1, this strain dependence implies that the surface energy and surface stress are in general not equal for this class of materials. In contrast, as a crystalline solid is deformed, the surface density of atoms is altered, leading to a strain-dependent surface energy. For a liquid in contact with a vapour, the surface stress and energy are identical because as the liquid–vapour interface is deformed, molecules from the two fluids may simply rearrange themselves to maintain a constant average molecular environment at the interface. 2 for a review), it is not obvious how the surface energy is dependent upon strain. Where ε is the strain parallel to the interface and the subscript refers to the interface between A and B. The results provide fundamental insight into our understanding of the interfaces of amorphous solids and their interaction with contacting liquids. We show conclusively that interfaces involving polymeric glasses exhibit strain-dependent surface energies, and give strong evidence for the absence of such a dependence for incompressible elastomers. Here, we utilize contact angle measurements on strained glassy and elastomeric solids to address this matter. Crystalline materials are known to have strain-dependent surface energies, but in amorphous materials, such as polymeric glasses and elastomers, the strain dependence is debated due to a dearth of direct measurements. Although these quantities are identical for interfaces involving only fluids, the Shuttleworth effect demonstrates that this is not the case for most interfaces involving solids, since their surface energies change with strain. Surface stress and surface energy are fundamental quantities which characterize the interface between two materials.
0 kommentar(er)
