4.6 Article

The effect of surface modification with carbon nanotubes upon the tensile strength and Weibull modulus of carbon fibers

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS SCIENCE
卷 47, 期 23, 页码 8044-8051

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10853-012-6694-6

关键词

-

资金

  1. JSPS (Japan Society for the Promotion of Science) KAKENHI [22360282]
  2. JST (Japan Science and Technology Agency) through Advanced Low Carbon Technology Research and Development Program (ALCA)
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22360282] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carbon fibers are widely used as reinforcements in composite materials because of their high specific strength and modulus. Today, a number of ultrahigh strength polyacrylonitrile (PAN)-based (more than 6 GPa), and ultrahigh modulus pitch-based (more than 900 GPa) carbon fibers have been commercially available. In contrast, carbon nanotube (CNT) with the extremely high tensile strength have attracted attention as reinforcements. An interesting technique to modify the carbon fiber is CNT grafting on the carbon fiber surface. CNT-grafted carbon fibers offer the opportunity to add the potential benefits of nanoscale reinforcement to well-established fibrous composites to create micro-nano multiscale hybrid composites. In the present study, the tensile properties of CNT grown on T1000GB PAN- and K13D pitch-based carbon fibers have been investigated. Single filament tensile test at gauge lengths of 1, 5, and 25 mm were conducted. The effect of gauge length on tensile strength and Weibull modulus of CNT-grafted PAN- and pitch-based carbon fibers were evaluated. It was found that grafting of CNT improves the tensile strength and Weibull modulus of PAN- and pitch-based carbon fibers with longer gauge length (a parts per thousand yen5 mm). The results also clearly show that for CNT-grafted and as-received PAN- and pitch-based carbon fibers, there is a linear relation between the Weibull modulus and the average tensile strength on log-log scale.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据