Self-assembly Behavior and Elastic Response of Polymer Brushes in Solvents
LI Huishu1,*, LU Hao2,*, GU Yuhong1
1 School of Information Technology, Suzhou Institute of Trade & Commerce, Suzhou 215009, Jiangsu, China 2 School of Materials Science and Engineering, Suzhou University of Science and Technology, Suzhou 215009, Jiangsu, China
Abstract: This work use Monte Carlo simulation which relies on particle-based and density field to get self-assemble morphology of semi-flexible polymer brushes in poor solvents. It's revealed that in poor solvent, the free ends of the chains are stretched and the height of the chain brushes increases significantly as the chain rigidity enhances. Meanwhile, the internal cavity of the chain brushes can be observed and the ‘bridging’ behavior appears at the top. To further study the elastic response of polymer brushes, an alternative way is offered to calculate the surface elasticity of polymer brushes by pressing the weight plate on the top of polymer brushes, by virtue of which a complex theoretical derivation process on field simulation is saved. The results show that the elasticity of the polymer brush rise slowly at first but then varies sharply under compression. Results also display that the flexible polymer brushes take on better elastic response than semi-flexible ones under the same pressure in good solvent.
1 Wang Shengqin, Jing Benxin, Zhu Yingxi. Journal of Polymer Science Part B-Polymer Physics, 2014, 52(2), 85. 2 Hou Wangmeng, Liu Yingze, Zhao Hanying. Chempluschem, 2020, 85(5), 998. 3 Tang S D, Jonathan M H, Zhao B, et al. Polymer, 2016, 90(4), 9. 4 Ma Xin, Chen Cangyi, Yang Yingzi, et al. Soft Matter, 2014, 10(32), 6005. 5 Matsen M W. Journal of Chemical Physics, 2005, 122(14), 144904. 6 Taylor W, Jones R A L. Langmuir, 2010, 26(17), 13954. 7 Jurate Jonikaite-Svegzdiene, Alina Kudresova, Sarunas Paukstis, et al. Polymer Chemistry, 2017, 8(36), 5621. 8 Edgecombe S R, Gardiner J M, Matsen M W. Macromolecules, 2002, 35(16), 6475. 9 Ji Shengxiang, Liu Guoliang, Zheng Fan, et al. Advanced Materials, 2008, 20(16), 3054. 10 Wang Li, Zhong Tianping, Zhou Jian. Molecular Simulation, 2017, 43(13-16), 1322. 11 Mikhail M, Roman S, Evgeny K, et al. ACS Nano, 2008, 2(1), 41. 12 Edwin C J, Joshua D W, Grant B W, et al. Langmuir, 2020, 36(21), 5765. 13 Andrey M, Kurt B. Soft Matter, 2014, 10(21), 3783. 14 Michael S, Chin M H, Zachary U, et al. Faraday Discussions, 2016, 186, 17. 15 Hua Yunfeng, Deng Zhenyu, Zhang Linxi. Frontiers of Physics, 2017, 12(3), 128701. 16 Spirin L, Galuschko A, Binder K, et al. Physical Review Letters, 2011, 106(16), 168301. 17 Piotr P, Jeremiasz K J, Krzysztof M. Polymer, 2019, 173(31), 190. 18 Chen Yantao, Chen Jeff. Journal of Polymer Science Part B-Polymer Phy-sics, 2012, 50(1), 21. 19 Qiu Wenjuan, Li Baohui, Wang Qiang. Soft Matter, 2018, 14(10), 1887. 20 Chen Cangyi, Tan Ping, Qiu Feng, et al. Journal of Chemical Physics, 2015, 142(12), 124904. 21 François A D, Kang H M, Kostas C D, et al. Macromolecules, 2008, 41(13), 4989. 22 Kurt B, Wolfgang P. Macromolecules, 2008, 41(13), 4537. 23 Kaoru O, Takashi S, Taisuke M, et al. Macromolecules, 2007, 40(3), 723. 24 Jonas R, Labrini A, Sergei A E, et al. Scientific Reports, 2015, 5, 15854. 25 Hu Wenbing. Polymer Bulletin, 2000, 6(2), 97(in Chinese). 胡文兵. 高分子通报, 2000, 6(2), 97.