首页> 外文期刊>Composites Science and Technology >Adhesional pressure as a criterion for interfacial failure in fibrous microcomposites and its determination using a microbond test
【24h】

Adhesional pressure as a criterion for interfacial failure in fibrous microcomposites and its determination using a microbond test

机译:粘附压力作为纤维微复合材料界面破坏的标准,并通过微粘结试验确定

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Typical interfacial strength parameters calculated from the microbond and pull-out tests are the ultimate (local) interfacial shear strength, tau_d, and the critical energy release rate, G_(ic). These two parameters are often considered as criteria for interfacial failure. Several years ago, we proposed a new interfacial parameter, adhesional pressure (sigma_d), which is the normal (tensile) stress component at the fiber-matrix interface at the moment of the debonding onset near the crack tip. Adhesional pressure has the following advantages as an interfacial parameter and eventual failure criterion: (a) it corresponds to the actual mechanism of crack initiation in the microbond test (interfacial debonding starts in tensile mode), and (b) the sigma_d value is directly proportional to the work of adhesion, WA, between the fiber and matrix surfaces. In this paper, we investigated, both theoretically and experimentally, the applicability of the adhesional pressure as an interfacial failure criterion. Several fiber-polymer pairs have been tested using a microbond technique, and local interfacial parameters (tau_d. G_(ic) and sigma_d) for these systems have been measured. Assuming sigma_d= const, we analyzed the initiation of interfacial crack (the debond force, F_d, as a function of the embedded length, 4) as well as crack propagation (variation of the crack length with the load applied to the fiber) and dependencies of the peak force, F_(max), and the apparent shear strength, tau_(app), on the embedded length. Residual thermal stresses and interfacial friction were included in our analysis. A comparison with two other interfacial failure criteria (tau_d and G_(ic)) was made depending on specimen geometry (cylindrical specimens; spherical matrix droplets). It was found that all three parameters satisfactorily describe interfacial failure in a microbond test, yielding asymptotically (at large embedded lengths) very close predictions for F_(max) and tau_(app) as functions of the embedded length. They also predict equally well the interfacial crack growth under increasing external load for not very large crack lengths. For shorter embedded lengths, the three interfacial criteria yield substantially different results, e.g. finite tau_(app) value as l_e- > 0 from the tau_d criterion, infinite tau_(app)from G_(ic) = const, and zero tau_(app) from sigma_d = const. In this range of 4's, the local interfacial strength, tau_d, appears to be the best failure criterion.
机译:由微粘结和拉拔测试计算得出的典型界面强度参数是极限(局部)界面剪切强度tau_d和临界能量释放率G_(ic)。这两个参数通常被认为是界面破坏的标准。几年前,我们提出了一个新的界面参数,粘附压力(sigma_d),它是裂纹尖端附近脱胶开始时纤维-基体界面处的法向应力。粘合压力作为界面参数和最终的破坏准则具有以下优点:(a)它对应于微粘结测试中裂纹萌生的实际机制(界面剥离在拉伸模式下开始),以及(b)sigma_d值与比例成正比纤维和基体表面之间的粘附力WA。在本文中,我们在理论上和实验上都研究了粘附压力作为界面破坏准则的适用性。已经使用微粘合技术测试了几对纤维-聚合物,并测量了这些系统的局部界面参数(tau_d。G_(ic)和sigma_d)。假设sigma_d = const,我们分析了界面裂纹的萌生(剥离力F_d,作为嵌入长度的函数4)以及裂纹扩展(裂纹长度随施加到纤维上的载荷的变化)和相关性嵌入力上的峰值力F_(max)和表观剪切强度tau_(app)的关系。残余的热应力和界面摩擦也包括在我们的分析中。根据试样的几何形状(圆柱试样;球形基质液滴),与其他两个界面破坏标准(tau_d和G_(ic))进行了比较。结果发现,所有三个参数均能令人满意地描述微键测试中的界面破坏,并根据嵌入长度的函数渐近地(在较大的嵌入长度下)对F_(max)和tau_(app)产生非常接近的预测。他们还很好地预测了在裂纹载荷不是很大的情况下,在外部载荷增加的情况下界面裂纹的增长。对于较短的嵌入长度,这三个界面标准会产生实质上不同的结果,例如从tau_d准则中,有限的tau_(app)值为l_e-> 0,从G_(ic)= const中获得无限的tau_(app),从sigma_d = const中获得零tau_(app)。在4的范围内,局部界面强度tau_d似乎是最佳的破坏准则。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号