Cure Monitoring and Stress-Strain Sensing of Single-Carbon Fiber Composites by the Measurement of Electrical Resistance

Abstract:

Cure monitoring and stress-strain sensing of single-carbon fiber composites were nondestructively evaluated by the measurement of electrical resistance. The difference of electrical resistance before and after curing increased highest when gauge length of the specimen was the smallest. As curing temperature increased, the electrical behavior of steel fiber was different from that of semi-conductive carbon and SiC fibers. Residual stress built in the fiber was the highest at the fiber axis direction. Whereas residual stress built in the matrix was relatively high at the fiber circumference and radius directions. Residual stress calculated from the experiment was consistent with the results from the finite element analysis (FEA). The strain at low curing temperature was larger than that of higher temperature until the load reached maximum value. The apparent modulus of the electrodeposited composites was higher than that of the untreated composites due to the improved interfacial shear strength (IFSS). The electrical resistance was responded quantitatively with stress-strain behavior during the test. Electrical resistance measurement can be feasible nondestructive techniques to evaluate cure monitoring and stress-strain sensing in the conductive fiber composites.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volumes 297-300)
• Pages: 676-684
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.297-300.676
• Online since: November 2005
• Authors: Sang Il Lee, Dong-Jin Yoon, Seung Seok Lee, Joung Man Park
• Keywords: Cure Monitoring, Electrical Resistance, Interfacial Shear Strength IFSS, Residual Stress, Stress-Strain Sensing

References

[1] B. Frakhanel, E. Muller, T. Frakhanel and W. Siegel: J. Euro. Cera. Soc. Vol. 18 (1998), p.1821.

[2] J.M. Park, S.I. Lee, K.W. Kim and D.J. Yoon: J. Coll. Interf. Sci. Vol. 237 (2001), p.80.

[3] M.S. Madhukar, M.S. Genidy and J.D. Russell: J. Compos. Mater. Vol. 34 (2000), p. (1926).

[4] X. Wang and D.D.L. Chung: Compos. Interf. Vol. 5 (1998), p.277.

[5] D.D.L. Chung: Thermoc. Acta. Vol. 364 (2000), p.121.

[6] X. Wang, X. Fu and D.D.L. Chung: J. Mater. Res. Vol. 13 (1998), p.3081 Strain (%) Stress (MPa) 500 1000 1500 2000 2500.

0.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5 (1) UT (2) ED (a) (1) (2) Electrical Resistivity (Ω·cm x 10-3) Stress (MPa) 050010001500 2000 2500 Electrical Resistivity (Ω·cm x 10-3).

[2] 000.

[2] 005.

[2] 010.

[2] 015.

[2] 020.

[2] 025.

[2] 030.

[2] 035.

[2] 040.

[2] 045 (b) (1) (2) (1) UT (2) ED Fig. 7 (a) Stress-strain and (b) electrical resistivity of the untreated and ED-treated composites.