๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

Contact Angles and Hysteresis on Soft Surfaces

โœ Scribed by C.W. Extrand; Y. Kumagai


Publisher
Elsevier Science
Year
1996
Tongue
English
Weight
335 KB
Volume
184
Category
Article
ISSN
0021-9797

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

โœฆ Synopsis


can exhibit unusually large hysteresis, an additional factor Wetting experiments were performed to determine how contact may influence the contact angles. The vertical component angles and their hysteresis change with the mechanical properties of the liquid surface tension can deform the underlying of soft substrates. Drops of water and ethylene glycol were used surface ( 2 ) , by pulling up a ridge, as depicted in Fig. 2. on elastomeric surfaces. Elastomers (natural and butadiene rub-This ridge can accentuate changes in u a and u r . For examber) were crosslinked with peroxide to give a wide range of moduli.

ple, natural rubber ( NR ) has shown u a 0 u r twice that of

The chemical nature of these surfaces was characterized using polyethylene ( PE ) ( 3 ) , even though they have similar attenuated total reflecting infrared spectroscopy and X-ray photosurface tensions ( 4, 5 ) .

electron spectroscopy. Roughness was determined by atomic force

Wetting of soft surfaces has been the aim of several theomicroscopy. After crosslinking residue was removed from the surfaces, they were similar in chemical nature and roughness. Never-retical studies (6-11), but to the best of our knowledge, theless, contact angle hysteresis changed quite dramatically with little experimental work has been done to relate contact angle bulk tensile modulus E of the substrates, due to deformation at hysteresis to the mechanical properties of soft, elastic subthe contact line. For example, water drops on soft, uncrosslinked strates. Therefore, we have performed some wetting expeributadiene rubber pulled up a ridge that was visible to the unaided ments using soft rubber surfaces in hopes of answering the eye, resulting in contact angle hysteresis of 69ะŠ. Crosslinking butafollowing questions. How soft must a surface be for deformadiene rubber with 2% peroxide increased E by almost 50-fold. tion at the contact line to significantly affect the observed Consequently, its contact angle hysteresis fell to 22ะŠ. For variation contact angles? And, if deformation does occur, how do the in the contact angles due to deformation to occur, the height of contact angles change with the mechanical properties of the the ridge pulled up by the surface tension of the liquid drop must substrate? be greater than the local roughness. For the surfaces in this study, this occurred where E was less than 5 MPa.


๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


Water Contact Angles and Hysteresis of P
โœ C.W. Extrand ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 2002 ๐Ÿ› Elsevier Science ๐ŸŒ English โš– 108 KB

The wetting behavior of a series of aliphatic polyamides (PAs) has been examined. PAs with varying amide content and polyethylene (PE) were molded against glass to produce surfaces with similar roughness. After cleaning, chemical composition of the surfaces was verified with X-ray photoelectron spec

Simulation of Contact Angle Hysteresis o
โœ Simon Brandon; Abraham Marmur ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1996 ๐Ÿ› Elsevier Science ๐ŸŒ English โš– 142 KB

available to the drop for overcoming the energy barriers A quasi-steady-state simulation of contact angle hysteresis is which inherently exist between the metastable states. ## presented. The model system consists of a two-dimensional drop The multiplicity of equilibrium states is a necessary con

Tentative Correlation between Contact An
โœ S. Bistac; P. Kunemann; J. Schultz ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1998 ๐Ÿ› Elsevier Science ๐ŸŒ English โš– 64 KB

## NOTE Tentative Correlation between Contact Angle Hysteresis and Adhesive Performance is the measure of the advancing u A and receding u R contact angles of a liquid drop (1 mL) deposited on the EVA film (Kruss apparatus). The In this work, the surface properties and adhesive performances secon