Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 6, 2026

Grafting Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes with Polystyrene to Enable Self-Assembly and Anisotropic Patchiness
Published on: April 1, 2018
Purity evaluation of carbon nanotube materials by thermogravimetric, TEM, and SEM methods
João Paulo C Trigueiro1, Glaura G Silva, Rodrigo L Lavall
1Departamento de Química-UFMG, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Pampulha, 31270 901, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Abstract:
Raw and purified samples of carbon nanotubes are considered as multicomponent systems with a distribution of carbonaceous, amorphous, multishell graphitic particles and nanotubes, together with the particles of metal compounds from the catalyst. With respect to the carbon nanotube fractions, a distribution of size, defect concentrations, and functionalities needs to be taken into account. In order to address the problem of quantitative evaluation of purity it is necessary to measure the quality and distribution of the carbon nanotubes. In this research conventional and high resolution thermogravimetry are applied to quantify different fractions of carbonaceous and metallic materials in raw and moderately purified single walled and multiwalled carbon nanotubes. For each oxidized fraction, defined by careful line shape analysis of the derivative thermogravimetric curves (DTG), the temperature of maximum rate of oxidation, the temperature range for this oxidation, related to the degree of homogeneity, and the amount of associated material is specified. The attribution of carbonaceous materials to each fraction in the distribution was based on SEM and TEM measurements and the literature. The MWNT purified sample with 1.6 wt% metal oxide was investigated by high resolution thermogravimetry (HRTG). The quantitative assessment for the carbonaceous fractions was 25 wt% of amorphous and high defect carbonaceous materials including nanotubes, 54 wt% MWNT and 20 wt% multishell graphitic particles. A qualitative evaluation of these fractions was obtained from the SEM and TEM images and supports these results. The accuracy of the values, taking into account other measurements performed on the same batch of material, should be more sensible than +/-4 wt%.

