4.5 Article

Effects of surface roughness and interface wettability on nanoscale flow in a nanochannel

Journal

MICROFLUIDICS AND NANOFLUIDICS
Volume 2, Issue 6, Pages 501-511

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10404-006-0096-5

Keywords

molecular dynamics; slip; surface roughness; interface wettability; nanochannel

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Non-equilibrium molecular dynamics simulations have been carried out to investigate the effect of surface roughness and interface wettability on the nanotheology and slip boundary condition of simple fluids in a nanochannel of several atomic diameters width. The solid surfaces decorated with periodic nanostrips are considered as the rough surface in this study. The simulation results showed that the interface wettability and the surface roughness are important in determining the nanotheology of the nanochannel and fluid slip at solid-fluid interface. It is observed that the presence of surface roughness always suppresses the fluid slip for hydrophilic and hydrophobic surface nanochannels. For fluids over smooth and hydrophobic surfaces, the snapshots of fluid molecules show that an air gap or nanobubble exists at the fluid-solid interface, resulting in the apparent slip velocity. For a given surface with fixed interface wettability, the fluid velocities increase by increasing the driving force, while the driving force has no significant influence on the density structure of fluid molecules. The fluid slip and the flow rate are measured for hydrophilic and hydrophobic nanochannels. The flow rates in rough surface nanochannels are smaller than those of smooth surface walls due to the increase of drag resistance at the solid-fluid interface. The dependence between fluid slip and flow rate showed that the slip length increases approximately linearly with the flow rate for both the hydrophobic and hydrophilic surface nanochannels.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available