The effect of heat treatment temperature and time on the microstructure and mechanical properties of PAN-based carbon fibers
Source abstract
Abstract
The influence of heat treatment temperature from 1400 to 2840 °C and time from 1.2 to 12.0 min on the structure and mechanical properties of polyacrylonitrile carbon fibers was studied. It was observed that the Young’s modulus increased with increasing temperature and time, but the tensile strength exhibited different variation trends with the different processing methods. For a fixed time of 1.2 min, the strength dropped from 4.6 GPa at 1400 °C to 2.6 GPa at 2840 °C, (~43.5 %) as opposed to a 63.9 % increase in Young’s modulus. However, when the treatment time was increased to 6.0 min at 2500 °C, the tensile strength decreased only by 1.9 %, from 3.71 to 3.64 GPa, versus a nearly 20.0 % increase in Young’s modulus. The same situation was found for treatment at 2000 and 2700 °C. Raman spectroscopy and uniform stress model analysis show that the degree of covalent cross-linking between the graphene planes decreased as temperature increased, while it remained almost constant as treatment time was increased. It is believed that during heat treatment of a carbon fiber, the cross-linking collapses at the beginning but the crystalline size keeps growing with prolonging time, so the tensile strength decreases little with further heat treatment while tensile modulus keeps increasing.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Fiber-reinforced polymer composites · Graphene research and applications · Tribology and Wear Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (40)
Show source-provided references
1. Fitzer E (1989) Carbon 27:62110.1016/0008-6223(89)90197-8 ↗
2. Chand S (2000) Carbon fibers for composites. J Mater Sci 35:1303. doi: 10.1023/A:100478030148910.1023/A:1004780301489 ↗
3. Liu F, Wang H, Xue L, Fan L, Zhu Z (2008) J Mater Sci 43:4316. doi: 10.1007/s10853-008-2633-y10.1007/s10853-008-2633-y ↗
4. Ozbek S, Isaac DH (1994) Mater Manuf Process 9:19910.1080/10426919408934899 ↗
5. Kim HS, Shioya M, Takaku A (1999) J Mater Sci 34:3299. doi: 10.1023/A:100466461169610.1023/A:1004691927626 ↗
6. Ozbek S, Isaac DH (2000) Carbon 38:200710.1016/S0008-6223(00)00060-9 ↗
7. Ogale AA, Lin C, Anderson DP, Kearns KM (2002) Carbon 40:130910.1016/S0008-6223(01)00300-1 ↗
8. Rennhofer H, Loidl D, Puchegger S, Peterlik H (2010) Carbon 48:96410.1016/j.carbon.2009.11.012 ↗
9. Li D, Wang H, Wang X (2007) J Mater Sci 42:4642. doi: 10.1007/s10853-006-0519-410.1007/s10853-006-0519-4 ↗
10. Tanaka F, Okabe T, Okuda H, Ise M, Kinloch IA, Mori T et al (2013) Carbon 52:37210.1016/j.carbon.2012.09.047 ↗
11. Johnson JW, Thorne DJ (1969) Carbon 7:65910.1016/0008-6223(69)90520-X ↗
12. Naito K, Tanaka Y, Yang JM, Kagawa Y (2008) Carbon 46:18910.1016/j.carbon.2007.11.001 ↗
13. Proctor BA (1971) Composites 2:8510.1016/0010-4361(71)90027-9 ↗
14. Kaburagi M, Bin Y, Zhu D, Xu C, Matsuo M (2003) Carbon 41:91510.1016/S0008-6223(02)00407-4 ↗
15. Loidl D, Paris O, Rennhofer H, Mller M, Peterlik H (2007) Carbon 45:280110.1016/j.carbon.2007.09.011 ↗
16. Reynolds WN, Sharp JV (1974) Carbon 12:10310.1016/0008-6223(74)90018-9 ↗
17. Isaac DH, Ozbek S, Francis JG (1994) Mater Manuf Process 9:17910.1080/10426919408934898 ↗
18. Sauder C, Lamon J, Pailler R (2005) Carbon 43:205410.1016/j.carbon.2005.03.020 ↗
19. Sauder C, Lamon J, Pailler R (2004) Carbon 42:71510.1016/j.carbon.2003.11.020 ↗
20. Ruland W (1967) J Appl Phys 38:358510.1063/1.1710176 ↗
21. Everall NJ, Lumsdon J, Christopher DJ (1991) Carbon 29:13310.1016/0008-6223(91)90064-P ↗
22. Northolt MG, Veldhuizen LH, Jansen H (1991) Carbon 29:126710.1016/0008-6223(91)90046-L ↗
23. Ruland W (1969) Appl Polym Symp 9:293
24. Blakslee OL, Proctor DG, Seldin EJ, Spence GB, Weng T (1970) J Appl Phys 41:337310.1063/1.1659428 ↗
25. Shioya M, Hayakawa E, Takaku A (1996) J Mater Sci 31:4521. doi: 10.1007/BF0036634710.1007/BF00366347 ↗
26. Sauder C, Lamon J (2005) Carbon 43:204410.1016/j.carbon.2005.03.019 ↗
27. Loidl D, Peterlik H, Müller M, Riekel C, Paris O (2003) Carbon 41:56310.1016/S0008-6223(02)00359-7 ↗
28. Loidl D, Paris O, Burghammer M, Riekel C, Peterlik H (2005) Phys Rev Lett 95:22550110.1103/PhysRevLett.95.225501 ↗
29. Fitzer E, Rozploch F (1988) Carbon 26:59410.1016/0008-6223(88)90162-5 ↗
30. Northolt MG, Baltussen JJM (2002) J Appl Polym Sci 83:50810.1002/app.2256 ↗
31. Robertson J (2002) Mater Sci Eng 37:12910.1016/S0927-796X(02)00005-0 ↗
32. Baldan MR, Almeida EC, Azevedo AF, Gonalves ES, Rezende MC, Ferreira NG (2007) Appl Surf Sci 254:60010.1016/j.apsusc.2007.06.038 ↗
33. Chi-Ting H, Chung DDL (1989) Carbon 27:60310.1016/0008-6223(89)90011-0 ↗
34. Hulman M, Skákalová V, Roth S, Kuzmany H (2005) J Appl Phys 98:2431110.1063/1.1984080 ↗
35. Telling RH, Ewels CP, El-Barbary AA, Heggie MI (2003) Nat Mater 2:33310.1038/nmat876 ↗
36. Hua Z, Zhong YJ, Li DF (2007) Mater Sci Forum 546–549:166510.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.546-549.1665 ↗
37. Peterlik H, Fratzl P, Kromp K (1994) Carbon 32:93910.1016/0008-6223(94)90053-1 ↗
38. Hughes JDH (1986) Strength and modulus of current carbon fibres. Carbon Proceedings of the Conference on Strength and Structural in Carbons and Graphites 24:55110.1016/0008-6223(86)90144-2 ↗
39. Cooper GA, Mayer RM (1971) J Mater Sci 6:60. doi: 10.1007/BF00550292f10.1007/BF00550292 ↗
40. Xiao H, Lu Y, Wang M, Qin X, Luan J (2013) Carbon 52:42710.1016/j.carbon.2012.09.054 ↗