Paper detail

Preferred sizes and ordering in surface nanobubble populations

Two types of homogeneous surface nanobubble populations, created by different means, are analyzed statistically on both their sizes and spatial positions. In the first type (created by droplet-deposition, case A) the bubble size R is found to be distributed according to a generalized gamma law with a preferred radius R*=20 nm. The radial distribution function shows a preferred spacing at ~5.5 R*. These characteristics do not show up in comparable Monte-Carlo simulations of random packings of hard disks with the same size distribution and the same density, suggesting a structuring effect in the nanobubble formation process. The nanobubble size distribution of the second population type (created by ethanol-water exchange, case B) is a mixture of two clearly separated distributions, hence, with two preferred radii. The local ordering is less significant, due to the looser packing of the nanobubbles.

preprint2009arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.