A Comparative Study of Conductive 3D Printing Filaments for Electrochemical Sensing Applications Pretreated by Alumina Polishing, Electrochemical Activation, and Electrodeposition of Au Nanoparticles.
Shakir Ahmed, Enock G Arthur, Tanner Obrzut, Ricoveer Shergill, Alexa Williams, Kelvin Wamalwa, Zackary D Epright, Cameron Darvish, Yousef Khatib, Wanlu Li, Bhavik A Patel, Glen D O'Neil
{"title":"A Comparative Study of Conductive 3D Printing Filaments for Electrochemical Sensing Applications Pretreated by Alumina Polishing, Electrochemical Activation, and Electrodeposition of Au Nanoparticles.","authors":"Shakir Ahmed, Enock G Arthur, Tanner Obrzut, Ricoveer Shergill, Alexa Williams, Kelvin Wamalwa, Zackary D Epright, Cameron Darvish, Yousef Khatib, Wanlu Li, Bhavik A Patel, Glen D O'Neil","doi":"10.1021/acselectrochem.5c00240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>3D-printed electrochemical devices have gained tremendous attention recently because they are highly customizable platforms for analysis and energy storage that can be produced using simple, inexpensive components in a wide variety of settings. 3D-printed electrochemical sensors, fabricated from carbon-loaded conductive thermoplastics, enable decentralized production of electrochemical devices that, if optimized, could be widely distributed. Achieving this goal requires a comprehensive understanding of the electrochemical behavior of these filaments. Here, we investigated how the electrochemical behavior of three commercial filaments was affected by alumina polishing, electrochemical activation in 0.5 M NaOH, and electrodepositing Au nanoparticles (NPs). The goal of this study is to characterize if/how these commonly used pretreatments affect different filaments. The study is not an exhaustive combination of all filaments and pretreatment options. We characterized the physical properties of each filament/pretreatment using thermogravimetric analysis, scanning electron microscopy, and Raman microscopy measurements. We then benchmarked the background electrochemical processes (capacitance and solvent window), the peak current response versus scan rate, and the peak potential separation of two common outer-sphere redox species (ruthenium hexamine and ferrocene methanol) for each filament under each pretreatment (<i>i.e.</i>, nine total conditions). We subsequently investigated how the filaments responded to inner-sphere redox couples that were surface sensitive (ferrocyanide oxidation), dependent on surface adsorption (dopamine oxidation), and sensitive to surface oxides (Fe<sup>2+</sup> oxidation). The data collectively underline the complexity of electrodes fabricated from conductive 3D printing filaments and highlight several important considerations that should be addressed when interpreting the electrochemistry of such materials. First, we present evidence that these materials behave as partially blocked electrodes, which complicates interpretations of electrochemical data. We also found that the outer-sphere electrochemical reactivity on a given filament was largely consistent regardless of pretreatment. The important variable for assessing outer-sphere electron transfer was the uncompensated resistance (<i>R</i> <sub>u</sub>), which varies depending on the filament material, electrode size, and contact method. Finally, we observed that the selected filaments do not respond to pretreatments identically when tested against inner-sphere redox species, suggesting that a variety of treatments should be evaluated when assessing conductive 3D-printed filament electrodes.</p>","PeriodicalId":520400,"journal":{"name":"ACS electrochemistry","volume":"1 11","pages":"2386-2401"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12598703/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS electrochemistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1021/acselectrochem.5c00240","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
3D-printed electrochemical devices have gained tremendous attention recently because they are highly customizable platforms for analysis and energy storage that can be produced using simple, inexpensive components in a wide variety of settings. 3D-printed electrochemical sensors, fabricated from carbon-loaded conductive thermoplastics, enable decentralized production of electrochemical devices that, if optimized, could be widely distributed. Achieving this goal requires a comprehensive understanding of the electrochemical behavior of these filaments. Here, we investigated how the electrochemical behavior of three commercial filaments was affected by alumina polishing, electrochemical activation in 0.5 M NaOH, and electrodepositing Au nanoparticles (NPs). The goal of this study is to characterize if/how these commonly used pretreatments affect different filaments. The study is not an exhaustive combination of all filaments and pretreatment options. We characterized the physical properties of each filament/pretreatment using thermogravimetric analysis, scanning electron microscopy, and Raman microscopy measurements. We then benchmarked the background electrochemical processes (capacitance and solvent window), the peak current response versus scan rate, and the peak potential separation of two common outer-sphere redox species (ruthenium hexamine and ferrocene methanol) for each filament under each pretreatment (i.e., nine total conditions). We subsequently investigated how the filaments responded to inner-sphere redox couples that were surface sensitive (ferrocyanide oxidation), dependent on surface adsorption (dopamine oxidation), and sensitive to surface oxides (Fe2+ oxidation). The data collectively underline the complexity of electrodes fabricated from conductive 3D printing filaments and highlight several important considerations that should be addressed when interpreting the electrochemistry of such materials. First, we present evidence that these materials behave as partially blocked electrodes, which complicates interpretations of electrochemical data. We also found that the outer-sphere electrochemical reactivity on a given filament was largely consistent regardless of pretreatment. The important variable for assessing outer-sphere electron transfer was the uncompensated resistance (Ru), which varies depending on the filament material, electrode size, and contact method. Finally, we observed that the selected filaments do not respond to pretreatments identically when tested against inner-sphere redox species, suggesting that a variety of treatments should be evaluated when assessing conductive 3D-printed filament electrodes.
3d打印电化学设备最近受到了极大的关注,因为它们是高度可定制的分析和能量存储平台,可以在各种环境下使用简单,廉价的组件来生产。3d打印电化学传感器由碳负载的导电热塑性塑料制成,可以分散生产电化学设备,如果经过优化,可以广泛分布。实现这一目标需要对这些细丝的电化学行为有全面的了解。在这里,我们研究了氧化铝抛光、在0.5 M NaOH中电化学活化和电沉积金纳米粒子(NPs)对三种商业长丝的电化学行为的影响。本研究的目的是表征这些常用的预处理是否/如何影响不同的细丝。这项研究并不是所有材料和预处理方案的详尽结合。我们使用热重分析、扫描电子显微镜和拉曼显微镜测量来表征每个灯丝/预处理的物理性质。然后,我们对背景电化学过程(电容和溶剂窗口)、峰值电流响应与扫描速率的关系以及两种常见的外球氧化还原物质(六检钌和二茂铁甲醇)在每种预处理(即总共9种条件)下的峰值电位分离进行了基准测试。我们随后研究了细丝对表面敏感(亚铁氰化物氧化)、依赖表面吸附(多巴胺氧化)和对表面氧化物(Fe2+氧化)敏感的内球氧化还原对的反应。这些数据共同强调了由导电3D打印细丝制造的电极的复杂性,并强调了在解释此类材料的电化学时应该解决的几个重要问题。首先,我们提出证据表明这些材料表现为部分阻塞电极,这使电化学数据的解释复杂化。我们还发现,在给定的灯丝上,外球电化学反应性在很大程度上是一致的,而不管预处理。评估外球电子转移的重要变量是未补偿电阻(R u),它取决于灯丝材料,电极尺寸和接触方法。最后,我们观察到,当对球内氧化还原物质进行测试时,所选择的长丝对预处理的反应并不相同,这表明在评估导电3d打印长丝电极时,应该评估各种处理。