Optimizing Micromixer Surfaces To Deter Biofouling
Source abstract
Abstract
Using computational modeling, we show that the dynamic interplay between a flowing fluid and the appropriately designed surface relief pattern can inhibit the fouling of the substrate. We specifically focus on surfaces that are decorated with three-dimensional (3D) chevron or sawtooth "micromixer" patterns and model the fouling agents (e.g., cells) as spherical microcapsules. The interaction between the imposed shear flow and the chevrons on the surface generates 3D vortices in the system. We pinpoint a range of shear rates where the forces from these vortices can rupture the bonds between the two mobile microcapsules near the surface. Notably, the patterned surface offers fewer points of attachment than a flat substrate, and the shear flows readily transport the separated capsules away from the layer. We contrast the performance of surfaces that encompass rectangular posts, chevrons, and asymmetric sawtooth patterns and thereby identify the geometric factors that cause the sawtooth structure to be most effective at disrupting the bonding between the capsules. By breaking up nascent clusters of contaminant cells, these 3D relief patterns can play a vital role in disrupting the biofouling of surfaces immersed in flowing fluids.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Polymer Surface Interaction Studies · Marine Biology and Environmental Chemistry · Surface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Chemical Engineering Department, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261, United States
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi 39762, United States
Funding
Office of Naval Research
References (39)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1021/ac025738910.1021/ac0257389 ↗
2. 10.1039/c2lc40356k10.1039/c2lc40356k ↗
3. 10.1073/pnas.101253910710.1073/pnas.1012539107 ↗
4. 10.1126/science.106623810.1126/science.1066238 ↗
5. 10.1080/08927014.2010.54280910.1080/08927014.2010.542809 ↗
6. 10.1016/s0048-9697(00)00506-410.1016/s0048-9697(00)00506-4 ↗
7. 10.1080/0892701080193048010.1080/08927010801930480 ↗
8. 10.1007/s11434-010-4158-410.1007/s11434-010-4158-4 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.jembe.2011.11.01410.1016/j.jembe.2011.11.014 ↗
10. 10.1146/annurev-matsci-070511-15501210.1146/annurev-matsci-070511-155012 ↗
11. 10.3390/ijms1302154110.3390/ijms13021541 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.01.01210.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.01.012 ↗
13. 10.1021/cr200350v10.1021/cr200350v ↗
14. 10.1016/s1369-7021(10)70058-410.1016/s1369-7021(10)70058-4 ↗
15. 10.1021/la502006s10.1021/la502006s ↗
16. 10.1002/adma.20120337410.1002/adma.201203374 ↗
17. 10.1021/acs.langmuir.5b0088810.1021/acs.langmuir.5b00888 ↗
18. 10.1073/pnas.120197310910.1073/pnas.1201973109 ↗
19. 10.1021/am900056210.1021/am9000562 ↗
20. 10.1088/0957-4484/22/49/49400710.1088/0957-4484/22/49/494007 ↗
21. 10.1080/0892701100362884910.1080/08927011003628849 ↗
22. 10.1021/la703421v10.1021/la703421v ↗
23. 10.1007/s10853-017-0821-310.1007/s10853-017-0821-3 ↗
24. Swain G. W. · J. Ship Prod. · 2007 · 23 · 16410.5957/jsp.2007.23.3.164 ↗
25. 10.1146/annurev.fluid.30.1.32910.1146/annurev.fluid.30.1.329 ↗
26. 10.1088/0965-0393/9/6/30210.1088/0965-0393/9/6/302 ↗
27. 10.1103/physreve.71.05670710.1103/physreve.71.056707 ↗
28. 10.1103/physrevlett.96.14810310.1103/physrevlett.96.148103 ↗
29. 10.1021/nn901296y10.1021/nn901296y ↗
30. 10.1038/nnano.2011.23510.1038/nnano.2011.235 ↗
31. 10.1126/science.34757510.1126/science.347575 ↗
32. 10.1016/0021-9797(76)90229-010.1016/0021-9797(76)90229-0 ↗
33. 10.1038/253619a010.1038/253619a0 ↗
34. 10.3354/meps0695010.3354/meps06950 ↗
35. 10.1080/0021846050031084610.1080/00218460500310846 ↗
36. 10.1103/physrevlett.73.323510.1103/physrevlett.73.3235 ↗
37. 10.1085/jgp.105.3.38510.1085/jgp.105.3.385 ↗
38. 10.1098/rsta.2010.020110.1098/rsta.2010.0201 ↗
39. 10.1039/c1sm05952a10.1039/c1sm05952a ↗