Statistical optimization of the electrospinning process for chitosan/polylactide nanofabrication using response surface methodology
Source abstract
Abstract
In this study, chitosan/polylactide (CP) blend solutions in trifluoroacetic acid as a co-solvent with different blend ratio were electrospun. Effects of different CP ratio and process parameters on the diameter of electrospun nanofibers were experimentally investigated. The fiber morphology and the distribution of fiber diameter were investigated by scanning electron microscopy. Response surface methodology (RSM) was used to define and evaluate a quantitative relationship between electrospinning parameters, average fiber diameters and its distribution for each chitosan–polylactide ratio. Applied voltage and polymer solution extrusion rate are the process variables which control the fiber diameter at similar spinning distances (15 cm). Fiber diameter was correlated to these variables by using a second-order polynomial function. The fibers were of diameter ranging from 94 to 389 nm. The predicted fiber diameters were in good agreement with the experimental results. Contour plots were obtained to identify the processing variables suitable for producing nanofibers. It was concluded that ratio of polylactide and chitosan in the blend polymer played an important role to the diameter of fibers and standard deviation of fiber diameter. The processing factors were found statistically significant in the production of nanofibers.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications · Advanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials · Conducting polymers and applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (43)
Show source-provided references
1. Doshi J, Reneker DJ (1995) J Electrostatics 35:15110.1016/0304-3886(95)00041-8 ↗
2. Jin HJ, Fridrikh SV, Rutledge GC, Kaplan DL (2002) Biomacromolecules 3(6):123310.1021/bm025581u ↗
3. Li WJ, Laurencin CT, Caterson EJ, Tuan RS, Ko FK (2002) Biomed Mater Res 60:61310.1002/jbm.10167 ↗
4. Zong X, Kim K, Fang D, Ran S, Hsiao BS, Chu B (2002) Polymer 43:440310.1016/S0032-3861(02)00275-6 ↗
5. Zeng J, Yang L, Liang Q, Zhang X, Guan H, Xu C, Chen X, Jing X (2005) J Control Release 105:4310.1016/j.jconrel.2005.02.024 ↗
6. Kenawy ER, Bowlin GL, Mansfield K, Layman J, Simpson DG, Sanders EH, Wnek GE (2002) J Control Release 81:5710.1016/S0168-3659(02)00041-X ↗
7. Khil MS, Cha DI, Kim HY, Kim IS, Bhattarai N (2003) J Biomed Mater Res Part B 67B:67510.1002/jbm.b.10058 ↗
8. Min BM, Lee G, Kim SH, Nam YS, Lee TS, Park WH (2004) Biomaterials 25:128910.1016/j.biomaterials.2003.08.045 ↗
9. Gibson PW, Schreuder-Gibson HL, Rivin D (1999) AIChE J 45:19010.1002/aic.690450116 ↗
10. Qin XH, Wang SY (2006) J Appl Polym Sci 102:128510.1002/app.24361 ↗
11. Park HS, Park YO (2005) Korean J Chem Eng 22(1):16510.1007/BF02701480 ↗
12. Huang ZM, Zhang YZ, Kotaki M, Ramakrishna S (2003) Compos Sci Technol 63:222310.1016/S0266-3538(03)00178-7 ↗
13. Kim JS, Reneker DH (1999) Polym Eng Sci 39:84910.1002/pen.11473 ↗
14. Zhang YZ, Lim CT, Ramakrishna S, Huang ZM (2005) J Mater Sci Mater Med 16:93310.1007/s10856-005-4428-x ↗
15. Pham QP, Sharma U, Mikos AG (2006) Tissue Eng 12:119710.1089/ten.2006.12.1197 ↗
16. Chew SY, Wen J, Yim EKF, Leong KW (2005) Biomacromol 6:201710.1021/bm0501149 ↗
17. Shin YM, Hohman MM, Brenner MP, Rutledge GC (2001) Polymer 42:995510.1016/S0032-3861(01)00540-7 ↗
18. Reneker DH, Chun I (1996) Nanotechnology 7:21610.1088/0957-4484/7/3/009 ↗
19. Li D, Xia Y (2004) Adv Mater 16:115110.1002/adma.200400719 ↗
20. Taylor GI (1969) Proc R Soc Lond 313:45310.1098/rspa.1969.0205 ↗
21. Reneker DH, Yarin AL, Fong H, Koombhongse S (2000) J Appl Phys 87:453110.1063/1.373532 ↗
22. Sukigara S, Gandhi M, Ayutsede J, Micklus M, Ko F (2004) Polymer 45:370110.1016/j.polymer.2004.03.059 ↗
23. Demir MM, Yilgor I, Yilgor E, Erman B (2002) Polymer 43:330310.1016/S0032-3861(02)00136-2 ↗
24. Heikkila P, Harlin A (2008) Eur Polym J 44:306710.1016/j.eurpolymj.2008.06.032 ↗
25. Gu SY, Ren J, Vancso GJ (2005) Eur Polym J 41:255910.1016/j.eurpolymj.2005.05.008 ↗
26. Kwon IK, Kidoaki S, Matsuda T (2005) Biomaterials 26:392910.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.10.007 ↗
27. Acatay K, Simsek E, Ow-Yang C, Menceloglu YZ (2004) Angew Chem Int Ed 43:521010.1002/anie.200461092 ↗
28. Fong H, Chun I, Reneker DH (1999) Polymer 40:458510.1016/S0032-3861(99)00068-3 ↗
29. Deitzel JM, Kleinmeyer J, Harris D, Tan NCB (2001) Polymer 42:26110.1016/S0032-3861(00)00250-0 ↗
30. Papila M, Haftka RT (2000) AIAA J 38:233610.2514/2.903 ↗
31. Meyers RH, Montgomery DC (1995) Response surface methodology, process and product optimization using designed experiments. Wiley, Hoboken
32. Lopez-Manchado MA, Arroyo Ramos M (2001) Polymer 42:655710.1016/S0032-3861(01)00127-6 ↗
33. Wachter R, Cordery A (1999) Carbon 37:152910.1016/S0008-6223(99)00032-9 ↗
34. Trieu H, Outubuddin S (1995) Polymer 36:253110.1016/0032-3861(95)91198-G ↗
35. Yordem OS, Papila M, Mencelo YZ (2008) Mater Des 29:3310.1016/j.matdes.2006.12.013 ↗
36. Montgomery DC (2002) Design and analysis of experiments, 5th edn. Wiley, New York
37. Ziabari M, Mottaghitalab V, Haghi AK (2010) Korean J Chem Eng 27:34010.1007/s11814-009-0309-1 ↗
38. Schmidt SR, Launsby RG (1999) Understanding industrial designed experiments, 4th edn. Air Academy Press & Associates, Colorado
39. Gu SY, Ren J, Vansco GJ (2005) Eur Polym J 41:255910.1016/j.eurpolymj.2005.05.008 ↗
40. Wan Y, Wu H, Yu A, Wen D (2006) Biomacromolecules 7:136210.1021/bm0600825 ↗
41. Wang T, Kumar S (2006) J App Polym Sci 102(2):102310.1002/app.24123 ↗
42. Zong X, Kim K, Fang D, Ran S, Hsiao BS, Chu B (2002) Polymer 43:440310.1016/S0032-3861(02)00275-6 ↗
43. Li D, Xia Y (2003) Nano Lett 3:55510.1021/nl034039o ↗