Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 52, Issue 19, pp 11774–11784 | Cite as

Preparation and characterization of highly conductive polyurethane composites containing graphene and gold nanoparticles

  • Nuha Y. Al-Attabi
  • Gagan Kaur
  • Raju Adhikari
  • Peter Cass
  • Mark Bown
  • Meg Evans
  • Pathiraja Gunatillake
  • François Malherbe
  • Aimin Yu
Polymers

Abstract

Two series of gold nanoparticles/graphene/polyurethane composite films were prepared using a solution mixing method. The first series was of constant loading of graphene/polyurethane with varying levels of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs), while the second was of varying graphene content with constant loading of AuNPs. The electrical conductivity of the AuNPs/graphene/polyurethane composites was determined using the two-point probe method. For the first series, a maximum conductivity of 0.424 S cm−1 was achieved with a 5% AuNPs/5% graphene/polyurethane composite, and for the second, a maximum conductivity of 1.388 S cm−1 was achieved with a 5% AuNPs/15% graphene/polyurethane composite. The composites were characterized by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, differential scanning calorimetry, thermogravimetric analysis, and tensile testing methods. Tensile strengths and thermogravimetric analyses showed, respectively, acceptable mechanical properties and thermal stability of the parent polyurethanes. Furthermore, cytotoxicity assay tests evidenced that AuNPs/graphene/polyurethane composites were not cytotoxic to living cells in vitro and, consequently, potentially useful in biomedical applications.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Dr Ajay Padsalgikar of St Jude Medical for providing Elast-Eon™ samples and Mark Greaves for his help with performing SEM.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no significant financial support for this work that could have influenced its outcome.

References

  1. 1.
    Jagur-Grodzinski J (2012) Biomedical applications of electrically conductive polymeric systems. e-Polymers 12(1):722–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Granström M, Inganäs O (1995) Electrically conductive polymer fibres with mesoscopic diameters: 1. Studies of structure and electrical properties. Polymer 36(15):2867–2872CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kim DH et al (2007) Effect of immobilized nerve growth factor on conductive polymers: electrical properties and cellular response. Adv Funct Mater 17(1):79–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaur G et al (2015) Electrically conductive polymers and composites for biomedical applications. RSC Adv 5(47):37553–37567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang W et al (2014) One-pot fabrication and thermoelectric properties of Ag nanoparticles–polyaniline hybrid nanocomposites. RSC Adv 4(51):26810–26816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gunatillake PA et al (2003) Designing biostable polyurethane elastomers for biomedical implants. Aust J Chem 56(6):545–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gunatillake PA et al (2000) Poly (dimethylsiloxane)/poly (hexamethylene oxide) mixed macrodiol based polyurethane elastomers. I. Synthesis and properties. J Appl Polym Sci 76(14):2026–2040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gogolewski S (1989) Selected topics in biomedical polyurethanes. A review. Colloid Polym Sci 267(9):757–785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kathalewar MS et al (2013) Non-isocyanate polyurethanes: from chemistry to applications. RSC Adv 3(13):4110–4129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hsu S-H, Tang C-M, Tseng H-J (2008) Gold nanoparticles induce surface morphological transformation in polyurethane and affect the cellular response. Biomacromolecules 9(1):241–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shukla R et al (2005) Biocompatibility of gold nanoparticles and their endocytotic fate inside the cellular compartment: a microscopic overview. Langmuir 21(23):10644–10654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Daniel M-C, Astruc D (2004) Gold nanoparticles: assembly, supramolecular chemistry, quantum-size-related properties, and applications toward biology, catalysis, and nanotechnology. Chem Rev 104(1):293–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Matte HR, Subrahmanyam K, Rao C (2009) Novel magnetic properties of graphene: presence of both ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic features and other aspects. J Phys Chem C 113(23):9982–9985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sun X et al (2013) Developing polymer composite materials: carbon nanotubes or graphene? Adv Mater 25(37):5153–5176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Potts JR et al (2011) Graphene-based polymer nanocomposites. Polymer 52(1):5–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mittal V, Nuzzo R, Kroto H (2012) Polymer-graphene nanocomposites. Royal Society of Chemistry, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stankovich S et al (2006) Graphene-based composite materials. Nature 442(7100):282–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kaur G et al (2015) Graphene/polyurethane composites: fabrication and evaluation of electrical conductivity, mechanical properties and cell viability. RSC Adv 5(120):98762–98772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hsu S-H, Lin Z-C (2004) Biocompatibility and biostability of a series of poly(carbonate)urethanes. Colloids Surf B 36(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shan C et al (2010) Graphene/AuNPs/chitosan nanocomposites film for glucose biosensing. Biosens Bioelectron 25(5):1070–1074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Simmons A et al (2004) Long-term in vivo biostability of poly(dimethylsiloxane)/poly(hexamethylene oxide) mixed macrodiol-based polyurethane elastomers. Biomaterials 25(20):4887–4900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Choi J et al (2013) Facile solvothermal preparation of monodisperse gold nanoparticles and their engineered assembly of ferritin-gold nanoclusters. Langmuir 29(50):15698–15703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Turcheniuk K, Boukherroub R, Szunerits S (2015) Gold–graphene nanocomposites for sensing and biomedical applications. J Mater Chem B 3(21):4301–4324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mudumba R, Padsalgikar AD, Littler SW (2006) Evaluation of aqueous extracts from Elast-Eon polymers for methylene dianiline (MDA) by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Aust J Chem 58(12):845–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hernandez R et al (2008) In vitro oxidation of high polydimethylsiloxane content biomedical polyurethanes: correlation with the microstructure. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 87(2):546–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Polavarapu L et al (2009) Optical-limiting properties of oleylamine-capped gold nanoparticles for both femtosecond and nanosecond laser pulses. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 1(10):2298–2303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ramaraj B (2007) Electrical and mechanical properties of thermoplastic polyurethane and polytetrafluoroethylene powder composites. Polym Plast Technol Eng 46(6):575–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Compton OC, Nguyen ST (2010) Graphene oxide, highly reduced graphene oxide, and graphene: versatile building blocks for carbon-based materials. Small 6(6):711–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ahmad R et al (2015) Nanocomposites of gold nanoparticles@ molecularly imprinted polymers: chemistry, processing, and applications in sensors. Chem Mater 27(16):5464–5478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zadeh EM et al (2014) Physical and thermal characterization of graphene oxide modified gelatin-based thin films. Polym Compos 35(10):2043–2049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Xu Y et al (2008) Flexible graphene films via the filtration of water-soluble noncovalent functionalized graphene sheets. J Am Chem Soc 130(18):5856–5857CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yousefi N et al (2012) Self-alignment and high electrical conductivity of ultralarge graphene oxide–polyurethane nanocomposites. J Mater Chem 22(25):12709–12717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rana S, Cho JW, Tan LP (2013) Graphene-crosslinked polyurethane block copolymer nanocomposites with enhanced mechanical, electrical, and shape memory properties. RSC Adv 3(33):13796–13803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kotzar G et al (2002) Evaluation of MEMS materials of construction for implantable medical devices. Biomaterials 23(13):2737–2750CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CSIRO ManufacturingClaytonAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Science Engineering and TechnologySwinburne University of TechnologyHawthornAustralia
  3. 3.CSIRO ManufacturingNorth RydeAustralia

Personalised recommendations