Revisiting the supplementary relationship of dynamic contact angles measured by sessile-droplet and captive-bubble methods: Role of surface roughness

被引:44
作者
Sarkar, Sreya [1 ]
Roy, Tamal [1 ]
Roy, Ankit [2 ]
Moitra, Shashwata [1 ]
Ganguly, Ranjan [2 ]
Megaridis, Constantine M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Illinois, Dept Mech & Ind Engn, Chicago, IL 60607 USA
[2] Jadavpur Univ, Dept Power Engn, Kolkata 700106, India
关键词
Wettability; Sessile droplet; Captive bubble; Contact angle; Roughness; Inverse Cassie-Baxter; Wenzel; WETTING TRANSITIONS; SOLID-SURFACES; WETTABILITY; HYSTERESIS; SIZE; ALUMINUM;
D O I
10.1016/j.jcis.2020.07.098
中图分类号
O64 [物理化学(理论化学)、化学物理学];
学科分类号
070304 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Hypothesis: Quantitative characterization of surface wettability through contact angle (CA) measurement using the sessile droplet (SD) or captive bubble (CB) methods is often limited by the intrinsic wetting properties of the substrate. Situations may arise when an extreme surface wettability may preclude using one of the two methods for predicting the behaviors of droplets or bubbles on the surface. This warrants a relationship between the dynamic CAs measured via the SD and CB methods. While the two dynamic CAs (e.g., the advancing CA of SD and receding CA of CB) add up to 180 degrees on a smooth surface, the simple geometric supplementary principle may not apply for rough surfaces. Experiments: We perform a systematic wettability characterization of solid substrates with varying degrees of roughness using the sessile-droplet and captive-bubble methods, and interpret the experimental observations using a theoretical model. Findings: The dynamic contact angles measured by the sessile-droplet and captive-bubble methods deviate from the supplementary principle as the surface roughness is increased. We present a theoretical explanation for this disparity and predict the values of the contact angles using prevalent thermodynamic models of wetting and contact-angle hysteresis on rough substrates. The theoretical prediction is in good agreement with the experimental observations. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:690 / 697
页数:8
相关论文
共 45 条
[1]   Angles of contact and polarity of solid surfaces. [J].
Adam, NK ;
Jessop, G .
JOURNAL OF THE CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 1925, 127 :1863-1868
[2]   Influence of surface wettability on friction and wear tests [J].
Borruto, A ;
Crivellone, G ;
Marani, F .
WEAR, 1998, 222 (01) :57-65
[3]   Wettability of porous surfaces. [J].
Cassie, ABD ;
Baxter, S .
TRANSACTIONS OF THE FARADAY SOCIETY, 1944, 40 :0546-0550
[4]   CONTACT ANGLES [J].
CASSIE, ABD .
DISCUSSIONS OF THE FARADAY SOCIETY, 1948, 3 :11-16
[5]  
Dettre R.H., 1964, Contact angle hysteresis .2. Contact angle measurements on rough surfaces, DOI DOI 10.1021/BA-1964-0043
[6]   Superaerophobicity: Repellence of Air Bubbles from Submerged, Surface-Engineered Silicon Substrates [J].
Dorrer, Christian ;
Ruehe, Juergen .
LANGMUIR, 2012, 28 (42) :14968-14973
[7]   The effect of drop (bubble) size on advancing and receding contact angles for heterogeneous and rough solid surfaces as observed with sessile-drop and captive-bubble techniques [J].
Drelich, J ;
Miller, JD ;
Good, RJ .
JOURNAL OF COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE, 1996, 179 (01) :37-50
[8]   THE EFFECT OF DROP SIZE ON CONTACT-ANGLE OVER A WIDE-RANGE OF DROP VOLUMES [J].
DRELICH, J ;
MILLER, JD ;
HUPKA, J .
JOURNAL OF COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE, 1993, 155 (02) :379-385
[9]   Control of Wettability of Polymers by Surface Roughness Modification [J].
Encinas, N. ;
Pantoja, M. ;
Abenojar, J. ;
Martinez, M. A. .
JOURNAL OF ADHESION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2010, 24 (11-12) :1869-1883
[10]   Contact angle hysteresis explained [J].
Gao, Lichao ;
McCarthy, Thomas J. .
LANGMUIR, 2006, 22 (14) :6234-6237