Enhanced nonlinear absorption and optical limiting of transparent, electrospun graphite filled polymer composite nanofibers in near IR region
Source abstract
Abstract
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.PVP (Polyvinylpyrrolidone) and PVP/GR composite nanofibers containing 1.0, 1.5 and 2.0 wt% of graphite (GR) filler were produced by electrospinning. The nanofibrous structure of electrospun mats allows high light-matter interactions, which greatly affects the nonlinear optical character of the materials. SEM measurements showed that the PVP/GR nanofibers are smooth, transparent and of cylindrical morphology in the 161–218 nm diameter range with a high homogeneity. The energy band gap increased from 1.87 to 2.02 eV and then decreased to 1.83 eV with increasing GR filler concentration in PVP while the Urbach energy decreased indicating the existence of localized defect states. To derive the transmission in open aperture Z-scan data at 1064 and 1200 nm, a theoretical model incorporating one-photon, two-photon and free carrier absorptions and their saturations were considered. The nonlinear absorption coefficient (βeff) increased from 3.31 × −5 to 1.01 × −4 m\W with increasing GR filler concentration in PVP although increasing GR filler content leads to decrease the number of defect states. The enhanced nonlinear absorption and optical limiting behavior with increasing GR filler content in PVP nanofibers are attributed to the increasing metallic nature, which enhances the FCA contribution. Femtosecond transient absorption spectroscopy measurements indicated that the charge transfer increases in GR-filled nanofibers. Our findings showed that GR-filled nanofibers feature highly desired properties in optical limiting applications such as high linear transmittance (> 80%), high nonlinear absorption and low optical limiting threshold. Therefore, these materials are good optical limiter candidates in the near IR wavelength region. Graphical abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.]
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Nonlinear Optical Materials Studies · Diamond and Carbon-based Materials Research · Polymer Nanocomposite Synthesis and Irradiation
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (50)
Show source-provided references
1. Pascariu P, Airinei A, Grigoras M, Vacareanu L, Iacomi F (2015) Appl Surf Sci 352:95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2015.03.06310.1016/j.apsusc.2015.03.063 ↗
2. Ghanipour M, Dorranian D (2013). J Nanomater. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/89704310.1155/2013/897043 ↗
3. Delmonte J (1990) Metal/polymer composites. Springer, Berlin10.1007/978-1-4684-1446-2 ↗
4. Gu FX, Yu HK, Wang P, Yang ZY, Tong LM (2010) ACS Nano 4:5332–5338. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn100775v10.1021/nn100775v ↗
5. Meng C, Xiao Y, Wang P, Zhang L, Liu YX, Tong LM (2011) Adv Mater 23:3770–3774. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.20110139210.1002/adma.201101392 ↗
6. Wang P, Zhang L, Xia YN, Tong LM, Xu X, Ying YB (2012) Nano Lett 12:3145–3150. https://doi.org/10.1021/nl301055f10.1021/nl301055f ↗
7. Yang XG, Xu R, Bao DH, Li BJ (2014) Acs Appl Mater Inter 6:11846–11850. https://doi.org/10.1021/am503580j10.1021/am503580j ↗
8. Yan YL, Zhang C, Yao JN, Zhao YS (2013) Adv Mater 25:3627–3638. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.20130032510.1002/adma.201300325 ↗
9. Garreau A, Duvail JL (2014) Adv Opt Mater 2:1122–1140. https://doi.org/10.1002/adom.20140023210.1002/adom.201400232 ↗
10. Iliopoulos K, Kasprowicz D, Majchrowski A, Michalski E, Gindre D, Sahraoui B (2013) Appl Phys Lett 103:231103-1–231103-4. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.483705510.1063/1.4837055 ↗
11. Banerjee M, Jain A, Mukherjee GS (2019) Polym Composite 40:E765–E775. https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.2501710.1002/pc.25017 ↗
12. Waszkowska K, Krupka O, Kharchenko O et al (2020) Appl Nanosci 10:4977–4982. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13204-020-01373-310.1007/s13204-020-01373-3 ↗
13. Gautam A, Ram S (2010) Mater Chem Phys 119:266–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2009.08.05010.1016/j.matchemphys.2009.08.050 ↗
14. Srivastava S, Haridas M, Basu JK (2008) B Mater Sci 31:213–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12034-008-0038-910.1007/s12034-008-0038-9 ↗
15. Djurisic AB, Li EH (1999) J Appl Phys 85:7404–7410. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.36937010.1063/1.369370 ↗
16. Zhou JF, Wang YG, Cheng L, Wu Z, Sun XD, Peng J (2016) Neural Regen Res 11:1644–1652. https://doi.org/10.4103/1673-5374.19324510.4103/1673-5374.193245 ↗
17. Zarei M, Karbasi S (2018) J Porous Mat 25:259–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10934-017-0439-510.1007/s10934-017-0439-5 ↗
18. Saeed K, Park SY, Lee HJ, Baek JB, Huh WS (2006) Polymer 47:8019–8025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2006.09.01210.1016/j.polymer.2006.09.012 ↗
19. Al-Dhahebi AM, Gopinath SCB, Saheed MSM (2020). Nano Converg. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40580-020-00237-410.1186/s40580-020-00237-4 ↗
20. Silvestri D, Miksicek J, Waclawek S, Torres-Mendieta R, Padil VVT, Cernik M (2019) Int J Biol Macromol 124:396–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.11.24310.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.11.243 ↗
21. Nag A, Afasrimanesh N, Feng SL, Mukhopadhyay SC (2018) Sensor Actuat a-Phys 271:257–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2018.01.04410.1016/j.sna.2018.01.044 ↗
22. Tang CB, Liu DX, Wang Z, Gao Y (2011) Appl Surf Sci 257:6364–6371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2011.01.12010.1016/j.apsusc.2011.01.120 ↗
23. Bullock CJ, Bussy C (2019) Adv Mater Interfaces 6:1900229-1–1900229-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/admi.20190022910.1002/admi.201900229 ↗
24. Liao CZ, Li YC, Tjong SC (2018) Int J Mol Sci 19:3564-1–3564-36. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms1911356410.3390/ijms19113564 ↗
25. Khan MA, Cantu E, Tonello S, Serpelloni M, Lopomo NF, Sardini E (2019) Appl Sci-Basel 9:961-1–961-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/app905096110.3390/app9050961 ↗
26. Wang L, Wu YB, Hu TL, Guo BL, Ma PX (2017) Acta Biomater 59:68–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2017.06.03610.1016/j.actbio.2017.06.036 ↗
27. Roman-Doval R, Tellez-Cruz MM, Rojas-Chavez H, Cruz-Martinez H, Carrasco-Torres G, Vasquez-Garzon VR (2019) J Mater Sci 54:3342–3353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-018-3024-710.1007/s10853-018-3024-7 ↗
28. Kurakula M, Rao GSNK (2020) Eur Polym J 136:109919-1–109919-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2020.10991910.1016/j.eurpolymj.2020.109919 ↗
29. Maleki M, Natalello A, Pugliese R, Gelain F (2017) Acta Biomater 51:268–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2017.01.03810.1016/j.actbio.2017.01.038 ↗
30. Burstein E (1954) Phys Rev 93:632–633. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.93.63210.1103/PhysRev.93.632 ↗
31. Hamberg I, Granqvist CG, Berggren KF, Sernelius BE, Engstrom L (1984) Phys Rev B 30:3240–3249. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.30.324010.1103/PhysRevB.30.3240 ↗
32. NBC S. Brandt (1988) Semimetals: Graphite and its compounds. North Holland
33. Ziabari AA, Ghodsi FE (2012) J Mater Sci: Mater Electron 23:1628–1639
34. Urbach F (1953) Phys Rev 92:1324-1–1324-1. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.92.132410.1103/PhysRev.92.1324 ↗
35. Yuksek M, Kurum U, Yaglioglu HG, Elmali A, Ates A (2010) J Appl Phys 107:033115-1–033115-7. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.329850010.1063/1.3298500 ↗
36. Humphrey JL, Kuciauskas D (2006) J Am Chem Soc 128:3902–3903. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja058835310.1021/ja0588353 ↗
37. Zhang XY, Selkirk A, Zhang SF et al (2017) Chem-Eur J 23:3321–3327. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.20160439510.1002/chem.201604395 ↗
38. Ran X, Li YQ, Wei ZR et al (2021) Opt Expr 29:5213–5225. https://doi.org/10.1364/Oe.41607910.1364/Oe.416079 ↗
39. Kumar R, Kumar A, Verma N, Anupama AV, Philip R, Sahoo B (2019) Carbon 153:545–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2019.07.05810.1016/j.carbon.2019.07.058 ↗
40. Ouyang QY, Yu HL, Zhang K, Chen YJ (2014) J Mater Chem C 2:6319–6325. https://doi.org/10.1039/c4tc00909f10.1039/c4tc00909f ↗
41. Harter DJ, Shand ML, Band YB (1984) J Appl Phys 56:865–868. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.33402510.1063/1.334025 ↗
42. Dini D, Calvete MJF, Hanack M (2016) Chem Rev 116:13043–13233. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b0003310.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00033 ↗
43. Rahmawati F, Wulandari R, Nofaris E (2017) Sci Eng Compos Mater 24:253–260. https://doi.org/10.1515/secm-2015-016210.1515/secm-2015-0162 ↗
44. Kumar R, Kumar A, Verma N, Philip R, Sahoo B (2020) Phys Chem Chem Phys 22:27224–27240. https://doi.org/10.1039/d0cp03328f10.1039/d0cp03328f ↗
45. Perumbilavil S, Lopez-Ortega A, Tiwari GK, Nogues J, Endo T, Philip R (2018) Small 14:1701001-1–1701001-9. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.20170100110.1002/smll.201701001 ↗
46. Sridharan K, Ollakkan MS, Philip R, Park TJ (2013) Carbon 63:263–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2013.06.07910.1016/j.carbon.2013.06.079 ↗
47. Saravanan M, Girisun TCS (2015) Mater Chem Phys 160:413–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2015.05.00910.1016/j.matchemphys.2015.05.009 ↗
48. Savelyev MS, Gerasimenko AY, Podgaetskii VM, Tereshchenko SA, Selishchev SV, Tolbin AY (2019) Opt Laser Technol 117:272–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2019.04.03610.1016/j.optlastec.2019.04.036 ↗
49. Abdullah M, Bakhtiar H, Krishnan G, Aziz MSA, Danial WH, Islam S (2019) Opt Laser Technol 115:97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2019.01.03210.1016/j.optlastec.2019.01.032 ↗
50. Praveen PA, Prabhakaran SP, Babu RR, Sethuraman K, Ramamurthi K (2015) B Mater Sci 38:645–651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12034-015-0853-810.1007/s12034-015-0853-8 ↗