Hyae Rim Hong1,2, Joon Seok Lee3, Chung Hee Park1,2. 1. Department of Textiles, Merchandising and Fashion Design, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea. 2. Research Institute of Human Ecology, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Fiber System Engineering, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsangbuk 38541, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to develop superhydrophobic polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) fabrics to increase their water repellency and self-cleaning properties and to investigate the effects of the inherent fabric roughness on these properties. A PVDF fabric, composed entirely of electrospun PVDF filament yarns, and two PVDF/polyester (PET) fabrics with different weave densities are used. After treatment with O2 plasma for 12 min and CF4 plasma for 4 min, superhydrophobicity is achieved in all fabrics, resulting in an increase in water repellency and self-cleaning efficiency. The PVDF fabric with the lowest shedding angle exhibits the most pronounced droplet rebound behavior and the highest self-cleaning efficiency. Increases in surface inclination angle and droplet volume and a decrease in the drop fall height all contribute to conditions more favorable for water droplet repellency. The self-cleaning efficiencies of the plasma-treated PVDF fabric and high-density PVDF/PET fabric are higher for hydrophilic dust, in contrast to those of the untreated ones. The findings of this study are expected to enable the design of weaving or nano-structuring conditions that enhance the water repellency and self-cleaning properties of PVDF fabrics, for the development of stable energy-harvesting smart textiles.
The purpose of this study is to develop superhydrophobic polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) fabrics to increase their water repellency and self-cleaning properties and to investigate the effects of the inherent fabric roughness on these properties. A PVDF fabric, composed entirely of electrospun PVDF filament yarns, and two PVDF/polyester (PET) fabrics with different weave densities are used. After treatment with O2 plasma for 12 min and CF4 plasma for 4 min, superhydrophobicity is achieved in all fabrics, resulting in an increase in water repellency and self-cleaning efficiency. The PVDF fabric with the lowest shedding angle exhibits the most pronounced droplet rebound behavior and the highest self-cleaning efficiency. Increases in surface inclination angle and droplet volume and a decrease in the drop fall height all contribute to conditions more favorable for water droplet repellency. The self-cleaning efficiencies of the plasma-treated PVDF fabric and high-density PVDF/PET fabric are higher for hydrophilic dust, in contrast to those of the untreated ones. The findings of this study are expected to enable the design of weaving or nano-structuring conditions that enhance the water repellency and self-cleaning properties of PVDF fabrics, for the development of stable energy-harvesting smart textiles.
A water droplet placed
on a superhydrophobic surface easily rolls
down the surface at a relatively shallow angle of less than 10°;
the contact angle is greater than 150°.[1] Numerous fabrication methods have been explored to achieve superhydrophobicity,
such as photolithography, etching, and nanoparticle deposition for
roughening the surface and vapor deposition, spraying, dip-coating,
and grafting with chemicals for lowering the surface free energy.[2,3] Superhydrophobicity endows surfaces with self-cleaning abilities,
wherein droplets adsorb any contaminants present on the superhydrophobic
surface and then roll along the surface, removing the contaminants.[4] A superhydrophobic surface with a high water
repellency can also prevent liquid wetting, condensation, ice formation,
and corrosion[5−7] and therefore finds applications in a variety of
fields, including electronic devices and materials for smart clothing.In recent years, superhydrophobic modification has been widely
employed in energy harvesters that rely on contact electrification
at the liquid–solid interface (i.e., triboelectric nanogenerators
[TENGs]).[8,9] When a water droplet comes in contact with
a surface and then detaches, triboelectric charges are generated on
the surface and electricity can be harvested via the electrostatic
induction caused by these surface charges.[9] In this context, Cho et al.[9] investigated
the dependence of the output performances of liquid–solid contact
TENGs on the dynamic behaviors of droplets on superhydrophobic aluminum
surfaces with hierarchical rough structures. They found that droplets
were retained on surfaces with nanoscale roughness, and the output
performances of the TENGs decreased as the number of falling droplets
increased. Meanwhile, the droplets were completely detached from surfaces
with micrometer (μm) and nanometer (nm) roughness, thereby significantly
enhancing the output performance. Due to the fact that the output
performance of a TENG is generally reduced when the surface is exposed
to moisture or pollutants,[10−13] it is necessary to endow the surface with water-repellent
and self-cleaning properties to overcome this limitation.Polyvinylidene
fluoride (PVDF) is frequently employed as the material
for use in TENGs owing to its high electron affinity, high flexibility,
and excellent biocompatibility, which result in highly negative triboelectric
properties and render this material suitable for use in smart clothing.[14] However, to date, PVDF has primarily been used
in the form of films or electrospun nanowebs, and only a few studies
have investigated its application as a woven fabric.[15−18] It is expected that the weaving conditions of such a fabric will
affect its inherent microstructure and lead to variations in the superhydrophobicity,
which in turn will affect the dynamic behavior of droplets on the
surface and the self-cleaning properties of the fabric. However, previous
studies have primarily focused on uniform, non-porous substrates,
such as films, and the water repellency of these substrates was typically
evaluated in terms of dynamic contact angles, such as the shedding
angle or the sliding angle.[2,19] It is, therefore, necessary
to analyze the dynamic behaviors of droplets on the surfaces of superhydrophobic
fabrics in a variety of environments to determine the most favorable
fabric structure and environment for complete droplet repellency.Thus, to develop wearable energy harvesting PVDF textiles resistant
to moisture and pollutants, we intended to enhance the water repellency
and self-cleaning properties of fabric through superhydrophobic modification.
For this purpose, a 100% PVDF fabric and two PVDF/polyester (PET)
fabrics with different weave densities are used to investigate the
effect of the inherent fabric structure under various weaving conditions.
Plasma treatment is the most commonly used method for enhancing the
output performance of TENGs;[20−22] it is a simple and human-friendly
process that can increase the roughness of fiber without a mask and
does not require further chemical treatment.[23,24] Therefore, plasma treatment is employed to impart superhydrophobicity
considering the application of PVDF fabrics. The fabrics are subsequently
treated with O2 plasma for 12 min and CF4 plasma
for 4 min, and the contact and shedding angles are measured to ensure
that superhydrophobic surfaces are achieved. In addition, the dynamic
behaviors of the droplets are examined on the fabric surfaces by varying
the drop fall height, the surface inclination angle, and the droplet
volume. Furthermore, the self-cleaning properties of the fabrics are
estimated using iron oxide and Sudan black B particles as hydrophilic
and hydrophobic dusts, respectively. Ultimately, our aim is to develop
effective weaving and treatment methods to enhance the water repellency
and self-cleaning properties of PVDF fabrics.
Results and Discussion
Surface Structures and Chemical Compositions
The pristine surface of each fabric was observed at a magnification
of 100× using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and the obtained
images are shown in Figure a–c. The PVDF filament yarn used in all fabrics was
composed of a one-way electrospun fiber with a thickness of ∼1
μm, and the total thickness of each PVDF yarn was 524–598
μm. The average thicknesses of the PET filament yarns in the
PVDF/PET fabric with low density (PVDF/PET-L) and high density (PVDF/PET-H)
were 807 and 665 μm, respectively, and the yarns were constructed
using PET fibers with average thicknesses of 22 and 12 μm. The
mean deviations of the surface geometrical roughness values and the
area percentages of the direct open pores in the images are summarized
in Table . It was
found that PVDF-L contained the highest area percentage of direct
open pores, whereas PVDF/PET-H contained the lowest (Figure S1, Supporting Information).
Figure 1
Surface morphologies
of the PVDF specimens. (a–c) Pristine
surfaces of the PVDF fabrics, and (d–g) nanoscale roughness
introduced after plasma treatment on the surface of PVDF fiber and
PET fiber in PVDF/PET-H. Field emission (FE)-SEM images are shown
at magnifications of 100× for each fabric and 100 000×
for each fiber.
Table 1
Geometrical Roughness of the Pristine
Specimens
SMD [μm]a
area percentage
of direct open pores [%]
PVDF-L
3.20 ± 1.65
16.5 ± 5.8
PVDF/PET-L
2.78 ± 1.62
10.4 ± 1.7
PVDF/PET-H
3.56 ± 1.06
4.6 ± 0.1
SMD: surface mean deviation, a measure
of the geometrical roughness.
Surface morphologies
of the PVDF specimens. (a–c) Pristine
surfaces of the PVDF fabrics, and (d–g) nanoscale roughness
introduced after plasma treatment on the surface of PVDF fiber and
PET fiber in PVDF/PET-H. Field emission (FE)-SEM images are shown
at magnifications of 100× for each fabric and 100 000×
for each fiber.SMD: surface mean deviation, a measure
of the geometrical roughness.High-magnification SEM images (×100 000)
revealed the
fine structures of the fibers after O2 and CF4 plasma treatment. As shown in Figure d–g, nanoscale roughness was developed on the
surfaces of the PVDF and PET fibers with a spacing of approximately
230–287 nm. Additionally, energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy
(EDS) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analyses showed high
fluorine content on the PVDF and PET fibers, and the emergence of
new peaks such as −CHF, CF2–CHF, and CF3–CHx (Figures and S3, and Table S1).[25,26] Furthermore, the peak corresponding to fluorine in the XPS broadened
and shifted by +0.5 eV,[27] confirming that
the PVDF and PET surfaces were successfully fluorinated by CF4 plasma treatment. As indicated above, the observed nanoscale
roughness and fluorinated surfaces are both favorable for achieving
superhydrophobic materials.
Figure 2
Changes in the surface chemical compositions
of the PVDF specimens.
(a–c) Pristine PVDF/PET-H, (d–f) PVDF fibers, and (g–i)
PET fibers after plasma treatment. Mass normalized concentrations
(%) of the atoms constituting (j) PVDF fiber and (k) PET fiber quantitatively
analyzed based on the EDS profiles at magnifications of 1000×.
Changes in the surface chemical compositions
of the PVDF specimens.
(a–c) Pristine PVDF/PET-H, (d–f) PVDF fibers, and (g–i)
PET fibers after plasma treatment. Mass normalized concentrations
(%) of the atoms constituting (j) PVDF fiber and (k) PET fiber quantitatively
analyzed based on the EDS profiles at magnifications of 1000×.The surface wettability of each fabric before and
after plasma
treatment was also measured, and the results are presented in Table . Specifically, prior
to plasma treatment, the PVDF-L and PVDF/PET-H possessed greater static
contact angles than PVDF/PET-L, and the shedding angle increased in
the order of PVDF-L < PVDF/PET-H < PVDF/PET-L. This was accounted
for by considering that PVDF and PET possessed hydrophobic and rough
surfaces, and therefore, the greater the number of air layers in contact
with the water droplets, the larger the static contact angle.[28−30] In addition, PVDF-L, which was composed entirely of PVDF, exhibited
lower surface energy and the highest area percentage of direct open
pores, while PVDF/PET-H possessed the highest surface roughness (Table ). Thus, PVDF-L and
PVDF/PET-H exhibited greater static contact angles, and the lower
adhesive energy was attributed to the smaller contact area of the
water droplet on the surface.[31]
Table 2
Surface Wettability Properties of
the Specimens before and after Plasma Treatment
contact
angle [°]
shedding angle [°]
pristine
after plasma
pristine
after plasma
PVDF-L
151.8 ± 2.7
160.0 ± 3.2
31.1 ± 3.8
3.3 ± 1.2
PVDF/PET-L
142.7 ± 3.8
159.2 ± 4.1
41.3 ± 4.0
10.5 ± 1.8
PVDF/PET-H
152.2 ± 3.4
163.7 ± 1.2
32.4 ± 4.3
4.6 ± 0.7
As indicated in Table , following plasma treatment, the static contact angle
increased
to ≥150° in all cases, while the shedding angle decreased
significantly to ≤10°, thereby suggesting that superhydrophobicity
was achieved for all fabrics. This was attributed to the introduction
of nanoscale roughness during plasma treatment, which minimized the
contact areas between the droplets and the sample surfaces.[23,24] In addition, the surface energy of the surface roughened by O2 plasma treatment was further decreased by fluorination during
the subsequent CF4 plasma treatment (Figures S2–S4 and Table S1). Furthermore, the shedding
angles for the various fabrics before and after plasma treatment followed
the same order, that is, PVDF-L < PVDF/PET-H < PVDF/PET-L, thereby
indicating that the observed superhydrophobicity was a result of dual-scale
surface roughness on both the micro- and nanoscales. In the case of
the PVDF film, after the same plasma treatment, the water drop adhered
to the surface even when the contact angle increased over 150°
(Figure S5), demonstrating the significance
of the microscale roughness of fabric. It should be noted here that
the inherent microscale roughness of the surface is advantageous to
achieving superhydrophobicity, and it also appears to affect the surface
wettability even after plasma treatment.The effect of plasma
treatment on the mechanical properties of
the developed superhydrophobic fabric was also evaluated for PVDF/PET-H
(Tables S2 and S3 and Figures S6–S8). Although the plasma treatment caused decreases in tensile strength
and elongation at break, it did not significantly affect the stiffness
and color, and air and water vapor permeabilities were maintained
at a high level (Table S3). In addition,
the contact angle remained more than 160° after laundering, tape
test, and abrasion with nylon knit. Furthermore, even after repeating
the abrasion with nylon knit 30 times, PVDF/PET-H demonstrated superhydrophobicity
as the shedding angle was low (6.2 ± 0.8°). These results
indicate that the plasma-treated superhydrophobic fabric provides
wearing comfort with excellent flexibility and breathability, and
stable superhydrophobicity against abrasion; thus, it is a promising
material for smart textiles.
Dynamic Behaviors of the Water Droplets on
the Fabric Surfaces
Zimmermann et al.[19] developed a method to measure the shedding angles of superhydrophobic
textiles to evaluate their water-repellent properties. However, even
when a surface is determined to be superhydrophobic based on the shedding
angle, it has been shown that the water repellency of the fabric can
vary significantly depending on the external conditions under which
the water droplet is applied.[32,33] Thus, considering that
the superhydrophobic textile is used for clothing materials to be
worn in various environments, we investigated the effects of the drop
fall height, the surface inclination angle, and the droplet volume
to examine the dynamic behaviors of the droplets on the PVDF-L, PVDF/PET-L,
and PVDF/PET-H specimens, as depicted in Figure , where the x-axis represents
the surface inclination angle and the y-axis represents
the droplet volume.
Figure 3
Effects of superhydrophobicity on the droplet impact dynamics
on
the surfaces of the prepared PVDF specimens. The dynamic behaviors
of droplets falling from heights of (a,d) 15 cm, (b,e) 7.5 cm, and
(c,f) 1 cm were categorized into deposition (Dp), roll (Ro), partial
rebound (pR), and complete rebound (cR) by varying the surface inclination
angle (0, 15, 30, 45, or 60°) and the droplet volume (3.5, 12.5,
or 22.8 μL) on the surface (a–c) before and (d–f)
after plasma treatment.
Effects of superhydrophobicity on the droplet impact dynamics
on
the surfaces of the prepared PVDF specimens. The dynamic behaviors
of droplets falling from heights of (a,d) 15 cm, (b,e) 7.5 cm, and
(c,f) 1 cm were categorized into deposition (Dp), roll (Ro), partial
rebound (pR), and complete rebound (cR) by varying the surface inclination
angle (0, 15, 30, 45, or 60°) and the droplet volume (3.5, 12.5,
or 22.8 μL) on the surface (a–c) before and (d–f)
after plasma treatment.For all fabrics, a more complete rebound was observed
when the
fall height was reduced from 15 to 1 cm, or when the surface inclination
angle was increased from 15 to 60°. Additionally, a greater degree
of rebound occurred with larger droplet volumes, and the largest droplet
tended to exhibit a partial rebound. Compared to the pristine specimens,
more complete rebound (denoted as cR (yellow) in Figure ) was observed after plasma
treatment, and the degree of rebound decreased in the following order:
PVDF-L > PVDF/PET-H > PVDF/PET-L. Importantly, when the surface
of
PVDF-L was tilted by ≥30° and the drop fall height was
15 cm, complete rebound of the droplets was observed on the plasma-treated
surfaces.The dynamic behavior of a droplet on a surface is
determined by
the relationship between the wetting pressure required to moisten
the surface and the anti-wetting pressure required to repel the droplet.[34] In terms of the wetting pressure, the effective
water hammer pressure (PWH) when the water
droplet impinges on the surface and the dynamic pressure (PD) at the spreading stage of impingement were
considered. These pressures can be represented as shown in eqs and 2, respectively[35]where ρ is the density of the droplet, C is the velocity of sound in water (C ≈
1497 m/s), and V is the impinging velocity of the
droplet. Overall, the wetting pressure is proportional to the impinging
velocity. In addition, the anti-wetting pressure is considered to
be the capillary pressure (PC) generated
between the roughness structure on the surface and can be represented
as outlined in eq (35)where γLA is the surface
tension of the water droplet, S is the distance between
surface roughness elements, and θA is the advancing
contact angle of the water droplet on the flat surface, which was
determined by measuring the contact angle with PVDF film (Figure S5). Overall, the capillary pressure is
inversely proportional to the distance between the surface roughness
elements. Given that the anti-wetting pressure must be greater than
the wetting pressure for the surface to completely repel water droplets,
a slow impinging water droplet velocity and a small distance between
the surface roughness elements are associated with a superior droplet
repellency. As a result, the generation of nanoscale structures and
the reduced distance between surface roughness that were imparted
by the plasma treatment, therefore, enhanced the water repellencies
of the fabrics. In this context, Chen et al.[34] calculated the theoretical pressure using the above equations when
water droplets were dropped at a velocity of 0.51 m·s–1 onto a superhydrophobic surface with dual-scale roughness. Based
on their calculation, the PWH was greater
than the PC generated by the microscale
roughness (PCM) but smaller than the PC generated by the nanoscale roughness (PCN). Accordingly, when a droplet contacts the
surface, it can penetrate the microscale roughness on the fabric but
cannot penetrate the nanostructured roughness, thereby indicating
that plasma treatment can effectively enhance the capillary pressure
to facilitate a complete rebound.As outlined in Table , PVDF-L possesses the highest
percentage of direct open pores of
the various specimens prepared herein, which suggests that it has
the smallest contact area for water droplet contact. Indeed, this
agrees well with the observation that complete rebound occurs most
frequently on PVDF-L. Comparatively, PVDF/PET-H demonstrates more
complete rebound than PVDF/PET-L owing to its prominent surface roughness.
It is believed that when a water droplet strikes the PVDF/PET-H surface,
it initially impinges on the protruding parts of the rough surface,
resulting in pressure loss. As a result, the droplets have insufficient
energy to penetrate the fabric surface.[34]It should also be noted that a lower drop fall height and
greater
surface inclination angle (i.e., α, 15 ≤ α ≤
60°) result in a more complete rebound. This can be attributed
to the fact that the velocity of the droplet impinging on the surface
is reduced proportionally to cos α,[36] resulting in a lower wetting pressure. In addition, the probability
of deposition was the highest for the smallest droplets with a volume
of 3.5 μL. These droplets have a diameter of 1.9 mm, which is
similar to the length of the repeating unit of warp and weft interlaying
for the various fabric specimens (Figure a–c). However, when the droplet volume
was increased to 22.8 μL, the possibility of partial rebound
increased. This was due to the larger droplets being more easily deformed,
ultimately resulting in droplet trapping between the pores or yarns,
wherein some droplets also remain on the surface when the wetting
pressure is relatively high.
Self-Cleaning of Dust Particles on the Fabric
Surfaces by the Action of Water Droplets
Iron oxide and Sudan
black B were used as dust particles to investigate the self-cleaning
properties of the fabrics. The size distribution, surface morphology,
and composition of each type of particle are represented in Figure . As shown in Figure a, the particle size
of iron oxide ranged between 0.460 and 66.9 μm, wherein a bimodal
distribution with peaks at ∼1.9 μm and 21.2 μm
was apparent. The particle size of Sudan black B ranged from 0.0114
to 666 μm, and in this case, a unimodal distribution with a
peak at ∼98.1 μm was observed. According to EDS analysis
of the particle surface compositions (Figure d–g), oxygen and iron accounted for
∼91% of the surface in the case of iron oxide, whereas carbon
accounted for ∼75% of the surface of Sudan black B. Thus, iron
oxide was considered to be hydrophilic, whereas Sudan black B was
considered to be hydrophobic.
Figure 4
Characteristics of (b,d,f) the iron(III) oxide
particles and (c,e,g)
the Sudan black B particles. (a) Size distributions based on the volume
density analyzed using a laser diffraction particle size analyzer.
(b,c) Surface morphologies and (d–g) chemical compositions.
FE-SEMimages at magnifications of 1000× and 100 000×
with corresponding EDS mapping results and profiles. *C: carbon (sky
blue), O: oxygen (pink), Fe: iron (yellow), and N: nitrogen (green).
Characteristics of (b,d,f) the iron(III) oxide
particles and (c,e,g)
the Sudan black B particles. (a) Size distributions based on the volume
density analyzed using a laser diffraction particle size analyzer.
(b,c) Surface morphologies and (d–g) chemical compositions.
FE-SEMimages at magnifications of 1000× and 100 000×
with corresponding EDS mapping results and profiles. *C: carbon (sky
blue), O: oxygen (pink), Fe: iron (yellow), and N: nitrogen (green).The effects of the hydrophilic or hydrophobic dust
on the dynamic
behaviors of droplets on each fabric surface were then investigated
by dropping a 12.5 μL droplet from a height of 1 cm. The corresponding
images are presented in Figures and 6, with surface inclination
angles of 0 and 15°, respectively. For all pristine fabrics,
contamination with the hydrophilic dust led to the same pattern observed
before contamination (i.e., deposition), regardless of the surface
inclination angle. In contrast, when the surfaces were contaminated
with the hydrophobic dust, the water droplets rebounded in all fabrics
both before and after plasma treatment.
Figure 5
Effects of hydrophilic
dust (iron oxide) and hydrophobic dust (Sudan
black B) on the dynamic behaviors of droplets on the surfaces of (a,b)
PVDF-L, (c,d) PVDF/PET-L, and (e,f) PVDF/PET-H, (a,c,e) before and
(b,d,f) after plasma treatment, when a water droplet (12.5 μL
volume) fell on a horizontal plane from a height of 1 cm. The scale
bar in each image represents 5 mm. The surface inclination angle was
0°.
Figure 6
Effects of hydrophilic dust (iron oxide) and hydrophobic
dust (Sudan
black B) on the dynamic behaviors of droplets on the surfaces of (a,b)
PVDF-L, (c,d) PVDF/PET-L, and (e,f) PVDF/PET-H, (a,c,e) before and
(b,d,f) after plasma treatment, when a water droplet (12.5 μL
volume) fell on a 15° inclined surface from a height of 1 cm.
The scale bar in each image represents 5 mm. The surface inclination
angle was 15°.
Effects of hydrophilic
dust (iron oxide) and hydrophobic dust (Sudan
black B) on the dynamic behaviors of droplets on the surfaces of (a,b)
PVDF-L, (c,d) PVDF/PET-L, and (e,f) PVDF/PET-H, (a,c,e) before and
(b,d,f) after plasma treatment, when a water droplet (12.5 μL
volume) fell on a horizontal plane from a height of 1 cm. The scale
bar in each image represents 5 mm. The surface inclination angle was
0°.Effects of hydrophilic dust (iron oxide) and hydrophobic
dust (Sudan
black B) on the dynamic behaviors of droplets on the surfaces of (a,b)
PVDF-L, (c,d) PVDF/PET-L, and (e,f) PVDF/PET-H, (a,c,e) before and
(b,d,f) after plasma treatment, when a water droplet (12.5 μL
volume) fell on a 15° inclined surface from a height of 1 cm.
The scale bar in each image represents 5 mm. The surface inclination
angle was 15°.In the case of the plasma-treated PVDF/PET-L with
an inclination
angle of 15°, the water droplets were found to rebound before
contamination, while after deposition of the hydrophilic dust, they
exhibited rebound followed by deposition (Figure d). Indeed, it was relatively difficult to
separate the droplet from the PVDF/PET-L surface, possibly due to
its high shedding angle (Table ) and the presence of the hydrophilic dust; these factors
ultimately reduced the kinetic energy of the droplet. The above observations
can be accounted for by considering that when a hydrophilic dust particle
comes into contact with a water droplet, it penetrates the droplet
and becomes suspended, whereas in the case of hydrophobic dust, the
dust particles adsorb onto the droplet surface.[37] As a result, the hydrophilic-dust-covered surface behaves
identically to the uncontaminated surface. In contrast, when a droplet
falls onto a hydrophobic-dust-covered surface, the area of direct
contact and the adhesion between the droplets and the fabric are reduced
due to the presence of the surface-adsorbed dust. Additionally, it
is believed that the hydrophobic dust increases the surface roughness,[38] thereby increasing the capillary pressure that
repels droplets, creating an advantageous environment for droplet
rebound.To determine the self-cleaning properties of the fabrics,
a surface
inclination angle of 15° was employed, and droplets with a volume
of 12.5 μL were dropped one by one onto the same position from
a height of 1 cm. The dust on the surface was removed during this
process, the entire process was photographed and digitalized, and
the histograms obtained from the black and white images of the surface
were extracted and analyzed. Thus, Figure shows the results obtained for hydrophilic
dust removal on plasma-treated PVDF/PET-H. More specifically, as shown
in Figure a, prior
to covering the surface with the dust, the most frequent pixels had
a brightness intensity of ∼161, whereas, in contrast, the most
frequent pixels for the dust-covered surface had a brightness intensity
of ∼17. As a greater number of water droplets fell onto the
dust-coated surface, the peak area decreased around the brightness
value of 17 but increased around 161, indicating that the dust was
gradually removed. In addition, Figure b shows the cumulative distribution of the pixel brightness
values of the uncontaminated surface integrated from 255. A pixel
brightness intensity value of 109, where the cumulative distribution
ratio reached 99.5%, was used as a threshold value to obtain the degree
of dust coverage (Figure c). The self-cleaning efficiency (%) was then calculated as
outlined in eq where AN is the
area fraction of dust to the total area of the surface after dropping N water droplets (N = 1, 2, ..., 9, 10),
and A0 is the area fraction of dust to
the total area before water droplet addition. The self-cleaning efficiency
was calculated to be 7.8% for the first droplet and 29.6% for the
tenth droplet.
Figure 7
Example of calculating the self-cleaning efficiency of
a textile.
(a) Changes in the pixel distribution and (c) area fraction of dust,
following hydrophilic dust (iron oxide) removal when a 12.5 μL
water droplet fell from a height of 1 cm on a 15° inclined surface
based on (b) the threshold value derived from the cumulative pixel
distribution of PVDF/PET-H after treatment with O2 plasma
for 12 min and CF4 plasma for 4 min.
Example of calculating the self-cleaning efficiency of
a textile.
(a) Changes in the pixel distribution and (c) area fraction of dust,
following hydrophilic dust (iron oxide) removal when a 12.5 μL
water droplet fell from a height of 1 cm on a 15° inclined surface
based on (b) the threshold value derived from the cumulative pixel
distribution of PVDF/PET-H after treatment with O2 plasma
for 12 min and CF4 plasma for 4 min.Based on the above results, the self-cleaning efficiencies
of the
fabrics before and after plasma treatment are presented in Figure a,b, respectively.
As shown, PVDF-L exhibited the highest removal rate for both iron
oxide and Sudan black B due to the fact that this fabric possessed
the lowest surface energy and because the PVDF filament yarns have
a higher fiber density than PET filament yarns. As a result, dust
adhesion or penetration becomes more difficult, thereby facilitating
dust removal. In the case of PVDF/PET-H, this fabric had the highest
weave density and the highest inherent surface roughness, which resulted
in a large surface area for hydrophobic dust adhesion and penetration,
thereby creating unfavorable conditions for dust removal.
Figure 8
Self-cleaning
properties of the PVDF specimens (a,c,e) before and
(b,d,f) after plasma treatment. (a,b) Self-cleaning efficiencies after
the last droplet (volume = 12.5 μL) fell from a height of 1
cm onto a 15° inclined surface. Cleaning processes for the surfaces
contaminated with (c, d) hydrophilic (iron oxide) and (e,f) hydrophobic
(Sudan black B) dust upon dropping water droplets until they accumulated
on the PVDF/PET-H surface. The scale bar in each image represents
5 mm.
Self-cleaning
properties of the PVDF specimens (a,c,e) before and
(b,d,f) after plasma treatment. (a,b) Self-cleaning efficiencies after
the last droplet (volume = 12.5 μL) fell from a height of 1
cm onto a 15° inclined surface. Cleaning processes for the surfaces
contaminated with (c, d) hydrophilic (iron oxide) and (e,f) hydrophobic
(Sudan black B) dust upon dropping water droplets until they accumulated
on the PVDF/PET-H surface. The scale bar in each image represents
5 mm.It was also found that plasma treatment increased
the self-cleaning
efficiencies of all fabrics by decreasing the adhesion between the
water droplets and the surfaces, allowing the water droplets to be
detached more easily (Figure c–f). Additionally, because the contact area between
the dust and the surface was reduced due to the nanoscale roughness
introduced by surface treatment, the van der Waals forces decreased,
ultimately facilitating dust detachment from the surface.[37]With the exception of the PVDF/PET-L specimen,
the fabrics showed
higher self-cleaning efficiencies toward the hydrophilic particles
compared to the hydrophobic particles after plasma treatment. This
can be accounted for by considering that in comparison to a surface
covered by hydrophobic dust, a surface covered by hydrophilic dust
has a larger droplet contact area and shows superior dust removal
after spreading of the fallen water droplets. In addition, the hydrophilic
dust has higher specific gravity than the hydrophobic dust, which
means that the weight of the droplet absorbing the hydrophilic dust
will increase to a greater extent, even if the droplets carry the
same amount of dust. Owing to this increased weight, when a water
droplet rebounds and impinges again on the surface, it can spread
further. As a result, the hydrophilic dust, in contrast to the hydrophobic
dust, does not promote droplet rebound. Indeed, in the case of a hydrophilic-dust-covered
surface, the droplet energy decreases to a greater extent as the displacement
distance increases, leading to a shorter rebound interval. Consequently,
the droplets roll along the surface, increasing their contact area
with the dust-covered surface. Furthermore, the minimum particle size
for the hydrophilic dust is larger than the spacing between the nanostructures
present on the plasma-treated surface, whereas the hydrophobic dust
has a smaller particle size, allowing it to penetrate the surface
nanostructures. Thus, the hydrophilic dust is believed to be adsorbed
on the surface, resulting in more favorable conditions for its removal.[38,39]
Conclusions
This study aimed to develop
superhydrophobic PVDF fabrics and examine
the effects of the fabric structure on the droplet dynamics of water
droplets and self-cleaning properties. Unlike the PVDF film, all fabrics
became superhydrophobic after treatment with O2 plasma
for 12 min and CF4 plasma for 4 min, and the shedding angles
for the various fabrics followed the same order as that before treatment.
The PVDF fabric composed of electrospun PVDF filament yarns exhibited
the smallest shedding angle. In addition, the high-density PVDF/PET
fabric possessed a higher surface roughness and a smaller shedding
angle than the low-density PVDF/PET fabric. Furthermore, after plasma
treatment, favorable conditions were created for droplet rebound and
self-cleaning in all fabrics, wherein the PVDF fabric exhibited the
highest possibility of droplet rebound and the highest self-cleaning
efficiency. Moreover, in all fabrics, a higher degree of droplet rebound
was related to a higher surface inclination angle, a larger droplet
volume, and a lower drop fall height. For the PVDF fabric and high-density
PVDF/PET fabric, the self-cleaning efficiencies for hydrophobic dust
removal were higher before the plasma treatment, but the hydrophilic
dust removal efficiencies were better after the plasma treatment.
It was confirmed that when the fabric surfaces are superhydrophobic
enough to exhibit complete rebound of water drops, hydrophilic particles
have low adhesion to the surface and are included inside the droplets,
resulting in better removal. The findings of this study are therefore
expected to contribute to the development of effective methods of
weaving, treating, and employing superhydrophobic PVDF fabrics. The
successful superhydrophobic modification implies that PVDF fabrics
can easily be endowed with water repellency and self-cleaning properties,
resulting in energy harvesting performance stabilization, which is
expected to be beneficial in the development of materials for smart
textiles.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Three different fabrics,
namely, PVDF-L, PVDF/PET-L, and PVDF/PET-H, were employed for the
purpose of this study and were provided by Yeungnam University (South
Korea). Photographic surface images and select characteristics of
these fabrics are presented in Table . The fabrics were composed of PVDF filament yarns
and commercial PET filament yarns with two different specifications,
that is, 300D/96F×3fly and 255D/84F. PVDF-L was woven with PVDF
warp and weft yarns at a density of 24 yarns per inch, while PVDF/PET-L
was woven with PVDF weft and PET warp yarns using 300D/96F×3fly
PET at a density of 24 yarns per inch. In addition, PVDF/PET-H was
woven with PVDF weft and PET warp yarns using two yarns of 255D PET
filament yarns interlaced with each weft yarn at a density of 38 ×
42 yarns per inch. It should be noted here that PVDF/PET-H is thinner
and has a higher density than PVDF-L and PVDF/PET-L.
Table 3
Sample Codes and Characteristics of
the Fabric Specimens
To remove the impurities present on the fabrics, a
solution containing
sodium dodecylbenzene (5 g L–1) sulfonate and anhydrous
sodium carbonate (5 g L–1) was prepared in distilled
water and diluted (dilution ratio 1:30). All fabrics were immersed
in the resulting diluted solution for 45 min prior to drying at room
temperature. Each fabric was analyzed in the weft direction parallel
to the PVDF filament yarns. To determine the contact angle with a
flat surface and to analyze the effect of plasma treatment on surface
properties, a commercial 100% PVDF film (thickness: 0.08 mm; Fils
Co., Ltd., South Korea) was used as the reference (Figure S5).
Plasma Treatment
The fabrics were
subject to O2 plasma treatment for 12 min followed by CF4 plasma treatment for 4 min using a Plasmalab 80Plus system
(Oxford Instrument PLC., UK). When the pressure in the plasma chamber
reached 40 mTorr, etching gas was injected at a flow rate of 20 sccm,
and a power of 180 W was applied. The purpose of the plasma treatment
was to introduce nanoscale roughness onto the surface and to increase
its hydrophobicity.
Characterization
Surface Properties
FE-SEM (SIGMA,
Carl Zeiss, Germany) was employed to observe the surfaces of the fabric
specimens at an acceleration voltage of 2.0 kV. To determine the thicknesses
of the yarns and fibers in the fabrics, 60 points were selected from
the SEM images where each yarn and fiber could be clearly distinguished,
and the lengths in the direction perpendicular to the fiber axes were
measured and averaged using the ImageJ software (National Institutes
of Health, USA). Using a Kawabata Evaluation System (KES-FB4-A surface
tester, Kato Tech Co., Ltd., Japan), the inherent surface roughness
of each fabric was measured three times to obtain an average and surface
mean deviation (SMD), an indicator of the geometrical roughness. To
determine the percentage of area occupied by direct open pores in
the fabric, the specimen surface (40 mm × 27 mm) was photographed
using a digital single-lens reflex DSLR (EOS 70D, Canon) camera at
three different positions, and the values were averaged (Figure S1). The compositions and distributions
of the surface components on the fabrics were determined using EDS
(XFlash FlatQUAD 5060F, Bruker, Germany) and XPS (AXISHis, Kratos,
UK). Prior to carrying out the FE-SEM and EDS analyses, all specimens
were coated with platinum at 30 mA for 100 s using a sputter coater
(EM ACE200, Leica, Austria).
Superhydrophobicity
The static
contact angle and the shedding angle between each fabric surface and
a water droplet (72 dyn cm–1, 20 °C distilled
water) were measured using a contact angle meter to determine the
surface wettability (Theta Lite Optical Tensiometer, KSV Instruments,
Finland). For the static contact angle, the angle formed after a droplet
(volume 3.5 ± 0.2 μL) contacted with the surface was measured
after 3 s. The shedding angle was determined as the minimum angle
at which a droplet began rolling more than 2 cm on the surface when
12.5 ± 0.2 μL of distilled water was dropped vertically
from a height of 1 cm onto the specimen surface.[19] The reported angles were averaged from three duplicates
of five different locations on each specimen. When the static contact
angle was ≥150°, and the shedding angle was ≤10°,
the surface was considered to be superhydrophobic.[2]
Drop Dynamic Behaviors of the Water Droplets
The water droplet behaviors were determined by capturing photographic
images at a rate of 3000 frames per second using a high-speed digital
camera (NX3, IDT Vision, USA) to determine the water repellency. The
dynamic behaviors of the water droplets on the specimen surfaces were
analyzed under 45 different conditions, as listed in Table . The variables examined herein
included the drop fall height, the droplet volume, and the surface
inclination angle. The dynamic behaviors of the droplets were classified
into four categories based on the images obtained, namely deposition,
roll, partial rebound, and complete rebound. When the droplets moved
no more than 2 cm from the point of origin and remained on the surface,
the behavior was classified as deposition. However, when the droplets
moved in contact with the surface while maintaining a spherical or
elliptical shape, the behavior was classified as a roll. In addition,
the behavior was classified as a rebound when the droplets bounced
off the surface at least once and moved away from the surface. Furthermore,
when some of the droplets remained attached at the point of dropping,
the behavior was classified as a partial rebound, but when the droplets
were completely detached, the behavior was classified as a complete
rebound. As previously reported, a greater probability of complete
rebound was associated with an increased water repellency.[34,35] Examples of each behavior pattern are depicted in Figure .
Table 4
Experimental Conditions for Analyzing
the Dynamic Behavior of a Droplet on the Surface
drop fall
height [cm]
drop volume
[μL]
surface inclination
angle [°]
1.0, 7.5, 15.0
3.5, 12.5, 22.8
0, 15, 30, 45, 60
Figure 9
Categorization of the
dynamic droplet behaviors on a surface. Representative
examples of (a) deposition on the pristine PVDF-L (drop fall height
= 1 cm, droplet volume = 12.5 μL on the horizontal plane), (b)
roll on the pristine PVDF/PET-H (1 cm, 12.5 μL, 30°), (c)
partial rebound on PVDF-L after plasma treatment (1 cm, 12.5 μL,
0°), and (d) complete rebound on PVDF/PET-H after plasma treatment
(1 cm, 12.5 μL, 0°). *Plasma treatment conditions: O2 plasma for 12 min and CF4 plasma for 4 min. The
initial droplet impact points in each image are indicated by triangles.
Categorization of the
dynamic droplet behaviors on a surface. Representative
examples of (a) deposition on the pristine PVDF-L (drop fall height
= 1 cm, droplet volume = 12.5 μL on the horizontal plane), (b)
roll on the pristine PVDF/PET-H (1 cm, 12.5 μL, 30°), (c)
partial rebound on PVDF-L after plasma treatment (1 cm, 12.5 μL,
0°), and (d) complete rebound on PVDF/PET-H after plasma treatment
(1 cm, 12.5 μL, 0°). *Plasma treatment conditions: O2 plasma for 12 min and CF4 plasma for 4 min. The
initial droplet impact points in each image are indicated by triangles.
Self-Cleaning
The self-cleaning
properties of the various fabrics were quantified using iron(III)
oxide (Fe2O3) (Daejung Chemicals & Metals
Co., Ltd., South Korea) and Sudan black B (fat-soluble diazo dye,
ab146284) as hydrophilic and hydrophobic dust, respectively. These
particles were used to facilitate digital image processing because
of their dark color, which produces a distinct contrast to the white
fabric surface. The particle size was determined using a laser diffraction
particle size analyzer (Mastersizer 3000, Malvern, England), and the
surface morphology and composition were determined using FE-SEM and
EDS, respectively.The particles were sieved onto the fabric
surface from a vertical height of 20 mm to give an area of 15 mm in
the warp direction and 40 mm in the weft direction. The minimum weight
required to completely cover the fabric surface was 0.121 ± 0.001
mg/mm2 for iron oxide and 0.028 ± 0.001 mg/mm2 for Sudan black B. Subsequently, on the dust-covered surface
tilted at a 15° angle, droplets (12.5 μL volume) were applied
from a height of 1 cm perpendicular to the surface. Droplets were
applied one at a time at the same position for up to 10 times.[39] When the droplets remained attached to the surface,
no additional droplets were applied.After the application of
the water droplets, the specimen surface
was placed on a white background under direct illumination in a dark
room with all external light sources blocked, and the specimen was
photographed at a vertical distance of 33.5 cm using a DSLR camera
(EOS 70D, Canon). Adobe Photoshop CS4 was used to cut a series of
images to an actual area of 12 mm × 38 mm at the same position,
and the image noise was filtered using the median filter (radius:
1 pixel). Subsequently, the RGB images were converted to black-and-white
images using ImageJ software. The black-and-white images were composed
of pixels with brightness intensity values ranging from 0 (black)
to 255 (white). The histogram of the original fabric surface image
prior to dust covering was extracted, and the pixel brightness intensity
at a cumulative distribution of 99.5% was set as the threshold to
differentiate the fabric and the dust. The image obtained during the
self-cleaning test was binarized using the threshold, and the area
fraction of dust was calculated by converting the ratio of the number
of dust pixels to the total number of pixels in the image to a percentage
(Figure S9).