4.5 Article

Assessment of unexplored isoconversional methods to predict epoxy-based composite curing under arbitrary thermal histories

期刊

JOURNAL OF REINFORCED PLASTICS AND COMPOSITES
卷 42, 期 19-20, 页码 1067-1074

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/07316844221145591

关键词

Differential scanning calorimetry; kinetics of cure; epoxy resins; isoconversional analysis; curing predictions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study demonstrates the feasibility of predicting the cure evolution of composite resin under arbitrary and complex temperature programs using two unexplored methods. These reliable predictions have the potential to optimize curing times and increase productivity in industrial processes.
The mass manufacturing of composite products is hindered by long curing times, and composite manufacturers demand shorter curing cycles while keeping material properties. This requires reliable methods to predict the curing kinetics of each resin formulation. Isoconversional methods are easy to implement and able to deal with complex processes. However, scientists still limit their isoconversional predictions of curing degree to isothermal or constant heating programs. In this study, we perform combined dynamic and isothermal DSC measurements for two different commercial epoxies for aerospace applications (M18 and VTC401). Based on the isoconversional kinetic analysis, we show the feasibility of predicting the evolution of an epoxy resin cure for an arbitrary and complex temperature program using two different unexplored methods for this purpose. Because of the versatility of both prediction methods, they are especially suited to deal with actual conditions in industrial processes. The proposed approach is validated experimentally by comparing predictions against the curing degree of these epoxies during a temperature program that comprises isothermal and dynamic stages. These reliable and straightforward predictions open the door to optimize curing times and increase productivity in composites.

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

4.5
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