Subscriber access provided by UNIV OF NEW ENGLAND ARMIDALE
New Concepts at the Interface: Novel Viewpoints and Interpretations, Theory and Computations
Dynamics of Contact Line Pinning and Depinning of Droplets Evaporating on Micro-Ribs Ali Mazloomi Moqaddam, Dominique Derome, and Jan Carmeliet Langmuir, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.8b00409 • Publication Date (Web): 18 Apr 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on April 18, 2018
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
1
Langmuir
Dynamics of Contact Line Pinning and Depinning of Droplets Evaporating on Micro-Ribs
2 3
Ali Mazloomi Moqaddama,b, Dominique Deromeb and Jan Carmelieta,b
4
a)
5 6
b)
Chair of Building Physics, Department of Mechanical and Process Engineering, ETH Zurich, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland
Laboratory for Multiscale Studies in Building Physics Empa, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology, Dübendorf, Switzerland
7 8 9
Abstract
10
The contact line dynamics of evaporating droplets deposited on a set of parallel micro-ribs is analyzed with the
11 12
use of a recently developed entropic lattice Boltzmann model for two-phase flow. Upon deposition, part of the droplet penetrates into the space between ribs due to capillary action, while the remaining liquid of the droplet
13 14
remains pinned on top of the micro-ribs. In a first stage, evaporation continues until the droplet undergoes a series of pinning-depinning events, showing alternatively constant contact radius and constant contact angle
15
modes. While the droplet is pinned, evaporation results in a contact angle reduction while the contact radius
16 17
remains constant. At a critical contact angle, the contact line depins and the contact radius reduces and the droplet rearranges to a larger apparent contact angle . This pinning-depinning behavior goes on until the liquid
18 19
above the micro-ribs is evaporated. By computing the Gibbs free energy taking into account the interfacial energy, pressure terms as well as viscous dissipation due to drop internal flow, we found that the mechanism that
20 21
causes the unpinning of the contact line results from an excess in Gibbs free energy. The spacing distance and the rib height play an important role in controlling the pinning-depinning cycling, the critical contact angle and
22
the excess Gibbs free energy. However, we found that neither the critical contact angle nor the maximum excess
23 24
Gibbs free energy depend on the rib width. We show that the different terms, i.e. pressure term, viscous dissipation and interfacial energy, contributing to the excess Gibbs free energy can be varied differently by
25 26
varying different geometrical properties of the micro-ribs. It is demonstrated that, by varying the spacing distance between the ribs, the energy barrier is controlled by the interfacial energy while the contribution of the
27 28
viscous dissipation is dominant if either rib height or width are changed. Main finding of this is study is that, for micro-rib patterned surfaces, the energy barrier required for the contact line to depin can be enlarged by
29
increasing the spacing or the rib height, which can be important for practical applications.
30 31
1. Introduction
32
Wetting and evaporation of sessile droplets are phenomena ubiquitous in daily life and present in many
33 34
engineering applications such as substrate patterning [1], inkjet printing [2], spray cooling [3], electronic chip fabrication [4]. These applications have sparked a renewed interest in understanding the underlying phenomena,
35 36
but one less studied aspect is the role of the surface texture on which an evaporating droplet lies. Although an apparently simple process, droplet evaporation is accompanied by a series of interesting phenomena studied
37
since long [5]. Due to non-uniform evaporation, a flow inside the drop is generated [6] [7] and this advective
38 39
flow brings liquid to the triple line where evaporation is higher for droplets on a hydrophilic surface. In general, a drop deposited on a surface evaporates in of two distinct evaporation modes: constant contact angle (CCA)
40 41
mode and constant contact radius (CCR) mode. During evaporation on textured surfaces or chemically heterogeneous surfaces, a combination of CCR and CCA modes namely “pinning-depinning” occurs. In the
42 43
“pinning” mode, the contact line is pinned as evaporation evolves, retaining a constant contact radius while the apparent contact angle and drop height decrease, until reaching a critical contact angle, where the triple contact
44
line slips or jumps to a new equilibrium condition. In the new position, the drop has a smaller contact radius and
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
45 46
obtains a larger apparent contact angle and height. This cycle continues until full evaporation of the liquid drop on the surface. In general, the depinning mode is much faster than the pinning mode [6].
47
The “pinning-depinning” mode can be considered as a transition between CCA and CCR. This transition has
48 49
been extensively observed experimentally for non-flat surfaces with geometrical morphologies [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]. For example, using micro- and nano-structured non-patterned hydrophobic surfaces, the effect of surface
50 51
structure on the evaporation characteristics of water droplets was investigated by Lee et al. [12]. Shin and his coworkers also experimentally examined the natural evaporation of a water droplet on submicron non-patterned
52 53
and patterned post array hydrophobic surfaces [11]. However, most efforts have been mainly focused on experimental studies of droplet evaporating on patterned surfaces decorated by post arrays of few ten micrometer
54
[6] [13] [14] [15]. For instance, Xu et. al [13] studied different evaporation modes by investigating the droplet
55
profile during evaporation of droplets on micro-pillar-patterned superhydrophobic surfaces. The micro-pillar
56
used in [13] was made to have the same diameter (5 𝜇𝑚) and height (25 𝜇𝑚) but varying spaces between pillars
57 58
(5 − 50 𝜇𝑚).The dynamics of contact line depinning during droplet evaporation was also studied both theoretically and experimentally for hydrophilic and hydrophobics surfaces designed by micropillars of a few ten
59 60
micrometer of height and diameter [16] [17] [6], and in [18] [19] showing that the wetting conditions close to the triple contact line impact the apparent contact angle. In [16], the co-occurrence of pinning and moving of a
61
contact line around a micropillar is described. Different contact angles such as equilibrium, receding and
62 63
advancing contact angles were studied in [17] and a model proposed that bridges the connection among these contact angles. Moreover, the evaporation process of a sessile drop of water on a regular pillar-like soft patterned
64
substrate was experimentally investigated by Yu-Chen et. al. [14]. The pillar size used in [14] was in the order of
65 66
10 𝜇𝑚 and it was shown that for the soft micropillar patterned substrate the receding contact angle is smaller and the evaporation rate is faster in contrast with the solid surfaces. Recently, the wetting and evaporation behavior
67 68
of water droplets containing bacteria on substrates decorated by pillars of a few ten micrometer size was studied in [15]. It was shown that the pattern of bacterial distribution after drying is affected by the pillar height together
69
with the concentration of suspended particle in the water droplet. Very recently, water evaporation in a wide
70 71
range of droplet diameters and wall temperatures on both smooth and corrugated surfaces was studied experimentally by Misyura [20]. The structured surface employed in [20] was made as sine waves with an
72 73 74
amplitude and wave length of around 20 and 80 𝜇𝑚, respectively. Using experimental observations, Misyura demonstrated that both static contact angle and evaporation rate are affected by droplet radius for the corrugated surfaces in comparison with the smooth ones.
75 76
To note, pinning-depinning has also been quite well studied in the evaporation of colloidal droplets on flat surfaces, where a set of ring-shaped stains is formed due to contact line self-pinning induced by the micro-
77
nanoparticles deposition [21] [22] [23] [24]. In all these studies, the dynamics of pinning-depinning is analyzed
78 79
using one of two approaches. The first approach is based on computing the critical pinning force required to be overcome for contact line depinning (see [25] and references therein). In the second approach, the dynamics of
80 81
the contact line depinning is analyzed using Gibbs free energy calculations to determine the energy barrier required to release the pinning contact line [6] [26] [27]. Thermodynamically, the Gibbs-free-energy-based
82 83
scheme is more consistent than the pinning-force-based approach [17]. However, both approaches can be criticized, as limitations in experimental measurements might lead to a lack of some information which results
84
from the internal flow of the evaporated droplet. Recently, the dynamics of contact line depinning during droplet
85 86
evaporation is investigated in more detail both theoretically and experimentally based on Gibbs free energy calculations. A proposed theoretical model estimates the receding contact angle at which the transition from
87
CCR to CCA occurs [13].
88
However, to the best of our knowledge, all the studies based on Gibbs free energy are restricted to the interfacial
89 90
Gibbs free energy term of the Gibbs free energy equation and do not take into account the remaining terms such as the pressure term and particularly the Gibbs free energy loss due to viscous dissipation induced by internal
91
liquid flow. Nevertheless, an adequate numerical simulation method like entropic lattice Boltzmann can allow to
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 2 of 34
Page 3 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
92 93
accurately capture the pinning-depinning behavior and to compute the Gibbs free energy of system with all terms involved.
94
In this study, using tri-dimensional numerical simulations, we aim to investigate the dynamics of the contact line
95 96
depinning for an evaporating drop deposited on a surface decorated by a set of parallel micro-ribs. Micro-ribs are structures, which resemble the surface structure of a cut wood surface, where the sliced cell walls represent
97 98
the ribs and the cellular voids the space in between the ribs. The impact of liquid drops on wood surfaces has been a topic of a few experimental studies in literature [28] [29] [30]. However to the best of our knowledge, in
99 100
comparison to evaporation on micro-pillar arrays [6] [13,14] [15], there is no effort in literature to study liquid drop evaporation on rib structures in terms of both distance and size of the ribs as performed in this study.
101
Further, the computation of the Gibbs free energy of an evaporating droplet includes all the terms involved in
102
this paper, namely the interfacial energy, pressure term and viscous dissipation. The effects of the geometry of
103 104
the surface, namely the rib height, rib width and spacing between the ribs on the critical contact angle and energy barriers is studied in details.
105 106
Evaporation is considered here as a slow diffusive process where the temperature change due to evaporation is very small. Thus, we assume that the evaporation process is an isothermal process. As a result, the evaporation is
107
modelled isothermally by imposing a constant vapor flux on the side and top boundaries of the computational
108 109
domain. Although Marangoni flow may occur during evaporation due to a gradient in surface tension, which stems from a gradient in temperature along the liquid-gas interface, as the simulations are isothermal, no surface
110 111
tension gradient will be observed in the simulation. We start the analysis once the droplet has penetrated into the ribs, since we focus mainly on the pinning-depinning process, and less on the initial wetting behavior.
112 113
The remainder of this paper is structured as following: first, we briefly explain our numerical model and present the simulation setup. Next, the simulation results along with a detailed discussion on the dynamics of the contact
114
line depinning during drop evaporation on micro-ribs are presented. Finally, we summarize the paper.
115 116
2. Methodology
117
A. Numerical method
118
The entropic lattice Boltzmann for two-phase flow proposed by Mazloomi et. al [31] is used to simulate the
119 120
drying process of a droplet deposited on a series of micro-ribs. The method is discussed in details in [32] and a summary of the method is given here. The entropic lattice Boltzmann equation for a system of liquid and vapor
121
separated by an interface reads as: 𝑒𝑞 𝑒𝑞 𝑒𝑞 𝑓𝑖 (𝒙 + 𝒗𝑖 𝛿𝑡, 𝑡 + 𝛿𝑡) = 𝑓𝑖 (𝒙, 𝑡) + 𝛼𝛽[𝑓𝑖 (𝜌, 𝒖) − 𝑓𝑖 (𝒙, 𝑡)] + [𝑓𝑖 (𝜌, 𝒖 + 𝛿𝒖) − 𝑓𝑖 (𝜌, 𝒖)]
122
(1)
123
where 𝑓𝑖 (𝒙, 𝑡) are the discrete populations and 𝒗𝑖 (𝑖 = 1, … , 𝑁) denote the discrete velocities describing the underlying lattice structure. The 𝐷3𝑄27 lattice (𝑁 = 27) is used for our thri-dimensional simulations. The
124
parameter (0 < 𝛽 < 1) is fixed by the kinematic viscosity, 𝜈, through 𝜈 = 𝑐𝑠2 𝛿𝑡 [
125
the lattice speed of sound; lattice units 𝛿𝑥 = 𝛿𝑡 = 1 are used. The equilibrium population 𝑓𝑖
126
1 2𝛽
1
𝛿𝑥
2
√3𝛿𝑡
− ] where the 𝑐𝑠 = 𝑒𝑞
is
is the minimizer of
𝑓𝑖
the discrete entropy function 𝐻 = ∑𝑖 𝑓𝑖 ln( ), under the constraints of local mass and momentum conservations, 𝑊𝑖
𝑒𝑞
127
{𝜌, 𝜌𝒖} = {1, 𝒗𝑖 }{𝑓𝑖 }, where 𝑊𝑖 are the lattice weights. The stabilizer parameter 𝛼 defines the maximal over-
128
relaxation, which is computed at each time step for each computational node from the entropy estimate equation
129
[33].
130
In Eq. (1), the two-phase effects as a result of intermolecular forces, are present through the velocity increment
131
𝛿𝒖 = 𝛿𝑡, with the force 𝑭 = 𝑭𝑓−𝑓 + 𝑭𝑓−𝑠 and 𝑭𝑓−𝑓 and 𝑭𝑓−𝑠 representing the fluid-fluid and fluid-solid
132
interactions, respectively. Phase separation occurs by defining the fluid-fluid interaction as 𝑭𝑓−𝑓 = 𝛁 ∙
133
(𝜌𝑐𝑠2 𝑰 − 𝑷) using the Korteweg’s stress 𝑷 as,
𝑭
𝜌
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
𝜅 𝑷 = (𝑝 − 𝜅𝜌∇2 𝜌 − |∇𝜌|2 ) 𝑰 + 𝜅(∇𝜌) ⊗ (∇𝜌) 2
Page 4 of 34
(2)
134 135 136
where 𝜅 is the coefficient that controls the surface tension, 𝑰 is the unit tensor and 𝑝 denotes the non-ideal equation of state [34]. The Carnahan-Starling (C-S) equation of state is used for this study [35]. The introduction of cohesive interaction through the velocity increment in Eq. 1, leads to surface tensional forces separating the
137
liquid and vapor by an interface, which maintains the liquid and vapor in equilibrium state. The wettability
138
condition is modeled by taking into account the fluid-solid interaction 𝑭𝑓−𝑠 as follows: 𝑭𝑓−𝑠 (𝒙, 𝑡) = 𝜅𝑤 𝜌(𝒙, 𝑡) ∑ 𝑤𝑖 𝑠(𝒙 + 𝒗𝑖 𝛿𝑡)𝒗𝑖 .
(3)
𝑖
139
where the strength of the fluid-solid interaction is reflected by 𝜅𝑤 . Different contact angles are modeled by
140
adjusting 𝜅𝑤 , which may range from negative to positive values corresponding to hydrophilic and hydrophobic
141
surfaces, respectively. The indicator function 𝑠(𝒙 + 𝒗𝑖 𝛿𝑡)𝒗𝑖 in Eq. (3) is equal to one for solid nodes and zero
142
otherwise and 𝑤𝑖 are the weight coefficients [32].
143
B. Simulation setup and boundary conditions
144 145
The simulation setup is initialized with a spherical droplet of radius 𝑅0 = 1.3 𝑚𝑚 (corresponding to 100 lattice nodes) deposited on top of a series of parallel ribs on a base, as schematically represented in Fig. 1. The liquid
146 147
drop and its surrounding vapor are initialized with a zero velocity without imposed gravity. Since the droplet size is smaller than the capillary length for a water droplet, gravitational effects are negligible. The computational
148 149
domain size, set in function of the size of the droplet, is 5𝑅0 × 5𝑅0 × 4𝑅0 for all simulations reported here, unless otherwise stated. The resulting grid is checked for sensitivity by varying the grid resolution. The ribs
150
have a height ℎ varying from 65 to 650 𝜇𝑚, and a width 𝑏 in a range from 65 to 326 𝜇𝑚. Ribs are at a spacing 𝑤 ranging from 39 to 234 𝜇𝑚. In all simulations, the liquid to vapor density ratio is fixed to 𝜌𝑙 ⁄𝜌𝑣 ≅ 100
151 152 153 154
(𝜌𝑙 /𝜌𝑐 = 3.05, 𝜌𝑣 /𝜌𝑐 = 0.0302 where 𝜌𝑐 is the critical density computed at the critical temperature, 𝑇𝑐 , and the critical pressure, 𝑝𝑐 , from the C-S equation of state used in this study [35]) at 𝑇⁄𝑇𝑐 = 0.6715 in accordance with the coexistence curve of the C-S equation of state [35]. Our previous studies showed that a density ratio of
155 156
around 100 is sufficient to correctly capture the dynamics of two-phase problems under consideration [36] [32] [37] [38] [33]. Using the C-S equation of state at the aforementioned temperature gives an interfacial surface
157
tension of 𝜎/𝑝𝑐 𝑅0 = 0.0315as a dimensionless number. The wetting contact angle is fixed to 67.6𝑜 using a fluid-solid interaction strength 𝜅𝑤 = 0.0035 in Eq. (3). The viscosity is fixed to 𝜈 = 1⁄6 in the lattice unit. The
158 159
viscosity of the simulated liquid is one order of magnitude larger than water at the same temperature.
160 161 162
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 5 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
163 164 165 166 167
Figure 1: Schematic representation of an evaporating drop of radius 𝑅0 deposited on arrays of microribs of width 𝑏, height ℎ and the spacing distance 𝑤. In all simulations the drop radius 𝑅0 is fixed to 1.3 𝑚𝑚 (corresponding to a 100 lattice nodes) while 𝑤, ℎ and 𝑏 are varied in a range between 39 to 234 𝜇𝑚, 65 to 650 𝜇𝑚 and 65 to 325 𝜇𝑚 respectively.
168 169
As mentioned above, we assume that the drop evaporates diffusively without temperature changes and thus evaporation is modeled by imposing a constant vapor flux, more precisely a constant vapor phase velocity at the
170
side and top outer boundaries. Imposing a constant outflow on the borders results in a reduction of the vapor
171 172
pressure inside the domain. For the system to come back to its equilibrium, some of the high density liquid phase evaporates and brings the vapor density to its equilibrium value. It should be noticed that, since the temperature
173 174
is constant and the interfacial surface tension controlling the liquid to vapor density ratio is related to the temperature, the density ratio between the liquid and vapor remains constant during the evaporation process. We
175 176
do not impose a uniform evaporation flux at the liquid-vapor interface of the droplet, but allow that the drop evaporates diffusively by imposing a constant vapor flux on the top and side outer boundaries of the calculation
177
domain, which are sufficiently far away from the droplet surface. The needed size of the computational domain
178 179
to ensure a diffusive evaporation process was determined after performing simulations of different computational domain sizes.
180 181
Numerically, the vapor flux at the boundaries is modeled by replacing all the populations on the boundary nodes with the equilibrium populations corresponding to a prescribed outflow velocity and vapor density. For the
182 183
boundary nodes, the density of vapor is computed based on the known populations at the boundaries derived from mass and momentum conservation. For example, for the top boundary, the vapor density can be easily
184
computed in respect to the known populations on the boundary nodes by solving the mass conservation equation
185 186
𝜌𝑣 = ∑𝑖 𝑓𝑖 in conjunction with the moment conservation equation 𝜌𝑣 𝑢𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡 = ∑𝑖 𝑓𝑖 𝒗𝑖 . We also apply a wall boundary condition as explained in detail in Ref. [32] at the bottom boundary and all wall surfaces.
187
By prescribing a vapor pressure on the boundaries, which are far enough from the droplet, we can capture the
188 189
slow diffusive evaporation process allowing non-isothermal effects to be neglected. The same approach was used in other works such as [39].
190
C. Numerical validation
191 192
The entropic lattice Boltzmann method for two phase flow used in this study has been previously validated and verified against a large number of experimental and theoretical predictions [36] [32] [37] [38] [33] [40].
193
However, to show the validity of the method for the problem under consideration, numerical results are first
194 195
compared to the 𝐷2 -law for the evaporation of a static droplet suspended in vapor. The classical 𝐷2 -law says that, during droplet evaporation, the surface area, represented by square of the droplet diameter, decreases
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
196
Page 6 of 34
linearly with the time [41]. For a droplet of the diameter D, the droplet mass and mass loss rate are 𝑚𝑑 =
197
and 𝑚̇𝑑 =
198
reads as:
𝜌𝑙 𝐷π 4
2
𝜌𝑙 π𝐷3 6
2
𝑑(𝐷 )/𝑑𝑡, respectively. By assuming 𝑚̇𝑑 /𝐷=constant, the 𝐷 -law in a dimensionless form 𝐷 ∗ 2 = 1 − Κ𝑡 ∗
(4) 2𝑡𝜎
199
where the non-dimensional diameter 𝐷 ∗ and time 𝑡 ∗ are defined as 𝐷/𝐷0 and 𝑡 ∗ =
200
denotes a constant value equal to Κ =
201 202
rate 𝑚̇𝑑 is measured from the simulations by computing the slope of mass evolution versus time. In Fig. 2, the square of the droplet diameter as a function of the evaporation time is plotted for both simulation results and
203 204
those obtained from Eq. (4). A good agreement between the numerical results and theoretical predictions is found.
2𝜇𝑙 𝑚̇𝑑
𝜋𝜎𝐷02 𝜌𝑙
𝜇𝐷0
, respectively and Κ
with the dynamic viscosity 𝜇𝑙 and the liquid density 𝜌𝑙 . The mass
205 206 207
Figure 2: 𝑫𝟐 -law: comparison between numerical simulations (open squares) and theoretical prediction (solid line).
208 209
3. Results and discussions
210
A. Droplet behavior and volume variation on a flat and a slightly rough surface
211 212 213
As a reference we first document and analyze the evaporation of a liquid droplet deposited on a flat surface and on a smooth surface with asperities. The contour lines of a liquid drop during evaporation on a flat surface is
214 215
shown in Fig. 3a. During evaporation, the contact radius (gray line) smoothly decreases while the apparent contact angle (red line) remains constant confirming the CCA (constant contact angle) mode. Fig 3c displays the
216 217 218
droplet profiles during evaporation on a slightly rough surface due to asperities of 2 × 5 (width×height) lattices at a 50 lattice spacing. The contact line is initially pinned at the first asperities, while the apparent contact angle and concurrently droplet height decreases leading to a CCR (constant contact radius) mode. Upon reaching a
219
critical contact angle, the droplet depins and the drop slides over the surface reducing its wetting contact radius
220 221
until it pins again at the next asperity. This pinning-depinning process is repeated until the droplet reaches the last pairs of asperities on the surface.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 7 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
222 223
Figure 3: a) Simulation results of an evaporating liquid drop on a flat surface where the apparent contact angle
224 225
remains constant during evaporation, while the drop contact diameter decreases (CCA mode). b) Normalized droplet contact radius (left axis) as well as drop contact angle (right axis). c) Evolution of an evaporating droplet
226 227
in CCR mode on a rough surface. d) Normalized droplet contact radius and apparent contact angle on a rough surface versus normalized time.
228 229 230
B. Dynamic behavior of evaporating drops on micro-ribs I.
Volume variation
231
We now consider an evaporating droplet deposited on a series of parallel micro-ribs. Three main phases can be
232 233
observed in Fig. 4: capillary suction, pinning and depinning during droplet evaporation from Fig. 4a to 4c. Fig. 4d illustrates the second depinning event. Fig 4e gives the time evolution of the total volume (solid line), the
234
volume of the droplet residing on top of the ribs (dash line) and the volume penetrated into the space between the
235
ribs (dash-dot line) for two different spacing distances, 𝑤/𝑅0 .
236 237
In the first phase, the space between the parallel ribs is invaded by the liquid droplet due to capillary suction (Fig. 4a). The capillary process results in a fast decrease of the droplet volume residing above the ribs (Fig. 4e;
238 239
dash line). At the end of the capillary suction period, the part of the droplet residing on the ribs remains pinned at a rib edge (Fig 4b). It should be noted that, for the entire range of spacing distances studied, we found that the
240 241
space between ribs is always invaded and wetted by the droplets, indicating that the pinning-depinning process during evaporation is studied for droplets in the Wenzel state. Thereafter, the total volume decreases linearly
242
with time due to the constant evaporation flux imposed on the top and side boundaries (Fig. 4e). As the
243 244
evaporation proceeds, the pinned contact angle and the droplet height decrease while the contact radius remains constant. The first depinning mode (Fig. 4c) occurs after reaching a critical contact angle followed by a second
245 246
pinning of the droplet (Fig 4d). The depinning and pinning sequence is repeated until the above ribs volume is totally vanished and liquid remains only in between the ribs.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
247
248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256
Figure 4: Selected snapshots of an evaporating droplet depostited on a series of parallel micro-ribs: a) capillary suction phase, b) pinning mode, c) the first slip or depinning event, d) the second slip event. In (a), (b), (c) and (d), the top panel shows the density iso-surface in a three-dimensional view, the middle panel represents the density conture in the middle droplet cross-plane and in the bottom panel the velocity field inside the drop and around the triple contact line in the same plane is visualized. In (e) the total liquid volume (solid line), liquid volume of the droplet residing on the ribs (dashed line) and liquid volume penetrated into micro-ribs (dash-dot line) are plotted versus time for two different rib widths (in both cases the height and width of ribs are kept constant to ℎ/𝑅0 = 0.5 and 𝑏/R 0 = 0.05).
257 258
We also visualize the velocity vectors for the middle plane of the droplet with the velocity magnitude contour in
259 260
the background (third row in Fig. 4). The internal flow in the droplet takes place from the evaporating liquidvapor surface towards the ribs underneath the droplet (Fig 4 (a)). Initially there is a downward flow towards and
261
into the space between the ribs driven by capillary suction. At the triple contact line, in addition to the downward
262 263
flow in the ribs, liquid flows towards the triple line due to high evaporative flux at this interface. We recall that when the droplet contact angle is less than 90° the evaporative flux is the largest at the triple line and smallest at
264 265
the apex of the droplet [42]. As evaporation proceeds accompanied with pinning-depinning sequence, the vapor velocity distribution at the droplet surface becomes strongly non-uniform leading to a high evaporative flux near
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 8 of 34
Page 9 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
266 267
the triple contact line (Fig. 4(c) and (d)). The high evaporative flux is replenished by an internal liquid flow in the droplet towards the triple line. We observed that, after each depinning event, the liquid in the rib space flows
268
downwards while the vapor in the other ribs flows upward leading to a large circulation around the triple point
269 270
(Fig. 4(c) and (d)). We conclude that the singularity of the evaporative flow at the triple line of the droplet interface highly influences the depinning of the contact line, since it drives the internal liquid flow in the droplet
271 272
and in the inter-rib spaces. We remark that the internal flow in the droplet will also play an important role in the dissipating energy due to viscosity and thus should be taken into account in the Gibbs free energy calculations,
273
which will be explained in section III.
274
II.
Contact angle and droplet contact radius
275
As shown in Fig.4, for an evaporating drop deposited on micro-ribs, the drop has an elliptic shape dictated by the
276 277
surface structure. The contact line profile of the drop placed on top of the ribs for different evaporating times is shown in Fig. 5a. It is evident from this Fig. 5a that the liquid drop keeps its elliptic shape as evaporation
278 279
proceeds. The characteristic time evolution of the minor (𝑟) and major (𝑅) semi-axis of the elliptical droplet during evaporation is plotted in Fig. 5b. As expected, both minor and major semi-axis reduces gradually as the
280 281
evaporation time elapses. Since the drop pins and depins along the minor semi-axis, a small fluctuation in the minor semi-axis magnitude can be observed from Fig. 5b (gray line) which corresponds to each pinning-
282 283 284
depinning event. It is interesting that the aspect ratio (𝑟/𝑅) between the minor and major semi-axis remains almost constant during evaporation as shown in Fig. 5c. This means that one can use one of this two as the characteristic length to calculate the excess Gibss free energy per unit length (see further). Here in this study we
285 286 287
will use the minor semi-axis, 𝑟, for computing the excess Gibbs free energy per unit length, which will be presented in the next section. From now, we will use “contact radius” instead of “minor semi-axis” in agreement with other studies in literature. We also remark that the contact angle during evaporation will measured in a
288
plane normal to the blades (along the minor semi-axis). This is the plane where contact line pinning and
289 290
depinning occurs. The contact angle is then the angle between the contact line and a horizontal line at the top of the ribs.
291 292
As shown on Fig. 5d, the critical contact angle over all pinning-depinning events reduces as evaporation proceeds. A similar behavior was observed by experiment for an evaporating droplet containing nanoparticles on
293
a silicon wafer surface [43]. In our case, we observed that as evaporation proceeds, less liquid remains on top of
294 295
the ribs generating nearly an elliptical cap which becomes more and more flat resulting in smaller pinned contact angles with time (see Fig. 4: top panel). The critical contact angle over all pinning-depinning events is averaged
296
and named, (𝜃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 )𝑎𝑣𝑔 . The first pinning event lasts for a longer time compared to the consecutive events
297
since when the drop is deposited and relaxed, the apparent contact angle at first pinning is around 78.5𝑜 and thus
298 299
a substantial evaporation time is required to reach the critical contact angle of 36.5𝑜 at which the first depinning occurs. The long first pinning period results in a substantial volume loss inducing a large reduction of the drop
300
height which results the apparent contact angle 𝜃0,1 at pinning right after the first slipping becomes much lower
301 302 303
than the Young equilibrium contact angle on the flat solid (67.6𝑜 ). As the evaporation evolves, the drop height constantly reduces leading to a decrease with time in the initial contact angle of the following pinning-depinning cycles as shown in Fig. 5d. Another approach is based on the maximum pinning force, where the detachment of
304 305
the triple contact line occurs at the critical contact angle, when the depinning force exceeds the maximum pinning force provided by the micro-ribs [44]. A more complete approach is however an energy approach
306 307
considering all terms in Gibbs free energy equation including pressure, viscous dissipation and interfacial energy terms which has been followed in this study.
308
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Page 10 of 34
309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318
Figure 5: (a) Top view of the contact line profile of the liquid drop pinned on top of the ribs for diffferent times. (b) Charactristic time evolution of the minor (left axis) and major semi-axis (right axis) of the ellips contact area. (c) The aspect ratio between the minor and the major semi-axis of ellips contact area during evaporation. (d) Variation of the apparent contact angle of the pinned contact line during evaporation process of the liquid drop. The micro-ribs have a spacing distance of 𝑤/𝑅0 =0.06, height of ℎ/𝑅0 = 0.5 and 𝑏/R 0 = 0.05. 𝜃0,𝑖 in (d) shows the apparent contact angle at the beginning of each pinning event 𝑖. After pinning the 𝜃0,𝑖 is decreased to a critical value at which the drop decomes depinned. The critical contact angle is averaged over all slipping modes and it is shown by (𝜃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 )𝑎𝑣𝑔 .
319 320
The results are further compared to the pinning time model for an evaporating droplet proposed by Shanahan as follows [45] [46]: 𝑡𝑝𝑖𝑛,𝑖 = 𝑡0,𝑖 −
𝜋𝑟 3 (𝜃0,𝑖 − 𝜃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡,𝑖 ) . 2 (1 + 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃0,𝑖 ) 𝑑𝑉⁄𝑑𝑡
(5)
321
where 𝑟 is the contact radius and 𝑑𝑉 ⁄𝑑𝑡 represents the droplet volume change rate due to evaporation.
322
For each pining-depinning event (i), we measure the initial contact angle (𝜃0,𝑖 ) and critical contact angle 𝜃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡,𝑖
323
from the simulations and then the pinning time computed from Eq. (5) is compared with that obtained directly
324
from the simulations.
325
Table 1 presents the pinning times for both numerical simulations and those obtained by Eq. (5) together with the
326 327
initial contact angle and the critical contact angle for all pinning-depinning events. The pinning times computed from simulations compare very well to those from Eq. (5) as listed in Table 1.
328 329
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 11 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
330 331 332
Langmuir
Table 1: Pinning time, initial and critical contact angles for all pinning and depinning events during evaporation of a liquid drop deposited on micro-ribs of spacing distance 𝑤/𝑅0 =0.06, height of ℎ/𝑅0 = 0.5 and rib width of 𝑏/𝑅0 = 0.05. (Fig. 5b) 𝑖
𝑡 ∗ 𝑝𝑖𝑛,𝑖 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑦
𝑡 ∗ 𝑝𝑖𝑛,𝑖 𝑠𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛
𝜃0,𝑖 (0 )
𝜃𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡,𝑖 (0 )
0
70.7
72.4
78.5
36.5
1
75.1
78.0
39.6
34.8
2
81.3
83.0
37.8
32.8
3
86.3
87.5
36.1
29.2
4
90.8
90.9
34.0
25.1
5
94.8
92.6
28.5
17.3
333 334 335
III.
Excess Gibbs free energy and average critical contact angle variation
336
The Gibbs free energy for our system i.e. an evaporating liquid droplet deposited on a set of parallel micro-ribs is
337 338
composed of the Gibbs free energy of the phases as well as the interfacial Gibbs free energy induced by the surface tension and the fluid-solid interactions.. Here, for a diffusive evaporation process, the Gibbs free energy
339 340
changes of the vapor and solid phases are assumed negligible compared to those of the liquid phase. We also remind that the LBM used here in this study does not consider thermal effects and isothermal conditions are
341
assumed. Therefore, the Gibbs free energy of the evaporating droplet reads as: 𝐺𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 = (𝑈 + 𝑃𝑉 − 𝑇𝑆)𝐿 + 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 𝜎𝐿𝑉 + 𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝜎𝑆𝐿 − 𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝜎𝑆𝑉 ,
(6)
342
where G, U, P, V, T, S are the Gibbs free energy, internal energy, pressure , volume, temperature and the entropy
343
of the liquid drop, respectively, as the subscript L stands for the liquid phase. 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 is the surface area of the
344
drop residing above the ribs and 𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 is the contact area between the droplet and the substrate. 𝜎𝐿𝑉 , 𝜎𝑆𝐿 and
345
𝜎𝑆𝑉 are the interfacial tensions between liquid/vapor, solid/liquid and solid/vapor respectively.
346
Since the pressures inside the drop and in the liquid between the ribs are different, the 𝑃𝑉 term is divided into
347
two separate terms (𝑃𝑉𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 , 𝑃𝑉𝑟𝑖𝑏 ). We also express the temperature and the entropy term in Eq. (6) in terms of
348
the Gibbs free energy loss due to viscous dissipation, Φ [36]. Φ=
349 350
𝜇𝑙 𝑡 ∫ ∫ (∇𝑢 + ∇𝑢 𝑇 )2 𝑑𝑉𝑑𝑡. 2 0 𝑉
where 𝜇𝑙 is the dynamic viscosity of the liquid phase and 𝑉 denotes the liquid volume. Assuming Young’s equation valid: 𝜎𝑆𝑉 − 𝜎𝑆𝐿 = 𝜎𝐿𝑉 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃𝑌
351
(8)
where the 𝜃𝑌 is the Young’s equilibrium contact angle, and combining with Eq. (6) , one obtains: 𝐺𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 = 𝑈 + 𝑃𝑉𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 + 𝑃𝑉𝑟𝑖𝑏 + Φ + 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 𝜎𝐿𝑉 −𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝜎𝐿𝑉 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃𝑌 ,
352
(7)
(9)
The excess Gibbs free energy is then defined as: 𝛿𝐺 = 𝐺𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 (𝑡) − 𝐺𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 (𝑡 = 𝑡0,𝑖 )
(10)
353
where 𝐺𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 (𝑡) is the total Gibbs free energy at the instant t and 𝐺𝑠𝑦𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑚 (𝑡 = 𝑡0,𝑖 ) is the total Gibbs free
354
energy at the moment when a new stick phase begins. At 𝑡 = 𝑡0,𝑖 the initial contact angle 𝜃 is 𝜃 = 𝜃0,𝑖 where 𝑖 is
355
the order of the pinning cycle (see Fig. 5b). In the calculation of the excess Gibbs free energy, the change of the
356
internal energy (𝑈) can be assumed to be zero as the drop evaporation is modeled as an isothermal process.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
357 358 359 360 361 362 363
Figure 6: Evolution of excess Gibbs free energy per unit length of triple line (contact radius 𝒓) normalized by the initial Gibbs free enrgy during evaporation proccess of a droplet deposited on a micro-ribs with 𝑤/𝑅0 = 0.06, ℎ/𝑅0 = 0.5 and 𝑏/R 0 = 0.05, taking into account all terms (black) or only the interfacial terms (blue). The maximum excess Gibbs free energy or the energy barrier required for the drop to be depinned is averaged over all depinning events except the first, depinning denoted by (𝛿𝐺𝑚𝑎𝑥 /𝐺0 )𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∗ (𝑅0 /𝑟).
364 365
Numerical simulations enable us to compute all the terms given in Eq. (9). Therefore, unlike other studies, the excess Gibbs free energy during drop evaporation is computed by taking into account not only the interfacial
366
energies but also the pressure terms as well as the viscous dissipation. In Fig. 6, the excess Gibbs free energy per
367
unit length of the triple line 𝑟 (defined as the minor semi-axis of the elliptical droplet generated on top of the
368
ribs) is plotted as a function of time for ribs with w/R 0 = 0.06, h/R 0 = 0.5 and b/R 0 = 0.05. The excess Gibbs
369
free energy per unit length, (𝛿𝐺/𝑟), is normalized by 𝐺0 /𝑅0 where 𝐺0 represents the total Gibbs free energy at
370 371
𝑡 = 0 and 𝑅0 stands for the initial drop radius. When the excess Gibbs free energy attains its maximum value, there is sufficient energy available to overcome the energy barrier and the triple line jumps to the next position or
372 373
stick phase where 𝛿𝐺 becomes zero again and the process is repeated.. As seen from Fig. 6, after the first depinning event, the maximum excess Gibbs free energy or the energy barrier per unit length of triple line is
374 375
almost constant for the other pinning-depinning motions. Here, we make an average over all these depinning events leading to the average maximum excess Gibbs free energy per unit length of triple line (𝛿𝐺𝑚𝑎𝑥 ⁄𝐺0 )𝑎𝑣𝑔 ∗
376
(𝑅0 ⁄𝑟), called for short the maximum excess Gibbs free energy.
377
The Gibbs free energy equation for droplets is commonly evaluated considering only interfacial energy terms,
378 379
i.e. the last two terms in Eq. (9). To analyze the influence of the pressure and viscous dissipation terms, the excess Gibbs free energy is calculated including all terms and also taking into account only the interfacial terms.
380
Fig. 6 compares the excess Gibbs free energies for these two cases (case all terms: black symbols, case only
381 382
interfacial terms: blue symbols). Note that the initial Gibbs free energy, 𝐺0 , is different for the two cases. Indeed, in the case with all terms the pressure term is included while in the other case (only interfacial term) is not
383
presented. In the first pinning event, the two cases differ a lot, due to the important influence of pressure and
384 385
viscous dissipation terms attributed to important internal flow. It is however interesting to note that after the first depinning event, the excess Gibbs free energy magnitude for both cases (all versus only interfacial terms) are
386 387
almost the same meaning that the pressure and viscous dissipation terms do not play a significant role during pinning-depinning cycles as evaporation proceeds. This can be attributed to the fact that the pressure and viscous
388 389
dissipation terms, which can be mainly attributed to the internal flow, remain quite constant during the different pinning-depinning events (with exception to the first depinning event). As a result the change in pressure and
390
viscous dissipation, as calculated in the excess Gibbs free energy, are very small compared to the change in the
391
interfacial terms.
The results shown in Fig. 6 confirm the validity, as done in previous studies, to only
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 12 of 34
Page 13 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
392 393
considering the interfacial terms for the calculation of energy barrier required for depinning contact line during pining-depinning motions.
394
To further investigate the effect of the geometrical properties of the ribs such as spacing distance 𝑤, rib height ℎ
395
and rib width 𝑏 on the dynamics of the contact line depinning, we performed further simulations by varying 𝑤, ℎ
396 397
and 𝑏. For each case, one geometrical characteristic was altered, while the other two remain constant.
398 399 400 401 402
Figure 7: Variation of (a) the average critical contact angle at droplet depinning as well as (b) the average maximum excess Gibbs free energy as a function of the spacing distance 𝑤. For all simulations here, the rib height and width are kept equal to ℎ/𝑅0 = 0.5 and 𝑏/R 0 = 0.05, respectively. The dashed line is fitted to the simualtion results (symbols) as a guide to the eye.
403
Figs. 7, 9 and 11 show the simulation results for the average critical contact angle and the maximum excess
404
Gibbs free energy versus the dimensionless spacing distance w, rib height h and rib width b, respectively. In Fig.
405
7, the dimensionless spacing distance 𝑤/𝑅0 is varied in a range between 0.03 to 0.18, while keeping the rib
406
height and width constant (ℎ/𝑅0 = 0.5, 𝑏/𝑅0 = 0.05). Fig. 7a shows that the critical contact angle decreases
407
with increasing spacing distance, while as seen from Fig.7b the maximum excess Gibbs free energy increases
408 409
with spacing distance. This means that the energy barrier for a droplet to depin and move over a capillary filled by liquid is larger for wider than for a smaller spacing distance. The dashed line is added to guide the eye. Bear
410 411
in mind that for all simulations shown in Fig. 7, the droplet size was fixed to 𝑅0 = 1.3 𝑚𝑚 (or 100 lattice nodes) and thus by increasing the spacing distance the droplet will span over less ribs resulting in less pinning-depinning
412
events. However, for the range of 𝑤/𝑅0 values studied here, two pinning-depinning events occur at least.
413
To analyze the effect of the different terms involved in the calculation of the excess Gibbs free energy, these
414
terms i.e. the change in pressure term (PV), viscous dissipation and interfacial energy, were determined.
415
Rewriting Eq. (10) we get: 𝛿𝐺 = 𝛿𝑃𝑉 + 𝛿Φ + 𝛿𝐴𝜎
(11)
416
where 𝛿𝑃𝑉 = 𝑃𝑉(𝑡) − 𝑃𝑉(𝑡 = 𝑡0,𝑖 ), 𝛿Φ = Φ(𝑡) − Φ(𝑡 = 𝑡0,𝑖 ), 𝛿𝐴𝜎 = 𝐴𝜎(𝑡) − 𝐴𝜎(𝑡 = 𝑡0,𝑖 ) and 𝐴𝜎 is the
417
interfacial energy 𝐴𝜎 = 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 𝜎𝐿𝑉 −𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝜎𝐿𝑉 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃𝑌 . Equation 11 enables us to analyze the impact of a change
418
of a geometrical property of the ribs on the three different energy terms, or how by changing the geometry we
419
can for example increase/decrease the energy barrier for depinning.
420
The contribution of the pressure (PV) term (diamond symbols), the viscous dissipation (square symbols) and the
421
interfacial energy (triangular symbols) to the maximum excess Gibbs free energy, or energy barrier as function
422 423
of the spacing distance is shown in Fig. 7b. As seen from Fig. 7b, the increase in energy barrier by increasing the spacing distance is mainly caused due to an increase of the interfacial energy. When increasing the spacing
424
distance while keeping the initial droplet volume fixed, the liquid droplet during spreading will wet a smaller
425
number of ribs resulting in a decrease in the solid-fluid contact surface area 𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 , while the fluid-fluid
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
426
surface area 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 roughly remains constant. This can be clearly seen from Fig. 8 representing the wetting
427
contact area 𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 and the drop surface 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 versus time for different values of spacing distance 𝑤/𝑅0 . The
428
wetting contact area 𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 decreases with spacing distance, while the drop surface 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 is less dependent on
429
the spacing distance. As a result, the term 𝐴𝜎 = 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 𝜎𝐿𝑉 −𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝜎𝐿𝑉 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝜃𝑌 increases with spacing distance,
430
resulting in an increase of the energy barrier or the maximum excess Gibbs free energy. Our simulations further
431 432
demonstrate that the PV and viscous dissipation terms have less effect on the change of the energy barrier as the spacing distance varies.
433 434 435 436 437
Figure 8: Evolution of (a) the solid-fluid contact area, 𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 , together with (b) the fluid-fluid interfacial area, 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 , during evaporation of the liquid droplet deposited on a rib-structured surface for different spacing distance 𝑤. In both (a) and (b) the surface area has been normalized by 𝐴0 i.e. the initial spherical drop surface area.
438 439 440
This means that the internal flow leading to viscous dissipation and the pressure (PV) terms has a smaller contribution to the energy barrier. It should be noted that each symbol shown in Fig. 7b is an average of the
441
maximum change of a corresponding term over all pinning-depinning events for an individual spacing distance.
442 443 444 445 446
Figure 9: Variation of (a) the average critical contact angle and (b) the average maximum excess Gibbs free energy as a function of the height of microribs . In all cases in (a) and (b) the spacing distance and rib width are kept constant to 𝑤/𝑅0 = 0.06 and 𝑏/R 0 = 0.05, respectively. The dashed line is fitted to the simualtion results (symbols) as a guide to the eye.
447
In Fig. 9, the results for the average critical contact angle and the maximum excess Gibbs free energy are
448
represented for different heights of the micro-ribs varying in a range from ℎ/𝑅0 = 0.05 to h/R 0 = 0.5 . The drop
449
size was fixed to 𝑅0 = 1.3 𝑚𝑚 and the spacing distance and rib width remained constant to w/R 0 = 0.06 and
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 14 of 34
Page 15 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
450 451 452
b/R 0 = 0.05, respectively. Fig. 9a shows that the critical contact angle decreases with increasing height of the ribs while as seen from Fig. 9b, the required energy to allow the drop to depin becomes larger by enlarging the height of the micro-ribs. This can be further analyzed by studying the contribution of different terms to the
453
maximum excess Gibbs free energy as plotted in Fig. 9b. The increase of the energy barrier by enlarging the rib
454 455
height can be attributed to an increase of viscous dissipation and surface energy and to a less extent to the pressure (PV) term. We further determine the solid-fluid contract area and the surface area of the deposited drop
456 457
on the ribs during evaporation for different rib heights (Fig. 10). As it is seen from Fig. 10, by increasing the rib height the wetting contact area increases while the drop surface area only slightly changes. The increase in
458
wetting contact area results in first increase of viscous dissipation due to increase of boundary layer a location
459
where the most viscous dissipation occurs and additionally increase of the interfacial energy (𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 increases
460
while the 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 remains nearly constant by increasing rib height, Fig. 10) as shown in Fig. 9b. However, from
461
simulation results shown in Fig. 9b, we observe that the PV term slightly changes by varying the rib height and
462
thus has less contribution to the value of energy barrier, which is similar to the pervious case shown in Fig. 7b.
463
464 465 466 467 468
Figure 10: Evolution of (a) the solid-fluid contact area, 𝐴𝑤𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔 , together with (b) the fluid-fluid interfacial area, 𝐴𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 , during evaporation of the liquid droplet deposited on the rib-structured surface for different rib heights ℎ. In both (a) and (b) the surface area has been normalized by 𝐴0 i.e. the initial spherical drop surface area.
469
470 471 472 473
Figure 11: Variation of (a) the average critical contact angle and (b) the average maximum excess Gibbs free energy as a function of the rib width. The spacing distance and rib height are fixed to 𝑤/𝑅0 = 0.06 and ℎ/𝑅0 = 0.5.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
474
To complete our geometrical study of the rib patterned surfaces on the pinning-depinning mode, the critical
475
contact angle and the maximum excess Gibbs free energy were measured by varying the rib width, 𝑏, in a range from b⁄R 0 = 0.05 to 0.25 while the distance and the rib height are kept constant to w/R 0 = 0.06 and h/R 0 =
476 477 478 479 480
0.5, respectively. The results are shown in Fig. 11. For all simulations reported in Fig. 11, the drop size was fixed to 1.3 𝑚𝑚 (100 lattice nodes). We chose a range for variation of the rib width (b⁄R 0 = 0.05 to 0.25 ) such that two pinning-depinning modes are recorded at least. As evident from Fig. 11, it was found that neither the average critical contact angle nor the maximum excess Gibbs free energy depend on the rib width. However, for nano-
481 482
droplets deposited on nano-textured surfaces the variation of the width of the geometrical properties may significantly affect the contact line dynamics and consequently the energy barrier. It was shown in [47] [48]
483 484
using molecular dynamics simulations that for nano-droplets on chemically heterogeneous solid substrates the characteristic width of the inhomogeneity can have a significance impact on the behavior of the contact line
485
motion during evaporation. The constant fitted dashed lines in Fig. 11a and 11.b, were measured by averaging
486 487
over all simulation results (symbols). We again measured the contribution of the different terms in the excess Gibbs free energy as plotted in Fig. 11b. We observe that the viscous dissipation predominantly contributes to
488 489
the maximum excess Gibbs free energy calculations, while the contribution of the pressure (PV) and interfacial energy terms is lower. It is also seen from Fig.11b. that the variation of the viscous dissipation is almost constant
490 491
as the size of the rib width changes resulting in the total energy barrier being almost constant. From these results, we conclude that the internal flow in the droplet is not significantly affected during evaporation by changing the
492
width of the ribs in the range under consideration. As a result the viscous dissipation as the main contributor of
493
the maximum excess Gibbs free energy remains constant.
494
From the simulation results shown in Fig. 7, 9 and 11, one can conclude that for an evaporating droplet pinned
495 496
on a series of parallel ribs, the energy barrier required for depinning the contact line is mainly dominated by either interfacial energy or the viscous dissipation and the contribution of the pressurebterm in the maximum
497 498
excess Gibbs free energy calculations is almost negligible. Moreover, by varying either spacing distance, rib height or rib width the changes in viscous dissipation are rather small.
499 500
4. Conclusions
501 502
In this study, using numerical simulations based on the entropic lattice Boltzmann method for two-phase flows, we studied the dynamics of the contact line pinning-depinning during evaporating drops on a set of parallel
503 504
micro-ribs. This type of surfaces, with ribs of a few tens of micrometer are different to common textured surfaces patterned by pillars. The dynamics of the contact line depinning was further investigated by varying the spacing
505 506
distance, the surface height and the rib width in a wide range from few ten to hundreds of micrometer. It was observed that upon deposition of the drop, first the space between ribs is invaded by the liquid drop due to the
507
effect of capillary suction. This process is followed by a pinning-depinning behavior, showing alternatively CCR
508 509
(constant contact radius) and CCA (constant contact angle) modes. The droplet depins at a critical contact angle, which is controlled by the maximum excess Gibbs free energy per unit length, when there is sufficient energy to
510 511
overcome the energy barrier resulting in a move of the triple contact line to a new pinning condition. Numerical simulations enabled us to correctly calculate the excess Gibbs free energy by taking into account not only the
512 513
interfacial energy terms studied previously in literature but also the pressure term as well as the viscous dissipation induced by the internal flow in the droplet. Unlike the rib width, both the spacing distance between
514
the ribs and the height of the ribs play a significant role in the control of the pinning/depinning cycles, the critical
515 516
contact angle and the maximum excess Gibbs free energy. Evaluating the contribution of the different terms to the energy barrier, i.e. the pressure, viscous dissipation as well as the interfacial energy terms, we surprisingly
517 518
found that the contribution of different terms can be different for different geometrical properties. By varying the spacing distance between the ribs the energy barrier is predominantly controlled by the interfacial energy while
519
the viscous dissipation is dominant in the case the rib height and width are altered.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 16 of 34
Page 17 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
520 521
However to get further insight into the dynamics of the contact line depinning for drops evaporating on ribs, further work is still needed to investigate the effect of rib shape and also to explore the behavior of contact line
522
depinning on porous architectures without base plate which will open a new window for future research.
523 524
5. Acknowledgment
525
This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (project No. 200021_175793). Prof. Iliya V.
526 527
Karlin and Dr. Shyam S. Chikatamarla acknowledge the support from the computational resources at the Swiss National Super Computing Center CSCS. The important contribution of the PhD work of Soyoun Son is also
528
acknowledged.
529 530
References 1 Zeng, Hongbo and Kristiansen, Kai and Wang, Peng and Bergli, Joakim and Israelachvili, Jacob. Surface-induced patterns from evaporating droplets of aqueous carbon nanotube dispersions. Langmuir, 27 (2011), 7163--7167. 2 Soltman, Dan and Subramanian, Vivek. Inkjet-printed line morphologies and temperature control of the coffee ring effect. Langmuir, 24 (2008), 2224--2231. 3 Bhattacharya, P and Samanta, AN and Chakraborty, S. Spray evaporative cooling to achieve ultra fast cooling in runout table. International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 48 (2009), 1741--1747. 4 Taylor, Robert and Coulombe, Sylvain and Otanicar, Todd and Phelan, Patrick and Gunawan, Andrey and Lv, Wei and Rosengarten, Gary and Prasher, Ravi and Tyagi, Himanshu. Small particles, big impacts: a review of the diverse applications of nanofluids. Journal of Applied Physics, 113 (2013), 1. 5 Birdi, KS and Vu, DT and Winter, A. A study of the evaporation rates of small water drops placed on a solid surface. The Journal of physical chemistry, 93 (1989), 3702--3703. 6 Yu, Dong In and Kwak, Ho Jae and Doh, Seung Woo and Ahn, Ho Seon and Park, Hyun Sun and Kiyofumi, Moriyama and Kim, Moo Hwan. Dynamics of contact line depinning during droplet evaporation based on thermodynamics. Langmuir, 31 (2015), 1950--1957. 7 Hu, Hua and Larson, Ronald G. Analysis of the microfluid flow in an evaporating sessile droplet. Langmuir, 21 (2005), 3963--3971. 8 Moffat, J Ross and Sefiane, Khellil and Shanahan, Martin ER. Effect of TiO2 nanoparticles on contact line stick- slip behavior of volatile drops. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B, 113 (2009), 8860-8866. 9 Moffat, J Ross and Sefiane, Khellil and Shanahan, Martin ER. Nanofluid droplet evaporation kinetics and wetting dynamics on flat substrates. Journal of Nano Research, 7 (2009), 75--80. 10 Shin, Dong Hwan and Lee, Seong Hyuk and Jung, Jung-Yeul and Yoo, Jung Yul. Evaporating characteristics of sessile droplet on hydrophobic and hydrophilic surfaces. Microelectronic Engineering, 86 (2009), 1350--1353.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
11 Shin, Dong Hwan and Lee, Seong Hyuk and Choi, Chang Kyoung and Retterer, Scott. The evaporation and wetting dynamics of sessile water droplets on submicron-scale patterned silicon hydrophobic surfaces. Journal of Micromechanics and Microengineering, 20 (2010), 055021. 12 Lee, Chi Young and Zhang, Bong June and Park, Jiyeon and Kim, Kwang J. Water droplet evaporation on Cu-based hydrophobic surfaces with nano-and micro-structures. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 2012 (2012), 2151--2159. 13 Xu, Wei and Leeladhar, Rajesh and Kang, Yong Tae and Choi, Chang-Hwan. Evaporation kinetics of sessile water droplets on micropillared superhydrophobic surfaces. Langmuir, 29 (2013), 6032-6041. 14 Chuang, Yu-Chen and Chu, Che-Kang and Lin, Shih-Yao and Chen, Li-Jen. Evaporation of water droplets on soft patterned surfaces. Soft matter, 10 (2014), 3394--3403. 15 Susarrey-Arce, A and Marin, A and Massey, A and Oknianska, A and D. Pattern formation by staphylococcus epidermidis via droplet evaporation on micropillars arrays at a surface. Langmuir, 32 (2016), 7159--7169. 16 Lu, Zhengmao and Preston, Daniel J and Antao, Dion S and Zhu, Yangying and Wang, Evelyn N. Coexistence of pinning and moving on a contact line. Langmuir, 33 (2017), 8970--8975. 17 Wu, Shuai and Ma, Ming. A contact angle hysteresis model based on the fractal structure of contact line. Journal of colloid and interface science, 505 (2017), 995--1000. 18 Bormashenko, E and Musin, A and Whyman, G and Zinigrad, M. Wetting transitions and depinning of the triple line. Langmuir, 28 (2012), 3460--3464. 19 Bahadur, Vaibhav and Garimella, Suresh V. Preventing the Cassie- Wenzel transition using surfaces with noncommunicating roughness elements. Langmuir, 25 (4815--4820 2009). 20 Misyura, SY. Contact angle and droplet heat transfer during evaporation on structured and smooth surfaces of heated wall. Applied Surface Science, 414 (2017), 188--196. 21 Deegan, Robert D and Bakajin, Olgica and Dupont, Todd F and Huber, Greg Huber. Capillary flow as the cause of ring stains from dried liquid drops. Nature, 389 (1997), 827. 22 Deegan, Robert D. Pattern formation in drying drops. Physical review E, 61 (2000), 475. 23 Shao, Fen Fen and Neild, Adrian and Alan, Tuncay. Controlled particle self-assembly in an evaporating droplet. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 398 (2012), 64--68. 24 Lin, Shih-Yao and Yang, Kai-Chieh and Chen, Li-Jen. Effect of Surface Hydrophobicity on Critical Pinning Concentration of Nanoparticles To Trigger the Coffee Ring Formation during the Evaporation Process of Sessile Drops of Nanofluids. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 119 (2015), 3050--3059.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 18 of 34
Page 19 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
25 Orejon, Daniel and Sefiane, Khellil and Shanahan, Martin ER. Stick--slip of evaporating droplets: substrate hydrophobicity and nanoparticle concentration. Langmuir, 27 (2011), 12834--12843. 26 Shanahan, Martin ER. Simple theory of" stick-slip" wetting hysteresis. Langmuir, 11 (1995), 1041-1043. 27 Bormashenko, Edward and Musin, Albina and Zinigrad, Michael. Evaporation of droplets on strongly and weakly pinning surfaces and dynamics of the triple line. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 385 (2011), 235--240. 28 Chen, Ping-ping and Wang, Xi-shi. Experimental study of water drop impact on wood surfaces. International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer, 54 (2011), 4143--4147. 29 Lan, Meijuan and Wang, Xishi and Chen, Pingping and Zhao, Xiangdi. Effects of surface tension and wood surface roughness on impact splash of a pure and multi-component water drop. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 8 (2016), 218--225. 30 Huang, Xianjia and Chen, Pingping and Lan, Meijuan and Wang, Xishi and Liao, Guangxuan. Experimental study of water drops with additive impact on wood surfaces. Procedia Engineering, 62 (2013), 852--858. 31 Ali, Mazloomi Moqaddam and Chikatamarla, Shyam S and Karlin, Iliya V. Entropic lattice Boltzmann method for multiphase flows. Physical review letters, 114 (2015), 174502. 32 Ali, Mazloomi Moqaddam and Chikatamarla, Shyam S and Karlin, Iliya V. Entropic lattice Boltzmann method for multiphase flows: Fluid-solid interfaces. Physical Review E, 92 (2015), 023308. 33 Ali, Mazloomi Moqaddam. Entropic Lattice Boltzmann Method for Two-Phase Flows. 2016. 34 Slemrod, Marshall. Dynamic phase transitions in a van der Waals fluid. Journal of differential equations, 52 (1984), 1--23. 35 Yuan, Peng and Schaefer, Laura. Equations of state in a lattice Boltzmann model. Physics of Fluids, 18 (2006), 042101. 36 Ali, Mazloomi Moqaddam and Chikatamarla, Shyam S and Karlin, Iliya V. Drops bouncing off macrotextured superhydrophobic surfaces. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 824 (2017), 866--885. 37 Ali, Mazloomi Moqaddam and Chikatamarla, Shyam S and Karlin, Iliya V. Simulation of binary droplet collisions with the entropic lattice Boltzmann method. Physics of Fluids, 28 (2016), 022106. 38 Ali, Mazloomi Moqaddam and Chikatamarla, Shyam S and Karlin, Iliya V. Simulation of droplets collisions using two-phase entropic lattice Boltzmann method. Journal of Statistical Physics, 161 (2015), 1420--1433. 39 Joshi, Abhijit S and Sun, Ying. Wetting dynamics and particle deposition for an evaporating colloidal drop: A lattice Boltzmann study. Physical Review E, 82 (2010), 041401.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
40 Chantelot, Pierre and Moqaddam, Ali Mazloomi and Gauthier, Ana. Water ring-bouncing on repellent singularities. Soft Matter (2018). 41 Godsave, GAE. Studies of the combustion of drops in a fuel spray—the burning of single drops of fuel. Symposium (International) on Combustion (1953), 818--830. 42 Stauber, Jutta M and Wilson, Stephen K and Duffy, Brian R and Sefiane, Khellil. On the lifetimes of evaporating droplets with related initial and receding contact angles. Physics of Fluids, 27 (2015), 122101. 43 Oksuz, Melik and Erbil, H Yildirim. Comments on the Energy Barrier Calculations during “Stick--Slip” Behavior of Evaporating Droplets Containing Nanoparticles. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 118 (2014), 9228--9338. 44 Wang, FengChao and Wu, HengAn. Molecular origin of contact line stick-slip motion during droplet evaporation. Scientific reports (2015), 17521. 45 Shanahan, Martin ER. Simple theory of" stick-slip" wetting hysteresis. Langmuir, 11 (1995), 1041-1043. 46 Shanahan, MER and Sefiane, K. Kinetics of triple line motion during evaporation. Contact angle, wettability and adhesion, 6 (2009), 19--31. 47 Wang, Feng-Chao and Wu, Heng-An. Pinning and depinning mechanism of the contact line during evaporation of nano-droplets sessile on textured surfaces. Soft Matter, 9 (2013), 5703--5709. 48 Zhang, Jianguo and Müller-Plathe, Florian and Leroy, Frédéric. Pinning of the contact line during evaporation on heterogeneous surfaces: slowdown or temporary immobilization? Insights from a nanoscale study. Langmuir, 31 (2015), 7544--7552. 49 Erbil, H Yildirim and McHale, Glen and Newton, MI. Drop evaporation on solid surfaces: constant contact angle mode. Langmuir, 18 (2002), 2636--2641. 50 Erbil, H Yildirim and Dogan, Muzeyyen. Determination of Diffusion Coefficient- Vapor Pressure Product of Some Liquids from Hanging Drop Evaporation. Langmuir, 16 (2000), 9267--9273. 51 Erbil, H Yildirim. Determination of the peripheral contact angle of sessile drops on solids from the rate of evaporation. Journal of adhesion science and technology, 13 (1999), 1405--1413. 52 Larson, Ronald G. Re-Shaping the Coffee Ring. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 51 (2012), 2546--2548. 53 Chen, Xuemei and Ma, Ruiyuan and Li, Jintao and Hao, Chonglei and Guo, Wei and Luk, Bing Lam and Li, Shuai Cheng and Yao, Shuhuai and Wang, Zuankai. Evaporation of droplets on superhydrophobic surfaces: Surface roughness and small droplet size effects. Physical review letters, 109 (2012), 116101.
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 20 of 34
Page 21 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
54 Cates, ME and Stratford, K and Adhikari, R and Stansell, P and Desplat, JC and Pagonabarraga, I and Wagner, AJ. Simulating colloid hydrodynamics with lattice Boltzmann methods. Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 16 (2004), S3903. 531 532 533
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
534 535
Graphical TOC Entry
536 537
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 22 of 34
Page 23 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
For Table of Content Only 342x178mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Schematic representation of an evaporating drop of radius R_0 deposited on arrays of micro-ribs of width b, height h and the spacing distance w. In all simulations the drop radius R_0 is fixed to 1.3 mm (corresponding to a 100 lattice nodes) while w, h and b are varied in a range between 39 to 234 µm, 65 to 650 µm and 65 to 325 µm respectively. 211x187mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 24 of 34
Page 25 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
D^2-law: comparison between numerical simulations (open squares) and theoretical prediction (solid line). 352x215mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
a) Simulation results of an evaporating liquid drop on a flat surface where the contact angleapparent contact angle remains constant during evaporation, while the drop contact diameter decreases (CCA mode). b) Normalized droplet contact radius (left axis) as well as drop contact angle (right axis). c) Evolution of an evaporating droplet in CCR mode on a rough surface. d) Normalized droplet contact radius and contact angleapparent contact angle on a rough surface versus normalized time. 127x76mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 26 of 34
Page 27 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
Selected snapshots of an evaporating droplet depostited on a series of parallel micro-ribs: a) capillary suction phase, b) pinning mode, c) the first slip or depinning event, d) the second slip event. In (a), (b), (c) and (d), the top panel shows the density iso-surface in a three-dimensional view, the middle panel represents the density conture in the middle droplet cross-plane and in the bottom panel the velocity field inside the drop and around the triple contact line in the same plane is visualized. In (e) the total liquid volume (solid line), liquid volume of the droplet residing on the ribs (dashed line) and liquid volume penetrated into micro-ribs (dash-dot line) are plotted versus time for two different rib widths (in both cases the height and width of ribs are kept constant to h/R_0=0.5 and b/R_0=0.05). 204x211mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
(a) Top view of the contact line profile of the liquid drop pinned on top of the ribs for diffferent times. (b) Charactristic time evolution of the minor (left axis) and major semi-axis (right axis) of the ellips contact area. (c) The aspect ratio between the minor and the major semi-axis of ellips contact area during evaporation. (d) Variation of the contact angleapparent contact angle of the pinned contact line during evaporation process of the liquid drop. The micro-ribs have a spacing distance of w/R_0=0.06, height of h/R_0=0.5 and b/R_0=0.05. θ_(0,i) in (d) shows the contact angleapparent contact angle at the beginning of each pinning event i. After pinning the θ_(0,i) is decreased to a critical value at which the drop decomes depinned. The critical contact angle is averaged over all slipping modes and it is shown by (θ_critical )_avg. 127x89mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 28 of 34
Page 29 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
Evolution of excess Gibbs free energy per unit length of triple line (contact radius r) normalized by the initial Gibbs free enrgy during evaporation proccess of a droplet deposited on a micro-ribs with w/R_0=0.06, h/R_0=0.5 and b/R_0=0.05, taking into account all terms (black) or only the interfacial terms (blue). The maximum excess Gibbs free energy or the energy barrier required for the drop to be depinned is averaged over all depinning events except the first, depinning denoted by 〖(δG_max/G_0)〗_avg*(R_0/r). 114x75mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Variation of (a) the average critical contact angle at droplet depinning as well as (b) the average maximum excess Gibbs free energy as a function of the spacing distance w. For all simulations here, the rib height and width are kept equal to h/R_0=0.5 and b/R_0=0.05, respectively. The dashed line is fitted to the simualtion results (symbols) as a guide to the eye. 127x53mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 30 of 34
Page 31 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
Evolution of (a) the solid-fluid contact area, A_wetting, together with (b) the fluid-fluid interfacial area, A_drop, during evaporation of the liquid droplet deposited on a rib-structured surface for different spacing distance w. In both (a) and (b) the surface area has been normalized by A_0 i.e. the initial spherical drop surface area. 127x45mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Variation of (a) the average critical contact angle and (b) the average maximum excess Gibbs free energy as a function of the height of microribs . In all cases in (a) and (b) the spacing distance and rib width are kept constant to w/R_0=0.06 and b/R_0=0.05, respectively. The dashed line is fitted to the simualtion results (symbols) as a guide to the eye. 127x50mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 32 of 34
Page 33 of 34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Langmuir
Evolution of (a) the solid-fluid contact area, A_wetting, together with (b) the fluid-fluid interfacial area, A_drop, during evaporation of the liquid droplet deposited on the rib-structured surface for different rib heights h. In both (a) and (b) the surface area has been normalized by A_0 i.e. the initial spherical drop surface area. 127x49mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Langmuir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
Variation of (a) the average critical contact angle and (b) the average maximum excess Gibbs free energy as a function of the rib width. The spacing distance and rib height are fixed to w/R_0=0.06 and h/R_0=0.5. 127x54mm (300 x 300 DPI)
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 34 of 34