journal article·2000-06

E‐Glass/DGEBA/m‐PDA single fiber composites: The effect of strain rate on interfacial shear strength measurements

G. A. Holmes, R. C. Peterson, D. L. Hunston, W. G. McDonough

Polymer Composites· Volume 21· Issue 3
Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract Precise measurements of fiber break regions have been made during the single fiber fragmentation test (SFFT) procedure on E‐glass/diglycidyl ether of bisphenol‐A (DGEBA)/meta‐phenylenediamine (m‐PDA) test specimens. From these measurements, the location and size of each fiber fragment was determined, and the resulting information was used to construct fragmentation maps of the tested fiber. By comparing these maps, the fragmentation process supports random fragmentation along the length of the fiber. Since the interfacial shear strength (IFSS) or the interfacial shear stress transfer coefficient (I‐STC) is obtained from the fragment length data at the end of the test (saturation), frequency histograms of the fragment length data were constructed to determine the repeatability of the fragmentation process. Since the SFFT is performed by sequential step‐strains of the test specimen, test protocols were developed by controlling the step size of each strain increment and the time between each step‐strain (dwell time). For the testing protocols used in this research, the E‐glass/DGEBA/m‐PDA frequency histograms of the fragment lengths were found to be generally repeatable. However, when the effective strain rate of the test was altered by changing the dwell time between strain increments, the fragment distribution at saturation of the E‐glass/DGEBA/m‐PDA SFFT specimens changed. The direction of the change was found to be inconsistent with the effect one might expect when only the nonlinear viscoelastic behavior of the matrix is considered. However, the magnitude of the change observed in the E‐glass/DGEBA/m‐PDA SFFT specimens is not universal. Fragmentation data obtained on E‐glass/polyisocyanurate SFFT specimens revealed a much smaller change in fragment length distributions with the same change in testing protocols. Consistent with the results obtained on the E‐glass/DGEBA/m‐PDA, fiber fragmentation occurs when the polyisocyanurate matrix exhibits nonlinear viscoelastic behavior. The implication of these results for interfacial shear strength measurements is discussed.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Fiber-reinforced polymer composites · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites

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

References (30)

Show source-provided references
1. Agarwal B. D. · 1990 · 87
2. 10.1088/0508-3443/3/3/30210.1088/0508-3443/3/3/302 ↗
3. 10.1016/0022-5096(65)90035-910.1016/0022-5096(65)90035-9 ↗
4. Hunston D. L. · 1996 · 427
5. 10.1016/0266-3538(91)90015-H10.1016/0266-3538(91)90015-H ↗
6. W. G.McDonough G. A.Holmes D. L.Hunston andR. S.Parnas NISTIR 6102(1997).
7. In the original derivation of the Cox model the radius of the matrix (rm) parameter was defined as the interfiber distance. Since there is no adjacent fiber in a SFFT specimen this parameter has often been taken as half the thickness of the sample specimen (8). This effectively makes the I‐STC dependent on the specimen size.
8. 10.1007/BF0110571310.1007/BF01105713 ↗
9. Shioya M. · 1994
10. 10.1007/BF0035659310.1007/BF00356593 ↗
11. 10.1007/BF0036336210.1007/BF00363362 ↗
12. 10.1016/0010-4361(93)90015-Z10.1016/0010-4361(93)90015-Z ↗
13. 10.1016/0266-3538(93)90050-Q10.1016/0266-3538(93)90050-Q ↗
14. Holmes G. A. · 1998 · 175
15. Holmes G. A. · 1998 · 26
16. McDonough W. G. · 1998 · 1688
17. G. A.Holmes R. C.Peterson D. L.Hunston W. G.McDonough andC. L.Schutte “The Effect of Nonlinear Viscoelasticity on Interfacial Shear Strength Measurements ” inTime Dependent and Nonlinear Effects in Polymers and Composites ASTMSTP 1357 R. A.Schapery ed. p.98 ASTM(2000).10.1520/STP15831S ↗
18. Certain commercial materials and equipment are identified in this paper to specify adequately the experimental procedure. In no case does such identification imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology nor does it imply necessarily that the product is the best available for the purpose.
19. Drzal L. T. · 1990 · 391
20. Ku H. H. · J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand. (U.S.) ‐ C. Engr. and Instr. · 1966 · 70 · 332
21. 10.1093/biomet/66.3.60510.1093/biomet/66.3.605 ↗
22. 10.1007/BF0102586810.1007/BF01025868 ↗
23. 10.1007/BF0053155810.1007/BF00531558 ↗
24. Hoaglin D. C. · 1983 · 25
25. Ott R. L. · 1993 · 230
26. 1998 · 27
27. Neter J. · 1996 · 776
28. 10.1002/pc.75010060310.1002/pc.750100603 ↗
29. 10.1177/00219983680020020810.1177/002199836800200208 ↗
30. 10.1177/00219983910250050810.1177/002199839102500508 ↗