Very interesting read, was that posted by SuperG ?
I find it interesting that the poster say that graphene is useless when it is 2 micron and less, It is almost bagging VRS.
VRS product range is between 0.1-10um, with majority of the platelets shown in the SEM are 500nm, 1000nm = 1um
If the SEM image on page 2 of the Product information sheet is any indication of VRS's typical platelets most of the graphene will be 0.5um = useless graphene for mechanical purposes https://www.nanene.com/wp-content/uploads/TDS-Nanene-V5.pdf
Did you read through FGR's realease for Puregraph- 3 product ranges, the Puregraph 5 which is most similar to VRS's product has been deemed as only being using for electroconductive inks and coatings,
10 Micron average (0.1 - 70um) Is suitable for reinforcing of rubbers, carbon fibre and glass fibre composites (VRS cannot make graphene platelets this large)
20 Micron Average (0.1 -100um) Is suitable for fire retardant paints, Concretes and geotextiles (yet again VRS cannot make graphene platelets this large)
Warwick Grigor has advised me that we do not need FGR's graphene certified prior to the AIM listing, I am going to continue to push for a product information sheet to contain the number of layers,
I posted this last night in the lounge part of HC as my post isn't ready for FGR's thread, I will Tag you in when I have completed the posts as Aspect ration is a very import part of graphene, not just the graphene's number of layers.
Evening all,
I have been working on FGR's Raman Shift Curves.
D = Defect band,
G = higher the intensity the higher the number of layers.
2D = Location at 2700 means there is not graphite,
Each layer of graphene is .34nm in thickness
I have added the Puregraph 5 & 20, and the November Product information sheet onto the Puregraph 10 Raman Shift Plot.
The Raman shift plot that was in the Octobers Capability statement has used a different light intensity reading, It would have been handy to add that one to this plot, as the graphene was independently tested by the University of Adelaide and had a thickness of 1-7 layers.
Nanene's Plot is also using different equipment so I cannot add it to the chart,
What we know from the previous information FGR has provided,
November Product Information sheet FGR graphene was 5-10nm in thickness / .34nm (layer thickness) = 15-30 layers.
this is represented on the chart with the light intensity @ 16000 (pink)
I do not understand why the original plots all run from zero, where the new plots start at around 400, then run on a slight upward direction.
In the new Product information sheet for the Puregraph Range, the company has stated the graphene is MLG,
I am going to assume the MLG is 10 layers in thickness as UoM have previously indicated this is what MLG is. alga's presentations also have MLG listed as 3-10 Layers.
Puregraph 10 (Blue) & 20 (Red) plots are very similar, with P20 having a slightly higher intensity = more layers, I can understand why it being a larger platelet graphene.
I wouldn't be surprised if Puregraph 10 (Green) is FLG / MLG,
Density of FGR graphene vs others
Versarien Nanene - 90% 10 layers or less, has a Tap Density of 162kg per m3
America Elements - 5 layer, has a Tap Density of 100kg per m3
FGR Puregraph 20 - has a Tap Density of 251kg per m3
FGR Puregraph 10 -has a Tap Density of 124kg per m3 FGR Puregraph 5 - has a Tap Density of 62kg per m3
With America Elements having a Tap Density of 100kg per m3 and being 5 layers in thickness, and Nanene being 10 layers in thickness with 162 kgs, Wouldn't this mean that Puregraph 5 is less than 5 layers in thickness ?
Puregraph 10 would be slightly more than 5 Layers but less than Nanene's 90% less than 10 layer, and
Puregraph 20 might be slightly more than 10 layers, or be majority 5-10 layer graphene ?
