Effects of Sizing Materials on the Properties of Carbon
Fiber-Reinforced Polyamide 6,6 Composites
N. Gamze Karsli,1 Cem Ozkan,2 Ayse Aytac,1 Veli Deniz1
1
Department of Chemical Engineering, Engineering Faculty, Kocaeli University, 41380 Izmit, Kocaeli, Turkey
2
Department of Polymer Science and Technology, Kocaeli University, 41380 Izmit, Kocaeli, Turkey
This article aims to study the effect of the sizing mate-
rials type on the mechanical, thermal, and morphologi-
cal properties of carbon fiber (CF)-reinforced
polyamide 6,6 (PA 6,6) composites. For this purpose,
unsized CF and sized CFs were used. Thermogravimet-
ric analysis was performed, and it has been found that
certain amounts of polyurethane (PU) and PA sizing
agents decompose during processing. The effects of
sizing agent type on the mechanical and thermome-
chanical properties of all the composites were investi-
gated using tensile, Izod impact strength test, and
dynamic mechanical analysis. Tensile strength values
of sized CF-reinforced composites were higher than
that of unsized CF-reinforced composites. PA and poly-
urethane sized CF-reinforced composites exhibited the
highest impact strength values among the other sized
CF-reinforced composites. PU and PA sized CF-
reinforced composites denoted higher storage modulus
and better interfacial adhesion values among the other
sizing materials. Scanning electron microscope studies
indicated that CFs which were sized with PU and PA
have better interfacial bonding with PA 6,6 matrix
among the sized CFs. All the results confirmed that PA
and PU were suitable for CF’s sizing materials to be
used for PA 6,6 matrix. POLYM. COMPOS., 34:1583–
1590, 2013. VC 2013 Society of Plastics Engineers
INTRODUCTION
Thermoplastic polymer based composite materials
have received more interest for structural applications
over the last 40 years. Particularly, carbon fiber (CF)-
reinforced thermoplastic composites are widely used in
aerospace, enginery, marine, and automobile industries
due to their superior properties such as high-specific
strength and stiffness, lower density, and flexible designs
Correspondence to: Ayse Aytac; e-mail: aaytac@kocaeli.edu.tr
Ayse Aytac is currently at Chemical Engineering Department, Engineer-
ing Faculty, Kocaeli University, 41380 Izmit, Kocaeli, Turkey.
Contract grant sponsor: Ministry of Science Industry and Technology of
Turkey; contract grant number: SANTEZ 01020.STZ.21011-2.
DOI 10.1002/pc.22556
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com).
C 2013 Society of Plastics Engineers
V which was able to bond potentially with the hydroxyl and
POLYMER COMPOSITES—2013
[1,2]. In addition, the polyamides (PAs) have been studied
as matrix material in thermoplastic composite due to their
low cost, ease of handling, and good mechanical proper-
ties when processed with CF reinforcement [2–7].
Properties of CF-reinforced composites are determined
not only by the properties of the CF and the matrix, but
also are influenced by the mutual interphase interactions
among these constituents [1]. A better interaction between
the matrix and fibers help to transfer the load efficiently
from fibers through the matrix, resulting in structural
coherence and stronger composites [8]. Because of the
unreactive nature of thermoplastic polymers and the sur-
face of CF, the interaction of the CFs and thermoplastic
matrices is usually weak [3]. Due to these reasons, the
majority of efforts have been focused on increasing fiber-
matrix adhesion using various modification methods [9].
Some of these methods have been developed to change
the fibers surface wettability for the improvement the
adhesion between CF and polymer matrix [8]. Sizing or
coating is a kind of simple and efficient method used for
these purposes [10]. In this method, CF surfaces are
coated by a sizing material, which is usually in the form
of solution or emulsion composed of polymeric compo-
nents [1]. It was reported in literature that use of sized
CF in the composites plays a crucial role for the control-
ling of mechanical properties [10].
In literature there are some studies which were investi-
gated the influence of sizing agent type on the properties
of CF-reinforced polymer composites. Dilsiz and Wight-
man [11] investigated the influences of polyurethane (PU)
and poly(ether imide) sizing on the surface energy of CFs.
The surfaces of unsized and sized fibers were also ana-
lyzed by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. They found
that the sizing materials on the CF surface reduced the sur-
face energy and decreased the number of hydroxyl groups
on the fiber surface. Dai et al. [1] studied the effect of siz-
ing on surface properties of CF and the fiber=epoxy (EPO)
interfacial adhesion by comparing with unsized CF. They
found that there was a low amount of activated carbon

EPO groups, on the surfaces of unsized CF. Zhang et al.
[8] analyzed the effect of the molecular weight of sizing
agents on the properties of CF-reinforced composites using
different characterization techniques. Their study showed
that the moderate molecular weight of sizing agent
enhanced the adhesion between the fiber and matrix. In
another study, Zhang et al. [12] aimed to study the influ-
ence of the concentration of the sizing agent on the proper-
ties of CF and CF’s composites. They showed that
concentrations of the sizing agent have different effect on
the wetting performance of CFs. They used sizing agent in
three different concentrations and they found that the opti-
mum sizing concentration was 1.5% (by wt). Luo et al.
[13] investigated the role of sizing on CF and the mecha-
nism of adhesion in CF=polymer matrix composites. They
used two types of sizing materials on CFs for this purpose.
The results of atomic force microscopy image analysis
showed that surface of carbon became smoother after siz-
ing. Besides, the total and the polar component surface
energies of the sized CF have found to be decreased
slightly when compared with unsized CF. Xu et al. [14]
modified the polyacrylonitrile-based CFs with nitric acid
and maleic anhydride (MA) to improve the interaction
between CF surface and polyimide (PI) matrix. They
investigated the characteristic changes on the surface after
modification and surface reactions taken place using vari-
ous characterization techniques. They suggested that the
chemical modification of CF surface with MA might fol-
low the Diels Alder reaction mechanism. Clark and Secrist
[15] characterized the mechanical properties of nylon 6,6
composites reinforced with the four different CFs which
were treated with different sizing agents and methods.
These treatments were air oxidation, anodic oxidations and
two different nylon compatible sizing agents. They per-
formed fiber length distribution analysis and they found
similar fiber length distributions for all the samples stud-
ied. Their results showed that tensile, impact strengths and
electrical conductivity could be affected by modification of
the surface treatment of CF.
The aim of this study is to examine the influence of
sizing agent type on the performance of CF-reinforced
polyamide 6,6 (PA 6,6) composites. Unsized CF and CFs
which were sized with five different kinds of sizing
agents were used in this study. Thermogravimetric analy-
sis (TGA) was performed for investigation of thermal
degradation of sizing agents on the CF surface. The
effects of sizing agent type on the mechanical and ther-
momechanical properties of prepared composites were
investigated using tensile, Izod impact test and dynamic
mechanical analysis (DMA). Scanning electron micro-
scope (SEM) is also used for analyzing the fracture surfa-
ces of the composite materials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PA 6,6 (Eplamid 66) was used as matrix material and
supplied from Epsan (Turkey). CF was supplied from
1584 POLYMER COMPOSITES—2013
15480569, 2013, 10, Downloaded from https://4spepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pc.22556 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [18/04/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Turkey (Aksaca). CFs, unsized and sized with five differ-
ent kinds of sizing agents were used as reinforcement
materials. These sizing agents were PU, PA, PI, phenoxy
(PHE), and epoxy=phenoxy (EPO_PHE). PA 6,6 was
dried in a vacuum oven at 80 C for 24 h before the com-
pounding process. CF loading level in the composites was
fixed at 30% by weight and fiber length was 0.6 cm. The
composites were processed in a DSM Xplore micro-
compounder at 285 C, 100 rpm and 3 min. All the com-
pounds were subsequently injection molded using a
laboratory scale injection molding machine (DSM Xplore
12 ml Micro-Injection Molder) with barrel temperature
285 C, mold temperature 80 C; and injection pressure
was 10 bars.
Thermal degradation of sizing agents on the CF sur-
face was measured using Perkin Elmer TGA Instrument.
Measurements were performed between the temperatures
from 25 to 900 C, with a heating rate of 10 C=min under
nitrogen atmosphere.
Tensile tests were applied according to ASTM D 638-
10 [16] using a computer controlled Lloyd Instrument-
LRX Plus model universal testing machine. Tensile
strength and strain at break values of composites were
determined at 5 mm=min crosshead speed. The Izod
impact strength tests were performed according to ISO
180 by a Ceast machine model 9050 with a 5.5-J hammer
and impact velocity 3.46 m=s. Five specimens of each
sample were tested and the average value of each set of
tests were reported with standard deviations in both ten-
sile and impact characterizations.
DMA was carried out in the tension mode using
Metravib DMA50 analyzer. Storage modulus (E0 ) and tan
delta (tan d) values of composites were measured. Com-
posites were tested under the condition of 1.5 3 1025 m
dynamic displacement and 1 Hz frequency. The scanning
was carried out from 25 to 200 C at 1 C=min heating
rate.
Morphologies of tensile fractured surfaces of compo-
sites were examined using SEM (JEOL JSM-6510).
Before the examinations, surfaces of composites were
sputter coated with gold and palladium.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
TGA of Sized CFs
The thermal stability of sized CF, i.e., thermal resist-
ance of sizing materials has been analyzed using TGA
under nitrogen atmosphere. Initial decomposition temper-
ature (Td) and the decomposition temperature at maxi-
mum rate (maxTd) of the sizing material were determined.
TGA curves of CFs which sized with five different agents
were given in Fig. 1a–e and the thermal decomposition
data were listed in Table 1 as the Td and maxTd. It can be
seen from the TGA curves that the lowest decomposition
temperature is about 270 C and the highest temperature
at which weight loose was ended is approximately 500 C
DOI 10.1002/pc
 15480569, 2013, 10, Downloaded from https://4spepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pc.22556 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [18/04/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
FIG. 1. TGA curves of carbon fibers coated with different sizing materials, (a) PU, (b) PA, (c) EPO_PHE,
(d) PHE, and (e) PI.

for all the sizing agents studied. This is very critical,
because all the composites were compounded at 285 C
in microcompounder. As seen from these figures and
TABLE 1. Initial decomposition temperature Td ( C) and the decompo-
sition temperature at maximum rate maxTd ( C) values of sizing
materials.
Table 1 that, PU and PA sizing materials start to decom-
pose at 270 and 280 C, respectively. It can be inferred
from this results that some amounts of PU and PA sizing
agents decompose during processing. The other sizing
materials, on the other hands, are thermally stable at the
processing temperatures.

max
Sizing material Td ( C) Td ( C) Tensile Test of Composites

PU 270 386 Tensile properties of composites as a function of fiber

EPO_PHE 305 425 sizing agent type were given in Figs. 2–4. Stress–strain
PI 310 387 curves of neat PA 6,6 and composites can be shown in
PHE 345 433 Fig. 2 and tensile strength and strain at break values were
PA 280 448
obtained from these curves. It can be seen from Fig. 2

DOI 10.1002/pc POLYMER COMPOSITES—2013 1585


FIG. 2. Stress–strain curves of neat PA 6,6 and PA 6,6=CF
composites.
that a ductile type of curve was obtained for neat PA 6,6
and the behavior of PA 6,6 matrix became brittle with the
addition of short CF. Young’s modulus of the composites
increased with addition of fiber, while the toughness of
composites decreased.
Tensile strength values of composites with respect to
sizing agent type were given in Fig. 3. It is shown in the
figure that tensile strength of composites increased with
the addition of CF. In addition to this, tensile strength of
sized CF-reinforced composites was higher than that of
unsized CF-reinforced composites. According to this
result, surface sizing enhances the interfacial bonding by
modifying chemical structure of the CF surface, hence
promoting more fiber–matrix interaction at the interface
and provides better adhesion between fiber and matrix. It
is known that better adhesion between fiber and matrix
facilitates stress transfer from matrix to fiber [17,18]. In
this study, the maximum tensile strength value was
observed with PA sized CF-reinforced composites.
Increase in tensile strength values with the addition of PA
FIG. 3. Effect of sizing agent type on the tensile strength values of PA
6,6=CF composites.
1586 POLYMER COMPOSITES—2013
15480569, 2013, 10, Downloaded from https://4spepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pc.22556 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [18/04/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
FIG. 4. Effect of sizing agent type on the strain at break values of PA
6,6=CF composites.
sized CF can be explained by the enhanced adhesion
between fiber and PA 6,6 matrix.
Strain at break values of composites with respect to
different sizing materials were given in Fig. 4. As it is
known, the strain at break value of neat PA 6,6 decreases
with the addition of the fiber. This is due to the decreas-
ing of the chain mobility of the polymeric matrix [17]. In
this study, the highest strain at break value was obtained
for the PA sized CF-reinforced composite. Besides, it was
observed that strain at break values of sized CF-
reinforced composites were higher than unsized CF-
reinforced composite. It can be concluded that surface
treatment using sizing materials enhanced the tensile
strain at break values of the composites by improving the
interfacial adhesion. Moreover, sizing treatment methods
hindered the debonding and pull out of the fibers as dem-
onstrated in Fig. 5a and b [19].
Izod Impact Strength Test of Composites
The unnotched impact energy is the sum of the energy
absorbed in fracture initiation and crack propagation [20].
The PA 6,6 matrix is a relatively high strength and duc-
tile thermoplastic polymer. Generally it can be said that
the addition of fiber into polymer matrix makes the poly-
mer more ductile and brittle by means of reducing impact
strength of fiber-reinforced composites [20,21]. As a
result, the fracture behavior of the matrix is very different
before and after the addition of fibers [22]. Moreover, the
addition of fiber to the matrix makes the initiation of
cracks easier because of the high stress concentration at
fiber ends [20].
The unnotched Izod impact energy values of composites
with respect to sizing agent type were given at Fig. 6.
Although the impact strength value of neat PA 6,6 was
measured as 80 kJ=m2, the impact strength values of CF-
reinforced composites were between 50 and 60 kJ=m2 [21].
PA and PU sized CF-reinforced composites gave the high-
est impact energy values among the other sized CF-
DOI 10.1002/pc

FIG. 5. Scanning electron micrographs of tensile fracture surfaces of PA 6,6=CF composites, (a) unsized
(31000) and (b) PA (31000).
reinforced composites. Besides, the lowest impact strength
values were obtained for the samples of unsized CF-
reinforced composites. In other words, sizing process
increased the impact strength independently from the sizing
materials types studied. This increase can be explained by
the increase of interaction between fiber surface and matrix.
A ductile polymer which has high impact strength absorbs
most of the impact energy and an initiated crack expands
slowly. But in the fiber-reinforced systems, if the adhesion
between the fiber and matrix is weak, the crack does not
pass through the fiber and prefers to propagate along the
weak fiber=matrix interfaces, and the poor adhesion
between the fiber and matrix increases the stress concentra-
tion sites in the matrix [22]. Therefore, impact strength of
the fiber-reinforced composites decreased due to the poor
adhesion between fiber and interface. Because of this it can
be said that, PU and PA sizing materials adhered to the PA
6,6 matrix better than the other sizing materials.
DMA of Composites
The dynamic mechanical properties of CF which
unsized and sized with five different kinds of sizing
FIG. 6. Effect of sizing agent type on the impact strength values of PA
6,6=CF composites.
DOI 10.1002/pc
15480569, 2013, 10, Downloaded from https://4spepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pc.22556 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [18/04/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
agents reinforced PA 6,6 composites were investigated to
elucidate interface interactions under dynamic conditions.
The effect of sizing agent type on the storage modulus
(E0 ) and damping factor values (tan d) at 30% fiber load-
ing level were given in Figs. 7 and 8, respectively as a
function of temperature. It can be seen from Fig. 7 that
there has been a remarkable increase in the storage modu-
lus values of PA 6,6 matrix with the addition of the CFs.
This increment is due to the increasing of composites’
stiffness with the reinforcing effect of the CFs. Besides,
there is an effect of the sizing materials’ type on the stor-
age modulus of the composites, because of the more effi-
cient stress transfer from fiber to matrix [23,24]. The
effect of sizing agent type on the storage modulus of
composites can be seen by comparing storage modulus
values of unsized CF reinforced and different sized CF-
reinforced composites. It is seen from Fig. 7 that the stor-
age modulus of sized CF-reinforced composites exhibited
higher values than the unsized CF-reinforced composites.
Although PU sized CF-reinforced composites had the
highest storage modulus among all samples, PA sized
CF-reinforced composites gave slightly lower values than
these values.
FIG. 7. Effect of sizing agent type on the storage modulus values of
PA 6,6=CF composites.
POLYMER COMPOSITES—2013 1587
 15480569, 2013, 10, Downloaded from https://4spepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pc.22556 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [18/04/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
The ratio of loss modulus to storage modulus is calcu-
lated as the damping factor (tan d). The area under the
damping factor curve gives an indication of the total
amount of energy that can be absorbed by the material
during an experiment [25,26]. In literature, it was
reported that fibers take over the most part of the stress
and allow only a small part of it to strain the interface
and energy dissipation occurs at the interface. Therefore,
a composite material with stronger interfacial bonding
between the fibers and matrix will be in tendency to dis-
sipate less energy and showing low intensity of damping
peak with compare to a material with poorly bonded
interface [23,27–29]. The effects of surface sizing of
fibers on the damping factor values of the composites
were evaluated and damping factor of composites were
FIG. 8. Effect of sizing agent type on the tan delta values of PA
6,6=CF composites.
given in Fig. 8. Unsized CF-reinforced composites

FIG. 9. Scanning electron micrographs of tensile fracture surfaces of PA 6,6=CF composites, (a) unsized
(3500), (b) PU (3500), (c) PA (3500), (d) EPO_PHE (3500), (e) PHE (3500), and (f) PI (3500).

1588 POLYMER COMPOSITES—2013 DOI 10.1002/pc


exhibited higher tan d peak value as compared to sized
CF-reinforced composites. This result may be attributed
to more energy dissipation due to the internal friction at
the poorly bonded interface [30]. The PU sized CF-
reinforced composites showed lower tan d peak intensity
than the other sized CF-reinforced composites. Because
there is a relation between the tan d peak intensity and
fiber–matrix adhesion, lower tan d peak intensity obtained
for PU sized CF-reinforced composite could be thought
as an evidence of better adhesion between PU sized CF
and PA 6,6 matrix.
SEM Analysis of Composites
Scanning electron micrographs of the tensile fracture
surfaces of unsized and sized CF-reinforced composites
were given in Fig. 9a–f. In the case of unsized, EPO_-
PHE, PI, and PHE sized CF; the fiber surfaces were clean
and smooth. Besides, pullout of fibers from the matrix
was seen from Fig. 9d–f. As a result, It can be clearly
seen in these figures there have been poor adhesion
between EPO_PHE, PI, and PHE sized CF and PA 6,6
matrix. On the other hand, it is seen in Fig. 9b and c that
the fiber surfaces completely coated with the polymer
layer. This is most probably due to the improved interfa-
cial adhesion and better interactions between PA and PU
sized CF and PA 6,6 matrix. Improved interfacial adhe-
sion increases the tensile properties of composite and it
was confirmed by the tensile test results [31,32].
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, the effect of different sizing materials on
the properties of the CF-reinforced PA6,6 composites was
studied. Mechanical, thermomechanical, and morphologi-
cal properties of the prepared composites were investi-
gated as a function of sizing material types. TGA results
showed that PU and PA sizing materials start to decom-
pose at 270 and 280 C, respectively. It can be inferred
from this results that some amounts of PU and PA sizing
agents decompose during processing. Tensile test results
revealed that sized CF-reinforced composites’ tensile
strength and strain at break values were higher than that
of unsized CF-reinforced composites. The maximum ten-
sile strength and strain at break values were observed for
CF sized with PA-reinforced composites. Izod impact test
results showed that adding CF to PA 6,6 decreased the
impact strength value of neat matrix. However, PA and
PU sized CF composites gave the highest impact energy
values among the other sized CF-reinforced composites.
According to DMA results, addition of CFs to the PA 6,6
matrix increased the storage modulus values of the com-
posites remarkably. PU and PA sized CF-reinforced com-
posites gave higher storage modulus. Besides, PU sized
fiber-reinforced composites showed lower tan d peak
intensity among the other sized CF-reinforced composites.
Because the tan d peak intensity is related to fiber matrix
DOI 10.1002/pc
15480569, 2013, 10, Downloaded from https://4spepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pc.22556 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [18/04/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
adhesion, lower tan d peak intensity of PU sized CF-
reinforced composite corresponds to better adhesion
between PU sized CFs and PA 6,6 matrix. It was seen in
the scanning electron micrographs that PU and PA sized
CFs have better interfacial bonding with PA 6,6 matrix
among the other sized CFs. The results obtained in this
study confirmed that the selection of sizing materials had
a critical effect on the properties of CF-reinforced poly-
meric composites. As a result, PA and PU are suitable
CF’s sizing materials to be used for PA 6,6 matrix.
REFERENCES
1. K. Dai, F. Shi, B. Zhang, M. Li, and Z. Zhang, Appl. Surf.
Sci., 257, 6980 (2011).
2. E.C. Botelho, Ł. Figiel, M.C. Rezende, and B. Lauke, Com-
pos. Sci. Technol., 63, 1843 (2003).
3. S. Erden, K.K.C. Ho, S. Lamoriniere, A.F. Lee, H. Yildiz,
and A. Bismarck, Plasma Chem. Plasma, P., 30, 471
(2010).
4. J. Li, Appl. Surf. Sci., 255, 2822 (2008).
5. E.C. Botelho and M.C. Rezende, Polym. Plast. Technol., 45,
6 (2006).
6. E.C. Botelho, C.L. Nogueira, and M.C. Rezende, J. Appl.
Polym. Sci., 86, 3114 (2002).
7. S. Molnar, S. Rosenberger, J. Gulyas, and B. Pukanszky, J.
Macromol. Sci. B, 38, 721 (1999).
8. R.L. Zhang, Y.D. Huang, L. Liu, Y.R. Tang, D. Su, and
L.W. Xu, Appl. Surf. Sci., 257, 1840 (2011).
9. T. Ramanathan, A. Bismarck, E. Schulz, and K.
Subramanian, Compos. Sci. Technol., 61, 1703 (2001).
10. R.L. Zhang, Y.D. Huang, L. Liu, Y.R. Tang, D. Su, and
L.W. Xu, Appl. Surf. Sci., 257, 3519 (2011).
11. N. Dilsiz and J.P. Wightman, Colloid Surf. A, 164, 325
(2000).
12. R.L. Zhang, Y.D. Huang, N. Li, L. Liu, and D. Su, J. Appl.
Polym. Sci,. 125, 425 (2012).
13. Y. Luo, Y. Zhao, Y. Duan, and S. Du, Mater. Des., 32, 941
(2011).
14. B. Xu, X. Wang, and Y. Lu, Appl. Surf. Sci., 253, 2695
(2006).
15. J.M. Clark and D.R. Secrist, J. Thermoplast. Compos., 1,
232 (1988).
16. Standard test method for tensile properties of plastics,
ASTM D638–10 (2010).
17. P. Threepopnatkul, N. Kaerkitcha, and N. Athipongarporn,
Compos. Part B: Eng., 40, 628 (2009).
18. G.N. Farahani, I. Ahmad, and Z. Mosadeghzad, Polym.
Plast. Technol., 51, 634 (2012).
19. L. Liu, J. Yu, L. Cheng, and W. Qu, Compos. Part A: Appl.
Sci., 40, 669 (2009).
20. M. Joshi, S.N. Maiti, and A. Misra, Polym. Compos., 15,
349 (1994).
21. J.M. Crosby and T.R. Drye, J. Reinforc. Plast. Compos., 6,
162 (1987).
22. S.Y. Fu and B. Lauke, Compos Part A: Appl. Sci., 29, 631
(1998).
POLYMER COMPOSITES—2013 1589

23. S. Mohanty, S.K. Verma, and S.K. Nayak, Compos. Sci.
Technol., 66, 538 (2006).
24. M.S. Huda, L.T. Drzal, A.K. Mohanty, and M. Misra, Com-
pos. Part B: Eng., 38, 367 (2007).
25. C. Guo, L. Li, and Q. Wang, Wood Sci. Technol., 46, 257
(2012).
26. M. Ashida and T. Noguchi, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 30, 1011
(1985).
27. S.A. Paul, C. Sinturel, K. Joseph, G.D.G. Mathew, L.A.
Pothan, and S. Thomas, Polym. Eng. Sci., 50, 384 (2010).
1590 POLYMER COMPOSITES—2013
15480569, 2013, 10, Downloaded from https://4spepublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pc.22556 by Indian Institute Of Technology, Wiley Online Library on [18/04/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
28. J.M. Felix and P. Gatenholm, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 42
(1991) 609–620.
29. M. Ashida and T. Noguchi, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 29, 661
(1984).
30. B.K. Goriparthi, K.N.S. Suman, and N.M. Rao, Compos.
Part A: Appl. Sci., 43, 1800 (2012).
31. Y. Zhao, J. Qiu, H. Feng, M. Zhang, L. Lei, and X. Wu,
Chem. Eng. J., 173, 659 (2011).
32. S. Shokoohi and A.A. Azar, J. Reinforc. Plast. Compos., 28,
2131 (2009).
DOI 10.1002/pc