The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Graphene/Polyurethane Nanocomposites for Improved Gas Barrier and Electrical Conductivity
Abstract
Recently developed strategies for isolating single-layer carbon sheets from graphite have enabled production of electrically conductive, mechanically robust polymer nanocomposites with enhanced gas barrier performance at extremely low loading. In this article, we present processing, morphology, and properties of thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) reinforced with exfoliated graphite. For the first time, we compare carbon sheets exfoliated from graphite oxide (GO) via two different processes: chemical modification (isocyanate treated GO, iGO) and thermal exfoliation (thermally reduced GO, TRG), and three different methods of dispersion: solvent blending, in situ polymerization, and melt compounding. Incorporation of as low as 0.5 wt % of TRG produced electrically conductive TPU. Up to a 10-fold increase in tensile stiffness and 90% decrease in nitrogen permeation of TPU were observed with only 3 wt % iGO, implying a high aspect ratio of exfoliated platelets. Real- and reciprocal-space morphological characterization indicated that solvent-based blending techniques more effectively distribute thin exfoliated sheets in the polymer matrix than melt processing. This observation is in good qualitative agreement with the dispersion level inferred from solid property enhancements. Although also processed in solvents, property increase via in situ polymerization was not as pronounced because of reduced hydrogen bonding in the TPU produced.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Electric Field Effect in Atomically Thin Carbon Films
Novoselov, K. S., Geim, A. K., Morozov, S. V., Jiang, D., Zhang, Y., Dubonos, S. V., Grigorieva, I. V., & Firsov, A. A. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1102896 · Cited by 66,834
Adsorption of Gases in Multimolecular Layers
Brunauer, S., Emmett, P. H., & Teller, E. (1938) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja01269a023 · Cited by 28,156
Graphene-based composite materials
Stankovich, S., Dikin, D. A., Dommett, G. H. B., Kohlhaas, K. M., Zimney, E. J., Stach, E. A., Piner, R. D., Nguyen, S. T., & Ruoff, R. S. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04969 · Cited by 12,922
Koerner, H., Price, G., Pearce, N. A., Alexander, M., & Vaia, R. A. (2004) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/nmat1059 · Cited by 1,034
Yang, W. P., Macosko, C. W., & Wellinghoff, S. T. (1986) · Polymer · doi:10.1016/0032-3861(86)90012-1 · Cited by 190
Self-citation
Cited by
Graphene/Polymer Nanocomposites
Kim, H., Abdala, A. A., & Macosko, C. W. (2010) · Macromolecules · doi:10.1021/ma100572e · Cited by 3,406
Self-citationGraphene-polymer nanocomposites for structural and functional applications
Hu, K., Kulkarni, D. D., Choi, I., & Tsukruk, V. V. (2014) · Progress in Polymer Science · doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2014.03.001 · Cited by 1,085
Polymer Nanocomposites—A Comparison between Carbon Nanotubes, Graphene, and Clay as Nanofillers
Bhattacharya, M. (2016) · Materials · doi:10.3390/ma9040262 · Cited by 747
Graphene-based materials: Synthesis and gas sorption, storage and separation
Gadipelli, S., & Guo, Z. X. (2015) · Progress in Materials Science · doi:10.1016/j.pmatsci.2014.10.004 · Cited by 734
Xu, Z., Zhang, J., Shan, M., Li, Y., Li, B., Niu, J., Zhou, B., & Qian, X. (2014) · Journal of Membrane Science · doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2014.01.050 · Cited by 499
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, H., Miura, Y., & Macosko, C. W.
- Venue
- Chemistry of Materials
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2010-05-17
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3441-3450
- ISSN
- 0897-4756 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5002
- OpenAlex
- W2070069180
- Cited by
- 1,399
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 71.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
