ArticleMicromachines2021
Distinct Roles of Tensile and Compressive Stresses in Graphitizing and Properties of Carbon Nanofibers.
Article in Micromachines, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
It is generally accepted that inducing molecular alignment in a polymer precursor via mechanical stresses influences its graphitization during pyrolysis. However, our understanding of how variations of the imposed mechanics can influence pyrolytic carbon microstructure and functionality is inadequate. Developing such insight is consequential for different aspects of carbon MEMS manufacturing and applicability, as pyrolytic carbons are the main building blocks of MEMS devices. Herein, we study the outcomes of contrasting routes of stress-induced graphitization by providing a comparative analysis of the effects of compressive stress versus standard tensile treatment of PAN-based carbon precursors. The results of different materials characterizations (including scanning electron microscopy, Raman and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopies, as well as high-resolution transmission electron microscopy) reveal that while subjecting precursor molecules to both types of mechanical stresses will induce graphitization in the resulting pyrolytic carbon, this effect is more pronounced in the case of compressive stress. We also evaluated the mechanical behavior of three carbon types, namely compression-induced (CIPC), tension-induced (TIPC), and untreated pyrolytic carbon (PC) by Dynamic Mechanical Analysis (DMA) of carbon samples in their as-synthesized mat format. Using DMA, the elastic modulus, ultimate tensile strength, and ductility of CIPC and TIPC films are determined and compared with untreated pyrolytic carbon. Both stress-induced carbons exhibit enhanced stiffness and strength properties over untreated carbons. The compression-induced films reveal remarkably larger mechanical enhancement with the elastic modulus 26 times higher and tensile strength 2.85 times higher for CIPC compared to untreated pyrolytic carbon. However, these improvements come at the expense of lowered ductility for compression-treated carbon, while tension-treated carbon does not show any loss of ductility. The results provided by this report point to the ways that the carbon MEMS industry can improve and revise the current standard strategies for manufacturing and implementing carbon-based micro-devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.