4.1 Article

EFFECT OF THE NANOFILLER SHAPE ON THE CONDUCTIVE NETWORK FORMATION OF POLYMER NANOCOMPOSITES VIA A COARSE-GRAINED SIMULATION

Journal

RUBBER CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 91, Issue 4, Pages 757-766

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC INC
DOI: 10.5254/rct.18.81546

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21704003]
  2. National 973 Basic Research Program of China [2015CB654700(2015CB654704)]
  3. Foundation for Innovative Research Groups of the NSF of China [51221002]
  4. Beijing University of Chemical Technology for excellent introduced talents [buctrc201710]
  5. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [JD1811]
  6. CHEMCLOUDCOMPUTING of Beijing University of Chemical Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It is very important to improve the electrical conductivity of polymer nanocomposites, which can widen their application. The effect of the nanofiller shape on the relationship between the nanofiller microstructure and the conductive probability of the nanofiller filled polymer nanocomposites (PNCs) has been investigated in detail by employing a coarse-grained molecular dynamics simulation. Four kinds of nanofiller shapes are considered: rod filler, Y filler, X filler, and sphere filler. First, the mean square radius of gyration gradually decreases from rod filler, Y filler, X filler, to sphere filler, which reflects the highest aspect ratio for rod filler. Meanwhile, the dispersion state of the nanofiller is relatively uniform in the matrix. The conductive probability (denoted by the formation probability of the conductive network) is adopted to stand for the conductive property. The results show that the conductive probability gradually decreases from rod filler, Y filler, X filler, to sphere filler, which is attributed to their gradually decreased size. In summary, the nanofiller shape affects the electric conductive property of PNCs.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available