English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Ever since the discovery of the record-high thermal conductivity of singlelayer graphene, thermal transport capability of monolayer 2D materials has beenunder constant spotlight. Since thermal conductivity is an intensive propertyfor 3D materials and the thickness of 2D materials is not well defined,different definitions of thickness in literature have led to ambiguity towardspredicting thermal conductivity values and thus in understanding the heattransfer capability of different monolayer 2D materials. We argue that ifconventional definition of thermal conductivity should be used as the quantityto compare the heat transfer capability of various monolayer 2D materials, thenthe same thickness should be used. Alternatively, to circumvent the problem ofambiguous thickness completely, we also suggest that a "sheet thermalconductance" to be defined as an intensive 2D material property whencharacterizing the heat transfer capability of 2D materials. When convertingliterature thermal conductivity values of monolayer materials to this newproperty, some new features that were not displayed when using differentthicknesses show up.

How to Characterize Thermal Transport Capability of 2D Materials Fairly? - Sheet Thermal Conductance and the Choice of Thickness