Low-rate dynamic contact angles on poly[styrene-alt-(hexyl/10-carboxydecyl(90/10)maleimide)] and the determination of solid surface tensions

• Published in: Macromolecular chemistry and physics Vol. 200; no. 5; pp. 1121 - 1133
• Main Authors: Kwok, Daniel Y., Li, Angel, Lam, Catherine N. C., Wu, Rebecca, Zschoche, Stefan, Pöschel, Kathrin, Gietzelt, Thomas, Grundke, Karina, Jacobasch, Hans-Jörg, Neumann, A. Wilhelm
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Weinheim WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH 01.05.1999; WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH; Wiley
• Subjects: Applied sciences; Exact sciences and technology; Organic polymers; Physicochemistry of polymers; Properties and characterization; Surface properties; Ionomer; Terpolymer; Dynamic contact angle; Surface properties; Alternating copolymer; Maleimide derivative copolymer; Surface tension; Acid copolymer; Experimental study; Computing method; Styrene copolymer
• ISSN: 1022-1352; 1521-3935
• DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-3935(19990501)200:5<1121::AID-MACP1121>3.0.CO;2-7

Low‐rate dynamic contact angles of 14 liquids on a poly[styrene‐alt‐(hexyl/10‐carboxydecyl(90/10)maleimide)] P[S‐(H/CM)] were measured by means of an automated axisymmetric drop shape analysis‐profile (ADSA‐P). It was found that 9 liquids yield non‐constant contact angles, and/or dissolve the polymer. From the experimental contact angles of the remaining 5 liquids, it was found that the product of the liquid‐vapour surface tension and the cosine of the contact angle changes smoothly with the liquid‐vapour surface tension, i. e. γlv cos θ depends only on γlv for a given solid surface (or solid surface tension). This contact angle pattern is in harmony with those from other inert and non‐inert (polar and non‐polar) surfaces. The solid‐vapour surface tension calculated from the equation‐of‐state approach for solid‐liquid interfacial tensions was found to be 31.0 mJ/m2, with a 95% confidence limit of ±0.6 mJ/m2 from the experimental contact angles of the 5 liquids in Laboratory 1, and γsv = 29.9 mJ/m2 from measurements with two liquids in Laboratory 2. The difference is essentially due to actual physical differences between the polymer films prepared in the two laboratories.