2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2010.11.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of particle shape and size on the wetting behavior of soft magnetic micropowders

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
24
0
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
3
24
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The apparent contact angle does decrease for smaller particles; see e. g. . Thus, below a critical diameter, wetting is prohibited, or at least slowed down.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The apparent contact angle does decrease for smaller particles; see e. g. . Thus, below a critical diameter, wetting is prohibited, or at least slowed down.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this method, packing of particles is also important since it may affect the penetration rate of the wetting liquid and thus the measured value of the contact angle Kirchberg et al, 2011).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A contact angle of 72-75° (Kirchberg et al, 2011) was reported for unsieved magnetite powder with a particle size of 6146 lm and irregular particle shape. For the magnetite with a size of 86% À74 lm, the contact angle was determined to be 46° (Qiu et al, 2004).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is a quantitative confirmation of the varying wetting behaviors of the powders. Favorable wetting is indicated at contact angles below 90 ° , while powders with more than 120 ° contact angles will be nonwetting …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Favorable wetting is indicated at contact angles below 90°, while powders with more than 120°c ontact angles will be nonwetting. 19,20 Laser sizing was done to obtain the PSDs, using the Malvern laser The atomized sample shows spheroidal and prolate particles ( Figure 1A), while the milled samples show angular granular particles ( Figure 1B-D). This shape distinction is expected as the production routes are clearly different and has been well reported.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%