Deformation and Fracture Behaviour of Polymer Materials

Abstract

of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Covalently γ-aminobutyric acid-functionalized carbon nanotubes: improved compatibility with PHBV matrix

“…Figure 7e shows a greater magnification from Fig. 7d and allows to identify some ears on the fracture surface of PHBV/CNT-GB, which are an indication of local plastic deformation [46]. Such localized plastic deformation shown in Fig.…”

Characterization methods for strain‐induced damage in polypropylene

“…This relation was originally designed for metals and assumes that plastic deformation happens under constant volume. While this may be true, for example, for shear yielding, [9,17] errors could arise for materials that are prone to void formation or crazing. In these cases, the lateral contraction may be overestimated, since the creation of additional volume inside the material has not been considered.…”

“…[16] Therefore, the craze still has a load bearing capacity to some extent. [17] The fibrils spanning the two crack faces are stretched to their maximum possible elongation. When the craze grows, there are two possibilities for the fibrils to react.…”

“…In that case, the craze becomes more similar to a crack the more fibrils are destroyed. [17] While the preferred orientation for crazes is 90 to the major principal stress, Karger-Kocsis and Barany suggest that slight deviations of orientations are possible to avoid running through spherulites or other obstacles, where surface drawing is hindered. [16] All of these mechanisms are cavitation-inducing processes that involve a dilatational stress component, which is why they never appear under pure compressive stresses.…”