Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T15:58:38.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thermal and viscoelastic behaviors of nanotube-reinforced polyethylene composite

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 January 2011

Ananta Raj Adhikari ,
Mircea Chipara  and
Karen Lozano
Ananta Raj Adhikari
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Sciences, Assumption College, Natick, MA-01609
Mircea Chipara
Affiliation:
Department of Physics and Geology, University of Texas-Pan American, Edinburg, TX-78539
Karen Lozano
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas-Pan American, Edinburg, TX-78539
Get access

Abstract

The effect of processing (shear) time on the mechanical behavior and thermal stability of multiwalled nanotube reinforced polyethylene was investigated. It was observed that the mechanical property (storage modulus, loss modulus) of the composites is process dependant whereas the thermal stability does not. The increase in mechanical behavior is attributed to a stronger interface between the nanotube and the polymer matrix.

Keywords

compositenanostructurethermogravimetric analysis (TGA)
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1312: Symposium HH/II/JJ – Polymer-Based Materials and Composites—Synthesis, Assembly and Applications , 2011 , mrsf10-1312-ii11-09
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Blond, D., Barron, V., Ruether, M., Ryan, K. P., Nicolosi, V., Blau, W. J., and Coleman, J. N., Enhancement of Modulus, Strength, and Toughness in Poly(methyl methacrylate)-Based Composites by the Incorporation of Poly(methyl methacrylate)-Functionalized Nanotubes, Adv. Adv. Funct. Mater. 16, 1608–1614 (2006).Google Scholar
2. Lozano, K., Yang, S. and Jones, R. E., Nanofiber toughened polyethylene composites, Carbon 42, 2329–2331 (2004).Google Scholar
3. Yang, B., Shi, J., Pramoda, K. P. and Goh, S. H., Enhancement of stiffness, strength, ductility and toughness of poly(ethylene oxide) using phenoxy-grafted multiwalled carbon nanotubes, Nanotechnology 18, 125606–125612 (2007).Google Scholar
4. Thompson, R. B., Rasmussen, K. Ø., and Lookman, T., Origins of Elastic Properties in Ordered Block Copolymer/Nanoparticle Composites, Nano Lett., 4, 2455–2459 (2004).Google Scholar
5. Dressaulhaus, M. S. and Dai, H., Carbon nanotubes: continued innovations and challenges, MRSbulletin/April 2004, 237–244.Google Scholar
6. Treacy, M. M. J., Ebbesen, T. W., and Gibson, J. M.. Exceptionally high Young’s modulus observed for individual carbon nanotubes. Nature 381, 678–680 (1996).Google Scholar
7. Coleman, J. N., Khan, U., Blau, W. J. and Gun’ko, Y. K., Small but strong: A review of the mechanical properties of carbon nanotube–polymer composites, carbon 44 , 1624–1652 (2006).Google Scholar
8. Gorga, R. E. and Cohen, R. E., Toughness enhancements in poly(methyl methacrylate) by addition of oriented multiwall carbon nanotubes, J. Polym. Sci., Part B: Polym. Phys. 42, 2690–2702 (2004).Google Scholar
9. Haggenmueller, R., Gommans, H. H., Rinzler, A. G., and Fischer, J. E., Aligned single-wall carbon nanotubes in composites by melt processing methods, K. I.Winey, Chem. Phys. Lett. 330, 219–225 (2000).Google Scholar
10. Chipara, M. D., Lozano, K., Hernandez, A., and Chipara, M.. TGA analysis of polypropylene-carbon nanofibers composites. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 93, 871–876 (2008).Google Scholar
11. John, B., Varughese, K. T., Oommen, Z., Potschke, P., and Thomas, S., Dynamic Mechanical Behavior of High-Density Polyethylene/Ethylene Vinyl Acetate Copolymer Blends: The Effects of the Blend Ratio, Reactive Compatibilization, and Dynamic Vulcanization, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 87, 2083–2099 (2003).Google Scholar