,661 9ro 1r 1ryhpehu - scientific journals · the main problem with most of the polymers is their...

ISSN : 2319-5991Vol. 6, No. 4

November 2017

16

Int. J. Engg. Res. & Sci. & Tech. 2017 M Subba Reddy et al., 2017

This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijerst.com/currentissue.php

COMPARISON OF MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OFSYNTHETIC AND NATURAL FIBER COMPOSITES

M Subba Reddy1*, Dr. P Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy2 and Suresh Yallala3

*Corresponding Author: M Subba Reddy, [email protected]

Polymers are serving to a maximum extent, but they are also posing environmental problemsdue to their non- judicious usage. The main problem with most of the polymers is their non-degradable nature which can pollute the environment to an alarming rate. Simultaneously lot ofresearch to develop polymer composites with natural fiber reinforcements is being carried outin various laboratories and research institutes. Natural fibers are biodegradable and can replacethe polymer society. In this project, composite materials will be developed for different fibervolume fractions with synthetic fiber and natural fiber as reinforcement. These two developedcomposites will be compared for tensile, compression, impact and flexural tests. Based on thevalues obtained in these tests it is expected that the natural fiber composite values may comecloser to the values of the synthetic fiber. Thus the aim of this work is to replace the syntheticfiber composite with natural fiber composite, which will be cheaper, widely available, abundantand very much eco-friendly, when compared to synthetic fibers.

Keywords: Polymers, Natural fibers, Synthetic fibers

INTRODUCTIONA composite is usually made up of at least twomaterials out of which one is the bindingmaterial, also called matrix and the other isthe reinforcement material (fiber, Kevlar andwhiskers). By definition, composite materialsconsist of two or more constituents withphysically separable phases. However, onlywhen the composite phase materials have

Research Paper

1 Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engg., NBKRIST, Vidyanagar, Nellore (Dt), Andhra Pradesh 524413, India.2 Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engg., NBKRIST, Vidyanagar, Nellore (Dt), Andhra Pradesh 524413, India.3 Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engg., NBKRIST, Vidyanagar, Nellore (Dt), Andhra Pradesh 524413, India.

notably different physical properties it isrecognized as being a composite material.Composites are materials that comprisestrong load carrying material (known asreinforcement) imbedded in weaker material(known as matrix).Reinforcement providesstrength and rigidity, helping to supportstructural load. The matrix or binder maintainsthe position and orientation of the reinforcement.

Int. J. Engg. Res. & Sci. & Tech. 2017

ISSN 2319-5991 www.ijerst.comVol. 6, No. 4, November, 2017

© 2017 IJERST. All Rights Reserved

Received on: 2nd August, 2017 Accepted on: 17th October, 2017

http://www.ijerst.com/currentissue.php

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.ijerst.com

17



Significantly, constituents of the compositecertain their individual, physical and chemicalproperties; yet together they produce acombination of qualities which individualconstituents would be incapable of producingalone. The reinforcement may be platelets,particles or fibers and are usually added toimprove mechanical properties such as stiffness,strength and toughness of the matrix material.

Natural fibers have come into use aftercenturies. They have been around a decadethat natural fibers have started to be used again.Now they are being highly recommendedbecause of being naturally derived from plantsand due to their characteristics of beinglightweight compared to glass. Thesereinforcements are reusable, good insulator ofheat and sound, degradable and have a lowcost. It is being used widely for buildingpurposes, in cars etc. The natural fibers usedfor composites are jute, hemp, flax, china grassetc. Natural fibers include those made fromplant, animal and mineral sources. Natural fiberscan be classified according to their origin.

The primary advantages of using fibers asfillers/reinforcements in composites are lowdensities, non abrasive, high filling levelspossible resulting in high stiffness properties,high specific properties, unlike brittle fibers,the fibers will not fractured when processingover sharp curvatures, biodegradable, widevariety of fibers available throughout the world,would generate rural jobs increases non-foodagricultural/farm based economy, low energyconsumption and low cost.

OBJECTIVES OF THEEXPERIMENT WORK• To develop glass fiber reinforced

composites and bamboo fiber reinforcedcomposites with different fiber lengths andfiber volume fractions.

• To study the effect of fiber length (Lf) andfiber volume fraction (Vf) on mechanicalbehavior of glass fiber as well as bamboofiber reinforced composites.

• Evaluation of mechanical properties suchas tensile strength (TS), flexural strength(FS) and impact strength (IS) for both glassfiber composites and bamboo fibercomposites.

• To develop a mathematical model to predictmechanical properties of the abovementioned composites like tensile strength(TS), flexural strength (FS) and impactstrength (IS) from experimental results usingresponse surface methodology (RSM).

• Compare the test results between glassfiber composites and bamboo fibercomposites and checking for thereplacement of glass fiber with bamboofiber in composites as reinforcement.

PREPARATION OF MOULDAND TEST SPECIMENSIn the present work glass moulds are used toprepare glass fiber reinforced composites aswell as bamboo fiber reinforced composites.A glass mould of 180mm x 180mm x 3 mm(length x width x thickness) is used to preparesheets and specimens for tensile, flexural andimpact test. The specimens for test wereprepared as per ASTM specifications. Thespecimen dimensions were presented Thetensile test specimens with dimensions150mm x 15mm x3mm are cut as describedelse where. The flexural test specimens with


18



Figure 1: The Processing of Scheme of Investigation

dimensions 100mm x10mm x3mm are cut asper ASTMD5943-96 specifications from sheet200mm x200mmx 3mm. The impact testspecimens with dimensions 122mm x 11mmx 3 mm are cut as per ASTM D 256-88specifications from a sheet of 180mm x180mm x 3mm.

COMPOSITE FABRICATIONThe matrix material used for the fabrication ofglass fiber reinforced composites andbamboo fiber reinforced composites is epoxy.

Test ASTM standard Specimen Dimensions (mm) Crosshead Speed (mm/min)

Tensile ASTM D 3039-76 150 X 15 X 3 5

Flexural ASTM D5943-96 100 X10 X 3 2

Impact ASTM 256-88 122 X 11 X 3 Sudden force

Table 1: Specimen Dimensions for Different Mechanical Testing

The bamboo fiber is collected from the localsources. The bamboo fibers are chemicallytreated with NaOH solution at theconcentration mentioned above as it will givethe best strength at that particularconcentration. The purpose of chemicaltreatment is to increase the strength of thefiber. As a result the bonding strength alsoincreases. After the chemical treatment, thebamboo fibers are allowed to dry for 2 weeksunder the sun. Then they are cut into 3, 5 and 7mm lengths.


19



Figure 2: Chopped Bamboo fibers in5 and 7 mm Lengths and 0.3 Glass

Mould While Applying Wax

Now weigh the bamboo fiber of particularlength & matrix of different volume fractions i.e.(30, 40 and 50%). After weighing the aboveraw materials they are reinforced in randomorientation into the Epoxy and mixed uniformlyand are poured in the glass mould. Beforepouring the materials, the glass mould is to beprepared by applying white wax on it andallowed to dry for 20 minutes Later PVA is

applied and is allowed to dry for 20 minutes atroom temperature until a thin layer is formedon the surface of the glass mould. After pouringthe mixture of bamboo fiber and epoxy on themould, it is adjusted to distribute the materialthroughout the mould uniformly as shown infigure 3.4. A roller is taken and is rolled on thesurface of the mould to level the surface andremove the excess content of the material bykeeping an OHP sheet in between roller andmould.

After that the glass plate is kept on the OHPsheet to cover the mould completely and is keptunder some weight so as not to disturb thearrangement as it should be kept for about 24hours without disturbing the arrangement. After24 hours, the upper glass plate is removed andthe mould is kept in the oven for 20 minutesunder 55-600C to melt the releasing agentapplied before pouring the material on theglass mould. The melting of the releasingagent helps to remove the composite materialvery easily. After getting the specimen, it is

Figure 3: Pouring the Bamboo Epoxy Mixture on the Glass Mould


20



Figure 4: Rolling on the Surface of the Specimen with a Roller by Keeping OHP Sheet

allowed to stay in oven at 650C up to 24 hoursfor curing. This is known as heat treatment forthe specimens in order to increase theirstrength. Care should be taken to avoid theair gaps in the mould while preparing thesespecimens.

This procedure is repeated for the other twofiber lengths of Bamboo fiber for different fiber

Specimen No. Fiber Volume Fraction (Vf) % Fiber Length (Lf) in mm

1 30 3

2 30 5

3 30 7

4 40 3

5 40 5

6 40 7

7 50 3

8 50 5

9 50 7

Table2: Total number of Bamboo composite Specimenswith Different Combinations of Vf and Lf

volume fractions to form the following totalnumber of specimens.

The same procedure is repeated taking glassfiber as reinforcing material. Glass fiber doesnot require any chemical treatment as it is asynthetic fiber. The following are the total numberof composite specimens shown in the table inwhich glass fiber is taken as the reinforcement.


21



Figure 5: Bamboo Fiber Specimens Figure 6: Glass Fiber Specimens

Specimen No. Fiber Volume Fraction (Vf) % Fiber Length (Lf) in mm

1 30 3

2 30 5

3 30 7

4 40 3

5 40 5

6 40 7

7 50 3

8 50 5

9 50 7

Table 3: Total Number of Glass Composite Specimenswith Different Combinations of Vf and Lf

MATERIAL PROPERTIESTESTINGIn order to know the performance of thecomposites made in the present work, thefollowing tests are conducted.

Tensile test, Flexural test and Impacttest

The flexural test and tensile tests areconducted using Instron Universal Testing

Machine (model 3369) Impact strength testwas conducted using Izod Impact tester.

TENSILE TESTTensile strength is a measure of strength andductility of the material. Ultimate tensilestrength is the force required to fracture amaterial. The tensile properties of thecomposites are determined by employing anInstron make 3369 model Universal Testing


22



Machine. Tensile testing provides useful datasuch as ul timate tensile strength andelongation at break. These properties indicatethe materials behavior under loading in tension.The test is conducted as per ASTM D3039-76 specifications. The cross-head speed ismaintained at 5mm/min. In each case, twospecimens are tested and the average valueis recorded.

FLEXURAL TESTThe strength of material in bending, expressedas the stress on the outer most fibers of a benttest specimen, at the instant of failure isdefined as the flexural strength. The flexuralproperties of the matrix and the compositesare determined using Universal TestingMachine. Here 3 Point bending method is

Figure 7: Dimensions of Test Specimen for Tensile Test

conducted. In this method, a bar of rectangularcross-section rests on two supports and loadis applied by means of a loading nose midwaybetween the supports as shown . The test isconducted as per the ASTMD 5943-96specifications. The cross-head speed ismaintained at 5mm/min. In each case, twospecimens are tested and the average valueis recorded.

IMPACT TESTThe ability of material to withstand shockloading is defined as the impact strength. Theimpact strength of the composites is measuredby the Izod Impact Tester. The samples aremade as per ASTM 256-88 specifications. Ineach case three specimens were tested toobtain average value.

Figure 8: Dimensions of Test Specimen for Flexural Test


23



Figure 9: Dimensions of Test specimen for Impact test

DESIGN OF EXPERIMENTSVIA TAGUCHI METHODA Design of Experiment (DOE) is a structured,organized method for determining therelationship between factors affecting aprocess and the output of that process.

The most important stage in the design ofexperiment lies in the selection of the controlfactors. The mechanical behavior of polymercomposites reveals that parameters viz., fiber

length and fiber volume fraction etc largelyinfluence the mechanical behavior of polymercomposites. The impact of two suchparameters are studied using L9 (32)orthogonal design. The control parametersused and their levels chosen are given in Table.

Taguchi’s orthogonal array of L9 (32) is mostsuitable for this experiment. This needs 9 runs(experiments). The L9 orthogonal array ispresented in Table 5.

Experiment No. Fiber Volume Fraction (Vf) % Fiber Length (Lf) in mm

1 1 1

2 1 2

3 1 3

4 2 1

5 2 2

6 2 3

7 3 1

8 3 2

9 3 3

Table 5: Orthogonal Array

Table 4: Control Parameters and Their Levels

Fiber volume fraction (Vf) % Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

30 40 50

Fiber length (Lf) in mm 3 5 7


24



Experiment No. Fiber Volume Fraction (Vf) % Fiber Length (Lf) in mm

1 30 3

2 30 5

3 30 7

4 40 3

5 40 5

6 40 7

7 50 3

8 50 5

9 50 7

Table 6: Actual Setting Values for the Coded Values of Table

MODELING OF PROCESSINGPARAMETERSThe experimental results are modeled usingRSM and empirical model has beendeveloped. Table shows the summary ofmodels for the three responses.

Measure of Performance Model Expression R2

Tensile strength 153.54–1.116*Vf –47.17* Lf +0.0128* (Vf) 2+ 4.558(Lf)

2+0.0768* Vf* Lf 92.9

Flexural strength 184.938–0.669*Vf–44.917* Lf +0.015*( Vf)2+4.408(Lf)

2 –0.050* Vf* Lf 99.2

Impact strength 6.634–0.032*Vf–1.645* Lf +0.0004* (Vf) 2+0.143(Lf)

2+0.0023* Vf* Lf 84.4

Table 7: Model Summary Results for Glass Fiber

Measure of Performance Model Expression R2

Tensile strength 24.218–0.355*Vf +0.468* Lf +0.0006* (Vf) 2– 0.081(Lf)

2+0.027* Vf* Lf 64.9

Flexural strength –81.857+4.100*Vf+11.733* Lf –0.045*( Vf)2–0.357(Lf)

2 –0.078* Vf* Lf 79.5

Impact strength –10.372–0.322*Vf+2.086* Lf –0.004* (Vf) 2–0.199(Lf)

2+0.0006* Vf* Lf 82

Table 8: Model Summary Results for Bamboo Fiber

The characterization of the compositesreveals that the fiber length (Lf) and fibervolume fraction (Vf) is having significant effecton the mechanical properties of composites.The properties of the composites with differentfiber lengths (Lf) and fiber volume fraction (Vf)under this investigation are presented.


25



COMPARISION OF THEEXPERIMENTAL VALUESAND PREDICTED VALUES OFTHE MECHANICALPROPERTIES OF BOTHBAMBOO AND GALSS FIBERREINFORCED COMPOSITESThe results predicted by RSM model werecompared with the experimental result valuesand graphs are drawn as shown in the followingGraphs 1 to 6.

Experiment No. Fiber Volume Fraction (Vf)% Fiber Length (Lf) in mm Experimental Values Predicted Values

1 30 3 35.572 38.0636

2 30 5 26.418 21.2736

3 30 7 38.301 40.9538

4 40 3 39.362 38.2076

5 40 5 20.322 22.9532

6 40 7 45.646 44.1692

7 50 3 42.261 40.9238

8 50 5 24.692 27.2052

9 50 7 51.133 49.957

Table 9: Model Results of Tensile Strength (TS) Glass Fiber

Graph 1: Graph Between Experimental and Predicted valuesof Tensile strength (Glass Fiber)

By observing the above graph, it is clearthat the experimental values and the predictedvalues of the glass fiber for the tensileproperties are converging (92.9%).

By observing the above graph, it is clearthat the experimental values and the predictedvalues of the glass fiber for the flexuralproperties are much convergent (99.2%).

By observing the above graph, it is clearthat the experimental values and the predictedvalues of the glass fiber for the impactproperties are converging (84.4%).


26




1 30 3 79.183 79.270

2 30 5 56.67 56.968

3 30 7 68.452 69.936

4 40 3 81.556 81.960

5 40 5 58.54 58.656

6 40 7 73.013 70.622

7 50 3 88.252 87.7608

8 50 5 63.87 63.4551

9 50 7 73.513 74.4191

Table 10: Model Results of Flexural Strength (FS) Glass Fiber

Graph 2: Graph Between Experimental and Predicted valuesof Flexural strength (Glass Fiber)


1 30 3 2.4 2.59083

2 30 5 2 1.74333

3 30 7 1.98 2.04583

Table 11: Model Results of Impact Strength (IS) Glassfiber


27




Table 11 (Cont.)

4 40 3 2.8 2.61667

5 40 5 1.7 1.81667

6 40 7 2.1 2.16667

7 50 3 2.73 2.7225

8 50 5 1.83 1.97

9 50 7 2.5 2.3675

Graph 3: Graph Between Experimental and Predicted Valuesof Impact Strength (Glass Fiber)


1 30 3 18.031 17.3234

2 30 5 16.525 18.6202

3 30 7 20.653 19.2654

4 40 3 14.54 15.0719

5 40 5 19.347 16.9232

6 40 7 16.231 18.1229

7 50 3 12.78 12.9557

8 50 5 15.033 15.3616

9 50 7 17.62 17.1157

Table 12: Model Results of Tensile Strength (TS) Glass Fiber


28



Graph 4: Graph Between Experimental and Predicted Valuesof Tensile strength (Bamboo Fiber)

By observing the above graph, it is clearthat the experimental values and the predictedvalues of the bamboo fiber for the tensileproperties are converging (64.9%).

By observing the above graph, it is clearthat the experimental values and the predictedvalues of the bamboo fiber for the flexuralproperties are converging (79.5%).


1 30 3 25.652 25.271

2 30 5 38.106 38.331

3 30 7 48.373 48.528

4 40 3 27.643 32.169

5 40 5 51.650 43.669

6 40 7 48.851 52.305

7 50 3 34.137 29.991

8 50 5 32.175 39.930

9 50 7 50.617 47.007

Table 13: Model Results of Flexural Strength (FS) Bamboo Fiber

Graph 5: Graph Between Experimental and Predicted Vvalues of Flexural Strength(Bamboo Fiber)


29




1 30 3 0.3 0.19806

2 30 5 1.35 1.21556

3 30 7 0.4 0.63639

4 40 3 0.26 0.62222

5 40 5 1.7 1.65222

6 40 7 1.4 1.08556

7 50 3 0.5 0.23972

8 50 5 1.1 1.28222

9 50 7 0.65 0.72806

Table 14: Model Results of Impact Strength (IS) Bamboo Fiber

By observing the above graph, it is clearthat the experimental values and the predicted

values of the bamboo fiber for the impactproperties are converging (82%).

Table 15: Experimental Results of Glass Fiber Reinforced Composites

Experiment Fiber Volume Fiber Length Tensile Strength Flexural Strength Impact strength

No. Fraction (Vf)% (Lf) in mm (TS) in Mpa (FS) in Mpa (IS) in j/3

1 30 3 35.572 79.183 2.4

2 30 5 26.418 58.540 2

3 30 7 38.301 68.452 1.98

Graph 6: Graph Between Experimental and Predicted Values of Impact Strength(Bamboo Fiber)


30



Table 15 (Cont.)

Experiment Fiber Volume Fiber Length Tensile Strength Flexural Strength Impact strength

No. Fraction (Vf)% (Lf) in mm (TS) in Mpa (FS) in Mpa (IS) in j/3

4 40 3 39.362 81.556 2.8

5 40 5 20.322 56.670 1.7

6 40 7 45.646 73.013 2.1

7 50 3 42.261 88.252 2.73

8 50 5 24.692 63.87 1.83

9 50 7 51.133 73.513 2.5

Experiment Fiber Volume Fiber Length Tensile Strength Flexural Strength Impact Strength No. Fraction (Vf)% (Lf) in mm (TS) in Mpa (FS) in Mpa (IS) in j/3

1 30 3 18.031 25.652 0.3

2 30 5 16.525 38.106 1.35

3 30 7 20.653 48.373 0.4

4 40 3 14.54 27.643 0.26

5 40 5 19.347 51.650 1.7

6 40 7 16.231 48.851 1.4

7 50 3 12.78 34.137 0.5

8 50 5 15.033 32.175 1.1

9 50 7 17.62 50.617 0.65

Table 16: Experimental Results of Bamboo Fiber Reinforced Composites

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONThis chapter discusses the mechanicalproperties of the glass fiber reinforcedcomposites as well as bamboo fiber reinforcedcomposites prepared for this presentinvestigation. Details of these composites andthe tests conducted on them have beendescribed in the previous chapter. The resultsof various tests are reported here. Thisincludes evaluation of tensile strength (TS),

flexural strength (FS) and impact strength (IS)has been studied and discussed. The effectsof constituent phases on mechanicalproperties are discussed in detail. Theinterpretation of the results and the comparisonamong various composite samples are alsopresented.

COMPARISON OF RESULTSBETWEEN GLASS FIBER


31



COMPOSITES AND BAMBOOFIBER COMPOSITESThe results for both glass as well as bamboofiber composites are discussed earlier and arecompared with the predicted values in theprevious chapter. Here the comparison ismade between the mechanical properties ofglass fiber reinforced composite and bamboofiber reinforced composite materials.

COMPARISON OF TENSILESTRENGTHFrom the results it is observed that the Tensilestrengths for glass fiber reinforced compositesare very much high when compared to bamboofiber reinforced composites as shown in theGraph 7.

From the graph, it can be clearly observedthat the tensile strengths for glass fiberreinforced composites are very higher than thebamboo fiber reinforced composites. Themaximum TS for glass fiber is observed to be51Mpa for specimen 9(i.e., Vf =50% and Lf =7mm) and the minimum TS is observed as20Mpa for specimen 5 (i.e., Vf =40% and Lf =5mm). Where as for bamboo fiber, the

maximum TS is observed as 20Mpa atspecimen 5 and minimum TS is observed tobe 12Mpa at specimen 7 (i.e., Vf =50% and Lf

= 3mm). The bamboo fiber curve is touchingthe glass fiber curve at 20Mpa. It means thetensile strength of specimen 5 (bamboo) isgetting very close to the tensile strength ofspecimen 5 (glass). Except at this point, thebamboo curve is no where touching the glasscurve.

COMPARISON OF FLEXURALSTRENGTHFrom the results it is observed that the Flexuralstrengths for glass fiber reinforced compositesare very much high when compared to bamboofiber reinforced composites as shown in theGraph 8.

From the graph, it can be clearly observedthat the Flexural strengths of glass fiberreinforced composites are very higher than thebamboo fiber reinforced composites. Themaximum FS for glass fiber is observed to be88Mpa for specimen 7(i.e., Vf =50% and Lf =3mm) and the minimum FS is observed as56Mpa for specimen 5 (i.e., Vf =40% and Lf =

Graph 7: Graph Between Glass and Bamboo Fiber Specimens ComparingTheir Tensile Strengths


32



Graph 8: Graph Between Glass and Bamboo Fiber Specimens ComparingTheir Flexural Strengths

5mm). Where as for bamboo fiber, themaximum FS is observed as 51Mpa atspecimen 5 and minimum FS is observed tobe 25Mpa at specimen 1 (i.e., Vf =50% and Lf

= 3mm). The bamboo fiber curve is nottouching the glass fiber curve. The flexuralstrength of specimen 5 (bamboo) is gettingclose near to the flexural strength of specimen5 (glass).

COMPARISON OF IMPACTSTRENGTHFrom the results it is observed that the Impactstrengths for glass fiber reinforced composites

are very much high when compared to bamboofiber reinforced composites as shown in theGraph 9.

From the graph, it can be clearly observedthat the Impact strengths of glass fiberreinforced composites are very higher than thebamboo fiber reinforced composites. Themaximum IS for glass fiber is observed to be2.8J/m2 for specimen 4(i.e., Vf =40% and Lf =3mm) and the minimum IS is observed as 1.7J/m2 for specimen 5 (i.e., Vf =40% and Lf =5mm). Where as for bamboo fiber, themaximum IS is observed as 1.7J/m2 at

Graph 9: Graph Between Glass and Bamboo Fiber Specimens ComparingTheir Impact Strengths


33



specimen 5 and minimum IS is observed tobe 0.26J/m2 at specimen 4. The bamboo fiberis touching the glass fiber curve at specimen5. The impact strength of specimen 5(bamboo) is equal to the impact strength ofspecimen 5 (glass).

CONCLUSIONBy comparing the results between glass fiberand bamboo fiber reinforced composites, andby observing the graphs and results in theprevious chapters, it is concluded as follows:

• The mechanical properties like Tensilestrength (TS), Flexural Strength (FS) andImpact Strength (IT) for glass fiberreinforced composites are same equal tothe bamboo fiber reinforced composites atparticular fiber volume fraction and fiberlength.

• However for tensile and impact strengths,the values of bamboo fiber specimennumber 5 (i.e., at Vf =40%, Lf = 5mm) aresame as that of the values of glass fiberspecimen number 5. Also for Flexuralstrength, the value of bamboo fiberspecimen number 5 (i.e., at Vf =40%, Lf =5mm) is very close to the value of glassfiber specimen number 5.

• Therefore it is observed that the glass fibercan be replaced with the bamboo fiber atparticular composition when fiber volumefraction (Vf)=40% and fiber length (Lf)=5mm.

• This suggests that the bamboo fibercomposites have the potential to replaceglass in some applications that do notrequire very high load bearing capabilities.

REFERENCES1. Aa Kaw K (1997), “Mechanics of

Compiosite Materials”, Introduction toComposite Materials, Chapter 1, pp. 1-46, Printed by CRC Press.

2. Annual Book of ASTM Standards(1989), Vol. 8, p. 386, ASTM Publishers,Philadelphia. .

3. Cao Y, Shibata S and Fukumoto I(2006), “Mechanical Properties ofBiodegradable Composites Reinforcedwith Bagasse Fiber Before and AfterAlkali Treatments”, Compos. A., Vol. 37,pp. 423-429.

4. Guduri B R, Rajulu A V and Luyt A S(2006), “Effect of Alkali Treatment on theFlexural Properties of Hildegardia FabricComposites”, J. Appl. Polymer Science,Vol. 102, pp. 1297-1302.

5. Guduri B R, Rajulu A V and Luyt A S(2007), “Chemical Resistance, VoidContents and Morphological Propertiesof Hildegardia Fabric/Polycarbonate-Toughened Epoxy Composites”, Journalof Applied Polymer Science, Vol. 106,pp. 3945-395.

6. Khazuya Okubu, Toru Fujii and YuzoYamamoto (2004), “Development ofBamboo-Based Polymer Compositesand Their Mechanical Properties”,Composites: Part A, Vol. 35, pp. 377-383.

7. Krishna K Chawla (1997), CompositeMaterials Science and Engineering,Part I and Part II, 2nd Edition, pp. 3-278,Printed by Springer Publications,

8. Mathews F L and Rawlings R D (1999),“Composite Materials: Engineering and


34



Science”, Short Fiber Composites,Chapter 10, pp. 287-320, Printed byCRC Press.

9. Pongsathorn Kongkeaw, Wim Nhuapengand Wandee Thamajaree (2011), “TheEffect of Fiber Length on TensileProperties of Epoxy Resin CompositesReinforced by the Fibers of Bamboo”,Journal of Microscopy society ofThailand, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 46-48.

10. Sandhyarani Biswas and Alok Satapathy(2010), “A Comparative Study onErosion Characteristics of Red MudFilled Bamboo–Epoxy and Glass–EpoxyComposites”, Materials and Design,Vol. 31, pp. 1752-1767.

11. Sandhyarani Biswas, Kishore Debnathand Amar Parnaik, “MechanicalBehaviour of Short Bamboo FiberReinforced Epoxy Composites Filledwith Alumina Particulate”.

12. Varada Rajulu A, Narasimha Chary K,Ram Chandra Reddy G and Meng Y Z(2004), “Void Content, Density and

Weight Reduction Studies on ShortBamboo Fiber-Epoxy Composites”,Journal of Reinforced Plastics andComposites, Vol. 23, pp. 127-130.

13. Varada Rajulu A, Rao G B, Devi L G,Ramaiah S, Prada D S, Bhat K S andShree R S (2005), “MechanicalProperties of Short, Natural FiberHildegardia Populifolia-ReinforcedStyrenated Polyester Composites”,Journal of Reinforced Plastics andComposites, Vol. 24, pp. 423-428.

14. Varadarajulu A, Babu Rao G,Ramakrishna Reddy R, Rao A M S,Zhang J and Jiasong H (2002),“Properties of Ligno–Cellulose FiberHi ldegardia”, Journal of AppliedPolymer Science, Vol. 84, pp. 2216-2219.

15. Varadarajulu A, Ramachandra Reddy Gand Chari K N (1996), “ChemicalResistance and Tensile Properties ofEpoxy Coated Bamboo Fibers”, IndianJournal of Fiber and Textile Research,Vol. 21, pp. 223-224.


,661 9ro 1r 1ryhpehu - scientific journals · the main problem with most of the polymers is their...

Documents