Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-018-8531-4

Enhanced electro-conductivity and multi-shielding performance

with copper, stainless steel and titanium coating onto PVA
impregnated cotton fabric
Shouxiang Jiang1 · Jiangtao Xu1 · Zhuoming Chen2 · Ronghui Guo3 · Dagang Miao4 · Linghui Peng1 ·
Yuxiang Wang1 · Songmin Shang1

Received: 23 November 2017 / Accepted: 4 January 2018

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
Samples of the woven cotton fabric are first modified with a continuous polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) thin film by using the pad-
ding method and then coated with copper (Cu), titanium and stainless steel (SS) respectively, by using a magnetron sputtering
system. The samples are then systematically characterized with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscope, X-ray diffractometer,
and scanning electron microscope. The infrared (IR), ultraviolet and electromagnetic interference shielding properties of the
samples are also well investigated, as well as the contact angle (CA), light transmittance and conductivity. The results show
that pretreatment with PVA can enlarge the light transmittance of cotton fabric. The metal coated PVA/cotton samples show
a better performance in electro-conductivity although there is a little bit decrease in other properties compared to the metal
coated cotton fabric. The Cu coated PVA/cotton sample has a higher electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness of
− 30 dB, a lower electrical resistivity of 5.49 × 10−6 Ω m, while the Cu coated cotton sample presents a higher IR reflection
rate about 25%, the SS coated cotton fabric show a higher CA of 128.2 °and UPF of 117.647. The excellent properties of
the coated cotton fabric mean that it is a promising electro-conductive and multi-shielding textile for smart applications.

1 Introduction electromagnetic radiation from the sun, such as through

ultraviolet (UV) and infrared (IR) rays, also has direct or
Smart textiles are fabrics that incorporate new technologies potential impacts on human health. Therefore, increasing
and sense stimuli such as electrical, thermal, chemical, and attention has been paid by the public to the shielding from
magnetic, from the external environment and provide new electromagnetic waves, due to the potentially dire results of
functions to the wearers [1, 2]. radiation on the human body [3–5]. Consequently, electro-
Nowadays, the development of wireless communications conductive fabric that can provide EMI shielding properties
technologies has led to the expansion in different usages has emerged due to public demand.
of electronic products, which has resulted in the serious Electro-conductive fabric is usually fabricated by deposit-
problem of electromagnetic interference (EMI). Moreover, ing conductive materials onto the fabric surface, which pro-
vides many benefits to the fabric, such as flexibility textile
machineries. In addition, electro-conductive fabric is very
* Shouxiang Jiang suitable for the fabrication of wearable intelligent textiles
kinor.j@polyu.edu.hk [6], for sensing [7, 8], pressure mapping imaging [9], wear-
1 able heating [10] and motion monitoring [11] application
Institute of Textiles and Clothing, the Hong Kong
Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China purpose. Moreover, conductive materials coated fabric can
2 also be used for IR [12, 13], UV [14] and electromagnetic
School of Fashion Technology, Shanghai University
of Engineering Science, Shanghai, China [15] shielding.
3 In recent decades, electro-conductive fabric has
College of Light Industry, Textile and Food Engineering,
Sichuan University, Chengdu, China attracted considerable attentions and has been extensively
4 studied by many researchers. Maiti et al. [16] fabricated
Industrial Research Institute of Nonwovens and Technical
Textiles, College of Textiles and Clothing, Qingdao electro-conductive polyester fabric by using a new method
University, Qingdao, China that combines an in situ chemical and electrochemical

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

polymerization process with polypyrrole. They reported In this study, electro-conductive fabric is fabricated by
that the effectiveness of the coated fabric to shield EMI is using a method that is a combination of padding and magne-
98%. Cohen David et al. [17] prepared electro-conductive tron sputtering. The samples are first impregnated with PVA
fabric by dip-coating cotton into poly(3-hexylthiophene). by using the padding method, and then coated with Cu, Ti
However, both the surface and volume resistivity of the and SS through magnetron sputtering. To fully investigate
coated fabric samples were reduced. Gan et al. [18] depos- the conductive properties of the fabric samples, tests are car-
ited copper–nickel–phosphorous (Cu–Ni–P) alloy onto the ried out with a scanning electron microscope (SEM), energy
surface of polyethylene terephthalate fabric, and found that dispersive X-ray spectroscope (EDX) and X-ray diffractom-
the shielding effectiveness of the alloy-coated fabric is eter (XRD). The electromagnetic, IR and UV shielding,
over 85 dB at a frequency that ranges from 100 MHz to contact angle (CA) and electrical conductivity properties
20 GHz. Egami et al. [6] fabricated electro-conductive are also evaluated.
fabric by immersing the fabric into a solution that con-
tained polypyrrole nanoparticles, and the result showed
that the surface resistivity of the prepared fabric is as high 2 Experimental
as 10 Ω cm which means that it is very durable. Hwang
et al. [19] knitted fabric by using bamboo yarn and stain- 2.1 Fabrication of electro‑conductive fabric
less steel (SS) filament, and found that the fabric has an
electromagnetic interference shielding effectiveness (EMI Plain woven cotton fabric (133 × 72 counts per square inch,
SE) of over 30 dB at a frequency that ranges from 2010 to 40 D × 40 D) which was used as the substrate was rinsed
2445 MHz. Woltornist et al. [20] used an interfacial trap- five times with deionized water followed by a ultrasonical
ping method to fabricate conductive fabric with the infu- cleaning process with acetone solution for 45 min, and then
sion of graphene/graphite which resulted in a fabric with dried in an oven at 50 °C for 12 h. The cleaned substrates
high electrical conductivity. The results of these research were then immersed into a PVA solution with a solid con-
works outlined here show that electro-conductive fabrics centration of 5% (degree of hydrolysis: 99%, polymeriza-
are a promising candidate for preventing EMI. tion degree: 1700, Beijing Chemical Co., Ltd.) for 60 s.
In more recent years, magnetron sputtering deposition Subsequently, the cotton fabric impregnated with PVA was
has been one of the most promising technologies for tex- treated by using a laboratory horizontal padder (model P-B0,
tiles modifications [21]. Woven fabrics are one of the basic Rapid) with a pressure of 1 kg/m2 at a temperature of 50 °C.
textiles used in daily life. However, there are few studies on The different metals (Cu, 99.99% purity; Ti, 99.99% purity;
the preparation of electro-conductive fabrics by using mag- and 304 SS) used as the target materials were respectively
netron sputtering on woven fabrics. This may be due to the deposited onto the PVA impregnated cotton and pure cot-
unique textile structure of these fabrics, because conductive ton fabric by using a magnetron sputtering system (ZZG/
materials deposited onto the surface of these fabrics by using JT-350; AOYI) at room temperature, and the samples were
magnetron sputtering cannot form a continuous film. named as Cu/PVA/cotton, Cu/cotton, Ti/PVA/cotton, Ti/
To solve the problem, here we proposed a method that a cotton, SS/PVA/cotton and SS/cotton. The film thickness
continuous film was firstly formed on the surface of cotton was controlled by an online measurement system and fixed
fabric then metal nanoparticles were deposited to realize the at 750 nm. The deposition process was conducted under a
fabrication of electro-conductive woven cotton fabric. base pressure of 5 × 10−4 Pa, working pressure of 0.25 Pa,
Polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) is a common film forming mate- argon (Ar) gas flow rate of 100 sccm, and a target-substrate
rial with good biocompatibility and a polyhydroxy struc- distance of 10 cm. Figure 1 is a diagram of the preparation
ture which can provide properties of cross-linking with each process of the electro-conductive fabric.
other or cross-linked with other polar groups by hydrogen
bond [22]. It is widely used in the medical and textile fields 2.2 Characterization
[23, 24]. On the other hand, copper (Cu) is a metal with
excellent conductivity. Therefore, Cu has been deposited as 2.2.1 Chemical composition
a film onto many optical and electronic devices [25]. As
mentioned above, SS was used as a conductive material to Cu, Ti and SS were detected on the fabric samples by using
fabricate fabrics with EMI property. Moreover, titanium (Ti) an EDX detector equipped on the SEM (Tescan VEGA3).
is a conductive metal with excellent properties, such as high
thermal and chemical stability, high biocompatibility and 2.2.2 Crystal structure
low toxicity [26]. Therefore, it is instructive both environ-
mentally and practically to investigate the property of Cu, The crystal structure of the untreated and coated samples
Ti and SS coated conductive fabric. was characterized with a high resolution XRD (Rigaku

13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

Fig. 1  Schematic of the preparation of PVA impregnated cotton fabric by padding and sputtering

SmartLab) with Cu Kα radiation (λ = 0.154 nm) at a volt- wavelengths of 1.0–20 µm. IR images were recorded by
age of 45 kV and a current of 200 mA. The spectra were using a thermal infrared imaging device (FLIR-E33).
recorded in an angular range of 30°–80° with a scanning
speed of 5°/min. 2.2.8 Electrical conductivity and EMI

2.2.3 Surface observation The electrical resistivity was measured by using a four-probe

resistivity measurement system (Suzhou Jingge ST-2258A).
The surface morphology of the Cu, Ti and SS coated fabric The EMI SE of the samples was assessed at room temper-
sample was investigated by using a SEM (JEOL-6335F). ature at a frequency range of 300 kHz–1.8 GHz (X band
range) by using a vector network analyzer (Agilent E5063A
2.2.4 Contact angle ENA).

The CA was evaluated by using a contact angle meter (model

CAM-Moric; Tantec Inc.). Samples (2.0 cm × 2.0 cm) were 3 Results and discussion
taken from the fabric samples and placed onto the observa-
tion platform. A water drop of 5 µl was placed onto each 3.1 Chemical composition analysis
sample and the CA was manually measured by manipulating
the protractor on the CA meter. Measurements were taken on The EDX patterns of the untreated and treated cotton fabrics
the water droplet 1 min after its placement. The results were are shown in Fig. 2. As shown in the figure, carbon (C) and
assessed by conducting the measurements on five different oxygen (O) are detected in all of the samples at 0.277 and
areas of five different fabric samples. 0.525 keV, respectively. Both elements are the components
of cotton (molecular formula: ­[C6H10O5]n; n is the polymeri-
2.2.5 Light transmittance zation degree) and PVA (molecular formula: ­[C2H4O]n). In
addition, C is a component of SS which can also be detected
The light transmittance was measured to evaluate the change as shown in Fig. 2d.
in the porosity of the fabric samples before and after treat- Peaks at 0.930, 8.048 and 8.905 keV are observed
ment by using a spectrophotometer (UH5300, Hitachi) over because of the deposited Cu film (Fig. 2b). In Fig. 2c, peaks
a wavelength range of 390–780 nm. at 4.511 and 4.932 keV which correspond to Ti elements are
also found. SS is an alloy; therefore, iron (Fe: 0.628, 6.404,
2.2.6 UV radiation penetration and 7.058 keV), chromium (Cr: 5.415, and 5.947 keV),
nickel (Ni: 0.851, 7.478 and 8.265 keV), and manganese
The UV transmittance of the samples was recorded in (Mn: 5.899 keV) peaks are all detected, as shown in Fig. 2d.
accordance with the British Standard BS EN 13758-1:2002- The EDX results indicate that Cu, Ti and SS particles were
10-01 by using a UV–vis spectrophotometer (Varian, Cary successfully deposited onto the cotton fabric.
300 Conc) over a wavelength of 280–400 nm.
3.2 Crystal structure analysis
2.2.7 IR shielding properties
The XRD patterns of the untreated and treated samples
A Perkin Elmer Spectrum 100 spectrophotometer was are shown in Fig. 3. A diffraction peak of the cotton fabric
used to assess the IR reflection of the coated fabrics at before and after treatment is found at 34.6° which belongs

13
 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

(a) 400 (b) 600

䖩
䕻
300 䖩

Counts/ (arb. unit)

Counts/ (arb. unit)

䖪: O 400
䖪: O
䕻㻦 㻯 䕻㻦 㻯
200
䖩㻦 㻯㼡

200
100
䖪
䖩
䕻䖪
0 0
2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10
Energy (keV) Energy (keV)

(c) 800 (d)

800 䕺
●
600
䖪: O
Counts/ (arb. unit)

Counts/ (arb. unit)

600 䕻㻦 㻯
䖪: O
䕻㻦 㻯 䕺㻦 㻲㼑
400 ●: Ti ▲: Cr
400 ▼: Ni
■: Mn
䖪 ▲
䖪
200 䕻 200 䕺
● 䕺▼
䕻▼ ■▲
▼
0 0
2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10
Energy (keV) Energy (keV)

Fig. 2  EDX patterns: a untreated cotton; b Cu/PVA/cotton; c Ti/PVA/cotton; and d SS/PVA/cotton

to the (040) lattice plane of cellulose I [27]. As shown in

Fig. 3b, no other peaks are observed, which suggests that the
PVA impregnated in the cotton fabric is an amorphous state.
It can also be found that the intensity of the peak at 34.6° is
reduced after the deposition of metal films in comparison to
the untreated cotton, thus indicating that Cu, Ti and SS are
coated onto the fabric.
For the Cu/cotton and Cu/PVA/cotton samples, differ-
ent peaks at 2θ of 43.3°, 50.4° and 74.1° which correspond
to lattice planes (111), (200) and (220) respectively are
detected in accordance with the PDF card (PDF#04-0836) of
Cu [28]. And the intensity of these two samples was similar,
indicating that the impregnation of PVA did not affect the
crystallation of Cu.
Obviously, no Ti and SS diffraction peaks can be found in
Fig. 3d, e, which indicate that the deposited Ti and SS films
remain in an amorphous form. This may be caused by the
inability of Ti and SS to crystallize at room temperature dur-
ing the deposition onto the cotton substrate. Moreover, the
Fig. 3  XRD patterns: (a) untreated cotton; (b) PVA impregnated cot-
ton; (c) Cu/cotton; (d) Cu/PVA/cotton; (e) Ti/cotton; (f) Ti/PVA/cot- intensity of the peak at 34.6° of the SS/PVA/cotton sample
ton; (g) SS/cotton and (h) SS/PVA/cotton is weak compared to the other samples. This is possibly due

13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

to the noise from fluorescent X-rays which can be generated cos 𝜃 ∗ = r cos 𝜃 (1)
when the mass absorption coefficient of the element does not where θ* is the apparent CA; θ denotes the Young CA as
match the X-ray wavelength, and then the X-rays generated defined for an ideal surface, and r stands for the surface
from the Cu Kα target are not suitable for analyzing SS that roughness.
contains Cr, Mn, Fe, Co and Ni [29]. According to the Wenzel model [31], when θ < 90°, θ*
decreases with increased surface roughness; when θ > 90°,
3.3 Surface morphology θ* increases with the increased surface roughness. There-
fore, the CA increases with increases in the surface rough-
As shown in Fig. 4A0 is the untreated cotton fabric. It can ness of the deposited metal film, which is consistent with the
be clearly seen that the surface has some curly grains and is images shown in Fig. 4.
rough, which is a natural phenomenon. Moreover, the fibers
are separate from each other, which show the uniqueness of
the structure of woven textiles. However, the cotton fibers 3.5 Light transmittance analysis
are adhered together by the PVA film, which is marked with
an arrow as shown in Fig. 4B0, after the padding process. The relative light transmittance of the fabrics with and
This adhesion of the fibers together can also be found in the without metal deposition was examined to assess the pores
other metal coated samples shown in Fig. 4B1–B3, while among the weft and warp yarns, as shown in Fig. 5. The
fibers of the metal coated samples without PVA pretreatment transmittance of the untreated cotton fabric was regarded
separated from each other, similarly with the untreated cot- as 100%; therefore, transmittance greater than 100% means
ton fabric under a low magnification view. that the porosity of the sample is higher and less than 100%
The images of metal coated samples under a high magni- means that the porosity is lower after treatment.
fication are also presented in Fig. 4. It can be seen that the In Fig. 5, it can be seen that the relative transmittance of
coated samples with PVA pretreatment look smoother than the PVA coated cotton fabric is higher than 100%, which
those without PVA pretreatment. It’s reported that a smooth may be caused by the coating process as it could adhere the
surface contributes to the formation of a smooth film during yarns fibers closely to each other, and then enlarge the pores.
the sputtering process [30]. However, the relative transmittances of all of the coated
It can be observed that the rough surface of the pure cot- samples with PVA impregnation is < 100% after the depo-
ton fabric became smoothly after PVA impregnation, due to sition of the different metals, while cotton fabric directly
a PVA film formed on the surface of cotton fiber. Therefore, coated with metals show a transmittance below 70%. This
the metal coated samples after impregnated with PVA seems is most likely caused by that the metal particles deposited
smoother. onto the surface and the gap between the different yarn fib-
The SEM images successfully proved that PVA film was ers, block, reflect and scatter light. This result reveals that
formed on the surface of cotton fiber, and different metals pores among the weft and warp yarns was enlarged after the
were deposited onto the surface of samples with and without padding process.
pretreatment of PVA.
3.6 UV radiation penetration
3.4 Contact angle
The UV transmittance of the samples is provided in Fig. 6.
The water repellency of the untreated and treated cotton The UV transmittance of cotton fabric modified by PVA is
samples was investigated by measuring the water CA. The increased, while that of the metal coated samples is reduced
CAs of the untreated and PVA modified cotton fabrics is to < 3%. There could be two reasons that have led to this
about 0°, because both cotton and PVA have a large number result. One is the change in the porosity of the samples, as
of hydroxyl groups which are hydrophilic. After deposi- discussed in the section on relative light transmittance. The
tion of the different metals, the CAs change significantly other is that the Cu, Ti and SS particles deposited onto the
as shown in Table 1, which may be attributed to the water- fabric surface reflect and scatter UV rays.
proof property of metal particles and high surface energy at The UPF is a crucial parameter for evaluating the amount
the nano-scale. It is obvious that the metal coated samples of UV protection provided by fabric, in which a higher UPF
without PVA pretreatment show higher CA and the highest value indicates greater protection. As shown in Fig. 7, the
CA of the treated samples is SS coated cotton fabric with a UPF of the samples is determined in accordance with British
CA of 128.2°. Standard BS EN 13758.
It has been reported in [13] that the surface roughness of The UPF value of the untreated and PVA treated cot-
a material also affects the hydrophobicity. As shown in the ton fabric samples show poor UV protection of 7.127 and
Wenzel equation below: 2.971 respectively. However, after coated with Cu, Ti and

13
 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

13
 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

◂Fig. 4  SEM images of samples: A0 untreated cotton; B0 PVA and the SS coated sample has the next best reflectivity,
impregnated cotton; A1 Cu/cotton; B1 Cu/PVA/cotton; A2 SS/cotton; while the Ti coated sample has a similar reflectivity as
B2 SS/PVA/cotton; A3 Ti/cotton; B3 Ti/PVA/cotton
the untreated cotton. Besides, it can also be found that the
samples pretreated with PVA perform a little better. This
SS, all the samples show excellent UV protection property, result is consistent with the analysis on IR shielding.
although there is a decrease for the coated samples pre-
treated with PVA, which was caused by the enlarged pores
among the weft and warp yarns after the padding process. 3.8 Conductivity and EMI shielding properties

3.7 Infrared shielding properties The EMI SE of the untreated and treated samples is
shown in Fig. 10. As shown in Fig. 10, the EMI SE of the
IR shielding was characterized by IR reflection rates that untreated cotton and PVA coated cotton samples is close
ranged from 1 to 20 µm which comprise most of the near-IR to 0 dB, thus indicating poor EMI shielding effect. For the
region and the radiation generated from other substances that metal coated PVA/cotton samples, the Cu coated sample
absorbs energy from sunlight. Figure 8 shows the IR reflec- shows a higher EMI SE that is less than − 30 dB, however,
tion rate of the prepared samples. The PVA modified cotton the Ti and SS coated samples have poor EMI shielding.
fabric shows poor IR reflectivity compared to the untreated For the metal coated cotton samples, the EMI SE is similar
cotton fabric; this is the primary result of the changes in with that of the untreated fabric.
porosity in the samples. Moreover, the samples coated with The explanation for these results can refer to Schelku-
Cu, Ti and SS show higher reflection rates. However, the noff’s theory where the relationship between EMI SE and
IR reflectivity of the Cu coated sample is the highest with resistivity was presented by an equation [32].
a reflection rate of 17–25%, while sample coated with Ti ( )1∕2
and SS shows a slight improvement with a reflection rate of SE(dB) = 50 + 10 log (𝜌 + f )−1 + 1.7 f∕𝜌
2.5–15 and 7–20% respectively. Nevertheless, it can also be
observed that the cotton fabric coated with metal nanopar- where ρ (Ω cm) denotes the resistivity of the electro-con-
ticles directly show a little higher reflection rate compar- ductive materials; and f (MHz) is the frequency [33]. There-
ing with the samples pretreated with PVA. This is due to fore, the electrical resistance is measured and provided in
two reasons: one, the variation in the porosity of the fabric Table 2. The resistivity of untreated cotton and PVA coated
samples affects the transmittance of IR rays and then the cotton samples cannot be determined by using current equip-
reflection rate, and the differences in the IR reflection rate ment, which means that they are non-conductive. Moreover,
of the different coated samples aligns with the results of the the samples directly coated with metal nanoparticles also
analysis on the relative light transmittance. showed a non-conductive performance which was caused by
Second, the crystallinity of the metal films deposited onto that all the fibers in these fabrics were separated from each
the fabric surface also impacts the reflection rate. It has been other hindering the formation of a continuous metal film, as
reported that IR reflection is the result of the interaction shown in the SEM images.
between IR electromagnetic waves and free electrons [29]; The surface electrical resistance of the Cu coated sam-
moreover, the IR reflection rate is largely determined by the ple is the lowest at 5.49 × 10 −6 Ω m, while the surface
concentration of free electrons. The crystallinity of the Cu resistivity of SS and Ti coated samples is 4.52 × 10−3 and
film is greater than that of the Ti and SS films, as discussed 5.6 × 10−3 Ω m, under the same film thickness.
in the analysis on the crystal structure. However, while the The EMI SE is relative to the resistivity of electro-
three different types of metal films have the same thickness, conductive materials; however, with reference to the EMI
the Cu coated samples have more free electrons. Therefore, SE curves, the EMI SE values of the SS and Ti coated
the IR reflectivity of the Cu coated sample excels that of the samples do not have a very large difference in comparison
Ti and SS coated samples. with the untreated cotton and PVA coated samples. This
Figure 9 shows the IR images of all the samples. All may be caused by the poor crystallinity of the Ti and SS
of the samples are placing on the human arm which is films or their higher resistivity. It can be observed that the
used as the IR source. As shown in the right of Fig. 9, the Cu coated PVA/cotton fabric can shield electromagnetic
marking on the right represents the temperature, and the waves at an EMI SE that is less than − 30 dB at a fre-
blue denotes a lowest temperature indicating a high IR quency range of 300 kHz–18 GHz. Thus, Cu coated PVA
shielding ability, while the yellow denotes the highest tem- impregnated cotton fabric has promise as an effective and
perature revealing a poor IR shielding ability. It is obvi- flexible type of textile for EMI shielding applications.
ous that the Cu coated sample has excellent IR reflectivity

13
 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

Table 1  CA of coated samples

Sample Cu/PVA/cotton SS/PVA/cotton Ti/PVA/cotton

CA (°) 118.4 117.2 95.2

Sample Cu/cotton SS/cotton Ti/cotton

CA (°) 120 128.2 100.4

Fig. 5  Relative light transmittance of samples

Fig. 7  UV protection factor of samples

Fig. 6  UV transmittance of samples

Fig. 8  Infrared reflection rate of samples

4 Conclusion
increase the porosity of fabrics and contributes to the for-
In the current study, electro-conductive woven fabric sam- mation of continuous metal film. The coated samples pre-
ples, impregnated with PVA and coated with Cu, SS and treated with PVA show an excellent performance in con-
Ti, have been successfully fabricated by using a combined ductivity and EMI, especially the Cu coated PVA/cotton
method of padding and magnetron sputtering. The experi- sample with a EMI SE of − 30 dB, a electrical resistivity of
mental results indicate that the PVA coating on fabric can 5.49 × 10−6 Ω m, a IR reflection rate about 20%, a UPF of
52.139 and a CA of 118.4°. While the best anti-ultraviolet

13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

Fig. 9  IR images of untreated and treated cotton fabrics: a untreated and coated samples without PVA impregnation, and b PVA impregnated
and coated samples pretreated with PVA. (Color figure online)

and water repellency properties belongs to SS coated cot-

ton with a UPF of 117.647 and a CA of 128.2°, and the
Cu coated samples exists the highest IR reflection rate of
25%. The metal coated samples with pre-impregnation of
PVA, which has a potential application in smart textile
such as sensor, IR stealth and antistatic textiles, provide
more excellent functions although there is a little decrease
compared with those without PVA pretreatment.

References
1. O.A. Stefan Schneegass, Smart Textiles: Fundamentals, Design,
and Interaction (Springer, New York, 2017), pp. 1–15
2. L. Chen et al., J. Mater. Chem. C 42, 10018 (2016)
3. D.C. Zhao, L.S. Zhang, Appl. Mech. Mater. 513, 3313 (2014)
Fig. 10  EMI SE of untreated and treated cotton samples 4. S.J. Genuis, Public Health 122, 113 (2008)
5. G. Redlarski et al., Biomed Res. Int. 2015, 1 (2015)
6. Y. Egami et al., Synth. Met. 161, 219 (2011)
7. J. Tsang et al., Effect of fabrication temperature on strain-sensing
Table 2  Electrical conductivity of coated samples capacity of polypyrrole-coated conductive fabrics. Polym. Int. 56,
827 (2007)
Sample Cu/PVA/cotton SS/PVA/cotton Ti/PVA/cotton
8. Y. Li et al., J. Mater. Sci. 15, 4093 (2005)
Resistivity (Ω m) 5.49 × 10−6 4.52 × 10−3 5.6 × 10−3 9. A. Yao, M. Soleimani, Sens. Rev. 32, 310 (2012)
10. L.R. Pahalagedara et al., RSC Adv. 7, 19174 (2017)

13
 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics

11. H. Jiyong et al., Autex Res. J. 16, 7 (2016) 23. H. Na et al., Polymer 53, 2736 (2012)
12. D. Miao et al., Vacuum 106, 1 (2014) 24. C. Lmm et al., Ind. Crops Prod. 41, 198 (2013)
13. D. Miao et al., Ceram. Int. 40, 12847 (2014) 25. K. Eun et al., Microelectron. Reliab. 55, 838 (2015)
14. L. Peng et al., J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Electron. 27, 5925 (2016) 26. J.C. Williams, Titanium (Springer, Berlin, 2007), pp. 15–17
15. R.R. Bonaldi, E. Siores, T. Shah, J. Fiber Bioeng. Inf. 2, 237 27. Y. Liu et al., Appl. Spectrosc. 8, 983 (2012)
(2010) 28. S.X. Jiang, R.H. Guo, Surf. Coat. Technol. 205, 4274 (2011)
16. S. Maiti, D. Das, K. Sen, Mater. Sci. Eng. B 187, 96 (2014) 29. R. Jenkins, Production and Properties X-Rays (Wiley, ‎Hoboken,
17. N. Cohen David et al., Polym. Adv. Technol. 5, 583 (2017) 1999), pp. 1–15
18. X. Gan et al., J. Alloys Compd. 455, 308 (2008) 30. S. Jiang et al., J. Mater. Sci.-Mater. Electron. 28, 3542 (2017)
19. P.W. Hwang et al., J Ind Text 44, 477 (2014) 31. S. Jiang et al., Ceram. Int. 2, 2424 (2017)
20. S.J. Woltornist et al., Carbon 81, 38 (2015) 32. F. Happ, F. Gronwald, H.D. Brüns, in IEEE International Sympo-
21. D. Miao et al., Ceram. Int. 41, 9177 (2015) sium on Electromagnetic Compatibility, Dresden, 2015, p. 1542
22. L. Costa et al., Ind. Crops Prod. 41, 198 (2013) 33. Y. Li et al., Fiber Polym. 10, 1657 (2013)

13