1-20 of 120 Search Results for

interface debonding

Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account

Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Close Modal
Sort by
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 26 Debonding at the interface of a carbide particle and the matrix in a bainitic 4150 steel. Loading direction indicated. Source: Ref 42 More
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 9 Schematic of debonding at a matrix-particle interface with unidirectional stress. (a) Plane stress loading of an inclusion (no interfacial bond) causes debonding at the particle caps. (b) Debonding and fracture of high-aspect-ratio particles (elongated inclusion) due to shear transfer More
Image
Published: 15 January 2021
Fig. 27 Debonding at the interface of a carbide particle and the matrix in a bainitic 4150 steel. Loading direction indicated. Source: Ref 18 More
Image
Published: 15 January 2021
Fig. 9 Schematic of debonding at a matrix-particle interface with unidirectional stress. (a) Plane-stress loading of an inclusion (no interfacial bond) causes debonding at the particle caps. (b) Debonding and fracture of high-aspect-ratio particles (elongated inclusion) due to shear transfer More
Series: ASM Handbook
Volume: 19
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 January 1996
DOI: 10.31399/asm.hb.v19.a0002415
EISBN: 978-1-62708-193-1
... Abstract Knowledge of fatigue behavior at the laminate level is essential for understanding the fatigue life of a laminated composite structure. This article describes fatigue failure of composite laminates in terms of layer cracking, delamination, and fiber break and interface debonding...
Series: ASM Handbook
Volume: 22A
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 December 2009
DOI: 10.31399/asm.hb.v22a.a0005458
EISBN: 978-1-62708-196-2
... Abstract Any model that describes the early stage of cavitation must therefore address experimental observations of continuous nucleation, cracklike interface cavities, cavity growth from nanometer-scale sizes, and debonding at particle interfaces and formation of large-faceted cavities...
Series: ASM Handbook
Volume: 19
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 January 1996
DOI: 10.31399/asm.hb.v19.a0002418
EISBN: 978-1-62708-193-1
...-fracture-energy interfaces are more effective. They cause the crack to deflect and debond the interfaces. The debonds acquire mode II (shear) characteristics, leading to friction, stability, and intact ligaments ( Ref 23 ). As the crack extends, further debonding occurs, subject to friction. Eventually...
Image
Published: 01 January 2001
Fig. 3 Stress-strain curves for (a) unreinforced glass (BSG), fiber reinforced glass with a strong fiber matrix interface, (b) fiber reinforced glass with a relatively weak fiber matrix interface in which toughening by fiber debonding and bridging can occur, and (c) fiber reinforced glass More
Image
Published: 01 January 1987
and will show a variety of different features in different locations. Transverse specimens, however, can usually be found to have a clearly predominant failure type. If the fiber/matrix interfacial bond is weak, such specimens will tend to fail by debonding (interface separation). If the interface is strong More
Image
Published: 01 December 2009
Fig. 8 Predictions of interface-constrained plasticity growth of cavities. (a) Effect of particle size ( R ) on growth and debonding for m = 0.3. (b) Effect of particle size, initial defect size (1 or 100 nm), and m -value on constrained growth, debonding, and subsequent unconstrained More
Image
Published: 01 January 2001
Fig. 4 A typical stress-strain curve under transverse loading when the interface bond strength is weak. Debonding initiates at a fairly low stress at B , and is accompanied with small-scale plasticity around the debonded fibers. Large-scale plasticity ensues at C , and failure occurs at D More
Image
Published: 01 January 1987
. In such failures, some fibers will also be torn or broken, but these are few. There also will be some areas where the interface is weak, so some debonding may be seen, but it will not predominate.) (The composite specimens shown in Fig. 1296 , 1297 , 1298 , 1299 , 1300 , 1301 , 1302 , 1303 , 1304 , 1305 More
Image
Published: 01 December 2009
Fig. 4 Cavity initiation at the interface of nondeformable second phases. Al-Mg-Cu-Mn alloy showing (a) a cracklike cavity at the particle interface and (b) complete debonding around a particle (embedded). Ti-6A1-4V showing (c) a cavity at the interface of grain-boundary α-phase and (d More
Image
Published: 01 January 1987
interfacial bond is weak, such specimens will tend to fail by debonding (interface separation). If the interface is strong, however, matrix failure will be the predominant failure mode. Most current fiber/epoxy systems have a strong interfacial bond and fail by this mode. The exception is for aramid fibers More
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 22 Micrograph of specimen shown in Fig. 17 . Cleaved second-phase particles are visible in the microstructure, and no debonding at second-phase/matrix interfaces is visible. Source: Ref 42 More
Image
Published: 15 January 2021
Fig. 22 Micrograph of specimen shown in Fig. 17 . Cleaved second-phase particles are visible in the microstructure, and no debonding at second-phase/matrix interfaces is visible. Source: Ref 43 More
Image
Published: 01 January 2001
Fig. 14 Skin-stringer debonding fatigue life prediction methodology. (a) Detail of lamina with initial delamination. (b) FEA using VCCT analysis; initial delamination is modelled. (c) Characterization data. (d) Life prediction of the skin-stringer interface More
Image
Published: 01 January 1987
by debonding (interface separation). If the interface is strong, however, matrix failure will be the predominant failure mode. Most current fiber/epoxy systems have a strong interfacial bond and fail by this mode. The exception is for aramid fibers, where the fiber itself is transversely weak and may fail More
Image
Published: 15 January 2021
Fig. 90 A model for ductile fracture due to Rice and Johnson. The model considers pure tearing on the plane of maximum normal stress. The preexisting flaw is assumed to blunt during yield to create a large strain field in front of the flaw. Debonding and growth at a particle interface occurs More
Image
Published: 01 January 2002
Fig. 90 A model for ductile fracture due to Rice and Johnson. The model considers pure tearing on the plane of maximum normal stress. The preexisting flaw is assumed to blunt during yield to create a large strain field in front of the flaw. Debonding and growth at a particle interface occurs More