Scientia et Technica Año XXVII, Vol. 27, No. 04, octubre-diciembre de 2022. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira. ISSN 0122-1701 y ISSN-e: 2344-7214

223

Abstract— In this study, a low-cost simple manufacturing process

for a composite material of thermoplastic matrix

PolyEtherEtherKetone (PEEK) and carbon fiber (CF) was

developed. The composite material CF/PEEK was mechanically

evaluated by three-point bending and tension tests, obtaining the

elastic modulus and the maximum tensile stress respectively. Also,

threads were made in the composite material and the strength of

threads machined on the composite material was evaluated with

tension tests. A comparison of the composite material CF/PEEK

and the composite material of carbon fiber and epoxy resin

(CF/EP) was performed, the elastic modules, peak tensile stresses

and the strength of threads were compared. It was found that it

was possible to produce the CF/PEEK composite at low cost by hot

molding. The elastic modulus and tensile strength of the CF/PEEK

were lower than those obtained in the CF/EP. However, the

performance of the thread in tension was better for CF/PEEK

compared to CF/EP.

Index Terms— Carbon Fiber, Epoxy Resin Manufacture,

PEEK, Mechanical Characterization, Thread.

Resumen—En este estudio se desarrolló un proceso de

manufactura sencillo, de bajo costo para producir un material

compuesto de matriz termoplástica PolyEtherEtherKetone

(PEEK) y fibra de carbón (CF) mediante moldeo en caliente. Se

caracterizó mecánicamente el material compuesto CF/PEEK con

ensayos de flexión en tres puntos y tensión, se obtuvieron el modulo

elástico y la resistencia máxima a tensión, respectivamente.

También roscas fueron maquinadas en el material compuestos y

se evaluó la resistencia de estas roscas mediante pruebas de

tensión. Se realizó una comparación del material compuesto

CF/PEEK con el material compuesto de fibra de carbón y resina

epoxi (CF/EP), los módulos elásticos, la resistencia máxima a la

tensión y la resistencia de las roscas fueron comparadas. Se

encontró que fue posible producir a bajo costo mediante moldeo al

caliente este compuesto de CF/PEEK. El módulo elástico y la

resistencia a la tensión fueron menores que las obtenidas en el

CF/EP. Sin embargo, el desempeño del CF/PEEK a tensión en

las roscas fue mejor comparado con el compuesto de CF/EP.

This manuscript was sent on June 30, 2021 and accepted on November 21,

2022.

J. E. Caicedo-Zuñiga, M.Sc. is with the Mechanical Engineering School,

Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia). (e-mail:

joyner.caicedo@correounivalle.edu.co).

Palabras claves— Caracterización mecánica, Fibra de carbón,

Manufactura, PEEK, Resina epoxi, Roscado.

I. INTRODUCTION

IBER reinforced materials are currently used in several

applications as for example, in the aerospace, automotive,

and biomedical engineering due to their good mechanical

properties combined with a relatively low weight [1]. Fiber

reinforced polymers (FPR) as composite materials are a good

strengthening technique for a variety of structural applications

and have been the focus of research in recent years. FPR were

performed as high performance materials because of their

advantages such as light weight, fatigue resistance, high tensile

strength, corrosion and thermal insulation [2]. These materials

are composed of fibers impregnated with a thermoset or

thermoplastic polymer matrix. When a thermoplastic polymer

is heated, their chemical bonds are broken causing a change of

state from solid to high viscosity liquid. In this state this

material can be deformed inside a mold where it is subsequently

cooled to solidify and obtain a mold-shaped piece [3].

PolyEtherEtherKetone (PEEK) is a thermoplastic polymer with

good mechanical properties frequently used as a matrix in

composites materials [4]. One of the main characteristics of the

PEEK is its high melting temperature until 400°C, which makes

it suitable for applications at relatively high temperature. In

many countries, the production of parts made of carbon fiber

reinforced with PEEK (CF/PEEK) is no completely developed

due to low availability of equipment required in the process of

autoclave, Automated Tape Laying (ATP) and Laser

Automated Tape Laying (LATP) [3]. In developing countries,

the situation is even more complex due to the slow process of

importing raw materials. However, manufacturing techniques

have been designed for these thermoplastic composites with

acceptable results. Some techniques such as: hot molding

[5][6][7], injection molding [6][8] and fused deposition

G. F. Casanova-Garcia, Ph.D. is with the Mechanical Engineering School,

Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia. (e-mail:

Gonzalo.casonova@correounivalle.edu.co).

Manufacture and mechanical characterization of

composite material of carbon fiber with matrix

of PEEK

Manufactura y caracterización mecánica de material compuesto de fibra de carbon

con matriz termoplástica PEEK

J. E. Caicedo-Zuñiga ; G. F. Casanova-García

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22517/23447214.24826

Scientific and technological research article

Scientia et Technica Año XXVII, Vol. 27, No. 04, octubre-diciembre de 2022. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira

224

modeling [9] [10] [11] are manufacturing techniques that have

been implemented to obtain composite materials at a low cost.

With the development of these techniques, in developing

countries composite materials are being manufactured and used

in applications such as: in bioengineering with the development

of prostheses for amputees [12] and in the development of

aircraft parts in Indonesia [13]. While in other countries, such

as: Brazil, Nigeria, India and Pakistan use natural fibers to make

biocomposites materials [14] [15] [16] [17].

Some authors who used hot molding to manufacture composite

materials with a thermoplastic matrix were Batistas et al. [18],

In their research, they manufacture sheets of carbon fiber (CF)

reinforced with polyphenylene sulfide (PPS), they vary the

cooling speed and compare the mechanical properties of these

speeds, Kaya et al. [19], Made composite panels in PLA with

basalt fibers (BF), they varied the fiber content to find high

mechanical properties and Mazur et al. [C], Found in their

research that hot molding is a good alternative to making the

composite material with a thermoplastic matrix of

polyetherketoneketone (PEKK) and carbon fiber with

appropriate impregnation.

The biggest challenge in the manufacturing process of

thermoplastic matrix composites is to achieve the appropriate

stamping temperature, this is the most important factor that

affects the quality of processing and the performance of these

composites, for example, by increasing temperature can cause

porosity, but too high a temperature will cause the matrix to

decompose and increase porosity [7]. On the other hand, the

cooling speed achieved with hot molding is also another

challenge when processing these materials, since it affects the

mechanical properties of the final product [6][7].

This paper presents a methodology to produce fiber-reinforced

material and thermoplastic matrix at high temperatures, through

a low-cost process, where a composite material with acceptable

mechanical properties was obtained. The objective of this study

was to produce CF/PEEK without conventional and expensive

equipment and compare it with carbon fiber composite material

and epoxy resin (CF/EP), especially the strength of machined

threads for the use of bolted joints.

II. MATERIALS AND METHODS.

A. Materials

Carbon fibers are frequently used as reinforcement material due

to their high mechanical properties. Fibers with tension

modules ranging from 207 GPa to 1035 GPa are currently

available [21]. In this study, for the manufacture of the

composite material we used fabric made of carbon fiber 3K

reference HexForce 282 (Hexcel Corporation, Stamford, CT,

USA), where the fibers follow an orientation pattern in the 0°

and 90° directions and a plain weave style. According to

manufacturer [22], this fabric has a thickness of 0.26 mm, a

tensile strength of 3650 MPa and elastic modulus of 234 GPa.

PEEK was chosen as matrix since it offers the possibility of

being used at high service temperatures (until 250°C). It has an

elastic modulus of about 4 GPa, a yield stress of 100 MPa, and

has a higher fracture toughness in comparison with the epoxy

resin [23]. Filaments of PEEK with 1.75 mm diameter (Apium

Additive TechnologyGmbh, Germany) were used as matrix.

While for the composite with thermosetting matrix, epoxy resin

744 was used.

B. Fabrication process

Hot compression molding was the selected manufacturing

process since it is one of the lowest cost process due to the use

of required equipment. This process begins with cutting a

rectangular section of fabric. Then, PEEK filaments were added

onto the fabric, followed by another layer of fabric laid over the

PEEK filaments and so on until eight layers of fabric and eight

layers of PEEK filaments were completed.

These layers of PEEK fabric and filaments were stacked and

compressed inside a mold made of AISI 1020 steel plates with

dimensions 150 mm x 150 mm x 4 mm and an electrical

resistance that works at 110 V at the base. The composite

material manufacturing process took 90 min. The parameters

used during this thermal cycle were: temperature 380 °C,

pressure 0.47 MPa and cooling rate 2.2 °C/min. Pressure was

applied gradually, while heating the mold, using a Hubbard-

field mechanical vise (Hubbard-field, Gainesville, FL, USA)

with a 10000-pound capacity. The CF/PEEK pieces obtained

were between 4 and 6 mm thick and presented a good surface

finish. These pieces were cut with a band saw to obtain 15 mm

x 150 mm specimens for bending tests and 25 mm x 150 mm

for tensile tests (Fig. 1a). The FC/EP was manufactured by

Hand Lay-Up [24].

C. Fiber weight fraction

The fiber weight fraction in the composite material resulting

from compaction and heating process was calculated by using

(1) [25].





 







 





   (1)

Where 



and 



are the weights of the fabric used and matrix

respectively. For CF/PEEK the following procedure was

performed to determine the weights mentioned above. First, the

carbon fiber fabric and PEEK filaments needed for the

composite material were weighed. Then, the compaction and

heating process take place, and then the residual PEEK from the

hot compression process was removed which was filtered from

Scientia et Technica Año XXVII, Vol. 27, No. 04, octubre-diciembre de 2022. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira.

225

the mold. Finally, the final product resulting from the CF/PEEK

composite manufacturing process was weighted. While for the

CF/EP composite, the weight fraction of the fiber was

calculated with the initial weight of the fabric introduced into

the mold, and compared with the final weight of the piece

impregnated with the cured resin.

Total fiber volume fraction is calculated by using (2) following

as [25] [26]:





































(2)

Here, 



and 



are the densities of the fabric used and matrix

respectively.

D. Mechanical tests

Three-point bending tests and tensile tests were performed on

samples of the composite materials to determine their elastic

modulus and ultimate strength. Also the strength of a thread

machined on the composite material was evaluated by tensile

tests as explained below. Three specimens were evaluated for

each kind of test.

Based on the ASTM D7264 standard [27], this standard

recommended a strain range of 0.002 with a start point 0.001

and end point 0.003, therefore, only the valid elastic region of

stress-strain curve was registered. The specimens were

subjected to three-point bending tests as shown in Fig. 1b. The

two endpoints were simply supported while the load was

applied at the midpoint. The tests were performed on a testing

machine reference Lloyd LF plus instruments (AMETEK TCI,

FL, USA). A displacement of two millimeters was applied to

characterize the linear elastic zone of the material avoiding any

damage to the specimens. Displacement was measured with a

(1) LVDT reference LD620-7.5 (Omega Engineering Inc,

Norwalk, CT). The force was measured with a tension-

compression load cell type S NTEP (2). Data were registered

with a DC 204R data acquisition system (TML, Tokyo Sokki

Kenkyujo Co., Ltd., JP) with a sampling rate of 100 Hz.

According to ASTM D7264 the stress (σ) in the middle of the

specimen is calculated with the force by using (3):

   





(3)

Where P is the applied force, L is the distance between supports,

b is the width of the specimen and h is the thickness. In addition,

the strain (ε) in the center was calculated by using (4):

   





 (4)

Where δ is the deflection at the midpoint.

The elastic modulus was determined as the slope of the linear

zone of the stress-strain curve.

Tensile tests were performed under the ASTM D3039 standard

[28]. The tests were carried out in a universal Tinius Olsen

H50KS test machine (Fig. 1c), to characterize the material

ultimate tensile stress.

According to ASTM D3039 standard [28], the ultimate tensile

stress (



) recorded at the failure of the specimen is calculated

by using (5):





 







(5)

Where 



is the maximum force reached just before the

fracture and A is the cross-sectional area of the specimen.

The strength of a machined thread on the composite material

was also evaluated. To generate the thread, an  



in hole

was drilled in the composite material and subsequently an  



in tap with ordinary thread was introduced. An  



in bolt was

inserted into this thread where a tensile test was performed on

the Tinius Olsen H50KS universal testing machine based on

ASTM F549-17 [29]. For the tests, an assembly was

constructed (Fig. 1d) in which a fixed base (1) maintains the

threaded area of the composite material (2) confined while the

cover (3) top supports the test piece with bolts. With the screw

(4) the force is applied.

Fig.1. a) Specimens for mechanical tests I) Bending test, II) Tensile test. b)

Three-point bending tests. c) Tensile test. d) Tensile testing scheme in

composite thread

Scientia et Technica Año XXVII, Vol. 27, No. 04, octubre-diciembre de 2022. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira

226

III. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

A completely randomized experimental design was used for

one factor: the composite material, with two levels: CF/PEEK

and CF/EP, using three replications per treatment. Six

specimens for each composite material were mechanically

evaluated: three using bending test and three using tensile test.

Variable responses were the elastic modulus and the ultimate

tensile stress.

Statistical analyses of variance were conducted for the elastic

modulus and ultimate tensile stress with confidence level of

95%.

IV. RESULTS

To validate the analyses of variance, Ryan-Joyner (similar to

Shapiro-Wilks) test was performed with p-values greater than

0.1 for the two analyses performed. In addition, we performed

Levene test with p-values of 0.264 for the analyses of the elastic

modulus and p-values of 0.386 for the analyses of the tensile

ultimate strength results. The independence was guaranteed by

randomize the sequence of the tests.

The fiber weight fraction achieved for the CF/PEEK composite

was 44.3%, while for the CF/EP was 65.4%. Both CF/PEEK

and CF/EP specimens showed an elastic linear behavior (Fig.

2) under the test conditions (only in the elastic region). For the

CF/PEEK an average elastic modulus of 8.35 GPa was found

with a standard deviation of 0.82, this value is within the elastic

modulus of the matrix and the reinforcement, while the CF/EP

material presented an average elastic modulus of 20.7 GPa with

a standard deviation of 8.54.

Fig. 2. Typical stress vs. strain curve obtained in FC/PEEK and CF/EP

specimens tests

An analysis of variance (Anova) (Table I) showed that the

difference between those average values was statistically no

significant (p-value >0.05), probably due to the low number of

specimens used for the tests, three for treatment.

TABLE I.

ANOVA ELASTIC MODULUS

Source







Composite

Material

232.9

232.88

6.32

0.066

Error

147.4

36.85

Total

380.3

The average ultimate tensile strength of the CF/PEEK

composite materials was 256.4 MPa with a standard deviation

of 117.8 MPa, this high standard deviation could be due to the

manufacture of the composite material, the bond between

PEEK layers and carbon fiber cloth, and for the CF/EP the

average was 365.4 MPa with a standard deviation of 21.2 MPa.

An analysis of variance (Table II) showed that the difference

between those average values was statistically no significant (p-

value = 0.308). The tensile tests were conducted only to obtain

the tensile strength of the material; therefore, the strain was not

registered during these tests and the corresponding stress-strain

diagrams were not obtained.

TABLE II.

ANOVA ULTIMATE TENSILE STRENGTH

Source







Composite

Material

14153

1.50

0.308

Error

28260

9429

Total

42413

For comparison purposes, Table III presents the results of

elastic modulus and ultimate strength obtained for the

CF/PEEK material together with other recent investigations.

The elastic modulus and ultimate strength obtained was smaller

than most of the values reported by other studies. However, the

cost of the manufacturing process proposed in this study is low

and this composite material could be carried out successfully.

Low values of mechanical strength and ultimate tensile can be

explained by the fiber volume low fraction and the adhesion

between the layers of fabric and matrix obtained with the

process presented in this paper in comparison with those

reported in the literature. Chunrui et al. [30] obtained greater

elastic modulus and tensile strength, probably because they

manufactured the composite material CF/PEEK starting from

layers of fabric made from yarns of PEEK and carbon fibers,

which have good adhesion of peek in the carbon fiber, improved

by the applied pressures of 0.5 MPa. Elwathing et al. [31], also

obtained a material with greater elastic modulus than the

obtained in the present study, probably due to chemical

activation process in the carbon fiber with acid, combined with

Scientia et Technica Año XXVII, Vol. 27, No. 04, octubre-diciembre de 2022. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira.

227

a manufacturing process using pressures and cooling rate of 2.5

MPa and 20 °C/min respectively. Shang-Lin [32] and Sharma

et al. [33], manufactured composite material of CF/PEEK using

carbon fiber and powder of PEEK. While Shang-Lin [32]

obtained a material with relatively low elastic modulus, Sharma

et al. [33] obtained a material with better mechanical properties

probably explained by the thermal cycle and the compression

using a pressure of 0.7 MPa.

TABLE III.

COMPARISON OF RESULTS CF/ PEEK COMPOSITE

Researcher



Fiber

Volume

Fraction



Fiber

Weight

Fraction

(GPa)





(MPa)

Year

In this paper

36.8

44.33

8.35

256.4

2019

Lu et al. [30]

40.3

48.9

480.7

2018

Elwathing et

al. [31]

23.5

2018

Shang-Lin et

al. [32]

4.5

140.2

2000

Sharma et al.

[33]

576

2011

The maximum force reached in the tensile tests on the threads

made in the CF/PEEK composite material reaches an average

of 5.6 KN with a standard deviation of 0.75 and for the CF/EP

the average was 2.6 KN with a standard deviation of 0.79. The

CF/PEEK composite was significantly better than the CF/EP

for this application (p-value = 0.011) as shown in table IV.

TABLE IV.

ANOVA TENSILE ON THE THREADS

Source







Composite

Material

11358544

20.42

0.011

Error

2225118

556279

Total

13583662

The CF/PEEK composite material showed a lower modulus of

elasticity and a lower ultimate tensile strength, compared with

the CF/EP composite as shown in table V. This is probably due

to the fact that in the CF/PEEK composite it was not possible to

obtain a fiber weight fraction as high as was achieved in the

CF/EP composite. The performance of the CF/PEEK material

was greater in the maximum force reached in the threads, which

may be due to a greater shear resistance of the PEEK with

respect to the EP. This makes the CF/PEEK material a

promising material in the manufacture of threaded joints.

TABLE V.

COMPARISON OF RESULTS CF/ PEEK AND CF/EP COMPOSITES

Composite



Fiber

Weight

Fraction

(GPa)





(MPa)









on the

threads

CF/PEEK

44.33

8.35(0.82)

256.4(117.8)

5.6(0.7)

CF/PEEK

65.4

20.7(8.5)

365.4(21.2)

2.6(0.8)

Data in parentheses are standard deviations

V. CONCLUSIONS

It was possible the manufacture of composite material of

CF/PEEK without the conventional machines and at a low cost,

additionally, this composite material presented mechanical

properties similar to those reported by other authors. A linear

behavior was evident between the stress and the strain in all the

bending tests, for the evaluated range up to strain of 0.0012

(only in the elastic region) on the two composite materials.

Regarding the effective elastic modulus and ultimate tensile

strength, the CF/PEEK composite material was no better than

the CF/EP composite material, a 60% lower effective elastic

modulus and an ultimate tension 1.37 times lower for the PEEK

compound compared to the EP compound. However, there are

still opportunities to improve properties for the CF/PEEK

composite material since by optimizing the manufacturing

process, for example, by improving the adhesion of the PEEK

in the carbon fiber, layering prepreg first, and increasing the

weight fraction of carbon fiber.

The machining process of holes and threads in the composite

material CF/PEEK was carried out with good results. The

thread strength of the CF/PEEK reached values 2.15-fold higher

than in the CF/EP composite. Therefore, the PEEK allows to

use bolted joints more resistant in the composite material.

Therefore, we can conclude that using this composite material

in parts and geometries that require bolted joints guarantees

better resistance than in composite material CF/EP.

REFERENCES

[1] C. Soutis, “Fibre reinforced composites in aircraft construction,” Prog.

Aerosp. Sci., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 143-151, 2005, DOI:

10.1016/j.paerosci.2005.02.004

[2] A. Imad Shakir, O. Sief aldeen, H. Kamalaldin F. and J. Mohammed A.,

"Properties evaluation of fiber reinforced polymers and their constituent

materials used in structures – A review," Mater. Today, vol. 43, p. 1003–

1008, 2021, DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.07.636

[3] P. Mallick, “Fiber-reinforced composites materials,” in Manufacturing and

design, 3rd ed., vol. 20, 1989, pp. 172-173.

[4] T. J. Hoskins, K. D. Dearn and S. N. Kukureka, “Mechanical performance

of PEEK produced by additive manufacturing,” Polym. Test, vol. 70, pp.

511-519, 2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2018.08.008

[5] S. Baeten and I. Verpoest, “Optimisation of a GMT-based cold pressing

technique for low cost textile reinforced thermoplastic composites,”

Scientia et Technica Año XXVII, Vol. 27, No. 04, octubre-diciembre de 2022. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira

228

Compos Part A-Appl S, no. 30, p. 667–682, 1999. DOI: 10.1016/S1359-

835X(98)00173-0

[6] N. Nier, E. Päßler, J. Weißhuhn, K. Roder, D. Nestler, L. Kroll, S. Spange

and G. Wagner, “Evaluation of the molding process for production of short-

fibre-reinforced C/C-SiC composites,” J. Eur. Ceram. Soc., no. 40, p.

1057–1066, 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.procir.2019.10.004

[7] S. Guangyong, K. Xiangren, W. Zhen, L. Quantian and L. Qing,

“Experimental investigation into stamping of woven CF/PP laminates:

Influences of molding temperature on thermal, mesoscopic and

macroscopic properties,” Compos. Struct., no. 263, 2021. DOI:

10.1016/j.compstruct.2020.113507

[8] D. M. Wirth and J. K. Pokorski, “Design and fabrication of a low-cost pilot-

scale melt-processing system,” Polymer, no. 181, 2019.

[9] H. Chao and Q. Qing-Hua, “Advances in fused deposition modeling of

discontinuous fiber/polymer composites,” Curr Opin Solid State Mater

Sci., no. 24, 2020.

[10] K. Palanikumar, M. Mudhukrishnan and P. Soorya Prabha, “Technologies

in additive manufacturing for fiber reinforced composite materials: a

review,” Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng., no. 28, p. 51–59, 2020. DOI:

10.1016/j.coche.2020.01.001

[11] N. Fuda, C. Weilong, Q. Jingjing, W. Junhua and W. Shiren, “Additive

manufacturing of carbon fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites using

fused deposition modeling,” Compos. B. Eng., no. 80, pp. 369-378, 2015.

DOI: 10.1177/0021998316646169

[12] G. A. Ramadhani, S. Susmartini, L. Herdiman, I. Priadythama and D.

Shepherd, “Advanced composite-based material selection for prosthetic

socket application in developing countries,” Cogent Eng., no. 7, 2020.

[13] A. Sazrhi, R. O. Bura and G. Amperiawan, “Mastery of Composite

Materials to Support Indonesia's Defense Industry,” IEEE 6th Asian

Conference on Defense Technology (ACDT), pp. 13-15, 2019.

[14] K. Ghavami and A. Azadeh, “Nonconventional materials (NOCMAT) for

ecological and sustainable development,” MRS Adv., vol. 1, no. 53, pp.

3553-3563, 2016. DOI: 10.1557/adv.2016.613

[15] T. Suoware, S. Onyemaechi, B. Ugwu and E. Amula, “Development of

flame retarded composite fibreboard for building applications using oil

palm residue,” Materiales de Construcción, vol. 69, no. 335, 2019. DOI:

10.3989/mc.2019.10418

[16] M. Ramesh, T. S. A. Atreya, U.S. Aswin, H. Eashwar and C. Deepa,

“Processing and mechanical property evaluation of banana fiber reinforced

polymer composites,” Procedia Eng., vol. 97, pp. 563-572, 2014.

[17] A. Majid, “Use of coconut fibre reinforced concrete and coconut-fibre

ropes for seismic-resistant construction,” Materiales de Construcción, vol.

66, no. 321, 2016. DOI: 10.3989/mc.2016.01015

[18] N. Batista, P. Olivier, G. Bernhart, M. Rezende and E. Botelho,

"Correlation between degree of crystallinity, morphology and mechanical

properties of PPS/carbon fiber laminates", Materials Research, vol. 19, no.

1, pp. 195-201, 2016. DOI: 10.1590/1980-5373-mr-2015-0453

[19] M. Kaya , M. Aslan , O. Güler and Ü. Alver , "effect of fibre content on

the mechanical properties of basalt fibre reinforced polylactic acid (pla)

composites", Textile and Apparel, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 66-71, Mar. 2018

[20] R. Mazur, G. Cândido, M. Rezende and E. Botelho, "Accelerated aging

effects on carbon fiber PEKK composites manufactured by hot

compression molding", Journal of Thermoplastic Composite Materials,

vol. 29, no. 10, pp. 1429-1442, 2016. DOI: 10.1177/0892705714564283

[21] N. Cogswell, “Thermoplastic aromatic polymer composites,” Int. Mater.

Rev., 1st ed., vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 124-124, 1994.

[22] Hexcel Corporation, hexcel, [On line]. Available:

https://www.hexcel.com/Resources/DataSheets/Reinforcements/Woven-

Reinforcements [Last access: 25 06 2020].

[23] E. Akca and A. Gursel, “A Review on the Matrix Toughness of

Thermoplastic Materials,” Period. Eng. Nat. Sci., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1-9,

2015. DOI: 10.21533/pen.v3i2.52

[24] F. Campbell, Manufacturing Processes for Advanced Composites,

Elsevier, 2004

[25] M. Sanjay and B. Yogesha, “Studies on hybridization effect of

jute/kenaf/E-glass woven fabric epoxy composites for potential

applications: Effect of laminate stacking sequences,” J. Ind. Text., vol. 47,

no. 7, pp. 1830-1848, 2017. DOI: 10.1177/1528083717710713

[26] K. Sabeel Ahmed and S. Vijayarangan, “Tensile, flexural and interlaminar

shear properties of woven jute and jute-glass fabric reinforced polyester

composites,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., vol. 207, pp. 330-335, 2008.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2008.06.038

[27] ASTM, Standard Test Method for Flexural Properties of Polymer Matrix

Composite Materials, 2007.

[28] ASTM, Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix

Composite Materials, 2017.

[29] ASTM, Standard Specification and Test Methods for Metallic Medical

Bone Screws, West Conshohocken: ASTM Int, 2017.

[30] L. Chunrui, X. Nou, Z. Ting., Z. Xin, L. Hanxiong, L. Xue, L. Xiao and Z.

Dongxing, “The Optimization of Process Parameters and Characterization

of High-Performance CF/PEEK Composites Prepared by Flexible

CF/PEEK Plain Weave Fabrics,” Polymers, vol. 11, no. 53, p. 16, 2018.

DOI: 10.3390/polym11010053

[31] H. Elwathing, G. Dengteng, Y. Lili, Z. Jianfeng and L. Mingxia, Y. Muhuo

and Z. Shu, “Highly boosting the interlaminar shear strength of CF/PEEK

composites via introduction of PEKK onto activated CF,” Compos Part A-

Appl S, vol. 112, pp. 155-160, 2018.

[32] G. Shang-Lin and K. Jang-Kyo, “Cooling rate influences in carbon

fiber/PEEK composites. Part 1. Crystallinity and interface adhesion,”

Compos Part A-Appl S, vol. 31, pp. 517-3530, 2000. DOI: 10.1016/S1359-

835X(00)00009-9

[33] M. Sharma, J. Bijwe and P. Mitschang, “Wear performance of PEEK–

carbon fabric composites with strengthened fiber–matrix interface,” Wear,

vol. 271, pp. 2061-2268, 2011. DOI: 10.1016/j.wear.2010.11.055

Joyner Esteban Caicedo Zuñiga.

Engineer Caicedo received the title of

Mechanical Engineer in 2016 from the

Universidad del Valle. In 2019, he graduated

in the Master’s Degree in Mechanical

Engineering at the same institution.

Currently, he works as a researcher for the

Energy Sustainability Alliance for Colombia

(SÉNECA).

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5245-3464

Gonzalo Fernando Casanova Garcia.

Professor Casanova received the title of

Mechanical Engineer in 2003 from

Universidad del Valle. In 2006, he

graduated in the Master’s Degree in

Mechanical Engineering from Universidad

del Valle. Later, he obtained a Ph. D. in

Mechanical Engineering at University of

Florida, United States, in 2013.His dissertation dealt with the

influence of needle insertion speed on tissue damage and

backflow during convection enhanced delivery of drugs in the

brain. Currently, his main research areas are: fatigue analyses

of mechanical systems, soft tissue mechanics, and mechanics of

fiber reinforced materials, including the development of

devices for orthopedic applications. His teaching areas are

focused on dynamics, mechanical design, advanced calculus,

and continuum mechanics.

ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3146-2027