pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.26311 · v1 · pith:3NL25DVTnew · submitted 2026-05-25 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci · nucl-ex

Resilience of the physicochemical properties of graphene-based materials for applications in harsh radiation environments

Marcilei A. Guazzelli , Saulo G. Alberton , Nemitala Added , Vitor A. P. Aguiar , Koiti Araki , Luis H. Avanzi , Francesco Cappuzzello , Manuela Cavallaro
show 11 more authors
Eliane F. Chinaglia Marcia T. Escote Fabio F. Ferreira Mauro Giovannini Renato F. Jardim Sueli H. Masunaga Nilberto H. Medina Marcelo Nakamura Jos\'e R. B. Oliveira Roberto B. B. Santos Alexis C. Villas-B\^oas
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 21:07 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci nucl-ex
keywords ion irradiationHOPGreduced graphene oxideradiation tolerancestructural orderXRDRaman spectroscopyelectrical transport
0
0 comments X

The pith

Ion irradiation disorders highly oriented graphite while partially reordering multilayer reduced graphene oxide at higher fluences.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper compares the response of two carbon materials to 60 MeV chlorine ions at fluences of 5.11 x 10^9 and 1.3 x 10^10 ions per square centimeter. In HOPG the ions broaden XRD peaks, raise the Raman ID/IG ratio, and degrade electrical transport, showing loss of crystalline order. In ML-rGO the same ions at the higher fluence produce sharper graphitic features in both XRD and Raman spectra together with altered surface morphology, pointing to formation of more ordered sp2 domains. The contrast demonstrates that the starting degree of structural order controls whether radiation mainly damages or can partially reorganize the material. These observations supply guidance for choosing graphene-based layers in radiation-exposed devices.

Core claim

The irradiation response is strongly influenced by the initial structural organization of the material. In HOPG, ion exposure leads to a progressive loss of crystalline order, evidenced by XRD peak broadening and an increase in the Raman ID/IG ratio, accompanied by a reduction in electrical transport performance. In contrast, ML-rGO exhibits distinct behavior at higher fluences, suggesting partial structural reorganization. The appearance of more defined graphitic features in XRD and Raman analyses, along with changes in surface morphology and electrical response, suggests the formation of more ordered sp2 domains.

What carries the argument

Initial structural organization of the carbon lattice, which determines whether 60 MeV 35Cl ions cause net disordering (HOPG) or partial reordering (ML-rGO), tracked through XRD peak width, Raman ID/IG ratio, SEM/AFM morphology, and electrical transport.

If this is right

  • HOPG loses crystalline order and electrical performance under the tested ion fluences.
  • ML-rGO develops sharper graphitic XRD and Raman signatures at the higher fluence, consistent with formation of ordered sp2 domains.
  • Surface morphology and electrical response shift in parallel with the structural changes in both materials.
  • Material choice for radiation environments must take account of the starting degree of crystalline order.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Disordered carbon forms could tolerate moderate radiation exposure through ion-driven reorganization rather than pure damage.
  • The same reordering tendency might appear in other defective carbon structures under comparable ion bombardment.
  • Device layers in radiation settings might benefit from using reduced graphene oxide instead of perfect graphite sheets.
  • Mapping the fluence threshold that separates damage from reorganization across different ions would be a direct next measurement.

Load-bearing premise

The reported changes in XRD, Raman, morphology, and transport are produced by the ion irradiation rather than by sample-to-sample differences or post-exposure handling.

What would settle it

If identical unirradiated HOPG control samples, measured under the same conditions and sequence, show the same XRD peak broadening and ID/IG increase as the irradiated specimens, the claim that irradiation drives the loss of order would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.26311 by Alexis C. Villas-B\^oas, Eliane F. Chinaglia, Fabio F. Ferreira, Francesco Cappuzzello, Jos\'e R. B. Oliveira, Koiti Araki, Luis H. Avanzi, Manuela Cavallaro, Marcelo Nakamura, Marcia T. Escote, Marcilei A. Guazzelli, Mauro Giovannini, Nemitala Added, Nilberto H. Medina, Renato F. Jardim, Roberto B. B. Santos, Saulo G. Alberton, Sueli H. Masunaga, Vitor A. P. Aguiar.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of the experimental setup in the SAFIIRA beamline, with ML-rGO and HOPG samples mounted on a rotating goniometer. The configuration allows periodic swapping during 60 MeV ³⁵Cl ion irradiation, ensuring uniform exposure. After each irradiation step (N1 and N2), the samples were sectioned into smaller pieces to enable the different characterization techniques to be performed on representative porti… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: shows the X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns, obtained in transmission geometry, for all samples. It is important to emphasize that the pristine and N1 ML-rGO samples shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Micro-Raman maps (10 × 10 µm²) of ML-rGO under different irradiation conditions: (a) pristine sample, (b) after the first irradiation step (N1), and (c) after the second irradiation step (N2). Binarized images are shown for (d) pristine HOPG, and (e) ML-rGO after N2. 3.3.Surface morphology and microstructural analysis As shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The development of radiation-tolerant materials capable of maintaining structural, electrical, and thermal stability in extreme, radiation-rich environments remains a critical challenge in materials science. In this work, the effects of 60 MeV 35Cl ion irradiation on highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) and multilayer reduced graphene oxide (ML-rGO) were investigated. The samples were exposed to fluences of 5.11 x 10^9 and 1.3 x 10^10 ions/cm^2 and characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), Raman spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), atomic force microscopy (AFM), and electrical transport measurements. The results show that the irradiation response is strongly influenced by the initial structural organization of the material. In HOPG, ion exposure leads to a progressive loss of crystalline order, evidenced by XRD peak broadening and an increase in the Raman ID/IG ratio, accompanied by a reduction in electrical transport performance. In contrast, ML-rGO exhibits distinct behavior at higher fluences, suggesting partial structural reorganization. The appearance of more defined graphitic features in XRD and Raman analyses, along with changes in surface morphology and electrical response, suggests the formation of more ordered sp2 domains. These findings indicate that irradiation effects vary with the initial degree of order, providing useful insights for selecting carbon-based materials for devices operating under severe radiation conditions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports an experimental study of 60 MeV 35Cl ion irradiation at fluences of 5.11×10^9 and 1.3×10^10 ions/cm² on HOPG and ML-rGO. Characterization by XRD, Raman, SEM, AFM, and electrical transport is used to claim that response depends on initial structural organization: HOPG exhibits progressive loss of crystalline order while ML-rGO shows partial reorganization into more ordered sp2 domains at higher fluence.

Significance. If the differential response is shown to be irradiation-driven rather than an artifact of sample variation, the findings would provide practical guidance for selecting carbon-based materials in radiation environments. The experimental approach is standard for the field, but the absence of statistical controls limits the strength of the conclusions.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and results: Changes in XRD peak width, Raman I_D/I_G ratio, morphology, and transport are presented as irradiation-induced without reported error bars, standard deviations, replicate counts, or statistical tests. This prevents evaluation of whether the reported differences between HOPG and ML-rGO exceed sample-to-sample variation.
  2. [Methods] Experimental section: No description of pre-irradiation measurements on the identical specimens, multiple independent samples per fluence, or unirradiated controls is provided. Without these, the central claim that initial structural organization dictates the irradiation response cannot be isolated from batch variation or handling effects.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The fluence values are given with scientific notation but without explicit units in the abstract; ensure consistent reporting of units and ion species throughout.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on statistical reporting and experimental controls. We have revised the manuscript to address these points as described below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and results: Changes in XRD peak width, Raman I_D/I_G ratio, morphology, and transport are presented as irradiation-induced without reported error bars, standard deviations, replicate counts, or statistical tests. This prevents evaluation of whether the reported differences between HOPG and ML-rGO exceed sample-to-sample variation.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of error bars and replicate information limits the ability to assess variability. In the revised manuscript we have added error bars (standard deviations) to all relevant plots in the results section, along with a statement specifying the number of measurements per condition and observed sample-to-sample variation. These additions allow direct evaluation of whether the reported differences between HOPG and ML-rGO exceed typical variation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Methods] Experimental section: No description of pre-irradiation measurements on the identical specimens, multiple independent samples per fluence, or unirradiated controls is provided. Without these, the central claim that initial structural organization dictates the irradiation response cannot be isolated from batch variation or handling effects.

    Authors: We have expanded the experimental section to describe the use of unirradiated control samples from the same preparation batches and to note that multiple specimens were measured per fluence. Pre-irradiation characterization was performed on representative samples from each batch. We acknowledge that pre-irradiation data on the exact same specimen locations were not obtained for every technique in every case. The revised text now includes an explicit discussion of this limitation and explains how the distinctly different initial structures of HOPG versus ML-rGO still permit attribution of the differential response to irradiation. This constitutes a partial revision because full isolation from all possible batch effects would require additional replicate experiments that were not part of the original study. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely experimental reporting with no models or derivations

full rationale

The paper consists entirely of experimental irradiation of HOPG and ML-rGO samples followed by direct characterization via XRD, Raman, SEM, AFM, and transport measurements. No equations, fitted parameters, predictive models, or derivation steps appear in the abstract or described content. Claims about differential response to irradiation are presented as observations, not as outputs of any chain that could reduce to inputs by construction. This matches the default case of a self-contained experimental report with score 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard domain assumptions about how XRD broadening and Raman ID/IG ratios map to crystalline order and defects, plus the premise that observed differences arise from irradiation rather than other variables.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption XRD peak broadening and increased Raman ID/IG ratio reliably indicate loss of crystalline order and increased defects
    Invoked when interpreting HOPG results and contrasting with ML-rGO

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5896 in / 1187 out tokens · 34428 ms · 2026-06-29T21:07:57.393129+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Guazzelli MA, et al., Effects of neutron radiation on the thermal conductivity of multilayer, Diam. Relat. Mater. 151 (2025) 111803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diamond.2024.111803

    work page doi:10.1016/j.diamond.2024.111803 2025

  2. [2]

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3438-6

    Was GS, Fundamentals of Radiation Materials Science, Springer, New York, NY (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3438-6

    work page doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-3438-6 2017

  3. [3]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2020.05.027

    Al-Qasir II, et al., Vacancy-driven variations in the phonon density of states of fast neutron irradiated nuclear graphite, Carbon 168 (2020) 42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2020.05.027

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2020.05.027 2020

  4. [4]

    Khandaker MU, et al., Defects and structural changes of graphite-rich media subjected to low-level neutron doses for radiation dosimetry, Radiat. Phys. Chem. 201 (2022) 110498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110498

    work page doi:10.1016/j.radphyschem.2022.110498 2022

  5. [5]

    Avanzi LH, et al., Using TRIM-SRIM code simulations to determine defect density produced in HOPG irradiated with high energy heavy ions, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2340 (2022) 012002. https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2340/1/012002

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2340/1/012002 2022

  6. [6]

    Cappuzzello F, et al., The NUMEN Technical Design Report, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 36 (2021) 2130018. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X21300180

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x21300180 2021

  7. [7]

    Lo Presti D, et al., Neutron radiation effects on an electronic system on module, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 91 (2020) 083301. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0010968

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0010968 2020

  8. [8]

    Pinna, V

    F. Pinna, V. Capirossi et al., Tests of a cooling system for thin targets submitted to intense ion beams for the NUMEN experiment, Acta Phys. Pol. B 51, 655 (2020). https://doi.org/10.5506/APhysPolB.51.655

    work page doi:10.5506/aphyspolb.51.655 2020

  9. [9]

    Pinna F, et al., Project of thin targets for the NUMEN experiment, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1056 (2018) 012046. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1056/1/012046

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1056/1/012046 2018

  10. [10]

    Balandin AA, Thermal properties of graphene and nanostructured carbon materials, Nat. Mater. 10 (2011) 569. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat3064

    work page doi:10.1038/nmat3064 2011

  11. [11]

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157996

    Lee C, Wei X, Kysar JW, Hone J, Measurement of the Elastic Properties and Intrinsic Strength of Monolayer Graphene, Science 321 (2008) 385–388. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157996

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1157996 2008

  12. [12]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cartre.2024.100429

    Kaftelen-Odabaşı Ü, Evaluation of morphological, structural, thermal, electrical, and chemical composition properties of graphene oxide and reduced graphene oxide obtained by sequential reduction methods, Carbon Trends 17 (2024) 100429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cartre.2024.100429

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cartre.2024.100429 2024

  13. [13]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cartre.2026.100619

    Tjenreng JSZ, Sukma FOR, Santjojo DJDH, Harun SW, Masruroh, From graphene oxide (GO) to reduced graphene oxide (rGO) films: A hybrid approach combining film transfer and vapor reduction for enhanced structural and optical properties, Carbon Trends (2026) 100619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cartre.2026.100619

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cartre.2026.100619 2026

  14. [14]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2013.07.017

    Mortazavi B, Ahzi S, Thermal conductivity and tensile response of defective graphene: A molecular dynamics study, Carbon 63 (2013) 460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2013.07.017

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2013.07.017 2013

  15. [15]

    Patil S, Kolekar S, Deshpande A, Revisiting HOPG superlattices: Structure and conductance properties, Surf. Sci. 658 (2017) 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susc.2016.12.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.susc.2016.12.002 2017

  16. [16]

    2026, Journal of High Energy Astrophysics, 50, 100490, doi: 10.1016/j.jheap.2025.100490

    Gupta S, Kumar R, Kumar A, Devi KD, Structural and electrical changes in multilayer graphene induced by negative oxygen ion bombardment, Results Surf. Interfaces 19 (2025) 100490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsurfi.2025.100490

    work page doi:10.1016/j.rsurfi.2025.100490 2025

  17. [17]

    Fok T, Janulewicz KA, Wachulak P, et al., Electronic structure of multi-layered graphene oxide membrane moderately reduced in vacuum, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 164 (2022) 110623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpcs.2022.110623

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jpcs.2022.110623 2022

  18. [18]

    6 (2006) 2667–2673

    Gupta A, Chen G, Joshi P, Tadigadapa S, Eklund PC, Raman scattering from high-frequency phonons in supported n-graphene layer films, Nano Lett. 6 (2006) 2667–2673. https://doi.org/10.1021/nl061420a

    work page doi:10.1021/nl061420a 2006

  19. [19]

    Ávila M, Venosta L, Bajales N, Bercoff P, Structural and magnetic changes induced by electron and ion irradiation on HOPG, Procedia Mater. Sci. 9 (2015) 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mspro.2015.04.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.mspro.2015.04.008 2015

  20. [20]

    Ziang Z, et al., Ultra-low threshold optically pumped random laser emission behaviour of highly oriented pyrolytic graphite, Mater. Lett. 115 (2014) 261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2013.10.045

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matlet.2013.10.045 2014

  21. [21]

    Ruddy FH, et al., The fast neutron response of 4H silicon carbide semiconductor radiation detectors, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 53 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2006.875151

    work page doi:10.1109/tns.2006.875151 2006

  22. [22]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2023.04.004

    Jimenez-Rioboo RJ, et al., Boron-doped diamond by 9 MeV microbeam implantation: Damage and recovery, Carbon 208 (2023) 421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2023.04.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2023.04.004 2023

  23. [23]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2020.10.086

    Liu D, et al., A macro-scale ruck and tuck mechanism for deformation in ion-irradiated polycrystalline graphite, Carbon 173 (2021) 215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2020.10.086

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2020.10.086 2021

  24. [24]

    Luhmann T, et al., Investigation of the graphitization process of ion-beam irradiated diamond using ellipsometry, Raman spectroscopy and electrical transport measurements, Carbon 121 (2017)

    2017

  25. [25]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2017.05.093

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2017.05.093 2017

  26. [26]

    Da Rocha MS, et al., Applying the inelastic thermal spike model to the investigation of damage induced by high-energy ions in polymers, Macromol. Chem. Phys. 224 (2023) 2200339. https://doi.org/10.1002/macp.202200339

    work page doi:10.1002/macp.202200339 2023

  27. [27]

    Abdol MA, Sadeghzadeh S, Jalaly M, et al., Constructing a three-dimensional graphene structure via bonding layers by ion beam irradiation, Sci. Rep. 9 (2019) 8127. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598- 019-44697-z

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598- 2019

  28. [28]

    Kolawole FO, Mitma Pillaca EJD, Martins GV, Kolawole SK, Corat EJ, Trava-Airoldi VJ, Deposition of graphene incorporated diamond-like carbon coatings using pulsed-DC PECVD with an additional cathode for space applications, Diam. Relat. Mater. 156 (2025) 112422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diamond.2025.112422

    work page doi:10.1016/j.diamond.2025.112422 2025

  29. [29]

    Moon I, Lee J, Ruoff R, et al., Reduced graphene oxide by chemical graphitization, Nat. Commun. 1 (2010) 73. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1067

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms1067 2010

  30. [30]

    Wei Y, Pastuovic Ž, Murphy T, Gore DB, Precise tuning chemistry and tailoring defects of graphene oxide films by low energy ion beam irradiation, Appl. Surf. Sci. 505 (2020) 144651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.144651

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.144651 2020

  31. [31]

    Tyagi C, Khan SA, Sulania I, Meena R, Avasthi DK, Tripathi A, Evidence of ion-beam-induced annealing in graphene oxide films using in situ X-ray diffraction and spectroscopy techniques, J. Phys. Chem. C 122 (2018) 9632–9640. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.7b10699

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.7b10699 2018

  32. [32]

    Capan I, Bernat R, Makino T, Knežević T, 4H-SiC Schottky barrier diodes as radiation detectors: A role of Schottky contact area, Diam. Relat. Mater. 137 (2023) 110072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diamond.2023.110072

    work page doi:10.1016/j.diamond.2023.110072 2023

  33. [33]

    Babu KV, Sree GNJ, Das S, Algarni AD, Ghzaoui MEL, Devana VNKR, A graphene material- based wideband metamaterial absorber exploiting slotted substrate integrated waveguide (SIW) for multifarious terahertz applications, Diam. Relat. Mater. 157 (2025) 112585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diamond.2025.112585

    work page doi:10.1016/j.diamond.2025.112585 2025

  34. [34]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2015.12.101

    Zeng J, et al., Comparative study of irradiation effects in graphite and graphene induced by swift heavy ions and highly charged ions, Carbon 100 (2016) 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2015.12.101

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2015.12.101 2016

  35. [35]

    Inagaki M, et al., Advanced materials science and engineering of carbon, Elsevier (2014)

    2014

  36. [36]

    Aguiar VAP, et al., SAFIIRA: A heavy-ion multi-purpose irradiation facility in Brazil, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 91 (2020) 053301. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5138644

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5138644 2020

  37. [37]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6223(92)90047-Z

    Hishiyama Y, Kaburagi Y, Electrical resistivity of highly crystallized kish graphite, Carbon 30 (1992) 483–486. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6223(92)90047-Z

    work page doi:10.1016/0008-6223(92)90047-z 1992

  38. [38]

    27 (2012) 104

    Blanton TN, Majumdar D, X-ray diffraction characterization of polymer intercalated graphite oxide, Powder Diffr. 27 (2012) 104. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0885715612000292

    work page doi:10.1017/s0885715612000292 2012

  39. [39]

    Ferreira EHM, et al., Evolution of the Raman spectra from single-, few-, and many-layer graphene with increasing disorder, Phys. Rev. B 82 (2010) 125429. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.82.125429

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.82.125429 2010

  40. [40]

    Livneh T, Haslett TL, Moskovits M, Distinguishing disorder-induced bands from allowed Raman bands in graphite, Phys. Rev. B 66 (2002) 195110. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.66.195110

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.66.195110 2002

  41. [41]

    Nakamura K, Kitajima M, Ion-irradiation effects on the phonon correlation length of graphite studied by Raman spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. B 45 (1992) 78. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.45.78

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.45.78 1992

  42. [42]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6223(94)90096-5

    Klemens PG, Pedraza DF, Thermal conductivity of graphite in the basal plane, Carbon 32 (1994) 735–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6223(94)90096-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0008-6223(94)90096-5 1994

  43. [43]

    Zhao Y, et al., Experimental measurement of thermal conductivity along different crystallographic planes in graphite, J. Appl. Phys. 128 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0013474

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0013474 2020

  44. [44]

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09579-0

    Pecharsky VK, Zavalij PY, Fundamentals of Powder Diffraction and Structural Characterization of Materials, 2nd ed., Springer (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09579-0

    work page doi:10.1007/978-0-387-09579-0 2009