Home Physical Sciences Controlling surface morphology of spin coated epoxy composites using the Marangoni instability
Article Publicly Available

Controlling surface morphology of spin coated epoxy composites using the Marangoni instability

  • Timothy M. Shenk ORCID logo EMAIL logo , Kenneth M. Benjamin ORCID logo and Robb M. Winter
Published/Copyright: July 2, 2025
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of inducing the Marangoni effect through a secondary reaction between the amine and atmospheric CO2 while spin coating neat and nanocomposite epoxy-amine reactions. Surface structures were manipulated through controlling spin coater parameters, environmental conditions, composition and extent of reaction, resulting in changes in Marangoni cell depth and width, which could lead to future targeted composite structures. The Marangoni effect was eliminated when relative humidity was above 60 %. Cell widths and depths ranged from approximately one cm to eight cm and one micron to 250 μm, depending on conditions. Additionally, though storage modulus increased up to 50 % as expected with increased clay loading, the glass transition T g did not, possibly demonstrating competing effects of plasticization or homopolymerization reducing T g at given nanoparticle loading when its inhibition of mobility of the polymer chain would indicate an expected increase. The greater importance of this could be in future work where different geometries and multi-layer interactions could be used to form various types of structures.

1 Introduction

The Marangoni effect, a local distortion of the liquid surface, is induced by a surface tension gradient due to temperature 1 , 2 and/or concentration 3 , 4 gradients, and is heavily impacted by the film’s thickness. 5 , 6 These variations in the surface tension at the interface results in fluid flowing from the lower to higher surface tension region, causing a depression in the center of the local distortion. 7 , 8 , 9 They are generally categorized as either Benard cells (hexagon cell formation), craters (circular), and spherical and deformable surfaces and volumes. 10 , 11 Sterling and Scriven 12 , 13 developed the theory of mass transfer at the interface resulting in fluid motion for various formations. The induction of instability primarily governed by the change in surface tension caused by a temperature gradient is characterized by the Marangoni number Ma,

(1) Ma = γ T h 2 T µ α

where γ T is the temperature dependent surface tension, ∇T is the temperature gradient at the surface, h is the film thickness, and µ and α are the viscosity and thermal diffusivity of the solution, respectively. The Marangoni instability occurs for a Ma > 80 14 , 15 Using the instability criteria, self-assembly of molecules can be induced with volatile solvents in a spin casting setting, forming rings and hexagons. 16 , 17 One such spin coating study by de Gennes 3 evaluated the difference between the thermal and concentration driven effects for the Benard-Marangoni cells found that the concentration gradient is usually the dominant driving force for cell formation. de Gennes demonstrated that most spin coated processes result in samples with thickness that are too thin to induce the Marangoni effect through a temperature gradient. In this case, concentration gradients become the driving force for inducing the instability, and the Ma number is then defined as

(2) Ma = γ C h 2 C µ D

where C is the concentration and D is the diffusion coefficient of the component inducing the surface tension change. 18 , 19 Due to the complexity of modeling the spin coating process, much research has focused on understanding the development of the interdependence of various process parameters, especially those parameters impacted by solvent evaporation such as concentration and viscosity and the resulting thickness. Emslie and colleagues 20 developed one of the first models for non-volatile Newtonian solutions with a final height given in Equation 3

(3) h f = h 0 1 + 4 K h o 2 t 1 2

where K = ρω 2 /3η, ρ is density, ω is angular velocity, η is viscosity, h o is initial thickness, and t is spin time. Subsequent studies examined more complex systems. However, others demonstrated that Emslie’s model cannot be used to model the final thickness for most non-Newtonian fluids. 21 , 22 , 23 But, under low steady state spin rate, no evaporation, net flow in the radial direction with no body or surface forces, Washo et al. 24 demonstrated some polymer solutions’ final thickness can be modeled as Newtonian fluids. However, at higher spin rates, the Newtonian fluid assumption of fluid shear stress being proportional to the shear rate is no longer valid. Since this means that viscosity is no longer independent of shear rate, the viscosity can be modeled as a power law. Thus, the film thickness of non-Newtonian fluids can be fitted to a power law. These, and other studies, 25 , 26 conclude final thickness (hf) of non-Newtonian fluid is proportional to a constant A and a power law exponent n of the angular velocity as shown in Equation (4).

(4) h f = A ω n

The studies demonstrated the final thickness was strongly dependent on time, final rotational speed, solvent used (if any), and material properties such as viscosity. 27 , 28 Additional studies demonstrated that non-uniformity in spin coated layers is induced for non-Newtonian properties and surface roughness/patterning. 22 , 23 , 29 , 30 , 31 More recently, various spin coating systems have been investigated due to advantageous applications. 32 , 33 , 34 Yet, there is a lack of full understanding of the impact of the Marangoni instability regarding polymer nanocomposites (PNC). Zhang et al. recently addressed this gap where they utilized solvent evaporation for the generation of microstructures through the Marangoni. 9 However, there are also PNC systems that do not utilize evaporation in the formation of Marangoni cells. This study provides a deeper understanding of the Marangoni effect in PNC non-solvent systems, where the driving force for its generation is not solvent evaporation but a secondary reaction between the amine and environmental CO2 that generates a concentration gradient to induce the Marangoni instability. Cell width and depth formation are demonstrated to be dependent not only on the RPM of the spin coated, but relative humidity, nanoparticle concentration and extent of reaction.

Further, this work examined and characterized the impact of RPM, spin coater spin time, extent of reaction, and cure schedules on the formation of Marangoni cells in thin film nanocomposites.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Materials

EPON® Resin 828, is a diglycidyl ether of bisphenol-A (DGEBA) with an epoxy equivalent weight (EEW) of approximately 190 g/eq. The curing agent used was Epikure® 3140, a polyamide which contains less than 10 % of primary amine triethylenetetramine (TETA) and has an amine value of approximately 370 mg KOH/g with amine hydrogen equivalent weight (AHEW) of approximately 95. The stoichiometric equivalent parts hundred epoxy resin (PHR) is 50 g. The epoxy and curing agent chemicals and their associated data were obtained from Miller-Stephen Chemical Co. 35 Bubble formation was reduced though not eliminated by processing under vacuum after shearing and mixing by degassing at a vacuum of greater than – 85,000 Pa for approximately five min.

Nanoclay Cloisite Clay 20A and 93A, with platelets of about 1 nm, were used in this study. Data sample specifications were provided by Southern Clays. All the clays were heated in a vacuum oven at temperatures over 110 °C for 48 h before being immediately stored in a desiccator until use. 36 , 37 , 38

Substrates were copier transparency film IVR-65210 from InnoveraTM Technology Essentials. It is a poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) base approximate 100 μm in thickness with a proprietary acrylic co-polymer toner receptive coating. 39

2.2 Equipment and material characterization

An IKA T25 digital Ultra-Turrax® High Shear (HS) was used for the intercalating and exfoliation of the clays in the epoxy resin. Samples were high sheared for 2 h unless specified differently below. A Laurell WS-400B Spin Coater with a four-inch chuck was used for spin coating thin films. Hand mixed epoxies were deposited manually after degassing onto the chuck. Dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) of the epoxy composites were performed using a Q800 DMA (TA Instruments, Newcastle, DE) with a multi-strain recipe using a temperature ramp of 3 °C/min, a frequency of 1 Hz and a thin film/fiber clamp. Humidity control was controlled using a Suncore Humidifier in a 3.5 ft × 3.5 ft × 4 ft glove box, and the relative humidity (RH) was measured using an Omega CP.

2.3 Polymer and composite processing

2.3.1 Reaction preparation

Neat and composite epoxy solutions samples were reacted with amine at a PHR of 90. For nanocomposites, the appropriate weight of nanoparticles was added to the epoxy and then high-sheared for 120 min and allowed to cool to room temperature before reacting with the appropriate amount of amine, using high shearing mixing to obtain improved composite properties through partial exfoliation of the clays. 40 , 41

2.3.2 RPM and relative humidity dependent sample preparation

Samples used for characterizing the impact of RPM and RH on Marangoni cell thickness, width, storage modulus G′ and glass transition T g were prepared by adding the required amount of amine curing agent to the epoxy (neat or PNC) and gently stirred for 1 min, degassed for five min in a vacuum oven, and then removed from the chamber and allowed to react for the specified amount of time before depositing epoxy reaction and spinning sample. The substrate was then removed from the spin coater and cured in a vacuum oven for 4 h at 40 °C before allowing them to rest at room conditions for 3 days.

2.3.3 Extent of reaction sample preparation

Samples used for characterizing the impact of extent of reaction on Marangoni thickness and width were prepared by adding the measured amount of amine curing agent to the epoxy (neat or PNC) and gently stirred for 1 min, degassed for five min in a vacuum oven, and allowed to react for specified extent of reaction (10–60 min). Samples were then spun at the desired RPM. Substrate was then removed from the spin coater and cured in a vacuum oven for 4 h at 40 °C before allowing them to rest at room conditions for 3 days.

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Spin coater parameters impacting Marangoni cell formation

In order to test the impact of spin coating on the epoxy systems, 90 PHR samples were spin coated onto substrates at room temperature and then cured, as described in the methods section. Surface Figure 1(a) provides an image of a neat epoxy thin film. Due to its translucent nature, actual patterns visible to the eye are difficult to capture through a photograph. Concentration gradients developed through centripetal and elongation forces and the development of Marangoni cells can result in lower density cross-linking along Marangoni edges during spin coating. 42 , 43 , 44 So a sample was ‘rolled' in order to induce cracks to make them more visible under a microscope as can be seen in Figure 1(b). It should be noted that even though hexagonal formation in Marangoni-Benard convection is the likely outcome in uniform systems, due to other forces at play such as elongation, striation, and centripetal forces along with localized concentration gradient variation, surface deformation results in multiple polygons and shapes. 9 , 45 , 46

Figure 1: 
Marangoni surface morphology images of neat epoxy. In (a), photo is of thin film after removed from substrate. Due to translucent nature, the hexagonal pattern is very difficult to see. In (b), sample was ‘rolled’ to enhance cracking along edge of hexagons to improve microscope image of Marangoni effect.
Figure 1:

Marangoni surface morphology images of neat epoxy. In (a), photo is of thin film after removed from substrate. Due to translucent nature, the hexagonal pattern is very difficult to see. In (b), sample was ‘rolled’ to enhance cracking along edge of hexagons to improve microscope image of Marangoni effect.

The thickness of samples was measured after three days of cure. The Marangoni effect was visible to the naked eye at these conditions. The final thickness and percent error with respect to RPM is tabulated in Tables 1 and 2 below.

Table 1:

Film thickness (μm) of 90 PHR amine cured epoxy for given spin times at various RPM.

RPM 40[s] C 40[s] E 60[s] C 60[s] E 90[s] C 90[s] E 120[s] C 120[s] E
2,000 67.6 150.4 56.2 144.0 46.5 40.6 133.4
4,000 35.3 80.3 29.0 73.0 23.8 45.1 20.6 34.6
6,000 23.8 68.0 19.4 53.9 15.9 33.6 13.8 23.8
Table 2:

% Error of experimental values observed to Emslie’s approximation.

RPM 40 s (% error) 60 s (% error) 90 s (% error) 120 s (% error)
2,000 122.6 156.0 228.7
4,000 127.3 151.7 89.8 67.7
6,000 186.2 177.1 111.3 72.6

Emslie’s equation does not approximate the final film thickness due to Marangoni cell formation on the surface. To see if Washo et al. 24 conditions were pertinent, these epoxy-amine systems samples were processed under conditions where one system would generate Marangoni cell formation and the other would inhibit formation for comparison. Samples prepared at 60 % ± 2 RH and spun for 40 s did not produce visible Marangoni cells while those prepared at 33 % ± 5 % RH and spun for 40 s did generate cells. Thicknesses were measured using a standard micrometer. For samples at 60 % RH, the difference between Emslie’s Equation prediction and measured values were 2.13 %, 7.9 %, and 20.7 % for RPM of 2,000, 4,000, and 6,000 respectively. Obviously, Emslie’s Equation did not approximate samples with Marangoni cells (33 % RH). Out of curiosity, if one measured the center thickness (taken as the difference of film thickness first measured with a standard micrometer and then substracting the thickness measured at the center of the Marangoni cell using a point micrometer) Emslie’s equation predictions were significantly improved to −8.2 %, +16.6 %, and 26.1 % error for RPM’s of 2,000, 4,000, and 6,000 respectively, which is on a similar order of magnitude error to samples without Marangoni cell formation. The comparison of the film thickness for samples is provided in Figure 2. From Emslie’s equation calculations, it would be expected that shear thinning polymers would overestimate the thickness, which is not observed. However, this is most likely due to the fact that Emslie’s equation assumes an initial constant film thickness which was approximated by the volume of sample deposited, divided by substrate surface area. However, system limitations required the deposit of sample onto the center of the spin coater, which then was initiated. The time required for the polymer to flow across the substrate before it is flung off could account for the underpredicted thickness instead of overprediction. For the Marangoni cell depth, final thickness measurements were fitted to Equation (4), for which n = −0.27 ± 0.01 and A = 14.03 ± 1.04. Both A and n are in excellent agreement with other similar published works. 31 , 47

Figure 2: 
Comparison of spin coated thickness at 40 s at different relative humidities and the Marangoni cell depth measurement (33RH_C) compared to Emslie’s (Equation (3)) approximation.
Figure 2:

Comparison of spin coated thickness at 40 s at different relative humidities and the Marangoni cell depth measurement (33RH_C) compared to Emslie’s (Equation (3)) approximation.

To better understand how RPM and spin time impact Marangoni cell formation of epoxy spin coated nanocomposites, neat and 2 wt% MMT samples were spun at different RPM. Figure 3 displays the impact on cell diameter, measured manually with a micrometer, as RPM was varied for both neat (Nxx) and 2 wt% 20A MMT composite (Cxx) epoxies spun for either 45 or 75 s. Lines are provided to guide the eyes. Further data provided in the Supplementary Material.

Figure 3: 
Marangoni cell width dependence on RPM and spin time for 90 PHR cured neat (N) or 2 wt% MMT composite (C) epoxies spun for 45 or 75 s.
Figure 3:

Marangoni cell width dependence on RPM and spin time for 90 PHR cured neat (N) or 2 wt% MMT composite (C) epoxies spun for 45 or 75 s.

Except for the N75, the difference between 1,000 and 2,000 is within one standard deviation, which all have large ranges (a quarter of the average size in some instances). With 45 s spin time, there is less than 2.5 % change in cell dimensions between 1,000 and 2,000 RPM. As RPM or spin time increases, Marangoni cell width, in general, decreases to a limit of approximately one mm with one σ of approximately 0.3 mm. Additionally, the composite samples appear to result in larger cell formation when compared with the neat epoxies for a given spin time. The exact cause of the larger cell formation is uncertain. It might be due to the nanoparticles’ impact on flows due to differences in viscosities or the change induced by a concentration profile and surface tension.

When considering the temperature effect on the Marangoni cell formation, even if hf was assumed to be 0.02 cm (thickness at initial substate coverage before draw down), and ∇T was assumed to be 2 K (high for this exothermic reaction), the temperature dependent Ma number <1. This is well below 80, indicating that temperature is not a significant driving force in the formation of Marangoni cells. The relatively thin sample thickness results in the temperature gradient having minimal effect. 5 , 15 As such, the concentration gradient is the primary driving force for the development of the Marangoni cells. 18 , 19

To further explore the impact of changing composition on the Marangoni cell diameter, experiments investigating the role of extent of reaction and RPM and their impact on cell formation were conducted. The RPM was varied from 2,000 to 6,000, and for PHR 90 neat and composite samples. Samples were spun and placed in the vacuum oven and cured at 40 °C. Results are presented in Figure 4. As the extent of reaction increases, so does the Marangoni cell width. In prior work, after an initial decrease, viscosity increases as the extent of reaction progresses. 43 This suggests Marangoni cell width has a strong dependence on the viscosity of the reacting solution. The lower RPM (2,000–4,000) had cell widths increase more than 200 %, while at 6,000 RPM, the neat samples increased only 60 % and composite samples only 23 % respectively. The greater the RPM, the smaller the change in cell width. Centripetal forces may play a role in the alignment of molecules and the movement of concentration gradients, impacting cell width. Shenk et al. 43 demonstrated that cell edges have lower cross-linking bonding and could be etched away, leading to new composite structures and possibilities. Additionally, they demonstrated that post curing can effectively increase composite strength. It was hypothesized that this was due to the reverse reaction of carbamate back into its amine constituents, leading to additional cross-linking occurring. 43 , 48 Using their hypothesis, it could be suggested that future work might focus on controlling geometries and shapes to target multilayer composite systems. If etching is utilized to remove cell edges, then one could choose different filler materials with targeted properties such as strength or conductivity to produce composites to meet desired properties.

Figure 4: 
Marangoni cell width dependence on reaction time for 2 wt% MMT composites (C) and neat (N) epoxies spun at 2,000 (2 k) 4,000 (4 k) and 6,000 (6 k) RPM.
Figure 4:

Marangoni cell width dependence on reaction time for 2 wt% MMT composites (C) and neat (N) epoxies spun at 2,000 (2 k) 4,000 (4 k) and 6,000 (6 k) RPM.

The Marangoni cell can also be quantified by overall sample thickness. In Figure 5, the differences in sample thicknesses with respect to the extent of reaction for both neat and composite samples at 4,000 and 6,000 RPM are presented. The extent of reaction is measured as the time from the end of stirring until the epoxy is deposited on the substrate and spun. Samples deposited within the first 20 min of the reaction show a decrease in thickness up to 41 %. This might be explained in the nearly 10 % decrease in viscosity occurring during initial 20 min of a reaction before viscosity begins to increase as reported elsewhere. 43 , 49 After 40 min, the thickness of neat and composite samples spun at 4,000 RPM increases drastically. This was due to bubble entrapment visible to the naked eye at the edges of the Marangoni cells. The bubbles were induced during the stirring of the epoxy and curing agent and were not completely removed during degassing. After spinning, they are visible to the naked eye. Upon curing, most bubbles are removed from the surface of the epoxy at the macro level. However, the samples at 4,000 RPM with extent of reaction past 40 min, bubbles are not removed. At 6,000 RPM, there is sufficient centripetal forces to minimize bubble formation, which disappear during the curing in the vacuum oven.

Figure 5: 
Marangoni cell formation for neat (N) and 2 wt% MMT composite (C) epoxy with respect to extent of reaction.
Figure 5:

Marangoni cell formation for neat (N) and 2 wt% MMT composite (C) epoxy with respect to extent of reaction.

The impact of bubble formation and thickness variation with changes in RPM as a function of time are also shown in Figure 6. The data represented is for neat (N) and 2 wt% MMT 20A composites (C) at RPM settings of 2,000 (2 k) and 6,000 (6 k). The setting of the ramp rate, r1, resulted in the RPM set point being reached at the end of the spin time. The max ramp rate, r20, resulted in the RPM set point being reached nearly instantaneously. Bubble formation occurred for composites processed at r1, even at 6,000 RPM, because the samples at lower ramp rates did not spin for significant amounts of time at the higher RPM. Samples at 2,000 RPM all had deeper well depths and bubble entrapment for reasons explained above. Samples spun at 6,000 RPM but at r1 were thicker overall. This is due to an “effective RPM” significantly below 6,000, and thus well depths of the same magnitude as those spun at 2,000 to 4,000 RPM. 22 , 50

Figure 6: 
Film thickness dependence for neat (N) and 2 wt% MMT composites (C) at different ramp rates r1 (slow) and r20 (instantaneous) for 2,000 (2 k) and 6,000 (6 k) RPM.
Figure 6:

Film thickness dependence for neat (N) and 2 wt% MMT composites (C) at different ramp rates r1 (slow) and r20 (instantaneous) for 2,000 (2 k) and 6,000 (6 k) RPM.

The objective of the characterization of the spin coater was to develop a more fundamental understanding of how the operation of this instrument might impact material morphology and Marangoni morphology development. Marangoni cell width decreases as RPM is increased and increases as the extent of reaction increases. The Marangoni cell depth decreases with decreasing viscosity during the initial stages of curing. However, as the extent of reaction and viscosity of the system increases, well depth increases due to bubble formation for the lower spin rates developed around the cell edges.

3.2 Relative humidity, modulus and the Marangoni cell

The Marangoni instability not only influences the surface roughness, but it also can impact material properties. Shenk et al. 45 demonstrated that Marangoni cell formation occurs at the two lower relative humidity conditions for this epoxy-amine system due to the reaction of the amine with CO2 in the presence of water vapor resulting in carbamate. Carbamate formation lowers the surface tension, creating localized concentration gradients. As the RH increases, however, a saturation of carbamate formation across the surface results in a more uniform concentration resulting in a reduction of the surface tension gradient. Thus, the mechanism for the instability is removed, and uniform surfaces result. Neat, 1.0 wt% and 2.5 wt% 93A MMT epoxy samples were spin coated at low (22 % RH), mid (40 % RH) and high (67 % RH) humidity to analyze material properties under conditions when Marangoni cells are generated (22 and 40 %) compared to those which are not (67 %). Measurements of the materials’s storage modulus (G′) and glass transition temperature (T g ) were recorded. Results are provided in Figure 7.

Figure 7: 
Modulus of neat, 1 wt% and 2.5 wt% MMT composites with respect to humidity for a 90 PHR epoxy spin coated film.
Figure 7:

Modulus of neat, 1 wt% and 2.5 wt% MMT composites with respect to humidity for a 90 PHR epoxy spin coated film.

The 2.5 wt% MMT composites’ storage modulus outperformed the neat and 1 wt% epoxy composite. This was anticipated, and is due to better partial exfoliation obtained from an increase in solution viscosity during high shear, enabling the shearing of the platelets and the larger numbers of clay platelets interacting with the epoxy and enhancement of composite modulus. 40 , 51 , 52 , 53 Figure is provided in the Supplementary Material as an example of partial exfoliation of the clay using our high shearing method. An in-depth analysis of the impact of high shear pre-mixing treatments on enhanced exfoliation and the improvement of mechanical properties for this epoxy-amine system is beyond the scope of this analysis and is given in Shenk et al. 45 , 48

Both 1 wt% MMT and neat epoxy thin films were hard to remove from the substrate without tearing while peeling. This is indicative of lower storage modulus and curing conditions not optimal for obtaining the highest storage modulus possible, resulting in a greater likelihood of more compliant (lower crosslinking) material. Though higher crosslinking would occur from further curing at higher temperatures, this study was interested in exploring the control of the Marangoni cell, and the impact on material properties. All epoxy thin films spun at 22 % RH had significant surface roughness and exhibited Marangoni cells. Samples spun at 40 % RH exhibited larger Marangoni hexagons than those spun at 22 % RH. Thin films produced in 67 % RH did not exhibit Marangoni patterns. It appears that as the RH increases, so does the carbamate/carbonate formation on the surface, and thus a reduction in the driving force (concentration gradient) for the formation of the Marangoni cells as reported by Shenk . 43 , 45 Shenk et al. also demonstrated more compliant material in the higher RH samples due to the formation of carbamates during the curing process. Additionally, at the curing temperature, the cure of the epoxy becomes diffusion limited, and thus conversion of the oxirane (epoxy functional group) is limited, resulting in a lower cross linking density and much more compliant material. 54 , 55 A combination of these effects probably explains the decrease in storage module between 67 % and 40 % for the neat and composites. The 1 wt% samples were more greatly impacted than the 2 wt% due to insufficient nanoparticle/polymer interactions to overcome the carbamate formation reducing composite crosslinking and chain interactions. It is not known why modulus increased from 22 % RH to 40 % RH, though the lower RH surfaces have a larger number of Marangoni cell formations. This will require future research.

The material’s T g was also measured. Results are provided in Figure 8. For a given RH, 1 wt% composites demonstrated a maximum in T g . The 2.5 wt% composites resulted in the lowest T g .

Figure 8: 
Glass transition temperatures of different compositions of 90 PHR amine cured epoxy.
Figure 8:

Glass transition temperatures of different compositions of 90 PHR amine cured epoxy.

The addition of MMT to nanocomposites can result in an increase in T g  > 10 °C, and can also result in a decrease of T g  > 10 °C. 53 , 56 The increase in T g is normally attributed to an increase in exfoliation, which lowers the polymer chains segmental motion due to it being anchored to the more abundant clay surface. On the other hand, some research has demonstrated a decrease in T g . The organoclay may homopolymerize with the epoxy resin during the mixing if at elevated temperatures, which results in the decrease of cross-linking density when the polymer is cured with the amine. This decrease in cross-linking density leads to a subsequent decrease in T g . It may also be due to high temperatures degrading the organic modifier in the clay such that it separates and acts as a small chain lubricant, decreasing T g . 57 , 58 In either case, each acts as a plasticizer. It would be understandable if one were only comparing the neat epoxy to 1 wt% composite and attribute the increase in T g to intercalation and exfoliation, in agreement with Lu and Nutt, 59 Kaya and Tanoglu 60 and Miyagawa et al. 61 If one were comparing the loading between 1 wt% and 2.5 wt%, one could conclude plasticization is occurring due to the temperatures reached during high shear whether via homopolymerization or lubrication.

The increase in T g from neat to 1 wt% and the observed decrease in T g as the MMT concentration is further increased to 2.5 wt% suggests competing effects. For low nanoparticle loading, the increase in intercalation/exfoliation impact is greater than the homopolymerization or lubrication effects, such that 1 wt% shows a higher T g to that of the neat polymer. This is believed to be the effect of polymer chains entering the clay gallery resulting in the restriction of mobility of the polymer chains. However, as the clay content increases, the impact of additional small molecules being added to the system by the temperature and high shear degradation function as lubricants, decreasing T g . Additionally, as the loading is increased, there could be an increase in homopolymerization such that it dominates the effects that intercalation/exfoliation might have on increasing T g , resulting in the overall decrease. Both lubrication and homopolymerization could be effects resulting in the overall decrease of T g as the organo-modified nanoparticle loading is increased.

For this system, as the RH increased, T g increased. Generally, for polymeric systems, as RH increases T g decreases due to plasticization and lower crosslinking. At sufficiently high RH, a surface phenomenon called blushing occurs. Amine blushing is a side reaction occurring in epoxy-amine cured films when they are exposed to CO2 in the presence of sufficient water vapor at the dew point. 62 , 63 This reaction results in carbamate/carbonate formation, decreasing the cross-linking of the network as amine reacts with the CO2 in the environment, reducing the composite’s modulus and T g . 64 , 65 Since the temperature during spin coating at the three different RHs were below 70 °C, blushing is not expected (70 °C is below the dew point for 67 % RH). Though the role of blushing is minimized, 66 Shenk et al. 43 demonstrated there is carbamate formation, which may still result in plasticization. The exact reason for the greater T g at 67 % RH versus the lower RH is not known. Shenk et al. 43 demonstrated after sufficient curing, cracking initiates at the edge of the cells when stress is applied, indicating lower cross-linking at the edges. 1 Since Marangoni cell formation is inhibited when the spin coating environment is above 60 % RH, it is possible a lower cross-linking density along the Marangoni cell boundary would result in a lower T g .

4 Conclusions

This study explored the impact of the environmental and spin coating parameters’ influence on the formation of Marangoni cells using a spin coater for amine cured epoxy thin films. The spin coated films’ final thicknesses, when Marangoni cell formation was considered, was fit to a power law exponent n = 0.27. The formation of Marangoni cells was dependent on the RH. The manipulation of these cells (their size and depth) could be controlled by varying spin time, RPM, ramp rate, and extent of reaction. In general, as the extent of reaction progressed, Marangoni cell depth and width increased. As spin coating RPM was increased, cell dimensions decreased. Marangoni cells formed at RH below 60 % due to carbamate dependent concentration gradients. Their formation was demonstrated to have a detrimental impact on material properties. Above 60 % RH carbamate formation inhibited sufficient cross-linking, resulting in lower storage modulus. Thus, controlling the environment in which these epoxies are processed is extremely important. The greater importance of this could be in future work where controlling the different geometries and boundary layers through etching, etc. creates new, targeted composite properties and structures.

Composites, in general, performed better than neat epoxy. High sheared MMT nanocomposites increased storage modulus from 12 to almost 50 %, depending on clay type and loading and curing regiment. Though too high of relative humidity resulted in a decrease in performance for the PNC. Also, possible competing effects of MMT limiting mobility and thus increasing T g versus the plasticization or homopolymerization decreasing T g were observed and believed to describe the surprise reduction of the glass transition temperature of higher MMT weight composite films.


Corresponding author: Timothy M. Shenk, School of Engineering, Campbell University, 143 Main Street, Buies Creek, NC 28339, USA, E-mail:

Funding source: National Science Foundation EASPI

Award Identifier / Grant number: NSF-08-603-1015592

Award Identifier / Grant number: NNX10AL27H

Award Identifier / Grant number: DE-AC52-06NA25396

Award Identifier / Grant number: DE-AC04-94AL85000

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr. Lori Groven for her helpful feedback. We would also like to acknowledge the generous financial support provided by the Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering at SDSMT.

  1. Research ethics: Not applicable.

  2. Informed consent: Not applicable.

  3. Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission. TS provided research, data analysis, and writing of manuscript. RW and KB provided guidance and revisions to manuscript.

  4. Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning Tools: None used.

  5. Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  6. Research funding: EAPSI NSF Grant NSF-08-603-1015592, CINT contract DE-AC52-06NA25396, SNL contract DE-AC04-94AL85000, South Dakota Space Grant Consortium grant NNX10AL27H.

  7. Data availability: The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author (TMS). The data are not publicly available due to privacy/ethical/legal/commercial restrictions.

References

1. Wu, S. Polymer Interface and Adhesion; M. Dekker: New York City, NY, 1982.Search in Google Scholar

2. Ross, J. R. The Effect of Gibbs Adsorption on Marangoni Instability; Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1974.Search in Google Scholar

3. de Gennes, P. G. Instabilities During the Evaporation of a Film: Non-glassy Polymer + Volatile Solvent. Eur. Phys. J. E 2001, 6 (5), 421–424; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10189-001-8055-3.Search in Google Scholar

4. Ibáñez, J. L.; Velarde, M. G. Hydrochemical Stability of an Interface between Two Immiscible Liquids: The Role of Langmuir-Hinshelwood Saturation Law. J. Phys. France 1977, 38 (12), 1479–1483; https://doi.org/10.1051/jphys.0197700380120147900.Search in Google Scholar

5. Maillard, M.; Motte, L.; Ngo, A. T.; Pileni, M. P. Rings and Hexagons Made of Nanocrystals: A Marangoni Effect. J. Phys. Chem. B 2000, 104 (50), 11871–11877; https://doi.org/10.1021/jp002605n.Search in Google Scholar

6. Schwarzenberger, K.; Eckert, K.; Odenbach, S. Relaxation Oscillations between Marangoni Cells and Double Diffusive Fingers in Areactiveliquid–Liquid System. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2012, 68, 11; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2011.10.033.Search in Google Scholar

7. Kang, Y. T.; Akisawa, A.; Kashiwagi, T. Visualization and Model Development of Marangoni Convection in NH3-H2O System. Int. J. Refrig. 1999, 22, 10; https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-7007-99-00019-5.Search in Google Scholar

8. Bragard, J.; Slavtchev, S. G.; Lebon, G. Nonlinear Solutal Marangoni Instability in a Liquid Layer with an Adsorbing Upper Surface. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1994, 168 (2), 402–413; https://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.1994.1436.Search in Google Scholar

9. Zhang, A. C.; Ohno, K.; Composto, R. J. Marangoni-Induced Honeycomb Structures in Spin-Coated Polymer Nanocomposite Films. J. Phys. Chem. B 2024, 128 (49), 12268–12278; https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.4c06630.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

10. Sorensen, T. S. Marangoni Instability at a Spherical Interface. Breakdown of Fluid Drops at Low Surface Tension and Cytokinetic Phenomena in the Living Cell. J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2: Mol. Chem. Phys. 1980, 76 (0), 1170–1195; https://doi.org/10.1039/f29807601170.Search in Google Scholar

11. Zierep, J.; Oertel, H. Convective Transport and Instability Phenomena; Braun: Karlsruhe, FRG, 1982.Search in Google Scholar

12. Sternling, C. V.; Scriven, L. E. Interfacial Turbulence: Hydrodynamic Instability and the Marangoni Effect. AIChE J. 1959, 5 (4), 514–523; https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.690050421.Search in Google Scholar

13. Scriven, L. E.; Sternling, C. V. The Marangoni Effects. Nature 1960, 187 (4733), 186–188; https://doi.org/10.1038/187186a0.Search in Google Scholar

14. Warmuziński, K. Marangoni Instability during Absorption Accompanied by Chemical Reaction. Periodica Polytechnica Seria Chemica Engeneria 1994, 38 (1-2), 8.Search in Google Scholar

15. Katzenstein, J. M.; Janes, D. W.; Cushen, J. D.; Hira, N. B.; McGuffin, D. L.; Prisco, N. A.; Ellison, C. J. Patterning by Photochemically Directing the Marangoni Effect. ACS Macro Lett. 2012, 1 (10), 1150–1154; https://doi.org/10.1021/mz300400p.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

16. Pearson, J. R. A. On Convection Cells Induced by Surface Tension. J. Fluid Mech. 1958, 4 (05), 489–500. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112058000616.Search in Google Scholar

17. Maillard, M.; Motte, L.; Pileni, M. P. Rings and Hexagons Made of Nanocrystals. Adv. Mater. 2001, 13 (3), 200–204.10.1002/1521-4095(200102)13:3<200::AID-ADMA200>3.0.CO;2-PSearch in Google Scholar

18. Birnie, D. P. Rational Solvent Selection Strategies to Combat Striation Formation during Spin Coating of Thin Films. J. Mater. Res. 2001, 16 (04), 1145–1154; https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2001.0158.Search in Google Scholar

19. Birnie, D. P.; Manley, M. Combined Flow and Evaporation of Fluid on a Spinning Disk. Phys. Fluids 1997, 9 (4), 870–875; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.869519.Search in Google Scholar

20. Emslie, A. G.; Bonner, F. T.; Peck, L. G. Flow of a Viscous Liquid on a Rotating Disk. J. Appl. Phys. 1958, 29 (5), 858–862; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1723300.Search in Google Scholar

21. Espig, H.; Hoyle, R. Waves in a Thin Liquid Layer on a Rotating Disk. J. Fluid Mech. 1965, 22 (4), 671–677; https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112065001052.Search in Google Scholar

22. Birnie, D. P.; Hau, S. K.; Kamber, D. S.; Kaz, D. M. Effect of Ramping-Up Rate on Film Thickness for Spin-On Processing. J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Electron. 2005, 16 (11), 715–720; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-005-4973-6.Search in Google Scholar

23. Meyerhofer, D. Characteristics of Resist Films Produced by Spinning. J. Appl. Phys. 1978, 49 (7), 3993–3997; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.325357.Search in Google Scholar

24. Washo, B. D. Rheology and Modeling of the Spin Coating Process. IBM J. Res. Dev. 1977, 21 (2), 190–198; https://doi.org/10.1147/rd.212.0190.Search in Google Scholar

25. Bornside, D. E.; Macosko, C. W.; Scriven, L. E. Spin Coating: One-Dimensional Model. J. Appl. Phys. 1989, 66 (11), 5185–5193; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.343754.Search in Google Scholar

26. Yonkoski, R. K.; Soane, D. S. Model for Spin Coating in Microelectronic Applications. J. Appl. Phys. 1992, 72 (2), 15; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.351859.Search in Google Scholar

27. Flack, W. W.; Soong, D. S.; Bell, A. T.; Hess, D. W. A Mathematical Model for Spin Coating of Polymer Resists. J. Appl. Phys. 1984, 56 (4), 1199–1206; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.334049.Search in Google Scholar

28. Tortai, J. H. Modeling of Ultra Thin Resist Film Structure after Spin-Coating and Post-application Bake. Microelectron. Eng. 2004, 73–74, 223–227; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mee.2004.02.044.Search in Google Scholar

29. Holloway, K. E.; Habdas, P.; Semsarillar, N.; Burfitt, K.; de Bruyn, J. R. Spreading and Fingering in Spin Coating. Physical Review E 2007, 75 (4), 046308; https://doi.org/10.1103/physreve.75.046308.Search in Google Scholar

30. Tsui, O. K. C.; Wang, Y. J.; Lee, F. K.; Lam, C. H.; Yang, Z. Equilibrium Pathway of Spin-Coated Polymer Films. Macromolecules 2008, 41 (4), 1465–1468; https://doi.org/10.1021/ma702374g.Search in Google Scholar

31. Lawrence, C. J. The Mechanics of Spin Coating of Polymer Films. Phys. Fluids 1988, 31 (10), 2786–2795; https://doi.org/10.1063/1.866986.Search in Google Scholar

32. Kim, S. H.; Misner, M. J.; Xu, T.; Kimura, M.; Russell, T. P. Highly Oriented and Ordered Arrays from Block Copolymers via Solvent Evaporation. Adv. Mater. 2004, 16 (3), 226–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.200304906.Search in Google Scholar

33. Seifrid, M. T.; Oosterhout, S. D.; Toney, M. F.; Bazan, G. C. Kinetic Versus Thermodynamic Orientational Preferences for a Series of Isomorphic Molecular Semiconductors. ACS Omega 2018, 3 (8), 10198–10204; https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.8b01435.Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

34. Moreira, J.; Vale, A. C.; Alves, N. M. Spin-coated Freestanding Films for Biomedical Applications. J. Mater. Chem. B 2021, 9 (18), 3778–3799; https://doi.org/10.1039/d1tb00233c.Search in Google Scholar PubMed

35. EPON® Resin Structural Reference Manual: EPON® Resin-EPI-Cure® Curing Agents-HELOXY Modifiers; 2001. http://www.engineering.com/Search?q=epon%20manual%20table%2012.Search in Google Scholar

36. Brown, J.; Rhoney, I.; Pethrick, R. A. Epoxy Resin Based Nanocomposites: 1. Diglycidylether of Bisphenol A (DGEBA) with Triethylenetetramine (TETA). Polym. Int. 2004, 53 (12), 2130–2137; https://doi.org/10.1002/pi.1638.Search in Google Scholar

37. Velmurugan, R.; Mohan, T. P. Epoxy-Clay Nanocomposites and Hybrids: Synthesis and Characterization. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 2009, 28 (1), 17–37; https://doi.org/10.1177/0731684407081439.Search in Google Scholar

38. Ingram, S.; Rhoney, I.; Liggat, J. J.; Hudson, N. E.; Pethrick, R. A. Some Factors Influencing Exfoliation and Physical Property Enhancement in Nanoclay Epoxy Resins Based on Diglycidyl Ethers of Bisphenol A and F. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2007, 106 (1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.25474.Search in Google Scholar

39. Carls, J. C. PET Transparency Lead Development Engineer at 3M, Private Email Communications, 2014.Search in Google Scholar

40. Bensadoun, F.; Kchit, N.; Billotte, C.; Trochu, F.; Ruiz, E. A Comparative Study of Dispersion Techniques for Nanocomposite Made with Nanoclays and an Unsaturated Polyester Resin. J. Nanomater. 2011, 2011 (1), 406087. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/406087.Search in Google Scholar

41. Agag, T.; Takeichi, T. Preparation and Cure Behavior of Organoclay-Modified Allyl-Functional Benzoxazine Resin and the Properties of Their Nanocomposites. Polym. Compos. 2008, 29 (7), 750–757; https://doi.org/10.1002/pc.20448.Search in Google Scholar

42. Giraud, M.; Nguyen, T.; Gu, X.; VanLandingham, M. R. Effects of Stoichiometry and Epoxy Molecular Mass on Wettability and Interfacial Microstructures of Amine-Cured Epoxies. In Proc. Adhesion Society Meeting, Vol. 260, 2001.Search in Google Scholar

43. Shenk, T. M.; Benjamin, K. M.; Winter, R. M. Atomic Force Microscopy and Scanning Electron Microscopy Characterization of the Controlling of Surface Morphology of Epoxy-Amine-Cured Spin-Coated Films. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2024, 141 (6), e54925. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.54925.Search in Google Scholar

44. Vanlandingham, M.; Eduljee, R.; GillespieJrJ. Relationships Between Stoichiometry, Microstructure, and Properties for Amine-Cured Epoxies. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 1999, 71 (5), 699–712.10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19990131)71:5<699::AID-APP4>3.3.CO;2-4Search in Google Scholar

45. Shenk, T. M.; Benjamin, K. M.; Winter, R. M. Impact of Carbamate Formation on the Surface Tension of Epoxy-Amine Curing Systems. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2023, 63 (5), 1347–1358. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.26288.Search in Google Scholar

46. Maroto, J. A.; Pérez-Muñuzuri, V.; Romero-Cano, M. S. Introductory Analysis of Bénard–Marangoni Convection. Eur. J. Phys. 2007, 28 (2), 311; https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/28/2/016.Search in Google Scholar

47. Lima, J. P. H.; Andrade, A. M. Morphological Analysis of Poly(o-Methoxyaniline) Thin-Films Deposited by Spin Coating Technique. J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Electron. 2006, 17 (8), 593–596; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-006-0004-5.Search in Google Scholar

48. Shenk, T. M.; Winter, R. M.; Benjamin, K. M. Experimental and Computational Characterization and Development of Epoxy System for Multifunctional Multilayer Nanocomposites. S. D. Sch. Mine Technol. Rapid City, South Dakota 2016, 1, 194–221.Search in Google Scholar

49. Abbott, J. R.; Higgins, B. G. Surface Tension of a Curing Epoxy. J. Polym. Sci., Part A: Polym. Chem. 1988, 26 (7), 1985–1988; https://doi.org/10.1002/pola.1988.080260724.Search in Google Scholar

50. Matsuba, I.; Matsumoto, K. Transient Behavior of Spin-Coated Resist Film Thickness Based on Invariance of Viscous Fluid under Similarity Transformation. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 1986, 33 (9), 1263–1269; https://doi.org/10.1109/T-ED.1986.22656.Search in Google Scholar

51. Mittal, V. Polymer Layered Silicate Nanocomposites: A Review. Materials 2009, 2 (3), 992; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma2030992.Search in Google Scholar

52. Surendran, A.; Pionteck, J.; Kalarikkal, N.; Thomas, S. Mechanical Responses of Epoxy/Cloisite Nanocomposites. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2022, 281, 125755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2022.125755.Search in Google Scholar

53. Azeez, A. A.; Rhee, K. Y.; Park, S. J.; Hui, D. Epoxy Clay Nanocomposites – Processing, Properties and Applications: A Review. Composites Part B Engineering 2013, 45 (1), 308–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.04.012.Search in Google Scholar

54. Sun, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Moon, K.-S.; Wong, C. P. Glass Transition and Relaxation Behavior of Epoxy Nanocomposites. J. Polym. Sci. B Polym. Phys. 2004, 42 (21), 3849–3858; https://doi.org/10.1002/polb.20251.Search in Google Scholar

55. Mijovic, J.; Shen, M.; Sy, J. W.; Mondragon, I. Dynamics and Morphology in Nanostructured Thermoset Network/Block Copolymer Blends During Network Formation. Macromolecules 2000, 33 (14), 5235–5244; https://doi.org/10.1021/ma991894e.Search in Google Scholar

56. Ray, S. S.; Okamoto, M. Polymer/Layered Silicate Nanocomposites: A Review from Preparation to Processing. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2003, 28 (11), 1539–1641; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2003.08.002.Search in Google Scholar

57. Liu, T.; Tjiu, W. C.; Tong, Y.; He, C.; Goh, S. S.; Chung, T.-S. Morphology and Fracture Behavior of Intercalated Epoxy/Clay Nanocomposites. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2004, 94 (3), 1236–1244; https://doi.org/10.1002/app.21033.Search in Google Scholar

58. Liu, W.; Hoa, S. V.; Pugh, M. Organoclay-modified High Performance Epoxy Nanocomposites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 2005, 65 (2), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2004.07.012.Search in Google Scholar

59. Lu, H.; Nutt, S. Restricted Relaxation in Polymer Nanocomposites Near the Glass Transition. Macromolecules 2003, 36 (11), 4010–4016; https://doi.org/10.1021/ma034049b.Search in Google Scholar

60. Kaya, E.; Tanoğlu, M.; Okur, S. Layered Clay/Epoxy Nanocomposites: Thermomechanical, Flame Retardancy, and Optical Properties. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2008, 109 (2), 834–840; https://doi.org/10.1002/app.28168.Search in Google Scholar

61. Miyagawa, H.; Rich, M. J.; Drzal, L. T. Amine-Cured Epoxy/Clay Nanocomposites. I. Processing and Chemical Characterization. J. Polym. Sci. B Polym. Phys. 2004, 42 (23), 4384–4390; https://doi.org/10.1002/polb.20288.Search in Google Scholar

62. Bell, J. P.; Reffner, J. A.; Petrie, S. Amine-cured Epoxy Resins: Adhesion Loss Due to Reaction with Air. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 1977, 21 (4), 1095–1102; https://doi.org/10.1002/app.1977.070210423.Search in Google Scholar

63. Hare, C. H. Protective Coatings: Fundamentals of Chemistry and Composition; SSPC: Pittsburgh, PA, 1999.Search in Google Scholar

64. Croll, S. G.; Research, N. R. C. C. D. o. B. Residual Stress in a Solventless Amine-Cured Epoxy Coating; National Research Council, Division of Building Research: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1979.Search in Google Scholar

65. Croll, S. G. Atmospheric Gases and the Hardening of an Amine-Cured Epoxy Coating. J. Coating Technol. 1980, 52 (664), 65–69.Search in Google Scholar

66. Burton, B. L. Amine Blushing Problem – No Sweat. In Society of Plastic Industry; Fall: The Woodlands, Texas, 2001; pp. 1–17.Search in Google Scholar


Supplementary Material

This article contains supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/polyeng-2025-0034).


Received: 2025-02-20
Accepted: 2025-06-15
Published Online: 2025-07-02
Published in Print: 2025-08-26

© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 24.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/polyeng-2025-0034/html?lang=en&srsltid=AfmBOopoNYwZXgyGjMeqpvo5TGPjAIDH-1CbCnzUkKhDjlbYxN7cGs2Q
Scroll to top button