journal article·2025-10

Cactus-like ZnO decorated UHMWPE fibers to improve the strength and toughness of polyurethane matrix composites

Weiwei Li, Wenhu Song, Shiting Li, Xiaoyu Wang

Publisher page

Abstract

Poor interfacial force is an important factor in preventing the development of fibers reinforced polymer composites. Fiber morphology design is an effective way to improve the interfacial property of composites. The development of nature has carried out the natural selection of survival of the fittest for organisms, and most of the surviving organisms have excellent structures and functions, which comes up with a new idea for the design of new reinforcement structure. Inspired by the cactus structure, we have prepared a new structural UHMWPE fiber reinforcement, which was characterized by a mass of cactus-like ZnO (C-ZnO) crystals decorated the UHMWPE fiber surface. The experimental results showed that the strength and toughness of C-ZnO UHMWPE fibers reinforced rigid polyurethane (RPU) composites were significantly improved. The satisfactory results were attributed to the cactus-like ZnO on the UHMWPE fiber surface, which could form a complex interfacial structure with the PRU matrix to increase the interface strength and the crack expansion paths.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Polymer composites and self-healing · Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications

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

Affiliations

School of Materials Science and Chemical Engineering, Ningbo University, Ningbo, China

Funding

Ningbo Natural Science Foundation

References (28)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1002/ppap.20093090610.1002/ppap.200930906 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2016.07.02610.1016/j.compscitech.2016.07.026 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.11.01110.1016/j.compositesb.2011.11.011 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2021.11386410.1016/j.compstruct.2021.113864 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.10688310.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106883 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.04.03110.1016/j.compositesb.2014.04.031 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.medengphy.2005.07.00910.1016/j.medengphy.2005.07.009 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2015.03.01710.1016/j.compscitech.2015.03.017 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2016.03.02610.1016/j.compscitech.2016.03.026 ↗
10. 10.1016/S0266-3538(98)00093-110.1016/S0266-3538(98)00093-1 ↗
11. 10.1080/00218464.2016.122960310.1080/00218464.2016.1229603 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2016.08.00610.1016/j.polymertesting.2016.08.006 ↗
13. 10.1021/am507087p10.1021/am507087p ↗
14. 10.1016/j.msea.2007.06.06010.1016/j.msea.2007.06.060 ↗
15. 10.1002/pat.490710.1002/pat.4907 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.11.38010.1016/j.jallcom.2017.11.380 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.matlet.2015.01.02410.1016/j.matlet.2015.01.024 ↗
18. 10.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.124-126.10110.4028/www.scientific.net/SSP.124-126.101 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2011.10.04810.1016/j.apsusc.2011.10.048 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.jiec.2023.05.01610.1016/j.jiec.2023.05.016 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.11.04710.1016/j.compscitech.2018.11.047 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.matlet.2016.08.04610.1016/j.matlet.2016.08.046 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.electacta.2007.03.05610.1016/j.electacta.2007.03.056 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.cis.2017.07.03310.1016/j.cis.2017.07.033 ↗
25. 10.1016/S0022-0248(99)00076-710.1016/S0022-0248(99)00076-7 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2011.11.08210.1016/j.matchemphys.2011.11.082 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2011.01.01010.1016/j.compositesb.2011.01.010 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2008.02.00810.1016/j.polymertesting.2008.02.008 ↗