Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The extensive growth of telecommunication and electronic devices has led to significant concerns regarding electromagnetic (EM) radiations. Thus, the effect of EM radiations can be reduced by using highly efficient shielding materials. This review aimed to explore the electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding materials based on polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polyurethane (PU), and polyaniline (PANI) composites. It was found that the composites based on PVDF, PU, and PANI polymers have attracted considerable interest and highly efficient for EMI shielding due to their remarkable properties like lightweight, thermal stability, processing benefits, cheap, tremendous flexibility, and excellent resistance to corrosion. Hence, the PVDF-, PU-, and PANI-based composites are efficient EMI shielding materials.

Keywords

Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF)polyurethane (PU)polyaniline (PANI)composites electromagnetic interference shielding

Introduction

In recent years, the rapid use of telecommunication and electronic devices such as cell phones, computers, radio, microwaves, radar system, laptops, and so on have produced the unique form of electronic pollution in the environment like electromagnetic (EM) radiations.^1–4 These EM radiations have harmful effects on human health and sensitive electronic devices.^5,6 To better solve these problems, electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding materials have attracted much attention to eliminating undesirable EM radiations.^7–9 Thus, the EMI shielding is the most common and excellent source to safe the sensitive electronic devices and human health from the ill-effect of EM radiations.^10,11 In the past decade, metal-based shielding materials were the material of choice to combat EM radiations.¹² But metal-based shielding materials have limited application in EMI shielding owing to some properties such as expensive, high specific gravity, difficult to process, reduced flexibility, and corrosiveness.^13–15 Alternatively, polymeric composites-based EMI shielding materials have been widely studied^16,17 and have attracted enormous attention owing to their unique features like lightweight, thermal stability, processing benefits, cheap, tremendous flexibility, and excellent resistance to corrosion.^18–24 These EMI shielding materials are used in the number of important areas such as radar, satellite communication, wireless networking devices, home-based consumer electronics, and so on. The present review discusses various polymeric composites-based shielding materials for the control of EM radiations. It is expected that this review will help to continue research about EMI shielding materials because reviews play a vital role in ongoing interest in new aspects of research in every academic area. Thus, this review mainly focuses on the polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polyurethane (PU), and polyaniline (PANI) composites-based EMI shielding materials. In the recent past, PANI composites have gained much attention due to ease of synthesis, excellent conductivity, tunable chemistry, and tremendous EMI shielding properties compared to the PVDF and PU composites-based EMI shielding materials.

Mechanism of EMI shielding effectiveness

The EMI shielding effectiveness (SE) of shielding materials has the ability to reduce the effects of EM radiations that can be defined as the incident EM wave fall on the surface of materials then a particular part of incident power (P_inc) is reflected (P_ref), whereas the certain parts are absorbed (P_abs) and transmitted (P_trans) of EM radiations. Thus, P_inc can be defined as²⁵

P_{inc} = P_{ref} + P_{trans} + P_{abs}

It is well established that the total EMI SE (SE_t) is the summation of three different mechanisms, that is, SE by reflection (SE_R), SE by absorption (SE_A), and SE due to multiple internal reflections (SE_M) of EM radiations, which is calculated from the reflectivity (R), absorptivity (A), and transmissivity (T) of the incident EM wave on a slab of materials. It is also well-known that SE_M can be neglected if the SE_t > 10 dB. Therefore, the SE_R, SE_A, and SE_T can be calculated by the following equations^12,26,27:

{SE}_{R} = 10 lg \frac{1}{1 - R}

{SE}_{A} = 10 lg \frac{1 - R}{T}

{SE}_{t} {=SE}_{R} + {SE}_{A} = 10 lg \frac{1}{1 - R} + 10 lg \frac{1 - R}{T} = 10 lg \frac{1}{T}

Another vital factor is the impedance matching of the EM wave absorbing materials that impact the reflection on the absorbents surface, which can be indicated by the reflection coefficient ( $Γ$ ).^28,29

Γ = \frac{Z_{in} - 1}{Z_{in} + 1}

where Z_in represents the normalized input impedance of the absorber and can be described as³⁰

Z_{in} = \sqrt{\frac{μ_{r}}{ε_{r}}} \tan h i \frac{2 π f}{c} \sqrt{μ_{r} ε_{r} d}

where $ε_{r}$ is the relative permittivity, $μ_{r}$ is the relative permeability, c is the velocity, f is the frequency, and d is the thickness of the EM waves absorber. Furthermore, $ε_{r}$ and $μ_{r}$ can be calculated by the following equations^31,32:

ε_{r} = ε^{'} - j ε^{″}

μ_{r} = μ^{'} - j μ^{″}

According to the transmission line theory, the reflection loss (R_L) values can be calculated by the following equation^33,34:

R_{L} = 20 lg \frac{Z_{in} - 1}{Z_{in} + 1}

For electrically conductive materials, SE_A and SE_R values can also be calculated by the following equations^35,36:

{SE}_{R} = 39.5 + 10 lg \frac{σ}{2 π f μ}

{SE}_{A} = 8.7 d \sqrt{π f μ σ}

where f, μ, σ, and d are the frequency of the EM wave, magnetic permeability, electrical conductivity, and thickness of the shielding materials, respectively.

From the above analysis, we can conclude that the decisive intrinsic factors in SE_R and SE_A of conductive materials (non-magnetism) are $ε_{r}$ and σ. And the imaginary part of permittivity ( $ε^{″}$ ) indicates the energy loss, which comprises of three different distinct effects.³⁷

ε^{″} = {ε^{″}}_{dc} + {ε^{″}}_{dipole} + {ε^{″}}_{MWS}

where ${ε^{″}}_{dc}$ , ${ε^{″}}_{dipole}$ , and ${ε^{″}}_{MWS}$ are related to the direct current resistor, dipole orientation, and Maxwell–Wagner–Sillars relaxation (interfacial polarization), respectively. Therefore, the key to promoting the EMI SE of conductive shielding materials is to improve the dipole and interfacial polarization based on proper conductivity.³⁸

Polymeric composites-based EMI shielding materials

In the ongoing research for composites-based EMI shielding materials, we found that the tremendous composites-based shielding materials have properties such as lightweight, high strength, cheap, simple processability, noncorrosive, excellent flexibility, and high thermal stability along with the efficient EM shielding performance. Currently, most of the researchers have now focused on the polymeric composites-based EMI shielding materials and have been widely used in industrial applications such as automotive, military, transportation, aircraft, aerospace, and so on, due to their tremendous properties like excellent resistance to corrosion, lightweight, tremendous flexibility, ease of fabrication, and cost-effective.^39–42 The polymers matrix such as insulating and conducting containing conductive fillers known as conductive polymer composites are very suitable for EMI shielding applications and also have been attracted considerable attention in recent years. The polymers matrix chosen in the conductive fillers are divided into intrinsically nonconducting polymers (INCPs) and intrinsically conducting polymers (ICPs). In the INCPs, PVDF and PU whereas, in the ICPs, PANI are the most usually used polymers for the EMI shielding applications.

PVDF composites-based EMI shielding materials

PVDF is a synthetic resin produced by the polymerization of vinylidene fluoride (CH₂=CF₂). It is a semicrystalline thermoplastic, which possesses excellent flexibility, piezoelectric properties, resistant to flame, good thermal, and chemical stability^43–45 and is mostly chosen as a matrix in the conductive fillers for EMI shielding applications. Guo et al. prepared reduced graphene oxide (RGO)/barium titanate (BT)/PVDF composites through a simple solvent casting method. They reported that the synergistic effect of RGO/BT fillers in the PVDF matrix has improved the electrical conductivity and EMI SE performance of RGO/BT/PVDF composite. Finally, the EMI SE of ∼45.3 dB in the frequency range 2–18 GHz was achieved at the loading of 15 wt% of filler.⁴⁶ Lee et al. prepared carbon nanofibers (CFs)/PVDF composites through a solution mixing technique. It has been observed that homogenously dispersed CFs as conductive fillers in a PVDF matrix has enhanced the electrical conductivity and EMI shielding performance of composites and finally obtained EMI SE of ∼14 dB at the loading of 10 wt% of filler in the 500 MHz–1.5 GHz frequency range.⁴⁷ Ram et al. prepared PVDF/multiwalled carbon nanotube (MWCNT) composite through solution casting method. They observed that the electrical conductivity and EMI SE performance of PVDF/MWCNT composites have significantly enhanced by adding the MWCNT in the PVDF and finally obtained EMI SE of ∼35 dB at loading of 5 wt% of MWCNT in the 8–12 GHz frequency range (Figure 1(a) and (b)).⁴⁸

Figure 1.

(a) EMI SE of PVDF/MWCNT composites in the 8–12 GHz frequency range by different MWCNT content and (b) EMI SE of PVDF/MWCNT composites at different frequencies versus MWCNT content. Reproduced with permission from reference.⁴⁸ Copyright 2018 Wiley.

Zhao et al. prepared PVDF/MWCNT composite film by solution casting method followed by compression molding as shown in Figure 2(a). They reported that the electrical conductivity and EMI SE performance of PVDF/MWCNT composite have significantly enhanced by adding the MWCNT in the PVDF. Thus, the EMI SE of composite films containing 8 wt% of MWCNT was found to be ∼25.02 dB in the 18–26.5 GHz frequency range (Figure 2(b)).⁴⁹ Zha et al. prepared PVDF/ethylene-α-octene block copolymer/MWCNT composite through melt compounding and showed that these composite had improved the dielectric, mechanical, and EMI SE performance. Thus, the EMI SE of ∼34 dB was obtained by loading of 2.7 vol% MWCNT in the 8–12 GHz frequency range.⁵⁰

Figure 2.

(a) Schematic representation of the preparation process of PVDF/MWCNT composite films and (b) plot of EMI SE of PVDF/MWCNT composite by using various MWCNT content in the 18–26.5 GHz frequency range. Reproduced with permission from reference.⁴⁹ Copyright 2017 ACS.

Wang et al. prepared segregated PVDF/carbon black (CB) composites containing magnetic carbonyl iron (Cl) particles through blending and hot compaction, as shown in Figure 3(a). It was observed that the electrical conductivity, magnetic, and EMI SE of PVDF/CB/Cl composite have significantly improved. Thus, the EMI SE of 20–27 dB was achieved by loading of 3 wt% of CB and 20 wt% Cl in the PVDF (5.4–18 GHz frequency range) (Figure 3(b)). Additionally, the increased content of Cl in the composites has enhanced the SE_T and SE_A properties of composites, but the SE_R of composites was negligible (Figure 3(c)). As a consequence, the absorption attenuation is the dominant EMI shielding mechanism of the composite.⁵¹ Gebretrstos et al. prepared PVDF/MWCNT composite through hot rolling. They reported that the flow-induced alignment of MWCNT in the PVDF has improved the electrical, mechanical, and EMI SE of the composite. The stacking five individuals rolled sheets with EMI shielding mechanism, as shown in Figure 4(a). As we can see (Figure 4(b)) the loading of MWCNT in the PVDF has significantly increased the EMI SE of composites and finally obtained EMI SE of −25 dB by loading of 2 wt% MWNT in the 12–18 GHz frequency range.⁵²

Figure 3.

(a) Schematic representation of the preparation process of PVDF/CB/Cl composites, (b) EMI SE of PVDF/CB/Cl composites with various Cl loading, and (c) SE_A and SE_R values of PVDF/CB/Cl composites at 20 wt% Cl content. Reproduced with permission from reference.⁵¹ Copyright 2018 IOP.

Figure 4.

(a) Schematic representation of stacking five individuals rolled sheets with EMI shielding mechanism and (b) SE_T of PVDF/MWCNT composites with different MWCNT loadings in the of 12–18 GHz frequency range. Reproduced with permission from reference.⁵² Copyright 2019 Elsevier.

PU composites-based EMI shielding materials

PU has been widely used in several technological applications due to its tremendous properties such as easy processability, chemical resistance, high tensile strength, and mechanical properties.^53,54 Recently, PU has gained considerable research attention and has been chosen as a matrix in the conductive fillers for EMI shielding applications.^55–57 Ji et al. prepared flexible and flame retarding thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) composites through coextrusion technology. They reported that the multilayer-assembled approach was proposed to balance the flame retarding, mechanical, and EMI SE.⁵⁸ Bansala et al. prepared graphene/TPU composites by using a solvent casting method. The addition of graphene with the TPU has significantly enhanced the electrical conductivity and EMI SE of composites and finally obtained EMI SE of −29.8 dB by loading of 10 wt% graphene in the 12–18 GHz frequency range.⁵⁹ Ji et al. prepared TPU/carbon nanotubes (CNTs)/intumescent flame retardants (IFRs) composites by melt compounding. The IFRs were used as eco-friendly additives for improving the flame retardancy of TPU. They reported that the achieved ∼20 dB EMI SE of TPU/CNTs/IFRs composite is not as high as those prepared through other strategies, but its balanced flame retarding and EMI SE performances originating from the synergistic effect of CNTs and IFRs may still own attractive competitiveness in the field of protective materials.⁶⁰ Ghosh et al. prepared PU/CB composites through dip coating and drying method. The EMI SE (∼65.6 dB) of the composite was achieved by loading of 2 wt% carbon content in the PU (12–18 GHz frequency range). They reported that the prepared composite is a suitable alternative for low-cost durable EMI shielding material.⁶¹ Esfahani et al. prepared TPU/amine-functionalized graphene (mTRGO) composite through solution mixing process. They reported that the electrical conductive and EMI SE of TPU/mTRGO composite are higher as compared with TPU/unmodified graphene (TRGO) which is due to the stronger interaction between the mTRGO filler and the TPU matrix. As Figure 5 shows, the TPU/mTRGO composites presented higher EMI SE than that of TPU/TRGO composites with the same loading. For TPU/mTRGO composite, the EMI SE of ∼24.5 dB was achieved by loading of 5 vol% mTRGO, while for TPU/TRGO composite, the EMI SE of ∼15 dB was achieved by loading of 5 vol% of TRGO (Figure 5(a)). This significant improvement in the EMI SE of TPU/mTRGO composites was attributed to the homogeneous connectivity of the mTRGO in the TPU. As we can see that the increased mTRGO and TRGO content in the composites has significantly enhanced the SE_T and SE_A properties, but the SE_R was almost negligible with all graphene content (Figure 5(b) and (c)).⁶²

Figure 5.

Verma et al. prepared PU/RGO (PUG) composites by using the solution mixing process, the fabrication process of the PUG composites, as shown in Figure 6(a). It was found that the EMI SE has significantly improved by RGO content in the PU matrix and finally obtained EMI SE of −21 dB by loading of 5.5 vol% RGO (8–12 GHz frequency range) (Figure 6(b)). This significant improvement in the EMI SE of PUG composite was due to the formation of the electrical conductive network of RGO in the PU matrix. Figure 6(c) shows that, though both SE_A and SE_R increase with the loading of RGO content in the PU matrix, the rate of SE_A increases more rapidly compared with SE_R. This behavior indicates that absorption attenuation is the dominant EMI shielding mechanism of the PUG composites.⁶³

Figure 6.

(a) Schematic representation of the fabrication process of PUG composite film, (b) variation in the EMI SE with frequency for PUG composite, and (c) variation in SE_T, SE_A, and SE_R with RGO loading at X-band frequency range. Reproduced with permission from reference.⁶³ Copyright 2015 RSC.

Ramôa et al. prepared TPU/CNT and TPU/CB composites by using melt mixing method. They reported that the electrically conductive and EMI SE have strongly dependent on the formation of a conductive network within the TPU matrix. It was observed that with the increase of conductive network (CNT and CB) in the TPU, the electrically conductive and EMI SE of TPU/CNT and TPU/CB composites have significantly increased. Thus, the TPU/CNT and TPU/CB composites were obtained EMI SE of ∼12.2 dB and ∼21.8 dB by loading of 10 wt% of CNT and CB, respectively. The acceptable EMI SE values of TPU/CNT and TPU/CB composites were obtained by loading of 10 and 15 wt% of CNT and CB, respectively, which indicate that these composites are promising candidates for EMI shielding applications (Figure 7(a) and (b)).⁶⁴

Figure 7.

Feng et al. prepared TPU/CNTs composites by using ball milling and microwave sintering technology. First, the ball milling was used to distribute the CNTs onto the surface of TPU granules to obtain the CNTs coated TPU powder and then by microwave irradiation to sinter the powder with a segregated structure to achieve the TPU/CNTs composites (Figure 8). It was observed that the obtained TPU/CNTs composites have tremendous mechanical, electrically conductive, and superb EMI shielding performance. Thus, the electrical conductive and EMI SE of 17.9 S/m and ∼35.3 dB were obtained by loading of 5 wt% CNTs, respectively.⁶⁵

Figure 8.

PANI composites-based EMI shielding materials

PANI has gained a lot of interest due to its outstanding properties such as facile synthesis, low cost, high electrical conductivity, and superb thermal stability.^66,67 PANI is the most common and widely used polymer for EMI shielding applications.^68–70 Zhang et al. prepared bagasse fiber (BF)/PANI composites by using in situ polymerization method (Figure 9(a)). They reported that the amount of PANI plays a vital role in the EMI SE of BF/PANI composites. The BF/PANI composites achieved EMI SE of ∼35.73 dB by adjusting the PANI content (Figure 9(b)). They concluded that the BF/PANI composites with excellent EMI SE can be useful for aerospace industries and precious electronic devices.⁷¹ The multiphase hybrid composites of PANI/graphene nanoplatelets (GRNPs) doped with para-toluene sulphonic acid were prepared through in situ polymerization method. EMI SE of PANI/GRNPs composite has significantly enhanced as compared to that of pure PANI and finally achieved EMI SE of −14.5 dB for PANI/GRNPs composite by loading of 10 wt% GRNPs (Figure 10).⁷²

Figure 9.

Figure 10.

Kumar et al. prepared functionalized f-MWCNT/PANI composites by using solution mixing method (Figure 11(a)). They observed that the resulting f-MWCNT/PANI composites (0–21 vol% CNT) show higher electrical conductivity as compared to that of pure PANI which is due to the formation of conducting network of MWCNT in the PANI. Thus, the increased electrical conductivity of composites has significantly improved the EMI SE and finally achieved EMI SE of ∼12 dB by loading of 21 vol% f-MWCNT (Figure 11(b)).⁷³ Zhang et al. prepared a hierarchical BF/PANI composite with a core-shell structure by using the in situ polymerization method (Figure 12(a)). They reported that the BF core plays a significant role in inducing the degree of doping and crystalline phase of PANI shell in the final composite. Thus, the electrical conductivity of BF/PANI composite has significantly increased as compared to that of pure PANI. The BF/PANI composite exhibits EMI SE (∼28.8 dB) with a thickness of 0.4 mm (Figure 12(b)). It was found that the dominant mechanism of the EMI SE of BF/PANI composite is absorption.⁷⁴

Figure 11.

Figure 12.

Bora et al. prepared PANI/manganese oxide (MnO₂) composite by using the solution mixing method. EMI SE of the PANI/MnO₂ composites was investigated by using X-band and Ku-band frequency range. The EMI SE value ∼35 dB of composite in the X-band was observed and ∼39 dB in the Ku-band. EMI shielding due to the absorption of the composite was found to be dominant for both X-band and Ku-band frequency range.⁷⁵ Bora et al. prepared PANI/nickel oxide (NiO)-coated cenosphere composite through a solution mixing method. EMI SE of the composite was investigated by using J-band, X-band, and Ku-band frequency range. An average EMI SE of ∼24 dB, ∼27–24 dB, and ∼21 dB was observed of PANI/NiO-coated cenosphere composite in the J-band, X-band, and Ku-band, respectively. EMI shielding due to the absorption of the composite was found to be dominant for composite.⁷⁶ Bera et al. prepared PANI/PVDF/ferrosoferric oxide (Fe₃O₄)/single-walled carbon nanohorn (SWCNH) (PFC) composite through solution mixing and salt leaching process. EMI SE of PFC composite was investigated by using Ku-band and finally obtained EMI SE of ∼29.7 dB for PFC composite at a very low loading of SWCNH (1 wt%).³² Ismail et al. prepared PANI/cobalt Fe₃O₄ by using mechanical blending method. The composite obtained a maximum reflection loss of −28.4 dB at 8.1 GHz and −9.6 dB at 11.2 GHz. Thus, these composites showed the absorbing properties in a wide frequency range X-band.⁷⁷ Faisal et al. prepared PANI/stannous oxide (SnO)/yttrium trioxide (Y₂O₃) composites by using in situ polymerization method. The ternary PANI/SnO/Y₂O₃ composite has shown tremendous microwave absorption properties and finally obtained EMI SE of −42.6 dB in the X-band.⁷⁸ Gairola et al. prepared PANI/barium ferrite/expanded graphene composites through in situ polymerization method. They observed that prepared composites have shown better microwave absorption properties and finally achieved EMI SE of ∼37.1 dB in the X-band.⁷⁹ Bora et al. prepared PANI/poly(vinyl butyral) (PVB)/cenosphere composites by solution mixing method. In the presence of PANI/cenosphere in the PVB matrix, the time average power of incident EM radiations decreases resulting in an increase of absorbance and finally obtained EMI SE of ∼30.5 dB in the X-band.⁸⁰ Joon et al. prepared PANI/carbon fiber (CF) composites by using in situ polymerization method. They observed that the prepared PANI/CF composites have excellent electrical conductivity with improved mechanical strength and thermal stability. In addition, the PANI/CF composite has shown EMI SE of ∼31.9 dB in the X-band. Thus, the PANI/CF composite can be used in the EMI shielding applications due to their tremendous mechanical, electrical, thermal, and EMI shielding performance.⁸¹ Gupta et al. prepared PANI/graphene/MWCNT composites by solvent mixing followed by high-speed homogenization and a ball mixing technique. It was observed that the improvement of the EMI SE is due to the synergistic effect of the graphene and MWCNT in the PANI matrix and finally obtained EMI SE of ∼98 dB in the Ku-band.⁸² Singh et al. prepared PANI/gamma-ferric oxide (Fe₂O₃)-decorated graphene composite through in situ polymerization method. It was observed that the gamma-Fe₂O₃-decorated graphene in the PANI matrix enhanced the interfacial polarization and the effective anisotropy energy of the composite and as a result more scattering occurs which lead to high EMI SE of ∼51 dB in the X-band.⁸³ Yun et al. prepared PANI/functionalized MWCNT composites through in situ polymerization method. The uniform coating of PANI on MWCNT played a crucial role in increasing electrical conductivity of composites. The improved interfacial affinity resulted in the high EMI SE of composites and finally obtained EMI SE of ∼47.03 dB in the S-band.⁸⁴ The EMI shielding properties of different PVDF, PU, and PANI composites are given in Table 1.

Table 1.

EMI shielding properties of different PVDF, PU, and PANI composites.

Composites	Methods	EMI SE	References
RGO/BT/PVDF	Solvent casting	∼45.3 dB	⁴⁶
CFs/PVDF	Solution mixing	∼14 dB	⁴⁷
PVDF/MWCNT	Solution casting	∼35 dB	⁴⁸
PVDF/MWCNT	Solution casting	∼25.02 dB	⁴⁹
PVDF/OBC/MWCNT	Melt compounding	∼34 dB	⁵⁰
PVDF/CB/Cl	Blending and hot compaction	20–27 dB	⁵¹
PVDF/MWCNT	hot rolling	−25 dB	⁵²
Graphene/TPU	Solution casting	−29.8 dB	⁵⁹
TPU/CNTs/IFRs	Melt compounding	∼20 dB	⁶⁰
PU/CB	Dip coating and drying	∼65.6 dB	⁶¹
TPU/mTRGO	Solution mixing	∼24.5 dB	⁶²
PU/RGO	Solution mixing	−21 dB	⁶³
TPU/CNT and TPU/CB	Melt mixing	∼12.2 dB and ∼21.8 dB	⁶⁴
TPU/CNTs	Ball milling and microwave sintering technology	∼35.3 dB	⁶⁵
BF/PANI	In situ polymerization	∼35.73 dB	⁷¹
PANI/GRNPs/p-TSA	In situ polymerization	−14.5 dB	⁷²
f-MWCNT/PANI	Solution mixing	∼12 dB	⁷³
BF/PANI	In situ polymerization	∼28.8 dB	⁷⁴
PANI/MnO₂	Solution mixing	∼35 dB	⁷⁵
PANI/NiO-coated cenosphere	Solution mixing	∼24 dB	⁷⁶
PANI/PVDF/Fe₃O₄/SWCNH	Solution mixing and salt leaching	∼29.7 dB	³²
PANI/CoFe₃O₄	Mechanical blending	−28.4 dB	⁷⁷
PANI/SnO/Y₂O₃	In situ polymerization	−42.6 dB	⁷⁸
PANI/barium ferrite/expanded graphene	In situ polymerization	∼37.1 dB	⁷⁹
PANI/ PVB/cenosphere	Solution mixing	∼30.5 dB	⁸⁰
PANI/CF	In situ polymerization	∼31.9 dB	⁸¹
PANI/graphene/MWCNT	Solvent mixing	∼98 dB	⁸²
PANI/gamma-Fe₂O₃-decorated graphenes	In situ polymerization	∼51 dB	⁸³
PANI/functionalized MWCNT	In situ polymerization	∼47.03 dB	⁸⁴

PVDF: polyvinylidene fluoride; PU: polyurethane; PANI: polyaniline; EMI: electromagnetic interference; SE: shielding effectiveness; RGO: reduced graphene oxide; BT: barium titanate; CF: carbon nanofiber; MWCNT: multiwalled carbon nanotube; OBC: octene block copolymer; CB: carbon black; Cl: carbonyl iron; TPU: thermoplastic polyurethane; CNT: carbon nanotube; IFR: intumescent flame retardant; mTRGO: TPU/amine-functionalized graphene; BF: bagasse fiber; GRNP: graphene nanoplatelet; p-TSA: para-toluene sulphonic acid; MnO₂: manganese oxide; NiO: nickel oxide; Fe₃O₄: ferrosoferric oxide; SWCNH: single-walled carbon nanohorn; CoFe₃O₄: cobalt Fe₃O₄; SnO: stannous oxide; Y₂O₃: yttrium trioxide; PVB: poly(vinyl butyral); Fe₂O₃: ferric oxide.

Conclusion

This review mainly focused on the PVDF-, PU-, and PANI-based composites for EMI shielding properties. Recently, PVDF, PU, and PANI composites have attracted enormous attention and have been widely studied for EMI shielding properties due to their outstanding features like lightweight, thermal stability, processing benefits, cheap, tremendous flexibility, and excellent resistance to corrosion. A detailed overview of up to date research on PVDF, PU, and PANI composites-based EMI shielding materials has been discussed. It is expected that this review will benefit ongoing research relating to EMI shielding applications.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Ahsan Nazir

References

Nazir

Wang

, et al. Recent progress in the modification of carbon materials and their application in composites for electromagnetic interference shielding. J Mater Sci 2018; 53(12): 8699–8719.

Kausar

Ahmad

Salman

. Effectiveness of polystyrene/carbon nanotube composite in electromagnetic interference shielding materials: a review. Polym Plast Technol Eng 2017; 56(10): 1027–1042.

Zahari

Guan

Cheng

, et al. EMI Shielding effectiveness of composites based on barium ferrite, PANI, and MWCNT. Prog Electromag Res M 2016; 52: 79–87.

Jia

Yan

Cui

, et al. Electrically conductive and electromagnetic interference shielding of polyethylene composites with devisable carbon nanotube networks. J Mater Chem C 2015; 3(36): 9369–9378.

Bodewein

Schmiedchen

Dechent

, et al. Systematic review on the biological effects of electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields in the intermediate frequency range (300 Hz to 1 MHz). Environ Res 2019; 171: 247–259.

Wall

Wang

Kendig

, et al. Real-world cell phone radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposures. Environ Res 2019; 171: 581–592.

Bansala

Joshi

Mukhopadhyay

, et al. Electrically conducting graphene-based polyurethane nanocomposites for microwave shielding applications in the Ku band. J Mater Sci 2017; 52(3): 1546–1560.

Zhao

Sun

, et al. Mechanical and electromagnetic interference shielding properties of carbon fiber/graphene nanosheets/epoxy composite. Polym Compos 2016; 37(8): 2494–2502.

Duan

Zhao

Yang

, et al. Flexible and conductive PP/EPDM/Ni coated glass fiber composite for efficient electromagnetic interference shielding. J Mater Sci Mater Electron 2018; 29(12): 10329–10336.

10.

Shukla

. Review of electromagnetic interference shielding materials fabricated by iron ingredients. Nanoscale Adv 2019; 1(5): 1640–1671.

11.

Geetha

Kumar

KKS

Rao

CRK

, et al. EMI shielding: methods and materials—a review. J Appl Polym Sci 2009; 112(4): 2073–2086.

12.

Shahzad

Alhabeb

Hatter

, et al. Electromagnetic interference shielding with 2D transition metal carbides (MXenes). Science 2016; 353(6304): 1137–1140.

13.

Saini

Choudhary

Sood

, et al. Electromagnetic interference shielding behavior of polyaniline/graphite composites prepared by in situ emulsion pathway. J Appl Polym Sci 2009; 113(5): 3146–3155.

14.

Tripathi

Saini

Gupta

, et al. Electrical and mechanical properties of PMMA/reduced graphene oxide nanocomposites prepared via in situ polymerization. J Mater Sci 2013; 48(18): 6223–6232.

15.

Saini

Choudhary

Singh

, et al. Enhanced microwave absorption behavior of polyaniline-CNT/polystyrene blend in 12.4–18.0 GHz range. Synthetic Metals 2011; 161(15): 1522–1526.

16.

Ganguly

Ghosh

Das

, et al. Poly(N-vinylpyrrolidone)-stabilized colloidal graphene-reinforced poly(ethylene-co-methyl acrylate) to mitigate electromagnetic radiation pollution. Polym Bull 2019; 77: 2923–2943.

17.

Ghosh

Ganguly

Das

, et al. Fabrication of reduced graphene oxide/silver nanoparticles decorated conductive cotton fabric for high performing electromagnetic interference shielding and antibacterial application. Fibers Polym 2019; 20(6): 1161–1171.

18.

Al-Saleh

Sundararaj

. Electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding effectiveness of PP/PS polymer blends containing high structure carbon black. Macromol Mater Eng 2008; 293(7): 621–630.

19.

Kumar

Muflikhun

Yokozeki

. Improved environmental stability, electrical and EMI shielding properties of vapor-grown carbon fiber-filled polyaniline-based nanocomposite. Polym Eng Sci 2019; 59(5): 956–963.

20.

Thomassin

Jerome

Pardoen

, et al. Polymer/carbon based composites as electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding materials. Mater Sci Eng R-Rep 2013; 74(7): 211–232.

21.

Thomassin

Lou

Pagnoulle

, et al. Multiwalled carbon nanotube/poly(epsilon-caprolactone) nanocomposites with exceptional electromagnetic interference shielding properties. J Phys Chem C 2007; 111(30): 11186–11192.

22.

Thomassin

Huynen

Jerome

, et al. Functionalized polypropylenes as efficient dispersing agents for carbon nanotubes in a polypropylene matrix; application to electromagnetic interference (EMI) absorber materials. Polymer 2010; 51(1): 115–121.

23.

Das

Ganguly

Banerjee

, et al. Graphene based emergent nanolights: a short review on the synthesis, properties and application. Res Chem Intermed 2019; 45(7): 3823–3853.

24.

Ganji

. Hill Model for the base growths and tip growths of doped and undoped carbon nanotubes. J Nanosci Nanotechnol 2018; 18(11): 7623–7640.

25.

Joshi

Datar

. Carbon nanostructure composite for electromagnetic interference shielding. Pramana J Phys 2015; 84(6): 1099–1116.

26.

Kong

. Electromagnetic wave absorption properties of reduced graphene oxide modified by maghemite colloidal nanoparticle clusters. J Phys Chem C 2013; 117: 19701–19711.

27.

Yuan

, et al. Lightweight flexible carbon nanotube/polyaniline films with outstanding EMI shielding properties. J Mater Chem C 2017; 5(34): 8694–8698.

28.

Ren

Wang

, et al. Current progress on the modification of carbon nanotubes and their application in electromagnetic wave absorption. RSC Adv 2014; 4(28): 14419–14431.

29.

Sun

Zou

Qian

, et al. Controlled synthesis of porous Fe₃O₄-decorated graphene with extraordinary electromagnetic wave absorption properties. Acta Materialia 2013; 61(15): 5829–5834.

30.

Melvin

GJH

Q-Q

Natsuki

. Electromagnetic wave absorption properties of barium titanate/carbon nanotube hybrid nanocomposites. J Alloy Compd 2014; 615: 84–90.

31.

Huang

Ding

, et al. Synthesis of core-shell FeCo@SiO₂ particles coated with the reduced graphene oxide as an efficient broadband electromagnetic wave absorber. J Mater Sci Mater Electron 2017; 28(21): 15782–15789.

32.

Bera

Das

Maitra

, et al. Salt leached viable porous Fe₃O₄ decorated polyaniline—SWCNH/PVDF composite spectacles as an admirable electromagnetic shielding efficiency in extended Ku-band region. Compos B Eng 2017; 129: 210–220.

33.

Duan

Liu

, et al. Broadband superior electromagnetic absorption of a discrete-structure microwave coating. J Magnet Magnet Mater 2016; 416: 155–163.

34.

Miles

Westphal

Von Hippel

. Dielectric spectroscopy of ferromagnetic semiconductors. Rev Modern Phys 1957; 29(3): 279–307.

35.

Dao

V-D

Choi

H-S

. Electromagnetic shielding effectiveness of a thin silver layer deposited onto PET film via atmospheric pressure plasma reduction. Appl Surface Sci 2018; 435: 7–15.

36.

Huang

C-J

Chang

T-C

. Studies on the electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness of metallized PVAc-AgNO₃/PET conductive films. J Appl Polym Sci 2004; 91(1): 270–273.

37.

Song

W-L

Cao

M-S

Wen

, et al. Synthesis of zinc oxide particles coated multiwalled carbon nanotubes: dielectric properties, electromagnetic interference shielding and microwave absorption. Mater Res Bullet 2012; 47(7): 1747–1754.

38.

Dang

Z-M

Wang

Yin

, et al. Giant dielectric permittivities in functionalized carbon-nanotube/electroactive-polymer nanocomposites. Adv Mater 2007; 19(6): 852–857.

39.

Swain

Jena

. Polymer/carbon nanotube nanocomposites: a novel material. Asian J Chem 2010; 22(1): 1–15.

40.

Fortunati

D’Angelo

Martino

, et al. Carbon nanotubes and silver nanoparticles for multifunctional conductive biopolymer composites. Carbon 2011; 49(7): 2370–2379.

41.

Chung

DDL

. Electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness of carbon materials. Carbon 2001; 39(2): 279–285.

42.

Luo

Chung

DDL

. Electromagnetic interference shielding using continuous carbon-fiber carbon-matrix and polymer-matrix composites. Compos B Eng 1999; 30(3): 227–231.

43.

Lang

Muensit

. Review of some lesser-known applications of piezoelectric and pyroelectric polymers. Appl Phys A 2006; 85(2): 125–134.

44.

Priya

Jog

. Intercalated poly(vinylidene fluoride)/clay nanocomposites: structure and properties. J Polym Sci B Polym Phys 2003; 41(1): 31–38.

45.

Priya

Jog

. Poly(vinylidene fluoride)/clay nanocomposites prepared by melt intercalation: crystallization and dynamic mechanical behavior studies. J Polym Sci B Polym Phys 2002; 40(15): 1682–1689.

46.

Guo

A-P

Zhang

X-J

J-K

, et al. Improved microwave absorption and electromagnetic interference shielding properties based on graphene-barium titanate and polyvinylidene fluoride with varying content. Mater Chem Front 2017; 1(12): 2519–2526.

47.

Lee

Woo

Park

, et al. Influence of aspect ratio and skin effect on EMI shielding of coating materials fabricated with carbon nanofiber/PVDF. J Mater Sci 2002; 37(9): 1839–1843.

48.

Ram

Khastgir

Rahaman

. Physical properties of polyvinylidene fluoride/multi-walled carbon nanotube nanocomposites with special reference to electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness. Adv Polym Technol 2018; 37(8): 3287–3296.

49.

Zhao

, et al. Flexible, ultrathin, and high-efficiency electromagnetic shielding properties of poly(vinylidene fluoride)/carbon composite films. ACS Appl Mater Interface 2017; 9(24): 20873–20884.

50.

Zha

X-J

J-H

L-F

, et al. A particular interfacial strategy in PVDF/OBC/MWCNT nanocomposites for high dielectric performance and electromagnetic interference shielding. Compos A Appl Sci Manufact 2018; 105: 118–125.

51.

Wang

Zheng

Zhang

, et al. Separated poly(vinylidene fluoride)/carbon black composites containing magnetic carbonyl iron particles for efficient electromagnetic interference shielding. Mater Res Exp 2018; 5(12): 125304.

52.

Gebrekrstos

Biswas

Menon

, et al. Multi-layered stack consisting of PVDF nanocomposites with flow-induced oriented MWCNT structure can supress electromagnetic radiation. Compos B Eng 2019; 166: 749–757.

53.

Ahmed

Kausar

Muhammad

. Advances in shape memory polyurethanes and composites: a review. Polym Plast Technol Eng 2015; 54(13): 1410–1423.

54.

Kausar

. Polyurethane composite foams in high-performance applications: a review. Polym Plast Technol Eng 2018; 57(4): 346–369.

55.

Vargas

Merlini

Ramoa

, et al. Conductive composites based on polyurethane and nanostructured conductive filler of montmorillonite/polypyrrole for electromagnetic shielding applications. Mater Res 2018; 21(5): 10.

56.

Merlini

Barra

GMO

da Cunha

, et al. Electrically conductive composites of polyurethane derived from castor oil with polypyrrole-coated peach palm fibers. Polym Compos 2017; 38(10): 2146–2155.

57.

Bernal

Martin-Gallego

Molenberg

, et al. Influence of carbon nanoparticles on the polymerization and EMI shielding properties of PU nanocomposite foams. RSC Adv 2014; 4(16): 7911–7918.

58.

Chen

Shen

, et al. Flexible and flame-retarding thermoplastic polyurethane-based electromagnetic interference shielding composites. Chem Eng J 2019; 370: 1341–1349.

59.

Bansala

Joshi

Mukhopadhyay

. Electromagnetic interference shielding behavior of chemically and thermally reduced graphene based multifunctional polyurethane nanocomposites: a comparative study. J Appl Polym Sci 2019; 136(25): 47666.

60.

Chen

Wang

, et al. Synergistic effect of flame retardants and carbon nanotubes on flame retarding and electromagnetic shielding properties of thermoplastic polyurethane. Compos Sci Technol 2018; 163: 49–55.

61.

Ghosh

Ganguly

Remanan

, et al. Ultra-light weight, water durable and flexible highly electrical conductive polyurethane foam for superior electromagnetic interference shielding materials. J Mater Sci Mater Electron 2018; 29(12): 10177–10189.

62.

Nasr Esfahani

Katbab

Taeb

, et al. Correlation between mechanical dissipation and improved X-band electromagnetic shielding capabilities of amine functionalized graphene/thermoplastic polyurethane composites. Eur Polym J 2017; 95: 520–538.

63.

Verma

Dhawan

, et al. Tailored graphene based polyurethane composites for efficient electrostatic dissipation and electromagnetic interference shielding applications. RSC Adv 2015; 5(118): 97349–97358.

64.

Ramôa

Barra

Oliveira

, et al. Electrical, rheological and electromagnetic interference shielding properties of thermoplastic polyurethane/carbon nanotube composites. Polym Int 2013; 62(10): 1477–1484.

65.

Feng

Wang

, et al. Highly stretchable electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding segregated polyurethane/carbon nanotube composites fabricated by microwave selective sintering. J Mater Chem C 2019; 7(26): 7938–7946.

66.

Mao

Liu

Qian

, et al. Preparation and dedoping-resistant effect of self-doped polyaniline/cellulose fibers (SPANI/CF) hybrid. Cellulose 2015; 22(4): 2641–2650.

67.

Moutsatsou

Coopman

Smith

, et al. Conductive PANI fibers and determining factors for the electrospinning window. Polymer 2015; 77: 143–151.

68.

Saini

Arora

Gupta

, et al. High permittivity polyaniline–barium titanate nanocomposites with excellent electromagnetic interference shielding response. Nanoscale 2013; 5(10): 4330–4336.

69.

Mohan

Varma

Faisal

, et al. Polyaniline/graphene hybrid film as an effective broadband electromagnetic shield. RSC Adv 2015; 5(8): 5917–5923.

70.

Chen

Yip

, et al. Electromagnetic interference shielding efficiency of polyaniline composites filled with graphene decorated with metallic nanoparticles. Compos Sci Technol 2013; 80: 80–86.

71.

Zhang

Yang

, et al. Tunable electromagnetic interference shielding ability in a one-dimensional bagasse fiber/polyaniline heterostructure. ACS Appl Polym Mater 2019; 1(4): 737–745.

72.

Khasim

. Polyaniline-graphene nanoplatelet composite films with improved conductivity for high performance X-band microwave shielding applications. Results Phys 2019; 12: 1073–1081.

73.

Kumar

, et al. Synthesis and characterization of hybrid PANI/MWCNT nanocomposites for EMI applications. Polym Compos 2018; 39(11): 3858–3868.

74.

Zhang

Qiu

, et al. A novel polyaniline-coated bagasse fiber composite with core–shell heterostructure provides effective electromagnetic shielding performance. ACS Appl Mater Interface 2017; 9(1): 809–818.

75.

Bora

Vinoy

Ramamurthy

, et al. Electromagnetic interference shielding efficiency of MnO₂ nanorod doped polyaniline film. Mater Res Exp 2017; 4(2): 025013.

76.

Bora

Vinoy

Ramamurthy

, et al. Electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness of polyaniline-nickel oxide coated cenosphere composite film. Compos Commun 2017; 4: 37–42.

77.

Ismail

Rafeeq

Sulaiman

JMA

, et al. Electromagnetic interference shielding and microwave absorption properties of cobalt ferrite CoFe₂O₄/polyaniline composite. Appl Phys A 2018; 124(5): 380.

78.

Faisal

Giri

Sood

. Polyaniline-coated SnO/Y₂O₃ nanocomposites for broadband EMI shielding and microwave absorption. Mater Today Proc 2017; 4(11, Part 3): 12039–12044.

79.

Gairola

Kumar

, et al. Barium ferrite and graphite integrated with polyaniline as effective shield against electromagnetic interference. Synthetic Metals 2016; 221: 326–331.

80.

Bora

Shahidsha

Madras

, et al. Novel poly (vinyl butyral) (PVB)/polyaniline-cenosphere composite film for EMI shielding. AIP Conf Proc 2016; 1728(1): 020646.

81.

Joon

Kumar

Singh

, et al. Fabrication and microwave shielding properties of free standing polyaniline-carbon fiber thin sheets. Mater Chem Phys 2015; 160: 87–95.

82.

Gupta

Singh

Mathur

, et al. Multi-walled carbon nanotube-graphene-polyaniline multiphase nanocomposite with superior electromagnetic shielding effectiveness. Nanoscale 2014; 6(2): 842–851.

83.

Singh

Mishra

Sambyal

, et al. Encapsulation of gamma-Fe₂O₃ decorated reduced graphene oxide in polyaniline core-shell tubes as an exceptional tracker for electromagnetic environmental pollution. J Mater Chem A 2014; 2(10): 3581–3593.

84.

Yun

Kim

H-I

, et al. Effect of oxyfluorination on electromagnetic interference shielding of polyaniline-coated multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Colloid Polym Sci 2011; 289(15): 1749–1755.

A review of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF),polyurethane (PU),and polyaniline (PANI) composites-based materials for electromagnetic interference shielding

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Mechanism of EMI shielding effectiveness

Polymeric composites-based EMI shielding materials

PVDF composites-based EMI shielding materials

PU composites-based EMI shielding materials

PANI composites-based EMI shielding materials

Conclusion

Footnotes

Funding

ORCID iD

References