No Access

CuO polymeric composite films

Department of Physics, College of Science, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, P. O. Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author

B. M. Alotaibi

Department of Physics, College of Science, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, P. O. Box 84428, Riyadh 11671, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author

A. Atta

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7553-8524

Physics Department, College of Science, Jouf University, P. O. Box 2014, Sakaka, Saudi Arabia

E-mail Address: aamahmad@ju.edu.sa

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

E. Abdeltwab

Physics Department, College of Science, Jouf University, P. O. Box 2014, Sakaka, Saudi Arabia

Search for more papers by this author

, and

M. M. Abdelhamied

Radiation Physics Department, National Center for Radiation Research and Technology (NCRRT), Egyptian Atomic Energy Authority (EAEA), Cairo, Egypt

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S021797922550119XCited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

The composite (PPy/CuO) films are created using the solution casting solution method by mixing the polymer polypyrrole (PPy) with copper oxide nanoparticles (CuONPs) at different concentrations of CuO (4%, 6% and 8%). The XRD confirms the effective fabrication of the composite (PPy/CuO). The impact of CuO on the optical and structural characteristics was studied. The addition of CuO enhances the refractive indices ( $n_{o})$ $n_{o})$ of PPy from 1.42 for pure PPy to 1.55 for PPy with 4% CuO, and further to 1.69 for PPy with 8% CuO. The dispersion energy of pure polypyrrole (PPy) is 4.55eV, which increased to 5.31eV when doped with 4% CuO. Furthermore, the increasing of CuO concentration to 6% and 8% resulted in higher dispersion energies, respectively, of 5.87 and 6.14eV. The oscillation energy $E_{0}$ $E_{0}$ decreased from 4.43eV for PPy to 3.76, 3.41 and 3.25eV for PPy/4%CuO, PPy/6%CuO and PPy/8%CuO, correspondingly. The introduction of CuO into the PPy polymer results in modifications to its optical characteristics. Additionally, there was an observed rise in the plasma frequency from $0.04 \times 1 0^{14}$ $0.04 \times 1 0^{14}$ $s^{- 1}$ $s^{- 1}$ for PPy to $0.14 \times 1 0^{14}$ $0.14 \times 1 0^{14}$ $s^{- 1}$ $s^{- 1}$ for PPy/8%CuO. The findings of this study offer empirical support for the possible use of PPy/CuO films in optical devices.

Keywords:

PACS: 72.80.Tm

You currently do not have access to the full text article.
Recommend the journal to your library today!

References

1. M. Rabia et al., Coatings 13, 1240 (2023). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
2. R. K. Rimpi et al., Polym. Sci. Ser. B 65, 700 (2023). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
3. H. M. Ragab et al., J. Inorg. Organomet. Polym. Mater. 34, 1 (2024). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
4. A. Atta et al., Int. J. Energy Res. 46, 6702 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
5. A. M. Elbasiony et al., J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 08927057241251835 (2024). Web of Science, Google Scholar
6. R. K. Sendi et al., Opt. Quantum Electron. 55, 1203 (2023). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
7. B. H. Rabee , Eur. J. Sci. Res. 57, 583 (2011). Google Scholar
8. T. A. Taha et al., Polym. Bull. 76, 4769 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
9. B. M. Alotaibi et al., Inorg. Chem. Commun. 144, 109904 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
10. N. A. Althubiti et al., Inorg. Chem. Commun. 137, 109229 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
11. S. Krishnaswamy et al., Optik 194, 163034 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
12. S. Kamal et al., Polym. Compos. 41, 3758 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
13. A. Radhakrishnan et al., Main Group Met. Chem. 38, 133 (2015). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
14. G. K. Sidhu and R. Kumar , IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 360, 012038 (2018). Crossref, Google Scholar
15. P. Moarref et al., Des. Monomers Polym. 19, 138 (2016). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
16. K. Malook, M. Khan and M. Ali , J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Electron. 30, 3882 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
17. M. M. Abdelhamied et al., J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Electron. 31, 22629 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
18. A. Farooq, M. H. Saleem and B. J. Ahmed , Eurasia J. Biosci. 14, 2969 (2020). Google Scholar
19. Y. Ma et al., Chem. Pap. 73, 119 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
20. A. Radhakrishnan, P. Rejani and B. Beena , Int. J. Nano Dimens. 5, 519 (2014). Google Scholar
21. N. Bouazizi et al., Adv. Mater. Lett. 6, 158 (2015). Crossref, Google Scholar
22. D. Majumdar and S. Ghosh , J. Energy Storage 34, 101995 (2020). Crossref, Google Scholar
23. M. M. Abdelhamied et al., Inorg. Chem. Commun. 133, 108926 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
24. R. Allen et al., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 6, 9966 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
25. A. Atta et al., J. Inorg. Organomet. Polym. Mater. 33, 1 (2023). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
26. X. Zhang et al., J. Materiomics 6, 339 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
27. S. Roy et al., J. Inorg. Organomet. Polym. Mater. 27, 257 (2017). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
28. B. B. Patel, M. Revanasiddappa and D. R. Rangaswamy , J. Electron. Mater. 51, 6937 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
29. M. Aslam, M. A. Kalyar and Z. A. Raza , Polym. Bull. 78, 1551 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
30. D. Jundale et al., J. Sens. Technol. 1, 34 (2011). Google Scholar
31. R. S. Shinde et al., J. Inorg. Organomet. Polym. Mater. 32, 1 (2022). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
32. A. K. Zak et al., Solid State Sci. 13, 251 (2011). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
33. S. A. Kakil et al., J. Korean Phys. Soc. 72, 561 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
34. Z. A. Alrowaili et al., J. Inorg. Organomet. Polym. Mater. 31, 3101 (2021). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
35. P. M. Z. Hasan et al., Diam. Relat. Mater. 140, 110425 (2023). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
36. S. Banerjee and A. Kumar , Nucl. Instrum. Meth. Phys. Res. B, Beam Interact. Mater. At. 269, 2798 (2011). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
37. T. Taha, Z. Ismail and M. Elhawary , Appl. Phys. A 124, 307 (2018). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
38. H. Donya et al., J. Mater. Res. Technol. 9, 9189 (2020). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
39. M. Abd El-Rahman, K. M. Yassien and A. A. Yassene , Optik 183, 962 (2019). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
40. R. Kandulna et al., Optik 292, 171393 (2023). Crossref, Google Scholar
41. S. R. Alharbi and K. F. A. El-Rahman KFA , Chalcogenide Lett. 14, 529 (2017). Web of Science, Google Scholar
42. J. H. Al-Zahrani, M. El-Hagary and A. El-Taher , Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. 39, 74 (2015). Crossref, Google Scholar
43. M. M. El-Nahass, A. A. M. Farag and F. Abd-El-Salam , Appl. Surf. Sci. 255, 9439 (2009). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
44. T. K. Hamad , Al-Nahrain J. Sci. 16, 164 (2013). Google Scholar
45. T. J. Alwan , Turk. J. Phys. 36, 377 (2012). Google Scholar
46. A. M. El Sayed et al., Polym. Compos. 35, 1842 (2014). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
47. I. Saadeddin et al., Appl. Surf. Sci. 253, 5240 (2007). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
48. M. Frumar et al., J. Non-Cryst. Solids 326, 399 (2003). Crossref, Web of Science, ADS, Google Scholar
49. H. Ticha and L. Tichy , J. Optoelectron. Adv. Mater. 4, 381 (2002). Web of Science, Google Scholar
50. D. R. Kanis et al., Chem. Mater. 3, 19 (1991). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar