2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.107987
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multiscale modeling of nano-SiO2 deposited on jute fibers via macroscopic evaluations and the interfacial interaction by molecular dynamics simulation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Through macroscopic evaluation and MD simulations, it was found that the deposition effect of nano-SiO 2 affects the wettability of jute fibers and improves the surface energy and tensile strength of jute fibers, while the protective layer formed by nano-SiO 2 eliminates the stress concentration sites on jute fibers. It has also been found that C-O-Si chemical bonding enhances the interfacial bonding within this composite interface [108].…”
Section: Investigation Of Mp Of Synthetic Of Plant Fiber/cementitious...mentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Through macroscopic evaluation and MD simulations, it was found that the deposition effect of nano-SiO 2 affects the wettability of jute fibers and improves the surface energy and tensile strength of jute fibers, while the protective layer formed by nano-SiO 2 eliminates the stress concentration sites on jute fibers. It has also been found that C-O-Si chemical bonding enhances the interfacial bonding within this composite interface [108].…”
Section: Investigation Of Mp Of Synthetic Of Plant Fiber/cementitious...mentioning
confidence: 92%
“…This solution was sonicated for one hour and stirred mechanically at 40 °C for 5 h. Lastly, the nano-SiO 2coated jute bres were washed in water to remove the excess material and then dried for 2 h at 70 °C. 359 4.3 Advantages and disadvantages of chemical treatment process 4.3.1 Advantages. The objective of the surface treatment of plant bres is to increase their bonding strength, and thus the stress transferability in the reinforced materials.…”
Section: Chemical Modicationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…263,279,442 To date, various chemical treatments have been reported, using chemicals such as NaOH, 38,58,61,63,230,302,361,371,382,386,387,441,443–451 silane, 231,386,452–457 alkali and silane, 458,459 potassium permanganate (KMnO 4 ), 356–358,460 maleic anhydride polypropylene (MAPP), 58,305,356–358,375,461–466 stearic acid, 356–358,467 bleaching, 468 toluene diisocyanate (TDI), 355–358 sodium silicate, 417 UV radiation monomer grafting, 383,469,470 maleic anhydride-grafted polypropylene (MAgPP), 305,462,471,472 detergent washing, dewaxing, acetic acid treatment, 443 graft co-polymerization, 291,473–477 deposition of nano-SiO 2 (ref. 359 and 478) and other chemical treatments. 102,342,365,378,409,412,434,479–485 Table 7 shows the different chemicals used and the effect of various chemical surface treatment methods.…”
Section: Fibre Surface Modificationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[22][23][24][25][26][27] Recent studies indicated that further improvement can be achieved via the modification of the JF surface with SiO 2 nanoparticles. [28][29][30][31][32] Liu et al 29 showed that the surface free energy and tensile strength of SiO 2 nanoparticle-modified fibres increased by 11.7% and 17.9%, respectively, compared with acid/alkali pre-treated fibres. Chen et al revealed that the tensile and impact strengths of composites reinforced with SiO 2 nanoparticle-modified JFs increased by 26.87% and 25.65%, respectively, compared with composites reinforced with untreated JFs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%