| Literature DB >> 30991702 |
Dumitru Bolcu1, Marius Marinel Stănescu2.
Abstract
As a result of manufacture, composite materials can appear to have variations to their properties due to the existence of structural changes. In this paper, we studied the influence of material irregularity on the mechanical behavior of two categories of bars for which we have used hemp fabric as a reinforcing material. The common matrix is a hybrid resin based on Dammar and epoxy resin. We molded two types of bars within each of the previously mentioned categories. The first type, also called "ideal bar", was made of layers in which the volume proportion and the orientation of the reinforcing material was the same in each section. The ideal bar does not show variations of mechanical properties along it. The second type of bar was molded to have one or two layers where, between certain sections, the reinforcing material was interrupted in several segments. We have determined some mechanical properties, the characteristic curves (strain-stress), the tensile strength, and elongation at break for all the sample sets on trial. Moreover, we have studied the influence of the non-uniformities on the mechanical behavior of the composites by entering certain quality factors that have been calculated after experimental determinations.Entities:
Keywords: composite materials; hybrid resin; mechanical behavior; natural reinforcement; non-uniformities
Year: 2019 PMID: 30991702 PMCID: PMC6514871 DOI: 10.3390/ma12081232
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Hybrid resin sample.
Figure 2Hemp fabric: (a) type “A”; (b) type “B”.
Details about the manufactured samples.
| Abbreviation | The Total Number of Layers | Number of Layers | Length of | Number of |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A00 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| A10 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 10 |
| A12 | 5 | 1 | 20 | 10 |
| A14 | 5 | 1 | 40 | 10 |
| A20 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 10 |
| A22 | 5 | 2 | 20 | 10 |
| A24 | 5 | 2 | 40 | 10 |
| B00 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| B10 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 10 |
| B12 | 5 | 1 | 20 | 10 |
| B14 | 5 | 1 | 40 | 10 |
| B20 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 10 |
| B22 | 5 | 2 | 20 | 10 |
| B24 | 5 | 2 | 40 | 10 |
Figure 3The tensile test assemblage of a sample from the hybrid resin.
Figure 4The characteristic curve of a Dammar-based resin sample.
Figure 5The characteristic curve for a sample A00.
Figure 6The characteristic curve for a sample: (a) A10; (b) A12; (c) A14.
Figure 7The characteristic curve for a sample: (a) A20; (b) A22; (c) A24.
Type “A” hemp fabric reinforced samples: lower and upper values (arithmetical average value and deviation value) for the elasticity modulus, tensile strength, and elongation at break.
| Abbreviation Sample | Modulus of Elasticity | Tensile Strength | Elongation at Break |
|---|---|---|---|
| A00 | 4473–4622 (4547 ± 75) | 55–57 (56 ± 1) | 2.24–2.29 (2.27 ± 0.03) |
| A10 | 4440–4618 (4529 ± 89) | 47–48 (47.5 ± 0.5) | 1.89–1.95 (1.92 ± 0.03) |
| A12 | 4326–4445 (4386 ± 60) | 47–48 (47.5 ± 0.5) | 1.96–2.02 (1.99 ± 0.03) |
| A14 | 4090–4209 (4150 ± 60) | 46–48 (47 ± 1) | 2.08–2.16 (2.12 ± 0.04) |
| A20 | 4421–4573 (4497 ± 76) | 40–41 (40.5 ± 0.5) | 1.56–1.62 (1.59 ± 0.03) |
| A22 | 4062–4199 (4131 ± 68) | 39–41 (40 ± 1) | 1.71–1.77 (1.74 ± 0.03) |
| A24 | 3692–3790 (3741 ± 49) | 38–40 (39 ± 1) | 1.87–1.93 (1.90 ± 0.03) |
Figure 8The characteristic curve for a sample B00.
Figure 9The characteristic curve for a sample: (a) B10; (b) B12; (c) B14.
Figure 10The characteristic curve for a sample: (a) B20; (b) B22; (c) B24.
Type “B” hemp fabric reinforced samples: lower and upper values (arithmetical average value and deviation value) for the elasticity modulus, tensile strength, and elongation at break.
| Abbreviation Sample | Modulus of Elasticity | Tensile Strength | Elongation at Break |
|---|---|---|---|
| B00 | 6580–6654 (6617 ± 37) | 74–76 (75 ± 1) | 2.02–2.10 (2.06 ± 0.04) |
| B10 | 6528–6610 (6569 ± 41) | 62–64 (63 ± 1) | 1.60–1.66 (1.63 ± 0.03) |
| B12 | 6094–6226 (6160 ± 66) | 62–64 (63 ± 1) | 1.70–1.74 (1.72 ± 0.02) |
| B14 | 5872–5989 (5930 ± 58) | 61–64 (62.5 ± 1.5) | 1.86–1.92 (1.89 ± 0.03) |
| B20 | 6568–6640 (6604 ± 36) | 51–53 (52 ± 1) | 1.21–1.29 (1.25 ± 0.04) |
| B22 | 5770–5899 (5834 ± 64) | 50–54 (52 ± 2) | 1.44–1.48 (1.46 ± 0.02) |
| B24 | 5257–5363 (5310 ± 53) | 50–53 (51.5 ± 1.5) | 1.72–1.82 (1.77 ± 0.05) |
Quality factors for composites reinforced by type “A” fabric.
| Sample Type | Elasticity Factor | Resistance Factor | Uniformity Factor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Theoretical | Experimental | Theoretical | Experimental | Theoretical | Experimental | |
| A10 | 1 | 0.991 | 0.853 | 0.848 | 0.853 | 0.855 |
| A12 | 0.967 | 0.959 | 0.853 | 0.848 | 0.883 | 0.884 |
| A14 | 0.936 | 0.908 | 0.853 | 0.839 | 0.912 | 0.924 |
| A20 | 1 | 0.984 | 0.707 | 0.723 | 0.707 | 0.735 |
| A22 | 0.923 | 0.903 | 0.707 | 0.714 | 0.765 | 0.790 |
| A24 | 0.858 | 0.818 | 0.707 | 0.696 | 0.824 | 0.851 |
Quality factors for composites reinforced by type “B” fabric.
| Sample Type | Elasticity Factor | Resistance Factor | Uniformity Factor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Theoretical | Experimental | Theoretical | Experimental | Theoretical | Experimental | |
| B10 | 1 | 0.993 | 0.836 | 0.840 | 0.836 | 0.846 |
| B12 | 0.962 | 0.931 | 0.836 | 0.840 | 0.869 | 0.902 |
| B14 | 0.927 | 0.896 | 0.836 | 0.833 | 0.902 | 0.929 |
| B20 | 1 | 0.998 | 0.673 | 0.693 | 0.673 | 0.694 |
| B22 | 0.911 | 0.882 | 0.673 | 0.693 | 0.738 | 0.785 |
| B24 | 0.837 | 0.802 | 0.673 | 0.687 | 0.804 | 0.856 |