AFM and UFM surface characterization of rubber‐toughened poly(methyl methacrylate) samples

Porfyrakis, Kyriakos; Kolosov, Oleg; Assender, Hazel E.

doi:10.1002/app.2133

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…5, dotted rectangles), that would correspond to graphite systems perpendicular to graphene planes, as the probe indenting into the relatively so materials that would lead to decrease of ultrasonic force. 49 It is interesting to note that signicant nonlinear response for low E materials can only be accessed at low normal forces and higher a. Furthermore, a mainly monotonous relation between g sample and UFS is generally observed (ESI Fig.…”

Section: Ufm Nonlinear Response In Liquid Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Probing nanoscale graphene–liquid interfacial interactions via ultrasonic force spectroscopy

Robinson

Kolosov

2014

Nanoscale

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We probe the interfacial forces in graphene-air and graphene-liquid environments with nanoscale resolution. Experimentally, probe 'snap-in' to contact, in scanning probe microscopy, is overcome by combining the ultrasonic force spectroscopy (UFS) approach and MHz frequency range harmonic oscillation of the sample thereby sweeping the tip-surface dynamically from separated to indented state across the region of intimate interface contact. We measured the force interaction between nanoscale probe tip and graphene, graphite and reference SiO₂ surface in ambient, polar and non-polar liquid environments. Via modelling we estimated the decay length of the force interaction in water to be 0.25-0.75 nm, equivalent to 1-3 monolayers, and interfacial effective stiffness at these distances associated with the liquid layer was an order of magnitude greater for non-polar than for polar liquid environment. During the elastic indentation at increased forces, the effective Young's modulus of graphene was shown only to be slightly reduced in ambient environment while experiencing significant reduction by a factor of 3 in non-polar dodecane environment.

show abstract

Section: Ufm Nonlinear Response In Liquid Environmentsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Probing nanoscale graphene–liquid interfacial interactions via ultrasonic force spectroscopy

Robinson

Kolosov

2014

Nanoscale

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These methods may involve the use of one or multiple ultrasonic waves, propagating through the sample holder and/or the cantilever, limiting the oscillations to the linear regime or taking advantage of the intrinsic nonlinearity of the tip-sample contact (Marinello, Passeri, & Savio, 2013). Overall, these ultrasonic methods have been used to characterize the mechanical properties of materials in a broad range of elastic moduli, including hard coatings (Amelio et al, 2001), piezoelectric ceramics (Rabe et al, 2002), clay minerals and their inclusions (Prasad, Kopycinska, Rabe, & Arnold, 2002;Smeraglia et al, 2017), Ti alloys (Kumar, Rabe, & Arnold, 2008), nanobelts (Zheng, Geer, Dovidenko, Kopycinska-Müller, & Hurley, 2006), nanotubes (Muthaswami et al, 2007;Stan et al, 2009), nanoislands (Kolosov et al, 1998), polymers (Garcia & Proksch, 2013;Killgore, Yablon, et al, 2011;Liu et al, 2011;Porfyrakis, Kolosov, & Assender, 2001;Yablon et al, 2012) and polymer-based nanocomposites (Passeri, Rossi, Alippi, Bettucci, Terranova, et al, 2008b;Passeri, Biagioni, Rossi, Tamburri, & Terranova, 2013;Preghenella, Pegoretti, & Migliaresi, 2006), food materials (Jones, 2016), cells and biological samples (Campbell, Ferguson, & Hurley, 2012;Ebert, Tittmann, Du, & Scheuchenzuber, 2006;Garcia & Proksch, 2013).…”

Section: Characterization Of Nanoparticles and Nanosystemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of nanoparticles and nanosystems in biological matrices with scanning probe microscopy

Angeloni

Reggente

Passeri

et al. 2018

WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identification of nanoparticles and nanosystems into cells and biological matrices is a hot research topic in nanobiotechnologies. Because of their capability to map physical properties (mechanical, electric, magnetic, chemical, or optical), several scanning probe microscopy based techniques have been proposed for the subsurface detection of nanomaterials in biological systems. In particular, atomic force microscopy (AFM) can be used to reveal stiff nanoparticles in cells and other soft biomaterials by probing the sample mechanical properties through the acquisition of local indentation curves or through the combination of ultrasound-based methods, like contact resonance AFM (CR-AFM) or scanning near field ultrasound holography. Magnetic force microscopy can detect magnetic nanoparticles and other magnetic (bio)materials in nonmagnetic biological samples, while electric force microscopy, conductive AFM, and Kelvin probe force microscopy can reveal buried nanomaterials on the basis of the differences between their electric properties and those of the surrounding matrices. Finally, scanning near field optical microscopy and tip-enhanced Raman spectroscopy can visualize buried nanostructures on the basis of their optical and chemical properties. Despite at a still early stage, these methods are promising for detection of nanomaterials in biological systems as they could be truly noninvasive, would not require destructive and time-consuming specific sample preparation, could be performed in vitro, on alive samples and in water or physiological environment, and by continuously imaging the same sample could be used to dynamically monitor the diffusion paths and interaction mechanisms of nanomaterials into cells and biological systems. This article is categorized under: Diagnostic Tools > In Vivo Nanodiagnostics and Imaging Nanotechnology Approaches to Biology > Nanoscale Systems in Biology.

show abstract

“…62,63 Atomic force microscopy (AFM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) have been used to demonstrate that rubber particle elongation is much more pronounced for the injection-moulded samples than for the extruded ones. Figure 9 shows topography (AFM) and ultrasonic force microscopy (UFM) images taken on the surface of the mouldings.…”

Section: Comparison Between Simulation Data and Experimental Observatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mesoscale modelling of processing rubber-toughened acrylic polymers

Porfyrakis¹,

Assender²

2004

Plastics, Rubber and Composites

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of modelling in reproducing the microstructure of rubber-toughened acrylic polymers has been examined. A modelling procedure has been carried out in three stages. In the first stage, a rheological constitutive equation for rubber-toughened poly (methyl methacrylate) (RTPMMA) has been developed. In the second stage, the flow of RTPMMA melt has been modelled simulating common industrial polymer processing techniques such as extrusion and injection moulding. For the final stage, a mesoscale model has been built in order to reproduce the RTPMMA microstructure. Comparison with experimental observations has shown that the code has successfully predicted that rubber particle elongation is much more pronounced during injection moulding than during extrusion. It has been shown that particle elongation is greater near the walls of the mould, whereas the particles are more or less spherical in the central region of the mould. The 'shear' region (where the particles deform at an angle of approximately ¡45u) has been reproduced. Particle distribution across the width and length of the mould has been found to be fairly uniform. Such a mesoscale model not only provides a better explanation of experimental observations for toughened polymers, but it can also provide the polymer industry with the ability to make useful suggestions for possible routes to improved materials for a wide range of multi-phase systems.

show abstract

AFM and UFM surface characterization of rubber‐toughened poly(methyl methacrylate) samples

Cited by 18 publications

References 46 publications

Probing nanoscale graphene–liquid interfacial interactions via ultrasonic force spectroscopy

Probing nanoscale graphene–liquid interfacial interactions via ultrasonic force spectroscopy

Identification of nanoparticles and nanosystems in biological matrices with scanning probe microscopy

Mesoscale modelling of processing rubber-toughened acrylic polymers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About