Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.

4, 600-607 ISSN 1229-9197 (print version)

DOI 10.1007/s12221-016-5931-z ISSN 1875-0052 (electronic version)

Bending Properties of Carbon/Glass and Carbon/Aramid Fabric Composites

with Various Stacking Structures by the VARTM Method
Jun Hee Song*
Division of Mechanical Design Engineering, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju 54896, Korea
(Received December 18, 2015; Revised January 15, 2016; Accepted March 8, 2016)

Abstract: In this paper, the bending properties of woven carbon/glass and carbon/aramid fabric-reinforced polymer
laminates is studied using a combination of experimental analysis and fracture observation. Six types of each hybrid
composite were manufactured by lamination of the carbon/aramid fabric and carbon/glass fabric using VARTM. Bending
behaviors were fundamentally evaluated for the six types of monolithic composites laminated by the same fabric. The
objective was to achieve a good bending strength by effective combination of composite structures using limited amounts of
a raw material. It was shown that the bending property was different, depending on the type of fiber, lamination structure, and
the number of layers.
Keywords: Hybrid composites, Bending strength, Carbon, Lamination, Vacuum assisted resin transfer molding

Introduction failure of the fiber and the matrix, interfacial separation,

The world is currently facing issues caused by global
warming and the energy crisis resulting from limited natural
resources. The survival of humanity has been threatened
because the ecosystem has been disturbed by climate change
[1,2]. A consequence of this is an economic loss that
amounts to 20 % of the global GDP [3]. For the efficiency of
the resources, there has been an increase in the demand for
using new reinforcement such as super fiber to raise the
performance of materials. Multilateral studies on material
weight have been attempted in the transport sector, in part to
reduce the consumption of finite energy resources [4-10].
Polymer composites have advantages such as being
lightweight with good specific strength and stiffness. These
have the flexibility of design and superior manufacturing
over other materials [11-14]. Recently, as the need for the
development of new materials is increasing, high-performance
multi-functional composites are being actively developed
with properties such as lightweight, heat resistance, electrical
conductivity, vibration damping, and dimensional stability
[15-19]. Super fiber composite materials, in particular, are of
much interest, with carbon and aramid fiber being typical
candidate materials. Laminating composites are excellent in
terms of flexibility of design as the stacking factor can be
adjusted depending on the intended use and function. Carbon
fabric-reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites have been
widely applied to aerospace, automotive structures, and
sports products. CFRP is suitable for the manufacture of
structural components such as aircraft shells, wings, fuselage,
and engines [20,21].
Composites consisting of different materials exhibit the
properties of heterogeneity and anisotropy. Fracture mechanics
behavior of composites is very complex and usually comprises
a mix of failure modes. The types of fracture include the
*Corresponding author: sjhee@jbnu.ac.kr
fiber splitting, and delamination of the layered interface.
Therefore, to ensure the safety and integrity of composite
materials during practical use, there is an urgent need to
accumulate data for reliability evaluation [22-24].
For the manufacturing of high-quality aerospace composites,
a prepreg process is carried out by subjecting the material to
heat and pressure in an autoclave. However, the autoclave
method has the disadvantage of a long production time, the
need for expensive equipment and manufacturing costs, and
the size of the limited material scope. The RTM method
involves inserting a strand mat, woven fiber or preform into
a mold, followed by injection and curing of a liquid
thermosetting resin. This method is less expensive and can
be manufactured using simpler tools compared to the
autoclave process. Metal ribs, reinforcement, or other inserts
may be added into the mold. To replace the autoclave
process for the manufacture of large and massive structures,
the development of a liquid composite molding method has
been widely researched in many countries; these include
vacuum assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM), resin
infusion under flexible tolling (RIFT), and seaman composite
resin infusion manufacture (SCRIMP). VARTM is an advanced
RTM method that can produce a material whose quality is
similar to that obtained in the autoclave process [25-28].
As mentioned previously, carbon and aramid fibers are
representative reinforcing material. These fibers have low
density and high elasticity and strength in comparison with
the steel wire. Moreover, the aramid fiber has been revealed
to be a good reinforcement due to its high tensile properties
and excellent thermal resistance. However, aramid fiber
composites have low interfacial adhesion due to chemical
resistance of aramid in the polymer matrix [29-33].
The mechanical performance of composites is usually
characterized using tensile, shear and bending tests. If the
bending load of a composite is in the elastic stress field, the
loaded tension and compressive stresses will equally interacted

600
Bending Properties of Carbon-Aramid Composites Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 601

in upper and lower side of the neutral surface. Bending
fracture of composites may occur due to tensile or compressive
stresses. However, if the adhesion of the laminate interface is
weak, failure occurs by interfacial delamination due to shear
stress. Since the laminated composite material is vulnerable
to the interfacial strength, bending characteristics should be
investigated [34-38].
Various specimens were manufactured by VARTM, and
there was nearly no pore inside the composite material. The
effect of the composites on the mechanical properties was
determined from bending tests. The purpose of this study is
to investigate the bending failure mechanism of a woven
carbon and aramid/epoxy composite, and specifically to
determine bending strength according to the type of reinforcing
material. Another objective of this research is to examine
how the combined structure of a composite material affects
its bending behavior, for a fixed amount of raw material.
Materials and Test Methods
Resin and Reinforcement
The reinforcing fibers used were carbon (TC06P, AKSACA,
Turkey), aramid (Kevlar T49, DuPont, USA), glass (K618,
Hankuk Fiber, Korea), and high modulus polypropylene
(HMPP, Innegra S, Innegrity LLC, USA); these were obtained
in the woven form for the manufacture of the composites. A
woven fabric was used with plain weaving at 0 o and 90 o.
The matrix used was epoxy resin (HTC-667C, Jeil Hi-Tech,
Korea). The specific properties of the fiber and resin are
presented in Table 1 and 2, respectively.
VARTM Process and Specimen
A variety of fiber reinforced composites were molded into
a plate shape with multilayered structure using VARTM. The
reinforcing fabric fibers were uniformly cut into 245285 mm
pieces and stacked into a laminated structure designed for
each type of specimen. The types of specimens and lamination
structure are shown in Figure 1 and Table 3, respectively.
There were six types of monolithic composites laminated by
the same fabric. It was also fabricated to six types of two
different hybrid composites of carbon/glass fiber (CG-type)
and carbon/aramid fiber (CG-type).
In a specially designed injection system for effective
process treatment, dry fibers, peel plies, and breather were
layered and sealed in a vacuum bag. Then, the inlet and
Table 2. Properties of the epoxy resin (HTC-667C)
Specific gravity (25 oC) 1.160.02
Viscosity (cps, 25 oC) 1200500
Hardener Modified aliphatic amine
Tensile strength (MPa) 63.7
Compressive strength (MPa) 88.2
Flexural strength (MPa) 81.3

Table 1. Specification of the reinforcing fabric materials

Fiber Carbon Aramid Glass HMPP
Style TC-06-P TA-05-P TG-04-P Innegra S
Weight (g/m2) 200 165 197 110
Warp primary fiber 3K 158 tex 134 tex 104 tex
Thickness (mm) 0.270.025 0.330.025 0.180.025 0.380.05
Density (count/in) 12.51 131 181 12.51

Figure 1. Structure of the hybrid composites manufactured by VARTM.

602 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 Jun Hee Song

Table 3. Stacking sequence for the different laminating structure

Fabric type Name Fabric ply Laminating structure
Glass GFRP G10 GGGGGGGGGG
Carbon CFRP C10 CCCCCCCCCC
Aramid AFRP A10 AAAAAAAAAA
HMPP HFRP H10 HHHHHHHHHH
Glass/HMPP GH-FRP GH10 =GH
Carbon/Aramid CA-FRP CA10 =CA
Carbon+Glass CG1 C1G1 10 CGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCGCG
(CG-Hybrid) CG2 C2G2 5 CCGGCCGGCCGGCCGGCCGG
CG3 C3G3 3 CCCGGGCCCGGGCCCGGG
CG4 C4G4 2 CCCCGGGGCCCCGGGG
CGC C5G10C5 CCCCCGGGGGGGGGGCCCCC
GCG G5C10G5 GGGGGCCCCCCCCCCGGGGG
Carbon+Aramid CA1 C1A1 10 CACACACACACACACACACA
(CA-Hybrid) CA2 C2A2 5 CCAACCAACCAACCAACCAA
CA3 C3A3 3 CCCAAACCCAAACCCAAA
CA4 C4A4 2 CCCCAAAACCCCAAAA
CAC C5A10C5 CCCCCAAAAAAAAAACCCCC
ACA A5C10A5 AAAAACCCCCCCCCCAAAAA

Figure 3. Dimension of the bending specimen and bending tester.

Figure 2. Schematic of the VARTM setup.

outlet ports were connected to a vacuum hose. The epoxy 2 mm/min using a universal testing machine (Unitech-M,
resin mixed with a curing agent was evaporated for 30 min R&B, Korea). Bending strength was determined using the
at the same time and injected into the vacuum bag through a following equation:
hose by applying a vacuum pressure of about 80 kPa. After
3FL
resin injection, the molded object was cured in an oven at b = ---------2- (1)
65 oC for more than 2 h. The schematic diagram of the 2bt
VARTM process is shown in Figure 2. The total thickness where F, L, b, and t represent the bending load, support span,
was increased to about 4 mm after manufacturing. width, and thickness of the specimen, respectively.

Bending Test Results and Discussion

Various composites were manufactured to evaluate the
changes in mechanical performance of the bending properties
with the laminated structure. The reinforcing fibers used
were carbon, aramid, glass, HMPP, carbon/aramid, and carbon/
glass. The raw plate-shaped composites manufactured by the
VARTM method were machined into a standardized specimen
through a water-jet system. Bending specimens were cut to a
predetermined size according to guidelines outlined in the
ASTM D790 standard [39]. As shown in Figure 3, the
specimens were 80 mm in length, 12.7 mm in width, and
4 mm in thickness. Five specimens were repeatedly tested
for each configuration. Three point bending tests were
performed at room temperature with a crosshead speed of
Bending Behavior
Figure 4 shows typical load-displacement curves under
bending loading obtained from the CG1 and CA1 samples,
which are laminated alternately with one layer of carbon and
hybrid fiber (aramid and glass). Both of them exhibit a linear
elastic behavior up to the maximum bending load. As shown
in Figure 4(a), GFRP broke down as soon as it reached the
maximum load. However, AFRP exhibits non-linear behavior
post the linear behavior, before being destroyed. CFRP
showed a sharp load increase and the highest maximum load
(about 900 N) compared with GFRP and AFRP. Beyond
900 N, CFRP exhibits a load drop and subsequent failure.
Bending Properties of Carbon-Aramid Composites
Figure 4. Bending load and displacement curves of 1 ply
laminating composites; (a) carbon and glass fibers and (b) carbon
and aramid fibers.
Figure 5. Bending stress of the monolithic composites laminated
by a single fabric.
For AFRP, the stepwise rise in the bending load showed
serrations. It is likely to be caused when the aramid fiber was
torn out under loading because of the high toughness against
the mechanical load.
Figure 5 shows the bending strength for the six types of
monolithic composites. As described above, the data obtained
Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 603
Figure 6. Bending stress for the different hybrid composites; (a)
CG-type by carbon and glass fibers and (b) CA-type by carbon
and aramid fibers.
from Figure 4 were substituted in equation and the bending
strengths were calculated to be about 700, 618, 427, and
355 MPa for CFRP, CA-FRP, GFRP, and AFRP, respectively.
The strength of CFRP was the highest and that of HFRP was
very low at about 55 MPa. According to equation (1), the
bending strength is inversely proportional to the square of
thickness. The thickness of CFRP was about 2.3 mm, but
that of the CG-type and CA-type was about 4 mm. Therefore,
the load of CFRP was low, but their bending strength was
high.
Figure 6 illustrates the bending strength for the six types
of hybrid composites with CG-type and CA-type. Overall,
the bending strength of the CG-type is higher than that of the
CA-type. It is known that the CG-type make an excellent
combination in terms of bending property. Figure 6(a)
represents the hybrid CG-type composite consisting of
carbon and glass fabric. Bending strength values were
similarly distributed within the range of 560-590 MPa for
the CG1, CG2 and CG3 specimens, which are laminated
alternately with one, two, and three layers of carbon and
glass fiber, respectively. CG4 had four cross-laminated ply
of carbon and glass fabric, and in the CGC specimen, the
glass fabric is placed on the inside and the carbon fabric is
604 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4
placed on the outside. The CG4 and CGC samples exhibited
a high strength of 695 MPa and 657 MPa, respectively. In
the GCG specimen, the glass fabric was placed on the
surface side, and this showed the lowest strength value of
about 500 MPa. Thus, the CG4 sample, in which many
layers of fabric were laminated at a time, showed the highest
bending strength. If the carbon fabric is laminated many fold
at a time, fracture initiation becomes difficult in the thickness
direction and crack resistance will increase, resulting in an
increase in the bending strength. Figure 6(b) shows the
hybrid CA-type composite consisting of carbon and aramid
fabric. The bending strength was the lowest at 505 MPa in
the CA1 type specimen in which one layer of carbon and one
layer of aramid fiber were alternately placed. The bending
strengths of the CA2, CA3 and CA4 specimens are similar
and lie within the range of 525-540 MPa. However, in the
CAC specimen, the laminated aramid fabric was placed on
the inside and this resulted in a high strength of 603 MPa. In
contrast, in the ACA specimen, the laminated aramid fabric
was placed on the outside and it resulted in a strength of
514 MPa.
Because the bending strength of the carbon fiber is higher
than that of the glass or aramid fiber, it is considered that the
bending properties are dominated by the position of the
carbon fabric in hybrid composites. Since the maximum
Figure 7. Fracture of the monolithic composites in thickness direction.
Jun Hee Song
resistance against bending load occurs in the most distant
surface side from the neutral plane, in the CAC composite,
the carbon fabric was placed on the surface side and this
resulted in higher strength than the ACA. The bending
strength of the CA-type and CG-type were distributed in the
range of roughly 500-600 MPa and 600-700 MPa, respectively.
Generally, the hybrid CA-type composite exhibited a lower
bending stress than the CG-type. This was believed to be due
to delamination of the aramid fabric surface, resulting from
low interfacial adhesion. In the investigation of strength by
bending tests, the bending property was found to differ
depending on the type of fiber, lamination structure, and the
number of layers.
Observation of Fracture Surfaces
After the bending tests, the thickness of all the specimens
was observed using an optical microscope. As shown in
Figure 7, the degree of fracture varied with the bending load
in the thickness direction for composites consisting of
reinforcing fiber and resin. The interface between the fiber
and resin in GFRP was found to separate easily. CFRP
showed delamination in the vicinity of the upper and lower
surfaces. The observation of AFRP was difficult due to the
presence of fluff (or lint), but delamination was confirmed to
occur between the layers. Composites of the HFRP and GH-
Bending Properties of Carbon-Aramid Composites
FRP exhibited large deformation of fibers rather than
delamination or crack formation under the influence of high
ductility. The CA-FRP contained cracks in the vicinity of the
upper and lower surfaces.
Changes in the fracture surface as a result of bending load
were macroscopically observed for a specific composite. As
can be seen in Figure 8, there was a lot of damage caused to
the upper and lower surfaces on application of a bending
load. Especially, in the case of the GFRP specimen, many
traces of failure and delamination were prominently observed
over wide areas in the lower part, which was subjected to
tensile load, than in the top part, which was subjected to
compressive load. In the failed part of the CG-type, the carbon
and glass fiber is shown in black and white, respectively.
This specimen was visualized in white color due to delamination
Figure 8. Fracture shape for the various hybrid composites.
Figure 9. SEM photograph of the CA-type and CG-type composites; (a) CA-type and (b) CG-type.
Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 605
of the glass fiber. If there is no damage to the CG-type,
everything appears black. On switching from the CG1 to the
CG3 type, delamination (white pattern) is increased and the
length also became larger. However, the failure of CG4 was
significantly reduced compared to CG3. As described above,
the bending strength of CG4 was excellent. The damage size
of GCG was bigger than that of CGC.
Figure 9 shows SEM photograph for fracture surface of
the CA-type and CG-type composites. As shown in Figure
9(a), the aramid fiber was destroyed without bonding of the
matrix at the interface. The carbon fiber was strongly attached
to the epoxy. In Figure 9(b) of the CG-type composites, the
glass fiber was fractured with the epoxy struck together at
the interface. The interfacial adhesion of the CG-type
composites was superior to that of the CG-type. Therefore,
606 Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4
it was confirmed that bending strength of the CG-type
composites was higher than that of the CG-type.
Conclusion
The present study was to find composites of high mechanical
performance using a fixed quantity of raw material. The
mechanical properties were evaluated in terms of the bending
performance. Test composites were manufactured using
VARTM. The bending specimens were divided into three
types: monolithic composites, carbon/glass, and carbon/
aramid hybrid composites. A total of 18 samples were used
to investigate the bending strength. The results obtained
from experimental analysis and fracture observation can be
summarized as follows.
Except for monolithic composites of aramid and HMPP,
all the other monolithic composites exhibited a linear elastic
behavior under bending load. Bending strengths of about
700, 427, 355, and 55 MPa are obtained for CFRP, GFRP,
AFRP, and HFRP, respectively. The strength of CFRP was
the highest and that of HFRP was very low. In general, the
bending strength of the CG-type composites is higher than
that of the CA-type. The bending strength values were
similar for the CG1, CG2 and CG3 specimens, but those of
CG4 and CGC were higher at 695 MPa and 657 MPa,
respectively. In the case of CG4, in which many carbon fabric
layers are laminated at a time, fracture initiation becomes
difficult in the thickness direction and crack resistance
increases, leading to an increase in the bending strength. In
CA-type composites, the bending strength of CA1 was the
lowest, while that of the CA2, CA3 and CA4 specimens
were similar. However, in the CAC laminated specimen, the
aramid fabric was placed in the middle and it exhibited a
high strength of 603 MPa. The bending property was found
to differ depending on the type of fiber, lamination structure,
and the number of layers.
Optical microscope observations show that the interface in
GFRP was easily separated, and CFRP showed delamination
in the vicinity of the upper and lower surfaces. It was
difficult to confirm the occurrence of delamination in AFRP
due to the presence of fluff. HFRP had large deformation
owing to high ductility. The CG-type specimen can be
macroscopically visualized in white color due to delamination of
the glass fiber. On switching from the CG1 to the CG3,
delamination is increased (increase of white pattern) and the
length also becomes larger. However, the failure of CG4 was
significantly reduced compared to CG3 and its high strength
was identified by fracture surface.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Basic Science Research
Program through the National Research Foundation of
Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-
Jun Hee Song
2015R1D1A3A01019379).
References
1. J. Tang, H. M. Meng, and L. L. Huang, RSC Adv., 4, 16512
(2014).
2. S. Chu and A. Majumdar, Nature, 488, 294 (2012).
3. R. Pielke Jr., Global Environ. Chang., 17, 302 (2007).
4. B. Tonn, P. D. Frymier, D. Stiefel, L. S. Skinner, N.
Suraweera, and R. Tuck, J. Clean. Prod., 66, 392 (2014).
5. P. Martensson, D. Zenkert, and M. Akermo, Compos.
Struct., 134, 572 (2015).
6. S. H. Nam, D. Y. Lee, J. W. Kim, and D. G. Lee, Compos.
Struct., 134, 124 (2015).
7. D. H. Kim, H. G. Kim, and H. S. Kim, Compos. Struct.,
131, 742 (2015).
8. Y. Li, L. Xie, and H. Ma, Mater. Des., 86, 313 (2015).
9. E. R. H. Fuchs, F. R. Field, R. Roth, and R. E. Kirchain,
Compos. Sci. Technol., 68, 1989 (2008).
10. V. Fiore, T. Scalici, G. D. Bella, and A. Valenza, Compos.
Pt. B-Eng., 74, 74 (2015).
11. S. L. Valena, S. Griza, V. G. Oliveira, E. M. Sussuchi, and
F. G. C. Cunha, Compos. Pt. B-Eng., 70, 1 (2015).
12. W. Hufenbach, R. Bohm, L. Kroll, and A. Langkamp,
Mech. Compos., 40, 519 (2004).
13. F. Sarasini, J. Tirillo, L. Ferrante, M. Valente, T. Valente, L.
Lampani, P. Gaudenzi, S. Cioffi, S. Iannace, and L.
Sorrentino, Compos. Pt. B-Eng., 59, 204 (2014).
14. T. T. Li, R. Wang, C. W. Lou, and J. H. Lin, Compos. Pt. B-
Eng., 59, 60 (2014).
15. Y. Yang, X. Wu, S. Terada, M. Okano, A. Nakai, and H.
Hamada, Int. J. Crash., 17, 295 (2012).
16. Q. Liu, Y. Lina, Z. Zonga, G. Sun, and Q. Lic, Compos.
Struct., 97, 231 (2013).
17. J. Bouchet, E. Jacquelin, and P. Hamelin, Compos. Sci.
Technol., 60, 1891 (2000).
18. G. Belingardi, A. T. Beyene, and E. G. Koricho, Compos.
Struct., 102, 217 (2013).
19. E. G. Koricho and G. Belingardi, Int. J. Automot. Compos.,
1, 90 (2014).
20. R. F. Gibson, Compos. Struct., 92, 2793 (2010).
21. L. Ye, Y. Lu, Z. Su, and G. Meng, Compos. Sci. Technol.,
65, 1436 (2005).
22. G. A. Bouche and A. T. Akono, Eng. Fract. Mech., 148,
243 (2015).
23. J. M. L. Reis, Constr. Build. Mater., 37, 177 (2012).
24. M. May, Compos. Pt. A-Appl. Sci. Manuf., 81, 1 (2016).
25. S. Bickerton and M. Z. Abdullah, Compos. Sci. Technol.,
63, 1359 (2003).
26. J. H. Song, E-Polymers, 14, 345 (2014).
27. N. K. Naik, M. Sirisha, and A. Inani, Prog. Aerosp. Sci.,
65, 22 (2014).
28. P. Simacek, . Eksik, D. Heider, J. W. Gillespie, and S.
Advani, Compos. Pt. A-Appl. Sci. Manuf., 43, 370 (2012).
Bending Properties of Carbon-Aramid Composites
29. L. Ghosh, H. Kinoshita, and N. Ohmae, Compos. Sci.
Technol., 67, 1611 (2007).
30. Y. H. Zhang, Y. D. Huang, J. M. He, L. N. Wu, and Z. W.
Xu, Compos. Interface, 15, 611 (2008).
31. G. Zhao, B. X. Liu, Q. H. Wang, and T. M. Wang, Surf.
Interface Anal., 45, 605 (2013).
32. W. Wang, R. Li, M. Tian, L. Liu, H. Zou, X. Zhao, and L.
Zhang, ACS Appl. Mater. Interface, 5, 2062 (2013).
33. S. Hussain, C. Yorucu, I. Ahmed, R. Hussain, B. Chen, M.
B. Khan, N. A. Siddique, and I. U. Rehman, Surf. Coat.
Technol., 258, 458 (2014).
34. E. G. Koricho and G. Belingardi, Compos. Pt. B-Eng., 79,
430 (2015).
Fibers and Polymers 2016, Vol.17, No.4 607
35. H. Ullah, A. R. Harland, and V. V. Silberschmidt, Compos.
Pt. B-Eng., 75, 156 (2015).
36. C. Dong and I. J. Davies, Compos. Pt. B-Eng., 43, 2751
(2012).
37. J. Shi, L. Bao, R. Kobayashi, J. Kato, and K. Kemmochi,
Compos. Sci. Technol., 72, 1298 (2012).
38. J. Hoffman, J. Middleton, and M. Kumosa, Compos. Sci.
Technol., 106, 141 (2015).
39. ASTM D 790-10, Standard Test Methods for Flexural
Properties of Unreinforced and Reinforced Plastics and
Electrical Insulating Materials, West Conshohocken,
ASTM International, 2010.