Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009 Available online at www.fkkksa.utm.

my/mpj

The Mechanical Properties of Hybrid Composites Based on Self-Reinforced Polypropylene Hoo Tien Kuan1, Wesley Cantwell 2 and Hazizan Md Akil1*
1

School of Material and Mineral Resources, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Transkrian, 14300, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia
2

Department of Engineering, University of Liverpool, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT: The properties of composite materials based on two types of self-reinforced polypropylene (SRPP) and a glass fibre reinforced polypropylene are investigated under quasi-static and dynamic loading conditions. The SRPP composites were tested in tension, flexure and under impact loading in order to characterise their mechanical properties and to evaluate their relative performance. Hybrid laminates based on glass fibre reinforced PP skins and a SRPP core was then manufactured using a compression moulding technique and tested. Hybridising the glass and PP fibre composites in this manner combines the strength and stiffness of the glass fibres system with the excellent impact resistance and low density of the SRPP composite. Tests have shown that increasing the volume fraction of SRPP can enhance the energy-absorbing characteristics of the hybrid composites, whereas increasing the amount of glass fibre reinforced composite increased the flexural modulus of the hybrid. The experimental evidence suggests that hybrid composites based on combinations of thin glass fibre reinforced PP skins and a PP fibre core offer a range of mechanical properties for use in a number of engineering sectors such as the automotive industry. Keywords: degradative impact, specimen preparation, failure modes, condoms, chrome washer.

1.0

INTRODUCTION

Composite materials based on strong, stiff fibres in a low modulus matrix system are currently attracting considerable interest from a broad range of sectors, ranging from the aerospace industry to automotive manufacturers. Research has shown that these lightweight fibre-reinforced systems offer a number of impressive mechanical properties such as a high specific strength and stiffness and excellent energy-absorbing characteristics [1]. In recent years, the automotive has been using increasing amounts of thermoplastic-matrix composites, such as glass fibre reinforced polypropylene (GFPP), in the manufacture of car body panels and similar structures. Research has shown that GFPP composites can be manufactured using a simple stamping procedure and that the resulting materials offer and excellent resistance to impact and moisture ingress [2]. Currently, there is significant interest in the use of what are termed self-reinforced composites such as polypropylene (PP) fibre reinforced PP [3,4]. These so-called selfreinforced polypropylene (SRPP) composites offer the distinct advantage of being fully recyclable, suggesting that used automotive components can be removed and easily recycled at the end of their operational lives. The materials are generally supplied in roll or fabric form and are processed at temperatures between approximately 160 o and 170oC. Previous work has shown that self-reinforced PP composites offer a range of attractive mechanical properties, particularly under impact conditions. Impact tests on plain SRPP composites have shown that considerable energy can be absorbed in deforming and
*Corresponding author: H. M. Akil Email: hazizan@eng.usm.my

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

fracturing the highly ductile polymer fibres [4,5]. Further testing has shown that they maintain their impressive impact resistance at sub-zero temperatures [6]. One of the disadvantages of these materials is their relatively low stiffness properties. One means of overcoming this limitation is to combine the composites with metal alloys or similar systems [5]. Another possibility is to hybridise the low density SRPP with a glass or carbon fibre-reinforced polymer based on the same thermoplastic polymer. Hybridising the SRPP in this way clearly reduces its recyclability. However, the very low density of the SRPP should ensure that the resulting hybrid composites offer attractive specific mechanical properties. The aim of the work presented here is to investigate the possibility of combining a glass fibre reinforced polypropylene with an SRPP composite to form a lightweight composite sandwich structure. Particular attention is given to characterising the mechanical properties of these hybrid structures. 2.0 METHODS & MATERIALS

Three types of fibre reinforced polypropylene (PP) were investigated in this study. Two of the composites were self-reinforced polypropylene (SRPP), i.e. they were based on a PP fibre reinforced PP and the third was based on a glass fibre reinforced PP (referred to here as GFPP). The first SRPP, referred to in this study as SRPP1, was supplied by Lankhorst Pure Composites b.v. in the form of a continuous roll of 0o/90o woven fabric with a nominal thickness 0.3 mm. The composite tapes are co-extruded and consist of a highly oriented core with a specially formulated skin on either side. Individual plies of composite were cut from the roll in preparation for manufacture. SRPP2 was supplied in the form of a continuous 0o/90o woven roll or woven 0o/90o flat plates (depending on the thickness of the material) by Propex Fabrics. The composite is produced in a process in which highly drawn thermoplastic tapes are heat treated to selectively melt the outer surfaces of the polypropylene fibres to yield a single material type with perfect continuity between the individual fibres and the matrix. Two thicknesses of SRPP2 were employed here, the first being in the form of sheets with a nominal thickness of 3 mm and the second being in the form of a roll with a nominal thickness of 0.3 mm. The thinner layers were cut using a pair of scissors whereas the thicker sheet was cut using a guillotine. Nine different types of laminate were manufactured in this study and details of the stacking sequences of the laminates are given in Table 1. All of the panels were compression moulded in a hydraulic press with a 300 mm square platen area. Laminate A was based on SRPP1 and was manufactured by stacking sixteen plies of this fabric in a mould and heating the stack to approximately 160oC. The density of this composite is clearly very low (780 kg/m3), this being roughly half of that for the glass fibre system Laminate B was supplied in the form of a 3 mm thick laminate and was tested in this form. This composite offers a slightly higher density than SRPP1. Laminate C was based on twelve plies of GFPP in a [0,90]3s configuration. Laminates D to F were produced by incorporating different numbers (two, four and six) of SRPP2 plies between the GFPP skins. Finally, Laminates G to J were produced by stacking different numbers (two, four and six) of SRPP1 layers between two outer GFPP plies. A schematic of the stacking sequence for Laminate G is shown in Figure 1. As before, all of the laminates were manufactured by heating the hybrids to approximately 160 oC before cooling to room temperature.

72

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

Table 1: The different types of laminates and hybrid composites investigated in this study.

Laminate A B C D E F G H J

Constituent Materials 16 plies SRPP1 1 sheet SRPP2 12 plies GFPP 4 plies GFPP + 2 plies SRPP2 4 plies GFPP + 4 plies SRPP2 4 plies GFPP + 6 plies SRPP2 4 plies GFPP + 2 plies SRPP1 4 plies GFPP + 4 plies SRPP1 4 plies GFPP + 6 plies SRPP1

Stacking Sequence [0,90]8s [0,90] s [0,90]3 s [0,90,SRPP22] s [0,90,SRPP24] s [0,90,SRPP26] s [0,90,SRPP12] s [0,90,SRPP14] s [0,90,SRPP16] s

Density (kg/m3) 780 920 1480 1300 1200 1140 1250 1130 1060

2 plies of GFPP Skin: arranged at 0o and 90o Core: 2 plies of SRPP1 of GFPP Skin: 2 plies o o arranged at 0 and 90

Figure 1: Stacking sequence for a composite based on Laminate G.

Tensile tests were conducted on 20 mm wide samples on an Instron 4505 universal test machine at a crosshead displacement rate of 1 mm/minute. Flexural tests were undertaken on 20 mm wide samples supported over a span of 100 mm. The test specimens were loaded at a crosshead displacement rate of 10 mm/minute. The flexural strength and flexural modulus were determined using beam theory. Low velocity impact testing was conducted on the drop-weight impact tower using an impactor with a mass of 2 kg and a 10 mm hemi-spherical steel indentor (Figure 2). Tests were undertaken on square plates with an edge length of 100 mm, clamped in a square steel frame with a 75 mm square window. Holes were drilled along the edges of the samples in order to clamp them during the impact event, Figure 3. The drop-height of the impactor was increased until the impactor just penetrated the laminate. The energy required to perforate the target was measured for each laminate. After testing, a number of samples were sectioned using a diamond slitting wheel in order to elucidate the failure mechanisms.

73

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

Tower Falling weight Load cell Ruler

Test sample

Figure 2: Photograph and schematics of the drop-weight rig used for low velocity impact testing.

100m

Locating holes for clamping the samples

Figure 3: Schematic of the specimens used for impact testing. 3.0 RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Figure 4 shows typical stress-strain curves tensile tests of the laminates based on SRPP2, GFRPP and hybrid composites. The plain SRPP initially exhibits a non-linear response with the stiffness decreasing with increasing strain. During the initial stages of loading, localised plasticity occurs between the fibres oriented at 90o to the loading direction, leading to a knee in the stress-strain trace. Following this, the stiffness remains roughly constant until the composite fails in a ductile mode at a strain of approximately 35%. The tensile strength of the SRPP is approximately 110 MPa, slightly below the value of 120 MPa quoted by the manufacturers [6]. In contrast, the GFPP composite exhibits a more brittle response but offers a tensile strength in excess of 300 MPa. Increasing the volume fraction of SRPP in the laminates results in a response that exhibits characteristics of the two constituent systems, with the stress increasing to a maximum, at which point the GFPP layers fail, before dropping to a lower value, associated with continued loading of the inner SRPP plies. It is interesting to note that the strain associated with failure of the two outer GFPP skins decreases as the SRPP is added. For example, Laminate D with two layers of SRPP fails at a strain of approximately 10%, well
74

100mm

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

below that associated with the plain composite. An examination of the failed SRPP samples highlighted a highly fibrous mode of fracture in both the GFPP and SRPP layers, with fibre pull-out in the glass fibre layers and extensive plastic deformation in the GFPP plies being in evidence.
350 GFPP 300 250
S tress (M pa)

200 150 SRPP2 100 50 D 0 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 Strain E 0.25 0.30 F 0.35 0.40

Figure 4: Flexural stress-strain curves for SRPP2, the GFPP and hybrid composites

Figure 5 shows the variation of tensile strength with volume fraction of SRPP for both types of composite. For clarity, only average values are shown and standard deviations have not been included. From the figure, it is evident that the increasing of volume fraction of SRPP reduces the tensile strength of both types of the laminate. The figure suggests that the tensile strength of the laminates based on SRPP1 remains roughly constant for volume fractions greater than approximately 40%. The laminates based on SRPP2 offered lower values of tensile strength than its counterpart, due mainly to the lower tensile strength of the plain SRPP2 composite. In order to take account of differences in density between the various composites, the tensile data in Figure 5 were normalised by their respective densities to yield a specific tensile strength (STS) in Figure 6. Here, it is interesting to note that the STS of the plain woven SRPP1 was greater than that of the plain (0o,90o) GFPP, i.e. the polymer fibre composite offers a superior specific strength that the more conventional glass fibre system. In addition, the values of STS for the SRPP1 hybrid systems were comparable to the plain glass fibre system. This evidence highlights the potential offered by PP reinforced composites, suggesting that certain key specific mechanical properties can exceed those of more traditional thermoplastic-matrix composites.

75

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

300

250

Tensile strength (MPa)

200

150

100

50

SRPP1 SRPP2 0 20 40 60 80 100

Volume fraction SRPP (%)

Figure 5: The variation of tensile strength with volume fraction of SRPP.

0.25

Specific Tensile Strength (MPa m /kg)

0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

SRPP1 SRPP2

0 0 20 40 60 80 100

Volume fraction SRPP (%)

Figure 6: The variation of specific tensile strength with volume fraction of SRPP. Figure 7 shows typical stress-strain curves following flexural tests of the hybrids based on SRPP2 as well as the two constituent materials. The figure clearly highlights the superior flexural strength and stiffness of the plain glass fibre reinforced PP composite. It is interesting to note that the flexural strength of the plain 0o/90o GFPP is significantly higher that its tensile strength. This is commonly observed in flexural testing of composites, and is due to the fact that a smaller volume of material is loaded to high stresses in the flexural test. Hybridising the composites, by placing the stronger, stiffer GFPP composite either side of the SRPP core, yields composites that offer properties between those of the two individual components. In contrast, the plain SRPP composites offer very low values of flexural strength and stiffness due to the rather modest flexural properties exhibited by the PP fibres.
76

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

600

500

GFPP D

400
Stress (MPa)

300

200

F
100

SRPP2
0 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 Strain 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.09 0.10

Figure 7: Stress-strain curves following flexural tests on SRPP2, the GFPP and hybrids of both of these materials. The flexural properties of the two types of SRPP system were compared by normalising the flexural strength and flexural modulus values by their corresponding densities and these results are shown in Figures 8 and 9 respectively. An examination of Figure 8 shows that the specific flexural strength (SFS) of SRPP2 at 30% SRPP almost equal to that of the plain GFPP. The remaining hybrids offer values of SFS between 10% and 30% lower that of the plain glass fibre composite. Clearly, the specific flexural properties of the SRPP composites remain very low in spite of the low density of these PP fibre systems. A comparison of Figures 6 and 8 highlights the fact that the specific flexural properties are significantly higher than their tensile counterparts, again due to the fact that only a localised region is loaded to a high stress in bending.

0.35

Specific Flexural Strength (MPa m /kg))

0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1 SRPP1 0.05 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 SRPP2

Volume fraction SRPP (%)

Figure 8: The variation of the specific flexural strength with volume fraction of SRPP.
77

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

35

Specific Flexural Modulus (MPa m 3 /kg)

30 25 20 15 10 SRPP1 5 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 SRPP2

Volume Fraction SRPP (%)

Figure 9: The variation of the specific flexural modulus with volume fraction of SRPP. Figure 9 shows the variation of specific flexural modulus with volume fraction of SRPP. The specific flexural properties of the composites based on SRPP2 decrease steadily as the polypropylene fibre composite is added. Clearly, the modulus of the plain SRPP is significantly lower than that of the GFPP, a reflection of the lower stiffness of the PP fibres. The hybrids based on SRPP1 offered slightly higher values of specific modulus, partly as a result of the higher modulus of the plain SRPP. As mentioned previously, the perforation resistances of the laminates investigated in this study were evaluated by determining the energy required for perforation under low velocity impact conditions. Clearly, the thicknesses and the densities of the nine laminates investigated here vary, making it difficult to compare absolute values of perforation energy. Previous workers have compared the impact properties of different laminates by determining the specific perforation energy of the respective systems [7]. Figure 10 shows the variation of the specific perforation energy (SPE) of the composite targets with volume fraction of SRPP. An examination of the data indicates that the SPE of SRPP1 is particularly impressive, being almost double that of the GFPP and SRPP2 systems. An examination of the figure indicates that the SPE of Laminates G to J, all based on SRPP1 increase steadily with increasing volume fraction of SRPP composite. In contrast, the SPE of hybrid based on SRPP2 reaches a maximum at a volume fraction of 50% before decreasing at higher values of Vf. This evidence suggests that SRPPs and their hybrids offer very impressive perforation resistances, suggesting that they offer potential for use in the design of impact resistant structures.

78

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

18

Specific perforation energy (Jm /kg)

16

SRPP1 SRPP2

14

12

10

6 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Volume fraction SRPP (%)

Figure 10: The variation of specific perforation energy with volume fraction of SRPP. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS

The mechanical properties of composites based on self-reinforced polypropylene and glass fibre reinforced PP have been investigated. Results shown that one of the SRPP composites and hybrids based on this composites offer specific tensile strengths comparable to that offered by the plane glass fibre system. Flexural tests on the composites showed that hybrids can be developed that offer similar values of specific flexural strength to that offered by a plain glass fibre reinforced PP. Low velocity impact tests on the nine types of laminate showed that all of the hybrids offered specific perforation resistances higher than those of the glass fibre reinforced polypropylene. Here, it was shown that increasing the volume fraction of one of the two SRPPs resulted in a steady increase in the specific perforation energy of the hybrid, with the plain SRPP offering a value of SPE that was approximately double that of the plain glass fibre composite. The evidence presented here indicates that full-recyclable self-reinforcing polypropylene composites offer significant potential, particularly when loaded in tension and low velocity impact loading. Flexural testing has shown that these polymer fibre systems offer relatively poor flexural properties. For such applications, hybridisation with a glass fibre reinforced PP appears to offer a suitable compromise. However, the incorporation of glass fibres reduces the recyclability of these systems.

REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] Peters, S.T., Handbook of Composites, Chapman and Hall 1998. Davies, P and Cantwell, W.J., Fracture of glass/polypropylene laminates: influence of cooling rate after moulding, Composites, 25 (1994) 869-877. Romhany, G., Barany, T., Czigany, T., and Karger-Kocsis, J., Fracture and failure behavior of fabric-reinforced all-poly(propylene) composite, Polymers for Advanced Technologies 18 (2007) 90-96.

79

Md Akil et al, Malaysian Polymer Journal, Vol. 4, No.2, p 71-80, 2009

[4]

Cabrera, N., Alcock, B., Loos, J., and Peijs, T., Processing of all-polypropylene composites for ultimate recyclability, J. Materials: Design and Applications, 218 (2004) 145-155. Reyes-Villanueva, G. and Cantwell, W.J., The high velocity impact response of composite and FML-reinforced sandwich structures, Comp. Sci. and Tech., 64 (2004) 35-54. www.curvonline.com (accessed February 2008) Vlot, A., Kroon, E. and LaRocca, G., Impact response & dynamic failure of composites & laminate materials, Key Eng. Materials, Vols. 141-143 (1998) 235-276.

[5]

[6] [7]

80