| Literature DB >> 36131735 |
Shi-Hyun Seok1, Seungjun Choo1, Jinsung Kwak1, Hyejin Ju1, Ju-Hyoung Han1, Woo-Seok Kang1, Joonsik Lee2, Se-Yang Kim1, Do Hee Lee1, Jungsoo Lee1, Jaewon Wang1, Seunguk Song1, Wook Jo1, Byung Mun Jung2, Han Gi Chae1, Jae Sung Son1, Soon-Yong Kwon1.
Abstract
The practical application of 2D MXenes in electronic and energy fields has been hindered by the severe variation in the quality of MXene products depending on the parent MAX phases, manufacturing techniques, and preparation parameters. In particular, their synthesis has been impeded by the lack of studies reporting the synthesis of high-quality parent MAX phases. In addition, controllable and uniform deposition of 2D MXenes on various large-scale substrates is urgently required to use them practically. Herein, a method of pelletizing raw materials could synthesize a stoichiometric Ti3AlC2 MAX phase with high yield and processability, and fewer impurities. The Ti3AlC2 could be exfoliated into 1-2-atom-thick 2D Ti3C2T x flakes, and their applicability was confirmed by the deposition and additional alignment of the 2D flakes with tunable thickness and electrical properties. Moreover, a practical MXene ink was fabricated with rheological characterization. MXene ink exhibited much better thickness uniformity while retaining excellent electrical performances (e.g., sheet resistance, electromagnetic interference shielding ability) as those of a film produced by vacuum filtration. The direct functional integration of MXenes on various substrates is expected to initiate new and unexpected MXene-based applications. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 36131735 PMCID: PMC9417611 DOI: 10.1039/d0na00398k
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Adv ISSN: 2516-0230
Fig. 1(a) XRD patterns of as-milled Ti3AlC2 MAX phase pellets sintered at various temperatures, (b) XRD patterns of the pellets sintered at 1500 °C at different times, and (c) calculated atomic ratio based on sintering temperature. Photographs of a cold-pressed pellet (d) before and (e) after the sintering process at ≈1480 °C for 2 h, and (f) as-milled powder. SEM images of the (g) sintered pellet surface and (h) as-synthesized MAX phase with a layered structure after grinding. (i) EDX spectrum of a pellet, revealing the chemical composition of the Ti3AlC2 MAX phase, and (j) XRD patterns of commercial and as-synthesized Ti3AlC2 MAX phase powder compared with hexagonal closed-packed Ti3AlC2 (JCPDS 10-074-8806).
Comparison of Ti3AlC2 MAX phases synthesized by three different methods in terms of volume fraction, atomic ratio, and exfoliation yield of MXenes
| Methods | Volume fraction [vol%] | Atomic ratio | Exfoliation yield | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ti3AlC2 (MAX phase) | TiC (impurity phase) | Ti (3) | Al (1) | C (2) | |||
| Commercial MAX | 32.0 | 68.0 | 3.40 | 1 | 2.32 | 0.56 ± 0.14% | |
| Sintering (this work) | Bulky powder (5.84 g) | 28.6 | 71.4 | 3.04 | 1 | 2.77 | 2.35 ± 1.86% |
| Pellet (0.6 g) | 91.2 | 8.8 | 3.13 | 1 | 2.06 | 55.5 ± 12.8% | |
Exfoliation yields were calculated using the equation of (weight of exfoliated MXene flakes)/(weight of used MAX powders).
Fig. 2(a and b) SEM images of diluted and dropped Ti3C2T MXene flakes on a SiO2/Si substrate. (c and d) AFM mapping images of the Ti3C2T MXene flakes. (e) SEM cross-section image of the vacuum-filtrated Ti3C2T MXene membrane. The insets in (e) are a photograph of a free-standing membrane (left) and HR SEM image of the area marked by a white dashed line (right). (f) Sheet resistance of filtrated Ti3C2T MXene on PP membranes with different thicknesses. (g) Thickness and (h) sheet resistance of Ti3C2T MXene membranes hot-pressed with different pressure. Average and standard deviation in (g) were calculated from fifteen measurements within 1 cm of each sample. Sheet resistance in (h) was measured three times per sample and the average and standard deviation were calculated.
Fig. 3(a) Schematic illustration of the fabrication process of Ti3C2T-MXene ink. (b) Dynamic shear viscosity (η′) curves of MXene inks at various concentrations and (c) the storage (G′) and loss (G′′) moduli curves of Ti3C2T MXene inks as a function of shear stress at different flake concentrations. (d) Painted Ti3C2T MXene ink on various substrates using a brush. SEM cross-sectional images of painted Ti3C2T MXene ink on the (e and i) PP filter, (f and j) glass, (g and k) PC filter, and (h and l) filter paper. Detailed information (i.e., contact angle and root-mean-square surface roughness) on the bare substrates is included on the upper right in (e–h).
Fig. 4(a) Thickness and (b) sheet resistance of painted Ti3C2T MXene ink as a function of number of paintings. (c) Thickness of painted Ti3C2T MXene on filter paper with a different number of paintings. (d) Sheet resistance and (e) EMI SE of painted Ti3C2T MXene/filter paper with different thicknesses. (f) EMI SE and (g) EMI SE/t versus thickness of previously reported different materials. Detailed EMI shielding data are presented in Table S1 in the ESI.† The horizontal red dashed line in (f) indicates basic requirements for commercialization. Average and standard deviation of thickness in (a) and (c) were calculated from 15 measurements within 1 cm of each of the three samples, with the same number of paintings. Sheet resistance in (b) was measured with three samples with the same number of paintings and the average and standard deviation were calculated.
Fig. 5Graph showing the cross-section thicknesses of the (a) vacuum-filtrated MXene membrane and (b) painted MXene ink. It shows the thickness non-uniformity of the MXene membrane deposited by two different ways over a large area of ≈54 mm in diameter. The numbers above the spectrum indicate the average thicknesses (the number of vacuum filtration or painting processes) of the MXene membranes. Photographs show the corresponding areas where the thicknesses were measured in the vacuum-filtrated MXene membrane (top) and painted MXene ink (bottom).