Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”COST Action FP0802, Innventia: November 4-5, 2009 / Stockholm
Micromechanics of wood Fiber under axial tension; experiment and modeling
Parviz NAVI*Marjan SEDIGHI-GILANI
Institute of Materials Science, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Switzerland*Bern University of Applied Sciences, Biel, Switzerland
1
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Introduction3- Study of the
tensile behavior of fsingle wood fibers
4- Results interpretation
2- Morphological study of wood 1-Tensile behavior ofinterpretation,
Micromechanical approach
yfiber
microstructure, CLSM
1 Tensile behavior of thin wood specimens
2
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
1. Tensile behavior of thin wood specimens ~100m
A thin wood specimen
Experimental apparatus
3
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Failure mode of longitudinal specimens under tensile forces
4
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Force-displacement curve, sampledi i 160 20 4 3 b ittl
Force-displacement curve in thin tissu, di i 28 2 74 19 3 d tildimensions 160x20x4 mm3 ,brittle dimensions 28x2.74x.19 mm3 , ductile
5
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
ce(N
)Fo
rc
Displacement(μm)
• Force-extension behavior of a thin wood (30 mm x 3 mm x 0.14 mm) under controlled cyclic tensile test
Navi et al (1995), Wood science and technology
6
• Hypothesis• Fibers are considered non-uniform• Wood tissue with thin thickness
becomes non-uniform• Thicker elements represent more
uniformity
C• Consequences:• Under tensile forces the thick elements
(uniform) illustrates strain localization with a brittle failure
Schematically representation of a thin wood section with a brittle failure
• Non-uniform thin elements undergo elasto-plastic behavior with ductile failure
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Latewood
2. Study the morphology and variation of MFAs of the spruce fibers
Latewood Ray cell
EarlywoodSingle fiber Fiber ultra structure
Thi ti t tThin tissu structure
8
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
110
120
y
80
90
100
Pixe
l int
ensi
ty
I=33.92 cos 2 (P-24)+70.78 Fluorescent intensity curve measured CLSM
60
70
-90 -70 -50 -30 -10 10 30 50 70 90
Angle of incident polarization, P (degree)
by CLSM for the marked area, MFA=24º.The Method first was developed by
JANG (1998) equation : I=A cos2(P- )+I
9
Angle of incident polarization, P (degree) I=A cos (P- )+I min
Confocal laser scanning microscopy CLSM
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Confocal laser scanning microscopy, CLSMRadial face of an earlywood fiber
Bordered pit
Bordered pit
Sedighi-Gilani ,et al. (2005), wood and fiber scienceSedighi-Gilani ,et. al. (2005), , Holz Roh-Werk
10
Bergander , et al. (2002), J. Wood Science
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Inside the border of a pit in an earlywood fiber
Measured data show the pattern of MFA
Schematic sketch (a proposition)
11
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Reduction of MFA between bordered pits
60
70
80
90
sity
I=42.02 cos2(P-(0))+35.04
30
40
50
Pixe
l int
en
I=25.26 cos2(P-(16))+14.31I=25.26 cos2(P-(-16))+14.31
10
20
-90 -70 -50 -30 -10 10 30 50 70 90
Angle of incident polarization, P (degree)
Two proposed patterns
MFA of an area with two crossed planes of microfibrils (MFA=16º, -16º) is the resultant of the
two directions (MFA=0º)
12
( )
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Latewood fiber
itpit
MFA uniformity in Latewood fiber
13
MFA uniformity in Latewood fiber
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Cross-field zone in earlywood fibers
-Microfibril angles in S2 are not uniform-Microfibril angles in S2 are not uniform-Fiber can be considered inhomogeneous
14
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
3. Tensile behavior of Wood fiber
•Sample preparation for test, Kersavage (1973)
15
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
micro-band with two screws for
Sample
micro band with two screws for adjusting the fiber alignment
a) Displacement screws, b) force transducer, c) circular steel piece, d) micro-band
Perez et al (2000),wood and wood fiber composites conference Semi-circular steel piece with
16
pconical hole
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
4 E i t ti R lt I t t ti d M d li
1
4. Experimentation, Results, Interpretations and Modeling
0.7
0.8
0.9
)MFAs=20.5, 21, 35 º
MFAs=19,14,24,20 ºMFAs=23, 24.5, 24.5 º
0.4
0.5
0.6
Stre
ss(G
pa)
MFAs=24, 26 º
0.1
0.2
0.3MFAs=60.5, 59.5, 60º
00.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
Strain (%)
Stress-strain curves of dry wood fibers under tensile test, measured local MFAs in some points along fiber have been mentioned
17
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
0.35 Stress-strain curve of two earlywood fiber (32° d 37°) d li t il l di
0.20
0.25
0.30
s(G
pa)
(32° and 37°) under cyclic tensile loading-unloading test
0.05
0.10
0.15
Str
ess
Observation
1 The results show plastic deformation
32°0.00
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Strain (%)
0.25
0.30
0.35
pa)
1- The results show plastic deformation2- History dependent behaviour3- Increasing the Young’s modulus with increasing applied force4 Elasticity domain increases
37°
0 05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Stre
ss(G
p 4- Elasticity domain increases
180.00
0.05
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0
Strain (%)
Fig 2 Under tensile forceFig 1 Under controlled cyclic tensile force
4.1 Modeling and micromechanical approach
Fig. 2 Under tensile force
0 35
Fig. 1 Under controlled cyclic tensile force
1
MFA 19 14 24 20 ºMFA 23 24 5 24 5 º
0 15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
ess(
Gpa
)
MFAs=20.5, 21, 35 º
MFAs=24, 26 º
MFAs=19,14,24,20 ºMFAs=23, 24.5, 24.5 º
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
S i (%0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4Stre
MFAs=60.5, 59.5, 60º
Observation:1- Fig. 2 shows non-linear behaviour of single fibres2- Fig. 1 shows increasing the Young’s modulus and increasing the elasticity
Strain (% 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0
Strain (%)
domain after yield point 2- Fig. 1, indicates history dependent behaviour3.- Fig. 1 illustrate elastic-plastic behaviour.Consequences:1- Local damaging of matrix with local large deformation make MFA decrease locallylocally2- Increasing of tension force might produces redistribution of the strain along the fibre.
19
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Hypothesis for modeling:
• Wood fiber is considered as a long hollow cylinder of length L
•Cell was is made of only S2 layer which is composed of three constituents,cellulose hemicelluloses and lignin with known characteristicscellulose, hemicelluloses and lignin with known characteristics.
•MFA is non-uniform along the fiber;bordered pits, cross-field zones and all natural defect like dislocation or micro-pcompression which add to the fiber heterogeneities along the fiber, all arereplaced by MFA non-uniformities
20
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
•MFA is non-uniform
Effective Young’s modulus of a fiber
•A set (α α αn) is assumed to represent the local MFAs of differentsegments along the fiber
n 21
LLLL n 21
n21
1 21 1 ( )nLL L
nEEE 21
MFA is constant along 1 2
1 2
( ..... )n
eff nE L E E E MFA is constant along
each segment
21 (1 )E 1 E 1' = (1 )E 1 E 1
' < E 1
Fiber property after yielding (only matrix damages but not fibers
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Fiber property after yielding (only matrix damages but not fibers, isotopic damage theory of Kachanof 1984 is applied)
EEE 21
Damage first will happen in part L1Persson (2000)
E)1( nEEE 21
is damage parameter
Constituent CoefficientMean
engineering constant value
Volume fraction for 12% M.C.
E1(GPa) 150 Mean engineering Volume
g pLets take = 0.9
Cellulose 44.5
E2(GPa) 17.5
G12(GPa) 4.5
21 .01
32 .5
Constituent Coefficient constant value are 90% reduced
fraction for 12% M.C.
E1 (GPa) 1.6
E2 (GPa) .35
Hemicellulose
E1 (GPa) 16
31.6
E2 (GPa) 3.5
G12 (GPa) 1.5
21 .1
Hemicellulose 31.6G12 (GPa) .15
ν21 .1
ν32 .4
LigninE (GPa) .275
23 921
3 .4
LigninE (GPa) 2.75
23.9ν .33
Lignin 23.9ν .33
22
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Local wood fiber Young’s modulus after isotropic matrix degradation
60.0
40 0
50.0du
lus(
Gpa
)
E L intact material
30.0
40.0
You
ng's
Mod
E L1 matrix rigidity is reduced 50%
E t i i idit i d d 70%
10.0
20.0
ongi
tudi
nal Y E L2 matrix rigidity is reduced 70%
E L3 matrix rigidity is reduced 90%
0.00.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
Microfibril angle(Deg)
L
o
•Local longitudinal Young’s modulus of a fiber segment as a function of microfibril angle , for virgin fiber (EL) and for the same fiber with reduced matrix constants (EL1 ,EL2 ,EL3)
g ( g)
23
El i b h i i h
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
RDifferent possible scenarios after damage initiation in a fiber segment and its progress
Elastic behavior with brittle failure
AA1
50.0
60.0
s(G
pa)
P Perfect plasticity
AA1
30.0
40.0
oung
's M
odul
u
p y
AA2
P
10.0
20.0
ongi
tudi
nal Y
o
A
B2B
A4
Localization and strain softening damage
AA30.0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0
Microfibril angle(Deg)
L A2
A1
B1 A3
R
elasto-plasticity with positive strain hardening
AA3
P
R
AA4Sedighi-Gilani & Navi (2007), Wood Science and TechnologyKeckes and Burget et al. (2003), Nature Materials
24
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Experimental observations
1 Positive slope of the stress-strain curve after the yield point indicates that no strain1. Positive slope of the stress-strain curve after the yield point indicates that no strainsoftening happens
2. Slight increase of the Young’s modulus (see the slopes of unloading-loading cycles intensile test) indicates positive strain hardening behaviour
RB
S t i fib il l P ASegment microfibril angle
Segment young’s modulusLine AA4
elasto-plasticity with positive strain hardening
Y ’ d l i
Potential of large tensile strain = e + irr
Young’s modulus increaseNon-localized damage
25
e irr
Observation by light microscopy the process of fiber damaging and failure
26
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
27
Paper Mechanics Workshop on “Single Fiber Testing and Modeling”
Conclusion and remarks
• MFA of an individual wood fiber is non-uniform.• Fiber tensile behavior is not a simple function of average MFA.Non-uniformities of MFA and other natural heterogeneities have dominantNon uniformities of MFA and other natural heterogeneities have dominanteffect on the fiber stress-strain curve.• Under tensile force non-uniform wood fiber seems to behave as an elasto-plasticity with positive strain hardening. This might be the consequence ofp y p g g qnon-localized damage with re-strain distribution along the fiber
•Micromechanical Approaches (Modeling of heterogeneity effects andpp ( g g yexperiments) can provide more possibility to understand the mechanismsinvolved in wood cell behavior before and after damage
28