Journal
ADVANCES IN COLLOID AND INTERFACE SCIENCE
Volume 170, Issue 1-2, Pages 48-55Publisher
ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cis.2011.12.001
Keywords
Cassie; Cassie-Baxter; Contact angle; Contact area; Contact line; Rough surface
Categories
Funding
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
- Izaak Walton Killam Memorial Scholarship
- NSERC CGS-D
- Alberta Innovates Technology Futures Nanotechnology Graduate Research Scholarship
Ask authors/readers for more resources
A review of literature shows that the majority of papers cite a potentially incorrect form of the Cassie and Cassie-Baxter equations to interpret or predict contact angle data. We show that for surfaces wet with a composite interface, the commonly used form of the Cassie-Baxter equation, cos theta(c)=f(1) cos theta - (1-f), is only correct for the case of flat topped pillar geometry without any penetration of the liquid. In general, the original form of the Cassie-Baxter equation, cos theta(c), = f(1) cos theta(1)-f(2), with f(1) + f(2) >= 1, should be used. The differences between the two equations are discussed and the errors involved in using the incorrect equation are estimated to be between similar to 3 degrees and 13 degrees for superhydrophobic surfaces. The discrepancies between the two equations are also discussed for the case of a liquid undergoing partial, but increasing, levels of penetration. Finally, a general equation is presented for the transition/stability criterion between the Cassie-Baxter and Wenzel modes of wetting. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. 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
Recommended
No Data Available