Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T18:41:14.059Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Smart MD-Sampling Method for Interfacial Free Energy between Polymer-Grafted Substrate and Liquid

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2018

Masayuki Uranagase  and
Shuji Ogata
Masayuki Uranagase*
Affiliation:
Department of Physical Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Nagoya Institute of Technology, Gokiso-cho, Nagoya, Aichi466-8555, Japan
Shuji Ogata
Affiliation:
Department of Physical Science and Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Nagoya Institute of Technology, Gokiso-cho, Nagoya, Aichi466-8555, Japan
*
*(Email: uranagase.masayuki@nitech.ac.jp)
Get access

Abstract

A novel and efficient scheme for evaluating the work of adhesion between a liquid and a polymer-grafted surface is proposed. A set of spherically symmetric potentials are gradually inserted at the interface to separate the liquid molecules from the surface according to its shape. This method is applied to the interface between the water and the gold substrate modified by poly(ethylene glycol). We find that the work of adhesion becomes maximum at the intermediate density of grafted poly(ethylene glycol). This is attributed to penetration of the water molecules into grafted poly(ethylene glycol) and hydrophilic interaction between them.

Keywords

adhesionsimulationpolymer
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Advances , Volume 3 , Issue 10: Theory, Characterization and Modeling , 2018 , pp. 519 - 524
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2018 

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

Awaja, F., Gilbert, M., Kelly, G., Fox, B., and Pigram, P. J., Prog. Polym. Sci. 34, 948 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leroy, F., dos Santos, D., and Müller-Plathe, F., Macromol. Rapid Commun. 30, 864 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benjamin, R. and Horbach, J., J. Chem. Phys. 137, 044707 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prime, K. L. and Whitesides, G. M., Science 252, 1164 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pertsin, A. J. and Grunze, M., Langmuir 16, 8829 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ismail, A. E., Grest, G. S., and Stevens, M. J., Langmuir 23, 8508 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heinz, H., Vaia, R. A., Farmer, B. L., and Naik, R. R., J. Phys. Chem. C 112, 17281 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, G. D., Borodin, O., and Bedrov, D., J. Comp. Chem. 23, 1480 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kajima, Y., Hiyama, M., Ogata, S., Kobayashi, R., and Tamura, T., J. Chem. Phys. 136, 234105 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussi, G., Donadio, D., and Parrinello, M., J. Chem. Phys. 126, 014101 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folkers, J. P., Laibinis, P. E., and Whitesides, G. M., J. Adhesion Sci. Technol. 6, 1397 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernett, M. K. and Zisman, W. A., J. Phys. Chem. 74, 2309 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar