Fabrication of Bacterial Cellulose/Polyaniline Nanocomposite Paper with Excellent Conductivity, Strength, and Flexibility
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bacterial cellulose/polyaniline (BC/PANI) nanocomposites display many potential applications in various fields. However, the conductivity and mechanical properties remain a challenge. Here, we developed a novel method to prepare BC/PANI nanocomposites via the chemical grafting of PANI onto epoxy modified BC (EBC), followed by the grafting of polyacrylamide (PAM). For comparison, an in situ BC/PANI sample was also prepared. The grafting reaction between PANI and EBC and the retention of PANI on EBC were confirmed by FTIR, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and elemental analysis. The cross-section morphology of BC transformed into a three-dimensional and continuous network structure with the incorporation of PANI. The effects of epoxy and PAM contents on the morphology, conductivity, and mechanical properties of PANI-g-EBC and PANI-g-EBC3/PAM nanocomposites were investigated. Compared with those of the in situ BC/PANI sample, the conductivity of PANI-g-EBC increased from 0.12 to 1.08 S/cm, while the stress increased from 8.18 to 18.47 MPa. With the addition of PAM, the conductivity of PANI-g-EBC/PAM nanocomposite paper further increased to 1.43 S/cm, and the stress increased to 47.94 MPa. The conductivity of PANI-g-EBC3/PAM nanocomposites only decreased from 1.43 to 1.36 S/cm after refolding 160 times. PANI-g-EBC and PANI-g-EBC3/PAM nanofibers could be blended with conventional plant cellulose fiber to prepare flexible and high strength conductive composite paper.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".