Forces in Mechanics 4 (2021) 100029

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Forces in Mechanics
journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/forces-in-mechanics

Improving the tensile and flexural properties of reinforced epoxy

composites by using cobalt filled and carbon/glass fiber
Dipen Kumar Rajak a, *, Pratiksha H. Wagh b, Hassan Moustabchir c, Catalin I. Pruncu d, **
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sandip Institute of Technology and Research Centre, Nashik, MH 422213, India
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, G. H. Raisoni Institute of Engineering and Technology, Pune, MH 412207, India
c
Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, ENSA, Fez, Morocco
d
Design, Manufacturing & Engineering Management, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, G1 1XJ, Scotland, United Kingdom

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this paper, the study concentrates on the flexural and tensile characteristics of the cobalt filler and fiber-
GFRP reinforced epoxy composites used in the car body parts. Glass fiber (GF) and carbon fiber (CF) filled with the
CFRP epoxy compound were prepared by hand lay-up varying the percentage of weight (wt.%) of cobalt from (0.4 to
Reinforced
1.0 wt.%). GF tensile and flexural strength were available at approximately 96.9 MPa and 120 MPa, respectively,
Composites
Strength
while tensile and flexural strength of the reinforced CF was combined found in 194.82 MPa and 393.34 MPa. A
Tensile 55.64% increase in flexural and tensile strength of the specimen was obtained compared to pure epoxy which
represents a significant improvement. The use of a 0.6 wt.% Cobalt (Co) filler content for the combination of GF
and CF epoxy reinforces positive results in the strength test. In addition, Field Emission Scanning Electron Mi­
croscopy (SEM) was done to investigate the microstructural characterization, the performance of GF and CF
epoxy reinforced composite.

1. INTRODUCTION
In recent day’s carbon and glass fiber-reinforced composites are the
most extensively used in the field of fiber-reinforced polymer composites
in the construction of car body parts. Experts around the world are now
trying to provide a substitute material for wood, metal, and reinforced
concrete with composite materials [1]. Fiber-reinforced composites
have several advantages such as excellent strength, high strength, low
weight, good resistance to wear, low density, low cost, etc. [2-5].
However, due to the magnitude of the frictional force and sliding ve­
locity performing on the fiber, depending on the direction of equilibrium
between CF / GF and the polymer matrix, their interface is very weak,
leading to poor structural and low-fiber composite properties. [6]. The
most common way to improve GFRP / CFRP composite structures is to
insert fillers into a composite matrix [7-11].
In a continuous GFRP / CFRP combination, the interface acts as a
bridge to transfer the loads from the fiber matrix through a shear flow
mechanism [12]. The simplicity of production, economic advantages,
and superior mechanical properties has made short glass fiber and
carbon fiber reinforced polymer composites very popular [13–17]. This
may help to fill the mechanical characteristic gap between continuous
fiber laminates used as the primary structures in the aerospace and
aerospace industries and the unrestricted polymers used in part-load
applications [18]. In addition, epoxy resin is the most common ther­
mosetting polymer used in aircraft structures, making it ideal for making
glass/carbon fiber composite materials with highly desirable properties
such as low shrinkage, high strength, low volatile release during curing,
and good durability in hot and humid environments [19-20]. On the
other hand, carbon fibers are found to be an important strong material
for many lightweight composite applications such as aerospace, auto­
motive and sporting goods due to their low density, high tensile strength
and modulus and corrosion resistance. E-glass fibers have become one of
the better materials due to their superior impact resistance, good fatigue
life, high strength to failure, and corrosive action under the most com­
mon conditions, along with polymer matrix [21–24]. Takagaki et al.
[25] examined the effect of adding micro-fibrilled cellulose to the stable
fatigue and aggressive properties of plain-woven CFRP. The onset of
matrix cracks between the woven carbon fiber fabrics was limited, thus

* Corresponding author: Dipen Kumar Rajak, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sandip Institute of Technology and Research centre, Nashik, MH 422213,
India.
** Corresponding author: Catalin I. Pruncu, Design, Manufacturing & Engineering Management, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, G1 1XJ, Scotland, UK.
E-mail addresses: dipenkumar.rajak@sitrc.org (D.K. Rajak), Catalin.pruncu@strath.ac.uk (C.I. Pruncu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.finmec.2021.100029
Received 30 January 2021; Received in revised form 1 June 2021; Accepted 1 June 2021
Available online 5 June 2021
2666-3597/Crown Copyright © 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
D.K. Rajak et al. Forces in Mechanics 4 (2021) 100029

Table 1 bonded to sisal-hemp fibers with GFRP and can be used as an alternative
: Material selection proportion. to fiberglass reinforced polymer composites. Velmurugan et al. [30] the
Material Epoxy Hardner Glass/ BYK9065 Styrene Cobalt tensile, curvature, shear, and impact properties of palm-fiber composite
resin carbon composites were tested experimentally. Mechanical properties were
mat improved due to hybridization and continuous growth of glass fibers.
Proportion 56 0.7 35 0.7 7 0.6 Tested for leather cores and scattered type hybrids. The mechanical
(wt.%) features of the fiber skin core structure are more powerful than the
scattered fiber structure. As a result, flexibility and modulus were
improved by carbon / fiberglass hybridization. In a world where sus­
Table 2 tainable development is paramount, various aspects must be considered
Comparative physical and mechanical properties of E-glass and carbon fiber before commercial use of any product. When estimating the life cycle of
[24]. a 1 kg carbon fiber composite, the study suggests that energy production
Fiber Density Tensile Strength Tensile Elongation at up to 300 MJ is required for consumption. Similarly, 1 kg of glass fiber
Types (g/cm3) at Break (MPa) Modulus Break (%) composites shows that about 54 MJ of energy is required for con­
(GPa) sumption [31]. In addition to this limited recycling and
Carbon 1.78 3800 240 1.6 non-biodegradability of carbon/glass fiber, concerns arise when
Fibers disposing of waste and life products. Another disadvantage of CF / GF
E-Glass 2.5 2000–3500 70 2.5 composite is the mechanical properties of short carbon fiber composites
which are still very low compared to long fiber composites. In addition,
increasing the wear life by 10 times compared to the unconfirmed case. the use of short carbon and glass fibers easily causes cracks on both ends
Xu et al. [26] carbon fiber reinforced epoxy / clay nano composites with of the fiber. Therefore, the excellent performance of small GF / CF is
the help of a hot melting lay-up and autoclave process. The results difficult to achieve. Currently, progress has stated that modifying the
showed that mode-I interlaminar fracture hardness increased by 85% for matrix by nano-micro scaled filler increases the fracture stiffness of the
4phr nano clay and increased flexibility by 38% for 2phr nano clay. Geet matrix and fiber/matrix adhesion, thereby delaying the cracks initiation
et al. [27] tensile strength increases when carbon fiber is placed at the and propagation, and consequently, the composite [32–36] mechanical
core of a hybrid compound. Therefore, the mechanical properties are properties are strengthened.
driven by the fiber ratio and its structure. Dong et al. [28] it has been Current research work is focused on revealing the benefits of using
noted that the failure of low elongation carbon fiber is associated with two combinations of materials i.e. cobalt-carbon fiber and cobalt-E-glass
the high elongation glass fiber surrounding the crack before and while fiber epoxy composites to improve the mechanical properties of the
the carbon fiber is approaching its ultimate strength. The recent progress composite. Mechanical properties i.e. tensile strength and flexural
of E-glass as a reinforcement material in polymer matrix composites is strength were carefully studied and microstructural probes were
particularly general. Ramesh et al. [29] when subjected to mechanical embedded via SEM to understand the fracture mechanism. During the
tests such as traction, flexibility and impact tests, the effect of various comparative study, it was observed that a significant improvement was
parameters on the presence of hybrid compounds was studied. The re­ achieved for the tensile and flexural properties of the proposed material.
sults showed that the hemp composite material has maximum tensile
strength and can improve the properties of the hemp composite material

Fig. 1. (a) Carbon fiber (b)glass fiber tensile test sample (c)tensile test specimen dimension.

2
D.K. Rajak et al.
Fig. 2. (a) Carbon fiber (b) glass fiber flexural test sample (c) flexural test specimen dimension.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Material selection
The materials utilized in this study are glass fiber/carbon fiber,
epoxy resin, and cobalt description ratios shown in Table 1. Carbon fi­
bers were polyacrylonitrile-based woven fabrics and glass fiber was E-
glass are widely used in automobiles and aerospace structures due to
their high modulus and strength. The cobalt size was between 7 and 10
μm due to the high melting point and ferromagnetic properties. Epoxy
resins (832B) and hard (MEKP) were purchased by MG chemicals from
Gujarat and were selected due to their low viscosity and wide industrial
application. Styrene was also added as a therapeutic. Resin and hard­
eners were used in the ratio of 2: 1.
2.2. fibre properties
Two types of composite laminates consisting of carbon fiber and E-
glass fiber were fabricated. The configuration of the laminate was
symmetrical and contained a number of 4 plies equal to 0 / + 45 / − 45 /
90. The mechanical and physical characteristic of E-glass and carbon
fiber are presented in Table 2.
3. Sample preparation process
A simple hand lay-up method was employed in the manufacturing of
E-glass / carbon fiber composites. Initially, the discharge gel is sprayed
onto the surface of the mold to avoid mixed adhesives on the surface.
The first layer of composite material was applied and then a sheet of E-
glass / carbon fiber was placed over it. The same process was repeated
for all remaining sheets until the mold was filled. The prepared mold
was kept in the oven at 75 ◦ C for 4 h and the mold was further cured in
atmospheric condition for 24 h. The specimens were removed and pre­
pared for tensile and flexural testing according to ASTM standards [37].
3
Forces in Mechanics 4 (2021) 100029
3.1. Tensile testing
Tensile testing was performed using UTM model AG-KNISMS /
130,104,504,279 (Shimadzu-Japan) at room temperature with a range
of 100 kN, with pre-load sample dimensions and cross-sections of 5 mm
/ min and cross-section selected at cross-section speeds following the
ASTM standard D3039 [37]. The model gage length is 50 mm and the
length is 169 mm. The modulus of composites and tensile strength were
calculated using the standard method as shown in Fig. 1. For every
laminate, seven tests were performed.
3.2. Flexural testing
Flexural testing was performed on the same UTM model AG-
KNISMS/130,104,504,279 (Shimadzu-Japan) used for tensile testing
samples with cell capacity 5 kN and load speed 5 mm/min. For the
flexural testing execution using a specimen with the standard dimen­
sion, the span between supports (L) will be 80 mm ± 0.2 mm. It mea­
sures the maximum force that a material can withstand before it breaks.
The sample dimensions and crosshead speed were selected following the
ASTM standard D7264 over a wide range from 0.0005 mm/min to 1500
mm/min [37] as shown in Fig. 2.
3.3. Field emission scanning electron microscopy
Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) is a test
method that examines a sample with an electron beam and amplifies it
for analysis. The microscope features unique low-vacuum capabilities
and ultra-high-resolution low-voltage imaging. The resolution is 1.0 nm
at 15 kV, 1.4 nm at 1 kV, and 1.4 nm at 3 kV and 30 Pa. A wide variety of
signals on the surface of solid samples were generated with FESEM as it
uses a focused beam of high-energy electrons. SEM is also capable of
analyzing selected point locations on samples.
D.K. Rajak et al. Forces in Mechanics 4 (2021) 100029

Table 3
Test result of glass fiber tensile samples.
Name Thickness (mm) width (mm) gage length (mm) Max force (N) Max stress (N/mm2)

0.4% Co+ GF 2.84 15.17 50.00 3832.03 88.946

0.4% Co+ GF 2.88 15.17 50.00 3840.18 87.897
0.4% Co+ GF 2.81 15.17 50.00 3825.47 89.741
0.4% Co+ GF 2.83 15.17 50.00 3830.44 89.223
0.6% Co+ GF 2.84 15.17 50.00 4164.38 96.659
0.6% Co+ GF 2.89 15.17 50.00 4177.02 95.276
0.6% Co+ GF 2.80 15.17 50.00 4155.47 97.831
0.6% Co+ GF 2.83 15.17 50.00 4160.65 96.915
0.8% Co+ GF 2.84 15.17 50.00 2907.97 67.497
0.8% Co+ GF 2.88 15.17 50.00 2918.29 66.796
0.8% Co+ GF 2.81 15.17 50.00 2900.15 68.034
0.8% Co+ GF 2.83 15.17 50.00 2905.47 67.678
1.0% Co+ GF 2.84 15.17 50.00 3799.38 88.188
1.0% Co+ GF 2.86 15.17 50.00 3802.74 87.649
1.0% Co+ GF 2.79 15.17 50.00 3792.48 89.605
1.0% Co+ GF 2.87 15.17 50.00 3802.92 87.347

Table 4
Test result of carbon fiber tensile samples.
Name Thickness (mm) width (mm) gage length (mm) Max force (N) Max stress (N/mm2)

0.4% Co+ CF 2.98 12.33 50.00 2907.97 79.14

0.4% Co+ CF 3.01 12.33 50.00 2917.27 78.60
0.4% Co+ CF 2.90 12.33 50.00 2888.57 80.78
0.4% Co+ CF 3.03 12.33 50.00 2918.07 78.11
0.6% Co+ CF 2.98 12.33 50.00 7099.69 193.22
0.6% Co+ CF 3.02 12.33 50.00 7117.57 191.14
0.6% Co+ CF 2.95 12.33 50.00 7083.44 194.74
0.6% Co+ CF 2.97 12.33 50.00 7098.06 193.83
0.8% Co+ CF 2.98 12.33 50.00 6473.75 176.19
0.8% Co+ CF 3.03 12.33 50.00 6489.18 173.69
0.8% Co+ CF 2.94 12.33 50.00 6460.71 178.23
0.8% Co+ CF 2.97 12.33 50.00 6471.36 176.72
1.0% Co+ CF 2.98 12.33 50.00 6125.72 166.72
1.0% Co+ CF 3.02 12.33 50.00 6141.44 164.93
1.0% Co+ CF 2.95 12.33 50.00 6111.82 168.03
1.0% Co+ CF 2.97 12.33 50.00 6128.90 167.36

4. Results and discussion
4.1. Tensile property
The tensile strength and maximum expansion of carbon fiber-
reinforced composites and E-glass fiber-reinforced composites at
different weight ratios were examined and the detailed results are given
in Table 3 and Table 4, taking into account each wt% of the four Co
models. The force and stroke curves obtained by calculation as shown in
Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 provide tensile strength comparable to e-glass and
carbon fiber reinforced composites. The highest tensile strength at
194.82 MPa was exhibited by the carbon fiber-reinforced composites.
The recorded tensile strength for E-glass reinforced composites is
approximately 96.91 MPa. Testing of various combinations of cobalt and
glass/carbon fiber in epoxy indicates that 0.6% cobalt gives maximum
strength compared to any other compound. This significant increase in
tensile properties was due to the carbon / E-glass fiber ply coating on the
upper and lower layers of the epoxy, which helped to withstand most of

Fig. 3. Force verse stroke graph (Co+GF tensile test specimen).

4
D.K. Rajak et al. Forces in Mechanics 4 (2021) 100029

Fig. 4. Force v/s stroke graph (Co+CF tensile test specimen).

the loads applied to the laminates during tensile loading. The average
elongation of the peak is shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 with 0.6% Co and
the carbon fiber reinforced composite showed greater tensile properties
than the fiber-reinforced composite, the higher load-carrying capacity of
the carbon fiber. Carbon fiber reinforced epoxy composite provided
much higher tensile strength compared to E-glass fiber reinforced epoxy
composite, but E-glass fiber is cheaper than carbon fiber, so E-glass is
preferred as reinforced material. Hybridization of natural fibers with
fiberglass advances mechanical characteristic such as Young’s modulus,
tensile strength, flexibility over natural fibers, but the impact strength is
still weak and the use of hybrid natural fibers is particularly effective in
load-bearing areas used in car architecture [38-40].
4.2. Flexural test
Flexural strengths of carbon/ E-glass fiber reinforced composites are
presented in Table 5 and Table 6. It was observed that carbon fiber
reinforced composites exhibit higher flexural strength than E-glass fiber-
reinforced composites. The increase in flexural strength of composites is
due to the carbon / E-glass fiber content in epoxy. The variation of
flexural strength with cobalt content is shown in Fig. 5 and Fig. 6. It has
been observed that 0.6% cobalt gives maximum strength compared to
any other combination. The carbon fiber-reinforced composites exhibi­
ted the maximum flexural strength at around 393.34 MPa and the
flexural strength for the E-glass reinforced composites was
approximately 120.07 MPa. A summary of the accepted values of Co +
GF and Co + CF is presented in Table no. 7.
4.3. SEM analysis
SEM scanning was employed to examine the interfacial characteristic
of composites based on E-glass. SEM studies were more essential to find
the involvement of fiber-matrix within composites. The joint surface
appears rough as the composites were set by hand lay-up technique.
Small holes are manifest in the matrix near the E-glass fiber. As seen
from the SEM images of the fractured surfaces of the E-glass, a clear
graphical view is shown, and it describes the intersecting properties of
the composite. Fig. 7(a) represents the fiber pull-out and Figs. 7(b)
specifies the fiber-matrix interface of composites. The cracks between
the E-glass fiber and the matrix are undoubtedly shown in the SEM
image where the fiber pull-out is very less, presenting excellent fiber-
matrix adhesion between the E-glass and the reinforcement. In Fig. 7
(c) and 7 (d) displays very minor holes in the matrix representing a very
good bond between the E-glass fiber and the matrix, most important it
provides good mechanical properties to the joint. The proposed com­
posite represents excellent bond between the fiber and the filler material
when compared to ZrB2-SiC composite Co + fiber [41].

Table 5
Flexural strength results of glass fiber testing samples.
Name Thickness (mm) Width (mm) Lower support(mm) Max force (N) Max stress (N/mm2)

0.4% Co+ GF 3.17 13.44 100.00 62.7531 69.70

0.4% Co+ GF 3.21 13.44 100.00 68.2400 73.91
0.4% Co+ GF 3.14 13.44 100.00 57.8231 65.45
0.4% Co+ GF 3.16 13.44 100.00 62.1962 69.52
0.6% Co+ GF 3.17 13.44 100.00 101.3590 112.57
0.6% Co+ GF 3.22 13.44 100.00 111.5480 120.07
0.6% Co+ GF 3.13 13.44 100.00 94.5270 107.69
0.6% Co+ GF 3.16 13.44 100.00 98.0020 109.53
0.8% Co+ GF 3.17 13.44 100.00 88.6531 98.46
0.8% Co+ GF 3.21 13.44 100.00 96.4810 104.50
0.8% Co+ GF 3.14 13.44 100.00 83.5240 94.55
0.8% Co+ GF 3.16 13.44 100.00 85.9543 96.07
1.0% Co+ GF 3.17 13.44 100.00 93.0406 103.33
1.0% Co+ GF 3.22 13.44 100.00 100.4210 108.09
1.0% Co+ GF 3.13 13.44 100.00 87.2570 99.40
1.0% Co+ GF 3.16 13.44 100.00 91.4438 102.20

5
D.K. Rajak et al. Forces in Mechanics 4 (2021) 100029

Table 6
Flexural strength results of carbon fiber testing samples.
Name Thickness (mm) Width (mm) Lower support (mm) Max force (N) Max stress (N/mm2)

0.4% Co+ CF 3.17 13.44 100.00 260.016 288.78

0.4% Co+ CF 3.21 13.44 100.00 271.254 293.80
0.4% Co+ CF 3.14 13.44 100.00 251.489 284.68
0.4% Co+ CF 3.16 13.44 100.00 257.305 287.58
0.6% Co+ CF 3.17 13.44 100.00 352.188 391.15
0.6% Co+ CF 3.22 13.44 100.00 363.285 391.05
0.6% Co+ CF 3.13 13.44 100.00 345.271 393.34
0.6% Co+ CF 3.16 13.44 100.00 348.008 388.96
0.8% Co+ CF 3.17 13.44 100.00 245.609 272.78
0.8% Co+ CF 3.21 13.44 100.00 254.817 276.00
0.8% Co+ CF 3.14 13.44 100.00 238.475 269.95
0.8% Co+ CF 3.16 13.44 100.00 243.535 272.19
1.0% Co+ CF 3.17 13.44 100.00 321.344 356.90
1.0% Co+ CF 3.22 13.44 100.00 332.475 357.88
1.0% Co+ CF 3.13 13.44 100.00 312.487 355.99
1.0% Co+ CF 3.16 13.44 100.00 319.070 356.62

Fig. 5. Force v/s stroke graph (Co+GF flexural test specimen).

Fig. 6. Force v/s stroke graph (Co+GF flexural test specimen).

5. Conclusions
Table 7
: Summery of accepted values. The present research work investigated the performance of applica­
0.6% of cobalt as a filler tions of epoxy-based composite. Two different combinations of compo­
Properties Coþ GF CoþCF sitions were considered such as Co + GF and Co + CF. It were found that
Tensile test results 96.659 193.22 the flexural and tensile strength of the material significantly improved
(N/mm2) 95.276 191.14 with respect to specific composite materials. Addition of 35% GF / CF
97.831 194.74 and 0.6 wt% Co content in epoxy resin leads to some major increases in
96.915 193.83 tensile and flexural strength. On the UTM Model AG-KNISMS /
Mean 96.670 193.23
Flexural test results 112.57 391.15
130,104,504,279 machine, an increase in terms of tensile and flexural
(N/mm2) 120.07 391.05 strength of the material is recorded as 96.670 MPa (GF tensile), 193.23
107.69 393.34 MPa (CF tensile), and 112.465 MPa (GF flexural). Improvement in
109.53 388.96 physical properties such as tensile and flexural strength will maximize
Mean 112.465 391.125
the application area related to polymer composite, where strength and

6
D.K. Rajak et al.
Fig. 7. (a) Fibers pull-out quite low (b) fiber-matrix interfaces (c) & (d) strong bond between fiber and matrix with (0.6 wt.% Co & 35 wt.% GF) of vertical section.
flexural characteristics are mainly required for automobiles (frames).
Compared to other materials used in automobiles, novel-made materials
provide good strength as well as reduce weight. For future work, rein­
forced composite material applications developed after thermal gravi­
metric analysis can be extended for another thermal stability field.
Declaration of Competing Interest
There is no conflict of interest.
References
[1] M.R. Sanjay, B. Yogesha, Studies on mechanical properties of jute/E-glass fiber
reinforced epoxy hybrid composites, J. Minerals and Mater. Characterization and
Eng. 4 (1) (2016) 15–25.
[2] P.K. Mallick, Fiber-reinforced composites: materials, manufacturing, and Design,
CRC press, 2007.
[3] C. Soutis, Fibre reinforced composites in aircraft construction, Progress in
Aerospace Sci. 41 (2) (2005) 143–151, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
paerosci.2005.02.004.
[4] M. Altin Karataş, H Gökkaya, A review on machinability of carbon fiber reinforced
polymer (CFRP) and glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) composite materials,
Defence Technol. 14 (4) (2018) 318–326, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
dt.2018.02.001.
[5] A.B. Aripin, T. Yamamoto, M. Nishi, K. Hayakawa, Electromagnetic shielding
property of laminated carbon fiber tape reinforced thermoplastics, Polymer-
Plastics Technol. Mater. (2020) 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1080/
25740881.2020.1738472.
[6] Y. Liu, J.-.P. Yang, H.-.M. Xiao, C.-.B. Qu, Q.-.P. Feng, S.-.Y. Fu, Y. Shindo, Role of
matrix modification on interlaminar shear strength of glass fibre/epoxy
composites, Compos. Part B: Eng. 43 (1) (2012) 95–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compositesb.2011.04.037.
[7] K. Iqbal, S.-.U. Khan, A. Munir, J.-.K. Kim, Impact damage resistance of CFRP with
nanoclay-filled epoxy matrix, Compos. Sci. Technol. 69 (11–12) (2009)
1949–1957, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.04.016.
[8] S. Wang, Z. Zhou, H. Xiang, W. Chen, E. Yin, T. Chang, M. Zhu, Reinforcement of
lignin-based carbon fibers with functionalized carbon nanotubes, Compos. Sci.
Technol. 128 (2016) 116–122, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compscitech.2016.03.018.
7
Forces in Mechanics 4 (2021) 100029
[9] D. De Cicco, Z. Asaee, F. Taheri, Use of Nanoparticles for Enhancing the
Interlaminar Properties of Fiber-Reinforced Composites and Adhesively Bonded
Joints—A Review, Nanomaterials 7 (11) (2017) 360, https://doi.org/10.3390/
nano7110360.
[10] Y. Ou, C. González, J. José Vilatela, Interlaminar toughening in structural carbon
fiber/epoxy composites interleaved with carbon nanotube veils, Compos. Part A:
Appl. Sci. Manufacturing (2019), 105477, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compositesa.2019.105477.
[11] M.R. Zakaria, H.M. Akil, M.H.A. Kudus, F. Ullah, F. Javed, N Nosbi, Hybrid carbon
fiber-carbon nanotubes reinforced polymer composites: a review, Compos. Part B:
Eng. (2019), 107313, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107313.
[12] H. Yoshida, T. Ogasa, R. Hayashi, Statistical approach to the relationship between
ILSS and void content of CFRP, Compos. Sci. Technol. 25 (1) (1986) 3–18, https://
doi.org/10.1016/0266-3538(86)90018-7.
[13] A.G. Koniuszewska, J.W. Kaczmar, Application of Polymer Based Composite
Materials in Transportation, Progress in Rubber Plastics and Recycling Technol. 32
(1) (2016) 1–24, https://doi.org/10.1177/147776061603200101.
[14] N.T.T. Nguyen, O. Kiyotaka, O. Kazuya, F. Toru, S. Ou, T. Hidehiko, F Yukiko,
Effect of Submicron Glass Fiber Modification on Mechanical Properties of Short
Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composite with Different Fiber Length,
J. Composites Sci. 4 (1) (2020) 5.
[15] S.-.J. Park, M.-.K. Seo, Composite Characterization, Interface Sci. Technol. (2011)
631–738, https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-375049-5.00008-6.
[16] I.D. Ibrahim, T. Jamiru, R.E. Sadiku, W.K. Kupolati, S.C. Agwuncha, G. Ekundayo,
The use of polypropylene in bamboo fibre composites and their mechanical
properties – A review, J. Reinforced Plastics and Compos. 34 (16) (2015)
1347–1356, https://doi.org/10.1177/0731684415591302.
[17] J.L. Kardos, Critical issues in achieving desirable mechanical properties for short
fiber composites, Pure and appl. chem. 57 (11) (1985) 1651–1657.
[18] H. ZHANG, Z. ZHANG, K. FRIEDRICH, Effect of fiber length on the wear resistance
of short carbon fiber reinforced epoxy composites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 67 (2)
(2007) 222–230, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.08.001.
[19] H. Lee, M. Huh, J. Yoon, D. Lee, S. Kim, S. Kang, Fabrication of carbon fiber SMC
composites with vinyl ester resin and effect of carbon fiber content on mechanical
properties, Carbon Lett. (Carbon Lett.) 22 (2017) 101–104.
[20] A.I. Alateyah, H.N. Dhakal, Z.Y. Zhang, Mechanical and thermal properties
characterisation of vinyl ester matrix nanocomposites based on layered silicate, Int.
J. Mechanical, Aerospace, Industr. Mechatron. Eng. 7 (9) (2013) 701–708.
[21] M.N. Khan, J.K. Roy, N. Akter, H.U. Zaman, T. Islam, R.A. Khan, Production and
Properties of Short Jute and Short E-Glass Fiber Reinforced Polypropylene-Based
Composites, 2012.
[22] M.N.S. Hadi, H. Ahmad, M.N Sheikh, Effect of Using GFRP Reinforcement on the
Behavior of Hollow-Core Circular Concrete Columns, J. Compos. Construction 25
(1) (2021), 06020003, https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)cc.1943-5614.0001103.
D.K. Rajak et al.
[23] K.L. Pickering, M.G.A. Efendy, T.M Le, A review of recent developments in natural
fibre composites and their mechanical performance, Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci.
Manuf. 83 (2016) 98–112, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2015.08.038.
[24] O. Faruk, A.K. Bledzki, H.-.P. Fink, M. Sain, Progress Report on Natural Fiber
Reinforced Composites, Macromol. Mater. Eng. 299 (1) (2013) 9–26, https://doi.
org/10.1002/mame.201300008.
[25] N. Takagaki, K. Okubo, T. Fujii, Improvement of Fatigue Strength and Impact
Properties of Plain-Woven CFRP Modified with Micro Fibrillated Cellulose, Adv.
Mat. Res. 47-50 (2008) 133–136, https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/
amr.47-50.133.
[26] Y. Xu, S.V. Hoa, Mechanical properties of carbon fiber reinforced epoxy/clay
nanocomposites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 68 (3–4) (2008) 854–861, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.compscitech.2007.08.013.
[27] J.H. Song, Pairing effect and tensile properties of laminated high-performance
hybrid composites prepared using carbon/glass and carbon/aramid fibers,
Compos. Part B: Eng. 79 (2015) 61–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compositesb.2015.04.015.
[28] C. Dong, H.A. Ranaweera-Jayawardena, I.J. Davies, Flexural properties of hybrid
composites reinforced by S-2 glass and T700S carbon fibres, Compos. Part B: Eng.
43 (2) (2012) 573–581, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.09.001.
[29] M. Ramesh, K. Palanikumar, K.H. Reddy, Mechanical property evaluation of
sisal–jute–glass fiber reinforced polyester composites, Composites Part B:
Engineering 48 (2013) 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.12.004.
[30] R. Velmurugan, V. Manikandan, Mechanical properties of palmyra/glass fiber
hybrid composites, Compos. Part A: Appl Sci. Manufact. 38 (10) (2007)
2216–2226, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2007.06.006.
[31] T. Suzuki, J. Takahashi, Prediction of energy intensity of carbon fiber reinforced
plastics for mass-produced passenger cars, in: Proceedings of 9th Japan
International SAMPE Symposium, 2005, pp. 14–19.
[32] Vautard, F., Xu, L., & Drzal, L.T. (2009). Carbon Fiber—Vinyl Ester Interfacial
Adhesion Improvement by the Use of an Epoxy Coating. Major Accomplishments in
Composite Materials and Sandwich Structures, 27–50. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-
3141-9_2.
Forces in Mechanics 4 (2021) 100029
[33] N. Domun, H. Hadavinia, T. Zhang, T. Sainsbury, G.H. Liaghat, S. Vahid, Improving
the fracture toughness and the strength of epoxy using nanomaterials – a review of
the current status, Nanoscale 7 (23) (2015) 10294–10329, https://doi.org/
10.1039/c5nr01354b.
[34] A. Dorigato, S. Morandi, A. Pegoretti, Effect of nanoclay addition on the fiber/
matrix adhesion in epoxy/glass composites, J. Compos. Mater. 46 (12) (2011)
1439–1451, https://doi.org/10.1177/0021998311420311.
[35] M. Quaresimin, R.J. Varley, Understanding the effect of nano-modifier addition
upon the properties of fibre reinforced laminates, Compos. Sci. Technol. 68 (3–4)
(2008) 718–726, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2007.09.005.
[36] I. De Baere, W. Van Paepegem, M. Quaresimin, J. Degrieck, On the tension–tension
fatigue behaviour of a carbon reinforced thermoplastic part I: limitations of the
ASTM D3039/D3479 standard, Polym. Test 30 (6) (2011) 625–632.
[37] A.S.T.M Standard, Standard Test Method For Flexural Properties of Polymer Matrix
Composite Materials, D7264/D7264 M, 2007, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, PA, 2003.
[38] Z.-.K. Zhao, S.-.S. Du, F. Li, H.-.M. Xiao, Y.-.Q. Li, W.-.G. Zhang, S.-.Y. Fu,
Mechanical and tribological properties of short glass fiber and short carbon fiber
reinforced polyethersulfone composites: a comparative study, Compos. Commun. 8
(2018) 1–6, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coco.2018.02.001.
[39] C. Wonderly, J. Grenestedt, G. Fernlund, E. Cěpus, Comparison of mechanical
properties of glass fiber/vinyl ester and carbon fiber/vinyl ester composites,
Compos. Part B: Eng. 36 (5) (2005) 417–426, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compositesb.2005.01.004.
[40] M.M. Davoodi, S.M. Sapuan, D. Ahmad, A. Ali, A. Khalina, M. Jonoobi, Mechanical
properties of hybrid kenaf/glass reinforced epoxy composite for passenger car
bumper beam, Mater. Des. 31 (10) (2010) 4927–4932, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
matdes.2010.05.021.
[41] T.P. Nguyen, M. Shahedi Asl, S.A. Delbari, A. Sabahi Namini, Q.V. Le,
M. Shokouhimehr, M. Mohammadi, Electron microscopy investigation of spark
plasma sintered ZrO2 added ZrB2–SiC composite, Ceram. Int. (2020), https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2020.04.292.