4.6 Article

General Way To Compute the Intrinsic Contact Angle at Tubes

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 122, 期 51, 页码 29210-29219

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.8b08100

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51501024, 51871037]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2018CDQYCL0027]
  3. Chongqing Entrepreneurship and Innovation Program for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars [cx2017035]
  4. Open Fund of National Engineering Laboratory of Highway Maintenance Technology, Changsha University of Science Technology [4170107]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanostructured coatings of superwettability, especially at the outer and inner surfaces of large-scale tubes, have generated broad interests for anti-biofouling, drag reduction, condensation heat transfer, and so on. The contact angle, a major parameter to evaluate the wettability, is derived and gradually modified mainly for flat surfaces after Thomas Young (1773-1829). However, in the case of tubular surfaces, the curvature affects and biases the measurement. In this article, a tube-in-tube coaxial anodization approach is developed to generate coatings of nanotube arrays at the outer surface of Ti tubes. The wetting property of the resulting nanotubes is tailored; the apparent contact angle (measured in the radial plane) deviates substantially from its intrinsic value (measured in the axial plane) as the tube diameter decreases or droplet size increases. A general equation, suitable for tubular surfaces of different wetting states, is hence derived to compute the intrinsic contact angle in terms of apparent contact angle, droplet radius, and tube radius. Intrinsic contact angles calculated using the equation agree well with the values measured directly from the corresponding flat surface, validating its effectiveness. This study provides a theoretical basis to assess the wetting property of tubular or curved surfaces by eliminating the curvature effect.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据