Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fabrication and characterization of gecko-inspired dry adhesion, superhydrophobicity and wet self-cleaning surfaces

  • Published:
Journal of Bionic Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, gecko-inspired polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) microfiber surfaces were fabricated by combining Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) and micro-mold casting. The effect of roughness and surface energy of counterface on the adhesion of gecko-inspired microfiber surfaces and its superhydrophobicity and wet self-cleaning were studied. The adhesion of gecko-inspired microfiber surfaces depended on the roughness of the counterfaces due to the influences of contact area and interlocking mechanism. SEM images of interfaces between counterfaces with different roughness and gecko-inspired microfiber surfaces revealed the matched and dis-matched contact directly. The gecko-inspired microfiber surface got the larger adhesive force from the higher surface energy counterface, which is consisted with Johnson-Kendall-Roberts (JKR) theory. The smaller dimension and lower duty ratio of microfibers on PDMS resulted in the increasing of Water Contact Angle (WCA) and the decreasing of Sliding Angle (SA) compared to those of smooth PDMS. Particularly, sample P-8-28-20 had the biggest WCA (155°) and SA (7°), which displayed the superhydrophobicity and the best wet self-cleaning efficiency in all samples. The present studies showed that the roughness and surface energy of counterface both affected the adhesion of gecko-inspired microfiber surfaces. The smaller dimension and lower duty ratio of microfibers on PDMS endowed it with the superhydrophobicity and the wet self-cleaning abilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mengüç Y, Yang S Y, Kim S, Rogers J A, Sitti M. Geckoinspired controllable adhesive structures applied to micromanipulation. Advanced Functional Materials, 2012, 22, 1246–1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hansen W R, Autumn K. Evidence for self-cleaning in gecko setae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005, 102, 385–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Huber G, Mantz H, Spolenak R, K, Jacobs K, Gorb S N, Arzt E. Evidence for capillarity contributions to gecko adhesion from single spatula nanomechanical measurements. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2005, 102, 16293–16296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Autumn K, Peattie A M. Mechanisms of adhesion in geckos. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 2002, 42, 1081–1090.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Williams E E, Peterson J A. Convergent and alternative designs in the digital adhesive pads of scincid lizards. Science, 1982, 215, 1509–1511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Shahsavan H, Zhao B X. Conformal adhesion enhancement on biomimetic microstructured surfaces. Langmuir, 2011, 27, 7732–7742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Liu K S, Du J X, Wu J T, Jiang L. Superhydrophobic gecko feet with high adhesive forces towards water and their bio-inspired materials. Nanoscale, 2012, 4, 768–772.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Autumn K, Sitti M, Liang Y A, Peattie A M, Hansen W R, Sponberg S, Kenny T W, Fearing R, Israelachvili J N, Full R J. Evidence for van der Waals adhesion in gecko setae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2002, 99, 12252–12256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jeong H E, Lee J K, Kim H N, Moon S H, Suh K Y. A nontransferring dry adhesive with hierarchical polymer nanohairs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009, 106, 5639–5644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Qu L T, Dai L M, Stone M, Xia Z H, Wang Z L. Carbon nanotube arrays with strong shear binding-on and easy normal lifting-off. Science, 2008, 322, 238–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. He Q S, Yu M, Li Y, Chen X L, Zhang H, Gong L, Dai Z D. Adhesion characteristics of a novel synthetic polydimethylsiloxane for bionic adhesive pads. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2014, 11, 371–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Del Campo A, Greiner C, Arzt E. Contact shape controls adhesion of bioinspired fibrillar surfaces. Langmuir, 2007, 23, 10235–10243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Murphy M P, Kim S, Sitti M. Enhanced adhesion by gecko-inspired hierarchical fibrillar adhesives. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2009, 1, 849–855.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang Y, Hu H, Shao J Y, Ding Y C. Fabrication of well-defined mushroom-shaped structures for biomimetic dry adhesive by conventional photolithography and molding. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2014, 6, 2213–2218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bovero E, Krahn J, Menon C. Fabrication and testing of self cleaning dry adhesives utilizing hydrophobicity gradient. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2015, 12, 270–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Murphy M P, Aksak B, Sitti M. Gecko-inspired directional and controllable adhesion. Small, 2009, 5, 170–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Castellanos G, Arzt E, Kamperman M. Effect of viscoelasticity on adhesion of bioinspired micropatterned epoxy surfaces. Langmuir, 2011, 27, 7752–7759.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yu J, Chary S, Das S, Tamelier J, Turner K L, Israelachvili J N. Friction and adhesion of gecko-inspired PDMS flaps on rough surfaces. Langmuir, 2012, 28, 11527–11534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cañas N, Kamperman M, Völker B, Kroner E, McMeeking R M, Arzt E. Effect of nano- and micro-roughness on adhesion of bioinspired micropatterned surfaces. Acta Biomaterialia, 2012, 8, 282–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ran C B, Ding G Q, Liu W C, Deng Y, Hou W T. Wetting on nanoporous alumina surface: transition between Wenzel and Cassie states controlled by surface structure. Langmuir, 2008, 24, 9952–9955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Janssen D, De Palma R, Verlaak S, Heremans P, Dehaen W. Static solvent contact angle measurements, surface free energy and wettability determination of various self-assembled monolayers on silicon dioxide. Thin Solid Films, 2006, 515, 1433–1438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mark J E, Sullivan J L. Model networks of end-linked polydimethylsiloxane chains. I. Comparisons between experimental and theoretical values of the elastic modulus and the equilibrium degree of swelling. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 1977, 66, 1006–1011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. De Sena Affonso J E, Nunes R C R. Influence of the filler and monomer quantities in the rheometrical behaviour and crosslink density of the NBR-cellulose II composites. Polymer Bulletin, 1995, 34, 669–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chung C K. Geometrical pattern effect on silicon deep etching by an inductively coupled plasma system. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 2004, 14, 656–662.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Jin K J, Tian Y, Erickson J S, Puthoff J, Autumn K, Pesika N S. Design and fabrication of gecko-inspired adhesives. Langmuir, 2012, 28, 5737–5742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cho W K, Choi I S. Fabrication of hairy polymeric films inspired by geckos: wetting and high adhesion properties. Advanced Functional Materials, 2008, 18, 1089–1096.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim S, Cheung E, Sitti M. Wet self-cleaning of biologically inspired elastomer mushroom shaped microfibrillar adhesives. Langmuir, 2009, 25, 7196–7199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Khanafer K, Duprey A, Schlicht M, Berguer R. Effects of strain rate, mixing ratio, and stress–strain definition on the mechanical behavior of the polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) material as related to its biological applications. Biomedical Microdevices, 2009, 11, 503–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Sitti M, Fearing R S. Synthetic gecko foot-hair micro/ nano-structures as dry adhesives. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, 2003, 17, 1055–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Greiner C, Del Campo A, Arzt E. Adhesion of bioinspired micropatterned surfaces: effects of pillar radius, aspect ratio, and preload. Langmuir, 2007, 23, 3495–3502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson K L, Kendall K, Roberts A D. Surface energy and the contact of elastic solids. In Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 1971, 324, 301–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Cassie A B D, Baxter S. Wettability of porous surfaces. Transactions of the Faraday Society, 1944, 40, 546–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Stanton M M, Ducker R E, MacDonald J C, Lambert C R, Grant McGimpsey W. Super-hydrophobic, highly adhesive, polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) surfaces. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2012, 367, 502–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Jin M H, Feng X J, Xi J M, Zhai J, Cho K W, Feng L, Jiang L. Super-hydrophobic PDMS surface with ultra-low adhesive force. Macromolecular Rapid Communications, 2005, 26, 1805–1809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Liu J F, Xiao X Y, Shi Y L, Wan C X. Fabrication of a superhydrophobic surface from porous polymer using phase separation. Applied Surface Science, 2014, 297, 33–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Yoshimitsu Z, Nakajima A, Watanabe T, Hashimoto K. Effects of surface structure on the hydrophobicity and sliding behavior of water droplets. Langmuir, 2002, 18, 5818–5822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Tuteja A, Choi W, Ma M L, Mabry J M, Mazzella S A, Rutledge G C, Mckinley G H, Cohen R E. Designing superoleophobic surfaces. Science, 2007, 318, 1618–1622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Tuteja A, Choi W, Mabry J M, Mckinley G H, Cohen R E. Robust omniphobic surfaces. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2008, 105, 18200–18205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kim S, Cheung E, Sitti M. Wet self-cleaning of biologically inspired elastomer mushroom shaped microfibrillar adhesives. Langmuir, 2009, 25, 7196–7199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Lab of Advanced Technologies of Materials, Ministry of Education, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, 610031, China

    Yongchao Zhang, Shuxin Qu, Xiang Cheng & Xueling Gao

  2. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Kowloon, Hong Kong, 999077, China

    Xia Guo

Authors
  1. Yongchao Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shuxin Qu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiang Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xueling Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xia Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuxin Qu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, Y., Qu, S., Cheng, X. et al. Fabrication and characterization of gecko-inspired dry adhesion, superhydrophobicity and wet self-cleaning surfaces. J Bionic Eng 13, 132–142 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1672-6529(14)60167-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1672-6529(14)60167-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation