Materials Today: Proceedings 50 (2022) 1774–1780

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Interfacial shear strength of carbon nanotube reinforced polymer

composites: A review
Akash Mani, Sumit Sharma ⇑
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Dr BR Ambedkar National Institute of Technology Jalandhar 144011, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study provides a review of the research on the interfacial shear strength (IFSS) of the carbon nan-
Received 26 August 2021 otube (CNT) reinforced polymer composites. The IFSS reflects the efficiency of transferring load between
Received in revised form 8 September 2021 the reinforced fiber and its surrounding matrix, which plays a critical part in determining the character-
Accepted 13 September 2021
istics of the composite. The review focuses on the experimental as well as theoretical/modeling studies of
Available online 27 September 2021
the CNT and the polymer matrix interface. The major techniques required for the measurement of the
IFSS of the composites have been discussed. The methods to enhance the shear strength at the interface
Keywords:
along with the functionalization of CNT and the advantages and disadvantages have been explained in
Interface
Nanotube
detail. Moreover, the review presents some of the research opportunities associated with IFSS for the
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) growth and enhancement of the mechanical properties of the CNT-reinforced polymer nanocomposites.
Copyright Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 2nd International Con-
ference on Functional Material, Manufacturing and Performances

1. Introduction walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs). Poly-ether-ether-ketone

The discovery of an extremely small tube-like structure made of
carbon known as carbon nanotubes (CNTs) [1] has given a new
direction to the research in the field of materials science and engi-
neering and has opened new paths for innovation. CNTs possess
some remarkable both physical as well as mechanical characteris-
tics [2-5]. Owing to their high tensile strength and elastic modulus
that occur due to covalent sp2 bonds between the two atoms are
among some of its properties that have fascinated technical enthu-
siasts and attracted numerous scientific researches [6]. These traits
of CNTs have resulted in the development of nanocomposites
which include CNTs as reinforcement. The number of studies on
CNT-polymer composites has exploded in recent years [78]. CNTs
are commonly used as a primary filler in the polymer matrix to
enhance its mechanical characteristics. Numerous composites with
structural as well as functional applications have been developed
using the characteristics of this form of carbon [9-12]. Throughout
the previous several decades, a wide range of polymers have been
combined with varying wt. % of CNTs to achieve the desired char-
acteristics. Qian et al. [13] have observed an increase of 36% in the
elastic modulus of polystyrene (PS) upon adding 1 wt% of multi-
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sharmas@nitj.ac.in (S. Sharma).
(PEEK) observed an increase of 90% in the elastic modulus for the
addition of 15 wt% of MWCNTs. Chen et al. [14] have described
the enhanced properties of the polymer-CNTs as a result of
improvement in stress transfer within the fiber/matrix interface
as well as increased interfacial shear strength. Yang et al. [15] have
stated that IFSS describes the efficiency of transferring load
between fiber and the matrix. This reflection of the load transfer
effectiveness between the fiber and matrix, as well as CNT disper-
sion and alignment, has been discovered to have a significant role
in determining the mechanical characteristics of the composite,
such as elastic modulus, tensile strength etc. [16,17]. Furthermore,
the mechanical performance of nanocomposites is essentially
dependent on both stress transmission across the interface and
the shear strength of the interface. [18-21]. The improvement in
the interfacial properties of the CNT-polymer composites can be
accomplished through chemical functionalization which helps in
the better dispersion of the CNTs in the polymer matrix, hence
strengthening the bond at the interface [22,23].
The objective of this paper is to summarize the work that has
been done to date on the IFSS of CNT-polymer composites and dis-
cuss the variability in mechanical properties among those
nanocomposites. The paper highlights the studies done to signifi-
cantly improve the IFSS of the CNT-polymer composites.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.09.194
2214-7853/Copyright Ó 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 2nd International Conference on Functional Material, Manufacturing and Performances
A. Mani and S. Sharma
2. Interfacial shear strength measurement
Various micromechanical methods are used to evaluate single
fiber interfacial shear strength including a single fiber pull-out
[24,25], single fiber push-out test [26,27], fragmentation test
[28,29], and microdroplet test [30-32].
2.1. Single fiber pullout test
The single fiber pull-out test has been an extensively used
method to find out the IFSS. The test involves exerting a progres-
sively increasing axial force on the loose end of the fiber for pulling
it out of the matrix [33,34]. During the test either the fiber gets
pulled out from the matrix or gets fractured due to the load. To
evaluate the shear strength between the fiber and matrix interface,
Eq. (1) is used that balances both the tensile stress (rf) acting on
the fiber and the shear stress (s) acting on the fiber–matrix com-
posite interface (Fig. 1).
r d
s¼ f
2 L
where:
L = fiber embedded length along which the shear strength is
assumed to be uniform
d = fiber diameter
2.2. Single fiber pushout test
Another method that helps in determining the shear strength of
the fiber/matrix interface is fiber pushout test. During this test, a
thin sheet consisting of fiber is stacked until the slipping of the
fiber takes place. The fiber is kept under continuous loading condi-
tions until the interface reaches a point when the respective fiber
undergoes a complete fracture and eventually is pushed out of
the sheet [27,35]. Usually, the force vs. displacement curve of the
pushout test comprises three regions. The first area corresponds
to the bending of the composite sheet in an elastic manner
between the supports. In the next region, the indenter exerts a
push force which makes the fiber undergo an elastic deformation;
this region ends suddenly with the interfacial rupture and the slid-
ing of the fiber in the respective sheet, resulting in maximizing the
load. The IFSS for the single fiber pushout test can be expressed by
means of Eq. (2) as:
 
P
s¼
2pre
where:
P = applied load on the fiber
r = radius of fiber
e = thickness of the sheet
Fig. 1. Schematic representation of the pullout test with geometric parameters.
Materials Today: Proceedings 50 (2022) 1774–1780
The IFSS is computed using equation (2) where the applied load
is maximum in the pushout test. Fig. 2 depicts the schematic view
of the pushout test.
2.3. Fragmentation test
The single embedded fiber tensile specimen was first used by
Kelly and Tyson [36]. In the fragmentation test, the embedding of
fiber in a matrix material is carried to such an extent that the max-
imum elongation i.e., at the break of the matrix is more than three
times that of the fiber used. When a tensile force is provided to a
specimen consisting of a tiny amount of typically brittle tungsten
fibers that are axially aligned and placed in a copper matrix, many
occurrences of fibre fracture can be observed. It starts to fracture
with the increment in the application of the strain resulting in
the elongation of the fiber and eventually leading to failure. Con-
tinuous strain application within the sample leads to the recur-
rence of this fragmentation process until the length of all the
remaining pieces is reduced to such an extent that no further fiber
ð1Þ breakdown can be caused by the tensile stresses generated due to
the transfer of shear stress on the fiber length (Fig. 3). After the
final fragmentation is achieved the remaining fiber length is usu-
ally termed as the fiber critical length. The IFSS between the
fiber-matrix interface is expected to be uniform across the short
fiber critical length. (assuming a constant diameter). Hence, to cal-
culate the mean shear strength ‘s’ a rather basic force expression
Eq. (3) is required to be balanced which results in:
r  d 
s¼ f
ð3Þ
2 lc
where:
rf = ultimate strength of fiber at the critical length
d = fiber diameter for a circular fiber cross-section
lc = critical length of the fiber
Because the fiber-matrix interface is subjected to shear, the cal-
culated value of ‘s’ is frequently referred to as an estimate of the
composite interfacial shear strength. [37].
2.4. Microdroplet test
A microdroplet test is an alternative to the fibre retrieval tech-
nique (Fig. 4) and is a primarily recorded test for the direct assess-
ment of the shear strength of the sample fiber-matrix interface
[39]. It is expected that the IFSS is constant across the embedded
ð2Þ length of fiber [33]. Due to the use of an individual fiber in this test,
a simple method of isolating the interface and characterizing the
failure mode of the interphase material is provided. The IFSS
between the carbon nanotube and epoxy resin can be computed
using Eq. (4), which is centred on the assumption that the IFSS is
uniform between the fiber and its surrounding matrix [33].
1775
A. Mani and S. Sharma Materials Today: Proceedings 50 (2022) 1774–1780

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of the pushout test.

Fig. 3. Schematic representation of the single fiber fragmentation test process.

r d 
Fd rd = tensile stress at debonding.
s¼ ¼
d f
ð4Þ
pdf Le 4 Le pdf Le = embedment area
The examination of the fibre surface after debonding of the
interface under the scanning electron microscope (SEM) indicates
where:
that microdroplet debonding takes place as a result of the interfa-
Fd = maximum fiber axial force recorded at the onset of micro-
cial sliding of CNT bundles inside the fiber. Therefore, ‘s’ from the
droplet debonding
above relationship could be referred to as an effective IFSS.
df = fiber diameter
Le = embedded fiber length
1776
A. Mani and S. Sharma Materials Today: Proceedings 50 (2022) 1774–1780

Table 2 discusses the analytical studies conducted on various

CNT-polymer nanocomposites in a summarized manner. The IFSS
and the measurement technique involved during the study has
been given.

4. IFSS improvement

A superior IFSS is vital to confirm the transfer of load through

Fig. 4. Schematic representation of the micro bond test technique with geometric
representation.
3. Literature review
In this section some of the important studies based on the inter-
facial shear strength (IFSS) of the CNT-polymer nanocomposite
have been reviewed. A sizeable number of studies has been
reviewed and the conclusions based on these studies have been
mentioned. The study of IFSS through different methods has been
studied by various researchers which involves experimental as
well as theoretical techniques. Table 1 discusses the characteriza-
tion and measurement methods and the corresponding IFSS
between CNT and polymer. The material used during the experi-
mental procedure of the study has also been mentioned. The
the interface with higher efficiency, which is a decisive property
for further advancement in the field of nanocomposites with excel-
lent mechanical characteristics [53,63,64]. Recent studies by Zare
et Al. [65] has shown that the slender and long CNT produces a lar-
ger area of the surface in comparison to the shorter nanotubes, lar-
gely involving the surrounding polymer matrix. This means that
comparatively thinner and longer CNTs make a larger area at the
interface possible between the matrix and the nanotubes. The
intense interfacial interconnection between the polymer matrix
and the CNT strengthens the interphase in this case. However,
the surface area of fiber particles is reduced by thicker and shorter
CNT, which ineffectively includes the polymer matrix close to the
CNT. The nanotubes slightly influence the adjacent chains of poly-
mer in this state, producing thin and weak nanocomposite
interphases.
CNT functionalization has been proven in studies to enhance
the interfacial characteristics of nanocomposite. [18,59,66,67].
Functionalization can be classified into two categories: covalent
functionalization and non-covalent functionalization. As the name
suggests the covalent chemical functionalization necessarily has a
covalent part of the functional groups either on the side walls or on
the nanotube tips [68,69] and has emerged as an effective tech-
nique for enhancing the interfacial characteristics [70,71].
Although experimental [71,72] and computational [52,73] findings
have shown that effective CNT-polymer matrix bond can be
attained by covalent functionalization but the process would intro-
duce sp3 hybridization defects into the surface of carbon nan-
otubes, thus bringing down their mechanical performances [74].
As a result, there is usually a trade-off between carbon nanotube
properties and interface properties. On the contrary, the non-
covalent functionalization method can improve the properties of
the composite without deteriorating the intrinsic properties
[75,76]. The approach used by this functionalization group com-
prises p  p interactions and van der Waals forces through poly-
mer adsorption. [77-79]. Polymer chain wrapping around the
nanotubes has been proven extremely successful in the enhance-

Table 1
Summary of literature review of the experimental results obtained for the IFSS between CNT and various polymer matrices.

Author Materials Characterization Method Interfacial Shear Strength (MPa) Measurement technique
Barber et al. [24] MWNT/polyethylene-butene AFM 10–90 Pullout
Wagner et al. [40] MWNT/polyurethane TEM 500 Pullout
Cooper et al. [25] SWNT/epoxy SPM & TEM 366 Pullout
MWNT/epoxy 35–376
Deng et al. [41] MWNT/PEEK (fracture surface) SEM 4.0 Pullout
Tsuda et al. [42] MWNT/PEEK (Without heat treatment) SEM 3.5–7.0 Pullout
(Hot-pressed sample) 6-14
Roy et al. [43] SWNT/PVA Raman 187.5 Pullout
Ding et al. [44] MWNT/Polycarbonate SEM NA Pullout
Rahmat et al. [45] SWNT/PMMA AFM 7 –
Zu et al. [46] (Double/triple walled) CNT/epoxy – 14.4 Microdroplet
Ganesan et al. [47] MWNT/epoxy SEM 2.41 – 12.45 Pullout
Manoharan et al. [48] CNF/epoxy SEM 170 Pullout
Sager et al. [49] Unsized fiber – 50.5 Fragmentation
Sized fiber > 101.5
Aligned CNT 56.2
Random CNT 86.6
With epoxy
Medina et al. [50] Fiber/CNT/epoxy – 58–72 Push-out

1777
A. Mani and S. Sharma Materials Today: Proceedings 50 (2022) 1774–1780

Table 2
Summary of literature review of the theoretical results obtained for the IFSS between CNT and various polymer matrices.

Author Materials Method Interfacial Shear Strength (MPa) Measurement technique

Sanvito et al. [51] CNT/polyethylene MD 2 Pullout
Frankland et al. [52] CNT/polyethylene (crystalline) MD 2.8 Pullout
CNT/polyethylene (cross-linked crystalline) MD 110 Pullout
Wong et al. [53] CNT/PS MD 186 Pullout
CNT/epoxy MD 138
Liao and Li [54] CNT/PS MD 160 –
Jiang et al. [55] CNT/PI MD 18.67 Pullout
Zhao et al. [30] CNT/epoxy FE 40.88–42.46 Microdroplet
Gao et al. [56] MWNT/epoxy Shear lag 2.0 –
Gou et al. [57] SWNT/epoxy MD 75 Pullout
Liu et al. [58] Pristine SWNT/epoxy MD 160 –
PmPV wrapped SWNT/epoxy MD 290
Epon 828 epoxidized SWNT/epoxy MD 690
Hybrid functionalized SWNT/epoxy MD 940
Xiao et al. [59] Pristine SWNT/PE MD 90 Pullout
PmPV wrapped SWNT/PE MD 130
Alkyl functionalized MD
(C5H11) SWNT/PE 98
(C10H21) SWNT/PE 101
(C15H31) SWNT/PE 118
Mixed functionalized with PmPVv(C5H11) SWNT/PE MD
(C10H21) SWNT/PE 149
(C15H31) SWNT/PE 155
150
Chawla and Sharma [38] SWNT/PE MD 141 Pullout
Zheng et al. [60] Pristine SWNT/PE MD 33 Pullout
Phenyl functionalized C6H5 MD 575
Xu et al. [61] SWNT/epoxy MD 138 Pullout
Yashiro et al. [62] MWNT/epoxy Shear lag 10.3–24.1 –

ment of interfacial characteristics, among the numerous alterna-
tive methods. [80-82]. The ability of this technique to bind massive
numbers of functional molecules to CNT walls without affecting
their reputed ideal structures has made it an intriguing option
[79,83]. Wrapping of carbon nanotubes with polymer has provided
an excellent opportunity for the proper handling and arrangement
of nanotubes in orderly structures and also for their non-covalent
functionalization [84]. In the study done by Xiao et al. [59], the
shear strength of SWNT-PE interface has been considerably
enhanced with the help of PmPV wrapping and mixed functional-
ization which has been attained by first grafting alkyl chains to the
SWNT sidewalls, followed by the right approach for enhancement
i.e., wrapping of PmPV molecules. The length of alkyl may signifi-
cantly affect the shear strength of alkyl functionalized SWNT-PE
composites but the increment in the strength of mixed functional-
ized SWNT-PE composites does not show much dependence on the
alkyl length. Regardless of significantly improving the dispersion of
carbon nanotubes in the polymer matrix, the non-covalent interac-
tion between functional groups and CNTs has proven to be on the
weaker side when compared with the covalent bonds.
The effectiveness of interfacial stress transfer can be consider-
ably enhanced, particularly in cases of simultaneous use of cova-
lent and non-covalent functionalization [58], and also small
intertube spacing in MWNTs can affect the load transferring ability
between carbon nanotubes [85].
interfaces is necessary so that further advancements in technology
can be done. CNTs claim incredible opportunities for the advance-
ment in the properties of these polymers. This study also reassures
further research in this area to develop these nanocomposites.
6. Research gap
Based on various experimental as well as theoretical/modelling,
it can be safely stated that there is a difference between the results
of both techniques. The improper dispersion of CNTs is an area that
requires much more study and works so that the interfacial prop-
erties and hence the mechanical properties of the nanocomposites
could be improved to a greater extent. As already stated, the non-
covalent polymer wrapping is an intriguing way of functionaliza-
tion that improves the characteristics of the composites. However,
the study of this technique has to be done to completely under-
stand the mechanism within this process of non-covalent interac-
tions also improvement in the efficiency for transferring the load
across the interface of carbon nanotube-reinforced composite can
be achieved by the detailed study. The CNT- composite polymers
are also expected to increase with the addition of new polymers.
A detailed study can also possibly be conducted on eco-friendly
polymers and related interfacial properties to cater to the immedi-
ate needs of the environment.

5. Future scope of work 7. Conclusion

The study of carbon nanotubes becomes an essential subject for
the development and advancement in the mechanical world. The
application of the CNT reinforced polymer composites is depen-
dent on their physical as well as mechanical properties. Therefore,
this study of the load transfer between nanotubes and polymer
matrix is much more essential. The characterization of the respec-
tive nanotubes also carries certain challenges. To address these
concerns, a thorough study of the properties and strengths of these
1778
This paper provides an overview of the studies done on the
interfacial shear strength of the CNT reinforced polymer compos-
ite. This paper acknowledges the considerable influence on
mechanical properties of the composites by interfacial interactions
between CNT and polymer matrix. A decent amount of research
has been done in the area concerning carbon nanotubes and differ-
ent polymer matrix. The main findings of this study have been
summarized below: -
A. Mani and S. Sharma
i. The major focus of the paper has been on past experimental
and theoretical investigations on the corresponding area of
concern, namely, the interaction at the interface of carbon
nanotubes reinforced polymer composites.
ii. The paper addresses the key approaches necessary for the
measurement of IFSS of these nanocomposites. The effects
of various parameters associated with the interfacial shear
strength of the nanocomposites are discussed.
iii. Certain methods to improve IFSS have been listed along with
the functionalization of the carbon nanotube. Its advantages,
as well as disadvantages, have also been provided.
iv. Finally, it also discusses the future scope related to IFSS for
the research, development and enhancement of the mechan-
ical properties of carbon nanocomposites.
This review paper also reassures further research in the area of
concern and aims to help the researchers in the study of interfacial
strength which is expected to lead to development and advance-
ment in the mechanical properties of carbon nanocomposites and
their usage, eventually resulting in symbiotic benefits.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Akash Mani: Writing – original draft, Investigation, Formal
analysis. Sumit Sharma: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing
– review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
The authors are highly grateful to the Department of Mechani-
cal Engineering of NIT Jalandhar for providing the guidance for this
research.
References
[1] S. Iijima, Helical microtubes of graphic carbon, Nature 354 (1991) 56–58.
[2] P.M. Ajayan, L.S. Schadler, C. Giannaris, A. Rubio, Single-Walled Carbon
Nanotube-Polymer Composites: Strength and Weakness, Advanced Materials
12 (2000) 750–753.
[3] C. Stéphan, T.P. Nguyen, M. Lamy De La Chapelle, S. Lefrant, C. Journet, P.
Bernier, Characterization of single-walled carbon nanotubes-PMMA
composites, Synthetic Metals, ISSN 0379–6779 108 (2) (2000) 139–149.
[4] R.N.B. Kumar, V. Crasta, B.M. Praveen, M. Kumar, Studies on structural, optical
and mechanical properties of MWCNTs and ZnO nanoparticles doped PVA
nanocomposites, Nanotechnol. Rev. 4 (5) (2015) 457–467.
[5] Q. Duan, S. Wang, Q. Wang, T. Li, S. Chen, M. Miao, Simultaneous Improvement
on Strength, Modulus, and Elongation of Carbon Nanotube Films
Functionalized by Hyperbranched Polymers, Acs. Appl. Mater. Inter. 11 (39)
(2019) 36278–36285.
[6] R.H. Baughman, A.A. Zakhidov, W.A. de Heer, Carbon nanotubes—the route
toward applications, Science 297 (5582) (2002) 787–792.
[7] E. Pop, D. Mann, Q. Wang, K. Goodson, H. Dai, Thermal conductance of an
individual single-wall carbon nanotube above room temperature, Nano Lett 6
(2006) 96–100.
[8] Z. Yao, C.L. Kane, C. Dekker, High-field electrical transport in single-wall carbon
nanotubes, Phys Rev Lett 84 (2000) 2941–2944.
[9] Z. Spitalsky, D. Tasis, K. Papagelis, C. Galiotis, Carbon nanotube-polymer
composites: chemistry, processing, mechanical and electrical properties,
Progress in Polymer Science 35 (3) (2010) 357–401.
[10] V.D. Punetha, S. Rana, H.J. Yoo, A.C. James, T. McLeskey Jr., M.S. Ramasamy, N.G.
Sahoo, J.W. Cho, Functionalization of carbon nanomaterials for advanced
polymer nanocomposites: a comparison study between CNT and graphene,
Progress in Polymer Science 67 (2017) 1–47.
[11] C. Pramanik, D. Nepal, M. Nathanson, J.R. Gissingera, A. Garleya, R.J. Berry, A.
Davijanic, S. Kumar, H. Heinza, Molecular engineering of interphases in
polymer/carbon nanotube composites to reach the limits of mechanical
performance, Composites Science and Technology 166 (2018) 86–94.
1779
Materials Today: Proceedings 50 (2022) 1774–1780
[12] Y. Liu, S. Kumar, Polymer/carbon nanotube nanocomposite fibers-A review,
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 6 (9) (2014) 6069–6087.
[13] D. Qian, E.C. Dickey, R. Andrews, T. Rantell, Load transfer and deformation
mechanisms in carbon nanotube–polystyrene composites, Appl Phys Lett 76
(2000) 2868–2870.
[14] J. Chen, L. Yan, W. Song and D. Xu: Interfacial characteristics of carbon
nanotube-polymer composites: A review. Composites Part A: Applied Science
and Manufacturing, Vol: 114, Page: 149-169 (2018).
[15] Q.S. Yang and X. Liu: Mechanical behaviour of extra-strong CNT fibers and
their composites. Toughening Mechanisms in Composite Materials, Page: 339-
372 (2015).
[16] M. Heidarhaei, M. Shariati, H.R. Eipakchi, Analytical investigation of interfacial
debonding in graphene-reinforced polymer nanocomposites with cohesive
zone interface, Mech. Adv. Mater Struc. 26 (12) (2019) 1008–1017.
[17] X. Chen, L. Zhang, C. Park, C.C. Fay, X. Wang, C. Ke, Mechanical strength of
boron nitride nanotube-polymer interfaces, Appl. Phys. Lett. 107 (2015)
25310525.
[18] K.S. Khare, F. Khabaz, R. Khare, Effect of carbon nanotube functionalization on
mechanical and thermal properties of cross-linked epoxy-carbon nanotube
nanocomposites: role of strengthening the interfacial interactions, ACS
Applied Materials & Interfaces 6 (9) (2014) 6098–6110.
[19] N. Ning, T. Mi, G. Chu, L.Q. Zhang, L. Liu, M. Tian, H.T. Yu, Y.L. Lu, et al., A
quantitative approach to study the interface of carbon nanotubes/elastomer
nanocomposites, European Polymer Journal 102 (2018) 10–18.
[20] M. Yoonessi, M. Lebŕon-Coĺon, D. Scheiman, M.A. Meador, Carbon nanotube
epoxy nanocomposites: the effects mechanical properties of the
nanocomposites, ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 6 (19) (2014) 16621–16630.
[21] P. Katti, S. Bose, S. Kumar, Tailored interface resulting in improvement in
mechanical properties of epoxy composites containing poly(ether ether
ketone) grafted multiwall carbon nanotubes, Polymer 102 (2016) 43–53.
[22] P.C. Ma, N.A. Siddiqui, G. Marom, J.-K. Kim, Dispersion and functionalization of
carbon nanotubes for polymer-based nanocomposites: a review, Composites,
Part A 41 (10) (2010) 1345–1367.
[23] C. Velasco-Santos, A.L. Martinez-Hernandez, V.M. Castano, Carbon nanotube-
polymer nanocomposites: the role of interfaces, Compos. Interfaces 11 (8–9)
(2005) 567–586.
[24] A.H. Barber, S.R. Cohen, H.D. Wagner, Measurement of carbon nanotube-
polymer interfacial strength, Appl Phys Lett 82 (2003) 4140–4142.
[25] C.A. Cooper, S.R. Cohen, A.H. Barber, H.D. Wagner, Detachment of nanotubes
from polymer matrix, Appl Phys Lett 81 (2002) 3873–3875.
[26] N. Chandra, H. Ghonem, Interfacial mechanics of push-out tests: theory and
experiments, Compos Part A 32 (2001) 575–584.
[27] L.P. Canal, C. Gonzalez, J. Segurado, J., LLorca,, Intraply fracture of fiber-
reinforced composites: microscopic mechanisms and modelling, Compos Sci
Technol 72 (2012) 1223–1232.
[28] T. Kamae, L.T. Drzal, Carbon fiber/epoxy composite property enhancement
through incorporation of carbon nanotubes at the fiber-matrix interphase –
Part I: the development of carbon nanotube coated carbon fibers and the
evaluation of their adhesion, Compos Part A 43 (2012) 1569–1577.
[29] Y.L. Yilmaz, Analyzing single fiber fragmentation test data by using stress
transfer model, J Compos Mater 36 (2002) 537–551.
[30] Q. Zhao, C. Qian, L. Harper, N. Warrior, Finite element study of the
microdroplet test for interfacial shear strength: Effects of geometric
parameters for a carbon fiber/epoxy system, Journal of Composite Materials
52 (16) (2018) 2163–2177.
[31] M. Zu, Q. Li, Y. Zhu, M. Dey, G. Wang, W. Lu, J. Deitzel, J. Gillespie Jr, J.H. Byun
and T.W. Chou: The effective interfacial shear strength of carbon nanotube
fibers in an epoxy matrix characterized by a microdroplet test. Carbon. 50.
10.1016/j.carbon.2011.10.047 (2012).
[32] S. Sockalingam, M. Dey, J.W. Gillespie Jr., M. Keefe, Finite element analysis of
the microdroplet test method using cohesive zone model of the fiber/matrix
interface, Compos Part A 56 (2014) 239–247.
[33] L.J. Broutman: Measurement of the fiber-polymer matrix interfacial strength.
Interfaces in Composites, ASTM STP 452 (American Society for Testing and
Materials) pp 27-41 (1969).
[34] V. Nova, L. Karygianni, M.J. Altenburger, M. Wolkewitz, A.M. Kielbassa, K.
Wrbas, Pull-out bond strength of a fiber-reinforced composite post system
luted with self-adhesive resin cements, J. Dent. 41 (11) (2013) 1020–1026.
[35] A. Godara, L. Gorbatikh, G. Kalinka, A. Warrier, O. Rochez, L. Mezzo, F. Luizi, A.
W. van Vuure, S.V. Lomov, I. Verpoest, Interfacial shear strength of a glass
fiber/epoxy bonding in composites, Compos Sci Technol 70 (2010) 1346–1352.
[36] A.W.R. Kelly, Tyson, Tensile properties of fiber-reinforced metals:
copper/tungsten and copper/molybdenum, J Mech Phys Solids 13 (1965)
329–350.
[37] L.T. Drzal, M.J. Rich, J.D. Camping and W.J. Park: Interfacial shear strength and
failure mechanisms in graphite fiber composites.35th Ann Tech Conf
Reinforced PlasticsComposites lnst (The Society of the Plastics Industry)
paper 20-C (1985).
[38] R. Chawla, S. Sharma, Molecular dynamics simulation of carbon nanotube pull-
out from polyethylene matrix, Composites Science and Technology 144 (2017)
169–177.
[39] B. Miller, P. Muri, L.L. Rebenfeld, A microbond method for determination of the
shear strength of a fiber–resin interface, Compos Sci Technol 28 (1) (1987) 17–32.
[40] H.D. Wagner, O. Lourie, Y. Fledman, R. Tenne, Stress-induced fragmentation of
multiwall carbon nanotubes in a polymer matrix, Appl Phys Lett 72 (1988)
188–190.
A. Mani and S. Sharma
[41] F. Deng, T. Ogasawara and N. Takeda N: Pull-out testing for individual MWCNT
and functionalized MWCNT. In: Proceedings US-Japan conference on
composite materials (2008).
[42] T. Tsuda, T. Ogasawara, F. Deng, N. Takeda, Direct measurements of interfacial
shear strength of multi-walled carbon nanotube/PEEK composite using a
nano-pullout method, Composites Science and Technology, ISSN: 0266–3538
71 (10) (2011) 1295–1300.
[43] D. Roy, S. Bhattacharyya, A. Rachamim, A. Plati, M.L. Saboungi, Measurement of
interfacial shear strength in single-wall carbon nanotubes reinforced
composite using Raman spectroscopy, J Appl Phys 107 (2010) 043501.
[44] W. Ding, L. Calabr, K.M. Kohlhass, X. Chen, D.A. Dikin, R.S. Ruoff, Modulus,
fracture strength, and brittle vs. plastic response of the shell of arc-grown
multi-walled carbon nanotubes, Exp Mech 47 (2007) 25–36.
[45] M. Rahmat, K. Das, P. Hubert, Interaction stresses in carbon nanotube-polymer
nanocomposites, ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 3 (9) (2011) 3425–3431.
[46] M. Zu, Q. Li, Y. Zhu, M. Dey, G. Wang, W. Lu, J. Deitzel, J. Gillespie Jr, J.H. Byun
and T.W. Chou, Tsu-Wei: The effective interfacial shear strength of carbon
nanotube fibers in an epoxy matrix characterized by a microdroplet test.
Carbon. 50. 10.1016/j.carbon.10.047 (2012).
[47] Y. Ganesan, C. Peng, Y. Lu, P.E. Loya, P. Moloney, E. Barrera, B.I. Yakobson, J.M.
Tour, R. Ballarini, J. Lou, Interface toughness of carbon nanotube reinforced
epoxy composites, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 3 (2) (2011) 129–134.
[48] M.P. Manoharan, A. Sharma, A.V. Desai, M.A. Haque, C.E. Bakis, K.W. Wang, The
interfacial strength of carbon nanofiber epoxy composite using single fiber
pullout experiments, Nanotechnology 20 (29) (2009) 295701.
[49] R.J. Sager, P.J. Klein, D.C. Lagoudas, Q. Zhang, J. Liu, L. Dai, J.W. Baur, Effect of
carbon nanotubes on the interfacial shear strength of T650 carbon fiber in an
epoxy matrix, Composites Science and Technology 69 (7–8) (2009) 898–904.
[50] C.M. Medina, J.M. Molina-Aldareguía, C. González, M.F. Melendrez, P. Flores, J.
LLorca, Comparison of push-in and push-out tests for measuring interfacial
shear strength in nano-reinforced composite materials, Journal of Composite
Materials 50 (12) (2016) 1651–1659.
[51] S. Sanvito, Y.K. Kwon, D. Tománek, C.J. Lambert, Fractional quantum
conductance in carbon nanotubes, Phys Rev Lett 84 (2000) 1974–1977.
[52] S.J.V. Frankland, A. Caglar, D.W. Brenner, M. Griebel, Molecular simulation of
the influence of chemical cross-links on the shear strength of carbon
nanotube-polymer interfaces, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 106
(2002) 3046–3304.
[53] M. Wong, M. Parasothy, X.J. Wu, Y. Ren, S. Li, K. Liao, Physical interactions at
carbon nanotube-polymer interface, Polymer 44 (2003) 7757–7764.
[54] K. Liao, S. Li, Interfacial characteristics of a carbon nanotube–polystyrene
composite system, Appl Phys Lett 79 (2001) 4225–4227.
[55] Q. Jiang, S.S. Tallury, Y. Qiu, M.A. Pasquinelli, Interfacial characteristics of a
carbon nanotube-polyimide nanocomposite by molecular dynamics
simulation, Nanotechnology Reviews 9 (1) (2020) 136–145.
[56] X.L. Gao, K. Li, A shear–lag model for carbon-reinforced polymer composites,
Int J Solids Struct 42 (2005) 1649–1667.
[57] J. Gou, B. Minaie, B. Wang, Z. Liang, C. Zhang, Computational and experimental
study of interfacial bonding of single-walled nanotube reinforced composites,
Comput. Mater. Sci. 31 (2004) 225.
[58] J.Q. Liu, T. Xiao, K. Liao, P. Wu, Interfacial design of carbon nanotube-polymer
composites: hybrid system of noncovalent and covalent functionalization,
Nanotechnology 18 (2007) 165701.
[59] T. Xiao, J. Liu, H. Xiong, Effects of Different Functionalization Schemes on the
Interfacial Strength of Carbon Nanotube Polyethylene Composite, Acta Mech.
Solida Sin. 28 (2015) 277–284.
[60] Q. Zheng, D. Xia, Q. Xue, K. Yan, X. Gao, Q. Li, Computational analysis of effect
of modification on the interfacial characteristics of a carbon nanotube
polyethylene composite system, Appl. Surf. Sci. 255 (2009) 3534–3543.
[61] X. Xu, M.M. Thwe, C. Shearwood, K. Liao, Mechanical properties and interfacial
characteristics of carbon-nanotube-reinforced epoxy thin films, Appl. Phys.
Lett. 81 (2002) 2833–2836.
[62] S. Yashiro, Y. Sakaida, Y. Shimamura, Y. Inoue, Evaluation of interfacial shear
stress between multiwalled carbon nanotubes and epoxy-based on strain
distribution measurement using Raman spectroscopy, Composites, Part A 85
(2016) 192–198.
[63] J.M. Wernik, B.J. Cornwell-Mott, S.A. Meguid, Determination of the interfacial
properties of carbon nanotube reinforced polymer composites using atomistic
based continuum model, International Journal of Solids and Structures 49 (13)
(2012) 1852–1863.
1780
Materials Today: Proceedings 50 (2022) 1774–1780
[64] N. Ning, D. Cheng, J. Yang, L. Liu, M. Tian, Y. Wu, W. Wang, L. Zhang, Y. Lu, New
insight on the interfacial interaction between multiwalled carbon nanotubes
and elastomers, Composites Science and Technology 142 (2017) 214–220.
[65] Y. Zare, K.Y. Rhee, Effects of critical interfacial shear strength between a
polymer matrix and carbon nanotubes on the interphase strength and
Pukanszky’s ‘‘B” interphase parameter, RSC Adv. 10 (2020) 13573–13582.
[66] G. Zamfirova, V. Gaydarov, F. Faraguna, E., Vidovíc, and, A., Jukíc,, Influence
of carbon nanotubes functionalization on the mechanical properties of
polymethacrylate nanocomposites”, Colloids and Surfaces A:
Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects 510 (2016) 169–175.
[67] M. Rafiee, F. Nitzsche, M.R. Labrosse, Effect of functionalization of carbon
nanotubes on vibration and damping characteristics of epoxy nanocomposites,
Polymer Testing 69 (2018) 385–395.
[68] K.M. Lee, L. Li, L. Dai, Asymmetric end functionalization of multi-walled carbon
nanotubes, Journal of the American Chemical Society 127 (12) (2005) 4122–
4123.
[69] Y. Li, D. Yang, A. Adronov, Y. Gao, X. Luo, H. Li, Covalent functionalization of
single-walled carbon nanotubes with thermoresponsive core cross-linked
polymeric micelles, Macromolecules 45 (11) (2012) 4698–4706.
[70] F.H. Gojny, K. Schulte, Functionalisation effect on the thermo-mechanical
behavior of multi-wall carbon nanotube/epoxy composites, Composites
Science and Technology 64 (15) (2004) 2303–2308.
[71] F.H. Gojny, J. Nastalczyk, Z. Roslaniec, K. Schulte, Surface modified multi-
walled carbon nanotubes in CNT/epoxy-composites, Chemical Physics Letters
370 (5–6) (2003) 820–824.
[72] J. Zhu, J.D. Kim, H.Q. Peng, J.L. Margrave, V.N. Khabashesku, E.V. Barrera,
Improving the dispersion and integration of single-walled carbon nanotubes in
epoxy composites through functionalization, Nano Letters 3 (2003) 1107–
1113.
[73] S. Namilae, N. Chandra, Multiscale model to study the effect of interfaces in
carbon nanotube-based composites, Journal of Engineering Materials and
Technology 127 (2005) 222–232.
[74] Y.J. Kim, T.S. Shin, H.D. Choi, J.H. Kwon, Y.-C. Chung, H.G. Yoon, Electrical
conductivity of chemically modified multiwalled carbon nanotube/epoxy
composites, Carbon 43 (1) (2005) 23–30.
[75] S.K. Samanta, M. Fritsch, U. Scherf, W. Gomulya, S.Z. Bisri, M.A. Loi, Conjugated
polymer-assisted dispersion of single-wall carbon nanotubes: the power of
polymer wrapping, Accounts of Chemical Research 47 (8) (2014) 2446–2456.
[76] T. Lei, I. Pochorovski, Z. Bao, Separation of semiconducting carbon nanotubes
for flexible and stretchable electronics using polymer removable method,
Accounts of Chemical Research 50 (4) (2017) 1096–1104.
[77] A.A.B. Davijani, S. Kumar, Ordered wrapping of poly(methyl methacrylate) on
single-wall carbon nanotubes, Polymer 70 (2015) 278–281.
[78] A. Nish, J.-Y. Hwang, J. Doig, R.J. Nicholas, Highly selective dispersion of single-
walled carbon nanotubes using aromatic polymers, Nature Nanotechnology 2
(10) (2007) 640–646.
[79] M.J. O’Connell, P. Boul, L.M. Ericson, C. Huffman, Y. Wang, E. Haroz, C. Kuper, J.
Tour, K.D. Ausman, R.E. Smalley, Reversible water-solubilization of single-
walled carbon nanotubes by polymer wrapping, Chemical Physics Letters 342
(3–4) (2001) 265–271.
[80] V. Lordi, N. Yao, Molecular mechanics of binding in carbon-nanotube-polymer
composites, Journal of Materials Research 15 (2000) 2770–2779.
[81] R.J. Chen, Y.G. Zhang, D.W. Wang, H.J. Dai, Noncovalent sidewall
functionalization of single-walled carbon nanotubes for protein
immobilization, Journal of the American Chemical Society 123 (2001) 3838–
3839.
[82] W. Chung, K. Nobusawa, H. Kamikubo, M. Kataoka, M. Fujiki, M. Naito, Time-
resolved observation of chiral-index-selective wrapping on single-walled
carbon nanotube with non-aromatic polysilane, Journal of the American
Chemical Society 135 (6) (2013) 2374–2383.
[83] D.W. Steuerman, A. Star, R. Narizzano, H. Choi, R.S. Ries, C. Nicolini, J.F.
Stoddart, J.R. Heath, Interactions between conjugated polymers and single-
walled carbon nanotubes, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 106 (2002)
3124–3130.
[84] M. Yang, V. Koutsos, M. Zaiser, Interactions between polymers and carbon
nanotubes: a molecular dynamics study, Journal of Physical Chemistry B 109
(20) (2005) 10009–10014.
[85] M. Nie, D.M. Kalyon, F.T. Fisher, Interfacial load transfer in polymer/carbon
nanotube nanocomposites with a nanohybrid shish kebab modification, ACS
Appl. Mater. Interfaces 6 (17) (2014) 14886–14893.