Advances in Computational Mechanics at ACES Centre; Edited by: Yuan Tong Gu, Xu Han and Zheng Ping WuNo Access

MODELING OF CONTACT ANGLES AND WETTING EFFECTS WITH PARTICLE METHODS

Key Laboratory for Hydrodynamics and Ocean Engineering, Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China

The State Key Laboratory for Nonlinear Mechanics, Institute of Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

J. Z. CHANG

School of Mechatronice Engineering, North University of China, Taiyuan, 030051, China

Search for more papers by this author

H. T. LIU

School of Mechatronice Engineering, North University of China, Taiyuan, 030051, China

Search for more papers by this author

, and

T. X. SU

School of Mechatronice Engineering, North University of China, Taiyuan, 030051, China

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219876211002733Cited by:16 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

The physics of fluid–fluid–solid contact line dynamics and wetting behaviors are closely related to the inter-particle and intra-molecular hydrodynamic interactions of the concerned multiple phase system. Investigation of surface tension, contact angle, and wetting behavior using molecular dynamics (MD) is practical only on extremely small time scales (nanoseconds) and length scales (nanometers) even if the most advanced high-performance computers are used. In this article we introduce two particle methods, which are smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) and dissipative particle dynamics (DPD), for multiphase fluid motion on continuum scale and meso-scale (between the molecular and continuum scales). In both methods, the interaction of fluid particles and solid particles can be used to study fluid–fluid–solid contact line dynamics with different wetting behaviors. The interaction strengths between fluid particles and between fluid and wall particles are closely related to the wetting behavior and the contact angles. The effectiveness of SPH and DPD in modeling contact line dynamics and wetting behavior has been demonstrated by a number of numerical examples that show the complexity of different multiphase flow behaviors.

Keywords:

Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!
Check out these titles in finite element methods!

References

J. U. Brackbill, D. B. Kothe and C. Zemach, J. Comput. Phys. 100(2), 335 (1992), DOI: 10.1016/0021-9991(92)90240-Y. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. Bracke, F. De Voeght and P. Joos, Trends Colloid Interf. Sci. III, 142 (1989). Google Scholar
S. Chen and G. D. Doolen, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 30, 329 (1998), DOI: 10.1146/annurev.fluid.30.1.329. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
P. G. De Gennes, Rev. Mod. Phys. 57(3), 827 (1985). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
P. Espanol and P. Warren, Europhys. Lett. 30(4), 191 (1995). Crossref, Google Scholar
H. S. Fanget al., Numer. Heat Tr. A-Appl. 55(2), 124 (2009), DOI: 10.1080/10407780802603139. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
D. Frenkel and B. Smit , Understanding Molecular Simulation: From Algorithms to Applications ( Academic Press , San Diego, CA , 2002 ) . Crossref, Google Scholar
R. A. Gingold and J. J. Monaghan, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 181, 375 (1977). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
R. D. Groot, J. Chem. Phys. 107(11), 4423 (1997), DOI: 10.1063/1.474784. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
G. Háziet al., Ann. Nucl. Energ. 29(12), 1421 (2002). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
P. J. Hoogerbrugge and J. Koelman, Europhys. Lett. 19, 155 (1992), DOI: 10.1209/0295-5075/19/3/001. Crossref, Google Scholar
T. Inamuroet al., J. Comput. Phys. 198(2), 628 (2004), DOI: 10.1016/j.jcp.2004.01.019. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Q. Liet al., Appl. Math. Mech-Engl. 27(1), 67 (2006), DOI: 10.1007/s10483-006-0109-1. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
G. R. Liu and M. B. Liu , Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics: A Meshfree Particle Method ( World Scientific , Singapore , 2003 ) . Link, Google Scholar
M. B. Liu and G. R. Liu, Comput. Mech. 35(5), 332 (2005), DOI: 10.1007/s00466-004-0620-y. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. B. Liu, G. R. Liu and K. Y. Lam, Int. J. Comput. Engrg. Sci. 4(2), 405 (2003). Link, Google Scholar
M. B. Liu, G. R. Liu and K. Y. Lam, J. Comput. Appl. Math. 155(2), 263 (2003), DOI: 10.1016/S0377-0427(02)00869-5. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. B. Liu, G. R. Liu and Z. Zong, Int. J. Comput. Meth. 5(1), 135 (2008). Link, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. B. Liu, P. Meakin and H. Huang, Phys. Fluids 18(1), 017101 (2006), DOI: 10.1063/1.2163366. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
J. P. Morris, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Fl. 33(3), 333 (2000). Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
S. Nugent and H. A. Posch, Phys. Rev. E 62(4), 4968 (2000), DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.62.4968. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
D. C. Rapaport , The Art of Molecular Dynamics Simulation ( Cambridge University Press , Cambridge, UK/New York, NY , 2004 ) . Crossref, Google Scholar
D. H. Rothman and J. M. Keller, J. Stat. Phys. 52(3), 1119 (1988), DOI: 10.1007/BF01019743. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
X. Shan and H. Chen, Phys. Rev. E 47(3), 1815 (1993), DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.47.1815. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
A. Tartakovsky and P. Meakin, Phys. Rev. E 72(2), 26301 (2005), DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.72.026301. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
P. A. Thompson and M. O. Robbins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63(7), 766 (1989), DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.63.766. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
X. Wuet al., Phys. Fluids 15, 1357 (2003), DOI: 10.1063/1.1566751. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar