4.7 Article

Wear resistance of nanoparticle coatings on paperboard

Journal

WEAR
Volume 307, Issue 1-2, Pages 112-118

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.wear.2013.08.022

Keywords

Nanoparticle coatings; Wear resistance; Microscopy techniques; Surface analysis; Wettability; Paperboard

Funding

  1. Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation (Tekes) under Liquid flame spray nanocoating for flexible roll-to-roll web materials - project [40095/11]
  2. Academy of Finland [250 122]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Paper can be coated with liquid flame spray (LFS) generated nanoparticles to control the wettability of its surface from hydrophilic to superhydrophobic. The adhesion of the nanoparticles on paper is of interest both for understanding the product durability during its lifetime and for product safety issues. Poor particle adhesion influences the desired functional properties and released nanoparticles cause health and environmental concerns. To investigate the wear resistance of LFS-TiO2 and -SiO2 coated papers, the nanoparticle surfaces were exposed to rotary abrasion tests. The changes in the samples were analyzed by contact angle measurements and high resolution field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM). After abrasive action with another paperboard surface, only relatively small changes in wettability of superhydrophobic/hydrophilic coatings were found. A more severe abrasive action will remove some of the nanoparticle coating, but the hydrophobic/hydrophilic character of the surface is still maintained to large extent. The results indicate that the wear resistance of LFS nanocoated paper surfaces differs and depends on the nanoparticle material type used for the coating. This is clearly reflected as changes in surface structure shown by FE-SEM and wettability. The results can help understanding which paper-related application areas could be targeted with the LFS-nanoparticle coating process. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available