Jasper Ruhkopf1,2, Simon Sawallich2,3, Michael Nagel3, Martin Otto1, Ulrich Plachetka1, Tom Kremers4, Uwe Schnakenberg4, Satender Kataria2, Max C Lemme1,2. 1. AMO GmbH, Advanced Microelectronics Center Aachen (AMICA), Otto-Blumenthal-Strasse 25, 52074 Aachen, Germany. 2. RWTH Aachen University, Chair of Electronic Devices, Otto-Blumenthal-Strasse 2 52074 Aachen, Germany. 3. Protemics GmbH, Otto-Blumenthal-Strasse 25. 52074 Aachen, Germany. 4. RWTH Aachen University, Institute of Materials in Electrical Engineering 1, Sommerfeldstrasse 24, 52074 Aachen, Germany.
Abstract
Two-dimensional (2D) materials, such as graphene, are seen as potential candidates for fabricating electronic devices and circuits on flexible substrates. Inks or dispersions of 2D materials can be deposited on flexible substrates by large-scale coating techniques, such as inkjet printing and spray coating. One of the main issues in coating processes is nonuniform deposition of inks, which may lead to large variations of properties across the substrates. Here, we investigate the role of surface morphology on the performance of graphene ink deposited on different paper substrates with specific top coatings. Substrates with good wetting properties result in reproducible thin films and electrical properties with low sheet resistance. The correct choice of surface morphology enables high-performance films without postdeposition annealing or treatment. Scanning terahertz time-domain spectroscopy (THz-TDS) is introduced to evaluate both the uniformity and the local conductivity of graphene inks on paper. A paper-based strain gauge is demonstrated and a variable resistor acts as an on-off switch for operating an LED. Customized surfaces can thus help in unleashing the full potential of ink-based 2D materials.
Two-dimensional (2D) materials, such as graphene, are seen as potential candidates for fabricating electronic devices and circuits on flexible substrates. Inks or dispersions of 2D materials can be deposited on flexible substrates by large-scale coating techniques, such as inkjet printing and spray coating. One of the main issues in coating processes is nonuniform deposition of inks, which may lead to large variations of properties across the substrates. Here, we investigate the role of surface morphology on the performance of graphene ink deposited on different paper substrates with specific top coatings. Substrates with good wetting properties result in reproducible thin films and electrical properties with low sheet resistance. The correct choice of surface morphology enables high-performance films without postdeposition annealing or treatment. Scanning terahertz time-domain spectroscopy (THz-TDS) is introduced to evaluate both the uniformity and the local conductivity of graphene inks on paper. A paper-based strain gauge is demonstrated and a variable resistor acts as an on-off switch for operating an LED. Customized surfaces can thus help in unleashing the full potential of ink-based 2D materials.
Two dimensional (2D) layered materials,
such as graphene, have received significant attention and are considered
for applications in a broad spectrum of fields spanning from electronics
to biology.[1,2] 2D materials possess a wide range of interesting
properties, which include high electrical and thermal conductivity,
strong light-matter interaction for photodetection and light emission,
and high mechanical strength and flexibility, making them a potential
candidate for flexible devices and wearables.[3] 2D materials can be obtained by different methods, such as mechanical
exfoliation, epitaxial growth, chemical vapor deposition techniques,
and liquid phase exfoliation.[4] Intense
research on the latter method of production has led to inks and dispersions
of 2D materials, which are now commercially available in large quantities.[5−7] Such liquid dispersions have been proposed for printed electronics[8−11] and as composites for energy[12,13] and health applications.[14,15] There exist numerous reports on the deposition of 2D inks using
techniques, such as inkjet printing, spray coating, and drop-casting.[16−18] Despite great progress, 2D-material-based inks still face limits
regarding uniform deposition and consistent electrical performance
of solvent based inks.[19] For applications
as flexible devices, 2D inks are generally required to be deposited
on flexible substrates, which are either polymer based, such as Kapton,
polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), and polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
or paper based. Generally, such substrates have low surface energy,[20,21] which leads to nonuniform deposition of inks and thus gives rise
to issues, such as coffee-ring effects[22,23] or incomplete
coalescence of single droplets.[24] Often,
additional processes like thermal or laser annealing are required
for improving the properties of the as-deposited inks to obtain reliable
and reproducible results.[16,25,26] Therefore, a basic understanding and tailoring of the substrate
surface is essential for exploiting the full potential of 2D inks
in flexible and wearable electronics.Here, we demonstrate how
surface morphology of the substrate plays a significant and crucial
role on uniform deposition of graphene inks on flexible paper substrates.
We find that a surface with good wetting properties and porous microstructure
leads to uniform deposition of inks with desirable electrical properties
without requiring further postdeposition treatments. Raman spectroscopy
and THz-TDS confirm the uniform deposition and, more importantly,
reproducible properties of the inks. Finally, the proposed method
is applied to graphene ink on paper-based flexible strain sensors
and variable resistors, which can act as on–off switches in
a simple circuit.
Experimental Section
We used commercial graphene dispersion (Thomas Swan Elicarb) for
the experiments. The dispersion contains few layer graphene flakes
dispersed in water and stabilized with sodium cholate as a surfactant.
The flake thickness is five to eight layers on average, while the
mean lateral dimension is around 1 μm. The concentration of
the dispersion is 1 g/L. A detailed description of the ink production
method can be found in ref (5). We have used electronic grade paper (Felix Schoeller)
p_e:smart type 1, 2, and 3 as flexible substrates. The material has
a paper core with a smoothening surface coating on the front and back
sides. A thin top coating layer, dense for paper type 1 and nanoporous
for type 2 and 3, is present as well. According to the paper type,
the samples were named sample S1 for paper type 1, S2 for type 2,
and S3 for type 3 paper. An additional letter, for example, sample
S2a and S2b indicates samples fabricated on paper type 2 in different
runs using the same graphene ink.The samples (20 × 20
mm2) were coated by spray deposition using a Badger 200
NH airbrush gun with 0.76 mm nozzle diameter and compressed air as
the propellant gas. To achieve a uniform layer, the spray parameters
were optimized to 2.5 bar backpressure and a working distance of 10–15
cm. The ink flow rate was kept at a constant low level during the
whole coating process. An average of 0.25 mL ink per cm2 substrate was used through all the experiments, to ensure that the
same amount of material was deposited on all samples. After the deposition
process, the samples were dried under ambient conditions for 30 min.
No further post-treatment, such as high temperature or laser annealing,
was conducted. The sample surface morphology was characterized using
atomic force microscope (AFM) (Veeco Instruments) before and after
ink deposition. The samples were then cut into 10 × 10 mm2 pieces and fixed on a 20 × 20 mm2 silicon
chip with double-sided tape to avoid measurement errors caused by
a curved sample. Raman spectroscopy was carried out using a WITEC
300R system and confirmed the uniformity of the deposited inks. A
532 nm wavelength laser with a power of 1 mW was employed for the
Raman measurements. For the estimation of graphene layer thicknesses,
a ZEISS Supra 60VP FE-SEM was utilized to take cross-section images
of the samples.The sheet resistance of as-coated samples was
measured using the four-point probe (4PP) technique (CMT-SR2000N,
Advanced Instrument Technology). A Jandel probe head equipped with
Tungsten Carbide needles (tip radius of 100 μm and 1 mm needle
spacing) was mounted. Several measurements were taken at different
positions close to the center. The impressed current was set to 1
mA. A correction factor of 4.53 was applied for the sheet resistance
calculations. The wetting abilities of the paper substrates were measured
using contact angle measurements. The contact angle of ink droplets
on different substrates was measured with a home-built goniometer
setup consisting of a moveable stage, a camera and a housing. A droplet
of 5.5 μL was cast on various substrates with an Eppendorf pipet.
The apparent contact angle was calculated using a customized image
analyzing software evaluating the droplet image taken with the camera.
The evolution of the contact angle over time was also studied by capturing
the droplet image successively for 3 min at 30 s intervals.Electrical characterization of the strained/unstrained samples was
carried out with a Keithley semiconductor analyzer SC4200. Compressive
and tensile strain was applied by fixing the samples to a stainless-steel
bending beam and loading the beam with different weights. Terahertz
(THz) conductivity measurements were performed in a transmission setup
based on a pump/probe scheme, using laser pulses with 100 fs duration
at a central wavelength of 780 nm and a bias-free bimetal grating
Schottky-field-emitter for THz generation. Subwavelength spatial resolution
is achieved by using a near-field microprobe (TeraSpike TD-800-X-HRS,
Protemics GmbH) for photoconductive THz detection, which was scanned
across the investigated coated samples in a few μm distance.
The sheet resistance RS of the conductive
layer on top of the paper substrate was calculated from the measured
THz transmission amplitude reduction generated by the coating layer
using the Tinkham equation.[27] The direct
substrate transmission value was measured through a bare paper substrate
alone.
Results and Discussion
Figure a–1c shows
a comparison of the surface morphologies of the pristine paper samples
obtained through AFM by scanning an area of 5 μm × 5 μm.
The surface of uncoated paper 1 (sample S1) is smooth, while papers
2 (sample S2) and 3 (sample S3) exhibit similar morphologies with
small nanopores in the range of ∼200 nm diameter. The measured
root-mean-square (rms) roughness of S1 was 2.17 nm, which is
a factor of 5 lower compared to that of samples S2 (9.74 nm) and S3
(11.71 nm). The AFM scans were repeated after spray coating the three
different papers with graphene ink (Figure d–1f). The
surface morphology of graphene-coated papers has been found to be
almost identical on all three substrates with an rms roughness in
the range of ∼60 nm. The increase in roughness is mainly attributed
to the random orientation of the few-layer graphene flakes, which
are partly aligned flat on the substrate surface but were also found
standing upright. Furthermore, separate few-layer graphene flakes
with lateral dimensions of ∼1 μm can be seen in the images
(Figure d–1f).
Figure 1
AFM scans of uncoated and graphene ink coated paper substrate.
(a–c) Scan of S1–S3 uncoated. S1 shows a dense smooth
surface, while S2 and S3 contain nanopores of approximately 200 nm
diameter. (d–f) Graphene ink coated paper samples S1–S3
with similar morphology. The lateral dimension of graphene flakes
is ∼1.0 μm.
AFM scans of uncoated and graphene ink coated paper substrate.
(a–c) Scan of S1–S3 uncoated. S1 shows a dense smooth
surface, while S2 and S3 contain nanopores of approximately 200 nm
diameter. (d–f) Graphene ink coated paper samples S1–S3
with similar morphology. The lateral dimension of graphene flakes
is ∼1.0 μm.The microstructure of
the paper coating layers and thereon deposited graphene flakes was
studied by SEM. Cross-section images of samples S1–S3 were
taken at similar levels of magnification to compare the layer stacks
and estimate the graphene layer thickness (Figure a–2c). It is
observed that, for roughly the same amount of material deposited,
the graphene layer on sample S1 is thicker (∼2 μm) compared
to that on samples S2 and S3 (<1 μm). Furthermore, porous
(S2 and S3) and nonporous (S1) paper coatings, on which graphene ink
is deposited, can be observed, where the porous coatings can be identified
by vertical grooves in the cross-sectional area. The porous microstructure
of the paper coating, in case of sample S2, is clearly seen in the
SEM image shown in Figure d. A densely packed stack of individual graphene flakes is
also visible.
Figure 2
SEM cross-section images of graphene ink coated papers
S1–S3. (a–c) Images of samples S1–S3 were taken
at ∼×5k magnification to compare the layer stack and determine
the graphene thickness. The graphene layers are indicated by arrows.
In panel a, the graphene thickness is in the range of 2 μm,
while in panels b and c, the thickness is below 1 μm. (d) Image
of S2 taken at ×50k magnification. The densely packed graphene
flakes can be observed.
SEM cross-section images of graphene ink coated papers
S1–S3. (a–c) Images of samples S1–S3 were taken
at ∼×5k magnification to compare the layer stack and determine
the graphene thickness. The graphene layers are indicated by arrows.
In panel a, the graphene thickness is in the range of 2 μm,
while in panels b and c, the thickness is below 1 μm. (d) Image
of S2 taken at ×50k magnification. The densely packed graphene
flakes can be observed.The properties of the
graphene ink on the paper substrates were further investigated through
Raman spectroscopy. An area of 40 μm × 40 μm (marked
by the red rectangle in the optical micrograph shown in Figure a, sample S2) was scanned with
a step size of 1 μm. Figure b shows a point spectrum obtained at the center of
the area to verify the presence of few-layer graphene. A 2D/G intensity
ratio of less than one, with sharp G and 2D peaks confirmed that the
flakes are indeed crystalline multilayer graphene.[28] The presence of a strong D peak is typical for edge defects
in graphene dispersions.[29,30] The disorder related
D′ peak is visible as well.[31]Figure c shows the map of
the 2D/G intensity ratio extracted from the Raman scan. The uniform
intensity ratio (0.53–0.55) over the whole scanned area confirms
the structural uniformity of the deposited inks. Figure d shows a map of the D/G ratio
and it is predominantly around 0.3 across the sample.
Figure 3
Raman characterization
of graphene coated sample S2. (a) Optical micrograph of the deposited
graphene ink. Red rectangle shows analyzed sample area of 40 μm
× 40 μm. (b) Average point Raman spectrum of the graphene
ink. (c) Raman map of 2D/G intensity ratio showing homogeneous flake
structure over scanned area. (d) Raman map of D/G intensity ratio.
Raman characterization
of graphene coated sample S2. (a) Optical micrograph of the deposited
graphene ink. Red rectangle shows analyzed sample area of 40 μm
× 40 μm. (b) Average point Raman spectrum of the graphene
ink. (c) Raman map of 2D/G intensity ratio showing homogeneous flake
structure over scanned area. (d) Raman map of D/G intensity ratio.The electrical properties of the deposited graphene
inks were characterized to assess the suitability of different papers
as substrates for electronic applications. The sheet resistance of
the as-deposited inks was measured using a four-point probe setup. Table summarizes the sheet
resistance values for the different paper substrates. Sample S1 exhibits
a high sheet resistance of 700 kΩ/sq. on average. On the other
hand, samples S2 and S3 have much lower sheet resistances of approximately
3 kΩ/sq. This is in stark contrast to the similar surface morphology
observed in all three samples through AFM and Raman measurements:
This suggests that the substrate surface has a significant impact
on the electrical performance of graphene inks regardless of the observed
uniform surface topography. From an application point of view, the
sheet resistance of sample S1 is much too high, while the samples
S2 and S3 exhibit competitive values to recently reported data.[32] It should be highlighted that no postdeposition
treatment was conducted prior to the electrical measurements in our
current experiments, whereas such treatments have been widely used
and shown to greatly improve electrical properties of graphene inks.
The porous coating of paper types 2 and 3, thus, enables application
relevant conductivities of graphene inks utilizing low-temperature
processing. This is a fundamental achievement as porous substrates
will allow low-cost roll-to-roll production of flexible substrates
with conductive graphene coatings regardless of the ink deposition
technique used.
Table 1
Sheet Resistance Mapping by Four-Point-Probe
Methoda
sheet
resistance [kΩ/sq.]
sample
position 1
position 2
position 3
average
sample S1
671.50
765.90
687.00
708.10
sample S2
3.12
2.83
3.27
3.07
sample S3
3.30
3.34
3.24
3.29
Comparison of ink coated samples S1–S3.
Comparison of ink coated samples S1–S3.
THz Characterization
THz-TDS sheet
resistance mapping was carried out on paper type 2 to evaluate the
spatial homogeneity of the electrical properties of the deposited
ink (sample S2a). A simplified drawing of the THz-TDS measurement
setup is provided in Figure a. The mapping yielded an average sheet resistance of 258
Ω/sq. (Figure b). The mapping shows homogeneous coating of the substrate, which
supports the previous observations of morphology and structural homogeneity
made through AFM and Raman measurements. The statistical distribution
of the measured sheet resistance is shown in Figure c with a standard deviation σ of 18
Ω/sq. 4PP sheet resistance measurements done on S2a (Table ), resulted in an
average value of 1.54 kΩ/sq. The value differs from the sheet
resistance value of 3.07 kΩ/sq. measured on sample S2 fabricated
on the same substrate in a different batch. This is attributed to
the manual application method of the coating with a hand-held airbrush.
The considerable discrepancy (around a factor of 6) of the sheet resistance
values of S2a recorded by two different techniques can be explained
using the employed extraction method. By measuring the THz-absorption
by free charge carriers in the conductive layer of interest (i.e.,
the graphene coating in this case), the conductivity/sheet resistance
of the intrinsic graphene is obtained.[33] Though the results are low-frequency resistance or quasi-DC values,
it is important to note that the excited charge carriers will only
move distances of up to 100 nm. As a result, there is no net induced
DC-current flow in the graphene flake film. On the other hand, current
flows between the two outer needles separated by a distance of 3 mm
during the 4PP measurements. This means that the conductivity extracted
through THz TDS is a local conductivity in the sub-micrometer-scale
(i.e., often within a flake), while the 4PP measurement averages the
current flow through an area much larger than the average flake size.
Thus, charge carriers need to pass many high resistance flake-to-flake-junctions
to travel between the probes and hence a higher sheet resistance is
measured by 4PP.
Figure 4
Sheet resistance mapping by THz spectroscopy. (a) Schematic
of the measurement setup. (b) Sheet resistance maps of coated (upper
half with average sheet resistance of 258 Ω/sq.) and bare (lower
half) paper S2. (c) Statistical distribution of sheet resistance of
graphene coated paper S2a.
Table 2
Sheet Resistance Mapping by Four-Point-Probe Method
of Sample S2a
measurement
position
sheet resistance [kΩ/sq.]
1
1.62
2
1.59
3
1.75
4
1.34
5
1.49
6
1.55
7
1.37
8
1.51
9
1.63
Sheet resistance mapping by THz spectroscopy. (a) Schematic
of the measurement setup. (b) Sheet resistance maps of coated (upper
half with average sheet resistance of 258 Ω/sq.) and bare (lower
half) paper S2. (c) Statistical distribution of sheet resistance of
graphene coated paper S2a.
Contact Angle
Measurements
The drying mechanism for inks on different surfaces
was investigated through contact angle measurements. The evolution
of the contact angles over time was recorded for pristine paper type
1, paper 2, and paper 3 (Figure a–5c). Droplets of 5.5
μL of graphene ink were deposited on the substrates with an
Eppendorf pipet. The ink droplet on paper 2 had an initial contact
angle of 63.6°, which was considerably lower than on paper 1
(81.8°). Paper 3 even shows a lower contact angle (39.8°).
This result demonstrates the higher hydrophilicity of the porous paper
top coating. During the first 180 s of drying time, the droplet’s
contact angle decreased while the droplet diameter was constant due
to contact line pinning.[22] The contact
angle decreased much faster on paper 2 and 3, which can be explained
by a vertical flow of solvent into the porous top coat. The proposed
drying mechanism, in case of porous coating, is provided as a schematic
in Figure d: The solvent
is drained by capillary forces created by the nanometer sized pores,
which takes place simultaneously with the solvent evaporation process
though the latter is happening much slower.[34] During airbrush coating, picoliter droplets are deposited on the
substrate surface as measured in Scardaci et al.[35] For small droplets in the picoliter range, the time scale
of both drying mechanism was investigated by Tan.[34] The author found that solvent absorption by the porous
substrate is completed within milliseconds while the evaporation of
residual solvent happens in the seconds range. However, for microliter
droplets as used for the contact angle measurements, the time scale
of solvent absorption shifts toward the seconds range, because the
absorption time is proportional to a power law dependence of the initial
droplet diameter.[34] The observed wetting
and liquid penetration properties are in agreement with recent studies
of porous paper based materials.[36,37] On paper 1,
the solvent cannot enter the substrate, therefore, evaporation is
the dominating mechanism involved in droplet drying. Wu et al. found
a similar effect for thermoplastic electrically conductive adhesives
deposited on various paper substrates with different grades of porosity.[38] On all three papers, the decrease of contact
angle was found to be linear for a given time frame. It took approximately
30 min for all droplets to dry completely, observable by naked eye.
On paper type 1, the coffee-ring effect is clearly visible, with a
thicker flake layer at the droplet perimeter compared to the droplet
center. The dried ink droplet on paper 2 is homogeneous and no coffee-ring
formation is observed. The faster drying of the ink on paper 3 leads
to the generation of “cobweb”-like structures. The occurrence
of this effect seems to depend on the droplet size, as it was not
present for smaller droplets. As studied by Pack et al., the pore
size determines whether a coffee-ring is formed or uniform deposition
could be observed.[39] A pore size of 200
nm, which was measured by AFM on samples S2 and S3, generates a uniform
layer which indeed could be validated experimentally.
Figure 5
Time-dependent contact
angle measurements after droplet deposition and after 180 s together
with top view photographs after complete droplet drying: (a) paper
type 1 substrate, (b) paper type 2, and (c) paper type 3. Paper type
2 facilitates homogeneous droplet drying, while a coffee-ring effect
is clearly visible on paper type 1. A “cobweb-like”
structure is seen on paper type 3 indicating faster drying process
on this paper. (d) Proposed drying mechanism of graphene ink on porous
surfaces. The solvent can enter the substrate’s pores for improved
drying conditions.
Time-dependent contact
angle measurements after droplet deposition and after 180 s together
with top view photographs after complete droplet drying: (a) paper
type 1 substrate, (b) paper type 2, and (c) paper type 3. Paper type
2 facilitates homogeneous droplet drying, while a coffee-ring effect
is clearly visible on paper type 1. A “cobweb-like”
structure is seen on paper type 3 indicating faster drying process
on this paper. (d) Proposed drying mechanism of graphene ink on porous
surfaces. The solvent can enter the substrate’s pores for improved
drying conditions.This makes the porous
papers 2 and 3 the most suitable substrates for graphene ink deposition
of those studied in this article.We assume that the drying
mechanisms described above directly affect the microstructure of the
deposited graphene flake layer. Capillary forces, present during ink
deposition on porous substrates generate a well-aligned, densely packed
graphene flake layer. In absence of these forces, the graphene flakes
are randomly oriented and exhibit a high porosity which was observed
on nonporous substrates. The density of the graphene layers also explains
the difference in sheet resistance. This is similar to a study by
Huang et al., which reports the sheet resistance of graphene flake
layers after compressing the layers by applying different amounts
of pressure.[40] The higher the flake density
of the layers, the lower was the measured sheet resistance. It is
evident from the comparison of the THz-TDS and the 4PP measurements
that the overall resistance of the layers is dominated by flake-to-flake-junctions,
which form a conductive percolation network.[41] It has been shown that electron tunneling is the predominant mechanism
for the electrical connection of two neighboring graphene flakes.[42] The general equation for electron tunneling,
derived by Simmons,[43] states that the tunnel
resistivity ρ is proportional to e with d defined as the flake–flake
distance. A densely packed layer has a lower average flake–flake
distance compared to a porous layer and thus shows a lower sheet resistance.Bending beam measurements on sample S2b (paper type 2 substrate)
were carried out to study its performance as strain gauge. A significant
decrease of resistance for compressive strain (inward bending) and
an increase in resistance for tensile strain (outward stretching)
can be clearly observed. Figure a shows the relative change in resistance ΔR/R0 for several load/unload
cycles of the bending beam, where R is the resistance
under strained conditions and R0 is the
resistance of the unstrained sample. Tensile strain was applied by
loading the beam with a weight of 2 kg, which equals a strain of approximately
ε = 4.25 × 10–4 for the given parameters.
A gauge factor (GF) of 8 was extracted, using the equation . As shown by
Hempel et al.,[44] strain induces movement
of the flakes, that is, the overlapping areas and distances between
connected flakes change considerably. The compressive strain decreases
the flake–flake distance d and, therefore,
reduces the tunneling resistivity according to the Simmons equation,
which is in line with our observations as well. Utilizing the bending
direction dependent induced changes in resistance, we have applied
the graphene coated paper (sample S2) as a resistor switch. A 9 V
battery was connected to the clamp-contacted paper in series with
an LED. By bending the paper the LED can be switched on and off (Figure b and 6c, respectively). This concept was generally shown by Casiraghi
et al., without discussing the influence of the paper substrate’s
morphology on the electrical properties of the deposited graphene
flake layer.[45]
Figure 6
Bending beam measurement
of paper sample S2b and switching application (sample S2). (a) Electrical
characterization of S2b with tensile (outward bending) and compressive
strain (inward bending) applied. The percolation path of graphene
flakes network changes by bending and thus the sample resistance.
Panels b and c show the application as switch. In panel b, the switch
is in the off state (sample kept straight), and in panel c, it is
in the on state (sample inward bent).
Bending beam measurement
of paper sample S2b and switching application (sample S2). (a) Electrical
characterization of S2b with tensile (outward bending) and compressive
strain (inward bending) applied. The percolation path of graphene
flakes network changes by bending and thus the sample resistance.
Panels b and c show the application as switch. In panel b, the switch
is in the off state (sample kept straight), and in panel c, it is
in the on state (sample inward bent).
Conclusion
We have studied the influence of substrate surface
morphology on the structural and electrical properties of graphene
inks deposited thereon. Commercial graphene ink was spray coated onto
different paper substrates with porous and nonporous surface coating.
The topography of the graphene ink layers was characterized by AFM
and showed uniform deposition of the graphene flakes, independent
of the substrate. Raman mapping confirmed the graphitic nature of
the graphene flakes and visualized the layer homogeneity. The papers
with porous coating showed superior characteristics as substrates
for graphene flake layers with considerably lower sheet resistance
values, measured by the 4-point-probe method and THz time-domain spectroscopy.
Capillary forces present in the porous coatings drain the ink’s
solvent uniformly, resulting in densely packed graphene layers. Thus,
low sheet resistance without any postdeposition thermal annealing
steps was observed. This hypothesis is further supported by contact
angle measurements performed during the ink drying process. A paper-based
strain gauge was fabricated from the porous substrate, utilizing the
percolation-type charge transport in the deposited graphene ink. This
effect was also deployed as variable resistor in a small electronic
circuit. The study demonstrates the importance of nanoscale surface
morphology of flexible substrates to exploit the inherent properties
of inks and dispersions of 2D materials.
Authors: Keith R Paton; Eswaraiah Varrla; Claudia Backes; Ronan J Smith; Umar Khan; Arlene O'Neill; Conor Boland; Mustafa Lotya; Oana M Istrate; Paul King; Tom Higgins; Sebastian Barwich; Peter May; Pawel Puczkarski; Iftikhar Ahmed; Matthias Moebius; Henrik Pettersson; Edmund Long; João Coelho; Sean E O'Brien; Eva K McGuire; Beatriz Mendoza Sanchez; Georg S Duesberg; Niall McEvoy; Timothy J Pennycook; Clive Downing; Alison Crossley; Valeria Nicolosi; Jonathan N Coleman Journal: Nat Mater Date: 2014-04-20 Impact factor: 43.841
Authors: Volkan Yokaribas; Stefan Wagner; Daniel S Schneider; Philipp Friebertshäuser; Max C Lemme; Claus-Peter Fritzen Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2017-12-18 Impact factor: 3.576