2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.11.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The mechanics of reinforcement of polymers by graphene nanoplatelets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

9
185
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 265 publications
(195 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
9
185
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Although the tensile testing results revealed good levels of reinforcement for the PMMA-NH-GNPs/PMMA composites (considerably superior than those found for the non-modified GNPs based composites), the effective modulus found here for this filler was still much lower than the 350 GPa theoretically predicted for the mechanical modulus of GNPs [32,33].…”
contrasting
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although the tensile testing results revealed good levels of reinforcement for the PMMA-NH-GNPs/PMMA composites (considerably superior than those found for the non-modified GNPs based composites), the effective modulus found here for this filler was still much lower than the 350 GPa theoretically predicted for the mechanical modulus of GNPs [32,33].…”
contrasting
confidence: 68%
“…Young et al [32] recently developed a theory which explains why it is not possible to realise the promised 1 TPa or 350 GPa moduli for graphene or GNPs, respectively, in low modulus polymeric matrices. This theory predicts that the Young's modulus of a nanocomposite will be independent of the Young's modulus of the nanofiller, and highlights the importance of three structural parameters: (i) aspect ratio of the nanofiller, (ii) orientation of the nanofiller, and (iii) strength of the interface with the matrix (the theory shows that a strong nanofillermatrix interface leads to good stress-transfer and hence better reinforcement than a weak interface).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6b values of E f = 14 GPa and E eff = 26 GPa were determined for the nanofiller used here. Although the tensile testing results revealed good levels of reinforcement for these GNPs epoxy composites, the modulus found for these nanoplatelets is much lower than their estimated 300 GPa value [22]. For the GNP/epoxy-Oven composites, the stress and strain at break (Fig.…”
Section: Mechanical Properties Of the Gnp/epoxy Compositesmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Therefore, the stress at the laser-focused point of the nanoplatelet is higher than the average stress along the flakes, leading to higher filler modulus acquired by Raman measurements (ER) than the filler modulus determined by tensile testing (Ef) [21].…”
Section: Raman 2d Band Shiftmentioning
confidence: 99%