Page 298 - Fiber Fracture
P. 298

280                                                          J.W.S. Hearle


                   100
                8
                5
                 ul
                 E  75
                 c
                 v)
                 a,
                 >
                .-
                 c
                %  50
                U
                            0     100     200    300
                              Temperature “C

                                                            0           0.5          1
                                                              Fraction of  1 second break load
                Fig.  14. Comparison of theoretical predictions by Termonia and Smith (1986) with experimental results by
                Schaefgen et al.  (1979). (a) Effect of temperature on strength of Kevlar. (b) Time to  break  for Kevlar and
                HMPE.


                approximation for the prediction of the elastic properties, the tensile modulus, of a real
                fibre with a modest degree of disorientation and other defects. However, I have problems
                with creep and fracture.
                   It  would  appear  that  the  only  modes  for  major, inelastic deformation  are  either
                breakage of  covalent bonds  or  the  movement of  whole molecules past  one  another
                due to a cooperative breakage of  all the intermolecular bonds. The title of the paper
                refers to “ultimate mechanical properties”, and the model may be valid as a prediction
                of  the  theoretical maximum values  for  an  ideal  fibre,  if  such  a  structure could  be
                made. However, both the forms of fracture and theoretical considerations of  the stress
                distributions and the modes of deformation in defective structures suggest that real fibres
                behave differently. The SEM pictures do not support the view that “fracture . . . proceeds
                through the breaking of a small number of primary bonds”.  Nor do they support the
                comments on fracture propagation: namely that, for PPTA, high-stress concentrations
                build  up,  so  that  “catastrophic failure  occurs  and  the  specimen breaks  in  a  brittle
                fashion”, and, for polyethylene, that the reduction in chain length due to primary bond
                breakage increases the stress on the van der Waals bonds and “failure of the specimen
                is accompanied by  a creep-like mode of deformation”. In reality, I believe that shear
                stresses and consequent crack formation and propagation play a much  larger role in
                PPTA, and, as mentioned below, that defect mobility occurs in polyethylene.
                   As  I  wrote  (Morton  and  Hearle,  1993, pp.  666-667):  “The  predictions  are,  of
                course, very dependent on the choice of  input parameters used in the computational
                modelling: there  is  a  major  effect  of  activation energies for  bond  breakage  and  a
                less effect for activation volume. The authors’ conclusion that fracture in both PPTA
                 [Kevlar] and polyethylene is initiated through primary-bond breakage is not immediately
   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303