Electromagnetic interference shielding performance of carbon nanostructure reinforced, 3D printed polymer composites
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract We report the electrical, mechanical and electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding performance of polypropylene random copolymer (PPR)/multi-wall carbon nanotube (MWCNT) nanocomposites enabled via customized fused filament fabrication process. The electro-conductive PPR/MWCNT filament feedstocks were fabricated via shear-induced melt-blending process that allows 3D printing of nanoengineered composites even at higher MWCNT loading (up to 8 wt%). The uniform dispersion of MWCNTs in PPR matrix confirmed via Raman spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy facilitates better mechanical, electrical and EMI shielding performance. The results furthermore show enhanced shielding properties and higher attenuation for the nanocomposites printed in 90° direction (~ − 37 dB for 8 wt% MWCNT loading). Effective interfacial adhesion between the beads with lesser extent of voids (confirmed via micro-computed tomography) endorsed low transmission loss in nanocomposites printed in 90° direction compared to samples printed in 0° direction. Surface architected structure (frustum shape) reveals higher specific shielding effectiveness (maximum ~ − 40 dBg−1cm3, + 38%) over the plain structure. The realization of excellent shielding effectiveness (~ 99.9% attenuation) of additive manufacturing-enabled PPR/MWCNT nanocomposites demonstrates their potential for lightweight and strong EMI shields. Graphical Abstract
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Electromagnetic wave absorption materials · Cellular and Composite Structures
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (59)
Show source-provided references
1. Abbasi H, Antunes M, Velasco JI (2019) Recent advances in carbon-based polymer nanocomposites for electromagnetic interference shielding. Prog Mater Sci 103:319–37310.1016/j.pmatsci.2019.02.003 ↗
2. Choudary V, Dhawan SK, Saini P (2012) Polymer based nanocomposites for electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding. EMI Shielding Theory and Development of New Materials; Research Signpost, Kerala, pp. 67–100
3. Colaneri NF, Schacklette LW (1992) EMI shielding measurements of conductive polymer blends. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 41(2):291–29710.1109/19.137363 ↗
4. Verma P, Saini P, Malik RS, Choudhary V (2015) Excellent electromagnetic interference shielding and mechanical properties of high loading carbon-nanotubes/polymer composites designed using melt recirculation equipped twin-screw extruder. Carbon 89:308–31710.1016/j.carbon.2015.03.063 ↗
5. Verma P, Saini P, Choudhary V (2015) Designing of carbon nanotube/polymer composites using melt recirculation approach: effect of aspect ratio on mechanical, electrical and EMI shielding response. Mater Des 88:269–27710.1016/j.matdes.2015.08.156 ↗
6. Al-Saleh MH, Saadeh WH, Sundararaj U (2013) EMI shielding effectiveness of carbon based nanostructured polymeric materials: a comparative study. Carbon 60:146–15610.1016/j.carbon.2013.04.008 ↗
7. Chung DDL (2000) Materials for electromagnetic interference shielding. J Mater Eng Perform 9(3):350–35410.1361/105994900770346042 ↗
8. Chung DDL (2001) Electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness of carbon materials. Carbon 39(2):279–28510.1016/S0008-6223(00)00184-6 ↗
9. Kim HS, Chung KY, Cho BW (2009) Electrochemical properties of carbon-coated Si/B composite anode for lithium ion batteries. J Power Sour 189(1):108–11310.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.10.045 ↗
10. Luo X, Chung DDL (1996) Electromagnetic interference shielding reaching 130 dB using flexible graphite. Carbon 34(10):1293–129410.1016/0008-6223(96)82798-9 ↗
11. Al-Saleh MH, Sundararaj U (2009) A review of vapor grown carbon nanofiber/polymer conductive composites. Carbon 47(1):2–2210.1016/j.carbon.2008.09.039 ↗
12. Viskadourakis Z, Vasilopoulos K, Economou E, Soukoulis CM, Kenanakis G (2017) Electromagnetic shielding effectiveness of 3D printed polymer composites. Appl Phys A 736:1–7
13. Liljenhjerte J, Upadhyaya P, Kumar S (2016) Hyperelastic strain measurements and constitutive parameters identification of 3D printed soft polymers by image processing. Addit Manuf 11:40–48
14. Rajkumar AR, Shanmugam K (2018) Additive manufacturing-enabled shape transformations via FFF 4D printing. J Mater Res 33(24):4362–437610.1557/jmr.2018.397 ↗
15. Dugbenoo E, Arif MF, Wardle BL, Kumar S (2018) Enhanced bonding via additive manufacturing-enabled surface tailoring of 3D printed continuous-fiber composites. Adv Eng Mater 20(12):180069110.1002/adem.201800691 ↗
16. Khan M, Kumar S (2018) Performance enhancement of tubular multilayers via compliance-tailoring: 3D printing, testing and modeling. Int J Mech Sci 140:93–10810.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.02.038 ↗
17. Andrew JJ, Ubaid J, Hafeez F, Schiffer A, Kumar S (2019) Impact performance enhancement of honeycombs through additive manufacturing-enabled geometrical tailoring. IntJImpact Eng 134:10336010.1016/j.ijimpeng.2019.103360 ↗
18. Wang X, Jiang M, Zhou Z, Gou J, Hui D (2017) 3D printing of polymer matrix composites: a review and prospective. Compos B Eng 110:442–45810.1016/j.compositesb.2016.11.034 ↗
19. Feng P, Kong Y, Yu L, Li Y, Gao C, Peng S et al (2019) Molybdenum disulfide nanosheets embedded with nanodiamond particles: co-dispersion nanostructures as reinforcements for polymer scaffolds. Appl Mater Today 17:216–22610.1016/j.apmt.2019.08.005 ↗
20. Andrew JJ, Verma P, Kumar S (2021) Impact behavior of nanoengineered, 3D printed plate-lattices. MaterDes 202:1095
21. Gupta V, Alam F, Verma P, Kannan A, Kumar S (2021) Additive manufacturing enabled, microarchitected, hierarchically porous polylactic-acid/Lithium iron phosphate/carbon nanotube nanocomposite electrodes for high performance Li-Ion batteries. J Power Sources 494:22962510.1016/j.jpowsour.2021.229625 ↗
22. Farahani RD, Dubé M, Therriault D (2016) Three-dimensional printing of multifunctional nanocomposites: manufacturing techniques and applications. Adv Mater 28(28):5794–582110.1002/adma.201506215 ↗
23. Berretta S, Davies R, Shyng YT, Wang Y, Ghita O (2017) Fused deposition modelling of high temperature polymers: exploring CNT PEEK composites. Polym Test 63:251–26210.1016/j.polymertesting.2017.08.024 ↗
24. Gnanasekaran K, Heijmans T, van Bennekom S, Woldhuis H, Wijnia S, de With G et al (2017) 3D printing of CNT-and graphene-based conductive polymer nanocomposites by fused deposition modeling. Appl Mater Today 9:21–2810.1016/j.apmt.2017.04.003 ↗
25. Arif M, Alhashmi H, Varadarajan K, Koo JH, Hart A, Kumar S (2020) Multifunctional performance of carbon nanotubes and graphene nanoplatelets reinforced PEEK composites enabled via FFF additive manufacturing. ComposPart B Eng 184:10762510.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107625 ↗
26. Paddubskaya A, Valynets N, Kuzhir P, Batrakov K, Maksimenko S, Kotsilkova R et al (2016) Electromagnetic and thermal properties of three-dimensional printed multilayered nano-carbon/poly (lactic) acid structures. JApplPhys 119(13):13510210.1063/1.4945576 ↗
27. Chizari K, Arjmand M, Liu Z, Sundararaj U, Therriault D (2017) Three-dimensional printing of highly conductive polymer nanocomposites for EMI shielding applications. Mater Today Commun 11:112–11810.1016/j.mtcomm.2017.02.006 ↗
28. Schmitz D, Ecco L, Dul S, Pereira E, Soares B, Barra G et al (2018) Electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness of ABS carbon-based composites manufactured via fused deposition modelling. Mater Today Commun 15:70–8010.1016/j.mtcomm.2018.02.034 ↗
29. Prashantha K, Roger F (2017) Multifunctional properties of 3D printed poly (lactic acid)/graphene nanocomposites by fused deposition modeling. J Macromol Sci Part A 54(1):24–2910.1080/10601325.2017.1250311 ↗
30. Spinelli G, Lamberti P, Tucci V, Kotsilkova R, Ivanov E, Menseidov D et al (2019) Nanocarbon/poly (lactic) acid for 3d printing: effect of fillers content on electromagnetic and thermal properties. Materials 12(15):236910.3390/ma12152369 ↗
31. Spinelli G, Lamberti P, Tucci V, Kotsilkova R, Tabakova S, Ivanova R et al (2018) Morphological, rheological and electromagnetic properties of nanocarbon/poly (lactic) acid for 3d printing: solution blending versus melt mixing. Materials 11(11):225610.3390/ma11112256 ↗
32. El Achaby M, Qaiss A (2013) Processing and properties of polyethylene reinforced by graphene nanosheets and carbon nanotubes. Mater Des 44:81–8910.1016/j.matdes.2012.07.065 ↗
33. Mora A, Verma P, Kumar S (2020) Electrical conductivity of CNT/polymer composites: 3D printing, measurements and modeling. ComposPart B Eng 183:10760010.1016/j.compositesb.2019.107600 ↗
34. Verma P, Schiffer A, Kumar S (2021) Thermo-resistive and thermo-piezoresistive sensitivity of carbon nanostructure engineered thermoplastic composites processed via additive manufacturing. Polym Test 93:10696110.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106961 ↗
35. Shah TK, Malecki HC, Basantkumar RR, Liu H, Fleischer CA, Sedlak JJ, et al (2014) Carbon nanostructures and methods of making the same. Google Patents
36. Arif MF, Kumar S, Gupta TK, Varadarajan KM (2018) Strong linear-piezoresistive-response of carbon nanostructures reinforced hyperelastic polymer nanocomposites. Compos A Appl Sci Manuf 113:141–14910.1016/j.compositesa.2018.07.021 ↗
37. Carneiro OS, Covas JA, Vergnes B (2000) Experimental and theoretical study of twin-screw extrusion of polypropylene. J Appl Polym Sci 78(7):1419–143010.1002/1097-4628(20001114)78:7<1419::AID-APP130>3.0.CO;2-B ↗
38. Preetha Nair K, Thomas P, Joseph R (2012) Latex stage blending of multiwalled carbon nanotube in carboxylated acrylonitrile butadiene rubber: mechanical and electrical properties. Mater Des 41:23–3010.1016/j.matdes.2012.04.021 ↗
39. Kum C, Sung Y-T, Han M, Kim W, Lee H, Lee S-J et al (2006) Effects of morphology on the electrical and mechanical properties of the polycarbonate/multi-walled carbon nanotube composites. Macromol Res 14(4):456–46010.1007/BF03219110 ↗
40. Chipara DM, Chipara AC, Chipara M (2011) Raman spectroscopy of carbonaceous materials: a concise review-a critical review focused on the Raman spectroscopy of carbonaceous materials and of polymer-based nanocomposites that contain carbonaceous (nano) materials as fillers. Spectroscopy-Eugene 26(10):42
41. Chipara DM, Macossay J, Ybarra AV, Chipara A, Eubanks TM, Chipara M (2013) Raman spectroscopy of polystyrene nanofibers—multiwalled carbon nanotubes composites. Appl Surf Sci 275:23–2710.1016/j.apsusc.2013.01.116 ↗
42. Bansala T, Joshi M, Mukhopadhyay S, Doong R-A, Chaudhary M (2017) Electrical and dielectric properties of exfoliated thermally reduced graphene based polyurethane nanocomposites. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 17(12):8782–879010.1166/jnn.2017.15221 ↗
43. Tjong SC, Liang GD, Bao SP (2007) Electrical behavior of polypropylene/multiwalled carbon nanotube nanocomposites with low percolation threshold. Scr Mater 57(6):461–46410.1016/j.scriptamat.2007.05.035 ↗
44. De Vivo B, Lamberti P, Spinelli G, Tucci V (2013) Numerical investigation on the influence factors of the electrical properties of carbon nanotubes-filled composites. J ApplPhys 113(24):2443010.1063/1.4811523 ↗
45. Dyre JC, Schrøder TB (2000) Universality of ac conduction in disordered solids. Rev Mod Phys 72(3):87310.1103/RevModPhys.72.873 ↗
46. Joo J, Epstein AJ (1994) Electromagnetic radiation shielding by intrinsically conducting polymers. Appl Phys Lett 65(18):2278–228010.1063/1.112717 ↗
47. Ott HW (2011) Electromagnetic compatibility engineering. Wiley, New Jersey
48. Paul CR (2006) Introduction to electromagnetic compatibility. Wiley, New Jersey
49. Saini P, Choudhary V, Singh B, Mathur R, Dhawan S (2011) Enhanced microwave absorption behavior of polyaniline-CNT/polystyrene blend in 12.4–18.0 GHz range. Synth Metals 161(15):1522–152610.1016/j.synthmet.2011.04.033 ↗
50. Arif M, Kumar S, Varadarajan K, Cantwell W (2018) Performance of biocompatible PEEK processed by fused deposition additive manufacturing. Mater Des 146:249–25910.1016/j.matdes.2018.03.015 ↗
51. Odell D, Wright PK, Montero M, Roundy S, Ahn SH (2002) Anisotropic material properties of fused deposition modeling ABS. Rapid Prototyp J 8(4):248–25710.1108/13552540210441166 ↗
52. Durgun I, Ertan R (2014) Experimental investigation of FDM process for improvement of mechanical properties and production cost. Rapid Prototyp J 20(3):228–23510.1108/RPJ-10-2012-0091 ↗
53. Ameli A, Nofar M, Wang S, Park CB (2014) Lightweight polypropylene/stainless-steel fiber composite foams with low percolation for efficient electromagnetic interference shielding. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 6(14):11091–1110010.1021/am500445g ↗
54. Sood AK, Ohdar RK, Mahapatra SS (2010) Parametric appraisal of mechanical property of fused deposition modelling processed parts. Mater Des 31(1):287–29510.1016/j.matdes.2009.06.016 ↗
55. Heidary H, Karimi NZ, Minak G (2018) Investigation on delamination and flexural properties in drilling of carbon nanotube/polymer composites. Compos Struct 201:112–12010.1016/j.compstruct.2018.06.041 ↗
56. Verma P, Kumar A, Chauhan SS, Verma M, Malik RS, Choudhary V (2018) Industrially viable technique for the preparation of HDPE/fly ash composites at high loading: thermal, mechanical, and rheological interpretations. JApplPolymSci 135(11):45995
57. Verma P, Choudhary V (2015) Polypropylene random copolymer/MWCNT nanocomposites: isothermal crystallization kinetics, structural, and morphological interpretations. J Appl Polym Sci. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.4173410.1002/app.41734 ↗
58. Dubnikova I, Kuvardina E, Krasheninnikov V, Lomakin S, Tchmutin I, Kuznetsov S (2010) The effect of multiwalled carbon nanotube dimensions on the morphology, mechanical, and electrical properties of melt mixed polypropylene-based composites. J Appl Polym Sci 117(1):259–27210.1002/app.31979 ↗
59. Tymrak BM, Kreiger M, Pearce JM (2014) Mechanical properties of components fabricated with open-source 3-D printers under realistic environmental conditions. Mater Des 58:242–24610.1016/j.matdes.2014.02.038 ↗