Hydrophobic Recovery of Vacuum Ultraviolet Irradiated Polyolefin Surfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Summary: Film samples of low‐density polyethylene (LDPE) and biaxially oriented poly(propylene) (BOPP) were surface modified by vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) irradiation using a Kr resonant lamp at λ = 123.6 nm in low‐pressure ammonia gas, and were then stored in air. The time‐dependence of the surface properties was monitored using several complementary surface‐sensitive techniques such as contact angle goniometry (CAG), X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and time‐of‐flight secondary ion mass spectroscopy (ToF‐SIMS), which allows one to determine the surface energy, and chemical composition at different depths. The relative importance of four possible mechanisms involved in surface hydrophobic recovery is discussed, and we show that in our particular case the main mechanism is rotational and/or translational motion of polymer chains and chain segments. This restructuring determines the observed “loss” of functional groups, which occurs within the first few monolayers of the surface (∼1 nm), as shown by the ToF‐SIMS results, and which leads to the observed decrease in the surface energy. In the deeper surface regions (∼10 nm) long‐lived radicals react with oxygen and water vapor upon exposure to the atmosphere, leading to an increase in the concentration of bound oxygen, as observed by XPS. Finally, CAG measurements show that the hydrophobic recovery is reversible and can be significantly reduced by cross‐linking near the surface, as illustrated by depth sensing nano‐indentation measurements on BOPP surfaces. Surface energy, γs, values as a function of storage time for VUV/NH3‐treated a) LDPE (Ed = 14.1 J · cm−2), and b) BOPP samples (Ed = 28.2 J · cm−2). Open symbols pertain to rinsed samples. magnified image Surface energy, γs, values as a function of storage time for VUV/NH3‐treated a) LDPE (Ed = 14.1 J · cm−2), and b) BOPP samples (Ed = 28.2 J · cm−2). Open symbols pertain to rinsed samples.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".