Mechanics of Composite Materials

, Volume 20, Issue 1, pp 44–52 | Cite as

Failure of the aluminum-boron plastic in static and cyclic tensile loading

  • M. Ya. Mikel'son
  • Yu. A. Gutans
Article

Conclusions

  1. 1.

    The aluminum-boron plastic fails by means of volume failure during tensile loading, i.e., by gradual cumulation of fractures of the fibers and separation of the fibers from the matrix.

     
  2. 2.

    The degree of fragmentation of the fibers of the aluminum-boron plastic in cyclic loading is lower than in static tensile loading.

     
  3. 3.

    The maximum value of the degree of fragmentation of the fibers P depends on the dimensions of the specimen and the reinforcement coefficient. In the case of the aluminum-boron plastic, the variation of the reinforcement coefficient from 0.17 to 0.38 reduces the value of P from 25 to 5%.

     
  4. 4.

    The length distribution of the fragments of the fibers in the fractured aluminum-boron plastic shows a maximum corresponding to the theoretically calculated ineffective length of the fiber.

     
  5. 5.

    The theoretical values of the strength of the unidirectional composite calculated in accordance with [1] taking into account volume failure are in satisfactory agreement with the experimental results.

     

Keywords

Cyclic Loading Tensile Loading Satisfactory Agreement Length Distribution Unidirectional Composite 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. 1.
    V. P. Tamuzh, M. T. Azarova, V-. M. Bondarenko, Yu. A. Gutans, Yu. G. Korabel'nikov, P. É. Pikshe, and O. F. Siluyanov, “Failure of unidirectional carbon-reinforced plastics and utilization of the strength properties of the fibers in these composites,” Mekh. Kompozitn. Mater., No. 1, 34–41 (1982).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. Rozen, “Failure of compound reinforced materials in tensile loading,” Raket. Tekh. Kosmon., No. 11, 121–129 (1964).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. Zweben, “Tensile failure of composites,” AIAA J., No. 2, 2325–2331 (1967).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. K. O'Brien, and K. L. Reifsnider, “Fatigue damage: stiffness/strength comparisons for composite materials,” J. Test. Eval.,5, No. 5, 384–393 (1977).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. R. Hancock, “Fatigue of metal-matrix composites,” in: Composite Materials [Russian translation], Vol. 5, Mir, Moscow (1978).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. É. Pikshe, V. P. Tamuzh, and M. Ya. Mikel'son, “Fragmentation of fibers in composite materials during loading,” Mekh. Kompozitn. Mater., No. 4, 725–728 (1981).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Ya. Mikel'son, I. V. Grushetskii, L. V. Katinova, and V. P. Tamuzh, “Anisotropy of failure of composites with orthogonal fibers in low-cycle loading,” Mekh. Kompozitn. Mater., No. 6, 993–999 (1981).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. C. Kim and L. J. Ebert, “Axial failure sequence and mechanisms in unidirectional fiber-glass composites,” J. Compos. Mater.,12, April, 139–152 (1978).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    W. W. Stinchcomb and K. L. Reifsnider, “Fatigue mechanisms,” in: Symposium, Kansas City, 22–24 May 1978, ASTM STP No. 675, pp. 762–787.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    C. K. H. Dharan, “Fatigue failure in graphite fiber and glass fiber-polymer composites,” J. Mater. Sci.,10, No. 10, 1665–1670 (1975).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. T. Hahn, “Fatigue behavior and life prediction of composite laminates,” in: Composite Materials, Testing and Design, 5th Conference, New Orleans, La., 1978, Philadelphia (1979), pp. 383–417.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    G. J. Dvorak and W. S. Johnson, “Fatigue damage mechanisms in boron-aluminum composite laminates,” in: Advances in Composite Materials, Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference, Paris, 26–29 August 1980, Vol. 2, Oxford (1980), pp. 1177–1190.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    D. M. Kotchick, R. C. Hink, and R. E. Tressler, “Gauge length and surface damage effects on the strength distributions of silicon carbide and sapphire filaments,” J. Compos. Mater.,9, October, 327–336 (1975).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. M. Skudra and F. Ya. Bulavs, Structural Theory of Reinforced Plastics [in Russian], Riga (1978).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. M. Hedgepeth and P. Van Dyke, “Local stress concentrations in imperfect filamentary composite materials,” J. Compos. Mater.,1, 294–319 (1967).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    L. C. Holloway and I. M. Allison, “Photoelastic study of the elastic stress distribution around discontinuous fibers,” Strain,17, No. 1, 12–19 (1981).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    0. Okuno and I. Miura, “Fiber/fiber interaction in a surrounding fiber model of short fiber-reinforced composite alloys,” J. Jpn. Inst. Met.,39, No. 8, 773–778 (1975).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. K. Wells and P. W. Beaumont, “Correlations for the fracture of composite materials,” Scr. Metall.,16, No. 1, 99–103 (1982).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    P. C. Chou and R. Croman, “Degradation and sudden-death models of fatigue of graphite/epoxy composites,” in: Composite Materials, Testing and Design (5th Conference, New Orleans, 1978), Philadelphia (1979), pp. 413–454.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    T. T. Chiao, “Some interesting mechanical properties of composite materials,” in: Fracture of Composite Materials [in Russian], Riga (1979), pp. 240–243.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Ya. Mikel'son
    • 1
  • Yu. A. Gutans
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Polymer MechanicsAcademy of Science of the Latvian SSRRiga

Personalised recommendations