Study on the Effect of Matrix Properties on the Mechanical Performance of Carbon Fabric Composites

Abstract:

Carbon fiber (CF) reinforced compositesusing different types of vinylester (VE)resin includingconventional VE resinhave been prepared. The mechanical performance were characterized by different tests, such as tensile, mode-I interlaminarfracture toughness, tension-tension fatigue and scanning electron microscope (SEM).The experimental results showed that the tensile strength of CF/VE composites changed at a wide range from 22.3% to 37.8% in comparison with the CF/conventional VE composite due to resin type, where the strain at failure was varying. The tensile strength increased with an increase of adhesive strength between carbon fiber and VE resin characterized by the microdroplet test. Namely, a good correlation between the tensile strength of composites and the adhesive strength was found. On the other hand, almost an inverse correlation was found between the tensile strength of composites and the interlaminar fracture toughness of composites obtained by DCB (double cantilever beams) tests. There was no apparent correlation found between the strain at failure for pure resins and the tensile strength of composites.Thefatigue life of CF/VE compositesincreased as well as the tensile strength with an increase of the adhesive strength between carbon fiber and the resin. The samples sometime survived 1000 times longer than that of CF/conventional VE compositewhen the maximum cycle stress was 70% of the tensile strength of the strongest composite.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volume 646)
• Pages: 38-43
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.646.38
• Online since: January 2013
• Authors: Yong Zheng Shao, Nguyen T. Phong, Kazuya Okubo, Toru Fujii, Ou Shibata, Yukiko Fujita
• Keywords: Carbon Fiber (CF), Composite, Tension-Tension Fatigue, Vinylester

References

[1] W. E. Daniels, ed. Encyclopedia of Polymer Science and Engineering Vol. 17; Wiley: New York, (1985).

[2] H. Li, A.C. Rosario, S.V. Davis, T. Glass: J. Adv. Mater. Vol 28(1997), p.55.

[3] P. K. Mallick: FiberReinforcedComposites, Ch. 1. Marcel Dekker, New York (1993).

[4] N.S. Broyles, K.N.E. Verghese, S.V. Davis, H. Li, R.M. Davis, J.J. Lesko, J.S. Riffle: Polymer Vol. 39(1998), No. 15, p.3417.

DOI: 10.1016/s0032-3861(97)10078-7

[5] F. Vautard, S. Ozcan, H. Meyer: Composites: Part AVol. 43 (2012), p.1120.

[6] I.C. Kim, T.H. Yoon:J. Adhesion Sci. Technol. Vol. 14 (2000), No. 4, p.545.

[7] C.L. Weitzsacker, M. Xie and L. T. Drzal: Surface Interface Anal. Vol. 25(1997), p.53.

[8] J. Zhu, A. Imam, R. Crane, K. Lozano V.N. Khabashesku, E.V. Barrera: Composites Science and TechnologyVol. 67 (2007), p.1509.

[9] C. Varga, N. Miskolczi, H. Szakács, G. Lipóczi: Materials and Design Vol. 32(2011), No. 1, p.12.

[10] P. Compston, P.Y.B. Jar: Appl Compos Mater: Vol. 9(2002), p.291.

[11] D. Stevanovic,S. Kalyanasundaram, A. Lowe, P.Y.B. Jar: Composites Science and Technology Vol. 63(2003), p. (1949).

[12] H.Y. Chen, Z.X. Kong, J.H. Wang: Materials Science Forum Vol. 675-677(2011), p.419.

[13] Y. Liang, R.E. Jensen, D.D. Pappas, G.R. Palmese: PolymerVol. 52(2011), Issue 2, P. 510.

[14] C.C. Chamis: National Aeronautics and Space Administration Report TN D-5367 (1972).

[15] P.J. Hine, R.A. Brew, R.A. Duckett, I.M. Ward: Composites Science and Technology Vol. 43(1992), p.37.

[16] R. Rikards, F.G. Buchhoiz, A.K. Bledzki,G. Wacker, A. Korjakin: Composites Science and Technology Vol. 32 (1996), p.439.

[17] E.K. Gamstedt, L.A. Berglund, T. Peijs: Composites Science and Technology Vol. 59(1999), p.759.