In this paper, poly(glycolic acid–co-DL–lactic acid) (PGDLLA)/poly(ɛ-caprolactone) (PCL) incompatible nanocomposites were combined with multiscale modeling (MSM) in a ratio of 80/20. Since the behavior and mechanical properties of blends depend significantly on the interphase region, the compatibilizer poly(l,l-lactic acid–co-ɛ-caprolactone) (P(lLA-co-ɛ-CL)) was used to improve compatibility and graphene oxide (GO) was used to increase the interphase strength of PGDLLA matrix/PCL. This work was done by mixing solvent to achieve the optimum disperse of GO in the matrix. The investigation of interfacial phenomenon by the theoretical interfacial models is important. Under the assumption of constant modulus and elastic deformation in the zero interface region, the predictions in this region are more unreliable when the calculations of experimental mechanical properties are analyzed in detail. In this study, PGDLLA/P(lLA-co-ɛ-CL)/PCL compounds were compared with the MSM approach to predict the plastic deformation in the stress–strain behavior. In contrast to the hypothesis that a simple look at the interphase area in nanocomposites, a finite element code is proposed to evaluate the efficiency of the interphase area. Both experimental results and FEM analysis showed that Young’s modulus increases by incorporating GO into GO/PGDLLA/P(lLA-co-ɛ-CL)/PCL nanocomposites; the amount of increase for incorporating 1 phr GO is about 61%.

Graphene oxide-enhanced multiscale modeling of PGDLLAP(lLA-co-ɛ-CL)PCL interfacial debonding: investigating rheological and mechanical properties, compatibility, and morphology
    Abstract
    1 Introduction
    2 Theoretical background
    3 Numerical simulation
        3.1 Stress–strain prediction
    4 Experiment
        4.1 Materials
        4.2 Preparation PGDLLAP(lLA-co-ɛ-CL)PCL blends
        4.3 Characterization techniques
            4.3.1 Brabender
            4.3.2 Mechanical testing
            4.3.3 Surface characterization
            4.3.4 Rheological measurement
            4.3.5 Dynamic mechanical thermal analysis (DMTA)
    5 Results and discussion
        5.1 DMTA characterization
        5.2 Rheological properties
        5.3 Phase morphology
        5.4 Mechanical properties
    6 Conclusions
    Acknowledgements 
    References

• Ehsan Vafa(Department of Medical Nanotechnology, School of Advanced Medical Sciences and Technologies, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran)
• Mohammad Javad Azizli(Department of Medical Nanotechnology, School of Advanced Medical Sciences and Technologies, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran, Sazeh Paidar Elahie Company (LINKRAN Industrial Group), P.O. Box: 1447813184, Tehran, Iran) Corresponding author
• Mohammad Ali Amani(Department of Medical Nanotechnology, School of Advanced Medical Sciences and Technologies, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran)
• Mohammad Barghamadi(Department of Rubber, Iran Polymer and Petrochemical Institute, P. O. Box: 14965‑115, Tehran, Iran)
• Somayeh Parham(Research Institute of Petroleum Industry, P.O. Box: 14857‑33111, Tehran, Iran)
• Katayoon Rezaeeparto(Research Institute of Petroleum Industry, P.O. Box: 14857‑33111, Tehran, Iran)
• Mohammad Bagher Zarei(Pars Special Economic Energy Zone, Persian Gulf Mobin Energy Company, Asalouyeh Port, P. O. Box: 75391‑418, Bushehr, Iran)
• Hesam Kamyab(UTE University, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Architecture Department, TCEMC Investigation Group, Calle Rumipamba S/N and Bourgeois, Quito, Ecuador, Department of Biomaterials, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Chennai 600077, India)
• Shreeshivadasan Chelliapan(Department of Smart Engineering and Advanced Technology, Faculty of Artificial Intelligence, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia)