journal article·2022-08Open access

Study Mullins effect of polyurethane reinforcement with halloysite nanotube by molecular dynamics simulation

Mohammadreza Heidari Pebdani

Journal of Elastomers & Plastics· Volume 54· Issue 5

Abstract

Molecular dynamics simulation was applied to study the irreversible strain through loading and unloading cyclic tests of polyurethane (PU) reinforced with halloysite nanotube (HNT). The influences of the stretching cycle rate, different temperatures, the volume of halloysite nanotube and the density rate of the hard and soft domain of PU were studied on the permanent set. The results illustrate that the residual strain was increasing when the stretching loading is increasing, for example, with increasing strain load to 250% the residual strain increased to 55%. In contrast, the increasing volume fraction of HNT and hard part content of PU lead to lower residual strain. The recovery of the permanent set is achievable by increasing temperature from 1 K to 200 K residual strain is decreased to 52%. An Ogden constitutive and the theory of pseudo-elasticity were adopted to simulate this composite in the ABAQUS software. This model has proposed a reasonable prediction of plastic deformation.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Clay minerals and soil interactions · Polymer Nanocomposites and Properties · Carbon Nanotubes in Composites

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

Affiliations

Department of mechanical engineering, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada

Funding

Canadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

References (43)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1063/1.46067210.1063/1.460672 ↗
2. 10.1021/ma062924y10.1021/ma062924y ↗
3. 10.1002/app.1966.07010021210.1002/app.1966.070100212 ↗
4. 10.1002/app.1965.07009090710.1002/app.1965.070090907 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.polymer.2005.09.03910.1016/j.polymer.2005.09.039 ↗
6. 10.1021/ma200725510.1021/ma2007255 ↗
7. 10.1021/ma035985u10.1021/ma035985u ↗
8. 10.5254/1.353921010.5254/1.3539210 ↗
9. 10.1038/nature0352110.1038/nature03521 ↗
10. 10.1038/nature0545910.1038/nature05459 ↗
11. 10.5254/1.354270510.5254/1.3542705 ↗
12. 10.1039/C7CP01142C10.1039/C7CP01142C ↗
13. 10.1016/j.polymer.2014.08.02010.1016/j.polymer.2014.08.020 ↗
14. 10.1080/15376494.2018.143279310.1080/15376494.2018.1432793 ↗
15. 10.1088/0957-4484/24/10/10570410.1088/0957-4484/24/10/105704 ↗
16. 10.1166/jnn.2011.472010.1166/jnn.2011.4720 ↗
17. 10.1021/nn800259q10.1021/nn800259q ↗
18. 10.1021/jp100902e10.1021/jp100902e ↗
19. 10.1039/C7CP06575B10.1039/C7CP06575B ↗
20. Njoroge JL · 2013
21. 10.1016/0079-6700(91)90011-910.1016/0079-6700(91)90011-9 ↗
22. 10.1021/jp980939v10.1021/jp980939v ↗
23. 10.1063/1.501118110.1063/1.5011181 ↗
24. 10.1021/j100389a01010.1021/j100389a010 ↗
25. 10.1021/cm801287d10.1021/cm801287d ↗
26. 10.1021/la303884610.1021/la3038846 ↗
27. 10.5254/1.354486710.5254/1.3544867 ↗
28. 10.1080/10667857.2016.126527810.1080/10667857.2016.1265278 ↗
29. 10.1051/epjconf/2012300400110.1051/epjconf/20123004001 ↗
30. 10.1006/jcph.1995.103910.1006/jcph.1995.1039 ↗
31. 10.1115/1.404831910.1115/1.4048319 ↗
32. 10.1887/085274392010.1887/0852743920 ↗
33. 10.1103/PhysRevB.17.130210.1103/PhysRevB.17.1302 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2008.11.01710.1016/j.eurpolymj.2008.11.017 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.04.00210.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.04.002 ↗
36. Rigbi Z · Prop Polym · 1980 · 21
37. 10.1016/j.polymer.2010.10.00910.1016/j.polymer.2010.10.009 ↗
38. 10.1098/rspa.1999.043110.1098/rspa.1999.0431 ↗
39. 10.1016/B978-0-08-025443-2.50021-510.1016/B978-0-08-025443-2.50021-5 ↗
40. 10.1016/S0020-7462(00)00080-910.1016/S0020-7462(00)00080-9 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.12.01510.1016/j.ijsolstr.2008.12.015 ↗
42. 10.1098/rspa.1972.002610.1098/rspa.1972.0026 ↗
43. 10.1155/2019/236932910.1155/2019/2369329 ↗