Journal of Basic and Applied Research

International
17(1): 32-48, 2016
ISSN: 2395-3438 (P), ISSN: 2395-3446 (O)

International Knowledge Press

www.ikpress.org

MODELLING AND OPTIMIZATION OF PERFORMANCE

CHARACTERISTICS OF COCONUT FIBRE PARTICLES
REINFORCED HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE
1

C. C. IHUEZE1, M. K. ACHIKE2 AND C. E. OKAFOR3*

Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria.
2
Federal College of Education (Technical), Umunze, Nigeria.
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria.

AUTHORS CONTRIBUTIONS
This work was carried out in collaboration between all authors. Author CCI designed the study, wrote the
protocol and interpreted the data. Author MKA anchored the field study and gathered the initial data and author
CEO performed preliminary data analysis, managed the literature searches and produced the initial draft.
All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Received: 24th August 2015

Accepted: 12th November 2015
Original Research Article
Published: 19th March 2016
__________________________________________________________________________________
ABSTRACT
This paper investigated the performance of coconut fibre particles as a filler material in high-density
polyethylene matrix employing Taguchi robust design (TRD) and response surface method (RSM). Three levels
of filler material particles and three levels of volume fraction of filler material were used in formulating the
composite samples. The composite samples were prepared by injection moulding and kept at room temperature
for 48 hours prior to testing in order to promote relaxation of stresses. The test specimens were prepared and
tested in accordance with ASTM standards D638, D790, D256, and D785 for tensile strength, flexural strength,
impact strength and Rockwell hardness respectively. L9 Taguchi orthogonal array for control factors matrix and
signal-to-noise ratio (SN) greater the better was used as a control function. The SN is used to set optimum
control factors levels for various responses. RSM established the response surface models and the optimum
responses for tensile, flexural, impact and hardness as 30 MPa (at Vfr =16, Ps = 0.039), 23 MPa (at Vfr = 44, Ps
= 0.039), 59 J/m (at Vfr =16, Ps = 0.039) and 61HR (at Vfr =16, Ps = 0.039) respectively. Coefficient of
determination, R2 values of 99.97%, 99.98%, 99.42% and 99.95% are obtained for tensile, flexural, impact and
hardness response models. It can be concluded from the results obtained that the Coconut Fibre Particles
Reinforced High Density Polyethylene (CNFRHDPE) showed improved performance for applications of High
Density Polyethylene (HDPE). Also particle size has the highest influence in increasing the tensile, impact and
hardness responses of CNFRHDPE, while volume fraction of fibre has the highest influence in increasing the
flexural responses of CNFRHDPE.
Keywords: Coconut fibre; volume fraction; particle size; Archimedes principle; optimum performance;
response surface; Taguchi robust design.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
*Corresponding author: Email: ce.okafor@unizik.edu.ng;

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

producers in the world. Coconut fibres may be

decomposed in 2030 years in the nature, and it may
be regarded as an environmentally friendly material
[14]. Coconut fibres as already been used to reinforce
polyolefins [15,16,10]. Both coconut fibres and cork
are used as insulator material in thermal and acoustic
applications and presents lower hydrophilic behaviour
when compared with sisal fibre [17]. In this study,
high density polyethylene (HDPE) was selected as the
matrix to develop the coconut fibres-based composites
because HDPE presents a good balance property
range, is easy to process through melt based
technologies, such as extrusion and compression
moulding, and is a high consumption industrial
polymer that presents low price in the market which is
of significant importance to the cost-performance
assessment. Additionally, it requires a relatively low
processing temperature, which is essential because of
the relatively low thermal stability of both natural
components. In this work, we report the effect of
using coconut fibre as a reinforcement material,
preferably in the presence of 2 wt. % of coupling
agent, to promote higher mechanical performance of
the cork-based composites.

1. INTRODUCTION
Most of the pressing scientific problems that are
currently faced today are due to the limitations of the
materials that are currently available [1]. Mulinari [2]
defined composite materials as materials made from
two or more constituent materials with significantly
different physical or chemical properties, that when
combined, produce a material with characteristics
different from the individual components. American
Composites Manufacturers Association [3] defined
composite materials as the combination of two or
more materials to reinforce their properties and make
them stronger together than they are apart. The
individual components remain separate and distinct
within the finished structure. Composite materials are
continuously replacing traditional materials due to
their excellent properties. A single large part made of
composites can replace many metal parts [4].
Composite materials can be embedded with sensors,
which can monitor fatigue and performance. They
have high stiffness to density ratio thereby providing
greater strength at lighter weights. The use of lightweight materials means an increase in the fuel
efficiency of automobiles and airplanes. Also the
endurance limit of some composites is higher than
that of aluminum and steel [5]. Most composites are
made up of plastics or resins and hence provide a high
level of resistance to corrosion, while aluminum and
iron need special treatments like alloying to protect
them from corrosion. Composites have a low coefficient of thermal expansion, which can provide a
greater dimensional stability when required. The fact
that composites in general can be custom tailored to
suit individual requirements, have desirable properties
in corrosive environment, provide higher strength to
weight ratio and have lower life-cycle costs has aided
in their evolution [6].

Agunsoye, Talabi and Sanni [18] reported that natural

lignocellulosics such as coconut shell powder has
outstanding potentials as reinforcement in plastics;
coconut shell is important filler for the development
of new composites as a result of its inherent properties
such as high strength and high modulus [19].
Increased coconut shell content increases the tensile
strength, Youngs modulus and water absorption rate
but reduces the elongation at break of coconut shell
filled polyester composites [20]. Incorporating
coconut shell powder reduces the damping property of
biocomposites with a significant improvement in the
tensile strength and tensile modulus [21].
Recently, a number of studies have been conducted
involving combined utilization of Taguchi robust
design and response surface approach. Raviraj,
Raghuvir, Srikanth and Vasanth [22] examined
the machinability of discontinuously reinforced
aluminium composites (DRACs) using response
surface methodology and Taguchis design of
experiments under dry cutting condition. The
experimental results reveal that the most significant
machining parameter for surface roughness is feed,
followed by cutting speed. The predicted values and
measured values are fairly close, which indicates that
the developed model can be effectively used to predict
the surface roughness in the machining of DRACs.
Similarly Pai, Rao & Shetty [23] mathematically
modelled the variation of metal removal rate and
surface roughness with grinding process parameters
using response surface methodology and the

Many studies on the use of natural fibres such as

kenaf, bagasse, jute, ramie, hemp and oil palm
reinforced with thermoplastic matrices have
successfully proven their high qualities in various
fields of engineering application [7,8,9,10]. However,
not much working models has been developed for
coconut fibre particles reinforced high density
polyethylene. Annually, approximately 33 billion
coconuts are harvested worldwide with only 15% of
these coconuts being utilized for fibers and chips
[11,12,13]. This suggests that there is considerable
room to reduce this kind of environmental pollution
and enhance the efficiency of using natural resources.
Coconut fibre or coir is a versatile lignocellulosic
fibre obtained from coconut trees, which grow
extensively in tropical countries. Sri Lanka, Nigeria
and India are considered to be the major coir fibre

33

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

CNFRHDPE and also to apply Taguchi robust design

and response surface method to design and optimize
experiments that lead to optimal surfaces of
performance characteristics of CNFRHDPE.

developed model was validated with the set of

experiments. It is observed that developed model is in
close agreement with the experimental results.
Yung-Tsan, Wen-Tsann, Wei-Cheng and Tsu-Ming
[24] integrated the Taguchi method and response
surface methodology for process parameter
optimization of the injection moulded samples. The
Taguchi method (TM) was used to screen the
variables that have significant effects on the
contraction rate of the outer coating while the
optimization engineering of response surface
methodology (RSM) was utilized for the empirical
research to acquire a prediction model that can be
used to optimize the optical fiber outer coating
injection molding process. Madia, Radovanovia,
Mania, Trajanovia [25] optimized CO2 laser cutting
process using Taguchi and dual response surface
methodology. The study determined the near optimal
laser cutting parameter values in order to ensure
robust condition which minimized the average surface
roughness. Sivaraos, Milkey, Samsudin, Dubey and
Kidd [26] applied Taguchi method and RSM to model
the laser parameters when machining industrial PVC
foams, though both the techniques predicted near
values of average error, the RSM technique seems to
be more promising in predicting the response via
mathematical modelling over the Taguchi technique.
Adalarasan and Santhanakumar [4] applied Taguchi
based response surface method (TRSM) for
optimization of multi responses in drilling Al/SiC/Al2
O3 hybrid composites. They observed that the
significant improvements in the responses observed
for the optimal parameter setting has validated the
TRSM approach permitting its application in other
areas of manufacturing. In all these previous studies,
researchers has attempted to complement the viability
of Taguchi robust design and response surface
methodology; there is need to further apply this
approach to investigate the performance of coconut
fibre particles as a filler material in high-density
polyethylene matrix.

2. METHODOLOGY
The methodology of this research considered volume
fraction of fibres and particle size of fibres as factors
controlling the behavior of HDPE matrix filled fillers.
The ASTM specified standard particle sizes are
presented in Table 1. Archimedes principle was
employed to determine the density of coconut fibre
from where the composite samples are designed
following the method of Okafor et al. [28] and ASTM
Standards for mechanical properties tests [29].
Table 1 shows three grades of fibre particle sizes and
their corresponding sieve sizes according to ASTM
Standard. This study leveraged on the Taguchi robust
design and response surface method to design and
optimize experiments that lead to optimal surfaces of
performance characteristics of CNFRHDPE. Taguchi
method uses signal to noise ratio to decide optimal
variables while RSM establishes optimal surface
without reference to noise factors. This is a major
limitation of RSM. This research therefore uses
Taguchi method to set up design matrix that is used to
evaluate the responses while RSM is used to optimize
the responses of Taguchi experiment by linearization
of Taguchi experimental results on assumption that
the results follow a power law model. The responses
of the design matrix of RSM are evaluated with the
power law model obtained from the experiments
based on Taguchi orthogonal array of control factors.

2.1 Taguchi Robust Design

Taguchi uses signal to noise ratio to establish the
optimal setting of control and noise factors to make
performance or quality characteristics robust. For
responses needed to be maximized, the signal to noise
ratio the greater the better option is chosen. This is the
case of this study where we desire the performance
characteristics to be great. This option is expressed as

Due to poor compatibility of natural fibres, the

surface of the fibres must be treated to improve the
adhesion between the fibre and matrix. Bledzki [27]
reported many methods to modify the surface of
natural fibres for their use in composite materials such
as acetylation, alkali and isocyanates treatments.
These Treatments make the fibres more hydrophobic.
It is important to indicate that the good cohesion
between fibres and matrix is governed by many
parameters such as the surface area, the roughness and
the surface tensile of fibres.

SN = 10log



 

(1)

Where
= number of experimental trials,
performance characteristics.

y =

Table 1. Sieve sizes

Grade
1
2
3

The main objective of this research was to investigate

the effect of volume fraction of fibres and particle size
of fibres as factors controlling the behaviour of

ASTM number
325
270
200

Sieve size
45 micron (0.045 mm)
53 micron (0.053 mm)
75 micron (0.075 mm)

Source: Annual book of ASTM standards 2013

34

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Where M. = mass of composite, M/ = mass of fibre,

M0 = mass of resin, !"#$%& '() =ASTM specified
sample size, V/0 = volume fraction,  = volume of
fibre, subscripts f and r defines fibre and resin
respectively. V stands for volume and * stands for
density.

2.1.1 Design of experiment (DOE)

This is achieved by making decision on levels of
factors and the number of control factors. Taguchi
established many design plans called an orthogonal
array that suits many designs. The designer of
experiments on knowing the number of levels of
factors and number of control factors simply uses the
standard array selector to choose the array for the
experiment. This study considers two design factors
volume fraction of fibres and particle size of fibre at
three levels of factors. With three levels of factors and
two factors we need L9 orthogonal array as estimated
with array selector.

2.4 Composite Samples Manufacture

The aggregates (coconut fibre particles and high
density polyethylene resin) were mixed thoroughly
until even dispersion was achieved. Addition of 1%
weight of chromium catalyst was made and stirred for
3 minutes, after which 2% weight of accelerator
(Cobalt Octoate) was added and stirred for another 3
minutes before pouring the composite mixture into the
hopper of the injection moulding machine where the
already prepared mould is fitted. The mould was
cleaned with acetone and coated with polyvinyl
alcohol (PVA) and allowed to dry before fixing it on
the injection moulding machine. This was done to
prevent particles of the composite sticking to the walls
of the mould which may alter the dimensional
accuracy of the samples produced. The procedure was
repeated for all the samples produced with changes in
the percentage of ground coconut fibre based on
volume fraction decision and particle sizes. Barrel
temperature set-points of rear zone, middle zone, and
nozzle zone of the injection moulding machine was
kept at 150C, 180C and 200C respectively. Screw
speed was set to 240 rpm and injection speed was
around 1m/s. All the samples prepared were kept at
room temperature for 48 hours prior to testing to
promote relaxation of stress [31]. The tensile strength,
elastic modulus, flexural strength, impact strength and
hardness value of each of the samples developed were
determined. Five samples in each case were tested and
the average value recorded.

2.1.2 Design matrixes

The Design Matrix allows additional constraints to be
placed on the real parameter estimates.
Table 2. Experimental outlay and variable sets for
mechanical testing
Factors
1
20
0.045

Vfr (%)
PS (mm)

Levels
2
30
0.053

3
40
0.075

2.2 Fibre Extraction and Modification

Fibres extracted by double retting were soaked in 4%
NaOH and 2% Na2SO3 solution for 24 hours. These
fibres were washed with distilled water and dried
under sun for 48 hours. To further remove any trace
of moisture, the fibres were further dried in an oven at
50C for one hour.

2.3 Composite Sample Design

Composite design was carried out using standard
specifications of ASTM D638, D790, D256 and D785
for tensile, flexural, impact and hardness sample tests.
Archimedes principle was used to determine the
density of fibres from where the mass of both fibres
and resin for a particular volume fraction is evaluated.
Ihueze and Enetanya [30] have shown that starting
from rule of mixtures relation:
 = 
 =



2.5 Experimental Tests and Results

Experimental tests were carried out following the
Taguchi orthogonal arrays and ASTM standards for
tensile test experiment using universal tensile testing
machine (JJ Lloyd London, capacity 1- 20KN) at a
crosshead speed of 10 mm/min and an applied load of
5KN. Flexural properties were investigated using the
same universal tensile testing machine for Three-point
bending at a crosshead speed of 12mm/min
considering a beam span of 50 mm. Charpy impact
tester (Changteh China, model JC-25, pendulum
capacity of 4J at a test velocity of 5m/s) was used to
determine the impact strength of the specimens. Vnotch depth of 2.5 mm and notch angle of 45 was cut
on each of the specimens prior to testing. The energy
transferred to the material can be inferred by
comparing the difference in the height of the striker

(2)

 



 
 

(3)



=  !"#$%& '() *

(4)

= *  + * 

(5)
35

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Table 3. Taguchi standard orthogonal array L9

Experiment
number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Parameter 1:A

Parameter 2:B

Parameter 3:C

Parameter 4:D

1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3

1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3

1
2
3
2
3
1
3
1
2

1
2
3
3
1
2
2
3
1

Table 4. Experimental design matrix and factors results

Experiment
number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Volume
fraction Vfr
(%)
20
20
20
30
30
30
40
40
40

Fibre particle
sizes Ps (mm)
0.045
0.053
0.075
0.045
0.053
0.075
0.045
0.053
0.075

Tensile
strength
(MPa)
28.6
28.2
24.8
28.4
27.8
24.4
27.6
27.4
25.0

(hammer) before and after the fracture as indicated on

the impact meter. The hardness values of the
developed samples were measured using Rockwell
Hardness Tester on M-Scale in accordance with
ASTM D785.

Flexural
strength
(MPa)
20.6
19.5
19.0
21.8
20.0
19.8
22.3
21.6
21.0

Impact
strength
(J/m)
55.0
52.0
48.0
52.0
49.0
45.0
49.0
47.0
43.0

Hardness
values (HR)
46.5
36.2
32.4
52.6
44.8
40.2
54.0
48.6
42.8

The results of the various tests are presented in above

Table 4.

The responses at factors settings are shown in Table 5

while the optimal setting of parameters and levels are
presented in Table 6. Table 5 clearly shows that
particle size has the highest influence in increasing
the tensile, impact and hardness responses of
CNFRHDPE while volume fraction of fibre has the
highest influence in increasing the flexural responses
of CNFRHDPE.

3. ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL DATA

AND RESPONSE MODELLING

3.2 Response Surface Modelling

Response surface method (RSM) is a powerful
statistical tool that employs factorial analysis and
regression analysis for the determination of optimum
operating conditions on the response surface, with the
major objective of determining the equation of the
response surface near the optimum point. RSM uses
many experiments to reach optimum and at optimum
the appropriate model is nonlinear regression model.
The general Polynomial model to detect nonlinearity
and second order effects is expressed as:

3.1 Analysis of Experimental Data

Experimental results are analysed implementing
Taguchi robust design with Minitab 16.0 software.
The signal to noise ratio evaluated for all factors
combinations is the basis for optimal setting of design
factors and responses. The main effects plots for
means and signal to noise ratios of all performance
characteristics are presented. The greater the SN the
better is the response. Figs. 1-4 actually presents the
facts that responses are higher at higher SN.

(6)

36

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Fig. 1. Main effects plots of SN ratios for tensile response

Fig. 2. Main effects plots of SN ratios for flexural response

Fig. 3. Main effects plots of SN ratios for impact response

37

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Fig. 4. Main effects plots of SN ratios for hardness response

Table 5. Response table of means
Level
1
2
3
Delta
Rank

Vfr (%)
27.20
26.87
26.67
0.63
2

Tensile
Ps (mm)
28.20
27.80
24.73
3.47
1

Vfr (%)
19.70
20.53
21.63
1.93
1

Flexural
Ps (mm)
21.57
20.37
19.93
1.63
2

Vfr (%)
51.67
48.67
46.33
5.33
2

Impact
Ps (mm)
52.20
49.33
45.33
6.67
1

Hardness
Vfr (%)
Ps (mm)
38.37
51.03
45.87
43.20
48.47
38.47
10.10
12.57
2
1

Table 6. Optimum levels and parameter settings

Parameters

Vfr (%)
PS (mm)

Tensile
Optimum Parameter
level
setting
1
20%
1
0.045 mm

Flexural
Optimum Parameter
level
setting
3
40%
1
0.045 mm

Excels Analysis Tool box or Minitab 16 software can

be used to carry out regression modeling on
experimental data transformed to Log base 10 to
obtain equation (4).

(7)
For response of two variables (7) reduces to

By transforming the power model of (7) applying the

utility of linear regression,
=>?2 = 34 + 3 =>?5 + 37 =>?57
+38 =>?58 . . 3; =>?5;

Hardness
Optimum Parameter
level
setting
3
40%
1
0.045 mm

nonlinear model where the optimum occurs gives the

optimum variables at the response surface.

The first stage of RSM is to determine the responses

of the factorial experimental design runs using a
nonlinear data obtained from an organized experiment
of many variable. This is can be achieved by
assuming that experimental results can be modeled by
the power equation usually expressed as
2 = 34 5 "6 57 " 58 "9 5; "<

Impact
Optimum Parameter
level
setting
1
20%
1
0.045 mm

2 = 34 5 "6 57 "

(9)

And equation (6) reduces to

(8)

AB = C4 + C 5 + C7 57 + C 5 7 + C77 57 7
+C7 5 57
(10)

By antilog, (8) reduces to (7)

Equation (10) gives the equation of the response

surface where responses are optimum.

Equation (7) can be used to estimate the responses of

the factorial design matrix that when applied to

38

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

3.2.1 Linearization and power law models of

experimental responses

3.2.2 Central Composite Design (CCD) matrixes

and power law responses

Table 4 responses are assumed to follow power law

model of equation (9) so that the models representing
Table 4 can be expressed respectively for tensile,
flexural impact and hardness responses as

Equations (11)-(14) are used to compute the central

composites design matrixes runs responses of this
study and presented as in Tables 8, 9, 10 and 11.

DE = 13.583 I4.47J (LM)I4.7OP

QE = 8.79265

4.8874V

I4.W477

(LM)

Table 7. Factors for response surface study

(11)
S/N

(12)
1

DE = 38.5496 I4.VOWJ8 (LM)I4.7OWO4

(13)

Y2 = 2.91559 4.8VWW7V(LM)I4.V7OPV

(14)

Processing
factors
A: Volume
fraction Vfr (%)
B: Fibre particle
sizes Ps (mm)

Low
level (-1)
20

High
level (+1)
40

0.045

0.075

Table 8. Central composite design (CCD) matrix for tensile strength

Std order
10
6
1
8
5
2
4
9
7
3
11
13
12

Run order
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Pt type
0
-1
1
-1
-1
1
1
0
-1
1
0
0
0

Blocks
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Vfr
30
44.14214
20
30
15.85786
40
40
30
30
20
30
30
30

Ps
0.06
0.06
0.045
0.081213
0.06
0.045
0.075
0.06
0.038787
0.075
0.06
0.06
0.06

R
26.41135851
26.13737532
28.85052527
24.34578936
26.86992211
28.31560952
24.68019581
26.41135851
29.70006873
25.14643424
26.41135851
26.41135851
26.41135851

Table 9. Central composite design (CCD) matrix for flexural strength

Std order
9
8
10
2
3
13
5
11
4
12
6
7
1

Run order
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Pt type
0
-1
0
1
1
0
-1
0
1
0
-1
-1
1

Blocks
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

39

Vfr
30
30
30
40
20
30
15.85786
30
40
30
44.14214
30
20

Ps
0.06
0.081213
0.06
0.045
0.075
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.075
0.06
0.06
0.038787
0.045

R
20.52096
19.66813
20.52096
22.20025
18.84315
20.52096
18.85021
20.52096
20.66579
20.52096
21.60431
21.8154
20.24227

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Table 10. Central composite design (CCD) matrix for impact strength
Std order
13
4
11
3
12
1
7
2
10
6
9
8
5

Run order
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Pt type
0
1
0
1
0
1
-1
1
0
-1
0
-1
-1

Blocks
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Vfr
30
40
30
20
30
20
30
40
30
44.14214
30
30
15.85786

Ps
0.06
0.075
0.06
0.075
0.06
0.045
0.038787
0.045
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.081213
0.06

R
47.66424
42.95371
47.66424
47.87444
47.66424
54.8031
53.49657
49.17021
47.66424
44.86908
47.66424
43.99509
52.66431

Table 11. Central composite design (CCD) matrix for hardness

Std order
11
2
13
8
9
3
12
5
10
4
6
1
7

Run order
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Pt type
0
1
0
-1
0
1
0
-1
0
1
-1
1
-1

Blocks
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

Vfr
30
40
30
30
30
20
30
15.85786
30
40
44.14214
20
30

Ps
0.06
0.045
0.06
0.081213
0.06
0.075
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.075
0.06
0.045
0.038787

R
42.86132
55.23051
42.86132
36.54174
42.86132
33.00586
42.86132
34.19271
42.86132
42.1972
49.14893
43.20028
53.93849

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The response surface models for tensile, flexural, impact and hardness responses are expressed mathematical in
terms of actual factors in equations (15)-(18) respectively while the associated surface and contour plots are
expressed in Figs. 5-12.
DE = 40.0506 0.0577543 288.770LM + 0.000423707 7 + 1342.27(LM)7 + 0.114462 LM (15)
QE = 20.6875 + 0.197085 102.314LM 0.00146012 7 + 494.403(LM)7 0.225567 LM

(16)

ZE = 84.4479 0.663290 538.098LM + 0.00537253 7 + 2341.42(LM)7 + 1.18693 LM

(17)

Y2 = 55.7494 + 1.17775 884.721LM 0.00607001 7 + 5233.98(LM)7 4.73148 LM

(18)

40

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Fig. 5. Minitab depiction of 3-D surface plot of tensile response of CNFRHDPE

Fig. 6. Minitab depiction of contour plot of tensile response of CNFRHDPE

22

21
20
19

40

0.08
30
Vfr

0.06

20
0.04

Ps

Fig. 7. Minitab depiction of 3-D plot of flexural response of CNFRHDPE

41

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Contour Plot of R vs Vfr, Ps

19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5

40

35

Vfr

R
<

>

19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
22.0

30

25

20

0.04

0.05

0.06
Ps

0.07

0.08

Fig. 8. Minitab depiction of contour plot of flexural response of CNFRHDPE

55

50

40

45
30
0.04

Vfr

20
0.06
0.08

Ps

Fig. 9. Minitab depiction of 3D surface plot of impact response of CNFRHDPE

Contour Plot of R vs Vfr, Ps

44
46
48
50
52

40

Vfr

35

R
<

>

44
46
48
50
52
54
54

30

25

20

0.04

0.05

0.06
Ps

0.07

0.08

Fig. 10. Minitab depiction of contour plot of impact response of CNFRHDPE

42

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

50
R
40
40
30

30
0.04

Vfr

20
0.06
0.08

Ps

Fig. 11. Minitab depiction of 3-D surface plot of hardness response of CNFRHDPE
Contour Plot of R vs Vfr, Ps

35
40
45
50

40

Vfr

35

R
<

>

35
40
45
50
55
55

30

25

20

0.04

0.05

0.06
Ps

0.07

0.08

Fig. 12. Minitab depiction of contour plot of hardness response of CNFRHDPE

Fig. 5 and 6 clearly show saddle points responses and
that the tensile strength of CNFRHDPE increases
with decreasing particle size. Figs. 7 and 8 clearly
show saddle points responses and that the flexural
strength of CNFRHDPE increases with decreasing
particle size and incrasing volume fraction. Fig. 9 and
10 clearly show saddle points responses and that the
impact strength of CNFRHDPE increases with
decreasing particle size and decreasing volume
fraction. Figs. 11 and 12 clearly show saddle points
responses and that the hardness of CNFRHDPE
increases with decreasing particle size and incrasing
volume fraction.

The ANOVA results of the four experiments of

tensile, flexural, impact and hardness responses of
CNFRHDPE are exhibited in Tables 12, 13, 14 and
15. ANOVA is a statistical tool used in several ways
to develop and confirm an explanation for the
observed data. ANOVA is a particular form of
hypothesis testing heavily used in the analysis of
experimental data.
Table 12 clearly shows with its p-values that the main
effects, higher order effects are all significant but
interaction effects of factors are not significant hence
equation (15) for tensile strength response of
CNFRHDPE need to be modified to drop interaction
effect to read

DE = 40.0506 0.0577543 288.770LE + 0.000423707 7 + 1342.27LE 7

43

( 19)

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Tables 13, 14 and 15 both shows that the main effects,

interaction effects and high order effects resulting
from second order polynomial fit for flexural, impact
and hardness responses of CNFRHDPE are significant
terms at optimal response surface.

The degrees of fitness of responses of this study are

exhibited in Table 15. The recorded coefficients of
determinations clearly means that the obtained models
are correct fits for the tensile, flexural, impact and
hardness responses of CNFRHDPE.

Table 12. ANOVA for tensile response model

Source
Linear
Vfr
Ps
Square
Vfr*Vfr
Ps*Ps
Interaction
Vfr*Ps
Residual error
Lack-of-Fit
Pure error
Total

DF
5
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
7
3
4
12

Seq SS
28.9490
28.3132
0.5187
27.7945
0.6346
0.0001
0.6345
0.0012
0.0012
0.0074
0.0074
0.0000
28.9563

Adj SS
28.9490
28.3132
0.5187
27.7945
0.6346
0.0125
0.6345
0.0012
0.0012
0.0074
0.0074
0.0000

Adj MS
5.7898
14.1566
0.5187
27.7945
0.3173
0.0125
0.6345
0.0012
0.0012
0.0011
0.0025
0.0000

F
5499.34
13446.42
492.71
26400.12
301.37
11.86
602.68
1.12
1.12

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.011
0.000
0.325
0.325

F
5674.04
13864.84
17276.77
10452.92
314.88
347.94
201.96
10.74
10.74

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.014
0.014

F
4715.44
11505.07
9139.52
13870.62
273.58
315.32
303.19
19.91
19.91

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.003
0.003

Table 13. ANOVA for flexural response model

Source
Regression
Linear
Vfr
Ps
Square
Vfr*Vfr
Ps*Ps
Interaction
Vfr*Ps
Residual error
Lack-of-fit
Pure error
Total

DF
5
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
7
3
4
12

Seq SS
12.0927
11.8197
7.3642
4.4555
0.2684
0.1824
0.0861
0.0046
0.0046
0.0030
0.0030
0.0000
12.0957

Adj SS
12.0927
11.8197
7.3642
4.4555
0.2684
0.1483
0.0861
0.0046
0.0046
0.0030
0.0030
0.0000

Adj MS
2.41854
5.90985
7.36417
4.45553
0.13422
0.14831
0.08608
0.00458
0.00458
0.00043
0.00099
0.00000

Table 14. ANOVA for impact response model

Source
Regression
Linear
Vfr
Ps
Square
Vfr*Vfr
Ps*Ps
Interaction
Vfr*Ps
Residual error
Lack-of-fit
Pure error
Total

DF
5
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
7
3
4
12

Seq SS
150.138
146.527
58.200
88.327
3.484
1.554
1.931
0.127
0.127
0.045
0.045
0.000
150.183

Adj SS
150.138
146.527
58.200
88.327
3.484
2.008
1.931
0.127
0.127
0.045
0.045
0.000

44

Adj MS
30.0276
73.2635
58.1999
88.3272
1.7421
2.0079
1.9307
0.1268
0.1268
0.0064
0.0149
0.0000

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Table 15. ANOVA for impact response model

Source
Regression
Linear
Vfr
Ps
Square
Vfr*Vfr
Ps*Ps
Interaction
Vfr*Ps
Residual error
Lack-of-fit
Pure error
Total

DF
5
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
7
3
4
12

Seq SS
526.158
510.401
224.432
285.969
13.742
4.094
9.648
2.015
2.015
0.241
0.241
0.000
526.399

Adj SS
526.158
510.401
224.432
285.969
13.742
2.563
9.648
2.015
2.015
0.241
0.241
0.000

Adj MS
105.232
255.201
224.432
285.969
6.871
2.563
9.648
2.015
2.015
0.034
0.080
0.000

Fig. 13. Hardness response optimization

Fig. 14. Tensile response optimization

45

F
3051.95
7401.38
6509.03
8293.73
199.27
74.34
279.80
58.43
58.43

P
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

Fig. 15. Flexural response optimization

Fig. 16. Impact response optimization

Table 16. Goodness of fit data for RSM models
Response
Tensile
Flexural
Impact
Hardness

Press
0.0324
0.0206
0.0009
1.71634

R2 (%)
99.97
99.98
99.42
99.95

When the optimum parameter settings of Table 5

obtained through Taguchi robust design is used in
equations (15) - (18) the optimum responses of the
tensile, flexural, impact and hardness are obtained as
28.89 MPa, 22.42 MPa, 54.91J/m, and 56.42 HR
respectively. These results are in agreement with the
response contour plots of Figs. 6-12.

R2 (pred) (%)
99.82
99.82
98.87
99.67

R2 (adj) (%)
99.96
99.96
99.23
99.92

The optimum conditions for application of

CNFRHDPE are shown in the optimization plots of
Figs. 13-16.

5. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, this study investigated the performance
of coconut fibre particles as a filler material in high-

46

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

density polyethylene matrix employing Taguchi

robust design (TRD) and Response Surface Method
(RSM). The developed Coconut Fibre Particles
Reinforced High Density Polyethylene composites
have shown improved mechanical properties as
compared with the unreinforced high-density
polyethylene resin. From the results obtained, the
composites can be utilized in many applications
requiring energy absorption and dissipation such as in
auto bodies, brake bands and clutch plates.
furthermore, Response Surface models are developed
for prediction of CNFRHDPE tensile, flexural, impact
and hardness responses, the model showed that
particle size has the highest influence in increasing
the tensile, impact and hardness responses of
CNFRHDPE while volume fraction of fibre has the
highest influence in increasing the flexural responses
of CNFRHDPE. As the results has indicated, the
closeness of R2 and R2 (adj) of this study shows that
the model terms are significant; high correlation exists
between the model and experimental values because
R2 value is more than 95 % in all the cases. Finally,
RSM established the response surface models and the
optimum responses for tensile, flexural, impact and
hardness as 30 MPa (at Vfr =16, Ps = 0.039), 23MPa
(at Vfr = 44, Ps = 0.039), 59 J/m (at Vfr =16,
Ps = 0.039) and 61HR (at Vfr =16, Ps = 0.039)
respectively.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

COMPETING INTERESTS

12.

Authors have declared that no competing interests

exist.

13.

REFERENCES
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Callister W. Material science and engineering:

An introduction. USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
2011;513.
Mulinari J. Effects of chemical modifications
on the mechanical properties of particulate
composites. Journal of Composite Science and
Technology. 2005;65(1):118128.
American
Composites
Manufacturers
Association (ACMA); 2015.
Available:http://documents.mx/documents/topi
c-11-composite-materials-notes.html
Retrieved December 12.
Adalarasan R, Santhanakumar M. Application
of taguchi based response surface method
(TRSM) for optimization of multi responses in
drilling Al/SiC/Al2 O3 hybrid composite.
Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India):
Series C. 2015;96(1):65-71.
Vimal RSS, Latha B, Senthilkumar VS.
Modeling and analysis of thrust force and
torque in drilling GFRP composites by multifacet drill using fuzzy logic. International

14.

15.

16.

17.

47

Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering.

2009;1(5):66-70.
Abdalla FH, Megat MH. Determination of
volume fraction values of filament wound glass
and carbon Fibre reinforced composites.
Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences.
2008;3(4):711.
Mohd YY, Phongsakorn PT, Sihambing H. A
comparison process between vacuum infusion
and hand Lay-Up method toward Kenaf/
polyester composite. International Journal of
Basic & Applied Sciences. 2010;10(3):63-66.
Nishino T, Hirao K, Kotero M, Nakamae K,
Inagaki H. Kenaf reinforced biodegradable
composite.
Composites
Science
and
Technology. 2003;63(9):1281-1286.
Sharifah HA, Martin PA, Simon JC, Simon RP.
Modified polyester resins for natural fibre
composites.
Composites
Science
and
Technology. 2005;65(3-4):525-535.
Wamubua P, Ivens J, Verpoest I. Natural
Fibres: Can they replace glass in Fibre
reinforced plastics? Composites Science and
Technology. 2003;63(9):1259-1264.
Monteiro SN, Terrones LAH, DAlmei JRM.
Mechanical performance of coir fiber/
polyester composites. Polymer Testing.
2008;27(5):591-595.
Wang W, Huang G. Characterization and
utilization of natural coconut fibers composites.
Materials & Design. 2009;30(7):2741-2744.
Olumuyiwa AJ, Talabi S, Sanni OS. Study of
mechanical behavior of coconut shell
reinforced polymer matrix composites. Journal
of Minerals and Materials Characterization and
Engineering. 2012;774-779.
Wei W, Gu H. Characterisation and utilization
of natural coconut fibres composites. Mater
Des. 2009;30(7):27414.
Fernandes EM, Correlo VM, Chagas JAM,
Mano JF, Reis RL. Cork based composites
using polyolefins as matrix: Morphology and
mechanical performance. Compos Sci Technol.
2010;70(16):23108.
Brahmakumar M, Pavithran C, Pillai RM.
Coconut
fibre
reinforced
polyethylene
composites: effect of natural waxy surface
layer of the fibre on fibre / matrix interfacial
bonding and strength of composites. Compos
Sci Technol. 2005;65(34):5639.
Bismarck A, Mohanty AK, AranberriAskargorta I, Czapla S, Misra M, Hinrichsen
G. Surface characterization of natural fibers;
surface properties and the water up-take
behavior of modified sisal and coir fibers.
Green Chem. 2001;3(2):1007.

Ihueze et al.; JOBARI, 17(1): 32-48, 2016

18.

Agunsoye JO, Talabi SI, Sanni OS. Study of 25.

Madia M, Radovanovia M, Mania M,
mechanical behaviour of coconut shell
Trajanovia M. Optimization of CO2 laser
reinforced polymer matrix composite. Journal
cutting process using Taguchi and Dual
of Minerals and Materials Characterization and
response surface methodology. Tribology in
Engineering. 2012;11:774-779.
Industry. 2014;36(3):236-243.
19. Sapuan M, Harimi M. Mechanical properties of 26.
Sivaraos A, Milkey KR, Samsudin AR, Dubey
epoxy/coconut shell filler particle composites.
AK, Kidd P. Comparison between Taguchi
The Arabian Journal for Science and
method and response surface methodology
Engineering. 2003;28(2B):171-181.
(RSM) in Modelling CO2 laser machining.
20. Husseinsyah S, Mostapha M. The effect of
Jordan Journal of Mechanical and Industrial
filler content on properties of coconut shell
Engineering. 2014;8(1):3542.
filled polyester composites. Malasian Polymer
27.
Bledzki AK, Gassan J. Composites reinforced
Journal. 2011;6(1):87-97.
with cellulose based fibres. Progress in
21. Roopa S, Siddaramaiah M. Mechanical,
Polymer Science. 1999;24(2):221-274.
thermal and morphological behaviours of
28.
Okafor EC, Ihueze CC, Nwigbo SC.
coconut
shell
powder
filled
Pu/Ps
Optimization of hardness strengths response of
biocomposites. Advanced Materials Research.
plantain fibres reinforced polyester matrix
2010;41(14):3141-3153.
composites applying Taguchi robust design.
22. Raviraj Shetty, Raghuvir Pai, Srikanth S. Rao,
International journal of engineering. 2013;26:1.
Vasanth Kamath. Machinability study on
Annual book of ASTM standards. West
discontinuously
reinforced
aluminium 29.
Conshohockam, USA. 2013;15.
composites (DRACs) using response surface
methodology and Taguchis design of 30.
Ihueze CC, Enetanya AN. Energy absorption
experiments under dry cutting condition, Mj.
and strength evaluation for compressed glass
Int. J. Sci. Tech. 2008;2(01):227-239.
fibre reinforced polyester (GRP) for
23. Pai D, Rao S, Shetty R. Application of Taguchi
automobile components design in crash
and response surface methodologies for metal
prevention scheme. Journal of Minerals and
removal rate and surface roughness in grinding
Materials Characterization and Engineering.
of DRACS. I.J.E.M.S. 2012;3(1):1-8.
2012;11(1):85-105.
24. Yung-Tsan J, Wen-Tsann L, Wei-Cheng L,
31.
Hassan SB, Oghnevweta EJ, Aigbodion VS.
Tsu-Ming Y. Integrating the Taguchi method
Potentials of maize stalk ash as reinforcement
and response surface methodology for process
in polyester composites. Journal of Minerals
parameter optimization of the injection
and
Materials
Characterization
and
molding. Applied Mathematics & Information
Engineering. 2011;11(4):543-557.
Sciences. 2014;8(3):1277-1285.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Copyright International Knowledge Press. All rights reserved.

48