Why doesn't water actually perfectly wet glass?












80












$begingroup$


According to many high school textbook sources, water perfectly wets glass. That is, the adhesion between water and glass is so strong that it is energetically favorable for a drop of water on glass to spread out and coat the entire surface. Students are often made to memorize this fact, and many physics questions use it as an assumption.



However, it's perfectly obvious that this doesn't actually happen. If you put a drop of water on glass, it might spread out a little, but it doesn't remotely coat the whole thing. In fact, I've never seen anything like the phenomenon described as "perfect wetting".



Can perfect wetting actually be observed for everyday materials? If not, what are the main additional factors preventing it from happening, as the textbooks say?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I've deleted the comments, several of which were obsoleted by an edit and some of which were pushing the limits of what we consider appropriate.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    Dec 27 '18 at 2:41
















80












$begingroup$


According to many high school textbook sources, water perfectly wets glass. That is, the adhesion between water and glass is so strong that it is energetically favorable for a drop of water on glass to spread out and coat the entire surface. Students are often made to memorize this fact, and many physics questions use it as an assumption.



However, it's perfectly obvious that this doesn't actually happen. If you put a drop of water on glass, it might spread out a little, but it doesn't remotely coat the whole thing. In fact, I've never seen anything like the phenomenon described as "perfect wetting".



Can perfect wetting actually be observed for everyday materials? If not, what are the main additional factors preventing it from happening, as the textbooks say?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    I've deleted the comments, several of which were obsoleted by an edit and some of which were pushing the limits of what we consider appropriate.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    Dec 27 '18 at 2:41














80












80








80


12



$begingroup$


According to many high school textbook sources, water perfectly wets glass. That is, the adhesion between water and glass is so strong that it is energetically favorable for a drop of water on glass to spread out and coat the entire surface. Students are often made to memorize this fact, and many physics questions use it as an assumption.



However, it's perfectly obvious that this doesn't actually happen. If you put a drop of water on glass, it might spread out a little, but it doesn't remotely coat the whole thing. In fact, I've never seen anything like the phenomenon described as "perfect wetting".



Can perfect wetting actually be observed for everyday materials? If not, what are the main additional factors preventing it from happening, as the textbooks say?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




According to many high school textbook sources, water perfectly wets glass. That is, the adhesion between water and glass is so strong that it is energetically favorable for a drop of water on glass to spread out and coat the entire surface. Students are often made to memorize this fact, and many physics questions use it as an assumption.



However, it's perfectly obvious that this doesn't actually happen. If you put a drop of water on glass, it might spread out a little, but it doesn't remotely coat the whole thing. In fact, I've never seen anything like the phenomenon described as "perfect wetting".



Can perfect wetting actually be observed for everyday materials? If not, what are the main additional factors preventing it from happening, as the textbooks say?







everyday-life water physical-chemistry surface-tension glass






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 25 '18 at 16:35









Qmechanic

104k121871192




104k121871192










asked Dec 23 '18 at 13:41









knzhouknzhou

43.8k11120209




43.8k11120209












  • $begingroup$
    I've deleted the comments, several of which were obsoleted by an edit and some of which were pushing the limits of what we consider appropriate.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    Dec 27 '18 at 2:41


















  • $begingroup$
    I've deleted the comments, several of which were obsoleted by an edit and some of which were pushing the limits of what we consider appropriate.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    Dec 27 '18 at 2:41
















$begingroup$
I've deleted the comments, several of which were obsoleted by an edit and some of which were pushing the limits of what we consider appropriate.
$endgroup$
– David Z
Dec 27 '18 at 2:41




$begingroup$
I've deleted the comments, several of which were obsoleted by an edit and some of which were pushing the limits of what we consider appropriate.
$endgroup$
– David Z
Dec 27 '18 at 2:41










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















126












$begingroup$

In everyday life glass surfaces are always covered by a layer of, well, crud. Glass surfaces are exceedingly high energy surfaces due to the high density of polar hydroxyl groups and they attract pretty much anything. This means that outside of a colloid science laboratory you will never encounter a clean glass surface.



I spent many years carrying out experiments involving interactions with glass surfaces, and to get the surface clean we had to clean it with chromic acid. A quick Google found instructions for doing this here, but if you ever feel tempted to try this at home do note the comment in that article:




The dichromate should be handled with extreme care because it is a powerful corrosive and carcinogen.




If you survive the cleaning process then you will find a water drop placed on the glass does have an effectively zero contact angle and the drop will spread out almost completely.



But it's only under these extreme conditions that you will see this. Just leaving the glass exposed to the air for a few hours is enough to coat it with a monolayer of whatever organic detritus if floating around (which if humans are present is quite a lot :-). Once this happens you aren't measuring the contact angle on glass, you are measuring it on whatever organic film is coating the glass.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$









  • 69




    $begingroup$
    "If you survive the cleaning process"- John Ronnie, 2018
    $endgroup$
    – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
    Dec 23 '18 at 16:56






  • 27




    $begingroup$
    @MohammadZuhairKhan - If you liked that, I suggest you read "Sand Won't Save You This Time", about chlorine triflouride. Specifically, "It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers,"
    $endgroup$
    – WhatRoughBeast
    Dec 23 '18 at 17:19






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    Dichromate seems a bit wacky. I've always used a plasma asher, although that's not really something one could do at home.
    $endgroup$
    – J...
    Dec 23 '18 at 17:56








  • 10




    $begingroup$
    @Chloe does water droplets spread out after cleaning with a microfiber cloth? Unfortunately the answer is no. It's actually not clean. It may no longer have optical aberrations, but it's not necessarily clean just because you can't see it.
    $endgroup$
    – Nelson
    Dec 24 '18 at 5:20






  • 6




    $begingroup$
    Obligatory xkcd: xkcd.com/541
    $endgroup$
    – dessert
    Dec 24 '18 at 13:33



















1












$begingroup$

It's because of surface energy



enter image description here



You can just cover glass with a thin layer of material that has low surface energy (like teflon) and then water/stuff won't stick(will stick alot less) to it...



Check this link for much more information.



To answer the question, yes and no.



The reason why we don't observe water, spread out on its own, on glass, as much as it can, is because of >> see accepted answer :D



However if you spread it yourself, then yea you could make a very thin coat of water covering the whole glass, which could be described as perfect wetting.



Check this page for great information about this topic.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    I don't see how this answers OPs question. Does it stick to glass or not?
    $endgroup$
    – pipe
    Dec 25 '18 at 16:47










  • $begingroup$
    @pipe yes, water does stick to glass.
    $endgroup$
    – Noob
    Dec 27 '18 at 12:03



















0












$begingroup$

I'm gonna say it's due to surface tension. In darkroom photography unless you're careful you'll get waterdrop marks on your negatives when you hang them up to dry. There's a commercial product called Photoflo (sp?) that stops this. Being cheap I found a couple drops of ordinary liquid dish detergent in the last rinse does about the same thing a lot cheaper. There are also "wetting agents" or some similar name for products you put into your dishwasher to avoid water spots on glasses, same idea. This is also related to a classic experiment to measure the thickness of an oleic acid molecule by putting a drop into a water bath and measuring the area it spreads out to. 8th grade science, 50 years ago but I still remember it.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    The question is vague: what is meant by "wetting"? Is it a question of whether a drop of water will spontaneously spread over a glass surface, or whether a drop can be spread across a glass surface and not tend to reform into one or more drops or droplets?



    First of all, the glass will have a surface covered by water vapor. The oxide surface grabs water from the air with a vengeance. A few hundred degrees C will get rid of most of it, possibly >300 C (sometimes for hours in a vacuum) is needed to get all of it. Of course there are different kinds of glasses; soda glass, which contains major amounts of the oxides of silicon, sodium, calcium and aluminum, is the most common.



    A drop of water will not spread spontaneously on glass. The physics behind this is that water molecules like water molecules (remember "like dissolves like"?). The term "like" is not scientific: a better term is "cohesive energy," meaning the energy required to pull a water molecule out of the droplet. For example, oil and water don't mix - the attraction of water to water is greater than of water to oil, or oil to water.



    This discussion can also be made in terms of surface energy, but I think is is more clear and more generally applicable to cast it in terms of cohesive energy, which is close in meaning to "heat of vaporization."



    The glass surface obtains a hydrated coating by both physical and chemical adsorption. This means that the glass surface will look a little like water, i.e, the effective cohesive energy of the surface will be a little less like pure glass and slightly more like water. In the battle for water, the drop will still win but the hydrated glass gets in a few licks. The glass likes glass a lot and is not itself dissolved by the water.



    Nonetheless drops of water can be spread over the glass by physical energy such as with a spatula (as in one of the referenced videos) without re-forming into drops or droplets. In this case the water is introduced onto fresh hydrated surfaces that it quickly hydrates all the more. Then the glass surface looks more like water to the water. It will take energy to reform the drops - they may not reform spontaneously.



    So my answer is that glass can be totally wetted under some circumstances but not in the (unobtainable) purist of systems, and not spontaneously unless acted on by external energies.



    Entropy of mixing, free energy of droplet formation and other complications mess up a pure discussion, but I think the above discussion gets most of it. The quantitative description of the concepts described above are used in industry from cosmetics to metallurgy and are founded in chemical thermodynamics.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "151"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f450006%2fwhy-doesnt-water-actually-perfectly-wet-glass%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      126












      $begingroup$

      In everyday life glass surfaces are always covered by a layer of, well, crud. Glass surfaces are exceedingly high energy surfaces due to the high density of polar hydroxyl groups and they attract pretty much anything. This means that outside of a colloid science laboratory you will never encounter a clean glass surface.



      I spent many years carrying out experiments involving interactions with glass surfaces, and to get the surface clean we had to clean it with chromic acid. A quick Google found instructions for doing this here, but if you ever feel tempted to try this at home do note the comment in that article:




      The dichromate should be handled with extreme care because it is a powerful corrosive and carcinogen.




      If you survive the cleaning process then you will find a water drop placed on the glass does have an effectively zero contact angle and the drop will spread out almost completely.



      But it's only under these extreme conditions that you will see this. Just leaving the glass exposed to the air for a few hours is enough to coat it with a monolayer of whatever organic detritus if floating around (which if humans are present is quite a lot :-). Once this happens you aren't measuring the contact angle on glass, you are measuring it on whatever organic film is coating the glass.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$









      • 69




        $begingroup$
        "If you survive the cleaning process"- John Ronnie, 2018
        $endgroup$
        – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
        Dec 23 '18 at 16:56






      • 27




        $begingroup$
        @MohammadZuhairKhan - If you liked that, I suggest you read "Sand Won't Save You This Time", about chlorine triflouride. Specifically, "It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers,"
        $endgroup$
        – WhatRoughBeast
        Dec 23 '18 at 17:19






      • 4




        $begingroup$
        Dichromate seems a bit wacky. I've always used a plasma asher, although that's not really something one could do at home.
        $endgroup$
        – J...
        Dec 23 '18 at 17:56








      • 10




        $begingroup$
        @Chloe does water droplets spread out after cleaning with a microfiber cloth? Unfortunately the answer is no. It's actually not clean. It may no longer have optical aberrations, but it's not necessarily clean just because you can't see it.
        $endgroup$
        – Nelson
        Dec 24 '18 at 5:20






      • 6




        $begingroup$
        Obligatory xkcd: xkcd.com/541
        $endgroup$
        – dessert
        Dec 24 '18 at 13:33
















      126












      $begingroup$

      In everyday life glass surfaces are always covered by a layer of, well, crud. Glass surfaces are exceedingly high energy surfaces due to the high density of polar hydroxyl groups and they attract pretty much anything. This means that outside of a colloid science laboratory you will never encounter a clean glass surface.



      I spent many years carrying out experiments involving interactions with glass surfaces, and to get the surface clean we had to clean it with chromic acid. A quick Google found instructions for doing this here, but if you ever feel tempted to try this at home do note the comment in that article:




      The dichromate should be handled with extreme care because it is a powerful corrosive and carcinogen.




      If you survive the cleaning process then you will find a water drop placed on the glass does have an effectively zero contact angle and the drop will spread out almost completely.



      But it's only under these extreme conditions that you will see this. Just leaving the glass exposed to the air for a few hours is enough to coat it with a monolayer of whatever organic detritus if floating around (which if humans are present is quite a lot :-). Once this happens you aren't measuring the contact angle on glass, you are measuring it on whatever organic film is coating the glass.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$









      • 69




        $begingroup$
        "If you survive the cleaning process"- John Ronnie, 2018
        $endgroup$
        – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
        Dec 23 '18 at 16:56






      • 27




        $begingroup$
        @MohammadZuhairKhan - If you liked that, I suggest you read "Sand Won't Save You This Time", about chlorine triflouride. Specifically, "It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers,"
        $endgroup$
        – WhatRoughBeast
        Dec 23 '18 at 17:19






      • 4




        $begingroup$
        Dichromate seems a bit wacky. I've always used a plasma asher, although that's not really something one could do at home.
        $endgroup$
        – J...
        Dec 23 '18 at 17:56








      • 10




        $begingroup$
        @Chloe does water droplets spread out after cleaning with a microfiber cloth? Unfortunately the answer is no. It's actually not clean. It may no longer have optical aberrations, but it's not necessarily clean just because you can't see it.
        $endgroup$
        – Nelson
        Dec 24 '18 at 5:20






      • 6




        $begingroup$
        Obligatory xkcd: xkcd.com/541
        $endgroup$
        – dessert
        Dec 24 '18 at 13:33














      126












      126








      126





      $begingroup$

      In everyday life glass surfaces are always covered by a layer of, well, crud. Glass surfaces are exceedingly high energy surfaces due to the high density of polar hydroxyl groups and they attract pretty much anything. This means that outside of a colloid science laboratory you will never encounter a clean glass surface.



      I spent many years carrying out experiments involving interactions with glass surfaces, and to get the surface clean we had to clean it with chromic acid. A quick Google found instructions for doing this here, but if you ever feel tempted to try this at home do note the comment in that article:




      The dichromate should be handled with extreme care because it is a powerful corrosive and carcinogen.




      If you survive the cleaning process then you will find a water drop placed on the glass does have an effectively zero contact angle and the drop will spread out almost completely.



      But it's only under these extreme conditions that you will see this. Just leaving the glass exposed to the air for a few hours is enough to coat it with a monolayer of whatever organic detritus if floating around (which if humans are present is quite a lot :-). Once this happens you aren't measuring the contact angle on glass, you are measuring it on whatever organic film is coating the glass.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$



      In everyday life glass surfaces are always covered by a layer of, well, crud. Glass surfaces are exceedingly high energy surfaces due to the high density of polar hydroxyl groups and they attract pretty much anything. This means that outside of a colloid science laboratory you will never encounter a clean glass surface.



      I spent many years carrying out experiments involving interactions with glass surfaces, and to get the surface clean we had to clean it with chromic acid. A quick Google found instructions for doing this here, but if you ever feel tempted to try this at home do note the comment in that article:




      The dichromate should be handled with extreme care because it is a powerful corrosive and carcinogen.




      If you survive the cleaning process then you will find a water drop placed on the glass does have an effectively zero contact angle and the drop will spread out almost completely.



      But it's only under these extreme conditions that you will see this. Just leaving the glass exposed to the air for a few hours is enough to coat it with a monolayer of whatever organic detritus if floating around (which if humans are present is quite a lot :-). Once this happens you aren't measuring the contact angle on glass, you are measuring it on whatever organic film is coating the glass.







      share|cite|improve this answer












      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer










      answered Dec 23 '18 at 14:04









      John RennieJohn Rennie

      274k43541788




      274k43541788








      • 69




        $begingroup$
        "If you survive the cleaning process"- John Ronnie, 2018
        $endgroup$
        – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
        Dec 23 '18 at 16:56






      • 27




        $begingroup$
        @MohammadZuhairKhan - If you liked that, I suggest you read "Sand Won't Save You This Time", about chlorine triflouride. Specifically, "It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers,"
        $endgroup$
        – WhatRoughBeast
        Dec 23 '18 at 17:19






      • 4




        $begingroup$
        Dichromate seems a bit wacky. I've always used a plasma asher, although that's not really something one could do at home.
        $endgroup$
        – J...
        Dec 23 '18 at 17:56








      • 10




        $begingroup$
        @Chloe does water droplets spread out after cleaning with a microfiber cloth? Unfortunately the answer is no. It's actually not clean. It may no longer have optical aberrations, but it's not necessarily clean just because you can't see it.
        $endgroup$
        – Nelson
        Dec 24 '18 at 5:20






      • 6




        $begingroup$
        Obligatory xkcd: xkcd.com/541
        $endgroup$
        – dessert
        Dec 24 '18 at 13:33














      • 69




        $begingroup$
        "If you survive the cleaning process"- John Ronnie, 2018
        $endgroup$
        – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
        Dec 23 '18 at 16:56






      • 27




        $begingroup$
        @MohammadZuhairKhan - If you liked that, I suggest you read "Sand Won't Save You This Time", about chlorine triflouride. Specifically, "It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers,"
        $endgroup$
        – WhatRoughBeast
        Dec 23 '18 at 17:19






      • 4




        $begingroup$
        Dichromate seems a bit wacky. I've always used a plasma asher, although that's not really something one could do at home.
        $endgroup$
        – J...
        Dec 23 '18 at 17:56








      • 10




        $begingroup$
        @Chloe does water droplets spread out after cleaning with a microfiber cloth? Unfortunately the answer is no. It's actually not clean. It may no longer have optical aberrations, but it's not necessarily clean just because you can't see it.
        $endgroup$
        – Nelson
        Dec 24 '18 at 5:20






      • 6




        $begingroup$
        Obligatory xkcd: xkcd.com/541
        $endgroup$
        – dessert
        Dec 24 '18 at 13:33








      69




      69




      $begingroup$
      "If you survive the cleaning process"- John Ronnie, 2018
      $endgroup$
      – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
      Dec 23 '18 at 16:56




      $begingroup$
      "If you survive the cleaning process"- John Ronnie, 2018
      $endgroup$
      – Mohammad Zuhair Khan
      Dec 23 '18 at 16:56




      27




      27




      $begingroup$
      @MohammadZuhairKhan - If you liked that, I suggest you read "Sand Won't Save You This Time", about chlorine triflouride. Specifically, "It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers,"
      $endgroup$
      – WhatRoughBeast
      Dec 23 '18 at 17:19




      $begingroup$
      @MohammadZuhairKhan - If you liked that, I suggest you read "Sand Won't Save You This Time", about chlorine triflouride. Specifically, "It is also hypergolic with such things as cloth, wood, and test engineers,"
      $endgroup$
      – WhatRoughBeast
      Dec 23 '18 at 17:19




      4




      4




      $begingroup$
      Dichromate seems a bit wacky. I've always used a plasma asher, although that's not really something one could do at home.
      $endgroup$
      – J...
      Dec 23 '18 at 17:56






      $begingroup$
      Dichromate seems a bit wacky. I've always used a plasma asher, although that's not really something one could do at home.
      $endgroup$
      – J...
      Dec 23 '18 at 17:56






      10




      10




      $begingroup$
      @Chloe does water droplets spread out after cleaning with a microfiber cloth? Unfortunately the answer is no. It's actually not clean. It may no longer have optical aberrations, but it's not necessarily clean just because you can't see it.
      $endgroup$
      – Nelson
      Dec 24 '18 at 5:20




      $begingroup$
      @Chloe does water droplets spread out after cleaning with a microfiber cloth? Unfortunately the answer is no. It's actually not clean. It may no longer have optical aberrations, but it's not necessarily clean just because you can't see it.
      $endgroup$
      – Nelson
      Dec 24 '18 at 5:20




      6




      6




      $begingroup$
      Obligatory xkcd: xkcd.com/541
      $endgroup$
      – dessert
      Dec 24 '18 at 13:33




      $begingroup$
      Obligatory xkcd: xkcd.com/541
      $endgroup$
      – dessert
      Dec 24 '18 at 13:33











      1












      $begingroup$

      It's because of surface energy



      enter image description here



      You can just cover glass with a thin layer of material that has low surface energy (like teflon) and then water/stuff won't stick(will stick alot less) to it...



      Check this link for much more information.



      To answer the question, yes and no.



      The reason why we don't observe water, spread out on its own, on glass, as much as it can, is because of >> see accepted answer :D



      However if you spread it yourself, then yea you could make a very thin coat of water covering the whole glass, which could be described as perfect wetting.



      Check this page for great information about this topic.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$









      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I don't see how this answers OPs question. Does it stick to glass or not?
        $endgroup$
        – pipe
        Dec 25 '18 at 16:47










      • $begingroup$
        @pipe yes, water does stick to glass.
        $endgroup$
        – Noob
        Dec 27 '18 at 12:03
















      1












      $begingroup$

      It's because of surface energy



      enter image description here



      You can just cover glass with a thin layer of material that has low surface energy (like teflon) and then water/stuff won't stick(will stick alot less) to it...



      Check this link for much more information.



      To answer the question, yes and no.



      The reason why we don't observe water, spread out on its own, on glass, as much as it can, is because of >> see accepted answer :D



      However if you spread it yourself, then yea you could make a very thin coat of water covering the whole glass, which could be described as perfect wetting.



      Check this page for great information about this topic.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$









      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I don't see how this answers OPs question. Does it stick to glass or not?
        $endgroup$
        – pipe
        Dec 25 '18 at 16:47










      • $begingroup$
        @pipe yes, water does stick to glass.
        $endgroup$
        – Noob
        Dec 27 '18 at 12:03














      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$

      It's because of surface energy



      enter image description here



      You can just cover glass with a thin layer of material that has low surface energy (like teflon) and then water/stuff won't stick(will stick alot less) to it...



      Check this link for much more information.



      To answer the question, yes and no.



      The reason why we don't observe water, spread out on its own, on glass, as much as it can, is because of >> see accepted answer :D



      However if you spread it yourself, then yea you could make a very thin coat of water covering the whole glass, which could be described as perfect wetting.



      Check this page for great information about this topic.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      It's because of surface energy



      enter image description here



      You can just cover glass with a thin layer of material that has low surface energy (like teflon) and then water/stuff won't stick(will stick alot less) to it...



      Check this link for much more information.



      To answer the question, yes and no.



      The reason why we don't observe water, spread out on its own, on glass, as much as it can, is because of >> see accepted answer :D



      However if you spread it yourself, then yea you could make a very thin coat of water covering the whole glass, which could be described as perfect wetting.



      Check this page for great information about this topic.







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited Dec 26 '18 at 14:51

























      answered Dec 24 '18 at 19:53









      NoobNoob

      213




      213








      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I don't see how this answers OPs question. Does it stick to glass or not?
        $endgroup$
        – pipe
        Dec 25 '18 at 16:47










      • $begingroup$
        @pipe yes, water does stick to glass.
        $endgroup$
        – Noob
        Dec 27 '18 at 12:03














      • 1




        $begingroup$
        I don't see how this answers OPs question. Does it stick to glass or not?
        $endgroup$
        – pipe
        Dec 25 '18 at 16:47










      • $begingroup$
        @pipe yes, water does stick to glass.
        $endgroup$
        – Noob
        Dec 27 '18 at 12:03








      1




      1




      $begingroup$
      I don't see how this answers OPs question. Does it stick to glass or not?
      $endgroup$
      – pipe
      Dec 25 '18 at 16:47




      $begingroup$
      I don't see how this answers OPs question. Does it stick to glass or not?
      $endgroup$
      – pipe
      Dec 25 '18 at 16:47












      $begingroup$
      @pipe yes, water does stick to glass.
      $endgroup$
      – Noob
      Dec 27 '18 at 12:03




      $begingroup$
      @pipe yes, water does stick to glass.
      $endgroup$
      – Noob
      Dec 27 '18 at 12:03











      0












      $begingroup$

      I'm gonna say it's due to surface tension. In darkroom photography unless you're careful you'll get waterdrop marks on your negatives when you hang them up to dry. There's a commercial product called Photoflo (sp?) that stops this. Being cheap I found a couple drops of ordinary liquid dish detergent in the last rinse does about the same thing a lot cheaper. There are also "wetting agents" or some similar name for products you put into your dishwasher to avoid water spots on glasses, same idea. This is also related to a classic experiment to measure the thickness of an oleic acid molecule by putting a drop into a water bath and measuring the area it spreads out to. 8th grade science, 50 years ago but I still remember it.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$


















        0












        $begingroup$

        I'm gonna say it's due to surface tension. In darkroom photography unless you're careful you'll get waterdrop marks on your negatives when you hang them up to dry. There's a commercial product called Photoflo (sp?) that stops this. Being cheap I found a couple drops of ordinary liquid dish detergent in the last rinse does about the same thing a lot cheaper. There are also "wetting agents" or some similar name for products you put into your dishwasher to avoid water spots on glasses, same idea. This is also related to a classic experiment to measure the thickness of an oleic acid molecule by putting a drop into a water bath and measuring the area it spreads out to. 8th grade science, 50 years ago but I still remember it.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$
















          0












          0








          0





          $begingroup$

          I'm gonna say it's due to surface tension. In darkroom photography unless you're careful you'll get waterdrop marks on your negatives when you hang them up to dry. There's a commercial product called Photoflo (sp?) that stops this. Being cheap I found a couple drops of ordinary liquid dish detergent in the last rinse does about the same thing a lot cheaper. There are also "wetting agents" or some similar name for products you put into your dishwasher to avoid water spots on glasses, same idea. This is also related to a classic experiment to measure the thickness of an oleic acid molecule by putting a drop into a water bath and measuring the area it spreads out to. 8th grade science, 50 years ago but I still remember it.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          I'm gonna say it's due to surface tension. In darkroom photography unless you're careful you'll get waterdrop marks on your negatives when you hang them up to dry. There's a commercial product called Photoflo (sp?) that stops this. Being cheap I found a couple drops of ordinary liquid dish detergent in the last rinse does about the same thing a lot cheaper. There are also "wetting agents" or some similar name for products you put into your dishwasher to avoid water spots on glasses, same idea. This is also related to a classic experiment to measure the thickness of an oleic acid molecule by putting a drop into a water bath and measuring the area it spreads out to. 8th grade science, 50 years ago but I still remember it.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 26 '18 at 3:11









          Alan CoreyAlan Corey

          1




          1























              0












              $begingroup$

              The question is vague: what is meant by "wetting"? Is it a question of whether a drop of water will spontaneously spread over a glass surface, or whether a drop can be spread across a glass surface and not tend to reform into one or more drops or droplets?



              First of all, the glass will have a surface covered by water vapor. The oxide surface grabs water from the air with a vengeance. A few hundred degrees C will get rid of most of it, possibly >300 C (sometimes for hours in a vacuum) is needed to get all of it. Of course there are different kinds of glasses; soda glass, which contains major amounts of the oxides of silicon, sodium, calcium and aluminum, is the most common.



              A drop of water will not spread spontaneously on glass. The physics behind this is that water molecules like water molecules (remember "like dissolves like"?). The term "like" is not scientific: a better term is "cohesive energy," meaning the energy required to pull a water molecule out of the droplet. For example, oil and water don't mix - the attraction of water to water is greater than of water to oil, or oil to water.



              This discussion can also be made in terms of surface energy, but I think is is more clear and more generally applicable to cast it in terms of cohesive energy, which is close in meaning to "heat of vaporization."



              The glass surface obtains a hydrated coating by both physical and chemical adsorption. This means that the glass surface will look a little like water, i.e, the effective cohesive energy of the surface will be a little less like pure glass and slightly more like water. In the battle for water, the drop will still win but the hydrated glass gets in a few licks. The glass likes glass a lot and is not itself dissolved by the water.



              Nonetheless drops of water can be spread over the glass by physical energy such as with a spatula (as in one of the referenced videos) without re-forming into drops or droplets. In this case the water is introduced onto fresh hydrated surfaces that it quickly hydrates all the more. Then the glass surface looks more like water to the water. It will take energy to reform the drops - they may not reform spontaneously.



              So my answer is that glass can be totally wetted under some circumstances but not in the (unobtainable) purist of systems, and not spontaneously unless acted on by external energies.



              Entropy of mixing, free energy of droplet formation and other complications mess up a pure discussion, but I think the above discussion gets most of it. The quantitative description of the concepts described above are used in industry from cosmetics to metallurgy and are founded in chemical thermodynamics.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                0












                $begingroup$

                The question is vague: what is meant by "wetting"? Is it a question of whether a drop of water will spontaneously spread over a glass surface, or whether a drop can be spread across a glass surface and not tend to reform into one or more drops or droplets?



                First of all, the glass will have a surface covered by water vapor. The oxide surface grabs water from the air with a vengeance. A few hundred degrees C will get rid of most of it, possibly >300 C (sometimes for hours in a vacuum) is needed to get all of it. Of course there are different kinds of glasses; soda glass, which contains major amounts of the oxides of silicon, sodium, calcium and aluminum, is the most common.



                A drop of water will not spread spontaneously on glass. The physics behind this is that water molecules like water molecules (remember "like dissolves like"?). The term "like" is not scientific: a better term is "cohesive energy," meaning the energy required to pull a water molecule out of the droplet. For example, oil and water don't mix - the attraction of water to water is greater than of water to oil, or oil to water.



                This discussion can also be made in terms of surface energy, but I think is is more clear and more generally applicable to cast it in terms of cohesive energy, which is close in meaning to "heat of vaporization."



                The glass surface obtains a hydrated coating by both physical and chemical adsorption. This means that the glass surface will look a little like water, i.e, the effective cohesive energy of the surface will be a little less like pure glass and slightly more like water. In the battle for water, the drop will still win but the hydrated glass gets in a few licks. The glass likes glass a lot and is not itself dissolved by the water.



                Nonetheless drops of water can be spread over the glass by physical energy such as with a spatula (as in one of the referenced videos) without re-forming into drops or droplets. In this case the water is introduced onto fresh hydrated surfaces that it quickly hydrates all the more. Then the glass surface looks more like water to the water. It will take energy to reform the drops - they may not reform spontaneously.



                So my answer is that glass can be totally wetted under some circumstances but not in the (unobtainable) purist of systems, and not spontaneously unless acted on by external energies.



                Entropy of mixing, free energy of droplet formation and other complications mess up a pure discussion, but I think the above discussion gets most of it. The quantitative description of the concepts described above are used in industry from cosmetics to metallurgy and are founded in chemical thermodynamics.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  0












                  0








                  0





                  $begingroup$

                  The question is vague: what is meant by "wetting"? Is it a question of whether a drop of water will spontaneously spread over a glass surface, or whether a drop can be spread across a glass surface and not tend to reform into one or more drops or droplets?



                  First of all, the glass will have a surface covered by water vapor. The oxide surface grabs water from the air with a vengeance. A few hundred degrees C will get rid of most of it, possibly >300 C (sometimes for hours in a vacuum) is needed to get all of it. Of course there are different kinds of glasses; soda glass, which contains major amounts of the oxides of silicon, sodium, calcium and aluminum, is the most common.



                  A drop of water will not spread spontaneously on glass. The physics behind this is that water molecules like water molecules (remember "like dissolves like"?). The term "like" is not scientific: a better term is "cohesive energy," meaning the energy required to pull a water molecule out of the droplet. For example, oil and water don't mix - the attraction of water to water is greater than of water to oil, or oil to water.



                  This discussion can also be made in terms of surface energy, but I think is is more clear and more generally applicable to cast it in terms of cohesive energy, which is close in meaning to "heat of vaporization."



                  The glass surface obtains a hydrated coating by both physical and chemical adsorption. This means that the glass surface will look a little like water, i.e, the effective cohesive energy of the surface will be a little less like pure glass and slightly more like water. In the battle for water, the drop will still win but the hydrated glass gets in a few licks. The glass likes glass a lot and is not itself dissolved by the water.



                  Nonetheless drops of water can be spread over the glass by physical energy such as with a spatula (as in one of the referenced videos) without re-forming into drops or droplets. In this case the water is introduced onto fresh hydrated surfaces that it quickly hydrates all the more. Then the glass surface looks more like water to the water. It will take energy to reform the drops - they may not reform spontaneously.



                  So my answer is that glass can be totally wetted under some circumstances but not in the (unobtainable) purist of systems, and not spontaneously unless acted on by external energies.



                  Entropy of mixing, free energy of droplet formation and other complications mess up a pure discussion, but I think the above discussion gets most of it. The quantitative description of the concepts described above are used in industry from cosmetics to metallurgy and are founded in chemical thermodynamics.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  The question is vague: what is meant by "wetting"? Is it a question of whether a drop of water will spontaneously spread over a glass surface, or whether a drop can be spread across a glass surface and not tend to reform into one or more drops or droplets?



                  First of all, the glass will have a surface covered by water vapor. The oxide surface grabs water from the air with a vengeance. A few hundred degrees C will get rid of most of it, possibly >300 C (sometimes for hours in a vacuum) is needed to get all of it. Of course there are different kinds of glasses; soda glass, which contains major amounts of the oxides of silicon, sodium, calcium and aluminum, is the most common.



                  A drop of water will not spread spontaneously on glass. The physics behind this is that water molecules like water molecules (remember "like dissolves like"?). The term "like" is not scientific: a better term is "cohesive energy," meaning the energy required to pull a water molecule out of the droplet. For example, oil and water don't mix - the attraction of water to water is greater than of water to oil, or oil to water.



                  This discussion can also be made in terms of surface energy, but I think is is more clear and more generally applicable to cast it in terms of cohesive energy, which is close in meaning to "heat of vaporization."



                  The glass surface obtains a hydrated coating by both physical and chemical adsorption. This means that the glass surface will look a little like water, i.e, the effective cohesive energy of the surface will be a little less like pure glass and slightly more like water. In the battle for water, the drop will still win but the hydrated glass gets in a few licks. The glass likes glass a lot and is not itself dissolved by the water.



                  Nonetheless drops of water can be spread over the glass by physical energy such as with a spatula (as in one of the referenced videos) without re-forming into drops or droplets. In this case the water is introduced onto fresh hydrated surfaces that it quickly hydrates all the more. Then the glass surface looks more like water to the water. It will take energy to reform the drops - they may not reform spontaneously.



                  So my answer is that glass can be totally wetted under some circumstances but not in the (unobtainable) purist of systems, and not spontaneously unless acted on by external energies.



                  Entropy of mixing, free energy of droplet formation and other complications mess up a pure discussion, but I think the above discussion gets most of it. The quantitative description of the concepts described above are used in industry from cosmetics to metallurgy and are founded in chemical thermodynamics.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Dec 26 '18 at 23:52









                  Incredible IIIncredible II

                  576




                  576






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f450006%2fwhy-doesnt-water-actually-perfectly-wet-glass%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Bressuire

                      Cabo Verde

                      Gyllenstierna