2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.cplett.2020.137830
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the elastic properties of single-walled phagraphene nanotubes

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Y Mod (estimated up to ϵC 5 %) and σ US (measured at critical strain) values for (0,3)/(7,0) PopNTs are 845.12GPa/842.14GPa and 150.00GPa /129.42GPa , respectively. Those Y mod and σ US values are similar to the ones reported for conventional armchair and zigzag CNTs, and also Phagraphene tubes (PhaNTs) using the same methodology, [18,34] being however significantly higher than values found for Graphyne tubes (GyNTs) [34] . For instance, the average of Y mod values found for α ‐GyNTs is ten times smaller while Y mod values found for γ ‐GyNTs are about half of the values found for PopNTs.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The Y Mod (estimated up to ϵC 5 %) and σ US (measured at critical strain) values for (0,3)/(7,0) PopNTs are 845.12GPa/842.14GPa and 150.00GPa /129.42GPa , respectively. Those Y mod and σ US values are similar to the ones reported for conventional armchair and zigzag CNTs, and also Phagraphene tubes (PhaNTs) using the same methodology, [18,34] being however significantly higher than values found for Graphyne tubes (GyNTs) [34] . For instance, the average of Y mod values found for α ‐GyNTs is ten times smaller while Y mod values found for γ ‐GyNTs are about half of the values found for PopNTs.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 81%
“…At this point, it is worth to mention that our results for (n,0) PopNTs suggest that they behave similarly to γ ‐GyNTs concerning the observed smaller resilience (low critical strain values). However, the (0,n) PopNTs have their flexibility compared with PhaNTs (ϵz=0.21 ), and even a slightly high resilience than conventional CNTs (ϵz=0.14-0.17 ) and (n,n) α ‐GyNTs (ϵz=0.18 ), but still low resilience when compared to (n,0) α ‐GyNTs (ϵz=0.25 ) [18,34] …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[34,35] Both carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and phagraphene nanotubes (PhaNTs) exhibit similar brittle fracture mechanisms between 15% to 20% of fractural strains. [36] Electronically driven optical properties of B-and N-doped CNTs are reviewed and novel properties are summarized, accordingly in ref. [37].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, as carbon nanotubes are generated rolling up graphene sheets, popgraphene nanotubes (PopNT) can be generated in the same way and are the subject of the present work. Indeed, many nanotubes based on 2D carbon structures were already proposed, such as graphynes [3], penta-graphene [14,15,16,17] and phagraphene [18]. To the best of our knowledge, a comprehensive study on the mechanical properties of PopNTs was not reported so far.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%