High Temperature Mechanical Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites

High Temperature Mechanical Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites
High Temperature Mechanical Behavior of

Ceramic-Matrix Composites
Longbiao Li
Author All books published by WILEY-VCH
are carefully produced. Nevertheless,
Prof. Longbiao Li authors, editors, and publisher do not
Nanjing Univ. of Aeronautics & warrant the information contained in
Astronaut these books, including this book, to
College of Civil Aviation be free of errors. Readers are advised
No. 29 Yudao St. to keep in mind that statements, data,
210016 Nanjing illustrations, procedural details or other
China items may inadvertently be inaccurate.
Cover Library of Congress Card No.:

Cover Design: Wiley applied for
Cover Image: © Iuzvykova
Iaroslava/Shutterstock British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication
Data
A catalogue record for this book is
available from the British Library.
Bibliographic information published by

the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists
this publication in the Deutsche
Nationalbibliografie; detailed
bibliographic data are available on the
Internet at <http://dnb.d-nb.de>.
© 2021 WILEY-VCH GmbH, Boschstr.

12, 69469 Weinheim, Germany
All rights reserved (including those of

translation into other languages). No
part of this book may be reproduced in
any form – by photoprinting,
microfilm, or any other means – nor
transmitted or translated into a
machine language without written
permission from the publishers.
Registered names, trademarks, etc.
used in this book, even when not
specifically marked as such, are not to
be considered unprotected by law.
Print ISBN: 978-3-527-34903-6

ePDF ISBN: 978-3-527-83177-7
ePub ISBN: 978-3-527-83178-4
oBook ISBN: 978-3-527-83179-1
Typesetting Straive, Chennai, India

Printing and Binding
Printed on acid-free paper
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
v
Contents
Preface xiii
Acknowledgments xv
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Tensile Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature 2
1.2 Fatigue Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature 6
1.3 Stress Rupture Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature 7
1.4 Vibration Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature 9
1.5 Conclusion 10
References 10
2 First Matrix Cracking of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at

Elevated Temperature 19
2.1 Introduction 19
2.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC
Composites 20
2.2.1 Theoretical Models 20
2.2.2 Results and Discussion 21
2.2.2.1 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite for
Different Fiber Volumes 23
Different Interface Shear Stress 24
Different Fiber/Matrix Interface Frictional Coefficients 25
Different Interface Debonding Energies 26
2.2.2.5 Effect of Matrix Fracture Energy on Temperature-Dependent Matrix
Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite 27
2.2.3 Experimental Comparisons 28
2.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC
Composite 29
vi Contents

2.3.1.1 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite
for Different Fiber Volumes 30
for Different Interface Shear Stress 30
for Different Interface Frictional Coefficients 33
for Different Interface Debonding Energies 34
for Different Matrix Fracture Energies 34
2.4 Time-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composites 39
2.4.2.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite for
Different Interface Frictional Coefficients 50
Different Matrix Fracture Energies 56
2.5 Time-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of Si/SiC Composites 59
2.5.1.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite for
2.6 Conclusion 71
References 71
3 Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of Fiber-Reinforced

Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Temperature 75
3.1 Introduction 75
3.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of C/SiC
Composites 76
Contents vii

3.2.1.1 Temperature-Dependent Stress Analysis 77
3.2.1.2 Temperature-Dependent Interface Debonding 78
3.2.1.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking 79
3.2.2.1 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking of C/SiC Composite
3.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of SiC/SiC
Composites 89
3.3.1.1 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking of SiC/SiC Composite
for Different Interface Frictional Coefficients 93
3.4 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of C/SiC
Composites 101
3.4.1.1 Time-Dependent Stress Analysis 102
3.4.1.2 Time-Dependent Interface Debonding 103
3.4.1.3 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking 105
3.4.2.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking of C/SiC Composite for
3.5 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of SiC/SiC
Composites 116
viii Contents
3.5.1.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking of SiC/SiC Composite for

3.5.2.1 Unidirectional SiC/SiC Composite 136
3.5.2.2 SiC/SiC Minicomposite 139
3.6 Conclusion 139
References 140
4 Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix

Composites 145
4.1 Introduction 145
4.2 Theoretical Analysis 148
4.3 Results and Discussion 149
4.3.1 Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of SiC/SiC Composite for Different
Fiber Volumes 149
Fiber Radii 149
Matrix Weibull Moduli 152
Matrix Cracking Characteristic Strengths 152
Matrix Cracking Saturation Spacings 155
Interface Shear Stress 155
Interface Debonding Energies 155
Fiber Strengths 159
Fiber Weibull Moduli 160
Oxidation Durations 160
4.4 Experimental Comparisons 161
4.4.1 Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of SiC/SiC Composite 161
4.4.2 Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of C/SiC Composite 173
Contents ix
4.5 Conclusion 179

References 181
5 Fatigue Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated

Temperature 187
5.3.1 2.5D Woven Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C] at 600 ∘ C in Air
Atmosphere 191
Atmosphere 193
5.3.3 2D Woven Self-Healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[SiC-B C] at 1200 ∘ C in Air and
4
in Steam Atmospheres 199
5.3.4 Discussion 203
5.4 Conclusion 206
References 206
6 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated

Temperature 211
6.2 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites Under Constant Stress at
Intermediate Temperature 213
6.2.2.1 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Fiber Volumes 215
6.2.2.2 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Peak Stress
Levels 218
6.2.2.3 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Saturation Spaces
Between Matrix Cracking 221
6.2.2.4 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Interface Shear
Stress 221
6.2.2.5 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Fiber Weibull
Modulus 227
6.2.2.6 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Environmental
Temperatures 229
6.3 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites Under Stochastic Loading
Stress and Time at Intermediate Temperature 234
6.3.1.1 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite Under Stochastic Loading for
Different Stochastic Stress Levels 236
Different Stochastic Loading Time Intervals 240
x Contents

Different Matrix Crack Spacings 251
Different Environmental Temperatures 261
6.3.2.1 𝜎 = 80 MPa and 𝜎 s = 90 MPa with Δt = 7.2, 10.8, and 14.4 ks 267
6.3.2.2 𝜎 = 100 MPa and 𝜎 s = 110 MPa with Δt = 7.2 ks 267
6.3.2.3 𝜎 = 120 MPa and 𝜎 s = 130 and 140 MPa with Δt = 7.2 ks 271
6.3.2.4 Discussion 271
6.4 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites Under Multiple Load
Sequence at Intermediate Temperature 274
6.4.1.1 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite Under Multiple Loading Sequence
for Different Matrix Crack Spacings 280
for Different Environment Temperatures 292
6.5 Conclusion 302
References 302
7 Vibration Damping of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated

Temperature 307
7.2 Temperature-Dependent Vibration Damping of CMCs 308
7.2.2.1 Effect of Fiber Volume on Temperature-Dependent Vibration Damping
of SiC/SiC Composite 310
7.2.2.2 Effect of Matrix Crack Spacing on Temperature-Dependent Vibration
Damping of SiC/SiC Composite 314
7.2.2.3 Effect of Interface Debonding Energy on Temperature-Dependent
Vibration Damping of SiC/SiC Composite 317
7.2.2.4 Effect of Steady-State Interface Shear Stress on Temperature-Dependent
7.2.2.5 Effect of Interface Frictional Coefficient on Temperature-Dependent
Contents xi
7.3 Time-Dependent Vibration Damping of CMCs 329

7.3.2.1 Effect of Fiber Volume on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping of C/SiC
Composite 331
7.3.2.2 Effect of Vibration Stress on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping of
C/SiC Composite 334
7.3.2.3 Effect of Matrix Crack Spacing on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping
of C/SiC Composite 337
7.3.2.4 Effect of Interface Shear Stress on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping
of C/SiC Composite 340
7.3.2.5 Effect of Temperature on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping of C/SiC
Composite 343
7.3.3.1 t = 2 hours at T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C 346
7.3.3.2 t = 5 hours at T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C 346
7.3.3.3 t = 10 hours at T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C 351
7.3.3.4 Discussion 354
7.4 Conclusion 356
References 356
Index 359
xiii
Preface
Monolithic ceramic is a kind of brittle material. The properties of the material will
be greatly reduced by microdefects, which limit the practical application of ceram-
ics in many fields. However, the inherent brittleness of ceramic materials can be
improved by a continuous or discontinuous ceramic fiber or carbon fiber reinforce-
ment, namely, ceramic-matrix composites (CMCs). This dispersed second phase can
improve the fracture toughness of ceramic materials. The main mechanism is that
the crack bridging effect in the process of fracture can make the matrix materials con-
nect with each other, disperse the fracture energy by the way of fiber debonding, and
fiber pulling out to prevent the fracture of the material. Compared with the mono-
lithic ceramic, the mechanical behavior of CMCs has many different characteristics.
Understanding the failure mechanisms and internal damage evolution represents
an important step to ensure reliability and safety of CMCs. This book focuses on the
high-temperature mechanical behavior of CMCs as follows:
(1) Temperature- and time-dependent first matrix cracking stress of fiber-reinforced
CMCs is investigated using the energy balance approach. The temperature-
dependent micromechanical parameters are incorporated into the analysis of
the microstress analysis, interface debonding criterion, and energy balance
approach. Relationships between the first matrix cracking stress, interface
debonding, temperature, and time are established. Effects of fiber volume,
interface shear stress, interface frictional coefficient, interface debonding
energy, matrix fracture energy, temperature, and time on the first matrix
cracking stress and interface debonding length are discussed. Experimental
first matrix cracking stress and interface debonding of C/SiC and SiC/SiC
composites at elevated temperature are predicted.
(2) Temperature- and time-dependent matrix cracking evolution of fiber-reinforced
CMCs is investigated using the critical matrix strain energy (CMSE) criterion.
Temperature-dependent interface shear stress, Young’s modulus of the fibers
and the matrix, matrix fracture energy, and the interface debonding energy are
considered in the microstress field analysis, interface debonding criterion, and
matrix multiple cracking evolution model. Effects of fiber volume, interface
shear stress, interface debonding energy, matrix fracture energy, temperature,
and time on matrix multiple cracking evolution and interface debonding are
discussed. Experimental matrix multiple cracking evolution and fiber/matrix
interface debonding of C/SiC and SiC/SiC composite at elevated temperatures
are predicted.
(3) Time-dependent tensile damage and fracture of fiber-reinforced CMCs are
investigated considering the interface and fiber oxidation. Time-dependent
damage mechanisms of matrix cracking, interface debonding, fiber failure,
and interface and fiber oxidation are considered in the analysis of the tensile
xiv Preface
stress–strain curve. Experimental time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves,

matrix cracking, interface debonding, and fibers failure of different SiC/SiC and
C/SiC composites are predicted for different oxidation durations.
(4) Cyclic-dependent damage development in self-healing 2.5D woven Hi-NicalonTM
SiC/[Si-B-C] and 2D woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composites at T = 600
and 1200 ∘ C is investigated. Cyclic-dependent damage parameters of internal
friction, dissipated energy, Kachanov’s damage parameter, and broken fiber
fraction are obtained to analyze damage development in self-healing CMCs.
Relationships between cyclic-dependent damage parameters and multiple
fatigue damage mechanisms are established. Experimental fatigue damage
evolution of self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] and Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C]
composites are predicted. Effects of fatigue peak stress, testing environment,
and loading frequencies on the evolution of internal damage and final fracture
are analyzed.
(5) Time-dependent deformation, damage, and fracture of fiber-reinforced CMCs
that were exposed to stress rupture loading at intermediate environmental tem-
peratures are investigated. The composite microstress field and tensile consti-
tutive relationship of the damaged CMCs were examined to characterize their
time-dependent damage mechanisms. Relationships between stress rupture life-
time, peak stress level, time-dependent composite deformation, and evolution of
internal damages are established. Effects of composite material properties, com-
posite damage state, and environmental temperature on stress rupture lifetime,
time-dependent composite deformation, and evolution of the internal damages
of SiC/SiC are analyzed. Experimental stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent
composite deformation, and composite internal damage evolution of SiC/SiC
composite subjected to the stress rupture loading are evaluated.
(6) A micromechanical temperature-dependent vibration damping model of
fiber-reinforced CMCs is developed. Temperature-dependent damage mech-
anisms of matrix cracking, interface debonding and slip, and fiber fracture
contribute to the vibration damping of damaged CMCs. Temperature-dependent
fiber and matrix strain energy and dissipated energy density are formulated
of composite constituent properties and damage-related microparameters
of matrix crack spacing, interface debonding and slip length, and broken
fibers fraction. Relationships between temperature-dependent composite
damping, temperature-dependent damage mechanisms, temperature, and
oxidation duration are established. Effects of composite constituent properties
and composite damage state on temperature-dependent composite vibra-
tion damping of SiC/SiC and C/SiC composites are analyzed. Experimental
temperature-dependent composite vibration damping of 2D SiC/SiC and C/SiC
composites are predicted.
I hope this book can help the material scientists and engineering designers to
understand and master the high-temperature mechanical behavior of CMCs.
30 November 2020 Longbiao Li

Nanjing, PR China
xv
Acknowledgments
I am grateful to my wife Li Peng and my son Sheng-Ning Li for their encouragement.

A special thanks to Dr. Shaoyu Qian and Katherine Wong for their help with my
original manuscript.
I am also grateful to the team at Wiley for their professional assistance.
1
Introduction
Monolithic ceramic is a kind of brittle material. The properties of the material will
be greatly reduced by microdefects, which limit the practical application of ceram-
ics in many fields. However, the inherent brittleness of ceramic materials can be
improved by continuous or discontinuous ceramic fiber or carbon fiber reinforce-
ment, namely, ceramic-matrix composites (CMCs). This dispersed second phase can
improve the fracture toughness of ceramic materials. The main mechanism is that
the crack bridging effect in the process of fracture can make the matrix materials
connect with each other, disperse the fracture energy by the way of fiber debonding,
and fiber pulling out to prevent the fracture of the material [1, 2].
Compared with the superalloy, fiber-reinforced CMCs can withstand higher
temperature, reduce cooling air flow, and improve the turbine efficiency. The
density of fiber-reinforced CMCs is 2.0–2.5 g/cm3 , which is only 1/4–1/3 of super-
alloy. CMCs have already been applied to aeroengine combustion chambers,
nozzle flaps, turbine vanes, and blades. For example, the CMC nozzle flaps and
seals manufactured by SNECMA have already been used for more than 10 years
in the M88 and M53 aeroengines. The CMC tail nozzle designed by SAFRAN
Group of France passed the commercial flight certification of European Union
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) and completed its first commercial flight on
the CFM56-5B aeroengine on 16 June 2015. National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) has prepared and tested the CMC turbine guide vanes and
turbine blade disc components in the Ultra-Efficient Engine Technology (UEET)
project. General Electric (GE) tested the CMC combustor and high-pressure
turbine components in the ground test of GEnx aeroengine. The CMC turbine
blades were successfully tested on the F414 engine, which are planned to be
used in GE90 series aeroengines. The engine weight is expected to be reduced
by 455 kg, accounting for about 6% of the total weight of GE90-115 aeroengine.
The LEAP (Leading Edge Aviation Propulsion) series aeroengine developed
by CFM company adopts CMC components. The LEAP-1A, 1B, and 1C aero-
engine provides power for Airbus A320, Boeing 737MAX, and COMAC C919,
respectively.
Compared with polymer matrix composites (PMCs), CMCs have some similar-
ities, including anisotropy, braided structure, high strength/high modulus fibers,
manufacturing process sensitivity, and diversity, but there are also differences,
High Temperature Mechanical Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites, First Edition. Longbiao Li.
© 2021 WILEY-VCH GmbH. Published 2021 by WILEY-VCH GmbH.
2 1 Introduction
such as high operation temperature (>500 ∘ C), diversity of material constituents

(i.e. oxide matrix, nonoxidized matrix, carbide matrix, silicon nitride matrix,
carbon matrix, etc.) and processing methods (i.e. reaction bonding [RB], hot
pressing sintering [HPS], precursor infiltration and pyrolysis [PIP], reactive melt
infiltration [RMI], chemical vapor infiltration [CVI], slurry infiltration and hot
pressing [SIPH], CVI-PIP, CVI-RMI, and PIP-HP), low matrix failure strain, com-
plex degradation/damage/failure mechanisms at elevated temperature, difficult
connection of structures in high-temperature environment, and high requirement
of nondestructive testing and repair technology.
To ensure the reliability and safety of their use in aircraft and aeroengine struc-
tures, it is necessary to investigate the tensile, fatigue, stress rupture, and vibration
behavior of CMCs at elevated temperature.
1.1 Tensile Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature

The stress–strain curve of CMCs under tensile load appears obviously nonlin-
ear. The tensile stress–strain curve can be divided into three regions, i.e. elastic
region, nonlinear region, and secondary linear region before failure. In region
I, there is no damage in the material during initial loading, and the tensile
stress–strain curve is linear. With the increase of stress, microcracks appear in
the matrix-rich area or matrix defects. The initial matrix cracking stress is defined
as 𝜎 mc . These microcracks can only be detected by means of acoustic emission
(AE), microscopic observation of specimen surface, and temperature measure-
ment of sample surface. When the stress reaches the proportional limit stress,
the accumulation of matrix cracks makes the stress–strain curve deflect, and
the stress–strain curve is nonlinear, which marks the beginning of region II. In
region II, the matrix cracks propagate along the vertical load direction while the
number of matrix cracks increases. When the cracks extend to the fiber/matrix
interface, the cracks deflect along the fiber/matrix interface, and debonding occurs
at the fiber/matrix interface. With the increase of stress, when the slip zones of
adjacent matrix cracks overlap each other, the matrix cracks reach saturation.
The saturated stress of matrix cracks is defined as 𝜎 sat . When the matrix crack
is saturated, the region III of the stress–strain curve starts, and the external load
is mainly borne by the fiber. The tangent modulus of the stress–strain curve is
about V f Ef (V f is the volume content of the fiber and Ef is the elastic modulus
of the fiber). With the increase of the stress, some fibers fail, and the failed
fibers continue to carry through the shear stress at the fiber/matrix interface.
When the fibers broken fraction reaches the critical value, the composite fracture
occurs.
The tensile stress–strain behavior reflects the strength of the composite mate-
rial to resist the damage of external tensile loading. The tensile properties (i.e.
proportional limit stress, matrix crack spacing, tensile strength, and fracture
strain) can be obtained from the tensile stress–strain curves and can be used for
component design [3–5]. Jia et al. [6] investigated the relationship between the
interphase and tensile strength of SiC fiber monofilament. The tensile strength
of the SiC fiber monofilament decreases with the increasing coating layers. The
SiC fibers with single boron nitride (BN) coating have the high monofilament
strength retention of about 70%, 42.1% with two BN coatings, and 32.3% with
four BN coatings. The minicomposite comprises one single fiber tow, interphase,
and matrix and can be used to optimize the fiber–matrix interfacial zone and to
generate micromechanical data necessary for modeling the mechanical behavior
[7]. Almansour [8], Sauder et al. [9], and Yang et al. [10] performed investigations
on the tensile behavior of SiC/SiC minicomposites with different fiber types and
interface properties. Shi et al. [11] performed an investigation on the variability
in tensile behavior of SiC/SiC minicomposite. The tensile strength of the SiC/SiC
minicomposite satisfied the Weibull distribution. He et al. [12] performed an
investigation on the tensile behavior of SiC/SiC minicomposites with different
interphase thickness. The tensile strength and fiber pullout length increase with
the interphase thickness. Chateau et al. [13] investigated the damage evolution and
final fracture in SiC/SiC minicomposite using the in situ X-ray microtomography
under tensile loading. Zeng et al. [14] performed experimental and theoretical
investigations on the tensile damage evolution of unidirectional C/SiC composite
at room temperature. Ma et al. [15], Wang et al. [16], Liang and Jiao [17], and Hu
et al. [18] performed investigations on the tensile damage and fracture of 2.5D and
3D CMCs. The nonlinearity appears in the tensile curves along both the warp and
weft directions. Under tensile loading, the matrix cracking first occurs because
of the local stress concentration of the pores inside of the composite, and the
transverse cracks and longitudinal interlaminar cracks result in the final brittle
fracture of the composite. The acoustic emission technique is used to monitor
the damage evolution of a 3D needled C/SiC composite [19]. The damage signal
contained three main frequencies of 240, 370, and 455 kHz corresponding to the
damage mechanisms of the interface damage, matrix damage, and fiber fracture,
respectively. Wang et al. [20] compared the tensile behavior of C/SiC composites
with different fiber preforms. The minicomposite has the largest strength, mod-
ulus, and strain energy density to failure in contrast to the lowest values of the
2D composite and the intermediate properties of the 3D composite. The tensile
behavior of CMCs is affected by temperature [21–23]. For the unidirectional C/SiC
composite at 1300 ∘ C, the composite tensile strength was 𝜎 UTS = 374 MPa and the
composite tensile modulus was Ec = 134 GPa, and at 1450 ∘ C, the composite tensile
strength was 𝜎 UTS = 338 MPa and the composite tensile modulus was Ec = 116 GPa.
For the 2D SiC/SiC composite, the fracture strain at 1200 ∘ C is higher than that at
room temperature because of the interface oxidation. For the 3D C/SiC composite,
when the temperature increases from room temperature to 1500 ∘ C, the composite
elastic modulus and the strain for saturation matrix cracking remained unchanged;
the first matrix cracking stress, matrix cracking saturation stress, and fracture
stress all increased first with temperature to the peak value at the temperature
range of 1100–1300 ∘ C and then decreased with temperature. Luo and Qiao [24]
investigated the effect of loading rate on tensile behavior of 3D C/SiC composite
at room temperature, 1100, and 1500 ∘ C. At room temperature, the fracture stress
4 1 Introduction
increased with loading rate; at 1500 ∘ C, the fracture stress decreased with loading
rate; and at 1100 ∘ C, the fracture stress remained the same without changing
with loading rate. At elevated oxidizing temperature, the applied stress opens
the existing cracks and allows for easier ingress of oxygen to the fibers [25, 26].
Under thermal and mechanical load cycling in oxidative environment, the strain is
damage dependent and a combination of physical mechanism in the form of matrix
microcracking and fiber debonding and chemical mechanism of fiber oxidation.
Li et al. [27, 28] and Li [29] developed a micromechanical approach to predict
the tensile behavior of CMCs with different fiber preforms considering multiple
damage mechanisms. Li [30] predicted the time-dependent proportional limit
stress of C/SiC composites with different fiber volumes, interface properties, and
matrix damage. Li [31] analyzed matrix multi-cracking of fiber-reinforced CMCs
considering the interface oxidation and compared the matrix cracking evolution
of C/SiC composite with/without the interface oxidation. Martinez-Fernandez
and Morscher [32] investigated the tensile properties of single tow Hi-NicalonTM
SiC/PyC/SiC composite at room temperature, 700, 950, and 1200 ∘ C. The elevated
temperature stress rupture behavior was dependent on the precrack stress, and
the stress rupture life increases with the decreasing precrack stress. Forio et al.
[33] investigated the lifetime of SiC multifilament tows under static fatigue in
air at a temperature range of 600–700 ∘ C. A slow-crack-growth mechanism is
considered in the analysis of delayed failure of SiC/SiC minicomposite under low
stress state. Morscher and Cawley [34] investigated the time-dependent strength
degradation of woven SiC/BN/SiC composite at intermediate temperatures. The
strength degradation is dependent on the kinetics for fusion of fibers to one another,
the number of matrix cracks, and the applied stress state. Larochelle and Morscher
[35] investigated the tensile stress rupture behavior of woven Sylramic–iBN/BN/SiC
composite at 550 and 750 ∘ C in a humid environment. The stress rupture strengths
decreased with respect to time with the rate of decrease related to the temper-
ature and the amount of moisture content. Pailler and Lamon [36] developed a
micromechanics-based model of fatigue/oxidation for CMCs considering thermally
induced residual stresses and kinetics of interphase degradation or crack healing.
Santhosh et al. [37, 38] investigated the time-dependent deformation and damage
of 2D SiC/SiC composite under multiaxial stress and dwell fatigue at 1204 ∘ C.
Morscher et al. [39] investigated the damage evolution and failure mechanisms
of 2D Sylramic–iBN SiC/SiC composite under tensile creep and fatigue loading
at 1204 ∘ C in air condition. The damage development was the growth of matrix
cracks and increasing number of matrix cracks with stress and time. Four dominant
failure criterions are present in the literature for modeling matrix crack evolution
of CMCs: maximum stress theories, energy balance approach, critical matrix strain
energy (CMSE) criterion, and statistical failure approach. The maximum stress
criterion assumes that a new matrix crack will form whenever the matrix stress
exceeds the ultimate strength of the matrix, which is assumed to be single valued
and a known material property [40]. The energy balance failure criteria involve
calculation of the energy balance relationship before and after the formation of a
single dominant crack as originally proposed by Aveston et al. [41]. The progression
of matrix cracking as determined by the energy criterion is dependent on matrix

strain energy release rate. The energy criterion is represented by Zok and Spearing
[42] and Zhu and Weitsman [43]. The concept of a CMSE criterion presupposes
the existence of an ultimate or critical strain energy limit beyond which the matrix
fails. Beyond this, as more energy is placed into the composite, the matrix, unable
to support the additional load, continues to fail. As more energy is placed into the
system, the matrix fails such that all the additional energy is transferred to the
fibers. Failure may consist of the formation of matrix cracks, the propagation of
existing cracks, or interface debonding [44]. Statistical failure approach assumes
matrix cracking is governed by statistical relations, which relate the size and spatial
distribution of matrix flaws to their relative propagation stress [45].
In Chapter 2 “First Matrix Cracking of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated
Temperature,” the temperature- and time-dependent first matrix cracking stress
of fiber-reinforced CMCs is investigated using the energy balance approach. The
temperature-dependent micromechanical parameters of fiber and matrix modulus,
fiber/matrix interface shear stress, interface debonding energy, and matrix fracture
energy are incorporated into the analysis of the microstress analysis, fiber/matrix
interface debonding criterion, and energy balance approach. Relationships between
the first matrix cracking stress, fiber/matrix interface debonding, temperature, and
time are established. Effects of fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface fric-
tional coefficient, interface debonding energy, matrix fracture energy, temperature
and time on the first matrix cracking stress, and interface debonding length are
discussed. Experimental first matrix cracking stress and interface debonding of
C/SiC and SiC/SiC composites at elevated temperature are predicted.
In Chapter 3, “Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of Fiber-Reinforced
Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Temperature,” the temperature- and
time-dependent matrix cracking evolution of fiber-reinforced CMCs is investigated
using the CMSE criterion. The temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface shear
stress, Young’s modulus of the fibers and the matrix, matrix fracture energy, and
the fiber/matrix interface debonding energy are considered in the microstress field
analysis, fiber/matrix interface debonding criterion, and matrix multiple cracking
evolution model. Effects of fiber volume, fiber/matrix interface shear stress,
fiber/matrix interface debonding energy, matrix fracture energy, temperature and
time on matrix multiple cracking evolution, and fiber/matrix interface debonding
are discussed. Experimental matrix multiple cracking evolution and fiber/matrix
interface debonding of C/SiC and SiC/SiC composite at elevated temperatures are
predicted.
In Chapter 4, “Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Compos-
ites,” time-dependent tensile damage and fracture of fiber-reinforced CMCs are
investigated, considering the interface and fiber oxidation. Time-dependent damage
mechanisms of matrix cracking, interface debonding, fiber failure, and interface
and fiber oxidation are considered in the analysis of the tensile stress–strain
curve. Experimental time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves, matrix cracking,
interface debonding, and fiber failure of different SiC/SiC and C/SiC composites
are predicted for different oxidation duration.
6 1 Introduction
1.2 Fatigue Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature

For CMCs, because of the low fracture toughness of the matrix, there is no fatigue
damage in the matrix itself. The degradation of interface or fiber properties is the
main cause of fatigue damage. The interface degradation is mainly caused by inter-
face layer fracture, wear, thermal residual stress release, and temperature rise at the
interface; fiber degradation is caused by defects on the fiber surface during the inter-
face wear process. It is found that the strength of the fiber decreases obviously after
fatigue failure. The decrease of interfacial shear stress leads to the increase of interfa-
cial debonding length with the increase of cycle, resulting in the increase of residual
strain and decrease of modulus. The characteristic length and load of fiber increase
with the decrease of interfacial shear stress. At the same time, the strength of fiber
decreases because of interface wear, which further increases the probability of fiber
fracture. When the percentage of fiber fracture reaches the critical value, the modu-
lus of the composite decreases sharply, and the fatigue failure occurs.
At elevated temperature, oxidation is the key factor to limit the application of
CMCs on hot section load-carrying components of aeroengine. Combining carbides
deposited by CVI process with specific sequences, a new generation of SiC/SiC com-
posite with self-healing matrix has been developed to improve the oxidation resis-
tance [46, 47]. The self-sealing matrix forms a glass with oxygen at high temperature
and consequently prevents oxygen diffusion inside the material. At low temperature
of 650–1000 ∘ C in dry and wet oxygen atmosphere, the self-healing 2.5D NicalonTM
NL202 SiC/[Si-B-C] with a pyrolytic carbon (PyC) interphase exhibits a better oxi-
dation resistance compared to SiC/SiC with PyC because of the presence of boron
compounds [48]. The fatigue lifetime duration in air atmosphere at intermediate
and high temperature is considerably reduced beyond the elastic yield point. For
the Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite, the elastic yield point is about 𝜎 = 80 MPa. The
lifetime duration was about t = 10–20 hours at T = 873 K and less than t = 1 hour at
T = 1123 K under 𝜎 max = 120 MPa. For the self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC com-
posite, a duration of t = 1000 hours without failure is reached at 𝜎 max = 170 MPa, and
a duration higher than t = 100 hours at 𝜎 max = 200 MPa at T = 873 K [49]. For the
self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite, at 1200 ∘ C, there was little influ-
ence on fatigue performance at f = 1.0 Hz but noticeably degraded fatigue lifetime at
f = 0.1 Hz with the presence of steam [50, 51]. Increase in temperature from T = 1200
to 1300 ∘ C slightly degrades fatigue performance in air atmosphere but not in steam
atmosphere [52]. The crack growth in the SiC fiber controls the fatigue lifetime of
self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] at T = 873 K, and the fiber creep controls the
fatigue lifetime of self-healing SiC/[Si-B-C] at T = 1200 ∘ C [53]. The typical cyclic
fatigue behavior of a self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite involves an ini-
tial decrease of effective modulus to a minimum value, followed by a stiffening, and
the time-to-the minimum modulus is in inverse proportion to the loading frequency
[54]. The initial cracks within the longitudinal tows caused by interphase oxidation
contribute to the initial decrease of modulus. The glass produced by the oxidation of
self-healing matrix may contribute to the stiffening of the composite either by seal-
ing the cracks or by bonding the fiber to the matrix [55]. The damage evolution of
1.3 Stress Rupture Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature 7
self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at elevated temperature can be mon-

itored using acoustic emission (AE) [56, 57]. The relationship between interface oxi-
dation and AE energy under static fatigue loading at elevated temperature has been
developed [58]. However, at high temperature above 1000 ∘ C, AE cannot be applied
for cyclic fatigue damage monitoring. The complex fatigue damage mechanisms of
self-healing CMCs affect damage evolution and lifetime. Hysteresis loops related
with cyclic-dependent fatigue damage mechanisms [59–61]. The damage parame-
ters derived from hysteresis loops have already been applied for analyzing fatigue
damage and fracture of different nonoxide CMCs at elevated temperatures [62–65].
However, the cyclic-dependent damage evolution and accumulation of self-healing
CMCs are much different from previous analysis results especially at elevated tem-
peratures.
In Chapter 5, “Fatigue Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated
Temperature,” cyclic-dependent damage development in self-healing 2.5D woven
Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] and 2D woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composites at
T = 600 and 1200 ∘ C are investigated. Cyclic-dependent damage parameters of
internal friction, dissipated energy, Kachanov’s damage parameter, and broken
fiber fraction are obtained to analyze damage development in self-healing CMCs.
Relationships between cyclic-dependent damage parameters and multiple fatigue
damage mechanisms are established. Experimental fatigue damage evolution of
self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] and Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composites
are predicted. Effects of fatigue peak stress, testing environment, and loading
frequencies on the evolution of internal damage and final fracture are analyzed.
1.3 Stress Rupture Behavior of CMCs at Elevated

Temperature
At the intermediate temperature, SiC/SiC composite lifetime is decreased because
of interface oxidation and lowered fiber content following exposure to stress
rupture loading [66]. At elevated temperature range of 700–1200 ∘ C, the SiC/SiC
minicomposite with the PyC interphase exhibited severe damages of oxidation
embrittlement, and the SiC/SiC minicomposite with the BN interphase showed only
mild degradation subjected to the stress rupture loading [67]. Martinez-Fernandez
and Morscher [32] investigated the monotonic tensile, stress rupture under con-
stant load, and low-cycle fatigue of single tow Hi-Nicalon, PyC interphase, and
CVI SiC matrix minicomposites at room temperature, 700, 950, and 1200 ∘ C in
air atmosphere. The stress rupture behavior at elevated temperature depended
on the precracking stress level. However, for the 2D woven melt-infiltrated (MI)
Hi-Nicalon SiC/SiC composite, the stress rupture properties were obvious worse
than the SiC/SiC minicomposite properties under similar testing conditions because
of complex fiber preform and damage evolution mechanisms [68]. Verrilli et al. [69]
investigated the lifetime of C/SiC composite at elevated temperatures of 600 and
1200 ∘ C subjected to the stress rupture loading in different environments. Stress
rupture lives in air and in steam containing environments were similar at a low
8 1 Introduction
stress level of 69 MPa at an elevated temperature of 1200 ∘ C. The fiber oxidation rate
correlated with the composite stress rupture lifetime in the various environments.
In the theoretical research area, Marshall et al. [70] and Zok and Spearing [42]
applied the fracture mechanics approach to explore nonsteady first matrix cracking
stress and multiple matrix cracking in fiber-reinforced CMCs. The energy balance
relationship before and after the matrix cracking is established considering the
mutual inference factors of the stress field between the adjacent matrix cracks.
Curtin [45] investigated multiple matrix cracking in CMCs in the presence of matrix
internal flaws. Evans [71] reported a method to predict design and life problems in
fiber-reinforced CMCs. In addition, a connection between the macro-mechanical
behavior and constituent properties of CMCs was established based on these
predictions. McNulty and Zok [72] investigated the low-cycle fatigue damage
mechanism and reported predictive damage models to describe the low-cycle CMC
fatigue life. The degradation of the interface properties and fiber strength controls
the fatigue life of CMCs. Lara-Curzio [73] established a micromechanical model
for fiber-reinforced CMC reliability and time-to-failure estimation, particularly
following the application of stresses greater than the first matrix cracking stress. The
relationship between internal damage mechanisms and lifetime was established.
In addition, the stress and temperature influences on the fiber-reinforced CMCs
were investigated. Halverson and Curtin [74] developed a micromechanically
based model for composite strength, and stress rupture lifetime of oxide/oxide
fiber-reinforced CMCs considering the degradation of the fiber, matrix damage, and
fiber pullout. Casas and Martinez-Esnaola [75] produced a fiber-reinforced CMC
micromechanical creep-oxidation model, which was used to characterize oxidation
at the CMC interface and the matrix, fiber creep, and fiber degradation with respect
to time. Pailler and Lamon [36] developed a micromechanics-based model for the
thermomechanical behavior of minicomposites based on multi-matrix cracking and
fiber failure, which was derived from a fracture statistics-based model. Dassios et al.
[76] analyzed the micromechanical behavior and micromechanics of crack growth
resistance and bridging laws. The contributions of intact and pulled-out fibers on
the bridging strain were discussed. Baranger [77] developed a reduced constitutive
law to characterize the complex material behavior and applied the constitutive
law to the mechanical modeling of SiC/SiC composites. Li [78–80] developed
micromechanical damage models and constitutive relationship of cross-ply CMCs
subjected to the dwell-fatigue loading at elevated temperature. Li et al. [27, 28]
and Li [29] developed a micromechanical constitutive relationship to predict the
damage and fracture of different fiber-reinforced CMCs subjected to tensile loading
considering multiple damage mechanisms. Nonetheless, the above research did not
consider fiber-reinforced CMC time-dependent deformation, damage, and fracture
following the application of stress rupture loading at intermediate environmental
temperatures.
In Chapter 6, “Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Tem-
perature,” time-dependent deformation, damage, and fracture of fiber-reinforced
CMCs that were exposed to stress rupture loading at intermediate environmen-
tal temperatures are investigated. The composite microstress field and tensile
1.4 Vibration Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature 9
constitutive relationship of the damaged CMCs were examined to characterize

their time-dependent damage mechanisms. Relationships between stress rupture
lifetime, peak stress level, time-dependent composite deformation, and evolution
of internal damages are established. Effects of composite material properties,
composite damage state, and environmental temperature on stress rupture lifetime,
time-dependent composite deformation, and evolution of the internal damages
of SiC/SiC are analyzed. Experimental stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent
composite deformation, and composite internal damage evolution of SiC/SiC
composite subjected to the stress rupture loading are evaluated.
1.4 Vibration Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature

Failure analysis shows that approximately two-thirds of the failures are related to
vibration and noise, leading to reduced operational control accuracy, structural
fatigue damage, and shortened safety life. Therefore, studying the damping per-
formance of fiber-reinforced CMCs and improving their reliability in the service
environment is an important guarantee for the safe service of CMCs in various fields.
Compared with metals and alloys, CMCs have many unique damping mechanisms
because of internal structure and complex damage mechanisms [81–85]. Hao et al.
[86] performed computational and experimental analysis on the modal parameters
and vibration response of C/SiC bolted fastenings. The composite vibration damping
affects the vibration amplitude of CMC components. Zhang [87] investigated the
vibration characteristics of a CMC panel subjected to high temperature and large
gradient thermal environment and performed damping measurement experiments
of CMC panels in the thermal environment. The effect of thermal environment
on the natural frequency and vibration damping of CMCs was analyzed. Huang
and Wu [88] performed natural frequencies and acoustic emission testing of 2D
SiC/SiC composite subjected to tensile loading. The natural frequencies decrease
with increasing tensile stress because of internal damages. Natural frequency
and vibration damping are affected by the damage state of CMCs [89]. Energy
dissipation of frictional sliding between matrix cracks is the main mechanism for
the damping of unidirectional or cross-ply CMCs at room temperature [90]. The
damping of CMCs is also affected by the fabrication method [91], property of the
fiber [91], internal damages inside of CMCs [82, 92], and interphase thickness [93].
At elevated temperature, the temperature-dependent damage mechanisms affect
the mechanical behavior and vibration damping of CMCs [94–99].
In Chapter 7 “Vibration Damping of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated
Temperature,” a micromechanical temperature-dependent vibration damping
model of fiber-reinforced CMCs is developed. Temperature-dependent damage
mechanisms of matrix cracking, interface debonding and slip, and fiber fracture
of composite constituent properties and damage-related microparameters of
matrix crack spacing, interface debonding and slip length, and broken fiber
10 1 Introduction
fraction. Relationships between temperature-dependent composite damping,

temperature-dependent damage mechanisms, temperature, and oxidation duration
are established. Effects of composite constituent properties and composite damage
state on temperature-dependent composite vibration damping of SiC/SiC and
C/SiC composites are analyzed. Experimental temperature-dependent composite
vibration damping of 2D SiC/SiC and C/SiC composites is predicted.
1.5 Conclusion
In this chapter, tensile, fatigue, stress rupture, and vibration behavior of
fiber-reinforced CMCs are briefly introduced. In the following chapters, detailed
formation about the matrix cracking, matrix multiple cracking, tensile, fatigue,
stress rupture, and vibration behavior of fiber-reinforced CMCs are given:
● Chapter 2: First Matrix Cracking of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Tem-
perature.
● Chapter 3: Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of Fiber-Reinforced Ceramic-Mat-
rix Composites at Elevated Temperature.
● Chapter 4: Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites.
● Chapter 5: Fatigue Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Tempera-
ture.
● Chapter 6: Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Intempera-
ture.
● Chapter 7: Vibration Damping of Ceramic-Matrix composites at Elevated Temper-
ature.
References
1 Naslain, R. (2004). Design, preparation and properties of non-oxide CMCs for

application in engines and nuclear reactors: an overview. Compos. Sci. Technol.
64: 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00230-6.
2 Li, L.B. (2018). Damage, Fracture and Fatigue in Ceramic-Matrix Composites.
Singapore: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1783-5.
3 Perrot, G., Couegnat, G., Ricchiuto, M., and Vignoles, G.L. (2019). Image-based
numerical modeling of self-healing in a ceramic-matrix minicomposites. Ceram-
ics 2: 308–326. https://doi.org/10.3390/ceramics2020026.
4 Maillet, E., Singhal, A., Hilmas, A. et al. (2019). Combining in-situ synchrotron
X-ray microtomography and acoustic emission to characterize damage evolution
in ceramic matrix composites. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 39: 3546–3556. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2019.05.027.
5 Li, S., Wang, M., Jeanmeure, L. et al. (2019). Damage related material con-
stants in continuum damage mechanics for unidirectional composites with
matrix cracks. Int. J. Damage Mech. 28 (5): 690–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1056789518783239.
References 11
6 Jia, L., Wang, M., Xu, H. et al. (2019). Preparation of (BN-SiC)n composite coat-
ings on SiC fibers and tensile properties of monofilament. Acta Mater. Compos.
Sin. 36: 1873–1878. https://doi.org/10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20181025.003.
7 Naslain, R., Lamon, J., Pailler, R. et al. (1999). Micro/minicomposites: a useful
approach to the design and development of non-oxide CMCs. Compos. Part A:
Appl. Sci. Manuf. 30: 537–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-835X(98)00147-X.
8 Almansour, A.S. (2017). Use of single-tow ceramic matrix minicomposites to
determine fundamental room and elevated temperature properties. PhD thesis.
University of Akron, USA.
9 Sauder, C., Brusson, A., and Lamon, J. (2010). Influence of interface charac-
teristics on the mechanical properties of Hi-Nicalon type-S or Tyranno-SA3
fiber-reinforced SiC/SiC minicomposites. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 7:
291–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7402.2010.02485.x.
10 Yang, P., Zhang, R., Li, Y. et al. (2018). Preparation and tensile behavior of
SiCf /SiC minicomposites with (PyC/SiC)n multilayered interphases. Mater. Sci.
Eng. Powder Metall. 23: 553–561.
11 Shi, D., Sha, J., Cheng, Z., and Yang, X. (2019). Numerical simulation method of
the variability in tensile properties of SiC/SiC minicomposites. J. Aerosp. Power
34: 971–979.
12 He, Z., Zhang, R., Fu, D. et al. (2019). Tensile mechanical behavior of SiC fiber
bundle reinforced composites with different interfaces. J. Mater. Eng. 47: 25–31.
13 Chateau, C., Gelebart, L., Bornert, M. et al. (2011). In situ X-ray microtomog-
raphy characterization of damage in SiC/SiC minicomposites. Compos. Sci.
Technol. 71: 916–924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2011.02.008.
14 Zeng, Z., Zhang, Q., Liu, W., and Kong, B. (2015). Matrix failure mechanism
and strength prediction of UD-C/SiC ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater.
Compos. Sin. 32: 1075–1082.
15 Ma, J., Xu, Y., Zhang, L. et al. (2006). Microstructure characterization and ten-
sile behavior of 2.5D C/SiC composites fabricated by chemical vapor infiltration.
Scr. Mater. 54: 1967–1971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2006.01.047.
16 Wang, Y., Zhang, L., Cheng, L. et al. (2008). Tensile performance and damage
evolution of a 2.5-D C/SiC composite characterized by acoustic emission. Appl.
Compos. Mater. 15: 183–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-008-9066-2.
17 Liang, S. and Jiao, G. (2016). The tensile damage and strength of 2.5D
self-healing C/SiC composite. Gas Turbine Exp. Res. 29: 47–50.
18 Hu, X., Zhang, Y., Yang, H. et al. (2019). Investigation on the tensile and bend-
ing behavior of a 3D-SiC/SiC ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater. Compos.
Sin. 36: 1879–1885. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.1801.TB.20181023.1015
.006.html.
19 Huang, X., Wang, B., Yang, C. et al. (2018). Evaluating damage evolution of
three-dimension needled C/SiC composite based on acoustic emission signal
analysis. J. Inorg. Mater. 33: 609–616.
20 Wang, Y., Zhang, L., and Cheng, L. (2013). Comparison of tensile behaviors of
carbon/ceramic composites with various fiber architectures. Int. J. Appl. Ceram.
Technol. 10: 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7402.2011.02727.x.
12 1 Introduction
21 Cao, Y., Zhang, C., Zhou, X., and Chen, C. (2001). Tensile properties of
UD-C/SiC ceramic matrix composites at elevated temperature. Acta Mater.
Compos. Sin. 18: 82–84.
22 Qiao, S., Luo, G., Du, S., and Li, M. (2004). Tensile performance of 3D-C/SiC
composites at high temperature. Mech. Sci. Technol. 23: 335–338.
23 Chen, M., Chen, X., Zhang, D. et al. (2019). Tensile behavior and failure mech-
anisms of plain weave SiC/SiC composites at room and high temperatures.
J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. Sci. 53: 11–18.
24 Luo, G. and Qiao, S. (2003). Influence of loading rates on 3D-C/SiC tensile prop-
erties at different temperature. Mater. Eng. 10: 9–10.
25 Halbig, M.C., Brewer, D.N., and Eckel, A.J. (2000). Degradation of con-
tinuous fiber ceramic matrix composites under constant-load conditions.
NASA/TM-2000-209681.
26 Mei, H., Cheng, L., Zhang, L., and Xu, Y. (2007). Modeling the effects of thermal
and mechanical load cycling on a C/SiC composite in oxygen/argon mixtures.
Carbon 45: 2195–2204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2007.06.051.
27 Li, L.B., Song, Y., and Sun, Y. Modeling the tensile behavior of unidirectional
C/SiC ceramic-matrix composites. Mech. Compos. Mater. 203 (49): 659–672.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11029-013-9382-y.
28 Li, L.B., Song, Y., and Sun, Y. (2015). Modeling the tensile behavior of cross-ply
C/SiC ceramic-matrix composites. Mech. Compos. Mater. 51: 359–376. https://doi
.org/10.1007/s11029-015-9507-6.
29 Li, L.B. (2018). Modeling the monotonic and cyclic tensile stress–strain behavior
of 2D and 2.5D woven C/SiC ceramic-matrix composites. Mech. Compos. Mater.
54: 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11029-018-9729-5.
30 Li, L. (2019). Time-dependent proportional limit stress of carbon fiber-reinforced
silicon carbide-matrix composites considering interface oxidation. J. Ceram. Soc.
Jpn. 127: 279–287. https://doi.org/10.2109/jcersj2.18176.
31 Li, L.B. (2018). Effect of interface oxidation on matrix multi-cracking evolution
of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperatures. J. Ceram.
Sci. Technol. 9: 397–410.
32 Martinez-Fernandez, J. and Morscher, G.N. (2000). Room and elevated temper-
ature tensile properties of single tow Hi-Nicalon, carbon interphase, CVI SiC
matrix minicomposites. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 20: 2627–2636. https://doi.org/10
.1016/S0955-2219(00)00138-2.
33 Forio, P., Lavaire, F., and Lamon, J. (2004). Delayed failure at intermediate tem-
peratures (600 ∘ C–700 ∘ C) in air in silicon carbide multifilament tows. J. Am.
Ceram. Soc. 87: 888–893. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-2916.2004.00888.x.
34 Morscher, G.N. and Cawley, J.D. (2002). Intermediate temperature strength
degradation in SiC/SiC composites. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 22: 2777–2787. https://doi
.org/10.1016/S0955-2219(02)00144-9.
35 Larochelle, K.J. and Morscher, G.N. (2006). Tensile stress rupture behavior of a
woven ceramic matrix composite in humid environments at intermediate tem-
perature – Part I. Appl. Compos. Mater. 13: 147–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10443-006-9009-8.
References 13
36 Pailler, F. and Lamon, J. (2005). Micromechanics based model of fatigue/

oxidation for ceramic matrix composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 65: 369–374.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.09.029.
37 Santhosh, U., Ahmad, J., Ojard, G. et al. (2016). Deformation and damage mod-
eling of ceramic matrix composites under multiaxial stresses. Compos. Part B:
Eng. 90: 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.12.017.
38 Santhosh, U., Ahmad, J., Kalarikkal, S. et al. (2018). Time-dependent deforma-
tion and damage modeling of a SiC/SiC composite. J. Aerosp. Eng. 31: 04018086.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000921.
39 Morscher, G.N., Ojard, G., Miller, R. et al. (2008). Tensile creep and fatigue of
Sylramic-iBN melt-infiltrated SiC matrix composites: retained properties, damage
development, and failure mechanisms. Compos. Sci. Technol. 68: 3305–3313.
40 Daniel, I.M., Anastassopoulos, G., and Lee, J.W. (1993). The behavior of ceramic
matrix fiber composites under longitudinal loading. Compos. Sci. Technol.
46: 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-3538(93)90166-E.
41 Aveston, J., Cooper, G.A., and Kelly, A. (1971). Single and multiple fracture.
Properties of Fiber Composites: Conference on Proceedings. England: National
Physical Laboratory, IPC, pp. 15–26.
42 Zok, F.W. and Spearing, S.M. (1992). Matrix crack spacing in brittle matrix
composites. Acta Metall. Mater. 40: 2033–2043. https://doi.org/10.1016/0956-
7151(92)90189-L.
43 Zhu, H. and Weitsman, Y. (1994). The progression of failure mechanisms in uni-
directional reinforced ceramic composites. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 42: 1601–1632.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(94)90089-2.
44 Solti, J.P., Mall, S., and Robertson, D.D. (1997). Modeling of matrix failure in
ceramic matrix composites. J. Compos. Technol. Res. 19: 29–40. https://doi.org/10
.1520/CTR10011J.
45 Curtin, W.A. (1993). Multiple matrix cracking in brittle matrix composites. Acta
Metall. Mater. 41: 1369–1377. https://doi.org/10.1016/0956-7151(93)90246-O.
46 Lamouroux, F., Camus, G., and Thebault, J. (1994). Kinetics and mechanisms
of oxidation of 2D woven C/SiC composites: I, Experimental approach. J. Am.
Ceram. Soc. 77: 2049–2057. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.1994.tb07096.x.
47 Hay, R.S. and Chater, R.J. (2017). Oxidation kinetics strength of Hi-NicalonTM -S
SiC fiber after oxidation in dry and wet air. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 100: 4110–4130.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.14833.
48 Viricelle, J.P., Goursat, P., and Bahloul-Hourlier, D. (2001). Oxidation behavior
of a multi-layered ceramic-matrix composite (SiC)f /C/(SiBC)m . Compos. Sci.
Technol. 61: 607–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(00)00243-8.
49 Bouillon, E., Abbe, F., Goujard, S. et al. (2002). Mechanical and thermal
properties of a self-sealing matrix composite and determination of the life
time duration. Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc. 21: 459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/
9780470294628.ch54.
14 1 Introduction
50 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B., Delapasse, J., Chamberlain, A.L. et al. (2012). Fatigue

behavior of a Hi-NicalonTM /SiC-B4 C composite at 1200 ∘ C in air and in steam.
Mater. Sci. Eng., A 534: 119–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2011.11.049.
51 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B. and Kurtz, G. (2013). Notch sensitivity of fatigue behav-
ior of a Hi-NicalonTM /SiC-B4 C composite at 1200 ∘ C in air and in steam. Appl.
52 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B. and Lee, M.D. (2016). Fatigue behavior of an advanced
SiC/SiC composite with a self-healing matrix at 1300 ∘ C in air and in steam.
53 Reynaud, P., Rouby, D., and Fantozzi, G. (2005). Cyclic fatigue behaviour at high
temperature of a self-healing ceramic matrix composite. Ann. Chim. Sci. Mater.
30: 649–658.
54 Carrere, P. and Lamon, J. (1999). Fatigue behavior at high temperature in air
of a 2D woven SiC/SiBC with a self healing matrix. Key Eng. Mater. 164–165:
321–324. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.164-165.321.
55 Forio, P. and Lamon, J. (2001). Fatigue behavior at high temperatures in air of a
2D SiC/Si-B-C composite with a self-healing multilayered matrix. In: Advances
in Ceramic Matrix Composites VII (eds. N.P. Bansal, J.P. Singh and H.-T. Lin),
127–141. The American Ceramic Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118380925
.ch10.
56 Simon, C., Rebillat, F., and Camus, G. (2017). Electrical resistivity monitoring
of a SiC/[Si-B-C] composite under oxidizing environments. Acta Mater. 132:
586–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2017.04.070.
57 Simon, C., Rebillat, F., Herb, V., and Camus, G. (2017). Monitoring dam-
age evolution of SiCf /[Si-B-C]m composites using electrical resistivity: crack
density-based electromechanical modeling. Acta Mater. 124: 579–587. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2016.11.036.
58 Moevus, M., Reynaud, P., R’Mili, M. et al. (2006). Static fatigue of a 2.5D
SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at intermediate temperature under air. Adv. Sci. Technol.
50: 141–146. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AST.50.141.
59 Reynaud, P. (1996). Cyclic fatigue of ceramic-matrix composites at ambient and
elevated temperatures. Compos. Sci. Technol. 56: 809–814. https://doi.org/10
.1016/0266-3538(96)00025-5.
60 Dalmaz, A., Reynaud, P., and Rouby, D. (1998). Fantozzi, Abbe F. mechanical
behavior and damage development during cyclic fatigue at high-temperature of
a 2.5D carbon/sic composite. Compos. Sci. Technol. 58: 693–699. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0266-3538(97)00150-4.
61 Fantozzi, G. and Reynaud, P. (2009). Mechanical hysteresis in ceramic matrix
composites. Mater. Sci. Eng., A 521–522: 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea
.2008.09.128.
62 Li, L.B. (2015). A hysteresis dissipated energy-based damage parameter for life
prediction of carbon fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites under fatigue
loading. Compos. Part B: Eng. 82: 108–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb
.2015.08.026.
References 15
63 Li, L.B. (2018). Damage monitoring and life prediction of carbon fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites at room and elevated temperatures using hystere-
sis dissipated energy-based damage parameter. Compos. Interfaces 25: 335–356.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09276440.2018.1439621.
64 Li, L.B., Reynaud, P., and Fantozzi, G. (2019). Mechanical hysteresis and damage
evolution in C/SiC composites under fatigue loading at room and elevated tem-
peratures. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 16: 2214–2228. https://doi.org/10.1111/
ijac.13300.
65 Li, L.B. (2019). Failure analysis of long-fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix compos-
ites subjected to in-phase thermomechanical and isothermal cyclic loading. Eng.
Fail. Anal. 104: 856–872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.06.082.
66 Lara-Curzio, E. (1997). Stress rupture of Nicalon/SiC continuous fiber ceramic
composites in air at 950 ∘ C. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 80: 3268–3272. https://doi.org/10
.1111/j.1151-2916.1997.tb03266.x.
67 Morscher, G.N. (1997). Tensile stress rupture of SiCf /SiCm minicomposites with
carbon and boron nitride interphases at elevated temperatures in air. J. Am.
68 Morscher, G.N., Hurst, J., and Brewer, D.B. (2000). Intermediate-temperature
stress rupture of a woven Hi-Nicalon, BN-interphase, SiC-matrix composite in
air. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 83: 1441–1449. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.2000
.tb01408.x.
69 Verrilli, M.J., Opila, E.J., Calomino, A., and Kiser, J.D. (2004). Effect of environ-
ment on the stress-rupture behavior of a carbon-fiber-reinforced silicon carbide
ceramic matrix composites. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 87: 1536–1542. https://doi.org/10
.1111/j.1551-2916.2004.01536.x.
70 Marshall, D.B., Cox, B.N., and Evans, A.G. (1985). The mechanics of matrix
cracking in brittle-matrix fiber composites. Acta Metall. 33: 2013–2021. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(85)90124-5.
71 Evans, A.G. (1997). Design and life prediction issues for high-temperature engi-
neering ceramics and their composites. Acta Mater. 45: 23–40. https://doi.org/10
.1016/S1359-6454(96)00143-7.
72 McNulty, J.C. and Zok, F.W. (1999). Low-cycle fatigue of Nicalon-fiber-
reinforced ceramic composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 59: 1597–1607. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(99)00019-6.
73 Lara-Curzio, E. (1999). Analysis of oxidation-assisted stress-rupture of contin-
uous fiber-reinforced ceramic matrix composites at intermediate temperatures.
Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci. Manuf. 30: 549–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-
835X(98)00148-1.
74 Halverson, H.G. and Curtin, W.A. (2002). Stress rupture in ceramic-matrix com-
posites: theory and experiment. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 85: 1350–1365. https://doi
.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.2002.tb00279.x.
75 Casas, L. and Martinez-Esnaola, J.M. (2003). Modeling the effect of oxidation on
the creep behavior of fiber-reinforced ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater.
51: 3745–3757. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(03)00189-7.
16 1 Introduction
76 Dassios, K.G., Galiotis, C., Kostopoulos, V., and Steen, M. (2003). Direct in situ
measurements of bridging stresses in CFCCs. Acta Mater. 51: 5359–5373. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(03)00393-8.
77 Baranger, E. (2013, 2013). Building of a reduced constitutive law for ceramic
matrix composites. Int. J. Damage Mech. 22: 1222–1238. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1056789513482338.
78 Li, L.B. (2017). Synergistic effects of temperature, oxidation, loading frequency
and stress-rupture on damage evolution of cross-ply ceramic-matrix composites
under cyclic fatigue loading at elevated temperatures in oxidizing atmosphere.
Eng. Fract. Mech. 175: 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.03.013.
79 Li, L.B. (2017). Synergistic effects of stress-rupture and cyclic loading on strain
response of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperature
in oxidizing atmosphere. Materials 10: 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10020182.
80 Li, L.B. (2017). Damage evolution of cross-ply ceramic-matrix composites under
stress-rupture and cyclic loading at elevated temperatures in oxidizing atmo-
sphere. Mater. Sci. Eng., A 688: 315–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2017.02
.012.
81 Zhang, J., Perez, R.J., and Lavernia, E.J. (1993). Documentation of damping
capacity of metallic ceramic and metal-matrix composite materials. J. Mater. Sci.
28: 2395–2404. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01151671.
82 Li, L.B. (2020). A micromechanical temperature-dependent vibration damping
model of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Compos. Struct. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.113297.
83 Li, L.B. (2020). A cyclic-dependent vibration damping model of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. https://doi
.org/10.1177/0954406220971665.
84 Li, L.B. (2020). A micromechanical vibration damping model of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites considering interface debonding. Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng. Pt. L. J. Mater. Des. Appl. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464420720969711.
85 Li, L.B. (2020). A time-dependent vibration damping model of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperature. Ceram. Int. 46: 27031–27045.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.07.180.
86 Hao, B., Yin, X., Liu, X. et al. (2014). Vibration response characteristics and
looseness – proof performance of C/SiC ceramic matrix composite bolted fasten-
ings. Acta Mater. Compos. Sin. 31: 653–660.
87 Zhang, X. (2015). Thermal vibration analysis and model updating of ceramic
matrix thermal protection/insulation structure. PhD thesis. Harbin Institute of
Technology, Harbin, China.
88 Huang, D. and Wu, J. (2020). Natural frequency and acoustic emission test anal-
ysis of ceramic matrix composites under monotonic tensile. Open J. Acoust. Vib.
8: 17–25. https://doi.org/10.12677/ojav.2020.81003.
89 Li, H. (2019). Analysis of vibration and damage test of ceramic matrix compos-
ites structure. Master thesis. Nanchang Hangkong University, Nanjing, China.
References 17
90 Birman, V. and Byrd, L.W. (2002). Effect of matrix cracks on damping in uni-
directional and cross-ply ceramic matrix composites. J. Compos. Mater. 36:
1859–1877. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998302036015247.
91 Sato, S., Serizawa, H., Araki, H. et al. (2003). Temperature dependence of inter-
nal friction and elastic modulus of SiC/SiC composites. J. Alloys Compd. 355:
142–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-8388(03)00252-4.
92 Wang, W., Cheng, L.F., Zhang, L.T. et al. (2006). Study on damping capacity of
two dimensional carbon fiber reinforced silicon carbide (2D C/SiC) composites.
J. Solid Rocket Technol. 29: 455–459.
93 Zhang, Q., Cheng, L.F., Wang, W. et al. (2007). Effect of interphase thickness
on damping behavior of 2D C/SiC composites. Mater. Sci. Forum 546–549:
1531–1534.
94 Hong, Z.L., Cheng, L.F., Zhao, C.N. et al. (2013). Effect of oxidation on internal
friction behavior of C/SC composites. Acta Mater. Compos. Sin. 30: 93–100.
95 Li, L.B. (2019). Modeling matrix multicracking development of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites considering fiber debonding. Int. J. Appl. Ceram.
Technol. 16: 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijac.13068.
96 Li, L.B. (2019). Time-dependent damage and fracture of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperatures. Compos. Interfaces 26:
963–988. https://doi.org/10.1080/09276440.2019.1569397.
97 Reynaud, P., Douby, D., and Fantozzi, G. (1998). Effects of temperature and
of oxidation on the interfacial shear stress between fibers and matrix in
ceramic-matrix composites. Acta Mater. 46: 2461–2469. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S1359-6454(98)80029-3.
98 Snead, L.L., Nozawa, T., Katoh, Y. et al. (2007). Handbook of SiC properties for
fuel performance modeling. J. Nucl. Mater. 371: 329–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jnucmat.2007.05.016.
99 Wang, R.Z., Li, W.G., Li, D.Y., and Fang, D.N. (2015). A new temperature depen-
dent fracture strength model for the ZrB2 -SiC composites. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 35:
2957–2962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2015.03.025.
19
First Matrix Cracking of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at

Elevated Temperature
2.1 Introduction
With the development of aerospace industry, the requirements for high temper-
ature, high specific strength, and high specific modulus materials are getting
higher. Ultra-high temperature, long-life, lightweight thermal structural materials
are the key prerequisites for the future development of aerospace engines to
high performance, lightweight, low emissions, and low noise. Ceramic-matrix
composites (CMCs) possess the advantages of high specific strength, high specific
modulus, low density, good wear resistance, and chemical resistance at elevated
temperatures, making them the material of choice for replacing high-temperature
alloys in high thrust-to-weight ratio aeroengines [1–5]. The mechanical properties
of CMCs are much different from those of single-phase ceramics. In single-phase
ceramics, the failure of materials is caused by the initiation and propagation of
main cracks. The elastic modulus of the whole material does not change during this
process. However, when the CMC is subjected to stress, there are many microscopic
failure mechanisms generated inside of composite, i.e. matrix cracking, fiber/matrix
interface debonding, and fiber fracture, leading to the quasi-ductile behavior in
tensile stress–strain curves [6–10].
Many researchers performed experimental and theoretical investigations on
matrix cracking in fiber-reinforced CMCs. Energy balance approach can be used
to determine the steady-state first matrix cracking stress, including the ACK
model [11], AK model [12], BHE model [13], Kuo–Chou model [14], Sutcu–Hilling
model [15], Chiang model [16], and Li model [17–21], and the stress intensity factor
method is adopted to determine the short matrix cracking stress, including the MCE
model [22], MC model [23], McCartney model [24], Chiang–Wang–Chou model
[25], Danchaivijit–Shetty model [26], and Thouless–Evans model [27]. Kim and
Pagano [28] and Dutton et al. [29] investigated the first matrix cracking in CMCs
using the acoustic emission (AE), optical microscopy, and scanning electronic
microscopy (SEM). It was found that the experimental first matrix cracking stress
is much lower than the theoretical results predicted by the ACK model [11]. The
micromatrix cracking appears first in the matrix-rich region, and with increasing
applied stress, these micromatrix cracks propagate and stop at the fiber/matrix
interface. In fact, these micromatrix cracks do not affect the macrostrain and
20 2 First Matrix Cracking of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Temperature
stiffness of CMCs [30]; however, at higher applied stress, these micromatrix cracks
evolve first into the short matrix cracking defined by the MCE model [22] and then
the steady-state matrix cracking defined by the ACK model [11]. The steady-state
matrix cracking model can be used to predict the proportional limit stress (PLS).
In this chapter, the temperature- and time-dependent first matrix cracking stress
of fiber-reinforced CMCs is investigated using the energy balance approach. The
temperature-dependent micromechanical parameters of fiber and matrix modulus,
fiber/matrix interface shear stress, interface debonding energy, and matrix fracture
energy are incorporated into the analysis of the microstress analysis, fiber/matrix
interface debonding criterion, and energy balance approach. Relationships between
the first matrix cracking stress, fiber/matrix interface debonding, temperature, and
time are established. Effects of fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface fric-
tional coefficient, interface debonding energy, matrix fracture energy, temperature,
and time on the first matrix cracking stress and interface debonding length are dis-
cussed. Experimental first matrix cracking stress and interface debonding of C/SiC
and SiC/SiC composites at elevated temperature are predicted.
2.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress

of C/SiC Composites
In this section, the temperature-dependent matrix cracking stress of C/SiC com-
posite is investigated using the energy balance approach. Temperature-dependent
micromechanical parameters of the fiber and matrix modulus, fiber/matrix inter-
face shear stress, interface debonding energy, and matrix fracture energy are
incorporated into the analysis of the microstress analysis, fiber/matrix interface
debonding criterion, and energy balance approach. Relationships between matrix
cracking stress, interface debonding, and environmental temperature are estab-
lished. Effects of fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface frictional coefficient,
interface debonding energy, and matrix fracture energy on matrix cracking stress
and interface debonding length versus environmental temperature are discussed.
Experimental matrix cracking stress of 2D C/SiC composite at elevated temperature
is predicted.
2.2.1 Theoretical Models

The energy balance relationship to evaluate the matrix cracking stress of
fiber-reinforced CMCs is [13]
∞{ }
1 Vf Vm
[𝜎 (T) − 𝜎fd (T)] + 2
[𝜎 (T) − 𝜎md (T)]2
dx
2 ∫−∞ Ef (T) fu Em (T) mu
[ ]
1
ld (T) R
rf 𝜏i (x, T)
+ 2𝜋r dr dx (2.1)
2𝜋R2 Gm (T) ∫−ld (T) ∫rf r
4V l (T)
= Vm Γm (T) + f d Γd (T)
rf
2.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composites 21
where V f and V m denote the fiber and matrix volume, respectively, Ef (T) and Em (T)
denote the temperature-dependent fiber and matrix elastic modulus, respectively,
𝜎 fu (T) and 𝜎 mu (T) denote the fiber and matrix axial stress distribution in the matrix
cracking upstream region, respectively, and 𝜎 fd (T) and 𝜎 md (T) denote the fiber and
matrix axial stress distribution in the matrix cracking downstream region, respec-
tively. Γm (T) and Γd (T) denote the temperature-dependent matrix fracture energy
and interface deboning energy, respectively.
Ef (T)
𝜎fu (T) = 𝜎 (2.2)
Ec (T)
E (T)
𝜎mu (T) = m 𝜎 (2.3)
Ec (T)
⎧𝜎 2𝜏i (T)
⎪ Vf − rf x, x ∈ [[0, ld (T)] ]
𝜎fd (x, T) = ⎨ Ef (T) l (T) (2.4)
⎪ Ec (T) 𝜎, x ∈ ld (T), c 2
⎩
⎧ Vf 𝜏i (T)
⎪2 Vm rf x, x ∈ [[0, ld (T)] ]
𝜎md (x, T) = ⎨ Em (T) l (T) (2.5)
⎪ Ec (T) 𝜎, x ∈ ld (T), c 2
⎩
√
rf Vm Em (T)𝜎 rf Vm Ef (T)𝛾d (T)
ld (T) = − (2.6)
2Vf Ec (T)𝜏i (T) Ec (T)𝜏i2 (T)
where [31]
|𝛼rf (T) − 𝛼rm (T)|(Tm − T)
𝜏i (T) = 𝜏0 + 𝜇 (2.7)
A
Substituting the upstream and downstream temperature-dependent fiber and matrix
axial stresses of Eqs. (2.2–2.5), and the temperature-dependent interface debonding
length of Eq. (2.6) into Eq. (2.1), the energy balance equation leads to the following
equation.
𝛼𝜎 2 + 𝛽𝜎 + 𝛾 = 0 (2.8)
where
Vm Em (T)ld (T)
𝛼= (2.9)
Vf Ef (T)Ec (T)
2𝜏 (T) 2
𝛽=− i l (T) (2.10)
rf Ef (T) d
[ ]2
4 𝜏i (T) Vf Ec (T) 4V Γ (T)
𝛾= l3 (T) − f d − Vm Γm (T) (2.11)
3 rf Vm Ef (T)Em (T) d rf
2.2.2 Results and Discussion

The ceramic composite system of C/SiC is used for the case study and its material
properties are given by V f = 30%, r f = 3.5 μm, Γm = 25 J/m2 (at room temperature),
and Γd = 0.1 J/m2 (at room temperature).
Temperature-dependent carbon fiber elastic modulus Ef (T) is [32]

[ ( )]
T
Ef (T) = 230 1 − 2.86 × 10−4 exp , T < 2273 K (2.12)
324
Temperature-dependent SiC matrix elastic modulus Em (T) is [33]
[ ( )]
350 962
Em (T) = 460 − 0.04T exp − , T ∈ [300 K 1773 K] (2.13)
460 T
Temperature-dependent carbon fiber axial and radial thermal expansion coeffi-
cient 𝛼 lf (T) and 𝛼 rf (T) are [34]
𝛼lf (T) = 2.529 × 10−2 − 1.569 × 10−4 T + 2.228 × 10−7 T 2
[ ]
− 1.877 × 10−11 T 3 − 1.288 × 10−14 T 4 , T ∈ 300 K 2500 K (2.14)
𝛼rf (T) = −1.86 × 10−1 + 5.85 × 10−4 T − 1.36 × 10−8 T 2

[ ]
+ 1.06 × 10−22 T 3 , T ∈ 300 K 2500 K (2.15)
Temperature-dependent SiC matrix axial and radial thermal expansion coefficient
of 𝛼 lm (T) and 𝛼 rm (T) are [33]
−5 2
⎧−1.8276 + 0.0178T − 1.5544 × 10 T
⎪ [ ]
𝛼lm (T) = 𝛼rm (T) = ⎨ +4.5246 × 10−9 T 3 , T ∈ 125 K 1273 K
⎪
⎩ 5.0 × 10−6 K−1 , T > 1273 K
(2.16)
Temperature-dependent interface debonding energy Γd (T) and matrix fracture
energy Γm (T) are [35]
⎡ ∫T CP (T) dT ⎤
T
Γd (T) = Γdo ⎢1 − To ⎥ (2.17)

⎢ ∫ m
C (T) dT ⎥
⎣ To P ⎦
⎡ ∫T CP (T) dT ⎤
T
⎢
Γm (T) = Γmo 1 − To ⎥ (2.18)
⎢ ∫ m
C (T) dT ⎥
⎣ To P ⎦
where T o denotes the reference temperature, T m denotes the fabricated temperature,
Γdo and Γmo denote the interface debonding energy and matrix fracture energy at the
reference temperature of T o , respectively, and CP (T) is
CP (T) = 76.337 + 109.039 × 10−3 T − 6.535 × 105 T −2 − 27.083 × 10−6 T 2

(2.19)
Effects of fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface frictional coefficient,
interface debonding energy, and matrix fracture energy on temperature-dependent
matrix cracking stress of C/SiC composite are discussed.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.1 Effect of fiber volume (i.e. V f = 30% and 35%) on (a) the matrix cracking stress
versus temperature curves and (b) the interface debonding length versus temperature
curves of C/SiC composite.
2.2.2.1 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite

for Different Fiber Volumes
Figure 2.1 shows the matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc and interface debonding length
ld /r f versus environmental temperature curves for different fiber volumes. When the
fiber volume is V f = 30%, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 48 MPa
at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 103 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length
increases from ld /r f = 0.68 to ld /r f = 4.5. When the fiber volume is V f = 35%, the
matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 47 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 113 MPa
at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 0.08 to
ld /r f = 3.9.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.2 Effect of interface shear stress (i.e. 𝜏 0 = 30 and 40 MPa) on (a) the matrix
cracking stress versus environmental temperature curves and (b) the interface debonding
length versus environmental temperature curves of C/SiC composite.

for Different Interface Shear Stress
Figure 2.2 shows the matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc and the interface debonding length
ld /r f versus environmental temperature curves for different interface shear stress.
When the interface shear stress is 𝜏 0 = 30 MPa, the matrix cracking stress increases
from 𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 115 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the inter-
face debonding length increases from ld /r f = 1.4 to ld /r f = 4.2. When the interface
shear stress is 𝜏 0 = 40 MPa, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 93 MPa
increases from ld /r f = 2.1 to ld /r f = 3.7.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.3 Effect of interface frictional coefficient (i.e. 𝜇 = 0.03 and 0.05) on (a) the matrix
cracking stress versus environmental temperature curves and (b) the interface debonding
length versus environmental temperature curves of C/SiC composite.

for Different Fiber/Matrix Interface Frictional Coefficients
Figure 2.3 shows the matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc and the fiber/matrix interface
debonding length ld /r f versus environmental temperature curves for different
interface frictional coefficient. When the fiber/matrix interface frictional coefficient
is 𝜇 = 0.03, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 84 MPa at T = 973 K
to 𝜎 mc = 131 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length
increases from ld /r f = 1.9 to ld /r f = 3.8. When the fiber/matrix interface frictional
coefficient is 𝜇 = 0.05, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at
T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 127 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.4 Effect of interface debonding energy (i.e. Γd = 0.3 and 0.5 J/m2 ) on (a) the
matrix cracking stress versus environmental temperature curves and (b) the interface
debonding length versus temperature curves of C/SiC composite.

for Different Interface Debonding Energies
ld /r f versus environmental temperature curves for different interface debonding
energy. When the interface debonding energy is Γd = 0.3 J/m2 , the matrix cracking
stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 102 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 139 MPa at T = 1273 K,
and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 1.3 to
ld /r f = 3.3. When the fiber/matrix interface debonding energy is Γd = 0.5 J/m2 , the
matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 110 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 143 MPa
at T = 1273 K, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length increases from
ld /r f = 0.9 to ld /r f = 3.0.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.5 Effect of interface debonding energy (i.e. Γm = 20 and 30 J/m2 ) on (a) the
matrix cracking stress versus environmental temperature curves and (b) the interface
debonding length versus environmental temperature curves of C/SiC composite.
2.2.2.5 Effect of Matrix Fracture Energy on Temperature-Dependent Matrix

Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite
ld /r f versus environmental temperature curves for different matrix fracture energies.
When the matrix fracture energy is Γm = 20 J/m2 , the matrix cracking stress increases
from 𝜎 mc = 49 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 102 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface
debonding length increases from ld /r f = 0.59 to ld /r f = 3.6. When the matrix frac-
ture energy is Γm = 30 J/m2 , the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 79 MPa
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.6 Tensile stress–strain curves of 2D C/SiC composite at (a) T = 973 K and
(b) T = 1273 K.
2.2.3 Experimental Comparisons

Yang et al. [36] investigated the tensile behavior of 2D T300TM -C/SiC composite
at elevated temperature. The C/SiC composite was fabricated using the chemical
vapor infiltration (CVI) method with the pyrolytic carbon (PyC) interphase of
approximately 1.5–2.0 μm. The fiber volume fraction is approximately 40%. Tensile
tests were performed under the displacement control and the loading speed was
0.3 mm/min. The tensile stress–strain curves of 2D C/SiC composite at elevated tem-
peratures of T = 973 and 1273 K are shown in Figure 2.6. The tensile stress–strain
response of 2D C/SiC composite exhibits obviously nonlinearly. At T = 973 K, the
composite matrix cracking stress is approximately 𝜎 mc = 50 MPa, and the composite
tensile strength is approximately 𝜎 UTS = 232 MPa with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.25%;
at T = 1273 K, the composite matrix cracking stress is approximately 𝜎 mc = 80 MPa,
and the composite tensile strength is approximately 𝜎 UTS = 271 MPa with the failure
2.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite 29
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.7 (a) Experimental and theoretical matrix cracking stress versus environmental
temperature curves and (b) the interface debonded length versus environmental
temperature curves of 2D C/SiC composite.
strain 𝜀f = 0.33%. Experimental and theoretical predicted PLS and the fiber/matrix
interface debonding length versus environmental temperature curves are shown
in Figure 2.7. With increasing temperature, the matrix cracking stress of 2D C/SiC
composite increased from 𝜎 mc = 48 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 82 MPa at T = 1273 K,
and the interface debonded length increases from ld /r f = 2.7 to ld /r f = 6.3.
2.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress

of SiC/SiC Composite
In this section, temperature-dependent matrix cracking stress of SiC/SiC com-
posite is investigated using the micromechanical approach. The matrix cracking
stress of SiC/SiC composite is predicted using the energy balance approach

considering the effect of environmental temperature. The relationship between
environmental temperature, matrix cracking stress, and composite damage state
is established. Effects of fiber volume, interface properties, and matrix properties
on the temperature-dependent matrix crack stress and composite damage state of
SiC/SiC composite are analyzed. Experimental matrix cracking stress and interface
debonding length of 2D SiC/SiC composites with the PyC and boron nitride (BN)
interphase at elevated temperatures are predicted.

The ceramic composite system of SiC/SiC is used for the case study and its
material properties are given by [37] V f = 30%, r f = 7.5 μm, Γm = 25 J/m2 (at
room temperature), Γd = 0.1 J/m2 (at room temperature), 𝛼 rf = 2.9 × 10−6 K−1 , and
𝛼 lf = 3.9 × 10−6 K−1 . Effects of fiber volume, interface properties, and matrix proper-
ties on the temperature-dependent matrix cracking stress of SiC/SiC composite are
discussed.

Figure 2.8 shows the matrix cracking stress and the interface debonding length ver-
sus environmental temperature curves for different fiber volumes (i.e. V f = 25%, 30%,
and 35%). When temperature increases from T = 873 to 1273 K, the matrix cracking
stress and fiber/matrix interface debonding length decrease with increasing tem-
perature. At the same temperature, the matrix cracking stress increases with the
fiber volume, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length decreases with the
fiber volume. When the fiber volume increases, the stress transfer between the fiber
and the matrix increases, the stress carried by the matrix increases, leading to the
increase of the matrix cracking stress and the decrease of the fiber/matrix interface
debonding length.
When the fiber volume is V f = 25%, the matrix cracking stress decreases from
𝜎 mc = 103 MPa at T = 873 K to 𝜎 mc = 87 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the fiber/matrix
interface debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 6.1 at 𝜎 mc = 103 MPa to ld /r f = 5.0
at 𝜎 mc = 87 MPa. When the fiber volume is V f = 30%, the matrix cracking stress
decreases from 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa at T = 873 K to 𝜎 mc = 99 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the
fiber/matrix interface debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 5.3 at 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa
to ld /r f = 4.4 at 𝜎 mc = 99 MPa. When the fiber volume is V f = 35%, the matrix cracking
stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 130 MPa at T = 873 K to 𝜎 mc = 110 MPa at T = 1273 K,
and the interface debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 4.6 at 𝜎 mc = 130 MPa to
ld /r f = 3.9 at 𝜎 mc = 110 MPa.

Figure 2.9 shows the matrix cracking stress and the interface debonding length
versus environmental temperature curves for different interface shear stress (i.e.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.8 Effect of fiber volume on (a) the matrix cracking stress versus temperature
curves and (b) the fiber/matrix interface debonding length versus temperature curves of
SiC/SiC composite.
𝜏 i = 15, 20, and 25 MPa). When environmental temperature increases from T = 873
to 1273 K, the matrix cracking stress and fiber/matrix interface debonding length
decrease with the increasing temperature. The matrix cracking stress increases with
the interface shear stress, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length decreases
with the interface shear stress at the same temperature. When the interface shear
stress increases, the stress transfer between the fiber and the matrix also increases,
leading to the increase of the matrix cracking stress and the decrease of the interface
debonding length.
When 𝜏 i = 15 MPa, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 89 MPa at
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.9 Effect of interface shear stress on (a) the matrix cracking stress versus
temperature curves and (b) the fiber/matrix interface debonding length versus temperature
curves of SiC/SiC composite.
decreases from ld /r f = 6.8 at 𝜎 mc = 89 MPa to ld /r f = 5.9 at 𝜎 mc = 81 MPa. When

𝜏 i = 20 MPa, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 104 MPa at T = 873 K
to 𝜎 mc = 90 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length decreases from
ld /r f = 5.9 at 𝜎 mc = 104 MPa to ld /r f = 5 at 𝜎 mc = 90 MPa. When 𝜏 i = 25 MPa, the
matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa at T = 873 K to 𝜎 mc = 99 MPa
at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 5.3 at
𝜎 mc = 117 MPa to ld /r f = 4.4 at 𝜎 mc = 99 MPa.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.10 Effect of interface frictional coefficient on (a) the matrix cracking stress versus
temperature curves and (b) the interface debonding length versus temperature curves of
SiC/SiC composite.

for Different Interface Frictional Coefficients
versus environmental temperature curves for different interface frictional coeffi-
cients (i.e. 𝜇 = 0.02, 0.03, and 0.04). When temperature increases from T = 873
to 1273 K, the matrix cracking stress and fiber/matrix interface debonding length
decrease with the increasing temperature. At the same temperature, the matrix
cracking stress decreases with the interface frictional coefficient, and the interface
debonding length increases with the interface frictional coefficient. When the
interface frictional coefficient increases, the interface shear stress decreases at the
same temperature, leading to the decrease of the matrix cracking stress and the
increase of the interface debonding length.
When 𝜇 = 0.02, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa at
𝜇 = 0.03, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 113 MPa at T = 873 K to
𝜎 mc = 98 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length decreases from
ld /r f = 5.5 at 𝜎 mc = 113 MPa to ld /r f = 4.4 at 𝜎 mc = 98 MPa. When 𝜇 = 0.04, the

versus environmental temperature curves for different interface debonding energies
(i.e. Γd = 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 J/m2 ). When environmental temperature increases from
T = 873 to 1273 K, the matrix cracking stress and interface debonding length
decrease with the increasing temperature. At the same temperature, the matrix
cracking stress increases with the interface debonding energy, and the interface
debonding length decreases with the interface debonding energy. When the
interface debonding energy increases, the resistance for the interface debonding
also increases, leading to the increase of matrix cracking stress and the decrease of
interface debonding length.
When Γd = 0.1 J/m2 , the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa
Γd = 0.2 J/m2 , the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 121 MPa at T = 873 K
to 𝜎 mc = 101 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length decreases from
ld /r f = 4.8 at 𝜎 mc = 121 MPa to ld /r f = 4.1 at 𝜎 mc = 101 MPa. When Γd = 0.3 J/m2 , the

for Different Matrix Fracture Energies
versus environmental temperature curves for different matrix fracture energies
(i.e. Γm = 15, 20, and 25 J/m2 ). When environmental temperature increases from
T = 873 to 1273 K, the matrix cracking stress and fiber/matrix interface debonding
length decrease with the increasing temperature. At the same temperature, the
matrix cracking stress and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length increase
with the matrix fracture energy. When the matrix fracture energy increases, the
energy needed for the matrix cracking increases, leading to the increase of the
matrix cracking stress and the interface debonding length.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.11 Effect of the interface debonding energy on (a) the matrix cracking stress
versus temperature curves and (b) the fiber/matrix interface debonding length versus
temperature curves of SiC/SiC composite.
When Γm = 15 J/m2 , the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa
the matrix fracture energy is Γm = 20 J/m2 , the matrix cracking stress decreases
debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 6.2 at 𝜎 mc = 132 MPa to ld /r f = 5 at
𝜎 mc = 110 MPa. When the matrix fracture energy is Γm = 25 J/m2 , the matrix
cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 PLS = 145 MPa at T = 873 K to 𝜎 mc = 119 MPa
at T = 1273 K, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length decreases from
ld /r f = 6.9 at 𝜎 mc = 145 MPa to ld /r f = 5.5 at 𝜎 mc = 119 MPa.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.12 Effect of matrix fracture energy on (a) the matrix cracking stress versus
temperature curves and (b) the fiber/matrix interface debonding length versus temperature
curves of SiC/SiC composite.

Guo and Kagawa [38] investigated the tensile behavior of 2D SiC/SiC composites
with the PyC and BN interphase at elevated temperature. Experimental tensile
stress–strain curves of NicalonTM SiC/PyC/SiC and Hi-NicalonTM SiC/BN/SiC
composites at room and elevated temperatures are shown in Figures 2.13 and 2.14.
For the Nicalon SiC/PyC/SiC composite, the matrix cracking stress decreases from
𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at T = 298 K to 𝜎 mc = 33 MPa at T = 1200 K, and for the Hi-Nicalon
SiC/BN/SiC composite, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 75 MPa
at T = 298 K to 𝜎 mc = 45 MPa at T = 1400 K. Experimental and predicted matrix
Figure 2.13 Experimental

tensile stress–strain curves
of NicalonTM SiC/PyC/SiC at
(a) T = 298 K, (b) T = 800 K,
and (c) T = 1200 K.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 2.14 Experimental

tensile stress–strain curves
of NicalonTM SiC/BN/SiC at
(a) T = 298 K, (b) T = 1200 K,
and (c) T = 1400 K.
(a)
(b)
cracking stress versus temperature curves of Nicalon SiC/PyC/SiC and Hi-Nicalon

SiC/BN/SiC are shown in Figure 2.15.
For the 2D Nicalon SiC/SiC composite with the PyC interphase, matrix cracking
stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at T = 298 K to 𝜎 mc = 33 MPa at T = 1200 K,
and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 12.8 at
𝜎 mc = 65 MPa to ld /r f = 7.3 at 𝜎 mc = 33 MPa. For the 2D Hi-Nicalon SiC/SiC
composite with the BN interphase, the interface shear stress of SiC/BN/SiC at room
and elevated temperatures are much lower than those of the SiC/C/SiC composite
because of the better oxidation resistance of BN-coating on the Hi-Nicalon fiber
surface than C-coating on Nicalon fiber surface [38]. The matrix cracking stress
decreases from 𝜎 mc = 75 MPa at T = 298 K to 𝜎 mc = 45 MPa at T = 1400 K, and the
fiber/matrix interface debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 7.3 at 𝜎 mc = 75 MPa
to ld /r f = 2.9 at 𝜎 mc = 45 MPa.
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.15 Experimental and predicted matrix cracking stress versus the temperature
curves of (a) SiC/SiC composite with the PyC interphase and (b) SiC/SiC composite with the
BN interphase.
2.4 Time-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC

Composites
In this section, the time-dependent matrix cracking stress of C/SiC composite is
investigated. Effects of fiber volume, interface properties, and matrix fracture energy
on time-dependent matrix cracking stress and interface debonding of C/SiC compos-
ite are discussed. Experimental time-dependent matrix cracking stresses of C/SiC
composites corresponding to different oxidation times are predicted.

Because of a mismatch between the axial thermal expansion coefficients of the
carbon fiber and silicon carbide matrix, unavoidable microcracks were created in
the matrix when the composite was cooled down from a high fabricated tempera-
ture to ambient temperature. These processing-induced microcracks, which were
present on the surface of the material, served as avenues for the ingress of environ-
mental atmosphere into the composite at elevated temperature. Time-dependent
fiber/matrix interface oxidation length 𝜁 is [39]
{ [ ]}
𝜑 (T)t
𝜁(t, T) = 𝜑1 (T) 1 − exp − 2 (2.20)
b
where b is the delay factor considering the deceleration of reduced oxygen activity,
t denotes the oxidation time, and 𝜑1 (T) and 𝜑2 (T) are the temperature-dependent
parameters described using the Arrhenius law [39].
( )
8231
𝜑1 (T) = 7.021 × 10−3 × exp (2.21)
T
( )
17 090
𝜑2 (T) = 227.1 × exp − (2.22)
T
Temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface shear stress in the oxidation region
and debonded region are [31]
𝜏i (T) = 𝜏0 + 𝜇 (2.23)
A
𝜏f (T) = 𝜏s + 𝜇 (2.24)
A
where 𝜏 0 and 𝜏 s denote the initial interface shear stress, 𝜇 denotes the interface fric-
tional coefficient, 𝛼 rf and 𝛼 rm denote the fiber and matrix radial thermal expansion
coefficient, respectively, T m and T denote the processing temperature and testing
temperature, respectively, and A is a constant dependent on the elastic properties of
the matrix and fibers.
The energy balance relationship for evaluating the matrix cracking stress of
fiber-reinforced CMCs is [13]
{ }
1 ∞ Vf 2 + Vm [𝜎 (T) − 𝜎 (T)]2 dx
∫
2 −∞
[𝜎
Ef (T) fu
(T) − 𝜎 fd (T)] E (T) mu md
[ ] m
1 ld (T) R rf 𝜏i (x,T)
+ 2𝜋R2 G (T) ∫−l (T) ∫r r
2𝜋r dr dx
m d f
4Vf ld (T)
= Vm Γm (T) + rf
Γd (T) (2.25)
where
Ef (T)
𝜎fu (T) = 𝜎 (2.26)
Ec (T)
Em (T)
𝜎mu (T) = 𝜎 (2.27)
Ec (T)
⎧ 𝜎 − 2𝜏f (T) x, x ∈ [0, 𝜁(t, T)]
⎪ Vf rf
𝜎fd (x) = ⎨ (2.28)
𝜎 2𝜏f (T) 2𝜏i (T)
⎪ V − r 𝜁(t, T) − [x − 𝜁(t, T)], x ∈ [𝜁(t, T), ld (t, T)]
⎩ f f rf
⎧ 2 Vf 𝜏f (T) x, x ∈ [0, 𝜁(t, T)]

⎪ Vm rf
𝜎md (z) = ⎨ V 𝜏 (T) V 𝜏i (t,T)
⎪2 V f fr 𝜁(t, T) + 2 V f [x − 𝜁(t, T)], x ∈ [𝜁(t, T), ld (t, T)]
⎩ m f m rf
(2.29)
[ ] √
𝜏f (T) rf Vm Em (T)𝜎 rf Vm Em (T)Ef (T)
ld (t, T) = 1 − 𝜁(t, T) + − Γd (T)
𝜏i (T) 2 Vf Ec (T)𝜏i (T) Ec (T)𝜏i2 (T)
(2.30)
Substituting the upstream and downstream temperature-dependent fiber and matrix
axial stresses of Eqs. (2.26–2.29), and the temperature-dependent interface debond-
ing length of Eq. (2.30) into Eq. (2.1), the energy balance equation leads to the fol-
lowing equation:
𝛼𝜎 2 + 𝛽𝜎 + 𝛾 = 0 (2.31)
where
Vm Em (T)ld (t, T)
𝛼= (2.32)
Vf Ef (T)Ec (T)
{ }
2𝜏 (T) 𝜏 (T)
𝛽=− i [ld (t, T) − 𝜁(t, T)]2 + f 𝜁(t, T)[2ld (t, T) − 𝜁(t, T)] (2.33)
rf Ef (T) 𝜏i (T)
[ ]2 { [ ]2 }
V Ec (T) 𝜏i (T) 3 + 𝜏f (T) 𝜁 3 (t, T)
𝛾 = 43 V E f(T)E (T) r
[ld (t, T) − 𝜁(t, T)] 𝜏 (T)
m f m f i
4Vf Ec (T) 𝜏f (T)𝜏i (T)

+ V E (T)E rf2
𝜁(t, T)[ld (t, T)− 𝜁(t, T)]
m (T)
{ [ ] }
m f
𝜏f (T) 4Vf ld (t,T)

× ld (t, T) − 1 − 𝜏i (T)
𝜁(t, T) − Vm Γm (T) − rf
Γd (T) (2.34)

The ceramic composite system of C/SiC is used as a case study and its material prop-
erties are given by V f = 30%, r f = 3.5 μm, Γm = 25 J/m2 (at room temperature), and
Γd = 0.1 J/m2 (at room temperature). When oxidation temperature is below 1000 ∘ C,
the oxidation of C/SiC composite is controlled by the carbon/oxygen reaction, as
shown in Eq. (2.35), and when the temperature is higher than 1000 ∘ C, the oxidation
of C/SiC composite is controlled by the SiC/oxygen reaction, as shown in Eq. (2.36)
[40, 41]. In the present analysis, an oxidation temperature below 1000 ∘ C is consid-
ered, but the effects of the physical properties of SiO2 on the fiber/matrix interface
shear stress and energy and matrix fracture energy have not been considered.
C + O2 → 2CO (2.35)
SiC + 2O2 → SiO2 + CO2 (2.36)

Effects of fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface debonding energy, and
matrix fracture energy on time-dependent matrix cracking stress and interface
debonding are discussed.
2.4.2.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite

Figure 2.16 shows the matrix cracking stress and interface debonding length ver-
sus temperature curves of C/SiC composite corresponding to different fiber volumes
V f = 25%, 30%, and 35% and oxidation duration t = 0, 1, and 2 hours.
When V f = 25% and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases from
𝜎 mc = 48.5 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 93.1 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface
debonding length increases from ld /r f = 1.5 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5.3 at T = 1273 K;
when the oxidation time is t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress increases from
𝜎 mc = 45.9 MPa at T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 73.9 MPa at T = 1253 K and
then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 73.4 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length
increases from ld /r f = 1.5 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5.7 at T = 1273 K, and when oxi-
dation time is t = 2 hour, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 43.5 MPa
at T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 63.3 MPa at T = 1233 K and then decreases
to 𝜎 mc = 63 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length increases from
ld /r f = 1.5 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 6.9 at T = 1273 K.
when oxidation time is t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress increases from
𝜎 mc = 44.8 MPa at T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 79.8 MPa and then decreases
to 𝜎 mc = 79.4 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length increases from
ld /r f = 0.68 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5.0 at T = 1273 K, and when oxidation time is
t = 2 hours, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 41.8 MPa at T = 973 K
When V f = 35% and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases
from 𝜎 mc = 47.4 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 113.8 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the
interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 0.08 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 3.9 at
T = 1273 K; when oxidation time is t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress increases
from 𝜎 mc = 43.4 MPa at T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 85.1 MPa and then
decreases to 𝜎 mc = 84.9 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length
increases from ld /r f = 0.08 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 4.47 at T = 1273 K, and when oxi-
dation time is t = 2 hours, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 39.7 MPa
at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 71.8 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length
increases from ld /r f = 0.1 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5.7 at T = 1273 K.

Figure 2.17 shows the matrix cracking stress and interface debonding length versus
temperature curves of C/SiC composite corresponding to different interface shear
stress 𝜏 0 = 30, 35, and 40 MPa and oxidation duration t = 0, 1, and 2 hours.
When 𝜏 0 = 30 MPa and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases
from 𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 115 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the inter-
face debonding length increases from ld /r f = 1.47 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 4.23
Figure 2.16 (a) The matrix

cracking stress versus
temperature curves when
V f = 25% and t = 0, 1, and
2 hours; (b) the interface
debonding length versus
V f = 25% and t = 0, 1, and
2 hours; (c) the matrix
V f = 30% and t = 0, 1, and
2 hours; (d) the interface
V f = 30% and t = 0, 1, and (a)
2 hours; (e) the matrix
V f = 35% and t = 0, 1, and 3
2 hours; and (f) the interface
debonding length versus 2
V f = 35% and t = 0, 1, and
2 hours.
(b)
(c)
Figure 2.16 (Continued)
(d)
(e)
(f)

𝜏 0 = 30 MPa and t = 0, 1, and
𝜏 0 = 30 MPa and t = 0, 1, and
𝜏 0 = 35 MPa and t = 0, 1, and
𝜏 0 = 35 MPa and t = 0, 1, and (a)
𝜏 0, = 40 MPa and t = 0, 1, and
𝜏 0 = 40 MPa and t = 0, 1, and
2 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
at T = 1273 K; when t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress increases from

increases from ld /r f = 1.47 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 4.87 at T = 1273 K, and when
to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 70 MPa at T = 1173 K and then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 68.7 MPa
at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 1.5 at
T = 973 K to ld /r f = 6.3 at T = 1273 K.
from 𝜎 mc = 79.8 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 125 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the
interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 1.88 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 3.98
t = 2 hours, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 68.3 MPa at T = 973 K to
the peak value 𝜎 mc = 75.3 MPa at T = 1093 K and then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 69.7 MPa
T = 973 K to ld /r f = 6.3 at T = 1273 K.
from 𝜎 mc = 92.9 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 134 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface
when t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 85.7 MPa at
T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 97.2 MPa at T = 1133 K and then decreases to
𝜎 mc = 88.7 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length increases from
ld /r f = 2.1 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 4.6 at T = 1273 K, and when t = 2 hours, the
matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 78.9 MPa at T = 973 K to the peak value
𝜎 mc = 82.1 MPa at T = 1053 K and then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 70.4 MPa at T = 1273 K,
and the interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 2.1 at T = 973 K to
ld /r f = 6.3 at T = 1273 K.
Figure 2.18 shows the matrix cracking stress and interface debonding length
versus temperature curves of C/SiC composite corresponding to different interface
shear stress 𝜏 f = 1, 5, and 10 MPa and oxidation duration t = 0, 1, and 2 hours.
When 𝜏 f = 1 MPa and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases from
𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 114.9 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface
when t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 58 MPa at T = 973 K
to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 74 MPa at T = 1153 K and then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 67.3 MPa at
T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 1.4 at T = 973 K
to ld /r f = 5.1 at T = 1273 K, and when t = 2 hours, the matrix cracking stress increases
from 𝜎 mc = 51.3 MPa at T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 56.6 MPa at T = 1073 K
and then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 42.2 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding
length increases from ld /r f = 1.5 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 7.0 at T = 1273 K.
When 𝜏 f = 5 MPa and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases
from 𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 114.9 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface

𝜏 f = 1 MPa and t = 0, 1, and
(a) 𝜏 f = 5 MPa and t = 0, 1, and
2 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)

ld /r f = 6.7 at T = 1273 K.
When 𝜏 f = 10 MPa and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases
𝜎 mc = 70 MPa at T = 1173 K and then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 68.7 MPa at T = 1273 K, and
the interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 1.5 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 6.3
at T = 1273 K.

temperature curves of C/SiC composite corresponding to different interface fric-
tional coefficients 𝜇 = 0.03, 0.05, and 0.07 and oxidation time t = 0, 1, and 2 hours.
When 𝜇 = 0.03 and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases from
T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 107.4 MPa at T = 1093 K and then decreases
to 𝜎 mc = 92.1 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length increases
from ld /r f = 2.2 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 4.4 at T = 1273 K, and when t = 2 hours, the
ld /r f = 6.3 at T = 1273 K.
T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 101.6 MPa at T = 1133 K and then decreases
from ld /r f = 2.1 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 4.4 at T = 1273 K, and when t = 2 hours, the

𝜇 = 0.03 and t = 0, 1, and
𝜇 = 0.03 and t = 0, 1, and
𝜇 = 0.05 and t = 0, 1, and
𝜇 = 0.05 and t = 0, 1, and (a)
𝜇 = 0.07 and t = 0, 1, and
𝜇 = 0.07 and t = 0, 1, and
2 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)

ld /r f = 6.3 at T = 1273 K.
ld /r f = 6.3 at T = 1273 K.

temperature curves of C/SiC composite corresponding to different interface debond-
ing energies Γd = 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7 J/m2 and oxidation durations t = 0, 1, and 2 hours.
When Γd = 0.3 J/m2 and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases
t = 2 hours, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 66.2 MPa at T = 973 K to
the peak value 𝜎 mc = 77.5 MPa at T = 1153 K and then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 74.8 MPa
T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5.7 at T = 1273 K.
from 𝜎 mc = 84.2 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 125.5 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface
debonding length increases from ld /r f = 0 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 3.3 at T = 1273 K;
T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 98 MPa at T = 1173 K and then decreases to
ld /r f = 0 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 3.9 at T = 1273 K, and when t = 2 hours, the matrix
cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 75.3 MPa at T = 973 K to the peak value
and the interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 0 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5.4
at T = 1273 K.
debonding length increases from ld /r f = 0 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 3.0 at T = 1273 K;

Γd = 0.3 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 2 hours; (b) the interface
Γd = 0.3 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 2 hours; (c) the matrix
Γd = 0.5 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 2 hours; (d) the interface
(a) Γd = 0.5 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 2 hours; (e) the matrix
Γd = 0.7 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 2 hours; and (f) the
interface debonding length
versus temperature curves
when Γd = 0.7 J/m2 and t = 0,
1, and 2 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
𝜎 mc = 99 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length increases from
ld /r f = 0 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 3.7 at T = 1273 K, and when t = 2 hours, the matrix
cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 83.8 MPa at T = 973 K to the peak value
and the interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 0 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5.2
at T = 1273 K.

temperature curves of C/SiC composite corresponding to different matrix fracture
energies Γm = 20, 25, and 30 J/m2 and oxidation duration t = 0, 1, and 2 hours.
When Γm = 20 J/m2 and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress increases
from 𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 114.9 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the
to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 70 MPa at T = 1173 K and then decreases to 𝜎 mc = 68.7 MPa
T = 973 K to ld /r f = 6.3 at T = 1273 K.
matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 70 MPa at T = 973 K to the peak value

Γm = 20 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
Γm = 20 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
Γm = 25 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 2 hours; (d) the interface
Γm = 25 J/m2 and t = 0, 1, (a)
and 2 hours; (e) the matrix
Γm = 30 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 2 hours, and (f) the
when Γm = 30 J/m2 and
t = 0, 1, and 2 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)

ld /r f = 6.7 at T = 1273 K.

Yang et al. [36] investigated the tensile behavior of 2D C/SiC composite at elevated
temperatures. The T300-C/SiC composite was fabricated using the CVI method
with a pyrolytic carbon interphase of 1.5–2.0 μm. The fiber volume fraction was
approximately 40%, and the composite density was approximately 2.0 g/cm3 . Tensile
tests were performed under displacement control at a loading speed of 0.3 mm/min.
Tensile stress–strain curves of 2D C/SiC composite at T = 973 and 1273 K are shown
in Figure 2.6. At T = 973 K, the composite matrix cracking stress was 𝜎 mc = 50 MPa
and the tensile strength was 𝜎 UTS = 232 MPa with a failure strain of 0.25%, and at
T = 1273 K, the matrix cracking stress was 𝜎 PLS = 80 MPa and the tensile strength
was 𝜎 UTS = 271 MPa with a failure strain of 0.33%. Experimental and theoretical
time-dependent matrix cracking stress and interface debonding length of 2D
C/SiC composite are shown as functions of temperature with oxidation times of
0, 1, and 2 hours, respectively (Figure 2.22). For the case of without oxidation,
when the temperature increases, the matrix cracking stress of 2D C/SiC composite
increases from 𝜎 mc = 48 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 82 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the
interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 2.7 to ld /r f = 6.3; for the case of
oxidation time t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress increases from 𝜎 mc = 46.3 MPa
at T = 973 K to the peak value 𝜎 mc = 67.3 MPa at T = 1233 K and then decreases
from ld /r f = 2.7 to ld /r f = 6.7, and for the case of oxidation time t = 2 hours, the
and the interface debonding length increases from ld /r f = 2.7 to ld /r f = 7.8.
2.5 Time-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of Si/SiC

Composites
In this section, synergistic effects of temperature and time on matrix cracking stress
of SiC/SiC composites are investigated. Temperature-dependent constituent prop-
erties and time-dependent interface oxidation are considered to determine matrix
cracking stress. Effects of fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface debonding
energy, and matrix fracture energy on time-dependent matrix cracking stress and
interface debonding length of SiC/SiC composite are discussed. Experimental matrix
cracking stress of SiC/SiC composite corresponding to different temperatures and
times are predicted.

The ceramic composite system of SiC/SiC is used for the case study and its material
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.22 (a) Experimental and predicted matrix cracking stress versus temperature
curves when t = 0, 1, and 2 hours and (b) the interface debonding length versus
temperature curves when t = 0, 1, and 2 hours of C/SiC composite.
Γd = 0.1 J/m2 (at room temperature), 𝛼 rf = 2.9 × 10−6 K−1 , and 𝛼 lf = 3.9 × 10−6 K−1 .
Effects of fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface frictional coefficient, inter-
face debonding energy, and matrix fracture energy on time-dependent matrix crack-
ing stress and interface debonding are discussed.
2.5.1.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite

temperature curves of SiC/SiC composite corresponding to different fiber volumes
V f = 25% and 30% and oxidation time t = 0, 1, and 3 hours.

V f = 25% and t = 0, 1, and
V f = 25% and t = 0, 1, and
V f = 30% and t = 0, 1, and
3 hours; and (d) the interface
V f = 30% and t = 0, 1, and (a)
3 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)
𝜎 mc = 100 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 87 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debond-
ing length decreases from ld /r f = 5.8 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5 at T = 1273 K; when
t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 98 MPa at T = 973 K to
matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 94 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 62 MPa at
to ld /r f = 7.6 at T = 1273 K.
𝜎 mc = 114 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 99 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debond-
ing length decreases from ld /r f = 5.1 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 4.4 at T = 1273 K; when
t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 111 MPa at T = 973 K to
matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 105 MPa at T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 70 MPa at
to ld /r f = 7.2 at T = 1273 K.

temperature curves of SiC/SiC composite corresponding to different interface shear
stress 𝜏 0 = 15 and 20 MPa and oxidation time t = 0, 1, and 3 hours.
When 𝜏 0 = 15 MPa and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress decreases
debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 6.6 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 5.9 at T = 1273 K;
when t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 87.5 MPa at
T = 973 K to 𝜎 mc = 74.6 MPa at T = 1273 K, and the interface debonding length
decreases from ld /r f = 6.6 at T = 973 K to ld /r f = 6.1 at T = 1273 K, and when
Figure 2.24 (a) The

matrix cracking stress
when 𝜏 0 = 15 MPa and
t = 0, 1, and 3 hours; (b) the
versus the temperature
curves when 𝜏 0 = 15 MPa
and t = 0, 1, and 3 hours; (c)
the matrix cracking stress
when 𝜏 0 = 20 MPa and
t = 0, 1, and 3 hours; and
(d) the interface debonding
length versus temperature
curves when 𝜏 0 = 20 MPa (a)
and t = 0, 1, and 3 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)
t = 2 hours, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 86.1 MPa at T = 973 K
When 𝜏 0 = 20 MPa and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress decreases
when t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 100.5 MPa at
t = 2 hours, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 97.2 MPa at T = 973 K
Figure 2.25 shows the matrix cracking stress and interface debonding length ver-
sus temperature curves of SiC/SiC composite corresponding to different interface
shear stress 𝜏 s = 10 and 15 MPa and oxidation time t = 0, 1, and 3 hours.
When 𝜏 s = 10 MPa and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress decreases
when t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 111 MPa at
t = 2 hours, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 106 MPa at T = 973 K
When 𝜏 s = 15 MPa and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress decreases

𝜏 s = 10 MPa and t = 0, 1,
𝜏 s = 10 MPa and t = 0, 1,
𝜏 s = 15 MPa and t = 0, 1,
and 3 hours; and (d) the
when 𝜏 0 = 15 MPa and t = 0, (a)
1, and 3 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)

Figure 2.26 shows the matrix cracking stress and interface debonding length
versus temperature curves of SiC/SiC composite corresponding to different inter-
face debonding energies Γd = 0.1 and 0.3 J/m2 and oxidation time t = 0, 1, and
2 hours.
When Γd = 0.1 J/m2 and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress decreases
When Γd = 0.3 J/m2 and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress decreases

Γd = 0.1 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 3 hours; (b) the
when Γd = 0.1 J/m2 and
t = 0, 1, and 3 hours; (c) the
matrix cracking stress
when Γd = 0.3 J/m2 and
t = 0, 1, and 3 hours; and (d)
the interface debonding
length versus temperature
curves when Γd = 0.3 J/m2 (a)
and t = 0, 1, and 3 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)

temperature curves of C/SiC composite corresponding to different matrix fracture
energies Γm = 15 and 20 J/m2 and oxidation durations t = 0, 1, and 2 hours.
When Γm = 15 J/m2 and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress decreases
When Γm = 20 J/m2 and without oxidation, the matrix cracking stress decreases

Guo and Kagawa [38] investigated tensile behavior of 2D SiC/SiC composites with
PyC and BN interphase at elevated temperature. Figure 2.28 shows the experimental
and predicted matrix cracking stress versus temperature curves.
For 2D SiC/SiC composite with the PyC interphase without oxidation, the
experimental matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 65 MPa at T = 298 K

Γm = 15 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
Γm = 15 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
Γm = 20 J/m2 and t = 0, 1,
and 3 hours; and (d) the
when Γm = 20 J/m2 and (a)
t = 0, 1, and 3 hours.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.28 Experimental and predicted matrix cracking stress versus temperature curves
of (a) SiC/SiC composite with PyC interphase and (b) SiC/SiC composite with BN interphase.
References 71
to 𝜎 mc = 33 MPa at T = 1200 K, the predicted matrix cracking stress decreases

debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 12.8 to ld /r f = 7.3; when t = 1 hour, the
at T = 1200 K, and the interface debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 12.8 to
ld /r f = 7.7; when t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 63 MPa
decreases from ld /r f = 12.8 to ld /r f = 9.8.
For 2D SiC/SiC composite with the BN interphase without oxidation, the
experimental matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 75 MPa at T = 298 K
to 𝜎 mc = 45 MPa at T = 1400 K, the predicted matrix cracking stress decreases
debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 7.3 to ld /r f = 2.9; when t = 1 hour, the
at T = 1400 K, and the interface debonding length decreases from ld /r f = 7.3 to
ld /r f = 3.8; when t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking stress decreases from 𝜎 mc = 84 MPa
decreases from ld /r f = 7.3 to ld /r f = 7.1.
2.6 Conclusion
In this chapter, first matrix cracking of fiber-reinforced CMCs was investigated using
the micromechanical approach. Temperature- and time-dependent micromechani-
cal parameters were incorporated into analysis of the microstress analysis, interface
debonding, and matrix cracking. Relationships between the first matrix cracking
stress, interface debonding, temperature, and time were established. Experimental
first matrix cracking stress of C/SiC and SiC/SiC composites at elevated temperature
was predicted.
● With increasing temperature, the first matrix cracking stress of C/SiC composite
increased, and the first matrix cracking stress of SiC/SiC composite decreased.
● When the fiber volume, interface shear stress, and interface debonding energy
increased, the matrix cracking stress at the same temperature increased, and the
interface debonding length decreased.
● When matrix fracture energy increases, the matrix cracking stress and the inter-
face debonding length increased at the same temperature.
● When oxidation time increased, the matrix cracking stress decreased, and the
interface debonding length increased.
References
1 Christin, F. (2002). Design, fabrication, and application of thermostructural

composites (TSC) like C/C, C/SiC and SiC/SiC composites. Adv. Eng. Mater. 4:
903–912. https://doi.org/10.1002/adem.200290001.

64: 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00230-6.
3 Schmidt, S., Beyer, S., Knabe, H. et al. (2004). Advanced ceramic matrix com-
posite materials for current and future propulsion system applications. Acta
Astronaut. 55: 409–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2004.05.052.
4 DiCarlo, J.A. and Roode, M. (2006). Ceramic composite development for gas
turbine hot section components. Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo: Power for
Land, Sea and Air, Volume 2, pp. 221−231.
5 Watananbe, F., Nakamuram, T., and Shinohara, K. (2016). The application of
ceramic matrix composite to low pressure turbine blade. Proceedings of ASME
Turbo Expo 2016: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition (13–17
June 2016), Seoul, South Korea.
6 Li, L.B. (2015). Micromechanical modeling for tensile behavior of carbon
fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Appl. Compos. Mater. 22: 773–790.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-014-9435-y.
7 Li, L.B. (2018). Modeling for monotonic and cyclic tensile stress-strain behavior
54: 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11029-018-9729-5.
8 Li, L.B. (2018). Damage, Fracture and Fatigue in Ceramic-Matrix Composites.
Singapore: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1783-5.
9 Jenkins, M.G. and Zawada, L.P. (2001). Elastic modulus and proportional limit
stress in ceramic matrix composites: comparison of methods and results. 25th
Annual Conference on Composites, Advanced Ceramics, Materials, and Structures:
A, Cocoa Beach, FL (21–27 January 2001). Westerville, OH: American Ceramic
Society, pp. 503–511.
10 Liu, S., Zhang, L., Yin, X. et al. (2014). Proportional limit stress and residual
thermal stress of 3D SiC/SiC composite. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 30: 959–964.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2014.08.004.
11 Aveston, J., Cooper, G.A., and Kelly, A. (1971). The Properties of Fiber Compos-
ites, Conference on Proceedings. National Physical Laboratory, 15–26. Guildford:
IPC Science and Technology Press.
12 Aveston, J. and Kelly, A. (1973). Theory of multiple fracture of fibrous compos-
ites. J. Mater. Sci. 8: 352–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00550155.
13 Budiansky, B., Hutchinson, J.W., and Evans, A.G. (1986). Matrix fracture in
fiber-reinforced ceramics. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 34: 167–189. https://doi.org/10
.1016/0022-5096(86)90035-9.
14 Kuo, W.S. and Chou, T.W. (1995). Multiple cracking of unidirectional and
cross-ply ceramic matrix composites. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 78: 745–755. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.1995.tb08242.x.
15 Sutcu, M. and Hillig, W.B. (1990). The effect of fiber-matrix debonded energy
on the matrix cracking strength and the debonded shear strength. Acta Metall.
Mater. 38: 2653–2662. https://doi.org/10.1016/0956-7151(90)90278-O.
References 73
16 Chiang, Y. (2001). On fiber debonding and matrix cracking in fiber-reinforced

ceramics. Compos. Sci. Technol. 61: 1743–1756. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-
3538(01)00078-1.
17 Li, L.B. (2017). Synergistic effects of fiber debonding and fracture on matrix
cracking in fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Mater. Sci. Eng., A 682:
482–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2016.11.077.
18 Li, L.B. (2020). Temperature-dependent proportional limit stress of SiC/SiC
fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. High Temp. Mater. Processes (Lon-
don) 39: 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1515/htmp-2020-0052.
19 Li, L.B. (2019). Temperature-dependent proportional limit stress of carbon
fiber-reinforced silicon carbide ceramic-matrix composites. Ceram. Silik. 63:
330–337.
20 Li, L.B. (2019). Time-dependent proportional limit stress of carbon
fiber-reinforced silicon carbide ceramic-matrix composites considering inter-
face oxidation. J. Ceram. Soc. Jpn. 127: 279–287. https://doi.org/10.2109/jcersj2
.18176.
21 Li, L.B. (2020). Synergistic effects of temperature and time on proportional limit
stress of silicon carbide fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Compos.
Interfaces 27: 341–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/09276440.2019.1637196.
cracking in brittle-matrix fiber composites. Acta Metall. Mater. 33: 2013–2021.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(85)90124-5.
23 Marshall, D.B. and Cox, B.N. (1987). Tensile fracture of brittle matrix compos-
ites: influence of fiber strength. Acta Metall. 35: 2607–2619. https://doi.org/10
.1016/0001-6160(87)90260-4.
24 McCartney, L.N. (1987). Mechanics of matrix cracking in brittle-matrix
fiber-reinforced composites. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 409: 329–350. https://
doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1987.0019.
25 Chiang, Y.C., Wang, A.S.D., and Chou, T.W. (1993). On matrix cracking in fiber
reinforced ceramics. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 41: 1137–1154. https://doi.org/10.1016/
0022-5096(93)90087-V.
26 Danchaivijit, S.D. and Shetty, D.K. (1993). Matrix cracking in ceramic matrix
composites. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 76: 2497–2504. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-
2916.1993.tb03972.x.
27 Thouless, M.D. and Evans, A.G. (1988). Effects of pull-out on the mechanical
properties of ceramic-matrix-composites. Acta Metall. 36: 517–522. https://doi
.org/10.1016/0001-6160(88)90083-1.
28 Kim, R.Y. and Pagano, N.J. (1991). Crack initiation in unidirectional
brittle-matrix composites. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 74: 1082–1090. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1151-2916.1991.tb04346.x.
29 Dutton, R.E., Pagano, N.J., Kim, R.Y., and Parthasarathy, T.A. (2000). Modeling
the ultimate tensile strength of unidirectional glass-matrix composites. J. Am.
30 Barsoum, M.W., Kangutkar, P., and Wang, A.S.D. (1992). Matrix crack initiation
in ceramic matrix composites Part I: experiments and test results. Compos. Sci.
Technol. 44: 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-3538(92)90016-V.
31 Reynaud, P., Rouby, D., and Fantozzi, G. (1994). Effects of interfacial evolution
on the mechanical behavior of ceramic matrix composites during cyclic fatigue.
Scr. Metal. Mater. 31: 1061–1066. https://doi.org/10.1016/0956-716X(94)90527-4.
32 Sauder, C., Lamon, J., and Pailler, R. (2004). The tensile behavior of carbon
fibers at high temperatures up to 2400 ∘ C. Carbon 42: 715–725. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.carbon.2003.11.020.
j.jnucmat.2007.05.016.
34 Pradere, C. and Sauder, C. (2008). Transverse and longitudinal coefficient of
thermal expansion of carbon fibers at high temperatures (300–2500 K). Carbon
46: 1874–1884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2008.07.035.
36 Yang, C., Zhang, L., Wang, B. et al. (2017). Tensile behavior of 2D-C/SiC com-
posites at elevated temperatures: experiment and modeling. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.
37: 1281–1290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2016.11.011.
37 Fantozzi, G., Reynaud, P., and Rouby, D. (2001). Thermomechanical behavior of
long fibers ceramic–ceramic composites. Silic. Indus. 66: 109–119.
38 Guo, S. and Kagawa, Y. (2002). Tensile fracture behavior of continuous SiC
fiber-reinforced SiC matrix composites at elevated temperatures and correlation
to in situ constituent properties. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 22: 2349–2356. https://doi
.org/10.1016/S0955-2219(02)00028-6.
39 Casas, L. and Martinez-Esnaola, J.M. (2003). Modelling the effect of oxidation
on the creep behavior of fiber-reinforced ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater.
51: 3745–3757. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(03)00189-7.
40 Lamourous, F., Camus, G., and Thebault, J. (1994). Kinetics and mechanisms
41 Lamoroux, F., Naslain, R., and Jouin, J.-M. (1994). Kinetics and mechanisms
of oxidation of 2D woven C/SiC composites: II, Theoretical approach. J. Am.
75
Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of Fiber-Reinforced

Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Temperature
3.1 Introduction
Ceramic-matrix composites (CMCs) not only possess higher mechanical properties,
wear, and corrosion resistance than metal materials at elevated temperature but also
have better strength and toughness than ceramics [1]. In recent years, the CMCs
have already been successfully applied on some aeroengine components [2]. The
SAFRAN designed, built, and ground tested the CMC exhaust cone demonstrator,
which was certified on 22 April 2015 by the European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA) for use on commercial flights after carrying out its initial test on an A320
in 2012. On 16 June 2015, the CMC exhaust cone designed by SAFRAN company
Herakles made its first commercial flight on a CFM56-5B engine powering an
Air France Airbus A320 jetliner, which is the first time in the world that a CMC
part has flown on a jetliner in commercial service. The application of CMCs on
aeroengines has the following advantages (i) as the specific strength of CMCs is
higher than that of nickel-based alloys and the weight of turbine components made
of nickel-based alloys can be reduced by 61% if using CMCs; (ii) due to the high
temperature resistance of CMCs, the turbine temperature can be increased up to
1650 ∘ C, which is beneficial to increase the thrust–weight ratio of the aeroengine;
(iii) compared with ceramics, the strain tolerance of CMCs is greatly improved,
which will not cause catastrophic damage, and it is possible to detect the mechanical
degradation before materials failure and improve the reliability of life prediction;
and (iv) replacing the existing high-temperature metal materials with CMCs can
reduce the weight, pollution emission, and noise level of the aeroengine.
At elevated temperatures, matrix cracking is an important failure mode of CMCs
[3–7]. The generation and propagation of matrix cracking consume the energy inside
of CMCs, which slows down or prevent the further matrix cracking propagation and
achieves the toughness behavior [8–12]. The nonlinearity of stress–strain curves of
CMCs is mainly caused by matrix cracking and propagation [13–21]. The damage
stage from first matrix cracking to saturation of matrix cracking affects the defor-
mation characteristics of CMCs. For the multiple matrix cracking problem, the
maximum stress criterion is firstly used to predict the generation of matrix multiple
cracking; however, the predicted matrix cracking approaches to saturation at single
applied stress, leading to the step behavior on the predicted stress–strain curve
76 3 Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of Fiber-Reinforced CMCs at Elevated Temperature
[22, 23]; the matrix interaction cracking model involving calculation of the
steady-state strain energy release rate considered the energy change before and
after steady-state matrix cracking and matrix flaw density [24]; the energy balance
approach is also used to predict the matrix multiple cracking by establishing
the energy balance relationship between two different matrix cracking spaces or
configurations [25–28]; the critical matrix strain energy (CMSE) criterion presumes
the critical value of the matrix strain energy, when the matrix strain energy is
higher than the critical value, the additional matrix strain energy is dissipated
through new cracking and fiber/matrix interface debonding [29, 30]; the matrix
statistical cracking model considered the matrix flaw distribution using the Weibull
model and divided the matrix cracking space into three cases, i.e. long matrix
crack spacing, medium matrix crack spacing, and short matrix crack spacing, with
increasing applied stress, the long and medium matrix crack spacing continually
transferred to the short matrix crack spacing because of the interaction effect
between neighboring cracks, when all the matrix crack spacings are less than the
fiber/matrix interface debonded length, and the matrix cracking approaches to
the saturation [31, 32]. However, most of the existing theoretical matrix cracking
models for the fiber-reinforced CMCs can only be used at normal temperature
ranges [33, 34], and there are few experimental investigations on matrix cracking
at elevated temperature [35, 36]. The temperature dependence of the fiber/matrix
interface shear stress, Young’s modulus of matrix and fibers, and the matrix fracture
energy and fiber/matrix interface debonding energy in fiber-reinforced CMCs
affects the matrix multi-cracking evolution [37–42]. The principal objective of the
present study is to develop a temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking
model for the fiber-reinforced CMCs.
In this chapter, temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking evolution
of fiber-reinforced CMCs is investigated using the CMSE criterion. The
temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface shear stress, Young’s modulus
of the fibers and the matrix, the matrix fracture energy, and the fiber/matrix
interface debonding energy are considered in the microstress field analysis,
fiber/matrix interface debonding criterion, and matrix multiple cracking evolution
model. Effects of fiber volume, fiber/matrix interface shear stress, fiber/matrix
interface debonding energy, matrix fracture energy, temperature and duration
on matrix multiple cracking evolution, and fiber/matrix interface debonding are
interface debonding of unidirectional C/SiC composite at elevated temperatures are
predicted.
3.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking

Evolution of C/SiC Composites
In this section, temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking evolution of
fiber-reinforced CMCs is investigated using the CMSE criterion. Temperature-
dependent fiber/matrix interface shear stress, Young’s modulus of the fibers and the
3.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of C/SiC Composites 77
matrix, matrix fracture energy, and the interface debonding energy are considered
in the microstress field analysis, interface debonding criterion, and matrix multiple
cracking evolution model. Effects of interface shear stress, interface debonding
energy, matrix fracture energy, and temperature on temperature-dependent matrix
multiple cracking evolution and interface debonding are discussed. Experimental
matrix multiple cracking evolution and interface debonding of unidirectional C/SiC
composite at elevated temperatures are predicted.

The temperature affects the constituent properties and damage behavior of
fiber-reinforced CMCs, i.e. matrix multi-cracking, fiber/matrix interface debond-
ing, and thermal residual stress. If the radial thermal expansion coefficient of the
matrix is higher than the coefficient of the fibers, at a testing temperature lower than
the processing temperature, the radial thermal residual stresses are compressive
stresses. The temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface shear stress (𝜏 i (T)) can
be described using the following equation [43].
|𝛼 (T) − 𝛼rm (T)|(Tm − T)
𝜏i (T) = 𝜏0 + 𝜇 rf (3.1)
A
where 𝜏 0 denotes the steady-state fiber/matrix interface shear stress, 𝜇 denotes the
fiber/matrix interface frictional coefficient, 𝛼 rf and 𝛼 rm denote the temperature-
dependent fiber and matrix radial thermal expansion coefficient, respectively,
T m and T denote the processing temperature and testing temperature, and A is a
constant depending on the elastic properties of the matrix and fibers.
3.2.1.1 Temperature-Dependent Stress Analysis

The shear-lag model is adopted to perform temperature-dependent stress and strain
calculations in the interface debonding region (x ∈ [0, ld (T)]) and interface bonding
region (x ∈ [ld (T), lc (T)/2]). Temperature-dependent fiber axial stress 𝜎 f (x, T), matrix
axial stress 𝜎 m (x, T), and the interface shear stress 𝜏 i (x, T) are
⎧ 𝜎 − 2𝜏i (T) x, x ∈ [0, ld (T)]

⎪ Vf rf
𝜎f (x, T) = ⎨ [ ] [ ] [ ]
V l (T) x−l (T) l (T)
⎪𝜎fo + Vm 𝜎mo − 2 dr 𝜏i (T) exp −𝜌 rd , x ∈ ld (T), c 2
⎩ f f f
(3.2)
⎧2𝜏 (T) Vf x , x ∈ [0, ld (T)]

⎪ i Vm rf
𝜎m (x, T) = ⎨ [ ] [ ] [ ]
V ld (T) 𝜌(x−l (T)) l (T)
⎪𝜎mo − 𝜎mo − 2𝜏i (T) V f exp − rd , x ld (T), c 2
⎩ m rf f
(3.3)
⎧𝜏 (T), x ∈ [0, ld (T)]

⎪ i
𝜏i (x, T) = ⎨ 𝜌 [ V ld (T)
] [
𝜌(x−ld (T))
] [
l (T)
] (3.4)
⎪ 2 Vf 𝜎mo − 2𝜏i (T) rf exp − rf , x ∈ ld (T), c 2
m
⎩
where 𝜎 denotes the applied stress, V f and V m denote the fiber and matrix volume,
respectively, r f denotes the fiber radius, 𝜏 i (T) denotes the temperature-dependent
interface shear stress, ld and lc denote the temperature-dependent interface debond-
ing length and matrix crack spacing, 𝜌 denotes the shear-lag model parameter, and
𝜎 fo and 𝜎 mo denote the temperature-dependent fiber and matrix axial stress in the
interface bonding region, respectively.
Ef (T)
𝜎fo (T) = 𝜎 + Ef (T)[𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lf (T)]ΔT (3.5)
Ec (T)
Em (T)
𝜎mo (T) = 𝜎 + Em (T)[𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lm (T)]ΔT (3.6)
Ec (T)
where Ef (T), Em (T), and Ec (T) denote the temperature-dependent fiber, matrix,
and composite elastic modulus, respectively, 𝛼 lf (T), 𝛼 lm (T), and 𝛼 lc (T) denote
the temperature-dependent fiber, matrix, and composite axial thermal expansion
coefficient, respectively, and ΔT denotes the temperature difference between testing
and fabricated temperature.
3.2.1.2 Temperature-Dependent Interface Debonding

When matrix cracking propagates to the fiber/matrix interface, it will deflect
along the interface. The fracture mechanics approach is adopted to deter-
mine the temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface debonding length. The
fiber/matrix interface debonding criterion can be described using the following
equation [44].
F 𝜕wf (T) 1
ld
𝜕v(T)
Γd (T) = − 𝜏 (T) dx (3.7)
4𝜋rf 𝜕ld 2 ∫0 i 𝜕ld
where F(= 𝜋rf2 𝜎∕Vf ) denotes the fiber load at the matrix cracking plane, wf (T)
denotes the temperature-dependent fiber axial displacement at the matrix cracking
plane, and v(T) denotes the temperature-dependent relative displacement between
the fiber and the matrix. The temperature-dependent axial displacements of the
fiber and matrix, i.e. wf (x, T) and wm (x, T), are
lc
2 𝜎f (T)
wf (x, T) = dx
∫x Ef (T)
𝜎 𝜏 (T) 2
= (l − x) − i (l − x2 )
Vf Ef (T) d rf Ef (T) d
2𝜏 (T) r V E (T) 𝜎
− i ld + f m m 𝜎+ (l ∕2 − ld ) (3.8)
𝜌Ef (T) 𝜌Vf Ef (T)Ec (T) Ec (T) c
lc
𝜎m (T)
2
wm (x) = dx
∫x Em (T)
( )
Vf 𝜏i (T) 2Vf 𝜏i (T) rf 𝜎 lc
= (l2d − x2 ) + ld − 𝜎+ − ld
rf Vm Em (T) 𝜌Vm Em (T) 𝜌Ec (T) Ec (T) 2
(3.9)
Temperature-dependent relative displacement between the fiber and the matrix,

i.e. v(x, T), are
𝜎 𝜏i (T)Ec (T)
v(x, T) = |wf (x, T) − wm (x, T)| = (ld − x) − (l2 − x2 )
Vf Ef (T) Vm Em (T)Ef (T)rf d
2𝜏i (T)Ec (T)ld rf
− + 𝜎 (3.10)
𝜌Vm Em (T)Ef (T) 𝜌Vf Ef (T)
Substituting wf (x = 0, T) and v(x, T) into Eq. (3.7), it leads to
[ ]
Ec (T)𝜏i2 (T) 2 Ec (T)𝜏i2 (T) 𝜏i (T)𝜎
l + − l
Vm Em (T)Ef (T)rf d 𝜌Vm Em (T)Ef (T) Vf Ef (T) d
rf Vm Em (T)𝜎 2 rf 𝜏i (T)
+ − 𝜎 − 𝛾d (T) = 0 (3.11)
4Vf 2 Ef (T)Ec (T) 2𝜌Vf Ef (T)
Solving Eq. (3.11), temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface debonding length
ld (T) is
√
[ ] √
√( r )2 r V E (T)E (T)
rf Vm Em (T)𝜎
−√ f
1
ld (T) = − + f m m 2 f Γd (3.12)
2 Vf Ec (T)𝜏i (T) 𝜌 2𝜌 Ec (T)𝜏i (T)
3.2.1.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking

Solti et al. [29] developed the CMSE criterion to predict the matrix multi-cracking in
fiber-reinforced CMCs. In the present analysis, the effects of temperature on the con-
stituent properties and internal damage in fiber-reinforced CMCs are considered in
the CMSE criterion. Temperature-dependent matrix strain energy can be described
using the following equation.
lc (T)
1
Um (T) = 𝜎m
2
(T) dx dAm (3.13)
2Em (T) ∫Am ∫0
where Am is the cross-sectional area of matrix in the unit cell. Substituting the
temperature-dependent matrix axial stresses in Eq. (3.3) into Eq. (3.13), the matrix
strain energy considering matrix multi-cracking and fiber/matrix interface partially
debonding, can be described using the following equation.
{ [ ]2 [ ]
Am 4 Vf 𝜏i (T) l (T)
Um (T) = ld (T) ld (T) + 𝜎mo
2
(T) c − ld (T)
Em (T) 3 Vm rf 2
[ ][ ( )]
r 𝜎 (T) 2Vf 𝜏i (T)ld (T) l (T)∕2 − ld (T)
+2 f mo − 𝜎mo (T) 1−exp −𝜌 c
𝜌 Vm rf rf
[ ]2 [ ( )]}
rf 2Vf 𝜏i (T)ld (T) lc (T)∕2 − ld (T)
+ − 𝜎mo (T) 1 − exp −2𝜌
2𝜌 Vm rf rf
(3.14)
When the fiber/matrix interface completely debonds, the matrix strain energy can
be described using the following equation.
[ ]
Am l3c (T) V𝜏i (T)f 2
Um (T) = (3.15)
6Em (T) rf Vm
Evaluating matrix strain energy at a critical stress 𝜎 cr , the CMSE of U mcr can be
obtained. The CMSE can be described using the following equation.
1 𝜎 2 (T)
Umcr (T) = kAm l0 mocr (3.16)
2 Em (T)
where k (k ∈ [0,1]) is the CMSE parameter, l0 is the initial matrix crack spacing, and
𝜎 mocr (T) can be described using the following equation.
Em (T)
𝜎mocr (T) = 𝜎 (T) + Em (T)[𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lm (T)]ΔT (3.17)
Ec (T) cr
where 𝜎 cr (T) denotes the temperature-dependent critical stress corresponding to
composite’s proportional limit stress, i.e. the stress at which the stress–strain curve
starts to deviate from linearity because of the damage accumulation of matrix
cracking [13]. The critical stress is defined to be ACK matrix cracking stress [38],
which was determined using the energy balance criterion, involving the calculation
of energy balance relationship before and after the formation of a single dominant
cracking [38].
[ 2 ]1
6Vf Ef (T)Ec2 (T)𝜏i (T)Γm (T) 3
𝜎cr (T) = 2
− Ec (T)[𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lm (T)]ΔT (3.18)
rf Vm Em (T)
where Γm (T) denotes the temperature-dependent matrix fracture energy.
Matrix multiple cracking evolution can be determined using the following
equation.
Um (𝜎 > 𝜎cr , T) = Ucrm (𝜎cr , T) (3.19)
Matrix cracking density is determined using the following equation.

1000
𝜓= (3.20)
lc
The interface debonding ratio is defined as
2ld
𝜂= (3.21)
lc

Under tensile loading of fiber-reinforced CMCs, matrix multiple cracking and
fiber/matrix interface debonding occur with increasing applied stress. The CMSE
criterion is adopted in the present analysis to determine the matrix crack spacing
for different applied stress levels. By combining Eqs. (3.1, 3.12, 3.14, 3.16, 3.19),
the matrix multiple cracking evolution when the fiber/matrix interface partially
debonding can be determined; combining Eqs. (3.1, 3.15, 3.16, 3.19), the matrix
multiple cracking evolution when the fiber/matrix interface completely debonding
can be determined. The temperature-dependent matrix elastic modulus, matrix
axial, and radial thermal expansion coefficient, fiber/matrix interface debonded
energy, and matrix fracture energy are given in the following equations.
The temperature-dependent carbon fiber elastic modulus of Ef (T) can be

described using the following equation [45].
[ ( )]
T
Ef (T) = 230 1 − 2.86 × 10−4 exp , T < 2273 K (3.22)
324
The temperature-dependent SiC matrix elastic modulus of Em (T) can be described
using the following equation [46].
[ ( )]
350 962
Em (T) = 460 − 0.04T exp − , T ∈ [300 K 1773 K] (3.23)
460 T
The temperature-dependent carbon fiber axial and radial thermal expansion coef-
ficient of 𝛼 lf (T) and 𝛼 rf (T) can be described using the following equation, respectively
[47].
𝛼lf (T) = 2.529 × 10−2 − 1.569 × 10−4 T + 2.228 × 10−7 T 2
[ ]
− 1.877 × 10−11 T 3 − 1.288 × 10−14 T 4 , T ∈ 300 K 2500 K (3.24)
𝛼rf (T) = − 1.86 × 10−1 + 5.85 × 10−4 T − 1.36 × 10−8 T 2

[ ]
+ 1.06 × 10−22 T 3 , T ∈ 300 K 2500 K (3.25)
The temperature-dependent SiC matrix axial and radial thermal expansion coef-
ficient of 𝛼 lm (T) and 𝛼 rm (T) can be described using the following equation, respec-
tively [46].
⎧−1.8276 + 0.0178T − 1.5544 T ∈ [125 K 1273K]
⎪
𝛼lm (T) = 𝛼rm (T) = ⎨ ×10−5 T 2 + 4.5246 × 10−9 T 3 ,
⎪5.0 × 10−6 K−1 , T > 1273 K
⎩
(3.26)
The temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface debonding energy Γd (T) and
the matrix fracture energy Γm (T) can be described using the following equation,
respectively [48].
⎡ ∫T CP (T) dT ⎤
T
⎢
Γd (T) = Γdo 1 − To ⎥ (3.27)
⎢ ∫ m
C (T) dT ⎥
⎣ To P ⎦
⎡ ∫T CP (T) dT ⎤
T
⎢
Γm (T) = Γmo 1 − To ⎥ (3.28)
⎢ ∫ m
C (T) dT ⎥
⎣ To P ⎦
where T o denotes the reference temperature, T m denotes the fabricated temperature,
Γdo and Γmo denote the fiber/matrix interface debonded energy and matrix fracture
energy at the reference temperature of T o , respectively, and CP (T) can be described
CP (T) = 76.337 + 109.039 × 10−3 T − 6.535 × 105 T −2 − 27.083 × 10−6 T 2

(3.29)
The ceramic composite system of C/SiC is used for the case study, and its material
Γd = 0.4 J/m2 (at room temperature), and 𝜏 i = 20 MPa (at room temperature). Effects
of interface shear stress, interface debonding energy, matrix fracture energy, and
temperature on the temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking evolution and
fiber/matrix interface debonding are discussed.

Figure 3.1 shows the matrix cracking density and fiber/matrix interface debonding
ratio of C/SiC composite at T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for different interface shear
stress (i.e. 𝜏 0 = 30 and 35 MPa).
For 𝜏 0 = 30 MPa, when T = 773 K, matrix cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.08 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 53 MPa to 𝜓 = 1.2 mm−1 at
2.5
Matrix cracking density (mm–1)
2.0
1.5
1.0
1: T = 773 K
1 4 2: T = 873 K
2 3
0.5 3: T = 973 K
4: T = 1073 K
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(a) Stress (MPa)
0.7
0.6
Interface debonding ratio
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2 1 2 3 4 1: T = 773 K
2: T = 873 K
3: T = 973 K
0.1
4: T = 1073 K
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
(b) Stress (MPa)
Figure 3.1 (a) The matrix cracking density versus applied stress curves when 𝜏 0 = 30 MPa;
(b) the fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio versus applied stress curves when
𝜏 0 = 30 MPa; (c) the matrix cracking density versus applied stress curves when 𝜏 0 = 35 MPa;
and (d) the fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio versus applied stress curves when
𝜏 0 = 35 MPa of C/SiC composite at elevated temperatures of T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K.
Matrix cracking density (mm–1) 3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1: T = 773 K
1.0 2: T = 873 K
1 2 3: T = 973 K
3 4
0.5 4: T = 1073 K
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(c) Stress (MPa)
0.8
0.7 4
0.6 3
0.5 2
0.4 1
0.3
1: T = 773 K
0.2 2: T = 873 K
3: T = 973 K
0.1 4: T = 1073 K
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(d) Stress (MPa)
the matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 107 MPa, and the interface debonding
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 30.2%; when T = 873 K, the matrix cracking density
increases from 𝜓 = 0.07 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 77 MPa
to 𝜓 = 1.5 mm−1 at the matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 154 MPa, and the
interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 40.6%; when T = 973 K, the
matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.07 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking
stress 𝜎 mc = 104 MPa to 𝜓 = 1.9 mm−1 at the matrix cracking saturation stress
𝜎 sat = 209 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.98% to 51.9%,
and when T = 1073 K, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.08 mm−1 at
the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 134 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.2 mm−1 at the matrix crack-
ing saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 268 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases
from 𝜂 = 1% to 62.8%.
For 𝜏 0 = 35 MPa, when T = 773 K, the matrix cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.09 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 73 MPa to 𝜓 = 1.7 mm−1
at the matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 146 MPa, and the interface debonding
length increases from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 36.6%; when T = 873 K, the matrix cracking den-
sity increases from 𝜓 = 0.09 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 95 MPa
matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.09 mm−1 at the first matrix crack-
ing stress 𝜎 mc = 121 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.3 mm−1 at the matrix cracking saturation stress
the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 149 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.7 mm−1 at the matrix cracking
saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 298 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from
𝜂 = 1% to 65.3%.

Figure 3.2 shows the matrix cracking density and interface debonding ratio of
C/SiC composite at T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for different fiber/matrix interface
debonding energies (i.e. Γd = 0.5 and 1.0 J/m2 ).
For Γd = 0.5 J/m2 , when T = 773 K, matrix cracking density increases from
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.93% to 40.5%; when T = 873 K, matrix cracking density
increases from 𝜓 = 0.1 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 109 MPa to
𝜓 = 2.5 mm−1 at matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 218 MPa, and the interface
debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.95% to 48.4%; when T = 973 K, matrix
cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.1 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress
𝜎 mc = 134 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.8 mm−1 at matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 269 MPa,
and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.98% to 57.5%, and when
T = 1073 K, matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.1 mm−1 at the first matrix
cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 162 MPa to 𝜓 = 3.1 mm−1 at the matrix cracking saturation
stress 𝜎 sat = 324 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 1% to
66.7%.
For Γd = 1.0 J/m2 , when T = 773 K, the matrix cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.12 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 88.4 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.3 mm−1 at
the matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 176.8 MPa, and the interface debonding
interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.93% to 47.8%; when T = 973 K,
and when T = 1073 K, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.12 mm−1
at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 162 MPa to 𝜓 = 3.3 mm−1 at the matrix
Matrix cracking density (mm–1) 3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1: T = 773 K
1.0
1 2 3 2: T = 873 K
4
3: T = 973 K
0.5 4: T = 1073 K
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(a) Stress (MPa)
0.8
0.7 4
0.6 3
0.5 2
1
0.4
0.3
1: T = 773 K
0.2 2: T = 873 K
3: T = 973 K
0.1 4: T = 1073 K
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(b) Stress (MPa)
Figure 3.2 (a) The matrix cracking density versus applied stress curves when
Γd = 0.5 J/m2 ; (b) the fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio versus applied stress curves
when Γd = 0.5 J/m2 ; (c) the matrix cracking density versus applied stress curves when
Γd = 1.0 J/m2 ; and (d) the fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio versus applied stress curves
when Γd = 1.0 J/m2 of C/SiC composite at elevated temperatures of T = 773, 873, 973, and
1073 K.
cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 324 MPa, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding
length increases from 𝜂 = 0.97% to 65%.

Figure 3.3 shows the matrix cracking density and interface debonding ratio of C/SiC
composite at T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for different matrix fracture energies (i.e.
Γm = 20 and 30 J/m2 ).
For Γm = 20 J/m2 , when T = 773 K, the matrix cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.14 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 78 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.4 mm−1 at the
matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 156 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1: T = 773 K
1 2 3 4 2: T = 873 K
1.0
3: T = 973 K
4: T = 1073 K
0.5
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(c) Stress (MPa)
0.8
0.7 4
0.6 3
0.5 2
1
0.4
0.3
1: T = 773 K
0.2 2: T = 873 K
3: T = 973 K
0.1 4: T = 1073 K
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(d) Stress (MPa)
increases from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 37.2%; when T = 873 K, matrix cracking density increases
from 𝜓 = 0.13 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 97 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.8 mm−1
interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.93% to 53.8%, and when T = 1073 K,
𝜎 sat = 296 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.95% to 62.6%.
𝜓 = 0.1 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 97.3 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.2 mm−1 at
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1: T = 773 K
1.0 1 2 3 4 2: T = 873 K
3: T = 973 K
0.5 4: T = 1073 K
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(a) Stress (MPa)
0.7
4
0.6
3
0.5
2
0.4 1
0.3
0.2 1: T = 773 K
2: T = 873 K
3: T = 973 K
0.1 4: T = 1073 K
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(b) Stress (MPa)
Figure 3.3 (a) The matrix cracking density versus applied stress curves when
Γm = 20 J/m2 ; (b) the fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio versus applied stress curves
when Γm = 20 J/m2 ; (c) the matrix cracking density versus applied stress curves when
Γm = 30 J/m2 ; and (d) the fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio versus applied stress curves
when Γm = 30 J/m2 of C/SiC composite at elevated temperatures of T = 773, 873, 973, and
1073 K.
fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.95% to 50.1%; when
T = 973 K, matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.1 mm−1 at the first matrix
cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 146 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.8 mm−1 at the matrix cracking saturation
stress 𝜎 sat = 292 MPa, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio increases from
𝜂 = 0.96% to 58.5%, and when T = 1073 K, matrix cracking density increases from
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1: T = 773 K
1.0 1 2 3 4 2: T = 873 K
3: T = 973 K
4: T = 1073 K
0.5
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
(c) Stress (MPa)
0.7 4
0.6 3
2
0.5
1
0.4
0.3
1: T = 773 K
0.2
2: T = 873 K
3: T = 973 K
0.1 4: T = 1073 K
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
(d) Stress (MPa)
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.98% to 66.9%.

Experimental and theoretical predicted matrix cracking density and inter-
face debonding ratio of unidirectional C/SiC composite at room and elevated
temperatures T = 773 and 873 K are predicted, as shown in Figure 3.4.
At room temperature, matrix multiple cracking evolution starts from 𝜎 mc =
100 MPa and approaches to saturation at 𝜎 sat = 220 MPa; matrix cracking density
increases from 𝜓 = 4.2 mm−1 to the saturation value 𝜓 = 9.4 mm−1 . At T = 773 K,
𝜎 sat = 281 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.5% to 43%,
3.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of SiC/SiC Composites 89
Figure 3.4 (a) The 12

experimental and

theoretical matrix cracking 10
density versus applied
stress curves and (b) the
8
fiber/matrix interface
debonding ratio versus
applied stress curves of 6
unidirectional C/SiC
composite. 4 Experimental data
Room temperature
T = 773 K
2 T = 873 K
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
(a) Stress (MPa)
0.6
2
0.5
1: T = 773 K
2: T = 873 K 1
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
(b) Stress (MPa)
and at T = 873 K, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 1.1 mm−1 at the
first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 182 MPa to 𝜓 = 9.4 mm−1 at the matrix cracking
𝜂 = 0.6% to 52.2%.
3.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking

Evolution of SiC/SiC Composites
In this section, matrix multiple cracking of SiC/SiC composite is investigated using

the CMSE criterion. Effects of fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface frictional
coefficient, interface debonding energy, matrix fracture energy, and temperature on
matrix multiple cracking of SiC/SiC composite are discussed. Experimental matrix
multiple cracking and interface debonding of unidirectional SiC/SiC composite at
elevated temperatures are predicted.

The ceramic composite system of SiC/SiC is used for the case study and its mate-
rial properties are given by V f = 30%, r f = 7.5 μm, Ef = 230 GPa, Γm = 15 J/m2 ,
Γd = 0.4 J/m2 , 𝜏 0 = 10 MPa, 𝛼 rf = 2.9 × 10−6 K−1 , and 𝛼 lf = 3.9 × 10−6 K−1 .
3.3.1.1 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking of SiC/SiC

Composite for Different Fiber Volumes
Figure 3.5 shows the matrix cracking density and interface debonding ratio at
T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for different fiber volumes (i.e. V f = 30% and 35%).
When the fiber volume fraction increases, the first matrix cracking stress and
saturation matrix cracking stress increase, and the matrix cracking evolves with
higher applied stress.
For V f = 30%, when T = 773 K, the matrix cracking density increases from
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.7% to 1.0%; when the temperature is T = 873 K, the

cracking density versus
applied stress curves when
V f = 30%; (b) the
V f = 30%; (c) the matrix
V f = 35%; and (d) the
V f = 35% of SiC/SiC
composite at T = 773, 873,
(a)
973, and 1073 K.
(b)
(c)
(d)
𝜎 sat = 219 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.8% to 97.2%;
when T = 973 K, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.3 mm−1 at
the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 134 MPa to 𝜓 = 10.2 mm−1 at the matrix
cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 202 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio
increases from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 91.9%, and when T = 1073 K, the matrix cracking density
interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 87.2%.
For V f = 35%, when T = 773 K, the matrix cracking density increases from
at the matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 291 MPa, and the fiber/matrix
𝜎 sat = 270 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 95.2%;
when T = 973 K, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.28 mm−1 at the
𝜂 = 0.9% to 90.8%, and when T = 1073 K, the matrix cracking density increases from
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 86.7%.

Composite for Different Interface Shear Stress
T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for different fiber/matrix interface shear stress (i.e.
𝜏 0 = 15 and 20 MPa). When the interface shear stress increases, the stress transfer
between the fiber and the matrix increases, leading to the increase of the first
matrix cracking stress, matrix cracking saturation stress, and saturation matrix
cracking density, and the matrix cracking evolves with higher applied stress, and the
fiber/matrix interface debonded length decreases because more energy dissipated
during the process of fiber/matrix interface debonding.
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.8% to 98%; when T = 873 K, the matrix cracking den-
to 𝜓 = 12 mm−1 at the matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 234 MPa, and the
ing saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 199 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from
𝜂 = 0.9% to 85.4%.
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.8% to 95%; when T = 873 K, the matrix cracking den-

𝜏 0 = 15 MPa; (b) the
𝜏 0 = 15 MPa; (c) the matrix
𝜏 0 = 20 MPa; and (d) the
𝜏 0 = 20 MPa of SiC/SiC
composite at elevated
(a)
temperatures of T = 773,
873, 973, and 1073 K.
(b)
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 1% to 84.2%.

Composite for Different Interface Frictional Coefficients
Figure 3.7 shows the matrix cracking density and interface debonding ratio
at T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for different interface frictional coefficients
(i.e. 𝜇 = 0.15 and 0.2). When the interface frictional coefficient increases, the
interface shear stress increases, leading to the increase of the first matrix cracking
stress, matrix cracking saturation stress, and saturation matrix cracking density, and
the matrix cracking evolves at higher applied stress, and the fiber/matrix interface
debonded length decreases because more energy dissipated during the process of
fiber/matrix interface debonding.
For 𝜇 = 0.15, when T = 773 K, the matrix cracking density increases from
(c)
(d)
ing saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 198 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases
from 𝜂 = 0.9% to 85.4%.
For 𝜇 = 0.2, when T = 773 K, the matrix cracking density increases from

𝜇 = 0.15; (b) the fiber/matrix
interface debonding ratio
versus applied stress curves
when 𝜇 = 0.15; (c) the matrix
𝜇 = 0.2; and (d) the
𝜇 = 0.2 of SiC/SiC composite
at T = 773, 873, 973, and
1073 K.
(a)
(b)
length increases from 𝜂 = 0.99% to 84.2%.

Composite for Different Interface Debonding Energies
Figure 3.8 shows the matrix cracking density and interface debonding ratio
at T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for different interface debonding energies
(i.e. Γd = 0.1 and 0.5 J/m2 ). When the interface debonding energy increases, the
(c)
(d)
matrix saturation cracking stress decreases, and the saturation matrix cracking
density increases, and the rate of matrix cracking development increases because of
the decrease of interface debonding ratio.
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 1% to 99.5%; when T = 873 K, the matrix cracking den-
the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 122 MPa to 𝜓 = 8.4 mm−1 at the matrix cracking

Γd = 0.1 J/m2 ; (b) the
Γd = 0.1 J/m2 ; (c) the matrix
Γd = 0.5 J/m2 ; and (d) the
Γd = 0.5 J/m2 of SiC/SiC
(a)
973, and 1073 K.
(b)
saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 171 MPa, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding length
increases from 𝜂 = 1.1% to 86.8%.
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.7% to 86.4%; when T = 873 K, the matrix cracking den-
ing saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 171 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from
𝜂 = 0.9% to 74.2%.
(c)
(d)

Composite for Different Matrix Fracture Energies
T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for different matrix fracture energies (i.e. Γm = 10 and
20 J/m2 ). When the matrix fracture energy increases, the first matrix cracking stress
and saturation matrix cracking stress increase, and the matrix cracking evolves at
higher applied stress.

Γm = 10 J/m2 ; (b) the
Γm = 10 J/m2 ; (c) the matrix
Γm = 20 J/m2 ; and (d) the
Γm = 20 J/m2 of SiC/SiC
(a)
973, and 1073 K.
(b)
ing saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 158 MPa, and the fiber/matrix interface debonding ratio
increases from 𝜂 = 0.79% to 89.7%.
interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.98% to 94%; when T = 973 K, the
𝜎 sat = 224 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 1% to 90%, and
when T = 1073 K, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.2 mm−1 at the
(c)
(d)
𝜂 = 1% to 86.4%.

Figure 3.10 shows the experimental and theoretical matrix cracking density and
interface debonding ratio of unidirectional SiC/SiC composite at room and elevated
temperatures of T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K.
At room temperature, the matrix multiple cracking evolution starts from
𝜎 mc = 240 MPa and approaches to saturation at 𝜎 sat = 320 MPa; the matrix cracking
density increases from 𝜓 = 1.1 mm−1 to the saturation value 𝜓 = 13 mm−1 . At
T = 773 K, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.5 mm−1 at the first
matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 222 MPa to 𝜓 = 12.4 mm−1 at the matrix cracking
saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 311 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases
from 𝜂 = 0.7% to 75.4%; at T = 873 K, the matrix cracking density increases from
3.4 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of C/SiC Composites 101
Figure 3.10 (a) The

experimental and
theoretical matrix cracking
density versus applied stress
curves and (b) the
applied stress curves of
unidirectional SiC/SiC
composite.
(a)
(b)
ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.7% to 72.3%; at T = 973 K, the matrix cracking density
increases from 𝜓 = 0.4 mm−1 at the first matrix cracking stress 𝜎 mc = 188 MPa to
𝜓 = 10.2 mm−1 at the matrix cracking saturation stress 𝜎 sat = 263 MPa, and the
interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.8% to 69.5%, and at T = 1073 K, the
𝜎 sat = 236 MPa, and the interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.8% to 66.9%.
3.4 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking

Evolution of C/SiC Composites
In this section, time-dependent matrix multiple cracking of C/SiC composite is

investigated considering interface oxidation. Time-dependent interface oxidation
length and temperature-dependent interface shear stress in the oxidation and

debonding region, interface debonding energy, fiber and matrix modulus, and
matrix fracture energy are considered in the analysis for the microstress field,
interface debonding criterion, and CMSE model. Relationships between time,
temperature, applied stress, fiber/matrix interface debonding, and matrix fracture
are established. Effects of interface shear stress, interface frictional coefficient,
interface debonding energy, and matrix fracture energy on matrix cracking density
and interface oxidation ratio are discussed for different temperatures and oxidation
durations. Experimental matrix cracking density and interface oxidation ratio for
unidirectional C/SiC composite at different testing temperatures and oxidation
durations are predicted.

Because of a mismatch between axial thermal expansion coefficients of the fiber and
matrix, unavoidable micro-cracks were created in the matrix when the composite
was cooled down from a high fabricated temperature to ambient temperature. These
processing-induced micro-cracks, which were present on the surface of the material,
served as avenues for the ingress of environmental atmosphere into the composite
at elevated temperature. Time-dependent interface oxidation length 𝜁 is [49]
{ [ ]}
𝜑 (T)t
𝜁(t, T) = 𝜑1 (T) 1 − exp − 2 (3.30)
b
where b is the delay factor considering the deceleration of reduced oxygen activ-
ity, t denotes the oxidation time, and 𝜑1 (T) and 𝜑2 (T) are temperature-dependent
parameters described using Arrhenius law [49].
( )
8231
𝜑1 (T) = 7.021 × 10−3 × exp (3.31)
T
( )
17 090
𝜑2 (T) = 227.1 × exp − (3.32)
T
Temperature-dependent interface shear stress in the oxidation and debonding
region are [43]
𝜏i (T) = 𝜏0 + 𝜇 (3.33)
A
|𝛼 (T) − 𝛼rm (T)|(Tm − T)
𝜏f (T) = 𝜏s + 𝜇 rf (3.34)
A
where 𝜏 0 and 𝜏 s denote the initial interface shear stress, 𝜇 denotes the interface fric-
tional coefficient, 𝛼 rf and 𝛼 rm denote the fiber and matrix radial thermal expansion
coefficient, respectively, T m and T denote the processing temperature and testing
temperature, and A is a constant dependent on the elastic properties of the matrix
and fibers.
3.4.1.1 Time-Dependent Stress Analysis

Temperature-dependent fiber axial stress 𝜎 f (x, T), matrix axial stress 𝜎 m (x, T), and
the interface shear stress 𝜏 i (x, T) can be described using the following equations.
⎧ 𝜎 − 2𝜏f (T) x, x ∈ [0, 𝜁(T)]

⎪ Vf rf
⎪𝜎 2𝜏 (T) 2𝜏 (T)
⎪ V − fr 𝜁(T) − ri [x − 𝜁(T)], x ∈ [𝜁(T), ld (T)]
𝜎f (x, T) = ⎨ f f { f [ ] (3.35)
Vm 2𝜏f (T) l (T)
⎪𝜎fo (T) + V 𝜎mo (T) − r 𝜁(T) x ∈ ld (T), c 2
⎪ 2𝜏i (T) f } f[ ]
x−l (T)
⎪ − r [ld (T) − 𝜁(T)] exp −𝜌 rd ,
⎩ f f
⎧ Vf 𝜏f (T)
⎪2 Vm rf x, x ∈ [0, 𝜁(T)]
⎪ Vf 𝜏f (T) Vf 𝜏i (T)
⎪2 V r 𝜁(T) + 2 V r [x − 𝜁(T)], x ∈ [𝜁(T), ld (T)]
𝜎m (x, T) = ⎨ m f { Vf 𝜏f (T)m f Vf 𝜏i (T)
[
lc (T)
] (3.36)
𝜎
⎪ mo (T) + 2 𝜁(T) + 2 x ∈ ld (T),
Vm rf
} [ rf
Vm ] 2
⎪ x−ld (T)
[l
⎪ d (T) − 𝜁(T)] − 𝜎 mo (T) exp −𝜌 rf
,
⎩
⎧ 𝜏f (T), x ∈ [0, 𝜁(T)]
⎪
𝜏i (x, T) = ⎨ 𝜏i (T),
[ ] [ x
] ∈ [𝜁(T),
[ ld (T)]] (3.37)
⎪ 𝜌 Vm 𝜎mo − 2𝜏i (T) ld (T) exp −𝜌 x−ld (T) , x ∈ ld (T), lc (T)
⎩ 2 Vf rf rf 2
where
Ef (T)
𝜎fo (T) = 𝜎 + Ef (T)[𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lf (T)]ΔT (3.38)
Ec (T)
E (T)
𝜎mo (T) = m 𝜎 + Em (T)[𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lm (T)]ΔT (3.39)
Ec (T)
3.4.1.2 Time-Dependent Interface Debonding

Temperature-dependent interface debonding criterion can be described using the
following equation [44].
F 𝜕wf (T) 1
ld
𝜕v(T)
Γd (T) = − 𝜏i (x, T) dx (3.40)
4𝜋rf 𝜕ld ∫
2 0 𝜕ld
where F(= 𝜋rf2 𝜎∕Vf ) denotes the fiber load at the matrix cracking plane, wf (T)
denotes the temperature-dependent fiber axial displacement at the matrix cracking
plane, and v(T) denotes the temperature-dependent relative displacement between
the fiber and the matrix. The temperature-dependent axial displacements of the
fiber and matrix, i.e. wf (x, T) and wm (x, T), can be described using the following
equations.
lc (T)
2 𝜎f (x, T)
wf (x, T) = dx
∫x Ef (T)
𝜎 𝜏 (T)
= [l (T) − x] − f [2𝜁(T)ld (T) − 𝜁 2 (T) − x2 ]
Vf Ef (T) d rf Ef (T)
( )
𝜏 (T) 𝜎 (T) lc (T)
− i [ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]2 + fo − ld (T)
rf Ef (T) Ef (T) 2
{ }
rf Vm 2𝜏f (T) 2𝜏i (T)
+ 𝜎 (T) − 𝜁(T) − [ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]
𝜌Ef (T) Vf mo rf rf
[ ( )]
l (T)∕2 − ld (T)
× 1 − exp −𝜌 c (3.41)
rf
lc (T)
2 𝜎m (x, T)
wm (x, T) = dx
∫x Em (T)
Vf 𝜏f (T)
= [2𝜁(T)ld (T) − 𝜁 2 (T) − x2 ]
rf Vm Em (T)
[ ]
Vf 𝜏i (T) 𝜎mo (T) lc (T)
+ [l (T) − 𝜁(T)] +2
− ld (T)
rf Vm Em (T) d Em (T) 2
{ }
rf V 𝜏 (T) V 𝜏 (T)
− 𝜎mo (T) − 2 f f 𝜁(T) − 2 f i [ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]
𝜌Em (T) rf Vm rf Vm
[ ( )]
lc (T)∕2 − ld (T)
× 1 − exp −𝜌 (3.42)
rf
Temperature-dependent relative displacement between the fiber and the matrix,

i.e. v(x, T), can be described using the following equation.
v(x, T) = |wf (x, T) − wm (x, T)|

𝜎 Ec (T)𝜏i (T)
= [ld (T) − x] − [l (T) − 𝜁(T)]2
Vf Ef (T) rf Vm Em (T)Ef (T) d
Ec (T)𝜏f (T)
− [2𝜁(T)ld (T) − 𝜁 2 (T) − x2 ]
rf Vm Em (T)Ef (T)
{ }
rf Ec (T) 𝜏 (T) 𝜏 (T)
+ 𝜎mo (T) − 2 f 𝜁(T) − 2 i [ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]
𝜌Vm Em (T)Ef (T) rf rf
[ ( )]
lc (T)∕2 − ld (T)
× 1 − exp −𝜌 (3.43)
rf
Substituting wf (x = 0, T) and v(x, T) into Eq. (3.40), it leads to the following

equation.
Ec (T)𝜏i2 (T) Ec (T)𝜏i2 (T)

[ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]2 + [l (T) − 𝜁(T)]
rf Vm Em (T)Ef (T) 𝜌Vm Em (T)Ef (T) d
𝜏 (T)𝜎 2E (T)𝜏f (T)𝜏i (T)
− i [l (T) − 𝜁(T)] + c [l (T) − 𝜁(T)]𝜁(T)
Vf Ef (T) d rf Vm Em (T)Ef (T) d
r 𝜏 (T)𝜎 Ec (T)𝜏f2 (T) E (T)𝜏f (T)𝜏i (T)
− f i + 𝜁 2 (T) + c 𝜁(T)
2𝜌Vf Ef (T) rf Vm Em (T)Ef (T) 𝜌Vm Em (T)Ef (T)
𝜏 (T)𝜎 r V E (T)𝜎 2
− f 𝜁(T) + f 2m m − Γd (T) = 0 (3.44)
Vf Ef (T) 4V Ef (T)Ec (T)
f
Solving Eq. (3.44), the temperature-dependent interface debonding length ld (T) can
be described using the following equation.
[ ] ( )
𝜏 (T) r Vm Em (T)𝜎 1
ld (T) = 1 − f 𝜁(T) + f −
𝜏i (T) 2 Vf Ec (T)𝜏i (T) 𝜌
√
√( )2
√ r r V E (T)E (T)
−√ f + f m m 2 f Γd (T) (3.45)
2𝜌 Ec (T)𝜏i (T)
3.4.1.3 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking

Temperature-dependent matrix strain energy can be described using the following
equation.
lc (T)
1
Um (T) = 𝜎m
2
(x, T) dx dAm (3.46)
2Em (T) ∫Am ∫0
where Am is the cross-sectional area of matrix in the unit cell, Em (T) denotes the
temperature-dependent matrix modulus, lc (T) denotes the temperature-dependent
matrix crack spacing, and 𝜎 m (T) denotes the temperature-dependent matrix axial
stress.
Substituting temperature-dependent matrix axial stresses in Eq. (3.36) into
Eq. (3.46), the matrix strain energy for the interface partially debonding can be
described using the following equation.
{ ( )2 ( )
Am 4 Vf 𝜏f (T) Vf 𝜏f (T) 2
Um (T) = 𝜁 3 (T) + 4 [ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]𝜁 2 (T)
Em 3 Vm rf (T) Vm rf
( )
Vf 2
+4 𝜏f (T)𝜏i (T)𝜁(T)[ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]2
rf Vm
[ ]2 [ ]
4 Vf 𝜏i (T) lc (T)
+ [ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]3 + 𝜎mo 2
− ld (T)
3 Vm rf 2
[ ]
2rf 𝜎mo (T) Vf 𝜏f (T) Vf 𝜏i (T)
+ 2 𝜁(T) + 2 [l (T) − 𝜁(T)] − 𝜎mo (T)
𝜌 V r Vm rf d
[ ( m f )]
l (T)∕2 − ld (T)
× 1 − exp −𝜌 c
rf
[ ]2
rf Vf 𝜏f (T) Vf 𝜏i (T)
+ 2 𝜁(T) + 2 (l (T) − 𝜁(T)) − 𝜎mo (T)
2𝜌 Vm rf Vm rf d
[ ( )]}
l (T)∕2 − ld (T)
× 1 − exp −2𝜌 c (3.47)
rf
where the temperature-dependent interface oxidation length 𝜁(T) can be deter-
mined by Eq. (3.30). The temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface debonded
length can be determined by Eq. (3.45).
The matrix strain energy for the interface completely debonding can be described
{ [ ]2 [ ]
Am 4 Vf 𝜏f (T) Vf 𝜏f (T) 2
Um (T) = 𝜁 (T) + 4
3
[ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]𝜁 2 (T)
Em 3 Vm rf Vm rf
( )
Vf 2
+4 𝜏f (T)𝜏i (T)𝜁(T)[ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]2
rf Vm
[ ]2 }
4 Vf 𝜏i (T)
+ [ld (T) − 𝜁(T)]3
(3.48)
3 Vm rf
The CMSE U mcr at the critical stress 𝜎 cr can be described using the following
equation.
1 𝜎 2 (T)
Umcr (T) = kA l mocr (3.49)
2 m 0 Em (T)
where k (k ∈ [0,1]) is the critical matrix strain energy parameter, l0 is the initial
matrix crack spacing, and 𝜎 mocr (T) can be described using the following equation.
Em (T)
𝜎mocr (T) = 𝜎 (T) + Em (T)[𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lm (T)]ΔT (3.50)
Ec (T) cr
where 𝜎 cr (T) denotes the temperature-dependent critical stress corresponding to
composite’s proportional limit stress defined by the ACK model [38].
[ 2 ]1
6Vf Ef (T)Ec2 (T)𝜏i (T)Γm (T) 3
𝜎cr (T) = 2
− Ec (T)[𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lm (T)]ΔT (3.51)
rf Vm Em (T)
where Γm (T) denotes the temperature-dependent matrix fracture energy.
The matrix multi-cracking evolution can be determined using the following
equation.
Um (𝜎 > 𝜎cr , T) = Ucrm (𝜎cr , T) (3.52)
The interface oxidation ratio is defined as
𝜁
𝜔= (3.53)
ld

The ceramic composite system of C/SiC is used for the case study and its material
and Γd = 0.1 J/m2 (at room temperature). Effects of interface shear stress, inter-
face frictional coefficient, interface debonding energy, and matrix fracture energy on
time-dependent matrix cracking density and interface oxidation ratio are discussed.
3.4.2.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking of C/SiC Composite

Figure 3.11 shows the effect of interface shear stress (i.e. 𝜏 0 = 30 and 40 MPa) on
temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking and interface oxidation of C/SiC
composite at T = 873, 973, and 1073 K for the oxidation duration t = 1 and 3 hours.
When 𝜏 0 = 30 MPa at T = 873 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking den-
sity increases from 𝜓 = 0.19 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa to 𝜓 = 3.49 mm−1 at
𝜎 sat = 235 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 9% to 𝜔 = 3.4%,
and at the oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases
from 𝜓 = 0.17 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa to 𝜓 = 3.4 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 235 MPa, and
the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 25.3% to 𝜔 = 9.9%. At T = 973 K
and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.17 mm−1 at
𝜎 mc = 137 MPa to 𝜓 = 4.2 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 275 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio
decreases from 𝜔 = 23% to 𝜔 = 9.9%, and at the oxidation duration t = 3 hours,
the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.14 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 137 MPa to

applied stress curves for
different oxidation
temperatures and times when
𝜏 0 = 30 MPa; (b) the interface
oxidation ratio versus applied
stress curves for different
oxidation temperatures and
times when 𝜏 0 = 30 MPa;
(c) the matrix cracking
curves for different oxidation
𝜏 0 = 40 MPa; and (d) the
interface oxidation ratio
(a)
for different oxidation
𝜏 0 = 40 MPa.
(b)
𝜓 = 3.9 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 275 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from
𝜔 = 55.9% to 𝜔 = 26.9%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density
increases from 𝜓 = 0.16 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 153 MPa to 𝜓 = 4.9 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 306 MPa,
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 46% to 𝜔 = 22.9%, and at
the oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.12 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 153 MPa to 𝜓 = 4.3 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 306 MPa, and the
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 90.7% to 𝜔 = 54.5%.
𝜎 sat = 338 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 9.7% to
𝜔 = 4.2%, and at the oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 25.7% to 𝜔 = 11.9%. At
T = 973 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.2 mm−1
at 𝜎 mc = 180 MPa to 𝜓 = 5.8 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 360 MPa, and the interface oxidation
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 25.2% to 𝜔 = 12%, and at oxidation duration t = 3 hours,
(c)
(d)
𝜔 = 55.5% to 30.7%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 48.5% to 𝜔 = 26.5%, and
at oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from

Figure 3.12 shows the effect of interface frictional coefficient (i.e. 𝜇 = 0.03 and 0.06)
on the temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking and interface oxidation of
C/SiC composite at T = 873, 973, and 1073 K for the oxidation duration t = 1 and
3 hours.

different oxidation
temperatures and times
when 𝜇 = 0.03; (b) the
when 𝜇 = 0.03; (c) the
matrix cracking density
when 𝜇 = 0.06; and (d) the
(a)
when 𝜇 = 0.06.
(b)
When 𝜇 = 0.03 at T = 873 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases
the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 9.5% to 𝜔 = 4%, and at oxidation
duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.18 mm−1
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 25.3% to 𝜔 = 11.4%. At T = 973 K and t = 1 hour, the
matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.19 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 166 MPa to
𝜔 = 24.3% to 𝜔 = 11.3%, and at the oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix
cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.15 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 167 MPa to 𝜓 = 4.8 mm−1
at 𝜎 sat = 334 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 55.2% to
𝜔 = 29.4%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases
from 𝜓 = 0.17 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 172 MPa to 𝜓 = 5.7 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 345 MPa, and the
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 47.2% to 𝜔 = 24.8%, and at the oxidation
duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.13 mm−1 at
(c)
(d)
decreases from 𝜔 = 86.9% to 𝜔 = 55.9%.
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 10.4% to 3%, and at the oxidation
duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.21 mm−1
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 30.7% to 𝜔 = 9.4%. At T = 973 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix
cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.17 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 119 MPa to 𝜓 = 3.6 mm−1 at
𝜎 sat = 238 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 22.8% to 𝜔 = 9%,
and at the oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases
the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 59% to 𝜔 = 25.8%. At T = 1073 K
decreases from 𝜔 = 45.7% to 𝜔 = 21.8%, and at the oxidation duration t = 3 hours,
𝜓 = 4 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 284 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from
𝜔 = 94.6% to 𝜔 = 53.9%.

Figure 3.13 shows the effect of fiber/matrix interface debonding energy (i.e. Γd = 0.3
and 0.5 J/m2 ) on temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking and interface oxi-
dation of C/SiC composite at T = 873, 973, and 1073 K for the oxidation duration t = 1
and 3 hours.
When Γd = 0.3 J/m2 at T = 873 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 18.8% to 𝜔 = 4.2%, and at
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 48.8% to 𝜔 = 12.2%. At T = 973 K

different oxidation
when Γd = 0.3 J/m2 ; (b) the
when Γd = 0.3 J/m2 ; (c) the
when Γd = 0.5 J/m2 ; and
(a)
(d) the interface oxidation
ratio versus applied stress
when Γd = 0.5 J/m2 .
(b)
(c)
(d)
𝜎 mc = 137 MPa to 𝜓 = 4.7 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 275 MPa, and the interface oxidation
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 34.1% to 𝜔 = 11.5%, and at oxidation duration t = 3 hours,
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 1 to 𝜔 = 59%.
increases from 𝜓 = 1 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 118 MPa to 𝜓 = 5.4 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 235 MPa,
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 72.9% to 𝜔 = 5%, and at
𝜓 = 0.73 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 117 MPa to 𝜓 = 5 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 235 MPa, and the interface
oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 1 to 𝜔 = 14.5%. At T = 973 K and t = 1 hour,

the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.35 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 137 MPa
to 𝜓 = 5.3 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 275 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases
from 𝜔 = 51% to 𝜔 = 12.9%, and at the oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix
at 𝜎 sat = 275 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 1% to
34.3%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases from
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 69.6% to 27.5%, and at the oxidation
decreases from 𝜔 = 1% to 𝜔 = 62.8%.

Figure 3.14 shows the effect of matrix fracture energy (i.e. Γm = 15 and 30 J/m2 )
on temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking and interface oxidation of
C/SiC composite at T = 873, 973, and 1073 K for the oxidation duration t = 1 and
3 hours.
When Γm = 15 J/m2 at T = 873 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 16.6% to 5.1%, and at the oxida-
tion duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.29 mm−1
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 43.9% to 𝜔 = 14.8%. At T = 973 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix
cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.24 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 104 MPa to 𝜓 = 5 mm−1
at 𝜎 sat = 208 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 33.9%
to 13.6%, and at the oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 75.7% to 36%. At T = 1073 K
𝜔 = 1% to 𝜔 = 66%.
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 7.6% to 𝜔 = 2.9%, and at oxida-
tion duration t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.15 mm−1
at 𝜎 mc = 130 MPa to 𝜓 = 3.1 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 261 MPa, and the interface oxida-
tion ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 21.6% to 𝜔 = 8.7%. At T = 973 K and t = 1 hour,
from 𝜔 = 20.4% to 𝜔 = 8.9%, and at oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix

different oxidation
Γm = 15 J/m2 ; (b) the interface
oxidation ratio versus applied
times when Γm = 15 J/m2 ;
(c) the matrix cracking
Γm = 30 J/m2 ; and (d) the
(a)
Γm = 30 J/m2 .
(b)
𝜔 = 24.5%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 42.3% to 𝜔 = 21%, and at the oxidation
decreases from 𝜔 = 85.7% to 𝜔 = 50.9%.

Figure 3.15 shows the experimental and theoretical matrix cracking density and
interface debonding of unidirectional C/SiC composite at room temperature, T = 773
and 873 K for the oxidation duration t = 1 and 3 hours.
At room temperature, matrix cracking starts from 𝜎 mc = 100 MPa and approaches
to saturation at 𝜎 sat = 220 MPa; the matrix cracking density increases from
(c)
(d)
𝜓 = 4.2 mm−1 to 𝜓 = 9.4 mm−1 . Experimental matrix cracking density of C/SiC

composite is obtained through the optical microscope observation on the surface
of the specimen. The matrix cracking on the surface of the specimen first occurs at
low stress level in the matrix rich region, and these surface cracks do not propagate
through the thickness of the whole specimen. However, the model in the present
analysis is suitable for predicting the evolution of matrix cracking, which propagates
through the thickness of the specimen. The predicted matrix cracking stress is
higher than the experimental data, and the saturation of the matrix cracking density
is lower than the experimental data.
At T = 773 K, matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 1.3 mm−1 at
𝜎 mc = 140 MPa to 𝜓 = 8.7 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 281 MPa, and at oxidation dura-
tion t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.84 mm−1 at
decreases from 𝜔 = 13.9% to 2.2%, and at oxidation duration t = 3 hours, the matrix
Figure 3.15 (a) The

experimental and
curves for different
times and (b) the interface
oxidation ratio versus
different oxidation
temperatures and times of
unidirectional C/SiC
composite.
(a)
(b)
at 𝜎 sat = 281 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 35% to
𝜔 = 6.5%.
At T = 873 K, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 1.1 mm−1 at
𝜎 mc = 182 MPa to 𝜓 = 9.4 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 365 MPa, and at the oxidation dura-
tion t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.38 mm−1 at
𝜔 = 6.4 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 365 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from
𝜔 = 45.3% to 𝜔 = 16.9%.
3.5 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking

Evolution of SiC/SiC Composites
In this section, time-dependent matrix multiple cracking of SiC/SiC composite is
investigated considering the interface oxidation. Effects of fiber volume, interface
3.5 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of SiC/SiC Composites 117
shear stress, interface frictional coefficient, interface debonding energy, and matrix
fracture energy on matrix cracking density and interface oxidation ratio of SiC/SiC
composite are discussed for different temperatures and oxidation durations. Exper-
imental matrix cracking density and interface oxidation ratio for unidirectional and
mini SiC/SiC composites at different testing temperatures and oxidation durations
are predicted.

The ceramic composite system of SiC/SiC is used for the case study, and its mate-
rial properties are given by V f = 30%, r f = 7.5 μm, Ef = 230 GPa, Γm = 15 J/m2 ,
Γd = 0.4 J/m2 , 𝜏 0 = 10 MPa, 𝛼 rf = 2.9 × 10−6 K−1 , and 𝛼 lf = 3.9 × 10−6 K−1 . Effects of
fiber volume, interface shear stress, interface frictional coefficient, interface debond-
ing energy, and matrix fracture energy on time-dependent matrix cracking density
and interface oxidation ratio are discussed.
3.5.1.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking of SiC/SiC Composite

Figure 3.16 shows the effect of fiber volume (i.e. V f = 25%, 30%, and 35%) on
time-dependent matrix cracking density and interface oxidation ratio of SiC/SiC
composite at T = 873, 973, and 1073 K for the oxidation duration t = 1 and
3 hours.
When V f = 25% at T = 873 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 6% to 𝜔 = 3.4%, and at t = 3 hours,
at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.17 mm−1 at
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 40.5% to 𝜔 = 25.1%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour,
𝜓 = 7 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 144 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from
𝜔 = 36.7% to 𝜔 = 21.1%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases
from 𝜓 = 0.09 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 96.3 MPa to 𝜓 = 5.0 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 144 MPa, and the
the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 5.6% to 𝜔 = 3.2%, and at t = 3 hours,

different oxidation
when V f = 25%; (b) the
when V f = 25%; (c) the
when V f = 30%; (d) the
(a)
when V f = 30%; (e) the
when V f = 35%; and (f) the
when V f = 35%.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.15 mm−1 at
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 5.5% to 𝜔 = 3.2%, and at t = 3 hours,
𝜔 = 15.4% to 9.2%. At T = 973 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases
the matrix multi-cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.15 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 165 MPa
to 𝜓 = 6.7 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 234 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from
𝜔 = 38.8% to 𝜔 = 24.3%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix multi-cracking
density increases from 𝜓 = 0.14 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 148 MPa to 𝜓 = 6.6 mm−1 at
𝜎 sat = 222 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 36% to 𝜔 = 21%,
and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.09 mm−1 at
decreases from 𝜔 = 71.9% to 48.7%.

Figure 3.17 shows the effect of interface shear stress (i.e. 𝜏 0 = 15, 20, and 25 MPa)
on time-dependent matrix cracking density and interface oxidation ratio of SiC/SiC
composite at T = 873, 973, and 1073 K for t = 1 and 3 hours.
from 𝜓 = 0.15 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 176 MPa to 𝜓 = 7 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 258 MPa, and the
𝜎 mc = 159 MPa to 𝜓 = 7 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 239 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio
decreases from 𝜔 = 37.5% to 𝜔 = 22.8%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking

different oxidation
when 𝜏 0 = 15 MPa; (b) the
when 𝜏 0 = 15 MPa; (c) the
when 𝜏 0 = 20 MPa; and
(a)
(d) the interface oxidation
ratio versus applied stress
(e) the matrix cracking
and (f) the interface
different oxidation
when 𝜏 0 = 25 MPa.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)

𝜔 = 50.9%.
𝜎 sat = 251 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 6.5% to 𝜔 = 3.9%,
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 17.7% to 𝜔 = 11%. At T = 973 K and t = 1 hour, the
𝜔 = 18.2% to 𝜔 = 11%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases
decreases from 𝜔 = 39% to 𝜔 = 24.5%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 72.1% to 𝜔 = 52.9%.
decreases from 𝜔 = 40.4% to 𝜔 = 26.1%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking den-
sity increases from 𝜓 = 0.09 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 178 MPa to 𝜓 = 5 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 268 MPa,
Figure 3.18 shows the effect of interface shear stress (i.e. 𝜏 f = 1, 3, and 5 MPa)
When 𝜏 f = 1 MPa at T = 873 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density

different oxidation
when 𝜏 f = 1 MPa; (b) the
when 𝜏 f = 1 MPa; (c) the
when 𝜏 f = 3 MPa; (d) the
(a)
when 𝜏 f = 3 MPa; (e) the
when 𝜏 f = 5 MPa; and (f) the
when 𝜏 f = 5 MPa.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 15% to 𝜔 = 9.1%. At T = 973 K and t = 1 hour, the

𝜔 = 15.4% to 𝜔 = 9%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 33.5% to 𝜔 = 20%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking
𝜔 = 44.3%.
When 𝜏 f = 3 MPa at T = 873 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases
from 𝜔 = 34.7% to 𝜔 = 20.5%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix multi-cracking
𝜎 sat = 222 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 67% to
𝜔 = 46.4%.
When 𝜏 f = 5 MPa at T = 873 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix cracking density increases
decreases from 𝜔 = 38.8% to 𝜔 = 24.3%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour, the matrix
cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.15 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 148 MPa to 𝜓 = 6.6 mm−1 at
𝜎 sat = 222 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 36% to 𝜔 = 21%,
decreases from 𝜔 = 72% to 𝜔 = 48.7%.

Figure 3.19 shows the effect of fiber/matrix interface frictional coefficient
(i.e. 𝜇 = 0.05, 0.1, and 0.15) on time-dependent matrix cracking density and
interface oxidation ratio of SiC/SiC composite at T = 873, 973, and 1073 K for t = 1
and 3 hours.
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 5.6% to 𝜔 = 3.2%, and at t = 3 hour,

different oxidation
when 𝜇 = 0.05; (b) the
when 𝜇 = 0.05; (c) the
(a) when 𝜇 = 0.1; (d) the
when 𝜇 = 0.1; (e) the matrix
different oxidation
when 𝜇 = 0.15; and (f) the
when 𝜇 = 0.15.
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.15 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 132 MPa to 𝜓 = 7 mm−1
𝜔 = 22.4%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix multi-cracking density increases from
interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 71% to 𝜔 = 50.1%.

Figure 3.20 shows the effect of interface debonding energy (i.e. Γd = 0.3, 0.5, and
0.7 J/m2 ) on time-dependent matrix cracking density and interface oxidation ratio
of SiC/SiC composite at T = 873, 973, and 1073 K for t = 1 and 3 hours.
𝜔 = 46.3%.
at 𝜎 sat = 184 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 17.1%
to 𝜔 = 9.5%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from

different oxidation
when Γd = 0.3 J/m2 ; (b) the
when Γd = 0.3 J/m2 ; (c) the
when Γd = 0.5 J/m2 ; (d) the (a)
when Γd = 0.5 J/m2 ; (e) the
when Γd = 0.7 J/m2 ; and (f)
the interface oxidation ratio
when Γd = 0.7 J/m2 .
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)

𝜔 = 50%.
the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 46% to 𝜔 = 27%. At T = 1073 K
decreases from 𝜔 = 46% to 𝜔 = 23.8%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density

Figure 3.21 shows the effect of matrix fracture energy (i.e. Γm = 20, 25, and 30 J/m2 )
𝜔 = 13.7% to 𝜔 = 8%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from
oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 34.4% to 𝜔 = 21.6%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour,

different oxidation
when Γm = 20 J/m2 ; (b) the
when Γm = 20 J/m2 ; (c) the
(a) when Γm = 25 J/m2 ; (d) the
when Γm = 25 J/m2 ; (e) the
when Γm = 30 J/m2 ; and (f)
the interface oxidation ratio
when Γm = 30 J/m2 .
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)

ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 27.7% to 𝜔 = 16.5%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix
multi-cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.08 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 146 MPa to
𝜔 = 60% to 𝜔 = 40.4%.
and the interface oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 4% to 𝜔 = 2.4%, and
𝜔 = 11.2% to 𝜔 = 6.7%, and at t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.11 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 172 MPa to 𝜓 = 4.9 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 253 MPa, and the interface
oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 29.1% to 𝜔 = 18.4%. At T = 1073 K and t = 1 hour,

Figures 3.22 and 3.23 show the experimental and theoretical matrix cracking density
and fiber/matrix interface oxidation ratio of unidirectional SiC/SiC [50] and mini
SiC/SiC [51] composites at room temperature, T = 773, 873, 973, and 1073 K for t = 1
and 3 hours.
3.5.2.1 Unidirectional SiC/SiC Composite

Beyerle et al. [50] investigated the damage evolution of matrix multiple cracking in
unidirectional SiC/SiC composite. At room temperature, the matrix multiple crack-
ing evolution starts at 𝜎 mc = 240 MPa and approaches to saturation at 𝜎 sat = 320 MPa,
and the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 1.1 mm−1 to 𝜓 = 13 mm−1 .
Figure 3.22 (a) The

experimental and
times; and (b) the interface
different oxidation
unidirectional SiC/SiC
composite.
(a)
(b)

𝜎 mc = 222 MPa to 𝜓 = 12.4 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 311 MPa; at T = 773 K and t = 1 hour,
𝜓 = 11.9 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 272 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases
from 𝜔 = 2% at 𝜎 mc = 222 MPa to 𝜔 = 1.1% at 𝜎 sat = 272 MPa, and at T = 773 K
and t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.34 mm−1 at
ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 5.8% at 𝜎 mc = 222 MPa to 𝜔 = 3.4% at 𝜎 sat = 273 MPa.
𝜓 = 10.3 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 288 MPa, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases
from 𝜔 = 8.3% at 𝜎 mc = 206 MPa to 𝜔 = 4.6% at 𝜎 sat = 288 MPa, and at T = 873 K
decreases from 𝜔 = 22.3% at 𝜎 mc = 206 MPa to 𝜔 = 13% at 𝜎 sat = 288 MPa.
Figure 3.23 (a) The

experimental and
density versus the applied
times and (b) the interface
different oxidation
mini SiC/SiC composite.
(a)
(b)

𝜔 = 26.3% at 𝜎 mc = 188 MPa to 𝜔 = 13.7% at 𝜎 sat = 263 MPa, and at T = 973 K
decreases from 𝜔 = 57.2% at 𝜎 mc = 188 MPa to 𝜔 = 34.5% at 𝜎 sat = 263 MPa.
𝜔 = 65.7% at 𝜎 mc = 169 MPa to 𝜔 = 33.2% at 𝜎 sat = 236 MPa, and at T = 1073 K
decreases from 𝜔 = 1 at 𝜎 mc = 169 MPa to 𝜔 = 68.1% at 𝜎 sat = 236 MPa.
3.6 Conclusion 139
3.5.2.2 SiC/SiC Minicomposite

Zhang et al. [51] investigated the damage evolution of matrix multiple cracking
in mini-SiC/SiC composite. At room temperature, the matrix cracking evolution
starts from the applied stress 𝜎 mc = 135 MPa and approaches to saturation at
𝜎 sat = 250 MPa; the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.4 mm−1 to
𝜓 = 2.4 mm−1 .
At T = 973 K and t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from
oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 9.8% to 𝜔 = 4.6%.
At T = 1073 K and t = 3 hours, the matrix cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.04 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 98.4 MPa to 𝜓 = 1.9 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 136 MPa, and the
At T = 1173 K and t = 3 hours, the matrix multi-cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.03 mm−1 at 𝜎 mc = 83.4 MPa to 𝜓 = 1.7 mm−1 at 𝜎 sat = 133 MPa, and the inter-
face oxidation ratio decreases from 𝜔 = 46.2% to 𝜔 = 24.5%.
3.6 Conclusion
In this chapter, temperature-dependent matrix multiple cracking evolu-
tion of fiber-reinforced CMCs was investigated using the CMSE criterion.
Temperature-dependent fiber/matrix interface shear stress, Young’s modulus
of the fibers and the matrix, the matrix fracture energy, and the fiber/matrix
interface debonding energy were considered in the microstress field analysis,
fiber/matrix interface debonding criterion, and matrix multiple cracking evolution
model. Effects of fiber volume, fiber/matrix interface shear stress, fiber/matrix
interface debonding energy, matrix fracture energy, temperature, and duration
on matrix multiple cracking evolution and fiber/matrix interface debonding were
interface debonding of unidirectional C/SiC composite at elevated temperatures
were predicted.
● With increasing fiber/matrix interface shear stress, the first matrix cracking
stress, matrix cracking saturation stress, and saturation matrix cracking density
increased, the matrix cracking evolved with higher applied stress, and the
fiber/matrix interface debonding length decreased.
● With increasing fiber/matrix interface debonding energy, the matrix saturation
cracking stress decreased, and the saturation matrix cracking density increased,
and the rate of matrix cracking development increased because of the decrease of
fiber/matrix interface debonding length.
● With increasing matrix fracture energy, the first matrix cracking stress and matrix
saturation cracking stress increased, the saturation matrix cracking density
decreased, and the fiber/matrix interface debonded length decreased.
● With increasing oxidation duration at elevated temperature, the saturation matrix
cracking density decreased because of the decrease of the interface shear stress in
the oxidation region.
References
1 Padture, N.P. (2016). Advanced structural ceramics in aerospace propulsion. Nat.

Mater. 15: 804–809. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat4687.
2 DiCarlo, J.A. and Roode, M. (2006). Ceramic composite development for gas
turbine hot section components. Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo: Power for
Land, Sea and Air, Volume 2, pp. 221–231.
3 Li, L. (2017). Modeling first matrix cracking stress of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites considering fiber fracture. Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech.
92: 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2017.05.004.
4 Choi, S.R. and Gyekenyesi, J.P. (2005). Load-rate dependency of ultimate tensile
strength in ceramic matrix composites at elevated temperatures. Int. J. Fatigue
27: 503–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2004.10.001.
5 Liu, S., Zhang, L., Yin, X. et al. (2014). Proportional limit stress and residual
thermal stress of 3D SiC/SiC composite. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 30: 959–964.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2014.08.004.
6 Sevener, K.M., Tracy, J.M., Chen, Z. et al. (2017). Crack opening behavior in
ceramic matrix composites. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 100: 4734–4747. https://doi.org/
10.1111/jace.14976.
7 Parthasarathy, T.A., Cox, B., Surde, O. et al. (2018). Modeling environmentally
induced property degradation of SiC/BN/SiC ceramic matrix composites. J. Am.
Ceram. Soc. 101: 973–997. https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.15325.
8 Sun, Y. and Singh, R.N. (1998). The generation of multiple matrix cracking
and fiber–matrix interfacial debonding in a glass composite. Acta Mater. 46:
1657–1667. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(97)00347-9.
9 Cheng, T., Qiao, R., and Xia, Y. (2004). A Monte Carlo simulation of damage
and failure process with crack saturation for unidirectional fiber reinforced
ceramic composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 64: 2251–2260. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.compscitech.2004.04.001.
10 Morscher, G.N., Hee, M.Y., and DiCarlo, J.A. (2005). Matrix cracking in 3D
orthogonal melt-infiltration SiC/SiC composite with various Z-fiber types. J. Am.
11 Rajan, V.P. and Zok, F.W. (2014). Matrix cracking of fiber-reinforced ceramic
composites in shear. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 73: 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmps
.2014.08.007.
12 Gowayed, Y., Ojard, G., Santhosh, U., and Jefferson, G. (2015). Modeling of
crack density in ceramic matrix composites. J. Compos. Mater. 49: 2285–2294.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998314545188.
13 Li, L.B. (2018). Modeling for monotonic and cyclic tensile stress-strain behavior
54: 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11029-018-9729-5.
14 Li, L.B. (2015). Micromechanical modeling for tensile behavior of carbon
fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Appl. Compos. Mater. 22: 773–790.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-014-9435-y.
References 141
15 Li, L.B., Song, Y., and Sun, Y. (2015). Modeling tensile behavior of cross-ply
.org/10.1007/s11029-015-9507-6.
16 Li, L.B., Song, Y., and Sun, Y. (2014). Modeling tensile behavior of unidirectional
C/SiC ceramic matrix composites. Mech. Compos. Mater. 49: 659–672. https://doi
.org/10.1007/s11029-013-9382-y.
17 Guo, S. and Kagawa, Y. (2002). Tensile fracture behavior of continuous SiC
fiber-reinforced SiC matrix composites at elevated temperatures and correlation
to in situ constituent properties. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 22: 2349–2356. https://doi
.org/10.1016/S0955-2219(02)00028-6.
18 Chen, Z., Fang, G., Xie, J., and Liang, J. (2016). Experimental study of
high-temperature tensile mechanical properties of 3D needled C/C-SiC com-
posites. Mater. Sci. Eng., A 654: 271–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2015.12
.010.
19 Guo, S. and Kagawa, Y. (2004). Effect of matrix modification on tensile mechan-
ical behavior of Tyranno Si-Ti-C-O fiber-reinforced SiC matrix minicomposite at
room and elevated temperatures. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 24: 3261–3269. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2003.10.044.
20 Almansour, A., Maillet, E., Ramasamy, R., and Morscer, G.N. (2015). Effect of
fiber content on single tow SiC minicomposite mechanical and damage proper-
ties using acoustic emission. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 35: 3389–3399. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2015.06.001.
21 Morscher, G.N., Singh, M., Kiser, J.D. et al. (2007). Modeling stress-dependent
matrix cracking and stress-strain behavior in 2D woven SiC fiber reinforced CVI
SiC composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 67: 1009–1017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j
.compscitech.2006.06.007.
22 Aveston, J., Cooper, G.A., and Kelly, A. (1971). The Properties of Fiber Compos-
ites, Conference on Proceedings. National Physical Laboratory, 15–26. Guildford:
IPC Science and Technology Press.
matrix fiber composites under longitudinal loading. Compos. Sci. Technol. 46:
105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-3538(93)90166-E.
7151(92)90189-L.
25 Weitsman, Y. and Zhu, H. (1993). Multi-fracture of ceramic composites. J. Mech.
Phys. Solids 41: 351–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(93)90012-5.
26 Erdman, D.L. and Weitsman, Y. (1998). The multi-fracture response of cross-ply
ceramic composites. Int. J. Solids Struct. 35: 5051–5083. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0020-7683(97)00248-5.
27 Takeda, N. and Kiriyama, M. (1999). Matrix crack evolution in SiC fiber/glass
matrix cross-ply laminates. Composites, Part A 30: 593–597. https://doi.org/10
.1016/S1359-835X(98)00155-9.
28 Li, L.B. (2015). Modeling for matrix multicracking evolution of cross-ply

ceramic-matrix composites using energy balance approach. Appl. Compos. Mater.
22: 733–755. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-014-9433-0.
ceramic matrix composites. J. Compos. Tech. Res. 19: 29–40.
30 Li, L.B. (2015). Effect of fiber Poisson contraction on matrix multicracking evo-
lution of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Appl. Compos. Mater. 22:
583–598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10443-014-9426-z.
32 Curtin, W.A., Ahn, B.K., and Takeda, N. (1998). Modeling brittle and toughness
stress-strain behavior in unidirectional ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater.
46: 3409–3420. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(98)00041-X.
33 Smith, C.E., Morscher, G.N., and Xia, Z.H. (2008). Monitoring damage accumu-
lation in ceramic matrix composites using electrical resistivity. Scr. Mater. 59:
463–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.04.033.
34 Morscher, G.N. and Gordon, N.A. (2017). Acoustic emission and electrical resis-
tance in SiC-based laminate ceramic composites tested under tensile loading. J.
Eur. Ceram. Soc. 37: 3861–3872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2017.05
.003.
.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2016.11.036.
36 Racle, E., Godin, N., Reynaud, P., and Fantozzi, G. (2017). Fatigue lifetime of
ceramic matrix composites at intermediate temperature by acoustic emission.
Materials 10: 658. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10060658.
37 Guo, S. and Kagawa, Y. (2000). Temperature dependence of in situ con-
TM
stituent properties of polymer-infiltration-pyrolysis-processed Nicalon SiC
fiber-reinforced SiC matrix composite. J. Mater. Res. 15: 951–960. https://doi.org/
10.1557/JMR.2000.0136.
38 Li, L.B. (2020). Modeling stress-dependent matrix multiple fracture of
fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites considering fiber oxidation and
fracture. Compos. Interfaces https://doi.org/10.1080/09276440.2020.1775016.
39 Li, L.B. (2020). Effect of temperature on matrix multicracking evolution of
C/SiC fiber reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. High Temp. Mater. Processes
(London) 39: 189–199. https://doi.org/10.1515/htmp-2020-0044.
40 Li, L.B. (2019). Modeling matrix multi-fracture in SiC/SiC ceramic-matrix com-
posites at elevated temperatures. J. Aust. Ceram. Soc. 55: 1115–1126. https://doi
.org/10.1007/s41779-019-00326-6.
41 Li, L.B. (2020). Time-dependent matrix fracture of carbon fiber-reinforced silicon
carbide ceramic-matrix composites considering interface oxidation. Compos.
42 Li, L.B. (2019). Time-dependent matrix multi-fracture of SiC/SiC ceramic-matrix
composites considering interface oxidation. Ceram.-Silik. 63: 131–148.
References 143
S1359-6454(98)80029-3.
44 Gao, Y.C., Mai, Y., and Cotterell, B. (1988). Fracture of fiber-reinforced materi-
als. J. Appl. Math. Phys. 39: 550–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00948962.
45 Sauder, C., Lamon, J., and Pailler, R. (2004). The tensile behavior of carbon
fibers at high temperatures up to 2400∘ C. Carbon 42: 715–725. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.carbon.2003.11.020.
j.jnucmat.2007.05.016.
47 Pradere, C. and Sauder, C. (2008). Transverse and longitudinal coefficient of
thermal expansion of carbon fibers at high temperatures (300–2500 K). Carbon
46: 1874–1884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2008.07.035.
49 Casas, L. and Martinez-Esnaola, J.M. (2003). Modelling the effect of oxidation
on the creep behavior of fiber-reinforced ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater.
51: 3745–3757. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(03)00189-7.
50 Beyerle, D.S., Spearing, S.M., Zok, F.W., and Evans, A.G. (1992). Damage and
failure in unidirectional ceramic matrix composites. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 75:
2719–2725. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.1993.tb03828.x.
51 Zhang, S., Gao, X., Chen, J. et al. (2016). Strength model of the matrix element
in SiC/SiC composites. Mater. Des. 101: 66–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes
.2016.03.166.
145
Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix

Composites
4.1 Introduction
Ceramics possess extremely high resistance to heat, chemicals, abrasion, and wear
and typified by chemical inertness, low density, and high strength and hardness.
However, in a monolithic form, even these advanced ceramics have their limita-
tions, i.e. low damage tolerance or low fracture toughness. Once a crack begins to
develop during loading or from a manufacturing defect, the ceramic structures fail
catastrophically in fracture. Ceramic-matrix composite (CMC) incorporated with
the reinforcing fiber in the ceramic-matrix has been found to drastically improve
the fracture toughness over that of monolithic ceramics. The outstanding thermal
and mechanical properties, increased fracture toughness, and damage tolerance
ability make CMCs ideal candidates for use as structural or other components in
high-temperature applications [1–5].
The mechanical properties reflect the damage resistance of composites under
different loading conditions, which is an important index for the safety design of
components [6–9]. It is directly related to the safety and reliability of components in
service and the predictability of damage [10–14]. The tensile stress–strain behavior
reflects the strength of the composite material to resist the damage of external tensile
loading. The tensile properties (i.e. proportional limit stress, matrix crack spacing,
tensile strength, and fracture strain) can be obtained from the tensile stress–strain
curves and can be used for component design [15–17]. Jia et al. [18] investigated the
relationship between the interphase and tensile strength of SiC fiber monofilament.
The tensile strength of the SiC fiber monofilament decreases with the increasing
coating layers. The SiC fibers with single boron nitride (BN) coating have the high
monofilament strength retention of about 70%, and 42.1% with two BN coatings,
and 32.3% with four BN coatings. The minicomposite comprises one single fiber
tow, interphase, and matrix and can be used to optimize the fiber–matrix interfacial
zone and to generate micromechanical data necessary for modeling the mechanical
behavior [19]. Almansour [20], Sauder et al. [21], and Yang et al. [22] performed
investigations on the tensile behavior of SiC/SiC minicomposites with different
fiber types and interface properties. Shi et al. [23] performed an investigation on the
variability in tensile behavior of SiC/SiC minicomposite. The tensile strength of the
SiC/SiC minicomposite satisfied the Weibull distribution. He et al. [24] performed
146 4 Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites
an investigation on the tensile behavior of SiC/SiC minicomposites with different

interphase thicknesses. The tensile strength and fiber pullout length increase with
the interphase thickness. Chateau et al. [25] investigated the damage evolution and
final fracture in SiC/SiC minicomposite using the in situ X-ray microtomography
under tensile loading. Zeng et al. [26] performed experimental and theoretical
investigations on the tensile damage evolution of unidirectional C/SiC composite
at room temperature. Ma et al. [27], Wang et al. [28], Liang and Jiao [29], and Hu
et al. [30] performed investigations on the tensile damage and fracture of 2.5D
and 3D CMCs. The nonlinearity appears in the tensile curves both along the warp
and the weft direction. Under tensile loading, the matrix cracking first occurs
because of the local stress concentration of the pores inside of the composite, and
the transverse cracks and longitudinal interlaminar cracks result the final brittle
fracture of the composite. The acoustic emission technique is used to monitor
the damage evolution of 3D-needled C/SiC composite [31]. The damage signal
contained three main frequencies of 240, 370, and 455 kHz, corresponding to the
damage mechanisms of the interface damage, matrix damage, and fiber fracture,
respectively. Wang et al. [32] compared the tensile behavior of C/SiC composites
with different fiber preforms. The minicomposite has the largest strength, modulus,
and strain energy density to failure in contrast to the lowest values of 2D composite
and the intermediate properties of 3D composite. The tensile behavior of CMCs
is affected by the temperature [33–35]. For the unidirectional C/SiC composite at
1300 ∘ C, the composite tensile strength was 𝜎 UTS = 374 MPa and the composite
tensile modulus was Ec = 134 GPa; and at 1450 ∘ C, the composite tensile strength
was 𝜎 UTS = 338 MPa and the composite tensile modulus was Ec = 116 GPa. For
the 2D SiC/SiC composite, the fracture strain at 1200 ∘ C is higher than that at
room temperature because of the interface oxidation. For the 3D C/SiC composite,
when the temperature increases from room temperature to 1500 ∘ C, the composite
elastic modulus and the strain for saturation matrix cracking remained unchanged;
the first matrix cracking stress, matrix cracking saturation stress, and fracture
stress all increased first with temperature to the peak value at the temperature
range of 1100–1300 ∘ C and then decreased with temperature. Luo and Qiao [36]
investigated the effect of loading rate on tensile behavior of 3D C/SiC composite
at room temperature, 1100, and 1500 ∘ C. At room temperature, the fracture stress
increased with loading rate; at 1500 ∘ C, the fracture stress decreased with loading
rate; and at 1100 ∘ C, the fracture stress remained without changing with loading
rate. At elevated oxidizing temperature, the applied stress opens existing cracks
and allows for easier ingress of oxygen to the fibers [37, 38]. Under thermal and
mechanical load cycling in oxidative environment, the strain is damage dependent
and a combination of physical mechanism in the form of matrix micro-cracking and
fiber debonding and chemical mechanism of fiber oxidation. Li et al. [39, 40] and Li
[41] developed a micromechanical approach to predict the tensile behavior of CMCs
with different fiber preforms considering multiple damage mechanisms. Li [42]
predicted the time-dependent proportional limit stress of C/SiC composites with
different fiber volumes, interface properties, and matrix damage. Li [43] analyzed
matrix multi-cracking of fiber-reinforced CMCs considering the interface oxidation
and compared the matrix cracking evolution of C/SiC composite with/without

the interface oxidation. Martinez-Fernandez and Morscher [44] investigated the
tensile properties of single tow Hi-NicalonTM SiC/PyC/SiC composite at room tem-
perature, 700, 950, and 1200 ∘ C. The elevated temperature stress rupture behavior
was dependent on the precrack stress, and the stress rupture life increases with
the decreasing precrack stress. Forio et al. [45] investigated the lifetime of SiC
multifilament tows under static fatigue in air at a temperature range of 600–700 ∘ C.
A slow-crack-growth mechanism is considered in the analysis of delayed failure of
SiC/SiC minicomposite under low stress state. Morscher and Cawley [46] investi-
gated the time-dependent strength degradation of woven SiC/BN/SiC composite at
intermediate temperatures. The strength degradation is dependent on the kinetics
for fusion of fibers to one another, the number of matrix cracks, and the applied
stress state. Larochelle and Morscher [47] investigated the tensile stress rupture
behavior of the woven Sylramic-iBN/BN/SiC composite at 550 and 750 ∘ C in
humid environment. The stress rupture strengths decreased with respect to time
with the rate of decrease related to the temperature and the amount of moisture
content. Pailler and Lamon [48] developed a micromechanics-based model of
fatigue/oxidation for CMCs considering thermally induced residual stresses and
kinetics of interphase degradation or crack healing. Santhosh et al. [49, 50] investi-
gated the time-dependent deformation and damage of 2D SiC/SiC composite under
multiaxial stress and dwell fatigue at 1204 ∘ C. Morscher et al. [51] investigated the
damage evolution and failure mechanisms of 2D Sylramic-iBN SiC/SiC composite
under tensile creep and fatigue loading at 1204 ∘ C in air condition. The damage
development was the growth of matrix cracks and increasing number of matrix
cracks with stress and time. Four dominant failure criterions are present in the
literature for modeling matrix crack evolution of CMCs: maximum stress theories,
energy balance approach, critical matrix strain energy criterion, and statistical
failure approach. The maximum stress criterion assumes that a new matrix crack
will form whenever the matrix stress exceeds the ultimate strength of the matrix,
which is assumed to be single-valued and a known material property [52]. The
energy balance failure criteria involve calculation of the energy balance relationship
before and after the formation of a single dominant crack as originally proposed
by Aveston et al. [53]. The progression of matrix cracking as determined by the
energy criterion is dependent on matrix strain energy release rate. The energy
criterion is represented by Zok and Spearing [54] and Zhu and Weitsman [55]. The
concept of a critical matrix strain energy criterion presupposes the existence of
an ultimate or critical strain energy limit beyond which the matrix fails. Beyond
this, as more energy is placed into the composite, the matrix, unable to support
the additional load, continues to fail. As more energy is placed into the system, the
matrix fails such that all the additional energy is transferred to the fibers. Failure
may consist of the formation of matrix cracks, the propagation of existing cracks, or
interface debonding [56]. Statistical failure approach assumes that matrix cracking
is governed by statistical relations, which relate the size and spatial distribution of
matrix flaws to their relative propagation stress [57].
In this chapter, time-dependent tensile behavior of fiber-reinforced CMCs is inves-

tigated using the micromechanical approach. Damages in the matrix, interface, and
fibers were taken into consideration for the tensile damage and fracture analysis.
Experimental time-dependent tensile damage and fracture of SiC/SiC and C/SiC
composites are predicted.
4.2 Theoretical Analysis

When no damage occurs, the composite strain is
𝜀c = 𝜎∕Ec (4.1)
When damages of matrix cracking, interface debonding, and fiber fracture occur,
the composite strain is
2
𝜀c = 𝜎 (x) dx − (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT (4.2)
Ef lc ∫lc ∕2 f
where Ef is the fiber Young’s modulus, lc is the matrix crack spacing, 𝛼 f and 𝛼 c denote
the fiber and composite thermal expansion coefficient, respectively, and ΔT denotes
the temperature difference between test temperature and fabricated temperature.
{ [ ( )m ]}−1
𝜎 − (𝜎mc − 𝜎th )
lc (𝜎, t) = Λ𝛿R (t) 1 − exp − (4.3)
(𝜎R − 𝜎th ) − (𝜎mc − 𝜎th )
where Λ denotes the final nominal crack space, 𝜎 R is the matrix cracking character-
istic stress, and m is the matrix Weibull modulus.
( )
𝜏f r V E
𝛿R (t) = 1 − 𝜁(t) + f m m 𝜎R (4.4)
𝜏i 2𝜏i Vf Ec
where 𝜏 i and 𝜏 f are the interface shear stress in the debonding and oxidation region,
respectively, V f is the fiber volume, and Em and Ec are Young’s modulus of the matrix
and the composite, respectively.
When matrix cracking and interface debonding occur, the time-dependent com-
posite strain is
2𝜎 ld (t) 2𝜏f 4𝜏 l (t) 2𝜏i [ ]2
𝜀c (t) = + 𝜁 2 (t) − f d 𝜁 (t) − ld (t) − 𝜁 (t)
Vf Ef lc (t) rf Ef lc (t) rf Ef lc (t) rf Ef lc (t)
( ) { }
2𝜎fo lc (t) 2rf 𝜎 2𝜏 2𝜏 [ ]
+ − ld (t) + − f 𝜁 (t) − i ld (t) − 𝜁 (t) − 𝜎fo
Ef lc (t) 2 𝜌Ef lc (t) Vf rf rf
[ ( )]
l (t)∕2 − ld (t)
× 1 − exp −𝜌 c − (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT (4.5)
rf
where 𝜎 fo is the fiber stress in the interface bonding region, 𝜁 is the interface oxida-
tion length, and ld is the interface debonding length.
{ [ ]}
𝜙t
𝜁(t) = 𝜙1 1 − exp − 2 (4.6)
b
√
( ) ( ) √
√( r )2 r V E E
𝜏f r f Vm E m 𝜎 1
ld (t) = 1 − 𝜁(t) + − −√ f + f m m f
Γd (4.7)
𝜏i 2 Vf Ec 𝜏i 𝜌 2𝜌 Ec 𝜏i2
where 𝜑1 , 𝜑2 , and b are interface oxidation model parameters, 𝜌 is the shear-lag

model parameter, and Γd is the interface debonding energy.
When fiber failure occurs, the time-dependent composite strain is
Φ(t) 2ld (t) 2𝜏f 4𝜏 l (t) 2𝜏i [ ]2
𝜀c (t) = + 𝜁 2 (t) − f d 𝜁 (t) − l (t) − 𝜁 (t)
Ef lc (t) rf Ef lc (t) rf Ef lc (t) rf Ef lc (t) d
( ) { }
2𝜎fo lc (t) 2rf 2𝜏 2𝜏 [ ]
+ − ld (t) + Φ(t) − f 𝜁 (t) − i ld (t) − 𝜁 (t) − 𝜎fo
Ef lc (t) 2 𝜌Ef lc (t) rf rf
[ ( )]
lc (t)∕2 − ld (t)
× 1 − exp −𝜌 − (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT (4.8)
rf
where Φ is the intact fiber stress.
4.3 Results and Discussion

Effects of fiber volume, fiber radius, matrix Weibull modulus, matrix cracking
characteristic strength, matrix cracking saturation spacing, interface shear stress,
interface debonded energy, fiber strength, fiber Weibull modulus, and oxidation
time (the oxidation tine is an exposure time before applying tensile stress) on the
time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves, interface debonding, and fiber failure
of fiber-reinforced unidirectional Hi-Nicalon SiC/SiC are analyzed.
4.3.1 Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of SiC/SiC Composite

Figure 4.1 shows the time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves and interface
debonding for different fiber volumes (i.e. V f = 35%, 40%, and 45%) when the
oxidation duration is t = 3000 seconds. When the fiber volume increases from
V f = 35% to 45%, the composite tensile strength and fracture strain increase, and
the composite strain at the damage stages of the matrix cracking and interface
debonding decreases. Lissart and Lamon [58] found that the tensile strength and
failure strain increase with the fiber volume. At high fiber volume, the stress carried
by the fiber at the matrix crack plane decreases, leading to the decrease of the
interface debonding length.
When the fiber volume is V f = 35%, the composite ultimate tensile strength is
𝜎 UTS = 640 MPa, and the corresponding failure strain is 𝜀f = 0.38%; the interface
debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 56%, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases to
𝜔 = 9.7%. When the fiber volume is V f = 45%, the composite ultimate tensile strength
is 𝜎 UTS = 823 MPa and the failure strain is 𝜀f = 0.43%; the interface debonding ratio
increases to 𝜂 = 62.4%, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 11.3%.

for Different Fiber Radii
debonding for different fiber radii (i.e. r f = 5, 6, and 7 μm) when the oxidation
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.1 Effect of fiber volume on (a) the time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves;
(b) the time-dependent interface debonding ratio versus the applied stress curves; and (c)
the time-dependent interface oxidation ratio versus the applied stress curves of
unidirectional Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC minicomposite.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.2 Effect of fiber radius on (a) the time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves; (b)
the time-dependent interface debonding ratio versus the applied stress curves; and (c) the
time-dependent interface oxidation ratio versus the applied stress curves of unidirectional
Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC minicomposite.
duration is t = 3000 seconds. When the fiber radius increases from r f = 5 to 7 μm, the
composite failure strain increases, the interface debonding length increases, and the
interface oxidation ratio decreases. When the fiber radius increases, the interface
debonding length increases, leading to the decrease of the interface oxidation ratio
and the increase of the composite failure strain.
When the fiber radius is r f = 5 μm, the composite ultimate failure strain is
𝜀f = 0.4%; the interface debonding length increases to 𝜂 = 49.3%; and the inter-
face oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 14.3%. When the fiber radius is r f = 7 μm,
the composite ultimate failure strain is 𝜀f = 0.44%; the interface debonding
length increases to 𝜂 = 68.1%; and the interface oxidation ratio decreases to
𝜔 = 10.3%.

for Different Matrix Weibull Moduli
debonding for different matrix Weibull moduli (i.e. m = 3, 4, and 5) when the
oxidation duration is t = 3000 seconds. When the matrix Weibull modulus increases
from m = 3 to 5, the composite failure strain increases, the interface debond-
ing length decreases first and then increases, and the interface oxidation ratio
remains unchanged. Lissart and Lamon [58] found that the composite failure strain
decreases with matrix Weibull modulus. At high matrix Weibull modulus, the
matrix strength distribution becomes much more concentrated, and the matrix
crack spacing increases, and the interface debonding length decreases at low
stress.
When m = 3, the composite failure strain is 𝜀f = 0.418% with interface debonding
ratio 𝜂 = 57.9%, and the interface oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 11%. When m = 6, the composite
failure strain is 𝜀f = 0.429% with the interface debonding ratio 𝜂 = 62.7% and the
interface oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 11%.

for Different Matrix Cracking Characteristic Strengths
debonding for different matrix cracking characteristic strengths (i.e. 𝜎 R = 300,
400, and 500 MPa) when the oxidation duration is t = 3000 seconds. When the
matrix cracking characteristic strength increases from 𝜎 R = 300 to 500 MPa,
the composite strain decreases at the damage stage of the matrix cracking and
interface debonding, and interface debonding length decreases at the stage of
matrix cracking, and the interface oxidation ratio remains unchanged. At higher
matrix cracking characteristic strength, the matrix cracking occurs at the higher
applied stress level, the matrix crack spacing increases at low stress level, and
the interface debonding length decreases at the damage stage of the matrix
cracking.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.3 Effect of matrix Weibull modulus on (a) the time-dependent tensile
stress–strain curves; (b) the time-dependent interface debonding ratio versus the applied
stress curves; and (c) the time-dependent interface oxidation ratio versus the applied stress
curves of unidirectional Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC minicomposite.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.4 Effect of the matrix cracking characteristic strength on (a) the time-dependent
tensile stress–strain curves; (b) the time-dependent interface debonding ratio versus the
applied stress curves; and (c) the time-dependent interface oxidation ratio versus the
applied stress curves of unidirectional Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC minicomposite.

for Different Matrix Cracking Saturation Spacings
debonding for different matrix cracking saturation spacings (i.e. lsat = 200, 300,
and 400 μm) when the oxidation duration is t = 3000 seconds. When the saturation
matrix crack spacing increases from lsat = 200 to 400 μm, the composite failure strain
decreases, the interface debonding length decreases, and the interface oxidation
ratio decreases when the interface complete debonding. At high saturation matrix
crack spacing, the matrix crack spacing increases, and the interface debonding
length, interface oxidation ratio, and composite failure strain decrease.
When lsat = 200 μm, the composite failure strain is 𝜀f = 0.53% with the inter-
face debonding ratio 𝜂 = 1, and the interface oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 12.3%. When
lsat = 400 μm, the composite failure strain is 𝜀f = 0.41% with the interface debonding
ratio 𝜂 = 55.4% and the interface oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 11%.

debonding for different interface shear stress (i.e. 𝜏 i = 10, 20, and 30 MPa) when the
oxidation duration is t = 3000 seconds. When the interface shear stress increases
from 𝜏 i = 10 to 30 MPa, the composite failure strain decreases, the interface debond-
ing length decreases, and the interface oxidation ratio increases. Lissart and Lamon
[58] found that the composite tensile failure strain decreases with the interface
shear stress. At high interface shear stress, the stress transfer between the fiber
and the matrix increases, the interface debonding length decreases, the interface
oxidation ratio increases, and the composite failure strain and fiber pullout length
decrease.
When 𝜏 i = 10 MPa, the composite failure strain is εf = 0.56% with the interface
debonding ratio 𝜂 = 1 and the interface oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 7%. When 𝜏 i = 30 MPa, the
composite failure strain is εf = 0.43%, with the interface debonding ratio 𝜂 = 63.4%
and the interface oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 11%.

debonding for different interface debonding energy (i.e. Γd = 0.1, 0.3, and 0.5 J/m2 )
when the oxidation duration is t = 3000 seconds. When the interface debonding
energy increases from Γd = 0.1 to 0.5 J/m2 , the composite tensile failure strain
decreases, the interface debonding length decreases, and the interface oxidation
ratio increases. When the interface debonding energy increases, the energy needed
for the interface debonding propagation increases, leading to the decrease of the
interface debonding length, the increase of the interface oxidation ratio, and the
decrease of the composite failure strain.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.5 Effect of matrix cracking saturation spacing on (a) the time-dependent tensile
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.6 The effect of the interface shear stress on (a) the time-dependent tensile
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.7 Effect of interface debonding energy on (a) the time-dependent tensile
When Γd = 0.1 J/m2 , the composite failure strain is εf = 0.43% with the inter-
face debonding ratio 𝜂 = 63%, and the interface oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 11%. When
Γd = 0.5 J/m2 , the composite failure strain is εf = 0.42%, with the interface debonding
ratio 𝜂 = 54% and the interface oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 13%.

for Different Fiber Strengths
Figure 4.8 shows the time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves and fiber failure
for different fiber strengths (i.e. 𝜎 o = 2.0, 2.5, and 3 GPa) when the oxidation dura-
tion is t = 3000 seconds. When the fiber strength increases from 𝜎 o = 2 to 3 GPa, the
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.8 Effect of fiber strength on (a) the time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves
and (b) the time-dependent broken fiber fraction versus the applied stress curves of
composite tensile strength and failure strain increase, and the fiber failure probabil-
ity at low stress decreases. Lissart and Lamon [58] found that the composite tensile
strength and failure strain increase with fiber strength.
When 𝜎 o = 2 GPa, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 612 MPa with
the failure strain of εf = 0.28%, and the fiber failure probability is q = 13.5%; when
𝜎 o = 2.5 GPa, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 765 MPa with a failure
strain of εf = 0.4% and the fiber failure probability is q = 13.5%, and when 𝜎 o = 3 GPa,
the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 805 MPa with a failure strain of
εf = 0.43%, and the fiber failure probability is q = 13.5%.

for Different Fiber Weibull Moduli
Figure 4.9 shows the time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves and fiber failure
for different fiber Weibull moduli (i.e. mf = 3, 4, and 5) when the oxidation duration
is t = 3000 seconds. When the fiber Weibull modulus increases from mf = 3 to 5, the
composite tensile strength and failure strain increase, and the fiber failure probabil-
ity at low stress decreases. Lissart and Lamon [58] found that the composite tensile
strain and failure strain increase with fiber Weibull modulus. At high fiber Weibull
modulus, the fiber strength distribution becomes much more concentrated, leading
to the higher composite tensile strength and failure strain.
When mf = 3, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 671 MPa with a fail-
ure strain of εf = 0.36%, and the fiber failure probability is q = 18.2%; when mf = 4,
the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 706 MPa with a failure strain of
εf = 0.37%, and the fiber failure probability is q = 15.5%, and when mf = 5, the com-
posite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 734 MPa with a failure strain of εf = 0.38%,
and the fiber failure probability is q = 13%.

for Different Oxidation Durations
Figure 4.10 shows the time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves, interface debond-
ing, and fiber failure for different oxidation durations (i.e. t = 1, 2, and 3 hours)
at an elevated temperature of T = 800 ∘ C. The degradation of the fiber strength
and the increase of the interface oxidation length both increase with oxidation
time. When the oxidation time increases, the composite tensile strength and failure
strain decrease, the interface debonding length increases, the interface oxidation
ratio increases, and the fiber failure probability at low stress increases. Li [42, 43]
investigated the time-dependent matrix cracking evolution and proportional limit
stress of fiber-reinforced CMCs. It was found that the interface debonding length
and the interface oxidation ratio increase with the oxidation time.
When t = 1 hour, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 734 MPa with
the failure strain of 𝜀f = 0.38%, the interface debonding ratio 𝜂 = 57%, the interface
oxidation ratio 𝜔 = 14.4%, and the fiber failure probability q = 13%. When t = 3 hours,
the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 584 MPa with the failure strain of
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.9 Effect of fiber Weibull modulus on (a) the time-dependent tensile stress–strain
curves and (b) the time-dependent broken fiber fraction versus the applied stress curves of
εf = 0.27%, the interface debonding ratio 𝜂 = 34.9%, the interface oxidation ratio
𝜔 = 41.8%, and the fiber failure probability q = 12.6%.
4.4 Experimental Comparisons

Almansour [20] and Sauder et al. [21] investigated the tensile behavior of
unidirectional SiC/SiC minicomposites with different fiber types and interface
properties. Material properties of four different unidirectional SiC/SiC minicom-
posites are listed in Table 4.1. The tensile stress–strain curves, matrix cracking
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.10 Effect of the oxidation time on (a) the time-dependent tensile stress–strain
curves; (b) the time-dependent interface debonding ratio versus the applied stress curves;
(c) the time-dependent interface oxidation ratio versus the applied stress curves; and (d)
the time-dependent broken fiber fraction versus the applied stress curves of unidirectional
Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC minicomposite.
(d)
Table 4.1 Material properties of SiC/SiC minicomposites.
Hi-NicalonTM Hi-NicalonTM type TyrannoTM SA3 TyrannoTM ZMI

Items SiC/SiC [8] S SiC/SiC [9] SiC/SiC [9] SiC/SiC [9]
r f (μm) 7 6.5 3.5 5.5

V f (%) 25.8 46 43 27.5
Ef (GPa) 350 372 387 170
Em (GPa) 400 400 400 350
𝛼 (10−6 /∘ C)
f 3.5 3.5 4 4
𝛼 m (10−6 /∘ C) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
𝜏 i (MPa) 40 9 100 30
𝜏 f (MPa) 1 1 1 1
2
Γd (J/m ) 3 0.1 0.1 3
𝜎 UTS (MPa) 644 940 1116 498
mf 5 5 5 5
evolution, interface debonding, and fiber failure for different oxidation times at
T = 800 ∘ C are predicted.
Figure 4.11 shows the experimental and predicted tensile damage and fracture of
unidirectional Hi-Nicalon SiC/SiC minicomposite. When the composite is without
oxidation, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 642 MPa with the fail-
ure strain 𝜀f = 0.57%; the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.06 mm−1
at 𝜎 = 260 MPa to 𝜓 = 1.77 mm−1 at 𝜎 = 566 MPa. When the oxidation duration is
t = 1 hour, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 451 MPa with the failure
strain 𝜀f = 0.34%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 22%, the interface
(a)
(b)
Figure 4.11 (a) Experimental and predicted tensile stress–strain curves for the oxidation
duration t = 0, 1, 2, and 3 hours; (b) experimental and predicted matrix cracking density
versus the applied stress curves; (c) time-dependent interface debonding ratio versus the
applied stress curves when t = 1, 2, and 3 hours; (d) the time-dependent interface oxidation
ratio versus the applied stress curves when t = 1, 2, and 3 hours; and (e) the
time-dependent broken fiber fraction versus the applied stress curves when t = 1, 2, and
3 hours of unidirectional Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC minicomposite.
(c)
(d)
(e)

oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 18%, and the fiber failure probability increases to
q = 13.1%. When the oxidation duration is t = 2 hours, the composite ultimate tensile
strength is 𝜎 UTS = 379 MPa with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.24%, the interface debond-
ing ratio increases to 𝜂 = 11%, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 39%, and
the fiber failure probability increases to q = 12.6%. When the oxidation duration is
t = 3 hours, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 342 MPa with the fail-
ure strain 𝜀f = 0.2%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 7%, the interface
oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 55.4%, and the fiber failure probability increases to
q = 12%.
Figure 4.12 shows experimental and predicted tensile damage and fracture of
unidirectional Hi-Nicalon type S SiC/SiC minicomposite. When the composite
is without oxidation, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 940 MPa
with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.62%, and the matrix cracking density increases from
𝜓 = 0.08 mm−1 at 𝜎 = 375 MPa to 𝜓 = 2.85 mm−1 at 𝜎 = 937 MPa. When the oxida-
tion duration is t = 1 hour, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 804 MPa
with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.54%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 1,
the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 8.4%, and the fiber failure probability
increases to q = 12.9%. When the oxidation duration is t = 2 hours, the composite
ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 676 MPa with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.45%, the
interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 1, the interface oxidation ratio decreases
to 𝜔 = 14.8%, and the fiber failure probability increases to q = 12.9%. When the
oxidation duration is t = 3 hours, the composite tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 611 MPa
the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 17.1%, and the fiber failure probability
increases to q = 13.1%.
Figure 4.13 shows experimental and predicted tensile damage and fracture of uni-
directional TyrannoTM SA3 SiC/SiC minicomposite. When the composite is without
ure strain 𝜀f = 0.63%, and the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 1.6 mm−1
at 𝜎 = 593 MPa to 𝜓 = 23 mm−1 at 𝜎 = 1031 MPa. When the oxidation duration is
ing ratio increases to 𝜂 = 22.4%, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 74.7%,
and the fiber failure probability increases to q = 13%. When the oxidation duration
is t = 3 hours, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 571 MPa with the
failure strain 𝜀f = 0.23%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 16.8%, the
interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 83.8%, and the fiber failure probability
increases to q = 12.9%.
Figure 4.14 shows experimental and predicted tensile damage and fracture of uni-
directional Tyranno ZMI SiC/SiC minicomposite. When the composite is without
ure strain 𝜀f = 0.5%, and the matrix cracking density increases from 𝜓 = 0.02 mm−1
(a)
(b)
versus the applied stress curves; (c) the time-dependent interface debonding ratio versus
the applied stress curves when t = 1, 2, and 3 hours; (d) the time-dependent interface
oxidation ratio versus the applied stress curves when t = 1, 2, and 3 hours; and (e) the
3 hours of unidirectional Hi-NicalonTM type S SiC/SiC minicomposite.
(c)
(d)
(e)

(a)
(b)
3 hours of unidirectional TyrannoTM SA3 SiC/SiC minicomposite.
(c)
(d)
(e)

(a)
(b)
3 hours of unidirectional TyrannoTM ZMI SiC/SiC minicomposite.
(c)
(d)
(e)

at 𝜎 = 158 MPa to 𝜓 = 1.5 mm−1 at 𝜎 = 388 MPa. When the oxidation duration is
ing ratio increases to 𝜂 = 27%, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 33%, and
the fiber failure probability increases to q = 12.7%. When the oxidation duration is
t = 3 hours, the composite ultimate tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 365 MPa with the fail-
ure strain 𝜀f = 0.41%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 28%, the interface
oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 47.7%, and the fiber failure probability increases to
q = 12.6%.
4.4.2 Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of C/SiC Composite

Wang et al. [32] investigated the tensile behavior of 1D, 2D, and 3D C/SiC composites
at room temperature. Zhang et al. [59] investigated the tensile behavior of 2.5D C/SiC
composite after exposure at elevated temperature. The material properties of 1D, 2D,
2.5D, and 3D C/SiC composites are listed in Table 4.2.
Figure 4.15 shows experimental and predicted tensile stress–strain curves, inter-
face debonding and oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction of 1D C/SiC compos-
ite without and with oxidation at T = 800 ∘ C and t = 10, 20, and 30 hours. With
Table 4.2 Material properties of C/SiC composites.
Items 1D C/SiC 2D C/SiC 2.5D C/SiC 3D C/SiC
𝜆 1 0.5 0.75 0.93

r f (μm) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
V f (%) 30 35 40 40
Ef (GPa) 230 230 230 230
𝛼 f (10−6 /K) 0 0 0.5 0
𝛼 m (10−6 /K) 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6
m 3 5 6 5
𝜎 R (MPa) 100 40 80 80
lsat (μm) 120 300 80 80
𝜏 i (MPa) 10 11 5 9
𝜏 f (MPa) 1 1 1 1
Γd (J/m2 ) 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1
𝜎 UTS (MPa) 333 149 226 206
𝜀f (%) 0.59 0.34 0.56 0.37
mf 5 5 5 5
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 4.15 (a) Experimental and predicted tensile stress–strain curves; (b) the interface
debonding ratio versus the applied stress curves; (c) the interface oxidation ratio versus the
applied stress curves; and (d) the broken fiber fraction versus applied stress curves of
unidirectional C/SiC composite.
(d)
increasing oxidation duration, both the composite tensile strength and failure strain
decrease; the interface debonding ratio and interface oxidation ratio increase, and
the broken fiber fraction increases at low stress level. Without oxidation, the com-
posite tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 333 MPa with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.68%; when
the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 24.8%, and the broken fiber fraction
increases to q = 12%; when the oxidation duration is t = 20 hours, the composite
tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 264 MPa with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.61%, the interface
debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 1, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 49%,
and the broken fiber fraction increases to q = 12%; when the oxidation duration is
t = 30 hours, the composite tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 239 MPa with the failure strain
𝜀f = 0.59%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 1, the interface oxidation
ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 74.4%, and the broken fiber fraction increases to q = 12.8%.
face debonding and oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction of 2D C/SiC composite
without and with oxidation at T = 800 ∘ C and t = 10, 20, and 30 hours. With increas-
ing oxidation time, both the composite tensile strength and failure strain decrease;
the interface debonding ratio and interface oxidation ratio increase; and the broken
fiber fraction increases at low stress level. Without oxidation, the composite tensile
strength is 𝜎 UTS = 148 MPa with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.35%; when the pre-exposure
time is t = 10 hours, the composite tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 148 MPa with the failure
strain 𝜀f = 0.37%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 38.4%, the inter-
face oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 8.6%, and the broken fiber fraction increases
to q = 11.7%; when the oxidation duration is t = 20 hours, the composite tensile
ing ratio increases to 𝜂 = 35.4%, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 18.6%,
and the broken fiber fraction increases to q = 12.2%; when the oxidation duration is
(a)
(b)
(c)
applied stress curves; and (d) the broken fiber fraction versus applied stress curves of 2D
C/SiC composite.
(d)
𝜀f = 0.3%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 34%, the interface oxidation
ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 29%, and the broken fiber fraction increases to q = 10.9%.
Figure 4.17 shows experimental and predicted tensile stress–strain curves,
interface debonding and oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction of 2.5D C/SiC
composite without and with oxidation at T = 900 ∘ C and t = 10 hours. Without
oxidation, the composite tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 225 MPa with the failure strain
𝜀f = 0.54%; when the oxidation duration is t = 10 hours, the composite tensile
ing ratio increases to 𝜂 = 1, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 25%, and
the broken fiber fraction increases to q = 23.5%.
face debonding and oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction of 3D C/SiC compos-
ite without and with oxidation at T = 800 ∘ C and t = 10, 20, and 30 hours. With
increasing oxidation duration, both the composite tensile strength and failure strain
decrease; the interface debonding ratio and interface oxidation ratio increase; and
the broken fiber fraction increases at low stress level. Without oxidation, the com-
posite tensile strength is 𝜎 UTS = 203 MPa with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.38%; when the
with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.38%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 83%,
the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 15%, and the broken fiber fraction
increases to q = 13.1%; when oxidation duration is t = 20 hours, the composite tensile
ing ratio increases to 𝜂 = 79%, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 31%,
and the broken fiber fraction increases to q = 11.7%; when the oxidation duration is
𝜀f = 0.32%, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 83%, the interface oxidation
ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 44%, and the broken fiber fraction increases to q = 10.8%.
(a)
(b)
(c)
applied stress curves; and (d) the broken fiber fraction versus applied stress curves of 2.5D
C/SiC composite.
4.5 Conclusion 179
(d)
4.5 Conclusion
In this chapter, time-dependent tensile damage and fracture of fiber-reinforced
CMCs is investigated considering the interface and fiber oxidation. Time-dependent
damage mechanisms of matrix cracking, interface debonding, fiber failure, and
interface and fiber oxidation are considered in the analysis of the tensile stress–strain
curve. Experimental time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves, matrix cracking,
interface debonding, and fiber failure of different SiC/SiC and C/SiC composites
are predicted for different oxidation durations.
1) When the fiber volume increases, the composite ultimate tensile strength and
failure strain increase, and the composite strain at the damage stages of matrix
cracking, interface debonding, and fiber failure decrease; when the fiber radius
increases, the composite failure strain increases, the interface debonding ratio
increases, and the interface oxidation ratio decreases.
2) When the matrix Weibull modulus increases, the composite ultimate failure
strain increases, and the interface debonding ratio decreases first and then
increases; when the matrix cracking characteristic strength increases, the com-
posite strain at the damage stages of matrix cracking and interface debonding
decreases, and the interface debonding ratio at the stage of matrix cracking
decreases; when the saturation matrix crack spacing increases, the composite
failure strain decreases and the interface debonding ratio decreases, and the
interface oxidation ratio decreases during the interface complete debonding.
3) When the interface shear stress and interface debonding energy increase, the
composite failure strain decreases, the interface debonding ratio decreases, and
the interface oxidation ratio increases.
4) When the fiber strength and fiber Weibull modulus increase, the composite ten-
sile strength and failure strain increase, and the fiber failure probability at low
stress decreases.
(a)
(b)
(c)
applied stress curves; and (d) the broken fiber fraction versus applied stress curves of 3D
C/SiC composite.
References 181
(d)
5) When the oxidation time increases, the composite tensile strength and failure
strain decrease, the interface debonding ratio increases, the interface oxidation
ratio increases, and the fiber failure probability at low stress increases.
References

64: 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00230-6.
2 Li, L.B. (2018). Damage, Fracture and Fatigue of Ceramic-Matrix Composites.
Singapore: Springer Nature.
3 Panakarajupally, R.P., Presby, M.J., Manigandan, K. et al. (2019). Thermome-
chanical characterization of SiC/SiC ceramic matrix composites in a combustion
facility. Ceramics 2: 407–425. https://doi.org/10.3390/ceramics2020032.
4 Dassios, K.G. and Matikas, T.E. (2019). Assessment of fatigue damage and crack
propagation in ceramic matrix composites by infrared thermography. Ceramics
2: 393–406. https://doi.org/10.3390/ceramics2020031.
5 Li, L.B. (2019). A thermomechanical fatigue hysteresis-based damage evolution
model for fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Int. J. Damage Mech.
28: 380–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056789518772162.
6 Chen, J.K., Huang, Z.P., and Zhu, J. (2007). Size effect of particles on the dam-
age dissipation in nanocomposites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 67: 2990–2996. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2007.05.020.
7 Marcin, L., Maire, J.F., Carrere, N., and Martin, E. (2011). Development of
a macroscopic damage model for woven ceramic matrix composites. Int. J.
Damage Mech. 20: 939–957. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056789510385259.

1056789513482338.
9 Christopher, J. and Choudhary, B.K. (2019). Prediction of long-term creep
behaviour of grade 91 steel at 873 K in the framework of microstructure-based
creep damage mechanics approach. Int. J. Damage Mech. 28: 877–895. https://doi
.org/10.1177/1056789518796118.
10 Bache, M.R., Newton, C.D., Jones, J.P. et al. (2019). Advances in damage
monitoring techniques for the detection of failure in SiC/SiC ceramic matrix
composites. Ceramics 1: 347–371. https://doi.org/10.3390/ceramics2020028.
11 Baranger, E. (2019). Accounting for frictional contact in an anisotropic dam-
age model based on compliance tensorial variables, illustration on ceramic
1056789518812932.
12 Mareau, C. and Morel, F. (2019). A continuum damage mechanics-based
approach for the high cycle fatigue behavior of metallic polycrystals. Int. J.
Damage Mech. 28 (6): 838–856. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056789518795204.
13 Matta, S., Kolanu, N.R., Chinthapenta, V. et al. (2019). Progressive damage
analysis of adhesively bonded patch repaired carbon fiber-reinforced polymer
specimen under compression involving cohesive zone model. Int. J. Damage
Mech. 28: 1457–1489. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056789519832062.
14 Yu, X., Yu, T., Song, K., and Guo, B. (2019). Reliability analysis of mechanical
components based on a nonlinear fatigue damage accumulation model. Int. J.
Damage Mech. 28: 1135–1149. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056789518815219.
15 Perrot, G., Couegnat, G., Ricchiuto, M., and Vignoles, G.L. (2019). Image-based
numerical modeling of self-healing in a ceramic-matrix minicomposites. Ceram-
ics 2: 308–326. https://doi.org/10.3390/ceramics2020026.
16 Maillet, E., Singhal, A., Hilmas, A. et al. (2019). Combining in-situ synchrotron
X-ray microtomography and acoustic emission to characterize damage evolution
in ceramic matrix composites. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 39: 3546–3556. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2019.05.027.
17 Li, S., Wang, M., Jeanmeure, L. et al. (2019). Damage related material con-
stants in continuum damage mechanics for unidirectional composites with
matrix cracks. Int. J. Damage Mech. 28 (5): 690–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1056789518783239.
18 Jia, L., Wang, M., Xu, H. et al. (2019). Preparation of (BN-SiC)n composite coat-
ings on SiC fibers and tensile properties of monofilament. Acta Mater. Compos.
Sin. 36: 1873–1878. https://doi.org/10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20181025.003.
19 Naslain, R., Lamon, J., Pailler, R. et al. (1999). Micro/minicomposites: a useful
approach to the design and development of non-oxide CMCs. Compos. Part A:
Appl. Sci. Manuf. 30: 537–547. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-835X(98)00147-X.
20 Almansour, A.S. (2017). Use of single-tow ceramic matrix minicomposites to
determine fundamental room and elevated temperature properties. PhD thesis.
University of Akron, USA.
References 183
21 Sauder, C., Brusson, A., and Lamon, J. (2010). Influence of interface charac-
teristics on the mechanical properties of Hi-Nicalon type-S or Tyranno-SA3
fiber-reinforced SiC/SiC minicomposites. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol.
7: 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7402.2010.02485.x.
22 Yang, P., Zhang, R., Li, Y. et al. (2018). Preparation and tensile behavior of
SiCf /SiC minicomposites with (PyC/SiC)n multilayered interphases. Mater. Sci.
Eng. Powder Metall. 23: 553–561.
23 Shi, D., Sha, J., Cheng, Z., and Yang, X. (2019). Numerical simulation method of
the variability in tensile properties of SiC/SiC minicomposites. J. Aerosp. Power
34: 971–979.
24 He, Z., Zhang, R., Fu, D. et al. (2019). Tensile mechanical behavior of SiC fiber
bundle reinforced composites with different interfaces. J. Mater. Eng. 47: 25–31.
25 Chateau, C., Gelebart, L., Bornert, M. et al. (2011). In situ X-ray microtomog-
raphy characterization of damage in SiC/SiC minicomposites. Compos. Sci.
Technol. 71: 916–924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2011.02.008.
26 Zeng, Z., Zhang, Q., Liu, W., and Kong, B. (2015). Matrix failure mechanism
and strength prediction of UD-C/SiC ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater.
Compos. Sin. 32: 1075–1082.
27 Ma, J., Xu, Y., Zhang, L. et al. (2006). Microstructure characterization and ten-
sile behavior of 2.5D C/SiC composites fabricated by chemical vapor infiltration.
Scr. Mater. 54: 1967–1971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2006.01.047.
28 Wang, Y., Zhang, L., Cheng, L. et al. (2008). Tensile performance and damage
evolution of a 2.5-D C/SiC composite characterized by acoustic emission. Appl.
29 Liang, S. and Jiao, G. (2016). The tensile damage and strength of 2.5D
self-healing C/SiC composite. Gas Turbine Exp. Res. 29: 47–50.
30 Hu, X., Zhang, Y., Yang, H. et al. (2019). Investigation on the tensile and bend-
ing behavior of a 3D-SiC/SiC ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater. Compos.
Sin. 36: 1879–1885. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/11.1801.TB.20181023.1015
.006.html.
31 Huang, X., Wang, B., Yang, C. et al. (2018). Evaluating damage evolution of
three-dimension needled C/SiC composite based on acoustic emission signal
analysis. J. Inorg. Mater. 33: 609–616.
32 Wang, Y., Zhang, L., and Cheng, L. (2013). Comparison of tensile behaviors of
carbon/ceramic composites with various fiber architectures. Int. J. Appl. Ceram.
Technol. 10: 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7402.2011.02727.x.
33 Cao, Y., Zhang, C., Zhou, X., and Chen, C. (2001). Tensile properties of
UD-C/SiC ceramic matrix composites at elevated temperature. Acta Mater.
Compos. Sin. 18: 82–84.
34 Qiao, S., Luo, G., Du, S., and Li, M. (2004). Tensile performance of 3D-C/SiC
composites at high temperature. Mech. Sci. Technol. 23: 335–338.
35 Chen, M., Chen, X., Zhang, D. et al. (2019). Tensile behavior and failure mech-
anisms of plain weave SiC/SiC composites at room and high temperatures.
J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. 53: 11–18.
36 Luo, G. and Qiao, S. (2003). Influence of loading rates on 3D-C/SiC tensile prop-
erties at different temperature. Mater. Eng. 10: 9–10.
37 Halbig, M.C., Brewer, D.N., and Eckel, A.J. (2000). Degradation of con-
tinuous fiber ceramic matrix composites under constant-load conditions.
NASA/TM-2000-209681.
38 Mei, H., Cheng, L., Zhang, L., and Xu, Y. (2007). Modeling the effects of thermal
and mechanical load cycling on a C/SiC composite in oxygen/argon mixtures.
Carbon 45: 2195–2204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2007.06.051.
39 Li, L.B., Song, Y., and Sun, Y. (2014). Modeling the tensile behavior of unidi-
rectional C/SiC ceramic-matrix composites. Mech. Compos. Mater. 49: 659–672.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11029-013-9382-y.
.org/10.1007/s11029-015-9507-6.
41 Li, L.B. (2018). Modeling the monotonic and cyclic tensile stress–strain behavior
54: 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11029-018-9729-5.
42 Li, L. (2019). Time-dependent proportional limit stress of carbon fiber-reinforced
silicon carbide-matrix composites considering interface oxidation. J. Ceram. Soc.
Jpn. 127: 279–287. https://doi.org/10.2109/jcersj2.18176.
43 Li, L.B. (2018). Effect of interface oxidation on matrix multi-cracking evolution
of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperatures. J. Ceram.
Sci. Technol. 9: 397–410.
.1016/S0955-2219(00)00138-2.
∘ ∘
peratures (600 C–700 C) in air in silicon carbide multifilament tows. J. Am.
46 Morscher, G.N. and Cawley, J.D. (2002). Intermediate temperature strength
degradation in SiC/SiC composites. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 22: 2777–2787. https://doi
.org/10.1016/S0955-2219(02)00144-9.
47 Larochelle, K.J. and Morscher, G.N. (2006). Tensile stress rupture behavior of a
woven ceramic matrix composite in humid environments at intermediate tem-
perature – Part I. Appl. Compos. Mater. 13: 147–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10443-006-9009-8.
48 Pailler, F. and Lamon, J. (2005). Micromechanics based model of
fatigue/oxidation for ceramic matrix composites. Compos. Sci. Technol.
65: 369–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.09.029.
49 Santhosh, U., Ahmad, J., Ojard, G. et al. (2016). Deformation and damage mod-
eling of ceramic matrix composites under multiaxial stresses. Compos. Part B:
Eng. 90: 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.12.017.
References 185
50 Santhosh, U., Ahmad, J., Kalarikkal, S. et al. (2018). Time-dependent deforma-

tion and damage modeling of a SiC/SiC composite. J. Aerosp. Eng. 31: 04018086.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000921.
51 Morscher, G.N., Ojard, G., Miller, R. et al. (2008). Tensile creep and fatigue of
Sylramic-iBN melt-infiltrated SiC matrix composites: retained properties, damage
development, and failure mechanisms. Compos. Sci. Technol. 68: 3305–3313.
matrix fiber composites under longitudinal loading. Compos. Sci. Technol.
46: 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-3538(93)90166-E.
53 Aveston, J., Cooper, G.A., and Kelly, A. (1971). Single and multiple fracture. In:
Properties of Fiber Composites: Conference on Proceedings (ed. A. Kelly), 15–26.
London, England: National Physical Laboratory, IPC.
7151(92)90189-L.
55 Zhu, H. and Weitsman, Y. (1994). The progression of failure mechanisms in uni-
directional reinforced ceramic composites. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 42: 1601–1632.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(94)90089-2.
ceramic matrix composites. J. Compos. Tech. Res. 19: 29–40. https://doi.org/10
.1520/CTR10011J.
58 Lissart, N. and Lamon, J. (1997). Damage and failure in ceramic matrix mini-
composites: experimental study and model. Acta Mater. 45: 1025–1044. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(96)00224-8.
59 Zhang, C., Zhao, M., Liu, Y. et al. (2016). Tensile strength degradation of
a 2.5D-C/SiC composite under thermal cycles in air. J. Euro. Ceram. Soc.
36: 3011–3019.
187
Fatigue Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated

Temperature
5.1 Introduction
At present, superalloy is still the main material of high-temperature structure
in aeroengines (i.e. combustion chamber and turbine). After more than 40 years
of development, the temperature resistance of metal materials represented by a
single-crystal alloy has been greatly improved, but the difference between them
and the combustion temperature of aeroengines is still large, and the gap is
gradually increasing in the new generation of aeroengines. In order to improve
the temperature resistance, most designers adopt the active cooling of “thermal
barrier coating + film cooling.” However, the introduction of cooling air affects the
combustion efficiency, and the higher the combustion temperature, the greater the
effect. Therefore, the improvement of temperature resistance is the key technology
to develop next-generation aeroengines. Ceramic materials with high temperature
resistance, good mechanical properties, and low density have long been consid-
ered as ideal materials for high-temperature structures in aeroengines. However,
because of the low toughness of ceramics, once damaged, it will cause catastrophic
consequences for aeroengine, which limits its application. In order to improve the
toughness of ceramic materials, the fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites
(CMCs) have been developed. SiCf /SiC composite possesses low density and long
lifetime at high temperature up to thousands of hours, which is an ideal material
for the hot section components of commercial aeroengine [1–4]. Under long-term
applications at elevated temperature, CMCs are subjected to mechanical or thermal
cyclic fatigue loading [5–7]. Understanding the fatigue damage mechanisms of
CMCs at elevated temperature is necessary for hot section component designers
[8–10]. To reduce the failure risk of CMC hot section components in aeroengines
during operation, it is necessary to investigate the cyclic-dependent fatigue damage
evolution in high-temperature environment and to develop related damage models,
prediction methods, and computation tools [11–13].
Oxidation is the key factor to limit the application of CMCs on hot section
load-carrying components of aeroengines. Combining carbides deposited by
chemical vapor infiltration (CVI) process with specific sequences, a new generation
of SiC/SiC composite with self-healing matrix has been developed to improve the
oxidation resistance [14, 15]. The self-sealing matrix forms a glass with oxygen
188 5 Fatigue Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Temperature
at high temperature and consequently prevent oxygen diffusion inside the mate-
rial. At low temperature of 650–1000 ∘ C in dry and wet oxygen atmosphere, the
self-healing 2.5D NicalonTM NL202 SiC/[Si-B-C] with a pyrolytic carbon (PyC)
interphase exhibits a better oxidation resistance compared to SiC/SiC with PyC
because of the presence of boron compounds [16]. The fatigue lifetime duration
in air atmosphere at intermediate and high temperature is considerably reduced
beyond the elastic yield point. For the Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite, the elastic
yield point is about 𝜎 = 80 MPa. The lifetime duration was about t = 10–20 hours
at T = 873 K and less than t = 1 hour at T = 1123 K under 𝜎 max = 120 MPa. For the
self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC composite, a duration of t = 1000 hours without
failure is reached at 𝜎 max = 170 MPa, and a duration higher than t = 100 hours at
𝜎 max = 200 MPa at T = 873 K [17]. For the self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C]
composite, at 1200 ∘ C, there was little influence on fatigue performance at f = 1.0 Hz
but noticeably degraded fatigue lifetime at f = 0.1 Hz with the presence of steam
[18, 19]. Increase in temperature from T = 1200 to 1300 ∘ C slightly degrades fatigue
performance in air atmosphere but not in steam atmosphere [20]. The crack growth
in the SiC fiber controls the fatigue lifetime of self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C]
at T = 873 K, and the fiber creep controls the fatigue lifetime of self-healing
SiC/[Si-B-C] at T = 1200 ∘ C [21]. The typical cyclic fatigue behavior of a self-healing
Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite involves an initial decrease of effective modulus
to a minimum value, followed by a stiffening, and the time-to-the minimum
modulus is in inverse proportion to the loading frequency [22]. The initial cracks
within the longitudinal tows caused by interphase oxidation contributes to the
initial decrease of modulus. The glass produced by the oxidation of self-healing
matrix may contribute to the stiffening of the composite either by sealing the cracks
or by bonding the fiber to the matrix [23]. The damage evolution of self-healing
Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at elevated temperature can be monitored using
acoustic emission (AE) [24, 25]. The relationship between interface oxidation and
AE energy under static fatigue loading at elevated temperature has been developed
[26]. However, at high temperature above 1000 ∘ C, AE cannot be applied for
cyclic fatigue damage monitoring. The complex fatigue damage mechanisms of
self-healing CMCs affect damage evolution and lifetime. Hysteresis loops related
with cyclic-dependent fatigue damage mechanisms [27–29]. The damage parame-
ters derived from hysteresis loops have already been applied for analyzing fatigue
damage and fracture of different non-oxide CMCs at elevated temperatures [30–33].
However, the cyclic-dependent damage evolution and accumulation of self-healing
CMCs are much different from previous analysis results especially at elevated
temperatures.
In this chapter, cyclic-dependent damage development in self-healing 2.5D woven
Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] and 2D woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composites at
T = 600 and 1200 ∘ C are investigated. Cyclic-dependent damage parameters of
internal friction, dissipated energy, Kachanov’s damage parameter, and broken
fiber fraction are obtained to analyze damage development in self-healing CMCs.
Relationships between cyclic-dependent damage parameters and multiple fatigue
damage mechanisms are established. Experimental fatigue damage evolution of
self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] and Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composites

are predicted. Effects of fatigue peak stress, testing environment, and loading
frequencies on the evolution of internal damage and final fracture are analyzed.
5.2 Theoretical Analysis
When peak stress is higher than the first matrix cracking stress, under cyclic fatigue
loading, multiple fatigue damage mechanisms of matrix cracking, interface debond-
ing, wear and oxidation, and fiber fracture occur [5–8, 34]. Hysteresis loops appear
and evolve with cycle number upon unloading and reloading because of internal
multiple damages in CMCs [27–37]. A unit cell is extracted from the damaged
CMCs, as shown in Figure 5.1. The total length of the unit cell is half of a matrix
crack spacing lc /2, and the interface debonding length between the space of matrix
cracking is ld . Upon unloading, the debonding zone is divided into counter-slip
zone with length ly and slip zone with length ld − ly , as shown in Figure 5.1a, and
upon reloading, the debonding zone is divided into new slip zone with length lz ,
counter-slip region with length ly − lz , and slip region with length ld − ly , as shown in
Figure 5.1b.
Based on the interface debonding and slip state between the space of matrix
cracking, the type of hysteresis loops can be divided into four cases, as shown in
Table 5.1.
For cases 1 and 2 in Table 5.3, the unloading and reloading composite hysteresis
strain is a function of cyclic-dependent unloading intact fiber stress ΦU (N), reload-
ing intact fiber stress ΦR (N), interface shear stress 𝜏 i (N), interface debonding length
ld (N), and interface slip length ly (N) and lz (N). Cyclic-dependent unloading com-
posite hysteresis strain 𝜀U (N) and reloading composite hysteresis strain 𝜀R (N) are
2
ΦU (N) + Σ(N) 𝜏 (N) ly
𝜀U (N) = +4 i
Ef Ef rf lc
( )( )
𝜏i (N) 2ly (N) − ld (N) 2ly (N) + ld (N) − lc (N)
− − (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT (5.1)
Ef rf lc
(a) (b)
Figure 5.1 Unit cell of damaged CMCs upon (a) unloading and (b) reloading.
Table 5.1 Interface debonding and slip state in CMCs.
Interface debonding Interface counter Interface new

Case condition slip condition slip condition
Case 1 ld (𝜎 max ) < lc /2 ly (𝜎 min ) = ld (𝜎 max ) lz (𝜎 max ) = ld (𝜎 max )

Case 2 ld (𝜎 max ) < lc /2 ly (𝜎 min ) < ld (𝜎 max ) lz (𝜎 max ) < ld (𝜎 max )
Case 3 ld (𝜎 max ) = lc /2 ly (𝜎 min ) < lc /2 lz (𝜎 max ) < lc /2
Case 4 ld (𝜎 max ) = lc /2 ly (𝜎 min ) = lc /2 lz (𝜎 max ) = lc /2
( )2
ΦR (N) + Σ(N) 𝜏i (N) l2z 𝜏i (N) ly (N) − 2lz (N)
𝜀R (N) = −4 +4
Ef E f r f lc Ef r f lc
( )( )
𝜏i (N) d l (N) − 2l y (N) + 2lz (N) l d (N) + 2l y (N) − 2lz (N) − lc (N)
+2
Ef r f lc
− (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT (5.2)
where Σ is the additional stress in intact fibers resulting from gross slip of adjacent
fractured fibers, r f is the fiber radius, Ef is the fiber Young’s modulus, 𝛼 f and 𝛼 c denote
the fiber and composite thermal expansion coefficient, respectively, and ΔT denotes
the temperature difference between tested and fabricated temperature.
For cases 3 and 4 in Table 5.1, cyclic-dependent unloading composite hysteresis
strain 𝜀U (N) and reloading composite hysteresis strain 𝜀R (N) are
2
( )2
ΦU (N) + Σ(N) 𝜏i (N) ly (N) 𝜏i (N) 2ly (N) − lc (N)∕2
𝜀U (N) = +4 −2 − (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT
Ef Ef rf lc Ef rf lc
(5.3)
2
ΦR (N) + Σ(N) 𝜏 (N) l2z 𝜏 (N) (ly − 2lz )
𝜀R (N) = −4 i +4 i
Ef Ef rf lc Ef rf lc
( )2
𝜏 (N) lc ∕2 − 2ly + 2lz
−2 i − (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT (5.4)
Ef rf lc
Cyclic-dependent internal damage parameter is defined by ΔW/W e , where W e is
the maximum elastic energy stored during a cycle [30].
𝜎max [ ]
ΔW(N) = 𝜀U (N) − 𝜀R (N) d𝜎 (5.5)
∫𝜎min
Substituting Eqs. (5.1)–(5.4) into Eq. (5.5), the damage parameter ΔW(N) can be
obtained, which is a function of cyclic-dependent unloading intact fiber stress
ΦU (N), reloading intact fiber stress ΦR (N), interface shear stress 𝜏 i (N), and inter-
face debonding and slip length ld (N), ly (N), and lz (N). It should be noted that the
cyclic-dependent unloading intact fiber stress (ΦU (N)) and reloading intact fiber
stress (ΦR (N)) consider fiber failure and broken fiber fraction.
The mean elastic modulus E is the mean slope of hysteresis loop. This modulus is
usually normalized by Young’s modulus E0 of an undamaged composite, leading to
the plotting of E/E0 . A Kachanov’s damage parameter D is
E
D=1− (5.6)
E0
The Kachanov’s damage parameter D is another way to describe evolution of
composite mean elastic modulus E under cyclic fatigue but contains the same
information than the normalized modulus E/E0 .
5.3 Experimental Comparisons
Monotonic tensile and cyclic-dependent damage evolution of self-healing 2.5D

woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] and 2D woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] com-
posites are analyzed for different temperatures. The monotonic tensile curves
exhibit obvious nonlinear at elevated temperatures. For 2.5D woven Hi-Nicalon
SiC/[Si-B-C] at 600 and 1200 ∘ C, the tensile curves can be divided into three
main zones; however, for 2D woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] at 1200 ∘ C, the
tensile curve can only be divided into two main zones. Cyclic-dependent damage
parameters of internal friction ΔW(N)/W e (N), dissipated energy ΔW(N), interface
shear stress 𝜏 i (N), Kachanov’s damage parameter D(N), and broken fiber fraction
q(N) versus applied cycle number are analyzed for different temperatures, peak
stresses, and loading frequencies. The interface shear stress decreases with applied
cycle number; and the Kachanov’s damage parameter and broken fiber fraction
increase with applied cycle number. However, the evolution of internal frictional
and dissipated energy with increasing applied cycles is much more complex, which
depends on the peak stress, temperature, and testing environment. The internal
damage evolution of 2.5D woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] and 2D woven Hi-Nicalon
SiC/[SiC-B4 C] subjected to cyclic fatigue loading are obtained.

Atmosphere
Figure 5.2 shows the monotonic tensile curve of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon
SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at T = 600 ∘ C in air atmosphere. The self-healing Hi-Nicalon
SiC/[Si-B-C] composite fractures at 𝜎 UTS = 341 MPa with the failure strain 𝜀f = 0.64%.
The tensile curve exhibits obvious nonlinear and can be divided into three zones,
including (i) the linear elastic zone with an elastic modulus Ec = 195 ± 20 GPa;
(ii) the nonlinear zone due to multiple matrix cracking; and (iii) the second linear
zone after saturation of matrix cracking up to final fracture, with an elastic modulus
of Ec = 23 ± 1 GPa, which is half of theoretical value Ef V fl (43 GPa) when the load
is supported only by the longitudinal fiber.
Experimental cyclic-dependent internal friction parameter ΔW/W e versus cycle
number curves of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite
under 𝜎 min = −50/𝜎 max = 300 MPa and 𝜎 min = 0/𝜎 max = 200 MPa at T = 600 ∘ C in air
atmosphere are shown in Figure 5.3. Cyclic-dependent internal friction parameter
ΔW/W e decreases first, followed by a short stabilization, and increases again before
Figure 5.2 Tensile curve of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at
600 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
Figure 5.3 Experimental ΔW/W e versus cycle number curves of 2.5D woven self-healing
Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at 600 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
reaching a plateau, and finally a sharp increase when the composite approaches
failure. During initial stage of cyclic fatigue loading, matrix cracking and interface
debonding occur when the fatigue peak stress is higher than the first matrix cracking
stress. Under repeated unloading and reloading, the sliding between the fiber and
the matrix leads to the interface wear and oxidation, which decreases the interface
shear stress [5, 8, 27, 29]. The initial decrease of internal friction parameter ΔW/W e
is mainly attributed to matrix cracking, cyclic-dependent interface debonding, and
interface wear. However, with increasing applied cycle number, the interface wear
and oxidation decrease the interface shear stress to a constant value [30], leading to
the stabilization of cyclic-dependent interface debonding and slip length and also
the internal friction damage parameter ΔW/W e . The interface wear and oxidation
also decrease the fiber strength, leading to the gradual fracture of fiber, and the
sudden increase of internal friction at the end of the test correspond to fibers broken
[30, 33].
Experimental and predicted cyclic-dependent internal friction parameter
ΔW(N)/W e (N) and broken fiber fraction q(N) versus the interface shear stress
curves, and the cyclic-dependent Kachanov’s damage parameter D(N) and the
interface shear stress 𝜏 i (N) versus cycle number curves of 2.5D woven self-healing
Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] at 600 ∘ C in air atmosphere are shown in Figure 5.4
and Table 5.2. Under 𝜎 max = 200 and 300 MPa, the internal damage parameter
ΔW(N)/W e (N) first decreases with the interface shear stress mainly because of
the interface wear and oxidation and then increases with the interface shear stress
mainly because of the fiber broken, corresponding to the interface slip case 4 in
Table 5.1, as shown in Figure 5.4a. Under 𝜎 max = 300 MPa, the broken fiber fraction
q(N) at higher interface shear stress is much higher than that under 𝜎 max = 200 MPa,
mainly because of higher peak stress, as shown in Figure 5.4b, and the Kachanov’s
damage parameter D(N) is also higher than that under 𝜎 max = 200 MPa, as shown
in Figure 5.4c. The interface shear stress under 𝜎 max = 300 MPa is also higher than
that under 𝜎 max = 200 MPa, mainly because of the scatter of interface shear stress
or compressive stress of 𝜎 min = −50 MPa acting on the composite, as shown in
Figure 5.4d.
Under 𝜎 max = 200 MPa, the cyclic-dependent damage parameter ΔW/W e
decreases first, i.e. from ΔW/W e = 0.054 at 𝜏 i = 15.7 MPa to ΔW/W e = 0.034
at 𝜏 i = 8.0 MPa, and then increases from ΔW/W e = 0.034 at 𝜏 i = 8.0 MPa to
ΔW/W e = 0.062 at 𝜏 i = 6.0 MPa. The cyclic-dependent broken fiber fraction
increases from q = 0.004 at 𝜏 i = 15.7 MPa to q = 0.24 at 𝜏 i = 6.0 MPa. The
cyclic-dependent Kachanov’s damage parameter D increases from D = 0 at N = 1
to D = 0.21 at N = 89 459. The cyclic-dependent interface shear stress 𝜏 i decreases
from 𝜏 i = 15.7 MPa at N = 1 to 𝜏 i = 6.0 MPa at N = 33 788.
Under 𝜎 max = 300 MPa, the cyclic-dependent damage parameter ΔW/W e
decreases first, i.e. from ΔW/W e = 0.067 at 𝜏 i = 19.5 MPa to ΔW/W e = 0.058
at 𝜏 i = 14.7 MPa and then increases from ΔW/W e = 0.058 at 𝜏 i = 14.7 MPa to
ΔW/W e = 0.091 at 𝜏 i = 10.5 MPa. The cyclic-dependent broken fiber fraction
increases from q = 0.029 at 𝜏 i = 19.5 MPa to q = 0.347 at 𝜏 i = 10.5 MPa. The
cyclic-dependent Kachanov’s damage parameter D increases from D = 0 at N = 1 to
D = 0.265 at N = 23 666. The interface shear stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 19.5 MPa at
N = 1 to 𝜏 i = 10.5 MPa at N = 19 812.

Atmosphere
Monotonic tensile curve of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] com-
posite at T = 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere is shown in Figure 5.5. The composite tensile
fractured at 𝜎 UTS = 354 MPa with 𝜀f = 0.699%. The tensile curve can also be divided
into three zones, including (i) the initial linear elastic zone, (ii) the non-linear zone,
Figure 5.4 (a) Experimental

and predicted internal friction
parameter ΔW/W e versus the
interface shear stress curves;
(b) the broken fiber fraction q
versus the interface shear
stress curves; (c) the
experimental and predicted
Kachanov’s damage
parameter D versus cycle
number curves; and (d) the
interface shear stress 𝜏 i (N)
versus cycle number curve of
2.5D woven self-healing
Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C]
composite at 600 ∘ C in air
(a) atmosphere.
(b)
(c)
(d)
Table 5.2 Cyclic-dependent damage evolution of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM

SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at 600 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
Cycle number 𝚫W /W e 𝝉 i (MPa) q (%)
0/200 MPa at 600 ∘ C in air atmosphere

1 0.054 15.7 0.4
1 055 0.034 8.0 4.5
2 993 0.037 7.1 7.7
5 041 0.042 6.5 12.3
10 343 0.045 6.3 15.1
33 788 0.062 6 24.0
−50/300 MPa at 600 ∘ C in air atmosphere

1 0.067 19.5 2.9
10 0.058 14.7 7.0
100 0.059 13.0 10.9
500 0.067 11.5 18.4
1 000 0.071 11.2 21.1
2 080 0.074 11.0 23.5
4 410 0.075 10.9 24.9
10 406 0.079 10.8 26.7
19 812 0.091 10.5 34.7
Figure 5.5 Tensile curve of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at
1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
Figure 5.6 Experimental internal friction parameter ΔW/W e versus cycle number curves of
2.5D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
and (iii) the second linear region with fiber broken. The average fracture strength
and failure strain of 2.5D woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite is slightly lower
at T = 1200 ∘ C, i.e. 𝜎 UTS = 320 MPa and 𝜖 f = 0.62%, against 𝜎 UTS = 332 MPa and
𝜖 f = 0.658% at T = 600 ∘ C.
Experimental cyclic-dependent internal friction parameter ΔW/W e versus cycle
number curves of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] at T = 1200 ∘ C
in air atmosphere are shown in Figure 5.6. The cyclic-dependent internal friction
parameter ΔW/W e decreases continuously, and finally a sharp increase when the
composite approaches fail. The internal friction decreases as the interface wear
reduces the interface shear stress. The sudden increase of internal friction at the
end of the test corresponds to the fiber broken.

and predicted internal friction
parameter ΔW/W e versus the
interface shear stress curves;
(b) the broken fiber fraction
versus the interface shear
stress curves; (c) the
Kachanov’s damage
parameter versus cycle
number curves; and (d) the
interface shear stress versus
cycle number curves of 2.5D
woven self-healing
Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C]
atmosphere.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Experimental and predicted cyclic-dependent internal friction parameter

ΔW(N)/W e (N) and the broken fiber fraction q(N) versus the interface shear stress
curves, and the cyclic-dependent Kachanov’s damage parameter D(N) and the
interface shear stress 𝜏 i (N) versus cycle number curves of 2.5D woven self-healing
Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere are shown in
Figure 5.7 and Table 5.3. Under 𝜎 max = 170 and 200 MPa, the internal damage
parameter ΔW/W e decreases with the interface shear stress, corresponding to the
interface slip case 4 in Table 5.1. Under 𝜎 max = 200 MPa, the broken fiber fraction
is higher than that under 𝜎 max = 170 MPa at the same interface shear stress; and
the Kachanov’s damage parameter D is also higher than that under 𝜎 max = 170 MPa
at the same cycle number. However, the value of the interface shear stress under
𝜎 max = 200 MPa is close to that under 𝜎 max = 170 MPa.
Under 𝜎 max = 170 MPa, the cyclic-dependent internal friction parameter ΔW/W e
increases to the peak value first and then decreases, i.e. from ΔW/W e = 0.2 at
𝜏 i = 150 MPa to ΔW/W e = 0.42 at 𝜏 i = 39.5 MPa, and then to ΔW/W e = 0.04 at
𝜏 i = 1.25 MPa. The broken fiber fraction increases from q = 0.0007 at 𝜏 i = 150 MPa
to q = 0.12 at 𝜏 i = 1.2 MPa. The Kachanov’s damage parameter increases from
D = 0 at N = 1 to D = 0.068 at N = 13 202. The interface shear stress decreases from
𝜏 i = 5.5 MPa at N = 1 to 𝜏 i = 1.7 MPa at N = 32 334.
Under 𝜎 max = 200 MPa, the cyclic-dependent internal friction parameter ΔW/W e
increases to the peak value first and then decreases, i.e. from ΔW/W e = 0.161 at
𝜏 i = 150 MPa to ΔW/W e = 0.42 at 𝜏 i = 26.4 MPa, and then to ΔW/W e = 0.05 at
𝜏 i = 1.37 MPa. The broken fiber fraction increases from q = 0.0008 at 𝜏 i = 150 MPa to
q = 0.14 at 𝜏 i = 1.3 MPa. The Kachanov’s damage parameter increases from D = 0 at
N = 1 to D = 0.2 at N = 60 530. The interface shear stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 5.1 MPa
at N = 1 to 𝜏 i = 2 MPa at N = 66 794.
Table 5.3 Cyclic-dependent damage evolution of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM

SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
Cycle number 𝚫W /W e 𝝉 i (MPa) q (%)
0/170 MPa at 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere

1 0.097 5.5 2.0
10 0.076 4.7 2.4
517 0.068 4.3 2.6
1 281 0.062 3.6 3.2
13 700 0.047 2.5 4.9
32 334 0.044 1.7 7.8
−50/200 MPa at 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere

1 0.133 5.1 2.7
5 0.096 3.6 4.0
20 0.090 3.4 4.3
100 0.087 3.3 4.4
450 0.085 3.2 4.6
790 0.082 3.1 4.8
8 910 0.073 2.6 5.9
66 794 0.061 2.0 8.1
5.3.3 2D Woven Self-Healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[SiC-B4 C] at 1200 ∘ C

in Air and in Steam Atmospheres
Monotonic tensile curve of 2D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C]
composite at T = 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere is shown in Figure 5.8. The composite
tensile fractured at 𝜎 UTS = 345 MPa with 𝜀f = 0.79%. Experimental cyclic-dependent
dissipated energy (ΔW(N)) versus cycle number curves of 2D woven self-healing
Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa at T = 1200 ∘ C in air
atmosphere and in steam atmosphere with f = 0.1 and 1 Hz are shown in Figure 5.9.
Experimental and predicted cyclic-dependent dissipated energy ΔW(N) and bro-
ken fiber fraction versus the interface shear stress curves, and the cyclic-dependent
interface shear stress 𝜏 i (N) and dissipated energy ΔW(N) versus cycle number
curves of 2D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite under
𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 0.1 and 1 Hz at T = 1200 ∘ C in air and in steam atmospheres
are shown in Figure 5.10 and Table 5.4. The damage parameter ΔW increases with
the interface shear stress, corresponding to the interface slip case 2 in Table 5.1, as
shown in Figure 5.10a. The broken fiber fraction increases with decreasing interface
shear stress, as shown in Figure 5.10b. The interface shear stress degrades with
cycle number, and the degradation rate of the interface shear stress under f = 0.1 Hz
is higher than that under f = 1 Hz. When f = 1 Hz, the degradation rate of the
Figure 5.8 Tensile curve of 2D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite at

1200 ∘ C.
Figure 5.9 Experimental cyclic-dependent dissipated energy (ΔW) versus cycle number
curves of 2D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite under
𝜎 max = 140 MPa at 1200 ∘ C in air and in steam atmospheres.
interface shear stress is less affected in air or in steam condition; however, when
f = 0.1 Hz, the degradation rate of the interface shear stress in steam is higher than
that in air condition.
At T = 1200 ∘ C in air condition, under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 1 Hz, the exper-
imental cyclic-dependent dissipated energy ΔW increases from ΔW = 8.5 kPa at
𝜏 i = 34 MPa to ΔW = 32.4 kPa at 𝜏 i = 9.2 MPa; the broken fiber fraction increases
from P = 0.001 at 𝜏 i = 150 MPa to P = 0.167 at 𝜏 i = 1.57 MPa; the experimental inter-
face shear stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 34 MPa at N = 1000 to 𝜏 i = 9.2 MPa at N = 60 000,
Figure 5.10 (a)

Experimental and predicted
dissipated energy ΔW versus
the interface shear stress
curves; (b) the broken fiber
fraction versus the interface
shear stress curves; (c) the
interface shear stress versus
cycle number curves; and (d)
the experimental and
predicted dissipated energy
versus cycle number curves of
2D woven self-healing
Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[SiC-B4 C]
atmosphere.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Table 5.4 Cyclic-dependent damage evolution of 2D woven self-healing

Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa at 1200 ∘ C in air
and in steam atmospheres.
Cycle number 𝚫W (kPa) 𝝉 i (MPa) q (%)
𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 1.0 Hz at 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere

1 000 8.5 34 0.48
10 000 10.1 28 0.58
30 000 15.6 18 0.9
60 000 32.4 9.2 1.8
𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 0.1 Hz at 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere

1 000 12.7 23 0.7
10 000 18.8 15.7 1
30 000 34.2 8.7 2
𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 1.0 Hz at 1200 ∘ C in steam atmosphere

1 000 8.5 34 0.48
10 000 10.8 27.1 0.6
30 000 18.1 16.3 1
𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 0.1 Hz at 1200 ∘ C in steam atmosphere

1 000 14.8 20 0.8
10 000 17.5 16.5 1
10 000 27 11 1.5
and the experimental dissipated energy increases from ΔW = 8.4 kPa at N = 1000 to
ΔW = 32.4 kPa at N = 60 000.
Under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 0.1 Hz, the experimental cyclic-dependent dissi-
pated energy increases from ΔW = 12.7 kPa at 𝜏 i = 23 MPa to ΔW = 34.2 kPa at
𝜏 i = 8.7 MPa; the broken fiber fraction increases from q = 0.001 at 𝜏 i = 150 MPa to
q = 0.167 at 𝜏 i = 1.57 MPa; the experimental interface shear stress decreases from
𝜏 i = 23 MPa at N = 1000 to 𝜏 i = 8.7 MPa at N = 30 000; and the experimental dis-
sipated energy increases from ΔW = 12.7 kPa at N = 1000 to ΔW = 34.2 kPa at
N = 30 000.
At T = 1200 ∘ C in steam condition, under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 1 Hz, the
experimental cyclic-dependent dissipated energy increases from ΔW = 8.5 kPa at
𝜏 i = 34 MPa to ΔW = 18.1 kPa at 𝜏 i = 16.3 MPa; the broken fiber fraction increases
from P = 0.001 at 𝜏 i = 150 MPa to P = 0.167 at 𝜏 i = 1.57 MPa; the experimental
interface shear stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 34 MPa at N = 1000 to 𝜏 i = 16.3 MPa at
N = 30 000; and the experimental dissipated energy increases from ΔW = 8.5 kPa at
N = 1000 to ΔW = 18.1 kPa at N = 30 000.
At T = 1200 ∘ C in steam condition, under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa and f = 0.1 Hz, the
experimental cyclic-dependent dissipated energy increases with decreasing interface
shear stress, i.e. from ΔW = 14.8 kPa at 𝜏 i = 20 MPa to ΔW = 27 kPa at 𝜏 i = 11 MPa;
the broken fiber fraction increases from q = 0.001 at 𝜏 i = 150 MPa to q = 0.167 at
𝜏 i = 1.57 MPa; the experimental interface shear stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 20 MPa
at N = 100 to 𝜏 i = 11 MPa at N = 10 000; and the experimental dissipated energy
increases from ΔW = 14.8 kPa at N = 100 to ΔW = 27 kPa at N = 10 000.
5.3.4 Discussion
The evolution curves of cyclic-dependent interface shear stress 𝜏 i (N) and bro-
ken fiber fraction versus cycle number of 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon
SiC/[Si-B-C] composite under different peak stresses at T = 600 and 1200 ∘ C in
air atmosphere are shown in Figure 5.11. For 2.5D SiC/[Si-B-C] composite, the
temperature is a govern parameter for the fatigue damage process. When the
temperature increases from T = 600 to 1200 ∘ C, the interface shear stress decreases
a lot, and the interface shear stress degradation rate and broken fiber fraction
increase with peak stress.
At T = 600 ∘ C and 𝜎 max = 200 MPa, the interface shear stress decreases from
𝜏 i = 15.7 MPa at N = 1 to 𝜏 i = 6.0 MPa at N = 33 788, and the broken fiber fraction
increases from q = 0.004 to q = 0.24, and under 𝜎 max = 300 MPa, the interface shear
stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 19.5 MPa at N = 1 to 𝜏 i = 10.5 MPa at N = 19 812, and the
broken fiber fraction increases from q = 0.029 to q = 0.347. However, at T = 1200 ∘ C
and under 𝜎 max = 170 MPa, the interface shear stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 5.5 MPa
at N = 1 to 𝜏 i = 1.7 MPa at N = 32 334, and the broken fiber fraction increases
from q = 0.0007 to q = 0.12, and under 𝜎 max = 200 MPa, the interface shear stress
decreases from 𝜏 i = 5.1 MPa at N = 1 to 𝜏 i = 2 MPa at N = 66 794, and the broken
fiber fraction increases from q = 0.0008 to q = 0.14.
(a)
(b)
Figure 5.11 (a) Experimental and predicted interface shear stress versus cycle number
curves and (b) the broken fiber fraction versus cycle number curves of 2.5D woven
self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at 600–1200 ∘ C in air and in steam
atmospheres.
The evolution curves of cyclic-dependent interface shear stress 𝜏 i (N) and the
broken fiber fraction versus cycle number of 2D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon
SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa at T = 1200 ∘ C in air and in
steam atmospheres with f = 0.1 and 1 Hz are shown in Figure 5.12. For the 2D
SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite, the loading frequency is the govern parameter for the
fatigue process. Under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa, at the same cycle number, the interface
shear stress decreases with decreasing loading frequency, and the interface shear
stress in steam atmosphere is lower than that in air atmosphere, and the broken
fiber fraction increases with decreasing loading frequency, and the broken fiber
fraction in steam atmosphere is higher than that in air atmosphere.
(a)
(b)
Figure 5.12 (a) Experimental and predicted interface shear stress versus cycle number
curves and (b) the broken fiber fraction versus cycle number curves of 2D woven
self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa at 1200 ∘ C in air
and in steam atmospheres.
At T = 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere and f = 1 Hz, the interface shear stress decreases
from 𝜏 i = 34 MPa at N = 1000 to 𝜏 i = 9.2 MPa at N = 60 000, and the broken fiber
fraction increases from q = 0.0048 to q = 0.018; when f = 0.1 Hz, the interface shear
stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 23 MPa at N = 1000 to 𝜏 i = 8.7 MPa at N = 30 000, and the
broken fiber fraction increases from q = 0.007 to q = 0.02. At T = 1200 ∘ C in steam
atmosphere and f = 1 Hz, the interface shear stress decreases from 𝜏 i = 34 MPa at
N = 1000 to 𝜏 i = 16.3 MPa at N = 30 000, and the broken fiber fraction increases
from q = 0.0048 to q = 0.01; when f = 0.1 Hz, the interface shear stress decreases
from 𝜏 i = 20 MPa at N = 100 to 𝜏 i = 11 MPa at N = 10 000, and the broken fiber
fraction increases from q = 0.008 to q = 0.015.
5.4 Conclusion
In this chapter, cyclic-dependent damage evolution of self-healing 2.5D woven

Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] and 2D woven Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composites
under different peak stresses and loading frequencies at T = 600 and 1200 ∘ C are
investigated. Damage parameters of internal friction ΔW/W e , dissipated energy
ΔW, Kachanov’s damage parameter D, broken fiber fraction, and interface shear
stress are used to describe fatigue damage evolution.
● For 2.5D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite, temperature is a

govern parameter for the fatigue process. At T = 600 ∘ C in air atmosphere, ΔW/W e
first decreases and then increases with cycle number, and at T = 1200 ∘ C in air
atmosphere, ΔW/W e decreases with cycle number. The degradation rate of the
interface shear stress and broken fiber faction increases with peak stress.
● For 2D woven self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite at T = 1200 ∘ C,
loading frequency is a govern parameter for the fatigue process. ΔW increases
with cycle number; under 𝜎 max = 140 MPa, at the same applied cycle number, the
interface shear stress decreases with the loading frequency, and the interface shear
stress in steam atmosphere is lower than that in air atmosphere, and the broken
fiber fraction increases with decreasing loading frequency, and the broken fiber
fraction in steam atmosphere is higher than that in air atmosphere.
References

64: 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00230-6.
2 Bendnarcyk, B.A., Mital, S.K., Pineda, E.J., and Arnold, S.M. (2015). Multiscale
modeling of ceramic matrix composites. In: The 56th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC
Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Kissimmee, FL, USA
(5–9 January 2015). Reston, USA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astro-
nautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2015-1191.
3 Padture, N.P. (2016). Advanced structural ceramics in aerospace propulsion. Nat.
Mater. 15: 804. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat4687.
4 Steibel, J., Blank, J., and Dix, B. (2017). Ceramic-matrix composites at GE Avi-
ation. In: Advanced Ceramic Matrix Composites: Science and Technology of
Materials, Design, Applications, Performance and Integration, La Fonda on the
Plaza, Santa Fe, NM, USA (5–9 November 2017). New York, USA: Engineering
Conferences International.
5 Zhu, S.J., Mizuno, M., Kagawa, Y., and Mutoh, Y. (1999). Monotonic tension,
fatigue and creep behavior of SiC-fiber-reinforced SiC-matrix composites:
a review. Compos. Sci. Technol. 59: 833–851. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-
3538(99)00014-7.
References 207
6 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B., Christensen, D.T., Chamberlain, A.L. et al. (2011). Effect

of frequency and environment on fatigue behavior of a CVI SiC/SiC ceramic
matrix composite at 1200 ∘ C. Compos. Sci. Technol. 71: 190–196. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compscitech.2010.11.008.
7 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B. and Jones, T.P. (2013). Tension–tension fatigue of a
SiC/SiC ceramic matrix composite at 1200 ∘ C in air and in steam. Int. J. Fatigue
47: 154–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2012.08.006.
8 Li, L.B. (2017). Damage and failure of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites
subjected to cyclic fatigue, dwell fatigue and thermomechanical fatigue. Ceram.
Int. 43: 13978–13996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.07.130.
9 Racle, E., Godin, N., Reynaud, P., and Fantozzi, G. (2017). Fatigue lifetime of
ceramic matrix composites at intermediate temperature by acoustic emission.
Materials 10: 658. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10060658.
10 Ikarashi, Y., Ogasawara, T., and Aoki, T. (2019). Effects of cyclic tensile loading
on the rupture behavior of orthogonal 3-D woven SiC fiber/SiC matrix compos-
ites at elevated temperatures in air. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 39: 806–812. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2018.10.016.
11 Murthy, L.N., Nemeth, N.N., Brewer, D.N., and Mital, S. (2008). Probabilistic
analysis of a SiC/SiC ceramic matrix composite turbine vane. Compos. Part B
39: 694–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2007.05.006.
12 Santhosh, U., Ahmad, J., John, R. et al. (2013). Modeling of stress concentration
in ceramic matrix composites. Compos. Part B 45: 1156–1163. https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.compositesb.2012.07.034.
13 Li, L.B. (2018). Advanced SiC/SiC composite system. In: Comprehensive Compos-
ite Materials II, vol. 5 (eds. P.W.R. Beaumont and C.H. Zweben), 41–85. Oxford:
Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-803581-8.09989-6.
14 Lamouroux, F., Camus, G., and Thebault, J. (1994). Kinetics and mechanisms
15 Hay, R.S. and Chater, R.J. (2017). Oxidation kinetics strength of Hi-NicalonTM -S
SiC fiber after oxidation in dry and wet air. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 100: 4110–4130.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jace.14833.
16 Viricelle, J.P., Goursat, P., and Bahloul-Hourlier, D. (2001). Oxidation behav-
ior of a multi-layered ceramic-matrix composite (SiC)f /C/(SiBC)m . Compos. Sci.
Technol. 61: 607–614. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(00)00243-8.
17 Bouillon, E., Abbe, F., Goujard, S. et al. (2002). Mechanical and thermal proper-
ties of a self-sealing matrix composite and determination of the life time dura-
tion. Ceram. Eng. Sci. Proc. 21: 459–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470294628
.ch54.
18 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B., Delapasse, J., Chamberlain, A.L. et al. (2012). Fatigue
behavior of a Hi-NicalonTM /SiC-B4 C composite at 1200 ∘ C in air and in steam.
19 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B. and Kurtz, G. (2013). Notch sensitivity of fatigue behav-
ior of a Hi-NicalonTM /SiC-B4 C composite at 1200 ∘ C in air and in steam. Appl.
20 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B. and Lee, M.D. (2016). Fatigue behavior of an advanced

SiC/SiC composite with a self-healing matrix at 1300 ∘ C in air and in steam.
21 Reynaud, P., Rouby, D., and Fantozzi, G. (2005). Cyclic fatigue behaviour at high
temperature of a self-healing ceramic matrix composite. Ann. Chim. Sci. Mat. 30:
649–658.
22 Carrere, P. and Lamon, J. (1999). Fatigue behavior at high temperature in air
of a 2D woven SiC/SiBC with a self healing matrix. Key Eng. Mater. 164–165:
321–324. https://doi.org/10.4028/http://www.scientific.net/KEM.164-165.321.
23 Forio, P. and Lamon, J. (2001). Fatigue behavior at high temperatures in air of a
2D SiC/Si-B-C composite with a self-healing multilayered matrix. In: Advances
in Ceramic Matrix Composites VII (eds. N.P. Bansal, J.P. Singh and H.-T. Lin),
127–141. The American Ceramic Society. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118380925
.ch10.
24 Simon, C., Rebillat, F., and Camus, G. (2017). Electrical resistivity monitor-
ing of a SiC/[Si-B-C] composite under oxidizing environments. Acta Mater.
132: 586–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2017.04.070.
.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2016.11.036.
26 Moevus, M., Reynaud, P., R’Mili, M. et al. (2006). Static fatigue of a 2.5D
SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at intermediate temperature under air. Adv. Sci. Technol.
50: 141–146. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AST.50.141.
27 Reynaud, P. (1996). Cyclic fatigue of ceramic-matrix composites at ambient and
elevated temperatures. Compos. Sci. Technol. 56: 809–814. https://doi.org/10
.1016/0266-3538(96)00025-5.
28 Dalmaz, A., Reynaud, P., Rouby, D., and Fantozzi, A.F. (1998). Mechanical
behavior and damage development during cyclic fatigue at high-temperature of a
2.5D carbon/sic composite. Compos. Sci. Technol. 58: 693–699. https://doi.org/10
.1016/S0266-3538(97)00150-4.
.2008.09.128.
30 Li, L.B. (2015). A hysteresis dissipated energy-based damage parameter for life
prediction of carbon fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites under fatigue
loading. Compos. Part B 82: 108–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2015
.08.026.
31 Li, L.B. (2018). Damage monitoring and life prediction of carbon fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites at room and elevated temperatures using hystere-
sis dissipated energy-based damage parameter. Compos. Interfaces 25: 335–356.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09276440.2018.1439621.
References 209
32 Li, L.B., Reynaud, P., and Fantozzi, G. (2019). Mechanical hysteresis and damage
evolution in C/SiC composites under fatigue loading at room and elevated tem-
peratures. Int. J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 16: 2214–2228. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijac
.13300.
ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperatures. Compos. Interfaces 26
(11): 963–988. https://doi.org/10.1080/09276440.2019.1569397.
35 Penas, O. (2002). Etude de composites SiC/SiBC à matrice multiséquencée en
fatigue cyclique à hautes températures sous air. PhD thesis. INSA de Lyon.
36 Budiansky, B., Hutchinson, J.W., and Evans, A.G. (1986). Matrix fracture in
fiber-reinforced ceramics. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 34: 167–189. https://doi.org/10
.1016/0022-5096(86)90035-9.
.1016/S1359-6454(96)00143-7.
211
Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated

Temperature
6.1 Introduction
The improvement of thrust–weight ratio and the reduction of fuel consumption
have become the trend of aeroengine development. Two most effective ways
to increase the thrust–weight ratio of aeroengine are to reduce the component
weight and to increase the turbine inlet temperature. In general, aeroengines had
high thrust–weight ratios of approximately 12–15, the inlet temperature at turbine
approaches 1800 ∘ C, which exceeds the limit of the service temperature of superalloy
materials. To satisfy the design requirements of aeroengines, especially those with
high thrust–weight ratios and low fuel consumptions, it is necessary to develop a
new type of lightweight material for hot-section components, which can withstand
higher temperature, possess higher strength, and longer life in order to replace
the traditional superalloy materials [1–3]. In general, ceramic-matrix composites
(CMCs) exhibit high strength and modulus and corrosion resistance especially at
elevated temperature. Compared with the traditional superalloy materials, CMCs
can withstand higher operating temperature, simplify or even remove cooling
structure, optimize aeroengine structure design, and improve the service life of
aeroengine hot-section components [4–8]. Silicon carbide fiber-reinforced silicon
carbide CMCs (SiC/SiC) and oxide fiber-reinforced oxide CMCs (Oxide/Oxide) have
already been used in aeroengines. SiC/SiC composite consists of the SiC fiber with
a diameter of 12 μm, the interface layer with a thickness of 0.2–0.5 μm, and the SiC
matrix. SiC/SiC composite has high oxidation resistance, lightweight (i.e. density
2.1–2.8 g/cm3 ), high-temperature (1200–1400 ∘ C) gas lifetime up to thousands of
hours, and is the most ideal material for the hot end structure of aeroengines. In
1992, with the project support from the U.S. Department of Energy, General Electric
(GE) company developed the prepreg infiltration process, realized the rapid and
low-cost preparation of high-performance SiC/SiC composite, and carried out the
verification process of different levels, including material level, component level,
and engine level. In 2010, GE aviation carried out turbine rotor blade test with
F414 engine as the verification platform to build a ceramic aeroengine. In 2016,
SiC/SiC composite material was first used in the turbine outer ring of Leading
Edge Aviation Propulsion (LEAP) aeroengine and has been produced in batches.
Then, this material was applied in the combustion chamber, guide vane, turbine
212 6 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Temperature
outer ring, and other structures of the new GE9x commercial aeroengine. The fuel
consumption rate was 10% lower than that of GE90-115B [9].
Because of the long service lifetime requirements of CMCs components in
aeroengines, it is necessary to understand the complex damage mechanisms and
develop methods or tools to predict the damage evolution of CMCs [10–16]. At
the intermediate temperature, SiC/SiC composite lifetime is decreased because of
interface oxidation and lowered fiber content following exposure to stress rupture
loading [11]. At elevated temperature range of 700–1200 ∘ C, the SiC/SiC mini-
composite with the pyrolytic carbon (PyC) interphase exhibited severe damages of
oxidation embrittlement, and the SiC/SiC minicomposite with the boron nitride
(BN) interphase showed only mild degradation subjected to the stress rupture
loading [17]. Martinez-Fernandez and Morscher [18] investigated the monotonic
tensile, stress rupture under constant load, and low-cycle fatigue of single tow
Hi-NicalonTM , PyC interphase, chemical vapor infiltration (CVI) SiC matrix mini-
composites at room temperature, 700, 950, and 1200 ∘ C in air atmosphere. The stress
rupture behavior at elevated temperature depended on the precracking stress level.
However, for the 2D woven melt-infiltrated (MI) Hi-Nicalon SiC/SiC composite,
the stress rupture properties were obviously worse than SiC/SiC minicomposite
properties under similar testing conditions because of complex fiber preform and
damage evolution mechanisms [19]. Verrilli et al. [20] investigated the lifetime of
C/SiC composite at elevated temperatures of 600 and 1200 ∘ C subjected to the stress
rupture loading in different environments. Stress rupture lives in air and in steam
containing environments were similar at a low stress level of 69 MPa at an elevated
temperature of 1200 ∘ C. The fiber oxidation rate correlated with the composite
stress rupture lifetime in various environments.
In the theoretical research area, Marshall et al. [21] and Zok and Spearing [22]
applied the fracture mechanics approach to explore nonsteady first matrix cracking
stress and multiple matrix cracking in fiber-reinforced CMCs. The energy balance
relationship before and after the matrix cracking is established considering the
mutual inference factors of the stress field between the adjacent matrix cracks.
Curtin [23] investigated multiple matrix cracking in CMCs in the presence of matrix
internal flaws. Evans [24] reported a method to predict design and life problems in
fiber-reinforced CMCs. In addition, a connection between the macromechanical
behavior and constituent properties of CMCs was established based on these
predictions. McNulty and Zok [25] investigated the low-cycle fatigue damage
mechanism and reported predictive damage models to describe the low-cycle CMC
fatigue life. The degradation of the interface properties and fiber strength controls
the fatigue life of CMCs. Lara-Curzio [26] established a micromechanical model
for fiber-reinforced CMC reliability and time-to-failure estimation, particularly
following the application of stresses greater than the first matrix cracking stress. The
relationship between internal damage mechanisms and lifetime was established.
In addition, the stress and temperature influences on the fiber-reinforced CMCs
were investigated. Halverson and Curtin [27] developed a micromechanically
based model for composite strength, and stress rupture lifetime of oxide/oxide
fiber-reinforced CMCs considering the degradation of the fiber, matrix damage, and
6.2 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites 213
fiber pullout. Casas and Martinez-Esnaola [28] produced a fiber-reinforced CMC

micromechanical creep–oxidation model, which was used to characterize oxidation
at the CMC interface and the matrix, fiber creep, and fiber degradation with respect
to time. Pailler and Lamon [29] developed a micromechanics-based model for the
thermomechanical behavior of minicomposites based on multi-matrix cracking and
fiber failure, which was derived from a fracture statistics-based model. Dassios et al.
[30] analyzed the micromechanical behavior and micromechanics of crack growth
resistance and bridging laws. The contributions of intact and pulled-out fibers on
the bridging strain were discussed. Baranger [31] developed a reduced constitutive
law to characterize the complex material behavior and applied the constitutive
law to the mechanical modeling of SiC/SiC composites. Li [32–34] developed
micromechanical damage models and constitutive relationship of cross-ply CMCs
subjected to the dwell fatigue loading at elevated temperature. Li et al. [35, 36]
and Li [37] developed a micromechanical constitutive relationship to predict the
damage and fracture of different fiber-reinforced CMCs subjected to tensile loading
considering multiple damage mechanisms. Nonetheless, the above research did not
consider fiber-reinforced CMC time-dependent deformation, damage, and fracture
following the application of stress rupture loading at intermediate environmental
temperatures.
In this chapter, time-dependent deformation, damage, and fracture of
fiber-reinforced CMCs that were exposed to stress rupture loading at interme-
diate environmental temperatures are investigated. The composite microstress
field and tensile constitutive relationship of the damaged CMCs were examined
to characterize their time-dependent damage mechanisms. Relationships between
stress rupture lifetime, peak stress level, time-dependent composite deformation,
and evolution of internal damages are established. Effects of composite material
properties, composite damage state, and environmental temperature on stress
rupture lifetime, time-dependent composite deformation, and evolution of the
internal damages of SiC/SiC are analyzed. Experimental stress rupture lifetime,
time-dependent composite deformation, and composite internal damage evolution
of SiC/SiC composite subjected to the stress rupture loading are evaluated.
6.2 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites Under

Constant Stress at Intermediate Temperature
In this section, time-dependent deformation, damage, and fracture tendencies of

fiber-reinforced CMCs that were exposed to stress rupture loading at intermedi-
ate environmental temperatures are discussed. Relationships between stress rup-
ture lifetime, constant peak stress level, time-dependent composite deformation, and
evolution of internal damages are established. Effects of composite material prop-
erties, composite damage state, and environmental temperature on stress rupture
lifetime, time-dependent composite deformation, and evolution of the internal dam-
ages of SiC/SiC are analyzed.

Under the stress rupture loading at intermediate temperature, multiple time-
dependent damage mechanisms occur and are affected by the environmental
temperature. The time-dependent composite damage mechanisms are charac-
terized by combining microstress field analysis and different damage models.
The time-dependent composite strain is determined considering time-dependent
composite damage mechanisms, damage modes, and microstress field analysis.
Two damage parameters of debonding and oxidation fraction at the interface are
developed to analyze the internal time-dependent damage evolution. When multi-
ple damage modes existed inside of the fiber-reinforced CMCs, the time-dependent
composite strain 𝜀c (t) is given by
2
𝜀c (t) = 𝜎 (x, t) dx − (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT (6.1)
Ef lc ∫lc ∕2 f
where Ef is the fiber Young’s modulus, lc is the matrix crack spacing, 𝜎 f (x, t) is the
fiber axial stress, 𝛼 c and 𝛼 f are the composite and fiber thermal expansion coeffi-
cients, and ΔT is the temperature difference between testing and fabricated temper-
ature. The time-dependent fiber axial stress is
⎧Φ(t) − 2𝜏f x, x ∈ [0, 𝜁(t)]

⎪ rf
⎪ 2𝜏f 2𝜏i
𝜎f (x, t) = ⎨Φ(t) − rf 𝜁(t) − rf (x − 𝜁(t)), x ∈ [𝜁(t), ld ]
⎪ [ ] ( ) [ ]
⎪𝜎fo + Φ(t) − 𝜎fo − 2𝜏f 𝜁(t) − 2𝜏i (ld − 𝜁(t)) exp −𝜌 x−ld , x ∈ ld , lc
⎩ rf rf rf 2
(6.2)
where Φ is the stress carried by the intact fiber, 𝜏 f and 𝜏 i are the interface shear stress
in the oxidation and debonding region, r f is the fiber radius, 𝜌 is the shear-lag model
parameter, 𝜎 fo is the fiber axial stress in the interface bonding region, ld is the inter-
face debonding length, and ζ is the interface oxidation length. The interface debond-
ing length can be determined using the fracture mechanics approach, as shown in
Eq. (6.3). The intact fiber stress is determined by combining Eqs. (6.4)–(6.7).
( ) ( )
𝜏 r Vm Em Φ(t) 1
ld (t) = 1 − f 𝜁(t) + f −
𝜏i 2 E c 𝜏i 𝜌
√
√( )2 ( )
√ r 2
rf2 Vf Vm Ef Em Φ (t) 𝜎 rV EE
−√ f
− 1− + f m f2 m Γd (6.3)
2𝜌 4Ec2 𝜏i2 Vf Φ(t) E c 𝜏i
𝜎 2𝜏
= Φ(1 − q(Φ)) + f ⟨L⟩q(Φ) (6.4)
Vf rf
[ ( ) ]
mf +1
Φ
q(Φ) = 1 − exp − (6.5)
𝜎fc
mf
( m
) 1 ⎛ 1
⎞ mf +1
l0 𝜎0 f (t)𝜏i ⎜ 𝜎0 (t)rf l0 f
m
mf +1
⎟
𝜎fc = , 𝛿fc = ⎜ ⎟ (6.6)
rf ⎜ 𝜏i ⎟
⎝ ⎠
⎧ ( )4
1 KIC
⎪ 𝜎0 , t ≤ k Y 𝜎0
𝜎0 (t) = ⎨ ( )4 (6.7)
KIC K
⎪ √ , t > k1 Y 𝜎IC
⎩ Y kt
4
0
where mf is the Weibull modulus of the fiber, 𝜎 0 is the fiber strength, K IC is the
fracture toughness, Y is the geometric parameter, and k is the parabolic rate constant.
Substituting the time-dependent fiber axial stress in Eq. (6.2) into Eq. (6.1), the
time-dependent composite strain 𝜀c (t) is
Φ(t) 𝜏 l 𝜏 l (t) 𝜏 l (t)
⎧ E 𝜂(t) + Ef rd 𝜂(t)𝜔2 (t) − 2 Ef dr 𝜂(t)𝜔(t) − Ei dr 𝜂(t)(1 − 𝜔(t))2
⎪ f f f
{
f f f f
}
⎪ + 𝜎fo (1 − 𝜂(t)) + 2 1 rf Φ(t) − 𝜏 lc 𝜂(t)𝜔(t) − 𝜏 lc 𝜂(t)(1 − 𝜔(t)) − 𝜎
⎪ Ef 𝜌Ef lc f rf i rf fo
𝜀c (t) = ⎨ [ ( )]
𝜌 lc
⎪ × 1 − exp − (1 − 𝜂(t)) − (𝛼c − 𝛼f )ΔT, 𝜂(t) < 1
⎪ 2 rf
⎪Φ(t) 𝜂(t) + 𝜏f ld 𝜂(t)𝜔2 (t) − 2 𝜏f ld (t) 𝜂(t)𝜔(t) − 𝜏i ld (t) 𝜂(t)(1 − 𝜔(t))2 , 𝜂(t) = 1
⎩E f E r
f f E r
f f E r
f f
(6.8)
where 𝜂(t) is the time-dependent debonding fraction at the interface and 𝜔(t) is the
time-dependent oxidation fraction at the interface.
l (t) 𝜁(t)
𝜂(t) = 2 d , 𝜔(t) = (6.9)
lc ld (t)

Under the stress rupture loading at intermediate temperature, the time-dependent
deformation, damage, and fracture evolution are affected by the composite material
properties, composite damage state, and intermediate environmental temperature.
In the present analysis, effects of the composite material properties, constant peak
stress level, composite damage state, and environmental temperature on the evolu-
tion of the time-dependent deformation and fraction of SiC/SiC composite subjected
to the stress rupture loading are analyzed. Material properties of SiC/SiC composite
are listed in Table 6.1.
6.2.2.1 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Fiber Volumes

Figure 6.1 and Table 6.2 show the effect of the fiber volume (i.e. V f = 20%, 30%, and
40%) on the stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent composite deformation, debond-
ing fraction at the interface, and oxidation fraction at the interface. In addition,
Figure 6.1 and Table 6.2 present the broken fiber fraction of the SiC/SiC composite
at a constant peak stress of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa at T = 800 ∘ C.
When the fiber volume increases, the stress rupture lifetime increases, and the
final composite fracture strain is the highest at the fiber volume of V f = 30%; at
V f = 40%, the failure strain is more comparable to the conditions of V f = 20%,
which indicates that the composite failure strain depends on the fiber volume, and
the failure strain is low for low or high fiber volume, as shown in Figure 6.1a;
the time-dependent debonding fraction at the interface increases to the complete
debonding (i.e. 𝜂 = 1) at the fiber volume of V f = 30% and 40%, and the time for the
Table 6.1 Material properties

of SiC/SiC composite.
Vf 0.4
Ef (GPa) 270
Em (GPa) 400
r f (μm) 7
m 3
𝛼 f (10 /∘ C)
−6
3.5
𝛼 (10−6 /∘ C)
m 4.6
ΔT (∘ C) −1000
Γd (J/m2 ) 0.1
𝜏 i (MPa) 50
𝜏 f (MPa) 1
𝜎 0 (GPa) 2.59
l0 (mm) 25
mf 5
Table 6.2 Evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture of SiC/SiC composite under
constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa for different fiber volumes.
t (ks) 𝜺c (%) 𝜼 𝝎 q
V f = 20%
0 0.1 0.25 0 4.8 × 10−5
93.5 0.19 0.54 0.45 0.16
V f = 30%
0 0.072 0.136 0 4.0 × 10−6
335 0.234 1.0 0.872 0.05
385 0.244 1.0 1.0 0.06
752 0.274 1.0 1.0 0.25
V f = 40%
0 0.065 0.08 0 4.0 × 10−6
361 0.173 1.0 0.938 0.009
385 0.175 1.0 1.0 0.01
3015 0.205 1.0 1.0 0.27
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.1 Effect of the fiber volume (i.e. V f = 20%, 30%, and 40%) on (a) the evolution
of the time-dependent stress rupture curves; (b) the evolution of the time-dependent
debonding fraction at the interface versus time curves; (c) the evolution of the
time-dependent oxidation fraction at the interface versus time curves; and (d) the evolution
of the time-dependent broken fraction of the fiber versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite
under constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa.
complete debonding at the interface for the fiber volume of V f = 30% is less than
that at V f = 40%, as shown in Figure 6.1b; the time-dependent oxidation fraction at
the interface increases to the complete interface oxidation (i.e. 𝜔 = 1.0) at the fiber
volume of V f = 30% and 40%, and the time for the complete interface oxidation is
the same at the fiber volume of V f = 30% and 40%, as shown in Figure 6.1c, and
the time-dependent failure probability of the fiber at the final composite fracture
increases with the fiber volume, as shown in Figure 6.1d. At the fiber volume of
V f = 30%, there is a large increase in the composite fracture strain because of the
(c)
(d)
decrease of the debonding fraction at the interface and the increase of the oxidation
fraction at the interface, whereas at the fiber volume of V f = 40%, the composite
fracture strain is more comparable to the conditions of the fiber volume of V f = 20%
because of the low broken fiber fraction before complete debonding and oxidation
of the interface.
6.2.2.2 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Peak Stress Levels
Figure 6.2 and Table 6.3 show the effect of the constant peak stress level 𝜎 max = 150,
250, and 350 MPa on the stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent composite defor-
mation, debonding fraction at the interface, and oxidation fraction at the interface.
In addition, Figure 6.2 and Table 6.3 present the broken fiber fraction of the SiC/SiC
composite at T = 800 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.2 Effect of the constant peak stress level (i.e. 𝜎 max = 150, 250, and 300 MPa) on
(a) the evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves; (b) the evolution of the
time-dependent debonding fraction at the interface versus time curves; (c) the evolution of
the time-dependent oxidation fraction at the interface versus time curves; and (d) the
evolution of the time-dependent broken fraction of the fiber versus time curves of SiC/SiC
composite.
The time-dependent damage evolution and composite final fracture are affected
by the peak stress level. When the peak stress level increases, the stress rupture
lifetime decreases, the final composite fracture strain is the highest at the peak
stress level of 𝜎 max = 250 MPa, under high peak stress of 𝜎 max = 350 MPa, the
composite failure strain is low because of the composite fracture with partial
debonding at the interface, as shown in Figure 6.2a; the composite fracture occurs
at the condition of partial debonding at the interface corresponding to the high
constant peak stresses of 𝜎 max = 250 and 300 MPa, and the composite fracture
(c)
(d)
occurs at the condition of complete debonding and oxidation at the interface

corresponding to the low constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 150 MPa, as shown in
Figure 6.2b; the composite fracture occurs at the condition of the partial oxidation
at the interface corresponding to the high constant peak stresses of 𝜎 max = 250
and 300 MPa, and the composite fracture occurs at the condition of the complete
oxidation at the interface corresponding to the low constant peak stress level of
𝜎 max = 150 MPa, as shown in Figure 6.2c; the failure probability of the fiber at
composite final fracture increases with the decrease of the peak stress, as shown
in Figure 6.2d. At the high constant peak stresses of 𝜎 max = 250 and 350 MPa,
the tensile composite strain increases to the final fracture, and at low constant
peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 150 MPa, the tensile composite strain evolution with
time can be divided into two stages, i.e. (i) Stage I, the condition of the partial
debonding and oxidation at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 < 1 and 𝜔 < 1) and (ii) Stage II, the
Table 6.3 Evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture of SiC/SiC composite for
different constant peak stress levels.
𝜎 max = 150 MPa

0 0.046 0 0 1 × 10−6
688 0.167 1.0 0.968 0.02
710 0.168 1.0 1.0 0.021
3015 0.196 1.0 1.0 0.27
𝜎 max = 250 MPa

0 0.105 0.25 0 1.6 × 10−5
203 0.293 1.0 0.718 0.13
227 0.31 1.0 0.8 0.16
𝜎 max = 300 MPa

0 0.18 0.43 0 1.2 × 10−4
32.7 0.238 0.63 0.21 0.08
condition of the complete debonding and oxidation at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 = 1 and
𝜔 = 1).
6.2.2.3 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Saturation Spaces

Between Matrix Cracking
Figure 6.3 and Table 6.4 show the effect of the saturation space between the matrix
cracking (lsat = 150, 250, and 350 μm) on the stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent
composite deformation, debonding fraction at the interface, and oxidation fraction
at the interface. In addition, Figure 6.3 and Table 6.4 present the broken fiber
fraction of the SiC/SiC composite at a constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa
at T = 800 ∘ C.
When the saturation spacing between the matrix cracks increases, the
time-dependent composite strain decreases, which indicates that the compos-
ite failure strain depends on the damage in matrix, as shown in Figure 6.3a; the time
for the condition of the complete debonding at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 = 1) increases, as
shown in Figure 6.3b; the time for the condition of the complete oxidation at the
interface (i.e. 𝜔 = 1) increases, as shown in Figure 6.3c; and the failure probability
of the fiber remains the same, as shown in Figure 6.3d.
6.2.2.4 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Interface Shear

Stress
Figure 6.4 and Table 6.5 show the effect of the interface shear stress in the slip
region 𝜏 i = 20, 30, and 40 MPa on the stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent
Table 6.4 Evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture of SiC/SiC composite for
different spacings between saturation matrix cracking.
lsat = 150 𝜇m
0 0.08 0.22 0 4 × 10−6
180 0.228 1.0 0.782 0.02
230 0.244 1.0 1.0 0.03
752 0.278 1.0 1.0 0.25
lsat = 250 𝜇m
0 0.07 0.13 0 4 × 10−6
335 0.234 1.0 0.872 0.05
384 0.244 1.0 1.0 0.06
752 0.274 1.0 1.0 0.25
lsat = 350 𝜇m
0 0.067 0.09 0 4 × 10−6
490 0.238 1.0 0.909 0.09
540 0.246 1.0 1.0 0.109
752 0.27 1.0 1.0 0.25
constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa for different interface shear stress in slip
region.
𝜏 i = 20 MPa
0 0.085 0.25 0 1.1 × 10−5
354 0.233 0.99 0.99 0.23
𝜏 i = 30 MPa
0 0.075 0.16 0 7 × 10−6
442 0.241 1.0 0.82 0.167
491 0.262 1.0 0.91 0.23
𝜏 i = 40 MPa
0 0.07 0.12 0 5 × 10−6
474 0.239 1.0 0.879 0.119
540 0.253 1.0 1.0 0.155
628 0.269 1.0 1.0 0.25
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.3 Effect of the space between saturation matrix cracking (i.e. lsat = 150, 250, and
350 μm) on (a) the evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves; (b) the evolution
of the time-dependent debonding fraction at the interface versus time curves; (c) the
evolution of the time-dependent oxidation fraction at the interface versus time curves; and
(d) the evolution of the time-dependent broken fraction of the fiber versus time curves of
SiC/SiC composite under constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa.
at T = 800 ∘ C.
When the interface shear stress in the slip region increases, the stress rupture
lifetime increases, and the composite final fracture strain increases, under low
interface shear stress (i.e. 𝜏 i = 20 MPa), the strain curve has a slight curvature
at higher times because of a large amount of fiber failure without interface
complete debonding; however, under high interface shear stress (i.e. 𝜏 i = 30
(c)
(d)
or 40 MPa), the strain curve shows linearity till final fracture because of com-
posite final fracture with complete interface debonding, as shown in Figure 6.4a;
the time-dependent debonding fraction at the interface increases to the con-
dition of the complete debonding at high values of interface shear stress, i.e.
𝜏 i = 30, and 40 MPa, as shown in Figure 6.4b; and the time-dependent oxidation
fraction at the interface increases to the complete oxidation at high values of
interface shear stress, i.e. 𝜏 i = 30 and 40 MPa, as shown in Figure 6.4c, and the
time-dependent failure probability of the fiber at the condition of composite
final fracture increases with the interface shear stress, as shown in Figure 6.4d.
At a low interface shear stress of 𝜏 i = 20 MPa, the tensile fracture occurs at the
condition of partial debonding and oxidation at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 < 1 and 𝜔 < 1),
and the debonding fraction of the interface increases fast near the condition of
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.4 Effect of the interface shear stress in slip region (i.e. 𝜏 i = 20, 30, and 40 MPa)
on (a) the evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves; (b) the evolution of the
composite under constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa.
composite final fracture, leading to the decrease of the oxidation fraction at the
interface approaching final fracture; at the interface shear stress of 𝜏 i = 30 MPa,
the tensile composite fracture occurs at the condition of complete debonding
and partial oxidation at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 = 1 and 𝜔 < 1), and at the inter-
face shear stress of 𝜏 i = 40 MPa, the tensile composite fracture occurs at the
condition of complete debonding and oxidation at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 = 1 and
𝜔 = 1).
Figure 6.5 and Table 6.6 show the effect of the interface shear stress in the oxida-
tion region (i.e. 𝜏 f = 1, 3, and 5 MPa) on the stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent
(c)
(d)

at T = 800 ∘ C. When the interface shear stress in the oxidation region increases, the
time-dependent composite strain decreases because of the decrease of the interface
debonding fraction, as shown in Figure 6.5a; the time for the condition of complete
debonding at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 = 1) increases, as shown in Figure 6.5b; the time
for the condition of the complete oxidation at the interface (i.e. 𝜔 = 1) remains
the same, as shown in Figure 6.5c, and the failure probability of the fiber remains
the same; in the present analysis, the fiber failure in the oxidation region is not
considered, as shown in Figure 6.5d. At the interface shear stress of 𝜏 f = 5 MPa,
the time for the condition of complete debonding at the interface is the highest
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.5 The effect of the interface shear stress in oxidation region (i.e. 𝜏 f = 1, 3, and
5 MPa) on (a) the evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves; (b) the evolution of
the time-dependent debonding fraction at the interface versus time curves; (c) the
evolution of the time-dependent oxidation fraction at the interface versus time curves; and
(d) the time-dependent broken fraction of the fiber versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite
under constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa.
compared with that of low interface shear stress of 𝜏 f = 1 and 3 MPa, and the time
for the condition of complete oxidation at the interface is the same for 𝜏 f = 1, 3, and
5 MPa.
6.2.2.5 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Fiber Weibull

Modulus
Figure 6.6 and Table 6.7 show the effect of the Weibull modulus of the fiber mf = 4,
5, and 6 on the stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent composite deformation,
debonding fraction at the interface, and oxidation fraction at the interface. In
(c)
(d)
addition, Figure 6.6 and Table 6.7 present the broken fiber fraction of the SiC/SiC
composite at a constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa at T = 800 ∘ C.
When the Weibull modulus of the fiber increases, the stress rupture lifetime
decreases, and the composite fracture strain also decreases, under high fiber Weibull
modulus, most of the fiber fractures at low stress level with complete interface
debonding, leading to the decrease of the composite failure strain, as shown in
Figure 6.6a; the composite fracture occurs at the condition of partial debonding
at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 < 1) for the high Weibull modulus of the fiber, i.e. mf = 6,
and at the condition of complete debonding at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 = 1) for the
low Weibull modulus of the fiber, i.e. mf = 4 and 5, as shown in Figure 6.6b; the
composite fracture occurs at the condition of partial oxidation at the interface (i.e.
𝜔 < 1) for the high Weibull modulus of the fiber, i.e. mf = 6, and the condition of
complete oxidation at the interface (i.e. 𝜔 = 1) for low Weibull modulus of the fiber,
constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa for different interface shear stress in oxidation
region.
𝜏 f = 1 MPa
0 0.067 0.09 0 4 × 10−6
490 0.238 1.0 0.909 0.092
540 0.246 1.0 1.0 0.109
752 0.27 1.0 1.0 0.25
𝜏 f = 3 MPa
0 0.067 0.09 0 4 × 10−6
511 0.214 1.0 0.946 0.099
540 0.217 1.0 1.0 0.109
752 0.24 1.0 1.0 0.25
𝜏 f = 5 MPa
0 0.067 0.09 0 4 × 10−6
533 0.187 1.0 0.987 0.106
540 0.188 1.0 1.0 0.109
752 0.21 1.0 1.0 0.25
i.e. mf = 4 and 5, as shown in Figure 6.6c, and the failure probability of the fiber at
final composite fracture increases with decreasing Weibull modulus of the fiber, as
shown in Figure 6.6d.
6.2.2.6 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite for Different Environmental

Temperatures
Figure 6.7 and Table 6.8 show the effect of the environmental temperature T = 600,
700, and 800 ∘ C on the stress rupture lifetime, time-dependent composite deforma-
tion, debonding fraction at the interface, and oxidation fraction at the interface.
In addition, Figure 6.7 and Table 6.8 present the broken fiber fraction of the SiC/SiC
composite at a constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa.
When the environmental temperature increases, the stress rupture lifetime
decreases, and the final composite fracture strain increases, as shown in Figure 6.7a
and Table 6.8; the time-dependent debonding fraction at the interface and
the oxidation fraction at the interface increase, as shown in Figure 6.7b,c and
Table 6.8, and the time-dependent broken fraction of the fiber remains the same,
as shown in Figure 6.7d and Table 6.8. The fracture occurs at the condition of
partial debonding and oxidation at the interface (i.e. 𝜂 < 1 and 𝜔 < 1), and the
rate for interface debonding, interface oxidation, and fiber failure probability all
increase.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.6 Effect of the Weibull modulus of the fiber (i.e. mf = 4, 5, and 6) on (a) the
evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves; (b) the evolution of the

Lara-Curzio [11] reported the SiC/SiC composite stress rupture behavior at
T = 950 ∘ C. The experimental data and predicted results of the stress rupture life-
time, time-dependent composite deformation, debonding fraction at the interface,
oxidation fraction at the interface, and the broken fraction of the fiber curves under
𝜎 max = 80, 100, and 120 MPa are shown in Figures 6.8–6.10.
At a constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 80 MPa, the time-dependent composite
strain increased from 𝜀c = 0.085% at t = 0 seconds to 𝜀c = 0.27% at t = 83 600 seconds;
(c)
(d)
the time-dependent debonding fraction at the interface increases from partial

debonding 𝜂 = 0.06 at t = 0 seconds under the peak stress level 𝜎 max = 80 MPa to
partial debonding 𝜂 = 0.55 at t = 83 600 seconds because of the oxidation propaga-
tion at the interface and increasing broken fiber probability; the time-dependent
oxidation fraction at the interface increases from 𝜔 = 0 at t = 0 seconds to partial
oxidation 𝜔 = 0.84 at t = 83 600 seconds because of the oxidation propagation at
the interface; finally, a higher time-dependent fiber broken fraction of q = 0.29 was
observed at t = 83 600 seconds as compared to that at t = 0 seconds (q = 0).
strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.1% at t = 0 seconds to 𝜀c = 0.2% at t = 33 700 seconds;
constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa for different Weibull moduli of the fiber.
mf = 4
0 0.067 0.09 0 1.6 × 10−5
494 0.232 1.0 0.915 0.044
540 0.238 1.0 1.0 0.048
1855 0.28 1.0 1.0 0.32
mf = 5
0 0.067 0.09 0 4 × 10−6
490 0.238 1.0 0.909 0.092
540 0.246 1.0 1.0 0.109
752 0.27 1.0 1.0 0.25
mf = 6
0 0.067 0.09 0 1 × 10−6
426 0.24 0.91 0.86 0.23
constant peak stress level of 𝜎 max = 200 MPa for different environmental temperatures.
T = 600 ∘ C
0 0.067 0.09 0 1 × 10−6
2745 0.23 0.9 0.85 0.23
T = 700 ∘ C
0 0.067 0.09 0 1 × 10−6
983 0.23 0.91 0.86 0.23
T = 800 ∘ C
0 0.067 0.09 0 1 × 10−6
426 0.24 0.91 0.86 0.23
debonding 𝜂 = 0.07 at t = 0 seconds under the peak stress level 𝜎 max = 100 MPa
to the partial debonding at the interface 𝜂 = 0.27 at t = 33 700 seconds because of
the oxidation propagation at the interface and increasing broken fiber probability;
the time-dependent oxidation fraction at the interface increases from 𝜔 = 0 at
t = 0 seconds to partial oxidation at the interface 𝜔 = 0.61 at t = 33 700 seconds
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.7 Effect of the environmental temperature (i.e. T = 600, 700, and 800 ∘ C) on
(a) the evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves; (b) the evolution of the
because of the oxidation propagation at the interface; lastly, a higher time-dependent

broken fiber fraction of q = 0.22 at was observed at t = 33 700 seconds as compared
to that at t = 0 seconds (q = 1 × 10−6 ).
strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.16% at t = 0 seconds to 𝜀c = 0.27% at t = 10 500 seconds;
debonding 𝜂 = 0.19 at t = 0 seconds under the peak stress level 𝜎 max = 120 MPa to
the partial debonding 𝜂 = 0.42 at t = 10 500 seconds because of the oxidation propa-
gation at the interface and increasing broken fiber probability; the time-dependent
(c)
(d)
oxidation fraction at the interface increases from 𝜔 = 0 at t = 0 seconds to

partial oxidation 𝜔 = 0.4 at t = 10 500 seconds because of the oxidation propa-
gation at the interface; lastly, a higher time-dependent broken fiber fraction of
q = 0.17 was observed at t = 10 500 seconds as compared to that at t = 0 seconds
(q = 2 × 10−6 ).

Stochastic Loading Stress and Time at Intermediate
Temperature
In this section, synergistic effects of stochastic loading stress and time interval
on stress rupture damage evolution and lifetime of fiber-reinforced CMCs at
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.8 (a) Evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves of experimental data
and theoretical results; (b) the evolution of the time-dependent debonding fraction at the
interface versus time curves; (c) the evolution of the time-dependent oxidation fraction at
the interface versus time curves; and (d) the evolution of the time-dependent broken
fraction of the fiber versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under constant peak stress
level of 𝜎 max = 80 MPa.
intermediate temperatures are investigated. Relationships between the stochastic

loading stress and stochastic time interval, internal damage evolution, macrostrain,
broken fiber fraction, and stress rupture lifetime of fiber-reinforced CMCs are
established. Effects of the stochastic loading stress and stochastic time interval,
constituent properties, damage condition, and environment temperature on the
stress rupture time, strain evolution, and internal damage of SiC/SiC composite
under stress rupture loading are discussed. Experimental stress rupture behav-
ior of SiC/SiC composite under constant and stochastic loading condition is
predicted.
(c)
(d)

Effects of stochastic stress and time interval, fiber volume, matrix crack spacing,
fiber/matrix interface shear stress, and environmental temperature on the stress rup-
ture damage evolution and lifetime of SiC/SiC composite are analyzed.

Different Stochastic Stress Levels
Figure 6.11 and Table 6.9 shows the effect of the stochastic stress level (i.e.
𝜎 s = 200, 220, 240, 260, and 280 MPa) and time interval of Δt = 36 ks on the
time-dependent strain, interface debonding ratio, interface oxidation ratio, broken
fiber fraction, and stress rupture lifetime of SiC/SiC composite under constant
stress 𝜎 = 180 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere. When the stochastic stress
level increases, the stress rupture lifetime decreases; the time for the fiber/matrix
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.9 (a) Evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves of experimental data
and theoretical results; (b) the evolution of the time-dependent debonding fraction at the
interface versus time curves; (c) the evolution of the time-dependent oxidation fraction at
the interface versus time curves; and (d) the evolution of the time-dependent broken
interface complete debonding and oxidation decreases; and the broken fiber
fraction at the stage of stochastic loading increases. The stress rupture lifetime
decreases from t = 1223.6 ks at 𝜎 s = 200 MPa to t = 1186 ks at 𝜎 s = 280 MPa.
The time for the interface complete debonding decreases from t = 232.9 ks at
𝜎 s = 200 MPa to t = 143.3 ks at 𝜎 s = 280 MPa. The time for the interface com-
plete oxidation decreases from t = 267.1 ks at 𝜎 s = 200 MPa to t = 179.9 ks at
𝜎 s = 280 MPa.
When the stochastic stress level is 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, the strain increases from
𝜀c = 0.062–0.077% under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜀c = 0.095%
(c)
(d)
under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.115% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa,

and decreases to 𝜀c = 0.102% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to
𝜀c = 0.213% at t = 1223.6 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.125
to 0.23 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜂 = 0.31 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa,
and increases to 𝜂 = 0.44 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and remains to 𝜂 = 0.44 till
t = 79 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 232.9 ks. The interface
oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 to 0.47 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks
decreases to 𝜔 = 0.43 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 0.61 at t = 72 ks
under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 267.1 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa. The
broken fiber fraction increases from q = 2 × 10−6 to 1.5 × 10−3 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa,
and at t = 36 ks increases to q = 2.9 × 10−3 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases
to q = 7 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to q = 0.285 at
t = 1223.6 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.10 (a) Evolution of the time-dependent stress rupture curves of experimental
data and theoretical results; (b) the evolution of the time-dependent debonding fraction at
the interface versus time curves; (c) the evolution of the time-dependent oxidation fraction
at the interface versus time curves; and (d) the evolution of the time-dependent broken
When the stochastic stress level is 𝜎 s = 280 MPa, the strain increases from
𝜀c = 0.062% to 0.077% under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜀c = 0.178%
𝜀c = 0.21% at t = 1186 ks. The interface debonded ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.12 to
0.23 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜂 = 0.61 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa,
and increases to 𝜂 = 0.83 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 280 MPa, and remains to 𝜂 = 0.83
till t = 112.1 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 143.3 ks. The
interface oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 to 0.47 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at
(c)
(d)
t = 36 ks decreases to 𝜔 = 0.32 under 𝜎 s = 280 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 0.48

at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 280 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 179.9 ks under
𝜎 = 180 MPa. The broken fiber fraction increases from q = 2 × 10−6 to 1.5 × 10−3
under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to q = 0.023 under 𝜎 s = 280 MPa, and
increases to q = 0.06 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 280 MPa, and increases to q = 0.285 at
t = 1186 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa.

Different Stochastic Loading Time Intervals
Figure 6.12 and Table 6.10 show the effect of the stochastic loading time (i.e.
Δt = 18, 36, 54, 72, and 90 ks) and stochastic stress level 𝜎 s = 240 MPa on the
time-dependent strain, interface debonding ratio, interface oxidation ratio, broken
fiber fraction, and the stress rupture lifetime curves of SiC/SiC composite under
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.11 Effect of stochastic stress (i.e. 𝜎 s = 200, 220, 240, 260, and 280 MPa) and time
(Δt = 36 ks) on (a) the strain versus the time curves; (b) the interface debonding ratio versus
the time curves; (c) the interface oxidation ratio versus the time curves; (d) the broken fiber
fraction versus the time curves; and (e) the stress rupture lifetime versus the stochastic
stress curves of SiC/SiC composite under stress rupture loading 𝜎 = 180 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C
in air atmosphere.
constant stress 𝜎 = 180 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere. When stochastic

loading time increases, the stress rupture time decreases; and the time for the
interface complete debonding and oxidation remains the same. The stress rupture
lifetime decreases from t = 1220.8 ks at Δt = 18 ks to t = 1204.2 ks at Δt = 90 ks.
When the stochastic loading time is Δt = 18 ks, the strain increases from
𝜀c = 0.214% at t = 1220.8 ks. The interface debonded ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.12
(c)
(d)
(e)

Table 6.9 The strain, interface debonding and oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction for
different stochastic stress levels.
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79 232.9 267.1 1223.6
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.095 0.115 0.102 0.104 0.176 0.182 0.213
𝜂 0.125 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.44 0.44 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.43 0.61 0.61 0.67 0.87 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7.0 × 10−3 7.0 × 10−3 7.4 × 10−3 0.019 0.023 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 220 220 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 86.2 193.9 229.2 1222
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.114 0.14 0.11 0.117 0.176 0.183 0.214
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.39 0.54 0.54 0.54 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.40 0.58 0.58 0.69 0.85 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 5.2 × 10−3 0.0125 0.0125 0.0135 0.0219 0.025 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 240 240 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 93.8 169 204.9 1218.3
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.134 0.167 0.117 0.13 0.176 0.183 0.213
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.47 0.644 0.644 0.644 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.37 0.547 0.547 0.712 0.826 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 8.8 × 10−3 0.0216 0.0216 0.023 0.0289 0.031 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 260 260 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 102.2 153.2 189.5 1209.3
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.156 0.195 0.122 0.142 0.176 0.184 0.212
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.54 0.74 0.74 0.74 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.35 0.51 0.51 0.73 0.81 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 0.014 0.036 0.036 0.038 0.042 0.045 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 280 280 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 112.1 143.4 179.9 1186
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.178 0.225 0.123 0.154 0.176 0.184 0.21
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.61 0.83 0.83 0.83 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.32 0.48 0.48 0.75 0.798 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 0.023 0.06 0.06 0.063 0.065 0.068 0.285
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.12 Effect of stochastic stress (i.e. 𝜎 s = 240 MPa) and time interval (i.e. Δt = 18,
36, 54, 72, and 90 ks) on (a) the strain versus the time curves; (b) the interface debonding
ratio versus the time curves; (c) the interface oxidation ratio versus the time curves; (d) the
broken fiber fraction versus the time curves; and (e) the stress rupture lifetime versus the
stochastic time interval curve of SiC/SiC composite under stress rupture constant stress
𝜎 = 180 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
to 0.23 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜂 = 0.47 under 𝜎 s = 240 MPa,
till t = 75.3 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 169 ks. The interface
under 𝜎 s = 240 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 204.9 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa. The
and at t = 36 ks increases to q = 8.8 × 10−3 under 𝜎 s = 240 MPa, and increases to
q = 0.014 at t = 54 ks under 𝜎 s = 240 MPa, and increases to q = 0.285 at t = 1220.8 ks
under 𝜎 = 180 MPa.
(c)
(d)
(e)

Table 6.10 The strain, interface debonding and oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction
for different stochastic times.
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 240 240 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 54 54 75.3 169 204.9 1220.8
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.134 0.15 0.106 0.118 0.176 0.183 0.214
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.47 0.557 0.557 0.557 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.37 0.475 0.475 0.662 0.826 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 8.8 × 10−3 0.0148 0.0148 0.0162 0.023 0.026 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 240 240 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 93.8 169 204.9 1218.3
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.134 0.167 0.117 0.13 0.176 0.183 0.213
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.47 0.644 0.644 0.644 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.37 0.547 0.547 0.712 0.826 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 8.8 × 10−3 0.0216 0.0216 0.023 0.0289 0.031 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 240 240 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 90 90 112.4 169 204.9 1214.9
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.134 0.183 0.129 0.142 0.176 0.183 0.212
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.47 0.732 0.732 0.732 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.37 0.602 0.602 0.751 0.826 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 8.8 × 10−3 0.029 0.029 0.031 0.035 0.038 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 240 240 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 108 108 131 169 204.9 1210.3
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.134 0.199 0.14 0.153 0.176 0.183 0.211
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.47 0.821 0.821 0.821 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.37 0.644 0.644 0.78 0.826 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 8.8 × 10−3 0.037 0.037 0.039 0.042 0.045 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 240 240 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 126 126 149.8 169 204.9 1204.2
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.134 0.216 0.151 0.165 0.176 0.183 0.21
𝜂 0.12 0.23 0.47 0.909 0.909 0.909 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.37 0.678 0.678 0.805 0.826 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 8.8 × 10−3 0.046 0.046 0.048 0.049 0.053 0.285
When the stochastic loading time is Δt = 90 ks, the strain increases from
𝜀c = 0.21% at t = 1204.2 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.12 to
till t = 149.8 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 169 ks. The
under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to q = 8.8 × 10−3 under 𝜎 s = 240 MPa,
and increases to q = 0.046 at t = 126 ks under 𝜎 s = 240 MPa, and increases to
q = 0.285 at t = 1204.2 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa.

Different Fiber Volumes
Figure 6.13 and Table 6.11 show the effect of the fiber volume (i.e. V f = 20%,
25%, 30%, 35%, and 40%) on the time-dependent strain, interface debonding ratio,
interface oxidation ratio, broken fiber fraction, and stress rupture lifetime curves
of SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 160 MPa, stochastic stress level
𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and time interval Δt = 36 ks at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere. When
the fiber volume increases, the stress rupture time increases; the time for the inter-
face complete debonding increases; the time for the interface complete oxidation
remains the same; and the broken fiber fraction at the stage of stochastic loading
decreases. The stress rupture lifetime increases from t = 133.1 ks at V f = 20% to
t = 4090.2 ks at V f = 40%. The time for the interface complete debonding decreases
from t = 266.7 ks at V f = 25% to t = 311.3 ks at V f = 40%.
When the fiber volume is V f = 20%, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.074%
to 0.096% under 𝜎 = 160 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜀c = 0.135% under
𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.179% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and
decreases to 𝜀c = 0.143% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 = 160 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.205%
at t = 133.1 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.206 to 0.294
under 𝜎 = 160 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜂 = 0.431 under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and
increases to 𝜂 = 0.584 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and remains to 𝜂 = 0.584
interface oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 to 0.292 under 𝜎 = 160 MPa, and
at t = 36 ks decreases to 𝜔 = 0.257 under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 0.38
𝜎 = 160 MPa. The broken fiber fraction increases from q = 2.5 × 10−5 to 0.023
under 𝜎 = 160 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to q = 0.05 under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and
increases to q = 0.162 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and increases to q = 0.285 at
t = 133.1 ks under 𝜎 = 160 MPa.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.13 Effect of fiber volume (i.e. V f = 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, and 40%) on (a) the
strain versus the time curves; (b) the interface debonding ratio versus the time curves;
(c) the interface oxidation ratio versus the time curves; (d) the broken fiber fraction versus
the time curves; and (e) the stress rupture lifetime versus the fiber volume curve of SiC/SiC
composite under stress rupture constant stress of 𝜎 = 160 MPa and stochastic stress of
𝜎 s = 180 MPa and Δt = 36 ks at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
When the fiber volume is V f = 40%, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.05% to 0.059%
under 𝜎 = 160 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜀c = 0.071% under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa,
and increases to 𝜀c = 0.083% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and decreases
to 𝜀c = 0.073% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 = 160 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.161% at
t = 4090.2 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.06 to 0.144 under
𝜎 = 160 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜂 = 0.202 under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and
increases to 𝜂 = 0.31 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and remains to 𝜂 = 0.31 till
t = 77.6 ks under 𝜎 = 160 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 311.3 ks. The interface
(c)
(d)
(e)

for different fiber volumes.
𝝈 (MPa) 160 160 180 180 160 160 160
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 97.4 133.1
V f = 20%
𝜀c (%) 0.0746 0.0967 0.135 0.179 0.143 0.166 0.205
𝜂 0.206 0.294 0.431 0.584 0.584 0.584 0.722
𝜔 0 0.292 0.257 0.38 0.38 0.513 0.567
−5
q 2.5 × 10 0.023 0.05 0.162 0.162 0.199 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 160 160 180 180 160 160 160 160 160
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 83.8 266.7 326.9 426.8
V f = 25%
𝜀c (%) 0.0618 0.0779 0.102 0.127 0.109 0.115 0.223 0.24 0.263
𝜂 0.147 0.232 0.332 0.445 0.445 0.445 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.371 0.334 0.5 0.5 0.581 0.817 1.0 1.0
q 7 × 10−6 5.8 × 10−3 0.012 0.029 0.029 0.032 0.103 0.14 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 160 160 180 180 160 160 160 160 160
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 80.7 288.7 326.9 1027.3
V f = 30%
𝜀c (%) 0.055 0.068 0.086 0.105 0.092 0.095 0.182 0.188 0.219
𝜂 0.108 0.192 0.274 0.382 0.382 0.382 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.447 0.406 0.581 0.581 0.651 0.884 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.9 × 10−3 3.9 × 10−3 9.4 × 10−3 9.4 × 10−3 0.010 0.032 0.037 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 160 160 180 180 160 160 160 160 160
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 78.9 301.9 326.9 2154.3
V f = 35%
𝜀c (%) 0.052 0.062 0.077 0.092 0.081 0.083 0.155 0.157 0.186
𝜂 0.081 0.164 0.233 0.34 0.34 0.34 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.523 0.477 0.65 0.65 0.71 0.924 1.0 1.0
q 1 × 10−6 7.6 × 10−4 1.5 × 10−3 3.7 × 10−3 3.7 × 10−3 3.9 × 10−3 0.013 0.0142 0.285
(Continued)
Table 6.11 (Continued)
𝝈 (MPa)160 160 180 180 160 160 160 160 160
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 77.6 311.3 326.9 4090.2
V f = 40%
𝜀c (%) 0.0506 0.059 0.071 0.083 0.073 0.075 0.134 0.135 0.161
𝜂 0.06 0.144 0.202 0.31 0.31 0.31 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.597 0.548 0.716 0.716 0.772 0.953 1.0 1.0
q 0 3.4 × 10−4 6.9 × 10−4 1.6 × 10−3 1.6 × 10−3 1.7 × 10−3 5.9 × 10−3 6.2 × 10−3 0.285

under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 326.9 ks under 𝜎 = 160 MPa.
The broken fiber fraction increases from q = 0 to 3.4 × 10−4 under 𝜎 = 160 MPa,
and at t = 36 ks increases to q = 6.9 × 10−4 under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and increases
to q = 1.6 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 180 MPa, and increases to q = 0.285 at
t = 4090.2 ks under 𝜎 = 160 MPa.

Different Matrix Crack Spacings
Figure 6.14 and Table 6.12 show the effect of the saturation matrix crack spacing
(i.e. lsat = 100, 150, 200, 250, and 300 μm) on the strain, interface debonding ratio,
interface oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction versus time curves of SiC/SiC
composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 180 MPa, stochastic stress level 𝜎 s = 200 MPa,
and stochastic time Δt = 36 ks at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere. When the saturation
matrix crack spacing increases, the stress rupture time remains the same; the time
for the interface complete debonding and oxidation increases; and the broken fiber
fraction remains the same. The time for the interface complete debonding increases
from t = 60.7 ks at lsat = 100 μm to t = 288.4 ks at lsat = 300 μm. The time for the inter-
face complete oxidation increases from t = 106.3 ks at lsat = 100 μm to t = 321.1 ks at
lsat = 300 μm.
When the saturation matrix crack spacing is lsat = 100 μm, the strain increases
from 𝜀c = 0.08% to 0.118% under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to
𝜀c = 0.152% under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.196% at t = 72 ks under
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and decreases to 𝜀c = 0.174% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and
increases to 𝜀c = 0.219% at t = 1223.6 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases
from 𝜂 = 0.313 to 0.582 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜂 = 0.774
under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 60.7 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa. The
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.14 Effect of saturation matrix crack spacing (i.e. lsat = 100, 150, 200, 250, and
300 μm) on (a) the strain versus the time curves; (b) the interface debonding ratio versus the
time curves; (c) the interface oxidation ratio versus the time curves; and (d) the broken fiber
fraction versus the time curves of SiC/SiC composite under stress rupture constant stress
𝜎 = 180 MPa and stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 200 MPa and Δt = 36 ks at T = 850 ∘ C in air
atmosphere.
and increases to q = 7 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to

When the saturation matrix crack spacing is lsat = 300 μm, the strain increases
from 𝜀c = 0.061% to 0.073% under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to
𝜀c = 0.088% under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.105% at t = 72 ks under
increases to 𝜀c = 0.211% at t = 1223.6 ks. The interface debonded ratio increases
under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 0.368 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa,
(c)
(d)
and remains to 𝜂 = 0.368 till t = 79 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0
at t = 288.4 ks. The interface oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 to 0.477 under
𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks decreases to 𝜔 = 0.438 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and
increases to 𝜔 = 0.614 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at
t = 321.1 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa. The broken fiber fraction increases from q = 2 × 10−6
to 1.5 × 10−3 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to q = 2.9 × 10−3 under
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to q = 7 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and
increases to q = 0.285 at t = 1223.6 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa.

Different Interface Shear Stress
Figure 6.15 and Table 6.13 show the effect of the interface shear stress in the slip
region (i.e. 𝜏 i = 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 MPa) on the strain, interface debonding
ratio, interface oxidation ratio, broken fiber fraction, and stress rupture lifetime
for different saturation matrix crack spacings.
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 200 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 60.7 72 72 106.3 1223.6
lsat = 100 𝜇m
𝜀c (%) 0.08 0.118 0.152 0.185 0.196 0.174 0.186 0.219
𝜂 0.313 0.582 0.774 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.477 0.438 0.572 0.678 0.678 1.0 1.0
−6 −3 −3 −3 −3 −3 −3
q 2 × 10 1.5 × 10 2.9 × 10 5.6 × 10 7 × 10 7 × 10 9.3 × 10 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79 122.6 159.7 1223.6
lsat = 150 𝜇m
𝜀c (%) 0.07 0.095 0.12 0.154 0.136 0.141 0.175 0.185 0.219
𝜂 0.208 0.388 0.516 0.736 0.736 0.736 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.477 0.438 0.614 0.614 0.674 0.769 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.4 × 10−3 0.0105 0.0134 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79 177.7 213.3 1223.6
lsat = 200 𝜇m
𝜀c (%) 0.065 0.084 0.104 0.129 0.115 0.118 0.176 0.183 0.215
𝜂 0.156 0.291 0.387 0.552 0.552 0.552 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.477 0.438 0.614 0.614 0.674 0.834 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.4 × 10−3 0.015 0.018 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79 232.9 267.1 1223.6
lsat = 250 𝜇m
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.095 0.115 0.102 0.104 0.176 0.182 0.213
𝜂 0.125 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.44 0.44 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.43 0.61 0.61 0.67 0.87 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.4 × 10−3 0.019 0.023 0.285
(Continued)
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79 288.4 321.1 1223.6
lsat = 300 𝜇m
𝜀c (%) 0.061 0.073 0.088 0.105 0.093 0.095 0.176 0.18 0.211
𝜂 0.104 0.194 0.258 0.368 0.368 0.368 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.477 0.438 0.614 0.614 0.674 0.899 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.4 × 10−3 0.025 0.028 0.285
curves of SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 180 MPa, stochastic stress
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and stochastic time interval of Δt = 36 ks at T = 850 ∘ C in air
atmosphere. When the interface shear stress in the slip region increases, the stress
rupture time increases; the time for the interface complete debonding increases;
the time for the interface complete oxidation remains the same; and the broken
fiber fraction at the stage of stochastic loading decreases. The stress rupture lifetime
increases from t = 507.2 ks at 𝜏 i = 10 MPa to t = 1841.8 ks at 𝜏 i = 50 MPa. The time
for the interface complete debonding decreases from t = 150.9 ks at 𝜏 i = 10 MPa to
t = 247.9 ks at 𝜏 i = 50 MPa.
When the interface shear stress in the slip region is 𝜏 i = 10 MPa, the strain
increases from 𝜀c = 0.086% to 0.1% under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases
to 𝜀c = 0.13% under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.15% at t = 72 ks under
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and decreases to 𝜀c = 0.13% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa,
and increases to 𝜀c = 0.212% at t = 507.2 ks. The interface debonding ratio
increases from 𝜂 = 0.387 to 0.489 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases
to 𝜂 = 0.674 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 0.805 at t = 72 ks under
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and remains to 𝜂 = 0.805 till t = 95.4 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and
increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 150.9 ks. The interface oxidation ratio increases from
𝜔 = 0 to 0.227 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks decreases to 𝜔 = 0.201 under
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 0.336 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and
increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 267.1 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa. The broken fiber fraction
increases from q = 5 × 10−6 to 4.6 × 10−3 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks
increases to q = 8.8 × 10−3 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to q = 0.022 at
t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to q = 0.285 at t = 507.2 ks under
𝜎 = 180 MPa.
When the interface shear stress in the slip region is 𝜏 i = 50 MPa, the strain
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.15 Effect of the interface shear stress in the slip region (i.e. 𝜏 i = 10, 20, 30, 40,
and 50 MPa) on (a) the strain versus the time curves; (b) the interface debonding ratio
versus the time curves; (c) the interface oxidation ratio versus the time curves; (d) the
broken fiber fraction versus the time curves; and (e) the stress rupture lifetime versus the
interface shear stress curves of SiC/SiC composite under stress rupture constant stress
𝜎 = 180 MPa and stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 200 MPa and Δt = 36 ks at T = 850 ∘ C in air
atmosphere.
and remains to 𝜂 = 0.37 till t = 76.1 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to q = 4.1 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and
(c)
(d)
(e)

for different interface shear stress in the slip region.
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 95.4 150.9 267.1 507.2
𝜏 i = 10 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.086 0.1 0.13 0.15 0.13 0.139 0.165 0.186 0.212
𝜂 0.387 0.489 0.674 0.805 0.805 0.805 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.227 0.201 0.336 0.336 0.446 0.567 1.0 1.0
q 5 × 10−6 4.6 × 10−3 8.8 × 10−3 0.022 0.022 0.026 0.04 0.077 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 82.8 213.5 267.1 884.3
𝜏 i = 20 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.068 0.083 0.103 0.123 0.109 0.113 0.174 0.183 0.213
𝜂 0.19 0.297 0.374 0.531 0.531 0.531 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.4 0.339 0.51 0.51 0.587 0.8 1.0 1.0
q 3 × 10−6 2.3 × 10−3 4.3 × 10−3 0.01 0.01 0.0116 0.0276 0.0355 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79 232.9 267.1 1223.6
𝜏 i = 30 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.095 0.115 0.102 0.104 0.176 0.182 0.213
𝜂 0.125 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.44 0.44 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.43 0.61 0.61 0.67 0.87 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.4 × 10−3 0.019 0.023 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 77.1 242.3 267.1 1540.5
𝜏 i = 40 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.0598 0.074 0.09 0.11 0.098 0.1 0.177 0.181 0.213
𝜂 0.092 0.201 0.264 0.396 0.396 0.396 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.553 0.514 0.683 0.683 0.732 0.908 1.0 1.0
q 1 × 10−6 1.1 × 10−3 2 × 10−3 5.2 × 10−3 5.2 × 10−3 5.4 × 10−3 0.015 0.017 0.285
(Continued)
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 76.1 247.9 267.1 1841.8
𝜏 i = 50 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.058 0.073 0.088 0.108 0.096 0.098 0.178 0.181 0.213
𝜂 0.072 0.181 0.237 0.37 0.37 0.37 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.611 0.573 0.733 0.733 0.774 0.928 1.0 1.0
q 1 × 10−6 9.2 × 10−4 1.7 × 10−3 4.1 × 10−3 4.1 × 10−3 4.3 × 10−3 0.012 0.013 0.285
Figure 6.16 and Table 6.14 show the effect of the interface shear stress in the oxi-
dation region (i.e. 𝜏 f = 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 MPa) on the strain, interface debonding ratio,
interface oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction versus time curves of SiC/SiC
composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 180 MPa, stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and
stochastic time interval Δt = 36 ks at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere. When the inter-
face shear stress in the oxidation region increases, the stress rupture time remains
the same; the time for the interface complete debonding increases; the time for the
interface complete oxidation decreases; and the broken fiber fraction remains the
same. The time for the interface complete debonding increases from t = 232.9 ks at
𝜏 f = 1 MPa to t = 267.2 ks at 𝜏 f = 5 MPa. The time for the interface complete oxidation
decreases from t = 267.1 ks at 𝜏 f = 1 MPa to t = 250.5 ks at 𝜏 f = 5 MPa.
When the interface shear stress in the oxidation region is 𝜏 f = 1 MPa, the strain
from 𝜂 = 0.125 to 0.23 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜂 = 0.31 under
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 0.44 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and remains
to 𝜂 = 0.44 till t = 79 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 232.9 ks.
The interface oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 to 0.47 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and
at t = 36 ks decreases to 𝜔 = 0.43 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 0.61
and increases to q = 7 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to
When the interface shear stress in the oxidation region is 𝜏 f = 5 MPa, the strain
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.16 Effect of interface shear stress in the oxidation region (i.e. 𝜏 f = 1, 2, 3, 4, and
5 MPa) on (a) the strain versus the time curves; (b) the interface debonding ratio versus the
time curves; (c) the interface oxidation ratio versus the time curves; and (d) the broken fiber
fraction versus the time curves of SiC/SiC composite under stress rupture loading of
𝜎 = 180 MPa and stochastic loading stress of 𝜎 s = 200 MPa and Δt = 36 ks at T = 850 ∘ C in
air atmosphere.

and remains to 𝜂 = 0.405 till t = 80.1 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to q = 7 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and
(c)
(d)

Different Environmental Temperatures
Figure 6.17 and Table 6.15 show the effect of the environmental temperature (i.e.
T = 750, 800, 850, 900, and 950 ∘ C) on the strain, interface debonding ratio, interface
oxidation ratio, and broken fiber fraction versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite
under constant stress of 𝜎 = 180 MPa, stochastic stress of 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and
stochastic time interval of Δt = 36 ks in air atmosphere. When the environmental
temperature increases, the stress rupture time decreases; the time for the interface
complete debonding and oxidation decreases; and the broken fiber fraction at the
stage of stochastic loading increases. The stress rupture lifetime decreases from
t = 2614 ks at T = 750 ∘ C to t = 648 ks at T = 950 ∘ C. The time for the interface
complete debonding decreases from t = 501.5 ks at T = 750 ∘ C to t = 123.1 ks at
T = 950 ∘ C. The time for the interface complete oxidation decreases from t = 574.8 ks
at T = 750 ∘ C to t = 141.3 ks at T = 950 ∘ C.
for different interface shear stress in the oxidation region.
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79 232.9 267.1 1223.6
𝜏 f = 1 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.095 0.115 0.102 0.104 0.176 0.182 0.213
𝜂 0.125 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.44 0.44 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.43 0.61 0.61 0.67 0.87 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.4 × 10−3 0.019 0.023 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79.2 241.3 267.1 1223.6
𝜏 f = 2 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.094 0.113 0.1 0.102 0.168 0.171 0.202
𝜂 0.125 0.229 0.305 0.432 0.432 0.432 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.485 0.445 0.627 0.627 0.69 0.904 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.47 × 10−3 0.02 0.023 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79.5 250.3 267.1 1223.6
𝜏 f = 3 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.076 0.093 0.11 0.098 0.1 0.159 0.161 0.192
𝜂 0.125 0.225 0.3 0.423 0.423 0.423 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.493 0.45 0.64 0.64 0.707 0.937 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.49 × 10−3 0.021 0.023 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79.8 259.9 267.1 1223.6
𝜏 f = 4 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.075 0.092 0.108 0.096 0.098 0.15 0.151 0.182
𝜂 0.125 0.221 0.296 0.414 0.414 0.414 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.501 0.458 0.654 0.654 0.725 0.973 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.51 × 10−3 0.022 0.023 0.285
(Continued)
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 80.1 250.5 267.1 1223.6
𝜏 f = 5 MPa
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.075 0.091 0.107 0.094 0.096 0.138 0.14 0.171
𝜂 0.125 0.218 0.291 0.405 0.405 0.405 0.938 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.509 0.466 0.669 0.669 0.744 1.0 1.0 1.0
−6 −3 −3 −3 −3 −3
q 2 × 10 1.5 × 10 2.9 × 10 7 × 10 7 × 10 7.53 × 10 0.0214 0.023 0.285
When the environmental temperature is T = 750 ∘ C, the strain increases from

𝜀c = 0.213% at t = 2614 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.125 to
and increases to q = 2.6 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to
q = 0.285 at t = 2614 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa.
When the environmental temperature is T = 950 ∘ C, the strain increases from
under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.15% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and
decreases to 𝜀c = 0.133% at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.212%
at t = 648 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.125 to 0.33 under
𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks increases to 𝜂 = 0.428 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases
to 𝜂 = 0.678 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and remains to 𝜂 = 0.678 till t = 75.8 ks
under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 123.1 ks. The interface oxidation
ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 to 0.64 under 𝜎 = 180 MPa, and at t = 36 ks decreases
to 𝜔 = 0.602 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 0.758 at t = 72 ks under
𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 141.3 ks under 𝜎 = 180 MPa. The
and at t = 36 ks increases to q = 6.5 × 10−3 under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to
q = 0.016 at t = 72 ks under 𝜎 s = 200 MPa, and increases to q = 0.285 at t = 648 ks
under 𝜎 = 180 MPa.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.17 Effect of environment temperature (i.e. T = 750, 800, 850, 900, and 950 ∘ C) on
(a) the strain versus the time curves; (b) the interface debonding ratio versus the time
curves; (c) the interface oxidation ratio versus the time curves; (d) the broken fiber fraction
versus the time curves; and (e) the stress rupture lifetime versus the temperature curves of
SiC/SiC composite under stress rupture constant stress of 𝜎 = 180 MPa and stochastic stress
of 𝜎 s = 200 MPa and Δt = 36 ks in air atmosphere.

Lara-Curzio [11] investigated the stress rupture behavior of SiC/SiC composite at
T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere. Experimental and predicted stress rupture curves,
interface debonding and interface oxidation, broken fiber fraction versus time
curves, and the stress versus lifetime curves of SiC/SiC composite under constant
and stochastic stress with different time intervals at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere
are shown in Figures 6.18–6.20 and Tables 6.16–6.18.
(c)
(d)
(e)

for different environment temperatures.
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 86.8 501.5 574.8 2614
T = 750 ∘ C
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.069 0.084 0.093 0.083 0.085 0.176 0.182 0.213
𝜂 0.125 0.175 0.238 0.299 0.299 0.299 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.294 0.263 0.419 0.419 0.505 0.873 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 5.9 × 10−4 1.1 × 10−3 2.6 × 10−3 2.6 × 10−3 3 × 10−3 0.018 0.021 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 81.9 335.6 384.7 1757.2
T = 800 ∘ C
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.073 0.088 0.102 0.091 0.094 0.176 0.182 0.213
𝜂 0.125 0.199 0.269 0.36 0.36 0.36 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.385 0.349 0.521 0.521 0.593 0.873 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 9.8 × 10−4 1.8 × 10−3 4.4 × 10−3 4.4 × 10−3 4.8 × 10−3 0.018 0.022 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 79 232.9 267.1 1223.6
T = 850 ∘ C
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.077 0.095 0.115 0.102 0.104 0.176 0.182 0.213
𝜂 0.125 0.23 0.31 0.44 0.44 0.44 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.47 0.43 0.61 0.61 0.67 0.87 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 1.5 × 10−3 2.9 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7 × 10−3 7.4 × 10−3 0.019 0.023 0.285
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 77.1 166.9 191.5 878.6
T = 900 ∘ C
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.083 0.103 0.13 0.116 0.118 0.176 0.182 0.213
𝜂 0.125 0.276 0.362 0.546 0.546 0.546 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.563 0.524 0.693 0.693 0.742 0.873 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 2.3 × 10−3 4.4 × 10−3 0.01 0.01 0.011 0.021 0.024 0.285
(Continued)
𝝈 (MPa) 180 180 200 200 180 180 180 180 180
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 75.8 123.1 141.3 648
T = 950 ∘ C
𝜀c (%) 0.062 0.09 0.113 0.15 0.133 0.136 0.176 0.182 0.212
𝜂 0.125 0.33 0.428 0.678 0.678 0.678 1.0 1.0 1.0
𝜔 0 0.64 0.602 0.758 0.758 0.797 0.873 1.0 1.0
q 2 × 10−6 3.4 × 10−3 6.5 × 10−3 0.016 0.016 0.0163 0.024 0.027 0.285
6.3.2.1 𝝈 = 80 MPa and 𝝈 s = 90 MPa with 𝚫t = 7.2, 10.8, and 14.4 ks

Experimental and predicted strain, interface debonding ratio, interface oxidation
ratio, and broken fiber fraction versus time curves, and the stress versus lifetime
curve of SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 80 MPa, stochastic stress
𝜎 s = 90 MPa and Δt = 7.2, 10.8, and 14.4 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere are
shown in Figure 6.18 and Table 6.16.
Under constant stress 𝜎 = 80 MPa, the stress rupture lifetime is t = 83.6 ks with
partial interface debonding 𝜂 = 0.557, partial interface oxidation 𝜔 = 0.846, and
broken fiber fraction q = 0.291. Under stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 90 MPa occurs at
t = 14.4 ks, the stress rupture lifetime decreases to t = 83.1 ks with partial interface
debonding 𝜂 = 0.711, partial interface oxidation 𝜔 = 0.852, and the broken fiber
fraction q = 0.283. Under 𝜎 s = 90 MPa and Δt = 7.2 ks, the stress rupture lifetime
decreases to t = 82.6 ks with partial interface debonding 𝜂 = 0.705, partial interface
oxidation 𝜔 = 0.854, and broken fiber fraction q = 0.284. Under 𝜎 s = 90 MPa and
Δt = 10.8 ks, the stress rupture lifetime decreases to t = 82.2 ks with partial interface
debonding 𝜂 = 0.7, partial interface oxidation of 𝜔 = 0.856, and broken fiber fraction
q = 0.284. Under 𝜎 s = 90 MPa and Δt = 14.4 ks, the stress rupture lifetime decreases
to t = 81.6 ks with partial interface debonding 𝜂 = 0.695, partial interface oxidation
𝜔 = 0.857, and broken fiber fraction q = 0.285.
Compared with constant stress 𝜎 = 80 MPa, the stress rupture lifetime decreases
with stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 90 MPa and the time interval. When the constant stress
is 𝜎 = 80 MPa, the stress rupture lifetime is t = 83.6 ks; however, under constant
stress 𝜎 = 80 MPa with the stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 90 MPa and stochastic time interval
Δt = 14.4 ks, the stress rupture time decreases to t = 81.6 ks.
6.3.2.2 𝝈 = 100 MPa and 𝝈 s = 110 MPa with 𝚫t = 7.2 ks

ratio, and broken fiber fraction versus time curves, and the stress versus lifetime
curve of SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 100 MPa, stochastic stress
𝜎 s = 110 MPa, and Δt = 7.2 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere are shown in
Figure 6.19 and Table 6.17.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.18 (a) The experimental and predicted strain versus time curves; (b) the interface
debonding ratio versus time curves; (c) the interface oxidation ratio versus time curves;
(d) the broken fiber fraction versus time curves; and (e) the stress versus lifetime curves of
SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 80 MPa, stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 90 MPa and
Δt = 7.2, 10.8, and 14.4 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
Under 𝜎 = 100 MPa, the stress rupture lifetime is t = 33.7 ks with partial interface
debonding 𝜂 = 0.279, partial interface oxidation 𝜔 = 0.617, and broken fiber frac-
tion q = 0.228. Under 𝜎 s = 110 MPa occurs at t = 10.8 ks, the stress rupture lifetime
oxidation 𝜔 = 0.627, and broken fiber fraction q = 0.285.
with stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 110 MPa and the time interval. When the constant stress is
𝜎 = 100 MPa, the stress rupture lifetime is t = 33.7 ks; however, under constant stress
𝜎 = 100 MPa with the stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 110 MPa and stochastic time interval
Δt = 7.2 ks, the stress rupture time decreases to t = 32.8 ks.
(c)
(d)
(e)

Table 6.16 Experimental and theoretical strain, interface debonding and oxidation ratio,
and broken fiber fraction of SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 80 MPa,
stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 90 MPa and Δt = 7.2, 10.8, and 14.4 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air
atmosphere.
𝝈 (MPa) 80 80 80 80 80
t (ks) 8.5 21.6 42.9 55.5 78.4
𝜎 = 80 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.106 0.13 0.167 0.191 0.233

(experimental data)
𝝈 (MPa) 80 80 80 80 80 80
t (ks) 8.5 21.6 42.9 55.5 78.4 83.6
𝜎 = 80 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.102 0.127 0.169 0.196 0.252 0.277

(theoretical 𝜂 0.112 0.186 0.307 0.379 0.516 0.557
values)
𝜔 0.432 0.659 0.792 0.828 0.858 0.846
q 0.007 0.024 0.064 0.097 0.203 0.291
𝝈 (MPa) 80 80 90 80 80
t (ks) 0 14.4 14.4 14.4 83.1
𝜎 = 80 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.085 0.113 0.145 0.126 0.331

𝜎 s = 90 MPa
𝜂 0.064 0.145 0.204 0.204 0.711
t = 14.4 ks
(theoretical values) 𝜔 0 0.563 0.517 0.517 0.852
q 0 0.014 0.03 0.03 0.283
𝝈 (MPa) 80 80 90 90 80 80
t (ks) 0 14.4 14.4 21.6 21.6 82.6
𝜎 = 80 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.085 0.113 0.145 0.167 0.144 0.327

𝜎 s = 90 MPa
𝜂 0.064 0.145 0.204 0.259 0.259 0.705
t = 14.4 ks
Δt = 7.2 ks 𝜔 0 0.563 0.517 0.612 0.612 0.854
(theoretical values) q 0 0.014 0.03 0.054 0.054 0.284
𝝈 (MPa) 80 80 90 90 80 80
t (ks) 0 14.4 14.4 25.2 25.2 82.2
𝜎 = 80 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.085 0.113 0.145 0.178 0.154 0.324

𝜎 s = 90 MPa
𝜂 0.064 0.145 0.204 0.286 0.286 0.7
t = 14.4 ks
Δt = 10.8 ks 𝜔 0 0.563 0.517 0.645 0.645 0.856
(Continued)
𝝈 (MPa) 80 80 90 90 80 80
t (ks) 0 14.4 14.4 28.8 28.8 81.6
𝜎 = 80 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.085 0.113 0.145 0.189 0.163 0.321

𝜎 s = 90 MPa
𝜂 0.064 0.145 0.204 0.314 0.314 0.695
t = 14.4 ks
Δt = 14.4 ks 𝜔 0 0.563 0.517 0.672 0.672 0.857
6.3.2.3 𝝈 = 120 MPa and 𝝈 s = 130 and 140 MPa with 𝚫t = 7.2 ks
ratio, broken fiber fraction versus time curves, and the stress versus lifetime curve
of SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 120 MPa, stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 130,
140 MPa, and Δt = 7.2 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere are shown in Figure 6.20
and Table 6.18.
Under 𝜎 = 120 MPa, the stress rupture lifetime is t = 10.5 ks with partial interface
debonding 𝜂 = 0.42, partial interface oxidation of 𝜔 = 0.406, and broken fiber frac-
tion q = 0.17. Under 𝜎 s = 130 MPa occurs at t = 3.6 ks, the stress rupture lifetime
oxidation 𝜔 = 0.287, and broken fiber fraction q = 0.151. Under 𝜎 s = 140 MPa occurs
at t = 3.6 ks, the stress rupture lifetime decreases to t = 4.4 ks with partial interface
debonding 𝜂 = 0.407, partial interface oxidation 𝜔 = 0.199, and broken fiber fraction
q = 0.128.
with stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 130 and 140 MPa and the time interval. When the con-
stant stress is 𝜎 = 120 MPa, the stress rupture lifetime is t = 10.5 ks; however, under
constant stress of 𝜎 = 120 MPa with the stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 140 MPa and stochastic
time interval Δt = 7.2 ks, the stress rupture time decreases to t = 4.4 ks.
6.3.2.4 Discussion
Under stress rupture loading, damage evolution and lifetime are affected by stochas-
tic stress level and stochastic time interval, and also the constituent properties of
fiber volume and interface properties, damage state of matrix crack spacing, and
environmental temperature.
Under constant stress with stochastic loading, the stress rupture lifetime decreases
with increase of stochastic stress level, as shown in Figures 6.11e and 6.20e. When
the stochastic stress level increases, the broken fiber fraction increases at the high
stochastic stress, leading to the decrease of the lifetime under stress rupture loading.
The stress rupture lifetime decreases with increase of stochastic time interval, as
shown in Figures 6.12e and 6.18e. When the stochastic time interval increases,
the accumulation fiber broken fiber fraction at the high stochastic stress increases,
leading to the decrease of the lifetime under stress rupture loading. The stress
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.19 (a) Experimental and predicted strain versus time curves; (b) the interface
(d) the broken fiber fraction versus time curves; and (e) the stress versus lifetime curve of
SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 100 MPa, stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 110 MPa and
Δt = 7.2 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
rupture lifetime increases with the fiber volume, as shown in Figure 6.13e, because
of the decrease of the intact fiber stress and broken fiber fraction under stress
rupture loading. The stress rupture lifetime increases with the interfacial shear
stress at the slip region, as shown in Figure 6.15e, because of the higher stress
transfer between the fiber and the matrix and between the intact and broken fiber.
The stress rupture lifetime decreases with the environmental temperature, as shown
in Figure 6.17e. When the temperature increases, the rate of the interface oxidation
and fiber strength degradation increases, leading to the higher fiber broken under
stress rupture loading.
(c)
(d)
(e)

Table 6.17 Experimental and theoretical strain, interface debonding and oxidation ratio,
and broken fiber fraction of SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 100 MPa,
stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 110 MPa and Δt = 7.2 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
𝝈 (MPa) 100 100 100 100 100

t (ks) 8.3 13.8 21 25.3 33.3
𝜎 = 100 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.125 0.135 0.15 0.161 0.189

(experimental data)
𝝈 (MPa) 100 100 100 100 100 100
t (ks) 8.3 13.8 21 25.3 33.3 33.7
𝜎 = 100 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.127 0.14 0.158 0.169 0.196 0.198

(theoretical values) 𝜂 0.122 0.152 0.192 0.216 0.273 0.279
𝜔 0.348 0.466 0.561 0.598 0.624 0.617
q 0.022 0.044 0.083 0.114 0.218 0.228
𝝈 (MPa) 100 100 110 110 100 100
t (ks) 0 10.8 10.8 18 18 32.8
𝜎 = 100 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.109 0.133 0.159 0.186 0.161 0.212

𝜎 s = 110 MPa
𝜂 0.078 0.135 0.174 0.229 0.229 0.312
t = 10.8 ks
Δt = 7.2 ks 𝜔 0 0.408 0.370 0.469 0.469 0.627

Multiple Load Sequence at Intermediate Temperature
In this section, effect of multiple loading sequence on time-dependent stress rupture
of fiber-reinforced CMCs at intermediate temperatures in oxidative environment
is investigated. Relationships between multiple loading sequence, composite strain
evolution, time, matrix cracking, interface debonding and oxidation, and fibers
fracture are established. Effects of fiber volume, matrix crack spacing, interface
shear stress in the slip and oxidation region, and environment temperature on the
stress/time-dependent strain, interface debonding and oxidation fraction, and fibers
broken fraction of SiC/SiC composite are analyzed. Experimental stress rupture of
SiC/SiC composite under single and multiple loading sequence at T = 950 ∘ C in air
atmosphere is predicted.

Figure 6.21 shows multiple loading sequence for stress rupture of fiber-reinforced
CMCs at elevated temperature. Effects of fiber volume, matrix crack spacing,
6.4 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites Under Multiple Load Sequence 275
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.20 (a) Experimental and predicted strain versus time curves; (b) the interface
(d) the broken fiber fraction versus time curves; and (e) the stress and lifetime curve of
SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 120 MPa, stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 130 and
140 MPa and Δt = 7.2 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
interface shear stress, and environmental temperature on stress/time-dependent

stress rupture of SiC/SiC composite are analyzed.

Figure 6.22 and Table 6.19 show the effect of fiber volume (i.e. V f = 25%, 30%, and
35%) on stress rupture, fraction of interface debonding and oxidation, and fraction
of fiber broken versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under multiple loading
sequence 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in
air atmosphere. When fiber volume increases, the stress rupture lifetime increases;
(c)
(d)
(e)

Table 6.18 The experimental and theoretical strain, interface debonding and oxidation
length, and broken fiber fraction of SiC/SiC composite under constant stress 𝜎 = 120 MPa,
stochastic stress 𝜎 s = 130, 140 MPa and Δt = 7.2 ks at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
𝝈 (MPa) 120 120 120 120

t (ks) 0.7 4.4 7.1 9.3
𝜎 = 120 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.17 0.2 0.23 0.268

(experimental
data)
𝝈 (MPa) 120 120 120 120 120 120
t (ks) 0 0.7 4.4 7.1 9.3 10.5
𝜎 = 120 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.168 0.174 0.207 0.234 0.26 0.277

(theoretical values)
𝜂 0.197 0.209 0.276 0.33 0.38 0.42
𝜔 0 0.005 0.259 0.35 0.397 0.406
q 0 0.003 0.04 0.08 0.13 0.17
𝝈 (MPa) 120 120 130 130
t (ks) 0 3.6 3.6 6.8
𝜎 = 120 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.168 0.2 0.23 0.281

𝜎 s = 130 MPa
𝜂 0.197 0.261 0.312 0.415
t = 3.6 ks
Δt = 7.2 ks 𝜔 0 0.224 0.202 0.287
(theoretical values) q 0 0.03 0.05 0.151
𝝈 (MPa) 120 120 140 140
t (ks) 0 3.6 3.6 4.4
𝜎 = 120 MPa 𝜀c (%) 0.168 0.2 0.272 0.288

𝜎 s = 140 MPa
𝜂 0.197 0.261 0.369 0.407
t = 14.4 ks
Δt = 7.2 ks 𝜔 0 0.224 0.18 0.199
(theoretical values) q 0 0.03 0.09 0.128
the time-dependent strain decreases at the same time; the time-dependent fraction
of interface debonding decreases under the same applied stress when the interface
partial debonds, and the time for complete interface debonding (𝜂 = 1.0) increases;
the time-dependent fraction of interface oxidation increases, and the time for com-
plete interface oxidation (𝜔 = 1.0) remains the same for different fiber volumes,
and the time-dependent fiber failure probability decreases. Under multiple loading
sequence, the time-dependent strain and the fraction of interface debonding and
broken fiber increase at higher applied stress; however, the time-dependent frac-
tion of interface oxidation decreases at higher applied stress. At low fiber volume of
V f = 25%, the composite fractures at short lifetime with partial interface debonding
(𝜂 < 1.0) and partial interface oxidation (𝜔 < 1.0), and low fraction of fiber failure;
Figure 6.21 Diagram of multiple loading sequence.
however, at high fiber volume of V f = 30% and 35%, the composite fractures at long
lifetime with complete interface debonding (𝜂 = 1.0) and complete interface oxida-
tion (𝜔 = 1.0), and high fraction of fiber failure.
When V f = 25%, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.029% at t = 0 seconds to
𝜀c = 0.032% at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress
level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the strain increases to 𝜀c = 0.067%,
and increases to 𝜀c = 0.08% at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to
𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the strain increases to 𝜀c = 0.16%, and increases to
𝜀c = 0.236% at t = 129.3 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.02 at
t = 0 seconds to 𝜂 = 0.046 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa;
when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the interface
debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 0.188, and increases to 𝜂 = 0.26 at t = 72 ks,
and when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the interface
debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 0.59, and increases to 𝜂 = 0.85 at t = 129.3 ks.
The interface oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 at t = 0 seconds to 𝜔 = 0.54
at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level
increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to
𝜔 = 0.39 and increases to 𝜔 = 0.56 at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases
to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 0.45
and increases to 𝜔 = 0.56 at t = 129.3 ks. The fiber failure probability increases
from q = 0 at t = 0 seconds to q = 3.3 × 10−4 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level
𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the
fiber failure probability increases to q = 3.9 × 10−3 and increases to q = 9.4 × 10−3
at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the
fiber failure probability increases to q = 0.06 and increases to q = 0.17 at t = 129.3 ks.
When V f = 35%, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.028% at t = 0 seconds to 𝜀c = 0.03%
at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level increases
to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the strain increases to 𝜀c = 0.055% and increases to
𝜀c = 0.063% at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa
at t = 72 ks, the strain increases to 𝜀c = 0.115%, and increases to 𝜀c = 0.234% at
t = 732.8 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.01 at t = 0 seconds to
𝜂 = 0.034 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level
increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the interface debonding ratio increases to
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.22 Effect of fiber volume (i.e. V f = 25%, 30%, and 35%) on (a) the composite
strain versus time curves; (b) the fraction of the interface debonding versus time curves;
(c) the fraction of the interface oxidation versus time curves; and (d) the broken fiber
fraction versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under multiple loading sequence
𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
𝜂 = 0.134, and increases to 𝜂 = 0.20 at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to
𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 0.44 and
increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 225 ks. The interface oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 at
t = 0 seconds to 𝜔 = 0.73 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when
the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the interface oxidation ratio
decreases to 𝜔 = 0.54 and increases to 𝜔 = 0.72 at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level
𝜔 = 0.61 and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 267.1 ks. The fiber failure probability increases
(c)
(d)
fiber failure probability increases to q = 5.1 × 10−4 and increases to q = 1.2 × 10−3 at
t = 72 , and when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the fiber
failure probability increases to q = 0.007 and increases to q = 0.26 at t = 732.8 ks.

for Different Matrix Crack Spacings
Figure 6.23 and Table 6.20 show the effect of saturation matrix crack spacing (i.e.
lsat = 150, 200, and 350 μm) on stress rupture, fraction of interface debonding and oxi-
dation, and fraction of broken fiber versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under
multiple loading sequence 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa
at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere. When saturation matrix crack spacing increases,
the stress rupture lifetime remains the same; the time-dependent strain decreases
at the same time; the time-dependent fraction of interface debonding decreases at
Table 6.19 Effect of fiber volume on stress rupture of SiC/SiC composite under multiple
loading sequence 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in
air atmosphere.
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 129.3
V f = 25%
𝜀 (%) 0.029 0.032 0.067 0.08 0.16 0.236
𝜂 0.02 0.046 0.188 0.26 0.59 0.85
𝜔 0 0.54 0.39 0.56 0.45 0.58
q 0 3.3 × 10−4 3.9 × 10−3 9.4 × 10−3 0.06 0.17
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 343
V f = 30%
𝜀 (%) 0.028 88 0.031 17 0.060 16 0.070 13 0.134 43 0.270 85
𝜂 0.014 94 0.039 29 0.156 94 0.228 45 0.500 04 1
𝜔 0 0.641 05 0.471 44 0.646 92 0.542 8 1
q 0 1.14 × 10−4 0.001 3 0.003 11 0.018 14 0.238 44
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 732.8
V f = 35%
𝜀 (%) 0.028 92 0.030 78 0.055 9 0.063 92 0.115 02 0.234 92
𝜂 0.010 06 0.034 41 0.134 67 0.206 07 0.441 59 1
𝜔 0 0.732 11 0.549 38 0.717 17 0.614 64 1
q 0 4.5 × 10−5 5.15 × 10−4 0.001 23 0.007 0.261 77
the same time, and the time for complete interface debonding (𝜂 = 1.0) increases; the
time-dependent fraction of the interface oxidation remains the same when the inter-
face partial debonds (𝜔 < 1.0), and the time for complete interface oxidation (𝜔 = 1.0)
increases, and the time-dependent fraction of fiber broken remains the same at the
same time.
When lsat = 150 μm, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.029% at t = 0 seconds to
level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the strain increases to 𝜀c = 0.072%
𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the strain increases to 𝜀c = 0.18% and increases to
𝜀c = 0.27% at t = 343 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.025 at
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.23 Effect of saturation matrix crack spacing (i.e. lsat = 150, 200, and 300 μm) on
(a) the composite strain versus time curves; (b) the fraction of the interface debonding
versus time curves; (c) the fraction of the interface oxidation versus time curves; and (d) the
broken fiber fraction versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under multiple loading
sequence of 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air
atmosphere.
when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the interface debond-
ing ratio increases to 𝜂 = 0.26 and increases to 𝜂 = 0.38 at t = 72 ks, and when the
stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the interface debonding ratio
increases to 𝜂 = 0.83 and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 98.9 ks. The interface oxidation
ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 at t = 0 seconds to 𝜔 = 0.64 at t = 36 ks under the first
stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at
t = 36 ks, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 0.47 and increases to 𝜔 = 0.64
(c)
(d)
interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 0.54 and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 159.7 ks.
The fiber failure probability increases from q = 0 at t = 0 seconds to q = 1.1 × 10−4 at
t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level increases
to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the fiber failure probability increases to q = 1.3 × 10−3
and increases to q = 3 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to
𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the fiber failure probability increases to q = 0.018 and
increases to q = 0.23 at t = 343 ks.
When lsat = 350 μm, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.028% at t = 0 seconds to
𝜀c (t) = 0.26% at t = 343 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.025
Table 6.20 Effect of matrix crack spacing on stress rupture of SiC/SiC composite under
multiple loading sequence of 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at
T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 343
lsat = 150 𝜇m
𝜀 (%) 0.029 66 0.033 49 0.072 56 0.089 22 0.187 12 0.275 04
𝜂 0.024 9 0.065 49 0.261 56 0.380 74 0.833 4 1
𝜔 0 0.641 05 0.471 44 0.646 92 0.542 8 1
q 0 1.14 × 10−4 0.001 3 0.003 11 0.018 14 0.234 16
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 343
lsat = 200 𝜇m
𝜀 (%) 0.029 17 0.032 04 0.064 81 0.077 31 0.154 19 0.272 94
𝜂 0.018 68 0.049 12 0.641 05 0.285 56 0.625 05 1
𝜔 0 0.196 17 0.471 44 0.646 92 0.542 8 1
q 0 1.14 × 10−4 0.001 3 0.003 11 0.018 14 0.234 16
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 343
lsat = 300 𝜇m
𝜀 (%) 0.028 68 0.030 6 0.057 06 0.065 39 0.121 26 0.268 76
𝜂 0.012 45 0.032 75 0.641 05 0.190 37 0.416 7 1
𝜔 0 0.130 78 0.471 44 0.646 92 0.542 8 1
q 0 1.14 × 10−4 0.001 3 0.003 11 0.018 14 0.234 16
at t = 0 seconds to 𝜂 = 0.032 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa;
stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the interface debonding length
length increases from 𝜔 = 0 at t = 0 seconds to 𝜔 = 0.64 at t = 36 ks under the first
interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 0.54 and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 321.1 ks.
The fiber failure probability increases from q = 0 at t = 0 seconds to q = 1.1 × 10−4 at

t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level increases
to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the fiber failure probability increases to q = 1.3 × 10−3
and increases to q = 3 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to
𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the fiber failure probability increases to q = 0.018 and
increases to q = 0.23 at t = 343 ks.

Figure 6.24 and Table 6.21 show the effect of interface shear stress in the slip region
(i.e. 𝜏 i = 20, 40, and 60 MPa) on stress rupture, fraction of the interface debond-
ing and oxidation, and the fraction of fiber broken versus time curves of SiC/SiC
composite under multiple loading sequence 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and
𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere. When interface shear stress in the
slip region increases, the stress rupture lifetime increases; the time-dependent strain
decreases at the same time; the time-dependent fraction of the interface debonding
decreases when the interface partial debonds (𝜂 < 1.0); and the time for complete
interface debonding (𝜂 = 1.0) increases; the time-dependent fraction of the interface
oxidation increases when the interface partial debonds, and the time for complete
interface oxidation (𝜔 = 1.0) remains the same; and the time-dependent fraction of
fiber broken decreases.
When 𝜏 i = 20 MPa, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.029% at t = 0 seconds to
𝜀c = 0.268% at t = 246.4 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from 𝜂 = 0.023 at
t = 0 seconds to 𝜂 = 0.047 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level of 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa;
when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the interface
debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 0.2 and increases to 𝜂 = 0.27 at t = 72 ks, and when
the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the interface debonding
ratio increases to 𝜂 = 0.62 and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 169.2 ks. The interface
oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 at t = 0 seconds to 𝜔 = 0.53 at t = 36 ks under the
first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa
at t = 36 ks, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 0.36 and increases to
𝜔 = 0.54 at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at
at t = 246.4 ks. The fiber failure probability increases from q = 0 at t = 0 seconds
to q = 1.7 × 10−4 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the
stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks, the fiber failure probability
increases to q = 1.9 × 10−3 and increases to q = 4.6 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks, and when the
increases to q = 0.028 and increases to q = 0.227 at t = 246.4 ks.
When 𝜏 i = 60 MPa, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.028% at t = 0 seconds to
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.24 Effect of interface shear stress in the slip region (i.e. 𝜏 i = 20, 40, and 60 MPa)
on (a) the composite strain versus time curves; (b) the fraction of the interface debonding
versus time curves; (c) the fraction of the interface oxidation versus time curves; and (d) the
fraction of the broken fiber versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under multiple loading
sequence of 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air
atmosphere.
(c)
(d)

stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa
increases to q = 0.008 and increases to q = 0.25 at t = 604.8 ks.
Figure 6.25 and Table 6.22 show the effect of interface shear stress in oxidation
region (i.e. 𝜏 f = 1, 3, and 5 MPa) on stress rupture, fraction of interface debonding
Table 6.21 Effect of interface shear stress in slip region on stress rupture behavior of
SiC/SiC composite under multiple loading sequence of 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa,
and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 246.4
𝜏 i = 20 MPa
𝜀 (%) 0.029 43 0.031 69 0.064 12 0.073 99 0.148 8 0.268 54
𝜂 0.023 15 0.047 08 0.200 65 0.271 15 0.622 27 1
𝜔 0 0.535 03 0.368 73 0.545 04 0.436 18 0.923 23
q 0 1.7 × 10−4 0.001 96 0.004 68 0.027 9 0.227 62
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 432
𝜏 i = 40 MPa
𝜀 (%) 0.028 6 0.030 92 0.058 19 0.068 25 0.127 42 0.270 96
𝜂 0.010 83 0.035 39 0.135 07 0.207 12 0.439 91 1
𝜔 0 0.711 79 0.547 77 0.713 54 0.617 1
q 0 8.5 × 10−5 9.75 × 10−4 0.002 33 0.013 45 0.234 76
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 604.8
𝜏 i = 60 MPa
𝜀 (%) 0.028 33 0.030 66 0.056 22 0.066 36 0.120 53 0.273 71
𝜂 0.006 69 0.031 46 0.113 14 0.185 76 0.380 29 1
𝜔 0 0.800 68 0.653 92 0.795 6 0.713 72 1
q 0 5.7 × 10−5 6.5 × 10−4 0.001 55 0.008 86 0.250 24
and oxidation, and fiber failure probability versus time curves of SiC/SiC com-
posite under multiple loading sequence 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and
𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere. When interface shear stress
in oxidation region increases, the stress rupture lifetime remains the same; the
time-dependent strain decreases at the same time; the time-dependent fraction of
the interface debonding decreases when the interface partial debonds (𝜂 < 1.0), and
the time for complete interface debonding (𝜂 = 1.0) increases; the time-dependent
fraction of the interface oxidation increases when the interface partial debonds,
and the time for complete interface oxidation (𝜔 = 1.0) remains the same, and the
time-dependent fraction of fiber broken remains the same.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.25 Effect of interface shear stress in the oxidation region (i.e. 𝜏 f = 1, 3, and
5 MPa) on (a) the composite strain versus time curves; (b) the fraction of the interface
debonding versus time curves; (c) the fraction of the interface oxidation versus time curves;
and (d) the fraction of the broken fiber versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under
multiple loading sequence of 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at
T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
When 𝜏 f = 1 MPa, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.028% at t = 0 seconds to

(c)
(d)
stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the interface debonding length
increases to q = 1.3 × 10−3 and increases to q = 3 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks, and when the
increases to q = 0.018 and increases to q = 0.23 at t = 343 ks.
Table 6.22 Effect of interface shear stress in oxidation region on stress rupture behavior
of SiC/SiC composite under multiple loading sequence of 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa,
𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at T = 850 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 343
𝜏 f = 1 MPa
𝜀 (%) 0.028 88 0.031 17 0.060 16 0.070 15 0.134 43 0.270 85
𝜂 0.014 94 0.039 29 0.156 94 0.228 45 0.500 04 1
𝜔 0 0.641 05 0.471 44 0.646 92 0.542 8 1
q 0 1.14 × 10−4 0.001 3 0.003 11 0.018 14 0.234 16
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 343
𝜏 f = 3 MPa
𝜀 (%) 0.028 88 0.030 95 0.059 27 0.068 01 0.129 59 0.249 92
𝜂 0.015 01 0.037 61 0.152 0.218 59 0.481 95 1
𝜔 0 0.669 67 0.486 74 0.676 08 0.563 18 1
q 0 1.14 × 10−4 0.001 3 0.003 11 0.018 14 0.234 16
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 343
𝜏 f = 5 MPa
𝜀 (%) 0.028 88 0.030 74 0.058 4 0.065 98 0.124 96 0.229
𝜂 0.015 0.035 94 0.147 07 0.208 74 0.463 85 1
𝜔 0 0.700 97 0.503 06 0.707 99 0.585 15 1
q 0 1.14 × 10−4 0.001 3 0.003 11 0.018 14 0.234 16
When 𝜏 f = 5 MPa, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.028% at t = 0 seconds to

at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks,
the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 0.58 and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at
t = 267.1 ks. The fiber failure probability increases from q = 0 at t = 0 seconds to
q = 1.1 × 10−4 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the
increases to q = 1.3 × 10−3 and increases to q = 3 × 10−3 at t = 72 ks, and when the
increases to q = 0.018 and increases to q = 0.23 at t = 343 ks.

for Different Environment Temperatures
Figure 6.26 and Table 6.23 show the effect of environment temperature (i.e. T = 700,
800, and 900 ∘ C) on stress rupture, fraction of interface debonding and oxidation, and
fraction of fiber broken versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under multiple load-
ing sequence 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa. When tem-
perature increases, the stress rupture lifetime decreases; the time-dependent com-
posite strain increases at the same time; the time-dependent fraction of the interface
debonding increases when the interface partial debonds (𝜂 < 1.0), and the time for
complete interface debonding (𝜂 = 1.0) decreases; the time-dependent fraction of the
interface oxidation increases when the interface partial debonds, and the time for
complete interface oxidation (𝜔 = 1.0) decreases, and the time-dependent fraction
of fiber broken increases.
When T = 700 ∘ C, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.028% at t = 0 seconds to
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.26 Effect of temperature (i.e. T = 700, 800, and 900 ∘ C) on (a) the composite
strain versus time curves; (b) the fraction of the interface debonding versus time curves; (c)
the fraction of the interface oxidation versus time curves; and (d) the broken fiber fraction
versus time curves of SiC/SiC composite under multiple loading sequence of
𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa.
increases to q = 3.9 × 10−3 and increases to q = 0.26 at t = 1155.4 ks.
When T = 900 ∘ C, the strain increases from 𝜀c = 0.028% at t = 0 seconds to
𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the strain increases to 𝜀c = 0.154% and increases
to 𝜀c (t) = 0.265% at t = 263.1 ks. The interface debonding ratio increases from
𝜂 = 0.0149 at t = 0 seconds to 𝜂 = 0.048 at t = 36 ks under the first stress level
(c)
(d)
𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa at t = 36 ks,
the interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 0.185, and increases to 𝜂 = 0.285 at
t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the
interface debonding ratio increases to 𝜂 = 0.6 and increases to 𝜂 = 1.0 at t = 147.1 ks.
The interface oxidation ratio increases from 𝜔 = 0 at t = 0 seconds to 𝜔 = 0.718
at t = 36 ks under the first stress level 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; when the stress level
𝜔 = 0.557 and increases to 𝜔 = 0.72 at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases
to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks, the interface oxidation ratio decreases to 𝜔 = 0.62
and increases to 𝜔 = 1.0 at t = 191.5 ks. The fiber failure probability increases
fiber failure probability increases to q = 1.9 × 10−3 and increases to q = 4.7 × 10−3
Table 6.23 Effect of temperature on stress rupture behavior of SiC/SiC composite under
multiple loading sequence of 𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa, 𝜎 max2 = 150 MPa, and 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa.
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 236.1
T = 700 ∘ C
𝜀 (%) 0.028 88 0.029 57 0.053 01 0.056 03 0.098 68 0.265
𝜂 0.014 94 0.022 17 0.106 54 0.127 8 0.311 86 1
𝜔 0 0.337 16 0.206 04 0.343 51 0.258 53 1
q 0 2.5 × 10−5 2.91 × 10−4 6.92 × 10−4 0.003 92 0.259 27
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 502.4
T = 800 ∘ C
𝜀 (%) 0.028 88 0.030 48 0.057 05 0.064 04 0.118 8 0.276 12
𝜂 0.014 94 0.031 81 0.134 92 0.184 52 0.417 76 1
𝜔 0 0.548 57 0.379 92 0.555 26 0.450 43 1
q 0 7.2 × 10−5 8.27 × 10−4 0.001 97 0.011 35 0.263 43
𝝈 max (MPa) 100 150 200
t (ks) 0 36 36 72 72 1155.4
T = 900 ∘ C
𝜀 (%) 0.028 88 0.032 07 0.064 17 0.077 97 0.154 75 0.275 35
𝜂 0.014 94 0.048 99 0.185 47 0.285 24 0.606 78 1
𝜔 0 0.718 89 0.557 71 0.723 53 0.624 67 1
q 0 1.72 × 10−4 0.001 97 0.004 72 0.028 14 0.199 87
at t = 72 ks, and when the stress level increases to 𝜎 max3 = 200 MPa at t = 72 ks,
the fiber failure probability increases to q = 0.028 and increases to q = 0.199 at
t = 236.1 ks.

Lara-Curzio [11] investigated the stress rupture of SiC/SiC composite at T = 950 ∘ C
in air atmosphere. The experimental and predicted stress rupture curves, fraction
of the interface debonding and oxidation, and fraction of broken fiber versus the
time curves of SiC/SiC composite under single and multiple loading sequence at
T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere are shown in Figures 6.27–6.29.
(a)
(b)
Figure 6.27 (a) Experimental and predicted composite strain versus time curves; (b) the
fraction of the interface debonding versus time curves; (c) the fraction of the interface
oxidation versus time curves; and (d) the broken fiber fraction versus time curves of SiC/SiC
composite under single loading stress 𝜎 max = 80 MPa, and multiple loading stress
𝜎 max1 = 80 MPa and 𝜎 max2 = 90 MPa at T = 950 ∘ C in air atmosphere.
Under 𝜎 max = 80 MPa, experimental time-dependent composite strain increases

from 𝜀c (t = 0.6 ks) = 0.091% to 𝜀c (t = 78.4 ks) = 0.23%; the predicted
time-dependent composite strain increases from 𝜀c (t = 0 seconds) = 0.085%
to 𝜀c (t = 83.6 ks) = 0.27%; the time-dependent fraction of interface debonding
increases from 𝜂 (t = 0 seconds) = 0.06 to 𝜂 (t = 83.6 ks) = 0.55; the time-dependent
fraction of the interface oxidation increases from 𝜔 (t = 0 seconds) = 0 to 𝜔
(t = 83.6 ks) = 0.84, and the time-dependent fraction of the broken fiber increases
from q (t = 0 seconds) = 0 to q (t = 83.6 ks) = 0.29.
Under 𝜎 max1 = 80 MPa and 𝜎 max2 = 90 MPa, the time-dependent composite
strain increases from 𝜀c (t = 0 seconds) = 0.085% to 𝜀c (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.099% under
(c)
(d)
𝜎 max1 = 80 MPa; upon increasing stress level to 𝜎 max2 = 90 MPa at t = 7.2 ks, the
time-dependent composite strain increases to 𝜀c (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.12% and then
increases to 𝜀c (t = 39.8 ks) = 0.228%. The time-dependent fraction of the interface
debonding increases from 𝜂 (t = 0 seconds) = 0.064 to 𝜂 (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.1 under
time-dependent fraction of the interface debonding increases to 𝜂 (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.15
and increases to 𝜂 (t = 39.8 ks) = 0.4. The time-dependent fraction of the interface
oxidation increases from 𝜔 (t = 0 seconds) = 0 to 𝜔 (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.38 under
time-dependent fraction of the interface oxidation decreases to 𝜔 (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.35
and then increases to 𝜔 (t = 39.8 ks) = 0.72. The time-dependent fraction of the
fiber broken increases from q (t = 0 seconds) = 0 to q (t = 7.2 ks) = 5.8 × 10−3 under
(a)
(b)
oxidation versus time curves; and (d) the broken fiber fraction versus time curves of SiC/SiC
composite under single loading stress 𝜎 max = 100 MPa, and multiple loading stress
fraction of the fiber broken increases to q = 1.2 × 10−2 and then increases to q
(t = 39.8 ks) = 0.15.
Under 𝜎 max = 100 MPa, the experimental time-dependent composite strain
increases from 𝜀c (t = 1.1 ks) = 0.11% to 𝜀c (t = 33.3 ks) = 0.19%; the predicted
time-dependent composite strain increases from 𝜀c (t = 0 seconds) = 0.1% to
𝜀c (t = 33.7 ks) = 0.2%; the time-dependent fraction of the interface debonding
(t = 33.7 ks) = 0.61; and the time-dependent fraction of the broken fiber increases
from q (t = 0 seconds) = 1 × 10−6 to q (t = 33.7 ks) = 0.22.
(c)
(d)
𝜎 max1 = 100 MPa; upon increasing the stress level to 𝜎 max2 = 110 MPa at t = 7.2 ks,
the time-dependent composite strain increases to 𝜀c (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.14% and
increases to 𝜀c (t = 13.4 ks) = 0.168%. The time-dependent fraction of the interface
debonding increases from 𝜂 (t = 0 seconds) = 0.07 to 𝜂 (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.116 under
time-dependent fraction of the interface debonding increases to 𝜂 = 0.15 and then
increases to 𝜂 (t = 13.4 ks) = 0.19. The time-dependent fraction of the interface
oxidation increases from 𝜔 (t = 0 seconds) = 0 to 𝜔 (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.31 under
time-dependent fraction of the interface oxidation decreases to 𝜔 (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.28
and increases to 𝜔 (t = 13.4 ks) = 0.41. The time-dependent fraction of the fiber
(a)
(b)
oxidation versus time curves; and (d) the fraction of the broken fiber versus time curves of
SiC/SiC composite under single loading stress 𝜎 max = 120 MPa, and multiple loading stress
broken increases from q (t = 0 seconds) = 0 to q (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.018 under

time-dependent fraction of the fiber broken increases to q (t = 7.2 ks) = 0.034 and
increases to q (t = 13.4 ks) = 0.084.
Under 𝜎 max = 120 MPa, the experimental time-dependent composite strain
increases from 𝜀c (t = 0.73 ks) = 0.17% to 𝜀c (t = 9.3 ks) = 0.26%; the predicted
time-dependent composite strain increases from 𝜀c (t = 0 seconds) = 0.16% to
𝜀c (t = 10.5 ks) = 0.27%; the time-dependent fraction of the interface debonding
(c)
(d)
(t = 10.5 ks) = 0.4; and the time-dependent fraction of the broken fiber increases
from q (t = 0 seconds) = 2 × 10−6 to q (t = 10.5 ks) = 0.17.
𝜎 max1 = 120 MPa; upon increasing stress level to 𝜎 max2 = 130 MPa at t = 3.6 ks,
the time-dependent composite strain increases to 𝜀c = 0.23% and increases to
𝜀c (t = 6.8 ks) = 0.28%. The time-dependent fraction of the interface debonding
increases from 𝜂 (t = 0 seconds) = 0.19 to 𝜂 (t = 3.6 ks) = 0.26 under 𝜎 max1 = 120 MPa;
upon increasing stress level to 𝜎 max2 = 130 MPa at t = 3.6 ks, the time-dependent
fraction of the interface debonding increases to 𝜂 = 0.31 and then increases to 𝜂
(t = 6.8 ks) = 0.41. The time-dependent fraction of the interface oxidation increases
from 𝜔 (t = 0 seconds) = 0 to 𝜔 (t = 3.6 ks) = 0.22 under 𝜎 max1 = 120 MPa; upon
increasing stress level to 𝜎 max2 = 130 MPa at t = 3.6 ks, the time-dependent fraction
of the interface oxidation decreases to 𝜔 (t = 3.6 ks) = 0.2 and increases to 𝜔
(t = 6.8 ks) = 0.28. The time-dependent fraction of the fiber broken increases from q
(t = 0 seconds) = 0 to q (t = 3.6 ks) = 0.03 under 𝜎 max1 = 120 MPa; upon increasing
stress level to 𝜎 max2 = 130 MPa at t = 3.6 ks, the time-dependent fraction of the fiber
broken increases to q = 0.05 and increases to q (t = 6.8 ks) = 0.15.
6.5 Conclusion
In this chapter, stress rupture of fiber-reinforced CMCs at elevated environmen-
tal temperatures is investigated. Time-dependent damage mechanisms were
considered in the analysis of composite’s microstress field and tensile constitutive
relationship. Relationships between stress rupture lifetime, peak stress level,
time-dependent composite deformation, and evolution of internal damages are
established. Experimental stress rupture lifetime and internal damage evolution of
SiC/SiC composite are evaluated.
● When the stochastic stress level increases, the stress rupture time decreases; the
time for the interface complete debonding and oxidation decreases; and the bro-
ken fiber fraction at the stage of stochastic loading increases. When the stochastic
loading time interval increases, the stress rupture time decreases; and the time for
the interface complete debonding and oxidation remains the same.
● When temperature increased, the stress rupture lifetime decreased; the
time-dependent composite strain increased at the same time; the time-dependent
fraction of the interface debonding increased for partially interface debonding,
and the time for complete interface debonding decreased; the time-dependent
fraction of the interface oxidation increased for partially interface debonding, and
the time for complete interface oxidation decreased; the time-dependent fraction
of the fiber broken increased.
References
1 Li, L.B. (2018). Damage, Fracture and Fatigue of Ceramic-Matrix Composites. Sin-
gapore: Springer Nature.
2 Li, L.B. (2018). Fatigue life prediction of ceramic-matrix composites. Aircr. Eng.
Aerosp. Technol. 90: 720–726. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-01-2016-0014.
64: 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00230-6.
.2008.09.128.
References 303
6 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B., Christensen, D.T., Chamberlain, A.L. et al. (2011). Effect

of frequency and environment on fatigue behavior of a CVI SiC/SiC ceramic
matrix composite at 1200 ∘ C. Compos. Sci. Technol. 71: 190–196. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compscitech.2010.11.008.
7 Dassios, K.G., Aggelis, D.G., Kordatos, E.Z., and Matikas, T.E. (2013). Cyclic
loading of a SiC-fiber reinforced ceramic matrix composite reveals damage
mechanisms and thermal residual stress state. Compos. Part A 44: 105–113.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2012.06.011.
8 Rebillat, F. (2014). Advances in self-healing ceramic matrix composites. In:
Advances in Ceramic Matrix Composites (ed. I.M. Low), 369–409. Woodhead
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857098825.2.369.
9 Li, L.B. (2020). Time-Dependent Mechanical Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Com-
posites at Elevated Temperatures. Singapore: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10
.1007/978-981-15-3274-0.
10 Lin, H.T. and Becher, P.F. (1997). Stress-temperature-lifetime working envelope
of Nicalon fiber-reinforced SiC matrix composites in air. Compos. Part A 28:
935–942. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-835X(97)00062-6.
11 Lara-Curzio, E. (1997). Stress rupture of Nicalon/SiC continuous fiber ceramic
composites in air at 950 ∘ C. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 80: 3268–3272. https://doi.org/10
.1111/j.1151-2916.1997.tb03266.x.
12 Halbig, M.C., Brewer, D.N., and Eckel, A.J. (2000). Degradation of continuous
fiber ceramic matrix composites under constant-load conditions. In: Mechanical,
Thermal and Environmental Testing and Performance of Ceramic Composites and
Components (eds. M. Jenkins, E. Lara-Curzio and S. Gonczy), 290–305. West
Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP15021S.
peratures (600 ∘ C–700 ∘ C) in air in silicon carbide multifilament tows. J. Am.
14 Li, H., Morscher, G.N., Lee, J., and Lee, W.Y. (2004). Tensile and stress-rupture
behavior of SiC/SiC minicomposite containing chemically vapor deposited zirco-
nia interphase. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 87: 1726–1733. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-
2916.2004.01726.x.
15 Li, L.B. (2019). Damage development and lifetime prediction of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites subjected to cyclic loading at 1300 ∘ C in vacuum,
inert and oxidative atmospheres. Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 86: 613–629. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.ast.2019.01.060.
16 Li, L.B. (2020). Synergistic effects of stochastic loading stress and time on
stress-rupture damage evolution and lifetime of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix
composites at intermediate temperatures. Ceram. Int. 46: 7792–7812. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.11.283.
17 Morscher, G.N. (1997). Tensile stress rupture of SiCf /SiCm minicomposites with
carbon and boron nitride interphases at elevated temperatures in air. J. Am.

.1016/S0955-2219(00)00138-2.
19 Morscher, G.N., Hurst, J., and Brewer, D.B. (2000). Intermediate-temperature
stress rupture of a woven Hi-Nicalon, BN-interphase, SiC-matrix composite in
air. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 83: 1441–1449. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.2000
.tb01408.x.
20 Verrilli, M.J., Opila, E.J., Calomino, A., and Kiser, J.D. (2004). Effect of environ-
ment on the stress-rupture behavior of a carbon-fiber-reinforced silicon carbide
ceramic matrix composites. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 87: 1536–1542. https://doi.org/10
.1111/j.1551-2916.2004.01536.x.
cracking in brittle-matrix fiber composites. Acta Metall. 33: 2013–2021. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(85)90124-5.
7151(92)90189-L.
.1016/S1359-6454(96)00143-7.
25 McNulty, J.C. and Zok, F.W. (1999). Low-cycle fatigue of Nicalon-fiber-reinforced
ceramic composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 59: 1597–1607. https://doi.org/10
.1016/S0266-3538(99)00019-6.
26 Lara-Curzio, E. (1999). Analysis of oxidation-assisted stress-rupture of contin-
uous fiber-reinforced ceramic matrix composites at intermediate temperatures.
Compos. Part A 30: 549–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-835X(98)00148-1.
27 Halverson, H.G. and Curtin, W.A. (2002). Stress rupture in ceramic-matrix com-
posites: theory and experiment. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 85: 1350–1365. https://doi
.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.2002.tb00279.x.
28 Casas, L. and Martinez-Esnaola, J.M. (2003). Modeling the effect of oxidation on
the creep behavior of fiber-reinforced ceramic matrix composites. Acta Mater. 51:
3745–3757. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(03)00189-7.
29 Pailler, F. and Lamon, J. (2005). Micromechanics based model of
fatigue/oxidation for ceramic matrix composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 65:
369–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.09.029.
30 Dassios, K.G., Galiotis, C., Kostopoulos, V., and Steen, M. (2003). Direct in situ
measurements of bridging stresses in CFCCs. Acta Mater. 51: 5359–5373. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6454(03)00393-8.
1056789513482338.
32 Li, L.B. (2017). Synergistic effects of temperature, oxidation, loading frequency
and stress-rupture on damage evolution of cross-ply ceramic-matrix composites
References 305
under cyclic fatigue loading at elevated temperatures in oxidizing atmosphere.

Eng. Fract. Mech. 175: 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.03.013.
33 Li, L.B. (2017). Synergistic effects of stress-rupture and cyclic loading on strain
response of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperature
in oxidizing atmosphere. Materials 10: 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma10020182.
34 Li, L.B. (2017). Damage evolution of cross-ply ceramic-matrix composites under
stress-rupture and cyclic loading at elevated temperatures in oxidizing atmo-
sphere. Mater. Sci. Eng., A 688: 315–−321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2017.02
.012.
35 Li, L.B., Song, Y., and Sun, Y. (2013). Modeling the tensile behavior of unidi-
rectional C/SiC ceramic-matrix composites. Mech. Compos. Mater. 49: 659–672.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11029-013-9382-y.
.org/10.1007/s11029-015-9507-6.
37 Li, L.B. (2018). Modeling the monotonic and cyclic tensile stress-strain behavior
54: 165–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11029-018-9729-5.
307
Vibration Damping of Ceramic-Matrix Composites

at Elevated Temperature
7.1 Introduction
Ceramic-matrix composites (CMCs) possess high specific strength and modulus
and high temperature resistance and are the candidate materials for hot-section
components of aerospace vehicles, aeroengines, and thermal protection systems
(TPS) [1–3]. Silicon carbide fiber-reinforced silicon carbide CMCs (SiC/SiC) and
oxide fiber-reinforced oxide CMCs (Oxide/Oxide) have already been used in
aeroengines. SiC/SiC composite consists of the SiC fiber with a diameter of 12 μm,
the interface layer with a thickness of 0.2–0.5 μm, and the SiC matrix. SiC/SiC
composite has high oxidation resistance, lightweight (i.e. density 2.1–2.8 g/cm3 ),
and high-temperature (1200–1400 ∘ C) gas lifetime up to thousands of hours and
is the most ideal material for the hot-section structures of aeroengines [4–6]. In
2010, General Electric (GE) aviation carried out turbine rotor blade test with an
F414 engine as the verification platform to build a ceramic aeroengine [6]. In 2016,
SiC/SiC composite material was first used in the turbine outer ring of Leading
Edge Aviation Propulsion (LEAP) aeroengine and has been produced in batches.
Then, this material was applied in the combustion chamber, guide vane, turbine
outer ring, and other structures of the new GE9x commercial aeroengine. The fuel
consumption rate was 10% lower than that of GE90-115B [7, 8]. However, in the
above applications, failure analysis shows that approximately two-thirds of the
failures are related to vibration and noise, leading to reduced operational control
accuracy, structural fatigue damage, and shortened safety life [9, 10]. Therefore,
studying the damping performance of fiber-reinforced CMCs and improving their
reliability in the service environment is an important guarantee for the safe service
of CMCs in various fields.
Compared with metals and alloys, CMCs have many unique damping mechanisms
because of internal structure and complex damage mechanisms [11–15]. Hao et al.
[16] performed computational and experimental analysis on the modal parameters
and vibration response of C/SiC bolted fastenings. The composite vibration damp-
ing affects the vibration amplitude of CMC components. Zhang [17] investigated the
vibration characteristics of a CMC panel subjected to high temperature and large
gradient thermal environment and performed damping measurement experiments
of CMC panels in the thermal environment. The effect of thermal environment on
308 7 Vibration Damping of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated Temperature
the natural frequency and vibration damping of CMCs was analyzed. Huang and Wu
[18] performed natural frequencies and acoustic emission testing of 2D SiC/SiC com-
posite subjected to tensile loading. The natural frequencies decrease with increasing
tensile stress because of internal damages. Natural frequency and vibration damp-
ing are affected by the damage state of CMCs [19]. Energy dissipation of frictional
sliding between matrix cracks is the main mechanism for the damping of unidirec-
tional or cross-ply CMCs at room temperature [20]. The damping of CMCs is also
affected by the fabrication method [21], property of the fiber [21], internal damages
inside of CMCs [12, 22], and interphase thickness [23]. At elevated temperature, the
temperature-dependent damage mechanisms affect the mechanical behavior and
vibration damping of CMCs [24–29].
In this chapter, a micromechanical temperature-dependent vibration damping
model of fiber-reinforced CMCs is developed. Temperature-dependent damage
mechanisms of matrix cracking, interface debonding and slip, and fiber fracture
of composite constituent properties and damage-related microparameters of
matrix crack spacing, interface debonding and slip length, and broken fiber
fraction. Relationships between temperature-dependent composite damping,
temperature-dependent damage mechanisms, temperature, and oxidation duration
are established. Effects of composite constituent properties and composite damage
state on temperature-dependent composite vibration damping of SiC/SiC and
C/SiC composites are analyzed. Experimental temperature-dependent composite
vibration damping of 2D SiC/SiC and C/SiC composites are predicted.
7.2 Temperature-Dependent Vibration Damping of CMCs

Temperature-dependent vibration damping Ωx (T) of a composite without damage
subject to axial loading is [30]
Ef (T)Vf Ωf + Em (T)Vm Ωm
Ωx (T) = (7.1)
Ef (T)Vf + Em (T)Vm
where V f and V m are the volume of the fiber and the matrix, Ωf and Ωm are
the damping of the fiber and matrix materials, and Ef (T) and Em (T) are the
temperature-dependent fiber and matrix elastic modulus.
When temperature-dependent damage mechanisms of matrix cracking, interface
debonding and slip, and fiber failure occur, the temperature-dependent vibration
damping Ωy (T) is [20]
Ud (T)
Ωy (T) = (7.2)
2𝜋U(T)
where U d (T) is the temperature-dependent energy-dissipated density per cycle of
motion, and U(T) is the temperature-dependent maximum strain energy density
during a cycle.
Ud (T) = Ud unloading (T) + Ud reloading (T) (7.3)
U(T) = Uf (T) + Um (T) (7.4)

where U d_unloading (T) and U d_reloading (T) are the temperature-dependent dissipated
energy density upon unloading and reloading, respectively, and U f (T) and U m (T)
are the temperature-dependent fiber and matrix strain energy, respectively.
[ ]
𝜏 (T) 8 Ec (T)𝜏i (T) 3
Ud unloading (T) = 2𝜋rf i (Φ(T) − ΦU (T))l2y (T) − ly (T)
Ef (T) 3 rf Vm Em (T)
(7.5)
[ ]
𝜏 (T) 8 Ec (T)𝜏i (T) 3
Ud reloading (T) = 2𝜋rf i (Φ(T) − ΦR (T))l2z (T) − l (T) (7.6)
Ef (T) 3 rf Vm Em (T) z
{ ( )
Φ2 (T) 𝜏 (T)Φ(T) 2 4 𝜏i (T) 3
2 𝜎fo
2
(T) lc (T)
Uf (T) = 𝜋rf2 ld (T) − 2 i ld (T) + l (T) + − l d (T)
Ef (T) rf Ef (T) 3 r 2 Ef (T) d Ef 2
f
( )( [ ])
r 𝜎 (T) l (T) l (T)∕2 − ld (T)
+ 2 f fo Φ(T) − 𝜎fo (T) − 2 d 𝜏 (T) 1 − exp −𝜌 c
𝜌Ef (T) rf i rf
( )2 ( [ ])}
rf ld (T) lc (T)∕2 − ld (T)
+ Φ(T) − 𝜎fo (T) − 2 𝜏i (T) 1 − exp −2𝜌
2𝜌Ef (T) rf rf
(7.7)
{ ( )
4 Vf 𝜏i (T) 3
2 2
𝜎 2 (T) lc (T)
Um (T) = 𝜋rf2 2 2
ld (T) + mo − ld (T)
3 r Vm Em (T) Em (T) 2
f
[ ][ [ ]]
r V 𝜎 (T) l (T) 𝜌(l (T)∕2 − ld (T))
− 2 f f mo Φ(T) − 𝜎fo (T) − 2𝜏i (T) d 1 − exp − c
𝜌Vm Em (T) rf rf
[ ] [ [ ]]}
rf Vf2 ld (T) 2 𝜌(lc (T)∕2 − ld (T))
+ Φ(T) − 𝜎 fo (T) − 2𝜏 i (T) 1 − exp −2
2𝜌Vm2 Em (T) rf rf
(7.8)
where r f is the fiber radius, 𝜏 i (T) is temperature-dependent interface shear
stress, ld (T) is temperature-dependent interface debonding length, ly (T) and lz (T)
are temperature-dependent counter slip length upon unloading and new slip
length upon reloading, respectively, F(T) is temperature-dependent intact fiber
stress, FU (T) and FR (T) are temperature-dependent unloading and reloading
intact fiber stress, 𝜌 is shear-lag model parameter, and 𝜎 fo (T) and 𝜎 mo (T) are
temperature-dependent fiber and matrix axial stress in the interface bonding
region, respectively.
Ef (T)
𝜎fo (T) = 𝜎 + Ef (T)(𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lf (T))ΔT (7.9)
Ec (T)
E (T)
𝜎mo (T) = m 𝜎 + Em (T)(𝛼lc (T) − 𝛼lm (T))ΔT (7.10)
Ec (T)
where 𝛼 lc (T) is temperature-dependent composite thermal expansion coefficient
and ΔT denotes temperature difference between testing temperature (T) and
fabricated temperature (T 0 ).
Temperature-dependent damping of CMCs with matrix cracking, interface

debonding, and fiber failure is
Ωc (T) = Ωx (T) + Ωy (T) (7.11)
Two parameters of interface debonding fraction 𝜂 and interface slip fraction 𝛿 are
introduced to characterize the interface damage state inside of CMCs:
ld (T) ly (T)
𝜂(T) = 2 , 𝛿(T) = 2 (7.12)
lc lc

Effects of material properties and damage state on temperature-dependent vibra-
tion damping of SiC/SiC composite are analyzed. Material properties of SiC/SiC
composite are given by V f = 0.3, r f = 7 μm, T 0 = 1248 K, 𝛼 rf = 2.9 × 10−6 K−1 , and
𝛼 lf = 3.9 × 10−6 K−1 .
7.2.2.1 Effect of Fiber Volume on Temperature-Dependent Vibration Damping

of SiC/SiC Composite
Figures 7.1 and 7.2 and Table 7.1 show the effect of fiber volume (i.e. V f = 20% and
30%) on temperature-dependent composite vibration damping Ωc , the fraction of
interface debonding 𝜂, and the fraction of interface slip 𝛿 versus temperature curves
of SiC/SiC composite under 𝜎 = 30, 40, and 50 MPa.
When temperature increases, the interface shear stress of SiC/SiC composite
decreases because of the misfit between the fiber and the matrix radial thermal
expansional coefficient [27], the composite vibration damping increases to the
peak value and then decreases, and the interface debonding and slip fraction
increases with the temperature. When the fiber volume increases, the interface
debonding and slip range decrease, the composite vibration damping decreases,
and the temperature for the peak value of the composite damping increases, mainly
because of the decrease of the fraction of the interface debonding and slip range.
Under the same fiber volume, the composite damping increases with the vibration
stress, as the interface debonding and slip range increases with vibration stress,
and the temperature for the peak of composite damping decreases with increasing
temperature. To improve the vibration damping of SiC/SiC composite, the fiber
volume should be low, in order to increase the interface debonding and slip range
at the vibration stress. However, low fiber volume decreases the proportional limit
stress [31, 32], and it is necessary to get the balance design of CMCs between the
design stress and damping capacity.
When V f = 20% and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the fiber broken fraction is q = 0.05%,
the temperature-dependent composite vibration damping increases from Ωc
(T = 293 K) = 0.006 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1303 K) = 0.0425 and then decreases
to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.0406; the fraction of the interface debonding increases from
𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.18 to 𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.35, and the fraction of the interface slip
increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.18 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.22. Under 𝜎 = 40 MPa,
the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.16%, the temperature-dependent composite
Figure 7.1 (a) Composite damping

versus temperature curves; (b) the
fraction of the interface debonding
versus temperature curves; and
(c) the fraction of the interface slip
versus temperature curves of
SiC/SiC composite under different
vibration stress when V f = 20%.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Figure 7.2 (a) Composite damping

fraction of interface debonding
versus temperature curves; and
(c) the fraction of the interface slip
vibration stress when V f = 30%.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Table 7.1 Effect of fiber volume on composite damping, interface debonding, and slip
fraction of SiC/SiC composite under different vibration stress.
𝝈 (MPa) q (%) T (K) 𝛀c 𝜼 𝜹
V f = 20%
30 0.05 293 0.0060 0.18 0.18
1303 0.0425 0.324 0.219
1400 0.0406 0.35 0.22
40 0.16 293 0.0140 0.31 0.26
1266 0.0428 0.46 0.29
1400 0.041 0.5 0.29
50 0.39 293 0.024 0.44 0.32
1185 0.043 0.58 0.36
1400 0.041 0.65 0.37
V f = 30%
30 0.01 293 0.0005 0.04 0.04
1326 0.023 0.16 0.13
1400 0.021 0.18 0.132
40 0.03 293 0.002 0.12 0.12
1325 0.0263 0.25 0.174
1400 0.025 0.27 0.176
50 0.07 293 0.006 0.2 0.19
1324 0.0287 0.34 0.21
1400 0.0282 0.36 0.22
vibration damping increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.014 to the peak value Ωc

(T = 1266 K) = 0.0428 and then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.041; the fraction of
the interface debonding increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.31 to 𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.5,
and the fraction of the interface slip increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.26 to 𝛿
(T = 1400 K) = 0.29. Under 𝜎 = 50 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.39%,
increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.32 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.37.
When V f = 30% and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%,
to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.021; the fraction of the interface debonding increases
from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.04 to 𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.18, and the fraction of the
interface slip increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.04 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.13. Under
𝜎 = 40 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.03%, the temperature-dependent

composite vibration damping increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.002 to the peak
value Ωc (T = 1325 K) = 0.0263 and then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.025;
the fraction of the interface debonding increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.12 to
𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.27, and the fraction of the interface slip increases from 𝛿
(T = 293 K) = 0.12 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.17. Under 𝜎 = 50 MPa, the broken fiber
fraction is q = 0.07%, the temperature-dependent composite vibration damping
increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.006 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1324 K) = 0.0287 and
then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.0282; the fraction of the interface debonding
increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.2 to 𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.36, and the fraction of the
interface slip increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.19 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.22.
7.2.2.2 Effect of Matrix Crack Spacing on Temperature-Dependent Vibration

Damping of SiC/SiC Composite
Figures 7.3 and 7.4 and Table 7.2 show the effect of matrix crack spacing (i.e. lc = 300
and 400 μm) on temperature-dependent composite vibration damping, the fraction
of interface debonding, and slip versus temperature curves of SiC/SiC composite
under 𝜎 = 30, 40, and 50 MPa.
When the matrix crack spacing increases, the interface debonding and slip occupy
few range between the matrix crack spacing, and the composite vibration damping
decreases, and the temperature for the peak damping increases, mainly because of
the decrease of the interface debonding and sliding range. To improve the composite
vibration damping, it is better to improve the matrix cracking density of CMCs at the
same vibration stress.
When lc = 300 μm and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%;
fraction is q = 0.07%, the temperature-dependent composite damping increases from
Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.004 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1350 K) = 0.023 and then decreases
increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.129 at T = 293 K to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.146.
When lc = 400 μm and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%, the
temperature-dependent composite damping increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.0003
to the peak value Ωc (T = 1328 K) = 0.014 and then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) =
0.013; the fraction of the interface debonding increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.022
Figure 7.3 (a) Composite

damping versus temperature
curves; (b) the fraction of
interface debonding versus
temperature curves; and (c) the
fraction of interface slip versus
temperature curves of SiC/SiC
composite under different
vibration stress when lc = 300 μm.
(a)
(b)
(c)

curves; (b) the fraction of
fraction of interface slip versus
temperature curves of SiC/SiC
composite under different
vibration stress when
lc = 400 μm.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Table 7.2 Effect of matrix crack spacing on composite vibration damping, interface
debonding, and slip fraction of SiC/SiC composite under different vibration stress.
lc = 300 𝜇m
30 0.01 293 0.0003 0.029 0.029
1326 0.0175 0.110 0.087
1400 0.0163 0.124 0.088
40 0.03 293 0.001 0.081 0.081
1341 0.0206 0.171 0.116
1400 0.0201 0.183 0.117
50 0.07 293 0.0042 0.133 0.129
1350 0.0230 0.231 0.145
1400 0.0228 0.242 0.146
lc = 400 𝜇m
30 0.01 293 0.0003 0.022 0.022
1328 0.0140 0.083 0.065
1400 0.0131 0.093 0.066
40 0.03 293 0.001 0.061 0.061
1348 0.0169 0.129 0.087
1400 0.0166 0.137 0.088
50 0.07 293 0.003 0.1 0.09
1363 0.0193 0.175 0.109
1400 0.0191 0.181 0.11
to 𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.093, and the fraction of the interface slip increases from 𝛿
fraction is q = 0.03%, the temperature-dependent composite damping increases from
Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.001 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1348 K) = 0.0169 and then decreases
increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.061 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.088. Under 𝜎 = 50 MPa, the
broken fiber fraction is q = 0.07%, the temperature-dependent composite damping
interface slip increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.09 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.11.
7.2.2.3 Effect of Interface Debonding Energy on Temperature-Dependent

Vibration Damping of SiC/SiC Composite
Figures 7.5 and 7.6 and Table 7.3 show the effect of interface debonding energy
(i.e. Γd = 0.05 and 0.15 J/m2 ) on the temperature-dependent composite vibration

curves; (b) the fraction of the
fraction of the interface slip
Γd = 0.05 J/m2 .
(a)
(b)
(c)

Γd = 0.15 J/m2 .
(a)
(b)
(c)
Table 7.3 Effect of interface debonding energy on composite damping, interface

𝛤 d = 0.05 J/m2
30 0.01 293 0.001 0.092 0.092
1324 0.0224 0.185 0.131
1400 0.021 0.201 0.132
40 0.03 293 0.003 0.17 0.155
1337 0.0256 0.27 0.174
1400 0.0251 0.28 0.176
50 0.07 293 0.007 0.248 0.194
1338 0.028 0.363 0.218
1400 0.027 0.377 0.22
𝛤 d = 0.15 J/m2
30 0.01 293 0.0001 0.0069 0.0069
1317 0.0238 0.146 0.13
1400 0.022 0.176 0.132
40 0.03 293 0.0016 0.0847 0.0847
1320 0.0269 0.236 0.174
1400 0.0260 0.264 0.176
50 0.07 293 0.005 0.162 0.162
1322 0.0292 0.321 0.218
1400 0.028 0.352 0.220
damping, the fraction of the interface debonding and slip fraction versus the tem-
perature curves of SiC/SiC composite under 𝜎 = 30, 40, and 50 MPa.
When the interface debonding energy increases, the energy needs to debonding
at the interface increases, and the interface debonding and slip length at the same
applied stress decreases, and the composite damping decreases, and the tempera-
ture for peak damping also decreases because of the decrease of the fraction of the
interface debonding and slip. To improve the damping capacity of the composite, it
is better to design the interface as weak bonding between the fiber and the matrix.
When Γd = 0.05 J/m2 and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%,

the fraction of the interface debonding increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.17
to 𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.28, and the fraction of the interface slip increases from
𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.155 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.176. Under 𝜎 = 50 MPa, the broken fiber
increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.248 to 𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.377, and the fraction of
the interface slip increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.194 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.22.
When Γd = 0.15 J/m2 and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%, the
temperature-dependent composite damping increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.0001
to the peak value Ωc (T = 1317 K) = 0.0238 and then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) =
0.022; the fraction of the interface debonding increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.0069
𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.0069 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.132. Under 𝜎 = 40 MPa, the broken
fiber fraction is q = 0.03%, the temperature-dependent composite vibration damping
increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.0016 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1320 K) = 0.0269
and then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.026; the fraction of the interface debonding
composite damping increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.005 to the peak value
Ωc (T = 1322 K) = 0.029 and then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.028; the
fraction of the interface debonding increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.162 to
𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.352, and the fraction of the interface slip increases from
𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.162 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.22.
7.2.2.4 Effect of Steady-State Interface Shear Stress

on Temperature-Dependent Vibration Damping of SiC/SiC Composite
Figures 7.7 and 7.8 and Table 7.4 show the effect of steady-state interface shear stress
(i.e. 𝜏 0 = 10 and 30 MPa) on temperature-dependent composite vibration damping,
the fraction of the interface debonding, and slip fraction versus temperature curves
of SiC/SiC composite under 𝜎 = 30, 40, and 50 MPa.
When the steady-state interface shear stress increases, the energy needed for
debonding at the interface between the fiber and the matrix increases, and the
interface debonding and slip length decreases at the same applied stress, and the
composite vibration damping decreases, and the temperature for peak damping
increases. To improve the damping capacity of the composite, it is better to decrease
the steady-state interface shear stress between the fiber and the matrix. However,
low interface shear stress also decreases the proportional limit stress of the compos-
ite [32], which would decrease the design stress of composite. It needs to find the
balance between the design stress and capacity of the composite.
When 𝜏 0 = 10 MPa and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%,
the temperature-dependent composite vibration damping increases from

𝜏 0 = 10 MPa.
(a)
(b)
(c)

𝜏 0 = 30 MPa.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Table 7.4 Effect of steady-state interface shear stress on composite damping, interface
𝜏 0 = 10 MPa
30 0.01 293 0.001 0.097 0.097
1297 0.034 0.343 0.262
1400 0.031 0.41 0.269
40 0.03 293 0.006 0.237 0.237
1273 0.0363 0.505 0.348
1400 0.0346 0.589 0.359
50 0.07 293 0.013 0.377 0.349
1217 0.0383 0.649 0.429
1400 0.0364 0.769 0.449
𝜏 0 = 30 MPa
30 0.01 293 0.002 0.0233 0.0233
1327 0.0176 0.1 0.087
1400 0.0165 0.114 0.087
40 0.03 293 0.0017 0.077 0.077
1344 0.0208 0.161 0.116
1400 0.0204 0.172 0.116
50 0.07 293 0.004 0.131 0.131
1353 0.0232 0.221 0.145
1400 0.023 0.230 0.145
Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.001 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1297 K) = 0.034 and then

decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.031; the fraction of the interface debonding
fraction is q = 0.07%, the temperature-dependent composite damping increases
from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.013 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1217 K) = 0.038 and then
When 𝜏 0 = 30 MPa and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%,

Under 𝜎 = 40 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.03%, the temperature-dependent
increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.004 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1344 K) = 0.0232
and then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.023; the fraction of the interface debond-
ing increases from 𝜂 (T = 293 K) = 0.131 to 𝜂 (T = 1400 K) = 0.23, and the fraction
of the interface slip increases from 𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.131 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.145.
7.2.2.5 Effect of Interface Frictional Coefficient on Temperature-Dependent

Vibration Damping of SiC/SiC Composite
Figures 7.9 and 7.10 and Table 7.5 show the effect of the interface frictional coef-
ficient (i.e. 𝜇 = 0.03 and 0.05) on the temperature-dependent composite vibration
damping, the fraction of the interface debonding, and slip versus temperature curves
of SiC/SiC composite under 𝜎 = 30, 40, and 50 MPa. When the interface frictional
coefficient increases, the composite damping increases, and the temperature for
peak damping also increases.
When 𝜇 = 0.03 and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%,
Ωc (T = 1340 K) = 0.0266 and then decreases to Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.0261;
fraction is q = 0.07%, the temperature-dependent composite damping increases
from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.005 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1344 K) = 0.029 and then
When 𝜇 = 0.05 and 𝜎 = 30 MPa, the broken fiber fraction is q = 0.01%,

vibration stress when 𝜇 = 0.03.
(a)
(b)
(c)

vibration stress when 𝜇 = 0.05.
(a)
(b)
(c)
Table 7.5 Effect of interface frictional coefficient on composite damping, interface

𝜇 = 0.03
30 0.01 293 0.003 0.031 0.031
1327 0.0234 0.169 0.133
1400 0.0222 0.196 0.137
40 0.03 293 0.002 0.095 0.095
1340 0.0266 0.263 0.179
1400 0.0261 0.288 0.183
50 0.07 293 0.005 0.158 0.158
1344 0.029 0.355 0.224
1400 0.028 0.38 0.229
𝜇 = 0.05
30 0.01 293 0.027 0.023 0.023
1335 0.0238 0.177 0.137
1400 0.0227 0.206 0.143
40 0.03 293 0.0017 0.076 0.076
1353 0.027 0.276 0.185
1400 0.026 0.301 0.191
50 0.07 293 0.004 0.13 0.13
1362 0.0293 0.374 0.233
1400 0.0292 0.397 0.239


Sato et al. [21] investigated the vibration damping of 2D chemical vapor infiltration
(CVI) SiC/SiC composite from T = 293 to 1373 K. Figure 7.11 shows the experimen-
tal and predicted composite vibration damping versus the temperature curves. The
experimental composite vibration damping increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.0001
to Ωc (T = 1373 K) = 0.0017.
Under 𝜎 = 5 MPa, the temperature-dependent composite vibration damping (Ωc )
increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.0001 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.0018;
𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.023 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.035.
Under 𝜎 = 6 MPa, the temperature-dependent composite vibration damping
increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.000 17 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.004;
𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.04 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.055.
Under 𝜎 = 7 MPa, the temperature-dependent composite vibration damping
increases from Ωc (T = 293 K) = 0.0002 to the peak value Ωc (T = 1400 K) = 0.006;
𝛿 (T = 293 K) = 0.058 to 𝛿 (T = 1400 K) = 0.0069.
7.3 Time-Dependent Vibration Damping of CMCs

Considering time- and temperature-dependent interface damages of oxidation,
debonding, and slip, relationships between composite vibration damping, material
properties, internal damages, oxidation duration, and temperature are established.
Effects of material properties, vibration stress, damage state, and oxidation tem-
perature on time-dependent composite vibration damping and interface damages
of C/SiC composite are discussed. Experimental composite vibration damping and
internal damages of 2D C/SiC composite for different oxidation durations t = 2, 5,
and 10 hours at T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C are predicted.

The vibration damping of fiber-reinforced CMCs can be divided into two sections,
as shown in Eqs. (7.1, 7.2). Time-dependent fiber and matrix strain energy density
per cycle can be determined by Eqs. (7.13, 7.14).
1
Uf (𝜎, t) = 𝜎 (t)𝜀f (t) dV
2 ∫V f
{
4 𝜏f 3 𝜏2
2
Δ𝜎 2 Δ𝜎𝜏f 2
=𝜋rf2 2
ld (t) − 2 𝜁 (t) + 2
𝜁 (t) + 4 2 f 𝜁 2 (t)[ld (t) − 𝜁(t)]
Vf Ef rf Vf Ef 3 r Ef rf Ef
f
4 𝜏i
2
Δ𝜎𝜏f Δ𝜎𝜏i
+ [l (t) − 𝜁(t)]3 − 4 𝜁(t)[ld (t) − 𝜁(t)] − 2 [l (t) − 𝜁(t)]2
3 r Ef d
2 rf Vf Ef rf Vf Ef d
f

and predicted composite damping
fraction of the interface
debonding versus temperature
curves; and (c) the fraction of the
interface slip versus temperature
curves of 2D SiC/SiC composite
under different vibration stress.
(a)
(b)
(c)
[ ]
𝜏f 𝜏i 𝜎fo
2
lc
+4 𝜁(t)[ld (t) − 𝜁(t)]2 + − ld (t)
rf2 Ef Ef 2
[ ][ ( )]
rf 𝜎fo Vm 𝜏 𝜏 l ∕2 − ld (t)
+2 𝜎mo − 2 f 𝜁(t) − 2 i (ld (t) − 𝜁(t)) 1 − exp −𝜌 c
𝜌Ef Vf rf rf rf
[ ]2 [ ( )]}
r Vm 𝜏 𝜏 l ∕2 − ld (t)
+ f 𝜎mo − 2 f 𝜁(t) − 2 i (ld (t) − 𝜁(t)) 1 − exp −2𝜌 c
2𝜌Ef Vf rf rf rf
(7.13)
1
Um (𝜎, t) = 𝜎 (t)𝜀m (t) dV
2 ∫V m
{
Vf 𝜏f V 2𝜏2 V 2 𝜏f 𝜏i
=𝜋rf2 𝜁 2 (t) + 4 2 f 2 f 𝜁 2 (t)[ld (t) − 𝜁(t)] + 4 2 f 2 𝜁(t)[ld (t) − 𝜁(t)]2
rf Vm Em rf Vm Em rf Vm Em
2 [ ]
4 Vf 𝜏i
2 2
𝜎mo lc
+ [l (t) − 𝜁(t)] 3
+ − l (t)
3 r 2 Vm2 Em d Em 2 d
f
[ ][ ( )]
r𝜎 V𝜏 V𝜏 l ∕2 − ld (t)
− 2 f mo 𝜎mo − 2 f f 𝜁(t) − 2 f i (ld (t) − 𝜁(t)) 1 − exp −𝜌 c
𝜌Em rf Vm rf Vm rf
[ ]2 [ ( )]}
1 rf Vf 𝜏f Vf 𝜏i lc ∕2 − ld (t)
+ 𝜎 −2 𝜁(t) − 2 (l (t) − 𝜁(t)) 1 − exp −2𝜌
2 𝜌Em mo rf Vm rf Vm d rf
(7.14)
and
U(t) = Uf (t) + Um (t) (7.15)
Upon unloading and reloading, the energy is dissipated through frictional slip at
the fiber/matrix interface, and the time-dependent dissipated energy upon unload-
ing and reloading can be determined by Eqs. (7.16, 7.17).
[ ]
Δ𝜎 2 8 E c 𝜏f
Ud u (t) = 2𝜋rf 𝜏f l (t) − 3
l (t) (7.16)
Vf Ef y 3 rf Vm Ef Em y
[ ]
Δ𝜎 2 8 E c 𝜏f
Ud r (t) = 2𝜋rf 𝜏f lz (t) − l3z (t) (7.17)
Vf Ef 3 rf Vm Ef Em
where Δ𝜎 is the range of applied stress and
Ud (t) = Ud u (t) + Ud r (t) (7.18)

Effects of material properties, vibration stress, damage state, and temperature on
time-dependent composite vibration damping of C/SiC composite are discussed.
7.3.2.1 Effect of Fiber Volume on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping of C/SiC

Composite
Figure 7.12 and Table 7.6 show the time-dependent composite vibration damping,
the ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxida-
tion duration t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C for different fiber volumes.
Figure 7.12 Effect of fiber

volume on (a) time-dependent
composite vibration damping
versus temperature curves; (b)
time-dependent interface
temperature curves; (c)
oxidation ratio versus temperature
curves; and (d) time-dependent
interface slip ratio versus
temperature curves of C/SiC
composite after oxidation duration
t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Table 7.6 Effect of fiber volume on time-dependent composite vibration damping and the
ratio of interface debonding, slip, and oxidation of C/SiC composite after oxidation duration
t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C.
T (∘ C) 𝛀c 𝜼 𝝎 𝜹
V f = 0.2
20 0.005 07 0.345 0.017 0.345
100 0.005 09 0.323 0.018 0.323
200 0.005 69 0.311 0.019 0.311
300 0.006 59 0.303 0.019 6 0.303
400 0.007 94 0.295 0.020 5 0.295
500 0.009 99 0.289 0.020 5 0.289
V f = 0.3
20 0.001 69 0.144 6 0.041 21 0.144 6
100 0.001 67 0.129 6 0.045 96 0.129 6
200 0.001 75 0.126 6 0.047 05 0.126 6
300 0.001 88 0.125 3 0.047 54 0.125 3
400 0.002 1 0.124 9 0.047 71 0.124 9
500 0.002 46 0.125 1 0.047 62 0.125 1
V f = 0.4
20 0.001 38 0.048 5 0.122 9 0.048 5
100 0.001 37 0.037 5 0.158 7 0.037 5
200 0.001 37 0.038 4 0.155 0.038 4
300 0.001 39 0.040 6 0.146 0.040 6
400 0.001 41 0.043 3 0.137 0.043 3
500 0.001 46 0.046 4 0.128 0.046 4
When fiber volume increased, the composite damping decreased because of the
decrease of frictional energy dissipated through interface slip. At low fiber volume,
i.e. V f = 0.2–0.3, the ratio of interface debonding and slip decreased with temper-
ature, and the ratio of interface oxidation increased with temperature; however, at
high fiber volume, i.e. V f = 0.4, the ratio of interface debonding and slip decreased
first and then increased, and the ratio of interface debonding increased first and
then decreased. When fiber volume increased, the stress transfer between the fiber
and the matrix increased, the ratio of interface debonding decreased, and the ratio
of interface oxidation increased. The vibration damping of damaged CMCs mainly
depended on the energy dissipated in the slip region, and the composite vibration
damping decreased with the increase of fiber volume.
When V f = 0.2, the composite damping increased from Ωc = 0.005 07 at T = 20 ∘ C
to Ωc = 0.009 99 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface debonding ratio decreased from 𝜂 = 0.345
at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.289 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation ratio increased from
𝜔 = 0.017 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.0205 at T = 500 ∘ C, and the interface slip ratio
decreased from 𝛿 = 0.345 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.289 at T = 500 ∘ C.
to Ωc = 0.002 46 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface debonding ratio decreased from
𝜂 = 0.1446 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.1251 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation ratio
increased from 𝜔 = 0.041 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.047 at T = 500 ∘ C, and the interface
slip ratio decreased from 𝛿 = 0.1446 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.1251 at T = 500 ∘ C.
to Ωc = 0.001 46 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface debonding ratio decreased from
𝜂 = 0.0485 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.0384 at T = 200 ∘ C and increased to 𝜂 = 0.0464 at
T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation ratio increased from 𝜔 = 0.1229 at T = 20 ∘ C to
𝜔 = 0.1587 at T = 100 ∘ C and decreased to 𝜔 = 0.128, and the interface slip ratio
decreased from 𝛿 = 0.0485 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.0384 at T = 200 ∘ C and increased to
𝛿 = 0.0464 at T = 500 ∘ C.
7.3.2.2 Effect of Vibration Stress on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping

of C/SiC Composite
ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation
duration t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C for different vibration stress.
When vibration stress increased, the time-dependent composite vibration
damping increased because of the increasing frictional dissipated energy caused
by the interface frictional slip. Under low vibration stress, i.e. 𝜎 = 50 MPa, the
time-dependent ratio of interface debonding and slip decreased first and then
increased with temperature, and the time-dependent ratio of interface oxidation
increased first and then decreased with temperature. However, under high vibration
stress, i.e. 𝜎 = 70 and 90 MPa, the time-dependent ratio of interface debonding and
slip decreased with temperature and the ratio of interface oxidation increased with
temperature. The ratio of interface debonding increased with vibration stress, and
the ratio of interface oxidation decreased with vibration stress. However, the total
frictional slip between the fiber and the matrix increased with vibration stress, and
Figure 7.13 Effect of vibration

stress on (a) time-dependent
t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Table 7.7 Effect of vibration stress on time-dependent composite vibration damping and
the ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation
duration t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C.
𝜎 = 50 MPa
20 0.001 69 0.144 6 0.041 2 0.144 6
100 0.001 67 0.129 6 0.045 9 0.129 6
200 0.001 75 0.126 6 0.047 0 0.126 6
300 0.001 88 0.125 3 0.047 5 0.125 3
400 0.002 1 0.124 9 0.047 7 0.124 9
500 0.002 4 0.125 1 0.047 6 0.125 1
𝜎 = 70 MPa
20 0.003 61 0.275 8 0.021 6 0.275 8
100 0.003 62 0.256 2 0.023 2 0.256 2
200 0.004 0 0.247 8 0.024 0 0.247 8
300 0.004 5 0.241 5 0.024 6 0.241 5
400 0.005 4 0.236 4 0.025 2 0.236 4
500 0.006 7 0.232 4 0.025 6 0.232 4
𝜎 = 90 MPa
20 0.008 29 0.407 0 0.014 6 0.407 0
100 0.008 3 0.382 8 0.015 5 0.382 8
200 0.009 1 0.369 0.016 1 0.369
300 0.010 3 0.357 7 0.016 6 0.357 7
400 0.011 8 0.348 0 0.017 1 0.348 0
500 0.013 9 0.339 7 0.017 5 0.339 7
the ratio of energy dissipated in the low interface shear stress region decreased. The
energy dissipated in the slip region is the main part for the vibration damping of
damaged CMCs. The total composite vibration damping increased with vibration
stress because of the increase of the interface slip range.
When 𝜎 = 50 MPa, the composite damping increased from Ωc = 0.001 69 at
T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.0024 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface debonding ratio decreased
from 𝜂 = 0.1446 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.1249 at T = 400 ∘ C and increased to 𝜂 = 0.1251
at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation ratio increased from 𝜔 = 0.0412 at T = 20 ∘ C to
𝜔 = 0.0477 at T = 400 ∘ C and decreased to 𝜔 = 0.0476 at T = 500 ∘ C, and the interface
slip ratio decreased from 𝛿 = 0.1446 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.1249 at T = 400 ∘ C, and
increased to 𝛿 = 0.1251 at T = 500 ∘ C.
T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.0067 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface debonding ratio decreased from
𝜂 = 0.2758 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.2324 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation ratio
increased from 𝜔 = 0.0216 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.0256 at T = 500 ∘ C, and the interface
slip ratio decreased from 𝛿 = 0.2758 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.2324 at T = 500 ∘ C.
T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.0139 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface debonding ratio decreased
from 𝜂 = 0.407 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.3397 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation
ratio increased from 𝜔 = 0.0146 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.0175 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the
interface slip ratio decreased from 𝛿 = 0.407 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.3397 at T = 500 ∘ C.
7.3.2.3 Effect of Matrix Crack Spacing on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping

of C/SiC Composite
ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation
duration t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C for different matrix crack spacings.
When matrix crack spacing increased, the time-dependent composite vibration
damping decreased because of the decrease of the ratio of interface debonding and
slip between the matrix crack spacing. However, for partial interface debonding,
the ratio of interface oxidation was not affected by matrix crack spacing. The ratio
of interface debonding depended on the matrix crack spacing and vibration stress.
Under the same vibration stress, the increase of matrix crack spacing decreased the
ratio of interface slip, and the ratio between the interface oxidation length and inter-
face debonding length remained unchanged, and the composite vibration damping
decreased because of the decreasing ratio of the frictional dissipated energy in the
total energy dissipated.
When lc = 100 μm, the composite damping increased from Ωc = 0.002 36 at
T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.003 99 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface debonding ratio decreased
at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation ratio increased from 𝜔 = 0.0412 at T = 20 ∘ C
to 𝜔 = 0.0477 at T = 400 ∘ C and decreased to 𝜔 = 0.0476 at T = 500 ∘ C, and the
interface slip ratio decreased from 𝛿 = 0.2893 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.2498 at T = 400 ∘ C
and increased to 𝛿 = 0.2503 at T = 500 ∘ C.
Figure 7.14 Effect of matrix

crack spacing on (a)
time-dependent composite
vibration damping versus
temperature curves; (b)
t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Table 7.8 Effect of matrix crack spacing on time-dependent composite vibration damping
and the ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation
duration t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C.
lc = 100 𝜇m
20 0.002 36 0.289 3 0.041 2 0.289 3
100 0.002 28 0.259 3 0.045 9 0.259 3
200 0.002 46 0.253 3 0.047 0 0.253 3
300 0.002 76 0.250 7 0.047 5 0.250 7
400 0.003 23 0.249 8 0.047 7 0.249 8
500 0.003 99 0.250 3 0.047 6 0.250 3
lc = 200 𝜇m
20 0.001 69 0.144 6 0.041 2 0.144 6
100 0.001 67 0.129 6 0.045 9 0.129 6
200 0.001 75 0.126 6 0.047 0 0.126 6
300 0.001 88 0.125 3 0.047 5 0.125 3
400 0.002 1 0.124 9 0.047 7 0.124 9
500 0.002 46 0.125 1 0.047 6 0.125 1
lc = 300 𝜇m
20 0.001 52 0.096 4 0.041 2 0.096 4
100 0.001 51 0.086 4 0.045 9 0.086 4
200 0.001 56 0.084 4 0.047 0 0.084 4
300 0.001 64 0.083 5 0.047 5 0.083 5
400 0.001 78 0.083 2 0.047 7 0.083 2
500 0.002 02 0.083 4 0.047 6 0.083 4

and increased to 2ly /lc = 0.1251 at T = 500 ∘ C.
and increased to 2ly /lc = 0.0834 at T = 500 ∘ C.
7.3.2.4 Effect of Interface Shear Stress on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping

of C/SiC Composite
ratio of the interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxida-
tion duration t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C for different interface shear stress.
When the interface shear stress in the oxidation region increased, the
time-dependent composite vibration damping increased because of the increase of
frictional dissipated energy along the interface oxidation region. Interface shear
stress transferred the stress between the fiber and the matrix. High interface shear
stress decreased the interface debonding length between the fiber and the matrix.
However, the interface oxidation length was time dependent and not affected by
the interface shear stress in the oxidation region. The ratio between the interface
oxidation length and the interface slip length increased, leading to the high energy
dissipated in the oxidation region, and the time-dependent composite vibration
damping increased.
When 𝜏 f = 3 MPa, the composite damping increased from Ωc = 0.001 87 at
at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation ratio increased from 𝜔 = 0.0415 at T = 20 ∘ C to
𝜔 = 0.0481 at T = 400 ∘ C and decreased to 𝜔 = 0.048 at T = 500 ∘ C, and the interface
slip ratio decreased from 𝛿 = 0.1433 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.1238 at T = 400 ∘ C and
increased to 𝛿 = 0.1241 at T = 500 ∘ C.
Figure 7.15 Effect of interface

shear stress on (a) time-dependent
t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Table 7.9 Effect of interface shear stress on time-dependent composite vibration damping
and the ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation
time t = 2 hours at T = 800 ∘ C.
𝜏 f = 3 MPa
20 0.001 87 0.144 2 0.041 3 0.144 2
100 0.001 84 0.129 2 0.046 1 0.129 2
200 0.001 95 0.126 2 0.047 2 0.126 2
300 0.002 14 0.125 0.047 6 0.125
400 0.002 45 0.124 5 0.047 8 0.124 5
500 0.002 97 0.124 8 0.047 7 0.124 8
𝜏 f = 5 MPa
20 0.002 15 0.143 3 0.041 5 0.143 3
100 0.002 12 0.128 4 0.046 4 0.128 4
200 0.002 29 0.125 5 0.047 5 0.125 5
300 0.002 59 0.124 2 0.047 9 0.124 2
400 0.003 05 0.123 8 0.048 1 0.123 8
500 0.003 84 0.124 1 0.048 0 0.124 1
𝜏 f = 7 MPa
20 0.002 36 0.142 5 0.041 8 0.142 5
100 0.002 33 0.127 6 0.046 7 0.127 6
200 0.002 56 0.124 7 0.047 8 0.124 7
300 0.002 93 0.123 4 0.048 2 0.123 4
400 0.003 52 0.123 1 0.048 4 0.123 1
500 0.004 51 0.123 4 0.048 3 0.123 4

7.3.2.5 Effect of Temperature on Time-Dependent Vibration Damping of C/SiC

Composite
the ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxida-
tion duration t = 2 hours for different oxidation temperatures.
When temperature increased, the temperature-dependent composite vibration
damping increased because of the increase of the interface debonding and slip range
between the matrix crack spacing. The interface oxidation length is temperature
dependent and increased with temperature. The ratio of interface debonding and
oxidation increased with temperature, and the energy dissipated of frictional slip
between the fiber and the matrix increased because of the increase of interface slip
range and the time-dependent composite vibration damping increased.
When T = 600 ∘ C, the composite damping increased from Ωc = 0.001 67 at
to 𝜔 = 0.007 46 at T = 400 ∘ C and decreased to 𝜔 = 0.007 45 at T = 500 ∘ C, and the
T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.003 at T = 500 ∘ C; the interface debonding ratio decreased from
𝜂 = 0.1705 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.1514 at T = 400 ∘ C and increased to 𝜂 = 0.1518 at
T = 500 ∘ C; the interface oxidation ratio increased from 𝜔 = 0.2121 at T = 20 ∘ C

Zhang et al. [33] performed experimental investigation on the effect of oxidation on
vibration damping behavior of 2D C/SiC composite at elevated temperature T = 700,
Figure 7.16 Effect of oxidation

temperature on (a)
time-dependent composite
vibration damping versus
temperature curves; (b)
t = 2 hours.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Table 7.10 Effect of temperature on time-dependent composite vibration damping and the
ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation duration
t = 2 hours.
T = 600 ∘ C
20 0.001 67 0.140 3 0.00 64 0.140 3
100 0.001 64 0.125 3 0.007 18 0.125 3
200 0.001 72 0.122 3 0.007 35 0.122 3
300 0.001 84 0.120 9 0.007 43 0.120 9
400 0.002 04 0.120 4 0.007 46 0.120 4
500 0.002 37 0.120 7 0.007 45 0.120 7
T = 900 ∘ C
20 0.001 72 0.149 8 0.080 4 0.149 8
100 0.001 7 0.134 9 0.089 3 0.134 9
200 0.001 79 0.131 9 0.091 3 0.131 9
300 0.001 93 0.130 6 0.092 2 0.130 6
400 0.002 17 0.130 2 0.092 4 0.130 2
500 0.002 56 0.130 5 0.092 3 0.130 5
T = 1100 ∘ C
20 0.001 86 0.170 5 0.212 1 0.170 5
100 0.001 85 0.155 7 0.232 3 0.155 7
200 0.001 97 0.152 8 0.236 6 0.152 8
300 0.002 1 0.151 7 0.238 4 0.151 7
400 0.002 4 0.151 4 0.238 9 0.151 4
500 0.003 0.151 8 0.238 3 0.151 8
1000, and 1300 ∘ C for different oxidation durations t = 2, 5, and 10 hours. The com-
posite was fabricated using the CVI. The volume of fiber was approximately 40%. A
pyrocarbon (PyC) layer as the interphase was deposited on the surface of the car-
bon fiber. Dynamical Mechanical Analyzer (DMA 2980) made by TA company of
USA was used for measurements of damping of C/SiC composite. All of the mea-
surements were performed in air atmosphere from room temperature to 400 ∘ C, and
the testing frequency was f = 1 Hz.
7.3.3.1 t = 2 hours at T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C

Figure 7.17 and Table 7.11 show the experimental and predicted time-dependent
composite vibration damping, and the ratio of interface debonding, oxidation, and
slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation duration t = 2 hours at oxidation tempera-
ture T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C. When the oxidation duration was t = 2 hours, the
time-dependent ratio of interface debonding and slip decreased when temperature
increased from T = 700 ∘ C to T = 1000 ∘ C first and increased when the temperature
increased to T = 1300 ∘ C; the ratio of interface oxidation increased with temperature,
and the composite vibration damping decreased with temperature.
After oxidation at T = 700 ∘ C for t = 2 hours, the experimental time-dependent
composite damping increased from Ωc = 0.014 77 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.022 49 at
T = 400 ∘ C; the predicted time-dependent composite vibration damping increased
from Ωc = 0.015 73 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.024 13 at T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent
interface debonding ratio decreased from 𝜂 = 0.5378 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.4463 at
T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent interface oxidation ratio increased from ω = 0.0047
at T = 20 ∘ C to ω = 0.0057 at T = 500 ∘ C, and the time-dependent interface slip ratio
composite vibration damping increases from Ωc = 0.014 79 at T = 20 ∘ C to
Ωc = 0.0211 at T = 400 ∘ C; the predicted time-dependent composite vibration damp-
ing increased from Ωc = 0.014 14 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.022 63 at T = 500 ∘ C; the
time-dependent interface debonding ratio decreased from 𝜂 = 0.5218 at T = 20 ∘ C
to 𝜂 = 0.4367 at T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent interface oxidation ratio increased
from 𝜔 = 0.041 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.049 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the time-dependent
interface slip ratio decreased from 𝛿 = 0.5218 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.4367 at T = 500 ∘ C.
After oxidation at T = 1300 ∘ C for t = 2 hours, the experimental composite
vibration damping increased from Ωc = 0.013 79 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.02 at
interface debonding ratio decreased from 𝜂 = 0.5408 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.4632 at
T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent interface oxidation ratio increased from 𝜔 = 0.1515
at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.1769 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the time-dependent interface slip ratio
7.3.3.2 t = 5 hours at T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C


and predicted time-dependent
temperature curves; and (d)
time-dependent interface slip
ratio versus temperature curves of
C/SiC composite after oxidation
duration t = 2 hours at T = 700,
1000, and 1300 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Table 7.11 Experimental and predicted time-dependent composite vibration damping and
duration t = 2 hours at T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C.
T (∘ C) 𝛀c (experiment) 𝛀c (theory) 𝜼 𝝎 𝜹
T = 700 ∘ C
20 0.014 77 0.015 73 0.537 8 0.004 7 0.537 8
100 0.015 64 0.015 54 0.508 3 0.005 0 0.508 3
200 0.016 43 0.016 76 0.489 08 0.005 2 0.489 08
300 0.018 86 0.018 57 0.472 89 0.005 4 0.472 89
400 0.022 49 0.021 0.458 76 0.005 56 0.458 76
500 — 0.024 13 0.446 39 0.005 72 0.446 39
T = 1000 ∘ C
20 0.014 79 0.014 14 0.521 83 0.041 79 0.521 83
100 0.015 82 0.014 05 0.493 53 0.044 18 0.493 53
200 0.017 21 0.015 28 0.475 75 0.045 83 0.475 75
300 0.022 96 0.017 07 0.460 9 0.047 31 0.460 9
400 0.021 11 0.019 5 0.447 99 0.048 67 0.447 99
500 — 0.022 63 0.436 76 0.049 93 0.436 76
T = 1300 ∘ C
20 0.013 79 0.014 53 0.540 8 0.151 5 0.540 8
100 0.015 68 0.014 52 0.513 99 0.159 5 0.513 99
200 0.016 73 0.015 87 0.497 89 0.164 66 0.497 89
300 0.017 80 0.017 79 0.484 59 0.169 18 0.484 59
400 0.020 12 0.020 31 0.473 12 0.173 28 0.473 12
500 — 0.023 51 0.463 21 0.176 99 0.463 21
Figure 7.18 (a) Experimental and

predicted time-dependent
temperature curves; and (d)
time-dependent interface slip
ratio versus temperature curves of
C/SiC composite after oxidation
duration t = 5 hours at T = 700,
1000, and 1300 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
the ratio of the interface debonding, oxidation, and slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation
T = 700 ∘ C
20 0.011 69 0.014 23 0.519 4 0.012 28 0.519 4
100 0.014 1 0.014 11 0.490 7 0.013 0.490 7
200 0.016 2 0.015 32 0.472 38 0.013 5 0.472 38
300 0.022 7 0.017 09 0.457 04 0.013 96 0.457 04
400 0.023 0 0.019 5 0.443 68 0.014 38 0.443 68
500 — 0.022 64 0.432 02 0.014 77 0.432 02
T = 1000 ∘ C
20 0.015 24 0.011 78 0.495 64 0.109 94 0.495 64
100 0.015 51 0.011 82 0.469 42 0.116 08 0.469 42
200 0.015 09 0.013 03 0.454 05 0.120 01 0.454 05
300 0.016 52 0.014 77 0.441 42 0.123 45 0.441 42
400 0.017 73 0.017 14 0.430 57 0.126 56 0.430 57
500 — 0.020 27 0.421 23 0.129 37 0.421 23
T = 1300 ∘ C
20 — 0.014 58 0.569 44 0.358 24 0.569 44
100 0.017 66 0.014 79 0.545 88 0.373 7 0.545 88
200 0.019 55 0.016 42 0.533 61 0.382 29 0.533 61
300 0.019 8 0.018 63 0.523 83 0.389 43 0.523 83
400 0.020 4 0.021 48 0.515 61 0.395 64 0.515 61
500 — 0.025 0.508 7 0.401 01 0.508 7
slip ratio of C/SiC composite after oxidation duration t = 5 hours at T = 700, 1000,
and 1300 ∘ C. When the oxidation duration was t = 5 hours, the time-dependent
ratio of interface debonding and slip decreased when temperature increased from
T = 700 ∘ C to T = 1000 ∘ C first and increased when the temperature increased
to T = 1300 ∘ C; the time-dependent ratio of interface oxidation increased with
temperature; and the composite vibration damping decreased when temperature
increased from T = 700 ∘ C to T = 1000 ∘ C first and increased when the temperature
increased to T = 1300 ∘ C.
composite vibration damping increased from Ωc = 0.011 69 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.023
at T = 400 ∘ C; the predicted time-dependent composite vibration damping increased
ratio of the interface debonding decreased from 𝜂 = 0.5194 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.432
at T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent ratio of the interface oxidation increased from
𝜔 = 0.0122 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.0147 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the time-dependent ratio of
the interface slip decreased from 𝛿 = 0.5194 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.432 at T = 500 ∘ C.
composite vibration damping increased from Ωc = 0.015 24 at T = 20 ∘ C to
Ωc = 0.0177 at T = 400 ∘ C; the predicted time-dependent composite vibration
damping increased from Ωc = 0.011 78 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.0202 at T = 500 ∘ C;
the time-dependent ratio of the interface debonding decreased from 𝜂 = 0.4956 at
T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.4212 at T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent ratio of the interface
oxidation increased from 𝜔 = 0.109 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.129 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the
time-dependent ratio of the interface slip decreased from 𝛿 = 0.495 at T = 20 ∘ C to
𝛿 = 0.421 at T = 500 ∘ C.
composite vibration damping increased from Ωc = 0.017 66 at T = 100 ∘ C to
Ωc = 0.0204 at T = 400 ∘ C; the predicted time-dependent composite damping
increased from Ωc = 0.014 58 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.025 at T = 500 ∘ C; the
time-dependent ratio of the interface debonding decreased from 𝜂 = 0.569 at
T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.508 at T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent ratio of the interface
oxidation increased from 𝜔 = 0.358 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.401 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the
time-dependent ratio of the interface slip decreased from 𝛿 = 0.569 at T = 20 ∘ C to
𝛿 = 0.508 at T = 500 ∘ C.
7.3.3.3 t = 10 hours at T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C

slip of C/SiC composite after oxidation duration t = 10 hours at oxidation tempera-
ture of T = 700, 1000, and 1300 ∘ C. When the oxidation duration was t = 10 hours,
the ratio of interface debonding and slip decreased when the temperature increased
from T = 700 ∘ C to T = 1000 ∘ C first and increased when the temperature increased
to T = 1300 ∘ C; the ratio of interface oxidation increased with temperature; and
the composite vibration damping decreased when the temperature increased from
Figure 7.19 (a) Experimental and

t = 10 hours at T = 700, 1000, and
1300 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
T = 700 ∘ C
20 0.011 05 0.014 53 0.524 92 0.024 3 0.524 92
100 0.012 3 0.014 41 0.496 19 0.025 71 0.496 19
200 0.014 0 0.015 63 0.477 91 0.026 69 0.477 91
300 0.016 8 0.017 43 0.462 6 0.027 58 0.462 6
400 0.019 6 0.019 85 0.449 28 0.028 4 0.449 28
500 — 0.022 98 0.437 65 0.029 15 0.437 65
T = 1000 ∘ C
20 — 0.011 18 0.498 9 0.218 32 0.498 9
100 0.015 4 0.011 31 0.474 48 0.229 56 0.474 48
200 0.015 4 0.012 59 0.461 2 0.236 16 0.461 2
300 0.015 5 0.014 41 0.450 51 0.241 77 0.450 51
400 0.016 4 0.016 87 0.441 44 0.246 74 0.441 44
500 — 0.020 1 0.433 74 0.251 11 0.433 74
T = 1300 ∘ C
20 0.018 9 0.015 85 0.633 0.639 54 0.633
100 0.018 3 0.016 44 0.614 28 0.659 03 0.614 28
200 0.016 8 0.018 69 0.607 62 0.666 25 0.607 62
300 0.018 9 0.021 64 0.603 03 0.671 32 0.603 03
400 0.020 7 0.025 35 0.599 58 0.675 18 0.599 58
500 — 0.029 85 0.597 09 0.678 0.597 09
T = 700 ∘ C to T = 1000 ∘ C first and increased when the temperature increased to

T = 1300 ∘ C.
After oxidation at T = 700 ∘ C for t = 10 hours, the time-dependent experimental
composite damping increased from Ωc = 0.011 05 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.0196 at
ratio of interface debonding decreased from 𝜂 = 0.5249 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.4376
at T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent ratio of interface oxidation increased from
𝜔 = 0.0243 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.0291 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the ratio of time-dependent
interface slip decreased from 𝛿 = 0.5249 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.4376 at T = 500 ∘ C.
composite vibration damping increased from Ωc = 0.0154 at T = 100 ∘ C to
Ωc = 0.0164 at T = 400 ∘ C; the predicted time-dependent composite vibration
damping increased from Ωc = 0.011 18 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.0201 at T = 500 ∘ C; the
time-dependent ratio of interface debonding decreased from 𝜂 = 0.4989 at T = 20 ∘ C
to 𝜂 = 0.4337 at T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent ratio of interface oxidation increased
from 𝜔 = 0.2183 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.2511 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the time-dependent
ratio of interface slip decreased from 𝛿 = 0.4989 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.4337 at
T = 500 ∘ C.
composite vibration damping increased from Ωc = 0.0189 at T = 20 ∘ C to Ωc = 0.0207
at T = 400 ∘ C; the predicted time-dependent composite vibration damping increased
ratio of interface debonding decreased from 𝜂 = 0.633 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜂 = 0.597 at
T = 500 ∘ C; the time-dependent ratio of interface oxidation increased from 𝜔 = 0.639
at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝜔 = 0.678 at T = 500 ∘ C; and the time-dependent ratio of interface
slip decreased from 𝛿 = 0.633 at T = 20 ∘ C to 𝛿 = 0.597 at T = 500 ∘ C.
7.3.3.4 Discussion
Because of temperature-dependent material properties and especially the interface
properties (i.e. the interface shear stress), the composite vibration damping and
interface damages of C/SiC composite is time and temperature dependent. For 2D
C/SiC, the time-dependent composite vibration damping increases with tempera-
ture, the interface debonding and slip ratio decreases with temperature, and the
interface oxidation ratio increases with temperature.
When the oxidation duration was short (i.e. t = 2 hours), the time-dependent com-
posite vibration damping decreased with temperature; however, when the oxidation
duration was long (i.e. t = 5 and 10 hours), the time-dependent composite vibration
damping decreased with temperature below 1000 ∘ C and increased with temperature
to 1300 ∘ C. The time-dependent interface oxidation ratio increased with temper-
ature, and the time-dependent interface debonding and slip ratio decreased with
temperature below 1000 ∘ C and increased with temperature to 1300 ∘ C.
When the oxidation temperature was T = 700 ∘ C, the time-dependent composite
damping increased for short oxidation duration (i.e. t = 2 and 5 hours) and decreased
for long oxidation duration (i.e. t = 10 hours). When the oxidation temperature
Figure 7.20 Experimental and

composite vibration damping versus
temperature curves for (a) t = 2, 5,
10 hours at T = 700 ∘ C; (b) t = 2, 5,
10 hours at T = 1000 ∘ C; and, (c)
t = 2, 5, 10 hours at T = 1300 ∘ C.
(a)
(b)
(c)
was T = 1000 ∘ C, the time-dependent composite damping decreased with increas-

ing oxidation duration. When the oxidation temperature was T = 1300 ∘ C, the
time-dependent composite damping increased with oxidation duration, as shown
in Figure 7.20.
In the present analysis, the time-dependent damage mechanism of the interface
oxidation is considered in the analysis. However, at elevated temperature, the oxida-
tion inside of CMCs may degrade the fiber strength, and the effect of time-dependent
fiber failure on vibration damping of CMCs has not been considered, which may be
the reason for the difference between the experimental data and predicted results of
present model.
7.4 Conclusion
In this chapter, temperature-dependent vibration damping of fiber-reinforced

CMCs is investigated using the micromechanical approach. Relationships between
composite’s vibration damping, damage mechanisms, and environmental temper-
ature are established. Experimental temperature-dependent vibration damping of
2D SiC/SiC and C/SiC composites is predicted.
● Experimental vibration damping of 2D SiC/SiC composite increases with tem-

perature, and the theoretical predicted composite vibration damping for different
vibration stress of 𝜎 = 5, 6, and 7 MPa are obtained and agreed with experimen-
tal data, and the predicted interface debonding and slip fraction increases with
temperature.
● For 2D C/SiC, the time-dependent composite vibration damping increases with
temperature, the interface debonding and slip ratio decreases with temperature,
and the interface oxidation ratio increases with temperature.
References

64: 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00230-6.
2 Glass, D. (2008). Ceramic matrix composite (CMC) Thermal Protection Systems
(TPS) and hot structures for Hypersonic Vehicle. 15th AIAA International Space
Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, Dayton, OH, USA
(28 April–1 May 2008), American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics:
Reston, USA. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-2682.
3 Li, L.B. (2018). Damage, Fracture and Fatigue of Ceramic-Matrix Composites. Sin-
gapore: Springer Nature. https://www.springer.com/in/book/9789811317828.
4 Morscher, G.N. and Gordon, N.A. (2017). Acoustic emission and electrical resis-
tance in SiC-based laminate ceramic composites tested under tensile loading. J.
References 357
Eur. Ceram. Soc. 37: 3861–3872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2017.05

.003.
5 Ruggles-Wrenn, M., Boucher, N., and Przybyla, C. (2018). Fatigue of three
advanced SiC/SiC ceramic matrix composites at 1200 ∘ C in air and in steam. Int.
J. Appl. Ceram. Technol. 15: 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijac.12773.
6 Li, L.B. (2020). Durability of Ceramic-Matrix Composites. Oxford: Woodhead Pub-
lishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2018-0-03346-0.
7 Liu, H., Yang, J., Zhou, Y. et al. (2018). Progress in coupon tests of SiCf /SiC
ceramic matrix composites used for aero engines. J. Mater. Eng. 46: 1–12.
8 Li, L.B. (2019). Thermomechanical Fatigue of Ceramic-Matrix Composites.
Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/
9783527822614.
9 Min, J.B., Harris, D.L., and Ting, J.M. (2011). Advances in ceramic matrix com-
posite blade damping characteristics for aerospace turbomachinery applications.
52nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Mate-
rials Conference, Denver, CO, USA, American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics: Reston, USA (4–7 April 2011).
10 Min, J.B., Xue, D., and Shi, Y. (2014). Micromechanics modeling for fatigue
damage analysis designed for fabric reinforced ceramic matrix composites.
Compos. Struct. 111: 213–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.12.025.
11 Zhang, J., Perez, R.J., and Lavernia, E.J. (1993). Documentation of damping
capacity of metallic ceramic and metal-matrix composite materials. J. Mater. Sci.
28: 2395–2404. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01151671.
12 Li, L.B. (2020). A micromechanical temperature-dependent vibration damping
model of fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Compos. Struct. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.113297.
13 Li, L.B. (2020). A cyclic-dependent vibration damping model of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., C https://doi.org/10.1177/
0954406220971665.
14 Li, L.B. (2020). A micromechanical vibration damping model of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites considering interface debonding. Proc. Inst. Mech.
Eng., L https://doi.org/10.1177/1464420720969711.
15 Li, L.B. (2020). A time-dependent vibration damping model of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperature. Ceram. Int. 46: 27031–27045.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.07.180.
16 Hao, B., Yin, X., Liu, X. et al. (2014). Vibration response characteristics and
looseness – proof performance of C/SiC ceramic matrix composite bolted fasten-
ings. Acta Mater. Compos. Sin. 31: 653–660.
17 Zhang, X. (2015). Thermal vibration analysis and model updating of ceramic
matrix thermal protection/insulation structure. PhD thesis. Harbin Institute of
Technology, Harbin, China.
18 Huang, D. and Wu, J. (2020). Natural frequency and acoustic emission test anal-
ysis of ceramic matrix composites under monotonic tensile. Open J. Acoust. Vibr.
8: 17–25. https://doi.org/10.12677/ojav.2020.81003.
19 Li, H. (2019). Analysis of vibration and damage test of ceramic matrix compos-
ites structure. Master thesis. Nanchang Hangkong University, Nanjing, China.
20 Birman, V. and Byrd, L.W. (2002). Effect of matrix cracks on damping in uni-
directional and cross-ply ceramic matrix composites. J. Compos. Mater. 36:
1859–1877. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998302036015247.
21 Sato, S., Serizawa, H., Araki, H. et al. (2003). Temperature dependence of inter-
nal friction and elastic modulus of SiC/SiC composites. J. Alloys Compd. 355:
142–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-8388(03)00252-4.
22 Wang, W., Cheng, L.F., Zhang, L.T. et al. (2006). Study on damping capacity of
two dimensional carbon fiber reinforced silicon carbide (2D C/SiC) composites.
J. Solid Rocket Technol. 29: 455–459.
23 Zhang, Q., Cheng, L.F., Wang, W. et al. (2007). Effect of interphase thickness
on damping behavior of 2D C/SiC composites. Mater. Sci. Forum 546–549:
1531–1534.
24 Hong, Z.L., Cheng, L.F., Zhao, C.N. et al. (2013). Effect of oxidation on internal
friction behavior of C/SC composites. Acta Mater. Compos. Sin. 30: 93–100.
25 Li, L.B. (2019). Modeling matrix multicracking development of fiber-reinforced
ceramic-matrix composites considering fiber debonding. Int. J. Appl. Ceram.
Technol. 16: 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijac.13068.
ceramic-matrix composites at elevated temperatures. Compos. Interfaces 26:
963–988. https://doi.org/10.1080/09276440.2019.1569397.
S1359-6454(98)80029-3.
j.jnucmat.2007.05.016.
30 Gao, Y.C., Mai, Y., and Cotterell, B. (1988). Fracture of fiber-reinforced materi-
als. J. Appl. Math. Phys. 39: 550–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00948962.
31 Curtin, W.A. (1991). Theory of mechanical properties of ceramic-matrix compos-
ites. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 74: 2837–2845. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.1991
.tb06852.x.
32 Li, L.B. (2020). Synergistic effects of temperature and time on proportional limit
stress of silicon carbide fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix composites. Compos.
33 Zhang, Q., Cheng, L., Wang, F., and Zhang, L. (2014). Effect of oxidation on the
damping behavior of 2D C/SiC composites. New Carbon Mater. 29: 522–528.
359
Index
a composite vibration damping 9–10,

ACK matrix cracking stress 80 307–308, 310, 313–314, 317,
ACK model 19, 20, 106 320, 321, 325, 328–329,
acoustic emission testing of 2D 331–356
SiC/SiC composite 9, 308 composite’s proportional limit stress
adjacent fractured fibers 190 80, 106
AK model 19 crack bridging effect 1
critical matrix strain energy (CMSE)
b 80, 105
BHE model 19 criterion 5, 76, 147
broken fiber fraction 7, 159, model 102
161–162, 174–178, 190–191, parameter 80
193–194, 197–201, 203–206, critical stress 80, 105, 106
223, 226, 228–229, 233–238, cross-ply CMCs 8, 9, 213, 308
240–241, 243–244, 246–247, C/SiC bolted fastenings 9, 307
251–256, 259–268, 321, 325, 328 C/SiC composite 173
temperature-dependent matrix
c cracking stress of
carbide matrix 2, 39 for different fiber/matrix interface
carbon matrix 2 frictional coefficient 25
ceramic-matrix composites (CMCs) different fiber volumes 23
19, 75 for different interface debonding
application 1 energy 26
crack bridging effect 1 for different interface shear stress
density of 1 24
fatigue behavior 6–7 matrix fracture energy effect 27
vs. polymer matrix composites 1 theoretical models 20–21
stress-rupture behavior 7–9 temperature-dependent matrix
vs. superalloy 1 multiple cracking evolution of
tensile behavior 2–5 ACK matrix cracking stress 80
vibration behavior 9–10 critical matrix strain energy 80
chemical vapor infiltration (CVI) critical matrix strain energy
346 parameter 80
process 6, 187 for different fiber/matrix interface
SiC matrix minicomposites 212 debonding energy 84–85
Chiang model 19 for different interface shear stress
Chiang-Wang-Chou model 19 82–83
360 Index
C/SiC composite (contd.) time-dependent matrix multiple

for different matrix fracture cracking of
energy 85–88 for different interface debonding
energy balance criterion 80 energy 111–113
experimental comparisons for different interface frictional
88–89 coefficient 108–111
fiber/matrix interface debonding for different matrix fracture
78–79 energy 113–114
interface debonding ratio 80 experimental comparisons
matrix cracking density 80 114–116
matrix multiple cracking time-dependent interface
evolution 80 debonding 103–104
temperature-dependent carbon time-dependent stress analysis
fiber axial and radial thermal 102–103
expansion coefficient 81 cyclic-dependent damage parameters
temperature-dependent carbon of internal friction 7, 188, 191
fiber elastic modulus 81 cyclic-dependent dissipated energy
temperature dependent 199, 200, 203
fiber/matrix interface cyclic-dependent fatigue damage
debonding energy 81 evolution 187
temperature-dependent matrix cyclic-dependent internal damage
fracture energy 80 parameter 190
temperature-dependent matrix cyclic-dependent unloading
strain energy 79 composite hysteresis strain
temperature-dependent stress 189, 190
analysis 77–78 cyclic-dependent unloading intact
temperature-dependent vibration fiber stress 189, 190
damping
fiber volume effect 334 d
interface shear stress effect Danchaivijit–Shetty model 19
340–343 1D C/SiC composite 173
matrix crack spacing effect 2D C/SiC 20, 28, 29, 59, 175, 176,
337–340 329, 343, 354, 356
temperature effect 343, 2D C/SiC composite 20, 28, 29, 59,
344–345 175, 176, 329, 343
vibration stress effect 334–337 2D SiC/SiC composite 3, 4, 9, 30, 36,
time-dependent matrix cracking 68, 71, 146, 147, 330, 356
stress of 2D Sylramic-iBN SiC/SiC composite
for different fiber volumes 42, 4, 147
43–44 2D woven Hi-NicalonTM
for different interface debonding SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite 7,
energy 53–56 188, 191, 206
for different interface frictional 2D woven melt-infiltrated (MI)
coefficient 50–53 Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC
for different interface shear stress composite 7, 212
42, 45–50 2D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM
different matrix fracture energy SiC/[SiC-B4 C] composite 199,
56–59 204, 206
experimental comparisons 59, at T = 1200o C in air and in steam
60 atmosphere 199–203
theoretical models 39–41 2.5D C/SiC composite 173, 177, 178
Index 361
2.5D NicalonTM NL202 SiC/[Si-B-C] fiber-reinforced ceramic-matrix

6, 188 composites (CMCs) 1, 5,
2.5D woven Hi-NicalonTM 75–139, 187
SiC/[Si-B-C] micromechanical creep-oxidation
at 600o C in air atmosphere model 213
191–199 fiber/matrix interface debonded
2.5D woven self-healing Hi-NicalonTM length 76, 92, 93, 105, 139
SiC/[Si-B-C] composite 206 fiber/matrix interface debonding 5,
at T = 1200o C in air atmosphere 19, 20, 25, 26, 29–36, 38, 76–85,
193–199, 204 87, 89–93, 95, 97, 99, 101, 102,
3D C/SiC composite 3, 146, 173, 111, 139
177, 180 fiber/matrix interface debonding
3D needled C/SiC composite 3, 146 energy 5, 26, 76, 81, 111, 139
debonding fraction at the interface fiber/matrix interface frictional
215, 217–219, 221, 223–227, coefficient 25, 77, 127
229–231, 233, 235, 237, fiber/matrix interface shear stress 5,
239 20, 40, 41, 76, 77, 92, 139, 236
dissipated energy 7, 188, 191, first matrix cracking stress 3, 5, 8,
199–201, 203, 206, 308, 309, 19, 20, 71, 83–101, 139, 146, 212
334, 337, 340 fracture mechanics approach 8, 78,
dwell-fatigue loading 8, 213 212, 214
Dynamical Mechanical Analyzer fracture statistics-based model 8, 213
(DMA 2980) 346 fracture strain 2, 3, 145, 146, 149,
215, 217, 218, 219, 223, 228, 229
e fracture toughness 1, 6, 145, 215
energy balance approach 4, 5, 19, 20,
30, 76, 147 g
energy balance criterion 80 GE9x commercial aeroengine 212,
energy balance failure criteria 4, 147 307
energy dissipation of frictional sliding
9, 308 h
Hi-Nicalon SiC/PyC/SiC composite
f 4, 147
fatigue behavior 6–7, 188 Hi-NicalonTM SiC/[SiC-B4 C]
of ceramic-matrix composites composites 7, 188, 189, 191,
experimental comparisons 206
191–205 Hi-NicalonTM SiC/BN/SiC 36
theoretical analysis 189–191 Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC 6, 149, 150,
fiber axial stress 77, 102, 214, 215 151–154, 156–159, 161–164, 188
fiber debonding 1, 4, 146
fiber failure probability 160, 161, i
166, 173, 179, 181, 277–280, initial matrix crack spacing 80, 106
283, 285, 287, 288, 290, intact fiber stress 149, 189, 190, 214,
292–295 272, 309
fiber radius 78, 149, 151, 152, 179, interface bonding region 77, 78, 148,
190, 214, 309 214, 309
fiber stress 148, 149, 189, 190, 214, interface debonding
272, 309 energy 21, 102, 149
fiber thermal expansion coefficient fraction 310
214 length 148, 214
fiber Young’s modulus 148, 190, 214 ratio 80, 337
362 Index
interface debonding (contd.) matrix crack spacing 2, 9, 76, 78, 80,

region 77 105–106, 145, 148, 152, 155, 179,
and slip length 190 189, 214, 236, 251–255, 271,
interface frictional coefficient 5, 20, 274, 280–285, 308, 314–317,
22, 25, 33, 40, 50–53, 60, 77, 337–339
93–95, 102, 108, 117, 127–130, matrix cracking 75, 92
325–328 density 80
interface frictional slip 334 saturation stress 83, 84, 86, 92
interface oxidation length 40, 102, stress 2, 92
105, 148, 160, 214, 284, 337, matrix fracture energy 5, 20–22, 27,
340, 343 34–36, 39, 41, 59–60, 71, 76–77,
interface oxidation model parameters 80–82, 89, 98, 102, 106, 113,
149 117, 133, 139
interface oxidation ratio 106–118, matrix interaction cracking model
120–121, 123–124, 126–128, 76
130–131, 136–139, 149–162, matrix microcracking 4, 146
166–167, 173–179, 238–241, matrix multi-cracking evolution 76,
247–248, 251–256, 259–261, 106
263–264, 267–268, 271–272, matrix multiple cracking evolution
278–279, 282–285, 334–335, 5, 75–139
337–338, 340–341, 343–344, matrix statistical cracking model 76
346–347, 352, 354, 356 matrix strain energy 5, 9, 76, 79–80,
interface shear stress 24–25, 30–33, 105–106, 147, 308–309, 329
42–50, 62–66, 77, 82–84, 92–93, maximum stress criterion 4, 75, 147
102, 106–108, 120–126, 155, MC model 19
190, 191, 221–227, 253–261, McCartney model 19
285–292, 321–325, 340–343 MCE model 19–20
interface slip fraction 310 medium matrix crack spacing 76
interface slip ratio 332, 334, 335, micro matrix cracking 19
337, 338, 340, 341, 343, 344, micro stress field analysis 5, 76–77,
346, 347, 349, 352 139, 214
internal time-dependent damage micro-cracks 2, 39–40, 102
evolution 214 micromechanical
temperature-dependent
k vibration damping model 9,
Kachanov’s damage parameter 7, 308
188, 190, 191, 193, 194, 197, mini-SiC/SiC composite 139
198, 206 minicomposite 3–4, 7–8, 139,
Kuo–Chou model 19 145–147, 150–151, 153–154,
156–159, 161–164, 166–167,
l 169, 171, 212–213
Li model 19 monolithic ceramic 1, 145
long matrix crack spacing 76 multiple loading sequence 274–302
low-cycle fatigue damage mechanism multiple matrix cracking 8, 75, 191,
8, 212 212
m n
material properties of SiC/SiC natural frequency, CMCs 308
composite 163, 215–216, 310 NicalonTM SiC/[Si-B-C] composite 6
matrix axial stress 21, 41, 77–79, 102, NicalonTM SiC/PyC/SiC 36
105, 309 non-oxidized matrix 2
Index 363
non-steady first matrix cracking stress self-healing Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC

8, 212 composite 6, 188, 192,
194–197, 199–202, 204–205
o self-sealing matrix 6, 187
oxidation 4–5, 10, 38–42, 47, shear-lag model parameter 78, 149,
101–102, 106–118, 214, 309
146–150, 187–189, 211–215, short matrix crack spacing 76
307–308 short matrix cracking stress 19
oxidation fraction at the interface SiCf /SiC composite 187
214–215, 217–219, 221, SiC/SiC composite(s)
223–227, 229–235, 237 material properties of 215
oxide fiber reinforced oxide stress-rupture of
ceramic-matrix composites for different environmental
(oxide/oxide) 8, 211, 212, 307 temperature 229, 232, 233
oxide matrix 2 for different fiber volumes
215–218
p for different fiber Weibull
parabolic rate constant 215 modulus 227–229, 230–231
predicted matrix cracking stress 39, for different interface shear stress
60, 68, 70–71, 115 221–227
prepreg infiltration process 211 for different peak stress levels
processing-induced micro-cracks 40 218–221
proportional limit stress (PLS) 2, 4, for different saturation spaces
20, 29, 80, 106, 145–146, 160, between matrix cracking 221,
310, 321 222
pyrocarbon (PyC) 6, 346 experimental comparisons
pyrolytic carbon (PyC) interphase 6, 230–234
28, 59, 188, 212 stress-rupture under multiple
loading sequence
for different environment
r temperature 292–295
reloading composite hysteresis strain for different fiber volume
189–190 275–280
reloading intact fiber stress 189–190, for different interface shear stress
309 285–292
for different matrix crack spacing
s 280–285
saturated stress of matrix cracks 2 experimental comparisons
saturation matrix crack spacing 155, 295–300
179, 251–252, 254, 280, 284 stress-rupture under stochastic
saturation matrix cracking density loading
92–93, 96, 139 for different environmental
saturation matrix cracking stress 90, temperature 261–264, 265
98 for different fiber volume
self-healing 2.5D NicalonTM NL202 247–251
SiC/[Si-B-C] 6 for different interface shear stress
self-healing 2.5D woven Hi-NicalonTM 253–261
SiC/[Si-B-C] 7, 188 for different matrix crack spacing
self-healing Hi-NicalonTM 251–253
SiC/[Si-B-C] composite 6, 7, for different stochastic loading
192, 194–197, 199, 204 time interval 240–247
364 Index
SiC/SiC composite(s) (contd.) time-dependent matrix multiple

experimental comparisons 264, cracking of
266–274 for different fiber volume
temperature-dependent matrix 117–120
cracking stress of for different interface debonding
for different fiber volumes 30 energy 130–133
for different interface debonding for different interface shear stress
energy 34 120–126
for different interface frictional mini-SiC/SiC composite 139
coefficient 33–34 unidirectional SiC/SiC composite
for different interface shear stress 136–138
30–33 time-dependent tensile behavior of
for different matrix fracture for different fiber radius 149,
energy 34–36 151–152
experimental comparisons for different fiber strength
36–39 159–160
temperature-dependent matrix for different fiber volumes 149,
multiple cracking evolution of 150
different fiber volumes 90–92 for different fiber Weibull
for different interface debonding modulus 160, 161
energy 95–98 for different interface debonding
different interface frictional energy 155, 158–159
coefficient 93–95 for different interface shear stress
for different matrix fracture 155, 157
energy 98–100 for different matrix cracking
experimental comparison characteristic strength 152,
100–101 154
for interface shear stress 92–93 for different matrix cracking
temperature-dependent vibration saturation spacing 155, 156
damping for different matrix Weibull
effect of fiber volume 310–314 modulus 152, 153
interface debonding energy effect for different oxidation duration
317–321 160–161, 162
interface frictional coefficient experimental comparisons 161,
effect 325–328 163–179
matrix crack spacing effect SiC/SiC minicomposite(s) 3–4, 7,
314–317 139, 145–147, 150–151,
steady-state interface shear stress 153–154, 156–159, 161–164,
effect 321–325 166–167, 169, 171, 212
time-dependent matrix cracking silicon carbide fiber reinforced silicon
stress of carbide ceramic-matrix
for different fiber volume composites (SiC/SiC) 211, 307
60–62 silicon nitride matrix 2
for different interface debonding single crystal alloy 187
energy 66–68 single dominant cracking 80, 147
for different interface shear stress single tow Hi-Nicalon SiC/PyC/SiC
62–66 composite 4, 147
for different matrix fracture single tow Hi-NicalonTM 4, 147, 212
energy 68, 69–70 single-phase ceramics 19
experimental comparisons 68, slow-crack-growth mechanism 4,
70–71 147
Index 365
steady state strain energy release rate for different matrix crack spacing
76 251–253
steady-state first matrix cracking for different stochastic loading
stress 19 time interval 240–247
steady-state matrix cracking 20, 76 experimental comparisons 264,
stochastic loading stress 234–236, 266–274
260 stress-strain curve 2, 5, 19, 28,
stress analysis, time-dependent 102 36–38, 75, 80, 145, 149–162,
stress intensity factor method 19 164, 167, 169, 171, 173–180
stress-rupture behavior 4, 7–9, 147, of CMCs 75
212, 230, 235, 264, 288, 291, 295 superalloy 1, 187, 211
stress-rupture lifetime 8–9, 212–213, Sutcu–Hilling model 19
215, 218–219, 221, 223, 225, Sylramic-iBN/BN/SiC composite 4,
227–230, 235–237, 240–241, 147
244, 247–248, 253, 255–256,
261, 264, 267–268, 271–272, t
275, 280, 285, 288, 292, 302 temperature resistance 75, 187,
stress-rupture of SiC/SiC composite 307
for different environmental temperature-dependent carbon fiber
temperature 229, 232, 233 axial and radial thermal expansion
for different fiber volumes coefficient 22, 81
215–218 elastic modulus 22, 81
for different fiber Weibull modulus temperature-dependent composite
227–229, 230–231 thermal expansion coefficient
for different interface shear stress 309
221–227 temperature-dependent composite
for different peak stress levels vibration damping 10, 308,
218–221 310, 313–314, 320–321, 325,
for different saturation spaces 328–329, 343
between matrix cracking 221, temperature-dependent counter slip
222 length 309
experimental comparisons temperature-dependent critical stress
230–234 80, 106
under multiple loading sequence temperature-dependent energy
for different environment dissipated density per cycle of
temperature 292–295 motion 308–309
for different fiber volume temperature-dependent fiber axial
275–280 stress 77, 102
for different interface shear stress temperature-dependent fiber/matrix
285–292 axial stress 78
for different matrix crack spacing temperature-dependent fiber/matrix
280–285 interface debonded length
experimental comparisons 105
295–300 temperature dependent fiber/matrix
under stochastic loading interface debonding energy
for different environmental 81
temperature 261–264, 265 temperature-dependent fiber/matrix
for different fiber volume interface shear stress 5, 40,
247–251 76–77, 139
for different interface shear stress temperature-dependent intact fiber
253–261 stress 309
366 Index
temperature-dependent interface for different interface shear stress

debonding energy 22 82–83
temperature-dependent interface for different matrix fracture
debonding length 21, 41, 78, energy 85–88
104, 309 energy balance criterion 80
temperature-dependent interface experimental comparisons
oxidation length 105 88–89
temperature-dependent interface fiber/matrix interface debonding
shear stress 78, 102, 309 78–79
temperature-dependent matrix axial interface debonding ratio 80
stress 79, 105 matrix cracking density 80
temperature-dependent matrix crack matrix fracture energy 81
spacing 105 matrix multiple cracking
temperature-dependent matrix evolution 80
cracking stress temperature-dependent carbon
of C/SiC composites fiber axial and radial thermal
different fiber volumes 23 expansion coefficient 81
for different fiber/matrix interface temperature-dependent carbon
frictional coefficient 25 fiber elastic modulus 81
for different interface debonding temperature dependent
energy 26 fiber/matrix interface
for different interface shear stress debonding energy 81
24 temperature-dependent matrix
experimental comparisons 28 fracture energy 80
theoretical models 20–21 temperature-dependent matrix
of SiC/SiC composite strain energy 79
for different fiber volumes 30 temperature-dependent SiC
for different interface debonding matrix elastic modulus 81
energy 34 temperature-dependent stress
for different interface frictional analysis 77–78
coefficient 33–34 of SiC/SiC composites
for different interface shear stress different fiber volumes 90–92
30–33 for different interface debonding
for different matrix fracture energy 95–98
energy 34–36 different interface frictional
experimental comparisons coefficient 93–95
36–39 for different matrix fracture
temperature-dependent matrix energy 98–100
fracture energy 21, 80, experimental comparison
106 100–101
temperature-dependent matrix for interface shear stress 92–93
modulus 105 temperature-dependent matrix strain
temperature-dependent matrix energy 79, 105
multiple cracking evolution temperature-dependent maximum
of C/SiC composites strain energy density
ACK matrix cracking stress 80 308–309
critical matrix strain energy 80 temperature-dependent SiC matrix
critical matrix strain energy axial and radial thermal
parameter 80 expansion coefficient 22, 81
for different fiber/matrix interface temperature-dependent SiC matrix
debonding energy 84–85 elastic modulus 22, 81
Index 367
temperature-dependent stress analysis time-dependent debonding fraction

77–78 215, 217, 219, 223–225, 227,
temperature-dependent unloading 229–231, 233, 235, 237, 239
and reloading intact fiber stress time-dependent failure probability
309 217, 224
temperature-dependent vibration time-dependent fiber and matrix
damping of CMCs strain energy density per cycle
effect of fiber volume on SiC/SiC 329
composite 310–314 time-dependent fiber axial stress
experimental comparisons 329, 214–215
330, 343, 346–356 time-dependent fiber/matrix interface
fiber volume effect, C/SiC oxidation length 40
composite 331–334 time-dependent interface debonding
interface debonding energy effect, 103–104, 150–151, 153–154,
SiC/SiC composite 317–321 156–158, 162, 164, 167, 169,
interface frictional coefficient effect, 171, 332, 335, 338, 341, 344,
SiC/SiC composite 325–328 346–347, 349, 352, 354
interface shear stress effect, C/SiC time-dependent interface oxidation
composite 340–343 length 102
matrix crack spacing effect on time-dependent matrix cracking stress
SiC/SiC composite 314–317 of C/SiC composites
matrix crack spacing effect, C/SiC for different fiber volumes 42,
composite 337–340 43–44
steady-state interface shear stress for different interface debonding
effect, SiC/SiC composite energy 53–56
321–325 for different interface frictional
temperature effect, C/SiC composite coefficient 50–53
343, 344–345 for different interface shear stress
theoretical models 308–310, 42, 45–50
329, 331 different matrix fracture energy
vibration stress effect, C/SiC 56–59
composite 334–337 experimental comparisons 59,
tensile behavior 2–5, 10, 28, 36, 59, 60
68, 145–181 theoretical models 39–41
tensile strength 2–3, 28, 59, 145–146, of SiC/SiC composites
149, 160, 163, 166, 173, 175, for different fiber volume 60–62
177, 179, 181 for different interface debonding
thermal expansion coefficient 22, energy 66–68
39–40, 77–78, 80–81, 102, 148, for different interface shear stress
190, 214, 309 62–66
Thouless–Evans model 19 for different matrix fracture
T300TM -C/SiC composite 59 energy 68, 69–70
time-dependent composite damage experimental comparisons 68,
mechanism 214 70–71
time-dependent composite time-dependent matrix multiple
deformation 9, 213, 215–216, cracking
221, 227, 229–230, 302 of C/SiC composite
time-dependent composite strain for different interface debonding
148–149, 214–215, 221, energy 111–113
226, 230–231, 233, 292, for different interface frictional
296–302 coefficient 108–111
368 Index
time-dependent matrix multiple for different matrix cracking

cracking (contd.) characteristic strength 152,
106–108 for different matrix cracking
for different matrix fracture saturation spacing 155, 156
energy 113–114 for different matrix Weibull
experimental comparisons modulus 152, 153
114–116 for different oxidation duration
time-dependent interface 160–163
debonding 103–104 experimental comparisons 161,
time-dependent stress analysis 163–173
102–103
of SiC/SiC composite u
for different fiber volume unidirectional C/SiC composite 3,
117–120 76, 88–89, 102, 114, 116, 139,
for different interface debonding 146, 174
energy 130–133 unidirectional Hi-NicalonTM SiC/SiC
for different interface frictional minicomposite 150–151,
coefficient 127–130 153–154, 156–159, 161, 163
for different interface shear stress unidirectional Hi-NicalonTM Type S
120–126 SiC/SiC minicomposite 166,
for different matrix fracture 167
energy 133–136 unidirectional SiC/SiC composite
mini-SiC/SiC composite 139 89, 100, 101, 136–138
unidirectional SiC/SiC composite unidirectional SiC/SiC
136–138 minicomposites 161
time-dependent oxidation fraction unidirectional TyrannoTM SA3
215, 217, 219, 223–225, 227, SiC/SiC minicomposite 166
230–233, 235, 237, 239 unidirectional TyrannoTM ZMI
time-dependent proportional limit SiC/SiC minicomposite 166
stress 4, 146 unidirectional/cross-ply CMCs 9,
time-dependent stress analysis 308
102–103
time-dependent tensile behavior v
CMCs vibration behavior 2, 9–10
theoretical analysis 148–149 vibration characteristics of CMC panel
of SiC/SiC composite 9, 307
for different fiber radius 149,
151–152 w
for different fiber strength Weibull modulus of the fiber 215,
159–160 227–230
for different fiber volumes 149, woven SiC/BN/SiC composite 4, 147
150 woven Sylramic-iBN/BN/SiC
for different fiber Weibull composite 4, 147
modulus 160
for different interface debonding y
energy 155, 158–159 Young’s modulus of matrix and fibers
155, 157

High Temperature Mechanical Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

High Temperature Mechanical Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

High Temperature Mechanical Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites

High Temperature Mechanical Behavior of

Cover Library of Congress Card No.:

Bibliographic information published by

© 2021 WILEY-VCH GmbH, Boschstr.

All rights reserved (including those of

Print ISBN: 978-3-527-34903-6

Typesetting Straive, Chennai, India

Printed on acid-free paper

2 First Matrix Cracking of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at

2.3.1 Results and Discussion 30

3 Matrix Multiple Cracking Evolution of Fiber-Reinforced

3.2.1 Theoretical Models 77

3.5.1.1 Time-Dependent Matrix Multiple Cracking of SiC/SiC Composite for

4 Time-Dependent Tensile Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix

4.5 Conclusion 179

5 Fatigue Behavior of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated

6 Stress Rupture of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated

6.3.1.3 Stress Rupture of SiC/SiC Composite Under Stochastic Loading for

7 Vibration Damping of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at Elevated

7.3 Time-Dependent Vibration Damping of CMCs 329

stress–strain curve. Experimental time-dependent tensile stress–strain curves,

30 November 2020 Longbiao Li

I am grateful to my wife Li Peng and my son Sheng-Ning Li for their encouragement.

such as high operation temperature (>500 ∘ C), diversity of material constituents

1.1 Tensile Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature

of matrix cracking as determined by the energy criterion is dependent on matrix

1.2 Fatigue Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature

self-healing Hi-Nicalon SiC/[Si-B-C] composite at elevated temperature can be mon-

1.3 Stress Rupture Behavior of CMCs at Elevated

constitutive relationship of the damaged CMCs were examined to characterize

1.4 Vibration Behavior of CMCs at Elevated Temperature

fraction. Relationships between temperature-dependent composite damping,

1 Naslain, R. (2004). Design, preparation and properties of non-oxide CMCs for

36 Pailler, F. and Lamon, J. (2005). Micromechanics based model of fatigue/

50 Ruggles-Wrenn, M.B., Delapasse, J., Chamberlain, A.L. et al. (2012). Fatigue

First Matrix Cracking of Ceramic-Matrix Composites at

2.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress

2.2.1 Theoretical Models

2.2.2 Results and Discussion

Temperature-dependent carbon fiber elastic modulus Ef (T) is [32]

𝛼rf (T) = −1.86 × 10−1 + 5.85 × 10−4 T − 1.36 × 10−8 T 2

Γd (T) = Γdo ⎢1 − To ⎥ (2.17)

CP (T) = 76.337 + 109.039 × 10−3 T − 6.535 × 105 T −2 − 27.083 × 10−6 T 2

2.2.2.1 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite

2.2.2.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite

2.2.2.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite

2.2.2.4 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of C/SiC Composite

2.2.2.5 Effect of Matrix Fracture Energy on Temperature-Dependent Matrix

2.2.3 Experimental Comparisons

2.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress

stress of SiC/SiC composite is predicted using the energy balance approach

2.3.1 Results and Discussion

2.3.1.1 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite

2.3.1.2 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite

decreases from ld /r f = 6.8 at 𝜎 mc = 89 MPa to ld /r f = 5.9 at 𝜎 mc = 81 MPa. When

2.3.1.3 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite

2.3.1.4 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite

2.3.1.5 Temperature-Dependent Matrix Cracking Stress of SiC/SiC Composite

2.3.2 Experimental Comparisons

Figure 2.13 Experimental

Figure 2.14 Experimental