EFFECT OF GATE AND RUNNER DESIGN ON ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY OF

THE POLYSTYRENE/MULTI-WALLED CARBON NANOTUBE

NANOCOMPOSITES

Mehdi Mahmoodi1, Mohammad Arjmand2, Uttandaraman Sundararaj2 and Simon Park*1

1
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB,
Canada
2
Department of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

Abstract molding needs a short producing cycle and has the ability
to produce 3D complicated parts, makes it suitable for
Polystyrene (PS) was compounded with multi-walled batch production of the nanocomposites. So in this study,
carbon nanotube (MWCNT) using a counter rotating twin injection molding was utilized to produce samples for
screw extruder. Samples with 5 weight % of nanotube electrical conductivity measurement purpose.
were injection molded into a mold equipped with three The electrical behaviour of the CPCs extensively
different cavities. Electrical conductivity testing was depends on the alignment and dispersion of the nanotubes
applied in in-flow and cross-flow directions of the molded inside the microstructure of the polymer. Higher alignment
samples. Different injection molding conditions: mold can decrease the probability of CNT-CNT contact in
temperature, melt temperature, injection/holding pressure polymers and can noticeably affect the percolation
and injection velocity was varied to investigate the effect threshold and volume resistivity/conductivity of the CPCs
of process parameters on electrical conductivity of each (Abbasi et al. 2010, Kharchenko et al. 2004). Abbasi et al.
part. Experiments show that electrical conductivity can be (2010) performed a study on the orientation of the carbon
varied up to 7 orders of magnitude by small change in nanotubes in polycarbonate using different processes and
processing conditions. Among the process parameters, concluded that a high degree of CNT alignment and then
injection velocity and melt temperature have the largest higher percolation threshold can be obtained by micro
influence on alignment and then electrical conductivity of injection molding compared with compression molding.
the samples. Villmow et al. (2007) investigated the impact of
processing parameters on the electrical surface and
Introduction volume resistivities of the injection molded parts and
concluded that melt temperature and injection velocity
Carbon nanotubes (CNT) are promising additives for followed by their interaction have the highest impact on
thermoplastics due to their superior mechanical, thermal, the electrical resistivity of the samples.
magnetic and electrical properties (Koerner et al. 2004, This paper focuses on the effect of runner and gate
Bauhofer et al. 2009). Due to the high electrical properties design and process parameters on electrical volume
of CNT/polymer composites and their application in resistivity of the injection molded samples. Mold
electro-static dissipation, electromagnetic interference temperature, melt temperature, injection/holding pressure
shielding, printable circuit writing, or transparent and injection velocity were considered as the main
conductive coatings, these materials have attracted a great parameters in this study. Two-level, four-factor factorial
attention both in research and industry (Lellinger et al. design was used for this aim. A mold was designed and
2008, Xie et al. 2005). A noticeable amount of research manufactured equipped with three different cavities. To
has been conducted on electrical properties of carbon investigate the alignment and dispersion of nanotubes
nanotube composites (Bauhofer and Kovacs 2009, inside the polystyrene, SEM and TEM images from the
Ounaies et al. 2003). Among these, just a limited number samples were taken and presented.
of studies have chosen injection molding as a method of
shaping the conductive polymer composites (COC) Materials and Experiments
(Villmow et al. 2007, Chandra et al. 2007, Abbasi et al.
2010). Injection molding is almost the most important 20 wt% MWCNT/PS masterbatch was purchased
processing procedure of thermoplastic parts besides from Hyperion Catalysis International. The nanotubes are
extrusion. Compared to the other manufacturing processes vapor grown and typically have outer diameter of 10-15
which are used to produce CNT/polymer nanocomposites, nm wrapped around a hollow 5 nm diameter core (Abbasi
such as compression molding and sonication, injection 2010). The lengths range between 1-10 µm while their
density is approximately 1.75 g/cm3. All the materials Table 2. Levels (set points) of the experiments
were dried at 80 C for at least 4 hours. The masterbatch Level Factors
was diluted into 5 wt% of PS/MWCNT using a co-
c1 (°C) c2 (°C) c3 (bar) c4 (mm/sec)
rotating twin screw extruder. The temperature profile was
set as xxxxx for zone 1-x respectively while the rotating + 60 240 100 240
speed was set as xxxx rpm. 25 215 60 24
Experiments were conducted using a micro injection
molding machine (Boy 12A) with screw diameter of 18 TEM scanning of the samples were conducted using a
mm and a length to diameter (L/D) ratio of 20. A series of Hitachi H-7650 machine. Samples for TEM scanning
experiments were conducted using a two-level, four factor were ultra-microtomed using a glass knife in room
factorial design to investigate the impact of four process temperature. Electrical testing was conducted on the
parameters, i.e. mold temperature (c1), melt temperature samples in both thickness and in-flow direction using a
(c2), injection/holding pressure (c3) and injection velocity keithley 6517A electrometer connected to keithley test
(c4) on the volume resistivity of the molded samples. The fixture (Keithley instruments, USA).
set points were selected with the maximum possible
intervals with considering the limitations of the used Mold Design and Manufacturing
micro injection molding machine and also the
recommended processing condition of the polystyrene. A A mold equipped with three cavities was designed
constant holding and cooling time of 8 and 10 seconds and manufactured on a 3-axis micro milling center using a
were applied for all the experiments. It should be 700 µm taper-end mill tool with 2 degree taper angle and
mentioned that holding pressure was set same as the spindle speed of 100 krpm. Cavities were same in size and
injection pressure for all the runs. The volume resistivity all had the dimension of 22.86 × 10.16 × 2 mm, but fed
was measured both in in-flow and in thickness direction of with different gates and runners. Figure 1 shows a
the molded samples. schematic of the designed mold with the given dimension
All the samples had same size, but the runner and in Table 3. Cavity #1 was fed by a trapezoidal runner and
gate shape and position differ from each other. A detailed an edge gate. Cavity #2 was fed by a trapezoidal runner
description of the mold is given in the next section. Table and a fan gate. Cavity #3 was fed by a trapezoidal runner
1 and 2 show the experiment design and the set points of and an edge gate, but the position of the gate was located
the molding parameters respectively. at the longer edge of the rectangular cavity. The runner
and gate dimensions were balanced using Moldflow
Table 1. Experiment design showing the two-level, four software for polystyrene to make sure that all the cavities
factor factorial design. The factors are c1: mold are filled at the same time. Figure 1b shows a schematic of
temperature, c2: melt temperature, c3: injection/holding the filling step simulated in Moldflow software showing
pressure and c4: injection velocity. that all the cavities have same filling time.
Exp. # Factors
c1 c2 c3 c4
1
2 +
3 + +
4 +
5 +
6 + +
7 + + +
8 + +
9 + +
10 + + +
11 + + + +
12 + + +
13 + +
14 + + +
15 + +
16 +
 Fill time
it can be seen in this image, no preferable alignment can
= 0.5284 [s]
be observed in this image.
[s]
0.5284

0.3963

0.2642

0.1321

0.0000

0
0
0

scale (40 mm)

Figure 1. a) A schematic view of the designed mold

and b) filling simulation of the cavities using Flow direction 100 nm
HV=83.0 kV
Moldflow software. Direct Mag: 30000 x

Table 3. Dimensions of the designed 3-cavity mold.

Parameter Value (mm)
a 22.86
b 10.16
c 1
d 1
e 2
f 10
g 1.84
h 1
i 2
j 7
k 12 100 nm
l 1 HV=83.0 kV
Direct Mag: 30000 x
m 1 Figure 2. TEM images from a) parallel to the flow from
n 2 injection molded sample (# 14) and b) compression
molded sample.
Results and Discussions
Electrical Resistivity
Morphological Characterization Electrical resistivity of the molded samples in
The electrical conduction pathways within the thickness direction is measured and given in Figure 3.
polymer matrix are obtained when a network of the carbon This figure shows the resistivity of PS-MWCNT
nanotubes is created. Figure 2a shows a TEM image taken composites for three different cavities. Interestingly,
from cavity 1 parallel to the flow direction. Good depends on the runner and gate type, position and
dispersion of nanotubes can be observed within the processing condition, up to 7 orders of magnitude
polystyrene matrix proving the effective mixing of twin difference in electrical resistivity can be observed in
screw extruder. Flow direction is also shown in this thickness direction. For the given figure, the highest
picture. As it can be seen, CNTs are more aligned in flow resistivity of the samples can be observed for the first
direction along their length axis due to the effect of shear three and last three experiments, where for all of them, c2
flow in injection molding. However, considering the (melt temperature) is minimum. This issue can be
entanglement of the nanotubes, some of them are explained by this fact that decreasing the melt temperature
remained transverse to the flow direction. Figure 2b shows can increase the shear force exerted to the melt and then
a TEM image from the compression molded samples. As increase in nanotube alignment. So this can decrease the
probability of CNT-CNT contact and decrease in trapezoidal runner and fan gate) show the lowest electrical
conducting the electrons through the nanotubes network. resistivity. In another word, a conductive network of
nanotubes can better be formed in cavity #2. Resistivity of
1 E+14 the samples molded with cavity #3 is between the first and
Cavity #1
1 E+12 Cavity #2
second cavities.
Electrical Resistivity (Ω.cm)

1 E+14
Cavity #3 Cavity #1
1 E+10
1 E+12 Cavity #2

Volume Resistivity (Ω.cm)

1 E+08 Cavity #3
1 E+10
1 E+06
1 E+08
1 E+04
1 E+06

1 E+02
1 E+04

1 E+00
1 E+02
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Experiment No. 1 E+00
Figure 3. Electrical resistivity of the molded parts in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
thickness direction. Experiment No.
Figure 4. Electrical resistivity of the molded samples
The lowest amount of volume resistivity (highest parallel to the flow direction.
amount of electrical conductivity) can be seen in
experiments 5, 8, 9 and 12. From Table 1, for all these Another interesting observation is a comparison
experiments c2 (melt temperature) and c4 (injection between the resistivities in flow and thickness direction.
velocity) have their highest and lowest values respectively. Cavity #1 shows the highest resistivity among the cavities
This decrease in electrical resistivity results from the in parallel to the flow direction (Fig. 4), while the lowest
formation of the conductive network in the polymer amount of electrical resistivity can be observed for cavity
structure. The low shear force applied to the melt due to #1 in thickness direction (Figure 3). This might be due to
the decrease in viscosity and injection velocity helps to the better formation of nanotube network in thickness
formation of a percolated network on nanotubes. Among direction for the nanocomposite molded parts with cavity
the cavities, the first cavity, equipped with an edge gate on #1. In another mean, alignment of nanotubes in flow
the smaller edge shows the lowest volume electrical direction is higher than that in thickness direction for the
resistivity compared with the other two cavities. It’s first cavity. Similar to the resistivity in thickness direction
worthwhile to mention that as a comparison between the (Figure 3), the lowest electrical resistivity of the samples
first and second cavities, which have edge and fan gate can be observed in experiments 5, 8, 9 and 12. These four
respectively, the volume resistivity of the parts molded experiments are molded with high melt temperature and
with edge gate cavity is lower than that for fan gate one. It low injection speed, again mentioning that these two
means that the alignment of the nanotubes in thickness parameters show the highest influence on electrical
direction is higher with fan gate cavity. conductivity of the molded nanocomposites. To analyze
The electrical resistivity of the samples along the flow the data of in-flow resistivity, Minitab software was used
direction is measured and shown in Figure 4. To measure to find the importance of each factor and their
the electrical resistivity parallel to the flow direction, combination.
samples with 2 mm thickness were cut from the near gate Effects of main factors on the electrical resistivity of
location. It should be mentioned that samples from cavity the nanocomposites molded with cavity # 1 are plotted in
#3 were cut parallel to their longer edge for measuring Figure 5.This plot shows the effect of each independent
their electrical resistivity. Same as resistivity of the variable (C1 - C4) on electrical resistivity of the samples.
samples in thickness direction, up to 7 orders of As it can be seen in this figure, C2 (melt temperature) and
magnitude difference in resistivity of the samples in C4 (injection speed) show the highest impact on the
parallel to the flow direction is observable. An interesting electrical resistivity of the samples. To better understand
trend can be observed among in-flow resistivity of the the interaction of the factors on electrical resistivity of the
samples. Parts molded in cavity #1 show the highest samples, interaction plots are shown in Figure 5b. In this
electrical resistivity among the samples. In another mean, figure, the interaction plot shows the mean electrical
the highest alignment in parallel to the flow direction can resistivity of two factors at all possible conditions. Based
be obtained with cavity #1. It is worthwhile to mention on this figure, interaction of C2 and C4 (symbolically
that cavity #1 is the one with trapezoidal runner and edge shown by C24 in this paper) and C34 have the highest
gate located at the smaller edge of the rectangular cavity impact on volume resistivity of the nanocomposites.
(Figure 1). Molded samples with cavity #2 (equipped with
 (a) 10. S.B. Kharchenko, J.F. Douglas, J. Obrzut, E.A.
C1 C2 Grulke, and K.B. Migler, Nat. Mater., 3, 564 (2004).
6.0E+11
4.5E+11
Key Words: ANTEC, Writing Papers, Hints, Template.
3.0E+11
1.5E+11
0
Mean

-1 1 -1 1
C3 C4
6.0E+11
4.5E+11
3.0E+11
1.5E+11
0
-1 1 -1 1

-1 1 -1 1 -1 1 (b)
1.0000E+12

C1 5.0000E+11

0
1.0000E+12

C2 5.0000E+11
C1
0
-1 1.0000E+12
1

C2 C3
C3 5.0000E+11
-1 -1
1 1 0
C4
Figure 5. a) Minitab main effect plot-electrical resistivity
mean of the molded samples with cavity #1 and b)
interaction plot for electrical resistivity of the
nanocomposites.

References
1. H. Koerner, G. Price, N.A. Pearce, M. Alexander,
and R.A. Vaia, Nature Mater., 3, 115 (2004).
2. W. Bauhofer, and J.Z. Kovacs. Compos. Sci.
Technol., 69, 1486 (2009).
3. D. Lellinger, D. Xu, A. Ohneiser, T. Skipa, and I.
Alig, Phys. Stat. Sol. (b), 245, 2268 (2008).
4. X.L. Xie, Y.W. Mai, X.P. Zhou, Mater. Sci. Eng., R
49, 89 (2005).
5. W. Bauhofer, and J.Z. Kovacs, Compos. Sci.
Technol. 69, 1486 (2009).
6. Z. Ounaies, C. Park, K.E. Wise, E.J. Siochi, J.S.
Harrison, Compos. Sci. Technol., 63, 1637 (2003).
7. T. Villmow, S. Pegel, P. Potschke, and U.
Wagenknecht, Compos. Sci. Technol., 68, 777
(2008).
8. A. Chandra, A.J. Kramschuster, X. Hu, and L.S.
Turng, SPE-ANTEC Tech. Papers, 2184 (2007).
9. S. Abbasi, P.J. Carreau, and A. Derdouri, Polymer,
51, 922 (2010).

View publication stats