## 3 Results and Discussion
### X-Ray Diffraction Study of EB-Irradiated PLC Nanocomposite  
The crystalline and amorphous phases of the PLC nanocomposite were investigated using X-ray diffraction studies. The XRD patterns of the unirradiated and 120 kGy EB-irradiated PLC nanocomposite are presented in Figure 4. The available sharp peaks at 2\(\theta\) = 9.14\({}^{\circ}\), 15.07\({}^{\circ}\), 20.25\({}^{\circ}\), and 25.06\({}^{\circ}\), with the corresponding crystal planes (0 0 1), (0 1 1), (1 0 0), and (1 1 0), respectively, were observed for the unirradiated PLC nanocomposite [29] and the peak positions, as well as the peak intensity, varied after irradiation, as shown in Figure 4 (120 kGy EB-irradiated). The major characteristic and high-intensity peak observed at around 2\(\theta\) = 25\({}^{\circ}\) indicates the semicrystalline nature of the host polymer [30] in the unirradiated PLC nanocomposite. After irradiation, its relative intensity drastically decreased, and a slight variation in the peak position was observed, suggesting a decrease in the degree of crystallinity and, hence, increase in the amorphous nature of the PLC nanocomposite after the 120 kGy EB irradiation dose.  
The changes in the structural parameters due to EB irradiation in the crystalline phase of the PLC nanocomposite were estimated using the Debye-Scherrer equation. For every \(\theta\) value (i.e., sharp peaks), the average crystallite separation (\(R\)), strain (\(\epsilon\)), crystallite size (\(D\)), and percentage of crystallinity (\(\chi\)) were calculated using the following equations [30]:  
\[R=\frac{5\lambda}{8\sin\theta} \tag{1}\]  
\[\epsilon=\frac{\beta\cos\theta}{4} \tag{2}\]  
Figure 3: EDX spectra of the PLC nanocomposite: (**a**) PLC unirradiated; (**b**) PLC 40 kGy; (**c**) PLC 80 kGy; (**d**) PLC 120 kGy EB irradiation doses.  
\[D=\frac{k\lambda}{\beta\cos\theta} \tag{3}\]  
\[\chi_{\rm c}=\frac{A_{\rm c}}{A_{\rm c}+A_{\rm a}}\times 100 \tag{4}\]  
where \(k\) is the shape factor (0.9), \(\lambda\) is the wavelength of the X-ray (0.154 A), and \(A_{\rm c}\) and \(A_{\rm a}\) are the areas under crystalline and amorphous peaks, respectively. Table 2 displays the determined parameters. The estimated values represent the variation after EB irradiation. The average separation between the crystallites and the strain (\(\epsilon\)) values varied, and the FWHM (\(\beta\)) changed with a decrease in crystallinity after irradiation. The percentage of crystallinity decreased from 79.55% in the unirradiated sample to 59.23% with a 120 kGy EB dose. This is mainly due to chain scission processes at higher dosages. These changes lead to disorders and, thus, increase the amorphous content in the polymer matrix. The decreased peak intensity noticed after irradiation is due to the reduced crystalline dimension. The slightly increased crystallite size (\(D\)) indicates that the crystalline domains embedded in the amorphous phase are responsible for this phenomenon. Defect states in the polymer matrix, caused by lattice strain from defect dislocations, lead to decreased lattice strain (\(\epsilon\)). This is confirmed by the broadening or decreased peak intensity after irradiation. The interchain separation length was determined and found to decrease after irradiation, which represents the decreased hopping distance of electrons from one site to another, thereby increasing ion mobility. The calculated crystallites (\(R\)) value is 4.44 A, which is very close to the reported value for the conductive polymer [31; 32].  
Figure 4: XRD patterns of the unirradiated and 120 kGy dose EB-irradiated sample.