3.8 Proceedings Paper

Evaluate the tensile, flexural and impact strength of hemp and flax based hybrid composites under cryogenic environment

期刊

MATERIALS TODAY-PROCEEDINGS
卷 50, 期 -, 页码 1326-1332

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2021.08.244

关键词

Natural Fibers; Hemp; Flax; Alkaline Treatment; Cryogenic; SEM

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Natural fibers have gained popularity as reinforcement materials and replacements for non-biodegradable synthetic fabrics in materials research. This study investigates the mechanical characteristics of hemp and flax-based hybrid composites reinforced with epoxy resin at cryogenic and room temperatures.
In recent decades, natural fibers have emerged as a rising trend in materials research as a reinforcement for polymer matrix materials and as a replacement for non-biodegradable, non-renewable, and high-density synthetic fabrics. The main objective of this research is to examine the mechanical characteristics of hemp and flax-based hybrid composites reinforced with epoxy resin at cryogenic and room tempera-tures. The composites were made using a hand lay-up approach, with both fibers being prepared with a NaOH solution for 4 h to improve interfacial adhesion. It is apparent from this research that cryogenic temperature has a significant impact on the flexural, tensile and impact characteristics of polymer com-posites, and that these qualities vary depending on the amount of cryogenic treatment. After being sub-merged in liquid nitrogen for 15, 30, and 45 min, the specimens are tested for tensile, flexural, and impact characteristics. An untreated specimen has the highest tensile strength of 27.89 MPa, a flexural strength of 58.95 MPa, and impact strength of 10.94 kJ/m(2), with the value decreasing as the curing period rises. Copyright (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 2nd International Con-ference on Functional Material, Manufacturing and Performances

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据