Search Results (533)

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) Tafel curves and (<b>b</b>) Bode plots of neat ZRE and hybrid filler-modified ZRE coatings.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Tafel curves of nanocarbon-modified ZRE-coated Q235 samples.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The dependence of |Z|_0.01Hz of neat ZRE and 01_3DNG-CNT ZRE coatings on the immersion time.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Tafel curves of neat ZRE and 01_3DNG-CNT ZRE coatings after 300 h immersion in 3.5 wt% NaCl solution.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Nyquist plots of 01_3DNG-CNT ZRE coating on Q235 sample immersed in NaCl solution at 25 h, 100 h and 300 h and (<b>b</b>) schematic diagrams of equivalent analog circuits for EIS analysis of the hybrid nanocarbon-modified ZRE.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Images of scratched area of neat ZRE soaked in 3.5 wt% NaCl solution for 12 h: (<b>a</b>) SEM image and inset digital photo; the element mapping of (<b>b</b>) Fe, (<b>c</b>) O, (<b>d</b>) Zn, (<b>e</b>) Cl and (<b>f</b>) C.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Images of scratched area of the hybrid filler-modified ZRE-coated steel sample soaked in 3.5 wt% NaCl solution for 12 h: (<b>a</b>) SEM image and inset digital photo and the element mapping of (<b>b</b>) Fe, (<b>c</b>) O, (<b>d</b>) Zn, (<b>e</b>) Cl and (<b>f</b>) C.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Schematic diagram of the anti-corrosive mechanism of 3DNG-CNT ZRE coating on steel in simulated seawater.</p> Full article ">

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Application of plant biomass in marine structures [<a href="#B12-jcs-08-00532" class="html-bibr">12</a>]. Reproduced from Iwuozor et al., 2024 with permission.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Micro- and macro-biofouling evolution [<a href="#B46-jcs-08-00532" class="html-bibr">46</a>]. Reproduced from Gizer et al., 2019, licensed under Creative Commons 3.0.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Biofouling tests (six months). Flax/epoxy plate: (<b>a</b>) unprotected before immersion; (<b>b</b>) unprotected after immersion; (<b>c</b>) protected after immersion. Hemp/epoxy plate: (<b>d</b>) unprotected before immersion; (<b>e</b>) unprotected after immersion; (<b>f</b>) protected after immersion [<a href="#B67-jcs-08-00532" class="html-bibr">67</a>]. Reproduced from Haramina et al., 2023 under Creative Commons 4.0.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Weight gain vs. immersion time in different conditions for flax–epoxy composites [<a href="#B149-jcs-08-00532" class="html-bibr">149</a>]. Reproduced with permission from Yan and Chouw (2015).</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Mechanisms leading to interface degradation and composite swelling due to water absorption [<a href="#B148-jcs-08-00532" class="html-bibr">148</a>]. (<b>a</b>) Condition of fiber before water exposure; (<b>i</b>) Start of water exposure (water diffusion), (<b>ii</b>) Prolonged exposure before swelling (capillary diffusion); (<b>b</b>) Start of fiber swelling; (<b>iii</b>) Water molecules transport phenomena; (<b>c</b>) Effect of combined mechanisms. Reproduced with permission from Azka et al., 2024.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparison of water absorption between flax fiber composites and jute fiber composites, untreated (AR) and sodium bicarbonate-treated (T) [<a href="#B229-jcs-08-00532" class="html-bibr">229</a>]. Reproduced with permission from Fiore et al., 2019.</p> Full article ">

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Chemical particulars of the precursor, reactive diluent, and curing agent, as well as main features of both carbon-based nanofillers: MWCNTs and GNs.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Nanomechanical test system for innovative material characterization.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Real optical image of nanoindentation test trace performed on the surface of HYB 0.5% (1:1) sample and schematic representation of the indentation matrix.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Three-dimensional SPM images of the nanoindentation test traces captured on the surfaces of the samples: (<b>a</b>) HYB 0.5% (1:1) and (<b>b</b>) HYB 0.5% (5:1).</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Key model definitions for the numerical analysis. (<b>b</b>) Schematic illustration of the case study numerically investigated.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Geometrical features of the Berkovich’s indenter tip.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Schematic view of the experiment design.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Density (<b>a</b>), reduced modulus (<b>b</b>), hardness (<b>c</b>), and contact depth (<b>d</b>) for all nanocomposites investigated in the present study. In each subplot, the red upward arrow indicates the maximum value for that property, with the numerical value displayed, while the black downward arrow marks the minimum value.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>In (<b>a</b>), a trapezoidal load function utilized for nanomechanical characterization. In (<b>b</b>), the force versus displacement curves for all the samples analyzed.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>DMA curves for the HYB 0.5% (1:1) and HYB 0.1% (5:1) samples: (<b>a</b>) storage modulus vs. temperature; (<b>b</b>) Tan δ vs. temperature.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Dex Scatter Plot (DSP) and Main Factor Plot (MFP) for the experimental data of the reduced modulus for HYB 0.1% (1:1) in panels (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) and HYB 0.1% (5:1) in panels (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>), respectively.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Dex Scatter Plot (DSP) and Main Factor Plot (MFP) for the experimental data of the hardness for HYB 0.1% (1:1) in panels (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) and HYB 0.1% (5:1) in panels (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>), respectively.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Dex Scatter Plot (DSP) and Main Factor Plot (MFP) for the experimental data of the contact depth for HYB 0.1% (1:1) in panels (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) and HYB 0.1% (5:1) in panels (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>), respectively.</p> Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Response surface plots representing the mechanical properties of the two HYB formulations. Subplots (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) display the reduced modulus for the 0.1% and 0.5% HYB compositions, respectively. Subplots (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) illustrate the hardness values for each formulation, while (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) depict the contact depth. Experimental data points are marked with black dots, demonstrating the fit of the surface to the measured values. The color bar in each subplot shows the range of variability for each property.</p> Full article ">Figure 14 Cont.
<p>Response surface plots representing the mechanical properties of the two HYB formulations. Subplots (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) display the reduced modulus for the 0.1% and 0.5% HYB compositions, respectively. Subplots (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) illustrate the hardness values for each formulation, while (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) depict the contact depth. Experimental data points are marked with black dots, demonstrating the fit of the surface to the measured values. The color bar in each subplot shows the range of variability for each property.</p> Full article ">Figure 15
<p>The z-axis displacement versus the entire time interval [0, 0.3] s for the HYB 0.5% (1:1) sample in (<b>a</b>) and the HYB 0.5% (5:1) sample in (<b>b</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 16
<p>The contact depth measurements for HYB 0.5% (1:1) in (<b>a</b>) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) in (<b>b</b>) are shown at the time point t = 0.13 s, where the maximum contact depth occurs. The applied load is 10,000 µN. The contour lines emphasize the distinct indentation patterns for each sample.</p> Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Indentation imprint at maximum contact depth for evaluating projected areas (Aproj) under an applied load of 10,000 µN. Panels (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) show the 3D views for the HYB 0.5% (1:1) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) samples, respectively, with the corresponding 2D top views displayed in (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 18
<p>The z-axis displacement (D) over time (T) during the loading (<b>a</b>) and unloading phases (<b>b</b>) to evaluate the depth rate (DR) of the selected specimens as the slope of the linear fitting curve.</p> Full article ">Figure 19
<p>The z-axis displacement versus thickness at some selected instants of time for HYB 0.5% 1:1 during loading phase in (<b>a</b>) and unloading phase in (<b>b</b>). Same results for HYB 0.5% 5:1 sample during load phase in (<b>c</b>) and unloading phase in (<b>d</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Average Von Mises stress for HYB 0.5% (1:1) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) samples, assessed over the full domain in (<b>a</b>) and on the upper surface in (<b>b</b>), respectively.</p> Full article ">Figure 21
<p>The 3D sectional view of the Von Mises stress measured at t = 0.13 s within the materials, displayed for HYB 0.5% (1:1) in panel (<b>a</b>) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) in panel (<b>b</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 22
<p>Von Mises stress recorded at the time instant t = 0.13 s for and HYB 0.5% (1:1) in (<b>a</b>) and (<b>b</b>), respectively.</p> Full article ">Figure 23
<p>Mechanical energy flux, z-component, transferred during the entire time windows of nanoindentation test for HYB 0.5% (1:1) in (<b>a</b>) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) in (<b>b</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 24
<p>Total elastic strain energy stored in the two formulations, HYB 0.5% (1:1) and HYB 0.5% (5:1), evaluated on the overall volume during the entire time windows of nanoindentation test.</p> Full article ">Figure 25
<p>Cauchy-Green tensor, z-component, for HYB 0.5% (1:1) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) samples in (<b>a</b>) and schematic representation of the dynamic point at which it is evaluated in (<b>b</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 26
<p>3D cross-sectional views of Cauchy-Green tensor, z-component, for HYB 0.5% (1:1) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) samples in (<b>a</b>) and (<b>b</b>), respectively.</p> Full article ">Figure 27
<p>FESEM images of the HYB 0.5% (1:1) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) nanocomposites.</p> Full article ">Figure 28
<p>Deflection error and TUNA current images of the HYB 0.5% (1:1) and HYB 0.5% (5:1) nanocomposites.</p> Full article ">Figure 29
<p>Correlation between experimental and computational results on a micrometric scale for the sample HYB 0.1% (1:5).</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>XRD spectra for GN–MWCNT/PDMS (<span class="html-italic">w</span>/<span class="html-italic">w</span>) composites with total reinforcement concentrations of (<b>a</b>) 1 phr, (<b>b</b>) 2 phr, and (<b>c</b>) 4 phr.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>SEM micrographs of PDMS composites, reinforced with (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) 1 phr 10:90, (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) 1 phr 50:50, and (<b>e</b>,<b>f</b>) 4 phr 50:50, GN–MWCNT ratio.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Raman spectra of graphene, carbon nanotubes, and hybrid GN–MWCNT/PDMS (<span class="html-italic">w</span>/<span class="html-italic">w</span>) composites with total concentrations of (<b>a</b>) 1 phr, (<b>b</b>) 2 phr, and (<b>c</b>) 4 phr.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>DSC curves during cooling and heating, for the non-reinforced PDMS and 1 phr GN–MWCNT/PDMS composites.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>TGA curves of the 1 phr GN–MWCNT/PDMS composites: (<b>a</b>) mass change and (<b>b</b>) derivative of mass change, versus temperature.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Comparative bar charts of (<b>a</b>) tensile strength and (<b>b</b>) modulus of elasticity of GN–MWCNT/PDMS composites, for different concentrations and reinforcement ratios.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparative bar chart of O₂ permeability of the GN–MWCNT/PDMS composites, for a total concentration of 1 phr.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparative histogram of O₂ permeability of the GN–MWCNTs/PDMS composites for reinforcement ratios of: (<b>a</b>) 50:50 and (<b>b</b>) 10:90 <span class="html-italic">w</span>/<span class="html-italic">w</span>.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>DRS diagrams of conductivity vs. frequency for the unreinforced PDMS and the GN–MWCNT/PDMS hybrid composites with total concentrations of (<b>a</b>) 1 phr, (<b>b</b>) 2 phr, and (<b>c</b>) 4 phr.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Schematic representation of the formation of a hybrid GN–MWCNT conductive path (for electrons) within the polymeric matrix.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Electrical conductivity of PDMS composites with various GN–MWCNT (<span class="html-italic">w</span>/<span class="html-italic">w</span>) ratios, at a frequency of 100 mHz.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>EMI shielding effectiveness in the frequency range of 8.2–12.4 GHz for GN–MWCNT/PDMS composites composite membranes with (<b>a</b>) 1 phr, (<b>b</b>) 2 phr, and (<b>c</b>) 4 phr content or reinforcement.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>EMI shielding effectiveness in the frequency range of 8.2-12.4 GHz for composite membranes with ratios of (<b>a</b>) 50:50, (<b>b</b>) 10:90, and (<b>c</b>) 0:100 GN–MWCNT (<span class="html-italic">w</span>/<span class="html-italic">w</span>)/PDMS.</p> Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Reflection (R), absorption (A), and transmission (T) components in the frequency range of 8.2–12.4 GHz for the composites (<b>a</b>) 1 phr, (<b>b</b>) 2 phr, and (<b>c</b>) 4 phr, 50:50 (<span class="html-italic">w</span>/<span class="html-italic">w</span>) GN–MWCNT/PDMS.</p> Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Reflection (R), absorption (A), and transmission (T) components in the frequency range of 8.2–12.4 GHz for the composites (<b>a</b>) 1 phr, (<b>b</b>) 2 phr, and (<b>c</b>) 4 phr, 10:90 (<span class="html-italic">w</span>/<span class="html-italic">w</span>) GN–MWCNT/PDMS.</p> Full article ">

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Mixing steps of ENR composites with alumina, silica, and hybrid fillers, following the formulations in <a href="#polymers-16-03362-t001" class="html-table">Table 1</a>.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>FTIR spectra of ENR composites with alumina, silica, and hybrid fillers.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Possible chemical reactions between ENR and hybrid filler, (<b>a</b>) rubber-filler interaction, (<b>b</b>) hydrogen bonding between alumina and silica, (<b>c</b>) hydrogen bonding between ENR and silica, and (<b>d</b>) hydrogen bonding of ENR and alumina.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>SEM micrographs of unfilled ENR (<b>a</b>) and ENR/Alumina (<b>b</b>), ENR/Silica (<b>c</b>), and ENR/Hybrid fillers (<b>d</b>) at 20,000× magnification.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>BSE-SEM (<b>a</b>) when (A)–(C) is elemental spectrum of each point on matrix, and SEM-EDX (<b>b</b>) images of ENR/Hybrid filler.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Hardness of ENR composites with alumina, silica, and hybrid fillers. a–d: Different letters within same picture indicate statistically significant differences at <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05, based on one-way ANOVA.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Mechanical properties: modulus at 100% (<b>a</b>), tensile strength (<b>b</b>), and elongation at break (<b>c</b>) of ENR composites, before and after aging at 100 °C for 48 h. a–h: Different letters within same picture represent statistically significant differences at <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05, based on one-way ANOVA.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Thermal conductivity (<b>a</b>) and schematic diagram (<b>b</b>) of ENR composites. a–d: Different letters within same picture represent statistically significant differences at <span class="html-italic">p</span> &lt; 0.05, based on one-way ANOVA.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Temperature dependence of storage modulus (<b>a</b>) and of tan <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>δ</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> (<b>b</b>) for ENR composites with alumina, silica, and hybrid fillers.</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>Illustration of the electrical percolation process: (<b>a</b>) UHPC-only (without fiber); (<b>b</b>) G-only; (<b>c</b>) G + MCMF; (<b>d</b>) G + CCMF; (<b>e</b>) G + MCMF + CCMF.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Magnified pictures of dry mixture components.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Fabrication process of the mold-cast and 3D-printed self-sensing UHPC specimen.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) Picture of the 3D printer; (<b>b</b>) schematic illustration of the 3D-printed rectangular prism showing the overall geometry dimension and the directional description of 3DP process; (<b>c</b>) directional description of the nozzle path; (<b>d</b>) picture of the 3DP process.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Pictures showing (<b>a</b>) overall experimental setup used to characterize sensing properties; (<b>b</b>) closeup view on a tested specimen; (<b>c</b>) 3DP specimen after brittle failure.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Percolation curves obtained from 28-day resistivity measurements for (<b>a</b>) single MCMF versus CCMF doping with the inset showing the percolation curve for G filling; (<b>b</b>) dual doping (MCMF + CCMF).</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Strain sensing performance for key mix designs under quasi-static cyclic loading test for specimens (<b>a</b>) 0G0CMF; (<b>b</b>) 3G0CMF; (<b>c</b>) 3G1000MCMF; (<b>d</b>) 3D500CCMF; (<b>e</b>) 3G125M500CCMF; (<b>f</b>) 3G250M250CCMF; (<b>g</b>) 3G250M500CCMF; (<b>h</b>) 3DP-3G250M250CCMF. I don’t think we used hyphen in this figure. All symbols are minus sign. Same as below.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Time histories of electrical and strain measurements under increased loading frequency for specimens (<b>a</b>) 0G0CMF; (<b>b</b>) 3G0CMF; (<b>c</b>) 3G1000MCMF; (<b>d</b>) 3D500CCMF; (<b>e</b>) 3G125M500CCMF; (<b>f</b>) 3G250M250CCMF; (<b>g</b>) 3G250M500CCMF; (<b>h</b>) 3DP-3G250M250CCMF.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Stress strain curve for (<b>a</b>) G dopant; (<b>b</b>) selected 3DP versus mold-cast specimens.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Plots of -FCR measured from the monotonic compressive loading test for specimens under representative mix designs.</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>Biochips used in the work as attached biocenosis carriers: ETEK biochip (<b>a</b>), BF33 (<b>b</b>), and MutagBioChip30™ (<b>c</b>). Scale bar, 10 mm.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Isometric drawing of the MBBR-SBR anammox: nipple insets (<b>1</b>); inner volume (<b>2</b>); water jacket (<b>3</b>); sites for sampling and oxygen sensor installation (<b>4</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The technological scheme of MBBR-SBR anammox. Designations: <b>1</b>, computer; <b>2</b>, a PLK 154 Oven programmable controller; <b>3</b>, AKPM-1-01P oximeter; <b>4</b>, Siemens LOGO logical module; <b>5</b>, compressor; <b>6</b>, circulation pump; <b>7</b>, oxygen sensor; <b>8</b>, protective grid; <b>9</b>, air for aeration. Color coding: red, 220 V; green, analog signal; black, digital signal; blue, liquid recycle; light blue, air.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Electron microscopy of sections of the ETEK (<b>A</b>), BF33 (<b>B</b>), and Mutag biochips (<b>C</b>) at low magnification: frontal view from the top (<b>T</b>) of chips and side view of section (<b>S</b>). Scale bar, 500 µm.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Dynamics of removal of mineral nitrogen species (mg/L) from experimental reactors with ETEK (<b>1</b>), BF33 (<b>2</b>), and Mutag (<b>3</b>) biochips.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Biochips after 1.5 months of incubation with the anammox-activated sludge: ETEK (<b>a</b>), BF33 (<b>b</b>), and Mutag (<b>c</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Electron micrographs of the biofilms developing on the ETEK (<b>A</b>), BF33 (<b>B</b>), and Mutag biochips (<b>C</b>). Bar length is 1 μm in (<b>C</b>) (<b>right</b>), 2 μm in (<b>A</b>,<b>B</b>) (<b>right</b>), 5 μm in (<b>A</b>–<b>C</b>) (<b>left</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Taxonomic composition of the studied samples according to the sequences of the 16S rRNA amplicons.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Multidimensional scaling of the Jaccard similarity index between microbial communities of the anammox reactors: inoculum (circle) and communities of 127 (squares) and 150 days (triangles). Color coding: green, inoculum; purple, ETEK; blue, Mutag; and red, BF33.</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>Schematic of the research design.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Images of the weaving machine producing 3D woven fabric at Novavaran Sanat Silk Co., Ltd., Kashan, Iran.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>An image of the (<b>a</b>) (3DGF), (<b>b</b>) (3DJF), and (<b>c</b>) (3DJGF).</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Overall methodology for preparing the 3D spacer composite samples. (<b>a</b>) Process flow chart, and (<b>b</b>) material flow chart.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Samples of the produced 3D hybrid composite panels.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>View of the sound measuring device (a chamber to act as an obstacle to sound transmission) in the laboratory.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Comparative line graph illustrating the sound insulation performance of different materials (no filler, palm fiber, and coffee husk) at two frequencies, 1000 Hz and 10,000 Hz. The error bars around each point represent data variability and uncertainty at each frequency.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>(<b>a</b>) Bar chart, (<b>b</b>) line chart, and (<b>c</b>) 3D bar chart illustrating the sound reduction levels for different materials at both 1000 Hz and 10,000 Hz frequencies.</p> Full article ">Figure 8 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Bar chart, (<b>b</b>) line chart, and (<b>c</b>) 3D bar chart illustrating the sound reduction levels for different materials at both 1000 Hz and 10,000 Hz frequencies.</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>(<b>a</b>) FRW-M panel; (<b>b</b>) 30WF-M panel; (<b>c</b>) 30CS-M panel; (<b>d</b>) 15CS15WF-M panel.</p> Full article ">Figure 1 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) FRW-M panel; (<b>b</b>) 30WF-M panel; (<b>c</b>) 30CS-M panel; (<b>d</b>) 15CS15WF-M panel.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Flammability test set-up according to ASTM D635-22 [<a href="#B33-jcs-08-00484" class="html-bibr">33</a>].</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Thermogravimetric analysis of the clamshell powder.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>XRD of the clamshell powder.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) Heating DSC curves of the panels; (<b>b</b>) cooling DSC curves of the panels.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Flexural Stress–strain graph of the four panels.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>SEM micrographs at 30× magnification of (<b>a</b>) FRW-M sample; (<b>b</b>) 30CS-M sample; (<b>c</b>) 30WF-M sample; (<b>d</b>) 15CS15WF-M sample.</p> Full article ">Figure 7 Cont.
<p>SEM micrographs at 30× magnification of (<b>a</b>) FRW-M sample; (<b>b</b>) 30CS-M sample; (<b>c</b>) 30WF-M sample; (<b>d</b>) 15CS15WF-M sample.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>SEM micrographs at 800× magnification of (<b>a</b>) FRW-M sample; (<b>b</b>) 30CS-M sample; (<b>d</b>) 15CS15WF-M sample; (<b>f</b>) 30WF-M sample; Calcium EDS mapping of (<b>c</b>) 30CS-M; (<b>e</b>) 15CS15WF-M.</p> Full article ">Figure 8 Cont.
<p>SEM micrographs at 800× magnification of (<b>a</b>) FRW-M sample; (<b>b</b>) 30CS-M sample; (<b>d</b>) 15CS15WF-M sample; (<b>f</b>) 30WF-M sample; Calcium EDS mapping of (<b>c</b>) 30CS-M; (<b>e</b>) 15CS15WF-M.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Storage modulus of the four panels; (<b>b</b>) loss modulus of the four panels; (<b>c</b>) tan (δ) of the four panels.</p> Full article ">Figure 9 Cont.
<p>(<b>a</b>) Storage modulus of the four panels; (<b>b</b>) loss modulus of the four panels; (<b>c</b>) tan (δ) of the four panels.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Water absorption of the panels.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Burning rate of the panels.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Burning behavior of (<b>a</b>) FRW-M sample; (<b>b</b>) 30WF-M sample; (<b>c</b>) 30CS-M sample; (<b>d</b>) 15CS15WF-M sample.</p> Full article ">Figure 12 Cont.
<p>Burning behavior of (<b>a</b>) FRW-M sample; (<b>b</b>) 30WF-M sample; (<b>c</b>) 30CS-M sample; (<b>d</b>) 15CS15WF-M sample.</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>The DTA curve of the JNi-5 filler metal foil.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Schematic of (<b>a</b>) the sample assembly and (<b>b</b>) the shear test fixture.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Schematic of the brazing process.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Typical microstructure and heat-affected zone of the joint: (<b>a</b>) typical microstructure; (<b>b</b>) heat-affected zone.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Typical microstructure and element distributions of the joint brazed at 1030 °C: (<b>a</b>) typical microstructure; (<b>b</b>) Si; (<b>c</b>) Ni; (<b>d</b>) Cr; (<b>e</b>) Fe; (<b>f</b>) Nb; (<b>g</b>) Mo; (<b>h</b>) B; (<b>i</b>) Y; (<b>j</b>) Co.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>XRD pattern of the joint brazed at 1030 °C.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>The mixing enthalpy between different metal elements with B.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Microstructure and heat-affected zone of GH4169 joints at different brazing temperatures: (<b>a</b>) 1030 °C; (<b>c</b>) 1060 °C; (<b>e</b>) 1090 °C; (<b>g</b>) 1120 °C; (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>,<b>f</b>,<b>h</b>) correspond to the enlarged views at the dashed boxes in (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>,<b>e</b>,<b>g</b>), respectively.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Microhardness distributions of joints at different brazing temperatures.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Shear strength of joints at different brazing temperatures.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Fracture paths of joints at different brazing temperatures: (<b>a</b>) 1030 °C; (<b>b</b>,<b>c</b>) 1060 °C; (<b>d</b>) 1090 °C; (<b>e</b>) 1120 °C.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Microstructure of the end of the brazed seam at 1060 °C.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Fracture morphology of joints at different brazing temperatures (confocal microscopy): (<b>a</b>) 1030 °C; (<b>b</b>) 1060 °C; (<b>c</b>) 1090 °C; (<b>d</b>) 1120 °C.</p> Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Fracture morphology of joints at different brazing temperatures (SEM): (<b>a</b>) 1030 °C; (<b>b</b>) 1060 °C; (<b>c</b>) 1090 °C; (<b>d</b>) 1120 °C.</p> Full article ">

Graphical abstract
Full article ">Figure 1
<p>Molecular structures of epoxy resin, curing agents, and components of four types of epoxy [<a href="#B8-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">8</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Relative growth rate of mechanical properties of four type epoxy resin at RT and −196 °C [<a href="#B8-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">8</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Mechanical properties of different types of epoxy resin at RT and −196 °C: (<b>a</b>) δ tensile strength, (<b>b</b>) E tensile modulus, (<b>c</b>) ε failure strain, (<b>d</b>) impact strength [<a href="#B8-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">8</a>,<a href="#B30-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">30</a>,<a href="#B31-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">31</a>,<a href="#B32-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">32</a>,<a href="#B33-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">33</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>(<b>a</b>) Mechanical properties of CFRP at RT and −196 °C; tensile failure morphology of CFRP. (<b>b</b>) RT and (<b>c</b>) −196 °C (1: fibre pull-out; 2: interfacial debonding; 3: fibre breakage; 4: matrix crack) [<a href="#B8-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">8</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>(<b>a</b>) G′ vs. temperature curve, (<b>b</b>) G″ vs. temperature curve [<a href="#B8-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">8</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>(<b>a</b>) Tan <span class="html-italic">δ</span> vs. temperature curve; (<b>b</b>) crosslinking structure of epoxy; (<b>c</b>) CTE vs. temperature curve [<a href="#B8-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">8</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Tensile failure morphology of epoxy at (<b>a</b>) RT and (<b>b</b>) −196 °C; (<b>c</b>) stress–strain curve of epoxy at RT and −196 °C [<a href="#B8-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">8</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Electrical resistance (ER) fragmentation tensile test specimen [<a href="#B35-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">35</a>]. Copyright 2015 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>(<b>a</b>) Data and empirical correlation calculations between △R/R₀ and stress to strain; (<b>b</b>) tensile data of the fragmentation sample (bisphenol A) at RT; (<b>c</b>) tensile findings of the fragmentation sample (bisphenol A) at CT; (<b>d</b>) tensile data of the fragmentation sample (bisphenol F) at RT; and (<b>e</b>) tensile findings of the fragmentation sample (bisphenol F) at CT [<a href="#B35-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">35</a>]. Copyright 2015 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Schematic model of carbon fiber with tensile loading [<a href="#B35-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">35</a>]. Copyright 2015 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Model of tensile loading of fragmentation specimen with different interfacial adhesion between fiber and matrix [<a href="#B35-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">35</a>]. Copyright 2015 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>(<b>a</b>) Static contact angle test system under the cryogenic condition; (<b>b</b>) static contact angle results of epoxy resin for different temperature conditions; and (<b>c</b>) static contact angle of epoxy resin at RT and CT [<a href="#B35-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">35</a>]. Copyright 2015 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>(<b>a</b>) Diagrams and dimensions of fragmentation testing specimens; (<b>b</b>) cryogenic treatment process for different samples [<a href="#B36-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">36</a>]. Copyright 2017 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 14
<p>(<b>a</b>) Electrical resistance-changing ratio of CNT fiber and fragmentation specimen before and after cryogenic treatment under tensile testing; (<b>b</b>) static resistance and gage factor of the embedded CNT fiber before and after cryogenic treatment [<a href="#B36-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">36</a>]. Copyright 2017 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 15
<p>(<b>a</b>) ILSS and (<b>b</b>) IFSS of carbon fiber composites [<a href="#B41-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">41</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 16
<p>The fracture surface in the radial direction of the composites reinforced by (<b>a</b>) desized, (<b>b</b>) CVD-485, (<b>c</b>) CVD-465, (<b>d</b>) CVD-450, (<b>e</b>) CVD-430, and (<b>f</b>) CVD-400 carbon fibers [<a href="#B41-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">41</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 17
<p>AFM force modulation images and section analysis of the interphase (along the white arrow) in (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) desized carbon fiber/epoxy and (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) CVD-400 carbon fiber/epoxy composites [<a href="#B41-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">41</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 18
<p>The fracture surface in the weft direction of CNT-coated carbon fiber/epoxy composites: (<b>a</b>) bare surfaces; (<b>c</b>) filamentous bridging between fibers; (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) length of a single CNT left on the surface of carbon fiber [<a href="#B41-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">41</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 19
<p>Schematic depicting behavior of neat composite at RT and CT and of modified composite at CT [<a href="#B42-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">42</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 20
<p>Molecular structures of (<b>a</b>) DGEBA, (<b>b</b>) BCI, and (<b>c</b>) DDM [<a href="#B30-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">30</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 21
<p>Schematic of the preparation process of the EP/BCI composites [<a href="#B30-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">30</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 22
<p>(<b>a</b>) The reaction between the epoxy and amino groups; (<b>b</b>) in BCI, the amino group reacts with the double bond via the Michael addition reaction; (<b>c</b>) a complete response to the two intermediate products [<a href="#B30-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">30</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 23
<p>Schematic of the deformation of pure EP and the EP/BCI composite molecular curing networks under tensile load [<a href="#B30-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">30</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 24
<p>Schematic illustration of the cross-linked network of (<b>a</b>) pristine EP and (<b>b</b>) EP/BCI materials [<a href="#B30-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">30</a>]. Copyright 2022 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 25
<p>The <span class="html-italic">τ</span>₃, <span class="html-italic">I</span>₃, and <span class="html-italic">T</span>_g of unmodified and PEG-4000 modified epoxy resins and schematic depicting: (<b>a</b>) a single PEG-4000, (<b>b</b>) DGEBA, and (<b>c</b>) MeTHPA compounds [<a href="#B5-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">5</a>]. Copyright 2014 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 26
<p>Mechanism of epoxy resins toughened with PEG [<a href="#B5-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">5</a>]. Copyright 2014 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 27
<p>Chemical structures of epoxy, D-230, PBT, PEI, and PC [<a href="#B45-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">45</a>]. Copyright 2013 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 28
<p>(<b>a</b>) thermal expansion, (<b>b</b>) CTE values, (<b>c</b>) DMA curves, and (<b>d</b>) average crack densities of neat epoxy and thermoplastic modified EP [<a href="#B45-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">45</a>]. Copyright 2013 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 29
<p>Reflected optical microscopy images of cryogenically cycled CF/EP laminates: (<b>a</b>) CF/neat epoxy, (<b>b</b>) CF/PBT modified epoxy, (<b>c</b>) CF/PC modified epoxy, and (<b>d</b>) CF/PEI modified epoxy laminates [<a href="#B45-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">45</a>]. Copyright 2013 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 30
<p>The schematic graphic depicts the CFRP composite fabrication process [<a href="#B46-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">46</a>]. Copyright 2021 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 31
<p>Optical pictures of contact angles with microdroplets on CF for (<b>a</b>) neat EP, (<b>b</b>) EP/HTPU1, and (<b>c</b>) EP/HTPU2 [<a href="#B46-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">46</a>]. Copyright 2021 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 32
<p>Digital pictures of longitudinal tensile (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) and digital images of the bending after failure test samples (<b>c</b>,<b>d</b>) of CFRP and CF/EP/HTPU materials following tensile failure: (<b>a</b>,<b>c</b>) RT; (<b>b</b>,<b>d</b>) 77 K [<a href="#B46-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">46</a>]. Copyright 2021 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 33
<p>(<b>a</b>) The synthetic pathway of flexible polymer containing epoxy groups (EPSE), and (<b>b</b>) illustration diagram of the CF/EP composite laminate [<a href="#B50-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">50</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 34
<p>SEM images of the fracture surfaces of neat epoxy at (<b>a</b>) RT and (<b>b</b>) 77 K, EPSE-EP with 8 wt% EPSE content at (<b>c</b>) RT and (<b>d</b>) 77 K, optical images of CF/neat epoxy laminate after flexural test at (<b>e</b>) RT and (<b>f</b>) 77 K, and CF/EPSE-EP laminate after flexural evaluate at (<b>g</b>) RT and (<b>h</b>) 77 K [<a href="#B50-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">50</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 35
<p>The procedure for producing HPB/epoxy composites [<a href="#B44-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">44</a>]. Copyright 2021 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 36
<p>Schematic of hyperbranched polymer toughened epoxy at CT [<a href="#B44-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">44</a>]. Copyright 2021 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 37
<p>Manufacturing procedures for producing nanocomposite and CF composites with the nanocomposite as the sample: (<b>a</b>) BCP-EP nanocomposites and (<b>b</b>) vacuum-assisted infusion of CF composites with BCP/epoxy matrix [<a href="#B53-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">53</a>]. Copyright 2024 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 38
<p>Rigid and soft fillers improve nanocomposites’ fracture toughness at (<b>a</b>) RT and (<b>b</b>) −196 °C; (<b>c</b>) comparison of fracture toughness enhancement at CT vs. RT [<a href="#B53-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">53</a>]. Copyright 2024 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 39
<p>Fractographs of the fracture surfaces of DCB samples evaluated at RT and CT ((<b>a</b>–<b>c</b>), (<b>d</b>–<b>f</b>), respectively). (<b>a</b>) neat epoxy; (<b>b</b>) polymer with 2.5 wt% BCP; (<b>c</b>) high resolution image of polymer in (<b>b</b>); (<b>d</b>) neat epoxy; (<b>e</b>) polymer with 2.5 wt% BCP; and (<b>f</b>) high resolution image of polymer in (<b>e</b>) [<a href="#B53-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">53</a>]. Copyright 2024 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 40
<p>Optical microscopy images of cracks in cross-ply [04/904]s laminates after quenching in liquid nitrogen (−196 °C): (<b>a</b>) neat sample; (<b>b</b>) matrix with 1.0 wt% BCP; (<b>c</b>) sample with 2.5 wt% BCP; (<b>d</b>) sample with 5.0 wt% BCP [<a href="#B53-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">53</a>]. Copyright 2024 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 41
<p>Schematic depicting the sample production procedure for contact angle testing, as well as the immersion of a CNT/EP mixture into CF bundles to create transverse fiber bundle tension testing (TFBT) samples [<a href="#B58-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">58</a>]. Copyright 2014 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 42
<p>(<b>a</b>) Transverse tensile specimen geometry (in mm), (<b>b</b>) TFBT specimen shot, and (<b>c</b>) cryogenic tensile testing schematic [<a href="#B58-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">58</a>]. Copyright 2014 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 43
<p>The contact angle measurement process is represented schematically in two views: (<b>a</b>) vertical and (<b>b</b>) [<a href="#B58-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">58</a>]. Copyright 2014 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 44
<p>Optical micrographs of epoxy matrix droplets with various MWCNT percentages on CF bundles [<a href="#B58-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">58</a>]. Copyright 2014 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 45
<p>SEM photographs of the matrix samples’ fracture surfaces during transverse tensile testing at 77 K and RT [<a href="#B58-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">58</a>]. Copyright 2014 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 46
<p>(<b>a</b>) Scheme to preparing Fe₃O₄/O-MWCNTs and O-MWCNTs; (<b>b</b>) diagram of the design for preparing ordered Fe₃O₄/O-MWCNTs modified EP systems; (<b>c</b>) scheme for preparing Fe₃O₄/O-MWCNTs/CF/EP laminate (<b>left</b>), and picture of Fe₃O₄/O-MWCNTs/CF/EP laminate (<b>right</b>) [<a href="#B59-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">59</a>]. Copyright 2018 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 47
<p>Propagating cracks and suppression characteristics of CNT-modified CF/EP composite materials. CF/EP laminate (<b>a</b>), R-MWCNT-modified CF/EP laminate (<b>b</b>), O-MWCNT-modified CF/EP laminate (<b>c</b>), and Fe₃O₄/O-MWCNT-modified CF/EP laminate (<b>d</b>) [<a href="#B59-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">59</a>]. Copyright 2018 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 48
<p>Schematic representation of the preparation of CF/GO-modified epoxy systems [<a href="#B61-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">61</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 49
<p>Schematic representation of the RT and cryogenic evaluation for three-point bending tests, (<b>a</b>) RT, (<b>b</b>) 77K and (<b>c</b>) sample immersed in liquid nitrogen [<a href="#B61-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">61</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 50
<p>Macroscopic failure morphologies of CFRP samples after three-point bending tests at (<b>a</b>) RT and (<b>b</b>) 77 K, shown from the side [<a href="#B61-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">61</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 51
<p>GO dispersion in the epoxy matrix with various GO concentrations: (<b>a</b>) 0.05 wt%, (<b>b</b>) 0.1 wt%, (<b>c</b>) 0.2 wt%, and (<b>d</b>) 0.5 wt% [<a href="#B61-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">61</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 52
<p>Schematic representation of the production process of GO-containing CFRP matrices: (<b>a</b>) GO-EP/CWF matrices and (<b>b</b>) GO-CWF/EP matrices [<a href="#B62-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">62</a>]. Copyright 2019 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 53
<p>SEM morphological characteristics of the fracture surface of (<b>a</b>) pristine, (<b>b</b>) GO-EP/CWF, and (<b>c</b>) GO-CWF/EP matrices at RT [<a href="#B62-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">62</a>]. Copyright 2019 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 54
<p>Schematic diagrams of failure at the interface for (<b>a</b>) pristine, (<b>b</b>) GO-EP/CWF, and (<b>c</b>) GO-CWF/EP matrices [<a href="#B62-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">62</a>]. Copyright 2019 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 55
<p>(<b>a</b>) Scheme for the manufacturing of Fe₃O₄/GO, (<b>b</b>) Scheme for manufacture of Fe₃O₄/GO/CF/EP laminate and image of Fe₃O₄/GO/CF/EP [<a href="#B65-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">65</a>]. Copyright 2018 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 56
<p>Reflected optical microscope pictures of cryogenically cycled CF/EP laminates: (<b>a</b>) CF/pristine EP laminate; (<b>b</b>) CF/EP laminate with 0.5 wt% GO; and (<b>c</b>) CF/EP laminate with 0.5 wt% Fe₃O₄/GO. (<b>d</b>) average crack density for the different systems [<a href="#B65-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">65</a>]. Copyright 2018 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 57
<p>A diagram depicting the crack growth and suppression actions of CF/EP materials adjusted with additives: (<b>a</b>) CF/EP laminate, (<b>b</b>) GO or Fe₃O₄/GO modified CF/EP laminate [<a href="#B65-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">65</a>]. Copyright 2018 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 58
<p>Schematic representation of the procedure used to prepare a EFPS/Nano-SiO₂ EP laminate with CF reinforcement [<a href="#B43-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">43</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 59
<p>Schematic representation of the EFPS/Nano-SiO₂ fabrication process [<a href="#B43-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">43</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 60
<p>(<b>a</b>) Schematic diagram and (<b>b</b>) test picture of the cryogenic tensile testing, (<b>c</b>) schematic diagram and (<b>d</b>) a test picture of the three-point bending testing a cryogenic environment [<a href="#B43-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">43</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 61
<p>At 90 K, CF-reinforced (<b>a</b>) pristine epoxy laminate and (<b>c</b>) EFPS/Nano-SiO₂ epoxy laminate exhibit microfractured morphologies. A diagram depicting the failure mode of CF-reinforced (<b>b</b>) pristine epoxy laminate and (<b>d</b>) EFPS/Nano-SiO₂ epoxy laminate [<a href="#B43-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">43</a>]. Copyright 2020 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 62
<p>Diagram of the preparation process of the modified nano-ZrO₂/EP matrices [<a href="#B73-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">73</a>]. Copyright 2016 RSC.</p> Full article ">Figure 63
<p>Tensile stress–strain diagrams for ZrO₂ treated resin at RT and CT [<a href="#B73-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">73</a>]. Copyright 2016 RSC.</p> Full article ">Figure 64
<p>(<b>a</b>) Method for PDA coating CuO NPs, (<b>b</b>) Illustration of PDA coated CuO dispersed in PDA coated CuO-EP NCs, and (<b>c</b>) Vacuum assisted infusion technique for angle-ply laminates [<a href="#B54-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">54</a>]. Copyright 2021 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 65
<p>(<b>a</b>) Curing network of pristine EP; (<b>b</b>) improved curing network by PDA-coating on nCuO [<a href="#B54-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">54</a>]. Copyright 2021 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 66
<p>Mechanisms of NP debonding, matrix shear banding, and plastic void formation, in modified EP at CT [<a href="#B54-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">54</a>]. Copyright 2021 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 67
<p>The arrangement of ZrW₂O₈ NPs in EP-ZrW₂O₈ NCs. SEM pictures of fracture surfaces of tensile samples at CT with amounts of (<b>a</b>) 1 wt% uncoated, (<b>b</b>) 1 wt% PDA-coated, (<b>c</b>) 4 wt% uncoated, and (<b>d</b>) 8 wt% uncoated ZrW₂O₈ NPs [<a href="#B75-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">75</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 68
<p>Fracture surfaces of the epoxy-ZrW₂O₈ nanocomposites containing (<b>a</b>) 1 wt.% ZrW₂O₈ and (<b>b</b>) 1 wt.% PDA-coated ZrW₂O₈ tested at −196 °C. The blue arrows show the direction of crack growth. The blue arrows show the direction of crack propagation [<a href="#B75-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">75</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 69
<p>An illustration of the primary toughening mechanisms in nanocomposites, which include debonding, crack deflection, fracture pinning, and plastic void expansion [<a href="#B75-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">75</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 70
<p>The effectiveness of ZrW₂O₈ NPs in toughening EP systems was compared to SiO₂ NPs, POSS and rubber NPs at (<b>a</b>) RT and (<b>b</b>) CT [<a href="#B75-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">75</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 71
<p>(<b>a</b>) Preparation procedure and important parameters for CcH₂ storage tank; (<b>b</b>) composite layer design [<a href="#B80-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">80</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 72
<p>Preparation and testing of PEG-modified epoxy [<a href="#B80-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">80</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 73
<p>Mechanical properties of PEG modified epoxy at both RT and CT: (<b>a</b>) Stress-strain curves; (<b>b</b>) Tensile strength and tensile modulus; (<b>c</b>) stress-strain curves; and (<b>d</b>) compressive strength and compressive modulus [<a href="#B80-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">80</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 74
<p>Two possibilities for design for a CcH₂ storage vessel [<a href="#B80-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">80</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 75
<p>Preparation technique for composites with hydrogen barrier properties [<a href="#B84-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">84</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 76
<p>Adhesion testing and structural characterization. (<b>a</b>) A composite of CFs and polyethylene (PE) film. (<b>b</b>) Distinct zones inside the semi-product. (<b>c</b>) A cross-linked network framework. (<b>d</b>) Sandwich construction. (<b>e</b>) Curves for force displacement during adhesion tests. (<b>f</b>) Adhesive force values. (<b>g</b>) Shear interface images at the macroscopic photographs [<a href="#B84-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">84</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 77
<p>Hydrogen-barrier performance testing. (<b>a</b>) Differential pressure technique. (<b>b</b>) Specimen. (<b>c</b>) Cyclical loading curve for cryogenic fatigue. (<b>d</b>) Microcracks. (<b>e</b>) Diffusion and penetration via microcracks [<a href="#B84-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">84</a>]. Copyright 2023 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 78
<p>Sample production process diagram [<a href="#B90-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">90</a>]. Copyright 2024 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 79
<p>Change in the epoxy matrix gas permeability coefficient [<a href="#B90-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">90</a>]. Copyright 2024 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 80
<p>Nanocomposites-modified polymers make gas diffusion more tortuous [<a href="#B90-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">90</a>]. Copyright 2024 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">Figure 81
<p>The types of MMT in epoxy resin and PEG are: (<b>a</b>) in epoxy resin, in the type of agglomeration, intercalation, and exfoliation; (<b>b</b>) in PEG, it is mainly in the type of agglomeration [<a href="#B90-jcs-08-00459" class="html-bibr">90</a>]. Copyright 2024 Elsevier.</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>Phases of experimental plan.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Cladding samples.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Integration of the CNC Optimus and Fronius CMT systems.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Dimensional measurements: (<b>a</b>) welding seams; (<b>b</b>) cladding samples.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Metallography and hardness procedure.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Sketch of machining of tensile samples (<b>a</b>) top view (<b>b</b>) Left view.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Test 5 (1) bead with <span class="html-italic">wf</span> = 4 m/min and <span class="html-italic">ts</span> = 400 mm/min, (2) bead with <span class="html-italic">wf</span> = 5 m/min and <span class="html-italic">ts</span> = 400 mm/min.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Experiments C1.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Average height and width versus cooling time.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Average height and width vs. overlapping (Ov_l).</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Experiment C5, where the first horizontal layer has been facing: (<b>a</b>) Machining of two samples with <span class="html-italic">ts</span> = 400 mm/min, <span class="html-italic">wf</span> = 5 m/min; (<b>b</b>) Second layer of samples C5-5 and C5-6 with same direction; (<b>c</b>) Other two samples with <span class="html-italic">ts</span> = 400 mm/min, <span class="html-italic">wf</span> = 5 m/min; (<b>d</b>) Second layer of samples C5-9 and C5-10 with cross layer direction.</p> Full article ">Figure 11 Cont.
<p>Experiment C5, where the first horizontal layer has been facing: (<b>a</b>) Machining of two samples with <span class="html-italic">ts</span> = 400 mm/min, <span class="html-italic">wf</span> = 5 m/min; (<b>b</b>) Second layer of samples C5-5 and C5-6 with same direction; (<b>c</b>) Other two samples with <span class="html-italic">ts</span> = 400 mm/min, <span class="html-italic">wf</span> = 5 m/min; (<b>d</b>) Second layer of samples C5-9 and C5-10 with cross layer direction.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Dimensional results of experiments C4 and C5: (<b>a</b>) Average heights and widths versus direction of layers; (<b>b</b>) Average heights and widths versus facing.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Micrographs of weld beads: Microstructure of the base material and heat affected zone. General view at 500× and detail of different zones at 1000×.</p> Full article ">Figure 14
<p>Microstructure of the austenitic weld microstructure (<b>right</b>) and the acicular microstructure detected in the interphase (<b>left</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 15
<p>Hardness of HV0.1 versus z (mm).</p> Full article ">Figure 16
<p>(<b>a</b>) Section of experiment C5 with <span class="html-italic">wf</span> = 4m/min; (<b>b</b>) macro-photograph of experiment C5 with linear disposition and intermediate machining; (<b>c</b>) micrograph of contact zone 316LSI and S275JR.</p> Full article ">Figure 17
<p>Machining of tensile samples and details of section of ED-2 and M-3.</p> Full article ">Figure 18
<p>Results tensile test: (<b>a</b>) ED-2 test with fracture zone; (<b>b</b>) Measuring pore ED-2 with fracture zone; (<b>c</b>) M-3 test; (<b>d</b>) Measuring pore M-3.</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>The impact of expandable graphite (EG)–phosphorous flame retardants (FRs) synergism on the limiting oxygen index (LOI) increase (based on the literature data: <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i001"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i001" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i001.png"/></span> [<a href="#B59-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">59</a>], <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i002"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i002" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i002.png"/></span> <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i003"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i003" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i003.png"/></span> <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i004"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i004" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i004.png"/></span> [<a href="#B53-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">53</a>], <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i005"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i005" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i005.png"/></span> <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i006"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i006" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i006.png"/></span> [<a href="#B33-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">33</a>], <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i007"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i007" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i007.png"/></span> [<a href="#B60-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">60</a>], <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i008"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i008" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i008.png"/></span> [<a href="#B61-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">61</a>], and <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i009"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i009" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i009.png"/></span> <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i010"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i010" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i010.png"/></span> [<a href="#B55-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">55</a>]), peak heat release rate (pHRR) decrease (based on the literature data: <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i001"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i001" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i001.png"/></span> [<a href="#B53-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">53</a>], <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i002"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i002" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i002.png"/></span> [<a href="#B61-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">61</a>], and <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i003"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i003" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i003.png"/></span> [<a href="#B55-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">55</a>]), and total heat release (THR) decrease (based on the literature data: <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i001"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i001" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i001.png"/></span> [<a href="#B53-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">53</a>], <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i002"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i002" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i002.png"/></span> [<a href="#B61-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">61</a>], and <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i003"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i003" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i003.png"/></span> [<a href="#B55-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">55</a>]) for polyurethane (PU) foams. The following abbreviations were used: APP—ammonium polyphosphate, BDMPP—bis( [dimethoxyphosphoryl] methyl) phenyl phosphate, DMMP—dimethyl methyl phosphonate, EG—expandable graphite, TEP—triethylphosphate, and Zr-AMP—nano zirconium amino-tris-(methylenephosphonate).</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Chemical structures of surface modifiers of applied nanoclays.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>The correlation between FPI and FRI values calculated for the analyzed composites, as well as for the flexible foamed PU/GTR composites reported in our previous works: <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i011"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i011" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i011.png"/></span> [<a href="#B50-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">50</a>], Kliknij lub naciśnij tutaj, aby wprowadzić tekst. <span class="html-fig-inline" id="materials-17-05344-i012"><img alt="Materials 17 05344 i012" src="/materials/materials-17-05344/article_deploy/html/images/materials-17-05344-i012.png"/></span> [<a href="#B51-materials-17-05344" class="html-bibr">51</a>].</p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>Biomaterial evolution in bone repair and regeneration.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Formulation of PLGA-CIP and PLGA-CIP implantable local release systems.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>FTIR spectra of (<b>A</b>) PLGA-CIP and PLGA–CIP films deposited by MAPLE on titanium supports; (<b>B</b>) CIP; (<b>C</b>) PLGA.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Volume distribution of PLGA-CIP (500 rpm) (<b>A</b>); number distribution of PLGA-CIP (500 rpm) (<b>B</b>); volume distribution of PLGA-CIP (1500 rpm) (<b>C</b>); number distribution of PLGA-CIP (1500 rpm) (<b>D</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 4 Cont.
<p>Volume distribution of PLGA-CIP (500 rpm) (<b>A</b>); number distribution of PLGA-CIP (500 rpm) (<b>B</b>); volume distribution of PLGA-CIP (1500 rpm) (<b>C</b>); number distribution of PLGA-CIP (1500 rpm) (<b>D</b>).</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Scanning electron microscopy images of (<b>A</b>) PLGA-CIP (1500 rpm) and (<b>B</b>) PLGA-CIP (500 rpm).</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>CIP release from the control sample: mechanical mixture CIP:HA (<span class="html-italic">w</span>:<span class="html-italic">w</span>) (25:75).</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>CIP release from PLGA-CIP scaffolds.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Release profile of CIP from implantable PLGA-CIP LRS.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Korsmeyer–Peppas model for the mechanism of drug release.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Higuchi release model or the mechanism of drug release.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Antibacterial activity of scaffolds over tested germs.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>The zone of inhibition obtained for (<b>A</b>) PLGA-CIP scaffolds on Staphylococcus aureus; (<b>B</b>) PLGA-CIP scaffolds (1500 rpm) on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus using the disk diffusion agar method.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>The zone of inhibition obtained for implantable PLGA-CIP LRS (1500 rpm) on <span class="html-italic">Staphylococcus aureus.</span></p> Full article ">

Figure 1
<p>Methodology.</p> Full article ">Figure 2
<p>Eggshell filler processing.</p> Full article ">Figure 3
<p>Ball milling.</p> Full article ">Figure 4
<p>Tensile testing in UTM.</p> Full article ">Figure 5
<p>Tensile test specimens of (<b>a</b>) unfilled, (<b>b</b>) unhatched raw eggshell-filled, (<b>c</b>) unhatched boiled eggshell-filled, (<b>d</b>) post-hatched eggshell-filled composite variants.</p> Full article ">Figure 6
<p>Flexural strength testing in UTM.</p> Full article ">Figure 7
<p>Flexural test specimens of (<b>a</b>) unfilled, (<b>b</b>) unhatched raw eggshell-filled, (<b>c</b>) unhatched boiled eggshell-filled, (<b>d</b>) post-hatched eggshell-filled composite variants.</p> Full article ">Figure 8
<p>Comparison of tensile strengths.</p> Full article ">Figure 9
<p>Comparison of tensile modulus.</p> Full article ">Figure 10
<p>Comparison of tensile stress–strain variation.</p> Full article ">Figure 11
<p>Comparison of flexural strength.</p> Full article ">Figure 12
<p>Comparison of flexural modulus.</p> Full article ">Figure 13
<p>Comparison of flexural stress–strain variation.</p> Full article ">Figure 14
<p>SEM images of (<b>a</b>) unobstructed crack propagation in unfilled composite; (<b>b</b>) meagre interfacial bonding of fibre and matrix in unfilled composite; (<b>c</b>) superior interfacial bonding and crack deviation in unhatched raw eggshell-filled composite; (<b>d</b>) crack deviation in unhatched raw eggshell-filled composite; (<b>e</b>) superior interfacial bonding in boiled eggshell-filled composite; (<b>f</b>) crack deviation in boiled eggshell-filled composite; (<b>g</b>) crack deviation in post-hatched eggshell-filled composite; (<b>h</b>) crack deviation in post-hatched composites.</p> Full article ">