Why Graphene Inks Are Difficult to Make: From Sheet Dispersion to Printable Conductive Patterns

Introduction

At first glance, graphene ink may seem straightforward: graphene has good electrical conductivity, flexibility, and chemical stability, so can’t we simply add graphene powder to a solvent, disperse it by ultrasonication, and obtain a conductive ink?

Once the work moves into the laboratory, problems often appear quickly. A freshly sonicated graphene dispersion may look uniform, yet sedimentation can occur after standing for some time. When the graphene powder is changed to another batch, the dispersion behavior may differ significantly. During deposition, the ink may discharge discontinuously, or the nozzle or needle may become clogged. After droplets land on the substrate, they may shrink into beads or spread excessively. The dried pattern may look black, but its resistance may be much higher than expected. Further increasing the graphene content does not necessarily improve conductivity in a stable way; instead, the ink may become harder to process.

These phenomena point to a basic fact: graphene ink is not simply “graphene powder + solvent.” It is a material system jointly determined by sheet dispersion, solvent system, stabilizers/binders, rheological parameters, drying and film formation, and post-treatment.

1. Why is graphene worth formulating into conductive inks?

Graphene is not the only route for conductive inks. Common conductive inks can be broadly divided into three categories: noble metal inks, conductive polymer inks, and carbon nanomaterial inks.

Noble metal inks, especially silver-based inks, can usually provide high electrical conductivity, but the material cost is relatively high. Conductive polymers such as PEDOT:PSS offer good solution processability, but they have certain limitations in conductivity, thermal stability, or chemical stability. Carbon nanomaterials, including carbon nanotubes and graphene, have become important candidates in printed electronics because of their environmental stability, flexibility, and material compatibility.

The appeal of graphene comes from its two-dimensional sp² carbon structure. It can be understood as a single-layer graphite sheet, with relatively high charge carrier mobility, good thermal and chemical stability, and inherent flexibility. These properties make graphene suitable for flexible electrodes, sensors, conductive coatings, microsupercapacitors, and other printed electronic devices. In actual inks, however, the materials used are often few-layer graphene, graphene nanoplatelets, or graphene sheets obtained by liquid-phase exfoliation; they are not necessarily perfect monolayer graphene.

Excellent graphene material properties do not automatically mean that a graphene ink will have excellent performance. To translate material properties into ink performance, at least three stages are involved, as shown in the table below. If any stage is not well controlled, the final result may be merely “a black deposit” rather than a usable conductive pattern.

Stage	Key question
Liquid stage	Can the graphene sheets be stably and uniformly dispersed in the solvent?
Deposition stage	Can the ink be deposited onto the target substrate in a controlled manner?
Solidification stage	After drying or post-treatment, can effective conductive contact form between the sheets?

2. Not every “graphene” is suitable for the same type of ink

Common graphene-related materials used in experiments include graphene oxide, reduced graphene oxide, and pristine graphene. They are all related to graphene, but their dispersibility, conductivity, and suitable application scenarios are not the same.

2.1 Graphene oxide: easy to disperse, but with impaired conductivity

Graphene oxide is usually obtained by oxidation and exfoliation of graphite. Because its surface contains oxygen-containing functional groups such as hydroxyl, epoxy, and carboxyl groups, it is easier to disperse in water or polar solvents. Therefore, graphene oxide is commonly used in aqueous systems, composites, bio-related materials, and surface functionalization research. However, these oxygen-containing functional groups also disrupt the original continuous sp² conjugated structure of graphene, thereby reducing electron transport capability. The advantage of graphene oxide is good dispersibility and easy modification; its limitation is restricted electrical performance when used directly as a highly conductive ink.

2.2 Reduced graphene oxide: improved conductivity, but incomplete structural recovery

Reduced graphene oxide can be understood as a material obtained by chemically, thermally, or otherwise reducing graphene oxide. The reduction process removes part of the oxygen-containing functional groups and improves the conductivity of the material. However, reduced graphene oxide is not equivalent to fully restored ideal graphene. Defects, residual oxygen-containing groups, and sheet fragmentation generated during oxidation and reduction all affect the final electrical properties.

For electrochemical sensors, electrode modification, or certain composite applications, rGO can be quite practical. However, if the goal is to obtain the highest possible intrinsic conductivity of graphene sheets, its structural defects and degree of reduction need to be carefully evaluated. The conductivity of different rGO materials can vary greatly, depending on the degree of oxidation, reduction method, residual oxygen-containing groups, defect level, and sheet-to-sheet contact after film formation. Therefore, the conductivity level of an ink cannot be judged simply by the name “rGO.”

2.3 Pristine graphene: favorable for retaining intrinsic conductive structure, but harder to disperse stably

Pristine graphene, also known as unoxidized graphene, is closer to the electronic structure of ideal graphene and is therefore attractive for conductive inks. However, its problem is also obvious: strong van der Waals interactions exist between pristine graphene sheets, making them prone to restacking and aggregation. Simply adding the powder to an ordinary solvent usually makes it difficult to obtain a long-term stable dispersion. Unoxidized graphene sheets are often obtained by liquid-phase exfoliation of graphite in suitable solvents, with common methods including ultrasonication and shear mixing. Liquid-phase exfoliation of graphite to prepare graphene dispersions is a classical route, and solvents such as NMP are often used in this type of research. Solvents such as NMP and DMF have high boiling points and create challenges related to safety, environmental handling, and subsequent removal.

Therefore, material selection should not be based only on “which type of graphene has the best conductivity.” It should be judged in relation to the actual experimental objective.

Material type	Main advantages	Main limitations	More suitable scenarios
Graphene oxide, GO	Easy to disperse and functionalize	Relatively weak conductivity	Aqueous systems, composites, functionalization research
Reduced graphene oxide, rGO	Improved conductivity compared with GO	Defects and residual functional groups remain	Sensors, electrode modification, low-cost conductive materials
Pristine graphene	Closer to the intrinsic electronic structure of graphene	More difficult to disperse and stabilize	High-conductivity inks, flexible conductive patterns, printed electronics

3. Dispersion stability determines whether the ink can truly be used

The first threshold for graphene ink is not electrical conductivity, but dispersion stability. If graphene sheets rapidly aggregate or sediment in the liquid, all subsequent processing steps become difficult to control. Even if the ink looks uniform when freshly prepared, aggregation during storage, transport, or deposition can lead to the following problems:

1. Uneven solid content between the top and bottom of the bottle;

2. Discontinuous ink discharge;

3. Clogging of microchannels or nozzles by large aggregates;

4. Deposited patterns with locally thick and thin regions;

5. Rough films after drying;

6. Large resistance variation between batches.

Graphene sheets naturally tend to adsorb onto each other and restack, whereas an ink requires them to remain relatively independent and uniformly suspended in the liquid. This is the core contradiction.

Common approaches to solving dispersion problems include:

1. Selecting a suitable solvent so that the solvent better matches the surface energy of graphene;

2. Adding stabilizers or dispersants to create steric hindrance or other stabilizing effects between sheets;

3. Controlling ultrasonication, shear mixing, and centrifugation conditions to adjust sheet size, thickness, and aggregate content;

4. Controlling storage conditions to avoid prolonged standing, evaporation, contamination, or viscosity changes.

4. Four fundamental ink parameters: solid content, viscosity, surface tension, and evaporation rate

After graphene can be stably dispersed, the next step is to determine whether the ink has suitable fluid properties. For graphene inks, four parameters require attention: solid content, viscosity, surface tension, and evaporation rate. These four parameters determine whether the ink can be processed and whether the film after drying will be uniform.

Parameter	Main influence	Common signs when uncontrolled
Solid content	How much graphene material remains after a single deposition	Too low: film is too thin and resistance is high; too high: aggregation and viscosity increase
Viscosity	Whether the ink can flow and be deposited stably	Too low: excessive spreading; too high: difficult discharge or clogging
Surface tension	Wetting and spreading of droplets on the substrate	Droplet beading, uneven edges, broken lines, or widened patterns
Evaporation rate	Sheet migration and film uniformity during drying	Uneven drying, edge accumulation, film cracking, or excessive residual solvent

4.1 Solid content: higher is not always better

Solid content determines how much nonvolatile material can be deposited per unit volume of ink. If the solid content is too low, insufficient graphene remains after a single deposition, the dried film may be discontinuous, and the resistance is usually high. Increasing the solid content can increase the deposited amount, but it also strengthens interactions between sheets, raising viscosity and the risk of aggregation. Therefore, the goal of solid content is not “the higher the better,” but rather to serve the target film thickness, target resistance, and processing method.

4.2 Viscosity: determining whether the ink is within a stable deposition range

Viscosity reflects the flow resistance of the ink. If the viscosity is too low, the ink may flow excessively after deposition onto the substrate, causing blurred pattern edges. If the viscosity is too high, stable delivery may become difficult, and channels may even clog. The viscosity of graphene ink is not determined only by the solvent; it is also affected by graphene concentration, sheet size, polymer stabilizers, binders, and dispersion history. The same formulation may show different viscosity and deposition behavior immediately after sonication, after standing overnight, or after slight solvent evaporation.

4.3 Surface tension: determining whether the ink matches the substrate

An ink does not form an ideal pattern on every substrate. Glass, silicon wafers, polyimide, PET, PDMS, and other substrates have different surface energies, and the same graphene ink can exhibit different spreading behavior on different substrates. When surface tension is mismatched, droplets may shrink into beads or spread excessively. The former can lead to discontinuous patterns, while the latter sacrifices resolution. Substrate cleaning, plasma treatment, surface modification, and solvent system adjustment are all intended to establish an appropriate wetting relationship between the ink and the substrate.

4.4 Evaporation rate: determining how the sheets finally stack

The drying process is often underestimated. After ink deposition, the solvent begins to evaporate, and graphene sheets migrate, orient, stack, and recontact as internal liquid flow occurs. If the solvent evaporates too quickly, the film may show local accumulation, edge enrichment, or cracking. If evaporation is too slow, the pattern may diffuse, adjacent lines may merge, or the film may be disturbed by subsequent deposition.

Therefore, graphene ink formulation is not about optimizing a single parameter in isolation. It is about finding a balance among solid content, viscosity, surface tension, and evaporation rate.

5. Polymer stabilizers: helpful, but also potential obstacles

To stably disperse graphene, researchers often add polymer stabilizers or binders. Ethyl cellulose, EC, is a typical example.

Its functions mainly include three aspects:

1. Helping stabilize graphene sheets and reducing the risk of aggregation and sedimentation;

2. Improving the rheological properties of the ink so that it better matches the target deposition process;

3. Improving the morphology of the dried film and reducing severe sheet aggregation during drying.

This is why polymer stabilizers are common in graphene inks. Without stabilizers, pristine graphene is difficult to disperse uniformly over the long term. Without suitable rheological adjustment, the ink is also difficult to adapt to processing requirements.

The problem is that polymer stabilizers are usually not highly conductive components. After the ink dries, if polymer residues remain between graphene sheets, they may hinder direct sheet-to-sheet contact. For conductive films, electrons must not only travel within individual graphene sheets, but also cross the interfaces between sheets. If these interfaces are separated by insulating or weakly conductive polymers, the overall resistance will increase.

This is the most typical contradiction in graphene ink formulation: the components that help graphene remain stably dispersed in the liquid may hinder conductivity in the solid film. A stabilizer system should not be evaluated only by whether the dispersion is stable, nor only by whether the pattern is uniform. It is also necessary to examine whether the electrical performance truly improves after post-treatment.

6. Why do post-treatment and annealing affect final conductivity?

Many graphene inks do not show ideal resistance immediately after deposition and drying. This does not necessarily mean that the graphene material itself is poor. It may be due to insufficient contact between sheets, incomplete removal of residual solvent, or polymer stabilizer still separating the sheets.

The main functions of post-treatment include:

1. Removing residual solvent;

2. Promoting decomposition, rearrangement, or partial removal of stabilizers or binders;

3. Improving contact between graphene sheets;

4. Reducing barriers to electron transport between sheets;

5. Improving film densification and electrical stability.

Thermal annealing is one of the most common post-treatment methods. Studies have shown that, for EC-stabilized graphene ink systems, the EC binder separates the sheets, while after annealing in air at 250 °C, the printed patterns can reach a conductivity of about 25,000 S/m. Even at a thickness of about 150 nm, this conductivity level can be maintained. This value should not be treated as a universal result for all graphene inks. It only shows that, under a specific EC-stabilized graphene ink formulation and specific printing and annealing conditions, post-treatment can significantly improve the conductivity of graphene films.

In actual experiments, annealing conditions need to consider three questions.

1) Can the substrate withstand this temperature?

Glass, silicon wafers, and polyimide usually tolerate higher temperatures than PET, PDMS, or certain biological substrates. If the substrate cannot withstand high temperature, the ink must use a route that can be processed at lower temperature.

2) Is the ink system suitable for thermal annealing?

Different stabilizers, binders, and solvent residues have different thermal behaviors. Some systems require relatively high temperature to remove residues, while others may undergo carbonization, cracking, or loss of adhesion at high temperature.

3) Does the device structure allow post-treatment?

If the conductive pattern has already been integrated with a semiconductor layer, bioactive layer, flexible encapsulation layer, or other functional materials, high-temperature annealing may damage the entire device.

7. What should be confirmed before starting graphene ink experiments?

Before beginning formulation or testing, it is recommended to answer the following questions.

7.1 Are you making a dispersion or a printable ink?

A dispersion only requires graphene to remain relatively stable in a solvent. A printable ink must also satisfy the viscosity, surface tension, solid content, and drying-rate requirements of the deposition process. Being dispersible does not mean being printable.

7.2 Which type of graphene material do you need?

If water dispersibility and functionalization are important, graphene oxide may be more convenient.

If relatively good electrical performance and a comparatively low-cost route are needed, reduced graphene oxide may be suitable.

If the goal is higher conductivity and printed electronics applications, pristine graphene is attractive, but dispersion and stabilization are more difficult.

7.3 What is the target substrate?

The substrate affects wetting, adhesion, drying behavior, and annealing temperature. Good performance on a glass slide should not be assumed to mean that the ink is suitable for flexible polymer substrates.

7.4 What type of post-treatment is allowed?

If the application permits thermal treatment at 200–300 °C, some polymer-stabilized systems can improve conductivity through annealing. If the application allows only low-temperature processing, insulating residues should be minimized, or other low-temperature post-treatment strategies should be selected.

7.5 Are you pursuing the highest conductivity or overall usability?

In research, it is easy to focus on the highest conductivity. However, real devices also require pattern continuity, reproducibility, adhesion, flexibility, long-term stability, and process compatibility. The highest conductivity does not necessarily mean the most usable ink.

7.6 Has the time stability of the ink been recorded?

An ink that works immediately after preparation may not necessarily work after one day or one week. It is recommended to record sedimentation, phase separation, viscosity change, aggregation, and repeat deposition behavior.

7.7 Has the ink state been correlated with film performance?

At minimum, the following information should be recorded:

Category	Recommended records
Material information	Graphene source, sheet size, whether oxidized or reduced
Dispersion conditions	Solvent, stabilizer, sonication time, shear conditions, centrifugation conditions
Ink parameters	Solid content, viscosity, surface tension, storage time
Deposition conditions	Substrate type, surface treatment, deposition method, drying conditions
Post-treatment conditions	Temperature, time, atmosphere, heating method
Performance testing	Film thickness, resistance, sheet resistance, conductivity, adhesion, stability

8. Representative Products Related to Experimental Selection for Graphene Inks: From Ready-to-Use Inks and Dispersion Slurries to Sheet Materials and Formulation Additives

Table 1 | Ready-to-Use Graphene Inks and Direct Printing Systems

Category	CAS No.	Aladdin Cat. No.	Name	Specification or Purity	Product Features and Applications
3D-printing graphene ink	——	D487607	3D printing graphene ink	——	Used for 3D printing of conductive structures; suitable for evaluating ink extrusion stability, interlayer build-up, and continuity of the conductive network
Spin/spray-coating photonic-annealable ink	——	G485796	Graphene ink for spin/spray coating photonically annealable	For spin coating, spray coating, and photonic annealing	Suitable for spin-coated and spray-coated film preparation and photonic annealing treatment; useful for studying the effect of low-thermal-load post-treatment on graphene conductive films
High-solid-content graphene ink	——	G485891	Graphene	Ink, solid content 40%, 100 g, viscosity 5.5 Pa·s	High-solid-content and high-viscosity ink system; useful for studying the relationship among solid content, viscosity, and conductivity of printed thick films
Screen-printing graphene ink	——	G485792	Graphene ink	For screen printing, containing ethyl cellulose and terpineol, screen-printable	Ethyl cellulose/terpineol system; suitable for screen printing of conductive patterns and for studying sheet-to-sheet contact improvement after annealing
Gravure-printing graphene ink	——	G485653	Graphene ink	For gravure printing, containing ethyl cellulose and terpineol, gravure-printable	Used for preparing gravure-printed conductive patterns; suitable for comparing ink flow behavior, transfer performance, and drying/film-formation effects
Inkjet-printing graphene ink	——	G485279	Graphene ink	Suitable for inkjet printing; optically annealable	Used for inkjet printing of conductive patterns; suitable for studying nozzle compatibility, droplet formation, pattern continuity, and optical annealing effects
Aqueous multi-process graphene ink	——	G478442	Graphene ink in water	Flexographic/gravure/screen printing	Aqueous graphene ink system; suitable for comparing wetting, spreading, and film formation under flexographic, gravure, and screen-printing conditions

Table 2 | Graphene Dispersions and Slurry Systems

Category	CAS No.	Aladdin Cat. No.	Name	Specification or Purity	Product Features and Applications
High-boiling polar organic-solvent slurry	7782-42-5	G139801	Graphene NMP Paste	Graphene content: 1–1.5 wt%; dispersant content: 0.2–0.3 wt%	Used for research on organic-solvent dispersion systems; suitable for comparing dispersant content, sheet stability, and subsequent film conductivity
Aqueous graphene slurry	7782-42-5	G139800	Graphene Aqueous Paste	Graphene content: 1–1.5 wt%; dispersant content: 0.2–0.3 wt%	Aqueous slurry system; suitable for water-based graphene ink formulation, coating film formation, and substrate wettability studies
High-boiling polar organic-solvent slurry	——	G494546	Graphene DMF slurry	≥98%, Thickness: 0.55–3.74 nm; Diameter: 0.5–3 μm; Number of layers: <10	Provides defined sheet thickness, sheet diameter, and layer-number information; suitable for studying how sheet structural parameters affect dispersion stability and conductive network formation
Alcohol-based graphene slurry	——	G494548	Graphene ethanol slurry	≥98%, Thickness: 0.55–3.74 nm; Diameter: 0.5–3 μm; Number of layers: <10	Alcohol-based dispersion system; suitable for comparing evaporation rate, drying uniformity, and coating continuity
Surfactant-stabilized dispersion	——	G466037	Graphene dispersion	0.5–1.0 mg/mL aqueous solution, containing nonionic surfactant	Aqueous dispersion system containing a nonionic surfactant; suitable for studying the effect of dispersants on sheet suspension stability and dry-film resistance

Table 3 | Graphene Oxide and Reduced Graphene Oxide Systems

Category	CAS No.	Aladdin Cat. No.	Name	Specification or Purity	Product Features and Applications
Aqueous graphene oxide dispersion system	7782-42-5	I489798	Industrial-grade graphene oxide solution	Single-layer ratio >95%, 0.8–1.2 nm	Provides defined single-layer ratio and thickness information; suitable for studies on aqueous dispersion, film formation, and subsequent reduction treatment
High-concentration aqueous graphene oxide dispersion	——	G405797	Graphene Oxide	10 mg/mL, aqueous dispersion	High-concentration aqueous dispersion; suitable for graphene oxide coating films, composite systems, and aqueous ink precursor research
Graphene oxide powder raw material	7782-42-5	G139803	Graphene oxide	≥99%	Solid graphene oxide raw material; suitable for preparing aqueous dispersions, functional modification, and reduction-assisted film-formation experiments
Aqueous reduced graphene oxide dispersion system	——	R485644	Reduced graphene oxide	10 mg/mL, dispersed in H₂O	Aqueous reduced graphene oxide dispersion; suitable for conductive coatings, electrode modification, and aqueous conductive dispersion systems
Reduced graphene oxide sheet raw material	R487602	R487602	Reduced graphene oxide	Chemically reduced, single layer, sheet diameter 1–5 μm	Chemically reduced single-layer sheet material; suitable for comparing the effects of reduction degree, sheet diameter, and sheet-to-sheet contact on the electrical properties of thin films

Table 4 | Pristine Graphene, High-Purity Graphene, and Nanoplatelet Raw Materials

Category	CAS No.	Aladdin Cat. No.	Name	Specification or Purity	Product Features and Applications
Conductive graphene powder	1034343-98-0	G476622	Graphene	Powder, conductivity >10³ S/m	Conductive powder raw material; suitable for preparing graphene inks, conductive coatings, and sheet-contact network studies
Few-layer high-purity graphene	7782-42-5	H494522	High purity graphene	≥98%, Thickness 1–3 nm, Scale >50 μm, layers <3	Few-layer high-purity graphene; suitable for studying the effects of sheet size, layer number, and dispersion stability on conductive films
Graphene nanoplatelets	7782-42-5	G434031	Graphene nanoplatelets	Particle size: 5–7 μm, surface area: 50–200 m²/g	Nanoplatelet raw material; suitable for conductive fillers, coating formulations, and studies on film structures formed from different sheet-size distributions

Table 5 | Representative Products Related to Graphene Ink Formulation Additives and Solvent Systems

Category	CAS No.	Aladdin Cat. No.	Name	Specification or Purity	Product Features and Applications
High-viscosity polymer stabilizer and binder	9004-57-3	E110675	Ethyl cellulose（EC）	270–330 mPa·s	Can be used to increase the viscosity and film-supporting ability of graphene ink systems; suitable for studying screen printing, thick-film deposition, and conductive network formation after annealing
Medium-viscosity polymer stabilizer and binder	9004-57-3	E110672	Ethyl cellulose(EC)	45–55 mPa·s	Can be used to adjust graphene dispersion stability, flow behavior, and dried-film morphology; suitable for comparing the effect of stabilizer dosage on sheet contact and sheet resistance
Low-viscosity polymer stabilizer and binder	9004-57-3	E110668	Ethyl cellulose	3–7 mPa·s	Can be used for low-viscosity or diluted graphene ink formulation studies; suitable for evaluating dispersion stability, spray/coating processes, and film uniformity
Volatile alcohol solvent	64-17-5	E111965	Ethanol	Moligand™, electronic grade, Total metal impurities ≤20 ppm	Can be used for graphene dispersion, solvent exchange, ink dilution, and substrate wetting adjustment; electronic-grade specification is suitable for conductive patterns and printed electronics experiments
High-boiling ink solvent	8000-41-7	T103776	Terpineol	≥95%, mixture of isomers	Commonly used in ethyl cellulose-stabilized graphene ink systems; suitable for adjusting drying rate, print transfer behavior, and film continuity
Ketone organic solvent	108-94-1	C1522434	Cyclohexanone	USP, electronic grade, ≥99.5%	Can serve as an organic solvent or co-solvent for graphene inks; used to adjust evaporation rate, wetting/spreading behavior, and coating smoothness

Note: The products listed above are representative Aladdin products. More product specifications can be searched on the Aladdin official website using the product name, CAS number, or catalog number.

References

[1] Secor E. B., Hersam M. C. Graphene Inks for Electronics. Sigma-Aldrich / Merck Technical Article.

[2] Hernandez Y., Nicolosi V., Lotya M., Blighe F. M., Sun Z., De S., et al. High-yield Production of Graphene by Liquid-phase Exfoliation of Graphite. Nature Nanotechnology, 2008, 3: 563–568. DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2008.215.

[3] Coleman J. N. Liquid Exfoliation of Defect-Free Graphene. Accounts of Chemical Research, 2013, 46(1): 14–22. DOI: 10.1021/ar300009f.

[4] Liang Y. T., Hersam M. C. Highly Concentrated Graphene Solutions via Polymer Enhanced Solvent Exfoliation and Iterative Solvent Exchange. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2010, 132(50): 17661–17663. DOI: 10.1021/ja107661g.

[5] Secor E. B., Prabhumirashi P. L., Puntambekar K., Geier M. L., Hersam M. C. Inkjet Printing of High Conductivity, Flexible Graphene Patterns. The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters, 2013, 4(8): 1347–1351. DOI: 10.1021/jz400644c.

[6] Torrisi F., Hasan T., Wu W., Sun Z., Lombardo A., Kulmala T. S., et al. Inkjet-Printed Graphene Electronics. ACS Nano, 2012, 6(4): 2992–3006. DOI: 10.1021/nn2044609.

[7] Dreyer D. R., Park S., Bielawski C. W., Ruoff R. S. The Chemistry of Graphene Oxide. Chemical Society Reviews, 2010, 39: 228–240. DOI: 10.1039/B917103G.

[8] Tran T. S., Dutta N. K., Choudhury N. R. Graphene Inks for Printed Flexible Electronics: Graphene Dispersions, Ink Formulations, Printing Techniques and Applications. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, 2018, 261: 41–61. DOI: 10.1016/j.cis.2018.09.003.

For more related articles, see below.

Application of Graphene in Photocatalysis

Graphene Inks for Printed Electronics

Preparation and functionalized design of novel graphene-based nanostructures

How to Prepare Graphene Quantum Dots?

Panorama Guide to Graphene Materials: Bulk Graphene × GO/rGO Precursors × Functionalization & Doping × Dispersions/Inks and Composite Devices (with a Selection Roadmap)