLaminate, membrane / bending resultants and calibrated effective ply strengthsResults / handoffLinear-shear LaRC04 initiation indices at ply faces; no progressive degradation
NASA LaRC04 linear-shear specialization, evaluated at both faces of every ply under membrane and bending loads. Supplied ply strengths are effective/in-situ values; no automatic thin-ply enhancement. Initiation only, not degradation or nonlinear-shear instability.
Formulations and study choices
LaRC04 · linear shear
∑ Tool-release shape
Structural models → Tool-release shape
InputsLaminate and prescribed temperatures, CTE and effective post-gel shrinkageResults / handoffFree-release CLT curvature and separate corner spring-in estimate; not an automatic process-history handoff
Free CLT release from prescribed ply-local shrinkage/thermal eigenstrains. Corner spring-in is a separate uniform-strain estimate. Stress-free temperature and effective post-gel shrinkage need calibration. No tool friction, cure kinetics or viscoelastic restraint history.
InputsModulus, independently fitted stiffness / strength retention laws, life and elapsed cyclesResults / handoffResidual-property curves for the specified constant-amplitude calibration; saved laminate is unchanged
Prescribed power-law retention fitted to constant-amplitude tests at a fixed stress ratio, amplitude and temperature. Stiffness and strength have independent coefficients. S–N life alone cannot calibrate either. Does not modify the saved laminate.
InputsThin specially orthotropic shell, radius, length, axial compression and prescribed knockdownResults / handoffIdeal / knocked-down Donnell axial buckling and governing mode; no pressure or postbuckling
Simply supported, thin, specially orthotropic cylinder under uniform axial compression. Discrete Donnell modes; prescribed knockdown factor explores imperfection sensitivity, not a prediction from measured imperfection amplitude. No pressure, torsion, postbuckling or strength pass.
Formulations and study choices
Donnell cylinder · axial buckling
∑ Uncertainty & sensitivity
Structural models → Uncertainty & sensitivity
InputsLaminate, bounded modulus / thickness / angle variations, seed and axial loadResults / handoffABD axial-strain percentiles and signed correlations; not certified reliability
Seeded independent uniform sampling of shared modulus, ply-thickness and angle offsets. Recomputes laminate ABD for each sample. Bounds are assumptions, not measured distributions. Percentiles and sensitivity are exploratory, not reliability certification.
Formulations and study choices
Seeded laminate uncertainty
∑ Wiener series and parallel
Models → Electromagnetics · RF → Wiener series and parallel
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
One cube-root mixing law, not two independent models.
Formulations and study choices
EM · Looyenga / Landau–Lifshitz–Looyenga
∑ Maxwell–Garnett
Models → Electromagnetics · RF → Maxwell–Garnett
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
Dilute subwavelength spherical inclusions in a host.
InputsExplicit dielectric A/B layers, thicknesses, repetition, frequency and supported polarizationResults / handoffReflection, transmission, absorption and shielding spectra; no mechanical coupling
Coherent isotropic nonmagnetic layers between air half-spaces.
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
Two positive-permittivity phases; no explicit contact network.
Formulations and study choices
EM · Bruggeman symmetric EMT
∑ EM Mori–Tanaka
Models → Electromagnetics · RF → EM Mori–Tanaka
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
Scalar principal-axis ellipsoidal field approximation.
Formulations and study choices
EM · EM Mori–Tanaka
∑ EM self-consistent
Models → Electromagnetics · RF → EM self-consistent
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
Scalar principal-axis self-consistency; spherical case equals Bruggeman.
Formulations and study choices
EM · EM self-consistent
∑ Differential effective medium
Models → Electromagnetics · RF → Differential effective medium
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
Incremental mixing with time-step refinement check.
Formulations and study choices
EM · Differential effective medium
∑ Coated sphere and interphase
Models → Electromagnetics · RF → Coated sphere and interphase
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
Concentric subwavelength coated spheres; no dynamic Mie scattering.
InputsExplicit host/inclusion electrical properties and fractionsResults / handoffEffective permittivity; manual handoff to an RF layer, not an automatic mechanical-property update
Spherical multiphase Bruggeman with convergence checks.
InputsExplicit dielectric A/B layers, thicknesses, repetition, frequency and supported polarizationResults / handoffReflection, transmission, absorption and shielding spectra; no mechanical coupling
TE or TM waves; scalar isotropic layers, no polarization conversion.
Formulations and study choices
EM · Oblique polarized laminate TMM
∑ 1D transmission line matrix
Models → Electromagnetics · RF → 1D transmission line matrix
InputsExplicit dielectric A/B layers, thicknesses, repetition, frequency and supported polarizationResults / handoffReflected and transmitted pulse histories and spectra; mesh and energy checks
Normal-incidence lossless delay-line mesh with pulse decay, energy and mesh-refinement safeguards. Explicit Run required; not a 3D solver.