Effect of carbon fiber surface properties on carbon fiber/polyphenylene sulfide composite interfacial property

Abstract

Carbon fiber (CF) reinforced polyphenylene sulfide (PPS) composite shows extraordinary thermal stability, chemical resistance, and processability. The interface between CF and PPS transfers the load, and its properties are crucial to determine composite properties such as mechanical performance, reliability, and so forth. This work explores the relationship between surface properties of CFs (with/without sizing layer) and the interfacial properties of CF/PPS composite. X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, atomic force microscope were employed to evaluate surface physicochemical properties of CFs, and reveal the increasing roughness and decreasing content of functional groups on the CF surface after desizing. Inverse gas chromatography and dynamic contact angle tests were adopted to characterize the surface energy of CFs, and present that the dispersive component of surface energy increases, while the polar component decreases, and the total surface energy is barely changed after desizing. Differential scanning calorimetry measurement reveals the increasing crystallinity of CF/PPS after CF desizing. Microbond test was performed to analyze interfacial shear strength (IFSS) of CF/PPS, displays that IFSS keeps almost constant after CF desizing. The results demonstrate that the surface energy of CF is important to the interfacial crystallinity, but not the critical factor for interfacial strength of CF/PPS composite.

A new strategy for improvement of interface and mechanical properties of carbon fiber/epoxy composites by grafting graphene oxide onto carbon fiber with hyperbranched polymers via thiol‐ene click chemistry

“…[1][2][3][4][5] Averagely, the mechanical performances of CFRP are strongly affected by their interface property between fiber and polymer matrix, which is crucial for efficient transfer of internal stress. [6][7][8] Unfortunately, the interfacial interaction of CFRP is generally very poor because of the chemically inert surface and poor wettability of carbon fiber (CF). The modulus difference between fiber and polymer matrix is also prone to cause internal stress concentration at the composites interface.…”

“…Carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) composites have attracted extensive attention owing to their outstanding properties of high strength, lightweight, high corrosion resistance, and good design flexibility 1–5 . Averagely, the mechanical performances of CFRP are strongly affected by their interface property between fiber and polymer matrix, which is crucial for efficient transfer of internal stress 6–8 . Unfortunately, the interfacial interaction of CFRP is generally very poor because of the chemically inert surface and poor wettability of carbon fiber (CF).…”

Mutual dependence of experimental and data analysis features in characterization of fiber‐matrix interface via microdroplets

“…In general, IFSS is calculated simply using F max as the cardinal data point (i.e., IFSS ¼ F max = embedded area). 3,4,15 In addition, the shape of the F À δ curve has been qualitatively used to determine the nature of the damage. The damage initiation and also the effect of surface modifications on fibers influencing the interface have been qualitatively investigated.…”

“…Single fiber test methods, such as the pull‐out test, 1,2 the microbond (MB) test 3–5 and the push‐out test 6 have been developed to characterize the interface of fiber‐matrix systems in composite materials. The MB test has become increasingly popular as it can use a relatively small embedded length and multiple droplets can be deposited on a single fiber, especially compared to the pull‐out test 7–9 …”

“…In general, IFSS is calculated simply using as the cardinal data point (i.e., ) 3,4,15 . In addition, the shape of the curve has been qualitatively used to determine the nature of the damage.…”