In situ synchrotron radiation computed tomography (SRCT) was used to compare the fibre damage progression in five configurations of (902/02)s carbon-epoxy coupons loaded to failure. The effects of different sizing types, surface treatments and fibre diameters on the macroscopic properties, for example, ultimate tensile strength (UTS), and on the damage accumulation at a microscopic scale, for example, fibre break accumulation, were assessed. A semi-automated approach was adopted to process the large amount of data obtained from the SRCT scans and further method applicability areas can be envisaged. Single fibre break accumulation was seen to be influenced by the fibre type, while the formation of interacting fibre break groups by the surface treatment and the sizing type. For the materials presented, it can be suggested that an increased defect tolerance can be obtained by moving from stronger to weaker fibre-matrix adhesion, with sub-critical multiplet behaviour emerging as independent of the average UTS value.
BunsellAGorbatikhLMortonH, et al.Benchmarking of strength models for unidirectional composites under longitudinal tension. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf2018; 111: 138–150. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2018.03.016.
2.
SwolfsYVerpoestIGorbatikhL. A review of input data and modelling assumptions in longitudinal strength models for unidirectional fibre-reinforced composites. Compos Struct2016; 150: 153–172. DOI: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.05.002.
3.
HedgepethJMVan DykeP. Local stress concentrations in imperfect filamentary composite materials. J Compos Mater1967; 1: 294–309. DOI: 10.1177/002199836700100305.
4.
ZwebenCRosenBW. A statistical theory of material strength with application to composite materials. J Mech Phys Sol1970; 18: 189–206. DOI: 10.1016/0022-5096(70)90023-2.
5.
ZwebenHBellB. Tensile failure criteria for fiber composite material, NASA contract. Rep Vi1972; 12: 13166.
6.
BeyerleinIJPhoenixSL. Stress concentrations around multiple fiber breaks in an elastic matrix with local yielding or debonding using quadratic influence superposition. J Mech Phys Sol1996; 44: 1997–2039. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5096(96)00068-3.
7.
PhoenixSLBeyerleinIJ. Statistical strength theory for fibrous composite materials. In: KellyA (eds) Comprehensive Composite Materials. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science2000, pp. 559–639. DOI: 10.1016/B0-08-042993-9/00056-5.
8.
OkabeTNishikawaMTakedaN, et al.Effect of matrix hardening on the tensile strength of alumina fiber-reinforced aluminum matrix composites. Acta Mater2006; 54: 2557–2566. DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2006.01.044.
9.
MishnaevskyLBrøndstedP. Micromechanisms of damage in unidirectional fiber reinforced composites: 3D computational analysis. Compos Sci Technol2009; 69: 1036–1044. DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.01.022.
10.
ThionnetAChouHYBunsellA. Fibre break processes in unidirectional composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2014; 65: 148–160. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2014.06.009.
11.
SwolfsYMcMeekingRMVerpoestI, et al.The effect of fibre dispersion on initial failure strain and cluster development in unidirectional carbon/glass hybrid composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2015; 69: 279–287. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2014.12.001.
12.
PimentaS. A computationally-efficient hierarchical scaling law to predict damage accumulation in composite fibre-bundles. Compos Sci Technol2017; 146: 210–225. DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.04.018.
13.
GriffithAA. The phenomena of rupture and flow in solids. Phil Trans R Soc, 1921; 221: 582–593.
14.
WeibullW. A Statistical Theory of the Strength of Materials. Washington, DC: Generalstabens litografiska anstalts förlag, 1939.
15.
WeibullW. A statistical distribution function of wide applicability. J Appl Mech1951; 18: 293–297.
16.
ScottAEMavrogordatoMWrightP, et al.In situ fibre fracture measurement in carbon–epoxy laminates using high resolution computed tomography. Compos Sci Technol2011; 71: 1471–1477. DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2011.06.004.
17.
FukudaHKawataK. On the stress concentration factor in fibrous composites. Fibre Sci Technol1976; 9: 189–203. DOI: 10.1016/0015-0568(76)90003-8.
18.
LandisCMMcMeekingRM. A shear-lag model for a broken fiber embedded in a composite with a ductile matrix. Compos Sci Technol1999; 59: 447–457. DOI: 10.1016/S0266-3538(98)00091-8.
19.
CoxHL. The elasticity and strength of paper and other fibrous materials. Br J Appl Phys1952; 3: 72–79. DOI: 10.1088/0508-3443/3/3/302.
20.
ThionnetAChouHYBunsellA. Fibre break failure processes in unidirectional composites. Part 1: Failure and critical damage state induced by increasing tensile loading. Appl Compos Mater2014; 22: 141–155. DOI: 10.1007/s10443-014-9398-z.
21.
ThionnetAChouHYBunsellA. Fibre break failure processes in unidirectional composites. Part 2: Failure and critical damage state induced by sustained tensile loading. Appl Compos Mater2014; 22: 141–155. DOI: 10.1007/s10443-014-9398-z.
22.
ThionnetAChouHYBunsellA. Fibre break failure processes in unidirectional composites. Part 3: Unidirectional plies included in laminates. Appl Compos Mater2014; 22: 157–169. DOI: 10.1007/s10443-014-9399-y.
23.
TavaresRPOteroFBaigesJ, et al.A dynamic spring element model for the prediction of longitudinal failure of polymer composites. Comput Mater Sci2019; 160: 42–52. DOI: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.12.048.
24.
GaneshRSockalingamSHaqueBZ, et al.Dynamic effects of single fiber break in unidirectional glass fiber-reinforced composites. J Compos Mater2017; 51: 1307–1320. DOI: 10.1177/0021998316669218.
25.
SwolfsYMortonHScottAE, et al.Synchrotron radiation computed tomography for experimental validation of a tensile strength model for unidirectional fibre-reinforced composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2015; 77: 106–113. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2015.06.018.
26.
GarceaSCSinclairISpearingSM, et al.Mapping fibre failure in situ in carbon fibre reinforced polymers by fast synchrotron X-ray computed tomography. Compos Sci Technol2017; 149: 81–89. DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.06.006.
27.
GaneshRSockalingamSGillespieJW. Dynamic effects of a single fiber break in unidirectional glass fiber-reinforced polymer composites: Effects of matrix plasticity. J Compos Mater2018; 52: 1873–1886. DOI: 10.1177/0021998317737604.
28.
WrightPFuXSinclairI, et al.Ultra high resolution computed tomography of damage in notched carbon fiber—epoxy composites. J Compos Mater2008; 42: 1993–2002. DOI: 10.1177/0021998308092211.
29.
RosiniSMavrogordatoMNEgorovaO, et al.In situ statistical measurement of local morphology in carbon-epoxy composites using synchrotron X–ray computed tomography. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2019; 125: 105543. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2019.105543.
30.
OtsuN. A threshold selection method from gray-level histograms. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern C1979; 9: 62–66. DOI: 10.1109/TSMC.1979.4310076.
SchöberlEBreiteCMelnikovA, et al.Fibre-direction strain measurement in a composite ply under quasi-static tensile loading using digital volume correlation and in situ synchrotron radiation computed tomography. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf C2020; 137: 105935. DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2020.105935.
33.
MortonH. 3D imaging of the tensile failure mechanisms of carbon fibre composites. PhD thesis. University of Southampton, 2014. https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/366506/.
34.
ZhaoFMTakedaN. Effect of interfacial adhesion and statistical fiber strength on tensile strength of unidirectional glass fiber/epoxy composites. Part II: comparison with prediction. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf2000; 31: 1215–1224. DOI: 10.1016/S1359-835X(00)00086-5.
