| Literature DB >> 35591358 |
Soundhar Arumugam1, Jayakrishna Kandasamy2, Subramani Venkatesan2, Rajesh Murugan2, Valayapathy Lakshmi Narayanan2, Mohamed Thariq Hameed Sultan3,4,5, Farah Syazwani Shahar5, Ain Umaira Md Shah5, Tabrej Khan6, Tamer Ali Sebaey6,7.
Abstract
The main objective of this study is to examine the impact of reinforcements on the strength of natural fiber composites. Recent advancements in natural fiber composites have minimized the usage of man-made fibers, especially in the field of structural applications such as aircraft stiffeners and rotor blades. However, large variations in the strength and modulus of natural fiber degrade the properties of the composites and lower the safety level of the structures under dynamic load. Without compromising the safety of the composite structure, it is significant to enrich the strength and modulus of natural fiber reinforcement for real-time applications. The strength and durability of natural fiber can be enriched by reinforcing natural fiber. The reinforcement effect on natural fiber in their woven, braided, and knit forms enhances their structural properties. It improves the properties of natural fiber composites related to reinforcement with short and random-orientation fibers. The article also reviews the effect of the hybridization of natural fiber with cellulosic fiber, synthetic fiber, and intra-ply hybridization on its mechanical properties, dynamic mechanical properties, and free vibration characteristics, which are important for predicting the life and performance of natural fiber composites for weight-sensitive applications under dynamic load.Entities:
Keywords: dynamic mechanical; mechanical; natural fiber composite; orientation; vibration; woven natural fiber
Year: 2022 PMID: 35591358 PMCID: PMC9103548 DOI: 10.3390/ma15093025
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
Figure 1Structure of natural fiber.
Figure 2Common natural fibers used in composites: (a) bamboo (grass fiber type); (b) banana (leaf fiber type); (c) coir (fruit fiber type); (d) cotton (seed fiber type); (e) kenaf (bast fiber type); (f) flax (bast fiber type); (g) hemp (bast fiber type); (h) jute (bast fiber type); (i) nettle (grass fiber type); (j) oil palm (fruit fiber type); (k) ramie (bast fiber type); (l) sisal (leaf fiber type).
Figure 3Classification of natural fibers.
Figure 4Schematic diagram of randomly oriented short fiber composite.
Figure 5Schematic of various woven mats: (a) plain; (b) basket; (c) twill; (d) satin.
Mechanical properties of plant fiber-reinforced polymeric biocomposites.
| Composites | Flexural Strength (MPa) | Flexural Modulus (GPa) | Tensile Strength (MPa) | Tensile Modulus (GPa) | Elongation at Break (%) | Author and Year | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jute/polypropylene | 77.32 | 4.34 | 56.71 | 1.82 | – | Chandekar et al. (2020) | [ |
| ramie (5-layer) /epoxy | 98.73 ± 5.98 | – | 99.04 ± 2.85 | – | – | Darshan and Suresha (2021) | [ |
| Kenaf/polypropylene | 45.56 | 2.37 | 24.67 | 2.35 | – | Akthar et al. (2016) | [ |
| Sisal/epoxy | 252.39 ± 12.11 | 11.32 ± 1.02 | 83.96 ± 6.94 | 1.58 ± 0.08 | – | Gupta and Srivastava (2016) | [ |
| Rice straw/LDPE | 33.7 | 1.6 | 13.7 | 0.144 | 24.10 | Xia et al. (2018) | [ |
| Pineapple/epoxy | ~100 | – | 80.12 ± 2.23 | 8.15 ± 0.23 | – | Odusote and Oyewo (2016) | [ |
| Rice straw/polypropylene | 36.5 ± 0.5 | 1.28 ± 0.027 | 33.2 ± 0.5 | 1.66 ± 0.025 | 23.9 ± 2.9 | Hidalgo-Salazar and Salinas (2019) | [ |
| Reed/citric acid | 12.51 | 2.45 | – | – | 0.54 | Ferrandez-Garcia et al. (2019) | [ |
| Basalt fiber/silk fiber/epoxy | 151.42 | 6.20 | 118.85 | 2.15 | – | Georgiopoulos et al. (2016) | [ |
| Sisal/cotton/polyester | 270 ± 4 | 12.62 ± 0.41 | 65 ± 5 | 0.52 ± 0.015 | 12.31 | Sathishkumar et al. (2017) | [ |
| Hemp/sisal/epoxy | 44.47 ± 2 | 1.892 ± 0.061 | 31.76 ± 0.88 | 1.173 ± 0.32 | 3.2 6 ± 0.41 | Thiagamani et al. (2019) | [ |
| Sisal/chitosan/epoxy | 136 ± 2.8 | 7.023 ± 0.61 | 46.70 ± 3.5 | 3.821 ± 0.13 | 2.176 ±0.82 | Soundhar et al. (2019) | [ |
| Sisal/bagasse/epoxy | 0.76 | – | 27.36 | – | 0.06 | James et al. (2020) | [ |
| Jute/hemp/flax/epoxy | 66 ± 4 | 1.25 ± 0.23 | 60 ± 3 | 1.88 ± 0.21 | 5.8 ± 2.2 | Chaudhary et al. (2018) | [ |
| Banana/ramie/polypropylene | 30 | 35 ± 2 | Sai krishnan et al. (2020) | [ | |||
| sisal/banana/coir/epoxy | 48.60 | 3.45 | 26.35 | 1.20 | – | Balaji et al. (2019) | [ |
| Date palm/flax/thermoplastic starch | 73.6 | 5 | 31 | 2.8 | 5.25 | Ibrahim et al. (2014) | [ |
| Kenaf fiber/phenolic resin | 62.12 | 2.63 | 15.8 | 4.350 | 2.89 | Naresh Kumar et al. (2021) | [ |
| Banana/jute fiber/vinylester | 70 | 3.26 | 17.98 | 1.89 | 4.5 | Ravindran et al. (2021) | [ |
| Red banana/ramie/vinyl ester | 80 | – | 42 | – | – | Sai krishnan et al. (2020) | [ |
| Flax/jute/polypropylene | 58.79 ± 1.73 | 1.39 ± 0.11 | 39.48 ± 1.61 | 2.85 ± 0.12 | 2.90 ± 0.18 | Karaduman et al. (2015) | [ |
| Coconut sheath/epoxy | 76.80 | – | 58.60 | – | – | Suresh Kumar et al. (2014) | [ |
| Areca sheath/palm leaf sheath fiber/epoxy | 51 | – | 46 | – | 0.18 | Ganesh et al. (2020) | [ |
| Kenaf/jute fiber | 57.2 | 4.62 | 43.21 | 3.60 | 2.1 | Khan et al. (2019) | [ |
| Banana/kenaf/epoxy | 24 | 2.32 | 54 | 0.291 | 18.5 | Sathish et al. (2017) | [ |
Some of the research work related to dynamic mechanical properties.
| No. | Composites | Observations | Authors and Year | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Kenaf and hemp bast fiber-reinforced polyester | The composites had a relatively higher storage modulus than other samples. | Aziz and Ansell (2004) | [ |
| 2. | Natural fiber-reinforced polyethylene | The developed composite had relatively better shear properties than other samples. | Franco and Valadez (2005) | [ |
| 3. | Coir fiber-reinforced natural rubber | Interfacial bonding influence energy dissipation was observed. | Geethamma et al. (2005) | [ |
| 4. | Jute fiber-reinforced green composites | The developed composites had relatively better tensile property and toughness. | Hossain et al. (2011) | [ |
| 5. | Doum fiber-reinforced polypropylene composites | The usage of a coupling agent in the composites improved the rheological properties. | Essabir et al. (2013) | [ |
| 6. | Flax- and linen-fabric-reinforced epoxy | Improved fiber/matrix adhesion reduced the damping ratio of the composite. | Yan (2012) | [ |
| 7. | Coconut sheath fiber epoxy | The enhanced interface bonding reduced the damping ratio of the fiber. | Kumar et al. (2014) | [ |
| 8. | Banana fiber-reinforced phenol formaldehyde resole | The developed composite had a better glass transition temperature and storage modulus. | Indira et al. (2014) | [ |
| 9. | Woven coconut sheath/polyester composite | The developed composites demonstrated better damping characteristics than the counterpart materials. | Rajini et al. (2013a) | [ |
| 10. | Banana/polyester hybrid composites | Reducing the red-mud particle composition increased the damping properties of the composites. | Uthayakumar et al. (2014) | [ |
| 11. | Ensete stem fibers/polyester composites | The storage modulus of the constructed composites made from ensete fibers treated with 5.0% NaOH was 1412 MPa, i.e., it was 108% more than that of untreated ensete-fiber polyester composites. | Negawo et al. (2019) | [ |
| 12. | Date palm fibers/epoxy composites | The storage modulus and loss modulus were improved by including date palm fibers (DPF) in epoxy. However, 50% DPF loading showed greater performance than 40% or 60% DPF loading. | Gheith et al. (2019) | [ |
| 13. | Banana fiber (BF)/recycled high-density polyethylene composites (RHDPEs) | The modulus of the RHDPE matrix was significantly increased when BF was added. An increase in the storage modulus value of about 20.42% was found while adding BF to RHDPE. | Sukanya and Kothapalli (2018) | [ |
| 14. | Pineapple leaf fiber (PALF) hybridized with basalt-reinforced epoxy composite | Changes in fiber orientations were discovered to have a significant impact on the loss tangent and storage modulus. | Doddi et al. (2020) | [ |
| 15. | Luffa cylindrical/ polyester composite | The effects of fiber surface treatment (with NaOH, silane, and Ca(OH)2) and fiber content on the generated vegetable fiber (luffa cylindrica) polyester composite were investigated (30%, 40%, and 50%). The Ca(OH)2-treated fiber had a high peak in the damping factor (at 50%), whereas silane-treated fiber had a higher loss modulus (at 50%). | Kalusuraman et al. (2020) | [ |
Various studies on natural fiber hybrid polymer composites.
| Hybrid | Matrix | Observations | References | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Rice husk/sisal | Polyurethane | A total of 82/18 (% | Otto et al. (2017) [ |
| Bamboo fiber/sisal | Polyester | Tensile strength increased by 30%, flexural strength increased by 27.4%, and impact strength increased by 36.9%. | Prasanna et al. (2016) | |
| Jute/hemp/flax fiber | Epoxy | The developed hybrid composite exhibited a higher modulus, tensile strength, and impact strength. | Chaudhary et al. (2018b) [ | |
| Jute/ramie | Epoxy | Mechanical testing revealed that increasing the quantity of bidirectional woven ramie fiber enhanced the flexural and tensile strength of the hybrid composites, whereas increasing the content of chopped jute fiber lowered the flexural and tensile strength. | Mohanvel et al. (2021) | |
| Sugarcane bagasse/bamboo | Polyurethane foam | In comparison to other combinations, the bagasse fiber/bamboo charcoal 30/70-based composites had a greater flexural strength, impact strength, and thermal insulation coefficient. | Abedom et al. (2021) | |
| Caryota/sisal | Epoxy | Over single-fiber composites, hybrid composites exhibited improved mechanical characteristics. | Atmakuri et al. (2021) | |
| Ramie/sisal/curaua | Epoxy | Hybridization of sisal-based composites improved mechanical characteristics. The thermal investigation revealed that the hybridization had no effect on the composite’s thermal stability. | Pereira et al. (2020) | |
| Banana/coconut sheath fiber | Polyester | The mechanical properties were varied with the layering sequence of banana and coconut sheath fiber. Irrespective of the relative wt% of the fibers and layering sequence used, alkali treatment exhibited a positive effect on the assessed properties. | Senthil Kumar et al. (2016) [ | |
|
| Kenaf fiber/Kevlar fiber | Epoxy | The hybridization of kenaf with Kevlar fiber improved the mechanical characteristics of epoxy composites. | Ramasamy et al. (2021) |
| Flax fiber/basalt | Green vinyl ester | The hybrid composite was prepared by using flax fiber reinforcement (FFR) in the central zone and basalt fiber reinforcement (BFR) in the external layers for applications of boats and yachts. The results showed significant impact behavior improvements for hybrid composites compared to single composites. | Zivkovic et al. (2017) | |
| Sisal fiber/glass | Epoxy | Higher mechanical properties were observed while placing glass fiber as an external layer and sisal fiber as an inner layer. | Soundhar et al. (2020) | |
| Flax fiber/carbon | Epoxy | Hybrid composites were prepared by using flax and carbon fiber with different stacking sequences. Results revealed that the presence of carbon fiber laminates as outer layers and flax as inner layers showed higher mechanical properties in contrast to other combinations. | Sarasini et al. (2016) | |
| Basalt/glass fiber | Unsaturated polyester | In comparison to clean glass fiber composites, adding basalt to a glass fiber-reinforced unsaturated polyester resin enhanced the tensile, density, and flexural characteristics of the composites. | Sapuan et al. (2020) | |
| Bamboo/glass fiber | Polypropylene | The hybrid composites (bamboo–glass fiber) performed minimum heat reduction, and were thermally steadier before starting to degrade at 275 °C and fully degraded at 400 °C compared to glass-polypropylene composites. | Zuhudi et al. (2016) | |
| Sugar palm fiber/carbon | Epoxy | The ratio of 60/40 hybrid sugar palm yarn/carbon fiber-reinforced composites delivered the best flexural and torsion performances. | Baihaqi et al. (2021) | |
| Areca sheath/jute/glass | Epoxy | The hybrid composites using jute fiber as middle layers, areca sheath fiber as an inner layer, and glass textiles as an exterior layer showed a significant increase in mechanical properties. | Jothibasu et al. (2018) | |
| Basalt fiber/Kevlar | Polypropylene | Results indicate that there was a considerable enhancement in the energy-absorbing capability of hybrid composites (Kevlar/basalt/polypropylene) compared to Kevlar/polypropylene and basalt/polypropylene composites. | Bandaru et al. (2016) | |
| Kenaf fiber/Kevlar | Epoxy | Due to the sandwich structural effect, the hybrid composites had better mechanical characteristics in tension than compression. | Salman et al. (2016) [ | |
|
| Waste cotton/wood sawdust | Polypropylene | The hybrid composites showed higher tensile strength and flexural strength up to 15 wt% of addition of wood sawdust particles in the polypropylene composites. | Islam et al. (2019) [ |
| Prosopis juliflora fiber/CaCO3,/TiO2 and Al2O3 | Epoxy | Hybrid composites were prepared by using prosopis juliflora fiber with three different filler materials (CaCO3, TiO2, and Al2O3). The composites with Al2O3 filler material attained higher mechanical properties than the other two filler materials. | Venkateshwar et al. (2019) [ | |
| Kenaf/magnesium hydroxide | Epoxy | The hybrid composites were prepared by the addition of magnesium hydroxide (MH) filler-reinforced kenaf/epoxy hybrid composites with various weight percentages (10%, 15%, 20%, and 25%). When compared to the rest of the hybrid composites produced in this investigation, the 20% MH/kenaf/epoxy hybrid composites had better mechanical strength, thermal stability, and dynamic characteristics. | Saba et al. (2019) [ | |
| Bamboo fiber/fly ash | Polypropylene | Hybrid composites were prepared by using bamboo fiber and polypropylene along with different concentrations of fly ash. With the addition of 25 wt% of fiber in the composition, the flexural strength and bending moment were increased. | Venkateswara Rao et al. (2019) [ | |
| Coir fiber/graphene nanosheet | Polyester | The mechanical characteristics of hybrid composites with graphene loadings of 1.5 wt% were better. | Abdellaoui et al. (2019) [ | |
| Banana fiber/fly ash | Epoxy | The composites were prepared with banana fiber/epoxy and banana fiber/fly ash/epoxy hybrid composites. In comparison to epoxy composite, it was found that fly ash/epoxy composite had better properties. | Kauser et al. (2019) [ | |
| Hemp/sisal/silica nanoparticles | Epoxy | Compression molding was used to make hemp–sisal natural fiber-reinforced hybrid epoxy composites with different proportions of silica nanoparticles (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 wt%). The composites containing 2 wt% silica nanoparticles exhibited maximum tensile strength, impact strength, and hardness. | Singh et al. (2021) [ | |
| Sisal fiber/mustard cake/pine needle | Polyester | The hybrid polymer composites based on 40 wt% sisal and 5 wt% pine needles delivered superior mechanical and wear properties compared to other combinations. | Kumar et al. (2017) | |
| Coir fiber/aramid fiber/coconut shell powder | Vinyl ester | The hybrid polymer composites based on 20 wt% coir fiber, 10 wt% aramid fiber, and 5 wt% coconut shell particles showed a 52% increase in hardness, 145% increase in tensile strength, and 75% increase in the modulus compared to other combinations. | Udaya Kumar et al. (2018) [ | |
| Hemp fiber/eggshell | Epoxy | The hybrid polymer composites were prepared by using hemp fiber and eggshell particles using varying proportions of fillers at 0.25%, 0.5 %, and 1.0%. The mechanical results demonstrated that adding fiber to epoxy resin improved its load-bearing properties. Adding up to 0.5% eggshell as a filler enhanced the composite’s thermal stability. | Inbakumar and Ramesh (2018) [ |
Figure 6Various intra-ply hybrid woven natural fiber mats.
Figure 7Different types of intra-ply hybrid woven natural/glass fiber mats.