ArticlePolymers2024
Nanoindentation Response of Structural Self-Healing Epoxy Resin: A Hybrid Experimental-Simulation Approach.
Article in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, self-healing polymers have emerged as a topic of considerable interest owing to their capability to partially restore material properties and thereby extend the product's lifespan. The main purpose of this study is to investigate the nanoindentation response in terms of hardness, reduced modulus, contact depth, and coefficient of friction of a self-healing resin developed for use in aeronautical and aerospace contexts. To achieve this, the bifunctional epoxy precursor underwent tailored functionalization to improve its toughness, facilitating effective compatibilization with a rubber phase dispersed within the host epoxy resin. This approach aimed to highlight the significant impact of the quantity and distribution of rubber domains within the resin on enhancing its mechanical properties. The main results are that pure resin (EP sample) exhibits a higher hardness (about 36.7% more) and reduced modulus (about 7% more), consequently leading to a lower contact depth and coefficient of friction (11.4% less) compared to other formulations that, conversely, are well-suited for preserving damage from mechanical stresses due to their capabilities in absorbing mechanical energy. Furthermore, finite element method (FEM) simulations of the nanoindentation process were conducted. The numerical results were meticulously compared with experimental data, demonstrating good agreement. The simulation study confirms that the EP sample with higher hardness and reduced modulus shows less penetration depth under the same applied load with respect to the other analyzed samples. Values of 877 nm (close to the experimental result of 876.1 nm) and 1010 nm (close to the experimental result of 1008.8 nm) were calculated for EP and the toughened self-healing sample (EP-R-160-T), respectively. The numerical results of the hardness provide a value of 0.42 GPa and 0.32 GPa for EP and EP-R-160-T, respectively, which match the experimental data of 0.41 GPa and 0.30 GPa. This validation of the FEM model underscores its efficacy in predicting the mechanical behavior of nanocomposite materials under nanoindentation. The proposed investigation aims to contribute knowledge and optimization tips about self-healing resins.
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.