ADVANCED MATERIALS & PROCESSES | JULY/AUGUST 2024 27 and specific modulus compared to the control laminate, at 37.0% and 30.9%, respectively. Characterization indicated successful surface modification with an increase of functional groups and oxygen concentration due to irradiation in open air, improving both wettability and interfacial bonding. These improvements led to significantly greater mechanical properties compared to traditional CF composites (Fig. 4). Manufacturing of these laminates was also shown to be scalable, increasing this material’s potential for use in aerospace applications. TAKING INITIATIVE Over the course of seven years, US-COMP had to evolve to achieve success in its mission[7]. Their organizational evolution teaches the importance of effective teaming, collaboration, and leadership for a large-scale MGIstyle research approach. The institute believes their path can serve as a model for future such projects. Initially, the institute’s teams were organized by discipline to develop the fundamental tools required for eventual materials production. After three years, they shifted into a collaborative Fig. 5 — Evolution of ultra-strong composites by computational design team structure[7]. team structure to integrate those tools and reach their overall project goals (Fig. 5). The new teams were comprised of all stakeholders (academic, industrial, and national laboratory) with common goals, regardless of discipline specialization. For example, the collaborative team for “modeling-driven improvement of CNT composite materials” included multiscale modelers, composite manufacturing experts, the CNT yarn manufacturer, and NASA researchers. This team worked together to better understand the mechanical failure characteristics of the composites and to thereby suggest improvements to manufacturing techniques for improving composite toughness. Due to the mixed priorities and goals of all stakeholders, effective collaboration within US-COMP was required to strike a balance. In the first three years, fundamental research and a proliferation of journal papers were the main outputs of US-COMP. Later, the focus shifted into use-driven research such as manufacturing-level improvements and broader partner base engagement. Collaboration between stakeholders provided mutual benefits to all. For example, industry partners directly involved in tool development and tool integration phases were able to make manufacturing parameter changes on the fly, saving them from pursuing synthesis pathways costing significantly more time and money. In turn, the industrial partners provided the academic partners with guidance in modeling parameters highly relevant to materials manufacturing. Facilitating conversation at all levels of the institute proved to be perhaps the most important element of effective leadership within US-COMP. By consistently prioritizing facilitating team discussions, providing higher-level project guidance, and fully under- standing the progress and needs of each project, the US-COMP leadership team ensured overall progress toward program goals. The leadership team acknowledged that students were the critical driver of overall success. The institute served as an exceptional opportunity for students to work closely with researchers and students from different disciplines, research culture environments, and physical locations. Perhaps the most transformative collaborations were between students on opposite sides of the computational/
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTYyMzk3NQ==