Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T18:25:27.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Determining In-plane and Thru-plane Percolation Thresholds for Carbon Nanotube Thin Films Deposited on Paper Substrates Using Impedance Spectroscopy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Rachel L. Muhlbauer
Affiliation:
Georgia Institute of Technology, 771 Ferst Dr. Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
Rosario A. Gerhardt
Affiliation:
Georgia Institute of Technology, 771 Ferst Dr. Atlanta, GA 30332, USA
Get access

Abstract

Concentration- and layer-dependent percolation thresholds can be determined for carbon nanotube (CNT) films deposited from aqueous dispersions on paper substrates at both the surface of the deposited film (in-plane) and through the thickness of the paper (thru-plane) using impedance spectroscopy. By analyzing the impedance spectra as a function of the number of layers (solution concentration is constant) or the solution concentration (number of layers is constant), the electrical properties and percolation thresholds for CNT-paper composites can be determined. In-plane measurements show that percolation occurs at 4 layers when 1 mg/mL solution concentration is used. In the thru-plane direction, the films are already percolated at 1 mg/mL concentration, which is confirmed by varying the concentration of the solution used to deposit 1 layer films. A second percolation event happens between 8 and 12 layers due to an increased number of interconnections of CNTs within the paper substrate. The lowest sheet resistance achieved was 100 Ω/□.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Tobjork, D. and Osterbacka, R., Advanced Materials. 23, 1935 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Y., Hu, L., and Gruner, G., Appl. Phys. Lett. 88, 123109 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kordas, K., Mustonen, T., Toth, G., Jantunen, H., Lajunen, M., Soldano, C., Talapatra, S., Kar, S., Vajtai, R., and Ajayan, P.M., Small. 2, 1021 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baughman, R.H., Zakhidov, A.A., and de Heer, W.A., Science. 297, 787 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muhlbauer, R.L., Joshi, S.M., and Gerhardt, R.A., J. Mater. Res. 28, 1617 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muhlbauer, R.L. and Gerhardt, R.A., Appl.Phys. Lett., submitted January 2013.Google Scholar
Garrett, M.P., Ivanov, I.N., Gerhardt, R.A., Puretzky, A.A., and Geohegan, D.B.. Appl. Phys. Lett. 97, 163105 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar