Why CNT additives can destabilize melt flow and increase processing variability in filament extrusion (context: CNTs, GNPs/FLG in ESD polymers) in graphene nanoplatelet systems

Introduction

CNT addition commonly destabilizes melt flow and raises processing variability because CNTs form high-aspect-ratio networks and agglomerates that change stress transmission and extensional viscosity in ways incompatible with steady filament extrusion. The mechanism is entanglement and network formation (physical percolation) plus heterogeneous local shear heating/cooling that produces time-dependent viscosity and slip at the die wall. This explanation applies where CNTs are present at or above dilute-to-semi-dilute concentrations within thermoplastic melts processed by single- or twin-screw extrusion into filament geometries. As a result, when dispersion is incomplete, or when CNTs coexist with high-surface-area platelets (GNPs/FLG) the melt shows heterogeneous shear zones, pressure and throughput oscillations, and inconsistent filament diameter. The effect is amplified by moisture, residual volatiles, or poor compounding history because these promote agglomeration and local vapor generation. Therefore, understanding entanglement, filler–matrix slip, and local thermal transport to diagnose and control variability in filament extrusion for ESD plastics containing carbon nano-fillers.

Read more on the material page: https://www.greatkela.com/en/product/Carbon_Allotropes/242.html

Common Failure Modes

Primary Failure Modes

• Flow pulsing and pressure oscillation observed at the extruder head. Mechanism mismatch: CNT network formation and dynamic break/reformation under shear causes time-dependent viscosity (thixotropy) that the extrusion feed/die system cannot damp, producing cyclic load and filament diameter variability. See also: GNP/FLG vs Carbon Black: Mechanisms for increased brittleness and reduced layer adhesion in conductive FDM filaments.
• Intermittent die swell and ovality in filament cross-section. Mechanism mismatch: heterogeneous dispersion and agglomerates create local regions of different elastic recovery and shear history; elastic stresses relax unevenly on exit causing shape instability. See also: Why printed parts with Graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) show weaker interlayer than in-plane conductivity.
• Localized surging or surficial defects (lines, voids) along printed filament. Mechanism mismatch: poor CNT dispersion plus trapped moisture/volatiles cause micro-degassing or slip at the filler–matrix interface, leading to void nucleation and surface defects during cooling.

Secondary Failure Modes

• Higher apparent viscosity at low shear rates but shear-thinning at processing rates, causing inconsistent startup/stopping behavior. Mechanism mismatch: CNT entanglement increases low-rate viscosity while alignment under high shear decreases resistance, so transient conditions (start-up, slow zones) produce unpredictable flow.
• Increased die pressure sensitivity to throughput changes. Mechanism mismatch: formation of a percolated conductive/rigid network transfers load through the filler network (solid-like response) rather than through pure melt viscous flow; small throughput changes produce disproportionately large pressure changes.

Conditions That Change the Outcome

Primary Drivers

• Polymer matrix glass transition and melt viscosity: Higher matrix viscosity amplifies CNT-induced network stress transfer because the melt cannot relax quickly; therefore stiffer melts show larger pressure spikes and slower recovery.
• Filler concentration and aspect ratio: Increasing CNT loading or aspect ratio increases probability of percolation and entanglement; as a result threshold concentrations mark transitions from Newtonian-like to solid-like response and change extrusion stability.
• Dispersion quality and compounding history: Poor dispersion (residual agglomerates) raises local stress concentrations and promotes flow instabilities; thorough shear mixing reduces agglomerates but may shorten CNT length and change mechanism balance.

Secondary Drivers

• Co-filler presence (GNPs/FLG): Platelet fillers alter thermal transport and particle-particle interactions; therefore mixtures of CNTs and Graphene nanoplatelets change network topology and can either localize or delocalize stress depending on relative loading and orientation.
• Moisture and volatiles: Residual water or solvent vaporizes under processing temperatures and causes local pressure spikes and bubble formation; therefore drying and vacuum venting materially reduce these transient instabilities.
• Extrusion shear/thermal regime and screw design: Low-shear screws and short residence time favor undeformed CNT networks and agglomerates, producing variability; conversely, very high shear can damage fillers, changing aspect ratio and hence mechanism of stress transfer.

How This Differs From Other Approaches

• Entanglement vs platelet percolation: CNTs produce filamentary entangled networks that transmit stress through a connected web, whereas Graphene nanoplatelets create planar percolation pathways; the former couples to extensional flow differently because entanglement resists elongation more strongly.
• Dynamic reversible network vs rigid flake scaffold: CNT networks often break and reform under shear (dynamic, time-dependent), while stacked platelets can form a more rigid, orientation-dependent scaffold; the dynamic nature changes transient viscosity responses.
• Slip-dominated interface vs tortuous confinement: CNT agglomerates promote local polymer slip and slip layers, while high-aspect-ratio platelets primarily increase tortuosity of flow at the particle scale; the two mechanisms alter wall shear and die interaction differently.
• Shear alignment vs layer orientation: CNTs align under shear into fiber-like bundles changing extensional viscosity abruptly; Graphene nanoplatelets align into planes producing anisotropic but less fiber-like alignment effects, changing extensional vs shear response.

Scope and Limitations

• Applies to: thermoplastic filament extrusion processes (single/twin-screw feed to die) where carbon nanotubes are added to polymer compounds that may include Graphene nanoplatelets, targeting ESD/anti-static properties at lab-to-production scale.
• Does not apply to: low-temperature casting, solvent-cast films, or powder-based additive manufacturing where melts and extensional extrusion dynamics are not the dominant transport mechanism.
• Results may not transfer when: CNT loading is below the semi-dilute threshold (<percolation onset for the given aspect ratio), when CNTs are fully surface-functionalized to prevent entanglement, or in matrices with extremely low or extremely high molecular weight that alter relaxation time scales outside the processing window.
• Physical/chemical pathway (causal): CNTs absorb stress and form a connected network because of high aspect ratio and strong van der Waals attraction; therefore under shear the network transmits stress, stores elastic energy, and reforms over a finite timescale. Absorption: CNTs interact with polymer chains via adsorption and mechanical interlocking; Energy conversion: shear work is partly stored elastically in the filler network and partly dissipated as heat; Material response: stored elastic energy and heterogeneous heating cause time-dependent viscosity, local slip, and micro-degassing leading to extrusion instability.
• Separate absorption, energy conversion, material response: absorption occurs by physical adsorption and geometric confinement of polymer on CNT surfaces; energy conversion is from mechanical shear into elastic network energy and local temperature rise; material response is non-linear viscosity, thixotropy, and localized phase changes (bubbles, voids) that destabilize filament extrusion.

Related Links

Application page: Conductive 3D Printing Masterbatch & Filaments

Failure Modes

• GNP/FLG vs Carbon Black: Mechanisms for increased brittleness and reduced layer adhesion in conductive FDM filaments
• Why printed parts with Graphene nanoplatelets show weaker interlayer than in-plane conductivity
• Why Print Parameters (Temperature, Speed, Flow) Shift Resistivity at Constant Loading in graphene nanoplatelet systems

Mechanism

• How Platelet Orientation Evolves During Filament Extrusion in graphene nanoplatelet systems

Key Takeaways

• CNT addition commonly destabilizes melt flow and raises processing variability.
• Flow pulsing and pressure oscillation observed at the extruder head.
• Polymer matrix glass transition and melt viscosity: Higher matrix viscosity amplifies CNT-induced network stress transfer because the melt cannot relax quickly.

Engineer Questions

Q: At what CNT loading will I expect to see the transition from stable melt to network-dominated variability?

A: There is no single universal value because threshold depends on CNT aspect ratio, dispersion and matrix; expect the dilute-to-semi-dilute transition for high-aspect-ratio CNTs in many common thermoplastics to occur in low volume fractions (order-of-magnitude ~0.1–1 vol%, depending on aspect ratio and dispersion); therefore verify with rheology (rise in low-shear storage modulus or complex viscosity) rather than relying on nominal wt% alone.

Q: How should I change compounding to reduce CNT-induced pulsation without removing CNTs?

A: Increase dispersion energy and residence time using appropriate screw elements, add a venting stage to remove volatiles and moisture, consider masterbatch dilution with controlled devolatilization, and monitor rheological recovery time; these actions reduce agglomerates and trapped gas which are primary instability drivers.

Q: Will replacing some CNTs with Graphene nanoplatelets improve filament dimensional stability?

A: Mechanistically, replacing filamentary CNT networks with planar Graphene nanoplatelets changes network topology and thermal transport, which can reduce entanglement-driven elastic response but may introduce platelet stacking and anisotropy; therefore substitution changes the instability mechanism rather than guaranteeing improvement—trial rheology and dispersion mapping are required.

Q: Which process measurements best detect CNT network formation before visible defects appear?

A: Monitor low-shear complex viscosity and storage modulus (G') for a rise indicating network formation, use in-line pressure fluctuation sensors at the die, and measure die swell/exit diameter variance in real time; these metrics detect network-dominated behavior earlier than visual inspection.

Q: How does moisture interact with CNT-related instability and what drying protocol is recommended?

A: Moisture vaporizes under processing temperatures producing local bubbles and enhancing slip at filler interfaces; therefore dry feedstock to <1 wt% moisture (target depends on matrix hygroscopicity) using vacuum drying at recommended polymer-specific temperature and time, and add venting in compounding to remove residual volatiles.

Q: Can screw design eliminate CNT-induced variability?

A: Screw design can mitigate but not fully eliminate CNT network effects because it influences dispersion, shear history, and residence time; use mixing elements to break agglomerates, long gentle mixing to avoid over-fracturing fillers, and incorporate venting — these changes adjust the balance between network breakage and reformation and therefore change but do not erase the underlying mechanism.