Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.

4, 600-607 ISSN 1229-9197 (print version)

DOI 10.1007/s12221-016-5931-z ISSN 1875-0052 (electronic version)

Bending Properties of Carbon/Glass and Carbon/Aramid Fabric Composites

with Various Stacking Structures by the VARTM Method
Jun Hee Song*
Division of Mechanical Design Engineering, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju 54896, Korea
(Received December 18, 2015; Revised January 15, 2016; Accepted March 8, 2016)

Abstract: In this paper, the bending properties of woven carbon/glass and carbon/aramid fabric-reinforced polymer
laminates is studied using a combination of experimental analysis and fracture observation. Six types of each hybrid
composite were manufactured by lamination of the carbon/aramid fabric and carbon/glass fabric using VARTM. Bending
behaviors were fundamentally evaluated for the six types of monolithic composites laminated by the same fabric. The
objective was to achieve a good bending strength by effective combination of composite structures using limited amounts of
a raw material. It was shown that the bending property was different, depending on the type of fiber, lamination structure, and
the number of layers.
Keywords: Hybrid composites, Bending strength, Carbon, Lamination, Vacuum assisted resin transfer molding

Introduction failure of the fiber and the matrix, interfacial separation,

fiber splitting, and delamination of the layered interface.
The world is currently facing issues caused by global Therefore, to ensure the safety and integrity of composite
warming and the energy crisis resulting from limited natural materials during practical use, there is an urgent need to
resources. The survival of humanity has been threatened accumulate data for reliability evaluation [22-24].
because the ecosystem has been disturbed by climate change For the manufacturing of high-quality aerospace composites,
[1,2]. A consequence of this is an economic loss that a prepreg process is carried out by subjecting the material to
amounts to 20 % of the global GDP [3]. For the efficiency of heat and pressure in an autoclave. However, the autoclave
the resources, there has been an increase in the demand for method has the disadvantage of a long production time, the
using new reinforcement such as super fiber to raise the need for expensive equipment and manufacturing costs, and
performance of materials. Multilateral studies on material the size of the limited material scope. The RTM method
weight have been attempted in the transport sector, in part to involves inserting a strand mat, woven fiber or preform into
reduce the consumption of finite energy resources [4-10]. a mold, followed by injection and curing of a liquid
Polymer composites have advantages such as being thermosetting resin. This method is less expensive and can
lightweight with good specific strength and stiffness. These be manufactured using simpler tools compared to the
have the flexibility of design and superior manufacturing autoclave process. Metal ribs, reinforcement, or other inserts
over other materials [11-14]. Recently, as the need for the may be added into the mold. To replace the autoclave
development of new materials is increasing, high-performance process for the manufacture of large and massive structures,
multi-functional composites are being actively developed the development of a liquid composite molding method has
with properties such as lightweight, heat resistance, electrical been widely researched in many countries; these include
conductivity, vibration damping, and dimensional stability vacuum assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM), resin
[15-19]. Super fiber composite materials, in particular, are of infusion under flexible tolling (RIFT), and seaman composite
much interest, with carbon and aramid fiber being typical resin infusion manufacture (SCRIMP). VARTM is an advanced
candidate materials. Laminating composites are excellent in RTM method that can produce a material whose quality is
terms of flexibility of design as the stacking factor can be similar to that obtained in the autoclave process [25-28].
adjusted depending on the intended use and function. Carbon As mentioned previously, carbon and aramid fibers are
fabric-reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites have been representative reinforcing material. These fibers have low
widely applied to aerospace, automotive structures, and density and high elasticity and strength in comparison with
sports products. CFRP is suitable for the manufacture of the steel wire. Moreover, the aramid fiber has been revealed
structural components such as aircraft shells, wings, fuselage, to be a good reinforcement due to its high tensile properties
and engines [20,21]. and excellent thermal resistance. However, aramid fiber
Composites consisting of different materials exhibit the composites have low interfacial adhesion due to chemical
properties of heterogeneity and anisotropy. Fracture mechanics resistance of aramid in the polymer matrix [29-33].
behavior of composites is very complex and usually comprises The mechanical performance of composites is usually
a mix of failure modes. The types of fracture include the characterized using tensile, shear and bending tests. If the
bending load of a composite is in the elastic stress field, the
*Corresponding author: [email protected] loaded tension and compressive stresses will equally interacted

600
Bending Properties of Carbon-Aramid Composites Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 601

in upper and lower side of the neutral surface. Bending The matrix used was epoxy resin (HTC-667C, Jeil Hi-Tech,
fracture of composites may occur due to tensile or compressive Korea). The specific properties of the fiber and resin are
stresses. However, if the adhesion of the laminate interface is presented in Table 1 and 2, respectively.
weak, failure occurs by interfacial delamination due to shear
stress. Since the laminated composite material is vulnerable VARTM Process and Specimen
to the interfacial strength, bending characteristics should be A variety of fiber reinforced composites were molded into
investigated [34-38]. a plate shape with multilayered structure using VARTM. The
Various specimens were manufactured by VARTM, and reinforcing fabric fibers were uniformly cut into 245285 mm
there was nearly no pore inside the composite material. The pieces and stacked into a laminated structure designed for
effect of the composites on the mechanical properties was each type of specimen. The types of specimens and lamination
determined from bending tests. The purpose of this study is structure are shown in Figure 1 and Table 3, respectively.
to investigate the bending failure mechanism of a woven There were six types of monolithic composites laminated by
carbon and aramid/epoxy composite, and specifically to the same fabric. It was also fabricated to six types of two
determine bending strength according to the type of reinforcing different hybrid composites of carbon/glass fiber (CG-type)
material. Another objective of this research is to examine and carbon/aramid fiber (CG-type).
how the combined structure of a composite material affects In a specially designed injection system for effective
its bending behavior, for a fixed amount of raw material. process treatment, dry fibers, peel plies, and breather were
layered and sealed in a vacuum bag. Then, the inlet and
Materials and Test Methods
Table 2. Properties of the epoxy resin (HTC-667C)
Resin and Reinforcement Specific gravity (25 oC) 1.160.02
The reinforcing fibers used were carbon (TC06P, AKSACA, Viscosity (cps, 25 oC) 1200500
Turkey), aramid (Kevlar T49, DuPont, USA), glass (K618, Hardener Modified aliphatic amine
Hankuk Fiber, Korea), and high modulus polypropylene
Tensile strength (MPa) 63.7
(HMPP, Innegra S, Innegrity LLC, USA); these were obtained
Compressive strength (MPa) 88.2
in the woven form for the manufacture of the composites. A
woven fabric was used with plain weaving at 0 o and 90 o. Flexural strength (MPa) 81.3

Table 1. Specification of the reinforcing fabric materials

Fiber Carbon Aramid Glass HMPP
Style TC-06-P TA-05-P TG-04-P Innegra S
Weight (g/m2) 200 165 197 110
Warp primary fiber 3K 158 tex 134 tex 104 tex
Thickness (mm) 0.270.025 0.330.025 0.180.025 0.380.05
Density (count/in) 12.51 131 181 12.51

Figure 1. Structure of the hybrid composites manufactured by VARTM.

602 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 Jun Hee Song

Table 3. Stacking sequence for the different laminating structure

Fabric type Name Fabric ply Laminating structure
Glass GFRP G10 GGGGGGGGGG
Carbon CFRP C10 CCCCCCCCCC
Aramid AFRP A10 AAAAAAAAAA
HMPP HFRP H10 HHHHHHHHHH
Glass/HMPP GH-FRP GH10 =GH
Carbon/Aramid CA-FRP CA10 =CA
Carbon+Glass CG1 C1G1 10 CGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCG
(CG-Hybrid) CG2 C2G2 5 CCGGCCGGCCGGCCGGCCGG
CG3 C3G3 3 CCCGGGCCCGGGCCCGGG
CG4 C4G4 2 CCCCGGGGCCCCGGGG
CGC C5G10C5 CCCCCGGGGGGGGGGCCCCC
GCG G5C10G5 GGGGGCCCCCCCCCCGGGGG
Carbon+Aramid CA1 C1A1 10 CACACACACACACACACACA
(CA-Hybrid) CA2 C2A2 5 CCAACCAACCAACCAACCAA
CA3 C3A3 3 CCCAAACCCAAACCCAAA
CA4 C4A4 2 CCCCAAAACCCCAAAA
CAC C5A10C5 CCCCCAAAAAAAAAACCCCC
ACA A5C10A5 AAAAACCCCCCCCCCAAAAA

Figure 3. Dimension of the bending specimen and bending tester.

Figure 2. Schematic of the VARTM setup.

outlet ports were connected to a vacuum hose. The epoxy 2 mm/min using a universal testing machine (Unitech-M,
resin mixed with a curing agent was evaporated for 30 min R&B, Korea). Bending strength was determined using the
at the same time and injected into the vacuum bag through a following equation:
hose by applying a vacuum pressure of about 80 kPa. After
3FL
resin injection, the molded object was cured in an oven at b = ---------2- (1)
65 oC for more than 2 h. The schematic diagram of the 2bt
VARTM process is shown in Figure 2. The total thickness where F, L, b, and t represent the bending load, support span,
was increased to about 4 mm after manufacturing. width, and thickness of the specimen, respectively.

Bending Test Results and Discussion

Various composites were manufactured to evaluate the
changes in mechanical performance of the bending properties Bending Behavior
with the laminated structure. The reinforcing fibers used Figure 4 shows typical load-displacement curves under
were carbon, aramid, glass, HMPP, carbon/aramid, and carbon/ bending loading obtained from the CG1 and CA1 samples,
glass. The raw plate-shaped composites manufactured by the which are laminated alternately with one layer of carbon and
VARTM method were machined into a standardized specimen hybrid fiber (aramid and glass). Both of them exhibit a linear
through a water-jet system. Bending specimens were cut to a elastic behavior up to the maximum bending load. As shown
predetermined size according to guidelines outlined in the in Figure 4(a), GFRP broke down as soon as it reached the
ASTM D790 standard [39]. As shown in Figure 3, the maximum load. However, AFRP exhibits non-linear behavior
specimens were 80 mm in length, 12.7 mm in width, and post the linear behavior, before being destroyed. CFRP
4 mm in thickness. Five specimens were repeatedly tested showed a sharp load increase and the highest maximum load
for each configuration. Three point bending tests were (about 900 N) compared with GFRP and AFRP. Beyond
performed at room temperature with a crosshead speed of 900 N, CFRP exhibits a load drop and subsequent failure.
Bending Properties of Carbon-Aramid Composites Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 603

Figure 6. Bending stress for the different hybrid composites; (a)

Figure 4. Bending load and displacement curves of 1 ply CG-type by carbon and glass fibers and (b) CA-type by carbon
laminating composites; (a) carbon and glass fibers and (b) carbon and aramid fibers.
and aramid fibers.
from Figure 4 were substituted in equation and the bending
strengths were calculated to be about 700, 618, 427, and
355 MPa for CFRP, CA-FRP, GFRP, and AFRP, respectively.
The strength of CFRP was the highest and that of HFRP was
very low at about 55 MPa. According to equation (1), the
bending strength is inversely proportional to the square of
thickness. The thickness of CFRP was about 2.3 mm, but
that of the CG-type and CA-type was about 4 mm. Therefore,
the load of CFRP was low, but their bending strength was
high.
Figure 6 illustrates the bending strength for the six types
of hybrid composites with CG-type and CA-type. Overall,
the bending strength of the CG-type is higher than that of the
CA-type. It is known that the CG-type make an excellent
Figure 5. Bending stress of the monolithic composites laminated combination in terms of bending property. Figure 6(a)
by a single fabric. represents the hybrid CG-type composite consisting of
carbon and glass fabric. Bending strength values were
For AFRP, the stepwise rise in the bending load showed similarly distributed within the range of 560-590 MPa for
serrations. It is likely to be caused when the aramid fiber was the CG1, CG2 and CG3 specimens, which are laminated
torn out under loading because of the high toughness against alternately with one, two, and three layers of carbon and
the mechanical load. glass fiber, respectively. CG4 had four cross-laminated ply
Figure 5 shows the bending strength for the six types of of carbon and glass fabric, and in the CGC specimen, the
monolithic composites. As described above, the data obtained glass fabric is placed on the inside and the carbon fabric is
604 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 Jun Hee Song

placed on the outside. The CG4 and CGC samples exhibited resistance against bending load occurs in the most distant
a high strength of 695 MPa and 657 MPa, respectively. In surface side from the neutral plane, in the CAC composite,
the GCG specimen, the glass fabric was placed on the the carbon fabric was placed on the surface side and this
surface side, and this showed the lowest strength value of resulted in higher strength than the ACA. The bending
about 500 MPa. Thus, the CG4 sample, in which many strength of the CA-type and CG-type were distributed in the
layers of fabric were laminated at a time, showed the highest range of roughly 500-600 MPa and 600-700 MPa, respectively.
bending strength. If the carbon fabric is laminated many fold Generally, the hybrid CA-type composite exhibited a lower
at a time, fracture initiation becomes difficult in the thickness bending stress than the CG-type. This was believed to be due
direction and crack resistance will increase, resulting in an to delamination of the aramid fabric surface, resulting from
increase in the bending strength. Figure 6(b) shows the low interfacial adhesion. In the investigation of strength by
hybrid CA-type composite consisting of carbon and aramid bending tests, the bending property was found to differ
fabric. The bending strength was the lowest at 505 MPa in depending on the type of fiber, lamination structure, and the
the CA1 type specimen in which one layer of carbon and one number of layers.
layer of aramid fiber were alternately placed. The bending
strengths of the CA2, CA3 and CA4 specimens are similar Observation of Fracture Surfaces
and lie within the range of 525-540 MPa. However, in the After the bending tests, the thickness of all the specimens
CAC specimen, the laminated aramid fabric was placed on was observed using an optical microscope. As shown in
the inside and this resulted in a high strength of 603 MPa. In Figure 7, the degree of fracture varied with the bending load
contrast, in the ACA specimen, the laminated aramid fabric in the thickness direction for composites consisting of
was placed on the outside and it resulted in a strength of reinforcing fiber and resin. The interface between the fiber
514 MPa. and resin in GFRP was found to separate easily. CFRP
Because the bending strength of the carbon fiber is higher showed delamination in the vicinity of the upper and lower
than that of the glass or aramid fiber, it is considered that the surfaces. The observation of AFRP was difficult due to the
bending properties are dominated by the position of the presence of fluff (or lint), but delamination was confirmed to
carbon fabric in hybrid composites. Since the maximum occur between the layers. Composites of the HFRP and GH-

Figure 7. Fracture of the monolithic composites in thickness direction.

Bending Properties of Carbon-Aramid Composites Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 605

FRP exhibited large deformation of fibers rather than of the glass fiber. If there is no damage to the CG-type,
delamination or crack formation under the influence of high everything appears black. On switching from the CG1 to the
ductility. The CA-FRP contained cracks in the vicinity of the CG3 type, delamination (white pattern) is increased and the
upper and lower surfaces. length also became larger. However, the failure of CG4 was
Changes in the fracture surface as a result of bending load significantly reduced compared to CG3. As described above,
were macroscopically observed for a specific composite. As the bending strength of CG4 was excellent. The damage size
can be seen in Figure 8, there was a lot of damage caused to of GCG was bigger than that of CGC.
the upper and lower surfaces on application of a bending Figure 9 shows SEM photograph for fracture surface of
load. Especially, in the case of the GFRP specimen, many the CA-type and CG-type composites. As shown in Figure
traces of failure and delamination were prominently observed 9(a), the aramid fiber was destroyed without bonding of the
over wide areas in the lower part, which was subjected to matrix at the interface. The carbon fiber was strongly attached
tensile load, than in the top part, which was subjected to to the epoxy. In Figure 9(b) of the CG-type composites, the
compressive load. In the failed part of the CG-type, the carbon glass fiber was fractured with the epoxy struck together at
and glass fiber is shown in black and white, respectively. the interface. The interfacial adhesion of the CG-type
This specimen was visualized in white color due to delamination composites was superior to that of the CG-type. Therefore,

Figure 8. Fracture shape for the various hybrid composites.

Figure 9. SEM photograph of the CA-type and CG-type composites; (a) CA-type and (b) CG-type.
606 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 Jun Hee Song

it was confirmed that bending strength of the CG-type 2015R1D1A3A01019379).

composites was higher than that of the CG-type.
References
Conclusion
1. J. Tang, H. M. Meng, and L. L. Huang, RSC Adv., 4, 16512
The present study was to find composites of high mechanical (2014).
performance using a fixed quantity of raw material. The 2. S. Chu and A. Majumdar, Nature, 488, 294 (2012).
mechanical properties were evaluated in terms of the bending 3. R. Pielke Jr., Global Environ. Chang., 17, 302 (2007).
performance. Test composites were manufactured using 4. B. Tonn, P. D. Frymier, D. Stiefel, L. S. Skinner, N.
VARTM. The bending specimens were divided into three Suraweera, and R. Tuck, J. Clean. Prod., 66, 392 (2014).
types: monolithic composites, carbon/glass, and carbon/ 5. P. Martensson, D. Zenkert, and M. Akermo, Compos.
aramid hybrid composites. A total of 18 samples were used Struct., 134, 572 (2015).
to investigate the bending strength. The results obtained 6. S. H. Nam, D. Y. Lee, J. W. Kim, and D. G. Lee, Compos.
from experimental analysis and fracture observation can be Struct., 134, 124 (2015).
summarized as follows. 7. D. H. Kim, H. G. Kim, and H. S. Kim, Compos. Struct.,
Except for monolithic composites of aramid and HMPP, 131, 742 (2015).
all the other monolithic composites exhibited a linear elastic 8. Y. Li, L. Xie, and H. Ma, Mater. Des., 86, 313 (2015).
behavior under bending load. Bending strengths of about 9. E. R. H. Fuchs, F. R. Field, R. Roth, and R. E. Kirchain,
700, 427, 355, and 55 MPa are obtained for CFRP, GFRP, Compos. Sci. Technol., 68, 1989 (2008).
AFRP, and HFRP, respectively. The strength of CFRP was 10. V. Fiore, T. Scalici, G. D. Bella, and A. Valenza, Compos.
the highest and that of HFRP was very low. In general, the Pt. B-Eng., 74, 74 (2015).
bending strength of the CG-type composites is higher than 11. S. L. Valena, S. Griza, V. G. Oliveira, E. M. Sussuchi, and
that of the CA-type. The bending strength values were F. G. C. Cunha, Compos. Pt. B-Eng., 70, 1 (2015).
similar for the CG1, CG2 and CG3 specimens, but those of 12. W. Hufenbach, R. Bohm, L. Kroll, and A. Langkamp,
CG4 and CGC were higher at 695 MPa and 657 MPa, Mech. Compos., 40, 519 (2004).
respectively. In the case of CG4, in which many carbon fabric 13. F. Sarasini, J. Tirillo, L. Ferrante, M. Valente, T. Valente, L.
layers are laminated at a time, fracture initiation becomes Lampani, P. Gaudenzi, S. Cioffi, S. Iannace, and L.
difficult in the thickness direction and crack resistance Sorrentino, Compos. Pt. B-Eng., 59, 204 (2014).
increases, leading to an increase in the bending strength. In 14. T. T. Li, R. Wang, C. W. Lou, and J. H. Lin, Compos. Pt. B-
CA-type composites, the bending strength of CA1 was the Eng., 59, 60 (2014).
lowest, while that of the CA2, CA3 and CA4 specimens 15. Y. Yang, X. Wu, S. Terada, M. Okano, A. Nakai, and H.
were similar. However, in the CAC laminated specimen, the Hamada, Int. J. Crash., 17, 295 (2012).
aramid fabric was placed in the middle and it exhibited a 16. Q. Liu, Y. Lina, Z. Zonga, G. Sun, and Q. Lic, Compos.
high strength of 603 MPa. The bending property was found Struct., 97, 231 (2013).
to differ depending on the type of fiber, lamination structure, 17. J. Bouchet, E. Jacquelin, and P. Hamelin, Compos. Sci.
and the number of layers. Technol., 60, 1891 (2000).
Optical microscope observations show that the interface in 18. G. Belingardi, A. T. Beyene, and E. G. Koricho, Compos.
GFRP was easily separated, and CFRP showed delamination Struct., 102, 217 (2013).
in the vicinity of the upper and lower surfaces. It was 19. E. G. Koricho and G. Belingardi, Int. J. Automot. Compos.,
difficult to confirm the occurrence of delamination in AFRP 1, 90 (2014).
due to the presence of fluff. HFRP had large deformation 20. R. F. Gibson, Compos. Struct., 92, 2793 (2010).
owing to high ductility. The CG-type specimen can be 21. L. Ye, Y. Lu, Z. Su, and G. Meng, Compos. Sci. Technol.,
macroscopically visualized in white color due to delamination of 65, 1436 (2005).
the glass fiber. On switching from the CG1 to the CG3, 22. G. A. Bouche and A. T. Akono, Eng. Fract. Mech., 148,
delamination is increased (increase of white pattern) and the 243 (2015).
length also becomes larger. However, the failure of CG4 was 23. J. M. L. Reis, Constr. Build. Mater., 37, 177 (2012).
significantly reduced compared to CG3 and its high strength 24. M. May, Compos. Pt. A-Appl. Sci. Manuf., 81, 1 (2016).
was identified by fracture surface. 25. S. Bickerton and M. Z. Abdullah, Compos. Sci. Technol.,
63, 1359 (2003).
Acknowledgements 26. J. H. Song, E-Polymers, 14, 345 (2014).
27. N. K. Naik, M. Sirisha, and A. Inani, Prog. Aerosp. Sci.,
This research was supported by the Basic Science Research 65, 22 (2014).
Program through the National Research Foundation of 28. P. Simacek, . Eksik, D. Heider, J. W. Gillespie, and S.
Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF- Advani, Compos. Pt. A-Appl. Sci. Manuf., 43, 370 (2012).
Bending Properties of Carbon-Aramid Composites Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 607

29. L. Ghosh, H. Kinoshita, and N. Ohmae, Compos. Sci. 35. H. Ullah, A. R. Harland, and V. V. Silberschmidt, Compos.
Technol., 67, 1611 (2007). Pt. B-Eng., 75, 156 (2015).
30. Y. H. Zhang, Y. D. Huang, J. M. He, L. N. Wu, and Z. W. 36. C. Dong and I. J. Davies, Compos. Pt. B-Eng., 43, 2751
Xu, Compos. Interface, 15, 611 (2008). (2012).
31. G. Zhao, B. X. Liu, Q. H. Wang, and T. M. Wang, Surf. 37. J. Shi, L. Bao, R. Kobayashi, J. Kato, and K. Kemmochi,
Interface Anal., 45, 605 (2013). Compos. Sci. Technol., 72, 1298 (2012).
32. W. Wang, R. Li, M. Tian, L. Liu, H. Zou, X. Zhao, and L. 38. J. Hoffman, J. Middleton, and M. Kumosa, Compos. Sci.
Zhang, ACS Appl. Mater. Interface, 5, 2062 (2013). Technol., 106, 141 (2015).
33. S. Hussain, C. Yorucu, I. Ahmed, R. Hussain, B. Chen, M. 39. ASTM D 790-10, Standard Test Methods for Flexural
B. Khan, N. A. Siddique, and I. U. Rehman, Surf. Coat. Properties of Unreinforced and Reinforced Plastics and
Technol., 258, 458 (2014). Electrical Insulating Materials, West Conshohocken,
34. E. G. Koricho and G. Belingardi, Compos. Pt. B-Eng., 79, ASTM International, 2010.
430 (2015).