Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Jamrozy, Michael

  • Google
  • 1
  • 6
  • 16

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2017Comparative characterization of quasi-static and cyclic deformation behavior of glass fiber-reinforced polyurethane (GFR-PU) and epoxy (GFR-EP)16citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Niedermeier, Michael
1 / 2 shared
Mueller, Yves
1 / 2 shared
Frieling, Gerrit
1 / 1 shared
Huelsbusch, Daniel
1 / 1 shared
Barandun, Gion Andrea
1 / 4 shared
Walther, Frank
1 / 70 shared
Chart of publication period
2017

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Niedermeier, Michael
  • Mueller, Yves
  • Frieling, Gerrit
  • Huelsbusch, Daniel
  • Barandun, Gion Andrea
  • Walther, Frank
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Comparative characterization of quasi-static and cyclic deformation behavior of glass fiber-reinforced polyurethane (GFR-PU) and epoxy (GFR-EP)

  • Niedermeier, Michael
  • Mueller, Yves
  • Frieling, Gerrit
  • Jamrozy, Michael
  • Huelsbusch, Daniel
  • Barandun, Gion Andrea
  • Walther, Frank
Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Glass fiber-reinforced polymers (GFRP) are highly suitable for use in transportation industry in order to achieve the targets of energy and resource efficiency. In this context, due to its high specific strength, GFR-epoxy (GFR-EP) has already been implemented in a wide range of applications. However, in cases of energy efficiency and damage tolerance, GFR-EP shows disadvantages compared to GFR-polyurethane (GFR-PU). The aim of this study is the comparative characterization of the quasi-static and cyclic deformation behavior of GFR-PU and GFR-EP with similar layer setup. The mechanical properties have been investigated in instrumented tensile, interlaminar shear strength and compression after impact tests. In addition, the tests were combined with varying temperatures (−30 °C, RT, +70 °C) with respect to aerospace applications to determine the material property development under low and elevated temperatures. In cyclic investigations, the fatigue properties have been estimated by resource-efficient multiple step tests and validated in constant amplitude tests. Hysteresis and temperature measurements were applied in order to investigate the damage processes. It could be shown that polyurethane exhibits improved damage tolerance by significantly reducing delamination area under impact loading, whereas epoxy leads to optimized properties under elevated temperature. Furthermore, epoxy generally underlines higher capabilities under cyclic loading, which is due to void content of polyurethane.</jats:p>

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • polymer
  • glass
  • glass
  • strength
  • fatigue
  • impact test
  • void