2014
DOI: 10.7567/jjap.53.05hc05
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dynamic effect of surface contact angle on liquid transfer in a low speed printing process

Abstract: In this study, experiments on liquid transfer were performed to observe the change of the surface contact angle with respect to the process speed. The liquid transfer ratio from the experiments was compared with that from numerical simulation for low speed ranges. While the surface contact angle on the lower plate was almost constant in the experiment regardless of operating speed, the surface contact angle on the upper plate was found to be significantly changed during the process at the low speed ranges. Thi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The difference between predictions and experimental values can be explained by the error in contact angles used between the constructed models and the real liquid bridge. In SE and theoretical models, the contact angles are set to a constant, while the contact angles are varied with the stretching process of the liquid bridge [40]. Additionally, the results of SE solutions are consistent well with theoretical solutions, as demonstrated in reference [41].…”
Section: Comparison Of Ga-ann Gann Simulation and Theoretical Solutionssupporting
confidence: 63%
“…The difference between predictions and experimental values can be explained by the error in contact angles used between the constructed models and the real liquid bridge. In SE and theoretical models, the contact angles are set to a constant, while the contact angles are varied with the stretching process of the liquid bridge [40]. Additionally, the results of SE solutions are consistent well with theoretical solutions, as demonstrated in reference [41].…”
Section: Comparison Of Ga-ann Gann Simulation and Theoretical Solutionssupporting
confidence: 63%
“…In particular, the process is defined by the speed U a at which the AFM probe approaches the substrate, the force value that signals the AFM to stop approaching, the dwell time t d for which the probe is held in contact, and the retraction speed U . Taking inspiration from prior work on macroscale liquid transfer, we hypothesized that U is the most important property in determining the outcome of liquid patterning. Thus, we utilize U a = 1 μm s –1 to ensure that the cantilever was moving slowly enough that the 300 nN attractive force setpoint would be triggered when the liquid comes into contact with the surface and utilize t d = 1 s to allow the capillary bridge equilibrate prior to retraction.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The insertion of this silicone-based offset process enables the generation of finer patterns because silicone tends to absorb the surrounding liquid depending on its chemical nature [6], and thus solvents contained in printed ink are eliminated promptly so that the spreading of pattern contact lines can be avoided by rapid consolidation [7]. Other fine-pattern compatible techniques expected to be applied for printed electronics include gravure offset printing [8,9] and microcontact printing (μCP) [10][11][12][13][14][15][16] which can also be regarded as amended, siliconeutilizing versions of direct gravure or intaglio [17,18], and flexographic printing [19,20]. Therefore, an understanding of the behaviour of silicone materials, particularly during the printing process, is of great importance to accomplish highresolution patterning.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%