Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 26, 2025

Taking Advantage of Reduced Droplet-surface Interaction to Optimize Transport of Bioanalytes in Digital Microfluidics
Published on: November 10, 2014
Why Bubbles Coalesce Faster than Droplets: The Effects of Interface Mobility and Surface Charge
Ivan U Vakarelski1,2, Farrukh Kamoliddinov1, Sigurdur T Thoroddsen1
1Division of Physical Sciences and Engineering, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
Abstract:
Air bubbles in pure water appear to coalesce much faster compared to oil emulsion droplets at the same water solution conditions. The main factors explaining this difference in coalescence times could be interface mobility and/or pH-dependent surface charge at the water interface. To quantify the relative importance of these effects, we use high-speed imaging to monitor the coalescence of free-rising air bubbles with the water-air interface as well as free-falling fluorocarbon-oil emulsion droplets with a water-oil interface. We measure the coalescence times of such bubbles and droplets over a range of different water pH values (3.0, 5.6, 11.0). In the case of bubbles, a very fast coalescence (milliseconds) is observed for the entire pH range in pure water, consistent with the hydrodynamics of fully mobile interfaces. However, when the water-air interface is immobilized by the deposition of a monolayer of arachidic acid, the coalescence is significantly delayed. Furthermore, the coalescence times increase with increasing pH. In the case of fluorocarbon-oil droplets, the coalescence is always much slower (seconds) and consistent with immobile interface coalescence. The fluorocarbon droplet's coalescence time is also pH-dependent, with a complete stabilization (no coalescence) observed at pH 11. In the high electrolyte concentration, a 0.6 M NaCl water solution, bubbles, and droplets have similar coalescence times, which could be related to the bubble interface immobilization at the late stage of the coalescence process. Numerical simulations are used to evaluate the time scale of mobile and immobile interface film drainage.
More Related Videos
11:14A Microfluidic System with Surface Patterning for Investigating Cavitation Bubble(s)–Cell Interaction and the Resultant Bioeffects at the Single-cell Level
Published on: January 10, 2017
06:31Studying Surfactant Effects on Hydrate Crystallization at Oil-Water Interfaces Using a Low-Cost Integrated Modular Peltier Device
Published on: March 18, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Surface Tension of Fluid
Surface tension varies...
Surface Tension, Capillary Action, and Viscosity
The various IMFs between identical molecules of a substance are examples of cohesive forces. The molecules within a liquid are surrounded by other molecules and are attracted equally in all directions by the cohesive forces within the liquid. However, the molecules on the surface of a liquid are attracted only by about one-half as many molecules. Because of the unbalanced molecular attractions on the surface molecules, liquids contract to form a shape that minimizes the number...
Excess Pressure Inside a Drop and a Bubble
Theories of Dissolution: The Danckwerts' Model and Interfacial Barrier Model
Colloidal precipitates
Comparing Intermolecular Forces: Melting Point, Boiling Point, and Miscibility
Temporary attractive forces like dispersion are present in all molecules, whether they are polar or nonpolar. They...