2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.expthermflusci.2019.03.024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamic behavior of non-evaporative droplet impact on a solid surface: Comparative study of R113, water, ethanol and acetone

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
31
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
2
31
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The value of the relative error of We number was calculated by the equation, Δ We / We = Δ D 0 / D 0 + 2Δ U 0 / U 0 to be 12.8%. 59 The angle deviation of the SAW device holder was ±0.3°.…”
Section: Experimental Methods and Sample Preparationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The value of the relative error of We number was calculated by the equation, Δ We / We = Δ D 0 / D 0 + 2Δ U 0 / U 0 to be 12.8%. 59 The angle deviation of the SAW device holder was ±0.3°.…”
Section: Experimental Methods and Sample Preparationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results of Figure S3b in the Supporting Information shows that the uncertainty of the impact velocity was ±4.5%. The value of the relative error of We number was calculated by the equation, Δ We / We = Δ D 0 / D 0 + 2Δ U 0 / U 0 to be 12.8% . The angle deviation of the SAW device holder was ±0.3°.…”
Section: Experimental Methods and Sample Preparationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To this end, we have shown that the QFDD starting from the Townes states can produce rich dynamical phases including the deposition, recoiling and splashing, which perfectly mimic the droplet impact outcomes as studied in literature [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. However, different from these literal studies, the driving force of QFDD is purely given by quantum fluctuations (in terms of LHY correction), whose strength can be easily tuned by the size (σ 0 ) and the number (N ) of initial state.…”
mentioning
confidence: 90%
“…The first systematic study of droplet impact dynamics can be traced back to the 19th century by Worthington [12,13]. Since then such intriguing phenomenon has intrigued great attention and various impact outcomes, including splashing, receding/recoiling, rebound and deposition, have been observed successfully in experiments [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29]. In general, there are two important physical observables in these studies, namely, the maximum spreading factor (β) [16,20,27] and the splashing threshold(K) [15, 17-19, 21-26, 29], which have been shown to not only depend on the properties of droplet itself (size, density, surface tension, viscosity, impact velocity), but also closely reply on the surface condition(roughness, wettability) and surrounding gas (pressure, composition).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In terms of jet cooling, Haixiang Zhang et al paid attention to the effect of surface wettability on water droplet spreading and splashing [8]. Tian, J. and Chen, B compared the different effects of droplet diameter, impact velocity, viscosity and surface tension on the impaction [9]. In terms of evaporative cooling, Zang [10], Sazhin [11], Volkov [12] and Strizhak [13] did a large amount of work on the dynamic model.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%