Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:20:47.759Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Wetting and Desiccation on the Creep Properties of Spider Dragline Silk

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Joanne Ritchie ,
Christopher Smith ,
Fraser I. Bell ,
Iain J. McEwen  and
Christopher Viney
Joanne Ritchie
Affiliation:
Chemistry, School of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, Midlothian, Scotland
Christopher Smith
Affiliation:
Chemistry, School of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, Midlothian, Scotland
Fraser I. Bell
Affiliation:
Chemistry, School of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, Midlothian, Scotland
Iain J. McEwen
Affiliation:
Chemistry, School of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, Midlothian, Scotland
Christopher Viney
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, University of California at Merced, P.O. Box 2039, Merced, CA 95344, USA Chemistry, School of Engineering and Physical Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, Midlothian, Scotland
Get access

Abstract

We have previously devised a simple method for quantifying the creep resistance of silk fibres – i.e. the ability of silk to maintain dimensional stability while supporting a constant load. We demonstrated (C. Smith et al., J. Arachnol. 31:421–424, 2003) that creep of spider dragline is significant at stresses that are small compared to the conventional yield strength. In addition, the existence of a limiting creep stress was revealed: if samples are loaded smoothly and quickly to a constant stress lying above the limiting creep stress, they break within a few seconds of the stress being applied. The magnitude of the limiting creep stress is equal to approximately one fifth of the fracture stress recorded in conventional constant strain rate tests (in which the stress is applied more gradually).

Here we develop the method and broaden the study of creep to investigate the effects of immersion in water and in ethanol. Experiments are conducted by attaching a small weight (an appropriate number of office staples) to an approximately 20 cm length of dragline from Nephila clavipes spiders, and monitoring extension as a function of time while the samples are suspended vertically in the liquid. The silk is previously conditioned (immersed without imposing any geometrical constraint) in the liquid, to allow it to supercontract or relax if the liquid promotes such a response. Allowance for buoyancy is made when calculating the net force applied to samples by the weight of the staples. Water is found to have a plasticizing effect; it exacerbates the rate of creep in response to a given small load, and it decreases the limiting creep stress. Ethanol, a desiccant, delays the transition from creep dominated by changes in chain conformation to creep dominated by chain slip, and increases the limiting creep stress. These results draw attention to an important limitation that must be overcome if biomimetic silk is to be used in applications where dimensional stability is required while loads are being supported for long times, especially in a wet environment. The results also point to the molecular origins of the creep sensitivity, and thus to ways of making silk and silk analogues less susceptible to creep.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 844: Symposium Y – Mechanical Properties of Bio-Inspired and Biological Materials , 2004 , Y4.4
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Viney, C., J. Textile Inst. 91(3), 2, (2000).Google Scholar
2. Lazaris, A., Arcidiacono, S., Huang, Y., Zhou, J.F., Duguay, F., Chretien, N., Welsh, E.A., Soares, J.W., Karatzas, C.N., Science 295, 472 (2002).Google Scholar
3. Kubik, S., S., , Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 41, 2721 (2002).Google Scholar
4. Smith, C., Ritchie, J., Bell, F.I., McEwen, I.J., Viney, C., J. Arachnol. 31, 421 (2003).Google Scholar
5. Viney, C., Bell, F.I., Cur. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci., 8, 165 (2004).Google Scholar
6. Thiel, B., Kunkel, D., Guess, K., Viney, C., in Biomolecular Materials by Design, edited by Alper, M., Bayley, H., Kaplan, D., Navia, M., (Mater. Res. Soc. Proc. 330, Pittsburgh, PA, 1994) pp. 21–30.Google Scholar
7. Foelix, R.F., Biology of Spiders, 1st ed. (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1982).Google Scholar
8. Carmichael, S., Viney, C., J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 72, 895 (1999).Google Scholar
9. Bell, F.I., McEwen, I.J., Viney, C., Nature 416, 37 (2002).Google Scholar
10. Eles, P.T., Michal, C.A., Macromolecules 37, 1342 (2004).Google Scholar