Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The boundary coefficient of friction (COF) of starch–oil composite dry film lubricants was investigated as a function of starch type (waxy vs. normal purified food grade corn starch), oil chemistry (hexadecane vs. oleic acid and various vegetable oils), and starch‐to‐oil ratio. Based on the results, a mechanism of starch–oil interaction in these composites was proposed. According to the proposed mechanism: (a) the oil in the composite is distributed between the bulk and the surface of the starch; and (b) the fraction of the oil trapped in the bulk and that adsorbed on the surface are related to each other by an equilibrium constant, and are functions of the total oil concentration in the composite. In line with the proposed mechanism, an adsorption model was used to quantify the free energy of adsorption (Δ G ads ) of the polar oils onto the starch surface. The analysis gave Δ G ads values that were higher than those reported for the adsorption of the same polar oils onto steel surfaces. This result is consistent with the effect of the relative surface energies of steel and starch on the adsorption of polar oils. The adsorption property of the non‐polar hexadecane relative to the polar oils was estimated by comparing their interfacial tensions with starch. The result showed a higher interfacial tension for hexadecane–starch than that for the polar oil–starch composites. This result predicts a relatively poorer compatibility with, and, hence, poorer adsorption of hexadecane onto starch leading to higher COF, as was observed in the friction measurements. Published in 2006 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Biresaw et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: