J Inorg Organomet Polym (2011) 21:937–940
DOI 10.1007/s10904-011-9565-8
COMMUNICATION
Carbon Nanotube/Carbon Fiber Multiscale Composite:
Influence of Interfacial Strength on Mechanical Properties
Jiaqi Nie • Yuxi Jia • Peng Qu • Qiurong Shi
Received: 15 April 2011 / Accepted: 1 August 2011 / Published online: 13 September 2011
Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011
Abstract A promising study to gain the multiscale
composite by the growth of carbon nanotubes on the fibers
for intralaminar and interlaminar reinforcement was carried
out. The mathematical modeling and the numerical simu-
lation of the mechanical response are helpful for the opti-
mum design of the multiscale composite. In this paper, a
multiscale modeling approach using a commercial package
ANSYS was used to simulate the mechanical response of
the complicated material systems. The behavior of two
types of interfaces (carbon nanotube/epoxy resin, carbon
fiber/equivalent matrix) was described using a cohesive
zone model, and the mechanical properties of the multi-
scale composite were predicted accurately. The mechanism
of intralaminar reinforcement was then analyzed numeri-
cally. The results reveal that the matrix-dominated prop-
erties of the multiscale composite, such as the transverse
elastic modulus, increase with the increase of the carbon
nanotube/epoxy resin interfacial strength.
Keywords Carbon nanotube  Multiscale simulation 
Interfacial strength  Mechanical property
Presented in part at the 1st International Congress on Advanced
Materials held in Jinan, PRC, from May 12–17, 2011.
J. Nie  Y. Jia (&)  P. Qu  Q. Shi
Key Laboratory for Liquid–Solid Structural Evolution and
Processing of Materials (Ministry of Education), Shandong
University, Jinan 250061, China
e-mail: jia_yuxi@sdu.edu.cn
J. Nie
e-mail: niejiaqi87@gmail.com
P. Qu
e-mail: qproc@163.com
Q. Shi
e-mail: qiurongshi@163.com
1 Introduction
Carbon nanotubes (CNT) have recently attracted extensive
attention of scientific community owing to their excellent
mechanical, electrical and thermal properties. Considering
its very high elastic modulus and strength, CNT was
introduced into the polymer matrix as an ideal reinforce-
ment to obtain nanocomposites for structural applications
[1–6]. However, experimental results have not achieved the
desired effects because of the poor dispersion, irregular
alignment and low interfacial strength of CNTs in the
nanocomposite [7–10]. In recent years, some researchers
have grown CNTs radially on the surfaces of fibers to gain
the multiscale composite for intralaminar and interlaminar
reinforcement. Thostenson et al. [11, 12] first used chem-
ical vapor deposition to grow well-distributed CNTs
directly on the pitch-based carbon fibers in order to
improve the interfacial load transfer between the fibers and
the polymer matrix. Previous reports confirmed that the
fiber/polymer interfacial shear strength, the interlaminar
shear strength and the bearing stiffness of hierarchical
composite laminates with aligned CNTs had a remarkable
increase [13–20]. Wicks et al. [14] pointed out that the
modeling of the mechanical response for this multiscale
system is a significant research, which will be helpful for
the optimum design of the multiscale composite.
2 Multiscale Modeling Approach
In this paper, CNT/carbon fiber multiscale composite is
formed by micro-diameter carbon fibers, aligned nano-
diameter CNTs oriented along the radial directions of fibers
and epoxy resin. Therefore, a multiscale modeling
approach involving two steps was used to simulate the
123
938
composite mechanical response. The first step requires the
mathematical modeling of the nanocomposite formed by a
single CNT surrounded by the epoxy resin and the
numerical prediction of the nanocomposite mechanical
properties. Then the nanocomposite is considered as the
equivalent matrix in the second step. The second step
requires the mathematical modeling of the overall com-
posite formed by the carbon fibers surrounded by the
equivalent matrix and the numerical prediction of the
mechanical properties of the overall composite. In these
models, the geometrical description of the material system
is in accordance with the scanning electron microscope
micrographs of CNT/carbon fiber multiscale composites
[12, 21].
2.1 Representative Volume Element (RVE) for CNT/
Epoxy Nanocomposite
There are mainly three kinds of nanoscale RVEs for the study
of CNT-based composites: cylindrical RVE, square RVE
and hexagonal RVE. It was found that the cylindrical RVE
leads to inaccuracies due to the ignoring the materials not
covered by the cylindrical cell; the square RVE might be the
preferred model [22]. In this paper, the square RVE (Fig. 1)
was chosen for modeling the elastic response of the CNT/
epoxy nanocomposite. The CNT and the epoxy resin are
considered as homogeneous and isotropic materials with the
elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio being ECNT = 1TPa,
tCNT = 0.3, Eepoxy = 3 GPa, and tepoxy = 0.3 [21]; and, the
CNT volume fraction is 10% in the nanocomposite.
2.2 Periodic RVE for Carbon Fiber/Equivalent Matrix
Composite
It is assumed that the distribution of fibers is uniform in the
unidirectional fiber reinforced composite and the radii of
Y
Epoxy resin
CNT
Z X
Fig. 1 A square RVE for CNT/epoxy nanocomposite shown in a cut-
through view
123
J Inorg Organomet Polym (2011) 21:937–940
fibers are the same [23]. Considering the regular packing of
fibers in the matrix, each unidirectional layer could be rep-
resented by a square or hexagonal periodic RVE with a single
fiber having the same fiber volume fraction as the ply. In this
work, in order to apply the periodic boundary condition
conveniently, a revised hexagonal periodic RVE [24] for
modeling the elastic response of the carbon fiber/equivalent
matrix composite was used (Fig. 2). The carbon fiber is
considered as a homogeneous and transversely isotropic
material with the elastic modulus and Poisson’s ratio of
Ez = 228 GPa, Ex = Ey = 16.54 Gpa, Gxz = 24.82 Gpa,
txy = 0.25, and tzx = 0.2 [25]. Moreover, the CNT volume
fraction is 6% in the overall composite.
The periodic boundary condition must be applied to the
periodic RVE in consideration of the displacement and
stress continuity on boundary surfaces between adjacent
unit cells [23]. For the revised hexagonal periodic RVE, the
unified periodic boundary condition is given in Eq. 1 [23]:
ujþ j
i ðx; y; zÞ  ui ðx; y; zÞ ¼ ci
j
ði; j ¼ 1; 2; 3Þ; ð1Þ
where ujþ
i and uj
i denote the displacements on a pair of
opposite boundary surfaces (with their normals along the Xj
axis); ‘‘j?’’ means along the positive Xj direction, and ‘‘j-’’
means along the negative Xj direction. The constant cij
represents the deformation due to the traction component.
2.3 Cohesive Zone Model for the Interface
The nature of interfacial bond plays a key role in the load
transfer between the fiber and the matrix, which affects the
mechanical properties of the composite [12, 26]. In reality,
the interfacial bond is always imperfect and, hence, com-
plete load transfer does not take place between the fiber and
the matrix. To accurately predict the mechanical properties,
the behavior of two types of interfaces (CNT/epoxy and
carbon fiber/equivalent matrix) was described using a
Y
Carbon fiber
Z
Equivalent matrix
Fig. 2 A revised hexagonal periodic RVE for carbon fiber/equivalent
matrix composite
J Inorg Organomet Polym (2011) 21:937–940 939

cohesive zone model (CZM). The interfacial constitutive 3 Simulation Results and Discussion
relation defined by the CZM is such that, with an increase
the interfacial separation, the traction across the interface An important task in this study was to examine the influ-
reaches a maximum, then decreases and eventually van- ence of the CNT/epoxy interfacial strength on the com-
ishes [27]. It is generally believed that the cohesive posite mechanical properties. When the multiscale
strength (the maximum stress) and the work of separation composite is stretched, the tensile force is transferred from
(the area under the traction–separation curve) are important the epoxy resin to the CNTs and the carbon fibers.
in setting a CZM. Moreover, a specific shape of CZM Therefore, a high CNT/epoxy interfacial strength is bene-
(bilinear, parabolic, sinusoidal, or exponential) can signif- ficial to the load transfer between the CNT and the epoxy
icantly affect the fracture analysis results [28]. In this resin, and makes the CNT play an important role in the
paper, an exponential CZM was chosen because it presents load carrying capacity.
a smooth separation law.
The CZM considers the existence of an interfacial 3.1 Effect of CNT/Epoxy Interfacial Strength
potential, /, which can be expressed as (Eq. 2) [27] on Nanocomposite Mechanical Properties
o/
T¼ ; ð2Þ As shown in Fig. 3, when the CNT/epoxy interfacial
oD
strength is relatively low, the nanocomposite longitudinal
where T = T(Tn, Tt) denotes the traction vector on the elastic modulus gets a distinct improvement with the
cohesive surface, D = D(Dn, Dt) denotes the displacement increase of the CNT/epoxy interfacial strength. However,
jump across the interface and / ¼ /ð/n ; /t Þ denotes the when the CNT/epoxy interfacial strength reaches a certain
work of separation; n denotes along the normal direction of value, the variation of the nanocomposite longitudinal
the interface and t denotes along the tangential direction of elastic modulus along with the CNT/epoxy interfacial
the interface. When / reaches a critical fracture energy strength is not distinct. The simulation results are in
introduced by the CZM, the interfacial surfaces are agreement with the values in the previous study [21] and
required to break apart. indicate an obvious reduction of effective mechanical
properties compared with the case of the perfect interface
[29]. Liu and Chen [29] predicted that the nanocomposite
2.4 Evaluation Method of Effective Material Properties longitudinal elastic modulus Ez was 53.46 Gpa in the case
of the perfect bonding between the CNT and the matrix. In
The mean stress component, mean strain component and their simulation, the material parameters and volume
elastic stress–strain relationship in the RVE are defined as fraction were ECNT = 1 TPa, tCNT = 0.3, Ematrix =
follows (Eqs. 3–5) [23]: 5 Gpa, tmatrix = 0.3; and, the CNT volume fraction was
Z Pm k k
1 k¼1 rj V 4.871%.
j ¼
r V rj dV ¼ ; ð3Þ
V V
Z Pm k k
1 k¼1 ei V
ei ¼ V ei dV ¼ ; ð4Þ
V V
ei ¼ Sij r
j ði; j ¼ 1; 2;   ; 6Þ; ð5Þ
where rkj , eki and Vk denote the stress component, the strain
component and the volume of the k-th element, respec-
tively. V is the total volume of the RVE, m is the number of
elements in the RVE, and Sij is the compliance coefficient.
The equivalent matrix and the overall composite are
considered as homogeneous and transversely isotropic.
Five independent elastic properties (Ez, Ex, Gxz, txy, and
tzx) are required to determine the constitutive relation of
the transversely isotropic material. To calculate the five
elastic properties of the equivalent matrix, five equations
are obtained from the numerical analysis for the RVE of
the equivalent matrix under three types of load conditions.
The same method can be used to determine the elastic Fig. 3 Curve of nanocomposite longitudinal elastic modulus versus
properties of the overall composite. CNT/epoxy interfacial strength

123
940 J Inorg Organomet Polym (2011) 21:937–940

this multiscale composite, the matrix-dominated properties

are enhanced significantly, and increase with an increase of
the CNT/epoxy interfacial strength. However, the fiber-
dominated properties change slightly with the CNT/epoxy
interfacial strength.

Acknowledgments This work was supported by the Natural Sci-

ence Foundation of China (50973056) and Shandong Province
(JQ201016), the National Basic Research Program of China
(2010CB631102), and the Independent Innovation Foundation of
Shandong University (2009JQ013).

References

1. X.W. Zhao, L. Ye, Compos. Part B 42, 926 (2011)

Fig. 4 Curve of multiscale composite elastic moduli versus CNT/
2. P.M. Ajayan, J.M. Tour, Nature 447, 1066 (2007)
epoxy interfacial strength
3. M. Moniruzzaman, K.I. Winey, Macromolecules 39, 5194 (2006)
4. J.N. Coleman, U. Khan, W.J. Blau, Y.K. Gun’ko, Carbon 44,
3.2 Effect of CNT/Epoxy Interfacial Strength 1624 (2006)
5. E.T. Thostenson, Z.F. Ren, Tsu.-Wei. Chou, Compos. Sci.
on Multiscale Composite Mechanical Properties
Technol. 61, 1899 (2001)
6. P. Calvert, Nature 399, 210 (1999)
It is assumed that the carbon fiber/equivalent matrix 7. J.N. Coleman, U. Khan, Y.K. Gun’ko, Adv. Mater. 18, 689
interfacial strength is kept at 1.654 GPa (10% of Ex of (2006)
8. O. Breuer, U. Sundararaj, Polym. Compos. 25, 630 (2004)
carbon fiber). The multiscale composite transverse elastic
9. J. Zhu, J.D. Kim, H.Q. Peng, J.L. Margrave, V.N. Khabashesku,
modulus increases with the increase of the CNT/epoxy E.V. Barrera, Nano Lett. 3, 1107 (2003)
interfacial strength, whereas the CNT/epoxy interfacial 10. Y. Lin, B. Zhou, K.A. Shiral Fernando, P. Liu, L.F. Allard, Y.P.
strength has little influence on the multiscale composite Sun, Macromolecules 36, 7199 (2003)
11. Tsu.-Wei. Chou, L.M. Gao, E.T. Thostenson, Z.G. Zhang, Joon.-
longitudinal elastic modulus (Fig. 4). Due to the existence
Hyung. Byun, Compos. Sci. Technol. 70, 1 (2010)
of the CNTs, the matrix-dominated properties of the mul- 12. E.T. Thostenson, W.Z. Li, D.Z. Wang, Z.F. Ren, T.W. Chou, J.
tiscale composite perpendicular to the fiber axis are greatly Appl. Phys. 91, 6034 (2002)
enhanced, whereas the fiber-dominated properties of the 13. S.P. Sharma, S.C. Lakkad, Compos. Part A 42, 8 (2011)
14. S.S. Wicks, R.G. de Villoria, B.L. Wardle, Compos. Sci. Technol.
multiscale composite in the fiber direction change little.
70, 20 (2010)
For the equivalent matrix of the overall composite, the 15. R.F. Gibson, Compos. Struct. 92, 2793 (2010)
plane perpendicular to the fiber axis is considered as iso- 16. R.J. Sager, P.J. Klein, D.C. Lagoudas, Q. Zhang, J. Liu, L. Dai,
tropic. In the isotropic plane, the mechanical properties of J.W. Baur, Compos. Sci. Technol. 69, 898 (2009)
17. K.H. Hung, W.S. Kuo, T.H. Ko, S.S. Tzeng, C.F. Yan, Compos.
each point in every direction are equivalent to the nano-
Part A 40, 1299 (2009)
composite longitudinal mechanical properties, which is 18. Q.H. Zhang, J.W. Liu, R. Sager, L.M. Dai, J. Baur, Compos. Sci.
obviously higher than the nanocomposite transverse Technol. 69, 594 (2009)
mechanical properties. In fact, this approximation approach 19. E.J. Garcia, B.L. Wardle, A.J. Hart, N. Yamamoto, Compos. Sci.
Technol. 68, 2034 (2008)
exaggerates the enhancement effect of the CNTs to some
20. V.P. Veedu, A.Y. Cao, X.S. Li, K.G. Ma, C. Soldano, S. Kar,
extent; therefore, the simulation results tend to overesti- P.M. Ajayan, M.N. Ghasemi-Nejhad, Nat. Mater. 5, 457 (2006)
mate the transverse mechanical properties of the overall 21. M. Kulkarni, D. Carnahan, K. Kulkarni, D. Qian, J.L. Abot,
composite. Compos. Part B 41, 414 (2010)
22. X.L. Chen, Y.J. Liu, Comput. Mater. Sci. 29, 1 (2004)
23. Z.H. Xia, Y.F. Zhang, F. Ellyin, Int. J. Solids Struct. 40, 1907
(2003)
4 Summary 24. X.F. Wang, X.W. Wang, G.M. Zhou, C.W. Zhou, J. Compos.
Mater. 41, 1773 (2007)
25. D. Goyal, J.D. Whitcomb, Compos. Sci. Technol. 68, 969 (2008)
The mechanical response of the carbon nanotube/carbon
26. L.L. Sun, Y.X. Jia, F.D. Ma, S. Sun, J. Zhao, C.C. Han, Polym.
fiber multiscale composite was simulated by a multiscale Compos. 31, 1457 (2010)
modeling approach. The simulation results show that the 27. X.P. Xu, A. Needleman, Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 1, 111
longitudinal elastic modulus of the CNT/epoxy nanocom- (1993)
28. K.Y. Volokh, Commun. Numer. Methods Eng. 20, 845 (2004)
posite is higher with a higher CNT/epoxy interfacial
29. Y.J. Liu, X.L. Chen, Mech. Mater. 35, 69 (2003)
strength. Because of the CNT reinforced nanocomposite
instead of the pure epoxy resin as the equivalent matrix in

123