4.7 Article

Development of a closed-loop recycling process for discontinuous carbon fibre polypropylene composites

Journal

COMPOSITES PART B-ENGINEERING
Volume 146, Issue -, Pages 222-231

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.03.048

Keywords

Recycling; Polymer-matrix composites (PMCs); Compression moulding; Discontinuous reinforcement

Funding

  1. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council through the EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training at the Advance Composites Centre for Innovation and Science (ACCIS) [EP/L016028/1]
  2. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council through High Performance Discontinuous Fibre Composites - a sustainable route to the next generation of composites project [EP/P027393/1]
  3. EPSRC [EP/P027393/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study the effects of a closed-loop recycling methodology are evaluated for degradation using a discontinuous carbon fibre polypropylene (CFPP) composite material. The process comprises two fundamental steps, reclamation and remanufacture. The material properties are analysed over two recycling loops. For neat polypropylene, the molecular weight analysis indicates evidence of minimal matrix degradation that does not affect the material behaviour, as demonstrated by the shear tests. CFPP specimens show no decrease in mechanical properties over repeated loops, the final specimens show an increase of 26% and 43% in ultimate tensile strength and ultimate strain, respectively. These are attributed to cumulative matrix residue on the fibre surface after reclamation and subsequently increased fibre-matrix adhesion. The improvement of CFPP properties and insignificant variability in the tensile properties and molecular weight distribution of neat polypropylene validate the potential of this proof-of-concept, closed-loop recyclable material. Future studies will investigate alternative, higher performance matrices.

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