Journal Club Theme of May 1 2008: Mechanical Behaviors
of Polymer-matrix Nanocomposites
1. Definition of
nanocomposites
Nanocomposites are a novel
class of composite materials whose reinforcements have dimensions in the range
of 1-100 nm. Although nanoscale reinforcements (or nanofillers) of
nanocomposites have different kinds of fillers such as nanofibers, nanowires,
nanotubes and nanoparticles etc, their mechanical behaviors have some common
features. Figure 1 shows a potential use of nanocomposites as multifunctional materials.

In terms of matrices,
polymer-matrix is commonly used for nanocomposites. Since this J-club theme is focused on
mechanical behaviors and analysis, our discussions are still helpful to
understand the mechanical behaviors of nanocomposite materials with other
matrices such as ceramics and metals.
For reviews of general nanocomposites, I would refer you to,
Composites Science and Technology, 65, 491–516
2. Connections with other
J-club themes
This J-club theme is closely
related to two previous J-club themes: Xiaodong Li's May 2007: Experimental
Mechanics of Nanobuilding Blocks, and Zoubeida
Ounaies's Jan. 15 2008: Active Nanocomposites. The previous two discussion
leaders provided excellent insight into the material aspects of nanocomposites,
while the present discussion tries to analyze some special mechanical behaviors
from the solid mechanics viewpoint. Any overlap is minimized and the readers
may read the two previous themes to obtain a complete understanding of
mechanical behaviors of nanocomposites.
3. Special mechanics
phenomena of nanocomposites
Traditional composite
materials used as structural materials are continuous fiber-reinforced
composites (carbon fiber/epoxy etc), which are different from nanocomposites in
terms of reinforcements. Here, only unique mechanical behaviors of
nanocomposites resulting from their special discontinuous reinforcements and
interfaces will be discussed.
a) Stiffness improvement and
waviness effects.
After very stiff nanotubes
or nanofibers (Young’s modulus E~1000GPa) are added into soft polymer matrices
such as epoxy (E~4GPa), the stiffness of the nanocomposite should be
increased. However, the composite
stiffness is often below our expectation because the nanofibers/nanotubes are
often curved inside the matrix due to their very high aspect ratio (Figure 2
shows a TEM image of uniformly distributed nanofibers inside an epoxy matrix
from our previous work). Micro-mechanical model was proposed to analyze this special
phenomenon:

b) Strength and failure
mechanics
Two key parameters for
structural materials--tensile strength and fracture toughness of the
nanocomposite are not as high as we would expect. The fracture toughness of the
nanocomposites is slightly higher than that of the baseline epoxy matrix, but
sometimes it is even less than that of the pure epoxy! As seen in Figure 3, for tensile experiments
on nanofiber/PEEK composites, with the increase in nanoscale reinforcements,
the Young’s modulus of the nanocomposites will increase (slope of the initial
elastic region). Therefore, the final tensile strength is controlled by the
failure strain. However, the failure strain of the nanocomposite significantly
decreases with the increase of the weight percent of the nanofibers (from 5% to
15%). So the tensile strength increase
is very limited.
A major reason is that very
strong nanotube/nanofibers inside nanocomposite materials are not fully loaded
due to low efficiency of interfacial shear load transferring. Since the
interfacial shear stress is related to the shear modulus of the matrix, a soft
polymeric matrix only offers very limited load transferring from the matrix to
the strong nanotube/nanofiber (should be better for ceramic and metal matrices
due to their high stiffness properties).
Therefore, future nanocomposite materials for structural applications
would require nanoscale reinforcements to carry load directly (continuous nanotubes
or nanofibers, and aligned discontinuous nanotubes are not enough).

c) Interface mechanics issue
It should be noticed that
strong interfacial bonding (such as covalent binding) is a necessary condition,
not a sufficient condition in order to increase the failure strength of
nanocomposite materials due to the interfacial shear stress transferring
mechanism for discontinuous nanofiber/nanotubes. Indeed, the high mismatch in the elastic
properties of the matrix and the nanoscale reinforcement (4GPa vs. 1000 GPa)
will lead to interfacial debonding at the matrix and the nanotube/nanofiber
end, when compared to traditional composites with much less stiffness mismatch
(the stress singularity order is around -0.2 in our nanofiber/epoxy composites,
compared to -0.5 for a traditional crack case).
In terms of mechanics modeling, since the smallest dimension of any
nanoscale reinforcement is greater than 1 nm, continuum
mechanics model is widely employed to analyze mechanical behaviors of
nanocomposites, except for the interface mechanics case, when nanomechanics
model is necessary:
d) Uncertain mechanical
properties
There is always a large
scatter in the strength and fracture toughness data of nanocomposites. This
phenomenon might result from very large interfacial bonding area of
nanocomposites compared to the same traditional composite materials with the
same fiber/particle volume percents. As
a result, initial interfacial defects are easily induced in nanocomposites than
traditional composites, and lead to a large scatter in nanocomposite failure
strengths.
Here I briefly summarize
major mechanical behaviors of nanocomposites (other properties such as impact
and fatigue are not addressed). Indeed, I propose more problems for you to
solve in the future. Hope more insight would be explored through discussion
with iMechanica users. Some papers are uploaded as attachments if any user
cannot access on-line papers.