Superhydrophobic surfaces have attracted considerable attention because of their unique water-repellency and their wide range of applications. The conventional method to characterize the surface wetting properties of surfaces, including superhydrophobic surfaces, relies on measuring static and dynamic contact angles, and sliding angles of water drops. However, because of the inhomogeneities inherently present on surfaces (smooth and textured), such optical methods can result in relatively large variability in sliding angle measurements. In this work, by using a force-based technique with ±1 μN sensitivity, the friction force between water drops and various surfaces is measured. The friction force can then be used to accurately predict the sliding angle of water drops of various sizes with improved consistency. We also show that the measured friction force can be used to determine the critical drop size below which a water drop is not expected to slide even at a tilt angle of 90°. The proposed technique to characterize the wetting properties of surfaces has a higher accuracy (between 15% and 65%, depending on the surface) compared to optical methods.
Superhydrophobic surfaces have attracted considerable attention because of their unique water-repellency and their wide range of applications. The conventional method to characterize the surface wetting properties of surfaces, including superhydrophobic surfaces, relies on measuring static and dynamic contact angles, and sliding angles of water drops. However, because of the inhomogeneities inherently present on surfaces (smooth and textured), such optical methods can result in relatively large variability in sliding angle measurements. In this work, by using a force-based technique with ±1 μN sensitivity, the friction force between water drops and various surfaces is measured. The friction force can then be used to accurately predict the sliding angle of water drops of various sizes with improved consistency. We also show that the measured friction force can be used to determine the critical drop size below which a water drop is not expected to slide even at a tilt angle of 90°. The proposed technique to characterize the wetting properties of surfaces has a higher accuracy (between 15% and 65%, depending on the surface) compared to optical methods.
Lotus leaf surfaces have inspired scientists to gain a better understanding
of the basic science and mechanisms behind their water-repellant properties
and to fabricate biomimetic superhydrophobic (SH) surfaces.[1] Although the fabrication of SH surfaces can be
traced back to 1907 by Ollivier,[2] the concept
of superhydrophobicity did not gain significant attention until this
phenomenon was described in Lotus leaves.[3] The superhydrophobic property originates from the micro- and nanoscale
structures as well as the low surface energy waxy coating.[1] Various potential industrial applications have
been proposed for SH surfaces. For example, superantiwetting textile
surfaces can be designed with self-cleaning,[4] self-healing,[5] antibacterial,[6] oil/water separation,[7] UV-blocking,[8] flame-retardant,[9] and photocatalytic[10] properties. Static water contact angle (WCA) and sliding (roll-off)
angle (SA) have been proposed as two conventional wetting parameters
to characterize the water repellency of surfaces.[1,11]The conventional method of measuring WCA and SA, that is, using
a goniometer,[12−21] is relatively fast and easy. However, optical-based methods have
been shown to be prone to errors in WCA measurement. For example,
in the case of a SH surface (i.e., WCA > 150°), the misplacement
of the baseline boundary between the three phases can result in more
than a 10° error in WCA measurements.[22] SA measurements are also susceptible to errors associated with surface
inhomogeneities originating from surface defects and contamination.
In a typical SA measurement, a water drop (∼10–20 μL)
is placed on a surface residing on a tilt stage. The tilt angle of
the stage is then increased until the water drop begins to slide.
However, any surface defect or contamination locally present at the
water drop/surface interface can pin the 3-phase contact line thus
resulting in larger SAs. As a result, SA measurements can have relatively
large standard deviations thereby preventing reliable differentiation
between the wetting properties of surfaces.Several research
groups have explored force-based techniques to
characterize the wetting properties of surfaces.[22−25] In a force-based measurement,
a water drop is sheared against a surface over a predetermined distance
and velocity, while the friction force is monitored. Since the friction
force over the entire sheared distance is recorded, considering the
average friction force minimizes contributions from local inhomogeneities
thereby providing a more accurate surface wetting characterization.
Several instruments have been developed or adapted to measure the
adhesion, friction, snap-in and pull-off forces of water drops on
surfaces thereby allowing for the characterization of surface wetting
properties.[26−29] R. Tadmor et al.,[30] for the first time,
measured the lateral adhesion force between a drop and a surface,
using a centrifugal adhesion balance. They successfully measured the
lateral adhesion (or static friction) force as a function of normal
force acting on a water drop and the rest time of the drop before
sliding. Yao et al.[31] used a similar setup
and proposed a force-based model to calculate the SA from force measurements
with a ±1 μN sensitivity. Conventional SA measurements
cannot be used to characterize the wettability of surfaces when the
drop does not slide even at a 90° tilt, either because of pinning
events on the surface or the drop weight being insufficient to overcome
the threshold force. K. Shi et al.[32] proposed
a new technique to accurately characterize the wetting properties
of surfaces. They utilized a capillary sensor (with ±0.7–2
μN sensitivity) attached to a water drop to measure the friction
force between the drop and solid surfaces. By recording the capillary
deflection, the friction force was extracted based on Hooke’s
law.In this paper, a force-based approach is proposed to predict
the
SA of water drops on surfaces with greater accuracy compared to optical-based
techniques. Compared to the use of a capillary sensor, the proposed
technique can measure a higher magnitude of friction forces because
of the greater capillary interaction between a water drop and ring
probe. The approach relies on measuring dynamic friction forces of
water drops sliding on surfaces as shown in Figure . The fact that the measurement is performed
over a relatively large shear distance thereby probing the wetting
properties of the surface over a large area allows for greater accuracy
compared to conventional optical-based measurements of the SA.
Figure 1
Side-view optical
image of a 20 μL water drop (A) sliding
on a hydrophobic surface at a tilt angle α. When the drop begins
to slide, the SA is equal to α. (B) sheared on a hydrophobic
surface at a velocity V and corresponding applied force F. F∥ is the friction force at the interface of the water drop and the
surface.
Side-view optical
image of a 20 μL water drop (A) sliding
on a hydrophobic surface at a tilt angle α. When the drop begins
to slide, the SA is equal to α. (B) sheared on a hydrophobic
surface at a velocity V and corresponding applied force F. F∥ is the friction force at the interface of the water drop and the
surface.
Experimental
Section
Materials
Silicon (Si) wafers (University
wafer, rms <0.5 nm), polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (McMaster,
rms = 29 nm), and glass surfaces (Corning, rms = 87 nm) were used
as flat surfaces. Textured surfaces were fabricated using photolithography
with SU-8 (Kayaku) as the photoresist. Octadecyltrichlorosilane (OTS)
(Sigma-Aldrich) in pentane (Fisher Chemical) or toluene (Fisher Chemical)
solutions were used for surface modification. SH_x_y was used to identify
the SH surfaces where x corresponds to the diameter of circular pillars
and y corresponds to the pillar spacing in μm. The cylindrical
pillars, with a height of approximately 80 μm, were arranged
in a square lattice.
OTS Surface Modification
Surfaces
to be modified were placed in a plasma cleaner (Harrick Plasma) for
1 min. The surfaces were then immediately placed in a freshly prepared
OTS solution.[33] Glass surfaces were modified
using a 2.5 mM OTS in pentane solution for 5 min. Si wafers and textured
surfaces were modified using a 10 mM OTS in toluene solution for 48
and 24 h, respectively. The modified surfaces were then rinsed thoroughly
with ethanol and dried in air.
Optical-Based
Sliding Angle Measurements
In a typical sliding angle measurement,
the surface of interest
was placed on a tilt stage at ambient temperature.[34,35] A water drop was then placed on the surface and allowed to equilibrate
for 10 s. The tilt angle was increased from 0° (i.e., no tilt)
at a rate of approximately 0.5° per second to the angle at which
the drop starts moving (i.e., measured sliding angle (MSA)). Each
experiment was repeated at least five times on different locations
of the surface. Reported error bars correspond to the standard deviation.
Force-Based Friction Measurements and Experimental
Setup
To measure the dynamic friction force of water drops
sliding on surfaces, a nanotribometer (UMT Multi-Specimen Test System)
was utilized. A force sensor with a force range of ±10 mN and
±1 μN sensitivity was used (Supporting Information (SI) Figure S1). A water drop of predetermined
volume (3–50 μL) was placed on a copper ring drop holder
with an inside diameter of 1.7 mm. Figure shows a plot of the measured friction force
as a function of time using the nanotribometer and the various steps
involved. In step 1, a water drop is approached to the surface in
the z-direction with a velocity V = 2 mm/s until it touches the surface.
A preload corresponding to the weight of the drop is applied and the
drop is allowed to equilibrate for 20 s, which mimics the interaction
of the water drop on the surface under its own weight. In step 2,
the ring drop holder moves in the x-direction with V = 0.1 mm/s. While the drop
moves, the nanotribometer maintains the applied preload and the dynamic
friction force between the water drop and the surface is recorded.
Finally, in step 3, the drop is pulled off from the surface (see SI Video S1). In all experiments, the friction
force and applied load were recorded as a function of time. Each experiment
was repeated at least five times on different locations on the surface
and error bars correspond to the standard deviation.
Figure 2
Plot of friction data
between a 20 μL water drop and an OTS-modified
hydrophobic silicon surface collected using a nanotribometer at various
stages in the measurement; step 1 - Approach, step 2 - Shear, step
3 - Retract and return to start position. Corresponding optical images
of the water drop in contact with the surface during the various steps
are also shown as insets.
Plot of friction data
between a 20 μL water drop and an OTS-modified
hydrophobic silicon surface collected using a nanotribometer at various
stages in the measurement; step 1 - Approach, step 2 - Shear, step
3 - Retract and return to start position. Corresponding optical images
of the water drop in contact with the surface during the various steps
are also shown as insets.
Results and Discussion
The force component
on a stationary drop acting parallel to a tilted
surface is mgsin(α) (see Figure A) where m is the mass of the drop and g is the gravitational
acceleration. As the tilt increases, this force increases until it
exceeds the static friction force at which point the drop begins to
slide. Figure shows
a plot of the force component acting parallel to a tilted surface.
Superimposed in the plot are the measured friction forces (dotted
lines) between similar sized drops and an OTS-modified silicon surface.
For a given drop size, the intersection of the friction force measured
and the solid curve (i.e., F∥ = mgsin(α)) provides the predicted sliding angle (PSA).
The PSAs for a 50 μL and a 20 μL water drop on an OTS-modified
silicon surface are 8.6° and 15.1°, respectively. As expected,
smaller drops require larger tilt angles to initiate sliding. However,
when the drop is too small (for e.g., 3 μL), the force component
required to initiate movement is never achieved. In other words, the
friction force (approximately 33 μN, see red dotted line) is
greater than the force component provided by the drop’s own
weight. An additional force (>3 μN) would be required to
cause
the 3 μL drop to slide on the 90° tilted OTS-modified silicon
surface.
Figure 3
Plot of force versus angle for three drop sizes. The solid lines
correspond to the force component acting parallel to the surface (i.e.,
mgsin(α)) originating from the weight of the drop. The dotted
lines correspond to the friction force measured while a drop is sheared
against an OTS-modified Si surface.
Plot of force versus angle for three drop sizes. The solid lines
correspond to the force component acting parallel to the surface (i.e.,
mgsin(α)) originating from the weight of the drop. The dotted
lines correspond to the friction force measured while a drop is sheared
against an OTS-modified Si surface.Figure shows a
comparison of the measured sliding angles (MSAs) and predicted sliding
angles (PSAs) of a 20 μL drop on various surfaces. The error
bars correspond to the standard deviation from at least five measurements.
Based on the magnitude of the error bars, the force-based technique
has less variability in predicting the SA on the hydrophobic surfaces
including OTS-modified Si wafer, OTS-modified glass and PTFE. In the
case of the PTFE surface, the force-based technique reduced the standard
deviation of the SA from ±5.51° to ±2.87°. The
advantage of the force-based technique over the conventional technique
is further demonstrated when comparing SH surfaces (i.e., SH_20_30
and SH_20_20). Using conventional methods for SA measurements of SH
surfaces, an overlap was observed between the results; the minimum
MSA for the SH_20_20 surface was approximately equal to the maximum
MSA for the SH_20_30 surface (see SI Table S1). However, by using the force-based technique, one can differentiate
the values of the SAs between the SH surfaces. On average, the standard
deviation of SA measurements was reduced by ∼42% for hydrophobic
and ∼58% for SH surfaces.
Figure 4
Plot of the measured and predicted sliding
angles of a 20 μL
drop on various surfaces. SH_20_30 and SH_20_20 are superhydrophobic
textured surfaces, whereas the other surfaces are flat hydrophobic
surfaces.
Plot of the measured and predicted sliding
angles of a 20 μL
drop on various surfaces. SH_20_30 and SH_20_20 are superhydrophobic
textured surfaces, whereas the other surfaces are flat hydrophobic
surfaces.To test the limitations of the
force-based technique, the latter
was used to predict the SA for water drops of various sizes (Figure ). A smooth hydrophobic
OTS-modified Si wafer was selected as the model surface. Based on
the data, a good agreement was found between the PSA and the MSA for
drop sizes larger than 6 μL. However, the difference between
the MSA and PSA increased for smaller drop sizes (i.e., 4 μL
and 5 μL). A possible explanation for this difference is that
the ring drop holder has a larger influence on the shape of smaller
drops. Small drops are distorted from their spherical shape thereby
affecting the contact area between the water drop and the surface
in the measurements. We again note the improved accuracy of the force-based
measurement compared to the conventional technique as shown by the
smaller standard deviations obtained for the PSA measurements.
Figure 5
Plot showing
the comparison between predicted and measured sliding
angles for various water drop sizes on an OTS-modified silicon wafer.
Plot showing
the comparison between predicted and measured sliding
angles for various water drop sizes on an OTS-modified silicon wafer.Another factor to consider is the fact that certain
samples have
significant threshold (or static) friction forces (i.e., the maximum
friction force attained before sliding occurs) that are larger than
the dynamic friction force. This was not the case with the samples
used in this study, but we propose that for samples which show a distinct
threshold friction force, the latter ought to be used (instead of
the dynamic friction) to calculate the predicted sliding angle. A
series of start–stop experiments on a single force-based measurement
can provide multiple data points for the threshold friction force.
Conclusions
Although conventional optical-based water
sliding angle measurements
are quick and easy to perform and are commonly used to characterize
the wetting properties of surfaces, standard deviations in measurements
can be quite significant. The suggested force-based technique can
predict SAs with less variability by probing a larger area of a surface
thereby minimizing the influence of localized surface imperfections.
Different drop sizes (3–50 μL) and five different surfaces
were explored to test the limitations of the force-based technique.
It was found that the technique was suitable for surface wettability
characterization of all surfaces. Deviations between measured and
predicted sliding angles at smaller drop sizes were a result of the
ring drop probe distorting the drop profile. We conclude that force-based
dynamic friction measurements between water drops and surfaces ought
to be used to more accurately characterize surface wetting properties.
Authors: Hong Zhong; Zhaoran Zhu; Jing Lin; Chi Fai Cheung; Vivien L Lu; Feng Yan; Ching-Yuen Chan; Guijun Li Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2020-04-24 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Ville Liimatainen; Maja Vuckovac; Ville Jokinen; Veikko Sariola; Matti J Hokkanen; Quan Zhou; Robin H A Ras Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 14.919