Conversion Tables of Contact Angles to Surface Tensions

Neumann, A. W.; Absolom, D. R.; Francis, David; Van, C. J. Oss

doi:10.1080/03602548008057240

Cited by 141 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We have generated a matched series of COOH/CH 3 -and OH/CH 3 -SAMs which vary systematically in cos AW and, thus, ␥ SV, according to equation-of-state models for its estimation (1,28). Analysis by XPS shows that AW varies in accordance with the changes in the relative molar ratios of different alkanethiolates within the SAM (4, 5).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The simplest and most elegant of these models invokes an equation of state, of the form ␥ 12 ϭ f(␥ 13 ,␥ 23 ) (28). Thus, ␥ SL can be obtained as a function of ␥ SV and ␥ LV , ␥ BS can be obtained as a function of ␥ BV and ␥ SV , and ␥ BL can be obtained as a function of ␥ BV and ␥ LV , where ␥ BV and ␥ LV are the vapor interfacial tensions (surface tensions) of the bacterium and liquid, respectively.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Substratum Surface Chemistry and Surface Energy on Attachment of Marine Bacteria and Algal Spores

Ista

Callow

Finlay

et al. 2004

Appl Environ Microbiol

187

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two series of self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) of -substituted alkanethiolates on gold were used to systematically examine the effects of varying substratum surface chemistry and energy on the attachment of two model organisms of interest to the study of marine biofouling, the bacterium Cobetia marina (formerly Halomonas marina) and zoospores of the alga Ulva linza (formerly Enteromorpha linza). SAMs were formed on gold-coated glass slides from solutions containing mixtures of methyl-and carboxylic acid-terminated alkanethiols and mixtures of methyl-and hydroxyl-terminated alkanethiols. C. marina attached in increasing numbers to SAMs with decreasing advancing water contact angles ( AW ), in accordance with equation-of-state models of colloidal attachment. Previous studies of Ulva zoospore attachment to a series of mixed methyl-and hydroxyl-terminated SAMs showed a similar correlation between substratum AW and zoospore attachment. When the hydrophilic component of the SAMs was changed to carboxylate, however, the profile of attachment of Ulva was significantly different, suggesting that a more complex model of interfacial energetics is required.Upon submersion in a nonsterile aqueous liquid, most surfaces become rapidly colonized by collections of bacteria and other microorganisms. These attached cells, along with extracellular material they produce and other organic compounds adsorbed to the surface, comprise a structure referred to as a biofilm (17). Biofilms are ubiquitous in natural aqueous milieus and are increasingly considered to represent a separate developmental form of microorganisms (29). Similarly, a number of macroorganisms, such as algae, exploit a unicellular form for attachment and colonization of surfaces. Surface coverage by both macro-and microorganisms, therefore, depends initially on the ability of single cells to adsorb and adhere to the attachment substratum.The tendency (driving force) for a microorganism to attach to a given surface is given by the free energy of adhesion (⌬G adh ), which can be expressed by the following equation as a thermodynamic energy balance between the interfacial energies between the substratum, the organism, and the surrounding liquid (1): ⌬G adh ϭ ␥ BS Ϫ ␥ BL Ϫ ␥ SL , where ␥ BS is the interfacial tension between the organism (e.g., a bacterium) and substratum, ␥ BL is the interfacial tension between the organism and the liquid, and ␥ SL is the interfacial tension between the substratum and the liquid.Experimental determination of the interfacial energy values for the above equation is controversial and has led to three different, yet complementary, models (8). All rely on estimation of interfacial energies by contact angles as indicated by Young's equation (2), which states that ␥ SV (the vapor interfacial tensions [surface tensions] of the substratum) is related to the contact angle () formed by a drop of liquid on the substratum such that ␥ SV ϭ ␥ SL ϩ ␥ LV cos, where ␥ SL is the interfacial tension between the surface and the liquid and ␥ LV is the interfac...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Substratum Surface Chemistry and Surface Energy on Attachment of Marine Bacteria and Algal Spores

Ista

Callow

Finlay

et al. 2004

Appl Environ Microbiol

187

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An advantage of the approach recently outlined (8), and mentioned in this paper, is that it takes spreading pressures into account, a severe disadvantage being the use of liquid mixtures, which has the possibility of showing preferential adsorption at the various interfaces (3,13). One of the most commonly applied methods to derive surface free energies is the equation of state approach, this enables the determination of the surface free energy of a solid from contact angle measurements with only one liquid (14,15). Results for the five substrata used in this study based on measured water and a-bromonaphthalene contact angles are summarized in Table IV.…”

Section: Appendix: Comparison Of Various Methods To Determine Surfacementioning

confidence: 99%

Spreading pressures of water and n-propanol on polymer surfaces

Busscher

Kip

Silfhout

et al. 1986

Journal of Colloid and Interface Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…X = Polymer-solvent interaction parameter = Lattice constant 0.34 for (ds = dp) Vo = Molar volume of the solvent dr = Density of polymer Surface and mechanical studies The surface properties of the polymers were determined by water contact angle measurements and the interfacial free energy was calculated from standard tables. 19 The tensile properties were determined as per ASTM standard D 812 with rectangular specimens using an Instron Automated Materials Testing system (IX) 1.09. Shore`A' hardness was determined for the polyurethane by piling the sheets of polymers to 6 mm thickness.…”

Section: Physico-chemical Characterisationmentioning

confidence: 99%