Electrochemical Capacities of Commercially Available 

Structural Carbon Fibers, Fabrics, and Papers

by Emma L. Wong, James F. Snyder, and Clifford W. Hubbard 

ARL-TR-4574 September 2008 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 
NOTICES 

Disclaimers 

The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of the Army position 

unless so designated by other authorized documents. 

Citation of manufacturer’s or trade names does not constitute an official endorsement or 

approval of the use thereof. 

Destroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator. 
Army Research Laboratory 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, 21005-5069 

ARL-TR-4574 September 2008 

Electrochemical Capacities of Commercially Available 

Structural Carbon Fibers, Fabrics, and Papers

Emma L. Wong, James F. Snyder, and Clifford W. Hubbard 

Weapons and Materials Research Directorate, ARL 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 
ii

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188 

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and 

Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 

person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

September 2008 

2. REPORT TYPE

Final 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To) 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Electrochemical Capacities of Commercially Available Structural Carbon Fibers, Fabrics, 

and Papers 

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 

Emma L. Wong, James F. Snyder, and Clifford W. Hubbard 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

U.S. Army Research Laboratory 

ATTN: AMSRD-ARL-WM-MA 

Weapons and Materials Research Directorate 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5069 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

 REPORT NUMBER 

ARL-TR-4574 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) 

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT 

 NUMBER(S) 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

14. ABSTRACT 

This study focuses on the anodic properties of unmodified commercial carbon fabric materials for potential use in applications that require 

electrochemical capacity or electrochemical capacitance. Electrochemically active fabrics could enable scalable integration of structural 

carbon with energy storage devices and facilitate the development of multifunctional structural composites that provide energy storage. 

Electrochemical capacity and capacitance were evaluated for carbon fibers based on poly(acrylonitrile) (PAN), pitch, or activated carbon; and 

papers made from carbon nanotubes or nanofoams. While each material exhibited variable performance that depended on processing and 

dimensions, PAN-based fibers and nanofoam papers demonstrated superior reversible capacities as high as 186 mA*h/g. Capacitances for 

activated carbon fibers, nanotube fibers, and nanofoam papers consistently approached or exceeded 10 F/g. 

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

17. LIMITATION 

 OF 

 ABSTRACT 

UU 

18. NUMBER 

 OF 

 PAGES 

24 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

James F. Snyder 

a. REPORT 

U 

b. ABSTRACT 

U 

c. THIS PAGE 

U 

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) 

(410) 306-0842 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98) 

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18 
iii

Contents 

List of Figures iv

List of Tables iv

Acknowledgements v

Summary 1

1. Introduction 3

2. Experimental Section 4

2.1 Materials ..........................................................................................................................4

2.1.1 PAN-based Fabrics/Fibers ...................................................................................6

2.1.2 Pitch-based Fibers ...............................................................................................6

2.1.3 Activated Carbon-based Fiber .............................................................................6

2.1.4 Nanotubes ............................................................................................................6

2.1.5 Nanofoams ...........................................................................................................6

2.2 De-sizing .........................................................................................................................6

2.3 Electrochemical Analyses ...............................................................................................7

3. Results and Discussion 8

4. Conclusions 14

References 15

Acronyms 17

Distribution 18 
iv

List of Figures 

Figure 1. FE-SEM images of T300-1K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× 

magnification. Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL 

(right) are both shown. The fibers were taken from a plain weave fabric. ..............................10

Figure 2. FE-SEM images of T40/800-6K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× 

magnification. Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL 

(right) are both shown. The fibers were taken from a plain weave fabric. ..............................11

Figure 3. FE-SEM images of IM7-6K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× 

magnification. Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL 

(right) are both shown. The fibers were taken from a plain weave fabric. ..............................11

Figure 4. FE-SEM images of IM7-12K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× 

magnification. Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL 

(right) are both shown. The fibers were taken from a unidirectional fabric. ...........................12

Figure 5. FE-SEM images of PX35-50K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× 

magnification. Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL 

(right) are both shown. The fibers were taken from a unidirectional fabric. ...........................12

Figure 6. FE-SEM images of fibers removed from a H&V 8000036 nonwoven fabric. The 

images are at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× magnification. Commercial fibers that are 

unmodified (left) and with binder removed at ARL (right) are both shown. ..........................13

List of Tables 

Table 1. Manufacturer-provided and the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL)-measured 

data of commercial carbon fibers and fabrics. ...........................................................................5

Table 2. Capacity measurements for sized and de-sized commercial carbon fibers. ....................10
v

Acknowledgements 

Ms. Emma Wong was supported in part by an appointment to the Postgraduate Research 

Participation Program at the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) administered by the Oak 

Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the U.S. 

Department of Energy and ARL. We gratefully acknowledge Kang Xu for support and advice 

with respect to the electrochemical measurements. 
vi

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 
1

Summary 

This study focuses on the energy storage properties of commercial carbon fabric materials. 

Electrochemically active carbon fabrics could facilitate scalable development of multifunctional 

fiber-based structural composites or fabric-based wearable components that provide a secondary 

function as a battery or supercapacitor. Multifunctional composites are desirable to reduce 

system mass by integrating load-bearing and energy storage capabilities into a single material. 

Electrochemical capacity and double layer capacitance were evaluated for a wide range of 

structural carbon fibers based on poly(acrylonitrile) (PAN), pitch, or activated carbon; and 

papers made from carbon nanotubes or nanofoams. The impact of fiber sizing on electrochemical 

activity was also studied. The data is tabulated with manufacturer-reported material properties to 

enable rapid identification of fibers or fabrics for a wide range of potential applications. PANbased fibers and nanofoam papers demonstrated reversible capacities as high as 186 mA*h/g. 

Fiber sizing did not appear to be a detriment to electrochemical activity. The T-300 PAN-based 

fibers are most recommended for use in multifunctional composite batteries given their high 

tensile strength and high capacities. Double layer capacitances for activated carbon fibers, 

nanotube fibers, and nanofoam papers consistently approached or exceeded 10 F/g. 
2

INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 
3

1. Introduction 

The need for energy storage devices with higher energy densities, lower weight and volume, and 

more efficient form factors has driven research into a wide variety of new electrode materials 

(1–4). Carbon is a commonly used material for anodes in modern technologies, particularly in 

lithium-ion batteries and electrochemical supercapacitors. Graphitic carbon allows for efficient 

ion intercalation and is of particular interest for the former (5, 6), while carbon with a high 

surface area optimizes use of the double layer effect and is desirable for the latter (4, 7).

Considerable effort has been directed towards surpassing graphite’s theoretical capacity of 

372 mA*h/g using non-carbonaceous materials such as metal oxides and tin alloys (1, 3, 8). 

Other groups have focused on improving the electrochemical properties of alternative forms of 

carbon such as carbon fibers (2, 8, 11), carbon nanotubes (1, 14, 17), and carbon foams (4, 18, 

19). These carbon-based materials are particularly attractive owing to their continuous structure 

and inherent electrical conductivity, obviating the need for a polymer binder and metal substrate 

that add parasitic mass in granular carbon anodes. Carbon fibers have also been shown to 

perform well in overcharge as a result of minimized heat-generating side reactions and excess 

lithium ion capacity (20–22). 

The properties of carbonaceous materials are dependent on the processing conditions and source 

material that largely determine the composition and structure of the material. Carbon fibers 

typically have an amorphous core surrounded by a graphitic sheath that allows for efficient ion 

intercalation. Poly(acrylonitrile) (PAN)-based fibers have moderate graphite content and under 

proper conditions provide superior failure strength, tensile strength, and compressive strength, 

making PAN-based fibers useful for structural composite applications (23). Pitch-based fibers 

when compared to PAN-based fibers are more graphitized, and have higher cost, density, thermal 

conductivity, and electrical conductivity (10, 23). Carbon nanofoams are a carbonized product of 

polymer aerogels combined with carbon fibers. They have demonstrated favorable anodic 

properties (4, 18, 19) and have been developed for commercial electrode use (24). 

Non-graphitic fibers are also commercially available, such as fibers composed of activated 

carbon. These are comprised entirely of amorphous carbon and have a high surface area and 

good microporosity (7, 25). These materials are not typically considered without chemical 

modification (25) for use in batteries due to the low graphite content, although their high surface 

area makes them potentially attractive for high capacitance applications (7). Carbon nanotubes 

and nanofoams also possess high surface areas that are ideal for high capacitance applications 

(15). For battery applications, the concentric continuous graphitic cylinders comprising carbon 

nanotubes indicate additional capability for optimizing ion intercalation. While recent work 

indicates that the partially graphitized nature of PAN- and pitch-based fibers may be beneficial 

for anodic properties (9), using carbon nanotubes by themselves or as additives to other 
4

intercalative materials has been shown to improve capacities beyond that of pure graphite, 

372 mA*h/g (17). One study has reported an initial electrochemical capacity as high as 

1770 mA*h/g from a combination of multi-walled nanotubes with silicon (16). 

Previous studies on structural carbon, including fibers, nanotubes, and nanofoams, have focused 

their efforts on improving the electrochemical properties prior to testing through heat treatment 

(9–12), milling (9–12, 16, 17), chemical modification (1, 9), and/or additives such as carbon 

black (11) and metals (26). Some of these techniques have elicited materials with capacities 

superior to that of pure graphite (16). In many cases these modifications eradicated or 

significantly reduced the structural properties the carbon sources originally had. There is also 

little indication of the impact on electrochemical properties from fiber sizing or binders, which 

are removed or reduced during modification. In addition, the tested materials were individually 

processed or fabricated and are not commercially available. The electrochemical performance 

of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) structural carbon materials has not been adequately 

reported. An evaluation of the properties of unmodified COTS materials would indicate their 

usefulness in electrochemical devices and would provide a baseline for comparison with the 

specialized lab-grown or modified materials reported elsewhere. There is particular interest 

in COTS structural carbon materials for use in multifunctional composite devices, such as 

structural batteries (27-32). 

In this study, we investigated the performance of unmodified COTS carbon materials for 

potential anode applications. Particular focus is currently placed on electrochemical capacity, 

and some preliminary capacitance data are also reported. A broad variety of structural carbon 

sources were surveyed, including carbon fibers acquired from fabrics of varying composition, 

manufacture, and grade; carbon nanotubes; and carbon nanofoams. Several fiber types were also 

desized to demonstrate the impact of sizing or binding on the electrochemical properties. 

Downselected materials demonstrating useful capacity or capacitance will be reported in greater 

depth in a future publication detailing the explicit electrochemical-mechanical properties of 

carbon reinforced multifunctional composites.

2. Experimental Section 

2.1 Materials 

Table 1 lists the samples procured for this study. PAN- and pitch-based fibers were tested in both 

commercial grade and aerospace grade. Commercial grade is made from larger tows and then 

pulled apart to make smaller tows. This process makes the fibers more frayed and less smooth, 

and generates more inclusions and flaws. The aerospace grade fibers are made in smaller tows 

and the fibers have cleaner tow/surface morphology (23). Each grade has possible advantages for 

anodic activity. Commercial grade fibers are rougher on the surface, which may give the fiber 
5

more active surface area. On the other hand, the aerospace grade, being more morphologically 

uniform, can retain a better graphitic structure and a larger number of sites for lithium 

intercalation. 

Table 1. Manufacturer-provided and the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL)-measured data of commercial 

carbon fibers and fabrics. 

Grade Fiber Density Fiber Length Fiber Diameter Sizing/Binder Fiber Tensile Strength Resistance Resistivity Capacitance Capacity

(g/cm3

) (microns) (%) (MPa) (Ohm/mm) (Ohm-mm) (F/g) (mAh/g)

Graphite 0.06 74

Activated Carbon 153 3

Lamp Black <1 89

YSH70A 2.14 continuous 7 1.60% 3811 0.077 0.4 32

YSH50A 2.1 continuous 7 1.90% 3687 0.074 0.38 40

YS80A 2.17 continuous 7 1.60% 3626 0.068 0.8 18

YS95A 2.2 continuous 7 2.10% 3745 0.070 1.1 23

CN90 2.19 continuous 10 2.70% 3419 0.051 0.68 14

CN60 2.12 continuous 10 2.90% 3331 0.055 0.81 76

XN15 1.85 continuous 10 3% 2378 0.35 0.42 52

XN05 1.7 continuous 10 2.60% 1157 0.23 0.5 45

K-1100 2.2 continuous 10 1% 3100 0.050 0.001 0.87 32

AS4 1.79 continuous 7.1 1% 4278 2.4 0.60 1.3 88

IM7, 6k 1.79 continuous 5.2 1% 5175 1.3 0.26 3.2 131

IM7, 12k 1.79 continuous 5.1 1% 5605 0.61 0.92 67

PANEX 30 1.75 continuous 7.4 --- 3600 0.22 0.0017 70

PANEX 35 1.81 continuous 7.2 4.20% 3860 0.38 128

T-300, 1k 1.76 continuous 7 1% 3530 2.9 0.11 1 139

T-300, 3k 1.76 continuous 7 1% 3530 3.7 0.52 166

T40/800 1.79 continuous 5.1 AP-200 5520 0.84 0.16 3.5 74

8000015 25 mm 1% 0.85 89

8000020 25 mm 1% 0.64 48

8000028 13 mm 1% 0.63 55

8000030 25 mm 1% 0.49 1.1 96

8000033 25 mm 1% 0.64 94

8000036 13 mm 1% 1.05 1.88 106

8000037 13 mm 1% 0.74 1 78

8000039 6.4 mm 1% 0.95 107

8000047 6.4mm and 25mm 1% 1.48 114

1064 continuous (>51mm) 0.44 6.7 99

2225 continuous 8.97 7.4 102

14/86 364 15.6 64

SWNT 1-10 μm 0.001-0.003 --- 0.1 8.45 76

MWNT 5-20 μm 0.03+/-0.015 --- 0.1 12.5 89

BPNT 5-20 μm 0.03+/-0.015 --- 0.1 25 96

I --- 0.28 7.19 149

II --- 0.48 5.68 136

Nanotube Paper

Nanofoam Paper

Activated Carbon Fibers – Woven Fabric

Activated Carbon Fibers – Nonwoven Mats

Granular Carbon Film, 80 wt%

PAN-Based Fibers – Woven Fabrics

PAN-Based Fibers – Nonwoven Mats

Pitch-Based Fibers – Woven Fabrics
6

2.1.1 PAN-based Fabrics/Fibers 

PAN-based fibers were obtained from both woven and nonwoven carbon fabrics. Nonwoven 

fabrics come in two forms: chopped fiber mat and continuous fiber mat. The chopped mats were 

obtained from Hollingsworth and Vose in grades: 8000015, 8000020, 8000028, 8000030, 

8000033, 8000036, 8000037, 8000039, and 8000047. The chopped mats have short uniform 

fiber lengths (6.4–25 mm) and can have more than one fiber length in the mat. The continuous 

fiber mat, product 1064 carbon fiber veil, was from Fibre Glast Developments Corporation. The 

continuous fiber mat has longer fiber lengths than the chopped fiber lengths (>51 mm). The 

PAN-based woven fabrics obtained for study came from multiple sources as unidirectional or 

plain woven and in variable tow sizes described as “nk”. The specific grades were T300 (plain 

1k and plain 3k; Torayca), AS4 (Hexcel), IM7 (plain 6k and unidirectional 12k; Hexcel), PX30 

(plain; Zoltek), PX35 (unidirectional; Zoltek), and T40/800 (plain 6k; Thornel). PX30 and PX35 

are commercial grade fibers, and the rest are aerospace grade. 

2.1.2 Pitch-based Fibers 

Pitch-based carbon fibers were obtained from Nippon Graphite Fibers, with the exception of 

K1100, which was obtained from Cytec. Grades K1100, YSH70A, YSH50A, YS80A, and 

YS95A are aerospace grade graphitized fibers with an amorphous core. Grades CN90 and CN60 

are commercial grade graphitized fibers with an amorphous core. Grades XN15 and XN05 are 

commercial grade fibers that are entirely amorphous.

2.1.3 Activated Carbon-based Fiber 

Activated carbon fabrics were purchased from Engineered Fibers Tech. SpectraCarb 2225 is a 

woven fabric with a surface area of 1650 m2

/g (25), and Sterling Fibers’ filtration media 14/86 

(fibrillated acrylic fiber pulp (CFF)/activated carbon (AC)) is a nonwoven fabric. 

2.1.4 Nanotubes 

Carbon nanotube sheets were purchased from Nanolab in three varieties: single-wall nanotube 

(SWNT), multi-wall nanotube (MWNT), and bamboo multi-wall nanotube (BPNT). 

2.1.5 Nanofoams 

Carbon nanofoam sheets were procured from Marketech Inc. in grades I and II, which have 

respective surface areas of 400 m2

/g and 600 m2/g. 

2.2 De-sizing 

To evaluate the impact of fiber sizing on electrochemical properties, the sizing was removed 

from select carbon fibers by solvent extraction using a Soxhlet extractor and methylene chloride 

for 48 h (33). The materials modified through this process included PX-30, PX-35, T40/800 6k, 

T300 1k, and IM7 6k. The IM7 12k was treated in a similar manner for seven days. The fibers 
7

were then heated under vacuum for 10 min at 80 °C to drive off excess solvent. The treated 

fibers were imaged by a Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope (FE-SEM) before and 

after solvent extraction to observe the extent of sizing removal. Heat treatment to burn off sizing 

was not employed as this has been shown to have a significant detrimental impact on fiber 

structural performance. 

2.3 Electrochemical Analyses 

Prior to measuring the electrochemical properties of the carbon materials, the fiber resistance or 

fabric resistivity of each material was measured with a multi-meter. The resistance of the fibers 

was normalized by the length of the samples, and the resistivity of the fabrics was normalized by 

the cross-sectional area and length of the sample. 

Measurements of electrochemical properties were performed in a coin cell configuration 

requiring a 10 mm circular area of material. Nonwoven samples, including the sized and de-sized 

nonwoven fabrics, carbon nanotube paper, and carbon nanofoam paper, were cut into 10 mm 

disks. The sized and de-sized woven fabrics were unraveled and the fibers cut into 9 mm strands. 

The pitch-based fibers were also cut into 9 mm strands. Granular graphite was solvent cast from 

acetonitrile on stainless steel disks with 20 wt% poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) 200k Da as a binder 

(2, 6). The carbonaceous materials were placed into coin cells with a lithium metal opposing 

electrode. The separators used were polypropylene separators from Celgard and Hollingsworth & 

Vose. A liquid electrolyte of ethylene carbonate: ethyl methyl carbonate (3:7 by weight) with 1.0 

M lithium hexafluorophosphate (LiPF6) was used. 

Electrochemical capacity was measured on a Maccor 4000 battery test system at a constant 

current for 52 cycles. The cells were run at 9x10-5 Ampere between 0.002 V and 1.5 V over the 

first three cycles during formation of the solid electrolyte interface (SEI) layer (34). The 

remaining cycles were run at 3x10-4 A. The capacity values in table 1 were measured at the 

completion of the third cycle to approximate the reversible capacity. Capacity values were 

normalized by weight for comparison. The reported values are an average of at least three 

different experiments for each sample, with the exception of the lamp black and activated carbon 

powders, PAN IM7 6k, pitch YS95A, and BPNT, for which only one sample was successfully 

completed. The error, derived from standard deviations, was approximately 30% for PAN-based 

fibers, 50% for pitch- and activated carbon fibers, and 10% for nanotubes. 

Capacitance was measured in the same coin cell configuration using cyclic voltammetry at a rate 

of 20 mV/s. The cells were cycled five times before taking the current measurement. Capacitance 

was determined from the ratio of current over rate and normalized by weight. 
8

3. Results and Discussion 

Table 1 reports the electrical and electrochemical properties measured for each of the samples 

along with several relevant material properties disclosed by the suppliers. The resistances and 

resistivities were sufficiently low enough such that all of the materials tested are expected to be 

able to perform adequately as current collectors and conductors for energy storage devices. The 

low resistances also enable reliable measurements of the electrochemical capacities and 

capacitances. Differences in the electrochemical properties for the materials studied may 

therefore be attributed primarily to changes in composition, dimensions, and interface. 

Capacitance is a phenomenon that depends heavily on surface area. This is reflected in the 

significantly higher capacitance values for fabrics and papers made from high surface area 

materials, including nanotubes, nanofoams, and activated carbons. Most of the pitch-based fibers 

have capacitance values about an order of magnitude lower, generally less than 1 F/g. The PANbased fibers exhibit a wide range of values but most of the values appear to be 1–3 F/g. Fiber 

dimensions are approximately the same for the latter and the outer shells of PAN fibers are 

typically graphitic, so the divergence in values between grades may reflect differences in sizing 

since the outliers have unique sizing applied. The discrepancy may also reflect differences in 

alignment of the graphite sheets in the shell as a product of processing. Similarly, the range of 

values between pitch-based materials may also relate to changes in the size and nature of the 

surface area as processing conditions are varied. Further work is needed measuring surface area 

and imaging the surfaces before more in-depth conclusions may be made. In general, the more 

structural PAN-based fibers are found to provide meaningful capacitance for low energy density 

applications, and higher efficiency devices could feasibly be made using activated carbon fibers, 

which are cheaper, more plentiful, and easier to process than nanotubes and nanofoams while 

providing competitive charge storage capability. 

The electrochemical capacity data do not align so clearly with material source. This is because 

capacity involves ion intercalation, a complex process that depends not only on the interface and 

dimensions but also on composition. Intercalation in graphite has been studied for many years 

and graphite has been a predominant focus for anodic materials. Intercalation is not as well 

understood in other forms of carbon such as nanotubes, nanofoams, and even amorphous carbon; 

and materials with multiple phases interfacing each other present an even more complex 

challenge. 

The nanofoams demonstrated the best overall performance as a material type. However, their 

tensile strength is approximately that of paper and they are not as practical for applications as the 

other types. Fibers incorporating aerogels, or more structural forms of aerogels, may be 

considered for future multifunctional material development. The other two nontraditional fiber 
9

types, comprised of nanotubes and activated carbons, performed reasonably well. The capacity 

data for nanotubes follow an approximate trend mirroring that for capacitance, although further 

analyses should be performed to reduce statistical error and confirm these relationships. 

With regard to more traditional structural fibers, those using PAN-based precursors significantly 

outperformed the pitch-based fibers. Surprisingly, all of the pitch-based materials also 

underperformed the baseline granular graphite film. Considering that pitch-based materials have 

higher graphitic content than PAN-based materials, the graphite layers may be more accessible in 

PAN-based fibers. It is also possible that the larger amorphous carbon cores in PAN-based fibers 

more efficiently augment the capability for ion uptake, which has also been suggested in 

previous studies (9). A third possibility is potential difficulty of the ions to reach the fiber itself 

due to the sizing. During processing, all of the fibers had any of a variety of proprietary sizings 

applied. Sizing composition, application, and quantity could all affect performance. Similar 

problems at the interface could potentially occur with binders in nonwoven fabrics. For this 

reason, several of the PAN-based fibers were de-sized using a literature preparation, and one 

fiber was de-sized for an extended period. 

Table 2 presents electrochemical capacity data for sized and de-sized fibers, with each data point 

representing an average over three samples. Notable samples are IM7 12k, which was de-sized 

for significantly longer than recommended by the literature; PX-30, which is listed as having no 

sizing; and PX-35, which is listed as having considerably more sizing than the other fibers. 

While there is some variability in the results, it is clear that for sized fibers there is a capacity 

loss typically on the order of 30% after formation of the SEI layer and that the reversible 

capacity is generally stable over the first 52 cycles. De-sizing the fibers for 48 hours resulted in a 

reversible capacity that declines substantially with cycling for several sized samples. Although 

several desized samples showed apparent improvement over their unmodified counterparts, only 

the IM7 12k shows capacity of desized fibers to be equal to or improved over the unmodified 

fibers after 50 cycles. A possible explanation is that the sizing was not adequately removed at 

48 h, but perhaps partially redistributed as a uniform layer on the fibers. 

Figures 1–6 illustrate representative FE-SEM images of sized and de-sized materials. Nonwoven 

8000036 was not tested electrochemically and did not appear in table 2. The dark gray matter on 

the sized fibers is the sizing. In some of the images it is evident that the sizing was removed, 

although it is possible that it was redistributed in a layer on the fibers so thin or transparent that it 

cannot be resolved in the FE-SEM images. In this scenario, the sizing may be interfering with 

formation of the SEI layer and possibly creating a more widespread barrier for ion migration. 

De-sizing may actually hurt performance if not performed adequately, and if it is performed 

adequately it appears to have little impact on performance in comparison to the sized material. 

It should be noted that these studies were performed using a liquid electrolyte that may be 

effectively penetrating the sizing. The effectiveness of this technique, and/or the need for it, may 

be different for the pitch-based fibers, as well as cells using solid or polymer electrolytes, and 
10

further studies are underway. However, for the purposes of the current study, the removal of 

sizing from COTS PAN-based fibers was not found to be justified. This conclusion is especially 

true for application in composites in which the sizing is important for establishing fiber-matrix 

bonding and removal of the sizing can diminish structural performance. 

Table 2. Capacity measurements for sized and de-sized 

commercial carbon fibers. 

1st 

cycle

3rd 

cycle

52nd 

cycle

1st 

cycle

3rd 

cycle

52nd 

cycle

IM7 6k 198 131 146 169 75 26

IM7 12k 127 67 57 167 77 76

PX-30 96 70 78 99 69 50

PX-35 182 128 118 141 82 75

T-300 1k 222 139 124 52 31 17

T40/800 6k 109 74 80 182 103 64

Grade

Capacity (mAh/g)

Sized

Sized De-sized

5k

10k

Figure 1. FE-SEM images of T300-1K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× magnification. 

Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL (right) are both 

shown. The fibers were taken from a plain weave fabric. 
11

Sized De-sized

5k

10k

Figure 2. FE-SEM images of T40/800-6K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× 

magnification. Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL 

(right) are both shown. The fibers were taken from a plain weave fabric. 

Sized De-sized

5k

10k

Figure 3. FE-SEM images of IM7-6K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× magnification. 

Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL (right) are both 

shown. The fibers were taken from a plain weave fabric. 
12

Sized De-sized

5k

10k

Figure 4. FE-SEM images of IM7-12K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× 

magnification. Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL 

(right) are both shown. The fibers were taken from a unidirectional fabric. 

Sized De-sized

5k

10k

Figure 5. FE-SEM images of PX35-50K tow fibers at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× 

magnification. Commercial sized fibers that are unmodified (left) and de-sized at ARL 

(right) are both shown. The fibers were taken from a unidirectional fabric. 
13

Sized De-sized

5k

10k

Figure 6. FE-SEM images of fibers removed from a H&V 8000036 nonwoven fabric. The images 

are at 5 keV with 5,000× and 10,000× magnification. Commercial fibers that are 

unmodified (left) and with binder removed at ARL (right) are both shown. 

Fiber dimensions also appear to impact electrochemical capacity. This is particularly evident 

with the nonwoven PAN-based carbon fiber mats, which all use the same type of fiber. The 

nonwoven binder is anticipated to have minimal impact on comparative performance since the 

binder quantity is constant between grades. In addition, the binder is batch processed with all of 

the fibers rather than adhered directly to individual fibers as with sizing, so it should present 

even less of an impediment to the electrolyte-fiber interface than sizing. The nonwoven samples 

are listed in order of increasing mat thickness. Cell failure and relatively poor performance were 

frequent for first three grades, possibly as a result of poor mat adhesion that creates stray fibers 

shorting the cell or becoming dislocated from the circuit. Chopped fiber nonwoven mats below a 

critical thickness of about 0.13 mm are therefore not recommended for future study. Of the 

remaining samples, capacity was found to generally improve with shorter fibers, possibly 

because the surface area increases. However, the best result is with the continuous fiber sample, 

which suggests that good fiber connectivity is at least as important as high surface area. Longer 

fibers also minimize the risk of dislocating stray fibers. COTS nonwoven mats are not as 

structural as woven fabrics, but they are easy to handle and the electrochemical performance is 

acceptable. 
14

4. Conclusions 

From these tests, the potential use of COTS materials as carbon anodes in power and energy 

storage applications is viable. Suitable de-sizing of the fibers did not show enough improvement 

over sized materials to require a de-sizing step, and all the materials were able to be tested as 

received. The PAN-based materials had the best overall electrochemical capacity and tensile 

properties and have the widest breadth of applicability for use in structural applications. The 

pitch-based fibers generally performed more poorly and would be best used only in applications 

where there is a strong need for other properties associated with pitch-based materials, such as 

high thermal conductivity. Considering both capacity and tensile strength, the difference in 

electrochemical-mechanical properties between many PAN-based fibers appears to be 

insignificant. A determination of the appropriate fiber for an application would depend primarily 

on the structural requirements, which enables the designing of a wide range of structural 

electrodes. The activated carbons, carbon nanotubes, and nanofoams demonstrated promise with 

both a good electrochemical capacity and high capacitance, although the fabric tensile strengths 

are too low for isolated use in structural materials. 

In-depth analyses of the materials described here with regard to electrochemical-mechanical 

performance, cycling behavior, and morphology are underway and will be submitted to the peerreviewed electrochemistry literature. 
15

References 

1. Wu, Y.P.; Rahm, E.; Holze, R. J. of Power Sources 2003, 114, 228. 

2. Tarascon, J-M.; Armand, M. Nature 2001, 414. 

3. Ulus, A.; Rosenberg, Y.; Burstein, L.; Peled, E. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2002, 149 (5), A635. 

4. Hrubesh, L.W. J. of Non-Crystalline Solids 1998, 225, 335. 

5. Nazri, G.-A.; Pistoia, G. Lithium Batteries Science and Technology. Kluwer Academic 

Publishers: Boston, 2004. 

6. Joho, F.; Novak, P.; Spahr, M.E. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2002, 149 (8), A1020. 

7. Du Pasquier, A.; Plitz, I.; Gural, J.; Badway, F.; Amatucci, G.G. J. of Power Sources 2004, 

136, 160. 

8. Zaghib, K.; Armand, M.; Gauthier, M.J. Electrochem. Soc. 1998, 145 (9). 

9. Iijima, T.; Suzuki, K.; Matsuda, Y. Synthetic Metals 1995, 73 (1), 9. 

10. Yazami, R.; Zaghib, K.; Deschamps, M. J. of Power Sources 1994, 52, 55. 

11. Yazami, R.; Zaghib, K.; Deschamps, M. Mol Cyst Liq Cryst. 1994, 245, 165. 

12. Lee, J. K.; An, K. W.; Ju, J. B.; Cho, B. W.; Cho, W. I.; Park, D.; Yun, K. S. Carbon 2001, 

39, 1299. 

13. Kanno, R.; Kawamoto, Y.; Takeda, Y.; Ohashi, S.; Imanishi, N.; Yamamoto, O. J. 

Electrochem. Soc. 1992, 139 (12), 3397. 

14. Lipka, S.M. IEEE 1998, 373. 

15. Tanimura, A.; Kovalenko, A.; Hirata, F. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2003, 378, 638. 

16. Eom, J.Y.; Park, J.W.; Kwon, H.S.; Rajendran, S. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2006, 153 (9), 

A1678. 

17. Gao, B.; Bower, C.; Lorentzen, J.D.; Fleming, L.; Kleinhammes, A.; Tang, X.P.; McNeil, 

L.E.; Wu, Y.; Zhou, O. Chemical Physical Letters 2000, 327, 69. 

18. Kovalenko, A.; Hirata, F. Condensed Matter Physics 2003, 6 (36), 583. 

19. Pierre, A.C.; Pajonk, G.M. Chem. Rev. 2002, 102, 4243. 

20. Hossain, S.; Kinm, Y.-K.; Saleh, Y.; Loutfy, R. J. of Power Sources 2006, 161, 640. 
16

21. Hossain, S.; Saleh, Y.; Loutfy, R. J. of Power Sources 2001, 96, 5. 

22. Hossain, S.; Kinm, Y.-K.; Saleh, Y.; Loutfy, R. J. of Power Sources 2003, 114, 264. 

23. Walsh, P.J. “Carbon Fibers” In ASM Handbook, Vol 21, Composites, 2001. 

24. Kelley, K.C.; Votoupal, J.J. Patent 6,979,513, 2005. 

25. Isaev, I.; Salitra, G.; Soffer, A.; Cohen, Y.S.; Aurbach, D. J. Fischer, J. of Power Sources 

2003, 119–121, 28. 

26. Yoshizawa, N.; Hatori, H.; Soneda, Y.; Hanzawa, Y.; Kaneko, K.; Dresselhaus, M. S. J. of 

Non-Crystalline Solids 2003, 330 (1–3), 99. 

27. Wetzel, E. D. AMPTIAC Quarterly 2004, 8, 91. 

28. Thomas, J. P.; Qidwai, M. A. Acta Materialia, 52, 2155 (2004). 

29. Qidwai, M. A.; Baucom, J. N.; Thomas, J. P.; Horner, D. M. in Functionally Graded 

Materials Viii, p. 157, TRANS TECH PUBLICATIONS LTD, Zurich-Uetikon, 2005. 

30. Snyder, J. F.; Carter, R. H.; Wong, E. L.; Nguyen, P.-A.; Xu, K.; Ngo, E. H.; Wetzel, E. D. in 

2006 Fall Meeting of the Society for the Advancement of Materials and Process 

Engineering, Dallas, TX, 2006. 

31. Wong, E.L.; Baechle, D.M.; Xu, K.; Snyder, J.F.; Carter, R.H.; Wetzel, E.D. Proceedings of 

SAMPE Conference, Baltimore, June 3–7, 2007. 

32. Snyder,J. F.; Carter, R. H.; Wetzel, E. D. Chem. Mat. 2007, 19, 3793. 

33. Wang, L.T.; Poleunis, C.; Bertrand, P.; Carlier, V.; Scavons, M.; Franquinet, P.; Legras, R. 

J. Adhesion Sci Techno. 1995, 9, 859. 

34. Fong, R.; von Sacken, U.; Dahn, J. R. J. Electrochem. Soc. 1990, 137, 2009. 
17

Acronyms 

AC activated carbon 

ARL U.S. Army Research Laboratory 

BPNT bamboo multi-wall nanotube 

CFF fibrillated acrylic fiber pulp 

COTS commercial off-the-shelf 

Da dalton 

FE-SEM Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope 

LiPF6 lithium hexafluorophosphate 

MWNT multi-wall nanotube 

PAN poly(acrylonitrile) 

PEO poly(ethylene oxide) 

SEI solid electrolyte interface 

SWNT single-wall nanotube 
18

No. of

Copies Organization

1 (PDF ADMNSTR 

ONLY) DEFNS TECHL INFO CTR 

 ATTN DTIC OCP (ELECTRONIC COPY) 

 8725 JOHN J KINGMAN RD STE 0944 

 FT BELVOIR VA 22060-6218 

1 US ARMY RSRCH LAB 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL CI OK TP 

 TECHL LIB T LANDFRIED 

 BLDG 4600 

 APG MD 21005-5066 

3 US ARMY RSRCH LAB 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL CI OK T 

 TECHL PUB 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL CI OK TL 

 TECHL LIB 

 ATTN IMNE ALC IMS MAIL & 

 RECORDS MGMT 

 ADELPHI MD 20783-1197 

3 US ARMY RESEARCH LAB 

 ATTN AMSRD ARL WM MA 

 J SNYDER (2 copies) 

 C HUBBARD 

 APG MD 21005-5066 

Total: 8 (1 PDF, 7 HCs)