# Preparation Methods and Properties of CNT/CF/G Carbon-Based Nano-Conductive Silicone Rubber
## 3 Results and Discussion
### Properties of Blended Carbon Nano-Conductive Silicone Rubber  
Blended carbon nano-conductive silicone rubber (LSR/CNT/CF/G) was prepared with the optimal proportions of the nano-fillers. The properties of LSR/CNT/CF/G  
Figure 11: Raman spectra of 1.25 wt% CNT. Figure 12: Thermogravimetric analysis of LSR + 1.25 wt% CNT. were compared with those of LSR/CF, LSR/CNT, and LSR/G via Raman spectroscopy, thermogravimetry analysis, DSC, XRD, scanning electron microscopy, and tensile resistance analysis. (1) Analysis of the tensile sensitivity of LSR/CNT/CF/G. As shown in Figure 13, LSR/CNT/CF/G obviously has good tensile resistance characteristics. Its initial resistance was 2.69 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\)\(\Omega\), and when the elongation was 100%, the resistance was 3.86 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\)\(\Omega\). The resistance of LSR/CF with 7.5 wt% CF was 5.34 \(\times\) 10\({}^{7}\)\(\Omega\), As shown in Figure 14,The resistance value of 5.5 wt% graphene conductive silicone rubber is 8.33 \(\times\) 10\({}^{8}\)\(\Omega\). The stretching sensitivity of blended carbon nano conductive silicone rubber is better than that of carbon fiber conductive silicone rubber and graphene conductive silicone rubber. When the stretch rate reaches 250%, the resistance value 9.71 \(\times\) 10\({}^{3}\)\(\Omega\), As shown in Figure 15, 1.25 wt% carbon nanotube conductive silicone rubber resistance value is 7.09 \(\times\) 10\({}^{6}\)\(\Omega\). As shown in Figure 16,The tensile sensitivity of LSR/CNT/CF/G was better than that of LSR/CNT, and the resistance value increased from 1.01 \(\times\) 10\({}^{4}\) to 9.66 \(\times\) 10\({}^{4}\)\(\Omega\) when the tensile strength was increased from 250% to 520%. Blended carbon nano-conductive silicone rubber is in the range of 520-816%. The maximum resistance was 1.04 \(\times\) 10\({}^{6}\)\(\Omega\) when the elongation was 827%. Figure 14: Tensile resistance of LSR/G. Figure 13: Tensile resistance of LSR/CF. (2) Dispersion analysis of LSR/CNT/CF/G  
Next, the dispersion of LSR/CNT/CF/G was analyzed. Figure 17 displays the Raman spectra of LSR/CNT/CF/G in comparison to the spectra of the single-filler conductive silicone rubbers. For pure LSR, the peak of the bending of -CH2 was at 1340 cm\({}^{-1}\), and the characteristic peak of the stretching vibration of -CH2 was at 2899 cm\({}^{-1}\). The LSR/CNT/CF/G sample curve comprised two peaks: D (1280 cm\({}^{-1}\)) and G (2430 cm\({}^{-1}\)). The D peak stemmed from the defect of the sp3 orbital in the graphene sheet, while the G peak stemmed from the phonon mode of the sp2 carbon atom in the plane. As shown in Figure 18, for LSR/CF, the bending and stretching vibration characteristic peaks of -CH2 were still observed at 1340 and 2899 cm\({}^{-1}\), respectively. The characteristic peaks in the curve of the pure LSR sample gradually weakened or disappeared, proving that good interfacial adhesion exists between the multi-filler blend and the matrix and that the dispersion is good. (3) Thermal stability analysis of the carbon-based nano-conductive silicone rubbers  
When comparing the thermal stability of the carbon-based nano-conductive silicone rubbers prepared with different conductive fillers, the data need to be recorded under different weightlessness conditions. Then, the thermal stabilities of the different carbon-based nano-conductive silicone rubbers were compared. Figure 19 displays the thermogravimetric analysis diagram of LSR/CNT/CF/G. Figures 20 and 21 compare the thermogravi  
Figure 16: Tensile resistance of LSR/CNT/CF/G. Figure 15: Tensile resistance of LSR/CNT. metric analysis and derivative thermogravimetric results of the different carbon-based nano-conductive silicone rubbers and LSR, respectively. A shown in Figure 19, for LSR/CNT/CF/G, T\({}_{\rm d.5\%}\) was 476.8 \({}^{\circ}\)C, T\({}_{\rm d.10\%}\) was 526.02 \({}^{\circ}\)C, and T\({}_{\rm d.50\%}\) was 645.6 \({}^{\circ}\)C, and the corresponding temperature and weight loss at Tmax were 719.0 \({}^{\circ}\)C and 43.99% respectively.