Pay Out

INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI
films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some
thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be
from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the
copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality
illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins,
and improper alignment can adversely afreet reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete
manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if
unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate
the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by
sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and
continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each
original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced
form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced
xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6 x 9 black and white
photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations
appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to
order.
UMI
A Bell & Howell Information Company
300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor M I 48106-1346 USA
313/761-4700 800/521-0600
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The Pennsylvania State University

The Graduate School
Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics
A STUDY OF THE LOW-VELOCITY IMPACT BEHAVIOR OF WHISKERREINFORCED AUOj/SiCw CERAMIC COMPOSITES
A Thesis in
Engineering Science and Mechanics
by
Khalid A. Al-Dheyian
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements
for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
August 1996
UMI Number: 9702242
U M I Microform 9702242
Copyright 1996, by U M I Company. All rights reserved.
This microform edition is protected against unauthorized
copying under Title 17, United States Code.
UMI
300 North Zeeb Road

Ann Arbor, M I 48103
We approve the thesis of Khalid A. AI-Dheyian.
Date of Signature
2- 2.
/5
y --------
S. I. Hayek
Distinguished Professor of Engineering Mechanics
Thesis Co-Adviser
Co-Chair of Committee
C
/ L
laurice F. Amateau
Professor of Engineering Science
and Mechanics
Thesis Co-Adviser
Co-Chair of Committee
. Ci.
(o
R. A. Queeney
^
Professor of Engineering Mechanics
Charles E. Bakis
Associate Professor of Engineering
Science and Mechanics
M. N. Kallas
Assistant Professor of Engineering Graphics
G-izz-foc
R. P. McNitt
Professor of Engineering Science and Mechanics
Head of the Department of Engineering Science
and Mechanics
96
Abstract
Ceramic composite materials possess both low toughness and low impact resistance.
However, the incorporation of ceramic whiskers into the microstructure o f ceramic matrix has been
shown to produce a ceramic composite with improved toughness and greater strength.
This
dissertation studies both experimentally and theoretically the d\namic behavior o f SiCvv/ATOs
ceramic composites under low velocity impact loading. The main objective of this study is to
determine the effects of local-contact loading and dynamic flexural stresses on impact resistance,
failure modes, and toughening mechanisms o f whisker reinforced composites. To accomplish this
objective. ( I) several samples o f this composite material were designed and fabricated using
different SiC whisker volume fractions, and then tested at low-velocity impact; (2 ) the static and
dynamic mechanical properties o f this composite were determined, and the damage caused by low
velocity impact loading was quantified and assessed. A theoretical solution to the transverse impact
problem o f whisker-reinforced ceramic composite plates by striking these plates with solid
projectiles, at low impact velocity was formulated, and its predictions are compared to impact test
results. Test results of this study show that under low-velocity. transverse impact the local-contact
tensile stresses in AhCVSiCw composites didn't reach critical values that would initiate fractures
around the contact area in any tested specimen, and that all fractures were caused by dynamic
flexural stresses. In addition, correlations between unpact test results and these composites'
material properties are also included in this dissertation. This study's test results indicate that the
AhCVSiCw composite which possesses the highest bending strength, highest fracture toughness,
highest theoretical density percentage, and lowest Young's modulus should be the most (lowvelocity) impact resistant.
Table of Contents
LIST OF FIGURES..............................................................................................VII
LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................XI
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..................................................................................... XII
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................. 1
1.1. L IT E R A T U R E R E V IE W ....................................................................................................... 2
1.1.1 Background Review o f SiCw/A1203 Composites........................................................................ 2
1.1.2. Low-velocity Impact......................................................................................................................7
1.2. M O T IV A T IO N ....................................................................................................................... 16
1.3. SCOPES AND O B JE C TIV E S .............................................................................................. 17
CHAPTER 2. THEORETICAL ANALYSIS..........................................................19

2.1. S T A T IC A N A LYSIS: S IM P LY SUPPORTED PLATE UNDER L A T E R A L
L O A D IN G .................................................................................................................................... 19
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
The Differential Equation o f the Plate.........................................................................................19

The Deflection o f the Plate Due to a Concentrated Load........................................................... 21
Evaluating Stresses and Strains.................................................................................................. 25
Strain Energy o f the Plate in Bending........................................................................................26
2.2. L O C A L D E FO R M A T IO N A N A LY S IS ............................................................................. 28
2.2.1 Hertzian Contact Law Equations................................................................................................ 30
2.2.2 Local-Contact Stress Energy...................................................................................................... 32
2.2.3 Local-Contact Tensile Stress (crc)............................................................................................... 33
2.3. L O W -V E L O C IT Y IM P A C T A N A LYSIS O F A SIM PLY-SU PPO R TED P L A T E ...34

2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.3.4
The Equation o f M otion............................................................................................................. 34

Deflection................................................................................................................................... 35
Calculating Dynamic Stress and Strain.....................................................................................38
Estimating Dynamic Strain Energy o f the Plate in Bending...................................................... 41
2.4. E N E R G Y ABSORBED BY S PEC IM EN AND M A C H IN E ........................................... 43

2.4.1 Specimen.................................................................................................................................... 43
2.4.2 Impact Testing Machine............................................................................................................. 44
CHAPTER 3. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES................................................ 47

3.1.
M A T E R IA L P R O C ESSIN G ............................................................................................. 47
3.1.1
Material Selection and Specification........................................................................................ 48
CHAPTER 3. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES.................................................47

3.1. M A T E R IA L PR O C E SS IN G ............................................................................................... 47
3.1.1 Material Selection and Specification......................................................................................... 48
3.1.2 Tape-Cast A M V S iC w Composites........................................................................................... 48
3.1.3 WG-300 SiCVAl-Oj Composites................................................................................................55
3.2. S P E C IM E N P R E P A R A TIO N ............................................................................................. 55

3.3. M A T E R IA L S C H A R A C T E R IZ A T IO N ............................................................................58
3.3.1 Density........................................................................................................................................ 58
3.3.2 Microstructure.............................................................................................................................59
3.4. M E C H A N IC A L PRO PERTY C H A R A C T E R IZ A T IO N ............................................... 60

3.4.1 Elastic Modulus...........................................................................................................................60
3.4.2 Bending Strength........................................................................................................................ 62
3.4.3 Fracture Toughness..................................................................................................................... 62
3.5. S T A T IC AND L O W -V E L O C IT Y IM P A C T T E S T IN G O F A L 20 3 /S IC w C E R A M IC
P L A T E S .......................................................................................................................................64
3.5.1 The Support System.................................................................................................................... 65
3.5.2 Description o f the Impact Test Apparatus................................................................................... 65
3.5.3 Testing Procedures.......................................................................................................................71
3.5.3.1 Static Testing o f AlÔ^SiCw Plates.................................................................................... 71
3.5.3.2 Low-Velocity Impact Testing of ALOj/SiCvv Plates.............................................................72
CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS....................................................78

4.1. M A T E R IA L S C H A R A C T E R IZ A T IO N ............................................................................ 78
4.1.1 Density Results.......................................................................................................................... 78
4.1.2 Microstructure and Whisker Distribution.................................................................................. 81
4.2. M E C H A N IC A L PRO PERTY C H A R A C T E R IZ A T IO N S ............................................. 84

4.2.1 Elastic Modulus Results............................................................................................................. 87
4.2.2 Bending Strength Test Results...................................................................................................89
4.2.3 Fracture Toughness. Kic............................................................................................................. 91
4.3. S T A T IC LO A D IN G O F C E R A M IC C O M P O S ITE PLA TES..................................... 94

4.3.1 Load vs. Strain Tests.................................................................................................................. 94
4.3.2 Load-defiection Curve................................................................................................................ 95
4.4. L O W -V E L O C IT Y IM P A C T TEST R E S U LTS ..............................................................95

4.4.1 Incremental Impact Testing: Pre-fracture Damage Assessment.............................................. 100
4.4.2 Local Contact Load Effects: Local Tensile Stress and Local Tensile Energy.........................103
4.4.3 Load Time. Energy Time, and Strain Time Curves................................................................104
4.4.4 Impact Load Vs. Maximum Stress and Strain Curves.............................................................. 108
4.4.5 Estimating the Impact Fracture Energy in Bending for ALCVSiCvv Ceramrc
Composites......................................................................................................................................... 115
4.4.6 Determination of Impact Energy Proportions Absorbed by the Specimen and
M achine..............................................................................................................................................116
4.4.7 Examining Fracture Surfaces................................................................................................... 123
4.4.8 Summary and Discussion......................................................................................................... 132
4.5. C O M P A R IN G T H E RESPONSE OF C E R A M IC C O M P O S ITE PLATES TO

S T A T IC AND L O W -V E L O C IT Y IM P A C T L O A D IN G .................................................. 138
4.5.1
4.5.2
4.5.3
4.5.4
Comparing Load vs. Maximum Strain Curves......................................................................... 139

Comparing Fracture Energy Curves.........................................................................................139
Comparing Overall Fracture Patterns.......................................................................................142
Comparing Fracture Surfaces................................................................................................... 148
4.6. C O R R E L A T IN G L O W -V E L O C IT Y IM P A C T TE S T RESULTS W IT H S T A T IC
M A T E R IA L P R O P E R TIE S .................................................................................................... 152
4.6.1
4.6.2
4.6.3
4.6.4
Impact Fracture Energy vs. Young s Modulus.......................................................................... 155

Impact Fracture Energy vs. Fracture Toughness (K [c) ..............................................................160
Impact Fracture Energy vs. Four-point Bending Strength........................................................ 165
Specimen Porosity Effects on Impact Strength.......................................................................... 168
CHAPTER 5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
172
5.1. S U M M A R Y ............................................................................................................................ 172

5.2. C O N C L U S IO N S ....................................................................................................................175
5.3. R E C O M M E N D A T IO N S FO R FUTU RE R E S E A R C H ................................................ 176
REFERENCES...................................................................................................177
List of Figures
FIGURE 2.1. THE SIM PLY SUPPORTED CERAMIC PLATE UNDER A LATERAL. POINT
STATIC LOAD (P (X ,Y )).............................................................................................................20
FIGURE 2.2. THE LOADED AREA IS REPRESENTED BY A S M A LL RECTANGLE
U X V .............................................................................................................................................24
FIGURE 2.3. HERTZIAN CO NTACT OF A SPHERICAL IM P ACTO R ON AN ELASTIC
FLAT TARG ET............................................................................................................................ 31
FIGURE 2.4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM: CENTRAL. LO W -V E LO C ITY IM PACT
OF A T H IN , SIM PLY SUPPORTED PLATE BY A SPHERICAL STRIKER OF MASS M
AND RADIUS R........................................................................................................................... 37
FIGURE 2.5. A HALF-SINE CURVE REPRESENTATION OF TH E IM P A C T LOAD F(T)...40
FIGURE 3.1. A SCHEM ATIC V IE W OF THE TAPE-CASTING PROCESS (COURTESY OF
ELI RODICH, 1989).................................................................................................................... 50
FIGURE 3.2. PUNCHING AND LAM IN ATING . NOTE TH A T TH E LA M IN A TE IS FORMED
BY STACKING PILES T H A T E X H IB IT CERTAIN W HISKER A LIG N M EN TS IN THE
X -Y PLANE.................................................................................................................................. 51
FIGURE 3.3. BINDER BURNOUT CYCLE FOR 30% VOL. SICw/A L 20 3 C O M P O S ITE
53
FIGURE 3.4. A SCHEM ATIC V IEW OF THE HOT PRESS APPARATU S...............................54
FIGURE 3.5. HOT PRESSING CYCLE FOR A 30% VOL. SICw/A L 20 3 CO M PO SITE..........56
FIGURE 3.6. SPECIMEN PREPARATION FOR IM PACT AND PROPERTY'S SPECIMENS.
RESPECTIVELY..........................................................................................................................57
FIGURE 3.7. RESONANCE FREQUENCY APPARATUS............................................................61
FIGURE 3.8. FOUR-POINT CONFIGURATION FOR BENDING STRENGTH AND
FRACTURE TOUGHNESS TESTS (A). AND VICKERS IN D EN TA TIO N S (B ).............. 63
FIGURE 3.9. THE SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR STATIC LO ADING AND LO W -VELO CITY
IM PACT TESTING OF A L 20 3/SICW CERAMIC PLATES. (A ) HARDENED STEEL
INDENTOR; AND (B)SPECIMEN SUPPORT F IX T U R E ..................................................... 66
FIGURE 3.10. THE IM PACT TEST APPARATUS........................................................................67
FIGURE 3 .11. THE TRIG G ERING MECHANISM USING A V E L O C ITY DETECTOR
SPLITTER..................................................................................................................................... 70
FIGURE 3.12. PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING VIEW OF (A) O VERALL IM PA C T TEST SITE
AND EQUIPMENT; AND (B) IM PACT SPECIMEN HELD IN S ID E TH E SUPPORT
FIXTURE DURING AN IM PACT T E S T ................................................................................. 74
FIGURE 3.13. TYPICAL DYNATUP LOAD/ENERGY VS. T IM E (A): AND OSCILLOSCOPE
STRAIN VS. T IM E (B) RECORDS FOR THE STAINLESS STEEL PLATE IM PACTED
AT A VELO C ITY OF 3.10 FT ./SEC..........................................................................................76
FIGURE 4.1. SEM MICROGRAPHS OF FRACTURE SURFACES SHOW ING
MICROSTRUCTURE: (A ) 0% SICW: AND (B) 10% SICW VO L. FRACTIONS AL 20 3
/SICW CERAM IC CO M PO SITES............................................................................................ 82
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
vni
FIGURE 4.2. SEM MICROGRAPHS OF FRACTURE SURFACES SHOWING

MICROSTRUCTURE: (A) 20% SICW: AND (B) 33% SICW VOL. FRACTIONS A L 20 3
/S IC W CERAM IC COM POSITES............................................................................................ 83
FIGURE 4.3. OPTICAL (A); AND SAM (B) MICROGRAPHS SHOW ING W HISKER
O R IE N TA TIO N . DISTRIBUTIO N. AND MICROSTRUCTURE OF A 10% SIC TAPECAST CERAM IC COMPOSITE................................................................................................ 85
FIGURE 4.4. AN OPTICAL MICROGRAPH (X500) SHOW ING TH E W HISKER
D IS TR IB U TIO N OF A 20% SICW TAPE-CAST CERAM IC COMPOSITE POLISHED
(1 M IC R O N ) SURFACE............................................................................................................. 86
FIGURE 4.5. O PTICAL MICROGRAPHS (X500) OF VICKERS IN D EN TA TIO N IN (A) 10%
SICW ; AND (B) 30% SICW /A L 20 3 CERAMIC COMPOSITES. THE IN D E N TA TIO N
LOAD OF 7 KG IS THE SAME FOR BOTH TESTS..............................................................93
FIGURE 4.6. STRAIN VS. STATIC LOAD FOR W G-300 CERAM IC PLATES....................... 96
FIGURE 4.7. STRAIN VS. STATIC LOAD FOR W G-300 CERAM IC CO M POSITES............97
FIGURE 4.8. DEFLECTION VS. STATIC LOAD FOR A WG-300 CERAM IC PLATE (A);
A ND STRAIN VS. STATIC LOAD FOR A 10% VOL. SICW TAPE-CAST PLATE (B). 98
FIGURE 4.9. C-SCAN IMAGES OF A 33% SICW WG-300 COMPOSITE PLATE IM PACTED
7 TIM E S REPEATEDLY FROM THE SAME HEIG HT (1.5 IN .) USING A 2.86 POUND
DROP W E IG H T .........................................................................................................................102
FIGURE 4.10. TYPIC A L ELASTIC (A) AND NO N-ELASTIC (FRACTURE) (B)
LO AD/ENERG Y T IM E HISTORIES FOR 20% AND 10% SICW TAPE-CAST CERAM IC
PLATES, RESPECTIVELY...................................................................................................... 106
FIGURE 4.11. TYPIC A L ELASTIC (A) AND NO N-ELASTIC (B) STRAIN T IM E
W AVEFO RM S FOR 20% AND 10% SICW TAPE-CAST CERAM IC PLATES.
RESPECTIVELY........................................................................................................................107
FIGURE 4.12. IM PA C T AMPLITUDE VS. DYNAM IC STRAIN (A) AND STRESS (B) FOR
0% VO L SICW TAPE-CAST COMPOSITE........................................................................... 110
FIGURE 4.13. IM PACT AM PLITUDE VS. DYNAM IC STRAIN (A) AND STRESS (B) FOR
10% VO L SICW TAPE-CAST COMPOSITE......................................................................... 111
FIGURE 4.14. IM PACT AM PLITUDE VS. DYNAM IC STRAIN (A) AND STRESS (B) FOR
FIGURE 4.15. IM PA C T AM PLITUDE VS. DYNAM IC STRAIN (A) AND STRESS (B) FOR
FIGURE 4.16. IM P A C T AM PLITUDE VS. D YNAM IC STRAIN (A) AND STRESS (B) FOR
A W G-300 COMPOSITE...........................................................................................................114
FIGURE 4.17. ESTIM A TIN G THE IMPACT FRACTURE ENERGY IN BENDING (EB)
ABSORBED BY A L:0 5/SICW CERAMIC COMPOSITES.................................................. 117
FIGURE 4.18. COMPARING IM PACT ENERGY ABSORBED BY THE TAPE-CAST
SPECIM EN AND THE SPECIMEN PLUS THE IM PACT TESTING M A C H IN E ............119
FIGURE 4.19. CORRELATION BETWEEN IM PACT FRACTURE ENERGY MEASURED
BY TH E INSTRUM ENTED TUP (AE0) AND SPECIMEN STRAIN GAGE
M EASUREM ENT (Eb) .............................................................................................................. 120
FIGURE 4.20. COMPARING ENERGY PROPORTIONS ABSORBED BY TH E W G-300
CERAM IC SPECIMEN (EB) AND THE IM PACT TESTING M ACHINE (EM)................. 121
FIGURE 4.21. CORRELATION BETWEEN IM P A C T FRACTURE ENERGY

MEASUREMENTS USING IM PACT M A C H IN E INSTRUM ENTED TUP .AND
SPECIMEN STRAIN GAGE IN S TR U M E N TA TIO N ........................................................... 122
FIGURE 4.22. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROGRAPHS (SEM ) OF IM PACT FRACTURE
SURFACE FOR A LU M IN A (AL 20 3) AT LOW M AG N IFIC A TIO N (A); AND HIG H ER
M A G N IFIC A TIO N (B ).............................................................................................................. 124
FIGURE 4.23. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROGRAPHS (SEM) OF IM PACT FRACTURE
SURFACE FOR 5% VO L. SICW /AL 20 3COMPOSITE A T LOW M A G N IFIC A TIO N (A);
AND HIG HER M AG NIFICA TIO N (B )................................................................................... 125
SURFACE FOR 10% VOL. SICW /AL 20 3COMPOSITE (A); AND 20% VO L. SICW /AL 20 3
COMPOSITE (B)........................................................................................................................ 127
SURFACE FOR 20% VOL. SICW /AL 20 3COMPOSITE A T LOW M A G N IFIC A TIO N (A);
SURFACE FOR 30% VOL. SICW /AL 20 3COMPOSITE AT LOW M A G N IFIC A TIO N (A);
SURFACE FOR W G-300, SICW /AL 20 3COMPOSITE A T LOW M A G N IFIC A TIO N (A);
FIGURE 4.28. COMPARING THE RESPONSE OF WG-300 CERAM IC COMPOSITES TO
STATIC LOADING AND IM P A C T.........................................................................................140
FIGURE 4.29. COMPARING THE RESPONSE OF TAPE-CAST A L ^ S IC W CERAM IC
COMPOSITES TO STATIC LOADING A ND IM P A C T...................................................... 141
FIGURE 4.30. COMPARING ABSORBED ENERGY IN BENDING UNDER STATIC
LO ADING AND IM PACT FOR TAPE-CAST. AL.O ^SICW CERAMIC PLATES......... 143
FIGURES 4.31. COMPARING ENERGY ABSORBED IN BENDING UNDER STATIC
LO ADING AND IM PACT FOR WG-300 CERAM IC PLATES.......................................... 144
FIGURE 4.32. FRACTURE PATTERNS CAUSED BY STATIC LOADING AND LOW V ELO C ITY IMPACTS IN SICW /AL 20 3 CERAM IC SQUARE PLATES. FRACTURE
STATIC LOADS ARE 478 AND 486 POUNDS (TOP) AND FRACTURE IM PA C T
LOADS AND IM PACT VELOCITIES ARE 469 AND 478 POUNDS. AND 2.89 AND 2.90
FT ./SEC. (BO TTO M ), RESPECTIVELY................................................................................ 145
FIGURE 4.33. FRACTURE PATTERNS CAUSED BY STATIC LOADING AND LOW V E L O C ITY IMPACTS IN SICW /AL 20 3 CERAM IC SQUARE PLATES. FRACTURE
STATIC LOADS ARE 625 AND 635 POUNDS (TOP) AND FRACTURE IM PACT
LOADS AND IM PACT VELOCITIES ARE 659 AND 705 POUNDS. AND 3.56 AND 3.72
FT./SEC. (BO TTO M ). RESPECTIVELY................................................................................ 146
FIGURE 4.34. FRACTURE PATTERNS CAUSED BY STATIC LOADING AND LOW V E LO C ITY IMPACTS IN SICW /AL 20 3 CERAM IC SQUARE PLATES. FRACTURE
STATIC LOADS ARE 732 AND 878 POUNDS. AND 3.76 AND 4.47 FT./SEC. (TOP)
AND FRACTURE IM PACT LOADS AND IM PACT VELOCITIES ARE 920 AND 817
POUNDS. AND 4.47 AND 4.48 FT./SEC. (BO TTO M ). RESPECTIVELY........................ 147
FIG URE 4.35. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROGRAPHS (SEM ) OF M ACRO FRACTURE

SURFACE FOR 10% VO L. SICW /AL:0 3 COMPOSITE (A ) O BTAINED UNDER
S TA TIC LOADING; AND (B) UNDER IM PACT.................................................................. 150
FIG URE 4.36. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROGRAPHS (SEM ) OF MACRO FRACTURE
SURFACE FOR W G-300 S IC W /A L A COMPOSITE (A) O BTAINED UNDER STATIC
LO ADING ; AND (B) UNDER IM PACT................................................................................. 151
FIG URE 4.37. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROGRAPHS (SEM ) OF S TA TIC A LLY
O BTAINED FRACTURE SURFACE FOR 10% VOL. SIC W /A L:0 3 COMPOSITE (A) AT
LO W M A G N IFIC A TIO N ; AND (B) HIGHER M A G N IFIC A TIO N ..................................... 153
FIG URE 4.38. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROGRAPHS (SEM ) OF STA TIC A LLY
O B TA IN ED FRACTURE SURFACE FOR WG-300 S IC W /A L 20 3 COM POSITE (A) AT
LO W M A G N IFIC A TIO N ; AND (B) HIGHER M A G N IFIC A TIO N ..................................... 154
154
FIG URE 4.39. CORRELATION BETWEEN YOUNG S MODULUS AND IM P A C T
FRACTURE ENERGY FOR AL.O j/SICW COMPOSITES.................................................. 156
FIG URE 4.40. EFFECTS OF YO UNG S MODULUS ON ENERGY ABSORPTION OF
A L.O j/S IC W CERAM IC COMPOSITES UNDER IM P A C T ................................................159
FIG URE 4.41. CORRELATION BETWEEN FRACTURE TOUGHNESS, KICAND IM PACT
FRACTURE ENERGY FOR A L ^ S IC W CERAMIC C O M PO SITES............................. 161
FIG URE 4.42. CORRELATION BETWEEN K,CAND IM P A C T TEST RESULTS FOR
A LjO ^SIC W COM POSITES....................................................................................................164
FIG URE 4.43. CORRELATION BETWEEN FOUR-POINT BENDING STRENGTH (MOR)
A ND IM PACT FRACTURE ENERGY FOR AL.O ^SICW CERAM IC COMPOSITES.. 166
FIGURE 4.44. POROSITY EFFECTS ON THE IM PACT STRENGTH OF A L.O j/SIC W
CERAM IC COMPOSITES. (A)TAPE CAST COMPOSITES; AND (B) WG-300
C O M P O S ITE S........................................................................................................................... 169
List of Tables
TABLE 1.1. M ECHA NICAL PROPERTIES OF VARIOUS A L203/S IC W C O M PO SITES
TABLE 3.1 CO NSTITUENT PROPORTIONS OF AL203/SICW CERAM IC

CO M PO SITES..............................................................................................................................49
TABLE 4.1 DENSITY RESULTS FOR THE TAPE-CAST A L203/SIC W CERAM IC
C O M PO SITES..............................................................................................................................79
TABLE 4.2 DENSITY RESULTS FOR THE WG-300 AL 2Oj/SICW CERAM IC
CO M PO SITES..............................................................................................................................80
TABLE 4.3 MEASURED ELASTIC MODULUS FOR AL.O^SICW CER A M IC
CO M PO SITES.............................................................................................................................. 88
TABLE 4.4. FOUR-POINT BENDING STRENGTH (M OR) FOR AL.O ^SIC W CERAM IC
C O M PO SITES..............................................................................................................................90
TABLE 4.5. FRACTURE TOUGHNESS KIC FOR AL:0 3/SICW CERAM IC COMPOSITES . 92
TABLE 4.6. SUM M A RY OF M ECHANICAL AND IM PACT PROPERTIES FOR
AL203/SICW COM POSITES.....................................................................................................135
Table 4.7. Impact Test Results for Alumina (Ai20 3), as Reported by Earlier Studies 138
Acknowledgments
I would like to express my gratitude and full appreciation to my two advisors. Professors
Hayek and Amateau, for their support, guidance, and contribution to this thesis. 1 also would like
to thank my other committee members, many o f the ESM faculty and staff, and several ARL staff
members who contributed directly or indirectly to this thesis. In particular. I would like to thank
Professor Tittmann for his contribution concerning the non-destructive examination (N D E) part o f
this study, and ARL staff members Donald Stiver, for his technical assistance during material
processing and mechanical property testing, and Eric Strauch. for his assistance during impact
testing.
I would like to thank all my brothers and sisters, my wife Hoda. my three daughters
Samaher. Mais. and Halah, and my son Saud. who were a constant source o f inspiration and
encouragement. Their love and dedication to success during the time o f preparation o f this thesis
was a continuing source o f motivation.
Finally. I would like to thank the royal government o f Saudi Arabia for their financial
support the entire duration of my doctoral study in the United States.
Chapter 1
Introduction
This doctoral dissertation, was carried out to investigate both experimentally and
theoretically the dynamic behavior o f silicon carbide whisker (SiCw)/Alumina matrix (A I2O 3)
ceramic composites under low-velocity impact loading. In this study, we investigate dynamic as
well as static material properties in order to consistently compare the two kinds o f properties to
each other. We hope not only that the relationship between the properties, which emerges from this
study, can improve our understanding o f these ceramic composites' behavior under severe loading
rates, but also adds new knowledge in the strength and energy absorption capability o f ceramic
composite materials.
In recent years, advanced ceramic composite materials have been a real material option in
many structural applications. However, applications for these composites are limited because
these composites are brittle, difficult to process, and exhibit both low toughness and low impact
resistance. In many applications where ceramic composites must be used as structural
components, severe loading rates, such as object impact or tool dropping, can cause crack
initiation, rapid crack propagation, and fracture. In order to prevent such catastrophic failure in
these structural components, it is essential for us to obtain new information characterizing the
dynamic behavior of these composites, so that their energy absorption capabilities can be
established.
In this introductory chapter, the mechanical properties and toughening mechanisms in

SiCw/AI2O 3ceramic composites are reviewed. Next, the most recent literature on impact damage
and theoretical response o f structures to low-velocity impact loading in monolithic and composite
ceramics are discussed. Then this background information is followed with a discussion of
objectives, dissertation plans and outline.
1.1 Literature Review

l.l. I Background Review of SiCJ A I20 3 Composites
Mechanical Properties
Many researchers in the past focused on the incorporation o f ceramic whiskers and fibers
into the microstructure o f the ceramic matrix to produce a composite with improved mechanical
properties. In particular, ceramic composites exhibited greater impact resistance and higher
toughness when compared to the monolithic material (Tiegs and Becher, 1985). Ceramic whiskers
are useful in high performance ceramic structures because whiskers in general have a high degree
of internal and structural perfection with a length to diameter ratio in the range between 5 - 10.000
(Askeland. 1984).
A newly developed ceramic composite which has received wide attention is designed by
incorporating SiC whiskers into the microstructure of A l;03 matrix. SiC whiskers are single
crystals in short filament form which can offer an exceptional combination o f high strength, high
stiffness and low density as reinforcements in high performance ceramic composites.
The latest study by Kragness. Amateau and Messing (1991) on the mechanical properties
of the SiCw /Al:0 3 composite showed that adding SiCw whiskers to A1;0 3 matrix results in greater
toughness, but unchanged elastic moduli, of the composite when compared to the unreinforced
alumina. Earlier. Tiegs and Becher (1987) reported that the fracture strength and toughness of the
SiC \v/A l;0 3 composite increase with higher whisker content up to a whisker volume fraction o f
30%. At a whisker volume fraction greater than 30%. Tiegs and Becher reported a dramatic
decrease in fracture toughness, but offered no full explanation.
Similar results were achieved by Horrone, Nult and Suresh (1988), and Watanabe,
Matubara and Matuo (1989). Watanabe, et.al. (1989), added that at 40% wt SiC w'hisker content,
the SiCw/ATCh composite showed a significant decrease in toughness when temperature of hotpressing was increased. For example, composite hot-pressed at 1900 C has significantly less
toughness than composite hot-pressed at 1850 C. Watanabe concluded that whisker distribution
(whether homogenous or agglomerate), and possibly SiC whisker reacting, and not the grain size of
the alumina, strongly affects the fracture toughness of the whole composite.
In spite o f the possible effects of whisker reaction or grain size. Becher (1990) obtained
room temperature 4-point flexure strengths that ranged from 650 to 900 MPa and fracture
toughness values that varied from 6.7 to 8.5 M PaVin for 20% vol. S iC w /A li0 3 composites.
Becher attributed the higher value results to the processing steps applied to those composites, to
uniformly dispersed whiskers, and to the removal of extraneous particulate matter from the
whiskers. However. Becher obtained lower strengths for composites with whisker contents o f less
than 10% vol. SiCw. partly because o f an increase in alumina grain size. Becher concluded that
w hiskers are an effectiv e gram growth inhibitor when they are well dispersed and present in
sufficient levels. Therefore, in cases where whisker additions result in decreases in fracture stress
o f SiCw7Al;Oj composites, the detrimental effect is usually attributed to processing defects.
Homney (1990 ) reported that improper control of whisker/matrix interfaces in whisker reinforced
ceramics results in failure to produce enhanced toughening of these composites.
Although, several investigators (including those cited above) have demonstrated that the
mechanical properties of alumina ceramics can be significantly improved with the addition o f SiC
whiskers, the degree of improvement varies widely, depending on other factors such as the length
o f the whiskers and the mechanical properties o f the matrix and the reinforcing whiskers. Baek
(1989) studied 20% vol. SiCw/AhC^ composites o f various SiCw-type whiskers o f different
lengths. He concluded that alumina ceramics reinforced with shorter SiC whiskers exhibit lower
strengths. He explained that shorter whiskers usually undergo a longer pre-treatment process which
damages them and lowers their strengths as a reinforcement. Yasuda et.al. (1991) examined the
influence o f the whiskers' shape and size on the mechanical properties o f SiC whisker-reinforced
AI2O 3 composites. He reported that in spite o f improvements in toughness, the 4-point bending
strength, measured as a function o f whisker content, didn't improve, presumably because long
whiskers can introduce large defects into the ceramic matrix.
Toughening Mechanisms
To fully understand how SiCw/AljOj composites behave under low-velocity impact, we
must understand their toughening mechanisms under static loading. Kragness. Amateau and
Messing (1991) suggested that the increase in fracture toughness o f the SiCw/Al203 composite was
mainly due to crack deflection by SiC whiskers, with some whisker pullout limited to one or two
whisker diameters. They added that the greatest increase in toughness occurs when the crack plane
is perpendicular to the whisker axis.
Earlier, Tiegs and Becher (1987) obtained similar results. They explained that SiC
whiskers cause the crack plane to be longer in a plane normal to the applied tensile stress axis.
Furthermore, Tiegs and Becher added that for the crack to continue to grow the applied stress must
be increased. On the other hand, whisker pullout takes place when the stress transferred to the
whisker during fracture of the matrix is less than the fracture strength, generating a shear strength
greater than the interfacial shear strength o f the whisker-matrix interface.
Other researchers noted that toughness in SiCw/AkOs composites may be increased by

crack bridging (Becher. Hsuesh. Angelim and Tiegs, 1988). When a crack propagates in the
matrix without damaging intact whiskers, these whiskers bridge the crack behind the crack tip. As
the whisker-matrix interface debonds, the crack tip approaches the interface and whisker bridging
occurs.
Finally, we conclude our discussion o f A130 3 /SiCw composites with a table showing the
mechanical properties for various A1:03 /SiCw composites which have been reported by several
references (Table 1.1). This table can serve as a reference for later comparison with test results of
this study.
Table 1.1. Mechanical Properties of Various Al2Oj/SiCw Composites

Bending
Strength
(MPa)
Fracture
Toughness
(M P a ^ )
39160
3.6
15
652100
4.6
No.
SiCw
Vol. %
2
3
4
Youngs
Modulus
(GPa)
References
Porter (1987)
Homney (1987)
30
275-375
350-650
15
391
566
5.1
25
392
635
6.6
33
Critical
Flaw Size
(nm)
Wrona (1989)
4.6
117-125
Morrone (1988)
6.2.4
90
Wittmer(1989)
(WG-300)
5
20
54010
2.7
5.9-6.6
25
7
8
9
10
Suresh (1990)
30
590-651
6.6-9.4
Shih (1990)
20
370-430
4.2-9.1
Chakaraborty
(1991)
Kragness (1991)
10
410
5-6.2
20
412
6.3-8
387
408
29
Deabald (1994)
1.1.2. Low-velocity Impact

General Aspects o f Impact Mechanics in Ceramic Materials
The response o f structural materials to impact loading has always been a problem o f
theoretical and practical interest for engineers and researchers. The analysis of the response of
structures and materials to impact loading can be very complex, and in many instances remains
unresolved. Under low-velocity impact, both the geometry' o f the entire structure and the material
properties play a significant role in the response o f the structure. As impact velocity increases, the
response becomes more localized (this is especially true for impact by light projectiles) and is more
affected by the composition o f the material near the impact center than the geometry o f the whole
structure (Cantwell and Morton, 1991).
Under high-velocity impact loading, energy is dissipated over a small region surrounding
the point o f impact, which may result in the generation of elastic, plastic, or shock waves that will
propagate in the structure. In addition to stress wave generation under high velocity impacts,
inertia effects also become important and must be considered in the analysis o f the response
(Zukas. 1990).
Ceramic materials are inherently brittle, with relatively low resistance to crack extension
originating at pre-existing defects, as compared to more ductile materials o f similar strength level.
Because plastic or viscoelastic deformations have not been noted for dissipating energy in ceramic
materials, energy- release in ceramics is more likely achieved through the formation o f fracture
surfaces (Evans. 1979). Once a crack starts to propagate under the influence o f a transient load,
crack branching often takes place. Cracks branch in order to dissipate the excess energy caused by
a rapid energy release rate exceeding the rate o f surface energy absorbed by a single crack.
8
The damage caused by impact loading in ceramics may contain many complex patterns,
such as ring, cone, median, radial, or lateral cracks, depending on the relative velocity o f the
impactor and the properties and geometry of the target material.
Lmv-velocity Impact Damage in Monolithic Ceramic Materials

According to Hertzian contact theory, the stresses of undamaged specimens under low
velocity impact show similar stress distribution to those under static loading for equal contact radii
(Timoshenko. 1970). However, Tsai (1971) reported that the impact damage cannot easily be
predicted solely on the basis of the stress field associated with undamaged specimen. Evans (1973)
showed that the only damages observed under low-velocity projectile impacts are ring and cone
cracks for blunt or soft projectiles. Evans added that since these cracks revealed an elastic
response o f the damaged material, this damage can be fully explained by the Hertzian theory of
elastic response.
However. Kirchner. et al. (1977) indicated that conical cracks (sometimes called Hertzian
cracks) are formed as a result o f ring cracks penetrating into the specimen when the impact
velocity increases beyond a specific intermediate range. Knight, et al. (1977) and Dao. et al.
(1979) predicted the cone angle to depend on the elastic constants of the projectile and target,
impact velocity, and projectile size. Kirchner. et.al. observed an increase in the depth o f
penetration in cone cracks when the impact velocity increases. Dao. et al.. described ring cracks
as short parallel surface cracks which propagate circumferentially. inclining about 50 degree to the
free surface, and with a range that expands as the impact velocity increases.
As the impact velocity increases even further, other damages such as a pit-shaped
permanent impression, a porous zone of damage-induced crushed powder (beneath the impacted
surface), a penny-shaped vent median crack, surface semi-circular radial cracks, and penny-shaped
lateral cracks can form depending on the relative impact velocity and the elastic properties o f the
projectile and target (Evans, 1979).
When thin monolithic ceramic structures are subjected to transverse, Iow-velocitv impacts
by rigid spherical projectiles, local effects caused by local loading may eventually be small.
Therefore, the response of the ceramic material to the global dynamic bending o f the structure
becomes the limiting factor in determining its impact strength. In addition, in several early studies
under the same test conditions as described above, not all o f the impact energy- given up by the
projectile is converted into bending energy of the specimen. Instrumented impact test results by
these studies suggest that in many instances more than half o f the energy given up by the projectile
during low-velocity impact testing of ceramics is stored in the testing machine (Davidge et.al.,
1972; Bertolotti, 1974; Kirchner et.al., 1975; Hiroshic et.al., 1978, and Kobayashi et.al, 1986).
Horoshi et.al. (1978) measured the impact strength o f some commercial silicon carbides using an
instrumented pendulum-tvpe machine and Charpy-type specimen, and found that an average 59%
o f the deflection energy was absorbed by the testing machine. They also found that in every
instance the machine energy- exceeds the specimen energy, and that the machine energy increased
with increasing specimen strength. Bertolotti (1974) analyzed the flexural strength and energy
absorbed by alumina (A120 3) during Charpy-impact fracture and demonstrated that the apparent
measured energy needs be corrected for machine compliance to obtain the true energy absorbed by
the specimen in loading to failure.
Another important aspect in determining the impact strength o f ceramic materials is the
method by which the impact strength is measured. Some studies suggest that differences between
theoretical impact strengths (e.g.. specimen stored elastic energy ) and experimental results for
ceramics can reach as high as forty- times when test results are obtained using ASTM standard full-
swing impact test method (Hiroshi et. al.. 1978). Multer (1966) compared the impact strengths o f
eight ceramic materials obtained using an incremental impact test method with test results obtained
using the A STM D256 single-blow test method, and found that the incremental impact test results
were five to eight times lower than those results obtained by the ASTM D256 method. Smoke
(1970) attributed this difference in magnitude o f impact strengths (with ASTM test data being
higher in magnitude than the increment test data) to the so called toss factor, defined as the
algebric difference between the energy measured in the ASTM tests and the energy required to just
fracture the ceramic specimen as determined by means o f the incremental impact test method. His
logical assumption appears to be that, in the ASTM test, the specimen is given kinetic energy in
addition to the kinetic energy it possesses as a result o f elastic strain induced in the specimen by the
impacting load.
Several researchers in the field o f low-velocity impact of monolithic ceramic materials

have also attempted to correlate their impact test results with the mechanical properties o f these
materials. Howard (1944) compared the fracture bending stresses under static loads and impact for
glass beams and plates. He found ratios o f 1.0 to 1.2 in the two stresses. He concluded that the
time factor plays a major part in causing the energy required to break glass under low-velocity
impact to be larger than is necessary under statically applied forces. Dinsdale (1962) measured the
impact strength o f sintered alumina rods and correlated it with the static modulus o f rupture
(M O R ) of these rods, measured using a wide range o f loading rates. He obtained a "dynamic
strength o f 4/3 the static value." Davidge (1972) reviewed several experimental data reported
by others to determine the impact energy o f a number o f brittle materials, and discussed their
significance in terms of material properties and test conditions. He then calculated the impact
strength o f these materials based on their reported static bending strengths (M OR). He discovered
that the measured impact strength is slightly larger than the calculated one. which was based on the
statically measured bending strengths. He concluded that for some brittle materials, including
monolithic aluminas, when corrections are made for loss energy and energy lost in the machine, the
resulting impact strength will be related to the elastic stored energy at the initiation o f fracture. He
recommends that whenever possible, impact data for brittle materials should be correlated with
other material properties, including stored elastic strain energy, strength, and other staticallly
measured elastic properties.
Low Velocity Impact Damage in Fiber-Reinforced Composites

The complex impact damage pattern described above for monolithic ceramics in general
resembles the impact damage pattern in ceramic composites. The toughening behavior in ceramic
composites, described earlier, complicates even further the damage pattern to include such damage
due to delamination, fiber breakage and matrix cracking.
Barta, Shook and Graves (1972) compared the impact damage in two alumina composites,
the graphite fiber/alumina matrix composite and the silicon fiber/alumina matrix composite, and
found that incorporating fibers in a ceramic matrix creates weak interfaces in the path o f a
propagating crack. These weak interfaces can absorb more elastic energy under impact, which
assists in stopping or slowing a propagating crack. While the graphite/alumina composite, which
exhibits a weak interface, showed an increase in toughness, the strong bond between silicon fibers
and alumina matrix prevented any substantial improvement in this composites' toughness.
Wang and Yew (1990) investigated the impact damage in laminated composite plates at
low velocities and showed that the majority- o f damage was due to matrix cracking and
delamination. Fiber breakage damage was reported to be confined to the area under and near the
contact area between the impactor and target. Chang and Choi (1990) explained that matrix
cracking under low velocity impact which is followed by delamination begins with "initial critical
12
matrix cracks." Chang and Choi believed that these initial matrix cracks were caused by strong
interlaminar shear stresses and in-plane tensile stresses, while out-of-plane normal stresses caused
delamination growth.
Cantwell and Morton (1991) examined the role o f fibers in determining the impact
resistance o f composite materials at low velocity impacts, and concluded that fibers with larger
area under the stress/strain curve absorb more strain energy, enabling them to exhibit higher
impact resistance. The same study concluded that interlaminar fracture toughness should be high
for good compression strength after impact.
Because discontinuous fiber (whisker) ceramic composites are a relatively new materials
which are still evolving, most recent impact studies on these materials are limited to a few
publications (Akimune, 1989, 1990, 1991; Yang, 1990; and Lankford, 1991). Damage patterns in
whisker ceramic composites to static loading were shown to be more complex than the damage
observed in continuous fiber composites because of the increased modes o f failure. Most recent
studies on w hisker ceramic composites in general have focused on properties analysis and
strengthening mechanisms under static loading. Furthermore, publications which investigate
impact behavior of whisker composites examine particle impacts at high velocity, and none has
discussed the problem of solid projectile impacts at low velocities.
Takagi and Kobavashi (1991) studied the dynamic fracture responses o f alumina and
silicon carbide whisker/alumina matrix SiCw/ALCh composites and found that under high velocity
dynamic loading, a propagating crack could not be arrested. Takagi and Kobavashi believed that
the rapidly propagating crack caused a small percentage area o f transgranular failure to generate a
flat fracture surface.
13
Akimune. Katano. and Motaba (1989) investigated spherical particle impact damage and
degradation in silicon carbide whisker/silicon nitride composites at high velocity impacts. Their
study showed that SiC-whisker/Si3N 4 composites exhibit improved strength degradation because o f
improved mechanical properties provided by the SiC whiskers. Lankford and Blanchard (1991)
studied the response of SiC whisker-reinforced, hot pressed Si3N 4 composites to dynamic
compressive loading at high strain rates, and concluded that the strength of the Si3N 4 matrix is
extremely sensitive to high strain rate, impact loading, irrespective o f whisker orientation.
Theoretical Analysis Review o f Structural Response to Low-Velocity Impacts

As indicated earlier, a good portion o f the analytical work and design on structural
response to low-velocity impact loading available in the current literature has been based on
equivalent quasi-static loading design techniques. However, for many strain-sensitive materials,
such as ceramic composites, material properties determined under static loading should not be used
to predict dynamic failure (Mallick, 1988). It is therefore necessary to carry out a theoretical study
in which dynamic effects can be superimposed on the static effects to predict the response of
certain structures (e.g.. plates) to low-velocity impact loading.
Studying isotopic and composite material structural local response to low-velocity impact
loading consists of three major steps: ( I) determining the impactor-induced surface pressure and
it's distribution; ( 2 ) determining the internal stresses in the structure caused by the surface
pressure; and (3) determining the failure modes caused by the internal stresses, using appropriate
failure criteria (Greszczuk. 1982).
Greszczuk (1982) introduced equations based on Hertz contact law describing impactinduced surface pressure distribution and the resulting internal stresses for impactor-target solids
made o f isotropic and transversely-isotropic materials at low impact velocities.
14
Goldsmith (1960) treated extensively the response of various structures o f isotropic
materials to impact loading, covering responses which involve both elastic and plastic strains.
Goldsmith's analysis, which includes the investigation of transverse impact o f a mass on a beam
and on plates, considers the vibrational effects o f these structures as well as the local contact
effects. Goldsmith's investigated the transverse impact by a spherical mass on a thin plate of
uniform thickness. His analysis, which assumes a point contact force for the loading function, is
derived in terms o f the normal harmonics of the plate.
Nash (1969) analytically solved for the forces and bending moments generated during
beam impact, using Goldsmith's technique of including several normal modes o f the beam in
addition to Hertz local contact. He obtained a good agreement between his analytical solution and
observed experimental results for brittle materials.
Tsai (1971) investigated the dynamic contact stresses produced by a solid projectile
impacting an elastic half-space rigid surface. His derivation of the expressions for the normal and
radial stresses included the sum o f Hertz contact stresses and wave-effect stresses. Tsai used
Hankel and Laplace integral transforms derived by Young (1954) and Linz (1967) to solve the
three-dimensional equations o f motion. He found that wave-effect stresses can be dropped for
moderate impact velocities and still obtain a good approximation for impact generated stresses.
Tsai also found that the Hertz contact law is a good approximation for determining the total impact
force.
Keer and Lee (1985) studied the problem of a rigid smooth striker impacting an elastically
supported beam at low velocity. Their solution consists of combining an elastic layer solution with
elementary beam theory that incorporates the dynamic effect o f the beam. Their analytical
approach to this problem required solving a Volterra integral equation for each time increment.
15
Keer and Lee showed that the impact response is highly dependent on geometrical and material
parameters, and for most cases studied, the force-time history for the impact showed two peaks.
El-Raheb and Wagner (1987) adopted Mindlin's equations (Whitney, 1987)]to obtain the
response o f a circular plate to impact by a cylindrical projectile. Wang and Yew (1990) presented
a low-velocity impact damage model for a quasi-symmetric composite plate. They employed
DiSciuva's composite laminate theory, together with Hashin's failure criterion (Gibson. 1994) for
fiber-reinforced composites, to calculate damage in each layer of the plate.
Finite element solution methods (FEM ) have also increasingly proven to be valuable tools
in solving complex problems (such as impact o f composite structures) where closed form
analytical solutions are extremely difficult to obtain. Finite element solutions are valid techniques
for verifying analytical and experimental results. However, when using FEM to determine the
response o f structures to impact, such impact parameters as pressure distribution, contact
geometry, impact force, and impact duration must be prescribed in order to solve the internal
triaxial transient stresses generated by the impact-induced pressure distribution.
Chen and Sun (1985) studied the impact response of composite laminates using finite
element techniques. Their approach deployed a nine-node isoparametric quadrilateral element,
based on Mindlin's plate theory and Von Karman's large deflections assumptions. In the time
integration. Chen and Sun used the Newmark constant acceleration algorithm in conjunction with
successive iterations within each time step. These authors incorporated the Hertzian contact theory
into their finite element model to evaluate the impact force and obtained good results compared
with observed experimental values.
16
1.2. Motivation
In considering new advanced ceramic composites as alternatives to more conventional
engineering materials (e.g. metals), we must fully understand the mechanical properties o f these
composites in general, including their resistance to low-velocity impacts. This will offer us safer,
more efficient, less expensive, and more reliable new materials to choose from in many critical
structural applications.
Although advanced ceramic composites have been employed as structural materials in

many engineering applications (e.g. jet engine turbine blades), the response to various loads has
been determined through static loading techniques. Therefore, no comparable techniques are
available for the design o f advanced ceramic composites under solid object low-velocity impact.
As we stated earlier, the only extensive data on impact studies in the recently published
literature covers monolithic ceramics, not composites. These impact studies for the most part
cover impact at very high velocities, where only local deformations were thought to be significant.
Few impact studies have been performed on advanced ceramic composites and none at low
velocity impacts. Furthermore, due to the degree of complexity involving impact damage analysis
and the governing differential equations of motion, most impact research studies have been
confined to empirical analysis coupled with experimental observations.
These facts demonstrate the need to carry out a theoretical as well as experimental study
on low-velocity impact of new ceramic composite materials such as the silicon carbide whisker
alumina composite. In this study. local and global effects were considered on the overall response
o f the impacted structure as being equally important. The conclusions reached from this study w ill
enable one to choose from a broader range o f reliable composite materials for many critical
structural applications.
17
1.3 Scopes and Objectives

The main objective o f this study is to determine the effects o f local-contact loading and
dynamic flexural stresses on the impact resistance, failure modes, and toughening mechanisms of
whisker reinforced ceramic composites. To accomplish this objective, we:
1. Design and fabricate silicon carbide whisker (SiCw)/Alumina matrix (AI2O3) ceramic
composite samples with composites' density approaching the 100 % theoretical densities, and
with overall improved mechanical properties over that o f monolithic alumina.
2. Impact-test, quantify, and assess damage in these composites under low-velocity impact
loading.
Dissertation Outlines
In
Chapter 2 a solution is formulated for the impact problem where a body of revolution
projectile (e.g. solid sphere) transversely impacts a ceramic composite plate at low velocities.
This study's derivation of the governing differential equation o f motion includes, in addition to
the Hertzian contact effects, the effects of plate vibration. We then outline procedures to
separate the energy absorbed by specimen from the energy absorbed by the testing machine.
using a derived d>namic deflection equation of the plate.
Chapter 3 includes procedures which outline the processing steps undertaken to fabricate
several SiCw M TO j composite samples with silicon carbide volume fractions o f 0 %. 5%. 10%.
20%. 30%. and 33% using tape casting and hot-pressing, and casting and hot pressing
processing methods. Tape casting is an established technique for manufacturing ceramic sheet
products. Hot pressing refers to laminates being vacuum hot-pressed in a Grafoil lined
graphite die. Following these processing procedures which we applied to manufacture our
samples, we describe experimental methods to determine the pre-impact material properties of
18
each composite. Material properties such as Young's modulus (E) were determined using the
dynamic resonance test method. Fracture toughness (KiC) measurements were determined using
the four-point bend, multiple indentation fracture strength (M IFS ) test method.
Following material property, equipment and steps needed to test each composite sample at low
velocity impact are discussed, using the instrumented Dynatup drop test machine and strain
gauges built into the back face directly underneath the impact center o f the specimen. The
instrumented Dynatup drop test machine is operated by a complete Dynatup G R C730-7
instrumented impact test data system, and is equipped with a pneumatic assist that can provide
impact velocities from 0.61 to 13.41 m/s. In addition, Chapter 3 describes the methods used to
determine and assess the extent of specimens surface and subsurface damage, and the non
destructive testing techniques used to examine fiacture surfaces, such as C-scan ultrasonics,
scanning acoustic microscopes (SAM ), and scanning electron microscopes (SEM).
In Chapter 4 experimental test results to obtain the dynamic stress-strain curves for each
composite, the energy absorption curves for both specimen and machine, and curves comparing
and correlating our analytical models with our experimental results are presented.
Finally. Chapter 5 contains conclusions and recommendations for future research.
19
Chapter 2
Theoretical Analysis
2.1
Static Analysis: Simply Supported Plate Under Lateral Loading
2.1.1
The Differential Equation o f the Plate

For a thin plate under static transverse load P(x.y) (figure 2.1), the summation o f forces
and moments along the z direction and about the x and y axes respectively give after simplification
the force-moment relation:
& Mx
c^Mxy & M y
- Z T - + 2 J - + f - + P (x ,y ,t) = 0
8c
dcty
oy
The stress-strain relationships for plates with isotropic properties are:
o\ = - E r (, * r + vsv)^
1- v'
E
<r. =
1- v
~{ev + ie x)
E
Yv
where E and v denote the elastic modulus and the Poisson's ratio, respectively.
The strain-deflection relationships are defined as:
Sx
8 :w
,
ex'
_ 8 :w
Yn
-2 :
dcdy
Normal and shear stresses are expressed in terms of the lateral deflection, w, as:
simple supports on all edges
Figure 2.1. The simply supported ceramic plate under a lateral, point static
load (P(x,y))
21
- E z
ai w s
= - r (
1- v
ex
+ v, t
cv
-E -z e ^ w
c^w
<* = r ir r r + v -r r )
1- v' dy~
ex
- 2 E - z tfw
Xxv
2(1 + v) dcdy
The moment-deflection relations are written as:

-
M x =
E h3
----------------------
I2 (l-v '") <3r
dyz
-E h l
,<?w
My = ----------- ( - + v 7 -)
12( 1 - 1/ ') dy~
ck
- Eh3
a lw
M xy =
12(1 + v) dcdy
The substitution of the above relations into the force-moment relation finally yields the
governing differential equation o f the plate under lateral loads:
c? w
ex
c* w
** ->2 2 1
ex cy
c^w _ P ( x , y )
^4
ey
rv
(2. 1)
where:
12(1 - v ' )
is defined as the flexural ngidity o f the plate.
2.1.2
The Deflection o f the Plate Due to a Concentrated Load

The solution of the governing differential equation. Eq. (2.1). for plates with various
boundary conditions and subjected to transverse loading can be found in numerous references
(Timoshenko. 1959: Volterra. 1971) For the simply supported rectangular plate (SS). Navier's
method to obtain "exact" solution represent the simplest, and hence, this method is adopted here as
follows:
For simply supported plate, the boundary conditions are:

(w)x= 0 , x=a =
(w)y= 0 , y=b
(Mx)x=0 , x=a =
(My)yÔ. V=b
I f we represent the loading function, P(x,y), and deflection, w(x,y) by double trigonometric series,
such that
P (x ,y ) =
/> ,. sin(
m=ln=l
(2.2)
)s in (^ -)
b
. rnjvc^ . ,nnys
w(x,y) = 1 1 Wm*sin(------ )sin()

m=ln=l
(2.3)
then, after substituting Eqs. (2.2) and (2.3) into Eq. (2.1), we can solve for W j^ as follows:
rm*K4
n4;r4, . mux . nizy
Hwrnnf + --- + ]stn-------sin

a
a~b'
b
a
. mnx . nny
= >.2. r-msirv----- )sin-----)

D
Therefore.
W m n ----------------------- ;---------
;-----
(2.4)
0 * 4[ ( ^ ) + ( ) f
a*
b~
By observing the orthogonality properties of sine functions, we obtain:

a
4 r r
, . ,rmcc^ . ,n jr . , ,
Pmn = ~
i
\
1------------------------)sm
(n )dxdy
n h
n
a
b J\ J*
a
b
Therefore.
(2.5)
Now, to appiv the above result to find the deflection, strains, and stresses for a simply
supported plate subjected to a single, concentrated load. P, applied at a given point x=^, y=r|, the
load is first modeled as being uniformly distributed over a small rectangular area (u,v), as shown in
figure (2.2). Then, we let the contact area approach zero by permitting u>0 and v-0.
Proceeding, Eq. (2.5) becomes (Timoshenko. 1959)
Pmn
ab
P . nny. , ,
)<cdy
sin(----- )sin(
%yuv
s /z1~ I
and after integrating:
_
16 P
. m nC. . J in rj . mrtu. . ,nnv
p mn =
sin(----- --) sin( ) sin( ) sin( )
n'm m iv
a
b
2a
2b
(2.7)
as we let u - 0 . v>0 . P ^ becomes
4 P . mnC, . nnn,
p m = sin(
^)sin(
)
ab
a
b
( 2 .8 )
Substituting Eq. (2.8) into Eq. (2.6) w ill give the deflection o f the plate due to a
concentrated single load, hence
,p
mnC, . 7I7T77, . ,m7C. . jin v .
r * sin(-------)s in ( )sin (------)sin ( =-)

I I
2------------ 1---------_ S ------------ B
w (x ,y ) =
n *abD m='n='
{2 9)
[ ( ) + (-r r )]
a'
b~
The convergence of the solution in the series of Eq. (2.9) is rapid after only few terms.
However, the second derivative of Eq. (2 .9) diverges at the point of application o f force. To assure
the convergence of the second derivative (strains, stress. ..). the small rectangular contract
24
------------
Figure 2.2. The loaded area is represented by a small rectangle u
25
area modeled as shown m figure ( 2 .2 ) is assumed for the concentrated load to uniformly work over.
Hence, by substituting Eq. (2.7) into Eq. (2.6). we finally obtain
. .mnC . . ,n m \
] f -p
sm(
* (* ,> ) = 4 ^ 1 1
2 ------------
'T
x sin(
a'
2b( 2 . 10 )
b'
mjccN .
nw ,
) sin( )
2.1.3
. ,mmi. . .njtv x
-) sin() sin() stn()
Evaluating Stresses and Strains

Re-writing the strain-deflection and stress deflection relationships, respectively:
& = -z
8c
-E z
CTx =
, 8 1m>
-----------------
(l-v )
8 2w s
v
a :2
- )
dyz
and using Eq. (2.10) to evaluate the above expressions yields
ifip .
lo -r-
; . ( tnnc. . nn77
m sin(-------- )sm (- )
a_______ b
-y y
[(_ )+ (_ )]a'
b
- 1
. mmi
x sin(
la
) sin(
nmi
2b
. ,m nxs . ,nxv^
) sin(
) sin( )
and
a _
]6P
F~
l o r -
+V/(la)_________
-^ Sin(----a_______
a
nr
/r ,
mn[( ) + ( - r ) ]
tm v D O - v'; )
a'
b~
. ,n x v s .,mvx^ . ,nnv,
/ ,, 7r77x
x sin().sin( ) sin()sin(------)sm(--)
b
la
2b
26
For a square plate o f length a and thickness h. loaded at its center (=a/2. rpa/2). ex = e v , crx=crv,
and max. stresses and strains occur at the outer thickness (z=h/2 ) at the middle of the plate (x=a/2 ,
v=a/2). Hence
/_ \
a p hnz
^
o . r - n a
( x)ma*.-
J
a- v>
. . m n . . .M7C. . ,m m r . tjrcv
/w-sm-( )a n ( )a n ( )sin( )
Z-
j-
: i2
n[m + n ]
=1
8P h a -
(l-r )u -v D ^
y y
(a ) .= -------- ;
. ,m m r .
n7tv
2a
2a
?a
2a
n m
(2 - 11)
+ l: )sin:( )sin:( )
r
a . ,
a_
(2.12)
x an() an()
2.1.4
Strain Energy o f the Plate in Bending

The strain energy in bending o f an elastic body is equal to 1/2 the product o f stresses and
corresponding strains, integrated over the volume. It is noted here that for thin plates, plate theory
assumes small contributions of the transverse normal and shear strains. sz. e ^ . and evz. Based on
this assumption, the formula for the strain energy of bending may be written as (Langhaar. 1962):
4 4 1
2
JJ
[ < ^ - 4 4 = - 2 ( .- , > 4 ^ 4
cx
cy'
ac~ cy~
cxcv
( f w CH'~
c :w .
ex' cy'
cxcy
For a polygonal plate with straight edges, the term (: ( ------ ) ')
mav be dropped
because it contributes nothing to the differential equation o f the plate (same reference), hence U|j
may be simplified to
Substituting Eq. (2.3) in Eq. (2.13). and integrating
r n
r 1
/*=-*
X ( ~ r + TT)
and introducing Eq. (2.6) into the above equation yields

1 ab
6
Pi
"
8 ) ^ 5
[ ( " * 2 ^ , ) -i- ( " ' ^ , ) ] 2
and substituting Eq. (2.8):
. ,,m x . . , ,ri7rn
2P z
D
sin ( - J s in 'C - ^ )
[ ( o ,) + (n;.4,)]J
x c , b
Finally, for a square plate, with the load applied at the center of the plate (i;=a/2=T|),
.
i p la ub =
^ , m x .
* , n x .
s m ( ) s in ( )
=:------------ r - T ^ -
I I
becomes
(2.14)
[( m *- /?')]
D x
It is also possible to derive the stram energy of the plate in bending (U 5 ) in terms o f the
bending stresses, as follows:
(J - L p . ( w\
b
m ax
where (w )max is maximum deflection.Introducing Eq. (2.10) into U^:
xu 'D
a
(for a = b. C= rj= and u=v)
where
28
. , ,m it . -
M ir
ir u .
* sin '()s in '( ) sin(-^) sm(-^)
X = y
2a;
2---------------------------
ts
2a
m/i((/7|- +-)]*
The bending stress. a x is (Eq. 2.12)
8 P ha-E
K x m
i r \ \ - \ r ) u 2D
where
( m2 + v n 2)
. -.m it. . -.n it.
Y = 5
5
. miru . .nitu.
xsm( )sm ()
2a
2a
solving for P:
Sha2E Y
Finally, substituting the above expression into U 5 yields:
= r ( [ , , ) J - | l - ^ W
s
Sh'E
^
(Y )-
The usefulness of Eq. (2.15) will become apparent when it is used to estimate the energy
absorbed by the plate as a function o f measured bending stresses (see Section 4.5.2).
2.2
Local Deformation Analysis

Impact can cause damage to ceramic plates in two ways: local damage at the point of
impact, and damage away from the point of contact due to cantilevered-tvpe loading. The local
damage can usually be identified as unpact damage because of some distinctive features such as
ring cracks around the point of contact. The damage by cantiievered-type loading may resemble a
29
typical bend overload, with a compressive lip on the exit end o f the fracture, a feature which may
not be easily identified as caused by impact without some supporting data (Richerson. 1992).
Local contact stresses which are caused by impact are essentially point contact stresses
that consist mainly o f compressive stresses present directly beneath the impactor. and tensile
stresses at the edge o f the contact area between impactor and target. For ceramics, if these tensile
stresses encounter a material flaw which is of critical size, a shallow crack follows the tensile
stress path around the circumference o f the contact zone. However, as the radius o f the impactor
decreases, the size o f the contact area decreases, and the possibility that a major defect is present
around the contact area diminishes. As the possibility of the presence o f major defects diminish
around the contact area, the mean strength o f the ceramic target increases, and higher loads are
required to create local damage. On the other hand, for thin ceramic structures, such as beams or
plates, because o f their relatively small bending stiffness (.D). bending stresses are more likely to
prevail over local stresses and failure will occur due to bending. It should be noted here that
although most o f the unpact energy absorbed by the structure is convened into bending stress
energy, contact stresses remain higher than the bending stress (Mencik. 1992).
Before examining the local stresses and the energy required to produce these
stresses in a flat target impacted by a spherical projectile, a review o f the Hertzian contact
equations is needed.
30
2.2.1
H ertzian Contact Lan> Equations

According toHertz law. the force P. pressedbetween the impactor anda target (figure 2.3)
is related to the distance of penetration a . between theimpactor and the targetby thefollowing
equation (Greszcuk. 1982):
P=ncx3/2
(2.16)
For a spherical projectile o f radius R. pressing against a flat target, n is defined as
" =
(217)
where.
1- K
1
t x
(2. 18)
k, =
1- K
7ZE2
v and E refer to Poisson's ratio and Young's modulus respectively. Subscripts 1 and 2 refer to
impactor and target, respectively.
The maximum deformation a ., is given by:
5v:
a, = ( - r ) ' 5
4 M/7
(2.19)
where v is the impact velocity, and M is defined in terms o f impactor and target masses m j and m2
respectively:
,V / = ---------- -
mx
/.
The impact force can thus be written as:
4M
31
Impactor. (Ei.v, mO
Target
Figure 2.3. H e rtzia n contact o f a spherical im p acto r on an elastic fla t targ et
32
The radius o f area o f contact a. between the spherical impactor and a flat surface is
a = [ ^ f ( k , + k . ) J t , r
(2.20)
The contact radius can also be written as
=W ' 5(7ir>'
4A fn
The maximum surface pressure q0, which occurs at the center o f the contact area, is obtained by
equating the sum o f the pressure over the contact area to the compressive force P.
For a
hemispherical pressure distribution. q0 is given by (Timoshenko. 1972).
or
3P
(2'21)
The pressure distribution q(x.y) over the circular area of contact is then
q{x,y) = qo{ \ - - ^
a'
a'
2.2.2
Local-Contact Stress Energy

The local-contact stress energy (Econt) can be estimated from
Substituting Eq. (2.16) into Econl
= J n a 3 '-da = ^ n a \ 1
o
33
and Eq. (2.19) yields:
^ ,, 5v
:;5 5/2
c ^ (( . , , ) )
5
4A /
or
**
2M
Finally, substituting Eqs. (2.16) and (2.19) into this last equation yields
,= 0 .3 3 ( ^ ) m
(2 .2 2 )
where
,
l- v ^
l-v ;
kE = - T + ^
/E E ,,
2.2.3
7&
(2.23)
z
Local-Contact Tensile Stress ( a ^

The maximum contact tensile stress, which occurs in the target at the edge o f the area of
contact is given by (Timoshenko. 1972)
1-7 v
<*c = (~ y ^ )< 7 o
(2-24)
Substituting Eqs. (2.20) and (2.21) into Eq. (2.24) and rearranging gives
cx, = 0.578( r - 2 . ) ( - _ - ) 3
J
krR\~
where kg is defined by Eq. (2.23).
(2.25)
2.3
Low-Velocity Impact Analysis of a Simply-Supported Plate
2.3.1
The Equation o f Motion

To develop the plate equation o f Motion, extend the P.D.E. o f static equilibrium for the
dl w
plate to include the inertia force, ph 7-. or
dt~
D V *\v = P(x, y , t ) ~ p h ^ a
(2.26)
where, P(x,y,t) is the forcing function due to impact, and ph is the mass density' per unit area. The
operator V 4* is defined as
d*
&
&
= -r + 2 --- ;----T + T
&
3c3 /4/
To solve for the free vibrations o f the plate set P(x,y,t)=0 and, assume a solution of the
form
w(x,v,t)=W (x.y) e1<at
For simply supported boundary conditions, the normal mode functions take the form
. .m m
K n = sn(
//.tv ,
)s n iH
b
Substituting the above two equations into Eq. (2.26), and solving for the ffequencv-equation.
//z4t t 4
UK
COmn
- p h = - = 0
b
D
m K~ n ~ x '
a'
b-
vields
- rm~
( 0 *m
nn ~
'T [C
//'
ID
-------------t ------------------I
1
V ph
(2.27)
35
2.3.2
D eflection
Analyzing the response of a plate to low-velocity, transverse impact w ill require solving
the equation o f motion o f the plate. One way o f solving the equation o f motion is to separate the
response into a function o f position W mn(x,v) and of time, T ^ f t ) , and then expand the solution,
w (x,y,t) in an infinite series o f the eigenfunctions such that (Havek. 1991)
where W mn(x,y) are the normal modes. For a simply supported plate, the normal modes take the
form
Wnnix,}) = sin(
mm
(2.28)
Proceeding, if we substitute w(x.y,t) into Eq. (2.26), we obtain
J V Jtr^fb xfy
O O
J b
= J J P {x,y,t)W n dxdy
O
where double dots denote differention with respect to time.

By observing the following orthogonality condition.
fo
m * p,n * q
m = p ji = q
the last equation becomes
tm
n - coTtn
i . Tmn = Fmintv ) /
fttn
(2.30)
36
where
PrnnW = ~ T ^ P (*.y.t)
dxdv
abph
For a plate at rest, and at equilibrium position, prior to impact.

w(x,y,0 ) = 0
^ < i,> > , 0 ) = 0
a
the solution to Eq. (2.30) is (Havek. 1991).
L ,( 0 =
f /^ ( r X s in ^ / - r))dr
(2.31)
For the same reasons, outlined in the derivation o f the static load case, the point-load forcing
function again is modeled as being uniformly distributed over a small area (u,v) (figure(2.4)),
hence. F ^ t ) becomes;
v-',
q*
. .
r ' F(t)
r*
Fnn{t) = J
.
*
f
v
. ,ni7Dc . .n m , ,
=sm (
)s ir i- )dxdy
uv Jflhab
_ , x
8a b F (t)
I
. .nt7rc .
. m m . . .n m .
F ) =
7 T t 7~ i : sin(----- " )sin (-------- )sin( )sin( - )
uvyjfhab (n mn)
a
a
2a
2b
Finally, by substituting Eqs.(2.28),
(2.32)
(2.31), and (2.32) into w(x,y,t), we arrive at the
following result (A .L. Dobyns andT.R. Porter. 1981).
\6
u>(x, y ,/) = ------- >
x'uvph
x
mnco_
mn
'
* . mxc.. ,n irn , .
> sin(
n=l
mm. .
nm ,
-)s in (----- )sin (--------)sin(------- )
2a
2b
s i n ( ^ ^ ) s i n ( ^ ) f ^ r X s in ty ^ C / - r )) d r
(2.33)
37
the striker is freely felling

impacting the plate
at a velocity v0
R=0.25 in
thickness^ h)= 0.142 in
length (a) =
The plate is simply supported on all edges
Figure 2.4. Description of the problem: central, low-velocity impact of a thin, simply
supported plate by a spherical striker of mass m and radius R
38
2.3.3
Calculating Dynamic Stress and Strain

Recalling the strain-deflection and stress-deflection relationships:
d 2w
Sx = ~z ~a?
-E z .S 2w
<yz = - r ( l i/ ) cc
d 2w
V' T T )
cy
and using Eq. (2.33), the above strain and stress relations become
16z _ _ m
. ,m n. . .urni. . mmi. . .nxv
ez = r l I ------- sin(------ -)s m ( )sin( - ) a n ( )
uvpha'
a
b
2a
2b
t
x s i n ( ^ ^ ) s i n ( ^ ) f F (r)(s in tu m (/ - r))dr
a
b o
16z E
T 7;
a* =
mx .
x 'u v p i(\ - V )
)+ K ) ) ----------- sin( 2 .)
mna>mn
. ,n x rj x . ,mmi . , nxv s . ,mmc. . .nxy.

x sm( ) a n ( ) sm( ) sin(-------) sm( )
b
2a
2b
x j F(r)(sintum(/ - v))dr
For a square plate. a=b. centrally impacted. c=q= . max. stresses and strains occur at
the outer thickness. z=h/2 at x=a/2. \-b /2 . The expresions o f max. strains and stresses for a
square contact area (u=v), then becomes
(s j*
= r >
u-pa- H
m
>
,=i
. , n x , . , nxu, . ,mmi ^
Sin ( )sin ( )s in (- )sin( )
2a
2a
J /r (r)(sin<yinii( / - r ) ) c / r
mn n
(2.34)
8E
^
(ox ) ^ = - t t t ; r : Z
a u p (l - v )
n=l
. Z/m x . z n n . .mmi . nmt

an ( - r - ) an ( F r ) an( F r - ) s in ( - )
2
2a
2a
(2.35)
X
+ m ^ J FCrXsincy^Cr - r )) d t
m n/'ii
mno)
mn
In order to evaluate the above expressions, one must know the force-time relations, F(t).
In many impact problems F(t) can be approximated fairly accurately by a half-sine curve
(Greszcuk. 1982). Our experimental records for this study justify' such an approximation.
Therefore, we may write F(t) in terms of the max. contact load. F0, (figure 2.5) as
F ( r ) = Fsin(
'2
where x.j >s
(2.34)
contact duration and H (t;-t) is the Heaviside step function. The integrals in Eqs.
and (2.35) become
J F(T)sin(comn(t - r) )dr = Faj sin( )sin(<y ,,(/- r)).H(tz - v)dv

o
l2
using the following identity;
sin[tymt - tymnr] = sin<ym,/ costu^/ir

-c o s ru ^ /s in ty ^ r
Hence
F0J sin( )sin(eomn(t - r )).H(tz - r)dr
lZ
/ZX
[^sin<ymn/ - comnt 2 sin( )]
= ?J z
= FaKmn(t)
, :
( 7t
- m
t <u
t< L
40
F(t)
Figure 2.5. A half-sine curve representation of the impact load F(t)
41
F inally substituting the above expression into Eqs. (2.34) and (2.35), results in
8 F
(* .)- =
u
__
p a
. , , m n . . ^mjc .
------- an-( )a n -( )
2
n< o m
. ,m nus . .n m.
x s tn (- ) a n ( ) 2a
2a
(2.36)
=- )
2
r r (" + w
(O m ax = ; r ; . ------------------------------ Sl ( ~ )
ap(l-v/)
2
t
. TlXTZll
.f'tTTti,
la
la
X a n - ( ) a n ( ) a n (
..
) ^
(/ = - )
(2.37)
2. J. / Estimating Dynamic Strain Energy o f the Plate in Bending

To derive a relationship which expresses the strain energy in bending as a function
o f maximum bending stress, we start with eq.(2.16) derived in Section 2.3.2 as follows
\6Fa ^
w ( x , y , t )
2,
.mrti. .
.w n r .
mm.
2 - sm ^------ - ) sm ( ) a n ( )
7f \
a
b
la
K 'u v p h ^
1
. ,n it v ^ .
m ix x , .
x ------------sin ( ) a n ( ---------) a n ( ^m n a )_
2b
a
b
. .
) K m ( t)
For a square plate centrally impacted(r = = >\w = v ), the maximum deflection becomes
, ,
(vv)
âx =
' 'm
16F A
Iw i
A . , ,m n , . , , n
. ,mmi
. nrcu
fln
/t ,
fit/lit
f t /IU .
2 - sm-( )sm -( )sin( - ) s i n ( - )
v
'
>. m / t
x - u - p h tZ
2a
2a
* * J -i)
m n c o mn
The maximum strain energy in bending E^ is
Eb =
Substitute (w )max into E^ to obtain
42
8F : ^ ^
v mn
. *,n jr
mmi
^ = - ^ t Z Z sin-( )sin -( )sin( )

2a
K - u 'f h ^ =l
2
2
(2.38)
l
. nrn
tz
* ----------sin().ATmn()
mna)__
2a
2
We may write Eq. (2.38) as
o rx
#
(2.39)
= - r f e
n'urph ^ Il 1n=I x -
where
. ,m n .
. ,mim. . n im .
)
X = sm'( )sm '( )sin(------ )sin(
Mn
2a
2a
mnco.
Eq. (2.37) derived in Section 2.3.3., which expresses the maximum bending stress (CTx)max> can be
written as:
OUI'
8 F
: r :r--r:Z
(q~x)^ =
a -w -p (l-v -) ^
mz + w
nT?
i JTlTt
'i ttlt
sm-( )sm-( )
2
. ,mmi. . ,/?7zw. ..
x ------------sin( ) sin( ).ATmn(-f-)

mnco __
2a
2a
2
Eq. (2.40) may be written as:
C
V ^ r / max
/t
V'
2 x 2 i 2 *
a u p(l- v ) ~
tT!
mn
(^z\
^m nV _ /
where
v
.
, mm\ ,n
Ym = sin ( )sin ( )sin( - )sm ( - )
2a
2a
tm- + w*(
mnco
Solving for
F =
K L ( azu2p ( l - v z) ) _____I
8
Substituting the above equation for F0 into Eq. (2.40). results in:
(2.40)
43
8 ^ : :
c if . /: . ( |) ) ;
Eq. (2.41) above expresses the maximum strain energy in bending absorbed by the pi.ite during
impact as a function o f maximum dynamic bending stress. This equation also can be used to study
the effects o f material properties such as fracture toughness. K IC, bending strength M O R. and
elastic modulus. E, on the energy absorbed by the plate.
2.4
Energy Absorbed by Specimen and Machine
2.4.1
Specimen
We may use the deflection equation o f the plate derived in Section 2.3.2 to
estimate the energy in bending, E5 , absorbed by the specimen at fracture as follows:
E ^ \ C S,P }
where Cs is the specimen's compliance and P f is the fracture load. For a square plate, centrally
impacted ( = r j - cj / >) the deflection equation of the plate [Eq. (2.33) of Section 2.3.4] then
becomes the maximum deflection. wm Hence
w ( a / 2 , a / 2 , t )
16F, 2 - ^
=
. , ,m 7ts . - , n x ^ . ,m m r .
s i n '(
) s m - ( ) s in ( ) s in (
2a
2a
------
mnoinn
where
r;[^sin<ym/ -c o mnt1sin( )]
K m n ( t)
= ------------- ;----;;--------- =------( * '
t<I.
44
The compliance may then be calculated from
or
_
16
-A -A
Z
K - u 'f h ~ ^
'
.
sin*(
, .n n . . mmi. . .nmi.
) a n - ( )sin( )a n ( )
2a
2a
(2-42)
mn( o
>
mn0)mn
hence
4
8P5
= -W -rZ
* w
. mm . .
. m m i. . ,n m i .
a n -( )a n * ( )a n ( - ) a n ( - )
2a
2a
(2.43)
-------* * . ( ' = ' / )
mrlCOmn
where tf is time to fracture.
Total energy absorbed bv the specimen Esd:
^sp = ^b + ^cont
where Econt is the energy of local contact stresses (Eq. (2.22). Section 2.2.2).
2.4.2
Impact Testing Machine

The force-time signal obtained form the instrumented-tup provides a record which
is a true indication o f the system's response (Specimen + machine). The force-time signal can be
analyzed to determine such system parameters as load. P. energy, AE0, and deflection, df. In order
to account for the difference between the measured energy (AE0). provided by the instrumented tup
and the energy absorbed by the specimen (ESp), the energy absorbed by the impact machine (Em)
must also be determined. The apparent energy (Ea) absorbed by the system is (Ireland. 1974)
E * = vo\ Pdt
(2 44)
45
where v0 and
are the impact velocity and contact duration respectively.
J pdt
is the area under the force-time curve. When Ea is corrected for the tup average velocity,
O
v , Ea (Eq. (2.44) becomes the true absorbed energy', AE0, or
t
A 0 = v j Pdt
(2.45)
where
v = ~ ( Vo + V f )
Dividing Eq. (2.44) by Eq. (2.45) gives

A . = . ( )
v.
To proceed, we first express v in terms of both the potential energy, E0, and the apparent absorbed
energy, Ea.
A 0 = jffK v , - v - )
where m is the mass o f the projectile, or
.
2AE
v- = v j -----------
(2.46)
Also.
r
E,o = ~ mvo
or
m=
IE
Substitute (2.47) into (2 46) results in:

AE
v ;.= v ; (l--^ )
(2.47)
46
hence, the expression for v becomes

v
AE 1
v = ^ - ( l + ( l - r - ) ' 2)
By substituting the expression for AE0 and rearranging, we obtain:
2v
i/
v.
squaring both sides and canceling terms
v_
4 ,O
Hence
4
(2'48)
so that (AE0) becomes:

A 0 = a( l - - ^ - )
4$.
(2.49)
Therefore, the energy absorbed by the machine, Em, can be calculated from (Wogulis, Whitney.
and Ireland. 1980)
. = jC P ;
(2.50)
where Cm is the compliance of the machine and is estimated from
Cm = Cs - Csp
^
~
v -l r ^
C
m=
p - - C sp
(2-51>
rf
tf and P f are time to fracture and fracture load, respectively. C-sp is the specimen compliance, and
is estimated from Eq. (2.42).
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
47
Chapter 3
Experimental Procedures
3.1 Material Processing
This section details procedures and techniques for fabricating silicon carbide whisker
(SiCw)-Alumina Matrix (A120 3) ceramic composites. The fabrication o f SiCw/Al20 3 ceramic
composites is the first step in studying the dynamic behavior o f these composites under lowvelocity impact loading.
Sample SiCw/Al20 3 ceramic composites to be tested in this study were manufactured using
tape casting, and powder cast and hot pressing fabrication techniques. One o f the main tasks o f
this study is to determine a sound processing technique to produce SiCVALCh ceramic
composites. This task is important for several reasons. First, ceramic composite processing is
highly complex and specific techniques are required for specific applications. Second, the material
properties of ceramic composites are highly dependent on the techniques used to manufacture
them. Third, processing techniques can affect packing. Packing is the rearrangement o f
constituents in a composite to minimize free spaces. Tape casting and hot pressing techniques give
the best packing. In addition, hot pressing techniques have created SiCw/Al203 composites with a
density of 99.5% of the theoretical density (Kragness. Amateau. and Messing, 1991). The same
study reported that hot pressing techniques produce anisotropy (whisker alignment in one
direction) in the microstructure o f the composite, a property often sought by materials designers.
Microstructural analyses indicated that preferentially oriented whiskers, with the long axis
perpendicular to the direction o f hot pressing, resulted in higher green densities, whereas randomly
packed whiskers resulted in lower densities (Belitskus. 1993).
48
3.1.1 M aterial Selection and Specification

The following materials were used to produce SiCv/AIiC^ ceramic composites:
1.
SiC Whisker: Beta phase (cubic) with average diameters o f 0.3-1.0 micrometer (pm) and an
aspect ratio o f 60, produced by the American Matrix Corporation (A M ), and ACM C.
2.
Alumina Powder
(A I2 O 3 ):
High purity 99.95% alumina. 0.05% MgO, grain average size of
0.5.pm, and average surface area o f 6.3 m:/g, produced by Reynolds RC-HP-DBM .
3.
W G -300 SiCw/AUOa powder: 33% vol. SiC (ACM C Whiskers), 67% vol. A I2O 3 (Reynolds
matrix), produced by Greenleaf Corp.
4.
Binder: Commercial binder, B-73305, produced by Metorganic Sciences Incorporated (M SI).
5.
Solvent: Toluene, produced by (M SI).
3.1.2 Tape-Cast A l2Oj/SiCw Composites

This section describes in detail the steps of the process (tape casting and hot pressing) to
produce SiCw/ATCh ceramic composites.
A. Material Mixing
1.
Select the quantities for constituent materials. M ix alumina powder with 0% silicon
carbide whisker volume fraction.
2.
Add the 5200 MLC binder, plasticizer, and TCE in appropriate proportions to control the
intended volume fraction o f both the SiC whisker and the AI2O 3 powder in the final
composite. Table 3.1 lists the proportions of each constituent in each composite mixture.
B. Ball Milling
1.
Ball mill the mixture at 1 revolution/sec for 24 hours. Ball milling is performed in 1 liter
Nalgene bottles which contain high purity media.
2.
Remove the milling bottle form the ball mill 15 minutes prior to casting to allow trapped
air to escape.
C. Tape Casting
1.
Cast the slum (mixture) into 3 inch wide tapes on a TA M model 104 continuous tape
caster (see figure 3.1). A doctor blade of 0.3 mm height at a speed o f 5 m/min is used to
cast the tapes.
2.
Use nitrogen gas to pump the slurry from the milling bottleintothe milling head. Notice
that a moving carrier film moves the slurry from thecasting head under the doctor blade.
The solvents in the carrier film and tape are evaporated in a drying chamber, and the tape
is carried away safely, leaving a dry tape.
3.
Wind the dry tape into a spool and remove.

Table 3.1 Constituent Proportions of AI203/SiCw Ceramic Composites
SiCw Volume %
Alumina |
SiCw
Binder
Solvent
weight % of constituents
0
56.4
34.0
9.6
52.8
2.3
33.5
11.4
10
50.1
4.5
33.5
11.9
20
43.6
8.5
33.0
14.6
30
35.2
12
33.3
19.5
D. Punching and Laminating

1. Punch the tapes into squares using a film cutter and stack themin a laminating die in such
a way as to form a cross-plv, multilayer laminate (figure 3.2).
2. Press the stacking block at a temperature o f 140F and a pressure o f 2000 psi for 30
minutes.
3. Remove the stacked block from the die and allow to cool.
RESERVOIR
BOX
V E N T IL A T IO N
C A R R IE R F IL M
SPO O L
P U M P IN G O F
S LU R R Y
W IN D U P SPOOL
D R Y IN G C H A M B E R
N IT R O G E N GAS
C A S T IN G C H A M B E R
S LU R R Y M IX T U R E
C A R R IE R F IL M
RESER VO IR BOX
(D E T A IL E D )
D O C T O R B LA D E
C E R A M IC T A P E C A ST
Figure 3.1. A schematic view of the tape-casting process
51
STACKING SEQUENCE
[0 /9 0 ls
0-P LY
NUMBER OF PLIES (N1
9 0 -PLY
67 (THIN LAMINATES)
85 (THICK LAMINATES)
N =
(FINAL)
(50)r(ply)
General N otes
1.
Average Dry Ply Thickness:
.005 inch
2.
Casting Direction (0-plies):
X-Direction
3.
Hot-pressing Direction:
Z-Direction
Figure 3.2. Punching and laminating. Note that the laminate is formed by
stacking piles that exhibit certain whisker alignments in the X-Y plane.
E. Binder Burnout
Place the stacked laminated (block) into a heating furnace and heat slowly and uniformly to
450C in order to prevent delamination o f the stack and eliminate bursts o f gas which may
fracture the sample. A typical binder bumout cycle is shown in figure 3.3.
F. Hot Pressing
Hot pressing is a consolidation process in which stacked blocks are pressed at high pressure
and temperature. This process increases the density of the composite and increases the whisker
aspect ratio. The hot press apparatus consists of a graphite resistance furnace and a two stage
vacuum system and controller (figure 3.4).
1.
Place the stacked samples into a 0.13 mm thick graphite foil envelope to prevent them
from fusing to the die during the process.
2.
Place the enveloped samples and split die into the master die inside the furnace. The split
die is used to prevent cracking in the die at the comers o f the sample. Note that this setup
allows hot pressing of two stacked samples at the same time.
3.
Heat the stacked sample uniformly from room temperature at a rate o f 10C/min and a
pressure of 31 MPa until the specimen's temperature reaches 1400C.
4.
Apply the pressing load slowly from the time the temperature reaches 1400C until it
reaches the maximum hold temperature. Maximum hold temperature is a function o f the
whisker volume fraction. Maximum hold temperatures o f 1500C. 1600C. 1700C.
1775C. and 1800C were used for 0%. 3%. 10%. 20%. and 30% whisker volume
fractions, respectively.
5.
Hold the load at the maximum hold temperature. This was done for 1 hour for samples
with 0 %. 5%. 10%. and 2 0 % whisker fractions, and for 25 minutes for samples with
whisker fractions greater than 20 %.
6.
Cool the specimen to 1000C at a rate o f 20C/min while removing the load in a smooth
ramp. Hot pressing time is monitored through ramp displacement using dial gauges
mounted on the hot press outside the vacuum chamber.
53
TEMPERATURE
(C*)
450
HOLD TEMPERATURE
270
160
TIME (hr)
Figure 3.3. Binder burnout cycle for 30% Vol. SiCw/AI20 3 composite
54
PLUNGER
SPLIT DIE
MASTER DIE
H EA TIN G ELEMENT
S P E C IM E N S
Figure 3.4. A schematic view of the hot press apparatus
55
7.
Allow the furnace to cool to a temperature below 200C. and remove the SiCw/AkOj
ceramic specimens. A typical hot pressing cycle is shown in figure 3.5.
8.
Repeat the entire procedure for the 5%. 10%. 20%. and 30% silicon carbide whisker
volume fractions to produce different SiCVAhCh ceramic composites.
3.1.3 WG-300 S iC J A h O j Composites

Because o f a shortage o f SiC whiskers which occurred after the first set o f tape-cast
SiCw/AljCh composites were produced, the Greenleaf SiC whisker reinforced A I1O 3 matrix
ceramic powder (trade name W G-300) was selected to produce more SiCVAkO j composites for
impact testing.
Appropriate quantities o f the dry pow der mixture w-ere weighed (37 and 45 g for thin and
thick laminates, respectively), and loaded directly into the hot press die. Graphite foil separated the
bottom and top o f the powder stack from the die. preventing the powder material from sticking to
the die curing the hot-pressing cycle. The mixture was then hot pressed using the hot-pressing cycle
shown in figure 3 .5.
3.2 Specimen Preparation

The following paragraphs describe the preparation o f SiCVATC^ composite specimens
for mechanical property and low-velocity impact testing. Before preparation procedures, the hot
pressed SiCw/AhCh ceramic laminates measured 2.0 x 2.0 x 0.210 in. and 2.0 x 2.0 x 0.176 in., for
the property's and impact specimens respectively (figure 3.6).
The graphite foil layer which adhered to the surfaces o f the laminates during hot pressing,
was removed using a diamond surface grinder wheel with a grit of 400. The final dimensions o f the
laminates after grinding are shown in figure 3.6.
56
TEMPERATURE CURVE: UPPER

PRESSURE CURVE: LOWER
TEMPERATURE
(C'J
1800
1400
(HOLD TEMP.)
COOLING
RATE = 20
C/MIN
HEATING RATE
= 10* C/MIN
PRESSURE
4500
PSI
1000
TIME (MIN)
Figure 3.5. Hot pressing cycle for a 30% vol. SiCw/AI20 3 composite
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
57
1 .8 0 '
2 . 00' *
.1760*
n e
. 1460' - .MOO'
[FINAL THICKNESS]
NOTE:
2. 00'
INITIAL DIMENSION:
2 .0 ' x 2 .0 ' x .176'
(surface grinder; diamond wheel with a grit
FINAL DIMENSION:
0f 400 )
1 .8 0 ' x 1.80* x .142'
IMPACT SPECIMEN
.1900' - .1850"
(FINAL THICKNESS]
1.80
2.00
NOTE:
INITIAL DIMENSION:
FINAL DIMENSION:
1.80" X 1 .8 0 ' X .185"
PROPERTY'S SPECIMEN
Figure 3.6. Specimen preparation for impact and propertys specimens,

respectively
58
Next, all laminates were polished with 45, 30. 15, 9, 6 , 3 and 1 pm Diamet diamond
airsprays and a synthetic silk polishing cloth, using a Planpol automatic polisher. The polishing to
produce mirror image laminates insured parallel surfaces o f the test specimens, easy detection of
surface cracks during microstructure examinations, and enhanced the uniformity o f surface flaw
distribution while polishing away any grinding-induced shallow cracks. Note that for laminates
which were to be used for mechanical property measurements, only the side which later became the
flexure side o f test bars was polished. Finally, these property laminates were cut into bars (0.185 x
0.250 x 1.80 in.) in a direction parallel to the grinding direction, and all edges and comers were
chamfered to about 0.005 in., using diamond cutting wheels.
3.3 Materials Characterization

The whisker reinforced ceramic composites contain several microstructural phases,
including the reinforcement whisker, the matrix grain, and the pores. It is important to identify and
examine these phases in order to assess their role in determining the composite material mechanical
properties and impact strength. The main features of the material composite microstructure include
size, shape, and distribution o f pores (pore volume fraction is directly related to density); the size
and shape o f the matrix grain; and the size, shape, orientation, and distribution o f whiskers. The
present section explains the methods o f measuring and examining the material density and
microstructure of the ATCh/SiCw ceramic composites produced for this study.
3.3.1 Density
Sample density was measured for all AFO 3/SiCwcomposite laminates produced for
mechanical property and impact testing, using the Archimedes principle. The composite laminate
was first weighed dry in air (W c), then weighed again w'hile suspended from a string and
59
completely immersed in distilled water (W ). The measured bulk density, pc, o f the composite was
then calculated according to the following relation:
0.9980;
pc ~ We + Wt - W
where W , is the dry weight o f the string portion which was submerged in water.
3.3.2 Microstructure
For microstructural examination o f various A120 3/SiCwcomposite surfaces, several non
destructive test methods were employed. Such microstructural characteristics as average size and
shape o f the alumina (A120 3) matrix grain; the average diameter o f the silicon carbide whisker; and
the size, shape, and distribution o f pores were examined using the scanning electron microscope
(SEM ). The test specimen, with a surface fractured by tests such as bending strength or impact,
was mounted on holders, coated with evaporated gold, then loaded in the SEM. The main
microstructural characteristics mentioned above were observed and photographed. Other
microstructural features such as whisker length, distribution, and orientation were observed using
reflected light optical microscopy and the scanning acoustic microscope (SAM ). For SAM
measurements, the polished laminate ( I pm) was mounted on a flat platform, then a few drops of
distilled water coupler were placed on the small test area o f the laminate surface. The test area was
scanned by a high frequency (800 M Hz) focused SAM transducer, and several subsurface images
(approximately 10 pm deep) at various magnifications were generated and photographed.
60
3.4 Mechanical Property Characterization

3.4.1 Elastic Modulus
Elastic moduli for ALCVSiCw ceramic composites were measured using two test methods:
the A STM standard resonance test method (figure 3.7), where measurements were made on
rectangular bars cut from property 's laminates with their longitudinal axes perpendicular to the hot
pressing direction: and the ultrasonic immersion test method, where measurements were made on
impact tested square laminates using a 15 M H z ultrasonic beam (See Chapter 4). This section
describes the test setup and procedure o f the first method. Test results of the second method were
provided by the PSU Ultrasonic Test Laboratory for comparison purposes.
A schematic view o f the resonance frequency test apparatus is shown in figure 3.7. In this
test, a wide frequency sine wave (up to 25,000 HZ) excites vibrations at one end o f the bar, and the
vibration spectrum is measured at the other end of the bar. Resonance peaks are identified by a
Fast Fourier Transformation (FFT) operation o f the material vibration spectrum. In the present
tests, each composite specimen was placed on support wires such that the support wires were
directly under the modes of vibration (0.226 L from each end). The excitation and pickup
transducers were placed so that they were lightly touching the sample ends. At the end o f each test,
the resonance frequency of each sample was collected and provided by a computerized system
which operates with the above testing apparatus (Ceramic Resonance Frequency Test Lab, PSU),
and the fundamental resonant frequency o f the bar in flexure (ff) was determined. Elastic modulus
values (E) were then calculated according to the following equation (ASTM C747-74):
E= 0.9465 (m fV b) (L 7tJ) T,
where m. b. L. t, and Ti are as defined in Chapter 4.
61
W ire Supports
Excitation Transducer
Pickup Transducer
H .226L
Specimen
Pream plifier
FFT Analyzer/Data
Processor
A m p lifie r
Figure 3.7. Resonance frequency apparatus
62
3.4.2 Bending Strength

This section covers the determination o f bending strength o f ALOj/SiCw composites
produced in this study, according to the ASTM C 1161-90 standard flexural strength test method.
Rectangular composite samples o f 0.185 x 0.250 in. cross-section and 1.80 in. span were placed
inside a four-point support fixture, such that polished surfaces (lp m finish) o f the inner span were
loaded in tension. The load was applied at the cross-head speed o f 0.0078 in/min until the sample
fractured, using an Instron testing machine. Inspection o f fractured pieces recovered after each test
revealed that fractures occurred somewhere within the inner span o f tested samples. The fracture
load (P) for each test was recorded, and the bending strength o f the composite (a b) was calculated
according to:
Ob = 3Pa/bh2
where a is the distance between the inner and outer supports, and h and b are the thickness
and width o f the specimen, respectively (figure 3.8).
3.4.3 Fracture Toughness

Fracture toughness values (K|C) for the ALCL/SiCw ceramic composites were measured in
the present study using the modified indentation toughness technique developed by Cook and Lawn
(1983). Three indentations of proper size were introduced and aligned 4 mm apart on the tensile
(polished) surfaces of the inner span of four-point bend rectangular specimens (o f similar
dimensions as those used for bending strength tests), using Vickers diamond indentors at the
indentation loads o f 7 and 5 kg for the tape-cast and WG-300 specimens, respectively. The
specimens w ere indented such that the crack arms emanating from the indentation comers were
perpendicular and parallel to the specimen length (figure 3.8). Indented specimens were placed
63
P/2
P/2
a)
NOTE:
L= 1.761 in
c=0.802 in
a=0.480 in
h=0.185 in
b=0.250 in
r
P/2
P/2
b)
M ~+
Figure 3.8. Four-point configuration for bending strength and fracture

toughness tests (a), and Vickers indentations (b)
64
inside a four-point fixture, as described in Section 3.4.2. W ith the three indentations positioned on
the middle o f the tensile surface of the inner span, the load was applied under the same test
conditions as those used for bending strength measurement (see Section 3.4.2), until the sample
fractured. Surface inspections under an optical microscope confirmed that fractures initiated from
one o f the three indentations. The crack lengths emanating from the two remaining indentations,
perpendicular to the tensile direction, were then measured and averaged to give the critical crack
length ( c j.
Based on the above experimental results, the fracture toughness (KiC) was calculated using
a relationship between the maximum stress at failure (am) and critical crack length (Cm), and these
fracture toughness values were compared to values calculated from a relationship between a mand
the indentation load (F) (see experimental results, Chapter 4, for a description of these
relationships).
3.5 Static and Low-Velocity Impact Testing of AI20 3/SiCw Ceramic Plates
In the previous sections experimental procedures were outlined that dealt with fabrication.
preparation, material and mechanical properties characterizations, and microstructural
characteristics of A l:0 3/SiC specimens. In the following sections, static and low-velocitv impact
testing o f these materials are outlined. The support fixture used to hold square plates o f these
materials and the geometry of the indentor used to press these squares are both described in section
3.5.1. Following this description, the test apparatus needed for low-velocity impact testing o f these
materials is presented. The last section (3.5.3) outlines procedures followed in this study to test
A l;0 3/SiCw ceramic specimens under both static and low-velocity impact loading.
R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
65
3.5.1 The Support System

Figure 3.9 shows a schematic view o f the support fixture assembly, which was designed
and constructed specifically for this study to hold and test AljOj/SiCw ceramic plates. This support
assembly was used for both static and impact experiments. Figure 3.9(a) also shows a cylindrical
indentor (tup) with a 0.5 in. diameter spherical head, which is a standard Dynatup drop tower
insert machined from D2 tool steel and hardened to Rockwell C o f 58-60.
The square fixture, which is screwed to a steel base plate, consists o f four L-shaped flat
supports machined from stainless steel and assembled tohold the ceramic plate. The steel base
plate has two grooved adjustment slots which assist in centering the support fixture, and four 1/2
inch holes drilled and positioned such that the plate support assembly can be mounted and fastened
into the Dynatup impact machine. Finally, the base plate has a 1 3/8 inch diameter hole drilled in
its center to protect the testing machine from any broken pieces o f sample during testing.
3.5.2 Description o f the Impact Test Apparatus

Figure 3.10 shows a schematic view of the impact test apparatus used for this study. The
following is a list o f equipment combined to create this apparatus:
Instrumented Dynatup drop tower impact machine model 8350 complete with Dynatup GRC7300-1 impact test data system
Dynatup instrumented tup
velocity detector block and a flag
CEA-06-125W T-120. 2-element 90'Tee' (2.09 nom. gage factor [G F]) stacked rosette strain
gages. Micro-measurements Division Group
two P-3500 bridge amplifiers. Instruments Division. Measurements Group
Tektronix 2211 digital storage oscilloscope
66
0. 0 3 8 6 2.0000
0.2500
a)
A
NO TET""^
0.5000
3 / 4 - 1 0
THREAD
SQUARE, L-SHAPED
FLAT SUPPORT
1 3 / 8 DIA. HOLE
ADJUSTMENT
SLOTS
1/ 8
BASE PLATE
6 3 /8
5 7 /8
tt
Figure 3.9. The support system for static loading and low-velocity impact
testing of AI20 3/SiCw ceramic plates: (a) hardened steel indentor; and
(b)specimen support fixture
67
'D yn atu p D rop T o w e r
&
Release
Crosshead Side Plates
FLAG
o
V
Computerized
Data
Acquisition
Svstem
1strumen ted Tup

/elocitv Detector Bloc
BP Plotter
T rig g e r
Source
Storage
O S C ILL O S C O P E
Specimen Support Fixture
Strain
gage wire
P-3500
Figure 3.10. The impact test apparatus
P-3500
customized velocity detector splitter
specimen support fixture assembly
1.80 x 1.80 x 0.142 steel plate
Tektronix Oscilloscope camera system
HP 7470A graphics plotter

The Dynatup Model 8250 drop tower impact machine, with its complete GRG 730-1
computerized data system, provided the means o f testing and obtaining impact data for the
materials tested in this study. The machine's pneumatic assist has two possible modes o f operation:
gravity driven, which can provide impact velocities from 2 to 12 ft/sec.; or pneumatically assisted,
with a range o f impact velocities from 12 to 44 ft/sec. For this study, the impact velocity required
to break the ATOj/SiCw composite was well within the range of impact velocities provided by the
gravity driven mode and. therefore, the pneumatically assisted mode option was not used. In the
gravity mode, the energy available at a particular drop height can be altered by changing the mass
of the falling weight or by selecting a new drop height. The crosshead weight can be set up for
weights from 5.5 lb. to 100 lb. by selecting from several sets o f interchangeable crosshead side
plates. The impact data, which is acquired by the machine's computerized data system, is collected
by both the instrumented tup and velocity detector. The data systems then analyze, manipulate, and
display this data in the form of force, energy, deflection, and time.
The CEA-06-125 W T series strain gage is a self-temperature compensated, general

purpose, two-element stacked gage with exposed solder tabs. This gage was cemented to the center
o f the tensile surface o f the ceramic specimen to measure directly transient strain signals coming
from the strained specimen during impact, in the 0 and 90 directions o f the plate. The P-3500
strain gage bridge (band width of DC to 4000 H Z), which amplifies the strain signal, is equipped
69
with an analog output to allow monitoring o f the signal waveform using an oscilloscope or
recorder. The 2 2 11 series Tektronix oscilloscope, with its memory capability, can capture transient
signals o f bandwidth o f DC -to-l M Hz. This oscilloscope is equipped with dual vertical input
channels, a CRT readout and cursor measurement display, and reference memory where stored
reference waveforms can be recalled for analysis or comparison with a newly acquired waveform.
For all transient tests, a method o f triggering the oscilloscope's time base sweep is vital the
moment before the event occurs. In most triggered oscilloscopes, a trigger source switch is
provided for this purpose. The switch has two positions: IN T for internal triggering and E X T for
external triggering. When IN T is selected, part o f the transient pulse signal coming through the
vertical amplifier of the oscilloscope (initial portion) is used to trigger and initiate the horizontal
time base sweep. In this case, the settings o f the vertical amplifier (amplitude/Div.) and the AC/DC
coupling affect the internal triggering, and any variation in specimen size or hammer velocity
affects the strain signal (Ireland. 1974). External triggering, on the other hand, is independent of
vertical controls (amplitude settings and input coupling) and the input signal itself.
Thus, we designed an external triggering method for the present tests: a circuit diagram for
this method is shown in figure 3.11. This figure may be explained as follows: the flag, which is
mounted on the crosshead, passes through the center o f the velocity detector (which uses a
photodetector), momentarily breaking an infrared beam just before the tup contacts the specimen
(the length o f time the beam is interrupted is translated into velocity by the computer), generating a
signal. This signal, which is generated by the velocity detector to measure impact velocity and
trigger data acquisition, is split into two signals. One split signal is transmitted to initiate and
70
Storage Oscilloscope
C H .1 &
C H .2
9 -p in m ale
Data Acquisition Computer
9-pin, Female Velocity

Detector
Splitter
'-p in fe m ale
Velocity Detector
Block
FLAG
Figure 3.11. The triggering mechanism using a velocity detector splitter
71
trigger the time sweep o f the oscilloscope. At the same time, the other split signal is transmitted to
trigger the load cell data acquisition system.
Finally, due to the brittle nature of ceramic materials and the complex process to fabricate
them, it was important not to expend too many valuable specimens trying to determine proper
equipment settings and adjusting the system's triggering. Therefore, a square stainless steel plate,
with identical dimensions as the ceramic plate listed above, was fabricated to serve as a mock-up
for impact testing trial runs.
3.5.3 Testing Procedures

3.5.3.1 Static Testing of Al2Oj/SiCw Plates
This section details the preparation and testing o f AliCVSiCw ceramic composites under
statically applied loads. Six Al20 3/SiCwsquare plates measuring 1.80 x 1.80 x 0.142 in. were
tested. Five o f the six specimens selected were WG-300 samples and the sixth was a 10%SiCw
tape-cast. Two-element. 90Tee' stacked strain gages were installed at the center o f the
prospective tensile surface of four of the five WG-300 and the 10% tape-cast specimens. The
remaining W G-300 sample was tested without strain gages. The strain gages were bonded to the
specimens using M-bond 200 adhesive, with the gages' axes aligned with the plates' principle axes
(1 and 2). Each sample was then placed inside the support fixture (figure 3.9), and the whole
support assembly was mounted on a flat platform attached to the frame o f an Instron testing
machine. A hardened steel indentor. similar to the one shown in figure 3.10, was rigidly screwed to
a cylindrical jig (adapter). The indentor-jig assembly was then attached to the Instron machine. The
support fixture holding the specimen was positioned such that the nose o f the indentor was
vertically above the center of the compression side of the test specimen. The lead wires o f the strain
gages were connected to the binding posts of the Instron's strain conditioner, with the 1/4-bridge
72
configuration selected. The load was then applied at a crosshead speed o f .0078 in./min. until
fracture occurred. Five load vs. strain and one load vs. deflection records were obtained for these
specimens by the testing machine data acquisition system. After each test, the fracture sample was
removed and saved for further analysis.
3.S.3.2 Low-Velocity Impact Testing of AkCVSiCw Plates

The following testing procedure was completed for each new type test performed. For a
detailed description of the operating procedure for the Dynatup Impact Machine, refer to the
Dynatup Drop Tower Instruction Manual. Note that before any o f these specimens were tested
under impact, the CEA-06-125 W T-120, two-element 90o,Tee' stacked strain gages were installed
on all prospective A l:0 3 /SiCwceramic test samples, and the stainless steel plates were installed on
their prospective tensile surfaces, as was described for the static test samples (section 3.5.3.1).
A. Setting Up the Dynatup Drop Tower Impact Machine

1. Place the steel plate inside the support fixture shown in figure 3.9. Slide the fixture onto
the test machine base plate support assembly inside the Dynatup machine cage, and tighten
the attachment bolts securely.
2. Attach the spherical tup insert to the instrumented tup and tighten the insert securely.
Screw the tup assembly to the crosshead, and connect the tup cable to the data acquisition
system.
3. Select the appropriate combination o f weighted crosshead side plates, and attach them to
the crosshead. For this study, we initially chose a weight combination of 5.5 lb.
(minimum).
4. With the machine's power on. select the gravity mode and lower the crosshead slowly until
the tup insert contacts the steel test specimen. Adjust the shock absorber heights, so that
the crosshead doesn't contact the shocks.
5.
Set the velocity detector block to the proper position by lowering the crosshead until the
tup insert rests on the specimen and sliding the detector up or down until the edge of the
flag is approximately 1/4 in. below the center of the velocity detector block (figure 3.12).
B. Strain-Gage Instrumentation
1.
Attach the strain gages lead wires to the P-3500 bridge amplifier binding posts, selecting
the 1/4-bridge configuration. Press the GAGE FACTOR buttons and set gage factor
values of 2.09.
2.
Balance and calibrate the amplifier. The amplifier was balanced when a reading of
500 pa x
3.
20
;-------- 0.005% was displaved while pressing the CAL button.

GFSetting
Attach the two P-3500 analog output posts to the oscilloscope two vertical channel inputs
using BNC connectors, and connect the external trigger source (velocity detector splitter
output) to the E X T /10 post o f the oscilloscope.
C. Trial Runs
1.
Turn on the oscilloscope power. Set the trigger input control at an appropriate level (close
to the middle). Select the single sweep store (SGL SWP STORE) mode. Press the RESET
button to prepare the storage acquisition system to accept a trigger event. The T R IG D,
READY indicator light comes on. Set the coupling switch to DC (DC to full bandwidth).
2.
Select the proper vertical channels deflection (volts/div.), and the horizontal sweep rate
(sec/div.) factors. 20 mv/div. and 2 ms/div. for both channels were the settings used
throughout the present tests.
3.
Turn the Dynatup data acquisition system on. Raise the crosshead to a certain height and
hold at this height. Make sure the TR IG D/Ready indicator light is on. Release the
crosshead and allow' it to fall freely and strike the steel test specimen once. Notice that the
oscilloscope's TRIG'D/Ready indicator light turns o ff as the flag passes through the
velocity detector block, sending a triggering signal that starts a single sweep. Notice also
that two stored waveforms o f the strained element are displayed on the screen o f the
oscilloscope. These waveforms represent the strain-time histories in two principle
directions (1 and 2 ) o f the plate.
Figure 3.12. Photographs showing view of (a) overall impact test site and
equipment; and (b) impact specimen held inside the support fixture during
an impact test
4.
Repeat step 3 a few times until reproducible results are obtained with the data acquisition
system o f the Dynatup machine set up to record and display the impact event (load and
energy' time histories), figure 3.13 shows typical load/energy-time and strain-time histories
for the steel plate impacted at a velocity o f 3.10 ft/sec..
D. Determining Average Impact Energy to Break AI20 3 /SiCw Specimens

1.
Replace the steel test specimen with an A I2O 3/SiCwtest sample (W G-300 specimen) and
impact test it, following the same procedure oudined above. First the crosshead weight is
released (total weight o f 7.097 lb.) from a height o f 2.75 in. This sample shattered into
pieces, and no record o f the impact event was obtained.
2.
Alter the energy available. Second, the mass o f the falling weight is changed by removing
the crosshead side plates from the crosshead, so that the new weight o f the falling mass
was 4.289 lb. (weight o f upper and lower crossheads plus the weight o f the tup assembly).
Then, a new W G-300 test sample was tested, releasing the crosshead from a height o f 1.05
in. (minimum allowed by machine). This sample also broke and shattered into pieces, but
with less intensity than the previous sample.
3.
Further reduce the energy available. Third, the tup assembly was replaced with another tup
assembly with a lighter tup holder, decreasing the weight of the falling crosshead to 2.86
lb. When a third specimen was tested using this new weight configuration from a drop
height of 1.25 in.. the specimen fractured, but the fracture this time was much less intense,
with no shattering of specimen pieces. Finally, a fourth specimen was tested from a height
o f 1.125 in. and the specimen didnt fracture. Thus, the average energy required to break
the weakest AÔj/SiCw ceramic specimens is somewhat greater than this value (0.30 ftlb ), and all subsequent incremental impact tests (see next step) were performed using an
initial drop height around 1.125 in.
E. Incremental Impact Testing

Once the average energy required to break the ceramic samples was determined, the
incremental impact test method provided a fairly accurate method for measuring the
approximate impact stress reached and energy absorbed by the ceramic specimen, in addition
to obtaining dynamic stress/strain curves for each ceramic composite.
76
STEEL-:
MAR 10) 1995
6 : 7 :1 9
oa
Ov
a)
o
175
M .5
Tap*ratur* Slop*
5
lb /In
Specinen Id.
'3.00
V elocity
ft/a * c
370
Load
Tin*
Znercy
ft-ib
lb
u k
D eflect
inch
000
Inpact:
lUxisun .cac.
Zneray A fter nax Loaa::

Total Energy:
ir\
b)
11
i
- a*-
I
i m
i r
?0rr V
"
'
"t*. f
Figure 3.13. Typical dynatup load/energy vs. time (a); and oscilloscope
strain vs. time (b) records for the stainless steel plate impacted at a
velocity of 3.10 ft./sec.
Reproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
77
1.
Strike each ceramic plate with incrementally increasing drop heights until fracture occurs.
The initial drop height was approximately 1.125 in. which was increased in increments o f
1/8 to 3/16 in.
2.
After each test, read the maximum amplitudes o f the displayed strain signals from the
screen o f the oscilloscope, using the cursor and CRT readout. We photographed selected
examples o f stored waveforms, in addition to the printed plots. Some o f these example
waveforms are presented in Chapter 4.
78
Chapter 4
Results and Discussions

4.1 Materials Characterization
Two sets o f A1203/SiCw materials were processed differently and used for this study:
tape-cast A1203/SiCw composites, and W G-300 A M V S iC w composites. As mentioned in the
previous chapter (Experimental Procedures), the tape-casting/hot pressing processing technique
was initially chosen to produce most o f the ATCVSiCw samples needed for this study because of
its excellent control of thickness, whisker fraction, and whisker distribution, and the near
theoretical bulk density of its products. However, after the first set o f ATOM'SiCw samples were
produced, the shortage o f SiCw whiskers from ACM C and American M atrix Corps forced us to
use the only commercially available SiCw reinforced ATO 3 ceramic powder, known as the
Greenleaf W G-300 (33% SiCw). This WG-300 (trade name) A TfV S iC w ceramic powder was
directly loaded into the hot-press die and hot pressed. (See Chapter 3 for a detailed outline of both
processing procedures.)
4.1.1 Density Results

The bulk densities of all samples produced for this study were determined using
Archimede s principle. Density measurements were performed on square composite plates after
their surfaces were ground and machined to their final dimensions for the unpact specimens, or to
their final thickness for the property's specimens.
Tables 4.1 and 4.2 list the density results (pc) and their percentage theoretical values
(% TD ), for the tape-cast and W G-300 ceramic composites, respectively. In addition, table 4.1
includes the hot-pressing conditions for the tape-cast specimens, namely the maximum hold
temperature (T h) and hold time (th) at maximum hold temperature. The hot-press cycle used for the
30% SiCw tape-cast specimens was used also for all WG-300 specimens. Note that table 4.1 lists
two SiCw whisker types: the American Matrix Corp. whiskers (A M ), and the ACM C whiskers.
The use o f the ACMC whiskers to make the 30% and the two 10% SiCw tape-cast composites was
necessary because of the shortage o f A M whiskers.
Table 4.1 Density Results for the Tape-Cast A1203/SiCw Ceramic Composites
No.
Specimen's
Designation
SiCw Vol.%
(Whisker
Manufacturer)
Th (C)
th
(min.)
(g/cm )
% ph
Propertys
0
(American Matrix)
1500
60
3.9323
99
0-1
0
(AM)
1500
60
3.9560
100
Property's
5
(AM)
1650
60
3.8990
99
5-1
5
(AM)
1650
60
3.9107
99
Property's
10
(AM)
1700
60
3.8846
100
10-1
10
(AM)
1700
60
3.8847
100
10-33
10
(AM)
1700
60
3.8800
100
10-34
10
(AM)
1700
60
3.8656
100
10-35
10
(ACMC)
1700
60
3.8073
98
10-36
10
(ACMC)
1700
60
3.8026
98
11
Property's
20
(AM)
1775
45
3.7996
100
12
20-1
20
(AM)
1775
45
3.7973
100
13
Property's
30
(ACMC)
1800
25
3.6304
97
14
30-1
30
(ACMC)
1800
25
3.6659
98
9
10
Pe
80
Table 4.2 Density Results for the WG-300 AljOs/SiCw Ceramic Composites
No.
Specimen's
Designation
Pc (g/cm3)
% pm
No.
Specimens
Designation
pe (g/cm 3)
% pm
Property's
3.4526
93
18
33-16
3.3936
91
Propertys
3.3413
90
19
33-17
3.2705
88
33-1
3.4008
92
20
33-18
3.4388
93
33-2
3.3601
91
21
33-19
3.3240
90
33-3
3.4413
93
22
33-20
3.2996
89
33-4
3.3973
92
23
33-21
3.4129
92
33-5
3.3684
91
24
33-22
3.5732
96
33-6
3.4040
92
25
33-23
3.3276
90
33-7
3.4475
93
26
33-24
3.4952
94
10
33-8
3.3885
91
27
33-25
3.4391
93
11
33-9
3.3353
90
28
33-26
3.3145
89
12
33-10
3.3333
90
29
33-27
3.3681
91
13
33-11
3.4905
94
30
33-28
3.4891
94
14
33-12
3.4431
93
31
33-29
3.4400
93
15
33-13
3.2752
88
32
33-30
3.4606
93
16
33-14
3.3158
89
33
33-31
3.4556
93
17
33-15
3.4378
93
34
33-32
3.4508
93
The theoretical density (pm) was calculated for each specimen using the rule o f mixture
(RO M ) equation as follows:
= vf pf+vmPm
(4.1)
where v denotes volume fraction, and subscripts f and m denote fiber and matrix,
respectively. The percent theoretical density was calculated from the following equation:
%Ph = Pc/ Pu, xlOO
A general comparison between the two test results listed in tables 4.1 and 4.2 shows that
the tape-cast and WG-300 specimens reached average densities o f 99.5 and 92% o f their
theoretical values, respectively. The superior density results obtained by the tape-cast specimens
81
indicates that tape casting and subsequent lamination (precompactness) during processing results in
superior packing density o f constituents prior to hot pressing. On the other hand, loading the W G 300 composite powder directly into the hot-press die may result in non-uniformity, contamination,
and low packing density o f the loose powder (Risherson, 1992). Next, we w ill compare the
microstructure o f the two materials.
4.1.2 Microstructure and Whisker Distribution

In order to determine microstructure characteristics such as shape, size, and distribution of
the alumina matrix grains, silicon carbide whiskers, and pores typical o f ATOM'S iCw ceramic
composites, several A M V S iC w composite sections were examined using several types o f N D E
evaluation methods.
Figures 4.1 (a and b) and 4.2 (a) are SEM micrographs o f gold-coated fractured surfaces
produced by 4-point bending tests for alumina, 10% SiCw, and 20% SiCw tape-cast composites,
respectively. The almost fully dense alumina (% TD= 99) has a microstructure which consists o f
fine grains about 1-3 pm in size and small round scattered pores (much smaller than the grains)
that appear to be inside the grains. The microstructures o f the fully dense 10 and 20% SiCw
composites (figures 4 .1 (b) and 4.2 (a)) consist o f matrix grains that are slightly larger than those
o f the monolithic alumina, and SiCw whiskers that appear to be 0.3 to 0.6 pm wide and up to 36
pm long. Figure 4.2 (b) shows an SEM micrograph o f a gold-coated W G-300 fractured surface
which was produced by an impact test. Although the microstructural features o f the W G-300
composites are. in general, identical to those of tape-cast composites, figure 4.2 (b) reveals the
presence o f large numbers o f uniformly distributed pores and several scattered grain agglomerates
(white areas) through the section. Such features are not as frequently observed in the tape-cast
composite sections.
Figure 4.1. SEM micrographs of fracture surfaces showing microstructure:

(a) 0% SiCw; and (b) 10% SiCw vol. fractions AI203 /SiCw ceramic
composites
Figure 4.2. SEM micrographs of fracture surfaces showing microstructure:

(a) 20% SiCw; and (b) 33% SiCw vol. fractions AI203 /SiCw ceramic
composites
84
The distribution o f the SiCw whiskers in the AJ:0 3 matrix was examined using an optical
and scanning acoustic microscope (SAM ), figure 4.3(a and b) shows optical and near-surface
(depth approximately 8 pm) SAM micrographs of a polished, 10% SiCw composite surface (the
composite surface shown is perpendicular to the hot-pressing direction). Figure 4.4 shows an
optical micrograph of a 20% SiCw composite surface perpendicular to the hot-pressing direction.
These micrographs indicate that the tape-casting and hot-pressing processing techniques produce
laminates with SiCw whiskers aligned randomly and distributed uniformly in the plane
perpendicular to the hot-pressing direction. Optical micrographs o f surfaces of laminates with 5
and 30% vol. SiCw whiskers showed similar whisker distribution and orientation. The degree o f
whisker alignment in the plane of the laminate can be controlled by varying the carrier surface
speed and doctor blade height. In addition, comparing the SAM micrograph in figure 4.3(b) with
the optical micrograph in figure 4.3 (a) for the 10% SiCw composite reveals the effects o f crossply stacking o f layers during processing (see Chapter 3) on the degree of whisker alignment in the
plane o f the laminate. The effects of cross-ply stacking o f layers on the measured elastic modulus
o f these composites will be determined and highlighted in the next section.
4.2 Mechanical Property Characterizations

In order to obtain a full understanding o f how whisker reinforced ceramic composites
behave under low-veiocitv impact loading, one must first know how these composites respond to
static loading. This understanding may come from studying and correlating certain mechanical
properties o f these composites to their impact behaviors. One type o f property important in the
study o f impact behavior is stiffness, expressed as Young's modulus. In cases, such as those under
low-velocity impact, it is not intuitively obvious whether high stiffness ceramic composites are
more desirable than low stiffness composites. Another important property is flexural strength.
85
a)
b)
" 'i.? '% ,- S ' "
-* S
^ 's
Figure 4.3. Optical (a); and SAM (b) micrographs showing whisker
orientation, distribution, and microstructure of a 10% SiC tape-cast ceramic
composite
86
Figure 4.4. An optical micrograph (X500) showing the whisker distribution

of a 20% SiCw tape-cast ceramic composite polished (1 micron) surface
87
expressed as the stress required to break the material in bending. Owing to the similarity between
the two tests, it follows that the impact strengths o f ceramic composites can be correlated with their
static transverse strengths. Fracture toughness, which is a measure o f the susceptibility o f a
material to fail due to the presence of a surface or interior flaw, is one other important property
that must be measured, and correlated to the impact strength of these ceramic composites.
Therefore, the elastic modulus (E), bending strength (M OR), and fracture toughness (K tc) were
measured for the various ATOM'SiCw composites produced for this study, and the results are
presented in the next few sections.
4.2.1 Elastic Modulus Results

The elastic modulus of A TfV S iC w ceramic composite samples were measured using the
standard resonance and ultrasonic immersion test methods (see Chapter 3). In the standard
resonance tests, the first resonance frequency in flexure (ff) of the test specimens was measured.
Using a rectangular-cross section bar as the test specimen in flexure, the Young's modulus (E) is
calculated from ASTM C 1198-91:
E = 0.9465 (m ff:/b) (L 3/t3) T,
(4.2)
where m. b, L. and t denote mass, width, length, and thickness o f the bar, respectively. Ti
is a correction factor and is given as:
T, = 1 + 6.585(1 + .0752p + 0.8l09p:) (t/L)* - 0.868(t/L )4 8.34(1 + 0.2023/1 + 2 .1 7 3 /r)(f / Z,)4

_ 1.0 + 6.338(1 + 0.1408/r + 1 .5 3 6 /r) ( / / L f
where p. is Poisson's ratio. In the ultrasonic immersion test method, the longitudinal wave
speed o f the composite was measured for square test specimens at different angles o f incidence.
The stiffness constants of the material were then calculated using expressions relating them to the
longitudinal wave speed. The elastic modului. E l and Et, were determined in directions parallel
(longitudinal) and perpendicular (transverse) to one of the square sample sides, respectively, in a
plane perpendicular to the hot-pressing direction using the relations between the elastic modulus
and stiffness constants (B.E. Read and G.D.Dean, 1978).
Table 4.3 summarizes the elastic modulus measurement results for both the tape-cast and
W G-300 ceramic composites. We note here that because the 30% SiCw tape-cast composite
contains ACMC-type whiskers which are smaller in diameter than the AM whiskers, its bulk
density achieved only 97% of its theoretical density (TD ) and its elastic modulus was relatively
low.
Table 4.3 Measured Elastic Modulus for AUO j/SiCw Ceramic Composites
Ultrasonic
Resonance
Random
SiCw
Vol. %
E
(Gpa)
Et
(Gpa)
El
(Gpa)
Er
(Gpa)
389
389
400
391
408
397
10
400
400
407
403
20
406
410
413
411
293
316
302
301
300
30
291
WG-300
(90%TD)
241
WG-300
(93% TD)
293
300
Note: The experimental values obtained by the resonance method

represent the mean o f six tape-cast and five W G-300 composites.
89
Note that in table 4.3 two elastic modulus values (241 and 293 Gpa) are reported for the
W G-300 composites because two property's specimens with two different density measurements
(90 and 93% T D ) were produced.
The random elastic modulus (Er) was calculated using the following expression (Agarvval,
1980):
Er = 3/8 El + 5/8 Et
(4.3)
where the longitudinal modulus, El. and the transverse modulus. Et. are measured
ultrasonicallv. The E r and resonance test values agree both quantitatively and trend-wise. Finally,
the elastic modulus test results (EL and E t) indicate that cross-ply stacking layers during
processing o f the tape-cast composites results in laminates that are essentially isotropic in a plane
perpendicular to the hot-pressing direction.
4.2.2 Bending Strength Test Results

The bending strengths of the AhOj/SiCw ceramic composites were determined using
rectangular cross-sections in the four-point support arrangement described earlier (see Chapter 3
for test setups and dimensions). Bending strength (ab) was determined according to:
3Pa
=
bhr
(4.4)
where P is the applied force, a is the distance between the inner and outer supports, h is the
thickness o f the specimen, and b is the width of the specimen (figure 3.8). Table 4.4 lists the
bending strength test results for both the tape-cast and W G-300 ceramic composites. Note that the
test values reported in table 4.4 represent the mean o f three tests for the 5. 10. 20, and 30% SiCw
composites; the mean o f two tests for the 0% SiCw alumina: and the mean o f five tests for the
W G-300 composites.
Table 4.4. Four-point Bending Strength (M O R ) for A ljO j/S iC w Ceramic Composites
SiCw Vol. %
crb (ksi)
ab (MPa)
120.4
830.2
92.6
638.5
10
112.5
775.7
20
95.3
657.1
30
79.7
549.7
WG-300
61.9
426.8
W ith some accepted scatter, the above results show that for up to 20% whisker content the
average bending strength o f these composites didn't change significantly. At a whisker content o f
30% the average bending strength decreases dramatically (about 25% reduction). Although it is
difficult to draw any firm conclusions regarding the effects o f varying whisker content on the
bending strength o f these composites because of the limited number o f specimens tested, these test
results provide some indication about the average strength o f each composite. Due to the varying
shapes and sizes o f SiCw whiskers used in recent studies o f the strength o f SiCw whiskerreinforced A 1: 0 3 ceramic composites, their experimental results and conclusions are widely
divided. One such recent study (Eilichi Yasuda et. al., 1991) investigating the mechanical
properties o f AFCVSiCw ceramic composites concludes that four-point bending strength o f these
composites didn't improve in spite o f toughening by whisker reinforcement. Their explanation o f
this lack o f improvement in bending strengths is that long whiskers with small diameters, rather
than short whiskers with large diameters, introduce large defects into the ceramic matrix.
91
4.2.3 Fracture Toughness, Kic

Fracture toughness, which is defined as the stress intensity factor at which crack
propagation becomes rapid, is another important mechanical property measured and reported for
this study. Fracture toughness values were measured using the modified indentation toughness
technique described by Cook and Lawn (1983). In this technique, multiple Vickers indentations of
proper sizes are introduced on the tensile surface of the inner span o f a four-point bend specimen.
These indentations produce radial cracks o f approximately half-elliptic shape (see Chapter 3 for
procedures). Because all indentations (three in the present tests) during bend testing experience the
same stress history, the critical crack length at failure can be measured from the remaining intact
indentations. The three indentations were aligned in the middle o f the tensile surface, 4 mm apart,
with the crack arm emanating from the indentation comers perpendicular and parallel to the tensile
direction. A ll specimens were indented with Vickers diamond indentors at indentation loads o f 7 kg
(68.7 N ) for the tape-cast and 5 kg (49.1 N) for the WG-300 specimens, and fractured in fourpoint bending, under the same conditions as those used for bending strength measurements. After
fracture, each specimen was visually inspected to ensure that one of the three indentations
originated the fracture.
Figure 4.5 shows optical micrographs o f typical Vickers indentations o f 10 and 30%
ALCVSiCw specimens. The fracture toughness. KiC, was calculated according to the following
equation (Cook and Lawn. 1983):
(4.5)
where a mis maximum stress at failure and cmis the average crack length o f the two
remaining indentations. For comparison purposes, fracture toughness was also calculated based on
92
the relationship between the maximum stress at failure (crmdefined above) and the indentation load
F, (Chantikul, et.al.. 1981) as follows:
Klc = 0 5 9 ( /
F ,/3) 3/4MPaVm
(4.6)
where E is the elastic modulus and Hv is the Vickers hardness. Table 4.5 lists the two fracture
toughness values calculated from the above m o equations for the ATCVSiCw ceramic composites.
The Vickers hardness. Hv, which was substituted in the residual strength-fracture toughness
equation, was determined by measuring the diagonals o f the indentations and substituting their
average, d. in the following equation (Mincik, 1992):
//v =
(4.7)
where F is the indentation load. The elastic modulus, E, used in the above calculations is
determined using the resonance method (see section 4.2.2). The fracture toughness values which
are listed in table 4.5 represent the mean of three and five tests per composite for the tape-cast and
W G-300 composites, respectively. The Vickers hardness Hv. residual strength crm, and critical
crack length, Cm, are the calculated averages for each composite.
Table 4.5. Fracture Toughness K iC for AUOj/SiCw Ceramic Composites
Residual Strength Method
Crack Length Method

SiCw
Vol. %
Cm
him)
K ic
Cm
( M
ksiv
MPa v
H v
K ic
(GPa)
k s iv k
K ic
M P a ^ m
9 0
3 3 .7
3 .6 7
4 .0 3
3 2 .9
3 .9 7
4 .3 6
8 0
3 7 .3
3 .8 1
4 .1 9
3 4 .6
4 .2 7
4 .6 9
10
9 7
4 3 .8
4 .9 4
5 .4 3
3 0 .1
4 .8 9
5 .3 7
20
9 7
5 0 .3
5 .6 7
6 .2 3
2 8 .1
5 .5 2
6 .0 7
3 0
1 0 4
4 9 .1
5 .7 4
6 .3 1
21.8
5 .3 4
5 .8 7
W G -3 0 0
8 9
4 7 .6
5 .3 4
5 .8 6
1 3 .8
5 .1 9
5 .7 0
Figure 4.5. Optical micrographs (X500) of Vickers indentation in (a) 10%

SiCw; and (b) 30% SiCw /AI203 ceramic composites. The indentation load of
7 kg is the same for both tests.
The test results presented in this section show the positive toughening effects of adding
SiCw whiskers to the A I2O 3 matrix. The correlation between results obtained by the residual
strength and those obtained by crack length measurements is excellent, and both results are
consistent with fracture toughness results obtained by other researchers. The correlation between
the three mechanical properties test results presented in these three last sections and the impact
properties of these composites will be discussed later in a separate section.
4.3 Static Loading of Ceramic Composite Plates

Six square ceramic plates were supported as described in section 3.5.3.1 and statically
loaded until fracture. The load was applied at the center using the hardened steel indentor shown in
figure 3.10, at a rate (crosshead speed) o f .0078 inches/minute. Five o f the tested plates were
direct-cast W G-300 specimens (E=295 GPa). The other tested plate was a 10% SiCw tape-cast
plate (E= 400 GPa). Stacked (0, 90) CEA-06-125W T-120 strain gages were bonded to four o f
the W G-300 specimens and the 10% SiCw tape-cast plate at the center o f their tensile sides. The
support configuration and indentor (a 0.5 inch radius sphere) were the same as those used in the
impact testing.
4.3.1 Load vs. Strain Tests

Figures 4.6 to 4.8 are the static load vs. strain curves for the five ceramic composite plates
described above, for the orthogonal directions. It is evident from these curves that the relationship
between load and strain is linear up to fracture for these composites. Two o f these specimens. #11
in figure 4.6 and #28 in figure 4.7. show some degree o f anistropv, as indicated by the upper
curves in the two directions. The tape-cast specimen shown in figure 4.8. has a lower strain-load
slope than the W G-300 specimens. The highest fracture load is 634 pounds at a stram of 1060
micro in/in. attained by a WG-300 specimen (#28). A tape-cast specimen (#34) attained the lowest
fracture load o f 475 pounds at a fracture strain of 660 micro in/in. A ll the tested square specimens
fractured in radial cracks starting from the center, indicating that these fractures were caused by
bending stresses, and not by the local contact tensile stresses. In addition, no sign o f local contact
damage was detected, and the character o f the cracks is identical to that of the low-velocity impact
cracks. The comparison between statically fractured square ceramic plates and those fractured
under low-velocity impact loading will be discussed in a later section. All experimental test results
agree very well with the theoretical predictions derived earlier, and these predictions are also
included in figures 4.6 to 4.8.
4.3.2 Load-deflection Curve

Figure 4.8(a) is a load-deflection curve for a W G-300 square plate (#24) loaded statically
at the center until fracture. It was originally intended to be loaded and released just prior to
fracture. It can seen from this figure that this specimen exhibits a slight non-linearity at the
beginning o f the loading cycle (experiment). This non-linearity may be attributed to the fact that
the recorded deflection is the sum of the machine and specimen deflection, and. therefore, is not a
true representation o f the specimen deflection. This specimen fractured at a maximum load o f 486
pounds.
4.4 Low-velocity Impact Test Results

Two fundamental problems arose in designing our experiments to determine fracture
strains and energies o f A lTV S iC w ceramic materials by low-velocity impact testing. The first
design problem was how to capture the low-amplitude transient strain signal coming from the
impacted specimen without expending too many valuable specimens in the process. The second
design issue was how' to determine the average energy required to fracture these ceramic
33% SiCw
1.2
WG-300 (#11)
>
experiment
theory i
0.2 -
200
400
600
load P, pounds
33% SiCw
1.2
o
o
o
1 , WG-300 (#8)
X, 0.8
0.6
experiment
theory
c
e
w
*_
+->
w
0.4
""theory
e2
0.2
0
200
400
600
800
load P, pounds
Figure 4.6. Strain vs static load for WG-300 ceramic plates
33% SiCw
1.2
experiment
200
400
600
800
load P, pounds
33% SiCw
o
o
WG-300 (#29)
x
c
theory
0.6
experiment
2
0)
theory j
o
</>
0
200
400
600
800
load P, pounds
Figure 4.7. Strain vs. static load for WG-300 ceramic composites
98
33% SiCw
0.007
0.006
WG-300 (#24)
0.005
0.004
o
OJ
e:
o
o
0.003
0.002
expenment
linear fit
100
200
300
400
500
load P, pounds
10% SiCw
0.8
o
o
o
theory
- el
------------- e2
Tape-Cast
0.6
5,
c
c
0.4
theory
experiment
<5
0.2
<A
o
o
200
400
load, pounds
Figure 4.8. Deflection vs static load for a WG-300 ceramic plate (a); and strain
vs static load for a 10% vol. SiCw tape-cast plate (b)
99
specimens. The first problem was dealt with by fabricating a square plate made o f stainless steel,
with identical dimensions as the ceramic plate, to serve as a mock-up for determining equipment
settings and the system's triggering adjustments. The average energy required to break these
ceramic specimens was determined through trial and error by impact testing three ceramic plates
with three different drop-weights. from three different release heights, as described in section
3.5.3.2. When the proper drop weight and release height were determined, a fourth specimen was
incrementally impacted, starting at an energy level that was less than required to break it and
followed by successive drops from release heights increased incrementally ( 1/8 to 3/16 in) until the
specimen fractured. This incremental impact test method was then applied to all remaining ceramic
specimens prepared for this study. The mechanics of the incremental impact test method and its
possible fatigue effects are discussed in section 4.4.1.
We noted in Chapter 2 (Theoretical Analysis) that although the contact stresses are higher
than the bending stresses in low-velocity impacts on thin ceramic structures, most o f the impact
energy absorbed by the specimens converts to bending stress energy (Eb). Section
4.4.2 examines
and assesses the importance o f local contact tensile stresses and local strain energies for the
A l;0 3/SiCwr ceramic composite plates. Typical load-time, energy-time, and strain-time traces for
these ceramic composites are presented and discussed in section 4.4.3. From strain-time and load
time traces, we obtained load vs. maximum strain and load vs. maximum stress curves, and these
curves are found in section 4.4.4. along with their approximate theoretical solutions.
In addition, we indicated in Chapter 2 that the apparent measured energy (Ea) recorded by
the Dynatup's instrumented tup is a combination of energy absorbed by the specimen (Eb) and the
machine (Em). In section 4.4.5. the energy absorbed by the specimen in bending (Eb) was estimated
from the measured fracture stresses for those specimens bonded with strain gages. This energy is
100
compared to the true measured energy (AE,), where AE0 is obtained from the apparent measured
energy, Ea(section 4.4.6). Finally, in the same section (4.4.6), we estimate the energy absorbed by
the machine (Em) using eqs. (2.50) and (2.51) from Chapter 2, add this energy to the energy
absorbed by the specimen (Eb), and compare the sum (Eb + E,) to AE0.'
4.4.1 Incremental Impact Testing: Pre-fracture Damage Assessment

In this section, the incremental impact test method, which we adopted in this study to
measure the approximate fiacture stresses and energies attained by the AhCVSiCw ceramic
composite plates, and its possible fatigue effects on these composites, are examined. This impact
test method was first developed by Staley and Hromalta (1919) for determining the impact strength
o f some American hotel china and semi-porcelain plates. Before using the incremental impact test
method to determine the impact properties of the test materials, an average energy level to break
these materials must be determined. In this study, this average energy value was determined after
impacting to fracture three WG-300 ceramic plates. The first plate fractured at an impact energy of
1.63 ft-pounds (drop-weight (W) of 7.097 lb. and release height (h) of 2.75 in.). The second plate
fractured at an impact energy of 0.38 ft-pounds (W =4.289 lb.. h= 1.05 in.). The third plate
fractured at an impact energy of 0.30 ft-pounds (W =2.862 lb.. h= 1.25 in.). When a fourth
specimen was impacted at an energy level of 0.27 ft-pounds (W =2.862 lb., h= 1.125 in.) and did
not fracture, the impact energy was increased in small increments until fracture occurred at an
impact energy of 0.36 ft-pounds (W =2.862. h= 1.5 in.). For the remaining specimens, the impact
energy was incrementally increased to fracture, starting with an impact energy o f 0.23 to 0.25 ftpounds.
Since the incremental impact test method was first developed by Staley and Hromatka in
1919. many other researchers, w ho also adopted this impact test method in their studies o f impact
101
strength o f ceramic materials, have examined its fatigue effects. These researchers' studies
concluded that minute surface flaws caused by repeated impacts do not affect the final strength
because they occur on the surface of the structure that was under compression, and. therefore,
either fatigue is not present or its effect is so small as to be considered negligible.
A ll o f the studies cited above investigated repeated impacts fatigue effects on the final
strength o f monolithic ceramic materials; therefore, their findings might not be applicable for
whisker-ceramic composite materials. In addition, A M V S iC w ceramic composites possess
distinctly different toughening mechanisms than those o f monolithic ceramics. The main concern
for this study was to determine whether any large pre-existing surface or internal defects propagate
under repeated impacts. To investigate this possibility, we selected three previously C-scanned
W G-300 specimen plates. Five repeated impacts on the first plate, six on the second, and seven on
the third were performed; dropping the weight from a height of 1.125 in., 1.375 in., and 1.5 in. for
the first, second, and third specimen, respectively. These three impacted plates were then sent to an
NDE lab and examined first by an optical microscope at high magnifications (100 times and
greater) for any sign o f local damage caused by the repeated impacts. When no sign o f any local
damage was detected, these same specimens were re-C-scanned. Figure 4.9 shows pulse-echo type
C-scan images taken through the thickness o f the plate that was impacted seven times. These
images were obtained using an ultrasonic emerging C-scan with 0.5 in. diameter transducer at a
nominal frequency of 30 Mhz and a 0.75 in. focal length. This ultrasonics C-scan assembly uses
distilled water as the coupling medium between the transducer and tested specimen, and has a
lateral resolution o f 15 microns. Notice in figure 4.9 that the upper two C-scan images were taken
through the top-half thickness, while the two lower ones were taken through the bottom-half
thickness, scanning the w hole 1.8 in. x 1.8 in. area o f the plate. By studying the C-scan images in
figure 4.9. it is evident that any pre-existing flaws did not extend to a length which can be detected
i "l .
- - 'vv '
1I
FILE
ZOOM
UINDOU
PALETTE
THRESH
ALTER
MISC
3D_PLT
SMOOTH
X-SECTN
Y v r
v '. , <! >

. 'A r ; >/
; v
. '-
y
- *.' V.' ; -v
*rr ~ *
*-^ -..r .
/
V :*? :
t.
'
, .:* . 7' '* " *%'* ,
ALUM15B.CS0
ALUM15B.CS8
ALUM15B.CS1
ALUM15B.CS9

"
-* ,
" V. .
.
: 1v'- '
.
*V
,.v, *
** . .*% / '
'
I .
**
..
'W:
?* ' V ! ' '
' i % i*"*
spacebr
CACL
QUIT
Figure 4.9. C-scan images of a 33% SiCw WG-300 composite plate

impacted 7 times repeatedly from the same height (1.5 in.) using a 2.86
pound drop weight
103
by this NDE technique. Similar test results were obtained for the other two tested specimens. In
addition, these C-scan images revealed no sign of any local damage around the impacted site
(center o f plate). We may, therefore, conclude that any fatigue effects which may result from
repeated impacts on ALCVSiCw ceramic composites cannot be proved, within the limitations of
the available NDE testing techniques. Local contact effects will be examined further in the next
section, but from a different point of view.
4.4.2 Local Contact Load Effects: Local Tensile Stress and Local Tensile Energy
Past research has shown that when thin ceramic structures are impacted transversely at
low velocities by hardened spherical projectiles, fracture is mainly caused by maximum bending
stresses. This is in spite o f the fact that localized tensile stresses, which are higher in magnitude
than these bending stresses, are also present on the surface at the boundary o f the contact zone
(Mencik, 1992). In this section, the localized tensile stress effects caused by low velocity impacts
in relation to the ceramic composite materials investigated in this study are briefly examined.
Expressions to calculate the local tensile stress and local tensile energy in terms o f impact force (or
impact velocity ) were derived and presented in Chapter 2. Using these expressions, the calculated
local contact stresses for impacted ALOj/SiCw composite plates range from 130 to 200 ksi at
impact velocities o f 2.35 to 4.48 ft/sec. These local stresses are 3 to 4 times higher than the
maximum bending stresses (see section 4.4.4). On the other hand, the corresponding local tensile
energies range in magnitudes from 0.0116 to 0.0491 ft-pound for the same impact velocities, and
these values are 3 to 5% o f the total energy absorbed by the specimen plus machine assembly
(AE0). Although the local tensile stresses are high compared to the maximum bending stresses. Cscan and optical microscope test results show no local damages. Therefore, we can conclude that
these local contact stresses never reached critical values that would initiate fracture around the
104
contact area in any o f the tested specimens. Several recent studies (Tsai. 1983 and Ball. 1994)
examining low-velocity impact local effects on glass plates found that the threshold velocity
required for the local contact stresses to reach critical values depends on such factors as plate
thickness, radius o f the spherical impactor. the size and distribution o f surface flaws around the
contact area, and the material properties o f the impactor and plate. The study by Ball (1994)
determined this threshold velocity to be 30 m/sec (98.4 ft/sec) for glass circular plates o f 2.55 in
radius and 0 .118 in thickness. Tsai (1983) concluded that the threshold velocity to cause a
transition from bending fracture to local (Hertzian) fracture in glass plates decreases as the support
span decreases. Dynamic fracture bending stresses and strains for ALCVSiCw ceramic composite
plates w ill be discussed in detail in the sections to follow.
4.4.3 Load Time, Energy Time, and Strain Time Curves

This section describes typical load-time, energy-time, and strain-time signals obtained
during impact testings of Al;Oj/SiCw ceramic specimens. Load-time signals were generated by a
load-sensor cemented to the striker (instrument tip) which was positioned to sense the compressive
force interaction between the impact machine and specimen. The Dvnatup impact machine (model
8250) used in this study has a computerized data acquisition system (G RC730-I), which compiles
and displays load, energy, deflection, vs. time. Figures 4.10 (a and b) are typical load and energy
histories displayed by the Dvnatup GRG-730-I for the elastic (sub-fracture) and fracture impacts,
respectively. The energy-time signals shown in these displays are actually computed from
expressions relating the impact load and velocity to the deflection of the machine/specimen system.
These expressions were derived using standard equations of motion and the conservation o f total
energy o f the hammer/specimen system throughout the impact test (Dynatup 8250 Impact Machine
Manual). Figures 4.11 (a and b) are photographs of typical memory oscilloscope traces showing
strain-time signals obtained by strain gages cemented to the center of the tensile side o f square
105
specimens situated opposite the impact point. The strain-time traces o f figure 4.11 correspond with
the load-time and energy-time signals of figures 4.10 .
Several important impact parameters can be determined from load, energy, and strain
histories similar to those shown in figures 4.10 . The total apparent energy (Ea) absorbed during
impact is one common parameter which can be obtained from the energy-time signal. This energy
value consists o f initiation energy (energy at maximum load) and propagation energy (energy after
maximum load). For all specimens tested in this study, propagation energy amounted to only a
small fraction o f the total absorbed energy (approximately 10 to 15%), which is typical o f brittle
fractures. Maximum (or fracture) load and strain at maximum load are other impact parameters
which can be extracted from load and strain history records. Figures 4 .10(a) and 4.11(a) show,
respectively, the sub-fracture (elastic) load and strain signals for the 20% AliCVSiCw composite,
impacted at a velocity of 2.96 ft/sec. Notice from these two figures that the profile and time history
o f these two signals are exactly identical.
Figure 4 .10(b) and 4 .1 1(b) are the load- and energy-time and strain-time signal,
respectively, for the 10% AhO^SiCw composite impacted to fracture at a velocity of 4.47 ft/sec.
Also included in figure 4.11(b) is the strain-time signal (right curve) obtained during the impact
test which preceded the impact to fracture test (left curve). From these signals, the fracture load is
920 lb and the fracture strain is 1180 microstrain. Maximum load vs. dynamic strain curves,
constructed from load-time and strain-time signals for each composite, will be shown and discussed
in Section 4.4.4.
106
o
2 0 -1 -3
MAR 17> 1995
4 :1 5 :1 3
o o
*
A
JCO
I
tL.
Q
U
U
a)
n iS lis E c T
Specimen Id .
2 0 -1 -3
Temperature Slope
f
lb /in
rime
Lead
lb
Energy
ft-lb
D eflect
inch
73.00
Impact:
Maximum Load:
Energy A fter Max Load:
T o tal Energy:
V elo city
f t/ e e c
2.96
.42
S4S.05
1.15
.39
.25
.13
.38
1 0 -1 -1 4
MAR 17> 1995
1 :5 8 :2 6
.01
.0 2
O Q)
b)
J 1
TIMEC MSEC
Specimen Id.
10- 1 -1 4
Temperature Slope
f
lb /in
73.00
V elocity
:t/e e c
Time
msec
Load
lb
Energy
t- l b
D eflect
inch
.000
Impact:
Maximum Load:
Energy A fter Max Load:;
T o tal Energy:
4 .4 7
.3 5
.55
9 t 9 .7 6
.89
.45
.08
.54
.0 2
.0 2
Figure 4.10. Typical elastic (a) and non-elastic (fracture) (b) load/energy
time histories for 20% and 10% SiCw tape-cast ceramic plates, respectively.
Figure 4.11. Typical elastic (a) and non-elastic (b) strain time waveforms for
20% and 10% SiCw tape-cast ceramic plates, respectively.
108
One other impact parameter which can be obtained from either Ioad-time or strain-time
signals (since both signals are identical) is time to fracture (to) for each tested specimen. The timeto-ffacture value must be measured in order to estimate the compliance o f the testing machine,
which when combined with the compliance o f the test specimen enables the separation o f the
energy absorbed by the specimen (Eb), and that which is absorbed by the machine (Em) (see
Chapter 2). For the specimens tested in this study, time-to-ffacture (to) values varied from 0.3 to
0.5 ms, depending on the specific composite and impact velocity'. A comparison between energy
absorbed by the specimen and energy absorbed by the specimen and machine w ill be presented
later in Section 4.4.6, along with a correlation between test results obtained by the Dvnatup
instrumented tip and results obtained from strain-time signals.
4.4.4 Impact Load Vs. Maximum Stress and Strain Curves

The plots contained in figures 4.12-4.16 show typical curves o f strains and stresses at
maximum impact loads plotted against the maximum load for various Al^CVSiCw ceramic plates.
In these plots s and ct refer to strain and stress, respectively, and subscripts I and 2 denote
principal directions of the plate, parallel and perpendicular to one of its lengths respectively. The
strain at maximum load was calculated from each oscilloscope trace using a sensitivity factor o f 40
pv/ps (obtained from the P-3500 Strain Indicator Instruction Manual). The stress at maximum
load was calculated from strain using the measured Young's modulus values for these ceramic
composites. The average number of incremental impacts sustained by these specimens before
fracture is 11 for the tape-cast and 4 for the WG-300 specimens. In these tests the height o f release
was increased by 1/8 to 3/16 inch increments. The average fracture load, fracture strain, and
fracture stress for the eight tape-cast specimens is 715 pounds. 910 micro in/in (.091%), and 73
ksi. respectively. The average fracture load for 17 W G-300 specimens is 491 pounds, while the
109
average fracture strain and stress, which was calculated for only four strain gauged specimens, is
944 micro in/in (.094 %) and 48.3 ksi, respectively. Some o f the factors which might have
contributed to the difference in these average strength values between the two groups o f specimens
w ill be discussed later in Section 4.4.5.
Figures 4.12-4.16 also include the theoretical calculations using eqs. (2.36) and (2.37)
derived in Chapter 2 for predicting strain and stress amplitudes o f simply-supported thin plates
subjected to central impacts. In each o f these calculations we have substituted for the load
amplitude (Fc) and time to maximum load (to) from each load-time record, which was measured
directly by the Dvnatup Impact Machine loading cell for each test. Note that the time histories o f
both the Dvnatup Impact Machine and the strain-gage measuring systems are identical for each
impact test; therefore, either time measurement may be used when performing the calculations
using eqs. (2.36) and (2.37).
Furthermore, in carrying out these theoretical predictions, the area o f the loaded square
patch. U \ is assumed to have an equivalent area with a radius equivalent to the impactor radius
(U : = 7tR \ where R is the tip radius). This approximation means that the loaded patch is only 6 %
o f the total 1.8 inch x 1.8 inch plate area. The convergence o f the series in eqs. (2.36) and (2.37)
was accomplished after 1225 terms (m=35, n=35). Comparison between the approximate
theoretical predictions and test results indicates that the theoretical calculations, which are about
70 to 85% o f the experimental values, generally agree with the experimental results.
110
0% SiCw
o
k.
0
1 4 0 0
1
</>
c
'(5
1200
1000
+* e
(/) ~
o
c
ia i
8 0 0
6 0 0
4 0 0
200
Tape-Cast
ra
>*
el
e2
- theory
linear
o
tb
theory
0 -
a
x
(0
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1 0 0 0
1 2 0 0
impact force, pounds
0% SiCw
</>
</f
(A
0)
b.
</)
o
E
re
>
O
X
(0
120
Tape-Cast
100
so
6
I
4 0
20
ctI
c2
- theory:
" linear
theory
42 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1 0 0 0
1 2 0 0
Figure 4.12. Impact amplitude vs dynamic strain (a) and stress (b) for 0% vol.
SiCwtape-cast composite
111
10% SiCw
c
c
o
k
o
E
1 4 0 0
Tape-Cast
1 2 0 0
1 0 0 0
<A
c
'<
5
8 0 0
theory
(A
6 0 0
linear
E
(0
c
o
4 0 0
> s
theory
2 0 0
><
(0
E
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1 0 0 0
1 2 0 0
10% SiCw
120
Tape-Cast
(A
X.
100
(0
<A
0)
h.
+->
(A
O
8 0
theory |
linear 1
>N
"O
><
fs
crl
4 0
theory
20
2 0 0
4 0 0
6 0 0
8 0 0
1 0 0 0
1 2 0 0
j
i
Figure 4.13. Impact load amplitude vs dynamic strain (a) stress (b), for 10%
vol. SiCw tape-cast composite
112
20% SiCw
c
o
h.
1200 -
1000 -
el
s2
- theory
linear
Tape-Cast
800 -
'io
to
600 -
400 -
1
<o
c
>>
o
200
x'
(0
200
400
600
800
1000

20% SiCw
tn
tn
w
crl
ct2
100
Tape-Cast
theory
linear
80 -
60 -
(0
40 -
>s
T3
X
(0
20
theory
-
E
200
400
600
800
1000
Figure 4.14. Impact amplitude vs. dynamic strains (a) vs dynamic stress (b) for
20% vol. SiCw tape-cast composite
113
30% SiCw (ACMC)

c
1400
o
L_
1200 -
1000 -
Tape-Cast
0)
c
'<
5
k.
(A
O
E
CO
800 600 -
cl
pi
Z
J.
theory
400 I
theory
>*
o
200
linear
0 -r-
re
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
30% SiCw (ACMC)

90
(A
<A
80 -
Tape-Cast
70 -
(A
0)
k.
(A
60 -
50 -
40 -
CO
C
>*
*o
CTT*J>
30 20
10
I
theory |
theory
linear i
re
ctI
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
Figure 4.15. Impact load amplitude vs dynamic strains (a) and stress (b) for
30% vol. SiCw tape-cast composite
114
O
i_
o
WG-300 (#6)
1200
1000 |
-r-
a S
E
800 |
600 400 -
200 r
(0
>N
T3
el
e2
theory i !
" linear 11
A
theory
o -L
X
(0
150
300
450
600
750
WG-300 (#6)
tn
XL
tn
tn
o
CTl
ct2
theory i
- linear
a
60
to 45 ^
E 30 CO
theory
151
150 300 450 600 750 900
Figure 4.16. Impact amplitude vs dynamic strain (a) and stress (b) for a WG-300
composite
4.4.5 Estimating the Impact Fracture Energy in Bending f o r A l20 /S iC w

Ceramic Composites
The impact energy in bending absorbed by the specimen at fracture (Eb) was calculated
based on measured fracture stresses using eq. (2.41) from Chapter 2. To carry out the calculation,
the measured time to fracture, t,-, for each specimen was determined from the load-time record (or
from the strain-time record, since the time history o f both records are identical) and used in
eq.(
2.41). Figure 4.17 shows the impact fracture energy' absorbed by the specimen (Eb) plotted against
the potential energy (E0) of the released weight. Note that because of some anistropy in the two
principal measured fracture stresses, two impact fracture energy' values were calculated for each
specimen in figure 4.17. Figure 4.17 also includes the theoretical impact fracture energy values,
which were calculated based on maximum impact loads at fracture (F0) using equation 2.38. The
impact fracture energies estimated from impact fracture loads tend to yield lower values than those
estimated from fracture stresses. Based on fracture-stress estimation, the average impact fracture
energy for eight tape-cast specimens is 0.1142 ft-pounds. compared to 0.0647 ft-pounds based on
fracture unpact load estimation, a 43% difference. The average impact fracture energy' for four
W G-300 specimens is 0 0804 ft-pounds based on fracture-stress estimation, and 0.0447 ft-pounds
based on unpact fracture loads for 17-WG-300 specimens.
Several factors that are inherent in the measurement system might have contributed to this
discrepancy between the two estimations. Two of these factors are reviewed here. First, the
available load range, which is used to set amplifier gains on the data acquisition board, depends on
tup sensitivity or calibration factor. For the present tests, a tup with a sensitivity' o f 3500 lb was
chosen, with a corresponding load range of 5000 lb. The average impact load measured with this
system for the WG-300 specimens is 400 lb. This load value is only 8% of the load range (5000
lb). It is not clear what percentage error in load readings this low load value (as compared to tup
116
sensitivity ) might have caused. Second, the transfer o f strain from the specimen surface to the gage
grid for dynamic systems may be different than that for static systems, which implies that the
"dynamic gage factor may be different from the "static gage factor (Dove, 1964). Dove suggests
that the properties o f plastics, such as those interposed between specimen surface and gage grid,
are affected by the rate o f straining. Thus, any experimental errors which may come from
inaccurate transient strains are compounded when these strains are used to calculate elastic energy
terms (Eq. 2.41).
4.4.6 Determination o f Impact Energy Proportions Absorbed by the Specimen and

Machine
In drop-w eight impact testing o f ceramic materials, the dissipation o f the drop weight
potential energy (Ec) should include the deformation of the specimen, the inertial acceleration o f the
specimen, the local deformation at the specimen load points, the vibrational energy in both machine
and specimen, and the elastic compliance-tvpe deformation by the testing machine assembly. When
determining various energy' values, data from the instrumented tup signals must be reduced with an
understanding of what proportions of the available potential energy is allocated to each of these
components.
Both the tup and the specimen were instrumented in this study, creating two independent
measuring systems, which should aid in the estimation of the dissipation o f potential energy. Under
low-velocity impact loading, the portion of available energy which is absorbed by the specimen
(Eb) results principally from elastic mechanical loading. The other energy term which accounts for
the difference between the true measured energy (AE) and the energy' absorbed by the specimen
(Eb) is the energy absorbed by the testing machine assembly. Vibrational energy and the energy
0.25
w
TJ
0.2
Tape-Cast
Eb (measured)
Eb (theory)
linear fit
3
O
CL
Ui
>.
E>
0)
c
0)
2
2
o
(0
0.15
based on fracture stress
0.1
o
ffi
a
E 0.05
based on fracture load
0.25
0.5
0.75
1.25
potential energy, ft-pounds

Figure 4.17. Estimating the impact fracture energy in bending (Eb) absorbed by AI20 3 /SiCwceramic
composites
118
necessary to accelerate the specimen to tup velocity (toss energy ) are considered to be insignificant
in low-velocity impacts. Local deformation o f the specimen at the specimen load points has been
examined in this study and was also proven to be relatively small for ceramic composites subjected
to low-velocity impacts (see section 4.4.2).
Figure 4.18 is a plot which compares the true measured energy at fracture (AEo) with the
specimen impact fracture energy (Eb) versus the potential energy (E0) for the tape-cast ceramic
composite plates. AE0 was estimated from the apparent measured energy' (E,), using equation 2.49.
It is apparent from this figure that the impact energy' absorbed in bending bv the specimen at
fracture is only 35 to 40% o f the total energy (AE0) absorbed by the specimen plus the machine
assembly. One can also observe from figure 4 .18(a) that the proportion of energy' absorbed by the
specimen decreases as the potential energy is increased, indicating that the compliance o f the
testing machine increases with more available impact energy. Figure 4.19 was constructed by
adding the energy absorbed by the machine alone (Em) to the energy' absorbed by the specimen (Eb).
We estimated Em using equation 2.50 (Em = 1/2 CmP f). The procedure for estimating Em was
outlined in Chapter 2. It can be seen from this figure that the correlation between the instrumented
tup measurements (AE) and the strain-gage measurements (Eb + Em) is quite good for most of the
test points shown, with only a few scattered points at the higher loading rate. Similar conclusions
regarding the proportion of energy absorbed by the specimen and machine-specimen system, and
the comparison between the instrumented tup and strain-gage measurements may be drawn from
the plots in figures 4.20 and 4.21 which were constructed for the W G-300 specimens.
0.5
fracture energy absorbed
a E0,
and Eb (ft-pounds)
0.4
Tape-Cast
/
/
/
SPECIMEN+MACHINE
0.3
y
(A E 0 )
(Efc)
SPECIMEN
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
DEO
Eb
linear
linear
1.2
potential energy (E0), ft-pounds

Figure 4.18. Comparing impact energy absorbed by the tape-cast specimen and the specimen plus the impact
testing machine
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission
0.5
<0
O
0.4
Instrumented Tup
3
0
Q.
1
5k
(AEo)
0.3
2>
0)
c
Q>
0)
Tape-Cast
0.2
O
CO
Strain Gage Instrumentation

O
(0
a.
(Eb+Em)
0.1
Eb+Em
DEO
-i------
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2

Figure 4.19. Correlation between impact fracture energy measured by the instrumented tup (AE0) and
specimen strain gage measurement (Eb)
0.5
AEO
fracture energy, ft-pounds
0.4
Eb
WG-300
specimen + machine
(measured AE0)
0.3
specimen
0.2
(measured Eb)
0.1
h
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Figure 4.20. Comparing energy proportions absorbed by the WG-300 ceramic specimen (Eb) and the impact
testing machine (Em)
0.5
WG-300
(/>
T3
0.4
Eb+Em
AEO
linear
Instrumented Tup
(AE0)
> 0.3
o>
l.
a>
c
a>
0)
k_
3
4=
o
(0
0.2
Strain-Gage Instrumentation
a
a
0.1
(Eb+Em)
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Figure 4.21. Correlation between impact fracture energy measurements using impact machine instrumented
tup and specimen strain gage instrumentation
hi
K
123
4.4.7 Examining Fracture Surfaces

Typical fractures o f impacted A M V S iC w specimens were examined using a scanning
electron microscope (SEM). In all o f the specimens, the fracture originates at the center on the
tensile side of the specimen opposite the point o f impact, and branches from the center towards the
specimens' edges. All o f the SEM ffactographs mentioned in this section were taken within the
fiacture initiation area o f the fracture surface o f the specimen.
Alumina (AI?Q-d
This composite exhibited higher than average flexural strength, both under impact (c f = 82
ksi), and under static 4-point bending (M O R = 120.4 ksi). The SEM micrograph for this composite
is shown in figure 4.22(a) & (b). Figure 4.22(a) reveals no major structural defects, with the
exception o f a few isolated pores which are much smaller than the grain size. Figure 4.22(b)
reveals a predominant transgranular fiacture mode.
5% Vol. SiCw/AUOi
This composite contains the larger diameter AM-type SiC whiskers (approximately 0.8
pm). Although the fracture toughness. Kic, for this composite material is slightly higher than that
o f the alumina, this composite fractured under impact at a stress of 68.6 ksi which is about 16%
lower than that for the alumina sample. This lower impact strength may indicate that the addition
o f a small number of whiskers in the alumina matrix induced higher stress around these whiskers
during impact. Alternately, some studies (Becher. et. al. 1990) suggest that for 5% vol.
SiCw/ATOs composites, higher processing temperatures produce larger grains in the alumina
matrix, caused by grain growth. The grain growth o f the alumina matrix may have resulted in a
large fraction of intragranular SiC whiskers in the 5% vol. SiCw composite. This last effect may
be observed in figure 4.23(a) & (b) for the 5% vol. SiCw specimen, where because o f grain
124
a)
Figure 4.22. Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) of impact fracture

surface for alumina (AI203) at low magnification (a); and higher
magnification (b)

surface for 5% vol. SiCw/AI203 composite at low magnification (a); and
higher magnification (b)
126
growth during hot pressing, some whiskers became trapped within alumina grains. Figure 4.23(b)
also shows that cracks cut through these SiC whiskers with little or no deflection. The SEM
micrograph o f figure 4 .23(b) suggests the fracture mode for this composite material is
predominantly transgranular. although because of grain growth, there is a higher percentage of
intergranular fracture for this composite than for the monolithic alumina.
10% Vol. SiCw/AkO-t

This composite material, which contains AM-type SiC whiskers, exhibited the best
performance o f the ATCVSiCw composites tested under low-velocity impact. This composite
achieved the highest values for dynamic fracture stress. Of,, (91.3 ksi) and stored elastic energy
prior to fracture. Eb (0.1949 ft-pounds). These values are, respectively, 11 and 17% greater than
those of the alumina specimens, and 25 and 44% greater than those o f the 5% vol. SiC specimens.
The superior impact properties obtained by this composite material suggest that the processing
parameters used to produce this sample are optimum. Some studies (Becher. 1986) suggest that the
SiC whiskers in the 10% vol. SiCw composite act as grain growth inhibitors. Therefore, this
composite should be stronger and tougher than the alumina and the 5% vol. SiCw composites,
because the fracture strength o f alumina decreases with increasing grain size. This effect
ultimately activates and enhances the toughening mechanisms produced by the presence o f the
whiskers in the matrix structure. The SEM micrograph in figure 4.24(a) for the 10% vol. SiCw
specimen reveals two o f these toughening mechanisms. Evidence o f w hisker pull-outs protruding
whiskers and whisker-shaped cavities is clearly visible in figure 4.24(a). In addition, figure
4.24(a) reveals the presence of whisker outlines in the plane o f crack, which some studies suggest
is the result o f crack deflection along the whisker matrix interface (Krgness et. al.. 1991). The

surface for 10% vol. SiCw/AI203 composite (a); and 20% vol. SiCw/AI203
composite (b)
128
micrograph o f figure 4 .24(a) suggests a predominantly transgranular fracture mode for this
composite material.
20% Vol. SiCw/AI?Oi

This composite material, which also contains AM-type SiC whiskers, exhibited
intermediate strength under impact. The fracture impact stress o f 71.3 ksi for this specimen is 22%
lower than that of the 10% vol. SiCw specimen. The reduced impact strength o f this composite
may be associated with structural defects caused by processing techniques. Figures 4.24(b), and
4.25(a) and (b) are SEM micrographs o f fracture surfaces for the 20% vol. SiCw composite.
Figures 4.24(b) and 4.25(a) reveal an area within the initiation site about 30 pm wide, which seems
to contain a cluster of unbonded, poorly dispersed whiskers. The difficulty in achieving greater
whisker dispersion at higher whisker content may be related, some studies suggest, to whiskerwhisker interactions during hot pressing (Tiegs and Becher, 1987). Therefore, to obtain better
performance from high whisker content composites, better processing techniques must be used to
eliminate the structural flaws.
Despite the intermediary performance exhibited by this composite under impact for the
reasons explained above, the magnified SEM micrograph of figure 4.25(b) for this specimen
reveals evidence of several whisker pull-outs, crack deflection, and intragranular SiC whisker
fractures. The predominant matrix fracture mode, as seen from this figure, is transgranular.
30% Vol. SiCw/AbOi

The 30% vol. SiCw tape cast composite contains the smaller diameter ACMC-type SiC
whiskers. The fracture dynamic strain for this specimen is 1125 pe; however, the fracture stress is
only 60.9 ksi. because of its relatively low Young's modulus o f 291 GPa. The 30% vol. SiCw
specimen stored the third highest impact energy prior to fracture (0.1201 ft-pounds). The energy

absorbed for this composite is 10% greater than that of the 5% composite, and 2% greater than
th a t
o f the 20% composite. The relatively small increase in energy absorption for this composite
over those o f the 5 and 20% vol. SiCw composites may be caused by the same processing factors
that contributed to a similar intermediary performance by the 20% vol. SiCw composite. In
addition, SEM examination o f fracture surfaces produced by 4-point bending for the 30% SiCw
specimen reveals large whisker agglomerates (approximately 70 pm wide) that could have come
from the starting whiskers. Despite these defects, SEM examination o f the fiacture surfaces shows
many whisker pull-outs, and crack deflections (figure 4.26(a) and (b)). Figure 4.26(a) and (b)
shows that the fiacture mode for this composite seems to be mixed inter-transgranular.
WG-300 (33% Vol. SiCwl

Among the AljO^SiCw composites produced and tested in this study, the W G-300
composites exhibited the lowest impact flexural strength. The average impact fiacture stress o f
49.3 ksi and the average absorbed strain energy o f 0.0852 ft-pounds are. respectively, 46% and
56% lower than those of the 10% vol. SiCw tape-cast composites, and 19% and 29% lower than
those o f the 30% composites. The poor performance by the W G-300 composite materials is likely
related to processing defaults, and possibly to a poorly dispersed (non-uniform as received)
Al2O j/SiCw mixture. As have been mentioned before, the processing method used to produce the
W G-300 specimens is different from the method used to produce the tape-cast specimens. By
loading the WG-300 AlzO^SiCw mixture directly into the hot-press die, the materials lack the
precompactness needed to produce high packing density, possibly resulting in non-uniformity,
contamination, and low packing density- of the loose powder. Furthermore, although both the W G 300 and the 30% vol. SiCw tape-cast composites contain the same Reynolds-type alumina powder,
the same ACMC-tvpe SiC whiskers, and were processed using the same hot-pressing cycle, the

132
average theoretical density percentage o f 92% for the WG-300 specimens was significantly lower
than the 98% TD of the 30% SiCw tape-cast specimens.
The other factor which may contribute to poor performance and inferior density results of
the W G-300 specimens may be related to a poorly dispersed (as received) ANCVSiCw mixture.
Such structural defects were confirmed by this study and earlier studies, where examination of
fracture surfaces using SEM revealed whisker-free agglomerates of alumina grains. The SEM
micrograph o f figure 4 .27(a) for a typical impact-fracture surface of this material clearly shows
such a flaw. A study by Morrone (1988) investigating the fracture toughness and fatigue crack
growth behavior o f WG-300 composites also confirmed the presence o f flaws.
Despite such flaws, examination o f the magnified SEM micrograph o f figure 4.27(b)
reveals whisker debonding, whisker pull-out, through-whisker fracture, and to a lesser degree,
crack deflection. The presence of these fracture types, especially the frequently observed whisker
pull-outs, may explain the high energy transfer ratio (the ratio o f elastic strain energy stored by the
specimen to the potential energy of the drop-weight) exhibited by the WG-300 composites. The
predominant fracture mode o f the alumina matrix, as revealed by figure 4.27(b). is mixed intertransgranular.
4.4.8 Summary and Discussion

Previously, only a few' early studies have investigated low-velocity impact o f ceramics.
Most o f these studies focused on analyzing impacts of ceramic rods or beams, and few. if any.
have dealt with impact of ceramic plates. The following discussion will examine the elastic strain
energy required to deflect the specimen to its fracture the flexural stress. This elastic strain
energy in bending o f the specimen was shown to be the principal energy absorbed by the specimen

surface for WG-300, SiCw/AI203 composite at low magnification (a); and
134
during low-velocity impact (section 4.4.6). Local deformation, caused by local contact tensile
stresses, were examined and discussed earlier in this study, and the results were presented in
section 4.4.2.
We have also derived the equation that estimates the elastic strain energy o f the plate in
bending (Eq. 2.42); and it is clear from this equation that the impact strength o f the ceramic
composite is dependent upon the elastic modulus and flexural strength o f the body. However,
because we had to use two types o f whiskers (ACMC and AM-type whiskers) to produce the
A M V S iC w composites, we ended up with two groups o f materials with two different elastic
modulus. This complication made analyzing and interpreting impact test results more difficult.
Therefore, to compare the dependency of impact strength o f the various ALOj/SiCw composites
tested in this study on their mechanical properties, we must correlate impact test results to these
properties. This correlation w ill be investigated in the last section o f this the chapter.
Although, several studies investigating the mechanical properties o f A LfV S iC w ceramic

materials have shown that incorporating SiC whiskers significantly increases the flexural strength
o f ceramics under static loads, our test results (section 4.2 .2) indicate only modest improvements.
It is logical to think that significant improvement in the flexural strength of SiC-whisker
strengthened ALC^-ceramics would lead to significant improvement in the impact strength o f these
ceramics. For the most part, the impact test results obtained from this study are consistent with this
hypothesis. Table 4.6 summarizes the mechanical and impact properties o f the ATOj/SiCw
ceramic composites tested in this study so that we can further examine this hypothesis.
135
Table 4.6. Summary of Mechanical and Impact Properties for A I 2 Oj/SiCw Composites
Vol. %
SiCw
Young's
Modulus
(GPa)
389
400
5
10
(ACMC)
Kic
(M P a,~ )
MOR
(ksi)
Average
Impact
Fracture
Stress (of)
(ksi)
Measured
Absorbed
Energy
AEo (ft-lb)
Average
Elastic Strain
Energy
Absorbed by
Specimen, Eb
(ft-lb.)
Elastic
Strain
Energy
Absorbed
by Machine
Em (ft-lb.)
4.03
120.4
82.06
0.423
0.1619
0.2225
4.19
92.6
68.64
0.386
0.1091
0.2000
50.4
0.1975
0.061
0.1190
400
5.43
112.5
91.3
0.4581
0.1949
0.2651
20
406
6.23
95.3
71.3
0.308
0.1175
0.1741
30
291
6.31
79.7
60.9
0.323
0.1201
0.1727
293
5.86
61.9
49.3
0.250
0.0852
0.1360
10 (AM)
33
(WG-300)
From examining table 4.6. it is clear that the two composites which exhibit exceptional
flexural strength. M OR (the 0 and 10% SiCw composites), also exhibit exceptional impact strengths.
The SEM analysis of these composites' fracture surfaces, discussed in a previous section, indicated
that die 0 and 10% SiCw composites suffered no major structural defects during the processing o f
these materials. Furthermore, the fiacture surface o f the 10% SiCw specimen showed higher
frequency o f crack deflection than that of the other composites. Crack deflection has been shown by
Homney (1990) and others to contribute significantly to the fracture toughness o f AlÔj/SiCw
composites. This toughening mechanism forces the crack out-of-plane rather than through the whisker,
which means that the crack is no longer normal to the applied stress. When the crack plane is deflected
so that it is no longer normal to the tensile stress axis, applied stress must increase in order for the
Mode I crack tip stress to become sufficient to continue crack growth (Beacher. P.. Tiegs. T and
Angelini. P., 1990). Therefore, crack deflection increases fracture surface area and ultimately
increases the energy absorbed during fracture by forcing a mixed, tortuous fracture mode.
On the other hand, an inspection o f table 4.6 reveals that with the exception o f the alumina
and 10% SiCw composites, the impact strength increases modestly as the SiC whisker content
increases from 5 to 20 to 30%. The reasons for this modest increase in impact strength and the less
than expected performance o f these composites, were analyzed and discussed in the previous
section, and it was concluded from that discussion that the presence of several structural defects
within these composites most likely constrained them from performing to their full potentials.
Despite the modest impact strengths these composites exhibited, evidence o f such energyabsorbent mechanisms as whisker pull-out in these composites were observed and noted in section
4.4.7. In particular, whisker pull-out were observed more frequently in the 30% SiCw and the W G300 specimens than in the other Al;Oj/SiCw composites. Many investigators believe that whisker
pull-out is a strongly function of whisker/matrix interface and whisker aspect ratio (e.g., whisker
diameter). Homeny (1990) suggested that the whisker pull-out toughening mechanism requires
relatively weak whisker/matrix interfacial bonding. In his study o f SiCw/ AlÔj composites,
Homney examined the surfaces of the ACMC-type whisker and found a substantial amount of
excess oxygen and carbon as a result of whisker surface treatments. He concluded that ATOj/SiCw
composites fabricated vith ACMC-type whiskers exhibited extensive whisker pull-out and bridging
because the thin layer o f oxygen and carbon present on the surface of these whiskers prevented
chemical bonding, w hich, in turn, allowed the observed toughening mechanisms to operate. Other
studies showed, based on results associating a decrease in flaw size with decreasing whisker
diameter, that the strength and toughness of whisker-strengthened ceramic composites can be
increased by reducing the diameter of these whiskers (Becher. 1990).
Before we conclude this section, impact data obtained from early studies w ill be presented
for comparison purposes. Table 4 7 lists unpact test results for aluminas (A I2O 3) from several
studies. Only those sources which used the incremental impact test method for their experiments
were selected. Several observations can be made from the test results listed in table 4.7. First, the
impact strengths are widely scattered, reflecting, in part, the dependency o f these results upon the
method o f measurement. For example, the results obtained by Dinsdale and Mcmillian are
significantly lower than those obtained by the rest. Dinsdale (1962) used a test method in which the
cylindrical ceramic test rod moves without constraints and strikes a vertical cylindrical steel anvil.
This test method can yield accurate results if the point o f contact between the anvil and specimen is
maintained exactly the same each time the specimen strikes the anvil. Second, the mechanical
properties o f alumina ceramics are known to be a function o f the grain size o f the alumina. The test
results by Dinsdale (1962), Acquviva (1971), Bertolotti (1974) and Mcmillian (1975) were
obtained for 94-95% purity aluminas with average grain sizes of 8-10 pm. According to literature,
aluminas with coarse grain size are much weaker than aluminas with fine grain size. Multer (1962)
did not list any information regarding purity or grain size for the alumina he tested. Third, the
impact strength values given by Multer (1962) and Monach (1970) (0.280 and 0.315 ft-lb..
respectively) are almost mice as high as the value obtained in this study (0.1619 ft-lb), indicating
that these values are absorbed energies for the specimen/machine combined, and not corrected for
the test machines compliance. Last, the results obtained by Barta (1971) and Davidge (1972) seem
to agree, within accepted experimental errors, with the value (Eb) obtained in this study for the
alumina specimen. Both Barta and Davidge used instrumented ceramic alumina specimens of
better than 99.5% purity (<1 pm grain size) to obtain their results.
138
Table 4.7. Impact Test Results for Alumina (AI 1 O 3 ), as Reported by Earlier Studies
No.
Source
Youngs
Modulus
(Gpa)
MOR
(ksi)
Fracture
Energy, ft-lb
315
50.0
0.027
Dinsdale (1962)
Multer (1966)
0.280
Monack(1970)
0.315
Acquviva (1971)
0.067
Barta (1971)
385
0.091
Davidge (1972)
300
43.5
0.138
Bertolotti (1974)
330
105.0
0.060
Mcmillian (1975)
30.2
0.016
4.5 Comparing the Response of Ceramic Composite Plates to Static and

Low-Velocity Impact Loading
So far this study have dealt separately with the effects o f static and impact forces on
various Al;O j/SiCw ceramic composite specimens, and have considered the ways in which they can
be deformed and the nature of the forces required to fracture them.
In this section an attempt will be made to compare the two responses to each other; namely
the maximum strains and energy absorption for several ceramic composite plates tested under
identical testing geometrical conditions. In addition, an attempt will be made to compare the
fracture patterns and SEM micrographs of fractured surfaces for these ceramic plates under static
and impact conditions. It is hoped that this comparison o f the two responses can help properly
identify some o f the factors w hich cause differences in energy absorption under static and impact
conditions for these ceramic composites.
139
4.5.1 Comparing Load vs. Maximum Strain Curves

To compare the response of ceramic composite plates to static and impact loadings, we
chose two different groups of specimens, the W G-300 (33% SiCw) and the 10% SiCw tape-cast
groups. Each group contains two tested ceramic plates under the two different loading conditions
(figures 4.28 and 4.29). Figure 4.28 shows the difference in maximum strain plotted against load
under static and impact conditions for two W G-300 (E=295 GPa) plates. Figure 4.29 compares the
same thing for two 10% SiCw tape-cast (E=400 G-Pa) plates. It is clear from these two plots that
the difference in maximum strain between the two loading conditions is small at low-impact
velocities (or low impact load). At higher loads, the dynamic strains are 10 to 20% higher than the
static strains (figure 4.28). Although the tape-cast specimen sustained higher loads before fracture
under impact (920 pounds) than the specimen loaded statically (475 pounds), the difference in
response (load vs. strain) is not as pronounced as those for the W G-300 specimens. It is not only
reasonable but also logical to think that the difference in the elastic moduli between the two groups
o f specimens caused this difference in response, with the lower-modulus composites deforming
more under impact than under static loading. The effects of varying the elastic modulus on the
amount o f energy absorbed by these ceramic composites under impact loading w ill be further
analyzed later in this chapter.
4.5.2 Comparing Fracture Energy Curves

There are several factors which cause differences in energy absorption under impact and
static conditions, and identifying and understanding these differences may provide a guide to
material behavior under impulsive loadings. The last section demonstrated that the static strains of
ceramic composite plates are. in general, different from the impact strains due to the difference in
the time allowed for these materials to deform. The difference in response between the two loading
states should be further widened when comparing energy absorption, since strains are directly
impact (1 &
(measured)
o
o
o
c
c
0.6
WG-300 specim ens
C
n
U
in
&
static (1 & 2]
33% SiCw
(measured)
0.4
0.2
100
200
300
t -
400
500
600
700
load P, pounds
Figure 4.28. Comparing the response of WG-300 ceramic composites to static loading and impact
1.2
Tape-Cast specimens
10% SiCw
strain, in/in (x1000)
0.8
static (1 & 2)
(measured)
0.6
impact (1 & 2)
(measured)
0.4
0.2
0
o
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
load P, pounds
Figure 4.29. Comparing the response of tape-cast AI 20 3 /SiCw ceramic composites to static loading and impact
142
proportional to the first power o f the applied forces, while strain energy is proportional to the
second power o f the applied stresses.
Figures 4.30 and 4.31 compare the fracture energy absorbed in bending (Eb) plotted
against measured fracture stress (a,-) under both static and impact conditions. Figure 4.30
compares the two responses for the tape-cast specimens, and figure 4.31 for the W G-300
specimens. A study o f these two figures reveals that the energy' absorbed under impact loading is
about 15 to 30% higher than that which was absorbed under static loading, and this percentage
difference is even greater at higher fracture stresses (higher impact velocities). Note that the slopes
o f the two curves in figure 4.31 are higher than those which are shown in figure 4.30, supporting
the earlier conclusion that the differences in response between the two loading conditions are higher
for those ceramic composites which possess a lower elastic modulus.
4.5.3 Comparing Overall Fracture Patterns

So far the load vs. maximum strain and energy absorption curves o f AhCVSiCw
composites were compared under static and impact conditions. Also, it was shown that for those
weaker composites (the W G-300) fracturing at very low impact velocities, the slopes o f the load
vs. strain curves, for both test conditions, are. in general, identical; although the energy'
absorptions for those composites loaded under impact are slightly higher. It was also shown that
for those stronger composites (the 10% SiCw composites) both the slope of the load vs. strain
curves and the energy absorptions are higher under impact than those obtained under static loading.
To gain more insight on the differences in energy absorption and response of these composites
under the two test conditions, the fracture patterns obtained under impact are compared with those
formed under static loading for several specimens in this section (figures 4.32 to 4.34).
0.25
impact (measured)
Tape-Cast
(0
TJ
C
3
O
a
static (measured)
0.2
Eb (IMPACT)
O) 0.15
c
c
0)
XJ
>
O)
k.
0)
c
a>
0.1
5o
0.05
(0
Eb (STATIC)
20
40
60
80
100
fracture stress (af), ksi
143
Figure 4.30. Comparing absorbed energy in bending under static loading and impact for tape-cast,
AI20 3/SiCwceramic plates
0.2
Eb (impact)
0.18
0.16
(A
TJ
0.14
Eb (impact)
A
X
Eb (static)
Eb (static)
linear fit
WG-300
4T
0.12
UJ
>;)
O
k.
0.1
a>
o
a
>
L.
3
0.08
ts
0.06
to
>*-
IMPACT (1&2)
STATIC (1&2)
0.04
0.02
15
30
45
60
75
90
fracture stress <Xf, ksi

Figure 4.31. Comparing energy absorbed in bending under static loading and impact for WG-300 ceramic
composites
145
Figure 4.32. Fracture patterns caused by static loading and low-velocity

impacts in SiCw/AI203 ceramic square plates. Fracture static loads are 478
and 486 pounds (top) and fracture impact loads and impact velocities are
469 and 478 pounds, and 2.89 and 2.90 ft./sec. (bottom), respectively.
146

impacts in SiCw/A1203 ceramic square plates. Fracture static loads are 625
and 635 pounds (top) and fracture impact loads and impact velocities are
659 and 705 pounds, and 3.56 and 3.72 ft./sec. (bottom), respectively
147

impacts in SiCw/AI203 ceramic square plates. Fracture static loads are 732
and 878 pounds, and 3.76 and 4.47 ft./sec. (top) and fracture impact loads
and impact velocities are 920 and 817 pounds, and 4.47 and 4.48 fUsec.
(bottom), respectively.
148
Figures 4.32 to 4.34 are photographs which show several fractured A M V S iC w composite
plates, whose centers were impacted with various velocities. Figure 4.32 compares the cracking
patterns formed in two composite plates by static loading (a and b) with those obtained by impact
(c and d). These composites plates, which fractured at the loads of 475, 486, 469. and 478 lbs,
respectively, show similar fracture patterns furnishing further evidence of an analogy between the
two test methods. However, deviations in fracture patterns between the two test conditions become
more evident for those stronger composites requiring higher impact velocities at fracture (figures
4.33 and 4.34). For these composites, the number o f cracks formed under impact (figures 4.33 (c
and d) and 4.34) is greater than those obtained under static loading (figure 4.33 (a and b)).
This increase in the amount o f cracking (crack density) for the stronger composites (the 0,
10, and 30% SiCw tape-cast composites) partially explains the fact that the time factor
contributed to the higher energy absorbed by these composites under impact compared to under
statically applied loads.
4.5.4 Comparing Fracture Surfaces

In order to determine w hether a change from impact to static loading of A l;O j/SiC w
ceramic plates is associated with any change in fracture mechanisms o f these ceramics. SEM
fractographs of fractured specimens are compared and presented in this section. Fractured surfaces
under impact conditions were examined in detail in section 4.4.7; therefore. SEM micrographs o f
fractured surfaces obtained under static loading that are presented in this section w ill be compared
to the SEM micrographs in section 4.4.7 (figures 4.24 (a) and 4.27 (b)).
Figures 4.35 and 4.36 show SEM fractographs comparing macro fractures under static
and impact loadings for the 10% vol. SiCw. tape-cast and WG-300 specimens, respectively. The
fractographs in these figures are of fractured pieces taken from the broken A M V S iC w ceramic
plates that were shown optically in the previous section. For the specimens in figure 4.35(a) and
(b). the fracture static and impact loads are 475 and 920 lb. respectively; and the fractures static
and impact strains are 660 and 1180 microns, respectively. For the W G-300 specimens, the
fracture static and impact loads are 635 lb and 602 lb. respectively; and the fractures static and
impact strains are 1060 and 975 microns, respectively.
Figures 4.35 and 4.36 show that the fracture surfaces for those specimens tested under
static loading are smoother and flatter than those tested under impact; those fracture surfaces
obtained under impact show considerable chipping at the compressive faces. In addition, the
fracture surface o f the specimen shown in figure 4.35(b) (which exhibited high impact strength)
shows more pronounced hackles at the tensile face than the other weaker specimens shown in
Figures 4.35(a), 4.36(a), and 4.36(b). Note that for the specimen o f figure 4.36(a), the fracture
originated from a large whisker/matrix agglomerate (about 0.8 mm wide) located 0.3 mm below
the tensile surface. This type of flaw was also observed on the fracture surfaces o f the W G-300
specimens tested under impact (see section 4.4.7).
The complex fracture mechanisms (more branching and chipping) under impact observed in the
figures described in the previous paragraph may be explained as follows. If the amount o f stored
elastic energy' is sufficiently large under impact loading, the fracture process may reach a point
where the rate o f increase in forming one single fracture area is less than the release rate o f the
stored energy. Consequently, the crack will branch into several separate radial cracks, following
the contour o f high tensile stresses, until the rate of increase in fracture surface area is sufficiently
large to contain the release rate of stored elastic energy' (Kepple and W'asvlyk. 1994). Therefore,
one can conclude that for A l;0 3/SiCw specimens of identical composition, the fracture surfaces
obtained under impact loading will exhibit more complex fracture mechanisms (chipping
Figure 4.35. Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) of macro fracture

surface for 10% vol. SiCw/AI203 composite (a) obtained under static
loading; and (b) under impact.
Figure 4.36. Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) of macro fracture

surface for WG-300 SiCw/AI203 composite (a) obtained under static
loading; and (b) under impact.
152
and more branching), than those exhibited under static loading; and that the degree o f complexity
in fractures increases with increasing strength o f the specimen.
Finally, typical SEM micrographs of fracture surfaces obtained under static loading will
be examined here, for those specimens which are described in the previous paragraphs. Figures
4.37 and 4.38 represent the fracture surfaces for the 10% vol. SiCw and W G-300 specimens of
figures 4.35(a) and 4.36(b), respectively. From figure 4.37. it is clear that the fracture surface of
the 10% vol. SiCw composite obtained under static loading exhibits a predominantly similar
transgranular fracture as that which was observed for the 10% vol. SiCw specimen tested under
impact (figure 4.28). However, the percentage transgranular fracture under static load appears to
be slightly higher than that which was observed for figure 4.28 (for the impact load). In addition,
such toughening mechanisms as crack deflection, through whisker fracture, and, to a lesser extent,
whisker pull-out can also be observed under static loading in figure 4.37. Figure 4.38. which
represents the fracture surface of the WG-300 specimen obtained under static loading, also shows
similar inter-transgranular mix fracture modes as those which were observed for specimens tested
under impact (figure 4 .3 1), and identical toughening mechanisms.
4.6 Correlating Low-Velocity Impact Test Results With Static Material

Properties
In this section, the influence o f various material properties, measured under static loading
will be assessed on the amount of impact energy absorbed by AW VSiC w ceramic plates. The
unpact fracture energy absorbed by each composite was estimated from measured fracture stresses.
Because o f the similarity between the static and impact test methods, we believe that the impact
behavior o f ceramic composite specimens could be correlated with their static Young's modulus
(E). fracture toughness (KiC). and four-point bending strength (M O R ). I f we can show the effects
Figure 4.37. Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) of statically obtained

fracture surface for 10% vol. SiCw/AI203 composite (a) at low magnification;
and (b) higher magnification.
Figure 4.38. Scanning electron micrographs (SEM) of statically obtained

fracture surface for WG-300 SiCw/AI203 composite (a) at low magnification;
and (b) higher magnification.
155
o f static material properties on the impact behavior o f these ceramics, then we may be able to
predict the impact strengths of ceramic composite materials based on their static material
properties. Determining the physical property o f a ceramic composite plate that dictates the most
its behavior under low-velocity impact should lead to the development of more impact-resistant
ceramic materials. In addition to the three mentioned properties (E, K[C. and M O R), the effect o f
specimen porosity on the impact strength of ceramic composites will also be examined in the
section .
4.6.1 Impact Fracture Energy vs. Youngs Modulus

Figure 4.39 is a plot showing the relationship between the measured impact fracture
energy (Eb) and Young's modulus (E), for Al;Oj/SiCw ceramic composite specimens. This
comparison is attempted because two types o f silicon carbide whiskers were used to produce the
AljCVSiCw composites tested in the present experiments. These two types o f SiC whiskers possess
two different average diameters: the A M SiC whiskers with an average diameter o f approximately
0.8 pm, and the ACM C SiC whiskers with an average diameter of approximately 0.3 - 0.4 pm.
This, o f course, adds another factor which must be considered in analyzing unpact test results.
because the average measured elastic modulus of the composites which contain ACM C whisker is
significantly lower than that of the composites which contain AM whiskers.
The Young's modulus values for these composites were measured and presented in an
earlier section. In order to take into account the fact that the ceramic specimen strength depends on
flaw distribution (however. Yong's modulus measurements are independent o f surface flaws), the
impact fracture energy w as normalized by dividing it by the potential energy o f the drop-weight
(E0). The plot in figure 4.39. which shows a negative slope line fitted through test points, suggests
an inverse dependence of impact fracture energy on the Young's modulus. However, this
<A
C
"O
0.25
a.
(A
TJ
C
0.2
4_______
3
O
ft
a
0.15
UJ
>>
O)
k_
<u
0% SiCw
0.1
A 10% SiCw
0)
a
>
k_
43
->
u
ra
ft
5% SiCw
X
20% SiCw
30% SiCw (ACMC)
0.05
33% SiCw (W G -300)

Linear fit
ra
a
E
250
300
350
400
450
Young's modulus (E), GPa
Figure 4.39. Correlation between Young's modulus and impact fracture energy for AI203 /SiCwcomposites
157
dependence is not very pronounced in this plot because the measured E values did not vary
significantly with varying whisker content for these composites (with the exception o f the 30% SiC
vol., and W G-300 composites). The percentage increase in normalized fracture impact energy
absorbed by the composite with the lowest E value (291 GPa for the 30% SiCw) over that
absorbed by the composite which has the highest E value (406 GPa for the 20% SiCw) is 14%.
These test results are qualitatively in good agreement with theoretical predictions.
One may explain further the results o f figure 4.39 bv studying Equation 2.41 o f section
2.3.4. Equation 2.42, which computes the elastic strain energy in bending, Eb, o f the plate is
a '
primarily dependent on the ratio where crx is the bending stress and E is the Young's
E
modulus. , too, mav be written in terms o f the dynamic strains, e x. For a square plate
E
impacted at its center, this ratio becomes:
Ee (1-u)
where v is the Poisson's ratio. Note that the dynamic strains, e x, are directly related to the impact
load amplitude. F0, and. therefore, the ratio
fe
, which represent the slope o f the max. Ioad-
\ F J
strain curve, should be constant for the range of incremental impact tests for specimens o f the same
composition (see section 4.4.4). Furthermore, from the results o f the incremental impact tests, we
found the ratio o f elastic strain energy, Eb. in the specimen to the potential energy, E, o f the drop
weight is (within an accepted experimental scatter) constant for specimens o f the same material.
Therefore, the average ratios
E,
\ E aj
and
'.y
were calculated from the incremental impact
ave.
158
tests for each composite, and
Eh)
v E oJ
was plotted against

ave.
r E,
From figure 4.40. the highest average -
VFJ
as shown in figure 4.40.
ratios are exhibited by the 30%-tape cast (E =291
\ E,
GPa) and the W G-300 (E=293 GPa) composites. These two composites contain the ACMC-type
SiC whiskers. The percentage increase in energy absorption ratio o f the 30%-tape cast composite
over that of the 20%-tape cast composite (E=406 GPa), which contains the larger diameter A M type SiC whiskers, is about 9%. It appears, therefore, that under conditions o f low velocity impact
loading, a reduction in elastic modulus results in a higher energy absorption ratio. The following
two reasons may explain the cause of this difference in energy absorption between the two
composites with different SiC whiskers. First, reducing the whisker diameter results in an increase
o f strain to fracture. The increase in strain to fiacture increases the area under the stress/strain
curve for the composite with the smaller diameter whisker. A study by Cantwell (1991) on impact
resistance o f fiber-reinforced composite materials suggests that composites with larger areas under
the stress/strain curves absorb more energy. Second. SEM examination o f impacted fracture
surfaces reveals that the 30% SiCw tape cast and WG-300 composites have more protruding
whiskers and w hisker-shaped cavities that appear to result from whisker pullouts than do the AM
whisker-type composites. Fiber pullout is considered a primary energy dissipation mechanism for
impact-resistant, fiber reinforced composite materials (Cantwell. 1991).
One may conclude that under the conditions o f low-velocity impact loading, AbOj/SiCw
composites with lower elastic moduli tend to absorb more elastic strain energy than composites
with higher elastic moduli. This conclusion agrees both with theory (Equation 2.42) and with other
researchers. Smoke (1970), who investigated the impact resistance o f fine-textured. electrical grade
Figure 4.40. Effects of Young's modulus on energy absorption of AI203 /SiCwceramic composites under impact
160
ceramic rods, found that bodies possessing the lowest value o f Young's modulus are the most
impact-resistant. Kirchner (1975) also concluded from a study o f impact fractures o f several
ceramic rods with different compositions, that a low Young's modulus is desirable since it results
in larger deflections and. therefore, more energy absorbed during deflection.
4.6.2 Impact Fracture Energy vs. Fracture Toughness (Kic)

Figure 4.41 is a plot showing the relationship between the measured impact fracture
energy (Eb) and the static fracture toughness (Kic) for the A^CVSiCw ceramic composite
specimens. The impact fracture energy values were normalized with respect to the potential energy
of the falling weight (E0). The reason for the normalization, as we stated earlier, is because the
energy transfer ratio, Et/E0. of the ceramic specimen does not depends on flaw distribution. The
test results shown in figure 4.41 indicate that the normalized impact fracture energy increases with
an increase in specimen fracture toughness, with the exception o f the monolithic alumina which
exhibited high impact strength. Comparing the 5% SiCw (K[C = 4.27 ksi -Jin ) and the 20% SiCw
(Kic = 5 .49 ksi -Jin ) specimens, a 22% increase in K[C results in a 42% increase in impact fracture
strength. Within some accepted experimental scatter, these test results are qualitatively consistent
with theoretical predictions.
The following paragraphs discuss whether a conceptual correlation exists between Kic
values, obtained from slow bend fracture mechanics tests, and impact test results for the materials
tested in this study. I f such a correlation exists, it would not only show the effect o f increasing K [C
on energy absorption for AI:Oj/SiCw composites as compared with the effects o f other mechanical
properties, it would be possible to relate directly impact test results to structural design for these
materials. (K [C values are measured in terms o f the allowable stress level for a given flaw size, Cm.)
Thus, such a correlation could be used to estimate Ktc values from impact test results. Following
0.25
(A
C
TJ
0.2
a
0.15
(A
C
0% SiCw
5% SiCw (AM)
10% SiCw
20% SiCw
30% SiCw (ACMC)
33% SiCw (W G -300)
linear fit
T3
3
O
0.1
Ui
Ui
0.05
- h
t
10
20
30
40
50
(Kic)2, (ksi sqrt in)
Figure 4.41. Correlation between fracture toughness, KIC and impact fracture energy for AI20 3 /SiCwceramic
composites
r-*
ON
162
this reasoning, K[C -impact results correlations could be used to predict energy absorption levels
for various ceramic materials, if the stress-flaw size relations developed from fracture mechanics
concepts are known (Barson and Rolfe, 1970).
There have been several studies attempting to correlate Charpv-V notched specimen
(C VN ) impact results with slow-bend. fracture mechanics Kic values for structural steels; but no
such studies are reported for ceramics. Rolfe and Novak (1970) conducted four-point slow bend
Kic tests using linear-elastic fracture mechanics (LEFM ) concepts, and Charpy-V notch impact
tests, for medium-strength high-toughness steels. Their results show that an empirical correlation
does exist between K [C and CVN tests when energy absorption values obtained from impact tests
are normalized on the basis o f yield strength. Barson and Wolfe (1970) established similar
correlation between the results of slow-bend K[C tests and those o f standard CVN impact tests for
several structural steels with yield strengths that range from 40 to 250 ksi. Hertzberg (1987)
postulates that the K[C -CVN results obtained from statically and dynamically loaded samples can
be correlated, depending on whether strain effects are minimized and whether the Charpy specimen
is pre-cracked.
To determine if a correlation exits between KjC values and impact test results for the
ATOj/SiCw composites, we w ill carry out the following conceptual analysis. Equation 2.41 shows
<7f 2
that the elastic strain energy in bending of the plate is most dependent on the : ratio, where a f
E
is the dynamic bending stress at fracture and E is the Young's modulus, or
163
Fracture mechanics show that K[C is related to crf, and critical flaw size, Cm, as follows:
K IC = Y
where Y is a shape factor, dependent on specimen geometry and crack size. Thus,
af
E
I _ K[c~ _ c h e
Y2
CmE
where we have assumed for the sake o f simplicity that the variation in Cm values for all A kfV S iC w
composites studied here is not significant (see section 4.2.3). Therefore:
-l= f
Values of
Kic
f K !C * ^
were calculated for each composite and plotted against average Eb/E0
values obtained from incremented impact tests, with the result shown in figure 4.42. Figure 4.42
clearly shows that a correlation between K lc values and absorbed energy for these materials exists:
although for the small range o f K tc values used in figure 4.42. the effect o f increasing KiC values
on energy absorption under impact is not very strong. This conclusion may be further justified
based on studies which show an apparent lack o f difference between fracture toughness values
measured under slow -bend tests. K[c, and those measured under impact loads. K,d. One o f these
studies (Hiroshi. 1978) compared fracture toughness values. Kld- calculated from load/time traces
for commercial silicon carbides, with those obtained from slow-bend tests. K|C. Hiroshi found very
little, if any. difference between the two values, even though, the strain rate under impact was
nearly five orders of magnitude greater than the strain rate under static tests. Another more recent
Figure 4.42. Correlation between K|Cand impact test results for AI20 3/SiCwcomposites
0.36
164
165
study by Deobald (1994) also found that the static toughness value, K [C, and the impact fracture
toughness value. Kld, are essentially equivalent for AI2O 3 and 29 vol% SiC/ A120 3.
4.6.3 Impact Fracture Energy vs. Four-point Bending Strength

In this section, the dependence o f absorbed elastic energy o f AECVSiCw ceramic
composites on their statically measured bending strengths (M O R ) are analyzed; since two o f these
composites, the 30%-tape cast and the WG-300 composites, have markedly lovver-than-average
MORs. In order to accomplish this analysis, the relationship between the measured static 4-point
bending strength (M O R ) and measured impact fracture energy (Eb) for A l2(V S iC w ceramic
composite specimens is plotted in figure 4.43. The positive slope line fitted through the test points
correlates well with theoretical predictions because impact fracture energy' (Eb) varies directly with
(M O R ): as derived in Chapter 2 . The comparison between the impact fracture energy absorbed by
the 0% SiCw specimen (M O R = 120.4 ksi) and that absorbed by the WG-300 specimen
(M OR=61.9 ksi), demonstrates that a 48.5 % increase in bending strength results in a 62.2%
increase in impact fracture energy'.
This last comparison between energy absorbed by alumina and energy absorbed bv the
WG-300 specimens (average value) suggests that the strength o f the ceramic specimen under low
velocity impact conditions is favorably influenced by its static bending strength (M O R ). However,
this comparison is somewhat flawed because both the static bending strength and impact fracture
stress are statistical material properties, which are dependent on flaw distribution. Nevertheless.
Equation 2.42 shows that the elastic strain energy, stored in the specimen before fracture, is the
minimum energy that the projectile has to deliver to the specimen in order for the stress to reach the
dynamic strength. Thus, the quantity
is really the parameter which can be used to screen
tf>
o
c
3
0.2
0% SiCw
0.16
5% SiCw
XI
UJ
>.
O) 0.12
a>
10% SiCw
20% SiCw
0)
O 30% SiCw (ACMC )
ir 0.08
o
(0
i_
33% SiCw (WG-300)

Linear fit
5 0.04
(0
a
E
-i
3000
6000
9000
12000
15000
18000
four-point bending Strength (MOR) squared, ksi2
Figure 4.43. Correlation between four-point bending strength (MOR) and impact fracture energy for AI20 3/SiCw
ceramic composites
167
any group o f materials for impact resistance to flexural stresses. This quantity, - , which is
E
measured by means of the incremental impact drop test was shown by Smoke (1970) to be directly
related to the static transverse strength, for alumina rods. Smoke used his method o f analysis to
demonstrate that by equating a portion of the kinetic energy (K-E) imparted on the alumina rod by
the projectile (a fraction of K-E is spent in overcoming the inertia of the rod) to the elastic strain
energy o f the rod (with the assumption that the fracture stress under impact is equal to MOR
multiplied by a constant), a correlation exists between the impact strength o f these alumina rods
and their static transverse strength and Young's modulus o f elasticity. Smoke also concludes that
randomly distributed structural defects in alumina rods have a greater influence on the static
transverse strength than the impact strength o f these rods. In a similar earlier study, Dinsdale
(1962) measured the impact strength of cylindrical ceramic rods using a modified incremental
impact test to study the correlation between the impact strength of his test specimens and the
modulus o f rupture and Young's modulus o f material. In Dinsdale's experiment, the cylindrical
ceramic rod was free of constraints at the moment o f transverse central impact with a vertical
cylindrical steel anvil. Dinsdale's results show a linear relationship between
(M O R )2
----- and
(M O R )\ and the impact strength (he defines impact strength as the impact energy to cause
fracture, E0, divided by the volume of the rod), although his experimental points show considerable
scatter about the straight line fit.
Although the results of Smoke and Dinsdale studies agree qualitatively with the results o f
this study (figure 4.43). it may be worthwhile for future studies to compare the indented transverse
strength am. with the absorbed energy transfer ratio (Eb/E0) obtained from low-velocity impact
tests, since both o f these quantities are less influenced by surface flaw distributions.
168
Therefore, we conclude that an approximate linear relationship should exist between the
elastic strain energy stored in the specimen under transverse impact, and the modulus o f rupture
(M O R ) o f the material; and this relationship suggests that materials which possess the highest
static bending strength should possess the highest resistance to low-velocity impact flexural
stresses.
4.6.4 Specimen Porosity E ffects on Impact Strength

The two plots in figure 4.44(a and b) compare the effects o f specimen porosity (percent
moisture absorption) on the impact strength o f A M V S iC w ceramic composite specimens. Figure
4.44(a) compares impact fracture energy (Eb) test results vs. porosity values for the tape-cast
specimens. Figure 4.44(b) compares the true measured impact fracture energy (AEo) vs. porosity
for the W G-300 specimens. The two plots show the detrimental effects o f porosity on the impact
strength o f these specimens, especially for the W G-300 specimens whose pore volume fractions
range from 0.04 to 0.12.
Extrapolation to zero porosity of the linear fit of experimental data for the W G-300
composites (figure 4.44(b)) yields a value of 0.275 ft-pounds for the true absorbed energy (AE0).
The results o f section 4 .4.6 shows that the average energy absorbed by the impact machine is
0.136 ft-pounds. Therefore, the maximum average energy absorbed by the W G-300 composites is
approximately 0.139 ft-pounds. The average energy absorbed by the tape-cast specimens at zero
porosity is 0.129 ft-pounds (figure 4.44 (a)). In the following discussion, studies correlating the
strength o f ceramics with porosity volume fractions assume spherical pores, uniformly or randomly
169
(A
Tape-Cast
T3
C
3
O
0.24
0.
u
>*
0 .1 6
- i-
0.12
-" *
0 .0 8
0.04
ff
0)
c
0
0
O
a
3
+*
a
t
7X I X
A
6
5% SiCw
1 0 %
SiCw
2 0 %
SiCw
30% SiCw
(ACMC)
! linear fit
!
0 %
a
a
E
SiCw
0.01
0.02
0.03
porosity vol. fraction
WG-300
0.4
measured
ti
linear fit
0.3 *
&
0)
<
o <n
*- -n
0.2
(AE0)
O
CO
3
O
O
0.1
a
<0
3
(/>
(0
a>
0.05
0.1
0.15
porosity vol. fraction
Figure 4.44. Porosity effects on the impact strength of AI203 /SiG ceramic
composites, a) tape-cast composites, and b) WG-300 composites
170
distributed throughout the studied structures. This assumption is made because spherical pores in
ceramics is the minimum-energy configuration (Davidge, 1976).
Studies o f the effects of porosity on the physical and mechanical properties o f ceramics
show the detrimental effects of pores on these properties (Coble et. al., 1958; Murray, 1958;
Smoke, 1970; Homery, 1987; and Krause et. al., 1993). Coble et. al., (1956) investigated the
porosity effects on the strength, elastic modulus, thermal resistance, and torsional creep o f sintered
alumina for porosities ranging from 5 to 50%, with the pores discontinuous and isometric in the
continuous solid phase o f the alumina structure. Their observations o f the four-point bending
strength showed that increasing porosity decreases the strength and maximum strain
(or/E), and that
maximum densities are required for optimum properties. However, this study determined that the
strength w ill be less dependent on total porosity than on surface defects for structures with low
porosities (less than 5%), which agrees qualitatively with the results o f figure 4.44(a). Murray
(1958), in a similar study on the bend strength/porosity relationship for silicate porcelains,
alumina, and zirconia. reached similar conclusions, suggesting that the presence o f pores
introduces stress-concentration effect on the bend strength of the materials he studied. Homney et.
al. (1987) examined the fractured surfaces o f four-point bend ATOj/SiCw ceramic composites and
observed the presence o f porosity along the regions o f poor whisker matrix bonding. However, for
high density specimens which exhibited higher bending strength, fractured surfaces showed little
matrix porosity and the matrix-whisker bonding was observed to be almost complete.
In a more recent study. Krause et. al.. (1993) investigated the fracture resistance and 4point flexure strength o f a 25% wt. AbOj/SiCw composite as a function o f porosities that range
from 0.6 to 11.5%. His study concluded that a decrease in porosity increases the 4-point bend
171
strength and raises the level of fracture resistance, since a decrease in porosity increases the crosssectional area on which the load is applied.
The studies cited above investigated the relationship between porosity and strength o f
ceramics under statically applied loads. One study by Smoke (1970) investigated the correlation
between the impact strength and percent moisture absorption in fine textured, electrical grade
ceramic rods. For the range of porosities studied (0 to 10.5%), this study concluded that to attain
the maximum impact strength possible in these rods, they must be fired to the minimum percent
moisture absorption possible, if these materials don't include crystalline phases that invert at or
below the temperature that gives the body the highest density.
Therefore, one can conclude that porosity adversely affects the impact strength o f
A I2O 3/S 1CW ceramic composites tested in this study, and this conclusion is in full agreement with
ail other studies cited above.
172
Chapter 5
Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
5.1 Summary
The study o f low-velocity impact of A TfV S iC w ceramic composites was the subject of
this dissertation. The following paragraphs summarize the results o f this dissertation:
1. We processed and studied two sets of ALOj/SiCw composites materials for this purpose: tapecast. A lT V S iC w composites, with samples containing SiC whisker volume fractions of 0. 5.
10, 20, and 30%; and WG-300 composites, with samples containing a 33% SiC volume
fraction produced from a commercially available AliCVSiCw powder mixer. The material and
mechanical properties o f both composite groups were determined and examined. The tape-cast
AljOj/SiCw composites exhibited superior bulk densities and significantly higher flexural
strength (almost 2 to 1 ratio) under both static loading (M O R ) and impact. We associated this
marked difference in properties between the two composite groups to differences in the
processing techniques used to manufacture composite samples. Lamination (precompactness)
during tape-casting processing results in superior packing density o f constituents prior to hot
pressing. On the other hand, loading the WG-300 powder mixer directly into the hot-press die
may result in non-uniformity, contamination, and low packing density o f the loose powder.
2.
We examined ALOj/SiCw polished surfaces with optical as well as scanning acoustic (SAM )
microscopes and found that as a result of cross-ply stacking during the tape-casting process,
the w hiskers in the tape-cast composites are preferentially aligned perpendicular to the hotpressing axis; however, in planes normal to this axis, the whiskers are randomly distributed.
3.
In our low-velocity unpact experiments we acquired and correlated impact information for the
A l:Oj/SiCw composites from two independent sources: the Dynatup drop test machine, whose
instrumented tup collected various impact parameters including load, deflection, energy, and
time, and transmitted them to the machine's data acquisition system for display: and strain
gages built into the back face directly beneath the impact center of the specimen, which
transmitted transient strain signals of the strained specimens were transmitted and captured
173
them with a storage oscilloscope. The agreement between the two measurement systems is
excellent, further validating the two test results. We later used the impact load obtained from
the instrumented tup measurements to predict the flexural transient strains in the specimens,
and compared this prediction with experimental values obtained directly from the strain gage
measurements.
4.
We adopted a testing procedure for our impact experiments in which the drop-weight energy is
increased incrementally until the ATOM'SiCw ceramic specimen fractured. This test method not
only enabled us to determine fracture strains and energies, but also to obtain the dynamic strain
and stress curves for each composite up to fracture. Possible pre-fracture damage (weakening)
o f ATOj/SiCw specimens due to repeated impacts was examined and assessed. Using optical
and C-scan ultrasonic NDE techniques, we examined three WG-300 specimens which were
subjected to repeated impacts o f various intensities and found no apparent damage.
5.
We also looked for signs o f local damage just outside the area o f contact between the projectile
and specimen caused by local-contact tensile stresses during low-velocity impact of
AliCVSiCw composites. C-scan and optical microscope test results showed no such damage.
Furthermore, examination o f all broken specimens revealed that fractures in these specimens
initiated in the center of the face opposite the impact point, where maximum flexural stresses
are known to exist, and propagated toward the plates edges.
6.
We theoretically studied the effects of dynamic flexural stresses in ANO^SiCw composites and
compare test results with theoretical predictions. A theoretical model, in which a projectile with
a spherical head transversely impacts a ceramic plate at the center at low velocities, was
formulated. In this analytical model, we considered the effects of the plates transverse
vibrations, and modeled the impact load variation with time as a half-sine curve. This
assumption enabled us to obtain closed-form. approximate solutions for the plate's transient
deflection, stresses and strains, and its elastic strain energy in bending. However, to obtain
converging solutions for the plates dynamic flexural stresses and strains, we also modeled the
point-impact load to work uniformly over a small rectangular area in the center o f the plate.ln
general, the analytical model predictions yielded good results when compared with results
obtained from our impact experiments. In some cases the agreement between theory and
experiment reached 90% o f each other, further validating the experimental impact results.
174
7.
In our studv o f low-velocity impact o f ceramic materials, we compared impact fracture

energies estimated from the output of the specimen's strain gages (Eb) with results obtained
from the output of the impact machine's instrumented tup (AEo). This process is important
because in instrumented impact testing of ceramic materials, the break up o f the drop-weight
potential energy (E0) should not only include the deformation o f the specimen, but also the
elastic-upe deformation by the testing machine assembly.
8.
We considered the effects of dynamic flexural stresses on the impact resistance o f AhCVSiCw
composites in this study. Examination o f fractured ATO j/SiCw samples revealed that dynamic
flexural stresses prevailed over local-contact tensile stresses, and that for all specimens tested,
failure occurred due to bending.
9.
We examined the composites' fracture surfaces using SEM examination and found
predominantly transgranular fractures under impact for the 5, 10, and 20% vol. SiCw, tapecast composites: while the 30% vol. SiCw. tape-cast, and W G-300 composites had intertransgranular fractures.
10. We also devoted part of this study to investigating the difference in response o f the
AljO j/SiCw composite plates under static loading and under low-velocity impact. A
comparison of load vs. strain curves revealed a small difference in the two strain curves at low
impact velocities. At higher velocities (for the stronger composites), the dynamic strains are 10
to 20% higher than the static strains. Similarly, a comparison of fracture curves revealed that
the energy absorbed under impact is about 10 to 30% higher than that which is absorbed under
static loading. In addition, a comparison o f fracture patterns showed that for those composites
which fractured at the higher impact velocities, the number o f radial cracks formed under
impact is greater than those formed under static loading.
11. Finally, we attempted to correlate the material and mechanical properties o f AFCySiCw
composites with their impact strengths. Theoretical relations as well as experimental
correlations indicate that the impact strength o f these materials is directly proportional to the
material bending strength and the material fracture toughness, and inversely proportional to the
Young's modulus o f the materials.
175
5.2. Conclusions
From the present study of low-velocity impact of whisker-reinforced ATO j/SiCw ceramic
composites, the following conclusions may be drawn:
1. Any fatigue effects which may have resulted from repeated, low-velocity impacts on
A liO j/SiC w ceramic composites could not be found within the limitations o f the available
NDE testing methods.
2.
Under low-velocity impact. local-contact tensile stresses never reached critical values that
would initiate fiacture around the contact area in any o f the impacted A M V S iC * specimens.
3. The energy absorbed by the impact machine assembly during impact testing o f ANCVSiCw
composites is a large fraction o f the energy supplied to the specimen/machine assembly by the
drop-weight (E0). This fiaction increases as the impact load increases.
4.
Under impact test conditions, the elastic strain energy' in bending, stored just prior to fiacture.
is the principal energy absorbed by each A^CVSiCw composite at fiacture.
5. Under impact loading, crack deflection and transgranular fiacture are respectively the main
toughening mechanism and fiacture mode for those composites containing the larger AM-type
SiC whiskers, while whisker pull-out and inter-transgranular fiacture are the main toughening
mechanism and fiacture mode respectively, for those composites containing the smaller
diameter ACMC-type whiskers.
6. Whisker/matrix agglomerates, non-bonded whiskers, porosity, and poorly distributed whiskers
are typical structural defects observed in AÔj/SiCw composites, which apparently reduced
their impact strengths.
7. The time factor contributes to a higher energy absorbed under impact by A l20 3/SiCw
composites, compared to the energy absorbed under statically applied loads.
8 The ANCh/SiCw composite which possesses the highest bending strength, highest fracture
toughness, highest theoretical density percentage, and lowest Youngs modulus should be the
most impact resistant.
176
5.3 Recommendations for Future Research

The present study on low-velocity impact behavior o f AljO j/SiCw ceramic composites has
some potential areas for further investigations. These areas include the following:
1.
Studying the effects o f different stacking sequences o f the tape-cast, A l:Oj/SiCw laminates on
the response o f these composites to low-velocity impact.
2.
Further investigating the effects of different whisker diameters (of the same SiC whisker type)
on the impact strength o f AkCtySiCw composites. Our preliminary results indicate that
composites containing the larger diameter whiskers perform better under impact than those
containing smaller diameter whiskers.
3.
Determining the impact strengths of notched (or indented) ATCVSiCw composites as a

function o f whisker content. Such a flaw introduced into the tensile surface determines the
strength o f the composite, since it is the worst flaw present in the distribution o f flaw sizes and
orientations. Therefore, a definitive relationship between the impact strength and whisker
volume fraction can be determined.
4.
Further investigating the correlation between static material properties and the low-velocity
impact strength of ATCVSiCw ceramic composites. Our preliminary conceptual analysis as
well as test results strongly suggest such correlations exist. These correlations can then be used
to predict the impact strength of the composites, using, for example, the fiacture toughness
values (Kic) o f the material.
Ill
References
Acquaviva, S.J. (1971), Materials Research and Standards. Vol. 11, No. 10.
Akimune, Y . (1 9 9 0 ),/. Am. Ceram. Soc., Vol. 73 (10), 3019.
. (1991), Ceramics International. Vol. 17, 111.
Akimune, Y ., Katano. Y .. and Matoba. K. (1989), J. Am. Ceram. Soc.. Vol. 72(5), 791.
Amman, J. (1988), Impact: Effects o f Fast Transient Loadings. A.A. Balkema.
Rotterdam/Brookfield.
Askeland. D.R. (1984), The Science and Engineering o f Materials, Brooks/Cole Engineering
Division.
Baek, K.K, and Kim, C.H. (1989), J. Material Science (24), 1589-1593.
Ball, A. and McKenzie, H.W . (1994), Journal de Physique IT I. Vol. 4
Barson, J.M. and Rolfe, S.T. (1970) ASTMSTP 466. 281-302.
Barta, I., Shook, W .B.. and Graves, G.A. (1972), Am. Ceramic Soc. Bull., Vol. 51(5), 464.
Belitskus, D. (1993), Fiber and Whisker Reinforced Ceramics fo r Structural Applications,
Marcel Dekker. Inc.
Becher. P.F. (1986). in Advanced Ceramics II, Elsvier Applied Science.
(1990), Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. (20). 179-95.
Becher. P.F.. Hsueh. C.. and Tiegs. T. (1988). J. Am. Ceram. Soc.. ( ).
Becher, P.F., Tiegs, T .M ., and Angelini. P. (1990), in Fiber Reinforced Ceramic Composites,
Noyes Publications.
Bertolotti. R.L. (1974). J. Am. Ceram. Soc. (57). No. 7.
Cantwell. W.J. and Morton. J. (1991). Composites. Vol. 22(5). 347.
Ceibson. R.F.. (1994). Principles o f Composite Material Mechanics. McGraw-Hill. Inc.
Chakraborty. A.. Bhadun. S.. Reddy. J.. and Mahajan. Y. (1991). P M I vol. 23. No. 3
Chang. F. and Choi. Y. (1990). Mechanics o f Materials. Vol. 10. 83.
178
Chantikul, P., Antis. G.R.. Lawn. B.R., and Marshall, D.B. (1981). J. Am. Ceramic Soc.. Vol. 64,
No. 9.
Chen, J.K. and Sun. C.T. (1985), Composite Structures, Vol. 3, 97.
Coble, R.L. and Kngery, W .D (1956), J. Am. Ceramic Soc. Vol., 39, No. 11.
Cook, R.F. and Lawn. B.R. (1983). ,4m. Ceram. Soc. (66), C 200-C 20I.
Dao, K.C., Shockey, D.A., Seaman. L.. Curran. D R., and Rocliffe, D.J. (1979). Annual Report.
Davidge, R.W . (1979), Mechanical Behavior o f Ceramics. Cambridge University Press.
Davidge, R.W . and Phillips. D.G. (1972), J. Materials Science (7), 1308-1314.
Deobald. L. and Kobavshi. A. (1994), ASTMSTP, 1207, 793-802.
Dinsdale, A ., Moulson, A.J.. and Wilkinson. W .T. (1962), Transactions o f the British Ceramic
Society, Vol. 6 1.
Dobyns, A .L. and Porter, T.R. (1981), Polymer Engineering and Science. Vol. 21, No. 8.
Dove, R. (1964), Experimental Stress Analysis and Motion Measurements. Charles E. Merril
Books, Inc.
El-Raheb. M . and Wagner. P. (1987). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. (78), 497.
Evans. A.G. (1973). J. Am. Ceram. Soc.. Vol. 56, 405.
(1979), in Treatise on Materials Science and Technology. Vol. 16. 1.
Goldsmith, W . (1960). Impact: The Theory and Physical Behavior o f Colliding Solids. Edward
Arnold (Publishers) Ltd.
Greszczuk. L.B. (1982), in Impact Dynamics, John Wiley & Sons.
Havek. S.I. (1991), Advanced Mathematical Methods in Engineering, The Pennsylvania State
University.
Hertzberg. R.W . (1987), Deformation and Fracture Mechanics o f Engineering Materials. John
Wiley & Sons.
Hiroski. A., and Chandan. H. (1978), J. Am. Ceram. Soc.. Vol. 57. No. 6.
Homeny. J. (1990), Ceramic Matrix Composites.
Homeny. J., Vaughn. W . and Ferber, M. (1987). Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 67(2). 333-38.
Howard. R.N. (1944). The Strength o f Plastics and Glass. Interscience Publishers. Inc.
Ireland, D.R. (1974), ASTMSTP 563, 3-29.

Keer, L.M . and Lee, J.C. (1985), International J. o f Engineering Science, Vol. 23(10), 987.
Kepple, J.B. and Wasylyk, J.S. (1994) in Fractography o f Glass, Plenum Press.
Kirchner, H.P., and Gruver, R.M . (1977), Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 28, 249.
Kirchner, H.P., Gruvner, R .M ., and Sotter. W .A. (1975), J. Am. Ceram. Soc., Vol. 58.
Knight, C.G.. Swain, M .V ., and Chaudhri, M .M . (1977), J. Materials Sciences. Vol. 12, 1573.
Kobayshi, T., Niinomi. J., Yoshihiro. K., and Matsunama, K. (1986). Transactions o f the Japan
Institiute o f Metals, Vol. 27, No. 10.
Kragness. E.D., Amateau, M .F. and Messing, G.L. (1991), J. o f Composite Materials. Vol. 25,
416.
Krause, R.F. and Fuller, E.R. (1990), J. Am. Ceramic Soc. (73), 559-66.
Langhaar, H.L. (1962), Energy Methods in Applied Mechanics, John Wiley & Sons. Inc.
Lankford, J. and Blanchard, C.R. (1991), Materials Science and Engineering, A138. 63.
Lio, S., Watanabe, M Matsubara. M .. and Matsu, Y. (1989). J. Am. Ceram. Soc.. 72(10), 1880.
Mallick, P.K. (1988), Fiber Reinforced Composites, Marcel Dekker. Inc.
Mcmillian. P.W. and Tesh. J.R. (1975), J. Materials Science (10), 621-632.
Mencik. J. (1992), Strength and Fracture o f Glass and Ceramics. Elsevier.
Monack. A.J (1971). Materials Research and Standards. Vol. 11.
Morrone. A.A.. Nutt. S R.. and Suresh. S., (1988), J. Materials Science, 23. 3206
Multer, R. (1966), Materials Research and Standards. Vol. 6. No. 6.
Murry, (1958)??
Nash. G. (1969). International Journal o f Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 5(4). 269.
Porter. J., Lange, F.. and Chokshi, A. (1987). Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 66(2), 343-47.
Read. B.E. (1978). The Determination o f Dynamic Properties o f Polymers and Composites, John
Wiley & Sons.
Richerson. D. (1992). Modern Ceramic Engineering. Marcel Dekker. Inc.
180
Shih, C.J., Yang, J., and Ezis. A. (1990), Materials and Manufacturing Process (5). 35-49.
Smoke, E.J. (1970). Engineering Research Bulletin No. 50, Rutgers University.
Staley, H .F., and Hromatka, J.S. (1919), J. Am. Ceramic Soc. (2), 227-240.
Suresh, S., Nakamura, T Yeshurun, Y ., Yang, K.. and Duffv, J. (1990), J. Am. Ceram. Soc. (73),
2457-66.
Takagi, Y . and Kobayshi, A. (1991), Technical Report AD-A235-286-2-XAB.
Tiegs, T .N . and Becher, P.F. (1986), Ceramic Engineering and Science Proceedings. Vol.7 n 910, 1182.
(1987), Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull., 66(2), 339.
Timoshenko, S. (1959), Theory o f Plates and Shells, M cGraw-Hill, Inc.
(1972), Theory o f Elasticity, McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Timoshenko, S.P., and Goodiev, J.N. (1970), Theory o f Elasticity, 3rd ed McGraw-Hill. Inc.
Tsai, Y .M . (1971), Int. J. Solids Structures, Vol. 7. 543.
Tsai, Y .M . and Chen. Y .T. (1983), Engineering Fracture Mechanics. Vol. 18. No. 6, 1185-1190.
Volterra. E. (1971), Advanced Strength o f Materials. Prentice-Hall. Inc.
Wang, C. and Yew, C. (1990), Computers & Structures. Vol. 37(6), 967.
Wei. C.G. and Becher. P.F. (1985), Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull.. 64 (2). 298.
Whitney. J. (1987), Structural Analysis o f Laminated Anistropic Plates. Technomic Publishing
Company book.Wittmer. D.E.. and Trimble. W. (1989). Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc. (10).
1233-1280.
Wogulis. S.G., Whitney, B.W., and Ireland, D.R. (1980), ASTMSTP 710. 155-187.
Wrona, B., Rhodes. J.. and Rogers. W. (1989), Advanced Composite Materials Corp.. Greer, SC.
Yang, K. and Kobayshi. A. (1990), J. Am. Ceram. Soc. (72), 2309-45
Yasuda, E.. Akatsu. T.. and Tanabe. Y. (1991). J. Ceramic Society o f Japan. Int. Edition (99).
No. 1-3.
Zukas. J.A. (1990). High Velocity Impact Dynamics. John Wilev & Sons. Inc.
Vita
Bom in Hofiif, Saudi Arabia, Khalid Al-Dheylan was graduated from Hofufs High
School. He obtained the degrees o f Bachelor o f Science in Mechanical Engineering in 1982 from
the University o f Pittsburgh, and Master o f Science in Aerospace Engineering in 1985 from the
Pennsylvania State University. In 1985 he began employment with the royal government o f Saudi
Arabia as a structural engineer at the Aeronautical Engineering section o f the Royal Saudi A ir
Force at Dhahran. Saudi Arabia. His duties and tasks included engineering studies, structural
damage assessment and repair, and supervision of repairs, as well as engineering-related
troubleshooting for the fleet o f Royal Saudi A ir Force aircraft. M r. Al-Dheylan continued this
profession with the Royal Saudi Air Force for five years until the government o f Saudi Arabia
awarded him a full scholarship to pursue his doctoral studies in the United States.

Pay Out

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Pay Out

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

INFORMATION TO USERS

The Pennsylvania State University

A STUDY OF THE LOW-VELOCITY IMPACT BEHAVIOR OF WHISKERREINFORCED AUOj/SiCw CERAMIC COMPOSITES

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment

UMI Number: 9702242

300 North Zeeb Road

We approve the thesis of Khalid A. AI-Dheyian.

CHAPTER 2. THEORETICAL ANALYSIS..........................................................19

The Differential Equation o f the Plate.........................................................................................19

2.3. L O W -V E L O C IT Y IM P A C T A N A LYSIS O F A SIM PLY-SU PPO R TED P L A T E ...34

The Equation o f M otion............................................................................................................. 34

2.4. E N E R G Y ABSORBED BY S PEC IM EN AND M A C H IN E ........................................... 43

CHAPTER 3. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES................................................ 47

Material Selection and Specification........................................................................................ 48

CHAPTER 3. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES.................................................47

3.2. S P E C IM E N P R E P A R A TIO N ............................................................................................. 55

3.4. M E C H A N IC A L PRO PERTY C H A R A C T E R IZ A T IO N ............................................... 60

CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS....................................................78

4.2. M E C H A N IC A L PRO PERTY C H A R A C T E R IZ A T IO N S ............................................. 84

4.3. S T A T IC LO A D IN G O F C E R A M IC C O M P O S ITE PLA TES..................................... 94

4.4. L O W -V E L O C IT Y IM P A C T TEST R E S U LTS ..............................................................95

4.5. C O M P A R IN G T H E RESPONSE OF C E R A M IC C O M P O S ITE PLATES TO

Comparing Load vs. Maximum Strain Curves......................................................................... 139

Impact Fracture Energy vs. Young s Modulus.......................................................................... 155

CHAPTER 5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. S U M M A R Y ............................................................................................................................ 172

FIGURE 4.2. SEM MICROGRAPHS OF FRACTURE SURFACES SHOWING

FIGURE 4.21. CORRELATION BETWEEN IM P A C T FRACTURE ENERGY

FIG URE 4.35. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROGRAPHS (SEM ) OF M ACRO FRACTURE

TABLE 3.1 CO NSTITUENT PROPORTIONS OF AL203/SICW CERAM IC

In this introductory chapter, the mechanical properties and toughening mechanisms in

1.1 Literature Review

Other researchers noted that toughness in SiCw/AkOs composites may be increased by

Table 1.1. Mechanical Properties of Various Al2Oj/SiCw Composites

1.1.2. Low-velocity Impact

Lmv-velocity Impact Damage in Monolithic Ceramic Materials

Several researchers in the field o f low-velocity impact of monolithic ceramic materials

Low Velocity Impact Damage in Fiber-Reinforced Composites

Theoretical Analysis Review o f Structural Response to Low-Velocity Impacts

Although advanced ceramic composites have been employed as structural materials in

1.3 Scopes and Objectives

Finally. Chapter 5 contains conclusions and recommendations for future research.

Static Analysis: Simply Supported Plate Under Lateral Loading

The Differential Equation o f the Plate

simple supports on all edges

The moment-deflection relations are written as:

I2 (l-v '") <3r

The Deflection o f the Plate Due to a Concentrated Load

For simply supported plate, the boundary conditions are:

w(x,y) = 1 1 Wm*sin(------ )sin()

n4;r4, . mux . nizy

Hwrnnf + --- + ]stn-------sin

= >.2. r-msirv----- )sin-----)

By observing the orthogonality properties of sine functions, we obtain:

and after integrating:

as we let u - 0 . v>0 . P ^ becomes

mnC, . 7I7T77, . ,m7C. . jin v .

r * sin(-------)s in ( )sin (------)sin ( =-)

Figure 2.2. The loaded area is represented by a small rectangle u

-) sin() sin() stn()

Evaluating Stresses and Strains

and using Eq. (2.10) to evaluate the above expressions yields

Strain Energy o f the Plate in Bending