Visualization of dynamic fiber-matrix interfacial shear debonding
To visualize the debonding event in real time for the study of dynamic crack initiation and propagation at the fiber–matrix interface, a modified tension Kolsky bar was integrated with a high-speed synchrotron X-ray phase-contrast imaging setup. In the gage section, the pull-out configuration was utilized to understand the behavior of interfacial debonding between SC-15 epoxy matrix and S-2 glass fiber, tungsten wire, steel wire, and carbon fiber composite Z-pin at pull-out velocities of 2.5 and 5.0 m s−1. The load history and images of the debonding progression were simultaneously recorded. Both S-2 glass fiber and Z-pin experienced catastrophic interfacial debonding whereas tungsten and steel wire experienced both catastrophic debonding and stick–slip behavior. Even though S-2 glass fiber and Z-pin samples exhibited a slight increase and tungsten and steel wire samples exhibited a slight decrease in average peak force and average interfacial shear stress as the pull-out velocities were increased, no statistical difference was found for most properties when the velocity was increased. Furthermore, the debonding behavior for each fiber material is similar with increasing pull-out velocity. Thus, the debonding mechanism, peak force, and interfacial shear stress were rate insensitive as the pull-out velocity doubled from 2.5 to 5.0 m s−1. Scanning electron microscope imaging of recovered epoxy beads revealed a snap-back behavior around the meniscus region of the bead for S-2 glass, tungsten, and steel fiber materials at 5.0 m s−1 whereas those at 2.5 m s−1 exhibited no snap-back behavior.
This research was partially sponsored by the Army Research Laboratory and was accomplished under Cooperative Agreement Number W911NF-12-2-0022. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Laboratory or the US Government. The US Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation herein. The authors thank insightful discussions with University of Delaware researchers. The authors also thank Brady Aydelotte from Army Research Laboratory for his insightful and professional input in this research. Lastly, the authors thank Alex Deriy from Argonne National Laboratory’s APS for his professional help during our beam time. This research used resources of the Advanced Photon Source, a US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science User Facility operated for the DOE Office of Science by Argonne National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
No conflict of interest exists in this article.
- 1.Broutman LJ (1969) Measurement of the fiber-polymer matrix interfacial strength. In: Committee D (ed) STP44698S Interfaces in composites, STP44698S. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, pp 27–41Google Scholar
- 2.Mandell JF, Chen JF, McGarry FH (1980) A microdebonding test for in situ fiber-matrix bond strength and moisture effects (No. MIT/RR-R80-1). Massachusetts Inst of Tech Cambridge Dept of Materials Science and EngineeringGoogle Scholar
- 5.Gao X (2006) Tailored interphase structure for improved strength and energy absorption of composites. Dissertation, University of DelawareGoogle Scholar
- 10.Li Z, Bi X, Lambros J, Geubelle PH (2002) Dynamic fiber debonding and frictional push-out in mode composite systems: experimental observations. Exp Mech 42(4):417–425Google Scholar
- 16.Ashton T, Negre P, Langer J (2001) Interlaminar damage resistance of Z fiberTM reinforced structural CFRP. In: Extended abstracts of the 13th international conference on composite materialsGoogle Scholar