
Nanofillers as secondary reinforcement in polymeric composites have shown promising results on improvement of mechanical properties of the polymeric composites. However, due to the in-plane resin path, filtration of the nanofillers through fabric during processing is a major challenge in liquid infusion processes such as resin transfer molding. In resin film infusion process, the resin travels in thickness direction and due the shorter resin path, the possibility of filtration is minimal. In this study, resin film infusion (RFI) process is used to fabricate graphene platelets reinforced glass/epoxy hybrid composites. First, the resin films with 0.4 and 0.8 percent of graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) were manufactured using solvent casting process. Then, these films were used to fabricate composites using resin film infusion process. Mechanical characterization tests, namely tensile, flexural and short beam, were performed. Tensile strength of the 0.4% and 0.8% GNPs reinforced composites was 36.13% and 22.23% higher, respectively, than that of baseline composites. Flexural strength 0.4% and 0.8% GNPs modified composites was 24.96% higher and 32% lower, respectively, compared to baseline composite. Lastly, minimal change was observed in short beam shear strength due to GNPs reinforcement. Higher void volume fraction of 1.7% and 4.5% as compared to baseline composites observed in 0.4% and 0.8% GNPs modified composites respectively.
Citation: Neerajkumar Wayzode, Vinod Suryawanshi. Mechanical properties of graphene nanoplatelets reinforced glass/epoxy composites manufactured using resin film infusion process[J]. AIMS Materials Science, 2023, 10(4): 693-709. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2023038
[1] | Ahlem Matallah, Rabie Guezi, Abdelmadjid Bairi . Repeated restraint stress induced neurobehavioral and sexual hormone disorders in male rats. AIMS Neuroscience, 2022, 9(2): 264-276. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2022014 |
[2] | Masao Ito, Naoko Nisimaru . Cerebellar Control of Defense Reactions under Orexin-mediated Neuromodulation as a Model of Cerebellohypothalamic Interaction. AIMS Neuroscience, 2014, 1(1): 89-95. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2014.1.89 |
[3] | Graziella Orrù, Marina Baroni, Ciro Conversano, Angelo Gemignani . Exploring the therapeutic potential of tDCS, TMS and DBS in overcoming tobacco use disorder: an umbrella review. AIMS Neuroscience, 2024, 11(4): 449-467. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2024027 |
[4] | Laaziz Abderrahim, El Mostafi Hicham, Elhessni Aboubaker, Azeroil Fatima, Touil Tarik, Boumlah Soufiane, Mesfioui Abdelhalim . Sex differences in behavioral, cognitive and voluntary ethanol-intake effects in Dexamethasone-induced depression-like state in Wistar rat. AIMS Neuroscience, 2022, 9(2): 228-249. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2022012 |
[5] | Ashok Chakraborty, Anil Diwan . Depression and Parkinson's disease: a Chicken-Egg story. AIMS Neuroscience, 2022, 9(4): 479-490. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2022027 |
[6] | Nao Fukuwada, Miki Kanno, Satomi Yoshida, Kenjiro Seki . Gαq protein signaling in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis regulate the lipopolysaccharide-induced despair-like behavior in mice. AIMS Neuroscience, 2020, 7(4): 438-458. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2020027 |
[7] | Stefan G. Hofmann, Elizabeth A. Mundy, Joshua Curtiss . Neuroenhancement of Exposure Therapy in Anxiety Disorders. AIMS Neuroscience, 2015, 2(3): 123-138. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2015.3.123 |
[8] | AB Segarra, I Prieto, M Martínez-Cañamero, Manuel Ramírez-Sánchez . Is there a link between depression, neurochemical asymmetry and cardiovascular function?. AIMS Neuroscience, 2020, 7(4): 360-372. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2020022 |
[9] | Nicholas J. D. Wright . A review of the direct targets of the cannabinoids cannabidiol, Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol, N-arachidonoylethanolamine and 2-arachidonoylglycerol. AIMS Neuroscience, 2024, 11(2): 144-165. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2024009 |
[10] | Kiran Kumar Siddappaji, Shubha Gopal . Molecular mechanisms in Alzheimer's disease and the impact of physical exercise with advancements in therapeutic approaches. AIMS Neuroscience, 2021, 8(3): 357-389. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2021020 |
Nanofillers as secondary reinforcement in polymeric composites have shown promising results on improvement of mechanical properties of the polymeric composites. However, due to the in-plane resin path, filtration of the nanofillers through fabric during processing is a major challenge in liquid infusion processes such as resin transfer molding. In resin film infusion process, the resin travels in thickness direction and due the shorter resin path, the possibility of filtration is minimal. In this study, resin film infusion (RFI) process is used to fabricate graphene platelets reinforced glass/epoxy hybrid composites. First, the resin films with 0.4 and 0.8 percent of graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) were manufactured using solvent casting process. Then, these films were used to fabricate composites using resin film infusion process. Mechanical characterization tests, namely tensile, flexural and short beam, were performed. Tensile strength of the 0.4% and 0.8% GNPs reinforced composites was 36.13% and 22.23% higher, respectively, than that of baseline composites. Flexural strength 0.4% and 0.8% GNPs modified composites was 24.96% higher and 32% lower, respectively, compared to baseline composite. Lastly, minimal change was observed in short beam shear strength due to GNPs reinforcement. Higher void volume fraction of 1.7% and 4.5% as compared to baseline composites observed in 0.4% and 0.8% GNPs modified composites respectively.
The prevalence of depression and anxiety disorder has shown a marked increase in the last years, thus highlighting their status as a growing worldwide public health issue [1]. Depression is characterized by persistent feelings of sadness, hopelessness, and a loss of interest or pleasure in activities, and is often accompanied by physical symptoms such as changes in appetite, sleep disturbances, and fatigue [2], and behavioral symptoms, which cover emotional, motivational, cognitive, and physiological domains, and include anhedonia and memory alterations [3]. Anxiety disorders involve excessive worry, fear, and physiological symptoms such as increased heart rate and restlessness, insomnia, and dizziness [4],[5]. Their treatment typically includes pharmacological approaches, such as antidepressants (e.g., selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) and anti-anxiety medications, as well as psychological interventions such as cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), which focuses on restructuring negative thought patterns, and mindfulness-based interventions, which help individuals develop awareness and an acceptance of their thoughts and feelings. In this field, neuromodulation techniques, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), have emerged as valuable strategies for patients who do not respond to traditional therapies, thus offering promising results in managing these debilitating conditions.
Repetitive TMS (rTMS) uses magnetic pulses that penetrate the scalp and reach the brain through a coil placed over a patient's head, and is based on the activation of neurons by depolarization [6]. It is usually used for both psychiatric and neurological disorders through inhibitory (1 Hz and continuous theta burst stimulation) or excitatory (>5 Hz and intermittent theta burst stimulation) protocols [7], with different levels of evidence according to the most recent guidelines [8]. In the treatment of depression and anxiety, the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) is an area of major interest, mostly identified using neuronavigation systems [9]. Otherwise, tDCS uses two electrodes (one anode and one cathode) which create a feeble continuous current (1–2 mA) and acts on cortical excitability [10]. It seems to be effective for the treatment of unipolar and bipolar depression, with effects for active versus sham tDCS considered small-to-medium in depressive symptoms [11],[12], and may also alleviate chronic anxiety disorders [13].
However, longer protocols demand a greater time investment and commitment from patients, and often leads to a poor compliance or logistical challenges that hinder the treatment completion. For this reason, achieving significant results within a shorter timeframe would be highly beneficial for patients.
Given this background, we decided to use a short and more intensive protocol of only 5 days that can act on both depression and anxiety symptoms. The distinctive feature of the protocol lies in the short timeframe and in the sequential application of combined tDCS and TMS techniques, aiming to maximize the neuromodulatory effect. rTMS induces synaptic plasticity in a frequency-dependent manner, thus producing effects similar to long-term potentiation (LTP) or depression (LTD); on the other hand, tDCS modulates the baseline excitability of neurons, which enhances it with anodal or cathodal stimulation, thereby making neural circuits more responsive to subsequent interventions. In this context, tDCS can prime the cortex, thus creating a more favorable state for TMS to induce stronger and more targeted neuroplastic changes [14],[15].
G. was a 68-year-old woman who suffered from depression and generalized anxiety disorder. Her psychopathological onset dates were recorded about 30 years ago and it was characterized by sadness and anxiety symptoms. From 2006 to 2015, a neurologist specialist prescribed prazepam and paroxetine for her; however, she had a poor compliance with pharmacological treatment over the years. She either decreased or stopped using the drugs on her own. She had a period of total remission (2015) which was interrupted by a cancer diagnosis. Over the last 10 years, there were periods of well-being alternating with periods of worsening symptoms.
The therapies prescribed during these years were as follows: delorazepam, citalopram, paroxetine, and venlafaxine. At the time the patient arrived at our observation, she was in a treatment comprised of duloxetine 30 mg/day, quetiapine 100 mg/day (slow-release formulation), and delorazepam 1 mg/day. She was referred to the neuromodulation clinic due to the persistence of mild symptoms despite the pharmacotherapy. The patient provided written informed consent after an explanation of the protocol design.
The protocol developed for her consisted of the combination of tDCS and rTMS (and for this reason we considered it intensive), and included two sessions/day separated by a 20-minute break for five consecutive days.
The first session provided anodal tDCS stimulation at the level of the left DLPFC (lDLPFC) followed by rTMS stimulation of the right DLPFC (rDLPFC). The brain areas were identified by locating landmarks through craniometric references, without the aid of magnetic resonance imaging. Specifically, the tDCS parameters were as follows: electrodes (PiSTIM) with a diameter of 12 mm and a circular surface area of approximately 3.14 cm2. The electrodes were placed at the DLPFC. Specifically, anodal stimulation was performed with a voltage of 2000 µA, at the level of the lDLPFC, and cathodic stimulation was performed on the corresponding area on the rDLPFC. A highly conductive saline gel was applied to each electrode, and the protocol lasted for 20 min and 4 seconds. The second session provided the same tDCS treatment as the first one but was followed by rTMS stimulation of the lDLPFC. The r-TMS protocol of the rDLPFC consisted of a frequency of 1Hz (parameters: 600 stimuli/session, 30 pulses/train, 20 total trains, 1 s inter-train interval at 80% motor threshold (MT) for the hand muscles); the rTMS protocol of the lDLPFC consisted of a frequency of 10Hz (parameters: 3000 stimuli/session,40 pulses/train,75 total trains, 26 s inter-train interval at 110% MT).
The Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) and the Hamilton rating scale for depression (HAM-D) were used for the clinical assessment [16],[17]. These scales were administered twice to the patient: once before the beginning of treatment (T0) and once at the end of the treatment (T1). At T0, the score was indicative of mild anxiety (HAM-A score = 13) and mild depression (HAM-D score = 11). At T1, the scores indicated no depression or anxiety (HAM-A score = 2; HAM-D score = 4), which suggests that the patient reported remission of both the depression and anxiety symptoms (see Figure 1). Moreover, the tDCS/rTMS combination was well tolerated; the only one side effect was a slight headache after the first day of treatment, with a remission a few hours following its onset.
A follow up at 1 month (T2) and 3 months (T3) was conducted using the same assessment tools (Figure 1). At T2, the scales indicated a stable clinical condition (HAM-A = 5; HAM-D = 7), with a slight increase in both scales but no pathological score, and a worsening on both scales at T3, with a mild score in both anxiety and depression (HAM-A = 10; HAM-D = 8).
This case describes the effect of two combined neuromodulation techniques (tDCS and rTMS in succession), which, in a short time, have shown a good efficacy in reducing symptoms in a patient with depression and generalized anxiety.
The designed protocol included a first session of tDCS (2000 µA) followed by a low frequency rTMS stimulation of the rDLPFC, and then a second session provided the same tDCS treatment as the first one, followed by a high frequency rTMS stimulation of the lDLPFC. The effectiveness of this kind of protocol has already been investigated in literature, which described the sequential bilateral high frequency rTSM of the lDLPFC and a low frequency rTMS of the rDLPFC in depression and anxiety in comorbidity [18], an accelerated bilateral theta burst stimulation (TBS) for the treatment of depression [19], and the treatment of suicide ideation with a 5 consecutive day TBS protocol [20].
The choice of DLPFC as the target area of treatment arose from the observations of common prefrontal abnormalities, both in depression and anxiety [21], with a possible laterality in the expression and regulation [22].
The use of tDCS in this case also draws from literature data, which showed that an anodal stimulation of the lDLPFC had a level A of evidence in the treatment of depression [7]; however, there was not the same level of evidence in the treatment of anxiety, where tDCS was shown to lead to a reduction in symptoms compared to placebo [23], with optimal sessions lasting 20 minutes (sessions of 20, 30 or 60 minutes have been tested) and an optimal current intensity of 2 mA [24]. However, compared to common interventions which lasted more than 10 days [8], our case involved the use of combined techniques over just 5 days of treatment, thus ensuring an intensive, brief, and effective protocol which was psychologically well-tolerated by the patient.
In any case, a near-clinical stabilization was observed one month after the end of the treatment, followed by a deterioration at three months, thus suggesting the need to reinforce the intervention with at least monthly booster sessions. Considering the patient's age, this pattern may indicate that aging could contribute to a reduced duration of treatment effects, as neuroplasticity, which underlies the efficacy of neuromodulation techniques, tends to decline with age [25].
Moreover, it is possible that the prior use of medications for the treatment of depression (such as duloxetine, quetiapine, and benzodiazepines) may have limited the neuromodulatory effects of the applied techniques [26],[27]. However, neuromodulation techniques have also emerged as augmentation strategies for the treatment of anxiety and depression in individuals who exhibit partial or poor responses to pharmacological or psychotherapeutic interventions. Our study supports the potential of non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques as effective augmentation or combination therapies for anxiety and depression, which is in agreement with other recent studies [23],[28],[29].
The results of the present case are promising, and demonstrated that combining two neuromodulation techniques (tDCS and rTMS) can effectively reduce the symptoms of depression and anxiety within just a few days of treatment.
Nevertheless, this study has some limitations. First, the identification of the brain areas was not performed using MRI-guided neuronavigation, which may have slightly reduced the accuracy of the stimulation targeting. Second, as this was a single case report, the findings cannot be generalized and should be considered exploratory. Therefore, further studies are warranted to improve the statistical power, investigate the long-term durability of the clinical effects, and assess the efficacy of the protocol in more severe cases. Future randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should aim to evaluate the broader applicability and potential limitations of this combined neuromodulation approach, thus contributing to a more comprehensive understanding of its therapeutic potential.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
[1] |
Sasidharan S, Anand A (2020) Epoxy-based hybrid structural composites with nanofillers: A Review. Ind Eng Chem Res 59: 12617–12631. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.0c01711 doi: 10.1021/acs.iecr.0c01711
![]() |
[2] |
Bhanushali H, Bradford PD (2016) Woven glass fiber composites with aligned carbon nanotube sheet interlayers. J Nanomater 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/9705257 doi: 10.1155/2016/9705257
![]() |
[3] |
Prasanthi PP, Kumar MSRN, Chowdary MS, et al. (2023) Mechanical properties of carbon fiber reinforced with carbon nanotubes and graphene filled epoxy composites: Experimental and numerical investigations. Mater Res Express 10: 025308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2053-1591/acaef5 doi: 10.1088/2053-1591/acaef5
![]() |
[4] |
Anand A, Harshe R, Joshi M (2012) On the processing and properties of carbon nanofiber reinforced hybrid structural composites. J Compos Mater 47: 2937–2943. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021998312459873 doi: 10.1177/0021998312459873
![]() |
[5] |
Marrivada GV, Chaganti PK, Sujith R, et al. (2022) Effect of addition of graphene nanoplatelets on the mechanical properties of triaxially braided composites. Adv Compos Mater 32: 182–210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09243046.2022.2080990 doi: 10.1080/09243046.2022.2080990
![]() |
[6] |
Shokrieh MM, Esmkhani M, Shahverdi HR, et al. (2013) Effect of graphene nanosheets (GNS) and fraphite nanoplatelets (GNP) on the mechanical properties of epoxy nanocomposites. Sci Adv Mater 5: 260–266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1166/sam.2013.1453 doi: 10.1166/sam.2013.1453
![]() |
[7] |
Suresha B, Varun CA, Indushekhara NM, et al. (2019) Effect of nano filler reinforcement on mechanical properties of epoxy composites. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 574: 012010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1757-899x/574/1/012010 doi: 10.1088/1757-899x/574/1/012010
![]() |
[8] |
Yang T, Lu S, Song D, et al. (2021) Effect of nanofiller on the mechanical properties of carbon fiber/epoxy composites under different aging conditions. Materials 14: 7810. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma14247810 doi: 10.3390/ma14247810
![]() |
[9] |
Li X, Wang Q, Cui X, et al. (2022) Study on the mechanical and toughness behavior of epoxy nano-composites with zero-dimensional and two-dimensional nano-fillers. Polymers-Basel 14: 3618. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/polym14173618 doi: 10.3390/polym14173618
![]() |
[10] |
Domun N, Paton KR, Blackman BRK, et al. (2020) On the extent of fracture toughness transfer from 1D/2D nanomodified epoxy matrices to glass fibre composites. J Mater Sci 55: 4717–4733. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10853-019-04340-8 doi: 10.1007/s10853-019-04340-8
![]() |
[11] |
Monti M, Rallini M, Puglia D, et al. (2013) Morphology and electrical properties of graphene-epoxy nanocomposites obtained by different solvent assisted processing methods. Compos Part A-Appl S 46: 166–172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2012.11.005 doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2012.11.005
![]() |
[12] |
Rafiee MA, Rafiee J, Wang Z, et al. (2009) Enhanced mechanical properties of nanocomposites at low graphene content. ACS Nano 3: 3884–3890. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/nn9010472 doi: 10.1021/nn9010472
![]() |
[13] |
Ge Z, Qin J, Sun R, et al. (2021) The effect of the addition of graphene nanoplatelets on the selected properties of cementitious composites. Front Built Environ 7: 673346. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2021.673346 doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2021.673346
![]() |
[14] |
Reia da Costa EF, Skordos AA, Partridge IK, et al. (2012) RTM processing and electrical performance of carbon nanotube modified epoxy/fibre composites. Compos Part A-Appl S 43: 593–602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.12.019 doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.12.019
![]() |
[15] |
Yao X, Kinloch IA, Bissett MA (2021) Fabrication and mechanical performance of graphene nanoplatelet/glass fiber reinforced polymer hybrid composites. Front Mater 8: 773343. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2021.773343 doi: 10.3389/fmats.2021.773343
![]() |
[16] |
Zhang H, Liu Y, Huo S, et al. (2017) Filtration effects of graphene nanoplatelets in resin infusion processes: Problems and possible solutions. Compos Sci Technol 139: 138–145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2016.12.020 doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2016.12.020
![]() |
[17] |
Anand A, Harshe R, Joshi M (2012) Resin film infusion: Toward structural composites with nanofillers. J Appl Polym Sci 129: 1618–1624. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/app.38855 doi: 10.1002/app.38855
![]() |
[18] |
Summerscales J (2012) Resin infusion under flexible tooling (RIFT). Wires Encyclopedia Compos. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118097298.weoc216 doi: 10.1002/9781118097298.weoc216
![]() |
[19] |
Yourdkhani M, Liu W, Baril-Gosselin S, et al. (2018) Carbon nanotube-reinforced carbon fibre-epoxy composites manufactured by resin film infusion. Compos Sci Technol 166: 169–175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.01.006 doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.01.006
![]() |
[20] |
Kavosi J, Sarikaya S, Creasy TS, et al. (2021) Identification of the effect of nanofiller morphology on interlaminar fracture toughness of hybrid composites. J Compos Mater 55: 2899–2910. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00219983211002915 doi: 10.1177/00219983211002915
![]() |
[21] |
Feng J, Safaei B, Qin Z, et al. (2023) Nature-inspired energy dissipation sandwich composites reinforced with high-friction graphene. Compos Sci Technol 2023: 109925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2023.109925 doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2023.109925
![]() |
[22] |
Feng J, Safaei B, Qin Z, et al. (2023) Effects of graphene surface morphology on damping properties of epoxy composites. Polymer 281: 126107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2023.126107 doi: 10.1016/j.polymer.2023.126107
![]() |
[23] |
Dhawan A, Jindal P (2021) Mechanical behavior of carboxylic functionalized graphene reinforced polyurethane nanocomposites under static and dynamic loading. Polym Composite 42: 4911–4922. https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.26199 doi: 10.1002/pc.26199
![]() |
[24] |
Zeng C, Lu S, Xiao X, et al. (2014) Enhanced thermal and mechanical properties of epoxy composites by mixing noncovalently functionalized graphene sheets. Polym Bull 72: 453–472. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00289-014-1280-5 doi: 10.1007/s00289-014-1280-5
![]() |
[25] |
Li W, Wang M, Yue Y, et al. (2016) Enhanced mechanical and thermal properties of bismaleimide composites with covalent functionalized graphene oxide. RSC Adv 6: 54410–54417. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c6ra09260h doi: 10.1039/c6ra09260h
![]() |
[26] |
Qiao SJ, Xu XN, Qiu Y, et al. (2016) Simultaneous reduction and functionalization of graphene oxide by 4-Hydrazinobenzenesulfonic acid for polymer nanocomposites. Nanomaterials-Basel 6: 29. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nano6020029 doi: 10.3390/nano6020029
![]() |
[27] |
Wan YJ, Yang WH, Yu SH, et al. (2016) Covalent polymer functionalization of graphene for improved dielectric properties and thermal stability of epoxy composites. Compos Sci Technol 122: 27–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2015.11.005 doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2015.11.005
![]() |
[28] |
Singh RK, Kumar R, Singh DP (2016) Graphene oxide: Strategies for synthesis, reduction and frontier applications. RSC Adv 6: 64993–65011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c6ra07626b doi: 10.1039/c6ra07626b
![]() |
[29] |
Kumar R, Singh RK, Singh DP (2016) Natural and waste hydrocarbon precursors for the synthesis of carbon based nanomaterials: Graphene and CNTs. Renew Sust Energ Rev 58: 976–1006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.120 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.120
![]() |
[30] |
Ma Q, Luo J, Chen Y, et al. (2015) Reactive copolymer functionalized graphene sheet for enhanced mechanical and thermal properties of epoxy composites. J Polym Sci Pol Chem 53: 2776–2785. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pola.27751 doi: 10.1002/pola.27751
![]() |
[31] |
Hou G, Gao J, Xie J, et al. (2015) Preparation and properties characterization of gallic acid epoxy resin/succinic anhydride bionanocomposites modified by green reduced graphene oxide. Soft Mater 14: 27–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1539445x.2015.1098704 doi: 10.1080/1539445x.2015.1098704
![]() |
[32] |
Wang H, Lu S, Zhang Y, et al. (2015) Pristine graphene dispersion in solvents and its application as a catalyst support: A combined theoretical and experimental study. J Mater Chem A 3: 6282–6285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/c5ta00359h doi: 10.1039/c5ta00359h
![]() |
[33] |
Wei J, Saharudin MS, Vo T, et al. (2017) Dichlorobenzene: An effective solvent for epoxy/graphene nanocomposites preparation. Roy Soc Open Sci 4: 170778. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.170778 doi: 10.1098/rsos.170778
![]() |
[34] | ASTM International (2020) Standard test methods for density and specific gravity (relative density) of plastics by displacement. ASTM D792-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/d0792-20 |
[35] | ASTM International (2022) Standard test methods for constituent content of composite materials. ASTM D3171-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/d3171-22 |
[36] | ASTM International (2014) Standard test method for tensile properties of polymer matrix composite materials. ASTM D3039/D3039M-08. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/d3039_d3039m-08 |
[37] | ASTM International (2015) Standard test method for flexural properties of polymer matrix composite materials. ASTM D7264/D7264M-07. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/d7264_d7264m-07 |
[38] | ASTM International (2022) Standard test method for short-beam strength of polymer matrix composite materials and their laminates. ASTM D2344/D2344M-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/d2344_d2344m-22 |
[39] |
Wilson NR, Pandey PA, Beanland R, et al. (2010) On the structure and topography of free-standing chemically modified graphene. New J Phys 12: 125010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/12/12/125010 doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/12/12/125010
![]() |
[40] |
Jose PPA, Kala MS, Joseph AV, et al. (2019) Reduced graphene oxide/silver nanohybrid as a multifunctional material for antibacterial, anticancer, and SERS applications. Appl Phys A 126: 58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00339-019-3237-x doi: 10.1007/s00339-019-3237-x
![]() |
[41] |
Mehdikhani M, Gorbatikh L, Verpoest I, et al. (2018) Voids in fiber-reinforced polymer composites: A review on their formation, characteristics, and effects on mechanical performance. J Compos Mater 53: 1579–1669. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021998318772152 doi: 10.1177/0021998318772152
![]() |
[42] | Robles JB, Hong L, Octeau MA, et al. Material characterization of graphene enhanced composites for resin transfer moulding. 11th Canadian-International Conference on Composites, 2018, 1–7. |
[43] |
Prusty RK, Ghosh SK, Rathore DK, et al. (2017) Reinforcement effect of graphene oxide in glass fibre/epoxy composites at in-situ elevated temperature environments: An emphasis on graphene oxide content. Compos Part A-Appl S 95: 40–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2017.01.001 doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2017.01.001
![]() |
[44] |
Rahman MM, Zainuddin S, Hosur MV, et al. (2012) Improvements in mechanical and thermo-mechanical properties of e-glass/epoxy composites using amino functionalized MWCNTs. Compos Struct 94: 2397–2406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2012.03.014 doi: 10.1016/j.compstruct.2012.03.014
![]() |
[45] |
Shivakumar H, Renukappa NM, Shivakumar KN, et al. (2020) The reinforcing effect of graphene on the mechanical properties of carbon-epoxy composites. Open J Compos Mater 10: 27–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojcm.2020.102003 doi: 10.4236/ojcm.2020.102003
![]() |
[46] |
Vigneshwaran GV, Shanmugavel BP, Paskaramoorthy R, et al. (2020) Tensile, impact, and mode-Ⅰ behaviour of glass fiber-reinforced polymer composite modified by graphene nanoplatelets. Arch Civ Mech Eng 20: 94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43452-020-00099-x doi: 10.1007/s43452-020-00099-x
![]() |
[47] |
Genedy M, Daghash S, Soliman E, et al. (2015) Improving fatigue performance of GFRP composite using carbon nanotubes. Fibers 3: 13–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/fib3010013 doi: 10.3390/fib3010013
![]() |
[48] |
Kumar MS, Raghavendra K, Venkataswamy MA, et al. (2012) Fractographic analysis of tensile failures of aerospace grade composites. Mater Res 15: 990–997. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s1516-14392012005000141 doi: 10.1590/s1516-14392012005000141
![]() |
[49] |
Rafiee M, Nitzsche F, Labrosse M (2019) Fabrication and experimental evaluation of vibration and damping in multiscale graphene/fiberglass/epoxy composites. J Compos Mater 53: 2105–2118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021998318822708 doi: 10.1177/0021998318822708
![]() |
[50] |
Le MT, Huang SC (2015) Thermal and mechanical behavior of hybrid polymer nanocomposite reinforced with graphene nanoplatelets. Materials 8: 5526–5536. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma8085262 doi: 10.3390/ma8085262
![]() |
[51] |
Seretis GV, Nitodas SF, Mimigianni PD, et al. (2018) On the post-curing of graphene nanoplatelets reinforced hand lay-up glass fabric/epoxy nanocomposites. Compos Part B-Eng 140: 133–138. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.12.041 doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.12.041
![]() |
[52] |
Srivastava AK, Gupta V, Yerramalli CS, et al. (2019) Flexural strength enhancement in carbon-fiber epoxy composites through graphene nano-platelets coating on fibers. Compos Part B-Eng 179: 107539. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107539 doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107539
![]() |
[53] |
Alsaadi M, Younus B, Erklig A, et al. (2021) Effect of graphene nano-platelets on mechanical and impact characteristics of carbon/Kevlar reinforced epoxy hybrid nanocomposites. P I Mech Eng C-J Mec 235: 7139–7151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09544062211016883 doi: 10.1177/09544062211016883
![]() |
[54] |
Hagstrand PO, Bonjour F, Månson JAE (2005) The influence of void content on the structural flexural performance of unidirectional glass fibre reinforced polypropylene composites. Compos Part A-Appl S 36: 705–714. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.03.007 doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.03.007
![]() |