| Literature DB >> 30621240 |
Mariusz Ptak1, Paweł Kaczyński2, Johannes Wilhelm3, José M T Margarido4, Paula A A P Marques5, Susana C Pinto6, Ricardo J Alves de Sousa7, Fábio A O Fernandes8.
Abstract
The use of cork for a variety of applications has been gaining significance due to environmental concerns and political agendas. Consequently, its range of applications is growing rapidly. In this work, aiming to improve its mechanical response for crashworthiness applications, cork agglomerates were enriched by small quantities of graphene oxide or graphene nanoplates in order to observe a resulting improvement of the mechanical behaviour during quasi-static and dynamic compressive loading cases. To produce homogenous cork agglomerates including graphene, the material was previously dispersed into granulated cork using stirrers to achieve a good distribution. Then, the typical procedure of compression and curing was carried out. Magnified images attest a good dispersion of graphene into the cork matrix. Mechanical testing was performed for a variety of graphene concentrations (0.1, 0.5 and 1.0 weight %), becoming clear that the beneficial effect of including graphene (either oxide or nanoplates) is related to a later densification stage while keeping the same stress plateau levels.Entities:
Keywords: composites; cork; crashworthiness; energy-absorbing materials; graphene; mechanical tests; natural materials
Year: 2019 PMID: 30621240 PMCID: PMC6337156 DOI: 10.3390/ma12010151
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1The cork-graphene samples production.
Description and nomenclature used for the produced samples.
| Description | Nomenclature Used |
|---|---|
| cork with 0.1% of graphene oxide | GO 0.1% |
| cork with 0.5% of graphene oxide | GO 0.5% |
| cork with 1% of graphene oxide | GO 1% |
| cork with 0.1% of graphene nanoparticles | GNP 0.1% |
| cork with 0.5% of graphene nanoparticles | GNP 0.5% |
| cork with 1% of graphene nanoparticles | GNP 1% |
| without graphene | Gx 0% |
Figure 2Example of samples subjected for quasi-static and dynamic testing.
Figure 3Microstructure of GNP sample with 1 wt.% graphene nanoplates: magnitude of 267 (left) and 1330 (right). Top row: specimen before test—magnitude of 267 (left) and 1330 (right), lower row: specimen after dynamic tests—magnitude of 1590 (left) and 1810 (right).
Figure 4The influence of the GO used as a reinforcement on uniaxial quasi-static compression.
Figure 5Influence of the GPNs used as a reinforcement on uniaxial quasi-static compression.
Figure 6Comparison between samples with 0.1 wt.% GNP and 0.1 wt.% GO (left), Comparison between samples with 0.5 wt.% GNP and 0.5 wt.% GO respectively (right).
Figure 7Comparison between samples with 1 wt.% GNP and 1 wt.% GO.
Time sequence of the first impact for 3 different composite types.
| Type/Time | 0Gx | GO1% | GNP1% |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 8Stress-strain curves for the specimens during the first impact and second impact (marked by R).
Figure 9Absorbed energy (Energy(15)) at a sample deflection of 15 mm and displacement chart for the first and second impacts.