The internal factors of influencing dielectric constant were the condition of dielectric polarization and polarization divided into electronic polarization, atomic polarization, orientation polarization, and interfacial polarization according to different molecular polarization mechanisms.
However, with the increase of O-MWCNT doping content, the binding density increased, the chain segment motion of polymer was hindered by the binding entanglement effect, and the orientation polarization of the dipole in the system was restrained.
At high frequency, the orientation polarization needed to overcome the internal resistance of the material, while the dipole steering lagged behind the variation of the electric field and the relaxation phenomenon was obvious .
The orientation polarization contributes a major part of the total polarization for polar polymers like EVA.
Thus, orientation polarization is suppressed which ultimately reflects in its reduced permittivity.
From a structural point of view, the dielectric relaxation involves the orientation polarization which in turn depends upon the molecular arrangement of dielectric material.
The extent of restriction of orientation polarization of EVA domains may also contribute to the resultant permittivity.
Therefore, the dielectric constant increased due to the comprehensive action of orientation polarization and interfacial polarization.
This phenomenon was opposite to theory and the reasons were as follows: on one hand, the dielectric constant depended on orientation polarization since SCE-[Al.sub.2][O.sub.3] was polar molecule.