Corrigendum: Dynamic micromechanical measurement of the flexural modulus of micrometre-sized diameter single natural fibres using a vibrating microcantilever technique (2024 J. Micromech. Microeng. 34 015009)

Ali Reda; Thomas Dargent; Steve Arscott

doi:10.1088/1361-6439/ad3659

Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering

Corrigendum • The following article is Free article

Corrigendum: Dynamic micromechanical measurement of the flexural modulus of micrometre-sized diameter single natural fibres using a vibrating microcantilever technique (2024 J. Micromech. Microeng.34 015009)

Ali Reda¹, Thomas Dargent¹ and Steve Arscott^2,1

Published 28 March 2024 • © 2024 IOP Publishing Ltd
Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, Volume 34, Number 4 Citation Ali Reda et al 2024 J. Micromech. Microeng. 34 049501 DOI 10.1088/1361-6439/ad3659

Download Article PDF

This is a correction for 2024 J. Micromech. Microeng. 34 015009

Article metrics

130 Total downloads

Submit

Submit to this Journal

Permissions

Get permission to re-use this article

Author e-mails

steve.arscott@univ-lille.fr

Author affiliations

¹ University of Lille, CNRS, Centrale Lille, University Polytechnique Hauts-de-France, UMR 8520-IEMN, F-59000 Lille, France

Author notes

² Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed.

ORCID iDs

Ali Reda https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9555-1031

Thomas Dargent https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0437-0231

Steve Arscott https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9938-2683

Dates

Received 12 March 2024
Accepted 21 March 2024
Published 28 March 2024

Peer review information

Method: Single-anonymous
Screened for originality? Yes

Buy this article in print

Journal RSS

Abstract

This corrigendum corrects typographic errors in the article. The corrections do not change the conclusions of the article.

Export citation and abstract BibTeX RIS

Previous article in issue

The authors have realized that typographical errors occurred when compiling tables 1 and 2 of the article. The correct versions of tables 1 and 2 are as follows:

Table 1. Summary of experiments.

Sample	${d_o}$ (µm)	${d_i}$ (µm)	${f_{air}}$ (Hz)	L (µm)	${E_f}$ (GPa)
1	46.56	5.59	385.56	7625.0	15.82
2	55.45	6.65	362.23	8862.5	17.97
3	20.08	2.41	180.60	8517.1	29.05
4	36.91	4.43	190.03	10 145.7	19.17
5	26.14	3.14	214.97	7900.1	17.98
6	24.55	2.94	302.55	6828.2	22.53
7	30.25	3.63	326.43	7748.8	28.65
8	40.05	4.80	348.73	7509.2	16.45
9	27.54	3.30	338.19	6988.9	24.56
10	22.16	2.66	210.14	8167.3	27.31
11	24.59	2.95	148.98	9943.6	24.49
12	20.93	2.51	243.07	7547.1	29.86
13	33.92	4.07	160.83	9980.7	15.23
14	25.03	3.00	313.69	7629.2	36.32
15	28.40	3.41	111.47	10 852.3	14.58
16	35.95	4.31	501.98	6849.6	29.29
17	25.07	3.01	276.07	7921.3	32.58
18	33.20	3.98	214.83	8706.4	16.42

Table 2. Summary of results. $d_o^{range}$ is the outer diameter range, $E_f^{ave}$ is the average flexural modulus, and S.D. is the standard deviation of the results.

$d_o^{range}$ (µm)	$E_f^{ave}$ (GPa)	S.D.
20.08–55.45	23.24	6.78

This value of the average flexural modulus agrees very well with the value obtained using a complimentary static bending method recently reported by the authors [1]. The flax density used for the computation is based on measured values found in the literature [2].

For completeness, the corrected figure 10 is as follows:

These corrections do not change the conclusions of the article.

Please wait… references are loading.