Submicron drops from flapping bursting bubbles

Jiang, Xinghua; Rotily, Lucas; Villermaux, Emmanuel; Wang, Xiaofei

doi:10.1073/pnas.2112924119

Cited by 42 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A bold proposal has been very recently published in this journal (16) to explain the submicron SSA origin from film droplets: the film flapping mechanism (32). This mechanism aims to complement the film bursting described in (17) for the complete description of the spray size distribution, disregarding jet droplets.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These scales allow the rationalization and comparison of the different extremely rapid mechanisms of droplet generation. Using all data provided by (16,27,31,33) among other valuable information and data resources, jet and film droplet generation from seawater are here exhaustively revised under current available theoretical proposals (16,30) and experimental evidences. Disaggregated data and detailed experimental description in (16) allow reliable statistical resolution of ambiguities in the origin of droplets in the micron and submicron range.…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Note that Jiang et al (16) use what they call the radius of curvature of the cap as the equivalent bubble radius Ro, which according to their calculations is approximately twice the radius of a sphere with the same volume of the bubble for small Bond numbers Bo=ρgR 2 o /σ. For bubbles larger than about 0.5 mm, they use Toba's correction (34).…”

Section: Film Droplets: Physics and Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Incomplete or incorrect causal attributions in science are strongly correlated with the limitations of instruments and tools able to observe the very large or very small spatial and temporal scales (15), limitations which often lead to periods of stymied progress. However, the assembly of indirect evidences from multiple sources and methods (13,16) is the usual process of advancement. This work presents a thorough revision of the physics of bursting bubbles and their associated statistics, and proposes a global statistical model to describe the size distribution of the average ocean spray.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two basic mechanisms are responsible of this droplet emission: bubble film breakup (16,17) and jet emission (18)(19)(20). The super-micron size range is comprised by wet aerosols and its presence is fundamentally reduced to marine and coastal regions (21).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The ocean fine spray

Gañán‐Calvo¹

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Film Droplets: Physics and Statisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The ocean fine spray

Gañán‐Calvo¹

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bubble‐Assisted Sample Preparation Techniques for Mass Spectrometry

Elpa,

Urban

2024

Mass Spectrometry Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review delves into the efficacy of utilizing bubbles to extract analytes into the gas phase, offering a faster and greener alternative to traditional sample preparation methods for mass spectrometry. Generating numerous bubbles in liquids rapidly transfers volatile and surface‐active species to the gas phase. Recently, effervescence has found application in chemical laboratories for swiftly extracting volatile organic compounds, facilitating instantaneous analysis. In the so‐called fizzy extraction, liquid matrices are pressurized with gas and then subjected to sudden decompression to induce effervescence. Alternatively, specifically designed effervescent tablets are introduced into the liquid samples. In situ bubble generation has also enhanced dispersion of extractant in microextraction techniques. Furthermore, droplets from bursting bubbles are collected to analyze non‐volatile species. Various methods exist to induce bubbling for sample preparation. The polydispersity of generated bubbles and the limited control of bubble size pose critical challenges in the stability of the bubble–liquid interface and the ability to quantify analytes using bubble‐based sample preparation techniques. This review covers different bubble‐assisted sample preparation methods and gives practical guidance on their implementation in mass spectrometry workflows. Traditional, offline, and online approaches for sample preparation relying on bubbles are discussed. Unconventional bubbling techniques for sample preparation are also covered.

show abstract

Comparison between shadow imaging and in-line holography for measuring droplet size distributions

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A direct comparison of the droplet size and number measurements using in-line holography and shadow imaging is presented in three dynamically evolving laboratory scale experiments. The two experimental techniques and image processing algorithms used to measure droplet number and radii are described in detail. Droplet radii as low as $$r = 14$$ r = 14 µm are measured using in-line holography and $$r = 50$$ r = 50 µm using shadow imaging. The droplet radius measurement error is estimated using a calibration target (reticle) and it was found that the holographic technique is able to measure droplet radii more accurately than shadow imaging for droplets with $$r \le 625$$ r ≤ 625 µm. Using the measurements of droplet number and size we quantitatively cross-validate and assess the accuracy of the two measurement techniques. The droplet size distributions, N(r), are measured in all three experiments and are found to agree well between the two measurement techniques. In one of the laboratory experiments, simultaneous measurements of droplets ($$r \ge 14$$ r ≥ 14 µm, using holography) and dry aerosols ($$0.07 \lessapprox r \lessapprox 2$$ 0.07 ⪅ r ⪅ 2 µm, using an scanning mobility particle sizer and $$0.15 \lessapprox r \lessapprox 5$$ 0.15 ⪅ r ⪅ 5 µm using an optical particle sizer) are reported, one of the first such comparison to the best of our knowledge. The total number and volume of droplets is found to agree well between both techniques in the three experiments. We demonstrate that a relatively simple shadow imaging technique can be just as reliable when compared to a more sophisticated holographic measurement technique over their common droplet radius measurement range. The agreement in results is shown to be valid over a large range of droplet concentrations, which include experiments with relatively sparse droplet concentrations as low as 0.02 droplets per image. Advantages and disadvantages for the two techniques are discussed in the context of our results. The main advantages to in-line holography are the greater accuracy in droplet radius measurement, greater spatial resolution, larger depth of field, and the high repetition rate and short pulse duration of the laser light source. In comparison, the main advantages to shadow imaging are the simpler experimental setup, image processing algorithm, and fewer computer resources necessary for image processing. Droplet statistics like number and size are found to be very reliable between the two methods for large range of droplet densities, $${\mathcal {P}}_{r>50}$$ P r > 50 , ranging from $$10^{-4} \le {\mathcal {P}}_{r>50} \le 10^{-1}$$ 10 - 4 ≤ P r > 50 ≤ 10 - 1 cm$$^{-3}$$ - 3 , when the two techniques are implemented as shown in this paper.

show abstract

Submicron drops from flapping bursting bubbles

Cited by 42 publications

References 43 publications

The ocean fine spray

The ocean fine spray

Bubble‐Assisted Sample Preparation Techniques for Mass Spectrometry

Comparison between shadow imaging and in-line holography for measuring droplet size distributions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About