| Literature DB >> 30875892 |
Maurizio Arena1, Massimo Viscardi2, Giuseppina Barra3, Luigi Vertuccio4, Liberata Guadagno5.
Abstract
The adoption of multifunctional flame-resistant composites is becoming increasingly attractive for many components of aircrafts and competition cars. Compared to conventional alloy solutions, the reduced weight and corrosion resistance are only a couple of the relevant advantages they can offer. In this paper, a carbon fiber reinforced panel (CFRP) was impregnated with an epoxy resin enhanced using a combination of 0.5 wt% of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) and 5 wt% of Glycidyl-Polyhedral Oligomeric Silsesquioxanes (GPOSS). This formulation, which is peculiar to resins with increased electrical conductivity and flame-resistance properties, has been employed for manufacturing a carbon fiber reinforced panel (CFRP) composed of eight plies through a liquid infusion technique. Vibro-acoustic tests have been performed on the panel for the characterization of the damping performance, as well the transmission loss properties related to micro-handling treatments. The spectral excitation has been provided by an acoustic source simulating the aerodynamic pressure load agent on the structure. The incorporation of multi-walled carbon nanotubes MWCNTs in the epoxy matrix determines a non-trivial improvement in the dynamic performance of the laminate. An increased damping loss factor with reference to standard CFRP laminate and also an improvement of the sound insulation parameter was found for the specific test article.Entities:
Keywords: carbon fiber reinforced composite; carbon nanotubes; damping; laminate; nanocomposite
Year: 2019 PMID: 30875892 PMCID: PMC6471376 DOI: 10.3390/ma12060869
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Epoxy matrices formulation names and MWCNTs and GPOSS contents.
| Sample Name | CNTs (wt%) | GPOSS (wt%) |
|---|---|---|
| Epoxy | - | - |
| GP | - | 5.0 |
| CNT | 0.5 | - |
| GP-CNT | 0.5 | 5.0 |
Figure 1Vacuum bag preparation for the liquid infusion.
Figure 2Curing cycle.
Figure 3Manufactured panel.
Figure 4Specification of tensile test specimen according to ASTM D638-14. All dimensions in mm.
Figure 5Vibro-acoustic characterization test setup.
Figure 6DMA analysis for the filled and unfilled epoxy resin (a) storage modulus (b) Loss factor (tanδ).
Figure 7Stress–strain curves and mechanical parameters of epoxy resin with and without carbon nanotubes and GPOSS.
Young’s modulus, tensile strength, and elongation at break for filled and unfilled epoxy samples.
| Sample | Young’s Modulus (Mpa) | Tensile Strength at Break (Mpa) | Elongation at Break (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Epoxy | 2182.2 ± 120.5 | 17.3 ± 3.9 | 1.1 ± 0.1 |
| CNT | 3325.2 ± 80.3 | 22.2 ± 5.2 | 1.2 ± 0.1 |
| GP | 3076.5 ± 96.5 | 35.4 ± 4.8 | 1.6 ± 0.3 |
| GP-CNT | 3282.4 ± 62.7 | 38.1 ± 6.3 | 1.5 ± 0.2 |
Limiting oxygen index (LOI) for filled and unfilled epoxy samples.
| Sample | LOI % ASTM 2863 |
|---|---|
| Epoxy | 27 |
| GP | 33 |
| CNT | 28 |
| GP-CNT | 30 |
Figure 8Thermogravimetry profile of epoxy resin with and without carbon nanotubes and GPOSS (a): in nitrogen atmosphere (b): in air.
Figure 9The oxygen consumed and gas released during oxidation in the temperature programmed oxidation (TPO) experiment.
Onset temperatures, temperatures at the peak, and offset temperatures for the concentration of the oxygen and for the released compounds during the combustion.
| Sample | T Onset (°C) | T Peak (°C) | T Offset (°C) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| O2 | EPOXY | 360 | 491 | 610 | 852 | |
| GP-CNT | 330 | 460 | 618 | 770 | ||
| H2O | EPOXY | 330 | 439 | 645 | 835 | |
| GP-CNT | 290 | 388 | 610 | 750 | ||
| CH4 | EPOXY | 398 | 455 | 644 | ||
| GP-CNT | 340 | 411 | 536 | 615 | ||
| CO | EPOXY | 500 | 651 | 840 | ||
| GP-CNT | 452 | 653 | 747 | |||
| CO2 | EPOXY | 510 | 659 | 860 | ||
| GP-CNT | 452 | 653 | 754 | |||
Figure 10Frequency response function, laser vibrometry.
Figure 11Operative deflection shapes of the composite panel.
Modal damping values.
| Resonance Frequency [Hz] | Modal Damping [%] |
|---|---|
| 87.5 | 2.53 |
| 120 | 2.81 |
| 157.5 | 3.14 |
Figure 12Transmission Loss: 1/3 Octave Bands Centre Frequency.