Efficient bonding of ethylene-propylene-diene M-class rubber to stainless steel using polymer brushes as a nanoscale adhesive

Highly Efficient Rubber-to-Stainless Steel Bonding by Nanometer-Thin Cross-linked Polymer Brushes

“…Four stages in response to the applied loading could be identified: (1) loading of the specimen, during which the rubber arm is bent and stretched, (2) stable crack propagation, (3) unstable crack propagation, and (4) loss of load carrying capacity. 32 For the SS Chemosil samples, the peel curves consistently achieved high forces, leaving the exposed surface area (7.85 × 7.85 mm 2 ) completely covered with rubber after fracture (Figure 4, picture 1). The peel curve from the two SS allyl samples displays about the same high force as that from SS Chemosil with the characteristic four stages of load response indicating cohesive fracture (Figure 4, picture 2).…”

“…Figure (left) presents peel curves of three SS Chemosil reference samples and two SS allyl samples along with pictures of relevant fracture surfaces. Four stages in response to the applied loading could be identified: (1) loading of the specimen, during which the rubber arm is bent and stretched, (2) stable crack propagation, (3) unstable crack propagation, and (4) loss of load carrying capacity . For the SS Chemosil samples, the peel curves consistently achieved high forces, leaving the exposed surface area (7.85 × 7.85 mm 2 ) completely covered with rubber after fracture (Figure , picture 1).…”

“…In our previous study, 32 we promoted adhesion by activating PGMA brushes with drop-casted benzoyl peroxide (BPO). Some adhesion was found, although a severe problem was encountered in having a rather non-uniform distribution of BPO on the surface along with the “washing” away of BPO from the edges during compression molding, a problem which could be anticipated to be even larger with the injection molding technique.…”

“… a Two out of seven samples did not yield cohesive fracture and were not included in the result. b From ref . …”

“…A full description of the test setup and the data treatment is provided elsewhere. 32 In general, peel tests were conducted on a universal testing machine (Zwick Z005, Zwick GmbH & Co. KG, Ulm-Einsingen, Germany) under a loading rate of 0.5 mm s –1 . A custom-made fixture consisting of a sled and a base both fixed to the testing machine was designed.…”