< back to main site


Critical review of interface testing methods for composites.

Lodeiro, M J; Maudgal, S; McCartney, L N; Morrell, R; Roebuck, B (1998) Critical review of interface testing methods for composites. NPL Report. CMMT(A)101

[img] Text

Download (202kB)


This report provides an assessment of the test methods and models suitable for characterising the nature and degree of interface adhesion in composite materials, in order to ascertain the impact on full composite behaviour. All material classes are evaluated: polymer, metal and ceramic matrix composites. Particular emphasis has been placed on the key issues associated with each of the tests and their ability to provide reliable, quantitative data. Mechanical tests used to measure a ‘characteristic’ interface parameter, such as shear/tensile strength or fracture energy, are identified. The measurement of surface roughness, physical wetting and chemical species contributing to interfacial adhesion have also been considered.
The preliminary review demonstrates the complexity of the effects of specimen preparation, experimental procedures, data reduction models and failure modes associated with the mechanical test methods. Similarly, the assessment of the physico-chemical evaluation techniques shows that these properties are often difficult to quantify and to incorporate into a full interface model for predicting the interfacial properties and subsequently composite performance.
The review highlights several important issues. There is no single ideal or universally applicable interface test technique. No standard test methods exist, although it is recognised that the geometry of the test-pieces and the conditions of the test affect the measured results, contributing to the variability of published data and the difficulty associated with making comparisons between them. There is doubt about which interface property to measure and how best to analyse the test data. In general, the tests are well-documented and researched, but further refinement is necessary. The most satisfactory methods appear to be the fragmentation test for polymer matrix composites and the push-through/push-back test for metal and ceramic matrix composites. Atomic force microscopy, wetting angle, differential scanning calorimetry and dynamic mechanical thermal analysis techniques show the best potential from the physico-chemical measurement methods available.

Item Type: Report/Guide (NPL Report)
NPL Report No.: CMMT(A)101
Subjects: Advanced Materials
Advanced Materials > Composites
Last Modified: 02 Feb 2018 13:18
URI: http://eprintspublications.npl.co.uk/id/eprint/1819

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item