Droplet Ejection

An alternative approach, developed by chemical engineers as well, is the surface renewal model by Higbie (1935) and Danckwerts (1951). It applies to highly turbulent conditions in which new surfaces are continuously formed by breaking waves, by air bubbles entrapped in the water, and by water droplets ejected into the air. Here the interface is described as a diffusive boundary. 

In the past three decades, it has become clear that a rather large amount of surface-active organic material ends up in each tiny droplet ejected into the air by bursting bubbles. Some of these materials may reach concentrations in (or on) the droplets well over a thousand times their bulk concentrations in sea water (ref. 46,85,92). The water in the droplets that remain airborne eventually evaporates, leaving the nonvolatile materials to float around in the atmosphere (ref. 46) and ultimately settle out and, as a result, contribute appreciably to soil nutrients (ref. 93-95). 

This natural process by which dissolved and/or particulate surface-active materials end up in the atmosphere has been modeled and studied in the laboratory. As summarized by Detwiler and Blanchard (ref. 46), tests in suspensions of bacteria (ref. 76,96,97), latex spheres (ref. 98), dyes (ref. 99), and in sea water and river water (ref. 96,100,101) have demonstrated successful transfer of all manner of surface-active material from the bulk fluid, or the bulk interface, to the droplets ejected when bubbles burst. (This situation can be pictured as an extension of the common industrial adsorptive-bubble-separation process (ref. 102) into a third dimension or phase — the atmosphere.) Further laboratory tests with various tap waters, distilled waters, and salt solutions have shown that no water sample was ever encountered that did not contain at least traces of surface-active material (ref. 46). 

FIGURE 12.6 Liquid transfer by acoustic droplet ejection. A transducer travels beneath a source plate and emits a pulse of acoustic energy focused on the liquid surface, causing a droplet of liquid to jump upward. The droplet is captured by an inverted destination plate. (Photo courtesy of Labcyte.)... 

Heron, E., Ellson, R., and Olechno, J. 2006. Acoustic droplet ejection in drug discovery. Drug Plus Int. 5, 22-25. 

Wu HC, Lin HJ, Kuo YC, Hwang WS. (2004) Simulation of droplet ejection for a piezoelectric inkjet printing device. Mater Transact 45 893-899. 

Smirnov The droplet ejection problem will seriously challenge the model. 

Ink-jet printing Ink droplet ejection from a reservoir to a surface using either thermal (bubble-jet) or piezoelectric means. 

Adjust the microdispenser parameters to ensure droplet ejection. There are a number of settings, such as the voltage, pulse duration, and pulse frequency that affect the output of the microdispenser. The values of each of these settings must be tailored to ensure proper droplet ejection. A stroboscope is available from Gesim that enables visualization of ejected droplets, and the fine tuning of these settings to ensure a reliable droplet ejection. 

Confirm that the pump head is properly loaded and ejecting droplets prior to printing a gradient. Examine the pump head for air bubbles on the video monitor (Fig. 3). If air bubbles are present, droplets will not eject properly, and the pump head must be washed and dried thoroughly (see later) and then reloaded with solution. Hold a piece of paper under the pump head while the dispenser is activated to check for droplet ejection. 

In stark contrast with most other pharmacologic delivery methods (e.g., pills, intravenous), there is little control on what amount of drug is actually delivered to the target tissue (i.e., the ocular surface) when a physician prescribes a topical formulation. To overcome this problan, investigators have attempted to deliver medications by spraying the drug onto the eye, but initial efforts with such systems as atomizer sprays have failed due to the inability to control droplet size and flow dynamics for consistent and predictable administration. Major problans related to the physics of droplet ejection, such as dispersion, droplet evaporation, drag, and non-coUimated flow turbulence, have held back such new approaches until recently. ... 

A disk-type piezoelectric ceramic and some sequential pictures of droplet ejection from this droplet generator are shown in Fig. 25.5 [36]. The piezoelectric buzzer is constructed of a 0.2 mm piezoelectric ceramic layer, which sticks on a vibration diaphragm with a 27 mm diameter. It is fixed within the main body and bends when a voltage pulse is applied. The pressure is generated in the liquid flow channel and pushes the liquid out of the glass nozzle. 

Dispensing Drop Droplet break up Droplet ejection Droplet formation Droplet generation Droplet injection Droplet release Droplet tear-off Droplet... 

In Fig. 4 the droplet ejecting technologies mentioned above are arranged in a graph indicating the suitable volume range of the different... 

Acoustic actuatirm is a special kind of pressure boundary condition. There is a pressure involved for actuation, but in contrast to a pure pressure boundary condition creating a convective flow, acoustic actuation does not lead to a substantial liquid flow inside the device during droplet ejection. The spreading velocity of the induced density fluctuations is approximately the speed of sound in the liquid which is much faster than the liquid flow in the case of a pure pressure boundary condition. In practice the acoustic pressure is mostly generated with a piezoelectric transducer. The created shock wave travels through the liquid where it can be influenced by... 

The process of drop ejection is not as simple as taking a fluid chamber with a small hole and pressurizing it enough for fluid to start emerging from the ejection nozzle hole [10]. To accomplish monodisperse droplets ejected out of a nozzle, one needs the ability to produce highspeed fluid jets of approximately the diameter of the desired droplets. Additionally, the behavior of the jets has to be controlled precisely enough to cause them to consistently disperse into uniformly sized droplets. 

The creation of spherical droplets has been the focus of numerous studies over the years [11-14]. These show conclusively that for both steady and transient flows the onset and mechanisms of droplet breakup can be correlated with the non-dimensional Weber number. It is the most important dimensionless number characterizing droplet formation and can be applied to determine the threshold of droplet formation. However, the critical Weber number is only a sufficient condition for droplet breakup and not a necessary condition. This means that if the critical Weber number is surpassed in a process certainly droplet breakup will occur. But droplet ejection is also possible at lower Weber numbers. The only necessary condition for droplet formation is that the supplied energy is sufficient to overcome friction losses and the surface energy of an ejected droplet. 

The dimensionless Weber number is considered as the ratio of kinetic energy idnetic and surface energy surface of a droplet ejected out of a nozzle ... 

The Ohnesorge number is sometimes also referred to as the stability number, viscosity number, Laplace number or Z number. It is independent of the velocity and therefore only adequate to describe droplet ejection in conjunction with the Weber number. The lower the Ohnesorge number the weaker are the friction losses due to viscous forces. This means that most of the inserted energy converts into surface tension energy, i. e. a droplet can be formed. The higher the Ohnesorge number the more dominant is the internal viscous dissipation. This means that most of the inserted energy converts into internal viscous dissipation, i. e. that droplet formation is critical or even impossible. 

---