4.7 Article

A developed Takayanagi model to estimate the tensile modulus and interphase characteristics of polymer nanocellulose composites

Journal

INDUSTRIAL CROPS AND PRODUCTS
Volume 206, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.117703

Keywords

Nanocellulose; Nanocomposite; Tensile modulus; Interphase; Takayanagi model

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study analyzes the tensile modulus of nanocellulose-reinforced composites and reveals the effects of nanocellulose treatment, radius, and interphase modulus on the relative modulus. The results show that nanocellulose treatment increases the modulus and thickness of the interphase, and the nanocellulose modulus and radius significantly affect the relative modulus, while the interphase modulus only has a significant effect within a certain range.
This study analyzes the tensile modulus of nanocellulose-reinforced composites by developing the Takayanagi model considering the interphase section and filler size. The model accuracy is assessed by reported experimental moduli of composites and by parametric studies. The estimates of advanced model fit to the measured moduli of numerous examples. Also, it is revealed that the treatment of nanocellulose increases the modulus and thickness of interphase in nanocomposites. The relative modulus (E-r) as the ratio of nanocomposite modulus to the modulus of matrix significantly changes when nanocellulose modulus (E-f) is raised from 50 to 100 GPa; however, E-r unimportantly rises at E-f > 100 GPa. Additionally, nanocellulose radius (R) of 2 nm maximizes the E-r to 1.636, though E-r decreases to 1.09 at R = 58 nm and the variation of E-r is insignificant at R > 20 nm. Furthermore, the interphase moduli (E-i) below 10 GPa meaningfully affect the nanocomposite modulus, but E-i > 10 GPa cannot cause the considerable change in E-r. Therefore, E-r does not change at the high levels of E-f, R and E-i.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available