Chapter 74. Specimen Size Effects and Round Robin Results for Transthickness Tensile Strength of N720/AS-1
- Hua-Tay Lin,
- Mrityunjay Singh
Published Online: 26 MAR 2008
DOI: 10.1002/9780470294741.ch74
Copyright © 2002 The American Ceramic Society
Book Title
26th Annual Conference on Composites, Advanced Ceramics, Materials, and Structures: A: Ceramic Engineering and Science Proceedings, Volume 23, Issue 3
Additional Information
How to Cite
Zawada, L. P. and Jenkins, M. (2008) Specimen Size Effects and Round Robin Results for Transthickness Tensile Strength of N720/AS-1, in 26th Annual Conference on Composites, Advanced Ceramics, Materials, and Structures: A: Ceramic Engineering and Science Proceedings, Volume 23, Issue 3 (eds H.-T. Lin and M. Singh), John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, USA. doi: 10.1002/9780470294741.ch74
Publication History
- Published Online: 26 MAR 2008
- Published Print: 1 JAN 2002
Book Series:
ISBN Information
Print ISBN: 9780470375785
Online ISBN: 9780470294741
- Summary
- Chapter
- References
Keywords:
- interlaminar tensile;
- diameter;
- parameters;
- longitudinal tensile strength;
- microstructure
Summary
Transthickness tensile (interlaminar tensile) strength of N720/AS-1 was investigated. Circular cross-section test specimens with diameters of 19, 25.4, 30, and 40 mm were tested for transthickness tensile strength to examine the influence of specimen size on strength. For the diameters studied, no influence of specimen size on strength was observed. A round robin test program was then conduced using a circular cross-section test specimen with a diameter of 25.4 mm. The objective of the round robin was to establish precision values for a recently published testing practice. Results and statistical analysis are presented for the eight laboratories that participated in the round robin. Finally, transthickness tensile results are presented for test specimens that were given heat treatments and for test specimens that were first loaded to 125 MPa to increase the crack density of the matrix. Discussion addresses strength values measured for each study, and how those results may have implications on CMC development.