Advertisement

Carbon Fiber—Vinyl Ester Interfacial Adhesion Improvement by the Use of an Epoxy Coating

  • Frederic Vautard
  • Lanhong Xu
  • Lawrence T. Drzal
Chapter

Abstract

With the use of composites expanding into larger structural applications, vinyl ester matrices which are not dependent on an autoclave cure and are more environmentally resistant to water absorption are being investigated. The degree of adhesion between the fiber and matrix has been recognized to be a critical factor in determining the performance of fiber-reinforced composites. The mechanical properties of carbon fiber–vinyl ester composites are low compared to carbon fiber–epoxy composites, partly because of lower interfacial adhesion. The origins of this limitation were investigated. The influence of preferential adsorption of the matrix constituents on the interfacial adhesion was not significant. However, the high cure volume shrinkage was found to be an important factor. An engineered interphase consisting of a partially cross-linked epoxy sizing that could chemically bond to the carbon fiber and form an interpenetrating network with the vinyl ester matrix was found to sharply improve the interfacial adhesion. The mechanisms involved in that improvement were investigated. The diffusion of styrene in the epoxy coating decreased the residual stress induced by the volume shrinkage of the vinyl ester matrix. The optimal value of the thickness was found to be a dominant factor in increasing the value of the interfacial shear strength according to a 2D non-linear finite element model.

Keywords

Carbon Fiber Interfacial Adhesion Vinyl Ester Interfacial Shear Strength Epoxy Coating 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgment

Ashland, Huntsman and Hexcel Co. are sincerely thanked for having donated samples of vinyl ester resins (Derakane 411-C50 and Derakane 510A-40), Jeffamine T-403 and AS4 carbon fibers respectively. Financial support for this research from the US Office of Naval Research (Y. Rajapakse) and Florida Atlantic University (R. Granata) is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    Kang HM, Yoon TH, Bump M, Riffle JS (2001) Effect of solubility and miscibility on the adhesion behavior of polymer-coated carbon fibers with vinyl ester resins. J Appl Polym Sci 79:1042–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim IC, Yoon TH (2000) Enhanced interfacial adhesion of carbon fibers to vinyl ester resin using poly(arylene ether phosphine oxide) coatings as adhesion promoters. J Adhes Sci Technol 14:545–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Robertson MAF, Bump MB, Vergese KE, McCartney SR, Lesko JJ, Riffle JS, Kim IC, Yoon TH (1999) Designed interphase regions in carbon fiber reinforced vinyl ester matrix composites. J Adhes 71:395–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schultz J, Nardin M (1990) Interfacial adhesion, interphase formation and mechanical properties of single fiber polymer based composites. In:Ishida H (ed) Controlled Interphases in Composites Materials, Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schultz J, Nardin M (1994) Some physico-chemicals aspects of the fibre–matrix interphase in composite materials. J Adhes 45:59–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nardin M, Asloun EM, Schultz J (1990) Physico-chemical interactions between carbon fibers and PEEK. In:Ishida H (ed) Controlled Interphases in Composite Materials, Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jennings CW (1972) Surface roughness and bond strength of adhesives. J Adhes 4:25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Drzal LT, Sugiura N, Hook D (1997) The role of chemical bonding and surface topography in adhesion between carbon fibers and epoxy matrices. Compos Interfaces 5:337–354Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schultz J, Lavielle L, Martin C (1987) The role of the interface in carbon–fiber epoxy composites. J Adhes 23:45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Raghavendran VK, Drzal LT, Askeland P (2002) Effect of surface oxygen content and roughness on interfacial adhesion in carbon fiber–polycarbonate composites. J Adhes 16:1283–1306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Owens DK, Went RC (1969) Estimation of the surface free energy of polymers. J Appl Polym Sci 13:1741–1747CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fowkes FM (1987) Role of acid—base interfacial bonding in adhesion. J Adhes Sci Technol 1:7–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fowkes FM (1984) Acid—base contribution to polymer-filler interactions. Rubber Chem Tech-nol 57:328–344Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hook KJ, Agrawal RK, Drzal LT (1990) Effects of microwave processing on fiber-matrix adhesion. 2. Enhanced chemical bonding epoxy to carbon-fibers. J Adhes 32:157–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pisanova E, Mäder E (2000) Acid—base interaction and covalent bonding at a fiber—matrix interface:contribution to the work of adhesion and measured adhesion strength. J Adhes Sci Technol 14:415–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bikerman JJ (1961) The Science of Adhesive Joints, Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paiva MC, Nardin M, Bernardo CA, Schultz J (1997) Influence of thermal history on the results of fragmentation tests on high-modulus carbon-fiber/polycarbonate model composites. Compos Sci Technol 57:839–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mandell JF, Grande DH, Tsiang T-H, McGarry FJ (1986) Modified microdebonding test for direct in situ fiber/matrix bond strength determination in fiber composites. Composite Materials:Test and Design ASTM STP 893, American Society for Testing and Materials, pp. 87–108Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    The Interfacial Testing System (ITS). The Dow Chemical Company. Freeport, TX.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ho H, Drzal LT (1996) Evaluation of interfacial mechanical properties of fiber reinforced composites using the microindentation method. Compos A 27:961–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Weitzsacker CL, Xie M, Drzal LT (1997) Using XPS to investigate fiber/matrix chemical interactions in carbon-fiber-reinforced composites. Surf Interface Anal 25:53–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brill RP, Palmese GR (2000) An investigation of vinyl-ester-styrene bulk copolymerization cure kinetics using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. J Polym Sci 76:1572–1582Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Launikitis MB (1982) Vinyl ester resins. In:Lubin G (ed.), Handbook of Composites, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Penn LS, Chiao TT (1982) Epoxy resins. In:Lubin G (ed.), Handbook of Composites, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Xu L, Drzal LT (2003) Influence of cure volume shrinkage of the matrix resin on the adhesion between carbon fiber and vinyl ester resin. Proc of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Soc (Feb 23–26, 2003 Myrtle Beach, SC)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xu L (2003) Interfacial engineering of the interphase between carbon fibers and vinyl ester resin. Ph.D. thesis, Michigan State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li P, Yu Y, Yang X (2008) Effects of initiator on the cure kinetics and mechanical properties of vinyl ester resins. J Appl Polym Sci 109:2539–2545CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frederic Vautard
    • 1
  • Lanhong Xu
    • 1
  • Lawrence T. Drzal
    • 1
  1. 1.Composite materials and Structures CenterMichigan State UniversityEast LansingUSA

Personalised recommendations