Oscillatory nanoindentation of highly compliant hydrogels: A critical comparative analysis with rheometry
Source abstract
Abstract
We present a method for measuring the shear complex modulus of hydrogels by oscillatory nanoindentation, with unprecedented attention to procedure and uncertainty analysis. The method is verified by testing a typical low-molecular-weight gelator formed from the controlled hydrolysis of glucono-δ-lactone. Nanoindentation results are compared with those obtained by rheometry using both vane-in-cup and parallel-plate fixtures. At 10 Hz, the properties measured by oscillatory nanoindentation wereG′ = 38.1 ± 2.8 kPa, tan δ = 0.22 ± 0.02. At the same frequency, the properties measured by rheometry wereG′ = 15.3 ± 2.9 kPa, tan δ = 0.11 ± 0.016 (vane-in-cup) andG′ = 7.9 ± 1.1 kPa, tan δ = 0.05 ± 0.004 (parallel-plate). The larger shear modulus measured by nanoindentation is due to the scale of testing. Whereas rheometry characterizes the bulk material response, nanoindentation probes the fibrous network of the gel. The procedure and analysis presented here are valuable for nanoindentation testing of other compliant materials such as hydrogels, soft biological tissue, and food products.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Polymer Surface Interaction Studies · Metal and Thin Film Mechanics · Tribology and Wear Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1557/jmr.2009.012910.1557/jmr.2009.0129 ↗
2. 10.1002/aic.69038090410.1002/aic.690380904 ↗
3. 10.1557/JMR.2010.006710.1557/JMR.2010.0067 ↗
4. 10.1016/0020-7225(65)90019-410.1016/0020-7225(65)90019-4 ↗
5. 10.1021/cr970028210.1021/cr9700282 ↗
6. 10.1021/cr030204910.1021/cr0302049 ↗
7. 10.1039/b921863g10.1039/b921863g ↗
8. 10.1016/j.chempr.2017.07.01210.1016/j.chempr.2017.07.012 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.11.00410.1016/j.jconrel.2016.11.004 ↗
10. 10.1557/jmr.2006.019710.1557/jmr.2006.0197 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.jnnfm.2004.09.00110.1016/j.jnnfm.2004.09.001 ↗
12. 10.1088/0022-3727/41/7/07402110.1088/0022-3727/41/7/074021 ↗
13. 10.1179/1743280413Y.000000002210.1179/1743280413Y.0000000022 ↗
14. 10.1007/s10409-014-0025-x10.1007/s10409-014-0025-x ↗
15. 10.1016/j.actbio.2007.04.00510.1016/j.actbio.2007.04.005 ↗
16. 10.1016/S1748-0132(06)70077-910.1016/S1748-0132(06)70077-9 ↗
17. 10.1002/jbm.a.2009610.1002/jbm.a.20096 ↗
18. 10.1111/j.1747-1567.2011.00732.x10.1111/j.1747-1567.2011.00732.x ↗
19. 10.1016/j.bpj.2014.07.07310.1016/j.bpj.2014.07.073 ↗
20. 10.1557/JMR.1992.156410.1557/JMR.1992.1564 ↗
21. 10.1039/C5RA22253B10.1039/C5RA22253B ↗
22. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.03.00610.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.03.006 ↗
23. Du · 2013 · 106310.1109/Transducers.2013.6626954 ↗
24. 10.1557/JMR.1992.061310.1557/JMR.1992.0613 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.02.00910.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.02.009 ↗
26. 11. Oliver W.C. and Pethica J.B. : Method for continuous determination of the elastic stiffness of contact between two bodies. U.S. Patent No. 4,848,141, July 18, 1989.
27. Rheology of peptide-and protein-based physical hydrogels: Are everyday measurements just scratching the surface?
28. 10.1039/c2sm06825g10.1039/c2sm06825g ↗
29. 10.1088/1748-605X/aa5b0010.1088/1748-605X/aa5b00 ↗
30. Viscoelastic characterization of polymers using dynamic instrumented indentation
31. 10.1007/s11629-015-3543-510.1007/s11629-015-3543-5 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.msec.2010.12.00510.1016/j.msec.2010.12.005 ↗
33. Akhtar · 2016 · 6 · 141
34. 10.1557/JMR.2008.018510.1557/JMR.2008.0185 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.cossms.2014.12.00610.1016/j.cossms.2014.12.006 ↗
36. 10.1021/acs.chemmater.6b0267710.1021/acs.chemmater.6b02677 ↗
37. 10.1089/ten.teb.2010.052010.1089/ten.teb.2010.0520 ↗
38. 10.1122/1.494842810.1122/1.4948428 ↗
39. Loubet · 1995 · 31
40. 10.1016/j.cossms.2015.03.00110.1016/j.cossms.2015.03.001 ↗
41. 10.1557/JMR.2004.043710.1557/JMR.2004.0437 ↗
42. Nanoscale surface mechanical property measurements using force modulation technique