| Literature DB >> 35745339 |
Felipe J Valencia1,2, Viviana Aurora3, Max Ramírez2,3, Carlos J Ruestes4, Alejandro Prada1, Alejandro Varas2,3, José Rogan2,3.
Abstract
In this contribution, we present a study of the mechanical properties of porous nanoshells measured with a nanoindentation technique. Porous nanoshells with hollow designs can present attractive mechanical properties, as observed in hollow nanoshells, but coupled with the unique mechanical behavior of porous materials. Porous nanoshells display mechanical properties that are dependent on shell porosity. Our results show that, under smaller porosity values, deformation is closely related to the one observed for polycrystalline and single-crystalline nanoshells involving dislocation activity. When porosity in the nanoparticle is increased, plastic deformation was mediated by grain boundary sliding instead of dislocation activity. Additionally, porosity suppresses dislocation activity and decreases nanoparticle strength, but allows for significant strain hardening under strains as high as 0.4. On the other hand, Young's modulus decreases with the increase in nanoshell porosity, in agreement with the established theories of porous materials. However, we found no quantitative agreement between conventional models applied to obtain the Young's modulus of porous materials.Entities:
Keywords: molecular dynamics; nanoindentation; plasticity; porous materials; porous nanoshells
Year: 2022 PMID: 35745339 PMCID: PMC9231280 DOI: 10.3390/nano12122000
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.719
Figure 1(a) Force vs. depth curves for different porous NS. (b,c) CNA at different strains for and , respectively. Circles, color legend of CNA. Scale bars correspond to 15 nm.
Figure 2(a) Contact pressure curve. (inset) Magnification of contact pressure for case, where arrows indicate a “plateau” on the contact pressure curve. (b) Atomic contact area as a strain function. (c) Hardness as a function of the NS porosity.
Figure 3vs. effective strain.
Figure 4(a) Hertz, and Reissner fit from the load–depth curve for case. (b) Comparison among Hertz, Gibson–Ashby, Reissner, and MD data for Young’s modulus. “Linear” corresponds to a linear fit of the stress–strain curve at strains smaller than 0.01. The Young’s modulus of Au bulk was 78 GPa.
Figure 5Effective Poisson’s ratio as a strain function for different values.
Figure 6(a) % of hcp atoms as function of the indentation depth for . (b) % of atoms belonging to SF as function of the indentation depth.
Figure 7(a) Dislocation density as strain function. (b) Dislocation density considering only Shockley partial dislocation as a strain function. (c) Contribution of sessile dislocations to the dislocation density.
Figure 8(a) Shear strain of a porous NS with . (b) Shear strain of porous NS of . To depict the grain boundary structure, we use as refence the case of , where both NS are colored according to their lattice orientation, calculated from the PTM algorithm.