| Literature DB >> 35744176 |
Ewelina Kuźmicz-Mirosław1, Marcin Kuśmierz2, Konrad Terpiłowski2, Mateusz Śmietana3, Mariusz Barczak2, Magdalena Staniszewska1.
Abstract
The effect of three popular surface activation methods for a titanium oxide (titania) surface was thoroughly investigated to identify the most effective protocol for the enhancement of hydrophilicity. All the methods, namely H2O2 activation, UV irradiation and oxygen plasma treatment resulted in an enhanced hydrophilic titania surface, which was evidenced by the reduced contact angle values. To study in detail the chemical and morphological features responsible for the increased hydrophilicity, the treated surfaces were submitted to inspection with atomic force microscopy and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. The correlation between the treatment and titania surface hydroxylation as well as hydrophilic behavior have been discussed.Entities:
Keywords: hydroxyl groups; hydroxylation; surface activation; surface treatment; titania; wettability
Year: 2022 PMID: 35744176 PMCID: PMC9227497 DOI: 10.3390/ma15124113
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.748
Figure 1SEM images of the initial titania surface (sample R0) shown at different magnification.
Figure 2AFM images of the studied titania surfaces: intact R0 titania surface (a), RP oxygen plasma activated sample (b), RU sample activated with UV (c), and RH sample surface activated with H2O2 (d).
Analysis of surface roughness data derived from statistical processing of AFM images of the samples subjected to different activation protocols.
| Sample | Method of Activation | AFM Roughness Data | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sq (nm) | Sa (nm) | Sdiff (%) | ||
| R0 | untreated | 4.32 ± 0.3 | 2.97 ± 0.23 | 5.95 ± 0.44 |
| RP | plasma | 3.97 ± 1.40 | 2.57 ± 0.55 | 5.24 ± 0.18 |
| RU | UV | 4.11 ± 0.84 | 2.73 ± 0.57 | 5.56 ± 0.16 |
| RH | H2O2 | 3.15 ± 0.36 | 2.27 ± 0.25 | 5.34 ± 0.19 |
Values of contact angle of the untreated and activated titania surface.
| Sample | Method of Activation | Contact Angle (Degrees) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 h | After 24 h | ||
| R0 | untreated | 65.7 ± 2.8 | 65.7 ± 2.8 |
| RP | plasma | 10.1 ± 1.5 | 39.9 ± 3.1 |
| RU | UV | 9.4 ± 2.1 | 37.9 ± 1.9 |
| RH | H2O2 | 58.3 ± 1.2 | 67.6 ± 2.1 |
Figure 3Wettability of the initial, untreated R0 titania surface (a) and the resulting RP titania surfaces directly after activation with oxygen plasma (b), RU samples activated with UV (c), and RH surface activated with H2O2 (d) as presented by the shape of the photographed water drop.
XPS elemental composition and contact angle measurements of the untreated and activated titania surface.
| Sample | Method of Activation | XPS Elemental Composition (at %) * | Oxygen Surface Species (at %) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| %C | %O | %Ti | Ti:O Ratio | O2− | −OH (Bridging) | −OH (top) | Water | ||
| R0 | untreated | 33.3 ± 3.0 | 44.3 ± 2.2 | 18.0 ± 0.9 | 0.41 | 33.8 | 6.1 | 3.3 | 1.1 |
| RP | plasma | 26.8 ± 2.4 | 48.1 ± 1.8 | 20.3 ± 0.8 | 0.42 | 38.2 | 5.5 | 4.0 | 0.5 |
| RU | UV | 24.4 ± 3.1 | 49.8 ± 2.2 | 21.3 ± 0.9 | 0.43 | 41.6 | 4.7 | 2.9 | 0.5 |
| RH | H2O2 | 34.7 ± 2.8 | 42.9 ± 2.1 | 19.2 ± 0.9 | 0.45 | 35.6 | 3.8 | 2.8 | 0.6 |
* minor amount of other elements were also detected, i.e., N, F, Na, Ca.
Figure 4Deconvolution of O 1s core energy level for the studied titania surfaces: R0 unmodified titania surface (a), RP oxygen plasma treated (b), UV-activated RU sample (c), and RH sample H2O2-activated (d). The figure also shows various oxygen groups [43] for better interpretation of the XPS results (e).