Electrical properties of polycarbonate/expanded graphite

nanocomposites
A. Gupta,1 R. K. Goyal 2
1
Department of Metallurgy and Materials Science, College of Engineering Pune, Shivaji Nagar, Pune, 411 005, India
2
Department of Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Malaviya National Institute of Technology, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, 302017,
India
Correspondence to: R. K. Goyal (E-mail: rkgoyal72@yahoo.co.in)

ABSTRACT: In present study, polymer matrix nanocomposites based on polycarbonate as matrix and expanded graphite (EG) as rein-
forcement were fabricated using a simple solution method followed by hot pressing. Scanning electron microscopy revealed almost uni-
form dispersion and three dimensional networks of EG particles in the matrix. The dc and ac electrical conductivities of the
nanocomposites increased with increasing EG content in the matrix. The electrical percolation threshold was observed between 1 and
2 wt % EG. The improvement in the conductivity of 10 wt % nanocomposite was found more than 13 orders of magnitude higher than
that of pure matrix. The dielectric constant (at 1 MHz) of the nanocomposite containing 10 wt % EG was increased to about 137. The
significant increase in electrical conductivity, dielectric constant, and dissipation factor for the nanocomposites might be good for the
applications in antistatic/electromagnetic interference shielding applications. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2018, 00, 47274.

KEYWORDS: electrical properties; nano-structure; particle-reinforcement; polymer-matrix composites

Received 3 April 2018; accepted 8 October 2018

DOI: 10.1002/app.47274

INTRODUCTION density, prone to corrosion, expensive, physical rigidity, and diffi-

The proliferation of electronic devices in the world has caused
electromagnetic interference (EMI) and radio frequency interfer-
ence to become important concerns. Although all electronics emit
magnetic and electrical energy, if this energy unintentionally
interacts with another device and causes it to malfunction, then it
is considered interference. Common sources of interference
include radios, televisions, motors, appliances, radar transmitters,
static electricity, and lightning. Devices that are vulnerable to
interference, such as computers, microprocessors, broadcasting
receivers, measuring instruments, and navigation systems, must
often be shielded to protect them from the effects of EMI. EMI
also causes health problems such as Languidness, insomnia, ner-
vousness, headache, and so forth. The most common cause of
EMI shielding is electrostatic discharge. So the EMI shielding of
both electronic and radiation sources are needed.1,2
EMI shielding is the process of preventing the electric field as
well as magnetic field by blocking them with a shielding material.
The EMI shielded materials must possess high dielectric constant,
high dissipation factor, and significant electrical conductivity
(up to 0.1 S/cm). Metals like copper (Cu), aluminum (Al), steel,
nickel (Ni), and so forth are commonly used materials for EMI
shielding, but they have a lot of shortcomings such as high
cult to process. In view of this, polymer composites are used for
such applications. Compared to metals, polymer composites
exhibit low density, low cost, high strength to weight ratio, flexi-
bility, resistance to corrosion, and easy processing.3 Conducting
polymer like polyaniline particles filled expanded graphite
(EG) nanocomposite are also suggested for EMI shielding,4 but
their poor strength limits their applications. Therefore carbon
materials such as carbon nanotubes (CNTs), carbon black, carbon
fibers, carbon nanofibers (CNFs), graphite flakes (GFs), EG, and
graphite nanosheets (NanoG) have been used as fillers for the
insulating polymer matrix. Electrical conductivity in such com-
posites is imparted due to the formation of a three dimensional
conductive network of conductive particles in the matrix.4–7 The
minimum volume fraction of the conductive particles which pro-
vides a significant increase in electrical conductivity is called per-
colation threshold. The higher aspect ratio of filler helps to form
conductive network at a very low filler loading. The different
composite systems have different value of percolation threshold
depending on several parameters like electrical conductivity of
filler, aspect ratio of filler, interaction between filler and matrix,
polarity of polymer matrix, and type of processing methods used

© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

47274 (1 of 9) J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274

ARTICLE WILEYONLINELIBRARY.COM/APP
to form composites. For example, the percolation threshold for
the Ni nanoparticles and EG filled PVDF nanocomposites
was reported 286 and 6.3 vol %,8 respectively. Similarly, a broad
range of percolation threshold was reported for polycarbonate
(PC)/CNFs,7 high density polyethylene/EG,9 and PC/multiwalled
carbon nanotube (MWCNT)10 nanocomposites.
In last two decades, CNT has shown interesting properties as
filler into the polymer matrices due to its excellent thermal, elec-
trical, and mechanical properties. Moreover, its high aspect ratio
(100–1000) provides a very low percolation threshold, that is,
0.05–1 wt % for PS/CNT5 and 0.48 vol % for poly(trimethylene
tetra phthalate) PTT/CNT nanocomposites.11 This percolation
threshold value can be further decreased by selecting a suitable
polymer matrix, coupling agent, and processing method. Unfor-
tunately, the CNT has high cost and problem of dispersion and
alignment in the matrices.5 Compared to CNT, the EG which
consists of abundant multi pores of 2–10 nm in size is a very
good alternative cost effective conductive filler. The electrical
conductivity of the EG is 2.26 × 104 S/cm.7 It has porous worm
or vermicular appearance in nature and its sheets have layered
structure with large interlayer spacing (3.34 nm), high aspect
ratio (100–500), and large surface area (43 m2/g for 20 nm thick
graphite sheets) which is responsible for lower percolation
threshold, good electrical conductivity, and mechanical
strength.12,13 The PC is an amorphous engineering polymer
which exhibits glass transition temperature of about 150
C. It
has excellent toughness, good transparency, good tensile strength,
and modulus. It has a very high resistivity of 1018 Ω m. Molded
PC has largest application in the electronics and electrical engi-
neering.14 The addition of nanoparticles into the polymer matrix
further enhances thermal, mechanical, and electrical properties of
the nanocomposites.15–17 The manufacture of polymer/EG nano-
composites with good dispersion and distribution of EG in the
matrix is a major challenge for the researchers or engineers. Sev-
eral works showed that surface modification of EG using cou-
pling agent overcome the drawback related to the dispersion of
EG. For example, the addition of 4.5 wt % untreated-EG and
treated-EG into the epoxy resin improved the thermal conductiv-
ity approximately 4.4-folds and 5-folds, respectively, compared to
that of pure epoxy.18 The out-of-plane coefficient of thermal
expansion (CTE) of 60 wt % untreated-SiO2 and treated SiO2
filled polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) composite was decreased
from a value of 109 × 10−6/
C for the pure PTFE to about
33.2 × 10−6/
C and 40.5 × 10−6/
C, respectively.19 In other
words, compared to untreated-EG the addition of treated EG
may improve thermal conductivity but the addition of treated
SiO2 is degrading (i.e., increasing) CTE of the composite. In addi-
tion, the treatment of reinforcements by a coupling agent adds
the cost to the materials. To the best of our knowledge, a system-
atic study on the PC/EG nanocomposites hardly has been done.
In view of above, processing of the PC reinforced with untreated
EG nanoparticles was carried out using a simple solution method
followed by hot pressing for EMI shielding applications. The con-
tent of EG was varied from 0 to 10 wt %. The resultant PC/EG
nanocomposites were characterized using x-ray diffractometer
(XRD), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), Scanning
47274 (2 of 9)
Electron Microscopy (SEM), precision impedance analyzer, and
electrometer/digital multi-meter to get information about struc-
tural, dispersion of EG, dielectric constant/dissipation factor, and
electrical conductivity, respectively.
EXPERIMENTAL WORK
Materials
EG was obtained from International Advance Research Center for
Powder Metallurgy and New Materials (ARCI), Hyderabad, India.
Commercial PC was obtained from local supplier, Pune, India. The
solvents (ethanol, chloroform, tetrahydrofluren [THF], and isopro-
pyl alcohol) were of special quality (SQ) lab reagents, and conduc-
tive silver paste was purchased from Electron Microscopy Sciences.
Preparation of PC/EG Nanocomposites
Commercially available PC and EG powders were dried for 3 h at
120
C in a vacuum oven. The appropriate weights of the EG pow-
der and PC beads were added in a THF solvent. The solution was
sonicated and stirred using magnetic stirrer at a temperature of
60
C to get homogeneous solution. Once the viscous solution of
PC/EG/THF is obtained, film was casted on a cleaned glass plate,
dried and degassed in a vacuum oven for overnight at 100
C.
Then, dried film pieces were cut and filled in a die. The die set-up
along with sample was placed on hydraulic press. The sample was
heated at a heating rate of 10
C/min under 45 MPa pressure to a
temperature of 260
C for 25 min. The samples were cooled to a
temperature below 50
C and ejected. Both sides of the samples
were polished using emery papers of successive numbers. The
nanocomposites containing 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10 wt %
EG were fabricated using the above procedure. A flow chart for the
fabrication of PC/EG nanocomposites is shown in Figure 1. For
comparison, pure PC pellet (as reference) was also made using
above-mentioned procedure. For a given weight fraction (Wf) of
EG, its volume fraction (Vf) was determined using eq. (1).
Wf
Vf ¼ h i ð1Þ
W f + ð1 − W f Þ*ρf =ρm
where, ρm is the density of the matrix and ρf the density of EG.
CHARACTERIZATION
Density
Theoretical density of the nanocomposites was calculated by the
rule of mixtures using the density of 1.2 g/cc for PC and 2.2 g/cc
for EG. The experimental density of the nanocomposites was
determined by Archimedes’s Principle using ethanol as medium.
The density of 0.79 g/cc for ethanol was considered.
X-Ray Diffraction
X-ray diffraction pattern of pure EG, PC, and nanocomposites con-
taining 0.5 and 1 wt % of EG was recorded on Philips X’Pert PRO
x-ray diffraction system PW3040/60 (PANalytical, Netherlands).
Ni-filtered CuKα, radiation (λ = 1.54 Å) generated at 40 kV and
30 mA was used for the angle (2θ) ranged from 10
to 60
at room
temperature. The scan step size and time per step were 0.02 and 5 s.
For the XRD of EG powder, EG powder was sonicated in the THF
for 1–2 h and then THF was evaporated to get dried EG powder.
J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274
ARTICLE WILEYONLINELIBRARY.COM/APP
Figure 1. Flow chart for PC/EG nanocomposites fabrication. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Fourier Transform Infrared Radiation
FTIR of nanocomposites was recorded on Perkin-Elmer FTIR
spectrometer (SPECTRUM 2000, USA) to study the presence of
chemical functional groups. Samples for FTIR analysis in the
transmission mode were prepared at 25
C in the form of thin
films. FTIR spectra of PC and PC/EG nanocomposites films were
studied in the range of 4000 to 400 cm−1 in the increment
of 4 cm−1.
Scanning Electron Microscopy
The distribution and morphology of EG particles in the PC
matrix were observed using SEM (JEOL JSM 6360 A, Japan). For
this, the samples were dipped in liquid nitrogen for 15 min and
then fractured. The fractured surfaces of the nanocomposites
were coated with a thin layer of platinum using sputter coater
(JEOL JEC60) and mounted on metal stub which was grounded
with silver paste to minimize charging effects.
Electrical Conductivity
The volume resistivity of compression molded nanocomposites
was tested using Electrometer (Keithley 6517-B, UK). Before
measurement, samples were coated with silver paste to eliminate
contact resistance. The electrometer can measure resistance of
the order of >106 Ω. The resistance of the conductive samples
(resistance <106 Ω) was tested with a 7½ digit digital multimeter
(Keithley 2001, UK). The resistivity (ρ) of the nanocomposites
was calculated using eq. (2).
47274 (3 of 9)
ρ ¼ ðR × AÞ=t ðΩ cmÞ ð2Þ
where R is the resistance (Ω), t the thickness (cm), and A the con-
tact surface area of the sample (cm2). The electrical conductivity
(σ) (S/cm) of the samples was determined by the reciprocal of the
resistivity. AC electrical conductivity was also determined using
Precision Impedance Analyzer (Wayne Kerr 6515 B, UK) for the
frequency range of 10 kHz to 15 MHz. For measuring ac resistiv-
ity, the impedance was used in place of resistance in eq. (2).
Dielectric Properties
Dielectric measurements such as capacitance and dissipation factor
of the nanocomposites were determined using Precision Imped-
ance Analyzer (Wayne Kerr 6515 B, UK) for the frequency range
of 10 kHz to 15 MHz at room temperature. Before measurement,
the both sides of samples were coated with a thin film of silver
paste. The dielectric constant was determined using eq. (3), and the
dissipation factor was obtained directly from the instrument.
C×t
ε¼ ð3Þ
ε0 A
where ε is the dielectric constant, C the capacitance of the sam-
ple, and ε0 is the permittivity of free space (8.854 × 10−12 F/m).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Density
The experimental density of the nanocomposites increased with
increasing EG content. It is due to the higher density of EG
J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274
ARTICLE WILEYONLINELIBRARY.COM/APP

Figure 3. FTIR spectra of PC, PC/EG 0.1 wt %, and PC/EG 0.5 wt % nano-
Figure 2. XRD pattern of EG, PC, and PC/EG nanocomposites. [Color fig- composites. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
ure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Scanning Electron Microcopy

(2.2 g/cc) than that of the matrix. The experimental density of
the nanocomposites containing up to 2.8 vol % is very close to
theoretical density but above 2.8 vol %, it is slightly higher than
the theoretical density. The higher experimental density of the
nanocomposites may be due to the presence of clay impurity in
the EG or due to over flow of PC molecules during processing.
X-Ray Diffraction
Figure 2 shows the XRD pattern of PC, EG, and PC/EG nano-
composites. EG shows the sharp reflection peaks at 2θ = 26.74

and 54.88
, which corresponds to (002) and (004) planes, respec-
tively. The occurrence of the peaks confirms that the individual
EG nanosheets consists of number of graphene planes with a d-
spacing of 3.33 Å. Similar reflection peaks were also observed for
the nanocomposites with slight increase in d-spacing (3.36 vs
2.33 Å) compared to that of pure EG. It is evidenced that the
basic constituent unit, that is, carbon crystal layer, is not changed.
The intensity of EG characteristic peaks increases with increasing
EG content. This is in agreement with the results reported for
other polymer/EG systems.8,20,21
Figure 4 shows the SEM image of polished and etched (in THF)
sample of 5 wt % nanocomposite. It can be clearly seen that hon-
eycomb structure and diamond shaped pores are preserved in the
nanocomposites. Figure 5(a,b) shows the fracture morphology of
2 and 5 wt % nanocomposites, respectively. The EG sheets are
well dispersed into the matrix and form a three-dimensional net-
work in the nanocomposites. This is due to good secondary
bonding and mechanical interlocking between the EG particles
and the matrix. It is happened due to penetration of polymer
molecules in the EG pores. The 5 wt % nanocomposite shows
denser network of EG particles than that of 2 wt % EG filled
nanocomposite. It is due to the decreased interparticle distances
at higher EG content in the matrix.26
DC Electrical Conductivity
Figure 6 shows the dc electrical conductivity of PC/EG nanocom-
posites as a function of vol % of EG content. The electrical con-
ductivity of the pure PC is 4.0 × 10−16 S/cm. It increases with
increasing EG content in the matrix. There is a sharp increase in

Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy

Figure 3 shows the FTIR spectrum of the pure PC and its nano-
composites containing 0.1 and 0.5 wt % EG. FTIR spectrum of
pure PC shows the absorption bands at 1767–1728, 1227–1196,
and 552–542 cm−1 which corresponds to C O stretching band
in the ester group of PC, C O C asymmetric stretching band,
and the O C O peaks, respectively.22 The out of phase skele-
ton vibration of C H band is observed at 768 cm−1. The
absorption bands for C C phenyl ring stretching vibration are
at 1449, 1508, and 1590 cm−1.23,24 EG shows peak at
1112 cm−1 which corresponds to existence of oxygen contain-
ing functional group on EG surface.25 The stretching vibrations
of hydroxyl ( OH) group are observed at 3442 and 1377 cm−1.
In the spectra of nanocomposites, there is no shift in the
absorption band of EG and PC characteristic bands. This shows
that there is no chemical interaction during processing of the Figure 4. SEM micrographs of polished and etched 5 wt % PC/EG nano-
nanocomposites. composite at magnification of 2000×.

47274 (4 of 9) J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274

ARTICLE WILEYONLINELIBRARY.COM/APP

Figure 5. SEM micrographs of fractured PC/EG nanocomposites containing (a) 2 wt % and (b) 5 wt % EG at magnification 2000×.

the electrical conductivity of the nanocomposites between 0.55 nanocomposites. The critical exponent, obtained for present
and 1.1 vol % EG. The electrical conductivity is increased from study is in good agreement with the three-dimensional systems.8
3.0 × 10−12 S/cm for 0.55 vol % nanocomposite to about From Table I, we can clearly see that the PC/EG nanocompo-
2.0 × 10−8 S/cm for 1.1 vol % nanocomposite. The highest con- sites show better electrical conductivity compared to the values
ductivity achieved is 0.9 × 10−2 S/cm for 5.71 vol % EG reported in literature, which may be attributed to higher aspect
(Table I). The lower percolation threshold of about 0.55 vol % ratio and uniform dispersion of EG in the matrix, and the good
may be attributed to unique structural features, high aspect ratio processing conditions as confirmed from the SEM micrographs.
of EG, and its uniform dispersion in the matrix as confirmed by The low percolation threshold makes the polymer composite
SEM. Similarly, the PC/CNTs nanocomposites showed a percola- processing easier which is beneficial for the industries. PC/EG
tion threshold between 1 and 1.5 wt % CNTs and the maximum nanocomposites with electrical conductivity of 10−4–10−1 S/cm
conductivity of 1.0 × 10−2 S/cm was reported for 15 wt % are useful for antistatic and EMI shielding applications.
(10.8 vol %) CNTs.28 In present work, the highest conductivity of
0.9 × 10−2 S/cm for 5.71 vol % (or 10 wt %) EG filled PC nano-
AC Electrical Conductivity
composite has industrial important because of very low cost of
Figure 7 displays the ac electrical conductivity of the nanocompo-
EG powder compared to that of CNT powder.
sites as a function of frequency. The conductivity of the nano-
According to classical percolation theory, the conductivity of a composites increases with increasing frequency from 1 kHz to
conductor–insulator composite follows the power law relationship 10 MHz. The ac conductivity of the nanocomposites shows a
and the conductivity near the percolation range can be estimated general frequency-dependent trend. This follows ac universal law
by the power law model of percolation theory using eq. (4).11 given by; [σ(f ) = σ 0 + Aωx] where, σ is ac conductivity, σ 0 the dc
conductivity, A the temperature dependent parameter, ω the
σ / ð; − ;c Þt ð4Þ
where σ is the electrical conductivity of the nanocomposites, ;
the volume fraction of EG, ;c the critical volume fraction of EG,
and t is the critical exponent constant, which is related to the
system dimensions. The log (σ) versus log(; − ;c) plot is shown
in the inset of Figure 6. To get an estimate for ;c and the critical
exponent t, we fitted the conductivity for ; > ;c. This is done by
varying ;c in steps of 0.01 from 0.55 to 1.08. Critical exponent
has been determined from the slope of linear relation between σ
and (; − ;c) on a log–log scale. According to classical percola-
tion theory, the theoretical values of critical exponent t lie in the
universal range of “1.65 to 2.0” for three-dimensional composite
systems,32 but the experimental values for different polymer/car-
bon composites are reported in the range from 1.3 to 5.3. In the
present study, the best square fit line of the conductivity data in
the log–log plot gives t = 2.2 with ;c = 1.08 vol %, and root
mean square error or regression factor is R2 = 0.995. However,
the best square fit line of the conductivity for the PTT/MWCNT
nanocomposites is t = 2.9 with ;c = 0.48 vol % MWCNT,14 Figure 6. DC electrical conductivity (σ) versus vol % of EG in the PC
while for PMMA/CNT, t = 1.8 at 0.5 vol %.26 Similarly, Li et al.8 matrix. The inset shows the values of σ above the percolation threshold Φ
reported t = 2.58 with ;c= 6.3 vol % EG for PVDF/EG versus (Φ − Φc). [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

47274 (5 of 9) J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274

ARTICLE WILEYONLINELIBRARY.COM/APP

Table I. Comparison of Percolation Threshold and Maximum Conductivity of PC/EG Nanocomposites with the Literature Values

Composite Aspect The value of σ at The value of σ at max

systems Ratio ;c (S/cm) loading (S/cm) Remarks References
−12 −8 −2
PC/EG - 10 –10 0.9 × 10 (at 10 wt %) Solution method + hot Exp
(at 1–2 wt %)a compaction
PC/CFs - 10−9 (at 10 wt %) 10−8 (at 30 wt %) Hot compaction 27

−8 −3 7
PC/CNFs - 10 (6.3 wt %) 10 (at 9 wt %) High shear method
PC/MWCNT 600–1000 10−15 (at 1–2 wt %) 10−2 (at 5.5–15 wt %) Extrusion 28

−7 −4 29
PVDF/ 1000 10 (at 4.7 wt %) 2 × 10 (at 7.4 wt %) In situ polymerization + cold
MWCNT compaction
PP/CB - 10−14 (5–10 wt %) 10−2–10−6 (>15 wt %) Extrusion + Injection molded 30

−14 −2 −6 30
PP/CFs - 10 (5–10 wt %) 10 –10 (>15 wt %) Extrusion
−15 −4 31
PMMA/EG 10 10 (1–2 wt %) 10 (at 10 wt %) Solution method + hot
compaction
a
Values in brackets show percolation threshold value.

Figure 7. Variation of ac electrical conductivity for PC/EG nanocomposites

with varying frequency. NC-X indicates X wt % of EG content in the
matrix. [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
angular frequency, and exponent “x” has value of 0.8 for various
dielectric materials.26 This behavior is shown by a wide range of
dielectric materials. The ac conductivity may be considered due
to the combined effect of dc conductivity (f = 0 Hz) caused by
migrating charge carriers and frequency induced dielectric
dispersion.27,29–31,33–35 Therefore, the ac conductivity increases
with increasing frequency. However, above 2 wt % (or 1.1 vol %)
EG, the conductivity of the nanocomposites becomes frequency
independent indicating the electronic charge transport. Thus, the
nanocomposites containing higher EG content show conducting
nature in the whole frequency range.
As shown in Figure 8, for a given frequency the ac conductivity
increases with increasing EG content. There is a drastic increase
in conductivity above 0.55 vol % EG, which shows a transition of
the nanocomposites from insulating to semiconducting behavior.
This is called as percolation threshold. Above percolation thresh-
old conduction becomes ohmic whereas below this conduction
takes place by quantum mechanical tunneling mechanism.5 Simi-
larly, Li et al.34 reported a percolation threshold of 8 wt % EG
and the maximum ac conductivity of 10−3 S/cm at 12 wt % EG
Figure 8. Variation of ac electrical conductivity for PC/EG nanocomposites
with varying vol % at 1 kHz. [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
for the PVDF/EG nanocomposites. The maximum conductivity
achieved for PC/EG nanocomposites containing 10 wt % EG is
about 10−2 S/cm in the frequency range 103–107 Hz.
Dielectric Properties
Dielectric behavior of the PC/EG nanocomposites was studied
over a wide frequency range from 10 kHz to 15 MHz at room
temperature and is shown in Figure 9. There is a sharp increase
in the dielectric constant between 0.5 and 1.1 vol %. This dielec-
tric percolation threshold is coinciding with the percolation
threshold of both dc and ac electrical conductivities. However
dielectric constant of the nanocomposites containing more than
1.1 vol % EG is slightly decreased with increasing frequency. At
higher frequencies, the electric dipoles do not get sufficient time
to reorient themselves and therefore, the dielectric constant
decreases with increasing frequency. Figure 10 shows the dielec-
tric constant (measured at various frequencies) of the nanocom-
posites as a function of vol % EG. It can be clearly seen that the
dielectric constant of the nanocomposites increases with

47274 (6 of 9) J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274

ARTICLE WILEYONLINELIBRARY.COM/APP

Figure 11. Dissipation factor for PC/EG nanocomposites as a function of

Figure 9. Dielectric constant for PC/EG nanocomposites as a function of
frequency. NC-X indicates X weight % of EG content in the matrix. [Color
figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Figure 10. Dielectric constant for PC/EG nanocomposites as a function of
EG content in matrix. The inset shows variation of dielectric constant with
EG content in matrix at 1 MHz. [Color figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
frequency. NC-X indicates X wt % of EG content in the matrix. [Color fig-
ure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
The loss tangent or dissipation factor or loss factor (tan δ) is
defined as the ratio of the imaginary part of the dielectric con-
stant to the real part. Figure 11 shows the tan δ for the nano-
composites as a function of frequency. For the nanocomposites
containing EG content below percolation threshold (i.e., <0.5
vol %), there is insignificant change in tan δ with increasing fre-
quencies. The values of tan δ measured at 1 MHz for the pure
PC and the 0.5 vol % (or 1 wt %) nanocomposite are 0.0007
and 0.037, respectively. However, for the nanocomposites con-
taining EG content above percolation threshold the values of
tan δ decrease with increasing frequencies. For example, the
value of tan δ for the 5.71 vol % (or 10 wt %) nanocomposite
decreases from 4.3 × 104 (at 1 kHz) to 136.7 (at 1 MHz). The
decrease of tan δ mainly at higher frequencies is attributed to
the decrease in concentration of the induced charges. The elec-
tric field changes too fast for inducing polarization effects, lead-
ing to a decrease in the tan δ value. Despite the loss factor
decrease, its value is still very high compared with that of the

increasing vol % of EG. It is well known that the dielectric con-

stant of a material is proportional to its capacitance/polarization.
The addition of conductive EG particles into the matrix promotes
the polarization of the nanocomposites. In other words, the num-
ber of micro/mini-capacitors increases with increasing EG con-
tent which leads to increase of charge storage capacity and hence
dielectric constant.8 The percolation threshold of the present
PC/EG system is less than those of PC/CNT,29 PTT/MWCNT,14
and PPS/GF26 composites. The high aspect ratio and uniform dis-
persion of EG into the PC matrix probably leads to the formation
of a large number of micro-capacitors. The dielectric constant
measured at 1 MHz for the pure PC is 2.1, which is increased to
approximately 387 for the 5.71 vol % (or 10 wt %) EG filled
nanocomposite. This value is very high and comparable with Figure 12. Dissipation factor for PC/EG nanocomposites as a function of
those of other nanocomposites. Such PC/EG nanocomposites EG content in PC/EG matrix. Inset shows dissipation factor with EG con-
may be useful for the antistatic and EMI shielding tent in PC matrix at 1 MHz. [Color figure can be viewed at
applications.5,14 wileyonlinelibrary.com]

47274 (7 of 9) J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274

ARTICLE WILEYONLINELIBRARY.COM/APP
pure matrix at the highest concentration and frequency values
studied.28,35,36
Figure 12 shows the tan δ for the nanocomposites as a function
of EG content. For a given frequency, the increase in tan δ with
increasing EG content shows a transition from insulator to con-
ductor, which can be attributed to the enhanced electrical con-
ductivity of the material. It is interesting to see that the tan δ of
7 wt % EG filled PC/EG nanocomposite measured at 10 kHz is
about 1920 which is much higher than that of (i.e., 7.5) 8 wt %
EG filled PVDF/EG nanocomposites. This was attributed to the
uniform dispersion and good adhesion of EG with PC matrix
than that of PVDF matrix. High value of tan δ at smaller fre-
quency suggests that these nanocomposites are good absorber of
electric field at those frequencies.35,37 The tan δ more than unity
suggest that these nanocomposites have potential applications for
RF/EMI shielding.38,39
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results obtained on PC/EG nanocomposites, follow-
ing conclusions can be drawn.
1. The nanocomposites were successfully fabricated using a sim-
ple solution method followed by hot pressing. The experimen-
tal and theoretical densities were very close to each other
indicating sound samples.
2. SEM images of the nanocomposites revealed almost uniform
dispersion of the EG particles in the matrix and three-
dimensional conductive network of the EG particles in the
nanocomposites containing more than 2 wt % EG.
3. The electrical conductivity was found to increase from
4.0 × 10−16 S/cm for the pure matrix to 0.9 × 10−3 S/cm for
the 10 wt % EG nanocomposite. This improvement in the
electrical conductivity was nearly 13 orders of magnitude
higher than the pure matrix. The dielectric constant
(at 1 MHz) of the nanocomposites containing 5 and 10 wt %
EG was found to be 56 and 387, respectively. However, dissi-
pation factor of these nanocomposites was increased signifi-
cantly compared to the nanocomposites containing lower EG
content.
4. Due to their good electrical conductivity, dielectric constant,
and dissipation factor these composites may be useful for the
antistatic/EMI shielding applications.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Authors gratefully acknowledge the partial financial support
given by ISRO [Grant No. PU/ISRO-STC/1226 dated
20/07/2011] for the part of this research work.
REFERENCES
1. Chung, D. D. L. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2000, 9, 350.
2. Geetha, S.; Kumar, K. K. S.; Rao, C. R. K.; Vijayan, M.;
Trivedi, D. C. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2009, 112, 2073.
3. Zhang, C. S.; Ni, Q. Q.; Fu, S. Y.; Kurashiki, K. Compos.
Sci. Technol. 2007, 67, 2973.
47274 (8 of 9)
4. Du, X. S.; Xiao, M.; Meng, Y. Z. Eur. Polym. J. 2004, 40,
1489.
5. Goyal, R. K.; Samant, S. D.; Thakar, A. K.; Kadam, A.
J. Phys. D. 2010, 43, 365404.
6. Panda, M.; Srinivas, V.; Thakur, A. K. Appl. Phys. Lett.
2008, 92, 132905.
7. Gogai, J. P.; Bhattacharya, N. S.; Raju, K. C. J. Compos. Part
B. 2011, 42, 1291.
8. Li, Y.; Li, R. K.; Tjong, S. C. e-Polym. J. 2009, 19, 1.
9. Zheng, W.; Lu, X. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2004, 91, 2781.
10. Potschke, P.; Bhattacharyya, A. R.; Janke, A. Eur. Polym. J.
2004, 40, 137.
11. Gupta, A.; Choudhary, V. J. Mater. Sci. 2011, 46, 6416.
12. Panwar, V.; Kang, B.; Park, J. O.; Park, S.; Mehra, R. M.
Eur. Polym. J. 2009, 45, 1777.
13. Chen, G. H.; Weng, W. Eur. Polym. J. 2003, 39, 2329.
14. Brydson, J. A., Ed. Plastic Materials. 7th ed.; Butterworth-
Heinemann: USA, 2000. p. 365.
15. Chan, M.-L.; Lau, K.-T.; Wong, T.-T.; Ho, M.-P.; Hui, D.
Compos. Part B. 2011, 42, 1708.
16. Azeez, A. A.; Rhee, K. Y.; Park, S. J.; Hui, D. Compos. Part
B. 2013, 45, 308.
17. Fu, S.-Y.; Mai, Y.-W.; Du, S.-Y.; Hui, D. Compos. Part B.
2011, 42, 2091.
18. Wang, Z.; Qi, R.; Wang, J.; Qin, S. Ceram. Int. 2015, 41,
13541.
19. Chen, Y.-C.; Lin, H.-C.; Lee, Y.-D. J. Polym. Res. 2004,
11, 1.
20. Yasmin, A.; Daniel, I. M. Polymer. 2004, 45, 8211.
21. Shengato, Z.; Anyan, G.; Huanfang, G.; Xiangqian, C. Int.
J. Ind. Chem. 2011, 2, 123.
22. Lee, W. J.; Kim, Y. J.; Jung, M. O.; Kim, D. H.; Cho, D. L.;
Kaang, S. Synth. Met. 2001, 123, 327.
23. Li, J.; Wang, S.; Liu, H.; Wang, S.; You, L. J. Mater. Sci.
2011, 46, 3604.
24. Chen, G.; Weng, W.; Wu, D.; Wu, C.; Lu, J.; Wang, P.;
Chen, X. Carbon. 2004, 42, 753.
25. Goyal, R. K.; Jagadale, P. A.; Mulik, U. P. J. Appl. Polym.
Sci. 2009, 111, 2071.
26. Goyal, R. K.; Kadam, A. Adv. Mater. Lett. 2010, 1, 143.
27. Saq’an, S.; Zihlif, A. M.; Al-Ani, R. S. J. Mater. Sci. 2007,
18, 1203.
28. Potschke, P.; Dudkin, S. M. Polymer. 2003, 44, 5023.
29. Li, Q.; Xue, Q. Z.; Gao, X. L.; Zhang, Q. B. Exp. Polym. Lett.
2009, 3, 769.
30. Narkis, M.; Lidor, G.; Vaxman, A.; Zuri, L. J. Electrostatics.
1999, 47, 201.
31. Zheng, W.; Wong, S. C. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2003,
63, 225.
32. Singh, V. Ph.D. Thesis, IIT Bombay, 2002.
33. Logakis, E.; Pandis, C.; Pissis, P.; Pionteck, J.; Potschke, P.
Compos. Sci. Technol. 2011, 71, 854.
J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274
ARTICLE WILEYONLINELIBRARY.COM/APP

34. Li, Y. C.; Li, R. K. Y.; Tjong, S. C. J. Nanomater. 2009,
2010, 1.
35. Abdullah, E. T.; Naje, A. N. Ind. J. Sci. Technol. 2011,
4, 731.
36. Yacubowicz, J.; Narkis, M.; Benguigui, L. Polym. Eng. Sci.
1990, 30, 459.
37. Gokturk, H. S.; Fiske, T. J.; Kalyon, D. M. IEEE Trans.
Magn. 1993, 29, 4170.
38. Chen, G. H.; Wu, D. J.; Weng, W. G. J. Appl. Polym. Sci.
2001, 82, 2506.
39. Zhao, Y. F.; Xiao, M.; Wang, S. J.; Ge, X. E.; Meng, Y. Z.
Compos. Sci. Technol. 2007, 67, 2528.

47274 (9 of 9) J. APPL. POLYM. SCI. 2018, DOI: 10.1002/APP.47274