1

CHAIR’S MESSAGE

Spring of 2008 is now upon us and ANTEC 2008 is just around the corner. This year, Dr. Sanjiv Bhatt of Entegris Corporation, the Polymer Analysis Division Technical Program Chair, has as-sembled an exciting conference. This year we have eight sessions total including one joint session with the Medical Division. Of these eight sessions, three are on characterization and analysis of polymer nanocomposites, one is on polymer blends, one is on polymer thin films, and one is on new characterization techniques. These sessions start on Monday morning and continue through Wednesday. Our PAD Business Meeting is also scheduled for Tuesday afternoon right after the technical sessions scheduled on that day. As Chair, I encourage all of you to attend these sessions and our business meeting. This year the Polymer Analysis Division is facing many chal-lenges which are reflected in part by the national economy. The board is taking many steps to reinvigorate effective sponsorship for our Founder’s Award after our previous sponsor could no longer maintain support. Since it’s inception, the Founder’s Award recipients make up a list of prestigious individuals and we encourage any future potential sponsors to contact anyone on the PAD Board of Directors to determine how to contribute. The goals for PAD this year include efforts directed toward streamlining and simplifying paper submission and participation in ANTEC. The board believes that improvements in this process will increase both paper submission and participation, both within PAD as well as within ANTEC overall. Steps like these can revi-talize ANTEC which is critical to our society. I look forward to seeing you all at ANTEC 2008 in Milwaukee!!  Alan Lesser

Vol. XXXV, No. 2 April, 2008

IN THIS ISSUE

Chair’s Message……….Page 1 Membership Report……Page 3 Treasurer’s Report…….Page 5 Influence of Deagglomeration States of Carbon Nanotubes on the Thermal and Mechanical Properties of Carbon Nanotube Reinforced Polyethylene Oxide Feature Article………...Page 6 Best Paper Award Guidelines…………….Page 13

The PAD webpage address is: http://www.4spe.org/communities/divisions/d33.php

Polymer Analysis Division Polymer Analysis Division Society of Plastics EngineersSociety of Plastics Engineers

2

BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2006-2007 Alan Lesser (term ending 2008) P.A.D. CHAIR Polymer Science and Engineering University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 (413) 577-1316 (413) 545-0082 fax ajl@polysci.umass.edu James Batteas (term ending 2009) AWARD COMMITTEE CHAIR Department of Chemistry Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77842 Phone: (979) 458-2965; Fax: (979) 845-4719 batteas@mail.chem.tamu.edu Sanjiv Bhatt, (term ending 2009) ANTEC ‘08 TPC Enetgris 3500 Lyman Boulevard Chaska, MN 55318 (952) 556-3131 ; FAX 952-556-8606 sanjiv_bhatt@entegris.com Terry Collier III (term ending 2009) SECRETARY 3 M Building 0518-01-01 St. Paul, MN 55144 (651) 736-6420 tcollier@mmm.com Nandika D’Souza (term ending 2009) Department of Materials Science Univ. of North Texas Denton, TX 76203-5310 (940) 565-2979 (940) 565-4824 ndsouza@unt.edu John B. Enns (term ending 2009) TREASURER Vistakon 7500 Centurion Parkway, R&D W-3B Jacksonville, FL 32256 (904) 443-3809 (904) 928-5953 fax jenns@visus.jnj.com Claudius Feger (ex-officio) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE LIAISON IBM T.J. Watson Research Center P.O. Box 218, Room 39-114 Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 (914) 945-3466 (914) 945-4033 Vassilios Galiatsatos (term ending 2009) Equistar Chemicals, LP 11530 Northlake Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45249 (513) 530-4263 (513) 530-4268 fax vassilios.galiatsatos@equistarchem.com Changdeng Liu, (term ending 2009) Ethicon Inc. (a Johnson & Johnson Company) P.O. Box 151, Route 22 West Somerville, NJ 08876-0151 (908) 218-2896 cliu26@ethus.jnj.com

SOCIETY OF PLASTICS ENGINEERS, INC.,

PO BOX 0403, BROOKFIELD, CT 06804-0403 PHONE: 203-775-0471

FAX: 203-775-8490 WEB: www.4spe.org

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Susan Oderwald

ANTEC conference Lesley Kyle 740-5452 lskyle@4spe.org ANTEC boot sales Lesley Kyle 740-5452 lskyle@4spe.org ANTEC paper submission Peter Boergermann 740-5472 pboergermann@4spe.org Book orders Linda Roos 740-5449 lroos@4spe.org Council Liaison Marie Salzo 740-5422 mcsalzo@4spe.org Divisions, Special Interest Maria Russo 740-5431 mrusso@4spe.org Groups, Student Chapters, Annual Award Program Gail Bristol 740-5431 grbristol@4spe.org Awards for Outstanding Maria Russo 740-5431 mrusso@4spe.org Division, Fellow, Honor Society, and STRETCH Chase, Husky Awards Laurie McDougal 740-5432 lamcdougal@4spe.org Essay Contest, Newsletter, STAR Award Tricia McKnight 740-5430 tmcknight@4spe.org e-learning center Peter Boergermann 740-5472 pboergermann@4spe.org Employment ads Jackie Salzo 740-5411 jsalzo@4spe.org Membership Membership 740-5403 membership@4spe.org Seminar registration Martha Charris 740-5458 mlcharris@4spe.org SPE training products & Linda Roos 740-5449 lroos@4spe.org bookstore SPE Foundation Gail Bristol 740-5447 grbristol@4spe.org Topical conference Lesley Kyle 740-5452 lskyle@4spe.org planning Topical conference Martha Charris 740-5458 mlcharris@4spe.org registration Website Deb Daily 740-5468 dadaily@4spe.org

WHO CAN HELP YOU

www.4spe.org

PAD MISSION STATEMENT The purpose of the Polymer Analysis Division is to fa-cilitate dissemination of knowledge in the field of polymer analysis, to stimulate technical advances, to encourage high standards of scholarship and to provide a forum for discussion on all related issues.

3

Membership Report

March 2008

Polymer Analysis Division

The Polymer Analysis Division of SPE has grown significantly in the last five years while the total membership of SPE has fallen from 21,670 to 18,565. This indicates that the growth of SPE de-pends on emphasizing the importance of strength in the area of effort covered by the each division. Note that in January 2003 the Plastics Analysis Division had a total membership of only 718 (417 pri-mary members and 301 secondary members). Now the PAD has a total membership of 844 (primary—400, Secondary---444), a growth of 126. Just in the last month, PAD has increased its members by twelve more.

Polymer Analysis Div. New Members Guillaume Brault, College Ahustsic, Repentigny, QC, Canada (Student)

Sourav Chatterjee, U. of Massachsetts Lowell, MA (Student) Fadi A. El-khatib, PhD, BASF, Wyandotte, MI

Julien-Leandre Gareau, College Ahustsic, Montreal, QC, Canada (Student) William S. Gillman, Somerset, NJ

Linda A. Gordon, Boston Scientific Corp., Fremont, CA Elizabeth E. Grimes, Arkema, King of Prussia, PA

John W. Hughes, Acworth, GA C Kneale, Q-Lab Europe Ltd., Bolton, United Kingdom

Swapnil C. Kohale, Texas Tech Univ., Chemical Engineering Dept., Lubbock, TX (Student) Jong S Lee, Omnova, Haughton, LA

Sandeep Manandhar, Irving, TX (Student) Catherine Martin, College Ahustsic, Montreal, QC, Canada

Kenneth R. Morris, Cornelius, NC Kara Opritza, JJI Technologies, LLC.,Painesville, OH

Adolfo Ortiz, Stoneridge, El Paso, TX Anita R. Rajan, Southern Illinois Univ. Carbondale, Physics Dept., (Student)

Mark Riemann, Palmer Holland, Inc., North Olmsted, OH Bruno G. Sodaro, Husky Injection Molding, Bolton ON, Canada

Duckenson Supplice, College Ahustsic, Montreal, QC, Canada (Student) Jiahong Tan, St. Jude Medical, Sylmar, CA

James T. Wang, Formosa Plastics Corp., Technical Dept., Point Comfort, TX

Submitted by David W. Riley, Membership Chairman

Membership Report

4

Board of Directors (cont.) George Martin (term ending 2009) Department of Biomedical and Chemical Engineering 121 Link Hall Syracuse University Syracuse, NY 13244 (315) 443-4467 gcmartin@syr.edu Patrick T. Mather (term ending 2009) COUNCILOR Biomedical and Chemical Engineering 121 Link Hall Syracuse University Syracuse, NY 13244, (315)-443-8760 ptmather@syr.edu Kevin Menard (term ending 2008) Perkin Elmer LAS 2024 Pembrooke Place Denton TX 76205 (940) 367-2843; Fax: 940-383-6837 kevin.menard@charter.net Kwabena Narh (term ending 2009) NEWSLETTER EDITOR Mechanical Engineering Department New Jersey Institute of Technology Newark, NJ 07102-1982 (973) 596-3353 (973) 642-4282 fax narh@admin.njit.edu William J. Orts (term ending 2008) USDA-Western Regional Research Center 800 Buchanan, Albany, CA (510) 559-5730 (510) 559-5936 fax orts@pw.usda.gov Guiseppe R. Palmese (term ending 2008) Department of Chemical Engineering Drexel University Philadelphia, PA (215) 895-5814 (215) 895-5837 fax palmese@coe.drexel.edu David W. Riley (term ending 2009) MEMBERSHIP AND GROWTH CHAIR Extrusion Engineers 858 Princeton Court Neshanic Station, NJ 08853 (908) 369-7260 (908) 369-7260 fax drdriley@aol.com Mark Roller (term ending 2009) FELLOW/ HONORED SERVICE CHAIR 9 Quince Place North Brunswick, NJ 08902 (732) 297-7055 mroller867@aol.com Sindee L. Simon (term ending 2009) Department of Chemical Engineering Texas Tech University Lubbock, TX 79409 (806) 742-1763 (806) 742-3552 fax sindee.simon@coe.ttu.edu Harrison Yu (term ending 2009) Professional Scientific Staffing Lancaster Laboratories, Richmond, VA (804) 274-2290 Ligun.h.yu@musa.com

Walter X. Zukas (term ending 2009) U.S. Army Natick Soldier RDEC Kansas Street Natick, MA 01760 508-233-5656 walter.zukas@us.army.mil

Newsletter Edited and Managed by: Kwabena (Albert) Narh Layout in this issue by: Kwabena (Albert) Narh “The PAD Review” is published on-line by the non-profit Polymer Analysis Division of the Society of Plastics Engineers. For corpo-rate sponsorship rates, contact Albert Narh at narh@njit.edu

Do you have an idea for the newsletter? Please contact Albert Narh at narh@njit.edu We welcome articles, thermal analysis and characterization tips, book reviews, meeting reports – anything of interest to our readership.

5

Treasurer’s Report

Submitted by John B. Enns, Treasurer

BALANCE AS OF 6/30/2005 6/30/2006 6/30/2007 Budget $19,106.58 $17,116.21 $16,243.56 2007-2008 CREDITS SPE Rebate $1,644.32 $3,171.14 $2,365.76 $3,300.00 SPE - Philadelphia Section TMS Conference Award Interest $70.14 $78.32 $49.61 $100.00 ANTEC Keynote sponsors $600.00 $5,000.00 Newsletter Adds/Sponsorships $2,250.00 $2,550.00 $2,500.00 Total Credits $4,564.46 $5,799.46 $2,415.37 $10,900.00 EXPENSES RETEC TMS Conference Newsletter $5,020.65 $2,500.00 Teleconference Meetings $80.28 $201.24 $102.86 $250.00 Awards $336.70 $3,335.48 $650.00 ANTEC $1,115.00 $3,132.99 $5,000.00 Board Meetings $700.00 Councilor travel $1,500.00 Bank fees, Postage $2.20 $2.40 $2.40 $100.00 Web Site $200.00 Total Debits $6,554.83 $6,672.11 $105.26 $10,900.00 $17,116.21 $16,243.56 $18,553.67 BALANCE AS OF 6/30/2006 6/30/2007 2/29/2008

6

Influence of Deagglomeration States of Carbon Nanotubes on the Thermal and Mechanical Properties of Carbon Nanotube Reinforced Polyethylene Oxide

Ahmed-Tijani Agwedichama, Laila J. Jallob and Kwabena A. Narha

aDepartment of Mechanical Engineering bOtto York Department of Chemical Engineering

New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ 07102-1982

Abstract Highly aggregated multi-walled carbon nanotubes were first deagglomerated using a high-intensity ultrasonic probe, then mixed with a solution of polyethylene oxide. Deagglomeration of the nanotubes was carried out at dif-ferent amplitudes of the vibrating ultrasonic probe. Differ-ential Scanning Calorimetry results show an increase in melting temperature with increase in amplitude of sonica-tion. Also tensile test results show improved mechanical properties, with increased degree of deagglomeration of the nanotubes. SEM Images show that the extent of nano-tubes dispersion in the polymer matrix correlates with the extent of deagglomeration. Keywords: nano composites, sonication, carbon nano-tubes, thermal properties, mechanical properties, deag-glomeration Introduction Carbon nanotubes tend to form massive structures of highly sintered aggregates or bundles which make it diffi-cult, if not impossible, to disperse homogeneously in vis-cous fluids, especially thermoplastic melts, in order to create nanocomposites with superior mechanical, thermal and electrical properties. More specifically, because of the high surface area to volume ratio, carbon nanotubes have the propensity to form hard agglomerates that require spe-cial techniques to deagglomerate. To overcome the prob-lems associated with agglomeration of nanofillers, various methods have been used in the preparation of nanocompo-sites, including the use of high power ultrasonic mixers (1), surfactants in solution mixing (2), and in situ polym-erization (3). However, several reports indicate that while dispersion of nano-fillers in polymer matrices may be achieved during solution mixing, for example, re-aggregation of the nano-fillers occurs during the drying process (4, 5). Once uniform dispersion is achieved another issue to resolve is the interfacial interaction between the nano-tubes and the matrix. For there to be transfer of load from

the matrix to the nanotubes, there has to be sufficient in-teraction between the matrix and the nanotubes. For ex-ample, any load applied to the polymer matrix should be transferred to the nanotube. This load relies on the effec-tive interfacial stress transfer at the polymer–nanotube interface, which tends to be polymer dependent (6). While the existing methods attempt to modify the nanotube sur-face, enhancing the interfacial interaction, the methods are not cost effective and may involve hazardous chemicals. One way to circumvent the CNT separation during drying is to make the CNT-polymer solution very viscous so that during drying, the movement of CNTs is restricted by the high viscous forces. Work by Narh et al. (7) has shown that highly aggre-gated multi-walled carbon nanotubes are easily deagglom-erated, and subsequently dispersed in polymer solution, using high-intensity ultrasonic probe designed to vibrate at 20 kHz. In the current study the effect of degree of deagglomeration on the mechanical and thermal proper-ties of polyethylene oxide was investigated. Experimental Materials: Polyethylene Oxide (in a powder form) of molecular weight around 600000 (POLYOX WSR 205), was sup-plied by Dow Chemicals; Multi-Walled Carbon Nano-tubes (MWCNTs), purchased from Cheap Tubes Inc., were said to be of 95 wt% purity with outside diameter 20-30 nm and length 10-30 mm. Specimen Preparation 20g of PEO was first dissolved in water to form a very viscous solution. In a separate container, 1 wt% of MWCNTs was weighed and added to 50 ml of water. The resulting suspension was, then, subjected to the vibration of the ultrasonic probe set to a particular percentage of the maximum amplitude of 207 microns. The de-agglomeration process entails, submerging the tip of the ultrasonic probe halfway the height of the suspension and running the equipment for 15 minutes. Deagglomeration

7

of CNTS resulted from vibrations from the ultrasonic probe which produces powerful shearing action at the tip of the probe and, thus, causing the nanotubes in the wa-ter to become intensely agitated. The deagglomeration procedure was repeated for the same amount of MWCNTs and different amplitudes; 41, 62, 83, 104, 155 and 207 µm corresponding, respectively, to about 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 75% and 100% of the maximum am-plitude. The deagglomerated suspension of nanotubes was then added to the PEO solution and mixed with a high speed mixer at 1500 rpm for 5 minutes. The MWCNT-PEO mixture was then poured into an alumi-num pan and dried in an oven at 60ºC for 3 days. Finally, specimens from solution-cast sample were compression molded at 100 °C and at about 20,000 psi, to obtain plastics sheets with dimensions 70 mm x 70mm x 1.0 mm Thermal Characterization of CNT‐Reinforced PEO Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) analysis was conducted on the PEO containing 1 wt% of deagglomer-ated CNT, under non-isothermal conditions. The TA Instrument DSC (model: Q1000) was used for the analy-sis. Aluminum pans were used, and the specimen (and reference) chamber was flushed with argon at approxi-mately 50 ml/min. The following procedure was used: The system was first heated at 2.5 °C/min between room temperature and 125 °C (first heating), and kept at 125 °C for about 1 minute to ensure complete melting of the specimen. This was followed by cooling under ambient conditions to room temperature (about 4 °C/min). Fi-nally, the system was reheated at the same rate as in the first heating, in order to ensure that there had not been substantial thermal degradation during the preceding scans. Mechanical testing Tensile testing was used as an important tool for characterizing the effect of the degree of deagglomera-tion of carbon nanotubes on the mechanical properties of the nanocomposites. The tensile tests were done using an Instron material testing machine (Instron 8871). For this, a rectangular strip was cut from the compression molded sheets, prepared as described above. A strain rate of 0.5 mm/s was used for all the tensile tests. All the tensile tests were conducted at 25 °C. Two tensile tests were performed for each specimen. SEM Images SEM Images of a cross-section of the sample were taken with a field emission scanning electron micro-scope (FE-SEM, LEO SUPRA 55, Carl Zeiss, Germany) operating at 5 KV. Samples were mounted on aluminum stubs using double side carbon tape, and sputter-coated with gold particle.

Results and Discussion Thermal Behavior of CNT-Reinforced PEO From the DSC results, peak melting temperatures (from first and second heating), and peak crystallization temperatures (from cooling) were determined as a func-tion of nanotube deagglomeration, in terms of percent of maximum amplitude of vibration of the ultrasonic probe. Figure 1a shows field emission scanning electron mi-croscopy (FESEM) image of highly agglomerated multi-walled carbon nanotubes prior to deagglomeration. It shows the multi-walled carbon nanotubes which have aggregated to form agglomerates hundreds of times lar-ger than the primary nanoparticle, due to their small size and high inter-particle Van der Waals forces. Figure 1b shows details of the boxed region in Figure 1a. Figure 1c shows further details of the boxed region in Figure 1a. From FESEM images such as that in Figure 1c, the sizes of the nanotubes were determined to be in the range of 25 nm - 60 nm. Figure 1d shows significant deagglomeration of the MWCNTs by the sonication process. Figures 1e is a higher magnification (for details) of the boxed region in Figure 1d, showing a two-dimensional fine mesh of deagglomerated CNTs, indicating superior deagglom-eration of the ball-like, highly clustered MWCNTs in Figure 1a. For details, higher magnification of the SEM image in Figure 1d is shown in Figure 1f. Figure 2a shows a plot of transition temperature as a function of the degree of deagglomeration of carbon nanotubes in terms of the percentage of maximum soni-cation amplitude. The plot shows that the transition tem-peratures obtained from the first heating are as good as those taken from the reheating processes, especially at higher amplitude of sonication. Figure 2b shows a plot of the degree of crystallin-ity as a function of nanotubes deagglomeration. An in-crease in the amplitude of ultrasonic vibration (degree of deagglomeration) corresponds to an increase in the crys-tallization sites. This makes sense, since the nanotubes serve as nucleation sites for the polymer, so the more dispersed they are the more crystallization sites there are for the polymer. Mechanical Behavior of CNT-Reinforced PEO Figure 3a shows stress-strain curves of PEO-CNT composites for various percentage of vibration ampli-tudes. The curves in Figure 3b show that the degree of the MWCNTS deagglomeration seems to have direct effect on the yield strength of the polymer. With a change in vibration amplitude from 20% to 30% there wasn’t much change in the yield strength. However, there was a noticeable yield strength difference when the

8

vibration amplitude was changed from 30% to 40% of the maximum amplitude (207 µm). The yield strength of the polymer jumped from about 2.8 MPa to 8.0MPa. There was an even more increase at 100% amplitude. At 100% amplitude the yield strength is about 9.8MPa, which is about 3 times that of the 20%. Similarly, there were changes in the elastic modulus of the composite when the amplitude of the ultrasonic probe was varied. The elastic moduli were determined from the linear portions of the stress-strain curves. The overall trend is that the elastic modulus was improved with increased amplitude, although the im-provement was not as big as that of the yield strength. The composites containing MWCNT deagglomeration amplitudes of 20% and 30% had the smallest elasticity, while that containing MWCNTs sonicated at 100% of the amplitude had the highest elasticity. Furthermore, as expected, the strain in the compos-ite at the point of failure increases as the amplitude in-creases (Figure 4a). The higher the amplitude, the greater the efficiency of breaking up MWCNT agglom-erates, which serve as sites for shearing in the polymer matrix. The degree of deagglomeration Figures 4a, 4b, and 4c are the SEM Images of the nano-composites. Figure 4a shows the image of a com-posite prepared at 20% amplitude of nanotube deag-glomeration, 4b, at 50% and 4c, at 100%. The 20% sam-ple shows patches of the composite containing a cluster of the dispersed nanotubes with larger portions of same composite showing only PEO, indicating a lesser degree of dispersion. This confirms the thermal and mechanical test results which show very little improvement at 20% amplitude as compared to the other frequencies. The 50% sample shows good dispersion of the nanotubes in the polymer matrix, with the nanotubes aligned in mostly the lateral direction. Results of thermal and ten-sile tests for this sample indicate a slight increase in the melting temperature and two fold improvement of the mechanical strength over the 20%, or 30% samples. The sample at 100% amplitude shows the best nanotube dis-persion of all the samples, and an improvement of both the thermal and tensile properties larger than all the other samples. Conclusions There is a direct correlation between the degree of MWCNT deagglomeration and the thermal and me-chanical properties of CNT-PEO composite. Increasing the amplitudes of ultrasonic vibration and, hence, the degree of nanotube deagglomeration leads to an increase in the melting temperature, an increase in the yield and elastic modulus of the composite. While the toughness of the nanocomposite (area under the stress-strain curve)

is less than that of the unfilled polymer (not shown in Figure 2a), the increase in the intensity of deagglomera-tion did improve the toughness of the composites. The best thermal and mechanical properties of the composite are achieved with the maximum intensity of deagglom-eration. Acknowledgements This research was funded by the National Science Foundation (EEC-0552587, and CMMI-0802947). References 1. Valentini L, Biagiotti J, Lopez-Manchado MA, Snatucci S, Kenny JM. (2004). Polym Eng Sci, 44(2):303-11. 2. Bin Y, Kitanaka M, Zhu D, Matsuo M. (2003). Macromolecules 36:6213-9. 3. Li X, Huang YD, Liu L, Cao HL. (2006). J Appl Polym Sci, 102(3):2500-8. 4. Chatterjee T, Yurekli K, Hajiev VG, Krishnamoorti R. (2005). Adv Funct Mater, 15:1832-8. 5. Gopkumar TG, Patel NS, Xanthos M. (2006). Polymer Composites, 27(4):368-87. 6. Barber AH, Cohen SR, Wagner HD. (2003). Appl Phys Lett, 82(23):4140. 7. Narh KA, Jallo JL, Dave RN. Proceedings of the 65th Annual Technical Conference & Exhibition; 2007 May 6-11; ANTEC 2007, Cincinnati, OH: Society of Plastics Engineers; p. 2199-203.

9

a

b

c

d

e

Figure 1. FESEM images of (a) Highly agglomerated MWCNTs (1000X); (b) high magnification of boxed region in (a) (20,000X), (c) higher magnification of the boxed region in (a) (50,000X); (d) MWCNTs, deagglomerated with RESS (2000X); (e) high magnification of boxed region in (d) (20,000X); and (f) high magnification of the boxed region in (d) (150,000X).

f

10

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Amplitude (%)

Yiel

d St

ress

(MPa

)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Mod

ulus

(MPa

)

Yield StessModulus

52

54

56

58

60

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Amplitude (%)

Deg

ree

of C

ryst

allin

ity (%

)

1st meltingcooling2nd melting

Figure 2. (a) Transition temperature versus percentage of maximum amplitude of vibration of ultrasonic probe. Note that the maximum amplitude was 207 microns. (b) Degree of crystallinity as a function of percentage of maximum amplitude of vibration of ultrasonic probe.

Figure 3. (a) A graph of the tensile test as a function of the amplitude of sonication. (b) Elastic modulus and Yield strength as a function of amplitude of sonication.

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Amplitude (%)

Tran

sitio

n Te

mpe

ratu

re (°C

)

1st meltingcooling2nd melting

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

0 0 . 1 0 . 2 0 . 3 0 . 4 0 . 5

Strain (mm/mm)

Stre

ss (M

Pa)

20%30%

40%

75%100%

11

(a)

(c)

(b)

200nm

Figure 4. SEM images of the polymer-CNT composite at different amplitude of sonication: (a) 20% amplitude and 100000x magnification, (b) 50% amplitude and 100000x magnification, and (c) 100% amplitude and 30000x. The ripple-like features in (c) are knife marks.

12

13

PAD’s Best Paper Award for SPE ANTEC 2008

Brief Background This is an annual award made to the authors of the best symposium paper presented in the PAD session of the SPE ANTEC meetings. Each author of the best paper receives a plaque—presented at the next SPE ANTEC . Procedure for Selecting the Best Paper

The selection of the best paper follows a peer review process beginning with the nomination of a best paper by each of the PAD session chairs during the initial SPE review process. Members of the Board of Directors of PAD and Invited Speakers are EXCLUDED from consideration. The paper must conform to the preprint format of the SPE ANTEC papers and be commensurate with the regulations and customs of papers presented in the PAD/SPE programs. The second stage of the selection sends all the nominated papers to the PAD Award Committee Chair, who then forms a small committee of about five judges from among PAD board of directors. The committee of judges is headed by PAD Award Committee Chair. The five judges will attend the actual presen-tation of all the nominated papers, judge the papers individually - based mainly on the content and delivery- and score each paper. The judges’ scores are tallied by the chair, who then informs the PAD board of directors at the end of the ANTEC, as well as the winner. SPE headquarters is then notified of the winner.

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS AWARD, CONTACT THE EDITOR OF PAD REVIEW: Prof. Kwabena A Narh Mechanical Engineering Department New Jersey Institute of Technology Newark, NJ 07102-1982 (973) 596-3353 (973) 642-4282 fax narh@admin.njit.edu

14

Professor K. A. Narh, PAD Review Editor Department of Mechanical Engineering New Jersey Institute of Technology University Heights Newark, NJ 07102-1982

April 2008 Requested Material