Effect of Nanoscale Interfacial Strength on the Behavior of Carbon Nanotube Based Composites

N. Chandra Department of Mechanical Engineering Florida State/Florida A&M University Tallahassee FL 32310

The Scale of Things -- Nanometers and More

Things Natural
10 m
-2

Things Manmade
1 cm 10 mm Head of a pin 1-2 mm

Dust mite 200 m 10-4 m

Human hair ~ 10-50 m wide

The Microworld

Fly ash ~ 10-20 m

10-5 m

Microwave

Ant ~5 mm

1,000,000 nanometers = 10-3 m MicroElectroMechanical devices 1 millimeter 10 -100 m wide (mm)

21st Century Challenge

0.1 mm 100 m 0.01 mm 10 m

Infrared

O O

Red blood cells with white cell ~ 2-5 m

Red blood cells Pollen grain

The Nanoworld

~10 nm diameter

10-8 m

0.01 m 10 nm

Ultraviolet

10-7 m

Visible

1,000 nanometers = 10 m 1 micrometer Zone plate x-ray lens Outermost ring spacing ( m) ~35 nm
-6

0.1 m 100 nm

Nanotube electrode Nanotube transistor

Combine nanoscale building blocks to make novel functional devices, e.g., a photosynthetic reaction center with integral semiconductor storage

ATP synthase

DNA ~2-1/2 nm diameter

Soft x-ray

10-9 m 1 nanometer (nm)

Atoms of silicon spacing ~tenths of nm

10-10 m

0.1 nm

Quantum corral of 48 iron atoms on copper surface positioned one at a time with an STM

Carbon nanotube ~2 nm diameter

Office of Basic Energy Scienc Office of Science, U.S. DOE Version 03-05-02

Capability of Nanotechnology Capability of Nanotechnology

High Strength Material (>10 GPa)

Multi-Functional Materials

Revolutionary Aircraft Concepts (30% less mass, 20% less emission, 25% increased range)

Autonomous Spacecraft (40% less mass) Bio-Inspired Materials and Processes

Reusable Launch Vehicle (20% less mass, 20% less noise) Adaptive Self-Repairing Space Missions
Source: NASA Ames AMML

Then there are dreams

Library of Congress
Library of Congress?

Library of Congress inside a sugar cube Bottom-up manufacturing Materials (100x) stronger but lighter than steel Speed and efficiency of computer chips & transistors Nano contrast agents for cancer cell detection Contaminant removal from water & air Double energy efficiency of solar cells
*From Nanotechnology Magazine (nanozine.com)

AMML

Carbon Nanotubes (CNTs) Carbon Nanotubes (CNTs)

CNTs can span 23,000 miles without failing due to its own weight. CNTs are 100 times stronger than steel. Many times stiffer than any known material Conducts heat better than diamond Can be a conductor or insulator without any doping. Lighter than feather.

AMML

Carbon Nanotubes (CNT)

Carbon Nanotubes: Graphite sheet rolled into a tube Single wall and Multiwall nanotubes Zigzag, armchair and chiral nanotubes Length ~ 100 nm to few m Diameter~ 1 nm

Applications
V is c o - e la s t i c m e d iu m C a rb o n n a n o tu b e s in d if f e r e n t o r i e n t a t io n

~ 1 TPa Strength ~150 GPa onductivity depends on chirality

Do these properties extend to CNT reinforced composites ? AMML

Nano sensors Medical Functionalapplications Nano Energy High strength composites electronics storage composites

Basic Configurations of CNT

There are three sp 2 orbitals in CNT. In plane -bond is extremely strong. Out-of-plane -bond is weak. Different tubes in MWNT is connected by -bond.

C60, C70, C80 are fullerens. Graphene sheets are rolled into tubes, r = na + mb Chirality is based on the angle .

=0 Zig Zag ;0< <30Chiral; =30 Armchair ; Properties depend on chirality

Namas Chandra CSIT-Computational Nanotechnology Nov 1, 2002 Slide-7

Defects in carbon nanotubes (CNT)

Point defects such as vacancies Topological defects caused by forming pentagons and heptagons e.g. 5-7-75 defect Hybridization defects caused due to fictionalization

Sp3 Hybridization here

Role of defects

Mechanical properties

Changes in stiffness observed. Stiffness decrease with topological defects and increase with functionalization Defect generation and growth observed during plastic deformation and fracture of nanotubes Composite properties improved with chemical bonding between matrix and nanotube Topological defects required to join metallic and semi-conducting CNTs Formation of Y-junctions End caps Hydrogen storage, sensors etc

Electrical properties

Other applications

Ref: D Srivastava et. al. (2001)

Stress Measures
Total Volume

Virial stress
1 N 1 1 N ij = m vi v j fi rj 2 2
Averaging Volume for Lutsko stress
Y

BDT stress
ij

Atomic Volume

1 =

1 1 N mvi v j rj fi 2 2

Averaging Volume

Lutsko stress

lutsko ij

N 1 1 N ( r ) = Lutsko mvi v j rj fi l =1 2 2 = +1 1

Strain calculation in nanotubes

Defect free nanotube mesh of hexagons Strain calculated using displacements and derivatives shape functions in a local coordinate system formed by tangential (X) and radial (y) direction of centroid and tube axis Area weighted averages of surrounding hexagons considered for strain at each atom Similar procedure for pentagons and heptagons

X Y X Y Z i G j l Z

Updated Lagrangian scheme is used in MD simulations

Elastic modulus of defect free CNT

-Defect free (9,0) nanotube with periodic boundary conditions -Strains applied using conjugate gradients energy minimization -All stress and strain measures yield a Youngs modulus value of 1.002TPa -Values in literature range from 0.5 to 5.5 Tpa. Mostly around 1Tpa

60

Bulk Stress (E=1.002 TPa) Lutsko Stress (E= 0.997 TPa) BDT Stress (E= 1.002 TPa)

50

Stress (GPa)

40

30

20

10 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

Strain

Effect of Diameter
50

40

stiffness values of defects for various tubes with different diameters do not change significantly
(9,0) at defect (10,0) at defect (11,0) at defect (13,0) at defect (15,0) at defect (9,0) no defect (10,0) no defect (11,0) no defect (13,0) no defect (15,0) no defect

S tre ss (G P a )

30

20

Stiffness in the range of 0.61TPa to 0.63TPa for different (n,0) tubes Mechanical properties of defect not significantly affected by the curvature of nanotube

10

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

Strains

stress strain curves for different (n,0) tubes with varying diameters.

Residual stress at zero strain

Stress is present at zero strain values. This corresponds to stress due to curvature It is found to decrease with increasing diameter Basis for stress calculation graphene sheet Brenner et. al.1 observed similar variation in energy at zero strain

(8,0)

(9,0)

Sress (GPA)

(10,0)

(11,0)

2
(12,0)

1
(20,0) (25,0)

(15,0) (17,0) (50,0)

0 0.1

0.2

0.3

1/Radius (A)

Robertson DH, Brenner DW and Mintmire 1992

Phys. Rev B (2004)

CNT with 5-7-7-5 defect

Lutsko stress profile for (9,0) tube with type I defect shown below Stress amplification observed in the defected region This effect reduces with increasing applied strains In (n,n) type of tubes there is a decrease in stress at the defect region

60

8 % Applied S train 7 % Applied S train

50
5 % Applied S train

S tre s s ( G p a )

40
3 % Applied S train

30

20

1 % Applied S train

0 % Applied S train

10 -20 -10 0 10 20

z - position

Evolution of stress and strain

Strain and stress evolution at 1,3,5 and 7 % applied strains Stress based on BDT stress

Local elastic moduli of CNT with defects

60

-Type I defect E= 0.62 TPa

(b) (a)

50

40

Stress (GPa)

30

(c) (9,0) CNT no defect Type I defect

-Type II defect E=0.63 Tpa

20

10

Type II defect

0.025

0.05

0.075

0.1

Strain

-Reduction in stiffness in the presence of defect from 1 Tpa -Initial residual stress indicates additional forces at zero strain -Analogous to formation energy

Polymer Composites based on CNTs

To make use of these extra-ordinary properties, CNTs are used as reinforcements in polymer based composites

CNTs can be in the form

Single wall nanotubes Multi-wall nanotubes Powders films paste

Matrix can be
Polypropylene1 PMMA2 Polycarbonate3 Polystyrene4 poly(3-octylthiophene) (P3OT)5

Andrews R, Jacques D, Minot M, Rantell T, Macromolecular Materials And Engineering 287 (6): 395-403 (2002) 2 Cooper CA, Ravich D, Lips D, Mayer J, Wagner HD Composites Science And Technology 62 (7-8): 1105-1112 (2002) 3 Potschke P, Fornes TD, Paul DR Polymer 43 (11): 3247-3255 MAY (2002) 4 Safadi B, Andrews R, Grulke EA Journal Of Applied Polymer Science 84 (14): 2660-2669 (2002) 5 Kymakis E, Alexandou I, Amaratunga GAJ Synthetic Metals 127 (1-3): 59-62 (2002) Namas Chandra Nov 1, 2002 CSIT-Computational Nanotechnology Slide-18

Do we realize the potentials of CNT in PMC?

Researcher
Schaddler 98

Matrix
Epoxy Epoxy

Exptl
Vol% CNT 2.85 (tension) 2.85 (comp)

Calculation Parallel
9.60 9.60

EC

EM

EC

EM

Series
1.03 1.03

1.13 1.4

Parallel model Upper Bound EC = V f E f + Vm Em

Andrews 99

Petroleum pitch

0.33

1.20

9.09

1.003

1.62

2.29

12.46

1.016

Gong 00

Answer is No-We do not

Epoxy 0.57 1.12 4.98 0.57
( Wit h surfactant)

1.0057

1.25

4.98

1.0057

Qian 00

Polystyrene

0.49

1.24

4.9151

1.0049

Ma00 Andrews02

PET Polystyrene

3.6 2.5 5.0 10.0 15.0 25.0

1.4 1.22 1.28 1.67 2.06 2.50

4.564 14.86 28.73 56.46 84.18 139.64

1.037 1.03 1.05 1.11 1.18 1.33

Series model Lower Bound 1 V f Vm = + EC E f Em

PPA

0.50 1.50 2.50 5.00

1.17 1.33 1.50 2.50

AMML

5.16 13.49 21.81 42.62

1.01 1.02 1.03 1.05

Factors affecting interfacial properties

Interfacial chemistry Asperities
Origin: Surface irregularities inherent in the interface Issues: Affects interface fracture process through mechanical loading and friction Approach: Incorporate roughness effects in the interface model; Study effect of generating surface roughness using: Sinusoidal functions and fractal approach; Use push-back test data and measured roughness profile of push-out fibers for the model.

Mechanical effects Residual stress

Origin: Chemical reaction during thermal-mechanical Processing and service conditions, e.g. Aging, Coatings, Exposures at high temp.. Issues: Chemistry and architecture effects on mechanical properties. Approach: Analyze the effect of size of reaction zone and chemical bond strength (e.g. SCS-6/Ti matrix and SCS-6/Ti matrix )

In te r

Metal/ ceramic/ polymer

fa

ce

Origin: CTE mismatch between fiber and matrix. Issues: Significantly affects the state of stress at interface and hence fracture process Approach: Isolate the effects of residual stress state by plastic straining of specimen; and validate with numerical models.

CNTs

Properties affected
Trans. & long. Stiffness/strength Fatigue/Fracture

Thermal/electronic/magnetic

AMML

Functionalized Nanotubes

Change in hybridization (SP2 to SP3) Experimental reports of different chemical attachments Application in composites, medicine, sensors Functionalized CNT are possibly fibers in composites

How does functionalization affect the elastic and inelastic deformation behavior and fracture

120 o

o 108

Graphite

Diamond

Functionalized nanotubes

Increase in stiffness observed by functionalizing

Volume for Stress Calculation

Vinyl and Butyl Hydrocarbons T=77K and 3000K Lutsko stress

35 30

25

S tre ss (G p a )

20

15

10

(10,10) CNT

0.84 T Pa

Stiffness increase is more for higher number of chemical attachments Stiffness increase higher for longer chemical attachments

(10,10) CNT with vinyl 0.92 T Pa

(10,10) CNT with butyl 1.03 T Pa

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

S train

Local Stiffness of functionalized CNTs

Nanotube (8,0) (10,0) (12,0) Radius 3.13 3.91 4.69 5.87 5.42 6.78 8.13 6.78 6.78 6.78 6.78 6.78 Chemical Group -C2H3* -C2H3 -C2H3 -C2H3 -C2H3 -C2H3 -C2H3 -C3H5 -C4H7 -C5H9* -C2H3 -C2H3 #of E (TPa) w/o E (TPa) Attachments Attachments Attachments 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 21 31 50 0.862 0.854 0.859 0.849 0.721 0.837 0.784 0.837 0.837 0.837 0.837 0.837 1.05 1.04 0.977 0.951 0.889 0.932 0.906 0.940 1.03 0.95 1.02 1.11

(15, 0) (8,8) (10,10) (12,12) (10,10) (10,10) (10,10) (10,10) (10,10)

Stiffness increase is more for higher number of chemical attachments Stiffness increase higher for longer chemical attachments

Contour plots
Stress (GPa) Stress (GPa)

Higher stress at the location of attachment

(a)
Stress (GPa) Stress (GPa)

(b)
Stress (GPa)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

Stress contours with one chemical attachment. Stress fluctuations are present

Radius variation
with vinyl attachments without attachments

Increased radius of curvature at the attachment because of change in hybridization Radius of curvature lowered in adjoining area

7.3 7.2 7.1

Radius

7 6.9 6.8 6.7 6.6 100 200 300 400 Higher stress at

Atom Number

the location of attachment

Stress (GPa)

Stress (GPa)

Sp3 Hybridization here

(a)
Stress (GPa) Stress (GPa)

(b)
Stress (GPa)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

Evolution of defects in functionalized CNT

Defects Evolve at much lower strain of 6.5 % in CNT with chemical attachments Onset of plastic deformation at lower strain. Reduced fracture strain

Different Fracture Mechanisms ?

Fracture Behavior Different Fracture happens by formation of defects, coalescence of defects and final separation of damaged region in defect free CNT

In Functionalized CNT it happens in a brittle manner by breaking of bonds

Chemical Physics Letters (2004)

Atomic simulation of CNT pullout test

Matrix Fiber

Simulation conditions

Corner atoms of hydrocarbon attachments fixed Displacement applied as shown 0.02A/1500 steps T=300K

Interfacial shear

nterfacial shear measured as reaction force of fixed atoms

8 7 6

Max load Typical interface shear force pattern. Note zero force after Failure (separation of chemical attachment) After Failure

R a to ( V ) e ci n e / A

5 4 3 2 1 0 -1

1 0

1 5

D p c m n (A is la e e t )

250,000 steps

Debonding and Rebonding of Interfaces

8 7 6 5

Debonding

Rebonding

Force (eV/A)

4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 5 10 15

Failure

displacement (A)

Debonding and Rebonding

Matrix

Matrix

Energy for debonding of chemical attachment 3eV Strain energy in force-displacement plot 20

Variation in interface behavior

8 7 6

8 7
8

6 5

7 6 5

F rc o e(eV ) /A

Force (eV/A )

5 4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 5 10 15

Force (eV/A)
5 10 15

3 2 1 0

4 3 2 1 0

-1 -2 0

-1 -2 0 5 10 15

displacement (A)
8
8

displacement (A)
8 7 6 5

displacement (A)

7
7

6 5

6 5

Force (eV/A)

Force (eV/A)

4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 5 10 15

4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 5 10 15

Force (eV/A)

4 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 0 5 10 15

displacement (A)

displacement (A)

displacement (A)

Variation with interface type

8 7

Increasing the length of attachment increases region a Decreasing the number of attachments extends region b

6 5

Peak force

F orce(ev/A )

4 3 2 1 0

c
(c)

d
(d)

a
(a)

(b)

(e) failure

-1 -2 0 5 10 15

Displacement (A)

b a

Temperaturedependenceofpullouttests
Temperature 50 K
Temperature 300 K
8
8
8

Temperature 1000 K

Force (eV/A )

Force (eV/A )

Force (eV/A )

2
0

0 5

Displacement (A)

10

15

Displacement (A)

10

15

Displacement (A)

10

15

Temperature 2000 K

Force (eV/A )

Forcetofailuredecreaseswithincreasingtemperature Debonding-rebondingbehaviorathighertemperatures doesnotaltertheenergydissipation

Displacement (A)
10 15

Non-BondedInteractions

4.5 EnergyrequiredtopulloutCNTfrom nonbondedmatrixisoftheorderof5 4 eV(115Kcal/Mol)

3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 50 100 150 200

Energy (eV)

Displacement (A)

EnergyrequiredtopulloutCNTfromnonbondedmatrixisofthe orderof5eV(112kcal/mol)

Compressiveloadingofcarbonnanotubes

UsingsurfacemodifiedCNTincompositesimprovesresistancetobuckling

ThermalStresses

1.2 1.1 1 0.9

Stress (GPa)

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 100 200 300 400 500

11 22 11 22

With Attachments With Attachments No Attachments No Attachments

Temperature (K)

Thermalstressishigherforfunctionalizednanotubeinpolymermatrix

Cohesive zone model for interfaces

Assumptions

Nanotubes deform in linear elastic manner Interface character completely determined by tractiondisplacement plot
u
Ty p ica l

p lo t

M a t r ix

F ib e r (N a n o t u b e )

2
D i s p la c e m e n t ( )

(a)

(c )

M a tr ix

F ib e r (N a n o t u b e )

2
(d)

Cohesive zone Models for nanoscale interfaces

5
5

Traction (G Pa)

Traction(GPa)
5 10 15

Applied displacement (A)

0.6

10

15

20

25

Applied displacement (A)

(a)

0.5

0.6

Traction (GPa)

0.4
Tractio (GPa) n

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.1

0 5 10 15

10

15

20

25

Applied displacement (A)

Applied displacement (A)

(b)

Finite element simulation

ABAQUS with user element for cohesive zone model Linear elastic model for both matrix and CNT About 1000 elements and 100 elements at interface

Parametric studies
Variation of CNT content for different interface strengths
35 30
Perfect Interface

Elastic Modulus (GPa)

25
Interface Strength = 5 GPa

20
Interface Strength = 500 MPa

15
Interface Strength = 50 MPa

10

5 0 5 10

Interface Strength = 5 MPa

15

20

Volume % CNT

Parametric studies
Variation of matrix stiffness for different interface strengths
40
Perfect Interface Interface strength= 5 GPa

Composite Elastic Modulus (GPa)

35 30 25 20 15 10
Pure Matrix Interface strength= 50 MPa Interface strength= 5 MPa Interface strength= 500 MPa

5 0

10

Matrix Elastic Modulus (GPa)

Parametric studies
Variation of fiber stiffness for different interface strengths Fiber Volume = 7.7%
Matrix E = 3.5 GPa CNT

20
SiC Fiber

Composite Elastic Modulus (GPa)

18 16 14 12 10
Glass Fiber

Carbon Fiber

Perfect Interface

Interface strength = 5 GPa

Interface strength = 500 MPa

Interface strength = 50 MPa

8 6
Very low interface strength = 5 MPa

4 200 400 600 800 1000

Fiber Elastic Modulus (GPa)

Summary
Nanotechnology will have great impact in many fields. Manipulating atoms to achieve unusual properties will be a continuing research topic. Interfaces at atomic scale play a different role than microscale interfaces At atomic level, the mechanical behavior is quite different. Interfaces can be chemically altered to obtain high stiffness and strength properties in composites.

AMML

Acknowledgement

Prof. L. vanDommelen, A. Srinivasan, U. Chandra Dr. S. Namilae, C. Shet S. Guan, M. Naveen, Girish, Xanan, J. Kohle, Jason Montgomery

ARO, AFOSR, NSF, FSURF

AMML

Further References

N. Chandra, S. Namilae, and C. Shet, Local elastic properties of carbon nanotubes in the presence of Stone -Wales defects, Physical Review B, 69, 094101, (2004). S. Namilae, N. Chandra, and C. Shet, Mechanical behavior of functionalized nanotubes, Chemical Physics Letters 387, 4-6, 247-252, (2004) N. Chandra and S. Namilae, Multi-scale modeling of nanocystalline materials, Materials Science Forum, 447448, 19-27, (2004).. C. Shet, N. Chandra, and S. Namilae, Defect-defect interaction in carbon nanotubes under mechanical loading, Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, (2004) (in print). C. Shet, N. Chandra, and S. Namilae, Defect annihilations in carbon nanotubes under thermo-mechanical loading, Journal of Material Sciences , (in print). S. Namilae, C. Shet, N. Chandra and T.G. Nieh, Atomistic simulation of grain boundary sliding in pure and magnesium doped aluminum bicrystals, Scripta Materialia 46, 49-54 (2002). S. Namilae, C. Shet, N. Chandra and T.G. Nieh, Atomistic simulation of the effect of trace elements on grain boundary of aluminum, Materials Science Forum, 357-359, 387-392, (2001). C. Shet, H. Li and N. Chandra, Interface Models for grain boundary sliding and migration, Materials Science Forum 357-359, 577-586, (2001). N. Chandra and P. Dang, Atomistic Simulation of Grain Boundary Sliding and Migration, Journal of Materials Science, 34, 4, 656-666 (1998). N. Chandra, Mechanics of Superplastic Deformations at Atomic Scale, Materials Science Forum, 304, 3, 411419 (1998).

AMML

Further References

C. Shet and N. Chandra, The effect of the shape of the cohesive zone curves on the fracture responses, Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, 11(3), 249-276, (2004). N. Chandra and C. Shet, A Micromechanistic Perspective of Cohesive Zone Approach in Modeling Fracture. Computer Modeling in Engineering & Sciences, CMES, Computer Modeling in Engineering and Sciences, 5(1), 21-34, (2004)) H. Li and N. Chandra, Analysis of Crack Growth and Crack-tip Plasticity in Ductile Material Using Cohesive Zone Models, International Journal of Plasticity, 19, 849-882, (2003). N. Chandra, Constitutive behavior of Superplastic materials, International Journal for nonlinear mechanics, 37, 461-484, (2002). N. Chandra, H. Li, C. Shet and H. Ghonem, Some Issues in the Application of Cohesive Zone Models for Metal-ceramic Interface. International Journal of Solids and Structures, 39, 2827-2855, (2002). C. Shet and N. Chandra, Analysis of Energy Balance When Using Cohesive Zone Models to Simulate Fracture Process, ASME Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, 124, 440-450, (2002). N. Chandra, Evaluation of Interfacial Fracture Toughness Using Cohesive Zone Models, Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 33, 1433-1447, (2002). C. Shet, H. Li and N. Chandra, Interface Models for grain boundary sliding and migration, Materials Science Forum 357-359, 577-586, (2001).

AMML

Further References

N. Chandra and H. Ghonem, Interfacial Mechanics of push-out tests: theory and experiments, Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 32, 3-4, 575584, (2001). D. Osborne, N. Chandra and, H. Ghonem, Interface Behavior of Ti Matrix Composites at elevated temperature, Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 32, 3-4, 545-553, (2001). N. Chandra, S. C. Rama and Z. Chen, Process Modeling of Superplastic materials, Materials Transactions JIM, 40, 8, 723-726 (1999). S. R. Voleti, C. R. Ananth and N. Chandra, Effect of Fiber Fracture and Matrix Yielding on Load Sharing in Continuous Fiber Metal Matrix Composites, Journal of Composites Technology and Research, 20, 4, 203-209, (1998). C.R. Ananth, S. R. Voleti and N. Chandra, Effect of Fiber Fracture and Interfacial Debonding on the Evolution of Damage in Metal Matrix Composites, Composites Part A, 29A, 1203-1211, (1998) S. Mukherjee, C. R. Ananth and N. Chandra, Effect of Interface Chemistry on the Fracture Properties of Titanium Matrix Composites, Composites Part A, 29A, 12131219, (1998) S. R. Voleti, C. R. Ananth and N. Chandra, Effect of Interfacial Properties on the Fiber Fragmentation Process in Polymer Matrix Composites, Journal of Composites Technology and Research, 20, 1, 16-26, (1998). S. Mukherjee, C. R. Ananth and N. Chandra, Evaluation of Fracture Toughness of MMC Interfaces Using Thin-slice Push-out Tests, Scripta Materialia, 36, 13331338 (1997). C. R. Ananth, S. Mukherjee, and N. Chandra, Effect of Time Dependent Matrix Behavior on the Evolution of Processing-Induced Residual Stresses in Metal Matrix Composites, Journal of Composites Technology and Research 19, 3, 134-141, (1997). S. Mukherjee, C. R. Ananth and N. Chandra, Effect of Residual Stresses on the Interfacial Fracture Behavior of Metal Matrix Composites, Composite Science and Technology, 57, 1501-112, (1997). C. R. Ananth and N. Chandra, Elevated temperature interfacial behavior of MMC: a computational study, Composites: Part A, 27A, 805-811 (1996). S. R. Voleti, N. Chandra and J R. Miller, Global-Local Analysis of Large-scale Composite Structures Using Finite Element Methods, Composites & Structures, 58, 3, 453-464, (1996). C. R. Ananth and N. Chandra, Evaluation of Interfacial Properties of Metal Matrix Composites from Fiber Push-out Tests, Mechanics of Composite Materials and Structures, 2, 309-328 (1995). Xie, Z.Y. and N. Chandra, Application of GPS Tensors to Fiber Reinforced Composites, Journal of Composite Materials, 29, 1448-1514, (1995). S. Mukherjee, H. Garmestani and N. Chandra, Experimental Investigation of Thermally Induced Plastic Deformation of MMCs Using Backscattered Kikuchi Method, Scripta Metallurgica et Materialia, 33, 1, 93-99 (1995). N. Chandra and C.R. Ananth, Analysis of Interfacial Behavior in MMCs and IMCs Using Thin Slice Push-out Tests', Composite Science and Technology, 54, 1 , 87100, (1995). C. R. Ananth and N. Chandra, Numerical Modeling of Fiber Push-Out Test in Metallic and Intermetallic Matrix Composites-Mechanics of the Failure Process', Journal of Composite Materials, 29, 11, 1488-1514, (1995). N. Chandra., C.R. Ananth and H. Garmestani, Micromechanical Modeling of Process-Induced Residual Stresses in Ti-24Al-11Nb/SCS6 Composite', Journal of Composite Technology and Research, 17, 37-46, (1994). Z. Xie and N. Chandra, Application of Equation Regulation Method to Multi-Phase Composites', International Journal of Non-linear Mechanics, 28, 6, 687-704, (1993).

AMML