1

MATERIALS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY NEWSLETTER

Vol. 4, No. 2 SPRING-SUMMER 2007

Dr. Robert H. LacombeChairmanMaterials Science and TechnologyCONFERENCES, LLC3 Hammer DriveHopewell Junction, NY 12533-6124Tel. 845-897-1654, 845-227-7026FAX 212-656-1016E-mail: rhlacombe@compuserve.com

FOCUSING ON SURFACE SCIENCE AND ADHESION

EDITORIAL COMMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

WHYS AND WHEREFORES OF ADHESION MEASUREMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

How to Define Adhesion? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Exhibit A: The Peel Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Just what is being measured: A detailed analysis of the peel test . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Peel testing in a lower key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Peel testing in the lowest key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

What it All Comes Down to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Residual stresses can sneak up on you . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Setting the fox to guard the chickens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Can We Let the Coating Test Itself? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Now You Have the Adhesion Data What Are You Going to Do with It? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

ADHESION MEASUREMENT THE WAY FORWARD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

FINAL PROGRAMS

SIXTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON POLYMER SURFACE MODIFICATION: . . . . . . . . . . 13

SIXTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON SILANES AND OTHER COUPLING AGENTS . . . . . . . 16

FIFTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON POLYIMIDES AND OTHER HIGH TEMPERATUREPOLYMERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

THIRD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ADHESION ASPECTS OF THIN FILMS (INCLUDINGADHESION MEASUREMENT AND METALLIZED PLASTICS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

REGISTRATION INFORMATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2

EDITORIAL COMMENTS

This issue of the newsletter will take up issuesdealing with the upcoming June symposia onsurface modification and silane coupling agentsand also two additional symposia on adhesion andhigh temperature polymers to be held this comingNovember. The first item on the agenda is toannounce the final programs for the followingsymposia:

SIXTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ONPOLYMER SURFACE MODIFICATION:RELEVANCE TO ADHESION; to be held inCincinnati, Ohio, June 11-13, 2007.

SIXTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ONSILANES AND OTHER COUPLING AGENTS; tobe held in Cincinnati, Ohio, June 13-15, 2007.

The programs for these two symposia are listed atthe end of this newsletter along with detailedinformation on registration and hotelaccommodations. The staff of MST CONFERENCESand the faculty of the Chemical EngineeringDepartment of the University of Cincinnati cordially invite all readers of this letter toparticipate in these events. We are also happy toannounce that the documenting volumes for theprevious two symposia in the series are nowavailable and the contents of these books will becovered in two book reviews later in this issue.

By way of introduction to the symposia coming upthis November, the main essay in this letter willdeal with the topic of adhesion measurement. Ascommonly used the term adhesion conveys a widerange of meanings to different people dependingon their background and the types of problemsthey are currently struggling with. The problem ofadhesion is also closely related to the properties ofsurfaces and interfaces and as such provides acommon thread running through nearly all of theMST CONFERENCES symposia. What we will tryto get at is the question of measuring the adhesionbetween two materials which will depend ratherclosely not only on what we mean by the termadhesion but also on what practical end use wehave in mind for the “adhesion data” we intend tocollect.

WHYS AND WHEREFORES OF ADHESIONMEASUREMENT

I believe it was Lord Kelvin who uttered thefollowing dictum:

“Can you measure it? Can you express it infigures? Can you make a model of it? If notyour theory is apt to be based more uponimagination than upon knowledge”

In what follows we will take this sentiment onestep further and ask the follow on question: do youknow what your measurement data really means? This question has particular relevance in the realmof adhesion measurement which is not only asticky subject but a slippery one as well. We willnot dwell on the sticky aspects of the subject asthey are well known, rather it will be the slipperyissues that will be the focus of our attention.

How to Define Adhesion?

Before delving further into our subject we need tohave some sort of commonly understood definitionof the term “adhesion”. At the most fundamentallevel we can clearly assert that all adhesionphenomena arise from the fundamental atomic andmolecular interactions which bind all solid andliquid matter together. This would make anadmirable starting point since one would clearlyhave a fully quantitative definition grounded in themost rigorous principles of physics and chemistry. Unfortunately, at this level one would quicklyconclude that the only people measuring adhesionare those using atomic force microscopes or theequivalent. Further, the immediate upshot wouldbe to eliminate better than 95% of all publicationson adhesion measurement from consideration. What is required instead is a rather less Draconian definition of the term which expresslyrecognizes that most commonly used adhesionmeasurement methods actually confound the trueatomic and molecular interactions which theypurport to measure with a number of bulk materialproperties. Also we need a definition that will beof use to the practicing engineer, working either inthe development laboratory or on themanufacturing line, who is charged with deliveringsome specific product to the marketplace. Withthese constraints in mind, we propose thefollowing more flexible definition of the term“adhesion”:

DEFINITION: The adhesion of material Ato material B is a relative figure of meritindicative of the tendency of A to bind to Bunder specifically defined circumstances.

As understood in this context the term adhesionhas a hierarchal property in that it can be simplyqualitative at the lowest level, semi-quantitative atthe next level up and fully quantitative at thehighest level.

3

Figure 1: Four versions of the peel test.

Exhibit A: The Peel Test

Using the now more flexibilized definition of theterm “adhesion” we turn our attention to the peeltest which is in all likelihood the most popularadhesion measurement method for flexiblecoatings. As far as I am able to ascertain the fistpaper in the modern literature on the peel test waspublished by Spies . The interest in this work was1

testing adhesives for structural bonding of aircraftcomponents. From that point onward the peel testbecame a standard adhesion test for flexiblecoatings and adhesive joints. In the paintindustry, for instance, the peel test presents itselfas a natural method for testing adhesion sincepaint coatings tend to fail by delamination fromedges, blisters and other defects. Thus a moreformalized and controlled method of peelingquickly became a common adhesion measurementtool. Figure 1 exhibits several of the more popularexperimental setups for performing the peel test. Figure 1a exhibits the ever popular 90 degree peeltest where the coating is lifted off the surface at a90 degree angle and the force required to achievesteady state peeling is measured by an appropriatestrain gage device. In figure 1b we see a simplevariant of the 90 degree test where the peel angleis increased to 180 degrees. Clearly there existsan entire continuum of angles that could be usedbut the 90 and 180 degree tests are the mostpopular. The main reason for varying the peelangle is that it changes the mode of loading at thepeel front and thus the force required to achievesteady state peeling. We will have more to say onthe mode of loading later but for the momentsuffice it to say that during the lifting process thepeel strip material experiences both shear andtensile loads and the precise combination of theseseparate loading conditions determines the modeof loading. The precise distribution of these loadscan be varied by adjusting the peel angle. Infigure 1c we see the peel strip being lifted off thesubstrate and wound onto a circular drum. Themain purpose of this approach is to control theangle of liftoff of the peel strip at the delaminationfront. This is important in terms of controllingboth the mode of loading and the maximum strainwhich the peel strip experiences. Finally in figure1d we see an example of the T peel test which is ahandy way of dealing with the case of testing theadhesion between two flexible strips.

Just what is being measured: A detailedanalysis of the peel test

In all of the above examples of the peel testexperiment the obvious quantity being measuredis the force or torque required to sustain steady-state peeling. However, a moments reflectionquickly reveals that there are some geometricconsiderations involved also. Most obvious is thefact that the peel force is going to depend on thewidth of the peel strip. In addition, the testapparatus is clearly doing work in order tocontinuously lift the coating off the substrate. Inorder to suppress the effect of strip width it iscommon to divide the peel force F by the stripwidth w and arrive at a force per unit width F/wwhich in canonical units would have the dimensionNewton per meter or abbreviating (N/m). This isclearly an improvement but not quite what wewant since we know that the test apparatus isdoing work to remove the coating we would ratherlike something in energy units. This is easilyaccomplished by taking our initial (N/m) units andmultiplying numerator and denominator by a unitof length to get Nm/m = Joules per square meter2

(J/m ). Thus we see that in performing the peel2

test we are measuring the energy per unit arearequired to remove the coating from the substrate. Well you say this is very nice since this is just

“The Peeling Test on Redux-bonded1

Joints”, G. J. Spies, Aircraft Engineering, 25, 64(1953).

4

Figure 2 Loading steps suffered by a typical

segment of a peel strip as it is lifted off the substrate.

what is commonly called the work of adhesionwhich can be measured by contact angle methods. In particular, we could take a drop of our coatingmaterial in liquid form and place it on thesubstrate in question, let it cure to the solid formand then measure the contact angle by the usualmethods and thereby back out an independent2

measure of the work of adhesion. A nice idea intheory but not likely to work out in practicebecause of the confounding effect of a number ofhidden processes. In particular a large percentageof the work done in peeling goes into dissipativeprocesses which irreversibly deform the peel stripmaterial. If one were lucky enough to be dealingwith perfectly elastic materials then this schememight work out since in this case one can showthat the peel test does indeed measure the truework of adhesion. Unfortunately very few if anyreal world coatings live up to this idealization.

In order to get a better perspective on what ishappening during the peel test imagine a smallsegment of the peel strip resting just ahead of thepeel front which is steadily approaching at someconstant rate. As our test segment rests quietlyon the substrate it is held there not only by theintermolecular forces acting at the interfacebetween the strip and substrate but also by theforces binding it to its neighboring segments. Asthe peel front starts to close in our segment beginsto feel its presence through the neighboringsegments between it and the approaching front. Within a certain range on the order of the coatingthickness the segment starts to be elasticallystretched in the direction facing the peel front. Nothing to be worried about at the moment since,if the peel load were suddenly released at thispoint, the segment would relax back elastically toits original state. However, as the segment isengulfed in the relentlessly advancing front thelocal stress level climbs enormously and as thesegment enters the peel bend it suffers anenormous bending strain which can be up to 20 or30 percent or more depending on the materialproperties. At this point nearly every real materialis stretched beyond its yield point and suffersirreversible visco-plastic deformation whichconsumes a significant amount of energy whichhas to be supplied by the test apparatus and thus

enters into the apparent work per unit area. Sincethe peel bend comprises only a very small lengthof the strip the segment spends only a short timethere and after being completely lifted off thesubstrate immediately suffers a tensile load whichtends to straighten it out again. If the material ofthe peel strip were perfectly elastic our segmentwould quickly relax back to its original shapethereby releasing the elastic energy locked up inthe peel bend. Thus our test machine would bedoing no extra work in removing the segmentsince the work expended during the bendingprocess is immediately given back as the segmentstraightens out again. Of course this would onlybe the case for some fictional perfectly elasticmaterial. In actuality the straightening outprocess amounts to a reverse bending which incursmore irreversible energy loss which the tensilemachine must also accommodate. The mostdetailed analysis of this whole process which I amaware of was given in a series of papers by K. S.Kim and coworkers . These authors studied the3

peeling of thin films of copper off varioussubstrates using an elastic-plastic model for thedeformation of the copper and assuming thesubstrate behaved totally elastically at all times. The detailed analysis gets into some fairly heavysledding, but the basic ideas can be easilyunderstood by reference to figures 2 and 3. Infigure 2 we see the peel strip divided up into anumber of regions selected according to the natureof the mechanical loading which the strip materialsuffers as it progresses through the peel process. As outlined above we see that before liftoff the

The concept of work of adhesion is2

covered in numerous texts both advanced andelementary. An overview of the concept has beencovered in a previous issue of the newsletter: “TheCurious World of Contact Angles and ParticleAdhesion”, MST CONFERENCES newsletter Vol. 2No. 3, available online at(www.mstconf.com/Vol2No3-2005.pdf).

“Mechanical Effects in Peel Adhesion3

Test”, J. Kim, K. S. Kim and Y. H. Kim, J. AdhesionSci. Technol., 3, 175 (1989).

5

Figure 3 Analysis of energy expended during

the peel process depicted in figure 2.

material experiences elastic loading in the regionlabeled O-A. This is immediately followed by theplastic bending in region A-B. As the materialleaves the bending region it goes through anunloading region labeled B-C where elasticrecovery occurs and then on to the region C-Dwhere further reverse bending takes place. Figure3 follows the stress/strain consequences of theseries of deformations shown in figure 2. The axesare plotted in the more convenient angular units ofbending moment vs curvature as opposed to themore standard stress/strain quantities in order totake advantage of the fact that the peel process isessentially a bending operation as opposed to atensile deformation. The straight line segment O-A represents the elastic deformation which occursjust prior to liftoff. Point A is at the yield stress ofthe copper and all deformation beyond this point isin the form of plastic flow. In the region A-B largescale plastic deformation is occurring at a constantstress level. This is due to the very large strainsimposed on the strip in the peel bend region.Beyond point B this particular diagram makes thesimplifying assumption that the reverse bending isessentially elastic giving rise to the straight linesegment B-C. The area contained within thecircuit O-A-B-C-O represents the net irreversiblework which the test apparatus must supply inorder to maintain steady state peeling. Thisenergy must be subtracted from the apparent workof adhesion given by F/w which is what one wouldmeasure directly by dividing the steady state peelload by the width of the peel strip. What is leftover is now representative of the energy requiredto separate the coating material from the substrateand should more closely represent the true work ofadhesion.

Peel testing in a lower key

Prof. Kim’s analysis of the peel test as outlinedabove represents adhesion measurement at thehighest level where every precaution is taken inorder to eliminate confounding effects due to bulkmaterial properties in order to arrive at a resultthat reflects just the energy required to separatethe interface between the two materials beingtested. This is all well and good but leaves muchto be desired as a day to day tool for estimatingthe adhesion between two materials that onemight like to perform either in the developmentlaboratory or on the manufacturing line. Inparticular, in order to carry out the full analysisone requires accurate material property data onboth the substrate and peel strip materials. Thedata required for the substrate is the easiest sinceit is assumed to behave elastically at all times. Thus knowing the elastic modulus and the poissonratio are all that are required at least for

homogenous isotropic materials. One does not getoff so easy for the peel strip material, however. Assuming that we are dealing with copper metal,then we need not only the elastic modulus andpoisson ration, but also the yield stress and straindata and in addition some representation of thedeformation behavior beyond the yield point suchas a power law hardening relation. If all this isn’tenough, then please be advised that for carefulwork one should measure these properties directlyfor the copper film one is working with since howthe film is prepared can have a substantial effecton all of the just mentioned properties. You don’teven want to ask what happens if the peel stripmaterial happens to be a polymer instead of a softmetal such as copper. In this case a similaranalysis can be performed but now a full set ofviscoelastic response functions are required andthe temperature dependence of the materialproperties can become important especially if oneis working near an internal relaxation process suchas the glass transition. And you thought thesledding was rough for copper!

Is there an easier way one might ask? The answeris no. However, all is not lost since there aremany situations where a true measure of theadhesion strength is not required. Such might bethe case if one is screening a number of adhesionpromoters for some particular coating material andone wants to rank their relative performance. Thekey words here are “relative” and “rank” since ifone simply wants to compare how well oneadhesion promoter works relative to another thenthere is really no need to become bogged downwith worrying about the bulk material behavior ofthe coating material. Figure 4 shows one way ofgoing about testing the adhesion strength of oneinterface as compared to another. In this figurewe have a disk of the substrate material one halfof which has been treated with some sort of primeror adhesion promoter that is to be tested. The

6

Figure 4 Simple test sample for comparing

relative adhesion strength of two differentinterfaces.

Figure 5 Before and after adhesion data on a

polyimide coating on a silicon nitride substrate. Data to the left of the step increase represent theadhesion force required to lift the coating off theuntreated surface. The peel load is seen toincrease dramatically on entering the right handregion which was treated with a silane adhesionpromoter. Thermally cycling the sample to 400 Cand back 10 times clearly degrades the adhesionof the silane treated side.

other half remains untreated and serves as areference surface. The coating is applied to thedisk by what ever method is appropriate and afterthe requisite drying and curing steps is then cutinto strips. The cuts separating the contiguousstrips go down to but not into the substratesurface. This sample configuration has a numberof convenient properties. In the first place it isclear that simply peeling one strip completelyacross the dividing center line will quickly revealhow well the adhesion promoter underinvestigation performs relative to the untreatedsurface. Note also that there can be no questionof different material behavior between the treatedand untreated surfaces since the coating on eachsurface was formed under identical conditions. This would not be the case if two separate sampleswere prepared at different times with one samplesurface treated and the other not. Another nicefeature of the sample configuration in figure 4 isthe fact that one gets a large number of identicalpeel strips to work with for the cost of only onesample preparation. With a large number ofsamples one can perform fairly straight forwardbefore and after type experiments. The procedureis quite simply performed in two steps. At step 1 anumber of strips are tested to establish theprevailing adhesion level and the entire sample isthen subjected to some sort of environmentalstress. At step 2 more strips are tested toascertain the effect of the stressing procedure onthe coating adhesion. Figure 5 illustrates somesample results of this type of experiment for thecase of a polyimide coating on a silicon nitridesubstrate. The stressing procedure in this casewas thermal cycling to 400C and back. Half of thesubstrate was treated with a silane adhesionpromoter and the other half left untreated. As thefigure clearly shows, the silane treatmentdramatically and unambiguously improves theadhesion of the coating to the substrate. As anadded bonus, the same sample substrate could beused to see what effect cycling to 400 C and backwould have on the adhesion. In this case cyclingthe sample to 400 C and back 10 times clearlydegraded the adhesion on the silane treated side. Curiously enough the adhesion on the untreatedside was improved. It is not clear why thishappened be we suspect it may have to due withchanges in the mechanical properties of thepolyimide caused by the high temperaturetreatment. Basically this effect remains somewhatof a mystery but that is the way these things tendto go. You perform an experiment to answer onequestion and in the process more questions arise.C’est la vie.

Peel testing in the lowest key

The experiment outlined above represents what isquite likely an optimum compromise betweencarrying out the most rigorous and quantitativetest possible and simply performing the quickestand easiest test that will yield useful data. However, under some circumstances only the most

7

Figure 6 Tape test data comparing the

adhesion of two different ink binderformulations.

rough and ready method will suffice and thisbrings us to the venerable tape test. Here wehave what amounts to a purely qualitative testprocedure whereby one applies a strip of adhesivetape to the surface to be tested and then peels itoff to see if the surface coating is somehow liftedoff or left intact. The simplicity and ease ofexecution of this test are unquestioned. Whatremains in doubt is the precise meaning of what isbeing measured. All such misgivings aside,however, this test still finds a number of usefulapplications as will be seen in what follows.

The application where this test finds its mostwelcome home is in the arena of testing theadhesion of printing inks. The case for using thetape test in this context has been stated mostcogently by Calder and co-workers:4

There is a body of experience in theindustry that confirms that the tape test isa reasonable predictor of how the ink willremain in place, intact on the substrateunder many actual use conditions.

The test is fast and can be performed atpress side. It is obviously important toknow rather quickly whether an ink hasadequate adhesion when the film is beingprinted at 600 ft./min.

As with the standard peel test, the tape testconfounds the bulk mechanical properties of theink coating being tested with the actual adhesionof the ink to the underlying paper. Among otherthings, one is clearly testing the cohesive strengthof the ink as well as its adhesion. From a practicalpoint of view this is an advantage since an ink thatadhered very well to the underlying paper but waseasily smudged at the surface would not be at allsatisfactory. In this sense the tape test can beregarded as a sort of overall stress procedure withadhesion to the substrate being just one propertybeing tested. As with the standard peel testdiscussed above the fact that the tape test doesnot measure true adhesion is not a barrier touseful applications. Calder et al give an example4

where the tape test provides a very usefulmeasurement for developing ink formulations. Figure 6 exhibits the apparent adhesion of twodifferent ink formulations as a function of dryingtime. Samples were prepared by a standardprocedure and then subjected to a carefully

controlled tape test. The apparent ink adhesionwas estimated using a spectrophotometer whichmeasured the intensity of light which could pass through the specimen. In this way the percentageof ink removed could be measured in aquantitative and reproducible fashion. The datademonstrated that the so called “soft binder”formulation gave better performance at shortdrying times than the “hard binder” formulation. At drying times of 15 minutes or more bothformulations showed identical behavior. Thissimple experiment clearly showed that forapplications where a “quick take” of the ink isimportant then use of soft binder is preferable. Ifquick drying time is not important then either inkformulation will give the same results.

What it All Comes Down to

In this brief overview we have examined thepopular peel test from its most quantitativeincarnation as given by the elasto-plastic analysisof Kim and co-workers down to the rough andready world of testing the adhesion of printing inksas they come hot off the press. Much the sametype of comments hold for all the other commonand practical adhesion tests such as the pull test,the scratch test, the indentation test, the blistertest ...etc. Inevitably one is measuring not justthe true work of adhesion binding the coating tothe substrate but also a number of other materialparameters which relate somehow to themechanical properties of the coating and in somecases the substrate also.

Residual stresses can sneak up on you

“Quantifying the Tape Adhesion Test”, G.4

V. Calder, F. C. Hansen and A. Parra in AdhesionAspects of Polymeric Coatings, Ed. K. L. Mittal(Plenum Press, New York, 1983) p. 543.

8

Figure 7 Peel test data on a polyimide film on

aluminum substrate using a 180 degree peel test(Ref.5). Note that this coating willspontaneously delaminate at a thickness of 120micro meters due to relaxation of internal stresswith the expenditure of no more than 23 J/m .2

Before leaving the peel test it will be interesting tolook at two examples which reflect theconsequences of all these considerations. Bothexamples involve the slippery aspects of adhesiontesting which arise from the nasty habit of manymaterials to surreptitiously build up high levels ofinternal stress while no one is looking. Our firstexample deals with a most interesting studycarried out by Farris and Goldfarb who studied the5

adhesion of polyimide coatings to aluminum. Thepeel strength data are shown in figure 7 andindicate quite impressive adhesion strengthsranging from 500 to nearly 1000 J/m . Given2

such high values off the peel strength one wouldbe inclined to assume that these coatings couldnever be made to delaminate. However, it turnsout that at a thickness of about 120 micro metersthe coatings spontaneously delaminate due toresidual stress buildup alone. A closerexamination of the data indicated that the residualstress delaminated the coating at a rather modestdriving force of 23 J/m . What is clearly2

happening is that better than 90% of the apparentpeel strength exhibited in figure 7 is due todissipative processes acting at the peel bendgiving the deceiving impression of high adhesionstrength when in fact the level of adhesion is quitemodest. A further consideration is the fact thatthe mode of loading is quite different for the peeltest and spontaneous delamination. In generalthere exist three possible modes of deformation atthe delamination front. The most obvious is thevertical lifting which raises the peel stripperpendicular to the substrate. This mechanismgoes under the label of Mode I delamination. Somewhat less apparent but most definitelypresent is a shearing deformation in the directionof the advancing peel front. This is called Mode IIdelamination. Under certain circumstances therecan also be a mode III which is also a shearingtype deformation that can occur in a directionperpendicular to Mode II. For present purposes weneed not be concerned with mode III delaminationbut it can arise at the front of an expandingblister. What we need to note , however, is thatthe the work required to propagate a separation inmode I can be drastically different than for modeII. A common velcro fastener gives a readyexample of this phenomenon. It is nearlyimpossible to separate a velcro fastener via pure mode II or shear deformation whereas the samefastener readily separates in mode I. The issue of

knowing the mode of loading is perhaps one of the slipperiest in all of adhesion testing. One has tobe quite careful in using ones adhesion data topredict whether a particular structure will comeapart or not. Attention must be paid to what modeof loading was used to acquire the data as opposedto what the likely mode of loading will be that willdestroy the structure in question. One finalproperty of the peel test that one should also keepin mind is that the apparent peel force is quitesensitive to changes in the true coating adhesion. Small changes in the true adhesion strength giverise to large changes in the measured peel force.

Setting the fox to guard the chickens

Our second example comes from the front lines ofthe development laboratory and while it does notdirectly involve peel testing it underlines thedevious nature of residual stresses in coatings andtheir effect on adhesion behavior. In the early1980's the IBM company was getting ready tointroduce the first 64K RAM memory chip into itsproduct line. The reader needs to remember thatthough these days 64K of memory is a triflingamount, barely covering a simple graphic file, itwas a big deal in those days when that kind ofmemory was more than the entire amountavailable on most personal computers. One of the

“An Experimental Partitioning of the5

Mechanical Energy Expended during Peel Testing”,Richard J. Farris and Jay L. Goldfarb, in AdhesionMeasurement of Films and Coatings, Ed. K. L.Mittal (VSP, The Netherlands, 1995) p. 265

9

innovations of this new chip was the use of apolyimide material as a dielectric insulator. Nowsince this was a new material with no real trackrecord of performance in the field it was felt thatthere ought to be a protective layer covering thepolyimide in order to avoid any possible problemswith delamination or other unwanted failuremechanisms. The safe thing to due of course wasto use a material with a known history ofperformance and this led to the use of an epoxytype encapsulant that had seen successful servicein the 1970's as an adhesive sealant. Witheverything safely tucked in under the epoxy thedevice was ready for the standard temperature andhumidity test which all devices had to pass. Thiswas specified as 1000 hours at 80 degrees C and80% relative humidity. Pretty much tantamountto a pressure cooker test albeit at low pressure. Now 1000 hours is a long time and one cannotalways wait for the full duration to see how thingswent so roughly every 20 hours or so one of theparts would be examined to see how it was gettingon. Early results were not encouraging. The firstparts examined showed a large number ofelectrical opens due to heavy corrosion of thealuminum wiring. Needless to say this problemgot a lot of attention since it threatened to derailproduct announcement and that of course wouldhave serious consequences for the revenue plan. Rather than go into any detailed coverage of theresulting fracas this problem caused let it be notedthat the apparent unsung hero of this saga wasone of the bench workers who while cleaning uphappened to notice a petrie dish with a few dropsof the protective encapsulant spilled on it. Whatattracted his attention was the way the nowhardened encapsulant had shrunk and was in factcausing the underlying glass to spall off in smallchunks. It immediately occurred to our hero thatif the encapsulant could pull up chunks of glassfrom a glass plate what was it doing to the haplesspolyimide coating on the memory chips? Uponhearing the news the engineers in charge drew theobvious conclusion that the “protective”encapsulant was clearly incriminated in the earlyfailure of the parts under test and theyimmediately started testing a batch of chipswithout the encapsulant layer present. Lo andbehold 1000 hours of temperature and humiditytesting go by and no electrical failures aredetected. A postmortem conducted on the failedparts indicated that the encapsulant had indeedpulled the polyimide layer off the silicon thusexposing the underlying aluminum wiring to thedirect ravages of moisture at 80 C. Talk aboutsetting the fox to guard the chickens.

Can We Let the Coating Test Itself?

In all of the discussion so far one of the dominantthemes has been the fact that testing the adhesionof any given coating invariably involves applyingan external load of some kind which causesdelamination to occur. Unavoidably the appliedload also deforms the coating material being testedresulting in energy being expended which obscuresthe true work required to remove the coating. Theexamples related above, however, clearlydemonstrate that an external load need not beapplied to cause delamination. Coatings canspontaneously delaminate due to internal stressalone. A number of interesting ideas come tomind in consequence of this observation. First isthe fact that one of the most prevalent failuremodes for real structures is spontaneousdelamination from an edge or other defect. This isparticularly true for laminate structures containingmaterial layers with widely different thermalexpansion behaviors. Given the further fact thatthese devices inevitably undergo processing athigh temperatures, one sees that the stage is setfor the development of large internal mismatchstrains which give rise in turn to high levels ofinternal stress. Following this observation onestep further the thought occurs that, given thatthese residual stresses are capable of causingdelamination, can a simple test be developed thatuses the residual stresses within the coating todrive a “controlled” delamination process andthereby avoid the use of external loading? Thiswould then eliminate the high loads which give riseto all of the confounding effects discussed abovethat obscure the true adhesion strength? A thirdconsideration is the fact that standard adhesionmeasurements like the peel test induce high strainlevels in the test specimen. Real structures,however, tend to fail spontaneously due to residualstress levels at near zero strain. It would be verynice to have a test procedure that mimicked thefailure mode of real parts as closely as possible toensure that the data collected would be as relevantas possible to the problem at hand.

Such measurement methods do in fact existthough they have not found as wide application asthe standard methods due to a lack of familiarityand, more importantly, they require a knowledgeof and some control over the residual stress levelin the test sample. Figure 8 exhibits one of thesimplest self loading test structures for evaluatingthe adhesion of a coating to a substrate given thatthe coating has some uniform intrinsic stress level

oF . Starting with a uniform coating on a rigidsubstrate one simply creates a circular hole bywhatever means is most convenient. Assumingthe requisite hole can be created then a stress

10

(1)

Figure 8 Circle cut test for estimating the adhesion

of a coating by using the internal stress to drivethe delamination front.

Figure 9 Driving force vs delamination front radius

for a circular cut in a stressed uniform coating

singularity is created precisely at the outer radius. If the adhesion between the coating and thesubstrate is not high enough this stress singularitywill give rise to a circular delamintaion which willspread out radially in all directions. A nice featureof this experiment is that, due to the simplegeometry, an elementary formula can be derivedrelating the driving force for delamination to theradial extent of the delamination front as follows:6

Where G is the driving force for delamination inJ/m , E and < the modulus and poisson ratio of the2

coating and all other parameters are as depicted infigure 8. Figure 9 shows a suitably scaled plot of“G” vs the incremental increase in the hole radius“a” as given by Eq.(1). Note that the driving forcedecreases as the delamination front progressesoutward. This is another convenient feature of thisexperiment in that the delamination front willalways halt at some value of “a” making it easy toto measure this parameter using simple opticalinstruments and thus evaluate the driving force Gusing Eq.(1). Once the delamination front haltsthen we know that at this point the driving force Gmust precisely match the true work of adhesionrequired to remove the coating from the substrate. However, as with all of the more quantitativemeasurement methods there is a price to pay forthe improved precision of the results. Thisinevitably comes in the form of the greatlyincreased effort required. One can almost posit alaw of nature in the form of an effort/precisiontheorem which states that the effort requiredincreases exponentially as the precision desired. In the case of the circular cut test the maindifficulty comes in measuring and controlling thefilm stress level. This is followed by the problemof creating a clean circular cut with perfectlyvertical sidewalls. All difficulties not withstanding,this method has been used by Farris and Bauer to7

investigate the adhesion of polyimide coatings.

Another approach involves the use of a topcoating to supply the required internal stressneeded to drive the delamination process. Aversion of this test referred to as the Modified

Edge Liftoff Test (MELT) has been developed byHay and coworkers. Use of a top coating gives a8

An elementary derivation of this formula6

can be found in “Decohesion of Films withAxisymmetric Geometries”, M. D. Thouless, ActaMetall., 36(12), 3131 (1988).

“A Self Delamination Method of Measuring7

the Surface Energy of Adhesion of Coatings”, R. J.Farris and C. L. Bauer, J. Adhesion, 26, 293(1988).

”Measurement of Interfacial Fracture8

Energy in Microelectronic Multifilm Applications”,Jack C. Hay, Eric Lininger and Xiao Hu Liu, inAdhesion Measurement of films and Coatings, Vol.2, K. L. Mittal Ed. (VSP Utrecht, The Netherlands,2001) p. 205.

11

Figure 10 Schematic design of an array of copper

lines imbedded in a polyimide insulator matrix. Asilicon nitride capping layer is present for electricalpurposes.

significant range of flexibility in controlling thedriving force by varying the coating thickness andcuring conditions. Finally, a version of the edgeliftoff test suitable for testing microelectronicstructures has been developed by Bagchi et al. 9

This method makes use of photo lithographictechniques to create an array of microstrips whichcan be integrated onto a silicon wafer for in situtesting of thin film adhesion. A top coating ofchromium is used to supply the driving force fordelamination and a release layer is used to insureinitial release of each strip. Depending on thelevel of adhesion each strip will delaminate to acertain extent. A fracture mechanics analysissimilar to that used to derive Eq.(1) shows thatthe length of strip left attached to the substrate isindicative of the adhesion strength. Theeffort/precision theorem of adhesion testing ofcourse remains in effect for all of these tests asthe work involved is some 4 times greater thanthat for the more standard tests discussed above.Again, C’est la vie.

Now You Have the Adhesion Data What AreYou Going to Do with It?

One of the most important, and oftentimes hidden,questions one has to be aware of in doing adhesiontesting is what relevance does the collected datahave to the technical or engineering problem beingaddressed. In simple situations, such as using thetape test for ink adhesion, one is seeking astraightforward “go/no go” type of quality controlprocedure. As pointed out above the standard peeltest can be very useful in ranking surfacetreatment procedures or in determining whichadhesion promoter or primer to use for a specificapplication. However, what is the purpose of allthe time and effort required to obtain fullyquantitative adhesion data using the advancedmethods discussed above? The straightforwardanswer is engineering design. There are situationswhere one really needs to know how a structurewill perform under conditions that are very difficultif not impossible to replicate in simple labexperiments. My favorite example comes from themicroelectronics industry where one is worriedabout the stability of structures on the order of amicrometer in extent and buried within somemultilayer structure. If the small size of thestructure is not difficult enough to deal with thenhaving it embedded within a multilayer structuremakes direct testing next to impossible. Yet oneneeds to know how the structure will behave when

subjected to all of the manufacturing and end useconditions it is likely to face.

As a veteran of the microelectronics industry I cangive firsthand testimony as to the number ofmeetings I have attended where some truly “wiz-bang” structure is being proposed which promisesto revolutionize the technology. Everything looksreally great on the silver screen but troubleinevitably arises when it comes time to reduce theconcept to practice and real materials enter theact. In these cases I’m always reminded of thesage words of Prof. Jack Gordon:

“A deep intuitive appreciation of theinherent cussedness of materials is one ofthe most valuable accomplishments andengineer can have. No purely intellectualquality is really a substitute for this.”10

I would really hate to recall the number ofbeautiful design concepts that crumbled into dustbecause of the recalcitrant behavior of realmaterials but that would lead us too far astray. Rather for current purposes and also to wrap upthis essay I would like to give a short example ofhow this problem might be confronted. It allcomes down to the use of engineering designconcepts as implemented by an appropriate stressanalysis supported by valid material property andadhesion measurement data. Figure 10 shows a

A. Bagchi, G. E. Lucas, Z. Suo and A. G.9

Evans, J. Mater. Res., 9, 1734 (1994).

“Structures or Why Things Don’t Fall10

Down”, J. E. Gordon (DaCapo Press Inc, New York,1978) paperback edition, p. 63.

12

Figure 11 Transmission electron micrograph of

actual test structure based on schematic given infigure 10. The slivers at the base of the columnsindicate delamination between the polyimideinsulator and the copper line.

structure which was analyzed in terms of itsthermal-mechanical stability toward delaminationor fracture behavior by Lacombe and co-workers11

using the peel test to gather adhesion data andfinite element stress analysis to estimate thedriving force for possible delamination processesthat might occur. Having appropriate materialproperty data available, plus knowing the details ofthe loading conditions the structure would besubjected to, it was possible to perform a completestress analysis of the structure in figure 10. Initialresults showed that a stress singularity developedat the base of the copper lines that could be asource of trouble. Not only was the stress high butthe direction of the maximum principal stressvector was in a direction such as to promotedelamination along the copper sidewall. Takingnote of this warning sign a further detailed virtualcrack propagation analysis was carried out todetermine just how dangerous the potentialdelamination event could be. The analysis12

indicated a weak but potentially dangerous drivingforce for delamination of approximately 6J/m . 2

Though this is not an exceptionally high value forthe driving force, the nature of the delaminationfront was dangerous in that the driving force wasshown to increase as the front progressed. Mostalarming, however, was the fact that correctedpeel force data indicated that the adhesionstrength between the polyimide insulator and thecopper side wall could degrade to this level undercertain circumstances. Thus the stress analysissupported by the experimental mechanicalproperty and adhesion data gave a strong warningof possible delamination failure along the coppersidewall. This prediction was subsequentlyconfirmed by electron microscopy as shown infigure 11.

ADHESION MEASUREMENT THE WAYFORWARD

In this overview we have tried to give a brief buthopefully informative shapshot of the science andtechnology of adhesion measurement. The

presentation has been biased toward the morepractical and applied aspects of the subject but Ihope it is clear that the fundamental aspects areabsolutely important in that they form thefoundation on which all else rests. Unfortunatelymuch had to be left out including the exciting workat the nanoscale now made possible by atomicforce microscopy and the surface force apparatus. This work goes all the way back to the pioneeringinvestigations of Obreimoff in the 1930's on the13

separation of thin sheets of mica and is now beingrevived as the scientific world starts turning itsattention toward the new nanotechnology. We14

will try to return to this important topic in futureissues of the newsletter but now the time hascome to sign off. Interested reader can furtherpursue these topics in my recently publishedvolume on ADHESION MEASUREMENT METHODS. 15

Finally, since the science of adhesionmeasurement is very much a work in progress, werecommend that all who are interested in thelatest developments to join us at one or more of

“Comparison of Finite element Stress11

Analysis Results with Peel Strength at the Copper-Polyimide Interface”, R. H. Lacombe, L. P.Buchwalter and K. Holloway in AdhesionMeasurement of Films and Coatings, Ed. K. L.Mittal (VSP, The Netherlands, 1995) p. 283.

The topic of virtual crack propagation has12

been discussed in a previous issue of thenewsletter. See in particular “Fracture Mechanics101" available online at(www.mstconf.com/Vol3No4-2006.pdf) page 3.

J. W. Obreimoff, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 127,13

290 (1930).

Our views on nanotechnology have been14

covered in a previous issue of the newsletter. Seein particular “Fads an Fashion in Science andTechnology or is NANO over yet”, MSTCONFERENCES NEWSLETTER Vol.2 No. 1, availableonline at (www.mstconf.com/Vol2No1-2005.pdf)

“Adhesion Measurement Methods: Theory15

and Practice”, Robert Lacombe (CRC, TaylorFrancis, Boca Raton, Florida, 2006)

13

the MST symposia being held this year. Detailsare given at the end of this newsletter. TheNovember 2007 symposium on ADHESIONASPECTS OF THIN FILMS should be of particularinterest since adhesion measurement is one of thecore topics covered in that series. Last but by nomeans least, those who want to get a jump starton adhesion measurement technology can join usfor the short course on ADHESION MEASUREMENTMETHODS given in concert with all of the regularsymposia. The next scheduled class is for June 16,2007 at the University of Cincinnati. Details againmay be found in the registration sheet at the endof this newsletter.

FINAL PROGRAMS

SIXTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON POLYMER SURFACE MODIFICATION: RELEVANCE TO ADHESION

To be held June,11-13, 2007; Universityof Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

This symposium continues the tradition set by thefirst in the series entitled: “Polymer SurfaceModification: Relevance to Adhesion” which washeld in Las Vegas, NV, 1993. As with itspredecessors, this symposium will be concernedwith the technological areas where surfacemodification is a key technology which allows forthe processing and manufacture of products whichwould otherwise be unobtainable. It is also ourdistinct privilege to be able to hold the sixthsymposium in the series in collaboration with Prof.Wim van Ooij and his group at the University ofCincinnati. Prof. van Ooij has been an activeresearcher in the field and he and his group lookforward to hosting this symposium and greeting allparticipants from both academia and industry fromall corners of the globe. Proper adhesioncharacteristics are vital to the success of anypractical implementation of polymer materials.Though polymers are generally not veryadhesionable, careful surface modification canresult in greatly improved adhesion withoutaltering bulk properties. This symposium isorganized to bring together scientists,technologists and engineers interested in allaspects of polymer surface modification, to reviewand assess the current state of knowledge, toprovide a forum for exchange and cross-fertilization of ideas, and to define problem areaswhich need intensified efforts.

The invited speakers have been selected so as torepresent widely differing disciplines and interests,

and they hail from academic, governmental andindustrial research laboratories. This meeting isplanned to be a truly international event both ingeographic coverage as well as in spirit. PleaseNOTE that the address given may apply only tothe highlighted speaker.

SESSION I: MONDAY, JUNE 11, 2007; BIOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS

8:00-8:05: INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

8:05-8:35: Carel Jan van Oss; Department ofMicrobiology and Immunology, School of Medicineand Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo,South Campus, Buffalo, New York, NY 14214-3000; Surface Properties of Bacteria, HumanCells and Solid Substrata - Which FactorsCause Adhesion or Non-Adhesion to Prevail

8:35-9:05: Thomas Bahners, Klaus Opwis,Markus Milster and Eckhard Schollmeyer;Deutsches Textilforschungszentrum Nord-West e.V., Adlerstr. 1, D-47798 Krefeld, GERMANY;Surface Modifications for the Control of CellGrowth on Textile Substrates

9:05-9:35: Klaus Opwis and Thomas Mayer-Gall,Torsten Textor and Eckhard Schollmeyer;Deutsches Textilforschungszentrum Nord-West e.V., Adlerstr. 1, D-47798 Krefeld, GERMANY; Immobilization of Organometallic Catalysts onTextile Carrier Materials

9:35-10:05: E.T. Kang and K.G. Neoh; Dept. ofChemical and Biomolecular Engineering, NationalUniversity of Singapore, Kent Ridge, SINGAPORE119260; Modification of Polymers via Surface-Initiated Living Radical Polymerizations

10:05-10:20: COFFEE BREAK

10:20-10:50: S. Temmel, Ch. Buchgraber andW. Kern; Polymer Competence Center LeobenGmbH, A-8700 Leoben, AUSTRIA; Improvementof Surface Properties of Polymers Modified byPhoto-induced Processes

10:50-11:20: Dae Up Ahn and Erol Sancaktar; Department of Polymer Engineering, TheUniversity of Akron, Akron, OH 44325-0301, Direct Fabrication of High Density Polymer orSilicon Nano-Dots by Excimer LaserIrradiation on Block Copolymer Masks

14

11:20-11:50: M. Masudul Hassan , M. RabiulIslam and Mubarak A. Khan; Technical Universityof Berlin, Polymertechnik/Polymerphysik,Fasanenstr. 90, D- 0623 Berlin, GERMANY; Effectof Radiation on Surface Modification ofCellulose with Acrylamide

11:50-12:20: K.-D. Weltmann, J. Ehlbeck, R.Brandenburg, T. V. Woedtke , U. Krohmann, M.Stieber, K. Rackow, E. Kindel and R. Foest;Institute of Low-Temperature Plasma Physics(INP), Felix-Hausdorff-Straße 2, D-17489Greifswald, GERMANY; Polymer SurfaceDecontamination of Heat-Sensitive GoodsUsing Low Temperature Plasma Technology

12:20-1:30: LUNCH

SESSION II: MONDAY, JUNE 11, 2007:SURFACE MODIFICATION AND ADHESION

1:30-2:00: W. G. Mahy; Akzo Nobel ChemicalsResearch & Technology, THE NETHERLANDS; Increasing the Performance of Polymer-BasedApplications by Interphase Modification:Relevance of Microanalysis

2:00-2:30: Graham J Leggett; Department ofChemistry, University of Sheffield, Brook Hill,Sheffield S3 7HF, UK; Measuring MolecularOrganisation at the Nanometre Scale: SurfaceAnalysis by Friction Force Microscopy

2:30-3:00: Andrew Nelson; ANSTO, NewIllawarra Road, Menai, NSW 2234, AUSTRALIA; The Role of Reflectometry Techniques inExamining Thin Polymer Film Compositions

3:00-3:30: Michel Grisel; URCOM Université duHavre, 25 rue Philippe Lebon, F-76058 LE HAVRECedex, FRANCE; Polymer Surface Modificationfor Improvement of Adhesion Properties ofStructural Composites Used in Aeronautics

3:30-4:00: Arthur J. Coury; GenzymeCorporation, Cambridge, MA; Achieving andVerifying Tissue Adherence to AssurePerformance of Hydrogel-Based MedicalDevices

4:00-4:15: COFFEE BREAK

4:15-4:45: P. R. Norton, Natasha Patrito,Jessica McLachlan, Sarah Faria, Seyed Tadayyon,Claire McCague and Nils O. Petersen; Departmentof Chemistry, University of Western Ontario,London, ON. CANADA; Novel Techniques forPDMS Surface Modification: MicroscaleBiocompatible Patterning and Robust Bonding

4:45-5:15: Jeremy W. Bartels, Kenya T. Powell,Jinqi Xu, Chong Cheng and Karen L. Wooley; Center for Materials Innovation, Department ofChemistry and Department of Radiology,Washington University in Saint Louis, Saint Louis,MO 63130; Adhesion of a Non-AdhesiveCoating: The Use of PEGylatedHyperbranched Fluoropolymers as Surfaceswith Unique Anti-Biofouling, Uptake andRelease, and Mechanical Characteristics

5:15-5:45: Dae Up Ahn and Erol Sancaktar; Department of Polymer Engineering, TheUniversity of Akron, Akron, OH 44325-0301; Control of Block Copolymer CylinderOrientation by Homopolymer Blending

5:45-6:15: R. Bongiovanni and A.Priola; Department of Materials Science and ChemicalEngineering Politecnico di Torino, Torino, ITALY; Adhesion of Fluorinated UV-cured Coatings onFunctionalised Polyethylene

6:15-6:45: Zheng CAO, Jingxin LEI , Jun GAOand Qiman LI; State Key Lab. of Polymer MaterialsEngineering, Polymer Research Institute, SichuanIniversity, Chengdu 610065;P.R. CHINA; SurfaceModification of Polyolefin via a Novel Non-vapor and Non-liquid Photografting Method

SESSION III: TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 2007:PLASMA, RADIATION AND ADHESION

8:00-8:30: Norihiro Inagaki; ShizuokaUniversity, Laboratory of Polymer Chemistry,Hamamatsu 432-8023, JAPAN; Plasma SurfaceModification of Aromatic Polyester Films forCopper Metallization: Dynamic SurfaceProperties of Plasma-Modified Films

8:30-9:00: C. Lew, F. Chowdhury, M. V. Hosurand A. N. Netravali; Dept. of Fiber Science andApparel Design, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY

214853-4401; The Effect of Silica (SiO )Nanoparticle and Ethylene/Ammonia Plasmaon the Carbon Fiber/NanoEpoxy InterfacialShear Strength

15

9:00-9:30: K. Schröder, B. Busse, H. Steffen, A.Ohl, A. Quade and K.-D. Weltmann; Institute ofLow-Temperature Plasma Physics (INP), Felix-Hausdorff-Straße 2, D-17489 Greifswald,GERMANY; Plasma-Induced Generation ofCell-Adhesive and Cell-Repulsive PolymerSurfaces for Cell-based RNA Arrays

9:30-10:00: Masukuni Mori; Mori ConsultantEngineering office 36-1 Shinmeikuruwa KaimeiIchinomiya,Aichi 494-0001, JAPAN; WhatEffects does Ar-Plasma Irradiation Lead to inDyeing Properties as well as AntifeltingProperties of Wool Fibers?

10:00- 10:15: COFFEE BREAK

10:15-10:45: S. Wettmarshausen, D. Kühn, G.Hidde and J. F. Friedrich; Bundesanstalt fürMaterialforschung und –prüfung (BAM), D-12200Berlin, GERMANY; Plasmabromination – TheSelective Way to Produce MonotypeFunctionalized Polymer Surfaces

10:45-11:15: M. Krysak, A. Jayasekar, B.Parekh, T. Debies, K. S. V. Santhanam, R. A.DiLeo, B. J. Landi, R. P. Raffaelle and G. A. Takacs; Department of Chemistry, Centerfor Materials Science and Engineering, RochesterInstitute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623; Gas-Phase Surface Functionalization ofCarbon Nanotubes with UV Photo-oxidation

11:15-11:45: J. Friedrich, R. Mix and J.Falkenhagen; Bundesanstalt fur Materialforschungund Prufung (BAM), Unter den Eichen 87, D-12205Berlin, GERMANY; Deposition andCharacterization of Plasma CopolymerizedAllyl Alcohol Adhesion Promoting PolymerLayers

11:45-12:15: I. Hudec , M. Jaššo , M. Cernák,L. Cernáková and H. Krump: Institute of Physics,Commenius University, Bratislava, SLOVAKIA; Adhesion Strength Study Between PlasmaPolymerized Polyester Cords and a RubberMatrix

12:15-1:30: LUNCH

SESSION IV: TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 2007:PLASMA AND FLAME TREATMENT

1:30-2:00: Rory A. Wolf; Enercon IndustriesCorporation - Surface Treatment, Induction Sealing& Power Supply Technologies, W140 N9572Fountain Blvd., Menomonee Falls, WI 53051;

2Advances in Adhesion with CO -BasedAtmospheric Plasma Surface Modification

2:00-2:30: J. Reece Roth; Dept. of Electrical& Computer Engr., 409 Ferris Hall, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN37996-2100; Polymer Surface Modificationwith a One Atmosphere Uniform GlowDischarge Plasma (OAUGDP)

2:30-3:00: Terrence Vargo, David MacRae, andDerrick Lucey; Integument Technologies, Inc., 72Pearce Avenue, Tonawanda, NY 14150; PlasmaSurface Modification Meets Nanotechnology

3:00-3:30: S. Manolache, H. Jiang and F. S.Denes; Center for Plasma-Aided Manufacturing,University of Wisconsin, 1410 Engineering Drive#101, Madison, WI 53706-1608; ChemicalVersus Physical Nanotopography Generationinto Polymer Surfaces Induced by ColdPlasma

3:30-3:45: COFFEE BREAK

3:45-4:15: Michael S. Silverstein; Departmentof Materials Engineering, Technion-Israel Insituteof Technology, Haifa 32000, ISRAEL; Surface Modification of Low-k Dielectrics

4:15-4:45: Joseph DiGiacomo; Flynn BurnerCorp., 12550 Lake Avenue, Suite 1703, Lakewood,OH 44107; Adhesion Promotion Using DirectFlame Plasma Surface Treatment

4:45-5:15: Takaomi Kobayashi; Department ofChemistry, Nagaoka Univeristy of Technology,1603-1 Kamitomioka, Nagaoka, JAPAN; OzoneModification on Surface of PolystyreneDerivatives

5:15-5:45: T. Tanaka, K.Vutova, G.Mladenovand T.Takagi; Department of Electronics andPhotonic Systems Engineering, Hiroshima Instituteof Technology, 2-1-1, Miyake, Saiki-ku, Hiroshima731-5193, JAPAN; Surface Modification ofPlastic Films by Charged Particles

16

SESSION V: WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 2007: APPLICATIONS TO COATINGS

8:00-8:30: A. Narladkar, E. Balnois, G. Vignaudand Y. Grohens; Laboratoire Polymères, Propriétésaux Interfaces et Composites (L2PIC), Universitéde Bretagne Sud, BP 92116, 56321 Lorient Cedex,FRANCE; Aggregation and Pattering in ThinFilms of PLA and Their Stereocomplex: FromConformation to Glass Transition

8:30-9:00: Frank Simon; Institute of Polymer

Research, Hohe Straße 6, D-01069 Dresden,GERMANY; Super-Hydrophobic AluminiumSurfaces

9:00-9:30: E. Metwalli, V. Körstgens and P.Müller-Buschbaum; Physik-Department, TUMünchen, LS E13, James-Franck-Str. 1, D-85747Garching, GERMANY; Evaluation of theInterfacial Adhesion Between a ModelPressure Sensitive Adhesive and ChemicallyModified Surfaces Using the Probe TackMethod

9:30-10:00: M. Ignat, C. Malhaire, G. Ravel andE. Quesnel; SIMAP INP Grenoble, FRANCE; Cracking and Deadhesion of Thin Metal Filmson Mechanically Modified Polymer Surfaces

10:00-10:15: COFFEE BREAK

10:15-10:45: M. Charbonnier, F. Gaillard and M. Romand; Université de Lyon, Laboratoire desSciences Analytiques, UMR-CNRS # 5180,Université Claude Bernard-Lyon 1, 43 Bd du 11Novembre 1918, F-69622 Villeurbanne Cedex,FRANCE; Compared Catalytic Activity andSubsequent Electroless Metallization of

3 2Polymer Surfaces Treated by NH and NPlasma

10:45-11:15: Jay J. Senkevich, Carissa S.Jones and Young-Soon Kim; Brewer Science Inc.,2401 Brewer Dr., Rolla, MO 65401; DirectElectroless Metallization of a CVD PolymerFilm Without a Catalytic Layer

11:15-11:45: Wang Ke, Liang Hong,and Zhao-Lin Liu; Department of Chemical and BiomolecularEngineering, National University of Singapore, BLKE5 02-02, 4 Engineering Drive 4, SINGAPORE117576; Developing a Substantially Thin Ni/PLayer on the Surface of Silicone Elastomer

11:45-12:15: Grigoriy Kyryk and AlexanderStadnick; Ukrrosmetall Concern, 6 KurskyAvenue, Sumy, UKRAINE 40020; Reception ofMetal Coverings on Polymeric Materials byMethods of Conductors Electric Explosion

FINAL PROGRAM: SIXTH INTERNATIONAL

SYMPOSIUM ON SILANES AND OTHER

COUPLING AGENTS To be held June 13-15, 2007; University of CincinnatiCincinnati, Ohio, USA

This symposium continues the tradition set by thefirst symposium in this series:”Silanes and OtherCoupling Agents” which was hosted in 1991 by theDow Corning Corporation in honor of Dr. Edwin P.Plueddemann. As with its predecessors, thissymposium will be concerned with thetechnological areas where the use of surfaceprimers such as silanes is critical to the success of many technologies. It is also our distinct privilegeto be able to hold this the sixth symposium in theseries in collaboration with Prof. Wim van Ooij andhis group at the University of Cincinnati. Prof. vanOoij was a participant at the 1991 symposium inhonor of Dr. Plueddemann and has been an activeresearcher in the field of silanes ever since. Prof.van Ooij and his group look forward to hosting thissymposium and greeting all participants from bothacademia and industry from all corners of theglobe. Historically the silanes have been used ascoupling agents for thin films in themicroelectronics industry and in glass fibercomposites where the use of silanes has been anenabling factor in the success of manymanufactured products. Quite surprisingly, silaneshave also found a role in biotechnology as specificcoupling agents for bonding polynucleotides to theso-called “gene chips” and also in cosmeticapplications. This symposium is organized to bringtogether scientists, technologists and engineersinterested in all aspects of coupling agenttechnology, to review and assess the current stateof knowledge, to provide a forum for exchange andcross-fertilization of ideas and to define problemareas which need intensified efforts. The invitedspeakers have been selected so as to representwidely differing disciplines and interests, and theyhail from academic, governmental and industrialresearch laboratories. This meeting is planned tobe a truly international event both geographicallyand scientifically. NOTE the address given mayapply only to the presenting author.

17

SESSION I: WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 2007

1:30-1:35: INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

1:35-2:05: Barry Arkles and Youlin Pan; GelestInc., 11 East Steel Rd., Morrisville, PA 19067; Hydrophobicity, Hydrophilicity and SilaneSurface Modification

2:05-2:35: Eric Pohl, Misty Huang and AntonioChaves; Momentive Performance Materials , 771Old Saw Mill River Road, Tarrytown, NY 10591; New Silanes for Low VOC Adhesives andSealants

2:35-3:05: Burkhard Standke, Björn Borup,Peter Jenkner, and Christian Wassmer; DegussaGmbH, Rheinfelden, GERMANY; VOC FreeMultifunctional Organosilane Systems - ANew Modular Concept for Water Borne Sol-GelCoatings

3:05-3:35: E.T. Kang and K.G. Neoh; Dept. ofChemical and Biomolecular Engineering, NationalUniversity of Singapore, Kent Ridge, SINGAPORE119260; Silane-Coupling Agents for Surface-Initiated Living Radical Polymerizations

3:35-4:05: Marie-Laure Abel; UniS MaterialsInstitute & School of Engineering, University ofSurrey, Guildford, Surrey GU27XH UK; The Useof Organo-Silanes as Primers and Within anAdhesive Formulation

4:05-4:20: COFFEE BREAK

4:20-4:50: H. T. Deo; Polygel TechnologiesIndia Private Limited, Fort, Mumbai, INDIA; Coupling Agents in Chelating Chemicals,Printing Inks, Silicon Emulsions and PaintAdhesive Formulations

4:50-5:20: Ezzeldin Metwalli; TechnischeUniversität München James-Franck-Straße 1,D-85747, Garching GERMANY; Aminosilanetreated glass substrates for DNA microarrays

5:20-5:50: R Raval, S J Shaw and G Woods; Defence Science and Technology Laboratory,Salisbury, UK; Spectroscopic Probing of ModelSilane Coupling Compounds at Model Surfaces

5:50-6:20: Stephen L. Kaplan; 4th State, Inc.,1260 Elmer Street, Belmont, CA 94002; PlasmaSilanization of Metals, Ceramics and Polymers

SESSION II: THURSDAY, JUNE 14, 2007

8:00-8:30: Carl Tripp; Laboratory for SurfaceScience & Technology, Engineering and ScienceResearch Building, University of Maine, Orono, ME

204469; The Use of Supercritical CO forConducting Silane Reactions on Surfaces

8:30-9:00: David Vincent and Janis Matisons; Nanomaterials Group, School of Chemistry, Physicsand Earth Sciences, Flinders University, SturtRoad, Bedford Park, South Australia, AUSTRALIA5042; Investigation of the Surface Effects ofSulfur and Nitrogen Containing Silanes for theDesign and Production of Novel SilaneCompounds used in Surface Modification

9:00-9:30: X. Liu, J. L. Thomason and F. R. Jones; Department of EngineeringMaterials, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD,UK; The Concentration of Hydroxyl Groups onGlass Surfaces and Their Effect on theStructure of Silane Deposits

9:30-10:00: X. M. Liu, J. L. Thomason and F. R.Jones; Department of Engineering Materials,University of Sheffield, Sheffield S1 3JD, UK; XPSand AFM Study of the Structure of HydrolysedAminosilane on E-glass Surfaces

10:00-10:15: COFFEE BREAK

10:15-10:45: Peng Wang, Bill Hamilton andDale W. Schaefer; Dept. of Chemical andMaterials Engineering, Univ. of Cincinnati,Cincinnati, OH 45221; Characterization ofHydrothermal Degradation of OrganosilaneFilms on Silicon Wafer by Neutron Reflectivity

10:45-11:15: Peng Wang and Dale W.Schaefer, Dept. of Chemical and MaterialsEngineering, Univ. of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH45221; Characterization of Epoxy-Silane Filmsby Combined Scattering Techniques

11:15-11:45: F. Deflorian, S. Rossi, M. Fedeland L. Fedrizzi; Dipartimento di Ingegneria deiMateriali e Tecnologie Industriali, Università diTrento, Via Mesiano 77, 38050 Trento, ITALY; Advanced Electrochemical Techniques forStudying Silane Based Pretratments asAdhesion Promoters on Different Metals

18

11:45-12:15: V. Cech, S. Lichovnikova, J. Sova,and J. Studynka; Institute of Materials Chemistry,Brno University of Technology, Brno, CZECHREPUBLIC; Surface Free Energy of Silicon-Based Plasma Polymer Films

12:15-1:30: LUNCH

SESSION III: THURSDAY, JUNE 14, 2007

1:30-2:00: R. De Palma,, S. Peeters, W.Laureyn, G. Borghs, C. Van Hoof and G. Maes;Interuniversity Microelectronics Center (IMEC),BELGIUM; Katholieke Universiteit Leuven,Chemistry Department, BELGIUM; How to Tunethe Functionality of Magnetic NanoparticlesUsing Silanes?

2:00-2:30: Mandla A. Tshabalala, Vina Yangand Ryan Libert; USDA Forest Service, ForestProducts Laboratory, One Gifford Pinchot Drive,Madison, WI 53726-2398; Surface Modificationof Wood by Alkoxysilane Sol-gel Deposition toCreate Anti-mold and Anti-fungalCharacteristics

2:30-3:00: Ramsey Hamade; AmericanUniversity of Beirut, 850 Third Avenue 18th floor,New York, NY 10022; Durability ofSilane-Modified Adhesive Bonds

3:00-3:30: E. Metwalli, V. Körstgens and P.Müller-Buschbaum; Physik-Department, TUMünchen, LS E13, James-Franck-Str. 1, D-85747Garching, Germany; Adhesion of DifferentModified Glass Surfaces to a Model Pressure-sensitive Adhesive

3:30-4:00: L. Ge, S. Sethi, Betul Yurdumakan, P.M. Ajayan and A. Dhinojwala; Department ofPolymer Science, University of Akron, Akron, OH44320; Synthetic Gecko Foot-hairs fromMultiwalled Carbon Nanotubes

4:00-4:15: COFFEE BREAK

4:15-4:45: Jukka P. Matinlinna *, Jon E. Dahl,Stig Karlsson, Lippo V. J. Lassila and Pekka K.Vallittu; NIOM – Nordic Institute of DentalMaterials, P.O.Box 70, NO-1305 Haslum,NORWAY; The Effect of the Novel SilaneSystem to the Flexural Properties of E-glassFiber-Reinforced Composite

4:45-5:15: M. Masudul Hassan, and Mubarak A. Khan; Radiation and PolymerChemistry Lab., Institute of Nuclear Science andTechnology, Bangladesh Atomic EnergyCommission, P. O. Box 3787, Dhaka,BANGLADESH; Role of Amino-Silane on theMechanical Performance of the Jute-Polycarbonate Composites

5:15-5:45: Khodzhaberdi Allaberdiev; UkraineState Scientific Research Institute for Plastics,Illicha pr. 97, Donetsk 83059, UKRAINE; Investigation of the Interphase EpoxyComposites

SESSION IV: FRIDAY JUNE 15, 2007

8:00-8:30: Anthony A. Parker, Todd Waglerand Peter Rinaldi; A. A. Parker Consulting &Product Development, Newtown, PA; Solid StateNMR Studies of Surface Adsorbed Molecules onInorganic Pigments

8:30-9:00: A. N. Khramov, L.S. Kasten, V. N.Balbyshev and J. A. Johnson; UniversalTechnology Corp., 1270 N. Fairfield Rd., Dayton,OH 45432-2600; Phosphonate-FunctionalizedSol-Gel Surface Treatments for Aluminum andMagnesium Alloys

9:00-9:30: T. Textor, F. Schroeter and E.Schollmeyer; Deutsches TextilforschungszentrumNord-West e. V., Adlerstr. 1, D-47798 Krefeld,GERMANY; Photocatalytic Titania Derived bySol-Gel-Technique for Textile Application

9:30-10:00: T. Textor, T. Bahners, F. Schröder,B. Schulz and E. Schollmeyer; DeutschesTextilforschungszentrum Nord-West e.V., Adlerstr.1, D-47798 Krefeld, GERMANY; Application ofNanosols to Improve Different Properties ofP-aramide Fabrics Used for Bullet-proof Vests

10:00-10:15: COFFEE BREAK

10:15-10:45: W. J. van Ooij; Dept. of MaterialsScience and Engineering, University of Cincinnati,Cincinnati, OH 45221-0012; Overview ofPotential of Silanes to Protect Metal AgainstCorrosion Phenomena

19

10:45-11:15: Qingsong Yu; Department ofChemical Engineering, Center for Surface Scienceand Plasma Technology, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia, MO 65211; PlasmaPolymer Coatings in Corrosion Protection ofMetallic Materials

11:15-11:45: Rosa Di Maggio; Department ofEngineering Materials and Industrial Technologies,University of Trento, Via Mesiano, 77, 38100Trento, ITALY; Zirconia for Corrosion ResistantPrimers

11:45-12:15: Ji-Ming Hu, Wei-Gang Ji, LiangLiu, Jian-Qing Zhang and Chu-Nan Cao; Department of Chemistry, Zhejiang University,Hangzhou 310027, P. R. CHINA; Improving theCorrosion Performance of Epoxy Coatings bythe Modification with "Active" and"Non-Active" Silane Monomers

12:15-1:30: LUNCH

SESSION V: FRIDAY, JUNE 15, 2007

1:30-2:00: Dale W. Schaefer; Department ofChemical and Materials Engineering, University ofCincinnati, Cincinnati, OH 45221; The Role ofSilane Coupling Agents in Metal-ProtectiveFilms

2:00-2:30: Paula Puomi, Zhangzhang Yin, WimJ. van Ooij, Akshay Ashirgade and Anuj Seth;University of Cincinnati, 560 Engineering ResearchCenter, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0012; NovelChromate-Free Silane-Containing SuperprimerTechnology

2:30-3:00: Danqing Zhu, Man Xu and Wim J.van Ooij; Ecosil Technologies, 160-A Donald Drive, Fairfield, OH 45014; Corrosion Protection ofGalvanized Steel with WaterborneSilane-based Systems

3:00-3:30: Zhangzhang Yin, Akshay Ashirgade,Anuj Seth, Paula Puomi and Wim J van Ooij; Department of Chemical and MaterialsEngineering,University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati,OH 45221; Zinc Phosphate as an EffectiveAnticorrosion Pigment in Silane-basedWaterborne Primers

CALL FOR PAPERS

FIFTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON POLYIMIDES AND OTHER HIGH TEMPERATURE POLYMERSSYNTHESIS, CHARACTERIZATION ANDAPPLICATIONS

To be held November 5-7, 2007 inOrlando Florida, USA

This symposium is the fifth in a series the first ofwhich was held in Newark, NJ in 1999. As with itspredecessors, this symposium will be concernedwith all aspects of polyimides and other hightemperature polymers. These materials have foundapplications in such diverse areas as the aerospaceindustry and microelectronic components. Aunique combination of physical and chemicalproperties make these materials highly attractivefor demanding applications where chemicalinertness, high temperature stability, low dielectricconstant, mechanical toughness and processabilityare primary concerns. This symposium isorganized to bring together scientists,technologists and engineers interested in allaspects of high temperature polymers, to reviewand assess the current state of knowledge, toprovide a forum for exchange and cross-fertilization of ideas, and to define problem areaswhich need intensified efforts. The invitedspeakers have been selected so as to representwidely differing disciplines and interests, and theyhail from academic, governmental and industrialresearch laboratories. This meeting is planned tobe a truly international event both in geographiccoverage as well as in spirit. The technical programwill contain both invited overviews and contributedoriginal research papers. It is planned to chroniclethe transactions in a hard-bound volume ofarchival quality (to match or exceed the standardsof the journal literature) which will serve as areference work for future generations ofinvestigators.

TOPICS OF INTEREST INCLUDE:< Chemistry, synthesis and characterization

of polyimides and other high temperaturepolymers.

< Surface chemistry and surface modification

PHYSICO-CHEMICAL PROPERTIES< Thermal-mechanical properties< Electrical properties< Adhesion properties and adhesion

improvement< Encapsulation and barrier properties

20

< Effects of aging and environment on longterm stability, reliability and durability

APPLICATIONS< Polyimides as adhesives and insulators.< Polyimides as dielectrics, photoresists and

encapsulants in microelectronic andbiomedical structures

< Metallization of polyimide and investigationof interfaces.

NOVEL AND ADVANCED FORMULATIONS< Ultralow dielectric materials, low thermal

expansion liquid crystals, polyimide blends,nanocomposites, copolymers, foams,... etc.

This symposium is being organized by MSTConferences, LLC under the direction of Dr. K. L.Mittal, Editor, Journal of Adhesion Science andTechnology. A proceedings volume is planned forthis symposium and further details will be providedin due course. Please notify the conferencechairman of your intentions to present a paper asearly as possible. An abstract of about 200 wordsshould be sent by August 18, 2007 to theconference chairman by any of the followingmethods:

E-mail: rhlacombe@compuserve.com FAX: 212-656-1016Regular mail:

Dr. Robert H. LacombeConference Chairman3 Hammer Drive

Hopewell Junction, NY 12533

Contact by phone: 845-897-1654Full conference details and registration via theInternet will be maintained on our web site:

http://mstconf.com/polyimd5.htm

CALL FOR PAPERS

THIRD INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON

ADHESION ASPECTS OF THIN FILMS

(INCLUDING ADHESION MEASUREMENT

AND METALLIZED PLASTICS)To be held November 7-9, 2007 in Orlando,Florida, USA

This symposium is the third in a series dealing withadhesion aspects of thin films, adhesion measurementand metallized plastics. The first symposium with thistitle was held in Orlando, FL in 2003 with the intent ofintegrating key aspects of three separate symposia

which treated these topics singly in the past. The mainidea was to provide a broader venue for the discussionand exploration of these three closely related fields ofendeavor. The main part of the symposium focuses onthose aspects of thin film technology that have a directbearing on film adhesion to the substrate. This is a topicof both fundamental interest to all aspects of thin filmtechnology and of great practical concern in applicationswhere films of high stress are involved. The coating ofdiamond films onto machine tools is one of manyapplications where thin film adhesion is a critical factor incoating durability. The second part of the symposium willdeal with the ability to accurately measure the adhesion

of coatings to surfaces. This is always a crucial part ofdevelopment and manufacturing processes dealing withcoatings and films. Finally, metallized plastics are a

burgeoning technology heavily dependent on thin filmadhesion with applications ranging from decorativedesign to optical coatings to advanced thin film wiringschemes in the microelectronics industry. Metallizedplastic films allow the technologist to capitalize on thefavorable properties of two disparate classes of materialsto create new and unique products which transcend theperformance and usefulness that can be obtained byeither class alone.

The invited speakers have been selected so as torepresent widely differing disciplines and interests, andthey hail from academic, governmental and industrialresearch laboratories. This meeting is planned to be atruly international event both in geographic coverage aswell as in spirit. The technical program will contain bothinvited overviews and contributed original researchpapers.

TOPICS OF INTEREST INCLUDE:

Adhesion Aspects of Thin Films< Factors influencing adhesion - Residual stress,

mechanical properties, contamination ... etc.< Long term bond durability, corrosion prevention< Adhesion promoters Fundamental Issues< Role of surface chemistry, wettability and

morphology< Fundamental adhesion mechanisms including

role of surface roughness/morphology and film/substrate interactions

Applications of Adhesion Measurement< Adhesion measurements in quality control and

manufacturing< Adhesion measurements in support of coating

process research and development< Adhesion measurement instrumentation for

laboratory and manufacturing environmentsFundamental Aspects of Adhesion Measurement < Mechanics of adhesion testing, the role of film

stresses< Fracture mechanics of adhesion testing< Physico-chemical aspects of adhesion testing,

the role of film morphology and chemistry

21

Metallized Plastics< Metallization techniques and properties of metal

deposits< Metal diffusion during deposition< Morphology and properties of metal depositsInvestigation of Interfacial Interactions< Influence of polymer surface functional groups< Metal-polymer interactions< Fundamental adhesion mechanisms including

coating-substrate interactions at nanoscale

This symposium is being organized by MSTConferences, LLC under the direction of Dr. K. L.Mittal, Editor, Journal of Adhesion Science andTechnology. An archival volume is planned for thissymposium and further details will be provided indue course. Please notify the conference chairmanof your intention to present a paper as early aspossible. An abstract of about 200 words shouldbe sent by August 18, 2007 to the conference

chairman by any of the following methods:

E-mail: rhl@mstconf.com

FAX: 212-656-1016Regular mail:

Dr. Robert H. LacombeConference Chairman3 Hammer Drive

Hopewell Junction, NY 12533

Contact by phone: 845-897-1654; 845-227-7026Full conference details and registration via theInternet will be maintained on our web site:

(www.mstconf.com/adhfilm2007.htm )

22

REGISTRATION INFORMATIONDATES:June 11-13, 2007: SIXTH INTERNATIONALSYMPOSIUM ON POLYMER SURFACEMODIFICATION: RELEVANCE TO ADHESION

June 13-15, 2007: SIXTH INTERNATIONALSYMPOSIUM ON SILANES AND OTHERCOUPLING AGENTS

CLICK HERE FOR DETAILS ON SHORTCOURSE ON APPLIED ADHESIONMEASUREMENT METHODS HELD INCONJUNCTION WITH THESE SYMPOSIA, TOBE HELD ON June 16, 2007.

LOCATION: Please make room reservations directly with theMarriott Kingsgate Conference Hotel. A block ofrooms has been set aside for conferenceregistrants until May 15, 2007. After this datethe hotel will accept reservations on a spaceavailable basis and they cannot guarantee thatthe special conference rates of $139 CANsingle/double per day will apply. Make yourreservations early and be sure to mention thatyou are attending one of the MST symposia inorder to receive the reduced conference hotelrate.

Marriott Kingsgate Conference Hotel151 Goodman DriveCincinnati, OH 45219, USA

Tel: Reservations 1-888-720-1299Tel (local): 1-513-487-3800FAX: 1-513-487-3875Web Site: www.marriott.com/cvgkg

EARLY REGISTRATION: (On or before May 15, 2007)POLYMER SURFACE MODIFICATION: Speaker/student $395 each; regular attendee$595 each.SILANES AND OTHER COUPLING AGENTS:Speaker/student $395 each; regular attendee$595 each. A 20% discount applies if attendingboth symposia; additional 10% discount if morethan 1 participant from same organization.NOTE: For academic institutions, if in additionto the main speaker one or more students willalso be participating then the registration for eachsuch student will be ½ the lowest applicable rate.The short course fee will be $595 for allparticipants including complete set of lecturenotes and handouts and a copy of the recently

TO REGISTER: BY PHONE: 1-845-897-1654 or 1-845-227-7026BY FAX: 1-212-656-1016

BY MAIL: PRINT OUT ONLINE FORM BELOW AND MAILTO: Dr. Robert Lacombe, Chairman MST Conferences3 Hammer DriveHopewell Junction, NY 12533-6124, USA

ONLINE: www.mstconf.com/mstreg.htm

SHORT COURSE ON ADHESIONMEASUREMENT METHODS, June 16, 2007:

Audience: Scientists and professional staff inR&D, manufacturing, processing, qualitycontrol/reliability involved with adhesion aspectsof coatings or laminate structures.Level: Technical overviewPrerequisites: General background Inchemistry, physics or materials science.Duration: 1 dayRegistration fee: $595: Includes complete setof lecture notes and a copy of “ADHESIONMEASUREMENT METHODS:THEORY ANDPRACTICE, CRC PRESS, (2006)

How You Will Benefit From This Course:

< Understand advantages and disadvantagesof a range of adhesion measurementtechniques.

< Gain insight into mechanics of adhesiontesting and the role of sample intrinsicstress and material properties

< Learn optimal methods for settingadhesion strength requirements for coatingapplications.

< Learn how to select the best measurementtechnique for a given application.

< Gain perspective from detailed discussionof actual case studies of productmanufacturing and development problems.

CANCELLATIONS: Registration fees arerefundable, subject to a 15% service charge, ifcancellation is made by May 15, 2007. NOrefunds will be given after that date. Allcancellations must be in writing. Substitutionsfrom the same organization may be made at anytime without penalty. MST Conferences reservesthe right to cancel either of the symposia or the

23

REGISTRATION FORM

POLYMER SURFACE MODIFICATION: JUNE 11-13, 2007 (speaker/student) $395

POLYMER SURFACE MODIFICATION: JUNE 11-13, 2007 (regular attendee) $595

FOURTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON SILANES: JUNE 13-15, 2007 (speaker/student) $395

FOURTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON SILANES: JUNE 13-15, 2007 (regular attendee) $595

Sub Total

Deduct 20% if also attending the INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON SILANES. Deductadditional 10% if more than 1 participant from same institution

Short Course on Applied Adhesion Measurement Methods: June 16, 2007 $595

TOTAL REGISTRATION FEE

METHOD OF PAYMENTCHECK WHICH METHOD YOU PREFER

CREDIT CARD: Check here and fill out box below

BANK WIRE TRANSFER: Check here and contact the symposium Chairman, Dr.Lacombe for bankwire information either by phone, FAX or E-mail:

Tel. 845-897-1654FAX: 212-656-1016E-mail: rhlacombe@compuserve.com

CHECK: Make check payable to MST Conferences, LLC and mail to:Dr. Robert H. LacombeConference Chairman3 Hammer DriveHopewell Junction, NY 12533-6124, USA

CREDIT CARD INFORMATION

ADDRESS INFORMATION

9 VISA NAME:

9 MASTER CARD ADDRESS:

9 AMERICAN EXPRESS

9 DINERS CLUB

9 DISCOVERE-mail:

Expiration Date: PHONE: FAX:

Card Number: