Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T00:57:00.326Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Diblock Copolymers at Surfaces*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2011

Peter F. Green,
Thomas M. Christensen,
Thomas P. Russell and
Spiros H. Anastasiadis
Peter F. Green
Affiliation:
Sanda National Laboratories Albuquerque N.M. 87185-5800
Thomas M. Christensen*
Affiliation:
Sanda National Laboratories Albuquerque N.M. 87185-5800
Thomas P. Russell
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division Almaden Research Center 650 Harry Road San Jose, California 95120-6099
Spiros H. Anastasiadis
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division Almaden Research Center 650 Harry Road San Jose, California 95120-6099
*
Current Address: Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Colorado, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80933
Get access

Abstract

The surface properties of symmetric microphase separated diblock copolymers of polystyrene (PS) and polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) were investigated using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), the specular reflectivity of neutrons and secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS). PS, the lower surface energy component, exhibited a preferential affinity for the free surface. For copolymers that are far from the bulk microphase separation transition (MST), the surface consists of a layer of pure PS. When the system is close to the MST the surface is a mixture of PS and PMMA. The PS surface excess can be described bya N-1/2 dependence, where N is the number of segments that comprise the copolymer chain. It is shown that the surface undergoes an ordering transition at a temperature T2 that is above that of the bulk MST. The ordering of the bulk lamellar morphology is induced by an ordering at the surface. This is analogous to the ferromagnetic order observed in systems such as Gd at temperatures above the bulk Curie temperature. The results here are discussed in light of previous work on copolymer surfaces and in light of mean field theory.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 171: Symposium O – Polymer Based Molecular Composites , 1989, 317
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

This work was supported in part by U. S. DOE under Contract DE-AC046-DP00789

References

REFERENCES

1 Goodman, I., Ed., Developments in Block copolymers (Applied Science, New York, 1982).Google Scholar
2 Leibler, L., Macromolecules 13, 1602 (1980).Google Scholar
3 Ohta, T., Kawasaki, K., Macromolecules 19, 2621 (1986). A.N. Semenov, Sov. Phys. JETP, 61, 733 (1985).Google Scholar
4 Blakley, J. M., in Chemistry and Physics of Solid Surfaces, Vol 2, edited by Vanselow, R. (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1979).Google Scholar
5 Owen, M.J. and Kendrick, T.C., Macromolecules, 3, 458 (1970).Google Scholar
6 Rostogi, A.K. and Pierre, L.E. St., J. Colloid and Inf. Sce. 31, 168 (1969).Google Scholar
7 Schmitt, R.L., Gardella, J.A. Jr., Magill, J.H., Salvati, L. Jr., and Chin, R.L., Macromolecules 18, 2675 (1985)Google Scholar
8 Thomas, H.R. and O'Malley, J.J., Macromolecules 12, 323 (1979).Google Scholar
9 Patel, N.M., Dwight, D.W., Hendrick, J.L., Webster, D.C. and McGarth, J.E., Macromolecules, 21, 2689 (1988).Google Scholar
11 McGarth, J.E., Dwight, D.W.. Riffle, J.S., Davidson, T.F., Webber, D.C. and Vishwanathan, R., Polym. Prepr. Am Chem. Soc. Div. Polym. Chem 201(2), 528 (1979)Google Scholar
12 Henkee, C.S., Thomas, E.L. and Fetters, L.J., J. Materials Sci. 23, 1685 (1988).Google Scholar
13 Hasegawa, H., Hashimoto, T., Macromolecules 18, 589 (1985).Google Scholar
14 Anastasiadis, S.H., Russell, T.P., Satija, S.K. and Majkzrak, C.K., Physical Review Letters 62, 1852 (1989).Google Scholar
15 Anastasiadis, S.H., Russell, T.P., Satija, S.K. and Majkzrak, C.K., J. Chem. Phys. (submitted).Google Scholar
16 Coulon, G., Russell, T.P., Deline, V.R. and Green, P.F., Macromolecules, 22, 2581 (1989).Google Scholar
17 Gaines, G.L., Macromolecules, 14, 208 (1981)Google Scholar
18 Binder, K., In Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, Domb, C., Lebowitz, J.L., Eds.; Academic Press, New York, Vol. 8 (1983).Google Scholar
19 Rau, C. and Robert, M., Physical Review Letters, 58, 2714 (1987).Google Scholar
20 deGennes, P.G., Scaling Concepts in Polymer Physics (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1979).Google Scholar
21 Green, P.F., Russell, T.P., Jerome, R. and Granville, M., Macromolecules, 21, 3266 (1988).Google Scholar
22 Green, P.F., Russell, T.P., Jerome, R. and Granville, M., Macromolecules, 22, 908 (1989).Google Scholar
23 Green, P.F., Christensen, T.M., Russell, T.P. and Jerome, R., Macromolecules, 22, 2189 (1989).Google Scholar
24 Green, P.F., Christensen, T.M., Russell, T.P. and Jerome, R., J. Chem. Phys. (in press).Google Scholar
25 Clark, D.T., Peeling, J. and O'Malley, J.M., J. Polym. Sci., Polym. Chem. Ed. 14, 543 (1976). D.T. Clark and H.R. Thomas, J. Polym. Sce. 16, 791 (1978)Google Scholar
26 Als-Nielson, J., In Structure and Dynamics of Surfaces II, edited by Schommers, M. and Blanckenhagen, P. von (springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987).Google Scholar
27 Fredrickson, G.H., Macromolecules 20, 2535 (1987).Google Scholar
28 Wu, S., Polymer Interfaces and Adhesion (Marcel Dekker, New York, New York, 1982) p. 73.Google Scholar
29 The angle resolved measurements of these samples made by the slow solvent evaporation process showed variations only for the shortest copolymer system, the PMMA fraction varied from 0.25 to 0.18 in going from 90° to 20°.Google Scholar
30 The angle resolved measurements showed variations only for the shortest copolymer system, the PMMA fraction varied from 0.22 to 0.17 in going from 90° to 20°.Google Scholar
31 Many of the films, particularly the high N systems, that were not annealed long enough yielded values of ????, that were closer to 0.5. After longer anneals they reached their equilibrium values. As N increased the time required to reach equilibrium increased appreciaby.Google Scholar