Skip to main content

Electrical Response of Carbon Nanotube Reinforced Nanocomposites Under Static and Dynamic Loading

Abstract

An experimental investigation was conducted to study the effect of quasi-static and dynamic compressive loading on the electrical response of multi-wall carbon nanotube (MWCNT) reinforced epoxy nanocomposites. An in-situ polymerization process using both a shear mixer and an ultrasonic processor were employed to fabricate the nanocomposite material. The fabrication process parameters and the optimum weight fraction of MWCNTs for generating a well-dispersed percolation network were first determined. Absolute resistance values were measured with a high-resolution four-point probe method for both quasi-static and dynamic loading. In addition to measuring the percentage change in electrical resistance, real-time damage was captured using high-speed photography. The real-time damage was correlated to both load and percentage change in resistance profiles. The experimental findings indicate that the bulk electrical resistance of the nanocomposites under both quasi-static and dynamic loading conditions initially decreased between 40%–60% during compression and then increased as damage initiated and propagated.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

References

  1. 1.

    Park C, Onuaies Z, Watson KA, Pawlowski K, Lowther SE, Connell JW, Siochi EJ, Harrison JS, St. Clair TL (2002) Polymer-single wall carbon nanotube composites for potential spacecraft applications. Material Research Society 706

  2. 2.

    Dalton AB, Collins S, Razal J, Munoz E, Ebron VH, Kim BG, Coleman JN, Ferraris JP, Baughman RH (2004) Continuous carbon nanotube composite fibers: properties, potential applications, and problems. J Mater Chem 14:1–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Kang I, Heung YY, Kim JH, Lee JW, Gollapudi R, Subramaniam S, Narasimhadevara S, Hurd D, Kirikera GR, Shanov V, Schulz MJ, Shi D, Boerio J, Mall S, Ruggles-Wren M (2006) Introduction to carbon nanotube and nanofiber smart materials. Compos Part B 37(6):382–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Li C, Thostenson ET, Chou TW (2008) Sensors and actuators based on carbon nanotubes and their composites: a review. Compos Sci Technol 68(6):1227–1249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Thostenson ET, Ren Z, Chou TW (2001) Advances in the science and technology of carbon nanotubes and their composites: a review. Compos Sci Technol 61(13):1899–1912

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Allaoui A, Bai S, Cheng HM, Bai JB (2002) Mechanical and electrical properties of a MWNT/epoxy composite. Compos Sci Technol 62(15):1993–1998

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Guo P, Chen X, Gao X, Song H, Shen H (2007) Fabrication and mechanical properties of well-dispersed multiwalled carbon nanotubes/epoxy composites. Compos Sci Technol 67(15–16):3331–3337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Crespi V, Cohen M, Rubin A (1997) In Situ band gap engineering of carbon nanotubes. Phys Rev Lett 79:2093–2096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Kane CL, Mele EJ (1997) Size, shape, and low energy electronic structure of carbon Nanotubes. Phys Rev Lett 78:1932–1935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Nardelli M, Bernholc J (1998) Mechanical deformations and coherent transport in carbon nanotubes. Phys Rev B 60:R16338–16341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Rochefort A, Salahub D, Avouris P (1998) The effect of structural distortions on the electronic structure of carbon nanotubes. Chem Phys Lett 297:45–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Bezryadin A, Verschueren A, Tans S, Dekker C (1998) Multiprobe transport experiments on individual single-wall carbon nanotubes. Phys Rev Lett 80:4036–4039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Paulson S et al (1999) In situ resistance measurements of strained carbon nanotubes. Appl Phys Lett 75:2936–2938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Alexopoulos ND, Bartholome C, Poulin P, Marioli-Riga Z (2009) Structural health monitoring of glass fiber reinforced composites using embedded carbon nanotube (CNT) fibers. Compos Sci Technol 70(2):260–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Nofar M, Hoa SV, Pugh MD (2009) Failure detection and monitoring in polymer matrix composites subjected to static and dynamic loads using carbon nanotube networks. Compos Sci Technol 69(10):1599–1606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Gao L, Thostenson ET, Zhang Z, Chou TW (2009) Coupled carbon nanotube network and acoustic emission monitoring for sensing of damage development in composites. Carbon 47(5):1381–1388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Thostenson ET, Chou TW (2006) Carbon nanotube networks: sensing of distribute strain and damage for life prediction and self healing. Adv Mater 18:2837–2841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Kabir ME, Saha MC, Jeelani S (2007) Effect of ultrasound sonication in carbon nanofibers/polyurethane foam composite. Mater Sci Eng, A 459(1–2):111–116

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Evora VMF, Shukla A (2003) Fabrication, characterization, and dynamic behavior of Polyester/TiO2 nanocomposites. Mater Sci Eng, A 361(1–2):358–366

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Ma P, Siddiqui NA, Marom G, Kim J (2010) Dispersion and functionalization of carbon nanotubes for polymer-based nanocomposites: a review. Composites A 41(10):1345–1367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Smits FM (1958) Measurements of sheet resistivity with the four-point probe. Bell Syst Tech J 37(3):711–718

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Bauhofer W, Kovacs JZ (2009) A review and analysis of electrical percolation in carbon nanotube polymer composites. Compos Sci Technol 69(10):1486–1498

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under grant number CMMI 0856133.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Shukla.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Heeder, N.J., Shukla, A., Chalivendra, V. et al. Electrical Response of Carbon Nanotube Reinforced Nanocomposites Under Static and Dynamic Loading. Exp Mech 52, 315–322 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-011-9488-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Electrical response
  • Carbon nanotube/polymer composites
  • Dynamic response
  • Quasi-static response
  • Four-point probe method