Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:21:45.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Critical Evaluation of the Use of the Microbond Method for Determination of Composite Interfacial Properties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

Rebecca A. Haaksma  and
Marilyn J. Cehelnik
Rebecca A. Haaksma
Affiliation:
Alcoa Laboratories, Alcoa Center, PA, 15069
Marilyn J. Cehelnik
Affiliation:
Alcoa Laboratories, Alcoa Center, PA, 15069
Get access

Abstract

The microbond method has been applied with increased frequency to characterize interfacial adhesion in fiber reinforced composites. Nevertheless, a number of serious questions remain regarding the interpretation of experimental data. This paper addresses material and experimental variables in the microbond test procedure including the cure behavior of thermoset test specimens, matrix heterogeneity, locus of failure in test specimens and load application techniques. The theoretical basis for the method is examined by viewing experimental results in terms of existing theoretical interpretations of interfacial failure. Conclusions are presented regarding the limitations and the potential of the microbond method for determining fiber/matrix adhesive bond strength.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 170: Symposium N – Interfaces in Composites , 1989 , 71
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

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

1. Miller, Bernard, Muri, Pierre and Rebenfeld, Ludwig, Comp. Sci. Tech. 28, 17 (1987).Google Scholar
2. Gaur, Umesh and Miller, Bernard, Comp. Sci. Tech. 34, 35 (1989).Google Scholar
3. Penn, Lynn S. and Lee, Shaw M., J. Comp. Tech. Res. 11 (1), 23 (1989).Google Scholar
4. McLea, Kevin P. and Besio, Gregory J., Poly. Comp. 9 (11), 285 (1988).Google Scholar
5. Penn, L. S. and Lee, S. M., Fiber Science and Technology 12, 91 (1982).Google Scholar
6. Piggott, Michael R. and Chua, Ping S., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 27, 672 (1987).Google Scholar
7. Broutman, L. J. in American Society for Testing and Materials, edited by Salkind, M. J., (Philadelphia, 1969), p. 27.Google Scholar
8. Andreevska, G. D. and Gorbatkina, Y. A., Ind.Eng. Chem., Prod. Res. Develop. 11, 24 (1972).Google Scholar
9. Eagles, D. B., Blumentritt, B. F. and Cooper, S. L., J. Appl. Poly. Sci. 20 435 (1976).Google Scholar
10. Morrison, Jill K., Shah, Surenda P. and Jenq, Yeou-Shang, J. Engineering Mechanics 114 (2) 277 (1988).Google Scholar
11. Drzal, Lawrence T., Rich, Michael J. and Lloyd, Pamela F., J. Adhesion 16 1 (1982).Google Scholar
12. Drzal, L. T. (private communication).Google Scholar
13. Yeh, J. Y., Letter to Rolf, R. L., Alcoa Laboratories, 1989.Google Scholar