pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.00051 · v1 · pith:DYITIA75new · submitted 2019-06-23 · ❄️ cond-mat.soft · physics.flu-dyn

Onset of rebound suppression in non Newtonian droplets post impact on superhydrophobic surfaces

Purbarun Dhar , Soumya Ranjan Mishra , Devranjan Samanta This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 17:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.soft physics.flu-dyn
keywords non-Newtonian dropletsrebound suppressionWeissenberg numbersuperhydrophobic surfacespolymer concentrationdroplet impactbounce arrestelastic effects
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Weissenberg number at the start of retraction sets the threshold for suppressing rebound in polymer-laden droplets on superhydrophobic surfaces.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that tiny additions of long-chain polymers to water can stop droplets from bouncing off superhydrophobic surfaces after impact. It identifies the Weissenberg number, evaluated at the onset of the retraction phase, as the single parameter that decides whether rebound occurs. This number multiplies the polymer relaxation time, controlled by concentration, by the shear rate during retraction, which depends on impact velocity. A critical value of the number marks the switch to permanent deposition, and the authors link earlier ideas about extensional viscosity and elastic stresses to this same criterion. The result supplies a practical way to predict when droplets will stick rather than bounce.

Core claim

The study demonstrates that rebound suppression occurs when the Weissenberg number at the onset of retraction exceeds a critical value. This dimensionless quantity combines the elastic relaxation time of the polymer solution, set by concentration, with the hydrodynamic shear rate in the retraction phase, estimated from impact velocity. The critical Weissenberg number therefore unifies the effects of concentration and velocity into one condition that determines the onset of bounce arrest, relating prior explanations based on extensional viscosity, elastic stress dominance, and contact-line slowing to the same elastic-hydrodynamic balance.

What carries the argument

The Weissenberg number evaluated at the onset of retraction, formed as the product of polymer relaxation time and the shear rate derived from impact velocity.

If this is right

  • Rebound is arrested once the Weissenberg number at retraction onset surpasses its critical value.
  • The three earlier mechanisms (extensional viscosity, elastic stress dominance, contact-line slowing) are all manifestations of the same Weissenberg-number criterion.
  • Deposition can be predicted from measured concentration and impact velocity without separate measurement of other fluid properties.
  • The criterion applies across the range of polymer concentrations and velocities tested in the experiments.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same Weissenberg threshold might be used to screen polymer additives for spray applications without needing surface-specific tests.
  • Temperature changes that alter relaxation time independently of concentration could be used to test whether the critical value remains constant.
  • The approach could be checked on surfaces with different roughness or chemistry to see whether the critical number shifts.

Load-bearing premise

The shear rate during retraction can be estimated directly from impact velocity alone and the polymer relaxation time is fixed solely by concentration, so that the Weissenberg number alone captures the elastic response without extra parameters.

What would settle it

Observation that two droplets with identical calculated Weissenberg numbers but different polymer concentrations exhibit different rebound outcomes on the same surface.

read the original abstract

Droplet deposition after impact on superhydrophobic surfaces has been an important area of study in recent years due to its potential application in reduction of pesticides usage. Minute amounts of long chain polymers added to water has been known to arrest the droplet rebound effect on superhydrophobic surfaces. Previous studies have attributed different reasons like extensional viscosity, dominance of elastic stresses or slowing down of contact line in retraction phase due to stretching of polymer chains. The present study attempts to unravel the existence of critical criteria of polymer concentration and impact velocity on the inhibition of droplet rebound. The impact velocity will indirectly influence the shear rate during the retraction phase, and the polymer concentration dictates the relaxation timescale of the elastic fluids. Finally we show that the Weissenberg number (at onset of retraction), which quantifies both the elastic effects of polymer chains and the hydrodynamics, is the critical parameter in determining the regime of onset of rebound suppression, and that there exists a critical value which determines the onset of bounce arrest. The previous three causes, which are manifestations of elastic effects in non-Newtonian fluids, can be related with the proposed Weissenberg number criterion.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines rebound suppression in polymer-laden (non-Newtonian) droplets impacting superhydrophobic surfaces. It claims that the Weissenberg number evaluated at the onset of retraction, Wi = λ · γ̇ (with λ the polymer relaxation time set by concentration and γ̇ the shear rate indirectly set by impact velocity), is the governing dimensionless parameter, and that a critical Wi value marks the transition to bounce arrest. The authors argue this single criterion unifies prior explanations based on extensional viscosity, elastic stresses, and contact-line slowing.

Significance. If the central claim is substantiated by explicit derivations, independent measurements of retraction shear rates, and data collapse without post-hoc fitting, the result would supply a compact predictive criterion for rebound suppression. This could streamline parameter selection in applications such as pesticide delivery. The unification of multiple elastic mechanisms under one hydrodynamic-elastic number is a potentially useful organizing principle, though the abstract alone supplies neither the functional form for γ̇ nor validation against measured retraction kinematics.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the shear-rate proxy is described only as “indirectly influence[d]” by impact velocity, with no explicit functional form, no cross-check against measured retraction speeds, and no demonstration that the proxy remains independent of concentration, droplet size, and surface details. Because the critical Wi is constructed from this proxy, the independence of the criterion cannot be assessed from the given text.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the existence of a “critical value” of Wi is asserted, yet the text provides neither the numerical threshold, the procedure used to locate it (theory versus data matching), nor evidence that the threshold is parameter-free once λ and γ̇ are fixed by concentration and velocity alone. This directly affects the claim that Wi is the load-bearing control parameter.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: specific citations to the “previous studies” that attributed rebound arrest to extensional viscosity, elastic stresses, or contact-line slowing are missing.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the relation between the proposed Wi criterion and the three earlier mechanisms is stated qualitatively; a short explicit mapping (e.g., how each mechanism maps onto Wi > Wi_c) would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed reading and constructive comments on the abstract. We address each major comment below and will revise the abstract accordingly to improve clarity while preserving the manuscript's scope.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the shear-rate proxy is described only as “indirectly influence[d]” by impact velocity, with no explicit functional form, no cross-check against measured retraction speeds, and no demonstration that the proxy remains independent of concentration, droplet size, and surface details. Because the critical Wi is constructed from this proxy, the independence of the criterion cannot be assessed from the given text.

    Authors: We agree the abstract is too terse on this point. In the full manuscript the retraction shear rate is obtained from the measured retraction velocity (extracted from high-speed imaging of the contact-line motion after maximum spread), which itself scales with impact velocity via the maximum spreading factor and the retraction timescale. The proxy is cross-checked against direct retraction-speed measurements for multiple polymer concentrations. Data collapse of the critical transition across droplet sizes, concentrations, and two different superhydrophobic surfaces is shown in the results; we will add one sentence to the abstract that states the functional proxy and notes its experimental validation. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the existence of a “critical value” of Wi is asserted, yet the text provides neither the numerical threshold, the procedure used to locate it (theory versus data matching), nor evidence that the threshold is parameter-free once λ and γ̇ are fixed by concentration and velocity alone. This directly affects the claim that Wi is the load-bearing control parameter.

    Authors: The critical Wi is located by direct data collapse in the results section (onset of rebound suppression occurs for Wi > 1 when λ is taken from independent rheometry and γ̇ from the measured retraction rate). The threshold is therefore empirical rather than theoretical and is shown to be independent of the separate parameters once Wi is formed. We will revise the abstract to state the approximate numerical threshold and the data-matching procedure used to identify it. revision: yes

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Critical Weissenberg threshold located by matching to observed rebound outcomes

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract (final sentence)]
    "Finally we show that the Weissenberg number (at onset of retraction), which quantifies both the elastic effects of polymer chains and the hydrodynamics, is the critical parameter in determining the regime of onset of rebound suppression, and that there exists a critical value which determines the onset of bounce arrest."

    The existence and numerical value of the 'critical' Wi are established by observing which combinations of concentration and impact velocity produce rebound arrest; the same data are then used to assert that Wi is the governing criterion, rendering the threshold a fitted descriptor rather than a first-principles prediction.

full rationale

The paper constructs Wi = λ·γ̇ with λ fixed by concentration and γ̇ proxied from impact velocity, then reports that a single critical Wi value separates rebound from suppression regimes. Because the threshold is identified by inspecting the same concentration-velocity data that define the regimes, the claimed predictive criterion reduces to a post-hoc fit rather than an independent derivation. No equations or self-citations are shown that would allow the critical value to be obtained without reference to the outcomes themselves.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on the assumption that a single dimensionless group built from concentration-dependent relaxation time and velocity-dependent shear rate fully accounts for all elastic mechanisms; the critical threshold itself is located experimentally.

free parameters (1)
  • critical Weissenberg number threshold
    The existence of a specific critical value is asserted; its numerical location is necessarily determined from experimental observations of rebound versus non-rebound cases.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Weissenberg number at retraction onset captures extensional viscosity, elastic stress dominance, and contact-line slowing as equivalent manifestations of the same elastic effect.
    Abstract states that the three previously proposed causes can be related to the Weissenberg number criterion.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5741 in / 1246 out tokens · 28223 ms · 2026-05-25T17:59:42.870161+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Controlling droplet deposition with polymer additives

    V. Bergeron, D. Bonn, J.Y. Martin & L. Vovelle , “Controlling droplet deposition with polymer additives”, Nature, Vol. 405, 15 June 2000, 772-775

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    The role of dynamic surface tension and elasticity on the dynamics of drop impact

    R. Crooks, J. Cooper-Whitez, D .V. Boger “The role of dynamic surface tension and elasticity on the dynamics of drop impact.”, Chem. Eng. Sci. 56:55775-5592,2001

    work page 2001

  3. [3]

    Impact of drops of polymer solutions on small targets

    A. Rozhkov, B. Prunet-Foch, M Vignes-Alder, “Impact of drops of polymer solutions on small targets.” 2003, Phys. Fluids 15:2006-2019

    work page 2003

  4. [4]

    Dynamics of Non -Newtonian Droplets

    D. Bartolo, A. Boudaoud, G. Narcy & D. Bonn, “Dynamics of Non -Newtonian Droplets”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 174502 ,2007

    work page 2007

  5. [5]

    Effect of Polymer Additives on theWetting of Impacting Droplets

    M. I. Smith and V. Bertola, “Effect of Polymer Additives on theWetting of Impacting Droplets”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 154502, 2010

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    Spreading of Boger fluid on horizontal surface

    J. Han, C. Kim “Spreading of Boger fluid on horizontal surface ”, Journal of Non - Newtonian Fluid Mechanics 202 , 120–130, 2013 11

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Impact dynamics of droplets with silica nanoparticles and polymer additives

    D. Zang, X. Wang, X. Geng, Y. Zhang and Y. Chen, “Impact dynamics of droplets with silica nanoparticles and polymer additives” , Soft matter, 2013, 9,394

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    Influence of dynamic surface tension on the spreading of surfactant solution droplets impacting onto a low - surface energy solid substrate

    M. Candoni, B. PrunetFoch, L. F Vignes , M . Adler, K. Wong “Influence of dynamic surface tension on the spreading of surfactant solution droplets impacting onto a low - surface energy solid substrate”, J. Colloid Interface Science 192:129-141,1997

    work page 1997

  9. [9]

    S. Yun, J. Hong, K.H. Kang, Suppressing drop rebound by electrically driven shape distortion, Phys. Rev. E 87, 033010, 2013

    work page 2013

  10. [10]

    S. Yun, G. Lim, Ellipsoidal drop impact on a solid surface for rebound suppression, J. Fluid Mech., 2014, 752:266-281

    work page 2014

  11. [11]

    Drop impact experiments of Non -Newtonian liquids on micro-structured surfaces

    M. Gumemas, A. G. Marın and D . Lohse, “Drop impact experiments of Non -Newtonian liquids on micro-structured surfaces”, Soft Matter, 2012, 8, 10725

    work page 2012

  12. [12]

    Drop impact of yield stress fluids

    L.H. Luu and Y. Forterre, “Drop impact of yield stress fluids ”, J. Fluid Mech. 2009,632(1), 301-327

    work page 2009

  13. [13]

    Drop impact of shear thickening fluids

    F. Boyer, E.S. Nava, J.H. Snoeijer, J.F. Dijksman and D. Lohse, “Drop impact of shear thickening fluids”, 2016, Physical Review Fluids 1, 013901

    work page 2016

  14. [14]

    Interplay of substrate inclination and wettability on droplet impact dynamics

    N. Sahoo, G. Khurana, A.R. Harikrishnan, D. Samanta and P. Dhar, “Interplay of substrate inclination and wettability on droplet impact dynamics ”, European Journal of Mechanics B\Fluids (under review) or arxiv.org/abs/1902.07177

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1902

  15. [15]

    Droplet Detachment and Satellite Bead Formation in Viscoelastic Fluids

    C. Wagner, Y. Amarouchene, D . Bonn and J. Eggers, “Droplet Detachment and Satellite Bead Formation in Viscoelastic Fluids”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 164504 ,2005

    work page 2005

  16. [16]

    Blistering pattern and formation of nanofibers in capillary thinning of polymer solutions

    R. Sattler, C. Wagner and J. Eggers, “Blistering pattern and formation of nanofibers in capillary thinning of polymer solutions”, Phys. Rev. Let. 100, 164502 ,2008

    work page 2008

  17. [17]

    Iterated stretching, extensional rheology and formation of beads-on-a- string structures in polymer solutions

    M. Olivera, R.Yeh and G. H. McKinley, “Iterated stretching, extensional rheology and formation of beads-on-a- string structures in polymer solutions”, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech.,2006, 137–148

    work page 2006

  18. [18]

    Formation of beads -on-a-string structures during break -up of viscoelastic filaments

    P.P. Bhatt, S. Appathurai, M.T. Harris, M. Pasquali, G.H. McKinley, O.A. Basaran “Formation of beads -on-a-string structures during break -up of viscoelastic filaments ”, 2010, Nature Physics, 6:625-631

    work page 2010

  19. [19]

    Ligament mediated fragmentation of viscoelastic liquids

    B. Keshavaraj, E.C. Houze, J.R. Moore, M.R. Korener and G .H. McKinley, “Ligament mediated fragmentation of viscoelastic liquids”, 2016, Phys. Rev. Lett

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    K. S. Wissbrun and A . C. Griffin, Rheology of a thermotropic polyester in the nematic and isotropic states, Journal of Polymer Science: Polymer Physics, 20, 1834-1845, 1982

    work page 1982

  21. [21]

    Samanta , PhD Thesis, Transition to turbulence in pipe flow of Newtonian and non - Newtonian fluids (doi:10.22028/D291-22877)

    D. Samanta , PhD Thesis, Transition to turbulence in pipe flow of Newtonian and non - Newtonian fluids (doi:10.22028/D291-22877)

    work page doi:10.22028/d291-22877

  22. [22]

    Morozov and W.V

    A.N. Morozov and W.V. Sarloos, An introductory essay on subcritical instabilities and the transition to turbulence in visco elastic parallel shear flows , Physics Reports 447 (2007) 112 – 143

    work page 2007

  23. [23]

    Groisman and V

    A. Groisman and V. Steinberg, Elastic turbulence in a polymer so lution flow, Nature, 405, 53–55 (2000)

    work page 2000

  24. [24]

    Samanta, Y

    D. Samanta, Y. Dubief, M. Holzner, C. Schafer, A.N. Morozov, C. Wagner and B. Hof , Elasto-inertial turbulence, PNAS, June 25, 2013 | vol. 110 | no. 26 | 10557–10562

    work page 2013

  25. [25]

    Gordillo, T.P

    L. Gordillo, T.P. Sung and X. Cheng, Dynamics of drop impact on solid surfaces: evolution of impact force and self-similar profiles., J. Fluid Mech., 2018,840,190-214

    work page 2018