Introduction As the time goes by, technology and science will be under significant effect of new and advanced

materials in which smart alloys has had its prominent place. This type of materials has opened a new chapter in the modern technology due to its unique capabilities. The earliest observations about smartness phenomena refers 1932 which is about Au-Cu. In 1938, revelation and disappearance of a determined phase due to decrease and increase of the temperature in Cu-Zn was reported. At last, the basis for Smartness behaviors and Thermo-elastics was explained in between 1949 to 1951. Afterward, these alloys have become more of use hence nowadays they abound in Aerospace Engineering, Bioengineering, Medical, Automobile, Robotic Industries and etc. Smart Alloys are the type of materials that can recover the permanent deformations and strains exerted on them and eventually form as the initial shape. Smart alloys perform because of a change in the phase or the crystals of the material in which the alloy transforms from a strong and stable structure in a higher temperature (astenit) to stable and deformable structure in a lower temperature. The application of smart alloy wire in the polymer composites has improved. Developing these types of materials requires a fairly precise connection between internal strain distribution method and internal thermodynamic loading stress and the properties of the desired microscopic constitutive materials, the parameters pertaining to constitutive materials and microstructure are obliged to be chosen correctly in order to provide an optimized pattern of microstructure.[1] The intermediate part between the smart alloy wire and the matrix plays an important role in mechanical properties of composite material.

Fracture and delamination along the intermediate parts among the phases plays a significant role in expressing the hardness and softness of multiphase materials.
This issue has brought about many important researches about the separation of mutual surfaces. The delamination of the mutual surfaces can be modeled by the traditional fracture mechanics, nodal analytical technique. The increase of different expectations for material use in engineering applications has made the development of the smart materials and corresponding materials indispensable. The first research about yarn composites with smart alloys yarns was conducted by Rogers in 1990. [6] Rogers et al.[6] used mixed law in order to expand the micromechanic composites with smart alloy yarns including layers made up of epoxy- graphite and epoxy-nitinol as the base composite. Analyzing the smart alloy wires reinforced composite plates, they derived correlations to scrutinize the behavior of this type of materials against mechanical loads. Wang et al.[7,8] studied the effect of initiating stress distribution on minimum supplementary energy which enabled them to achieve separation critical stress by pull out test for a smart alloy wire with the epoxy matrix and also simulated the separation process by finite element analysis and show that the

shape and direction of the tiny combinations in composites(small particle scale) has an important role in mechanical behavior. In order to achieve the intermediate faces behavior between smart alloy wire and matrix and also intermediate face stress distribution and bending properties in reinforced yarn composites with smart alloy yarns, simple tension and pull out tests are conducted.[8] Wang et al.[10,11] presented an algorithm to automatically produce 2-dimensional representative volume element for a smart alloy yarn composites with long and single directed yarns. Then, the effect of random distribution of the yarns on lateral modulus was investigated. Mei et al.[12] conducted the same research in order to determine the features of yarn composites with smart alloy yarns. They derived the required relations to analyze the heat buckling, random vibrations, post heat buckling and the random vibrations of the heat buckling. The effect of yarns or smart alloy plate usage in manufacturing smart composites has already been studied in several articles. Investigation of intermediate parts between the smart alloy wire and the matrix is of cases which have been rarely followed. In this present work, the intermediate part between matrix and wire is studied. In this regard, pull out test is used and the results are modeled in finite element software. Experimental details: Two types of experiments were done. At the beginning, the smart wires were individually tested under tension and their tension properties (modulus and transform stress) are extracted. Hence, to find the strength of intermediate matrix and wires, pull out test is done. 1-1 wire tensile test Properties of smart wires vary due to temperature change. On the other hand, loading on this material causes phase change and property change. Regarding the modeling of the smart alloy material and pull out test are done in the finite element software, properties of smart alloy material are required. To find the mechanical properties and using them, simple tensile test should be done. As mentioned earlier, reinforcing wires are of smart alloy wire material and G&H companys product. Sample wires were of 0.3 and 0.4 millimeter diameter and were tested in 25 and 45 Celsius temperature. In order to generate the phase change from Martensite to Astenit in the wires, the test was done in 45 Celsius temperature. A DC-voltage source was used to provide the desired temperature. This source kept the wires temperature still during the test.

Fig.1-smart alloy wire A: preparation for simple tensile test B: After simple tensile test 1-2 Single fiber pull-out test In this test, a piece of smart alloy wire is laid in Epoxy matrix and is pulled from inside of matrix by tensile testing machine in order to determine the properties of cohesion interface between smart alloy wire and matrix. This test is investigated under different pre-strained and in order to exert the prestrain, a specific holder is designed and manufactured. Matrixs used in the test are Epoxy made by Mokarar Company. After designing and manufacturing process and providing the raw material (smart alloy wire and matrix), it is time to make the samples, cylindrical samples with radius and height of 2 cm and 6 cm, respectively. The samples are prepared for wires with diameter of 0.3 and 0.4 mm and prestrains of 0%, 2% and 4%. Then, the pull out test is done.

Fig.2- pull out test sample Given results by Pull out test
50 40
force (N)

30 20 10 0 0 5 10 15
displacement(mm)

Fig.3- behavior of a 0.4mm diameter smart alloy wire without pre-strain in 26 C in Pull out test
50 40
force(N)

30 20 10 0 0 5
displacement(mm)

10

15

Fig 4 - behavior of a 0.4mm diameter smart alloy wire with pre-strain of 2% in 26 C in Pull out test

PH264
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 10 15
Displacement(mm)

Fig 5- behavior of a 0.4mm diameter smart alloy wire with pre-strain of 4% in 26 C in Pull out test

force(N) Force(N)

40 30 20 10 0 0 1 2 3 4 5
Displacement(mm)

Fig 6- behavior of a 0.3mm diameter smart alloy wire without pre-strain in 26 C in Pull out test

40 30
Force(N)

20 10 0 0 2 4 6 8 10
Displacement(mm)

Fig 7- behavior of a 0.3mm diameter smart alloy wire with pre-strain of 2% in 26 C in Pull out test
40 30
Force(N)

20 10 0 0 5
Displacement(mm)

10

Fig 8- behavior of a 0.3mm diameter smart alloy wire with pre-strain of 4% in 26 C in Pull out test With respect to results and formulas related to cohesive zone theory[9,13] the amount of maximum shear stress in interface and the values related to the constants of cohesive zone theory are calculated.

. /,
In which ( ) . / ( )

)-

In above correlations,

denote smart alloy wire surface, matrixs section

surface, smart alloy wires Young modulus, matrixs Young modulus and matrixs Poisson ratio, respectively. Also a denotes radius of smart alloy wire and b denotes matrixs radius and l is the height of the sample. Using the results and formulas above conclude in the following chart:

sample PH260 PH262 PH264 PS260 PS262 PS264

Basic Models

a(mm) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.15 0.15 0.15

b(mm) 18 18 18 18 18 18

F(N) 41.43 45.42 55.08 34.53 32.37 31.91

Ef(GPa) 27 27 27 31.5 31.5 31.5

m 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

max(MPa) 16.35 17.93 21.75 19.85 16.3 15.6

Table 1- effect of pre-strain on maximum shear stress in pull out test

SMA Structural Equation An incremental constitutive model of SMA is used to predict and analyze the behavior of SMA. The developed stress and strain correlations (incremental) in SMA are as below

, -{* +

+}

In which , and E denote total SMA strain, total SMA stress and elasticity module based on Volume fraction of Martensite, tr denotes transformation strain. This strain is reached by the phase transformation which is explained later.

is Volume fraction of martensite and is maximum transform strain which are the constants of SMA material. These constants are reached by means of simple tension test in a temperature which the SMA wire is in the state of Astinite. In order to explain the effect of pressure on phase change, the relationship of pressure effect on phase change is modeled by the means of Drucker-Prager loading Function and the behavior of material considered an isotropic material.
( )

In which is the innate property of material and Tr is the trace operator. Also, M which is the pressure and tension response is denoted as below:

Since we know that two phase changes happen at the time of loading and unloading on the part, the )and also phase change of martensite to astenit phase change of Astenit to Martensite (

( )can be studied by the equations mentioned above. However the evolution of volume fraction of Martensite is as below ( {
( )

( )

That H is used to explain the phase change direction. { { ( ) ( )

( ) ( )

In which , , and are the material parameters and denote initiating and final stress of the change in loading and unloading. 2-2 Cohesive Zone Model
Fracture and delamination along the intermediate parts among the phases plays a significant role in expressing the hardness and softness of multiphase materials. This issue has caused many significant researches to be conducted about mutual surface separation. The mutual surface delamination can be modeled by traditional mechanical fracture and nodal analysis methods. In previous analyses, a quite strong mutual surface without any disconnection or a total weak mutual surface with elastic natural pressure support disability is utilized. Also methods representing fracture mechanisms regarding the softening correlations between tensions and separations can be used directly. The critical fracture energy which is the required energy to separate mutual surfaces is represented by these methods. These methods are Cohesive Zone Model. Mutual surfaces of materials can be presented by a specific group of mut5ual surface elements or contact elements and the model can be used to explain mutual

surface behavior. Cohesive Zone Model was expanded by Barnbelt [2] and dugdeil[3] to explain the relationship between the separation and traction along interfaces. In this section, the destructive separation model is represented as the intermediate [4,5]. The intermediate cohesive zone model is used to simulate the mutual surface cohesive zone between the wire and matrix. Many cohesive laws have been suggested in previous scripts and are often categorized as linear, bilinear and nonlinear softening laws. In this study, the planar between memory alloy wire and matrix is presented by a specific group of interfacial elements and the final model of cohesive zone law was used to determine the basic behavior of the mutual surface including normal parts and in order to ease the calculation, section was also used.

Fig. 9- interfacial element [9] The interfacial element is shown in figure 9 with a thickness of approximately zero and four nodes that the upper and lower faces display the surfaces for memory alloy wire and matrix. The normal and shear displacement are denoted with n and t, respectively. Un and Ut are the displacements for elements in normal and shear directions. Also, and are the surface displacements between the matrix

surfaces and memory alloy wire which are derived from the correlations below

Consequently normal and shear stress can be derived from the correlations below

In which

is the initial estimation of interfacial thickness. The mutual surface between the wire and matrix is extra thin and 10-5 m is set for it.[9] Also according to the relationship between
pressure and tension, basic element equation for intermediate element in 2 dimension state is as below

, -,

, -0

D is the interfacial strength and is concluded from the separation displacement which is different from memory alloy wire and matrix. Moreover, distinct guidelines have been suggested in order to choose

the strength of the mutual surface e.g. linear, bilinear, nonlinear and exponential equations-(relations) and etc. in this probe, the final model is chosen to simulate the cohesive zone considering the pull out test[24] For this model, interfacial potential is derived from the following correlations[9] ( ) [ . /

( )

are the constants of is the maximum surface traction in mutual surface; materials denoting interfacial normal and shear features, respectively. Normal and shear traction are derived from the following relationships
In which

That interfacial traction is concluded with the use of equations (2-35)and(2-36) as well.

. /

. /

Normal and shear separation are denoted with

, respectively and interact as below

Furthermore, the effective length of intermediate element plays an important role in properties and it is considered Software Analysis Simulation In this section, the APDL code is used to generate smart composite with SMA fibers and Epoxy matrix. This composite is made of a single SMA wire and its matrix around that represent the software analysis of the pull out test. Since the geometry of this problem and its loading type are axial symmetry, the 3 dimension model can be analyzed as a 2 dimension model. According to Fig. 23 regarding the dimensions of the sample, 2 dimension model is created. The final solution for this problem is achieved by revolution of the surface around central axis of the memory alloy wire. due to the results of previous tests and articles[8,15,16].

Fig 10- 3D model from the pull out test

Fig 11 Sample test modeling

Cohesive zone theory is used for interfacial zone. As mentioned earlier, the modeling of cohesive zone is a nonlinear analysis and the most important obstacle of the analysis is the convergence of the results. The initial surface separation has a significant impact on the composite stiffness and handling(displacement). Therefore, the size of the mesh is to be minimized to ensure the results. After the review of the application and obtaining the results, the diagrams pertaining to pull out test can be acquired and the effect of interfacial zone is to be studied.

Fig 12- the behavior of cohesive zone and its displacement in radius direction

400 350 300 )MPa( 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 strain 0.08 0.1 0.12

Fig 13- results from numerical solution and Pull out test Conclusion At this present research, pull out test was conducted for the memory alloy wire from a matrix in different pre-strains and on different wires. After conducting the tests on the H and S wires and the study of the force-displacement diagrams pertaining to different pre-strains, the process shows that the required force to pull out the H wire is increased when the pre-strains increase. H wire is a memory alloy wire with the transform temperature of 37 C . This wire is in martensite phase (soft phase) at the ambient temperature and according to the increase of pre-strains , it is observed the recovery stress is born in the part. After testing, first the applied force is expended to overcome the force recovers. Hence, the required force to pull the wire out increases in the force-displacement graph. It is observed that the amount of force will increase 19% corresponding to 4% pre-strain. Also, it shows an increase of 21.3% corresponding to 2% pre-strain. In the other test where the S wire is used, the required force to pull out the wire will reduce by the increase of pre-strain. The S wire is a memory alloy wire with the transform temperature of 25C and this wire is in Astenite phase(hard phase) in the ambient temperature and regarding that the memory alloy wire is in Astenite phase, the transformation temperature changes according to stress increase and in the constant temperature, phase change occur when adjusting stress and shifts to martensite (soft phase). Regarding that phase change happens in the part and pre-strain generate recovery force, the behavior of the graph is different for the wire S. it is observed that the required force to pull out is reduced when pre-strains are increased. This force reduction is due to phase change (the material shifts in soft phase)

the figures show that the amount of force reduces 7.6% when pre-strains are exerted 4%. However, this shows 1.4% reduction when pre-strains are exerted 2%.