You are on page 1of 7

Composites Science and Technology 88 (2013) 172177

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composites Science and Technology


jou r n a l h o m ep ag e: www. el sevi er .co m /l oca t e/co mp sci t
ech

Tensile and interfacial properties of unidirectional ax/glass ber


reinforced hybrid composites
Yongli Zhang, Yan Li , Hao Ma, Tao Yu
School of Aerospace Engineering and Applied Mechanics, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, PR China

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 14 April 2013
Received in revised form 18 August 2013
Accepted 27 August 2013
Available online 11 September 2013
Keywords:
Natural ber
A. Hybrid composites
B. Mechanical properties
B. Fracture toughness
D. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM)

a b s t r a c t
This paper studied the mechanical behaviors of unidirectional ax and glass ber reinforced hybrid composites with the aim of investigation on the hybrid effects of the composites made by natural and synthetic bers. The tensile properties of the hybrid composites were improved with the increasing of
glass ber content. A modied model for calculating the tensile strength was given based on the hybrid
effect of tensile failure strain. The stacking sequence was shown to obviously inuence the tensile
strength and tensile failure strain, but not the tensile modulus. The fracture toughness and interlaminar
shear strength of the hybrid composites were even higher than those of glass ber reinforced
composites due to the excellent hybrid performance of the hybrid interface. These macro-scale results
have been cor- related with the twist ax yarn structure, rough surface of ax ber and ber bridging
between ax ber layers and glass ber layers.
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In recent years, the usage of natural bers as a replacement for
synthetic bers such as carbon and glass bers in composite materials has gained interest among researchers throughout the world.
Extensive studies on natural bers, such as sisal [1], jute [2,3] and
ax [4,5], showed natural bers has the potential to be an effective
reinforcement for composite materials. The renewed interest of
natural bers over synthetic bers was that they are abundant in
nature and are also renewable raw materials. The usage of natural
bers also provided a healthier working condition than that of
glass bers [6]. Furthermore, natural bers offer good thermal
properties and excellent acoustic performance. These advantages
made natural bers gain applications in automotive, packaging
and construction industries [7]. However, the products made from
natural ber composite were still limited to the non-structure or
sub-structure applications, for example, the interiors of cars due
to their relatively poor mechanical properties [8]. Different approaches have been attempted to increase the mechanical properties of natural ber reinforced composites, such as chemical or
physical modications of the matrix, bers or both of the components. Mohanty et al. [9] found that alkali treatment increased
the bending strength of jute/biopol composites by 30%. Xie et al.
[10] reviewed the inuence of silane coupling agents used for

Corresponding author. Address: School of Aerospace Engineering and Applied

Mechanics, Tongji University, 1239 Siping Road, Shanghai 200092, China. Tel.: +86
021 65985919; fax: +86 021 65983950.
E-mail address: liyan@tongji.edu.cn (Y. Li).
0266-3538/$ - see front matter
2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2013.08.037

natural ber/polymer composites. Besides, hybridizing the natural


bers with a stronger synthetic ber could signicantly improve
the strength and stiffness of the natural ber reinforced composites [11]. Earlier works done on the natural ber/glass ber hybrid
composites basically focused on the short bers [12]. Nayak et al.
[13] proved that hybridization with short glass ber, the storage
modulus of short bamboo ber reinforced polypropylene composites could be improved. Velmurugan and Manikandan [14] reported addition of glass ber to palmyra ber in the matrix could
increase the mechanical properties and decrease the moisture
absorption of the composites.
The comparison on the mechanical properties of different natural bers and E-glass ber was shown in Table 1. It was seen that
ax bers possess superior mechanical properties over other natural bers. The tensile properties and elongation at break of natural
bers are all lower than those of E-glass ber. However, the
density of natural bers are almost 1/2 of that of glass ber.
Therefore, hybridizing ax bers with glass bers might yield a
material with interesting properties (lighter in weight, higher in
strength and modulus and greener than synthetic materials) and
the new hybrid effect might be revealed from the point of views
of properties matches of the component bers and the structure
characteristics of natural ber yarns.
In this work, unidirectional ax bers and glass bers were selected to make the hybrid composite laminates so that the hybrid
effects could be revealed more easily. The mechanical properties,
such as tensile, interlaminar shear and interlaminar fracture
toughness properties of the hybrid composite laminates, were
studied. The inuence of hybrid ratio and stacking sequence were

Y. Zhang
Y. Zhang
et al.
et / al.
Composites
/ Composites
Science
Science
andand
Technology
Technology
88 (2013)
88 (2013)
172177
172177

17

Table 1
Mechanical properties of natural bers and glass ber [12,15].
Fibers

Density
3
(g/cm )

Flax
Hemp
Sisal
Jute
E-glass

1.2
1.48
1.33
1.46
2.5

Tensile
strength (MPa)

Youngs
modulus
(GPa)

Elongation
at break (%)

8001500
550900
600700
400800
20003500

6080
70
38
1030
70

1.21.6
1.6
23
1.8
2.5

2. Materials and experimental


2.1. Materials
The unidirectional ax fabric was supplied by Belgium Lone
3
Company, which had a density of 1.201.25 g/cm and aerial
2
weight of 200 g/m . The unidirectional glass fabric was supplied
by Zhejiang Mengtai Composites Company, which also had an aer2
ial weight of 200 g/m . Phenolic resin was supplied by the Institute
of Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences.
2.2. Fabrication of composite laminates
The composite laminates were manufactured by compression
molding. The curing pressure was 1.8 MPa for obtaining the least
amount of voids in the composites. The curing temperature was
140 C for 1 h to get 100% curing of the resin. Six types of unidirectional hybrid composites with different hybrid ratios shown in
Table 2 were made to investigate the effect of hybrid ratio on the
tensile properties of the composites which included one ax ber
reinforced polymer composite (FFRP), 4 types of ax/glass
ber reinforced hybrid polymer composites (HFRP) and one glass
ber reinforced polymer composite (GFRP). The ber volume
fractions of ax and glass in the composites were varying while
the total ber volume fractions of the composites were kept the
same which were around 67%. Another three types of hybrid composites were made to investigate the inuence of stacking sequences on the tensile properties of the hybrid composites
shown in Table 3. The total ber volume fraction and ber volume
fractions for each component bers were all the same (total ber:
67%; ax ber: 35%; glass ber: 32%).
3. Experimental
Tensile properties of the composites were measured based on
ASTM D3039 and the test speed was 3 mm/min. The nominal

Designation

Volume
fraction
ratio
(ax/glass)

Ply number
ratio
(ax/glass)

FFRP

100/0

10/0

2G8F

86/14

8/2

4G6F

69/31

6/4

6G4F

50/50

4/6

Stacking sequence

GF
GGFF

investigated and the hybrid mechanisms were revealed with the


aid of the Scanning Electronic Microscopy (SEM) observations.

Table 2
Hybrid composite laminates with different hybrid ratios.

GGGGFFFF
GFRP ply;

, FFRP ply.

dimensions of the specimens were 15 mm 1 mm 250 mm.


Short beam shear tests were performed based on ASTM D2344 to
measure the interlaminar shear strength of the composites. The
test speed was 1 mm/min and the span-to-depth ratio was 4:1.
The sizes of the specimens were 12 mm 6 mm 32 mm. Mode
I interlaminar fracture toughness were measured according to
ASTM D5528-01 with the test speed of 2 mm/min. All the mechanical tests were carried out by a universal mechanical testing machine, CSS-44010, manufactured by Changchun Testing Machine
Institute, China. In each case, ve specimens were tested to obtain
the average values. The micro-structures and the failure modes of
the composites were observed with a SEM (PHILIPS XL30 FEG). The
surfaces were coated with gold before observation.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Tensile behaviors and properties of ax/glass ber reinforced
hybrid composites
4.1.1. Tensile behaviors and properties of the hybrid composites with
different hybrid ratios
The tensile modulus of unidirectional ax/glass ber reinforced
hybrid composites, shown in Fig. 1a, increased with the increasing
of the relative volume fraction of glass bers. The theoretical values predicted by the Rule of Mixture (ROM) were also shown in
the same gure. It can be seen that ROM prediction values essentially agreed with the experimental values as expected since there
was strain compatibility throughout the hybrid composites for
measuring the modulus (i.e., initial elastic deformation) and glass
bers acted as an improvement in resulting in better stiffness for
the hybrid composites [16].
The effect of hybrid ratio on the tensile strength of ax/glass
ber reinforced hybrid composites was shown in Fig. 1b. The
tensile strength increased with the increasing of the relative
volume con- tent of glass bers. However, the tensile strength of
the HFRP did not obey to the ROM since the bers with low
elongation were ex- pected to break when the failure strain was
reached [12,17]. The stressstrain curves of the FFRP, GFRP and
HFRP, shown in Fig. 2a, indicated that FFRP possessed lower
strength and smaller tensile failure elongation compared to those
of GFRP. Therefore the tensile behavior of the hybrid composites
could be divided into two types due to the differences in failure
elongation of ax ber and glass - ber, shown in Eq. (1) [18]. If
the volume fraction of ax bers in the hybrid composites was
high, the hybrid composites would fail when the tensile strain
reached the failure elongation of FFRP. However, if
the volume fraction of glass bers in the hybrid composites was
high, the FFRP phase would also fail at rst. But the hybrid
compos- ites would still keep their integrity until the failure of
the GFRP
phase occurred due to the bigger failure elongation of glass
ber.

r HT

V m rf V f ef Eg V g ;

V m rg V g ;

crit

crit

8G2F

27/73

2/8

GFRP

0/100

0/10

17

Table 3
Hybrid composites with different stacking sequences.
Designation
Stacking sequence

GFRP ply;

, FFRP ply.

Vg

Vg

17

where rHT was the tensile


strength of the HFRP. rg, Eg
and Vg were

Y. Zhang
Y. Zhang
et al.
et / al.
Composites
/ Composites
Science
Science
andand
Technology
Technology
88 (2013)
88 (2013)
172177
172177

17

the tensile strength, tensile modulus and relative volume fractions


of glass ber. ef, rf and Vf are the tensile failure strain, tensile
strength and relative volume fractions of ax ber. Vm and Vcrit were

Fig. 2. Tensile stressstrain curves and failure strain of ax/glass ber reinforced
hybrid composites with different hybrid ratios (a) tensile stressstrain curves (b)
tensile failure strain.

Fig. 1. Tensile properties of ax/glass ber reinforced hybrid composites with


different hybrid ratio (a) tensile modulus (b) tensile strength.

the volume fraction of matrix and critical relative volume fraction of


glass ber respectively. The critical glass ber volume fraction of
the hybrid composites was calculated as 49.6% by equating the
two equations in Eq. (1). The theoretical tensile strength thus obtained were listed in Fig. 1b. A big difference between the theoretical values and the experimental results was observed.
Therefore, the synergistic effect of failure strain between ax
ber and glass ber must play an important role on the failure of
the hybrid composites and should be considered. A linear
relationship could be easily observed from the tensile failure
strain of the composites against the hybrid ratio in Fig. 2b.
Therefore, the tensile failure strain of the HFRP eh may be predicted
by the following equation:

eh

ef

eg

2
where ef and eg were the tensile failure strains of the FFRP and
GFRP, respectively.
So the tensile strength of the hybrid composites could be predicted by the modied Eq. (3) based on the hybrid effect of failure
strain and the results were also given in Fig. 1b. A good
consistency between the modied theoretical values and the
experimental data could be observed. Therefore, as long as the
contents of the compo- nent materials were known, the tensile
strength of unidirectional natural ber and synthetic ber
reinforced hybrid composites could be predicted by Eq. (3).

rHT

eh

Eg

Ef

gated. All the hybrid composites had the same total ber volume
fraction and ber volume fractions of ax and glass bers in the
composites were all the same. Therefore, only the stacking sequence would be the matter.
The inuence of stacking sequence on the tensile properties of
the hybrid composites was shown in Table 4. It could be seen
that the tensile modulus for all the hybrid composites were
almost the same. Tensile modulus was obtained from the elastic
stage of the tensile stress strain curve. In this stage, no damages
would occur. The interface did not play a major role for the
elastic modulus. Therefore the stacking sequences showed no
additional inuence on the tensile modulus of the HFRP if the
ber volume fractions of glass ber and ax ber in the
hybrid composites were the same [17].
However, the stacking sequence of the FFRP plies and the GFRP
plies showed bigger inuence on the tensile strength and tensile
failure strains of the hybrid composites. The tensile strength and
failure strain of GF type composite were the highest among the
three types of hybrid composites. More ber layers interaction between ax ber plies and glass ber plies (i.e., more FFRP and
GFRP

Table 4
Tensile properties of ax/glass ber reinforced hybrid composites with different
stacking sequences.

3
Composites

Tensile modulus
(GPa)

Tensile strength
(MPa)

Failure strain
(%)

GF
GGFF
GGGGFFFF

40.1 1.7
40.8 1.4
39.7 0.6

450.1 16.5
412.5 12.7
392.5 20.0

1.09 0.02
0.99 0.04
0.96 0.06

4.1.2. Tensile behaviors and properties of the hybrid composites with


different stacking sequences
The effects of ber layer stacking sequence on the tensile properties of ax/glass ber reinforced hybrid composites were investi-

Fig. 3. Fiber bridging between ax ber and glass ber on the tensile specimen of GF type hybrid composite.

Fig. 4. Interlaminar shear strength of the GFRP, FFRP and HFRP.


Fig. 6. Delamination resistance curves (R curves) from DCB Test of FFRP, GFRP and
HFRP.

interfaces) led to higher tensile strength and bigger failure strain.


From the observations of the failure modes of the GF type
compos- ites shown in Fig. 3, the rough surface of ax ber and
the twisted ax yarn structure played very obvious bridging
roles on the adhesion between FFRP plies and GFRP plies.
Hence improved stress transfer efciency on
the hybrid
interface was obtained. More hybrid interfaces led to higher
tensile strength and tensile failure strain.

4.2. Interlaminar properties of ax/glass ber reinforced hybrid


composites
The interlaminar shear strength and interlaminar fracture
toughness of GFRP, FFRP and HFRP were investigated. All the com-

Fig. 5. SEM of (a) ax yarn, (b) glass fabric, (c) ax ber and (d) glass ber.

Fig. 7. Failure specimens of (a) GFRP, (b) FFRP and (c) HFRP.

posites had the same total ber volume fraction (67%). The ber
volume fraction of ax ber in the HFRP was 35% and the layup
sequence in the HFRP was one layer glass ber and one layer ax
ber interply hybrid.
Fig. 4 shows the interlaminar shear strength of FFRP, GFRP and
HFRP measured by short beam shear tests. It could be seen that
the HFRP possessed the highest shear strength, compared with
those of GFRP and FFRP. Improvements on interlaminar shear
strength by hybridizing ax and glass
bers signicantly
depended on the ber bridging between glass bers and ax
bers which was mainly caused by the twisted ax yarn structure
and rough surface of ax ber compared to their glass
counterparts, as shown in Fig. 5. The ax yarns were made by
twisting a bundle of short single ax - bers for industry
application requirements as the lengths of most natural bers are
less than 20 mm due to their natural growth characteristics.
Therefore, some ax single bers stretched from the ax yarns
which made the ax yarn structure like a tree full of branches
(Fig. 5a). However, the glass ber yarns showed the

regular-knit structure (Fig. 5b). And ax ber (Fig. 5c) showed


much rougher surfaces than that of the glass ber (Fig. 5d). All of
above produced large amount of ber bridging and ber entangling
within ax/glass ber hybrid interface and the out-layers ax bers served as the Z-directional reinforcement, thus contributed
to the increased interlaminar shear strength of HFRP.
Fig. 6 shows the delamination resistance curves (R-curves) of
FFRP, GFRP and HFRP obtained from double cantilever beam
(DCB) tests. The strain energy release rate (GI) values obtained
from the R-curves were 0.4 kJ/m2 for GFRP which was the lowest
and 0.55 kJ/m2 and 0.56 kJ/m2 for FFRP and HFRP, respectively. It
could also be seen that more energy was needed for the initiation
of the cracks for HFRP, FFRP compared with GFRP.
Fig. 7 compared the fractured specimens of FFRP, GFRP and
HFRP. Very clean delaminated surfaces of GFRP (Fig. 7a) were observed with almost no ber bridging due to the regular-knit structures of glass ber fabrics. An easier path for crack propagation
was expected. Large amount ax ber bridgings occurred on the
frac- ture surface of FFRP (Fig. 7b) resulted in higher fracture
toughness. A completely different fracture surfaces for HFRP
specimens com- pared to FFRP and GFRP have been observed (Fig.
7c). It was seen that the twisted ax yarn structures and rough
surface of ax bers led to a large number of bers bridging
between ax yarns, ax - bers and glass
bers, which
contributed to the improved fracture toughness of HFRP [19]. The
failure surface of HFRP was observed by SEM as shown in Fig. 8.
There were lots of glass bers torn out form the fractured surface
of glass ber layer (Fig. 8a) and plenty of glass bers bonded on
the fractured surface of ax ber layer (Fig. 8b) for HFRP due
to the easier separation of glass bers in their fabrics compared
with FFRP, in which not only the polymer matrix bonding forces
but also the mechanical forces caused by the twist contributed
to the connection between the single ax - bers. Thus, the torn
out glass bers played as the bridgings be- tween the ax ber
layer and glass ber layer, which led to the increased interlaminar
fracture toughness.

5. Conclusions
The tensile properties of the ax/glass ber reinforced hybrid
composites were improved with the increasing of glass ber
content. It was found that the tensile modulus of the HFRP followed
the ROM very well. And a theoretical model used to predict
the tensile

Fig. 8. SEM photographs of mode I delamination fracture interface for HFRP.

strength of ax/glass ber reinforced hybrid composites was proposed based on the hybrid effect of tensile failure strain. The
stacking sequence showed great inuence on the tensile strength of
ax/glass ber reinforced hybrid composites, but not on the tensile
modulus if the ber volume in the HFRP were the same. More
different ber interactions or more different phases interfaces led
to higher tensile strength and longer tensile failure strain.
The interlaminar shear strength and the interlaminar fracture
toughness of ax/glass ber reinforced hybrid composites were
higher than those of GFRP. The twist ax yarn structure and the
rough surface of ax bers led to remarkable bers bridging
between ax bers, ax yarn and glass bers, thus improved the
interlaminar properties of HFRP.
Acknowledgement
This project is supported by the National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) (Grant No. 2010CB631105).
References
[1] Barreto ACH, Rosa DS, Fechine PBA, Mazzetto SE. Properties of sisal bers
treated by
alkali solution and their application into cardanol-based
biocomposites. Compos A Appl Sci 2011;42:492500.
[2] Behera Ajaya Kumar, Avancha Sridevi, Basak Ratan Kumar, Sen Ramkrishna,
Adhikari Basudam. Fabrication and characterizations of biodegradable jute
reinforced soy based green composites. Carbohydr Polym 2012;88:32935.
[3] Plackett David, Andersen Tom Lgstrup, Pedersen Walther Batsberg, Nielsen
Lotte. Biodegradable composites based on L-polylactideand jute bres. Compos
Sci Technol 2003;63:128796.
[4] Liang S, Gning PB, Guillaumat L. A comparative study of fatigue behaviour of
ax/epoxy and glass/epoxy composites. Compos Sci Technol 2012;72:53543.

[5] Andersons J, Joffe R. Estimation of the tensile strength of an oriented ax berreinforced polymer composite. Compos A Appl Sci 2011;42:122935.
[6] Joshi SV, Drzal LT, Mohanty AK, Arora S. Are natural ber composites
environmentally superior to glass ber reinforced composites? Compos Part
A Appl Sci 2004;35:3716.
[7] Davoodi MM, Sapuan SM, Ahmad D, Ali Aidy, Khalina A, Jonoobi Mehdi.
Mechanical properties of hybrid kenaf/glass reinforced epoxy composite for
passenger car bumper beam. Mater Des 2010;31(10):492732 .
[8] Li Yan, Mai Yiu-Wing, Ye Lin. Sisal bre and its composites: a review of recent
developments. Compos Sci Technol 2000;60:203755.
[9] Mohanty AK, Khan Mubarak A, Hinrichsen G. Surface modication of jute and
its inuence on performance of biodegradable jute-fabric/biopol composites.
Compos Sci Technol 2000;60(11):1524.
[10] Xie Yanjun, Hill Callum AS, Xiao Zefang, Militz Holger, Mai Carsten. Silane
coupling agents used for natural ber/polymer composites: a review. Compos
Part A Appl Sci 2010;41:80619.
[11] Jawaid M, Abdul Khalil HPS. Cellulosic synthetic bre reinforced polymer
hybrid composites: a review. Carbohydr Polym 2011;86:118.
[12] Jarukumjorn Kasama, Suppakarn Nitinat. Effect of glass ber hybridization on
properties of sisal berpolypropylene composites. Compos B Eng
2009;40:6237.
[13] Nayak Sanjay K, Mohanty Smita, Samal Sushanta K. Inuence of short bamboo/
glass ber on the thermal, dynamic mechanical and rheological properties of
polypropylene hybrid composites. Mater Sci Eng A 2009;523:328.
[14] Velmurugan R, Manikandan V. Mechanical properties of palmyra/glass ber
hybrid composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci 2007;38:221626.
[15] Wambua Paul, Ivens Jan, Verpoest Ignaas. Natural bres: can they replace glass
in bre reinforced plastics? Compos Sci Technol 2003;63:125964.
[16] Qiu Yiping, Schwartz Peter. Micromechanical behavior of Kevlar-149/S-glass
hybrid seven-ber microcomposites: I. Tensile strength of the hybrid
composite. Compos Sci Technol 1993;47(3):289301.
[17] Kretsis G. A review of the tensile, compressive, exural and shear properties
of hybrid bre-reinforced plastics. Composites 1987;18(1):1323.
[18] Khatri C Subhash, Koczak Michael J. Thick-section as4-graphite/e-glass/pps
hybrid composites: Part I. Tensile behavior. Compos Sci Technol
1996;56(2):18192.
[19] Le Duigou Antoine, Davies Peter, Baley Christophe. Macroscopic analysis of
interfacial properties of ax/PLA biocomposites. Compos Sci Technol
2010;70:161220.

You might also like