banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Floating electrode electrowetting on hydrophobic dielectric with an SiO2 layer
Rent this article for


Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Schematics of the conventional and floating electrode electrowetting. A platinum wire (0.05 mm in diameter with 99.95% purity) is used as the auxiliary electrode immersed in the droplet.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Contact angle measurements on an oxidized Si wafer coated with 300 nm Cytop in conventional and FEE electrowetting systems. The droplet voltage was ramped to positive and negative values in 5 V increments.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

(a) Contact angle versus voltage and (b) current versus voltage on three different electrowetting substrates, namely Si/SiO/Cr/Cytop, Si/SiO/Al/Cytop, and Si/SiO/Cytop in the conventional electrowetting system (the electrical connections are made to chromium, aluminum, and silicon layers, respectively). In each test, 15 l droplet of 0.1M citric acid is placed on the hydrophobic Cytop layer, and then the substrate voltage is ramped up to +70 V in 1 V/70 ms increments with respect to a platinum wire immersed in the droplet. The current passage through the circuit is measured concurrently. To better understand how the droplets contact angle is modulated on the substrates, the contact angle versus voltage curves are also presented in this figure (Figure 3(a) ).

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

FEE: (a) on a 500 nm SiO coated with 300 nm Cytop before voltage application; (b) after voltage application without the conductive layer below the Cytop and (c) with a conductive layer (Cr or Al) between the SiO and the Cytop after voltage application. The insets show the corresponding droplet snapshots. The tests with the same magnitude and opposite polarity of the droplet showed the same results, where FEE occurred only on the wafer without the conductive layer. The solid circles on the applied voltage/time curves show the time at which the droplet snapshots were taken.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

(a) Memory effect after electrode retrieval in FEE compared with non-charged evaporating droplet. The pictures in the first row show a droplet after applying +80 V in the FEE configuration and removing the electrode from the droplet. The corresponding video of the droplet charging and discharging steps is available online. The pictures in the second row show a droplet placed on the wafer without charging. In both cases droplet volume decreases due to evaporation, but the contact angle stays the same. (b) Contact angle (left and right angles) of the FEE charged and non-charged droplets (enhanced online). [URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4807018.1]doi: 10.1063/1.4807018.1.


Generic image for table
Table I.

Timeline of the floating electrode electrowetting memory effect video in Figure 5(a) .



The following multimedia file is available, if you log in: 1.4807018.original.v1.avi

Article metrics loading...


Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Floating electrode electrowetting on hydrophobic dielectric with an SiO2 layer