4.8 Article

The use of Taguchi optimization in determining optimum electrophoretic conditions for the deposition of carbon nanofiber on carbon fibers for use in carbon/epoxy composites

期刊

CARBON
卷 50, 期 8, 页码 2853-2859

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbon.2012.02.052

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) through Korean Ministry of Education, Science & Technology (MEST) [K20704000090, 2011-0030804]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2011-0030804] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vapor grown carbon nanofibers (VGCNFs) were deposited on carbon fibers (CFs) using electrophoretic deposition (EPD). Composites of the resulting hybrid material (CF-VGCNF) in an epoxy matrix were fabricated by the vacuum-assisted resin transfer molding process. The electrical conductivities of the composites were significantly improved compared to those without the VGCNF reinforcement. The Taguchi method was used to optimize the EPD process conditions through the analysis of means and the analysis of variance for achieving a highly uniform deposition of carbon nanofibers. The parameters considered for optimization are: deposition time, applied voltage, concentration of VGCNF in a distilled water suspension, and the distance between anode (a carbon fabric) and cathode (a copper plate). An orthogonal array of L-9 (3(4)) was created in the statistical design of experiments. The through-thickness electrical conductivity of the composites produced using the optimum deposition conditions was more than 90 times that of carbon fiber/epoxy composites. When compared with the average electrical conductivity of the nine design experiments, the electrical conductivity of the CF-VGCNF/epoxy composite using a filler prepared under the optimum deposition conditions showed a 51% improvement. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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