| Literature DB >> 35897726 |
Lohitha Kalluri1, Yuanyuan Duan1.
Abstract
Our objective was to determine and optimize the significant parameters affecting mechanical properties and mean fiber diameter (MFD) of a novel GTR/GBR membrane composed of polycaprolactone (PCL) and chicken eggshell membrane (ESM). For this, we prepared electrospun membrane specimens (n = 16) with varying concentrations of PCL, ESM, nano-hydroxyapatite (HAp), and altered electrospinning parameters as generated by DOE++ software. After the determination of MFD and mechanical properties for all specimens, Taguchi orthogonal array L8 design was used to screen significant factors affecting the MFD and mechanical properties. PCL wt%, ESM wt%, HAp wt%, applied voltage (AV), flow rate (FR), and spinneret-collector distance (SCD) were the independent variables investigated. The response variables analyzed were MFD, tensile strength (TS), and elastic modulus. ANOVA outlined ESM wt%, HAp wt%, AV, FR, SCD, and an interactive effect between PCL wt% and AV to be the significant factors affecting modulus values of an electrospun PCL/ESM membrane (p < 0.05). Furthermore, concentrations of PCL and ESM were the significant factors affecting MFD (p < 0.05) and there were no significant factors affecting the TS values. Optimization using DOE++ software predicted that the maximal TS of 3.125 MPa, modulus of 278.168 MPa, and MFD of 882.75 nm could be achieved.Entities:
Keywords: Taguchi orthogonal arrays; eggshell membrane; electrospinning; guided tissue regeneration/guided bone regeneration; nanofibers; polycaprolactone
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35897726 PMCID: PMC9332595 DOI: 10.3390/ijms23158149
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 6.208
Figure 1SEM micrographs of 16 specimens (a–p) prepared for Taguchi orthogonal array analysis. All the SEM micrographs were collected at 1500× magnification and at an accelerating voltage of 8 kV.
TS, modulus, and MFD values for all 16 specimens.
| n # | Tensile Strength (MPa) | Elastic Modulus (MPa) | Mean Fiber Diameter (nm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.5 | 128.678 | 1649 |
| 2 | 2.3 | 194.813 | 1459 |
| 3 | 1.7 | 31.578 | 1201 |
| 4 | 2.6 | 29.981 | 932 |
| 5 | 2.9 | 68.888 | 993 |
| 6 | 3.1 | 104.391 | 1925 |
| 7 | 3 | 32.196 | 1067 |
| 8 | 1.9 | 23.488 | 1261 |
| 9 | 1.3 | 89.305 | 1532 |
| 10 | 1.2 | 207.338 | 1311 |
| 11 | 0.8 | 20.061 | 1592 |
| 12 | 1.6 | 16.622 | 956 |
| 13 | 2.7 | 41.67 | 1258 |
| 14 | 3 | 115.557 | 1672 |
| 15 | 3.1 | 24.867 | 1259 |
| 16 | 1.7 | 16.749 | 1141 |
Figure 2Pareto chart depicting the significant factors affecting elastic modulus values of an electrospun composite membrane.
Figure 3Pareto chart depicting the significant factors affecting TS values of an electrospun composite membrane.
Figure 4Pareto chart depicting the significant factors affecting mean MFD values of an electrospun composite membrane.
Regression information for analyzed response variables.
| Y | X/SE * | X1/SE * | X2/SE * | X3/SE * | X4/SE * | X5/SE * | X6/SE * | X7/SE * |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 97.4075/4.8274 | −9.2295/6.8269 | 23.8167/4.8274 | 42.5065/4.8274 | −30.7697/4.8274 | 45.1215/4.8274 | 22.2252/4.8274 | 51.5422/6.8269 |
|
| 2.425/0.2494 | −0.15/0.3527 | −0.0875/0.2494 | −0.1125/0.2494 | 0.15/0.2494 | 0.3625/0.2494 | −0.2375/0.2494 | 0.3/0.3527 |
|
| 1313.25/54.094 | 213.75/76.5004 | −115.625/54.094 | −57.625/54.094 | 58 /54.094 | 51.875/54.094 | 12.875/54.094 | −24.5/76.5004 |
* SE = standard error.
Figure 5The optimal solution for maximizing the mechanical properties and MFD values of an electrospun composite membrane.
The range and levels of the independent variables used for Taguchi orthogonal array design.
| Independent Variables | Level 1 (Low) | Level 2 (High) |
|---|---|---|
| PCL wt% | 12 | 18 |
| ESM wt% | 1 | 6 |
| HAp wt% | 0.5 | 2 |
| Applied Voltage (AV) (kV) | 13 | 18 |
| Flow Rate of Solution (FR) (mL/h) | 0.4 | 1.4 |
| Spinneret to Collector Distance (SCD) (cm) | 8 | 13 |
The 16 specimen combinations of various input independent variables generated by DOE++.
| n # | PCL (wt%) | SEP (wt%) | HAp (wt%) | Applied Voltage (kV) | Flow Rate (ml/h) | S-C Distance (cm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 18 | 1 | 2 | 13 | 1.4 | 8 |
| 2 | 18 | 6 | 2 | 13 | 1.4 | 13 |
| 3 | 18 | 6 | 0.5 | 13 | 0.4 | 13 |
| 4 | 12 | 6 | 2 | 18 | 0.4 | 8 |
| 5 | 12 | 1 | 0.5 | 13 | 0.4 | 8 |
| 6 | 18 | 1 | 0.5 | 18 | 1.4 | 13 |
| 7 | 12 | 6 | 0.5 | 18 | 1.4 | 8 |
| 8 | 12 | 1 | 2 | 18 | 0.4 | 13 |
| 9 | 18 | 1 | 2 | 13 | 1.4 | 8 |
| 10 | 18 | 6 | 2 | 13 | 1.4 | 13 |
| 11 | 18 | 6 | 0.5 | 13 | 0.4 | 13 |
| 12 | 12 | 6 | 2 | 18 | 0.4 | 8 |
| 13 | 12 | 1 | 0.5 | 13 | 0.4 | 8 |
| 14 | 18 | 1 | 0.5 | 18 | 1.4 | 13 |
| 15 | 12 | 6 | 0.5 | 18 | 1.4 | 8 |
| 16 | 12 | 1 | 2 | 18 | 0.4 | 13 |
Figure 6Electrospun membrane specimen (a) loaded onto the Sintech 2/G materials testing system for uniaxial tensile testing, and (b) tested till failure.