The influence of vacancy defects on the Young’s modulus of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) is studied. Firstly, the Young’s moduli of nondefected CNTs are predicted using two different nonlinear force fields. The stress–strain curves of CNTs are obtained up to the failure points and corresponding Young’s modulus and failure strain are reported. Then, the influence of CNTs diameter, chirality, and length on the results is extensively analyzed. Secondly, the influence of vacancy defects on the Young’s modulus of CNT is evaluated using molecular dynamics simulation. Both numbers and locations of defects are treated as random parameters. Therefore, stochastic modeling procedure is employed. The Young’s modulus of defected CNTs are obtained and compared with nondefected ones. The obtained results are compared with available date in literature. It is revealed that nanoscale continuum modeling which is used as a compromise in modeling of nanostructure underestimates the reduction level in the Young’s modulus of defected CNTs. A linear reduction trend is observed for the Young’s modulus of defected CNTs with respect to the number of vacancy defects. Moreover, the locations of defects play an important role in defining the degree to which the Young’s modulus decreases.
Hernandez-PerezAAvilesF. Modeling the influence of interphase on the elastic properties of CNT. Comput Mater Sci2010; 47: 926–933.
6.
NeddlemanABordersTLBrinsonLC. Effect of an interphase region on debonding of a CNT reinforced polymer composites. Compos Sci Technol2010; 70: 2207–2215.
7.
RafieeRMoghadamRM. On the modeling of carbon nanotubes: A critical review. Compos Part B: Eng2014; 56: 435–449.
AgrawalPMSudalayandiBSRaffLM. A comparison of different methods of Young’s modulus determination for SWCNT using MDS. Comput Mater Sci2006; 38: 271–281.
10.
GhavamianARahmandoustMOchsnerA. A numerical evaluation of the influence of defects on the elastic modulus of single and multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Comput Mater Sci2012; 62: 110–116.
11.
ChawlM. Influence of vacancy defects on the mechanical behavior and properties of carbon nanotubes. Procedia Eng2011; 10: 1579–1584.
12.
JengYRTsaiPCFangTH. Effects of temperature and vacancy defects on tensile deformation of single-walled carbon nanotubes. J Phys Chem Solids2004; 65: 1849–1856.
13.
MielkeSLTroyaDZhangS. The role of vacancy defects and holes in the fracture of carbon nanotubes. Chem Phys Lett2004; 390: 413–420.
14.
SharmaKSaxenaKKShuklaM. Effect of multiple Stone-Wales and vacancy defects on the mechanical behavior of carbon nanotubes using molecular dynamics. Procedia Eng2012; 38: 3373–3380.
15.
YuanJLiewKM. Effects of vacancy defect reconstruction on the elastic properties of carbon nanotubes. Carbon2009; 47: 1526–1533.
16.
ChengHCLiuYLHsuYC. Atomistic-continuum modeling for mechanical properties of single-walled carbon nanotubes. Int J Solids Struct2009; 46: 1695–1704.
17.
ChandrasekarKMukherjeeS. Atomistic-continuum and ab initio estimation of the elastic moduli of single-walled carbon nanotubes. Comput Mater Sci2007; 40: 147–158.
18.
MylvaganamKZhangLC. Important issues in a molecular dynamics simulation for characterising the mechanical properties of carbon nanotubes. Carbon2004; 42: 2025–2032.
19.
RobertsonDGBrennerDWMintmireJW. Energies of nanoscale graphitic tubule. Physics1992; 45: 12592–12595.
20.
CornwellCFWilleLR. Elastic properties of single-walled carbon nanotubes in compression. Solid State Commun1997; 101: 558–558.
ZhangHWWangJBGuoX. Predicting the elastic properties of single-walled carbon nanotubes. Mech Phys Solids2005; 53: 1929–1950.
23.
TalukdarKMitraAK. Comparative MD simulation study on the mechanical properties of a zigzag single-walled carbon nanotube in the presence of Stone-Thrower-Wales defects. Compos Struct2010; 92: 1701–1705.
24.
LiewKMHeXQWongCH. On the study of elastic and plastic properties of multi-walled carbon nanotubes under axial tension using molecular dynamics simulation. Acta Mater2004; 52: 2521–2527.
25.
XingBWChunZCZhaoCW. Simulation of Young’s modulus of single-walled carbon nanotubes by molecular dynamics. Physica B2004; 352: 156–163.
26.
MeoMRossiM. A molecular-mechanics based finite element model for strength prediction of single wall carbon nanotubes. Mater Sci Eng2007; 454: 170–177.
27.
SaxenaKKLalA. Comparative molecular dynamics simulation study of mechanical properties of carbon nanotubes with number of Stone-Wales and vacancy defects. Procedia Eng2012; 38: 2347–2355.
28.
HernandezEGozeCBernierP. Elastic properties of single-wall nanotubes. Appl Phys1999; 68: 287–292.
29.
PortalDSArtachoESolerJM. Ab initio structural, elastic, and vibrational properties of carbon nanotubes. Phys Rev1999; 59: 12678–12688.
30.
MolinaJMSavinskySSKhokhriakovNV. A tight-binding model for calculations of structures and properties of graphitic nanotubes. J Chem Phys1996; 104: 4652–4656.
31.
GozeCVaccariniLHenardL. Elastic and mechanical properties of carbon nanotubes. Synth Metal1999; 103: 2500–2501.
32.
VaccariniLGozeCHenrardL. Mechanical and electronic properties of carbon and boron–nitride nanotubes. Carbon2000; 38: 1681–1690.
33.
XinZJianjunZCanOYZ. Strain energy and Young’s modulus of single-wall carbon nanotubes calculated from electronic energy-band theory. Phys Rev2000; 62: 13692–13696.
34.
LierGVAlsenoyCVDorenVV. Ab initio study of the elastic properties of single-walled carbon nanotubes and grapheme. Chem Phys Lett2000; 326: 181–185.
35.
KudinKNScuseriaGEYakobsonBI. F, BN, and C nanoshell elasticity from ab initio computations. Phys Rev2001; 64: 235–306.
36.
CaiJWangYDWangCY. Effect of ending surface on energy and Young’s modulus of singlewalled carbon nanotubes studied using linear scaling quantum mechanical method. Physica B2009; 404: 3930–3934.
37.
ShokriehMMRafieeR. A review of the mechanical properties of isolated carbon nanotube composites. Mech Compos Mater2010; 46: 155–172.
38.
FefeyEGMohanRKelkarA. Computational study of the effect of carbon vacancy defects on the Young’s modulus of (6, 6) single wall carbon nanotube. Mater Sci Eng2011; 176: 693–700.
39.
Rafii-TabarH. Computational physics of carbon nanotubes, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
40.
CornellWDCieplakPBaylyCI. A second generation force field for the simulation of proteins, nucleic acids, and organic molecules. Am Chem Soc1995; 117: 5179–5197.
41.
TersoffJ. Empirical interatomic potential for carbon, with applications to amorphous carbon. Phys Rev Lett1988; 61: 2879–2882.
42.
BrennerDWShenderovaOAHarrisonsJA. A second-generation reactive empirical bond order (REBO) potential energy expression for hydrocarbons. J Phys: Condens Matter2002; 14: 783–802.
LAMMPS User’s Manual, Sandia Corporation. Jan 2013 Version.
45.
XiaoJRGamaBAGillespieJW. An analytical molecular structural mechanics model for the mechanical properties of carbon nanotubes. Int J Solids Struct2005; 42: 3075–3092.
46.
TalukdarKAgrawalRMitraAK. Dependence of mechanical characteristics and the fracture and buckling behavior of single-walled carbon nanotubes on their geometry. New Carbon Mater2011; 26: 408–415.
DemczykBGWangYMCumingsJ. Direct mechanical measurement of the tensile strength and elastic modulus of multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Mater Sci Eng2002; 334: 173–178.
49.
RafieeRPouraziziR. Evaluating the influence of defects on the Young’s modulus of carbon nanotubes using stochastic modeling. Mater Res2014; 17: 758–766.
50.
Chen L, Zhao Q, Gong Z, et al. The effects of different defects on the elastic constants of single-walled carbon nanotubes. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE international conference on nano/micro engineered and molecular systems, Xiamen, China, 2010.
