Advertisement

Sustainable Polymeric Nanocomposites for Multifaceted Advanced Applications

  • Rituparna Duarah
  • Deepshikha Hazarika
  • Aditi Saikia
  • Rajarshi Bayan
  • Tuhin Ghosh
  • Niranjan KarakEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Materials Horizons: From Nature to Nanomaterials book series (MHFNN)

Abstract

In recent times, bio-based hyperbranched polymers have attracted tremendous interest in industrial and scientific research, owing to their promising and unique attributes over their synthetic conventional analogs. Industrially important bio-based hyperbranched polymers such as polyurethane, polyester, poly(ester-amide), and epoxy have been developed over the last two decades from Advanced Polymer and Nanomaterial Laboratory of Tezpur University. They are synthesized by the Ax + By (x, y ≥ 2) approach with or without solvent, following the dictates of “Green Chemistry.” Again, it is a well-known fact that “virginity is not virtue” in case of polymers and the conventional filled composite systems are inappropriate to improve the performance of such bio-based polymers and hence unable to meet the service demands of advanced applications. Thus, nanotechnology, in recent times, is adopted to develop a variety of nanocomposites of the above sustainable polymers with  different types of nanomaterials. The developed nanocomposites showed significant improvement of desired properties including mechanical, thermal, chemical, biological, optical, etc., along with special properties like shape memory, self-healing, self-cleaning, biocompatibility, etc. A brief overview of such sustainable materials including their applications from advanced air cleaning paints to injectable bone tissue scaffold including smart materials is discussed in this chapter.

Keywords

Bio-based polymer Hyperbranched structure Polyurethane Polyester Epoxy Nanocomposites Application 

References

  1. 1.
    Gogoi S, Kumar M, Mandal BB, Karak N (2015) High performance luminescent thermosetting waterborne hyperbranched polyurethane/carbon quantum dot nanocomposite with in vitro cytocompatibility. Compos Sci Technol 118:39–46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2015.08.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gogoi S, Maji D, Mishra S, Devi Maity T, Karak N (2017) Nano-bio engineered carbon dot-peptide functionalized water dispersible hyperbranched polyurethane for bone tissue regeneration. Macromol Biosci 17:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mabi.201600271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bayan R, Karak N (2017) Renewable resource modified polyol derived aliphatic hyperbranched polyurethane as a biodegradable and UV-resistant smart material. Polym Int 66:839–850.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.5323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ghosh T, Karak N (2018) Biobased multifunctional macroglycol containing smart thermoplastic hyperbranched polyurethane elastomer with intrinsic self-healing attribute. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 6:4370–4381.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.8b00001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dutta GK, Karak N (2018) One-pot synthesis of bio-based waterborne polyester as UV-resistant biodegradable sustainable material with controlled release attributes. ACS Omega 3:16812–16822.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b02790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hazarika D, Karak N (2015) Waterborne sustainable tough hyperbranched aliphatic polyester thermosets. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 3:2458–2468.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.5b00494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Konwar U, Karak N, Jana T (2012) Vegetable oil-based highly branched polyester modified epoxy based low VOC high solid industrial paint. J Appl Polym Sci 125:E2–E9.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.35370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Barua S, Dutta G, Karak N (2013) Glycerol based tough hyperbranched epoxy: synthesis, statistical optimization and property evaluation. Chem Eng Sci 95:138–147.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2013.03.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thakur S, Barua S, Karak N (2015) Self-healable castor oil based tough smart hyperbranched polyurethane nanocomposite with antimicrobial attribute. RSC Adv 5:2167–2176.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RA11730ACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Noordover AJB, Duchateau R, Benthem ATM, Ming W, Koning E (2007) Enhancing the functionality of biobased polyester coating resins through modification with citric acid. Biomacromol 8:3860–3870.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm700775eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ghosh S, Goswami SK, Mathias LJ (2013) Surface modification of nano-silica with amides and imides for use in polyester nanocomposites. J Mater Chem A 1:6073–6080.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C3TA10381ACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yadav SK, Cho JW (2013) Functionalized graphene nanoplatelets for enhanced mechanical and thermal properties of polyurethane nanocomposites. Appl Surf Sci 266:360–367.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2012.12.028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gaminian H, Montazer M (2015) Enhanced self-cleaning properties on polyester fabric under visible light through single-step synthesis of cuprous oxide doped nano-TiO2. Photochem Photobiol 91:1078–1087.  https://doi.org/10.1111/php.12478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Szycher M (2013) Szycher’s handbook of polyurethanes. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p 2012Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Duarah R, Singh YP, Mandal BB, Karak N (2016) Sustainable starch modified polyol based tough, biocompatible, hyperbranched polyurethane with a shape memory attribute. New J Chem 40:5152–5163.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C5NJ03294FCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Akindoyo JO, Beg MDH, Ghazali S, Islam MR, Jeyaratnam N, Yuvaraj AR (2016) Polyurethane types, synthesis and applications—a review. RSC Adv 6:114453–114482.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c6ra14525fCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hepburn C (1992) Polyurethane elastomers. Springer, NetherlandsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Petrovic ZS, Ferguson J (1991) Polyurethane elastomers. Prog Polym Sci 16:695–836.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0079-6700(91)90011-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhou H, Wang H, Niu H, Lin T (2018) Recent progress in durable and self-healing super-nonwettable fabrics. Adv Mater Interfaces 5:1800461.  https://doi.org/10.1002/admi.201800461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Noreen A, Zia KM, Zuber M, Tabasum S, Zahoor AF (2016) Bio-based polyurethane: an efficient and environment friendly coating systems: a review. Prog Org Coat 91:25–32.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PORGCOAT.2015.11.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pfister DP, Xia Y, Larock RC (2011) Recent advances in vegetable oil-based polyurethanes. ChemSusChem 4:703–717.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cssc.201000378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Petrovic ZS (2008) Polymer reviews polyurethanes from vegetable oils polyurethanes from vegetable oils. Polym Rev 48:109–155.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15583720701834224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Karak N (2017) Biobased smart polyurethane nanocomposites: from synthesis to applications. Royal Society of Chemistry, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sharmin E, Zafar F Polyurethane: an introduction, polyurethane, Intech Open.  https://doi.org/10.5772/51663Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chang W, Karalis T (1993) Polyesterification reactions of adipic acid based polyesters. J Polym Sci A 2:493–504.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pola.1993.080310221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Malshe VC, Sikchi M (2004) Basics of paint technology, Part I, Prakash C. Malshe, Mumbai, 1st ednGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jasinska L, Koning CE (2010) Unsaturated, biobased polyesters and their crosslinking via radical copolymerization. J Polym Sci A 48:2885–2895.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pola.24067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Konwar U, Karak N (2011) Epoxy modified Mesua ferrea L. seed oil based polyester/clay nanocomposites. Int J Polym Mater 60:799–816.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00914037.2010.551366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brunelle DJ, Shannon TG (1991) Preparation and polymerization of bisphenol A cyclic oligomeric carbonates. Macromolecules 24:3035–3044.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ma00011a002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Denham H, Vaughan WE (1951) Sulfurized product and preparation thereof. US Patent 2,536,684, issued Jan 2Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Shachi K, Ishiura K (2002) Resin composition and usage thereof. US Patent 6,410,109, issued June 25Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Anastas P, Eghbali N (2010) Green chemistry: principles and practice. Chem Soc Rev 39:301–312.  https://doi.org/10.1039/B918763BCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Saikia A, Karak N (2017) Renewable resource based thermostable tough hyperbranched epoxy thermosets as sustainable materials. Polym Degrad Stab 135:8–17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2016.11.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Duarah R, Karak N (2015) A starch based sustainable tough hyperbranched epoxy thermoset. RSC Adv 5:64456–64465.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RA09955BCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Guo Z, Pereira T, Choi O, Wang Y, Hahn HT (2006) Surface functionalized alumina nanoparticle filled polymeric nanocomposites with enhanced mechanical properties. J Mater Chem 16:2800–2808.  https://doi.org/10.1039/B603020CCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jordan R, West N, Ulman A, Chou YM, Nuyken O (2001) Nanocomposites by surface-initiated living cationic polymerization of 2-oxazolines on functionalized gold nanoparticles. Macromolecules 34:1606–1611.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ma001615jCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sabatier P (1986) Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: a critical analysis and suggested synthesis. J Public Pol 6:21.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X00003846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sekunowo OI, Durowaye SI, Lawal GI (2015) An overview of nano-particles effect onmechanical properties of composites. Int J Mech Aero Ind Mech Manuf Eng 9:1–7Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sudha PN, Sangeetha K, Vijayalakshmi K, Barhoum A (2018) Nanomaterials history, classification, unique properties, production and market, emerging applications of nanoparticles and architectural nanostructures: current prospects and future trends. Elsevier Inc., pp 341–384Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Lee C, Wei X, Kyser JW, Hone J (2008) Measurement of the elastic properties and intrinsic strength of monolayer graphene. Science 321:385–388.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang X, Li Q, Xie J, Jin Z, Wang J, Li Y, Jiang K, Fan S (2009) Fabrication of ultralong and electrically uniform single-walled carbon nanotubes on clean substrates. Nano Lett 9:3137–3141.  https://doi.org/10.1021/nl901260bCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wang Y, Hu A (2014) Carbon quantum dots: synthesis, properties and applications. J Mater Chem C 2:6921–6939.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C4TC00988FCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bora C, Gogoi P, Baglari S, Dolui SK (2013) Preparation of polyester resin/graphene oxide nanocomposite with improved mechanical strength. J Appl Polym Sci 129:3432–3438.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.39068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hazarika D, Gupta K, Mandal M, Karak N (2018) High-performing biodegradable waterborne polyester/functionalized graphene oxide nanocomposites as an eco-friendly material. ACS Omega 3:2292–2303.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.7b01551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Naebe M, Wang J, Amini A, Khayyam H, Hameed N, Li LH, Chen Y, Fox B (2014) Mechanical property and structure of covalent functionalised graphene/epoxy nanocomposites. Sci Rep 4:4375.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep04375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rao CNR, Vivekchand SRC, Biswas K, Govindaraj A (2007) Synthesis of inorganic nanomaterials. Dalton Trans 34:3728–3749.  https://doi.org/10.1039/B708342DCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Petrovic ZS, Javni I, Waddon A, Banhegyi G (2000) Structure and properties of polyurethane-silica nanocomposites. J Appl Polym Sci 76:133–151.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wu CS, Liao HT (2011) Antibacterial activity and antistatic composite of polyester/Ag–SiO2 prepared by a sol-gel method. J Appl Polym Sci 121:2193–2201.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.33823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Zhao Y, Wang F, Fu Q, Shi W (2007) Synthesis and characterization of ZnS/hyperbranched polyester nanocomposite and its optical properties. Polymer 48:2853–2859.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2007.03.054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ray SS, Okamoto M (2003) Polymer/layered silicate nanocomposites: a review from preparation to processing. Prog Polym Sci 28:1539–1641.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2003.08.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kong D, Park CE (2003) Real time exfoliation behavior of clay layers in epoxy-clay nanocomposites. Chem Mater 15:419–424.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cm0205837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Sanchez C, Belleville P, Popall M, Nicole L (2011) Applications of advanced hybrid organic-inorganic nanomaterials: From laboratory to market. Chem Soc Rev 40:696–753.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C0CS00136HCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Andresen M, Stenstad P, Moretro T, Langsrud S, Syverud K, Johansson LS, Stenius P (2007) Nonleaching antimicrobial films prepared from surface-modified microfibrillated cellulose. Biomacromol 8:2149–2155.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bm070304eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Hazarika D, Karak N (2018) Unprecedented influence of carbon dot@TiO2 nanohybrid on multifaceted attributes of waterborne hyperbranched polyester nanocomposite. ACS Omega 3:1757–1769.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.7b02079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Bernal MM, Martin-Gallego M, Molenberg I, Huynen I, Manchado MAL, Verdejo R (2014) Influence of carbon nanoparticles on the polymerization and EMI shielding properties of PU nanocomposite foams. RSC Adv 4:7911–7918.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RA45607BCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Koo J (2006) Polymer nanocomposites: processing, characterization, and applications. McGraw Hill Professional, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Chen Z, Lu H (2012) Constructing sacrificial bonds and hidden lengths for ductile graphene/polyurethane elastomers with improved strength and toughness. J Mater Chem 22:12479–12490.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C2JM30517HCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wu C, Huang X, Wang G, Wu X, Yang K, Li S, Jiang P (2012) Hyperbranched-polymer functionalization of graphene sheets for enhanced mechanical and dielectric properties of polyurethane composites. J Mater Chem 22:7010–7019.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C2JM16901KCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Konwar U, Mandal M, Karak N, Mesua ferrea L (2011) Seed oil based acrylate-modified thermostable and biodegradable highly branched polyester resin/clay nanocomposites. Prog Org Coat 72:676–685.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2011.07.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Decker JJ, Chvalun SN, Nazarenko S (2011) Intercalation behavior of hydroxylated dendritic polyesters in polymer clay nanocomposites prepared from aqueous solution. Polymer 52:3943–3955.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2011.07.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hazarika D, Karak N (2016) Biodegradable tough waterborne hyperbranched polyester/carbon dot nanocomposite: approach towards an eco-friendly material. Green Chem 18:5200–5211.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C6GC01198ECrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Duarah R, Singh YP, Gupta P, Mandal BB, Karak N (2016) High performance bio-based hyperbranched polyurethane/carbon dot-silver nanocomposite: a rapid self-expandable stent. Biofabrication 8:045013.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/8/4/045013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Wang X, Hu Y, Song L, Yang H, Xing W, Lu H (2011) In situ polymerization of graphene nanosheets and polyurethane with enhanced mechanical and thermal properties. J Mater Chem 21:4222–4227.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C0JM03710ACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Gao H, Liu L, Luo YF, Jia D (2011) In situ preparation of epoxy/silver nanocomposites by thermal decomposition of silver-imidazole complex. Material Lett 65:3529–3532.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2011.07.086CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Karak N (2016) Experimental methods on polymers, nanomaterials and their nanocomposites. Nova Science Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Chun B, Cho TK, Chong MH, Chung YC, Chen J, Martin D, Cieslinski RC (2007) Mechanical properties of polyurethane/montmorillonite nanocomposite prepared by melt mixing. J Appl Polym Sci 106:712–721.  https://doi.org/10.1002/app.26721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lee SR, Park HM, Kang T, Li X, Cho WJ, Ha CS (2002) Microstructure, tensile properties, and biodegradability of aliphatic polyester/clay nanocomposites. Polymer 43:2495–2500.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0032-3861(02)00012-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kim JY, Han SI, Hong S (2008) Effect of modified carbon nanotubes on the properties of aromatic polyester nanocomposites. Polymer 49:3335–3345.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2008.05.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    De B, Kumar M, Mandal BB, Karak N (2015) An in situ prepared photo-luminescent transparent biocompatible hyperbranched epoxy/carbon dot nanocomposite. RSC Adv 5:74692–74704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Sudirman, Anggaravidya M, Budiantoa E, Gunawanb I (2012) Synthesis and characterization of polyester-based nanocomposite. Procedia Chem 4:107–113.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proche.2012.06.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Fu JF, Shi LY, Yuan S, Zhong QD, Zhang DS, Chen Y, Wu J (2008) Morphology, toughness mechanism, and thermal properties of hyperbranched epoxy modified diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A (DGEBA) interpenetrating polymer networks. Polym Adv Technol 19:1597–1607.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pat.1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Scognamillo S, Gioffredi E, Piccinini M, Lazzari M, Alzari V, Nuvoli D, Sanna R, Piga D, Malucelli G, Mariani A (2012) Synthesis and characterization of nanocomposites of thermoplastic polyurethane with both graphene and graphene nanoribbon fillers. Polymer 53:4019–4024.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2012.07.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Hong RY, Li JH, Chen LL, Liu DQ, Li HZ, Zheng Y, Ding J (2009) Synthesis, surface modification and photocatalytic property of ZnO nanoparticles. Powder Technol 189:426–432.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2008.07.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Duarah R, Karak N (2017) Facile and ultrafast green approach to synthesize biobased luminescent reduced carbon nanodot: an efficient photocatalyst. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 5:9454–9466.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Du Y, Yan H, Huang W, Chai F, Niu S (2017) Unanticipated strong blue photoluminescence from fully bio-based aliphatic hyperbranched polyesters. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 5:6139–6147.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b01019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Jena KK, Narayan R, Raju KV (2012) Investigation of the effect of ZnO nanoparticles on the thermomechanical and microbial properties of hyperbranched polyurethane-urea hybrid composites. Polym Int 61:1309–1317.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.4209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Yadav SK, Mahapatra SS, Cho JW (2012) Synthesis of mechanically robust antimicrobial nanocomposites by click coupling of hyperbranched polyurethane and carbon nanotubes. Polymer 53:2023–2031.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2012.03.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Barua S, Chattopadhyay P, Phukan MM, Konwar BK, Islam J, Karak N (2014) Biocompatible hyperbranched epoxy/silver-reduced graphene oxide-curcumin nanocomposite as an advanced antimicrobial material. RSC Adv 4:47797–47805.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RA07802KCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Guo Z, Park S, Hahn HT, Wei S, Moldovan M, Karki AB, Young DP (2007) Magnetic and electromagnetic evaluation of the magnetic nanoparticle filled polyurethane nanocomposites. J Appl Phys 101:09M511.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2711074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Kalita H, Mandal M, Karak N (2012) Biodegradable solvent-induced shape-memory hyperbranched polyurethane. J Polym Res 19:9982.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10965-012-9982-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Lee HF, Yu HH (2011) Study of electroactive shape memory polyurethane-carbon nanotube hybrids. Soft Matter 7:3801–3807.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c0sm01101kCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Tang Z, Kang H, Wei Q, Guo B, Zhang L, Jia D (2013) Incorporation of graphene into polyester/carbon nanofibers composites for better multi-stimuli responsive shape memory performances. Carbon 64:487–498.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2013.07.103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Rousseau IA, Xie T (2009) Shape memory epoxy: composition, structure, properties and shape memory performances. J Mater Chem 20:3431–3441.  https://doi.org/10.1039/b923394fCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Schmaljohann D, Voit BI, Jansen JFGA, Hendriks P, Loontjens JA (2000) New coating systems based on vinyl ether- and oxetane-modified hyperbranched polyesters. Macromol Mater Eng 275:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Kunduru KR, Basu A, Zada MH, Domb AJ (2015) Castor oil-based biodegradable polyesters. Biomacromol 16:2572–2587.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biomac.5b00923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Selim MS, Shenashen MA, Elmarakbi A, El-Saeed AM, Selim MM, El-Safty SA (2017) Sunflower oil-based hyperbranched alkyd/spherical ZnO nanocomposite modeling for mechanical and anticorrosive applications. RSC Adv 7:21796–21808.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c7ra01343dCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Song HJ, Zhang ZZ, Men XH (2007) Surface-modified carbon nanotubes and the effect of their addition on the tribological behavior of a polyurethane coating. Eur Polym J 43:4092–4102.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2007.07.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Li JH, Hong RY, Li MY, Li HZ, Zheng Y, Ding J (2009) Effects of ZnO nanoparticles on the mechanical and antibacterial properties of polyurethane coatings. Prog Org Coat 64:504–509.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2008.08.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Gnidakouong JR, Kim M, Park HW, Park YB, Jeong HS, Jung YB, Ahn SK, Han K, Park JM (2013) Electromagnetic interference shielding of composites consisting of a polyester matrix and carbon nanotube-coated fiber reinforcement. Compos Part A 50:73–80.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2013.03.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Seng LY, Wee FH, Rahim HA, Malek F, You KY, Liyana Z, Jamlos MA, Ezanuddin AAM (2018) EMI shielding based on MWCNTs/polyester composites. Appl Phys A Mater 124:140.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00339-018-1564-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Tang Z, Sun D, Yang D et al (2013) Vapor grown carbon nanofiber reinforced bio-based polyester for electroactive shape memory performance. Compos Sci Technol 75:15–21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2012.11.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Huang JH, Song Y, Chen XX, Zhang XS, Miao LM, Chen HT, Zhang HX (2017) Flexible fabric-based wearable solid-state supercapacitor. In: 2017 IEEE 12th international conference on nano/micro engineered and molecular systems (NEMS). Los Angeles, CA, pp 169–172Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Raja M, Ryu SH, Shanmugharaj AM (2014) Influence of surface modified multiwalled carbon nanotubes on the mechanical and electroactive shape memory properties of polyurethane (PU)/poly(vinylidene diflouride)(PVDF) composites. Colloids Surf A 450:59–66.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2014.03.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Nayak S, Sahoo B, Chaki TK, Khastgir D (2013) Development of polyurethane-titania nanocomposites as dielectric and piezoelectric material. RSC Adv 3:2620–2631.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c2ra22929cCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Srivastava SK, Singh IP (2012) Hybrid epoxy nanocomposites: lightweight materials for structural applications. Polym J 44:334–339.  https://doi.org/10.1038/pj.2011.140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Yang Y, Urban MW (2013) Self-healing polymeric materials. Chem Soc Rev 42:7446–7467.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c3cs60109aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Guimard NK, Oehlenschlaeger KK, Zhou J, Hilf S, Schmidt FG, Barner-Kowollik C (2012) Current trends in the field of self-healing materials. Macromol Chem Phys 213:131–143.  https://doi.org/10.1002/macp.201100442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    White SR, Sottos NR, Geubelle PH, Moore JS, Kessler MR, Sriram SR, Brown EN, Viswanathan S (2001) Autonomic healing of polymer composites. Nature 409:794–797.  https://doi.org/10.1038/35057232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Du P, Liu X, Zheng Z, Wang X, Joncheray T, Zhang Y (2013) Synthesis and characterization of linear self-healing polyurethane based on thermally reversible Diels-Alder reaction. RSC Adv 3:15475–15482.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c3ra42278jCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Feng L, Yu Z, Bian Y, Lu J, Shi X, Chai C (2017) Self-healing behavior of polyurethanes based on dual actions of thermo-reversible Diels-Alder reaction and thermal movement of molecular chains. Polymer (Guildf) 124:48–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2017.07.049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Zhao J, Xu R, Luo G, Wu J, Xia H (2016) Self-healing poly(siloxane-urethane) elastomers with remoldability, shape memory and biocompatibility. Polym Chem 7:7278–7286.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c6py01499bCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Jian X, Hu Y, Zhou W, Xiao L (2018) Self-healing polyurethane based on disulfide bond and hydrogen bond. Polym Adv Technol 29:463–469.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pat.4135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Yuan D, Bonab VS, Patel A, Manas-Zloczower I (2018) Self-healing epoxy coatings with enhanced properties and facile processability. Polymer 147:196–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2018.06.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Luo X, Mather PT (2010) Shape memory assisted self-healing coating. ACS Macro Lett 2:152–156.  https://doi.org/10.1021/mz400017xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Parkin IP, Palgrave RG (2005) Self-cleaning coatings. J Mater Chem 15:1689–1695.  https://doi.org/10.1039/b412803fCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Ganesh VA, Raut HK, Nair AS, Ramakrishna S (2011) A review on self-cleaning coatings. J Mater Chem 21:16304–16322.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c1jm12523kCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Charpentier PA, Burgess K, Wang L, Chowdhury RR, Lotus AF, Moula G (2012) Nano-TiO2/polyurethane composites for antibacterial and self-cleaning coatings. Nanotechnology 23:425606.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/23/42/425606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Duarah R, Karak N (2018) High performing smart hyperbranched polyurethane nanocomposites with efficient self-healing, self-cleaning and photocatalytic attributes. New J Chem 42:2167–2179.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c7nj03889eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Amarjargal A, Tijing LD, Park CH, Im IT, Kim CS (2013) Controlled assembly of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles on electrospun PU nanofibrous membrane: a novel heat-generating substrate for magnetic hyperthermia application. Eur Polym J 49:3796–3805.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2013.08.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Singhal P, Small W, Cosgriff-Hernandez E, Maitland DJ, Wilson TS (2014) Low density biodegradable shape memory polyurethane foams for embolic biomedical applications. Acta Biomater 10:67–76.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2013.09.027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Hsu SH, Tseng HJ, Lin YC (2010) The biocompatibility and antibacterial properties of waterborne polyurethane-silver nanocomposites. Biomaterials 31:6796–6808.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.05.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Guo C, Zheng Z, Zhu Q, Wang X (2007) Preparation and characterization of polyurethane/ZnO nanoparticle composites. Polym-Plast Technol Eng 46:1161–1166.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03602550701575789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Das B, Chattopadhyay P, Mishra D, Maiti TK, Maji S, Narayan R, Karak N (2013) Nanocomposites of bio-based hyperbranched polyurethane/funtionalized MWCNT as non-immunogenic, osteoconductive, biodegradable and biocompatible scaffolds in bone tissue engineering. J Mater Chem B 1:4115–4126.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c3tb20693aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Duarah R, Singh YP, Gupta P, Mandal BB, Karak N (2018) Smart self-tightening surgical suture from a tough bio-based hyperbranched polyurethane/reduced carbon dot nanocomposite. Biomed Mater 13:045004.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-605X/aab93cCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Moradi A, Dalilottojari A, Pingguan-Murphy B, Djordjevic I (2013) Fabrication and characterization of elastomeric scaffolds comprised of a citric acid-based polyester/hydroxyapatite microcomposite. Mater Des 50:446–450.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.03.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Meng ZX, Zheng W, Li L, Zheng FY (2011) Fabrication, characterization and in vitro drug release behavior of electrospun PLGA/chitosan nanofibrous scaffold. Mater Chem Phys 125:606–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Hu CB, Myers KE, Nguyen-Thien-Nhon D, Kafesjian R (1999) Nonpolymeric epoxy compounds for cross linking biological tissue and bioprosthetic grafts prepared thereby. Baxter International Inc, U.S. Patent 5:880,242Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rituparna Duarah
    • 1
  • Deepshikha Hazarika
    • 1
  • Aditi Saikia
    • 1
  • Rajarshi Bayan
    • 1
  • Tuhin Ghosh
    • 1
  • Niranjan Karak
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Advanced Polymer & Nanomaterial Laboratory, Center for Polymer Science and Technology, Department of Chemical SciencesTezpur UniversityTezpurIndia

Personalised recommendations