Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T08:31:34.486Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth of ZnO Nanostructures on Cellulosic Substrates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2012

Thushara J. Athauda ,
Umaiz Butt ,
Parameswar Harikumar  and
Ruya R. Ozer
Thushara J. Athauda
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, 74104, U.S.A.
Umaiz Butt
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, 74104, U.S.A.
Parameswar Harikumar
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, 74104, U.S.A.
Ruya R. Ozer*
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, 74104, U.S.A.
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

ZnO nanostructures such as nanorods and nanoneedles were prepared on both cotton textiles and electrospun cellulosic nanofibers by a simple, two-step hydrothermal process at low temperature in aqueous solution. Commercially available cotton fabrics were used. Cellulosic nanofibers (average diameters of 100 nm) were obtained by electrospinning of cellulose acetate/polyvinyl acetate/polyethylene glycol mixture on glass slides to form non-woven mats.

On cotton textiles, the systematic change of the seed-to-growth solution concentration ratio caused a noticeable variation on the morphology of the nanostructures. The loading ratio of ZnO nanorods and nanoneedles were 37.5% and 18.1 wt%, respectively. Durable superhydrophobicity was achieved with a static water contact angle of 160.7° upon fluorosilane treatment, even after prolonged exposure to UV and plasma irradiation. The surface wettability was found to slightly vary from nanorods (160.7°) to nanoneedles (159.8°). The ZnO nanostructures did not lose their superhydrophobicity after 1 h of agitation in DI water. Excellent UV blocking activities were observed for nanorods and nanoneedles in the wavelength region analyzed. On electrospun cellulosic nanofibers of approximately 100 nm diameter, the loading ratio of ZnO nanorods were found to be 33.3 wt% which are densely and uniformly distributed the entirety of the nanofibers. Although diameters of the nanofibers and cotton fibers are very different in size (around 100 nm and 15-20 micron, respectively) the ZnO loading on electrospun fibers are very close to that of cotton fabric due to the high surface area and coiled nature of electrospun fibers, resulting in high packing density. ZnO nanorods grown on electrospun nanofibers exhibited hydrophilic behavior.

Keywords

crystal growthfibernanostructure
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1439: Symposium N/AA – Nanowires and Nanotubes—Synthesis, Properties, Devices, and Energy Applications of One-Dimensional Materials , 2012 , pp. 39 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Baruah, S., Dutta, J.,, Sci. Tech. Adv. Mater. 10 (2009) 013001.Google Scholar
Lee, M., Kwak, G., Yong, K., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 3 (2011) 3350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baruah, S., Jaisai, M., Imani, R., Nazhad, M.M., Mater. Sci. 055002 (2010).Google Scholar
Wang, L., Zhang, X., Li, B., Sun, P., Yang, J., Xu, H., et al. ., ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 3 (2011) 1277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Y., Zou, Y., Hou, Y., Cellulose 18 (2011) 1643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mao, Z., Shi, Q., Zhang, L., Cao, H., Thin Solid Films. 517 (2009) 2681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, L., Zhang, X., Fu, Y., Li, B., Liu, Y., Langmuir 25 (2009) 13619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, B., Cai, Z., App. Surf. Sci. 254 (2008) 5899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, R.H., Xin, J.H., Tao, X.M., Inorg. Chem. 44 (2005) 3926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
-eong Teo, W., Inai, R., Ramakrishna, S., Sci. Technol. Adv. Mat. 12 (2011) 013002.Google Scholar
Lu, X., Wang, C., Wei, Y., Small 5 (2009) 2349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugunan, A., Guduru, V.K., Uheida, A., Toprak, M.S., Muhammed, M., J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 3744 (2010) 3740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Y., Gong, J., Deng, Y., Sensor. Actuat A-Phys. 158 (2010) 176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, H.-U., Ahn, K., Lee, S.-J., Kim, J.-P., Kim, H.-G., Jeong, S.-Y., Cho, C.-R., Appl. Phys. Lett. 98 (2011) 193114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, N., Sun, C., Zhao, Y., Zhou, S., Chen, P., Jiang, L., J. Mater. Chem. 18 (2008) 3909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Changangam, S., Rungrojchaipon, P., Wongsasuluk, S., J. Micro. Soc. Thailand 23 (2009) 119.Google Scholar
Vayssieres, L., Adv. Mater. 15 (2003) 464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar