Characterization of the uncertainties in the constitutive behavior of carbon nanotube/cement composites
Source abstract
Abstract
This paper addresses the uncertainties associated with using carbon nanotubes (CNTs) as reinforcement for cement. These uncertainties emerge mainly from the CNTs' wide range of mechanical properties and their interfacial behavior with cement. This study sheds light on the basis of choosing the optimal combinations of CNTs mechanical and interfacial parameters to improve the structural strength and ductility of CNT-reinforced cementitious composites. The finite element method (FEM) is employed to study the individual and interactive effects of five parameters, including interfacial shear (bond) strength, allowable slip, CNT Young's modulus, residual bond stress and aspect ratio. Numerical results show that the parameters, at certain ranges of values, interact substantially and greatly alter the mechanical properties of the composite. It is also found that the governing parameter is the CNT Young's modulus, which determines whether the composite is ductility critical or strength critical. Furthermore, the level of residual bond stress substantially influences the effect of other parameters, especially in the case of composite ductility.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Carbon Nanotubes in Composites · Nanotechnology research and applications · Smart Materials for Construction
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Newmark Civil and Environmental Engineering Laboratory, Universiy of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
References (31)
Show source-provided references
1. Bentur A · 1990
2. 10.1016/S0008-6223(01)00119-110.1016/S0008-6223(01)00119-1 ↗
3. 10.1038/3504069910.1038/35040699 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.matdes.2004.01.00310.1016/j.matdes.2004.01.003 ↗
5. 10.1016/S0167-9317(04)00181-910.1016/S0167-9317(04)00181-9 ↗
6. CampilloIDoladoJ SPorroA 2003 Proc. 1st Int. Symp. Nanotechnology in Construction Paisley Scotland p 215
7. 10.1016/j.carbon.2004.12.01710.1016/j.carbon.2004.12.017 ↗
8. Chan L C · Proc. 2009 Structures Congress · 2009 · p 2686
9. 10.1016/j.commatsci.2004.11.00310.1016/j.commatsci.2004.11.003 ↗
10. Liu Y J · Electron. J. Bound. Elem. · 2003 · 1 · 316
11. 10.1016/S0167-6636(02)00200-410.1016/S0167-6636(02)00200-4 ↗
12. MakarJBeaudoinJ 2003 Proc. 1st Int. Symp. Nanotechnology in Construction Paisley Scotland p 331
13. 10.1038/363603a010.1038/363603a0 ↗
14. 10.1126/science.106092810.1126/science.1060928 ↗
15. ANSYS, Inc. 2009 ANSYS Website http://www.ansys.com/services/ss-documentation.asp (retrieved 1 June 2009)
16. Willam K J · Proc. Int. Assoc. Bridge Struct. Eng. · 1975 · 19 · 1
17. 10.1016/S0008-8846(03)00039-510.1016/S0008-8846(03)00039-5 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2007.07.00110.1016/j.cemconres.2007.07.001 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.matchar.2007.05.01810.1016/j.matchar.2007.05.018 ↗
20. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1991)117:9(2791)10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9445(1991)117:9(2791) ↗
21. Wei C · Appl. Phys. Lett. · 2006 · 88 · 093018
22. Lim T · ACI Mater. J. · 1987 · 84 · 286
23. 10.1016/j.tws.2005.07.00310.1016/j.tws.2005.07.003 ↗
24. 10.1038/381678a010.1038/381678a0 ↗
25. 10.1126/science.277.5334.197110.1126/science.277.5334.1971 ↗
26. 10.1557/JMR.1998.033610.1557/JMR.1998.0336 ↗
27. 10.1166/jnn.2006.30510.1166/jnn.2006.305 ↗
28. Yu M · Soc. Mech. Eng. · 2002 · 55 · 495
29. Frankland S · Surf. Sci. · 2002 · 525 · L10310.1016/S0039-6028(02)02532-3 ↗
30. 10.1063/1.12068010.1063/1.120680 ↗
31. 10.1063/1.152158510.1063/1.1521585 ↗