2016
DOI: 10.1177/0021998316669218
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamic effects of single fiber break in unidirectional glass fiber-reinforced composites

Abstract: In a unidirectional composite under static tensile loading, breaking of a fiber is shown to be a locally dynamic process which leads to stress concentrations in the interface, matrix and neighboring fibers that can propagate at high speed over long distances. To gain better understanding of this event, a fiber-level finite element model of a 2-dimensional array of S2-glass fibers embedded in an elastic epoxy matrix with interfacial cohesive traction law is developed. The brittle fiber fracture results in relea… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

2
33
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
2
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Fiber-matrix debonding is a micromechanical failure mechanism that follows the tensile fracture of a fiber in a unidirectional composite and dissipates the elastic energy stored in the fiber by creating debonded surfaces, and by frictional sliding between the fiber and the surrounding matrix at the debonded regions. [33][34][35][36] Microdroplet experiments on S glass and DER 353 epoxy resin with GPS sizing (i.e. same constituents used in this study) have been carried out by the authors 37,38 in determining the traction-separation law for mode II dominated fiber-matrix interface debonding.…”
Section: Modeling Fiber-matrix Debonding Using Zero-thickness Cohesivmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fiber-matrix debonding is a micromechanical failure mechanism that follows the tensile fracture of a fiber in a unidirectional composite and dissipates the elastic energy stored in the fiber by creating debonded surfaces, and by frictional sliding between the fiber and the surrounding matrix at the debonded regions. [33][34][35][36] Microdroplet experiments on S glass and DER 353 epoxy resin with GPS sizing (i.e. same constituents used in this study) have been carried out by the authors 37,38 in determining the traction-separation law for mode II dominated fiber-matrix interface debonding.…”
Section: Modeling Fiber-matrix Debonding Using Zero-thickness Cohesivmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The major difference between the quasi-static and the transient dynamic solution of the single fiber break within a composite lies in the consideration of the inertial term in the governing equation of motion. 10,18
where σ is the Cauchy stress tensor, ρ denotes the mass density and a denotes the acceleration vector at a given material point.…”
Section: Problem Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is the same material system that was considered in our previous work where we had assumed that the matrix was purely linear elastic. 18…”
Section: Problem Formulationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…via acoustic emission) would thus be required in order to identify the sequence of individual ibre-break events leading to cluster formation. This is particularly important because most direct numerical simulations tend to predict a more progressive formation of clusters than what is typically seen experimentally[8,23]; this mismatch might be due to ignoring dynamic effects, as recent numerical simulations suggest that dynamic stress ields created during ibre-breakage are signi icantly different from those created under quasi-static conditions[70].De ining the link between progressive damage accumulation and specimen failure. By the nature of the in situ CT observation of ibre breaks (with inite time-scales for imaging and small imaging volumes), it has not yet been possible to conclude whether ultimate failure results from the overall accumulation of ibre breaks and broken clusters distributed over a volume of mate-rial, or from the formation of a critical cluster with a universal size.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%