Abstract
Dynamic modulus of elasticity (DMoE) of natural fiber reinforced high density polyethylene composites prepared with variety of fibers and their different proportions was determined using ultrasonic pulse propagation method. The DMoE was compared with the static modulus of elasticity as determined by both tensile and flexural test. The elastic modulus of the composites increased with the increasing fiber content irrespective of type of fiber. However, the incremental rate in modulus was varying with fiber type. Jute fibers resulted in maximum improvement whereas coir fibers reinforcement had marginal improvement in stiffness of the composites. The elastic modulus was theoretically modelled for all fiber types based on the elastic modulus of the fibers and HDPE and the model was effective in describing the change in modulus with increasing fiber content. There was a strong correlation between DMoE and static MoE (both tensile and flexural modulus). The ratio of DMoE to static MoE was found to vary with fiber content and smaller differences were observed in stiffer composites. This suggests that static MoE was influenced by the visco-elastic behaviour of HDPE and its composites at lower fiber content.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aggarwal P (2008) Studies on bio-fiber filled thermoplastic composites. PhD dissertation, FRI University, Dehradun, p 160
Bucur V (1996) Acoustics of wood as a tool for nondestructive testing. Proceedings of 10th international symposium on nondestructive testing of wood, Lausanne, Switzerland, p 53–59
Chauhan S, Sethy A (2016) Differences in dynamic modulus of elasticity determined by three vibration methods and their relationship with static modulus of elasticity. Maderas Ciencia y tecnología 18(2):373–382
Chauhan S, Entwistle K, Walker J (2005) Differences in acoustic velocity by resonance and transit-time methods in an anisotropic laminated wood medium. Holzforschung 59:428–434
Chauhan S, Karmarkar A, Aggarwal P (2006) Evaluation of dynamic elastic properties of wood-filled polypropylene composites. J App Polym Sci 102:1706–1711
Chauhan S, Aggarwal P, Karmarkar A (2016) The effectiveness of m-TMI-grafted-PP as a coupling agent for wood polymer composites. J Compos Mater 50:3515–3524
Divos F, Tanaka T (2000) Effect of creep on modulus of elasticity determination of wood. ASME J Vib Acoust 122(1):90–92
Fidelis MEA, Pereira TVC, Gomes O, Silva F, Filho R (2013) The effect of fiber morphology on the tensile strength of natural fibers. J Mater Res Technol 2(2):19–157
Hearmon R (1966) Vibration testing of wood. For Prod J 16(8):29–40
Kale A, Chauhan S (2017) Non-destructive estimation of modulus of elasticity of wood polymer composites. J Indian Acad Wood Sci 14(1):18–23
Kolsky H (1963) Stress waves in solids. Dover Publication Inc, New York
Mache A (2015) An advanced study on jute-polyester composite for mechanical design and impact safety applications. PhD Dissertation, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru
Nzojou P, Freed J, Kamdem DP (2006) Relationship between non destructive and static modulus of elasticity of commercial wood plastic composite. Holz als roh- und Werkstoff 64:90–93
Tanasoiu V, Micleaa C, Tanasoiua C (2002) Nondestructive testing techniques and piezoelectric ultrasonics transducers for wood and built in wooden structures. J Optoelectron Adv Mater 4(4):949–957
Toledo FRV, Ghavami K, Engaland GL (2005) Free restrained and drying shrinkage of cement mortar composites reinforced with vegetable fibers. Cem Concr Compos 27(5):537–546
Tucker B, Bender D, Pollock D (1998) Predicting flexural strength of wood plastic composites using nondestructive evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 11th international symposium on nondestructive testing of wood, Madison, pp 33–41
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Karmarkar, S., Shashidhar, G.M. & Chauhan, S. A comparative study of dynamic and static modulus of elasticity of natural fiber reinforced HDPE composites. J Indian Acad Wood Sci 15, 80–86 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13196-018-0211-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13196-018-0211-8