Static and dynamic flexural strength of 99.5% alumina: Relation to porosity

Abstract Advanced ceramic materials are widely implemented in a variety of cutting edge engineering applications. Their dynamic flexural strength is an important property under impact loading conditions. Therefore, this work reports a systematic comparison of static and dynamic flexural strength results for 99.5% commercial alumina, obtained using a recently reported adaptation of the 1-point impact experimental technique. Specimens of the same size and surface roughness conditions were used in this study, in a large sample batch, thus allowing for estimation of basic statistical parameters for the evaluated material. The main observation is that the flexural strength of this material is distinctly rate-sensitive, a point that was explained by fracture surface porosity levels corresponding to the different loading regimes. During static loading the crack apparently selects a weaker path, by connecting between pores, with a resulting lower strength values and rougher fracture surface. Under dynamic loading conditions, the fracture surface is smoother and the crack path connects only the larger pores, accompanied by an increase in dynamic flexural strength.

[1]  D. Rittel,et al.  Static and dynamic fracture of transparent nanograined alumina , 2010 .

[2]  D. Rittel,et al.  A Simple Methodology to Measure the Dynamic Flexural Strength of Brittle Materials , 2011 .

[3]  Daniel Rittel,et al.  A method for dynamic fracture toughness determination using short beams , 2000 .

[4]  J. Giovanola.  Investigation and Application of the One-Point-Bend Impact Test , 1986 .

[5]  Wei Li,et al.  Dynamic split tensile test of Flattened Brazilian Disc of rock with SHPB setup , 2009 .

[6]  Yong Yu,et al.  A modified Brazilian disk tension test , 2009 .

[7]  X. Nie,et al.  Effect of Loading Rate and Surface Conditions on the Flexural Strength of Borosilicate Glass , 2009 .

[8]  Jean-François Molinari,et al.  Dynamic fragmentation of ceramics, signature of defects and scaling of fragment sizes , 2010 .

[9]  Jean-François Molinari,et al.  On the rate-dependency of dynamic tensile strength of a model ceramic system , 2005 .

[10]  J. Kalthoff.  Fracture behavior under high rates of loading , 1986 .

[11]  Jean-François Molinari,et al.  Stochastic fracture of ceramics under dynamic tensile loading , 2004 .

[12]  Douglas W. Templeton,et al.  Dynamic Ring-on-Ring Equibiaxial Flexural Strength of Borosilicate Glass , 2010 .

[13]  P. Geubelle,et al.  Recent advances in dynamic indentation fracture, impact damage and fragmentation of ceramics , 2008 .

[14]  João Paulo Davim,et al.  Relationship between flexural strength and surface roughness for hot-pressed Si3N4 self-reinforced ceramics , 2000 .

[15]  Roger Morrell,et al.  Design Data for Engineering Ceramics: A Review of the Flexure Test , 1991 .

[16]  P. Bailly,et al.  A non-equilibrium approach to processing Hopkinson Bar bending test data: Application to quasi-brittle materials , 2010 .

[17]  Francisco Gálvez,et al.  Tensile Strength Measurements of Ceramic Materials at High Rates of Strain , 1997 .

[18]  C. Ruiz,et al.  Dynamic testing of ceramics under tensile stress , 1995 .

[19]  N. Frage,et al.  The spall strength of silicon carbide and boron carbide ceramics processed by spark plasma sintering , 2010 .

[20]  H. Kolsky.  An Investigation of the Mechanical Properties of Materials at very High Rates of Loading , 1949 .

[21]  K. Xia,et al.  Semicircular bend testing with split Hopkinson pressure bar for measuring dynamic tensile strength of brittle solids. , 2008, The Review of scientific instruments.

[22]  V. Sánchez-Gálvez,et al.  Splitting tests : an alternative to determine the dynamic tensile strength of ceramic materials , 1994 .

[23]  M. Matthewson,et al.  Mechanical properties of ceramics , 1996 .