Reinforced Polymer Composites E-Book
124,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Sprache: Englisch
Presents state-of-the-art processing techniques and readily applicable knowledge on processing of polymer composites
The book presents the advancement in the field of reinforced polymer composites with emphasis on manufacturing techniques, including processing of different reinforced polymer composites, secondary processing of green composites, and post life cycle processing. It discusses the advantages and limitations of each processing method and the effect of processing parameters on the overall performance of the composites. Characterization and applications of reinforced polymer composites are also introduced.
Reinforced Polymer Composites: Processing, Characterization and Post Life Cycle Assessment starts off by providing readers with a comprehensive overview of the field. It then introduces them to the fabrication of both short fiber/filler reinforced polymer composites and laminated reinforced polymer composites. Next, it takes them through the processing of polymer-based nanocomposites; the many advances in curing methods of reinforced polymer composites; and post life cycle processing, re-processing, and disposal mechanisms of reinforced polymer composites. Numerous other chapters cover: synthetic versus natural fiber reinforced plastics; characterization techniques of reinforced plastics; friction and wear analysis of reinforced plastics; secondary processing of reinforced plastics; and applications of reinforced plastics.
-Presents the latest development in materials, processing, and characterization techniques, as well as applications of reinforced polymer composites
-Guides users in choosing the best processing methods to produce polymer composites and successfully manufacture high quality products
-Assists academics in sorting out basic research questions and helps those in industry manufacture products, such as marine, automotive, aerospace, and sport goods
Reinforced Polymer Composites: Processing, Characterization and Post Life Cycle Assessment is an important book for materials scientists, polymer chemists, chemical engineers, process engineers, and anyone involved in the chemical or plastics technology industry.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 496
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2019
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
1 Overview and Present Status of Reinforced Polymer Composites
1.1 Introduction
1.2 FRPCs
1.3 FRPCs Applications and Future Prospects
1.4 Conclusion
References
2 Fabrication of Short Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Challenges with Composite Materials
2.3 Preprocessing of Natural Fibers and Polymeric Matrix
2.4 Processing of Polymeric Matrix Composites
2.5 Conclusions
References
3 Fabrication of Composite Laminates
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Fabrication Processes
3.3 Conclusions
References
4 Processing of Polymer‐Based Nanocomposites
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Classification of Nanomaterials
4.3 Fabrication Techniques of Polymer Matrix Nanocomposites
4.4 Future Perspective and Challenges
Acknowledgment
References
5 Advances in Curing Methods of Reinforced Polymer Composites
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Curing Method
5.3 Thermal Curing of FRPC
5.4 Radiation Curing of FRPCs
5.5 Conclusion
References
6 Friction and Wear Analysis of Reinforced Polymer Composites
6.1 Introduction
6.2 Results and Discussion
6.3 Conclusions
References
7 Characterization Techniques of Reinforced Polymer Composites
7.1 Introduction
7.2 Fiber Reinforced Polymers
7.3 Characterization of FRPs
7.4 Chemical Characterization
7.5 Physical Characterization
7.6 Mechanical Characterization
7.7 Thermal Characterization
7.8 Durability Characterization
7.9 Conclusion
References
8 Detection of Delamination in Fiber Metal Laminates Based on Local Defect Resonance
8.1 Introduction
8.2 Local Defect Resonance Based Nondestructive Evaluation
8.3 Super‐Harmonic and Subharmonic Excitation in Fiber Metal Laminates
8.4 Detection of LDR Frequency Using Bicoherence Analysis
8.5 Concluding Remarks
References
9 Secondary Processing of Reinforced Polymer Composites by Conventional and Nonconventional Manufacturing Processes
9.1 Introduction
9.2 Secondary Processing of Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composites by Conventional Machining
9.3 Secondary Processing of Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composites by Nonconventional Machining
9.4 Concluding Remarks
References
10 Hybrid Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymer Matrix Composites: Mechanical Strength Characterization and Life Assessment
10.1 Introduction
10.2 Polymer Matrix Composites (PMCs)
10.3 Environmental Degradation of PMCs
10.4 Life Assessment of PMCs
10.5 Conclusions
References
11 Fire Performance of Natural Fiber Reinforced Polymeric Composites
11.1 Introduction
11.2 Flammability Aspects and Thermal Properties of Natural Fibers and Natural Fiber Reinforced Polymeric Composites
11.3 Fire Retardants
11.4 Flame Retardants
11.5 Fire Performance for Usability as Materials in Transportation
11.6 Fire Performance for Usability as Building Materials
11.7 Summary
References
12 Post Life Cycle Processing of Reinforced Thermoplastic Polymer Composites
12.1 Introduction
12.2 Polymer Composites
12.3 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
12.4 LCA Studies on Bio‐composites
12.5 LCA Limitations
12.6 Conclusions
Acknowledgment
References
13 Reprocessing and Disposal Mechanisms for Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites
13.1 Introduction
13.2 Reprocessing or Recycling Methods of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites
13.3 Mechanical Recycling
13.4 Chemical Recycling
13.5 Hydrolytic Degradation of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composite
13.6 Photodegradation of Polymer Composite
13.7 Biodegradation of Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites
13.8 Conclusion
References
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 1
Table 1.1 Matrix and reinforcement materials used in reinforced polymer composit...
Table 1.2 Primary and secondary processing methods for FRPCs.
Table 1.3 Applications of reinforced polymer composites.
Chapter 2
Table 2.1 Natural fibers vs. synthetic fibers [2–5].
Table 2.2 Surface modification techniques.
Table 2.3 Comparison of processing techniques.
Table 2.4 Fabrication techniques.
Table 2.5 Mechanical properties of injection molded composites.
Chapter 5
Table 5.1 Advantages and disadvantages of autoclave curing.
Table 5.2 Advantages and disadvantages of induction curing.
Table 5.3 Advantages and disadvantages of induction curing.
Table 5.4 Effect of curing techniques parameters on properties of polymer compos...
Table 5.5 Advantage and disadvantage with US curing.
Table 5.6 Applications according to the EB intensity.
Table 5.7 EB curing advantages and disadvantages.
Table 5.8 UV curing advantages and disadvantages.
Chapter 6
Table 6.1 Wears testing of polymer materials.
Chapter 8
Table 8.1 Specification of the GLARE model.
Table 8.2 Material properties of the GLARE model.
Table 8.3 Material properties.
Chapter 10
Table 10.1 Properties of AW106 resin/ HV053U hardener [26].
Table 10.2 Elemental contribution characterized by EDS.
Table 10.3 Life assessment of composites.
Table 10.4 Relative exploration of life predictions.
Chapter 12
Table 12.1 Characteristics of thermoplastics starch.
Table 12.2 Natural fiber and thermoplastic matrix used in applications.
Table 12.3 LCA of common impact and damage categories.
Table 12.4 ISO/TR 14047 (2003) environmental impact classification fact...
Chapter 13
Table 13.1 Recycling of natural fiber reinforced polymer composite.
Table 13.2 Biodegradability study of fiber reinforced polymer composites.
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1 Development stages of FRPs.
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1 Classification of composite materials.
Figure 2.2 Classification of natural fibers.
Figure 2.3 Classification of polymer matrix composites.
Figure 2.4 Schematic of extrusion setup.
Figure 2.5 Processing techniques of polymer‐based composites.
Figure 2.6 Injection molding process.
Figure 2.7 Important processing parameters during injection molding proces...
Figure 2.8 Processing window for injection molding process.
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1 Composite laminate.
Figure 3.2 Hand lay‐up process.
Figure 3.3 Filament winding process.
Figure 3.4 Compression molding process.
Figure 3.5 Vacuum bagging process.
Figure 3.6 Resin transfer molding process.
Figure 3.7 Pultrusion process.
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1 Illustration of damage development in the multiscale glass fabr...
Figure 4.2 Schematic diagram of crack propagation mechanism of GNP/TRGO an...
Figure 4.3 Vibracell ultrasonic processor for fabrication of nano‐TiO
2
enh...
Figure 4.4 Schematic diagram of fabrication method of nanocomposite lamina...
Figure 4.5 FESEM image of nano‐TiO
2
particles (a) shape, (b) intensity ver...
Figure 4.6 Three filling configurations of ceramics particles in ceramic/p...
Figure 4.7 Schematic of filler dispersion in the epoxy matrix and fabricat...
Figure 4.8 Schematic diagram showing clay modification and intercalation o...
Figure 4.9 Schematic diagram of three main types of layered silicates in p...
Figure 4.10 Organoclay dispersion and exfoliation during melt processing....
Figure 4.11 Fabrication technique for GO/OPBI composites.
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1 Curing of resin.
Figure 5.2 Classification of curing techniques.
Figure 5.3 Conventional and advanced curing application.
Figure 5.4 Autoclave curing.
Figure 5.5 Curing curves for different resin and carbon fibers [9–11].
Figure 5.6 Variation of temperature across thickness.
Figure 5.7 Principle of induction curing.
Figure 5.8 Use of induction heating in the field of polymer composites.
Figure 5.9 Layout diagram of the working principle of resistance curing.
Figure 5.10 Schematic diagram of microwave curing. (a) Before microwave cu...
Figure 5.11 Ultrasonic curing of laminates.
Figure 5.12 Radiation curing of higher thickness composites laminates.
Figure 5.13 Layer by layer UV curing in filament winding.
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1 (a) Wear caused due to deformation and adhesion, (b) contact po...
Figure 6.2 Wear due to (a) adhesion, (b) abrasion, and (c) fatigue.
Figure 6.3 Wear rates of polymers that include ceramics for comparison at ...
Figure 6.4 Types of contact in a tribological test.
Figure 6.5 Schematic diagram of pin on disc.
Chapter 7
Figure 7.1 Material science tetrahedron illustrating the relationship amon...
Figure 7.2 Levels of characterization.
Figure 7.3 (a) Modes of interaction of light with sample, (b) schematic of...
Figure 7.4 Typical XRD curve for polypropylene.
Figure 7.5 Schematics of microscope: (a) Transmission, (b) reflection.
Figure 7.6 Characterization size regime for different microscopic techniqu...
Figure 7.7 Presence of voids in FRP structure.
Figure 7.8 Typical structure of hardness tester.
Figure 7.9 Shore hardness tester (durometer).
Figure 7.10 Modes of roughness measurement (a) contact type, (b) noncontac...
Figure 7.11 Tensile testing of FRP composites.
Figure 7.12 Compressive testing of FRP composites.
Figure 7.13 Flexural testing of FRP composites (a) three point bending, (b...
Figure 7.14 Impact testing of FRP composite specimen.
Figure 7.15 Shear testing of FRP composites.
Figure 7.16 Creep testing of FRP composites.
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1 Schematic of a defect in the form of flat bottom hole.
Figure 8.2 Schematic of GLARE plate with circular delamination at the (a) ...
Figure 8.3 (a) 3D model and (b) meshing of the GLARE plate consisting of d...
Figure 8.4 Frequency vs. displacement of the GLARE plate with delamination...
Figure 8.5 Nonlinear LDR effects of the GLARE model with delamination at t...
Figure 8.6 Nonlinear LDR effects of the GLARE model with delamination at
x
Figure 8.7 Non‐redundant zone of the bispectral plane known as the primary...
Figure 8.8 Schematicof the circular FBH model.
Figure 8.9 Frequency spectrum of the output signal showing maximum amplitu...
Figure 8.10 Variation of normalized frequency with DFT length in the case ...
Figure 8.11 Bicoherence plot of the receiver signal showing second order h...
Figure 8.12 In the case of circular FBH at the center (a) steady state ana...
Chapter 9
Figure 9.1 (a) Peel up delamination and (b) push down delamination.
Figure 9.2 Core drill bit for drilling of composites.
Figure 9.3 Delamination of hole drilled with (a) Twist drill, (b) candle s...
Figure 9.4 Delamination factor with variation in cutting speed: (a)
V
= 16...
Figure 9.5 Different drill geometries for machining (a) four facet, (b) pa...
Figure 9.6 SEM micrographs of GFRP machined by milling.
Figure 9.7 SEM micrograph of hole drilled with CD and RUM.
Figure 9.8 SEM micrograph of hole machined with (a) conventional machining...
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1 Schematic representation of the fabrication process [1].
Figure 10.2 (a) SEM of normal composite at 100× ; (b) SEM of hybrid compos...
Figure 10.3 Composite without SiC as reinforcement.
Figure 10.4 (a) Tensile strength vs. weight fraction of SiC, (b) compressi...
Figure 10.5 EDS mapping analysis of composite reinforced with SiC particle...
Figure 10.6 Experimental decrease in (a) tensile strength, (b) compressive...
Figure 10.7 Periodic decay in tensile strength under (a) acidic solution, ...
Figure 10.8 Composite dipped in acidic solution.
Figure 10.9 Composite dipped in saline solution.
Figure 10.10 Composite dipped in distilled water.
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1 Distribution of articles on the basis of subject area. Source:...
Figure 11.2 Number of publications with year. Source: http://wc...
Figure 11.3 Regional distribution of the articles published aro...
Figure 11.4 Distribution of articles on the basis of universities. Source:...
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1 Bio‐composites classification.
Figure 12.2 LCA procedure according to ISO 14040.
Figure 12.3 Material flow of forward and reverse supply loop in a product ...
Figure 12.4 System boundary of cradle‐to‐gate model for manufacturing natu...
Figure 12.5 System boundaries of bamboo and flax fiber.
Figure 12.6 Schematic production flow chain of PLA biopolymer from cultiva...
Chapter 13
Figure 13.1 Different recycling techniques of fiber reinforced polymer com...
Figure 13.2 Flow diagram of mechanical recycling.
Figure 13.3 Different chemical reactions of chemical recycling.
Guide
Cover
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
Pages
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
249
Reinforced Polymer Composites
Processing, Characterization and Post Life Cycle Assessment
Edited by
Pramendra K. BajpaiInderdeep Singh
Copyright
Editors
Prof. Pramendra K. Bajpai
Netaji Subhas University of Technology
Division of Manufacturing Processes and AutomationEngineering
Azad Hind Fauz Marg
Sector 3
Dwarka
110078 New Delhi
India
Prof. Inderdeep Singh
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering
Haridwar Highway
Roorkee
247667 Uttarakhand
India
All books published by Wiley‐VCH are carefully produced. Nevertheless, authors, editors, and publisher do not warrant the information contained in these books, including this book, to be free of errors. Readers are advised to keep in mind that statements, data, illustrations, procedural details or other items may inadvertently be inaccurate.
Library of Congress Card No.:
applied for
British Library Cataloguing‐in‐Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Bibliographic information published by
the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at <http://dnb.d‐nb.de>.
© 2020 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Boschstr. 12, 69469 Weinheim, Germany
All rights reserved (including those of translation into other languages). No part of this book may be reproduced in any form – by photoprinting, microfilm, or any other means – nor transmitted or translated into a machine language without written permission from the publishers. Registered names, trademarks, etc. used in this book, even when not specifically marked as such, are not to be considered unprotected by law.
Print ISBN: 978‐3‐527‐34599‐1
ePDF ISBN: 978‐3‐527‐82096‐2
ePub ISBN: 978‐3‐527‐82099‐3
oBook ISBN: 978‐3‐527‐82097‐9
Cover Design SCHULZ Grafik-Design, Fußgönheim, Germany
1Overview and Present Status of Reinforced Polymer Composites
Furkan Ahmad1, Inderdeep Singh2, and Pramendra K. Bajpai1
1Netaji Subhas University of Technology, MPAE Division, Sector‐3, Dwarka, New Delhi, 110078, India
2Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Roorkee, Uttarakhand, 247667, India
1.1 Introduction
Humans have been using a number of materials to improve their living standards since ages. In fact, the progress of human civilization has been classified into three categories, popularly known as the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the Iron Age, on the basis of materials only. Looking at the current rate of demand and consumption of plastics, it would not be wrong if somebody categorizes the present age as “The Age of Plastics” or “Plastic Age”. New materials form the foundation for new technologies and help in understanding nature. The most complex designs in the world can be of no use if suitable material is not used during the fabrication of products with that design. In actual realization of a design, the role of materials is quite indispensable. The limited availability of natural resources has forced material engineers to use materials in a more conscious manner. Therefore, material scientists and engineers are trying to optimize the use of materials in every possible field of application. In the present age, transportation industry is the biggest contributor of carbon footprints in the environment. Lower fuel consumption of automotive vehicles can lower the carbon footprints. In the quest for achieving low fuel consumption, transportation industry is leaning toward materials having high strength to weight ratio. Reinforced polymer composites (RPCs), also known as fiber reinforced polymer composites (FRPCs) are such promising materials for almost every industry looking for low weight and high strength materials [1]. The application spectrum of FRPCs has spread in almost every sector starting from engineered domestic products to the highly sensitive biomedical industry. FRPCs are not only just a replacement for conventional alloys but they also provide engineered properties. Rahmani et al. [2] fabricated the carbon/epoxy‐based FRPCs with 40 wt% of fiber. This system of FRPCs was able to achieve a tensile strength of 2500 MPa, which is quite close to the tensile strength of steel. The authors concluded that fiber orientation was the most influencing factor among other factors, namely number of laminates and resin type. The authors suggested the use of ±35° angle of plies to obtain better tensile properties along with good flexural properties. Modification in the matrix material can enhance the overall properties of FRPCs. Islam et al. [3] modified the epoxy matrix by incorporating nanoclay and multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs). The authors found significant improvement in the static and dynamic mechanical properties of the developed carbon fiber‐based FRPCs. Cho et al. [4] enhanced the in‐plane shear strength and shear modulus of carbon fiber reinforced epoxy composites by incorporating graphite nanoplatelets in the epoxy matrix using the sonication method. Increasing the volume fraction of reinforcement can increase the mechanical properties of the developed FRPCs. Aramide et al. [5] fabricated glass fiber/epoxy‐based FRPCs with varying volume fraction of fibers from 5% to 30%. The authors found that the mechanical strength increased as the fiber volume fraction increased up to 30%. Treinyte et al. [6] fabricated poly (vinyl alcohol)‐based pots. Forestry and wood processing waste was used as filler in the matrix. The authors claimed that the manufactured pots showed 45% lower water evaporation rate in comparison to regular peat pots.
Architecture of the reinforcement also affects the mechanical performance of developed FRPCs products. A range of reinforcement architectures is available in the market such as short fiber, unidirectional prepregs, 2D and 3D woven mats, braided mats, and knitted mats. Every architecture has its own merits and demerits – 2D woven mats show better in‐plane mechanical properties but they lack in out‐of plane properties while 3D woven mats offer better out‐of‐plane properties in comparison to others [7]. Erol et al. [8] investigated the effect of yarn material and weaving pattern on the macroscopic properties of FRPCs and concluded that weave pattern greatly influenced the tensile and shear properties of the developed composites. Some authors [9] have even used 3D and 5D braided reinforcement for the development of FRPCs. The authors concluded that braided architecture affects the fracture mechanism in a significant way. Kostar et al. [10] used two‐sided co‐braided carbon and Kevlar hybrid reinforcement for the development of FRPCs and concluded that the tensile strength and modulus of hybrid reinforcement‐based FRPCs were 13% and 80% higher than those with simple reinforcement. FRPs have evolved over a long time period as shown in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1 Development stages of FRPs.
Environmental problems and difficulty in the recycling associated with synthetic composites have led to the development of biocomposites/green composites. Biocomposites are eco‐friendly materials with adequate mechanical properties. Fombuena et al. [11] fabricated biocomposites using bio‐fillers derived from sea‐shell waste as reinforcement in bio‐based epoxy matrix. The authors found impressive improvement in mechanical properties of bio‐based epoxy when reinforced with bio‐fillers. End of life (EOL) impact of synthetic fibers and polymers is negative to the environment. Duflou et al. [12] showed that low mechanical strength of flax fiber is an obstruction in the replacement of glass fiber but it can be used in many applications where high mechanical strength is not the primary requirement. Effect of moisture on the mechanical performance of natural fiber‐based biocomposites is yet another concern while using biocomposites. Baghaei et al. [13] developed poly lactic acid (PLA)‐based biocomposites and analyzed the moisture absorption behavior. The authors found that the moisture absorption characteristic of the developed composite was reduced when the reinforcement was used in the woven form instead of the nonwoven form.
Hybridization can improve the mechanical strength of green composites. Hassanin et al. [14] developed a biocomposite particle board using a mixture of wood particles and short glass fibers covered with an outer layer of jute fabric. The particle board showed excellent mechanical and physical properties in comparison to commercially available particle boards. Chaudhary et al. [15] hybridized the reinforcement and found improved mechanical and thermal properties of the developed biocomposites. The authors used three types of woven fibers mats, namely jute, hemp, and flax, as reinforcement in epoxy matrix.
Chemical treatment of fibers/surface modification of fibers is also a promising method for improvement in the mechanical properties of FRPCs. Alkali, acryl, benzyl, and silane solutions are commonly used for the treatment of fibers [16]. Asaithambi et al. [17] treated banana fibers before using them as reinforcement in PLA‐based FRPCs. Banana fibers were first pretreated with 5% NaOH solution at room temperature for around two hours, and then the chemical treatment of the fiber was completed using benzoyl peroxide. Significant improvement in the mechanical properties developed with treated FRPCs was found in comparison to those developed with untreated FRPCs. Rahman and Khan [18] used ethylene dimethyl acrylate (EMA) for the surface modification of coir fibers along with UV treatment for the aging of fibers. The authors concluded that the mechanical properties of FRPCs developed using treated fiber were better than those of untreated fiber reinforced FRPCs.
1.2 FRPCs
FRPCs are multiphase materials comprised of natural/synthetic fiber as reinforcement and thermoset/thermoplastic polymer as matrix, resulting in synergistic properties that cannot be achieved from a single component alone. In general, reinforcement is in the form of long continuous fibers but they can be used in various other forms such as short fibers, fillers, or whiskers. The fibrous form of reinforcement is used in composite materials because they are stronger and stiffer than any other form [19]. Synthetic fibers (carbon, glass, aramid, etc.) can provide more strength than most of the metals along with being lighter than those materials. On the other hand, natural fibers are also being used in a number of structural as well as nonstructural applications due to the environmental problems associated with synthetic fibers. Matrix material, which is generally continuous in nature, protects the reinforcement from adverse environment and transfers the load to reinforcement from the point of application of load [12]. The matrix material holds the flexible reinforcements together to make it a solid. Matrix material is also responsible for the finish and texture of the composite material. The properties of composite materials depend on the dispersion and properties of the constituents and their interfacial interaction. Tailoring the properties of a material according to the requirement of application can be easily done in composite materials [20]. Table 1.1 shows the commonly used natural and synthetic polymers and fibers used as matrix and reinforcement, respectively.
Table 1.1 Matrix and reinforcement materials used in reinforced polymer composites.
Matrix
Natural
Synthetic
Polysaccharides such as homoglycans, cellulose, chitin, chitosan, heteroglycans, such as alginate, agar, and agarose, carrageenan, pectins, gums, and proteoglycans, protein, peptides, and enzymes
Polyolefins, poly(tetrafluoroethylene) (PTFE), poly(vinylchloride)(PVC), silicone, methacrylates, aliphatic polyesters, polyethers, poly(amino acids), polyamides, polyurethanes, epoxy, polycarbonates
Reinforcement
Natural
Synthetic
Animal‐based – silk, wool, hair;Plant‐based – bast fibers (jute, flax, ramie, hemp, kenaf, roselle, etc.), leaf fibers (sisal, banana, agava, etc.), seed, fruit, wood, and stalk fibers
Carbon, glass, Aramid/Kevlar, graphite, aromatic polyester fibers, boron, silica carbide
1.2.1 Fabrication of Fiber Reinforced Composites
Fabrication methods of FRPCs still require a lot of attention in order to produce defect‐free high quality products. Some unique features of primary and secondary processing of FRPCs are tabulated in Table 1.2.
Table 1.2 Primary and secondary processing methods for FRPCs.
Processing
Fabrication technique
Features
Primary processing methods
Hand lay‐up
Minimum infrastructural requirement; low initial capital requirement; only for thermosetting resins; lower production rate; and low volume fraction of the reinforcement
Spray lay‐up
Extension of hand lay‐up technique; reinforcement in the form of chopped fibers only
Compression molding
Use of heat and pressure both simultaneously; dimensionally accurate and finished products; process parameters need to be optimized; both thermosetting and thermoplastic polymers can be used; higher initial capital requirement compared to hand lay‐up
Injection molding
Reinforcement only in the form of short fibers; damage of fibers in barrel due to shearing action of screw. Highly accurate dimensions of the product; used for mass production
Pultrusion process
Resin impregnated continuous fibers are passed through a heating die for curing; automated process used for continuous production; only products with constant cross‐sectional area depending on the die can be manufactured
Resin transfer molding
Liquid resin system is forced into the mold; high fiber volume fraction can be achieved. Good surface finish with minimum material wastage
Filament winding
Continuous fiber strands as reinforcement; controlled fiber orientation; high production rate; high capital investment; not possible to produce female features of products and expensive mandrel
Vacuum assisted resin transfer molding
Uses vacuum to ensure zero voids; superior quality composites using autoclave (a strong heating container that is used for applying heat and pressure at the time of curing of the composite laminates)
Secondary processing methods
Conventional machining
Drilling with twist drill is the most used conventional method to produce holes in laminates. Requires milling machine or drilling machine. Spindle speed, feed rate, and drill geometry are influential parameters. Delamination, fiber linting, and fiber pull‐out are the most common defects
Unconventional machining
Abrasive water jet (AWJ) reduces the thermal damage that could be generated in conventional machining.Laser beam (LB) cutting is also being used for holes generation in composite laminates. High energy input is required.Ultrasonic machining (USM) can also be used for hole making in the composite laminates
1.2.2 Present Status of FRPCs
RPC products such as pipes are being used in various adverse conditions such as in offshore and marine applications. These pipes are exposed to severe climatic conditions ranging from −40 to 80 °C [21]. Benyahia et al. [21] tested the mechanical properties of a filament wound glass/epoxy pipe of 86 mm diameter and 6.2 mm thickness. The authors estimated that there was degradation of mechanical properties at higher temperatures. Ellyin and Maser [22] investigated the effect of moisture at elevated temperature on the mechanical properties of glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) composite tubes. At lower temperature, the ductility of the specimen was found to be decreased drastically and the stiffness was increased. Above the glass transition temperature, there was sudden degradation in the mechanical properties of composite pipes. In recent progress, shape memory alloy (SMA) wires are being incorporated into the FRPCs as reinforcement to increase the functionality of the developed composites such as shape recovery, high damping capacity, generation of high recovery stresses, and controlled overall thermal expansion. SMA wires not only improve the functionality of the FRPCs but also offer improved mechanical properties [23]. Paine and Rogers [24] concluded that the low velocity impact properties of FRPCs can be improved by incorporating SMA wires. Incorporation of just 2.8% volume fraction of SMA wires as reinforcement was able to increase the impact delamination resistance by 25% in comparison to the FRPCs without the SMA wire reinforcement. Pappada et al. [25,26] fabricated hybrid glass fiber reinforced vinyl ester‐based FRPC material and incorporated SMA wires in two forms, namely unidirectional SMA wires and knitted SMA wires. The authors assessed impact properties and found that FRPCs reinforced with SMA wires achieved higher impact properties than FRPCs with unidirectional SMA wires.
Polymer nanocomposites are also a relatively new class of materials. Nanocomposites are generally fabricated by incorporating one or more constituents of the size of the order of nanometers. These constituents are generally inorganic in nature and known as fillers, and not as reinforcement, due to their small size. Various researchers have reported impressive properties of nanocomposites such as high modulus and strength, high resistance to heat, and reduced flammability. However, effective dispersion of the nano‐sized fillers throughout the polymer matrix is still a challenge, and moreover this dispersion controls and determines the physical, chemical, and mechanical properties of the developed FRPC products [27–29]. The authors have used an in situ approach to homogenize the dispersion of nano‐sized fillers. In this approach, nano‐fillers are directly synthesized with the polymer using some suitable precursor [30,31]. Although the in situ approach provides controlled dispersion of nano‐fillers, it involves complex procedures and processing steps along with expensive reactants [32,33]. Various researchers used the ball milling method to fabricate nanocomposites. In this method, first both the constituents, polymer and nano‐fillers, are mixed with each other in solid state using ball mills and then the mixture is melted to polymerize. Although the morphology of the fillers changes in the ball mill, this change positively affects the composites by enriching the filler compatibility with the polymer. The ball milling method is not just an alternative to ex situ fabrication of FRPCs but is also an environment friendly and economical method to produce nano‐filler reinforced FRPCs [34]. Some authors [35] have also used reinforcing metallic powders such as copper powder of 29.5 and 260 μm size in the polyvinyl butyral (PVB) polymer matrix to fabricate polymer composites. Fan and Wang [36] developed a transparent protective polymer composite material with lightweight property, which could be used against high speed impact loading.
The behavior and performance of FRPCs changes from application to application. FRPCs exposed to various tribological environments lead to the necessity to evaluate the tribological performance. Tribology of FRPCs is quite complex than metal tribology due to the fact that polymers do not obey the well‐established laws of friction at high temperature [37]. Xue and Wang [38] studied the effect of filler particle size on the wear and frictional properties of polymer composites. The authors concluded that addition of nano‐sized SiC particles into the polymer matrix effectively reduced the friction and wear of the neat polymer. The nano‐sized particles form a continuous and thin layer between the interface, which results in reduction of friction and wear. Xing and Li [39] also confirmed a similar behavior of FRPCs with the incorporation of nano‐sized fillers. Gears, bearings, shoe soles, and brake pads for automobile applications are some of the mostly used tribological applications of FRPCs [40–42]. Researchers have suggested a number of methods to reduce the friction and wear at the interface between the FRPC product and the metal/nonmetal surface. Microencapsulation of liquid lubricant was found to be an effective method to improve the tribological properties of polymers [43]. Guo et al. [44,45] demonstrated that the friction coefficient of epoxy‐based FRPCs can be reduced up to 75% by incorporating just 10 wt% oil‐loaded microcapsules. The authors have claimed to develop self‐lubricating polymer‐based materials with the help of encapsulation method. Khun et al. [46] and Imani et al. [47] added wax‐loaded microcapsules in epoxy matrix composites and found that friction and wear were very much reduced in comparison to that in the neat epoxy polymer composite. In another study, Khun et al. [48] used the two types of microcapsules in the polymer composite. One type of microcapsules were loaded with wax and another type of capsules were loaded with MWCNTs. The authors concluded that tribological and mechanical properties were enhanced simultaneously. Wax‐loaded capsules were found to be responsible for improved tribological properties while MWCNTs loaded capsules result in improved mechanical properties, which was achievable with only wax‐loaded capsules. Encapsulation may help in the development of self‐healing materials as explained by some authors [49].
Self‐reinforced composites (SRCs) are yet another category of FRPCs in which only a single polymer is used. Hard/processed form of the same polymer is used as reinforcement that is being used as matrix material [50]. Huang [51] developed a polypropylene (PP)‐based SRC using melt‐flow induced crystallization. Li and Yao [52] and Makela et al. [53] developed PLA polymer‐based fibers that could be used as reinforcement in the SRCs. Similarly, Tormala [54] developed PLA‐based SRCs for medical applications. In the same series, Hine and Ward [55] developed PET‐based SRCs, Gilbert et al. [56] developed polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA)‐based SRCs, and Gindl and Keckes [57] manufactured cellulose‐based SRCs.
Gemi [58] developed glass and carbon‐based hybrid composite pipes and studied the effect of stacking sequence. The authors concluded that glass–carbon–glass sequence of reinforcement during the winding of fibers leads to no leakage property of pipes.
The superior electrical, mechanical, and thermal properties of graphene make it very useful in the field of FRPCs [59]. Graphene, in the form of 3D foam and gel is being used in FRPCs products in biomedical and electronics applications [60,61]. Various authors [62,63] reported impressive improvement in the mechanical properties of epoxy composites with the incorporation of 3D foam. Sun et al. [64] reported that the incorporation of 3D graphene foam in polymer significantly improved electrical properties. Jusza et al. [65] developed luminescent composite materials for possible applications in opto‐electronics, sensor networks, and imaging field. Complex technology and expensive manufacturing methods of optically active two‐phase composite materials have made them commercially unavailable.
Carbon nanotubes, popularly known as CNTs, are filler/reinforcement that are being used in polymers to fabricate composites with improved physical, mechanical, and electrical properties [66–69]. Nanomaterials are those materials that have dimensions below 100 nm [70]. Several authors [71,72] reported an increment of over 300% in the tensile strength of FRPCs reinforced with CNT‐based nano‐fillers. Incorporation of nanocarbons resulted in the increment of electrical properties up to over 14 orders of magnitude [73]. Carbon quantum dots (CQD), a form of nanocarbon material, is also being used as reinforcement due to their tunable optical and photochemical properties. Another emerging class of FRPCs is thermally conductive polymer composites and nanocomposites [74]. Studies [75,76] have reported that polymers reinforced with aligned molecular chain can obtain higher thermal conductivity than that of many metals. Rajapakse et al. [77] prepared electronically conductive nanocomposites for potential application as a cathode material.
Another advancement in the field of FRPCs is the production of shape memory polymer composites along with self‐healing properties [78]. FRPCs are being widely used in the field of electronics and biomedical and energy applications from the last decades. However, low thermal conductivity and insufficient thermal stability have restricted FRPCs usage to a limited number of applications [79].
Along with their advantages, there are some disadvantages associated with FRPCs as well. The disadvantage with FRPCs is the need for recycling and disposal methods after the finite life of the FRPC product. Li et al. [80] investigated the environmental and financial problems associated with the manufacturing of carbon FRPCs. The authors suggested the use of mechanical recycling of FRPCs instead of landfilling and incineration. Landfilling method for disposal of FRPCs was found to be modest with moderate landfilling tax. However, incineration method results in the production of greenhouse gases causing severe damage to environment. Longana et al. [81] suggested another method of recycling known as multiple closed loop recycling of carbon FRPCs. In this method, reclaimed carbon fibers (rCF) are again used to remanufacture a number of products once a virgin carbon fiber (vCF) product has completed its defined life.
1.3 FRPCs Applications and Future Prospects
The high strength to weight ratio of FRPCs makes them irreplaceable in a number of applications in the automobile and aerospace industries [82–86]. Dhruv, the advanced light helicopter (ALH) manufactured by Hindustan Aeronautics Limited for the service of the Indian army, has around 60% of structural area made up of FRPC components and sandwich structures [87]. A number of products are being successfully used in various automotive and other applications as reported in Table 1.3. A number of medical devices have been developed using biodegradable polymers alone. Drug‐eluting stents, orthotropic devices, disposable medical devices, drug delivery devices, and stents for urological applications are some biomedical applications of polymers [101]. Tian et al. [101] stated that along with the nontoxic nature and low biodegradability of polymers, mechanical strength is also required in a number of medical applications. To strengthen these biodegradable polymers, fibers are being incorporated in the polymers according to the requirement of application. Carbon fiber reinforced epoxy composite materials are being used to fabricate external fixation equipment used for fractured bones. Bone plates are being used for the development of internal fixation equipment. The authors [102] have reported carbon fiber reinforced polyether ether ketone (PEEK)‐based composite as a biocompatible material for bone plate. Lin et al. [103] proposed short glass fiber reinforced PEEK composite material for the fabrication of intramedullary nails, which are generally used to fix fractures of long bones. These nails are fixed in the intramedullary cavity using a screw mechanism. Kettunen et al. [104] used carbon fiber to fabricate composite material for these nails. Some authors [105,106] have successfully used FRPCs as bone grafting materials. Carbon fiber‐based FRPCs are intensively being used to fabricate stems for total hip replacement [107,108]. Deng and shalaby [109] used ultrahigh molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) to fabricate self‐reinforced composite materials for possible application in knee replacement. In dental applications, CF/epoxy‐based FRPCs are being used to fabricate dental post [110]. Usually, gold bridges were used to replace one or more teeth but their high cost and time‐consuming fabrication process have led to the development of FRPCs‐based bridges [111]. FRPCs are also being used to fabricate orthodontic arch‐wires. These wires are generally fitted over the teeth in order to align them [112,113]. Artificial legs, used to support amputees during walk, were generally made of metallic materials. Owing to the high weight of metals and low corrosion resistance, FRPCs have replaced these metallic prosthetic limbs. As of now, all the three components of prosthetic leg, namely shaft, socket, and foot, are being manufactured using FRPCs [114–116]. Moving tables, used in CT and MRI scanners, are being manufactured using FRPCs due to the requirement of lightweight and high strength material [117]. Calcium phosphate (CaP)/polymer composite materials are highly recommended materials in bone replacement due to high compressive and flexural strength [118].
Table 1.3 Applications of reinforced polymer composites.
S. No.
Composite
Processing technique
Application field
Component
References
1.
Glass fiber/unsaturated polyester
Hand lay‐up method
Automobile
Front bumper
[
88
]
2.
Sisal, roselle fiber, banana/epoxy grade 3554 A
Hand lay‐up method
Automobile
Visor in two‐wheeler
[
89
]
Indicator cover
Pillion seat cover
Rear view mirror cover
3.
Glass, carbon fiber/epoxy
—
Aerospace
Vertical stabilizer
[
89
]
4.
GFRPC/epoxy/polyester/pp
—
Electronic
Computer, electric motor covers cell phones
[
90
]
Home and furniture
Roof sheet, sun shade, book racks, etc.
Aerospace
Luggage rack, bulkheads, ducting, etc.
Boats and marine
Boat frame
Medical
X‐ray beds
Automobile
Body panel, seat cover, bumper, and engine cover
5.
CFRP laminates
Vacuum bagging
Aerospace
Upper deck floor berns
[
91
]
Pressure bulkhead
Centre wing box,
fin box, rudder HTP box
6.
Glass, carbon, aramid/polyester, vinyl ester, epoxy
Filament winding, resin infusion, prepreg, etc.
Energy industries
Wind turbine blades
[
92
]
7.
CFRP
—
Automobile
Citroen car body
[
93
]
8.
CF‐GF/epoxy (hybrid)
—
Aerospace
Pilot's cabin door
[
94
]
Boron–graphite (hybrid)
—
Fighter aircraft components
CF–aramid/thermoplastic hybrid
—
Safety
Helmet
GFPR, CFPR (hybrid)
—
Civil
Bridge girder
9.
CF/epoxy
Extrusion, compression molding
Automobile
Stiffener, floor panel, side sill inner
[
95
]
10.
CFRP
—
Automobile
Door sill stiffeners
[
96
]
Engine bay subframe
11.
CFRP/vinyl ester
Compression molding
Automobile
Fender support, headlamp supports, door components
[
97
]
GFRP/vinyl ester
Door inner panel, windshield surround outer and inner panel, door components
12.
CF/Epoxy
—
Biomedical
Prosthetic limbs (foot)
[
98
]
13.
Kevlar/CF/PMMA
—
Biomedical
Bone cement (used for fixing the bones)
[
99
]
14.
E‐glass/epoxy
Pultrusion
Electrical applications
Insulating material for high voltage line
[
100
]
1.4 Conclusion
RPCs are engineered materials used in a wide spectrum of applications ranging from domestic products to biomedical devices. Natural and synthetic fibers are both being reinforced in FRPCs according to the application. FRPCs offer a number of advantages over conventional monolithic materials such as corrosion resistance, light weight and high strength to weight ratio. Automobiles, aircrafts, boats, ships, recreational goods, chemical equipment, and civil building and bridges are some common applications of FRPCs. Biomedical applications such as prosthetic legs and bone cement are relatively new applications of FRPCs‐based materials. The consumption of FRPCs in the near future is expected to increase but a lot research is needed in the recycling and disposal methods of synthetic FRPCs.
References
1 Bajpai, P.K., Ahmad, F., and Chaudhary, V. (2017). Processing and characterization of bio‐composites. In:
Handbook of Ecomaterials
(ed. L.M. Torres‐Martinez, O.V. Kharissova and B.I. Kharisov). Springer International Publishing AG, https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐3‐319‐48281‐1_98‐1.
2 Rahmani, H., Najafi, S.H.M., and Ashori, A. (2014). Mechanical performance of epoxy/carbon fiber laminated composites.
Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites
33 (8): 733–740.
3 Islam, M.E., Mahdi, T.H., Hosur, M.V., and Jeelani, S. (2015). Characterization of carbon fiber reinforced epoxy composites modified with nanoclay and carbon nanotubes.
Procedia Engineering
105: 821–828.
4 Cho, J., Chen, J.Y., and Daniel, I.M. (2007). Mechanical enhancement of carbon fiber/epoxy composites by graphite nanoplatelet reinforcement.
Scripta Materialia
56: 685–688.
5 Aramide, F.O., Atanda, P.O., and Olorunniwo, O.O. (2012). Mechanical properties of a polyester fiber glass composite.
International Journal of Composite Materials
2: 147–151.
6 Treinyte, J., Bridziuviene, D., Fataraite‐Urboniene, E. et al. (2018). Forestry wastes filled polymer composites for agricultural use.
Journal of Cleaner Production
205: 388–406.
7 Liu, Q. and Hughes, M. (2008). The fracture behaviour and toughness of woven flax fibre reinforced epoxy composites.
Composites: Part A
39: 1644–1652.
8 Erol, O., Powers, B.M., and Keefe, M. (2017). Effects of weave architecture and mesoscale material properties on the macroscale mechanical response of advanced woven fabrics.
Composites: Part A
101: 554–566.
9 Yuanyuan, Z., Ying, S., Jialu, L. et al. (2016). Tensile response of carbon‐aramid hybrid 3D braided composites.
Materials and Design
116: 246–252.
10 Kostar, T.D., Chou, T.W., and Popper, P. (2000). Characterization and comparative study of three‐dimensional braided hybrid composites.
Journal of Material Science
35: 2175–2183.
11 Fombuena, V., Bernardi, L., Fenollar, O. et al. (2014). Characterization of green composites from biobased epoxy matrices and bio‐fillers derived from seashell wastes.
Materials and Design
57: 168–174.
12 Duflou, J.R., Yelin, D., Acker, K.V., and Dewulf, W. (2014). Comparative impact assessment for flax fibre versus conventional glass fibre reinforced composites: are bio‐based reinforcement materials the way to go?
CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2014.03.061
.
13 Baghaei, B. and Skrifvars, M. (2016). Characterisation of polylactic acid biocomposites made from prepregs composed of woven polylactic acid/hemp–Lyocell hybrid yarn fabrics.
Composites: Part A
81: 139–144.
14 Hassanin, A.H., Hamouda, T., Candan, Z. et al. (2016). Developing high‐performance hybrid green composites.
Composites Part B
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.02.051
.
15 Chaudhary, V., Bajpai, P.K., and Maheshwari, S. (2018). Studies on mechanical and morphological characterization of developed jute/hemp/flax reinforced hybrid composites for structural applications.
Journal of Natural Fibers
15 (1): 80–97.
16 Ahmad, F., Chaudhary, V., Ahmad, Z., and Bajpai, P.K. (2017). Effect of fiber selection and fiber treatment on the composite performance.
International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research
8: 55–57.
17 Asaithambi, B., Ganesan, G., and Kumar, S.A. (2014). Bio‐composites: development and mechanical characterization of banana/sisal fibre reinforced poly lactic acid (PLA) hybrid composites.
Fibers and Polymers
15: 847–854.
18 Rahman, M.M. and Khan, M.A. (2007). Surface treatment of coir (Cocosnucifera) fibers and its influence on the fibers' physico‐mechanical properties.
Composites Science and Technology
67: 2369–2376.
19 Shah, D.U., Schubel, P.J., and Clifford, M.J. (2013). Can flax replace E‐glass in structural composites? A small wind turbine blade case study.
Composites: Part B
52: 172–181.
20 Ahmad, F. and Bajpai, P.K. (2017). Finite element analysis and simulation of flax/epoxy composites under tensile loading.
International Journal of Advanced Research Science and Engineering
6 (2): 436–441.
21 Benyahia, H., Tarfaoui, M., El Moumen, A. et al. (2018). Mechanical properties of offshoring polymer composite pipes at various temperatures.
Composites Part B: Engineering
152: 231–240.
22 Ellyin, F. and Maser, R. (2004). Environmental effects on the mechanical properties of glass‐fiber epoxy composite tubular specimens.
Composite Science and Technology
64 (12): 1863–1874.
23 Cohades, A. and Michaud, V. (2018). Shape memory alloys in fibre‐reinforced polymer composites.
Advanced Industrial and Engineering Polymer Research
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aiepr.2018.07.001
.
24 Paine, J.S.N. and Rogers, C.A. (1994). The response of SMA hybrid composite materials to low velocity impact.
Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures
5: 530–535.
25 Pappada, S., Gren, P., Tatar, K. et al. (2009). Mechanical and vibration characteristics of laminated composite plates embedding shape memory alloy superelastic wires.
Journal of Material Engineering and Performances
18: 531–537.
26 Pappada, S., Rametta, R., Largo, A., and Maffezzoli, A. (2012). Low‐velocity impact response in composite plates embedding shape memory alloy wires.
Polymer Composites
33: 655–664.
27 Alexandre, M. and Dubois, P. (2000). Polymer‐layered silicate nanocomposites: preparation, properties and uses of a new class of materials.
Material Science and Engineering: R: Reports
28: 1–63.
28 Manias, E., Touny, A., Wu, L. et al. (2001). Polypropylene/montmorillonite nanocomposites. Review of the synthetic routes and materials properties.
Chemistry of Materials
13: 3516–3523.
29 Ma, P.‐C., Siddiqui, N., Marom, G., and Kim, J.‐K. (2010). Dispersion and functionalization of carbon nanotubes for polymer‐based nanocomposites: a review.
Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing
41: 1345–1367.
30 Liu, T., Burger, C., and Chu, B. (2003). Nanofabrication in polymer matrices.
Progress in Polymer Science
28: 5–26.
31 Ajayan, P.M., Schadler, L.S., and Braun, P.V. (eds.) (2003).
Nanocomposite Science and Technology
. Weinheim: FRG: Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA.
32 Wilberforce, S.I.J., Finlayson, C.E., Best, S.M., and Cameron, R.E. (2011). The influence of the compounding process and testing conditions on the compressive mechanical properties of poly (d, l‐lactide‐co‐glycolide)/a‐tricalcium phosphate nanocomposites.
Journal of Mechanical Behaviour of Biomedical Materials
4: 1081–1089.
33 Sorrentino, A., Gorrasi, G., and Vittoria, V. (2007). Potential perspectives of bio‐nanocomposites for food packaging applications.
Trends in Food Science and Technology
18: 84–95.
34 Delogu, F., Gorrasi, G., and Sorrentino, A. (2017). Fabrication of polymer nanocomposites via ball milling: present status and future perspectives.
Progress in Materials Science
86: 75–126.
35 Eichner, E., Heinrich, S., and Schneider, G.A. (2018). Influence of particle shape and size on mechanical properties in copper‐polymer composites.
Powder Technology
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2018.07.100
.
36 Fan, J. and Wang, C. (2018). Dynamic compressive response of a developed polymer composite at different strain rates.
Composites Part B
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.06.025
.
37 Friedrich, K. (2018). Polymer composites for tribological applications.
Advanced Industrial and Engineering Polymer Research
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aiepr.2018.05.001
.
38 Xue, Q. and Wang, Q. (1997). Wear mechanisms of polyetheretherketone composites filled with various kinds of SiC.
Wear
213: 54–58.
39 Xing, X.S. and Li, R.K.Y. (2004). Wear behavior of epoxy matrix composites filled with uniform sized submicron‐spherical silica particles.
Wear
256: 21–26.
40 Yousef, S. (2016). Polymer nanocomposite components: a case study on gears. In:
Light Weight Composite Structures in Transport Design, Manufacturing, Analysis and Performance
(ed. J. Njuguna), 385–420. Woodhead Publishing.
41 Koike, H., Kida, K., Santos, E.C. et al. (2012). Selflubrication of PEEK polymer bearings in rolling contact fatigue under radial loads.
Tribology International
49: 30–38.
42 Friedrich, K. and Schlarb, A.K. (2008).
Tribology of Polymeric Nanocomposites
. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
43 Su, F.H., Zhang, Z.Z., Wang, K. et al. (2006). Friction and wear properties of carbon fabric composites filled with nano‐Al
2
O
3
and nano‐Si
3
N
4
.
Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing
37: 1351–1357.
44 Guo, Q.B., Lau, K.T., Rong, M.Z., and Zhang, M.Q. (2010). Optimization of tribological and mechanical properties of epoxy through hybrid filling.
Wear
269: 13–20.
45 Guo, Q.B., Lau, K.T., Rong, M.Z., and Zhang, M.Q. (2009). Imparting ultra‐low friction and wear rate to epoxy by the incorporation of microencapsulated lubricant?
Macromolecular Material Engineering
294: 20–24.
46 Khun, N.W., Zhang, H., Yue, C.Y., and Yang, J.L. (2014). Self‐lubricating and wear resistant epoxy composites incorporated with microencapsulated wax.
Journal of Applied Mechanics
81: 1–9.
47 Imani, A.H., Zhang, H., Owais, M. et al. (2018). Wear and friction of epoxy based nanocomposites with silica nanoparticles and wax containing microcapsules.
Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing
107: 607–615.
48 Khun, N.W., Zhang, H., Yang, J.L., and Liu, E. (2013). Mechanical and tribological properties of epoxy matrix composites modified with microencapsulated mixture of wax lubricant and multi‐walled carbon nanotubes.
Friction
1: 341–349.
49 Oyman, Z.O. (2009).
An Overview of Research on Self Healing Coatings
, 1–3. BoyaTurk, Special Edition.
50 Gao, C., Yu, L., Liu, H., and Chen, L. (2012). Development of self‐reinforced polymer composites.
Progress in Polymer Science
37: 767–780.
51 Huang, H.X. (1998). Self‐reinforcement of polypropylene by flow‐induced crystallization during continuous extrusion.
Journal of Applied Polymer Science
67: 2111–2118.
52 Li, R. and Yao, D. (2008). Preparation of single poly(lactic acid) composites.
Journal of Applied Polymer Science
107: 2909–2916.
53 Makela, P., Pohjonen, T., Tormala, P. et al. (2002). Strength retention properties of self‐reinforced poly‐l‐lactide (SR‐PLLA) sutures compared with polyglyconate (Maxon(R)) and polydioxanone (PDS) sutures: an in vitro study.
Biomaterials
23: 2587–2592.
54 Tormala, P. (1992). Biodegradable self‐reinforced composite materials; manufacturing structure and mechanical properties.
Clinical Materials
10: 29–34.
55 Hine, P.J. and Ward, I.M. (2004). Hot compaction of woven poly(ethylene terephthalate) multifilaments.
Journal of Applied Polymer Science
91: 2223–2233.
56 Gilbert, J.L., Ney, D.S., and Lautenschlager, E.P. (1995). Self‐reinforced composite poly(methyl methacrylate): static and fatigue properties.
Biomaterials
16: 1043–1055.
57 Gindl, W. and Keckes, J. (2007). Drawing of self‐reinforced cellulose films.
Journal of Applied Polymer Science
103: 2703–2708.
58 Gemi, L. (2018). Investigation of the effect of stacking sequence on low velocity impact response and damage formation in hybrid composite pipes under internal pressure. A comparative study.
Composites Part B: Engineering
153: 217–232.
59 Idowu, A., Boesl, B., and Agarwal, A. (2018). 3D graphene foam‐reinforced polymer composites – a review.
Carbon
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2018.04.024
.
60 Li N, Zhang Q, Gao S, Song Q, Huang R, Wang L. Biocompatible and conductive scaffold. 2013, doi:
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep01604
.
61 Bello, A., Fashedemi, O.O., Lekitima, J.N. et al. (2013). High‐performance symmetric electrochemical capacitor based on graphene foam and nanostructured manganese oxide.
AIP Advances
3 (8): 82118.
62 Embrey, L., Nautiyal, P., Loganathan, A. et al. (2017). Three‐dimensional graphene foam induces multifunctionality in epoxy nanocomposites by simultaneous improvement in mechanical, thermal, and electrical properties.
Applied Materials and Interfaces
9 (45): 39717–39727.
63 Qiu, Y., Liu, J., Lu, Y. et al. (2016). Hierarchical assembly of tungsten spheres and epoxy composites in three‐dimensional graphene foam and its enhanced acoustic performance as a backing material.
ACS Applied Materials Interfaces
8: 18496–18504.
64 Sun, X., Liu, X., Shen, X. et al. (2015). Graphene foam/carbon nanotube/poly(dimethylsiloxane) composites for exceptional microwave shielding.
Composites Part A: Applied Science and Manufacturing
85: 199–206.
65 Jusza, A., Anders, K., Polis, P. et al. (2014). Luminescent properties in the visible of Er3+/Yb3+ activated composite materials.
Optical Materials
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optmat.2014.03.018
.
66 Kroto, H.W., Heath, J.R., Obrien, S.C. et al. (1985). C‐60 – Buckminsterfullerene.
Nature
318: 162–163.
67 Hirsch, A. (2010). The era of carbon allotropes.
Natural Materials
9: 868–871.
68 Iijima, S. (1991). Helical microtubules of graphitic carbon.
Nature
354: 56–58.
69 Novoselov, K.S., Geim, A.K., Morozov, S.V. et al. (2004). Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films.
Science
306: 666–669.
70 Lee, J.K.Y., Chen, N., Peng, S. et al. (2018). Polymer‐based composites by electrospinning: preparation and functionalization with nanocarbons.
Progress in Polymer Science
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2018.07.002
.
71 Bauhofer, W. and Kovacs, J.Z. (2009). A review and analysis of electrical percolation in carbon nanotube polymer composites.
Composite Science and Technology
69: 1486–1498.
72 McKeon‐Fischer, K., Flagg, D., and Freeman, J. (2011). Coaxial electrospun poly (ε‐caprolactone), multiwalled carbon nanotubes, and polyacrylic acid/polyvinyl alcohol scaffold for skeletal muscle tissue engineering.
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A
99: 493–499.
73 Markowski, J., Magiera, A., Lesiak, M. et al. (2015). Preparation and characterization of nanofibrous polymer scaffolds for cartilage tissue engineering.
Journal of Nanomaterials
1, 564087–9.
74 Leung, S.N. (2018). Thermally conductive polymer composites and nanocomposites: processing‐structure‐property relationships.
Composites Part B
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.05.056
.
75 Loomis, J., Ghasemi, H., Huang, X. et al. (2014). Continous fabrication platform for highly aligned polymer films.
Technology
2: 1–11.
76 Mehra, N., Mu, L., Ji, T. et al. (2018). Thermal transport in polymeric materials and across composite interfaces.
Applied Material Today
12: 92–130.
77 Rajapakse, R.M.G., Murakami, K., Bandara, H.M.N. et al. (2010). Preparation and characterization of electronically conducting polypyrrole‐montmorillonite nanocomposite and its potential application as a cathode material for oxygen reduction.
Electrochimica Acta
55: 2490–2497.
78 Mu, T., Liu, L., Lan, X. et al. (2018). Shape memory polymers for composites.
Composites Science and Technology
160: 169–198.
79 Saba, N. and Jawaid, M. (2018). A review on thermomechanical properties of polymers and fibers reinforced polymer composites.
Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiec.2018.06.018
.
80 Li, X., Bai, R., and McKechnie, J. (2016). Environmental and financial performance of mechanical recycling of carbon fibre reinforced polymers and comparison with conventional disposal routes.
Journal of Cleaner Production
127: 451–460.
81 Longana, M.L., Ong, N., Yu, H., and Potter, K.D. (2016). Multiple closed loop recycling of carbon fibre composites with the HiPerDiF (High Performance Discontinuous Fibre) method.
Composite Structures
152: 271–277.
82 Ahmad, F. and Bajpai, P.K. (2018). Analysis and evaluation of drilling induced damage in fiber reinforced polymer composites: a review.
IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering
https://doi.org/10.1088/1757‐899X/455/1/012105
.
83 Bajpai, P.K. and Singh, I. (2013). Drilling behavior of sisal fiber‐reinforced polypropylene composite laminates.
Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites
32: 1569–1576.
84 Abrate, S. and Walton, D. (1992). Machining of composite materials. Part II: Non‐traditional methods.
Composites Manufacturing
2: 85–94.
85 Sheikh‐Ahmad, J.Y. (2009).
Machining of Polymer Composites
. Springer Science and Business Media. ISBN: 978‐0‐387‐35539‐9.
86 Girot, F.A., Lacalle, L.N.L.D., Lamikiz, A., and Iliescu, D. (2009). Machining composite material, Chapter 2. In:
Machinability Aspects of Polymer Matrix Composites
(ed. J.P. Davim). ISTE Publication, Wiley,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268386427
.
87 Udupa, G., Rao, S.S., and Gangadharan, K.V. (2014). A review of carbon nanotube reinforced aluminium composite and functionally graded composites as a future material for aerospace.
International Journal of Modern Engineering Research
4: 13–22.
88 Achema, F., Yahaya, B.S., Apeh, E.S., and Akinyeye, J.O. (2017). Application of glass fibre reinforced composite in the production of light weight car bumper (a case study of the mechanical properties).
International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology
6: 575–579.
89 Fox, M.R., Schultheisz, C.R., Reeder, J.R. et al. Materials examination of the vertical stabilizer from American Airlines Flight 587. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20050238475 2019‐01‐09T09:26:42+00:00Z (accessed 19 January 2019).
90 Sathishkumar, T.P., Satheeshkumar, S., and Naveen, J. (2014). Glass fiber‐reinforced polymer composites – a review.
Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites
33: 1258–1275.
91 Vlot, A. and Gunnink, J.W. (2001).
Fibre Metal Laminates
. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
92 Aymerich, F. (2012).
Composite Materials for Wind Turbine Blades: Issues and Challenges
. University of Patras.
93 Dubravcik, I.M. and Kender, I.S. (2014). Composite materials application in car production.
Transfer Inovacii
29: 282–285.
94 Gururaja, M.N. and Rao, A.N.H. (2012). A review on recent applications and future prospectus of hybrid composites.
International Journal of Soft Computing and Engineering (IJSCE)
1: 352–355.
95 Ishikawa, T., Amaoka, K., Masubuchi, Y. et al. (2017). Overview of automotive structural composites technology developments in Japan.
Composites Science and Technology
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.09.015
.
96 Feraboli, P., Masini, A., and Bonfatti, A. (2007). Advanced composites for the body and chassis of a production high performance car.
International Journal of Vehicle Design
44: 233–246.
97 Boeman, R.G. and Johnson, N.L. (2002). Development of a cost competitive, composite intensive, body‐in‐white.
Proceedings of 2002 Future Car Congress
, Arlington, Virginia (3–5 June 2002). SAE technical paper.
98 Toh, S.L., Goh, J.C.H., Tan, P.H., and Tay, T.E. (1993). Fatigue testing of energy storing prosthetic feet.
Prosthetics and Orthotics International
17: 180–188.
99 Piller, R.M., Blackwell, R., Macneb, I., and Cameron, H.U. (1976). Carbon fiber‐reinforced bone cement in orthopedic surgery.
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
10: 893–906.
100 Taherian, R. (2008). Application of polymerbased composites: polymer‐based composite insulators. In:
Electrical Conductivity in Polymer‐Based Composites Experiments, Modelling and Applications
(ed. R. Taherian and A. Kausar), 131–181. William Andrew.
101 Tian, H., Tang, Z., Zhuang, X. et al. (2012). Biodegradable synthetic polymers: preparation, functionalization and biomedical application.
Progress in Polymer Science
37: 237–280.
102 Moyen, B.J.‐L., Lahey, P.J., Weinberg, E.H., and Harris, W.H. (1978). Effects on intact femora of dogs of the application and removal removal of metal plates.
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
60: 940–947.
103 Lin, T.W., Corvelli, A.A., Frondoza, C.G. et al. (1997). Glass PEEK composite promotes proliferation and osteo‐calcin production of human osteoblastic cells.
Journal of Bio‐Medical Materials Research
36: 37–144.
104 Kettunen, J., Makela, A., Miettinen, H. et al. (1999). Fixation of femoral shaft osteotomy with an intramedullary composite rod: an experimental study on dogs with a two year follow‐up.
Journal of Biomaterials Science Polymer Edition
10: 33–45.
105 Marcolongo, M., Ducheyne, P., Garino, J., and Schepers, E. (1998). Bioactive glass fibers/polymeric composites bond to bone tissue.
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
39: 161–170.
106 Claes, L., Schultheis, M., Wolf, S. et al. (1999). A new radiolucent system for vertebral body replacement: its stability in comparison to other systems.
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Applied Biomaterials
48: 82–89.
107 Simoes, J.A., Marques, A.T., and Jeronimidis, G. (1999). Design of a controlled‐stiffness composite proximal femoral prosthesis.
Composites Science and Technology
60: 559–567.
108 Wintermantel, E., Bruinink, A., Eckert, K. et al. (1998). Tissue engineering supported with structured biocompatible materials: goals and achievements. In:
Materials in Medicine
(ed. M.O. Speidel and P.J. Uggowitzer), 1–136. Zurich: vdf Hochschulverlag AG an der ETH.
109 Deng, M. and Shalaby, S.W. (1988). Properties of self‐reinforced ultra‐high molecular weight polyethylene composites.
Biomaterials
70: 1372–1376.
110 Ramakrishna S, Ganesh V.K., Teoh S.H. et al. (1998). Fiber reinforced composite product with graded stiffness. Singapore Patent Application No. 9800874‐1.
111 Bjork, N., Ekstrand, K., and Ruyter, I.E. (1986). Implant‐fixed dental bridges from carbon/graphite fiber reinforced poly(methyl methacrylate).
Biomaterials
7: 73–75.
112 Jancar, J. and Dibenedetto, A.T. (1993). Fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites for dentistry part I hydrolytic stability of the interface.
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine
4: 555–561.
113 Jancar, J., Dibenedetto, A.T., and Goldberg, A.J. (1993). Fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites for dentistry. Part II: Effect of moisture on flexural properties of unidirectional composites.
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine
4: 562–568.
114 Tallent, M.A., Cordova, C.W., Cordova, D.S., and Donnelly, D.S. (1990). Thermoplastic fibers for composite reinforcement. In:
