Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 1
Improving Kevlar™
Compressibility though
alternations in molecular
structures
Charley Yan
Cluster 8
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 2
Abstract
The goal of this paper is to improve upon the structure of Kevlar™ and its spinning
processes, such that the compressibility factor of Kevlar™ will increase by applicable amount.
By giving Kevlar™ a boost in compressible strength in can be used in a wider variety of fields
instead of just for simple protection. This paper will use advanced knowledge of common
functional groups and hydrogen bonding to predict a viable structure that will increase the
compressibility of Kevlar™. In order to strengthen the compressibility factor the overall
molecular structure of Kevlar™ was altered to increase the hydrogen bonding between various
layers of Kevlar™™. By building upon the results of other experiments this paper will examine
whether a structural modification in the benzene rings and amide groups will reduce the rigidity
of the structure with the strengthening of hydrogen bonds.
Kevlar™ Para‐Aramid synthetic fiber created by the Du‐Pont Corporation in 1965 and
since then has become well‐known in industry as the material used in bullet‐proof vests [1].
However, the polymer can also be found in rope, sports equipment, loudspeakers, and even
instruments just to name a few things. Out of all the Aramids Kevlar™ is the strongest. Kevlar™
can be separated into three classes based on their spinning processes: Kevlar™ (I), Kevlar™‐29,
and Kevlar™‐49 [4]. All have relatively the same properties, with Kevlar™‐ 49 having the
greatest tensile strength. The focus of this paper is Kevlar™ (I) since all the variations have
extremely similar properties.
Kevlar™ is created when the monomers 1,4‐phenylene‐diamine and terephthaloyl
chloride are combined in a condensation reaction forming Hydrochloric acid as a byproduct [1].
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 3
The condensation reaction for Kevlar™
patented by Akzo. HCl is formed as a
byproduct. The General structure of
Kevlar™ is shown to the right.
*Taken from Dupont’s Kevlar™ Guide.
Another alternative to the condensation reaction is a hydrolysis reaction which forms
water in the place of HCl. This reaction is non‐spontaneous, but is more favorable in industry
since H2O is a much safer by‐product than HCl due to waste management circumstances [1].
The result of either reaction is a solution that contains a liquid‐crystalline behavior which
displays unique properties when under shear forces [2]. When this Kevlar™ solution is passed
through an orifice (spinneret), the randomly positioned orientation of the molecules changes
into one that is fully oriented in the direction of the shear forces and come out with a much
more organized molecular orientation [3]. The orientation process explained above is cheap
way to create highly oriented molecules which later become extremely strong aramid fibers.
This ordered configuration gives Kevlar™ the ability to “stack” on top of each other when spun
which gives it a much greater hydrogen bond attraction than polymers such as Nylon and
Polyester making it stronger and more durable than the latter [3]. Once these fibers are created
the polymer is air dried and brought into cold water. The drawn out fibers are washed in the
cold water and after are dried to form the Kevlar™ fiber [3].
Kevlar™’s structural backbone is the benzene ring connecting the amides and the
ethers in the polymer. The para‐ orientation of the benzene ring allows the formation of Rod‐
Like Fiber structures instead of normal flexible melt polymers. This is important because when
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 4
Rod‐like polymers are dissolved the rods can align themselves in a parallel formation. Increasing
the concentration of these rigid rod polymers causes the rods to obtain a parallel alignment
quicker [8]. When aligned in a parallel manner the randomly oriented fibers of internally high
oriented polymer chains are created which can stack properly. Flexible Chain Polymers,
however, when dissolved only obtain a random coil configuration and even increasing the
polymer concentration cannot create a higher degree of order [1]. As a result a flexible chain is
highly unfavorable when forming parallel structures since it cannot achieve a high degree of
order like the rod‐like chains.
The Ether’s Oxygen and the Amide’s hydrogen ability to hydrogen bond also play a
large role in the formation of Kevlar™ as it pulls together the parallel lines created by the rod‐
like chain [1]. The aromatic rings and amide groups hold the strength of the polymer with the
rigidity are crosslinked by hydrogen bonding. These hydrogen bonded sheets are then stacked
with bonding between pi orbitals in a radial manner giving the structure of Kevlar™.
The rigid rod like structure and the strong hydrogen bonding make Kevlar™’s
properties slightly different, if not unique, compared to other aramids. Kevlar™ has a
respectable strength‐to‐weight ratio and is “five times stronger than steel” [1]. Kevlar™, as I
have already mentioned, is used in a wide variety of things ranging from the amazing to the
completely mundane. Its properties include great tensile strength (3.6 GPa), [1] resistance
towards chemicals, great thermal resistance, high cut resistance, and extreme durability.
Kevlar™, however, isn’t a perfect material as it comes with various drawbacks that keep it from
perfection. Kevlar™ suffers from UV degradation due to its ultraviolet light vulnerability so it
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 5
cannot be used constantly in the sunlight [1]. This can be countered though by adding a
protective UV screen on top of the Kevlar™ material.
Taken from:
http://www2.dupont.com/Kevlar/en_US/assets/downloads/KEVLAR_Technical_Guide.pdf
An even more important drawback is Kevlar™’s relatively weak compressive strength
(<400Mpa) [5]. The polymer structure of Kevlar™ chains is shown as a monoclinic structure with
the lattice parameters: a = 7.87 Angstrom (A), b= 5.18 (A), c=12.9 (A) with a 90 degree unit‐cell
angle [5]. Since the Kevlar™ structure likes it to form rigid–rod like formations with minimal
branching or bending loads can be distributed evenly along the fiber in a c‐direciton, resulting
in superior tensile strength. The weak compressive strength is because of stiff orientation of the
fibers and almost perfect axial orientation of the Kevlar™ fibers [3]. Not surprisingly, this
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 6
property of weak compressive loads is common among all high‐performance rigid‐rod
polymers.
The rigid structure of Kevlar™ allows it to use its fibers to work together to withstand
overall tensile load like a brick, but worsens the ability to spread the stress brought about with
a common compressive load. McGarry and Moalli [5] found that the compressive failure is
described by a “kink band” phenomenon. The kink band phenomenon involves a defect created
at the fiber surface that causes failure in the cross‐section of the fiber, causing failure. In order
to improve the compressive strength of Kevlar™ the intermolecular attraction between
adjacent polymer chains has to be improved through modifications in the hydrogen bonding
structure so the formation of kink is reduced.
If compressive strength can be improved in Kevlar™, it can be used as a much more
effective structural application than steel since its tensile strength is much greater. In addition
to this its properties of thermal resistance, extreme durability, and high resistance towards
various chemicals give it even more reason to become a replacement of steel. Kevlar™ could be
used in bridges, buildings, and other relative structural applications. Currently the ways to
improve compressive strength of Kevlar™ fibers can be separated into two main techniques.
The first is the incorporation of a modifier into the Kevlar™ microstructure during the
polymerization process to create intermolecular covalent crosslinkages between adjacent
chains. The Second involves the changing of Kevlar™ fibers through a post‐spinning treatment,
such as temperature changes or electron bombardment. This paper will use both the first and
second improvement processes stated above in a combination in order to form the most
optimal structure available.
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 7
Method
In order to alter the hydrogen bonding and rigidity several modifications will be made
to the structure of the atoms. First, half the benzene rings will be replaced with C=C bonds. C=C
double bonds are even more rigid than Benzene, but the double bonded Carbons lose the
ability to use “pi‐pi stacking” of the benzene rings. The alkene C=C has only one pi bond giving it
a more rigid structure than the benzene rings . Due to the lack of Pi‐Pi stacking, there will be
less crystalline so the Kevlar™ polymer structure might have more compressibility or possibly
even flexibility [5].
Another structure change that could be used is to attach OH groups and O atoms to
replace the hydrogen bonds around the remaining Benzene rings. This would induce even more
hydrogen bonding than the original Kevlar™ structure. The bonding between the OH and O
atoms would increase the attraction of the Kevlar™ polymers throughout forming a sheet with
higher intermolecular forces [3]. This structure is somewhat similar to Dacron with the addition
of the OH and O groups. As a result Kevlar™’s properties might become more stretch and
rubbery. The hydrogen bonding is used to compensate for the loss of tensile strength due to
the replacement of Benzene rings. Also, since the sheet will be held together with stronger
intermolecular forces, kinks will be less likely to form allowing an even more compressible
Kevlar™ to be formed.
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 8
Chem3D Pro.
CambridgeSoft
Corporation, 2007
Kevlar™ compressibility
structure alterations.
In addition to slight changes in structure, alterations in the spinning process will be also
be used to strengthen Kevlar™’s weak compressibility strength. Kevlar™ can be spun at
different temperatures in order to change its properties. Perhaps, by heating Kevlar™ at a
higher or lower temperature one of the properties that could be altered would be the
compressibility factor [3].
Experimental
Three experiments have been proposed to examine if the alterations to Kevlar™ have
any effect on the compressibility factor or not. The first is using Gaussview to examine how
alterations in structure will affect the bond strength and orientation. Chem 3D was not used in
this procedure due to its inability to accurately optimize large polymer structures like the
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 9
Kevlar™ modifications. Once the structure is changed it is then optimized using Gaussview’s
Optimization calculations feature. Settings for optimization in structures were as follows: Semi‐
Empirical AM‐1, 30Mb, Ground state, Default Spin, and Optimized to a minimum. Other options
during optimization were left as default. MD was used multiple times for each of the proposed
structures to obtain an accurate reading of the bond‐strength and the overall structure of the
altered Kevlar™. Structures would then be examined to see if the changes increased the
hydrogen bonding between polymers or if the structural changes altered bond angles between
atoms. Bond angles and lengths are then measured to view the overall extent to which the
structural modifications were made. In this experiment 3 basic Kevlar™ polymer chains are used
for each MD due to computing restraints.
The second experiment is to test whether temperature changes can alter the
compressibility factor of Kevlar™ without weakening the tensile strength. Kevlar™ strands will
be spun at different temperatures to examine whether it will have an effect on the strand or
not. Temperatures will begin at 400 Celsius and increased in ten degree increments until 500
Celsius. For each spinning process the fiber will be taken out for each increment and then
tested for tensile and compressibility strength using a Tensile Strength Machine provided by
Test Resources. Each heating will last for 5 min and followed up by a new heating process. The
amount of Kevlar™ spun will also be kept to a minimal as only a foot will be made with each
spinning process.
The third experiment is used to measure the compressibility of Kevlar™ after the
alterations in the Kevlar™ structure and spinning processes have been implemented. The
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 10
temperature to which Kevlar™ is thermally enhanced is 470 Celsius. Similar to the former
procedure only a foot of each variation of Kevlar™ will be produced. These variations will then
be compared to a normal unheated strand of Kevlar™ in order to compare the differences in
the properties of both. All Kevlar™ strands compressibility and tensile strengths will once again
be measured by a tensile strength Machine.
Results
Given time and resource constraints only the Gaussview experiment was able to be run.
The resulting structures bond‐angles were altered in such a way that the pi‐pi stacking was
reduced to a minimal amount so the compressibility factor of Kevlar™ increased. This, however,
did come with its drawbacks since in some of the structures the modifications took away
Kevlar™’s ability to form sheets so Kevlar™ couldn’t even be made. In the first structure the pi‐
pi bonding was reduced to a minimum as expected, but the hydrogen was strong enough that
sheets could still form. In the second structure pi‐pi bonding was reduced, but Kevlar™ sheets
couldn’t form
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 11
Error analysis might explain why the structure might have been altered into such an
orientation. Also MD was used on default parameters in order to conserve time, meaning the
resulting structure might not be the optimal one since calculations were essentially reduced to
a minimum. Finally the theory of MD itself is at fault since MD only finds the relative minimum
instead of the real minimum. All these factors contribute to the resulting odd structure.
Discussion
The structural modification of Kevlar™ is a viable path to Kevlar™ compressibility since
various scientists have already created new properties resulting from structural changes
implemented by the synthesis of monomers. However, according to the MD analysis one of the
structural changes proposed aren’t a viable option as they alter the overall structure of Kevlar™
to the point where it can no longer form sheets. This could be due to the error of the Gaussview
program (explained above in results) or possibly the repulsion created by the new additives
forming a completely alternate shape that could not stack. If the changed structure did form
sheets the compressive strength would be increased due to the weakening of pi‐bonding and
the strengthening of the hydrogen bonds in the sheets. However, tensile strength would also be
significantly reduced as the structure would be easier to pull apart due to the weakening of pi‐
pi stacking in the benzene rings. Although the thermal enhancement experiment wasn’t carried
out it can be inferred that it would be successful. When heated to a higher temperature the
molecules in the Kevlar™ structure will shake more violently than at colder temperatures. As a
result the bonds will be weaker and the distance between molecules will grow slightly giving
Kevlar™ a greater compressibility factor. According to Sweeny [6] thermal enhancement of
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 12
Kevlar™‐29 fibers will result in a large increase in compressive strength of Kevlar™‐29 at the
cost of some tensile strength. In Sweeny’s study the thermally enhanced fibers grew to a
compressive strength of about 500Mpa while reducing its tensile strength by almost 20%.
Based on the data given by studies such as Sweeny’s ,D’Aloia’s, and the MD , it can be
concluded that the changes to Kevlar™ that increase compressive strength results in the
decreasing of tensile strength in the Kevlar™ molecule. The degree to which the other increases
or decreases varies upon the changes made to structure and the post‐spinning treatment.
Therefore, Kevlar™ has the potential to be used as a material which can replace steel in
structural manufacturing. Unfortunately, the correct modifications to keep the tensile strength
reduction at a minimum, while maximizing the compressibility strength increase has not been
found to a degree to which it can replace steel. Perhaps, in the future, structures for Kevlar™
such as the one described above will be created.
Acknowledgements
I’d like to thank Annaliese Franz for guiding me through this project and giving me more
insight about Polymers in general. I’d also like to thank Toby and Dean for helping me develop
an even greater love for chemistry than before. Also thank you T.A.’s Rebecca Davis, Phil
Painter, and Josh for your immeasurable amount of patience when working with me in the
computer lab. Daniel Delgado has also been a great help as a teacher fellow as he has never
failed to tell us information on time and is always there when we need him for help. Thank you
so much.
Bibliography
Running Head: Improving Kevlar™ Compressibility Through Alternations 13
[1] "KEVLAR--PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER." Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Web. 27 July
2009. http://www.lbl.gov/MicroWorlds/Kevlar/KevlarPutting.html.
[2] Enhancement of the Compressive Strength of
Kevlar-29/Epoxy Resin Unidirectional Composites
[3] Newell, J. A. and Sagendorf, M. T. (1999). Experimental Verification of the End-Effect Weibull
Model
as a Predictor of the Tensile Strength of Kevlar-29 at Different Gauge Lengths, High Perform.
Polym., 11:
297–305.
[4] Fidan, S., Palazatto, A., Tsai, C., and Kumar, S. (1993). Compressive Properties of High
Performance
Polymeric Fibers, Comp. Sci. Tech., 49: 291–297.
[5] McGarry F J and Moalli J E 1991 Polymer 32 1811
[6] Sweeney, D., Newell, J., Picerno, S., and Kurzeja. T. (2002). Influence of Thermal Treatment
Conditions on the Tensile and Compressive Strengths of Kevlar-29, High Perform. Polym., 14: 139-
153.
[7] "A Brief History of Kevlar." Web. 27 July 2009.
<http://composite.about.com/od/aboutcompositesplastics/l/aa050597.htm>.
[8] DU PONT, GENEVA, "Preliminary evaluation of Kevlar-29 and Kevlar-49 for use in cables and
ropes" (April 1974).
[9] Greenwood, J.H.; Rose R.G. “Compressive Behavior of Kevlar 49 Fibers and Composites.”
Journal of Material Science, 9(1974), 1809-1814. 14, July 2009.
http://www.springlink.com/content/hm3m6386701r72461-fulltext.pdf
[10] Bunsell, A. R. (1975, January). The tensile and fatigue behaviour of Kevlar-49
(PRD-49) fibre [Electronic version]. Journal of Material Science, (10),
1301-1308.
[11] Johnson, D. J., Dobb, M. G., & Saville, B. P. (1977, June/July). Supramolecular
structure of a high-modulus polyaromatic fiber (Kevlar 49) [Electronic
version]. Journal of Polymer Science Polymer Physics Edition, 15,
2201-2211.
[12] http://www.edinformatics.com/inventions_inventors/400px-Kevlar_chemical_structure_H-
bonds.png