4.8 Article

Strong and Robust Electrochemical Artificial Muscles by Ionic-Liquid-in-Nanofiber-Sheathed Carbon Nanotube Yarns

期刊

SMALL
卷 17, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/smll.202006181

关键词

actuators; artificial muscles; carbon nanotubes; electrochemistry; ionic liquids

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFA0203301]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21975281, 21773293, 21603264]
  3. Jiangsu Planned Projects for Postdoctoral Research Funds [2019K048]
  4. Suzhou Science and Technology Plan Project [SYG201926]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An ionic-liquid-in-nanofibers sheathed carbon nanotube yarn muscle has been developed, which is strong, stable, and able to achieve a high contraction rate through utilizing accumulated isometric stress. These yarn muscles are tightly bundled, making them suitable for lifting heavy weights and gripping objects, and can serve as desirable actuation components for robotic devices.
To address the lack of a suitable electrolyte that supports the stable operation of the electrochemical yarn muscles in air, an ionic-liquid-in-nanofibers sheathed carbon nanotube (CNT) yarn muscle is prepared. The nanofibers serve as a separator to avoid the short-circuiting of the yarns and a reservoir for ionic liquid. The ionic-liquid-in-nanofiber-sheathed yarn muscles are strong, providing an isometric stress of 10.8 MPa (about 31 times the skeletal muscles). The yarn muscles are highly robust, which can reversibly contract stably at such conditions as being knotted, wide-range humidity (30 to 90 RH%) and temperature (25 to 70 degrees C), and long-term cycling and storage in air. By utilizing the accumulated isometric stress, the yarn muscles achieve a high contraction rate of 36.3% s(-1). The yarn muscles are tightly bundled to lift heavy weights and grasp objects. These unique features can make the strong and robust yarn muscles as a desirable actuation component for robotic devices.

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

4.8
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