Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T15:16:38.133Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Fiber strength utilization in carbon/carbon composites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Rafael J. Zaldivar
Affiliation:
Mechanics and Materials Technology Center, The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, California 90245
Gerald S. Rellick
Affiliation:
Mechanics and Materials Technology Center, The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, California 90245
J.M. Yang
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024
Get access

Abstract

The utilization of tensile strength of carbon fibers in unidirectional carbon/carbon (C/C) composites was studied for a series of four mesophase-pitch-based carbon fibers in a carbon matrix derived from a polyarylacetylene (PAA) resin. The fibers had moduli of 35, 75, 105, and 130 Mpsi. Composite processing conditions ranged from the cured-resin state to various heat-treatment temperatures (HTT's) from 1100 to 2750 °C for the C/C's. Room-temperature tensile strength and modulus were measured for the various processing conditions, and were correlated with SEM observations of fracture surfaces, fiber and matrix microstructures, and fiber/matrix interphase structures. Fiber tensile strength utilization (FSU) is defined as the ratio of apparent fiber strength in the C/C to the fiber strength in an epoxy-resin-matrix composite. Carbonization heat treatment to 1100 °C results in a brittle carbon matrix that bonds strongly with the three lower modulus fibers, resulting in matrix-dominated failure at FSU values of 24 to 35%. However, the composite with the 130-Mpsi-modulus filament had an FSU of 79%. It is attributed to a combination of tough fracture within the filament itself and a weaker fiber/matrix interface. Both factors lead to crack deflection and blunting rather than to crack propagation. The presence of a weakened interface is inferred from observations of fiber pullout. Much of the FSU of the three lower modulus fibers is recovered by HTT to 2100 or 2400 °C, principally as a result of interface weakening, which works to prevent matrix-dominated fracture. With HTT to 2750 °C, there is a drop in FSU for all the composites; it is apparently the result of a combination of fiber degradation and reduced matrix stress-transfer capability.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1Jortner, J., Effect of Weak Interfaces on Thermostructural Behavior of C/C Composites, Office of Naval Research Annual Report, Contract N00014-82-C-0405, pp. 1931 (March 1985).Google Scholar
2Jortner, J., “A Model for Tensile Fracture of Carbon-Carbon Composite Fiber Bundles,” paper presented at the Sixth JANNAF RNTS Meeting, Huntsville, AL (December 1984); included in Ref. 1.Google Scholar
3Leong, K., Zimmer, J., and Weitz, R., Fiber Property Changes During Processing of Carbon–Carbon Composites, Report AFWALTR-87-4035 (Acurex Corporation, Mountain View, CA, June 1987).Google Scholar
4Fitzer, E. and Hüttner, W., J. Phys. D.: Appl. Phys. 14, 347 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Katzman, H. A., Polyarylacetylene Resin Composites, Report TR-0090(5935-06)-1 (The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA, April 1990).Google Scholar
6Zaldivar, R.J., Kobayashi, R.W., Rellick, G.S., and Yang, J.M., Carbon 29, 1145 (1991).Google Scholar
7Zaldivar, R.J., Rellick, G.S., and Yang, J.M., SAMPE J. 27, 29 (September/October 1991).Google Scholar
8Edie, D., Cano, R.J., and Ross, R.A., Ext. Abstr., 20th Biennial Carbon Conf. (1991), p. 330.Google Scholar
9Fitzer, E. and Burger, A., in Carbon Fibers: Their Composites and Applications (The Plastics Inst, London, 1971), p. 134.Google Scholar
10Newling, D. O. and Walker, E. J., in Carbon Fibers: Their Composites and Applications (The Plastics Inst., London, 1971), p. 142.Google Scholar
11Thomas, C.R. and Walker, E.J., High Temp.-High Press. 10, 79 (1978).Google Scholar
12Cook, J. and Gordon, J. E., Proc. R. Soc. London A282,508 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13Reiswig, R. D., Levinson, L. S., and O'Rourke, J. A., Carbon 6, 142 (1968).Google Scholar
14Hishiyama, Y., Inagaki, M., Kimura, S., and Yamada, S., Carbon 12, 249 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Zaldivar, R.J. and Rellick, G.S., Carbon 29, 1155 (1991).Google Scholar
16Rellick, G.S., Chang, D.J., and Zaldivar, R.J., J. Mater. Res. 7, 2798 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar