4.6 Article

A Raman Spectroscopy Study on Single-Wall Carbon Nanotube/Polystyrene Nanocomposites: Mechanical Compression Transferred from the Polymer to Single-Wall Carbon Nanotubes

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 116, 期 33, 页码 17897-17903

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp303509g

关键词

-

资金

  1. Support Project to Assist Private Universities in Developing Bases for Research (Research Center for Single Molecular Vibrational Spectroscopy)
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan (MEXT)
  3. KAKENHI on Priority Area Strong Photon-Molecule Coupling Fields from MEXT [470, 20043032]
  4. KAKENHI from MEXT [23750025]
  5. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23560049, 23750025] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Single-wall carbon nanotube/polystyrene (SWCNT/PS) nanocomposites were prepared by solution coagulation. Characterization was performed using Raman and infrared spectroscopy. to elucidate the interactions between the SWCNTs and PS inside the nanocoiriposites. It was found that the G(-), G(+), and G' SWCNT bands shifted, to higher wavenumbers when incorporated into the nanocomposites.. We determined that this upshift was induced exclusively by a mechanical compression transfer from PS to the SWCNTs. From the magnitude of the upshift, the mechanical compression transfer was estimated to be similar to 518 MPa. Interestingly, we found that the upshift of the radial breathing mode was dominated by two factors: a van der Waals effect due to separation of the SWCNTs and mechanical compression from the PS system. A comparison of the laser heating effects on pristine SWCNTs arid on the nanocomposites showed that thermal expansion. of the SWCNTs in the nanocomposites was suppressed by the mechanical compression from the PS system. The combination of Raman and infrared spectroscopy enabled detailed characterization of the interactions occurring the nanocomposites, which cannot be achieved using other conventional methods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据