Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

A Comparative Study: Unveiling the Nanomorphology Evolution and Fibrillation Pathways in Deprotonation vs Proton-Coupled Deprotonation for High-Efficiency Aramid Nanofiber Synthesis.

Created on 29 Sep 2026

Authors

Weiwei Li, Jinxue Lei, Hongli Mi, Ting Chen, Xuan Li, Meiyun Zhang

Published in

ACS applied materials & interfaces. Sep 28, 2026. Epub Sep 28, 2026.

Abstract

Aramid nanofibers (ANFs) are promising high-performance nanoscale building blocks, yet their application is hindered by the time-consuming conventional deprotonation method. This study systematically compares this traditional method with a proton donor-coupled deprotonation (PCD) strategy. While both preserve the core chemical structure of PPTA fibers, the PCD approach, by incorporating a proton donor, dramatically alters the reaction kinetics and nanofibrillation pathway. Comprehensive characterization confirms that it accelerates exfoliation from days to 4 h, yielding a highly transparent dispersion. Crucially, the synthesis pathway dictates the final nanomorphology: conventional ANFs form rigid networks with larger pores (∼44 nm), whereas PCD-derived ANFs are more interconnected and pliable, self-assembling into denser membranes with finer pores (∼9 nm). This structural divergence translates to superior integrated mechanical performance, with PCD-ANF membranes exhibiting a remarkable balance of high tensile strength (115.14 MPa) and good ductility (19.27%), alongside fully retained inherent flame retardancy. This work establishes fundamental structureproperty relationships, demonstrating that the choice of nanofibrillation mechanism is a powerful tool for tailoring nanoscale architecture in advanced functional materials.

PMID:
42804543
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 29 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 12
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement