Advertisement

Iranian Polymer Journal

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 31–38 | Cite as

A new model for the determination of optimum fiber volume fraction under multi-axial loading in polymeric composites

  • Fathollah Taheri-Behrooz
  • Mahmood Mehrdad ShokriehEmail author
  • Hamidreza Sokhanvar
Original Research

Abstract

Mechanical properties of composite materials are a function of fiber volume fraction. Based on the existing micromechanical models, the in-plane shear strength of these materials is decreased as their fiber volume fraction is increased. However, their compressive strength is initially increased and then it is dropped as the fiber content increases. The fiber content in the composite of maximum compressive strength was referred to as the optimum fiber volume fraction. Experiments performed in this study revealed that in-plane shear strength variation versus fiber volume fraction was to some extent similar to that of compressive strength. Moreover, different optimum fiber volume fractions for in-plane shear strength and compressive strength were observed. Consideration of both in-plane shear strength and the compressive strength in combined loading was proposed to find the optimum fiber volume fraction. The modified Hashin failure criterion by Lessard was employed to relate the longitudinal and transverse compressive stress and strength to in-plane shear stress and strength. A safe region predicted by this failure criterion was represented by plotting longitudinal compressive and in-plane shear stress relation for different fiber contents. The fiber content corresponding to the maximum safe region was introduced as the optimum fiber volume fraction. Axial compressive and in-plane shear tests were conducted for obtaining the variation of longitudinal compressive and in-plane shear strengths with fiber volume fraction. To identify the capability of the model for multi-axial state of stress, a unidirectional off-axis test was also performed. The test results on the unidirectional and off-axis composite specimens confirmed the predictions by the theoretical model.

Keywords

Fiber volume fraction Composites Micromechanics Compression In-plane shear 

References

  1. 1.
    Gibson RF (2016) Principles of composite material mechanics. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chamis CC (1974) Micromechanics strength theories. Fracture and fatigue, vol 5 of composite materials. Academic Press, New York, pp 93–151Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Agarwal BD, Broutman LJ, Chandrashekhara K (2017) Analysis and performance of fiber composites, 3rd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Karayaka M, Sehitoglu H (1996) Failure behavior of unidirectional AS4/3501-6 carbon/epoxy laminates. J Compos Mater 30:1150–1176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Haberle J, Matthews F (1994) A micromechanics model for compressive failure of unidirectional fibre-reinforced plastics. J Compos Mater 28:1618–1639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xu YL, Reifsnider KL (1993) Micromechanical modeling of composite compressive strength. J Compos Mater 27:572–588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Morais AB, Marques AT (1997) A micromechanical model for the prediction of the lamina longitudinal compression strength of composite laminates. J Compos Mater 31:1397–1412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Naik N, Kumar RS (1999) Compressive strength of unidirectional composites: evaluation and comparison of prediction models. Compos Struct 46:299–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jasso AJM, Goodsell JE, Ritchey AJ, Pipes RB, Koslowski M (2011) A parametric study of fiber volume fraction distribution on the failure initiation location in open hole off-axis tensile specimen. Compos Sci Technol 71:1819–1825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yoo DY, Kim S, Park GJ, Park JJ, Kim SW (2017) Effects of fiber shape, aspect ratio, and volume fraction on flexural behavior of ultra-high-performance fiber-reinforced cement composites. Compos Struct 174:375–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abdullah A, Khalina A, Ali A (2011) Effects of fiber volume fraction on unidirectional kenaf/epoxy composites: the transition region. Polym Plast Technol Eng 50:1362–1366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Megahed A, Megahed M (2017) Fabrication and characterization of functionally graded nanoclay/glass-fiber/epoxy hybrid nanocomposite laminates. Iran Polym J 26:673–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kurd SM, Hassanifard S, Hartmann S (2017) Fracture toughness of epoxy-based stepped functionally graded materials reinforced with carbon nanotubes. Iran Polym J 26:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lessard LB, Shokrieh MM (1995) Two-dimensional modeling of composite pinned-joint failure. J Compos Mater 29:671–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hinton M, Kaddour A (2013) Triaxial test results for fibre-reinforced composites: the second world-wide failure exercise benchmark data. J Compos Mater 47:653–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang G (1994) Experimental investigation of strength criteria for S-glass, E-glass and graphite fiber composite plate. Theor Appl Fract Mech 20:59–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ASTM (1996) Standard test method for compressive properties of rigid plastics. D695-96. American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    SM21 (1982) Advanced torsion testing machine. Technical Manual, TecQuipment LtdGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    ASTM (1995) Standard test method for compressive properties of polymer matrix composite materials with unsupported gage section by shear loading. D3410-95. American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    ASTM (1983) Standard guide for testing in-plane shear properties of composite laminates. D4255-83. American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    ASTM (1985) Standard test method for ignition loss of cured reinforced resins. D2584-68. American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    ASTM (1993) Standard test method for measurement of resin content and other related properties of polymer matrix thermoset prepreg by combined mechanical and ultrasonic methods. D5300-93. American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mobasher B (2016) Textile fiber composites: testing and mechanical behavior. Textile fibre composites in civil engineering. Elsevier, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mortell D, Tanner D, McCarthy C (2017) A virtual experimental approach to microscale composites testing. Compos Struct 171:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Iran Polymer and Petrochemical Institute 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Composites Research Laboratory, Center of Excellence in Experimental Solid Mechanics and DynamicsSchool of Mechanical Engineering, Iran University of Science and TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations