研究目的
To compare the two HiPco materials (Rice HiPco and NoPo HiPCO?) and provide clarity on the state of HiPco SWCNTs for research and applications in 2019.
研究成果
The NoPo HiPCO? sample comprised smaller average diameter SWCNTs, lower catalyst content, and lower amorphous carbon content compared to Rice HiPco. The Raman IG/ID ratio suggested that NoPo samples have fewer defects overall for the smaller-diameter metallic-SWCNTs. NoPo HiPCO? represents a suitable replacement for Rice HiPco SWCNTs.
研究不足
The study focuses on comparing two specific HiPco SWCNT samples and may not generalize to all HiPco materials. The characterization techniques used have inherent limitations in resolution and sensitivity.
1：Experimental Design and Method Selection:
The study involved comparing Rice HiPco SWCNTs with NoPo HiPCO? SWCNTs using various characterization techniques.
2：Sample Selection and Data Sources:
Raw HiPco SWCNTs were obtained from Atom Optoelectronics, Inc. (Rice HiPco) and NoPo Nanotechnologies India (NoPo HiPCO?).
3：List of Experimental Equipment and Materials:
Equipment included AFM, TEM, SEM/EDS, Raman spectroscopy, and UV-vis-NIR spectrometer. Materials included SWCNT samples and surfactant-stabilized aqueous dispersions.
4：Experimental Procedures and Operational Workflow:
Samples were characterized as-is in solid form and as surfactant-stabilized aqueous dispersions. Techniques included AFM for diameter distribution, TEM and SEM for imaging, EDS for elemental analysis, TGA for thermal properties, Raman spectroscopy for defect analysis, and UV-vis-NIR spectroscopy for chirality distribution.
5：Data Analysis Methods:
Data analysis involved statistical measurement of CNT diameter, elemental quantification, thermal decomposition analysis, and chirality distribution assessment.
独家科研数据包，助您复现前沿成果，加速创新突破
获取完整内容
