applied

sciences
Article
Comparative Study of Glass Fiber Content
Measurement Methods for Inspecting Fabrication
Quality of Composite Ship Structures
Zhiqiang Han 1 , Sookhyun Jeong 1 , Jackyou Noh 2 and Daekyun Oh 3, *
1 Department of Ocean System Engineering, Mokpo National Maritime University, Mokpo 58628, Korea;
hzq910413@gmail.com (Z.H.); jeongsookhyun@gmail.com (S.J.)
2 Department of Naval Architecture & Ocean Engineering, Kunsan National University, Gunsan 54150, Korea;
snucurl@kunsan.ac.kr
3 Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Mokpo National Maritime University,
Mokpo 58628, Korea
* Correspondence: dkoh@mmu.ac.kr; Tel.: +82-61-240-7238




Received: 2 June 2020; Accepted: 24 July 2020; Published: 26 July 2020


Abstract: A comparative study of glass fiber content (Gc) measurement methods was conducted using
actual glass fiber reinforced plastic laminates from the hull plate of a 26-ton yacht. Two prototype
side hull plates with the design Gc (40 wt.%) and higher Gc (64 wt.%) were prepared. Four methods
were used to study the samples: the calculation method suggested by classification societies’ rules;
two direct measurement methods using either calipers and scales or a hydrometer; and the burn-off
method, wherein the resin matrix is combusted from the laminates. The results were compared and
analyzed to identify the accuracy and benefits of each method. The rule calculation method was
found to be effective if the quality of the manufacturing process is known. However, fabrication
errors in the laminate structures cannot be detected. Additionally, while direct methods are used
to measure the density of glass fibers using measurements of the densities of raw materials and
laminates, the volume of inner defects occurring during the fabrication of laminates could not be
considered. Finally, it was found that the burn-off method measures Gc and considers the defect
volume (voids) inside laminates as well as the non-uniformity of the external shape.

Keywords: composite ship; composite structure; glass fiber content; void volume; burn-off test;
calcination test

1. Introduction
Glass fiber reinforced plastics (GFRPs) have been widely used for decades for building small
ships, such as fishing boats and yachts [1,2], as they exhibit good specific strength, corrosion resistance,
and excellent workability. Many GFRP ships are manufactured with a large design margin, as this
enables faster and cheaper production. However, it also results in heavier vessels due to the thicker
GFRP laminate structures. Laminate structures for composite ships are considerably thicker than those
used for aviation and automobile components, which can cause adverse structural effects such as
fatigue over the ship’s lifetime [3]. In addition, GFRPs have elicited environmental concerns related to
their poor recyclability and issues during drying and disposal [4,5]. Accordingly, increased research
attention has been directed toward the optimal design and weight reduction of GFRP ships.
The design regulations for GFRP structures of small crafts are addressed in the international
standard ISO 12215-5 [6]. The laminate thickness, controlled by the number of glass fiber cloth
layers (plies), is designed based on ship variables such as hull shape, displacement, speed, and hull
form, as well as structural variables such as the layout of stiffeners, design loads, and the design

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130; doi:10.3390/app10155130 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 2 of 17

of the composite material (type of reinforcement material, reinforcement method, and mechanical
properties) [7,8]. The glass fiber weight fraction, Gc, is a critical design element that significantly affects
the mechanical properties of the laminate. The ISO standards and classification society rules provide
equations for estimating the mechanical properties of laminate structures according to variations in Gc.
These theoretical equations are also differentiated according to the type of glass fiber, reinforcement
method, number of plies, and amount of resin used [6,9,10].
However, while Gc is an important indicator of the fabrication quality of a laminate structure [11],
the quality of the laminate can vary widely according to the manufacturing method, environment,
and operator skill level. GFRP ships are typically manufactured using the hand lay-up method,
which can lead to degradation of the glass fiber or resin due to human error [12,13]. Moreover,
the laminate structures often contain fabrication defects, such as porosity or voids. These fabrication
defects can have a significant impact on the physical performance of the laminate structure, even if Gc
meets the design parameters [14–16].
For ships that adopt special glass fibers, special structures, or structures thinner than the rules
allow, classification societies require manufacturers to disclose the Gc of the laminate structure along
with the results of material tests. The mechanical properties are often verified by fracture testing
according to the ASTM standards [3,7,11,17], while experimental methods (e.g., resin burn-off) or
theoretical calculations are recommended to determine Gc. Nevertheless, the classification rules do
not provide detailed specifications on determining Gc. In addition, because of the flexible fabrication
characteristics and different types and combinations of materials, it is difficult to verify that laminates
are fabricated according to the designed Gc.
To aid the design and manufacture of GFRP laminates for shipbuilding, it is critical to identify an
accurate and consistent method of determining Gc. The method should also measure the size and
volume of voids inside the laminate structure, as well as the measurement error of the outer shape.
Considering the diverse methods currently in use to determine Gc and defect incidence, a comparative
study of the different methods is of significant applicative interest. Herein, we empirically tested four
different methods of measuring the Gc of GFRP ship components: a widely used theoretical calculation
proposed in the classification rules; direct measurement of the volume and weight or relative density
of a specimen followed by calculation of Gc; and the burn-off method, wherein the resin matrix is
combusted from the laminate. The methods were used to assess two types of composite hull plates for
a 16-m ship. A comparative analysis of the results methods was then conducted to determine:
1. The reliability of each method for analyzing the laminate structure and establishing the
manufacturing precision according to the material design
2. The accuracy of each method for testing the fabrication quality of the laminate structure
3. The advantages and disadvantages of each method
Overall, we found that the calculation method is effective at measuring Gc if the quality of the
manufacturing process is known, but that it cannot detect fabrication errors. The direct measurement
methods are also unsuitable for determining the volume of inner defects. In contrast, the burn-off
method can accurately measure Gc, the defect volume, and the non-uniformity of the external shape;
hence, this method is recommended for ship design when the exact Gc and fabrication quality need to
be known. There has been considerable research in other industries on fiber-reinforced composites.
However, limited research has been conducted on the use of GFRPs in shipbuilding. Therefore,
we expect that this comparative study on methods for assessing laminate structures of actual GFRP
ship components will provide a good reference for GFRP ship design.

2. Theoretical Section

2.1. Mechanical Properties and Fabrication Defects of Laminate Structures

The bending strength of the laminate determines the thickness required to build a specific
component. Figure 1 shows how the flexural strength of GFRP structures vary with Gc based on the
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 3 of 17
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17
results of estimation equations in ISO 12215-5 [6] and the rules of two classification societies—Lloyd’s
Register (LR) [9] and Registro Italiano Navale (RINA) [10]—in comparison to bending test results
Register (LR)
Register (LR) [9]
[9] and
and Registro
Registro Italiano
Italiano Navale
Navale (RINA)
(RINA) [10]—in
[10]—in comparison
comparison to to bending
bending test
test results
results
(according to ASTM D790) of actual GFRP laminates with 4- to 12-ply woven roving cloth with a
(according to ASTM D790) of actual GFRP laminates with 4- to 12-ply woven
(according to ASTM D790) of actual GFRP laminates with 4- to 12-ply woven roving cloth with roving cloth with aa
weight per unit area of 570 g/m222 [16]. The bending strength improves as Gc is increased. However,
weight per
weight per unit
unit area
area of
of 570
570 g/m
g/m [16].
[16]. The bending strength improves as Gc is is increased.
increased. However,
the experimental results are generally larger than the theoretical values owing to the safety margin
the experimental
the experimental results
results are
are generally
generally larger
larger than
than the
the theoretical
theoretical values
values owing
owing to to the
the safety
safety margin
margin
included in the standards and classification rules. The test results indicate that the bending strength
included in
included in the
the standards
standards andand classification
classification rules.
rules. The test results indicate
indicate that
that the
the bending
bending strength
strength
begins to decrease when Gc increases above 50 wt.% [6]. This is because a high Gc increases the
begins to
begins to decrease
decrease when
when GcGc increases
increases above
above 5050 wt.%
wt.% [6].
[6]. This is because a high
high GcGc increases
increases thethe
probability of defects and resin-poor regions. The measured bending strengths of some samples with
probability
probability of defects and resin-poor regions. The measured bending strengths
defects and resin-poor regions. The measured bending strengths of some samplesof some samples with
a Gc of 30–35 wt.% showed a significant decrease, which is likely because these specimens were taken
a Gc of
with 30–35
a Gc of wt.%
30–35showed a significant
wt.% showed decrease,decrease,
a significant which is likely
whichbecause
is likelythese specimens
because these were taken
specimens
from a heterogeneous section of laminate. In other words, to ensure the desired physical performance
from taken
were a heterogeneous section of laminate.
from a heterogeneous section of Inlaminate.
other words, to ensure
In other theto
words, desired
ensurephysical performance
the desired physical
of laminate parts, the actual Gc should correspond to the design value. The fabrication quality is also
of laminate parts,
performance the actual
of laminate Gc the
parts, should
actualcorrespond
Gc shouldtocorrespond
the design value. The fabrication
to the design value. The quality is also
fabrication
important; Figure 2a shows the typical lamination defects that appear in fiber-reinforced composites,
important;
quality Figure
is also 2a shows
important; the typical
Figure 2a shows lamination
the typicaldefects that appear
lamination defectsin fiber-reinforced
that composites,
appear in fiber-reinforced
and Figure 2b shows inner defects in a carbon fiber-reinforced laminate detected by computed
and Figure 2b
composites, andshows
Figureinner defects
2b shows in adefects
inner carboninfiber-reinforced laminate detected
a carbon fiber-reinforced laminatebydetected
computed by
tomography (CT).
tomography
computed (CT).
tomography (CT).

Figure
Figure 1.
1. Variation
Variation in
in laminate
laminate flexural
flexural strength
strength with
with Gc
Gc as determined by
as determined by international
international rules
rules and
and
Figure 1. Variation in laminate flexural strength with Gc as determined by international rules and
material tests.
material tests.

Figure 2. Defects
Defects in
infiber-reinforced
fiber-reinforcedplastic
plasticlaminates: (a)(a)
laminates: Schematic of common
Schematic of commonlamination defects
lamination [18];
defects
Figure 2. Defects in fiber-reinforced plastic laminates: (a) Schematic of common lamination defects
(b) X-ray CT image of defects in carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic laminate [19].
[18]; (b) X-ray CT image of defects in carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic laminate [19].
[18]; (b) X-ray CT image of defects in carbon-fiber-reinforced plastic laminate [19].
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 4 of 17

2.2. Measurement of Weight Fraction of Glass Fiber (Gc) of Laminate Structure

As shown in Figure 2b, destructive methods such as CT testing allow the accurate measurement
of inner defects such as void content. However, this method is not practical for the analysis of ship
structures owing to the need for specialized equipment and technicians, which are typically not
available during ship building. Therefore, we used the following four practical and simple methods to
measure, compare, and analyze the GFRP laminate specimens:

1. Arithmetic calculation of Gc based on material design, as per ISO 12215 and other
classification rules.
2. Calculation of the volume of laminate specimens using tools such as Vernier calipers, followed by
calculation of Gc.
3. Measurement of the specific gravity of laminate specimens using Archimedes’ principle, followed
by calculation of Gc.
4. Burn-off method involving combustion of the matrix, as suggested by ASTM D3171-15, followed
by weight measurement of the glass fiber to determine Gc.

This section summarizes the procedures for these four methods and their application to
laminate structures.

2.2.1. Rule Calculation

International standards and classification societies provide rules for ship design, with formulas to
calculate Gc and the mechanical properties of the laminate, as well as the required thickness of the
laminate structure, by considering the Gc and the hull shape [7]. This process is called “scantling” in
ship design. The rule calculations allow easy estimation of Gc from the properties of the fiber cloth
and resin and are widely used for the structural design of composite ships. Gc can be calculated from
the densities of the glass fiber and cured resin and the thickness of the laminate structure. ISO 12215
and classification society rules suggest that the glass fiber and resin densities should be taken as 2.56
and 1.2 g/cm3 , respectively, resulting in Equation (1) for calculating Gc [6].

Gc = 2.56/(3.072 × t/w + 1.36) × 100, (1)

where t is the laminate thickness (mm) and w is the weight of the glass fiber cloth per unit area (kg/m2 ).
The thickness of a single impregnated ply, Tsingle ply , can be obtained from the thickness of the
laminate structure, t, as follows:

Tsingle ply = w/3.072((2.56/Gc) − 1.36), (2)

where w is the weight of the glass fiber in a single ply of laminate (kg/m2 ).

2.2.2. Direct Measurement

One of the simplest approaches for experimentally determining Gc is to measure the dimensions
and weight of a section of the laminate structure using Vernier calipers and an electronic scale,
respectively. By assuming a perfect cuboid shape (volume = cross − sectional area × thickness), the
relative density, %c (g/cm3 ), can be calculated (Equation (3)). The relative density can then be used to
calculate Gc based on the theoretical densities of the glass fiber and resin (Equation (4)).

%c = M/(A × t × 1000), (3)

Gc = (p × N × 0.1)/(%c × t) × 100 (4)

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 5 of 17

where M is the weight of the laminate specimen (g), A is the cross-sectional area (m2 ), and t is the
thickness (mm); p is the weight of one sheet of reinforcement per unit area (g/m2 ), and N is the number
of sheets in the specimen.
This method is both theoretically and experimentally simple. However, the volume and weight of
the cut specimen must be measured accurately. The specimen density is often only approximated from
measurements taken using Vernier calipers and a scale if the laminate specimen has rough or irregular
surfaces; therefore, it is more accurate to measure the relative density directly using Archimedes’
principle and an instrument such as an immersion electronic densimeter. ASTM D792-13 [20] proposes a
procedure for measuring the relative density of plastics, which can be used as a reference. The measured
result can then be used in Equation (4).
For both these methods, it is important that the measurements are accurate, and that the density of
the glass fiber and uncured resin are known accurately. ISO 12215, LR, and RINA [9,10] prescribe the
method described in ISO 1172 [21] for density measurements to confirm those reported in the catalog.
However, the inner defects in the structure (see Figure 2) cannot be considered with either method.
This can lead to an inaccurate measurement of Gc.

2.2.3. Matrix Burn-Off

To accurately measure Gc and the volume of inner defects, such as porosity, voids, and delamination,
ISO 12215 and the classification society rules recommend the use of combustion methods whenever
possible. However, this method is not widely used because the process is inconvenient and requires
special equipment, and it is considered optional. ASTM D3171-15 [22] proposes two methods for
determining the percentages of the raw materials contained in composite materials by removing the
matrix. The first method is digestion, which involves chemical removal of the matrix phase, while the
other involves the burn-off of the matrix in a furnace. The fibers used in GFRP ship structures can be
deformed by the acid solvent used for digestion; therefore, the burn-off method is more appropriate.
After calcining the matrix of the laminate structure, Gc can be determined by comparing the
weight of the specimen before and after combustion. This is calculated as follows:

Gc = Mf /Mi × 100, (5)

where Mi and Mf are the weights (g) of the specimen before and after combustion, respectively.
The burn-off method has the advantage of allowing the matrix resin to be calcined slowly, which
provides an accurate characterization of the quality of the laminate structure. Moreover, by dividing
Equation (5) with the weight of the specimen before and after combustion, the volume of the voids can
be obtained [22]:
Vvoid = (1 − Mf /Mi × %c /%f − (Mi − Mf )/Mi × %c /%r ) × 100, (6)

where %f and %r are the densities (g/cm3 ) of the glass fiber and resin, respectively.

2.3. Selection of Glass Fiber Content Measurement Method

The principles and special properties of the methods described above for measuring the Gc of
laminate structures for composite ships are summarized in Table 1. Among these methods, the digestion
method was excluded because of the possibility of deformation of the raw material and because it is
a time-consuming process [23]. To compare the other four methods in more detail, we applied each
method to calculate Gc in laminate specimens taken from the side hull plate of a 16-m composite ship.
The results are described and compared below.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 6 of 17

Table 1. Comparison of determination methods for Gc.

Four Methods for Measuring Glass Fiber Weight Fraction

Rule Calculation Burn-off
â ISO 12215 reports the Method using â Weight of fiber in a
densities of glass Simple Direct laminate is
Hydrometer
fiber and resin. Measurement measured by
â The relative
Based on these â Volume and weight calcining a resin
density of a cut
values and the are measured by matrix using a
laminate structure
structure thickness, using tools such as furnace, and Gc is
is measured by
Gc can be calculated. a Vernier caliper calculated based on
using a tool such as
â This method is and a scale to the weight.
a densimeter.
widely calculate the â Gc can be
relative density. â A relatively
recommended by the accurately calculated.
accurate Gc value
classification societies. â Procedure is â A special
can be obtained by
â The calculation is very simple. experimental tool
using a simple tool.
simple, and the â Volume errors of is required.
â Interior defects
weight can be easily some external â Volume of
such as voids
estimated from the shapes can fabrication defects
cannot
thickness of be estimated. in a laminate can
be considered.
the laminate. â ASTM D792 be considered.
â ASTM D792
â ISO 12215, â ASTM D3171,
ASTM D792 ASTM D792

3. Experimental Methods

Fabrication of Composite Ship Hull Plate and Sample Characterization

The ship tested herein was a 16-m GFRP yacht with a displacement of 26 tons. The primary raw
materials in the structure are chopped strand mat (CSM; weight of dry fabric per unit area: 450 g/m2 )
and polyester resin. For the hull, which is the primary structure of the ship, 20-ply CSM was used for
the bottom plate, and 16-ply CSM was used for the side plates. Figure 3 shows the primary structure
of this ship, the structural layout of the hull, and the fabrication design for the hull plate.
For the composite structures used in the experiment, a hull side plate was fabricated with 16-ply
CSM containing 40 wt.% glass fiber, in accordance with the fabrication design (Figure 4). Another
prototype laminate structure based on the shape of the side plate, but with a different thickness,
was designed by increasing the amount of glass fiber. The higher-Gc laminate structure was designed
according to the ISO 12215-15 and RINA design rules; by intentionally increasing the design Gc
to 64 wt.%, the number of plies of cloth was increased while the amount of resin was reduced to
fabricate a composite hull structure with a higher Gc and smaller thickness. Both laminate structures
were fabricated using the vacuum infusion method. Table 2 shows the material design of the two
laminate structures, and Figure 4 shows the designs of the two prototypes and the fabricated hull
Appl.
plates. Sci. 2020,
Four 10, x FOR PEER
specimens wereREVIEW
cut and prepared from each laminate structure. 7 of 17

Figure 3.3.Details
Figure Detailsof
of the targetship
the target shipstructure
structure and
and hull
hull plate.
plate.

Table 2. Material design for fabrication of two hull side plates.

Item Original Side Plate High Gc Side Plate

Design Gc [wt.%] 40 64
Fiber type [density] E-glass fiber [2.56 g/cm3]
 Fiber type [density] E-glass fiber [2.56 g/cm3]
Fabric type [weight per area] Chopped strand mat (CSM) [450 g/m2]
Resin type [density] Polyester [1.13 g/cm3]
Manufacturing thickness (mm) 11.84 9.36
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 No. of plies 16 24 7 of 17
Weight per area (kg/m2) 18.00 16.88

Figure
Figure 4.
4. Dimensions
Dimensions of
of two
two hull
hull plates
plates and
and fabricated
fabricated prototypes.
prototypes.

4. Results Table 2. Material design for fabrication of two hull side plates.

Item Original Side Plate High Gc Side Plate

4.1. Specimen Size
Design Gc [wt.%] 40 64
The four specimens cut [density]
Fiber type from each laminate structure arefiber
E-glass shown
[2.56 in 3]
Figure
g/cm 5. Figure 6 shows
Fabric type [weight per area] Chopped strand mat (CSM) [450 g/m 2]
detailed photos of the #1 laminate specimens with designed Gc values of 40 and 64 wt.%, respectively,
Resin type [density] Polyester [1.13 g/cm 3]
indicating the defects generated during the fabrication process. The dimensions obtained for each
Manufacturing thickness (mm) 11.84 9.36
specimen are listed in Tables 2 and 3.
No. of plies 16 24
Weight per area (kg/m2 ) 18.00 16.88

4. Results

4.1. Specimen Size

The four specimens cut from each laminate structure are shown in Figure 5. Figure 6 shows
detailed photos of the #1 laminate specimens with designed Gc values of 40 and 64 wt.%, respectively,
indicating the defects generated during the fabrication process. The dimensions obtained for each
specimen are10,listed
Appl. Sci. 2020, x FORin Tables
PEER 2 and 3.
REVIEW 8 of 17

Figure 5.
Figure 5. Specimens cut from two hull plates.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 8 of 17
Figure 5. Specimens cut from two hull plates.

Figure 6.
Figure 6. Detailed
Detailed comparison
comparison of
of 40
40 and
and 64
64 wt.%
wt.% Gc
Gc specimens.
specimens.

Table 3. Dimensions
Table 3. Dimensions of
of specimens
specimens taken
taken from
from designed
designed hull
hull plate
plate with
withGc
Gcof
of40
40wt.%.
wt.%.
Sample
Sample Length(mm)
Length (mm) Width (mm)
Width (mm) Thickness (mm)
Thickness (mm) Weight (g)
Weight (g)
#1
#1 27.46
27.46 20.19
20.19 11.70
11.70 9.67
9.67
#2
#2 28.87
28.87 20.39
20.39 12.65
12.65 10.74
10.74
#3 26.38 20.22 12.05 9.66
#3 26.38 20.22 12.05 9.66
#4 27.01 20.19 11.35 9.32
#4
Mean 27.01 20.19 11.35
11.94 9.32
9.85
Mean 11.94 9.85
4.2. Gc Measurements
4.2. Gc Measurements
The four measurement methods summarized in Table 1 were used to determine Gc of the laminate
The four measurement methods summarized in Table 1 were used to determine Gc of the
sections with different design Gc values. The fabrication quality of the laminate structure was confirmed
laminate sections with different design Gc values. The fabrication quality of the laminate structure
by establishing whether glass-fiber reinforcement was included as specified in the material design.
was confirmed by establishing whether glass-fiber reinforcement was included as specified in the
The volume of defects and voids in the laminate structure was also determined. By comparing and
material design. The volume of defects and voids in the laminate structure was also determined. By
analyzing the measurement results obtained using each method, we propose the most suitable method
comparing and analyzing the measurement results obtained using each method, we propose the most
for use in optimized ship design.
suitable method for use in optimized ship design.
4.2.1. Rule Calculation
4.2.1. Rule Calculation
When Gc is determined from the material design, it is possible to calculate the expected thickness
When Gc
and weight is determined
according from thesuggested
to the method material design,
by theitrules;
is possible to calculate
by working the expected
backward, Gc can thickness
be easily
calculated from the fabricated structures. The thicknesses of the side plates of the hullGc
and weight according to the method suggested by the rules; by working backward, can11.84
were be easily
mm
calculated from the fabricated structures. The thicknesses of the side plates of the
for the Gc 40 wt.% design and 9.36 mm for the Gc 64 wt.% design. The side plates were scantled hull were 11.84 mm
for the Gc 40 wt.% design and 9.36 mm for the Gc 64 wt.% design. The side
according to the RINA [10] rule (Table 2). The weight per square meter of the laminate structureplates were scantled
according
can to the RINA
be calculated based[10] rulematerial
on the (Table 2). The weightused
information per square
for themeter of the laminate
construction structure
of this ship (Tablecan
2).
be calculated based on the material information used for the construction of this
Furthermore, from Equation (2), the thickness of a single-ply with 40 wt.% Gc was determined to be ship (Table 2).
Furthermore,
0.74 fromthat
mm, whereas Equation
with 64 (2),wt.%
the thickness
Gc was 0.39of amm;
single-ply
when with 40 wt.%
the ply number Gc of
was determined
each structureto be
was
0.74 mm,the
applied, whereas
weights that with
of the two64 structures
wt.% Gc was were0.39 mm;16.88
18 and whenkg/mthe 2ply number of(Table
, respectively each structure
2). Usingwas
the
calculations in Equation (1) yields Gc values for the two structures of 40 and 64 wt.%, respectively.

4.2.2. Simple Direct Measurement

For the simple direct measurement, the dimensions of the specimen were measured with Vernier
calipers (Tables 3 and 4), and the weight was measured with an electronic scale (Figure 7). The results
were used to calculate Gc of the specimens with Equations (3) and (4). In this process, some weights of
the CSM cloth were also measured with an electronic scale and applied to the Gc calculation. Table 5
shows the calculated Gc results for the eight laminate specimens.
4.2.2. Simple Direct Measurement
For the simple direct measurement, the dimensions of the specimen were measured with Vernier
calipers (Tables 3 and 4), and the weight was measured with an electronic scale (Figure 7). The results
were used to calculate Gc of the specimens with Equations (3) and (4). In this process, some weights
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 9 of 17
of the CSM cloth were also measured with an electronic scale and applied to the Gc calculation. Table
5 shows the calculated Gc results for the eight laminate specimens.

Figure 7.
Figure Weight measurement
7. Weight measurement of
of specimens
specimens using
using an
an electronic
electronic scale.
scale.
Table 4. Dimensions of specimens taken from design hull plate with Gc of 64 wt.%.
Table 4. Dimensions of specimens taken from design hull plate with Gc of 64 wt.%.
Sample Length (mm) Width (mm) Thickness (mm) Weight (g)
Sample Length (mm) Width (mm) Thickness (mm) Weight (g)
#1 25.81 20.15 9.00 8.43
#1 25.81 20.15 9.00 8.43
#2 29.18 20.01 9.07 9.56
#2
#3 29.18
28.11 20.01
20.03 9.07
9.13 9.56
9.37
#3
#4 28.11
27.15 20.03
19.90 9.13
9.22 9.37
8.59
#4
Mean 27.15 19.90 9.22
9.11 8.59
8.99
Mean 9.11 8.99
Table 5. Gc calculation result for specimens based on simple direct measurements.
Table 5. Gc calculation result for specimens based on simple direct measurements.
Glass Fiber Content (Gc) (wt.%)
Sample Glass Fiber Content (Gc) (wt.%)
Sample Design Gc: 40 wt.% Design Gc: 64 wt.%
Design Gc: 40 wt.% Design Gc: 64 wt.%
#1 41.30 66.67
#2#1 41.30
39.53 66.6765.79
#3#2 39.53
39.83 65.7965.00
#4#3 42.01
39.83 65.0068.10
Mean
#4 40.67
42.01 68.1066.39
Mean 40.67 66.39
Compared to the design Gc values of 40 and 64 wt.%, the simple direct measurements revealed
Compared
average Gc differences of +0.67
to the design and +2.39
Gc values of 40wt.%,
and 64respectively.
wt.%, the simple
This direct measurements
variation is likely duerevealed
to the
average Gc between
differences differences the of +0.67 and
densities +2.39
of the glasswt.%,
fiber respectively.
and polyesterThis resinvariation
proposedisinlikely dueand
the rule to the
differences between
actual values. the densities
In addition, of the glass
errors occurring fiber and
during polyester
laminate resin proposed
fabrication, perhapsin the rulefrom
resulting and the
actual values.
technical skillsInofaddition,
a workererrors occurringinduring
or a difference shapelaminate
volume, fabrication, perhaps to
may also contribute resulting from the
the discrepancy.
technical skills of a worker or a difference in shape volume, may also contribute to
The measured thicknesses of the laminate specimens (Tables 3 and 4) differed compared to the designed the discrepancy.
The measured
values by an average of +0.10
thicknesses ofmm
the and
laminate
−0.25 specimens
mm for Gc (Tables
40 and 64 3 wt.%,
and 4)respectively.
differed compared to the
In other words,
designed values
these results by an
indicate average
that the errorofarises
+0.10 from
mm differences
and −0.25 mm forexternal
in the Gc 40 and
shape64ofwt.%, respectively.
the specimens, In
rather
other words, these results indicate that the error arises from differences in the external
than from differences between the actual densities of the raw materials and the values specified in shape of the
specimens,
the rule. rather than from differences between the actual densities of the raw materials and the
values specified in the rule.
4.2.3. Archimedes’ Measurement
The relative densities of the hull plate specimens were measured in accordance with ASTM
D792-13 [20] using a water immersion hydrometer with a precision of 0.01 g/cm3 (Figure 8). For precise
verification, the densities of the CSM cloth and cured polyester resin were also measured (Table 6);
the average values were 2.56 and 1.22 g/cm3 , respectively, which are similar to the values suggested
in the classification rules. The Gc of each hull plate specimen was calculated by using the measured
density values (Tables 6 and 7) in Equation (2), and the results are listed in Table 8.
 The relative densities of the hull plate specimens were measured in accordance with ASTM
D792-13 [20] using a water immersion hydrometer with a precision of 0.01 g/cm3 (Figure 8). For
precise verification, the densities of the CSM cloth and cured polyester resin were also measured
(Table 6); the average values were 2.56 and 1.22 g/cm3, respectively, which are similar to the values
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 10 of 17
suggested in the classification rules. The Gc of each hull plate specimen was calculated by using the
measured density values (Tables 6 and 7) in Equation (2), and the results are listed in Table 8.

Figure 8.8.Measurement
Figure Measurementof of
thethe
relative densities
relative of CSM
densities ofcloth,
CSMpolyester, and hull plate
cloth, polyester, and using
hull hydrometer.
plate using
hydrometer.Table 6. Densities of raw materials derived from hydrometer measurements.

Density 3)
Table 6. Densities of raw materials derived from(g/cm
hydrometer measurements.
Sample
E-Glass Fiber Polyester Resin (Cured)
Density (g/cm ) 3
Sample
#1 2.53 1.22
E-glass Fiber Polyester Resin (cured)
#2 2.57 1.22
#3
#1 2.53 2.55 1.22 1.22
#4 #2 2.57 2.60 1.22 1.22
Mean#3 2.55 2.56 1.22 1.22
#4 2.60 1.22
Table Mean
7. Measurement2.56
of specimen densities 1.22
using a hydrometer.

3
Table 7. Measurement of specimenDensity
Sample
(g/cm
densities using) a hydrometer.
Design Gc: 40 wt.% Design Gc: 64 wt.%
Density (g/cm3)
Sample
#1 1.53 1.78
Design Gc: 40 wt.% Design Gc: 64 wt.%
#2 1.48 1.79
#3#1 1.53
1.52 1.78 1.78
#4#2 1.48
1.52 1.79 1.78
Mean#3 1.51
1.52 1.78 1.78
#4 1.52 1.78
Table 8. Calculated
Mean Gc values of
1.51 specimens measured using a hydrometer.
1.78
Glass Fiber Content (Gc) (wt.%)
Table Sample
8. Calculated Gc values of specimens measured using a hydrometer.
Design Gc: 40 wt.% Design Gc: 64 wt.%
Glass Fiber Content (Gc) (wt.%)
#1
Sample 40.22 67.42
#2 Design Gc: 40 wt.% Design Gc: 66.52
38.46 64 wt.%
#3#1 40.22
39.31 67.4266.46
#4#2 41.73
38.46 66.5265.81
Mean 39.93
#3 39.31 66.4666.55
#4 41.73 65.81
For the specimens withMeandesign Gc of 40 and 64 wt.%, the measurement
39.93 66.55 results showed differences
of −0.07 and +2.55 wt.%, respectively, relative to the design Gc, and differences of −0.74 and −0.17 wt.%,
respectively, relative to the average value of the Gc determined using the simple direct measurement.
Overall, the results tend to be similar to those of the simple direct measurement; the slight difference is
the result of volumetric error for the specimen. Therefore, the results measured using a hydrometer
were more accurate. The volume measurement using the hydrometer indicates that there is no
apparent defect, but it can be imagined that a higher vacuum was applied with a larger amount of
E-glass fibers during the fabrication of the higher Gc laminate and that the thickness was slightly
reduced. Overall, the direct measurement method indicates that the laminate structures were generally
direct measurement. Overall, the results tend to be similar to those of the simple direct measurement;
the slight
the slight difference
difference is is the
the result
result ofof volumetric
volumetric error error for
for the
the specimen.
specimen. Therefore,
Therefore, thethe results
results measured
measured
using aa hydrometer
using hydrometer were were moremore accurate.
accurate. The The volume
volume measurement
measurement using using the
the hydrometer
hydrometer indicates
indicates
that there is no apparent defect, but it can be imagined that a higher
that there is no apparent defect, but it can be imagined that a higher vacuum was applied with vacuum was applied with aa
larger amount of E-glass fibers during the fabrication of the higher Gc laminate
larger amount of E-glass fibers during the fabrication of the higher Gc laminate and that the thickness and that the thickness
Appl. Sci.
was slightly2020, 10,
slightly 5130
reduced. Overall, the the direct
direct measurement
measurement methodmethod indicates
indicates that
that the
the laminate 11 of 17
laminate structures
structures
was reduced. Overall,
were generally
were generally fabricated
fabricated well well and and without
without significant
significant quality
quality defects
defects resulting
resulting fromfrom incorrect
incorrect
scantling dimensions and
scantling and non-uniformity of of the external
external shape.
shape. InIn addition,
addition, thethe densities
densities ofof the
the
fabricateddimensions
well and withoutnon-uniformity
significant quality the defects resulting from incorrect scantling dimensions
constituent
constituent materials
materialsof are
are similar
similar to those
to those proposed
proposed in the
in the design
design rules.
rules.
and non-uniformity the external shape. In addition, the densities of the constituent materials are
similar to those proposed in the design rules.
4.2.4. Burn-off
4.2.4. Burn-off Method
Method
4.2.4.In Burn-Off Method
the burn-off
burn-off method, aa 4.5-L 4.5-L electric
electric muffle
muffle furnace
furnace (CORE
(CORE TECH,
TECH, HQ-DMF
HQ-DMF 4.5, 4.5, Figure
Figure 9) 9)
In the method,
with In
with aa heating
heating
the limitmethod,
limit
burn-off of 1200
of 1200a°C °C was
was
4.5-L used muffle
used
electric to remove
to remove polyester
polyester
furnace from
(COREfrom TECH, both
both laminate
laminate
HQ-DMF structures.
4.5,structures. The
The
Figure 9) with
procedure
procedure
a heating limit described
described in
◦
of 1200inCASTMASTM
was used D792-13
D792-13 [20] was
[20] was
to remove followed.
followed.
polyester The
fromThe heating
bothheating
laminatetemperature
temperature
structures. and and time
The time were
were
procedure
set to
set to 600
described600 °C°C and 33 h,
in and
ASTM h,D792-13
respectively,
respectively,
[20] was in accordance
in accordance
followed. The with
with prior work
prior
heating work utilizingand
utilizing
temperature muffle
muffle furnaces
timefurnaces [12,24]. At
to 600 ◦At
were set[12,24]. C
30-min
30-min intervals,
intervals, the
the temperature
temperature inside
inside the
the furnace
furnace and
and the
the weight
weight
and 3 h, respectively, in accordance with prior work utilizing muffle furnaces [12,24]. At 30-minof
of the
the specimen
specimen were
were measured,
measured,
and then
and then the
intervals, combustion
combustion
temperature was
was continued.
continued.
inside the furnace Thisand
This process
process was repeated
was
the weight repeated until the
until
of the specimen the
were weight
weight change
change
measured, andofthen
of the
the
specimen
specimen
combustion was
waswasless
less than 0.001
than 0.001
continued. Thisg. Figures
g. process
Figures was 9 and
9 and 10 summarize
10 summarize
repeated the
until the the burn-off
burn-off
weight change test
test procedure
of procedure
the specimen for the
forwas
the
laminate.
laminate.
less than 0.001 g. Figures 9 and 10 summarize the burn-off test procedure for the laminate.

Figure 9.
Figure Burn-off method
9. Burn-off method for
for the
the combustion
combustion of
of laminate
laminate specimens.
specimens.

Figure
Figure 10. Burn-off
Figure 10. Burn-off test
Burn-off test procedure
test procedure for laminate
procedure for laminate structures,
structures, according
according to
to ASTM
ASTM D792.
D792.

11 and
Figures 11 and
and1212 show
12show the
showthe burn-off
theburn-off test
burn-offtest
testresults forfor
results
results for specimen #1 with
specimen
specimen #1 with
#1 Gc 40
with
Gc 40 and
Gcand Gc 64
40 and
Gc 64 wt.%.
Gcwt.%. The
64 wt.%.
The
resin
The was
resinresin calcined
was was rapidly
calcined
calcined during
rapidly
rapidly the
during
during first
thethe hour
first
first of heating.
hourofofheating.
hour Furthermore,
heating.Furthermore, as the
Furthermore,asasthe laminate
the laminate was
laminate was
carbonized, the specimen gradually turned white. Tables 9 and 10 summarize the results of the burn-off
tests and present the calculated Gc values based on the weight of the glass fiber remaining after the
resin matrix was completely burned away.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 17
carbonized, the specimen gradually turned white. Tables 9 and 10 summarize the results of the burn-
off tests and the
carbonized, present the calculated
specimen graduallyGc values
turned based
white. on the
Tables weight
9 and of the glassthe
10 summarize fiber remaining
results after
of the burn-
the
off resin matrix
tests and was completely
present burned
the calculated away. based on the weight of the glass fiber remaining after
Gc values
the resinAppl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130
matrix was completely burned away. 12 of 17

Figure 11. Changes in weight of specimen due to combustion (Gc 40 wt.%, Specimen #1).
Figure 11. Changes in weight of specimen due to combustion (Gc 40 wt.%, Specimen #1).
Figure 11. Changes in weight of specimen due to combustion (Gc 40 wt.%, Specimen #1).

Figure 12. Changes in weight of specimens due to combustion (Gc 64 wt.%, Specimen #1).
Figure 12. Changes in weight of specimens due to combustion (Gc 64 wt.%, Specimen #1).
Table 9. Gc calculation result obtained from the burn-off method (design Gc 40 wt.%).
Figure 12. Changes in weight of specimens due to combustion (Gc 64 wt.%, Specimen #1).
Table 9. Gc calculation
Label Specimenresult
Weightobtained
(g) fromFiber
Glass the burn-off
Weight (g)method
Glass(design Gc 40(wt.%)
Fiber Content wt.%).

Table#1
9. Gc calculation9.67
result 3.82 39.50Gc 40 wt.%).
Label Specimen Weight (g) obtained from Weight
Glass Fiber the burn-off
(g) method
Glass(design
Fiber Content (wt.%)
#2 10.74 3.83 35.66
#1
Label #3
Specimen 9.67
Weight9.66(g) Glass Fiber 3.82Weight
3.79 39.50
39.23
(g) Glass Fiber Content (wt.%)
#2 #4 10.74 9.32 3.83 3.65 39.16
35.66
#1 Mean 9.67 - 3.82 - 39.50
38.39
#3
#2 9.66
10.74 3.79
3.83 39.23
35.66
#4
#3 9.32
9.66 3.65
3.79 39.16
39.23
Mean
#4 -
9.32 -
3.65 38.39
39.16
Mean - - 38.39
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 17
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 13 of 17

Table 10. Gc calculation result obtained from the burn-off method (design Gc 64%).
Table 10. Gc calculation result obtained from the burn-off method (design Gc 64%).
Label Specimen Weight (g) Glass Fiber Weight (g) Glass Fiber Content (wt.%)
Label
#1 Specimen
8.43 Weight (g) Glass5.21
Fiber Weight (g) Glass Fiber Content (wt.%)
61.80
#1
#2 9.568.43 5.93 5.21 61.80
62.03
#2 9.56 5.93 62.03
#3
#3 9.379.37 5.79 5.79 61.79
61.79
#4
#4 8.598.59 5.31 5.31 61.82
61.82
Mean - - 61.86
Mean - - 61.86

The
The burn-off
burn-off test
test confirmed
confirmed that
that the
the specimens
specimens with
with aa design
design Gc
Gc of
of 64
64 wt.%
wt.% exhibited
exhibited faster
faster
calcination
calcination of the resin, with complete burn-off completed approximately 30 min faster. Figure 13
of the resin, with complete burn-off completed approximately 30 min faster. Figure 13
shows
shows the
the progression
progressionof ofthe
thelaminate
laminateweight
weightchange
changeduring
duringcombustion
combustionfor
foreach
eachsample.
sample.

Figure 13. Changes in laminate weight during combustion.

Figure 13. Changes in laminate weight during combustion.
The average Gc values measured using the burn-off method were 38.39 and 61.86 wt.% for the hull
The average Gc values measured using the burn-off method were 38.39 and 61.86 wt.% for the
plates with design values of Gc 40 and 64 wt.%, respectively. These values respectively differ from the
hull plates with design values of Gc 40 and 64 wt.%, respectively. These values respectively differ
design values by −1.61 and −2.14 wt.%; from those obtained with the simple direct measurement by
from the design values by −1.61 and −2.14 wt.%; from those obtained with the simple direct
−2.28 and −4.53 wt.%; and from those obtained with the hydrometer method by −1.54 and −4.69 wt.%.
measurement by −2.28 and −4.53 wt.%; and from those obtained with the hydrometer method by
Overall, it was confirmed that the weight fraction of the glass fiber was lower than the values obtained
−1.54 and −4.69 wt.%. Overall, it was confirmed that the weight fraction of the glass fiber was lower
using the other measurement methods. This may be due to the volume of inner defects in the laminate
than the values obtained using the other measurement methods. This may be due to the volume of
(shown in Figure 2). The 40 wt.% Gc specimens seem to be affected by small porosities resulting from
inner defects in the laminate (shown in Figure 2). The 40 wt.% Gc specimens seem to be affected by
areas rich in resin, while in the 64 wt.% Gc specimens, the increase in the number of plies used may
small porosities resulting from areas rich in resin, while in the 64 wt.% Gc specimens, the increase in
have caused delamination between the cloth layers and voids in resin-poor areas. As these specimens
the number of plies used may have caused delamination between the cloth layers and voids in resin-
were fabricated by the infusion method and were well-fabricated without a significant quantity of
poor areas. As these specimens were fabricated by the infusion method and were well-fabricated
defects, as was apparent from the previous hydrometer measurements, the overall void volume must
without a significant quantity of defects, as was apparent from the previous hydrometer
be the total volume of many small voids. In particular, it was confirmed that an increased number of
measurements, the overall void volume must be the total volume of many small voids. In particular,
voids was present in the specimens of the hull plate with a high Gc.
it was confirmed that an increased number of voids was present in the specimens of the hull plate
Figure 14 shows the void volumes for the specimens of the two hull plates according to Equation (6).
with a high Gc.
Although the volume fraction of the voids is small, this has a significant influence on the weight
Figure 14 shows the void volumes for the specimens of the two hull plates according to Equation
fraction of glass fiber.
(6). Although the volume fraction of the voids is small, this has a significant influence on the weight
fraction of glass fiber.
Appl.
Appl.Sci.
Sci.2020,
2020,10,
10,x5130
FOR PEER REVIEW 14
14of
of17
17
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 17

Figure
Figure 14. Volume fraction of voids
voids in thespecimens,
specimens, measuredbybythe
the burn-off method:
(a)(a) design
Figure 14. Volume
14. Volume fraction of voidsininthe
the specimens,measured
measured by theburn-off method:
burn-off method: design
(a) Gc
design
Gc
40 40 wt.%;
wt.%; (b) (b) design
design Gc Gc
64 64 wt.%.
wt.%.
Gc 40 wt.%; (b) design Gc 64 wt.%.

5.5.Discussion
Discussion
5. Discussion
TheGc
The Gcvalues
valuesof ofthe
thetwo
twohull
hullplates
plateswith
withdifferent
differentdesign
designGc Gcwere
wereverified
verifiedthrough
throughfourfourmethods.
methods.
FigureThe15Gc values
shows a of the two hull
comparison ofplates
the with different
experimental designThe
results. Gc were verifiedbetween
differences throughthe fourGc
methods.
values
Figure 15 shows a comparison of the experimental results. The differences between the Gc values
Figure 15
obtained by shows
by the a
the simple comparison of the experimental results. The differences between the Gc values
obtained simple direct
directmeasurement
measurementand andhydrometer
hydrometermethod method were
werenotnot
significant, because
significant, becausethe
obtained
error in bymeasurement
the the simple direct of themeasurement
external volumeandwashydrometer
relatively method
small. were not significant,
Therefore, the because
discrepancies in
the error in the measurement of the external volume was relatively small. Therefore, the discrepancies
the
the error in obtained
results the measurement
using theofburn-off
the external volume
method are was
likely relatively
due to small. Therefore,
differences in thethe discrepancies
volume of inner
in the results obtained using the burn-off method are likely due to differences in the volume of inner
in the results
defects,such
suchas
obtained
as voids.
voids.In
using
Inother
the words,
burn-off
otherwords,
method are that
likely due to differences in the volume of inner
defects, ititwas
wasfound
foundthat thevolumes
the volumesof ofhull
hull plates
plateswithwith design
design GcGc
defects,
values
such
of 40
as
and
voids.
64 wt.%
In other words,
contained voids
it was
with
found that
volumes
the volumes
comprising
of
0.95
hull
and
plates
1.20
with
wt.%
design
of the
Gc
total
values of 40 and 64 wt.% contained voids with volumes comprising 0.95 and 1.20 wt.% of the total
values
volume.As
of 40 and
Asshown
shownin
64 wt.%
inFigure
contained
Figure14,14,the
voids
thelarger
with
largerdifference
volumes
differencein inthe
comprising
themeasured
0.95
measuredresults
and
resultsfor
1.20
forthe
wt.%
theGc
Gc64
of the
64wt.%
total
wt.%hull
hull
volume.
volume.
plate can
As
be
shown
considered
in Figure
to
14,from
arise
the larger
the
differencequalities
fabrication
in the measured
of the
resultsstructures.
laminate
for the Gc Furthermore,
64 wt.% hull
plate can be considered to arise from the fabrication qualities of the laminate structures. Furthermore,
plate can be considered to arise from the fabrication qualities of the laminate structures. Furthermore,
althoughthese
although theseare arerelatively
relativelywell-fabricated
well-fabricated prototypes
prototypes produced
produced using
using the
the vacuum
vacuum infusion
infusion method,
method,
although these are relatively well-fabricated prototypes produced using the vacuum infusion method,
the differences
the differences in in the
the results
results are
are not
notnegligible.
negligible.For Forexample,
example,the the2.14
2.14wt.%
wt.%difference
differenceininGcGc obtained
obtained in
the differences in the results are not negligible. For example, the 2.14 wt.% difference in Gc obtained
the burn-off measurement method for the hull plate with a design Gc value
in the burn-off measurement method for the hull plate with a design Gc value of 64 wt.% corresponds of 64 wt.% corresponds to
in the burn-off measurement method for the hull plate with a design Gc value of 64 wt.% corresponds
a decrease
to a decrease ininthe
thebending
bendingstrength
strengthofofthethelaminate
laminateofofabout
about4.32%,
4.32%,based
basedon onthe
theISOISO 12215
12215 equations.
equations.
to a decrease in the bending strength of the laminate of about 4.32%, based on the ISO 12215 equations.

Figure 15. Comparison of Gc values measured by the rule calculation, direct measurement,
Figure 15. Comparison
and burn-off methods. of Gc values measured by the rule calculation, direct measurement, and burn-
Figure 15. Comparison of Gc values measured by the rule calculation, direct measurement, and burn-
off methods.
off methods.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 15 of 17
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 17

The
Theexperimental
experimental results
results are
are summarized
summarized in in the
the form
form of of aa box
box plot,
plot, as
as shown
shown inin Figure
Figure 16.
16. In
Inthe
the
case of the 40 wt.% Gc hull plate, the shape, including the thickness, corresponded
case of the 40 wt.% Gc hull plate, the shape, including the thickness, corresponded well with the design. well with the
design. Nevertheless,
Nevertheless, nonuniform
nonuniform impregnation impregnation of theresin
of the polyester polyester
can be resin can be
confirmed by confirmed
the deviation byintheGc
deviation in Gc value shown in Figure 15. In particular, as shown in Figure 14,
value shown in Figure 15. In particular, as shown in Figure 14, specimen #2 (with a Gc of 35.66 wt.%)specimen #2 (with a
Gc of 35.66 wt.%) contained a relatively large volume of voids and polyester.
contained a relatively large volume of voids and polyester. In the case of the hull plate with a GcIn the case of the hull
plate
of 64with
wt.%,a Gc of 64
it can bewt.%, it can from
confirmed be confirmed from the
the increased Gc increased
seen withGc theseen withdirect
simple the simple direct and
and hydrometer
hydrometer
measurement methods that the pressure of the air compressor was slightly excessive duringexcessive
measurement methods that the pressure of the air compressor was slightly infusion.
during infusion. This was done to achieve the high Gc level, and it was
This was done to achieve the high Gc level, and it was confirmed that they were fabricated withconfirmed that they werea
fabricated
thickness with a thickness
slightly below theslightly
designbelow the design
thickness. thickness.
However, However,
this does this doesan
not constitute notincrease
constitute an
in the
increase in the actual Gc value, but rather an increase in the internal void volume.
actual Gc value, but rather an increase in the internal void volume. This resulted in a lower E-glass
This resulted in a
lower E-glass fiber content, relative to the content specified in the design, and this
fiber content, relative to the content specified in the design, and this was confirmed in the burn-off
was confirmed in
the burn-off measurement results.
measurement results.

16.GcGcdistribution
Figure 16.
Figure distribution
of of specimens
specimens measured
measured by by different
different methods:
methods: (a) design
(a) design Gcwt.%;
Gc 40 40 wt.%;
(b)
(b) design Gc 64
design Gc 64 wt.%. wt.%.

The results of each measurement method may be summarized as follows: the rule calculation
The results of each measurement method may be summarized as follows: the rule calculation
can be used very quickly and efficiently if the ship design and material design are known. However,
can be used very quickly and efficiently if the ship design and material design are known. However,
depending on the manufacturing quality of laminate structures, the errors in the measurements of
depending on the manufacturing quality of laminate structures, the errors in the measurements of
physical properties may increase, and these errors cannot be confirmed. To reduce this error, it is
physical properties may increase, and these errors cannot be confirmed. To reduce this error, it is
reasonable to use the density suggested by the manufacturer or the density measured directly, rather
reasonable to use the density suggested by the manufacturer or the density measured directly, rather
than use the density of the fiber and resin suggested by the rule. In the simple direct measurement,
than use the density of the fiber and resin suggested by the rule. In the simple direct measurement,
the differences in shape between the design and laminate can be easily compared. In particular, it is
the differences in shape between the design and laminate can be easily compared. In particular, it is
easy to identify key errors from the comparisons of laminate thicknesses and weights. Nonetheless, it is
easy to identify key errors from the comparisons of laminate thicknesses and weights. Nonetheless,
preferable to use a device such as a hydrometer to identify apparent quality defects involving the density
it is preferable to use a device such as a hydrometer to identify apparent quality defects involving the
of raw materials or the non-uniformity of the external shape. However, with these methods, the effect
density of raw materials or the non-uniformity of the external shape. However, with these methods,
of internal defects on Gc cannot be identified. Using the burn-off measurement method, suggested
the effect of internal defects on Gc cannot be identified. Using the burn-off measurement method,
in the rules of classification societies, it was possible to measure Gc most accurately, and defects in
suggested in the rules of classification societies, it was possible to measure Gc most accurately, and
laminates, including voids, could also be measured very accurately. However, this method requires
defects in laminates, including voids, could also be measured very accurately. However, this method
specialized knowledge regarding analysis with the equipment used for combustion.
requires specialized knowledge regarding analysis with the equipment used for combustion.
6. Conclusions
6. Conclusions
In this study, the Gc values of two hull plates of composite ships with different glass fiber weight
In this study, the Gc values of two hull plates of composite ships with different glass fiber weight
fractions were measured using rule calculation, simple direct measurement, hydrometer, and burn-off
fractions were measured using rule calculation, simple direct measurement, hydrometer, and burn-
methods, with the aim of identifying the change in fabrication quality resulting from quantitative
off methods, with the aim of identifying the change in fabrication quality resulting from quantitative
changes in Gc. Because laminate structures for hull plates are typically fabricated by mixing two or more
changes in Gc. Because laminate structures for hull plates are typically fabricated by mixing two or
cloths in building yards, large differences can occur between the fabricated laminate structure and the
more cloths in building yards, large differences can occur between the fabricated laminate structure
designed structure. The following conclusions were obtained with these practical measurement tests.
and the designed structure. The following conclusions were obtained with these practical
measurement tests.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 16 of 17

Because the rule calculation suggested by classification societies is based on statistics and long-term
experience, a logical and relatively accurate Gc value can be calculated for laminate structure design.
For more accurate structure determinations, direct measurements using tools such as a hydrometer
are recommended. However, only the combustion method was able to measure both the volume of
internal defects and Gc with high accuracy.
Overall, it is reasonable to conclude that, in the case of a high-performance ship or a ship built
using new materials, it is significantly important to ensure performance by verifying the weight fraction
of glass fibers through the use of an accurate test method such as the burn-off method.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, D.O.; Methodology, D.O.; Funding acquisition, D.O.; Manufacturing,
J.N.; Test and investigation, Z.H. and S.J.; Writing—original draft, Z.H., and S.J.; Writing—review and editing,
D.O. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research
Foundation of Korea (NRF), funded by the Ministry of Education, grant number NRF-2017R1D1A3B03032051;
and the IoT and AI based development of Digital Twin for Block Assembly Process Program of the Korean Ministry
of Trade, Industry and Energy, Republic of Korea, grant number 20006978.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Shenoi, R.A.; Dulieu-Barton, J.M.; Quinn, S.; Blake, J.I.R.; Boyd, S.W. Composite materials for marine
applications: Key challenges for the future. In Composite Materials; Nicolais, L., Meo, M., Milella, E., Eds.;
Springer: London, UK, 2011; pp. 69–89. ISBN 978-0-85729-165-3.
2. Oh, D.K. Marine composites, FRP small craft, and eco-friendliness. The Society of Naval Architects of Korea
Webzine. 2019. Available online: http://www.snak.or.kr/newsletter/webzine/news.html?Item=board21&
mode=view&s_t=1&No=645 (accessed on 15 August 2019).
3. Mouritz, A.P.; Townsend, C.; Shah Khan, M.Z. Non-destructive detection of fatigue damage in thick
composites by pulse-echo ultrasonics. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2000, 60, 23–32. [CrossRef]
4. Pickering, S.J. Recycling technologies for thermoset composite materials-current status. Compos. Part A Appl.
Sci. Manuf. 2006, 37, 1206–1215. [CrossRef]
5. Conroy, A.; Halliwell, S.; Reynolds, T. Composite recycling in the construction industry. Compos. Part A Appl.
Sci. Manuf. 2006, 37, 1216–1222. [CrossRef]
6. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). ISO 12215-5: Small Craft—Hull Construction, and
Scantlings—Part 5: Design Pressures for Monohulls, Design Stresses, Scantlings Determination; ISO: Geneva,
Switzerland, 2019.
7. Song, J.H.; Oh, D.K. Lightweight structure design for composite yacht with optimum fiber mass content.
In Proceedings of the International SAMPE Symposium and Exhibition, Long Beach, CA, USA, 25 May 2016.
8. Jang, J.W.; Han, Z.Q.; Oh, D.K. Light-weight optimum design of laminate structures of a GFRP fishing vessel.
J. Ocean Eng. Technol. 2019, 33, 495–503. [CrossRef]
9. LR (Lloyd’s Register). Rules & Regulations for the Classification of Special Service Crafts; Lloyd’s Register:
London, UK, 2019.
10. RINA (Registro Italiano Navale). Rules for the Classification of Pleasure Yachts. Part B—Hull and Stability; Imago
Media: Genova, Italy, 2019.
11. Oh, D.K.; Han, Z.Q.; Noh, J.K. Study on mechanical properties of CFRP multi-layered composite for ship
structure in change with carbon fiber weight fraction. Ship Ocean Eng. 2019, 48, 85–88. [CrossRef]
12. Kedari, V.; Farah, B.; Hsiao, K.T. Effects of vacuum pressure, inlet pressure, and mold temperature on the
void content, volume fraction of polyester/e-glass fiber composites manufactured with VARTM process.
J. Compos. Mater. 2011, 45, 2727–2742. [CrossRef]
13. Ibrahim, M.E. Nondestructive testing and structural health monitoring of marine composite structures.
In Marine Applications of Advanced Fibre-Reinforced Composites; Graham-Jones, J., Summerscales, J., Eds.;
Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2016; pp. 147–183. ISBN 978-1-78242-250-1.
14. Abdelal, N. Effect of Voids on Delamination Behavior under Static and Fatigue Mode I and Mode II. Ph.D.
Thesis, University of Dayton, Dayton, OH, USA, 2013.
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5130 17 of 17

15. Hakim, I.; Donaldson, S.L.; Meyendorf, N.; Browning, C.E. Porosity effects on interlaminar fracture behavior
in carbon fiber-reinforced polymer composites. Mater. Sci. Appl. 2017, 8, 170–187. [CrossRef]
16. Han, Z.Q.; Jang, J.W.; Noh, J.K.; Oh, D.K. A Study on material properties of FRP laminates for a composite
fishing vessel’s Hull. In Proceedings of the KSPE Spring Conference, Manhattan, KS, USA, 6–8 June 2018;
p. 113.
17. Kim, S.Y.; Shim, C.S.; Sturtevant, C.; Kim, D.; Song, H.C. Mechanical properties and production quality of
hand-layup and vacuum infusion processed hybrid composite materials for GFRP marine structures. Int. J.
Naval Archit. Ocean Eng. 2014, 6, 723–736. [CrossRef]
18. Bowkett, M.; Thanapalan, K. Comparative analysis of failure detection methods of composites materials’
systems. Sys. Sci. Cont. Eng. 2017, 5, 168–177. [CrossRef]
19. Kastner, J.; Plank, B.; Salaberger, D.; Sekelja, J. Defect and Porosity Determination of Fibre Reinforced
Polymers by X-ray Computed Tomography. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on NDT in
Aerospace 2010-We.1.A.2, Hamburg, Germany, 22–24 November 2010.
20. ASTM D792-13. Standard Test Methods for Density and Specific Gravity (Relative Density) of Plastics by Displacement;
ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2013. [CrossRef]
21. ISO (International Organization for Standardization), ISO 1172. Textile-Glass-Reinforced Plastics-Prepregs,
Moulding Compounds, and Laminates-Determination of the Textile-Glass and Mineral-Filler Content-Calcination
Methods; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1996.
22. ASTM D3171-15. Test Methods for Constituent Content of Composite Materials; ASTM International:
West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2015. [CrossRef]
23. He, H.W.; Huang, W.; Gao, F. Comparison of four methods for determining fiber content of carbon fiber/epoxy
composites. Int. J. Polym. Anal. Charact. 2016, 21, 251–258. [CrossRef]
24. McDonough, W.; Dunkers, J.; Flynn, K.; Hunston, D. A test method to determine the fiber and void contents
of carbon/glass hybrid composites. J. ASTM Int. 2004, 1, 1–15. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).