Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 8, Issue 11, pp 1581–1589 | Cite as

Fracture behaviour of boron filaments

  • G. K. Layden


Various types of boron filaments were broken in tension in such a way that primary fracture surfaces, and fragments ejected when fracture occurred, were retained. Fracture surfaces observed in the scanning electron microscope could be placed into one of two broad categories. Type I surfaces exhibited primary fracture characteristics such as mirror, mist and hackle zones. Flaws which initiated failure could frequently be resolved. Type II surfaces appeared to be generated by subsequent fracture immediately following primary failure. The relationship between the fracture surfaces and the stress distributions occurring within the fibres as a result of manufacturing conditions is discussed.


Polymer Electron Microscope Scanning Electron Microscope Boron Fracture Surface 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    R. E. Wawner, in “Boron”, Vol. II, edited by G. K. Gaule (Plenum Press, New York 1965) pp 283–300.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Idem, in “Modern Composite Materials”, edited by L. J. Broutman and R. H. Krock (Addison Wesley, Reading, Mass, 1967) pp. 244–269.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    L. E. Line, Jun. andU. V. Henderson, in “Hand-book of Fiberglass and Advanced Plastic Composites”, edited by G. Lubin (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1969) pp. 201–236.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. H. Lasday andC. P. Talley, in “Advanced Fibrous Reinforced Composites”, (Society of Aerospace Material and Processing Engineers, Vol. 10 Azusa, California, 1966) pp. D1-D12.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    K. G. Kreider andK. M. Prewo, “Composite Materials: Testing and Design” (Scond Conference) ASTM STP 497 (American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1972) p. 539.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    K. M. Prewo andF. Douglas, personal communication, to be published.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    C. P. Talley,J. Appl. Phys. 30 (1959) 1114.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    R. G. Bourdeau, in United Aircraft Research Laboratories Report G110550-2 (1968).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. J. Diefendorf andR. M. Mehalso, in Technical Report AFML-TR-70-287 (1971).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. P. I. Adler andM. L. Hammond,Appl. Phys. Letters 14 (1969) 354.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. S. Argon, in “Mechanical Behaviour of Materials”, edited by F. A. McClintock and A. S. Argon (Addison Wesley, Reading, Mass, 1966) pp. 500–504.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. W. Johnson andD. G. Holloway,Phil. Mag. 14 (1966) 731.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. Schardin, in “Fracture”, (edited by B. L. Averbach, D. K. Felbeck, G. T. Hahn and D. A. Thomas M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass, and Wiley, New York, 1959) p 394.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman and Hall Ltd. 1973

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. K. Layden
    • 1
  1. 1.United Aircraft Research LaboratoriesEast HartfordUSA

Personalised recommendations