A Mukherjee, H.S. Rao/Computational Materials Science 4(1995)249-4 short whisker long whisker Ref 0.0030 00035 0.0020 0008 0.0020 Displacement, um 6. fea derive of long SiC whisker embedded in Al2O3 matrix 00015 0.0000.0020.0040.0060.0080010 which is not true. The present FE model predicts Disp LaiceaenL. HIn Fig 8. FEA derived force-displacement curves for long and stiffer behaviour than the analytical solution short a-sic whisker embedded in al o. mat which is expected as the analytical solution is developed for 1-d plane strain conditions. The marginal difference between the force/displace ment curve obtained in the present study and that obtained from reference [9] may be due to discrete spring model employed in reference [9] to model the whisker/matrix interface Fig. 7 shows the comparison of the computed force/displacement curve for short whisker with that obtained by Laird and Kennedy [9 There is no analytical solution available for short whisker 0.0040 Again the difference between the two curves may be attributed to the discrete spring connection between the matrix and whisker employed in their [9] study. From Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 it can be observed that the force-displacement response obtained from this study is softer than that de rived in reference [9] for both long and short 0.0025 Fig. 8 shows the comparison of force/displace 0.0020 ment curves for long and short whiskers with analytical solution for a long whisker(Eg. (3).It 0.0015 is apparent froilI Fig. 8 that the long and short whiskers have almost identic: force/displacement responses, except at values very near the force that would initiate fracture of Fig. 7. FEA derived non-linear force-displacement curve of the whisker(of). The same observation was re short a-SiC whisker embedded in Al2O3 matrixA. Mukherjee, H.S. Rao /Computational Materials Science 4 (1995) 249-262 255 t 00020 t 0 000 0002 0 004 0006 0008 0010 Displacement, pm Fig. 6. FEA derived non-linear force-displacement curves of long SIC whisker embedded in Al,O, matrix. which is not true. The present FE model predicts stiffer behaviour than the analytical solution which is expected as the analytical solution is developed for 1-D plane strain conditions. The marginal difference between the force/displace￾ment curve obtained in the present study and that obtained from reference [91 may be due to 0.0045 0.0040 z 0.0035 & :! 2 0.0030 0.0025 0.0020 0.00 I5 0 00 I I , I 0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 Displncement, pm Fig. 7. FEA derived non-linear force-displacement curve of short U-SIC whisker embedded in Al,O, matrix. z 0.0030 6 2 9 0.0025 0.0020 0.0015 L I * 1 , I , I , I n.uuu U.UU? 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.010 Displacement. pm Fig. 8. FEA derived force-displacement curves for long and short a-Sic whisker embedded in Al,O, matrix. discrete spring model employed in reference [9] to model the whisker/matrix interface. Fig. 7 shows the comparison of the computed force/displacement curve for short whisker with that obtained by Laird and Kennedy [9]. There is no analytical solution available for short whisker. Again the difference between the two curves may be attributed to the discrete spring connection between the matrix and whisker employed in their [91 study. From Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 it can be observed that the force-displacement response obtained from this study is softer than that de￾rived in reference [9] for both long and short whiskers. Fig. 8 shows the comparison of force/displace￾ment curves for long and short whiskers with analytical solution for a long whisker (Eq. (3)). It is apparent from Fig. 8 that the long and short whiskers have almost identical non-linear force/displacement responses, except at values very near the force that would initiate fracture of the whisker (af). The same observation was re￾ported by Laird and Kennedy 191