Final fate of a Leidenfrost droplet: Explosion or takeoff

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Fig. 4 Altitudinal distributions of ice thickness change (m year−1) for the 650 glaciers. Altitudinal distributions of ice thickness change (m year−1)

Advertisements

Fig. 3 The electrical contact of direct-printed and reconfigured liquid metals. The electrical contact of direct-printed and reconfigured liquid metals.

Fig. 2 Changes in ice surface elevation, h, of Thwaites Glacier.

Fig. 2 Global production, use, and fate of polymer resins, synthetic fibers, and additives (1950 to 2015; in million metric tons). Global production, use,

Focus on the base of water drops placed on hot repellent substrates

Fig. 2 Adhesion of water on hot repellent materials.

Fig. 1 Water drops on hot hydrophilic and superhydrophobic materials.

Fig. 2 Quantification and mechanisms leading to the CAH for reentrant and doubly reentrant geometries at zero applied pressure. Quantification and mechanisms.

Fig. 1 Pump-probe signatures of vermilion (red HgS), black HgS, and metallic Hg. Pump-probe signatures of vermilion (red HgS), black HgS, and metallic.

Fig. 3 Critical pressure analysis for reentrant and doubly reentrant geometries. Critical pressure analysis for reentrant and doubly reentrant geometries.

Probing ferroelectricity in a metal-gated WTe2 thin film sample

Fig. 1 Examples of experimental stimuli and behavioral performance.

Fig. 3 Saturation velocity of BP FETs.

Fig. 1 NP-free Ch-CNC droplets.

Fig. 3 Electron PSD in various regions.

Fig. 4 Complete separation of water and solute after stable and efficient solar evaporation. Complete separation of water and solute after stable and efficient.

Fig. 4 Morphogenesis in the Ch-CNC host droplets and NP assemblies.

Fig. 6 Different models of assembly of Ch-CNC droplets laden with Fe3O4NPs under magnetic field. Different models of assembly of Ch-CNC droplets laden.

Fig. 2 Reference-fixing experiment, results.

Fig. 2 Ferroelectric domains resolved in WTe2 single crystals.

Fig. 3 Scan rate effects on the layer edge current.

Fig. 1 Virtual navigation task and behavioral data.

Interactive morphogenesis in Ch-CNC droplets laden with magnetic NPs

Fig. 3 Rotation experiment, setup.

Fig. 5 Panel appearance computation.

Fig. 1 Reference-fixing experiment, setup.

Fig. 3 Gate voltage dependence of the areal iDMI and PMA.

Fig. 3 Characteristics of UV and temperature sensors.

Emergence of resonances and prediction of distinct network responses

Fig. 2 Characteristics of the ReRAM and FETs.

Fig. 2 2D QWs of different propagation lengths.

Fig. 1 Structure of L10-IrMn.

Electronic structure of the oligomer (n = 8) at the UB3LYP/6-31G

Fig. 2 Variation of the SHC with carrier lifetime.

Fig. 2 EUV TG signal. EUV TG signal. Black lines in (A), (B), and (C) are the EUV TG signals from Si3N4 membranes at LTG = 110, 85, and 28 nm, respectively,

Fig. 6 WPS imaging of different chemical components in living cells.

Fig. 3 Load dependence of friction force and corresponding COF.

Fig. 3 ET dynamics on the control and treatment watersheds during the pretreatment and treatment periods. ET dynamics on the control and treatment watersheds.

Fig. 2 Gate and magnetic field dependence of the edge conduction.

Fig. 4 Evolution of fraction of sickled RBCs under hypoxia.

Fig. 4 Giant optical chirality.

Fig. 2 Results of the learning and testing phases.

Fig. 3 Production of protein and Fe(II) at the end of growth correlated with increasing concentrations of ferrihydrite in the media that contained 0.2.

Fig. 2 Folding motions of the TCO with strain-softening behavior.

Fig. 2 NH3, NOx, SO2, and NMVOC emission changes triggered by the JJJ clean air policy. NH3, NOx, SO2, and NMVOC emission changes triggered by the JJJ.

Fig. 1 Schematic view and characterizations of FGT/Pt bilayer.

Fig. 4 Relationships between light and economic parameters.

Relationships between species richness and temperature or latitude

Fig. 1 The calculation of STF moment acceleration, using the 2010 Maule, Chile M8.8 earthquake as an example. The calculation of STF moment acceleration,

Fig. 4 CO2 emission changes triggered by the JJJ clean air policy.

Fig. 4 MFEP calculation. MFEP calculation. (A) MFEPs between defective (dislocation dipole) and defect-free lamellar structures in symmetric BCP thin film.

Fig. 1 Structural and electrical properties of Bi2Se3/BaFe12O19.

Fig. 2 Mean field results. Mean field results. (A) Solutions P(x) to Eq. 4 for a range of T and wc = (B) Modulus ∣pk∣ of order parameters versus.

Fig. 4 The relationship between the total mean absolute momentum disturbance 〈∣p∣〉zB (in units of ℏ/D) and fringe visibility V. The relationship between.

Fig. 5 Simulation of the mechanical properties of the 3DGraphene foam in a wide temperature range down to the cryogenic region. Simulation of the mechanical.

Fig. 6 Stabilization of hippocampal signaling over sleep.

Fig. 3 Comparisons of NDVI trends over the globally vegetated areas from 1982 to Comparisons of NDVI trends over the globally vegetated areas from.

Fig. 2 Large-scale μXRF and EDS characterization of the text-containing side of the TS. Large-scale μXRF and EDS characterization of the text-containing.

Fig. 4 Mapping of abundance of the most dominant bacterial and archaeal phyla across France. Mapping of abundance of the most dominant bacterial and archaeal.

Fig. 4 Single-particle contact angle measurements.

Fig. 6 MD simulations of assembled binary supraballs.

Fig. 1 Quantifying dissonance.

Fig. 2 Supraballs and films from binary SPs.

The combined signal spectra of PSD for protons and helium nuclei

Fig. 3 Characterization of the luminescence temporal time traces.

Fig. 1 Doping schematics and optical properties.

Fig. 3 Calculated electronic structure of ZrCoBi.

Fig. 4 MxB intermolecular assembly interfaces and their role in the MxB assembly and HIV-1 inhibition. MxB intermolecular assembly interfaces and their.

Fig. 2 Imaging blood vessel before and after closure.

Fig. 3 Temperature-dependent heat capacity of YbTM2Zn20.

Presentation transcript:

Final fate of a Leidenfrost droplet: Explosion or takeoff by Sijia Lyu, Varghese Mathai, Yujie Wang, Benjamin Sobac, Pierre Colinet, Detlef Lohse, and Chao Sun Science Volume 5(5):eaav8081 May 3, 2019 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 1 Experiments showing two different behaviors of evaporating ethanol droplets. Experiments showing two different behaviors of evaporating ethanol droplets. (A) Experimental setup with two high-speed cameras mounted with long-distance microscopes and a microphone for acquiring the sound signal. (B and C) Side views of a small (initial radius Ri ≈ 30 μm; radius in the leftmost image ≈ 17 μm) and a large ethanol droplet (initial radius Ri = 1.9 mm; radius in the leftmost image ≈ 53 μm), respectively, in their Leidenfrost states. Scale bars, 100 μm. The temperatures of the substrate are the same, Ts = 296°C. The small droplet in (B) remains levitated and eventually takes off; its levitation height versus time t − tt, where tt is the takeoff time, is shown in (D). See also movie S1. The large droplet in (C) remains stably levitated on its vapor layer but finally explodes. The lower row in (C) (bottom-view images) shows the top surface of the substrate at the levitating and exploding stages. A dark patch appears when the droplet is in contact with the substrate. (E) Sound signal versus time t − te for the large droplet, where te is the time of explosion. An audible crack is heard at the time of explosion; see also movie S2 for a recording of the large droplet with sound. Videos of different final fates of Leidenfrost drops are shown in the Supplementary Materials. a.u., arbitrary units. Sijia Lyu et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaav8081 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 2 Explosion details of evaporating Leidenfrost droplets. Explosion details of evaporating Leidenfrost droplets. (A) Top view of an evaporating Leidenfrost droplet of ethanol with an initial contaminant volume fraction ϕi = 10−4 and a substrate temperature Ts = 296°C. The middle image shows the droplet at its explosion radius Re ≈ 150 μm, after having shrunk from an initial radius Ri = 1.9 mm (not shown here; radius in the leftmost image ≈ 230 μm). The rightmost image shows a violent explosion of the droplet, which leads to a marked increase in its lateral size. (B) Schematic of particle accumulation at the receding droplet interface during evaporation, leading to the formation of a shell. (C) Picture of an experimental piece of explosion debris with a shell of accumulated particles. Scale bar, 100 μm. (D) Ratio Re/Ri versus ϕi for exploding ethanol suspension droplets at various substrate temperatures and for different Ri. The solid line indicates ϕi1/3 scaling. The top inset shows Re/Ri for a range of substrate temperatures at various initial radii and fixed ϕi = 10−4. The bottom inset shows Re/Ri for a range of initial droplet radii at various substrate temperatures and fixed ϕi = 10−4. Note that the black, red, blue, and magenta symbols correspond to substrate temperatures 204°, 231°, 296°, and 321°C, respectively, and the triangle symbols in (D) are predictions for pure ethanol droplets based on the observed Re/Ri and by extrapolating the ϕi1/3 scaling. The error bars represent the SD. Sijia Lyu et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaav8081 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 3 Local contact and explosion modeling of evaporating Leidenfrost droplets. Local contact and explosion modeling of evaporating Leidenfrost droplets. (A) Side and bottom views of a suspension droplet just before and at the point of explosion; here, Ri = 1.6 mm, ϕi = 10−4, and Ts = 296°C. Scale bars, 200 μm. (B) Vapor layer thickness h versus time to explosion t − te for an evaporating drop, where h was estimated using Eq. 5. We find that the explosion occurs when h approaches 1 μm, which is comparable to the particle size. The inset shows a schematic of the levitation model used in the estimation of h. (C) Thickness he of the vapor layer (calculated) at explosion, for droplets with ϕi varying from 10−5 to 10−3. Note that he stays nearly constant (~1 μm), i.e., comparable to the particle size. (D) Surface averaged volume flow rate, q., when the vapor layer is 1 μm thick. Note that q. decreases with ϕi, suggesting that the accumulation of the particles at the droplet interface inhibits evaporation. The error bars represent the range of the data. Sijia Lyu et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaav8081 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

Fig. 4 Predictions of takeoff and explosion regimes for pure and suspension droplets of ethanol. Predictions of takeoff and explosion regimes for pure and suspension droplets of ethanol. (A) Dimensionless elevation h/R of a small pure ethanol droplet as a function of its radius R, as measured from experiment by using the high-speed images, at Ts = 296°C. At a takeoff radius Rt ≈ 15 μm (vertical dashed line), the shrinking droplet enters a quasi-static regime and follows the scaling h/R ∝ R− 3/2. (B) Predicted critical initial radius Ric versus contamination level ϕi for Ts = 296°C. This Ric separates the explosion regime from the takeoff regime. For pure ethanol drop (ϕi ≈ 2 × 10−6), Ric ≈ 0.6 mm. With increasing contamination ϕi, Ric decreases, which makes explosion the more likely outcome. Sijia Lyu et al. Sci Adv 2019;5:eaav8081 Copyright © 2019 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).