| Literature DB >> 33809070 |
Mengmeng Yu1, Ming Zhang1, Jing Sun1, Feng Liu1, Yujia Wang1, Guanzhong Ding1, Xiubo Xie1, Li Liu1, Xiangjin Zhao2, Haihong Li2.
Abstract
Both surface microstructure and low surface energy modification play a vital role in the preparation of superhydrophobic surfaces. In this study, a safe and simple electrochemical method was developed to fabricate superhydrophobic surfaces of Zr-based metallic glasses with high corrosion resistance. First, micro-nano composite structures were generated on the surface of Zr-based metallic glasses by electrochemical etching in NaCl solution. Next, stearic acid was used to decrease surface energy. The effects of electrochemical etching time on surface morphology and wettability were also investigated through scanning electron microscopy and contact angle measurements. Furthermore, the influence of micro-nano composite structures and roughness on the wettability of Zr-based metallic glasses was analysed on the basis of the Cassie-Baxter model. The water contact angle of the surface was 154.3° ± 2.2°, and the sliding angle was <5°, indicating good superhydrophobicity. Moreover, the potentiodynamic polarisation test and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy suggested excellent corrosion resistance performance, and the inhibition efficiency of the superhydrophobic surface reached 99.6%. Finally, the prepared superhydrophobic surface revealed excellent temperature-resistant and self-cleaning properties.Entities:
Keywords: corrosion resistance; electrochemical etching; metallic glasses; micro–nano composite structures; superhydrophobic surfaces
Year: 2021 PMID: 33809070 PMCID: PMC8000747 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26061558
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Contact angle (CA), sliding angle and roughness of Zr-based metallic glasses at different electrochemical etching times.
| Etching Time (min) | Roughness | CAs after Electrochemical Etching | CAs after | Sliding Angle |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0.452 | 75.3° ± 1.2° | 106.7° ± 1.5° | > 10° |
| 2 | 0.692 | 108.6° ± 4.2° | 138.6° ± 3.2° | > 10° |
| 7 | 2.303 | 114.3° ± 2.9° | 153.4°± 2.5° | < 5° |
| 12 | 3.550 | 119.4° ± 4.3° | 153.2° ± 3.0° | < 5° |
| 15 | 4.566 | 116.3° ± 3.9° | 154.3° ± 2.2° | < 5° |
| 17 | 4.916 | 123.1° ± 5.8° | 152.4° ± 2.4° | < 5° |
| 22 | 5.322 | 116.3° ± 3.3° | 151.2° ± 0.9° | < 5° |
Figure 1SEM images of the sample surfaces at different processing times: (a,b) 2 min, (c,d) 7 min, (e,f) 15 min, and (g,h) 22 min.
Figure 2XRD pattern of the sample surface before (a) and after (b) reaction.
Figure 3Surface energy spectrum of the surface after modification.
Figure 4(a) Polarisation curves of samples in different corrosion times in 3.5 w.t.% NaCl solution; (b) Nyquist plots of the original sample and the superhydrophobic sample in a 3.5 wt.% NaCl solution; (c) bode plots of the impedance spectrum of the original sample and the superhydrophobic sample in a 3.5 wt.% NaCl solution; (d) equivalent circuit diagram.
Corrosion potential and corrosion current density of samples with different electrochemical etching times.
| Electrochemical Etching Time (min) | Ecorr (V) | Icorr (A cm−2) | η (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | −0.472 | 1.080 × 10−5 | - |
| 7 | −0.370 | 1.376 × 10−6 | 87.3 |
| 15 | −0.280 | 3.920 × 10−8 | 99.6 |
| 22 | −0.415 | 2.160 × 10−6 | 80.0 |
Impedance parameters obtained by fitting the impedance spectrum.
| Etching Time | Rs (Ω⋅cm2) | QCPE | n | R1 (Ω⋅cm2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 390.4 | 3.48′ 10−6 | 0.567 | 16,084 |
| 15 | 593.2 | 6.83 × 10−7 | 0.659 | 85,518 |
Figure 5(a) CAs of different pH solutions; (b) CAs of superhydrophobic samples at different temperatures.
Figure 6(a) Self-cleaning process of the sample on an inclined surface; (b) the process of self-cleaning the surface particles on the horizontal plane.