RIGA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

Faculty of Civil and Mechanical Engineering

Institute of Mechanics and Mechanical Engineering

SAGAR PRAGAJIBHAI DOBARIYA

The student of the Master Study Programme “Engineering Technology,
Mechanics and Mechanical Engineering”
(Student ID number: 211AMM013)

EFFECT OF PAN NON-WOVEN LAYERS ON

MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF EPOXY
COMPOSITE

Master Thesis

Scientific advisor:
Associate Professor
Dr.sc.ing. Inga Ļašenko

Riga, 2024
INSTITUTE OF MECHANICS AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

APPROVED
IMME Director
………………………………………
Professor, Dr.sc.ing. Irīna Boiko

TASK FOR MASTER THESIS

1. Thesis title: “Effect of PAN nonwoven layers on mechanical properties of epoxy

composite” Approved on 15/01/2023 Order No.

2. Thesis title in Latvian: “PAN neausto slāņu ietekme uz epoksīda kompozīta

mehāniskajām īpašībām”

3. Submission deadline: 15/01/2024

4. The aim of the thesis: To examine the influence of nanofiber layers on the
mechanical and thermal characteristics of epoxy composites. This study is designed to
provide a comprehensive analysis of how the incorporation of nanofiber layers
impacts the mechanical and thermal behaviour of these composites, thereby offering
valuable insights into their performance and applicability in various domains.

5. The content of Master Thesis descriptive part: The initial phase involves
conducting experiments to fabricate nanofiber mats and layered epoxy composites.
This is followed by undertaking experiments focused on tensile testing and
thermogravimetric analysis. Subsequent to gathering experimental data, the next
crucial step is to corroborate these findings through numerical validation. This process
is integral to ensuring the reliability and accuracy of the experimental outcomes,
thereby solidifying the research's overall credibility.

Scientific adviser ……………………………/ Assoc. Prof. Dr.sc.ing., Inga Ļašenko /

Student ............................................/ Sagar Pragajibhai Dobariya /

2
 EXECUTION AND EVALUATION SHEET OF THE THESIS

Master Thesis developed at RTU, Institute of Mechanics and Mechanical Engineering

Author of the Thesis: Sagar Pragajibhai Dobariya ……………………………………

(signature, date)

Scientific advisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr.sc.ing. Inga Ļ ašenko …………………………

(signature, date)

Scientific consultant: Mg.Sc.Eng. Jaymin Sanchaniya …………………………………

(signature, date)

Master Thesis is suggested for defence:

Doc., Dr.sc.ing. Marina Čerpinska ...……………………................

(signature, date)

Master Thesis is defended at the meeting of the…………………………………………….….

……………………………………………………………………………………. Commission
(name of the commission)

on………………… and is assessed with the grade …………………...……………………….

(date) (numerical and verbal rating)

Secretary of Commission Dr.sc.ing., Prof. Olga Kononova ……………………………………

(signature)

3
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I am profoundly grateful for the guidance, support, and inspiration provided by Dr.sc.ing.,
Associate Professor Inga Ļašenko, and Mg.sc.ing., Jaymin Sanchaniya. Their expertise and
mentorship have been instrumental in shaping my academic journey and research in the field
of composite nanofibrous materials. Dr.sc.ing. Inga Ļašenko, as my supervisor, has offered
invaluable insights, and critical feedback. Her deep understanding of the subject and ability to
convey complex concepts in an accessible manner have greatly enriched my learning
experience.

Equally, I owe a debt of gratitude to my consultant Mg.sc.ing. Jaymin Vrajlal Sanchaniyahas,

whose expertise and guidance have been vital in navigating the intricate aspects of my
research. His approach to problem-solving and innovation has inspired me to explore new
avenues within my field of study. The combined guidance of Dr.sc.ing. Inga Ļašenko and
Mg.sc.ing. Jaymin Vrajlal Sanchaniya have been a cornerstone of my academic development,
enabling me to reach new heights of understanding in nanocomposite and nanofibrous
materials.

My time at Riga Technical University has been transformative, thanks to the exceptional
infrastructure and stimulating academic environment. The opportunity to study and conduct
research within such a well-equipped and supportive institution has been a privilege that has
significantly contributed to both my personal and professional growth. The interactions with a
community of outstanding academics and peers have enriched my educational journey,
fostering a vibrant learning atmosphere that has been integral to my development.

I also extend my heartfelt thanks to my friends, whose moral support and encouragement have
been a constant source of strength. Their belief in my abilities and their unwavering support
have been pillars of motivation throughout this way.

Lastly, my deepest appreciation goes to my family, specifically my parents and my brother.

Their endless love, support, and encouragement have been the foundation of all my
achievements. Their sacrifices, unwavering faith in my potential, and constant encouragement
have been instrumental in shaping my character and aspirations. This accomplishment is as
much theirs as it is mine, and for that, I am eternally grateful.

4
5
 ABSTRACT

The burgeoning field of layered composite materials and nanofiber mats is garnering
increasing interest in engineering disciplines. Nanofibers, characterized by their slender
diameters, substantial surface-to-volume ratio, and a porous structure that constitutes about
90% of their structure, exhibit distinct properties. These attributes render them highly
beneficial across a diverse array of applications. Notably, their recent application as interleaf
materials in composite matrices has shown promise in enhancing low-impact resistance.

Polyacrylonitrile (PAN), a polymer renowned for its versatility, has emerged as a

front-runner in the realm of nanofiber and composite material research. However, the specific
impact of individual nanofiber mats, when integrated with epoxy in a layered formation, has
not been extensively studied.

This research primarily focuses on examining the influence of PAN nanofiber mats
within epoxy composites. To achieve this, composites were innovatively designed by
intercalating one, two, and three layers of nanofiber mats amidst the epoxy layers,
culminating in a sandwich-structured composite. Subsequent to the fabrication process, these
composites were subjected to rigorous mechanical and thermal testing, and the results were
meticulously analysed. To supplement the empirical findings, both numerical and analytical
models were developed for a comprehensive comparison with the experimental data.

The findings of this research underscored a significant impact of the PAN nanofiber
layer on the overall properties of the composite materials, marking a noteworthy contribution
to the field.

This thesis is a comprehensive document, spanning 54 pages and includes 20 figures,

3 tables, and references 60 scholarly sources, providing a thorough exploration of the subject
matter.

6
 KOPSAVILKUMS

Plaukstošais slāņveida kompozītmateriālu un nanošķiedru paklāju lauks izraisa arvien

lielāku interesi par inženierzinātņu disciplīnām. Nanošķiedrām, ko raksturo tievs diametrs,
ievērojama virsmas un tilpuma attiecība un poraina struktūra, kas veido aptuveni 90% no to
sastāva, piemīt atšķirīgas īpašības. Šie atribūti padara tos ļoti izdevīgus dažādās
lietojumprogrammās. Proti, to nesenais pielietojums kā starplapu materiāli kompozītmateriālu
matricās ir izrādījis daudzsološu uzlabošanu zemas triecienizturības jomā.

Poliakrilnitrils (PAN), polimērs, kas ir slavens ar savu daudzpusību, ir kļuvis par līderi
nanošķiedru un kompozītmateriālu izpētes jomā. Tomēr atsevišķu nanošķiedru paklāju īpašā
ietekme, ja tie ir integrēti ar epoksīdu slāņveida veidojumā, nav plaši pētīta.

Šis pētījums galvenokārt ir vērsts uz PAN nanošķiedru paklāju ietekmes pārbaudi

epoksīda kompozītmateriālos. Lai to panāktu, kompozītmateriāli tika novatoriski izstrādāti,
starp epoksīda slāņiem ievietojot vienu, divus un trīs nanošķiedras paklājus, kas beidzās ar
sviestmaižu strukturētu kompozītmateriālu. Pēc ražošanas procesa šiem kompozītmateriāliem
tika veikta stingra mehāniskā un termiskā pārbaude, un rezultāti tika rūpīgi analizēti. Lai
papildinātu empīriskos atklājumus, tika izstrādāti gan skaitliskie, gan analītiskie modeļi
visaptverošam salīdzinājumam ar eksperimentālajiem datiem.

Šī pētījuma atklājumi uzsvēra PAN nanošķiedras slāņa būtisko ietekmi uz

kompozītmateriālu vispārējām īpašībām, iezīmējot ievērojamu ieguldījumu šajā jomā.

Šis darbs ir visaptverošs dokuments, kas aptver 54 lappuses un ietver 20 attēlus, 3

tabulas un atsauces uz 60 zinātnisku avotu, kas nodrošina rūpīgu tēmas izpēti.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction...............................................................................................................................10

1. Literature Review..........................................................................................................13

1.1 Nanofibers..................................................................................................................13
1.2 Nanofiber Mats Interleaving in CFRP/GFRP............................................................16
1.3 Electrospinning...........................................................................................................18
1.4 Literature Summary....................................................................................................21
2. Preliminary Experiment.................................................................................................23

2.1 Materials.....................................................................................................................23
2.2 Fabrication Method....................................................................................................23
2.2.1 Nanofiber Fabrication.....................................................................................24
2.2.2 Preparation of Epoxy Composites with PAN Nanofibers...............................25
2.3 Testing Method..........................................................................................................26
2.3.1 Mechanical Testing.........................................................................................26
2.3.2 Thermal Testing..............................................................................................28
2.4 Experimental Results..................................................................................................29
3. Numerical Simulation....................................................................................................38

3.1 CAD Model & Material Properties............................................................................38

3.2 Meshing......................................................................................................................40
3.3 Boundary Conditions..................................................................................................40
3.4 Numerical Results......................................................................................................41
4. Analytical Model...........................................................................................................43

5. Results...........................................................................................................................46

Conclusion................................................................................................................................48

List of References.....................................................................................................................50
 List of Figures

Figure 0.1 Nanofiber mats reinforced in CFRP/GFRP (Maccaferri et al., 2021).....................11

Figure 1.1 SEM image of Electrospun Nanofibers (Sanchaniya, et al., 2023).........................14

Figure 1.2 Applications of Nanofibers (Nathanael & Oh, 2021)..............................................15

Figure 1.3 Electrospinning Setup (Inovenso, n.d.)....................................................................18

Figure 2.1 Electrospinning setup with rotating drum collector................................................24

Figure 2.2 Specimen with paper template.................................................................................27

Figure 2.3 Tensile test results PAN nanofiber mats.................................................................29

Figure 2.4 Tensile test results of pure Epoxy...........................................................................30

Figure 2.5 Tensile test results of Single-Layer Nanocomposite...............................................30

Figure 2.6 Tensile test results of Two-Layer Nanocomposite..................................................31

Figure 2.7 Tensile test results of Three-Layer Nanocomposite................................................31

Figure 2.8 TGA of pure epoxy..................................................................................................33

Figure 2.9 TGA of composite with single layer of PAN nanofiber..........................................33

Figure 2.10 TGA of composite with two layer of PAN nanofiber mat....................................34

Figure 2.11 TGA of composite with three layer of PAN nanofiber mat..................................35

Figure 2.12 Comparative TGA of nanocomposites comparing to pure epoxy.........................36

Figure 3.1 CAD model..............................................................................................................39

Figure 3.2 Meshing of CAD Model..........................................................................................40

Figure 3.3 Boundary Conditions...............................................................................................41

Figure 3.4 Normal stress results................................................................................................41

 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1...................................................................................................................................17

Table 2.1...................................................................................................................................32

Table 5.1...................................................................................................................................47
 Introduction

The notable vulnerability of laminated fibre-reinforced polymer composites to impact

damage is a critical limitation of composite materials (Prichard & Hogg, 1990; Richardson &
Wisheart, 1996 these references very old) Recommendation: pls add just References:
Andrejs Pupurs, Olga Kononova, Vladislavs Jevstigņejevs, it will be good correlation with
your work, more other you will show more wider knowledge about relative works from our
university. Their layered structure often leads to diminished interlaminar fracture toughness,
predisposing them to delamination among the reinforcing layers. Such delamination,
particularly under impact loading, is a significant failure mechanism. The compromised load-
bearing capacity of composites after impact, even from minor incidents like tool drops or
runway debris, is a major concern. These seemingly trivial impacts can substantially degrade
the mechanical integrity of the composite structure, often without any visible damage.
Enhancing the impact resistance of composite laminates is therefore crucial, as it would
improve damage tolerance, performance, and longevity. Over the years, various methods have
been suggested to reinforce these materials, including rubber/thermoplastic toughening, the
introduction of rigid nanoparticles (Chandrasekaran et al., 2014; Kostagiannakopoulou et al.,
2015; Taraghi et al., 2014), interlayer toughening particles, and through-thickness
reinforcements (Bahrami et al., 2016; Xu et al., 2016). However, these approaches often
compromise in-plane properties, increase costs, or add weight, limiting their practicality.

A promising approach to toughening is the interleaving of electrospun nanofibrous mats

within laminates (Daelemans et al., 2015; van der Heijden et al., 2014). These nanofibers,
seamlessly integrated into laminated composites as self-supporting veils or through direct
deposition on reinforcing plies, offer several advantages. Their small diameter allows for thin
interlayers, and their continuous nature mitigates health risks associated with other
nanomaterials (van der Heijden et al., 2014). However, current research, primarily focused on
delamination tests like the double cantilever beam or end notch flexure method, does not
directly translate to improved impact damage tolerance (Xu et al., 2016). Figure 0.1 shows the
similar composite interleaved nanofiber mats reinforced in Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers
(CFRP) and Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymers (GFRP).
 Figure 0.1 Nanofiber mats reinforced in CFRP/GFRP (Maccaferri et al., 2021)

Investigations into the tensile strength and thermal properties of nanofiber interleaved
composite laminates remain scarce. Despite the significant enhancements in tensile strength
and thermal degradation resistance observed with interleaving nanofibrous mats, evidence
supporting similar improvements in tensile strength for interleaved composites is limited. This
indicates a need for more extensive research into the mechanical and thermal behaviours of
nanofiber interleaved composite laminates to assess whether this method can effectively
address one of the primary shortcomings of laminated composites.

This study focuses on the impact of PAN nanofiber mats on the mechanical and thermal
properties of epoxy composites. By interleaving various layers of nanofiber mats to create
sandwich structures, the research aims to understand their effect on composite properties.

The research hypotheses are as follows:

H0: There is no significant relationship between the mechanical (strength and durability
of the composites, tensile tests) and thermal properties (Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA))
and the interleaving of PAN nanofiber mats in epoxy composites.

H1: There is a significant relationship between the mechanical (strength and durability of
the composites, tensile tests) and thermal properties (Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA)) and
the interleaving of PAN nanofiber mats in epoxy composites.

12
 To accomplish the objectives of this study and derive meaningful insights into the effects
of PAN nanofiber mats on epoxy composites, the following tasks were meticulously executed:

1. Fabrication of PAN Nanofiber Mats: This involved the synthesis of PAN nanofiber
mats using advanced techniques, ensuring their quality and suitability for further
application in composite structures.
2. Creation of Composites with Interleaved PAN Nanofiber Mats: This step entailed the
strategic integration of the fabricated PAN nanofiber mats into epoxy composites,
forming layered structures that potentially enhance the mechanical and thermal
properties of the composites.
3. Conducting Tensile Tests: To evaluate the mechanical strength and durability of the
composites, tensile tests were conducted. These tests provided crucial data on the
composites' performance under stress.
4. Performing Thermogravimetric Analysis: This analysis was crucial to understand the
thermal stability and decomposition characteristics of the composites, offering insights
into their behaviour under various temperature conditions.
5. Developing Numerical Models: Numerical modelling helped in predicting and
understanding the complex interactions within the composites, providing a virtual
platform for analysis and hypothesis testing.
6. Formulating Analytical Models: These models were essential for interpreting the data
and understanding the underlying principles governing the behaviour of the
composites.
7. Analysing Results: This involved a thorough examination of the data obtained from
tests and models to draw meaningful conclusions about the impact of PAN nanofiber
mats on the epoxy composites.
8. Concluding Observations and Outlining Future Research Avenues: The study
concluded with a synthesis of findings and suggestions for future research, aiming to
further explore and utilize the potential of PAN nanofiber mats in enhancing
composite materials.

13
 1. Literature Review

This chapter offers a comprehensive examination of the research landscape in the area of
Nanofibers, delving into their fabrication processes and the application of nanofibers in
Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers (CFRP) and Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymers (GFRP).

1.1 Nanofibers

Nanoscale science and technology, an emergent domain of inquiry, concentrates on

entities measured in nanometres, with one nanometer equating to one-billionth of a meter. The
diminutive scale of nanoscale materials is the source of their immense potential. At this scale,
materials exhibit unique properties, paving the way for the innovation of new materials and
devices (Bhardwaj & Kundu, 2010).

Nanofibers are a pivotal component of nanotechnology. Defined as fibers with a

diameter less than 1000 nanometres, nanofibers are distinguished by their extraordinary
physical and chemical attributes, diminutive size coupled with a vast specific surface area,
and the phenomenon of quantum confinement. Through the manipulation of matter at the
nanoscale, scientists are able to develop novel materials, devices, and systems, leveraging the
unique properties and phenomena that manifest at this scale (Nien et al., 2021).

The mechanical properties of fibers are known to improve markedly as their diameter
decreases. Nanofibers, often fabricated through the process of electrospinning, are continuous
fibers with diameters ranging between 2 nm and 1000 nm. Typically, these nanofibers are
characterized by a solid core and a smooth exterior surface, leading to an expectation of high
axial strength. Bridging the gap between the nanoscale and macroscale dimensions,
nanofibers have diameters within the nanometric range while their lengths can be significantly
longer, theoretically unbounded. Currently, nanofibers are drawing considerable interest
owing to their exceptional micro and nano structural characteristics, high levels of porosity,
and inherently extensive surface area.

Figure 1.1 in the text presents Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) images,
showcasing of electrospun nanofibers, each illustrating the unique structural attributes of
these materials.
 Figure 1.2 SEM image of Electrospun Nanofibers (magnification???) (Sanchaniya, et al., 2023)

The versatility of electrospun nanofibers has led to their consideration for a wide array
of applications, as depicted in Figure 1.2. These applications span across multiple fields,
showcasing the adaptability and functionality of nanofibers. Some of the notable applications
include:

Medical Applications: In the medical field, nanofibers are utilized in several innovative
ways. They form critical components in artificial organs and tissue engineering, serve as
implant materials, and are used in drug delivery systems. Additionally, their application
extends to wound dressings and medical textiles, highlighting their significance in advancing
medical technology and healthcare (Chen et al., 2022; Kanani & Bahrami, 2010; Zulkifli et
al., 2023).

Protective Materials: Nanofibers play a pivotal role in the development of sound-

absorbing materials and protective clothing, especially for defence against chemical and
biological warfare agents. Furthermore, they are integral in sensor applications designed for
the detection of chemical agents, underlining their importance in safety and defence (Gorji et
al., 2017).

15
 Figure 1.3 Applications of Nanofibers (Nathanael & Oh, 2021)

Textile Industry: In the realm of textiles, nanofibers contribute significantly to sports

apparel, including sportswear, athletic shoes, and specialized clothing for activities like
climbing and rainwear. Their application also extends to outerwear garments and baby
diapers, illustrating their wide-ranging utility in everyday life.

Filtration Systems: Nanofibers are crucial in filtration, including air, oil, and fuel filters,
particularly in the automotive industry. They are also employed in filters for beverages,
pharmaceuticals, and medical applications, underscoring their role in maintaining cleanliness
and hygiene in critical environments (Sundarrajan et al., 2014).

Energy Generation and Electronics: In the field of energy and electronics, nanofibers
are used for electrostatic dissipation, solar sails, and electromagnetic interference shielding.
Their application in photovoltaic devices and the fabrication of miniature electronic devices
highlights their contribution to renewable energy and the miniaturization of technology
(Aliheidari et al., 2019; Sun et al., 2016).

These varied applications demonstrate the multifaceted nature of electrospun

nanofibers, making them a valuable asset in numerous industries and technological
advancements. And in all possible cases application of nanocomposite materials (functional

16
parameters), one of the key types of knowledge is the mechanical parameters, and the
changing the mechanical parameters under thermal influence; this applies to different
structures: or nanofiber mats or interleaving structures (sandwich).

1.2 Nanofiber Mats Interleaving in CFRP/GFRP

Over the past decade, there has been a significant shift in research focus towards
integrating nanofiber mats into Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers (CFRP) and Glass Fiber
Reinforced Polymers (GFRP). This emerging trend is largely driven by the discovery that
interleaving nanofiber mats into CFRP/GFRP can substantially enhance the mechanical and
thermal properties of these composite materials (Table 1.1).

The inclusion of nanofiber mats in laminated composites has proven to be highly

beneficial in several key aspects. Firstly, it markedly improves delamination resistance, an
important factor in maintaining the structural integrity of composites. Secondly, the impact
tolerance of these materials is enhanced, making them more resilient to physical stresses and
strains. This is particularly valuable in applications where the composites are exposed to
dynamic or unpredictable environment actions (Table 1.1).

Furthermore, the fracture and fatigue resistance of CFRP/GFRP composites are

significantly bolstered by the introduction of nanofiber mats. This leads to a longer lifespan of
the materials and reduces the need for frequent replacements or repairs. Additionally, the
interlaminar toughness and crack resistance are also improved, which contributes to the
overall durability and reliability of the composite structures.

Another intriguing development in this area is the exploration of self-healing materials.

The integration of nanofiber mats into composites opens up possibilities for developing
materials that can repair themselves after sustaining damage, further extending their usability
and functionality (Table 1.1).

In Table 1.1 meticulously details all these enhancements brought about by nanofiber mats
interleaving in CFRP/GFRP. Each improvement is backed by relevant citations, providing a
comprehensive overview of the current state of research in this field and underscoring the
substantial impact of nanofiber mats on the performance of composite materials.

The integration of nanofiber mats into Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers (CFRP) and
Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymers (GFRP), a focus of recent research over the past decade.
17
This chapter highlights how the incorporation of nanofiber mats, made from diverse materials,
significantly enhances the mechanical and thermal properties of CFRP/GFRP composites. It
details improvements in delamination resistance, impact and fracture tolerance, fatigue
resistance, as well as interlaminar toughness and crack resistance.

Table 1.1

Application of interleaving nanofiber mats in CFRP/GFRP

Application of Nanofiber mats in References

CFRP/GFRP composites

Improving the delamination resistance (Daelemans et al., 2019; MacCaferri et al., 2022;
Mohammadi et al., 2023; Ortolani et al., 2022;
Ravindran et al., 2021)

Improving the low impact tolerance (Daelemans et al., 2018; Garcia et al., 2018; Ladani
et al., 2016; Ladani, Wu, Kinloch, et al., 2017;
Ravindran et al., 2021)

Improving the fracture resistance (Ladani et al., 2016, 2018; Ladani, Wu, Zhang, et
al., 2017; Maccaferri et al., 2020, 2021; Nimbagal
et al., 2023)

Improving the fatigue resistance (T. Brugo et al., 2017; Ladani et al., 2018; Ladani,
Wu, Kinloch, et al., 2017; Mohammadi et al., 2023)

Improvement in thermal properties (ERDAL et al., 2018; Gavande et al., 2023;

Guadagno et al., 2023; Lasenko et al., 2023; Le et
al., 2023; Liu et al., 2023)

Improvement in mechanical properties (ERDAL et al., 2018; Guadagno et al., 2023;

Lasenko et al., 2023; Le et al., 2023; Liu et al.,
2023; Maccaferri, Mazzocchetti, et al., 2022;
Santos et al., 2023b; Simunin et al., 2023; Wable et
al., 2021; Wang et al., 2023)

Improvement in interlaminar toughness (Daelemans et al., 2021; Maccaferri, Dalle Donne,

et al., 2022; Minosi et al., 2021; Ravindran et al.,
2018; Saghafi et al., 2020, 2021; Santos et al.,
2023a; Wu et al., 2017)

Self-healing composite materials (T. M. Brugo et al., 2021; Torre-Muruzabal et al.,

2016)

Crack resistance (Daelemans et al., 2021; Maccaferri et al., 2020)

18
 The chapter also touches on the intriguing potential of developing self-healing materials
within this context. These advancements, comprehensively cited in Table 1.1, underscore the
pivotal role of nanofiber mats in augmenting the performance and longevity of CFRP/GFRP
composites.

The ways to fabricate the nano mats are discussed in detail in the next 1.3 subchapter,
including the interleaving various layers of nanofiber mats to create sandwich structures (2.2
subchapter).

1.3 Electrospinning

Electrospinning is a distinguished and widely adopted technique for the production of

nanofibers, favoured for its efficiency, adaptability, low cost, and simplicity. The nanofibers
created through this method are prized for their extensive surface area, minimal fibre diameter
(ranging from nano to microscale), and high porosity (Anusiya & Jaiganesh, 2022). Figure 1.3
shows the single electrospinning setup.

19
 Figure 1.4 Electrospinning Setup (Inovenso, n.d.)

The electrospinning apparatus consists of four key components: a high-voltage power

supply, a syringe pump, a spinneret or blunt-tipped needle, and a collector. The process
involves the use of a polymer solution, which may contain additives like drugs, peptides, or
nanoparticles. A high voltage applied to this solution ejects continuous strands of the polymer
towards a grounded collector. The applied electric field regulates the interfacial tension of the
polymer droplet, which elongates into a "Taylor cone." The fibre jet is expelled from this
cone, travels through the air, and solidifies into polymer fibers as it deposits on the metal
collector, forming a nonwoven web through solvent evaporation. Critical parameters in this
process include polymer type, concentration, conductivity, viscosity, flow rate, and the
distance between the nozzle and collector (Reneker & Yarin, 2008).

The electrospinning process for fabricating nanofibers involves several critical

parameters, each playing a distinct role in influencing the characteristics of the produced
nanofibers, as follow from [……]:

20
 Polymer Solution Properties:

Concentration: Determines the viscosity of the solution. A higher concentration

typically leads to larger fibre diameters due to increased solution viscosity, and vice versa.

Viscosity: Directly affects the fibre formation. Higher viscosity can prevent the
breakage of the jet, resulting in smoother fibers, but too high a viscosity can hinder the
electrospinning process.

Conductivity: Influences the stretching of the polymer jet. Higher conductivity allows
for greater elongation of the fibers, often leading to thinner fibers.

Surface Tension: Affects the formation of the Taylor cone. Lower surface tension
facilitates the formation of the cone and the ejection of the fibre jet.

Electric Field (Voltage):

The applied voltage affects the force exerted on the polymer jet. Higher voltages can
lead to increased whipping instabilities, resulting in thinner fibers. However, excessively high
voltages might cause instability and result in bead formation.

Flow Rate:

The rate at which the polymer solution is fed through the spinneret. A slower flow rate
gives the solution more time to solidify, leading to finer fibers. Conversely, a higher flow rate
can result in thicker fibers.

Distance Between Spinneret and Collector (Working Distance):

This distance influences the time and space available for the fibre to elongate and
solidify before deposition. A longer distance can facilitate the production of finer and more
uniform fibers, but too great a distance might lead to the formation of beaded fibers due to
incomplete solvent evaporation.

Ambient Conditions (Temperature and Humidity):

Temperature: Affects the evaporation rate of the solvent. Higher temperatures can
accelerate solvent evaporation, potentially leading to finer fibers.

Humidity: High humidity can slow down the evaporation of the solvent, which may
affect fibre morphology and lead to fusion or flattening of fibers.

21
 Collector Properties:

The nature of the collector (e.g., static, rotating, grounded, etc.) can influence the
alignment and structure of the fibers. Rotating collectors can produce more aligned fibers,
while static collectors generally result in randomly oriented fibers.

Each of these parameters interacts in complex ways, influencing the final properties of
the electrospun nanofibers. Therefore, careful optimization and control of these parameters
are crucial for achieving the desired fibre characteristics for specific applications.

Due to the importance of the electrospinning process parameters, varying any

parameters can lead to poor strength nanofiber mats. In this study, I have focused on the
parameters where previously published work showed higher strength of aligned PAN
nanofiber mats (Sanchaniya, Lasenko, Kanukuntala, et al., 2023; Sanchaniya, Lasenko,
Kanukuntla, et al., 2023). This approach ensures the production of superior quality nanofibers,
aligned with the most effective practices established in the field.

Despite its widespread use, electrospinning has limitations such as the requirement for
high voltage (posing safety concerns), lower yield, and the high cost of scaling up the process.
There are three main instabilities in the electrically charged polymer jet that affect
electrospinning [….]: the axisymmetric Rayleigh instability, which fragments the polymer jet;
a second instability that emerges at higher electric fields than the Rayleigh instability; and a
non-axisymmetric blending and whipping instability, which occurs due to electrostatic
repulsion between surface charges on the polymer jet. Enhancing the whipping instability is
crucial for producing thinner nanofibers.

Over the past two decades, various electrospinning techniques have been developed,
including solution electrospinning, melt electrospinning, multiple jet electrospinning, coaxial
electrospinning, and magnetic field-assisted electrospinning. Coaxial electrospinning, in
particular, is notable for producing core-shell nanofibers, where bioactive molecules are
encapsulated within the core, protected by an outer polymer coating that degrades to release
the contents.

1.4 Literature Summary

In the realm of nanoscale science and technology, nanofibers emerge as a crucial

element, showcasing unique properties due to their minuscule size. These fibers, characterized
22
by their large surface area and reduced diameter, possess enhanced mechanical properties and
exhibit a significant potential in various applications. Bridging the gap between the nano and
macro worlds, nanofibers are not just limited to their structural uniqueness; their high porosity
and extensive surface area also play a pivotal role in their functionality.

Delving deeper, the production and application of these nanofibers, particularly

through electrospinning, reveal their versatility. Electrospinning is highlighted as an efficient,
adaptable, and cost-effective method for creating nanofibers, producing fibers with diameters
that range from nano to microscale. The process involves key components like a high-voltage
power supply, syringe pump, spinneret, and collector, all of which contribute to the formation
of continuous nanofibers. The importance of process parameters in electrospinning is
emphasized, as variations can significantly affect the strength and quality of the nanofiber
mats.

A significant application of nanofibers is found in the reinforcement of composite

materials, particularly Carbon Fiber Reinforced Polymers (CFRP) and Glass Fiber Reinforced
Polymers (GFRP). The interleaving of nanofiber mats into these composites has been
identified as a trend in recent research, primarily due to the improvements in mechanical and
thermal properties that these mats provide. The incorporation of nanofiber mats enhances
delamination resistance, impact tolerance, and fracture resistance, thereby extending the
durability and efficiency of CFRP/GFRP composites. This advancement opens up new
possibilities in the field of composite materials, offering solutions to some of the longstanding
challenges in terms of strength and resilience.

In summary, the literature presents a comprehensive overview of nanofibers, from

their fundamental properties and fabrication methods to their impactful applications in
enhancing composite materials. The exploration of electrospinning as a key production
technique and the subsequent integration of nanofiber mats into CFRP/GFRP composites
underlines the significant potential of nanofibers in material science and engineering. This
body of work not only contributes to the current understanding of nanofibers but also paves
the way for future innovations in their application.

23
 2. Preliminary Experiment

In this chapter, the experimental setup, materials, and methodologies employed to

develop the layered nanofiber-reinforced composites are comprehensively detailed.

2.1 Materials

The experiment primarily focuses on assessing the impact of layer of oriented

polyacrylonitrile (PAN) nanofibers in reinforcing in the epoxy composite. For the production
of these electrospun nanofibers, PAN powder was utilized in conjunction with N, N-
dimethylformamide (DMF) as the solvent. The specific type of Polyacrylonitrile used, with an
average molecular weight of 150,000 and a CAS number of 25014-41-9, was sourced from
Sigma-Aldrich Chemicals (Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). Alongside this, N, N-
dimethylformamide (DMF), characterized as an ACS reagent with a purity of ≥99.8% and a
CAS number of 68-12-2, was also obtained from the same supplier.

In addition to these primary materials for nanofiber production, the experiment also
involved using of liquid resin epoxy and a hardener, identified by the CAS number 964-67-8.
These were procured from SIA “Latwood Master razosanas komercfirma,” (Riga, Latvia).
The combination of these materials was instrumental in the fabrication of the nanofiber mats
and their subsequent incorporation into epoxy composites.

2.2 Fabrication Method

This section of the chapter delves into the detailed process of nanofiber production and
the preparation of nanofiber-reinforced epoxy composites. It starts with the explanation of the
electrospinning technique used to create PAN nanofibers, outlining the specific parameters
and conditions under which the nanofibers were spun. The chapter further describes the
process of integrating these electrospun nanofibers into an epoxy matrix, thereby forming the
layered composite material. The methodology covers aspects such as the ratio of nanofiber
mats to epoxy, the layering technique, and the curing process, all of which are critical to
achieving the desired properties in the final composite. The comprehensive description of
these processes provides a clear understanding of the experimental approach and sets the stage
for the subsequent testing and analysis of the material properties.
2.2.1 Nanofiber Fabrication

In the fabrication of Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) nanofibers, a solution was prepared by

dissolving 10% PAN powder in N, N-dimethylformamide (DMF) solvent. The mixture was
stirred at a temperature of 80 °C for 10 hours using a magnetic stirrer (Thermo Scientific™
Cimarec + TM Stirring Hotplates Series, USA) set at a speed of 1000 rpm. Following this, the
solution was allowed to rest at room temperature for an hour to ensure the stabilization or
removal of any air bubbles.

The electrospinning process was carried out using a Fisherbrand TM Single Syringe
Pump and a needle-based electrospinning machine (Danbury, CT, USA). The setup included a
rotating drum collector (Shenzhen Tongli Tech Co. Ltd. (D-608), Shenzhen, China; Rotating
Collector RC-5000, D140, L50) operated at a room temperature of 22 ± 1 °C. A 1 mL Luer
lock syringe and an 18-gauge needle, with an outer diameter of 1.27 ± 0.01 mm and an inner
diameter of 0.838 ± 0.01 mm, were utilized.

The electrospinning parameters were carefully controlled: a voltage of 20 kV, a flow

rate was 1 mL/h, and a distance was 18 cm between the syringe centre and the rotating drum.
The drum's rotation speed was maintained at a constant 1800 rpm (this speed makes possible
to obtain an oriented nanofibers (parallel) structure [….]). Aluminium foil (width of 10 cm
and coating thickness of 35 µm; Vireo.de, Merseburg, Germany) was employed to collect the
nanofibers on the drum. Figure 2.1 shows the electrospinning setup with rotating drum
collector.

25
 Figure 2.5 Electrospinning setup with rotating drum collector

The prepared nanofiber mats were then left in the lab for 24 hours to condition them for
incorporation into the PAN reinforced epoxy composites.

2.2.2 Preparation of Epoxy Composites with PAN Nanofibers

The epoxy composites were prepared at a room temperature of 22 ± 1 °C and relative

humidity below 60% (according to ISO 139:1973, Standard atmospheres for conditioning and
testing). The epoxy resin and hardener were mixed in a 10:1 weight-to-weight ratio. The
epoxy hardener was precisely measured using a 1 ml syringe, and a controlled amount (0.05 ±
0.001 ml; (were used Analytical balance ABT 100-5NM; Max 101 g; e=0,001 g; d=0,00001
g; EU-Verification CE (=950-127); serial number: WB22G0101; calibration certificate
number: B61-389-2023-03/1, 2023; KERN&Sohn GmbH, Balingen, Germany)) was
uniformly spread over a 60 mm × 60 mm area on a silicone mat using a wooden rolling pin. A
nanofiber mat (thickness ?????, nm) was then placed on top of the applied epoxy layer, and
additional epoxy was applied over it. This layering process was repeated to create composites
with 1, 2, and 3 layers of nanofiber mats. A second silicone mat was placed over the layered
assembly, and a uniform pressure of approximately 700 N/m² was applied for 48 hours to
ensure proper curing and solidification. Post-curing, the composite samples were trimmed to a
precise size of 10 mm x 50 mm, with careful attention to maintaining the nanofiber alignment
along the longitudinal axis of the composite throughout the process.

For clarity in the experimental process and subsequent analysis, a systematic naming
convention was employed for the different specimens. All specimens consisting solely of
Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) nanofiber mats were designated as "PAN". This designation was
used to easily identify and differentiate the pure nanofiber samples from others in the study.

Specimens composed exclusively of epoxy were labelled as "Ep". This label was
crucial for establishing a baseline in the study, as it allowed for the comparison of the
mechanical and thermal properties of the epoxy in its unmodified form against those of the
modified composites.

The nanocomposite specimens, which comprised varying layers of PAN nanofiber mats
interleaved within the epoxy matrix, were designated as "CL1", "CL2" and "CL3". These
labels corresponded to composites with one, two, and three layers of nanofiber mats,

26
respectively. The "CL" prefix stands for "Composite Layer," followed by a numeral
indicating the number of nanofiber layers within the composite.

This nomenclature was essential for maintaining clear and organized records throughout
the experimentation and analysis phases. It facilitated easy identification and comparison of
the different materials and their respective test results, thus ensuring the accuracy and
efficiency of the research process. By systematically categorizing the specimens, the study
was able to effectively evaluate the impact of the number of nanofiber layers on the overall
properties of the epoxy composites.

2.3 Testing Method

This section outlines the standardized testing methodologies employed for conducting
mechanical and thermal testing of the developed composites.

2.3.1 Mechanical Testing

The tensile properties of the composites were assessed using a Mecmesin Multi-Test
2.5-i tensile testing machine equipped with a 25/250-N sensor (PPT Group UK Ltd.,
Mecmesin, Newton House, Spring Copse Business Park, Slinfold, UK). To ensure
consistency and reliability of the results, the samples were conditioned at room temperature as
per ISO 139:1973 “Standard Environments for Conditioning and Testing.” This standard
prescribes a temperature of 21 ± 1 °C, a relative air humidity of 60%, and an atmospheric
pressure of 760 mm Hg. The sample dimensions conformed to the ASTM D882-18 standard,
measuring 50 mm × 10 mm (length × width). Four measurements were taken to ascertain the
tensile properties accurately.

The thickness of the nanofiber mats was precisely measured using a digital
micrometer (range: 0–25 mm; Digimatic micrometer, MDC-25PX, code No. 293-240-30,
serial No. 71912410, Mitutoyo, Japan). For the tensile testing, specimens were prepared both
parallel and perpendicular to the direction of the nanofibers, facilitating testing in the
longitudinal and transverse directions. A paper template of 50 mm × 40 mm, with an inner cut
of 30 mm × 20 mm, was used to assist in sample preparation. The specimens were secured to
the paper template using double-sided thin scotch tape (3M Scotch Magic Tape (Matte Finish)
3/4” × 36-yard Desk Dispenser Refills). After mounting the paper and sample onto the tensile

27
testing machine, the sides of the paper template were carefully removed. This preparation
process is illustrated in Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.6 Specimen with paper template

For the comprehensive evaluation of the mechanical properties, a total of 20 different

specimens were subjected to tensile stress. The data gathered from these tests included force
and displacement values, which were essential for assessing the material's response under
tensile load. These raw data points were then meticulously converted into stress and strain
values using the Young’s Modulus formula (Equation 2.1). This conversion is critical as it
allows for a more nuanced understanding of the material’s elastic properties and provides
insights into its strength and flexibility. The Young's Modulus, a fundamental mechanical
property, reflects the material's ability to withstand changes in length when under tensile or
compressive stress. This analysis was crucial in determining the overall efficacy and potential
applications of the nanofiber-reinforced composites.

σ F/ A […..] (2.1)
E= =
ε dl/l

Where E – modulus of elasticity, N/m2 or Pascal

σ – stress, MPa

28
 ε – strain

F – force, N

A – cross sectional area, mm2

dl – change in length, mm

l – initial length, mm

2.3.2 Thermal Testing

Thermal properties were evaluated through Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA), using a

TG 209 F1 Libra® thermomicrobalance (NETZSCH, Selb, Germany). Samples, weighing
between 5–6 mg, were placed in Al2O3 crucibles and subjected to a temperature range from
20 °C to 800 °C at a heating rate of 10 °C/min. The tests were conducted under an inert
nitrogen atmosphere, with a flow rate of 30 mL/min.

For accurate weight measurement of the samples, a laboratory scale (KERN ABT 5NM
(KERN&Sohn GmbH, Balingen, Germany); maximum weight of 100 g; discreteness of
0.000001 g; serial number: WB22G0101; calibration certificate number: B61-389-2023-03/1,
24 March 2023) was utilized. This equipment ensured precise and reliable measurement,
critical for the accurate assessment of the thermal properties of the samples.

The Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA) provided insightful data on the thermal stability
and decomposition characteristics of the composite materials. The test results, represented as
the mass loss of the samples with respect to temperature change, were meticulously analysed.
A key aspect of this analysis involved determining the specific temperatures at which
significant mass loss occurred. This information is vital as it indicates the thermal degradation
points of the composite material, which are essential for understanding its performance under
various thermal conditions.

Additionally, comparative graphs were prepared to visualize and compare the thermal
behaviour of different specimens. These graphs provided a clear representation of how each
composite responded to increasing temperatures, offering a visual interpretation of the
thermal stability and degradation patterns. By examining the temperature range and rate of
mass loss, it was possible to gain insights into the material's thermal resistance and the

29
effectiveness of the nanofiber reinforcement in enhancing these properties. This comparative
analysis played a significant role in assessing the suitability of the developed composites for
applications where thermal stability is a critical factor.

2.4 Experimental Results

The experiment section provides a detailed analysis of the tensile properties of PAN
nanofiber mats, pure epoxy, and various nanocomposite layers through tensile testing. The
outcomes of these tests are depicted in a series of figures and summarized in a table, offering
a comprehensive view of the mechanical behaviour of each material under stress.

Figure 2.3 illustrates the tensile strength and elongation properties of PAN nanofiber
mats. The results indicate that the PAN nanofiber mat exhibits a maximum tensile strength of
8.5 ± 0.5 MPa and an elastic modulus of 920 ± 15. Additionally, the material displayed an
elongation at break of 5.4 ± 0.1%, suggesting a certain level of flexibility.

10.00
9.00
8.00
7.00
6.00
Stress (MPa)

PAN 1
5.00
PAN 2
4.00 PAN 3
PAN 4
3.00
PAN 5
2.00
1.00
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Strain (%)

Figure 2.7 Tensile test results PAN nanofiber mats

In contrast, Figure 2.4 focuses on the tensile test results for pure epoxy. The data
reveals that pure epoxy has a higher maximum tensile strength of 12.8 ± 2 MPa compared to
PAN nanofiber mats, but a lower elastic modulus of 580 ± 12. The elongation at break for the

30
pure epoxy is found to be 5.1 ± 0.2%, closely mirroring that of the PAN nanofiber mats.
Obtained study result of the sample Ep 1 was excluded from the analysis (measurement error).

Pls add description of the axes on the graph 2.4: Y-axis is Stress (MPa) and X-axis is Strain
(%), like in Fig. 2.5.

20
18
16
14
12 Ep 1
10 Ep 2
Ep 3
8 Ep 4
6
4
2
0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0

Figure 2.8 Tensile test results of pure Epoxy

The tensile properties of nanocomposites with varying layers of PAN nanofiber are
presented in Figures 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7. The single-layer nanocomposite, as shown in Figure
2.5, exhibits a maximum tensile strength of 12.5 ± 2 MPa and an elastic modulus of 610 ± 15,
with an elongation at break of 2.1 ± 0.2%. Moving to the two-layer nanocomposite depicted
in Figure 2.6, there's an observable increase in tensile strength to 16 ± 3 MPa and elastic
modulus to 650 ± 18, alongside an elongation at break of 3 ± 0.3%. The three-layer
nanocomposite, as seen in Figure 2.7, further enhances these properties, showing a maximum
tensile strength of 18 ± 2 MPa, an elastic modulus of 720 ± 12, and an elongation at break of
3 ± 0.5%.

31
 18.00
16.00
14.00
12.00

Stress (MPa)
10.00
CL1_1
8.00 CL1_2
6.00 CL1_3
CL1_4
4.00
2.00
0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50
Strain (%)

Figure 2.9 Tensile test results of Single-Layer Nanocomposite

Pls Give a brief analysis: why there are such different rates of Stress and Strain (for example:
instability of nanofibers in thickness, uneven distribution of nano mats on the collector, high
porosity).

25.00

20.00

15.00
Stress (MPa)

CL2_1
CL2_2
10.00
CL3_3
CL2_4

5.00

0.00
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
Strain (%)

Figure 2.10 Tensile test results of Two-Layer Nanocomposite

32
 25.00

20.00

15.00
Stress (MPa)

CL3_1
CL3_2
10.00
CL3_3
CL3_4
5.00

0.00
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00
Strain(%)

Figure 2.11 Tensile test results of Three-Layer Nanocomposite

Lastly, Table 2.1 succinctly summarizes the mechanical properties of all the materials
tested, including PAN nanofiber mats, pure epoxy, and the various layered nanocomposites.
This table facilitates an easy comparison across different materials, highlighting how the
addition of PAN nanofiber layers incrementally improves the tensile strength and elastic
modulus of the composites while moderately affecting their elongation at break.

Table 2.2

Summary of Mechanical Properties

Samples Thickness, t Tensile Strength Young’s Modulus, E Elongation at

(µm) σ at Break (MPa) Break,
(MPa) ε at Break (%)
PAN 74 ± 10 8.5 ± 0.5 920 ± 15 5.4 ± 0.1
EP 154 ± 7 12.8 ± 2 580 ± 12 5.1 ± 0.2
CL1 200 ± 11 12.5 ± 2 610 ± 15 2.1 ± 0.2
CL2 270 ± 15 16 ± 3 650 ± 18 3 ± 0.3
CL3 335 ± 18 18 ± 2 720 ± 12 3 ± 0.5
Through these tests and analyses, it becomes evident that the incorporation of PAN
nanofiber mats into epoxy composites significantly enhances their mechanical properties,
particularly their strength and stiffness. This progression in material properties with the
addition of nanofiber layers underscores the potential of nanofiber reinforcement in advanced
material applications.

33
 The experiment also explored the thermal properties of the materials using
thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), with the results depicted in a series of figures.

Figure 2.8 presents the TGA results for pure epoxy. The analysis revealed that the
peak degradation temperature for pure epoxy occurs at 373.5 degrees Celsius, indicating the
temperature at which the most significant thermal decomposition happens.

Figure 2.12 TGA of pure epoxy

Continuing with the TGA studies, Figure 2.9 focuses on the single-layer reinforced
nanocomposite. The peak degradation for this material was observed at a slightly lower
temperature of 370.5 degrees Celsius. This slight decrease in the degradation temperature
compared to pure epoxy suggests a subtle influence of the nanofiber layer on the thermal
stability of the composite.

34
 Figure 2.13 TGA of composite with single layer of PAN nanofiber

For the double-layer reinforced nanocomposite, as shown in Figure 2.10, the peak
degradation temperature was recorded at 369.4 degrees Celsius. This further reduction in the
peak degradation temperature indicates that additional layers of nanofibers have a more
pronounced effect on the thermal properties of the composite.

Figure 2.14 TGA of composite with two layer of PAN nanofiber mat

35
 Figure 2.11 extends this analysis to the three-layer reinforced nanocomposite. Here,
the peak degradation occurs at an even lower temperature of 364.2 degrees Celsius. This
consistent decrease in the degradation temperature with each added layer of nanofibers points
to a notable impact of the nanofiber reinforcement on the thermal behaviour of the
composites.

Figure 2.15 TGA of composite with three layer of PAN nanofiber mat

Finally, Figure 2.12 offers a comparative TGA analysis of all the nanocomposites
alongside pure epoxy. This comparative view provides a clear visual representation of how
the addition of nanofiber layers influences the thermal degradation behaviour of the epoxy
composites. It allows for a direct comparison between the thermal stability of the pure epoxy
and that of the nanocomposites, highlighting the effect of nanofiber reinforcement in altering
the composite's response to high temperatures.

These thermogravimetric analyses are crucial in understanding the thermal properties

of the nanocomposite materials and offer valuable insights into their potential applications,
especially in scenarios where thermal stability is a key factor. The gradual decrease in peak
degradation temperature with increased nanofiber layers demonstrates the influence of
nanofiber reinforcement on the thermal behaviour of epoxy composites.

36
 Figure 2.16 Comparative TGA of nanocomposites comparing to pure epoxy

Figure 2.12 in the experiment provides a compelling visual representation of the

thermal behaviour of pure epoxy and its nanocomposites through a comparative TGA
analysis. In this figure, the green graph represents pure epoxy, while the other graphs
correspond to the various nanocomposites with interleaved PAN nanofiber mats.

A critical observation from this figure is the evident influence of interleaving PAN
nanofiber mats on the thermal degradation pattern of the epoxy. The graphs distinctly show
how the mass loss of epoxy changes with respect to time when PAN nanofiber mats are
incorporated. This change is indicative of the impact that nanofiber reinforcement has on the
thermal stability and degradation characteristics of the composite materials.

Interestingly, the figure also reveals that there is no major difference in the thermal
degradation behaviour between the composites with one layer and those with three layers of
PAN nanofiber mats. This observation suggests that while the introduction of PAN nanofibers
alters the thermal properties of the epoxy, increasing the number of layers beyond a single
layer does not significantly change these properties further. It implies that a single layer of
PAN nanofibers might be sufficient to achieve the desired modification in the thermal
behaviour of the epoxy composite.

37
 This analysis provides valuable insights into the optimal design of nanofiber-
reinforced composites, especially in applications where thermal properties are a critical
consideration. It also underscores the importance of understanding the interactions between
the matrix material and the reinforcing nanofibers, as these interactions significantly influence
the overall performance and suitability of the composite material for specific uses.

38
 3. Numerical Simulation

In the field of composite material analysis, numerical simulations play a crucial role in
predicting and understanding the behaviour of these complex systems. One of the most
effective methods for determining the elastic properties of composite materials is through the
application of equal strain theory within the framework of Finite Element Method (FEM).

The equal strain theory posits that, when subjected to an external load, all components of
the composite material undergo the same strain. This theory is particularly useful in the
context of FEM simulations as it significantly simplifies the analysis. By assuming uniform
strain distribution across the different materials in the composite, the complexity associated
with the interaction between various materials is reduced. This simplification is beneficial for
computational efficiency and can still provide accurate insights into the overall behaviour of
the composite material under various loading conditions.

Applying this theory in FEM involves modelling the composite material as a

homogenized entity, where the different components are not distinctly separated but are
assumed to work in unison under strain. This approach allows for the analysis of the
composite's macroscopic behaviour while accounting for the contributions of its individual
components.

The chapter further delves into the specifics of setting up the FEM simulation, including
the selection of appropriate material models, meshing strategies, and boundary conditions, all
tailored to accurately reflect the behaviour of nanofiber-reinforced composites. The results
from these simulations are pivotal in providing a deeper understanding of the material's
response to mechanical loads and in validating the experimental findings.

3.1 CAD Model & Material Properties

In subchapter 3.1, the focus shifts to the development of a CAD (Computer-Aided

Design) model and the assignment of material properties, both crucial for the simulation
phase of the research. This step is informed by insights from previous studies on similar
materials and structures.

Based on existing research (Lasenko et al., 2023), it is anticipated that the thick and
viscous nature of the epoxy resin will not allow for complete penetration through the PAN
nanofiber mat. Instead, the resin is expected to adhere primarily to the top layer of the
nanofibers, resulting in a layered structure. This understanding is crucial for accurately
representing the composite in the CAD model. To mimic this behaviour, the CAD model is
designed with layers that vary in proportion between the epoxy and the nanofiber mat. For the
purposes of simulation and considering that the elastic region is the primary focus, a 1 cm x 1
cm plate is created with variable thicknesses representing the epoxy and nanofiber mat layers.

Figure 3.1 presents this CAD model, offering a visual representation of how the
composite layers are structured for the simulation. The model serves as a foundational
element for the subsequent numerical analysis, allowing for a detailed exploration of the
composite's behaviour under simulated conditions.

Proportion of Epoxy

Proportion of PAN Nanofiber

Mat
Figure 3.17 CAD model

In addition to the CAD model, assigning accurate material properties to the model is
critical for the simulation's validity. For this purpose, experimental values obtained from the
physical testing of the materials are inputted into the simulation software. These values
include the mechanical properties such as the elastic modulus, tensile strength, and elongation
at break for both the epoxy and the PAN nanofiber mats. By integrating these experimental
values, the simulation can more realistically predict how the actual composite material would
behave under various conditions.

This approach of combining a detailed CAD model with empirical material properties
ensures that the simulation results are as reflective of real-world behaviour as possible. This
methodology is pivotal in understanding the mechanical and thermal responses of the
nanofiber-reinforced composites, thereby providing crucial insights for their potential
applications and further development.

40
 3.2 Meshing

In subchapter 3.2, the process of meshing the CAD model is discussed. Figure 3.2
displays the model with a finely generated brick mesh. This step is crucial following the
import of the CAD model from SolidWorks into ANSYS, where the material properties are
assigned to the model. The importance of meshing in finite element analysis cannot be
overstated, as the mesh quality significantly influences the accuracy of the simulation results.
A fine mesh is chosen to ensure precise results, capturing the intricate details and variations
within the composite material more effectively. The finer mesh leads to a better representation
of the geometry and a more accurate approximation of the stress and strain distribution within
the composite.

Figure 3.18 Meshing of CAD Model

3.3 Boundary Conditions

Subchapter 3.3 addresses the establishment of boundary conditions, which is a critical

step in ensuring the validity of the simulation results. In the context of applying equal strain
theory to both materials in the composite, setting appropriate boundary conditions is essential.
Any inaccuracies in defining these conditions could lead to erroneous results.

Figure 3.3 illustrates the boundary conditions applied to the model. On the X-axis, an
initial displacement of 2% is applied, while the opposite face is supported by a roller support
to simulate a uniaxial tension scenario. On the Y-axis and Z-axis, one face of each is set with

41
roller support, and the opposite sides are left free. This arrangement helps to mitigate the
effects of Poisson's ratio on the simulation, ensuring that the strain is uniformly applied across
the composite material.

Figure 3.19 Boundary Conditions

3.4 Numerical Results

The numerical results of the simulation are presented in subchapter 3.4. Figure 3.4
showcases the normal stress distribution on the face where the initial displacement was
applied. To obtain an average normal stress, the stress at each node is summed and then
divided by the total number of nodes, which in this case is 172. This method yields an
averaged stress value, which, when combined with the initially applied strain, allows for the
calculation of the elastic modulus.

Figure 3.20 Normal stress results

42
 The calculated elastic modulus varies depending on the number of nanofiber layers in the
composite. For the single-layer nanocomposite, the elastic modulus was calculated to be 615
MPa. For the double-layer nanocomposite, it increased to 645 MPa, and for the three-layer
nanocomposite, the modulus further increased to 675 MPa. These results indicate a
progressive enhancement in the stiffness of the composite material with the addition of more
layers of PAN nanofiber mats, corroborating the experimental findings and underlining the
effectiveness of nanofiber reinforcement in improving the mechanical properties of the
composites.

43
 4. Analytical Model

In the exploration of composite materials, particularly those reinforced with fibers,

micromechanical (what does it mean? Pls explain) models serve as a powerful tool for
predicting mechanical properties. These models are especially effective when the aspect ratio
of the fibers and their volume fraction within the composite are known. This chapter focuses
on the application of the Halpin-Tsai micromechanical model, which has demonstrated a
strong correlation with the experimental data obtained in this work.

The Halpin-Tsai model is predicated on several key assumptions that allow it to

effectively estimate the mechanical properties of composite materials. These assumptions
include:

Uniform Distribution and Alignment of Fibers: The model assumes that the fibers are
uniformly distributed throughout the matrix and are aligned in a specific direction. This
alignment significantly influences the composite's mechanical properties.

Perfect Bonding Between Fibers and Matrix: It is assumed that there is perfect
adhesion between the fibers and the matrix material, ensuring efficient load transfer between
the two.

Linear Elastic Behaviour: The model considers the components of the composite (both
the fibers and the matrix) to exhibit linear elastic behaviour up to failure. This means that the
stress-strain relationship is linear and reversible.

Homogeneous Material Properties: Although the composite consists of different

materials, the Halpin-Tsai model treats the composite as a homogenized material with
averaged properties.

Influence of Fiber Aspect Ratio: The model specifically takes into account the aspect
ratio of the fibers, acknowledging that it plays a critical role in determining the composite's
overall mechanical properties.

The Halpin-Tsai equation integrates these assumptions to provide an analytical

framework for predicting the effective modulus of the composite. This model is particularly
useful for materials where the reinforcement fibers have a significant aspect ratio and their
distribution within the matrix is well controlled.

Where is page number????

 In this chapter, the application of the Halpin-Tsai model to the PAN nanofiber-reinforced
epoxy composites is discussed in detail. The model's predictions are compared with
experimental data to validate its effectiveness in estimating the mechanical properties of these
composites. The successful correlation between the model and experimental results
underscores the utility of micromechanical models in the design and analysis of fibre-
reinforced composite materials.

The general form of the Halpin-Tsai equation for a fibre-reinforced composite is:

E m (1+ ζη V f ) […] (4.1)

Ec =
(1−η V f )

Where:

Ec is the effective modulus of the composite material.

Em is the modulus of the matrix material.

Vf is the volume fraction of the fibers.

η is the efficiency parameter, which is a function of the aspect ratio of the fibers.

ζ is the reinforcement factor, which relates the modulus of the fibre to the modulus of the
matrix.

The Halpin-Tsai model is particularly useful for composites with a high aspect ratio of
reinforcement fibers. It assumes perfect bonding between the fibers and the matrix and
considers the composite as a homogenized material. The model effectively predicts how the
mechanical properties of the composite change with varying fibre content and aspect ratio,
providing critical insights for the design and analysis of composite materials.

By incorporating specific experimental values into equation 4.1, the Halpin-Tsai

micromechanical model, we can calculate the elastic modulus of the nanocomposite. For this
calculation, we consider the experimental values of E E (the modulus of the epoxy matrix) as
580 MPa and EPAN (the modulus of the PAN nanofiber mat) as 920 MPa.

Upon inserting these values into the model, the resulting calculations for the elastic
modulus of the nanocomposites with varying layers of PAN nanofiber are as follows:

45
 For the composite with one layer of PAN nanofiber mat (designated as E CL1), the elastic
modulus is calculated to be 610 MPa.

Similarly, for the composite with two layers of PAN nanofiber mat (E CL2), the elastic
modulus is found to be 635 MPa.

For the composite with three layers of PAN nanofiber mat (E CL3), the elastic modulus
increases to 670 MPa.

These results demonstrate a progressive increase in the stiffness of the composite material
with the addition of more layers of PAN nanofiber mats. The calculated values for the elastic
modulus reflect the enhanced mechanical properties of the nanocomposites due to the
reinforcement provided by the PAN nanofibers. This progression confirms the effectiveness
of the nanofiber reinforcement in improving the mechanical strength of the epoxy composites,
as predicted by the Halpin-Tsai model.

Is it possible to show results graphically?

46
 5. Results analysis

In line with the study's objective to explore the effects of PAN non-woven layers on
the mechanical and thermal properties of epoxy composites, Chapter 5 presents a detailed
analysis of the experimental and simulation results. The study commenced with an
understanding that traditional laminated fibre-reinforced polymer composites exhibit certain
limitations in impact tolerance and interlaminar fracture toughness. Addressing these
challenges, the research investigated the potential of PAN nanofibers in improving these their
properties.

The tensile testing of the materials demonstrated a clear trend. The PAN nanofiber
mats, pure epoxy, and the PAN nanofiber-reinforced composites each exhibited distinct
mechanical properties. Notably, the addition of PAN nanofiber layers resulted in a gradual
increase in both tensile strength and elastic modulus, with the three-layer nanocomposite
displaying the highest values. This finding aligns with the initial hypothesis that interleaving
nanofibers within epoxy composites could significantly enhance their mechanical robustness.

The thermal analysis, conducted via thermogravimetric analysis, provided insight into
the thermal degradation behaviour of the composites. A noteworthy observation was the
decrease in peak degradation temperature with the integration of PAN nanofiber layers. The
three-layer nanocomposite, in particular, demonstrated the most significant change, indicating
a modification in the composite's thermal properties due to the nanofiber reinforcement.

The numerical simulations, which utilized the Halpin-Tsai micromechanical model

and Finite Element Method (FEM), offered a complementary perspective to the experimental
data. The simulations accurately predicted the behaviour of the nanofiber-reinforced
composites, confirming the practicality and reliability of such models in material science
research. Disappear the page number, once more time.

Continuing the discussion of the results, Table 5.1 in the chapter 5 provides a
comprehensive summary of the findings obtained from the three distinct methods used in this
study: experimental, numerical, and analytical. This table plays a crucial role in comparing
and contrasting the results obtained through these different approaches.

One of the notable observations from the study is the consistency of results for the
single-layer reinforced nanocomposite across all three methods. The experimental, numerical,
and analytical results for this composite configuration showed remarkable similarity, with no
significant differences. This alignment indicates a high level of accuracy and reliability in the
methodologies employed for testing and simulation. It underscores the effectiveness of the
chosen experimental techniques and the validity of the numerical and analytical models in
predicting the behaviour of nanocomposite materials.

Table 5.3

Summary of the Results

Samples Experimental Numerical Analytical

EE (MPa) 580 - -
EPAN (MPa) 920 - -
ECL1 (MPa) 610 615 610
ECL2 (MPa) 650 645 635
ECL3 (MPa) 720 645 670
However, as the study progressed to the three-layer reinforced nanocomposite, a
divergence in the results was observed. This difference is primarily attributed to the increase
in the sample thickness and the challenges in maintaining uniform thickness of the nanofiber
mats during reinforcement. In the experimental setup, this variability in thickness likely led to
an overestimation of properties such as tensile strength and modulus, resulting in higher
values compared to those predicted by numerical and analytical methods. This discrepancy
highlights the complexities involved in working with multi-layered composite materials,
where factors like uniformity and consistency of layers significantly impact the material
properties.

The findings for the three-layer nanocomposite suggest that while nanofiber
reinforcement enhances the composite’s properties, the precision in layering and thickness
control is critical to achieving the desired outcomes. This aspect may require further
refinement in fabrication techniques to ensure consistency and accuracy in the properties of
the final composite material.

In summary, Table 5.1 not only presents a clear comparison of the results from
different methodologies but also sheds light on the intricacies and challenges in fabricating
and analysing multi-layered nanocomposite materials. These insights are invaluable for future
research and development efforts in the field of nanocomposite materials, particularly in
optimizing fabrication processes for enhanced material performance.

48
 Conclusion

This research, driven by the aim to enhance the mechanical and thermal properties of
epoxy composites through PAN nanofiber interleaving, culminates with several key
conclusions:

Mechanical Enhancement: The study conclusively demonstrates that the addition of PAN
nanofiber layers significantly improves the tensile strength and elastic modulus of epoxy
composites (how much, numerical parameters ???). This finding is crucial for applications
where high strength-to-weight ratios are essential.

Thermal Stability Alteration: The research also reveals that the thermal stability, as
indicated by peak degradation temperatures (which???), is influenced by the addition of
nanofiber layers. This alteration in thermal behaviour opens new possibilities for the use of
these composites in temperature-sensitive applications.

Model Validation: The use of numerical simulations in predicting the composite

behaviour aligns closely with the experimental results (how much more or less???),
validating the effectiveness of such models in composite material research.

Which hypothesis do you choose as a supporting result? H0 or H1???

Looking forward, the study paves the way for several avenues of future research:

Material Diversity and Configuration: Exploring different types of nanofibers and their
configurations could further enhance composite properties, broadening the scope of
applications.

Long-term Durability: Investigating the composites' long-term durability, particularly

their fatigue behaviour under repeated stress, would be crucial for real-world applications.

Advancement in Numerical Modelling: There is a significant opportunity to explore new

numerical models at the nanoscale to understand the behaviour of composites. Developing
and refining models that can accurately simulate the interactions and properties at the
nanoscale would provide deeper insights into the composite behaviour and potentially lead to
the discovery of more efficient material designs.

Page number?
 This study not only contributes to the field of material science by improving the
understanding of nanofiber-reinforced composites but also opens new horizons for their
application in industries where enhanced mechanical strength and thermal stability are
paramount. The potential for further innovation and exploration in this field is vast, heralding
exciting possibilities for future advancements in nanoscale modelling and material
engineering. Is it mean application?

50
 List of References

1. Aliheidari, N., Aliahmad, N., Agarwal, M., & Dalir, H. (2019). Electrospun nanofibers
for label-free sensor applications. Sensors (Switzerland), 19(16).
https://doi.org/10.3390/s19163587
2. Anusiya, G., & Jaiganesh, R. (2022). A review on fabrication methods of nanofibers
and a special focus on application of cellulose nanofibers. Carbohydrate Polymer
Technologies and Applications, 4(November), 100262.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carpta.2022.100262
3. Bahrami, A., Cordenier, F., Van Velthem, P., Ballout, W., Pardoen, T., Nysten, B., &
Bailly, C. (2016). Synergistic local toughening of high performance epoxy-matrix
composites using blended block copolymer-thermoplastic thin films. Composites Part
A: Applied Science and Manufacturing, 91, 398–405.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESA.2016.08.038
4. Bhardwaj, N., & Kundu, S. C. (2010). Electrospinning: A fascinating fiber fabrication
technique. Biotechnology Advances, 28(3), 325–347.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2010.01.004
5. Brugo, T. M., Maccaferri, E., Cocchi, D., Mazzocchetti, L., Giorgini, L., Fabiani, D.,
& Zucchelli, A. (2021). Self-sensing hybrid composite laminate by piezoelectric
nanofibers interleaving. Composites Part B: Engineering, 212(January), 108673.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2021.108673
6. Brugo, T., Minak, G., Zucchelli, A., Yan, X. T., Belcari, J., Saghafi, H., & Palazzetti,
R. (2017). Study on Mode I fatigue behaviour of Nylon 6,6 nanoreinforced CFRP
laminates. Composite Structures, 164, 51–57.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.12.070
7. Chandrasekaran, S., Sato, N., Tölle, F., Mülhaupt, R., Fiedler, B., & Schulte, K.
(2014). Fracture toughness and failure mechanism of graphene based epoxy
composites. Composites Science and Technology, 97, 90–99.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSCITECH.2014.03.014
8. Chen, K., Hu, H., Zeng, Y., Pan, H., Wang, S., Zhang, Y., Shi, L., Tan, G., Pan, W., &
Liu, H. (2022). Recent advances in electrospun nanofibers for wound dressing.
European Polymer Journal, 178(August), 111490.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2022.111490
9. Daelemans, L., Cohades, A., Meireman, T., Beckx, J., Spronk, S., Kersemans, M., De
Baere, I., Rahier, H., Michaud, V., Van Paepegem, W., & De Clerck, K. (2018).
Electrospun nanofibrous interleaves for improved low velocity impact resistance of
glass fibre reinforced composite laminates. Materials and Design, 141, 170–184.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.12.045
10. Daelemans, L., Kizildag, N., Van Paepegem, W., D’hooge, D. R., & De Clerck, K.
(2019). Interdiffusing core-shell nanofiber interleaved composites for excellent Mode
I and Mode II delamination resistance. Composites Science and Technology,
175(March), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.03.019
11. Daelemans, L., van der Heijden, S., De Baere, I., Rahier, H., Van Paepegem, W., &
De Clerck, K. (2015). Nanofibre bridging as a toughening mechanism in carbon/epoxy
composite laminates interleaved with electrospun polyamide nanofibrous veils.
Composites Science and Technology, 117, 244–256.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2015.06.021
12. Daelemans, L., Verschatse, O., Heirman, L., Van Paepegem, W., & De Clerck, K.
(2021). Toughening mechanisms responsible for excellent crack resistance in
 thermoplastic nanofiber reinforced epoxies through in-situ optical and scanning
electron microscopy. Composites Science and Technology, 201(September 2020),
108504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2020.108504
13. ERDAL, M. O., YAZMAN, Ş., GEMİ, L., & YAPICI, A. (2018). The Effect of
Nonwoven Electrospun PAN Nanofiber Mat on Mechanical and Thermal Properties of
Epoxy Composites. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi,
22(2), 528. https://doi.org/10.19113/sdufbed.81545
14. Garcia, C., Trendafilova, I., & Zucchelli, A. (2018). The effect of polycaprolactone
nanofibers on the dynamic and impact behavior of glass fibre reinforced polymer
composites. Journal of Composites Science, 2(3), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcs2030043
15. Gavande, V., Nagappan, S., Seo, B., Cho, Y. S., & Lee, W. K. (2023). Transparent
nylon 6 nanofibers-reinforced epoxy matrix composites with superior mechanical and
thermal properties. Polymer Testing, 122(March), 108002.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2023.108002
16. Gorji, M., Bagherzadeh, R., & Fashandi, H. (2017). Electrospun nanofibers in
protective clothing. In Electrospun Nanofibers. Elsevier Ltd.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100907-9.00021-0
17. Guadagno, L., Naddeo, C., & Raimondo, M. (2023). Thermal, mechanical and
electrical performance of structural epoxy resins filled with carbon nanofibers. Journal
of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry, 148(23), 13095–13106.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-023-12521-6
18. Inovenso. (n.d.). 2023. https://www.inovenso.com/ourtechnology/ourtechnology/
19. Kanani, G. A., & Bahrami, H. S. (2010). Review on electrospun nanofibers scaffold
and biomedical applications. Trends in Biomaterials and Artificial Organs, 24(2), 93–
115.
20. Kostagiannakopoulou, C., Loutas, T. H., Sotiriadis, G., Markou, A., & Kostopoulos,
V. (2015). On the interlaminar fracture toughness of carbon fiber composites enhanced
with graphene nano-species. Composites Science and Technology, 118, 217–225.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPSCITECH.2015.08.017
21. Ladani, R. B., Bhasin, M., Wu, S., Ravindran, A. R., Ghorbani, K., Zhang, J., Kinloch,
A. J., Mouritz, A. P., & Wang, C. H. (2018). Fracture and fatigue behaviour of epoxy
nanocomposites containing 1-D and 2-D nanoscale carbon fillers. Engineering
Fracture Mechanics, 203(April), 102–114.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2018.04.033
22. Ladani, R. B., Wu, S., Kinloch, A. J., Ghorbani, K., Mouritz, A. P., & Wang, C. H.
(2017). Enhancing fatigue resistance and damage characterisation in adhesively-
bonded composite joints by carbon nanofibres. Composites Science and Technology,
149, 116–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.06.018
23. Ladani, R. B., Wu, S., Kinloch, A. J., Ghorbani, K., Zhang, J., Mouritz, A. P., &
Wang, C. H. (2016). Multifunctional properties of epoxy nanocomposites reinforced
by aligned nanoscale carbon. Materials and Design, 94, 554–564.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2016.01.052
24. Ladani, R. B., Wu, S., Zhang, J., Ghorbani, K., Kinloch, A. J., Mouritz, A. P., &
Wang, C. H. (2017). Using Carbon Nanofibre Sensors for In-situ Detection and
Monitoring of Disbonds in Bonded Composite Joints. Procedia Engineering, 188,
362–368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.04.496
25. Lasenko, I., Sanchaniya, J. V., Kanukuntla, S. P., Ladani, Y., Viluma-Gudmona, A.,

52
 Kononova, O., Lusis, V., & Selga, T. (2023). The mechanical properties of
nanocomposites reinforced with the PA6 electrospun nanofibers. Polymers, 15(3).
https://doi.org/Unpublished work
26. Le, B., Fu, G., Khaliq, J., Huo, D., & Shyha, I. (2023). Experimental investigation on
thermomechanical properties and micro-machinability of carbon nanofibre reinforced
epoxy nanocomposites. Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 99(June), 781–793.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2023.05.080
27. Liu, J., Lu, S., Liu, X., Wang, B., Yu, Z., & Che, C. (2023). Effect of natural
Indocalamus leaf addition on the mechanical properties of epoxy and epoxy-carbon
fiber composites. E-Polymers, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/epoly-2023-0039
28. Maccaferri, E., Dalle Donne, M., Mazzocchetti, L., Benelli, T., Brugo, T. M.,
Zucchelli, A., & Giorgini, L. (2022). Rubber-enhanced polyamide nanofibers for a
significant improvement of CFRP interlaminar fracture toughness. Scientific Reports,
12(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25287-y
29. Maccaferri, E., Mazzocchetti, L., Benelli, T., Brugo, T. M., Zucchelli, A., & Giorgini,
L. (2020). Rubbery nanofibrous interleaves enhance fracture toughness and damping
of CFRP laminates. Materials and Design, 195, 109049.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.109049
30. Maccaferri, E., Mazzocchetti, L., Benelli, T., Brugo, T. M., Zucchelli, A., & Giorgini,
L. (2021). Rubbery-modified cfrps with improved mode i fracture toughness: Effect of
nanofibrous mat grammage and positioning on tanδ behaviour. Polymers, 13(12).
https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13121918
31. MacCaferri, E., Mazzocchetti, L., Benelli, T., Brugo, T. M., Zucchelli, A., & Giorgini,
L. (2022). Self-Assembled NBR/Nomex Nanofibers as Lightweight Rubbery
Nonwovens for Hindering Delamination in Epoxy CFRPs. ACS Applied Materials and
Interfaces, 14(1), 1885–1899. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c17643
32. Maccaferri, E., Mazzocchetti, L., Benelli, T., Ortolani, J., Brugo, T. M., Zucchelli, A.,
& Giorgini, L. (2022). Is Graphene Always Effective in Reinforcing Composites? The
Case of Highly Graphene-Modified Thermoplastic Nanofibers and Their Unfortunate
Application in CFRP Laminates. Polymers, 14(24).
https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14245565
33. Minosi, S., Cocchi, D., Maccaferri, E., Pirondi, A., Zucchelli, A., Mazzocchetti, L.,
Ambrosini, D., & Campanini, F. (2021). Exploitation of rubbery electrospun
nanofibrous mat for fracture toughness improvement of structural epoxy adhesive
bonded joints. Journal of Advanced Joining Processes, 3(February), 100050.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jajp.2021.100050
34. Mohammadi, R., Akrami, R., Assaad, M., Nasor, M., Imran, A., & Fotouhi, M.
(2023). Polysulfone nanofiber-modified composite laminates: Investigation of mode-I
fatigue behavior and damage mechanisms. Theoretical and Applied Fracture
Mechanics, 127(September), 104078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tafmec.2023.104078
35. Nathanael, A. J., & Oh, T. H. (2021). Encapsulation of calcium phosphates on
electrospun nanofibers for tissue engineering applications. Crystals, 11(2), 1–23.
https://doi.org/10.3390/cryst11020199
36. Nien, Y.-H., Chang, C.-N., Chuang, P.-L., Hsu, C.-H., Liao, J.-L., & Lee, C.-K.
(2021). Fabrication and Characterization of Nylon 66/PAN Nanofibrous Film Used as
Separator of Lithium-Ion Battery. Polymers, 13(12), 1984.
https://doi.org/10.3390/polym13121984
37. Nimbagal, V., Banapurmath, N. R., Umarfarooq, M. A., Revankar, S., Sajjan, A. M.,

53
 Soudagar, M. E. M., Shahapurkar, K., Alamir, M. A., Alarifi, I. M., & Elfasakhany, A.
(2023). Mechanical and fracture properties of carbon nano fibers/short carbon fiber
epoxy composites. Polymer Composites, 44(7), 3977–3989.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.27371
38. Ortolani, J., Maccaferri, E., Mazzocchetti, L., Benelli, T., Brugo, T. M., Zucchelli, A.,
& Giorgini, L. (2022). Polyamide Nanofibers Impregnated with Nitrile Rubber for
Enhancing CFRP Delamination Resistance. Macromolecular Symposia, 405(1), 1–3.
https://doi.org/10.1002/masy.202100232
39. Prichard, J. C., & Hogg, P. J. (1990). The role of impact damage in post-impact
compression testing. Composites, 21(6), 503–511. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-
4361(90)90423-T
40. Ravindran, A. R., Ladani, R. B., Kinloch, A. J., Wang, C. H., & Mouritz, A. P. (2021).
Improving the delamination resistance and impact damage tolerance of carbon fibre-
epoxy composites using multi-scale fibre toughening. Composites Part A: Applied
Science and Manufacturing, 150(May), 106624.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2021.106624
41. Ravindran, A. R., Ladani, R. B., Wu, S., Kinloch, A. J., Wang, C. H., & Mouritz, A.
P. (2018). Multi-scale toughening of epoxy composites via electric field alignment of
carbon nanofibres and short carbon fibres. Composites Science and Technology,
167(January), 115–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.07.034
42. Reneker, D. H., & Yarin, A. L. (2008). Electrospinning jets and polymer nanofibers.
Polymer, 49(10), 2387–2425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2008.02.002
43. Richardson, M. O. W., & Wisheart, M. J. (1996). Review of low-velocity impact
properties of composite materials. Composites Part A: Applied Science and
Manufacturing, 27(12), 1123–1131. https://doi.org/10.1016/1359-835X(96)00074-7
44. Saghafi, H., Nikbakht, A., Mohammadi, R., & Zarouchas, D. (2021). The thickness
effect of psf nanofibrous mat on fracture toughness of carbon/epoxy laminates.
Materials, 14(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14133469
45. Saghafi, H., Palazzetti, R., Heidary, H., Brugo, T. M., Zucchelli, A., & Minak, G.
(2020). Toughening behavior of carbon/epoxy laminates interleaved by PSF/PVDF
composite nanofibers. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 10(16), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app10165618
46. Sanchaniya, J. V., Lasenko, I., Kanukuntala, S.-P., Smogor, H., Viluma-Gudmona, A.,
Krasnikovs, A., Gobins, V., & Tipans, I. (2023). Mechanical and thermal
characteristics of annealed-oriented PAN nanofibers. Polymers.
https://doi.org/doi.org/10.3390/polym15153287
47. Sanchaniya, J. V., Lasenko, I., Kanukuntla, S. P., Mannodi, A., Viluma-gudmona, A.,
& Gobins, V. (2023). Preparation and Characterization of Non-Crimping Laminated
Textile Composites Reinforced with Electrospun Nanofibers. Nanomaterials, 13(13),
1949. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13131949
48. Santos, P., Silva, A. P., & Reis, P. N. B. (2023a). Effect of Carbon Nanofibers on the
Strain Rate and Interlaminar Shear Strength of Carbon/Epoxy Composites. Materials,
16(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16124332
49. Santos, P., Silva, A. P., & Reis, P. N. B. (2023b). Effect of Carbon Nanofibers on the
Viscoelastic Response of Epoxy Resins. Polymers, 15(4).
https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15040821
50. Simunin, M. M., Voronin, A. S., Fadeev, Y. V., Dobrosmyslov, S. S., Kuular, A. A.,
Shalygina, T. A., Shabanova, K. A., Chirkov, D. Y., Voronina, S. Y., & Khartov, S. V.

54
 (2023). Influence of the Addition of Alumina Nanofibers on the Strength of Epoxy
Resins. Materials, 16(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma16041343
51. Sun, G., Sun, L., Xie, H., & Liu, J. (2016). Electrospinning of nanofibers for energy
applications. Nanomaterials, 6(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/nano6070129
52. Sundarrajan, S., Tan, K. L., Lim, S. H., & Ramakrishna, S. (2014). Electrospun
nanofibers for air filtration applications. Procedia Engineering, 75, 159–163.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.11.034
53. Taraghi, I., Fereidoon, A., & Taheri-Behrooz, F. (2014). Low-velocity impact
response of woven Kevlar/epoxy laminated composites reinforced with multi-walled
carbon nanotubes at ambient and low temperatures. Materials & Design, 53, 152–158.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MATDES.2013.06.051
54. Torre-Muruzabal, A., Daelemans, L., Van Assche, G., De Clerck, K., & Rahier, H.
(2016). Creation of a nanovascular network by electrospun sacrificial nanofibers for
self-healing applications and its effect on the flexural properties of the bulk material.
Polymer Testing, 54, 78–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2016.06.026
55. van der Heijden, S., Daelemans, L., De Schoenmaker, B., De Baere, I., Rahier, H.,
Van Paepegem, W., & De Clerck, K. (2014). Interlaminar toughening of resin transfer
moulded glass fibre epoxy laminates by polycaprolactone electrospun nanofibres.
Composites Science and Technology, 104, 66–73.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2014.09.005
56. Wable, V., Biswas, P. K., Moheimani, R., Aliahmad, N., Omole, P., Siegel, A. P.,
Agarwal, M., & Dalir, H. (2021). Engineering the electrospinning of MWCNTs/epoxy
nanofiber scaffolds to enhance physical and mechanical properties of CFRPs.
Composites Science and Technology, 213(January), 108941.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2021.108941
57. Wang, Y., Sun, Z., Yin, P., Qu, R., Zhang, Y., & Sun, C. (2023). Preparation and
Mechanical Properties of UV-Curable Epoxy Acrylate/Modified Aramid Nanofiber
Nanocomposite Films. Nanomaterials, 13(22), 2960.
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13222960
58. Wu, S., Ladani, R. B., Ravindran, A. R., Zhang, J., Mouritz, A. P., Kinloch, A. J., &
Wang, C. H. (2017). Aligning carbon nanofibres in glass-fibre/epoxy composites to
improve interlaminar toughness and crack-detection capability. Composites Science
and Technology, 152, 46–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2017.09.007
59. Xu, F., Du, X. S., Liu, H. Y., Guo, W. G., & Mai, Y. W. (2016). Temperature effect
on nano-rubber toughening in epoxy and epoxy/carbon fiber laminated composites.
Composites Part B: Engineering, 95, 423–432.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPOSITESB.2016.04.019
60. Zulkifli, M. Z. A., Nordin, D., Shaari, N., & Kamarudin, S. K. (2023). Overview of
Electrospinning for Tissue Engineering Applications. Polymers, 15(11), 1–27.
https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15112418

55