@article{scholars16672, year = {2022}, publisher = {MDPI}, journal = {Polymers}, doi = {10.3390/polym14112225}, note = {cited By 5}, volume = {14}, number = {11}, title = {Off-Axis and On-Axis Performance of Novel Acrylic Thermoplastic (Elium{\^A}(R)) 3D Fibre-Reinforced Composites under Flexure Load}, url = {https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85132279682&doi=10.3390\%2fpolym14112225&partnerID=40&md5=d0a6bcc293cd92f1c7b23a55d6638a4a}, keywords = {Failure (mechanical); Fiber reinforced plastics; Thermoplastics, 3D composites; 3D fibers; Fibre-reinforced composite; Flexure behaviors; Off-axis flexure; Off-axis flexure behavior; Off-axis specimens; On-axis; On-axis flexure behavior, Thermosets}, abstract = {The flexure response of novel thermoplastic (Elium{\^A}(R)) 3D fibre-reinforced composites (FRC) was evaluated and compared with a conventional thermoset (Epolam{\^A}(R))-based 3D-FRC. Ten different types of sample 3D-FRC were prepared by varying fibre orientations, i.e., 0{\^a}??, 30{\^a}??, 45{\^a}??, 60{\^a}?? and 90{\^a}??, and resin system, i.e., thermoplastic and thermoset. The bending characteristics and failure mechanisms were determined by conducting a three-point bend test. Results elucidate that the on-axis specimens show linear response and brittle failure; in contrast, the off-axis specimens depicted highly nonlinear response and ductile failure. The thermoplastic on-axis specimen exhibited almost similar flexure strength; in comparison, the off-axis specimens show {\texttt{\char126}}17 lower flexure strength compared to thermoset 3D-FRC. Thermoplastic 3D-FRC shows {\texttt{\char126}}40 higher energy absorption, {\texttt{\char126}}23 lower flexure modulus and {\texttt{\char126}}27 higher flexure strains as compared to its thermoset counterpart. {\^A}{\copyright} 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.}, author = {Shah, S. Z. H. and Megat-Yusoff, P. S. M. and Karuppanan, S. and Choudhry, R. S. and Sajid, Z.}, issn = {20734360} }