Cargando…

Is contact-line mobility a material parameter?

Dynamic wetting phenomena are typically described by a constitutive law relating the dynamic contact angle θ to contact-line velocity U(CL). The so-called Davis–Hocking model is noteworthy for its simplicity and relates θ to U(CL) through a contact-line mobility parameter M, which has historically b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ludwicki, Jonathan M., Kern, Vanessa R., McCraney, Joshua, Bostwick, Joshua B., Daniel, Susan, Steen, Paul H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8861058/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35190559
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41526-022-00190-y
_version_ 1784654803638419456
author Ludwicki, Jonathan M.
Kern, Vanessa R.
McCraney, Joshua
Bostwick, Joshua B.
Daniel, Susan
Steen, Paul H.
author_facet Ludwicki, Jonathan M.
Kern, Vanessa R.
McCraney, Joshua
Bostwick, Joshua B.
Daniel, Susan
Steen, Paul H.
author_sort Ludwicki, Jonathan M.
collection PubMed
description Dynamic wetting phenomena are typically described by a constitutive law relating the dynamic contact angle θ to contact-line velocity U(CL). The so-called Davis–Hocking model is noteworthy for its simplicity and relates θ to U(CL) through a contact-line mobility parameter M, which has historically been used as a fitting parameter for the particular solid–liquid–gas system. The recent experimental discovery of Xia & Steen (2018) has led to the first direct measurement of M for inertial-capillary motions. This opens up exciting possibilities for anticipating rapid wetting and dewetting behaviors, as M is believed to be a material parameter that can be measured in one context and successfully applied in another. Here, we investigate the extent to which M is a material parameter through a combined experimental and numerical study of binary sessile drop coalescence. Experiments are performed using water droplets on multiple surfaces with varying wetting properties (static contact angle and hysteresis) and compared with numerical simulations that employ the Davis–Hocking condition with the mobility M a fixed parameter, as measured by the cyclically dynamic contact angle goniometer, i.e. no fitting parameter. Side-view coalescence dynamics and time traces of the projected swept areas are used as metrics to compare experiments with numerical simulation. Our results show that the Davis–Hocking model with measured mobility parameter captures the essential coalescence dynamics and outperforms the widely used Kistler dynamic contact angle model in many cases. These observations provide insights in that the mobility is indeed a material parameter.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8861058
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88610582022-03-15 Is contact-line mobility a material parameter? Ludwicki, Jonathan M. Kern, Vanessa R. McCraney, Joshua Bostwick, Joshua B. Daniel, Susan Steen, Paul H. NPJ Microgravity Article Dynamic wetting phenomena are typically described by a constitutive law relating the dynamic contact angle θ to contact-line velocity U(CL). The so-called Davis–Hocking model is noteworthy for its simplicity and relates θ to U(CL) through a contact-line mobility parameter M, which has historically been used as a fitting parameter for the particular solid–liquid–gas system. The recent experimental discovery of Xia & Steen (2018) has led to the first direct measurement of M for inertial-capillary motions. This opens up exciting possibilities for anticipating rapid wetting and dewetting behaviors, as M is believed to be a material parameter that can be measured in one context and successfully applied in another. Here, we investigate the extent to which M is a material parameter through a combined experimental and numerical study of binary sessile drop coalescence. Experiments are performed using water droplets on multiple surfaces with varying wetting properties (static contact angle and hysteresis) and compared with numerical simulations that employ the Davis–Hocking condition with the mobility M a fixed parameter, as measured by the cyclically dynamic contact angle goniometer, i.e. no fitting parameter. Side-view coalescence dynamics and time traces of the projected swept areas are used as metrics to compare experiments with numerical simulation. Our results show that the Davis–Hocking model with measured mobility parameter captures the essential coalescence dynamics and outperforms the widely used Kistler dynamic contact angle model in many cases. These observations provide insights in that the mobility is indeed a material parameter. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8861058/ /pubmed/35190559 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41526-022-00190-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Ludwicki, Jonathan M.
Kern, Vanessa R.
McCraney, Joshua
Bostwick, Joshua B.
Daniel, Susan
Steen, Paul H.
Is contact-line mobility a material parameter?
title Is contact-line mobility a material parameter?
title_full Is contact-line mobility a material parameter?
title_fullStr Is contact-line mobility a material parameter?
title_full_unstemmed Is contact-line mobility a material parameter?
title_short Is contact-line mobility a material parameter?
title_sort is contact-line mobility a material parameter?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8861058/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35190559
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41526-022-00190-y
work_keys_str_mv AT ludwickijonathanm iscontactlinemobilityamaterialparameter
AT kernvanessar iscontactlinemobilityamaterialparameter
AT mccraneyjoshua iscontactlinemobilityamaterialparameter
AT bostwickjoshuab iscontactlinemobilityamaterialparameter
AT danielsusan iscontactlinemobilityamaterialparameter
AT steenpaulh iscontactlinemobilityamaterialparameter