2.1 Materials
For the present study, the sisal plant leaves and glass fibers are obtained from local sources. Matrix material used for this investigation was unsaturated polyester, which was purchased from local market. It was mixed with the hardener methyl ethyl ketone peroxide (MEKP) in a proportion of 10:1 and used to cure the resin.
2.2 Methods
Mold preparation
The mold used in this work was prepared from wood with a dimension of 300mm × 200mm × 10mm. The top, bottom surfaces of the mold and the wall side are coated with a mold releasing wax to prevent the sticking of composite to the surface of the mold. The function of top and bottom plates is to cover, compress the fiber after the unsaturated polyester is applied, and to avoid the debris from entering into the composite parts during the curing time. A thin plastic sheet is also used between the top and bottom plates of the mold. It is to avoid the sticking of composite to the plate surface and to get a good surface finish.
Composite material preparation
The composite materials were prepared by using the hand layup method. The required sisal-glass-fiber-reinforced hybrid composite materials are developed with a different type of fiber orientation, ply arrangement, and fiber weight ratio. Twenty-seven sample laminates are fabricated by using sisal and glass fibers along with unsaturated polyester matrix materials, these laminates are differentiated based on fiber weight percentages (30%, 35%, 40%) of glass and sisal fiber, fiber orientation (mat, unidirectional and continuous random), and stacking sequences such as (sisal-glass-sisal, glass-sisal-glass, and sisal-sisal-sisal).
2.3 Testing
Tensile, Compressive, and Flexural Strength Test
After preparing the specimen in the desired dimension based on the respective standards, the mechanical properties tests were conducted. The specimens for a tensile test cut by using a band saw cutting machine and their dimensions are according to the ASTM standard D3039 for each designed composite material. During the test, the specimens were placed in the grips of the Universal testing machine and an axial load was applied through both ends of the specimen. The test was conducted at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min and carried out at room temperature. A typical specimen under the tensile strength test is shown in Figure 1.
The compressive strength test was carried out based on the ASTM D3410 standard by using Universal testing machine. The test was conducted to investigate the compressive strength of the developed composite material. Figure 2 indicates the specimen under the compressive strength test and flexural strength test; the samples were placed between the compression anvils to start compression testing. The flexural test was performed on the same tensile testing machine in accordance with ASTM D790 standards. The specimen hooked on the grip, then applies the load with a central grip that is fixed at the center of the specimen. When the specimen starts bending, the onboard computer generates the required data and graphs.
2.4 Results and Discussions
Tensile Strength Test Result
The tensile property result of developed composite materials for different fiber weight ratios, fiber orientation, and ply arrangement were presented. The tensile, compressive and flexural strength of each composite laminates were presented in Table 1. The fiber orientations, which were used in this investigation, are Mat, Unidirectional and Random fiber orientations. The orientations are Mat-Mat-Mat (MMM), Unidirectional-Mat-Unidirectional (UMU), Mat-Unidirectional-Mat (MUM), Random-Mat-Random (RMR), and Mat-Random-Mat (MRM). The ply arrangement forms Sisal-Glass-Sisal (SGS), Glass-Sisal-Glass (GSG), and Sisal-Sisal-Sisal (SSS). The fiber matrix weight ratios for this study were 30%, 35%, and 40% of the fiber in the prepared composite and the remaining were a matrix. The tensile characteristics of each composite laminates the tensile strength graphs were plotted in Figure 3.
It is observed that the mat or woven fiber orientation with glass-sisal-glass (GSG) ply arrangement and 35% fiber weight ratio composite material has the highest tensile strength as compared to other composite laminates. It is revealed from the experiment that an enhancement in the tensile strength due to better adhesion, and uniform dispersion of the fibers in the matrix.
Figure 3 implies that the tensile properties of prepared composite materials are affected by both ply arrangement and fiber orientation. Hybrid fiber composite material with Glass-Sisal-Glass (GSG) ply arrangement shows preferable tensile strength than Sisal-Glass-Sisal (SGS) and Sisal-Sisal-Sisal (SSS) ply arrangements. Since in the case of GSG ply arrangement, more glass fiber lamina was used than SGS and SSS ply arrangement. Additionally, it reveals concentrating glass fiber in the composite gives better tensile strength than concentrating sisal fiber.
The experiment data shows fiber weight ratio also affects the tensile strength of the composite material. When the fiber ratio is increased from 30% to 35%, it shows increases in tensile strength up to a certain limit. It shows that further addition of more fiber in composite causes a decrease in tensile strength; it is due to poor interfacial adhesion between fiber and matrix.
The glass-sisal fiber reinforced composite with 35% fiber weight concentration has higher tensile strength than the other fiber weight concentrations. In this case, the fiber-matrix interaction is excellent to withstand the applied load because the matrix may impregnate the fiber appropriately.
The tensile property of this study is compared with some of the other studies. As shown in Table 2, the tensile strength obtained from the current work is higher when compared to [4], and clearly shows that hybrid synthetic fibers with natural fibers and fiber orientation have a significant effect on the tensile strength of materials.
Compressive Strength Test Result
For different weight ratio, fiber orientations, and ply arrangements the compressive strength of composite materials were presented. The test was carried out in a Universal testing machine
The variation in compressive strength for various stacking sequences is shown in Figure 4. It is noticed that the MMM fiber orientation with glass-sisal-glass (GSG) ply arrangement and 35% fiber weight ratio composite material shows the highest compressive strength as compared to other composite materials.
The Figure 4 implies that the compression properties of prepared composite materials are affected by varying stacking sequences. It is observed that the lowest values of compressive strength are recorded on RMR fiber orientation of sisal composite with sisal-sisal-sisal (SSS) ply arrangement and 40% fiber weight fraction composite material than other composite materials.
The prepared composite with a glass- sisal- glass (GSG) ply arrangement shows preferable compressive strength than sisal-glass- sisal (SGS) and sisal-sisal-sisal (SSS) ply arrangements. This is because more glass fiber was found in GSG ply arrangement than SGS and SSS ply arrangement. This implies that the stiffness of glass fiber is higher than that of sisal fiber.
Table 1 Tensile, compressive, and flexural properties of the prepared composite materials.
Laminates
|
Fiber weight ratio, %
|
Orientation
|
Ply
arrangement
|
Tensile
strength (MPa)
|
Compressive strength (MPa)
|
Flexural strength (MPa)
|
L1
|
30
|
MMM
|
SGS
|
46.82
|
28.4
|
72
|
L2
|
30
|
MMM
|
GSG
|
92.53
|
49.2
|
102
|
L3
|
30
|
MMM
|
SSS
|
30.87
|
16
|
54
|
L4
|
35
|
MMM
|
SGS
|
50.76
|
31.34
|
87.6
|
L5
|
35
|
MMM
|
GSG
|
98.26
|
55.32
|
156
|
L6
|
35
|
MMM
|
SSS
|
32.32
|
17.2
|
56.4
|
L7
|
40
|
MMM
|
SGS
|
48.04
|
33.91
|
84.6
|
L8
|
40
|
MMM
|
GSG
|
94.68
|
45.06
|
120
|
L9
|
40
|
MMM
|
SSS
|
27.28
|
15.03
|
42
|
L10
|
30
|
UMU
|
SGS
|
41.61
|
22
|
62.4
|
L11
|
30
|
MUM
|
GSG
|
79.2
|
44.14
|
99
|
L12
|
30
|
UMU
|
SSS
|
20.52
|
14.66
|
52.32
|
L13
|
35
|
UMU
|
SGS
|
44.36
|
30.56
|
70.8
|
L14
|
35
|
MUM
|
GSG
|
85.76
|
46.26
|
109.2
|
L15
|
35
|
UMU
|
SSS
|
28.96
|
12.94
|
60
|
L16
|
40
|
UMU
|
SGS
|
43.23
|
26.14
|
67.2
|
L17
|
40
|
MUM
|
GSG
|
81.04
|
40.6
|
96
|
L18
|
40
|
UMU
|
SSS
|
22.64
|
13.64
|
53.4
|
L19
|
30
|
RMR
|
SGS
|
37.11
|
25
|
67.8
|
L20
|
30
|
MRM
|
GSG
|
70.68
|
36.64
|
79.2
|
L21
|
30
|
RMR
|
SSS
|
18.16
|
12.54
|
39
|
L22
|
35
|
RMR
|
SGS
|
40.34
|
31.2
|
64.9
|
L23
|
35
|
MRM
|
GSG
|
75.41
|
42.1
|
87
|
L24
|
35
|
RMR
|
SSS
|
24.21
|
11.68
|
41.4
|
L25
|
40
|
RMR
|
SGS
|
39.07
|
24.8
|
57.6
|
L26
|
40
|
MRM
|
GSG
|
72.56
|
35.26
|
72.6
|
L27
|
40
|
RMR
|
SSS
|
15.64
|
10.42
|
40.5
|
Table 2 Comparison of tensile properties reported.
Fiber
|
Matrix
|
Fiber
orientation
|
Fiber/ matrix ratio
|
Fabrication method
|
Tensile strength (MPa)
|
References
|
Glass/ Sisal
|
UPR
|
Mat form
|
35/65
|
Hand layup
|
98.26
|
Current work
|
Sisal/Coir
|
Epoxy
|
Unidirectional for sisal random coir
|
40/60
|
Hand layup
|
57
|
[5]
|
Jute
|
Epoxy
|
Random
|
30/70
|
Hand layup
|
69.5
|
[6]
|
Sisal
|
Polyester
|
Random
|
35/65
|
Hand layup
|
44.78
|
[7]
|
Sisal
|
Polyester
|
Random
|
30/70
|
Hand layup
|
65.93
|
[8]
|
Sisal/Glass
|
Epoxy
|
Unidirectional
|
20/80
|
Hand layup
|
26
|
[9]
|
Hemp
|
Polypropylene
|
Random
|
50/50
|
Hand layup
|
50
|
[10]
|
Sisal
|
Epoxy
|
Random
|
30/70
|
Hand layup
|
83.96
|
[4]
|
Therefore, the higher glass fiber percentage in the composite can improve the compressive strength of the material.
Table 3 Comparison of compressive properties reported in this work with previous work
Fiber
|
Matrix
|
Fiber orientation
|
Fiber/ matrix ratio
|
Fabrication method
|
Compressive strength (MPa)
|
References
|
Glass/ Sisal
|
UPR
|
Mat form for both fibers
|
35/65
|
Hand layup
|
55.32
|
Current work
|
Sisal
|
Epoxy
|
Random
|
30/70
|
Hand layup
|
44.66
|
[11]
|
Glass/ Sisal
|
UPR
|
Mat for glass and unidirectional for sisal
|
-
|
Hand layup
|
60.5
|
[12]
|
Compressive properties of the current work compared with some of the other researcher’s work. From Table 3 the compressive strength obtained from current work is lower when compared to [12]. It is clearly shown that the length of fiber has a significant effect on the compression property of the composite material.
Flexural Strength Test Result
The flexural strength of all prepared composite materials for different fiber weight ratio, fiber orientation, and ply arrangements were presented in Figure 5. It is observed that the mat- mat-mat (MMM) fiber orientation with glass-sisal-glass (GSG) ply arrangement and 35% fiber weight fraction composite material reveals the highest flexural strength. This is due to better adhesion between fiber and matrix interfaces to a uniform load transfer.
It is observed that the lowest value of flexural strength is found on random-mat-random (RMR) fiber orientation with Sisal-Sisal-Sisal (SSS) ply arrangement composite material than other composite materials. The reason may be that the laminates are exposed to poor adhesion between the fiber and matrix interface.
Figure 5 implies that the flexural properties of prepared composite materials are affected by varying stacking sequences. Sisal glass fiber hybrid composite with Glass-Sisal-Glass (GSG) ply arrangement shows preferable flexural strength than Sisal-Glass-Sisal (SGS) and Sisal-Sisal-Sisal (SSS) ply arrangements. Since in the GSG ply arrangement more glass fiber lamina was used than SGS and SSS ply arrangement. The data obtained from the experiment investigation shows that concentrating glass fiber in the composite gives better flexural strength than concentrating sisal fiber in hybrid fiber composite material.
The result shows, when the fiber weight ratio increases, the flexural strength of the composite also increases up to a certain limit. However, further addition of sisal fibers in the composite causes decreases the flexural strength. The possible reason is that the fibers are not fully impregnated in the matrix or poor interaction of the lamina in the sandwich model.