ArticlePolymers2025
Statistical Optimization of Graphene Nanoplatelet-Reinforced Epoxy Nanocomposites via Box-Behnken Design for Superior Flexural and Dynamic Mechanical Performance.
Article in Polymers, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) are efficient nanofillers for improving the mechanical and thermal properties of epoxy resins due to their high stiffness, aspect ratio, and interfacial reinforcement ability. This study employs a three-factor, three-level Box-Behnken Design (BBD) to investigate the combined effect of GNP content (0.5-3.5 wt.%), hardener concentration (9-17 phr), and post-curing temperature (30-120 °C) on DGEBA/TETA epoxy nanocomposites. Mechanical, thermal, dynamic mechanical, and morphological characterizations (flexural testing, DMA, TGA, DSC, FTIR, SEM, TEM, and AFM) established structure-property correlations. The optimized formulation (2.0 wt.% GNP, 9 phr hardener, and 120 °C post-curing) exhibited superior reinforcement, with flexural strength of 322.0 ± 12.8 MPa, flexural modulus of 9.7 ± 0.5 GPa, and strain at break of 4.4 ± 0.2%, corresponding to increases of 197%, 155%, and 91% compared with neat epoxy. DMA confirmed a rise in storage modulus from 2.9 to 7.5 GPa and a Tg of 143 °C, while TGA showed a 15 °C improvement in thermal stability. Statistical analysis identified post-curing temperature as the dominant factor governing Tg, stiffness, and thermal stability, with synergistic contributions from GNP content and hardener concentration to the overall network performance. These results surpass those of GO- and CNT-based systems, demonstrating the superior efficiency of GNPs under optimized conditions. The proposed approach provides a robust pathway for developing epoxy nanocomposites with low filler content and enhanced multifunctional performance.
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.