Absorption of water by thin, ionic films of gelatin

Langmuir

Volumn 20, Issue 9, 2004, Pages 3513-3516

  Fialkowski, M ^a   Campbell, C J ^a   Bensemann, I T ^a   Grzybowski, B A ^a  

^a Northwestern University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

IONIC ADDITIVES; IONIC FILMS; WET STAMPING TECHNIQUES;

ADDITIVES; DENSITY (SPECIFIC GRAVITY); GELS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; REACTION KINETICS; THIN FILMS;

WATER ABSORPTION;

ADDITIVES; DENSITY; GELATIN; GELS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MONOLAYERS; REACTION KINETICS; WATER ABSORPTION;

GELATIN; GELATIN FILM; ION; WATER;

CHEMISTRY; KINETICS; LETTER;

GELATIN; IONS; KINETICS; WATER;

EID: 2342590725     PISSN: 07437463     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/la036298z     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Zhang, Y. F.; Ji, H. P.; Brown, G. M.; Thundat, T. Anal. Chem. 2003, 75, 4773.
2. Khoury, C.: Adalsteinsson, T.; Johnson, B.; Crone, W. C.; Beebe, D. J. Biomed. Microdevices 2003, 5, 35.
3. Baldi, A.; Gu, Y. D.; Loftness, P. E.; Siegel, R. A.; Ziaie, B. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 2003, 12, 613.
4. Takeoka, Y.; Watanabe, M. Langmuir 2003, 19, 9104.
5. Sakohara, S.; Koshi, T.; Asaeda, M. Kobunshi Ronbunshu 1995, 52, 155.
6. Victor, S. P.; Sharma, C. P. J. Biomater. Appl. 2002, 17, 125.
7. Suzuki, A.; Kojima, S. J. Chem. Phys. 1994, 101, 10003.
8. Wu, C.; Yan, C. Y. Macromolecules 1994, 27, 4516.
9. Hermel, H.; Seeboth, A. Thin Solid Films 1993, 223, 371.
10. Tanaka, T. J. Chem. Phys. 1998, 104, 8743.
11. Li, Y.; Tanaka, T. J. Chem. Phys. 1990, 92, 1365.
12. Schott, H. J. Macromol. Sci. 1992, B31, 1.
13. Peters, A.; Candau, S. J. Macromolecules 1988, 27, 2278.
14. Tanaka, T.; Fillmore, D. J. J. Chem. Phys. 1979, 70, 1214.
15. Etienne, M.; et al. Electrophoresis 1999, 20, 1923.
16. Nussinovitch, A.; Corradini, M. G.; Normand, M. D.; Peleg, M. J. Texture Stud. 2000, 31, 205.
17. Pepin-Donat, B.; Viallat, A.; Rebourt, E.; Bras, J. Synth. Met. 1999, 102, 1506.
18. Ichikawa, H.; Fukumori, Y. J. Controlled Release 2000, 63, 107.
19. 2 is 2 orders of magnitude smaller than the osmotic pressure, this contribution due to the change of the surface composition can be neglected.
20. Harmon, M. E.; Kuckling, D.; Frank, C. W. Macromolecules 2003, 36, 162.
21. Harmon, M. E.; Jakob, T. A. M.; Knoll, W. Frank, C. W. Macromolecules 2002, 35, 5999.
22. Kuckling, D.; Harmon, M. E.; Frank, C. W. Macromolecules 2002, 35, 6377.
23. When a film of dry gelatin (ionic or pure) was peeled off from the glass surface and stamping was done on the film's backside (i.e., the side initially in contact with the glass support), the amounts of water transferred into the gel were significantly lower (by ∼50%) than for stamping on the top surface. Anisotropic absorptivity was also evidenced by the lack of blue color when stamps containing iron(III) chloride were applied to the back surface of the ionic gel containing potassium hexacyanoferrate. We also noted that the absorptivity of the backside slowly (∼days) increased, although it never reached that of the top side. We hypothesize that this increase could be due to a slow structural rearrangement within the boundary layer after it had been separated from the glass support.
24. Contact angles of water droplets on very thin films of dry gels were significantly higher than those of thicker gels (e.g., 60° on a 1.5-μm. film vs 50° on a 32-μm one). At the same time, water droplets spread more rapidly on thin gels than on thicker ones. For example, after 15 min, the contact angle on a 1.5-μm film was 18°, while that on a 32-μm film was 35°.
25. Van Kampen, N. G. Stochastic Processes in Physics and Chemistry; North-Holland: Amsterdam, 1981.