Supplementary materials

Supplementary materials

Flame-Retardant Textile-based Triboelectric Nanogenerators

for fire protection applications

Renwei Cheng1,2,﹟_{, Kai Dong}1,2,﹟_{, Longxiang Liu}3_{, Chuan Ning}1,2_{, Pengfei Chen}1,2_, Xiao Peng1,2_{, Di Liu}1,2_{, Zhong Lin Wang}1,2,4,*

1_{Beijing Institute of Nanoenergy and Nanosystems, Chinese Academy of Sciences,} Beijing 100083, China

2 _{School of Nanoscience and Technology, University of Chinese Academy of} Sciences, Beijing 100049, China

3_{Department of Chemistry, University College London, London WC1H 0AJ, United} Kingdom

4 _{School of Material Science and Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology,} Atlanta, Georgia 30332, United States

﹟_{These authors contributed equally to this work}

The PDF file includes:

Figure S1. The schematic cross-section of cotton fiber with 2 BL.

Figure S2. SEM images of the untreated cotton fabric and flame-retardant treated

cotton fabric.

Figure S3. The conductivity of the flame-retardant silver-coated cotton fabric. Figure S4. The outstanding flexibility of FT-TENG.

Figure S5. SEM photograph of the flame-retardant treated cotton fabric after being

burned.

Figure S6. TGA and DTG curves of untreated cotton fabric and flame-retardant

treated cotton fabrics under argon atmosphere.

Figure S7. The influence of soaking times of the cotton fabric into PTFE dispersion

liquid on the thickness (a) and electrostatic induction ability (b, c) of the PC.

Figure S8. The effects of several factors on electrical output performance of the

FT-TENG, including soaking thick cotton fabric into PTFE dispersion liquid for different times (1-5 times), different external force (5-45 N), and various motion frequencies (1-5 Hz).

Figure S9. The electrical output performance of the FT-TENG in different humidity

environments

Figure S10. The robustness measurement of the FC (a) and PC (b).

Figure S11. Comparison of the electrical output performance and photographs of the

FT-TENG after burning at the same position for different times.

Figure S12. The VOC of FT-TENG after burning in different positions.

Figure S13. Schematic illustration of FT-TENG in the high-low temperature

measurement platform.

Figure S14. The VOC of FT-TENG under different temperatures.

Figure S15. The photographs of the FT-TENG under 40-240 ℃

Figure S16. The electric output and photographs of the FT-TENG under different

temperatures after burning 4 times.

Figure S17. The flame-retardant property of the FT-TENG in different humidity

environments.

Figure S18. The schematic diagram of the forest self-rescue and fire location alarm

system.

Figure S19. The detailed diagram of FT-TENG placed on the tree. Table S1. Detailed information of different samples.

Table S2. Vertical burning test results of different samples.

Other Supplementary Material for this work includes the following:

in the open fire.

Movie S2. (.mp4 format). LEDs warning sign with ‘FIREMAN’ on the firefighter

uniform lighted up by the FT-TENG with a size of 5×5 cm2_.

Movie S3. (.mp4 format). The demonstration of the forest self-rescue and fire location

Figure S1. The schematic cross-section of cotton fiber with 2BL.

Figure S2. SEM images of the untreated cotton fabric (a,b) and flame-retardant

treated cotton fabric (c,d). The treated cotton fabric is prepared with concentration III and 6 BL.

Figure S3. The excellent conductivity of the flame-retardant silver-coated cotton

fabric.

Figure S5. SEM photograph of the flame-retardant treated cotton fabric after being

burned. The treated cotton fabric is prepared with concentration III and 6 BL.

Figure S6. TGA (a,c) and DTG (b,d) curves of untreated cotton fabric and

Figure S7. The influence of soaking times of the cotton fabric into PTFE dispersion

Figure S8. Electrical output performance of the FT-TENG. (a) VOC, (b) QSC, and (c)

ISC of the FT-TENG under soaking thick cotton fabric in PTFE dispersion liquid for

different times (1–5 times). Effect of external force on the electrical output performance including: (d) VOC, (e) QSC, and (f) ISC of the FT-TENG. Electrical

outputs of the FT-TENG at various motion frequencies (1–5 Hz), including (g) VOC,

Figure S9. The electrical output performance of the FT-TENG in different humidity

environments

Figure S10. The robustness measurement of the FC (a) and PC (b), including three

parts of the original electrical output (i), rubbing (ii), and the electrical output after rubbing 2000 cycles.

Figure S11. Comparison of the electrical output performance and photographs of the

FT-TENG after burning at the same position for different times.

Figure S13. Schematic illustration of FT-TENG in the high-low temperature

measurement platform.

Figure S15. The photographs of the FT-TENG under 40-240 ℃ (the photographs of

the FT-TENG under 25 ℃, 140 ℃, and 250 ℃ are shown in the illustration of Figure 4c).

Figure S16. The electric output (a) and photographs (b) of the FT-TENG under

Figure S17. The flame-retardant property of the FT-TENG in different humidity

environments.

Figure S18. The schematic diagram of the forest self-rescue and fire location alarm

Figure S19. Thedetailed diagram of FT-TENG placed on the tree.

Table S1. Detailed information of different samples.

Samples PEI (wt %) MA (wt %) PA (wt %) BL Weight gain (wt %) untreated 0 0 0 0 0 I 0.25 1 2 6 14.56 II 0.4375 1.75 3.5 6 27.75 III 0.5 2 4 6 34.04 2BL 0.5 2 4 2 14.14 4BL 0.5 2 4 4 23.39 8BL 0.5 2 4 8 47.79

Table S2. Vertical burning test results of different samples (the length of the samples

is 250 mm).

Samples untreated I II III 2BL 4BL 8BL

Afterflame time(s) 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 Afterglow time(s) 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 Char length(mm) 250 116 74 59 118 79 53 Residual mass after Vertical Burning Test (wt%) / 97.098 99.080599.5485 97.968 98.437 99.629