Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 46, Issue 18, pp 5931–5939 | Cite as

Corrosion behavior of surface-modified titanium in a simulated body fluid

  • Julia van Drunen
  • Baodong Zhao
  • Gregory Jerkiewicz
Article

Abstract

We investigate the influence of micro-sandblasting and electrochemical passivation on properties such as corrosion rate and surface roughness, which are important to the biocompatibility of titanium (Ti), using surface analysis techniques and electrochemical measurements. Results of microscopy and surface profilometry experiments reveal roughened but uniform surface topography with an average surface roughness in the 0.87–1.06 μm range, depending on the alternating current passivation voltage applied to the micro-sandblasted samples. Open circuit potential versus time measurements in Hank’s Balanced Salt Solution (HBSS, a simulated body fluid) allow determination of the corrosion potential (E corr) and reveal a shift of E corr toward higher values upon passivation, thus pointing to increased corrosion stability. Corrosion rates in HBSS range between 0.049 and 0.288 μm year−1 for micro-sandblasted and passivated Ti, as compared to that for the micro-sandblasted and non-passivated surface that is 0.785 μm year−1. Results from this study demonstrate that micro-sandblasting coupled with electrochemical passivation provides a roughened surface with increased corrosion stability and a low corrosion rate in HBSS. Application of this technique to Ti in medical and dental applications may be expected to result in an improvement of biocompatibility.

Keywords

Corrosion Rate Polarization Curve Simulated Body Fluid Open Circuit Potential Alternate Current 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgement

We acknowledge the National Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, Ministry of Research and Innovation of Ontario, and Queen’s University for their financial support as well as the Department of Geological Sciences for the facilities used in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    Clark RJH (1968) The chemistry of titanium and vanadium. Elsevier, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tschernitschek H, Borchers L, Geurtsen W (2005) Quintessence Int 36:523Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ADA Council on Scientific Affairs (2003) J Am Dent Assoc 134:347Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Williams D (ed) (1990) Concise encyclopedia of medical & dental materials. Pergamon Press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhao B, Jerkiewicz G (2006) Can J Chem 84:1132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hrapovic S, Luan BL, D’Amours M, Vatankhah G, Jerkiewicz G (2001) Langmuir 17:3051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Solar RJ (1979) In: Syrett A (ed) Corrosion and degradation of implant materials. American Society for Testing and Materials, STP 684, Philadelphia, p 259Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lide DR (1993) CRC handbook of chemistry and physics, 74th edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fukuzuka T, Shimogori H, Satoh H, Kamikubo F (1980) In: Kimura H, Izumi O (eds) Titanium ‘80-Science and Technology Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Titanium, KyotoGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jerkiewicz G, Strzelecki H, Wieckowski A (1996) Langmuir 12:1005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jerkiewicz G, Zhao B, Hrapovic S, Luan BL (2008) Chem Mater 20:1877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brunette DM, Tengvall P, Textor M, Thomsen P (eds) (2001) Titanium in medicine material science, surface science, engineering, biological responses and medical applications. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Munro A, Cunningham MF, Jerkiewicz G (2010) ACS Appl Mater Interfaces: 2:854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van Noort R (1987) J Mater Sci 22:3801. doi: 10.1007/BF01133326 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schutz RW, Thomas DE, Davis JR, Destefani JD, Frissell HJ, Crankovic GM (eds) (1987) ASM Handbook, vol 13, 9th edn. ASM International, Materials ParkGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    ASTM G5-94 (2004) Standard reference test method for making potentiostatic and potentiodynamic anodic polarization measurements ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ASTM G59-97 (2003) Standard Test Method for Conducting Potentiodynamic Polarization Resistance Measurements ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    ASTM G102-89 (2004) Standard Practice for Calculation of Corrosion Rates and Related Information from Electrochemical Measurements ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    ASTM STP 727 (1981) Cyclic Polarization Measurements-Experimental Procedure and Test Data ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    ASTM G3 (2004) Standard Practice for Conventions Applicable to Electrochemical Measurements in Corrosion Testing ASTM, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Parthasaradhy NV (1989) Practical electroplating handbook. Prentice-Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bowers KT, Keller J, Randolph B, Wick D, Michaels C (1992) Int J Oral Maxillofac Implant 7:302Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Boyan BD, Batzer R, Kieswetter K, Liu Y, Cochran DL, Szmuckler-Moncler S, Dean DD, Schwarts Z (1998) Biomed Mater Res 39:77CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julia van Drunen
    • 1
  • Baodong Zhao
    • 1
  • Gregory Jerkiewicz
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada

Personalised recommendations