Why printed-film conductivity depends on print direction and platelet alignment in graphene nanoplatelet systems

Introduction

Printed-film conductivity depends on print direction because Graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs, few-layer graphene, FLG nanosheets) form anisotropic percolating networks that align with shear and extensional flow during printing, producing directional conductive pathways. Alignment changes the contact area and overlap between platelets, so current prefers paths parallel to the platelet planes where in-plane conductivity and tunnelling gaps are smallest. The mechanism combines directional hydrodynamic orientation during deposition, aspect-ratio-dependent percolation, and contact resistance set by platelet edge defects and surface chemistry; boundary conditions include platelet lateral size, solids loading, ink rheology, and drying/consolidation kinetics. If these boundaries are not met (for example low aspect ratio, low loading, or rapid randomizing drying) alignment is weak and conductivity becomes isotropic or dominated by hopping/tunnelling through matrix. Therefore, print direction effects are largest when platelet aspect ratio and concentration place the system near the percolation threshold and when shear/strain during printing is sufficient to reorient platelets. Unknowns or limits for this explanation include exact percolation fraction for a given GNP batch (depends on lateral size distribution and defect density) and the quantitative relation between shear rate and orientation distribution for a specific ink formulation.

Read more on the material page: https://www.greatkela.com/en/product/Carbon_Allotropes/242.html

Common Failure Modes

• Failure: Strong in-plane conductivity in machine direction but weak cross-direction conductivity observed on finished film. Mechanism mismatch: shear-induced alignment during printing produces anisotropic platelet orientation and continuous pathways only along the print direction, leaving perpendicular directions reliant on higher-resistance inter-platelet contacts or tunnelling gaps. See also: Why GNP Inks Improve Print Definition Compared to Carbon Black.
• Failure: Large sample-to-sample variability in sheet resistance across nominally identical prints. Mechanism mismatch: small variations in solids loading, nanoplatelet aggregation, or drying rate alter percolation connectivity because percolation is steep near threshold; uncontrolled aggregation reduces effective aspect ratio and raises local percolation threshold. See also: Why GNP Inks Reduce Nozzle Clogging Compared to CNTs.
• Failure: Conductivity falls after post-processing (thermal cycling or mechanical flexing). Mechanism mismatch: bonded or near-contact platelet networks formed during drying are disrupted either by differential thermal expansion and interfacial debonding (separating contacts) or by mechanical rearrangement that reduces face-to-face overlap; where contacts rely on weak van der Waals forces or polymer-filled gaps, these changes increase contact resistance.
• Failure: Localized non-conductive zones aligned with print overlap or start/stop regions. Mechanism mismatch: transient flow patterns (eddies, recirculation) and variable shear at print head acceleration produce regions of poor orientation and/or differential solvent evaporation that lock in lower local filler connectivity.

Conditions That Change the Outcome

Primary Drivers

• Variable: Platelet lateral size and aspect ratio. Why it matters: larger lateral size increases probability of face-to-face overlap and lowers percolation threshold because long platelets span larger volumes, therefore alignment produced by shear more effectively creates continuous, low-resistance in-plane networks.
• Variable: Solids loading (wt% or vol%). Why it matters: because percolation behavior is nonlinear near threshold; small changes in loading change whether conductivity is dominated by direct platelet contacts (alignment-sensitive) or by tunnelling through matrix (less direction-dependent).
• Variable: Ink rheology and shear rate during printing. Why it matters: shear and extensional flow orient platelets; at sufficiently high shear stresses alignment increases, but if stresses exceed platelet fracture or promote comminution (depends on platelet quality and solvent), net alignment benefits may be reduced; the outcome depends on the balance of orientation versus damage.

Secondary Drivers

• Variable: Drying and consolidation kinetics. Why it matters: slow controlled drying permits platelet rearrangement and contact consolidation (reducing contact resistance) while fast solvent removal can lock in a disordered network or cause aggregation that raises tunnelling gaps.
• Variable: Surface chemistry / functionalization. Why it matters: inter-platelet contact resistance and interfacial adhesion to the polymer depend on functional groups and surfactants; insulating coatings or excessive surfactant increase tunnelling distance and reduce effective conductivity regardless of alignment.

How This Differs From Other Approaches

• Shear-orientation mechanism: alignment occurs via hydrodynamic torques and extensional flow during deposition; conductive pathways develop primarily through increased face-to-face overlap and reduced interplatelet gaps along the flow axis.
• Percolation-hopping mechanism: at lower loadings or with poor contacts, conductivity is dominated by electron tunnelling or hopping between discrete platelets; orientation changes tunnelling distances anisotropically but does not create continuous metallic-like paths.
• Aggregation-driven network formation: when platelets aggregate into clusters prior to or during drying, connectivity becomes cluster-limited rather than orientation-limited; cluster connectivity follows a different geometric percolation than dispersed-aligned platelets.
• Contact-resistance-limited conduction: when interfaces (edges, functional groups, polymer layers) dominate resistance, changes in overlapping area (mechanical contact) govern conductivity more than bulk platelet alignment; alignment matters only insofar as it changes the number and quality of contacts.

Scope and Limitations

• Applies to: printed polymer films and coatings where Graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs / FLG nanosheets) are the dominant conductive phase and where printing imposes shear or extensional flow (e.g., blade-coating, slot-die, screen, inkjet with shear during spreading).
• Does not apply to: bulk-mixed, isotropically cured composites where subsequent processing (e.g., intense mixing, extrusion) erases any print-imposed orientation, or to systems where a continuous metallic grid or vapor-deposited conductor dominates conduction.
• Results may not transfer when: platelet lateral size distribution, defect density, or surface chemistry differs substantially from the batch described (because percolation fraction and contact resistance change); when polymer matrix viscosity or drying conditions are outside the operating window that allows platelet mobility.
• Physical / chemical pathway: absorption of shear/strain energy orients rigid platelets because hydrodynamic torque overcomes rotational Brownian motion; as a result aligned platelets increase in-plane face-to-face overlap and reduce interplatelet tunnelling distance, therefore the effective percolation network becomes anisotropic. Energy conversion steps separated: (1) flow field applies mechanical torque (orientation), (2) particle translation and overlap create contacts (network formation), (3) solvent removal consolidates contacts and sets interfacial contact resistance (electronic pathway formation).
• Separate absorption, energy conversion, material response: because printing flow inputs mechanical energy, platelets reorient (absorption → orientation), contacts form and are changed by chemical surface states (conversion → contact resistance set by chemistry and defects), and the polymer matrix response during drying (viscosity increase, capillary forces) locks the network geometry (material response → final anisotropic conductivity).
• When unknowns remain: specific percolation threshold and quantitative alignment vs shear-rate relation must be measured for the specific GNP batch and ink; do not assume values from different suppliers or different lateral-size distributions.

Related Links

Application page: Functional Inks & Printing

Failure Modes

• Why GNP Inks Improve Print Definition Compared to Carbon Black
• Why GNP Inks Reduce Nozzle Clogging Compared to CNTs
• Drying rate and solvent effects on conductivity drift in printed films with Graphene nanoplatelets

Key Takeaways

• Printed-film conductivity depends on print direction.
• Failure: Strong in-plane conductivity in machine direction but weak cross-direction conductivity observed on finished film.
• Variable: Platelet lateral size and aspect ratio.

Engineer Questions

Q: What print variables should I measure to predict conductivity anisotropy?

A: Measure platelet lateral size distribution and aspect ratio, solids loading (vol% or wt%), ink shear viscosity and shear-rate profile at the print head, drying rate (solvent loss curve), and sheet resistance in both machine and cross directions; these inputs determine orientation, percolation proximity, and contact consolidation.

Q: How does platelet aggregation prior to printing change directional conductivity?

A: Aggregation reduces effective aspect ratio and creates cluster-limited connectivity so orientation produced by shear has less effect because clusters reorient as rigid bodies less effectively and intercluster gaps increase tunnelling distances, therefore anisotropy decreases while overall connectivity often worsens.

Q: Can I eliminate print-direction dependence by increasing filler loading?

A: Increasing loading generally moves the system further above the percolation threshold and can reduce orientation sensitivity, but excessive loading often increases aggregation, viscosity and film defects; as a result, anisotropy may be reduced in many cases, but this trade-off depends on the specific matrix, processing window, and dispersion quality.

Q: What role do surfactants or dispersants play in anisotropic conductivity?

A: Surfactants stabilize dispersed platelets and prevent aggregation but they also introduce insulating layers that increase tunnelling distance and contact resistance; because alignment by shear increases contact area only if contact resistance is low, surfactant chemistry must be optimized to balance dispersion vs interplatelet conductivity.

Q: How should I design a test to separate alignment vs aggregation effects on conductivity?

A: Prepare samples with identical loading and solvent but varied shear histories (e.g., static cast, low-shear coating, high-shear coating) and measure platelet dispersion (microscopy), orientation distribution (X-ray scattering or polarized Raman), and directional sheet resistance; correlation across these measurements distinguishes orientation-driven anisotropy from aggregation-dominated loss.

Q: When will thermal post-treatment change anisotropy?

A: Thermal annealing can remove residual solvents and some surface groups, increasing contact quality and lowering contact resistance; because annealing modifies interfacial chemistry and relaxes stresses, anisotropy may decrease if cross-direction contacts improve, but thermal budgets must respect matrix stability and platelet oxidation limits.