Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T02:51:33.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Evaluation of the Interface Tensile Strength–Toughness Relationship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

Vijay Gupta
Get access

Extract

Mechanical properties of interfaces between dissimilar or similar materials (e.g., grain boundaries) have become the focal point of research in several fields, including composite materials (metal, ceramic and intermetallic matrix composites), tribology, and solid state devices. This is not surprising because the interfaces between dissimilar materials are sites for mechanical stress concentrations and often nucleate the overall failure process.

Interfaces of interest in composite materials exist between fibers and their diffusion barrier coatings or between the fibers and the surrounding matrix material. In the field of tribology, interfaces exist between various types of functional (magnetic, conducting, optical, electrical), protective (thermal barrier, corrosion, wear resistant), or decorative coatings and their underlying substrates. And, finally, metal/ceramic interfaces are of interest in multilayer devices and magnetic disks and head technology. In all the above applications, mechanical properties of the interface (tensile and shear strength, toughness, etc.) often control the overall functionality of the coated part. Therefore, improving the mechanical properties of the interface for a prolonged life of the coated part is of fundamental interest. However, in ceramic and metal matrix composites, where the fiber/coating interface is used to deflect impinging cracks from the matrix, it is often desirable to impair the strength of the interface.

Type
Engineered Interfaces in Composites
Information
MRS Bulletin , Volume 16 , Issue 4 , April 1991 , pp. 39 - 45
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1991

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.Argon, A.S., Gupta, V., Landis, H.S., and Cornie, J.A., Mater. Sci. & Eng. A 107 (1989) p. 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Argon, A.S., Gupta, V., Landis, H.S., and Cornie, J.A., J. Mater. Sci. 24 (1989) p. 1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Gupta, V., Argon, A.S., and Cornie, J.A., J. Mater. Sci. 24 (1989) p. 2031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Evans, A.G., Mater. Sci. & Eng. A 107 (1989) p. 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Maheshwari, A., Chawla, K.K., and Michalske, T.A., Mater. Sci. & Eng. A 107 (1989) p. 269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Varias, A.G., O'Dowd, N.P., Asaro, R.J., and Shih, C.F., Mater. Sci. & Eng. A 126 (1990) p. 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Evans, A.G., Ruhle, M., Dalgleish, B.J., and Charalambides, P.G., Met. Trans. A 21A (1990) p. 2419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Wang, J.-S. and Suo, Z., Acta Metallurgica 38 (1990) p. 1279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Suo, Z., PhD thesis, Harvard University, 1989.Google Scholar
10.Rose, J.H., Smith, J.R., and Ferrante, J., Phys. Rev. B 28 (1983) p. 1835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Rose, J.H., Smith, J.R., Guinea, F., and Ferrante, J., Phys. Rev. B 29 (1984) p. 2963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Ferrante, J. and Smith, J.R., Phy. Rev. B 31 (1985) p. 3427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Griffith, A.A., Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. (London) A221 (1920) p. 163.Google Scholar
14.Gupta, V., Argon, A.S., Cornie, J.A., and Parks, D.M., J. Mech. Phys. Solids, in press.Google Scholar
15.Rose, J.H., Ferrante, J., and Smith, J.R., Phy. Rev. Letts. 47, 9 (1981) p. 675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Rose, J.H. (private communication).Google Scholar
17.Lawn, B.R. and Wilshaw, T.R., Fracture of Brittle Solids, (Cambridge University Press, 1975).Google Scholar
18.Rice, J.R., in Chemistry and Physics of Fracture, edited by Latanision, R.M. and Jones, R.H. (Martinus Nijhoff, Drodrecht, 1987) p. 22.Google Scholar
19.Rice, J.R., J. Appl. Mech. 55 (1988) p. 98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Rice, J.R. and Wang, J.-S., Mater. Sci. & Eng. A 107 (1989) p. 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21.Gilman, J.J., J. Appl. Phys. 31 (1960) p. 2208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Chiang, S.S., Marshal, D.B., and Evans, A.G. in Surfaces and Interfaces in Ceramic and Ceramic-Metal Systems, edited by Pask, J. and Evans, A.G. (Materials Science Research, Vol. 14, Plenum Press, New York, 1981) p. 603–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Mittal, K.L., ASTM STP 640 (1978) p. 5–17.Google Scholar
24.General Electric Aircraft Engines Division, Cincinnati, Ohio (private communication).Google Scholar
25.Gupta, V., Argon, A.S., Cornie, J.A., and Parks, D.M., Mater. Sci. & Eng. A 126 (1990) p. 105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Cornie, J.A., Argon, A.S., and Gupta, V., “Designing Interfaces in Inorganic Matrix Composites,” in this issue.Google Scholar
27.Gupta, V. and Argon, A.S., “Measurement of the Anisotropic Strength and Toughness of Pitch-55 Carbon Ribbons,” J. Mater. Sci., in press.Google Scholar
28.Gupta, V., PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1990.Google Scholar
29.Simmons, G. and Wang, H., Single Crystal Elastic Constants and Calculated Aggregate Properties, 2nd edition (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1971).Google Scholar
30.Li, Q., Megusar, J., Masur, L.J., and Cornie, J.A., Mater. Sci. & Eng. A 117 (1989) p. 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Rice, J.R., in Proc. First International Conference on Fracture, edited by Yokobori, T., Kawasaki, T., and Swedlow, J.L. (Japanese Society for Strength and Fracture of Materials 1, Sendai, Japan, 1965) p. 309–340.Google Scholar
32.Hutchinson, J.W. and Suo, Z., to appear in Advances in Applied Mechanics, Vol. 28, edited by Hutchinson, J. W. and Wu, T.Y. (Academic Press, 1991); Harvard University Report: MECH 164, Division of Applied Sciences, Harvard University.Google Scholar