2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.mtcomm.2022.104555
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of graphene-based additives on mechanical strength and microstructure of gypsum plaster

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The characteristic XRD peak of the graphite structure, which corresponded to the (002) crystal phase, was clearly visible at 2θ = 26.5°in the XRD patterns of GC composite foam. 41,42 In addition to the main peak, a small peak at 2θ = 44.2°was also observed, corresponding to the (100) reflection of the hexagonal graphite structure. 41 These facts support the existence of G and CNTs in composite foams.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The characteristic XRD peak of the graphite structure, which corresponded to the (002) crystal phase, was clearly visible at 2θ = 26.5°in the XRD patterns of GC composite foam. 41,42 In addition to the main peak, a small peak at 2θ = 44.2°was also observed, corresponding to the (100) reflection of the hexagonal graphite structure. 41 These facts support the existence of G and CNTs in composite foams.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…41,42 In addition to the main peak, a small peak at 2θ = 44.2°was also observed, corresponding to the (100) reflection of the hexagonal graphite structure. 41 These facts support the existence of G and CNTs in composite foams. However, it must be noted that the characteristic peak of G and CNTs could hardly be seen in the XRD patterns of the GCF composite foams, which may be attributed to either the complete exfoliation of G and CNTs in the PEN matrix or the partial exfoliation leaving a limited amount of crystalline G and CNTs.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…These results are in agreement with values from literature. For gypsum materials, the real density was between 2300 and 2600 kg/m 3 , depending on its hydration [47,48] the apparent density ranges between 940 and 1300 kg/m 3 [49][50][51][52], and the open porosity ranges from 36% to 68%, depending on water/gypsum mass ratio and on hydration [52][53][54]. For cellular concretes, the apparent density ranges from 300 to 600 kg/m 3 , the real density ranges around 2500 and 2600 kg/m 3 , the total and open porosities are close and are about 69%-87% [28][29][30]55,56].…”
Section: Density and Porositymentioning
confidence: 99%