Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesa

The influence of sizing conditions on bending properties of continuous

glass fiber reinforced polypropylene composites
H. Hamada*, K. Fujihara, A. Harada
Division of Advanced Fibro-Science, Kyoto Institute of Technology, Matsugasaki, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8585, Japan
Received 18 September 1998; received in revised form 22 November 1999; accepted 19 January 2000

Abstract
In this study, the interphase construction by using binding agents was proposed in continuous glass fiber reinforced polypropylene
composites. Two types of binding agents modified with maleic anhydride, i.e. low- and high-molecular-weight PP binders were employed.
Amino silane coupling agent was also used for the sizing of the glass fibers. In the first step, the sizing conditions with non-binding, low- and
high-molecular-weight PP binders were compared for bending properties. According to the near infra-red (NIR) analysis of the sized glass
fibers, the glass fiber finished with the low-molecular-weight PP binders greatly indicated the existence of the amide bond between the PP binder
and the silane coupling agent. This result implies that the matrix PP chain tends to entwine with the PP binder chain. As a consequence, lowmolecular-weight PP binder specimens gave the highest bending strength. Furthermore, the concentration ratio of the low-molecular-weight PP
binder was varied with three steps. Matrix PP modified with maleic anhydride was also used in order to investigate the effect of matrix
modification on bending properties. The interphase structure formed by a binder agent and a silane coupling agent in the continuous glass
fiber reinforced polypropylene composites was discussed in detail. 2000 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
Keywords: Continuous GF/PP composites; E. Surface treatment; B. Interphase; B. Mechanical properties

1. Introduction
Thermoset composite materials had a dominant share in
the market (about 85% in 1995) as compared with thermoplastic composite materials [1]. Nowadays, the consumption
of thermoplastic composite materials is increasing relative
to thermoset composite materials because of ecological
issues. This tendency is due to the development of high
performance polymers, such as polyetheretherketone
(PEEK), polyphenylenesulphide (PPS) or polycarbonate
(PC), the so-called engineering plastics, which offer excellent mechanical properties. On the other hand, polypropylene, which was firstly polymerized in 1955 by Natta et al.,
has also been recognized as a candidate matrix. The reason
lies in the versatile design ability of polypropylene at the
molecular level. For instance, the polymerization techniques with various catalysts can control the molecular weight
with the narrow distribution. There is another example,
which demonstrated that the copolymerization techniques
generate copolymers with different comonomer contents
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 81-75-724-7844; fax: 81-75-7247800.
E-mail address: hhamada@ipc.kit.ac.jp (H. Hamada).
1359-835X/00/$ - see front matter 2000 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.
PII: S1359-835 X( 00)00 010-5

[2,3]. Therefore, polypropylene exhibits many beneficial

propertieshigh thermal stability, easy processing and
resistance to corrosionand comes to be used for the
composites. By using the copolymerization technology, it
is well known that Ethylene Propylene Rubber (EPR) elastomer is dispersed into matrix PP for improving the impact
resistance in GF/PP injection moldings [4].
Grades of PP composites include particulate (calcium
carbonate or talc) filled PP, glass mat reinforced PP and
GF/PP injection moldings. Almost all of them have been
used for the automobile industries. This means that PP
composites should possess not only high strength but also
high toughness and energy absorption under impact loading.
These problems provoke the interphase control in the
mechanical properties of PP composites as well as thermoset composite materials. With regard to the PP composites,
except for the particulate filled PP, it is well known that the
interphase control is conducted with a silane coupling agent
and a binding agent or an additive agent such as maleicanhydride into matrix PP [59]. There is an example for
improving the impact properties using a silane coupling
agent in the GF/PP stampable sheets [5]. It can be considered that there were no major obstacles using PP as a matrix
instead of engineering plastics. It can be said that such kinds

980

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

Table 1
Specimen types I (comparison of the sizing conditions)
Specimen
name

Type of
fiber

Type of
matrix

Binder agent

Coupling agent

HN
HL1.0

N
L1.0

Homo-PP

Amino silane
coupling agent

HH1.0

H1.0

Nothing
Low-molecularweight PP binder
High-molecularweight PP binder

of technology gave a wide selection of material design to the

PP composites. Further, there are possibilities for improving
the mechanical property.
In this study, the use of a binding agent was proposed as a
new method for modifying the interphase in the GF/PP
composites. The reason lies in the production procedure of
the glass fiber. Continuous filament glass fibers are
produced by melting the raw materials in a reservoir or
tank which feeds the molten glass into a series of platinum
bushings, each of which has several hundred holes in its
base [10]. Next, the filament glass fibers are finished with
a sizing solution, which consists of both a silane coupling
agent and a binding agent, and they become the condition of
glass strand fibers. In the case of injection moldings, these
strand fibers are chopped and compounded with matrix PP.
The selection of the binding agent is also a crucial issue in
forming a good interphase. In the case of using urethane as a
binding agent in the GF/PP injection moldings, it gives the
minus effect for the adhesion between fiber and matrix [11].
We consider that there are two interfaces on glass fiber
reinforced thermoplastic composites, i.e. a silanebinder
and a bindermatrix interface. Besides, in the case of thermoset composites like GF/Vinylester, the interphase structure constructed by a silane coupling agent is very complex
and its mechanical properties are greatly affected by the
agent concentration [1214]. Even the silane coupling
agent concentration influences composite properties.
These phenomena indicate that in the case of thermoplastic
composite materials, the contribution of both types of interface to the macro mechanical behavior of the composite
materials should be discussed in detail. Therefore, in this
study, three point bending tests of continuous glass fiber
Table 2
Specimen types II (influence of the contents ratio and matrix modification
of low-molecular-weight PP binder)
Specimen
name

Type of
fiber

Type of
matrix

Binder agent

HL

L1.0

Homo-PP

Low-molecularweight PP binder

HL1.0
HL3.0
ML0.5
ML1.0
ML3.0

L2.0
L3.0
L1.0
L2.0
L3.0

Modified-PP

Fig. 1. Fabrication method of continuous glass fiber reinforced polypropylene composites.

reinforced polypropylene composites were carried out and

the focused issues were clarified into two steps. Firstly, the
comparison of the sizing conditions with and without two
types of binding agent was discussed. Next, the concentration ratio of the best PP binder was varied and discussed in
terms of its influence on bending properties. It is well known
that maleic-anhydride has been used for the improvement of
adhesion between fiber and matrix on the PP matrix composites. This is due to the non-polarity of polypropylene from
the viewpoint of polymer chemistry. Therefore, the effect of
matrix modification was also discussed in detail with the
best sizing conditions.
2. Experimental details
2.1. Materials
The material used in this study was E-glass fiber (fiber
diameter: 24 mm, Nippon Glass Fiber Co., Ltd). Matrixes

Coupling agent
Table 3
Molding conditions of specimens
Amino silane
coupling agent

Molding pressure
Molding temperature
Pre-heating time
Holding time at 220C
Cooling condition

4.5 MPa
220C
1 min
20 min
Gradual cooling (HN and HH type) gradual
cooling with pressure (HL and ML type)

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

981

Fig. 4. Comparison of the bending strength among three types of sizing

condition.

Fig. 2. Bending specimen geometry: (a) 0 specimen; (b) 90 specimen.

were homo-polypropylene film (thickness: 30 mm, Idemitsu

Petrochemical Co., Ltd) and polypropylene film modified
with maleic-anhydride (thickness: 27 mm, K1008/
XKP707W, Chisso Co., Ltd). They are denoted as HomoPP and Modified-PP, respectively. Their detailed polymerization processes were not informed by the company. The
glass fibers were finished with an amino silane coupling
agent. Furthermore, two types of binding agent which
consist of maleic-anhydride were employed in order to
develop the interphase property by a binding agent. Here,
they are called high- (mean molecular weight
20,000 40,000) and low- (mean molecular weight
5,000) PP binder, respectively. Nippon Glass Fiber Co.,
Ltd also performed the surface treatment procedures, details
of which are not given for reasons of commercial confidentiality. The sizing conditions of the glass fiber are shown in
Tables 1 and 2. A concentration ratio of 1.0 times is a
commercial-based treatment. The concentration of amino
silane coupling agent in an aqueous solution was maintained
as a constant for each condition. The glass fiber that finished
with an equal weight of high-molecular-weight PP binder is
denoted H1.0. Furthermore, when this fiber is combined
with Homo-PP, the specimen is denoted HH1.0.
2.2. Viscosity average molecular weight of polypropylene
film

Fig. 3. Loaddisplacement curves of 90 specimen for each sizing

condition.

In the case of thermoplastic polymers, their properties can

be controlled by their molecular weight. Recently, controlling the molecular weight has led to the development of
various types of polypropylene with unique properties.
Therefore, when polypropylene is used as a matrix of
composite materials, it is a crucial issue to understand its
molecular weight. The molecular weight of matrix PP used
in this study cannot be disclosed for commercial reasons.
Therefore, the viscosity-average molecular weights of
Homo-PP and Modified-PP were measured by the dynamic

982

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

dilute solution and drawing the liquid level to a point above

the upper mark. The flow time of the dilute solution is
related to the relative viscosity (h rel) of the polymer,
which is calculated by the following equation:

hrel t=t0

where t and t0 are outflow times of the solution and tetralin

solvent. From the data of h rel, the specific viscosity (h sp) is
calculated as follows:

hsp hrel 1

The intrinsic viscosity [h ] has the relationship with h sp as

follows:
hsp
h Ac
3
c
where A is a constant, which is dependent on the polymers
molecular weight, the solvent and the measurement
temperature. According to the plot of reduced specific viscosity (h sp/c) versus concentration (c), it was clear that intrinsic viscosity values of Homo-PP and Modified-PP were 1.53
and 1.63, respectively. Generally, the viscosity-average
molecular weight Mv of polydisperse linear polymer is
given by the MarkHouwinkSakurada equation as follows:
h KMv a

where K and a are the material constants for a given polymer

at a certain temperature, in a certain solvent. When the polypropylene solute and the tetralin solvent are used, K and a are
known to have the following values.
K 9:17 105 100 ml=g; a 0:80
Finally, the viscosity average molecular weight could be
obtained as follows:
Homo-PP 192; 000
Modified-PP 205; 000
Therefore, the comparison of the matrix modification with
maleic-anhydride could be possible.
2.3. Fabrication method of unidirectional glass fiber
reinforced polypropylene composites
Fig. 5. SEM photographs of the fracture surface for each sizing condition.

viscosity method. The viscosity was measured by the

Cannon-Fanske viscometer. For the Cannon-Fanske viscometer, the inclination of the two arms of the U-tube vertical
has the effect of placing the centers of the two liquid
surfaces along an axis, which is vertical, even if there is a
small degree of error in the vertical mounting of the viscometer. First, polypropylene was dissolved in tetralin
solvent in a silicone-oil bath at 135C. The concentration
of this dilute solution is C (g/100 ml). The capillary viscometer used for dilute solution measurements was made of
glass. It was operated by filling with a suitable volume of the

Continuous glass fiber reinforced polypropylene composites were fabricated by a film stacking method, as shown in
Fig. 1. Firstly, a winding of strand glass fibers was
performed unidirectionally on a metallic frame at 10
times. Next, a fiber layer and a polypropylene film layer
were stacked alternately. The total number of layers was
25. After performing this procedure, the film stacking materials were placed into a hot metal die heated to the required
temperature. The compression moldings were carried out by
using the press machine. The molding conditions are indicated in Table 3. The molding temperature and the pressure
were 220C and 4.5 MPa, respectively. The pre-heating and
holding times were 1 and 20 min, respectively, at 220C.

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

Fig. 6. Typical chemical reaction between a matrix PP modified with maleic anhydride and a glass fiber finished with a silane coupling agent.

Fig. 7. Chemical reactions in the time of a sizing treatment of the glass fiber.

Fig. 8. NIR spectra of N, L1.0 and H1.0 glass fibers.

983

984

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

Fig. 9. Stressdisplacement curves of 0 specimen: (a) homo-PP matrix; (b)

modified-PP matrix.

After holding at this temperature, gradual cooling was applied

for the HN and HH type specimens. However, in the case of
HL type specimens, the holding pressure was also maintained
for 6 h to avoid the generation of the voids. The importance
of the cooling pressure during molding on thermoplastic
composite materials was reported by Lin Ye [15]. The
fiber volume fraction of all the specimens was 55 vol%.
2.4. Three-point bending test
The bending specimens of the HN and HH types were cut
parallel to the transverse direction (i.e. 90), against the fiber
orientation, as illustrated in Fig. 2. Furthermore, in the case
of the HL and ML type specimens, they were also cut parallel to the longitudinal direction, i.e. 0. In the case of 90
specimens, three-point bending tests were carried out at
room temperature with a cross-head speed of 1.0 mm/min
with a 16 mm span length by using an AUTOGRAPH test-

Fig. 10. Stressdisplacement curves of the comparison of the matrix modification for each concentration: (a) L0.5; (b) L1.0; and (c) L3.0 glass fibers.

ing machine, while the 0 specimens were tested at room

temperature by using an INSTRON universal machine
under the condition with a cross-head speed of 3.0 mm/
min with a 32 mm span length. Scanning electron microscope (SEM) observations were carried out after the tests.

3. Experimental results and discussion

3.1. Comparison among three types of sizing condition
Fig. 3 gives the loaddisplacement curves of HN, HL1.0

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

Fig. 11. Relationship between bending strength and concentration ratio of

low-molecular-weight PP binder: (a) homo-PP matrix; (b) modified-PP
matrix.

and HH1.0 specimens. Here, the influence of a binder type

on bending properties has been discussed. Because of our
equipment problem, load data was used in the curve instead
of stress. In the case of the HN specimen without a binding
agent, the bending load remained approximately a constant
value after the maximum load. On the other hand, the other
types specimen, i.e. HL1.0 and HH1.0, showed a steady fall
after reaching maximum load; especially, a large load drop
was seen in HL1.0. The bending strength of each specimen
is shown in Fig. 4. The bending strength of the HL1.0 specimen exhibits the highest value. The HH1.0 specimen
finished with a high-molecular-weight PP binder, and also
gave a slightly higher value than the HN specimen. It was
found that the PP binder agent is effective for improving the
bending strength of the continuous GF/PP composites. After
the bending tests, SEM observations were performed as seen

985

Fig. 12. Loaddisplacement curves of 90 specimen: (a) homo-PP matrix;

(b) modified-PP matrix.

in Fig. 5. There is a remarkable difference on the fracture

surface between the specimens finished with the PP binder
and the non-binder specimen. The matrix PP was not
observed on the fracture surface of the HN specimen. On
the other hand, PP adhering to the fiber surface was
observed on the HL1.0 and HH1.0 specimens.
When the glass fibers are finished, a solution that consists
of a silane coupling agent and a binding agent is employed.
Generally, maleic-anhydride is used for matrix PP modification, and it is considered that the chemical reaction
between glass fibers treated with a silane coupling agent
and matrix PP is as illustrated in Fig. 6 [6,9]. Amide groups
are generated due to the reaction between the maleic group
in matrix PP and the amino group in the silane coupling
agent. However, in the case of this study, maleic-anhydride
was used for the PP binders. Therefore, the chemical
reactions on the surface of the glass fibers may be different.

986

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

fibers, the amide band was not observed. It was expected

that H1.0 would also give a band due to the amide group in
the region of 19002000 nm. The molecular weight of both
binders allows us to consider that the high-molecularweight PP binder is an isotactic polypropylene, while the
low-molecular-weight PP binder is an atactic polypropylene
with low-molecular-weight. Therefore, the number of
maleic-anhydride groups per unit mass may be smaller in
the former, and seems to lead to the small number of amide
groups in the H1.0 type glass fiber. As a result, the bending
strength of the HL1.0 specimen gave the highest value.
3.2. Low-molecular-weight PP binder

Fig. 13. Relationship between bending strength and concentration of lowmolecular-weight PP binder: (a) homo-PP matrix; (b) modified-PP matrix.

It is considered that chemical reactions between the

coupling agent and the glass fibers, and between the PP
binder and the coupling agent, occur simultaneously, as
seen in Fig. 7.
Therefore, near infra-red (NIR) spectroscopy analysis in
the 10002500 nm region was carried out with a Bran
Luebbe Infraprover II FT-NIR spectrometer to evaluate the
surface condition of glass fibers [16]. Fig. 8 gives the NIR
spectra of the N, L1.0 and H1.0 glass fiber strands. The
spectrum of the L1.0 sized glass strongly indicated a band
in the 19002000 nm region, where the combination mode
of the amide group is expected. The appearance of the amide
band in the spectrum proved that the amide band was
formed between the amino silane coupling agent and the
low-molecular-weight polypropylene binder. Therefore, it
is considered that the PP binder chain reacted with the silane
coupling agent and might entwine with the matrix PP
chains. On the other hand, in the case of the other glass

3.2.1. 0 specimen
In the previous section, the low-molecular-weight PP
binder seems to possess large numbers of amide groups
and to generate an excellent bending strength. Therefore,
the concentration ratio of low-molecular-weight PP binder
was changed in three steps in order to determine the effect of
concentration ratio in detail. Furthermore, the influence of
matrix modification was also investigated. Stressdisplacement curves of 0 specimens are given in Fig. 9. Firstly,
specimens with Homo-PP matrix are discussed. It can be
understood that the stress increased linearly for each specimen, and reached a maximum stress at 1.1 1.3 mm displacement. The feature that the stress remains approximately
stable after yield was recognized, and HL0.5 gave the
largest displacement after yield. On the other hand, in the
modified-PP specimen, the behavior of stressstrain curves
was dramatically changed and demonstrated the sudden
stress drop in the ML0.5 and ML1.0 specimens after
yield. However, the ML3.0 specimen, which possesses the
highest concentration ratio, showed approximately constant
stress after yield. Fig. 10 compares stressdisplacement
curves for the PP homopolymer and copolymer for each
concentration of the binder. The interesting point is that
every specimen with a modified-PP showed a large stress
increase above about 1.2 mm displacement. Furthermore, it
is clear that the linear stress increase region in stressstrain
curves is due to matrix modification. Fig. 11 shows the
relationship between the bending strength and the concentration ratio of the low-molecular-weight PP binder in the 0
specimens. Bending strength was 440 MPa in the HL0.5
specimen. However, the increase of the concentration ratio
led to an improvement in the bending stress (21% higher). In
the case of the specimen with the modified-PP matrix,
amazingly, the opposite tendency was obtained, which
means that the ML0.5 specimen gave the highest bending
strength (1 GPa) and its strength decreased with the increasing concentration ratio.
3.2.2. 90 specimen
Fig. 12 gives the loaddisplacement curves of the 90
specimens. The curves of the Homo-PP specimens showed
a small load drop (2 3 N) after the maximum load. On the

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

987

Fig. 14. SEM photographs of 90 specimen for each concentration ratio.

other hand, the modified-PP specimens gave a large load

drop after the maximum load, which suggests a brittle failure manner. Fig. 13 indicates the relation between the bending strength and the concentration ratio of low-molecularweight PP binders in the 90 specimens. With regard to the
modified-PP specimens, the bending strength indicated
about 36 MPa at 0.5 times, and decreased about 30% with
the increasing binder content. On the other hand, the HomoPP specimens had a peak at 1.0 times and the highest
strength was 16 MPa. The SEM observations of the 90
specimens were carried out after the tests, as shown in
Fig. 14. The observations were focused on the tensile side.
On the surface of the glass fibers of the Homo-PP specimens, the amounts of matrix PP increased with the concentration ratio. The modified-PP specimens formed were
striking fracture surfaces, which means substantial amounts
of resin adhere to the fibers for each concentration ratio. It

was impossible to distinguish between the SEM photographs. Besides, many resin cracks, which imply a brittle
fracture manner, were also observed (see in Fig. 15).
3.3. Interphase structure in continuous glass fiber
reinforced polypropylene composites
With respect to the Homo-PP specimens with the 90 fiber
orientation, it can be noticed here that there was a mismatch
between the strength tendency and the appearance of the
fracture surfaces. This means that the HL3.0 specimen
was expected to show the highest strength because much
PP adhered to the surface of the glass fiber in the SEM
photographs. Therefore, glass fibers after just sizing treatment procedure were observed in order to confirm the
surface conditions. Fig. 16 shows SEM photographs of
raw glass fibers. It can be understood that the amounts of

988

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

Fig. 15. SEM photograph of resin cracks.

the PP binder increase with the increasing concentration

ratio. It was also clear that the PP binder did not adhere to
the fiber surface uniformly. The NIR spectroscopy analysis
was also a great candidate for investigating the surface
conditions such as Fig. 8. However, the difference seen in
the SEM photographs of the raw glass fibers was not
detected by NIR spectroscopy.
The interphase structure model in the GF/Thermosetting
type composite material, which was reported by Ikuta et al.
[17,18], can explain these phenomena. According to the
reports, the interphase structure created by a silane coupling
agent varies with the concentration of coupling agent in the
solvent. At extremely low concentrations, few silane molecules exist on the surface of the glass fibers. On the other
hand, molecular chain networks generated by the silane
molecules were recognized at medium concentrations,
which means that the chemical bond between the silane
coupling agent and the glass fibers increases and tends to
react with the matrix resin. Here, the silane coupling agent
forming a chemical bond is called chemi-sorbed silane.
Furthermore, when a solution with a high concentration
agent was used, the number of chemical bonds between
silane molecules and glass fibers would be saturated. As a
consequence, the silane molecules physically adhere to the
glass fibers or exist between chemi-sorbed silane molecules
(called physi-sorbed silane). The physi-sorbed silane
prevents the reaction between the chemi-sorbed silane and
the matrix resin.
Therefore, we consider that the fixation phenomena of the
PP binder agent to the glass fiber is the same as that of the
silane coupling agent in the GF/Thermosetting type composites, as shown in Fig. 17. There were few PP binder molecules which reacted with silane molecules on the surface of
the glass fiber at 0.5 times concentration ratio. The optimum
concentration was obtained at 1.0 times, which means the
number of maleic groups in the PP binder is appropriate for
generating the amide bond with the silane coupling agent.
Finally, at 3.0 times concentration, many PP binders which
did not react with the silane molecules (physi-sorbed binder)
exist on the surface of the glass fibers. According to this

Fig. 16. SEM photographs of the raw glass fibers.

hypothesis, in the case of the 90 specimens with the HomoPP matrix, there are not many amide bonds due to a shortage
of the PP binding agent at 0.5 times concentration. This is
the reason why HL0.5 indicated the lowest bending
strength. On the other hand, the bending strength increased
due to the increase in the chemical bonds at 1.0 times.
Furthermore, matrix PP around a glass fiber seems to be
embrittled by the excessive maleic groups of the PP binder
at 3.0 times concentration. In this case, the crack tends to
propagate into the region of the modified matrix PP, i.e.
around the bindermatrix interface. Therefore, it can be
understood that the bending strength of the 90 specimens
decreased at 3.0 times concentration, regardless of the
observations of matrix PP adhering to the glass fiber surface.

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

989

Fig. 17. Interphase structure in continuous glass fiber reinforced polypropylene composites: (a) 0.5 times concentration; (b) 3.0 times concentration.

In the case of the ML type specimens with the modified

matrix PP, the opposite tendency in the bending strength
of the 90 specimens against the HL type specimens is
discussed as follows. At 0.5 times concentration, the maleic
groups of the modified PP react with the silane molecules
easily because of the scarcity of the PP binders. Consequently, many amide groups are generated between matrix
PP and the silane coupling agent and lead to the highest
strength. However, the bending strength decreased with
the increasing concentration ratio. It is considered that
there might be chemical interruption between the maleic
group of matrix PP and that of the physi-sorbed binder
because of the high polarity of the maleic-group. Therefore,
the ML3.0 specimens showed the lowest strength. With
regard to the 0 specimens, the tendency of the bending
strength also can be explained with the above discussion.
Therefore, it can be noted here that even in the glass fiber
reinforced polypropylene composite material, the theory,
which Ikuta et al. has proposed, i.e. the molecular structure
in the interphase, should be considered.

were investigated. As a result, a low-molecular-weight PP

binder was found to be appropriate for generating the highest bending strength. It was clear that the NIR analysis was a
great candidate for investigating the chemical condition of
the sized glass fiber. Furthermore, it can be noted that the
bending properties of continuous glass fiber reinforced polypropylene composites are dependent on the molecular
weight of the PP binder. In the next step, the concentration
ratio of the low-molecular-weight PP binder was varied in
three steps in order to determine the influence of the PP
binder agent on the bending properties in detail. The bending strengths of the 0 and 90 specimens with the modifiedPP matrix (i.e. ML type specimens) decreased with the
increasing concentration of the PP binder agent. On the
other hand, the bending strength of the HL type specimens
was saturated with the increasing concentration ratio in both
the 0 and 90 specimens. It can be concluded that there was
an optimum concentration of the PP binder in order to
obtain high bending properties. The optimum concentration
also depends on the chemical condition of matrix PP.

4. Conclusion

References

In the glass fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites

with the polyolefin polymer matrixes, the surface treatment
of the glass fibers with only a silane coupling agent is not
enough to obtain high mechanical properties. This is due to
the non-polarity of the matrix polymers. In the case of the
GF/PP composites, maleic-anhydride has been used generally for matrix modification. However, in this study, attention is focused on the binding agent that is needed for the
performance of the textile configurations, and the two types
of the PP binder agents with different molecular weights
were employed. They were modified with maleic-anhydride. In the first step, the influence of the sizing conditions
with and without the binder agents on the bending properties

[1] Bigg DM. In: Karger-Kocsis J, editor. Polypropylene: structure,

blends and composites, 1995. p. 26392.
[2] Todo Y, Tsuruhara Y. Nikkei Mechanical 1997;498:2531.
[3] Monasse B, Haudin JM. In: Karger-Kocsis J, editor. Polypropylene:
structure and morphology, 1995. p. 330.
[4] Zhang R, Zheng H, Lou X, Ma D. J Appl Polym Sci 1994;51:5156.
[5] Kitano T, Nagatsuka Y, Nishitani Y, Nakamura K. Proceedings of the
25th FRP Symposium, 1996. p. 978.
[6] Rijsdijk HA, Contant M, Peijs AAJM. Compos Sci Technol
1993;48:16172.
[7] Davies P, Manson J-A, Roulin M, Kausch HH, Echalier B, Jacquemet
RJ. Therm Compos Mater 1991;4:28598.
[8] Sova M. J Appl Polym Sci 1989;38:51128.
[9] Su DT, Chang GY, Lee MS. Proceedings of the ANTEC89, 1989. p.
5314.

990

H. Hamada et al. / Composites: Part A 31 (2000) 979990

[10] Hull D. An introduction to composite materials. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1981 (p. 16).
[11] Kawada H, Hashimoto S, Ikuta N, Hunami H, Takeshita J, Asou H.
Proceedings of the 25th FRP Symposium, 1996. p. 1112.
[12] Ikuta N, Suzuki Y, Maekawa Z, Hamada H. Polymer
1993;34:24456.
[13] Suzuki Y, Maekawa Z, Hamada H, Yokoyama A, Sugihara T, Hojo
M. J Mater Sci 1993;28:172532.

[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]

Kotaki M, Hamada H. Composites Part A 1997;28:25766.

Beehag A, Ye L. Composites Part A 1996;27:17582.
Kitagawa K, Hayasaki S, Ozaki Y. Vib Spectrosc 1997;15:4351.
Ikuta N, Hori T, Naitoh N, Kera Y, Abe I. Compos Interf
1993;1(6):45562.
[18] Nakanishi Y, Ikuta N. J Mater Sci 1996;45(12):130715.