4.7 Article

In-Plane Behavior of Auxetic Non-Woven Fabric Based on Rotating Square Unit Geometry under Tensile Load

Journal

POLYMERS
Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym11061040

Keywords

auxetic polymer materials; needle-punched non-woven fabric; rotating square unit geometry; mechanical properties; tensile load; Poisson's ratio

Funding

  1. Slovenian Research Agency, ARRS [J2-8186]
  2. Slovenian Research Agency [P2-0063]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper reports the auxetic behavior of modified conventional non-woven fabric. The auxetic behavior of fabric was achieved by forming rotating square unit geometry with a highly ordered pattern of slits by laser cutting. Two commercial needle-punched non-woven fabric used as lining and the reinforcement fabric for the footwear industry were investigated. The influence of two rotating square unit sizes was analyzed for each fabric. The original and modified fabric samples were subjected to quasi-static tensile load by using the Tinius Olsen testing machine to observe the in-plane mechanical properties and deformation behavior of tested samples. The tests were recorded with a full high-definition (HD) digital camera and the video recognition technique was applied to determine the Poisson's ratio evolution during testing. The results show that the modified samples exhibit a much lower breaking force due to induced slits, which in turn limits the application of such modified fabric to low tensile loads. The samples with smaller rotating cell sizes exhibit the highest negative Poisson's ratio during tensile loading through the entire longitudinal strain range until rupture. Non-woven fabric with equal distribution and orientation of fibers in both directions offer better auxetic response with a smaller out-of-plane rotation of rotating unit cells. The out-of-plane rotation of unit cells in non-homogenous samples is higher in machine direction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available