Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS Omega logoLink to ACS Omega
. 2023 Dec 19;9(1):294–303. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.3c05198

Enhanced Electrical Properties and Impact Strength of Phenolic Formaldehyde Resin Using Silanized Graphene and Ionic Liquid

Yan-Chun Li †, Seul-Yi Lee ‡, Hong Wang §, Fan-Long Jin ∥,*, Soo-Jin Park ‡,*
PMCID: PMC10785615  PMID: 38222635

Abstract

graphic file with name ao3c05198_0007.jpg

In this study, to improve the electrical properties and impact strength of phenolic formaldehyde (PF) resin, PF-based composites were prepared by mixing graphene and the ionic liquid 3-decyl-bis(1-vinyl-1H-imidazole-3-ium-bromide) (C10[VImBr]2) via hot blending and compression–curing processes. The graphene surface was modified using a silane coupling agent. The synergistic effect of graphene and C10[VImBr]2 on the electrical properties, electromagnetic shielding efficiency, thermal stability, impact strength, and morphology of PF/graphene and PF/graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites was then investigated. It was found that the electrical conductivity of the composites significantly increased from 2.3 × 10–10 to 4.14 × 10–3 S/m with an increase in the graphene content from 0 to 15 wt %, increasing further to 0.145 S/m with the addition of 5 wt % C10[VImBr]2. The electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the composite increased from 4.70 to 28.64 dB with the addition of 15 wt % graphene, while the impact strength of the composites rose significantly from 0.59 to 1.13 kJ/m2 with an increase in the graphene content from 0 to 15 wt %, reaching 1.53 kJ/m2 with the addition of 5 wt % C10[VImBr]2. Scanning electron microscopy images of the PF/GNP/C10[VImBr]2 composites revealed a rough morphology with numerous microcracks.

1. Introduction

Because it is an outstanding flame retardant with good adhesion, high heat resistance, excellent mechanical properties, and straightforward processability, phenolic formaldehyde (PF) resin has been extensively used in a number of applications, including coatings, construction, transportation, electronics, and the automotive and aerospace industries.1−5 However, its intrinsically low electrical conductivity and high brittleness have limited its widespread use in other fields.6−8 Thus, in recent years, electrically conductive polymer composites have attracted considerable attention due to their lightweight, corrosion resistance, and easy processing.

Generally, electrically conductive polymer composites are prepared by dispersing an electrically conductive filler, such as a metal or a carbon nanomaterial, within a polymer matrix.9−11 As conductive fillers, metals such as silver, copper, and aluminum have several disadvantages, including high density and cost. In contrast, carbon nanomaterials, such as graphene and carbon nanotubes (CNTs), exhibit many advantages. Graphene has a two-dimensional planar sheet structure composed of sp2 hybridized carbon atoms with each carbon atom, possessing a free electron in the π orbital that can move freely within the lattice. The π-orbital contributes to the formation of a delocalized electron network, meaning that graphene has an extremely high electron mobility of up to 250,000 cm2/v·s at room temperature and a low resistivity of 10–6 Ω·cm.12−15 Graphene also has an ultrahigh specific surface area, remarkable mechanical properties, low density, and excellent chemical stability. These unique properties make graphene an ideal electrically conductive filler when seeking to improve the electrical conductivity of polymer composites.16 CNTs have a hollow, seamless tube-like structure consisting of cylindrical curled graphene sheets with a high aspect ratio. This unique structure leads to an intrinsic mobility that is as high as 100,000 cm2/V·s at room temperature, with a current carrying capacity as high as 109 A/cm2.17,18 CNTs also have high thermal and electrical conductivity, excellent strength and modulus, good chemical stability, a large specific surface area, and a low density, making them particularly suitable as an electrically conductive filler for polymer composites.19−21

The development of functional composites based on carbon nanomaterials has attracted significant recent attention due to their functions and practicality. These composites can be used as active media for functional devices in high-frequency applications, such as electromagnetic shielding, antenna technology, and electromagnetic compatibility.22−25 However, previous studies have proven that graphene in a polymer matrix is not evenly dispersed and aggregates at relatively low volume fractions because of its large surface area and strong van der Waals forces.26−28 This has restricted the use of graphene in polymer composites. Therefore, the graphene surface is generally modified or functionalized using organic molecules to improve the compatibility between graphene and the polymer matrix.29−31

Ionic liquids (ILs), which are molten salts consisting of bulk organic cations and organic or inorganic anions, exhibit a number of attractive physical and chemical properties, such as low volatility, good compatibility, nonflammability, high thermal and chemical stability, and good electrical conductivity.32,33 ILs also have low toxicity, are recyclable, and are functionalizable, which is why they have been widely employed in electrochemistry, organic synthesis, chemical separation, and material preparation.34,35

To date, a variety of ILs have been synthesized and used to improve the electrical properties of polymer materials. For example, Ogoshi et al. prepared transparent ion-conductive IL–phenol resin hybrids via the in situ polymerization of phenol monomers in the presence of an IL.36 They reported that a transparent hybrid containing 20 wt % phenol resin had a high thermal stability and an ionic conductivity of 1.0 × 103 S/m at 30 °C. Guo et al. synthesized three ILs and used them as solvents for corn stalks during phenolic resin modification.37 The tensile strength and impact strength of the phenolic resin modified with the ILs improved from 3.28 MPa and 0.93 kJ/m2 to 9.36 MPa and 5.74 kJ/m2, respectively. Younesi-Kordkheili studied the properties of particleboard panels bonded with IL-treated lignin–phenol–glyoxal resin.38 The use of the IL-modified lignin not only led to a more rapid gelation time but also increased the viscosity, density, and solid content of the resulting resin, thus reducing the temperature required for curing. They subsequently investigated the physical and mechanical properties of plywood panels bonded with IL-modified lignin–phenol–formaldehyde resin,39 finding that the mechanical properties of the panels were significantly enhanced with an increase in the IL-modified lignin content from 0 to 20 wt %.

Li et al. synthesized animidazolium IL-modified phenolic resin (ILPR) that more effectively extracted the benzoylurea plant hormones thidiazuron and forchlorfenuron than unmodified phenolic resin due to the presence of imidazolium in the IL.40 Wang et al. also synthesized the IL 3-decyl-bis(1-vinyl-1H-imidazole-3-ium-bromide) (C10[VImBr]2) and used it to improve the electrical conductivity of PF/graphene composites.41 The electrical conductivity of the composites increased from 5.6 × 10–3 to 9.2 × 10–2 S/m when the IL content increased from 0 to 5 wt %. Yao et al. synthesized the IL 1,2-dimethyl-3-butylimidazole bromide salt and employed it in PF-based conductive materials.42 They reported that the thermal stability and impact strength of the PF/IL system increased with the addition of the IL, while its volume resistance significantly decreased from 1.02 × 109 to 1.64 × 107 Ω when the IL content rose from 0 to 1 wt %.

In the present study, PF-based composites with improved electrical properties and impact strength were prepared by combining graphene and the IL C10[VImBr]2 by using hot blending and compression–curing processes. The graphene surface was modified using a silane coupling agent. The synergistic effect of graphene and C10[VImBr]2 on the electrical properties, electromagnetic shielding efficiency, thermal stability, impact strength, and morphology of PF/graphene and PF/graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites was also investigated.

2. Experimental Section

2.1. Materials

PF with a dynamic viscosity of 11,000 mPa-s was synthesized for use in the present study.42 Graphene was obtained from Yantai Sinagraphene Co., Ltd. (Yantai, Shandong, China), with a carbon content of 96 wt % and an electrical conductivity of 50,000 S/m. C10[VImBr]2 was synthesized following a route described in a previous report.41 The silane coupling agent γ-methacryloxypropyltrimethoxysilane (KH-570) was obtained from Sahn Chemical Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China). Anhydrous ethanol was purchased from Tianjin Yongda Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd. (Tianjin, China). The chemical structures of PF, C10[VImBr]2, and KH-570 are presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Chemical structures of (a) PF, (b) C10[VImBr]2, and (c) KH-570.

2.2. Surface Modification of Graphene

To improve the dispersion of graphene within the PF matrix, the surface of graphene was modified by using the silane coupling agent. Graphene (25 g) was dispersed in anhydrous ethanol (400 mL) and then ultrasonically treated for 2 h to obtain a well-dispersed graphene solution. KH-570 (14 g) and water (16 mL) were then added to the graphene solution, and the mixture was heated to 55 °C and left to react for 1.5 h. After the reaction, the solution was vacuum-filtered, washed with deionized water to a neutral pH, and dried at 60 °C for 3 h in a vacuum oven to obtain the surface-modified graphene (hereafter, Si-graphene).

2.3. Preparation of the PF/Si-Graphene Composites

The PF/Si-graphene composites were prepared by using hot blending and compression–curing processes. The Si-graphene content in the PF/Si-graphene composite varied between 0 and 20 wt %. In the typical process, selected amounts of PF and Si-graphene were stirred at 60 °C for 30 min and then mixed at 25 °C for 30 min using a spin stirrer. The mixture was then heated to 145 °C in a vacuum oven and injected into a mold that had previously been sprayed with a mold-release agent. The mixture was then compression-cured at 145 °C under a pressure of 10 MPa for 30 min.

2.4. Preparation of the PF/Si-Graphene/C10[VImBr]2 Composites

The PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites were synthesized using the same method used for the PF/Si-graphene composites. The Si-graphene content in the composites was 15 wt %, and the C10[VImBr]2 content varied between 0 and 9 wt %. In the typical process, selected amounts of PF, Si-graphene, and C10[VImBr]2 were stirred at 60 °C for 30 min and then mixed at 25 °C for 30 min using a spin stirrer. The mixture was then heated to 145 °C in a vacuum oven and injected into a mold, which had previously been sprayed with a mold-release agent. The mixture was then compression-cured at 145 °C under a pressure of 10 MPa for 30 min.

2.5. Characterization and Measurements

The pristine graphene, Si-graphene, and PF/Si-graphene composites and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites were characterized using a variety of analytical techniques. The functional groups present in the pristine graphene and Si-graphene were characterized using a Nicolet 6700 Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific), while the surface properties of pristine graphene and Si-graphene were evaluated using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS; Thermo ESCALAB 250) with a monochromatic Al Kα source and a passing energy of 20 eV. The surface morphology of pristine graphene and Si-graphene was investigated via scanning electron microscopy (SEM; Zeiss, Gemini 500). Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and SEM were conducted to verify the presence of Si on the graphene surface.

The electrical conductivities of the PF/Si-graphene and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites were measured at room temperature using a DC resistance tester (ZC-90) following the GB/T 24525-2009 standard. The size of the samples was 5 × 20 × 30 mm3. The electrical conductivity (σ) was calculated using eq 1

2.5. 1

where L and S are the thickness and cross-sectional area of the sample, respectively, and R is its measured resistivity. The overall electrical conductivity was determined by averaging the five experimental values.

The electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the composites was measured using a Vector network analyzer (E5071C) in the X-band frequency range of 2–18 GHz at room temperature following the GB/T 32596-2016 standard. The electromagnetic shielding efficiency (SET) was calculated using eq 2

2.5. 2

where SER, SEA, and SEM are the reflection, absorption, and multiple internal reflection shielding efficiency, respectively. The electromagnetic shielding efficiency was determined by averaging three experimental values.

The thermal stability of the composites was investigated via thermogravimetric analysis (TGA; TA Instruments, Q50) at a temperature range of 30–800 °C and a scanning rate of 10 °C/min under a nitrogen atmosphere. In addition, the impact strength of the composites was measured by using an Izod impact tester (TP04G-AS1) in accordance with the GB/T 1843–2008 standard. The size of the samples for this test was 4 × 10 × 50 mm3. The impact strength was determined by averaging five experimental values. Finally, the morphology of pristine PF and the composites after the impact strength tests was examined using SEM (Zeiss, Gemini 500).

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Characterization of Si-graphene

The surface of the graphene was modified using KH-570 as a silane coupling agent, and the structure of Si-graphene was then characterized. The changes in the functional groups before and after the surface modification of graphene were characterized using FTIR. Figure 2 presents the FTIR spectra for pristine graphene, KH-570, and Si-graphene. After surface modification, two characteristic absorption peaks appeared at 2914 and 2853 cm–1, which were assigned to C–H antisymmetric and symmetric stretching vibrations, respectively. Three characteristic absorption peaks also appeared at 1733, 1632, and 1083 cm–1, which were attributed to C=O telescopic vibrations, C=C stretching vibrations, and C–O–Si bonds, respectively. These results could be attributed to the introduction of organic functional groups, such as methylene, methyl, C=O, and C–O on the graphene surface due to the surface modification.43

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

FTIR spectra for graphene, KH-570, and Si-graphene.

The surface characteristics of pristine graphene and Si-graphene were investigated by using XPS (Figure 3). The characteristic peak for C1s was observed at 285.1 eV, and its intensity significantly decreased after surface modification (Figure 3b), while the characteristic peak of O1s appeared at 532.6 eV, with its intensity increasing dramatically after surface modification (Figure 3c). A new peak was also observed at 102.5 eV after surface modification, which was ascribed to Si2p (Figure 3d). The atomic C/O ratio calculated from the C1s and the O1s peaks in the XPS spectra decreased from 12.61 for pristine graphene to 2.87 for Si-graphene. These results can be explained by the fact that, after surface modification with the silane coupling agent, oxygen-containing functional groups, such as C=O, C–O, and Si–O, were introduced to the graphene surface,28,44,45 reducing the intensity of the C1s peak and increasing the intensity of the O1s and Si2p peaks.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

High-resolution XPS spectra for graphene and Si-graphene: (a) survey, (b) C1s, (c) O1s, and (d) Si2p spectra.

SEM–EDX analysis was also conducted to investigate the morphology of graphene before and after surface modification and to verify the presence of silicon on the graphene surface. Figure 4a,b presents the surface morphology of pristine graphene and Si-graphene, respectively. The pristine graphene exhibited a smooth surface, while small white particles appeared on the surface of Si-graphene, indicating the presence of organic functional groups after surface modification.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

(a, b) SEM images of (a) graphene and (b) Si-graphene (magnification of 40,000; scale bar = 200 nm). (c, d) EDX maps of (c) graphene and (d) Si-graphene.

Figure 4c,d displays the EDX maps for pristine graphene and Si-graphene, respectively. The peaks for the pristine graphene at approximately 0.30 and 0.55 keV were attributed to carbon and oxygen, respectively, while a new silicon peak at approximately 1.68 keV appeared after surface modification. In particular, after surface modification, the carbon content decreased from 96.4 to 83.25%, and the oxygen and silicon content increased from 3.4 and 0% to 14.82 and 1.93%, respectively. Collectively, these results verify the successful surface modification of graphene using the silane coupling agent.

3.2. Electrical Properties

The electrical properties of the PF/Si-graphene and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites were investigated by using electrical conductivity measurements. Figure 5a presents the electrical conductivity of the PF/Si-graphene composites, which significantly increased with the addition of Si-graphene. Pristine PF had a low electrical conductivity of 2.3 × 10–10 S/m, classifying it as an insulating material. In contrast, the electrical conductivity of the PF/Si-graphene composites containing 15 and 20 wt % Si-graphene was 4.14 × 10–3 and 3.1 × 10–2 S/m, respectively, which was 1.8 × 107 and 1.3 × 108 times higher than that of pristine PF. This can be attributed to the high electrical conductivity and large surface area of graphene, which created electrically conductive pathways within the PF matrix, thus increasing the electrical conductivity of the PF/Si-graphene composites.43,46,47

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

(a, b) Electrical conductivity of the (a) PF/Si-graphene and (b) PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites. (c, d) Electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the (c) PF/Si-graphene and (d) PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites. (e–g) TGA thermograms for the (e) PF/Si-graphene and (f) PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites, and (g) graphene and PF. (h, i) Impact strength of the (h) PF/Si-graphene and (i) PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites.

The electrical conductivity of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites as a function of the C10[VImBr]2 content is presented in Figure 5b. The electrical conductivity of the composites increased significantly with the addition of C10[VImBr]2. In particular, the electrical conductivity with 5 wt % C10[VImBr]2 was 0.145 S/m, which was 34 times higher than 15 wt % Si-graphene and 6.3 × 108 times higher than pristine PF. The addition of ionically conductive C10[VImBr]2 to the PF-based polymer network retains the ionized state of the anions and cations and provides a bridge for electron transfer between the graphene layers, which promotes the formation of electrically conductive pathways within the PF matrix.41,48 Furthermore, the hydrophilic nature of the imidazole ring in C10[VImBr]2 facilitates the dispersion of graphene in the PF matrix. In the present study, this led to the formation of more electrically conductive pathways, thus increasing the electrical conductivity of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites.49,50

3.3. Electromagnetic Shielding Efficiency

Figure 5c presents the electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the PF/Si-graphene composites as a function of the Si-graphene content. The electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the composites significantly increased with the addition of Si-graphene from 4.7 dB for pristine graphene to 28.64 and 27.73 dB for the composites with 15 and 20 wt % Si-graphene, respectively, representing a 509 and 490% increase. This was because the dispersion of graphene within the PF matrix improved after surface modification, which led to the formation of electrically conductive networks. When electromagnetic waves entered the composite, they were repeatedly reflected and absorbed between the graphene layers, thus improving the electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the PF/Si-graphene composites.51,52

The electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites decreased with an increase in the C10[VImBr]2 content (Figure 5d). In particular, the electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composite with 9 wt % C10[VImBr]2 was 23.93 dB, which was 16% lower than that of the PF/Si-graphene composites. Thus, while the addition of C10[VImBr]2 can improve the electrical conductivity of the composites, it reduces the electromagnetic shielding efficiency. This can be explained by the fact that an ideal electromagnetic shielding material requires not only conductive components but also other properties (such as magnetism) to improve impedance matching.53,54

3.4. Thermal Stability

The thermal stability of the PF/Si-graphene and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites was investigated using TGA (Figure 5e,f, respectively). Two indicators of thermal stability—the initial decomposition temperature (i.e., the temperature at which 5% weight loss occurs; T5%) and the amount of char at 800 °C—were calculated from the TGA thermograms,55,56 and the results are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. Thermal Stability of PF/Si-graphene and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 Composites.

Si-graphene content (wt %) C10[VImBr]2 content (wt %) T5% (°C)a amount of char formation at 800 °C (%)a
0 0 112.4 42.7
5 0 153.1 53.8
10 0 152.0 54.5
15 0 154.2 53.6
20 0 147.2 52.3
15 3 156.2 51.4
15 5 157.4 55.0
15 7 168.3 56.3
15 9 177.0 56.6
Open in a new tab
a

Note: T5% and the amount of char at 800 °C were determined from TGA thermograms.

The T5% of the PF/Si-graphene composites significantly increased with the addition of Si-graphene from 112.4 °C for pristine PF to 147.2–154.2 °C for the composites, an increase of 34.8–41.8 °C. These results can be explained by the higher temperature required for the 1% loss of weight (749.9 °C) and the larger residual mass of graphene at 800 °C (98.3%) compared with pristine PF (Figure 5g). Moreover, graphene sheets dispersed within the PF matrix acted as a physical barrier that slowed down the diffusion of pyrolysis products, thus increasing the thermal stability of the PF/Si-graphene composites.57−59 In addition, the char formation of the composites at 800 °C significantly increased with greater Si-graphene content due to the high residual mass of graphene.

The T5% of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites also increased with the addition of C10[VImBr]2 (Table 1), reaching 156.2–177.0 °C, which was 2.0–22.8 °C higher than that of the PF/Si-graphene composites and 43.8–64.6 °C higher than that of pristine PF. This was because the vinyl groups in C10[VImBr]2 self-polymerized or participated in the curing reaction for PF, thus increasing the cross-linking density of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites. The dispersion of graphene within the PF matrix was also facilitated by the hydrophilic nature of the imidazole ring in C10[VImBr]2, and the graphene sheets limited the movement of the polymer chains via physical interlocking and interfacial adhesion, slowing the diffusion of the pyrolysis products during thermal decomposition.49,60 The addition of C10[VImBr]2 had little effect on the char formation of the PF/KH-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites at 800 °C.

3.5. Impact Strength

The impact strengths of the PF/Si-graphene and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites were also investigated. Figure 5h shows that the impact strength of the PF/Si-graphene composites increased with the addition of a Si-graphene content. Pristine PF, which is classified as a brittle material, has an impact strength of 0.59 kJ/m2 at room temperature.55 In contrast, the impact strength of the composites with 15 wt % Si-graphene was 1.13 kJ/m2, which was 91% higher than that of pristine PF. This was attributed to the improved dispersion of graphene within the PF matrix after surface modification. The graphene induced the formation of numerous microcracks in the PF matrix, which absorbed the external energy from the impact force, thus improving the impact strength of the PF/Si-graphene composites.61

Figure 5i shows that the addition of C10[VImBr]2 improved the impact strength of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites. At 5 wt % C10[VImBr]2, the impact strength was 1.53 kJ/m2, which was 45% higher than that of the PF/Si-graphene composites and 159% higher than that of pristine PF. This was attributed to the strong intermolecular interaction between C10[VImBr]2 and the PF matrix due to the formation of a stable polar conjugate structure via the self-polymerization of C10[VImBr]2 or the copolymerization of C10[VImBr]2 with PF.62

3.6. Morphology

The morphology of the PF/Si-graphene and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites after the impact strength tests was investigated by using SEM. Figure 6a–e presents SEM images of the fracture surface of the PF/Si-graphene composites. As shown in Figure 6a, pristine PF had a mirror-like morphology and ordered cracking behavior, indicating brittle deformation prior to fracture.63 In contrast, the PF/Si-graphene composites exhibit a relatively rough morphology with numerous microcracks, indicating that they absorbed more external energy64,65 (Figure 6b–e).

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

SEM micrographs of the PF/Si-graphene composites and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites: (a) pristine PF, (b) 5 wt % Si-graphene, (c) 10 wt % Si-graphene, (d) 15 wt % Si-graphene, (e) 20 wt % Si-graphene, (f) 15 wt % Si-graphene + 3 wt % C10[VImBr]2, (g) 15 wt % Si-graphene + 5 wt % C10[VImBr]2, (h) 15 wt % Si-graphene + 7 wt % C10[VImBr]2, and (i) 15 wt % Si-graphene +9 wt % C10[VImBr]2 (magnification: × 2000).

Figure 6f–i presents the morphology of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites according to the C10[VImBr]2 content. These composites exhibited a rough morphology with numerous tortuous microcracks, which explained their high impact strength,66 as revealed by the SEM images in Figure 6f–i.

4. Conclusions

In the present work, the synergistic effect of silanized graphene and C10[VImBr]2 on the electrical properties, electromagnetic shielding efficiency, thermal stability, impact strength, and morphology of PF/Si-graphene and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites was investigated. It was found that the electrical conductivity of the composites increased from 2.3 × 10–10 to 4.14 × 10–3 S/m with an increase in Si-graphene from 0 to 20 wt % due to the high electrical conductivity and large surface area of graphene. When 5 wt % C10[VImBr]2 was added, the electrical conductivity improved further to 0.145 S/m because C10[VImBr]2 acted as a bridge for electron transfer between the graphene layers and promoted the formation of electrically conductive pathways within the PF matrix. The electromagnetic shielding efficiency of the composites reached 28.64 dB with 15 wt % graphene, which was 509% higher than that of pristine PF due to the repeated reflection and absorption of electromagnetic waves between the graphene layers dispersed in the PF matrix. The T5% of PF/Si-graphene and PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites was 34.8–41.8 and 43.8–64.6 °C higher than that of pristine PF, respectively, due to graphene’s high thermal stability and its role as a physical barrier, combined with a high cross-linking density. The impact strength of the composites increased from 0.59 to 1.13 kJ/m2 (a 91% increase) with an increase in the Si-graphene content from 0 to 15 wt %, which was due to the absorption of external energy by a large number of microcracks caused by the uniformly dispersed graphene in the PF matrix. It further increased to 1.53 kJ/m2 (45% increase) with the addition of 5 wt % C10[VImBr]2, which was due to the high intermolecular interaction between C10[VImBr]2 and the PF matrix. The SEM images of the PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 composites revealed a rough morphology with numerous microcracks. The outcomes of this study demonstrate that PF/Si-graphene/C10[VImBr]2 ternary composites with high electrical conductivity, electromagnetic shielding efficiency, thermal stability, and impact strength can be successfully employed for electromagnetic shielding applications.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by an Inha University Research Grant, South Korea.

Author Contributions

⊥ Y.-C.L. and S.-Y.L. contributed equally. The manuscript was written through contributions of all authors. All authors have given approval to the final version of the manuscript.

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  1. Yoo J.; Yang I.; Kwon D.; Jung M.; Kim M. S.; Jung J. C. Low-cost carbon xerogels derived from phenol–formaldehyde resin for organic electric double-layer capacitors. Energy Technol. 2021, 9, 2000918. 10.1002/ente.202000918. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Younesi-Kordkheili H. Maleated lignin coreaction with phenol-formaldehyde resins for improved wood adhesives performance. Int. J. Adhes. Adhes. 2022, 113, 103080. 10.1016/j.ijadhadh.2021.103080. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bera B.; Das N. Synthesis of SBA 15 graphene oxide composite membrane using phenol–formaldehyde resin pore modifier for CO2 separation. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2022, 105 (2), 913–928. 10.1111/jace.18181. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Zhou R.; Sun X.; Xie J.; Ma G.; Li W. J.; Jiang J. C.; Shu C. M. A series of novel flame retardants produced with nanosilica, melamine, and aluminum diethylphosphinate to improve the flame retardancy of phenolic resin. ACS Omega 2022, 7, 16980–16989. 10.1021/acsomega.1c07246. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Chen K.; Cheng X.; Chen Y.; Qi J.; Xie J.; Huang X.; Jiang Y.; Xiao H. Thermal degradation kinetics of urea–formaldehyde resins modified by almond shells. ACS Omega 2021, 6, 25702–25709. 10.1021/acsomega.1c03896. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Pullichola A. H.; Varghese L. A.; Unnikrishnan G. P.; Das K. M. Novel protocol for resole phenol formaldehyde resins synthesis with tubular reactor and characterization. Macromol. React. Eng. 2021, 15 (4), 2100001. 10.1002/mren.202100001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Li J.; Ji H.; Li A.; Zhang J.; Yan Y.; Ren L.; Yu H. Carbonized foams from graphene/phenolic resin composite aerogels for superior electromagnetic wave absorbers. Ceram. Int. 2021, 47 (18), 26082–26091. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2021.06.014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Du X.; Yang H.; Zhang Y.; Hu Q.; Li S.; He W. Synthesis of size-controlled carbon microspheres from resorcinol/formaldehyde for high electrochemical performance. New Carbon Mater. 2021, 36 (3), 616–624. 10.1016/S1872-5805(21)60033-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Han W. B.; Yang S. M.; Rajaram K.; Hwang S. W. Materials and fabrication strategies for biocompatible and biodegradable conductive polymer composites toward bio-integrated electronic systems. Adv. Sustainable Syst. 2022, 6 (2), 2100075. 10.1002/adsu.202100075. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Mondal R. K.; Dubey K. A.; Bhardwaj Y. K. Role of the interface on electron transport in electro-conductive polymer-matrix composite: a review. Polym. Compos. 2021, 42 (6), 2614–2628. 10.1002/pc.26018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Zheng Z.; Zhao Y.; Ye Z.; Hu J.; Wang H. Electrically conductive porous MXene-polymer composites with ultralow percolation threshold via Pickering high internal phase emulsion templating strategy. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2022, 618, 290–299. 10.1016/j.jcis.2022.03.086. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Chen L.; Li N.; Yu X.; Zhang S.; Liu C.; Song Y.; Li Z.; Han S.; Wang W.; Yang P.; Hong N.; Ali S.; Wang Z. A general way to manipulate electrical conductivity of graphene. Chem. Eng. J. 2023, 462, 142139. 10.1016/j.cej.2023.142139. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Wang Y. Y.; Tan Y. Q.; Liu K.; Xu H. N. Preparation and electrical properties of conductive asphalt concretes containing graphene and carbon fibers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 318, 125875. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.125875. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Kappagantula K. S.; Smith J. A.; Nittala A. K.; Kraft F. F. Macro copper-graphene composites with enhanced electrical conductivity. J. Alloys Compd. 2022, 894, 162477. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2021.162477. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Kim S.; Lee C.; Lim Y. S.; Shim J. H. Investigation for thermoelectric properties of the MoS2 monolayer-graphene heterostructure: density functional theory calculations and electrical transport measurements. ACS Omega 2021, 6, 278–283. 10.1021/acsomega.0c04488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Nittala A.; Smith J.; Gwalani B.; Silverstein J.; Kraft F. F.; Kappagantula K. Simultaneously improved electrical and mechanical performance of hot-extruded bulk scale aluminum-graphene wires. Mater. Sci. Eng. B 2023, 293, 116452. 10.1016/j.mseb.2023.116452. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Huang Y.; Yang K.; Gao J.; Zhao Z.; Li H.; Wang Z. Study on the law and mechanism of anisotropic conductivity of carbon nanotubes film prepared by floating catalytic chemical vapor deposition method. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 26, 3571–3585. 10.1016/j.jmrt.2023.08.129. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Jin F. L.; Park S. J. A review of the preparation and properties of carbon nanotubes-reinforced polymer composites. Carbon Lett. 2011, 12 (2), 57–69. 10.5714/CL.2011.12.2.057. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Gisbert Roca F.; Martínez-Ramos C.; Ivashchenko S.; García-Bernabé A.; Compañ V.; Pradas M. M. Polylactic acid nanofiber membranes grafted with carbon nanotubes with enhanced mechanical and electrical properties. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. 2023, 5, 6081–6094. 10.1021/acsapm.3c00776. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Meng J.; Song J.; Zhang X.; Wang J.; Li S. A highly stretchable carbon nanotube/reduced graphene oxide/poly (dimethylsiloxane) composite with high thermal conductivity as a flexible strain sensor. Compos. Commun. 2023, 42, 101693. 10.1016/j.coco.2023.101693. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Qian Y.; Chen L.; Zhu L. Electrothermal heating in direct contact membrane distillation via PTFE membrane coated by tea polyphenols and carbon nanotube for enhanced conductivity and long-term stability. J. Membr. Sci. 2023, 668, 121196. 10.1016/j.memsci.2022.121196. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Trukhanov A. V.; Tishkevich D. I.; Podgornaya S. V.; Kaniukov E.; Darwish M. A.; Zubar T. I.; Timofeev A. V.; Trukhanova E. L.; Kostishin V. G.; Trukhanov S. V. Impact of the nanocarbon on magnetic and electrodynamic properties of the ferrite/polymer composites. Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 868. 10.3390/nano12050868. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Alabsy M. T.; Alzahrani J. S.; Sayyed M. I.; Abbas M. I.; Tishkevich D. I.; El-Khatib A. M.; Elsaf M. Gamma-ray attenuation and exposure buildup factor of novel polymers in shielding using geant4 simulation. Materials 2021, 14, 5051. 10.3390/ma14175051. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lim D. D.; Lee J.; Park J.; Choi W. High-resolution and electrically conductive three-dimensional printing of carbon nanotube-based polymer composites enabled by solution intercalation. Carbon 2022, 194, 1–9. 10.1016/j.carbon.2022.03.042. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Asim N.; Su’ait M. S.; Badiei M.; Mohammad M.; Akhtaruzzaman M.; Rajabi A.; Amin N.; Ghazali M. J. Perspectives in biopolymer/graphene-based composite application: advances, challenges, and recommendation. Nanotechnol. Rev. 2022, 11, 1525. 10.1515/ntrev-2022-0087. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Tsou C. H.; Ma Z. L.; Guzman M. R.; Zhao L.; Du J.; Emori W.; Gao C.; Zhao Y.; Yang T.; Wu J. High-performance antibacterial nanocomposite films with a 3D network structure prepared from carboxylated graphene and modified polyvinyl alcohol. Prog. Org. Coat. 2022, 166, 106805. 10.1016/j.porgcoat.2022.106805. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Han Z.; Gan C.; Li X.; Feng P.; Ma X.; Fan X.; Zhu M. Electrochemical preparation of modified-graphene additive towards lubrication requirement. Tribol. Int. 2021, 161, 107057. 10.1016/j.triboint.2021.107057. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Veloso V. A.; Silva D. L.; Gastelois P. L.; Furtado C. A.; Santos A. P. Polyaniline/graphene nanocomposite: effect of the graphene functionalization with a long-chain fatty acid. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2022, 285, 126162. 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2022.126162. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Narukulla R.; Ojha U.; Sharma T. Facile one pot green synthesis of – NH2 surface functionalized graphene-polymer nanocomposite: subsequent utilization as stabilizer in pickering emulsions. Colloids Surf., A 2022, 641, 128594 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2022.128594. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Nie F.; Jian W.; Lau D. An atomistic study on the thermomechanical properties of graphene and functionalized graphene sheets modified asphalt. Carbon 2021, 182, 615–627. 10.1016/j.carbon.2021.06.055. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Wang B.-c.; Shao W.; Cao Q.; Cui Z. Investigation on the interfacial heat transport between epoxy and the edge of amino-functionalized graphene. Int. J. Heat Mass Trans. 2022, 191, 122850. 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2022.122850. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Fonseca E.; Silva V. D.; Amico S. C.; Pupure L.; Joffe R.; Schrekker H. S. Time-dependent properties of epoxy resin with imidazolium ionic liquid. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2021, 138 (46), 51369. 10.1002/app.51369. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Wan M.; Shen J.; Sun C.; Gao M.; Yue L.; Wang Y. Ionic liquid modified graphene oxide for enhanced flame retardancy and mechanical properties of epoxy resin. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2021, 138 (31), 50757. 10.1002/app.50757. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Henriques R. R.; Soares B. G. Sepiolite modified with phosphonium ionic liquids as anticorrosive pigment for epoxy coatings. Appl. Clay Sci. 2021, 200, 105890. 10.1016/j.clay.2020.105890. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Kerche E. F.; Silva V. D.; Fonseca E.; Salles N. A.; Schrekker H. S.; Amico S. C. Epoxy-based composites reinforced with imidazolium ionic liquid-treated aramid pulp. Polymer 2021, 226, 123787 10.1016/j.polymer.2021.123787. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Ogoshi T.; Onodera T.; Yamagishi T.; Nakamoto Y.; Kagata A.; Matsumi N.; Aoi K. Transparent ionic liquid-phenol resin hybrids with high ionic conductivity. Polym. J. 2011, 43, 421–424. 10.1038/pj.2011.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Guo L.; Zhang B.; Bai S.; Ma X.; Wang Z. Synthesis and application of functionalized ionic liquids as solvent to corn stalk for phenolic resin modification. e-Polym. 2015, 15 (3), 195–201. 10.1515/epoly-2014-0195. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Younesi-Kordkheili H. Ionic liquid modified lignin-phenol-glyoxal resin: a green alternative resin for production of particleboards. J. Adhesion 2019, 95 (12), 1075–1087. 10.1080/00218464.2018.1471994. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  39. Younesi-Kordkheili H.; Pizzi A. Properties of plywood panels bonded with ionic liquid-modified lignin-phenol-formaldehyde resin. J. Adhesion 2018, 94 (2), 143–154. 10.1080/00218464.2016.1263945. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Li P.; Lu Y.; Cao J.; Li M.; Yang C.; Yan H. Imidazolium ionic-liquid-modified phenolic resin for solid-phase extraction of thidiazuron and forchlorfenuron from cucumbers. J. Chromatogr. A 2020, 1623, 461192 10.1016/j.chroma.2020.461192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Wang H.; Yao S. S.; Guan Z.; Jin F. L.; Park S. J. Electrical property improvement of phenolic formaldehyde resin with graphene and ionic liquid. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2021, 38 (11), 2332–2340. 10.1007/s11814-021-0860-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Yao S. S.; Wang H.; Jin F. L.; Park S. J. Synthesis of the ionic liquid 1, 2-dimethyl-3-butylimidazole bromide salt and its application in phenolic-formaldehyde-resin-based conductive materials. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2022, 139 (24), 52334. 10.1002/app.52334. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  43. Zhang L.; Jiao H.; Jiu H.; Chang J.; Zhang S.; Zhao Y. Thermal, mechanical and electrical properties of polyurethane/(3-aminopropyl) triethoxysilane functionalized graphene/epoxy resin interpenetrating shape memory polymer composites. Composites, Part A 2016, 90, 286–295. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2016.07.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Kim S. H.; Zhang Y.; Lee J. H.; Lee S. Y.; Kim Y. H.; Rhee K. Y.; Park S. J. A study on interfacial behaviors of epoxy/graphene oxide derived from pitch-based graphite fiber. Nanotechnol. Rev. 2021, 10, 1827–1837. 10.1515/ntrev-2021-0111. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Kang M. J.; Jin F. L.; Park S. J. Effect of ozone treatment on fracture toughness of single-walled carbon nanotubes-reinforced epoxy resin initiated by a thermal latent catalyst. Macromol. Res. 2018, 26 (11), 1048–1051. 10.1007/s13233-018-6138-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Huang Y.; Ding J.; Sun X.; Wang Y. Research of functional graphene nanosheets modified carbon fiber reinforced cyanate ester resin composites on thermal and electrical conductivities properties. J. Nanosci. Nanotechnol. 2017, 17 (6), 3695–3701. 10.1166/jnn.2017.13991. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Nobile M. R.; Raimondo M.; Naddeo C.; Guadagno L. Rheological and morphological properties of non-covalently functionalized graphene-based structural epoxy resins with intrinsic electrical conductivity and thermal stability. Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 1310. 10.3390/nano10071310. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Asim M.; Jawaid M.; Khan A.; Asiri A. M.; Malik M. A, Effects of Date Palm fibres loading on mechanical, and thermal properties of Date Palm reinforced phenolic composites. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9 (3), 3614–3621. 10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.01.099. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Caldas C. M.; Soares B. G.; Indrusiak T.; Barra G. M. O. Ionic liquids as dispersing agents of graphene nanoplatelets in poly(methyl methacrylate) composites with microwave absorbing properties. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2021, 138 (6), 49814. 10.1002/app.49814. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Shi K.; Luo J.; Huan X.; Lin S.; Liu X.; Jia X.; Zu L.; Cai Q.; Yang X. Ionic liquid-graphene oxide for strengthening microwave curing epoxy composites. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2020, 3 (12), 11955–11969. 10.1021/acsanm.0c02511. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  51. Dong W.; Zhao M.; Jin F. L.; Park S. J. Enhanced electrical conductivity and electromagnetic shielding efficiency of epoxy resin using grapheme nanoplatelets. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2022, 39 (7), 1968–1974. 10.1007/s11814-021-1007-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Zhang S.; Yin S.; Ran Q.; Fu Q.; Gu Y. Facile preparation of polybenzoxazine/graphene nanocomposites for electromagnetic interference shielding. Polymer 2019, 162, 20–28. 10.1016/j.polymer.2018.12.024. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Liu H.; Liang C.; Chen J.; Huang Y.; Cheng F.; Wen F.; Xu B.; Wang B. Novel 3D network porous graphene nanoplatelets/Fe3O4/epoxy nanocomposites with enhanced electromagnetic interference shielding efficiency. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2019, 169, 103–109. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.11.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  54. Chen Y.; Zhang H. B.; Huang Y.; Jiang Y.; Zheng W. G.; Yu Z. Z. Magnetic and electrically conductive epoxy/graphene/carbonyl iron nanocomposites for efficient electromagnetic interference shielding. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2015, 118, 178–185. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2015.08.023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  55. Chen J.; Hu R. R.; Jin F. L.; Park S. J. Synergistic reinforcing of poly(lactic acid) by poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate) and alumina nanoparticles. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2021, 138 (16), 50250. 10.1002/app.50250. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  56. Jin F. L.; Hu R. R.; Park S. J. Improved impact strength of poly(lactic acid) by incorporating poly(butylene succinate) and silicon dioxide nanoparticles. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2020, 37 (5), 905–910. 10.1007/s11814-020-0488-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Zhao S.; Cui J.; Zhang G.; Gao A.; Yan Y. An alternative avenue for high-performance phenolic resin/graphene composite. Polym. Compos. 2019, 40 (11), 4248–4256. 10.1002/pc.25286. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Gu N.; Zhang H.; Ge H.; Wang F.; Liu B. In-situ polymerization of graphene/SiO2 hybrids modified phenolic resin for improved thermal stability at an ultralow filler loading. Polym. Bull. 2021, 78 (10), 5963–5976. 10.1007/s00289-020-03409-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Chen J.; Zhang W.; Liu J.; Ge H.; Tian M.; Liu J.; Jing M. Improved thermal stability of phenolic resin by graphene-encapsulated nano-SiO2 hybrids. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2019, 135, 2377–2387. 10.1007/s10973-018-7325-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Ruan H.; Zhang Q.; Liao W.; Lia Y.; Huang X.; Xu X.; Lu S. Enhancing tribological, mechanical, and thermal properties of polyimide composites by the synergistic effect between graphene and ionic liquid. Mater. Design 2020, 189, 108527. 10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108527. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  61. Yao S. S.; Pang Q. Q.; Song R.; Jin F. L.; Park S. J. Fracture toughness improvement of poly(lactic acid) with silicon carbide whiskers. Macromol. Res. 2016, 24 (11), 961–964. 10.1007/s13233-016-4144-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. Donato R. K.; Donato K. Z.; Schrekker H. S.; Matĕka L. Tunable reinforcement of epoxy-silica nanocomposites with ionic liquids. J. Mater. Chem. 2012, 22, 9939–9948. 10.1039/c2jm30830d. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. Yang G.; Wang Y.; Xu H.; Zhou S.; Jia S.; Zang J. Preparation and properties of three dimensional graphene/phenolic resin composites via in-situ polymerization in graphene hydrogels. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2018, 447, 837–844. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2018.04.065. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Jin F. L.; Zhang H.; Yao S. S.; Park S. J. Effect of surface modification on impact strength and flexural strength of poly(lactic acid)/silicon carbide nanocomposites. Macromol. Res. 2018, 26 (3), 211–214. 10.1007/s13233-018-6028-x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  65. Jin F. L.; Ma C. L.; Guo B. T.; Park S. J. Effect of surface modification on thermal stability, flexural properties, and impact strength of epoxy/graphene nanocomposites. Bull. Korean Chem. Soc. 2019, 40 (10), 991–996. 10.1002/bkcs.11858. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  66. Yao S. S.; Ma C. L.; Jin F. L.; Park S. J. Fracture toughness enhancement of epoxy resin with graphene nanoplatelets and carbon nanotubes as reinforcing agents. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2020, 37 (11), 2075–2083. 10.1007/s11814-020-0620-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from ACS Omega are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES