4.7 Article

Influence of aramid fiber moisture regain during atmospheric plasma treatment on aging of treatment effects on surface wettability and bonding strength to epoxy

Journal

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
Volume 253, Issue 23, Pages 9283-9289

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2007.05.054

Keywords

aramid fibers; atmospheric pressure plasma treatment; moisture regain; XPS; interfacial shear strength; aging effect

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One of the main differences between a low-pressure plasma treatment and an atmospheric pressure plasma treatment is that in atmosphere, the substrate material may absorb significant amount of water which may potentially influence the plasma treatment effects. This paper investigates how the moisture absorbed by aramid fibers during the atmospheric pressure plasma treatment influences the aging behavior of the modified surfaces. Kevlar 49 fibers with different moisture regains (MR) (0.5, 3.5 and 5.5%, respectively) are treated with atmospheric pressure plasma jet (APPJ) with helium as the carrier gas and oxygen as the treatment gas. Surface wettability and chemical compositions, and interfacial shear strengths (IFSS) to epoxy for the aramid fibers in all groups are determined using water contact angle measurements, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), and micro-bond pull out tests, respectively. Immediately after the plasma treatment, the treated fibers have substantially lower water contact angles, higher surface oxygen and nitrogen contents, and larger IFSS to epoxy than those of the control group. At the end of 30 day aging period, the fibers treated with 5.5% moisture regain had a lower water contact angle and more polar groups on the fiber surface, leading to 75% improvement of IFSS over the control fibers, while those for the 0.5 and 3.5% moisture regain groups were only 30%. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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