Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Journal of Composites
Volume 2013, Article ID 792620, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/792620

Research Article
Effect of Natural Fillers on Mechanical Properties of
GFRP Composites

Vikas Dhawan,1 Sehijpal Singh,2 and Inderdeep Singh3

1
Research Scholar, Mechanical & Production Engineering Department, GNDEC, Punjab Technical University,
Ludhiana 141 010, Punjab, India
2
Mechanical & Production Engineering Department, GNDEC, Punjab Technical University, Ludhiana 141 010, Punjab, India
3
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee 247 667, India

Correspondence should be addressed to Inderdeep Singh; [email protected]

Received 26 January 2013; Revised 2 June 2013; Accepted 14 June 2013

Academic Editor: Masamichi Kawai

Copyright © 2013 Vikas Dhawan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Fiber reinforced plastics (FRPs) have replaced conventional engineering materials in many areas, especially in the field of
automobiles and household applications. With the increasing demand, various modifications are being incorporated in the
conventional FRPs for specific applications in order to reduce costs and achieve the quality standards. The present research endeavor
is an attempt to study the effect of natural fillers on the mechanical characteristics of FRPs. Rice husk, wheat husk, and coconut coir
have been used as natural fillers in glass fiber reinforced plastics (GFRPs). In order to study the effect of matrix on the properties
of GFRPs, polyester and epoxy resins have been used. It has been found that natural fillers provide better results in polyester-based
composites. Amongst the natural fillers, in general, the composites with coconut coir have better mechanical properties as compared
to the other fillers in glass/epoxy composites.

1. Introduction properties [3]. The mechanical properties such as tensile,

flexural, interlaminar shear strength, impact strength, notch
The widespread use of the fiber reinforced plastics (FRPs) sensitivity, and water absorption of jute-glass reinforced
over the last few years has led to the increased research inter- composites were studied and it was found that the mechanical
est in the area of FRPs. Though the synthetic fiber reinforced properties are lower than those of plain GFRP and more
plastics possess excellent properties, their cost of processing than the jute fiber reinforced composites [1, 4, 5]. Water
is quiet high, mainly due to the material cost. On the other absorption was found to increase with the increase in jute
hand, the use of natural fibers leads to cost reduction and content. A self-healing hybrid polymer composite of jute
light weight composites, though the mechanical properties of and glass fiber was developed to eliminate delamination
natural fiber composites are much lower as compared to the and to obtain lighter composites with lower maintenance
synthetic fiber composites [1]. Hence, researchers all around costs [6]. Thermal conductivity and thermal diffusivity were
the world have resorted to hybrid composites by combining found to increase with the increase in glass content in a
natural fibers with synthetic fibers in a common matrix. hybrid pineapple leaf and glass fiber reinforced polyester
Mohan et al. [2] found that longitudinal compressive strength composite [7]. In a study made on Cordenka fiber reinforced
of jute-glass hybrid composites increases with increase in polypropylene composites with partial jute fibers, it was
glass content whereas transverse compressive strength is even concluded that the stiffness and heat distortion temperatures
lower than that of jute composites. In another research effort increased with the increase in jute proportion while the
it was found that water absorption increased with jute-glass tensile strength and impact strength decreased [8]. John and
hybrid composites which lead to decrease in mechanical Venkata Naidu [9–11] studied the tensile, impact, flexural, and
2 Journal of Composites

compressive properties of sisal fiber and glass fiber hybrid 2. Experimental Details
composites with polyester as matrix material. The properties
were studied for different glass contents and were found to 2.1. Fabrication of Epoxy Laminates with Natural Fillers and
improve with increasing glass percentages. The variation of Glass Fibers. Composite laminates of 4 mm thickness were
tensile and flexural properties of Sisal/Carbon fiber hybrid prepared using boron-free EC-R glass mats, epoxy resin, and
composites with different fiber weight ratios were studied natural fillers. Rice husk, wheat husk, and coconut coir were
and significant improvement in these mechanical properties used as filler materials. Composite laminates were prepared
was observed with NaOH treatment of sisal fibers. It was by conventional hand layup technique in chrome plated mild
found in chemical resistance tests that hybrid composites steel mold, 560 mm by 460 mm at room temperature. The
were not resistant to carbon tetra chloride [12]. Thermal mold is specially designed to produce 4 mm thick laminate
conductivity of unsaturated polyester-based sisal/glass fiber sheets. All the composites have 6 layers of woven boron-free
hybrid composites was found to be lower than that of EC-R glass fiber mats of 610 GSM manufactured by Owens
glass fiber reinforced composites and more than that of Corning Fiber Glass, USA. The EC-R glass had a young’s
sisal fiber reinforced composites. It was also found that modulus of 80 GPa and density of 2.62 g/cm3 . Epoxy resin
adding chalk powder to the resin also increased thermal LY556 (density 1.15–1.20 g/cm3 at 25∘ C) and hardener HY 951
conductivity [13]. Tewari et al. [14] found that mixing bagasse (density 1 g/cm3 at 20∘ C) were used. The resin and hardener
fiber with glass fiber improves the modulus of elasticity were mixed and stirred mechanically in a ratio of 10 : 1 by
and impact strength but decreases the ultimate strength weight. In order to follow a standard comparative procedure,
and bending strength. Sorption behavior and environmental it was decided to fabricate laminates with a thickness of 4 mm.
aging in tensile properties were studied for short bamboo The natural fillers were used in a proportion of 5% of the
fiber reinforced polypropylene and short bamboo-glass fiber weight of glass fibers. The decision to add only 5% natural
reinforced polypropylene composites. Later hygrothermal fillers was taken after a pilot study. Initially, 10% natural fillers
aging and fatigue behavior under cyclic loading were also were added and a remarkable decrease in the mechanical
properties was observed. The reduction in the properties may
studied. Tensile strength and elastic modulus of the two
be attributed to the nonwetting of the fibers and fillers by the
composites reduced considerably after aging at 75∘ C for
polymer matrix and agglomeration of the fillers. Moreover,
3 months [15, 16]. Cicala et al. [17] proposed that a cost
the thickness constraint of 4 mm was also not achieved with
reduction of 20% and a weight reduction of 23% could be
the addition of 10% fillers. Here, it is worthwhile to mention
achieved by using natural fibers along with glass fibers for the that natural fibers before use were reduced to a size of one
purpose of design of pipes. Two types of hybrid composites to four cm in length. Initially, the work side of the mold
were fabricated in rooflite resin, one by mixing palmyra was coated with a thin layer of PVA (Poly Vinyl Alcohol)
and glass fiber and the other by sandwiching palmyra fiber which acts as a release agent. After the PVA coating has dried,
between glass fiber mats. The glass fiber skin with palmyra a light layer of the resin is made with the help of a brush
fiber core showed better mechanical properties than the and then the first layer of woven glass sheet is placed in the
dispersed one [18]. Rice husk along with glass fibers and lower part of the mold. The glass sheet is thoroughly coated
unsaturated polyester was found to produce composites with with the resin with the help of a brush and then one-fifth
acceptable properties [19]. Ultraviolet radiation pretreated of the filler is evenly spread over the layer and the second
jute and glass fiber hybrid composites were found to exhibit glass layer is placed. Again, the resin is applied thoroughly
better mechanical properties than untreated jute-glass hybrid so that the resin drips down the glass layer and coats the
composites [20]. Coir-glass hybrid polyester composites were natural fibers also. This process is continued till the final
found to be promising candidates for structural applications layer of glass mat is coated with the resin. The top plate
where high strength and stiffness are required [21]. The of the mold is then properly placed over the lower one to
tensile behavior of coir-glass hybrid composites at different complete the assembly. Finally, the complete mold is placed
temperatures was studied with coir and glass fibers in equal in a press and a compression load of 15 tonnes is applied.
proportions. The mechanical strength increased with the The compression ensures that the entrapped air bubbles are
increase in temperature after 50∘ C but reduced considerably completely removed and the excess resin flows out. The mold
at higher temperatures (100∘ C), especially for high fiber is left for 10 hours at room temperature to complete the
volume fractions [22]. From the literature it is clear that curing process. The same technique was used to fabricate
mechanical properties of the composites made by hybridiza- the other laminates. In all, four different types of specimens
tion of natural fibers with synthetic fibers are lower than were fabricated. Three of the GFR-epoxy-based composites
those of composites made with synthetic fibers alone. In order consisted of different natural biofillers, that is rice husk, wheat
to reduce the cost and weight of the composites, natural husk, and coconut coir, as fillers and the fourth laminate had
fibers are used along with synthetic fibers. In the present glass fiber alone as a reinforcement.
research endeavor, coconut coir, wheat husk, and rice husk
have been used as fillers along with glass fibers to form
GFR-Polyester-based and GFR-Epoxy-based composites. The 2.2. Fabrication of Unsaturated Polyester Laminates with Nat-
effect of the addition of natural fillers along with the effect of ural Fillers and Glass Fibers. General purpose polyester resin
using different resin material on the mechanical properties of (density 1.1 g/cm3 ) was used along with Methyl Ethyl Ketone
the GFRPs has been studied. Peroxide (MEKP) and Cobalt Octoate. First, the general
Journal of Composites 3

purpose resin was mixed with Cobalt Octoate (with 6% 3.3. Cross Breaking Strength. The cross breaking test was
Cobalt content) which acts as an accelerator. The accelerator conducted as per IS: 1998-1962. According to the IS standards,
accelerates the decomposition of organic peroxide initiators the test specimen needs to be 15 mm ± 0.5 mm in breadth and
called catalysts and in turn increases the polymerization. should have a length of 24 to 30 times the thickness of the lam-
Then just before the application of the resin to glass fiber, inate measured nearest to 0.03 mm. The test was conducted
MEKP is added to the resin which acts as a catalyst and on the UTM. Two parallel V-shaped supports were used
initiates the polymerization of polyester resins. MEKP also to fix the specimen in the machine. The distance between
helps in cold setting of polyester-based composites. As the the supports was kept equal to sixteen times the measured
sheets were made in summers with normal temperature being thickness of the test specimen. A load was applied by the
around 40 degree plus in India, just 10 mL of Cobalt Octoate third V-block parallel to and between the supporting blocks
and 10 mL of MEKP were added to the resin. It has to be kept across the width of the test specimen. The load was steadily
in mind that once MEKP has been added to the resin, the increased at such a rate that the test specimen fractures in 15
hand layup process has to be completed quickly; otherwise, to 45 seconds from the time of initial application of load:
the resin starts to gel and leads to wastage. The manufacturing
of polyester-based glass fiber sheets with natural fillers is done 1.5 𝑊𝐿
Cross Breaking Strength = (3)
in the same way as the epoxy-based sheets. The natural fibers 𝐵𝐷2
are again used in the proportion of 5% by weight of the glass
fiber weight and initially hand-layup process is used and then 𝑊 = Load in kgs, 𝐿 = Distance between supports in cm, 𝐵 =
the complete mold assembly is subjected to compressive force Breadth in cm, and 𝐷 = Thickness in cm.
of 15 tonnes in a press. The polyester-based laminates get
ready for use within 3 hours. Similar to the epoxy-based FRP 3.4. Izod Impact Strength. Izod Impact Strength was found
laminates; four polyester-based FRP sheets were prepared. according to IS0 180 : 1993, on an Izod Impact Testing
One with woven glass fiber alone and other three laminates Machine (0–168 Joule capacity). A rectangular piece of length
are with different natural fillers, that is, wheat husk, rice husk, 63.5 ± 2 mm and width 12.7 ± 0.2 mm having thickness of
and coconut coir. the laminate (4 mm) was prepared as shown in Figure 1. The
specimen is having a V-notch at a point equidistant from the
3. Mechanical Characterization ends of the long side. The specifications of the specimen as
per the standard are shown in Figure 1. The specimen was
3.1. Tensile Strength. The tensile test was performed in ac- fixed in the vice of the testing machine so that the notched
cordance with ASTM D3039. The test specimen size was face of the specimen faces the striker and the root of the
250 mm × 25 mm × 4 mm. The test was performed on a notch is in level with the horizontal face of the vice. When the
universal testing machine (UTM) of 10-tonne capacity. The pendulum is released with the help of an operating lever, the
flat specimens of required size were fixed between the grips of notched side of the specimen is struck by the striking edge of
each head of the testing machine in a way that the direction the pendulum. The energy absorbed in breaking the specimen
of force applied to the specimen is coincident with the was then recorded:
longitudinal axis of the specimen. The strain rate was so
selected so as to produce the failure from 1 to 10 min: Izod Impact Strength (KJ/m2 )

𝑊 Energy absorbed in joules

Tensile Strength = (1) = .
𝐵𝐷 Width of notched face × Length below the notch
(4)
𝑊 = Load in Kgs, 𝐵 = Breadth in cm, and 𝐷 = thickness in
cm.
3.5. Rockwell Hardness Test. Test specimens of size 25 mm
by 25 mm were prepared according to ASTM D785-08. A
3.2. Compressive Strength. The compressive strength of the steel ball indenter of 3.175 mm diameter was used to find the
test specimens was found using UCSB compressive fixture hardness on a Rockwell machine. The hardness was measured
[23]. The size of the test specimens was 127 mm × 38.1 mm on Rockwell hardness K-scale with a major load of 150 kg and
× 4 mm. A hole of 6.35 mm was then drilled in the center an average of five hardness tests was taken.
of the flat specimens. The test was performed on a universal
testing machine of 10-tonne capacity. The test specimens were
fixed in a UCSB fixture and the fixture was placed in between 3.6. Specific Gravity Test. The specific gravity test was done
two flat circular plates on the UTM. The compressive load was in accordance with Indian Standard IS: 10192-1982. The
applied in the axial direction so as to cause the failure of the specimen prepared for the test was a square of 40 ± 1 mm with
specimen. thickness being that of the laminate (4 mm). The specimen
was first weighed in air by suspending it with the help of a
𝑊 thread fixed to the hook of the balance, and the weight 𝑊1 was
Compressive Strength = (2) recorded. Then, the weight 𝑊2 was recorded by measuring the
𝐵𝐷
specimen in fresh distilled water. The specimen was allowed
𝑊 = Load in Kgs, 𝐵 = Breadth in cm, 𝐷 = thickness in cm. to attain the temperature of the water by immersing it in water
4 Journal of Composites

1∘ 1∘
22 ±
2 2

12.70 ± 0.20
Impact end R 0.25 ± 0.05
10.16 ± 0.05

31.80 ± 1.0
Width of
63.5 ± 2.0 specimen

Figure 1: Specimen for Izod Impact Strength.

for sufficient time. Care was also taken that no air bubbles resin commonly known as G. P resin) based. In general,
stick to the specimen: with the same resin, one specimen was reinforced with glass
fiber alone and three other were reinforced with different
𝑊1 natural fillers that is wheat husk, Rice husk, and coconut
Specific gravity = . (5)
𝑊1 − 𝑊2 coir. Various characterization tests were conducted and their
results are depicted in Table 1 and are discussed in the
3.7. Water Absorption Test. The water absorption test was following sections.
conducted according to Indian Standard IS: 1998-1962. A
square test specimen of 38+0.5
−0.0 mm was made. The weight of 4.1. Tensile Strength. In general, it has been found that
the specimen was first measured in air (𝑊1 ), and then the the tensile strength of epoxy-based GFRPs is more than
specimen was immersed in distilled water for a period of polyester-based composites. The tensile strength values of
24 ± 1 hour. On removal from water, the specimen was wiped the eight different composites under consideration are shown
properly and was weighed within two minutes of its removal in Figure 2. Though the tensile strength of composites
from water. This weight was recorded as 𝑊2 : developed with epoxy and polyester decreases when the
𝑊2 − 𝑊1 natural fillers are added, the tensile strength of epoxy-based
Water Absorption = × 100. (6) composites with coconut coir and wheat husk as fillers is
𝑊1 greater than the plain glass reinforced polyester composites.
On the contrary, the composites developed with rice husk
3.8. Volume Fraction of Glass Fibers. The volume fraction of fillers in polyester show more strength than the composites
glass fibers (glass content) was found according to ASTM developed in epoxy with rice husk as fillers. The reason may
D2584-08. The test specimens of 20 mm × 20 mm × 4 mm be attributed to the better bonding of rice husk with polyester
were prepared. Initially, a desiccated ceramic crucible was rather than with epoxy. The epoxy-based composites with
weighed (𝑊1 ), and then it was weighed along with the coconut coir as fillers show comparable strength with plain
specimen (𝑊2 ). Then, the crucible with the specimen was GFRP composites, and on the other hand, polyester-based
placed in a muffle furnace at 590∘ C. After the carbonaceous composites with rice husk fillers show good tensile strength in
material disappeared, the crucible was cooled to a room comparison to other polyester-based composites with fillers.
temperature and the crucible was weighed again with glass The tensile strength of the epoxy-based composites decreased
fibers left alone (𝑊3 ): by a maximum of 22.8% (with rice husk fillers) and that of
𝑊2 − 𝑊3 polyester-based composites decreased by 19.71% (with wheat
Ignition Loss = × 100 husk fillers).
𝑊2 − 𝑊1 (7)
Glass Content = 100 − Ignition Loss. 4.2. Compressive Strength. The compressive strength was
found using UCSB fixture on Universal Testing Machine.
4. Results and Discussion The compressive strength of epoxy-based composites is more
than that of polyester-based composites as shown in Figure 3.
In all, eight different types of GFRP laminates were fab- The compressive strength of all the composites with and
ricated. Four of the GFRPs were epoxy resin based and without fillers with epoxy as matrix is more than glass fiber
other four were general purpose polyester (orthophthalic reinforced polyester laminates. This shows that epoxy should
Journal of Composites 5

Table 1: Summary of experimental findings.

FRP
Property Glass fiber reinforced epoxy Glass fiber reinforced polyester
Wheat husk Coconut coir Rice Wheat husk Coconut coir Rice
No filler No filler
filler filler filler filler filler filler
Tensile strength (N/mm2 ) 398.73 353.05 372 307.65 352.5 283 315 324.9
Compressive strength (N/mm2 ) 351.3 222.24 289 280.43 212.9 173.69 224.14 199.47
Cross breaking strength (N/mm2 ) 896.07 698.03 827.45 733.33 614 522 702 548
Impact strength (N/mm2 ) 263.84 206.47 214.84 234.37 234.37 245.53 278.93 256.69
Hardness (K-scale) 56.1 30.33 42.83 40.33 41 33.25 35.9 41.375
Specific gravity 1.6727 1.6152 1.6629 1.6166 2.082 1.6723 1.707 1.7272
Water absorption 0.0343 0.6541 0.205 0.2316 0.47395 1.824 0.7522 0.685
Glass content 52.14 54.77 52.83 55.55 52.39 54.02 51.41 53.19

450 1200

Cross breaking strength (N/mm2 )

400
Tensile strength (N/mm2 )

1000
350
300 800
250
600
200
150 400
100
200
50
0 0
No filler Wheat husk Coconut coir Rice husk No filler Wheat husk Coconut Rice husk
filler filler filler filler coir filler filler

GFR-Epoxy composites GFR-Epoxy composites

GFR-Polyester composites GFR-Polyester composites

Figure 2: Tensile strength of composites with/without filler. Figure 4: Results of three-point bending test.

450
Compressive strength (N/mm2 )

400
350
The compressive strength of epoxy-based and polyester-
300
based composites decreased by a maximum of 36.7% and
250
18.41% on the addition of wheat husk fillers.
200
150 4.3. Cross Breaking Strength. The three-point bending test
100 conducted on UTM shows that among the GFR-Polyester
50 composites, the composites with coconut coir fillers show
0 better strength than the plain GFR-polyester composites.
No filler Wheat husk Coconut coir Rice husk Even in GFR-Epoxy composites, the specimens with coconut
filler filler filler
coir fillers show comparable strength to the plain GFR-Epoxy
specimens. As shown in Figure 4, the cross breaking strength
GFR-Epoxy composites
GFR-Polyester composites of GFR-Epoxy composites is better than GFR-Polyester
composites. The cross breaking strength of composites with
Figure 3: Compressive strength of composites with/without filler. wheat husk fillers is lower in both GFR-Epoxy and GFR-
Polyester composites. The cross breaking strength of epoxy-
based composites decreased by 22.1% on the addition of
be used as matrix for better compressive strength. Amongst wheat husk fillers whereas that of polyester-based composites
the GFR-Polyester composites, the specimens with coconut increased by 14.33% on the addition of coconut coir fillers.
coir as filler show better compressive strength than the plain
GFR-Polyester specimens. In general, the composites with 4.4. Impact Strength. Figure 5 clearly shows that the izod
wheat husk as fillers have the minimum compressive strength. impact strength of polyester-based composites with coconut
6 Journal of Composites

350 2.5
Impact strength (N/mm2 )

300
2
250

Specific gravity
200 1.5
150
1
100
50 0.5

0
0
No filler Wheat husk Coconut Rice husk No filler Wheat husk Coconut Rice husk
filler coir filler filler coir filler filler
filler

GFR-Epoxy composites GFR-Epoxy composites

GFR-Polyester composites
GFR-Polyester composites
Figure 5: Izod Impact Strength of composites with/without filler. Figure 7: Specific gravity of composites with/without fillers.

70 hardness of composites with wheat husk as fillers was found

60 to be the lowest with both epoxy and polyester as resin as
50
shown in Figure 6. The hardness of epoxy-based composites
Hardness, HRK

decreased by 45.9% on the addition of wheat husk fillers and

40
that of polyester-based composites increased by 0.91% on the
30 addition of rice fillers.
20
10 4.6. Specific Gravity. The specific gravity of GFR-Polyester-
based composites is more than GFR-Epoxy-based compos-
0
No filler Wheat husk Coconut Rice husk ites. As is clear from Figure 7, the specific gravity of GFR-
filler coir filler filler Epoxy composites is nearly the same whereas amongst the
GFR-Polyester composites the specific gravity of plain GFR
GFR-Epoxy composites composites is found to be marginally more than those with
GFR-Polyester composites fillers. The specific gravity of epoxy-based and polyester-
Figure 6: Hardness of composites with/without filler. based reduced by a maximum of 3.39% and 19.67%, respec-
tively, on the addition of wheat husk fillers.

coir as fillers was found to be the best among all the 4.7. Water Absorption. Water absorption in case of GFR-
composites fabricated. Different patterns were observed in Polyester composites was found to be much greater than
epoxy- and polyester-based composites. In epoxy-based the GFR-Epoxy composites. Water absorption, even in GFR-
composites, plain GFRP specimens showed more impact Epoxy composites with fillers, is less than the plain GFR-
strength followed by those with rice fillers, coconut coir fillers Polyester specimen. The test results of water absorption test
and the least impact strength was with wheat husk fillers, are shown in Figure 8.
whereas in polyester-based composites, the highest impact The water uptake may affect the mechanical behavior of
strength was shown by specimens with coconut coir as fillers the developed composites. It has already been established by
followed by those with rice husk fillers, wheat husk fillers, the authors that the water uptake affects the tensile behavior
and the minimum impact strength was depicted by plain of the polymer matrix composites [24, 25]. The researchers
GFR-Polyester composites. On the whole it is observed that worldwide have tried to correlate the amount of water-up
the impact strength improves in polyester-based composites with the mechanical behavior of composite materials [25, 26].
on the addition of natural fillers. The impact strength of
polyester-based composites increased by a maximum of 4.8. Volume Fraction of Glass Fibers. The glass content for all
19.01% on the addition of coconut coir as fillers, but it reduced the specimens is found to lie in the range of 51.4%–55.55%.
by 21.6% on the addition of wheat husk fillers in epoxy-based The variation is due to the variation in weight of glass fiber
composites. mats used.

4.5. Hardness. The hardness of plain GFR-Epoxy composites 5. Conclusions

was found to be maximum with a value of HRK 56.1.
The hardness of GFR-Epoxy composites reduced with the In the present research endeavor, various characterization
addition of fillers. The hardness of GFR-Polyester with rice tests were conducted over GFR-Polyester- and GFR-Epoxy-
fillers was more than simple GFR-Polyester composites. The based composites. In general, the addition of fillers leads to
Journal of Composites 7

2.5 References
2 [1] K. S. Ahmed and S. Vijayarangan, “Tensile, flexural and inter-
Water absorbed (%)

laminar shear properties of woven jute and jute-glass fabric

1.5 reinforced polyester composites,” Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, vol. 207, no. 1–3, pp. 330–335, 2008.
1 [2] R. Mohan, K. Kishore, M. K. Shridhar, and R. M. V. G. K. Rao,
“Compressive strength of jute-glass hybrid fibre composites,”
0.5 Journal of Materials Science Letters, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 99–102, 1983.
[3] E. M. F. Aquino, L. P. S. Sarmento, W. Oliveira, and R. V.
0
No filler Wheat husk Coconut Rice husk Silva, “Moisture effect on degradation of jute/glass hybrid
filler coir filler filler composites,” Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, vol.
26, no. 2, pp. 219–233, 2007.
GFR-Epoxy composites [4] K. S. Ahmed, S. Vijayarangan, and A. C. B. Naidu, “Elastic
GFR-Polyester composites properties, notched strength and fracture criterion in untreated
woven jute-glass fabric reinforced polyester hybrid composites,”
Figure 8: Results of Water Absorption Test. Materials and Design, vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 2287–2294, 2007.
[5] K. S. Ahmed, S. Vijayarangan, and C. Rajput, “Mechanical
behavior of isothalic polyester-based untreated woven jute and
glass fabric hybrid composites,” Journal of Reinforced Plastics
cost and weight reduction of the regular glass fiber reinforced and Composites, vol. 25, no. 15, pp. 1549–1569, 2006.
composites. The effect of the addition of natural fillers has [6] N. Abilash and M. Sivapragash, “Assesment of self healing
been studied and the following conclusions can be drawn. property in hybrid fiber polymeric composite,” International
(1) The tensile strength of epoxy-based composites is bet- Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST), vol. 3, no.
ter than that of polyester-based. The tensile strength 7, pp. 5430–5435, 2011.
of GFR-Epoxy composites with coconut coir as fillers [7] M. Idicula, A. Boudenne, L. Umadevi, L. Ibos, Y. Candau, and S.
is comparable to that of plain GFR-Epoxy composite Thomas, “Thermophysical properties of natural fibre reinforced
and in case of polyester composites GFR-polyester polyester composites,” Composites Science and Technology, vol.
66, no. 15, pp. 2719–2725, 2006.
with rice husk filler is comparable to that of plain
[8] M. A. Khan, J. Ganster, and H.-P. Fink, “Hybrid composites
GFR-Polyester laminate.
of jute and man-made cellulose fibers with polypropylene by
(2) The compressive strength of GFR-Epoxy-based com- injection moulding,” Composites A, vol. 40, no. 6-7, pp. 846–851,
posites is better than that of GFR-Polyester-based 2009.
composites. The compressive strength of GFR-Poly- [9] K. John and S. Venkata Naidu, “Sisal fiber/glass fiber hybrid
ester specimens with coconut coir as fillers results in composites: the impact and compressive properties,” Journal of
better compressive strength than plain GFR-Polyester Reinforced Plastics and Composites, vol. 23, no. 12, pp. 1253–1258,
composites. 2004.
(3) The impact strength of polyester-based filler compos- [10] K. John and S. V. Naidu, “Tensile properties of unsaturated
polyester-based sisal fiber: glass fiber hybrid composites,” Jour-
ites is better than that of epoxy-based composites. The
nal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, vol. 23, no. 17, pp. 1815–
impact strength of GFR-Polyester composites with 1819, 2004.
coconut coir fillers is even more than the GFR-Epoxy
[11] K. John and S. V. Naidu, “Effect of fiber content and fiber
composites with no fillers. treatment on flexural properties of sisal fiber/glass fiber hybrid
(4) The cross breaking strength of GFR-Epoxy compos- composites,” Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, vol.
ites is better than that of GFR-Polyester composites. 23, no. 15, pp. 1601–1605, 2004.
Addition of coconut coir shows good results in both [12] P. N. Khanam, H. P. S. A. Khalil, M. Jawaid, G. R. Reddy, C.
epoxy and polyester composites. S. Narayana, and S. V. Naidu, “Sisal/Carbon fibre reinforced
hybrid composites: tensile, flexural and chemical resistance
(5) The hardness of epoxy-based composites is more with
properties,” Journal of Polymers and the Environment, vol. 18, no.
respect to polyester-based composites. 4, pp. 727–733, 2010.
(6) The specific gravity of polyester-based composites is [13] V. N. P. Naidu, G. R. Reddy, and M. A. Kumar, “Thermal
more than epoxy-based composites. The addition of conductivity of Sisal/Glass fibre reinforced hybrid composites,”
fillers leads to reduction of specific gravity in all types International Journal of Fiber and Textile Research, vol. 1, no. 1,
of composites investigated in the present research pp. 28–30, 2011.
endeavor. [14] M. Tewari, V. K. Singh, P. C. Gope, and A. K. Chaudhary,
(7) Water absorption is more in polyester-based compos- “Evaluation of mechanical properties of bagasse-glass fiber
reinforced composite,” Journal of Materials and Environmental
ites.
Science, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 171–184, 2012.
(8) Overall, coconut coir fillers should be used instead [15] M. M. Thwe and K. Liao, “Effects of environmental aging on
of wheat husk and rice husk in general to improve the mechanical properties of bamboo-glass fiber reinforced
the properties of the developed glass fiber reinforced polymer matrix hybrid composites,” Composites A, vol. 33, no.
composite laminates. 1, pp. 43–52, 2002.
8 Journal of Composites

[16] M. M. Thwe and K. Liao, “Durability of bamboo-glass fiber

reinforced polymer matrix hybrid composites,” Composites
Science and Technology, vol. 63, no. 3-4, pp. 375–387, 2003.
[17] G. Cicala, G. Cristaldi, G. Recca, G. Ziegmann, A. El-Sabbagh,
and M. Dickert, “Properties and performances of various hybrid
glass/natural fibre composites for curved pipes,” Materials and
Design, vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 2538–2542, 2009.
[18] R. Velmurugan and V. Manikandan, “Mechanical properties of
palmyra/glass fiber hybrid composites,” Composites A, vol. 38,
no. 10, pp. 2216–2226, 2007.
[19] H. D. Rozman, A. Hazlan, and A. Abubakar, “Preliminary study
on mechanical and dimensional stability of rice husk-glass fiber
hybrid polyester composites,” Polymer-Plastics Technology and
Engineering, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 1129–1140, 2004.
[20] A.-A. Abdullah-Al-Kafi, M. Z. Abedin, M. D. H. Beg, K.
L. Pickering, and M. A. Khan, “Study on the mechanical
properties of jute/glass fiber-reinforced unsaturated polyester
hybrid composites: effect of surface modification by ultraviolet
radiation,” Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites, vol. 25,
no. 6, pp. 575–588, 2006.
[21] N. M. Kumar, G. V. Reddy, S. V. Naidu, T. S. Rani, and M. C.
S. Subha, “Mechanical properties of coir/glass fiber phenolic
resin based composites,” Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Com-
posites, vol. 28, no. 21, pp. 2605–2613, 2009.
[22] W. Yaakob, W. N. Azira, and A. E. Ismail, “Tensile behavior
of hybrid natural/glass fibers reinforced composites at different
temperatures,” in Conference on Energy and Environment, Kuch-
ing, Sarawak, 2007.
[23] J. D. Bardis, K. T. Kedward, J. O. Bish, and T. K. Tsotsis,
“Alternate compression test method for notched and unnotched
composites,” in Proceedings of the 45th International SAMPE
Symposium and Exhibition, pp. 1149–1152, Long Beach, Calif,
USA, May 2000.
[24] A. Agarwal, S. Garg, P. K. Rakesh, I. Singh, and B. K. Mishra,
“Tensile behavior of glass fiber reinforced plastics subjected to
different environmental conditions,” Indian Journal of Engineer-
ing and Materials Sciences, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 471–476, 2010.
[25] P. K. Bajpai, D. Meena, S. Vatsa, and I. Singh, “Tensile behavior
of nettle fibercomposites exposed to various environments,”
Journal of Natural Fibers. In press.
[26] S. Tamrakar and R. A. Lopez-Anido, “Water absorption of
wood polypropylene composite sheet piles and its influence on
mechanical properties,” Construction and Building Materials,
vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 3977–3988, 2011.
 BioMed Research Smart Materials
International Research

International Journal of
Corrosion
Journal of Journal of
Nanotechnology
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Composites
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013

International Journal of Journal of

Polymer Science Metallurgy

Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013

Nanomaterials
Submit your manuscripts at
http://www.hindawi.com

Journal of
Materials Advances in
Materials Science and Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Volume 2013 Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013

Nanomaterials
Journal of

The Scientific
Scientifica
International Journal of
Journal of
Nanoparticles
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
World Journal
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Biomaterials
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013

ISRN ISRN ISRN ISRN ISRN

Nanotechnology Polymer Science Materials Science Corrosion Ceramics
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013