© All Rights Reserved

7 tayangan

© All Rights Reserved

- Fatigue Resistance Design of Steel
- Fatigue Strength Prediction of Truck Cab by Cae
- Special-issue-Fatigue-and-corrosion-fatigue-Acom.pdf
- New Design of Composites
- Masonry design for Lateral load
- Adhesive joints
- Periodic Remaining Life Evaluation Program of PWR Pressurizer Surge Line Concerning Thermal Stratification Effect
- Chapter 6
- Fatigue Failure
- AFWAL_TR-81-3041_VOL1
- Short Basalt Fiber
- 6. FATIGUE Diagrams S-N Goodman Da-dN 2013
- fracture mechanics ppt
- Stress Analysis of Basalt Epoxy Laminate
- DNV-OS-J102 (Draft October 2004) Design and Manufacturing of Wind Turbine Blades (Offshore)
- 10 - Mechanical Design - Local Buckling (External Overpressure) Part1
- Ultrasonic Plastic Welding Horn
- Pub110_ITB_GreatLakes
- Report Fatigue Test
- 13347

Anda di halaman 1dari 12

COMPOSITE

M AT E R I A L S

Article

carbon fiber bundle and the statistical

distribution by experiments

2015, Vol. 49(25) 31573168

! The Author(s) 2014

Reprints and permissions:

sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0021998314560385

jcm.sagepub.com

Abstract

In this paper, the static, tensiontension fatigue, and residual strength behaviors of carbon fiber bundle have been

investigated using experimental methods. The corresponding mechanical models and statistical distribution regulations

have also been established based on the experimental data. The test results indicate that the test section length of fiber

bundle had a marked effect on the static strength, which decreased with the increase of length. A two-parameter Weibull

distributional function was used to describe the distribution of static strength. Furthermore, the S-N curve was obtained

by a new segmented function to reflect the changing of fatigue life against stress levels. The experimental results of

residual strength show that there was an abnormal tendency, which increased first and decreased later as the increase of

cyclic number, for the residual strength of carbon fiber bundle in both tested stress levels 87% and 80%, respectively.

Therefore, a new model for the residual strength was put forward and the good agreement between the fitting curves

and experimental was obtained.

Keywords

Carbon fiber bundle, static strength test and distribution law, fatigue life test and S-N, fatigue life distribution, residual

strength test and mechanical model

Introduction

Carbon ber reinforced composites have been widely

used as reinforcement in polymer composites, owing to

their good mechanical properties and light weight. Most

of the early works focus on the certainty performance,1

such as the stiness, strength, and fatigue characteristic

of composites, which causes that composites are often

overdesigned, such as heavier and more costly than

necessary. Therefore, probability design methods have

been gradually conducted into composites research.

Scha and Davidson2 proposed a strength-based wearout model to predict the fatigue life and residual strength

of composite laminates and the related distributions

were investigated by a two parameter Weibull function.

Cheng and Hwu3 investigated the fatigue reliability of

composite laminates subjected to constant amplitude

loading and a residual analysis model was proposed to

predict the residual strength. Whitworth46 studied the

statistical distribution laws on graphite/epoxy composites based on a set of static and fatigue tests and put

forward to p-E-N and p-S-N models. Yang et al.79

strength degradation model to predict the statistical fatigue behavior of angle-ply composites. Wu and Yao10

derived the fatigue life distribution of composite laminates based on their static strength distribution.

Although carbon ber reinforced composites has

been studied in many aspects, the research on the performance of carbon ber bundle as main component is

quite limited. There are still some issues associated with

that left to be solved in the respects of non-uniform quality of laments, length of limited ber bundle and fatigue

characteristic, all of which have an impact on the static

and fatigue performance to some extent. Moreover, it is

inevitable to consider the statistical distribution

owing to the random question of self-defect and

College of Energy and Power Engineering, Nanjing University of

Aeronautics and Astronautics, China

Corresponding author:

Jian Song, College of Energy and Power Engineering, Nanjing University of

Aeronautics and Astronautics, No. 29 Street, Nanjing 210016, China.

Email: dfsongjian2006@126.com

3158

Weibull distribution function used to analyze the

strength of single ber. Yu et al.12 studied the relationships between the tensile curves of ber bundles and

single bers and then proposed an approach to predict

the stressstrain curve of single bers based on ber bundles. Joe et al.13 showed that two-parameter Weibull

distribution could be used to describe the tensile strength

of bers at a xed length and some experimental

research for cellulose bers were performed. Yuan

et al.14 studied the static strength distribution laws of

single bers and a theory of random crack cores was

presented to predict the strength of composites. Zhu

et al.15 carried out research on the fatigue characteristic

of carbon ber bundles, which had experienced 1800 C

heat treatment in nitrogen atmosphere.

The purpose of this work is to investigate the static

strength, fatigue behavior and residual strength of

carbon ber bundle based on experiments. Meanwhile,

as there is a large scatter in the carbon ber bundles, it is

meaningful to investigate the static strength and fatigue

life of ber bundles adopting the theory of probability

and statistics. According to the experimental research,

the relationship between static strength and experimental length (dened as characteristic length) is rstly

obtained and a two-parameter Weibull distribution

function is then assumed to describe the distributional

regular of ber bundles static strength, in which the two

parameters are obtained by tting the experimental

data. Additionally, a segmented function is proposed

to describe the carbon ber bundles S-N curve and

the distribution function has also been obtained based

on test results. Finally, the residual strength is studied

by experiment and a new model is applied to describe

variation of the residual strength.

Experimental

T300/3K was used as experimental materials. General

characteristics of this type of carbon ber bundles were

198 g/1000 m; number of laments in the single bundle

3000.Three types of specimens with various lengths

(L 30 mm, 40 mm, and 50 mm) were prepared for

static strength test and only one type of specimens

with characteristic length 50 mm were tested in fatigue

and residual strength experiments. All of specimens were

tted with aluminum end tabs (length: 50 mm, width:

12.5 mm) by gluing bundle ends in between at pieces

of aluminum (Ergo 9190 two-component epoxy resin

was applied as glue). Schematic and actual representative specimens were shown in Figure 1(a).

The static strength tests of ber bundles were performed according to the ASTM D3379-75 standard.16

Due to the lack of associated fatigue testing standard

for carbon ber bundle, the tensiontension (T-T) fatigue tests for carbon ber bundle were done according

to the ASTM E606 standard.17

The T-T fatigue tests were subjected to a constant

amplitude load with stress ratio of 0.1 and frequency of

15 Hz. Meanwhile, fatigue tests were terminated at one

million cycles. The Instron8874 machine (Figure 1(b))

was applied to perform the static and fatigue tests.

Once the fatigue life under dierent stress levels was

obtained, the corresponding residual strength tests

can be measured. The specimens were rstly fatigued

at a maximum stress level up to 1/3 or 2/3 corresponding fatigue life, and then the residual strengths were

measured.

Static strength tests

Testing results of static strength. In order to investigate the

static strength calculated by equation (1) and statistics

distribution of carbon ber bundles, a set of 19 specimens with dierent characteristic lengths (7 specimens

with 50 mm length, 6 specimens with 40 mm, and 8 specimens with 30 mm length) has been generated and the

Song et al.

3159

are also the residual strengths R(0) in the condition of

zero cycle.

U

4P

d2 3000

diameter of carbon ber bundle in which d is equal

to 7 mm.

From Table 1, we can see that the static strength of

ber bundles was increased with the decrease of characteristic lengths, which indicated a size eect on the static

strength of ber bundles. In addition, the representative

loaddisplacement curves for dierent characteristic

lengths and the curve of inuence of characteristic

length on average strength tted by the model 2 were

shown in Figure 2, respectively. It is clearly found that

an obvious non-linear phenomenon happened as the

increase of load and also the average static strengths of

ber bundle with dierent lengths were remarkable

reduced with the increase of characteristic length.

0 1=m

c

0

S

L

length (30, 40, and 50 mm), c and m are the constants

determined by experimental data (m 1.632,

c0 3,625,272.57).

Damaged photographs subjected static loading are

given in Figure 3. From this gure, the location in

the surface of ber bundles appears as the amount

of uness phenomena, which indicates that there

exists a certain quantity of monolament taking

place failure gradually so that a de-bunching failure

mode nally happens in the middle of carbon ber

bundle.

Statistical distribution of static strength. To research the

statistics distribution of ber bundles, the two-parameter Weibull distribution function (3) is used to t

the static strengths R(0) and thus we can plot the

related probability paper and distribution of static

strength in Figure 4.

!

X

FX PfU Xg 1 exp

Characteristic

length

Specimen

number

Peak

load (N)

Strength

(MPa)

Average

strength (MPa)

50 mm

L50-1

L50-2

L50-3

L50-4

L50-5

L50-6

L50-7

112.84

103.35

104.05

113.21

106.95

110.79

113.81

977.32

895.17

901.23

980.57

926.31

959.57

985.73

946.50

964.83

23.99

40 mm

L40-1

L40-2

L40-3

L40-4

L40-5

L40-6

127.84

123.43

122.02

129.51

129.64

128.00

1107.29

1069.05

1056.91

1121.73

1122.84

1108.71

1097.75

1111.23

37.61

30 mm

L30-1

L30-2

L30-3

L30-4

L30-5

L30-6

L30-7

L30-8

130.72

131.74

132.65

133.48

134.92

137.84

140.68

141.15

1132.25

1141.09

1148.91

1156.11

1168.58

1193.86

1218.47

1222.56

1172.73

1188.73

34.75

Scale

parameter,

Shape

parameter,

3160

(a)

(b)

160

140

L30-1 : L=30mm

L40-3 : L=40mm

L50-4 : L=50mm

1300

Average strength/MPa

120

Load/N

100

80

60

40

Experimental data

1200

1100

1000

900

20

0

0.0

1400

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

displacement/%

1.0

1.2

1.4

800

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

Fiber length/mm

Figure 2. (a) Loaddisplacement curve of typical fiber bundle with different characteristic lengths; (b) influence of characteristic

length on average strength.

Figure 3. Static tensile test of carbon fiber bundle: (a) pre-test; (b) during the test; (c) photograph of failure specimen.

Song et al.

3161

carbon ber bundles; U means the static strength;

and are scale parameter and shape parameter,

respectively.

From Figure 4, several important ndings about the

static strength statistical distribution of carbon ber

bundles were given as follows: First of all, it is logical

to consider that the statistical distribution for ber

bundle strength can be estimated by using a twoparameter Weibull distribution function (3) according

to the correlation coecients (R 0.903, 0.884, and

0.865 for L 50, 40, and 30 mm, respectively) in

Figure 4(a) to (c). Furthermore, although the strength

of ber bundles varies with dierent characteristic

length, the value of shape parameters has a no signicant change (refer to Figure 4(d)) and the general

change trend is that with the increase of length, the

curve slope of Weibll distribution function in view of

one type of length decreases gradually.

(a)

tests were applied to verify quantitatively whether the

proposed two-parameter Weibull distribution function

is suitable for the statistical distribution of carbon ber

bundles. The hypothesis test results are listed in Table 2

and the method is introduced briey in Appendix 1.

According to Table 2, the values for all of the test

statistics (sqrt(n)*D) are outside the reject domain,

therefore, it is reasonable to accept the hypothesis

that the statistical distribution for static strength of

ber bundles follows the Weibull distribution law.

Testing results of fatigue life. A set of 22 specimens subjected to nine various constant amplitude stress levels

are listed in Table 3. The S-N curve of carbon ber

bundles referred to equations (4) to (6) was then plotted

in Figure 5 and the related parameters tted by the

(b)

7.04

6.90

7.03

L50: Fitting curving

6.88

7.02

7.01

lnX

lnX

6.86

6.84

6.82

Equation

y=a+b

Adj. R-Squ 0.90297

6.80

6.78

L40: Fitting curving

B

B

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

Intercep

Slope

-0.5

7.00

6.99

6.98

Value Standard Er

6.871

0.00551

0.041

0.00553

0.0

0.5

Equation

y=a+b

Adj. R-Squa 0.88385

6.97

6.96

1.0

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

ln[-ln(1-F(X))]

(c)

(d)

L30: Experimental data

L30: Fitting curving

Failure probability

7.08

lnX

7.07

7.06

7.05

7.04

Equation

y=a+b

Value

7.02

7.01

-2.5

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

Standard Err

Intercept 7.0806

0.00437

Slope

0.0287

0.00426

0.0

0.5

-0.5

ln[-ln(1-F(X))]

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.0

0.8

7.09

7.03

-0.5

ln[-ln(1-F(X))]

7.11

7.10

Intercept 7.0132

0.00409

Slope

0.0265

0.00426

D

D

1.0

0.6

0.4

L30:Fitting curving

L40:Fitting curving

L50:Fitting curving

L30: Experimental data

L40: Experimental data

L50: Experimental data

0.2

0.0

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

Static strength/MPa

Figure 4. Weibull distribution probability paper of static strength (a)(c) and failure probability of carbon fiber bundles with different

characteristic lengths (d).

3162

function.

Characteristic lengths

L 30 mm

L 40 mm

L 50 mm

Number of specimens

Kolmogorov D

sqrt(n)*D

Reject domain at

significant level 0.05

8

0.2388

0.6755

[1.36,1)

6

0.2974

0.7285

7

0.2438

0.6450

D supjFn(x) F(x)j, where F(x) and Fn(x) are the assumed distributional

function and distributional function of samples, respectively; sqrt(n)*D

represents test statistics.

bundles.

Stress

level

94% U

Specimen

number

Fatigue

life, Nf

lgNf

0:94

1. 0:85 max

U

max

0:0506l g Nf 1:059

U

185

243

291

2.267

2.386

2.464

2.372

92% U

4

5

6

629

500

450

2.799

2.699

2.653

2.721

87% U

7

8

9

10

6984

7949

5923

6550

3.844

3.900

3.773

3.816

3.836

85% U

11

12

10,881

12,363

4.037

4.092

4.064

80% U

13

14

15

16

14,544

20,883

15,869

19,486

4.163

4.320

4.201

4.290

4.248

75%

17

18

19

235,079

239,358

274,297

5.371

5.379

5.438

5.397

73%

70%

60%

20

21

22

>1e6

>1e6

>1e6

max

lg Nf 4:014 0:182

1 0:310

lg Nf 1:469

U

3.

>6

>6

>6

to (6).

From the experimental results in Figure 5(a) (open

triangle 4), it is concluded that the normalized stress

basically underwent a linear trend between 0.85 and

0.94, while there was an obvious decay trend in the

0:85

2. 0:75 max

U

Average lgNf

1

2

3

>6

>6

>6

less than 0.73, all of the fatigue life of ber bundles was

more than 1e6, which was dened as the innite life.

Therefore, it can be used a linear function to describe

the variation trend between 0.85 and 0.94 and an exponential model to describe the change regularity of

0.730.85, respectively. The determined relationships

between fatigue life and normalized stress were

expressed in the following equations

max

U

0:75

lg Nf 4 6

From Figure 5(a), it is clearly found that good coincidence between experiment and theory was obtained

for the fatigue issue of carbon ber bundles. Moreover,

failure photograph under the fatigue load was shown in

Figure 5(b) and it can be seen that the failure model

mainly manifested de-bunching failure, which was similar with the mode as that in static strength.

Nevertheless, the dierence was that the failure regions

were concentrated in the middle of specimens compared

to that in the static tests.

Statistical distribution of fatigue life. Furthermore, in order

to investigate the distribution law for the fatigue of

ber bundles, we assume that the statistical distribution

of the fatigue life also follows a two-parameter Weibull

distribution with reference to composite laminates3,6,18

l !

n

Fn P Nf n 1 exp

carbon ber bundles, N is the fatigue life, and l are

the scale and shape parameter, respectively both of

which can be calculated by the same method as the

static strength.

The calculated results are presented in Table 4 and

corresponding distributional curves are plotted in

Figure 6. As for these results, the statistical distribution

Song et al.

3163

(a) 1.0

(b)

max/ult

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

2

lgNf

Figure 5. (a) The curve of fiber bundles normalized stress against lgNf; (b) fatigue test specimen of carbon fiber bundle.

life.

Weibull distribution

parameters

87%

stress level

80%

stress level

G

l

7263.01

6.96

19,100.89

5.11

distribution fairly well, as shown in Figure 6(c).

According to the statistical results mentioned above,

the excellent correlation implies that adoption of

Weibull distributional function in carbon ber bundle

fatigue analysis is feasible. In addition, there was a

more discreteness in low stress level, which was also

reasonable because the lower stress level causes that

the fatigue damage takes place in more local positions

in the surface of ber bundles and the propagation

paths are also more complex.

In addition, the similar approach as the static

strength was used to investigate whether the hypothesis

distribution regulation was reasonable for the fatigue

life of carbon ber bundle at various stress levels. The

quantitative results are given in Table 5. It is clearly

seen that all the values of D were less than 1.36,

which was the lower limit of reject domain. Thus, the

hypothesis can be accepted.

fiber bundles

Testing results of residual strength. Fourteen specimens

were fatigued at two maximum stress levels 87% and

average fatigue life, which were 7852 for 87% stress

level and 17696 for 80%. Their residual strength tests

were then performed and the results are listed in

Table 6. The failure photograph related to residual

strength tests is shown in Figure 7(a).

From Table 7, it is obviously found that the residual

strengths had a non-monotonic tendency with the

increase of cycle, which is similar to the notched

strength of woven composites.19,20 Figure 7(a) exhibits

several serious failure models with de-bunching and

fracture damages in the middle of ber bundles. The

possible reason for the phenomenon could be that the

monolaments in the ber bundle are gradually dispersed under the fatigue load, which may lead to

more uniform bearing in each of monolaments.

Therefore, a higher load and further serious damage

are shown in the following static tensile test.

Meanwhile, a briefness bang sound could be listened

when the fracture occurred.

Furthermore, in order to investigate the dierence

between static and residual strength, Figure 7(b) presents the loaddisplacement curves for three representative specimens used in static strength and residual

strength tests, respectively. It is found that the value

of residual strength experienced an increase rstly,

and then showed a decreased trend against cycle

number. The reasons of this abnormal phenomenon

may be that on the one hand, the stress state for each

of monolaments is more uniform as mentioned above,

which could lead to the more bearing capacity for single

ber bundle. On the other hand, the extent of accumulative damage in monolaments may increase subjected

cyclic loading, which could cause the decrease of the

mechanical performance to some degree. Therefore,

3164

(a)

(b)

10.00

9.00

Fitting curve

9.95

Ult

8.90

9.85

8.85

9.80

8.80

8.75

Equation

Adj. R-Squar

8.65

B

B

-1.5

-1.0

Intercept

Slope

-0.5

Ult

9.75

9.70

y = a + b*

0.95498

Value

8.70

Fitting curve

9.90

lnX

lnX

8.95

8.89055

0.14367

0.0

Standard Erro

0.01531

0.01787

y = a + b*

Value

9.60

9.55

0.5

Equation

9.65

-1.5

-1.0

ln[-ln(1-F(X))]

Standard Err

Intercept 9.8574

0.02849

Slope

0.03326

-0.5

0.0

0.1955

0.5

ln[-ln(1-F(X))]

(c) 1.0

Failure probablity

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

Distribution function with max=87%U

Experimental data with max=87%U

0.0

4000

8000

12000

16000

20000

24000

Fatigue cycle Nf

Figure 6. Weibull distribution probability paper of fatigue life (a), (b) and failure probability (c).

function.

Stress levels

87%

80%

Number of specimens

Kolmogorov D

sqrt(n)*D

Reject domain at

significant level 0.05

4

0.2465

0.4931

[1.36,1)

4

0.2696

0.5392

Stress

levels

87%

Terminal

number

1/3Nf*

2/3Nf*

may be the result of interaction of both factors

mentioned.

In order to describe the phenomenon quantitatively,

a new model was proposed. It is assumed that

dRn

gS, r f n

dn

80%

1/3Nf**

2/3Nf**

Peak

load (N)

Strength

(MPa)

Average

strength (MPa)

169.41

150.69

158.58

163.86

155.26

156.59

153.66

152.12

1467.30

1305.19

1373.58

1419.28

1344.81

1356.34

1330.93

1317.57

1391.34

153.36

152.45

156.19

110.35

136.94

128.64

1328.33

1320.43

1352.82

955.81

1186.06

1114.23

1333.86

1337.41

1085.37

Nf* and Nf** means the fatigue life of 87% and 80% stress levels,

respectively.

Song et al.

3165

(a)

(b)

180

Residual strength at 2/3Nf

Ultimate strength

150

Load/N

120

90

60

30

0

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

displacement/%

the nth stress cycles) is equal to the product of the

eect, g(S, r), of the stress range, S, of the stress ratio,

r and the eect, f(n), of the number of cycle. The stress

range S is dened as the dierence between the maximum and minimum cycle stress. So, the simplest

approximation to the functional form of g(S, r) and

f(n) is expressed as

gS k1 Sb , S 1 rmax , k1 4 0

f n Qn v, Q 4 0, v 4 0

assumed for simplicity that the stress ratio is xed so

that g(S, r) is a function of S alone and f(n) is the linear

function to ensure the variation of R(n) is in accordance

with the experimental data.

Substituting equation (9) into equation (8) and carrying out the integration from n1 to n2 cycles, we have

Rn2 Rn1

k1 Sb Q 2

n2 n21 k1 vSb n2 n1

2

10

Rn R0

k1 Sb Q 2

n k1 vSb n

2

11

Rn R0 Sb an2 cn

12

carbon ber bundle involving three parameters a, b,

Parameters

Low stress

amplitudes (80% U)

High stress

amplitudes (87% U)

a

b

c

1.55e-3

0.532

10.016

3.86e-3

1.009

59.454

strength tests in the following section.

Based on the data of residual strength tests, the parameters involved in equation (12) can be obtained. The

results for residual strength tests at high and low stress

amplitudes are shown in Table 7 and the related curves

are plotted in Figure 8. Additionally, the corresponding

residual strength under 87% and 80% stress levels for

1/3Nf and 2/3Nf cycles calculated by the equation (12)

are listed in Table 8. According to the results, the maximum error was only 8.14%, which took place under

80% stress levels for 2/3Nf, therefore, it is reasonable to

accept the theoretical formula (12) to predict the residual strength of ber bundle.

Furthermore, as equation (12) reects the relationship between the static strength and residual strength, it

is necessary to further validate whether the converted

static strengths R(0) calculated by equation (13) are

suitable to the statistical distribution of static strength.

Therefore, the residual strength data listed in Table 6

can be converted into the equivalent static strength

using the model given by equation (13). And the corresponding results are plotted in Figure 9 where the set

of converted equivalent static strength, R(0), using the

values of a, b, and c given in Table 7 was plotted as

3166

(a)

(b)

1400

1400

1200

1200

1000

800

600

of 87% stress level

Average value of 87% stress level

Experimental data of 87% stress level

400

200

1000

800

600

of 80% stress level

Average value of 80% stress level

Experimental data of 80% stress level

400

200

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

4000

Cycle number n

8000

12000

16000

20000

Cycle number n

Figure 8. Residual strength curves of carbon fiber bundle at high stress level (a) and low stress level (b).

strength based on equation (12) and test data.

Stress

levels

Terminal

number

Test

results

Predicted

results

Error

87%

1/3Nf*

2/3Nf*

1391.34

1337.41

1386.26

1345.20

0.37%

0.58%

80%

1/3Nf**

2/3Nf**

1333.86

1085.37

1245.92

1173.69

6.59%

8.14%

Nf* and Nf** means the fatigue life of 87% and 80% stress levels, respectively. All of the test data are from Table 6.

R0 Rn Sb an2 cn

13

strength.

It can be observed from Figure 9 that the correlation

between the Weibull distribution obtained directly by

static strength and converted data from residual

strength was comparatively well despite of stress

levels. Thus, it is reasonable to describe the residual

strength at various stress levels by equation (12).

Conclusions

1.0

residual strength for carbon ber bundles of T300

bers have been tested and the corresponding mechanical models have also been built based on the testing

results. The following conclusions can be made:

0.9

0.8

Distribution function

solid squares and the solid curve was the same Weibull

distribution of the static strength presented in

Figure 4(d) with the 50 mm characteristic length.

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

840

Weibull distribution obtained form equation (6)

860

880

900

920

940

960

980

1000

1020

1040

strength data converted to static strength for carbon fiber bundle

under both stress levels.

1. The inner original defects derived from manufacturing process existing in each of monolaments caused

that the static strength of ber bundle was correlated

with test section length. Therefore, the specimen

with a longer characteristic length has generally

lower strength under static tests.

2. Under T-T cyclic loading, the de-bunching phenomena are more obviously and mainly concentrated in

the middle of ber bundle, and less in the root part.

A segmented function was proposed to describe the

S-N curve of carbon ber bundles and the related

parameters were then obtained based on the fatigue

Song et al.

3167

life data. In order to investigate the statistical distribution of fatigue life, a two-parameter Weibull distribution function was well used to describe the

distribution.

3. In the end, the residual strength tests were conducted

and a theoretical model was derived based on the

assumption that the residual strength of ber bundles is non-monotonic. Additionally, the failure

degree for residual strength tests was the most serious compared to others, which had not only obvious de-bunching damages, but also fracture

damages.

Funding

This work was supported by Jiangsu Innovation Program for

Graduate Education [grant number KYLX_0237].

Conflict of interest

None declared.

References

1. Degrieek J and Paepegem WV. Fatigue damage modeling

of fibre-reinforced composite materials: Review. Appl

Mech Rev 2001; 54(4): 279300.

2. Schaff JR and Davidson BD. Life prediction methodology for composite structures, part I: Constant amplitude and two-stress level fatigue. J Compos Mater 1997;

31(2): 128157.

3. Cheng HC and Hwu FS. Fatigue reliability analysis of

composites based on residual strength. Adv Compos

Mater 2006; 15(4): 385402.

4. Whitworth HA. Modeling stiffness reduction of graphite/

epoxy composite laminates. J Compos Mater 1987; 21(6):

362371.

5. Whitworth HA. A stiffness degradation model for composite laminates under fatigue loading. Compos Struct

1998; 40(2): 95101.

6. Whitworth HA. Evaluation of the residual strength degradation in composite laminates under fatigue loading.

Compos Struct 2000; 48(5): 261264.

7. Yang JN and Miller PK. Effect of high load on statistical

fatigue of unnotched graphite/epoxy laminates. J Compos

Mater 1980; 14(4): 8294.

8. Yang JN and Liu MD. Residual strength degradation

model and theory of periodic proof tests for graphite/

epoxy laminates. J Compos Mater 1977; 11(2): 176202.

9. Yang JN and Jones DL. Statistical fatigue of graphite/

epoxy angle-ply laminates in shear. J Compos Mater

1978; 12(4): 371389.

10. Wu FQ and Yao WX. A model of the fatigue life distribution of composite laminates based on their static

strength distribution. Chin J Aeronaut 2007; 21(6):

241246.

11. Phani KK. Evaluation of single-fibre strength distribution from fibre bundle strength. J Mater Sci 1988;

23(3): 941945.

12. Yu WD, Postle R and Gyan HJ. Evaluating single fiber

and fiber bundle tensile curves. Text Res J 2003; 73(8):

875882.

13. Joffe R, Andersons J and Sparnins E. Applicability of

Weibull strength distribution for cellulose fibers with

highly non-linear behaviour. In: Proceedings of the 17th

international conference on composite materials (ICCM17), Edinburg, UK, 2731 July 2009.

14. Yuan H, Wen WD, Cui HT, et al. The random crack core

model for predicting the longitudinal tensile strengths of

unidirectional composites. J Mater Sci 2009; 44(12):

30263034.

15. Zhu YL, Cui HT, Wen WD, et al. Experiments on fatigue

damage failure test of carbon fiber yarn. Acta Mater

Compos Sin 2012; 29(5): 179183.

16. ASTM. Standard test method for tensile strength and

Youngs modulus for high-modulus single filament materials. ASTM D3379-75. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM,

1989.

17. ASTM. Standard recommended practice for constantamplitude low-cycle fatigue testing. ASTM E606. West

Conshohocken, PA: ASTM, 1980.

18. Yang JN. Fatigue and residual strength degradation

for

graphite/epoxy

composites

under

tensioncompression cyclic loadings. J Compos Mater 1978;

12(19): 1939.

19. Li JL, Yang HN and Kou CH. Fatigue properties of

three dimensional braiding composites. Acta Mater

Compos Sin 2005; 22(4): 172176.

20. Ken G, Yu KF, Hiroshi H, et al. Fatigue behavior of 2D

laminate C/C composites at room temperature. Compos

Sci Technol 2005; 65(5): 10441051.

21. Teng SZ and Feng JH. Mathematical statistics. Dalian:

Dalian University of Technology Press, 2005.

Appendix

The KolmogorovSmirnov test.

This method21 proposed by Kolmogorov was

used to test quantitatively the dierence degree

between the assumed distributional function F(x)

and the distributional function of samples Fn(x)

(plotted in Figure 10). From the following

3168

the dierence

Dn supFn x Fx

14

the hypothesis distribution is true, the value Dn mentioned above has a reduced trend, else the value

would be increased. Therefore, there exists a threshold value k, i.e. when sqrt(n)*Dn < k, the hypothesis

could be accepted, else be rejected, where sqrt(n) is

used to reect the eect of the number of test

specimens.

by Kolmogorov as follows

p

lim P nDn t Ft

n!1

Ft 1 2

1

X

2 2

1i1 e2i

15

i1

where F(t) was calculated and listed in the limiting distributional table of Dn.

Finally, the rejection domain can be obtained by

checking out the limiting distributional table under a

given signicant levels , i.e. when 0.05, the reject

domain U [1.36, 1).

- Fatigue Resistance Design of SteelDiunggah olehPrantik Adhar Samanta
- Fatigue Strength Prediction of Truck Cab by CaeDiunggah olehmeDC123
- Special-issue-Fatigue-and-corrosion-fatigue-Acom.pdfDiunggah olehJoshua Walker
- New Design of CompositesDiunggah olehMarbun Benny
- Masonry design for Lateral loadDiunggah olehMeganathan Mega
- Periodic Remaining Life Evaluation Program of PWR Pressurizer Surge Line Concerning Thermal Stratification EffectDiunggah olehMuhammad Naveed
- Chapter 6Diunggah olehpwijesinghe
- Fatigue FailureDiunggah olehdinacaran
- Adhesive jointsDiunggah olehKeerthiChowdary
- AFWAL_TR-81-3041_VOL1Diunggah olehsqc150
- Short Basalt FiberDiunggah olehManohar Simha
- 6. FATIGUE Diagrams S-N Goodman Da-dN 2013Diunggah olehİrem Uğurlu
- fracture mechanics pptDiunggah olehDEEPAK
- Stress Analysis of Basalt Epoxy LaminateDiunggah olehSelva Kumaran
- DNV-OS-J102 (Draft October 2004) Design and Manufacturing of Wind Turbine Blades (Offshore)Diunggah olehmpk8588
- 10 - Mechanical Design - Local Buckling (External Overpressure) Part1Diunggah olehvb_pol@yahoo
- Ultrasonic Plastic Welding HornDiunggah olehAnonymous MVHeP5z
- Pub110_ITB_GreatLakesDiunggah olehAtlas Teknik Shipyard
- Report Fatigue TestDiunggah olehCherif Chokeir
- 13347Diunggah olehTuan Nguyen Quoc
- Characterisation of AluminiumDiunggah olehsathishjey
- Shake Table-Model AnalysisDiunggah olehSaurabh Pednekar
- 1-s2.0-S2213290214000194-main.pdfDiunggah olehhutomo_kusmarnadi
- CompositesDiunggah olehJorge RojAs Ulloa
- tdDiunggah olehJlorenz Amandy
- 0147-0157Diunggah olehpraveen
- Analisis Del Esfuerzo en Compuestos Unidireccionales LaminadosDiunggah olehBrian Pinto
- Volety ThesisDiunggah olehSorin Gavrilescu
- Report 300 x 300Diunggah olehMashudi Ali
- RISK_2_4_044504Diunggah olehShivdayal Patel

- Constraints and Connections in abaqusDiunggah olehVenu Kishore
- Fatigue Life Assessment for Composite MaterialsDiunggah olehvahid030951
- Modelling of Fatigue Damage in CFRPDiunggah olehvahid030951
- Technical Research for fatique test results.pdfDiunggah olehvahid030951
- ECSS-E-HB-32-20_Part-1A - Structural Materials Handbook - Overview and Material PropertiesDiunggah olehdkleeman4444
- Ecss e Hb 32 20 Part5aDiunggah olehvahid030951
- l9 Damage FailureDiunggah olehvahid030951
- l5 Quasi StaticDiunggah olehvahid030951
- Brake Drums DK1264_ch04Diunggah olehvahid030951
- Brake type DK1264_ch02Diunggah olehvahid030951
- Ecss e Hb 32 20 Part8aDiunggah olehaemis2010
- Vibration Characteristic AnalysisDiunggah olehvahid030951
- Vibration Analysis Based on Full Multi-BodyDiunggah olehvahid030951
- Vibration analysis of rotary drierDiunggah olehhussalkhafaji
- Rigid Self Contact TutorialDiunggah olehkrol
- Elastic Plastic MaterialsDiunggah olehRejita Pillai
- Buckling TutorialDiunggah olehShahram Abbasnejad

- Sim.diffProcDiunggah olehcastjam
- Ricci Distributions EnDiunggah olehJorge Romero
- WeibullPaperDiunggah olehJeff Hardy
- Far OwDiunggah olehv1alfred
- Calculating the Parameters of the Weibull DistributionDiunggah olehcasaean
- HW1_ININ5559.pdfDiunggah olehOsiris López Limas
- Effect of collision warning systemDiunggah olehaleman87
- Mechanical Properties of e293-1581 FiberglassDiunggah olehAndre Coraucci
- Estimating Electrical Relay Switching ReliabilityDiunggah oleharturo snodgrass
- Weibull7 TrainingDiunggah olehPravin Shekhar
- Solution Manual -Quality Control 5th Edition MontgomeryDiunggah olehpmartinez89
- Pianc Berm BWDiunggah oleheduardovalera
- Using Excel for Weibull AnalysisDiunggah olehHarmoni Andreas
- Weibull Analysis in ExcelDiunggah olehPurwantoro
- As Virk 2010Diunggah olehvirk_70
- Constant-stress Accelerated Life Test of WhiteDiunggah olehJeevan Jalli
- 271-278.pdfDiunggah olehray m derania
- Assignment Mb 0016Diunggah olehAayat Verma
- We i Bull Parameters EstimationDiunggah olehBayronPalacio
- Reliability Modeling: The RIAC Guide to Reliability Prediction, AssessmentDiunggah olehAlexanderPetrov
- Coursera _ Online Courses From Top Universities Quiz 2Diunggah olehephrem
- We i Bull AnalysisDiunggah olehImron Mashuri
- Use Software R to Do Survival Analysis and SimulationDiunggah olehAntonio Gil
- RelexWeibullDiunggah olehutopial2006
- Assessment of Technical Wind Power Potential in Myanmar-IJAERDV04I0182669NDiunggah olehEditor IJAERD
- Rosin Rammler RegressionDiunggah olehLuis Katsumoto Huere Anaya
- accelaration testingDiunggah olehmanoj262400/2
- ComplianceDiunggah olehKathirselvam
- modified goodness of fit test for weibullDiunggah olehعبدالمجيد القليطي
- Crecimiento y Rendimiento de Pinus occidentalis en La Sierra, República DominicanaDiunggah olehSantiago W. Bueno-Lopez Phd