1965
DOI: 10.1021/j100889a012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contact Angle Hysteresis. IV. Contact Angle Measurements on Heterogeneous Surfaces1

Abstract: HCN was formed. Similar difficulty was encountered by McElcheran, Wijnen, and Steacie13 in the photolysis of CO(CN)2, and it would appear to be quite a general problem which must be overcome before further progress can be made towards absolute rate parameters.Although CF3 is relatively unreactive compared to CN, we did not think the indirect estimation of the extent of reaction 13 as (2ñc2H6 + Schscn + Kcfjchj), together with the indirect estimation of reaction 16 already proposed, was worthwhile at this stage… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
142
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 278 publications
(152 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
5
142
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 2a. Results show that the advancing contact angle is considerably higher than the receding contact angle in the same pore throat, consistent with previous studies [18,22,[43][44][45]. The difference between ACA and RCA is attributed to the blemishes on non-ideal surfaces which results in pinning the interfaces to the solid surface [46].…”
Section: Contact Angle Measurementsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Figure 2a. Results show that the advancing contact angle is considerably higher than the receding contact angle in the same pore throat, consistent with previous studies [18,22,[43][44][45]. The difference between ACA and RCA is attributed to the blemishes on non-ideal surfaces which results in pinning the interfaces to the solid surface [46].…”
Section: Contact Angle Measurementsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Secondly, contact angle hysteresis can occur. This phenomenon has been long recognized and studied (Dettre & Johnson, 1964 ;Oliver et al, 1980). The general observation is (Adamson & Gast, 1997) that the contact angle measured for a liquid advancing across a surface exceeds that of one receding from the surface.…”
Section: Assumptions and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…As the surface micromorphology does not change significantly, the wettability of the epicuticular waxes seems to be more or less constant, although the chemical composition of the cuticular wax changes considerably during leaf ageing (Marksta$ dter, 1994). In contrast to smooth surfaces, rough hydrophobic surfaces have considerably higher contact angles because air is enclosed between the surface structures, and the contact area between water and surface is drastically reduced (Dettre & Johnson, 1964 ;Holloway, 1970). In such cases, the contact angle mainly depends on the surface tension of the water and not on the adhesion between water and surface.…”
Section: Leaf Surfaces Micromorphology and Wettabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%