Back to SWCNT index

Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes: Why EMI coatings lose conductivity after humidity and corrosion exposure

Direct Answer

Direct answer: SWCNT-based EMI coatings lose conductivity under humidity and corrosion because oxidizing species, ionic ingress, and interfacial corrosion sever percolating carbon–carbon contacts and introduce insulating functionalization or salts that raise contact resistance.

Evidence anchor: Engineers routinely observe progressive sheet resistance rise and loss of shielding effectiveness in SWCNT coatings after salt spray, humidity soak, or electrochemical corrosion testing.

Why this matters: Loss of percolation and contact integrity in SWCNT coatings directly reduces EMI shielding and can trigger local overheating in battery cells, therefore understanding mechanisms is necessary for reliable coating design.

Introduction

Core mechanism: Oxidation and ionic/corrosive species disrupt the conductive percolating network by chemically modifying tubes, depositing insulating salts, and corroding metal interfaces that maintain electrical continuity.

Water uptake and surfactant or polymer dispersant swelling increase inter-tube distance and physically weaken contacts while corrosion products (metal oxides/hydroxides) grow into the network.

Physical consequence: Electrical continuity in SWCNT coatings therefore depends on dense, low-resistance carbon–carbon contacts and low interfacial resistance, so any chemical functionalization or insulating film increases electron scattering and contact resistance.

Boundary condition: This explanation applies when SWCNTs form the primary conductive pathway in percolated coatings and does not describe systems dominated by continuous metallic conduction.

What limits the process kinetically is the accessibility of oxidants/ions and the activation energies for covalent functionalization or metal corrosion, which slow or prevent rapid wholesale breakdown in protected architectures.

Once oxidation or deposited salts separate tube contacts or create insulating layers, those changes are often kinetically stable at ambient conditions and can persist until removed by mechanical or chemical treatment; partial recovery after stronger thermal annealing or chemical reduction has also been reported depending on the modification severity.

Read an overview of the material: https://www.greatkela.com/en/use/electronic_materials/SWCNT/210.html
Read the application details (EMI Shielding & Conductive Coatings): https://www.greatkela.com/en/use/electronic_materials/SWCNT/261.html

Common Failure Modes

Observed failure

Mechanism mismatch

Why it happens physically

Conditions That Change the Outcome

hydrophobic)

Ionic strength and salt species (Cl-, SO4^2-)

Presence and form of metal residues/catalysts (nanoparticles, exposed current collectors)

Temperature and humidity cycling (thermal/hygro cycles)

pH and oxidant concentration (acidic or oxidative environments)

How This Differs From Other Approaches

Approach

Mechanism difference

Scope and Limitations

Engineer Questions

How does residual surfactant or polymer dispersant affect long-term conductivity under humidity? A: Residual dispersants change outcome because hydrophilic coatings absorb water and swell, therefore increasing inter-tube spacing and enabling ionic transport that raises contact resistance and promotes salt deposition.

Can oxidation of SWCNTs under battery-relevant conditions be reversible by drying or mild anneal? A: Typically oxidation-induced covalent defects are kinetically stable at room temperature and not fully reversed by drying; however, partial restoration of conductivity has been reported with stronger thermal annealing or chemical reduction under controlled conditions, so reversibility depends on the oxidation severity and treatment applied.

Which is the dominant route to contact loss: salt deposition or tube functionalization? A: Dominance depends on exposure: neutral humid/saline environments often first cause ionic deposition and increased tunneling barriers at contacts, whereas strongly oxidative environments (e.g., peroxides, low pH) accelerate covalent functionalization that degrades tube sp2 structure.

How do metal catalyst residues influence corrosion-driven conductivity loss? A: Metal residues can act as local electrochemical sites and change behavior by accelerating localized corrosion and oxide growth at tube–metal junctions, therefore creating insulating barriers that sever conduction paths in some cases.

Will thicker SWCNT coatings resist conductivity loss from humidity better than thin coatings? A: Not necessarily, because thicker porous coatings can trap more moisture and salts and create internal sites for corrosion; packing density and impermeability matter more than thickness alone.

What processing controls should be prioritized to reduce humidity-related conductivity loss? A: Prioritize minimizing residual surfactant, reducing exposed metal residues, increasing coating packing density or adding impermeable barrier layers, and selecting hydrophobic matrix chemistries because each reduces ionic ingress or the chemical reactivity that severs tube contacts.

Related links

comparative-analysis

cost-analysis

decision-threshold

degradation-mechanism

design-tradeoff

failure-mechanism

mechanism-exploration

performance-limitation

physical-limitation

Last updated: 2026-01-18

Change log: 2026-01-18 — Initial release.