4.8 Article

Dynamic Defrosting on Scalable Superhydrophobic Surfaces

期刊

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
卷 9, 期 28, 页码 24308-24317

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.7b05651

关键词

dynamic defrosting; Cassie ice; superhydrophobic; melting; condensation frosting

资金

  1. Department of Biomedical Engineering and Mechanics at Virginia Tech

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies have shown that frost can grow in a suspended Cassie state on nanostructured superhydrophobic surfaces. During defrosting, the melting sheet of Cassie frost spontaneously dewets into quasi-spherical slush droplets that are highly mobile. Promoting Cassie frost would therefore seem advantageous from a defrosting standpoint; however, nobody has systematically compared the efficiency of defrosting Cassie ice versus defrosting conventional surfaces. Here, we characterize the defrosting of an aluminum plate, one-half of which exhibits a superhydrophobic nanostructure while the other half is smooth and hydrophobic. For thick frost sheets (>1 mm), the superhydrophobic surface was able to dynamically shed the meltwater, even at very low tilt angles. In contrast, the hydrophobic surface was unable to shed any appreciable meltwater even at a 90 tilt angle. For thin frost layers (less than or similar to 1 mm), not even the superhydrophobic surface could mobilize the meltwater. We attribute this to the large apparent contact angle of the meltwater, which for small amounts of frost serves to minimize coalescence events and prevent droplets from approaching the capillary length. Finally, we demonstrate a new mode of dynamic defrosting using an upside-down surface orientation, where the melting frost was able to uniformly detach from the superhydrophobic side and subsequently pull the frost from the hydrophobic side in a chain reaction. Treating surfaces to enable Cassie frost is therefore very desirable for enabling rapid and low-energy thermal defrosting, but only for frost sheets that are sufficiently thick.

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

4.8
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