Preparation and thermo-responsive properties of poly(acrylamide-co-acrylonitrile)/layered double hydroxide composite gas barrier membrane
Source abstract
Abstract
Thermo-responsive gas barrier membranes were fabricated using acrylamide–acrylonitrile copolymers and layered double hydroxides. The membranes exhibited temperature-dependent behavior, showing enhanced water vapor barrier properties below 40 °C and reduced performance at 50 °C. Such characteristics are attractive for packaging applications in logistics, where fluctuating temperatures can affect perishable products. By providing stronger barrier properties at lower temperatures and allowing increased permeability at higher temperatures, these membranes may help mitigate condensation-related damage during transportation. FT-IR analysis revealed a slight low-wavenumber shift in the amide absorption peaks upon LDH incorporation, suggesting molecular-level interactions between the copolymer matrix and the inorganic layers. These findings indicate that combining UCST-type copolymers with LDH fillers offers a promising approach for developing membranes with tunable gas barrier performance for future smart packaging systems.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Membrane Separation and Gas Transport · Membrane Separation Technologies · Fuel Cells and Related Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
National Institute of Technology, Yuge College
Graduate School of Maritime Science, Kobe University
Research Center for Membrane and Film Technology, Kobe University
References (22)
Show source-provided references
1. 1) D. Hara, TOSOH Research & Technology Review 57, 39 (2013).
2. 2) T. Sato, J. Clay Sci. Soc. Jpn. 41, 26 (2001).
3. 3) K. Kuraoka, JPI Journal 49(12), 20 (2011).
4. 4) H. Liu, Z. Lv, W. Yang, A. Li, J. Liu, Q. Zhang and Z. Jiao, Foods 12, 2403 (2023).10.3390/foods12122403 ↗
5. 5) L. Zhang, M. Zhang, C. L. Law and Y. Ma, Food Packaging Shelf 38, 101126 (2023).10.1016/j.fpsl.2023.101126 ↗
6. 6) T. Aizawa, M. Kubota and T. Ebina, Appl. Clay Sci. 226, 106571 (2022).10.1016/j.clay.2022.106571 ↗
7. 7) S. Ogawa, J. Surf. Finish. Soc. Jpn. 61, 670 (2010).
8. 8) T. Ebina, High Performance Paper Society 47, 63 (2008).
9. 9) A. Yamazaki, Kagaku to kyouiku (Science and Education) 68, 356 (2020).
10. 10) T. Shiono, K. Yamashiro, K. Kuraoka and T. Okumiya, J. Packaging Sci. Technol. Jpn. 23, 131 (2014).
11. 11) K. Haraguchi, H. J. Li, K. Matsuda, T. Takehisa and E. Elliott, Macromolecules 38, 3482 (2005).10.1021/ma047431c ↗
12. 12) T. Tanaka, D. Fillmore, S. Sun, I. Nishio, G. Swislow and A. Shah, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 1636 (1980).10.1103/PhysRevLett.45.1636 ↗
13. 13) S. Ikeda, T. Murakami and K. Kuraoka, J. Packaging Sci. Technol. Jpn. 32, 265 (2023).
14. 14) S. Ikeda, T. Murakami and K. Kuraoka, J. Packaging Sci. Technol. Jpn. 26, 123 (2017).
15. 15) A. Auge and Y. Zhao, RSC Adv. 6, 70616 (2016).10.1039/C6RA12720G ↗
16. 16) Z. Liu, R. Ma, M. Osada, N. Iyi, Y. Ebina, K. Takada and T. Sasaki, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 4872 (2006).10.1021/ja0584471 ↗
17. 17) M. Iida, K. Yoshikawa, M. Togo and A. Nakahira, J. Jpn. Soc. Powder Powder Metall. 64, 595 (2017).10.2497/jjspm.64.595 ↗
18. 18) R. Cooksey, Food Technol.-Chicago 53, 60 (1999).
19. 19) K. Lahtinen and J. Kuusipalo, TAPPI European PLACE Conference (2007).
20. 20) Q. Qin, Y. Hu, J. Wang, Y. Yang, T. Lei, Z. Cui, S. Guo and S. Qin, Nanoscale Adv. 5, 2873 (2023).10.1039/D3NA00087G ↗
21. 21) X. Guo, M. Tang, N. Wang, L. Li, Y. Wu, X. Chen, J. Qin, K. Zhang and X. Lu, Polym. Polym. Compos. 27, 287 (2013).
22. 22) G. V. Manohara, D. Norris, M. Mercedes Maroto-Valer and S. Garcia, Dalton T. 50, 7474 (2021).10.1039/D1DT00602A ↗