Thermal Conductivity of Polymer Nanocomposites

Made With Carbon Nanofibers

Sushant Agarwal,1 M. Masud K. Khan,2 Rakesh K. Gupta1

1
Department of Chemical Engineering, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506

2
Faculty of Sciences, Engineering and Health, Central Queensland University, Rockhampton,
Qld-4702, Australia

An internal mixer was used to prepare polycarbonate
(PC)-based nanocomposites containing carbon fibers,
carbon nanofibers (CNF), and mixtures of the two fill-
ers. The influence of the filler volume fraction, the rela-
tive amounts of the two fillers, and the filler orientation
relative to the direction of heat flow on the thermal
conductivity was examined. Filler orientation was
obtained by the extrusion of strands of the nanocom-
posite. The thermal conductivity was measured using a
steady-state heat conduction technique. The CNF were
fragile, and their aspect ratio could be decreased dur-
ing processing. In general, the composite thermal con-
ductivity increased with increasing filler content. Fiber
alignment in the heat flux direction resulted in a sig-
nificant increase in thermal conductivity. Mixing of
nanofibers with microfibers resulted contacts between
the microfibers. This, together with fiber alignment
provided large increases in the thermal conductivity.
POLYM. ENG. SCI., 48:2474–2481, 2008. ª 2008 Society of
Plastics Engineers
INTRODUCTION
Nanomaterials are increasingly being used as additives
to polymers to simultaneously enhance a variety of pro-
perties without sacrificing any qualities of the base
polymer. Carbon nanotubes (CNT) and carbon nanofibers
(CNF), for example, have very high stiffness values as
well as very high thermal and electrical conductivities. As
a consequence, these nanofillers can be used to convert
thermally and electrically insulating plastics into conduc-
tive materials [1] and to increase their mechanical proper-
ties at the same time. This article is concerned with the
thermal conductivity of polymer nanocomposites. Ther-
mally conductive thermoplastics have many applications
Correspondence to: Sushant Agarwal; e-mail: sushant.agarwal@mail.
wvu.edu
Contract grant sponsors: West Virginia EPSCoR Research Challenge
Grant Program, George and Carolyn Berry endowment.
DOI 10.1002/pen.21205
Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).
C 2008 Society of Plastics Engineers
V the filler, provided that the ratio of the filler to matrix
in the aerospace, electronics, and energy storage industries
[2]. They can be used as thermal interface materials or
heat sinks to dissipate heat from electronic devices such
as computers, flat panel displays, and cell phones [3]; in
some cases, it is the in-plane thermal conductivity that is
important, while, in others, high values of the out-of-
plane thermal conductivity are required. In principle,
proper alignment of the nanofillers can give the desired
directional properties, but it is not always easy to obtain
such alignment with the normal polymer processing meth-
ods of extrusion and injection molding.
CNF are a form of multiwall carbon nanotubes
(MWCNTs) which are synthesized by the catalytic
decomposition of aliphatic hydrocarbons. They differ
from CNT in their diameter (dia.
100 nm) which is
much larger than that of either single-wall nanotubes (dia.

1 nm) or MWCNT (dia.
10 nm). In recent years, due
to advances in technology, CNFs have become readily
available in large quantities and at a price that is signifi-
cantly lower than that of CNTs. As a result, it is now pos-
sible to look for applications of polymer nanocomposites
made with CNFs. The thermal conductivity value of the
CNFs is not precisely known, but it is thought to be very
high; its value should be bracketed by the thermal con-
ductivity of graphite (600 W/m K) and the corresponding
value of MWCNTs (3000 W/m K) [4]. Nonetheless, it is
expected that, by adding even a small amount of CNF to
polymers, a considerable enhancement in the thermal con-
ductivity can be achieved. Thus, CNFs have been used to
make thermally-conducting nanocomposites with poly-
mers such as polypropylene, epoxy, polyimide, and ny-
lon-11 [5–8]. However, it has been found that the thermal
conductivity of such nanocomposites is much lower than
what would be expected from the use of a mixture rule.
This mismatch is not surprising, and it results from the
very high interfacial resistance to heat transfer between
the polymer matrix and the nanofibers [9]. It is for this
reason that the thermal conductivity of particulate compo-
sites is not sensitive to the thermal conductivity value of

POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE—-2008

thermal conductivity is large [10]. To increase the interfa-
cial interaction between the CNF and the polymer matrix,
acid treatment of the fibers has been attempted [7, 11].
Results showed that the acid treatment promoted contacts
amongst the fibers and resulted in a higher thermal con-
ductivity when compared with the untreated fibers. Other
strategies to obtain higher thermal conductivities involve
aligning the fibers in the direction of heat flow and the
use of a mixture of filler materials of different sizes and
shapes. Kuriger and Alam [5] aligned pyrograf III carbon
fibers in a polypropylene matrix by extruding the compos-
ite through a die to obtain a strand and then compression
molded a bundle of these strands into an aligned sample.
Ghose et al. [7] used a polyimide resin and CNFs and
extruded the composite in the form of a ribbon to align
the fibers. Cummins et al. [8] used nylon as the matrix
and injection molding to align the fibers. These authors
found that the thermal conductivity of the nanocomposites
in the direction parallel to the fiber alignment was much
larger than that normal to it. Concerning the use of fillers
of different sizes, Kim et al. [12] used a mixture of
micron-sized carbon fibers and MWCNTs to make pheno-
lic resin nanocomposites; the addition of 7 wt%
MWCNTs resulted in about a 57% increase in the thermal
conductivity. However, no fiber alignment was attempted.
It was postulated that the high aspect ratio nanofibers
formed a bridge between the microfillers, thus providing a
continuous path for heat conduction which resulted in the
higher thermal conductivity.
In this article, we studied the combined effect of fiber
alignment and inter-fiber contacts through the use of a
hybrid mixture of microscopic carbon fibers and CNF.
Fiber alignment was achieved by extruding the strands of
nanocomposite through a circular die and then compres-
sion molding in the desired direction.
EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS
Materials Used
Polycarbonate (PC) is commonly used in electronic
applications, and this was used as the matrix polymer for
the nanocomposites. The specific material was Lexan 101,
a general purpose PC that was purchased from GE Poly-
merland. PC has a density of 1.2 g/cm3, a thermal con-
ductivity of 0.29 W/m K, and it wets the surface of the
carbon fibers easily. Two different carbon fillers were
used in the research. Thermalgraph DKD, Pitch-based
carbon fibers, was obtained from Cytec Industries. As
received, these fibers had a length of 200 lm and diame-
ter of about 10 lm. Their thermal conductivity ranges
from 400 to 700 W/m K, and their density is 2.2 g/cm3.
The CNF were Pyrograf III-PR19 PS, and they were pur-
chased from Applied Sciences. The term PS indicates that
any deposited hydrocarbons on the surface of the fibers
had been stripped by pyrolytic stripping to expose the
DOI 10.1002/pen
graphitic surface. These CNFs had a diameter in the range
of 70–200 nm and lengths of tens of micrometers, and
their morphology was one of stacked conic sections. The
fiber density is 1.99 g/cm3, and the fibers were highly
entangled with each other, forming aggregates. During
compounding, the CNFs had to be disentangled and
dispersed in order to obtain the best properties. In this
work, all these materials were used as obtained from the
suppliers.
Mixing
A Thermo-Haake Polydrive 600 internal mixer was
used to disperse CNFs, the carbon fibers and their mix-
tures in the PC matrix by melt mixing at 2508C. Before
melt mixing, all the materials were dried overnight in an
oven at 1208C. To begin with, the required amount of
polymer pellets was fed to the internal mixer, and, when
these pellets were completely melted, carbon fibers were
added and mixed for an additional 5 min at 60 rpm. After
mixing, the composites were removed from the mixer and
stored in sealed plastic bags.
Sample Preparation
Samples for thermal conductivity determination were
prepared in the form of circular disks of varying thick-
nesses, and these were used in the thermal conductivity
measurement cell described later. These samples con-
tained either one of the two carbon fibers or their mix-
tures, and the sample composition was changed not only
by varying the volume fraction of the filler(s) but also the
relative amounts of the two fillers. Samples were prepared
in such a way that they contained fibers which were either
oriented isotropically or were aligned horizontally or ver-
tically with respect to the direction of heat flow. To
obtain the isotropic samples, the composite, as obtained
from internal mixer, was dried and then molded into [1/
2]00 diameter disks of various thicknesses using a PHI hy-
draulic compression press at 2508C. To obtain fiber align-
ment, the isotropic composites were loaded into the barrel
of a Rosand-Bohlin capillary rheometer. A 2 mm circular
capillary die (aspect ratio ¼ 32) was installed and the
temperature was set to 2808C. Strands were then extruded
into a water bath at a piston speed of 5 mm/min. This
was expected to result in the micro- or nanofibers being
oriented along the axis of the strands. To make disks con-
taining fibers having a horizontal alignment, the solidified
extruded strands were arranged flat on the surface of a
mold and then compression molded. For samples with
vertically aligned fibers, the strands were held together
vertically and tightly packed in a vertical mold of circular
cross section and then compression molded into a speci-
men of cylindrical shape; disks of various thicknesses
were then cut from this cylinder for thermal conductivity
measurements. Figure 1 shows a schematic diagram of
POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE—-2008 2475
 the process of making samples having either horizontally
or vertically aligned carbon fibers.

Structure Characterization
Both transmission and scanning electron microscopy
were used to observe the morphology of the nano- and
microcomposites and to verify the expected fiber align-
ment. To prepare the samples for transmission electron
microscopy, a cryo-ultramicrotome with a diamond knife
was used to obtain 60–100 nm thick sections from the
compression molded sheets. These were then scanned at
100 kV accelerating voltage in a JEOL 100 CX transmis-
sion electron microscope (TEM). For scanning electron
microscopy, a Hitachi model S-4700 field emission scan-
ning electron microscope was used.

Thermal Conductivity Measurement

FIG. 1. Schematic diagram showing the preparation of horizontally and A steady-state heat-conduction technique similar to that
vertically aligned fiber samples. described in ASTM D5470 standard was used to measure

FIG. 2. Electron micrographs of polycarbonate-based nanocomposites: (a) SEM of top view of sample hav-
ing vertically aligned fibers. The sample has 30 vol% CF and 10 vol% CNF, (b) Same as (a), but sample has
horizontally aligned fibers, (c) TEM showing dispersion of CNFs in an isotropic sample containing 13.3
vol% CNF.

2476 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE—-2008 DOI 10.1002/pen

the thermal conductivities of the samples. The circular
disks of [1/2]00 diameter obtained according to the proce-
dure described earlier were sandwiched between two
copper rods. A temperature difference was imposed across
the assembly by contacting the end of the upper rod with
hot water at constant temperature, whereas the end of the
lower rod was brought into contact with cold water at a
constant temperature. The resulting (constant) temperature
gradient along the length of the copper rods was meas-
ured by the use of several thermocouples located at
known distances along the rods. A computer and data ac-
quisition system were used to record all the temperature
data. A knowledge of the thermal conductivity of copper,
in conjunction with the measured temperature gradient,
then gave the heat flux through the assembly using Four-
ier’s law. The thermal impedances was calculated and
plotted versus sample thickness. A straight line is fitted to
the data and the slope of the best-fit line was the recipro-
cal of the thermal conductivity of the sample.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Figure 2 shows SEM and TEM pictures of the PC-
based nanocomposites. Figure 2a shows a low magnifica-
tion view of the cross section of a sample where vertical
fiber alignment was expected. This sample contains 30
vol% microfibers and 10 vol% nanofibers based on the
total sample volume. The carbon fibers are clearly visible,
and their cross section appears circular, indicating that
these fibers are aligned vertically. Similarly, Fig. 2b
shows horizontally aligned fibers demonstrating that our
technique of aligning the microfibers in a desired direc-
tion gives the expected results. Finally, a TEM of a sam-
ple containing 13.3 vol% of isotropically distributed
CNFs is shown in Fig. 2c, and one can see a variety of
fiber orientations. Note that white areas in this micrograph
represent voids that resulted from microtoming. Figure 3
shows TEM pictures of the top view of three vertically
aligned hybrid samples. One can see that the interstitial
space between microscopic carbon fibers is filled with dis-
persed CNF. Some of these nanofibers are in contact with
the carbon fibers, thus providing better contact between
the fibers. One also notices that the aspect ratio of the
nanofibers has been reduced during processing, and this
observation is consistent with results reported in the liter-
ature. From these electron micrographs, however, it can
be unequivocally concluded that the desired microfiber
alignment was successfully achieved with our sample
preparation technique, though CNF were not significantly
aligned. This is to be expected because, whereas individ- FIG. 3. TEM pictures of vertically aligned samples of (a)10 vol% CF
and 30 vol% CNF, (b) 20 vol% CF and 20 vol% CNF, and (c) 30 vol%
ual carbon fibers are straight circular cylinders, the CNF
CF and 10 vol% CNF. Pictures show that CNFs are dispersed in the
are irregularly curved along the length, and are highly areas between microscopic carbon fibers.
entangled with each other.
Figure 4 shows the experimentally measured values of about 40 vol% because, beyond this value, the composites
the thermal conductivity of the composites containing car- become very brittle. For isotropically distributed fibers, it
bon microfibers and CNF. The maximum loading level is can be seen that the thermal conductivity increased with

DOI 10.1002/pen POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE—-2008 2477

 contacts being formed between the microfibers due to the
presence of the nanofibers. Figure 5 also suggests that, in
order to obtain large thermal conductivity values, it is
preferable to use equal volumes of the two fibers or even
a disproportionate amount of the nanofibers.

Model Predictions
Many theoretical models are available to predict the
thermal conductivity of nanocomposites. The simplest of
these are mixture rules such as series, parallel, and geo-
metric models, which are given by [15]:
FIG. 4. Thermal conductivity of polycarbonate-based microcomposites
and nanocomposites as a function of CF and CNF volume% for isotropi- Series model
cally and vertically aligned fibers.
kc ¼ ð1  fÞkm þ fkf ; (1)

parallel model
increasing concentration of both CF and CNF. Although a
very significant increase in the thermal conductivity of 1 1f f
¼ þ (2)
the PC can be achieved by adding 40 vol% of carbon kc km kf
fibers, the magnitude of the increase is similar to that
attained with the use of high thermal conductivity particu- and geometric mean model
lates [10]. It can also be seen that, at the lower concentra-
1f f
tion levels, isotropic nanocomposites have a higher ther- kc ¼ km kf : (3)
mal conductivity than isotropic microcomposites. At the
30 vol% filler level, however, the thermal conductivity of where, kc is the thermal conductivity of the composite
the nanocomposite began to decrease. A decrease in ther- and km and kf are thermal conductivities of the polymer
mal conductivity of nanocomposites with nanofiller con- matrix and filler material, respectively. However, the se-
centration has also been observed in other studies [12– ries model typically over predicts the thermal conductiv-
14]. We speculate that this was due to fiber breakage. ity, whereas the parallel model tends to under predict the
Figure 4 also shows thermal conductivity values for thermal conductivity of the nanocomposites. This is
microcomposites having fibers (vertically) aligned in the because these models are based on the amount of filler
direction of heat flow. It can be seen that these thermal loading and do not take into account the true geometry
conductivities are much higher than those for isotropic and the size of the filler particles. Other models such as
samples and fiber alignment resulted in a doubling of the the Hamilton-Crosser model [16] and the Lewis-Nielsen
thermal conductivity at each loading level. We also men- [17] model are based on particle size, geometry, and the
tion that Fig. 4 does not display data for nanocomposites
having vertically aligned fibers. Results did not seem to
be very sensitive to fiber orientation (see datum point at
30 vol% loading in Fig. 5), and it is suspected that with
CNF a high degree of alignment is difficult to achieve
due to irregular and entangled nature of the nanofibers as
evidenced by electron micrographs.
Thermal conductivities of the nanocomposites contain-
ing a mixture of microscale and nanoscale carbon fibers
are shown in Fig. 5. The relative amounts of CFs and
CNFs was varied, but the total filler concentration was
maintained at either 30 or 40 vol%. Results are presented
for isotropic and vertical alignments in each case, and for
horizontal alignment in some cases. In the case of vertical
fiber alignment, at both the 30 and 40 vol% total filler
levels, there was a dramatic increase in the nanocompo-
site thermal conductivity (relative to either the horizontal FIG. 5. Thermal conductivity as a function of filler concentration for
nanocomposites containing isotropic, horizontal, and vertically-aligned
or isotropic alignment) upon mixing the two kinds of fibers. X-axis shows percent volume fractions of CF and CNF in the
fibers. Also, the relative increase was greater at the higher nanocomposite (aCFbCNF represents a %v carbon fibers and b %v
loading level. We suspect that this is the consequence of carbon nanofibers).

2478 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE—-2008 DOI 10.1002/pen

manner of particle packing in the matrix. The expression
for the Hamilton-Crosser model is given by [16]:


kf þ ðn  1Þkm  ðn  1Þfðkm  kf Þ
kc ¼ km ; (4)
kf þ ðn  1Þkm þ fðkm  kf Þ

where kc, km, and kf are thermal conductivities of compos-

ite, matrix material, and fibers, respectively. f is the vol-
ume fraction of the filler material and n is a geometric
factor based on sphericity of the particles.
The Lewis-Nielsen model is given by [17]


1 þ ABf
kc ¼ km ; (5)
1  Bcf

where

kf=
km  1
B¼ and (6)
kf=
km þ A
!
1  fm
c¼1þ f: (7)
f2m

where A is a factor akin to Einstein’s coefficient, but it

also depends on the alignment of fibers with respect to
the heat flow and the aspect ratio. For example, for iso-
tropically oriented long fibers (l/d . 15) A is 8.38. Simi-
larly, for heat flow parallel to the fibers, A is 2l/d while
for heat flow perpendicular to fibers, it is 0.5. fm is the
maximum packing fraction for the particles in the matrix.
For three dimensional random packing this quantity is
0.52, whereas for uniaxial random packing it is 0.82 [17].
Figure 6 compares experimental data for both the
nanocomposites and the microcomposites made with ran-
domly oriented fibers in PC with a variety of theoretical
predictions. For the microcomposite, the geometric and
Lewis-Nielsen models seemed to over predict the meas-
urements, whereas the parallel model under predicted the
results. The Hamilton-Crosser model appeared to provide
fairly close predictions when n was chosen to equal to 6,
which was for long fibers. For the nanocomposite sam-
ples, however, none of the models provided a satisfactory
prediction of thermal conductivity. This may be due to
the fact that the experimental data are themselves not
internally consistent because the thermal conductivity is
found to decrease with increasing filler concentration. It
has also been observed that nanomaterials, despite having
a very large thermal conductivity, do not, in general,
impart the expected enhancement in thermal conductivity.
This behavior is attributed to their very large surface area
which results in a large interfacial resistance to heat flow
between the nanoparticle surface and the matrix material
due to incomplete bonding and phonon acoustic mismatch
[18, 19]. Prasher et al. [19] have proposed a model based
on Every’s model [20] that takes into account the effect
FIG. 6. Comparison of experimental values of isotropic thermal con-
ductivity of polycarbonate-based composites with theoretical predictions
for (a) Carbon nanofiber nanocomposites, Prasher model 1 is for a ¼
0.15 and Model 2 is for a ¼ 0.06, and (b) Carbon fiber microcompo-
sites.
of interfacial boundary thickness and the particle size.
Their result is
km
kc ¼ 3ð1aÞ
; (8)
ð1  fÞð1þ2aÞ
In which a is the Biot number defined as
Rb k m
a¼ ; (9)
d
where Rb is the interfacial resistance and d is the diameter
of the nanoparticles. This equation shows that kc increases
with a decrease in the value of a, which happens if inter-
facial resistance decreases or the particle size increases.
Figure 6a shows theoretical predictions for a ¼ 0.15
(shown as model 1) and a ¼ 0.06 (shown as model 2),
representing high and low thermal interfacial resistance.
This might be used to explain the observed decrease in
the thermal conductivity at 30 vol% filler loading in the

DOI 10.1002/pen POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE—-2008 2479

 As noted earlier, a very significant increase in the ther-
mal conductivity is observed if a hybrid mixture of CF and
CNF is used. To explain this increase in thermal conductiv-
ity of the hybrid nanocomposites, one may adapt the
Lewis-Nielsen model to the situation at hand to obtain [21]
" P2 #
1þ Ai Bi f i
kc ¼ km P2i¼1 : (10)
1 i¼1 Bi ci fi

In above expression A, B, /, and w are defined as ear-

FIG. 7. Comparison of experimental values of thermal conductivity of
polycarbonate-based microcomposites containing vertically aligned fibers
with theoretical predictions of the Lewis-Nielsen Model. Experimental
values are represented by solid circles in this graph.
nanocomposites. Indeed, a leveling off in the thermal con-
ductivity with nanoparticle loading or even a decrease has
been observed by others as well [12–14, 19]. It has been
suggested that, at higher concentration levels of nanofib-
ers, there is incomplete wetting of the nanofiber surfaces
leading to higher interfacial resistance and a lower ther-
mal conductivity [19].
To conclude this section, Fig. 7 shows a comparison
between experimental values of thermal conductivities for
vertically aligned carbon fibers and theoretical predictions
of the Lewis-Nielsen model for aspect ratios (2l/d) of 50
and 10. These values are based on electron micrographs
of the samples. It can be seen that the predictions closely
track the experimental values for 2l/d ¼ 10. However, if
one applies the same model to nanocomposites having
vertically aligned fibers and containing 30 vol% CNF, the
predicted value of the thermal conductivity is 1.66 W/m
K for 2l/d ¼ 10 and 6.5 W/m K for 2l/d ¼ 50; both these
numbers are much higher than the observed experimental
value of 0.88 W/m K. This again suggests that the nano-
fibers are not significantly aligned.
lier in Eqs. 6 and 7 with components i ¼ 1 and 2 repre-
senting CF and CNF, respectively. Table 1 shows the
experimental values and the corresponding theoretical pre-
dictions for hybrid nanocomposites for isotropic, horizon-
tal, and vertically aligned fibers. For CF, 2l/d was chosen
to be either 20 or 10 whereas for CNF, 2l/d was taken to
be either 50 or 100. These values were chosen from the
fiber size observed from the electron micrographs. In each
case, the total volume fraction of filler was kept constant
at 0.4. It can be seen that for vertically aligned fibers, the
measured values are close to or in between the theoretical
values for the small and large aspect ratios. However, for
isotropic and horizontal cases, the agreement was not very
good. Examining the theoretical values further, it should
be noticed that, for vertically aligned fibers, the theo-
retical thermal conductivity increases monotonically with
increasing CNF fraction in the mixture whereas for the
isotropic fibers it seems to go through a minimum. These
trends do not always agree with the experimental results
and point to the need for better predictive equations.
CONCLUSIONS
High thermal conductivity polymer nanocomposites
can be obtained by using a hybrid mixture of microscopic
carbon fibers and CNF. In general, thermal conductivity
values increase as the filler volume fraction increases.
Alignment of the microfibers in the direction of the heat
flow increases the thermal conductivity. Nanocomposites

TABLE 1. Thermal conductivities of hybrid samples and comparison with theoretical predictions.

Thermal conductivity (W/m K)

Model vertical Model vertical
CNF CF Exp., (CF 2l/d ¼ 20, (CF 2l/d ¼ 10, Exp., Model Exp., Model
vol fr vol fr vertical CNF 2l/d ¼ 50) CNF 2l/d ¼ 100) isotropic isotropic horizontal horizontal

0.01 0.39 4.66 2.95 2.90 0.60

0.05 0.35 5.19 4.70 2.69 0.59
0.10 0.30 8.6 5.86 6.84 2.1 2.53 1.3 0.59
0.15 0.25 6.55 8.97 2.44 0.58
0.20 0.20 11.4 7.26 11.13 1.3 2.41 1.6 0.58
0.25 0.15 8.00 13.34 2.44 0.58
0.30 0.10 11.4 8.79 15.63 1.5 2.53 1.9 0.59
0.35 0.05 9.64 18.04 2.69 0.59
0.39 0.01 10.36 20.08 2.90 0.60
0.20 0.10 5.1 5.30 8.97 1.0 1.53 0.47

2480 POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE—-2008 DOI 10.1002/pen

containing hybrid mixtures of two fillers show higher
thermal conductivity due to increased contacts between
the microfibers that are promoted by the presence of the
nanofibers, especially when microfibers are aligned.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Professor M.M.K. Khan spent two months as a Visiting
Professor at West Virginia University at the initiation of
this work.
REFERENCES
1. O. Breuer and U. Sundaraj, Polym. Comp., 25, 630 (2004).
2. J. Njuguna and K. Pielichowski, Adv. Eng. Mat., 5, 769
(2003).
3. R. Prasher, J.Y. Chang, I. Sauciuc, S. Narsimhan, D. Chau,
G. Chrysler, A. Myers, S. Prstic, and C. Hu, Intel Technol.
J., 9, 285 (2005).
4. P. Kim, L. Shi, A. Majumdar, and P.L. McEuen, Phys. Rev.
Lett., 87, 215502–1, (2001).
5. R.J. Kuriger and M.K. Alam, Exp. Heat Trans., 15, 19
(2002).
6. M.J. Biercuk, M.C. Llaguno, M. Radosavljevic, J.K. Hyun,
T.J. Johnson, and J.E. Fischer, Appl. Phys. Lett., 80, 2767
(2002).
7. S. Ghose, D.C. Working, J.W. Connell, J.G. Smith Jr., K.A.
Watson, D.M. Delozier, Y.P. Sun, and Y. Lin, High Perf.
Polm., 18, 961 (2006).
DOI 10.1002/pen
8. A.T. Cummings, L. Shi, and J.H. Koo, Proceedings of
IMECE2005, Nov 5–11, Orlando, FL, 773 (2005).
9. C.W. Nan, R Birringer, D.R. Clarke, and H. Gleiter, J. Appl.
Phys., 81, 6692 (1997).
10. J. Rajaiah, G. Andrews, E. Ruckenstein, and R.K. Gupta,
Chem. Eng. Sci., 47, 3863 (1993).
11. G.W. Lee, J.I. Lee, S.S. Lee, M. Park, and J. Kim, J. Mater.
Sci., 40, 1259 (2005).
12. Y.A. Kim, S. Kamio, T. Tajiri, T. Hayashi, S.M. Song, M.
Endo, M. Terrones, and M.S. Dresselhaus, Appl. Phys. Lett.,
90, 093125 (2007).
13. C. Guthy, F. Du, S. Brand, K.I. Winey, and J.E. Fischer,
J. Heat Transfer, 129, 1096 (2007).
14. O. Shenderova, T. Tyler, G. Cunningham, M. Ray, J. Walsh,
S.H.M. Casulli, G. McGuire, V. Kuznetsov, and S. Lipa,
Diamond Relat. Mater., 16, 1213 (2007).
15. R.C. Progelhof, J.L. Throne, and R.R. Ruetsch, Polym. Eng.
Sci., 16, 615 (1976).
16. R.L. Hamilton and O.K. Crosser, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam.,
1, 187 (1962).
17. L.E. Nielsen, Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam., 13, 17 (1974).
18. C.W. Nan, G. Liu, Y. Lin, and M. Li, Appl. Phys. Lett., 85,
3549 (2004).
19. R.S. Prasher, J. Shipley, S. Prstic, P. Koning, and J.L.
Wang, J. Heat Transfer, 125, 1170 (2003).
20. A.G. Every, Y. Tzou, D.P.H. Hasselman, and R. Raj, Acta.
Metall. Mater., 40, 123 (1992).
21. E.H. Weber, M.L. Clingerman, and J.A. King, J. Appl.
Polym. Sci., 88, 112 (2003).
POLYMER ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE—-2008 2481