Fig. 4: Properties and fracture mechanism of SPS-sintered samples.
From: Graphene–amorphous carbon with interwoven networks for enhanced strength
a Density comparison. b Comparison of flexural strength and compressive strength. c Comparison of elastic modulus and hardness. d Comparison of electrical conductivity. e In-situ SEM micro-pillar compression stress-strain curve of the PG-900-s sample, with insets showing the sample’s state before and after compression. f In-situ TEM tensile stress-strain curve of the PG-900-s sample, with insets showing the sample’s state before and after tensile testing. g–i Fracture surface morphology, side view, and enlarged view of the blue box in h of PG-900-s. j–l Fracture surface morphology, side view and enlarged view of the blue box in k of PG-1400-s. The error bars in a–d represent individual deviations from three parallel measurements, with data presented as mean values ± individual deviations. Each experiment in Figures g–l was independently repeated three times with similar results. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
