0
Research Papers

High Strain Rate Behavior of Graphene Reinforced Polyurethane Composites

[+] Author and Article Information
Sanjeev K. Khanna, Ha T. T. Phan

Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering Department,
University of Missouri,
Columbia, MO 65211

Contributed by the Materials Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received June 6, 2014; final manuscript received October 9, 2014; published online December 23, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Ghatu Subhash.

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 137(2), 021005 (Apr 01, 2015) (10 pages) Paper No: MATS-14-1125; doi: 10.1115/1.4029291 History: Received June 06, 2014; Revised October 09, 2014; Online December 23, 2014

A compressive split Hopkinson pressure bar (SHPB) was used to investigate the dynamic mechanical behavior of graphene (GR) reinforced polyurethane (PU) composites (GR/PU) at high strain rates ranging from approximately 1500 s−1 to 5000 s−1. Four types of GR/PU composites with different GR contents: 0.25% GR, 0.5% GR, 0.75% GR, and 1% GR were prepared by the solution mixing method and divided into two groups of unheated and postheated specimens. Experimental results show that the GR/PU composite is a strong strain rate dependent material, especially in the high strain rate regime of 3000 s−1–5000 s−1. The dynamic mechanical properties of GR/PU composite in terms of plateau stress, peak stress, and peak load carrying capacity are better than that of pristine PU at most of the applied strain rates. Among the four different GR concentrations used, the 0.5 wt.%-GR specimen shows the highest peak stress, and the 1 wt.% GR specimen has the highest plateau stress; while no significant change in peak strain with changing GR weight fraction was observed. Compared to unheated specimens, the plateau stress, peak stress, and peak strain of postheated specimens are significantly higher.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Kuilla, T., Bhadra, S., Yao, D., Kim, N. H., Bose, S., and Lee, J. H., 2010, “Recent Advances in Graphene Based Polymer Composites,” Prog. Polym. Sci., 35(11), pp. 1350–1375. [CrossRef]
Khan, U., Blighe, F. M., and Coleman, J. N., 2010, “Selective Mechanical Reinforcement of Thermoplastic Polyurethane by Targeted Insertion of Functionalized SWCNTs,” J. Phys. Chem. C, 114(26), pp. 11401–11408. [CrossRef]
Kim, H., Abdala, A. A., and Macosko, C. W., 2010, “Graphene/Polymer Nanocomposites,” Macromolecules, 43(16), pp. 6515–6530. [CrossRef]
Zhao, X., Zhang, Q., and Chen, D., 2010, “Enhanced Mechanical Properties of Graphene-Based Poly(Vinyl Alcohol) Composites,” Macromolecules, 43(5), pp. 2357–2363. [CrossRef]
Kim, H., Miura, Y., and Macosko, C. W., 2010, “Graphene/Polyurethane Nanocomposites for Improved Gas Barrier and Electrical Conductivity,” Chem. Mater., 22(11), pp. 3441–3450. [CrossRef]
Lee, H.-I., and Jeong, H. M., 2009, “Functionalized Graphene Sheet/Polyurethane Nano-Composites,” Physics and Applications of Graphene: Experiments, S. Mikhailoe, ed., InTech, Rijeka, Croatia, pp. 193–208.
Wang, X., Hu, Y., Song, L., Yang, H., Xing, W., and Lu, H., 2011, “In Situ Polymerization of Graphene Nanosheets and Polyurethane With Enhanced Mechanical and Thermal Properties,” J. Mater. Chem., 21(12), pp. 4222–4227. [CrossRef]
Nguyen, D. A., Lee, Y. R., Raghu, A. V., MoJeong, H., Shin, C. M., and Kim, B. K., 2009, “Morphological and Physical Properties of a Thermoplastic Polyurethane Reinforced With Functionalized Graphene Sheet,” Polym. Int., 58(4), pp. 412–417. [CrossRef]
Hosur, M. V., Alexander, J., Vaidya, U. K., and Jeelani, S., 2001, “High Strain Rate Compression Response of Carbon/Epoxy Laminate Composites,” Compos. Struct., 52(3–4), pp. 405–417. [CrossRef]
Woldesenbet, E., Gupta, N., and Vinson, J. R., 2002, “Determination of Moisture Effects on Impact Properties of Composite Materials,” J. Mater. Sci., 37(13), pp. 2693–2698. [CrossRef]
Naik, N. K., and Kavala, V. R., 2008, “High Strain Rate Behavior of Woven Fabric Composites Under Compressive Loading,” Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 474(1–2), pp. 301–311. [CrossRef]
Rafiee, M. A., Rafiee, J., Wang, Z., Song, H., Yu, Z. Z., and Koratka, N., 2009, “Enhanced Mechanical Properties of Nanocomposites at Low Graphene Content,” ACS Publ., 3(12), pp. 3884–3890 [CrossRef].
Gorham, D. A., 1983, “A Numerical Method for the Correction of Dispersion in Pressure Bar Signals,” J. Phys. E: Sci. Instrum., 16(6), pp. 477–479. [CrossRef]
Gong, J. C., Malvern, L. E., and Jenkins, D. A., July 1990, “Dispersion Investigation in the Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar,” ASME J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 112(3), pp. 309–314. [CrossRef]
Gama, B. A., Lopatnikov, S. L., and Gillespie, J. W., Jr., 2004, “Hopkinson Bar Experimental Technique: A Critical Review,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 57(4), pp. 223–250. [CrossRef]
George, T. G., III, 2000, “Classic Split-Hopkinson Pressure Bar Testing,” Mechanical Testing and Evaluation (ASM Handbook), Vol. 8, ASM International, Materials Park, OH, pp. 462–476.
Frew, D. J., Forrestal, M. J., and Chen, W., 2005, “Pulse Shaping Techniques for Testing Elastic-Plastic Materials With a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar,” Exp. Mech., 45(2), pp. 186–195. [CrossRef]
Song, B., and Chen, W., 2004, “Dynamic Stress Equilibrium in Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar Tests on Soft Materials,” Exp. Mech., 44(3), pp. 300–312. [CrossRef]
Lee, O. S., Kim, S. H., and Lee, J. W., 2006, “Thickness Effect of Pulse Shaper on Dynamic Stress Equilibrium in the NBR Rubber Specimen,” Key Eng. Mater., 306–308, pp. 1007–1012. [CrossRef]
Vecchio, K. S., and Jiang, F., 2007, “Improved Pulse Shaping to Achieve Constant Strain Rate and Stress Equilibrium in Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar Testing,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 38(11), pp. 2655–2665. [CrossRef]
Frew, D. J., Forrestal, M. J., and Chen, W., 2002, “Pulse Shaping Techniques for Testing Brittle Materials With a Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar,” Exp. Mech., 42(1), pp. 93–106. [CrossRef]
Chen, W., Zhang, B., and Forrestal, M. J., 1998, “A Split Hopkinson Bar Technique for Low-Impedance Materials,” Exp. Mech., 39(2), pp. 81–85. [CrossRef]
Prisacariu, C., 2011, Polyurethane Elastomers: From Morphology to Mechanical Aspects, Springer, Berlin, Germany.
Li, Y., Gao, T., Liu, J., Linliu, K., Desper, C. R., and Chu, B., 1992, “Multiphase Structure of Segmented PU: Effects of Temperature and Annealing,” Macromolecules, 25(26), pp. 7356–7372 [CrossRef].
Jiang, F., Zhang, L., Jiang, Y., Lu, Y., and Wang, W., 2012, “Effect of Annealing Treatment on the Structure and Properties of Polyurethane/Multiwalled Carbon Nanotube Nanocomposites,” J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 126(3), pp. 845–852. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of compression SHPB setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Test results with unheated 1 wt.% GR PU composite specimens with annealed copper shaper (a), (c), (e) and un-annealed copper shaper (b), (d), and (f)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

A scheme of a data-acquisition system

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of unheated pristine PU

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Optical micrographs (10×) of unheated pristine PU tested at the strain rates of: (a) 1910 s−1, (b) 2851 s−1, (c) 3898 s−1, and (d) 4351 s−1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of unheated GR/PU with 0.25% GR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Optical micrographs (10×) of unheated GR/PU with 0.25% GR tested at strain rates of: (a) 1630 s−1, (b) 2912 s−1, (c) 3400 s−1, and (d) 3815 s−1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of unheated GR/PU with 0.5% GR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of unheated GR/PU with 0.75% GR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of unheated GR/PU with 1% GR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of postheated pristine PU

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Optical micrographs (10×) of postheated pristine PU tested at the strain rates of: (a) 1223 s−1, (b) 3018 s−1, (c) 3480 s−1, and (d) 4126 s−1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of postheated GR/PU with 0.25% GR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of postheated GR/PU with 0.5% GR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of postheated GR/PU with 0.75% GR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Dynamic compression stress–strain response of postheated GR/PU with 1% GR

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Strain rate versus plateau stress in unheated GR/PU composites with different GR contents, measured at strain 0.01 m/m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Strain rate versus plateau stress in postheated GR/PU composites with different GR contents, measured at strain 0.01 m/m

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Strain rate versus peak stress of unheated GR/PU composites at different GR contents

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Strain rate versus peak stress for postheated GR/PU composites at different GR contents

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Damage modes of unheated and postheated GR/PU composites

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In