Wear-Resistant and Oleophobic Biomimetic Composite Materials

  • Vahid Hejazi
  • Michael Nosonovsky
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)


The Lotus effect involving roughness-induced superhydrophobicity is a way to design biomimetic non-wetting, non-sticky, self-cleaning, omniphobic, icephobic, and anti-fouling surfaces, which can be applied for various purposes related to green tribology. However, such surfaces require micropatterning, which is extremely vulnerable to even small wear rates. This limits the applicability of the Lotus effects to situations, when wear is practically non-present. To design sustainable superhydrophobic surfaces, we suggest using metal matrix composites (MMC) with hydrophobic reinforcement in the bulk of the material, rather than at its surface. Such surfaces provide roughness and heterogeneity needed for superhydrophobicity. In addition, they are sustainable since when surface layer is deteriorated and removed due to wear, hydrophobic reinforcement and roughness remains. We present a model and experimental data on wetting of MMCs. We also conduct experiments with graphite-reinforced MMCs and show that the contact angle can be determined from the model. In order to decouple the effects of reinforcement and roughness, the experiments were conducted for initially smooth and etched matrix and composite materials. Micropatterned surfaces can be used for underwater oleophobicity and self-cleaning, in a manner, similar to the Lotus effect. However, wetting of a rough surface by oil (or any non-polar organic liquid) can follow more complex scenarios than just wetting of a rough surface by water, since a four-phase solid–oil–water–air interface can be involved.


Contact Angle Water Droplet Water Contact Angle Graphite Particle Superhydrophobic Surface 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors acknowledge the support of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (UWM) RGI, NSF I/UCRC for Water Equipment and Policy, and UWM Research Foundation Bradley Catalyst grants. The authors are also thankful to Prof. Pradip K. Rohatgi and Mr. Aniedi Nyong from the UWM Center for Composite materials for metallic samples.


  1. 1.
    M. Nosonovsky, B. Bhushan, Superhydrophobic surfaces and emerging applications: non-adhesion, energy, green engineering. Curr. Opin. Coll. Interface Sci. 14, 270–280 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Wenzel, Resistance of solid surfaces to wetting by water. Ind. Eng. Chem. 28, 988 (1936)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    A.B.D. Cassie, S. Baxter, Wettability of porous surfaces. Trans. Faraday Soc. 40, 546 (1944)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Quere, Rough ideas on wetting. Physica A 313(1–2), 32–46 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Nosonovsky, B. Bhushan, Biologically-inspired surfaces: broadening the scope of roughness. Adv. Funct. Mater. 18, 843–855 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Nosonovsky, Multiscale roughness and stability of superhydrophobic biomimetic interfaces. Langmuir 23, 3157–3161 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. Verho et al., Mechanically durable superhydrophobic surfaces. Adv. Mater. 23, 673–678 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A.M. Kietzig, S.G. Hatzikiriakos, P. Englezos, Patterned superhydrophobic metallic surfaces. Langmuir 25, 4821–4827 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Tadmor et al., Measurement of lateral adhesion forces at the interface between a liquid drop and a substrate. Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 266101 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    E. Bormashenko et al., Wetting properties of the multiscaled nanostructured polymer and metallic superhydrophobic surfaces. Langmuir 22, 9982–9985 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Bormashenko et al., Micrometrically scaled textured metallic hydrophobic interfaces validate the Cassie–Baxter wetting hypothesis. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 302, 308–311 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J.J. Bikerman, Sliding of drops from surfaces of different roughnesses. J. Colloid Sci. 5, 349 (1950)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    B. Qian, Z. Shen, Fabrication of superhydrophobic surfaces by dislocation-selective chemical etching on aluminum, copper, and zinc substrates. Langmuir 21, 9007–9009 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    N.J. Shirtcliffe, G. McHale, M.I. Newton, C.C. Perry, Wetting and wetting transitions on copper-based super-hydrophobic surfaces. Langmuir 21, 937–943 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    A.D. Sommers, A.M. Jacobi, Creating micro-scale surface topology to achieve anisotropic wettability on an aluminum surface. J. Micromech. Microeng. 16, 1571–1578 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P.K. Rohatgi, Metal-matrix composites. Def. Sci. J. 43(4), 323–349 (1993)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    K. Sobolev, M. Ferrada-Gutiérrez, How nanotechnology can change the concrete world: part 1. Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 84(10), 14–17 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    V. Mortazavi, M. Nosonovsky, Wear-induced microtopography evolution and wetting properties of self-cleaning, lubricating and healing surfaces. J. Adhes. Sci.Technol. 25(12), 1337–1359 (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    V. Mortazavi, M. Nosonovsky, Friction-induced pattern-formation and Turing systems. Langmuir 27(8), 4772–4779 (2011). doi:  10.1021/la200272x Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    S. Wang, L. Fen, H. Liu, T. Sun, X. Zhang, L. Jiang, D. Zhu, Manipulation of surface wettability between superhydrophobicity and superhydrophilicity on copper films. Chem. Phys. Chem. 6, 1475–1478 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    F.M. Fowkes, W.D. Harkins, The state of the monolayers adsorbed at the interface solid–liquid solution. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 62(12), 3377–3386 (1940)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    I. Morcos, Surface tension of stress-annealed pyrolitic graphite. J. Chem. Phys. 57(4), 1801–1802 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Engineering and Applied ScienceUniversity of WisconsinMilwaukeeUSA

Personalised recommendations