COMPARISON OF TENSILE AND PEEL BOND STRENGTHS OF RESILIENT LINERS
COMPARISON OF TENSILE AND PEEL BOND STRENGTHS OF RESILIENT LINERS
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/0022-3913(94)90194-5
复制
发表时间：
1994-05-01
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
KUTAY, O
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
KUTAY, O
先前的研究表明，用于评估粘合强度的测试方法与弹性衬里的失效模式之间几乎没有一致性。本研究通过 180 度剥离和对接拉伸强度测试评估了弹性衬垫的粘合强度特性。 72 个样本被分为剥离粘合样本组和拉伸粘合样本组，然后再分为四个测试组以评估每个弹性衬里。使用 Instron 万能试验机进行测试，拉伸样品的十字头速度为 2 毫米/分钟，剥离样品的十字头速度为 5 毫米/分钟。在拉伸测试中，除了 Novus 和 Palasiv-62 衬垫之间之外，弹性衬垫之间的拉伸粘合强度和剥离粘合强度差异显着。 Molloplast-B 和 Novus 衬里的失效模式在拉伸粘合和剥离粘合测试方法之间存在显着差异。结论是，粘合强度特性可能会根据所使用的测试方法而变化。
Previous studies have shown little agreement between the test methods used to assess the bond strength and the mode of failure of resilient liners. This study evaluated the bond strength characteristics of resilient liners by means of 180-degree peeling and butt tensile strength testing. Seventy-two specimens were divided into peel bond and tensile bond specimen groups and were then subdivided into four test groups to evaluate each resilient liner. Tests were conducted with an Instron universal testing machine at a cross-head speed of 2 mm/minute for the tensile specimens and 5 mm/min for the peel specimens. Tensile bond strength and peel bond strength varied significantly among resilient liners except between Novus and Palasiv-62 liners in tensile testing. The mode of failure of Molloplast-B and Novus liners was significantly different between the tensile bond and peel bond test methods. It was concluded that bond strength characteristics can vary according to the test method used.