4.6 Article

AC electrowetting promoted droplet shedding on hydrophobic surfaces

期刊

APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS
卷 116, 期 19, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/5.0006117

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [CBET-1805179]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Condensation is significantly enhanced by condensing vapor as droplets (instead of a film), which rapidly shed-off. Electrowetting (EW)-induced coalescence and shedding of droplets have been recently shown to accelerate condensation. This work studies the influence of AC electrowetting fields on short-duration droplet shedding on hydrophobic surfaces. Experiments involve tracking the shedding of an ensemble of water droplets under the influence of EW fields, with three parameters being varied (voltage, AC frequency, and device geometry). Significant physical insights into EW-induced droplet shedding are obtained. First, EW enables almost complete removal of water (dry area fraction similar to 98%) in very short time durations (similar to 1s). Second, while the dry area fraction does depend on the applied voltage, significant water shedding can be achieved without needing to apply voltages significantly higher than the threshold voltage. Third, the frequency of the AC waveform does not influence the dry area fraction (for voltages above the threshold voltage); however the time constant associated with droplet shedding strongly depends on the AC frequency. Fourth, the orientation of the device influences water removal due to electrostatic pinning of droplets. Importantly, the measured water removal fluxes immediately after the application of an EW field are two orders of magnitude higher than those measured over a long-duration condensation experiment; this highlights the benefits of intermittent EW fields as opposed to continuous EW fields. Overall, these results suggest that EW on hydrophobic surfaces offers benefits comparable to those offered by superhydrophobic surfaces. Published under license by AIP Publishing.

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