Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 44, Issue 20, pp 5588–5594 | Cite as

Effect of fibre concentration, temperature and mould thickness on weldline integrity of short glass-fibre-reinforced polypropylene copolymer composites

  • S. Hashemi
  • P. Onishi


The effect of fibre concentration, temperature and mould thickness on tensile strength of single- and double-gated injection-moulded polypropylene copolymer reinforced with 0, 10, 20, 30 and 40 wt% short glass fibre was studied at a fixed strain-rate of 7.58 × 10−3 s−1 between 23 and 100 °C. It was found that tensile strength of single-gated mouldings, σc, increased with increasing volume fraction of fibres, ϕf in a nonlinear manner and decreased with increasing temperature in a linear manner. However, for ϕf values in the range 0–10% a simple additive rule-of-mixtures adequately described the variation of σc with ϕf over the entire temperature range 23–100 °C studied here. Tensile strength of double-gated mouldings like their single-gated counterparts decreased linearly with increasing temperature. The presence of weldlines significantly reduced tensile strength of double-gated composite mouldings but had little effect on tensile strength of the matrix. Weldline integrity factor, F σ, defined as weldline strength divided by unweld strength, decreased with increasing ϕf but increased with increasing temperature. A linear dependence was found between F σ and temperature. Mould thickness had no significant effect upon weld and unweld tensile strengths and consequently had no significant effect upon weldline integrity factor.


Tensile Strength Differential Scanning Calorimetric Fibre Volume Fraction Entire Temperature Range Fibre Concentration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Nabi ZU, Hashemi S (1998) J Mater Sci 33:2985. doi: 10.1023/A:1004362915713 CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hashemi S (2002) J Plast Rubber Compos 31:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hashemi S (2007) eXPRESS Polym Lett 1:688CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wilberforce S, Hashemi S (2009) J Mater Sci 44(5):1333. doi: 10.1007/s10853-008-3233-6 CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hashemi S, Lepessova Y (2007) J Mater Sci 42:2652. doi: 10.1007/s10853-006-1358-z CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khamsehnezhad A, Hashemi S (2008) J Mater Sci 43:6344. doi: 10.1007/s10853-008-2918-1 CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Necar M, Irfan-ul-Haq M, Khan Z (2003) J Mater Process Technol 142:247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fu SY, Lauke B, Mader E, Yue CY, Hu X (2000) Composites A 31:1117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fisa B (1985) Polym Compos 6:232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thomason JL (2002) Compos Sci Technol 62:1455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thomason JL (2001) Compos Sci Technol 61:2007CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mouhmid B, Imad A, Benseddiq N, Benmedakhene S, Maazouz A (2006) Polym Testing 25:544CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.London Metropolitan Polymer CentreLondon Metropolitan UniversityLondonUK

Personalised recommendations