Effect of Glass Fiber and Filler Volume

Fraction Variation on Mechanical

Properties of GFRP Composite

Anurag Gupta, Hari Singh and R. S. Walia

Abstract Unsaturated polyesters are important matrix resins used for glass fiber-
reinforced composites/plastics. The strength of glass fiber-reinforced polyester
composite is mainly related to the glass content of the material and the arrange-
ment of glass fibers, but the mechanical properties can be altered by introducing
some filler materials in glass fiber-reinforced polymer (GFRP) composites. In this
paper, an effort is made to study the effect of different % of filler material on
mechanical properties of the GFRP. Hand layup process is used for manufacturing
the GFRP composite strips for testing. E-type glass fiber chopped strand mat
(CSM) is used as reinforced material, unsaturated polyester resin is used for
matrix, and calcium carbonate (CaCO3) is used as filler material. During manu-
facturing the specimens, the polyester resin % is kept fixed and effect of filler and
glass fiber percentage variation is evaluated in terms of tensile strength, impact
strength and toughness variation. In the experiments, the increase in the volume
fraction of E-glass fiber CSM increased the material flexural, tensile, and impact
strength. The consequences show that appropriate procedures are applied with the
proper choices. When the CaCO3 ratio increases, particles could cluster, and this
causes deviation in strength variation curves, but it has also been observed that the
finishing of specimen is better in case of higher filler volume fraction.

Keywords GFRP  Composites  Mechanical properties

A. Gupta (&)  H. Singh

Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra,
Haryana, India
e-mail: anurag_k2@yahoo.com
H. Singh
e-mail: hsingh_nitk@rediffmail.com
R. S. Walia
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Delhi Technological University, New Delhi, India
e-mail: waliaravinder@yahoo.com

S. S. Khangura et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Research 407

and Innovations in Mechanical Engineering, Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering,
DOI: 10.1007/978-81-322-1859-3_38,  Springer India 2014
408 A. Gupta et al.

1 Introduction

Polymers and their composites are emerging as viable alternative products to

metal-based ones in many common and advanced engineering applications (ASM
Handbook 1992). Composite materials are made by combining two materials
where one of the materials is reinforcement (fiber) and the other material is a
matrix (resin). The combination of the fiber and matrix provides characteristics
superior to either of the materials alone. Some examples of composite materials
are plywood, reinforced concrete, glass fiber and polyester resin, and graphite and
epoxy resin. The principal advantage of these materials is the very high strength-
to-weight ratio, which makes them attractive in aircrafts, spacecrafts, cars, boats,
and sport equipment.
The ease of fabrication, the availability of a good choice of materials from both
thermoplastic and thermoset varieties and economic viability have made the
advent of these newer materials for industries ranging from automobile to sports
goods (Derrien et al. 2000). The many uses of these materials in space and
aeronautical industry-related applications are well known (Merhi et al. 2006).
Just as any chef knows that ‘‘secret herbs and spices’’ can turn an ordinary
recipe into a culinary masterpiece, proper selection of resin fillers and additives
used to formulate a resin system can result in the fabrication of polymeric com-
posites with optimal properties. In commercial applications, and often in research
studies, little consideration is given to specific ingredients in resin formulation as
composites are specified based exclusively on reinforcement and resin constituent
materials. However, general specification of only the reinforcement and resin is
not sufficient because seemingly insignificant variations can have profound effects
on the properties of composite materials.
Orientation and distribution of the reinforcement in the components have sig-
nificant consequences on the mechanical properties and the final dimensions of the
components (Nageotte et al. 2000; Rosato and Rosato 2005). Many do not realize
what significant effects seemingly minor formulation changes can have. Just as
careful consideration is given to the selection of appropriate fiber reinforcement
and matrix materials for a given application, similar consideration should be given
to the selection of fillers and additives used to formulate the mixed resin systems.
Significant economic implications can result if these materials are not fully
considered.
The purpose of use of fillers can be divided into two basic categories (1) to
improve the properties of the material and (2) to reduce the cost of component.
Common fillers used for thermoplastics include mineral fillers, such as calcium
carbonate, talc, and wollastonite. Filler materials are also used extensively with
polyester resins for a variety of reasons, such as cost reduction of the molding,
facilitation of the molding process, and imparting specific properties to the
molding. Fillers are often added in quantities up to 50 % of the resin weight
although such an amount affects the flexural and tensile strengths of the laminates
(Cheon et al. 1999). The use of fillers can be beneficial in laminating or casting of
Effect of Glass Fiber and Filler Volume Fraction Variation 409

thick components where otherwise considerable exothermic heating can occur.

Addition of certain fillers can also contribute to increase the heat resistance of the
laminate (Hart-Smith 1996). Fillers also affect processing by increasing the vis-
cosity of resin mixes. The viscosity rise is related to the particle size distribution.
Increased viscosity may be beneficial or detrimental, depending on the composite
manufacturing applications (Gupta et al. 1999). In the present work, the effect of
silica and calcium carbonate fillers in the presence of glass fiber reinforcement on
tensile strength, impact strength, and flexural strength of woven glass fiber com-
posites has been studied. The glass fiber volume has been kept minimal so that the
effect of fillers is not subdued.
The study on such economical filler is necessary to ensure that mechanical
properties of the product are not affected adversely by their addition. A large number
of materials have been studied for their use as filler in polymer, but only few of them
are found to deal with the material system containing fibers simultaneously (Gupta
et al. 2001). The most commonly used categories of fillers include calcium car-
bonate, kaolin clay, and alumina trihydrate (ATH). In the composite industry, the
selection of filler is typically based on general properties associated with the cate-
gories of fillers. Here in this paper, the effect of calcium carbonate is under con-
sideration. Fillers are necessary for the reduction in cost as well as the improvement
of specific properties such as chemical resistance, heat resistance, dimensional
stability, hardness, surface smoothness, and shrinkage (Dalenberg 1984).

2 Manufacturing Technique

Hand layup method was used to fabricate the composite. A transparent polyester
film is used as liner and unsaturated polyester resin manufactured by Morex
Petrochem Pvt. Ltd premixed with some amount of accelerator, i.e., Cobalt
naphthalate; initiator, i.e., methyl ethyl keton peroxide (MEKP); and filler CaCO3
is applied on the surface of the polyester liner. Then, sheet of glass fiber CSM
manufactured by Goa Glass Ltd is laid down on it and again CSM is wetted by pre
mixed resin. Different number of layers was added depending upon the glass
content required by placing layers one by one. Fibers were assured for complete
impregnation in the resin using washer rollers. Samples were then cured at room
temperature for 2 days.

2.1 Composite Specimen Composition

Batch size Unsaturated Polyester resin—1 kg.

Cobalt naphthalate (accelerator)—2 % of resin mass.
Initiator (MEKP)—5 % of resin mass.
CaCO3 (Filler)—20 to 60 % as per composition of specimen.
410 A. Gupta et al.

Table 1 Composition of Polyester (%) Filler (%) E-glass (%)

composite
1 30 60 10
2 30 55 15
3 30 50 20
4 30 45 25
5 30 40 30
6 30 35 35
7 30 30 40
8 30 25 45
9 30 20 50

CSM (300 gm/m2)—10 to 60% as per composition of specimen.

The compositions of different test performed are given in Table 1.

2.2 Mechanical Testing

The tensile, flexural, and impact strengths of these composite materials were
evaluated at 25 C according to standard procedures (Colclough and Daniel 1998;
Wypych 2000; Gardner 2000; ASTM International 2010). Tensile testing of
specimens was carried out on a universal tensile testing machine (ENKAY
Enterprises, New Delhi) having capacity of 600 KN. While the tensile strength of
samples was calculated using Eq. (1)
S ¼ P=BD ð1Þ

where S = tensile strength (N/mm2 = MPa), P = load KN or Newton, B = width

of sample (15 mm), D = thickness of sample (6 mm) (Fig. 1).
Flexural strength of the composites was tested on a universal testing machine
(ENKAY Enterprises, New Delhi) having capacity of 600 tons. The flexural
strength of samples was calculated using Eq. (2).

S ¼ 3PL=2BD2 ð2Þ

where S = flexural strength (N/mm2 = MPa), P = load (KN or Newton),

B = width of sample (15 mm), D = thickness of sample (10 mm), L = span
length of flexural fixture (100 mm) (Fig. 2).
Impact strength of composites was tested on universal impact testing machine
(Paras Enterprises, New Delhi) having capacity of 29.4 J. Equation (3) was used to
calculate impact strength of specimens:

S ¼ Impact energy=Area of Sample ð3Þ

Effect of Glass Fiber and Filler Volume Fraction Variation 411

Fig. 1 Specimen for tensile test

Fig. 2 Specimen for flexural

test

Fig. 3 Specimen for impact

test

where S = impact strength (MPamm), impact energy is in joule and the area
(width 9 thickness) of the sample is in mm2 (Fig. 3).
Four specimens of each composition were manufactured for each testing and
the average results are shown in next section.

3 Results and Discussion

3.1 Density

Calculated specific gravity values of the specimens are given in Fig. 4. As shown
in the figure, densities of the composites decreased with the increase in E-glass
content. The change in density showed a linear fall except some exceptions.
412 A. Gupta et al.

Fig. 4 Density versus %

fiber volume

Fig. 5 Flexural strength

versus % fiber volume

3.2 Flexural Strength

Flexural strengths were calculated, and results are given in Fig. 5. As the fiber
volume fraction increases, flexural strength increases too. In this study, resin was
used 30 % by weight, which seems adequate to gain higher strength to composite
in higher fiber concentrations. Lower resin concentrations could not provide
enough wetting properties, which would cause a dramatic drop in strength values.

3.3 Tensile Strength

As expected, fiber incorporation in matrix increased the tensile strength of the

material. Tensile strengths of the composites were found to increase with fiber as
shown in Fig. 6, resembling to flexural strengths. Clustering problem can also be
seen in tensile test results. In these results, it was also seen that particular shaped
filler has no distinctive effect on strength values of the composite. Here, strength
was under control of the fiber content.
Effect of Glass Fiber and Filler Volume Fraction Variation 413

Fig. 6 Tensile strength

versus % fiber volume

Fig. 7 Impact strength

versus % fiber volume

3.4 Impact Strength

It is known that particular reinforcements cause fall in toughness of the composite.

So increase in filler concentration was expected to decrease the impact strength of
the composite, whereas fiber provided an improved impact resistance. Same as the
flexural and tensile strength, dimensional advantages of fibers could improve the
impact strength. The increase in impact strength with increasing fiber concentra-
tion is observed in Fig. 7.

4 Conclusion

It is has been seen that as the glass fiber concentration increases, the mechanical
properties of composites also improved. In the experiments, the increase in the
volume fraction of E-glass fiber CSM increased the material flexural, tensile, and
impact strength. The consequences show that appropriate procedures are applied
414 A. Gupta et al.

with the proper choices. When the CaCO3 ratio increases, particles could cluster,
and this causes deviation in strength variation curves, but it has also been observed
that the finish of specimen is better in case of higher filler volume fraction. So a
compromise can be done in between finish and strength, and optimum composition
can be formulated for specific application. To avoid cluster formation of CaCO3 in
resin, proper stirring should be done and particle size should be small.

References

ASM International (1992) ASM handbook, vol 18. ASM International, Materials Park, USA
ASTM International (2010) D638: 2010: Standard test method for tensile properties of plastics
Cheon SS, Lim TS, Lee DG (1999) Impact energy absorption characteristics of glass fiber hybrid
composites. Compos Struct 46:267–278
Colclough GW Jr, Daniel DP (1998) Engineered materials. Compos ASM 1:161–163
Dalenberg DP (1984) Long fiber thermoset molding compounds. In: Plastic fillers and
reinforcements, Regional technical conference, Atlanta, Society of Plastics Engineers, Oct
1984
Derrien K, Fitoussi J, Guo G, Baptiste D (2000) Prediction of the effective damage properties and
failure result for SMC composites. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 185:93–107
Gardner CH (2000) Engineering plastics. ASM, p 222
Gupta N, Karthikeyan CS, Sankaran S, Kishor (1999) Material characterization. J Mater Sci Lett
11:86
Gupta N, Barar BS, Woldesenbet E (2001) Effect of filler addition on the compressive and impact
properties of glass fibre reinforced epoxy. Bull Mater Sci 24(2):219–233
Hart-Smith LJ (1996) A re-examination of the analysis of in-plane matrix failures in fibrous
composite laminates. Compos Sci Tech 56:107–121
Merhi D, Michaud V, Comte E, Manson J-AE (2006) Predicting sizing dependent bending
rigidity of glass fibre bundles in SMC. Compos A 37:1773–1786
Nageotte VM, Maazouz A, Peix G, Bres S (2000) Methodologies for the characterization of glass
fibre orientation and distribution in large components molded from SMC. Polym Testing
22:867–873
Rosato D, Rosato D (2005) Reinforced plastics handbook, 3rd edn. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 127–137
Wypych G (2000) Handbook of fillers: A definitive user’s guide and databook, 2nd edn. ChemTec
Publishing, Toronto, pp 824–829