3 rd Lecture

Fiber-reinforced Composite
Presented by
Dr. Mnel A H Abelgnei

1
 Types of Composite Materials and Their
Classification
There are several ways to classify composite materials, one of which is to categorize them based on the
type of constituents, namely matrix and reinforcement.
Based on the type of matrix material, composite materials can be classified into the following
categories:
• Polymer matrix composites (PMC)
• Metal matrix composites (MMC)
• Ceramic matrix composites (CMC)
• Carbon and Graphite matrix composites (CGMC)
Based on the reinforcement shape, composite materials can be classified into
fibers,
whiskers, and particulates.
 Fiber-Reinforced Composite
Design goals of fiber-reinforced composites often include high strength and/or stiffness on a weight
basis.

These characteristics are expressed in terms of specific strength and specific modulus parameters,
which correspond, respectively, to the ratios of tensile strength to specific gravity and modulus of
elasticity to specific gravity.

Fiber-reinforced composites with exceptionally high specific strengths and moduli have been
produced that utilize low-density fiber and matrix materials.
 Influence of Fiber Length
Fiber-reinforced composites are subclassified by fiber length.

For short fiber, the fibers are too short to produce a significant improvement in strength.

The mechanical characteristics of a fiber-reinforced composite depend not only on the properties
of the fiber, but also on the degree to which an applied load is transmitted to the fibers by the
matrix phase.

Important to the extent of this load transmittance is the magnitude of the interfacial bond between
the fiber and matrix phases.
 Critical Fiber-Length
Some critical fiber length is necessary for effective strengthening and stiffening of the composite
material. This critical length lc is dependent on the fiber diameter d and its ultimate (or tensile)
strength σ*f and on the fiber–matrix bond strength (or the shear yield strength of the matrix,
whichever is smaller) τc according to

Critical fiber length—dependence on:

fiber strength
diameter,
Fig1. The deformation pattern in the matrix surrounding a fiber
fiber-matrix bond strength/matrix shear yield strength that is subjected to an applied tensile load.
Fiber Length

Fig.2. Stress–position
profiles when fiber length
l (a) is equal to the critical
length lc (b) is greater than
the critical length, and (c)
is less than the critical
length for a fiber-
reinforced composite that
is subjected to a tensile
stress equal to the fiber
tensile strength σ*f.
 Fiber Length
For a number of glass and carbon fiber–matrix combinations, this critical length is on the order of
1 mm, which ranges between 20 and 150 times the fiber diameter.

When a stress equal σ*f to is applied to a fiber having just this critical length, the stress–position
profile shown in Fig.2a results; that is, the maximum fiber load is achieved only at the axial center of
the fiber.
Fiber Length Cont.

As fiber length l increases, the fiber reinforcement

becomes more effective; this is demonstrated in Fig.2b, a
stress–axial position profile l > lc for when the applied
stress is equal to the fiber strength. Fig.2c shows the
stress–position profile for l < lc.

Fibers for which l >> lc (normally l > 15lc) are

termed continuous; discontinuous or short fibers have
lengths shorter than this.

For discontinuous fibers of lengths. significantly less

than lc the matrix deforms around the fiber such that there
is virtually no stress transference and little
reinforcement by the fiber.
 Influence of Fiber Orientation and Concentration
The arrangement or orientation of the fibers relative to one another, the
fiber concentration, and the distribution all have a significant influence
on the strength and other properties of fiber-reinforced composites.

With respect to orientation, two extremes are possible:

1. a parallel alignment of the longitudinal axis of the fibers in a
single direction, and
2. a totally random alignment. Continuous fibers are normally
aligned (Fig.3a),

Whereas discontinuous fibers may be aligned (Fig.3b), randomly

oriented (Fig.3c), or partially oriented. Better overall composite
properties are realized when the fiber distribution is uniform.

Fig.3.Schematic representations of (a) continuous and aligned,

(b) discontinuous and aligned, and (c) discontinuous and
randomly oriented fiber-reinforced composites.
 Continuous and Aligned Fiber Composites
Tensile
Stress–Strain Behaviour—Longitudinal Loading

Mechanical responses of this type of composite depend on several factors to include:

 the stress–strain behaviours of fiber and matrix phases,

 the phase volume fractions, and,
 the direction in which the stress or load is applied.

Furthermore, the properties of a composite having its fibers aligned are highly anisotropic, that is,
dependent on the direction in which they are measured.
 The Longitudinal Direction,

To begin, assume the stress versus strain

behaviours for fiber and matrix phases that
are represented schematically in Fig.4a; in
this treatment we consider the fiber to be
totally brittle and the matrix phase to be
reasonably ductile. Also indicated in this
figure are fracture strengths in tension for
fiber and matrix, σ*f and σ*m and
respectively, and their corresponding fracture
strains Ɛ*f and Ɛ*m

Furthermore, it is assumed that Ɛ*m and Ɛ*f

which is normally the case.
Fig.4. (a) Schematic stress–strain curves for brittle fiber and ductile matrix
materials. Fracture stresses and strains for both materials are noted. (b) Schematic
stress–strain curve for an aligned fiber-reinforced composite that is exposed to a
uniaxial stress applied in the direction of alignment; curves for the fiber and matrix
materials shown in part (a) are also superimposed.
 A Fiber-reinforced Composite
A fiber-reinforced composite consisting of these fiber and matrix materials
will exhibit the uniaxial stress–strain response illustrated in Fig.4;

In the initial Stage I region, both fibers and matrix deform elastically;
normally this portion of the curve is linear.

Typically, for a composite of this type, the matrix yields and deforms
plastically (at Ɛym, Fig.4b) while the fibers continue to stretch elastically, in as
much as the tensile strength of the fibers is significantly higher than the yield
strength of the matrix.

This process constitutes Stage II as noted in the figure; this stage is ordinarily
very nearly linear, but of diminished slope relative to Stage I.
 A Fiber-reinforced Composite
The onset of composite failure begins as the fibers start to fracture, which
corresponds to a strain of approximately Ɛ*f as noted in Fig.4b.

Composite failure is not catastrophic for a couple of reasons.

First, not all fibers fracture at the same time, since there will always be
considerable variations in the fracture strength of brittle fiber materials.

In addition, even after fiber failure, the matrix is still intact in as much as Ɛ*f
< Ɛ*m (Fig.4a). Thus, these fractured fibers, which are shorter than the original
ones, are still embedded within the intact matrix, and consequently are capable
of sustaining a diminished load as the matrix continues to plastically deform.
 Elastic Behaviour—Longitudinal Loading
It is assumed that the fiber–matrix interfacial bond is very good, such that deformation of both
matrix and fibers is the same (an isostrain situation).

Under these conditions, the total load sustained by the composite Fc is equal to the sum of the
loads carried by the matrix phase Fm and the fiber phase Ff

(1)

(1)
(2)

(3)
Elastic Behaviour—Longitudinal Loading

(3)

(4)

(5)
Elastic Behaviour—Longitudinal Loading
(4)

(6)

(6)

(7a)

(7b)
 Elastic Behaviour—Longitudinal Loading

Other properties, including density, also have this dependence on volume fractions. Equation 7a is
the fiber analogue of Equation 16.1, the upper bound for particle-reinforced composites.

It can also be shown, for longitudinal loading, that the ratio of the load carried by the fibers to that
carried by the matrix is

(8)
Example
(7a)
(8)
(5)