5.1 This test method (also known as overhung tube method) may be used for material development, material comparison, material screening, material down selection, and quality assurance. This test method is not recommended for material characterization, design data generation, material model verification/validation, or combinations thereof.

5.2 Continuous fiber-reinforced ceramic composites (CFCCs) are composed of continuous ceramic-fiber directional (1D, 2D, and 3D) reinforcements in a fine-grain-sized (<50 µm) ceramic matrix with controlled porosity. Often these composites have an engineered thin (0.1 to 10 µm) interface coating on the fibers to produce crack deflection and fiber pull-out.

5.3 CFCC components have a distinctive and synergistic combination of material properties, interface coatings, porosity control, composite architecture (1D, 2D, and 3D), and geometric shape that are generally inseparable. Prediction of the mechanical performance of CFCC tubes (particularly with braid and 3D weave architectures) cannot be made by applying measured properties from flat CFCC plates to the design of tubes. In particular, tubular components comprised of CMCs material form a unique synergistic combination of material and geometric shape that are generally inseparable. In other words, prediction of mechanical performance of CMC tubes generally cannot be made by using properties measured from flat plates. Strength tests of internally pressurized CMC tubes provide information on mechanical behavior and strength for a multiaxially stressed material.

5.4 Unlike monolithic advanced ceramics which fracture catastrophically from a single dominant flaw, CMCs generally experience “graceful” fracture from a cumulative damage process. Therefore, while the volume of material subjected to a uniform hoop tensile stress for a single uniformly pressurized tube test may be a significant factor for determining matrix cracking stress, this same volume may not be as significant a factor in determining the ultimate strength of a CMC. However, the probabilistic nature of the strength distributions of the brittle matrices of CMCs requires a statistically significant number of test specimens for statistical analysis and design. Studies to determine the exact influence of test specimen volume on strength distributions for CMCs have not been completed. It should be noted that hoop tensile strengths obtained using different recommended test specimens with different volumes of material in the gage sections may be different due to these volume effects.

5.5 Hoop tensile strength tests provide information on the strength and deformation of materials under biaxial stresses induced from internal pressurization of tubes. Nonuniform stress states are inherent in these types of tests and subsequent evaluation of any nonlinear stress-strain behavior must take into account the unsymmetric behavior of the CMC under biaxial stressing. This nonlinear behavior may develop as the result of cumulative damage processes (for example, matrix cracking, matrix/fiber debonding, fiber fracture, delamination, etc.) which may be influenced by testing mode, testing rate, processing or alloying effects, or environmental influences. Some of these effects may be consequences of stress corrosion or subcritical (slow) crack growth that can be minimized by testing at sufficiently rapid rates as outlined in this test method.

5.6 The results of hoop tensile strength tests of test specimens fabricated to standardized dimensions from a particular material or selected portions of a part, or both, may not totally represent the strength and deformation properties of the entire, full-size end product or its in-service behavior in different environments.

5.7 For quality control purposes, results derived from standardized tubular hoop tensile strength test specimens may be considered indicative of the response of the material from which they were taken for, given primary processing conditions and post-processing heat treatments.

5.8 The hoop tensile stress behavior and strength of a CMC are dependent on its inherent resistance to fracture, the presence of flaws, or damage accumulation processes, or both. Analysis of fracture surfaces and fractography, though beyond the scope of this test method, is highly recommended.

1.1 This test method covers the determination of the hoop tensile strength including stress-strain response of continuous fiber-reinforced advanced ceramic tubes subjected to an internal pressure produced by the expansion of an elastomeric insert undergoing monotonic uniaxial loading at ambient temperature. This type of test configuration is sometimes referred to as an overhung tube. This test method is specific to tube geometries because flaw populations, fiber architecture, and specimen geometry factors are often distinctly different in composite tubes, as compared to flat plates.

1.2 In the test method a composite tube/cylinder with a defined gage section and a known wall thickness is loaded via internal pressurization from the radial expansion of an elastomeric insert (located midway inside the tube) that is longitudinally compressed from either end by pushrods. The elastomeric insert expands under the uniaxial compressive loading of the pushrods and exerts a uniform radial pressure on the inside of the tube. The resulting hoop stress-strain response of the composite tube is recorded until failure of the tube. The hoop tensile strength and the hoop fracture strength are determined from the resulting maximum pressure and the pressure at fracture, respectively. The hoop tensile strains, the hoop proportional limit stress, and the modulus of elasticity in the hoop direction are determined from the stress-strain data. Note that hoop tensile strength as used in this test method refers to the tensile strength in the hoop direction from the induced pressure of a monotonic, uniaxially loaded elastomeric insert, where “monotonic” refers to a continuous, nonstop test rate without reversals from test initiation to final fracture.

1.3 This test method applies primarily to advanced ceramic matrix composite tubes with continuous fiber reinforcement: unidirectional (1D, filament wound and tape lay-up), bidirectional (2D, fabric/tape lay-up and weave), and tridirectional (3D, braid and weave). These types of ceramic matrix composites can be composed of a wide range of ceramic fibers (oxide, graphite, carbide, nitride, and other compositions) in a wide range of crystalline and amorphous ceramic matrix compositions (oxide, carbide, nitride, carbon, graphite, and other compositions).

1.4 This test method does not directly address discontinuous fiber-reinforced, whisker-reinforced, or particulate-reinforced ceramics, although the test methods detailed here may be equally applicable to these composites.

1.5 The test method is applicable to a range of test specimen tube geometries based on a non-dimensional parameter that includes composite material property and tube radius. Lengths of the composite tube, pushrods, and elastomeric insert are determined from this non-dimensional parameter so as to provide a gage length with uniform internal radial pressure. A wide range of combinations of material properties, tube radii, wall thicknesses, tube lengths, and insert lengths are possible.

1.5.1 This test method is specific to ambient temperature testing. Elevated temperature testing requires high-temperature furnaces and heating devices with temperature control and measurement systems and temperature-capable grips and loading fixtures, which are not addressed in this test standard.

1.6 This test method addresses tubular test specimen geometries, test specimen methods, testing rates (force rate, induced pressure rate, displacement rate, or strain rate), and data collection and reporting procedures in the following sections.

Section

Scope

1

Referenced Documents

2

Terminology

3

Summary of Test Method

4

Significance and Use

5

Interferences

6

Apparatus

7

Hazards

8

Test Specimens

9

Test Procedure

10

Calculation of Results

11

Report

12

Precision and Bias

13

Keywords

14

Appendixes

Verification of Load Train Alignment

Appendix X1

Stress Factors for Calculation of Maximum Hoop Stress

Appendix X2

Axial Force to Internal Pressure

Appendix X3

1.7 Values expressed in this test method are in accordance with the International System of Units (SI) (IEEE/ASTM SI 10).

1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Specific hazard statements are given in Section 8 and Note 1.

1.9 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.