International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012)
A Comparison Study between Boron nitride Nanotubes and
Carbon Nanotubes
Shokoofeh Dolati1, Abdolhossein Fereidoon2, Kazem Reza Kashyzadeh3
1,3
Young Researchers Club, Semnan branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan-Iran
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Semnan University, Semnan-Iran
Abstract — Carbon nanotubes discovered in 1991 and after
their developed in various fields, the first theory of boron
nitride nanotubes predicted in 1994 and experimentally
synthesized by arc-discharge method in 1995. In recent years,
most works focused on the synthesis of boron nitride
nanotubes. Boron nitride nanotubes have a structure similar
to that of carbon nanotubes, whereas carbon nanotubes can
be metallic or semiconducting depending on the rolling
direction and radius, boron nitride nanotubes are an electrical
insulator with a wide band gap of ~5.5eV (same as in
diamond), which is independent of tube chirality and
morphology. In this paper, similarities and differences
between structural parameters and properties of boron
nitride nanotubes with carbon nanotubes are particularly
compared and are expected to be as desirable for application
as carbon nanotubes.
All these properties develop the solid basis for their
future technological applications. [5] All well-founded
techniques of CNTs growth, such as arc-discharge [6, 7],
laser ablation [8, 9], and chemical vapour depositions [10]
are used to synthesize BNNTs. BNNTs can be produced by
ball milling of amorphous boron, mixed with a catalyst:
iron powder, under NH3 atmosphere. Later annealing at
~1100°C in nitrogen flow transforms most of the product
into BN. [11, 12]
This review gives an introduction to the BNNTs and
compares with CNTs, presents the purpose and significance
of this direction in the light of the general nanotube/nano
sheet developments. [13]
Keywords — Boron nitride nanotube; Carbon nanotube;
Nanotube properties.
I. INTRODUCTION
Boron nitride is a chemical combine with chemical
formula BN, consisting of equal numbers of boron and
nitrogen atoms. BN is a similarly structured carbon and
thus exists in various crystalline forms. Boron nitride (Fig.1
show BNNT) has a great potential in nanotechnology that
Nanotubes of BN can be produced. Strictly indicating, 14
years prior to this synthesis Ishii et al. [1, 2] have described
on the formation of hexagonal BN whiskers that in modern
terminology would be called bamboo-like BNNTs.
Boron nitride nanotubes (BNNTs) have the same atomic
structure as carbon nanotubes (CNTs), however, the
BNNTs properties are very different: whereas CNT can be
metallic or semiconducting but BNNT is an electrical
insulator with a band gap of ~5.5eV. [3] In addition, a
layered BN structure is much more thermally and
chemically stable than a graphitic carbon structure.[2, 4]
The physical property investigations expose that BNNTs’
display stable wide band gap, superb mechanical strength,
high thermal conductivity, ultra-violet light emission and
etc.
Figure 1: (a) An image of 2 grams of BNNTs; (b) SEM image of
purified BNNTs; (c) low-magnification TEM image of multiwalled BNNTs. [13]
II. PROPERTIES COMPARISON OF BNNTS WITH CNTS
BN is a binary compound created of Group III and
Group V elements in the periodic table. Due to its specific
structure, properties and polymorphism similarities, BN is
much closer to the C system compared to other
conventional Groups III–V compounds.[5]
470
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012)
A. Comparison of Chemical Properties
BN materials are isoelectronic with their all-carbon
analogues but possess local dipole moments due to a
difference in electronegativity of B and N atoms. [5] The
B–N bond contains ionic component. [2, 5]
This polarity can alter both molecular and solid-state
electronics as well as optical properties of the system by
modifying the character of the frontier molecular orbital.
[15, 16, 18]
The most appealing difference between BNNTs and
CNTs is their visible appearance: BNNTs are pure white
(sometimes slightly yellowish due to N vacancies) while
CNTs are totally black, as shown in Fig.2. [5] The band
gap of BNNTs described to be between 5.0 and 6.0eV
independent to tube chirality and this supplies electrical
insulation [2, 19-21], while CNTs can be a metal or a
semiconductor. [22]
Both tube types have radial breathing modes (RBM), but
the frequencies are slightly different. [5, 37]
BNNTs are electrically insulating, where CNTs are
semiconducting that this causes discrepancy of their
usages. For example, BNNTs are desirable fillers for
insulating materials [38], while CNTs are usually applied to
improve electrical conductivity of polymers [39-42]
Sometimes, BNNTs and CNTs were used in optical devices
and in different wavelength ranges. [5]
The research on hydrogen uptake in BNNTs was
stimulated by the initial results for CNTs. [2, 43-45] Single
walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) were studied and
showed strong interactions with hydrogen molecules. [4345] this may be induced by the difference in electronic
interactions between hydrogen and CNTs for various tube
structures because CNT electrical properties are highly
sensitive to the morphology and atomic order, which are
not under control yet. [2, 46] On the other hand, BNNTs
are electrically uniform, thus extending reliably predictable
NT–hydrogen interactions. [2]
C. Comparison of Mechanical Properties
BNNTs and CNTs have superb mechanical properties.
According to the theoretical calculations, the Young’s
modulus of CNTs has been predicted to achieve 1TPa level
and the BNNTs’ modulus is a moment lower, around 0.7–
0.9Tpa. [47, 48]
Never the less, experimentally, both BNNTs and CNTs’
Young’s module changed in samples fabricated by different
methods. [49-52]
CNTs were estimated to have high thermal conductivity
(6000W/mK) [53] but For BNNTs the two theoretical
papers devoted two totally different predictions: one
calculated a value higher than CNTs [54], the other: a
lower one, down to hundreds of W/mK. [55] BNNTs
possess improve thermal and oxidation stability than CNTs.
[56-58]
Figure 2: Images of (a) CNTs and (b) BNNTs exhibiting totally
different appearance. [3]
BNNTs are possible candidate materials for a large
variety of nano sized electronic and photonic devices. [23]
CNTs oxidize in air at 400–600ºC and burn totally by 700º
C, their applications limited in high temperature. On the
other hand, BNNTs show stability 1 in air at 700ºC but
BNNTs are more suitable as reinforcement for composite
materials for applications at elevated temperatures in
oxidizing environment. [23, 24]
D. Comparison of Structural Material
A theoretical employment by generalized tight-binding
molecular dynamics showed that unlike CNTs, BNNTs
have a wave-like or ‘‘rippled’’ surface in which B atoms
rotate inward to an around two-dimensional configuration,
where the N atoms move outward into a corresponding
pyramidal configuration. [5, 59] It was determined that a
zigzag BNNT may favour a flat end, while in an armchair
tube the conical tube closure is more energetically favoured
and a ‘‘chiral’’ tube may have the amorphous end. [5]
B. Comparison of Physical Properties
BNNTs have violet or ultraviolet luminescence under
excitation by electrons or photons [5, 25-30], while CNTs
can emit infrared light and the wavelengths. [31-34]
Furthermore, BNNTs have only one strong Raman active
phonon mode at 1370 cm-1 [18, 35], where CNTs possess a
nominal G band at 1580 cm-1 and a defect-induced D band
at 1350 cm-1.[36]
471
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012)
In h-BN, layers are arranged so that boron atoms in one
layer are located directly on top of nitrogen atoms in neigh
boring layers and visa versa [63], as presented in Fig5b, the
hexagons lie on top of each other.
Figure 3: Atomic models of (a) (7, 7) armchair BNNT; (b) (10, 0)
zigzag BNNT and (c) (10, 5) chiral BNNT. [5]
Figure5: Structures of parent materials. a) Graphite. b) Boron
nitride. [63]
III. CONCLUSION
Current studies have showed differences and similarities
of BNNTs and CNTs such as:
1. BNNTs are resistant to oxidation than CNTs and
therefore suited for high temperature applications in which
carbon nanostructures would burn.
2. BN nanotubes are expected to be semi- conducting, with
predictable electronic properties that are independent of
tube diameter and number of layers, different tubes built of
carbon. CNTs are Metallic or semi-conducting, whereas
BNNTs are semi-conducting.
3. CNT’s thermal conductivity is more than 3000W/mK
[64] and BNNT’s thermal conductivity is high value
expected h-BN: 600 W/mK. [64]
While CNTs research are growing exponentially year by
year, BNNT research follows a linear-like dependence that
BNNTs have properties as suitable for application as CNTs
if not more. [63]Thus, there is a dire require for
experimental investigation of electronic properties of
BNNTs. [3]
Figure 4: Atomic models of (a) armchair CNT; (b) zigzag CNT
and (c) chiral CNT.
Similar to CNTs, BNNTs can form multi-walled or
single-walled tubes [5]. Loiseau et al. [60] introduced a
series of BNNTs with a varying number of walls, including
single walled boron nitride nanotube (SWBNNT) that tubes
were grown by arc-discharge. [61] The spacing between
layers is about 0.34 nm (in other work, it is between 0.38
and 0.42 nm [62]), which is larger than the interphase
distance of 0.333 nm in a bulk hexagonal BN. [5]
BNNTs similar to CNTs have three atomic models such
as arm chair; zigzag and chiral (see Fig.3 and Fig.4).
Structures of graphite and hexagonal boron nitride (h-BN),
parent materials for CNTs and BNNTs are quite similar
(Fig.5 compares their structures). [63] They are layered
materials composed of layers of hexagonal lattices;
graphite has carbon atoms at all lattice points, while h-BN
is composed of alternating.
Boron and nitrogen atoms [63] that in plane lattice
constants are 2.46Å for graphite 4Å and 2.50Å for h-BN5.
REFERENCES
[1 ] T. Ishii, T. Sato, Y. Sekikawa, M. Iwata, J. Cryst, Growth. 1981, 52,
285.
[2 ] D. Golberg, Y. Bando, C. Tang, C. Zhi. Adv. Mater. 2007, 19,
2413–2432.
[3 ] X. Blasé, A. Rubio, S. G. Louie, M. L. Cohen, EPL. 1994, 28, 335.
[4 ] Wei-Qiang. Han, W. Mickelson, J. Cumings, A. Zettl. Appl. Phys.
Lett. 2002, 81, 1110.
472
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012)
[5 ] C. Zhi, Y. Bando, C. Tang, D. Golberg, Mat. Sci. Eng. R. 2010, 70,
92–111.
[6 ] N. G. Chopra, R. J. Luyken, K. Cherrey, V. H. Crespi, M. L. Cohen
,S. G. Louie, A. Zettl, Science. 1995, 269, 966.
[7 ] J. Cumings, A. Zettl, Chem. Phys. Lett. 2000, 316, 211.
[8 ] D. Golberg, Y. Bando, M. Eremets, K. Takemura, K. Kurashima, H.
Yusa, Appl. Phys. Lett. 1996, 69, 2045.
[9 ] Yu. D. P, Sun. X. S, Lee. C. S, Bello. I, Lee. S. T, Gu. H. D, Leung.
K. M, Zhou. G. W, Dong. Z. F, Zhang. Z, Appl. Phys. Lett. 1998,
72, 1966.
[10 ] C. Zhi, Y. Bando, C. Tan, D. Golberg, Solid State Commun. 2005,
135, 67.
[11 ] H. Chen, H. Zhang, L. Fu, Y. Chen, J. S. Williams, C. Yu, D. Yu,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 2008, 92, 243105.
[12 ] H. Chen, Y. Chen, C. P. Li, H. Zhang, J. S. Williams, Y. Liu, Z. Liu,
S. P. Ringer, Adv. Mater. 2007, 19, 1845.
[13 ] D. Golberg, Y. Bando, Y. Huang, T. Terao, M. Mitome, C. Tang, C.
Zhi,
International
Center
for
Materials
Nanoarchitectonics(MANA).2010,4,2979–2993.
[14 ] B. Akdim, X. Duan, W.W. Adams, R. Pachter, Proceeding of 3rd
International Conference on Computational Nanoscience and
Technology. 2003.
[15 ] Z.Q. Liu, T.B. Marder, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2008, 47, 242.
[16 ] B.C. Wang, M.H. Tsai, Y.M. Chou, Synth. Met. 1997, 86,2379.
[17 ] D.Y. Zhong, S. Liu, G.Y. Zhang, E.G. Wang, J. Appl. Phys. 2001,
89, 5939.
[18 ] B. Akdim, R. Pachter, X. Duan, W.W. Adams, Phys. Rev. B. 2003,
67, 245404.
[19 ] X. Blase, A. Rubio, S.G. Louie, M.L. Cohen, Europhys. Lett. 1994,
28, 335.
[20 ] M. Terrones, J.M. Romo-Herrera, E. Cruz-Silva, F. Lopez-Urias, E.
Munoz-Sandoval, J.J. Velazquez-Salazar, H. Terrones, Y. Bando, D.
Golberg, Mater. Today. 2007, 10, 30.
[21 ] H.S. Wu, J.F. Jia, Progress in Chemistry. 2004, 16, 6.
[22 ] J.W. Mintmire, B.I. Dunlap, C.T. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1992,
68,631.
[23 ] Narottam P. Bansal, w Janet B. Hurst, Sung R. Choi, Am. Ceram.
Soc. 2006, 89, 388–390.
[24 ] Y. Chen, J. Zou, S. J. Campbell, and G. Le Caer, Appl. Phys. Lett.
2004, 84,2430–2.
[25 ] J.S. Lauret, R. Arenal, F. Ducastelle, A. Loiseau, M. Cau, B. AttalTretout, E.Rosencher, L. Goux-Capes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 94,
037405.
[26 ] C.Y. Zhi, Y. Bando, C.C. Tang, D. Golberg, R.G. Xie, T. Sekiguchi,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 2005, 86, 213110.
[27 ] C.C. Tang, Y. Bando, C.Y. Zhi, D. Golberg, Chem. Commun. 2007,
4599.
[28 ] J. Wu, W.Q. Han, W. Walukiewicz, J.W. Ager, W. Shan, E.E.
Haller, A. Zettl, Nano Lett. 2004, 4, 647.
[29 ] P. Jaffrennou, J. Barjon, T. Schmid, L. Museur, A. Kanaev, J.S.
Lauret, C.Y. Zhi, C.Tang, Y. Bando, D. Golberg, B. Attal-Tretout, F.
Ducastelle, A. Loiseau, Phys. Rev. B. 2008, 77, 235422.
[30 ] P. Jaffrennou, F. Donatini, J. Barjon, J.S. Lauret, A. Maguer, B.
Attal-Tretout, F.Ducastelle, A. Loiseau, Chem. Phys. Lett. 2007,
442, 372.
[31 ] H. Harutyunyan, T. Gokus, A.A. Green, M.C. Hersam, M. Allegrini,
A. Hartschuh, Nano Lett. 2009, 9, 2010.
[32 ] S. Lebedkin, K. Arnold, F. Hennrich, R. Krupke, B. Renker, M.M.
Kappes, New J. Phys. 2003, 5, 140.
[33 ] Y. Murakami, B. Lu, S. Kazaoui, N. Minami, T. Okubo, S.
Maruyama, Phys. Rev. B. 2009, 79, 195407.
[34 ] M.J. O’Connell, S.M. Bachilo, C.B. Huffman, V.C. Moore, M.S.
Strano, E.H. Haroz,K.L. Rialon, P.J. Boul, W.H. Noon, C. Kittrell,
J.P. Ma, R.H. Hauge, R.B. Weisman, R.E.Smalley, Sci. 2002, 297,
593.
[35 ] R. Arenal, A.C. Ferrari, S. Reich, L. Wirtz, J.Y. Mevellec, S.
Lefrant, A. Rubio, A.Loiseau, Nano Lett. 2006, 6, 1812.
[36 ] M.S. Dresselhaus, P.C. Eklund, Adv. Phys. 2000, 49, 705.
[37 ] D.Y. Zhong, S. Liu, G.Y. Zhang, E.G. Wang, J. Appl. Phys. 2001,
89, 5939.
[38 ] C.Y. Zhi, Y. Bando, T. Terao, C.C. Tang, H. Kuwahara, D. Golberg,
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2009, 19, 1857.
[39 ] C. Kim, S.A. Zhang, J. Mech. Sci. Technol.2009, 23, 75.
[40 ] H.J. Park, K.A. Oh, M. Park, H. Lee, J. Phys. Chem. C. 2009, 113,
13070.
[41 ] W. Bauhofer, J.Z. Kovacs, Compos. Sci. Technol. 2009, 69, 1486.
[42 ] R. Zhang, A. Dowden, H. Deng, M. Baxendale, T. Peijs, Compos.
Sci. Technol. 2009, 69, 1499.
[43 ] A. C. Dillon, K. M. Jones, T. A. Bekkedahl, C. H. Kiang, D.
S.Bethune, M. J. Heben, Nature. 1997, 386, 377.
[44 ] A. Chambers, C. Park, R. T. K. Baker, N. M. Rodriguez, J. Phys.
Chem. B. 1998, 102, 4253.
[45 ] C. Liu, Y. Y. Fan, M. Liu, H. T. Cong, H. M. Cheng, M. S.
Dresselhaus, Sci. 1999, 286, 1127.
[46 ] J. W. G. Wildoer, L. C. Venema, A. G. Rinzler, R. E. Smalley,C.
Dekker, Nature 1998, 391, 59.
[47 ] D.Y. Zhong, S. Liu, G.Y. Zhang, E.G. Wang, J. Appl. Phys. 2001,
89, 5939.
[48 ] E. Hernandez, C. Goze, P. Bernier, A. Rubio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 1998,
80, 4502.
[49 ] J.N. Coleman, U. Khan, Y.K. Gun’ko, Adv. Mater. 2006, 18, 689.
[50 ] A.P. Suryavanshi, M.F. Yu, J.G. Wen, C.C. Tang, Y. Bando, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 2004, 84, 2527.
[51 ] D. Golberg, P. Costa, O. Lourie, M. Mitome, X.D. Bai, K.
Kurashima, C.Y. Zhi, C.C.Tang, Y. Bando, Nano Lett. 2007, 7,
2146.
[52 ] N.G. Chopra, A. Zettl, Solid State Commun. 1998, 105, 297.
[53 ] S. Berber, Y.K. Kwon, D. Tomanek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 84,
4613.
[54 ] Y. Xiao, X.H. Yan, J.X. Cao, J.W. Ding, Y.L. Mao, J. Xiang, Phys.
Rev. B. 2004, 69, 205415.
[55 ] D.A. Stewart, I. Savic, N. Mingo, Nano Lett. 2009, 9, 81.
[56 ] Y. Kai, M.Y. Gu, H.B. Han, G.H. Mu, Mater. Chem. Phys. 2008,
112, 387.
[57 ] D. Golberg, Y. Bando, K. Kurashima, T. Sato, Scripta Mater. 2001,
44, 1561.
[58 ] Y. Chen, J. Zou, S.J. Campbell, G. Le Caer, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004,
84, 2430.
[59 ] M. Menon, D. Srivastava, Chem. Phys. Lett. 1999, 307, 407.
473
International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering
Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 10, October 2012)
[60 ] A. Loiseau, F. Willaime, N. Demoncy, N. Schramchenko, G. Hug,
C. Colliex, H.Pascard, Carbon. 1998, 36, 743.
[61 ] D. Golberg, Y. Bando, W. Han, K. Kurashima, T. Sato, Chem. Phys.
Lett. 1999, 308, 337.
[62 ] R. Arenal, M. Kociak, A. Loiseau, D.J. Miller, Appl. Phys. Lett.
2006, 89, 073104.
[63 ] M. Ishigami, Hyoung Joon Choi, Shaul Aloni, S.G. Louie, M.L.
Cohen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 93, 196803.
[64 ] Duclaux, L., Nysten, B., Issi, J-P.,Moore, A. W, Phys. Rev. B. 1992,
46, 3362-7 .
474