ArticlePest management science2026
Mechanisms of rebound suppression of oil-in-water emulsion droplet on superhydrophobic surface.
Article in Pest management science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMitigating the rebounding of pesticide droplets on superhydrophobic leaf is of great significance for improving pesticide utilization. The purpose of this study is to elucidate the physical mechanism by which oil-in-water emulsions suppress rebounding, analyze the effects of emulsion concentration, impact velocity and droplet diameter on the impact process, identify the critical Weber number at which rebound ceases, and provide theoretical guidance for spray application.
resultsFour distinct outcomes were observed for droplet impact on superhydrophobic surfaces: complete rebound, partial rebound, transition, and adhesion. With increasing emulsion concentration, impact velocity, and droplet diameter, droplets were more likely to adhere to the superhydrophobic surface. When adhesion occurred, splashing was typically observed during the spreading stage, accompanied by satellite droplets separation during the retraction stage. When the emulsion concentration is less than or equal to 0.6%, the droplet impact outcomes can be categorized by the Weber number; the critical Weber number for droplets adhering to the superhydrophobic surface is 279.
conclusionThe suppression of droplet rebounding is governed by a wetting-induced energy dissipation mechanism. Surface wetting increases the contact area between the droplet and the surface, which enhances frictional resistance and energy dissipation. The maximum spreading velocity and coefficient of droplets increase with impact velocity and droplet diameter; accordingly, greater shear gradients and wetted areas lead to higher viscous dissipation and frictional energy loss. Furthermore, larger droplet diameter and higher impact velocity reduce the droplet's resistance to deformation and breakup, resulting in satellite droplets separation and therefore greater energy loss. © 2026 Society of Chemical Industry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.