Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Hunter, Bryan Keeney

Publications and source records attributed to Hunter, Bryan Keeney.

4 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Effects of Structure and Filler on Mechanical Properties of Direct Ink Write Pads

Direct ink write (DIW) is an extrusion-based additive manufacturing (AM) technique that enables superior repeatability, property tuning, and material customization compared to conventional manufacturing techniques. In this research, DIW is used to print silicone foams that must accommodate the thermal expansion of other parts. This expansion requires the material to compress and subsequently recover. Thus, a key performance metric is reducing “compression set” or deformation retained after the material is compressed. For this study, a silicone resin was compounded with a getter material, 1,4 bis(phenylethynyl)benzene (DEB) mixed with carbon-supported palladium (Pd) and printed in a variety of lattice structures. The effects of the filler and print structure on compression set were evaluated. In these experiments, 0.5-inch diameter coupons were compressed to 75% their original height for 22 hours at 70 °C, and the change in height calculated at intervals between 30 minutes and 24 hours post-decompression. The unfilled pad with skin layers had the best compression set at 0.7% ± 0.1%, followed by the unfilled pad with no skins at 1.5% ± 0.1%. As the number of filled layers increased, compression set performance degraded. The pad with filled skin layers and all filled layers had a compression set of 7.0% ± 0.3%. Additionally, the reaction extent of DEB was found to increase compression set, possibly due to the diffusion of DEB to the surface at elevated temperatures. Imaging reveals extensive crystallization at the surface. These investigations show that a non-reinforcing filler will increase compression set but that print structure can mitigate this effect.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Optimizing Aluminum Bonding: Exploring Surface Roughness and Contact Angle Effects through Plasma and Acid Etching Contrasts.

The use of adhesives to replace traditional techniques like welding and riveting has been on the rise in various industries as increasingly complex geometries and situations for bonding is required. It’s well known in the scientific community that an adhesive bond is only as efficient as the surface preparation used beforehand. Plasma treatments have been shown to gently clean the surface by only removing the top-most layer from the adherend and “charging” the surface instead of berating it. Whereas chemical treatments “etch” the surface in hopes of increasing surface area by increasing surface roughness. This method can be difficult to control quantitatively and can generate waste leading to serious environmental concerns. This study aims to address the encountered differences between plasma treatments and acid etching on aluminum substrates for adhesive bonding. Treating the surface of adherends plays a crucial role in promoting a good bond between adhesive and adherend. In this study, the effects of plasma and acid treatments are categorized using surface roughness measurements as well as contact angle which have been shown to correlate to mechanical strength. When evaluating different surface treatments, it is notable to mention that not only surface roughness and contact angle play a role in determining which method is most effective but also the consequences of the treatment itself. It was found that although chemical etching was the most effective in increasing roughness and decreasing contact angle, it generates a large amount of waste and is not sustainable compared to plasma work which uses a renewable process. The results from this work provide a deeper understanding of the relationship between surface treatments and surface roughness/contact angle and how this relates to a stronger adhesive bond

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2024

Optimizing Aluminum Bonding: Exploring Surface Roughness and Contact Angle Effects through Plasma and Acid Etching Contrasts

The use of adhesives to replace traditional techniques like welding and riveting has been on the rise in various industries as increasingly complex geometries and situations for bonding is required. It’s well known in the scientific community that an adhesive bond is only as efficient as the surface preparation used beforehand. Plasma treatments have been shown to gently clean the surface by only removing the top-most layer from the adherend and “charging” the surface instead of berating it. Whereas chemical treatments “etch” the surface in hopes of increasing surface area by increasing surface roughness. This method can be difficult to control quantitatively and can generate waste leading to serious environmental concerns. This study aims to address the encountered differences between plasma treatments and acid etching on aluminum substrates for adhesive bonding. Treating the surface of adherends plays a crucial role in promoting a good bond between adhesive and adherend. In this study, the effects of plasma and acid treatments are categorized using surface roughness measurements as well as contact angle which have been shown to correlate to mechanical strength. When evaluating different surface treatments, it is notable to mention that not only surface roughness and contact angle play a role in determining which method is most effective but also the consequences of the treatment itself. It was found that although chemical etching was the most effective in increasing roughness and decreasing contact angle, it generates a large amount of waste and is not sustainable compared to plasma work which uses a renewable process. The results from this work provide a deeper understanding of the relationship between surface treatments and surface roughness/contact angle and how this relates to a stronger adhesive bond.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗