A UV-curable epoxy with “soft” segments for 3D-printable shape-memory materials
Source abstract
Abstract
Three-dimensional (3D)-printable shape-memory polymers (SMPs) are of great interest for making advanced shape-memory materials. However, it has been challenging to combine 3D-printable capability with shape-memory function into one material. Here, we report a UV-curable epoxy with excellent shape-memory performance and improved toughness as compared with traditional epoxy counterpart. The epoxy system is realized by cross-linking epoxy resin diglycidyl ether of bisphenol F (DGEBF) (“hard” segments) with toughening agent 3-ethyl-3-oxetanemethanol (TMPO) (“soft” segments), which finally creates a three-dimensional network with TMPO-co-DGEBF block structures. The fold-deploy tests show that the shape fixity ratio (Rf) and the shape recovery ratio (Rr) of the epoxy with 50 wt% TMPO soft segment are above 97 and 99% even after 20 cycles of testing, respectively. In addition to bringing shape-memory performance, the toughness of the epoxy system is notably improved by the TMPO soft segments. This study provides a very promising epoxy system for 3D-printable shape-memory materials.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Polymer composites and self-healing · Photochromic and Fluorescence Chemistry · Photopolymerization techniques and applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (32)
Show source-provided references
1. Xiao X, Kong D, Qiu X et al (2015) Sci Rep 5:14137. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep1413710.1038/srep14137 ↗
2. Yu K, Ge Q, Qi HJ (2014) Nat Commun 5:3066. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms406610.1038/ncomms4066 ↗
3. Hoeher R, Raidt T, Rose M, Katzenberg F, Tiller JC (2013) J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys 51:1033. https://doi.org/10.1002/polb.2330110.1002/polb.23301 ↗
4. Liu Y, Gall K, Dunn ML, Greenberg AR, Diani J (2006) Int J Plast 22:279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2005.03.00410.1016/j.ijplas.2005.03.004 ↗
5. Parameswaranpillai J, Ramanan SP, Jose S et al (2017) Ind Eng Chem Res 56:14069. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.7b0367610.1021/acs.iecr.7b03676 ↗
6. Choong YYC, Maleksaeedi S, Eng H, Wei J, Su P-C (2017) Mater Des 126:219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.04.04910.1016/j.matdes.2017.04.049 ↗
7. Hu J, Zhu Y, Huang H, Lu J (2012) Prog Polym Sci 37:172010.1016/j.progpolymsci.2012.06.001 ↗
8. Zarek M, Layani M, Cooperstein I, Sachyani E, Cohn D, Magdassi S (2016) Adv Mater 28:4449. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.20150313210.1002/adma.201503132 ↗
9. Estelle K, Blair D, Evans K, Gozen BA (2017) J Manuf Process 28:500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2017.04.01810.1016/j.jmapro.2017.04.018 ↗
10. Wang X, Jiang M, Zhou Z, Gou J, Hui D (2017) Compos B Eng 110:442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.11.03410.1016/j.compositesb.2016.11.034 ↗
11. Ge Q, Sakhaei AH, Lee H, Dunn CK, Fang NX, Dunn ML (2016) Sci Rep 6:31110. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep3111010.1038/srep31110 ↗
12. Gladman AS, Matsumoto EA, Nuzzo RG, Mahadevan L, Lewis JA (2016) Nat Mater 15:413. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat454410.1038/nmat4544 ↗
13. Bhushan B, Caspers M (2017) Microsyst Technol 23:1117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00542-017-3342-810.1007/s00542-017-3342-8 ↗
14. Hu J, Chen W, Fan P et al (2017) Polym Testing 64:235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.09.03810.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.09.038 ↗
15. Meng H, Li G (2013) Polymer 54:2199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2013.02.02310.1016/j.polymer.2013.02.023 ↗
16. Hu J, Chen W, Fan P et al (2017) Polym Testing 62:335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.07.00110.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.07.001 ↗
17. Shen X, Liu X, Wang J, Dai J, Zhu J (2017) Ind Eng Chem Res 56:8508. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.7b0162410.1021/acs.iecr.7b01624 ↗
18. Abishera R, Velmurugan R, Gopal KVN (2017) Compos Sci Technol 141:145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.01.02010.1016/j.compscitech.2017.01.020 ↗
19. Santiago D, Fabregat-Sanjuan A, Ferrando F, De la Flor S (2017) J Appl Polym Sci. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.4462310.1002/app.44623 ↗
20. Lowenberg C, Balk M, Wischke C, Behl M, Lendlein A (2017) Acc Chem Res 50:723. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.accounts.6b0058410.1021/acs.accounts.6b00584 ↗
21. Zheng K, Zhu X, Qian X, Li J, Yang J, Nie J (2016) Polym Int 65:1486. https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.525810.1002/pi.5258 ↗
22. Schmidt AM (2006) Macromol Rapid Commun 27:1168. https://doi.org/10.1002/marc.20060022510.1002/marc.200600225 ↗
23. Rao KV, Ananthapadmanabha GS, Dayananda GN (2016) J Mater Eng Perform 25:5314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-016-2409-510.1007/s11665-016-2409-5 ↗
24. Tsige M, Stevens MJ (2004) Macromolecules 37:63010.1021/ma034970t ↗
25. Esen DS, Karasu F, Arsu N (2011) Prog Org Coat 70:102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2010.10.01010.1016/j.porgcoat.2010.10.010 ↗
26. Macan J, Ivankovic H, Ivankovic M, Mencer HJ (2004) J Appl Polym Sci 92:498. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.2002410.1002/app.20024 ↗
27. Wang Y, Li X, Pan Y, Zheng Z, Ding X, Peng Y (2014) RSC Adv 4:17156. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4ra00165f10.1039/c4ra00165f ↗
28. Liu Y, Han C, Tan H, Du X (2010) Mater Sci Eng A 527:251010.1016/j.msea.2009.12.014 ↗
29. Liu Y, Sun H, Tan H, Du X (2013) J Appl Polym Sci 127:315210.1002/app.37688 ↗
30. Kong D, Xiao X (2016) Sci Rep 6:33610. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep3361010.1038/srep33610 ↗
31. White EV, Arzberger SC, Tupper ML et al (2005) 5762:35. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.60058310.1117/12.600583 ↗
32. Ahn S-K, Deshmukh P, Kasi RM (2010) Macromolecules 43:7330. https://doi.org/10.1021/ma101145r10.1021/ma101145r ↗