Shear alignment and realignment of sphere-forming and cylinder-forming block-copolymer thin films

Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics

Volumn 81, Issue 1, 2010, Pages

  Marencic, Andrew P ^a   Adamson, Douglas H ^b   Chaikin, Paul M ^c,d   Register, Richard A ^a  

^a Princeton University   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^c POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BLOCK COPOLYMER THIN FILMS; HEXAGONAL LATTICE; LATTICE ORDERS; MICRO-DOMAINS; MICRODOMAIN; MISORIENTATION ANGLE; MONODOMAINS; PHENOMENOLOGICAL MODELS; SHEAR ALIGNMENT; SHEAR DIRECTION; SINGLE LAYER; STRUCTURED FLUIDS; TWO LAYERS; VARIABLE STRESS;

ALIGNMENT; BLOCK COPOLYMERS; COPOLYMERIZATION; CYLINDERS (SHAPES); SPHERES; THIN FILMS;

PLASTIC PRODUCTS;

EID: 76149145019     PISSN: 15393755     EISSN: 15502376     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.81.011503     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. S. B. Darling, Prog. Polym. Sci. 32, 1152 (2007). 10.1016/j.progpolymsci. 2007.05.004
2. P. G. de Gennes and J. Prost, The Physics of Liquid Crystals (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1993).
3. I. W. Hamley, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 13, R643 (2001). 10.1088/0953-8984/13/33/201
4. J. Ericksen, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 4, 231 (1959). 10.1007/BF00281389
5. J. L. Ericksen, Phys. Fluids 9, 1205 (1966). 10.1063/1.1761821
6. F. M. Leslie, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 19, 357 (1966). 10.1093/qjmam/19.3.357
7. F. M. Leslie, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 28, 265 (1968). 10.1007/BF00251810
8. O. Parodi, J. Phys. (Paris) 31, 581 (1970). 10.1051/jphys: 01970003107058100
9. D. M. Boudreau, H. H. Winter, C. P. Lillya, and R. S. Stein, Rheol. Acta 38, 503 (1999). 10.1007/s003970050203
10. B. Van Horn, D. Boudreau, and H. H. Winter, Rheol. Acta 42, 585 (2003). 10.1007/s00397-003-0315-x
11. B. L. Van Horn and H. H. Winter, Rheol. Acta 39, 294 (2000). 10.1007/s003970000111
12. I. W. Hamley, The Physics of Block Copolymers (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998).
13. Z.-R. Chen and J. A. Kornfield, Polymer 39, 4679 (1998). 10.1016/S0032-3861(98)00136-0
14. C. Daniel, I. W. Hamley, W. Mingvanish, and C. Booth, Macromolecules 33, 2163 (2000). 10.1021/ma991444m
15. J. A. Pople, I. W. Hamley, J. P. A. Fairclough, A. J. Ryan, and C. Booth, Macromolecules 31, 2952 (1998). 10.1021/ma9716490
16. K. Luo and Y. Yang, Polymer 45, 6745 (2004). 10.1016/j.polymer.2004.07. 059
17. H. Wang, M. C. Newstein, M. Y. Chang, N. P. Balsara, and B. A. Garetz, Macromolecules 33, 3719 (2000). 10.1021/ma991982z
18. D. L. Polis, S. D. Smith, N. J. Terrill, A. J. Ryan, D. C. Morse, and K. I. Winey, Macromolecules 32, 4668 (1999). 10.1021/ma981796d
19. L. Qiao, K. I. Winey, and D. C. Morse, Macromolecules 34, 7858 (2001). 10.1021/ma010611r
20. G. H. Fredrickson, J. Rheol. 38, 1045 (1994). 10.1122/1.550584
21. J. M. Sebastian, W. W. Graessley, and R. A. Register, J. Rheol. 46, 863 (2002). 10.1122/1.1475979
22. J. M. Sebastian, C. Lai, W. W. Graessley, and R. A. Register, Macromolecules 35, 2707 (2002). 10.1021/ma011523+
23. J. M. Sebastian, C. Lai, W. W. Graessley, R. A. Register, and G. R. Marchand, Macromolecules 35, 2700 (2002). 10.1021/ma011522h
24. M. J. Fasolka and A. M. Mayes, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 31, 323 (2001). 10.1146/annurev.matsci.31.1.323
25. R. A. Segalman, Mater. Sci. Eng. R. 48, 191 (2005). 10.1016/j.mser.2004. 12.003
26. G. E. Stein, E. W. Cochran, K. Katsov, G. H. Fredrickson, E. J. Kramer, X. Li, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 158302 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98. 158302
27. D. E. Angelescu, J. H. Waller, D. H. Adamson, P. Deshpande, S. Y. Chou, R. A. Register, and P. M. Chaikin, Adv. Mater. 16, 1736 (2004). 10.1002/adma.200400643
28. V. Pelletier, D. H. Adamson, R. A. Register, and P. M. Chaikin, Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 163105 (2007). 10.1063/1.2723673
29. D. E. Angelescu, J. H. Waller, R. A. Register, and P. M. Chaikin, Adv. Mater. 17, 1878 (2005). 10.1002/adma.200401994
30. M. W. Wu, R. A. Register, and P. M. Chaikin, Phys. Rev. E 74, 040801 (R) (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevE.74.040801
31. Some previous reports employed a similar model wherein T ODT □ possessed a quadratic dependence on σ rather than the linear dependence employed here and in Ref.. The quadratic dependence should hold at the lowest shear rates due to requirements of analyticity and symmetry. However, the coupling of the microdomains to the shearing field should occur quickly and can cause this relationship to become linear as shear rate and thus stress is increased, especially for high molecular weight polymers [A. I. Nakatani, J. Chem. Phys. 104, 1589 (1996)]. As a practical matter, it is difficult to determine the precise functional form of T ODT □ from the data presented here. Indeed, we have refit all the data using a quadratic dependence of T ODT □ on σ and while the values of σc necessarily differ, the general quality of the fits is similar. Most importantly, the finding presented herein that the cylinder-forming diblock can be satisfactorily described by a single value of σc (whether for alignment from a polygrain structure or realignment of the oriented structure), while the sphere-forming diblock requires a higher σc for realignment than initial alignment, is independent of the functional form assumed for T ODT □. 10.1063/1.470747
32. C. Harrison, Z. Cheng, S. Sethuraman, D. A. Huse, P. M. Chaikin, D. A. Vega, J. M. Sebastian, R. A. Register, and D. H. Adamson, Phys. Rev. E 66, 011706 (2002). 10.1103/PhysRevE.66.011706
33. A. P. Marencic, M. W. Wu, R. A. Register, and P. M. Chaikin, Macromolecules 40, 7299 (2007). 10.1021/ma0713310
34. D. E. Angelescu, C. K. Harrison, M. L. Trawick, R. A. Register, and P. M. Chaikin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 025702 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.025702
35. D. E. Angelescu, J. H. Waller, D. H. Adamson, R. A. Register, and P. M. Chaikin, Adv. Mater. 19, 2687 (2007). 10.1002/adma.200602904
36. J. L. Adams, D. J. Quiram, W. W. Graessley, R. A. Register, and G. R. Marchand, Macromolecules 31, 201 (1998). 10.1021/ma9710500
37. A block copolymer's TODT in a thin film can differ from its TODT in bulk because of substrate and free-surface effects. The TODT for a film of PS-PEP 3/23 containing a single layer of spherical microdomains was previously measured to be 125°C versus the bulk value of TODT =121±2°C. We were unable to measure the thin film TODT for the PS-PEP 4/13 because of the rapid formation of large grains, but we expect it to be similarly close to the bulk TODT since it has the same block chemistry and wetting conditions as the sphere former. We chose to consistently use the bulk TODT values because they are available for both polymers, but as a practical matter, using a slightly different value for TODT in our fits would simply change the best-fit value of the critical stress slightly (not beyond our quoted uncertainties) and would not affect our discussion or conclusions.
38. Y.-R. Hong, D. H. Adamson, P. M. Chaikin, and R. A. Register, Soft Matter 5, 1687 (2009). 10.1039/b820312a
39. M. W. Wu, Ph.D. thesis, Princeton University, 2005.
40. A. Hexemer, G. E. Stein, E. J. Kramer, and S. Magonov, Macromolecules 38, 7083 (2005). 10.1021/ma050286y
41. J. C. Crocker and D. G. Grier, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 179, 298 (1996). 10.1006/jcis.1996.0217
42. D. A. Hajduk, S. M. Gruner, S. Erramilli, R. A. Register, and L. J. Fetters, Macromolecules 29, 1473 (1996). 10.1021/ma950643c
43. See supplementary material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/ PhysRevE.81.011503 for color-scale versions of figures.