The Feasibility of Graphene-Based Defense Applications: An Industry Perspective

  • Antonio MiramontesEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the NATO Science for Peace and Security Series A: Chemistry and Biology book series (NAPSA)


Not all scientific research is innovation. New knowledge only becomes an innovation when it is transformed into products, processes and services that add value to the customers. If a new idea cannot be produced economically, or not be produced at all, it is just that: a new idea.

Schematic of a graphene sheet, showing the hexagonally arranged monolayer of carbon atoms (c)

Of course, scientific research does not need to reach the market to be highly valuable, but for an idea to be manufactured and fulfill a practical need it is important to take an industry perspective.

That is especially true for graphene, a new nanoscale material that is supposed to change many products and industries. However, while graphene research is gaining momentum by the day, graphene applications are lagging behind. In spite of the huge amount of resources invested worldwide and the thousands of patents filed each year, most applications are failing to deliver when it comes to scale up production and adjust to manufacturing conditions.

In particular, graphene-based defense applications show great potential. There is a lot of research going on and each result brings many new developments. The use of graphene for warfare agent detection could set a new standard for sensor devices. That is not only an opportunity, but also a major challenge for filling the gap between lab research and industry processes.

This chapter reviews some of the most important defense applications that could be radically improved by graphene, it also intends to map out some of the main constraints that are preventing graphene applications from being produced and commercialized.


Graphene Industry Defense 



I would like to thank for support and cooperation to my colleagues from Graphenemex.


  1. 1.
    Lee J-H, Loya PE, Lou J, Thomas EL (2014) Dynamic mechanical behavior of multilayer graphene via supersonic projectile penetration. Science 346(6213):1092–1096. ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lin X, He M, Liu J et al (2015) Fast adaptive thermal camouflage based on flexible VO2/graphene/CNT thin films. Nano Lett 15(12):8365–8370. ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu K, Zhang JF, Xu W et al (2015) Ultra-fast pulse propagation in nonlinear graphene/silicon ridge waveguide. Sci Rep.
  4. 4.
    Yu H, Chen X, Zhang H et al (2010) Large energy pulse generation modulated by graphene epitaxially grown on silicon carbide. CS Nano 4(12):7582–7586. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Singh E, Meyyappan M, Nalwa HS (2017) Flexible graphene-based wearable gas and chemical sensors. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 9(40):34544–34586. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    He H, Akbari M, Sydänheimo L et al (2017) 3D-Printed graphene antennas and interconnections for textile rfid tags: fabrication and reliability towards humidity Hindawi. Int J Antennas Propag 2017, Article ID 1386017:5Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Robinson JT, Perkins FK, Snow ES et al (2008) Naval research lab, Washington DC reduced graphene oxide molecular sensors defense technical information center. Accession number: ADA540573. Nano Lett 8(10):3137–3140ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sayago I, Matatagui D, Fernández MJ et al (2016) Graphene oxide as sensitive layer in love-wave surface acoustic wave sensors for the detection of chemical warfare agent simulants. Talanta 148(1):393–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ha S, Lee M, Seo HO et al (2017) Structural effect of thioureas on the detection of chemical warfare agent simulants. ACS Sens 2(8):1146–1151. Publication Date (Web): August 4, 2017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hwang HM et al (2016) Mesoporous non-stacked graphene-receptor sensor for detecting nerve agents. Sci Rep 6:33299. ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Olguin C, Laguarda-Miro N, Vidal Lluis PI et al (2014) An electronic nose for the detection of Sarin, Soman and Tabun mimics and interfering agents. Sensors Actuators B Chem 202:31–37. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Singh VV, Nigam AK, Yadav SS et al (2013) Graphene oxide as carboelectrocatalyst for in situ electrochemical oxidation and sensing of chemical warfare agent simulant. Sensors Actuators B Chem 188:1218–1224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wiederoder MS, Nallon EC, Weiss M et al Graphene nanoplatelet-polymer chemiresistive sensor arrays for the detection and discrimination of chemical warfare agent simulants. ACS Sens, Just Accepted Manuscript 2:1669–1678. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Quinton, Matthew J. Air Force Institute of Technology, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. Optimization of graphene biosensors to detect biological warfare agents. Accession Number: ADA598854. Thesis Mar 27, 2014Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ryu J, Lee E, Lee K, Jang J (2015) A graphene quantum dots based fluorescent sensor for anthrax biomarker detection and its size dependence. J Mater Chem B 24(3):4865–4870CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GraphenemexCiudad de MéxicoMexico

Personalised recommendations