Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-fnpn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T23:15:02.573Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Role of matrix microstructure in the ultrasonic characterization of fiber-reinforced metal matrix composites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

S. Krishnamurthy ,
T. E. Matikas  and
P. Karpur
S. Krishnamurthy
Affiliation:
USAF Materials Directorate, Wright Laboratory, WL/MLLM/UES, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433–7817
T. E. Matikas
Affiliation:
USAF Materials Directorate, Wright Laboratory, WL/MLLP/UDRI, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433–7817
P. Karpur
Affiliation:
USAF Materials Directorate, Wright Laboratory, WL/MLLP/UDRI, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio 45433–7817
Get access

Abstract

This work deals with the application of ultrasonic nondestructive evaluation for characterizing fiber-reinforced metal matrix composites. The method involved the use of a recently developed technique in which the fiber reinforcement acts as a reflector to incident ultrasonic shear waves. Single fiber and multifiber, single ply composites consisting of SiC fibers in several titanium alloy matrices were investigated. The ultrasonic images obtained were correlated with the results of metallographic characterization of the composites. The results showed that the ultrasonic response of the metal matrix composites is significantly influenced by the microstructure of the matrix through which the incident wave traverses. The general effects of matrix on ultrasonic wave propagation are reviewed, and the ultrasonic signals obtained from various SiC fiber-reinforced titanium alloy composites are discussed in terms of the scattering effects of matrix microstructure.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , March 1997 , pp. 754 - 763
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Johnson, W. S., J. Composites Technology & Research 11, 31–34 (1989).Google Scholar
2.Liaw, P. K., Shannon, R. E., Clark, W. G., Harrigan, W. C., Jeong, H., and Hsu, D. K., JOM 44, 36–40 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Krishnamurthy, S., Matikas, T. E., Karpur, P., and Miracle, D. B., Composites Sci. Technol. 54, 161–168 (1995).Google Scholar
4.Karpur, P., Matikas, T. E., and Krishnamurthy, S., Am. Soc. for Composites Seventh Technical Conference on Composite Materials, Mechanics and Processing, (Technomic Publishing Inc., Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 1992), Vol. 1, pp. 420–427.Google Scholar
5.Matikas, T. E., Karpur, P., Pagano, N. J., Hu, S. and Shaw, L., 21st Annual Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, edited by Thompson, D. O., and Chimenti, D. E. (Plenum, Snowmass Village, CO, 1994), Vol. 14B, pp. 1327–1332.Google Scholar
6.Robinson, E. A. and Silvia, M. T., Digital Foundations of Time Series Analysis: Wave Equation-Processing (Holden-Day, Inc., 1981), Vol. 2.Google Scholar
7.Karpur, P., Non-Destructive Evaluation, J., Indian Society for Non-Destructive Testing 10 (1), 19–28 (1990).Google Scholar
8.Papadakis, E. P., Physical Acoustics, edited by Mason, W. P. (Academic Press, New York, 1968), Vol. IV-B, pp. 269–328.Google Scholar
9.Lifshitz, E. M. and Parkhomovskii, G. D., Zh. Eksperim. i Teoret. Fiz. 20, 175–182 (1950).Google Scholar
10.Merkulov, L. G., Sov. Phys.–Tech. Phys. (English Transl.) 1, 59–69 (1956).Google Scholar
11.Bhatia, A. B. and Moore, R. A., J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 31, 1140–1142 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Morse, P. M. and Ingard, K. V., Theoretical Acoustics (McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1968).Google Scholar
13.Meeker, T. R. and Meitzler, A. H., Physical Acoustics, edited by Mason, W. P. (Academic Press, New York, 1964), Vol. I-A, pp. 111–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Buynak, C. F., Moran, T. J., and Martin, R. W., Mater. Eval. 47, 438–447 (1989).Google Scholar