Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8rzl6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T06:40:51.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Attapulgite-enabled multifunctional protective coatings: structure, functionalization and applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2026

Qiaozhi Miao
Affiliation:
Huaiyin Institute of Technology, China Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot, China
Chaoyu Zhang
Affiliation:
Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot, China
Wenbo Wang
Affiliation:
Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot, China
Yue Yin
Affiliation:
Huaiyin Institute of Technology, China Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot, China
Mei Wu*
Affiliation:
Huaiyin Institute of Technology, China
*
Corresponding author: Mei Wu; Email: meiwu@hyit.edu.cn
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Multifunctional coatings represent the most widely used strategy for extending the service life of metallic materials in harsh environments. However, coating performance is determined by the designed functional fillers, or the micro/nano-containers. Attapulgite (ATP) has attracted increasing attention in multifunctional coating systems because it can simultaneously improve barrier performance, act as a micro/nano-container for active agents, form surface micro- and nanostructures and regulate interfacial properties. These features enable its broad use in superhydrophobic, anti-corrosion, anti-bacterial/anti-fouling, self-cleaning/anti-smudge and anti-icing coatings. This review provides a comprehensive overview of recent progress in ATP-based multifunctional protective coatings. It examines the main pretreatment strategies for ATP, including thermal treatment, acid/alkali activation, hydrothermal treatment and solvothermal treatment, together with their influence on channel characteristics, surface activity, dispersibility and matrix compatibility. The diverse roles of ATP in coating systems are further discussed, ranging from barrier-phase reinforcement and micro/nano-container construction to roughness generation and interfacial functional regulation, as well as the corresponding protective mechanisms. By integrating the discussion of passive barrier enhancement and active functional protection, this review offers a unified perspective on the design of ATP-based multifunctional coatings. In addition, current challenges and future research directions are briefly outlined to promote the practical development of high-performance ATP-enabled protective coatings.

Information

Type
Review Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Mineralogical Society of the United Kingdom and Ireland.
Figure 0

Figure 1. (a) Annual publication output and citation trends of ATP-based multifunctional protective coatings, reflecting growing research interest in this field (data sourced from the Web of Science Core Collection using the keywords ‘Attapulgite’ and ‘Coating’). (b) Schematic illustration of the review structure, outlining the pretreatment and modification strategies of ATP and their subsequent applications in various multifunctional protective coatings, including active corrosion protection, self-cleaning/anti-smudge, anti-bacterial/anti-fouling, anti-icing and superhydrophobic coatings.Figure 1 long description.

Figure 1

Table 1. Chemical compositions (wt.%) of ATPs from various locations.Table 1 long description.

Figure 2

Figure 2. (a) Representative TGA profile of ATP. (b) X-ray diffraction trace of ATP subjected to thermal pretreatment at various temperatures (Liu et al., 2013). (c) SSA and pore volume of ATP as a function of temperature (Zhuang et al., 2022). (d–f) Scanning electron microscopy images of ATP at various temperatures: (d) 200°C, (e) 1000°C and (f) 1100°C (Wang et al., 2020b). (g) Schematic illustration of the structural evolution of water molecules and channels in ATP (Zhuang et al., 2022).Figure 2 long description.

Figure 3

Figure 3. (a) Schematic illustration of the preparation of inhibitor@ATP containers. (b) X-ray diffraction traces of pristine ATP and acid-etched ATP. (c) SSA and pore volume of pristine ATP, acid-etched ATP and benzotriazole (BTA)@ATP. (d) Scanning electron microscopy image of acid-etched ATP (Li et al., 2025). (e) Time-dependent evolution of SSA for ATP etched with various HCl concentrations (Yeh et al., 2013). (f) Effect of NaOH concentration on the SSA and pore volume of ATP. (g) Transmission electron microscope image of ATP after pretreatment with 5 M NaOH (Wang et al., 2015a). 3-NISA = 3-nitrosalicylic acid; MBT = 2-mercaptobenzothiazole.Figure 3 long description.

Figure 4

Figure 4. (a) Proposed mechanisms for the transformation from RATP (ball-milled natural ATP) nanorods to smectite nanosheets. (b) XRD traces of RATP, RATP-2h, RATP-4h, RATP-8h, RATP-12h, RATP-24h, RATP-48h and AATP-48h. (c–e) Field-emission SEM images (Wang et al., 2015b) of (c) RATP-2h, (d) RATP-12h and (e) RATP-24h. (f) Scheme for the direct synthesis of zeolite from ATP via the VIT method. (g) XRD traces of ATP and ZSM-5. (h) SEM image of ZSM-5. (i) XRD traces of ZSM-5 from various ATP, XATP, MATP and SATP sources, denoting ATP from Xuyi, Mingguang and Shijiazhuang, China, respectively (Li et al., 2017). (j) Schematic of the structural transition of PATP–MCM-41 during MCM-41 construction. (k) SSAs and pore volumes of TEOS–MCM-41, ATP–MCM-41 and PATP–MCM-41. (l) Small-angle XRD traces of TEOS–MCM-41, ATP–MCM-41 and PATP–MCM-41 (Chen et al., 2025). CTAB = cetyltrimethylammonium bromide; SDA = structure-directing agent.Figure 4 long description.

Figure 5

Figure 5. (a) Field-emission SEM (FESEM) image of natural ATP. (b) FESEM image of homogenized ATP dispersed in DMSO. (c) SSA and total pore volume of homogenized ATP in various liquid media (Xu et al., 2013b). (d) XRD traces, (e) Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy and (f) zeta potential of pristine ATP and solvothermally treated ATP in various solvents (MT, ET, IPA, DMSO and DMF; Zhang et al., 2015c). (g) XRD traces of ATP, GLY(0.1)-ATP, GLY(0.5)-ATP and GLY(1.0)-ATP. (h) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image of GLY(0.5)-ATP. (i) TEM image of GLY(1.0)-ATP (Zhang et al., 2015b).Figure 5 long description.

Figure 6

Table 2. Comparative advantages of ATP over representative fillers in functional coating applications.Table 2 long description.

Figure 7

Figure 6. (a) Schematic illustration of the preparation process for BTA-loaded superhydrophobic ATP containers. (b) Water CA and SA of composite coatings as a function of the EP resin to superhydrophobic nanoparticle mass ratio (thermally untreated SH-P and 300°C-activated SH-P-H; Wang et al., 2025b). (c,d) Evolution of CA and SA during (c) sandpaper abrasion and (d) water impact testing (Wang et al., 2025b). (e) CA of the EP/BTA@SH-P-H coating as a function of immersion time in various media: organic solvents (ethanol and n-hexane), acidic solution (pH 1), alkaline solution (pH 14) and saline solution (3.5 wt.% NaCl, pH 7; Wang et al., 2025b). (f) CA and SA of the coating as a function of UV irradiation time (Wang et al., 2025b). (g,h) Photographs of the SMP-BTA/fluoro-ATP-coated Mg alloy showing the impact and rebound behaviour of (g) a 3.5 wt.% NaCl droplet and (h) an n-hexadecane droplet (10 μL; Zhang et al., 2021). (i,j) Variation in superhydrophobicity of the SMP-BTA/ATP coating during (i) immersion testing and (j) neutral salt spray testing (Zhang et al., 2021). (k,l) CA and SA of the superamphiphobic OG-ATP/EP bilayer coating measured with droplets of (k) different pH values and (l) different temperatures (Zhang et al., 2024a). (m,n) CA and SA of water and n-hexadecane on the superamphiphobic bilayer coating after (m) sandpaper abrasion and (n) tape-peeling cycles (Zhang et al., 2024a).Figure 6 long description.

Figure 8

Figure 7. (a) Schematic illustration of the synthesis of ULM@ATP. (b) |Z|0.01Hz of the ULM@ATP/Oil-2 coating after 480 h of immersion in 3.5 wt.% NaCl solution. (c) Transmission electron microscopy image of ULM@ATP (Wu et al., 2023b). (d) |Z|0.01Hz values of various composite coatings. (e) Pull-off adhesion strengths of various composite coatings. (f) pH-responsive release profile of ATP@ATAT. (g) SEM image of the peeled EP/ATP@ATAT-3% coating after 96 h of immersion in 3.5 wt.% NaCl solution (Ali et al., 2026). (h–k) SECM maps of (h,i) a defective blank coating and (j,k) an assembled ATP coating on carbon steel immersed in electrolyte solution (Liu et al., 2018b). (l–n) Photographs of coatings after salt spray testing: (l) pure EP, (m) ATP/EP and (n) ATP@IL/EP (Ci et al., 2022). (o) Schematic illustration of the passivation and self-healing mechanism of PT-ATP@HQ for pyrite (Yu et al., 2022). HQ: 8-hydroxyquinoline (corrosion inhibitor); PT = organosilane passivator (Prop-SH/TEOS).Figure 7 long description.

Figure 9

Figure 8. (a) Schematic illustration of the fabrication process for the FPFTS coating. (b) Bacterial adhesion colonies on agar plates for various surfaces and (c) bacterial colonies on agar plates for various surfaces in anti-bacterial experiments. The numbers below the images denote colony-forming units (blue: E. coli; yellow: S. aureus). (d) Anti-adhesion performance of various material surfaces. (e) Anti-bacterial rates of various material surfaces. (f) Ag+ concentration in the soaking solution before and after wear resistance testing. (g) Schematic illustration of the passive defence mechanism of the FPFTS coating against bacteria. (h) Schematic illustration of the active anti-bacterial mechanism of the FPFTS coating. (i) Schematic illustration of the synergistic anti-bacterial mechanism of the superhydrophobic coating combining passive defence and active anti-bacterial strategies (Jiang et al., 2024). NP = nanoparticle.Figure 8 long description.

Figure 10

Figure 9. (a) Schematic illustration of the fabrication process for modified ATP@HDTMS particles and the superhydrophobic ATP@HDTMS@WEP coating. (b) Self-cleaning performance of the superhydrophobic ATP@HDTMS@WEP coating against various solid contaminants and the corresponding self-cleaning mechanism. (c) Anti-smudge performance of the superhydrophobic ATP@HDTMS@WEP coating against various liquid contaminants (Liu et al., 2024). (d) Schematic illustration of the fabrication process for OG-ATP particles and the superamphiphobic coating. (e) Water droplet (surface tension at 20°C: 72.8 mN m–1) and n-hexadecane droplet (surface tension at 20°C: 27.5 mN m–1) on OG-ATP particles. (f) Self-cleaning evaluation of the superamphiphobic OG-ATP coating driven by water and n-hexadecane. (g) CA and SA values of various liquid droplets on the superamphiphobic OG-ATP coating, along with its anti-smudge performance against various liquid contaminants of different surface tensions (Zhang et al., 2024b).Figure 9 long description.

Figure 11

Figure 10. (a) Schematic illustration of the preparation process for PPy/ATP@hexadecylPOS photothermal superhydrophobic coatings. (b) SEM images and water CA of the PPy/ATP@hexadecylPOS coatings, showing a silicone resin-rich phase (red rectangles) and a PPy/ATP@hexadecylPOS-rich phase (yellow circle). (c) Surface temperature evolution of various coatings as a function of irradiation time under 1 sun illumination. (d,e) Water freezing time on bare and PPy/ATP@hexadecylPOS-coated aluminium sheets at –10°C under (d) dark conditions and (e) 1 sun irradiation (Xie et al., 2022). (f) Schematic illustration of the preparation process for SiP/F-MOFs@ATP coatings. (g) Transmission electron microscopy image of SiP/F-MOFs@ATP. (h) 3D profilometer image of the SiP/F-MOFs@ATP coating. (i) SA of the coating as a function of temperature after storage at low temperature and 80% relative humidity for 1 h. (j) Surface temperature of bare and coated aluminium alloy plates as a function of time under 1 sun irradiation at 25.4°C and 38% relative humidity. (k,l) De-frosting process on (k) bare and coated aluminium alloy plates and (l) cable lines in a –10°C and 80% relative humidity environment under 0.1 sun irradiation (Mao et al., 2024b).Figure 10 long description.