Advertisement

Rapid manufacturing of woven comingled flax/polypropylene composite structures

  • Imed Derbali
  • Svetlana Terekhina
  • Laurent Guillaumat
  • Pierre Ouagne
Original Research
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

The use of natural fibre reinforced composites such as flax fibre / polypropylene is in a constant expansion particularly in automotive and marine industries due to their good mechanical properties, low density and thus, lightness, low environmental impact, low cost, recyclability, renewable properties of flax fibres and a minimum energy intake during their process. One of the major challenges of thermoplastic composites for the automotive industry is to manufacture finished parts in a single processing step within a minimum amount of time. For this purpose, a stamping airflow device was specifically developed. It is designed to produce woven comingled composite parts from comingled woven fabrics such as flax/polypropylene in only 200 s. Firstly, preliminary tests and the optimization of processing parameters were performed. Then, a quasi-static mechanical characterization of the formed parts was realized. By using criteria based on mechanical properties, the optimal process parameters such as the level of pressure, temperature, holding time and cooling rate so that to obtain the lowest voids rate were determined. Finally, a comparison of the mechanical properties of parts obtained from using the new manufacturing process and a conventional thermo-compression process is presented to demonstrate the interest and the level of performance achieved by this original and fast manufacturing device.

Keywords

Flax/polypropylene comingled fabric Rapid manufacturing Thermo-compression Void effect Mechanical characterization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We warmly thank Angers Metropole Regional Foundation for supporting this researching work and DEPESTELE group for supplying the comingled flax-PP fabrics used in this work.

Compliance with ethical standards

We confirm that this work is original and has not been published elsewhere nor is currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Shah DU (2013) Developing plant fibre composites for structural applications by optimising composite parameters: a critical review. J Mater Sci 48:6083–6107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baley C (2002) Analysis of the flax fibres tensile behaviour and analysis of the tensile stiffness increase. Comp Part A : Appl Sci and Manuf 33(7):939–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yan L, Chouw N, Jayaraman K (2014) Flax fibre and its composites – A review. Comp Part B 56:296–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shah D, Schubel P, Clifford M (2013) Can flax replace E-glass in structural composites? A small wind turbine blade case study. Comp Part B 52:172–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zimniewska M et al (2012) Natural Fiber textile structures suitable for composite materials. J of Natur Fib 9:229–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Duflou J, Yelin D, Acker K, Dewulf W (2014) Comparative impact assessment for flax fibre versus conventional glass fibre reinforced composites: are bio-based reinforcement materials the way to go? CIRP Ann 63(1):45–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sharma S, Sutcliffe M, Chang S (2003) Characterisation of material properties for draping of dry woven composite material. Comp Part A 34(12):1167–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ouagne P, Soulat D, Allaoui S, Hivet G (2010) Mechanical properties and forming possibilities of a new generation of flax woven fabrics. Proceeding of the 10th international conference on textile Composite (Texcomp), p. 345, LilleGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rudd C, Long A, Kendall K, Mangin C (1997) Liquid Moulding technologies. England, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shekar I et al (2011) Hybrid fabrics for structural composites. J of Industr Text 41(1):70–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fitoussi J, Bocquet M, Meraghni F (2013) Effect of the matrix behavior on the damage of ethylene–propylene glass fiber reinforced composite subjected to high strain rate tension. Comp Part B 45(1):1181–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Picher-Martel G, Levy A et PH (2016) Compression moulding of carbon/PEEK randomly-oriented strands composites: A 2D finite element model to predict the squeeze flow behaviour. Comp Part A 81:69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
  14. 14.
    Charlet K, Jernot J, Breard J, Gomina M (2010) Scattering of morphological and mechanical properties of flax fibres. Industr Crops and Prod 32(3):220–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Charlet K et al (2009) Influence of an Agatha flax fibre location in a stem on its mechanical, chemical and morphological properties. Comp Sci and Technol 69:1399–1403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Le Duigou A et al (2014) A multi-scale study of the interface between natural fibres and a biopolymer. Comp Part A 65:161–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Madsen B, Thygesen A, Lilholt H (2007) Plant fibre composites – porosity and volumetric interaction. Comp Sci and Technol 67:1584–1600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yan L, Yiu-Wing M, Lin Y (2000) Sisal fibre and its composites: a review of recent developments. Comp Sci and Technol 60:2037–2055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Peterlin A (1975) Plastic deformation of polymers with fibrous structures. Colloid and Polym Sci 253:809–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Samuels RJ (1985) Polymer structure: the key to process property control. Polym Eng & Sci 25:864–874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ouagne P, Bizet L, Baley C, Breard J (2010) Analysis of the film stacking processing parameters for PLLA/flax fibre biocomposites. J of Comp Mat 44:1201–1215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bourmaud A, Le Duigou A, Gourier C (2016 Jun) Baley C (2016). Influence of processing temperature on mechanical performance of unidirectional polyamide 11–flax fibre composites. Ind Crop Prod 84:151–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gassan J, Bledzki AK (2001) Thermal degradation of flax and jute fibers. J Appl Polym Sci 82:1417–1422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Destaing F (2012) Contribution à l’étude du comportement mécanique de matériaux composites biosourcés lin/PA11 élaborés par thermocompression. Dissertation, University of Caen NormandieGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Berges M et al (2016) Influence of moisture uptake on the static, cyclic and dynamic behaviour of unidirectional flax fibre-reinforced epoxy laminates. Comp Part A 88:165–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liang S, Gning P-B, Guillaumat L (2015) Quasi-static behaviour and damage assessment of flax/epoxy composites. Mater and Design 67:344–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yan L, Qian L, Hao M (2015) The voids formation mechanisms and their effects on the mechanical properties of flax fiber reinforced epoxy composites. Comp Part A 72:40–48Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Oksman K (2001) High quality flax fibre composites manufactured by the resin transfer moulding process. J of Reinf Plastics and Comp 20:621–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Georgiopoulos P, Christopoulos A, Koutsoumpis K, Kontou E (2016) The effect of surface treatment on the performance of flax/biodegradable composites. Comp Part B 106:88–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Martin N, Davies P, Baley C (2016) Evaluation of the potential of three non-woven flax fiber reinforcements: Spunlaced, needlepunched and paper process mats. Industr Crops and Prod 83:194–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Couture A, Lebrun G, Laperrière L (2016) Mechanical properties of polylactic acid (PLA) composites reinforced with unidirectional flax and flax-paper layers. Comp Struct 154:286–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Madsen B, Lilholt H (2003) Physical and mechanical properties of unidirectional plant fibre composites—an evaluation of the influence of porosity. Comp Sci and Technol 63:1265–1272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Angelov I et al (2007) Pultrusion of a flax/polypropylene yarn. Comp Part A 38:1431–1438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Oksman K (2000) Mechanical properties of natural fibre mat reinforced thermoplastic. Appl Compos Mater 7:403–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Nassiopoulos E, Njuguna J (2015) Thermo-mechanical performance of poly(lactic acid)/flax fibre-reinforced biocomposites. Mater & Design 66:473–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kong K, Park P, Lee J (2014) Study on structural design and analysis of flax natural fiber composite tank manufactured by vacuum assisted resin transfer molding. Mater Letters 130:21–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gu H, Liyan L (2008) Research on properties of thermoplastic composites reinforced by flax fabrics. Mater & Design 29:1075–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu L, Zhang B-M, Wang D-F, Wu Z-J (2006) Effects of cure cycles on void content and mechanical properties of composite laminates. Comp Struct 73:303–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Campbell F, Mallow A, Browning C (1995) Porosity in carbon fiber composites an overview of causes. J of Advan Mater 26:18–33Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    White S, Kim Y (1996) Staged curing of composite materials. Comp Part A 27:219–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Gu Y, Li M, Zhang Z, Sun Z (2010) Void formation model and measuring method of void formation condition during hot pressing process. Polym Compos 31:1562–1571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Grunenfelder L, Nutt S (2010) Void formation in composite prepregs – effect of dissolved moisture. Comp Sci and Technol 70:2304–2309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Koushyar H, Alavi-Soltani S, Minaie B, Violette M (2012) Effects of variation in autoclave pressure, temperature, and vacuum-application time on porosity and mechanical properties of a carbon fiber/epoxy composite. J Compos Mater 46:1985–2004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Herrmann A, Nicke J, Riedel U (1998) Construction materials based upon biologically renewable resources—from components to finished parts. Polym Degrad and Stab 59:251–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gourier C, Le Duigou A, Bourmaud A, Baley C (2014) Mechanical analysis of elementary flax fibre tensile properties after different thermal cycles. Comp Part A 64:159–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mohanty AK, Khan MA, Sahoo S, Hinrichsen G (2000) Effect of chemical modification on the performance of biodegradable jute yarn-biopol® composites. J. of. Mater Sci 35:2589–2595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Van de Velde K, Kiekens P (2003) Effect of material and process parameters on the mechanical properties of unidirectional and multidirectional flax/polypropylene composites. Comp Struc 62:443–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Alcock B et al (2006) The mechanical properties of unidirectional all-polypropylene composites. Comp Part A 37:716–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratoire Angevin de Mécanique, Procèdes et innovAtion, Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Art et MétiersAngers Cedex 01France
  2. 2.Laboratoire Génie de Production, (LGP), Université de Toulouse, INP-ENITTarbes CEDEXFrance

Personalised recommendations