Advertisement

Acoustic Emission Analysis of SCS-6 Fiber Fracture in Titanium Matrix Composites

  • David J. Sypeck
  • Haydn N. G. Wadley

Abstract

One aspect of successful composite design involves development of a detailed knowledge of damage evolution. In metal matrix composites, cracking and/or plastic deformation of one or more constituents together with fiber-matrix interfacial debonding and sliding generally occur prior to catastrophic failure [1, 2]. The nature and severity of these damage processes controls mechanical performance. In ductile matrix systems having a low fiber-matrix interfacial strength, the failure process can involve successive fragmentation of the fibers with increasing load. Broken fibers shed load (equally among the unbroken fibers in the case of global load sharing) until the fiber fracture density reaches some critical value and the sample catastrophically fails. Characterization of damage development has been slowed by a lack of NDE techniques. Here, the use of acoustic emission (AE) techniques is explored to further understand and quantify failure processes of this type.

Keywords

Acoustic Emission Acoustic Emission Signal Moment Tensor Fiber Fracture Interfacial Shear Stress 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hashin, Z., “Analysis of Composite Materials — A Survey”, Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol. 50, pp. 481–505, 1983.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kelly, A. and Macmillan, N.H., Strong Solids, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1986.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Scruby, C, Wadley, H., and Sinclair, J.E., “The origin of acoustic emission during deformation of aluminum and an aluminum-magnesium alloy”, Philosophical Magazine A, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 249–274, 1981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wadley, H.N.G., Scruby, C.B., and Shrimpton, G., “Quantitative Acoustic Emission Source Characterisation During Low Temperature Cleavage and Intergranular Fracture”, Acta Metallurgica et Materialia, Vol. 29, pp. 399–414, 1981.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim, K.Y. and Sachse, W., “Characteristics of an acoustic emission source from a thermal crack in glass”, International Journal of Fracture, Vol. 31, pp. 211–231, 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burridge, R. and Knopoff, L., “Body Force Equivalents For Seismic Dislocations”, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, Vol. 54, No. 6, pp. 1875–1888, 1964.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hsu, N. N., “Dynamic Green’s Functions of an Infinite Plate — A Computer Program”, NBSIR 85–3234, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, 1985.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sypeck, D.J., Master of Science Thesis, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, 1990.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Proctor, T.M. Jr., “An improved piezoelectric acoustic emission transducer”, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 71, No. 5, pp. 1163–1168, 1982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hsu, N.N. and Breckenridge, F.R., “Characterization and Calibration of Acoustic Emission Sensors”, Materials Evaluation, Vol. 39, pp. 60–68, 1981.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aki, K. and Richards, P.G., Quantitative Seismology Theory and Methods, Volumes I and II, W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, 1980.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • David J. Sypeck
    • 1
  • Haydn N. G. Wadley
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Engineering and Applied ScienceUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations