Carbon Fibers

Paul J. Walsh, Zoltek Corporation

CARBON FIBERS, after a 40 year period of
development and use in specialized applications,
are now on the brink of broad commercializa-
tion. Their use is growing rapidly, fueled by sig-
nicant price reductions during the 1990s and
increasing availability. Changes in the perfor-
mance/price ratio have resulted in the increased
penetration of composites into applications for-
merly held by metals and has enabled their use
in other applications previously not possible
with existing materials. Additionally, market
conditions increasingly favor designs for com-
mercial products that are lighter, stronger, faster,
and more fuel efcientdesigns that are possi-
ble with carbon bers. No longer relegated to
aerospace, carbon ber composites are now be-
ing adopted in elds such as automotive, civil
infrastructure, offshore oil, and paper produc-
tion.
History
The earliest commercial use of carbon bers
is often attributed to Thomas Edisons carboni-
zation of cotton and bamboo bers for incandes-
cent lamp laments (Ref 1). However, practical
commercial use of carbon bers for reinforce-
ment applications began in the late 1950s with
the pursuit of improved ablative materials for
rockets (Ref 2). Union Carbide marketed a car-
bonized rayon based fabric in the early 1960s
(Ref 3). DuPonts work with black Orlon in
the late 1950s showed that acrylics could be ther-
mally stabilized, while Shindo in Japan and Watt
et al. in the United Kingdom demonstrated that,
by using tension through the carbonization pro-
cess, high mechanical properties could be real-
ized (Ref 4).
Activity increased rapidly during the 1960s
and 1970s to improve the performance/price ra-
tio of carbon bers. Much of this effort focused
on evaluation of various precursors, since carbon
ber can be made from almost anything that
yields a quality char upon pyrolysis. Donnet and
Bansal (Ref 5) present a good overview of vari-
ous researchers efforts to evaluate different pre-
cursors, including PAN (polyacrylonitrile),
pitch, rayon, phenol, lignin, imides, amides, vi-
nyl polymers, and various naturally occurring
cellulosic materials.
Overall carbon ber demand grew to approx-
imately 1000 metric tons by 1980, fueled pri-
marily by the aerospace industry, with the sport-
ing goods industry taking some excess capacity
and off-specication ber. Polyacrylonitrile-
based carbon ber usage had exceeded all other
precursors at that time. This was a surprise to
some, since the anticipation in the late 1970s had
been that the signicantly lower raw material
price and higher char yield of pitch would result
in the winning combination. However, higher
processing costs are required to make a spinna-
ble pitch, so better overall properties for PAN
bers resulted in their dominance. Rayon was
relegated to third place, despite having a lower
rawmaterial cost, because inferior properties and
a low char yield (20 to 25%) after carbonization
made for a higher overall cost. Properties can be
improved by stress graphitization at high tem-
peratures, but this increases cost further, making
the ber even less desirable. Rayon is still used
today for insulating and ablative applications but
not for structural applications.
By the mid-1990s, a new cost-effective, PAN-
based carbon ber made from a modied textile
precursor was being aggressively promoted by
companies like Zoltek and Fortal for commer-
cial applications. In 1995, one manufacturer an-
nounced the goal of reaching a price level of $5/
lb ($11/kg) by the year 2000, which brought alot
of attention to and greatly accelerated applica-
tion development (Ref 6). An overall trend of
improved performance/price ratio for both pitch
and PAN ber manufacturers has sustained this
growth.
Carbon ber demand has grown to an esti-
mated 16 10
6
kg (35 10
6
lb) per year (Ref
7). Usage in 1997 was estimated at 30% aero-
space, 30% sporting goods, and 30% commer-
cial/industrial applications, with the industrial
applications poised for the greatest growth
(Ref 8).
Manufacture of Carbon Fibers
Precursor sources used, in order of volume,
are PAN, pitch, and rayon. Although the specic
processing details for each precursor is different,
all follow a basic sequence involving spinning,
stabilization, carbonization, and application of a
nish or sizing to facilitate handling, as shown
in Fig. 1. Discontinuous carbon ber whiskers
are also now produced in a batch process from
Fig. 1
The processing sequence for polyacrylonitrile (PAN) and mesophase-pitch-based precursor bers shows the
similarities for the two processes. Highly oriented polymer chains are obtained in PAN by hot stretching, while
high orientation in pitch is a natural consequence of the mesophase (liquid crystalline) order.
This article is from ASM Handbook, Volume 21, Composites

Copyright ASM International, 2001

It is reproduced by permission of ASM International,

www.asminternational.org. All rights reserved.
Additional information about ASM Handbook, Volume 21
is available at www.asminternational.org
36 / Constituent Materials
hydrocarbon gases using a vapor-liquid-solid
growth mechanism.
PAN-based Carbon Fibers. The majority of
all carbon bers used today are made from PAN
precursor, which is a form of acrylic ber. Pre-
cursor manufacture is accomplished by spinning
the PAN polymer into laments using variants
of standard textile ber manufacturing pro-
cesses. The PAN bers are white in color, with
a density of approximately 1.17 g/cm
3
(0.042 lb/
in
3
) and a molecular structure comprised of ori-
ented, long chain molecules. Stabilization in-
volves stretching and heating the PAN bers to
approximately 200 to 300 C (390 to 570 F) in
an oxygen-containing atmosphere to further ori-
ent and then crosslink the molecules, such that
they can survive higher-temperature pyrolysis
without decomposing. Stretching after spinning
and during stabilization helps develop the highly
oriented molecular structure that allows devel-
opment of a high tensile modulus and improved
tensile strength upon subsequent heat treat-
ment.
Carbonization of standard and intermediate
modulus ber typically involves pyrolyzing the
bers to temperatures ranging from1000 to 1500
C (1800 to 2700 F) in an inert atmosphere, typ-
ically to a 95% carbon content. An additional
high heat treatment step is included just after car-
bonization for some very high-modulus bers.
During carbonization, the bers shrink in diam-
eter and lose approximately 50% in weight. Re-
straint on longitudinal shrinkage helps develop
additional molecular orientation, further increas-
ing mechanical properties.
After carbonization, the bers may be run
through a surface treatment step designed to
clean and attach functional groups to the ber
surface, which increases bond strength with ma-
trix resins. Most manufacturers use an electro-
lytic oxidation process that creates carboxyl, car-
bonyl, and hydroxyl groups on the surface for
enhanced bonding. A sizing or nish is then ap-
plied to minimize handling damage during
spooling and enhance bonding with matrix res-
ins. The ber is then spooled.
Today, there is differentiation among manu-
facturers between those who use a modied tex-
tile-type PAN precursor and those who use an
aerospace-type precursor. The textile-type pre-
cursor is made on a very large scale in modied-
acrylic textile ber plants in tows or rovings con-
sisting of 200,000 laments. The tows are then
split down into smaller bundles (approximately
48,000 laments) after carbonization for spool-
ing. Aerospace precursor is made in smaller spe-
cialty plants and processed in 3000 (3K) to 12K
lament tows that can be assembled into 24K or
larger tows after carbonization. Manufacturing
cost is lower for the textile-type precursor, due
to higher line throughputs, larger economies-of-
scale, and less handling of smaller tow bundles.
This type ber is more targeted for industrial ap-
plications. The aerospace-type precursor, be-
cause it is processed in smaller tow sizes, is less
fuzzy and available in the small tow sizes fa-
vored by the aerospace industry, for whom it was
originally developed. Physical properties can be
similar for both types.
Pitch-Based Fibers. Pitch is a complex mix-
ture of aromatic hydrocarbons and can be made
from petroleum, coal tar, asphalt, or PVC (Ref
9). Starting raw material selection is important
to the nal ber properties. Pitches must be pro-
cessed through a pre-treatment step to obtain the
desired viscosity and molecular weight in prep-
aration for making high-performance carbon -
bers. The pre-processed pitch contains meso-
phase, a term for a disk-like liquid crystal phase
(Ref 10) that develops regions of long-term or-
dered molecules favorable to manufacture of
high-performance bers. Without this step, the
result is an isotropic carbon ber with low
strength and low modulus of less than 50 GPa
(7 10
6
psi) (Ref 11). Process details of the
nal composition and method of spinning me-
sophase pitch are generally held secret by the
manufacturers.
Once spun, the stabilization, carbonization,
surface treatment, application of sizing, and
spooling of pitch-based bers follows a se-
quence similar to the manufacture of PAN-based
bers, as shown in Fig. 1. Actual process param-
eters, such as temperatures, ramp rates, and time
at temperature for stretch and stabilization, are
different for pitch than for PAN. Gas species
evolved during pyrolysis and their onset of evo-
lution are very different for PAN and pitch. The
response to heat treatment is also greater for me-
sophase-pitch-based bers at higher tempera-
tures, a consequence of their more ordered start-
ing molecular structure. For example, a
mesophase-pitch-derived ber processed to the
same temperature as a PAN ber will exhibit
higher density and thermal and electrical con-
ductivity, all else being equal.
Other Precursors. Rayon is processed in
similar fashion to PAN, as shown in Fig. 1; the
difference is the actual process parameters used.
Carbon ber whiskers can be formed from
gas-phase pyrolysis via catalyzed cracking of hy-
drocarbon gases like methane. One process in-
volves growth of a thin carbon tube of 10 to 50
nm from a submicron iron particle in a hydro-
carbon-rich atmosphere, followed by a second-
ary process of thickening the tube by chemical
vapor deposition of carbon on the surface (Ref
12). Others have discussed similar processes,
some capable of longer length bers (Ref 13).
Although only discontinuous bers are fabri-
cated, they have unique properties approaching
those of single crystal graphite in some cases.
Available Formats for Fibers. Commercially
available carbon bers are produced by a mul-
titude of manufacturers with a wide range of
properties and tow sizes. Carbon bers are avail-
able in many of the same formats as glass ber.
These formats include continuous lament-
spooled ber, milled ber, chopped ber, woven
fabrics, felts, veils, and chopped ber mattes.
Most ber today is spooled, and then processed
into other formats in secondary operations. The
size of the carbon ber tow bundle can range
from 1000 laments (1K) to more than 200K.
Generally, aerospace carbon bers are available
in bundles of 3K, 6K, 12K, and 24K laments,
while most commercial-grade bers are avail-
able in 48K or larger lament counts. Composite
fabrication equipment, such as lament winders
and weaving machines, must be adapted to han-
dle the larger cross section of commercial grade
ber.
Properties and Characteristics of
Carbon Fibers
Composites made from carbon ber are ve
times stronger than grade 1020 steel for struc-
tural parts, yet are still ve times lighter. In com-
parison to 6061 aluminum, carbon ber com-
posites are seven times stronger and two times
stiffer, yet 1.5 times lighter. Carbon ber com-
posites have fatigue properties superior to all
known metals, and, when coupled with the
proper resins, carbon ber composites are one of
the most corrosion resistant materials available.
Certain mesophase-pitch-based carbon bers
possess thermal conductivity three times greater
than copper. The electrical conductivity of PAN
and pitch-based carbon bers is used to dissipate
static electricity in a wide variety of computer-
related products. They do not melt or soften with
heat, allowing them to be used in such high tem-
perature applications as rocket nozzles and air-
craft brakes. In fact, their strength actually in-
creases with temperature in non-oxidizing
atmospheres. These unique properties are the re-
sult of the ber microstructure, in both the axial
and transverse directions.
Axial Structure. Envision a single carbon l-
ament as a long cylinder with a diameter of ap-
proximately 7 lm. Packed within this cylinder
are tiny undulating ribbon-like crystallites which
are intertwined and oriented more or less parallel
to the axis of the cylinder (Ref 1416). The
length and straightness of these crystallite rib-
bons determines the modulus of the ber. A
model of the axial structure of a PAN-based car-
bon ber is shown in Fig. 2.
On a ner scale, each ribbon-like crystallite is
comprised of multiple wrinkled layers. Each
layer is made of carbon atoms arranged like
chicken wire in a hexagonal structure character-
istic of graphite, called a graphene plane. Strong
covalent C-C bonds within the layer plane give
the potential for high strength and stiffness.
Weak van der Waals bonding between the layer
planes gives rise to poor shear resistance, but
also allows thermal and electrical conductivity.
Loose electrons and thermal energy in the form
of phonons take advantage of the weak bonding
between layer planes and use the inter-plane
space as a corridor to travel. The width of the
ribbons, the number of graphene layers compris-
ing their thickness, and the length of the ribbons
help determine the electrical and thermal char-
acteristics of the carbon ber, as well as contrib-
ute to ber modulus. Typically, larger and more
oriented graphene planes result in higher thermal
and electrical conductivity.
Carbon Fibers / 37
Fig. 3
The preferred orientation of the graphene planes
is determined by the heat treatment temperature
and the precursor type. Source: Ref 14, 18
Fig. 2
The undulating ribbon structure of the graphene
layers for a PAN-based carbon ber with a 400
GPa (600 10
6
psi) modulus. The ribbons at the surface
have lower amplitude than in the core. There are about 20
graphene layers in the ribbons in the core and about 30
near the surface.
Fig. 5
A 400-GPa (60 10
6
psi) modulus PAN-based
ber. Source: Ref 26
Fig. 4
The modulus of a carbon ber is determined by
the preferred orientation, microstructure, and
elastic constants. The relationship between modulus and
preferred orientation for a pitch-based carbon ber is
shown.
Improving the orientation of the microstruc-
ture can also increase lament tensile modulus,
thermal conductivity, electrical conductivity, and
density. This can be accomplished by plastic de-
formation (for example, stretching the ber) and/
or heat treatment. Figure 3 shows x-ray diffrac-
tion results relating heat treatment temperature
to the degree of preferred orientation of the mi-
crostructure (Ref 17, 18). The degree of pre-
ferred orientation represents the average angle at
which the crystallites lie relative to the ber axis;
a zero degree angle means that the crystallites
are perfectly aligned with the ber axis. Trans-
mission electron microscopy shows that the rib-
bons undulate, such that their amplitude is
greater than their wavelength. Any reported
measurement of preferred orientation is therefore
only an average. The data clearly shows im-
proved orientation with increasing heat treat-
ment temperature. Figure 3 also shows that for
heat treatment temperatures above 1600 C
(2900 F) the mesophase pitch-based ber will
orient more than the PAN ber, a result of larger
crystallite sizes that PAN precursors are not able
to achieve. The relationship between preferred
orientation of the microstructure and modulus is
illustrated in Fig. 4. Increased orientation results
in increased ber modulus, as expected.
Increases in ber tensile modulus can also be
obtained by stretching the ber during stabili-
zation and carbonization. In this case, mechani-
cal rather than thermal energy provides the im-
petus for molecular realignment.
Transverse Structure. While axial orienta-
tion determines modulus, ber strength is deter-
mined by the number and size of aws and by
the transverse and axial orientation. A variety of
transverse textures are possible (Ref 19), includ-
ing a common one described as onion skin. In
this structure, the graphene layer planes at the
ber surface align like the layers of an onion. In
the center core region of the ber, the layers are
randomly oriented. Most of the microstructural
pores and aws are found in either the transition
from the skin to the random core region, or in
the core region; aws resulting from damage in-
duced during precursor or carbon ber process-
ing are observed on the surface. Some pitch -
bers have very large graphene layers in a at
orientation reminiscent of the old Pan-Am Air-
lines insignia. Some of the ultra-high modulus
bers 900 GPa (130 10
6
psi) have a radial
structure like the spokes of a wheel.
Unlike the axial structure, the radial structure
of the carbon lament depends upon precursor
type and processing (Ref 2024).
Flaw size and aw density reduce the strength
of a carbon ber. However, because the ber is
bundled with thousands or millions of other -
bers in a composite, the strength is an average
effect. Fiber manufacturers control the strength
of the overall ber bundle through rigorous pro-
cess control.
Effect of Structure on Properties. Fibers
made from PAN precursors generally exhibit
higher tensile and compressive strength, higher
strain at failure, and lower modulus as compared
to mesophase-pitch-based bers. The structure
of PAN-based carbon bers leads to a good bal-
ance in properties and is responsible for their
dominance in structural applications. Relatively
good layer alignment and small crystallite stack
heights minimize interlayer shear failure, which
improves compressive strengths while maintain-
ing good tensile strength (Ref 25). A model of a
400 GPa (58 10
6
psi) PAN-based carbon ber
is shown in Fig. 5 (Ref 26).
PAN bers used to be categorized into stan-
dard modulus, intermediate, and high modulus.
New offerings by ber producers have blurred
these categories somewhat. The differences be-
tween the three categories for bers made from
a particular precursor are due to combinations of
mechanical stretching, heat treatment, and/or
precursor spinning. Distinctions are also made
between aerospace and commercial-grade car-
bon bers. The difference relates to the type of
precursor used; commercial grades use a lower
cost, modied textile-type PAN. Polyacryloni-
trile chemistry is similar between the two, and
differences relate more to processing. General-
ized properties for PAN-based bers are pre-
sented in Table 1.
Larger crystallite size and greater orientation
of mesophase-pitch-based bers give them su-
perior modulus, thermal conductivity, and lower
thermal expansion characteristics as compared to
PAN-based bers. Satellite applications make
extensive use of pitch-based bers and take ad-
vantage of all three properties. Table 2 lists gen-
eral properties of mesophase-pitch-based bers.
One of the most benecial properties of all
carbon bers is their superior fatigue resistance
in composites. Unlike glass or aramid bers, car-
bon bers do not suffer from stress rupture, and
demonstrate complete elastic recovery upon un-
loading (Ref 2729). Creep is not observed in
carbon bers at temperatures below 2200 C
(3990 F) (Ref 30).
The carbon content of low-modulus carbon -
bers is less than 99%, largely because of retained
nitrogen (Ref 31). Increasing carbon contents
38 / Constituent Materials
Table 1 Properties of PAN-based carbon bers
Commercial,
Aerospace
Property standard modulus Standard modulus Intermediate modulus High modulus
Tensile modulus, GPa (10
6
psi) 228 (33) 220241 (3235) 290297 (4243) 345448 (5065)
Tensile strength, MPa (ksi) 380 (550) 34504830 (500700) 34506200 (600900) 34505520 (600800)
Elongation at break, % 1.6 1.52.2 1.32.0 0.71.0
Electrical resistivity, lX cm 1650 1650 1450 900
Thermal conductivity, W/m K
(Btu/ft h F)
20 (11.6) 20 (11.6) 20 (11.6) 5080 (2946)
Coefcient of thermal expansion,
axial direction, 10
6
K
0.4 0.4 0.55 0.75
Density, g/cm
3
(lb/in.
3
) 1.8 (0.065) 1.8 (0.065) 1.8 (0.065) 1.9 (0.069)
Carbon content, % 95 95 95 99
Filament diameter, lm 68 68 56 58
Manufacturers Zoltek, Fortal, SGL BPAmoco, Hexcel, Mitsubishi Rayon, Toho, Toray, Tenax, Socar, Formosa
and densities are achieved through higher heat
treatment temperature, which removes nitrogen
and provides greater crystalline perfection.
Electrical and thermal conductivity also in-
crease with increasing crystalline perfection and
purity (Ref 32). The electrical conductivity of
carbon bers must be taken into account when
processing, since free-oating bers can short
out electrical equipment. Dust-proof, gasketed
NEMA 12 enclosures (as specied by the Na-
tional Electrical Manufacturers Association) are
recommended for electrical cabinets, as are cov-
ers over electrical outlets (Ref 33).
Room temperature coefcients of thermal ex-
pansion (CTE) in the axial direction are slightly
negative for low modulus carbon bers, and
grow increasingly negative for the higher mod-
ulus bers. At temperatures above 700 C (1290
F), the axial CTE of all bers turns positive (Ref
34). Composite designers are able to couple the
negative CTE of high modulus bers with ap-
propriate matrix materials to make composites
with a CTE of zero over limited temperature
ranges.
Interfacial Bonding. Resins and molten met-
als do not easily wet carbon bers, due to the
relatively inert, non-polar ber surface. Glass -
bers depend upon coupling agents to chemically
bond with resins; carbon bers never achieve
strong bonds. Instead, carbon ber depends upon
a combination of mechanical and weak chemical
bonding with the matrix material. Surface treat-
ments used by carbon ber manufacturers pop-
ulate the ber surface with active chemical
groups such as hydroxyls, carboxyls, and car-
bonyls (Ref 35). These form bridges between the
ber and resin, and depend upon the number of
bonds rather than the strength of the bonds to
achieve a strong interface.
Reactivity with Other Compounds. As an
inorganic material, carbon bers are not affected
by moisture, atmosphere, solvents, bases, and
weak acids at room temperature (Ref 36). How-
ever, oxidation becomes a problem at elevated
temperatures. For low-modulus PAN-based -
bers and high-modulus PAN- or pitch-based -
bers, the threshold for oxidation for extended op-
erating times is 350 C (660 F) or 450 C (840
F), respectively (Ref 37). Impurities tend to cat-
alyze oxidation at these low temperatures and
somewhat improved oxidation resistance can be
expected with higher-purity bers (Ref 38).
Typical Applications of
Carbon Fibers
Carbon ber usage is growing in a variety of
applications, including aerospace, sporting
goods, and a variety of commercial/industrial ap-
plications. Growth is fastest in the commercial/
industrial applications. In many instances, car-
bon composites have displaced metal parts,
despite being more expensive on a direct-re-
placement purchased cost basis. Where success-
ful, carbon composites have lowered total sys-
tem costs through reduced maintenance, faster
processing speeds, and improved reliability.
Many new uses under development are enabling,
meaning applications that were not practical with
metal or other materials are now possible with
carbon composites.
Aerospace. Perhaps nowhere is the need to
save weight greater than in the aerospace indus-
try. Early growth of the carbon ber industry was
driven almost exclusively by the desire for
higher performance aircraft made possible with
carbon ber composites. Today, carbon ber is
used on aircraft for primary and secondary struc-
tures. Use is growing, having already established
a strong track record in primary structures on
military aircraft. All of these applications use
carbon ber for its high specic strength and
specic stiffness. Fiber formats used include pre-
preg for layup processes and fabrics for resin
transfer molding and similar processes.
Satellites incorporate very high modulus
pitch-based carbon bers, partly for the high
stiffness-to-weight ratios and partly for their
negative axial coefcient of thermal expansion.
Sporting Goods. Golf club shafts are pres-
ently the largest sporting goods application for
carbon bers. Lighter weight and higher stiffness
shafts, made possible with carbon ber, allow
club manufacturers to place more weight in the
clubhead, which increases club head speed for
improved distance. Most golf shaft manufactur-
ing today is done with unidirectional prepregged
sheets of carbon ber in a roll wrapping opera-
tion. Some shafts are lament wound.
Carbon ber shing rods are favored by sh-
erman for their lightweight and sensitive touch.
The rods are manufactured via a roll-wrapping
process similar to golf shafts, using unidirec-
tional prepreg. Most racquets for tennis, rac-
quetball, and squash are made from prepregged
carbon ber that is sheeted, wrapped around a
bladder, and cured. Carbon composite arrows are
fabricated by either of two processes: pultrusion
or roll wrapping. Skis and bicycle components
tend to use fabrics made from carbon ber.
Commercial and Industrial Applications.
Large volumes of milled and chopped carbon -
ber are used to impart static dissipating proper-
ties to trays for processing semiconductors, and
for computer printer and copier machine parts.
Parts are injection molded from thermoplastics
that have been pre-blended with carbon ber in
a compounding extruder. The carbon ber is
used for its electrical conductivity and ability to
Table 2 Properties of mesophase pitch-based carbon bers
Property Low modulus High modulus Ultra-high modulus
Tensile modulus, GPa (10
6
psi) 170241 (2535) 380620 (5590) 690965 (100140)
Tensile strength, MPa (ksi) 13803100 (200450) 19002750 (275400) 2410 (350)
Elongation at break, % 0.9 0.5 0.40.27
Electrical resistivity, lX cm 1300 900 220130
Thermal conductivity, W/m K
(Btu/ft h F)
. . . . . . 4001100 (230635)
Coefcient of thermal expansion in
axial direction, 10
6
K
. . . 0.9 1.6
Density, g/cm
3
(lb/in.
3
) 1.9 (0.069) 2.0 (0.072) 2.2 (0.079)
Carbon content, % 97 99 99
Filament diameter, lm 11 11 10
Manufacturers BPAmoco, Mitsubishi Kasei BPAmoco
Carbon Fibers / 39
provide lightweight reinforcement to thermo-
plastics.
Carbon ber drive shafts and couplings have
replaced steel shafts for cooling towers and
many other torque-transmitting applications.
Properties that favor carbon composites include
corrosion resistance, light weight, and high stiff-
ness, which reduces vibration. Filament winding
processes are used to fabricate the shafts and in-
corporate ber into various angles tailored for
the torque and vibrational characteristics re-
quired of the application.
The desire for faster processing in the paper-
making and lm casting industry has encouraged
growth of carbon composite rollers, which spin
faster and have less deection than steel rollers.
Roller diameters up to one meter are now rou-
tinely fabricated with carbon bers on automated
lament winding machines.
Speed and precision are also drivers for weav-
ing machine components, such as rapiers, that
are made from pultruded carbon composite
shapes.
Injection of liquids into oil wells to stimulate
production is currently being performed with
spoolable carbon composite pipe. The pipe is
made in a continuous process whereby a ther-
moplastic liner is pulled through multiple sets of
rotating creels containing carbon ber spools.
The ber is wetted with resin and wrapped onto
the liner, which serves as the mandrel. The tube
is cured in-line, and spooled at the other end.
Although spoolable carbon composite pipe is
more expensive than spoolable steel pipe, its us-
age is increasing because of superior fatigue per-
formance, which results in improved reliability.
Stress corrosion during unspooling and respool-
ing is responsible for premature failure of steel
spoolable pipe.
Depletion of shallow water oil elds and the
move into deeper water has raised oil company
interest in carbon composites. Development pro-
grams are underway to moor large oil platforms
to the ocean bottom via tethers constructed from
pultruded carbon ber rods. Carbon ber tethers
are the leading contender for use in water depths
beyond 1500 m (5000 ft); this shift is based on
its lightweight and high stiffness, which mini-
mize the natural frequency of the platform due
to wave motion. Steel tethers used in shallower
depths are impractical in deeper water, because
they cannot support their own weight hanging
from the platform.
Pultrusion companies that are eyeing the
tether application are also pursuing carbon com-
posite tendons for pre- and poststressing of pre-
cast concrete. Unlike glass ber, carbon com-
posite rods are inert to alkaline attack and
corrosion and satisfy the increased useful life re-
quirement imposed by many municipalities for
infrastructure projects. Another pultrusion appli-
cation, carbon composite rebar, is being devel-
oped for use along the waterfront to combat the
high costs of corrosion induced structural dam-
age.
Seismic retrotting of bridge columns and
walls has been extensively performed in Japan
with sheets of carbon ber wallpaper or fabrics
that are saturated with resin and applied to the
concrete structure. The high stiffness of the car-
bon minimizes movement of the concrete and the
inertness to corrosion insures long term protec-
tion.
The electrical properties of carbon ber and
the ability to congure the material into a semi-
permeable membrane with dened mass trans-
port properties make carbon the material of
choice as the electrode in polymer electrolyte
fuel cells to power next generation engines.
Anticipated Developments in
Carbon Fibers
Much of the effort expended for carbon bers
today is directed at cost reduction. It appears that
the prospects for cost reduction have stimulated
interest in many new applications. Certainly, as
prices come down, opportunities for new appli-
cations grow.
Future funding and technology development
for carbon bers will most likely be directed to-
wards application development, a trend experi-
enced in the glass ber industry. Areas of op-
portunity include lowering cost and improving
speed of manufacturing processes.
Education and familiarity with composite ma-
terials are increasing, but are still well belowthat
of metals. We can expect the demand for carbon
bers to grow in large steps as more engineers
learn how to design with carbon bers.
Property standardization is another expected
trend. Glass ber is easy for a designer to design
with, since E-glass and S-glass are standards by
which many suppliers produce. Carbon ber
suppliers have many grades to choose from, with
little commonality among producers. As large
applications for carbon ber develop, customers
will demand standardization among carbon ber
producers.
REFERENCES
1. T. Edison, U.S. Patent 223,898, 1880
2. R. Bacon and M.M. Tang, Carbonization of
Cellulose Fibers I, Carbon, Vol 2, 1964, p
211
3. R. Bacon and C.T. Moses, High-Perfor-
mance PolymersTheir Origin and Devel-
opment, R.B. Seymour and G.S. Kirshen-
baum, Ed., Elseveir, 1986, p 341
4. W. Schimpf, Advanced Fiber Technologies,
personal communication, 2000
5. J.B. Donnet and R.C. Bansal, Carbon Fi-
bers, 2nd ed., Marcel Dekker, 1990
6. Zoltek Corporation 1994 Annual Report,
St. Louis, 1995
7. Zoltek Corporation, unpublished data, 2000
8. K. Shariq, E. Anderson, and M. Yamaki,
Carbon Fibers, Chemical Economics
Handbook Market Research Report, SRI In-
ternational, Menlo Park, CA, July 1999
9. J.B. Donnet and R.C. Bansal, Carbon Fi-
bers, 2nd ed., Marcel Dekker, 1990, p 55
10. J.D. Brooks and G.H. Taylor, The Formation
of Graphitizing Carbons from the Liquid
Phase, Carbon, Vol 3, 1965, p 185193
11. R.P. Krock, D. Carolos, and D.C. Boyer,
Versatility of Short Pitch-Based Carbon Fi-
bers in Cost Efcient Composites, 42nd
Conf. of Composites Institute, SPI, Feb 1987
12. A. Oberlin, M. Endo, and T. Koyama, Fil-
amentous Growth of Carbon Through Ben-
zene Decomposition, J. Cryst. Growth, Vol
32, 1976, p 335
13. G.G. Tibbetts, Carbon Fiber Filaments and
Composites, J.L. Figueiredo et al. Ed., Klu-
wer Academic Publishers, 1990, p 7394
14. G.D. DAbate and R.J. Diefendorf, The Ef-
fect of Heat on the Structure and Properties
of Mesophase Precursor Carbon Fibers,
Proc. of the 17th Biennial Conf. on Carbon,
American Carbon Society, 1985, p 390
15. R. Perret and W. Ruland, The Microstruc-
ture of PAN-Based Carbon Fibers, J. Appl.
Crystallogr., Vol 3, 1970, p 525
16. S.C. Bennett and D.J. Johnson, Structural
Characterization of a High Modulus Carbon
Fibre by High-Resolution Electron Micros-
copy and Electron Diffraction, Carbon, Vol
14, 1976, p 177
17. G.D. DAbate and R.J. Diefendorf, The Ef-
fect of Heat on the Structure and Properties
of Mesopause Precursor Carbon Fibers,
Proc. of the 17th Biennial Conf. on Carbon,
American Carbon Society, 1985
18. C.W. LeMaistre and R.J. Diefendorf, The
Origin of Structure in Carbonized PAN Fi-
bers, SAMPE Q., Vol 4, 1973, p 1
19. D.D. Edie and E.G. Soner, Carbon-Carbon
Materials and Composites, J.D. Buckley
and D.D. Edie, Ed., Noyes Publications,
1993, p 50
20. C.W. LeMaistre and R.J. Diefendorf, The
Origin of Structure in Carbonized PAN Fi-
bers, SAMPE Q., Vol 4, 1973
21. R.J. Diefendorf and E.W. Tokarsky, The
Relationships of Structure to Properties in
Graphite Fibers, Part I, AFML-TR-72-133,
Air Force Materials Laboratory, 1971
22. R.J. Diefendorf and E.W. Tokarsky, The
Relationships of Structure to Properties in
Graphite Fibers, Part II, AFML-TR-72-
133, Air Force Materials Laboratory, 1973
23. R.J. Diefendorf and E.W. Tokarsky, The
Relationships of Structure to Properties in
Graphite Fibers, Part III, AFML-TR-72-
133, Air Force Materials Laboratory, 1975
24. R.J. Diefendorf and E.W. Tokarsky, The
Relationships of Structure to Properties in
Graphite Fibers, Part IV, AFML-TR-72-
133, Air Force Materials Laboratory, 1975
25. L. Singer, Overview of Carbon Fiber Tech-
nology, Material Technology Center News-
letter, Southern Illinois Univ. at Carbondale,
Spring 1994
26. E.W. Tokarsky and R.J. Diefendorf, High
Performance Carbon Fibers, Polym. Eng.
Sci., Vol 15 (No. 3), 1975, p 150
27. R.J. Diefendorf, Clemson University, un-
published data
40 / Constituent Materials
28. J. Awerback and H.T. Hahn, Fatigue and
Proof Testing of Unidirectional Graphite/
Epoxy Composites, Fatigue of Filamentary
Composite Materials, STP 636, Am. Soc. for
Testing and Materials, 1977, p 248
29. T.T. Chiao, C.C. Chiao, and R.J. Sherry,
Lifetimes of Fiber composites Under Sus-
tained Tensile Loading, Proceedings of the
1977 Int. Conf. on Fracture Mechanics and
Technology, 1977
30. L.A. Feldman, High Temperature Creep Ef-
fects in Carbon Yarns and Composites, Pro-
ceedings of the 17th Biennial Conference on
Carbon, American Carbon Society, 1985, p
393
31. R.J. Diefendorf, Carbon/Graphite Fibers,
Composites, Vol 1, Engineered Materials
Handbook, ASM International, 1987, p
51
32. A.A. Bright and L.S. Singer, Electronic
and Structural Characteristics of Carbon
Fibers from Mesophase Pitch, Proceedings
of the 13th Biennial Conference on Car-
bon, American Carbon Society, 1977, p
100
33. Zoltek Corporation, technical bulletin, St.
Louis, MO, 1999
34. R. J. Diefendorf, Carbon/Graphite Fibers,
Composites, Vol 1, Engineered Materials
Handbook, ASM International, 1987, p 52
35. W. Schimpf, Advanced Fiber Technologies,
person communication, 2000
36. N.C.W. Judd, The Chemical Resistance of
Carbon Fibers and a Carbon Fibre/Polyester
Composite, Proceedings of the First Int.
Conf. on Carbon Fibers, Plastics Institute,
1971, p 258
37. D.W. McKee and V.J. Memeault, Surface
Properties of Carbon Fibers, Chemistry and
Physics of Carbon, Vol 17, Marcel Dekker,
1981, p 1
38. D.W. McKee and V.J. Memeault, Surface
Properties of Carbon Fibers, Chemistry and
Physics of Carbon, Vol 17, Marcel Dekker,
1981, p 1