Numerical Simulations of Polymer Solution Droplet Impact on Surfaces of Different Wettabilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a physically based numerical model to simulate droplet impact, spreading, and eventually rebound of a viscoelastic droplet. The simulations were based on the volume of fluid (VOF) method in conjunction with a dynamic contact model accounting for the hysteresis between droplet and substrate. The non-Newtonian nature of the fluid was handled using FENE-CR constitutive equations which model a polymeric fluid based on its rheological properties. A comparative simulation was carried out between a Newtonian solvent and a viscoelastic dilute polymer solution droplet. Droplet impact analysis was performed on hydrophilic and superhydrophobic substrates, both exhibiting contact angle hysteresis. The effect of substrates’ wettability on droplet impact dynamics was determined the evolution of the spreading diameter. While the kinematic phase of droplet spreading seemed to be independent of both the substrate and fluid rheology, the recoiling phase seemed highly influenced by those operating parameters. Furthermore, our results implied a critical polymer concentration in solution, between 0.25 and 2.5% of polystyrene (PS), above which droplet rebound from a superhydrophobic substrate could be curbed. The present model could be of particular interest for optimized 2D/3D printing of complex fluids.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it