Surface modification affects both vapor formation and the heat transferred from a heated wall. These effects must be considered together when assessing surfaces for boiling applications. This study compares the effects of wall superheat, uniform wettability, chemical patterning and a nanoscale cavity under fixed wall-temperature conditions. A diffuse-interface model with thermal fluctuations is implemented in OpenFOAM to solve the conservation equations for mass, momentum and energy in a mesoscopic model fluid. The simulations follow vapor formation and growth from the initially liquid state, without a prescribed vapor seed, and measure the energy transferred from the wall during this process. Increasing the wall temperature from 620 to 638 K increases heat input and promotes sustained vapor growth. At 638 K, initially localized vapor regions grow and merge across the heated surface; at 620 K, persistent growth remains limited over the same interval. Increasing surface wettability by reducing the liquid-side equilibrium contact angle from 150° to 80° slightly delays the detected onset. Chemical patterns give similar onset times and cumulative heat input to a uniform wall with the same mean wettability. Over 0–200 ps, the cavity transfers 21.2% more cumulative energy than the flat wall over the same projected area. At 100 ps, its projected-area heat-transfer rate is 30.7% higher. Its actual heated area is 37.5% larger, so the energy transferred per unit heated area is lower. Among the cases studied, wall superheat has the strongest influence on sustained vapor formation. The heat-transfer comparisons show why vapor growth, heating duration and heated area must be considered together when interpreting nanoscale boiling inception.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pattamatta et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: