I ' E I l U T T E IR W O R T H htt. .l.

Adhesion and Adhesives 15 (1995) 73 80

I'~IE I N E M A N N ~" 1995 Elsevier Science Limited
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0143 -7496/95/$ I0.00

Assessment of fibre-matrix adhesion and

interfacial properties using the pull-out test

C.Y. Yue*, H.C. Looi and M.Y. Quek

School of Mechanical and Production Engineering, Nanyang Technological University,
Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 2263

Fibre-matrix adhesion is assessed using a technique based on the fbre pull-out test. The fibre-matrix
adhesion can be characterized in terms of the interracial shear (bond) strength, ri. The non-uniform shear
stress distribution at the fibre-matrix interface is taken into account. The technique also allows other
interfacial properties such as the matrix shrinkage pressure Po and the interfacial coefficient of friction/~
1o be evaluated from a single set of pull-out test data. Analysis of new experimental data for glass fibre
nylon 66 and glass fibre nylon 11 composite systems is presented to illustrate application of the
technique. The issue of the effect of loading configuration and specimen geometry on the pull-out test is
then considered. This is to facilitate proper analysis of experimental data, to ensure a high success rate in
the pull-out experiment and to minimize specimen failure by fibre fracture and other non pull-out modes.

(Keywords: fibre-matrix adhesion; single-fibre pull-out test; interfacial shear stress; loading configuration; specimen
geometry)

INTRODUCTION Although the single-fibre pull-out test has been

Fibre-matrix adhesion is important in fibrous
composite systems as it affects the strength and
toughness of the composite. Fibre-matrix adhesion can
be characterized in terms of the interfacial shear (bond)
strength, q. Most existing methods for assessing fibre-
matrix adhesion wrongly assume a constant shear
stress distribution ~x at the fibre matrix interface.
However, it is known ~ 3 that ~,- is non-uniform and
that regions of stress concentration exist at the fibre
ends. It is important to consider the stress concentra-
tions at the fibre-matrix interface since interfacial
failure initiates from such regions. A recent techni-
que 3"4 for determining Ti accounts for the non-uniform
shear stress distribution at the fibre-matrix interface.
The technique is based on the single-fibre pull-out test.
Application of this technique to evaluate q for two
model glass fibre-nylon composites will presently be
considered.
The mechanical properties of fibrous composite
systems are also dependent on their interfacial proper-
ties. Other than % the interfacial parameters of
composite systems include the matrix shrinkage
pressure on the fibre Po, and the interfacial coefficient
of friction /~ between the debonded fibre and the
surrounding matrix material. It will be shown that, in
addition to % the technique 3'4 can also be used to
determine Po and # from the pull-out data.
* T o w h o m c o r r e s p o n d e n c e should be a d d r e s s e d
commonly used for assessing the fibre-matrix interfa-
cial shear strength, a survey of published literature
reveals a number of observations which have yet to be
accounted for. For example, two different methods of
restraining the pull-out specimen have been utilized
during testing. Any effect of the restrain condition on
the interfacial stresses in the pull-out specimen has
largely been ignored in the analysis even though the
validity of this has not been considered. In addition,
debonding at the interface has been observed to initiate
at either end of the embedded fibre. Simultaneous
interfacial debonding at both ends of the fibre during
testing has also been observed 5. No account for such
phenomena has been provided. It is also clear from the
literature that another important aspect of pull-out
testing is to maximize the incidence of fibre pull-out
and to reduce the likelihood of specimen failure by
fibre fracture. An analysis of the stresses in the pull-out
specimen, and the dependence of these on loading
configuration and specimen geometry, will be consid-
ered in an attempt to elucidate the above observations.
INFLUENCE OF INTERFACIAL PARAMETERS
ON MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
The influence of the interfacial parameters "zi, Po and p
on the mechanical properties of a composite will now
be outlined. This is to indicate why, in addition"to q, it
is also important to determine Po and #.

INT. J. ADHESION AND ADHESIVES Volume 15 Number 2 1995 73

Fibre-matrix adhesion and interfacial properties: C.Y. Yue et al.
The effect of "ci is well known. A composite system
with large "Ci (excellent fibre-matrix bonding) has high
strength due to effective stress transfer from the matrix
to the fibres. However, high zi leads to a composite
system with low toughness since little energy would be
expended during crack propagation because matrix
cracks would propagate right through the interface and
the fibre. In contrast, a composite system with low zi
has low strength due to ineffective stress transfer to the
fibres. However, low zi leads to a composite system
with high toughness since significant energy would be
expended through the crack splitting, interfacial
debonding and fibre pull-out mechanisms during
failure.
The influence of the interfacial parameters % Po and
/~ on the mechanical properties of composites can
readily be understood with reference to their effect on
the single-fibre pull-out curve. Consider a typical force
versus displacement plot for the single-fibre pull-out
specimen in Figure 1. In Figure lb, debonding of the
fibre-matrix interface occurs within the initial linear
Errergent end
end
Fp ~ [
/ apparent from Figure 2c that a model composite
Fibre
a
complete
Force debonding
Displacement
b It is often desirable to assess and compare quantita-
Figure 1 Typical (a) single-fibre pull-out specimen and (b) force-
displacement pull-out curve
74 INT. J. ADHESION AND ADHESIVES Volume 15 Number 2 1995
portion of the curve. The debonding crack continues to
propagate along the interface as the applied load is
increased. Complete debonding occurs at the point
where the force reaches a maximum value, Fa. This is
followed by a small region in which the applied load
falls to a level required for pull-out (extraction) of the
debonded fibre from the matrix.
A composite system with a larger Fd has higher
strength. The area under the curve where fibre extrac-
tion occurs in Figure lb corresponds to the energy
expended during pull-out of the debonded fibre from
the matrix. Hence, a composite system with greater
energy being expended for fibre extraction (a larger
area in the pull-out portion of the curve) is expected to
have higher toughness. Therefore, it is apparent that
the effect of zi, Po and # on the strength and toughness
of a composite system may be assessed with reference
to their effect on Fd and changes in size of the fibre
extraction portion of the pull-out curve.
The effect of % Po and # on the shape of the force-
displacement curve in a single-fibre pull-out test is as
illustrated in Figure 2. For a given fibre-matrix system,
it can be seen from Figure 2a that a larger zi leads to
larger Fd. This implies a higher strength for the
composite system. A model composite specimen which
has higher Po would exhibit a higher Fd and an
increase in area in the fibre extraction portion of the
pull-out curve (see Figure 2b). This implies a composite
system with higher strength and toughness. It is
specimen with larger p would only exhibit an increased
area for fibre extraction. This indicates that composite
systems with higher p would have higher toughness.
In practice, zi can be varied through the use of
different fibre surface pretreatments and coupling
agents. Different fibre-matrix systems would also have
different zi. The shrinkage pressure Po is dependent on
the magnitude of residual stresses within the matrix
which in turn is dependent on the processing
conditions. The yield stress of polymers is affected by
pressure. Therefore, the increase in Fa (and by
inference zi) with Po is probably an indication that
debonding is not purely interfacial in nature but may
sometimes involve crack propagation within the
matrix. Hence, Po has an effect on Fd. The magnitude
of /~ is dependent on the physical properties of the
matrix and fibre, the properties of coupling agents
utilized and the plane of failure at the interface. A
qualitative assessment of % Po and ~ for different
composite systems can easily be obtained by compar-
ing force~lisplacement curves of pull-out specimens
with a given fibre embedded length.
DETERMINATION OF INTERFACIAL
PARAMETERS
tively the mechanical properties of new with existing
composite systems. Since variations in ri, Po and /~
 Fibre-matrix adhesion and interracial properties: C. Y. Yue et al.

e~
/I
/ I
I I
I I
I I
~F d / I ._=
III I
Q

o ~,,i
g~
Lc ., Io F.y
<
Embedded length L
Figure 3 Schematic plot of FO against L
Jk -. )
II 1II systems. Therefore, it is imperative to be able to
Displacement X determine the interfacial parameters. It is also
proposed that composite systems can be characterized
a in terms of their interfacial parameters.
The parameters % Po and # can readily be
determined from experimental data based on pull-out
tests for specimens with different embedded lengths
L. Consider data from specimens subjected to the
Q. It
LI. I
t~ fixed-bottom test configuration in Figure la. The
t l values of zi, Po and p can be determined by adopting
G)
o
FO- lllll I l the following procedure.
Initially, the maximum debonding force Fd for each
itI
"0
specimen should be plotted against their respective
I It embedded lengths L. This will produce a force versus
c~ embedded length plot similar to that shown in Figure
< 3. It can be seen from Figure 3 that an initial non-
linear portion exists whereby Fd increases with L. The
plot then goes through a 'knee' after which Fd varies
linearly with L. The location of the onset of this latter
Displacement x linear portion of the plot can be denoted by Lc where
Fd = Fuy (see Figure 3). Linear regression analysis may
b be used to extrapolate the linear portion so as to
obtain the Y-intercept, Io. The interracial bond strength
[J_ Fd ri and the other interfacial parameters can now be
determined.
o The value of ri can be calculated from the relation-
ship
"O
IdFdl (1)
zi(2rrrN -1) = Io + Lc k d L j L >~t.
Q_
<
/ nlgner ~, - ~ where r is the radius of the fibre, N is a parameter
which is dependent on the physical properties of the
fibre and matrix and on specimen geometry (see
Displacement x Appendix), and [dFd/dL]c >1L~ is the gradient of the
linear region of the plot. It is usually not necessary to
C
use the full theoretical expression (see Appendix) for Fd
Figure 2 Schematic diagrams showing the effect of % Po and ,u on against L for determining ~i.
the shape of the force~zlisplacement curve in a pull-out test: (a) The interfacial frictional shear stress rr (during the
higher zi; (b) higher Po; (c) higher p
fibre extraction process), which is equivalent to the
multiple of Po and p, is given by
provide a good indication of the attainable mechanical
properties, this is possible through a comparison of the 1 (dFd'] (2)
~r = PoP = ~ r \ d L J1~ ~ t<
interfacial parameters of the different composite

INT. J. ADHESION AND ADHESIVES Volume 15 Number 2 1995 75

Fibre-matrix adhesion and interracial properties: C. Y. Yue et al.

Since rf can be determined readily using equation (2), Table 1 Summary of physical properties and other factors
Po and # can be obtained when either /~ or Po is Glass Glass
known. Factor/property nylon 66 nylon I 1
The parameter # can be obtained from friction
Compression modulus of matrix, 1313.5 517.4
sliding experiments or from theoretical analysis 4 of the
Em (MPa)
data. When conducting friction sliding experiments to Average fibre diameter (mm) 0.42 0.53
determine /~, the plane of interfacial failure should be Radius of matrix block (mm) 3.5 5.0
observed closely in the scanning electron microscope. Lc (mm) 1.1 1.55
Fuy (N) 3.8 9.8
This is to ensure that the experimental surfaces in
Io (N) 2.3 10.3
sliding contact resemble and match the nature of the [dFd/dL]L >1L~ (N mm I) 1.38 3.0
debonded interfacial surfaces. It is sometimes simpler
to determine # from sliding experiments. The theoreti-
cal basis for the technique outlined above is given speed of 5 mm min I. The Fd for each specimen was
elsewhere 3. The analysis has been successfully applied normalized to the average fibre diameter by assuming
to both thermoplastic-based 6 as well as thermoset- the maximum debonding force to be directly propor-
based 7 fibre composites. tional to the bonding area.

EXPERIMENTAL Analysis of experimental data

Nylon pullout specimens
The pull-out specimens were compression moulded
from either Du P o n r s nylon 66 (Zytel 101) granules or
Atochem's nylon l l (Rislan) powder. The E-glass
fibres utilized were prepared by drawing glass rods in
the laboratory to fibres with diameters of between 400
and 500 ~tm. The modulus of the fibres was taken to be
60GPa. The compression modulus of each nylon
matrix was determined experimentally.
A one-step moulding process using a two-piece
mould similar to that utilized previously 8 for polypro-
pylene matrix pull-out samples was adopted. Basically,
the mould cavity was filled with either nylon granules
or powder whilst the glass fibre was held in position
with the aid of an adhesive tape. The whole set-up was
then placed between the pre-heated plates of the
moulding press and moulded for 7 min under a force of
9 tonnes. The compression moulding temperatures for
nylon 66 and nylon I I are 280 and 215°C, respectively.
The specimen dimensions are as shown in Figure 4.
The experimental data from the glass fibre nylon 66
and glass fibre nylon 11 composite systems will now be
analysed using the technique outlined above. The plots of
normalized F0 against L are as shown in Figures 5 and 6,
respectively. Io was obtained from regression analysis of
data in the linear portion of the curves. The values of Lc,
buy and Io as determined from Figures 5 and 6 and some
physical properties are summarized in Table 1. The shear
moduli of the matrices were then determined from the
respective compressive modulus and assuming the
Poisson's ratio of the matrices to be 0.3.
The parameter ri was calculated using equation (1).
The interfacial coefficient of friction /~ was determined
10
z
I.
O
j~

The thicknesses of the specimens are given in Table 1. i i -+ i ~ -

To facilitate testing, two pieces of cardboard of 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

dimensions 20 × 15mm were glued to the glass fibre Embedded length L (mm)
using Araldite cold cure epoxy. The epoxy was allowed
to fully cure for 24 h before the specimen was tested in Figure 5 Plot of Fd against embedded length L for glass fibre-nylon
66 system
an Instron universal testing machine at a crosshead
3O

Glass fibre 25
Nylon matrix 20
Cardboard i
J
10

2O 5

1 2 3 4 5 6
30 Embedded length L (ram)

Figure 6 Plot of Fd against embedded length L for glass fibre-nylon

Figure 4 Dimensions of pull-out specimen (mm) 11 system

76 INT. J. ADHESION AND ADHESIVES Volume 15 Number 2 1995

 Fibre-matrix adhesion and interracial properties: C. Y. Yue et al.

from sliding friction experiments of blocks of the nylon Rigid clamp support
matrices on a glass surface. Po was then calculated
using equation (2). The values of the interfacial
parameters % Po and/~ are summarized in Table 2.
It can be seen from Table 2 that the fibre-matrix
adhesion (~i) for the nylon 11 system is better than that
for the nylon 66 system. This implies that matrix-to-
fibre stress transfer is more effective in the nylon I I
Fibre II
system. This suggests a higher tensile strength for the Fp-" |
I ."".'.'.'.'_'.:

glass fibre-nylon 11 composite. The parameters # and

Po are slightly higher for the nylon 11 system. This
suggests a higher toughness for the glass fibre-nylon 11
composite as can be seen from the slightly larger value Matr
of %
It is apparent that fibre-reinforced composites can be
assessed in terms of their relative fibre-matrix adhesion
and other interfacial properties. It is proposed that
such analysis would be valuable for comparing differ- Fixed Bottom Loading Method (FBC)
ent composite systems and in the development stages of
a
new composite systems.
support
EFFECT OF TEST C O N F I G U R A T I O N AND
SPECIMEN G E O M E T R Y Fibre
Improvement of pull-out test !

Apart from failure by debonding followed by fibre

pull-out, specimens sometimes exhibit failure through
fibre fracture or matrix yielding. In the latter failure
mode, lumps of matrix remain on the surface of the
extracted fibre such that failure is clearly not at or near
the interface. The fibre-matrix interface remains intact
in failure by either fibre fracture or matrix yielding.
Clearly, these represent unsuccessful pull-out tests. The
problem with specimen failure via fibre fracture may be
serious when brittle fibres such as glass or carbon
fibres are utilized.
Sometimes only about 50% pull-out type failure is
obtained in experiments with brittle fibre specimens.
However, with some experience and skill, successful
pull-out rates of above 7(~80% can be obtained on a
routine basis. It is apparent that analysis of composite
systems can only be carried out readily when it is easy
to collect pull-out data. This implies that the probabil-
ity for specimen failure by fibre debonding leading to
pull-out should be much higher than that for failure by
either fibre fracture or matrix yielding.
A survey of the literature revealed that two methods
of loading configuration were commonly utilized in the
single-fibre pull-out test. These are (see Figure 7) the
fixed-bottom loading configuration (FBC) and the
Table 2 Summaryofinterfacial properties
Interracial parameter Glass-nylon
66 Glass-nylon11
/~ 0.30 0.33
ri (MPa) 2.8 6.8
rf (MPa) 1.0 1.6
Po (MPa) 3.5 4.9
Matrix
Restrained Top Loading Method (RTC)
b
Figure 7 Schematicdiagrams of: (a) fixed-bottom loading config-
uration (FBC); (b) restrained-top loadingcondition (RTC)
restrained-top loading condition (RTC). Furthermore,
debonding at the fibre-matrix interface has been
reported to initiate at either the fibre emergent or the
fibre embedded ends (see Figure 1). There has also been
a report 5 of interfacial debonding from both ends of
the fibre.
The above phenomena as well as the probability for
specimen failure by fibre debonding may be influenced
by the stress distributions at the fibre-matrix interface,
and in the matrix and fibre. Therefore, the effect of
loading configuration and specimen geometry on the
stress distributions in the pull-out specimen will now be
considered.
Stress distributions in the pull-out specimen
The theoretical derivations for the interfacial
shear stress ~ , matrix stress am and fibre stress ~f

INT. J. ADHESION AND ADHESIVES Volume 15 Number 2 1995 77

 Fibre-matrix adhesion and interracial properties: C. Y. Yue et al.

distributions in the single-fibre pull-out specimen
under the fixed-bottom 3 (FBC) and restrained-top 9
(RTC) loading conditions are outlined elsewhere.
The pull-out force and the diameters of the fibre
and matrix were assumed to be 10N, 0.1ram and
2.5mm, respectively. The fibre embedded length was
assumed to be 10mm.
Apart from the effect of loading configuration,
the effect of the relative modulus R of the matrix
and fibre (R = Em/Er) was also examined. The R
ratios considered are 0.001, 0.005, 0.01 and 0.5.
This is because most typical composites such as
polymer matrix systems reinforced with glass,
Kevlar and carbon fibres have R values of between
0.001 and 0.01. The case of R = 0 . 5 caters for
composites in which the matrix consists of material
similar to that of the fibres such as c a r b o n - c a r b o n
composites.
Stress distribution at the interface. The variation
of Zx along the embedded length is as shown in
Figure 8. It is apparent that the stress levels and
hence the stress concentration in the RTC is much
higher than that in the FBC. This implies that
in'terfacial debonding occurs more easily (at a lower
70
applied stress) in the restrained-top loading
condition.
Figure 9 represents a plot of edge stresses against R
for the results in Figure 8. It can be seen from Figure
9 that for the RTC, interfacial debonding always
occurs at the emergent end due to the higher stress
concentration in this region. However, for the FBC,
an embedded to emergent transition exists at low R
values (within the range for most practical
composites) as R increases. This probably accounts
for observations in the literature that interfacial
debonding may initiate at either the embedded or
emergent end.
Stress distribution in the fibre and matrix. The
plots of stress distribution in the fibre and the
matrix are as shown in Figures 10 and 11 respec-
tively. It can be seen from Figure 10 that the stress
profile for af in the FBC is different from that for
the RTC. For the same applied load, the stress
level of ar is much higher in the FBC than in the
RTC. This indicates that the tendency for specimen
failure by fibre fracture is much higher in the fixed-
bottom loading condition. Hence, it is better to test
specimens which are prone to brittle fracture of the
fibre in the restrained-top loading condition.
The stress profiles of o-m for both FBC and RTC

60

"~ 50
g 4

fJ
2 40 f
J

J
3O . 2O j ~
J
J
J
©
J

~ ~ ....~ " ~ - ~ - + ~ j/
=

i i i i i
2 4 6 8 10
E m b e d d e d l e n g t h {mm)
~" i , - - 4
o O0 0 0' 2 0 0' 4 006 0 Off O 10
8 Modulus ratio (Era/El)

a
80

60

40

~ ~o 4O

j-
0 I I I I I
~ -20 E m b e d d e d l e n g t h (ram) ~ 0 0 I 02 03 04 0,6
Modu}us ratio (Era/El)
~ -4O
-40

~ -80 ~ ~°
"~ - t O 0

- 120

-140
- 160

b
b
Figure 8 Plot of interracial shear stress 3, distribution along the
embedded length in (a) FBC and (b) RTC ( + , R = 0 . 0 0 1 ; O, Figure 9 Plot of m a x i m u m edge stresses ~ against R for (a) FBC
R=0.005; , R=0.01; 0, R=0.5) and (b) RTC ( , embedded end: , emergent end)

78 INT. J. ADHESION AND ADHESIVES Volume 15 Number 2 1995

 Fibre-matrix adhesion and interracial properties: C. Y. Yue et al.

350

300 ~ ,
0 ©O00000~OQO00000OO000000OO000000°O000000°OOO-~
~
250
04

150 O.3
o

~ lOO
~ 02

0t ° 0 ° ° ~ ° ° ° ° ° 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° ° 0 0 0 ° ~ 9 ~

I I I I J l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
0 E 4 6 8 10 1 E 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0

Embedded length (ram) Embedded length {ram)

i! a
06

l
70 f °O 05
IQ
60 0 04 L O0
0o
,L
"~ 0g
t O00Q
ot
©OOo0"o0 O0000Q©O© 0 /"t OGOOc'C'©o000 Embedded length (ram)
00 , t _ , i Om~_ , , i

e
N 3o
t '/}' -0 1

2o , -02
,{ -03
, \ v~/' l,
-04
\. ~. ~7~.~ ~v-~~ ./ ,7
O5

,ot0 i ~ -
g
I
4
I
6
L _
8
I
10
I

Embedded length {mm) b

b Figure 11 Plot of matrix stress distribution an, x along the embedded
length in (a) FBC and (b) RTC ( + , R = 0 . 0 0 1 ; O, R = 0 . 0 0 5 ;
Figure 10 Plot of fibre stress distribution afx along the embedded -, R = 0.01; O, R = 0.5)
length in (a) FBC and (b) RTC ( + , R = 0 . 0 0 1 ; ~ , R = 0 . 0 0 5 ;
,R=0.0h O,R=0.5)

to embedded transition occurs for initiation of

interfacial debonding in fixed-bottom loading at a
are also different (see Figure 11). However, in
matrix diameter of about 0.75 mm for the glass fibre-
contrast to that for af, the stress levels and stress
nylon 66 system.
concentration for am in the FBC are fairly similar to
those in the RTC. The main difference for an, is that
the stresses are tensile in fixed-bottom loading but
are predominantly compressive along the embedded CONCLUSIONS
length in restrained-top loading. It is known that the
yield stress of a polymer is higher in compression Fibre-matrix adhesion can be assessed using the
than in tension. Hence, the results in Figure 11 single-fibre pull-out test. Fibre-reinforced composite
indicate that specimen failure by matrix yielding systems can be characterized and assessed in terms of
occurs more readily in the FBC than in the RTC. their fibre-matrix adhesion and interfacial properties.
The interfacial parameters % Po and ff can be
Effect of ,specimen geometry. The effect of determined from pull-out data. The loading config-
specimen geometry will now be considered for the uration and specimen geometry have a significant
glass fibre-nylon 66 composite system studied in the effect on the type of failure exhibited by the pull-out
present work. In this study, the fibre embedded specimen. Precautions have been established that can
length and the fibre diameter were assumed to be 10 be undertaken to ensure specimen failure via interfa-
and 0.1 mm respectively, whilst the diameter of the cial debonding leading to pull-out. Specimen failure
nylon matrix block was varied. The dependence of rx by fibre fracture and matrix yielding occurs more
at the fibre edge on matrix diameter is as shown in readily in fixed-bottom than in restrained-top
Figure 12. It can be seen from Figure 12 that interfa- conditions. The position at which interfacial debond-
cial debonding always initiates at the emergent end in ing initiates is dependent on loading configuration
the restrained-top condition. In contrast, an emergent and specimen geometry.

INT. J. A D H E S I O N A N D ADHESIVES Volume 15 N u m b e r 2 1995 79

Fibre-matrix adhesion and interracial properties: C. Y. Yue et al.

3 Yue, C.Y. and Cheung, W.L.J. Mater. Sei. 1992, 27, 3173
4 Yue, C.Y. and Cheung, W.L.J. Mater. Sei. 1992, 27, 3181
25
5 Bowling, J. and Groves, G.W.J. Mater. Sei 1979, 14, 431
6 Yue, C.Y. and Quek, M.Y.J. Mater. Sei. 1994, 29, 2487
A
7 Yue, C.Y. and Looi, H.C. paper under preparation
~o \ 8 Yue, C.Y. and Cheung, W.L.J. Mater. Sci. 1991, 26, 870
9 Yue. C.Y. and Looi, H.C.J. Mater. Sci. 1994, 29, 1901
'\

1 j* ',,,

10 \

\,\ APPENDIX
5

The factor N is given by

0 ' i , I~ , ~

O0 05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Matrix diameter (ram) N = e(1 - O)exp(-c~Lc)
+ c~[O + (1 - ~) exp(-c~Lc)] cothc~Lc (AI)

where
5O Matrix diameter (ram)
I I I I I" , I , i , i
05 I0 15 20 25 :~0 35 4O
. 5O

Ka =2Gm[(rmr~m r)ln(? ) - 1] '

-150

× ( r ~ - - r 2) l [ E m ( r m - r )+Err 2
25 0
_- (A2)
/ 1¢
k - -iv - - k & l

L rTETTm
~ -35o

45 0 = E-(2-'"'rm- r2) (A3)

E m(r 2
m -- r 2) + Err 2
-550

b and r is the radius of the fibre, rm is the radius of the

matrix block, Gm is the shear modulus of the matrix
Figure 12 Plot of maximum interracial stress ~ against diameter of and Em is the compression modulus of the matrix.
matrix block in (a) FBC and (b) RTC ( - - - , embedded end;
emergent end) The full theoretical relationship between Fd and L is
given by:

REFERENCES Fd = 2a:r'Ci[~(1 -- ~b) e x p ( - ~ L )

1 Cox, H.L. Br. J. Appl. Phys. 1952, 3, 72

2 Galiotis, C., Young, R.J., Yeung, P.H.J. and Batchelder, D.N.
~cosh~L ] t
+ [0 + (1 - ~)exp(-c~L)] sinh~L J (A4)
J. Mater. Sei. 1984, 19, 3640

80 INT. J. A D H E S I O N A N D A D H E S I V E S V o l u m e 15 N u m b e r 2 1995