4.4 Article

Electrowetting on superhydrophobic surfaces: Present status and prospects

Journal

JOURNAL OF ADHESION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 3-4, Pages 319-334

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1163/156856108X295347

Keywords

electrowetting; superhydrophobic; nanostructures; nanotibers; nanotubes; wetting

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Electrowetting devices with an initial superhydrophobic water contact angle (> 150 degrees) have now been demonstrated on a variety of structured substrates. These substrates are more complex than a conventional superhydrophobic surface since electrowetting requires an electrical conductor that is coated with a highperformance dielectric and a hydrophobic fluoropolymer. Substrate structures that have been studied include silicon nanoposts and nanowires, carbon nanotibers and nanotubes, and polymer microposts. Even though these structured surfaces are geometrically diverse, there are several consistencies in electrowetting behavior for all these platforms. As an electrowetting bias of 10's of volts is applied between a saline drop and the substrate, the macroscopically observed contact angle is typically decreased from > 150 degrees to similar to 100 degrees. As the voltage is increased an electromechanical force promotes capillary wetting between the substrate structures, and the saline drop transitions from the Cassie state to the Wenzel state. The Wenzel state presents a new energy minimum for the system, and in all current experiments the wetting is irreversible. Transition from the Wenzel state back to the Cassie state has been demonstrated by rneans of liquid boiling or addition ofa second non-polar liquid. The importance of these recent investigations includes the dynamic tuning of the wetting on a superhydrophobic surface, and improved understanding of electrowetting on, and into, structured surfaces. (c) Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2008

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available