4.7 Article

Anisotropic thermal conductivity and electromagnetic interference shielding of epoxy nanocomposites based on magnetic driving reduced graphene oxide@Fe3O4

期刊

COMPOSITES SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 174, 期 -, 页码 1-10

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2019.02.005

关键词

Graphene; Magnetic field; Thermal conductivity; Electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding

资金

  1. Guangzhou Science and Technology Plan Project [20181002SF0519]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China [2015A030313798, 2016A030313161]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Highly thermal conductive materials with excellent electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding efficiency have been attracted much attention in the field of modem electronic devices. In this work, the magnetic reduced graphene oxide (RGO)@Fe3O4 nanoplatelets (NPs), which were acted as fillers, were fabricated via electrostatic self-assembly and co-precipitation technique. The nanocomposites were prepared by applying external magnetic fields to align RGO@Fe3O4 NPs during epoxy curing. Owing to external magnetic fields and the anisotropic properties of RGO@Fe3O4 NPs, the nanocomposite with aligned RGO@Fe3O4 NPs exhibited an anisotropic thermal conductivity(lambda). For the in-plane (parallel to) direction, lambda(parallel to) as high as 1.213 W m(-1) K-1, which was higher than that of through-plane (perpendicular to), and the anisotropy index (lambda(parallel to/)lambda(perpendicular to)) was 15.96. Meanwhile, the resulting sample possessed excellent thermal stability and an electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding of 13.45 dB at 8.2 GHz. Overall, aligning RGO@Fe3O4 NPs under magnetic field enhanced the interaction among RGO@Fe3O4 NPs in in plane direction, so as to promote the formation of thermal conductive networks in the horizontal direction with leading to anisotropic lambda. Furthermore, its contributed to electromagnetic shielding effectiveness, and the dominant EMI shielding mechanism is the reflection.

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

4.7
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