Static Mechanical Properties of High Density Polyethylene

Based Composites
Hemanth G and Apurva Rakesh,

Department of Mechanical Engineering, The National Institute of Engineering, Mysuru-570 008, India

Abstract

The main objective of this article is to discuss the mechanical properties of HDPE reinforced short glass
fiber and SiC filled composites. Composites materials made up of the high density poly ethylene (HDPE),
short glass fibers (SGFs) and silicon carbide (SiC) particles are tested for the various mechanical properties
such as hardness, inter-laminar shear strength, tensile properties, flexural properties and impact strength
following prescribed ASTM standards. This investigation showed that the mechanical properties can be
significantly improved by proper incorporation of SGFs and SiC particles into HDPE matrix. The fracture
surfaces are analyzed using scanning electron microscope (SEM). The effects between SGFs and SiC,
processing and mechanical properties are discussed.

Keywords: HDPE based composites, Processing, Mechanical properties, Fractography.

1. INTRODUCTION percentage variation of silicon carbide fillers varies

from 8% to 12% in the composite material. Here the
The polyethylene is the material having wide
HDPE is used as the matrix material which is then
industrial application. There are three major classes
being reinforced with the glass and silicon fillers.
of PEs namely, high-density PE (HDPE), low-
The specimen are prepared using extrusion followed
density PE (LDPE), and linear low-density PE
by the injection molding technique. Four different
(LLDPE) [10]. In order to enhance the mechanical
types of specimens are prepared which are named as
properties of the polymer, additional materials
TR-1, TR-2, TR-3, TR-4 on the basis for variation
called reinforcements (fiber) are added. The
of composition of Silicon carbide. Specimens for
percentage variations of High Density Poly
tensile, flexural, Inter Laminar Shear Strength,
Ethylene in the specimens ranges from 80% to 68%
Impact test and hardness testing were prepared.
(the four specimen of that sort are tested). The
Direct imaging of HDPE composites by SEM yields
percentage of short glass fibers are maintained
a more complete picture of both bulk and surface
constant in the composite and it is 20%. The
phase compositions. Similarly EDAX gives (injection molding). In third step it is pressed
composition of the composite material. horizontally to get a specimens. Fig-1.0[1] shows
the steps that are followed.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Materials

The specimen were prepared with a high density

polyethylene as matrix and short fibers are added as
reinforcements along with Silicon carbide as the
filler material. The percentage of short glass fibers
are kept constant and limited to 20% but the
percentage of matrix material is decreased in order
to facilitating the addition of filler.

The composites are designates as given below

Specimen Composition (by weight)

TR-1 80% HDPE + 20% SGF

TR-2 72% HDPE + 20% SGF + 8%

SiC
Fig-1.0: process of fabrication; 1.0(a): HDPE pellets
TR-3 70% HDPE + 20% SGF + 10%
and Carbon Nanotubes are taken in a container;
SiC
1.0(b): Heat is supplied to soften the HDPE Pellets;
TR-4 68% HDPE + 20% SGF + 12%
1.0(c): The mixture is stirred to form a dough
SiC
containing HDPE and CNT; 1.0(d): The dough is
compressed to form a flat plate; 1.0(e): Flat
2.2 Fabrication of composites
composite plate; 1.0(f): Composite pellets are
The process of fabrication is normally divided into formed by cutting the plate; 1.0(g): The composite
three steps. In the first step the HDPE is heated to pellets are fed into a rotary extruder to obtain strips
around 170°C-190°C [1] and melted then the short of the composite; 1.0(h): The strips are fed into dies
glass fibers are mixed with that and a dough is and cast into required shapes.
prepared. In the second step it is fed to a screw type
extruder and then it is extruded and fed into a mold
Prepared specimens were characterized by tensile,
flexural, inter laminar shear and notched impact
tests. All tests were carried out at 25°C [3].
2.3 Tensile test
Tensile tests were conducted according to ASTMD
638-03 [7] using universal testing machine on a
rectangular cross section dumb bell specimens.
Cross head speed of 0.5mm/min [2]. A span of
70mm [5] is maintained for all specimen.
2.4 Flexural test
The three point bend test is done according to
ASTM D 790 [8] is used. Test were conducted in
100KN UTM. The aspect ratio of 16:1 and span
length of 60mm is maintained throughout.
2.5 Interlaminar shear strength
The Interlaminar shear strength test is done
according to ASTM D 2344 [9] is used. Test were
conducted in 100KN UTM. The aspect ratio of 9:1
and span length of 30mm×10.15mm×3.75mm [6] is
maintained throughout.
2.6 Density measurement
The density is main parameter in a composite
material this is first measured in closed box
containing air later on it is measured in water to get
actual density. In order to measure the density the
specimen were cut into 10mm×10mm size.
2.7 Hardness measurement
The hardness is measured using Shore D hardness
scale. To measure the hardness the Duro meter is
pressed against the work piece. The needle is
deflected and stops at a position which is
considered. Similarly the readings are taken at
different positions to check for consisitency.
2.8 Impact test
The Izod impact test is done with V-notched
specimens to determine the impact strength. For
making the impact a hammer of 2.5J, 5J and even
7.5J are fixed to the pendulum tip.
2.9 Fractography
To analyze the fracture surface SEM images were
taken. SEM images of different magnification are
taken to concluding better. For the constituents and
their percentage composition, EDAX is done. This
is done parallel along with the SEM.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The mechanical properties depend to a greater
extent on the reinforcement/filler and to a lesser
extent on the matrix material and the interaction
between them, aspect ratio of fibers. The testing
shows trend in variations of Young’s modulus
flexural modulus, shear strength, impact strength
and density.
1. Tensile strength
HDPE composites belongs to soft and tough
polymer category. The tensile strength is more
sensitive to the matrix properties, whereas the
modulus is dependent on the fiber properties. To
improve the tensile strength, a strong interface, low
stress concentration, fiber orientation is required
whereas fiber concentration, fiber wetting in the
matrix phase, and high fiber aspect ratio determine
tensile modulus. The tensile testing is uniaxial
loading and is carried on all the specimens. Two
samples of each type are tested. The load versus
deflection curve is plotted and slope of which is used
Fig-2(b): The load v/s displacement curve for TR-4
for obtaining the Young’s Modulus. As the fillers
specimen.
increases from 0% to 12% the failure of the samples
deviate from elasticity and modulus of elasticity
increases accordingly. This can be noticed in Table Specimen Peak Tensile Young’s
1.0. As the percentage of silicon carbide increases Composition Load (N) Strength Modulus
then the strength decreases .The peak load that a (N/mm2) (N/mm2)
specimen carry decreases for a specimen with 10% TR-1 1047.51 26.94 449.90
Sic and 70% HDPE and increases for next specimen. TR-2 997.98 25.00 385.39
As the cross head speed is very less the specimen TR-3 989.34 26.016 411.52
fail elastically and that can be seen in fractography TR-4 1026.00 26.548 421.01
section of the same article. Table 1.0 Tensile Test Results

2. Flexural Strength

The three point bending test is done to determine the

Fig-2(a): The load v/s displacement curve for TR-1
specimen
flexural modulus of the specimens. The failure of
the specimen is not observed as seen in the tensile
and impact test. Load versus deflection curve is
plotted and the slope of the curve is used to calculate
the flexural modulus of the specimens. As the
percentage of silicon carbide increases from 0 to
10%, the strength decreases along with peak load
but increases again at 12% as seen from table 2.0.
 Specimen Cross Peak Flexural Flexural 3. Inter-Laminar Shear Strength
Section Load Strength Modulus
The Inter-Laminar Shear Stress test is conducted to
Area (N) (N/mm2)
determine the maximum shear stress the composite
2
(mm )
can withstand before individual layers are sheared
TR-1 37.02 55.57 35.63 747.68
away. The test is conducted similar to the three
TR-2 38.21 47.63 29.91 1327.75 point bending test using the same equipment and
fixtures. The load versus deflection curve was
TR-3 39.12 45.19 27.22 878.14
obtained and the shear strength were tabulated.
TR-4 38.39 49.21 30.44 1426.48 Shear strength tends to increase with the increase in
concentration of SiC. However, for a range of
values between 8% and 12% of SiC, the strength
Table-2.0 Three Point Bending Test Results decreases as seen in table 3.0. The only difference
lies in the aspect ratio of specimen which is 8.5:1 as
opposed to 16:1 for three point bending.

Fig-3(a) the load v/s deflection curve for TR-1

specimen Fig-4(a): The load v/s displacement curve for TR-1
specimen

Fig-3.0(b) the load v/s deflection curve for TR-4

Fig-4(b): The load v/s displacement curve for TR-2
specimen.
specimen
 Specimen Peak Load Shear Strength The main reason for not going with Barcol hardness
Composition (N) (N/mm2) is that the needle in the durometer is not getting
TR-1 122.60 2.45 deflected as soon as we press it against the work
TR-2 111.88 2.55 piece.
TR-3 90.07 1.76 Specimens Shore D Hardness
Number
TR-4 115.20 2.32
Table-3.0 Inter-Laminar Shear Stress Test Results. TR-1 45.7

4. Density Measurement TR-2 50

TR-3 55
The density is tested in a machine by first measuring
TR-4 57
in air and later in distilled water and unit then
expressed will be in the format of g/cm3, later it is Table-5.0 Shore D hardness number.
being expressed in Kg/m3. From observation we can
6. Impact strength
say that the density of the composite material is very
close to that of water which is so said that Impact test is to measure the ability of a material to

1000Kg/m3 or 1g/cm3. The pure HDPE has a density absorb the sudden application of a load with

of 953Kg/m3 or 0.953 g/cm3 [3]. This is beneficial in breaking. The Izod impact test is done by making

the light weight applications. the V-notch on the specimen using notch cutter
machine. The pendulum hammer strikes the
3 3
SPECIMENS g/cm Kg/m
specimen and the Table-4.0 shows the variation of
TR-1 1.0811 1081.1
impact strength with the percentage variation of
TR-2 1.0942 1094.2 filler material. It is found that the composite with no
TR-3 1.1121 1112.1 SiC and with 10% SiC showed higher strength when
TR-4 1.1156 1115.6 compared with other specimens.
Table-4.0: Density test result. Impact
Impact
Energy strength
5. Hardness Measurement strength
Specimen absorbed (Indian
(ASTM
(J) Standards)
) (J/m)
The shore D hardness is used to measure the (KJ/m2)
TR-1 0.5700 154.00 16.16
hardness. The Duro meter is a device used to
TR-2 0.5000 134.70 13.31
measure the hardness, but there is Barcol hardness TR-3 0.6000 159.50 16.76
scale which is also used with this. TR-4 0.4500 120.00 11.83
Table-6.0 Impact Test Results
 7. Fractography
Fractography is the study of the fracture surfaces of
materials. Fractographic methods are routinely used
to determine the cause of failure in engineering
structures. For the analysis of the fracture surfaces
images of scanning electron microscope is obtained
These images are 500x magnification (that is 50µm
scale) taken from JSM-IT300 instrument.and
compared with best two specimen and the samples
were thoroughly cleaned, air-dried and coated with
100 Å thick gold particles.
Fig-5.0(a): Image of Tensile specimen
Fig-5.0(b): Image of Tensile Specimen.
Here one can notice the failure is very elastic nature
this is due to low cross head speed and also due to
matrix material property. It can be seen that most of
the fibers are oriented along the loading and few are
not which do not support for load bearing capacity
of the material.
In Fig-5.0(b) there are few SiC filler particles that
can be seen which contributes in enhancing the
strength of the specimen.
Fig-5.0(c): Image of impact specimen.
Fig-5.0(d): Image of Impact specimen.
In the above images it is clearly visible that due to Elements Weight Atomic K-Ratio
transverse impact loading on a notched specimen % %
few fibers are dragged on to other part and few fiber C 62.44 73.27 0.2602
pullouts can be seen in Fig-4.0(d) this can be O 20.87 18.39 0.0279
interpreted as there is no good bondage between the F 3.01 2.24 0.0045
fibers and matrix material which reduces the Al 2.01 1.05 0.0134

strength of the composite.

Si 6.35 3.19 0.0481
Ca 5.32 1.87 0.0465
On one more keen observation we find that the
fibers are not sheared instead they failed making Table-7.0(b) Composition of TR-4 specimen from
some angle in axial direction. EDAX.

EDAX analysis

The tables below shows the composition of the 4. CONCLUSIONS

constituents present in a composites. From tables we
After all the tests, we can conclude that, the static
can see that amount of silicon increases from TR-1
tensile strength initially decreases for 8% of SiC but
to TR-4 correspondingly the values of Carbon also
then increases. Flexural and inter laminar shear
decreases ad the percentage of carbon in silicon
strength show a different behavior. The strengths of
carbide is lesser than that compared with the matrix
the composites got enhanced on addition of Silicon
material.
carbide material with percentage (8% and 12%) but
Elements Weight Atomic K-Ratio showed a deviated behavior for 10% of the Silicon
% % Carbide. Hence, we conclude that SiC improves the
C 90.06 96.38 0.6340
Al 0.48 0.23 0.0035 hardness and impact characteristics, whereas glass
Si 2.65 1.21 0.0216 fibers improve the mechanical properties.
Ca 6.81 2.18 0.0596
Hardness values increases with the increment of
filler material and values of the densities are
Table-7.0(a) composition of TR-1 specimen
increased with filler.

The fibers and fillers shows a medium range

bonding with the matrix materials. In fractographic
images it is observed though most of the fibers
contributed for load carrying capacity few of them
oriented in a random direction which reduces
strength of the material by not contributing for load 3. Herrera-Franco P, Valadez-Gonzalez A. A
carrying. Apart from fiber orientation it also speaks study of the mechanical properties of short
about type of matrix material and confirms that the natural-fiber reinforced composites.
material is elastic. The EDAX also gave the results Composites Part B: Engineering. 2005 Dec
which is as expected. 1;36(8):597-608.

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
4. Furukawa T, Sato H, Kita Y, Matsukawa K,
We would like to thank Dr. Suresha B, Dean of Yamaguchi H, Ochiai S, Siesler HW, Ozaki
Research and Development, NIE, Mysore, and the Y. Molecular structure, crystallinity and
Department of Mechanical Engineering for guiding morphology of polyethylene/polypropylene
us through this project. blends studied by Raman mapping,

We would like to thank Prof. Siddaramaiah, scanning electron microscopy, wide angle

Department of Polymer Science, SJCE, Mysore, for X-ray diffraction, and differential scanning

coordinating with us and providing us with the calorimetry. Polymer journal. 2006

assistance in acquiring the fractographic images we Nov;38(11):1127.

needed to complete our project. 5. Stark NM, Matuana LM, Clemons CM.
Effect of processing method on surface and
We also thank Team CogNIEscience for providing
weathering characteristics of wood–
us with this opportunity to participate
flour/HDPE composites. Journal of Applied
6. REFERNCES Polymer Science. 2004 Aug 5;93(3):1021-
1. Tang W, Santare MH, Advani SG. Melt 30.
processing and mechanical property 6. Liu N, Wang J, Chen B, Han G, Yan F.
characterization of multi-walled carbon Enhancement on interlaminar shear strength
nanotube/high density polyethylene and tribological properties in water of ultra
(MWNT/HDPE) composite films. Carbon. high molecular weight polyethylene/glass
2003 Jan 1;41(14):2779-85. fabric/phenolic laminate composite by
2. Wang M, Deb S, Bonfield W. Chemically surface modification of fillers. Materials &
coupled hydroxyapatite-polyethylene Design. 2014 Mar 1;55:805-11.
composites: processing and 7. Norma AS. Standard Test Method for
characterisation. Materials Letters. 2000 Tensile Properties of Plastics. Annu. B.
Jun 1;44(2):119-24. ASTM Stand. 2004:1-5.
8. ASTM S. Standard test methods for flexural
properties of unreinforced and reinforced
 plastics and electrical insulating materials.
ASTM D790. Annual book of ASTM
Standards. 1997.
9. Standard AS. Standard test method for
short-beam strength of polymer matrix
composite materials and their laminates.
Annual book of ASTM standards. 2010:71-
8.
10. Furukawa T, Sato H, Kita Y, Matsukawa K,
Yamaguchi H, Ochiai S, Siesler HW, Ozaki
Y. Molecular structure, crystallinity and
morphology of polyethylene/polypropylene
blends studied by Raman mapping,
scanning electron microscopy, wide angle
X-ray diffraction, and differential scanning
calorimetry. Polymer journal. 2006
Nov;38(11):1127.
11. Turla P, Kumar SS, Reddy PH, Shekar KC.
Interlaminar Shear Strength of Carbon Fiber
and Glass Fiber Reinforced Epoxy Matrix
Hybrid Composite. IJREAT International
Journal of Research in Engineering &
Advanced Technology. 2014 Apr;2(2).