journal article·2013-01

Determining the fracture resistance of thin sheet fiber composites – Paper as a model material

J. Zechner, M. Janko, O. Kolednik

Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract In nonlinear fracture mechanics testing of thin-sheet short-fiber composites, special problems occur that do not appear in other engineering materials, such as steels. The most important problem is the formation of a long process zone, where fiber pull-out, realignment and breakage occur, making an optical crack length measurement impossible. This impedes the determination of a reproducible value of the fracture toughness and the construction of a crack growth resistance curve. Two new approaches are presented to overcome this problem. In the first one, a procedure is presented to determine experimentally the cohesive zone relation on deeply-notched double-edge notch tension specimens. The cohesive zone relation enables us, together with the mechanical properties, to simulate numerically a fracture mechanics test on an arbitrary geometry and to determine a crack growth resistance curve. In the second approach, the displacements and strains around the process zone are measured during in situ experiments under an optical microscope using digital image analysis. With this local deformation analysis, a critical local strain is determined where the load bearing capacity of the material decreases to zero. The knowledge of this critical strain is used to find the location of the crack tip and to determine a crack growth resistance curve. The application of the two approaches is demonstrated on commercial printing paper as model material. It is shown that reproducible fracture toughness parameters can be determined with both procedures.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Material Properties and Processing · Vibration and Dynamic Analysis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (40)

Show source-provided references
1. Chen · Eng Fract Mech · 2005 · 72 · 207210.1016/j.engfracmech.2005.01.008 ↗
2. Seth · J Mater Sci · 1974 · 9 · 174510.1007/BF00541741 ↗
3. Isaksson · Eng Fract Mech · 2005 · 72 · 229910.1016/j.engfracmech.2005.03.002 ↗
4. Westerlind · J Mater Sci · 1991 · 26 · 263010.1007/BF00545548 ↗
5. Tanaka · J Mater Sci · 2000 · 35 · 182710.1023/A:1004797023064 ↗
6. Wellmar · Nord Pulp Pap Res J · 1997 · 12 · 18910.3183/NPPRJ-1997-12-03-p189-195 ↗
7. Yuhara · J Mater Sci · 1993 · 28 · 357110.1007/BF01159839 ↗
8. Cotterell · Int J Fract · 1977 · 13 · 26710.1007/BF00040143 ↗
9. Rice · J Appl Mech · 1968 · 35 · 37910.1115/1.3601206 ↗
10. Standard test method for measurement of fracture toughness. E-1820-08. Annual book of ASTM standards. vol. 03.01. West Conshohocken (PA): ASTM; 2008.
11. Kolednik O. Fracture mechanics. In: Nicolais L, Borzacchiello A, editors. The Wiley encyclopedia of composites. 2nd ed. John Wiley & Sons; 2012. p. 1126–41.10.1002/9781118097298.weoc096 ↗
12. Anderson · 2005
13. Kolednik · Eng Fract Mech · 1991 · 38 · 40310.1016/0013-7944(91)90092-F ↗
14. Metallic materials – unified method of test for the determination of quasistatic fracture toughness. International standard ISO 12135:2002(E). ISO; 2002. p. 83–90.
15. Rice JR, Paris PC, Merkle JG. Some further results of J-integral analysis and estimates. In: ASTM STP 536. American Society for Testing and Materials; 1973. p. 231–45.10.1520/STP49643S ↗
16. Begley JA, Landes JD. The J-integral as a fracture criterion. In: ASTM STP 514. American Society for Testing and Materials, 1972. p. 1–20.10.1520/STP38816S ↗
17. Haslach · Mech Time-Depend Mater · 2008 · 13 · 1110.1007/s11043-008-9074-5 ↗
18. Pandya · Composites · 2000 · 29 · 439
19. Pandya · Composites · 2000 · 29 · 447
20. Janko · Macromol Symp · 2012 · 311 · 110.1002/masy.201000140 ↗
21. Hillerborg · Cem Concr Res · 1976 · 6 · 77310.1016/0008-8846(76)90007-7 ↗
22. Dugdale · J Mech Phys Solids · 1960 · 8 · 10010.1016/0022-5096(60)90013-2 ↗
23. Barenblatt · Adv Appl Mech · 1962 · 7 · 5510.1016/S0065-2156(08)70121-2 ↗
24. Elices · Eng Fract Mech · 2002 · 69 · 13710.1016/S0013-7944(01)00083-2 ↗
25. Computational aspects of nonlinear fracture mechanics
26. Chen · Int J Fract · 2003 · 132 · 51710.1023/A:1025426121928 ↗
27. Tvergaard · J Mech Phys Solids · 1992 · 40 · 137710.1016/0022-5096(92)90020-3 ↗
28. Hutchinson · Acta Mater · 2000 · 48 · 12510.1016/S1359-6454(99)00291-8 ↗
29. Mäkelä · Eng Fract Mech · 2012 · 79 · 5010.1016/j.engfracmech.2011.10.001 ↗
30. Tryding · Tappi J · 2000 · 83 · 84
31. Siegmund · Int J Fract · 1999 · 99 · 9710.1023/A:1018300226682 ↗
32. Siegmund · Eng Fract Mech · 2000 · 67 · 13910.1016/S0013-7944(00)00054-0 ↗
33. Chen · Int J Fract · 2005 · 132 · 13510.1007/s10704-005-0626-2 ↗
34. Shen · Cem Conc Compos · 2011 · 33 · 57210.1016/j.cemconcomp.2011.01.005 ↗
35. Li · Compos Sci Technol · 2005 · 65 · 53710.1016/j.compscitech.2004.08.004 ↗
36. http://www.3ds.com/products/simulia/portfolio/abaqus/overview/. (14.05.12).
37. Cravero · Eng Fract Mech · 2007 · 74 · 273510.1016/j.engfracmech.2007.01.012 ↗
38. Tatschl · Mater Sci Eng · 2003 · A339 · 26510.1016/S0921-5093(02)00111-9 ↗
39. Kapp · Int J Mater Res · 2011 · 102 · 68710.3139/146.110522 ↗
40. Turner · Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct · 1994 · 17 · 108910.1111/j.1460-2695.1994.tb00837.x ↗