LAB REPORT

Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM):

Fracture Morphology of Metallic and
Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP)
Composite Materials
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
LIST OF FIGURES

1. INRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................2

1.1. AIM AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................2

2. SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY ..........................................................................3

3. SAMPLES .................................................................................................................................4

3.1. 2024 ALUMINUM .............................................................................................................4

3.2. CARBON FIBER REINFORCED POLYMER (CFRP) ...................................................4

4. FRACTURE MORPHOLOGY OF SAMPLES....................................................................5

5. COMPARISON OF SAMPLES .............................................................................................6

5.1. 2024 ALUMINIUM............................................................................................................6

5.2. CFRP...................................................................................................................................6

6. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION ..........................................................................................7

LIST OF FIGURES:
1. SEM Aluminium ........................................................................................................................7
2. SEM CFRP.................................................................................................................................8

1
 Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
In this experiment we will perform the fracture morphology of metallic and fiber reinforced
polymer (FRP) composite materials tensile properties. The samples being used for evaluating the
fracture surface are 2014 Aluminum and carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP). Following are
the aims and objectives of the experiment.

1.1 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES:

AIM:

The purpose of the experiment is to study the fracture morphology of metallic and fiber reinforced
polymer (FRP) composite materials tensile properties. The main objective is to evaluate the
fracture surface of the 2024 Aluminum and carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) composite
materials tested in tensile mode.

OBJECTIVES:

 Describe the fracture morphology that was observed in each type of sample at different
magnifications
 Compare the fracture morphology in between the two types of samples and explain the
differences in the fracture surfaces and why they differ.
 Discuss the findings in detail from the SEM analysis
 In conclusion, explain the knowledge gained through the experiment and the impact and
important of SEM analysis for both metallic and composite materials.

2
 Chapter 2
SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY
Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) is a test process that scans a sample with an electron beam
to produce a magnified image for analysis. The method is also known as SEM analysis and SEM
microscopy, and is used very effectively in microanalysis and failure analysis of solid inorganic
materials. Electron microscopy is performed at high magnifications, generates high-resolution
images and precisely measures very small features and objects.

The signals generated during SEM analysis produce a two-dimensional image and reveal
information about the sample, including external morphology (texture), chemical composition,
when used with the EDS feature, and orientation of materials making up the sample.

Scanning Electron Microscopy uses a focused beam of high-energy electrons to generate a variety
of signals at the surface of solid specimens. In most SEM microscopy applications, data is collected
over a selected area of the surface of the sample and a two-dimensional image is generated that
displays spatial variations in properties including chemical characterization, texture and
orientation of materials. The SEM is also capable of performing analyses of selected point
locations on the sample. This approach is especially useful in qualitatively or semi-quantitatively
determining chemical compositions, crystalline structure and crystal orientations.

WORKING:
Electrons are produced at the top of the column, accelerated down and passed through a
combination of lenses and apertures to produce a focused beam of electrons which hits the surface
of the sample. The sample is mounted on a stage in the chamber area and, unless the microscope
is designed to operate at low vacuums, both the column and the chamber are evacuated by a
combination of pumps. The level of the vacuum
will depend on the design of the microscope.

The position of the electron beam on the sample

is controlled by scan coils situated above the
objective lens. These coils allow the beam to be
scanned over the surface of the sample. This
beam rastering or scanning, as the name of the
microscope suggests, enables information about
a defined area on the sample to be collected. As
a result of the electron-sample interaction, a
number of signals are produced. These signals
are then detected by appropriate detectors.

3
 Chapter 3
SAMPLES
Many types of samples can be analyzed by SEM. Ideally, the sample should be a good electrical
conductor to avoid charge build-up during electron bombardment. In order to analyze insulating
samples such as ceramics, glass, or biological specimens, a thin conducting film of gold or carbon
can be deposited prior to conducting the analysis.

SAMPLES REQUIRMENTS:

 The sample must be small enough to fit on the specimen stage while allowing necessary
motions such as sample rotation and tilting.
 The sample must be compatible with a vacuum environment which is usually about in the
range of 10-6 to 10-4 Torr.
 Some materials have a high vapor pressure that may negatively affect the vacuum and the
structure may also change at low pressure. Precaution must be exercised.
 The sample must be reasonably electrically conducting and properly connected to the stage
to avoid charging.
 The sample must have the ability to emit secondary electrons in a fairly large quantity or
can be coated with a metal with a large coefficient of secondary electron emission.

Following are the samples analyzed in this experiment.

3.1. 2024 ALUMINIUM:

2024 aluminium alloy is an aluminium alloy, with copper as the primary alloying element. It is
used in applications requiring high strength to weight ratio, as well as good fatigue resistance. It
is weldable only through friction welding, and has average machinability.

Due to poor corrosion resistance, it is often clad with aluminium or Al-1Zn for protection,
although this may reduce the fatigue strength.

3.2. CFRP COMPOSITE MATERIALS:

Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites (CFRP) are lightweight, strong materials used in
the manufacturing of numerous products used in our daily life. It is a term used to describe a fiber-
reinforced composite material that uses carbon fiber as the primary structural component. It should
be noted that the "P" in CFRP can also stand for "plastic" instead of "polymer."

4
 Chapter 4

FRACTURE MORPHOLOGY OF SAMPLES

The study of forms and structures of fractures is called fracture morphology. In this experiment
we will do fracture morphology and them compare the result of 2024 aluminium and Carbon
fiber reinforced polymer under the tensile mode. From the results of the tensile test, all the
samples fractured within the region instead of the interface or the substrate, indicating that the
interlayer bonding is weaker than the interface bonding since tensile fracture normally takes place
at the weakest location of the specimen. To investigate the major causes that make the as-deposited
part weak, the fracture surfaces were examined by SEM.

The overall fracture surface of specimen with the intermediate tensile properties predominantly
presented a smooth brittle fracture mode. During the tensile test, the brittle fracture occurred
suddenly with little plastic deformation. Furthermore, the cross-sectional morphology of the
fractured specimens indicated flat and smooth surfaces, indicating a brittle fracture mode. Fracture
Surface and Failure Mechanism From the results of the tensile test. To investigate the major causes
that make the as-deposited part weak, the fracture surfaces were examined by SEM. Significantly
reduce the mechanical properties such as elastic modulus, ductility, microhardness, and bonding
strength of the laser-deposited part by leading to a drop in stress-strain tensile curves, early
deviation from the linear elastic response at low tensile stress loading, as well as premature fracture
failure due to reduced density and weakened interlayer bond strength of the as-built part.
Therefore, the tensile test result showed highly-deviated tensile behaviors between the test
specimens. From the high-magnification views on the fracture surface, more details of fracture
morphology and defects were revealed.

5
 Chapter 5

COMPARISON OF SAMPLES
5.1 2024 ALUMINIUM
For aluminium tensile fracture morphology under tensile mode can be done by following method.
The more commonly used techniques are the uniaxial tensile test, uniaxial compression test, plane
strain compression test, compression test (such as using a ring), and particularly, the tensile test.
Engineering stress (engineering strain curves and engineering stress-engineering strain curves) and
true stress (true strain curves and true stress-true strain curves) are critical data.

5.2 CFRP:

For performing fracture morphology on CFRP samples following test will be conducted.

 Tension: The axial tension failed samples exhibited macro-fractographic features

such as rough surface, chevron lines, three distinct regions viz., crack origin,
propagation and final failure

 Compression: The predominant macroscopic failure mode in the axial compression

failed samples has been identified as shear crippling (the result of kink-band
formation resembling.
 Flexure The flexure failed samples showed features such as distinct tensile and
compressive fracture areas (compression-tension boundary)/

6
 Chapter 6
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
FINDINGS:

ALUMINIUM findings are following.

The strain rate sensitivity of the 2024 aluminium alloy was close to none at room temperature.
The size of the sample does not have an impact on the tensile strength when the flat samples are
proportional and prepared in accordance with the rules. The type of loading has an impact on the
fracture mode. The number of dimples proved to be higher at low strain rates than at
intermediate strain rates at room temperature. For the surfaces which were rapidly torn, the
cleavage type of failure with no or a small number of pores was dominant. The findings
presented above are important for the development of a new methodology for predicting how
samples have been loaded before failure occurred. It seems that SEM analysis and its results may
be used to determine the loading which causes material failure. However, additional tests are
necessary. They should focus on different strain rates and temperatures.

Figure 1. SEM 2024 Aluminium.

CFRP findings are following.

Tension

7
  The axial tension failed samples exhibited macro-fractographic features such as
rough surface, chevron lines, three distinct regions viz., crack origin, propagation
and final failure and micro-fractographic features such radial marks on the individual
fiber fracture ends.
 Using the DAFF method, it is possible to trace the path of fracture over significant
areas of failure and by sampling a number of such areas, overall direction of tensile
failure in a composite can be determined. Also, following the root system of
sequential failures (DAFF method) back towards the origin, it becomes evident that a
whole group of failures may be traced back to the fracture of one fiber.

Compression

 The predominant macroscopic failure mode in the axial compression failed samples
has been identified as shear crippling (the result of kink-band formation resembling
the slip lines in metals) which leads to shear failure on a plane at an angle of 30-45°
to the direction of loading.
 The micro-fractographic informed that the micro-buckling occurs on several planes
and the overall fracture surface consists of a series of steps and the buckling axes
separate compressive failures (C) from tensile failures (T) on the individual fibers.

Flexure

 The flexure failed samples showed features such as distinct tensile and compressive
fracture areas (compression-tension boundary). The delamination and failure cause
the neutral axis to move towards the tensile surface and failure recommences as a
compression fracture. Therefore, the relative areas of the tensile and compressive
regions would provide valuable information regarding the initiation of failure.

Figure 2. SEM CFRP

8
CONCLUSION:

The findings presented above are important for the development of a new methodology for
predicting how samples have been loaded before failure occurred. It seems that SEM analysis
and its results may be used to determine the loading which causes material failure. However,
additional tests are necessary. They should focus on different strain rates and temperatures. this
research has led to the knowledge of the nature and origin of fracture, as well as understanding of
how the fracture occurs, with an insight into the various characteristic features and its effect of
these on the failure modes with the definition of overall crack propagation direction. All these
characteristics are very valuable in the aerospace structures fabricated by CFRP. Fractography
morphology is proving to be powerful and reliable tool for the composite engineer, and is a vital
technique for the overall development and design of composite structures.