4.6 Article

Kinetics of nanoscale probe-based contact electrification between metal and polymethyl methacrylate under bias

期刊

CHINESE JOURNAL OF PHYSICS
卷 73, 期 -, 页码 40-46

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjph.2021.06.013

关键词

Contact electrification; Charge transfer; Scanning probe; Polymethyl methacrylate; Electrostatic force microscopy

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan [MOST-109-2112-029-001, MOST-109-2112-M-029-006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Contact electrification has the potential to convert mechanical energy to electrical energy, with charge transfer between the Fermi level of the metal and the neutral level of the surface states of the polymer playing a significant role. The process is described by a saturating exponential function and the charge transfer can cancel out the net bias, ultimately leading to the cessation of contact electrification.
Contact electrification (CE) has the potential to be a renewable energy resource, because it converts mechanical energy to electrical energy. The kinetics of probe-based CE between metal and polymeric slab was studied by scanning probe microscopy. The CE static charges were produced on polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) films by a Pt-coated probe under a bias (V-B) and characterized by electrostatic force microscopy. The metal/PMMA CE was attributed to the charge transfer between the Fermi level of the metal (E-f) and the neutral level of the surface states of PMMA (E-n). The kinetics of the probe-based metal/PMMA CE was described by a saturating exponential function and the saturated charge Q(S) was proportional to the net bias, V-B - V-null, where the nulling bias V-null = -(E-n E-f)/e. The kinetics was regarded as the charging to a conductor-capacitor series circuit. Q(S) established a potential to cancel the net bias and ceased the CE. CE was a reversible process, and its transmission coefficient was asymmetric with the polarity of bias because of the heterogeneous nature of the metal/polymer contact.

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