| Literature DB >> 34862936 |
Zeshen Li1, Fan Guo2,3, Kai Pang1, Jiahao Lin1, Qiang Gao4, Yance Chen1, Dan Chang1, Ya Wang1, Senping Liu1, Yi Han5, Yingjun Liu1, Zhen Xu6, Chao Gao7.
Abstract
The processing capability is vital for the wide applications of materials to forge structures as-demand. Graphene-based macroscopic materials have shown excellent mechanical and functional properties. However, different from usual polymers and metals, graphene solids exhibit limited deformability and processibility for precise forming. Here, we present a precise thermoplastic forming of graphene materials by polymer intercalation from graphene oxide (GO) precursor. The intercalated polymer enables the thermoplasticity of GO solids by thermally activated motion of polymer chains. We detect a critical minimum containing of intercalated polymer that can expand the interlayer spacing exceeding 1.4 nm to activate thermoplasticity, which becomes the criteria for thermal plastic forming of GO solids. By thermoplastic forming, the flat GO-composite films are forged to Gaussian curved shapes and imprinted to have surface relief patterns with size precision down to 360 nm. The plastic-formed structures maintain the structural integration with outstanding electrical (3.07 × 105 S m-1) and thermal conductivity (745.65 W m-1 K-1) after removal of polymers. The thermoplastic strategy greatly extends the forming capability of GO materials and other layered materials and promises versatile structural designs for more broad applications.Entities:
Keywords: Graphene materials; Polymer intercalation; Processing capability; Structural design; Thermoplastic forming
Year: 2021 PMID: 34862936 PMCID: PMC8643290 DOI: 10.1007/s40820-021-00755-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomicro Lett ISSN: 2150-5551
Fig. 1a The thermoplastic forming process of Pi-GOS from flat films into different embossed structures ranging from macro- to nano-scale. b Schematic diagram of the thermoplastic mechanism, including the sliding of GO sheets and the activation of polymer chains under pressure and heating
Fig. 2a Plots of the interlayer spacing and FWHM versus the weight ratio between PVA and GO. The insets presents the comparison between 1.12 nm (mPVA/mGO = 0.4) and 2.23 nm (mPVA/mGO = 2). b Glass-transition temperature measurement of Pi-GOS with different interlayer spacing. c Curves of storage modulus versus temperature with increasing interlayer spacing. The insets are the deformation abilities of forming structure versus d at 25 °C (blue) and 95 °C (red). d A plot of the ratio between storage modulus at 95 °C (E95) and that at 25 °C (E25) versus interlayer spacing of Pi-GOS
Fig. 3a Typical stress–strain curves of Pi-GOS (d = 3.1 nm) at 25 °C (blue) and 95 °C (red). b SEM images of transverse cross section morphology of Pi-GOS (d = 3.1 nm) after tensile breaking at 25 °C (top) and 95 °C (bottom). c Young’s modulus and elongation of Pi-GOS with different d-spacing at 25 °C (blue) and 95 °C (red). d Schematics of brittle tensile fracture of Pi-GOS below T and plastic tensile fracture above T
Fig. 4a Thermoplastic forming process of Pi-GOS from flat papers into stereostructures with positive curvatures. b FEA simulation results of indentation test for spherical and c cylindrical shells molded of Pi-GOS with same thickness (32 μm). d Force–displacement curves of spherical shell (blue square points) and cylindrical shell (red square points). Solid lines correspond to the fitting results
Fig. 5a Representation of multi-imprinting process from flat to micro-pattern stages. Scale bar, 50 μm. b Surface patterns on Pi-GOSs through micro imprinting: simple hexagon formed by triangles (left), embossment of the ZJU logo (right). Scale bars, 50 μm (left), 2 mm (right). c The curve of height-diameter ratio versus pressure and time. Dashed lines correspond to the fitting results and points represent experiment results (error bars are based on the standard error of the mean)
Fig. 6a Schematic diagram of thermal nanoimprinting process with through-hole AAO template. b SEM observations, c structural representation and d TEM images of the exterior and interior manufacture of nanorods. e SEM images of AAO template (top), imprinted Pi-rGOS nanopillars (middle) and heat reduced GLS nanopillars (bottom). f Raman spectra of Pi-rGOS and GLS. The insets are Raman mapping analysis of Pi-rGOS (up) and GLS (bottom) by considering the intensity ratio of D and G band
Fig. 7a Schematic illustrations of Janus imprinted Pi-rGOS with different static contact angle on each side (top) and the reversible morphing behavior of Pi-rGOS (bottom). b Plots of length and curvature of Janus film versus cycle number during multiple wetting tests. c The change of apparent contact angle with a function of voltage when the GLS was settled as cathode (blue) and anode (red), respectively, and their corresponding Cassie and Semi-Cassie contact model