Paper detail

Effect of randomly occurring Stone-Wales defects on mechanical properties of carbon nanotubes using atomistic simulation

While CNTs are found to have ultra high stiffness and strength, an enormous scatter is also observed in available laboratory results. This paper studies the effects of randomly distributed Stone Wales (SW or 5 7 7 5) defects on the mechanical properties of single walled nanotubes (SWNTs) using the technique of atomistic simulation (AS). A Matern hard core random field applied on a finite cylindrical surface is used to describe the spatial distribution of the Stone Wales defects. We simulate a set of displacement controlled tensile loading up to fracture of SWNTs with (6,6) armchair and (10, 0) zigzag configurations and aspect ratio around 6. A modified Morse potential is adopted to model the interatomic forces. We found that fracture invariably initiates from a defect if one is present; for a defect-free tube the crack initiates at quite random locations. The force-displacement curve typically behaves almost linearly up to about half way, although there is no obvious yield point. Three mechanical properties - stiffness, ultimate strength and ultimate strain - are calculated from the simulated force and displacement time histories. The randomness in mechanical behavior resulting only from initial velocity distribution was found to be insignificant at room temperature. The mean values of stiffness, ultimate strength and ultimate strain of the tube decrease as the average number of defects increases although the coefficients of variation do not show such monotonic trend. The introduction of an additional defect has the most pronounced effect on the randomness in mechanical properties when the tube is originally defect free. We also found that, for a given mean number of defects in the tube, the zigzag configuration has less strength and less ultimate strain on the average, but more uncertainty in its stiffness and ultimate strain, compared with the armchair tube.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.