4.8 Article

On the Nanoengineering of Superhydrophobic and Impalement Resistant Surface Textures below the Freezing Temperature

Journal

NANO LETTERS
Volume 14, Issue 1, Pages 172-182

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/nl4037092

Keywords

Hierarchical surface morphology; superhydrophobicity; supercooling; anti-icing; drop impact

Funding

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [200021_135479]
  2. Marie Curie Intra-European Fellowship within the 7th European Community Framework Programme (ICE2) [301174]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The superhydrophobic behavior of nano- and microtextured surfaces leading to rebound of impacting droplets is of great relevance to nature and technology. It is not clear however, if and under what conditions this behavior is maintained when such surfaces are severely undercooled possibly leading to the formation of frost and icing. Here we elucidate key aspects of this phenomenon and show that the outcome of rebound or impalement on a textured surface is affected by air compression underneath the impacting drop and the time scale allowing this air to escape. Remarkably, drop impalement occurred at identical impact velocities, both at room and at very low temperatures (-30 degrees C) and featured a ringlike liquid meniscus penetration into the surface texture with an entrapped air bubble in the middle. At low temperatures, the drop contact time and receding dynamics of hierarchical surfaces were profoundly influenced by both an increase in the liquid viscosity due to cooling and a partial meniscus penetration into the texture. For hierarchical surfaces with the same solid fraction in their roughness, minimizing the gap between the asperities (both at micro- and nanoscales) yielded the largest resistance to millimetric drop impalement. The best performing surface impressively showed rebound at -30 degrees C for drop impact velocity of 2.6 m/s.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available