Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS Omega logoLink to ACS Omega
. 2022 Mar 10;7(11):9388–9396. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.1c06525

Aerosol-Printed MoS2 Ink as a High Sensitivity Humidity Sensor

Neuma M Pereira †,‡,§, Natália P Rezende †,§, Thiago H R Cunha †,§, Ana P M Barboza ∥, Glaura G Silva ‡,§, Daniel Lippross ‡, Bernardo R A Neves †, Hélio Chacham †, Andre S Ferlauto ⊥,§, Rodrigo G Lacerda †,§,*
PMCID: PMC8945157  PMID: 35356695

Abstract

graphic file with name ao1c06525_0006.jpg

Molybdenum disulfide (MoS2) is attractive for use in next-generation nanoelectronic devices and exhibits great potential for humidity sensing applications. Herein, MoS2 ink was successfully prepared via a simple exfoliation method by sonication. The structural and surface morphology of a deposited ink film was analyzed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), Raman spectroscopy, and atomic force microscopy (AFM). The aerosol-printed MoS2 ink sensor has high sensitivity, with a conductivity increase by 6 orders of magnitude upon relative humidity increase from 10 to 95% at room temperature. The sensor also has fast response/recovery times and excellent repeatability. Possible mechanisms for the water-induced conductivity increase are discussed. An analytical model that encompasses two ionic conduction regimes, with a percolation transition to an insulating state below a low humidity threshold, describes the sensor response successfully. In conclusion, our work provides a low-cost and straightforward strategy for fabricating a high-performance humidity sensor and fundamental insights into the sensing mechanism.

Introduction

In recent years, printing technologies have increasingly been used to replace conventional semiconductor device technologies for the fabrication of ultra-low-cost electronic components.1 Inks containing different classes of materials can be used to print functional components such as semiconducting layers, resistors, and dielectrics2 over different types of (flexible) substrates.3 In this context, a blooming field is the development of sensors that cover a wide area of applications such as real-time biomonitoring, wearables, environmental monitoring, industrial process control, and personal safety.4−6 In particular, an area of interest is humidity sensors, which have had an increasing demand for use in environmental control and industrial processing.7 For instance, humidity is closely monitored in the semiconductor industry, as devices and integrated circuits, printed circuit boards, electronic components, and data are highly sensitive to humidity.8 Similarly, several industrial processes such as chemical purification of gases, using dryers and ovens, paper production and textiles, and food processing, require high control of humidity.7 Thus, it is highly desirable to develop low-cost humidity sensors integrated into different surfaces and portable devices.9,10 Several materials have been studied for their humidity sensing capabilities, such as polymers,11,12 metal oxides,13,14 carbon nanomaterials,9,15,16 cellulose,17,18 and transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs).19−23 Two-dimensional (2D) transition metal dichalcogenides, such as molybdenum disulfide (MoS2), are becoming significant materials in various research fields and, specially, for sensing applications. Recently, MoS2 has received increasing attention in ultrasensitive sensor applications to detect different gases, such as NO2, NH3, H2, and water molecules.21,24−26

Conductive ink formulations are still far from ideal, as they require substrate functionalization27 or lengthy and expensive formulation processing.28,29 They are also usually based on toxic and expensive solvents and additives or need relatively high temperatures to dry,30 restricting their application to specific substrates. Alternatively, the use of aqueous dispersions as inks for printing on multiple devices can be an approach to replace nonsustainable and expensive methods.31,32 However, the development of new inks composed of functional materials, with different readily available properties, that are both sustainable and inexpensive still is in its infancy.33 Recently, several works in the literature have shown the development of water-based inks of 2D materials.23,34 For instance, Casiraghi et al.23 developed water-based and biocompatible graphene and hBN inks to fabricate all-2D material and inkjet-printed capacitors. In another work, McManus et al.35 developed photodetectors inkjet-printed on paper using graphene as electrodes and TMDs such as MoS2, WS2, MoSe2, and MoTe2 as photoactive components.34,36 Among various types of TMD preparation, liquid-phase exfoliation (LPE) by sonication is considered a low-cost, simple, and versatile method with high potential for scale-up.37 This work presents a low-cost, stable, and printable MoS2 ink for high-performance humidity sensors. No harsh conditions, solvent exchange, or chemical treatments were used, which allow the application to several substrates, including flexible substrates. The aerosol-printed MoS2 sensor exhibit high sensitivity (105–106%) with response/recovery times comparable to commercial humidity sensors and excellent repeatability. Possible mechanisms for the water-induced conductivity increase are discussed, and an analytical model that encompasses two conduction regimes, depending on relative humidity (RH), is proposed and describes the sensor response to RH successfully. We believe that our device can significantly influence the application of MoS2 ink for humidity sensors.

Results and Discussion

Material Characterization

Figure 1 shows a schematic illustration of the sensor preparation, described in detail in the Experimental Section (Figure 1a,b), with a representative picture of the device of the MoS2 film sensor on a flexible PET substrate (Figure 1c) and typical scanning electron microscopy (SEM) micrograph of the surface morphology of the film (Figure 1d). Details of the MoS2 ink sensor deposited on flexible (PET) substrate response to humidity are shown in the Support Information.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

(a) Schematic representation of the humidity sensor preparation: a spray pen was employed to apply a uniformly MoS2 ink layer on a PET substrate with previously Au-deposited interdigitated electrodes and (b) humidity sensor with the MoS2 sensing material deposited. (c) Picture of the MoS2 film sensor on a flexible PET substrate. (d) SEM micrograph of the surface morphology of the MoS2 film.

The SEM image presented in the inset of Figure 1d reveals that the deposited MoS2 sensing film is continuous and composed of an interconnected array of MoS2 flakes that densely cover the entire device area forming a 3D-like nanostructure film. A large number (∼50) of spray scans were performed to ensure film continuity in the active region. Raman spectroscopy was employed to investigate the structural properties of the as-deposited MoS2 films (Figure 2a). Two active Raman active modes, E2g1 at 381.1 cm–1 and A1g at 406.8 cm–1, associated with the hexagonal MoS2 structure, are observed as expected. The A1g mode is associated with the out-of-plane vibration of S atoms only in opposite directions, whereas E2g1 results from the opposite vibration of two S atoms with respect to the Mo atom.39−41 The frequency difference between the A1g and E2g1 Raman modes can be correlated to the number of MoS2 layers in the crystal. The obtained value of 25.7 cm–1 indicates that MoS2 flakes have multiple layers (>7 layers).42

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

(a) Raman spectrum of the MoS2 film. The separation between the position of the E2g1 and A1g peaks (25.7 cm–1) indicates that the flakes have multiple layers (>7 layers). (b) AFM image of MoS2 flakes. (c) Histogram of the average height distribution of the MoS2 flakes. (d) Distribution of Feret length of MoS2 flakes. A lognormal distribution (solid line) was fitted to the data to determine the mode of the MoS2 height and length distributions.

To perform the AFM measurements, the MoS2 ink was deposited on a Si wafer by drop-casting. To provide a representative statistical analysis of the material, nine images over distinct regions of the sample were acquired with a lateral size of 5 μm with 500 × 500 pixels. The lateral size of the MoS2 flakes was defined as the maximum Feret length and the height as the mean height value of the flakes.43 This analysis followed the methodology developed by Fernandes et al.,43 which provided a semiautomated statistical analysis of the thickness and size of graphene systems.

A representative AFM image of the MoS2 nanoflakes is shown in Figure 2b. The corresponding height and Feret length distributions are shown in Figure 2c,d, respectively. The modal height of the MoS2 flakes was 6.2 ± 5.7 nm (Figure 2c), which corresponds to around 10 layers, which is consistent with the number of layers estimated by Raman analysis (separation between the position of the E2g1 and A1g peaks (25.7 cm–1)), which indicates that the number of layers would be higher than 7 nm.42 The modal Feret length obtained was 28.2 ± 104.1 nm (Figure 2d). The characteristic length/thickness aspect ratio, obtained from the modal values discussed above, is 4.5. Such value of ratio can be considered intermediate between the near-unity values of quantum-dot-type nanoparticles44 and the values typically larger than 10 of nanoflake-type nanoparticles.45−47 Previous investigations on films of quantum-dot-type MoS2 nanoparticles have also reported humidity-dependent conductivities.44 Therefore, we can consider the possibility that small aspect ratio values can be relevant to humidity sensing characteristics.

Humidity-Sensing Results of the MoS2 film

To probe the sensor’s performance, we have carried out dynamic measurements, where the relative humidity is varied continuously. The sensor response was recorded as a function of time with a relative humidity variation of 10–95%. Figure 3a depicts the sensor conductance variation for a fixed applied voltage (+10 V) as a function of RH. Such high voltage is needed because of the high resistance of MoS2 films. One can note that the conductance changes by 6 orders of magnitude between 10–95% of RH. Results for different devices can be found in the Supporting Information. The sensitivity (S) of the MoS2 humidity sensor can be defined as48

graphic file with name ao1c06525_m001.jpg 1

where IRH and I10 represent the device’s current values at the humidity atmosphere and at 10% RH, respectively. The inset of Figure 3a shows the device sensitivity S in log scale versus RH, for RH between 10 and 95%. A detailed view of S in the range of 10–20% is shown in Figure S5 of the Supporting Information file. The sensitivity reaches a maximum value of 106%. The sensitivity results for different devices can be found in Figure S6 of the Supporting Information file.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

(a) Conductance values of a MoS2 sensor in a copper-clad phenolic sheet, determined from the fixed applied voltage of 10 V, as a function of the relative humidity (RH). Inset: Device sensitivity S (see eq 1) versus RH. (b) Repeatability performance of the MoS2 sensor exposed to cyclic variations of RH between 20 and 50%. (c) Stability of the MoS2 humidity sensor at 50 and 95% RH during a period of 40 days. (d) Response and recovery dynamics of the MoS2 (black) and commercial (blue) sensors to sudden changes in relative humidity.

Table 1 displays a comparison between the type of electrical response monitored (impedance, capacitive, and resistive) for different RH sensor materials reported in the literature, along with their sensitivity, recovery, and response time. Several materials have been used for humidity sensors in composite or in a single phase, having different properties like high thermal conductivity, high electrical conductivity, and good chemical and mechanical stabilities. Our sensor sensitivity is one of the highest achieved for resistive-type sensors and comparable with those obtained by other measurement techniques.

Table 1. Properties Comparison of the MoS2 Humidity Sensor and Reported Humidity Sensors.

sensing material sensor type detection range (RH) (%) sensitivity (%) response time (s) recovery time (s) reference
MoS2 FET 0–35 104 10 60 (49)
MWCNT/Nafion nanofibers film surface acoustic wave resonator 10–80 427.6 3 63 (50)
MoS2 QDs synthesized in NMP impedance 10–95 2.27 × 106 14 280 (44)
graphene/ZnO impedance 0–85 NA 1 2 (51)
glycidyl trimethyl ammonium chloride/cellulose impedance 11–95 >67.3 25 188 (52)
2D hBN-poly(ethylene oxide) impedance 0–90 2160 2.6 2.8 (53)
dendritic MoS2 impedance 11–95 3031 11 17 (21)
2D MoS2-PEDOT:PSS impedance 0–80 4000 0.5 0.8 (54)
PEDOT:PSS/GO impedance 0–100 2.6 × 104 1 3.5 (55)
halloysite nanotubes impedance 0–91.5 105 0.7 57.5 (56)
TiO2/(K,Na)NbO3 impedance 12–94 1.6 × 105 25 38 (57)
BEHP-co-MEH: PPV-PAA.PSS capacitive 0–80 NA 3.5 5 (58)
poly(dimethylsiloxane)/CaCl2 capacitive 30–95 10.2 120   (59)
GO capacitive 30–90 209 ∼200 ∼100 (9)
ITO/alumina capacitive 5–95 737.2 47.2 49.5 (60)
MoS2/nanodiamond capacitive 11–97 ∼3500 <1 0.9 (61)
carbon dots capacitive 20–90 6300     (62)
GO/MWCNT capacitive 11–97 7980 5 2.5 (63)
poly(ethylene oxide)/CuO/MWCNT capacitive 30–90 53837.6 20 11 (64)
MoS2/SnO2 capacitive 0–97 3.3 × 106 5 13 (65)
MWCNT/HEC resistive 20–80 3.84 ∼20 ∼35 (66)
SnO2/rGO resistive 11–97 45.02 ∼90 ∼100 (67)
PEDOT:rGO-PEI/Au NPs resistive 11–98 51.6 20 35 (68)
printed MWCNTs resistive 30–60 57.6     (69)
MoS2/PVP resistive 11–94 80 5 2 (70)
MoS2/GO resistive 35–85 ∼1700 43 37 (71)
MoS2/SiNWA resistive 11–95 2967 22.2 11.5 (26)
Pt/MoS2 resistive 35–85 4000 91.2 153.6 (72)
2D MoS2 resistive 0–80 6800 0.6 0.3 (73)
TiO2 nanoflowers resistive 20–95 4.61 × 104 4 <1 (74)
N-doped TiO2 resistive 0–90 3.28 × 105 18 299 (75)
MoS2-flakes resistive 10–95 5.3 × 106 8 22 this work
Open in a new tab

The repeatability of the MoS2 ink sensor was assessed via consecutive tests of adsorption and desorption processes, switching the RH level for 10 cycles between ∼20% RH (for 4 min) and 50% RH (for 1.5 min); see Figure 3b. In the adsorption (desorption) process, the sensor’s current increases (decreases) with the increase (decrease) of the relative humidity. As shown in Figure 3b, the current variation was almost identical for all cycles performed for more than 50 min indicating excellent repeatability. Next, the sensor stability was studied for several consecutive days, evaluating the sensitivity at 50 and 90% relative humidity, as shown in Figure 3c. The current variation was less than 10% for each humidity region probed. The device also shows a very stable response with minimal performance fluctuation after 35 days, demonstrating critical long-term stability.

Figure 3d compares the current response of the MoS2 sensor with a commercial capacitive humidity sensor model AM2303 DHT22 response, both normalized. The MoS2 sensor variation between the two states is fast, stable, and reversible. Figure 3d shows that the MoS2 sensor response time (to a suddenly increased humidity) is similar to that of the commercial sensor, but it also shows that the MoS2 sensor recovery time (to a suddenly reduced humidity) is faster than that of the commercial sensor investigated. The response time relative to an RH increase from 85 to 87% is 8 s. Conversely, the recovery time to an RH decrease from 87 to 85% is 22 s. The difference between the response and recovery times can be ascribed to the higher humidity sensitivity response and higher bonding energy between the adsorbed water molecules and the surface of the sensor material.76,77 Also, Table 1 shows that recovery and response times of our sensor are comparable to most of the humidity sensors reported. Response and recovery times for a wider range variation of humidity can be found in the Supporting Information.

Humidity-Sensing Mechanisms

We will now address possible mechanisms behind the change of conductivity of the MoS2 film upon interaction with water molecules. Previous studies have investigated this interaction for MoS2-based composites and exfoliated MoS2 flakes. The issue is controversial since some works report that H2O adsorption on MoS2 results in a decrease of conductivity.15,49,78 An electron charge transfer process from MoS2 to water molecules was predicted via density functional theory calculations79 and also observed in few-layer MoS2 transistors.80 On the other hand, other works report an increase of MoS2 conductivity due to water interaction.21,26,61,65,71 For instance, conductivity increase with humidity was observed for MoS2/GO,71 MoS2/nanodiamond composites,61 MoS2/Si nanowires,26 and dendritic MoS2.21

In the following, we will consider two analytical models81,82 that can describe the dependence of the conductivity σ (and, consequently, of the conductance G = 1/R) on the relative humidity, in limits of low and high relative humidity (<55 and >55%, respectively). Figure 4a shows √G versus RH for the sensor at the low RH regime. Up to a given value of RH, there is no measurable current through the device. Above a threshold value RH0, a linear behavior of √G versus RH–RH0 is shown. By extrapolating such linear behavior down to G = 0 (a value that is not experimentally accessible due to maximum resistivity limitations), we obtain an estimation of RH0 = 6.07%.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

(a) Square root of the conductance, √G, versus RH for humidity values below 55%. (b) Fitting of the conductance G as a function of relative humidity with eq 4 (in blue) and (5) (in red).

The observed linear behavior of √G implies a power-law behavior of σ above the conduction threshold,

graphic file with name ao1c06525_m002.jpg 2

with an exponent t = 2. As the amount of adsorbed water n has been predicted and observed83 to increase continuously with RH, we conclude that a power law with the same exponent will occur as a function of n,

graphic file with name ao1c06525_m003.jpg 3

Now, let us consider that a contiguous adsorbed water layer is the only medium, where conduction can occur, without the possibility of either tunneling or thermal-induced crossing of charge carriers through “dry” regions. Then, the physical situation can be described by standard percolation conductivity,84 where the conductivity, as a function of n, is predicted to be null up to a critical density n0, and, at the threshold for conduction, to behave exactly as in eq 3, with universal exponents that only depend on the dimensionality of the network of conducting channels. These exponents can be calculated numerically, leading to values such as t = 1.310 ± 0.001 in two dimensions85 and t = 1.998 ± 0.004 in three dimensions.86,87 Therefore, if standard percolation describes the conduction in our devices, the observed exponent t = 2 would indicate that the MoS2 film behaves as a “sponge” of finite thickness, where the adsorbed water can infiltrate and form a 3D network of water channels: a simple 2D water adsorption at the surface would lead to a smaller exponent. Interestingly, Figure 4a also shows that the approximately linear behavior of √σ versus RH extends for a wide range of relative humidity, well beyond the humidity RH0 at the conduction threshold up to about RH ≅ 55%. This provides us a very simple fitting formula for RH < 55%,

graphic file with name ao1c06525_m004.jpg 4

For values of RH larger than 55%, we will consider that the MoS2 layer is fully wet and that a contiguous liquid water layer is formed atop it. In this regime, the humidity-induced variation in the electrical transport is associated with changes in the ionic conductivity of the water layer. Such ionic transport is usually ascribed to the Grotthuss mechanism,81,82 where H3O+ ions act as charge carriers in proton-exchange reactions, H3O+ + H2O → H2O + H3O+. Skinner et al. have proposed an analytical description of the ionic conductivity of a humidity-induced water layer atop an otherwise insulating solid surface.88 Their calculations are based on the thermodynamic equilibrium between the water layer and the water vapor, as well as on the thermodynamic equilibrium between unbound (free) ionic carriers in the water layer and corresponding bound ions at the insulating surface. One of their main results is that the 2D density of free carriers n, in the limit of n ≪ nb, where nb is the 2D density of ion binding sites at the surface, is given by Inline graphic, where nH2O is the 3D density of water molecules in the liquid phase, γ is the Euler constant, κ is the water permittivity, lB is the Bjerrum length, and d is the thickness of the water layer.88 Based on that result, Skinner et al. obtained a simple fitting function for the ionic conductivity σ as a function of the relative humidity RH (as shown in Figure 4b),

graphic file with name ao1c06525_m006.jpg 5

Conclusions

In conclusion, we have investigated the humidity-sensing properties of the resistive-type humidity sensor based on MoS2 ink, which is produced via sonication-based exfoliation. The conductance readout of the sensor can increase up to 6 orders of magnitude upon relative humidity increase from 10 to 95% at room temperature. The MoS2 ink sensor showed very high sensitivity, excellent stability, repeatability, and good response and recovery times. The humidity-sensing mechanisms of MoS2 were also discussed in detail. The results showed ideal characteristics for the development of high-performance humidity sensors for real-life applications.

Experimental Section

Material Preparation and Fabrication of Humidity Sensor

Molybdenum disulfide ink was prepared by sonication-assisted exfoliation. Briefly, 400 mg of MoS2 powder (<2 mm, 99%, Aldrich) was dispersed in 250 mL of a 7:3 volume of deionized water and isopropyl alcohol. The exfoliation of MoS2 in suspension was performed using an ultrasonic probe processer for 3 hours (Sonics Vibra-Cell VCX 2500). After sonication, the dispersion was centrifuged at 2500 rpm for 20 minutes to remove the residue/precipitate, and the yellowish-green supernatant containing the nanoflakes was collected, as described by Coleman and collaborators.38 This supernatant was stable for six months. The UV–visible spectra of exfoliated MoS2 are shown in the Support Information. The MoS2 sensor film was deposited using an aerosol deposition method employing a 0.2 mm airbrush pen (Importway). Briefly, 20 mL of MoS2 ink was uniformly sprayed by the airbrush in an area of 50 × 4 mm2 in a copper-clad phenolic sheet or using a PET flexible substrate containing Au/Cr interdigital electrodes (IDEs) previously deposited. During the spraying process, the substrates were kept at 80 °C for rapid evaporation of water from the ink.

Material Characterization and Testing System of Humidity Sensors

The surface morphology of MoS2 ink films was observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM, FEI Quanta 200 FEG). The microstructure was characterized by Raman spectroscopy (Witec Alpha300 spectrometer). Atomic force microscopy characterization was carried out on a Bruker MultiMode 8 SPM using the intermittent contact mode and Si cantilevers (DPE/XSC11 hard) from Mikromasch, with spring constants of 7–42 Nm–1 and a tip radius of curvature of ∼10 nm. A home-built controlled environmental chamber was used to record the sensor’s electrical response upon changes in relative humidity. The humidity level inside the chamber was regulated using electronic mass flow controllers. Water vapor from a bubbler under heating was added to an argon stream to set the chamber’s humidity, whereas the second stream of argon was used for dehumidification and for purging. A commercial temperature and humidity sensor (AM2302 DHT22, precision of 2% RH), based on a capacitor with a hygroscopic polymer as dielectric, was used as a reference and feedback. The commercial sensor and the MoS2 film sensor responses were continuously monitored. The temperature for the whole experiment was maintained at 25 °C. In addition, the bubbler’s heating temperature was also controlled to keep the humidity approximately constant or to obtain different values of relative humidity inside the chamber. Figure S3 of the Supporting Information shows a detailed schematic of the characterization setup.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Fapemig (Rede 2D and individual projects), INCT Nanomateriais de Carbono, CNPq /MCT, Petrobras, BNDES, and CAPES for the funding support. The authors are also thankful to LabNano, Laboratório de Cristalografia (LabCri), Centro de Microscopia-UFMG, and SISNANO/LCPNano at UFMG.

Supporting Information Available

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.1c06525.

  • Characterization of MoS2 ink by UV–vis; preparation of copper-plated phenolites and Au/Cr interdigital electrodes (IDEs); influence of time of the exfoliation on the lateral size by DLS; characterization of the devices with MoS2 ink; test of MoS2 ink on the flexible PET substrate; response and recovery times for a large switching of the humidity levels (PDF)

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Supplementary Material

ao1c06525_si_001.pdf (637.3KB, pdf)

References

  1. Wiklund J.; Karakoç A.; Palko T.; Yiğitler H.; Ruttik K.; Jäntti R.; Paltakari J. A Review on Printed Electronics: Fabrication Methods, Inks, Substrates, Applications and Environmental Impacts. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89. 10.3390/jmmp5030089. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Akinwande D. Two-Dimensional Materials: Printing Functional Atomic Layers. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2017, 12, 287–288. 10.1038/nnano.2017.65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Akinwande D.; Petrone N.; Hone J. Two-Dimensional Flexible Nanoelectronics. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 5678 10.1038/ncomms6678. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Lima A. C.; Pereira N.; Policia R.; Ribeiro C.; Correia V.; Lrerreanceros-Mendez S.; Martins P. All-Printed Multilayer Materials with Improved Magnetoelectric Response. J. Mater. Chem. C 2019, 7, 5394–5400. 10.1039/C9TC01428D. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Oliveira J.; Correia V.; Castro H.; Martins P.; Lanceros-Mendez S. Polymer-Based Smart Materials by Printing Technologies: Improving Application and Integration. Addit. Manuf. 2018, 21, 269–283. 10.1016/j.addma.2018.03.012. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hu Y.; Zhao T.; Zhu P.; Zhu Y.; Shuai X.; Liang X.; Sun R.; Lu D. D.; Wong C.-P. Low Cost and Highly Conductive Elastic Composites for Flexible and Printable Electronics. J. Mater. Chem. C 2016, 4, 5839–5848. 10.1039/C6TC01340F. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen Z.; Lu C. Humidity Sensors: A Review of Materials and Mechanisms. Sens. Lett. 2005, 3, 274–295. 10.1166/sl.2005.045. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hashim A.; Al-Khafaji Y.; Hadi A. Synthesis and Characterization of Flexible Resistive Humidity Sensors Based on PVA/PEO/CuO Nanocomposites. Trans. Electr. Electron. Mater. 2019, 20, 530–536. 10.1007/s42341-019-00145-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Alrammouz R.; Podlecki J.; Vena A.; Garcia R.; Abboud P.; Habchi R.; Sorli B. Highly Porous and Flexible Capacitive Humidity Sensor Based on Self-Assembled Graphene Oxide Sheets on a Paper Substrate. Sens. Actuators, B 2019, 298, 126892 10.1016/j.snb.2019.126892. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kim H.; Park S.; Park Y.; Choi D.; Yoo B.; Lee C. S. Fabrication of a Semi-Transparent Flexible Humidity Sensor Using Kinetically Sprayed Cupric Oxide Film. Sens. Actuators, B 2018, 274, 331–337. 10.1016/j.snb.2018.07.127. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Mattana G.; Kinkeldei T.; Leuenberger D.; Ataman C.; Ruan J.; Molina-Lopez F.; Vásquez Quintero A.; Nisato G.; Troster G.; Briand D.; Rooij N. Woven Temperature and Humidity Sensors on Flexible Plastic Substrates for E-Textile Applications. Sensors Journal, IEEE 2013, 13, 3901–3909. 10.1109/JSEN.2013.2257167. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Yang T.; Yu Y. Z.; Zhu L. S.; Wu X.; Wang X. H.; Zhang J. Fabrication of Silver Interdigitated Electrodes on Polyimide Films via Surface Modification and Ion-Exchange Technique and Its Flexible Humidity Sensor Application. Sens. Actuators, B 2015, 208, 327–333. 10.1016/j.snb.2014.11.043. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Balde M.; Vena A.; Sorli B. Fabrication of Porous Anodic Aluminium Oxide Layers on Paper for Humidity Sensors. Sens. Actuators, B 2015, 220, 829–839. 10.1016/j.snb.2015.05.053. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Zhang D.; Zong X.; Wu Z.; Zhang Y. Hierarchical Self-Assembled SnS2 Nanoflower/Zn2SnO4 Hollow Sphere Nanohybrid for Humidity-Sensing Applications. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10, 32631–32639. 10.1021/acsami.8b08493. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Park S. Y.; Lee J. E.; Kim Y. H.; Kim J. J.; Shim Y. S.; Kim S. Y.; Lee M. H.; Jang H. W. Room Temperature Humidity Sensors Based on RGO/MoS2 Hybrid Composites Synthesized by Hydrothermal Method. Sens. Actuators, B 2018, 258, 775–782. 10.1016/j.snb.2017.11.176. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Rahim I.; Shah M.; Khan A.; Luo J.; Zhong A.; Li M.; Ahmed R.; Li H.; Wei Q.; Fu Y. Capacitive and Resistive Response of Humidity Sensors Based on Graphene Decorated by PMMA and Silver Nanoparticles. Sens. Actuators, B 2018, 267, 42–50. 10.1016/j.snb.2018.03.069. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  17. Courbat J.; Kim Y. B.; Briand D.; Rooij N. F.. de. Inkjet Printing on Paper for the Realization of Humidity and Temperature Sensors. In 2011 16th International Solid-State Sensors, Actuators and Microsystems Conference; 2011; 1356–1359. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kafy A.; Akther A.; Shishir M. I. R.; Kim H. C.; Yun Y.; Kim J. Cellulose Nanocrystal/Graphene Oxide Composite Film as Humidity Sensor. Sens. Actuators, A 2016, 247, 221–226. 10.1016/j.sna.2016.05.045. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Zhang D.; Wang M.; Zhang W.; Li Q. Flexible Humidity Sensing and Portable Applications Based on MoSe2 Nanoflowers/Copper Tungstate Nanoparticles. Sens. Actuators, B 2020, 304, 127234 10.1016/j.snb.2019.127234. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Burman D.; Choudhary D. S.; Guha P. K. ZnO/MoS2-Based Enhanced Humidity Sensor Prototype With Android App Interface for Mobile Platform. IEEE Sens. J. 2019, 19, 3993–3999. 10.1109/JSEN.2019.2896208. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Ren J.; Guo B.; Feng Y.; Yu K. Few-Layer MoS2 Dendrites as a Highly Active Humidity Sensor. Phys. E 2020, 116, 113782 10.1016/j.physe.2019.113782. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  22. Novoselov K. S.; Jiang D.; Schedin F.; Booth T. J.; Khotkevich V. V.; Morozov S. V.; Geim A. K. Two-Dimensional Atomic Crystals. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102, 10451–10453. 10.1073/pnas.0502848102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Worsley R.; Pimpolari L.; McManus D.; Ge N.; Ionescu R.; Wittkopf J. A.; Alieva A.; Basso G.; Macucci M.; Iannaccone G.; Novoselov K. S.; Holder H.; Fiori G.; Casiraghi C. All-2D Material Inkjet-Printed Capacitors: Toward Fully Printed Integrated Circuits. ACS Nano 2019, 13, 54–60. 10.1021/acsnano.8b06464. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Donarelli M.; Prezioso S.; Perrozzi F.; Bisti F.; Nardone M.; Giancaterini L.; Cantalini C.; Ottaviano L. Response to NO2 and Other Gases of Resistive Chemically Exfoliated MoS2-Based Gas Sensors. Sens. Actuators, B 2015, 207, 602–613. 10.1016/j.snb.2014.10.099. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Rezende N. P.; Cadore A. R.; Gadelha A. C.; Pereira C. L.; Ornelas V.; Watanabe K.; Taniguchi T.; Ferlauto A. S.; Malachias A.; Campos L. C.; Lacerda R. G. Probing the Electronic Properties of Monolayer MoS2 via Interaction with Molecular Hydrogen. Adv. Electron. Mater. 2019, 5, 1800591 10.1002/aelm.201800591. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Lou Z.; Wu D.; Bu K.; Xu T.; Shi Z.; Xu J.; Tian Y.; Li X. Dual-Mode High-Sensitivity Humidity Sensor Based on MoS2/Si Nanowires Array Heterojunction. J. Alloys Compd. 2017, 726, 632–637. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.07.338. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Torrisi F.; Hasan T.; Wu W.; Sun Z.; Lombardo A.; Kulmala T. S.; Hsieh G.-W.; Jung S.; Bonaccorso F.; Paul P. J.; Chu D.; Ferrari A. C. Inkjet-Printed Graphene Electronics. ACS Nano 2012, 6, 2992–3006. 10.1021/nn2044609. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Zheng J.; Zhang H.; Dong S.; Liu Y.; Tai Nai C.; Suk Shin H.; Young Jeong H.; Liu B.; Ping Loh K. High Yield Exfoliation of Two-Dimensional Chalcogenides Using Sodium Naphthalenide. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 2995 10.1038/ncomms3995. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Li J.; Naiini M.; Vaziri S.; Lemme M.; Östling M. Inkjet Printing of MoS2. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2014, 24, 6524–6531. 10.1002/adfm.201400984. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Finn D. J.; Lotya M.; Cunningham G.; Smith R. J.; McCloskey D.; Donegan J. F.; Coleman J. N. Inkjet Deposition of Liquid-Exfoliated Graphene and MoS2 Nanosheets for Printed Device Applications. J. Mater. Chem. C 2014, 2, 925–932. 10.1039/C3TC31993H. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  31. Forsberg V.; Zhang R.; Andersson H.; Bäckström J.; Dahlström C.; Norgren M.; Andres B.; Olin H. Liquid Exfoliation of Layered Materials in Water for Inkjet Printing. J. Imaging Sci. Technol. 2016, 60, 040405 10.2352/J.ImagingSci.Technol.2016.60.4.040405. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Paolucci V.; D’Olimpio G.; Lozzi L.; Mio A. M.; Ottaviano L.; Nardone M.; Nicotra G.; Le-Cornec P.; Cantalini C.; Politano A. Sustainable Liquid-Phase Exfoliation of Layered Materials with Nontoxic Polarclean Solvent. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 18830–18840. 10.1021/acssuschemeng.0c04191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Orrill M.; Abele D.; Wagner M.; LeBlanc S. Ink Synthesis and Inkjet Printing of Electrostatically Stabilized Multilayer Graphene Nanoshells. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2020, 566, 454–462. 10.1016/j.jcis.2020.01.095. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. McManus D.; Vranic S.; Withers F.; Sanchez-Romaguera V.; Macucci M.; Yang H.; Sorrentino R.; Parvez K.; Son S.-K.; Iannaccone G.; Kostarelos K.; Fiori G.; Casiraghi C. Water-Based and Biocompatible 2D Crystal Inks for All-Inkjet-Printed Heterostructures. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2017, 12, 343. 10.1038/nnano.2016.281. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. McManus D.; Dal Santo A.; Selvasundaram P. B.; Krupke R.; LiBassi A.; Casiraghi C. Photocurrent Study of All-Printed Photodetectors on Paper Made of Different Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Nanosheets. Flex. Print. Electron. 2018, 3, 34005 10.1088/2058-8585/aaddb5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Casiraghi C.; Macucci M.; Parvez K.; Worsley R.; Shin Y.; Bronte F.; Borri C.; Paggi M.; Fiori G. Inkjet Printed 2D-Crystal Based Strain Gauges on Paper. Carbon 2018, 129, 462–467. 10.1016/j.carbon.2017.12.030. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Li D.; Lai W.-Y.; Zhang Y.-Z.; Huang W. Printable Transparent Conductive Films for Flexible Electronics. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 1704738 10.1002/adma.201704738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Coleman J. N.; Lotya M.; O’Neill A.; Bergin S. D.; King P. J.; Khan U.; Young K.; Gaucher A.; De S.; Smith R. J.; Shvets I. V.; Arora S. K.; Stanton G.; Kim H.-Y.; Lee K.; Kim G. T.; Duesberg G. S.; Hallam T.; Boland J. J.; Wang J. J.; Donegan J. F.; Grunlan J. C.; Moriarty G.; Shmeliov A.; Nicholls R. J.; Perkins J. M.; Grieveson E. M.; Theuwissen K.; McComb D. W.; Nellist P. D.; Nicolosi V. Two-Dimensional Nanosheets Produced by Liquid Exfoliation of Layered Materials. Science 2011, 331, 568–571. 10.1126/science.1194975. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Lee C.; Yan H.; Brus L. E.; Heinz T. F.; Hone J.; Ryu S. Anomalous Lattice Vibrations of Single- and Few-Layer MoS2. ACS Nano 2010, 4, 2695–2700. 10.1021/nn1003937. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Li H.; Zhang Q.; Yap C. C. R.; Tay B. K.; Edwin T. H. T.; Olivier A.; Baillargeat D. From Bulk to Monolayer MoS2: Evolution of Raman Scattering. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2012, 22, 1385–1390. 10.1002/adfm.201102111. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Chen L.; Xue F.; Li X.; Huang X.; Wang L.; Kou J.; Wang Z. L. Strain-Gated Field Effect Transistor of a MoS2–ZnO 2D–1D Hybrid Structure. ACS Nano 2016, 10, 1546–1551. 10.1021/acsnano.5b07121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Zhang X.; Qiao X.-F.; Shi W.; Wu J.-B.; Jiang D.-S.; Tan P.-H. Phonon and Raman Scattering of Two-Dimensional Transition Metal Dichalcogenides from Monolayer, Multilayer to Bulk Material. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2015, 44, 2757–2785. 10.1039/C4CS00282B. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Fernandes T. F. D.; Miquita D. R.; Soares E. M.; Santos A. P.; Cançado L. G.; Neves B. R. A. A Semi-Automated General Statistical Treatment of Graphene Systems. 2D Mater. 2020, 7, 025045 10.1088/2053-1583/ab7975. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Yadav S.; Chaudhary P.; Uttam K. N.; Varma A.; Vashistha M.; Yadav B. C. Facile Synthesis of Molybdenum Disulfide (MoS2) Quantum Dots and Its Application in Humidity Sensing. Nanotechnology 2019, 30, 295501 10.1088/1361-6528/ab1569. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Chacham H.; Santos J. C. C.; Pacheco F. G.; Silva D. L.; Martins R. M.; Del’Boccio J. P.; Soares E. M.; Altoé R.; Furtado C. A.; Plentz F.; Neves B. R. A.; Cançado L. G. Controlling the Morphology of Nanoflakes Obtained by Liquid-Phase Exfoliation: Implications for the Mass Production of 2D Materials. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2020, 3, 12095–12105. 10.1021/acsanm.0c02598. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Santos J.; Prado M.; Morais H.; Sousa S.; Silva-Pinto E.; Cançado L.; Neves B. Topological Vectors as a Fingerprinting System for 2D-Material Flake Distributions. npj 2D Mater. Appl. 2021, 5, 51 10.1038/s41699-021-00234-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Backes C.; Campi D.; Szydlowska B. M.; Synnatschke K.; Ojala E.; Rashvand F.; Harvey A.; Griffin A.; Sofer Z.; Marzari N.; Coleman J. N.; O’Regan D. D. Equipartition of Energy Defines the Size–Thickness Relationship in Liquid-Exfoliated Nanosheets. ACS Nano 2019, 13, 7050–7061. 10.1021/acsnano.9b02234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Liu Y. J.; Hao L. Z.; Gao W.; Liu Y. M.; Li G. X.; Xue Q. Z.; Guo W. Y.; Yu L. Q.; Wu Z. P.; Liu X. H.; Zeng H. Z.; Zhu J. Growth and Humidity-Dependent Electrical Properties of Bulk-like MoS2 Thin Films on Si. RSC Adv. 2015, 5, 74329–74335. 10.1039/C5RA11454C. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Zhao J.; Li N.; Yu H.; Wei Z.; Liao M.; Chen P.; Wang S.; Shi D.; Sun Q.; Zhang G. Highly Sensitive MoS(2) Humidity Sensors Array for Noncontact Sensation.. Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1702076 10.1002/adma.201702076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Sheng L.; Dajing C.; Yuquan C. A Surface Acoustic Wave Humidity Sensor with High Sensitivity Based on Electrospun MWCNT/Nafion Nanofiber Films. Nanotechnology 2011, 22, 265504 10.1088/0957-4484/22/26/265504. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Hassan G.; Bae J.; Lee C. H.; Hassan A. Wide Range and Stable Ink-Jet Printed Humidity Sensor Based on Graphene and Zinc Oxide Nanocomposite. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Electron. 2018, 29, 5806–5813. 10.1007/s10854-018-8552-z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Guan X.; Hou Z.; Wu K.; Zhao H.; Liu S.; Fei T.; Zhang T. Flexible Humidity Sensor Based on Modified Cellulose Paper. Sens. Actuators, B 2021, 339, 129879 10.1016/j.snb.2021.129879. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Sajid M.; Kim H. B.; Lim J. H.; Choi K. H. Liquid-Assisted Exfoliation of 2D HBN Flakes and Their Dispersion in PEO to Fabricate Highly Specific and Stable Linear Humidity Sensors. J. Mater. Chem. C 2018, 6, 1421–1432. 10.1039/C7TC04933A. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  54. Siddiqui G. U.; Sajid M.; Ali J.; Kim S. W.; Doh Y. H.; Choi K. H. Wide Range Highly Sensitive Relative Humidity Sensor Based on Series Combination of MoS2 and PEDOT:PSS Sensors Array. Sens. Actuators, B 2018, 266, 354–363. 10.1016/j.snb.2018.03.134. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  55. Hassan G.; Sajid M.; Choi C. Highly Sensitive and Full Range Detectable Humidity Sensor Using PEDOT:PSS, Methyl Red and Graphene Oxide Materials. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 15227 10.1038/s41598-019-51712-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Duan Z.; Zhao Q.; Wang S.; Huang Q.; Yuan Z.; Zhang Y.; Jiang Y.; Tai H. Halloysite Nanotubes: Natural, Environmental-Friendly and Low-Cost Nanomaterials for High-Performance Humidity Sensor. Sens. Actuators, B 2020, 317, 128204 10.1016/j.snb.2020.128204. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Si R.; Xie X.; Li T.; Zheng J.; Cheng C.; Huang S.; Wang C. TiO2/(K,Na)NbO3 Nanocomposite for Boosting Humidity-Sensing Performances. ACS Sens. 2020, 5, 1345–1353. 10.1021/acssensors.9b02586. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Sajid M.; Kim H. B.; Yang Y. J.; Jo J.; Choi K. H. Highly Sensitive BEHP-Co-MEH:PPV + Poly(Acrylic Acid) Partial Sodium Salt Based Relative Humidity Sensor. Sens. Actuators, B 2017, 246, 809–818. 10.1016/j.snb.2017.02.162. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Komazaki Y.; Uemura S. Stretchable, Printable, and Tunable PDMS-CaCl2 Microcomposite for Capacitive Humidity Sensors on Textiles. Sens. Actuators, B 2019, 297, 126711 10.1016/j.snb.2019.126711. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. McGhee J. R.; Sagu J. S.; Southee D. J.; Evans P. S. A.; Wijayantha K. G. U. Printed, Fully Metal Oxide, Capacitive Humidity Sensors Using Conductive Indium Tin Oxide Inks. ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. 2020, 2, 3593–3600. 10.1021/acsaelm.0c00660. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  61. Yu X.; Chen X.; Ding X.; Yu X.; Zhao X.; Chen X. Facile Fabrication of Flower-like MoS2/Nanodiamond Nanocomposite toward High-Performance Humidity Detection. Sens. Actuators, B 2020, 317, 128168 10.1016/j.snb.2020.128168. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. Rivadeneyra A.; Salmeron J. F.; Murru F.; Lapresta-Fernández A.; Rodríguez N.; Capitan-Vallvey L. F.; Morales D. P.; Salinas-Castillo A. Carbon Dots as Sensing Layer for Printed Humidity and Temperature Sensors. Nanomaterials. 2020, 10, 122446 10.3390/nano10122446. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Li X.; Chen X.; Chen X.; Ding X.; Zhao X. High-Sensitive Humidity Sensor Based on Graphene Oxide with Evenly Dispersed Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2018, 207, 135–140. 10.1016/j.matchemphys.2017.12.033. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Ahmad W.; Jabbar B.; Ahmad I.; Mohamed Jan B.; Stylianakis M. M.; Kenanakis G.; Ikram R. Highly Sensitive Humidity Sensors Based on Polyethylene Oxide/CuO/Multi Walled Carbon Nanotubes Composite Nanofibers. Materials 2021, 14, 1037 10.3390/ma14041037. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Zhang D.; Sun Y.; Li P.; Zhang Y. Facile Fabrication of MoS2-Modified SnO2 Hybrid Nanocomposite for Ultrasensitive Humidity Sensing. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 14142–14149. 10.1021/acsami.6b02206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Turkani V. S.; Maddipatla D.; Narakathu B. B.; Saeed T. S.; Obare S. O.; Bazuin B. J.; Atashbar M. Z. A Highly Sensitive Printed Humidity Sensor Based on a Functionalized MWCNT/HEC Composite for Flexible Electronics Application. Nanoscale Adv. 2019, 1, 2311–2322. 10.1039/C9NA00179D. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Zhang D.; Chang H.; Liu R. Humidity-Sensing Properties of One-Step Hydrothermally Synthesized Tin Dioxide-Decorated Graphene Nanocomposite on Polyimide Substrate. J. Electron. Mater. 2016, 45, 4275–4281. 10.1007/s11664-016-4630-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  68. Zhang R.; Peng B.; Yuan Y. Flexible Printed Humidity Sensor Based on Poly(3,4-Ethylenedioxythiophene)/Reduced Graphene Oxide/Au Nanoparticles with High Performance. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2018, 168, 118–125. 10.1016/j.compscitech.2018.09.013. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  69. Zhang X.; Turkani V. S.; Hajian S.; Bose A. K.; Maddipatla D.; Hanson A. J.; Narakathu B. B.; Atashbar M. Z. In Novel Printed Carbon Nanotubes Based Resistive Humidity Sensors, 2019 IEEE International Conference on Flexible and Printable Sensors and Systems (FLEPS), 2019; pp 1–3.
  70. Jin X.-F.; Liu C.-R.-L.; Chen L.; Zhang Y.; Zhang X.-J.; Chen Y.-M.; Chen J.-J. Inkjet-Printed MoS2/PVP Hybrid Nanocomposite for Enhanced Humidity Sensing. Sens. Actuators, A 2020, 316, 112388 10.1016/j.sna.2020.112388. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  71. Burman D.; Ghosh R.; Santra S.; Guha P. K. Highly Proton Conducting MoS2/Graphene Oxide Nanocomposite Based Chemoresistive Humidity Sensor. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 57424–57433. 10.1039/C6RA11961A. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  72. Burman D.; Santra S.; Pramanik P.; Guha P. K. Pt Decorated MoS2nanoflakes for Ultrasensitive Resistive Humidity Sensor. Nanotechnology 2018, 29, 115504 10.1088/1361-6528/aaa79d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Zeeshan Yousaf H. M.; Kim S. W.; Hassan G.; Karimov K.; Choi K. H.; Sajid M. Highly Sensitive Wide Range Linear Integrated Temperature Compensated Humidity Sensors Fabricated Using Electrohydrodynamic Printing and Electrospray Deposition. Sens. Actuators, B 2020, 308, 127680 10.1016/j.snb.2020.127680. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  74. Jeong H.; Noh Y.; Lee D. Highly Stable and Sensitive Resistive Flexible Humidity Sensors by Means of Roll-to-Roll Printed Electrodes and Flower-like TiO2 Nanostructures. Ceram. Int. 2019, 45, 985–992. 10.1016/j.ceramint.2018.09.276. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  75. Li Z.; Haidry A. A.; Dong B.; Sun L.; Fatima Q.; Xie L.; Yao Z. Facile Synthesis of Nitrogen Doped Ordered Mesoporous TiO2 with Improved Humidity Sensing Properties. J. Alloys Compd. 2018, 742, 814–821. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.01.361. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  76. Zhao J.; Liu Y.; Li X.; Lu G.; You L.; Liang X.; Liu F.; Zhang T.; Du Y. Highly Sensitive Humidity Sensor Based on High Surface Area Mesoporous LaFeO3 Prepared by a Nanocasting Route. Sens. Actuators, B 2013, 181, 802–809. 10.1016/j.snb.2013.02.077. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  77. Wang J.-G.; Zhang L.-X.; Yin J.; Zhao L.-X.; Bie L.-J. Layered K(K1.5Eu0.5)Ta3O10 for Humidity Sensor. Measurement 2016, 82, 151–154. 10.1016/j.measurement.2016.01.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  78. Zhang S. L.; Choi H. H.; Yue H. Y.; Yang W. C. Controlled Exfoliation of Molybdenum Disulfide for Developing Thin Film Humidity Sensor. Curr. Appl. Phys. 2014, 14, 264–268. 10.1016/j.cap.2013.11.031. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  79. Yue Q.; Shao Z.; Chang S.; Li J. Adsorption of Gas Molecules on Monolayer MoS2 and Effect of Applied Electric Field. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2013, 8, 425 10.1186/1556-276X-8-425. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Late D. J.; Huang Y.-K.; Liu B.; Acharya J.; Shirodkar S. N.; Luo J.; Yan A.; Charles D.; Waghmare U. V.; Dravid V. P.; Rao C. N. R. Sensing Behavior of Atomically Thin-Layered MoS2 Transistors. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 4879–4891. 10.1021/nn400026u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Bi H.; Yin K.; Xie X.; Ji J.; Wan S.; Sun L.; Terrones M.; Dresselhaus M. S. Ultrahigh Humidity Sensitivity of Graphene Oxide. Sci. Rep. 2013, 3, 2714 10.1038/srep02714. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Agmon N. CHEMICAL PHYSICS The Grotthuss Mechanism. Chem. Phys. Lett. 1995, 244, 456–462. 10.1016/0009-2614(95)00905-J. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  83. Theillet P.-O.; Pierron O. N. Quantifying Adsorbed Water Monolayers on Silicon MEMS Resonators Exposed to Humid Environments. Sens. Actuators, A 2011, 171, 375–380. 10.1016/j.sna.2011.09.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  84. Sahimi M.; Hughes B. D.; Scriven L. E.; Davis H. T. Critical Exponent of Percolation Conductivity by Finite-Size Scaling. J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 1983, 16, L521–L527. 10.1088/0022-3719/16/16/004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  85. Grassberger P. Conductivity Exponent and Backbone Dimension in 2-d Percolation. Phys. A 1999, 262, 251–263. 10.1016/S0378-4371(98)00435-X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  86. Hu H.; Blöte H. W. J.; Ziff R. M.; Deng Y. Short-Range Correlations in Percolation at Criticality. Phys. Rev. E 2014, 90, 042106 10.1103/PhysRevE.90.042106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. Kozlov B.; Laguës M. Universality of 3D Percolation Exponents and First-Order Corrections to Scaling for Conductivity Exponents. Phys. A 2010, 389, 5339–5346. 10.1016/j.physa.2010.08.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  88. Skinner B.; Loth M. S.; Shklovksii B. I. Ionic Conductivity on a Wetting Surface. Phys. Rev. E: Stat., Nonlinear, Soft Matter Phys. 2009, 80, 041925 10.1103/PhysRevE.80.041925. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

ao1c06525_si_001.pdf (637.3KB, pdf)

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

RESOURCES