Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 42, Issue 16, pp 6701–6707 | Cite as

Fracture behavior and microstructure of steel fiber reinforced cast iron

  • Mehmet ŞimşirEmail author


In this study, improvement of fracture toughness and strength of gray cast iron by reinforcing steel fiber was investigated. Three point bend specimens were used to calculate the flexural strength and fracture toughness. Fracture toughness of the reinforced cast iron with two distinct volume fraction (Vf = 0.05 and 0.08) were calculated by compliance method and J-integral method using single specimen technique. The study shows that fiber reinforced composite has higher fracture toughness and flexural strength than cast iron without reinforcement. Also, fracture toughness increases with increasing volume fraction of reinforcement. Optical and scanning electron microcopy (SEM) analyses were used to examine the microstructure and fracture surface. It is noted that the carbon diffuses from gray cast iron to steel fiber and graphite free transition regions with high hardness were observed due to the carbon diffusion.


Fracture Toughness Cast Iron Flexural Strength Steel Fiber Maraging Steel 
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.


  1. 1.
    Antolovich SD, Shete PM, Chanani GR (1972) ASTM STP514. American Society for Testing and Materials. p 114Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antolovich SD, Kasi K, Chanani GR (1972) ASTM STP514. American Society for Testing and Materials, p 135Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Akdemir A, Arıkan H, Kuş R (2005) Mater Sci Technol 21:1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Soboyejo WO, Ye F, Chen LC, Bahtishi N, Schwartz DS, Lederich RJ (1996) Acta Mater 44:2027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chiang CR (2000) J Mater Sci 35:3161, doi: 10.1023/A:1004884322817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Qin S, Zhang G (2002) J Mater Sci 37:879, doi: 10.1023/A:1013868620945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Arpon R, Narciso J, Louis E, Cordovilla CG (2003) Mater Sci Technol 19:1225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Futato RJ, Aadland JD, van der Sluy WA, Lowe AL (1985) ASTM STP856. American Society for Testing and Materials, p 84Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Prokopski G, Langier B (2000) Cement Concrete Res 30:1427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Panontin TL, Makino A, Williams JF (2000) Eng Fract Mech 67:293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Begley JA, Landes JD (1972) ASTM STP 514. American Society for Testing and Materials, p 1Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rice JR, Paris PC, Merkle JG (1973) ASTM STP 536. American Society for Testing and Materials, p 231Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hickerson J (1976) ASTM Committee Meeting E-24, Lake Buena Vista FlaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gudas JP, Davis DA (1982) J Test Eval 10:252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schwalbe KH, Hellman D, Heerens J, Knaack J, Roos JM (1985) ASTM STP856. American Society for Testing and Materials, p 338Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Balton JD, Gant AJ (1998) J Mater Sci 33:939, doi: 10.1023/A:1004303609990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Neal BK, Priest RH (1985) ASTM STP 856. American Society for Testing and Materials, p 375Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gerberich WW (1971) J Mech Phys of Solids 19:71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Arikan H, Avci A, Akdemir A (2004) Polymer Test 23:615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rohatgi A, Harach DJ, Vecchio KS, Harvey KP (2003) Acta Materialia 51:2933–2957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Şimşir M, Öztürk T, Doruk M (2004) Turkish J Eng Env Sci 28:397Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Metallurgical and Materials EngineeringCumhuriyet UniversitySivasTurkey

Personalised recommendations