4.7 Article

Estimation of average contact number of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) in polymer nanocomposites to optimize the electrical conductivity

Journal

ENGINEERING WITH COMPUTERS
Volume 38, Issue SUPPL 1, Pages 243-253

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00366-020-01153-1

Keywords

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs); Polymer nanocomposites; Contact number; Tunneling effect

Funding

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2020R1A2B5B02002203]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper suggests an equation to calculate the average contact number of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) in CNT-reinforced polymer nanocomposites (PCNT) and explores the various parameters that affect the contact number. The results show that a dense interphase, a high fraction of networked CNTs, reedy and short CNTs, low CNT surface energy, high polymer surface energy, low tunneling distance, and small contact diameter increase the contact number and improve the conductivity.
The present paper suggests an equation for the average contact number of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) in CNT-reinforced polymer nanocomposites (PCNT) by two developed equations for electrical conductivity. Several novel parameters in PCNT such as CNT size, CNT concentration, network fraction, interphase depth, tunneling effect, and CNT wettability by the polymer medium are considered to define the average contact number (m). m is calculated for some samples and the variation of m is explored over a range of parameters' values. The results show that dense interphase, high fraction of networked CNTs, reedy and short CNTs, low CNT surface energy, high polymer surface energy, low tunneling distance, and small contact diameter increase the m improving the conductivity. Moreover, tunneling distance and CNT contact diameter have the greatest effects on the m. The optimized level for m is necessary to control the nanocomposite's conductivity.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available