Fig 1.
a) The hydrodynamic tube shearing device with dispersion barrel and stirrer, b) the dispersion barrel during stirring (to avoid graphite flotation) and, c) a TEM-image of the processed material.
Fig 2.
SEM-image of the initial graphite, before exfoliation (0 passes).
Fig 3.
TEM-images of particles from the process. a) after 5 passes, a typical particle found in the suspension that fits the frame size 20×20 μm. The scale is 5 μm. b) after 10 passes, a typical particle that fits the frame size 2.5×2.5 μm. The scale is 1000 nm.
Fig 4.
Particle size distribution from SEM image analysis.
Fig 5.
AFM image of a partly folded flake found in the suspension after 10 passes with corresponding height profile along the indication bar. The measured flake thickness was 9.12 nm and the flake fits frame size 7.5×7.5 μm.
Fig 6.
Sheet resistance Rs of composite films from batch A and B. The grammage was calculated from the weight and area of the each composite film. The standard deviation was too small to be visualized in the figure.
Table 1.
Comparison of electrical resistivity and BET surface area for alternative conducting carbons.
ρ is the electrical resistivity, SSA is the specific surface area of the material, CB is carbon black and BG is battery graphite.