Effects of Different Sizing Agents on the Interfacial Properties of Carbon Fibers

Abstract:

In this work, carbon fibers were sized with three different sizing agents in order to improve the performances of carbon fibers and the interface of carbon fibers composites. The surface characteristic was investigated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), atomic force microscopy (AFM), at the same time, the single fiber strengths and weibull distributions were also studied in order to understand the effect of different sizing agents on carbon fibers. The interlaminar shear strength (ILSS) of the composites was also measured to study the effect of fiber coatings on the interface of the composites. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was also used to analyze the element composition of carbon fiber modified by different sizing agents. This investigation shows that different sizing agents could give a different composition of surface functional group for carbon fiber, which is crucial to the interfacial performance of carbon fiber composites.

• Periodical: Materials Science Forum (Volume 813)
• Pages: 202-209
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.813.202
• Online since: March 2015
• Authors: Qing Bo Zhang, Kai Qiang Sui, Li Liu, Da Wei Jiang, Guang Shun Wu, Zi Jian Wu, Yu Dong Huang*
• Keywords: Carbon Fiber, Composite, Interfacial Properties, Sizing Agents, Weibull Distribution

References

[1] Y. P Tang, L Liu, W. W Li, B Shen, W. B Hu, Interface characteristics and mechanical properties of short carbon fibers/Al composites with different coatings, Appl. Surf. Sci. 255(2009) 4393–4400.

DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2008.10.124

[2] J Li, The research on the interfacial compatibility of polypropylene composite filled with surface treated carbon fiber, Appl. Surf. Sci. 255 (2009) 8682–8684.

DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2009.06.053

[3] R. L Zhang, Y. D Huang, Influence of sizing emulsifier content on the properties of carbon fibers and its composites, Mater. Design. 33 (2012) 367-371.

DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2011.03.032

[4] S. J Park, M. S Cho, Effect of anti-oxidative filler on the interfacial mechanical properties of carbon–carbon composites measured at high temperature, Carbon. 38 (2000) 1053–1058.

DOI: 10.1016/s0008-6223(99)00210-9

[5] S Chand, Review carbon fibers for composites, J. Mater. Sci. 35 (2000) 1303–1313.

[6] R. L Zhang, Y. D Huang, Effect of the concentration of the sizing agent on the carbon fibers surface and interface properties of its composites. J. Appl. Polym Sci. 125 (2012) 425–432.

DOI: 10.1002/app.35616

[7] A Bismarck, M. E Kumru, J Springer, J Simitzis, Surface properties of PAN based carbon fibers tuned by anodic oxidation in different alkaline electrolyte systems, Appl. Surf. Sci. 143 (1999) 45–55.

DOI: 10.1016/s0169-4332(98)00929-5

[8] N Dilsiz, J. P Wightman, Surface analysis of unsized and sized carbon fibers, Carbon. 37 (1999) 1105–1114.

DOI: 10.1016/s0008-6223(98)00300-5

[9] E Fitzer, R Weiss, Effect of surface treatment and sizing of C-fibers on the mechanical properties of thermosetting and thermoplastic polymers, Carbon. 25 (1987) 455–467.

DOI: 10.1016/0008-6223(87)90186-2

[10] M. A Montes Morán, A Martínez Alonso, J.M. D Tascón, Adsorption of polar probe molecules on plasma-oxidised high-strength carbon fibers, Fuel. Process. Technol. 77-78 (2002) 359–364.

DOI: 10.1016/s0378-3820(02)00051-6

[11] C Baillie, J Emanuelsson, F Morton, Building knowledge about the interface, Compos. Part A- Appl. S. 32 (2001) 305–312.

[12] T. Q Li, M. Q Zhang, H. M Zeng, Strong interaction at interface of carbon fiber reinforced aromatic semicrystalline thermoplastics, Polymer. 40 (1999) 4307–4313.

DOI: 10.1016/s0032-3861(98)00658-2

[13] M Toyoda, H Katoh, M Inagaki, Intercalation of nitric acid into carbon fibers, Carbon. 39 (2001) 2231–2234.

DOI: 10.1016/s0008-6223(01)00209-3

[14] J. W Shim, S. J Park, S. K Ryu, Effect of modification with HNO3 and NaOH on metal adsorption by pitch-based activated carbon fibers, Carbon. 39 (2001) 1635–1642.

DOI: 10.1016/s0008-6223(00)00290-6

[15] Z. W Xu, Y. D Huang, C. H Zhang, L Liu, L Wang, Effect of γ-ray irradiation grafting on the carbon fibers and interfacial adhesion of epoxy composites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 67 (2007) 3261–3270.

DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2007.03.038

[16] C.U. Jr Pittman, W Jiang, Z. R Yue, Surface properties of electrochemically oxidized carbon fibers, Carbon. 37 (1999) 1797–1807.

DOI: 10.1016/s0008-6223(99)00048-2

[17] Y Yang, C. X Lu, X. L Su, X. K Wang, Effects of emulsion sizing with nano-SiO2 on interfacial properties of carbon fiber/epoxy composites, J. Mater. Sci. 42 (2007) 6347-6352.

DOI: 10.1007/s10853-006-1198-x

[18] N. S Broyles, R Chan, R. M Davis, J. J Lesko, J. S Riffle, Sizing and characterization of carbon fibers with aqueous solutions of poly(vinylpyrrolidone), Polymer. 39 (1998) 2607–2613.

DOI: 10.1016/s0032-3861(97)00562-4

[19] N Dilsiz, J. P Wightman, Surface analysis of unsized and sized carbon fibers, Carbon. 37 (1999): 1105–1114.

DOI: 10.1016/s0008-6223(98)00300-5

[20] T. H Cheng, J Zhang, S Yumitori, F. R Jones, C. W Anderson, Sizing resin structure and interphase formation in carbon fiber composites, Composites. 25(1994) 661–670.

DOI: 10.1016/0010-4361(94)90199-6

[21] S Raif, Ay Irfan, Statistical analysis of bending fatigue life data using Weibull distribution in glass-fiber reinforced polyester composites, Mater. Design. 16 (1995) 167–173.

DOI: 10.1016/j.matdes.2007.05.005

[22] T Tagawa, T Mujata, Size effect on tensile strength of carbon fibers, Mater. Sci. Eng. A-STRUCT. 238 (1997) 336–342.

[23] L. C Pardini, L.G. B Manhani, Influence of the testing gage length on the strength Young's modulus and Weibull modulus of carbon fibers and glass fibers, Mater. Res. Bull. 5 (2002) 411–420.

DOI: 10.1590/s1516-14392002000400004

[24] P.M. A Sherwood, Surface analysis of carbon and carbon fibers for composites, J. Electron. Spectrosc. 81(1996) 319–342.

[25] A Paipetis, C Galiotis, Effect of fiber sizing on the stress transfer efficiency in carbon/epoxy model composites, Compos. Part A-APPl S. 2l (1996) 755–761.

DOI: 10.1016/1359-835x(96)00054-1