Surface energy monolayer

Section 4.1 briefly describes some of the commonly employed experimental tools and procedures. Chaudhury et al., Israelachvili et al. and Tirrell et al. employed contact mechanics based approach to estimate surface energies of different self-assembled monolayers and polymers. In these studies, the results of these measurements were compared to the results of contact angle measurements. These measurements are reviewed in Section 4.2. The JKR type measurements are discussed in Section 4.2.1, and the measurements done using the surface forces apparatus (SFA) are reviewed in Section 4.2.2. 

Johnson and coworkers [6], in their original paper on the JKR theory, reported the measurements of surface energies and interfacial adhesion of soft elastomeric materials. Israelachvili and coworkers [68,69], and Tirrell and coworkers [62, 63,70,88-90] used the SFA to measure the surface energies of self-assembled monolayers and polymer films, respectively. Chaudhury and coworkers [47-50] adapted the JKR technique to measure the surface energies and interfacial adhesion between self-assembled monolayers. More recently, Mangipudi and coworkers [55] modified the JKR technique to measure the surface energies of glassy polymers. All these measurements are reviewed in this section. 

JKR type mea.surement.s on monolayers depo.sited on. soft elastomers. The recent interest in the JKR experiments has been stimulated by the work of Chaudhury and coworkers [47-50J. In a 1991 paper, Chaudhury and White-sides [47] reported their extensive studies on the measurement of interfacial work of adhesion and surface energies of elastomeric solids. The motivation for this work was to study the physico-organic chemistry of solid surfaces and interfaces. 

Surface energies of different end-functionalized trichlorosilane monolayers self-assembled on oxidized PDMS ... 

SFA has been traditionally used to measure the forces between modified mica surfaces. Before the JKR theory was developed, Israelachvili and Tabor [57] measured the force versus distance (F vs. d) profile and pull-off force (Pf) between steric acid monolayers assembled on mica surfaces. The authors calculated the surface energy of these monolayers from the Hamaker constant determined from the F versus d data. In a later paper on the measurement of forces between surfaces immersed in a variety of electrolytic solutions, Israelachvili [93] reported that the interfacial energies in aqueous electrolytes varies over a wide range (0.01-10 mJ/m-). In this work Israelachvili found that the adhesion energies depended on pH, type of cation, and the crystallographic orientation of mica. 

Israelachvili and his colleagues have used the SEA to study the interactions between surface layers of surfactant and of other molecules representing functionalised polymer chains, adhesion promoters or additives. Typically a monolayer of the molecule concerned is deposited onto cleaved mica sheets. The values of surface energies obtained from the JKR equation (Eq. 18) throw some interesting light on the nature and roughness of surface layers in contact. 

In a typical experiment, Israelachvili deposited monolayers of surfactants onto cleaved mica sheets, and evaluated the surface energies using the JKR equation. Fig. 11 contrasts results for mica coated with monolayers of (a) L-a-dipalmitoyl-phosphatidylethanolamine (DMPE) where j/a = = 27 mJ/m and (b) hexa-decyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) where = 20 mJ/m and = 50 mJ/m. ... 

The lowest wettable surface known = 6 dyne/cm) is a monolayer of perfluoro-launc acid on platinum, whose surface is made up of closely packed CF3 groups [20] Fluonnated graphite, (C2FJ and (CF) , also have surface tensions approachmg 6 dyne/cm [21] Perfluorinated materials, however, are not required tor low surface energies only the outermost surface groups must be perfluorinated [20, 22]... 

The work functions of metals correlate with their surface energies Fig. 4.11 shows this for sp metals. Hence the surface energy of a metal with a high work function is lowered when it is covered with a monolayer of a metal with a lower work function and lower surface energy. 

An interesting possibility raised by this experiment is that of spontaneous resolution in chiral monolayers. If this were a reasonably common phenomenon, it would give yet another possible answer to the perennial question of the chiral environment for the primordial stereospecific condensation reaction that produced the first chiral biopolymers. As our knowledge of chiral monolayers develops, we should have a better perspective on the likelihood of a racemic film spontaneously unmixing to produce patches of enantiomeric film at lower surface energy. The relevance of such a result to the origin of terrestrial life problem will have to remain eternally speculative and untestable. 

It should be noted that, in the above equations, the effects of adsorption of vapor or gas on the solid surfaces are completely neglected. The amount of adsorption can be quite large, and may approach or exceed the point of monolayer formation at saturation. The spreading pressure, n, which is the amount of the reduction in surface energy on the solid surface due to the adsorption of vapor in equilibrium, is given by (Adamson, 1982)... 

Fig. 4 Water contact angle data (a) and surface energy data (b) from a surface energy library produced through the graded UV-ozonolysis of an ODS self-assembled monolayer on sihcon. (Reproduced with permission from [17])...

---