2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.107843
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparing non-destructive 3D X-ray computed tomography with destructive optical microscopy for microstructural characterization of fiber reinforced composites

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Typically, engineers are not interested in fragments of fibers with aspect ratios close to one because they contribute almost no load bearing capability when compared to their longer cylindrical neighbors present in the microstructure [28][29][30] . Therefore, techniques and algorithms to detect and characterize fibers are typically not suitable for ≤ l d / 1, which can be easily confused with noise 30,31 . In this work, the fragment of glass was manually observed in the in-situ tomography images, detected as a fragment of a fiber, included in the microstructural simulation, and proved to be a region of high hydrostatic stress and a region of corresponding microvoid nucleation, as was seen in Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Typically, engineers are not interested in fragments of fibers with aspect ratios close to one because they contribute almost no load bearing capability when compared to their longer cylindrical neighbors present in the microstructure [28][29][30] . Therefore, techniques and algorithms to detect and characterize fibers are typically not suitable for ≤ l d / 1, which can be easily confused with noise 30,31 . In this work, the fragment of glass was manually observed in the in-situ tomography images, detected as a fragment of a fiber, included in the microstructural simulation, and proved to be a region of high hydrostatic stress and a region of corresponding microvoid nucleation, as was seen in Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The material used in this work was a polypropylene thermoplastic reinforced with 30% by weight E-glass fibers which were approximately 10 m µ in diameter and were pre-treated with a tailored silane solution to promote fiber-matrix adhesion. The composite material was injection molded into a cylindrical rod measuring 1.27 cm in diameter and 45.72 cm in length where the flow direction was in the length direction of the rod, and the rod was then machined into a dog-bone shaped specimen with a gauge section diameter of 2.4 mm and length of 5 mm containing fibers that were, on average, approximately 300 µm long 31 . The specimen was studied in-situ by applying tensile load (at a quasi-static strain rate of approximately 0.001 − s 1 ) using a custom motorized screw driven miniature load frame, interrupting the tensile load by holding the cross-head displacement, and acquiring an in-situ X-ray µ-CT scan.…”
Section: Methods Experimental Detailsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The MoE implies the sectioning and polishing of the samples, i.e., it is a destructive technique, followed by optical microscopy or scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in order to determine the in-plane and out-of-plane angles of the projected fibers from the surface characterization. This method has certain limitations, such as the ambiguity in determining the 3D fiber orientation and the difficulty in achieving a proper FOD characterization over a representative area/volume of the material (McGee and McCullough, 1984;Vélez-Garcia, 2012;Sharma et al, 2018;Hanhan et al, 2019). Alternatively, in recent years the application of three-dimensional techniques, such as micro-CT scanning, have become really appealing for non-destructively characterizing composites' microstructural features (Salaberger et al, 2011;Emerson et al, 2017;Hanhan et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This method has certain limitations, such as the ambiguity in determining the 3D fiber orientation and the difficulty in achieving a proper FOD characterization over a representative area/volume of the material (McGee and McCullough, 1984;Vélez-Garcia, 2012;Sharma et al, 2018;Hanhan et al, 2019). Alternatively, in recent years the application of three-dimensional techniques, such as micro-CT scanning, have become really appealing for non-destructively characterizing composites' microstructural features (Salaberger et al, 2011;Emerson et al, 2017;Hanhan et al, 2019). However, there are few studies using these techniques to validate predictions given by simulation (Kleindel et al, 2015;Tseng et al, 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Before going to take microstructure, the weld samples were cut into transverse directions and the cross-sectional surface was carried out for the standard metallographic procedure. Polishing with emery sheets of SiC with grit size varying from 220 to 2000 followed by disc polishing using alumina and velvet cloth were employed on the specimen to obtain a mirror finish the weldments [17]. Metallurgical characterization was performed with the use of an optical microscope and inverted microscope on the weldment, compromising of base metal and fusion zone.…”
Section: Optical Microscopy and Tensile Strength Testmentioning
confidence: 99%