| Literature DB >> 28481498 |
Agata Maria Brzozowska1, Stan Maassen1,2, Rubayn Goh Zhi Rong1,3, Peter Imre Benke4,5, Chin-Sing Lim6, Ezequiel M Marzinelli7,8, Dominik Jańczewski1,9, Serena Lay-Ming Teo6, G Julius Vancso10,11.
Abstract
We report on the marine fouling and fouling release effects caused by variations of surface mechanical properties and microtopography of engineering polymers. Polymeric materials were covered with hierarchical micromolded topographical patterns inspired by the shell of the marine decapod crab Myomenippe hardwickii. These micropatterned surfaces were deployed in field static immersion tests. PDMS, polyurethane, and PMMA surfaces with higher elastic modulus and hardness were found to accumulate more fouling and exhibited poor fouling release properties. The results indicate interplay between surface mechanical properties and microtopography on antifouling performance.Entities:
Keywords: PDMS; biofouling; poly(methyl methacrylate); polyurethane; surface patterning; surface properties
Year: 2017 PMID: 28481498 PMCID: PMC5445506 DOI: 10.1021/acsami.6b14262
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces ISSN: 1944-8244 Impact factor: 9.229
Figure 1Schematic representation of the surface engineering process described in the text.
Figure 2Hierarchical surface patterns, inspired by the carapace surfaces of marine decapod crab Myomenippe hardwickii, consisting of two overlapping hexagonal arrays of 100 μm cylinders and 3 μm (a, b) and 5 μm diameter pillars (c), respectively, reproduced in PU using compression molding. The scale bars correspond to 100 (a), 50 (b), and 50 μm (c), respectively.
Figure 3Hardness (left) and elastic modulus (right; means ± SD) of the smooth and patterned polymer substrates discussed in this study. We marked significant differences between samples (‘***’ p < 0.001).
Selected Properties of the Polymers Used in This Study
| PDMS | PU | PMMA | |
|---|---|---|---|
| modulus [GPa] | 3.8 × 10–2 | 8.5 × 10–2 | 4.87 |
| water contact angle [deg] | 114.7 | 105.9 | 96.4 |
| surface energy [mN/m] | 22.3 | 26.7 | |
| critical surface tension [mN/m] | 23.4 | 23.9 | 20.8 |
| isoelectric point | 4.25 | 4.10 | 4.2[ |
The elastic modulus values of PDMS determined in this study carry significant uncertainty due to sample deformation upon indentation, which is not accounted for during raw data fitting, and should be viewed as a value for a rough indication only.
Figure 4Results of the static field immersion test −1st immersion. Figure shows mean values (± SE) of total counts of organisms settled on smooth and patterned (5 μm + 100 μm, and 3 μm + 100 μm hierarchical structures) test samples after the first 2 weeks of immersion before (0 psi) and after cleaning with water jet (50 and 100 psi, respectively). We note that, due to technical difficulties in pattern replication in PMMA, PMMA samples with 5 μm pillars were tested as a single replicate only. PVC was used as an internal reference material.
Figure 7Results of the static field immersion test −2nd immersion. Table shows images of smooth and patterned (5 μm + 100 μm, and 3 μm + 100 μm hierarchical structures) test samples after 2 weeks of the second immersion before (0 psi) and after cleaning with water jet (50 and 100 psi, respectively).
Figure 6Results of the static field immersion test −2nd immersion. Figure shows means (± SE) of total count of organisms settled on smooth and patterned (5 μm + 100 μm, and 3 μm + 100 μm hierarchical structures) test samples after 2 weeks of the second immersion before (0 psi) and after cleaning with water jet (50 and 100 psi, respectively).