Nano Materials laboratory (MCB 4413) Semester

September 2015
Compression molding and Tensile Properties
GROUP NO: 8
NO

1
2
3
4
5
6

NAME
MUHAMAD AIZAT SYAFIQ BIN MOHD AZMI
JEVITHA SRI A/P APPASAMY
MUHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN JINAL AHBIDIN
MUHAMMAD HAFIY BIN MAT NOH
MOHD RIDZUAN BIN ABDUL RAHMAN
MUHAMAD HARITH IZDIYAD BIN SIDIK
LAB SESSION
DATE
3/11/2015

DAY
TUESDAY

ID NO.
16296
16221
16417
15631
16060
15600

TIME
1-5PM

(To be filled by Examiner)

ITEM

MARKS
ALLOCATED

Abstract

10

Introduction

10

Objectives

10

Methodology

20

Data Collection

10

Results & Discussion

20

Conclusion

10

Neatness / English Usage

10

TOTAL

100

1. Abstract

SCORE

REMARKS

Carbon fiber is extremely strong and light which is a splendid reinforcement that could be
added to thermoplastic composites. Carbon fibers are commonly used wherever high strength-to-weight
ratio and rigidity are required, as for instances, military, aerospace, automotive, motorsports and others.
A test was done on the samples of polypropylene (PP) and carbon long-fiber composites. This report
focused mainly on the preparation of carbon long-fiber reinforced polypropylene composites by
compression molding process. The weight of both the materials was measured and jotted down before
carrying out the experiment. The objectives are to prepare tensile test specimen of PP-carbon
composite, to evaluate and compare the tensile properties of neat PP and PP-carbon composites
prepared. The scope of study of this experiment mainly involves the understanding of matrix and
reinforcement. The matrix that was used is polypropylene and the reinforcement that was used is
woven carbon long-fiber filaments. Accordingly, the experiment is carried out by sandwiching
filaments of carbon fiber with 10 dog bone-shaped PP which produced 5 specimens of PP-carbon
composites with approximate weightage of 70% PP and 30% carbon. From the result of the experiment,
it shows that PP is unable to transfer the load to carbon as only PP breaks during the test.
2. Introduction
In recent years, polymer composite materials have attracted vast interest from researchers since
they frequently exhibit marvelous properties. It is widely used in almost all the industries for various
purposes. Composites are made by incorporating two or more material that has different properties in
order to create a new material that has splendid mechanical properties. Composites consist of matrix
that acts as a binder which binds the fiber together so that the applied stress will be distributed among
the fiber.
As for thermoplastic polymer, it is a material that has been used vastly in packaging industry.
Thermoplastic could be heated and shaped into any desired shapes to produce a product. For an
instance regarded to this experiment, polypropylene (PP) is one of the thermoplastic polymers where it
has some useful properties such as good chemical resistance, semi rigid, good heat resistance and good
fatigue resistance. It offers good properties with a low cost compared to other thermoplastic polymer.
Even though PP is strong, it is not as strong as other polymers. Therefore, it is necessary to improvise
the properties of PP by reinforcing it with the fiber.
2

Carbon fiber is one of the most fiber that been used in industry because of its high tensile
strength, high stiffness, low weight, low thermal expansion, high chemical resistance, high temperature
tolerance [1]. The configuration of the fiber, the fiber content and also the composition of the matrix
are few of the significant properties that would enhance the mechanical properties of the polymer [2].
Yet, a good interfacial bonding may also affect the properties of the composites.
In this study, polypropylene composites reinforced with carbon long-fiber were prepared by
compression molding. The mechanical properties of the composites such as tensile modulus and tensile
strength were investigated.
3. Objective
The objectives of the experiment are:
1. To study the process of compression molding machine.
2. To measure the mechanical property of Polypropylene-Carbon fiber composite using tensile
testing.
4. Scope of study
This experiment mainly focuses on the composite material which is from Polypropylene and
Carbon fiber. The fiber is a long fiber. This composite was processed by the compression molding
machine using sandwich technique. The process of the compression molding need to be focus as to
ensure the next part of the experiment going smoothly which is tensile test.
The tensile test for the composite is to measure the mechanical properties. This test focuses on
to find the ultimate tensile strength and the modulus of elasticity of the composite.
5. Methodology
The composite which consist of polypropylene (PP) as matrix and carbon fiber as reinforcement
was produced using compression molding method. 10 of dog bone-shaped of polypropylene have been
prepared and the carbon fiber was separated thread by thread before sandwich with the dog bone. The
3

thread of carbon fiber filled the cavities between pair of the dog bone which produce 5 specimens of
carbon fiber-polypropylene matrix composites.
Task 1: Weight the material
Equipment: Balance Max 200g

Figure 5.1: Balance Max 200g

Procedure: The weight of the polypropylene and carbon fiber was measured based on 30% composition
of fiber and 70% composition of matrix for each of 5 specimens. The weight of each specimen was
recorded.

Task 2: Compression Molding Process

Equipment: Carver (Compression Molding Machine)
4

Figure 5.2: Carver (Compression Molding) Machine

Procedure: The mold of dog bone shaped was opened to put 1 of dog bone shape of
polypropylene in each of 5 cavities. The filament of carbon fiber was filled into the cavities and the
mold was closed. Control power, hydraulic pump and platen heat was switched on. The composites
specimens were pre heated until the temperature inside of the compression molding machine was
stable. The temperature of the machine is then calibrated to 185C while the pressure was calibrated to
20 tons. Heating process took about 1 hour to complete where the excessive material was flooded over
the mold were observed. The mold was cooled for 2 hours using fan before the product was removed.
Excessive material flooded over mold was removed from the product. After that, the tensile test was
done to all 5 composites product.

Task 3: Tensile Test

Equipment: Universal Testing Machine
5

Figure 5.3: Universal Testing Machine

Procedure: The thickness and width of the 5 composite products were measured and recorded
at 5 different points by using micrometer and vernier calliper. The total and mean of the thickness and
width for all composite products were calculated and recorded. After that, the specimen will be placed
and tightened at the grips of tensile machine. The grips should be tightening carefully to ensure the
specimen was not damaged. The extensometer was placed at the middle to measure the changes in
length of the specimens. The data of specimens and the graph of stress versus strain were recorded in
the computer.

6. Data collection

In this experiment, the composite are polymer-fiber composite which is polypropylene and
carbon fiber. The polymer dog-bone shape was weighted to estimate the fiber weight based on the
weight percentage. This step was taken before the compression molding process. For this experiment,
the total weight of the composite was taken after the compression molding to consider the weight loss
of matrix during the compression molding.

Figure 6.1: Weight of fiber is being measured and weight of the overall composite was
measured to obtain the weight of the matrix.

Figure 6.1 shows the carbon fiber are weighted using highly sensitive digital weigh. The PP
matrix weight calculation of the composite is shows below;
PP matrix weight = Composite weight Carbon fiber weight
Meanwhile, to calculate the weight percentage of the fiber, the formula below can be used:
Wc
100 =wt of Carbon fibre
W c +W p

Table 6.1: weight and weight percentage data of PP matrix and carbon fiber
Sample
1
2
3
4
5

Sample Weight (g)

Matrix
7.33
Fiber
3.52
Matrix
7.42
Fiber
3.50
Matrix
7.43
Fiber
3.50
Matrix
7.38
Fiber
3.50
Matrix
7.45
Fiber
3.52

Total Weight (g)

10.85
10.92
10.93
10.88
10.97

Weight Percentage (wt %)

67.6
32.4
68.0
32.0
68.0
32.0
67.9
32.1
67.9
32.1

After the composite was made, it will undergo tensile test in order to determine the tensile properties of
the composite. The initial dimensions of the composite sample (width and thickness) need to be
measured before the tensile test. The measurements were done using digital Vanier caliper and
micrometer.

Figure 6.2: Measurement of the width and thickness of the

composite dog bone sample.

Below is the tabulated data for the width and thickness measured right before the tensile test for
the composite sample:
Table 6.2: Width and thickness before tensile test
1
Sampl
e

Thicknes Width Thicknes Width Thicknes Width Thicknes

s (mm) (mm) s (mm) (mm) s (mm) (mm) s (mm)

4.45

13.39

4.29

12.69

4.22

12.73

4.50

4.36

12.65

4.37

12.67

4.35

12.81

4.30

4.45

12.59

4.40

12.69

4.24

12.72

4.17

4.40

11.61

4.40

12.64

4.27

12.89

4.18

4.40

12.64

4.27

12.71

4.67

12.82

4.13

Total

22.06

62.88

21.73

63.4

21.75

63.97

21.28

Mean

4.412

12.57
6

4.350

12.68
0

4.350

12.79
4

4.256

7. Result

Figure 7.1: Fracture on Sample 1

5
Widt
Thicknes Width
h
s (mm) (mm)
(mm)
12.7
4.54
12.66
2
12.8
4.36
12.72
1
12.8
4.27
12.67
7
12.6
4.31
12.73
8
12.8
4.39
12.61
2
63.9
21.87
63.39
5
12.7
12.67
4.374
9
8

Figure 7.2: Fracture on Sample 2

Figure 7.3: Fracture on Sample 3

Figure 7.4: Fracture on Sample 4

10

Figure 7.5: Fracture on Sample 5

All the photos shown above shows that the samples were broke outside the gauge length.
This means all sample were failed to meet the required criteria. Other than that, the other failure
that has been recognized was only PP (matrix) fiber broke off while the carbon fiber
(reinforcement) was not break off.

11

Stress Vs Strain
260
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8
1
Strain, %

1.2

1.4

Peak Stress:
236.476 MPa
Peak Load:
13.121 kN
Figure 7.6: Tensile result for sample 1

12

1.6

1.8

Stress Vs Strain
240
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

Peak Stress:
Peak Load:

0.5
Strain, %

0.6

0.7

230.367 MPa
12.707 kN

Figure 7.7: Tensile result for sample 2

13

0.8

0.9

Stress Vs Strain
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6
Strain, %

0.8

1.2

Peak Stress
185.556 MPa
Peak Load
10.237 kN
Figure 7.8: Tensile result for sample 3
Stress Vs Strain
220
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4
Strain, %

Peak Stress
Peak Load

0.5

0.6

204.662 MPa
11.125 kN

Figure 7.9: Tensile result for sample 4

14

0.7

Stress Vs Strain
300

250

200

150

100

50

0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Peak Stress:
Peak Load

1
Strain, %

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

282.413 MPa
15.661 kN

Figure 7.10: Tensile result for sample 5

Table 7.1: Tensile strength of PP and composite of PP+CF
Material
Sample No.
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
Standard
Deviation,

PP
Tensile Strength
(MPa)
11.54
9.36
7.84
8.84
15.2
10.556
2.927743158

15

Composite (PP+CF)
Tensile Strength (MPa)
236.476
230.367
185.556
204.662
282.413
227.8948
36.68896251

Tensile Strength (MPa)

250

200

150

Tensile Strength (MPa)

100

50

PP

Composite (PP+CF)

Figure 7.11: Graph of tensile strength PP and composite PP+CF

Table 7.2: Modulus Elasticity of PP and composite PP+CF
Material
Sample No.
1
2
3
4
5
Mean
Standard Deviation,

PP
Modulus Elasticity
(GPa)
0.034
0.015
0.014
0.043
0.098
0.0408
0.034303061

16

Composite (PP+CF)
Modulus Elasticity (GPa)
3.307
-1.343
2.386
5.814
6.827
3.3982
3.20564357

Modulus Elasticity Error Bar

4

3.5

2.5

Modulus Elasticity (GPa)

1.5

0.5

PP

Composite (PP+CF)

Figure 7.12: Graph of modulus elasticity of PP and composite PP+CF

8.0 Discussions
Figure 7.6-7.10 shows the tensile result for all samples. As shown in the Table 6.1 weight
percentage data for PP matrix and carbon fiber are different due to the way of carbon fiber were
put in different weight. Thus, the weight of carbon fiber cannot be accurately same for all 5
samples. However, the weight percentage for the 5 samples of carbon fiber is around 30% while
for PP matrix is around 70%. As shown in the Table 2 thickness of the 5 samples were measure 5
different points to get more accurate measurements of the width and thickness of the samples in
order to calculate the average area of the samples.

17

Table 7.1 and 7.2 shows the tensile strength and modulus of elasticity for PP and
composite of PP and CF while figure 7.11 and 7.12 shows the graph of tensile strength and
modulus of elasticity. The samples had failed to withstand the load due to the different
distribution of carbon fiber in the matrix where some of the fibers distributed only in the middle
part of the sample while some of the fibers distributed all over the sample. This is due to the lack
of interfacial bonding between the carbon fiber and PP matrix where the stress from the matrix
cant be distributed equally among the carbon fiber.
Due to the imperfect bonding between carbon fiber and PP matrix during the compression
molding, the result of the tensile test shown that only PP matrix break. So, it is depicted that the
matrix does not able to transfer the load to the reinforcement. The PP matrix also did not
successfully protect well the carbon fiber from environment where as shown in the photos there
were some carbon fibers showing outside of the matrix layer of each sample.
The recommendations for this experiment are the improvement during manufacture the
composite need to be improved. The reinforcement could not be sandwich between the matrixes.
The distribution of the fiber and the matrix in the composite did not show a strong binding and
slips during tensile test as the fiber did not break.
9.0 Conclusion
The conclusions that could be made from this experiment are the bonding between the
matrix and the reinforcement contribute a major factor in determinining the tensile strength of
the composite. The matrix break outside the gauge length and the carbon fiber did not break
causes the result for this experiment invalid. The result data are not valid for references as the
sample did not break between the gauge lengths.
Although the experiment shows a failure during testing, the data during the testing shows
that the reinforcement contribute higher tensile strength than neat matrix. This experiment can be
successful when more attention are focus on compression molding process to create the
composite.
10. References
18

[1] Tibbetts, G. G., Lake, M. L., Strong, K. L., & Rice, B. P. (2007). A review of the
fabrication and properties of vapor-grown carbon nanofiber/polymer composites.
Composites Science and Technology, 67(7), 1709-1718.
[2] Chung, D. (2012). Carbon fiber composites. Butterworth-Heinemann.

19