C1557 Tension y Modulo Compuestos Fibra

Designation: C1557 − 03 (Reapproved 2013)
Standard Test Method for

Tensile Strength and Young’s Modulus of Fibers1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation C1557; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (´) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope designed to be self-aligning if possible, and as thin as practi-

1.1 This test method covers the preparation, mounting, and cable to minimize fiber misalignment.
testing of single fibers (obtained either from a fiber bundle or 3.1.3 system compliance—the contribution by the load train
a spool) for the determination of tensile strength and Young’s system and specimen-gripping system to the indicated cross-
modulus at ambient temperature. Advanced ceramic, glass, head displacement, by unit of force exerted in the load train.
carbon and other fibers are covered by this test standard. 3.2 For definitions of other terms used in this test method,
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as refer to Terminologies D3878 and E6.
standard. No other units of measurement are included in this
standard. 4. Summary of Test Method
1.3 This standard may involve hazardous materials, 4.1 A fiber is extracted randomly from a bundle or from a
operations, and equipment. This standard does not purport to spool.
address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its 4.2 The fiber is mounted in the testing machine, and then
use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to stressed to failure at a constant cross-head displacement rate.
establish appropriate safety and health practices and deter-
mine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. 4.3 A valid test result is considered to be one in which fiber
failure doesn’t occur in the gripping region.
2. Referenced Documents 4.4 Tensile strength is calculated from the ratio of the peak
2.1 ASTM Standards:2 force and the cross-sectional area of a plane perpendicular to
C1239 Practice for Reporting Uniaxial Strength Data and the fiber axis, at the fracture location or in the vicinity of the
Estimating Weibull Distribution Parameters for Advanced fracture location, while Young’s modulus is determined from
Ceramics the linear region of the tensile stress versus tensile strain curve.
D3878 Terminology for Composite Materials
E4 Practices for Force Verification of Testing Machines 5. Significance and Use
E6 Terminology Relating to Methods of Mechanical Testing 5.1 Properties determined by this test method are useful in
E1382 Test Methods for Determining Average Grain Size the evaluation of new fibers at the research and development
Using Semiautomatic and Automatic Image Analysis levels. Fibers with diameters up to 250 × 10-6 m are covered by
this test method. Very short fibers (including whiskers) call for
3. Terminology specialized test techniques (1)3 and are not covered by this test
3.1 Definitions: method. This test method may also be useful in the initial
3.1.1 bundle—a collection of parallel fibers. Synonym, tow. screening of candidate fibers for applications in polymer, metal
3.1.2 mounting tab—a thin paper, cardboard, compliant or ceramic matrix composites, and quality control purposes.
metal, or plastic strip with a center hole or longitudinal slot of Because of their nature, ceramic fibers do not have a unique
fixed gage length. The mounting tab should be appropriately strength, but rather, a distribution of strengths. In most cases
when the strength of the fibers is controlled by one population
of flaws, the distribution of fiber strengths can be described
1
This test method is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee C28 on using a two-parameter Weibull distribution, although other
Advanced Ceramics and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee C28.07 on distributions have also been suggested (2,3). This test method
Ceramic Matrix Composites.
Current edition approved Aug. 1, 2013. Published September 2013. Originally constitutes a methodology to obtain the strength of a single
approved in 2003. Last previous edition approved in 2008 as C1557 – 03 (2008). fiber. For the purpose of determining the parameters of the
DOI: 10.1520/C1557-03R13.
2
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at [email protected]. For Annual Book of ASTM
3
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end of
the ASTM website. this standard.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. United States
Copyright by ASTM Int'l (all rights reserved); Sat Jul 12 10:54:47 EDT 2014
1
Downloaded/printed by
Universidad Industrial De Santander Bucaramanga Columbia pursuant to License Agreement. No further reproductions authorized.
C1557 − 03 (2013)
distribution of fiber strengths it is recommended to follow this range of the testing machine as defined in Practice E4. To
test method in conjunction with Practice C1239. determine the appropriate capacity of the load cell, the follow-
ing table lists the range of strength and diameter values of
6. Interferences representative glass, graphite, organic and ceramic fibers.
6.1 The test environment may have an influence on the 7.1.2 Grips—The gripping system shall be of such design
measured tensile strength of fibers. In particular, the behavior that axial alignment of the fiber along the line of action of the
of fibers susceptible to slow crack growth fracture will be machine shall be easily accomplished without damaging the
strongly influenced by test environment and testing rate (4). test specimen. Although studies of the effect of fiber misalign-
Testing to evaluate the maximum strength potential of a fiber ment on the tensile strength of fibers have not been reported,
should be conducted in inert environments or at sufficiently the axis of the fiber shall be coaxial with the line of action of
rapid testing rates, or both, so as to minimize slow crack the testing machine within δ, to prevent spurious bending
growth effects. Conversely, testing can be conducted in envi- strains and/or stress concentrations:
ronments and testing modes and rates representative of service lo
conditions to evaluate the strength of fibers under those δ# (1)
50
conditions.
where:
6.2 Fractures that initiate outside the gage section of a fiber
δ = the tolerance, m, and
may be due to factors such as stress concentrations, extraneous
lo = the fiber gage length, m.
stresses introduced by gripping, or strength-limiting features in
the microstructure of the specimen. Such non-gage section 7.2 Mounting Tabs—Typical mounting tabs for test speci-
fractures constitute invalid tests. When using active gripping mens are shown in Fig. 3. Alternative methods of specimen
systems, insufficient pressure can lead to slippage, while too mounting may be used, or none at all (that is, the fiber may be
much pressure can cause local fracture in the gripping area. directly mounted into the grips). A simple but effective
approach for making mounting tabs with repeatable dimen-
6.3 Torsional strains may reduce the magnitude of the
sions consists in printing the mounting tab pattern onto
tensile strength (5). Caution must be exercised when mounting
cardboard file folders using a laser printer. As illustrated in Fig.
the fibers to avoid twisting the fibers.
3, holes can be obtained using a three-hole punch. Fig. 3 shows
6.4 Many fibers are very sensitive to surface damage. a typical specimen mounting method. The mounting tabs are
Therefore, any contact with the fiber in the gage length should gripped or connected to the load train (for example, by pin and
be avoided (4,6). clevis) so that the test specimen is aligned axially along the line
of action of the test machine.
7. Apparatus 7.2.1 When gripping large diameter fibers using an active
7.1 The apparatus described herein consists of a tensile set of grips without tabs, the grip facing material in contact
testing machine with one actuator (cross-head) that operates in with the test specimen must be of appropriate compliance to
a controllable manner, a gripping system and a load cell. Fig. allow for a firm, non-slipping grip on the fiber. At the same
1 and Fig. 2 show a picture and schematic of such a system. time, the grip facing material must prevent crushing, scoring or
7.1.1 Testing Machine—The testing machine shall be in other damage to the test specimen that would lead to inaccurate
conformance with Practice E4. The failure forces shall be results. Large diameter fibers (diameter > 50 × 10-6 m) can also
accurate within 61 % at any force within the selected force be mounted inside hypodermic needles filled with an adhesive
FIG. 1 Typical Fiber Tester
2
C1557 − 03 (2013)
FIG. 2
TABLE 1 Room Temperature Tensile Strength of Fibers (25 × 10-3 an immediate record of the test as a supplement to the digital
m Gage Length) record. Recording devices must be accurate to 6 1 % of full
Fiber Diameter, m Strength, Pa scale and shall have a minimum data acquisition rate of 10 Hz
CVD-SiC 50-150 × 10-6 2-3.5 × 109 with a response of 50 Hz deemed more than sufficient.
polymer-derived SiC 10-18 × 10-6 2-3.5 × 109
sol-gel derived oxide 1-20 × 10-6 1-3 × 109
single-crystal oxide 70-250 × 10-6 1.5-3.5 × 109 8. Precautionary Statement
graphite 1-15 × 10-6 1-6 × 109
glass 1-250 x× 10-6 1-4 × 109 8.1 During the conduct of this test method, the possibility of
aramid 12-20 × 10-6 2-4 × 109 flying fragments of broken fibers may be high. Means for
containing these fragments for later fractographic reconstruc-
tion and analysis is highly recommended. For example,
(7). This is a good alternative to avoid crushing the fiber if vacuum grease has been used successfully to dampen the fiber
pneumatic/hydraulic/mechanical grips were to be used. The during failure and capture the fragments. In this case, vacuum
adhesive must be sufficiently strong to withstand the gripping grease is applied in the gage section of the fiber so that the
process, and prevent fiber “pull-out” during testing. former does not bear any force. An appropriate solvent can be
7.3 Data Acquisition—At a minimum, autographic records used afterwards to remove the vacuum grease.
of applied force and cross-head displacement versus time shall
be obtained. Either analog chart recorders or digital data 9. Procedure
acquisition systems may be used for this purpose although a 9.1 Test Specimen Mounting:
digital record is recommended for ease of later data analysis. 9.1.1 Randomly choose, and carefully separate, a suitable
Ideally, an analog chart recorder or plotter shall be used in single-fiber specimen from the bundle or fiber spool. The total
conjunction with the digital data acquisition system to provide length of the specimen should be sufficiently long (at least 1.5
3
C1557 − 03 (2013)
FIG. 3 Mounting Tab
times longer than the gage length) to allow for convenient 9.4 Ensure that the machine is calibrated and in equilibrium
handling and gripping. Handle the test specimen at its ends and (no drift).
avoid touching it in the test gage length. 9.5 Set the cross-head and data recorder speeds to provide a
NOTE 1—Because the strength of fibers is statistical in nature, the test time to specimen fracture within 30 s.
magnitude of the strength will depend on the dimensions of the fiber being
evaluated. In composite material applications, the gage length of the fiber 9.6 Grasp a mounted test specimen in one of the two tab
is usually of the order of several fiber diameters, but it has been customary grip areas (or pin load one end of the mounting tab). Zero the
to test fibers with a gage length of 25.4 × 10-3 m. However, other gage load cell.
lengths can be used as long as they are practical, and in either case, the
value of the gage length must be reported. 9.7 Position the cross-head so that the other tab grip area
may be grasped as in 9.6. Check the axial specimen alignment
9.1.2 When Using Tabs:
using whatever methods have been established, as described in
9.1.2.1 A mounting tab (Fig. 3) may be used for specimen
7.1.2.
mounting. Center the test specimen over the tab using the
printed pattern with one end taped to the tab. 9.8 If using tabs, with the mounting tab un-strained, cut both
9.1.2.2 Tape the opposite end of the test specimen to the tab sides of the tab very carefully at mid-gage as shown in Fig. 4.
exercising care to prevent fiber twisting. It has been found that Alternatively, the sides of the tab can be burned using a
the tensile strength of fibers decreases significantly with soldering iron, for example. If the fiber is damaged, then it
increasing torsional strain (5). must be discarded.
9.1.2.3 Carefully place a small amount of suitable adhesive 9.9 Initiate the data recording followed by the operation of
(for example, epoxy, red sealing wax) at the marks on the the test machine until fiber failure. Record both the cross-head
mounting tab that define the gage length, and bond the fiber to displacement and force, and strain if applicable.
the mounting tab.
9.1.2.4 Determine the gage length to the nearest 6 5 × 10-4 9.10 Recover the fracture surfaces and measure the cross-
m or 61 % of the gage length, whichever is smaller. sectional area of a plane normal to the axis of the fiber at the
fracture location or in the vicinity of the fracture location.
9.2 Optical Strain Flags—If optical flags are to be used for Determine the fiber cross-sectional area using with a linear
strain measurement, they may be attached directly to the fibers spatial resolution of 1.0 % of the fiber diameter or better, using
at this time, using a suitable adhesive or other attachment laser diffraction techniques (8-11), or an image analysis system
method. Note that this may not be possible with small-diameter in combination with a reflected light microscope or a scanning
fibers (δ < 5 × 10-6 m). electron microscope (12) (see Test Methods E1382). Note that
9.3 Test Modes and Rates—The test shall be conducted in practice, a reflected white light microscope can provide a
under a constant cross-head displacement rate. Rates of testing maximum resolution of 0.5 × 10-6 m and therefore its use may
must be sufficiently rapid to obtain the maximum possible be impractical when measuring the cross-sectional area of
strength at fracture within 30 s. The user may try as an initial small diameter fibers. Because stiff fibers tend to shatter upon
value a test rate of 8 × 10-6 m/s. However, rates other than failure, it is recommended to capture the fiber fragments using
those recommended here may be used to evaluate rate effects. vacuum grease, because vacuum grease is an effective medium
In all cases the test mode and rate must be reported. to dampen the energy released by the fiber upon fracture. The
4
C1557 − 03 (2013)
FIG. 4 Cutting Sides of Tab
user of this standard should be aware that the need to recover F = force to failure, N, and
the fracture surfaces of the fiber to determine the fiber A = fiber cross-sectional area at fracture plane (normal to
cross-sectional area is consistent with the need to do fractog- fiber axis), m2.
raphy to identify the strength-limiting flaws for the proper
10.2 Strain—Calculate the tensile strain of the fiber as
estimation of the parameters of the distribution of fiber
follows:
strengths.
NOTE 2—The user of this standard test method must be aware that the ∆l
diameter of many ceramic fibers varies not only among fibers in a bundle, ε5 (3)
lo
but also along the length of each fiber (13-16). It has been customary to
determine individual fiber strength values using the average cross- where:
sectional area of a group of fibers. However, it has been demonstrated that ∆l = the elongation of the gage length, m, and
this procedure leads to significant errors both in the determination of the l = the gage length, m.
actual fiber strength and in the estimates of the parameters of the
distribution of fiber strengths (17-19). 10.2.1 Direct Measurement of Elongation— Direct mea-
NOTE 3—When the fiber diameter varies along its length and the surement of the specimen elongation (in the gage section) is
diameter of a fiber is measured before the fiber is tested, there is a risk that
the measurement will be obtained at a location of the fiber that doesn’t
achieved by monitoring the displacement of the flags attached
coincide with the failure location. Monte Carlo simulations have been to the fiber.
carried out to estimate the magnitude of the error in the determination of 10.2.2 Indirect Measurement of Elongation— In the absence
the tensile strength of a fiber when the value of the cross-sectional area of a direct measurement of specimen elongation, the actual
used for the calculation of strength doesn’t correspond to that of the specimen elongation in the gage length can be determined by
fracture plane. The results of these simulations have shown that the
magnitude of the error increases with the degree of variability of the fiber subtracting the displacement associated with the system com-
diameter along its length (20) (see Appendix X1). pliance from the total cross-head displacement (21).
NOTE 4—Therefore, it is necessary to determine the cross-sectional area 10.2.2.1 System Compliance—The system compliance must
of the fiber on a plane perpendicular to the axis of the fiber at the location be determined experimentally for a given test machine, grip-
of failure, or in the vicinity of the failure location, after performing the ping system and fiber type. The system compliance is deter-
mechanical test, and use that value of the cross-sectional area for the
determination of the fiber strength. mined as follows:
10.2.2.2 Perform tensile tests according to the procedures
10. Calculations given in 9.1-9.10 on single fiber specimens with various
10.1 Tensile Strength—Calculate the tensile strength of the different gage lengths. Test specimens with at least three
fiber as follows: different gage lengths, and perform at least, three tests for each
value of the gage length.
F 10.2.2.3 For each test, obtain the force versus cross-head
T5 (2)
A displacement curve, and determine the inverse of the slope of
where: the initial linear region of the force versus cross-head displace-
ment curve in m/N. (See Fig. 5.)
T = tensile strength, Pa,
(1) Note that the recorded cross-head displacement is:
5
C1557 − 03 (2013)
FIG. 5 Typical Load versus Cross-head Displacement Curve
∆L 5 ∆l1C S F (4) 10.3 Young’s Modulus—Determine the fiber Young’s modu-

lus from the slope of the linear region of the stress-strain curve.
where:
If strain was not measured directly, the fiber Young’s modulus
∆L = recorded cross-head displacement, m, can be obtained from the process used to calculate the system’s
CS = system compliance, m/N, and compliance according to 10.2.2.1-10.2.2.3.
∆l = elongation of the specimen gage length, m.
(2) For the fiber, using Eq 3:
11. Report
σ F ∆l
ε5 5 5 (5) 11.1 The report shall include the following:
E EA lo
11.1.1 Complete identification of the test specimen, includ-
where: ing material type, source, manufacturer’s name and code or
σ = tensile stress, Pa, and batch number, previous history, etc.,
E = fiber Young’s modulus, Pa. 11.1.2 Method of selecting specimen,
(3) The combination of Eq 4 and 5 yields: 11.1.3 Method of mounting the test specimen,
11.1.4 Fiber cross-sectional area including method of
∆L ∆l lo
5 1C S 5 1C S (6) determination,
F F EA
11.1.5 Specimen gage length,
(4) Therefore, a plot of (∆L/ F) (that is, the inverse of the
slope of the force versus cross-head displacement curves) 11.1.6 System compliance, if required,
versus (lo/A), will yield a straight line with constant slope of 11.1.7 Test machine parameters; cross-head speed, speed of
(1/E) and intercept CS which is the value of the system data collection, load cell used, gripping method,
compliance. (See Fig. 6.) 11.1.8 Method used for determination of gage length
elongation,
10.2.2.4 From Eq 4, determine the actual elongation of the 11.1.9 The force to failure,
gage section of the specimen as follows: 11.1.10 Tensile strength,
∆l 5 ∆L 2 C S F (7) 11.1.11 Young’s modulus, if measured,
6
C1557 − 03 (2013)
FIG. 6 Method for Determining the System Compliance
11.1.12 Ambient conditions of test room (temperature and

relative humidity), and
11.1.13 Date of test.
12. Precision and Bias
12.1 Because of the lack of a wide database, no definitive
statement can be made at this time concerning the precision
and bias of this test method.
APPENDIX
(Nonmandatory Information)
X1.
X1.1 To estimate the magnitude of the error in the determi- to a two-parameter Weibull distribution. Let us assume that the
nation of fiber strength when using a value of the fiber diameter diameter of this fiber varies randomly along its length and that
different from that at the fracture plane, a Monte Carlo the diameter profile can be described by a mean value (φm)and
simulation was performed. The diagram shown in Fig. X1.1 standard deviation (φsd). Fig. X1.2 shows profiles of such
summarizes the process. fibers. Let us subdivide the fiber into n segments each of length
lo, diameter fi and strength si. The strength of each segment is
X1.2 Let us consider a fiber of length l that belongs to a
calculated according to Eq X1.1.
collection of fibers with strengths that are distributed according
7
C1557 − 03 (2013)
S S D D cross-sectional area of the fracture plane (that is, the cross-

1
2
lo φo 1 m
σi 5 σo ln (X1.1) sectional area of the section with the smallest strength). Let us
l φi ~ 1 2 P fi!
define the “modified strength” as the ratio of the breaking force
where: and the cross-sectional area of the fiber at a location that is
σo = the characteristic strength associated with a volume of selected randomly among the n segments, and that may or may
the fiber of magnitude, not coincide with the fracture plane. Following this procedure
~ πφ 2o l o ! results are presented in Fig. X1.3 for the magnitude of the error
(X1.2) in the determination of the fiber strength, for various values of
4
the variability of the diameter along the fiber length. Values of
and:
15 × 10-6 m for the average fiber diameter and 5 for the Weibull
Pfi = the probability of failure associated with the tensile modulus (which are typical of many ceramic fibers) were used
stress σi . in the simulations. The error bars correspond to the largest and
X1.3 Let us find the force needed to break the fiber by smallest values of the errors resulting from 1000 repetitions.
taking the product of the minimum of the n strengths and the
FIG. X1.1 Schematic of Monte Carlo Simulation
8
C1557 − 03 (2013)
-3
NOTE 1—Calculations were carried out for a fiber that is 25 × 10 m long and 15 × 10-6 m in diameter. Radial and axial scales are not the same in
these diagrams.
FIG. X1.2 Fiber Profiles Illustrating Variability of Fiber Diameter Along its Length
NOTE 1—Diameter variability values are in 1 × 10-6 m for a fiber with 15 × 10-6 m diameter.
FIG. X1.3 Error in Determination of Fiber Strength as a Function of Variability in Fiber Diameter (φsd) Along the Length of the Fiber
9
C1557 − 03 (2013)
REFERENCES
(1) Petrovic, J. J., Milewski, J. V., Rohr, D. L., and Gac, F. D., “Tensile (12) Wilson, D. M., “Statistical Tensile Strength of Nexterl ™610 and
Mechanical-Properties of SiC Whiskers,” Journal of Materials Nextel™ 720 Fibers,” Journal of Materials Science, 32, 1997, pp.
Science, 20, 4, 1985, pp. 1167-1177. 2535-2542.
(2) Phani, K. K., “A New Modified Weibull Distribution Function for the (13) Lissart, N., and Lamon, J., “Statistical Analysis of Failure of SiC
Evaluation of the Strength of Silicon Carbide and Alumina Fibers,” Fibers in the Presence of Bimodal Flaw Populations,” Journal of
Journal of Materials Science, 23, 1988, pp. 2424-2428. Materials Science, 32, 22, 1997, pp. 6107-6117.
(3) Gurvich, M. R., DiBenedetto, A. T., and Ranade, S. V., “A New (14) Morimoto, T., Goering, J., and Schneider, H., “A New Method for
Statistical Distribution for Characterizing the Random Strength of Measuring Diameter Distribution Along Ceramic Fibers,” Ceram.
Brittle Materials,” Journal of Materials Science, 32, 1997, pp. Eng. Sci. Proc., 19, 3, 1998, pp. 47-54.
2559-2564. (15) Youngblood, G. E., Eiholzer, C. R., Lewinsohn, C. A., Jones, R. H.,
(4) Kotchick, D. M., and Tressler, R. E., “Surface Damage and Environ- Hasegawa, A., and Kohyama, A., “Fiber Diameter Variation-Sample
mental Effects on the Strain Rate Sensitivity of the Strength of Preparation and Analysis,” Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc., 20, 3, 1999, pp.
Sapphire and Silicon Carbide Filaments,” Journal of Materials 481-486.
Science, 10, 22, 1975 , pp. 608-612. (16) Tanaka, T., Nakayama, H., Sakaida, A., and Horikawa, N., “Estima-
(5) Fukunaga, H., and Goda, K., “Tensile Strength of Nicalon™ SiC tion of Tensile Strength Distribution for Carbon Fiber with Diameter
Fibers Subjected to Torsional Strain,” Journal of Materials Science Variation Along Fiber,” Materials Science Research International,
Letters, 10, 1991, pp. 179-180. Vol. 5, No. 2, 1999, pp. 90-97.
(6) Kotchick, M., Hink, R. C., and Tressler, R. E., “Gage Length and (17) Lara-Curzio, E., and Russ, C., “On the Relationship Between the
Surface Damage Effects on the Strength Distributions of Silicon Parameters of the Distributions of Fiber Diameters, Breaking Loads
carbide and Sapphire Filaments,” Journal of Composite Materials, and Fiber Strengths,” J. Materials Science Letters, 18, 24, 1999 , pp.
Vol 9, 1975, pp. 327-336. 2041-2044.
(7) McHenry, K. D., and Tressler, R. E., “Elevated Temperature Strength (18) Lara-Curzio, E., and Russ, C. M., “Why it is Necessary to Determine
of Silicon Carbide-on-Carbon Filaments,” Journal of Composite Each Fiber Diameter When Estimating the Parameters of the
Materials, Vol 9, 1975, pp. 73-76. Distribution of Fiber Strengths,” Ceram. Eng. and Sci. Proc., 20,
(8) Li, C-T, Tietz, J., “Improved Accuracy of the Laser Diffraction 1999, pp. 681-688.
Technique for Diameter Measurement of Small Fibers,“ Journal of (19) Parthasarathy, T. A., “Extraction of Weibull Parameters of Fiber
Materials Science, 25, 1990, pp. 4694-4698. Strength from Means and Standard Deviations of Failure Loads and
(9) Krucinska, I., and Stypka, T., “Direct Measurement of the Axial Fiber Diameters,” J. Am. Ceram. Society, 83, 3, 2001, pp. 588-592.
Poisson’s Ratio of Single Carbon Fibers,” Composites Sci. Tech., Vol (20) Lara-Curzio, E., and Garcia, D., “Strength Statistics of Fiber
41, 1991, pp. 1-12. Bundles: The Effect of Fiber Diameter Variation Along and Among
(10) Giannelli, D., “Single Filament Diameter Measurement System Fibers, on the Determination of the Parameters of Distribution of
Based on Laser Diffraction,” Proceedings of the 22nd International Fiber Strengths,” Ceram. Eng. and Sci. Proc., 22, 3, 2001, pp.
SAMPE Technical Conference, November 6-8, 1990, pp. 546-553. 363-370.
(11) Tzeng, S. S., “Structure and Property Relationships in Carbon (21) Li, C-T, and Tietz, J., “Improvement in Fiber Testing of High-
Fibers,” Ph.D. Thesis, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, Modulus Single-Filament Materials,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc., Vol 68,
December 1992. No. 8, 1985, pp. C202-C204.
ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.
This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.
This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or [email protected] (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org). Permission rights to photocopy the standard may also be secured from the ASTM website (www.astm.org/
COPYRIGHT/).
10

C1557 Tension y Modulo Compuestos Fibra

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

C1557 Tension y Modulo Compuestos Fibra

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

C1557 Tension y Modulo Compuestos Fibra

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Designation: C1557 − 03 (Reapproved 2013)

Standard Test Method for

1. Scope designed to be self-aligning if possible, and as thin as practi-

FIG. 1 Typical Fiber Tester

FIG. 3 Mounting Tab

FIG. 4 Cutting Sides of Tab

FIG. 5 Typical Load versus Cross-head Displacement Curve

∆L 5 ∆l1C S F (4) 10.3 Young’s Modulus—Determine the fiber Young’s modu-

FIG. 6 Method for Determining the System Compliance

11.1.12 Ambient conditions of test room (temperature and

S S D D cross-sectional area of the fracture plane (that is, the cross-

FIG. X1.1 Schematic of Monte Carlo Simulation

You might also like