Abstract
Further innovation in the field of selective laser sintering (SLS) is strongly connected to the availability of new materials since the market is dominated by polyamide 12 (>90%). The aim of this publication is to develop a descriptive model for the droplet formation process in a Filament Extension Atomizer to predict the applicability to exploit further polymers for the SLS process. The feasibility was tested, investigated and characterized using a “Dripping out of a nozzle” setup for uniaxial extension. The droplet formation process was then observed via highspeed camera imaging and classified for certain parameters. The experiments were carried out using semidiluted polyethylene oxide (600–4000 kg/mol), glycerol and water solutions as model fluids. Driven by the PlateauRayleigh instability, different types of spherical droplets were observed and various droplet formation mechanisms demonstrated and analyzed. Based on the experimental results, a predictive model is derived to describe various essential parameters.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
In recent years, research in the field of selective laser sintering, a method of additive manufacturing, has been intensively promoted in many research centers since the process is fast while maintaining a decent product quality regarding mechanical properties and shape. The biggest retention for this technology at the moment is the lack of different powder materials to adjust product properties like elasticity or solvent resistance. The origin of this deficiency is the demand for high powder quality, namely the morphology, surface properties and the particle size distribution. Thus, polyamid12 (PA12) makes up more than 90% of polymers in SLS processes (Schmid 2015). The quantitative production of PA12 powder is done by a precipitation process optimized for polyamide (Baumann and Wilczok 1998; Monsheimer et al. 2005). Other promising polymers, such as polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP), can only be provided by means of complex and expensive processes like cryogenic grinding with subsequent rounding (Dechet et al. 2019). A new manufacturing method for polymer powders of sufficient grade for use in selective laser sintering is needed.
In 2017, the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) introduced the Filament Extension Atomizer (FEA) as a patent for atomizing fluids that cannot be atomized with conventional methods due to their strain hardening properties (e.g. polymer melts and solutions) (Beck and Johnson 2017). The FEA consists of two counterrotating cylinders between which fluids are stretched in filaments and ‘broken’ into droplets. It produces a monodisperse particle size distribution with modal values ranging from 1 µm to 200 µm for viscosities in five orders of magnitude between 1 mPas and 600 Pas depending on the setting (PARC 2018). Consequently, the FEA represents a promising and favorable principle for powder production, even though it has not yet been tested for this purpose. Since it is a recent technique there is only very few research published until now. Unlike top down processes, spherical particles form directly because of the surface tension. Therefore the process should be applicable to strain hardening polymers which cannot be atomized using conventional methods like jetting (Lefebvre 1989). Within the filaments, inertial, elastic and surface forces are balanced and depending on the elastic properties, the formation of a PlateauRayleigh instability can be controlled. The PlateauRayleigh instability results in a droplet formation. This droplet formation is influenced by the dissolution behavior of the polymers in the solvent and the rheological properties. Due to the viscoelastic properties of the polymers, there is a temporary stabilization of the instability and the still intensively investigated filament formation, which is desired in the case of the filament extension atomization process, in order to generate even smaller droplets. To understand and predict the possibilities of powder production using the FEA, it is necessary to develop a model for the droplet formation. For feasibility reasons regarding experiments it is easier to start with polymer solutions and extend the model to polymer melts.
The production of droplets from liquids, primarily Newtonian liquids and in the near past also viscoelastic fluids, e.g. in the field of inkjet printers, is a fairly old field of research (Rayleigh 1878; Tomotika 1935; Ohnesorge 1936; Pimbley and Lee 1977; Vassallo and Asgriz 1991). The primary aim of research, especially in the field of inkjet printers, has been to prevent the formation of secondary droplets (satellite droplets and even smaller droplet structures) in order to be able to apply ink in a targeted manner or to produce uniform droplets in general. In the presented research, however, the secondary drops are desired and should be generated in a targeted manner, as they can be in the size range of the SLS powder.
In addition to the PlateauRayleigh instability already mentioned, other current research areas relevant to processing in the filament extension atomization process are addressed. The process can be modeled as a twodimensional elongation process. Models for the description of (extensional) rheological behavior of polymers have been part of research for more than 40 years, but still face challenges in the field of extensional rheology (Huang et al. 2015). The possible approaches and models are addressed in the method section and serve as a guide for the reader and for a better understanding, but an empirical approach was chosen for the model created in this publication as it yields by far better results. A combination with physical models is under consideration for future work (Fig. 1).
Material and experimental methods
Theoretical background
The dominant type of deformation in filament stretching processes is extensional strain. Due to the nonbond surface and only one direction of forced deformation the strain in a filament can be approximately described as uniaxial (see Fig. 2) although that is not completely true at the outer regions. For a constant extensional rate \(\dot{\upvarepsilon }\), the length of the stretched object must increase exponentially (cf. Eq. (1)). At the same time, similar equations apply for the radius and surface at constant volume and radial symmetry (cf. Eq. (2) and (3)) (Mezger 2021).
Typically, polymers and polymer solutions show a strain hardening tendency under uniaxial strain that exceeds the effect of shear thickening by far (Pahl et al. 1995). The strain hardening is a result of the molecules interaction and depends strongly on the morphology of the molecules. It is widely accepted that branched polymer always show strain hardening behavior (Auhl 2006; Münstedt and Laun 1981). Even smallest amounts of branched polymers are sufficient to trigger this effect (Bin Wadud and Baird 2000). However, other research also shows that strain hardening can occur in linear polymers with a wide molar mass distribution (Ide and White 1978; Münstedt 1980; Takahashi et al. 1993; Wagner et al. 2000). But, according to Barnes (2000), linear polymers with low molar masses might even show strain softening under specific circumstances.
In special cases strainhardening due to linear molecules and long chain branching can be described analytically with the Tube Model by Doi and Edwards (Doi and Edwards 1978a, b, c) and its extensions ((extended) PomPom (McLeish and Larson 1998; Verbeeten et al. 2001), (double) RoliePoly (Abuga and Chinyoka 2020; Azahar et al. 2019; Boudara et al. 2019; Likhtman and Graham 2003), GLaMM (Auhl et al. 2008; Graham et al. 2003; Kröger 2019) and Molecular Stress Function(MSF)model (RolónGarrido and Wagner 2007; Wagner et al. 2000, 2003)). On the other hand, the influence of the ‘Kinetic Models’, e.g. FENEmodel (Bird et al. 1980; Chilcott and Rallison 1988) and Giesekusmodel (Giesekus 1982), has increasingly diminished over the last decade (Azahar 2020). Tube models are based on the idea of polymer movement along defined tubes. Lateral movement to the main direction is not possible and relaxation of the polymers occurs only along the tube, since deviation by other polymers is prevented. For longchain branched polymers, only the MSF and PomPom models are suitable. The MSFmodel assumes that the tube can contract orthogonally to the direction of strain, thus creating a contraction stress on side chains (Mattes 2007). The transverse contraction of the tube and the tension of the side chains create additional resistance to further elongation. The (extended) PomPommodel assumes idealized polymers. The polymers have a backbone and several branches at both ends. The backbone can move in a tube, whereas the branches are entangled with other polymers (McLeish and Larson 1998; Verbeeten et al. 2001). Despite the partially good results for certain cases, no model has emerged as universally applicable. Moreover, none of the models is suitable for investigating droplet formation and, with the prediction of rheological quantities, only reflects part of the problem (filament formation). Further research is necessary.
Polymer solutions
In general, the dissolving of polymers is separated into three different cases. In a poor solvent the chemical interaction between the polymer and the solvent is unfavorable, so polymerpolymer interactions are dominating (cf. Fig. 3). If the interactions between solvent and polymer are favorable, the polymers swell, resulting in a larger average distance between the ends of the polymer what can be described via the “Flory endtoend”distance R_{F} (cf. Fig. 3). Otherwise, the solution is called theta solution. Thermodynamically, the chemical potential between the solvent and the polymer is 0 and no excess volume is created by mixing them. The ‘endtoend’ distance R_{θ} of the molecule can be exactly determined by the random walk of polymers (Rubinstein and Colby 2010).
The described behavior of the polymer in solution can be illustrated by means of the “excludedvolume” parameter \(\upnu\) (also called solvent quality exponent, 0,5 for theta solvents) which is used to calculate the intrinsic viscosity [η]. The rheological behavior of a polymer solution is therefore directly dependent on \(\upnu\). Dissolved polymers produce a noticeable increase in viscosity even at low concentrations (Colby 2010; Rubinstein and Colby 2010).
The rheological behavior of a polymer solution therefore directly depends on \(\upnu\). Dissolved polymers produce a noticeable increase in viscosity even at low concentrations. The concentrationdependent behavior of polymer solutions however is a function of the coiloverlapconcentration (COC). The COC describes the overlap of the imagined polymer tubes (cf. strain hardening models) and helps to divide solutions into three different domains (Graessley 1982; Ying and Chu 1987). In the diluted domain, the physical properties are dependent on the solventpolymer interactions. The limit of this domain is the critical overlap concentration c* (Poinot et al. 2014). Above c*, the polymers begin to overlap and interact. The domain of c* < c < c_{e} is called semidiluted and is limited by the ‘entanglement concentration’ c_{e}., which is 10times the critical overlap concentration c* (cf. Eq. (4)) (Arnolds et al. 2010; Colby 2010). The critical overlap concentration is a function of the intrinsic viscosity: \({\mathrm{c}}^{*}\sim {\left[\upeta \right]}^{1}\). Depending on the source, the proportionality factor of the previous equation differs, but is usually around 1 what is taken for granted within this publication (Graessley 1982; Tirtaatmadja et al. 2006). For simplified representation, the dimensionless parameter of the concentration ratio c_{COC} is defined in Eq. (4).
Filament and droplet formation
The dynamics of the droplet formation and the decay of fluid necking for Newtonian fluids dripping from a nozzle has been of interests since the mid1800s. Initial investigations of droplet formation for inviscid fluids already revealed a clear correlation between gravity and surface tension but over time with the establishment of various experimental setups, further correlations for viscous fluids were found. Worth mentioning is the mathematical formulation of the idealized instability for cylindrical fluid threads of Plateau and Rayleigh (Plateau 1873; Rayleigh 1878, 1892a, b) and its further development of Tomotika (1935, 1936) for more precise application depending on fluid properties (viscosity and surface tension of the dripped/jetted fluid) and environmental conditions (viscosity and surface tension of the surrounding fluid; detailed description in ‘PlateauRayleigh instability’; Fig. 4). Another important variable is the Ohnesorge number (Eq. (8)). In his dissertation, Wolfgang von Ohnesorge presents the dimensionless number, which describes the flow of a liquid out of a capillary as a function of the velocity and the type of liquid (Ohnesorge 1936). He distinguished between four areas: dripping as a result of gravity; Decay of fluid jets due to the PlateauRayleigh instability; Decay of fluid jets due to waveshaped interference, whereby this was experimentally discovered by Weber (Weber 1931) and theoretically confirmed by Haenlein (Haenlein 1931); Atomization into droplets (Ohnesorge 1936; Lefebvre 1989). In the 1970s, research began to characterize the behavior of polymer solutions. This was due to the emergence of new applications such as inkjet printing, in which individual ink droplets had to be created (CooperWhite et al. 2002). However, due to low viscous and strainhardening effects of longchain components of the ink, the production of individual ink droplets was only possible to a limited extent. At low viscosities, satellite droplets are formed in addition to the primary drops which lead to reduced quality in printing. The formation of satellite droplets was investigated in detail in the 1990s (Carrier et al. 2015; Chaudhary and Maxworthy 1980a, b; Chaudhary and Redekopp 1980; Tjahjadi et al. 1992; Vassallo and Asgriz 1991; van der Geld and Vermeer 1994; Wagner et al. 2005). The longchain components cause the formation of filaments, which are also unwanted (inaccurate printing), but which are of importance for later droplet formation (Beadsonastring; detailed descriptions in ‘Filament formation and behavior’ and ‘Droplet formation’) (Anna and McKinley 2001; Clasen et al. 2006; McKinley and Tripathi 2000; Papageorgiou 1995). Two experimental standards have been established for the investigation of viscoelastic fluids, especially polymer solutions. On the one hand, the Plateau and Rayleigh experiments were used as a basis. Depending on the flow rate, the fluid flows through a capillary and the detachment of primary drops, the formation of satellite droplets and further droplets as well as the filament formation are investigated. Gravitational effects are studied with a vertical nozzle, whereas the decay from a jet is often studied with a horizontal orientation. Second there are filament stretching experiments (FSD/FBD/FISER) (Bazilevsky et al. 1990; Matta and Tytus 1990; Sridhar et al. 1991; Tirtaatmadja and Sridhar 1993) and ‘Capillary Breakup Extensional Rheometer’ (CaBER) (McKinley et al. 1999; McKinley and Sridhar 2002)). The experimental results could be accurately represented over the years by mathematical models with increasing computing power. Numerical experiments using different models have been performed for fluid spraying/jetting, thread formation and breakup (Fontelos and Li 2004; Forest and Wang 1990; Forest and Wang 1994; Renardy 2004; Renardy 1995), PlateauRayleigh instability, satellite droplet formation (van der Geld and Vermeer 1994; Vassallo and Asgriz 1991), BOAS structure (Bhat et al. 2010; Clasen et al. 2006; Li and Fontelos 2003) and strain hardening (e.g. Doi and Edwards 1978a; Gennes 1971; Wagner et al. 2000)). In this paper a semiempirical model for droplet formation while dripping out of a nozzle by continuous stretching and PlateauRayleigh instability will be developed. Therefore, special attention is paid to the dripping of fluids from a nozzle. The relevant theory is described for Newtonian and viscoelastic fluids.
PlateauRayleighInstability
A PlateauRayleigh instability occurs in a system of a cylindrical fluid threads (length >> diameter) and is driven by capillary forces, which minimizes the surface area. For Newtonian fluids the instability was already investigated by Plateau and Rayleigh at the end of the 19th century. Tomotika extended the PlateauRayleigh instability by further cases. (PlateauRayleighinstability = linear instability of inviscid liquids (Rayleigh 1878, 1892a, b); RayleighTomotika instability = linear instability of viscous liquids with fluid threads that are highly viscous and/or external fluid that is highly viscous (Tomotika 1935, 1936)). The explanation for the instability is selfenforcing perturbations in a thread, beginning with small random perturbations on the free surface. Growth of particular areas will occur, while other areas decrease, if the perturbations are sinusoidal with an appropriate wavelength Λ. A detailed description can be found in Fig. 4.
The mathematical correlation of the pressure gradients was established by Plateau and Rayleigh, and was extended by Tomotika (1935, 1936). They found a periodic decay of the cylindrical threads into droplets as a function of the unperturbed diameter of the threads and the viscosity. Plateau and Rayleigh assumed that only inertia and capillary forces had to be considered. This results in a maximum growth rate with the presented dependencies of Eq. (5) whereas R_{0} is the initial radius and λ the wavelength (Rayleigh 1878).
Two effects result from the PlateauRayleigh instability: The formation of a capillary thread (filament) that breaks up at a time t and the formation of droplets. For both a distinction must be made between Newtonian and viscoelastic fluids.
Therefore, for the viscoelastic polymer solution, the filament behavior and the droplet formation depend on the surface tension, the viscosity, the temperature, the solvent, the dissolved polymer, its molecular weight and concentration and the relaxation time of the polymer (Anna and McKinley 2001; Bazilevsky et al. 1990; Dinic and Sharma 2019; Entov and Hinch 1997; Sachsenheimer et al. 2014; Sousa et al. 2017; Tirtaatmadja et al. 2006). Various (dimensionless) quantities can be derived from these variables, so that the dependencies can be displayed in a simplified way (see also c_{COC} (Eq. (4)). Important (dimensionless) quantities are the Weber number We, the Reynolds number Re, the Ohnesorge number Oh, the Rayleigh time t_{R}, the capillary time t_{cap} (Anna and McKinley 2001)(also called t_{VC} (Dinic and Sharma 2019) or viscous timescale t_{V} (Sachsenheimer et al. 2014)), the Weissenberg number Wi, the Deborah number De and the elastocapillary number EC, the relaxation time λ and the disturbance frequency k (Eq. (5)). The detailed description of the used quantities can be found below whereas other combinations of these quantities can be obtained from various sources, although the definitions of the individual quantities are sometimes not consistent (e.g. (Anna and McKinley 2001; Christanti and Walker 2001, 2002; Dinic and Sharma 2019; Sachsenheimer et al. 2014; McKinley 2005)).
The Weber number describes the ratio of inertial force to surface tension, so inertia increases with increasing Weber number. It is often used to describe the outflow of fluids from a capillary and, together with the Reynolds number and the Ohnesorge number, establishes a classification for modes of disintegration (Rayleigh, varicose breakup, sinuous wave breakup, wavelike breakup with air friction, secondary atomization; according to Ohnesorge (1936)) (Lefebvre 1989).
The Reynolds number describes the ratio of inertia to viscous effects. The inertia increases with increasing Reynolds number. For small Reynolds numbers the viscous effects dominate, and dissipation occurs. Instabilities on a thread are continuously damped (Andrade et al. 2012).
The Ohnesorge number describes the relationship between the viscosity, inertia and capillary forces. It is the ratio between the capillary time (\({t}_{cap}=\frac{{\eta }_{0}{R}_{0}}{\sigma }\); breakup time of viscocapillary narrowing) and Rayleigh time (\({t}_{R}=\sqrt{\frac{\rho {R}_{0}^{3}}{\sigma }}\); breakup time of inertialcapillary narrowing) (Eggers and Villermaux 2008; Ohnesorge 1936).
Filament formation and behavior
The filament formation essentially depends on the viscosity, the dissolved substances (polymers) and the additional elastic stress of dissolved substances. A distinction between Newtonian and nonNewtonian viscoelastic flow behavior is necessary (e.g., Fig. 5).
The filament formation can be separated into four regimes: The inertiacapillary (IC) regime or viscouscapillary (VC) regime, the elastocapillary (EC) regime and the terminal viscoelastocapillary (TVEC) regime, whereby only the IC and the VCregime is possible for Newtonian fluids (McKinley 2005). Depending on the viscosity, the dynamics of the thinningprocess can either be a ‘potential flow’, inertia is dominating (ICregime), or a ‘viscous thread’, viscosity is dominating (VCregime) (Lister and Stone 1998; CooperWhite et al. 2002). The decay of the diameter in the ICregime is proportional to t^{2/3} (Eq. (9)), whereas it is linear depended on the time in the VCregime (Eq. (10)). Dinic and Sharma (2019) also made an empirical approach for the transition of the regimes but only for an viscoelastic fluid. Their approach depends on the Ohnesorge number (Eq. (8)) but also on the dimensionless concentration c_{COC}. (Eq. (4)). The ICregime is forming for Oh < 0,1 and c_{COC} < 4, whereas the VC regime develops at Oh > 4. In the intermediate area, there is a singularity of inertial and viscous forces, which was first proposed by Eggers as the ‘inertialviscous’ regime with a linear decay over the time (Eggers 1997; Lister and Stone 1998). The ‘inertiaviscous’ regime also occurs just before the final breakup of the filament. Yildirim and Basaran (2001) made numerical simulations of the transition between the regimes and were able to predict the transition.
The filament development for the ICregime is given by Eq. (9), whereby the time of the breakup is given by t_{p} (also called pinchpoint), t_{R} is the Rayleigh timescale (cf. Eq. (8)) and X is a proportionality factor. Hence the IC regime only depends on the surface tension as the Rayleigh timescale is a function of it. Recent simulations and experiments showed that X is close to 0.4 (Deblais et al. 2018; Dinic and Sharma 2019), although earlier mathematical approaches and experiments resulted in values between 0.6 and 0.8 (Anna and McKinley 2001; Chen et al. 2002; McKinley 2005; Rodd et al. 2005).
The filament development for the VCregime is given by Eq. (10). In addition to the surface tension γ, the decrease of the diameter depends on the viscosity η. The thinning process takes longer with higher viscosity (CooperWhite et al. 2002; Rodd et al. 2005). Papageorgiou (1995) used selfsimilarity with neglected inertial forces to determine the proportionality factor κ. The value κ = 0.0709 was later confirmed by McKinley and Sridhar for high viscous fluids (McKinley and Sridhar 2002). Eggers (1997) predicted κ = 0.0304 for the ‘inertialviscous’ regime, which especially fits for the dynamics near the breakup of Newtonian fluids.
The transition from the IC/VCregime to the ECregime is to be expected when the viscoelastic timescale (relaxation time λ) is in the same order of magnitude as the viscocapillary timescale (capillary time t_{cap}) and the inertiacapillary timescale (Rayleigh time t_{R}).
The linear behavior of Newtonian systems can be completely described with the Eq. (9) and (10) until breakup. The nonlinear behavior of viscoelastic fluids can only be described up to shortly before the breakup. Further regimes have to be considered. During the elongation, the molecules are oriented, and the elastic stress of the molecules has to be considered. This regime is called ECregime (elastocapillary) (Dinic and Sharma 2019). The inertial and viscous effects are neglectable, and the elastic stress is in equilibrium with the capillary force (Tirtaatmadja et al. 2006). Perturbations in the cylindrical form cannot develop, since the PlateauRayleigh instability is counteracted by strainhardening effects of the polymers (higher viscosity at necked regions due to greater extension rates). In the ECregime, the radius decreases exponentially with time (Eq. (11)) (CooperWhite et al. 2002; Dinic and Sharma 2019). The thinning behavior depends on the elastic modulus (G = η_{P}/λ_{c}) with η_{P} as the contribution of the polymer to the solutions viscosity (η_{S} = η_{P} + η_{solvent}), the surface tension γ and the initial radius of the filament R_{0}. The proportionality factor is also known as the elastocapillarynumber of Anna and McKinley (EC = (G⋅R_{0})/γ) (Anna and McKinley 2001).
The decrease is proportional to a characteristic relaxation time λ_{c} of the polymer solution (Anna and McKinley 2001; Anna et al. 2001; Arnolds et al. 2010; Christanti and Walker 2002). The characteristic relaxation time is usually the greatest relaxation time (Zhou and Doi 2018), but for diluted solutions it is often replaced by the model based Zimmrelaxation time. The Zimmrelaxation time can be directly calculated from the solution properties (Eq. (12)). In this equation, the Zimmrelaxation time depends on the prefactor (1/ζ(3ν)), which depends on the ‘excludedvolume’ parameter \(\upnu\) (previously mentioned while discussing polymer solutions below Fig. 3), the intrinsic viscosity [η], which can be calculated with suitable reference books (e.g. (Brandrup 1999)), the molecular mass of the polymer M_{w}, the Avogadro constant N_{A}, the Boltzmann constant k_{b} and the temperature T (Anna et al. 2001; McKinley et al. 1999; McKinley 2005; Del Giudice et al. 2017; Zimm 1956).
Dinic noted, that even though the EntovHinch’s (1997) expression (Eq. (11)) is the most often cited description of the filament thinning behavior in the EC regime, adjustments have to be made because of striking differences between shear rheological measurements and strain behavior (strain hardening) (Dinic and Sharma 2019). The shear modulus should be replaced with the extensional elastic modulus (G_{E} = η_{P}/λ_{E} ≠ G) and the characteristic relaxation time with the longest extensional relaxation time λ_{E}.
Considering Eq. (2), it can be shown, that the strain rate is constant in the EC regime. The combination of the Eq. (2) and (11) results in a constant Weissenberg number Wi = 2/3 (Eq. (13)) (Bhattacharjee et al. 2003; Liang and Mackley 1994). In general, the viscosity of the unperturbed filament can always be determined from the ratio of capillary stress (surface tension) and the change of the diameter over the time (dR(t)/dt). The determination is simpler in the ECregime (constant strain rate). It is possible to calculate the transient extensional viscosity from Eq. (14). Since the strain rate is constant, the transient viscosity increases monotonically until the polymers are orientated and completely stretched (Amarouchene et al. 2001).
In the final regime the polymer molecules are completely stretched. This regime is called TVEC regime (terminal viscoelastocapillary). The internal frictional force of the solution (viscosity), the elastic stress of the polymers and the surface tension are now in balance. There is a linear decrease of the radius over time until filament breakup (Eq. (15)), in which the factor \({\mathrm{t}}_{\mathrm{R}}\) (cf. Eq. (8)) and t_{EC} are the onset of the regime. Furthermore, the equation (15) depends on the Ohnesorge number (Eq. (8)) and the infinite Troutonratio (Tr_{∞} = η_{E,TVEC}/η_{S,TVEC} (extensional and shear viscosity in the TVECregime). The polymer cannot further stabilize the instability of the capillary forces and small droplets will emerge from the filament. While still connected with the filament, it is called ‘beadsfilament’ (Chang et al. 1999) or ‘Beadsonastring’(BOAS)structure (Bhat et al. 2010; Oliveira and McKinley 2005). The effects of finite extensibility in this regime were broadly discussed via the FENEP and Giesekus (with inertia) simulations by Renardy (1995, 2002, 2004). Renardy also subdivided the breakup into ‘with inertia’ (BOASstructure) and ‘without inertia’ (no beads) (Renardy 2002).
Droplet formation
Three different types of droplets—primary drops, satellite droplets and the Beadsonastring—are described in the literature. Concerning the performed dripping experiments, primary drops form directly on the outlet of a capillary until the gravity of the droplet predominates the surface tension (see Fig. 6). Individual primary drops can be identified for smaller Weber and Reynolds number (dripping). The size of the primary drops increases with the Weber number until there is no more distinction possible between the individual drops (chaotic dripping, jetting) (Lefebvre 1989). Furthermore, the primary drop size increases with increasing surface tension, which can be derived from the balance of forces at the capillary (Ambravaneswaran et al. 2002).
Satellite droplets, sometimes called secondary droplets, were already detected in the experiments of Plateau and Rayleigh. In principle, satellite droplets occur in both, Newtonian fluids and viscoelastic fluids in the IC/VCregime near the breakup point as a result of nonlinear capillary instabilities. At this point, the three timescales Rayleigh time, capillary time and relaxation time (for viscoelastic fluids), i.e., inertia, viscosity and viscoelasticity, overlap. The ratio of the timescales can be expressed more simply by the Ohnesorge number (Eq. (8)) and Deborah number (Eq. (16)).
Lafrance (1975) as well as Rutland and Jameson (1970) investigated the ratio of primary drop size to satellite droplet diameter as a function of the perturbation wavelength in water. The exemplary description according to Bousfield et al. (1986) agrees with the experimentally found results. Tjahjadi et at. (1992) then investigated the influence of viscosity on the formation of satellite droplets for Newtonian fluids (change in the Ohnesorge number). For small viscosities it was found that the formation of satellite droplets becomes a selfsimilar problem. Between the firstgeneration satellite droplets and the primary drops, subsatellites are formed (multiple satellite droplets, see Fig. 12). With increasing viscosity initially only one satellite droplet is formed, which diameter decreases with increasing viscosity. For sufficiently high viscosities, no more satellite droplets are formed. Typically, the limit is Oh > 1. Recent investigations have mostly dealt with viscoelastic solutions (polymer solutions). Tirtaatmadja et al. (2006) should be mentioned, who phenomenologically investigated the formation of satellite droplets at constant viscosity and thus at a constant Oh. It was found that the diameter of the satellite droplets decreases with increasing viscoelasticity until the relaxation time outweighs the Rayleigh time and no satellite droplet is formed. Bhat et al. numerically investigated the dependencies of inertia, viscosity and viscoelasticity and were able to define regions of multiple satellite droplets as well as single satellite droplets as a function of De and Oh ((Bhat et al. 2010) p.629 fig. 5). The location and size of the satellite droplets cannot be calculated from the fluid properties up to now.
The beadsonastring structure was first mentioned and numerical examined by Chang et al. (1999). The structure only occurs for polymer solutions if the polymers are oriented and completely extended. During the stretching process, the polymer molecules form a crystalline like structure and a phase separation occurs ((Sattler et al. 2012) p.24 fig. 15). The resulting droplets consist primarily of the solvent, while a polymeric thread is formed in between. When the polymers are fully stretched, periodic instabilities form according to the PlateauRayleigh instability. The shape of the periodic perturbation can be described according to the Eq. (17) (compare Fig. 4). It describes the spatial and temporal development of the shape which corresponds well with shape of droplets at the beginning of the experiment. In Equation (17) h_{0}(t) is the diameter of the filament, s(t)z is the adaptation to conical shape, a(t) is the amplitude of the perturbation and Λ(t) is the wavelength of the perturbation. The amplitude of the perturbation can be calculated from empirical proportionality factor a_{1} and the growth rate θ, which is a function of the surface tension γ (assumed to be constant), the diameter of the filament h_{0} and the effective Newtonian elongational viscosity η_{eff} (Fontelos and Li 2004). Sattler et al. (2012) pointed out, that the effective viscosity cannot be derived from Eq. (14). The effective viscosity is lower than the calculated viscosity since the solution differs from the solution of the EC regime because of the phase separation. A numerical calculation of the effective viscosity is necessary as well as a fitting of the empirical proportionality factor a_{1}.
The droplets (BOAS) are also called first generation droplets. After the formation of these firstgeneration droplets, second and subsequent generation of droplets can be formed (cf. Fig. 12). Chang et al. (1999) set up a general equation to describe the formation (Eq. (20)), whereby they found a power law exponent m = 3/2 for the Generations N ≥ 2. Later Sattler et al. (2008) and Oliveira and McKinley (2005) found a power law exponent closer to m = 2. In Eq. (20), the diameter of the resulting droplet D_{N} is related to the diameter of the undisturbed filament D^{*}. The power law exponent m represents the relation between the generations. The smallest undisturbed filament had a diameter of 44 µm, which corresponds well with the inner length scale l_{v} of Eggers (Eggers 1997; Haenlein 1931) (Eq. (21)) what is in good agreement with the results of Eggers (39 µm) for the same PEOWater solution. The diameter of the resulting firstgeneration droplets corresponds well with the calculations from the PlateauRayleigh instability (Eq. (5) and (17)), but differs from the results by Arnolds et al. (2010). Arnolds et al. found a narrow range between 5 µm and 10 µm for the diameter of the droplets over a broad range of the viscosity.
After the droplets have completely formed, the description according to Eq. (17) is no longer possible. A potential description of the shape is discussed in Fig. 10. In addition, the droplets can move along the polymer filament depending on their size and environmental conditions, e.g. gravity.
Experimental setup
All experiments were performed in a temperaturecontrolled laboratory at 22°C ± 0.5°C. The shear rheological measurements were performed using an Anton Paar Physica MCR 501 rheometer with a CC27 coaxial system. Two different experiments were performed to characterize the shear rheological properties of the solution: constant shear rate at 7.76 s^{1} and logarithmical shear rate ramp between 1 s^{1} and 100 s^{1}. All relevant results are displayed in Table 2 (columns 5 and 6).
The setup for the extensional rheological investigation was inspired by filament stretching devices (Matta and Tytus 1990; Sridhar et al. 1991; Tirtaatmadja and Sridhar 1993) as well as the CaBER (McKinley et al. 1999; McKinley and Sridhar 2002) and is similar to the setup of Tirtaatmadja et al (2006). It resembles a slow stretching process in the FEA. A polymer solution is dripped at low flow rates (1ml/min) from a nozzle with an inner diameter of 2 mm using a syringe pump (KD Scientific Gemini 88 from fisher scientific). A drop forms at the frontal face of the nozzle (see Fig. 6; hereinafter referred to as ‘primary drop’), which separates from the nozzle when a certain volume is reached. The release point is a function of density and surface tension. Depending on the viscous and viscoelastic properties, satellite droplets and/or a filament are formed which connects the two primary drops (one falling down and one at the nozzle). The nozzle could be moved to different heights for image acquisition as the camera (Fastcam SAX2 Type 1080km3 from Photron) was fixed. For better contrast and less noise, a backlight source was used.
Fluids
Polyethylene oxide with different molecular weights from Sigma Aldrich (M_{w }= 6⋅10^{5} g/mol; M_{w }= 1⋅10^{6} g/mol; M_{w }= 4⋅10^{6} g/mol) was investigated in this study. The PEO powder was dissolved in a mixture of deionized water and Propane1,2,3triol (glycerol) (w_{%,water} = 0,64; η_{S} = 2,958 mPa⋅s). The solution was homogenized with a magnetic stirrer for at least two days. Concentrations have been varied between 0.14 wt% and 2.23 wt% according to Table 1. The density was constant at 1090 kg/m^{3} ± 0,2%. The surface tension was about 60 mN/m for every solution which corresponds well with other publications (Arnolds et al. 2010; Bhat et al. 2010; Tirtaatmadja et al. 2006; CooperWhite et al. 2002).
The idea behind the choice of these solutions is to compare the three parameters—mass concentration Φ, dimensionless coiloverlapconcentration c_{COC} and shear viscosity η_{Sh,0}—for each molecular weight. From Table 1 it is obvious that the mass concentration and dimensionless coil overlap concentration are the same in the different solutions. A shear viscosity of 0.1 Pas is prepared in different dilution levels from the stock solution, which is the highest concentration for each molecular weight. The relevant results of the shear rheological measurements are shown in Table 2.
Results and discussion
Time dependency of the filament diameter
To investigate the filament thinning behavior, the filament diameter was measured at a fixed position over time. The Reynolds and Weber numbers are so low that Rayleigh breakup occurs (Andrade et al. 2012; Lefebvre 1989). The filament was assumed to be circular (a quite good assumption), and its diameter was calculated directly from the images. For a better comparison, the area A(t) is normalized with the initial area (frontal face of the nozzle). The error resulting from the camera sensors pixels reaches 10% for D = 50 µm or a normalized area (A(t)/A_{0}) of 10^{3}. An exemplary progression is shown in Fig. 7.
The qualitative temporal progression of the normalized area reflects the previously shown progressions in Fig. 5. For further evaluation, special attention is paid to the EC regime, since the relaxation time can be calculated directly from the strain rate via the constant Weissenberg number (combination of Eqs. (2), (11) and (13)).
The relaxation time is compared later with theoretical models (Table 3) and a mass concentration dependent equation of the relaxation time for each molecular mass was created (Eq. (29)). For the model presented subsequently (see “Modeling of the filament behavior and the droplet formation in the Filament Extension Atomizer”), the relaxation time plays an important role for the filament behavior during filament extension atomization and is significantly responsible for the maximum angular velocity of the FEAcylinders (cf. Eq. (34)).
It is obvious (cf. Table 2) that the relaxation time increases with increasing concentration (constant molecular weight) and increasing molecular weight (constant concentration). This was expected since increasing concentration and/or increasing molecular weight raises the viscosity and the relaxation time coupled to the viscosity as well as the interactions of the polymers. It must be noted that the relaxation time at constant viscosity (η_{Sh} ≈ 0.1 Pa s) increases when the concentrations decrease with increasing molecular weight. This can be ascribed to the viscoelasticity and strain hardening effects which originate from the long chain branching of polymers with higher molecular weight.
Effective relaxation times vs. Zimm relaxation times
The results also show that the relaxation time in the semidiluted regime differs from the Zimm relaxation time (compare Tables 1 and 2) because the effective relaxation time depends on the concentration. An adjustment of the Zimm relaxation time described in Eq. (12) is necessary and leads to Eq. (22) (Tirtaatmadja et al. 2006).
However, Eq. (22) is only valid for diluted solutions. At higher concentrations, the viscosity of the solution and thus the relaxation time is strongly underestimated. A possible solution for this is the combination of the findings of Arnolds et al. ((2010) p.1212 fig. 1) and Tirtaatmadja (Tirtaatmadja et al. 2006). Arnolds et al. calculated the slope of zeroshear viscosity as a function of c_{COC} in the concentration domains (diluted, semidiluted, entangled) of polymer solutions. Eq. (22) is extended by a further term for the semidiluted regime (Eq. (23)). The exponents x_{d} (diluted solution) and x_{s} (semidiluted solution) correspond to the power law of the slope of zeroshear viscosity with increasing concentration ((Arnolds et al. 2010) p.1212 fig. 1). c_{COC,d} represents the transition from diluted to semidiluted solutions. Eq. (23) can be simplified to Eq. (24) with \({\mathrm{c}}_{\mathrm{COC},\mathrm{d}}=1\) as transition from a diluted to a semidiluted system (see section ‘Polymer Solution’). This results in Eq. (25). Another possibility is the incorporation of real measured quantities like the zeroshear viscosity or the shear viscosity at \(\upeta (\dot{\upgamma }=\dot{\upepsilon })\) (cf. Eqs. (26) and (27)). All approaches (Eqs. 2527) formally correspond to the power law approach for determining the strain relaxation time according to Rubinstein and Colby (Eq. (28)) (Rubinstein 2010).
All calculated relaxation times (cf. Table 3) are in the same order of magnitude as the effective relaxation times of the experiments. Irrespective of this, the modelbased relaxation times show striking differences to reality, so that a complete theoretical prediction of the relaxation time is not possible at this stage, because the nonlinear strain hardening of the polymer molecules is overestimated. The power law of the approaches (Eqs. (25), (26) and (27)) is greater than in reality, and therefore an adjustment is necessary. Since a modelbased determination of the relaxation time does not yield sufficient results, the relaxation time is calculated using the empirical approach of Rubinstein and Colby (Eq. (28)) for the later presented model. The fitting parameter ψ is used to fit the equation to experimental data. It results in Eq. (29).
Droplet formation—satellite droplets
From the recorded data of the shear and extensional rheological investigations, the Oh and De numbers can be calculated. In all experiments, with the exception of the lowest concentrations of \({\mathrm{M}}_{\mathrm{W}}=6\cdot {10}^{5}\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{mol}\) and \({\mathrm{M}}_{\mathrm{W}}=4\cdot {10}^{6}\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{mol}\), the Ohnesorge number is in the range of 0.1 to 1.134 and therefore they are in the ‘inertialviscous’ regime (Eggers 1997). Regarding the Ohnesorge number, only at certain Deborah numbers the formation of satellite droplets would be expected. The requirements are only met at \({\mathrm{M}}_{\mathrm{W}}=6\cdot {10}^{5}\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{mol}\) (Fig. 8).
Droplet formation—BOASstructure ECregime
In most cases, droplet formation cannot be observed directly at the capillary outlet. For the observation, the imaging area is shifted downwards approx. 5 cm (Fig. 9).
According to the literature, two possible shapes occur during drop formation. Equation (17) and the simplification (30) explain the spatial and temporal development of the shape which corresponds well with the experimental findings, especially at beginning of the experiment.
The simplification is possible because the images clearly reveal that the filament is in fact cylindrical and not conical. Therefore, the adaptation to a conical shape is negligible (s(t)z = 0). With the assumption of rotational symmetry, the integration over the length z is possible and the volume (\({V}_{Sattler}=\pi \cdot {l}_{d}\cdot \frac{{h}_{0}^{2}+4\cdot {a}_{0}\cdot {h}_{0}+6\cdot {a}_{0}^{2}}{4}\); with \({a}_{0}=\frac{1}{2}\cdot \left(\frac{{w}_{d}}{2}\frac{{h}_{0}}{2}\right)\); cf. Fig. 10) as well as the equivalent diameter of the droplets can be calculated. Unfortunately, it was not possible to investigate the influence of time with the used setup.
The computed shape corresponds quite well to the real shape of the droplets, especially at the beginning of the droplet formation process. At the end of the droplet formation the shape resembles more an ellipsoid (cf. Fig. 10: B1; \({V}_{elli}=\frac{4}{3}\cdot \pi \cdot {l}_{d}\cdot {w}_{d}^{2}\)). Regardless of the shape, the volume can be calculated in both cases. The difference, and thus the error, is at most 21.1% of the volume and thus less than 10% of the equivalent diameter. Based on this evaluation, the equivalent diameters of the resulting droplets can be calculated (cf. Table 4).
In general, the diameter of the droplets and the stable filament diameter decrease with increasing polymer concentration and increasing molecular mass, but the dependence of the molecular mass predominates. The quotient of the two diameters remains constant within small deviations. Based on these results, it is not possible to derive a functional relationship between the concentration and the droplet size or between the concentration and the stable filament diameter. Especially for the stable filament diameters of the molecular mass of 4000000 g/mol, the accuracy is already not better than about 20% of the measured value. Regarding \(\frac{\Lambda }{dsF}\), the spectrum of this ratio is the same as that found by Sattler et al. using a CaBER (4.5 < Λ/d_{sF} < 6.5) (Sattler et al. 2012). The lower limit (Λ/d_{sF} = 4.5) is connected to the PlateauRayleigh instability. This is surprising, since the PlateauRayleigh instability refers to Newtonian fluids and still seems to be applicable to viscoelastic fluids while being consistent with the results of other publications (Christanti and Walker 2001; Sattler et al. 2012). Although the size of the droplets is well matched, significantly fewer droplets are formed than expected. Usually the PlateauRayleigh instability infers regular, harmonically oscillating instabilities out of which many droplets should be formed. Referring to the calculated volume of the filament, approx. 100 droplets per filament should thus be produced which is far from the gained results. A solution to this deviation might be formation of individual instabilities that lead to a stabilization of the filament and to a hindrance of further instabilities. A similar behavior could also be shown numerically by Li and Fontelos ((2003) cf. Figs. 3, 13, and 14) and MeadHunter and King (2012). Additionally, some droplets are formed below the image area, which are not included in the evaluation and thus an exact absolute number cannot be given. Nevertheless, this has been checked qualitatively and the absolute number is still lower than expected. Another mechanism reducing the droplet number is coalescence (Fig. 11).
High velocity differences occur between single droplets when they were formed at different time steps. The polymer molecules are more or less immobilized in the center at high elongations (interactions with other polymer molecules and resulting strain hardening), but the solvent is not. When the instabilities develop, polymer molecules can therefore no longer pass into the droplets and remain in the filament. The droplets thus have a different composition and, in the case of PEOwaterglycerol mixtures, a significantly lower viscosity. Gier and Wagner (2012) performed Particle Image Velocimetry measurements in filaments and was able to show that relative movements occur. Combining this and the instability formation at different time steps, relative movements between the droplets and the filament as well as relative movements between droplets occur.
Droplet formation—BOASstructure TVECregime
In addition to the droplets formed in the EC regime, another beadsonastring structure is formed later in the phase of final stretching of the polymer molecules. In the final phase, there is an absolute phase separation and the formation of droplets that are connected by a polymer filament. From the optical evaluation of the experiments, droplet sizes of up to approx. 30 µm could be determined (Fig. 12), which as a whole structure resembles the beadsonastring structures found in the literature before ((Sattler et al. 2012)) and could be reproduced in all experiments. An exact size determination was not possible due to the image quality. No dependence on concentration and molecular mass was found. This result is consistent with the results of Arnolds et al. (2010), who only found a minimal dependence on the dimensionless concentration c_{COC}. However, In contrast to the experimental results of this publication and the results of Sattler et al., the particle size of Arnolds et al. (2010) is between 5 µm and 10 µm.
Further relevant quantities to model the FEA process
Figure 9 shows exemplarily that the diameter of the filament is independent of the location. This could be shown by the superposition of the two curves and Fig. 10 as well as Fig. 11, excluding the droplets. In addition, there are a slight increase of the primary drop velocity at a second location with increasing concentration and molecular mass, which is not shown or discussed within this publication, but corresponds well with literature (Ambravaneswaran et al. 2002), and an increase of the filament volume with rising viscosity of the solution (Table 5). Likewise, the volume fraction of the filament to the total volume (primary drop and filament) increases. The total volume is almost constant (\(35.5 \mu l\pm 2 \mu l\)) regardless of the viscosity and molecular mass, but should theoretically decrease slightly with increasing concentration of polymer (equilibrium of forces at the nozzle). Tirtaatmadja et al (2006) was able to show that the surface tension is constant regardless of concentration and molecular weight. The density of the polymer solution, however, increases slightly from 1.089 g/cm^{3} (Φ = 0; waterglycerol mixture) to 1.093 g/cm^{3} (Φ = 2.23; maximum mass fraction PEO). For the volume fraction of the filament, similar to the relaxation time, a concentrationdependent empirical equation is derived Eq. (31), with Y and Z as empirical fitting parameters). The volume fraction was derived from the filament diameter in the second observing location while the total volume was known from the syringe pump.
Modeling of the filament behavior and the droplet formation in the Filament Extension Atomizer
The developed model is very complex and can be described as a system of eight equations what will be explained in the following paragraphs. Therefore, new formulaic correlations are developed and known formulaic correlations are adapted and combined in a new way. The system will be presented in three steps focusing on the filament formation, the droplet formation and the description of the extensional rate (Fig. 13).
As a starting point three main aspects have to be considered. First, a filament must be formed, which is stretched sufficiently until instabilities arise. From these instabilities, drops must form and at the same time the filament must not break before. Therefore, the strain rate times the relaxation time is limited to 2/3 in the ECregime as shown above (Fig. 7).
Formation of the filament
It was shown in the experimental section that a large part of the solutions volume is bound in the primary drops (Figs. 7 and 8). Approximately these primary drops form a hemispherical shape on both rotating cylinders during filament stretching. To determine the filament volume at the beginning of the stretching process, it is assumed to be of cylindrical shape (volume of the primary droplets and the filament, Fig. 14 (1)). The total volume is therefore defined as the gap distance L_{0} and the moistened surface of the cylinders (\({V}_{\mathrm{total}}={\mathrm{A}}_{0}\cdot {\mathrm{L}}_{0}=\frac{\uppi }{4}\cdot {\mathrm{D}}_{0}^{2}\cdot {\mathrm{L}}_{0}\)). In addition to Eq. (31), the zero length of the filament can be calculated as a function of the mass concentration (Eq. (32)).
The maximum length of the filament is limited by the radius of the FEA cylinders R_{FEA}, the gap distance L_{0} and the volume fraction of the primary drops. According to the conducted experiments they will be handled as spherical droplets with the radius R_{0}. It is important that perturbations occur before the maximum length is reached, so that the formation of defined, spherical droplets is possible over time.
Formation of the BOAS structure on the filament
Under the premise of a cylindrical filament and a Gaussian distributed wavelength of the instabilities (Table 4), Eq. (30) is used for the temporal description of droplet formation. The amplitude of the instability grows exponentially with time (Eq. (18)), while the growth rate depends on the surface tension, the effective viscosity and the stable filament diameter (d_{sF}; cf. Table 4). As the predictive power of the Eq. (21) could not be confirmed on the basis of the experimental results, only experimental data of stable filament diameters are used as model input parameters. Furthermore, no growth rates of the droplets could be determined due to the static observation setup. However, a numerical theoretical determination is possible with a sufficient amount of measurement data. From Sattler (2012), various parameters of the growth can be identified and estimated. For example, the effective viscosity of the stable filament is assumed to be 5 Pas (cf. p.24 Table II) and the prefactor a_{1} of the growth rate is calculated as 1 µm. According to Eq. (19), this results in an exponential factor θ = 28.7 s^{1}. The formation time of the droplets can be calculated from Eq. (19) with the given quantities (Eq. (33)).
In Eq. (18), the maximum amplitude a_{max}(t) is limited by the filament radius (h_{0}/2). The shape of the droplet can no longer be described by the Eq. (30). The result is a rounding of the droplets which is elliptical at first and spherical at the end.
It is assumed that exactly one droplet is created from one wavelength of the instability and that this droplet does not coalesce with other created droplets (which is more suitable for higher viscosities). The volume of the unstable section can be calculated from the theoretical consideration of Rayleigh (Λ/d_{sF} = 4.5) and the experimentally found ratio (Λ/d_{sF} = 4.56.5; Table 4 and (Christanti and Walker 2001)) as the maximum growth rate. From the maximum growth rate results a normal distribution of further instabilities, which for example in the case of a molecular mass of 1000000 g/mol showed a standard deviation of about 30 µm (Table 4). It has to be noted, however, that the standard deviation should correctly be concentrationdependent. According to other researchers it is assumed that the resulting polymer thread is infinitesimally small (cf. (Sattler et al. 2012)). This is based on the fact that the volume fraction of the polymer corresponds approximately to the mass fraction.
Strain rate in the Filament Extension Atomizer (FEA)
The strain rate profile is essential for the stretching process in the FEA and is given by Eq. (34) with l_{0} as the zero length as a function of the volume fraction and therefore a function of the concentration (dependency is not shown in the equation), the radius of the FEA cylinders R_{FEA} and the angular velocity ω. It can be shown that the maximum strain rate increases with increasing angular velocity, decreasing zero length and increasing radius (see Fig. 15). To justify the assumption of Rayleigh decay, the maximum strain rate of the FEA (Eq. (35)) has to be set according the EC regime for the given solution. Via exemplary calculation of the strain relaxation time it is possible to derive the maximum strain rate for each solution. The point of the maximum strain rate is mathematically dependent on the angular velocity, the effective zero length, the radius of the FEA and the rotation velocity n (Eq. (36)). Substituting Eq. (36) into Eq. (34), for example, results in a maximum strain rate depending on the relaxation time of the polymers and the design parameters R_{FEA} and l_{0} (Eq. (37)). The time and angular velocity dependent maximum strain rates are shown in Fig. 16. The process time t_{pro} can be calculated directly from the angular velocity (Eq. (38)).
The time dependent strain rate of the FEA is shown in Fig. 15. However, as mentioned before, the strain rate in the EC regime is constant and adjusts itself according to the relaxation time of the solutes. There is a decrease in the filament volume according to Eq. (39), whereas the temporal filament length is given by ’\(2\cdot {\mathrm{R}}_{\mathrm{FEA}}\cdot \left(1\mathrm{cos}\left(\upomega \cdot \mathrm{t}\right)\right)+{\mathrm{l}}_{0}\)’ and the temporal crosssection is given by ‘\({A}_{0}\cdot exp({\dot{\varepsilon }}_{real}\cdot t)\)’. The initial area A_{0} depends on the IC/VCECtransition (Fig. 17 and 18; Table 6).
This Eq. (39) does not apply to the IC/VC regime. Even though the strain rate in the IC/VC regime is higher than in the EC regime it is acceptable to assume an EC regime – decrease of the diameter over both. In the course of this assumption the equation can be further simplified. Furthermore, l_{0} can be substituted by the function of the volume fraction of the filament (Eq. (32)). The real strain rate can be substituted by the Weissenberg number and the relaxation time, which is a function of the concentration. A_{0} can be substituted by the radius to implement the effect of a perforated surface (Eq. (40)).
At a time t_{inst} smaller than the maximum processing time of a single filament (cf. Eq. (42)), the diameter of the filament must be thinned enough to develop instabilities (see Table 4).
Summary
In summary, a system of equations ((13), (19), (32), (33), (34), (36)(38), (40) and (42)) with ten independent parameters and four empirically resolved equations is created. This system of equations has to be numerically solved since it is an optimization problem between different internal times and the strain rate. The optimization function will be shown following the list of intrinsic parameters and empiric parameters. The prediction of droplet formation in the TVEC regime is not necessary, because the droplet size only change little with the concentration (Arnolds et al. 2010).
Intrinsic Parameters:

Mass concentration of solved polymer Φ

Molecular weight of solved polymer M_{w}

Radius of the FEA cylinders R_{FEA}

Zero length L_{0}

Angular velocity ω

Wetted surface FEA R_{0}

Time t

Surface tension γ

Effective Newtonian viscosity η_{eff}

Growth factor a_{1}
Empiric parameters:

Stable filament diameter d_{sF}(Φ; M_{w})

Relaxation time λ(Φ; M_{w})

Volume fraction of filament V_{%}(Φ; M_{w})

Standard deviation of instability wavelength σ(Φ; M_{w})
The optimization problem is made of generating the minimum process time t_{pro} in which filaments become instable t_{inst} and droplets form t_{form}. At the same time, the maximum strain rate must not exceed the maximum possible strain rate of the EC regime. Functionally, these two conditions result in the maximum value search for the angular velocity of Eq. (43).
At the time of instability formation, the volume of the filament is 0.1856 mm^{3}. At this point, however, it is not clear whether the complete volume merges into droplets or, as shown in Fig. 11, there is a pronounced flow along the strain axis, so that only the volume of the filament at the end of the process time (0.0117 mm^{3}) merges into droplets. Furthermore, a drop size dependent description of the flow is not possible due to the lack of data. For this reason, both extrema are determined, and the results are presented. However, it is relevant to say that the volume of the primary droplets, which is not converted in the filament, is not lost but reused in the next filament formation.
Conclusion
The aim of this study was the development of a model for the droplet formation in a Filament Stretching Atomizer to predict the droplet size and frequency. This goal could be achieved with a combination of stretching experiments and an adaption, advancement and combination of somehow related models. From the temporal observation of the filament diameter, it could be shown that it is independent of the location and the characteristic relaxation time could be determined. A theoretical approximation of the relaxation time is possible in principle using established models (extension of the Zimm model), but for an exact determination experiments are mandatory. Therefore, in this study, a selfdeveloped concentration, empirical equation was used for the relaxation time (Eq. (29)). In the following model investigations, the strainhardening effects of the polymer are to be created with a tube model and combined with the theory on droplet formation. Furthermore, different types of droplet formation could be experimentally proven for different stretching regimes. The shown formation of satellite droplets corresponds formally to the results of Bhat et al. (2010), so that multiple satellite droplets were expected and formed. Up to the knowledge of the author, the droplet formation in the EC regime has not been described theoretically before. However, the equivalent diameter of the droplets in connection with the last stable filament diameter agrees with the theory found by Rayleigh (as lower limit; λ/d_{sF} = 4.5) and Sattler (4.5 < λ/d_{sF} < 6.5)(2012). Furthermore, in this regime, coalescence of droplets can occur, which is critical to produce monodisperse, spherical particles with respect to the application in polymer melts. This is however due to the large differences in viscosity, which are smaller for polymer melts. The BOAS structure in the TVEC regime also agrees with Sattler's results (2012), but there are differences in size compared to Arnold's results (2010). Subsequently, the experimental results were transferred into a model to describe the filament behavior and the formation of droplets that has proven to resemble our own experiments and qualitatively other literature findings. Nevertheless, in this study the effects of centrifugal forces and a forced breakup which will occur in the FEA process were neglected and have to be incorporated in future work. But the prospects of success are very good since the production of polymer powder using PlateauRayleigh instability has already been demonstrated in principle by a discontinuous process Zhou et al. (2020).
References
Abuga Gesare J, Chinyoka,Tiri (2020) Numerical Study of Shear Banding in Flows of Fluids Governed by the RoliePoly TwoFluid Model via Stabilized Finite Volume Methods In Processes 8(7):10. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8070810
Amarouchene Y, Bonn D, Meunier J, Kellay H (2001) Inhibition of the finitetime singularity during droplet fission of a polymeric fluid. In Phys Rev Lett 86(16):3558–3561. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.3558
Ambravaneswaran B, Wilkes ED, Basaran OA (2002) Drop formation from a capillary tube: Comparison of onedimensional and twodimensional analyses and occurrence of satellite drops. Phys Fluids 14(8):2606–2621. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1485077
Andrade RD, Skurtys O, Osorio FA (2012) Atomizing Spray Systems for Application of Edible Coatings. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 11(3):323–337. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15414337.2012.00186.x
Anna SL, McKinley GH (2001) Elastocapillary thinning and breakup of model elastic liquids. J Rheol 45(1):115–138. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.1332389
Anna SL, McKinley GH, Nguyen DA, Sridhar T, Muller SJ, Huang J, James DF (2001) An interlaboratory comparison of measurements from filamentstretching rheometers using common test fluids. J Rheol 45(1):83–114. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.1332388
Arnolds O, Buggisch H, Sachsenheimer D, Willenbacher N (2010) Capillary breakup extensional rheometry (CaBER) on semidilute and concentrated polyethyleneoxide (PEO) solutions. Rheol Acta 49(11–12):1207–1217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s0039701005007
Auhl D, Ramirez J, Likhtman AE, Chambon P, Fernyhough C (2008) Linear and nonlinear shear flow behavior of monodisperse polyisoprene melts with a large range of molecular weights. J Rheol 52(3):801–835. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.2890780
Auhl, Dietmar W. (2006): Molekulare Struktur und rheologische Eigenschaften strahlenmodifizierter Polypropylene (Doctoral thesis, University of Erlangen–Nuremberg). Retrieved from https://opus4.kobv.de.
Azahar AA, Harlen OG, Walkley MA (2019) Modelling contraction flows of bidisperse polymer blends using the RoliePoly and RolieDoublePoly equations. Korea Aust Rheol J 31(4):203–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1336701900216
Azahar A, Aida B (2020) Numerical Simulation for Polymer Blend using OpenFOAM. University of Leeds. Available online at http://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/27632/
Barnes HA (2000) A handbook of elementary rheology. University of Wales Institute of NonNewtonian Fluid Mechanics, Aberystwyth
Baumann FE, Wilczok N (1998) Preparation of precipitated polyamide powders of narrow particle size distribution and low porosity patent (US patent 5932687A)
Bazilevsky AV, Entov VM, Rozhkov AN (1990) Liquid Filament Microrheometer and Some of Its Applications. In D. R. Oliver (Ed.): Third European Rheology Conference and Golden Jubilee Meeting of the British Society of Rheology. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands 41–43
Beck VA, Johnson DM (2017) Filament Extension Atomizer patent (US patent 9707577B2)
Bhat PP, Appathurai S, Harris MT, Pasquali M, McKinley GH, Basaran OA (2010) Formation of beadsonastring structures during breakup of viscoelastic filaments. Nat Phys 6(8):625–631. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys1682
Bhattacharjee PK, Nguyen DA, McKinley GH, Sridhar T (2003) Extensional stress growth and stress relaxation in entangled polymer solutions. J Rheol 47(1):269–290. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.1530625
Wadud B, Sujan E, Baird DG (2000) Shear and extensional rheology of sparsely branched metallocenecatalyzed polyethylenes. J Rheol 44(5):1151–1167. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.1289280
Bird R, Dotson PJ, Johnson N (1980) Polymer solution rheology based on a finitely extensible bead—spring chain model. In undefined. Available online at https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/PolymersolutionrheologybasedonafinitelychainBirdDotson/a7a6babea63638f96cf09cc0bdf5308bebd8fbaf
Boudara VAH, Peterson JD, Leal L, Gary Read Daniel J (2019) Nonlinear rheology of polydisperse blends of entangled linear polymers: RolieDoublePoly models. J Rheol 63(1):71–91. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.5052320
Bousfield DW, Keunings R, Marrucci G, Denn MM (1986) Nonlinear analysis of the surface tension driven breakup of viscoelastic filaments. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 21(1):79–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/03770257(86)800647
Brandrup J (ed) (1999) Polymer handbook, 4th edn. Wiley, Hoboken, N. J
Carrier O, Dervin E, Funfschilling D, Li HZ (2015) Formation of satellite droplets in flowfocusing junctions: volume and neck rupture. Microsyst Technol 21(3):499–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s005420131905x
Chang HC, Demekhin EA, Kalaidin E (1999) Iterated stretching of viscoelastic jets. Phys Fluids 11(7):1717–1737. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.870038
Chaudhary KC, Maxworthy T (1980a) The nonlinear capillary instability of a liquid jet. Part 2. Experiments on jet behaviour before droplet formation. J Fluid Mech 96(2):275–286. https://doi.org/10.1017/s002211208000211x
Chaudhary KC, Maxworthy T (1980b) The nonlinear capillary instability of a liquid jet. Part 3. Experiments on satellite drop formation and control. J Fluid Mech 96(2):287–297. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022112080002121.
Chaudhary KC, Redekopp LG (1980) The nonlinear capillary instability of a liquid jet. Part 1. Theory. J Fluid Mech 96(2):257–274. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022112080002108
Chen AU, Notz PK, Basaran OA (2002) Computational and experimental analysis of pinchoff and scaling. Phys Rev Lett 88(17):174501. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.88.174501
Chilcott MD, Rallison JM (1988) Creeping flow of dilute polymer solutions past cylinders and spheres. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 29:381–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/03770257(88)850626
Christanti Y, Walker LM (2001) Surface tension driven jet break up of strainhardening polymer solutions. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 100(1–3):9–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S03770257(01)001355
Christanti Y, Walker LM (2002) Effect of fluid relaxation time of dilute polymer solutions on jet breakup due to a forced disturbance. J Rheol 46(3):733–748. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.1463418
Clasen C, Eggers J, Fontelos MA, LI J, McKinley IE, Gareth H (2006) The beadsonstring structure of viscoelastic threads. J Fluid Mech 556:283. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022112006009633
Colby RH (2010) Structure and linear viscoelasticity of flexible polymer solutions: comparison of polyelectrolyte and neutral polymer solutions. Rheol Acta 49(5):425–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s0039700904135
CooperWhite JJ, Fagan JE, Tirtaatmadja V, Lester DR, Boger DV (2002) Drop formation dynamics of constant lowviscosity, elastic fluids. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 106(1):29–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S03770257(02)000848
Deblais A, Herrada MA, Hauner I, Velikov KP, van Roon T, Kellay H et al (2018) Viscous Effects on Inertial Drop Formation. Phys Rev Lett 121(25):254501. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.254501
Dechet MA, Kloos S, Peukert W, Schmidt J (2019) Production of spherical micronsized polymer particles for additive manufacturing by liquid phase processes. AIP Conf Proc 2055(1):140002. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5084905
D Giudice Francesco Haward, Simon J, Shen Amy Q 2017 Relaxation time of dilute polymer solutions: A microfluidic approach J Rheol 61 2 327 337 https://doi.org/10.1122/1.4975933
Dinic J, Sharma V (2019) Macromolecular relaxation, strain, and extensibility determine elastocapillary thinning and extensional viscosity of polymer solutions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 116(18):8766–8774. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1820277116
Doi, Masao; Edwards, S. F. (1978a): Dynamics of concentrated polymer systems. Part 1.—Brownian motion in the equilibrium state. J Chem Soc Faraday Trans 2 74 (0), pp. 1789–1801. https://doi.org/10.1039/F29787401789.
Doi, Masao; Edwards, S. F. (1978b): Dynamics of concentrated polymer systems. Part 2.—Molecular motion under flow. J Chem Soc Faraday Trans 2 74 (0), pp. 1802–1817. https://doi.org/10.1039/F29787401802.
Doi, Masao; Edwards, S. F. (1978c): Dynamics of concentrated polymer systems. Part 3.—The constitutive equation. J Chem Soc Faraday Trans 2 74 (0), pp. 1818–1832. https://doi.org/10.1039/F29787401818.
Eggers J (1997) Nonlinear dynamics and breakup of freesurface flows. Rev Mod Phys 69(3):865–930. https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.69.865
Eggers J, Villermaux E (2008) Physics of liquid jets. Rep Prog Phys 71(3):36601. https://doi.org/10.1088/00344885/71/3/036601
Entov VM, Hinch EJ (1997) Effect of a spectrum of relaxation times on the capillary thinning of a filament of elastic liquid. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 72(1):31–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/S03770257(97)000220
Fontelos MA, Li J (2004) On the evolution and rupture of filaments in Giesekus and FENE models. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 118(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnnfm.2004.02.002
M Forest Gregory Wang Q 1994 Dynamics of Slender Viscoelastic Free Jets SIAM J Appl Math 54 4 996 1032 https://doi.org/10.1137/S0036139992236761
M Forest Gregory Wang Qi 1990 Changeoftype behavior in viscoelastic slender jet models Theor Comput Fluid Dyn 2 1 1 25 https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00271426
de Gennes PG (1971) Reptation of a Polymer Chain in the Presence of Fixed Obstacles. J Chem Phys 55(2):572–579. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1675789
Gier S, Wagner C (2012) Visualization of the flow profile inside a thinning filament during capillary breakup of a polymer solution via particle image velocimetry and particle tracking velocimetry. Phys Fluids 24(5):53102. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4718675
Giesekus H (1982) A simple constitutive equation for polymer fluids based on the concept of deformationdependent tensorial mobility. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 11(1–2):69–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/03770257(82)850167
Graessley, William W. (1982): Entangled linear, branched and network polymer systems — Molecular theories. In HansJoachim Cantow, Gino Dall'Asta, Karel Dušek, John. D. Ferry, Hiroshi Fujita, Manfred Gordon et al. (Eds.): Synthesis and Degradation Rheology and Extrusion. Berlin, Heidelberg, 1982. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer (Advances in Polymer Science, 47), pp. 67–117.
Graham RS, Likhtman AE, McLeish TCB, Milner ST (2003) Microscopic theory of linear, entangled polymer chains under rapid deformation including chain stretch and convective constraint release. J Rheol 47(5):1171–1200. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.1595099
Haenlein A (1931) Über den Zerfall eines Flüssigkeitsstrahles. Forsch IngWes 2(4):139–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02584624
Huang Q, Hengeller L, Alvarez NJ, Hassager O (2015) Bridging the Gap between Polymer Melts and Solutions in Extensional Rheology. Macromolecules 48(12):4158–4163. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.macromol.5b00849
Ide Y, White JL (1978) Experimental study of elongational flow and failure of polymer melts. J Appl Polym Sci 22(4):1061–1079. https://doi.org/10.1002/app.1978.070220416
Kröger M (2019) Developments in Polymer Theory and Simulation. Polymers 12(1):30. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym12010030
Lafrance P (1975) Nonlinear breakup of a laminar liquid jet. Phys Fluids 18(4):428. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.861168
Lefebvre, Arthur Henry (1989): Atomization and sprays. Bristol, Pa.: Taylor & Francis (Combustion).
Li J, Fontelos MA (2003) Drop dynamics on the beadsonstring structure for viscoelastic jets: A numerical study. Phys Fluids 15(4):922–937. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1556291
Liang RF, Mackley MR (1994) Rheological characterization of the time and strain dependence for polyisobutylene solutions. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 52(3):387–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/03770257(94)850313
Likhtman AE, Graham RS (2003) Simple constitutive equation for linear polymer melts derived from molecular theory: RoliePoly equation. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 114(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S03770257(03)001149
Lister JR, Stone HA (1998) Capillary breakup of a viscous thread surrounded by another viscous fluid. Phys Fluids 10(11):2758–2764. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.869799
Matta JosephE, Tytus RaymondP (1990) Liquid stretching using a falling cylinder. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 35(2–3):215–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/03770257(90)850509
Mattes, Kurt (2007): Methoden zur Charakterisierung des nichtlinear viskoelastischen Verhaltens von Polymerschmelzen. Available online at https://dnb.info/986772577/34.
McKinley, Gareth H. (2005): ViscoElastoCapillary Thinning and BreakUp of Complex Fluids. Available online at https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/18085.
McKinley, Gareth H.; Anna, Shelley L.; Tripathi, A.; Yao, Minwu (1999): Extensional rheometry of polymeric fluids and the uniaxial elongation of viscoelastic filaments.
McKinley GH, Sridhar T (2002) Filament  Stretching rheometry of complex fluids. Ann Rev Fluid Mech 34(1):375–415. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.fluid.34.083001.125207
McKinley GH, Tripathi A (2000) How to extract the Newtonian viscosity from capillary breakup measurements in a filament rheometer. J Rheol 44(3):653–670. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.551105
McLeish TCB, Larson RG (1998) Molecular constitutive equations for a class of branched polymers: The pompom polymer. J Rheol 42(1):81–110. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.550933
MeadHunter R, King AJC, Mullins BJ (2012) Plateau Rayleigh instability simulation. Langmuir ACS J Surf Colloids 28(17):6731–6735. https://doi.org/10.1021/la300622h
Mezger T (2021) Applied Rheology. With Joe Flow on Rheology Road, 8th edn. Anton Paar GmbH, Graz
Monsheimer S, Grebe M, Baumann FE (2005) Laser sinter powder with a metal salt and a fatty acid derivative, process for its production, and moldings produced from this laser sinter powder. Patentschrift (Veröffentlichungsnummer: US20050027050A1)
Münstedt H (1980) Dependence of the Elongational Behavior of Polystyrene Melts on Molecular Weight and Molecular Weight Distribution. J Rheol 24(6):847–867. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.549587
Münstedt H, Laun HM (1981) Elongational properties and molecular structure of polyethylene melts. Rheol Acta 20(3):211–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01678022
Ohnesorge Wolfgang V (1936) Die Bildung von Tropfen an Düsen und die Auflösung flüssiger Strahlen. ZAMM  Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics / Zeitschrift für Angewandte Mathematik und Mechanik. In Z Angew Math Mech. 16(6):355–358. https://doi.org/10.1002/ZAMM.19360160611
Oliveira MSN, McKinley GH (2005) Iterated stretching and multiple beadsonastring phenomena in dilute solutions of highly extensible flexible polymers. Phys Fluids 17(7):71704. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1949197
Pahl Manfred, Gleißle Wolfgang, Laun HansMartin (Eds.) (1995) Praktische Rheologie der Kunststoffe und Elastomere. 4., überarb. Aufl. Düsseldorf: VDIVerl. (Kunststofftechnik)
Papageorgiou DT (1995) On the breakup of viscous liquid threads. Phys Fluids 7(7):1529–1544. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.868540
PARC (2018) PARC’s filament extension atomizer technology successfully spraying a PEO/water/glycerol solution at room temperature. PARC. Available online at www.parc.com/blog/meettheparcresearcherjeromeunidadandtheallmystifyingfilamentextensionatomizer/, checked on 11/15/2021
Pimbley WT, Lee HC (1977) Satellite Droplet Formation in a Liquid Jet. IBM J Res Dev 21(1):21–30. https://doi.org/10.1147/rd.211.0021
Plateau J (1873) Statique expérimentale et théorique des liquides soumis aux seules forces moléculaires: GauthierVillars
Poinot T, Govin A, Grosseau P (2014) Importance of coiloverlapping for the effectiveness of hydroxypropylguars as water retention agent in cementbased mortars. Cem Concr Res 56:61–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconres.2013.11.005
Rayleigh (1878) On The Instability Of Jets. Proc London Math Soc s110(1):4–13. https://doi.org/10.1112/plms/s110.1.4
Rayleigh (1892a) XIX. On the instability of cylindrical fluid surfaces. London Edinburgh Dublin Philos Mag J Sci 34(207):177–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786449208620304.
Rayleigh (1892b) XVI. On the instability of a cylinder of viscous liquid under capillary force. London Edinburgh Dublin Philos Mag J Sci 34(207):145–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786449208620301.
Renardy M (2004) Selfsimilar breakup of nonNewtonian liquid jets. Available online at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.361.7185&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Renardy M (1995) A numerical study of the asymptotic evolution and breakup of Newtonian and viscoelastic jets. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 59(2–3):267–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/03770257(95)013756
Renardy M (2002) Similarity solutions for jet breakup for various models of viscoelastic fluids. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 104(1):65–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/s03770257(02)000162
Rodd LE, Scott TP, CooperWhite JJ, McKinley GH (2005) Capillary Breakup Rheometry of LowViscosity Elastic Fluids. Appl Rheol 15(1):12–27. https://doi.org/10.1515/arh20050001
RolónGarrido VH, Wagner MH (2007) The MSF model: relation of nonlinear parameters to molecular structure of longchain branched polymer melts. Rheol Acta 46(5):583–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s0039700601369
Rubinstein M (2010) Polymer physicsThe ugly duckling story: Will polymer physics ever become a part of “proper” physics? In. J Polym Sci B Polym Phys 48(24):2548–2551. https://doi.org/10.1002/polb.22135
Rubinstein M, Colby Ralph H (2010) Polymer physics. Reprinted. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press
Rutland DF, Jameson GJ (1970) Theoretical prediction of the sizes of drops formed in the breakup of capillary jets. Chem Eng Sci 25(11):1689–1698. https://doi.org/10.1016/00092509(70)800604
Sachsenheimer D, Hochstein B, Willenbacher N (2014) Experimental study on the capillary thinning of entangled polymer solutions. Rheol Acta 53(9):725–739. https://doi.org/10.1007/s0039701407898
Sattler R, Gier S, Eggers J, Wagner C (2012) The final stages of capillary breakup of polymer solutions. Phys Fluids 24(2):23101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3684750
Sattler R, Wagner C, Eggers J (2008) Blistering pattern and formation of nanofibers in capillary thinning of polymer solutions. Phys Rev Lett 100(16):164502. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.100.164502
Schmid, Manfred (2015) Selektives Lasersintern (SLS) mit Kunststoffen. Technologie, Prozesse und Werkstoffe. München: Hanser. Available online at http://subhh.ciando.com/book/?bok_id=2006293
Sousa PC, Vega EJ, Sousa RG, Montanero JM, Alves MA (2017) Measurement of relaxation times in extensional flow of weakly viscoelastic polymer solutions. Rheol Acta 56(1):11–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s0039701609801
Sridhar T, Tirtaatmadja V, Nguyen DA, Gupta RK (1991) Measurement of extensional viscosity of polymer solutions. J NonNewtonian Fluid Mech 40(3):271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/03770257(91)87012M
Takahashi M, Isaki T, Takigawa T, Masuda T (1993) Measurement of biaxial and uniaxial extensional flow behavior of polymer melts at constant strain rates. J Rheol 37(5):827–846. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.550397
Tirtaatmadja V, McKinley GH, CooperWhite JJ (2006) Drop formation and breakup of low viscosity elastic fluids: Effects of molecular weight and concentration. Phys Fluids 18(4):43101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2190469
Tirtaatmadja V, Sridhar T (1993) A filament stretching device for measurement of extensional viscosity. J Rheol 37(6):1081–1102. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.550372
Tjahjadi M, Stone HA, Ottino JM (1992) Satellite and subsatellite formation in capillary breakup. J Fluid Mech 243(1):297. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022112092002738
Tomotika S (1935) On the instability of a cylindrical thread of a viscous liquid surrounded by another viscous fluid. Proc R Soc Lond A 150(870):322–337. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1935.0104
Tomotika S (1936) Breaking up of a drop of viscous liquid immersed in another viscous fluid which is extending at a uniform rate. Proc R Soc Lond A 153(879):302–318. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1936.0003
van der Geld CWM, Vermeer H (1994) Prediction of drop size distributions in sprays using the maximum entropy formalism: the effect of satellite formation. Int J Multiphase Flow 20(2):363–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/03019322(94)900884
Vassallo P, Asgriz N (1991) Satellite formation and merging in liquid jet breakup. Proc R Soc Lond A 433(1888):269–286. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1991.0047
Verbeeten WMH, Peters GWM, Baaijens FPT (2001) Differential constitutive equations for polymer melts: The extended PomPom model. J Rheol 45(4):823–843. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.1380426
Wagner C, Amarouchene Y, Bonn D, Eggers J (2005) Droplet detachment and satellite bead formation in viscoelastic fluids. Phys Rev Lett 95(16):164504. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.164504
Wagner MH, Yamaguchi M, Takahashi M (2003) Quantitative assessment of strain hardening of lowdensity polyethylene melts by the molecular stress function model. J Rheol 47(3):779–793. https://doi.org/10.1122/1.1562155
Wagner MH, Bastian H, Hachmann P, Meissner J, Kurzbeck S, Münstedt H, Langouche F (2000) The strainhardening behaviour of linear and longchainbranched polyolefin melts in extensional flows. Rheol Acta 39(2):97–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003970050010
Weber C (1931) Zum Zerfall eines Flüssigkeitsstrahles. ZAMM J Appl Math Mech / Zeitschrift Für Angewandte Mathematik Und Mechanik 11(2):136–154. https://doi.org/10.1002/zamm.19310110207
Yildirim OE, Basaran OA (2001) Deformation and breakup of stretching bridges of Newtonian and shearthinning liquids: comparison of one and twodimensional models. Chem Eng Sci 56(1):211–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/S00092509(00)004085
Ying Q, Chu B (1987) Overlap concentration of macromolecules in solution. Macromolecules 20(2):362–366. https://doi.org/10.1021/ma00168a023
Zhou J, Doi M (2018) Dynamics of viscoelastic filaments based on Onsager principle. Phys Rev Fluids 3(8):84004. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.3.084004
Zhou Y, Xi S, Huang Y, Kong M, Yang Qi, Li G (2020) Preparation of nearspherical PA12 particles for selective laser sintering via PlateauRayleigh instability of molten fibers. Mater Des 190:108578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2020.108578
Zimm BH (1956) Dynamics of Polymer Molecules in Dilute Solution: Viscoelasticity, Flow Birefringence and Dielectric Loss. J Chem Phys 24(2):269–278. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1742462
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visithttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Neukötter, M., Jesinghausen, S. & Schmid, HJ. Model droplet formation in extensional filament stretching within a Filament Extension Atomizer. Rheol Acta 61, 499–521 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s0039702201339y
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s0039702201339y