Accepted Manuscript

Effect of water absorption on the mechanical properties of hybrid interwoven

cellulosic-cellulosic fibre reinforced epoxy composites

A.B. Maslinda, M.S. Abdul Majid, M.J.M. Ridzuan, M. Afendi, A.G. Gibson

PII: S0263-8223(16)32767-2
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.02.023
Reference: COST 8242

To appear in: Composite Structures

Received Date: 5 December 2016

Revised Date: 16 December 2016
Accepted Date: 3 February 2017

Please cite this article as: Maslinda, A.B., Abdul Majid, M.S., Ridzuan, M.J.M., Afendi, M., Gibson, A.G., Effect
of water absorption on the mechanical properties of hybrid interwoven cellulosic-cellulosic fibre reinforced epoxy
composites, Composite Structures (2017), doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.02.023

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Effect of water absorption on the mechanical properties of hybrid interwoven cellulosic-
cellulosic fibre reinforced epoxy composites

A.B. Maslindaa,b, M.S. Abdul Majida*, M.J.M. Ridzuana , M.Afendia, A.G. Gibsonc

a
School of Mechatronic Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Pauh Putra Campus, 02600 Arau, Perlis,
Malaysia.
b
Faculty of Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Perlis, Uniciti Alam Campus, 02100, Padang Besar,
Perlis, Malaysia.
c
School of Mechanical and Systems Engineering, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK

Authors email addresses: maslinda@gmail.com, *shukry@unimap.edu.my, ridzuanjamir@unimap.edu.my,

afendirojan@gmail.com, geoff.gibson@ncl.ac.uk

Abstract
The absorption behaviour of water and its effect on the tensile and flexural properties of
interwoven cellulosic fibres were investigated. Hybrid composites consisting of interwoven
kenaf/jute and kenaf/hemp yarns were prepared by an infusion process that used epoxy as the
polymer matrix. The water absorption characteristics of the fibres were obtained by immersing
the composite samples in tap water at room temperature, until reaching their water content
saturation point. The dry and water-immersed woven and interwoven hybrid composite samples
were subjected to tensile and flexural tests. To study the effect of water penetration in the
fibre/matrix interface, fractured samples were examined using field emission scanning electron
microscopy (FESEM). The study shows that the mechanical and water-resistant properties of the
kenaf, jute, and hemp fibres were improved through hybridization. However, as a result of water
penetrating the fibre/matrix interface, longer water-immersion times reduced the tensile and
flexural strength of the composites.

Keywords: Natural fibre; hybrid; mechanical properties; strength; fibre/matrix bond.

_______________________________
*Corresponding author. Tel: +6012 7367500
E-mail address: shukry@unimap.edu.my
Introduction
Due to environmental concerns, the potential use of natural fibres as replacements of synthetic
fibres has been investigated. In comparison with glass fibres, one of the advantages of using
natural fibres is their low density, which endows them with excellent specific mechanical
properties, easier handling and processing, recyclability, and good thermal and acoustic
insulation [1]. Despite these advantages, natural fibre reinforced composites have several
drawbacks that limit their application, such as a low strength, variability in quality, high moisture
absorption, limited processing temperature, and a lesser durability and incompatibility between
fibres and polymer matrices [1,2]. However, through continuous studies, researchers have come
out with a number of methods and treatments to improve the performance of natural fibre
composites. Nowadays, natural fibre composites have been widely implemented in load bearing
and outdoor applications, such as in the exterior underfloor panelling of cars, sports equipment,
and marine structures [3]. Faruk et al. [4] summarised the development of biocomposites from
the years 2000 to 2010, and reported that flax, jute, hemp, sisal, ramie, and kenaf fibres are
among the most widely used and studied fibre materials.
Hybrid composites are commonly termed as the mixture of two or more reinforcing fibres in a
single matrix system. Through proper fibre selection and design, the balance between cost and
performance of hybrid composites could be achieved through hybridization [5]. For example, the
incorporation of glass with different cellulosic fibres such as abaca, jute, banana, hemp, and
napier have been previously reported in the literature [6-9], with results that showed the
mechanical properties of the hybrid composites being superior to those of the single-fibre
reinforced composites. There are also published works about synthetic/synthetic [10], and
cellulosic/cellulosic [11-13] fibres based on reinforced hybrid composites. Furthermore, the
performance of a hybrid kenaf/kevlar composite was investigated by Yahaya et al. [14,15], who
found that the composite had the potential to be used in impact applications. In the industry,
FlexForm Technologies mixed hemp with kenaf fibre and used it in Chrysler’s Sebring door
panels, and the company is currently in the process of using the natural composite in other
automotive parts [5]. A review by Swolfs et al. [16] indicates that hybridization is a method that
can be used to increase the toughness of fibre reinforced composites, and that there are three
main hybrid configurations that can be used to combine two fibres: the (1) interlayer or layer-by-
layer, (2) intra-layer or yarn-by-yarn, and (3) intra-yarn or fibre-by-fibre configurations.
 One important factor that contributes to the excellent properties of hybrid composites is the
fibre orientation. For example, a continuous and long fibre aligned parallel to the load direction
exhibits a higher strength, in comparison with a randomly oriented fibre [3]. To attain a greater
degree of fibre alignment, different textile processing methods such as weaving, knitting, and
braiding can be applied [17]. Specifically, weaving is the interlacing of two sets of yarns to
construct a woven fabric. In a plain weave, for example, the warp is defined as the yarn that runs
along the length of the fabric, and the weft is defined as the yarn that has been weaved over and
underneath the warp yarn [18]. As reported in the literature [19, 20], the tensile, flexural and
impact properties of woven fabric composites are higher than those of unidirectional and
randomly oriented composites. In woven structures, the stress is uniformly transferred, and the
interlocking between the reinforced fibres further increases the strength of the composite [21].
Khan et al. [19] investigated the influence of the fibre direction and found that the mechanical
properties of a woven jute reinforced poly(l-lactic acid) composite are greater when tested along
the warp direction, than along the weft direction. A woven banana reinforced epoxy composite
was used by Sapuan et al. [22] in the fabrication of household telephone stands, and they proved
that the natural based composite was able to replace the conventional material in the furniture
industry.
In regards to natural based composites, the presence of polar groups (e.g. hydroxyl, among
others) in natural fibres allows them to absorb high amounts of moisture, and also makes them
incompatible with the polymer matrix. Together, these two factors lead to a reduced fibre/matrix
bonding strength, which results in a weaker mechanical performance of fibre/matrix hybrid
composites [23,24]. Akil et al. [25] found that when pultruded jute/glass fibre reinforced
polyester hybrid composites were exposed to humidity or aqueous environments, water
molecules penetrated the composites through three routes, as follows: through the flaws at the
composites interphase attributed to the poor wettability between the fibre and matrix, through
micro-gaps between the polymer chains, and through the cracks in the polymer matrix induced
by the fibre swelling.
In this work, water absorption and its effect on the mechanical properties of interwoven
kenaf/jute and kenaf/hemp hybrid composites were experimentally investigated as an extension
of the research regarding hybrid- and woven-structured composites. Up to date, only few works
have been conducted involving interwoven cellulosic fibres, and this study will provide useful
information to the research community.

Experimental procedure
Materials
The kenaf, jute, and hemp yarns that were to produce the woven fabrics were obtained from a
local supplier. The EpoxAmite 100 series resin was selected as the polymer matrix, and it was
mixed with a hardener in a ratio of 3:1 to form the binder for the composite preparation. The
chemical compositions of the reinforcement fibres are listed in Table 1, while Table 2 details
their mechanical properties, alongside those of the matrix. The kenaf, jute and hemp fibres were
chosen as reinforcements because they are easily available in Malaysia, and they are also among
the most widely used materials in the natural fibre reinforced polymer composite industry [3].

Woven fabric production

Woven fabrics were produced by weaving the fibre yarns using a wooden frame. The wooden
frame (400 mm × 400 mm) was manually constructed, and it contained nails that acted as the
warp yarn guider on both of its sides. The weaving process was done by passing the weft yarn
over and underneath the warp yarn, which had been previously arranged on the frame with the
help of the warp yarn guider. The wooden frame, weaving process, and completed woven fabric
are shown in Fig. 1. Figure 2 illustrates the construction of the interwoven kenaf/jute and
kenaf/hemp hybrid composites, where the interlacing of the kenaf yarns followed the warp fibre
direction, while the jute and hemp yarns were arranged in the weft fibre direction.

Composite fabrication
A vacuum infusion manufacturing technique was used to prepare the composite specimens,
which had a fibre weight content of 30% ± 2%. Five types of composites were prepared, and the
symbols that represent each type of composite are listed in Table 3. The fabrication process
began by polishing the glass surface with acetone to remove any dirt and balanced resin from the
previous infusion process. A thin layer of wax, or catalyst, was used for the easy removal of the
composites after infusion. The woven fabrics were positioned on the glass surface followed by a
peel ply, netting, and an enka channel, as shown in Fig. 3. The resin inlet and outlet, which were
made from a PVC hose, were placed over the mould area before it was wrapped with a plastic
sheet. The vacuum pump was switched on, and the in-mould pressure was controlled at below
2000 Pa, to make sure that the air was fully evacuated. The resin mixture, which was prepared
according to the manufacturer’s specification, was infused into the mould, where it flowed
evenly until it reached the end. Excess resin flowed into a resin trap. The infused composite was
removed from the mould and cured for 24 h at room temperature (25 oC).

Moisture absorption test

The water absorption tests were carried out as elucidated in the ASTM D570 standard [33]. First,
the specimens were submerged in a container filled with tap water at room temperature for up to
1400 h. Thereafter, to monitor the mass during the ageing process, the specimens were
withdrawn from the water, wiped dry to remove any surface moisture, and then weighted using a
high accuracy 4-digit analytical balance. For each type of composite, five specimens were tested,
and the average result was recorded. The moisture content percentage, ∆M(??), was calculated
using the following equation :



∆ = × 100 (1)


where  and  represent the mass of the dry and immersed sample, respectively, at a specific
time. The percentage of the moisture absorption was plotted against the square root of time
(hours). The effects of aging on the tensile and flexural properties of the woven composites were
investigated after 2, 5, 10, 15, 24, 48, and 1400 hours (at saturation).
The diffusion coefficient, D is defined as the ability of water molecules to penetrate
through laminate composites. It is computed from the slope of moisture content versus the square
root of time by:

  
 
 =      (2)
 √
√
where M∞ is the percent moisture absorbed at saturation, h is the specimen thickness, M2 – M1 is
the slope of the plot of the moisture absorption rate during the initial ageing time and t 2 − t1
is the linear portion of the curve. Assuming the absorption process is linear at an early stage of
immersion; times are taken at the beginning of absorption process, so that the weight change is
expected to vary linearly with the square root of time.

Tensile testing
For this test, “dog-bone” shaped specimens with dimensions of 165 × 19 × (3.2 ± 0.4) mm3 were
prepared using a Dremel 4000 tool. The tensile strength and elastic modulus of the plain weave
kenaf/jute, kenaf/hemp, and their individually woven composites were determined according to
the ASTM D638 [34] standard, which was performed using a 100 kN universal testing machine
with a crosshead speed of 1 mm/min. These tests were performed for samples at dry and wet
conditions. The strain value was obtained using a clip-on extensometer attached to the gauge
length of the specimen. Five specimens were tested for each type of woven composite, and the
average value was recorded. The specimens before and after the tensile tests are shown in Fig. 4.

Flexural testing
The flexural tests were performed using an Instron 5848 universal testing machine, with a
crosshead speed of 2.5mm/min, in accordance with the ASTM D790-10 standard [35]. The
rectangular shaped three-point bending specimens with dimensions of 125 mm × 13 mm (3.2 ±
0.4 mm) were prepared using a Dremel 4000 tool. The distance between the supports was kept at
52 mm as per the standard, with a ratio of 16:1. The specimens before and after the flexural test
are shown in Fig. 5. For each case, five specimens were tested, and the average values were
recorded. The flexural strength of the composites was calculated using the following equation:

 !
 = (3)
"#
where P, L, b, and d represent the bending load, support span length, width, and depth of the
samples, respectively.

Field emission scanning electron microscopy

In order to study the morphological features of the fibre-matrix interface after the tensile and
flexural tests, fractured portions of the samples were examined using a field emission electron
microscope (FESEM). Prior to their examination, the surfaces of the samples were coated with
platinum. Images of the fractured specimens were taken by subjecting them to a voltage of 3-5
kV.

Results and discussion

Moisture absorption behaviour

The moisture absorption by the samples was determined by the weight gain relative to the dry
weight of the samples. The moisture content of each sample was computed using Eq. 1. It was
assumed that the samples reached equilibrium moisture absorption when the daily weight gain of
the samples was less than 0.01% [36]. Figure 6 shows the moisture absorption percentage as a
function of the square root of time (hours) for various woven composites, which had been
immersed in tap water at room temperature. From the water absorption curves, the absorbed
water content increased with increasing immersion time. A similar finding was reported in a
previous study where the water absorption effects of natural fibre reinforced polymer composites
were investigated [24,37]. The water uptake process of the woven composites was linear at the
beginning, especially in the woven kenaf (KK), woven jute (JJ) and woven hemp (HH)
composites, demonstrating the rapid water penetration into the composite materials. The water
uptake then slowed down and approached saturation after a prolonged time period. The moisture
uptake is following non-Fickian behaviour and seems more sigmoidal in nature. This is due to
material lost, most likely by leaching out of resin particles leading to a loss of weight of the
composites.
As far as individual fibres are concerned, woven kenaf (KK) composites absorbed a higher
amount of water, compared with the woven jute (JJ) and hemp (HH) composites. This was
expected due to the higher cellulose content in the kenaf fibre, as was presented in Table 1.
Cellulose, which is the main constituent of plant fibre, is hygroscopic, and thus able to absorb
moisture in comparatively large quantities [26]. The resin matrix, besides serving as the binder of
the reinforcements and helping to transfer the load to the fibres, also protects the fibres from
environmental attacks [21]. However, when the composites are continuously exposed to
moisture, the brittle thermosetting resin will experience micro-cracking due to the swelling
behaviour of the fibres. The high cellulose content in the kenaf fibres further contributes to more
water penetrating into the fibre-matrix interphase creating stress concentration leading to failure
of the composite. As more micro-cracking take place, water transport via these cracks become
active [38]. The water molecules flow within the capillary cracks and continuously attack the
interface, resulting in debonding of the fibre and the matrix. This explanation is supported by the
micrograph in Fig. 7, where matrix cracking is observed in water immersed sample.
When compared to the individually woven composites, a reduction of the water uptake was
observed for the interwoven kenaf/jute (KJ) and kenaf/hemp (KH) hybrid composite. The
interwoven kenaf/jute (KJ) hybrid composite absorbed 46% less water than the woven kenaf
(KK) and woven jute (JJ) composites. Meanwhile, the amount of water absorption of the
interwoven kenaf/hemp (KH) hybrid composite was reduced by 64% and 58%, in comparison
with the woven kenaf (KK) and hemp (HH) composites, respectively. This reduction shows that
the hybridisation enhanced the water resistance properties of the kenaf, jute, and hemp fibres. A
similar behaviour was also reported by Venkateshwaran et al. where a decrease in the water
absorption properties of composites was also found when sisal fibre was hybridised into a
banana/epoxy composite [13]. Lignin protect the fibres from hydrothermal degradation due to its
hydrophobic features and theoretically, composites with fibre containing higher lignin content as
a filler should present lower values of water uptake [13,26]. Referring to Table 1, incorporation
of high lignin content fibres such as jute and hemp with kenaf fibre reduced the absorbed water
of the hybrid composites, compared with their individual woven composites.
The diffusion coefficient of the woven composites are shown in Table 4 and from the result,
the amount of water uptake are correspond well with the value of diffusion coefficient. Woven
kenaf composite (KK) had the highest diffusion coefficient, D and maximum of the water
content, M∞. As explained earlier, high lignin content hemp fibre hybridised with kenaf fibre;
resulted in lower diffusion coefficient and present good behaviour against water absorption.
Higher porosity or the existence of voids, formed during processing could be other reasons that
accelerate the diffusion process into the matrix of the composite materials and reflect their water
uptake [39].

Tensile strength
The woven and interwoven hybrid composites were subjected to a tensile test, under dry and wet
conditions, to determine their strength, elastic modulus, and strain to failure. For the wet
samples, the test was carried out at different immersion times to observe their degradation
response. A summary of the tensile properties is listed in Table 5. The effect that the
hybridization had on the tensile properties of the woven composites can be seen in Fig. 8, where
it is observed that the interwoven hybrid composites had the highest tensile strength, elastic
modulus, and failure strain in both the dry and saturated conditions. In the dry condition, the
tensile strength, elastic modulus and failure strain of the interwoven kenaf/jute hybrid composite
(KJ) was found to be 11, 23, and 41% higher than that of the woven kenaf composite (KK),
respectively; and 16, 30, and 29% greater than that of the woven jute composite (JJ),
respectively. For the interwoven kenaf/hemp hybrid composite (KH), increment of 4, 22 and
59% over the woven kenaf composite (KK); and 9, 38 and 21% over the woven hemp composite
(HH) were recorded for the tensile strength, elastic modulus and failure strain, respectively. A
similar trend was observed for the saturated samples, where the tensile strength, elastic modulus,
and failure strain increased due to the hybridization effect. The tensile strength, elastic modulus,
and failure strain of the interwoven kenaf/jute hybrid composite (KJ) at the saturation state
increased by 25, 40, and 14%, respectively, in comparison with those of the woven kenaf
composite (KK); and by 4, 8, and 9%, respectively, in comparison with those of the woven jute
composite (JJ).
For the saturated samples of the interwoven kenaf/hemp hybrid composite (KH), an
increment of 30, 50, and 18% over the woven kenaf composite (KK); and 4, 7, and 9% over
woven hemp composite (HH), were observed for the strength, modulus, and failure strain,
respectively. These results indicate that the incorporation of a high strength kenaf fibre with the
jute and hemp fibres enhanced the ability of the interwoven hybrid composites to resist breaks
and deformation under a tensile load, in comparison with the individually woven composites. To
achieve the desired properties, it is important to properly select the reinforcement fibres that will
be used in the hybrid composites [21]. In this case, the kenaf fibre was chosen to be hybridised in
a woven structure with the jute and hemp fibres due to its outstanding mechanical properties, as
shown in Table 2. Furthermore, the two fibres with difference properties created a complex load-
sharing property, between the longitudinal and transverse directions, when they were weaved
together. This resulted in a greater stress uptake by the interwoven hybrid composites, which
were observed to break at higher failure strains, in comparison with the individually woven
composites. The proper stress transfer from the matrix to the fibres contributed to a lower crack
propagation rate, which resulted in the higher ductility of the interwoven hybrid composites [20].
 Comparing the results between the dry and saturated samples in Fig. 8, the tensile properties
of the woven composites were reduced by the effects of water absorption. The tensile strength of
the woven kenaf (KK), woven jute (JJ), woven hemp (HH), interwoven kenaf/jute (KJ), and
interwoven kenaf/hemp (KH) hybrid composites at the saturation state were reduced by 75, 69,
67, 72, and 69% of their strength under the dry condition, respectively. Similarly, the tensile
modulus of the saturated samples (following the aforementioned sequence) was also reduced by
83, 77, 74, 81, and 79%, respectively, from the dry condition samples. The strength and tensile
modulus of the composites were found to be dependent on the amount of water absorbed. The
interwoven kenaf/hemp (KH) hybrid composite, which was the composite with the lowest water
absorption, had the highest strength and modulus; whereas the woven kenaf composite (KK) had
the lowest strength and modulus due to its greater water uptake.
The mechanical performance of the composites was reduced as the water immersion time
was prolonged [9, 40]. Referring to Table 6, the tensile strength was observed to significantly
drop during the first 10 h of the water immersion time, and it slowly decreased as the immersion
time increased, following the water absorption curve in Fig. 6. During the water absorption test,
the reinforced fibres absorbed water and swelled. The swelling of the fibre changed the
dimensions of the composites, and micro cracks started to appear on the matrix. With longer
immersion times, larger water molecules penetrated the interphase of the composites through the
micro cracks, and this resulted in the detachment of the fibres and the matrix. Poor fibre/matrix
adhesion is one of the main factors that affect the final properties of a composite, as it results in
lower mechanical properties [41].
An increase in the immersion time also reduced the tensile modulus of the composites, as is
shown in Table 7. When a composite is continuously exposed to an aqueous environment,
hydrogen bonds between the macromolecules of the matrix and reinforcement fibre are formed.
The hydrogen bonds then react with the hydroxyl groups (-OH) in the fibre structure forming a
large number of hydrogen bonds between the macromolecules of the polymer and cellulose. This
formation tends to be less susceptible to moisture exposures which lead to poor fibre-matrix
interfacial bonding, and a reduction of the tensile modulus is observed [40].
The ductility of the woven composites was expressed by the strain to failure presented in
Table 8. Different from the tensile strength and modulus, the failure strain increased with
increasing immersion times due to a plasticization effect. As a result of water absorption, the
cellulose content of the reinforcement fibre was reduced when the water molecules embedded
themselves between the polymer chains. This made the structure of the fibre more flexible [38].
FESEM images of the woven composites after their fracture under tensile loading are shown
in Fig. 9 and Fig. 10. The fractured surfaces of the highest tensile strength composite under dry
conditions, and vice versa for the wet condition, were selected as representative samples in order
to fully understand the water absorption effect towards the fibre/matrix bond. Closely packed
interfacial bonding between the fibre and the matrix, as shown in Fig. 9a, contributed to the
higher tensile performance of the composites in dry conditions. In Fig. 9b, a less hollowed
surface was observed in the dry sample, compared with the water-immersed sample. This
hollowed portion indicated the ‘pull out’ phenomenon, which largely occurred in the water-
immersed samples, as shown in Fig 10a. Matrix cracking and delamination as observed in Fig.
10b are among the physical damage contributed by the water absorption that further increase the
fibre/matrix detachment and reduced the tensile properties of the water immersed samples [5].

Flexural strength
The flexural strength and modulus describe ability of composites to withstand a bending load and
deformation before reaching their breaking point [14, 15]. Table 9 summarises the results
obtained from the flexural test. As a result of hybridization, excellent flexural properties were
achieved. As presented in Fig. 11, a higher flexural performance was recorded for the interwoven
hybrid composites, at the dry and saturation states, in comparison with the individually woven
composites. In the dry condition, the flexural strength, modulus, and failure strain of the
interwoven kenaf/jute hybrid composite (KJ) were found to be 22, 12, and 16% higher than those
of the woven kenaf composite (KK), respectively; and 39, 26 and 16% greater than those of
woven jute composite (JJ), respectively. For the interwoven kenaf/hemp hybrid composite (KH),
increments of 17, 4 and 20% over the woven kenaf composite (KK); and 33, 23, and 5% over the
woven hemp composite (HH) were recorded for the flexural strength, modulus, and failure strain,
respectively. At the saturation state, the flexural strength, modulus, and failure strain of the
interwoven kenaf/jute hybrid composite (KJ) were 41, 27, and 13% higher than those of the
woven kenaf composite (KK), respectively; and 18, 3, and 10% greater than those of the woven
jute composite (JJ), respectively. Meanwhile, an increment of 44, 32, and 13% over the woven
kenaf composite (KK); and of 2, 6, and 10% over the woven hemp composite (HH), were
experienced by the saturated interwoven kenaf/hemp hybrid composite (KH) for the flexural
strength, modulus, and failure strain, respectively. The increments of the flexural strength and
modulus clearly show that the interwoven hybrid composites were stronger and more rigid, in
comparison with the individually woven composites. This indicates that hybridization with high
strength fibres, such as kenaf, yields a material with a better flexural performance. This is in
accordance with a previous work, where the presence of the kenaf fibre also increased the
flexural strength of a woven kenaf/banana hybrid composite [20].
The interlocking structure of the reinforcement fibres further contributed to the higher
bending capacity of the interwoven hybrid composites, which resulted in a higher load required
to break the tight structure. The combination of compression, shear, and tension modes
determined the failure mode of the flexural samples [38]. In comparison with the individually
woven composites, the interwoven hybrid composites experienced a higher flexural strain before
reaching their breaking point, as a result of hybridization. Different types of fibres in the warp
and weft directions of the interwoven hybrid composites resulted in a higher extension of the
fibre yarns along the transverse and longitudinal directions [20]. When the samples were
subjected to a bending load, the stress was initially absorbed by the fibres along the longitudinal
direction, and then it was transferred to the fibres in the transverse direction, before final failure
of the composite occurred through the complete removal of the fibre bundle.
From Fig. 11, it is observed that the flexural strength was reduced by 73, 64, 57, 69, and
67% for the woven kenaf (KK), woven jute (JJ), woven hemp (HH), interwoven kenaf/jute (KJ),
and interwoven kenaf/hemp (KH) hybrid composites, respectively, when they were immersed in
water up until their saturation state. Similar to the trend observed for the flexural strength, a
reduction of the flexural modulus was also observed. The flexural modulus of the saturated
samples of woven kenaf (KK), woven jute (JJ), woven hemp (HH), interwoven kenaf/jute (KJ)
and interwoven kenaf/hemp (KH) hybrid composites was 78, 70, 68, 76 and 73% lower than that
of the dry samples. Among the hybrid composites, the interwoven kenaf/jute hybrid composite
(KJ) had the highest flexural strength and modulus under dry conditions, but it was unable to
surpass the strength and modulus of the interwoven kenaf/hemp hybrid composite (KH) in the
wet (saturated) condition. This is due to the higher water resistance properties of the hemp fibre,
which led to less water being absorbed by the saturated samples of the interwoven kenaf/hemp
hybrid composite (KH).
 The mechanical properties of the composites were greatly influenced by the water
absorption [11,23]. As presented in Table 10 and 11, the flexural strength and modulus of the
woven composites decreased with increasing immersion times. The poor wettability and micro-
gaps between the polymer chains, and the cracking induced by the fibre swelling, increased the
water uptake and weakened the fibre/matrix bonding, which resulted in a reduction of the
flexural strength and modulus of the composites when they were ccontinuously immersed in
water [25,42]. However, the flexural strain behaved differently from the flexural strength and
modulus. From Table 12, it can be observed that a longer immersion time increased the flexural
strain of the woven composites. The flexural strain percentage of the woven kenaf (KK), woven
jute (JJ), woven hemp (HH), interwoven kenaf/jute (KJ), and interwoven kenaf/hemp (KH)
hybrid composites were 94,100, 75, 90, and 83% higher than their strain in dry conditions. It is
believed that, the cellulose contents in the fibres reduced during the water ingress making these
fibres more flexible due to plasticisation effect. The molecules of the reinforcing fibres were
freer to move when the water molecules filled the cracks and cavities of the composites and act
as a plasticiser to the composite and render the structure more flexible, and thus the strain value
was significantly increased [37].
FESEM images of the woven composites after their fracture under the flexural test are
shown in Fig. 12. The surface morphology of the water-immersed samples was different from
that of the dry samples in terms of voids, porosity swelling, and sorption through the microcracks
[11]. A micrograph of the dry sample, shown in Fig. 12a, displays a good interface between the
matrix and the reinforcement fibre, which contributed to its high strength when the bending load
was applied. As for the water-immersed sample, its flexural strength was reduced due to a poor
fibre/matrix adhesion, as shown in Fig. 12b. When the water molecules penetrate the macrovoids
and free space of the polymer, new cavities and cracks are formed; acts as the water transport
pathway within the composites and this gradually reduced the interface bonding [23].
Furthermore, the voids seen in Fig. 12b act as stress concentrators [38], and lead to the failure of
the water-immersed samples. Observation of the fracture surface from the flexural test sample
further underlines the importance of fibre/matrix adhesion on flexural strength.
Conclusions
The water absorption of interwoven kenaf/jute and kenaf/hemp hybrid composites, and its effect
on their mechanical properties, was investigated following their immersion in tap water at room
temperature. The conclusions from this experiment are as follow:
• The water absorption pattern of these composites is found to follow a non-Fickian
behaviour. Furthermore, through their hybridisation, the water-resistant properties of
woven kenaf, jute, and hemp fibre were improved.
• The tensile and flexural strength of the interwoven hybrid composites were superior to
those of the individual woven composites due to the different load sharing properties
between the longitudinal and transverse directional fibres in the woven structure. A
greater stress uptake of the interwoven hybrid composites was obtained by the
interlocking structure between the fibre yarns; therefore, a larger load was required to
break the structure.
• Longer immersion times reduced the strength and modulus of the composites as a result
of water absorption. However, the failure strain increased with increasing immersion time
due to a breakdown of the cellulose structure.
• Matrix cracking, delamination, and voids (as shown by the FESEM images) increased the
penetration of water, and reduced the strength and modulus of the water immersed
samples, by weakening the interface between the fibre and matrix.

References
1. Dittenber DB, GangaRao HVS. Critical review of recent publications on use of natural
composites in infrastructure. Composites Part A 2012; 43:1419–1429.
2. Azwa ZN, Yousif BF, Manalo AC, Karunasena W. A review on the degradability of
polymeric composites based on natural fibres. Materials and Design 2013; 47: 424–442.
3. Pickering KL, Efendy MGA, Le TM. A review of recent developments in natural fibre
composites and their mechanical performance. Composites Part A 2016; 83: 98–112.
4. Faruk O, Bledzki AK, Fink HP, Sain M. Biocomposites reinforced with natural fibers:
2000–2010. Progress in Polymer Science 2012; 37: 1552– 1596.
5. Jawaid M, Khalil HPSA. Cellulosic/synthetic fibre reinforced polymer hybrid
composites: A review. Carbohydrate Polymers 2011; 86: 1– 18.
6. Ramnath BV, Kokan SJ, Raja SN, Sathyanarayanan R, Elanchezhian C, Prasad AR,
Manickavasagam VM. Evaluation of mechanical properties of abaca–jute–glass fibre
reinforced epoxy composite. Materials and Design 2013; 51: 357–366.
7. Braga RA, Magalhaes JPAA. Analysis of the mechanical and thermal properties of jute
and glass fiber as reinforcement epoxy hybrid composites. Materials Science and
Engineering C 2015; 56: 269–273.
8. Bhoopathia R, Ramesha M, Deepa C. Fabrication and property evaluation of banana-
hemp-glass fiber reinforced composites. Procedia Engineering 2014; 97: 2032 – 2041.
9. Ridzuan MJM, Majid MSA, Afendi M , Azduwin K, Amin NAM, Zahri JM, Gibson AG.
Moisture absorption and mechanical degradation of hybrid Pennisetum purpureum/glass-
epoxy composites. Composites Structure 2016; 141: 110-116.
10. Burks B, Armentrout D, Kumosa M. Characterization of the fatigue properties of a hybrid
composite utilized in high voltage electric transmission. Composites Part A 2011; 42:
1138–1147.
11. Athijayamania A, Thiruchitrambalamb M, Natarajana U, Pazhanivel B. Effect of
moisture absorption on the mechanical properties of randomly oriented natural
fibers/polyester hybrid composite. Materials Science and Engineering A 2009; 517: 344–
353.
12. Singha NP, Aggarwalb L, Gupta VK. Tensile behavior of sisal/hemp reinforced high
density polyethylene hybrid composite. Materials Today Proceedings 2015; 2: 3140 –
3148.
13. Venkateshwaran N, ElayaPerumal A, Alavudeen A, Thiruchitrambalam M. Mechanical
and water absorption behaviour of banana/sisal reinforced hybrid composites. Materials
and Design 2011; 32: 4017–4021.
14. Yahaya R, Sapuan SM, Jawaid M, Leman Z, Zainudin ES. Mechanical performance of
woven kenaf-kevlar hybrid composites. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites
2014; DOI: 10.1177/0731684414559864.
15. Yahaya R, Sapuan SM, Jawaid M, Leman Z, Zainudin ES. Effect of layering sequence
and chemical treatment on the mechanical properties of woven kenaf–aramid hybrid
laminated composites. Materials and Design 2015; 67: 173–179.
16. Swolfs Y, Gorbatikh L, Verpoest I. Fiber hybridization in polymer composites: A review.
Composites Part A 2014; 67: 181-200.
17. Misnon MI, Islam MM, Epaarachchi JA, Lau K. Potentiality of utilising natural textile
materials for engineering composites applications. Materials and Design 2014; 59: 359–
368.
18. Yan L, Kasal B, Huang L. A review of recent research on the use of cellulosic fibres,
their fibre fabric reinforced cementitious, geo-polymer and polymer composites in civil
engineering. Composites Part B 2016; 92: 94-132.
19. Khan GMA, Terano M, Gafur MA, Alam MS. Studies on the mechanical properties of
woven jute fabric reinforced poly(L-lactic acid) composites. Journal of King Saud
University-Engineering Sciences 2016; 28: 69-74.
20. Alavudeen A, Rajini N, Karthikeyan S, Thiruchitrambalam M, Venkateshwaren N.
Mechanical properties of banana/kenaf fiber-reinforced hybrid polyester composites:
Effect of woven fabric and random orientation. Material and Design 2015; 66: 246-257.
21. Dan-Mallam Y, Abdullah MZ, Yusoff PSMM. The effect of hybridization on mechanical
properties of woven kenaf fiber reinforced polyoxymethylene composites. Polym
Compos 2014; 35:1900-1910.
22. Sapuan SM, Maleque MA. Design and fabrication of natural woven fabric reinforced
epoxy composite for household telephone stand. Material and Design 2005; 26: 65-71.
23. Haameem MJA, Majid MSA, Afendi M, Marzuki HFA, Hilmi EA, Fahmi I, Gibson AG.
Effects of water absorption on Napier grass fibre/polyester composites. Composite
Structures 2016; 144: 138–146.
24. Salleh Z, Taib YM, Hyie KM, Mihat M, Berhan MN, Ghani MAA. Fracture toughness
investigation on long kenaf/woven glass hybrid composite due to water absorption effect.
Procedia Engineering 2012; 41: 1667 – 1673.
25. Akil HMD, Santulli C, Sarasini F, Tirillò J, Valente T. Environmental effects on the
mechanical behaviour of pultruded jute/glass fibre-reinforced polyester hybrid
composites. Composites Science and Technology 2014; 94: 62–70.
26. Akil HM, Omar MF, Mazuki AAM, Safiee S, Ishak ZAM, Bakar AA. Kenaf fiber
reinforced composites: A review. Material and Design 2011; 32: 4107-4121.
27. Saba N, Paridah MT, Jawaid M. Mechanical properties of kenaf fibre reinforced
composite: A review. Construction and Building Materials 2015; 76: 87-96.
28. Mahjoub R, Yatim JM, Sam ARM, Hashemi SH. Tensile properties of kenaf fiber due to
various condition of chemical fiber surface modifications. Construction and Building
Materials 2014; 55: 103-113.
29. Xing C, Riedl B, Cloutier A, Shaler SM. Characterization of urea-formaldehyde resin
petration into medium density fiberboard fibers’ Wood SciTechnol 2005; (39), DOI
10.1007/s00226-005-0294-4: 374-384.
30. Wambua P, Ivens J, Verpoest I. Natural fibres: Can they replace glass in fibre reinforced
plastics?. Composites Science and Technology 2003; 63: 1259-1264.
31. Ho MP, Wang H, Lee JH, Ho CK, Lau KT, Leng J, Hui D. Critical factors on
manufacturing processes of natural fibre composites. Composites Part B 2012; 43: 3549-
3562.
32. Rahmanian S, Suraya AR, Shazed MA, Zahari R, Zainudin ES. Mechanical
characterization of epoxy composite with multiscale reinforcements: Carbon nanotubes
and short carbon fibers. Mater Des 2014; 60: 34–40.
33. ASTM D570-98 (Reapproved 2010), Standard test method for water absorption of
plastics.
34. ASTM D638-10, Standard test method for tensile properties of plastics.
35. ASTM D790-10, Standard Test Methods for Flexural Properties of Unreinforced and
Reinforced Plastics and Electrical Insulating Materials. ASTM International. 2010.
36. Wang W, Sain M, Cooper PA. Study of moisture absorption in natural fiber plastic
composites. Composites science and technology 2006; 66: 379-386.
37. Akil HMD, Cheng LW, Ishak ZAM, Bakar AA, Rahman MAA. Water absorption study
on pultruded jute fibre reinforced unsaturated polyester composites. Composites Science
and Technology 2009: 69: 1942–1948.
38. Dhakal HN, Zhang ZY, Richarson MOW. Effect of water absorption on the mechanical
properties of hemp fibre reinforced unsaturated polyester composites. Composites
Science and Technology 2007; 67: 1674-1683.
39. Espert A, Vilaplana F, Karlsson S. Comparison of water absorption in natural cellulosic
fibres from wood and one-year crops in polypropylene composites and its influence on
their mechanical properties. Composite Part A 2004; 35: 1267-1276.
40. Ghani MAA, Salleh Z, Hyie KM, Berhan MN, Taib YMD, Bakri MAI. Mechanical
Properties of Kenaf/Fiberglass Polyester Hybrid Composite. Procedia Engineering 2012;
41:1654 – 1659.
41. Fiore V, Bella GD, Valenza A. The effect of alkaline treatment on mechanical properties
of kenaf fibers and their epoxy composites. Composites Part B 2015; 68: 14–21.
42. Huang G, Sun H. Effect of water absorption on the mechanical properties of
glass/polyester composites. Materials and Design 2007; 28: 1647–1650.
Figure Captions

Figure 1. Woven fabric fabrication including the a) wooden frame, b) weaving process, and c)
completed woven fabric.

Figure 2. Warp and weft fibre directions of the interwoven hybrid composites.

Figure 3. Vacuum infusion system.

Figure 4. Tensile test specimens (a) before and (b) after the test.

Figure 5. Flexural test specimens (a) before and (b) after the test.

Figure 6. Water absorption curves of various woven composites.

Figure 7. Matrix cracking of an immersed sample due to attacks by the water molecules.

Figure 8. Tensile properties of various woven composites in dry and saturated condition.

Figure 9. FESEM images of tensile fractured specimens under dry conditions where (a) good
fibre/matrix bonding, and (b) the less ‘pull out’ phenomena can be observed.

Figure 10. FESEM images of saturated samples after the tensile test. In (a) the hollowed portion
indicates the ‘pull out’ phenomena; and in (d) the presence of matrix cracking and delamination,
which result from water adsorption, can be observed.

Figure 11. Flexural properties of various woven composites in dry and saturated conditions.

Figure 12. FESEM images of the fractured flexural specimen at the (a) dry and (b) saturated
conditions.
Tables

Table 1. Chemical composition of the reinforcement [4]

Constituent/ Cellulose Hemicellulose Lignin Waxes
Fibre (wt%) (wt%) (wt%) (wt%)

Kenaf 72 20.3 9 -

Jute 61-71 14-20 12-13 0.5

Hemp 68 15 10 0.8

Table 2. Mechanical properties of fibres and epoxy resin

Properties/ Tensile Elastic Strain at Moisture References
Fibre strength modulus failure (%) absorption
(MPa) (GPa) rate (%)
Kenaf 930 53 1.6 17-20 [4],[20],[26-29]

Jute 393-773 26.5 1.5-1.8 12 [25],[26],[28],[29]

Hemp 690 70 2-4 8 [25],[26],[28]

Epoxy 55 1.75 6 - [30]

Table 3: Symbols used to represent the different types of composites prepared.

Type of composite Symbols
Woven kenaf/kenaf KK
Woven jute/jute JJ
Woven hemp/hemp HH
Interwoven kenaf/jute KJ
Interwoven kenaf/hemp KH
Table 4: Diffusion coefficients of the composite materials
Specimens Diffusion coefficients, D (m2/s)
KK 6.32 x 10-8
JJ 6.29 x 10-8
HH 4.36 x 10-8
KJ 3.57 x 10-9
KH 1.47 x 10-9

Table 5: Tensile properties data for the dry and saturated woven composite samples
Specimens

Properties KK JJ HH KJ KH

Dry 80 ± 4 77 ± 3 76 ± 5 89 ± 3 83 ±1
Tensile strength (MPa)
Saturated 20 ± 4 24 ± 1 25 ± 3 25 ± 2 26 ±1

Dry 6 ± 0.5 5.7 ± 0.3 5.3 ± 0.5 7.4 ± 0.5 7.3 ± 0.3
Tensile Modulus (GPa)
Saturated 1 ± 0.2 1.3 ± 0.1 1.4 ± 0.1 1.4 ± 0.2 1.5 ± 0.1

Dry 2.2 ± 0.3 2.4 ± 0.2 2.9 ± 0.6 3.1 ± 0.5 3.5 ± 0.3
Tensile strain (%)
Saturated 5.1 ± 0.2 5.3 ± 0.3 5.5 ± 0.1 5.8 ± 0.6 6.0 ± 0.2

Table 6: Tensile strength of the woven composites when tested at difference immersion times
Specimens Dry (MPa) Wet (MPa)
0h 2h 5h 15 h 24 h
KK 80 ± 4 67 ± 2 42 ± 3 38 ± 1 31 ± 4
JJ 77 ± 3 71 ± 1 44 ± 1 39 ± 4 33 ± 5
KJ 89 ± 3 74 ± 3 48 ± 1 40 ± 2 37 ± 1

0h 2h 10 h 24 h 48 h
HH 76 ± 5 74 ± 3 40 ± 2 35 ± 4 28 ± 2
KH 83 ± 1 75 ± 2 42 ± 3 39 ± 3 30 ± 2
Table 7: Tensile modulus of the woven composites when tested at difference immersion times
Specimens Dry (GPa) Wet (GPa)
0h 2h 5h 15 h 24 h
KK 6 ± 0.5 3 ± 0.3 3 ± 0.1 2.9 ± 0.2 1.9 ± 0.1
JJ 5.7 ± 0.3 3.7 ± 0.4 3.6 ± 0.2 3 ± 0.2 2 ± 0.4
KJ 7.4 ± 0.5 4.3 ± 0.3 4.2 ± 0.2 3.3 ± 0.2 2.1 ± 0.3

0h 2h 10 h 24 h 48 h
HH 5.3 ± 0.5 3.8 ± 0.2 2.7 ± 0.4 2.1 ± 0.3 1.8 ± 0.2
KH 7.3± 0.3 5 ± 0.2 3.1 ± 0.3 2.7 ± 0.1 2.1 ± 0.2

Table 8: Tensile strain of the woven composites when tested at difference immersion times.
Specimens Dry (%) Wet (%)
0h 2h 5h 15 h 24 h
KK 5.1 ± 0.3 5.5 ± 0.2 5.8 ± 0.5 6.2 ± 0.5 6.5 ± 0.6
JJ 5.3 ± 0.2 5.6 ± 0.5 6.1 ± 0.4 6.6 ± 0.7 6.7 ± 0.4
KJ 5.8 ± 0.5 6.3 ± 0.4 6.5 ± 0.6 6.8 ± 0.5 7.1 ± 0.3

0h 2h 10 h 24 h 48 h
HH 5.5 ± 0.6 6.1 ± 0.6 6.6 ± 0.5 6.9 ± 0.2 7 ± 0.3
KH 6 ± 0.3 6.4 ± 0.5 6.8 ± 0.5 7.3 ± 0.5 7.7 ± 0.4
Table 9: Flexural properties of dry and saturated woven composite samples
Specimens

Properties KK JJ HH KJ KH

Flexural Dry 77.6 ± 2.9 68.5 ± 5.3 68.2 ± 4.9 95 ± 3.4 90.8 ± 6.3

Strength (MPa) Saturated 20.7 ± 3.6 24.8 ± 3.8 29.2 ± 2.3 29.2 ± 5.1 29.8 ± 2.7

Flexural Dry 2.6 ± 0.1 2.3 ± 0.2 2.2 ± 0.2 2.9 ± 0.1 2.7 ± 0.2
Modulus (GPa) Saturated 0.56 ± 0.2 0.69 ± 0.1 0.7 ± 0.2 0.71± 0.2 0.74 ± 0.1

Flexural Dry 5 ± 0.5 5 ± 0.6 5.7 ± 0.6 5.8 ± 0.2 6 ± 0.7

Strain (%) Saturated 9.7 ± 0.4 10 ± 0.7 10 ± 0.2 11 ± 1 11 ± 1

Table 10: Flexural strength of the woven composites when tested at difference immersion times
Specimens Dry (MPa) Wet (MPa)
0h 2h 5h 15 h 24 h
KK 77.6 ± 2.9 52.1 ± 2.5 49.9 ± 1.3 42.9 ± 1.3 35.8 ± 1.2
JJ 68.5 ± 5.3 54 ± 3.6 50.2 ± 4.7 44 ± 5.9 38.3 ± 2.6
KJ 95 ± 3.4 62.6 ± 1.7 51.5 ± 1.6 46.3 ± 2.2 39 ± 2.7

0h 2h 10 h 24 h 48 h
HH 68.2 ± 4.9 55.5 ± 1.2 48.3 ± 1.4 39 ± 2.4 29.8 ± 1.4
KH 90.8 ± 6.3 63.3 ± 5.5 48.4 ± 1.1 42.6 ± 4.4 30.6 ± 4.3
Table 11: Flexural modulus of the woven composites when tested at difference immersion times
Specimens Dry (GPa) Wet (GPa)
0h 2h 5h 15 h 24 h
KK 2.6 ± 0.1 1.7 ± 0.2 1.6 ± 0.1 1.4 ± 0.2 1 ± 0.1
JJ 2.3 ± 0.2 1.8 ± 0.2 1.6 ± 0.3 1.4 ± 0.1 1.1 ± 0.1
KJ 2.9 ± 0.1 2 ± 0.3 1.7 ± 0.2 1.4 ± 0.1 1.3 ± 0.1

0 hours 2 hours 10 hours 24 hours 48 hours

HH 2.2 ± 0.2 1.9 ± 0.2 1.5 ± 0.2 1.3 ± 0.2 0.8 ± 0.1
KH 2.7 ± 0.2 2.1 ± 0.2 1.6 ± 0.1 1.3 ± 0.1 1 ± 0.1

Table 12: Flexural strain of the woven composites when tested at difference immersion times
Specimens Dry (%) Wet (%)
0h 2h 5h 15 h 24 h
KK 5 ± 0.5 6 ± 0.4 7 ± 0.8 8.5 ± 0.8 9±1
JJ 5 ± 0.6 6 ± 0.9 7±1 8.7 ± 0.6 9 ± 0.8
KJ 5.8 ± 0.2 6.4 ± 0.3 7 ± 0.8 9 ± 0.9 9 ± 1.3

0h 2h 10 h 24 h 48 h
HH 5.7 ± 0.6 6±1 7.3 ± 0.9 9±1 9.3 ± 1
KH 6 ± 0.7 6.5 ± 0.8 7.4 ± 0.5 9.3 ± 0.3 9.5 ± 0.4
List of Figures

Figure 1

Kenaf Yarns (warp)

Jute/Hemp Yarns (weft)

Warp

Weft

Figure 2
 Resin Outlet Hose
Plastic Sheet
Woven Fabric
Netting
Enka Channel
Peel Ply

Resin Inlet Hose

Resin Trap

Vacuum Pump

Figure 3

(a) (b)

Figure 4
(a) (b)

Figure 5
 14 KK
JJ
HH
12 KJ
KH

10
Weight gain (%)

0
0 10 20 30 40
√Time (h)

Figure 6

Matrix cracking
Figure 7

Figure 8
(a) Pull out (b)

Pull out
Fibre breakage

Fibre/matrix debonding Fibre breakage

Fibre/matrix debonding
Fibre bending

Figure 9

Delamination

Pull out

Fibre/matrix debonding
Fibre bending

Matrix cracking

Figure 10
 Figure 11

Void
(a) (b)

Pull out Fibre bending

Fiber/matrix debonds Fiber/matrix debonding Pull out

Figure 12