Comparative analysis of bending test methods for evaluating the stiffness of high-performance yarns
Source abstract
Abstract
This study evaluates yarn stiffness measurement techniques, focusing on 3-point and 4-point bending tests, the cantilever method, and the hanging pear loop method. It examines the effects of force and bending moment distribution on the stiffness of yarns such as recycled polyester, carbon, Kevlar, Vectran, and glass. The 4-point bending test consistently provides higher stiffness values than the 3-point method., reducing shear deformation and stress concentration. This difference is especially pronounced for carbon, Kevlar, and Vectran yarns, while glass and recycled polyester yarns exhibit more stable stiffness behavior. Alternative methods, like the hanging pear loop and cantilever techniques, also show differences based on stress application. A proposed buckling force evaluation for thin composite yarns with high fiber volume fractions demonstrates strong correlations with other methods. The findings emphasize the importance of selecting appropriate testing techniques based on yarn characteristics and accuracy requirements.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Textile materials and evaluations · Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Additive Manufacturing and 3D Printing Technologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Textile Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt
References (37)
Show source-provided references
1. Yüksəkkaya ME, Howard T, Adanur S. Influence of the fabric properties on fabric stiffness for the industrial fabrics. J Textile Eng 2008; 1(1): 1–10.
2. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.11336610.1016/j.compstruct.2020.113366 ↗
3. Özdi̇l N, Özgüney AT, Süpüren Mengüç G, et al. Influence of yarn and fabric construction parameters on drape and bending behaviour of cotton woven fabrics. Teksti̇l ve Konfeksi̇yon 2014; 24(2): 169–179.
4. 10.3390/jcs807028010.3390/jcs8070280 ↗
5. 10.1177/004051750935535110.1177/0040517509355351 ↗
6. 10.1007/s43939-024-00091-910.1007/s43939-024-00091-9 ↗
7. 10.1007/s12221-024-00779-y10.1007/s12221-024-00779-y ↗
8. 10.1007/s12221-011-0104-610.1007/s12221-011-0104-6 ↗
9. 10.1177/0040517521105507010.1177/00405175211055070 ↗
10. Harris BM. The spinning of fibres: a review. Text Res J 1990; 60(1): 7–14.
11. Alves F, da Silva C. The influence of bending stiffness on the dyeing process of textiles. Coloration Technol 2014; 130(4): 276–282.
12. Jiang W, Lu W. Influence of fabric properties on cutting performance. Text Res J 2015; 85(14): 1495–1504.
13. 10.1177/073168441879804910.1177/0731684418798049 ↗
14. ASTM D3822. Standard test method for tensile properties of single textile fibers. ASTM International. https://www.astm.org/d3822 (2019 accessed 17 December 2024).
15. Oyen ML. Nanoindentation of soft biological and hydrogel materials. J Mater Res 2006; 21(3): 719–728.
16. Hughes BP, Smith R. The mechanics of textile structures. J Text Inst 2008; 99(1): 23–36.
17. 10.1557/JMR.1992.156410.1557/JMR.1992.1564 ↗
18. Tan S, Lim T. Nanoindentation study of nanofiber. Appl Phys Lett 2005; 87(12): 123106–123106-3
19. Strout B, Trenkle J, Torf D. Design and evaluation of safety harness systems: performance and standards. In: D Pfaff (ed.) Occupational safety engineering and risk management. Springer, 2020, pp.245–266.
20. International Climbing and Mountaineering Federation. UIAA 101: safety standards for dynamic ropes 2019 https://theuiaa.org/documents/safety/UIAA_101_Rope_EN.pdf
21. Nguyen M, Park H. Wind and snow load resistance in structural design of fabric tents and awnings. Procedia Eng 2017; 200: 2587–2596.
22. El-Dessouky HM, Naficy A. Flexural stiffness and tensile strength in multifunctional textile composites for automotive and aerospace applications. Compos B Eng 2018; 150: 45–56.
23. Griffin DP, Taylor TJ. The role of material stiffness in sail shape and performance. Sports Eng 2017; 20(2): 123–134.
24. Li J, Zhang Y, Cheng H. Flexural behavior of fiber-reinforced composite panels: influence of fiber type and orientation. Compos Struct 2016; 157: 455–464.
25. El Messiry M, Eltahan E, Fathy S. Influence of pre-tensioning high-performance yarns on the bending stiffness of textile composites. J Ind Text 2024; 54: 1–2610.1177/15280837241280678 ↗
26. Shahpurwala M, Denton MJ. A new cantilever method for measuring the flexible stiffness of textile yarns. Text Res J 1993; 63(10): 559–564.
27. Fangueiro R, Filgueiras A, Pinto J. Vertical cantilever method for determining yarn flexible stiffness. Fibers Polym 2002; 3(2): 81–85.
28. Tserpes KI, Papanikos P. Three-point bending of carbon fibers: an experimental and computational study. Compos Sci Technol 2005; 65(3): 467–474.
29. Al-Obaidi ASM, Taylor PA. A comparison of three-point and four-point bending test methods for measuring the bending stiffness of high-performance fibers. J Appl Polym Sci 2006; 102(3): 2963–2972.
30. 10.1177/004051751985877210.1177/0040517519858772 ↗
31. Numayr KS, Haddad MA, Al-Taani MH. Approximate solutions for bending of beams and buckling of columns made of functionally graded materials. J Inst Eng (India) Ser A 2024; 105(4): 913–937.10.1007/s40030-024-00834-0 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2005.10.00610.1016/j.polymertesting.2005.10.006 ↗
33. Kara Ş. Comparison of cantilever, heart loop, and circular bending test methods in determining the bending behaviours of sewn woven polyester fabrics. Tekstil ve Konfeksiyon 2021; 31(2): 82–90.10.32710/tekstilvekonfeksiyon.736334 ↗
34. Sacco E, Stocco S. Experimental and numerical investigation of bending properties of carbon fiber yarns using the 4-point bending test. Compos B Eng 2021; 206: 108565.
35. 10.1177/004051751455387710.1177/0040517514553877 ↗
36. 10.1177/1528083723121313810.1177/15280837231213138 ↗
37. Mittelstedt C. Buckling and post-buckling of thin-walled composite laminated beams—a review of engineering analysis methods. Appl Mech Rev 2020; 72(2): 020802.10.1115/1.4045680 ↗