Science Advances
Supplementary Materials
The PDF file includes:
- Supplementary Discussion
- Fig. S1. Surface modification of GN and FTIR spectrum results.
- Fig. S2. SEM images of fracture surfaces of the pure MJ polymer and MJ/GNs composites with rGNs and aGNs without and with surface modification, respectively.
- Fig. S3. Schematic diagram and optical microscopic images show the alignment of GNs under the electric field.
- Fig. S4. Picture of the natural nacre and SEM images.
- Fig. S5. Sliced patterns of nacre model and SEM results of the 3D-printed nacre.
- Fig. S6. Comparison of fracture surfaces of the natural nacre with the 3D-printed nacre.
- Fig. S7. Changes of cure depth with the fraction of GNs.
- Fig. S8. Demonstration of the bonding between the MJ polymer matrix and GN fillers.
- Fig. S9. Crack deflection and the brick-and-mortar structure in the natural nacre and the 3D-printed nacre.
- Fig. S10. A comparison of fracture behavior of the 3D-printed nacre and the natural nacre.
- Fig. S11. The schematic diagram shows the drop-tower impact test setup for 3D printed helmet with rGNs and aGNs.
- Fig. S12. The standard three-point bending tests were performed to study the flexural strength of the 3D-printed structures.
- Fig. S13. The setup to test the resistance change of the 3D-printed helmet during compression.
- Fig. S14. A comparison of the resistance changes of the 3D-printed helmets with different loadings of rGNs and aGNs during compression.
- Fig. S15. Illustration of the microstructure of the 3D-printed nacre with rGNs and aGNs.
- Fig. S16. The calculation of the interconnection of GNs in 3D-printed structures.
- Table S1. Comparison of alignment of fillers in polymer-based composites using different methods.
- Table S2. Comparison of densities, shape complexity, and electrical conductivity of nacre-inspired structures fabricated using different methods.
- References (49–60)
Other Supplementary Material for this manuscript includes the following:
Files in this Data Supplement: