Facile production of binary polymer/carbonic nanofiller‐based biodegradable electromagnetic interference shield films with low electrical percolation threshold

Abstract

Interference of electromagnetic (EM) radiation generated from different electronic gadgets produces noises diminishing their performance. So, shielding of EM interferences (EMI) is necessary to achieve noise‐free performance from electronic gadgets. In the present work, we have produced thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU)/polybutylene adipate‐co‐terephthalate (PBAT) based biodegradable binary polymeric blend and incorporated different carbonic nanofillers such as Vulcan XC‐72 conductive carbon black (VCB) and multiwalled carbon nanotube (MWCNT) into it employing solvent mixing and casting technique and studied the morphology of polymer blends, EMI shielding effectiveness in X‐band of the EM spectrum as well as mechanical performance, electrical performance, and biodegradability of polymer nanocomposites. The selective nanofiller distribution in the low viscous PBAT phase of the “co‐continuous” binary blend is found to achieve a “lower electrical percolation threshold” compared to neat polymer nanocomposites. For each of the TPU/PBAT/VCB and TPU/PBAT/MWCNT nanocomposites, electrical percolation threshold of around 12.5 and 5 wt% respectively has been achieved successfully. Nanocomposite sheets with a thickness of 1.0 mm and loading of 30 wt% of VCB and 15 wt% of MWCNT gave EMI shielding values of −25 dB and −28 dB respectively at a frequency of 8.4 GHz.

Synthesis of ionic liquid modified 1‐D nanomaterial and its strategical distribution into the biodegradable binary polymer matrix to get reduced electrical percolation threshold and electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness

“…From Figure 8a one could see at 1 wt% of MIL loading the DC conductivity of the polymer nanocomposite is found to be around 10 −9 S/cm. Now, if the MIL loading is increased to 3 wt%, there is a sudden jump in the DC conductivity to around 10 −4 S/cm indicating the position of the EPT approximately at 2 wt% of MIL loading whereas with pristine MWCNT the percolation threshold was around 5 wt%, 29 which was our previous work. After crossing 3 wt% of MIL loading the improvement in DC conductivity of the polymer nanocomposite is found to be insignificant.…”

“…At a particular frequency (~10 GHz) the value of EMI shield material with 1 wt% of MIL loading is around −14.6 dB. As the MIL loading is upgraded from 1 wt% to 3 wt% the value jumps to −28.6 dB from −14.6 dB suggesting the EPT is at 2 wt% of MIL loading whereas with the pristine MWCNT, EPT was achieved around 5 wt% 29 . After crossing 3 wt% the value of did not increase that remarkably and EMI shield material with 10 wt% of MIL loading gives the of −37.3 dB at 10 GHz.…”

“…As the MIL loading is upgraded from 1 wt% to 3 wt% the SE T value jumps to À28.6 dB from À14.6 dB suggesting the EPT is at 2 wt% of MIL loading whereas with the pristine MWCNT, EPT was achieved around 5 wt%. 29 After crossing 3 wt% the value of SE T did not increase that remarkably and EMI shield material with 10 wt% of MIL loading gives the SE T of À37.3 dB at 10 GHz. The shielding mechanism is mainly absorption dominated with the increment in MIL loading.…”

Enhanced electrical and electromagnetic interference shielding performance of immiscible poly(vinylidene chloride)/poly(lactic acid)/multi‐walled carbon nanotube composites via constructing filler‐wrapped porous structure

“…The higher conductivity usually leads to higher EMI shielding performances. [33,40,53] Figure 6A reveals EMI SE of compact VAC-x composites in X-band. The composites with higher electrical conductivity demonstrate EMI SE For instance, neat PVDF/PLA (50/50 v/v) blend exhibit poor EMI SE of ca.…”

Preferential localization of conductive filler in ethylene‐co‐methyl acrylate/thermoplastic polyolefin polymer blends to reduce percolation threshold and enhanced electromagnetic radiation shielding over K band region

“…[32][33][34] The conducting property of CB is influenced by its high surface area and structure with lower chemisorbed oxygen complexes thus offering a very low electrical percolation threshold. [35][36][37] This is essential parameter for superior EMI shielding but makes CB costly material as a filler. [38] Whereas low structured carbon black is cheap alternative compared to high structured CB.…”