Comparison of the Mechanical Properties Between 2D and 3D Orthogonal Woven Ramie Fiber Reinforced Polypropylene Composites

Comparison of the Mechanical Properties Between 2D and 3D

Orthogonal Woven Ramie Fiber Reinforced Polypropylene
Composites
Qian Zhang, Xiaomeng Fang, Xiaojuan Sun, Baozhong Sun, and Yiping Qiu
Key Laboratory of Textile Science and Technology Ministry of Education, College of Textiles, Donghua University,
Shanghai, China, 201620

Summary
Polypropylene (PP) composites reinforced with ramie 2D plain fabric is widely developed recently. In this
paper, PP composites reinforced by using 3D orthogonal woven ramie fabric under hot-press molding process
were made. The tensile and flexural strength of reinforced composites were tested and discussed. The results
showed that the normalized tensile strength and the normalized tensile Young's modulus of 3D composite were
significantly improved compared with that of 2D composites. The normalized flexural strength and the normalized
flexural Young's modulus of 3D composite were also greatly improved. Overall results indicating that compared
with 2D composite the 3D orthogonal woven ramie fabric could significantly improve the mechanical property
of PP composites.

Keywords: Green composites, 3D orthogonal woven, 2D plain fabrics, Ramie yarns, Polypropylene

1. Introduction limited in cellulose fibers reinforced 2.2 Preparation and Heat-press

“Green composites” with molding
ability and recyclable characters
combined with cellulose fiber
and biodegradable or thermoset/
thermoplastic resin has been a focus
in new material fields. Cellulose fiber
including ramie, flax, jute, kenaf etc,
are commonly used as reinforcing
materials as the specific strength and
stiffness approached the level of glass
fiber. Furthermore cellulose fiber is
environmental friendly from growth
to processing 1,2. Referring to the
main type of textile structure used as
reinforce material in green composites,
randomly arranged staple fiber in the
composites is widely used. As the length
and weight content of fibers raise,
fracture strength and Young’s modulus
of staple fiber reinforced composites
obviously increase3,4. Woven fabrics
as preforms of composites was also
investigated5, whereas studies on 3D
orthogonal woven fabrics with tie
yarns in the thickness direction are
©
Smithers Rapra Technology, 2014
composites. This paper focuses on
the mechanical properties of the
3D orthogonal ramie woven fabrics
reinforced polypropylene composites.
2. Experimental
procedure
2.1 Preform Fabrication
Textile fabrics as the preforms contain
two types: 2D and 3D. 2D stands for
laminates of plain woven fabrics;
3D orthogonal woven fabrics differ
from 2D in the thickness direction,
the z-yarns in 3D fabrics tie the warp
and weft yarns together into a integer
structure. In addition, warp and weft
yarns in 3D fabrics align in 0° and 90°
direction respectively without crimp.
2D fabrics were laid up with 4 layers
of plain fabrics and 3D fabrics were
fabricated with 3 layers of warp yarns
and 4 layers of weft yarns (Figure 1).
The parameters of fabrics of perform
as Table 1.
Polypropylene was used as
thermoplastic matrix and heat-press
were conducted on a plate vulcanizing
machine. Before heat-press mold, PP
master batch was molded into two
films. Then PP films were laid on the
upper and bottom of fabric in order to
build a sandwich structure. Then the
three layer were heat-press in 180 °C
and 7 MPa for 5 minutes.
2.3 Composite Parameters
Design
The fiber volume fractions were
calculated in corresponding to the
different weft densities of fabric
preforms. A hollow square steel
frame with the same size of the
performs (30 cm×30 cm) was placed
surrounding the fabric and matrix
in heat-press process so as to fix
the thickness of composites as the
thickness of frame (3 mm). As the
3D fabrics were non-crimped and
fabricated with 3 layers warp yarns
and one system of Z yarns, so the
fiber volume friction was less than
2D composites with same thickness
either in warp yarns and weft yarns.

Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2014 187

 Qian Zhang, Xiaomeng Fang, Xiaojuan Sun, Baozhong Sun, and Yiping Qiu

Table 1. Parameters of fabrics 3. Results and

Yarns Fineness Material Densities of fabric discussion
Warp 560 tex Ramie 40 lines/10 cm
3.1 Tensile Properties
Weft 560 tex Ramie 40 lines/10 cm
Figures 2 to 4 show the tensile test
Z 560 tex Ramie 40 lines/10 cm
results in warp and weft directions.
Normalized strength is calculated with
Table 2. Parameters of fabrics below equation:
Yarns Warp density Weft density Z Densities
(lines/10 cm) (lines/10 cm) (lines/10 cm) normalized strength = strength
2D-40 40/layer 40/layer -- (MPa)/fiber volume fraction (%)
2D-60 40/layer 60/layer --
Figure 2 and Figure 3 are the
3D-40 40/layer 40/layer 40 normalized tensile Young's modulus
3D-60 40/layer 60/layer 60 and normalized tensile strength for
2D and 3D orthogonal ramie woven
fabrics reinforced polypropylene
Figure 1. Construction diagram of 2D (a) and 3D (b) orthogonal woven fabric, composites. The data indicates that
coordinate, and directions of yarns the 3D composites demonstrated much
higher normalized tensile Young’s
(a)
modulus and normalized tensile
strength than 2D composites. The
main reason for the higher Young’s
modulus is that the warp and weft
yarn in 3D composites were fabricated
in a flat and straight manner. When
doing the initial stretch all the fibers
were under tension. While the warp
and weft yarn in 2D composites were
fabricated in a crimped manner. When
doing the initial stretch, the clamp are
basically measuring the strength to
(b) stretch the crimped fibers into flat and
straight fibers. The other reason maybe
from the sample preparation. The 2D
composition are prepared by heat press
molding of flat woven fabrics. It was
very challenge to keep all the fiber at
the same direction for either warp or
weft direction. So part of the fiber in
either warp or weft direction were not
fully utilized during tensile test which
generates no tensile strength.
2.4 Sample Preparation and volume fractions were calculated
Test with weigh method. In tensile tests, Figure 2 and Figure 3 also showed
specimens shaped in dog-bone form the differences between 2D and 3D
In order to compare the performance were loaded along warp and weft composites for mechanical property
of 2D and 3D orthogonal ramie woven directions in a constant speed of 5 mm/ impacted by weft yarns density change.
fabrics reinforced polypropylene min on MTS810. Test clamp length was For 3D composite with the increase of
composites under different fiber 115 mm. Impact tests were conducted weft yarns density there was no big
densities, samples listed in Table 2 on Intron Dynamic weight impact changes on normalized tensile strength
were prepared. tester, and test speed was 2 m/s. Each and Young's modulus in warp direction.
sample included 5 specimens; the Mainly because the change of weft
Regard the difference between result was averaging from all single yarns density didn't have big impact
structures of fabric preforms, fiber test results. to the wrap yarn. However at the weft

188 Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2014

 Comparison of the Mechanical Properties Between 2D and 3D Orthogonal Woven Ramie Fiber Reinforced Polypropylene Composites

direction with the increase of weft Figure 2. Normalized tensile Young’s modulus of 2D and 3D composites
yarns density the normalized Young's
modulus were increased, mainly
because of the higher fiber density
improved the stiffness of composition
in weft direction. While the normalized
tensile strength were reduced with
increase of weft yarns density. Mainly
because the improve of tensile strength
by higher weft density was offset by
the increase of fiber volume fraction.

For 2D composite the normalized

tensile strength and Young’s modulus
were reduced in wrap direction. Mainly
because the increased weft yarns
density created more crimp of wrap
yarn which resulted in more strain from
relaxation of crimped fibers. However Figure 3. Normalized tensile strengths of 2D and 3D composites
in weft direction increased weft yarn
density did help improves the modulus
but the normalized tensile strength was
not improved mainly because of the
same reason that improve of tensile
strength by higher weft density was
offset by the increase of fiber volume
fraction.

The ultimate tensile strains of 2D and

3D composites were shown in Figure 4.

The tensile strength of 3D composition

is lower than 2D composition. The
major reasons to the lower tensile
strength comes from two different
factor. Firstly the 3D composites only
have 3 layer warp yarns and 4 layer
weft yarns while 2D composites has
4 layers of both waft and warp yarns. Figure 4. Ultimate tensile strains of 2D and 3D composites
Secondly the flat straight structure
of 3D composition in both wrap and
weft direction also result in less fiber
friction which reduces the ultimate
tensile strength.

Figure 5 presents the typical stress-

strain curves of 2D and 3D composites.
For 3D composites, from the initiation
point A to damage point B, the slope
of curve was very constant. After the
damage point B, it showed a ladder like
curve from point B to point G. The 3D
orthogonal woven fabric contained 3
layers of warp yarns, differences on
weaving and straightness of yarns

Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2014 189

 Qian Zhang, Xiaomeng Fang, Xiaojuan Sun, Baozhong Sun, and Yiping Qiu
Figure 5. Stress-strain curves of 2D and 3D composites in warp direction for
tensile tests. (a) Stress-strain curve of 3D-40 composites; (b) Stress-strain curve of
2D-40 composites
Figure 6. Normalized flexural Young’s modulus of 2D and 3D composites
between different layers would
demonstrate different tension. As a
result, the respective damage point of
3 layers are not at same time.
The slope of stress-strain curve of 2D
composites changed in point H. There
is a short higher modulus area from
starting point to point H owing to the
inter-yarns and inter-fibers friction
resistance force produced by changing
190
of crimp of the yarns and fibers in
fabrics. After point H the crimp degree
of warp yarns is decreased and yarns are
compressed at the interlacing points.
Until the load reaches the break point,
the fabrics break immediately.
3.2 Flexural Tests
Figures 6 and 7 show the flexural
test results of 2D and 3D composites.
Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2014
It is obvious that the normalized
flexural strengths and flexural Young’s
modulus of 3D composites are higher
than 2D composites in both warp
direction and weft direction. The
reasons are as follows: firstly the
Z yarn in the thickness direction of
the 3D composites helps to avoid
delamination, secondly yarns in the
fabric interlaced in 2D fabrics slip
easily than parallel yarns arranged in
the 3D fabrics.
Figure 6 and Figure 7 also showed
the differences between 2D and 3D
composites for flexural property
impacted by weft density change. For
3D composite with the increase of weft
yarn density there was no improvement
on normalized flexural strength and
flexural Young’s modulus in warp
direction. Mainly because the same
reason as tensile property, the change
of weft yarn density didn’t have big
impact to the wrap yarn. However at
the weft direction with the increase
of weft yarn density the normalized
flexural Young’s modulus were
increased, mainly because of the higher
fiber density improved the stiffness of
composition in weft direction. While
the normalized flexural strength were
reduced with increase of weft yarn
density. Mainly because the improve
of tensile strength by higher weft
density was offset by the increase of
fiber volume fraction.
For 2D composite the normalized
flexural strength and flexural Young’s
modulus were reduced in wrap
direction. Mainly because the increased
weft yarn density created more crimp
of wrap yarn which resulted in more
strain from relaxation of crimped fibers
during flexural test. In weft direction
the normalized tensile strength was
not improved by increased weft yarn
density mainly because of the same
reason that improve of tensile strength
by higher weft density was offset by
the increase of fiber volume fraction.
In addition, one thing worth mention is
that the normalized flexural strength in
 Comparison of the Mechanical Properties Between 2D and 3D Orthogonal Woven Ramie Fiber Reinforced Polypropylene Composites
Figure 7. Normalized flexural strengths of 2D and 3D composites
the warp direction was always higher
than in the weft direction indicated by
data from Figure 7.
As regarding PP matrix, the viscosity
is relative high for full penetration in
the woven fabrics. The increase of
weft yarn density also created some
challenges for PP matrix to fully
penetrated into the woven fabrics.
The soakage rate and the surface
compatibility between ramie and PP
are critical factors for mechanical
properties of composites.
4. Conclusions
3D orthogonal woven ramie fabric is
a new configuration type of preform
of green composites. The tensile
and flexural performances of 3D
composites are distinctly superior
Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2014
to 2D composites. With the weft
densities of the fabrics change, the
mechanical properties of 3D and
2D composites was quite different
owing to the different configurations
of the fabrics. Test results show that
3D orthogonal woven ramie fabric
composition demonstrated the most
attractive properties in terms of higher
normalized tensile strength, higher
young’s modulus and higher flexural
modulus
Acknowledgment
This study was supported by the
Fundamental Research Funds
for the Central Universities (No.
KLTST201201), the National
Level Teaching Groups for Textile
Materials Science grant, the National
High Technology Research and
Development Program of China
(No.2007AA03Z101), the State Key
Program of National Natural Science
of China (No.51035003), Natural
Science Foundation for the Youth (No.
50803010 and 60904056), National
Science Foundation for Post-doctoral
Scientists of China (No.20100470664),
Shanghai Post-doctoral Research
Funded Project (No.09R21410100),
the Program of Introducing Talents
of Discipline to Universities (No.
B07024).
References
1. John M.J. and Thomas S., Biofibres
and Biocomposites. Carbohyd
Polym., 71 (2008) 343-364.
2. Bledzki A.K. and Gassan J.,
Composites reinforced with cellulose
based fibres. Prog Polym Sci., 24
(1999) 221-274.
3. Lodha P. and Netravali A.N.,
Characterization of interfacial and
mechanical properties of "green"
composites with soy protein isolate
and ramie fiber. J. Mater. Sci., 37
(2002) 3657-3665.
4. Wollerdorfer M. and Bader H.,
Influence of natural fibres on
the mechanical properties of
biodegradable polymers. Industrial
Crops and Products, 8 (1998) 105-
112.
5. Herrmann A.S., Nickel J., and
Riedel U., Construction materials
based upon biologically renewable
resources from components to
finished parts. Polymer Degradation
and Stability, 59 (1998) 251-261.
191
 Qian Zhang, Xiaomeng Fang, Xiaojuan Sun, Baozhong Sun, and Yiping Qiu

192 Polymers & Polymer Composites, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2014