Two current theories [11, 17] of interfacial debonding and fibre pull-out, which have been developed on the basis of fracture mechanics and shear strength criteria, respectively, are critically compared with experimental results of several composite systems. From the plots of partial debond stress, σ d p , as a function of debond length, three different cases of the interfacial debond process can be identified, i.e. totally unstable, partially stable and totally stable. The stability of the debond process is governed not only by elastic constants, relative volume of fibre and matrix but more importantly by the nature of bonding at the interface and embedded fibre length,L. It is found that for the epoxy-based matrix composite systems, Gaoet al.'s model  predicts the trend of maximum debond stress, σ d * , very well for longL, but it always overestimates σ d * for very shortL. In contrast, Hsueh's model  has the capability to predict σ d * for shortL, but it often needs significant adjustment to the bond shear strength for a better fit of the experimental results for longL. For a ceramic-based matrix composite, σ d * predicted by the two models agree exceptionally well with experiment over almost the whole range ofL, a reflection that the assumed stable debond process in theory is actually achieved in practice. With respect to the initial frictional pull-out stress, σf, the agreement between the two theories and experiments is excellent for all range ofL and all composite systems, suggesting that the solutions for σf proposed by the two models are essentially identical. Although Gaoet al.'s model has the advantage to determine accurately the important interfacial properties such as residual clamping stress,q o, and coefficient of friction, μ, it needs some modifications if accurate predictions of σ d * are sought for very shortL. These include varying interfacial fracture toughness,G ic with debond crack growth, unstable debonding for very shortL and inclusion of shear deformation in the matrix for the evaluation ofG ic and fibre stress distribution. Hsueh's model may also be improved to obtain a better solution by including the effect of matrix axial stress existing at the debonded region on the frictionless debond stress, σo.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
J. K. Kim andY. W. Mai,Comp. Sci. Tech. 41 (1991) 333.
A. Kelly andW. R. Tyson,J. Mech. Phys. Solids 13 (1965) 329.
A. Kelly,Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A282 (1964) 63.
B. Miller, P. Muri andL. Rebenfeld,Comp. Sci. Tech. 28 (1987) 17.
M. K. Tse,SAMPE J. 21 (1985) 11.
H. L. Cox,Brit. J. Appl. Phys. 3 (1952) 72.
L. B. Greszczuk, “Interfaces in Composites”, ASTM STP 452 (American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, 1969) p. 42.
A. Takaku andR. G. C. Arridge,J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 6 (1973) 2038.
P. Lawrence,J. Mater. Sci. 7 (1972) 1.
V. Laws, P. Lawrence andR. W. Nurse,J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 6 (1973) 523.
C. H. Hsueh,Mater. Sci. Engng A123 (1990) 1.
Idem, ibid. A125 (1990) 67.
C. Gurney andJ. Hunt,Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 299 (1967) 508.
J. O. Outwater andM. C. Murphy, in “Proceedings of the 24th Conference on SPI” (1969) Paper 11C.
H. Stang andS. P. Shah,J. Mater. Sci. 21 (1986) 953.
J. K. Wells andP. W. R. Beaumont,ibid. 20 (1985) 1275.
Y. C. Gao, Y. W. Mai andB. Cotterell,J. Appl. Math. Phys. (ZAMP) 39 (1988) 550.
C. Atkinson, J. Avila, E. Betz andR. E. Smelser,J. Mech. Phys. Solids 30 (1982) 97.
C. K. Y. Leung andV. C. Li,Composites 21 (1990) 305.
Idem,J. Mater. Sci. (1992) 305 in press.
C. H. Hsueh,J. Mater Sci. Lett. 7 (1988) 497.
E. P. Buttler, E. R. Fuller Jr andH. M. Chan,Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 170 (1990) 17.
J. K. Kim, C. Baillie andY. W. Mai,Scripta Metall. Mater. 25 (1991) 315.
V. M. Karbhari andD. J. Wilkins,ibid. 24 (1990) 1197.
J. D. Bright, S. Danchaivijit andD. K. Shetty,J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 74 (1991) 115.
C. Cazeneuve, J. E. Castle andJ. F. Watts,J. Mater. Sci. 25 (1990) 1902.
P. Denison andF. R. Jones,ibid. 23 (1988) 2153.
J. G. Williams, M. E. Donnellan, M. R. James andW. L. Morris,Mater. Sci. Engng A126 (1990) 305.
T. C. Tsai, A. M. Arocho andL. M. Gause,ibid. A126 (1990) 294.
M. R. Piggott,Polym. Comp. 8 (1987) 291.
G. C. Papanicolaou, G. J. Messinis andS. S. Karakatsanidis,J. Mater. Sci. 24 (1989) 395.
P. Bartos,ibid. 15 (1980) 3122.
M. R. Piggott,Comp. Sci. Tech. 30 (1987) 295.
C. K. Y. Leung andV. C. Li,J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 9 (1991) 1140.
L-M. Zhou, J-K Kim andY-W Mai,J. Mater. Sci. (1992)27, 3155.
About this article
Cite this article
Kim, J., Baillie, C. & Mai, Y. Interfacial debonding and fibre pull-out stresses. J Mater Sci 27, 3143–3154 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01116004
- Shear Strength
- Bond Shear Strength
- Debond Length
- Interfacial Fracture Toughness
- Debond Process