2009
DOI: 10.1063/1.3158468
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical studies of the influence of the dynamic contact angle on a droplet impacting on a dry surface

Abstract: We numerically investigated liquid droplet impact behavior onto a dry and flat surface. The numerical method consists of a coupled level set and volume-of-fluid framework, volume/surface integrated average based multimoment method, and a continuum surface force model. The numerical simulation reproduces the experimentally observed droplet behavior quantitatively, in both the spreading and receding phases, only when we use a dynamic contact angle model based on experimental observations. If we use a sensible si… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

7
151
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 273 publications
(166 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
(102 reference statements)
7
151
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, modeling flows with moving contact lines, particularly in 3D, is very challenging. In addition to the computational resource issue associated with capturing 3D time-dependent flow, the crucial difficulty with most simulation methods, for example, the popular volume-of-fluid (VOF) approach, is that the dynamic contact angle needs to be prescribed, often in a complicated fashion [30][31][32][33], dependent on experimental measurements. Simulations of flows such as the impact and spreading of droplets are particularly sensitive to the dynamic contact angle behavior.…”
Section: Simulation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, modeling flows with moving contact lines, particularly in 3D, is very challenging. In addition to the computational resource issue associated with capturing 3D time-dependent flow, the crucial difficulty with most simulation methods, for example, the popular volume-of-fluid (VOF) approach, is that the dynamic contact angle needs to be prescribed, often in a complicated fashion [30][31][32][33], dependent on experimental measurements. Simulations of flows such as the impact and spreading of droplets are particularly sensitive to the dynamic contact angle behavior.…”
Section: Simulation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Simulations of flows such as the impact and spreading of droplets are particularly sensitive to the dynamic contact angle behavior. Yokoi et al [33] found that accurate dynamics could be achieved only when using a dynamic contact angle based on experimental observations. In contrast, the lattice Boltzmann method used here does not require the dynamic contact angle to be specified.…”
Section: Simulation Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the transport of the interface, we give here some examples showing that almost all the classical methods are concerned: Boundary Integral methods [1][2][3], adaptive grid methods [4,5], Level-Set methods [6,7], Volume of Fluid methods [8][9][10], Front Tracking Methods [11,12] and coupled Level set and Volume-of-Fluid (CLSVOF) methods [13]. Different methods have also been developed for the modeling of moving contact lines.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent developments, the dynamic or apparent contact angle is connected to the velocity of the contact line. The Cox [16] relation is directly applied [10,17] or adapted using an adjustable parameter that needs to be empirically determined from experiments [13,14]. As shown in this introduction, different strategies have been developed for the simulation of moving contact line.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A better method would be to use a more sophisticated relationship between capillary number and contact angle than the one used here. Options include those such as formulated by [24] or [25]. However, these require more detailed measurements of the dynamic contact angle at a range of capillary numbers.…”
Section: Case With No Air Co-flowmentioning
confidence: 99%