4.7 Article

The Quantitative Nanomechanical Mapping of Starch/Kaolin Film Surfaces by Peak Force AFM

Journal

POLYMERS
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym13020244

Keywords

AFM PeakForce QNM; nanomechanics; biopolymers; starch composite film; adhesion force

Funding

  1. Lublin University of Technology - Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education [030/RID/2018/19]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study demonstrates that additives have a significant impact on the mechanical and surface properties of starch films, with increasing kaolin content resulting in higher modulus and adhesion force, as well as increased surface roughness parameters.
Starch films modified with additives are materials increasingly being used in the production of packaging. These types of biopolymers can, to a considerable degree, replace plastic, contributing to the reduction in both production and waste management costs. However, they should be characterised by specific mechanical and surface parameters which determine their application. In the presented work, the PeakForce Quantitative Nanomechanics Mapping (PFQNM) method was applied to analyse a starch-based biopolymer modified with two different kaolin clay contents (5% and 10%). The technique used facilitates the assessment of the correlation of Atomic Force Microscope AFM height parameters with nanomechanical ones which provide the definitions of mutual interactions and allow the possibility to analyse materials in respect of various details. The investigated material was mapped in the Derjaguin-Muller-Toporov (DMT) modulus, adhesion and height domains. The results obtained indicated the impact of additives on the determined parameters. Increases in the DMT modulus and the adhesion force, along with the kaolin content, were observed. The enhancement of starch films with kaolin clay also induced growth in the surface roughness parameters.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available