Comparison highlights superhydrophilic coatings excel at anti-fogging, while superhydrophobic coatings target contaminants.
Transparent coatings with superwetting properties (superhydrophilicity or superhydrophobicity) have broad application prospects. Usually, most studies have been carried out separately on superhydrophobic coatings or superhydrophilic coatings. In our work, superhydrophilic transparent coatings were prepared by the four-mercapto and four-polyethylene glycol monomethyl acrylate modified POSS (POSS-(SH)4-(PEGMA)4) (designated as I-coating) as well as superhydrophobic transparent coating (designated as O-coating) were prepared with the mercapto and seven-heptyl decafluoroheptyl acrylate modified POSS (POSS-SH-(DFMA)7). The similarities and differences in anti-fogging, stain resistance, self-cleaning and anti-biological application between superhydrophobic and superhydrophilic coatings were compared systematically. The results show that superhydrophilic coatings performed better at preventing fog and facilitating self-cleaning; nevertheless, superhydrophobic coatings exhibited superior efficacy in the removal of contaminants such as markers and lipsticks. Both superwetting coatings demonstrated proficiency in self-cleaning and in deterring biological adhesion with respect to low-viscosity oil droplets. The relevant research of this paper provided a reference for the subsequent study on the advantages and disadvantages of superhydrophilic and superhydrophobic as well as its specific application.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: