Original Article

0(0) 1–24
! The Author(s) 2020
Influence of different Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
textile structure DOI: 10.1177/1528083720974421
journals.sagepub.com/home/jit
reinforced composite leaf
spring on their
fabrication potential

Vikas Khatkar and

Bijoya Kumar Behera

Abstract
In advanced engineering applications, machining of composite material is a must to
perform necessary assembly operations. This work deals with the investigation of fab-
rication potential of Glass/epoxy composites reinforced with different textile structures
in the form of E-glass based chopped fiber, unidirectional (UD) tow, bidirectional (2D)
plain woven, four different 3D woven orthogonal solid structures with varying binder
percentage and one 3D woven angle interlock structure. The Influence of reinforce-
ment architecture on tensile strength, drilling damage, bearing response, specific energy
absorption (bending), and spring stiffness of composites structure was investigated.
Damage analysis due to drilling was primarily assessed in terms of delamination where-
as bearing strength, bearing strain and common bearing failure were examined from the
bearing strength test. Different bearing failure was observed for different composite
structures; UD composite was noticed with complete shear out failure while chopped
failed due to tearing and 2D structure reinforced composite predominantly failed due
to tearing and delamination failure. 3D orthogonal composite failed due to tearing in
the warp direction and shear out in weft direction whereas 3D interlock failed due to
tearing in both warp and weft direction. 3D orthogonal based composite structure
exhibited the highest specific energy absorption (SEA) along with improved spring
stiffness and therefor it could be a potential material for automotive leaf spring
application.

Department of Textile and Fiber Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India
Corresponding author:
Vikas Khatkar, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 110016, India.
Email: vikas.khatkar1989@gmail.com
2 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

Keywords
textile reinforced composites, automotive leaf spring, fabrication potential, specific
energy absorption, spring stiffness

Introduction
Leaf spring is a load-carrying assembly in automobiles. It absorbs vertical vibra-
tions caused by irregularities in the road. Variations in the spring deflection allow
potential energy to be stored as strain energy and then released more gradually
over time. Normally leaf spring is joined with vehicle chassis by adhesive bonding
or mechanical fastening using nuts and bolts [1]. Figure 1 shows the schematic
diagram of leaf spring used in automobiles.
Composites are well suited for leaf-spring applications due to their high
strength-to-weight ratio, fatigue resistance, and natural frequency. Internal damp-
ing in the composite material leads to better vibration energy absorption within the
material, resulting in reduced transmission of vibration noise to neighboring struc-
tures. Despite all these advantages it’s joining with chassis is always a complex
process and it needs fabrication in terms of machining operation like drilling.
However, machining of composite materials is difficult to carry out due to the
anisotropic and non-homogeneous structure of composites and to the high abra-
siveness of their constituent material both matrix (thermoset) and reinforcing
constituents. Abrasiveness of reinforcement architecture can hardly be eliminated
especially in advance fibers like glass/carbon/aramid etc. due to their brittle behav-
ior. However properties of epoxy can be improved by changing its chemistry,
Meng et al. [2] described the viewpoint of synthetic chemistry, noncovalent and
covalent approaches for the preparation of carbon nanomaterial/CP composites
and discussed the challenges and perspective of each method along with their
potential applications. Yang et al. [3], Han et al. [4] work deals with the

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of leaf spring used in automobile suspension system.

Khatkar and Behera 3

improvement of thermal conductivity of epoxy composite from synthesized liquid

crystal epoxy by doping of boron nitride fillers. The abrasiveness and anisotropic-
ity typically result in damage being introduced into the workpiece and in very rapid
wear development in the cutting tool. Several studies were conducted on the dril-
ling behavior of composites reinforced with natural and high-performance fibers in
the recent past [5–10], wherein the effect of speed, drill geometry, and feed rate was
investigated on thrust force, torque requirement, and machinability of composites.
After drilling the joining of leaf spring end to the chassis of the vehicle is the main
task, therefore it is important to select the right joining technique to attach the
composite leaf spring with vehicle chassis to transfer load effectively between the
linked structures. Mechanically fastened bolted joints are the most common due to
their better reparability and joint performance [11]. Adhesively bonded joints gen-
erally preferred for joining of non-load bearing components as they offer more
uniform load transfer and lower stress concentration [12]. Several factors that
affect the performance of bonded joints are surface treatment, material character-
istics, geometry, and the configuration of the joint. Environmental condition like
temperature, moisture, etc. also affects the bonded joint durability to a greater
extent [13]. Since leaf spring is a structural element, it is essential to ensure a strong
joint to fulfill the functional requirement of the assembly. Therefore, bolted joint is
preferred for leaf spring assembly over adhesive-bonded joint due to their advan-
tage of easy on-site use, detachability, effective load transfer, and the possibility of
visual inspection [14]. However, a bolted joint may affect joint efficiency to some
extent. Hybrid joints offer greater strength, stiffness, and fatigue life compared to
adhesively bonded joints but hybrid joint (bonded/bolted) is in the early stage of
development compared to bonded and bolted joints [15,16]. In the recent past,
several investigations were carried out on the fabrication potential of the fiber-
reinforced composites in terms of joining/bearing strength and bearing failure
mechanisms [17–20]. Pisano and Fuschi [17] evaluated the joint strength of
pinned joints and predicted the most common joint failure mechanisms in com-
posite laminates. Some common mode of failures in the mechanically fastened
joint is shown in Figure 1(a) of the supplementary information section of this
article. Subramanian and Senthilvelan [18] investigated the performance of a
double bolted end joint for injection molded thermoplastic composite leaf spring
(20% glass/pp); wherein they have reported the bearing load of the joint under
static loading condition is superior to that of the leaf spring design load. In a study
by Irisarri et al. [19,20], progressive damage and failure of mechanically fastened
(Single fastener) joints in CFRP laminates were reported using refined finite ele-
ment modeling. However, there is hardly any work reported on the drilling and
bearing response of textile structural composites specifically reinforced with 3D
woven fabrics. Therefore, in this research, an attempt is made to examine the
fabrication potential of textile structural composites reinforced with various
woven architectures including 3D woven orthogonal and angle interlock structures
suitable for leaf spring application.
4 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

Materials, Experimental procedures, and methods

Materials
Multifilament E-glass tows of different linear density 300-2400 tex supplied by
Dhingra polymers, New Delhi (India) of make Owens corning) was used to pre-
pare different textile structure used for composite reinforcement. Epoxy LY556
was used as matrix material along with hardener HY951 in the ratio of 10:1 for
composite manufacturing.

Preparation of textile preforms

Chopped fibers. The multifilament E- glass tow of linear density 2400 tex was cut
into a staple length of 10 mm for chopped fiber reinforced composite preparation.
The preparation of Chopped fiber used in this investigation is shown in Figure 1(b)
of the supplementary information section of this article.

Unidirectional (UD) and two dimensional (2D) plain woven reinforcement. UD and 2D
plain woven fabric is produced on a conventional weaving machine. In UD all
the fibers (linear density 2400 tex) are aligned in one direction (warp) with only a
few yarns of 300 tex linear density are interlaced in the transverse direction just to
hold the structure as shown. Whereas (2D) plain woven fabric was produced with
an equal number of yarns of 2400 tex linear density in both warp and weft direc-
tion. The cross-section, lifting plan, and developed fabric sample are shown in the
Figure 2.

3D orthogonal Fabric. Four different 3D solid orthogonal structures were woven on

a customized rigid rapier weaving machine specially designed to produce 3D struc-
tures with provisions with provision to accommodate multiple warp beams. Four
different multilayer orthogonal structures were produced using 2400 tex yarns in
warp and weft direction and binder yarn of 300 tex. Warp yarns are designated as
stuffers and weft yarns as fillers throughout the discussion. The cross-section,
lifting plan, and developed different 3D solid orthogonal fabrics are shown in
Figure 3.

3D Interlock Fabric. 3D solid interlock fabric structure (shown in Figure 4) was

woven on the same loom using 4400 tex stuffer warp and filler weft and 300 tex
binder thread. The thread density in all three directions was set to achieve similar
areal density (approximately 9000 g/m2) as in case of orthogonal structure. All
measured parameters of different textile structures are summarized in Table 1.

Preparation of composite leaf spring

Figure 5 shows the flow chart for the development of composite leaf spring.
Teflon-coated semielliptical mold was used to make composite leaf spring using
Khatkar and Behera 5

Figure 2. Cross-section, lifting plan and developed UD and 2D fabric sample.

Figure 3. Cross-section, lifting plan, and developed 3D solid orthogonal structures.

6 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

Figure 4. Cross-section, lifting plan, and structure of 3D solid Interlock structure.

Table 1. Measured parameters of various reinforcement architecture and their composite.

Thickness Overall
Density of Areal of single Thickness
Fiber volume composite density of Staking fabric composite
Fiber architecture fraction (%) (g/cc) fabric (g/m2) layers layer (mm) (mm)

Chopped 38
1.1 1.71
0.08 – – – 6.6
0.32

UD 54
1.1 1.93
0.13 1150
20 08 1.3
0.15 5.1
0.27
2D 39
1.3 1.73
0.09 1020
18 09 1.2
0.17 6.2
0.25
3D Ortho (3S4B) 48
3.6 1.85
0.12 8400
200 01 6.5
0.31 6.3
0.18
3D Inter 49
4.0 1.91
0.08 9000
300 01 6.7
0.25 6.5
0.25
3D Ortho 3S1B 52
1.5 1.87
0.10 9000
500 01 7.2
0. 80 6.7
0. 60
3D Ortho 3S2B 55
3.2 1.81
0.08 8800
400 01 8.2
1.1 7.3
0.8
3D Ortho 3S3B 52
2.1 1.91
0.11 8700
500 01 8.1
1.0 7.1
0.7

a vacuum-assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM) process. Woven textile struc-

ture was cut to the required shape and placed on the mold so that it can take
semielliptical shape and then it is covered with peel ply (for easy removal) and resin
mesh placed on top of peel ply to stop the flow of resin outside the sample area.
Finally, vacuum bagging was fixed with sealant tape to make the process leak
Khatkar and Behera 7

Figure 5. Development process of composite leaf spring using VARTM.

proof. After resin infusion, the setup was left for room temperature curing of 24
hours. For chopped fiber reinforced composite leaf spring, fiber resin mixture was
placed in the bottom part of the mold and then after closing with top mold appro-
priate pressure was applied to give it leaf spring-like shape and then left for curing
for 24 hours. Measured parameters (fiber volume fraction, density, and thickness)
of composite structures are summarized in Table 1.
Post to the development of composite leaf springs, the end section from one side
was taken into consideration for the fabrication potential investigation as shown in
Figure 6. Since leaf spring is joined to the vehicle chassis from its two ends, there-
fore one of its ends was cut into the required dimensions to perform drilling
operation first and subsequent double bolted joint test for knowing the bearing
strength of the different composite leaf spring material. Detailed experimental
procedure for drilling and bearing strength test is discussed in “Preparation of
composite leaf spring” section of this manuscript.

Characterization
Tensile properties. Tensile properties of different textile structural composites inves-
tigated in accordance with ASTM D3039 standard. The test was conducted at a
strain rate of 2 mm/min, a total of five samples (250 mm25 mm) was tested and
the average value was taken. INSTRON 100 KN universal testing machine was
used for tensile testing of composites.

Drilling of composites. Different textile structure reinforced composite leaf spring

materials were investigated for their fabrication potential in terms of drilling and
8 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

Figure 6. Geometry of test specimen for drilling and Bearing failure test.

bearing response. Drilling was performed using a floor-mounted drill attached with
a carbide-based rill bit of 6 mm size. The composite sample was fixed into a
wooden board using a C- clamp on the drill machine platform to perform accurate
drilling at the marked position. The typical test setup for drilling of composites is
shown in Figure 1(c) (a) of the supplementary information section of this article.
All the drilled samples were subsequently tested for the double bolted joint bearing
response.

Bearing (Joint performance test). Bearing response were determined with the help of in
house fabricated test fixture shown in Figure 1(c) (b) of the supplementary infor-
mation section of this article, the fabricated setup was integrated with existing
INSTRON 5982 universal tensile tester according to ASTM D 5961 standard.
The test was conducted at a strain rate of 5mm/min in ambient room condition
at 27 C and 60% humidity. The effect of reinforcement architecture on their bear-
ing strength and bearing failure was recorded from this test. Three tests were
conducted for each configuration and the average value presented.

Specific Energy absorption and spring stiffness under bending (3 point). Flexural properties
of structural composites fabricated for leaf spring were tested according to stan-
dard ASTM D 790 using INSTRON (3365) universal testing machine of 5KN
capacity. Specimen size for flexural testing was 120 mm19 mm with a span to
thickness ratio of 16:1. The strain rate was kept at 1 mm/min. An average of five
observations was recorded for determining the specific energy absorption (bend-
ing) of the composite from the three-point bending test shown in Figure 1(d) of the
Khatkar and Behera 9

Table 2. Tensile properties of different textile structural composites.

Specific Specific
Tensile tensile Young’s Tensile tensile Young’s
strength strength modulus strength strength modulus
Material MPa (warp) warp GPa (warp) MPa (weft) weft Gpa (weft)

Steel 900
50 115
7 200
10 900
50 115
7 200
10

Chopped 56
1.0 33
0.58 5.49
0.21 56
1.0 33
0.58 5.49
0.21
UD 456
2.1 236
1.0 6.85
0.15 456
2.1 236
1.0 6.85
0.15
2D Plain 321
1.5 185
0.8 4.47
0.31 313
2. 4 181
1.3 3.84
0.24
3D Ortho 236
3.0 127
1.6 3.36
0.27 358
1.4 193
0.7 4.84
0.31
3D Inter 198
2.3 104
1.2 13.93
1.2 340
4.1 178
2.1 18.99
1.7

supplementary information section of this article. Specific strain energy absorption

was calculated using equation 1

r2
U¼ (1)
6qE

Where r is Bending strength, U is specific strain energy, E is bending modulus, q is

the density of composite [21]. Further spring stiffness of composite leaf spring
investigated from load deflection test using SAE J1528 standard.

Results and Discussion

Tensile properties of different composite structures
Table 2 shows the tensile strength of different textile structural composite and
conventional steel used in leaf spring application. Since both the materials have
significant difference in their density, therefore comparison of specific strength was
made. Specific tensile strength composite reinforced with textile structure (UD, 2D
and 3D ortho composites) found higher than conventional steel. Whereas specific
strength of Chopped and 3D Inter (Warp) direction found lower than steel. It is
clear from the results that textile structural composites could be a potential mate-
rial for leaf spring application. It is clear from the results that tensile stresses of
UD, 2D, and 3D composites were found in the range of design load stress (DLS)
required for the suspension system of different vehicles which is typically in the
range of 300 to 550 MPa for heavy vehicles like bus and trucks and 600 to 750 MPa
for the light passenger vehicle [22]. UD composite gives the highest tensile strength
followed by 2D Plain, 3D orthogonal, and 3D interlock reinforced composites
depending on the order of disposition of fibers along a particular direction. This
is because UD composite has all the fiber in one direction, in 2D fibers was dis-
tributed in two directions, and in 3D fibers distributed in three mutually
10 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

Figure 7. Tensile fractured different textile structural composite.

perpendicular directions. Though UD and 2D composites have higher tensile

stresses than 3D composites for comparable volume fraction, but they are prone
to delamination (separation of staking layer) at higher loads which ultimately will
lead to failure. It was also reported by Khatkar et al. [23] that UD and 2D
composites have undergone a higher degree of delamination compared to 3D
composites.
Figure 7 shows the tensile fractured samples of different composite structures.
The opaque region in UD and 2D plain indicate internal damage of composites
which results in delamination. Whereas in 3D composites delamination was found
negligible, the opaque region in 3D Orthogonal and interlock was due to surface
crazing because of matrix cracking at the point of Z binder reinforcement. Dai
et al. [24] also investigated the influence of z binder yarn on the tensile, compressive
and flexural behavior of 3D woven composites and made similar observation in
their fracture behavior. Further, it is important to know their fabrication potential
to have their applicability in automotive leaf spring.
Khatkar and Behera 11

Drilling Behavior
To perform assembly operations in composite structures drilling hole is an
important operation required to perform. Therefore the developed composite
structures must be investigated for their drilling potential and the associated
damage with regards to drilling. Drilling parameters like speed, drill geometry,
and feed rate may significantly affect the drilling characteristics of composite
laminates. However, this investigation is limited to the influence of drilling on
composite structures reinforced with different textile structures. The influence of
drilling was analyzed in terms of various defects induced due to drilling. Drilling
of composites is likely to develop various defects like burrs, tearing, delamina-
tion, fiber pullouts, and matrix degradation due to their inherent anisotropicity
in mechanical properties [5]. Therefore a comprehensive investigation on the
drilling-induced damage for textile structural composites plays a vital role in
accurate evaluation of the quality of the machined hole quality and their per-
formance while in use. The drilling operation was performed on different com-
posite structures using a power drill equipped with a 6 mm HSS drill bit. Front
and back side photographs of each individual drilled textile structural composite
are shown in Figure 8. It can be seen that in chopped fiber reinforced composite
fiber pull out sites were noticed near the drilled hole. Fibers peel out were noticed
on the front surface (Figure 8(a)) of drilled composites and fiber push-out was
observed on the back surface (Figure 8(b)) of the drilled composite structure.
Similar failure modes were observed by Khashaba et al. [25] for drilling of glass/
epoxy chopped composites with varying fiber volume fractions. Unidirectional
(UD) composite was noticed with the opaque region near the hole in the direc-
tion of fibers with fiber pull-out sites near the edge of the drilled hole both on the
front and backside of the drilled UD composite as shown in Figure 8(c) and (d).
Which indicates the delamination failure in the longitudinal direction. In 2D
composites, the opaque region (indicate internal damage of composite generally
considered as delamination) was noticed all-around the drilled holes with a few
fiber peel-up sites on the front side shown in Figure 8(d) to (e). This clearly
shows that the delamination was due to the inter-laminar shear failure between
the composite layers due to the drilling thrust force application. 3D composites
found with almost negligible delamination i.e. neither the opaque region nor the
fibers pull-out sites were found on either side of the drilled the hole. Fiber push
out was noticed in all 3D composite (Orthogonal and Interlock) in their back-
side. This infects the advantage of 3D woven reinforced composite due to their
balanced and isotropic behavior. Such balanced behavior could be due to the
through-thickness yarn present in Z direction which eliminates interlaminar shear
failure present between the composite layers compared to conventional laminated
composites. Further drilled composites were analyzed for their bearing response
to confirm the influence of fiber architecture on bearing failure response, bearing
strength, and failure morphology.
12 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

Figure 8. Different drilled textile structural composites (a) chopped front (b) chopped Back
(c) UD front (d) UD Back (e) 2D front (f) 2D back (g) 3D 1 front (h) 3D 1 back (i) 3D 2 front
(j) 3D 2 back (k) 3D 3 front (l) 3D 3 back (m) 3D 4 front (n) 3D 4 back (o) 3D Inter front and
(p) 3D Inter back.

Bearing Characteristics
Bearing properties of Chopped, UD, 2D, 3D Ortho, and 3D Interlock composite structures.
Figure 9 shows the typical bearing stress-strain curve obtained from bearing test of
chopped, UD, 2D, 3D Orthogonal, and 3D Interlock composites. A similar type of
curve was obtained for different composite structures. It can be seen from the
curve that the initial portion of the curve is flat along the horizontal axis this
could be due to the presence of clearance between bolt and hole. Later the curve
shows a linear response till it reaches the peak load and finally, the drop in load
was noticed when the fibers start moving along with the bolt motion. Bearing
stresses were calculated using equation 2 where P is the maximum bearing load,
d is the hole diameter and t is the average specimen thickness.

P
rb ¼ (2)
2dt
Khatkar and Behera 13

200 Chopped
UD

Bearing strength (MPa)

2D Plain
150
3D ortho
3D Inter
100

50

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Strain (%)

Figure 9. Typical bearing stress strain curve of chopped, UD, 2D plain, 3D ortho and interlock
composite structures.

Bearing strain was calculated using equation 3. Where dP is the bearing exten-
sion corresponding to the bearing load, k ¼ 2 for double bolted joint, and d is
the hole diameter. The similar equation for bearing strain was used by McCarthy
et al. [26]

dP
eb ¼ (3)
kd

Figure 10 shows the comparison of the bearing strength of chopped, UD, 2D

Plain, 3D Ortho (3S4B, 13% binder percentage), and 3D Interlock composite
structures. Bearing strength was found in order of 2D > CHOPPED> 3D
Inter > 3D Ortho >UD respectively. Composite reinforced with 2D plain
weaved architecture depicted the highest strength with a value of 192
3.2 MPa
for identical volume fraction and areal density. This could be inferred because in
2D plain reinforced composite 50% of the fibers were present in the direction
perpendicular to the loading direction, which is causing the maximum hindrance
to the bolt while performing the bearing test. The bearing strength of UD compo-
sites was found lowest with a value of 39
0.9 MPa this was because all the fibers
were present in loading direction which poses a negligible obstruction to the bolted
joint. Whereas the strength of chopped fiber-reinforced composite (CFRC) was
found higher than 3D reinforced composites (Orthogonal and Interlock) because
fibers are randomly distributed in multiple directions in CFRC which cause the
higher resistance to the bolted joints whereas in 3D composite structures composite
fibers were arranged in three mutually perpendicular directions and hence offered
lower bearing strength than chopped one. It is interesting to note that the bearing
strength in 3D Inter composite was higher than 3D Ortho with very little margin
14 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

250
Chopped UD 2D Plain 3D Ortho 3D Inter
Bearing Stress (MPa) 200

150

100

50

0
Composite structures

Figure 10. Comparisons of bearing strength for different textile structures reinforced
composite.

due to better interlocking mechanism in 3D interlock composite structure.

Subramanian and Senthilvelan [18] investigated the bearing strength (joint perfor-
mance) of injection molded 20% glass fiber reinforced polypropylene leaf springs
and found that maximum bearing strength of 48 MPa with a strain of 21%. It
seems E-glass/epoxy based textile structural based composite leaf spring can be a
suitable combination for leaf spring material because of suitability of textile struc-
tural composites for load bearing applications [27].
Figure 11 shows the microscopic images of bearing fractured composite sam-
ples. It can be seen that chopped fiber composite failed predominantly due to a
combination of tearing and cleavage failure Figure 11(a). While UD composite
failed due to complete shear out at the hole along the direction of fibers as shown
in Figure 11(b), a possible reason could be due to the all-fiber alignment in the
direction of loading and hence offer very low resistance to bearing bolts. 2D com-
posite failed due to tearing at the edges as well an opaque region was noticed near
the holes as shown in Figure 11(c), which indicates the delamination due to inter-
laminar shear stress. The edge tearing could be due to the resistance created by the
fibers perpendicular to loading direction and due to poor inter-laminar stress
between the stacked layers of 2D composite. Figure 11(d) to (e) shows the failed
samples of 3D Ortho and 3D Inter composite which indicates a clear failure of
tearing and cleavage in both the 3D reinforced composite structures.
Figure 12 shows the top view of the bearing fractured samples of 2D and 3D
composites which also confirm that in 2D separation of stacked layer i.e. delam-
ination appeared due to applied load, whereas in 3D composites nil delamination
noticed along with few matrix cracking sites. Therefore it can be concluded that
although bearing strength of 2D composites found highest compared to all other
composite structures, but microscopic analysis clearly indicates that 2D composites
Khatkar and Behera 15

Figure 11. Microscopic images of front view of bearing fractured composite samples (a)
chopped (b) UD (c) 2D plain (d) 3D ortho (3S4B) (e) 3D inter.

Figure 12. Microscopic images (a) 2D top view and (b) 3D top view.
16 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

(a) 160
140

Bearing strength (MPa)

120
100
80 3S1
60 B
3S2
40 B
3S3
20
B
0
0 0.2 0.4
Strain (%)

(b) 140

120
Bearing Strength (MPa)

100

80
3S1B
60
3S2B
40
3S3B
20 3S4B
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
strain (%)

Figure 13. Typical stress strain curve of 3D orthogonal textile structural composite obtained
from bearing strength test (a) 3D warp and (b) 3D weft.

structures are noticed with opaque region (internal damage) and separation of
stacked layer i.e. Delamination whereas 3D noticed with nil delamination.

Influence of structural variation on bearing properties of 3D orthogonal composite structures.

Figure 13(a) and (b) shows the typical stress-strain curves of different 3D orthog-
onal reinforced textile structural composites obtained from the bearing strength
test in warp and weft direction respectively. Structural variation was made in terms
of binder yarn percentage variation. 3D orthogonal structures named as 3S1B
(3%), 3S2B (7%), 3S3B (10%) and 3S4B (13%) with 3%, 7%, 10% and 13%
binder percentage respectively were used for developing composite leaf spring
Typical values of bearing strength and bearing strain for different 3D composite
structures are summarized in Table 3. It is clear from the test results that the
Khatkar and Behera 17

Table 3. Bearing properties of different textile reinforced composites.

Bearing Bearing Bearing Bearing

Reinforcement strength (MPa) strain (%) strength (MPa) strain (%)
architecture Warp (WP) Warp (WP) Weft (WF) Weft (WF)

3S1B 143
3.2 0.24
0.035 123
2.1 0.34
0.041

3S2B 127
2.7 0.19
0.016 125
4.2 0.25
0.025
3S3B 126
2.2 0.26
0.030 124
2.5 0.29
0.032
3S4B 92
1.7 0.22
0.011 119
3.2 0.20
0.024

bearing strength of 3S2B, 3S3B, and 3S4B composite structures found almost
similar with a variation of 10 to 12% higher values in 3S1B composite structures
in warp direction while bearing strength in weft direction noticed with almost
equal strength in all four composite structures. This proves that the influence of
binder (through-thickness) yarns is negligible on the bearing strength of 3D
orthogonal reinforced composites. The possible reason could be the minimum
number of crossover points of binder yarn in the test area selected for the bearing
test as the center of the drilled hole was 5 mm away from the edge of the composite
samples, therefore, the possibility of a similar percentage of binder yarn in the test
regions is higher. Dash and Behera [28] also described the influence of weave
design and the no. of crossover point on mechanical properties of 3D woven
solid structures for composite reinforcement. Whereas the strength of 3D
Interlock composite structures was found lower than other 3D orthogonal com-
posites with a value of 20 to 22% except in 3S4B composite structure. This is
because the binding effect of through-thickness yarn is comparatively lesser in
3D interlock structures than the 3D orthogonal structures due to the difference
in the geometry (unit cell) of 3D orthogonal and interlock structures, which can
result in lower bearing strength in 3D interlock reinforced composite structures
than 3D orthogonal. The strength of 3S4B (13%) was lower due to more no. of
resin-rich regions due to higher z-direction insertion compare to other 3D orthog-
onal structures which possibly could cause matrix cracking at lower load as well.
The strength of 3D composites strength was higher than chopped and UD com-
posites due to binder yarns present in the through-thickness direction which binds
the threads in warp and weft direction. Also, it can be noted that although the
strength of 2D composites is higher than 3D composites, however, they are prone
to delamination (separation of stacked layers) while performing drilling as shown
in Figure 9(f) there is a clear opaque region near the drilled hole which indicate the
delamination. Behera and Dash [29] proved that UD and 2D structures are more
prone to delamination than 3D composite structures. This indicates the balanced
and isotropic behavior of 3D orthogonal reinforced composite structures and this
infects the advantage of 3D textile structural composites that the position of fiber
can be varied depending upon the product’s need and requirement.
18 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

Figure 14. Photographs of bearing fractured composite samples (a) 3D weft and (b) 3D warp.

Figure 14(a) and (b) shows the bearing fractured 3D orthogonal (3S2B) com-
posite samples in warp and weft direction respectively. 3D orthogonal reinforced
composite structures were noticed with a different failure mode in warp and weft
direction regardless of its varying binder yarn percentage. The binder effect of
through-thickness yarns (Z yarn) is significant in warp direction because Z yarns
rows move parallel to the warp yarns and binding each row of weft yarns.
Therefore the composites failed due to the tearing out from the edges in the
warp direction and the central portion between the two drilled hole remains
intact due to the binding effect of through-thickness yarn on weft yarns. It can
be seen that in the weft direction all 3D composites failed due to shear out failure,
this could be because the effect of Z yarn in the weft direction is less significant
than the warp direction, therefore, they offer less binding effect in weft directional
than warp leading to shear out failure. Similar failure modes were noticed in all 3D
orthogonal composite structures. Whereas in 3D interlock reinforced composite
structures failure mode was tearing out and cleavage in both the warp and weft
direction as shown in Figure 12(e). This could be possibly due to the similar effect
of binder yarns in warp and weft direction.

Specific Energy absorption and spring stiffness

Specific energy absorption of various composite structures. Strain energy and spring stiff-
ness are the two important properties for leaf spring material and while doing
fabrication (in terms of machining) of composite leaf spring material, then these
properties may be affected due to various stress due to fabrication. Since leaf
spring function is to absorb and store energy during loading and release on
unloading due to bending deformation therefore it is important to know the
energy absorption and spring stiffness for better understanding. From equation
2 it is clear that to obtain higher bending strain energy in any material its ultimate
strength should be higher and modulus should be lower. For comparison, specific
bending strain energy was calculated by dividing strain energy values with the
density of each composite structure developed. Figures 15 and 16 show the com-
parison of specific strain energy obtained from the bending test in warp and weft
Khatkar and Behera 19

Chopped UD 2D Plain 3D Ortho 3D Inter

1

Specific Energy Absorption (J/kg)

0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5 Warp
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Composite Structures

Figure 15. Specific energy absorption (bending) in the warp direction.

Chopped UD 2D Plain 3D Ortho 3D Inter

1.8
Specific Energy absorption (J/kg)

1.6
1.4
1.2
1 Weft
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Composite Structures

Figure 16. Specific energy absorption (bending) in the weft direction.

direction respectively. Specific energy absorption (SEA) was found highest in com-
posite reinforced with 3D orthogonal structure (3S4B) in both warp and weft
direction whereas chopped fiber-reinforced composite structure gave the lowest
SEA. SEA of other composite structures was placed between these two structures
in order of 3D Interlock>UD> 2D composite. SEA of the 3D composite was
found highest among all other reinforced composite due to its low flexural mod-
ulus and high flexural strength.

Influence of structural variation of 3D orthogonal structures on specific energy absorption

under bending (3 point). Figures 17 and 18 show the comparison of specific energy
absorption for different 3D orthogonal composite structures in which binder yarn
20 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

3S1B 3S2B 3S3B 3S4B

1.1
Specific Energy Absorption (J/kg)
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
Warp
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Composite Structures

Figure 17. Specific energy absorption (bending) in warp direction.

3S1B 3S2B 3S3B 3S4B

1.7
Specific Energy Absorption (J/kg)

1.5
1.3
1.1
Weft
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.1
Composite Structures

Figure 18. Specific energy absorption (bending) in weft direction.

percentage was kept as 3%, 7%, 10%, and 13% and the samples were coded as
3S1B, 3S2B, 3S3B, and 3S4B respectively. It can be seen from the results that 3S1B
composite exhibited the highest energy absorption and 3S4B exhibited the lowest
in warp direction whereas 3S2B and 3S3B were found between the two. Whereas
specific energy absorption of all 3D orthogonal composite structure found almost
equal in weft direction with a variation of 3 to 4%. Therefore the specific energy
absorption under flexural stress founds improvement with a reduction in binder
thread content in 3D orthogonal composite in warp direction possibly because the
stiffer the material lower will be the energy absorption. From results can be con-
cluded that 3S1B exhibited higher energy absorption in both warp and weft direc-
tion compared to other composite structures which show it’s balanced and
isotropic behavior and could be a potential material for leaf spring application.
Khatkar and Behera 21

25 Chopped UD 2D Palin 3D Ortho 3D Inter

Spring stiffness (N/mm) 20

15

10

0
Composite structures

Figure 19. spring stiffness of different composite leaf spring.

Other composite structures were found with a large variation in energy absorption
in warp and weft direction.

Spring stiffness of different composite leaf spring. Figure 19 shows the comparison of
spring stiffness of various composite leaf spring reinforced with different textile
structures it is evident from the results that the spring stiffness of 3D Inter leaf
spring found highest with a value of 21.75 N/mm whereas the stiffness of 3D Ortho
reinforced composite leaf spring was 17.25 N/mm and approximately 63%, 6%
and 14% higher compared to chopped, UD, and 2D respectively. Spring stiffness
of 3D Inter and 3D Ortho was about 4 times and 2.5 times than that of chopped
leaf spring. Spring stiffness of 3D Ortho structure was found comparable to UD
and 2D with a difference of 10–15% and 3D inter with a variation of 20–25%.
The higher spring stiffness of 3D composite leaf spring was attributed due to the
presence of through-thickness reinforcement. This can be attributed from the
above discussion that 3D Ortho can be a potential material for leaf spring due
to its optimism stiffness and maximum energy compared to other composite leaf
spring structures. 3D Inter being the highest stiffness and Chopped being the
lowest stiffness is not suitable for such applications. Although UD and 2D leaf
spring also have considerable stiffness and energy absorption and comparable to
3D Ortho, the problem of delamination may arise at a higher loading rate due to
their laminated structure. It was also reported by Khatkar et al., Behera, and Dash
[23,28] that UD and 2D composites have undergone a higher degree of delamina-
tion compared to 3D composites. This is in fact, the limitation of UD and 2D
textile structural architecture in which it is impossible to produce higher thickness
preforms of high areal density except for multi-layering by stitching or adhesive
bonding. However, 3D weaving takes care of this limitation facilitating the
22 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

production of integrated (due to Z binder reinforcement) heavy structure (multi-

layer) both in terms of thickness and areal density which prevent delamination [30].

Conclusion
Fabrication potential of 3D textile structural composites reinforced with different
fiber architecture in the form of Chopped fiber, unidirectional (UD) tows, bidirec-
tional plain woven (2D), and 3D woven orthogonal and interlock structures were
analyzed in terms of tensile drilling performance, double bolted joint bearing fail-
ure response, specific flexural strain energy absorption and spring stiffness.

• Specific tensile strength composite reinforced with textile structure (UD, 2D and
3D ortho composites) found higher than conventional steel. Whereas specific
strength of Chopped and 3D Inter (Warp) direction found lower than steel.
• Different composite structures have a unique response to the drilling of the hole.
Chopped fiber composite was observed with fiber pullout sites near the edge of
the hole. UD composite was noticed with delamination in the longitudinal
direction; 2D composite has shown delamination due to poor interlaminar
shear stress whereas 3D composite exhibited negligible delamination.
• The bearing strength of 2D woven composite was found highest followed by 3D,
Chopped, and UD composite respectively. The strength of 3D orthogonal com-
posites was found almost 20 to 22% higher than 3D interlock composite
structures.
• Different bearing failure was noticed for different composite structures. UD
composite exhibited complete shear out failure while chopped fiber reinforced
composite failed due to tearing. 2D composite noticed with tearing and delam-
ination failure. 3D orthogonal composite failed due to tearing in the warp
direction and shear out in weft direction whereas 3D interlock failed due to
tearing in both warp and weft direction.
• Specific energy absorption (SEA) was found highest in composite reinforced
with the 3D orthogonal structure in both warp and weft direction along with
optimum spring stiffness required for leaf spring application, whereas chopped
fiber-reinforced composite structure gave the lowest SEA and spring stiffness.
Specific energy absorption under flexural stress can also be enhanced by increas-
ing stuffer thread density with proportionate reduction of binder thread content
in 3D orthogonal composites without perceptible loss in spring stiffness. Hence
3D woven orthogonal structure reinforced composites can be considered as a
potential material for automotive leaf spring application.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.
Khatkar and Behera 23

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication
of this article.

ORCID iDs
Vikas Khatkar https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2111-8978
Bijoya Kumar Behera https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7674-3693

Supplemental material
Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References
[1] Subramanian C. Design, development and performance of thermoplastic composite leaf
spring. PhD Thesis, IIT Guwahati, India, 2010.
[2] Meng D, Fan J, Ma J, et al. The preparation and functional applications of carbon
nanomaterial/conjugated polymer composites. Compos Commun 2019; 12: 64–73.
[3] Yang X, Zhu J, Yang D, et al. High-efficiency improvement of thermal conductivities
for epoxy composites from synthesized liquid crystal epoxy followed by doping BN
fillers. Compos Part B Eng 2020; 185: 107784.
[4] Han Y, Shi X, Yang X, et al. Enhanced thermal conductivities of epoxy nanocompo-
sites via incorporating in-situ fabricated hetero-structured SiC-BNNS fillers. Compos
Sci Technol 2020; 187: 107944.
[5] Xu J, Li C, Mi S, et al. Study of drilling-induced defects for CFRP composites using
new criteria. Compos Struct 2018; 201: 1076–1087.
[6] Bajpai PK, Debnath K and Singh I. Hole making in natural fiber-reinforced polylactic
acid laminates: an experimental investigation. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 2017; 30:
30–46.
[7] Debnath K, Singh I and Dvivedi A. Drilling characteristics of sisal fiber-reinforced
epoxy and polypropylene composites. Mater Manuf Process 2014; 29: 1401–1409.
[8] Yallew TB, Kumar P and Singh I. A study about hole making in woven jute fabric-
reinforced polymer composites. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part L J Mater Des Appl 2016;
230: 888–898.
[9] Rajamurugan TV, Shanmugam K and Palanikumar K. Analysis of delamination in
drilling glass fiber reinforced polyester composites. Mater Des 2013; 45: 80–87.
[10] Khashaba UA, El-Sonbaty IA, Selmy AI, et al. Machinability analysis in drilling
woven GFR/epoxy composites: part I–effect of machining parameters. Compos Part
A Appl Sci Manuf 2010; 41: 391–400
[11] Heimbs S, Schmeer S, Blaurock J, et al. Static and dynamic failure behaviour of bolted
joints in carbon fibre composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 2013; 47: 91–101.
[12] Keller T and Vallee T. Adhesively bonded lap joints from pultruded GFRP
profiles. Part I: stress–strain analysis and failure modes. Compos Part B Eng 2005;
36: 331–340.
[13] Budhe S, Banea MD, De Barros S, et al. An updated review of adhesively bonded joints
in composite materials. Int J Adhes Adhes 2017; 72: 30–42.
[14] Mara V, Haghani R and Al-Emrani M. Improving the performance of bolted joints in
composite structures using metal inserts. J Compos Mater 2016; 50: 3001–3018.
24 Journal of Industrial Textiles 0(0)

[15] Kelly G. Quasi-static strength and fatigue life of hybrid (bonded/bolted) composite
single-lap joints. Compos Struct 2006; 72: 119–129.
[16] Lopez-Cruz P, Laliberte J and Lessard L. Investigation of bolted/bonded composite
joint behaviour using design of experiments. Compos Struct 2017; 170: 192–201.
[17] Pisano AA and Fuschi P. Mechanically fastened joints in composite laminates: evalu-
ation of load bearing capacity. Compos Part B Eng 2011; 42: 949–961.
[18] Subramanian C and Senthilvelan S. Joint performance of the glass fiber reinforced
polypropylene leaf spring. Compos Struct 2011; 93: 759–766.
[19] Irisarri FX, Laurin F, Carrere N, et al. Progressive damage and failure of mechanically
fastened joints in CFRP laminates–part I: refined finite element modelling of single-
fastener joints. Compos Struct 2012; 94: 2269–2277
[20] Irisarri FX, Laurin F, Carrere N, et al. Progressive damage and failure of mechanically
fastened joints in CFRP laminates–part II: failure prediction of an industrial junction.
Compos Struct 2012; 94: 2278–2284.
[21] Shankar GSS and Vijayarangan S. Mono composite leaf spring for light weight vehi-
cle–design, end joint analysis and testing. Mater Sci 2006; 12: 220–225.
[22] SAE Spring Committee. Spring design manual. Warrendale: Society of Automotive
Engines, 1990, pp. 356–362.
[23] Khatkar V, Behera BK and Manjunath RN. Textile structural composites for auto-
motive leaf spring application. Compos Part B Eng 2020; 182: 107662.
[24] Dai S, Cunningham PR, Marshall S, et al. Influence of fibre architecture on the tensile,
compressive and flexural behaviour of 3D woven composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci
Manuf 2015; 69: 195–207.
[25] Khashaba UA, Seif MA, and Elhamid MA. Drilling analysis of chopped composites.
Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 2007; 38: 61–70.
[26] McCarthy CT, McCarthy MA and Lawlor VP. Progressive damage analysis of multi-
bolt composite joints with variable bolt–hole clearances. Compos Part B Eng 2005; 36:
290–305.
[27] Khatkar V, Manjunath RN, Olhan S, et al. Potential of textile structure reinforced
composites for automotive applications. In: ul - Islam S and Butola BS (eds) Advanced
Functional Textiles and Polymers: Fabrication, Processing and Applications, pp.65–98.
DOI:10.1002/9781119605843.
[28] Dash AK and Behera BK. Role of weave design on the mechanical properties of 3D
woven fabrics as reinforcements for structural composites. J Text Inst 2018; 109:
952–960.
[29] Behera BK and Dash BP. Mechanical behavior of 3D woven composites. Mater Des
2015; 67: 261–271.
[30] Khatkar V and Behera BK. Experimental investigation of composite leaf spring rein-
forced with various fiber architecture. Adv Compos Mater 2020; 29: 129–145.