2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2018.10.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of cohesive interfaces and polymer viscoelasticity on improving mechanical properties in an architectured composite

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Further consideration of the toughness for samples with MAPTES- and APTES-functionalized microspheres shows that stronger interfacial interactions result in lower toughness. This finding was also reported by Imam and Sain, in which the weaker interfaces led to higher toughness after investigating composite materials formed by backbone matrix materials (steel, aluminum, and poly­(methyl methacrylate)) and soft fillers (polyurethane and silica nanoparticle reinforced nanocomposite gel) …”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Further consideration of the toughness for samples with MAPTES- and APTES-functionalized microspheres shows that stronger interfacial interactions result in lower toughness. This finding was also reported by Imam and Sain, in which the weaker interfaces led to higher toughness after investigating composite materials formed by backbone matrix materials (steel, aluminum, and poly­(methyl methacrylate)) and soft fillers (polyurethane and silica nanoparticle reinforced nanocomposite gel) …”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
“…This finding was also reported by Imam and Sain, in which the weaker interfaces led to higher toughness after investigating composite materials formed by backbone matrix materials (steel, aluminum, and poly(methyl methacrylate)) and soft fillers (polyurethane and silica nanoparticle reinforced nanocomposite gel). 38 To better understand the tensile test results and fracture characteristics of printed microsphere-filled samples, fractography was performed on all the fractured specimens. SEM micrographs of fracture surfaces of printed resins with glass as well as MAPTES-, DTES-, and APTES-functionalized microspheres are shown in Figure 5.…”
Section: Mechanical Properties and Fractographymentioning
confidence: 99%