Journal of

Manufacturing and
Materials Processing

Review
A Review on Printed Electronics: Fabrication Methods, Inks,
Substrates, Applications and Environmental Impacts
Jenny Wiklund 1 , Alp Karakoç 2, * , Toni Palko 2 , Hüseyin Yiğitler 2 , Kalle Ruttik 2 , Riku Jäntti 2 and Jouni Paltakari 1

1 Department of Bioproducts and Biosystems, Aalto University, 02150 Espoo, Finland;

jenny.wiklund@aalto.fi (J.W.); jouni.paltakari@aalto.fi (J.P.)
2 Department of Communications and Networking, Aalto University, 02150 Espoo, Finland;
toni.palko@aalto.fi (T.P.); yusein.ali@aalto.fi (H.Y.); kalle.ruttik@aalto.fi (K.R.); riku.jantti@aalto.fi (R.J.)
* Correspondence: alp.karakoc@aalto.fi

Abstract: Innovations in industrial automation, information and communication technology (ICT),

renewable energy as well as monitoring and sensing fields have been paving the way for smart devices,
which can acquire and convey information to the Internet. Since there is an ever-increasing demand
for large yet affordable production volumes for such devices, printed electronics has been attracting
attention of both industry and academia. In order to understand the potential and future prospects
of the printed electronics, the present paper summarizes the basic principles and conventional
approaches while providing the recent progresses in the fabrication and material technologies,
applications and environmental impacts.







Citation: Wiklund, J.; Karakoç, A.;

Keywords: printed electronics; industrial automation; information and communication technologies
Palko, T.; Yiğitler, H.; Ruttik, K.; (ICT); monitoring and sensing technologies; environmental impacts
Jäntti, R.; Paltakari, J. A Review on
Printed Electronics: Fabrication
Methods, Inks, Substrates,
Applications and Environmental 1. Introduction
Impacts. J. Manuf. Mater. Process. Printed electronics has a great potential to offer biodegradable and recyclable so-
2021, 5, 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/ lutions, which is a way forward to minimize the electronic waste (e-waste) caused by
jmmp5030089
the ever-increasing number of disposable electronic devices [1,2]. As the demand toward
adding intelligence to the objects from our daily life has recently increased, the environ-
Academic Editor: George-Christopher
mental impact of electronics manufacturing has reached to a significant level. Additive
Vosniakos
Manufacturing (AM) of these devices, e.g., by conventional and the state-of-the-art printing
methods, relieves this impact by decreasing used (and wasted) materials and by allowing
Received: 31 May 2021
Accepted: 6 August 2021
manufacturing to be completed without the need for etching and masking [3]. AM not
Published: 13 August 2021
only improves the resource efficiency but also reduces the fabrication costs since these
manufacturing processes remain the same for both design prototyping and their mass
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
production [4]. In addition, the recent advances also prove that AM methods can be used
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
in hybrid printed electronic circuit fabrication, for which the conventional surface-mount
published maps and institutional affil- technology (SMT) components are adhesively bonded to the printed substrates [5,6]. The
iations. full potential of using AM for electronic component manufacturing will be reached by
replacing all SMT components with their printed counterparts as the assembly process
may be completely eliminated [7–9]. Therefore, in the future, the electronic components
and devices used in the fields of communication, energy and biomedicine can be viably
and sustainably manufactured using various printing technologies [10].
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
Printed electronics are manufactured in a process of registering thin functional mate-
This article is an open access article
rial (ink) layer combinations on a low-cost substrate that may be recycled and/or naturally
distributed under the terms and degraded in nature. Correspondingly, the manufacturing process is composed of three com-
conditions of the Creative Commons plementary stages: material selection, printing and post-printing, as depicted in Figure 1.
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// The materials for the printed electronics are principally inks of conducting, semiconducting
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ or dielectric characteristics and substrates, which are derived from synthetic or natural
4.0/). polymers. The inks are transferred with a master through direct contact to the substrate

J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp5030089 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jmmp

J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 2 of 36

in case of contact printing, while they are deposited onto the substrate typically through
nozzles in case of non-contact printing. Posterior to the printing process, it is often neces-
sary to conduct sintering/curing in order to reach the desired functional ink and substrate
characteristics. The inks, substrate and the printing technology along with the post printing
requirements must be carefully evaluated for quality, repeatability and life-time aspects of
the yield.

Figure 1. Complementary steps for electronics printing.

Although the requirements for the mass production of printed electronics with the de-
sired specifications are challenging, the current state-of-the-art for the materials, fabrication
processes and inspection technologies demonstrate an increasing trend in both repeatabil-
ity and functional performance [11]. Undoubtedly, continuous growth of biodegradable
and recyclable material portfolios for conductive, semiconductor and dielectric inks, and
synthetic and natural polymeric substrates are fostered by the printing and post-treatment
technologies, and optical inspection systems [12,13]. As a result, printing methods have
gained a ground for large area fabrication of flexible electronics including radio frequency
identification (RFID) devices; photovoltaic cells; organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs);
thin film transistors (TFTs); diodes; displays; batteries; and sensors measuring temper-
ature, humidity and pH levels [14–17]. These developments demonstrate that reliable
and repeatable solutions for the mass production of printed electronics with well-defined
manufacturing standards will be available in very near future. In this study, we present the
printing principles and approaches by surveying the recent investigations in the manufac-
turing and material technologies, applications and environmental impacts.

2. Motivation
The rapid growth of the Internet-of-Things (IoT) is contributing to the evergrowing
interconnection of the digital world with the physical world. IoT is composed of a vast
number of smart objects with communications capabilities for transferring data through
wired or wireless communication networks. This includes, for example, various personal
smart devices, as well as traffic management, security and RFID systems. The smart objects
in general contain several sensing components (sensors) to acquire information about physi-
cal phenomena of interest and communication electronics to convey the data to the Internet.
As such, IoT enables novel applications and services on the cloud. Naturally, IoT is a new
frontier of information and communication technology (ICT) and sensor technologies.
IoT applications in healthcare, transportation, construction, leisure and sports verticals
enable transforming the objects from our everyday life into smart objects. This transforma-
tion inevitably requires the addition of semiconductors, sensors and related electronics,
which are designed to be discarded once the battery lifetime ends (possibly after a couple
of thousands charge–discharge cycles). Although adding intelligence to the devices in
everyday use is attractive and aids in digitalization of the physical world, it also shortens
their lifetime and becomes a major contributor to global e-waste [18]. The products that
might have lasted 15 years must be hence replaced every 5 years after such a transfor-
mation [19]. These periods become even shorter with the consumer intention towards
purchasing new models of fully-operational electronic products. In addition, more power
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 3 of 36

is needed to maintain this trend as the volume and use of such electronic devices keep
constantly increasing [20].
The consequences of the digital transformation and consumer behavior result in
massive amounts of e-waste produced globally [21]. For instance, in 2019, approximately
53.6 Mt of e-waste was generated and it is increasing at an alarming rate of 2 Mt per
year [22]. Out of these, only around 20–25% of e-waste are assumed to be formally recycled
while the majority is domestically dumped into the environment or illegally exported to
developing countries [23,24]. Despite the claimed percentages of formal e-waste recycling,
the absence of systematic procedures in the formal processes frequently ends up in the
landfill [25]. Improper handling of the matter, lack of environmental awareness and
consumer behavior cause irreversible impacts on both environment and human health [26].
Therefore, the current trend of adding intelligence into everyday objects and discarding
their environmental impact is not sustainable and requires alternative solutions that aims
at reducing the looming e-waste stream.
Printed electronics offer several benefits, which are not likely to be achieved with the
conventional electronics manufacturing. Kunnari et al. classified these benefits in terms
of ecodesign (efficient use of materials), minimization of energy consumption both in the
manufacturing and utilization phases, reduced use of hazardous substances, and improve-
ment of recyclability [27]. For instance, use of recycled and/or biobased materials to reduce
the use of raw/virgin materials as printed electronics substrates, and recovery of precious
metals used as inks have been a long-term objective and already accomplished by the
researchers in the field [28–32]. In addition, the metal inks have been under investigation
for depletion of precious materials and ecological aspects (both in raw material mining and
recycling) [33]. Therefore, separation techniques for metals from e-waste and development
of energy-efficient and environmentally friendly carbon based or polymer inks have been
investigated so as to replace or minimize the use of metal inks [34,35].
Printing technologies, as a part of the additive manufacturing umbrella, have been
extending electronics designers toolbox with access to various materials and ability to
apply unorthodox structures in their designs. While printing of all the components is
the ultimate aim of the electronics printing, most of the research activities are related
to design and manufacturing of individual electronic components. Especially, their low
manufacturing cost, large-area processability and lower carbon footprints compared with
their conventional counterparts has attracted significant interest from the scientific and
industrial communities. The printed electronic devices also provide favorable physical
characteristics, e.g., low weight, stretching, resistance to folding or bending, which can not
be realized with the conventional electronics [36,37].
In printed electronics, it is common for a device to be partly printed and partly
fabricated, as elaborated in the literature [38–40]. Various rigid components, such as
memory units, sensors and chips that are manufactured through conventional methods
can be combined with printed parts to form hybrid devices. However, with flexible and
stretchable printed electronics, the use of these rigid components impose challenges in
terms of mechanical and electrical integration. Although flexible interconnects and thinning
of the microelectronic components can be used for this purpose [13], a more promising
solution to this problem is to outright print these components.
As illustrated in Figure 2, researchers have reported passive, active and sensor printed
electronic components [3,7]. While passive components are designed and manufactured
based on electromagnetic properties of printed materials and shapes, active components
utilize nonlinear behavior of printed materials, and sensors are designed based on the
electro-mechanical features of the printed structures. A diverse range of active, passive and
sensor devices have been printed on thin and flexible substrates, which can be recyclable
or even biodegradable [41–47]. In the following subsection, recently investigated printed
electronic component classes are summarized.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 4 of 36

Figure 2. Printed electronic component classes reported in the present review.

2.1. Sensors
Sensors convert various physical phenomenon, e.g., acceleration, temperature, mag-
netic field and capacitance, into electrical signals. As such, they are vital components
in a myriad of modern electronic across all application verticals. For instance, various
sensors are present in common household appliances, such as computers, security systems
and smartphones. In industrial manufacturing facilities, sensors are employed to moni-
tor ambient conditions and equipment parameters to ensure the quality of the produced
items. Sensors can be manufactured using printing technologies, since flexible, biodegrad-
able and stretchable sensing components compromise one of the most prominent area of
printed electronics.
Various printed sensors are reported in the literature, e.g., carbon nanotube (CNT)
based gas sensors [13], graphene-poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) poly(styrenesulfonate)
(PEDOT:PSS) humidity sensors [48], PEDOT:PSS based temperature sensors [49,50] and
active matrix sensor arrays printed on flexible substrate comprising organic TFTs, organic
photodiodes [13]. Recent developments on organic inks and lignocellulosic substrates have
demonstrated the printability of biocompatible and/or recyclable sensing devices. To name
a few, Kim et al. [51] fabricated entirely 3D-printed disposable ion sensor, Ling et al. [52]
explored the feasibility of inkjet-printed PEDOT:PSS/nanopaper-based touch sensor and
Guo et al. [53] demonstrated a 3D-printed pressure sensor composed of degradable and
fully recyclable thermoset elastomers. These sensors attest to their potential applications in
wearable and transient electronics. An example ensemble of printed sensors are depicted
in Figure 3, and a more comprehensive list is presented in Table 1. The tabulated works
have demonstrated that printed sensors may be designed to have performance metrics
comparable to their conventionally manufactured counterparts.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 5 of 36

Table 1. Collection of substrate and ink types used in various printed sensors.

Sensor Sensing Mechanism Substrate Ink

Gas sensor [13] Resistance - Carbon nanotube (CNT)
Pressure sensor [13] Resistance - Carbon
Silver (Ag) nanoparticle &
Polyethylene Terephthalate
Humidity sensor [49] Resistance Poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene)
(PET)
Polystyrene Sulfonate (PEDOT:PSS)

Humidity sensor [48] Resistance Silicon/Silicon dioxide Graphene PEDOT:PSS

(SiO2 /Si)
Humidity sensor [50] Capacitance Paper Ag nanoparticle
Humidity & temperature
Capacitance Polyimide (PI) Nafion/Titanium monoxide (TiO)
sensor [54]
Ag nanoparticle &
Temperature sensor [49] Resistance PET
PEDOT:PSS solution
Temperature sensor [50] Capacitance PI Ag nanoparticle
Temperature sensor [55] Resistance Polyethylene (PE) Silver nitrate (AgNO3 )
Temperature sensor [56] Flexural plate wave (FPW) Lead zirconate titanate (PZT) Ag nanoparticle
Temperature sensor [57] Resistance Paper Ag nanoparticle
Temperature sensor [58] Resistance PI CNT PEDOT:PSS solution
Temperature sensor [59] Capacitance & Resistance Glass NiO

Temperature sensor [60] Surface acoustic wave Lithium niobate (LiNbO3 ) Ag nanoparticle
(SAW)
Temperature sensor [61] Resistance Polyurethane (PU) plaster Graphene PEDOT:PSS solution
Strain gauge sensor [62] Resistance Buckypaper Ag nanoparticle
Poly-dimethylsiloxane
Strain gauge sensor [63] Resistance Ag nanoparticle & SBS/CB solution
(PDMS)

Figure 3. Printed sensors: (a) temperature sensors showing transparent property PEDOT:PSS (Reprinted
with permission from [50]. Copyright 2020 IEEE); (b) a CNT gas sensor array; (c) a resistive pressure
sensor array with test weights (Reprinted with permission from [13]. Copyright 2017 IEEE); (d) a
PEDOT:PSS based temperature sensor with silver nanoparticle electrodes (Reprinted from [49] under
CC BY 4.0 license).

Printed temperature sensors have been explored in detail by Rivadeneyra et al. [49]
and Lall et al. [50]. The temperature sensors studied by Lall et al. were printed in a Wheat-
stone configuration using silver, carbon and PEDOT:PSS on a flexible polyimide (PI)
substrate as presented in Figure 3a. In addition, a temperature sensor using this mate-
rial combination was also presented by Rivadeneyra et al., the purpose of which was
to generate a combination of both positive temperature coefficient (PTC) and negative
temperature coefficient (NTC) materials to measure a broad range of temperatures. As
can be observed in Figure 4, the resistance of PTC materials increases as temperature rises,
and vice versa; the resistance of NTC materials decreases when temperature increases.
Silver functions as a PTC material while carbon and PEDOT:PSS exhibit NTC behavior.
Rivadeneyra et al. [49] also studied specifically PEDOT:PSS based temperature sensors
printed on a flexible polyethylene terephthalate (PET) substrate (please, see Figure 3d), and
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 6 of 36

the effects of electrode spacing and fabrication methods on the thermal sensitivity of the
sensors. In recent years, fabric based NTC thermistors have been also gaining attention
due to the demand in wearable electronic textile industries. For instance, a recent work by
Li et al. [64] demonstrated that a novel low-temperature route can be used to print such
thermistors on polyester fabric, for which perovskite (Cs2 SnI6 ) ink can be used.

Figure 4. (a) Highly linear PTC behavior of silver throughout the test temperature range; (b) NTC
behavior of carbon; (c) NTC behavior of PEDOT:PSS. Note that carbon exhibits near linear NTC
behavior after an initial region of non-linear behavior (roughly from −40 ◦ C to −20 ◦ C). On the other
hand, PEDOT:PSS behaves near linearly initially from around −40 ◦ C to 70 ◦ C. (Reprinted with
permission from [50]. Copyright 2020 IEEE).

The work by Lall et al. [50] demonstrated that temperature sensors printed using
silver ink can reach to sensitivity values as high as 0.192%/◦ C temperature coefficient of
resistance (TCR). Furthermore, in the measured temperature range, resistivity of silver is
reported to behave in a highly linear fashion, as shown in Figure 4a. In contrast, the TCR
value of carbon is −0.048%/◦ C and −0.051%/◦ C with PEDOT:PSS. In addition, the NTC
of these materials changes non-linearly in some temperature ranges. The PTC and NTC
characteristics of just mentioned materials are given in Figure 4.
In the work by Rivadeneyra et al. [49], it was concluded that the sensitivity of printed
temperature sensors could be increased by altering the order of the fabrication steps.
Higher sensitivity values were obtained by first printing and drying the silver electrodes,
then printing and drying PEDOT:PSS and finally, sintering the sensor. In addition, it was
reported that the sensitivity of these sensors can be enhanced by a factor of 2.2 by increasing
the electrode spacing from 150 µm to 200 µm.
Strain gauge sensors are used across numerous industries for monitoring strains
caused by external forces and/or moments. As shown in Figure 5, such sensors are used
to monitor curing and exerted pressure during the manufacturing process and structural
integrity, and to monitor damage during the operation, i.e., for structural health monitoring
(SHM) purposes [65,66]. Recently, aerosol-jet printed CNT strain gauge sensors with CNT
onto buckypaper embedded in composite laminates demonstrated such sensor implemen-
tations in both resin flow and curing monitoring [62]. Thus, the effects of process defects
can be simply monitored during the entire life span of the structure, which gives a clear
idea about possible structural failures in advance. In a more recent paper by Wang et al. [63]
high sensitivity/low hysteresis screen printed strain sensors were also demonstrated. The
presented sensors have performance metrics comparable to their commercial counterparts.
This further indicates the great potential for printability of strain sensors.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 7 of 36

Figure 5. (a) Normalized impedance over time for vacuum and curing cycles for three types of resin;
(b) Printed strain sensor placed on glass fiber reinforced composite; (c) Results of impact hammer
bending of glass fiber reinforced composite with embedded printed strain sensor. (Reprinted from [62]
under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license).

Printed organic transistors can be also used for sensing slowly changing physical
phenomenon. For instance, a bacteria sensor, in which bacteria binding electrodes are inte-
grated with PEDOT:PSS transistor, was demonstrated by Demuru et al. [67]. Similar low
frequency sensors for measuring arterial pulse waves were reported by Laurila et al. [68], for
which the sensor was printed from piezoelectric poly(vinylidenefluoride-co-trifluoroethylene)
(PVDF-TrFE) and accompanied with entirely printed amplifier.

2.2. Thin Film Transistors and Their Applications

Digital electronics rely on the nonlinear behavior of diodes and transistors. However,
printed transistors are known to be relatively large and requiring high supply voltage.
Recently, carbon based transistors have been developed to overcome these issues. For exam-
ple, Portilla et al. [69] and Williams et al. [70,71] recently demonstrated low power printed
thin-film transistors (TFTs), which is a step forward toward fully recyclable electronics.
In addition to low power TFTs, multiple transistors have been recently combined to-
gether by Matsui et al. [72] and Sun et al. [73] to develop operational amplifiers. In their
investigations, Matsui et al. [72] used n-type semiconductor from 4,8-bis[5-(3-cyanophenyl)
thiophene-2-yl]benzo[1,2-c:4,5-c0 ]bis[1,2,5]thiadiazole derivative (TU-3) and p-type semicon-
ductor from 2,8-difluoro-5, 11-bis(triethylsilylethynyl) anthradithiophene (diF-TES-ADT). On
the other hand, Sun et al. used pentacene as the semiconducting material. Furthermore,
printing technologies, especially inkjet printing, have been observed to be suitable for fab-
ricating latches by Weller et al. [74], AND and OR circuits by Kamali-Sarvestani et al. [75],
and inverters by Singh et al. [76]. In the investigations by Weller et al. [74], latch circuits were
implemented by using PEDOT:PSS transistors while AND and OR circuits were printed
by using single-walled CNT field effect transistors (SWCNT-FET) in the research study of
Kamali-Sarvestani et al. [75]. The inverters, on the other hand, were printed using 7-dihexyl-
dithieno[2,3-d;20 ,30 -d0 ]benzo[1,2-b;4,5-b0 ]dithiophene (DTBDT-C6 ) and polystyrene (PS) semi-
conducting material as part of the investigations carried out by Singh et al. [76].
Integration of printed transistors with sensors, antennas and active circuits has been
widely investigated in the literature. The current printed transistor technologies cover
applications with relatively modest frequency needs, e.g., in sensors, RFID and audio
applications. For instance, an interesting audio application was presented by Kheradmand-
Boroujeni et al. [77], for which the printed preamplifier was combined with a printed
piezoelectric loudspeaker. The amplifier was constructed from organic FETs (OFETs),
printed capacitors and resistors while the whole circuit was printed on recyclable PET sheet.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 8 of 36

2.3. Radio Frequency (RF) Components

RFID aims at replacing the identification methods of goods with smart labels [78,79].
As the name suggests, RFID is used to transfer the identification information wirelessly via
RF transmissions. As schematized in Figure 6, a typical RFID system consists of three parts:
a reader (transponder), tag (smart label) categorized as active or passive, and a computer
that collects and manages the information [79]. In numerous RFID applications, the com-
puter manages a database of the supported tag identifiers, and it has the implementation
of the application. The transponder is responsible for accessing the tags and supplying
them the required energy. In passive RFID tags, no power supply units are integrated
into the circuits [80]. Instead, these tags draw power wirelessly through induction from
the device that is reading them. Active tags, on the other hand, have an onboard power
supply. However, passive tags are more common than active tags due to their lower cost
and compact size [78].

Figure 6. An illustration of an RFID system consisting of multiple RFID tags and an RFID reader
connected to a computer managing a database.

Currently, RFID tags can be manufactured in highly cost efficient manner using
printing manufacturing technologies. This opens up the possibility of using RFID tags, for
example, as part of packaging and other applications (please, see Figure 7), for which the
device has short life expectancy and is ultimately disposed. Literature on this subject has
shown that manufacturing of RFID tags is not limited to a specific printing technology,
and gravure, screen, flexographic and inkjet printing technologies have been effectively
used [38,39,81,82]. For instance,
In RF electronic hardware designs, power losses incurred in components and intercon-
nects need to be minimized, as these losses directly define the quality of the end-product. At
mm-wave frequency, inkjet printed interconnects have been found to outperform conven-
tional RF ribbon-bond interconnects, as reported by Eid et al. [83] and shown in Figure 8a.
The printed interconnects incur less losses at mm-wave frequency and generally are closer
to a continuous transmission line than the ribbon-bond interconnects. Furthermore, a
printed antenna targeted to operate at 3.5 GHz for 5G networks and at the frequency band
of wireless local area networks (WLAN), was demonstrated by Wang et al. [84] and shown
in Figure 8c. In addition to this, Jilani et al. [85] also presented an inkjet printed antenna
for mm-wave 5G, which was able to function in the 28 and 38 GHz frequency bands.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 9 of 36

Figure 7. (a) A printed RFID coil by the authors; (b) a fabricated RFID tag with an opening sensor
and force sensor as a part of the packaging [39]; (c) an RFID tag with light detection capabilities
printed on a flexible PEN substrate [40].

Figure 8. (a) Printed interconnect (above) and a ribbon-bond interconnect (below) (Reprinted with
permission from [83]. Copyright 2020 IEEE); (b) the structure for the embedded-on-package 5G
energy harvester (above) and printed device (below) (Reprinted with permission from [86]. Copyright
2019 IEEE); (c) Printed antenna for WLAN and 5G applications (Reprinted with permission from [84].
Copyright 2020 IEEE).

2.4. Energy Harvesting and Storage

As the demand for simple gadgets that can acquire data from the physical world has
increased, their need for energy related maintenance has become an important issue. This
problem, on one hand, is tackled by optimizing the energy storage components such as
batteries. On the other, energy autonomous devices that can harvest the required energy
from the environment are thoroughly investigated. To this end, novel renewable and light-
weight energy harvesting and storage technologies has a considerable potential [87–92].
Printed embedded-on-package 5G energy harvester modules converting electromagnetic
energy into direct current (DC) voltage (please, see Figure 8b), miniaturized silicon solar
cells embedded in textile yarns (please, see Figure 9a), extremely thin, flexible and trans-
parent organic and perovskite solar cells (please, see Figure 9b,c) converting the energy
of light directly into electricity, piezoelectric harvesters converting vibration energy into
useful electrical signals are some few examples [86,93,94]. Recently, Lin et al. [86] presented
a package-integrated mm-wave 5G energy harvester fabricated with 3D-printing and inkjet
printing technologies. As discussed by Eid et al. [83], these system-on-package energy
harvesters could be also designed to harvest other forms of energy, such as solar and
vibration energy. The capability of harvesting energy from the environment would allow
greater autonomy of various electronic devices compared to their battery powered variants.
Moreover, use of novel dissolvable and recyclable polymer materials in energy harvesters,
e.g., demonstrated by Shepelin et al. [95,96], can pave a way for the next-generation wear-
able and implantable transient electronics.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 10 of 36

Figure 9. (a) Solar cell embedded into yarns (Reprinted from [97] under CC BY 4.0 license); (b) Trans-
parent organic solar cell (Reprinted with permission from [93]. Copyright 2020 American Chemical
Society); (c) Flexible perovskite solar cell (Reprinted with permission [94]. Copyright 2019 Royal
Society of Chemistry).

Currently, one of the most important and commercialized forms of the energy har-
vesters utilize photoelectric effects to generate electricity using photovoltaic cells (also
known as solar cells). They are mainly composed of supporting layer covered by pho-
tovoltaic or photoemissive cells and conductive transport grid [98]. The most popular
and commercial material for solar cells has been silicon due to its rigidity and physical
invariance for indefinite time frames. With a global market share of about 90%, the silicon
solar cells have power conversion efficiencies (PCEs) varying between 19 and 25% [99–101].
Printable solar cells, on the other hand, are promising candidates to harvest energy for
niche applications such as wearable textile electronics to charge low-power devices and
building-integrated systems to harvest energy from solar cells placed on roofs, windows or
facades of buildings [102]. In these applications, the fabrication scalability, light-weight,
flexibility and transparency are vital. In recent years, printed solar cells have gained a
momentum due to their simple preparation methods, low energy input/high-throughput
roll-to-roll (R2R) printing, and low carbon footprints. Recently reported PCEs of printed
solar cells is similar to commercial viable cells [103–110]. For the printable solar cells,
various photoactive materials have been implemented in the literature including hybrid
organic-inorganic materials like perovskites and organic conjugated polymer blends such
as poly(3-hexylthiophene) (P3HT) (as being donor) and [6,6]-phenyl C61-butyric acid
methylester (PCBM) (as being acceptor) [111–114]. Lab-scale investigations showed that
printed perovskite solar cells can reach up to PCE values comparable with those of silicon
solar cells, e.g., 16.6% PCE by Zhang et al. [115], 17.2% PCE by Schackmar et al. [116],
17.74% PCE by Li et al. [117], stabilized PCE of 18.5% PCE by Eggers et al. [118] and 19.6%
by Li et al. [119]. In addition to these developments, the printed organic cells developed
by Liu et al. [120] achieved 15% PCE. Very recently, Ma et al. [121] built a highly efficient
ternary system for as-cast organic solar cells with a 16.68% PCE while organic solar cells
developed by Cai et al. [122] reached up to 18.66% PCE.
In parallel with the emerging energy harvesting technologies, scientific advancements
in energy storage devices play vital role in a wide variety of low-power or self-powered elec-
tronics applications [123–125]. Recently, Xing et al. [126], Sundriyal and Bhattacharya [87]
and Aeby et al. [127] demonstrated flexible and disposable printed supercapacitors, also
known as electric double-layer capacitors (EDLCs), by integration of electrodes and separa-
tors onto lignocellulosic substrates such as paper. In the upcoming years, the research on
energy storage devices are expected to advance the current state-of-the-art and result in
more reliable, autonomous and recyclable IoT devices.

2.5. Displays
Printed organic transistors are attractive due to their flexibility, low manufacturing
cost and possibility to cover large structures or sheets cost efficiently. Those features have
fueled the success story of active matrix OLED (AMOLED) displays. Usage of organic
transistors in displays have been hindered by their low electron mobility. However, re-
cently, Mizukami et al. [128] demonstrated how DTBDT-C6 based organic TFTs (OTFTs)
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 11 of 36

can be used as a light source in printed displays. In their work, flexible color displays
were fabricated with inkjet printing technology (please, see Figure 10a). As depicted in
Figure 10b,c, a novel study on printed displays have been reported by Ivanov [129], in
which a screen printed electroluminescent matrix display were developed and described
in detail.

Figure 10. (a) A flexible color display (Reprinted with permission from [128]. Copyright 2018 IEEE);
(b) a screen printed electroluminescent matrix display integrated into a back pack; (c) a closer look of
the screen printed electroluminescent matrix display with the controlling module (Reprinted with
permission from [129]. Copyright 2018 IEEE).

3. Printing Technologies
The technologies used for printing electronic components are well-known in the
graphic arts. Some examples are gravure printing, flexography, offset printing, screen
printing and inkjet printing as depicted in Figure 11. These technologies are often grouped
into contact printing processes, which use printing master [130], contactless (non impact)
printing processes that do not need a master [131], and hybrid printing processes combining
different printing and deposition techniques. In a nutshell, all these processes are used
to deposit stacked layer structures, such as electrodes, conductive layers, isolating layers
for electronic components [132]. After deposition, the ink subsequently changes its phase
in the desired site [133–136]. The initial state, flow and phase change of the ink on the
substrate are mainly affected by the viscosity, density, surface tension, solvent evaporation
rate, solubility and curing characteristics of the ink, and wettability and permeability
of the substrate in use [137,138]. Moreover, multi-layer and multi-material nature of the
final device require compatibility and hence treatment of each layer to ensure the desired
function, e.g., minimal sheet resistance within a short-time span and without damaging
previously deposited layers. As exemplified in the previous section, typical printed devices
include sensors, batteries, capacitors, transistors, solar cells, memories, electroluminescent
structures, large screens, and light panels [34,139–148].
A well-known application of printed electronics is RFID systems where the antennas
can be printed. Printing the RFID antennas on flexible substrates is a very efficient solution
because it provides thinner, lighter and cheaper structures compared to the conventional
etching-based manufactured antennas. Gravure printing, offset and flexographic printing
methods are more commonly used for high-volume production needs, such as solar cells.
Offset and flexographic printing are primarily used for inorganic and organic conductors.
Gravure printing is suitable for printing high resolution and high quality structures such as
organic semiconductors and semiconductor/dielectric interfaces of transistors. In addition,
different printing and deposition techniques, such as gravure printing, via-hole screen
printing and electroless plating can be combined in hybrid printing processes [149,150].
In recent years, new printing processes have been also introduced. For example, Devaraj
et al. [151] created a novel printing process called as ‘form-fuse’. Through this process,
silver nanoparticle patterns are printed onto thermoplastic films using a large-area aerosol
jet printer with mask or a large-area inkjet printer without mask. In order to achieve the
desired geometrical shape, the printed patterns and substrate are vacuum formed. The 3D
patterns are then treated using flash light sintering in order to decrease the resistivity [152].
Moreover, a 4D printing technique using 3D extrusion and melt-electrowriting has been
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 12 of 36

introduced by Constante et al. [153], which enables printing of anisotropic structures used
in biomedical applications.

Figure 11. Classification of printing technologies.

The key properties and parameters of the different printing techniques are summa-
rized in Table 2. Inkjet printing has traditionally been better suited for R&D or special
applications, screen printing is excellent for stacking multiple thick prints, while gravure
and flexographic printing offer more opportunities for mass production of printed elec-
tronics [154]. Flexographic printing creates a thin printed layer with a feature size of 80 µm
and a throughput of 3–30 m2 /s. Offset and gravure printing provide similar features, the
latter being the fastest printing technology in terms of print press speed. Screen printing
and inkjet printing can give a larger layer thickness; inkjet printing up to 20 µm and screen
printing up to 100 µm even with a lower throughput of 2–3 m2 /s in screen printing and
0.01–0.5 m2 /s in inkjet printing.

Table 2. Key properties and parameters of different printing methods [155,156].

Gravure Offset Flexography Screen Inkjet

Throughput (m2 /s) 3–60 3–30 3–30 2–3 0.01–0.5
Resolution (lines/cm) 20–400 100–200 60 50 60–250
Printing speed (m/min) 100–1000 100–900 100–700 10–15 15–500

3.1. Contact Printing Methods with a Master

In contact printing techniques, ink is transferred through direct contact between the
ink and substrate. Contact printing is often referred to as transfer printing or R2R printing.
These printing techniques typically utilize a roll to transfer ink directly to the substrate. The
initial costs are high and these techniques require longer preparation periods [135]. How-
ever, lower production costs, high manufacturing speeds and the repeatability associated
with contact printing technologies make them favorable for mass production [12].

3.1.1. Gravure Printing

In gravure printing, the elements of the image are engraved on the surface of the
printing cylinder, while the non-image areas remain at the original level. As visualized in
Figure 12, the engraved printing cylinder rotates in an ink fountain partially filled with ink.
The entire surface of the cylinder collects ink from the fountain and the excess ink is wiped
off the non-image areas with a doctor blade leaving the ink in the engraved cells. The ink
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 13 of 36

is then transferred from the cells directly to the substrate in a printing nip under pressure.
Ink transfer is often improved by using an electrostatic assistance system (ESA) that creates
an electric field across the nip. The electric field assist in lifting the ink from the cells onto
the substrate. The ink layer is dried by evaporating the ink solvent with hot air [130,157].

Figure 12. Schematics of gravure printing.

Gravure printing is known for its high print quality and speed. For example, the
resolution is 20 to 400 lines/cm and the print speed is 13 to 16 m/s. Other benefits include a
simple printing process, accurate ink application, and flexibility in press design. Publication
presses are designed for fast printing of high-quality magazines, catalogs and brochures.
Print quality has further improved when laser engraving came more popular. However,
increased demand for short batches and personalization has reduced the market share
of gravure printing because the production of a printing cylinder is time consuming and
expensive [130,157].

3.1.2. Offset Printing

Offset printing is an indirect printing method, in which the ink is transferred from a
printing plate to the substrate with an intermediate blanket cylinder, as schematized in
Figure 13. Damping rollers apply a thin layer of moisturizing water to the hydrophilic
non-image areas of the plate. After that ink rollers transfer a thin film of ink over the
oleophilic image areas. The image and other areas are at the same level, but their surface
energies are different. The surface chemistry has an important role in offset printing;
image areas accept ink but repel water and non-image areas accept water but repel ink.
This difference in surface energy prevents ink from spreading from the image areas, and
a thin layer of wetting water in non-image areas prevents further spreading. The ink
layer is then transferred to the blanket cylinder and then to the paper in the nip under
pressure. Offset printing is a wet-on-wet printing method in which process inks are printed
sequentially without intermediate drying. Therefore, some ink is also transferred to the
blanket cylinder of the next print unit. After the last printing, the ink layer is dried by
absorption, polymerization, oxidation, or evaporation [157].
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 14 of 36

Figure 13. Schematics of offset printing.

3.1.3. Flexography
As illustrated in Figure 14, flexography uses soft and flexible printing plates in which
the pixels are raised on the top surface of the rest of the printing plate. The printing ink is
applied to the pixels through an anilox roll with small cells evenly engraved on the surface.
The surface of the anilox roll is applied with ink from the chamber and the excess ink is
then removed with a doctor blade. After formulation, the ink is located only in the cells of
the anilox roll. The ink is then transferred to the pixels on the surface of the printing plate.
The ink transfer takes place in a nip where the prevailing pressure allows the ink transfer
by improving the contact between the ink and the substrate. At the nip outlet, the ink layer
splits and some of the ink is transferred to the substrate. The ink layer is dried by blowing
hot air onto its surface. This causes the ink solvent to evaporate.

Figure 14. Schematics of flexography.

J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 15 of 36

Flexography is used, e.g., for printing RFID antennas, batteries, organic electronic
circuits such as OLEDs and solar cells. OLEDs are used to make diode displays (tele-
visions, computer monitors) and lighting (diode lamps). Smart labels and thin films
printed on polyester film can be used, for example, to monitor temperature during drug
transport [158,159]. The resolution is typically 60 lines/cm and the print speed is 3 to
12 m/s. The biggest challenge is maintaining color saturation and density in fixed areas.
Flexography is suitable for a wide range of printing media. For example, non-porous and
porous substrates can be printed without problems.

3.1.4. Screen Printing

Screen printing is a so-called push-through process, in which ink is pushed through
a fine fabric (screen) made of plastic or metal fiber or wire. The non-image areas of the
screen are covered with a stencil that defines the printed image and acts as a printing
plate. As shown in Figure 15, the screen is full of ink that is pushed through the image
areas of the screen using a squeegee. The achievable print thickness is greater than it is in
other printing methods. Drying of the ink layer is typically accomplished by evaporation,
oxidation, or ultraviolet (UV) curing. Drying can be accelerated by blowing warm air onto
its surface [157]. Print quality is determined by the material, fineness and thickness of the
screen, the distance between the top and bottom of the screen, and the open area of the
screen. The fineness of the screen is typically 90 to 120 fibers/cm.

Figure 15. Schematics of screen printing.

Screen printing is a versatile and simple process for transferring ink to the surface of
substrates. The range of substrates is wide, from paper to ceramics in both sheets and con-
tinuous paths. The technology also allows printing on curved surfaces. Applications range
from art to large industrial applications, from small electrical components to multi-square
meter commercials, and from single-piece production to long print runs. Screen printing is
limited by relatively modest print quality. Screen printing is the oldest technology used
to print electronics. In addition, it is the cheapest, simplest and the most flexible printing
technology. It can be used, e.g., for printing electromagnetic enclosures, capacitors, mem-
brane switches or transistor electrodes. Screen printing has also been studied to print CNTs
and panels of graphene nanoparticles on polymer substrates [160,161] and flexible printed
supercapacitor structures comprising aqueous electrolyte and carbon electrode [150].

3.1.5. Pad Printing

Pad printing is a printing process that can be used to transfer a planar image to a
3D object as shown in Figure 16. This is accomplished using an indirect offset printing
technique in which an image is transferred from a cliché through a silicone pad to a
substrate. This process has been used as an alternative to screen printing, e.g., for printing
transistor electrodes [162].
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 16 of 36

Figure 16. Schematics of pad printing.

3.2. Non-Contact Printing Methods

In non-contact printing, nozzles are typically used to accurately deposit inks onto
substrates without direct contact, which in turn reduces nozzle contamination. Non-contact
printing technologies are significantly slower than R2R contact printing methods. However,
many non-contact printing methods are able to print digital models, unlike contact printing
methods that require parts of the printing unit to be changed in order to print various
patterns. This is particularly efficient in prototyping where a model may be printed only
once, and for on-demand production [135].

3.2.1. Inkjet Printing

An inkjet is a digital printing method, in which liquid ink droplets are sprayed from
small nozzles directly onto the surface of the paper according to digital page information.
Nozzle groups are located at the print heads, which are either stationary and page-wide or
smaller elements that scan from page to page. Fixed nozzle groups can be up to 1 m wide,
allowing for higher print speeds [163]. Inkjet printing is a fairly simple printing method
and also has a light and compact structure. In addition, each printed page can be different
and no printing plates are required, allowing for personalization and on-demand printing.
Therefore, the inkjet is suitable for hybrid printing applications used in conjunction with
the traditional printing techniques.
The main advantage of inkjet printing is high print quality (resolution 2880 dpi), but
limited print speed (2 to 5 m/s) [163]. The inkjet is widely used in commercial, graphic
and packaging printing as well as in publication printing. For example, direct mail and
wide-format products are often printed with an inkjet. In addition, the versatility of the
inkjet process for both sheets and web printing increases its use. The use of UV inks
has grown strongly because they are suitable for use with a variety of substrates, do not
produce volatile organic compounds, and are more durable [164].
Inkjet technologies can be divided into continuous-stream (CS) and drop-on-demand
(DOD) inkjet. These techniques are further subdivided into sub-technologies that differ
in droplet formation or control mechanisms [163]. CS is mainly used in high-speed and
high-volume printing applications such as direct marking, bar coding, personalization,
labeling, catalogs, hybrid printing, packaging and direct mail. Typically, there are no speed
limits, but print quality depends on droplet size and distance, nozzle diameter, droplet
stream quality and continuity, and ink surface tension and viscosity. New developments
have increased the resolution of the continuous inkjet printer to 600 dpi. A continuous
inkjet generates a continuous stream of ink droplets, but only some of them are printed
on the substrate. The ink droplets are charged according to the digital page information,
and the charged unprinted droplets are then directed to the gutter and collected to the ink
chamber. The ink drop is recycled about 40 times before printing [163]. The schematics for
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 17 of 36

CS inkjet printing are displayed in Figure 17a. On the other hand, the high-resolution DOD
inkjet is primarily used for small-scale home and office printing, desktop publishing, and
high-quality wide-format printing and color coating. However, the print speed is slow. The
maximum resolution (2880 dpi) is up to five times higher than CS inkjet, and the droplet
size is also significantly smaller. In the DOD inkjet, every drop of ink hits the paper, and
no charging, deflection or recycling systems are required. The most common DOD inkjet
technologies are thermal and piezoelectric inkjets, which differ in formation technology.
Figure 17b shows the schematic of DOD inkjet printing.

Figure 17. Schematics of (a) CS and (b) DOD inkjet printing.

3.2.2. Aerosol Jet Printing

Aerosol jet printing, also known as Maskless Mesoscale Materials Deposition (M3D),
utilizes atomization of an ink, which produces very small droplets in the aerosol ranging in
size from 1 to 5 µm in diameter [165]. As presented in Figure 18, the atomization of the ink
can be achieved using either a pneumatic or ultrasonic technique [166,167]. These droplets
are delivered to the ceramic nozzle attached to the print head with a vacuum generated by
means of a nitrogen sheath gas stream and impinged as a high-velocity jet onto the surface
of the substrate [168]. This process enables printing on both plane and conformal surfaces.
In order to print complex and 3D patterns, it is crucial to have accurate control over the
beam. Thus, a shutter in front of the nozzle is used to selectively interrupt the beam. In
addition, a proper distance between the nozzle and substrate, which should not exceed
10 mm and should not be lower than 1 mm, must be also maintained for the accuracy.
Exceeding these boundaries usually cause overspray defects in the printed pattern.
Similar to inkjet printing, aerosol-jet printing is capable of printing designs based on
digital models. As an advantage, aerosol-jet printing does not suffer from nozzle clogging.
Feature sizes as small as 10 µm can be produced with this technology, allowing high
resolution printing [169]. However, the main drawback of the aerosol-jet printing is the
speed, which is up to 12 m/min; thus, it is not suitable for mass manufacturing of printed
electronics [135].
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 18 of 36

Figure 18. Schematics of (a) pneumatic and (b) ultrasonic aerosol jet printing.

4. Printed Electronic Materials

In this section, the principle materials used in printed electronics are surveyed. The
ink materials are presented before the substrate materials.

4.1. Inks for Printed Electronics

In printed electronics, inks are used for implementing structures that has a certain
function. In order to print complex electronic structures, several kinds of inks are required,
such as conducting, semiconducting, dielectric (or insulator inks). In some specific cases,
light-emitting or photovoltaic inks are also used [170]. The functional inks used in printed
electronics need to be able to form homogeneous layers and should be compatible with the
other inks that are simultaneously applied.
Functional inks usually contain solvents, resins and/or polymers. The components in
inks can be both organic and inorganic materials; however, some materials have to be in
micro- or nanoscale in order to minimize the printer clogging issues [166], and instead of
pigments, metal particles are commonly used. Additives, such as dispersants, are utilized
to modify the ink properties for the application needs. The polymer or resin component of
the ink operates as the carrier of the metal particles to the substrate. Solvents are used to
adjust the viscosity, optimize the drying and dissolve the polymer or resin while keeping
particles of interest intact [148,171].

4.1.1. Conducting Materials

The conducting inks are synthesized as dispersed nanoparticles, dissolved organometallic
compounds, dissolved or dispersed conductive polymers [42]. Metals are the most commonly
used conductive ink materials, which are in the form of nanoparticle suspensions or metal-
organic decomposition (MOD) [172,173]. Metal-nanoparticles are easy to disperse into inks
for different printing methods due to their nanometer size; however, the production of metal-
nanoparticles require high labor and energy input. Additionally, stabilizers are required to
prevent agglomeration in the inks, and the post-print treatments require high temperatures
(simply over 100 ◦ C) but can be reduced by decreasing the size of the nanoparticles [148,158].
When silver nanoparticles are submersed in water and exposed to UV-light, dissolved silver
ions are released. The silver nanoparticles and the released silver ions have a high toxicity,
which limits the potential applications for silver nanoparticle inks [172–174]. MOD inks, on
the other hand, are based on metal precursor dissolved in a compatible solvent; thus, there
are no agglomeration or condensation problems. Due to evaporation of solvent, gaps in the
printed patterns can occur, which results in decreased conductivity [175]. Nevertheless, this
can be overcome by printing multiple layers with such inks [166,176].
The most popular metal inks are silver, copper, gold and aluminum. Silver-based inks
have high conductivity and resistance to oxidation for long periods of time. Compared
to silver-based inks, copper-based inks have only 6% less conductivity. However, their
conductivity decreases over time due to oxidation. There are several methods to prevent
the oxidation, such as use of antioxidants or carrying out the synthesis in an organic solvent
and forming a protective layer. These methods are, nonetheless, short-term solutions while
long-term solutions against oxidation are, e.g., forming a dense shell of non-oxidizable
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 19 of 36

conductive material or a biometallic core-shell [42]. Gold is another easy to prepare metal
as a conductive ink, which is environmentally stable and requires relatively low sintering
temperatures. Besides, aluminum inks have been also synthesized; however, they have
high tendency for oxidation and chemically active characteristics.
In addition to the metallic inks, carbon-based conductive inks including CNT and
graphene have been also formulated, which are tailorable and used for specific applications.
For instance, metallic SWCNTs (m-SWCNTs) provide excellent stability, flexibility, light
transmittance, the conductivity of which increases with the thickness. Graphene has a high
conductivity, light transmittance, mechanical strength and elasticity; however, conductivity
increases and light transmittance decreases with increased amount of layers [148,158,166].
In recent years, conductive polymers have been also drawing attention due to their cost,
flexibility, light-weight and compatibility with aqueous and organic solvents. However,
they usually have lower electrical conductivity than metallic materials and their production
is challenging due to limited solubility, stability and processability. Moreover, the concentra-
tion of polymer inks is very low (1–6%), which also results in long drying times [148]. They
can be classified as conjugated polymers, polymer electrolytes, organic metal chelates or
charge transfer complexes. Among all conductive polymers, PEDOT:PSS has been the most
popular due to its high conductivity, moderate band gap, low redox potential, temperature
and humidity stability. PEDOT is insoluble but gains the soluble characteristics with PSS
as a dispersion. Even, the conductivity of PEDOT:PSS can be further improved by adding
organic compounds. Other commonly used conductive polymers in inks can be listed as
polyacetylene, polyaniline, polypyrrole, polyacene, polythiophene, polyparaphenylene,
polypyrrole and doped polyacetylene [158,166].
Conductive oxide ceramics have been also used as ink materials, which are usually
produced by doping in order to alter the cation or the anion lattice. Examples of doped
conductive oxide ceramics are antimony tin oxide (ATO), fluorin tin oxide (FTO), indium
tin oxide (ITO), aluminum zinc oxide (AZO) and gallium zinc oxide (GZO). Among
these materials, ITO is the most popular because of its superior conductivity; however,
it is a rare and expensive material [166]. Two types of ITO inks exist, which are sol-
gel and nanoparticle. The sol-gel ink has better conductivity but requires very high
sintering temperatures while the nanoparticle ink cannot form dense oxide films with high
conductivity [158].

4.1.2. Semiconducting Materials

The semiconducting layer of the printed electronics, serves as the active layer, where
most of the electric activity occurs. Silicon and germanium have been the most common
semiconductor materials due to their physical stability and high-performance. In addition
to these, CNTs, graphene nanomeshes and nanoribbons with their unique semiconducting
and mechanical characteristics have been widely investigated for several decades, which
may advance the Moore’s law for packaging to the next level [158,177–183]. Semicon-
ducting SWCNT (s-SWCNT) has high flexibility, light transmittance and mobility [184].
By using only 1–2 layers of graphene, it can be used as semiconductor [148]. Many ce-
ramic oxides can be used as semiconductor materials, such as tin oxide (SnO2 ), zinc oxide
(ZnO), indium oxide (In2 O3 ) and gallium oxide (Ga2 O3 ) [166,185]. The ceramic oxides
have non-toxic degradation; however, they require high sintering temperatures and are
expensive due to their rarity [1]. The recent studies also demonstrated that transition metal
dichalcogenides have semiconducting properties [186,187].
In printed electronics, semiconducting inks are usually formulated from polymer
blends and appropriate solvents. Semiconductors printed with such inks can be used
to realize both p-type and n-type materials. Polymers mostly using holes as carriers are
p-type polymer semiconductors, the most promising types of which are are polythiophenes
(PT) and polyfluorenes (PF). Examples of PTs are poly(3-alkylthiophene) (P3AT), P3HT
and poly(3,30 -dialkyltetrathiophene) (PQT). N-type polymer conductors use electrons as
carriers sucg as poly(9,9-dioctylfluorene-co-bithiophene) (F8T2) [166].
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 20 of 36

4.1.3. Dielectric Materials

Dielectric inks are used as insulator and capacitor layers in printed electronics. In
comparison with conducting or semiconducting inks, it is challenging to make and print
dielectric inks since the dielectric layer requires enough thickness in order to prevent
electric leakage. Substrate materials, like cellulose, gelatine, shellac and silk, are insulators,
and can be used as dielectrics [1]. Additionally, ceramic oxides can be used as dielectric
materials; however, they have a tendency to form pinholes and cracks [166].
There is an abundance of polymers suitable as dielectrics, which have low surface
roughness, surface trap density, concentration of impurities, cost and sintering temper-
atures. Additionally, they are also compatible with organic semiconductors. The most
commonly used polymer dielectric materials are polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), PI,
polyvinylphenol (PVP), PS, polylactic acid (PLA), polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), polyviny-
lalcohol (PVA) and benzocyclobutene (BCB) [1,166].

4.2. Substrates for Printed Electronics

The substrate is a base for the rest of the electronics and acts as an electric insu-
lator to separate electric devices from each other. Traditional substrates for electronics
have been usually rigid and physically invariant for indefinite time frames. Despite their
high-performance, they possess brittle characteristics making them difficult to use, e.g., in
implantable or stretchable devices. On the other hand, the development of lighter, flexi-
ble and recyclable or biodegradable synthetic polymer substrates has been enabling the
advancement of such devices within useful time frames [188–191]. Additionally, biodegrad-
able and non-toxic natural materials, such as fibers, resins and proteins, have exhibited
insulating properties suitable for substrates [1]. A substrate in printed electronics can
be made from synthetic or natural materials; however, different applications may favor
flexibility, stiffness, high transparency, surface smoothness, low thermal expansion, heat
resistance, low cost, thin and light weight [158]. In addition, different printers may have
different requirements, e.g., certain thickness, flexibility and mechanical properties. The
ink used in printed electronics usually requires a treatment after printing, this treatment
can require high temperatures, chemicals or UV-radiation, and some substrates can be
damaged by these treatments. This should be taken into account when selecting a substrate
for the printed electronic device.

4.2.1. Natural Polymeric Substrates

Paper substrate is an attractive alternative for printed electronics, since it is cheap,
flexible, environmentally friendly and biodegradable [192]. The disadvantages of paper
are its high surface roughness, porosity, vapor permeability and poor moisture resistance.
However, the properties of paper can be improved by coating or laminating [193]. Another
suitable natural polymer substrate is nanocellulose, which possesses properties such as
high transparency, mechanical strength, heat resistance, low thermal expansion and high
surface smoothness [1,20,158].
Other natural biodegradable materials, which can be used as substrates are, e.g., silk,
shellac, gelatin and starch [20]. Silk is a biodegradable, biocompatible and nontoxic natural
protein fiber material, which has been shown to be a promising candidate for use as a
substrate. Silk is easy to process and has excellent chemical stability, mechanical properties,
and flexibility. Shellac is a natural resin exhibiting biodegradability, high surface smooth-
ness and high solubility in alcohol solvents, which makes it suitable for forming substrate
films [1].

4.2.2. Synthetic Polymeric Substrates

Polymer films are the most popular choice for printed electronic substrates but the
manufacturing and operational milieu has to be carefully designed and controlled in or-
der to minimize their surface defects and distortions. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET),
polyethylene naphthalate (PEN), PI and polycarbonate (PC) are the most commonly used
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 21 of 36

polymer substrate materials in printed electronics [1]. PET is the most popular poly-
mer substrate, it has high optical transparency, flexibility, solvent resistance, low price
and dimensional stability in high temperatures [37]. PEN and PI on the other hand have
better heat resistance, but lower transparency and higher cost [158]. PC has high stabil-
ity, low weight and good mechanical properties, such as rigidity, impact resistance and
hardness [194].
PLA, PDMS, PVA, polycaprolactone (PCL), poly-lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA),
polyurethane (PU), polybutylene succinate (PBS) and polyethylene glycol (PEG) are ex-
amples of biodegradable polymers that can be used as substrate materials. PLA is a stiff,
transparent polymer, with a slow crystallization rate and low heat resistance, the mechani-
cal properties and heat resistance of which can be improved by, e.g., nucleation, change in
the stereochemistry or the use of additives [20]. PDMS is a highly elastic biocompatible
polymer, which could be used as a substrate in stretchable electronics [1].
As the manufacturing demand for wearable electronics has been increasing, the inter-
est in direct writing or printing of electronic devices onto textiles, such as polyester fabrics,
has become more important. Due to the commonly used high sintering temperatures, it
is unavoidable to damage such fabric substrates. Hwang et al. [195] demonstrated that
the use of low temperature sintering methods, such as intense pulsed light sintering, can
successfully overcome this problem while increasing the conductivity of printed patterns
on the fabrics. In Table 3, the glass transition temperatures, maximum service temper-
atures and other properties of some substrate materials are listed. Here, the maximum
service temperature refers to the highest temperature where the material can be used for
an extended period of time without notable problems.

Table 3. Glass transition temperature, maximum service temperature and authors’ comments about different recyclable and
biodegradable substrate materials. Here, the maximum service temperature refers to the highest temperature where the
material can be used for an extended period of time without notable problems [1,196].

Glass Transition Maximum Service

Substrate Material Temperature (°C) Comments
Temperature (°C)
PET 68–80 115–120 Recyclable, excellent water resistance
Recyclable, excellent water resistance, good UV
PEN 118–126 160–180
durability, transparent
Recyclable, expensive, excellent water resistance,
PI thermoplastic 240–260 221–241
excellent UV durability
PC 142–158 101–116 Recyclable, excellent water resistance, transparent
Recyclable, biodegradable, good UV durability,
PLA 52–60 45–55
transparent, highly renewable material content
PCL (−72)–(−59) 40–50 Recyclable, biodegradable
Recyclable, biodegradable, expensive, good UV
PLGA 44–54 45–55
durability, transparent

PU thermoplastic 77–107 65–78 Recyclable, biodegradable, excellent water

resistance, transparent
Recyclable, biodegradable, highly renewable
Paper 47–67 77–130
material content
Recyclable, biodegradable, highly renewable
Starch 10–20 60–80
material content
Biodegradable, expensive, highly renewable
Silk 77 77–87
material content

5. Characterization of Inks and Substrates

The materials for printed electronics, presented in the previous section, are used as
inks and substrates. In this section, we provide an overview of the methods that are
typically used for characterizing the ink, substrate, the interaction with ink and substrate,
and finally post-treatment alternatives.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 22 of 36

5.1. Ink
Ink characteristics such as viscosity, surface tension, particle size and solid content (or
solid loading) have large impact on the printed electronics. To elaborate, the viscosity of
an ink specifies the resistance against the flow at a specific shear rate. As listed in Table 4,
different viscosities are required for different printing processes. The viscosity of an ink can
be modified; however, it is challenging to keep the same electrical properties with changing
the viscosity [166]. Increasing the temperature decreases the viscosity of the ink while
the solvent evaporation increases the viscosity [167,197]. The solvent in the ink can be
used to tune the viscosity of the ink. Additionally, increasing the dispersant concentration
decreases the viscosity of the ink [171]. Flexography, gravure and inkjet printing use low-
viscosity, liquid, inks, while offset, screen and pad printing use high-viscosity, paste-like,
inks [148].

Table 4. Ink characteristics for different printing methods [156,166,167].

Gravure Flexography Offset Screen Inkjet Aerosol

Viscosity (Pa.s) 0.01–1.1 0.01–2 20–100 0.1–1000 0.001–0.05 0.001–2.5
Surface tension (mN/m) 41–44 28–38 30–37 30–50 25–50 10–20
Layer thickness (µm) 0.1–8 0.04–2.5 0.5–2 0.015–100 0.05–20 0.001–10
Feature size (µm) 70–80 80 10–50 20–100 20–50 5–10

Maximum particle size (nm) 15,000 15,000 10,000 1/10th of mesh 1/10th of 1/10th of
opening nozzle diameter nozzle diameter
Maximum preferred particle size
3000 3000 1000 100 50 50
(nm)
55 (ultrasonic
automization)
Maximum solid loading (wt%) 30 40 90 90 20
75 (pneumatic
automization)

There is a tension at the surface between a liquid and a gas, because of the asymmetric
attractive force between the molecules, this phenomenon is called surface tension. The
surface tension of the ink is important for the formation of drops, which also affects the
interaction between the ink and the substrate [171]. Polar liquids usually have high surface
tension, and nonpolar liquids low. An increase in the temperature or increase in solid
content can decrease the surface tension of an ink [167,197].
The functionality of metal particle inks improve with decreasing particle size [148].
Decreasing the particle size increases the surface area and increases the amount of stabi-
lizing agents required. Additionally, smaller particle size in the ink cause a high surface
to volume ratio, which lowers the required sintering temperature. Small particle size
and uniform size distribution in the ink produce higher viscosity inks and denser printed
patterns [167]. Furthermore, particle morphologies, e.g., nanospheres (NS) and nanowires
(NW), also affect both the electrical conductivity and energy needed for sintering. In their
recent studies, Dexter et al. [198] and Jahangir et al. [199] showed that mixing both NS and
NW can enhance the conductivity and reduce the energy needed for pulsed light sintering,
i.e., lower sintering temperatures. In addition, the investigations by Joo et al. [200] also
demonstrated the decrease in bulk resistivity while the NW weight content in NS:NW
mixture is increased up to 5%. As a matter of course, higher conductivity can be also
achieved by using inks with higher solid content. In the printing process, fewer gaps in
the pattern can be achieved with such inks. An increase in the solid content also leads to
viscosity decrease under shear stress, allowing the ink to flow more smoothly from one
surface to another while still preventing excessive spreading of the ink after printing. The
rheological behavior of the ink can thus be tailored by changing the solid content of the
ink [167].
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 23 of 36

5.2. Substrate
Different printed electronic devices require different properties such as flexibility,
high light transmittance, low surface roughness, light weight, low thermal expansion,
stiffness, heat resistance, low cost and low thickness [158]. The print quality is affected
by the surface roughness and porosity of the substrate [201]. High porosity and large
surface roughness can cause disconnected and nonuniform conductive patterns, due to ink
penetration. The disconnection of the conductive particles cause a decrease in conductivity.
Nevertheless, this can be avoided by using a coating for the substrate, increasing the
amount of conductive ink used or printing wider patterns [193,202]. Additionally, the
surface roughness has contingent impact on the conductivity of the printed pattern [170].
The surface roughness can be analyzed by studying the surface topography and the
cross-section of a sample. An atomic force microscope (AFM) or scanning electron micro-
scope (SEM) can be used to analyze the surface topography [203]. SEM can additionally be
used to study the cross-section of a sample after cutting the sample using a focused ion
beam (FIB) instrument. Other topographic measurement devices can also be used to study
the surface roughness. The porosity can be examined using a print penetration test or a
mercury porosimeter [170].
The performance of electronics is also affected by the surface energy and absorption
capacity of the substrate. The resolution of the printed pattern, ink penetration and ink
film thickness are affected by these surface properties. A decrease in porosity, decreases
the absorption, and a decrease in capillary absorption, decreases the spreading of the
ink laterally, which allows printing more accurate patterns. Substrate properties can be
modified for the purpose by using, e.g., chemical modifications, physical modifications
or coatings [193]. The surface energy can be calculated by testing several known liquids,
such as water, ethylene glycol and diiodomethane, on the substrate using an optical
tensiometer [170].
The dimensional stability of the substrate affect how the substrate reacts to changes in
the environment. Cracks and discontinuity in the printed patterns can be caused by poor
dimensional stability. The dimensional stability can be analyzed by exposing the printed
device to different environmental conditions, such as increasing humidity and temperature
and study the changes in the topographic and electrical properties [170]. Furthermore, the
substrate is often required to be thermally stable since some inks require high sintering
temperatures. The thermal stability can be tested by placing the substrate on a hotplate
and analyzing the changes in dimensions and color [203].
In some electronic applications, it is important to know the dielectric properties of the
substrate. In particular, the dielectric constant and dissipation factor must be known in
order to achieve the required precision. In general, the dielectric constant of the printed
device has to be low in order not to adversely impact high-speed electrical signals. The
dielectric properties of a substrate can be examined using methods, such as a microstrip
T-resonator, microstrip ring test or parallel plate capacitor [203,204].

5.3. Ink-Substrate Interaction

The quality of the printed pattern can be evaluated by the printability, resolution, shelf-
life and adhesion to the substrate [42]. Printed electronics additionally require the ability
to form highly conductive patterns, which is achieved by a homogeneous distribution
and direct contact between conductive particles in the printed pattern [136,167]. The print
quality is greatly influenced by the interaction between the substrate and the ink during
and after the printing process. Ink-substrate interactions include drop impact, spreading,
wetting, solvent evaporation rate and penetration, in addition to the drying and ink particle
merging on the substrate. The interaction between the ink and the substrate include three
stages, it begins with the ink drop impact on the substrate, continues with the wetting and
spreading of the ink on the substrate and finally the ink achieves equilibrium with the
substrate and environment. The properties of the ink and the substrate, in addition to the
environmental conditions, strongly influence this interaction process [171,197].
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 24 of 36

The print quality is mostly affected by the equilibrium wetting, which can be deter-
mined by the contact angle (CA). The CA of a drop on a surface is the angle between the
tangents of the liquid–air and liquid–solid interfaces. The surface tension of the liquid,
the surface energy of the substrate and the environmental conditions, determine the CA.
If the surface energy of the substrate is higher than the surface tension for the ink, the
CA is small with an increased spreading of the ink. On the other hand, a high CA with
decreased spreading can be achieved by using a substrate with a lower surface energy than
the surface tension of the ink. A higher CA with decreased spreading results in thicker
patterns with higher resolution and a decrease in the line width [148,171,197].
The contact angle changes when it is observed over a longer time. An ink drop loses
mass due to evaporation, resulting in a decreased CA over time. It is important that the
evaporation rate is not too fast and allows for wetting and spreading of the drop. It should
not be either too slow with exaggerated spreading. A low advancing CA is required when
depositing individual ink drops on a substrate to form a uniform level high quality pattern.
Commonly the advancing CA is larger than the receding CA for most combinations of inks
and substrates, the difference between these is the CA hysteresis (CAH) [171]. If CAH is
high or CA is low, it is probable that the receding CA is zero [197].
Factors affecting CAH are porosity, surface roughness, chemical heterogeneity and
strong attractive interaction between ink and substrate. Surfaces with high porosity absorb
ink [148]. The surface roughness can increase the wetting and decrease the CA if the CA
is lower than 90°. On the other hand, if the CA is higher than 90°, the surface roughness
restricts the wetting of the surface. CAH is also increased by surface roughness. Addi-
tionally, a substrate with a high surface roughness and porosity can cause discontinuity
in the printed conductive pattern, which would cause a printed electronic device not to
function [136]. The effects of surface roughness can be minimized by surface treatments or
substrate patterning. Chemical heterogeneous materials have areas that are more wettable
and other areas that are less wettable, the receding CA is usually on the most wettable
areas, while the advancing CA is usually on the least wettable area. A drop and a substrate
that do not wet, but have a strong attractive interaction, can cause pinning of the edge of
the drop [197]. Additionally, high viscosity inks are usually more reluctant to spreading
compared to low viscosity inks [171].

5.4. Post-Printing Methods for Device Performance

It is often necessary to use some kind of post-print treatment in order to acquire the
optimal properties, such as conductivity, for printed electronics. These treatments can
be based on physical or chemical reactions and aim to remove solvents and additives
from the ink, in addition to improving the morphology and microstructure of the printed
pattern [166]. Depending on the ink and the substrate used in the printed electronic device,
different kinds of post-print treatments can be used, such as photonic curing, annealing,
thermal-, photonic-, microwave-, plasma- or chemical sintering [42]. The sintering process
is affected by parameters, such as particle size and shape, temperature, time, radiation
energy level and printed pattern thickness. Increased temperature and time, increases the
degree of sintering [171].
Thermal sintering is usually accomplished using an oven or hot plate at a specific
temperature. It is also to be noted that high temperatures can have a negative effect
on the adhesion of ink to substrate and are not suitable for various substrates. Different
inks also have varying thermal stability, some inks can endure very high temperatures
without a change in conductivity, while others may unexpectedly lose their conductivity at
a specific temperature. Thermal sintering is particularly important post-treatment method
for nanoparticle inks. Organic stabilizers are used for metal and oxide particle inks in
order to prevent agglomeration; however, after printing, the stabilizers are removed using
thermal sintering for the particles to form a continuous pattern. Additionally, by thermally
sintering particle-based inks to a temperature below their melting point, the electrical
properties can be improved. The melting point and sintering temperature can be decreased
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 25 of 36

by a decrease in the particle size used in the ink due to an increase in the surface-to-volume
ratio [42,171]. MOD inks usually require very high sintering temperatures, which limits
the choices for substrates used, and precipitation of metal [176]. Material properties can
also be improved by relieving internal stresses in solution-processed semiconductors, by
using annealing. Annealing is usually completed using an oven, hot air flow or hot plate.
The high temperatures used in annealing, limits its application [166].
The different temperatures required to thermally sinter various nanoparticle inks on
glass substrates are compared in Table 5. The silver nanoparticle ink clearly has the lowest
resistivity on glass substrate with a relatively low sintering temperature; however, there are
other factors affecting the sintering temperature and resultant conductive pattern resistivity,
e.g., the size of the conductive particle.

Table 5. Comparison of different sintering temperatures for different nanoparticle inks on glass substrates.

Nanoparticle Ink Sintering Temperature (°C) Resistivity (µΩ·cm)

Silver 200 4 [205]
Copper 200 18 [206]
Gold 240 714 [207]
Aluminium 600 (starting from 25 increasing 10 °C/min) 41.2 [208]
Nickel 230 460 [209]
ITO 400 100 [210]

Photonic sintering transfer energy from a light source, such as flash lamps or lasers, to
the surface. Fast, high temperature and selective heating can be achieved by photonic sin-
tering, which is practical when using substrates that cannot withstand high temperatures.
The use of flash lamps enables effective sintering of the printed pattern with high-intensity
millisecond light pulses, increasing only the ink temperature without damaging the sub-
strate [200]. Intense pulse lamps can be used to sinter large areas (58 cm2 or larger) in
milliseconds using a broad wavelength spectrum (350–800 nm) [198,199,211]. Both contin-
uous and pulse lasers can also be used for sintering printed metal nanoparticle patterns.
High-resolution patterns can be achieved by using laser sintering, the laser beam can be
tuned for different patterns by adjusting the size and intensity [42]. UV-curing, on the other
hand, is commonly used for insulating and chemically stable materials, such as dielectrics
or insulators. Without heating, UV-curing can swiftly solidify the ink with sharp edges and
smooth morphology [166]. However, since plastic absorbs the wavelength range used in
UV-curing, it may cause damage to the plastic substrates [158].
High temperature plasma sintering and low pressure argon plasma sintering are also
selective sintering techniques [166]. Low pressure argon plasma is the most commonly
used plasma sintering method for printed patterns. The sintering starts from the surface
and continues into the bulk, and increasing the treatment time result in decreased resistivity.
Plasma sintering can be used for electronics printed on plastic substrates due to the ability to
use low temperatures but the penetration depth of the plasma limits the possible achievable
thickness of the printed pattern [42,158].
Microwave sintering is a very fast method for sintering metals. The penetration depth
of the radiation is, however, very small (approximately 1–2 µm at 2.54 GHz), which limits
the supported thickness of the printed pattern [158]. Metals with high thermal conductivity
can still use thicker patterns, due to the thermal conductance, and still form uniform
patterns [42,166].
Electrical sintering heats the printed metal pattern using electric current, caused by an
application of voltage over the pattern. The printed pattern is required to be somewhat
conductive already before the electrical sintering. This sintering method is low temperature
and very fast [42].
Chemical sintering is performed using chemical agents in order to provoke nanopar-
ticles to merge at room temperature. Oppositely charged polyelectrolytes are applied
to the metal nanoparticles to stimulate a spontaneous process where the nanoparticles
merge and create a conductive pattern. The polyelectrolyte can be added onto the substrate
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 26 of 36

prior to printing or onto the printed pattern after printing. Chemical sintering enables the
use of substrates sensitive to heat, such as plastics and paper. Negatively charged silver
nanoparticles can be chemically sintered using poly(diallyldimethyl-ammonium chloride)
(PDAC), as a positively charged polyelectrolyte [212]. Other examples of chemical agents
are ascorbic acid, hydrochloric acid (HCl), sodium chloride (NaCl), magnesium chloride
(MgCl2 ) and chloride ions (Cl− ) [42,136,166].
The differences in the resistivity of silver nanoparticle inks on glass and PI substrates
using different sintering methods are compiled in Table 6. In addition to the sintering
method, substrate and ink, the resistivity depends on the silver particle size, other materials
used in the ink and the printed pattern.

Table 6. Comparison of different sintering methods for nanosilver ink on glass and PI substrates.

Sintering Method Resistivity (µΩ·cm) Resistivity (µΩ·cm)

Glass Substrate PI Substrate
Thermal 4.00 [205] 3.60 [213]
Flash lamp 5.59 [214] 3.30 [213]
IR lamp 3.00 [215] 65.50 [216]
Laser 3.41 [217] 4.60 [213]
UV 48.00 [218] 6.50 [219]
Argon plasma 8.73 [220] 15.00 [213]
Microwave - 30.00 [221]
Electrical 2.47 [222] 17 [223]

5.5. Life-Cycle Assessment

In order to address the environmental impacts of the printed electronics, comprehen-
sive assessment throughout the device life, known as life cycle assessment (LCA), is a must.
As holistically schematized in Figure 19, LCA of printed electronics provides relevant
quantification of the environmental aspects at different stages, i.e., production, use and
end-of-life, which are based on the ISO 14040:2006 (Environmental Management-Life Cycle
Assessment-Principles and Framework), ISO 14044:2006 (Environmental Management-Life
Cycle Assessment-Requirements and Guidelines) and ISO 14067:2018 (Greenhouse gases—
Carbon footprint of products—Requirements and guidelines for quantification) [224–226].
These standards complement each other describing the limitations and applications of LCA,
data collection and interpretation for the environmental impact assessment [20]. In align-
ment with these standards, several studies have been conducted which fully or partially
covers the life cycle stages. For instance, aging, degradation, environmental and safety
issues of polymer films have been studied and explained in detail by Izdebska [148] and
Radermacher [227]. Environmental assessments and toxic emission evaluations for printed
antennas have been studied by Kanth et al. [228]. LCA and recycling options for photo-
voltaics were proposed by Espinosa et al. [229], Gong et al. [230], Sondergaard et al. [231]
while energy demand and reusability of biodegradable and recycled printed LED foils
were investigated by Valimaki et al. [20]. In addition, energy demands, performance
and life-time comparisons of OFETs were provided by Vladu [232]. Recent studies by
Dinh et al. [233], Yan et al. [234] and Zhang et al. [235] demonstrated the effective printing
of carbon based inks on thermoplastic substrates, which are highly recyclable. The leading
work by Williams et al. was also a paramount of printable and recyclable sensors and TFTs
composed of fully carbon based inks and lignocellulosic substrates [70]. Although there
exist limitations, the recent advancement in printed electronics demonstrate the possibility
of manufacturing electronic devices with reduced carbon footprint.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 27 of 36

Figure 19. Holistic overview for life-cycle of a printed electronics device. Operational energy is the
energy required to use the device while embodied energy refers to the consumed energy by the
processes associated with the production and end of life.

6. Conclusions
The present article provides a comprehensive review of advantages and limitations
of printed electronics in manufacturing, material, application and environmental aspects.
Based on the trends in industrial and scientific communities, and consumer markets, com-
monly used substrates, inks, and contact and non-contact manufacturing methodologies
are outlined in line with their applications. The recent developments in the printed elec-
tronics related materials and processes have resulted in not only low-cost/low-power
applications but also the creation of international multidisciplinary research teams for long-
term collaboration. Owing to these communities, there have been intense efforts to exceed
commercially viable thresholds and deliver end-products. Overcoming the limitations
related to their performance, durability and reliability, printed electronics will be expected
to replace their conventional counterparts and offer rapid and affordable manufacturing
with less environmental impacts.
Printed electronics are foreseen to be more accessible and available in our daily lives,
which will be one of the gateways towards a digital 21st century. Printed components are
progressively utilized not only in consumer electronics but also in the fields of energy,
biomedicine, transportation, construction and agriculture. Consequently, automation,
communication, sensing and monitoring, data collection and transfer electronics will be
affordably and autonomously manufactured with minimum demand for human labor and
fossil-based energy.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.W., A.K. and H.Y.; Coordination, A.K. and J.W.; Writing—
original draft, J.W., A.K., T.P., H.Y., K.R.; Writing—review and editing, J.W., A.K., T.P., H.Y., K.R., R.J.
and J.P. All authors have read and agreed to the present version of the manuscript.
Funding: The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding from Academy of Finland BESIMAL
project (decision number 334197). J.W. also acknowledges the funding from Jenny and Antti
Wihuri Foundation.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 28 of 36

References
1. Tan, M.J.; Owh, C.; Chee, P.L.; Kyaw, A.K.K.; Kai, D.; Loh, X.J. Biodegradable electronics: Cornerstone for sustainable electronics
and transient applications. J. Mater. Chem. C 2016, 4, 5531–5558. [CrossRef]
2. Zeng, X.; Yang, C.; Chiang, J.F.; Li, J. Innovating e-waste management: From macroscopic to microscopic scales. Sci. Total. Environ.
2017, 575, 1–5. [CrossRef]
3. Maddipatla, D.; Narakathu, B.B.; Atashbar, M. Recent Progress in Manufacturing Techniques of Printed and Flexible Sensors:
A Review. Biosensors 2020, 12, 199. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Espera, A.H.; Dizon, J.R.C.; Chen, Q.; Advincula, R.C. 3D-printing and advanced manufacturing for electronics. Prog. Addit. Manuf.
2019, 4, 245–267. [CrossRef]
5. Gengenbach, U.; Ungerer, M.; Koker, L.; Reichert, K.M.; Stiller, P.; Huang, C.; Hagenmeyer, V. Automated fabrication of multi-layer
printed electronic circuits using a novel vector ink-jet printing process control and surface mounting of discrete components.
IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019, 52, 609–614. [CrossRef]
6. Gengenbach, U.; Ungerer, M.; Koker, L.; Reichert, K.M.; Stiller, P.; Allgeier, S.; Köhler, B.; Zhu, X.; Huang, C.; Hagenmeyer, V.
Automated fabrication of hybrid printed electronic circuits. Mechatronics 2020, 70, 102403. [CrossRef]
7. Ostfeld, A.E.; Deckman, I.; Gaikwad, A.M.; Lochner, C.M.; Arias, A.C. Screen printed passive components for flexible power
electronics. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 15959. [CrossRef]
8. Ramamoorthy, S.K.; Skrifvars, M.; Persson, A. A review of natural fibers used in biocomposites: Plant, animal and regenerated
cellulose fibers. Polym. Rev. 2015, 55, 107–162. [CrossRef]
9. Kasap, S.; Capper, P. Springer Handbook of Electronic and Photonic Materials; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017. [CrossRef]
10. Zhang, F.; Saleh, E.; Vaithilingam, J.; Li, Y.; Tuck, C.J.; Hague, R.J.; Wildman, R.D.; He, Y. Reactive material jetting of polyimide
insulators for complex circuit board design. Addit. Manuf. 2019, 25, 477–484. [CrossRef]
11. Beedasy, V.; Smith, P.J. Printed electronics as prepared by inkjet printing. Materials 2020, 13, 704. [CrossRef]
12. Khan, S.; Lorenzelli, L.; Dahiya, R.S. Technologies for printing sensors and electronics over large flexible substrates: A review.
IEEE Sens. J. 2015, 6, 3164–3185. [CrossRef]
13. Schwartz, D.E.; Rivnay, J.; Whiting, G.L.; Mei, P.; Zhang, Y.; Krusor, B.; Kor, S.; Daniel, G.; Ready, S.E.; Veres, J.; et al. Flexible
hybrid electronic circuits and systems. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Circuits Syst. 2017, 7, 27–37. [CrossRef]
14. Chang, J.S.; Facchetti, A.F.; Reuss, R. A Circuits and Systems Perspective of Organic/Printed Electronics: Review, Challenges,
and Contemporary and Emerging Design Approaches. IEEE J. Emerg. Sel. Top. Circuits Syst. 2017, 7, 7–26. [CrossRef]
15. Özkan, M.; Hashmi, S.G.; Halme, J.; Karakoç, A.; Sarikka, T.; Paltakari, J.; Lund, P.D. Inkjet-printed platinum counter electrodes
for dye-sensitized solar cells. Org. Electron. 2017, 44, 159–167. [CrossRef]
16. Sowade, E.; Ramon, E.; Mitra, K.Y.; Martínez-Domingo, C.; Pedró, M.; Pallarès, J.; Loffredo, F.; Villani, F.; Gomes, H.L.;
Terés, L.; et al. All-inkjet-printed thin-film transistors: Manufacturing process reliability by root cause analysis. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6,
33490. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Kjar, A.; Huang, Y. Application of micro-scale 3D printing in pharmaceutics. Pharmaceutics 2019, 11, 390. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18. Patil, R.A.; Ramakrishna, S. A comprehensive analysis of e-waste legislation worldwide. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27,
14412–14431. [CrossRef]
19. Higginbotham, S. The internet of trash: IoT has a looming e-waste problem. IEEE Spectr. Technol. Eng. Sci. News 2018, 17.
Available online: https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-internet-of-trash-iot-has-a-looming-ewaste-problem (accessed on 30 May 2021).
20. Välimäki, M.K.; Sokka, L.I.; Peltola, H.B.; Ihme, S.S.; Rokkonen, T.M.; Kurkela, T.J.; Ollila, J.T.; Korhonen, A.T.; Hast, J.T. Printed
and hybrid integrated electronics using bio-based and recycled materials—Increasing sustainability with greener materials and
technologies. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 111, 325–339. [CrossRef]
21. Heacock, M.; Kelly, C.B.; Asante, K.A.; Birnbaum, L.S.; Bergman, Å.L.; Bruné, M.N.; Buka, I.; Carpenter, D.O.; Chen, A.;
Huo, X.; et al. E-waste and harm to vulnerable populations: A growing global problem. Environ. Health Perspect. 2016, 124,
550–555. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Ismail, H.; Hanafiah, M.M. A review of sustainable e-waste generation and management: Present and future perspectives.
J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 264, 110495. [CrossRef]
23. Li, W.; Achal, V. Environmental and health impacts due to e-waste disposal in China—A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 737,
139745. [CrossRef]
24. Arya, S.; Kumar, S. E-waste in India at a glance: Current trends, regulations, challenges and management strategies. J. Clean. Prod.
2020, 271, 122707. [CrossRef]
25. Balde, C.; Forti, V.; Gray, V.; Kuehr, R.; Stegmann, P. The Global e-Waste Monitor 2017: Quantities, Flows and Resources; United
Nations University: Bonn, Germany; International Telecommunication Union: Geneva, Switzerland; International Solid Waste
Association: Vienna, Austria, 2017. [CrossRef]
26. Joseph, K. Electronic waste management in India–issues and strategies. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Waste
Management and Landfill Symposium, Sardinia, Italy, 1–5 October 2007.
27. Kunnari, E.; Valkama, J.; Keskinen, M.; Mansikkamäki, P. Environmental evaluation of new technology: Printed electronics case
study. J. Clean. Prod. 2009, 9, 791–799. [CrossRef]
28. Keskinen, M. End-of-life options for printed electronics. In Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Handbook; Woodhead
Publishing: Sawston, UK, 2012. [CrossRef]
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 29 of 36

29. Mraović, M.; Muck, T.; Pivar, M.; Trontelj, J.; Pleteršek, A. Humidity sensors printed on recycled paper and cardboard. Sensors
2014, 14, 13628–13643. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
30. Tuukkanen, S.; Välimäki, M.; Lehtimäki, S.; Vuorinen, T.; Lupo, D. Behaviour of one-step spray-coated carbon nanotube
supercapacitor in ambient light harvester circuit with printed organic solar cell and electrochromic display. Sci. Rep. 2016,
6, 22967. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
31. Ostfeld, A.E.; Arias, A.C. Flexible photovoltaic power systems: Integration opportunities, challenges and advances. Flex. Print. Electron.
2017, 2, 013001. [CrossRef]
32. Ataeefard, M.; Khamseh, S. Design of conductive pattern on recycled paper. Pigment Resin Technol. 2019, 48, 409–414. [CrossRef]
33. Pickard, W.F. Geochemical constraints on sustainable development: Can an advanced global economy achieve long-term stability?
Glob. Planet. Chang. 2008, 61, 285–299. [CrossRef]
34. Aliaga, C.; Ferreira, B.; Hortal, M.; Pancorbo, M.Á.; López, J.M.; Navas, F.J. Influence of RFID tags on recyclability of plastic
packaging. Waste Manag. 2011, 31, 1133–1138. [CrossRef]
35. Lehtimaäki, S.; Suominen, M.; Damlin, P.; Tuukkanen, S.; Kvarnstroöm, C.; Lupo, D. Preparation of supercapacitors on flexible
substrates with electrodeposited PEDOT/graphene composites. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2015, 7, 22137–22147. [CrossRef]
36. Cheng, I.C.; Wagner, S. Overview of flexible electronics technology. In Flexible Electronics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany,
2009; pp. 1–28.
37. Nathan, A.; Ahnood, A.; Cole, M.T.; Lee, S.; Suzuki, Y.; Hiralal, P.; Bonaccorso, F.; Hasan, T.; Garcia-Gancedo, L.;
Dyadyusha, A.; et al. Flexible electronics: The next ubiquitous platform. Proc. IEEE 2012, 100, 1486–1517. [CrossRef]
38. Salmerón, J.F.; Molina-Lopez, F.; Briand, D.; Ruan, J.J.; Rivadeneyra, A.; Carvajal, M.A.; Capitán-Vallvey, L.F.; de Rooij, N.F.;
Palma, A.J. Properties and Printability of Inkjet and Screen-Printed Silver Patterns for RFID Antennas. J. Electron. Mater. 2014, 43,
604–617. [CrossRef]
39. Fernández-Salmerón, J.; Rivadeneyra, A.; Martínez-Martí, F.; Capitán-Vallvey, L.F.; Palma, A.J.; Carvajal, M.A. Passive UHF RFID
tag with multiple sensing capabilities. Sensors 2015, 15, 26769–26782. [CrossRef]
40. Falco, A.; Salmerón, J.F.; Loghin, F.C.; Lugli, P.; Rivadeneyra, A. Fully Printed Flexible Single-Chip RFID Tag with Light Detection
Capabilities. Sensors 2017, 17, 534. [CrossRef]
41. Berggren, M.; Nilsson, D.; Robinson, N.D. Organic materials for printed electronics. Nat. Mater. 2007, 6, 3–5. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Kamyshny, A.; Magdassi, S. Conductive nanomaterials for printed electronics. Small 2014, 10, 3515–3535. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43. Khan, Y.; Thielens, A.; Muin, S.; Ting, J.; Baumbauer, C.; Arias, A.C. A new frontier of printed electronics: Flexible hybrid
electronics. Adv. Mater. 2020, 32, 1905279. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Perelaer, J.; Smith, P.J.; Mager, D.; Soltman, D.; Volkman, S.K.; Subramanian, V.; Korvink, J.G.; Schubert, U.S. Printed electronics:
The challenges involved in printing devices, interconnects, and contacts based on inorganic materials. J. Mater. Chem. 2010,
20, 8446–8453. [CrossRef]
45. Clemens, W.; Fix, W.; Ficker, J.; Knobloch, A.; Ullmann, A. From polymer transistors toward printed electronics. J. Mater. Res.
2004, 19, 1963–1973. [CrossRef]
46. Tomotoshi, D.; Kawasaki, H. Surface and interface designs in copper-based conductive inks for printed/flexible electronics.
Nanomaterials 2020, 10, 1689. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
47. Mackanic, D.G.; Chang, T.H.; Huang, Z.; Cui, Y.; Bao, Z. Stretchable electrochemical energy storage devices. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2020,
49, 4466–4495. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
48. Popov, V.I.; Kotin, I.A.; Nebogatikova, N.A.; Smagulova, S.A.; Antonova, I.V. Graphene-PEDOT: PSS Humidity Sensors for High
Sensitive, Low-Cost, Highly-Reliable, Flexible, and Printed Electronics. Materials 2019, 12, 3477. [CrossRef]
49. Rivadeneyra, A.; Bobinger, M.; Albrecht, A.; Becherer, M.; Lugli, P.; Falco, A.; Salmerón, J.F. Cost-effective PEDOT:PSS
Temperature Sensors Inkjetted on a Bendable Substrate by a Consumer Printer. Polymers 2019, 11, 824. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
50. Lall, P.; Goyal, K.; Narangaparambil, J. Accuracy, Hysteresis and Extended Time Stability of Additively Printed Temperature and
Humidity Sensors. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 70th Electronic Components and Technology Conference (ECTC), Orlando,
FL, USA, 3–30 June 2020. [CrossRef]
51. Kim, T.; Bao, C.; Hausmann, M.; Siqueira, G.; Zimmermann, T.; Kim, W.S. 3D printed disposable wireless ion sensors with
biocompatible cellulose composites. Adv. Electron. Mater. 2019, 5, 1800778. [CrossRef]
52. Ling, H.; Chen, R.; Huang, Q.; Shen, F.; Wang, Y.; Wang, X. Transparent, flexible and recyclable nanopaper-based touch sensors
fabricated via inkjet-printing. Green Chem. 2020, 22, 3208–3215. [CrossRef]
53. Guo, Y.; Chen, S.; Sun, L.; Yang, L.; Zhang, L.; Lou, J.; You, Z. Degradable and Fully Recyclable Dynamic Thermoset Elastomer for
3D-Printed Wearable Electronics. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2021, 31, 2009799. [CrossRef]
54. Hsiao, F.R.; Liao, Y.C. Printed Micro-Sensors for Simultaneous Temperature and Humidity Detection. IEEE Sens. J. 2018,
18, 6788–6793. [CrossRef]
55. Sui, Y.; Kreider, L.P.; Bogie, K.M.; Zorman, C.A. Fabrication of a Silver-Based Thermistor on Flexible, Temperature-Sensitive
Substrates Using a Low-Temperature Inkjet Printing Technique. IEEE Sens. Lett. 2019, 3, 1–4. [CrossRef]
56. Sappati, K.K.; Bhadra, S. Printed Polymer based Acoustic Sensor for Temperature Monitoring. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE
International Conference on Flexible and Printable Sensors and Systems (FLEPS), Manchester, UK, 16–19 August 2020; pp. 1–4.
[CrossRef]
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 30 of 36

57. Gieva, E.E.; Nikolov, G.T.; Nikolova, B.M.; Ruskova, I.N. Temperature Sensing with Inkjet Printed Structures. In Proceedings
of the 2019 IEEE XXVIII International Scientific Conference Electronics (ET), Sozopol, Bulgaria, 12–14 September 2019; pp. 1–4.
[CrossRef]
58. Kuzubasoglu, B.A.; Sayar, E.; Bahadir, S.K. Inkjet-printed CNT/PEDOT:PSS temperature sensor on a textile substrate for wearable
intelligent systems. IEEE Sens. J. 2021. [CrossRef]
59. Lin, S.C.; Liao, Y.C. Integrated humidity and temperature sensing circuit fabricated by inkjet printing technology. In Proceedings
of the 2016 11th International Microsystems, Packaging, Assembly and Circuits Technology Conference (IMPACT), Taipei, Taiwan,
26–28 October 2016; pp. 59–61. [CrossRef]
60. Morales-Rodríguez, M.E.; Joshi, P.C.; Humphries, J.R.; Fuhr, P.L.; Mcintyre, T.J. Fabrication of Low Cost Surface Acoustic Wave
Sensors Using Direct Printing by Aerosol Inkjet. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 20907–20915. [CrossRef]
61. Vuorinen, T.; Niittynen, J.; Kankkunen, T.; Kraft, T.M.; Mäntysalo, M. Inkjet-printed graphene/PEDOT: PSS temperature sensors
on a skin-conformable polyurethane substrate. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 35289. [CrossRef]
62. Siddique, S.; Park, J.G.; Andrei, P.; Liang, R. M3D aerosol jet printed buckypaper multifunctional sensors for composite structural
health monitoring. Results Phys. 2019. [CrossRef]
63. Wang, Y.F.; Sekine, T.; Takeda, Y.; Hong, J.; Yoshida, A.; Matsui, H.; Kumaki, D.; Nishikawa, T.; Shiba, T.; Sunaga, T.; et al. Printed
Strain Sensor with High Sensitivity and Wide Working Range Using a Novel Brittle–Stretchable Conductive Network. ACS Appl.
Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 35282–35290. [CrossRef]
64. Li, S.; Kosek, A.; Jahangir, M.N.; Malhotra, R.; Chang, C.H. Inkjet Printing of Perovskites for Breaking Performance–Temperature
Tradeoffs in Fabric-Based Thermistors. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2021, 31, 2006273. [CrossRef]
65. Zymelka, D.; Togashi, K.; Ohigashi, R.; Yamashita, T.; Takamatsu, S.; Itoh, T.; Kobayashi, T. Printed strain sensor array for
application to structural health monitoring. Smart Mater. Struct. 2017, 26, 105040. [CrossRef]
66. Lee, G.Y.; Kim, M.S.; Yoon, H.S.; Yang, J.; Ihn, J.B.; Ahn, S.H. Direct printing of strain sensors via nanoparticle printer for the
applications to composite structural health monitoring. Procedia CIRP 2017, 66, 238–242. [CrossRef]
67. Demuru, S.; Marette, A.; Kooli, W.; Junier, P.; Briand, D. Flexible Organic Electrochemical Transistor with Functionalized Inkjet-
Printed Gold Gate for Bacteria Sensing. In Proceedings of the 2019 20th International Conference on Solid-State Sensors, Actuators
and Microsystems Eurosensors XXXIII (Transducers Eurosensors XXXIII), Berlin, Germany, 23–27 June 2019; pp. 2519–2522.
[CrossRef]
68. Laurila, M.M.; Matsui, H.; Shiwaku, R.; Peltokangas, M.; Verho, J.; Montero, K.L.; Sekine, T.; Vehkaoja, A.; Oksala, N.;
Tokito, S.; et al. A Fully Printed Ultra-Thin Charge Amplifier for On-Skin Biosignal Measurements. IEEE J. Electron Devices Soc.
2019, 7, 566–574. [CrossRef]
69. Portilla, L.; Zhao, J.; Wang, Y.; Sun, L.; Li, F.; Robin, M.; Wei, M.; Cui, Z.; Occhipinti, L.G.; Anthopoulos, T.D.; et al. Ambipolar
Deep-Subthreshold Printed-Carbon-Nanotube Transistors for Ultralow-Voltage and Ultralow-Power Electronics. ACS Nano 2020,
14, 14036–14046. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
70. Williams, N.X.; Bullard, G.; Brooke, N.; Therien, M.J.; Franklin, A.D. Fully printed, all-carbon, recyclable electronics. arXiv 2020,
arXiv:2009.10225.
71. Williams, N.X.; Bullard, G.; Brooke, N.; Therien, M.J.; Franklin, A.D. Printable and recyclable carbon electronics using crystalline
nanocellulose dielectrics. Nat. Electron. 2021, 4, 261–268. [CrossRef]
72. Matsui, H.; Hayasaka, K.; Takeda, Y.; Shiwaku, R.; Kwon, J.; Tokito, S. Printed 5-V organic operational amplifiers for various
signal processing. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 8980. [CrossRef]
73. Sun, H.; Xu, Y.; Noh, Y.Y. Flexible Organic Amplifiers. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 2017, 64, 1944–1954. [CrossRef]
74. Weller, D.; Cadilha Marques, G.; Aghassi-Hagmann, J.; Tahoori, M.B. An Inkjet-Printed Low-Voltage Latch Based on Inorganic
Electrolyte-Gated Transistors. IEEE Electron Device Lett. 2018, 39, 831–834. [CrossRef]
75. Kamali-Sarvestani, R.; Martin, B.; Brayden, L. Design and Fabrication of Ink-Jet Printed Logic Gates using SWCNT-FET for
Flexible Circuit Applications. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS),
Sapporo, Japan, 26–29 May 2019; pp. 1–5. [CrossRef]
76. Singh, S.; Takeda, Y.; Matsui, H.; Tokito, S. Flexible PMOS Inverter and NOR Gate Using Inkjet-Printed Dual-Gate Organic Thin
Film Transistors. IEEE Electron Device Lett. 2020, 41, 409–412. [CrossRef]
77. Kheradmand-Boroujeni, B.; Schmidt, G.C.; Höft, D.; Bellmann, M.; Haase, K.; Ishida, K.; Shabanpour, R.; Meister, T.; Carta, C.;
Ghesquiere, P.; et al. A Fully-Printed Self-Biased Polymeric Audio Amplifier for Driving Fully-Printed Piezoelectric Loudspeakers.
IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I Regul. Pap. 2016, 63, 785–794. [CrossRef]
78. Want, R. An introduction to RFID technology. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 2006, 5, 25–33. [CrossRef]
79. Nasri, N.; Kachouri, N.; Samet, M.; Andrieux, L. Radio Frequency IDentification (RFID) working, design considerations and
modelling of antenna. In Proceedings of the 2008 5th International Multi-Conference on Systems, Signals and Devices, Amman,
Jordan, 20–22 July 2008. [CrossRef]
80. Weinstein, R. RFID: A technical overview and its application to the enterprise. IT Prof. 2005, 7, 27–33. [CrossRef]
81. Voigt, M.M.; Guite, A.; Chung, D.Y.; Khan, R.U.A.; Campbell, A.J.; Bradley, D.D.C.; Meng, F.; Steinke, J.H.G.; Tierney, S.;
McCulloch, I.; et al. Polymer Field-Effect Transistors Fabricated by the Sequential Gravure Printing of Polythiophene, Two
Insulator Layers, and a Metal Ink Gate. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2010, 20, 239–246. [CrossRef]
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 31 of 36

82. Xiao, G.; Zhang, Z.; Fukutani, H.; Tao, Y.; Lang, S. Improving the Q -Factor of Printed HF RFID Loop Antennas on Flexible
Substrates by Condensing the Microstructures of Conductors. IEEE J. Radio Freq. Identif. 2018. [CrossRef]
83. Eid, A.; He, X.; Bahr, R.; Lin, T.H.; Cui, Y.; Adeyeye, A.; Tehrani, B.; Tentzeris, M.M. Inkjet-/3D-/4D-Printed Perpetual Electronics
and Modules: RF and mm-Wave Devices for 5G+, IoT, Smart Agriculture, and Smart Cities Applications. IEEE Microw. Mag.
2020. [CrossRef]
84. Wang, Y.; Chen, C.L. A Triple-Band Printed Monopole Antenna for WLAN/WiMAX/5G Applications. In Proceedings of the
2020 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Electronic Information and Communication Technology (ICEICT), Shenzhen, China,
13–15 November 2020. [CrossRef]
85. Jilani, S.; Alomainy, A. An inkjet-printed MMW frequency-reconfigurable antenna on a flexible PET substrate for 5G wire-
less systems. In Proceedings of the Loughborough Antennas & Propagation Conference (LAPC 2017), Loughborough, UK,
13–14 November 2017. [CrossRef]
86. Lin, T.H.; Daskalakis, S.N.; Georgiadis, A.; Tentzeris, M.M. Achieving Fully Autonomous System-on-Package Designs:
An Embedded-on-Package 5G Energy Harvester within 3D Printed Multilayer Flexible Packaging Structures. In Proceedings of
the 2019 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium (IMS), Boston, MA, USA, 2–7 June 2019. [CrossRef]
87. Sundriyal, P.; Bhattacharya, S. Inkjet-printed electrodes on A4 paper substrates for low-cost, disposable, and flexible asymmetric
supercapacitors. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 38507–38521. [CrossRef]
88. Choi, Y.M.; Lee, M.G.; Jeon, Y. Wearable biomechanical energy harvesting technologies. Energies 2017, 10, 1483. [CrossRef]
89. Pacchierotti, C.; Sinclair, S.; Solazzi, M.; Frisoli, A.; Hayward, V.; Prattichizzo, D. Wearable haptic systems for the fingertip and
the hand: Taxonomy, review, and perspectives. IEEE Trans. Haptics 2017, 10, 580–600. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
90. Javed, M.S.; Zhong, D.; Ma, T.; Song, A.; Ahmed, S. Hybrid pumped hydro and battery storage for renewable energy based
power supply system. Appl. Energy 2020, 257, 114026. [CrossRef]
91. Wang, C.; Xia, K.; Wang, H.; Liang, X.; Yin, Z.; Zhang, Y. Advanced carbon for flexible and wearable electronics. Adv. Mater. 2019,
31, 1801072. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
92. Qin, J.; Lan, L.; Chen, S.; Huang, F.; Shi, H.; Chen, W.; Xia, H.; Sun, K.; Yang, C. Recent progress in flexible and stretchable organic
solar cells. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2002529. [CrossRef]
93. Lee, J.; Cha, H.; Yao, H.; Hou, J.; Suh, Y.H.; Jeong, S.; Lee, K.; Durrant, J.R. Toward Visibly Transparent Organic Photovoltaic Cells
Based on a Near-Infrared Harvesting Bulk Heterojunction Blend. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 32764–32770. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
94. Kang, S.; Jeong, J.; Cho, S.; Yoon, Y.J.; Park, S.; Lim, S.; Kim, J.Y.; Ko, H. Ultrathin lightweight and flexible perovskite solar cells
with an excellent power-per-weight performance. J. Mater. Chem. A 2019, 7, 1107–1114. [CrossRef]
95. Shepelin, N.A.; Lussini, V.C.; Fox, P.J.; Dicinoski, G.W.; Glushenkov, A.M.; Shapter, J.G.; Ellis, A.V. 3D printing of poly (vinylidene
fluoride-trifluoroethylene): A poling-free technique to manufacture flexible and transparent piezoelectric generators. MRS
Commun. 2019, 9, 159–164. [CrossRef]
96. Shepelin, N.A.; Sherrell, P.C.; Goudeli, E.; Skountzos, E.N.; Lussini, V.C.; Dicinoski, G.W.; Shapter, J.G.; Ellis, A.V. Printed
recyclable and self-poled polymer piezoelectric generators through single-walled carbon nanotube templating. Energy Environ.
Sci. 2020, 13, 868–883. [CrossRef]
97. Satharasinghe, A.; Hughes-Riley, T.; Dias, T. An investigation of a wash-durable solar energy harvesting textile. Prog. Photovolt.
Res. Appl. 2020, 28, 578–592. [CrossRef]
98. Baran, D.; Corzo, D.; Blazquez, G.T. Flexible Electronics: Status, Challenges and Opportunities. Front. Electron. 2020, 1, 2.
99. Battaglia, C.; Cuevas, A.; De Wolf, S. High-efficiency crystalline silicon solar cells: Status and perspectives. Energy Environ. Sci.
2016, 9, 1552–1576. [CrossRef]
100. Masuko, K.; Shigematsu, M.; Hashiguchi, T.; Fujishima, D.; Kai, M.; Yoshimura, N.; Yamaguchi, T.; Ichihashi, Y.; Mishima, T.;
Matsubara, N.; et al. Achievement of more than 25% conversion efficiency with crystalline silicon heterojunction solar cell.
IEEE J. Photovolt. 2014, 4, 1433–1435. [CrossRef]
101. Feldmann, F.; Simon, M.; Bivour, M.; Reichel, C.; Hermle, M.; Glunz, S. Carrier-selective contacts for Si solar cells. Appl. Phys. Lett.
2014, 104, 181105. [CrossRef]
102. Riede, M.; Spoltore, D.; Leo, K. Organic Solar Cells—The Path to Commercial Success. Adv. Energy Mater. 2021, 11, 2002653.
[CrossRef]
103. Ahlswede, E.; Mühleisen, W.; bin Moh Wahi, M.W.; Hanisch, J.; Powalla, M. Highly efficient organic solar cells with printable
low-cost transparent contacts. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2008, 92, 127. [CrossRef]
104. Vogelbaum, H.S.; Sauvé, G. Recently developed high-efficiency organic photoactive materials for printable photovoltaic cells:
A mini review. Synth. Met. 2017, 223, 107–121. [CrossRef]
105. Li, Y.; Xu, G.; Cui, C.; Li, Y. Flexible and semitransparent organic solar cells. Adv. Energy Mater. 2018, 8, 1701791. [CrossRef]
106. Facchetti, A. π-Conjugated polymers for organic electronics and photovoltaic cell applications. Chem. Mater. 2011, 23, 733–758.
[CrossRef]
107. Eggenhuisen, T.; Galagan, Y.; Biezemans, A.; Slaats, T.; Voorthuijzen, P.; Kommeren, S.; Shanmugam, S.; Teunissen, P.; Hadipour,
A.; Verhees, W.; et al. High efficiency, fully inkjet printed organic solar cells with freedom of design. J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3.
[CrossRef]
108. Cheng, P.; Zhan, X. Stability of organic solar cells: Challenges and strategies. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2016, 45, 2544–2582. [CrossRef]
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 32 of 36

109. Zhao, J.; Li, Y.; Yang, G.; Jiang, K.; Lin, H.; Ade, H.; Ma, W.; Yan, H. Efficient organic solar cells processed from hydrocarbon
solvents. Nat. Energy 2016, 1, 1–7. [CrossRef]
110. Hu, Z.; Wang, J.; Ma, X.; Gao, J.; Xu, C.; Wang, X.; Zhang, X.; Wang, Z.; Zhang, F. Semitransparent organic solar cells exhibiting
13.02% efficiency and 20.2% average visible transmittance. J. Mater. Chem. A 2021, 9, 6797–6804. [CrossRef]
111. Kim, Y.; Lim, E. Development of polymer acceptors for organic photovoltaic cells. Polymers 2014, 6, 382–407. [CrossRef]
112. Liu, S.; Chen, D.; Hu, X.; Xing, Z.; Wan, J.; Zhang, L.; Tan, L.; Zhou, W.; Chen, Y. Printable and Large-Area Organic Solar Cells
Enabled by a Ternary Pseudo-Planar Heterojunction Strategy. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30, 2003223. [CrossRef]
113. Yoo, J.J.; Seo, G.; Chua, M.R.; Park, T.G.; Lu, Y.; Rotermund, F.; Kim, Y.K.; Moon, C.S.; Jeon, N.J.; Correa-Baena, J.P.; et al. Efficient
perovskite solar cells via improved carrier management. Nature 2021, 590, 587–593. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
114. Pendyala, N.K.; Magdassi, S.; Etgar, L. Fabrication of Perovskite Solar Cells with Digital Control of Transparency by Inkjet
Printing. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021. [CrossRef]
115. Zhang, L.; Chen, S.; Wang, X.; Wang, D.; Li, Y.; Ai, Q.; Sun, X.; Chen, J.; Li, Y.; Jiang, X.; et al. ambient inkjet-printed high-efficiency
perovskite solar cells: Manipulating the spreading and crystallization behaviors of picoliter perovskite droplets. Sol. RRL 2021,
5, 2100106. [CrossRef]
116. Schackmar, F.; Eggers, H.; Frericks, M.; Richards, B.S.; Lemmer, U.; Hernandez-Sosa, G.; Paetzold, U.W. Perovskite Solar Cells
with All-Inkjet-Printed Absorber and Charge Transport Layers. Adv. Mater. Technol. 2021, 6, 2000271. [CrossRef]
117. Li, P.; Liang, C.; Bao, B.; Li, Y.; Hu, X.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Li, F.; Shao, G.; Song, Y. Inkjet manipulated homogeneous large size
perovskite grains for efficient and large-area perovskite solar cells. Nano Energy 2018, 46, 203–211. [CrossRef]
118. Eggers, H.; Schackmar, F.; Abzieher, T.; Sun, Q.; Lemmer, U.; Vaynzof, Y.; Richards, B.S.; Hernandez-Sosa, G.; Paetzold, U.W.
Inkjet-Printed Micrometer-Thick Perovskite Solar Cells with Large Columnar Grains. Adv. Energy Mater. 2020, 10, 1903184.
[CrossRef]
119. Li, Z.; Li, P.; Chen, G.; Cheng, Y.; Pi, X.; Yu, X.; Yang, D.; Han, L.; Zhang, Y.; Song, Y. Ink engineering of inkjet printing perovskite.
ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 39082–39091. [CrossRef]
120. Liu, S.; Yuan, J.; Deng, W.; Luo, M.; Xie, Y.; Liang, Q.; Zou, Y.; He, Z.; Wu, H.; Cao, Y. High-efficiency organic solar cells with low
non-radiative recombination loss and low energetic disorder. Nat. Photonics 2020, 14, 300–305. [CrossRef]
121. Ma, R.; Tao, Y.; Chen, Y.; Liu, T.; Luo, Z.; Guo, Y.; Xiao, Y.; Fang, J.; Zhang, G.; Li, X.; et al. Achieving 16.68% efficiency ternary
as-cast organic solar cells. Sci. China Chem. 2021, 64, 581–589. [CrossRef]
122. Cai, Y.; Li, Y.; Wang, R.; Wu, H.; Chen, Z.; Zhang, J.; Ma, Z.; Hao, X.; Zhao, Y.; Zhang, C.; et al. A Well-Mixed Phase Formed by
Two Compatible Non-Fullerene Acceptors Enables Ternary Organic Solar Cells with Efficiency over 18.6%. Adv. Mater. 2021,
2101733. [CrossRef]
123. Hu, L.; Wu, H.; Cui, Y. Printed energy storage devices by integration of electrodes and separators into single sheets of paper.
Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 96, 183502. [CrossRef]
124. Brunetti, F.; Operamolla, A.; Castro-Hermosa, S.; Lucarelli, G.; Manca, V.; Farinola, G.M.; Brown, T.M. Printed solar cells and
energy storage devices on paper substrates. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2019, 29, 1806798. [CrossRef]
125. Zhang, W.; Liu, H.; Zhang, X.; Li, X.; Zhang, G.; Cao, P. 3D Printed Micro-Electrochemical Energy Storage Devices: From Design
to Integration. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2021, 2104909. [CrossRef]
126. Xing, J.; Tao, P.; Wu, Z.; Xing, C.; Liao, X.; Nie, S. Nanocellulose-graphene composites: A promising nanomaterial for flexible
supercapacitors. Carbohydr. Polym. 2019, 207, 447–459. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
127. Aeby, X.; Poulin, A.; Siqueira, G.; Hausmann, M.K.; Nyström, G. Fully 3D Printed and Disposable Paper Supercapacitors.
Adv. Mater. 2021, 2101328. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
128. Mizukami, M.; Cho, S.I.; Watanabe, K.; Abiko, M.; Suzuri, Y.; Tokito, S.; Kido, J. Flexible Organic Light-Emitting Diode Displays
Driven by Inkjet-Printed High-Mobility Organic Thin-Film Transistors. IEEE Electron Device Lett. 2018. [CrossRef]
129. Ivanov, A. A Printed Electroluminescent Matrix Display: Implementation Details and Technical Solutions. In Proceedings of the
2018 IMAPS Nordic Conference on Microelectronics Packaging (NordPac), Oulu, Finland, 12–14 June 2018. [CrossRef]
130. Kipphan, H. Printing technologies with permanent printing master. In Handbook of Print Media; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg,
Germany, 2001; pp. 203–448.
131. Kipphan, H. Printing technologies without a printing plate (NIP technologies). In Handbook of Print Media; Springer:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2001; pp. 675–758.
132. d’Heureuse, W.; Kipphan, H.; Ag, H.D. Print Technologies and Design Concepts for Hybrid Printing Systems. IS T/DPP 2001, 1,
33–38.
133. Kim, B.H.; Onses, M.S.; Lim, J.B.; Nam, S.; Oh, N.; Kim, H.; Yu, K.J.; Lee, J.W.; Kim, J.H.; Kang, S.K.; et al. High-resolution patterns
of quantum dots formed by electrohydrodynamic jet printing for light-emitting diodes. Nano Lett. 2015, 15, 969–973. [CrossRef]
134. Onses, M.S.; Sutanto, E.; Ferreira, P.M.; Alleyne, A.G.; Rogers, J.A. Mechanisms, Capabilities, and Applications of High-Resolution
Electrohydrodynamic Jet Printing. Small 2015, 11, 4237–4266. [CrossRef]
135. Saengchairat, N.; Tran, T.; Chua, C.K. A review: Additive manufacturing for active electronic components. Virtual Phys. Prototyp.
2017, 12, 31–46. [CrossRef]
136. Stringer, J.; Althagathi, T.M.; Tse, C.C.; Ta, V.D.; Shephard, J.D.; Esenturk, E.; Connaughton, C.; Wasley, T.J.; Li, J.; Kay, R.W.; et al.
Integration of additive manufacturing and inkjet printed electronics: A potential route to parts with embedded multifunctionality.
Manuf. Rev. 2016, 3. [CrossRef]
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 33 of 36

137. Kwon, Y.J.; Park, Y.D.; Lee, W.H. Inkjet-printed organic transistors based on organic semiconductor/insulating polymer blends.
Materials 2016, 9, 650. [CrossRef]
138. Torrisi, F.; Hasan, T.; Wu, W.; Sun, Z.; Lombardo, A.; Kulmala, T.S.; Hsieh, G.W.; Jung, S.; Bonaccorso, F.; Paul, P.J.; et al.
Inkjet-printed graphene electronics. ACS Nano 2012, 6, 2992–3006. [CrossRef]
139. Rebros, M.; Hrehorova, E.; Bazuin, B.J.; Joyce, M.K.; Fleming, P.D.; Pekarovicova, A. Rotogravure printed UHF RFID antennae
directly on packaging materials. In Proceedings of the TAGA 60th Annual Technical Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA,
16–19 March 2008; pp. 16–19.
140. Wu, C.; Jin, X.F. Optimization design and fabrication of annular field emitter for field emission display panel. In Key Engineering
Materials; Trans Tech Publications: Stafa-Zurich, Switzerland, 2011; Volume 467, pp. 1520–1523.
141. Ramakrishnan, R.; Saran, N.; Petcavich, R.J. Selective inkjet printing of conductors for displays and flexible printed electronics.
J. Disp. Technol. 2011, 7, 344–347. [CrossRef]
142. Lin, C.T.; Hsu, C.H.; Chen, I.R.; Lee, C.H.; Wu, W.J. Enhancement of carrier mobility in all-inkjet-printed organic thin-film
transistors using a blend of poly (3-hexylthiophene) and carbon nanoparticles. Thin Solid Film. 2011, 519, 8008–8012. [CrossRef]
143. Jiang, L.; Zhang, J.; Gamota, D.; Takoudis, C.G. Organic thin film transistors with novel thermally cross-linked dielectric and
printed electrodes on flexible substrates. Org. Electron. 2010, 11, 959–963. [CrossRef]
144. Chitnis, G.; Ziaie, B. Waterproof active paper via laser surface micropatterning of magnetic nanoparticles. ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2012, 4, 4435–4439. [CrossRef]
145. Honda, W.; Harada, S.; Arie, T.; Akita, S.; Takei, K. Wearable, human-interactive, health-monitoring, wireless devices fabricated
by macroscale printing techniques. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2014, 24, 3299–3304. [CrossRef]
146. Eshkeiti, A.; Reddy, A.S.; Emamian, S.; Narakathu, B.B.; Joyce, M.; Joyce, M.; Fleming, P.D.; Bazuin, B.J.; Atashbar, M.Z. Screen
printing of multilayered hybrid printed circuit boards on different substrates. IEEE Trans. Compon. Packag. Manuf. Technol. 2015,
5, 415–421. [CrossRef]
147. Reddy, A.; Narakathu, B.; Atashbar, M.; Rebros, M.; Rebrosova, E.; Bazuin, B.; Joyce, M.; Fleming, P.; Pekarovicova, A. Printed
capacitive based humidity sensors on flexible substrates. Sens. Lett. 2011, 9, 869–871. [CrossRef]
148. Izdebska, J. Aging and Degradation of Printed Materials. In Printing on Polymers: Fundamentals and Applications; William Andrew
Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 353–370.
149. Park, J.; Lee, J.; Park, S.; Shin, K.H.; Lee, D. Development of hybrid process for double-side flexible printed circuit boards using
roll-to-roll gravure printing, via-hole printing, and electroless plating. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016, 82, 1921–1931. [CrossRef]
150. Kujala, M.; Kololuoma, T.; Keskinen, J.; Lupo, D.; Mäntysalo, M.; Kraft, T.M. Screen printed vias for a flexible energy har-
vesting and storage module. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Flexible Electronics Technology Conference (IFETC),
Ottawa, ON, Canada, 7–9 August 2018; pp. 1–6.
151. Devaraj, H.; Malhotra, R. Scalable forming and flash light sintering of polymer-supported interconnects for surface-conformal
electronics. J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 2019, 141, 041014. [CrossRef]
152. Devaraj, H.; Hwang, H.J.; Malhotra, R. Understanding the role of Nanomorphology on Resistance Evolution in the Hybrid
Form-Fuse Process for Conformal Electronics. J. Manuf. Process. 2020, 58, 1088–1102. [CrossRef]
153. Constante, G.; Apsite, I.; Alkhamis, H.; Dulle, M.; Schwarzer, M.; Caspari, A.; Synytska, A.; Salehi, S.; Ionov, L. 4D biofabrication
using a combination of 3D printing and melt-electrowriting of shape-morphing polymers. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021,
13, 12767–12776. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
154. Cerqueira, M.Â.P.R.; Lagaron, J.M.; Castro, L.M.P.; de Oliveira Soares, A.A.M. Chapter 8 in Nanomaterials for Food Packaging:
Materials, Processing Technologies, and Safety Issues; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018.
155. Blayo, A.; Pineaux, B. Printing processes and their potential for RFID printing. In Proceedings of the 2005 Joint Conference
on Smart Objects and Ambient Intelligence: Innovative Context-Aware Services: Usages and Technologies, Grenoble, France,
12–14 October 2005; pp. 27–30.
156. Känsäkoski, M.; Maaninen, A. Printed intelligence and applications in sensing. Meas. Control 2007, 40, 84–87. [CrossRef]
157. Hakola, E. Principles of conventional printing. In Papermaking Science and Technology: Print Media–Principles, Processes and Quality;
Finnish Paper Engineers’ Association: Helsinki, Finland, 2009; pp. 40–87.
158. Suganuma, K. Introduction to Printed Electronics; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014;
Volume 74.
159. Carter, E.; Gardiner, F. Polymer Electronics: A Flexible Technology; Smithers Rapra: Shrewsbury, UK, 2009.
160. Janczak, D.; Wróblewski, G.; Jakubowska, M.; Słoma, M.; Młożniak, A. Screen printed resistive pressure sensors fabricated from
polymer composites with carbon nanotubes. Chall. Mod. Technol. 2012, 3, 14–19.
161. Jakubowska, M.; Słoma, M.; Janczak, D.; Młożniak, A.; Wróblewski, G. Printed transparent electrodes with graphene nanoplatelets.
Elektron. Konstr. Technol. Zastos. 2012, 53, 97–99.
162. Knobloch, A.; Bernds, A.; Clemens, W. Printed polymer transistors. In Proceedings of the First International IEEE Conference on
Polymers and Adhesives in Microelectronics and Photonics, Incorporating POLY, PEP & Adhesives in Electronics, Proceedings
(Cat. No. 01TH8592), Potsdam, Germany, 21–24 October 2001; pp. 84–90.
163. Hakola, E. Principles of digital printing. In Papermaking Science and Technology: Print Media–Principles, Processes and Quality;
Finnish Paper Engineers’ Association: Helsinki, Finland, 2009; pp. 147–172.
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 34 of 36

164. Graindourze, M. UV-Curable Inkjet Inks and Their Applications in Industrial Inkjet Printing, Including Low-Migration Inks for
Food Packaging. In Handbook of Industrial Inkjet Printing: A Full System Approach; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2017; pp. 129–150.
165. Cai, F.; Chang, Y.h.; Wang, K.; Khan, W.T.; Pavlidis, S.; Papapolymerou, J. High resolution aerosol jet printing of D-band printed
transmission lines on flexible LCP substrate. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium
(IMS2014), Tampa, FL, USA, 1–6 June 2014; pp. 1–3.
166. Cui, Z. Printed Electronics: Materials, Technologies and Applications; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016.
167. Dimitriou, E.; Michailidis, N.S. Printable conductive inks used for the fabrication of electronics: An overview. Nanotechnology
2021. [CrossRef]
168. Reitberger, T.; Franke, J.; Hoffmann, G.A.; Overmeyer, L.; Lorenz, L.; Wolter, K.J. Integration of polymer optical waveguides by
using flexographic and aerosol jet printing. In Proceedings of the 2016 12th International Congress Molded Interconnect Devices
(MID), Wiirzburg, Germany, 28–29 September 2016; pp. 1–6.
169. Chen, Y.D.; Nagarajan, V.; Rosen, D.W.; Yu, W.; Huang, S.Y. Aerosol jet printing on paper substrate with conductive silver nano
material. J. Manuf. Process. 2020, 58, 55–66. [CrossRef]
170. Bollström, R. Paper for Printed Electronics and Functionality. Ph.D. Thesis, Abo Akademi University, Turku, Finland, 2013.
171. Magdassi, S. The Chemistry of Inkjet Inks; World Scientific: Singapore, 2009.
172. Atkinson, J.; Joyce, T.; Joyce, M. Printed electronics: A landfill simulation study to assess environmental impacts. J. Solid Waste
Technol. Manag. 2017, 43, 145–150. [CrossRef]
173. Atkinson, J.E. Fate of Conductive Ink Pigments during Recycling and Landfill Deposition of Paper-Based Printed Electronics; Western
Michigan University: Kalamazoo, MI, USA, 2017.
174. Martin, D.P.; Melby, N.L.; Jordan, S.M.; Bednar, A.J.; Kennedy, A.J.; Negrete, M.E.; Chappell, M.A.; Poda, A.R. Nanosilver
conductive ink: A case study for evaluating the potential risk of nanotechnology under hypothetical use scenarios. Chemosphere
2016, 162, 222–227. [CrossRef]
175. Valentine, A.D.; Busbee, T.A.; Boley, J.W.; Raney, J.R.; Chortos, A.; Kotikian, A.; Berrigan, J.D.; Durstock, M.F.; Lewis, J.A. Hybrid
3D printing of soft electronics. Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1703817. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
176. Choi, Y.; Seong, K.d.; Piao, Y. Metal-Organic Decomposition Ink for Printed Electronics. Adv. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 6, 1901002.
[CrossRef]
177. Popov, V.N. Carbon nanotubes: Properties and application. Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep. 2004, 43, 61–102. [CrossRef]
178. Li, X.; Wang, X.; Zhang, L.; Lee, S.; Dai, H. Chemically derived, ultrasmooth graphene nanoribbon semiconductors. Science 2008,
319, 1229–1232. [CrossRef]
179. Jiao, L.; Zhang, L.; Wang, X.; Diankov, G.; Dai, H. Narrow graphene nanoribbons from carbon nanotubes. Nature 2009,
458, 877–880. [CrossRef]
180. Bai, J.; Zhong, X.; Jiang, S.; Huang, Y.; Duan, X. Graphene nanomesh. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2010, 5, 190–194. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
181. Kim, M.; Safron, N.S.; Han, E.; Arnold, M.S.; Gopalan, P. Fabrication and characterization of large-area, semiconducting
nanoperforated graphene materials. Nano Lett. 2010, 10, 1125–1131. [CrossRef]
182. Obeng, Y.; Srinivasan, P. Graphene: Is it the future for semiconductors? An overview of the material, devices, and applications.
Electrochem. Soc. Interface 2011, 20, 47. [CrossRef]
183. Ji, T.h.; Sun, M.; Han, P. A review of the preparation and applications of graphene/semiconductor composites. Carbon 2014,
70, 319. [CrossRef]
184. Meyyappan, M.; Delzeit, L.; Cassell, A.; Hash, D. Carbon nanotube growth by PECVD: A review. Plasma Sources Sci. Technol.
2003, 12, 205. [CrossRef]
185. Garlapati, S.K.; Divya, M.; Breitung, B.; Kruk, R.; Hahn, H.; Dasgupta, S. Printed electronics based on inorganic semiconductors:
From processes and materials to devices. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 1707600. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
186. Manzeli, S.; Ovchinnikov, D.; Pasquier, D.; Yazyev, O.V.; Kis, A. 2D transition metal dichalcogenides. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2017,
2, 1–15. [CrossRef]
187. Chaves, A.; Azadani, J.G.; Alsalman, H.; da Costa, D.R.; Frisenda, R.; Chaves, A.; Song, S.H.; Kim, Y.D.; He, D.; Zhou, J.; et al.
Bandgap engineering of two-dimensional semiconductor materials. NPJ 2D Mater. Appl. 2020, 4, 29. [CrossRef]
188. Hwang, S.W.; Tao, H.; Kim, D.H.; Cheng, H.; Song, J.K.; Rill, E.; Brenckle, M.A.; Panilaitis, B.; Won, S.M.; Kim, Y.S.; et al.
A physically transient form of silicon electronics. Science 2012, 337, 1640–1644. [CrossRef]
189. Han, X.; Seo, K.J.; Qiang, Y.; Li, Z.; Vinnikova, S.; Zhong, Y.; Zhao, X.; Hao, P.; Wang, S.; Fang, H. Nanomeshed Si nanomembranes.
NPJ Flex. Electron. 2019, 3, 9. [CrossRef]
190. Wang, Y.; Lee, S.; Yokota, T.; Wang, H.; Jiang, Z.; Wang, J.; Koizumi, M.; Someya, T. A durable nanomesh on-skin strain gauge for
natural skin motion monitoring with minimum mechanical constraints. Sci. Adv. 2020, 6, eabb7043. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
191. Wang, B.; Thukral, A.; Xie, Z.; Liu, L.; Zhang, X.; Huang, W.; Yu, X.; Yu, C.; Marks, T.J.; Facchetti, A. Flexible and stretchable
metal oxide nanofiber networks for multimodal and monolithically integrated wearable electronics. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 2405.
[CrossRef]
192. Kim, S. Inkjet-Printed Electronics on Paper for RF Identification (RFID) and Sensing. Electronics 2020, 9, 1636. [CrossRef]
193. Agate, S.; Joyce, M.; Lucia, L.; Pal, L. Cellulose and nanocellulose-based flexible-hybrid printed electronics and conductive
composites—A review. Carbohydr. Polym. 2018, 198, 249–260. [CrossRef]
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 35 of 36

194. Fischer, T.; Wetzold, N.; Kroll, L.; Hübler, A. Flexographic printed carbon nanotubes on polycarbonate films yielding high heating
rates. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2013, 129, 2112–2120. [CrossRef]
195. Hwang, H.J.; Devaraj, H.; Yang, C.; Gao, Z.; Chang, C.h.; Lee, H.; Malhotra, R. Rapid pulsed light sintering of silver nanowires on
woven polyester for personal thermal management with enhanced performance, durability and cost-effectiveness. Sci. Rep. 2018,
8, 17159. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
196. Granta’s, C. EduPack. Teach. Resour. Mater. Process Education. 2021. Available online: http://www.Grantadesign.Com/Educ
(accessed on 15 July 202 ).
197. Hoath, S.D. Fundamentals of Inkjet Printing: The Science of Inkjet and Droplets; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016.
198. Dexter, M.; Bhandari, R.; Chang, C.; Malhotra, R. Controlling processing temperatures and self-limiting behaviour in intense
pulsed sintering by tailoring nanomaterial shape distribution. RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 56395–56405. [CrossRef]
199. Jahangir, M.N.; Cleeman, J.; Hwang, H.J.; Malhotra, R. Towards out-of-chamber damage-free fabrication of highly conductive
nanoparticle-based circuits inside 3D printed thermally sensitive polymers. Addit. Manuf. 2019, 30, 100886. [CrossRef]
200. Joo, S.J.; Park, S.H.; Moon, C.J.; Kim, H.S. A highly reliable copper nanowire/nanoparticle ink pattern with high conductivity
on flexible substrate prepared via a flash light-sintering technique. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2015, 7, 5674–5684. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
201. Morfa, A.; Rödlmeier, T.; Jürgensen, N.; Stolz, S.; Hernandez-Sosa, G. Comparison of biodegradable substrates for printed organic
electronic devices. Cellulose 2016, 23, 3809–3817. [CrossRef]
202. Bollström, R.; Pettersson, F.; Dolietis, P.; Preston, J.; Österbacka, R.; Toivakka, M. Impact of humidity on functionality of on-paper
printed electronics. Nanotechnology 2014, 25, 094003. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
203. Chen, L.; Yu, H.; Dirican, M.; Fang, D.; Tian, Y.; Yan, C.; Xie, J.; Jia, D.; Liu, H.; Wang, J.; et al. Highly Thermally Stable, Green
Solvent Disintegrable, and Recyclable Polymer Substrates for Flexible Electronics. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2020, 41, 2000292.
[CrossRef]
204. Latti, K.P.; Kettunen, M.; Strom, J.P.; Silventoinen, P. A review of microstrip T-resonator method in determining the dielectric
properties of printed circuit board materials. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2007, 56, 1845–1850. [CrossRef]
205. Wolf, F.M.; Perelaer, J.; Stumpf, S.; Bollen, D.; Kriebel, F.; Schubert, U.S. Rapid low-pressure plasma sintering of inkjet-printed
silver nanoparticles for RFID antennas. J. Mater. Res. 2013, 28, 1254. [CrossRef]
206. Li, Y.; Qi, T.; Chen, M.; Xiao, F. Mixed ink of copper nanoparticles and copper formate complex with low sintering temperatures.
J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Electron. 2016, 27, 11432–11438. [CrossRef]
207. Lawrence, J.; Pham, J.T.; Lee, D.Y.; Liu, Y.; Crosby, A.J.; Emrick, T. Highly Conductive Ribbons Prepared by Stick–Slip Assembly
of Organosoluble Gold Nanoparticles. ACS Nano 2014, 8, 1173–1179. [CrossRef]
208. Lee, Y.J.; Lee, C.; Lee, H.M. Synthesis of oxide-free aluminum nanoparticles for application to conductive film. Nanotechnology
2018, 29, 055602. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
209. Yabuki, A.; Ichida, Y.; Kang, S.; Fathona, I.W. Nickel film synthesized by the thermal decomposition of nickel-amine complexes.
Thin Solid Film. 2017, 642, 169–173. [CrossRef]
210. Wegener, M.; Spiehl, D.; Sauer, H.M.; Mikschl, F.; Liu, X.; Kölpin, N.; Schmidt, M.; Jank, M.P.; Dörsam, E.; Roosen, A. Flexographic
printing of nanoparticulate tin-doped indium oxide inks on PET foils and glass substrates. J. Mater. Sci. 2016, 51, 4588–4600.
[CrossRef]
211. Dexter, M.; Pfau, A.; Gao, Z.; Herman, G.S.; Chang, C.h.; Malhotra, R. Modeling nanoscale temperature gradients and conductivity
evolution in pulsed light sintering of silver nanowire networks. Nanotechnology 2018, 29, 505205. [CrossRef]
212. Kamyshny, A.; Steinke, J.; Magdassi, S. Metal-based inkjet inks for printed electronics. Open Appl. Phys. J. 2011, 4, 19–36.
[CrossRef]
213. Niittynen, J.; Abbel, R.; Mäntysalo, M.; Perelaer, J.; Schubert, U.S.; Lupo, D. Alternative sintering methods compared to
conventional thermal sintering for inkjet printed silver nanoparticle ink. Thin Solid Film. 2014, 556, 452–459. [CrossRef]
214. Hwang, H.J.; Malhotra, R. Shape-tuned junction resistivity and self-damping dynamics in intense pulsed light sintering of silver
nanostructure films. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 11, 3536–3546. [CrossRef]
215. Tobjörk, D.; Aarnio, H.; Pulkkinen, P.; Bollström, R.; Määttänen, A.; Ihalainen, P.; Mäkelä, T.; Peltonen, J.; Toivakka, M.;
Tenhu, H.; et al. IR-sintering of ink-jet printed metal-nanoparticles on paper. Thin Solid Film. 2012, 520, 2949–2955. [CrossRef]
216. Park, J.; Kang, H.J.; Shin, K.H.; Kang, H. Fast sintering of silver nanoparticle and flake layers by infrared module assistance in
large area roll-to-roll gravure printing system. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 34470. [CrossRef]
217. Lee, D.; Kim, D.; Moon, Y.; Moon, S. Effect of laser-induced temperature field on the characteristics of laser-sintered silver
nanoparticle ink. Nanotechnology 2013, 24, 265702. [CrossRef]
218. Saleh, E.; Zhang, F.; He, Y.; Vaithilingam, J.; Fernandez, J.L.; Wildman, R.; Ashcroft, I.; Hague, R.; Dickens, P.; Tuck, C. 3D inkjet
printing of electronics using UV conversion. Adv. Mater. Technol. 2017, 2, 1700134. [CrossRef]
219. Polzinger, B.; Schoen, F.; Matic, V.; Keck, J.; Willeck, H.; Eberhardt, W.; Kueck, H. UV-sintering of inkjet-printed conductive silver
tracks. In Proceedings of the 2011 11th IEEE International Conference on Nanotechnology, Portland, OR, USA, 15–18 August 2011;
pp. 201–204.
220. Ma, S.; Bromberg, V.; Liu, L.; Egitto, F.D.; Chiarot, P.R.; Singler, T.J. Low temperature plasma sintering of silver nanoparticles.
Appl. Surf. Sci. 2014, 293, 207–215. [CrossRef]
J. Manuf. Mater. Process. 2021, 5, 89 36 of 36

221. Perelaer, J.; De Gans, B.J.; Schubert, U.S. Ink-jet printing and microwave sintering of conductive silver tracks. Adv. Mater. 2006,
18, 2101–2104. [CrossRef]
222. Moon, Y.J.; Lee, S.H.; Kang, H.; Kang, K.; Kim, K.Y.; Hwang, J.Y.; Cho, Y.J. Electrical sintering of inkjet-printed silver electrode for
c-Si solar cells. In Proceedings of the 2011 37th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, Seattle, WA, USA, 19–24 June 2011;
pp. 001061–001065.
223. Allen, M.; Alastalo, A.; Suhonen, M.; Mattila, T.; Leppäniemi, J.; Seppa, H. Contactless electrical sintering of silver nanoparticles
on flexible substrates. IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech. 2011, 59, 1419–1429. [CrossRef]
224. Chatzisideris, M.D.; Espinosa, N.; Laurent, A.; Krebs, F.C. Ecodesign perspectives of thin-film photovoltaic technologies: A review
of life cycle assessment studies. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2016, 156, 2–10. [CrossRef]
225. Finkbeiner, M.; Inaba, A.; Tan, R.; Christiansen, K.; Klüppel, H.J. The new international standards for life cycle assessment:
ISO 14040 and ISO 14044. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2006, 11, 80–85. [CrossRef]
226. Pajula, T.; Vatanen, S.; Pihkola, H.; Grönman, K.; Kasurinen, H.; Soukka, R. Carbon Handprint Guide; VTT Technical Research
Centre of Finland: Espoo, Finland, 2018.
227. Radermacher, K. Environmental and safety issues of polymers and polymeric material in the printing industry. In Printing on
Polymers: Fundamentals and Applications; Elsevier Science Publishing Co. Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 397–415.
[CrossRef]
228. Kanth, R.K.; Wan, Q.; Kumar, H.; Liljeberg, P.; Chen, Q.; Zheng, L.; Tenhunen, H. Evaluating sustainability, environment
assessment and toxic emissions in life cycle stages of printed antenna. Procedia Eng. 2012, 30, 508–513. [CrossRef]
229. Espinosa, N.; García-Valverde, R.; Urbina, A.; Lenzmann, F.; Manceau, M.; Angmo, D.; Krebs, F.C. Life cycle assessment of
ITO-free flexible polymer solar cells prepared by roll-to-roll coating and printing. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2012, 97, 3–13.
[CrossRef]
230. Gong, J.; Darling, S.B.; You, F. Perovskite photovoltaics: Life-cycle assessment of energy and environmental impacts.
Energy Environ. Sci. 2015, 8, 1953–1968. [CrossRef]
231. Søndergaard, R.R.; Espinosa, N.; Jørgensen, M.; Krebs, F.C. Efficient decommissioning and recycling of polymer solar cells:
Justification for use of silver. Energy Environ. Sci. 2014, 7, 1006–1012. [CrossRef]
232. Irimia-Vladu, M. “Green” electronics: Biodegradable and biocompatible materials and devices for sustainable future.
Chem. Soc. Rev. 2014, 43, 588–610. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
233. Dinh, T.; Phan, H.P.; Nguyen, T.K.; Qamar, A.; Foisal, A.R.M.; Viet, T.N.; Tran, C.D.; Zhu, Y.; Nguyen, N.T.; Dao, D.V. Environment-
friendly carbon nanotube based flexible electronics for noninvasive and wearable healthcare. J. Mater. Chem. C 2016, 4,
10061–10068. [CrossRef]
234. Yan, Q.; Zhou, M.; Fu, H. A reversible and highly conductive adhesive: Towards self-healing and recyclable flexible electronics.
J. Mater. Chem. C 2020, 8, 7772–7785. [CrossRef]
235. Zhang, J.; Lei, Z.; Luo, S.; Jin, Y.; Qiu, L.; Zhang, W. Malleable and Recyclable Conductive MWCNT-Vitrimer Composite for
Flexible Electronics. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2020, 3, 4845–4850. [CrossRef]