(Credit: © Janeberry - stock.adobe.com)
In a Nutshell
- Applying an external electric field while pressing and separating plastic surfaces can control, and even completely reverse, the static charge left behind.
- Identical plastic sheets that normally build up almost no net static charge picked up a strong positive or negative charge, depending on the direction of the applied field.
- Computer simulations point to natural electric fields created by surface roughness and bending during rubbing as a likely reason static electricity behaves the way it does in everyday life.
Dry hair rising to chase a comb, strands crackling and sticking, is static electricity at its most familiar. That force has puzzled scientists for more than a century. Now researchers have found a way to command it: by applying a steady electric field to plastic as it touches and separates, they can increase or decrease the leftover static charge, or flip its sign entirely.
Scientists have long known that rubbing two materials together leaves one surface positive and the other negative, but nobody could fully explain what pushes the charge in one direction rather than the other. That missing piece matters far beyond annoying shocks and clingy laundry. Static buildup causes real headaches in industries that handle powders and plastics, and it also drives triboelectric nanogenerators, devices that harvest tiny amounts of electricity from everyday motion and friction.
In a new study published in Nature Communications, researchers applied a steady electric field while pressing identical plastic sheets together and pulling them apart hundreds of times. That single change let them steer the static charge left behind afterward, strengthening it, weakening it, or reversing it completely depending on which way the field pointed. Computer simulations run alongside the experiments point to tiny electric fields that form naturally when rough surfaces bend and flex during rubbing, the flexoelectric effect, as a possible driving force behind ordinary static electricity all along.
How Scientists Tested Static Electricity Control
Researchers built a setup using polystyrene, a common plastic found in packaging and widely used in static electricity experiments. They pressed a sheet of polystyrene against an identical polystyrene-coated metal surface and pulled it away over and over for 500 cycles. During contact and separation, the team applied a steady voltage between +3,000 V and -3,000 V through a metal electrode.
After switching off the voltage, the team measured the leftover static charge on the plastic with a sensitive electrical instrument, moving the sample back and forth near a separate electrode without touching it. They added a protective plastic layer to rule out a less interesting possibility: electrons simply jumping straight from the metal into the plastic.
What the Experiments Revealed About Static Electricity
Results showed something unexpected. Right after the voltage was turned off, the measured charge carried the opposite sign from what the applied voltage would predict. A positive voltage left behind a negative reading, and a negative voltage left behind a positive one. That first reading did not last. Over the following minutes, the measured charge faded, crossed zero, and flipped again, settling into a new, more stable charge that matched the direction of the original applied field.
Researchers read this two-stage pattern as evidence of two separate effects stacked on top of each other. A first, fast-fading signal comes from the plastic temporarily realigning its internal charges while the voltage is present, the same way many insulating materials briefly respond to an electric field. Once that temporary effect fades, what remains is a more permanent charge created during the actual contact and separation of the two surfaces, one that takes on whatever polarity the field pushed it toward.
Control tests backed up the finding. With no voltage applied, two identical plastic surfaces produced no measurable net charge, as expected, since identical materials have no reason to split charge in one direction over another on their own. When researchers kept the voltage running but held the two surfaces apart with a small air gap instead of letting them touch, the charge simply faded away without ever flipping. That confirmed that actual contact and separation, not just exposure to the electric field, generate the lasting charge. Under normal conditions, the persistent charge lasted at least an hour before gradually fading, and rinsing the treated surface with alcohol brought it back to near zero, suggesting the charge sat at the surface rather than buried deeper in the material.
Rough Surfaces Charge Differently Than Smooth Ones
A separate set of tests compared rough and smooth polystyrene films. Smooth and rough versions of the same plastic are already known to charge oppositely when brought into contact: smooth surfaces tend to pick up negative charge, while rough surfaces tend toward positive. When the team applied a negative voltage during contact, the rough film barely held onto any static charge afterward, while the smooth film retained a charge roughly ten times larger.
To understand why, researchers ran computer simulations modeling how bending and compression at tiny surface bumps generate their own local electric fields, the flexoelectric effect mentioned earlier. The simulations showed that rougher surfaces generate a stronger, more tightly focused electric field right at the point of contact than smooth surfaces do. That naturally occurring field can reinforce or push against the applied voltage depending on its direction, which likely helps explain why rough and smooth plastics behaved so differently.
Why This Static Electricity Discovery Matters
For decades, static electricity research has circled one unanswered question: during contact and friction, something has to physically pull charge apart and move it from one surface to the other, but what? These experiments give a concrete answer. An applied electric field can drive that separation, and simulations hint that the fields a bending or rough surface creates on its own might do the same job. That answer is also useful. If a field can steer charge, manufacturers could suppress static buildup on plastics where it causes problems or boost it in devices that harvest electricity from everyday motion.
Static shocks and clingy laundry might seem like minor annoyances, but the force behind them has puzzled scientists long before they understood electricity. Showing that an applied electric field can flip the static charge left on otherwise identical plastic surfaces turns a century-old puzzle into something researchers can dial up, dial down, or reverse outright.
Paper Notes
Limitations
Experiments focused primarily on polystyrene, with additional confirmation across several other common plastics, though the computer simulations of the underlying flexoelectric effect used a different plastic, polytetrafluoroethylene (commonly known as Teflon), because reliable flexoelectric data for polystyrene were not available in the scientific literature. Researchers also noted they cannot completely rule out contributions from other long-lived charge storage effects, such as charged microscopic voids trapped inside the material, though they argue these effects alone cannot explain the full pattern of results. A separate comparison between two silicone rubber materials with slightly different stiffness showed the expected trend but did not reach statistical significance, which the researchers attribute to the stiffness difference being too small to produce a clear separation in the data.
Funding and Disclosures
Funding came from Latvia’s Central Finance and Contracting Agency, under a contract for the ERC project TriboCharge. Peter C. Sherrell also received support from RMIT University’s Vice-Chancellor’s Research Fellowship Scheme. The authors stated they have no competing interests.
Publication Details
Paper Title: “Electric fields control static charge during contact-friction-separation”
Authors: Andris Šutka, Linards Lapčinskis, Artis Linarts, Qiang Sun, Janis Lungevics, Raivis Eglītis, Māris Knite, Dumindu G. Dassanayaka, Amanda V. Ellis, and Peter C Sherrell, with Šutka and Lapčinskis as co-first authors and Šutka and Sherrell as corresponding authors
Journal: Nature Communications (2026, volume 17, article number 9971)
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-026-77733-4







