Determinating optimum combination of ageing and manufacturing parameters for laminated composites using response surface methodology
Source abstract
Abstract
This study mainly focuses on the effects of ageing and manufacturing parameters on the water absorption behaviour and mechanical characteristics of the glass-fibre reinforced polymer (GFRP) composites, and multiple optimizations of these parameters based on the quasi-static mechanical properties and low-velocity impact performances. Utilizing response surface methodology (RSM), an experimental design was executed varying curing temperature (20-100°C), ageing temperature (20-70°C) and salinity (3-35%). After 59-days ageing period, gravimetric, tensile and low-velocity impact tests were conducted to assess weight gain at saturation, changes in tensile strength, elasticity modulus, peak force and peak energy. Tensile fracture surfaces of aged and un-aged samples were examined using scanning electron microscopy. ANOVA results indicated the adequacy of RSM models, supported by high R 2 (>80%) and R 2 adj (>65%) and proper residual distribution. Gravimetric tests revealed that higher curing and ageing temperatures resulted in greater water sorption-induced weight gain, while elevated salinity had the opposite effect. Ageing temperature and salinity are the most influential factors on tensile strength change. Optimal mechanical properties, minimizing differences between aged and un-aged samples, were achieved at 100°C curing temperature, 20°C ageing temperature and 19.8% salinity. Data from this study can be a valuable reference for designing GFRP composites, particularly in marine applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Polymer composites and self-healing
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Manisa Celal Bayar University, Institute of Natural and Applied Science, Manisa, Turkey
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Manisa Celal Bayar University, Hasan Ferdi Turgutlu Faculty of Technology, Manisa, Turkey
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, Manisa Celal Bayar University, Hasan Ferdi Turgutlu Faculty of Technology, Manisa, Turkey
Funding
Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi
References (74)
Show source-provided references
1. Garcia-Espinel JD · Mater Des 1980-2015 · 2015 · 66 · 46
2. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2003.10.01910.1016/j.compscitech.2003.10.019 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2013.11.00210.1016/j.compositesa.2013.11.002 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2008.07.01610.1016/j.compositesa.2008.07.016 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.matdes.2010.07.02410.1016/j.matdes.2010.07.024 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.06.01910.1016/j.compscitech.2006.06.019 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.04.00410.1016/j.compositesa.2004.04.004 ↗
8. 10.1023/A:101850820902210.1023/A:1018508209022 ↗
9. 10.1016/S1359-835X(96)00154-610.1016/S1359-835X(96)00154-6 ↗
10. 10.1016/S0032-3861(02)00189-110.1016/S0032-3861(02)00189-1 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.11.06210.1016/j.matdes.2016.11.062 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.01.00910.1016/j.compscitech.2005.01.009 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.matlet.2019.12709110.1016/j.matlet.2019.127091 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.12.01010.1016/j.compositesb.2012.12.010 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2005.09.02210.1016/j.compstruct.2005.09.022 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.10691010.1016/j.compositesb.2019.106910 ↗
17. Cerbu C. Effects of the long-time immersion on the mechanical behaviour in case of some E-glass/resin composite materials. In: Dobnik Dubrovski P (ed). Woven Fabric Engineering. Croatia: IntechOpen, pp. 363–386.
18. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.09.02510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.09.025 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2020.10614210.1016/j.compositesa.2020.106142 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2013.04.07310.1016/j.compositesb.2013.04.073 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2017.11.01710.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2017.11.017 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.09.02810.1016/j.compositesb.2014.09.028 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2013.11.00810.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2013.11.008 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2012.01.01010.1016/j.compscitech.2012.01.010 ↗
25. 10.1080/23311916.2023.216501810.1080/23311916.2023.2165018 ↗
26. Helbling C · 2004
27. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.01.01710.1016/j.compscitech.2004.01.017 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2018.12.03410.1016/j.compstruct.2018.12.034 ↗
29. 10.14314/polimery.2007.11710.14314/polimery.2007.117 ↗
30. 10.1177/073168440706995010.1177/0731684407069950 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2017.12.02910.1016/j.compositesa.2017.12.029 ↗
32. 10.1016/S0143-7496(02)00013-110.1016/S0143-7496(02)00013-1 ↗
33. 10.1016/S0141-3910(00)00168-310.1016/S0141-3910(00)00168-3 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.enconman.2017.09.02110.1016/j.enconman.2017.09.021 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.31610.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.316 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.measurement.2010.11.01810.1016/j.measurement.2010.11.018 ↗
37. NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods. https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/index.htm (accessed 22 October 2023).
38. 10.1007/s11356-011-0668-010.1007/s11356-011-0668-0 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2023.10637110.1016/j.ultsonch.2023.106371 ↗
40. 10.3390/molecules2516375210.3390/molecules25163752 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2022.10791010.1016/j.polymertesting.2022.107910 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.diamond.2022.10963210.1016/j.diamond.2022.109632 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.talanta.2008.05.01910.1016/j.talanta.2008.05.019 ↗
44. Kelley T · Technol Teach · 2010 · 69 · 18
45. 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.06.46610.1016/j.matpr.2020.06.466 ↗
46. 10.3390/ma1108131110.3390/ma11081311 ↗
47. 10.1080/1091034080251885010.1080/10910340802518850 ↗
48. 10.1007/s12666-018-1353-510.1007/s12666-018-1353-5 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.09.03110.1016/j.compositesb.2014.09.031 ↗
50. 10.1177/0731684422113956010.1177/07316844221139560 ↗
51. EC152/W152LR-Product Information. https://cristex.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/EC-152-W-152-LR.pdf (accessed 5 November 2023).
52. 10.1177/002199830203601900310.1177/0021998302036019003 ↗
53. 10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00161-610.1016/S0266-3538(02)00161-6 ↗
54. 10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00162-810.1016/S0266-3538(02)00162-8 ↗
55. 10.1177/002199830809815210.1177/0021998308098152 ↗
56. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.10.00310.1016/j.compositesa.2011.10.003 ↗
57. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2008.01.00510.1016/j.compositesa.2008.01.005 ↗
58. Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials. https://www.astm.org/d3039_d3039m-08.html (2017, accessed 28 September 2023).
59. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.02.00510.1016/j.compstruct.2016.02.005 ↗
60. Farooq U · Mater Des 1980-2015 · 2014 · 54 · 43
61. 10.1016/j.matdes.2013.05.00410.1016/j.matdes.2013.05.004 ↗
62. 10.1177/096739112093010710.1177/0967391120930107 ↗
63. 10.1007/s13721-013-0032-z10.1007/s13721-013-0032-z ↗
64. Why are some capability analysis results shown as asterisks in the output? https://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/21/help-and-how-to/quality-and-process-improvement/capability-analysis/supporting-topics/capability-metrics/capability-analysis-results-shown-as-asterisks/ (2023, accessed 28 September 2023).
65. 10.1016/j.clce.2022.10000710.1016/j.clce.2022.100007 ↗
66. 10.30939/ijastech..98997610.30939/ijastech..989976 ↗
67. 10.1016/j.matpr.2021.10.08410.1016/j.matpr.2021.10.084 ↗
68. Jones RM · 1999
69. 10.3390/polym1313218210.3390/polym13132182 ↗
70. 10.1177/152808371559865610.1177/1528083715598656 ↗
71. 10.1007/s13726-023-01172-x10.1007/s13726-023-01172-x ↗
72. 10.4314/ijest.v5i4.310.4314/ijest.v5i4.3 ↗
73. 10.1007/s00170-008-1731-y10.1007/s00170-008-1731-y ↗
74. 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.55.1510.3221/IGF-ESIS.55.15 ↗