Next Article in Journal
UV-Curable Bio-Based Polymers Derived from Industrial Pulp and Paper Processes
Next Article in Special Issue
Polymer Composites Filled with Metal Derivatives: A Review of Flame Retardants
Previous Article in Journal
Synergistic Antibacterial Effect of Casein-AgNPs Combined with Tigecycline against Acinetobacter baumannii
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Polymers
Volume 13
Issue 9
10.3390/polym13091532
polymers-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Kenaf Fiber/Pet Yarn Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Polymer Composites: Morphological, Tensile, and Flammability Properties

by
M. J. Suriani
1,2,*,
Hasliana Asyikin Zainudin
1,
R. A. Ilyas
3,4,*,
Michal Petrů
5,
S. M. Sapuan
6,7,
C. M. Ruzaidi
1,2 and
Rohani Mustapha
1
1
Faculty of Ocean Engineering Technology and Informatics, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Nerus 21030, Terengganu, Malaysia
2
Marine Materials Research Group, Faculty of Ocean Engineering Technology and Informatics, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Nerus 21030, Terengganu, Malaysia
3
School of Chemical and Energy Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM, Johor Bahru 81310, Johor, Malaysia
4
Centre for Advanced Composite Materials, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM, Johor Bahru 81310, Johor, Malaysia
5
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Liberec, Studentská 2, 461 17 Liberec, Czech Republic
6
Laboratory of Biocomposite Technology, Institute of Tropical Forestry and Forest Products (INTROP), Universiti Putra Malaysia, UPM, Serdang 43400, Selangor, Malaysia
7
Advanced Engineering Materials and Composites Research Centre (AEMC), Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, UPM, Serdang 43400, Selangor, Malaysia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Polymers 2021, 13(9), 1532; https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13091532
Submission received: 17 March 2021 / Revised: 3 May 2021 / Accepted: 6 May 2021 / Published: 10 May 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Bio and Synthetic Based Polymer Composite Materials)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The application of natural fibers is rapidly growing in many sectors, such as construction, automobile, and furniture. Kenaf fiber (KF) is a natural fiber that is in demand owing to its eco-friendly and renewable nature. Nowadays, there are various new applications for kenaf, such as in absorbents and building materials. It also has commercial applications, such as in the automotive industry. Magnesium hydroxide (Mg(OH)2) is used as a fire retardant as it is low in cost and has good flame retardancy, while polyester yarn (PET) has high tensile strength. The aim of this study was to determine the horizontal burning rate, tensile strength, and surface morphology of kenaf fiber/PET yarn reinforced epoxy fire retardant composites. The composites were prepared by hybridized epoxy and Mg(OH)2 PET with different amounts of KF content (0%, 20%, 35%, and 50%) using the cold press method. The specimen with 35% KF (epoxy/PET/KF-35) displayed better flammability properties and had the lowest average burning rate of 14.55 mm/min, while epoxy/PET/KF-50 with 50% KF had the highest tensile strength of all the samples. This was due to fewer defects being detected on the surface morphology of epoxy/PET/KF-35 compared to the other samples, which influenced the mechanical properties of the composites.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

In the last few decades, advanced application of composite materials has gained a lot of interest from various sectors, especially transmission towers, defense, aircrafts, marine, and the automotive industry [1,2,3,4]. Industries have sought environmentally friendly materials for their products due to increasing global awareness about the environmental impact [5,6]. Natural fibers are renewable sources that have emerged as a new generation of reinforcement and supplement for polymers [7,8]. Growing industrial activities have prompted continuous demand for better materials that satisfy various requirements, such as higher strength, higher modulus, reduced cost, etc. These requirements often involve a combination of many properties that are difficult to attain. The use of a composite material whose constituents will synergize to solve the needs of the application is therefore necessary. Many researchers in the past have developed composites using natural fibers, such as sugar palm [9,10,11,12,13,14,15], oil palm [16], sugarcane [17,18,19], water hyacinth [20], kenaf [21,22,23], corn husk [24], bamboo [25], coir [26], sisal [27], cogon [28], and banana [29,30]. These natural fibers possess good reinforcing capability when properly combined with polymers [31].
Nowadays, hybrid composites are widely used in industrial and automobile applications. A hybrid composite can be defined as a combination of two or more different types of fibers in which one fiber balances the deficiency of another fiber [32,33,34,35]. They are composites with two or more reinforcing materials incorporated in a mixture and filling materials in a single matrix [36]. The properties of hybrid composite are influenced by the fiber content, length, and orientation. The selection of the fiber constituent for hybrid composites affects the hybridization and the requirement of the material being constructed. The selection of compatible fibers and fiber properties is therefore a critical aspect in designing hybrid composites [37]. This step is crucial in order to achieve hybrid composites with the best performance [38]. A previous study found that sisal and oil palm fibers were compatible combinations for hybrid composites due to the high tensile strength and toughness of the sisal and oil palm fibers, respectively [39]. In addition, there are some specific advantages of hybrid composites compared to conventional composites. For instance, hybrid composites can balance strength and stiffness, improve fatigue resistance, balance bending and membrane mechanical properties, increase fracture toughness, and improve impact resistance [40]. The advantages of hybrid composites could complement other fiber constituents. The hybridization of kenaf with polyester (PET) and polyoxymethylene (POM) composites improved the mechanical performance of the composites due to the high strength of PET fiber [41]. Ramesh et al. [42] studied the effect of hybridization on mechanical properties for sisal, jute natural fiber, and glass fiber woven mat. They found that a sisal/jute/glass composite enhanced the mechanical properties compared to a composite made of only sisal and jute fibers. Polymer composites can be hybridized with different combinations, such as cellulosic/cellulosic, synthetic/synthetic, and cellulosic/synthetic fibers [43]. As for cost reduction of fibers such as carbon and glass, an attempt was made by combining jute, a cost-effective and eco-friendly natural fiber, with fiber metal laminate (FML) [44]. The use of natural resources to make high-performance materials is increasing [45]. Fiber hybridization with synthetic fibers results in improvement of the properties of hybrid composites by increasing their strength [46,47]. Synthetic fibers have good potential for hybridization with natural fibers due to their low cost and high strength. PET fibers have good mechanical properties and hydrophobic characteristics, which means hybridization of kenaf fiber with PET yarn could improve the strength of the composite material.
Natural fibers contain hydrogen bonds and other linkages that give them strength and stiffness. In Western Europe, natural fibers are being used in the automotive industry and for packaging materials. Natural fibers are cellulosic materials, which have several fibrils that run all along the length of the fiber [48]. The demand for natural fiber composites has grown rapidly for various applications, such as automotive components, building materials, and the aerospace industry, due to their ecological and economic advantages compared to conventional composites [49]. The use of sisal, bamboo, sugar palm, kenaf, cotton, and jute from natural resources has helped engineers develop high-performance and environmentally safe engineering products.
One of the potential constituents of natural fiber reinforced plastic composites in Malaysia is kenaf fiber (KF). Research on kenaf has grown tremendously. Kenaf long fibers could be used for a wide variety of applications if the properties were found to be comparable to existing synthesis composites. Nowadays, there are various new applications for kenaf, such as in furniture, composite boards, automotive panels, insulation mats, geotextiles, packaging, absorbents, building materials, and paper products. Kenaf also has commercial applications, such as in the automotive industry [37,50,51]. Large global corporations, such as Toyota Motor Corporation, have led the world in the use of kenaf. Biocomposites can result in a 25% reduction of vehicle weight, consequently contributing to saving 39.45 trillion of crude oil [52]. Moreover, this material can be used for composite frames for electric vehicles as it will reduce energy consumption. Because kenaf is always available in long fiber form, the mechanical properties could be of use in many industrial applications, such as insulator seals. In addition, kenaf fibers have the advantage of being biodegradable, low density, nonabrasive during processing, and environmentally safe [53]. The attractive features of kenaf fibers are low cost, lightweight, renewability, biodegradability, and high specific mechanical properties. Kenaf has a bast fiber that contains 75% cellulose and 15% lignin and offers the advantage of being biodegradable and environmentally safe [54]. Kenaf, like all agro (lignocellulosic) fibers or cell wall polymers, is a three-dimensional polymeric composite primarily made up of cellulose (56–64%), hemicelluloses (29–35%), lignin (11–14%), and small amounts of extractives and ash.
When using natural fibers as reinforcement, the composite is prone to fire damage, and it is therefore essential to find additives that have low total emission of heat [55]. Therefore, it is really important to improve the flame retardancy of composite materials [49]. With natural fibers being increasingly used, the development of safe and environmentally friendly flame retardant polymer composites is very important. Previous studies have used magnesium hydroxide and zinc borate as flame retardants to enhance the mechanical and flammability properties of sisal/polypropylene (PP) composites. They showed that addition of flame retardant to sisal/PP composites increased the thermal stability of the composites and reduced burning. Just like other organic materials, polymers and natural fibers are very sensitive to flame. In order to minimize the fire risk and meet fire safety requirements, solutions to prevent the ignition of these materials have been developed. Thus, flame retardant composites were produced [56]. Flame retardants are chemical substances that are added to materials both to constrain and delay the spread of fire after ignition [57]. Magnesium hydroxide is low in cost and has good flame retardancy for use as a fire retardant. It is an environmentally friendly, inorganic flame retardant with low smoke and nontoxic characteristics [58]. Besides examining the addition of flame retardant material in natural fiber/polymer composites, there is also research being undertaken for treatment of natural fibers with fire retardant materials. The preparation and characterization of thermosetting and thermoplastic composite materials reinforced with the most commonly used fibers with and without treatment using different methods have been conducted in the past. Treatment using alkaline on the surface of the fiber changes the surface wettability, altering the mechanical and physical properties of the natural fibers. Previous studies have also shown that, as the fiber content increases in accordance with the mixture rule, the strength and modulus of longitudinal composites in tensile and flexural loading also increases [59].
Compared to other natural fibers, kenaf is eco-friendly and has a high growth rate. Therefore, in the present work, an investigation was carried out to study the horizontal burning rate, with magnesium hydroxide used to determine its capability as a fire retardant composite. Different percentages of kenaf fibers were added, with PET yarn and magnesium hydroxide used as controls. The objective was to determine the horizontal burning rate, tensile strength, and surface morphology of kenaf fiber/PET yarn reinforced epoxy fire retardant composites.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

The main materials used in the study were kenaf fiber and PET yarn. Kenaf fiber was ordered from Innovative Pultrusion Sdn. Bhd., Negeri Sembilan. First, the kenaf fibers were combed to clean and untangle the strong bonds between individual fibers. Combed fibers exhibit stronger mechanical properties compared to uncombed ones [60]. Then, the kenaf fibers were cut to 22 cm pieces using scissors. PET yarn was bought from Wellward Sdn. Bhd., Johor, and were also cut into 22 cm pieces using scissors. The matrix used in this research was epoxy resin and hardener supplied by HR Team Enterprise, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu. Magnesium hydroxide was ordered from HR Team Enterprise, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu. Table 1 shows the properties of the epoxy resin and hardener. The densities of the materials used in this research are shown in Table 2.

2.2. Research Methodology

Figure 1 shows the research methodology of the experiment. The experiment started with the preparation of materials, followed by fabrication of hybrid composites, and then tests carried out to determine burning, tensile, and surface morphology properties of the hybrid composites. The data obtained were analyzed and are critically discussed.

2.3. Preparation of Materials

The composite comprised a hybrid of kenaf fiber/PET yarn as reinforcement, while epoxy resin was used as the matrix and magnesium hydroxide as the fire retardant [61]. Epoxy with a density of 1.21 g/cm3 was used as a binding material to fabricate the composite specimen. The recommended mixing ratio for epoxy resin and hardener is 2:1. The volume of epoxy used depended on the different ratios of kenaf fiber/epoxy, which determined the weight of epoxy needed. In this study, magnesium hydroxide was used as the control and a high filled-type inorganic flame retardant, with 5% magnesium hydroxide mixed with the epoxy resin to enhance the flame retardancy of the composite material.

2.4. Fabrication Process

The composite samples were prepared using a hybrid of kenaf fibers/PET yarn with the epoxy resin as binder and magnesium hydroxide as fire retardant through a random hand lay-up technique. The composition of the samples of kenaf fiber reinforced epoxy fire retardant composites is shown in Table 3.
Before fabricating, kenaf fibers were combed and then cut into 22 cm pieces. After that, the fibers were weighed based on the density of the fiber to determine the exact portion of fiber that should be used in the fiber polymer composite samples to obtain the designated fiber volume content. One of the problems with kenaf fiber reinforced epoxy that needs to be addressed is uneven fiber distribution [62]. In addition, it is difficult to manually and visually separate kenaf fibers during manufacturing [63].
The fabricating process of the composites in this study was as follows. The molds were polished using grease oil (releasing agent) before starting fabrication. Epoxy resin was mixed with a ratio of 2:1 (resin: hardener by weight) according to the manufacturer’s specifications. The mixture was stirred slowly for 10 minutes to ensure that both epoxy and hardener were uniformly mixed. Then, magnesium hydroxide was poured into the mixture of epoxy and hardener. The mixture of magnesium hydroxide was then stirred slowly for 5–10 min to ensure the mixtures were uniformly mixed.
A transparent plastic sheet was placed on the surface of the mold. Then, the mixture of magnesium hydroxide with epoxy and hardener was poured slowly into the mold. Next, the fibers and PET yarn were completely immersed in resin by portion and then distributed randomly in the mold. The composite was covered by a transparent plastic sheet to avoid formation of air bubbles inside the mold. The plastic cover was used to prevent the fibers from attaching to the steel plate during curing. The composite was pressed using a flat plate to remove the remaining bubbles inside the mold. The mold was then compressed by another steel plate on top of the transparent plastic sheet. Demoulding of specimens was carried out after 24 h of fabrication. Figure 2 depicts the arrangement of KF and PET yarn with epoxy in the metal mold. Finally, the mold was cleaned to be used for the next specimen.
For each composition, the fiber and its binder were calculated to determine the weight of the fiber and epoxy needed to fill the mold. After fabrication of the composite was complete, the specimen of each composition was cut into nine pieces of 1.3 cm width for use in the horizontal burning test and eight pieces of 1.5 cm width for use in the tensile test. The images of these composites were also captured after the tensile test. Table 4 shows the results for all samples. Figure 3 presents the samples of each composition that were completely cured.

2.5. Testing and Experiment

2.5.1. Horizontal Burning Test

The burning test was conducted to determine the burning rate of the samples. The samples were set up according to ASTM standard D635. For these points, all specimens were cut to exact length with dimension of 12.5 cm length × 1.3 cm width × 0.3 cm thickness. The test was carried out in triplicate. The test samples were supported horizontally at one end. Next, the free end was exposed to a specified gas flame for 30 s. The time and extent of burning were measured using a stopwatch, and it was noted if the specimen did not burn. An average burning rate was noted for the material if it was burned to the 100 mm mark from the ignited end. The formula below was used to determine the average burning rate of each sample:
Average   burning   rate   mm / min = Damaged   length ,   L   mm   Time ,   t   min

2.5.2. Tensile Test

The fiber tensile test was used to determine the strength of the composite materials. The samples were set up according to ASTM standard D3039M. First, all of the samples were cut into the same size of 20 cm height × 1.5 cm width × 0.3 cm thickness. Then, four aluminum plates with a dimension of 25 mm × 15 mm × 1 mm were attached to the two sides of both ends of the samples using the epoxy resin. The test was carried out in five replications using the Universal Testing Machine (INSTRON 5556) (Norwood, MA, USA) with a 5 kN load cell; the crosshead speed was maintained at 2 mm/min.

2.5.3. Scanning Electron Microscopy

SEM is capable of performing analyses of selected point locations on a sample, which is especially useful for qualitatively or semiquantitatively determining chemical composition (using energy-dispersive (EDS)), crystalline structure, and crystal orientations (using electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD)). The design and function of the SEM are very similar to EPMA, and considerable overlap in capabilities exists between the two instruments. From the tensile test fracture samples, the samples at the edge of the fracture side were cut using a jigsaw machine. Then, the samples were coated with gold using a vacuum sputter coater to make them conductive prior to SEM observation. The cross section of samples was coated with gold as shown in Figure 4. The samples underwent observation to detect defects on the surface using SEM.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Flammability Properties

From the results of horizontal burning test for every sample, the average horizontal burning rate was determined. Figure 5 shows samples of each composition after the burning test. The average burning rate for each sample was converted to a graph so that the trend of this average can be clearly seen (Figure 6).
From Figure 6, it can be clearly seen that the epoxy/Mg/PET with 0% KF showed the highest average burning rate of 22.151 mm/min compared to the other samples. Epoxy/Mg/PET ignited earlier, released more heat overall, and took shorter average time to reach its burning point. The ignition time is related to the fiber volume fraction of resin exposed to the flame on the composite surface [64]. Polymeric matrices have poor flammability behavior. The polymer matrix depends on the reinforcements and fillers, and it has no prominent role in improving the flame resistance of composites. The PET yarn was melted and moved away from the flame and burned with smoky flame during the burning test.
The KF content for epoxy/PET/KF-20, epoxy/PET/KF-35, and epoxy/PET/KF-50 was 20%, 35%, and 50%, respectively. The average burning rate of epoxy/PET/KF-35 was the lowest at 14.553 mm/min compared to the other samples. As a result, the composite with 35% KF and 5% magnesium hydroxide showed better result due to the compatible combination of fiber and fire retardant compared to 20% and 50% KF. The fiber volume content in epoxy/PET/KF-35 was the best compared to epoxy/PET/KF-20 and epoxy/PET/KF-50 samples because of the lower burning rate and higher fire retardant effectiveness. When the fiber content was increased above 20%, the characteristics of the composite became more similar to lignocellulosic materials [65]. A recent study showed that the presence of kenaf fiber increased the smoke density rating due to the characteristics of kenaf fiber that promote smoke production through char formation when exposed to flame [66].
The flame took a long time to propagate along epoxy/PET/KF-35 and also produced char at the same time. The production of char was the reaction of Mg in front of the flame. Charring is known as a chemical process of incomplete combustion of certain solids when subjected to high heat. By the action of heat, charring removes hydrogen and oxygen, so only carbon remains in the char. In addition, as acid and halogen-free flame retardant, Mg releases the water of hydration when it decomposes endothermically, which helps the flame retarding action [67]. The energy absorption mechanism then occurs because the magnesium compound undergoes a highly endothermic decomposition reaction that slows the heating rate of most materials in fire [68]. Epoxy/PET/KF-50 showed the highest average burning rate among the samples that contained the natural fiber. This might be due to possible environmental conditions that promote increased burning rate [66].

3.2. Tensile Properties

The ultimate tensile strength, elongation break, and elastic modulus were determined from the stress–strain curve of hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn reinforced epoxy fire retardant composite after the test. Statistical analysis was conducted based on the data of five specimens for each composite sample. Figure 7 shows the stress–strain curve of hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn reinforced epoxy fire retardant composites with different fiber volume contents (epoxy/Mg/PET, epoxy/PET/KF-20, epoxy/PET/KF-35, and epoxy/PET/KF-50), which was linear and followed the Hooke’s law. It can be seen that epoxy/PET/KF-50 had better tensile properties compared to the other samples. Its ultimate tensile stress was 32.02 MPa, which was higher than the those of epoxy/Mg/PET, epoxy/PET/KF-20, and epoxy/PET/KF-35, which were 10.87, 19.96, and 25.24 MPa, respectively.
The tensile strength of hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn increased with the increase of fiber volume content, as shown in Figure 8. The tensile strength of the composites is tabulated in Table 5. The combination of kenaf fiber and PET yarn resulted in an enhancement of tensile properties of the composites. The ultimate strain of the epoxy/Mg/PET composite was the lowest compared to the other samples. The tensile strength is greatly dependent on effective and uniform stress distribution [69,70,71]. The increased strength of the hybrid composite was primarily due to the high strength of the hemp fiber rather than the low strength of the PET fiber [72].
According to the study by Mobedi et al. [73], the addition of magnesium hydroxide has a negative impact on the tensile properties, with magnesium hydroxide found to be a cursor for controlling the polymer degradation rate and accelerating the rate of degradation of composites. A previous study revealed that the deterioration of strength was insignificant with addition of 15% and 20% magnesium hydroxide [74]. However, in this study, the epoxy/Mg/PET composite had the lowest tensile strength. This might be due to the defects that occurred in the composites during fabrication. It might have also been caused by the addition of only 5% (control) magnesium hydroxide, which did not have much influence on the tensile strength compared to the increase in percentage of KF.

3.3. Surface Morphology

The surface morphology of all the specimens after the tensile test was studied by capturing images of the fractured area. From this analysis, it was concluded that several types of defects occurred on the specimens. Defects typically take place during the production of composites and sometimes by manual construction known as “lay-up”. Variations in the amount of defects in composites during manufacturing will increase the likelihood of composite failure.
Two problems are critical to the material response: defects (built-in at manufacture) and damage (changes due to use). The effects of damage have been extensively covered in the open literature. Heslehurst and Scott [75] found that the “level of structural degradation in engineering properties varied” with defect severity, defect location and orientation, frequency of defect occurrence, component load path criticality and stress state, and defect idealization. As shown in Figure 9, the presence of agglomeration could be seen in the SEM micrograph of the epoxy/Mg/PET sample. It is known that Mg(OH)2 has a great tendency to form agglomerates. In fact, agglomeration is a well-known phenomenon, and its probability increases with decreasing particle size. These agglomerated particles could be stress concentrator points and could affect the final performance of the composites. This might result from the defects that occur in the composites during fabrication. Moreover, it is possible to identify the needled structure of Mg(OH)2 particles in images of higher magnification, e.g., 950×. This behavior might be an indication of poor interaction between the matrix and Mg(OH)2 [76].
As shown in Figure 10, there was good interfacial bonding of matrix and fiber in the epoxy/PET/KF-20 sample. The effective stress transfer between the fiber and the matrix was due to good interfacial bonding and was further promoted by maximizing the fiber strength [43]. The small particles of magnesium hydroxide possessed good dispersity and compatibility in the matrix, which provided a strengthening and toughening effect. Therefore, the tensile strength and elongation at break were substantially increased. Figure 11 presents the SEM micrograph of the tensile-fractured surface for debonding of the fiber within the epoxy/PET/KF-35 sample. The poor compactness of the composite caused weaker bonding strength between the matrix and the fiber.
Figure 12 shows the tensile damage that occurred on the composite, which consisted of fiber pull-outs and ensured enhanced interfacial adhesion in the epoxy/PET/KF-50 sample. As reported by Sanadi et al. [77], the primary disadvantage of natural fibers is the poor interfacial adhesion due to the hydrophilic character of cellulose, which is commonly mismatched with the hydrophobic matrix material [78,79]. Therefore, this phenomenon leads to poor fiber dispersion and fiber–matrix interfacial adhesion. This might also be due to the high fiber content, with the quantity of matrix not enough to cover the fiber [80,81,82].

4. Conclusions

In order to reduce cost and provide a pollution-free environment, the flammability and mechanical properties of hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn reinforced epoxy fire retardant composites was analyzed. The horizontal burning test showed that epoxy/Mg/PET with 0% KF had the highest average burning rate of 22.151 mm/min compared to epoxy/PET/KF-20, epoxy/PET/KF-35, and epoxy/PET/KF-50, which contained 20, 35, and 50% KF, respectively. The average burning rate of epoxy/PET/KF-35 was the lowest at 14.553 mm/min compared to the other samples. This suggests that epoxy/PET/KF-35 would be better for application as a fire retardant composite because of the optimum composition. Epoxy/PET/KF-50 demonstrated the highest tensile strength of 32.022 MPa compared to the other samples. The tensile strengths of epoxy/Mg/PET, epoxy/PET/KF-20, and epoxy/PET/KF-35 were 10.867, 19.956, and 25.244 MPa, respectively. The tensile strength of the hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn increased with the increase of fiber volume content. The combination of kenaf fiber and PET yarn enhanced the tensile properties of the composites. In addition, too many defects result in poor mechanical properties of composites. Epoxy/PET/KF-50 showed the fewest defects. In general, the surface morphology of the hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn possessed defects such as fiber pull-out and debonding.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.J.S.; methodology, M.J.S. and H.A.Z.; validation, M.J.S.; formal analysis, M.J.S. and H.A.Z.; investigation, M.J.S. and H.A.Z.; resources, M.J.S.; writing—original draft preparation, M.J.S. and H.A.Z.; writing—review and editing, C.M.R., M.P., R.M., R.A.I. and S.M.S.; supervision, M.J.S.; project administration, M.J.S.; funding acquisition, M.J.S. and M.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The result was obtained through financial support of the Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports of the Czech Republic and the European Union (European Structural and Investment Funds—Operational Program Research, Development, and Education) in the frames of the project “Modular platform for autonomous chassis of specialized electric vehicles for freight and equipment transportation”, Reg. No. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_025/0007293.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank all the members of CoREG (Composites Research Group) UMT, technicians, and support staff from the Maritime Technology Lab, UMT, Biocomposite Lab, INTROP, and Advanced Engineering Materials and Composites Research Centre, UPM, for their great contribution and help.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mohd Nurazzi, N.; Asyraf, M.R.M.; Khalina, A.; Abdullah, N.; Sabaruddin, F.A.; Kamarudin, S.H.; Ahmad, S.; Mahat, A.M.; Lee, C.L.; Aisyah, H.A.; et al. Fabrication, Functionalization, and Application of Carbon Nanotube-Reinforced Polymer Composite: An Overview. Polymers 2021, 13, 1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Suriani, M.J.; Rapi, H.Z.; Ilyas, R.A.; Petrů, M.; Sapuan, S.M. Delamination and Manufacturing Defects in Natural Fiber-Reinforced Hybrid Composite: A Review. Polymers 2021, 13, 1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Nurazzi, N.M.; Asyraf, M.R.M.; Khalina, A.; Abdullah, N.; Aisyah, H.A.; Rafiqah, S.A.; Sabaruddin, F.A.; Kamarudin, S.H.; Norrrahim, M.N.F.; Ilyas, R.A.; et al. A Review on Natural Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composite for Bullet Proof and Ballistic Applications. Polymers 2021, 13, 646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Asyraf, M.R.M.; Ishak, M.R.; Sapuan, S.M.; Yidris, N.; Ilyas, R.A. Woods and composites cantilever beam: A comprehensive review of experimental and numerical creep methodologies. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 6759–6776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M. Biopolymers and Biocomposites: Chemistry and Technology. Curr. Anal. Chem. 2020, 16, 500–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M. The Preparation Methods and Processing of Natural Fibre Bio-polymer Composites. Curr. Org. Synth. 2020, 16, 1068–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Diyana, Z.N.; Jumaidin, R.; Selamat, M.Z.; Ghazali, I.; Julmohammad, N.; Huda, N.; Ilyas, R.A. Physical Properties of Thermoplastic Starch Derived from Natural Resources and Its Blends: A Review. Polymers 2021, 13, 1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Harussani, M.M.; Hakimi, M.Y.A.Y.; Haziq, M.Z.M.; Atikah, M.S.N.; Asyraf, M.R.M.; Ishak, M.R.; Razman, M.R.; Nurazzi, N.M.; et al. Polylactic Acid (PLA) Biocomposite: Processing, Additive Manufacturing and Advanced Applications. Polymers 2021, 13, 1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Atikah, M.S.N.; Asyraf, M.R.M.; Rafiqah, S.A.; Aisyah, H.A.; Nurazzi, N.M.; Norrrahim, M.N.F. Effect of hydrolysis time on the morphological, physical, chemical, and thermal behavior of sugar palm nanocrystalline cellulose (Arenga pinnata (Wurmb.) Merr). Text. Res. J. 2021, 91, 152–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ibrahim, R.; Abral, H.; Ishak, M.R.; Zainudin, E.S.; Atiqah, A.; Atikah, M.S.N.; Syafri, E.; Asrofi, M.; et al. Thermal, Biodegradability and Water Barrier Properties of Bio-Nanocomposites Based on Plasticised Sugar Palm Starch and Nanofibrillated Celluloses from Sugar Palm Fibres. J. Biobased Mater. Bioenergy 2020, 14, 234–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ishak, M.R. Isolation and characterization of nanocrystalline cellulose from sugar palm fibres (Arenga pinnata). Carbohydr. Polym. 2018, 181, 1038–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ibrahim, R.; Abral, H.; Ishak, M.R.; Zainudin, E.S.; Atikah, M.S.N.; Mohd Nurazzi, N.; Atiqah, A.; Ansari, M.N.M.; et al. Effect of sugar palm nanofibrillated celluloseconcentrations on morphological, mechanical andphysical properties of biodegradable films basedon agro-waste sugar palm (Arenga pinnata(Wurmb.) Merr) starch. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2019, 8, 4819–4830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ishak, M.R.; Zainudin, E.S. Sugar palm nanofibrillated cellulose (Arenga pinnata (Wurmb.) Merr): Effect of cycles on their yield, physic-chemical, morphological and thermal behavior. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 123, 379–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Atiqah, A.; Ibrahim, R.; Abral, H.; Ishak, M.R.; Zainudin, E.S.; Nurazzi, N.M.; Atikah, M.S.N.; Ansari, M.N.M.; et al. Sugar palm (Arenga pinnata [Wurmb.] Merr) starch films containing sugar palm nanofibrillated cellulose as reinforcement: Water barrier properties. Polym. Compos. 2020, 41, 459–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ibrahim, R.; Abral, H.; Ishak, M.R.; Zainudin, E.S.; Asrofi, M.; Atikah, M.S.N.; Huzaifah, M.R.M.; Radzi, A.M.; et al. Sugar palm (Arenga pinnata (Wurmb.) Merr) cellulosic fibre hierarchy: A comprehensive approach from macro to nano scale. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2019, 8, 2753–2766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Suriani, M.J.; Radzi, F.S.M.; Ilyas, R.A.; Petrů, M.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ruzaidi, C.M. Flammability, Tensile, and Morphological Properties of Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunches Fiber/Pet Yarn-Reinforced Epoxy Fire Retardant Hybrid Polymer Composites. Polymers 2021, 13, 1282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Jumaidin, R.; Adam, N.W.; Ilyas, R.A.; Hussin, M.S.F.; Taha, M.M.; Mansor, M.R.; Azlan, U.A.-A.; Yob, M.S. Water transport and physical properties of sugarcane bagasse fibre reinforced thermoplastic potato starch biocomposite. J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sci. 2019, 61, 273–281. [Google Scholar]
  18. Asrofi, M.; Syafri, S.E.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ilyas, R.A. Improvement of Biocomposite Properties Based Tapioca Starch and Sugarcane Bagasse Cellulose Nanofibers. Key Eng. Mater. 2020, 849, 96–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Asrofi, M.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ilyas, R.A.; Ramesh, M. Characteristic of composite bioplastics from tapioca starch and sugarcane bagasse fiber: Effect of time duration of ultrasonication (Bath-Type). Mater. Today Proc. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Syafri, E.; Sudirman; Mashadi; Yulianti, E.; Deswita; Asrofi, M.; Abral, H.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ilyas, R.A.; Fudholi, A. Effect of sonication time on the thermal stability, moisture absorption, and biodegradation of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) nanocellulose-filled bengkuang (Pachyrhizus erosus) starch biocomposites. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2019, 8, 6223–6231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sabaruddin, F.A.; Paridah, M.T.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ilyas, R.A.; Lee, S.H.; Abdan, K.; Mazlan, N.; Roseley, A.S.M.; Abdul Khalil, H.P.S. The effects of unbleached and bleached nanocellulose on the thermal and flammability of polypropylene-reinforced kenaf core hybrid polymer bionanocomposites. Polymers 2020, 13, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Aisyah, H.A.; Paridah, M.T.; Sapuan, S.M.; Khalina, A.; Berkalp, O.B.; Lee, S.H.; Lee, C.H.; Nurazzi, N.M.; Ramli, N.; Wahab, M.S.; et al. Thermal Properties of Woven Kenaf/Carbon Fibre-Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Composite Panels. Int. J. Polym. Sci. 2019, 2019, 5258621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Aiza Jaafar, C.N.; Zainol, I.; Ishak, N.S.; Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M. Effects of the Liquid Natural Rubber (LNR) on Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of Epoxy/Silica/Kenaf Hybrid Composite for Potential Automotive Applications. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2021, 12, 1026–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Sari, N.H.; Pruncu, C.I.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ilyas, R.A.; Catur, A.D.; Suteja, S.; Sutaryono, Y.A.; Pullen, G. The effect of water immersion and fibre content on properties of corn husk fibres reinforced thermoset polyester composite. Polym. Test. 2020, 91, 106751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Aruchamy, K.; Pavayee Subramani, S.; Palaniappan, S.K.; Sethuraman, B.; Velu Kaliyannan, G. Study on mechanical characteristics of woven cotton/bamboo hybrid reinforced composite laminates. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 718–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Siakeng, R.; Jawaid, M.; Asim, M.; Saba, N.; Sanjay, M.R.; Siengchin, S.; Fouad, H. Alkali treated coir/pineapple leaf fibres reinforced PLA hybrid composites: Evaluation of mechanical, morphological, thermal and physical properties. Express Polym. Lett. 2020, 14, 717–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kandola, B.K.; Mistik, S.I.; Pornwannachai, W.; Anand, S.C. Natural fibre-reinforced thermoplastic composites from woven-nonwoven textile preforms: Mechanical and fire performance study. Compos. Part B Eng. 2018, 153, 456–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Jumaidin, R.; Khiruddin, M.A.A.; Asyul Sutan Saidi, Z.; Salit, M.S.; Ilyas, R.A. Effect of cogon grass fibre on the thermal, mechanical and biodegradation properties of thermoplastic cassava starch biocomposite. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 146, 746–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Hossain, M.; Mobarak, M.B.; Rony, F.K.; Sultana, S.; Mahmud, M.; Ahmed, S. Fabrication and Characterization of Banana Fiber Reinforced Unsaturated Polyester Resin Based Composites. Nano Hybrids Compos. 2020, 29, 84–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Jumaidin, R.; Diah, N.A.; Ilyas, R.A.; Alamjuri, R.H.; Yusof, F.A.M. Processing and Characterisation of Banana Leaf Fibre Reinforced Thermoplastic Cassava Starch Composites. Polymers 2021, 13, 1420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Azammi, A.M.N.; Ilyas, R.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ibrahim, R.; Atikah, M.S.N.; Asrofi, M.; Atiqah, A. Characterization studies of biopolymeric matrix and cellulose fibres based composites related to functionalized fibre-matrix interface. In Interfaces in Particle and Fibre Reinforced Composites; Elsevier: London, UK, 2020; pp. 29–93. ISBN 9780081026656. [Google Scholar]
  32. Aisyah, H.A.; Paridah, M.T.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ilyas, R.A.; Khalina, A.; Nurazzi, N.M.; Lee, S.H.; Lee, C.H. A Comprehensive Review on Advanced Sustainable Woven Natural Fibre Polymer Composites. Polymers 2021, 13, 471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Alsubari, S.; Zuhri, M.Y.M.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ishak, M.R.; Ilyas, R.A.; Asyraf, M.R.M. Potential of natural fiber reinforced polymer composites in sandwich structures: A review on its mechanical properties. Polymers 2021, 13, 423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Nurazzi, N.M.; Khalina, A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ilyas, R.A.; Rafiqah, S.A.; Hanafee, Z.M. Thermal properties of treated sugar palm yarn/glass fiber reinforced unsaturated polyester hybrid composites. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 1606–1618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Atiqah, A.; Jawaid, M.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ishak, M.R.; Ansari, M.N.M.; Ilyas, R.A. Physical and thermal properties of treated sugar palm/glass fibre reinforced thermoplastic polyurethane hybrid composites. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2019, 8, 3726–3732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Fu, S.Y.; Xu, G.; Mai, Y.W. On the elastic modulus of hybrid particle/short-fiber/polymer composites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2002, 33, 291–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mansor, M.R.; Sapuan, S.M.; Zainudin, E.S.; Nuraini, A.A.; Hambali, A. Hybrid natural and glass fibers reinforced polymer composites material selection using Analytical Hierarchy Process for automotive brake lever design. Mater. Des. 2013, 51, 484–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Rozilah, A.; Jaafar, C.N.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Zainol, I.; Ilyas, R.A. The Effects of Silver Nanoparticles Compositions on the Mechanical, Physiochemical, Antibacterial, and Morphology Properties of Sugar Palm Starch Biocomposites for Antibacterial Coating. Polymers 2020, 12, 2605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Jacob, M.; Thomas, S.; Varughese, K.T. Mechanical properties of sisal/oil palm hybrid fiber reinforced natural rubber composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2004, 64, 955–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Banerjee, S.; Sankar, B.V. Mechanical properties of hybrid composites using finite element method based micromechanics. Compos. Part B Eng. 2014, 58, 318–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Dan-mallam, Y.; Hong, T.W.; Abdul Majid, M.S. Mechanical Characterization and Water Absorption Behaviour of Interwoven Kenaf/PET Fibre Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Composite. Int. J. Polym. Sci. 2015, 2015, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Ramesh, M.; Palanikumar, K.; Reddy, K.H. Comparative Evaluation on Properties of Hybrid Glass Fiber- Sisal/Jute Reinforced Epoxy Composites. Procedia Eng. 2013, 51, 745–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Jawaid, M.; Abdul Khalil, H.P.S. Cellulosic/synthetic fibre reinforced polymer hybrid composites: A review. Carbohydr. Polym. 2011, 86, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Vasumathi, M.; Murali, V. Effect of Alternate Metals for use in Natural Fibre Reinforced Fibre Metal Laminates under Bending, Impact and Axial Loadings. Procedia Eng. 2013, 64, 562–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Faruk, O.; Bledzki, A.K.; Fink, H.-P.; Sain, M. Biocomposites reinforced with natural fibers: 2000–2010. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2012, 37, 1552–1596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sanjay, M.R.; Siengchin, S. Exploring the applicability of natural fibers for the development of biocomposites. Express Polym. Lett. 2021, 15, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Rangappa, S.M.; Siengchin, S.; Dhakal, H.N. Green-composites: Ecofriendly and Sustainability. Appl. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2020, 13, 183–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Amir, N.; Abidin, K.A.Z.; Shiri, F.B.M. Effects of Fibre Configuration on Mechanical Properties of Banana Fibre/PP/MAPP Natural Fibre Reinforced Polymer Composite. Procedia Eng. 2017, 184, 573–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sain, M.; Park, S.H.; Suhara, F.; Law, S. Flame retardant and mechanical properties of natural fibre-PP composites containing magnesium hydroxide. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2004, 83, 363–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Mazani, N.; Sapuan, S.M.; Sanyang, M.L.; Atiqah, A.; Ilyas, R.A. Design and Fabrication of a Shoe Shelf From Kenaf Fiber Reinforced Unsaturated Polyester Composites. In Lignocellulose for Future Bioeconomy; Ariffin, H., Sapuan, S.M., Hassan, M.A., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 315–332. ISBN 9780128163542. [Google Scholar]
  51. Sapiai, N.; Jumahat, A.; Jawaid, M.; Midani, M.; Khan, A. Tensile and Flexural Properties of Silica Nanoparticles Modified Unidirectional Kenaf and Hybrid Glass/Kenaf Epoxy Composites. Polymers 2020, 12, 2733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Hassan, F.; Zulkifli, R.; Ghazali, M.J.; Azhari, C.H. Kenaf Fiber Composite in Automotive Industry: An Overview. Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol. 2017, 7, 315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Nishino, T.; Hirao, K.; Kotera, M.; Nakamae, K.; Inagaki, H. Kenaf reinforced biodegradable composite. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2003, 63, 1281–1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kian, L.K.; Saba, N.; Jawaid, M.; Sultan, M.T.H. A review on processing techniques of bast fibers nanocellulose and its polylactic acid (PLA) nanocomposites. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 121, 1314–1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Shih, Y.-F.; Wang, Y.-T.; Jeng, R.-J.; Wei, K.-M. Expandable graphite systems for phosphorus-containing unsaturated polyesters. I. Enhanced thermal properties and flame retardancy. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2004, 86, 339–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Costes, L.; Laoutid, F.; Brohez, S.; Dubois, P. Bio-based flame retardants: When nature meets fire protection. Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep. 2017, 117, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Saba, N.; Safwan, A.; Sanyang, M.L.; Mohammad, F.; Pervaiz, M.; Jawaid, M.; Alothman, O.Y.; Sain, M. Thermal and dynamic mechanical properties of cellulose nanofibers reinforced epoxy composites. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2017, 102, 822–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Hao, A.; Zhao, H.; Chen, J.Y. Kenaf/polypropylene nonwoven composites: The influence of manufacturing conditions on mechanical, thermal, and acoustical performance. Compos. Part B Eng. 2013, 54, 44–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ratna Prasad, A.V.; Mohana Rao, K. Mechanical properties of natural fibre reinforced polyester composites: Jowar, sisal and bamboo. Mater. Des. 2011, 32, 4658–4663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bernard, M.; Khalina, A.; Ali, A.; Janius, R.; Faizal, M.; Hasnah, K.S.; Sanuddin, A.B. The effect of processing parameters on the mechanical properties of kenaf fibre plastic composite. Mater. Des. 2011, 32, 1039–1043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zhang, H.; Wang, H.; Wang, H. Flame retardant mechanism and surface modification of magnesium hydroxide flame retardant. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2018, 170, 032028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Joseph, K.; Tolêdo Filho, R.D.; James, B.; Thomas, S.; de Carvalho, L.H. A Review on Sisal Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agrícola Ambient. 1999, 3, 367–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Zampaloni, M.; Pourboghrat, F.; Yankovich, S.A.; Rodgers, B.N.; Moore, J.; Drzal, L.T.; Mohanty, A.K.; Misra, M. Kenaf natural fiber reinforced polypropylene composites: A discussion on manufacturing problems and solutions. Compos. Part A Appl. Sci. Manuf. 2007, 38, 1569–1580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Bar, M.; Alagirusamy, R.; Das, A. Flame retardant polymer composites. Fibers Polym. 2015, 16, 705–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Chapple, S.; Anandjiwala, R. Flammability of natural fiber-reinforced composites and strategies for fire retardancy: A review. J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 2010, 23, 871–893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Concrete, F.R.; Muda, Z.C.; Mohd, N.L.; Composites, P.; Ismail, A.E. Flammability of self-extinguishing kenaf/ABS nanoclays composite for aircraft secondary structure. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2016, 152, 012068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Prabhakar, M.N.; Shah AU, R.; Song, J.I. A Review on the Flammability and Flame Retardant Properties of Natural Fibers and Polymer Matrix Based Composites. Compos. Res. 2015, 28, 28–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Martins, L.A.L.; Bastian, F.L.; Netto, T.A. Reviewing some design issues for filament wound composite tubes. Mater. Des. 2014, 55, 242–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. El-Shekeil, Y.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Jawaid, M.; Al-Shuja’a, O.M. Influence of fiber content on mechanical, morphological and thermal properties of kenaf fibers reinforced poly(vinyl chloride)/thermoplastic polyurethane poly-blend composites. Mater. Des. 2014, 58, 130–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Jagadeesh, P.; Thyavihalli Girijappa, Y.G.; Puttegowda, M.; Rangappa, S.M.; Siengchin, S. Effect of natural filler materials on fiber reinforced hybrid polymer composites: An Overview. J. Nat. Fibers 2020, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Sanjay, M.R.; Siengchin, S.; Parameswaranpillai, J.; Jawaid, M.; Pruncu, C.I.; Khan, A. A comprehensive review of techniques for natural fibers as reinforcement in composites: Preparation, processing and characterization. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019, 207, 108–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hanifawati, I.N.; Azmah Hanim, M.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Zainuddin, E.S. Tensile and Flexural Behavior of Hybrid Banana Pseudostem/Glass Fibre Reinforced Polyester Composites. Key Eng. Mater. 2011, 471–472, 686–691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Mobedi, H.; Nekoomanesh, M.; Orafaei, H.; Mivechi, H. Studying the Degradation of Poly(L-Lactide) in Presence of Magnesium Hydroxide. Iran. Polym. J. 2006, 15, 31–39. [Google Scholar]
  74. Datta, J.; Kopczyńska, P. Effect of kenaf fibre modification on morphology and mechanical properties of thermoplastic polyurethane materials. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015, 74, 566–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Heslehurst, R.B.; Scott, M. Review of defects and damage pertaining to composite aircraft components. Compos. Polym. 1990, 3, 103–133. [Google Scholar]
  76. El-Sabbagh, A.; Steuernagel, L.; Ziegmann, G. Low combustible polypropylene/flax/magnesium hydroxide composites: Mechanical, flame retardation characterization and recycling effect. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 2013, 32, 1030–1043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Sanadi, A.R.; Hunt, J.F.; Caulfield, D.F.; Kovacsvolgyi, G.; Destree, B. High fiber-low matrix composites: Kenaf fiber/polypropylene. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Woodfiber-Plastic Composites, Madison, WI, USA, 15–16 May 2001; Forest Research Society: Madison, WI, USA, 2002; pp. 121–124. [Google Scholar]
  78. Nurazzi, N.M.; Khalina, A.; Chandrasekar, M.; Aisyah, H.A.; Rafiqah, S.A.; Ilyas, R.A.; Hanafee, Z.M. Effect of fiber orientation and fiber loading on the mechanical and thermal properties of sugar palm yarn fiber reinforced unsaturated polyester resin composites. Polimery 2020, 65, 115–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Baihaqi, N.M.Z.N.; Khalina, A.; Nurazzi, N.M.; Aisyah, H.A.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ilyas, R.A. Effect of fiber content and their hybridization on bending and torsional strength of hybrid epoxy composites reinforced with carbon and sugar palm fibers. Polimery 2021, 66, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Suriani, M.J.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ruzaidi, C.M.; Nair, D.S.; Ilyas, R.A. Flammability, morphological and mechanical properties of sugar palm fiber/polyester yarn-reinforced epoxy hybrid biocomposites with magnesium hydroxide flame retardant filler. Text. Res. J. 2021, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Sapuan, S.M.; Aulia, H.S.; Ilyas, R.A.; Atiqah, A.; Dele-Afolabi, T.T.; Nurazzi, M.N.; Supian, A.B.M.; Atikah, M.S.N. Mechanical properties of longitudinal basalt/woven-glass-fiber-reinforced unsaturated polyester-resin hybrid composites. Polymers 2020, 12, 2211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Ayu, R.S.; Khalina, A.; Harmaen, A.S.; Zaman, K.; Isma, T.; Liu, Q.; Ilyas, R.A.; Lee, C.H. Characterization study of empty fruit bunch (EFB) fibers reinforcement in poly(butylene) succinate (PBS)/starch/glycerol composite sheet. Polymers 2020, 12, 1571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Polymers 13 01532 g001 550
Figure 1. Research methodology.
Figure 1. Research methodology.
Polymers 13 01532 g001
Polymers 13 01532 g002 550
Figure 2. Arrangement of kenaf fiber and PET yarn with epoxy in the metal mold.
Figure 2. Arrangement of kenaf fiber and PET yarn with epoxy in the metal mold.
Polymers 13 01532 g002
Polymers 13 01532 g003 550
Figure 3. Observation of sample: (a) epoxy/Mg/PET, (b) epoxy/PET/KF-20, (c) epoxy/PET/KF-35, and (d) epoxy/PET/KF-50.
Figure 3. Observation of sample: (a) epoxy/Mg/PET, (b) epoxy/PET/KF-20, (c) epoxy/PET/KF-35, and (d) epoxy/PET/KF-50.
Polymers 13 01532 g003
Polymers 13 01532 g004 550
Figure 4. Cross section of sample after being coated with gold.
Figure 4. Cross section of sample after being coated with gold.
Polymers 13 01532 g004
Polymers 13 01532 g005 550
Figure 5. Samples of each composition after the burning test.
Figure 5. Samples of each composition after the burning test.
Polymers 13 01532 g005
Polymers 13 01532 g006 550
Figure 6. Graph of horizontal burning test for each composition.
Figure 6. Graph of horizontal burning test for each composition.
Polymers 13 01532 g006
Polymers 13 01532 g007 550
Figure 7. The stress–strain diagram of hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn reinforced epoxy fire retardant composites.
Figure 7. The stress–strain diagram of hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn reinforced epoxy fire retardant composites.
Polymers 13 01532 g007
Polymers 13 01532 g008 550
Figure 8. Effect of kenaf fiber loading on the tensile strength of epoxy/Mg/PET, epoxy/PET/KF-20, epoxy/PET/KF-35, and epoxy/PET/KF-50.
Figure 8. Effect of kenaf fiber loading on the tensile strength of epoxy/Mg/PET, epoxy/PET/KF-20, epoxy/PET/KF-35, and epoxy/PET/KF-50.
Polymers 13 01532 g008
Polymers 13 01532 g009 550
Figure 9. Agglomeration of Mg(OH)2 in the epoxy/Mg/PET sample.
Figure 9. Agglomeration of Mg(OH)2 in the epoxy/Mg/PET sample.
Polymers 13 01532 g009
Polymers 13 01532 g010 550
Figure 10. Good interfacial bonding in the epoxy/PET/KF-20 sample.
Figure 10. Good interfacial bonding in the epoxy/PET/KF-20 sample.
Polymers 13 01532 g010
Polymers 13 01532 g011 550
Figure 11. Debonding of fiber and polymer in the epoxy/PET/KF-35 sample.
Figure 11. Debonding of fiber and polymer in the epoxy/PET/KF-35 sample.
Polymers 13 01532 g011
Polymers 13 01532 g012 550
Figure 12. Fiber pull-outs in the epoxy/PET/KF-50 sample.
Figure 12. Fiber pull-outs in the epoxy/PET/KF-50 sample.
Polymers 13 01532 g012
Table
Table 1. Properties of epoxy resin and hardener.
Table 1. Properties of epoxy resin and hardener.
PropertyEpoxy ResinHardener
FormLiquidLiquid
Density (g/cm3)1.211.03
Curing time (hours)2424
Ratio21
Table
Table 2. Densities of materials used.
Table 2. Densities of materials used.
MaterialDensity (g/cm3)
Kenaf0.37
PET yarn1.38
Epoxy1.21
Magnesium hydroxide (Mg(OH2)) powder1.20
Table
Table 3. Composition of samples.
Table 3. Composition of samples.
Sample DesignationPercentage (%)
KFPET YarnMg(OH)2Epoxy + Hardener
Epoxy/Mg/PET05590
Epoxy/PET/KF-20205570
Epoxy/PET/KF-35355555
Epoxy/PET/KF-50505540
Table
Table 4. Results of the calculation for all samples.
Table 4. Results of the calculation for all samples.
DescriptionsSamples
Epoxy/Mg/PETEpoxy/PET/KF-20Epoxy/PET/KF-35Epoxy/PET/KF-50
Volume of specimen79.2 cm379.2 cm379.2 cm379.2 cm3
Volume of fiber0 cm315.84 cm327.72 cm339.6 cm3
Weight of fiber, Wf0 g18.37 g32.16 g45.94 g
Volume of PET yarn3.96 cm33.96 cm33.96 cm33.96 cm3
Weight of PET yarn5.46 g5.46 g5.46 g5.46 g
Volume of fire retardant3.96 cm33.96 cm33.96 cm33.96 cm3
Weight of fire retardant9.28 g9.28 g9.28 g9.28 g
Volume of matrix71.28 cm355.44 cm343.56 cm331.68 cm3
Weight of matrix, Wm85.54 g66.58 g52.27 g38.02 g
Weight of epoxy57.02 g44.38 g34.85 g25.34 g
Weight of hardener28.51 g22.19 g17.42 g12.67 g
Table
Table 5. Mechanical properties of hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn for all samples.
Table 5. Mechanical properties of hybrid kenaf fiber/PET yarn for all samples.
Samples DesignationTensile Strength (MPa)Elastic Modulus (MPa)
Epoxy/Mg/PET10.87 ± 1.92326.16 ± 20.13
Epoxy/PET/KF-2019.96 ± 2.49598.66 ± 15.12
Epoxy/PET/KF-3525.24 ± 1.56757.49 ± 25.95
Epoxy/PET/KF-5032.02 ± 3.91960.80 ± 30.87
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Suriani, M.J.; Zainudin, H.A.; Ilyas, R.A.; Petrů, M.; Sapuan, S.M.; Ruzaidi, C.M.; Mustapha, R. Kenaf Fiber/Pet Yarn Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Polymer Composites: Morphological, Tensile, and Flammability Properties. Polymers 2021, 13, 1532. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13091532

AMA Style

Suriani MJ, Zainudin HA, Ilyas RA, Petrů M, Sapuan SM, Ruzaidi CM, Mustapha R. Kenaf Fiber/Pet Yarn Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Polymer Composites: Morphological, Tensile, and Flammability Properties. Polymers. 2021; 13(9):1532. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13091532

Chicago/Turabian Style

Suriani, M. J., Hasliana Asyikin Zainudin, R. A. Ilyas, Michal Petrů, S. M. Sapuan, C. M. Ruzaidi, and Rohani Mustapha. 2021. "Kenaf Fiber/Pet Yarn Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Polymer Composites: Morphological, Tensile, and Flammability Properties" Polymers 13, no. 9: 1532. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13091532

APA Style

Suriani, M. J., Zainudin, H. A., Ilyas, R. A., Petrů, M., Sapuan, S. M., Ruzaidi, C. M., & Mustapha, R. (2021). Kenaf Fiber/Pet Yarn Reinforced Epoxy Hybrid Polymer Composites: Morphological, Tensile, and Flammability Properties. Polymers, 13(9), 1532. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13091532

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop