The present work focuses on the interfacial mechanical behaviour of a model composite consisting of a solid droplet on a fibre, generally referred to as the microbond test. The interfacial adhesion is derived from the modelling of stress transfer in the microbond geometry including process-induced internal stresses, following two alternative approaches, namely the numerical discretisation of the droplet profile, and the equivalent cylinder analytical solution. This is in contrast to previous approaches, which mainly consider approximate geometry of the droplet. The numerical derivation provides comprehensive stress field data, whereas the equivalent cylinder approach is less accurate. However, these two approaches are shown to be equivalent as they result in the determination of the same interfacial shear strength. Numerical results clearly demonstrate that the maximum shear strength is located at the inflection point of the droplet profile. This provides an insight into the commonly observed remaining cone of resin on the fibre after debonding. It is further shown that the shear strength obtained by this method is independent of the location of the applied force, provided that the load isapplied between the droplet end and itsprofile inflection point. The model isgeneralis ed to the case of a symmetric loading and therefore includes internal stresses. It is then used to predict experimental interfacial shear strength versus droplet length for epoxy/glass, epoxy/Kevlar and epoxy/carbon systems at different levels of internal stresses and contact angle values.
1. Korabel’nikov, Y.A. et al. (1987). Basic laws governing the mechanical properties of filler fibers in a unidirectional composite. Mekhanika Kompozitnykh Materialov (translation), 23(2): 270–274.
2.
2. Rashkovan, I.A. and Korabel’nikov, Y.A. (1993). Realization of properties of the fibrous reinforcement in unidirectional thermoplastic composites. Mekhanika Kompozitnykh Materialov (translation), 29(1): 61–65.
3.
3. Chamis, C.C. (1974). Mechanics of load transfer at the interface. In: Plueddemann, E.P. (ed.), Interfaces in Polymer Matrix Composites. pp. 33–77.
4.
4. Greszczuk, L.B. (1969). Theoretical studies of the mechanics of the fiber–matrix interface in composites. Interfaces in Composites. ASTM STP 452. pp. 42–58.
5.
5. Herrera-Franco, P.J. and Drzal, L.T. (1992). Comparison of methods for the measurement of fibre/matrix adhesion in composites. Composites, 23(1): 2–27.
6.
6. Drzal, L.T. and Madhukar, M. (1993). Fibre–matrix adhesion and its relationship to composite mechanical properties. J. Mater. Sci., 28: 569–610.
7.
7. Fraser, WA., Ancker, F.H. and DiBenedetto, A.T. (1975). A computer modelled, single filament technique for measuring coupling and sizing agent effects in fiber reinforced composites. SPI 30th ANTEC.
8.
8. Feillard, P., Desarmot, G. and Favre, J.P. (1994). Theoretical aspects of the fragmentation test. Compos. Sci. Technol., 50: 265–279.
9.
9. Curtin, W.A. (1991). Exact theory of fibre fragmentation in a single-filament composite. J. Mater. Sci., 26: 5239–5253.
10.
10. Nairn, J.A. (1992). A variational mechanics analysis of the stresses around breaks in embedded fibers. Mech. Mater., 13: 131–154.
11.
11. Zhandarov, S.F. and Pisanova, E.V. (1997). The local bond strength and its determination by fragmentation and pull-out tests. Compos. Sci. Technol., 57: 957–964.
12.
12. Kelly, A. and Tyson, W.R. (1965). Tensile properties of fibre-reinforced metals: copper/ tungstene and copper/molybdenum. J. Mech. Phys. Sol., 13: 329-329.
13.
13. Miller, B., Gaur, U. and Hirt, D.E. (1991). Measurement and mechanical aspects of the microbond pull-out technique for obtaining fibers/resin interfacial shear strength. Compos. Sci. Technol., 42: 207–219.
14.
14. Hsueh, C.-H. (1990). Fibre pullout against push-down for fibre-reinforced composites with frictional interfaces. J. Mater. Sci., 25: 811–817.
15.
15. Hsueh, C.H. et al. (1995). Analyses of fiber push-out tests performed on Nicalon/SiC composites with tailored interfaces. Compos. Eng., 5(10&11): 1387–1401.
16.
16. Gaur, U., Desio, G. and Miller, B. (1989). Interfacial adhesion in fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites. ANTEC’89.
17.
17. Gaur, U. and Miller, B. (1990). Effectsof environmental exposure on fiber/epoxy interfacial shear strength. Polym. Compos., 11(4): 217–222.
18.
18. Gaur, U., Chou, C.T. and Miller, B. (1994). Effect of hydrothermal ageing on bond strength. Composites, 25(7): 609–612.
19.
19. Latour, R.A., Black, J. and Miller, B. (1991). Fracture mechanisms of the fiber/matrix interfacial bond in fiber reinforced polymer composites. Surf. Interf. Anal., 17: 477–484.
20.
20. Wagner, H.D., Gallis, H.E. and Wiesel, E. (1993). Study of the interface in Kevlar 49-epoxy composites by means of microbond and fragmentation tests: effects of materials and testing variables. J. Mater. Sci., 28: 2238–2244.
21.
21. Jiang, K.R. and Penn, L.S. (1992). Improved analysis and experimental evaluation of the single filament pull-out test. Compos. Sci. Technol., 45: 89–103.
22.
22. Leterrier, Y. et al. (1994). A method to measure the adhesion of thin glass coatings on polymer films. J. Adhesion, 44: 213–227.
23.
23. Cox, H.L. (1952). The elasticity and strength of paper and other fibrous materials. Br. J. Appl. Phys., 3: 72-72.
24.
24. Sheer, R.J. and Nairn, J.A. (1992). Variational mechanics analysis of stresses and failure in microdrop debond specimens. Compos. Eng., 2(8): 641–654.
25.
25. Wu, H.F. and Claypool, C.M. (1991). A finite-element model of the use of the microbond test method for characterization of composite interfacial properties. J. Mater. Sci., 10: 1072–1075.
26.
26. Chiang, M.Y.M. and Herrera-Franco, P.J. (1992). Analyses of the techniques for fiber–matrix bond strength measurement. 6th International SAMPE Electronics Conference, 22–25 June.
27.
27. Liu, C.-H. and Nairn, J.A. (1999). Analytical and experimental methodsfor a fracture mechanicsinterpretation of the microbond test including the effectsof friction and thermal stresses. Int. J. Adhesion and Adhesives, 19: 59–70.
28.
28. Mendels, D.-A, Leterrier, Y. and Manson, J.-A.E. (1999). A stress transfer model for single fibre and platelet composites. J. Compos. Mater., 33: 1525–1543.
29.
29. Mendels, D.A., Leterrier, Y.Manson, J.-A.E. and Nairn, J.A. (2001). The influence of internal stresses on the microbond test-II: Physical aging and adhesion. submitted to J. Compos. Mater.
30.
30. Carroll, B.J. (1976). The accurate measurement of contact angle, phase contact areas, drop volume, and laplace excess pressure in drop-on-fiber systems. J. Colloid Interf. Sci., 57(3): 488–495.
31.
31. Yamaki, J.I. and Katayama, Y. (1975). New method of determining contact angle between monofilament and liquid. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 19: 2897–2909.
32.
32. Korn, G.A. and Korn, T.M. (1968). Legendre’snormal elliptic integrals. Mathematical Handbook for Scientists and Engineers. McGraw-Hill, Inc. pp. 833–840.
33.
33. Wagner, H.D. (1990). Spreading of liquid droplets on cylindrical surfaces: accurate determination of contact angle. J. Appl. Phys., 67(3): 1352–1355.
34.
34. Gorbatkina, Y.A. (1992). Adhesive Strength of Fiber-Polymer Systems. New York: Ellis Horwood.
35.
35. Dirand, X. (1994). Etude desinterfaceset interphasesverre/re sine vinylester. PhD Thesis, Universite de Haute-Alsace.
36.
36. Lange, J. et al. (1995). Residual stress build-up in thermoset films cured above their ultimate glass transition temperature. Polymer, 36(16): 3135–3141.
37.
37. Sheer, R.J. and Nairn, J.A. (1995). A comparison of several fracture mechanics methods for measuring the interfacial toughness with microbond tests. J. Adhesion, 53: 45–68.
38.
38. Vlattas, C. and Galiotis, C. (1994). Deformation behaviour of liquid crystal polymer fibres: 1. converting spectroscopic data into mechanical stress–strain curves in tension and compression. Polymer, 35: 2335–2345.
39.
39. Melanitis, N. et al. (1994). Compressional behavior of carbon fibers Part II modulus softening. J. Mater. Sci., 29: 786–799.
