journal article·2016-03

A comparative analysis of woven jute/glass hybrid polymer composite with and without reinforcing of fly ash particles

G. Raghavendra, Shakuntala Ojha, S.K. Acharya, S.K. Pal

Polymer Composites· Volume 37· Issue 3
Publisher page

Abstract

The objective of this research article is to compare the mechanical and tribological properties of jute‐glass‐fiber‐reinforced epoxy (J‐G‐E) hybrid composites with and without fly ash particulate filler. A dry hand lay‐up technique is used to fabricate all the laminates. The properties including flexural strength, tensile strength, flexural modulus, and erosion behavior of all the composites are evaluated as per American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards. The fly ash particulate‐filled hybrid composite shows a better mechanical and tribological property. The maximum flexural strength and flexural modulus are obtained for GJGJ+ 5 wt% fly ash filler epoxy composites. Whereas the maximum tensile strength is obtained for GJJG+ 10 wt% fly ash filler epoxy composites. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) analysis also has been carried out to categorize mechanical and tribological behavior of composites. POLYM. COMPOS. 37:658–665, 2016. © 2014 Society of Plastics Engineers
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Tribology and Wear Analysis · Polymer Nanocomposites and Properties

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Mechanical Engineering NIT Warangal Warangal Andhra Pradesh India

Department of Mechanical Engineering NIT Rourkela Rourkela Odisha India

Department of Ceramic Engineering NIT Rourkela Rourkela Odisha India

References (17)

Show source-provided references
1. Gujjala R. · J. Compos. Mater. · 2013
2. 10.1016/S0921-5093(01)01383-110.1016/S0921-5093(01)01383-1 ↗
3. 10.1007/s12034-011-0081-910.1007/s12034-011-0081-9 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.msea.2011.03.04710.1016/j.msea.2011.03.047 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2009.04.00710.1016/j.compositesb.2009.04.007 ↗
6. 10.1016/S1359-835X(98)00157-210.1016/S1359-835X(98)00157-2 ↗
7. 10.1300/J395v01n02_0410.1300/J395v01n02_04 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2003.09.01610.1016/j.compositesa.2003.09.016 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.01.01610.1016/j.compscitech.2009.01.016 ↗
10. 10.5539/mas.v4n6p6710.5539/mas.v4n6p67 ↗
11. 10.1002/app.3974910.1002/app.39749 ↗
12. 10.1002/app.3337810.1002/app.33378 ↗
13. 10.1177/002199831350192410.1177/0021998313501924 ↗
14. 10.1038/167775a010.1038/167775a0 ↗
15. Kolar F. · Acta Geodyn Geomater. · 2007 · 4 · 85
16. Chauhan S.R. · Mater. Design. · 2012 · 585 · 569
17. 10.1002/app.2541310.1002/app.25413 ↗