Flow and Fracture Behavior of Sand-Reinforced Low Density Polyethylene During Tensile Testing

  • Abdelrazek Y. Kandeil
  • Rouchdy R. Zahran

Abstract

Sand/low density polyethylene composite samples were prepared using injection molding. The effect of some processing and structural parameters on the flow and fracture behavior of the prepared samples was investigated. Typical processing parameters were melt and die temperatures. The investigated structural parameters were sand particle size and sand content.

Higher melt and die temperatures decrease the tensile strength and the modulus of elasticity for the various sand contents investigated, meanwhile, the ductility and toughness increase. Sand addition increases the tensile strength and the modulus of elasticity, as long as the sand size is smaller than 400 μm. Larger particle size weakens the structure. A maximum in the tensile strength, ductility and work done to fracture is observed for samples with a particle size of 400 μm. Adhesion and interlocking are responsible for the strengthening effect below 400 μm, while dewetting and interfacial friction are responsible for the reduced tensile strength and modulus of elasticity above 400 μm.

Keywords

Tensile Strength Injection Molding Sand Particle Fracture Strain Sand Content 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    C. Busigin, G.M. Martinez and R.T. Woodhams, Factors affecting the mechanical properties of mica-filled polypropylenes, Polym. Eng. Sci., 23:766 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    S.W. Shang, J.W. Williams, K-J.M. Söderholm, How the work of adhesion affects the mechanical properties of silica-filled polymer composites, J. Mater. Sci., 29:2406 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Padilla, A. S. Solis and O. Mañero, A note on the thermal conductivity of filled polymers, J. Comp. Mater., 22:616 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    A.P. Ramirez and A.S. Solis, Development of a new composite material from waste polymers, natural fiber and mineral fillers, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 29:2405 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    U. Yilmazer and R.J. Farris, Mechanical behavior and dilatation of particulate-filled thermosets in the rubbery state, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 28:3369 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    T.M. Malik, M.I. Farrooqi and C. Vachet, Mechanical and rheological properties of reinforced polyethylene, Polym. Comp. 13:174 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    I. Chodack, I. Chorvath, I. Novack and K. Csmorova, Crosslinked low density polyethylene filled with silica-I: The effect of filler on crosslinking, Eur. Polym. J., 28:107 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abdelrazek Y. Kandeil
    • 1
  • Rouchdy R. Zahran
    • 2
  1. 1.College of Engineering Studies and TechnologyArab Academy for Science and TechnologyMiami AlexandriaEgypt
  2. 2.College of EngineeringQatar UniversityDohaState of Qatar

Personalised recommendations