The effects of thermal exposure on the strengths of Nextel™ 550 and 720 tows, bare and coated with carbon, were determined by room-temperature tensile testing of single filaments extracted from tows that had been exposed to different thermal environments (i.e., air or vacuum) at temperatures from 550° to 1400°C. The results help define the allowable composite processing conditions when using these tows. A 28% drop in the strength of Nextel 550 filaments occurred after a thermal exposure at 1100°C for 2 h in air. After an exposure of 1300°C/2 h/air, a strength degradation of ∼47% resulted. Filaments exposed above 1100°C under vacuum showed more severe strength degradation than filaments exposed in air. The observed strength degradation may stem from a combination of phase transformations of the alumina, the onset of mullite crystallization, and/or exaggerated mullite grain growth. Strength after heat treatment under vacuum at 1050° and 1150°C did not deteriorate as rapidly as after heat treatment under vacuum between 950° and 1050°C or between 1150° and 1250°C. This may be a result of the competition between healing of flaws by the amorphous silica and its evaporation (leading to an increase in its viscosity or loss) and/or densification of the filaments. Nextel 720 filaments exhibited about 9% strength loss after an exposure at 1100°C/2 h/air. The filaments maintained 75% of their strength after a 1300°C/2 h/air heat treatment. The observed strength degradation may stem from thermal grooving, grain growth, and/or annealing of the mullite subgrain boundaries. Thermal exposure of >10 h at 1300°C was required to produce measurable grain growth. Strength loss between 1200° and 1300°C (air heat treatment) was not as great as between 1100° and 1200°C or 1300° and 1400°C.
[1]
T. Mah,et al.
Validity of Using Average Diameter for Determination of Tensile Strength and Weibull Modulus of Ceramic Filaments
,
2005
.
[2]
T. Mah,et al.
Carbon Coating of Nextel 550 and 720 by Pitch–Toluene Pyrolysis
,
2005
.
[3]
S. Lee,et al.
Mechanical Behavior and High‐Temperature Performance of a Woven Nicalon™/Si‐N‐C Ceramic‐Matrix Composite
,
2005
.
[4]
D. M. Wilson,et al.
Statistical tensile strength of NextelTM 610 and NextelTM 720 fibres
,
1997
.
[5]
J. Brennan,et al.
Intermediate‐Temperature Environmental Effects on Boron Nitride‐Coated Silicon Carbide‐Fiber‐Reinforced Glass‐Ceramic Composites
,
1997
.
[6]
A. Evans,et al.
Oxidation Embrittlement Probe for Ceramic‐Matrix Composites
,
1995
.
[7]
Anthony G. Evans,et al.
Overview no. 85 The mechanical behavior of ceramic matrix composites
,
1989
.
[8]
R. E. Tressler,et al.
Strengths of Ceramic Fibers at Elevated Temperatures
,
1989
.
[9]
Robert Ruh,et al.
High‐Temperature Mechanical Behavior of Fiber‐Reinforced Glass‐Ceramic‐Matrix Composites
,
1985
.
[10]
K. Prewo,et al.
Silicon carbide yarn reinforced glass matrix composites
,
1982
.
[11]
Xin Wu,et al.
Elevated temperature creep behavior of continuous fiber-reinforced ceramics
,
1995
.
[12]
A. Evans,et al.
Effects of composite processing on the strength of sapphire fiber-reinforced composites
,
1995
.
[13]
Ne Ashbaugh,et al.
A Fracture Mechanics Test Automation System for a Basic Research Laboratory
,
1990
.
[14]
N. J. Pagano,et al.
The role of the fiber-matrix interface in ceramic composites
,
1989
.