4.6 Article

Electrospray characterization based on an emitter of cone-shaped porous medium for the high-throughput microliter aerosol generation

期刊

APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS
卷 111, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.5004267

关键词

-

资金

  1. Industrial Strategic technology development program - Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE, Korea) [10077502]
  2. Research Fund of UNIST (Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) [1.170013.01]
  3. KIST Institutional Program
  4. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [10077502] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A compact electrospray system has been developed using a cone-shaped porous medium. The cone-jet conditions with a stable spraying mode were measured using ethanol and lavender oil, and the average diameter and size distribution of the sprayed droplets were investigated according to the applied voltage. In addition, the spray stability over time was analyzed because the fluid was supplied with a capillary action without the use of a pump. The average diameter of the droplets was 3.6-6.7 mu m (ethanol) and 6.4-8.6 mu m (lavender oil). We observed that the average particle size clearly increased with the applied voltage; the cause was determined based on the electric stress due to the potential difference (electric pressure) between the tip of the porous medium and ground ring. Moreover, the mean droplet size according to the electrical potential was proportional to E-0.5 (ethanol) and E-0.85 (lavender oil). The penetration time in the porous medium of the proposed system was controlled by the physical properties of the fluid, such as surface tension and viscosity, and affected the spray stability when spraying for a long time. Thus, the spray stability could be improved by controlling the applied voltage in the cone-jet mode region. Published 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