This study compares two ethylene-tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE) surface activation treatments, namely chemical attack with a solution of sodium naphthenate and plasma erosion via air-ionization corona discharge in order to improve the adhesive properties of the ETFE. An experimental design was prepared for both treatments in order to assess the effect of the treatment characteristics on the tensile load needed to break the bond between the ETFE and the acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene polymer (ABS) formed with a cyanoacrylate adhesive (CAA) applied between them. The reason for the selection of this problem is that both polymers are frequently used in the biomedical industry for their properties, and they need to be joined firmly in biomedical devices, and the cyanoacrylate adhesive is the adhesive traditionally used for fluoropolymers, in this case the ETFE, and the same CAA has also shown good adhesion with ABS. However, the strength of the bond for the triplet ETFE-CAA-ABS has not been reported and the improvement of the strength of the bond with surface treatments is not found in scholarly journals for modern medical devices such as stents and snares. Both treatments were compared based on the aforementioned design of experiments. The case where ETFE receives no surface treatment serves as the reference. The results indicated that the three factors evaluated (initial drying of the material, temperature of the chemical bath, and immersion time), and their interactions have no significant effect over the tensile load at failure (tensile strength) of the adhesive bond being evaluated. For the air-ionization corona discharge treatment, two factors were evaluated: discharge exposition time and air pressure. The results obtained from this experimental design indicate that there is no significant difference between the levels of the factors evaluated. These results were unexpected as the ranges used were representative of the maximum ranges permissible in manufacturing operations. As for the comparison of the treatments, it was determined that the treatments have statistically significant differences. It was also determined that there is a significant statistical difference between the processes where a surface treatment is performed and the process where no surface treatment is applied to the ETFE. The chemical treatment results in a higher tensile load at failure (tensile strength) of 276.6 N on average, the air ionization treatment has an average of 248.4 N, and the process with no treatment has the lower ultimate tensile strength average of 53 N. This comparison has demonstrated that the best treatment is the chemical treatment with sodium naphthenate under the conditions tested.
Read full abstract