Fabrication of pH Responsive Thin Film Using a One-Step Environmentally Friendly Plasma Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3610133/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Fabrication of pH Responsive Thin Film Using a One-Step Environmentally Friendly Plasma Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3610133/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

In recent years, there has been growing interest in pH responsive polymers. Polymers with ionizable tertiary amine groups, which have the potential to be used in many critical application areas due to their pKa values, have an important place in pH responsive polymers. In this study, poly(2-Diisopropyl aminoethyl methacrylate) (PDPAEMA) thin films were coated on various substrates such as glass, fabric and silicon substrate using a one-step environmentally friendly plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) method. The effects of typical PECVD plasma processing parameters such as substrate temperature, plasma power, reactor pressure on the deposition rate were studied. The highest deposition rate was obtained at a substrate temperature of 40 °C, a reactor pressure of 300 mtorr, and a plasma power of 60 W. The apparent activation energy was found to be 17.56 kJ/mol. Based on the results of this study, uniform film thickness and surface roughness were observed at large area. The PDPAEMA thin film was exposed to successive acid/base cycles. The results showed that the pH sensitivity of the thin film produced by the PECVD method is permanent and reversible.

Stimuli responsive polymers have significant potential for a wide range of engineering, scientific and industrial processes, because of their unique switchable properties. The physicochemical properties of stimuli responsive polymers change as a result of various physical and/or chemical stimuli in their environment [1]. When the stimuli responsible for the change return to its initial state, the changed physicochemical properties return to their initial state. pH, temperature, light and magnetic field are among the most common stimuli in the literature [2, 3]. Considering the role of solvents in chemical and biochemical processes, pH is considered to be a highly effective stimulus. A slight increase or decrease in the pH value of the medium can cause changes in the chain structure, solubility, volume, wettability, and similar structural properties of pH responsive materials [4]. The reason for these changes is the ionizable functional groups in the structures of the sensitive polymers that have the ability to accept or donate protons depending on the pH of the environment [5]. Depending on whether these groups are weakly acidic or weakly basic, pH responsive polymers can be generally divided into two groups as polyacid and polybase. Pendant acid groups such as carboxylic acids in polyacids and basic groups such as amines in polybases are ionized based on the pH of the medium. If the pH of the medium is lower than the dissociation constant (pKA) of the polymers, polyacids are deprotonated and shrink, while polybases are protonated and expand. In this case, polyacids and polybases exhibit hydrophobic and hydrophilic properties, respectively [6].

One of the most important potential application areas of pH responsive polymers is drugs used in the diagnosis/treatment of cancer. Since cancer cells are much more dependent on aerobic glycolysis for ATP than healthy cells, the extracellular environment of tumor cells is more acidic [7]. It is known that the pH value around tumors is between 6.2–6.8 [8]. The pKa values of methacrylate polymers with tertiary amine group are mostly in this range [9]. Since the pKa values of methacrylate polymer containing tertiary amine groups are mostly in this pH range, they have an important place among pH responsive polymers. Therefore, there is an increasing interest in the fabrication of this class of polymers such as poly(2-Diethylaminoethyl methacrylate) (PDEAEMA), poly(2-Dimethylaminoethyl methacrylate) (PDMAEMA) and poly(2-Diisopropylaminoethyl methacrylate) (PDPAEMA) [10–12].

The fabrication methods of polymers can generally be categorized under two main classes as wet and dry methods. Sol-gel, atom transfer radical polymerization (ATRP), reversible addition-fragmentation chain-transfer (RAFT), can be given as examples of wet processes [13–15]. These methods are relatively easy to implement and generally do not require expensive or special equipment. However, the solvents used in wet processes can cause damage to fragile substrates. Strong solvent tension forces prevent homogeneous and conformal polymer formation on the surface of complex geometry substrates with porous or corrugated parts. Furthermore, the solutions used in wet methods pose a threat to both the environment and the health of all organisms. Hence, additional processes are required to remove the solutions, resulting in higher energy consumption and cost. On the other hand, in dry methods, as its name implies, eliminate solution related problems including solvent disposal steps and costs. As a dry method, environmentally friendly plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD), is an effective technique for the fabrication of polymers in a one-step and at low temperature [16]. In addition, PECVD has significant advantages such as real-time film thickness measurement and the ability to be easily employed into large scale production [17, 18]. Due to the aforementioned advantages, the versatile PECVD method was used for the first time in this study for the production of PDPAEMA thin film. The effects of some important PECVD process parameters such as reactor pressure, substrate temperature and plasma power on the deposition rate were investigated.

2.1. Materials

Silicon wafer (100, p-type), glass slide (ISOLAB Laborgeräte GmbH, Germany) and fabric (40 g, polypropylene spunbond non-woven, Rota Teknik Tekstil, Turkey) were used as substrates. The monomer DPAEMA (%97, Sigma-Aldrich) was used as received without any further purification and modification. The chemical structure of the monomer is schematically displayed in Fig. 1a. Ultrapure nitrogen (99.999%) was used as a carrier gas to transport the monomer into the vacuum reactor.

2.2. Thin film synthesis by PECVD

The polymerization was carried out under vacuum in a custom-designed stainless-steel reactor with cylindrical planar geometry having a height of 10 cm and an outer diameter of 16 cm. A more detailed description of PECVD setup used in this study is given elsewhere [19]. The schematic drawing of PECVD was shown in Fig. 1b. The required vacuum in the reactor was achieved by a rotary vane vacuum pump. The pressure inside the reactor was measured with the help of a capacitance type barometer. The pressure was controlled by a butterfly valve (MKS) placed between the pump and the reactor. In order to keep the reactor pressure constant at the desired value during the experiments, a proportional-internal-derivative (PID) control unit connected to both the barometer and the butterfly valve was used. The monomer was put in a stainless steel jar and clamped to the manifold pipeline to fed in the reactor using nitrogen as the carrier gas. The monomer jar and manifold line were wrapped with heating tapes controlled by a PID temperature heater. The jar and line were heated to 70 and 80°C, respectively. An on-off and a needle (Swagelok) valve on the line ensured that monomer vapor was fed into the vacuum reactor at the desired flow rate. The substrates were placed on the reactor bottom in which a heat exchanger was located on the backside of the reactor bottom. The heat exchanger was connected to a recirculating chiller to maintain the substrate temperature at the desired temperature during the experiments. The reactor lid was quartz, which allowed real-time thickness monitoring using a laser interferometer. A more detailed description of the laser interferometer is given elsewhere [20]. The activation energy required to initiate polymerization was provided by plasma discharge generated inside the reactor. To generate the plasma discharge, a copper antenna connected to a plasma power generator (13.56 MHz) was placed on the reactor lid. A matching box was placed between the copper antenna and the plasma power supply to ensure stable plasma generation inside the vacuum reactor without back reflection. The PECVD parameters studied are given in Table 1.

Table 1

PECVD parameters for PDPAEMA deposition
Parameter	Value
Substrate temperature (°C)	10, 20, 30, and 40
Reactor pressure (mtorr)	100, 300, and 500
Plasma power (W)	20, 40, 60, and 80

2.3. Characterizations

The thicknesses of the thin films deposited on silicon wafers were measured by both in situ (laser interferometer) and ex situ (AEP 500LS profilometer) methods. The deposition rates of the films were calculated by dividing the thickness of the films by the deposition times.

The chemical structure of PDPAEMA thin film was revealed by FTIR and XPS analysis. FTIR analyses of PDPAEMA film and DPAEMA monomer were performed with a FTIR spectrometer (Bruker Vertex 70) with an attenuated total reflector (ATR) apparatus at a resolution of 4 cm^-1 and 32 scans. XPS analysis of the PDPAEMA film was performed with an Al source (hν = 1486.68 eV) using a XPS instrument (Thermoscientific, K-Alpha). The XPS instrument was calibrated to the reference peak positions of Au 4f7/2 (84.00 eV), Ag 3d5/2 (368.26 eV) and Cu 2p3/2 (932.67 eV). The survey spectrum was operated with a pass energy of 200 eV, an energy step size of 1 eV and a dwell time of 50 s. The high-resolution mode was operated with a pass energy of 30 eV, an energy step size of 0.1 eV and a dwell time of 50 s. Spectral deconvolution was performed using Advantage Software without any restrictions on the spectral position. Quantification of the XPS spectrum was performed by normalizing the calculated peak area using the relevant Scofield relative sensitivity factors.

SEM (Model LS-10, Zeis) was used to investigate the morphologies of the fabric before and after PDPAEMA coating. Before SEM analysis, the samples were placed on sample holders and coated with a gold layer of approximately 5 nm using a sputter coater (Cressington Scientific Instruments Ltd.). The optical transmittance of PDPAEMA coated glass was measured in the wavelength range from 300 to 800 nm using a UV/Vis spectrophotometer (Shimadzu UV-1800) with a spectral resolution of 1 nm. Contact angle measurement of PDPAEMA coated substrate was performed using a contact angle goniometer (Data Physics Instruments GmbH-OCA 50). The surface roughness of PDPAEMA coated silicon wafer in dimension of 5 µm × 5 µm was scanned using AFM (NT-MDT) in semi-contact mode.

3.1. Deposition rates

Deposition rates of polymeric thin films were calculated from in situ film thicknesses measured by interferometry system during the polymerization. In the thickness estimation by interferometer, the refractive index of the polymer film is assumed to be constant and the change of the film thickness per fringe is calculated based on Frensel's equation and Snell's law (Eq. 1) [21].

\(\frac{\varvec{d}}{\varvec{f}\varvec{r}\varvec{i}\varvec{n}\varvec{g}\varvec{e}}=\frac{\varvec{\lambda }}{2{\varvec{\eta }}_{\varvec{p}\varvec{o}\varvec{l}\varvec{y}\varvec{m}\varvec{e}\varvec{r}}}\) (Eq. 1)

where, d, λ and η represent the estimated thickness value, the wavelength of the laser used in the interferometer system and the refractive index of the polymer, respectively. A laser with a wavelength of 633 nm was used and assuming the refractive index of the polymeric thin film to be 1.5, each d/fringe value in Eq. 1 was found to be equal to 211nm. After the depositions were completed, the accuracy of the measured interferometric thickness values was checked by an ex-situ profilometer. It was observed that the thickness values measured by both measurement methods were in perfect agreement. The deposition rates of thin films produced at different plasma power, substrate temperature and reactor pressure are given in Fig. 2.

At the same pressure and substrate temperature, when the plasma power increased from 20 to 60 W, the deposition rates of the films increased. This observation can be explained by Yasuda equation (Eq. 2) used to describe the plasma power per unit gas molecules in plasma polymerization [22].

MJ/Kg = (W/FM) × 1340 (Eq. 2)

where, W, F, and M represent the applied plasma power (watt), the flow rate of the monomer (sccm), and the molecular weight of the monomer (g/mol), respectively. According to Yasuda equation, as the applied plasma power under constant conditions increases, the energy input per molecule increases. Therefore, it is expected that increasing plasma power increases the deposition rate. However, as the plasma power increased from 60 to 80 W, a decrease in deposition rates was observed. It is known that in plasma polymerization studies, after a certain level of plasma power, a further increase in plasma power may cause ablation of the deposited films from the surface [23–25]. This could be the reason why the deposition rate decreased with increasing the plasma power from 60 to 80 W.

Reactor pressure is another important CVD parameter, which plays a significant role in the deposition rates [26, 27]. As can be seen in Fig. 2, higher deposition rates are obtained when the pressure increases from 100 to 300 mtorr. This can be attributed to the fact that as the pressure increases, the monomer vapor remains in the reactor for a longer time. The increase in the retention time may have increased the number of molecules remaining in the reactor per unit time and consequently the number of molecules adsorbed on the surface may have increased [28]. However, as the pressure was further increased to 500 mtorr, a decrease in the deposition rates was observed. This observed change in the deposition mechanism can be attributed to two possible reasons. The first one is that the further increase in the retention time of the monomer may have caused an increase in the rate of termination. The other possible reason is that the reduction in mean free path may have initiated some gas reactions [29]. The highest deposition rate was found to be 18.6 nm/min at a substrate temperature of 40°C, a reactor pressure of 300 mtorr, and a plasma power of 60 W. A typical PECVD polymerization process consists of several chemical and physical phenomena. First, monomer vapor is fed into the reactor and then gas diffusion takes place through the boundary layer. As a result of the contact of the gas with the substrate surface, deposition occurs on the substrate surface. Meanwhile, volatile components are removed from the surface. The slowest process step determines the deposition rate in the CVD process. The most known rate-limiting steps are adsorption (mass transfer) and surface reactions [30]. In this study, the deposition rate increased with increasing substrate temperature when all other PECVD parameters were kept constant. This result indicates that the rate-limiting step in PDPAEMA thin film synthesis is surface reactions.

In order to obtain more detailed findings on the deposition kinetic, the apparent activation energy of PDPAEMA thin film deposited at the highest deposition rate was calculated. In the CVD polymerization process, the conversion rate of monomer to polymer is very low [31, 32]. That is why, it can be assumed that the concentration of monomer in the reactor does not change. Since the monomer vapor concentration is too large to limit the deposition kinetics, the relationship between PECVD parameters and deposition rate can be simplified. Because the plasma power per molecule is also constant, it can be assumed that the deposition rate depends mainly on the substrate temperature. Based on this assumption, the deposition rate as a function of the substrate temperature can be plotted in an Arrhenius form (Eq. 3).

\({ln}k=-\frac{{E}_{a}}{RT}+ {ln}A\) (Eq. 3)

where, k is the reaction rate constant, Ea is the activation energy required for the reaction to occur (J/mol), R is the gas constant (8.314 J/Kmol), T is the reaction temperature (°K) and A is the frequency factor. Semilogarithmic graphic of deposition rates versus different substrate temperatures is presented in Fig. 3.

If the surface reaction rate is lower than the adsorption rate, the activation energy is positive. In the opposite case, the activation energy is negative. From Fig. 3, the activation energy of PDPAEMA was calculated as 17.56 kJ/mol. Since the reaction rate increases with increasing temperature, the activation value greater than zero is not surprising.

3.2. Film structures

The chemical structure of PDPAEMA thin film deposited at the highest deposition rate was revealed. The comparison of FTIR spectra of PDPAEMA thin film and DPAEMA monomer is given in Fig. 4. Both spectra were thickness-normalized and baseline-corrected. FTIR spectra of both PDPAEMA and DPAEMA monomer displayed the following major peak assignments: C-H stretching (3100 − 2800 cm^− 1), C = O bond (1730 cm^− 1), C-H bending (1500 − 1350 cm^− 1), CH₂ group (1260 cm^− 1) [33, 34]. However, the C = C bond observed at 1650 cm^− 1 in the monomer spectrum was not observed in the spectrum of the polymer. The absence of C = C bonds in the thin film indicates that the polymerization proceeded through C = C bonds without any entrained monomer in the as-produced polymer.

Looking at the FTIR spectrum of PDPAEMA, it is important to note here that, unlike PDPAEMA produced using different methods, some peak broadening and peak intensity were observed in this study. This is not surprising, because in PECVD polymerizations intense bombardments of ions, electrons, neutrals, etc. may lead to a certain degree of functional group loss and extensive fragmentation of the polymer [35, 36]. However, the large similarities in the main peaks between the monomer and the thin film imply that a high retention of the monomer structure. The chemical structure of the PDPAEMA thin film was also confirmed by XPS analysis. As expected, only C, O and N atoms were observed in the thin film in XPS survey scan analysis (Fig. 4b). The atomic percentages of C, O and N elements were found to be 75.7, 17.5 and 6.8 at.%, respectively. These values are very close to the values calculated in the chemical structure of DPAEMA monomer (79.2 at.% C, 13.2 at.% O, 6.6 at.% N). More detailed chemical investigation of PDPAEMA thin film was carried out by high-resolution mode of XPS. C1s spectrum of PDPAEMA can be curve-fitted into six components at binding energies of 289.1, 286.9, 286.1, 285.6, 285.1 and 284.7 eV, which can be attributed to -C*=O, -O-C*H₂-, -N-C*H₂-, -C*-(CH₃)-, -C*H-N-, and -C*H₃, respectively (Fig. 5a). O1s spectrum of PDPAEMA can be curve-fitted into two components at binding energies of 533.8 and 532.5 eV which can be attributed to -O* C*H₃ and -C = O*, respectively (Fig. 5b) [37].

In order to investigate the response of PDPAEMA thin film to pH change, contact angles were measured after exposure to acidic and basic solutions. When PDPAEMA coated fabric was exposed to acidic solution, the fabric was completely wetted. After exposure to basic solution, PDPAEMA coated fabric showed hydrophobic properties, and the contact angle was measured as 114.7 °. This dramatic change in the contact angle measurements is attributed to the ionizable tertiary amine group in the PDMAEMA thin film, which is able to accept or donate proton according to the pH value of the solutions to which they are exposed [38]. From the studies in the literature, it is known that the pKa value of PDPAEMA thin film is in the range of 6.5 to 6.8 [39, 40]. In this study, when the pH value decreased to 3, tertiary amine groups were protonated and exhibited hydrophilic behavior due to the expansion of polymer chains with the effect of electrostatic repulsion force. When the pH value increased to 10, tertiary amine groups were deprotonated and PDPAEMA thin film exhibited hydrophobic behavior as a result of aggregation of the polymer chains. Depending on the ambient pH, it is very important that the change in the contact angle of pH responsive polymers is reversible. In order to display that the PDPAEMA thin film produced in this study has this capability, it was exposed to successively acidic and basic solutions. Figure 6a shows the contact angles of PDPAEMA coated fabric after successive exposure to acidic and basic solutions, similar contact angles were measured after each acid/base treatment cycle. Even after 5 repeated cycles, no significant change in the contact angle values was observed. Based on all these observations, it can be concluded that thin films are chemically stable and the conservation of functional groups in the monomer structure is high in the synthesized polymer. The predicted change in the chemical structure of the PDPAEMA thin film when exposed to acidic and basic solution is presented in Fig. 6b.

It is quite difficult to coat fragile and porous substrates such as fabric using traditional wet polymerization methods. In this study, PDPAEMA thin film was successfully coated on fabric by PECVD method due to its dry nature. SEM images of PDPAEMA coated and uncoated fabrics are shown in Fig. 7a-d. No difference was observed between the appearance of both fabrics. The porosity of the fabric is well preserved after coating, which indicates excellent conformal deposition.

PDPAEMA thin film produced by PECVD method can be used in areas where the use of it produced in bulk by conventional methods is very difficult or impossible. For example, PDPAEMA thin film produced at the nanoscale is expected to have high optical transmittance unlike the bulk polymer. Figure 8a shows photographs of uncoated and PDPAEMA thin film coated glass. No difference in the general appearance of the glasses was observed with the naked eye. The comparison of the optical transmittances of uncoated and PDPAEMA coated glasses is shown in Fig. 8b. It can be seen that PDPAEMA thin film does not cause any significant absorption and optical loss in the visible range.

3.3. Large-Scale Deposition

Large area thickness and roughness uniformities of the 10-min as-deposited PDPAEMA thin film were investigated. Fifteen silicon wafers were placed and coated on the reactor floor as shown schematically in Fig. 9. The reactor bottom was divided into three areas and five silicon wafers were placed in each area. In each area, the roughness value of one of the five silicon wafers and the film thicknesses of the other four were calculated. The measured thickness values were written regarding silicon wafer as schematically shown in Fig. 9. The average thickness value and standard deviation were found to be 186 nm and 5.6, respectively. Topographic images and roughness values of the films analyzed by AFM are shown next to their respective areas (Fig. 9). The similar values and low standard deviations of both AFM and film thickness measurements indicate that homogenous thin film coating in large scale. Furthermore, considering the easy integration of processes used for large-scale production such as roll-to-roll into CVD systems, it can be suggested that PDPAEMA thin film produced by PECVD method has a high potential for use in industrial applications.

The highest deposition rate was found to be 18.6 nm/min at a substrate temperature of 40°C, a reactor pressure of 300 mtorr, and a plasma power of 60 W. The deposition mechanism of PDPAEMA thin film was investigated. It was found that the rate-limiting step in the PECVD of PDPAEMA polymerization is surface reactions. The apparent activation energy was calculated to be 17.56 kJ/mol. It was observed that the wettability of the PDPAEMA thin film changes depending on the pH of the medium. PDPAEMA thin film showed high optical transmittance in the visible range and excellent conformal coverage. In large-scale synthesis, the similar surface roughness and film thickness values were measured. According to the results obtained in this study, PDPAEMA thin film produced by PECVD method has the potential to be used in many areas where pH sensitive polymers are used. Moreover, the strategy developed here can be used to fabricate other functional thin films.

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable

Consent for publication.

Not applicable

Availability of data and material

Not applicable

Competing interests

The author declares no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Funding

This study was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) with a grant number of 119M227.

Authors' contributions

M.G: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data collection, Supervision, Project administration, Writing—Review and Editing

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Dr. Emine Sevgili Mercan from Konya Technical University for fruitful discussion on the XPS analysis.

Png ZM, Wang C-G, Yeo J, Lee JJC, Surat'man NEB, Tan YL, Liu H, Wang P, Tan MBH, Xu J (2023) Stimuli-responsive Structure-Property Switchable Polymer Materials. Molecular Systems Design & Engineering
Wurm FR, Boyer C, Sumerlin BS (2021) Progress on Stimuli‐Responsive Polymers. vol 42.
Gao Y, Wei M, Li X, Xu W, Ahiabu A, Perdiz J, Liu Z, Serpe MJ (2017) Stimuli-responsive polymers: Fundamental considerations and applications. Macromolecular Research 25 (6):513-527
Yusa S-i (2022) Development and application of pH-responsive polymers. Polymer Journal 54 (3):235-242
Ofridam F, Tarhini M, Lebaz N, Gagnière É, Mangin D, Elaissari A (2021) pH‐sensitive polymers: Classification and some fine potential applications. Polymers for Advanced Technologies 32 (4):1455-1484
Bazban-Shotorbani S, Hasani-Sadrabadi MM, Karkhaneh A, Serpooshan V, Jacob KI, Moshaverinia A, Mahmoudi M (2017) Revisiting structure-property relationship of pH-responsive polymers for drug delivery applications. Journal of Controlled Release 253:46-63
Wang L, Ren K-f, Wang H-b, Wang Y, Ji J (2015) pH-sensitive controlled release of doxorubicin from polyelectrolyte multilayers. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 125:127-133
Zhu L, Smith PP, Boyes SG (2013) pH‐responsive polymers for imaging acidic biological environments in tumors. vol 51. Wiley Online Library,
Hu J, Zhang G, Ge Z, Liu S (2014) Stimuli-responsive tertiary amine methacrylate-based block copolymers: Synthesis, supramolecular self-assembly and functional applications. Progress in Polymer Science 39 (6):1096-1143
Gorji M, Zarbaf D, Mazinani S, Noushabadi AS, Cella MA, Sadeghianmaryan A, Ahmadi A (2023) Multi-responsive on-demand drug delivery PMMA-co-PDEAEMA platform based on CO2, electric potential, and pH switchable nanofibrous membranes. Journal of Biomaterials Science, Polymer Edition 34 (3):351-371
Eygeris Y, Ulery N, Zharov I (2023) pH-Responsive Membranes from Self-Assembly of Poly (2-(dimethylamino) ethyl methacrylate) Brush Silica Nanoparticles. Langmuir
Kongkatigumjorn N, Smith SA, Chen M, Fang K, Yang S, Gillies ER, Johnston AP, Such GK (2018) Controlling endosomal escape using pH-responsive nanoparticles with tunable disassembly. ACS Applied Nano Materials 1 (7):3164-3173
Echalier C, Jebors S, Laconde G, Brunel L, Verdié P, Causse L, Bethry A, Legrand B, Van Den Berghe H, Garric X (2017) Sol–gel synthesis of collagen-inspired peptide hydrogel. Materials Today 20 (2):59-66
Yin R, Zhao Y, Gorczyński A, Szczepaniak G, Sun M, Fu L, Kim K, Wu H, Bockstaller MR, Matyjaszewski K (2022) Alternating Methyl Methacrylate/n-Butyl Acrylate Copolymer Prepared by Atom Transfer Radical Polymerization. ACS Macro Letters 11 (10):1217-1223
Amano M, Uchiyama M, Satoh K, Kamigaito M (2022) Sulfur‐Free Radical RAFT Polymerization of Methacrylates in Homogeneous Solution: Design of exo‐Olefin Chain‐Transfer Agents (R− CH2C (= CH2) Z). Angewandte Chemie International Edition 61 (52):e202212633
Yartaşı Y, Karaman M (2020) Plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition of poly (Cyclohexyl Methacrylate) as a sacrificial thin film. Plasma Chemistry and Plasma Processing 40:357-369
Gosar Ž, Kovač J, Mozetič M, Primc G, Vesel A, Zaplotnik R (2019) Deposition of SiO x C y H z protective coatings on polymer substrates in an industrial-scale PECVD reactor. Coatings 9 (4):234
Gürsoy M, Kocadayıoğulları B (2023) Environmentally Friendly Approach for the Plasma Surface Modification of Fabrics for Improved Fog Harvesting Performance. Fibers and Polymers 24 (10):3557-3567
Karaman M, GüRSOY M, AYKüL F, Tosun Z, Kars MD, Yildiz HB (2017) Hydrophobic coating of surfaces by plasma polymerization in an RF plasma reactor with an outer planar electrode: synthesis, characterization and biocompatibility. Plasma Science and Technology 19 (8):085503
Gürsoy M, Uçar T, Tosun Z, Karaman M (2016) Initiation of 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate polymerization by tert‐butyl peroxide in a planar PECVD system. Plasma Processes and Polymers 13 (4):438-446
Saenger K, Tong H (1991) Laser interferometry: A measurement technique for diffusion studies in thin polymer films. Polymer Engineering & Science 31 (6):432-435
Yasuda H, Wang C (1985) Plasma polymerization investigated by the substrate temperature dependence. Journal of Polymer Science: Polymer Chemistry Edition 23 (1):87-106
d’Agostino R, Cramarossa F, Fracassi F, Illuzzi F (1990) Plasma polymerization of fluorocarbons. Plasma Deposition, Treatment, and Etching of Polymers 2:95-162
Gürsoy M, Karaman M (2018) Improvement of wetting properties of expanded perlite particles by an organic conformal coating. Progress in organic coatings 120:190-197
Gürsoy M (2021) Vapor deposition polymerization of synthetic rubber thin film in a plasma enhanced chemical vapor deposition reactor. Journal of Applied Polymer Science 138 (4):49722
Wuu D, Lo W, Chang L, Horng R-H (2004) Properties of SiO2-like barrier layers on polyethersulfone substrates by low-temperature plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition. Thin Solid Films 468 (1-2):105-108
Yılmaz K, Sakalak H, Gursoy M, Karaman M (2019) Initiated chemical vapor deposition of poly (ethylhexyl acrylate) films in a large-scale batch reactor. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 58 (32):14795-14801
Ozaydin-Ince G, Gleason KK (2009) Transition between kinetic and mass transfer regimes in the initiated chemical vapor deposition from ethylene glycol diacrylate. Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A 27 (5):1135-1143
Mercan ES, Karaman M (2021) Coating of hydrophilic poly (hydroxypropyl methacrylate) thin films via pulsed-initiated chemical vapor deposition method. Journal of Coatings Technology and Research 18 (5):1261-1268
Karaman M, Gürsoy M, Kuş M, Özel F, Yenel E, Şahin ÖG, Kivrak HD (2017) Chemical and physical modification of surfaces. Surface Treatments for Biological, Chemical, and Physical Applications:23-66
Mao Y, Gleason KK (2004) Hot filament chemical vapor deposition of poly (glycidyl methacrylate) thin films using tert-butyl peroxide as an initiator. Langmuir 20 (6):2484-2488
Martin TP, Gleason KK (2006) Combinatorial initiated CVD for polymeric thin films. Chemical Vapor Deposition 12 (11):685-691
Lin-Vien D, Colthup NB, Fateley WG, Grasselli JG (1991) The handbook of infrared and Raman characteristic frequencies of organic molecules. Elsevier,
Günzler H, Gremlich H-U (2002) IR spectroscopy. An introduction.
Gürsoy M (2021) Fabrication of paper-based microfluidic devices using PECVD for selective separation. Macromolecular Research 29 (6):423-429
Biederman H, Slavınská D (2000) Plasma polymer films and their future prospects. Surface and coatings Technology 125 (1-3):371-376
Beamson G (1992) High Relution XPS of Organic Polymers. The Scienta ESCA 300 Database. ICIplc
Karaman M, Çabuk N (2012) Initiated chemical vapor deposition of pH responsive poly (2-diisopropylamino) ethyl methacrylate thin films. Thin Solid Films 520 (21):6484-6488
Fielding LA, Edmondson S, Armes SP (2011) Synthesis of pH-responsive tertiary amine methacrylate polymer brushes and their response to acidic vapour. Journal of Materials Chemistry 21 (32):11773-11780
Giacomelli FC, Stepánek P, Giacomelli C, Schmidt V, Jäger E, Jäger A, Ulbrich K (2011) pH-triggered block copolymer micelles based on a pH-responsive PDPA (poly [2-(diisopropylamino) ethyl methacrylate]) inner core and a PEO (poly (ethylene oxide)) outer shell as a potential tool for the cancer therapy. Soft Matter 7 (19):9316-9325

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Fabrication of pH Responsive Thin Film Using a One-Step Environmentally Friendly Plasma Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1. Introduction

2. Experimental

2.1. Materials

2.2. Thin film synthesis by PECVD

2.3. Characterizations

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Deposition rates

3.2. Film structures

3.3. Large-Scale Deposition

4. Conclusions

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1