Scinovex
articleTop 1% cited

How Wenzel and Cassie Were Wrong

Langmuir · 2007 · Vol. 23(7) · pp. 3762–3765
Lichao GaoThomas J. McCarthy

Abstract

We argue using experimental data that contact lines and not contact areas are important in determining wettability. Three types of two-component surfaces were prepared that contain "spots" in a surrounding field: a hydrophilic spot in a hydrophobic field, a rough spot in a smooth field, and a smooth spot in a rough field. Water contact angles were measured within the spots and with the spot confined to within the contact line of the sessile drop. Spot diameter and contact line diameter were varied. All of the data indicate that contact angle behavior (advancing, receding, and hysteresis) is determined by interactions of the liquid and the solid at the three-phase contact line alone and that the interfacial area within the contact perimeter is irrelevant. The point is made that Wenzel's and Cassie's equations are valid only to the extent that the structure of the contact area reflects the ground state energies of contact lines and the transition states between them.

Surface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsNanomaterials and Printing TechnologiesContact angleWettingWetting transitionDrop (telecommunication)HysteresisSessile drop techniqueLine (geometry)Contact areaMaterials scienceOptics
Citations
788
FWCI
26.40
field-weighted impact
References
27
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Cited by
Some thoughts on superhydrophobic wetting
Soft Matter · 2008 · 368 citations
Anisotropic wetting on tunable micro-wrinkled surfaces
Soft Matter · 2007 · 435 citations
References
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.

How Wenzel and Cassie Were Wrong · Scinovex