Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:29:10.799Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Application of Self Assembled Monolayer Approach to Probe Fiber Matrix-Adhesion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

E. Feresenbet ,
D. Raghavan  and
G. A. Holmes
E. Feresenbet
Affiliation:
Howard University, Chemistry Department Washington D.C. 20059
D. Raghavan
Affiliation:
Howard University, Chemistry Department Washington D.C. 20059
G. A. Holmes
Affiliation:
Polymer Division National Institute of Standards & Technology 100 Bureau Drive Stop 8543 Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899-8543
Get access

Abstract

Adhesion at the fiber-matrix interface of composites is often related to a combination of factors such as mechanical interlocking, physico-chemical interactions, and chemical bonding of the fiber-matrix interphase region. We demonstrate the use of self-assembled monolayer (SAMs) approach for depositing silane coupling agent on glass fiber and studying the impact of the individual interactions on the adhesion process. Through some unique chemistry, functionalized and non-functionalized C11 chlorosilanes were deposited on to E-glass fiber and modified. The adhesion of diglycidyl ether of bisphenol-A (DGEBA) cured with meta-phenylene diamine (m-PDA) to SAM layer on E-glass fibers was measured by performing single fiber fragmentation tests (SFFT). The extent of adhesion between the fiber and matrix was found to be dependent on carbon chain length of coupling agents, and the functional group at the end of the SAMs layer. Furthermore, the contributions to adhesion by physico-chemical interaction and covalent bonding has been individually assessed.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 710: Symposia DD – Polymer Interfaces and Thin Films , 2001 , DD11.4.1/AA10.4.1
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1) Moussawi, H. A., Drown, E. K. and Drzal, L. T., Polymer. Composite, 1993, 14, 195.Google Scholar
2) Koenig, J. L., in Silanes Surface and Interfaces, Leyden, D. E., Ed. (Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York), Vol. 1, p. 43.Google Scholar
3) Bigelow, W. C., Pickett, D. L., and Zesman, W. A., Journal of Colloid Science 1946, 101, 201.Google Scholar
4) Maoz, R., and Sagiv, J., Journal of Colloid Interface Science 1984, 100, 465.Google Scholar
5) Brzoska, J. B., Ben, I. A., and Rondelez, F., Langmuir 1994 10, 4367.Google Scholar
6) Parikh, N., Allara, D. L., Ben, I. A., and Rondelez, F., Journal of Physical.Chemistry 1994, 98, 7577.Google Scholar
7) Holmes, G. A., Peterson, R. C., Hunston, D. L., and McDonough, W. G., Polymer Composites 2000.Google Scholar
8) Heise, A., Menzel, H., Yim, H., Foster, M. D., Wieringa, R. H., Schouten, A. J., Erb, V., and Stamm, M., Langmuir 1997, 13, 723–728.Google Scholar
9) Holmes, G. A., Peterson, R. C., Hunston, D. L., and McDonough, W. G., Polymer Composites 2000, 21, 450–465.Google Scholar
10) Holmes, G. A., Peterson, R. C., Hunston, D. L., and McDonough, W. G., Schutte, C. L., the Effect of Nonlinear Viscoelasticity on Interfacial Shear Strength Measurements; In Time Dependent and nonlinear effects in polymers and composites; Schapery, R. A., ed. ASTM: 2000; PP 98–117.Google Scholar
11) Nardin, M., and Ward, I. M., Materials Science and Technology 1987, 3, 814.Google Scholar
12) Holmes, G., Feresenbet, E., and Raghavan, D., Composite Interfaces, 2002, submitted.Google Scholar
13) Feresenbet, E., Raghavan, D., and Holmes, G., Adhesion, J., 2002, submitted.Google Scholar