journal article·2021-07

Effect of coupling agent quantity on composite interface structure and properties of fiber metal laminates

Wei Zhu, Hong Xiao, Jian Wang, Xiudong Li

Polymer Composites· Volume 42· Issue 7
Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract Epoxy silane coupling agent A‐187 and amine silane coupling agent A‐1387 were used to modify the interface of carbon‐reinforced aluminum laminates (CARE), respectively. The effects of the type and content of coupling agent on the microstructure and mechanical properties of CARE were investigated. Results show that with the increase in the content of two coupling agents, the wettability first increases and then decreases. When the mass fraction of the two coupling agents is 1%, good wetting property is obtained, and the interlaminar shear and flexural strengths of the CARE plate are the best. Compared with epoxy coupling agent A‐187, amine coupling agent A‐1387 had better wettability to aluminum alloy surface and highly contributed to the improvement of interface structure and properties, which then increased the interlaminar shear and flexural strengths by 19.1% and 8.9%, respectively.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Mechanical Behavior of Composites · Fiber-reinforced polymer composites · Advanced ceramic materials synthesis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

National Engineering Research Center for Equipment and Technology of Cold Strip Rolling Yanshan University Qinhuangdao Hebei China

State Key Laboratory of Advanced Design and Manufacturing for Vehicle Body Hunan University Changsha Hunan China

References (24)

Show source-provided references
1. Tao J. · J. Nanjing University Aeronautics Astronautics · 2015 · 47 · 626
2. 10.1023/A:102553370180610.1023/A:1025533701806 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.matdes.2011.03.01110.1016/j.matdes.2011.03.011 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2013.08.00310.1016/j.compstruct.2013.08.003 ↗
5. Wu S. · Acta Mater. Compos. Sinica · 2018 · 35 · 733
6. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.10.02310.1016/j.compositesb.2014.10.023 ↗
7. Wang Q. · Laster Technol. · 2016 · 40 · 853
8. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.05.00210.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.05.002 ↗
9. Wang F. · Electromach. Mould · 2015 · 322 · 26
10. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.12.02910.1016/j.compositesb.2014.12.029 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.04210.1016/j.compstruct.2017.11.042 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.10.29610.1016/j.proeng.2014.10.296 ↗
13. Zhai B. · Acta Mater. Compos. Sinica · 2013 · 30 · 154
14. 10.1002/sia.356010.1002/sia.3560 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2014.12.08110.1016/j.apsusc.2014.12.081 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2013.04.00710.1016/j.compscitech.2013.04.007 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2016.06.00710.1016/j.ijadhadh.2016.06.007 ↗
18. He Y. · Mater. Sci. Technol. · 2014 · 22 · 101
19. Wang X. · J. Mater. Sci. Eng. · 2005 · 23 · 146
20. 10.1016/j.porgcoat.2015.05.02310.1016/j.porgcoat.2015.05.023 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.memsci.2008.03.04410.1016/j.memsci.2008.03.044 ↗
22. 10.1007/s10853-006-0410-310.1007/s10853-006-0410-3 ↗
23. Lee M. S. · J. Compos. Mater. · 2016 · 10 · 1
24. 10.1016/j.matdes.2016.12.01110.1016/j.matdes.2016.12.011 ↗