ACCU DYNE TEST ™ Bibliography
Provided as an information service by Diversified Enterprises.
showing result page 41 of 76, ordered by
2022. Matienzo, L.J., J.A. Zimmerman, and F.D. Egitto, “Surface modification of fluoropolymers with vacuum ultraviolet irradiation,” J. Vacuum Science and Technology A, 12, 2662-2671, (Sep 1994).
975. Matousek, P., G. Kreuger, and O.-D. Hennemann, “Adhesion tests with corona-pretreated plastics,” Gummi Fasern Kunststoffe, 49, 630-631, (1996).
1232. Matsunaga, M., and P.J. Whitney, “Surface changes brought about by corona discharge treatment of polyethylene film and the effect on subsequent microbial colonisation,” Polymer Degradation and Stability, 70, 325-332, (2000).
1616. Matsunaga, T., “Relationship between surface energy and surface contamination,” in Surface Contamination: Genesis, Detection, and Control, Vol. 1, Mittal, K.L., ed., 47+, Plenum Press, 1979.
1814. Matsunaga, T.J., “Surface free energy analysis of polymers and its relation to surface composition,” J. Applied Polymer Science, 21, 2847-2854, (1977).
1991. Matsunaga, T.J., and Y. Ikada, “Dispersive component of surface free energy of hydrophilic polymers,” J. Colloid and Interface Science, 84, 8-13, (Nov 1981).
2109. Matsuzawa, Y., and H. Yasuda, “Semicontinuous plasma polymerization coating onto the inside surface of plastic tubing,” J. Applied Polymer Science, 38, 65-74, (1984).
530. Matuana, L.M., J.J. Balatinecz, and C.B. Park, “Evaluation of adhesion between PVC and surface-treated wood veneer laminates,” in ANTEC 97, Society of Plastics Engineers, 1997.
2480. Mausar, J., “Surface energy and surface tension: Measurements key to ink, adhesive, and coating wet out,” Chemsultants International, Oct 2010.
235. Maust, M.J., “Low VOC inks: correlation of two-parameter surface energies to printability on plastic films,” in 1992 Polymers, Laminations and Coatings Conference Proceedings, 391-396, TAPPI Press, Aug 1992.
531. Maust, M.J., “Correlation of dispersion and polar surface energies with printing on plastic films with low VOC inks,” TAPPI J., 76, 95-97, (May 1993).
236. Maxham, D., “Pushing the limits: halftone screen printing on plastic containers,” ScreenPrinting, 83, 106-108, (Feb 1993).
532. Maxwell, J.W., L. Salvati Jr., D.A. Markgraf, and M. Ferris, “The effect of time and contact on corona treated surfaces,” in 1986 Polymers, Laminations and Coatings Conference Proceedings, TAPPI Press, Aug 1986.
1738. Maxwell, J.W., et al, “The effect of time and contact on corona treated surfaces,” in 1987 Extrusion Coating Short Course/Seminar, 153-158, TAPPI Press, 1987.
1402. Maynard, P.W., “Electrostatic treating to promote adhesion...,” in 1976 Paper Synthetics Conference Proceedings, 59, TAPPI Press, 1976.
2451. Mazzola, L., M. Sebastiani, E. Bemporad, and F. Carassiti, “An innovative non-contact method to determine surface free energy on micro-areas,” J. Adhesion Science and Technology, 26, 131-150, (2012).
Surface free energy (SFE) is a property which depends on the chemical state and roughness of the surface and it is necessary to develop a reliable method to evaluate SFE value on a small area, taking into account these two different contributions. Today contact angle methods are the most used and they allow to evaluate the global mean value of SFE on areas of mm2 size. With these methods, it is not possible to evaluate the effects of roughness, surface defects, chemical contamination on SFE value. In addition, it is difficult to determine the surface free energy value on small components which have dimensions smaller than drop diameter. Nanoindentation and atomic force microscopy techniques provide alternative direct measurement methods to evaluate the SFE on small areas (on the order of μm2 or nm2) through a contact mechanism triggered by the contact of two bodies. In order to evaluate the adhesion properties, currently three models, Johnson– Kendall–Roberts, Maugis–Dugdale and Derjaguin–Muller–Toporov, use the value of pull-off force (force required to separate the indenter tip from the sample). All influences of surface morphology on SFE values are lost using these methods. In fact the adhesion value obtained refers to the energy balance between two conformal surfaces, which depends mainly on the morphology of the harder material (i.e., diamond tip). In this work we describe a new methodology for the SFE determination consisting in the modeling and quantitative evaluation of the interaction between the tip and sample surface during the approach phase in a nanoindentation test. During the test, the nanoindenter tip is attracted to the sample surface until the sample reaction forces become significant (in this case physical contact between two bodies is achieved). The SFE value is evaluated using experimental force of attraction and displacement of the nanoindenter spherical tip when it approaches the sample surface. In this method the sample surface is not altered by the tip, therefore unlike pull-off force method, it could be very useful to evaluate the actual SFE considering the effect of sample morphology (controlled roughness or pattern).
2353. McBride, R.T., and J.H. Rogers Jr., “Adheribility treatment of thermoplastic film,” U.S. Patent 3284331, Nov 1966.
1233. McCafferty, E., “Acid-base effects in polymer adhesion at metal surfaces,” J. Adhesion Science and Technology, 16, 239-255, (2002).
569. McCafferty, E., and J.P. Wightman, “Determination of the acid-base properties of metal oxide films and of polymers by contact angle measurements,” in Apparent and Microscopic Contact Angles, Drelich, J., J.S. Laskowski, and K.L. Mittal, eds., 149-170, VSP, Jun 2000.
771. McHale, G., S.M. Rowan, M.I. Newton, and N.A. Kab, “Estimation of contact angles on fibers,” in Apparent and Microscopic Contact Angles, Drelich, J., J.S. Laskowski, and K.L. Mittal, eds., 319-331, VSP, Jun 2000.
1487. McHale, G., S.M. Rowan, M.I. Newton, and N.A. Kab, “Estimation of contact angles on fibers,” J. Adhesion Science and Technology, 13, 1457-1469, (1999).
1020. McKee, G., “Novel method for the promotion of polymer adhesion to aluminum foil,” in 1997 Polymers, Laminations and Coatings Conference Proceedings, 183-185(V1), TAPPI Press, Aug 1997.
2932. McKell, K., “Corona or plasma - which is best for your process?,” PFFC, 27, 8-12, (Mar 2022).
2835. McKell, K., and K. Bredgaard, “Specialized plasma technology improves adhesion of water-based materials,” Converting Quarterly, 10, 47-50, (Oct 2020).
1100. McLaughlin, J.B., S.S. Suppiah, N. Moumen, and R.S. Subramanian, “Modeling of drop motion on solid surfaces with wettability gradients,” Presented at 12th International Coating Science and Technology Symposium, Sep 2004.
533. McLaughlin, T.F., Jr., “The surface treatment of polyolefins for bonding to inks and adhesives,” E.I. DuPont de Nemours, 1962.
2550. Medard, N., J.-C. Soutif, and F. Poncin-Epaillard, “Characterization of CO2 plasma-treated polyethylene surface bearing carboxylic groups,” Surface and Coatings Technology, 160, 197-205, (Oct 2002).
881. Meichsner, J., “Low-temperature plasmas for polymer surface modification,” in Low Temperature Plasma Physics: Fundamental Aspects and Applications, Hippler, R., S. Pfau, M. Schmidt, and K.H. Schoenbach, eds., 453-472, Wiley-VCH, Jun 2001.
1409. Meiners, S., J. Salge, E. Prinz, and F. Forster, “Surface modification of polymer materials by transient gas discharges at atmospheric pressure,” in 5th International Conference on Plasma Surface Engineering, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Sep 1996.
2787. Meiron, T.S., A. Marmur, and I.S. Saguy, “Contact angle measurement on rough surfaces,” J. Colloid and Interface Science, 274, 637-644, (Jun 2004).
A new method for the measurement of apparent contact angles at the global energy minimum on real surfaces has been developed. The method consists of vibrating the surface, taking top-view pictures of the drop, monitoring the drop roundness, and calculating the contact angle from the drop diameter and weight. The use of the new method has been demonstrated for various rough surfaces, all having the same surface chemistry. In order to establish the optimal vibration conditions, the proper ranges for the system parameters (i.e., drop volume, vibration time, frequency of vibration, and amplitude of vibration) were determined. The reliability of the method has been demonstrated by the fact that the ideal contact angles of all surfaces, as calculated from the Wenzel equation using the measured apparent contact angles, came out to be practically identical. This ideal contact angle has been compared with three methods of calculation from values of advancing and receding contact angles.
1234. Mekishev, G.A., T.A. Yovcheva, E. Guentcheva, and S. Nedev, “On the charge decay in PP electrets stored at pressures lower than atmospheric,” J. Materials Science: Materials in Electronics, 14, 779-780, (Oct 2003).
1662. Melamies, I.A., “A brilliant finish: A new atmospheric plasma pretreatment technology can improve the finish quality on plastics, metal and glass,” Finishing Today, (Mar 2007).
534. Menges, G., W. Michaeli, R. Ludwig, and K. Scholl, “Corona treatment of polypropylene films,” Kunststoffe, 80, 4-6, (Nov 1990).
237. Mercx, F.P.M., “Improved adhesive properties of high-modulus polyethylene structures, II. Corona grafting of acrylic acid,” Polymer, 34, 1981-1983, (1993).
2064. Mesic, B., “Ways to improve the printability in flexography of PE-coated cartonboard, using 'smart' polymers and corona treatment (licentiate dissertation),” Karlstad Univ., 2004.
2582. Mesic, B., “Printability of polyethylene-coated paper and paperboard (Doctorate thesis),” Karlstad University, 2006.
2060. Mesic, B., M. Lestelius, G. Engstrom, and B. Edholm, “Printability of PE-coated paperboard with water-borne flexography: Effects of corona treatment and surfactants addition,” Pulp & Paper Canada, 106, 36-41, (Nov 2005).
1278. Mesic, B., M. Lestelius, and G. Engstrom, “Influence of corona treatment decay on print quality in water-borne flexographic printing of low-density polyethylene-coated paperboard,” Packaging Technology and Science, 19, 61-70, (Mar 2006).
The decrease in the corona treatment effect with time and its influence on the flexographic printability of low-density polyethylene-coated paperboard were studied. After corona treatment, sheets were stored in different ways. Some sheets were stored in a laboratory atmosphere, while others were protected from exposure to light, air, moisture and dust in polyethylene bags. The tendency for ink to spread on the surfaces was studied using contact angle measurements. Printability was evaluated as print density, dot gain, uncovered (white) and mottling. The results obtained show that the surface energy of the protected sheets decreased with time, but not as much and not as quickly as that of the unprotected sheets. In the case of the protected sheets, the percentage uncovered areas and mottling remained constant, but for the unprotected sheets they increased with increasing time after the corona treatment. No significant differences were seen in the other print quality measures. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/pts.708
2065. Mesic. B., M. Lestelius, G. Engstrom, and B. Edholm, “Printability of PE-coated paper-board using water-based flexographic ink,” Presented at Surf-Treat Karlstad 2003, 2003.
1766. Mesyats, G., Y. Klyachkin, N. Gavrilov, and A. Kondyurin, “Adhesion of polytetrafluoroethylene modified by an ion beam,” Vacuum, 52, 285-289, (1999).
<-- Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | Next-->