| Literature DB >> 25771823 |
Ye Ji Noh1, Han-Ik Joh1, Jaesang Yu1, Soon Hyoun Hwang2, Sungho Lee1, Cheol Ho Lee1, Seong Yun Kim3, Jae Ryoun Youn2.
Abstract
The drying process of <Entities:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25771823 PMCID: PMC4360639 DOI: 10.1038/srep09141
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the solvent free process based on simple powder mixing and in-situ polymerization of cyclic butylene terephthalate (CBT) oligomers for preparation of graphene-polymer composites with an excellent dispersion of fillers.
Figure 2(a) SEM images, (b) digitally processed SEM images, and (c) distribution curves of the distance between fillers of GNP filled, GO filled, and CCG-P filled pCBT composites.
Figure 3Electrical conductivity of GNP-filled pCBT composites and the theoretical conductivity predicted by the MTM as a function of the filler content.
Average and standard deviation of filler-to-filler distance distribution obtained from digitally processed SEM images for fracture surfaces of polymer composites
| Average (nm) | standard deviation (nm) | |
|---|---|---|
| C300 | 415.2 | 208.7 |
| C500 | 410.2 | 201.9 |
| C750 | 307.5 | 153.6 |
| GO | 304.2 | 149.8 |
| CCG-P | 295.3 | 147.4 |
Figure 4Characterization of GNP, GO and CCG-P fillers: (a) WAXD results indicating interlayer spacing of the fillers, (b) Raman results exhibiting defect levels of the fillers, and (c) functional groups of the fillers analyzed by FT-IR.
Figure 5Stacked structure of graphene fillers and the number of stacked graphene layers determined by image analysis of AFM and TEM pictures.
Figure 6Chemical surface analysis based on the XPS C1s spectra of GNP, GO and CCG-P fillers.