Materials Research Express

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Experimental evaluation and numerical validation of bending and impact

behaviours of hybrid composites with various stacking arrangements
To cite this article before publication: Sathiyamoorthy Margabandu et al 2019 Mater. Res. Express in press https://doi.org/10.1088/2053-
1591/ab54e7

Manuscript version: Accepted Manuscript

Accepted Manuscript is “the version of the article accepted for publication including all changes made as a result of the peer review process,
and which may also include the addition to the article by IOP Publishing of a header, an article ID, a cover sheet and/or an ‘Accepted
Manuscript’ watermark, but excluding any other editing, typesetting or other changes made by IOP Publishing and/or its licensors”

This Accepted Manuscript is © 2019 IOP Publishing Ltd.

During the embargo period (the 12 month period from the publication of the Version of Record of this article), the Accepted Manuscript is fully
protected by copyright and cannot be reused or reposted elsewhere.
As the Version of Record of this article is going to be / has been published on a subscription basis, this Accepted Manuscript is available for reuse
under a CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 licence after the 12 month embargo period.

After the embargo period, everyone is permitted to use copy and redistribute this article for non-commercial purposes only, provided that they
adhere to all the terms of the licence https://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc-nd/3.0

Although reasonable endeavours have been taken to obtain all necessary permissions from third parties to include their copyrighted content
within this article, their full citation and copyright line may not be present in this Accepted Manuscript version. Before using any content from this
article, please refer to the Version of Record on IOPscience once published for full citation and copyright details, as permissions will likely be
required. All third party content is fully copyright protected, unless specifically stated otherwise in the figure caption in the Version of Record.

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address 130.237.165.40 on 11/11/2019 at 10:14

Page 1 of 15 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2

1
2
3
4 Experimental evaluation and numerical validation of bending and
5 impact behaviours of hybrid composites with various stacking
6
7 arrangements
8

pt
9 Sathiyamoorthy Margabandu1, Senthilkumar subramaniam2*
10 1
Research scholar, School of Mechanical Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology,
11 Vellore, Tamilnadu, India.
12
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8080-7749
13
Email: sathiyamoorthy.rm@vit.ac.in

cri
14
2
15 * Corresponding Author, Associate professor, School of Mechanical Engineering, Vellore
16 Institute of Technology, Vellore, Tamilnadu, India.
17 ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8765-1652
18
19
Email: ssenthilkumar@vit.ac.in
20

us
21 Abstract
22
23 In recent years, the fiber-based composites are preferred as alternate materials for traditional
24 metallic materials and alloys in numerous structural applications. The paper deals with the
25
26
influence of fabric stacking patterns on the flexural and impact properties of laminated
an
27 jute/carbon hybrid composites in the epoxy matrix. The composite laminates were prepared
28 with four layers of fabrics, which are stacked in different sequences by the hand-layup method.
29
30
The flexural and impact behaviours of the prepared composite test specimens were
31 experimentally studied as per ASTM standards. The experimental results revealed that the
32 hybrid laminates with natural jute fabric as core and carbon fabric at outer surfaces exhibited a
dM
33
flexural strength of 401.82 MPa and impact strength of 22.5 kJ/m2. The 3D solid models of the
34
35 composite specimens were imported to Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software to validate the
36 flexural and impact strength with specific experimental load conditions. The experimental and
37
predicted FEA results were compared and observed that a good agreement between the results.
38
39
40 Keywords
41
42 Jute fiber, Carbon fiber, Stacking sequences, Mechanical properties, Hybrid laminates, Finite
43
pte

element analysis.
44
45 1. Introduction
46
47 Over the past era, polymer composites are used in numerous applications like automotive,
48
49
aircraft, marine, space ships, sports-goods, fishing rods etc. to get high specific strength,
50 stiffness, better fatigue performances, corrosion resistance and enhanced properties at low cost
51
ce

[1]. The use of natural fibers namely banana, bamboo, coir, flax, jute, hemp, sisal, vetiver etc.
52 as reinforcing agents in polymer composites is increasing nowadays due to its several benefits
53
54
like low density, high availability, renewability, eco-friendly nature, biodegradable and
55 inexpensive [2]. Among all the natural fibers, jute fibers have attracted much interest in
56 research community because of their better physical and mechanical properties [3]. The
Ac

57 specific strength and specific modulus of the jute fibers are considered to be superior to that of
58
glass fibers [4]. Furthermore, the following benefits can be achieved by using jute fiber as filler
59
60 over synthetic (glass or carbon) fibers such as jute fibers are available from renewable
 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2 Page 2 of 15

1
2
3 resources, abundant in nature, light in weight, decomposable, good acoustic properties, low
4
5 thermal conductivity, low manufacturing cost, less pollution during production and no health
6 issues upon disposal at the end of its lifetime [5-8]. Despite these advantages of jute fibers,
7 they have some drawbacks like lower mechanical properties, higher water absorption nature
8 than synthetic fibers [9]. Hence the utilization of these bio-fibers in polymer composites cannot

pt
9
10
offer the desired performances. To overcome these shortcomings of natural fibers, the natural
11 fibers are combined with synthetic fibers (glass, carbon and Kevlar) in a polymer matrix
12 through hybridization technique, which results the hybrid composites [10]. The hybrid
13 composite materials offer the combined properties of individual fiber materials with relatively

cri
14
15
low cost [11,12].
16
Silva et al. [13] reported that natural fibers (sisal and jute) can be used as an alternate for man-
17
18 made fibers (glass and carbon) in several usages in view of easy availablity and low cost. Alkali
19 treatment of lignocellulosic fibers enhanced the fibers-matrix adhesion [14]. Jawaid and
20 Yahaya et al. [15,16] stated that composites with bidirectional bio-fibers possesses better

us
21 mechanical performances than the composites with short and unidirectional bio-fibers. Pandita
22 et al. [17] studied the impact of inclusion of reinforcing constituents on the mechanical
23 behaviours of jute/glass hybrid composites. Authors concluded that stacking the thin glass
24
25
fabrics at the surface sides of jute composites enriched the overall performances of the
26 composites. Rafiquzzaman et al. [18] developed glass-jute hybrid composites to investigate
27
28
29
an
their mechanical properties by experimental and numerical approach. They reported that
incorporation of optimal amount of natural jute fiber significantly improved the mechanical
properties. Lenda et al. [19] fabricated the hybrid jute-carbon composites with three different
30 volume fractions (0.47, 0.58 and 0.68) of fibers to assess the moisture intake responses and its
31 influences on impact strength and found that impact energy absorption of all the composites
32
dM
33
were reduced with increasing in water content.
34
35 Flynn et al. [20] prepared the hybrid flax/carbon reinforced epoxy composites with different
36 fiber volume fractions to examine the mechanical properties. It was found that the hybrid
37 flax/carbon composites exhibited higher mechanical strength and layering arrangements of
38
39
fabrics in the laminated composites have noticeable effect on their mechanical characteristics
40 [21]. Karahan et al. [22] explored the tensile, impact and water intake performances of flax,
41 jute, carbon and jute/carbon reinforced hybrid composites. Authors found that inclusion of
42 carbon fibers with jute enhanced the tensile and impact properties of the hybrids. Ramesh et al.
43
pte

44
[23] evaluated the outcome of hybridization on the tensile, flexural and impact properties of
45 sisal-jute-glass hybrid composites. Authors suggested that the combination of jute and sisal
46 with glass fiber enriched the mechanical properties. Sezgin et al. [24] developed hybrid
47 laminates with jute, glass, carbon fibers in polyester matrix to explore the impact of stacking
48
orders on mechanical (tensile and impact) properties and concluded that hybrid laminates with
49
50 carbon fabric at middle showed highest tensile strength and the laminate with glass fabric at
51
ce

outer side had higher impact resistance. Abdelbaky [25] considered the jute/E-glass/carbon
52 fabric composite laminates with different stacking order to evaluate the tensile and flexural
53
performances. It was found that layering configurations has no influences on tensile properties;
54
55 however, composites with carbon fabrics as external layers exhibits maximum flexural
56 properties.
Ac

57
58 The literature review revealed that most of the research work focused on incorporation of jute
59 with glass and carbon fibers in polyester matrix. However, limited investigations have been
60 reported on examining the impact of layering order. The present work involves fabrication of
Page 3 of 15 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2

1
2
3 hybrid jute/carbon composites in epoxy matrix material with novel interply configurations. i.e.
4
5
hybridization of jute with carbon fabrics in four stacking orders. The influence of hybridization
6 and layering sequences of fabrics on bending and impact behaviours of these hybrid composites
7 have been evaluated experimentally and validated numerically.
8

pt
9 2. Materials and methods
10
11 2.1 Constituents
12
13 A plain weave pattern jute fabric was purchased from Jute Cottage, Bangalore, India and the

cri
14 carbon fabric (2 x 2 twill weave pattern) was procured from S.M. Composites, Chennai, India
15
16 are used as reinforcements. The surface weight of jute and carbon fabrics are 264 g/m2 and 300
17 g/m2 respectively. Figure 1 shows the jute and carbon fabrics. The epoxy resin-LY556 with
18 hardener-HY951 was preferred as the matrix system. Table 1 gives the chemical composition
19 of jute and mechanical properties of jute and carbon fibers. The properties of epoxy resin and
20

us
21 hardener are tabulated in Table 2.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
an
30
31
32
dM
33
34
35
36
37 Fig. 1 a) Jute fabric b) Carbon fabric
38
39 Table 1. Properties of jute and carbon fibres
40
41
Chemical composition Mechanical properties
42 Properties Jute fibre [26] Properties Jute fibre [27] Carbon fibre [a]
43
pte

44 Cellulose (wt%) 62.6 Density (g/cm3) 1.3-1.5 1.8

45
46 Hemi Cellulose (wt%) 23.2 Tensile strength (MPa) 393-800 3500-5000
47
48 Lignin (wt%) 15.86 Young’s modulus 10-55 260
49 (GPa)
50 Ash (wt%) 1.29 Elongation at break (%) 1.5-1.8 1.4-1.8
51
ce

52 Supplier: aS.M. Composites (Chennai, India).

53
54
55
56
Ac

57
58
59
60
 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2 Page 4 of 15

1
2
3 Table 2. Properties of resin and hardener. [28]
4
5 Properties Epoxy resin-LY556 Hardener-HY951
6
7 Appearance Clear liquid -
8

pt
9 Viscosity at 25ᵒC (mPa s) 10,000-12,000 50-100
10
11 Density (g/cm3) 1.15-1.20 1.20-1.25
12
13
Tensile strength (MPa) 83-93 -

cri
14 Tensile modulus (GPa) 0.3-0.6 -
15
16
17
18 2.2 Laminates fabrication
19
20 The composite laminates with four fabric plies were made by hand-layup method. Four sets of

us
21 laminates with different layering orders of fabrics (jute and carbon) were prepared for
22
23 experimental work as presented in Table 3. Primarily, all the fabrics were cut to the size of 300
24 mm X 300 mm. A homogeneous matrix system was prepared by blending the epoxy and
25 hardener for 10 minutes with the proportion of 10:1. By using brush, the prepared mixture was
26
27
28
29
an
applied over the tile slab and the first layer of chemically (NaOH) treated jute fabric was laid
on it. The same procedure was repeated for the remaining layers. Another tile slab was placed
over the stacked plies to attain equal thickness of the composite laminate. Subsequently the
30
31 dead weight of 35 kg was kept upon the fabricated laminate, which is cured for 24 hours at
32 ambient temperature. The dead weight was removed and the laminates were placed in an oven
dM
33 for post-curing at 50°C for 3 hours. The test specimens were cut to the dimensions prescribed
34
35
in ASTM standard using diamond cutter, to conduct the flexural and impact tests.
36
37
Table 3. Configurations of hybrid jute/carbon composite laminates.
38
39
Specimen Stacking Fabric arrangements
40 symbol sequences
41 S1 J/J/J/J Jute/Jute/Jute/Jute
42 S2 C/C/C/C Carbon/Carbon/Carbon/Carbon
43
pte

44 S3 J/C/C/J Jute/Carbon/Carbon/Jute
45
46
S4 C/J/J/C Carbon/Jute/Jute/Carbon
47 J-jute fabric, C-carbon fabric.
48
49 3. Mechanical tests
50
51
ce

3.1 Flexural test

52
53 Flexural properties of the prepared test coupons were studied according to ASTM D7264
54 standard [29] using Instron 8801 Universal Testing Machine (UTM) at loading rate of 2
55
56
mm/min with three-point bending fixture as displayed in Figure 2(a). Rectangular specimens
Ac

57 with 13 mm width and 4 mm thickness were used. During flexural test, 32:1 span-to-thickness
58 ratio was maintained. Figure 2(b) represents the flexural test samples. Flexural test was carried
59 out on five specimens from individual group and the mean value was considered.
60
Page 5 of 15 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

pt
9
10
11
12
13

cri
14
15
16 Fig. 2 a) Three point bending setup b) Flexural Test samples
17
18 3.2 Impact test
19
20 Impact testing of the prepared test coupons was performed based on ASTM D256 procedure

us
21 [30] by using pendulum impact system (Make: Tinius Olsen, Model: IT 504, USA), which is
22 illustrated in Figure 3(a). Rectangular specimens with the dimensions of 64 mm x 12.7 mm x
23
4 mm were used for the test. Prior to testing, all the samples were notched for 2.5 mm using
24
25 notching apparatus. Figure 3(b) shows the specimens before the test. By testing five identical
26 samples from individual stacking sequences, the mean impact strength was tabulated.
27
28
29
an
30
31
32
dM
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
pte

44 Fig. 3 a) Impact tester and b) Impact test samples

45
46 3.3 Numerical simulation
47
48 In order to validate the experimental data on the composite laminates, numerical simulation
49 has been carried out through Finite Element Analysis (FEA) using ANSYS 18.0 software. The
50 Static Structural module and Explicit Dynamics module were used to solve structural problems
51
ce

under static loads and dynamic forces respectively. The FEA analysis performed in three steps:
52
53 i) Modeling and preprocessing: part modelling, assigning material properties,
54 meshing and applying loads and boundary conditions
55
ii) Solving: Preparing and solving the linear equation of an element
56
iii) Post-processing: Generating the results as graphs, tables or animations under
Ac

57
58 different loads.
59 In the initial step, 3D solid model of the composite specimens was created with Solidworks.
60 The model was imported to the ANSYS followed by Composite Pre/post (ACP) tool was used
 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2 Page 6 of 15

1
2
3 to generate the models with four layers identical to the fabricated laminates. The laminates are
4
5
considered to be orthotropic in nature and the material properties are listed in Table 4. Followed
6 by material properties characterization, the model was meshed using 20 nodes Solid 186-3D
7 structural elements. It exhibited quadratic displacement behavior and supports plasticity, hyper
8 elasticity, creep and large deflection. This element is well suitable to model curved boundaries

pt
9 and can tolerate irregular shapes without much loss of accuracy. Figure 4 shows the meshed
10 models of the flexural and impact test specimens. The meshed models are subjected to the
11
appropriate boundary conditions and loads. To end with, the static and dynamic analysis have
12
13
been carried out to obtain the flexural and impact responses.

cri
14 Table 4. Composite material properties for numerical simulation
15
16
Parameters Jute Carbon
17
18 Density ρ (Kg/m3) 1440 1600
19 Young’s modulus E11 (GPa) 23.95 47
20
Young’s modulus E22 (GPa) 0.98 47

us
21
22 Poisson’s ratio ν12 0.37 0.05
23 Shear modulus G12 (GPa) 0.42 5.1
24
25
26
27
28
29
an
30
31
32
dM
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40 Fig. 4 Meshed model of the (a) flexural and (b) impact test specimens
41
42 4. Results and discussions
43
pte

44 4.1 Flexural behaviour

45
46 Flexural properties of the composite laminates are generally influenced by the combined action
47 of compression on top ply, tension at bottom ply and shear at middle plies. The stacking
48
sequences of fabric plies in hybrid laminates had greater impacts on the flexural performances
49
50 of composites [31,32]. The influence of stacking patterns on flexural strength and modulus of
51 the tested specimens are illustrated in Figure 5 and Figure 6. From the figures, it is observed
ce

52 that the flexural strength and flexural modulus of the pure jute laminates, S1 is 51.09 MPa and
53 4.58 GPa, whereas for the pure carbon laminates, S2 is 378.10 MPa and 19.98 GPa
54
55 respectively. Also, it is visible that the hybrid composites S3 and S4 possess higher flexural
56 properties than pure jute fabric composites S1. It is evident that the hybridization of carbon
Ac

57 with jute improved the flexural properties. However, by comparing the flexural results of S3
58 (JCCJ) and S4 (CJJC), it is clear that the flexural responses of the composite laminates are not
59
60 only affected by hybridization, but also depends on stacking pattern of the fabrics [33,34].
Page 7 of 15 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2

1
2
3 According to Naveen et al. [35] flexural strength of hybrid composites is affected by the skin
4
5 layer of reinforced fabric, which is also evident here that the hybrid composites S4 with CJJC
6 stacking order offered maximum flexural properties than S3. This similar finding is observed
7 by Subagia and Jayabal et al. [36, 37] for hybrid coir/glass and carbon/basalt composite
8 materials. It was stated that stacking the high strength fabrics as skin plies and low strength

pt
9
10
fabrics as core plies, resulted in better improvement on flexural properties.
11
12 400

13 350

cri
14
Flexural Strength (MPa)

300
15
16 250

17 200 401.8
378
18
150
19
20 100

us
21 50
80.6
22 51
23 0
JJJJ CCCC JCCJ CJJC
24 Laminates
25
26 Fig. 5 Influence of stacking patterns on flexural strength of the hybrid jute/carbon laminates.
27
28
29
35
an
30
30
31
Flexural Modulus (GPa)

25
32
dM
33 20
34
35 15 31.59
36
37 10 19.98
38
39 5
40 4.58 4.03
41 0
42 JJJJ CCCC JCCJ CJJC

43 Laminates
pte

44
45 Fig. 6 Influence of stacking patterns on flexural modulus of the hybrid jute/carbon laminates.
46
47 4.2 FEA simulation results of flexural strength
48
49 The generated FEA model was validated by comparing the stress-strain characteristics of the
50 composite laminates obtained via experimental and simulated flexural test. Figure 7 shows the
51
ce

experimental and FEA simulated flexural stress-strain diagrams of the laminates. It is clear that
52
53
the stress-strain behaviour of numerical results exhibited the similar trend of experimental
54 findings. Also, the flexural stress found by the simulation was slightly higher than the
55 experimental method. It may be due to the reason, that during simulation the laminates was
56
treated as homogeneous and there are no voids and no crack formation in the developed
Ac

57
58 composites. In real time, the laminates are non-homogeneous which resulted in presence of
59 voids and occurrence of fiber-matrix crack during experimental flexural test. Total deformation
60
 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2 Page 8 of 15

1
2
3 of the developed numerical models is illustrated in Figure 8. The overall enhancement in the
4
5 flexural responses of the laminated composites are summarized in Table 4. It is noticed that the
6 simulated flexural results are in close coherence with experimental findings.
7
8

pt
9
10
11
12
13

cri
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

us
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
an
30
31
32
dM
33
34
35
36
37
38
39 Fig. 7 Experimental and FEA model flexural stress vs. strain curves (a) JJJJ, (b) CCCC, (c)
40 JCCJ and (d) CJJC composite laminates.
41
42
43
pte

44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
ce

52
53
54
55
56
Ac

57
58
59
60
Page 9 of 15 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

pt
9
10
11
12
13

cri
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

us
21
22
23
24
25 Fig. 8 Total deformation under flexural load of the composite laminates (a) JJJJ, (b) CCCC,
26 (c) JCCJ and (d) CJJC.
27
28
29
an
Table 5. Experimental and numerical results of flexural test for hybrid composite samples
30 Sample Flexural strength (MPa) Elongation at break (mm) Equivalent Strain
31 Experimental Numerical Experimental Numerical Experimental Numerical
32
dM
33 S1 51.09 55.85 2.88 3.01 0.0126 0.0128
34 S2 378.10 382.13 4.32 4.48 0.0240 0.0254
35
36 S3 80.62 83.32 6.23 6.53 0.0375 0.0377
37 S4 401.82 412.6 4.21 4.45 0.0141 0.0145
38
39
40
41 4.3 Failure mechanisms of flexural specimens
42
43 The fractured specimens, post to the flexural test were represented in Figure 9. It is clearly
pte

44 visible, that the composites were failed due to the combination of three stresses (compression,
45 shear and tensile) acted on the specimens under flexural loading conditions. Also, it is evident
46
47 that the delamination was occurred in pure carbon laminates S2 (CCCC) and the surface crack
48 occurred at the tensile side of hybrid laminates S3 (JCCJ). The SEM micrograph of the
49 fractured pure jute specimen (S1) and hybrid JCCJ specimen (S3) are displayed in Figure 10.
50 Figure 10 (a) shows that, existence of more voids and fiber pullouts due to improper adhesion
51
ce

52 of fiber and matrix in laminate S1 and Figure 10 (b) represents that occurrence of surface crake
53 at the bottom ply of the laminate S3 due to tension.
54
55
56
Ac

57
58
59
60
 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2 Page 10 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

pt
9
10
11
12
13

cri
14
15 Fig. 9 Fractured samples of flexural test.
16
17
18
19
20

us
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
an
30
31
32 Fig. 10 SEM micrograph of flexural fractured specimen (a) pure jute sample S1 and (b) JCCJ
dM
33 hybrid sample.
34
35 4.4 Impact strength
36
37 The influences of stacking patterns on the impact strength of jute/carbon reinforced hybrid
38 composite laminates are represented in Figure 11. The pure carbon fiber reinforced composites
39
40
S2 exhibited highest impact strength (40.8 kJ/m2) among the other composites. The pure jute
41 fabric reinforced composites S1 has poor impact strength (14.5 kJ/m2) compared to other
42 composites. The laminates S4 (CJJC) had higher impact strength (22.5 kJ/m2) than the
43 laminates S3 (JCCJ) i.e. (20.8 kJ/m2), caused by the fact, that higher impact strength of carbon
pte

44 fiber as skin layer in laminates S4 leads to more impact energy absorptions. This identical
45 behaviour was noticed by Athith et al [38]. On the other hand, the laminate S3 and S4 have
46
nearly similar impact strength. It is clear that the stacking pattern does not have significant
47
48
effect on impact properties. The fractured samples are displayed in Figure 12.
49
50
51
ce

52
53
54
55
56
Ac

57
58
59
60
Page 11 of 15 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2

1
2
3 45
4
5 40
6 35
7
Impact strength (kJ/m )
2

8 30

pt
9
25
10
11 20 40.8
12
13 15

cri
14 22.5
10 20.8
15
14.52
16 5
17
18 0
JJJJ CCCC JCCJ CJJC
19
20 Laminates

us
21
22 Fig. 11 Influence of stacking patterns on impact strength of the hybrid jute/carbon laminates
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
an
30
31
32
dM
33
34
35
36
37
38
39 Fig. 12 Fractured samples of impact test.
40
41 4.5 FEA simulation results of impact strength
42
43
pte

Figure 13 represents the impact energy contour plots of the numerical test. The absorbed impact
44 energy of the laminates obtained through simulation was rather higher than the experimental
45
46
results. The improvement in the impact energy is may be due to composites are assigned as
47 homogeneous materials during FEA simulation. The comparison of impact energy for the
48 composites obtained by the experimental and numerical method are tabularized in Table 5. It
49 is noticed that simulated results are in good coherence with experimental findings.
50
51
ce

52
53
54
55
56
Ac

57
58
59
60
 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2 Page 12 of 15

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

pt
9
10
11
12
13

cri
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

us
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
an
Fig. 13 Impact energy of the composite laminates (a) JJJJ, (b) CCCC, (c) JCCJ and (d) CJJC.
30 Table 6. Experimental and numerical results of impact test for hybrid composite samples
31
32 Sample Impact strength (kJ/m2)
dM
33
34 Experimental Numerical
35 S1 14.52 14.83
36
37 S2 40.8 40.16
38
39 S3 20.8 20.57
40
41 S4 22.5 22.60
42
43
pte

44
45 5. Conclusions
46
47 The experimental work was carried out to study the influences of layering patterns on the
48 flexural and impact responses of jute/carbon fabrics in epoxy matrix and the results were
49 numerically validated.
50
51 • The experimental results reveal the higher flexural strength (401.8 MPa) and modulus (31.59
ce

52
GPa) for the composites S4 with CJJC layering order among the other composite samples
53
54 due to the stacking arrangements of carbon fabric at outer surfaces and proper adhesion in
55 fiber/matrix interface.
56
• In the fabricated hybrid laminated composites, the composite S4 shows marginally higher
Ac

57
58 impact strength (22.5 kJ/m2) than the composite S3. Besides, no noticeable effect on the
59 impact strength was observed by the stacking arrangements of fabrics.
60
Page 13 of 15 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2

1
2
3
• Numerical validations for the developed composite model was performed by finite element
4
5 analysis and closer coherence were observed between the results. The slighter deviation in
6 the properties is due to the assumption that no void formation and proper bonding of
7 fiber/matrix during FEA simulation of the composites.
8 • The combination (CJJC) would be suitable for critical applications which require high

pt
9
flexibility with impact strength.
10
11 • The hybridization in the present study leads to less weight and low cost composite fabrication
12 with reduced environmental impacts by lowering the carbon foot prints.
13

cri
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

us
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
an
30
31
32
dM
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
pte

44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
ce

52
53
54
55
56
Ac

57
58
59
60
 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2 Page 14 of 15

1
2
3
4 References
5
6 1. Boopalan M, Niranjana M and Umapathy MJ. 2013 Study on the mechanical properties and
7 thermal properties of jute and banana fiber reinforced epoxy hybrid composites. Compos. Part
8 B 51 54-57.

pt
9 2. Vinayagamoorthy R and Rajeswari N. 2014 Mechanical performance studies on vetiveria
10 zizanioides/jute/glass fiber-reinforced hybrid polymeric composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 33
11
81-92.
12
13 3. Jawaid M, Abdul Khalil HPS, Bakar AA and Khanam NP. 2011 Chemical resistance, void
content and tensile properties of oil palm/jute fiber reinforced polymer hybrid composites.

cri
14
15 Mater Des 32 1014–1019.
16 4. Li X, Tabil LG, Panigrahi S. 2007 Chemical Treatments of Natural Fiber for Use in Natural
17 Fiber-Reinforced Composites: A Review. J. Polym Environ 15 25–33.
18 5. Begum K. and Islam M.A 2013 Natural Fiber as a substitute to Synthetic Fiber in Polymer
19
Composites: A Review. Res J Eng Sci 2 46-53.
20

us
21 6. Alam MM, Maniruzzaman M and Morshed MM 2014 Application and Advances in
22 Microprocessing of Natural Fiber (Jute)-Based Composites. Comp Mater Proc 7 243- 260.
23 7. Sanjay MR and Yogesha B 2016 Studies on Mechanical Properties of Jute/E-Glass Fiber
24 Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Composites. J Min Mater Char Eng 4 15-25.
25 8. Ashraf MA, Zwawi M, Mehran T, Kanthasamy R and Bahadar A 2019 Jute Based Bio and
26
27
28
29
an
Hybrid Composites and Their Applications. Fibers 7 77.
9. Saheb DN and Jog J. 1999 Natural fiber polymer composites: a review. Adv Polym Technol
18 351-363.
30 10. Jeyanthi S and Rani JJ. 2011 Improving mechanical properties by hybrid long fiber
31 reinforced composite for front beam of automotive. Eur J Sci Res 60 177–181.
32 11. Dhakal HN, Zhang ZY, Guthrie R, MacMullen J, Bennett N. 2013 Development of
dM
33 flax/carbon fibre hybrid composites for enhanced properties. Carbohydr Polym 96 1-8.
34
12. Rajkumar G, Srinivasan J and Suvitha L. 2015 Natural protein fiber hybrid composites:
35
36 Effects of fiber content and fiber orientation on mechanical, thermal conductivity and water
37 absorption properties. J Ind Text 44 709–724.
38 13. Silva FDA, Filho RDT, Filho JDAM, Fairbairn EDMR 2010 Physical and mechanical
39 properties of durable sisal fiber–cement composites. Constr. Build. Mater 24 777-785.
40 14. Jappes JW, Siva I. 2011 Studies on the influence of silane treatment on mechanical
41 properties of coconut sheath-reinforced polyester composite. Polymer-Plast Technol Eng 50
42
1600–1605.
43
pte

44 15. Jawaid M, Abdul Khalil HPS, Bakar AA. 2011 Woven hybrid composites: tensile and
45 flexural properties of oil palm–woven jute fibres based epoxy composites. Mater Sci Eng: A
46 528 5190–5195.
47 16. Yahaya R, Sapuan S, Jawaid M, Leman Z, Zainudin E. 2016 Effect of fibre orientations on
48 the mechanical properties of kenaf–aramid hybrid composites for spall-liner application.
49 Defence Technol 12 52–58.
50
51
17. Pandita SD, Yuan X, Manan MA, Chun H Lau H C, Subramanian S A and Wei J 2014
ce

52 Evaluation of jute/glass hybrid composite sandwich: Water resistance, impact properties and
53 life cycle assessment. J Reinf Plast Compos 33 14-25.
54 18. Rafiquzzaman M, Islam MM, Rahman MH, Talukdar MS and Hasan MN 2016 Mechanical
55 property evaluation of glass–jute fiber reinforced polymer composites. Polym Adv Technol 27
56 1308-1316.
Ac

57
19. Lenda TA and Mridha S 2011 Influence of moisture absorption on impact strength and
58
59 failure behavior of hybrid jute-carbon/epoxy composite. Adv Mater Res 264-265 457-462.
60
Page 15 of 15 AUTHOR SUBMITTED MANUSCRIPT - MRX-116334.R2

1
2
3 20.Flynn J, Amiri A and Ulven C 2016 Hybridized carbon and flax fiber composites for tailored
4
5
performance. Mater Des 102 21-29.
6 21. Fan Z, Santare MH, Advani SG. 2008 Interlaminar shear strength of glass fiber reinforced
7 epoxy composites enhanced with multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Compos Part A: Appl Sci
8 Manufact 39 540–54.

pt
9 22. Karahan M and Karahan N 2015 Investigation of tensile properties of natural and
10 natural/synthetic hybrid fiber woven fabric composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 34 795-806.
11
23. Ramesh M, Palanikumar K and Hemachandra Reddy K 2013 Mechanical property
12
13
evaluation of sisal-jute-glass fiber reinforced polyester composites. Compos Part B Eng 48 1-

cri
14 9.
15 24. Sezgin H and Berkalp OB 2016 The effect of hybridization on significant characteristics of
16 jute/glass and jute/carbon-reinforced composites. J Ind Text 47 283-296.
17 25. El-baky MAA 2017 Evaluation of mechanical properties of jute/glass/carbon fibers
18 reinforced hybrid composites. Fibers Poly 18 2417-2432.
19
26. Gujjala R, Ojha S, Acharya SK and Pal SK. 2014 Mechanical properties of woven jute-
20

us
21 glass hybrid reinforced epoxy composite. J Compos Mater 48 3445-3455.
22 27. Sathishkumar GK, Rajkumar G, Srinivasan K and Umapathy MJ 2018 Structural analysis
23 and mechanical properties of lignite fly-ash-added jute-epoxy polymer matrix composite. J
24 Reinf Plast Compos 37 90-104.
25 28. Kumar AP, Mohamed MN 2017 A comparative analysis on tensile strength of dry and
26
27
28
29
an
moisture absorbed hybrid kenaf/glass polymer composites. J Ind Text 47 2050-2073.
29. ASTM D7264 2007 Standard test method for flexural properties of polymer matrix
composite materials. ASTM International, West Conshohocken.
30 30. ASTM D256 2010 Standard test method for determining the izod pendulum impact
31 resistance of plastics. ASTM International, West Conshohocken.
32 31. Park R and Jang J 1997 Stacking sequence effect of aramid-UHMPE hybrid composites by
dM
33 flexural test method. Polym Test 16 549-562.
34
32. Amico SC, Angrizani CC and Drummond ML 2010 Influence of stacking sequence on the
35
36
mechanical properties of glass/sisal hybrid composites. J Reinf Plast Compos 29 179-189.
37 33. Banerjee AN, Saha N and Mitra B 1996 Flexural behavior of unidirectional polyethylene–
38 carbon fibers–PMMA hybrid composite laminates. J App Polym Sci 60 139-142.
39 34. Wan Busu WN, Anuar H, Ahmad SH, Rasid R and Jamal NA 2010 The mechanical and
40 physical properties of thermoplastic natural rubber hybrid composites reinforced with Hibiscus
41 cannabinus, L and short glass fiber. Ploy Plast Technol Eng 49 1315-1322.
42
35. Naveen J, Jawaid M, Zainudin ES, Sultan MTH and Yahaya R 2019 Mechanical and
43
pte

44 moisture diffusion behaviour of hybrid Kevlar/cocos nucifera sheath reinforced epoxy

45 composites. J Mater Res Technol 8 1308-1318.
46 36.Subagia IDGA, Kim Y, Tijing LD, Kim CS and Shon HK 2014 Effect of stacking sequence
47 on the flexural properties of hybrid composites reinforced with carbon and basalt fibers.
48 Compos Part B: Eng 58 251-258.
49 37. Jayabal S, Natarajan U and sathiyamurthy S 2011 Effect of glass hybridization and stacking
50
51
sequence on mechanical behaviour of interplay coir-glass hybrid laminate. Bull Mater Sci 34
ce

52 293-298.
53 38. Athith D, Sanjay MR, Yashas Gowda TG, Madhu P, Arpitha GR, Yogesha B and Omri
54 MA 2018 Effect of tungsten carbide on mechanical and tribological properties of jute/sisal/E-
55 glass fabrics reinforced natural rubber/epoxy composites. J Indus Text 48 713-737.
56
Ac

57
58
59
60