journal article·2022-10-25Open access

Effects of controlled shot peening on multi-scale morphology and hydrophobicity of 316L stainless steel

School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shenyang Ligong University, Shenyang 110159, China, J. Y. Zhang, L. J. Qin, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shenyang Ligong University, Shenyang 110159, China, F. G. Liu, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shenyang Ligong University, Shenyang 110159, China, C. S. Lou, School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shenyang Ligong University, Shenyang 110159, China

Abstract

In this study, we used shot peening-etching method to construct the multi-scale morphology on the surface of 316L stainless steel, assisted by surface modification to improve hydrophobicity. The effects of the diameter of projectile (0.2, 0.3, 0.4 mm) and shot peening time (1, 1.5, 2, 2.5 min) on the multi-scale morphology and hydrophobicity of the samples were studied. Meanwhile, the surface morphology was examined by metallographic microscope (OM) and scanning electron microscope (SEM). The surface profile and roughness were characterized by laser scanning confocal microscope (LSCM). The fractal dimension D was calculated by data analysis software, and the static contact angle measuring instrument was used to evaluate the hydrophobic performance. The results show that the smaller the diameter of projectile is, the stronger the hydrophobicity of the sample is, and there is the best time for shot peening. Moreover, the size and distance of pits on the surface decrease as the diameter of projectile decreases. The roughness of the surface shows a tendency to increase first and decrease with the increase of shot peening time, and the contact angle has the same tendency. The contact angle of the sample surface increases as the fractal dimension D increases. When the diameter of the projectile is 0.2 mm and the shot peening time is 2 min, after etching and surface modification, the static contact angle is 137.4° and the solid-liquid contact area is only 15.4%. This method has the advantages of low cost, high efficiency and environment-friendly, which is beneficial to the large-scale production of hydrophobic materials.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Surface Modification and Superhydrophobicity · Adhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions · Diamond and Carbon-based Materials Research

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (33)

Show source-provided references
1. [1] B. Wu, M. Zhou, J. Li, X. Ye, G. Li, L. Cai, Applied Surface Science256(1), 61 (2009);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2009.07.06110.1016/j.apsusc.2009.07.061 ↗
2. [2]S. S. Latthe, C. Terashima, K. Nakata, et al, Molecules19(4),4265(2014);https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules1904425610.3390/molecules19044256 ↗
3. [3] J. Zhang, Y. Han, Langmuir 24(3), 796 (2008);https://doi.org/10.1021/la702567w10.1021/la702567w ↗
4. [4] C.Gu, J.Tu, Langmuir27(16), 10132 (2011);https://doi.org/10.1021/la200778a10.1021/la200778a ↗
5. [5] W. Xu, X. Shi, S. Lu, Materials Chemistry and Physics 129(3), 1042 (2011);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2011.05.05310.1016/j.matchemphys.2011.05.053 ↗
6. [6] K. Liu, X. Yao, L. Jiang, Chemical Society Reviews 39(8), 3240 (2010);https://doi.org/10.1039/B917112F10.1039/b917112f ↗
7. [7]A. Garcia-Giron, J. M. Romano, A. Batal, et al, Langmuir35 (15), 5353 (2019);https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.9b0039810.1021/acs.langmuir.9b00398 ↗
8. [8] J. Li, Y. Zhou, W. Wang, et al, Langmuir36(5), 1075 (2020);https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.9b0227310.1021/acs.langmuir.9b02273 ↗
9. [9] J. M. Romano, M. Gulcur, A. Garcia-Giron, et al, Applied Surface Science476, 850 (2019);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.01.16210.1016/j.apsusc.2019.01.162 ↗
10. [10] V. S. Saji, Advances in Colloid and Interface Science283, 102245 (2020);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2020.10224510.1016/j.cis.2020.102245 ↗
11. [11] H. Yang, Y. Gao, G. S. Frankel, et al, Applied Surface Science499, 143916 (2020);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.14391610.1016/j.apsusc.2019.143916 ↗
12. [12] D. Wei, J. Wang, Y. Liu, et al, Chemical Engineering Journal404, 12644 (2021);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.12644410.1016/j.cej.2020.126444 ↗
13. [13] S. M. Emarati, M. Mozammel, Ceramics International46 (2), 1652 (2020);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2019.09.13710.1016/j.ceramint.2019.09.137 ↗
14. [14] H.Khaleghi, A.Eshaghi, Surfaces and Interfaces20, 100559 (2020);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2020.10055910.1016/j.surfin.2020.100559 ↗
15. [15] E. Liu, X. Yin, J. Hu, et al, Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects586, 124223 (2020);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colsurfa.2019.12422310.1016/j.colsurfa.2019.124223 ↗
16. [16] E. Khalili, M. Sarafbidabad, Surfaces and Interfaces8, 219 (2017);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2017.06.00810.1016/j.surfin.2017.06.008 ↗
17. [17] Y. L. Qu, M. Zhang, J. Yang, H. D. Yu, Materials Reports 33(16),2715 (2019);10.11896/cldb.18070134
18. [18] S. Kim, H. J. Hwang, H. Cho, et al, Chemical Engineering Journal350, 225 (2018);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.05.18410.1016/j.cej.2018.05.184 ↗
19. [19] H. Cho, J. Chung, G. Shin, et al, Nano energy56, 56 (2019);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoen.2018.11.03910.1016/j.nanoen.2018.11.039 ↗
20. [20] T. Liu, Y. Liu, Y. L. Di, H. D. Wang, B. Y. Zheng, Surface Technology 49(07),112 (2020);10.16490/j.cnki.issn.1001-3660.2020.07.014
21. [21] C. W. Lin, C. J. Chung, C. M. Chou, et al, Thin Solid Films620, 88 (2016);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2016.07.08710.1016/j.tsf.2016.07.087 ↗
22. [22] M. Balordi, A. Cammi, G. S. Magistris, et al, Surface and Coatings Technology374, 549 (2019);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2019.06.00110.1016/j.surfcoat.2019.06.001 ↗
23. [23] S. Dong, Z. Wang, L. An, et al,Nanomaterials10(8), 1509 (2020);https://doi.org/10.3390/nano1008150910.3390/nano10081509 ↗
24. [24] R. Schestatsky, C. P. Zucuni, K. S. Dapieve, et al, Journal of prosthodontic research64(1), 12 (2019);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2019.05.00410.1016/j.jpor.2019.05.004 ↗
25. [25] C. Panigrahy, A. Seal, N. K. Mahato, Measurement147, 106859 (2019);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.10685910.1016/j.measurement.2019.106859 ↗
26. [26] A. Das, V. Chawla, R. S. Matos, H. D. F.Filho, R. P. Yadav, Ş.Ţălu, S. Kumar, Surface and Coatings Technology421,127420 (2021); https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2021.12742010.1016/j.surfcoat.2021.127420 ↗
27. [27] H. Y. Jiang, M. Liu, H. Y. Qi, A. G. Liang, Y. L. Wang, N. N. Sun, Z. Wu, Chemical Tournal of Chinese Universities 41(06),1313 (2020);10.7503/cjcu20200050
28. [28] X. Zhang, Y. Si, J. Mo, et al, Chemical Engineering Journal313, 1152 (2017);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.11.01410.1016/j.cej.2016.11.014 ↗
29. [29] R. Sun, J. Zhao, Z. Li, et al, Progress in Organic Coatings133,77 ( 2019);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.porgcoat.2019.04.02010.1016/j.porgcoat.2019.04.020 ↗
30. [30] G. Wang, Y. Shen, J. Tao, et al, Surface and Coatings Technology329, 224 (2017);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2017.09.05510.1016/j.surfcoat.2017.09.055 ↗
31. [31] T. Shi, J. Kong, X. Wang, et al, Applied Surface Science389, 335(2016);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.07.12510.1016/j.apsusc.2016.07.125 ↗
32. [32] J. Gray-Munro, J. Campbell, Materials Letters189, 271 (2017);https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2016.11.10210.1016/j.matlet.2016.11.102 ↗
33. [33] B. Qian, Z. Shen, Langmuir21(20), 9007(2005);https://doi.org/10.1021/la051308c10.1021/la051308c ↗