4.7 Article

Droplet splashing on curved substrates

Journal

JOURNAL OF COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE
Volume 615, Issue -, Pages 227-235

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2022.01.136

Keywords

Smallest sphere; Same Weber number; different splashing outcomes; Largest sphere Flat substrate; Droplets; Splashing; Textured substrates; Wetting; Droplet impact

Funding

  1. Royal Society University Research Fellowship [URF\R\180016, RGF\EA\181002]
  2. NSF/CBET-EPSRC [EP/S029966/1, EP/W016036/1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the splashing behavior of millimetric droplets on convex and concave surfaces, and finds that the tendency of droplets to splash is proportional to the reciprocal of the substrate's radius of curvature, with it being harder for droplets to splash on small spheres.
Droplets impacting dry solid substrates often splash above a certain threshold impact velocity. We hypothesise that substrate curvature alters splashing thresholds due to a modification to the lift force acting on the lamella at the point of breakup. We have undertaken high-speed imaging experiments of millimetric droplets impacting convex and concave surfaces to establish splashing thresholds and dynamics across a wide range of substrate geometries and impact conditions. Our findings indicate that the tendency of droplets to splash is proportional to the reciprocal of the substrate's radius of curvature, independent of whether the substrate is convex or concave, with it being harder for droplets to splash on small spheres. Moreover, we consistently parameterise the axisymmetric splashing threshold across all curved substrate geometries via a modification to the well-known splashing ratio. Finally, the splashing dynamics resulting from initial asymmetry between the impacting droplet and curved substrate are also elucidated. (c) 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available